I think that's a good idea.

The demographics of the city.

So down below, we've also shown you, you know, what percentage of the folks we've spoken to come from each of the neighborhoods.

Um, and how that compares with the demographic breakdown of the city and how many people live in each of these neighborhoods.

We've done this for, you know, gender race, um and um other sort of demographic indicators.

Um I would say, you know, these things are never perfect, but I think we've done a really pretty good job of you know, coming up with developing representative idea of people in Sanford.

So in terms of the content of the plan, I want to call your attention to the second and third board.

compares with the demographic breakdown of the city and how many people live in each of these neighborhoods we've done this for you know gender race um and um other sort of demographic indicators um i would say you know these things are never perfect but i think we've done a really pretty good job of you know coming up with with developing representative idea of of people in stamper so um um in terms of the content of the plan i want to draw your attention to the second and third board so um one fundamental aspect of uh a comp plan the master plan is to cost out land use and land use really is is another way of talking about you know what we want the future of the city to look like so the map that you're looking at on the third board is a future land use map and this land use map um consists of a number of land use categories that are described in the table on the bottom left corner and I want to emphasize uh a couple of things about the land use map um it is not a zoning map these two things are not the same thing um the zoning map as you know is uh is a is a is a regulatory document is a legal document it tells you specifically on this parcel this can happen and that can happen the land use the land use map which we have here is meant to be much higher level than that right so a single land use zone can actually consist of multiple zoning districts um but this land use map is actually meant to indicate the sort of general um development patterns in each of these areas and as we go through this content in detail later we can talk about what each of these land use calegaries are um separate from the land use map we also have um other ideas specific ideas for the future of um you know infrastructure atomic development housing and all other multiple areas so these ideas are organized along the lines of what we're calling five visions and these visions again I think is a product of what folks have spoken up about in terms of what they want to see for the future of the city so I want to take the chance to just recap for you what these five major visions are the first one we're calling it the city of opportunity city of opportunity and that vision is meant to convey the idea that you know as Stanford accommodates and meets the challenges of growth in the coming decade um we want to grow in a way that's very thoughtful um that brings broad based benefits to everyone here living here in the city um the second one uh we're calling it the healthy city and this is to address the the the vision across the across the city that we want to have a city in the future 10 years from now that is healthy that is um resilient that is um uh taking action towards uh climate goals the the third vision is the connected city and this vision is about the idea that in the future 10 years from now we're gonna have a city where it's easier to get to where you want to go where destinations are more connected and people can get to those places um with in different modes um much more safely fourth um is the affordable city and this is very much you know top of mind um this vision is meant to um set goals for affordable housing affordability um you know 10 years from now but obviously making progress even before then um um meeting different housing needs and you know again creating the kind of housing that can help us meet the challenge of growth last but not least the prosperous city that visions about economic development and how do we create economic opportunity across the board for people across the skill spectrum and um across industries so with that said um what we have in the remaining five boards are what we're calling keystone projects so whereas these are very high level ideas we want to make sure that these high level ideas actually land as a tangible change that people can expect to see in the city each of those keystone projects you can think of them as a illustration of what these visions will ultimately become in the city so we'll have a chance to go through each of those in great detail but um so I'll I'll preserve you know I'll reserve commentary as we go through each of these boards.

So that's in the high level uh layout of the master plan and um you know we look forward to showing this to you but if you have any questions with high level comments right now we'd be happy to take them up as well yes uh chat's now question for you about process yes um just use your your own work yeah what was the concept to zero in overarching goals to be the final or more strategy yeah yeah if you would yeah uh that that's a great question I mean um you know there's no mapping formula obviously right um it's not the case that we you know get 300 questionnaires and those neatly will fall into five different buckets that that doesn't happen a lot of acknowledged that so um there is a heavy level of synthesis we have to do but what we've committed to uh throughout the process is to iterate right so take the first round of feedback develop some synthesis

Yeah, that's a great question.

I mean, um, you know, there's no mapping formula, obviously, right?

Um, it's not the case that we you know get 300 questionnaires and those neatly will fall into five different buckets.

That doesn't happen, it wasn't acknowledged that so um there is a heavy level of synthesis we have to do, but what we've committed to uh throughout the process is to iterate, right?

So take the first round of feedback, develop some synthesis content around that, and then take it back out to the community for validation, right?

Is this what you actually said?

So um maybe just to take one example around um you know both the vision and the strategies.

I mean, the vision certainly came out of um substantially came out of the first open cost.

Um I don't know if folks went the first open house, but there was a very specific question of you know what do you want the future of Stanford to be.

So it's a very open-ended question, and that question is really about getting at the question of vision, but so we took all of those comments, we um essentially bucketed the comments that we received and in order to kind of extract common thematic similarities between these comments, and that was a large kind of largely responsible for the input going into the visions.

In terms of the strategies, as you noted, there are many, many, many of them.

Um the way we um develop those strategies and make sure that those are rooted in community in the community is we came up with a first cut of those strategies.

We actually took them back to uh this technical advisory group, which is actually uh 50, 60 plus member members plus group that are it's it's a group of sample citizens, right?

Um the benefit of that group is these are people who are committed to the process and they actually committed many evenings of their own time to the process.

What we were able to do is we had a very in-depth set of workshops with this with this technical advisory group to essentially like go through every one of the strategies, make comments on the strategies, you know, struct certain ones and added new ones.

Um, and this with this was how we weren't able to make sure that even though there were like tens of strategies and hundreds of actions, um, people in Stanford actually looked at them and gave us very detailed comments about each of them.

Um others want to have any um want to provide any additional comments there.

It's also I would say it's also informed a bit by the general statutes and what we are mandated to look at, um, including the infrastructure, economic development, um, provision of housing.

Um so there are some statutory requirements that we have to cut as well.

Sure, we lender.

Um, I do have a question just regarding tech or the makeup of that technical advisor of the first three times.

Yeah, where the people of Stanford are from, you know, background, stuff like that.

Yeah, um, I might ask maybe Dominique or Eliza, maybe you can skip more to the detail of the process, but um, but I think the general idea with the advisory group is we try to be as representative as possible.

Certainly from the neighborhood representation perspective, we wanted to make sure that the people coming from these different neighborhoods, the breakdown of that represent the actual sort of population composition of the city, but there were other um considerations made to consider representation across multiple dimensions, um, but it was a very thoughtful process.

I don't know if you want to add anything to that.

Yeah, yeah, I'll just think that the makeup of it included uh portion where residents that were from each of the 13 neighborhood, and that was an application process that everyone went through, and then in um in planning to that, we had technical advisors, people who are experienced in the topic to offer the environments.

Um, and it varied between whether it was a religious organization, a nonprofit organization.

Um, so we can really try to get a little bit representative standard across all demographic um language and spoken disability, so that we could really you know pull um real information from so that with that application process, uh if there were um communities that you saw that didn't have you know people represented from that, was there any more in-depth process to get people you know to allow those certificatings that may not have had people apply for these positions that would be part of this advisory?

Yeah, so for instance, if we had you know one neighborhood that had 50 applicants and there was only two five, and then we had another neighborhood where we only have one applicant, we then you know went back to that neighborhood and candid more uh when the neighborhood map that I think as well as reaching out to um different neighborhood organizations um and religious institutions and uh community leaders in each of the do you guys remember which there was a specific example where we did extra outreach um to get more more engagement from the college funds and and this is Lindy, sorry, you don't forgetting that too much.

Any more questions on process right now for it?

Yeah, just one chest.

Yeah, I bet you're feeling really um and then when it came time to uh actually grab any good words.

Um I I see a fair bound uh uh discrepancy of words in certain cases versus other cases.

So and I just wonder if you could speak to how that can happen to the extent of the spirit committee or and or any one or body of people actually beyond the flushing out of ideas that you know, actually what's responsible to sit down and kind of prove it and say you really mean this, or that right.

Um, so you know, yeah, I'd be happy to talk about the maybe the specific um instance of this discrepancy, but obviously the like someone has to hold a pen, right, in terms of drafting the plan.

So uh for the most part, the plan was drafted by the by the planning team.

So that's after a very intensive process of betting the strategies and actions with the technical advisory group, of course, with the city with the city's guidance and input as well.

So with that content as the basis, and that content again is the community driven content.

We then you know went back and drafted the language of the actual master plan, and that that's really the planning team's work, right?

So um I think the you know, the point you raised about the intent, the community's intent, and then the actual language of the master plan and whether there might be any discrepancy about that.

We certainly recognize that the this draft that exists right now does require another round of community betting, which is why we brought the draft master plan document to Nova Card two weeks ago, and then there's this you know, period think then and the formal plan adoption when the community can have you know a serious amount of time to actually read a document, provide comments, and we're definitely selecting the comments on one of the thought documents.

And to be even more specific, I'm really I'm very curious.

Um, would love some examples that really interested to hear any examples of what we're spying speaking about in terms of discrepancies, um, but me and there are city leads, um, there are for city employees that um lead the work in each of my topic areas, housing mobility, infrastructure, um uh community well-being and economic development who have also poured over every word of detail.

We've had workshops, we've done um individual reading and commenting.

So um we have certainly read all of the all of the yes, yes.

This is uh we simple the planning, yeah.

So was there any other automated automated scenarios and alternate designs that you evaluated, for example, future land use?

Yeah, what were the optimities that you went through and made a conscious position to say that that doesn't fit the directly away with this person?

Um maybe I'm just wondering what does technology do with.

I mean, yeah, um I mean the short answer is yes.

I mean, I think there has been a fair amount of iteration on the content of all aspects of the plan, the specific iteration how of what the information looks like will differ depending on the content.

So um, in terms of future land use map, this is something that we iterated very heavily with the city, for example.

So, you know, this is the reason for that is obviously the land use map is a fairly technical exercise in some ways.

wondering what does technology do with I mean yeah um I mean I the short answer is yes I mean I think there's been a fair amount of iteration on the content of all aspects of the plan the specific iteration how of what the information looks like will differ depending on the content so um in terms of future land use map this is something that we iterated very heavily with the city for example so you know this is the reason for that is obviously the land use map is a fairly technical exercise in some ways so we take a first stop at translating community had technical land use map we would then need to bring it back to the city and then people who are very familiar with what's happening on the ground to make sure that these land use assignments are actually you know um uh consistent with reality on ground so that's the sort of iteration there with the land use map um with some of the Keystone projects I would say the iteration is probably a bit more direct with the community because those are um sort of very specific lines on the ground very specific descriptions of these projects so maybe just as one example the the uh green the the sort of the blue ring link network map that one really a lot of that came from the neighborhood based workshop in which we um actually were in a you know well in a zoom based conversation with the community um discussing very specific lengths and lines that might make up that blue network so um that one's less it's a lot more tangible and it's easier to have a conversation where you can directly we also during the process of of developing the plan um the city wouldn't in the first one of the first iterations was presented with um quite a greater number of strategies and actions to achieve uh some of the goals that we had set up and uh it was up to both the planning the consultant team and the uh city staff to determine what would work best in Stanford um so there were examples that you know we that are best practices from other cities that we did not think would work well in Stanford um but there were a lot of examples of best practices that we did think were were worthwhile and and are included in this um are you uh are you speaking like about different like alternative growth scenarios I mean uh we can become we can do those hand with one if not this cat program if I'm so this is one process yeah I'm just saying that I was trying to figure out how did we land at this point that we have a potential how we how we landed on this is based on the um best practices in planning and based on the land use land uses and infrastructure that makes Stanford the city that it is um so when looking at the charter for the Connecticut general statutes we have a list of things that we have to look into uh as I as I mentioned before infrastructure economic development it does uh direct us to look at the most efficient and sustainable ways to develop in a city it urges us to inquire and study transit oriented development um these so that's what we did with this um and these are not new ideas to Stanford um there was a Glenbrookie springale POD study that's probably five or 10 years old by now 2015 10 years old by now so this is this is not coming out of thin air um if you look back at the 2002 the 2015 master plans uh many of these tenants are within those plans uh the blue green link has been something that the city has been trying to work on since the 90s um transit oriented development uh again is something that we are statutorily required to look into and is the best practice for in pill development uh with mobile mobility options that's the best we're gonna get people to move oriented so it's a combination of best practices statutory requirements um yeah and you're right that there is always there is a difference for the thing uh that's the nature should we go into the future land use map for keystone projects you guys ready to folks want to come up and take a look and I would like if folks could get up and look at the future land use maps or we can really kind of dive in there can I give it a brief overview of similarities and differences so all of the meeting materials that the board has are available in these packets are I mean it is so this was hard to see after this one you can look at it online as well you can come up afterwards um so long as the planning board can continue on your discussion I

Mind kind of given a brief overview of similarities and differences.

So all of the meeting materials that the board has are available in these packets.

It is so this was hard to see.

You can look at it online as well.

You can come up afterwards.

So long as the planning board can continue on your discussion, I can imagine it would be fine.

If you want to look as well, you do the blow.

Yeah.

Okay.

So I can give everyone a brief overview of the future land use a lot on the line that you so, in terms of future land use, um, every 10 years as we know as part of the NASA plan, not comprehensive plan.

It's really important that you're able to hear what's being said both in the room and in the video phase.

Or if you'd like to do that, and just take it into another room, that would be great.

Thank you.

Okay.

You're once everyone.

So as I was saying, every 10 years, Stanford updates its future land use map is addition of how the city would like to grow for the next 10 years.

And this is informed by all of the public commentary that you know has been received in Vermont.

So to start the process of updating the future land use map, we took a really close look at the 2015 after fin um in all of the different future land uses that were included in that, and also difference between the future land use and what actually sits on the ground today, the current land use because all of the time via the city's specific vision 10 years down the road and how we would like to grow and use what ways and how we like you know residents of the state to use the land, but that all it doesn't always mess up in reality things change of the course of a decade, of course.

And so we looked at took a look at both of those maps.

Um thought there was room to streamline a lot some of the categories.

So for example, um we took a look, especially the residential category before there were, I think, five or six different objectal categories that were kind of you know, like kind of like teeth, you know, around the city, kind of scattered around.

And we thought that you know, as a vision for the future, zoning can do a little bit more of the heavy lifting and how we're regulating land use.

So if we're able to kind of provide a more holistic vision uh for different neighborhoods in the city through through different land uses, so we arrived at two different um you know residential land uses to start.

So there's a residential single family, these are all of the areas of the city where there's not infrastructure for kind of you know direct transit active to support um you know any kind of housing um change in housing land use, and then we um the technical use category is kind of our our low to the drive uh you know, single family residential to sort of like smaller um you know, do pack to their town home.

Um, so these are neighborhoods where there's a lot of existing different types of housing.

Um so we took a look at um you know game listing land use to make sure that all of these neighborhoods you know have kind of that existing mix that make Stanford such a unique place to live, and it's kind of a great uh option for people who are you know a smaller single family home or you know a duplex or a town home and want that kind of diversity of housing option.

And then another um you know category that is really kind of special to what we heard from a lot of the residents is to make sure that in every neighborhood they have kind of a little decentralized with the center where we can you know go you know walk from you know the Glenbrook they're off the Glenbrook to grab you know a cup of coffee um at the Glenbrook neighborhood center or the train station.

And so for each neighborhood, we uh you know, kind of based on a lot of the existing land uses, um, developed uh future land use category that's this next use neighborhood center, um, either kind of along major streets or um kind of in little nodes like these and sparkdale um that are next to the transit station.

So these are areas with kind of a subnex with the existing commercial activity, and we think they're you know a potential room for more.

So this is kind of where we start getting into the next uses.

I also just want to take a step back to this this um residential single family residential neighborhood, and then going into more dense uh land uses, mixed use.

So you can see so these future land use category names are changing because it seems to be confusing with our zoning designations.

Um within many of these single family can exist in any of these categories, and it does.

Um you can what it is is kind of a transition period from extremely low density, not a lot of infrastructure to support uh multifamily development, gradually getting more and more active.

Um, and you can see that in our different neighborhoods.

North Stanford uh does is not as accessible to the downtown, does not have the um water and sewer infrastructure that some of the neighborhoods south of the merit do have.

It's not to say that um we want anything to change in these neighborhoods, it's a categorization of what's there and trends that we are seeing happen as it is.

Um so and then kind of stepping up in that mixed use that we have mixed use urban.

And so these are areas that are you know, right kind of around downtown.

Um so you'll see that kind of pink category, um, you know, kind of getting up to the ridgeway full head in South End, um, that's kind of the two major places that we see that mixed-use urban category.

A lot of these areas are places where there's already kind of that urban skill.

Um, but the category is really just to provide a more co-hesive kind of look for how Stanford deals with this kind of higher density residential or mixed use development.

And again, this is capturing things that are currently happening.

So you guys will recall some plants, some zoning board applications you've seen come through.

Um, I think 1600 Summer Street, it was is a office conversion to residential.

Um, so we see that these trends are already starting to happen.

We are seeing a lot of office to residential conversions coming up this way.

You guys are all very well aware of the harbor point development down here, and it's kind of spilling over to some other some other developers.

So, how do we um make sure that the investment in infrastructure is also matched in these areas, not just focused down to the uh community campuses.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

So that one is a little bit kind of different from this like SEPA, but it's looking at all of the kind of larger parcels that are either former helping parks existing on the park or areas that are kind of like the Chelsea tier park called that are these large campuses.

Um, and so it's really just to provide a flexible framework, land use for, you know, it's not really saying that you know we want these uh campuses to change in any certain way, allowing them to transition over the next decade, however, you know, the market kind of takes them.

Um so for example, you know, chelsea is an example of one of those campuses here.

Um kind of some of the long road bridge.

And so the goal there is just to make sure they are kind of you know accessible to the community at larger parcels, um, and however, you know, they'll kind of change them that it's are you essentially saying that the market should affect land use or vice versa?

Um I I don't think it really is that it's kind of that expectation in the land use plan, it's really just a way to have a drive where the cases are and provide a flexible to you know change over the next.

Then you're putting the population 10 years from there, right?

So yeah, we have um we've done kind of that regional estimates, um, Stanford population over the next 10 years of becoming around 152,000 people, which is a 12% increase, which is along the lines of the past um 10 years of growth as well.

And so um, you know, one of the pieces of this plan and how we're kind of looking at future growth and where that should happen is to say that you know Stanford is a really really desirable place to live.

So a lot of people are moving here, um, you can have incredible access to you know both New York City in the South, the other areas of Connecticut, a huge you know, job center.

And so people are coming here, kind of the plan is really trying to say that you know people are coming here.

How do we how do we accommodate them in a way that's both you know efficient and sustainable mentioned in the statute requirements?

Should be out of accommodate them or how to control really what they do.

I I think that and that is part of it, right?

So um what the plan is this is Lindsay, um, what we're trying to plan for that growth.

Okay, so if we decide, okay, no more housing permit, no more building permits for housing, we're not going to build any housing, the cost of housing is going to continue to increase and increase and increase.

And then it becomes a city that's only affordable to extremely wealthy people, um, which is not how it is today.

We know that.

So this plan does maintain that the highest density development needs to stay within downtown, and then um potentially up towards these mixed use corridors.

But that is the highest density is in downtown and around the transportation center.

You guys all heard about CT DOT is doing this new TOD project.

We are trying to plan for that and accommodate that.

Um then to a lesser extent, lesser density, we are looking to accommodate an areas that are not going to be flooding, areas that have existing transportation, um, areas where we already see a diverse housing stop.

That those are the areas around Sprindale, Glenbrook, where the R2 and the midst neighborhood centers are along the west side or to the east side.

Um, and then we could expect that other areas like Westover, North Stanford, Japan, those residential single families could still there is room for additional housing up there, the infrastructure limits it.

Um, and so something more like an ADU or cluster subdivision is more in line with the character in those neighborhoods.

So, not to say that they wouldn't get any of this future population growth.

Um that is all what that is an option, and I think that's kind of what this plan is about is providing options.

If you live in a neighborhood that uh now allows ADUs, but ADUs are allowed, that's an option, you don't have to you don't have to do that.

Jeremy Lindner, I do have a question just going back to the community campuses.

Um I I'm interested to sort of understand dynamic of the development and still um the opportunity to have them become residential, but the growth of adding, you know, with trying to add new residents, right?

We don't want people to just not live your work in Stanford, right?

So I guess my question would be you know, how did we look at you know the growth of industry in Stanford and still having this need to be an office space for people that are coming in to still um possibly work at?

Yeah, so um Lindsay Cohen back in the um 80s and 90s, Stanford swung the pendulum really hard in office development.

Um we have millions and millions of square feet of offices, and um there was not a lot of housing development at that time, and what we're seeing now, especially with the onset of COVID-19 and working from home, the pendulum in terms of markets is swinging in the opposite direction.

People cannot uh necessarily want to work in suburban office parks, and the offices in downtown in and around downtown are empty.

Some of them are going into bankruptcy, so that is going to have a negative impact on the tax role for the city if those do go bankrupt.

So, how do we transition some of this real estate that is underperforming so that we can provide more housing, which is a need nationwide and in the city, and can address some of the concerns of our neighborhood of our residents and help economically our city.

Yeah, I guess there's a pendulum, right?

Like is the city going to switch two folds to presidential, right?

And then you're looking for space.

Yeah, that's part of also the proper vision that PQ and Elburn, maybe Chancellor kind of speak to a little bit more, um, and looking at the economic development and providing all those different opportunities, recognizing that you know, some of for example, the PA office is doing extremely well when other office types are under performing as long as we mentioned.

So I don't know if you sean you want to have anything.

Yeah, I know it's something that's it's really converting from you know looking at yeah, yeah this map right here and going forward to the economic side of it.

But but I think yeah.

Are you putting any analysis on how people move as population increases, particularly in a downtown area becomes uh a lot more popular?

Yeah, so that I think that's related to the plan use map specifically, but our entire connected vision is really looking at that exact question, um, and looking at how um you know land use and mobility kind of play go hand in hand and making sure that you know everyone is able to get around fairly smoothly.

So we have um a number of different strategies to make sure that it comes up with solutions, yeah, yeah.

There's not that's one of the most important parts of this plan because most of yes, because housing development, like we're seeing this right now.

Developers are merning housing based on our existing regulations.

Developers are converting uh uh office to residential, people are doing subdivisions, people are building housing the way it is right now.

Um we're talking about mobility mobility, but the city, we are the ones that need to advocate for the mobility and infrastructure improvements, both with the city and in our own capital funding and spending.

It's it's critical.

Should we should direct it as stress we can as well?

And something to think about in the upcoming capital budget season.

Yeah, so we have strategies for mobility and then also for infrastructure too, to make sure that any you know growth is supported by the two things now.

It's there sorry, sorry about me at the top.

Uh Jeremy Linear with that infrastructure, right?

And it's you know, it may be getting too deep into the weeds, but developer developer, you know, sharing in increasing that infrastructure, right?

You know, rather than city, yeah.

Yeah, yeah, we so um it's a balance right now.

So currently we have um requirements right obviously for the from the one market rate program, uh sidewalk provision, and if not providing it during a fee and lo.

Um sometimes it's they have to invest in citywide signal upgrades.

So we have enough and publicly available accessible open space.

So we have a number of different mechanisms right now to have big company city route some benefit.

Um I think there's more there's always more.

You want to put up a new high-wise building, right?

It's under a subway station.

They have to reuse someway subject, something you know, yeah.

The city of opportunity, the strategies and actions and affections they look a little bit kind of relationship between developers in the city and sharing structure costs.

You're projecting impact of schools.

So in terms of schools, that's like separate um budget process that's been undertaken by the pool system.

And so we looked at kind of their natural path and they call it copy down to 2040, I believe.

Yeah, I don't think you can do one without the other.

Exactly.

So yeah, that that's already been done and just uh they did a very very detailed work.

You're taking their information and putting it in your yeah, yeah.

So you can do a planning board.

So just for my super clinic, right?

Just because you know, like when you play each other like scattering, it doesn't mean that for example in LIBOR for example, but I have this point for that's correct.

What do you have to say because this is all standard looks like kind of how you're saying the family with the shield that at some point you should have high-dentity neighborhoods?

So you're laying it out till that future uh actions are somewhat component of this, but it doesn't mean that tomorrow you want to see a whole new package.

Exactly.

So that's cool.

So you in that differentiation point, so we I want to have to put that uh is there any uh two and uh uh one tweet right there's only so yeah so we think it's better to be more specific on the kind of development differentiates like when we level what it's more than like this highlight appointments, right?

And they will not think so declined based on this practice because uh collecting this uh what the most like see how we add more to it, plus some concern of the community saying what I want to do again.

I don't know what I want to do now.

Yeah, maybe more speaker Jeremy Blender played it board.

Um I I think that you know where it starts to say um uh um low rise, right?

Low rise can you know, some people say low rise is four stories, five stories.

That's you know, I don't know if that can be narrowed to you know two stories or something like that that you know really isn't changing the the integrity of the neighborhood, you know, going to like a flood book or something, you know uh that would be a admit that would be you know a two-story building or something to try to tighten.

I don't want to say tighten the parameters, but to gain clarity and you know, because it's really difficult that we need border.

So we have not architects, we have not been built.

really isn't changing the the integrity of the neighborhood you know going to like a blend book or something you'll uh that would be a admit that would be you know two story building or something to try to tighten i don't want to say tighten the parameters but to gain clarity and you know because it goes really difficult we need to less than the planning border so we have not architects we have not even say hey no you should not build like that we can be done do that like what you can this talking like the neighborhood the wheel does not stable and do a lot of one goal see one person yeah but that would be a little grabbing for the precision is just a point right maybe diving a little bit deeper into like existing land use patterns yeah um and developing the definitions of the future land use categories if you're yeah that's a that's early that's a great idea we'll do that um we are I think we will have to balance a bit with where the master plan leaves off and zoning picks up yeah so something um something that was in the last master plan that has caused a little bit of issues was a dwellings per unit and when a volume spare unit in a master plan area doesn't align with the zoning the zoning will take take take control um so that's where it gets a little sticky and what we think we'll be cognizant of that once uh even the existing ball something called design baseline design intellects designs like yeah we're designed looking and we do that they can windows can play at least we have a idea looking more the people would look like you know yeah that's just you can develop that yeah I think that's great that's like in in neighborhood centers maybe like buildings need the street there's a sidewalk with a grass amenity strip um more descriptive and that kind of goes along with this notion um the last master plan had a lot of discussion about character um we are statutorily not allowed to use the word character we have to describe what that means and describing these types of building characteristics is exactly what that um that bill wanted to be more specific what do we mean by character describes requirements stuff like that not necessarily set back requirements because that's gonna be zoning but describing describing a building meeting the street yeah an active ground floor picture okay not looking at a book well yeah we do have uh some actions document in the plan to kind of conduct more like a neighborhood specific design guideline just to make sure that we're not describing that yeah looking I mean community exactly exactly that's the idea as well yeah on the chat stuff on the residential stuff you do get into that a little bit with the same federal housing technology yeah yeah but whereas this chart kind of doesn't find so uh call it zoning like I don't think it's couldn't it be could something similar be done on the neighborhood we also be at 13 neighborhoods yeah you know the charts wouldn't be that long and uh some of them uh that this type of you know this as you started to say if we're this neighborhood this may be much more appropriate than this budget this other neighborhood this or this may be more appropriate than this I think between the land use where I quote between the land use category and an explanation of of what we mean that would be achieved because so the way that the land use categories are currently set up um residential single family notes it could include cluster subdivisions and A's um in the next category which is residential neighborhood the description says uh would include things like town homes do like this tripod did that get to what you're you're asking yeah more a little bit we also require um attaching sure sure idea yeah yeah well part of part of our dilemma is when we when they comment in the plan interpreters to a neighborhood you know the interpreted erroneous is broad brush applying to the entire neighborhood uh and that's never been our so kind of taking that into account you do have to neighborhood i i appreciate is is too broad even if you know certainly narrower than this but maybe it needs to be still more than I'm so I'm wondering um trying to think about the development of further development of describing what we want in these in these different categories and what the intention is behind the plan.

Um think about the development of further development of describing what we want in these in these different categories and what the intention is behind the plan.

Um there is and the planning does say what we've been getting some public comment on about like you're saying this one thing, you're saying you want to preserve our neighborhoods, you want to preserve Stanford, but then on the other hand, we're saying that we would like to introduce ADUs in cluster housing in in North Stanford and West Hover, or townhouses and uh two family dwellings in uh the west side and the east side.

So first of all, those uses already exist in those neighborhoods.

Second of all, that does not mean every single place in that category will be changed to a townhouse or a multi-family development.

We've gotten a lot of communication from Hubbard Height.

It's a beautiful neighborhood, it is important to Stanford identity.

There are no plans to rezone Hubbard Heights to multi-family.

I feel very comfortable saying that.

Uh and this master plan does not specify that either.

So um it is that high level.

If you look these specifically, the R2 residential neighborhood category is based on existing land uses a bit proximity to the flooding in certain areas.

Um transit accessibility and and infrastructure.

Um you're presenting this and trying to sell the problem.

That's something you have to really start with, and let them know that this is not all being every neighborhood that there's different homes in each neighborhood, and so that somebody that lives someplace where you've got only family housing once primarily a single family home that everybody knows their one family home that they pay whatever for is half a terabyte that they're gonna get a six-story building next to the new building.

You know, the main I wasn't here to so those of you were asked to address this.

My sense is there's a perception that there's a direct correlation between zoning regulation and things.

Oh, yes, yes, it doesn't always work out that way.

Well, it's just yes, um, at certain levels, not necessarily universal, and I think there's a perception public that to say that uh this broad area would be the next logical place to introduce mid-products or or slightly higher density uh residential uh typology uh is conjuring in their mind that you know next year the zoning is going to take that literally and it's gonna change the regulation.

I think we're saying essentially we have to worry about how people interpret the plan, yes, uh and how that affects their actions, which eventually affects the direction of the city.

I mean, the people in one family areas perceive the plan to say, well, you know, down the block you might have a seven-story building, maybe they're gonna fail and drive property values down.

So I think perception when it comes to a plan like this is all as is as important as the plan itself.

That's why I was trying to say we even say what would not be the same.

So it was like the one we're gonna say.

So yeah, hopefully, the column six fields or nothing like how do we think that's what yeah, I would go for it.

Uh this long you will be disappeared.

Hope you'll see uh the proportion of work of what means that houses development that has happened at Sanford.

all the shells even so yeah how we provide my idea of six fields or not really document like how do you think that's what yeah I would say what was go for it yeah yeah this on you will you just be hope you'll see uh the proportion of working that houses so most of the development that has happened at Sanford uh requirements right and that's absolutely the way out and that's what Musk get wants and like value to send the whole because in the document I didn't actually mention one people right but you know distinguishing between just a short lease or anything too or then you have an opportunity to actually take a stake in stand for long term so based on the experience document should have some people or not yeah yeah we looked a lot at uh increasing from one actually but any kind of access for especially you know younger families or if you're wanting to buy a home for the first time maybe you want to speak to a little bit more about that yeah in the plan not in this particular small but the plan also has the strategy that actions that we have to have to understand that in terms of providing and building everybody correct that's not that way right there's a deficient by the work and answer and we are just like this one by vertifying the technology makes ownership easier because again provide more of that policy on the market if they cannot afford one time.

Uh friendly reminder to speak up please yeah the point sir is that perception is perhaps more important thanks and yeah when we put this plan together run it by people who aren't professionals and see something and you may be one thing and they may see this is a way to actually understand to New York City when you're what we were thinking our plan develop it will keep standard of public city.

We did a very you know thorough round of revision with our technical advisory committee who you know many of them are not you know planning professionals and so a lot a lot of other interesting we know we propose strategies and you know people do you think about this um and you know many of our people are after um like what it would be you know like you boil it down into the most common you know what you can just to make sure that you know everybody was reached get a general understanding of what the plan is saying so we have you know pretty a kindround to that to that end um and then you know as well as you know you know you know workshopping a lot of the strategies connections with the public as well last point that uh parking which line uh I know there was a comparison analysis of when you just a couple of years ago we came to the conclusion that's that's what we were told right so some developments now will be like in the downtown in the downtown in the downtown so the anecdotal thing that personal experience like that somewhat that's developed a public apples kind of yeah it's impossible to get a lot so somehow we need to lessen this because it's all in one without saying that should be continued yeah and I would push you to be considered that I think I don't think we have too much time and public but obviously going around the speech trying to find that we take one feature going well I encourage you to envision a future where people have a choice on how they want to get down yes yeah I mean I get it bus culture here and anywhere I it's not it's not great they don't have bus shelters the service is not great but that doesn't mean we can't ask for more and ask for better um our having safer bike networks and sidewalks are stamp forward program which is a micro mobility service by the city is immensely popular and we are already trying to plan for its expansion so imagine a future where the car isn't the only option to get downtown if you want to take your car take your car but to have the option of choices um is quite free yeah I I don't see how you can really put together a meaningful plan that increases the population coming out with a way you can move people okay if even if increases the population by 2000 whatever it is so we're gonna try and buy something um that was a thing that I didn't say in I agree and I just want to make play again I just want to make clear the plan is not saying we want to grow by 12% the plan is saying this

I I don't see how you can really put together a meaningful plan that increases the population without coming out with a way you can move people okay.

So we're going to try and buy some more standard um thing side in the city in the I agree.

And I just want to make plays again.

I just want to make clear the plan is not saying we want to grow by 12%.

The plan is saying the city is naturally growing by 12%.

How do we make sure Stanford stays great?

Yeah.

And to the point, I think there's a lot of different modes of transit that that connected vision, you know, encourages.

And then also on your point about parking specifically, um, one of the options in there to look at a shared parking management strategy.

And so you know there might be a lot of you know parking lots, and you know, if you're trying to park for the Hallway for a festival, there might be a lot of lots that are just kind of closely different by that the city can work with those operators to make sure that maybe there's a strategy that they share parking three.

You know, the book is modularly as like automatic way to take it to speed that brought bacon buttoning lots.

So many pass that uh city development, yes, or something like that can be done.

Exactly.

Plus that we use us to do plus share to uh plus year can be what they would next plus coming, or you know, what things like yeah, I mean so many things can be done.

We can delete yeah, and I think you should you are probably the objects that say some automatic and yeah, and then it's a free white fly composed of each one of the recommendations because yeah, okay.

So those are all the foundations, yeah, or the other things that have I mean, I think you're gonna make a major cultural vision if people five questions.

Well, yeah, I think there's uh the part of the that mobility plan is make sure that the options are available and they're working well.

And said that you know someone wants to think about they can if they want to drive, they can hardly though kind of just like making the system more efficient.

Um you have pluses now, right?

Yeah, and but the I it's the service times, the routes, it's not optimal, right?

Uh, we need to work with either work with Connecticut DOT a little bit better to optimize those routes.

Uh other cities have taken over control of their bus system.

Don't think this plan proposes that.

No, it's just working because we do have a working relationship with them on this bus.

So looking into that check out you said a city that has the options, maybe for the next uh minimable 30 years.

Sorry for the next 30 years, one of those options is going to have to be cars.

Yeah, yeah.

Um, and if you can't present master plan, it's sound like you know, we're going to get rid of cars, you know, in the next one to three years.

Is that what it sounds like?

Um, there are many strategies that they would sound like okay.

Upper heights, let me use that as it took the city of Stanford 15 years to get the downtown that now is it's I was here 50 years ago.

Um, and the downtown that exists now is not certainly not the same that the downtown network.

Yeah, that's absolutely yeah, no, and not a value.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Okay, uh it just doesn't happen overnight, right?

And we can't paint any picture or any present any suggestion that we're gonna try to make it happen.

So the Hubbard Heights thing as an example at a minimum should not be a one to explain strategy.

Um, you know, if anything should probably be you know, a 10 to 20 year action strategy, which means some first action maybe at tangents um transitions between um you know this change and that change, you know, but in the next five years, we focus on that, not this at all, and then perhaps in the in the second half of this, or even in the next master plan from 2035 to 2045, it takes the next step into the you know, argument.

So maybe there's a bit of like prioritization to be done, and I think looking in the strategies and actions, we have a table um where that includes timeline and it's currently medium term, long-term, near term.

Uh maybe if we add years-ish to that, that might also be helpful.

Many are many of these uh actually strategies, yeah.

They are oh many more it's in the housing area, yeah.

That's where you're talking about you know, this this issue was in the housing section, yeah.

No, not in this future, yeah, but it was kind of reflective, I would say.

Well, I think there's a danger in and or not doing very well but I I wouldn't want to tie land use to a timeline just because it's oh I forgot, yeah.

Um all the more reasons why we you know any of those strategies that talk about what three years or three to five years or five to seven years or whatever, maybe we have in place of subsection.

I see, yeah.

I think it's it's just a way for the city to understand, you know, and they're making their list of action items for like you know, next year they're looking at all the near-term actions and saying, okay, let's think about starting on these and then well, I think um white new prior topics exactly, but maybe there's a different way to see this one is more important than this one for the next uh in the near term call it so look at uh priority one versus this one is a priority two, yeah, or something, yeah.

I think that will come into play in part of the capital budget, um in uh where the zoning board decides determinants to take their applications if we ever get direction from administration now or future on our priorities.

Um, but just we are so this is this Lindsay.

I'm looking at the next steps for the plan.

We are going to develop this further, and I think we can that can shed a bit of light on timeline and process after this comprehensive plan is approved.

So for example, um, if we're saying to prioritize investments in sidewalk infrastructure, um the planning board gets the first pass of the capital market.

So think about that when you're putting together your capital budget.

Um, but just because it gets capital budget funding, it's still a much longer process beyond that um things to continue to check up on some things, um and be achieved through private developers actually doing it.

Um getting new sidewalks up hybrid road is not uh it would be great, for example, the building building blocks development, a private redeveloper, a private developer redid that area, and we got the new sidewalks right there.

Um when we get in new funds for sidewalks, we can identify where priority areas are.

Yeah, yeah.

Um how do we uh maximized our okay until we need goals to develop the most helpful and do anything more to get more economic benefit because the next books I don't know the uh thing to three systems are not in all comfortable, yeah.

But we think that I wouldn't have said I would be getting business if we think that's how the station, you know.

I mean, just as a break, speaking again to I would say this whole plan are things that we can do because what this plan is, we these are planning best practices.

We would not be suggesting these if we thought that this was bad for Stanford.

So um having connected open spaces is very tight.

Yeah, but I'm saying a bugging board in your speed about so what do you want to uh track people from the city to Stanford?

Or just people can do back and forth, yeah.

Yeah, I mean that's close.

It's more late.

Yeah, yeah.

So Lindsay, Chad's right, that's happening.

We and we're we see that a lot.

Uh that people are fleeing from New York City and coming to live in Stanford.

Um part of this plan is to accommodate for growth in a way that maintains the great things that we have in Stanford.

So the transit accessible development guidelines focus on um how to um invest in our new favorite centers to make them uh more vibrant, to have more the well-working retail ground floor retail opportunities around the train station.

That is something that would be attractive if that's what that's what you're interested in.

Um there are things within these projects that make the city attractive to new residents as well as existing residents.

For example, the body that I state, the state the state built out.

Okay, that was a big uh individual stuff.

And then yeah, the state buffer can the redevelopment of the transit center as well, and then that also kind of five sealed and use a bit um in terms of envisioning the kind of downtown and you know area around the transit center as the the core of the city and absorbing the most amount of growth.

Right, out of any right.

So it's making sure like to your point someone in the coming, you know, living in Stanford and New York or right versus that very ultimately equally access, you know, kind of keep um that already what we want to do is well, I'm sorry I'm I'm also thinking about like Stanford's independence from New York City and our own economic growth and development, um, and kind of like creating a niche for ourselves, and we we do have that in the professional services industry, um health care industry as well, and uh the prosperity section really focuses on it has a number of different aspects, but one of them is um attract how attracting those businesses and how to prepare our workforce to work in those businesses and provide housing for the people who are already working in those businesses but not living in Stanford, which is significant because some of the the highs the high value industries attract a lot of transplants people like they are either like active elsewhere or what they prefer to do here, so how do you make our way to the president at the bottom of that their children have the skills and the jobs that are here, yeah?

So it's a bit of providing for attractive place for newcomers, but for what we already have here as well, making sure that our residents can work in the jobs that are here.

So natural break in the conversation.

Um we've been jumping around a bit.

Do you guys want to focus in on a Keystone project?

Um anyone in particular, do you want to keep on going with questions?

How are you guys feeling?

I brought waters and should we okay?

So we'll take a five-minute break.

Okay, five five minute break.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Call the trailer.

Well, I know a lot of people call it a lot of all the squad.

Yeah, offering class five years or something.

Yeah.

Yes.

Yeah.

Yeah.

That's from my comment.

I'm going to go down to the airport very happy because they're going to be able to do it.

I think the big screen is going to be a good thing.

I don't think it's a good thing.

They say it's very important.

And you're going to take it.

I don't know.

Yes.

No, but it comes down to the end.

That's kind of like ten percent cleaner.

Yeah, I think you're going to see the point.

Yeah, yeah.

Oh, we didn't think about it.

Can you have any right?

It's probably possible to see it's amazing.

Yeah, we'll do that.

So that's really like a certain one.

So you're trying to see that or I think it's basically something like this.

Yes.

Can we give it to the future?

Okay.

That's why I think that's it.

Yeah, okay.

So um perspective.

Yeah, so there's a thing which is going to move the transportation transportation platforms.

They are talking about standing board meetings.

Bringing down the discussion.

Okay.

Okay, thanks everyone for reconvening.

So now we'll move our attention to the keyone project, which is Lindsay mentioned, and this is Eliza from Kasaki, by the way.

And so, you know, as we know, um, Stanford is home to a number of different you know, village centers around the network rotation of surveillance.

Um so these are you know micro narrow stations that have been studied, you know, going back you know, 10 years with Lindsay mentioned the um transit uh you know feasibility study that looked at in the area around the training station, um, you know, how can we make this area you know more vibrant?

Um, is that in um you know making the area um more accessible and with different things to support additional development around the train station, essentially if someone is living or working in this area around the train station, making it um a more easily you know walkable visible place to be.

Um and this um you know helps kind of usher in some of the village commercial zoning um that was adopted in 2018, which um the IGLT and the here has made a number of different kind of improvements to the areas and especially looking at the Glenbrook um village center, um you know you know, improvements at facade and better sidewalks, better lighting, and street trees, so things that are really enhancing the kind of current conditions on the ground um around the train station.

So this um key zone project kind of goes a step further and look at you know what are the specific land use changes that can be accomplished to help um incensify some of these things that cost in the CFA.

So this um PSO project recommends you know specific, you know, implementation guidance, data guidance that the city can take to kind of take the next step and make a kind of the area role translation um you know more accessible for um you know a little bit of additional housing, mixed use development to support the translation.

Um so this has been something that's been requested by a lot of community members across all of our open houses.

Um being uses some of the lowest pain fruit for initial development, so we're thinking of where we want campers to grow, leave our areas that are you know directly connected to the train line, um support V transit, um or supporting the infrastructure and quite a lot of different housing already is um areas, and so they're they're really um excellent kind of contenders for supporting additional development and increased um commercial improvement.

So um that's kind of the synthesis of the um transit acceptable development.

I don't know when they want to add another point that you know undermined.

I think for now.

Okay, any questions from the planning board okay?

So the next one is uh fun line, it's the blue green link.

So Lindsay mentioned this is something that Dan Stanford has been looking at going back to the 90s, um, and making uh really easy links to the waterfront.

So I think one of my first impressions of community standard, you know, on the waterfront has this amazing co-fine, but I I never really thought, you know, so it's like how if we're all being to the towards neighborhoods along the waterfront, how can we make sure that people are able to access some of these public accessible waterfront locations through you know safe um and kind of TC ways of transit?

And so um throughout one of our neighborhood workshops, we heard from people who are living in Cole, living in Japan, water side who really wanted to have you know better ways to walk and bike you know with their families on the weekend from these points.

Um so we heard a lot.

So let's say take an example of someone we talked to who's living in Cove with his family, and you know, he family are biking to um you know coming park on the weekend.

Right now it's an incredibly dangerous bike ride, and so we almost hesitate to take his male design on this ride.

And so we're providing um you know street design concepts and you know route frameworks to see to prioritize capital funding to say, okay, here's you know what this current breed is, not the road and water size.

Here's what the current freeze looks like.

So have you know two drive lanes, uh, unprotected bike lane, um, and kind of triple planting pathways on either side.

If you're biking, it's you know, pretty dangerous condition.

Um, you're not you know protected against the car.

Um, so we're just saying, you know, there's a simple thing that we could do um to make this a little bit safer for um you know, whether you're walking, you're biking or driving, it kind of prioritizes all modes and um you know street planting frameworks and things like that to make it really beautiful and safe kind of connection and you know predicted cost those.

No, because it's gonna take further study.

Yeah.

So if I will just say COVID is a really good example because concurrent with this plan is the full, this is Lindsay, um, is the COVID neighborhood study.

So um basically what we've heard is that um some of that housing situations in Cove is there's illegal units, there's over parking, um, there's unsafe conditions on folk road and other side streets.

So what's happening is there's an independent study being undertaken on that neighborhood where these ideas that are high level at the comprehensive plan will be further developed and refined on a neighborhood-based level where they have where somebody has the opportunity to get down that high grade um plan is much higher level.

Any other questions on the one?

Okay.

Um moving on to the bridgeway both head mobility vision is an interconnected um build-in.

And so uh, you know, right when we start, we heard a lot about that about the streets like so being kind of a main road center coming in from downtown up to Ridgeway Bull Ped and how you're kind of moving to the northern parts of the city.

Um, but we heard a lot about you know different conditions on these roads, you know, traffic is moving too fast, so it's not a safe.

Um, so um as kind of a car development plan, we took a look at this area that's kind of bound, you know, between the Ridgeway Bull Pet and Intersection up here um down to kind of the balance of now.

Um so this is providing kind of through that piece of mixed use urban land use.

So not to say that anything you know that existing in this neighborhood would change day one, but just like kind of a cohesive vision for next use urban area that's getting you up to the Ridgeway Bullhead, kind of that full set intersection that's already kind of as those urban conditions.

So we're kind of connecting those dots through uh you know these different conditions on that sort of summer street.

And so you know, through this um section, we're recommending kind of a number of different ways that you know these conditions should be so back to the point of you know, recommending different sort of like ways of value which happened.

We're recommending you know, active um kind of engagement with the streets for retail or through holiday narcissist, um, not kind of having any you know street walls that are blanket when you're passing it at things that it was kind of a boring um you know, condition.

Um we're recommending you know, various conditions on making sure that you know all modes of transit can get on, you know, kind of up and down these roads um in a safer way to kind of alleviate some of the traffic um congestion concerns as well.

And there's uh you know separate kind of that for three, so they'll leave it happening right now as well.

Um, and then also we offer a number of different conditions that the city can kind of consider for um redesigning the bull-the intersection, which is something that happens as part of the long rate high ridge corridor study that was also back in 2015.

Um, but we're kind of just providing you know some options at the same time we kind of take forward if they want to redesign better questions better.

Um it's a great example of how long things take, right?

So that study um on the redesigning the intersection done 10 years ago.

Uh we haven't done anything, it's incredible, I mean, incredibly different whole project to approach, right?

But now that we're seeing all the as of right development happening with the whole foods and the shake shack and all that um and we're seeing some population density increases coming up the summer in Bedford Street corridors naturally.

How can we pick this 10-year-old study back up again?

Now it might be time to act on it based on what's happening in our current land use trends.

So that plan is 10 years old.

This is how long some of these things take.

Yeah, there's a lot of great ideas like that that it kind of feeds out if I think that you want to bring care for that for that being that you know we're bringing back up, and it's really good ideas for um any questions on the point.

Yeah, there's just one we have supposed to be a large time, yeah.

The L shape.

Yeah, so left hand like this can be right.

So this is looking at a kind of typical intersection um on uh that buried cover three.

So it's kind of it's not really choosing one, it's providing an option for either uh three.

Um this is uh kind of cost three intersection um and then this would be that breaker cover three.

And so we're just proposing uh we have a six-foot high block, a six foot bike lane, that's offered from car to put drive lane, a possible kind of loading zone, uh, and then uh six like uh five-second test and that's you guys look uh this discussion for us on the future.

So just trust yeah, so we've been talking with the team that doing that for two studies.

Um they're saying that is kind of getting underway right now.

So one of the options of the plan is to um you know kind of implement the recommendations for that is that's a more detailed study.

Um we wanted to acknowledge the plan of something that's going on right now.

Yeah, yeah, that's I think uh you know the plan is looking at a lot of the things that are happening in Stanford right now and trying to accommodate all of those different studies options and uh provide kind of common frameworks and they for the main to carry forward.

Yeah, thanks.

Next, okay.

I don't understand the view shop on the LTE part of that.

So as we know standards very logical rule here, that's part of that that's the how we have the particular methods and the volume.

So we don't plan we have we have many strategies about people how more one of them sits about increased supply.

And what's the purpose?

We verified the topology of how exist.

So but as we hear about increasing supply, so all we think about the apartment powers, like the six-low buildings, but that's not like we have that's we have the middle housing, which is what's in between a slightly higher housing and looks like we work about door typology because that's what that middle that's in the middle of the topology that can really work well with the whole neighborhood, but that's what we increase the supply to make housing more affordable to like the home higher or that would be more.

So here we have the multiple apartment, the APU, the town home, I don't know for how and politically have the value because the government's outfill project.

This is not to say oh, you have to build this, but rather we're providing context about where they have exist, and also policy tools in the plan to enable the supply of these what actual building that available for the option where they have or existing homeowners.

So we uh Robbie, you are this is Lindsay.

Robbie, you were asking about home ownership opportunities.

Um there's financing mechanisms that the city can't do anything about, but by allowing ADU, um perhaps it could be a source of income for an existing homeowner to help them stay in their home.

Similar happens with the multiplex apartment.

Perhaps somebody owns a single family home right now, they're an empty nester, maybe they're having trouble covering their bills.

Well, if you turn it into a turn it into a duplex, it stays the same on the outside, but uh an additional person living in it, and that might help the building owner maintain and continue to live in their home.

Um, so it's not just about the the developers, but it's about the existing residents, and it's an option, it's not a requirement.

Yes, not everywhere, no.

Um, there are certain requirements on lot sides and changes.

There is a recommended action to look at the ADU regulation.

What kind of time?

So I have one question.

Jeremy, uh going back to the study that we just talked about in code right now, and that seems like an area where there's a lot of AUs or you know, multi-family homes, you know, I I guess as the what's happened in the cove area, you know that we thought about or done the studies of could this happen in other areas of the city with having parking issues, etc.

with moving forward with something like that.

Yeah, so in the code, it's a really great example.

Um, the zoning in COVID does not match the land usage.

There are illegal apartments popping up there.

I think that's a result of the housing crisis, need for affordable units.

Um part of the residential neighborhood category recognizes that there's a range of housing options in an area, and it would be down to the zoning to understand okay, where does it make most sense in the code neighborhood to allow duplexes to triplexes, quadplexes, which would then be going through the approvals process and the building permitting process, versus where in these areas does it not make sense to allow for those types of uses in coal, for example, where there's major flooding, uh, that that wouldn't make sense to increase sense in those areas.

I guess we see there's an issue down there, but yeah, could this cause a set of systemic issue throughout you know another portion of the city by changing that by recommending opportunities?

I would and I the last part of that, what I what I left off saying is that this is why the keys, the other visions, the other keystones and other strategies are so critical to the plan because it's not just about adding housing because that would lead to a disaster situation.

It's about adding mobility choices, it's about making our open spaces more accessible, it's about investing in infrastructure that will make it the city more sustainable and resilient.

So we're not just adding people.

The growth isn't just adding people, we're trying to plan for how to accommodate all of that, not just by providing housing, but providing mobility choices, open space choices, commercial um opportunities of choice.

So Jerry again go back to that is and then I have to look closer to it.

Is you know, the parking or you know, requirements for that.

I'll use an example of myself, but I wouldn't doubt that I'll still drive down, right?

It's it's it's just the nature of maybe it's laziness, but it I'm curious.

I'm curious.

I I would be interested to figure out how, and if there were um better sidewalks, maybe with more shade or better bike lanes, or stare forward, or perhaps instead of going downtown to Honey Drills to get your coffee, you have one right below your your place of living.

Uh that would be an option too.

I wonder if in those cases you might choose to uh to not go.

I wonder, I don't know.

I don't know, but also you have that right.

You have the right to get an informants.

Yes, well, again, but I yes chat screw this one.

to get your coffee you have one right below your your place of living uh that would be an option too i wonder if in those cases you might choose to uh to not go i wonder i don't know i don't know but also you have that right you have the right to get an informs yes well yeah but i yes chat screw this one um finance of the apartment um many of most of them um choose to have a car to get out of stamp on occasion when they want to go visit someplace else in connect some do but the surveys surveys of the buildings in sandwich is that uh and and based on data is that folks that are living in downtown and in those apartment buildings are less likely to have a car are less likely to want a car that's what our that's what our statistics are and I'm more dispute that yeah um but in the long term um and let's say that now the kind of in their tank here for the meaning of that and they're uh motions along the way and your job the bike is going well but they're then going to choose to buy a car um because the online you know uh this and Ubers and cars and whatever's all of that here made out to be so as somebody's wealth increases and increases and increases it just and it how many outlets but don't you think they'd also move out of downtown too then well um but it's to the extent they move out of downtown reason yeah yeah um but that's that's their force right like they can choose to have a car they yeah but but I you know again the cities challenge is not to dictate which as you said earlier by the by not providing protected bike lanes by not providing a good bus service we are saying the car is the only option oh no i i won't go you know the good bike lanes and and uh better about surveys but as I said just can't turn say some of these up and people would work on you know very narrow streets you know barely two lane and they're already parking on both sides if it's about uh it is look at this project the impact of this single family houses in the neighborhoods that this would be placed in uh is uh we're not proposing the placement we're talking about Apple um that work with the compact of the neighborhood well these more popular so this is the only change anything so if this is a recommendation say the zone the the the zoning board is um decides to take this up in a certain neighborhood after study and they come up with certain zoning districts only in that case only if when the zoning is defined would somebody project the potential maximum number of units if every single person decided to redevelop to the mess so that's just so far away from where this is at basically it is meeting it's fine the sky clock in the future it's a vision that's what the conference and plan is a vision similar for Google obedience as opposed to yeah yes and I mean 11 I one thing I I looked at the yeah when you call it the area where you could reflect triple town homes the circumaries seem to be limited to the areas that have quite small lot whereas the larger lot area the North Stanford and West of the half acre three acre lots still wouldn't allow any of those that struck me as a little bit odd because those lots actually handle additional units better than these tiny lots of the land could but the infrastructure could not and the transportation it would be we have to get the buses much better working in addition the the yeah I'm just not seeing how pretty familiar with folks and I live in pretty one of the areas that I think

That struck me as a little bit odd because those lots actually handle additional units better than these tiny lots close to the land could, but the infrastructure could not, and the transportation would be we have to get the buses much better working.

In addition, the the yeah.

I live in one of the areas that I think possible service groups have the lots are tiny here.

I just don't see where you're family out and five clicks and et cetera are fitted there.

I could see it.

Not that it did anybody want to know, I can see a business place for huge lots theoretically because kind of do it.

And those sewers.

I think you make a good point, and it kind of shows how slow this is gonna take.

Like there are a lot of small lot single family homes that are not going to work as a duplex.

You can't put a duplex on it, so it's gonna stay a single family home, right?

So until you know small owner chooses, so there's some of the model and it's gonna take change.

So which is which is a method process is a feeling.

I'm not talking necessarily the entire city with couple of looks in.

Can I ask another time?

Going back to the future land use map.

I I try to compare the small as a computer, but compare like for land use map to the the 2035 and 2025, and one thing that's over there that's where you have the label is the far food arbory and actually is all the spot apart that science with our but anyway.

There's I'm wondering that a specific proposal should dramatically look like 10 times the size of what was shown in the current plan.

Is that a proposal to make that large enough to support grocery stores and growth stores and uses that aren't in North Stanford now, or is that the screen?

We'll have to double change that thing.

Oh no, yeah, that's the area that covers the gas station up there, and there's uh Giovanni's deli and a dry cleaner, and the elementary school is right there.

Yeah, it's shown shown about 10 times the size of which colour double check.

This is I've always wondered if there was a possibility of having drugs for the supermarket in North Stanford.

Uh carbon and reducing auto use, yet everybody there driving five miles building, and so I thought they actually posing that out of commercial, or might just one additional thing about that.

This is a minor notebook.

That's actually where you have that label this part of the exactly H percent or the farm.

Yeah, well, you know, I'll I'll look into that by thank you though.

And we're talking about housing first.

That's why I'm not coming about how it's um, I guess most of the other exceptions, how things are elements where again the government can have the fact that they want so there's more about the working with the demand.

I think apply to the double curve and makes it look easier, more than it's probably that we might be backing up.

Okay, the last one about economic development.

So in the plan, we have multiple strategies about major business that is the high growth industry area, I don't think it makes the difference, but there's also one element that's really important to like stack or cost, and that's almost all businesses not to be more.

And this particular keystone project addresses the key for the small businesses as we know traffic.

So for them to conquer.

And specifically, we are proposing a commercial activation toolkit, which are a set of strategies that the city can consider to make sure that more people are going to those typical businesses, they have more close traffic, and it's also easier for them to expand and grow and also make the income.

So one of the tools is regulatory changes, and there are multiple zoning and also permitting related recommendations there to make it easier for, for example, like a new shop owner to open store, or for a restaurant in the place that it's sent to be able to accommodate some outdoor seating as well.

And we are providing examples from other cities that have tried similar things in the past and worked.

The second type of tool that we're providing here is more about programming and activation.

So those are sort of like public arts, mural, but also capital urbanism, where you temporarily activate a vapor block or a parking cost to make additional spaces for vendors for entrepreneurs for neighboring business to attract for the third tool in the toolkit is about capital projects.

Again, these are things that the city government can directly invest in, especially the future capital budgeting process.

So thinking about how when we're in capital bank or capital recommendations, how can we make the business impact, like the positive business impact?

One of the criteria in which we ran away and project that's gonna be really helpful, but also thinking about uh investing in Plaza and Park and Sweet and Street State directly in those commercial areas, it can be really easy for people to walk there, people to convey parts and well, they can also feel very comfortable working there for their so they're frequently so they're um um so they're going to even more uh stores that they didn't go to in the past, and last but not least, I think uh Robbie mentioned that in the earlier discussion technology, right?

And we try to as well, or even uh larger areas where we have we Wi-Fi, and we try places where you have um certain, like say um polls or like smart infrastructure that displaces the weather that shows you what's the really interesting events coming up, so maybe also sponsored by a local um advertiser or like a business as well to showcase their business.

So those kinds of uh activities and investments have worked in places like Chathamoga, Kansas, and also for keys and other cities.

So we're providing case studies of those tools that places have used to really activate their commercial area, but also diversify the commercial offering so that they are not all concentrated on like a few soft downtown, but maybe also in smaller scale neighborhoods as well, and then make it both to be possible for the shop owners, that is owner to earn more revenue and have more customers, but create also really vibrant vibrant playlists that everyone here feel proud to go with the department.

So that's the uh last example, the journey.

Um with the universal activation, right?

I see it's really focused on you know small business commercial, I guess with any thought for the two trying to get larger corporations.

Yes, you know, there's no mention of any trying to develop, you know, there's no mention in Santa Cruz, right?

You know, we don't want to look at a company these people live here and work here, and all these the big business is one of the four key strategies in the larger last.

So this particular keystone talks about the small businesses, and then we have a whole section dedicated to uh attracting more big businesses, and also making sure that the work was planning aligns before you can.

And I just also think some of these um commercial activation ideas could be applicable to some of the um the ground floor making retail here in downtown, like allowing pop-ups, uh short-term activation.

No, which is which is great, but you know, and then with those to that and we trade in the city, where the people that just live here in working in your city, which are very more playing.

uh short term activation no which is which is great but you know and with goes to that to you know not having a trade in the city where the people that just live here in work in New York City which I think everybody's a little bit more to play but in yeah what you want to say yeah but yes that some of these activities definitely the ground successfully of like the larger office that you have and then outside of the Keystone project in the larger aspect of strategies that are also um enhancing the partnership between the high tech sectors which again is the uh a large role area in the region and their relationship with the diversity so that again we can have given more innovation have it their backway type dating jobs and also the work with training programs that are a must to make sure that those jobs stay local so that you don't just have people elsewhere if they talk the children algorithms here five years also build to those we also have strategies about um marketing also uh again um that you know economic bottom department where we work with very closely the development about this they have a lot of additional programs to be uh track like new fitness is coming in so we also demanding additional venues and conferences that it can go to uh joint different more bestness i'm gonna point you to um taking a look at strategies 27 and 28 um 27 is up scale local workforce to fuel high growth industries um with a number of actions in there that tell us how to do that um as well as the examples of how other cities have done that and examples of things Stanford's doing that contribute to it um as well as strategy 28 break down the barriers for residents to access workforce development opportunities there's actions to say you know what does that actually mean what the city is already doing and what are other cities doing that um that have been successful and question exactly yeah um yeah right through a strategy three anyway it has language talking about encourage high quality design harmonizing the existing fabric i found it to be so general that I I didn't know what it's specified or a little more tree what that means um strategy for this thoughtful with the buildings based department specific anyway I found some of this language in general useful I don't know exactly how to address that but somewhere here it said high quality design five people to have five different point that strategy is the result of some of our neighborhood workshops or really important to really find high quality design especially in development where there were concerns that new development might not be kind of designed in a way that is uh you know kind of respecting the local field standards but we want to make sure that that was really front and center uh definitely to your point like there what does that mean if people could have different kind of um definitions of that um yes we put Stanford I don't there's many different yeah we have the field we can talk about yeah feel Stanford which reimagined yeah modern building what is building so I just don't think that's where it is yeah that's a I think it's what we can definitely look at specifying the learning uh but some of the actions in there look to working with different neighborhoods um to make sure that we can like you know come up with design guidelines that might be appropriate for various neighborhoods so it's not saying that there's design is uh you know a standford but it could kind of make the different um style based on where you're very talking about and and it's also a process like we I think uh we've been hearing a lot about design guidelines and how and the new buildings are a whole mix of different styles uh some questionable uh and so we acknowledge that we have to do the design guidelines what we're hearing is kind of a more new england architectural style with shingles or brick is is what people kind of like but we need to study that and we need to develop you know is that just what we're hearing what what is it that that is it different from neighborhood to neighborhood and that's yeah so we're kick starting with a strategy for further that's a combat at the very end that is not a guideline action apologies that is we have currently what we've heard the about an intention or actually

What what is it that that is it different from neighborhood to neighborhood?

And that's yeah, so we're kick starting with a strategy for further that's not that at the very end that is not a guideline after the apologies that is we have article what we've heard about the five in the future, but it doesn't slide that's not it that we can not tell us that wasn't the time it's like just be a part of that part of the data.

Yeah, I think this would probably this will prioritize it.

So um developing design guidelines has been on the landing bureau to do list for a bit.

Um it hasn't been prioritized.

This helps prioritize it.

So in that report, I'm just curious.

Okay, that's good.

Was any was there any discussion whatsoever?

Introducing the issue.

There's an extra different ways of how we're gonna have time today.

So what the strategy tries to do is to um you know provide frameworks for by design, but not bought down ideas, right?

Um so that's something that you have that you can kind of think with a level.

Speak with your your planning board members, and you know, if that's something you would want to be included in the plan.

Um you can email me, call me.

Um we can set up a time to talk.

Uh planning board members cannot discuss topics of agendas or both with more so you Jay and Vale could not talk, but you and Bill could talk.

Um so uh call me, email me, we can set up some time.

Do you want to talk to the property?

So um, so it sounds like we're kind of closing wrapping up the meeting, but I wanted to make sure we touched on a process for creating the plan with comments and team for both you know the planning board and also the community at large.

So we released the job plan back in early July, and so it's been um out and available for public comment for a number of weeks down and have the open half and known remark, and then we have you know tonight public um forum and then a few planning for public hearings coming up, you know, with your body, uh one on September 9th and one on the first thing that'll be in first and nine club and virtual, and so we're looking forward to those.

Um right now we're in the process of we received a lot of different public comments, and we're in the process of reviewing those building those um at the meetings on the 9th and 15th will be kind of showcasing some of the updates that you know we made based on you know all the kind of coalistic um you know feedback of those comments.

Um so we'll have an updated version of the plan.

Um at those different so that's like the MP going forward.

Any questions on process or anything like that?

We have any final questions from the board.

If not, I would like to thank us and excellent job as usual.

And that concludes our agenda for this evening.

The next readily scheduled planning board meetings are on August 12th, August 26th and September 25th.

The time now is 16 minutes of nine, and this meeting is a channel.

Sorry, I'm gonna correct those up to the meeting.

It's it's um today August 12.

Okay, the next is August 26th, followed by September 2nd.

Um, those are regular meetings, and then cop plan starts up September 9th and September 16th.

Good back, we're done.

Thank you.

Um, I'm sorry.

Yeah, okay.

Don't no, another time.

Okay.

Uh yes.

But I don't know, I'm not sure.

So I don't know how to do it.

Um there's a thing.

Oh, it's one of the hot terms.

Family requirement, which we can do.