Okay. Thank you for joining me for this ULDC discussion on the transition of the business district to the mixed use district. I will provide some background on this topic, show you some examples of mixed use projects in the area. and lead a discussion on what mixed use means for the city of Castle Pines as represented in the comprehensive plan. Next slide, please. This is a map of our city. I-25 runs through our city north to south, bisecting it into a west half and an east half. Highlighted in reds here on the west half of the city is our west commercial area. It is a legacy commercial area that was inherited by the city when the city incorporated in 2008. Fun fact, when the city incorporated, it was originally named Castle Pines North. The city dropped the north part from the name in 2009. Also in 2009, the city annexed property on the east side of I-25 known as the Canyons. This annexation essentially doubled the geographical size of the city at that time. The Canyons property was zoned as a planned development and the area around the Castle Pines Parkway and I-25 was identified for mixed use. Next slide. Okay, so this is a closer look at the legacy commercial area. It is made up of property that is zoned business district and Parkway Plaza plan development. Fun fact number two, Parkway Plaza used to be zoned business district up until August of 2023 when it was rezoned to revise the permitted uses. the setbacks and heights for this particular area. But it is the business district that is the subject of our discussion tonight. Our discussion does not involve Parkway Plaza. Next slide. Thank you. So this is an aerial view of the business district. It is outlined in red. I-25 is on the east. Douglas County is to the north. outside of the city limits. The commercial area is 130 acres in size. Castle Pines Parkway is the main thoroughfare traveling west and east through the business district. The business district contains 52 properties. 29 of those properties are developed, 13 of those properties are vacant, and 10 are drainage tracks. The business district interfaces with single family residential to the west, south, and north. Next slide. So the business district was established by Douglas County in the 1950s. Due to its proximity to I-25 and developing residential in the area, it was a logical area for a satellite commercial area to support the local communities. Next slide. So this table shows the types of uses in the business district. We are not going to spend much time here, but I wanted to point out that the business district has three use types. It has principal uses, uses by special review, abbreviated as USR, you'll see there, and accessory uses. Next slide. Thank you. This table shows the development standards for the business district. So that's what we have now. The maximum height is 60 feet. Setbacks are dependent on the adjacent street type or the adjacent use. To a regional or major arterial such as I-25, the setback is 75 feet. To a minor arterial such as Castle Pines Parkway, the setback is 40 feet. And to a collector street, such as Legay Road, the setback is 20 feet. There are no lot dimension requirements. And the maximum building square footed for any commercial building is really a function of meeting height, setback, and other development requirements, such as parking and landscaping. So as long as you can meet all those requirements, you can maximize your commercial space. through this business district zoning. Next slide. This is a clip of the future land use map that's contained within our comprehensive plan. The future land use plan identifies four main land use categories. Those are residential, which are shown in the yellowy colors, recreation shown in the green colors, civic shown in the blue colors, and mixed use shown in the red colors. Next slide. Thank you. This is a closer look at the future land use plan for the business district. The future land use plan identifies a portion of the business district as mixed use downtown. That's shown in the more burgundy red color and mixed use community, which is shown in the tomatoey red color. This future land use plan from the comprehensive plan is the driver for transitioning the business district to the mixed use district. Next slide. So what does mixed use mean? Mixed use is a form of development that integrates residential and non-residential land uses. Integration could be in the form of a vertical pattern or a horizontal pattern. A vertical pattern would be one building that has commercial on the first floor, could have office on the second floor, and then on the top floors that has residential. Integrating in a horizontal pattern would mean having commercial side by side with residential, whether it's on one lot or many different lots. It is a design that is meant to be more compact, walkable, and well-connected that focuses more on the pedestrian experience rather than the auto experience. Next slide. So as we begin our discussion on transitioning from the business district to the mixed use district, I'd like you to think about a couple things. Number one, building height. What character are we trying to achieve for our mixed use district with building height? Does the location matter when considering building height? I also would like you to consider how height standards can impact the development of mixed use. Typically, a developer does need to build to a certain height or a certain number of units to make the financials work. Think about what type of mixed use integration that you want. Is it vertical? Is it horizontal? What kind of public amenities and open spaces are important to this mixed use district? Lastly, think about the appropriate distances from Interstate 25, Castle Pines Parkway, and other uses and buildings within the mixed use district, as well as lot dimensions and how they could impact the development of our mixed-use district the way that we want it to be developed. Next slide. This is the table from the comprehensive plan. This identifies the characteristics of the mixed-use downtown and the mixed-use community centers, which the business district is to transition to. I know this table is hard to read, but I will summarize these characteristics for you. But before I do, let's pop back three slides for another visual of the future land use plan for the business district. Okay, so again, there's the two areas. The more burgundy is meant to be a more dense mixed use environment than the tomato red. Okay, thank you very much. You can continue. Okay, so this slide identifies and describes the basic tenants for mixed use for the city of Castle Pines. We're looking at it through activity, uses, and scale. The mixed use district should have businesses that serve both the local and regional area. It should be a place for community events and daily socialization and be active during the day and the night. The mixed use district should enable various service businesses, retail businesses, restaurants, offices, residential and civic uses. It should encourage infill development and redevelopment. So when considering its scale and function, the mixed use district should have a compact design that is well connected with streets and sidewalks. have a mix of low and medium tall buildings and be walkable. Next, we'll look at two mixed use examples to start to get you thinking. Next slide. Next slide. Thank you. Okay. This is the streets at South Glen. It is located at Arapahoe Road and University within the city of Centennial. So notice that the commercial and residential development is generally centralized in the middle of the development with parking on the outskirts. It is designed to have an anchor store on either end and it has a pedestrian walkway where you can shop, mingle and sit in the public space that's located in the middle. Next slide. So here's a picture of its mixed use integration and building height. The mixed use is integrated in a vertical pattern. The commercial is located on the bottom floor with four residential floors on top. Next slide. So this is Aspen Grove. Aspen Grove is located along Santa Fe Drive, north of C-470 within Littleton. This mixed-use development has a C-shape where commercial cups the parking and residential is integrated in a horizontal pattern around the outside of the C. Gathering takes place usually in the parking lot in the form of a farmer's market or a pop-up shopping mart. Next slide. So Aspen Grove offers wide sidewalks, music, lighting, lush landscaping, and seating areas all along the sea where the commercial takes place. is located and you could see here that typically these tall one-story buildings. Next slide. So we've headed back to Castle Pines. Here is our business district. I would like to ask commissioners, what are your observations about our future mixed use district? Hey, Donna, the first observation that I have is that we probably need to reevaluate the heights. It's interesting, my son, I might have told you this, but when I was up in Oregon last month moving my son, he moved into a mixed-use district in Wilsonville, Oregon, where it's four stories on top, apartments, and a commercial on the bottom. So I got to spend a little bit of time in it. Yeah. So what were your thoughts on that pattern of mixed use? Well, outside of the fact it's great for a single 28-year-old guy, the only challenge that we ran into was really limited to the fact, like limited availability of products offloading or stuff like that, like the ability to unload the moving truck. Oh, gotcha. Yeah, but it seemed like a fun opportunity. They had enough stuff. There was a convenience store, a couple of restaurants. There was a park across the street that was set up for community events. It's going to be a great place for him to live, I think. It's good to hear. Yeah. Anyone else have some observations about our future mixed-use district? I can chime in. Obviously, there could be two anchor stores, as you can see visually, and then more of the horizontal with the multifamily units in between. But I think we all know that it's not quite as seamless as the Aspen Grove in the sense that there's not a lot of connectivity. We have it there. It's just very disjointed between all of the commercial. And I definitely have building height at the top of my mind. Me personally, I do not see Castle Pines as a tall, elevated building with that multifamily or mixed use that goes super high, maybe three, four stories high. That's just where I'm at with kind of keeping the feel of Castle Pines. What is Castle Pines? Thank you. Okay. Donna, this is Dorothy. Can you just clarify a little bit what you mean by observations? Because I think, you know, like the South Glen and Aspen Grove that you shared as examples, they were all built at like one time, right? It was like a planned overall development. Yes. how do you envision with, you know, what we have currently existing and what we're proposing for future to kind of have it tied together, I guess, instead of like one development at a time, right? Well, that is, that's our condition, right? We are going to try and create some standards to, implement a mixed use district that is the right size for Castle Pines. So when I had asked about your observations about our future mixed use district, it was open-ended. I wanted to see here where your minds were going. You've made a great observation in that this is, we've got some existing conditions. This is not, you know, unless this is scraped off and then rebuilt, it is going to be a different scenario for us than Aspen Grove and or the streets at South Glen. And so, again, I was just looking for just some initial observations before we head into our discussion. Okay. Yeah, I think that's the big observation I see that's going to be. difficult or us trying to figure out how to tie it together because you know you could have maybe one of the properties um have a developer come and want to scrape it and build something you know and then the other one not for another five ten years later on right so like how do you how do you connect a new development that's going to come in because everything that we have is um like the previous commissioners mentioned you know our high our current heights are one and two stories max Right. So if the proposed are at 60 and we have a new build come in, that's maybe even three or four stories. And then next to something that's one story for a while. Like, how do we I think I think that's the biggest challenge is like, how do we bridge that? Because it's not one single plan development where we're just doing it all together. Right. So but we do need to prepare and understand if that is the way we're going, that we may have a four story building next to a two story building for a period of time. So that that's what we have to decide. Like, is that OK as we transition or we are we never going to go above two stories what we have now? That's for that's kind of what we're looking at. That's what we're talking about today. Yeah. Okay, great. Okay, any other observations or comments you want to make at this point? I have a question. How directive do we get with what the end state looks like? Meaning, right, if we all could, we'd all just scrape all of this and have a nice cohesive area, right? But should we take the assumption that we're building requirements that when it's all done, five, 10, 50, 80 years from now, it will look like one big cohesive unit that may require massive changes in that window of time. Or do we just for now say, well, as long as it looks and feels about the same, that's what we're trying to achieve. I think kind of to clarify my point is like, how precise are we going to get and what it needs to be way down the road versus are we just going to kind of say that the standards are similar? Does that make sense? So again, we want to make sure we have the right vision for our mixed use district. We have to recognize that maybe some part will be done in one big swath, while other parts will be done incrementally. But with the goal that we're always working forward and toward the mixed use district that is right for us. We are, so again, we're setting the foundation right now. Did that answer your question, Commissioner Green? Okay. And can I just jump in really quick, Donna? Commissioner Green, I've had a comment that people can't hear you very well. So if you could move closer to your microphone, that would be great. All right, will do. I just have one observation. You know, I think we have two acres that were kind of identified on either side of the district. And then we kind of have this transition area that's in between. And it doesn't, you know, I just think connectivity should be one of our main points. It just doesn't really connect and flow from one side of the district to the other very well. Even when you're trying to get out of the Dukes or the library, you're weaving through parking lots and speed bumps and, you know, you're trying to transition most of our citizens right now. live on the west side of town. So we've been trying to get out of that area. It's just a little bit, you know, with no left turn, having to go all the way out to Lagay is a little bit cumbersome. So just connectivity, I think, should be an important part as this district, you know, redevelops and moves forward. Yes. Yes, I agree. And again, so we're thinking about what we need and we're thinking about the underlying standards to help us achieve our goals. for the mixed-use district. Donna, I've got a question. Are there developments in the mixed-use world in our business district currently that are untouchable, so to speak? Like the library, for example. I can't imagine the library moving. I mean, anything is possible with enough time and money. But, I mean, yes, I wouldn't imagine the library changing, right, its location or its use. But, I mean, anything is possible. And we have heard, you know, we've heard from time to time that the library wants to expand so that could come to fruition. It could either, they could move. All right. Let's go ahead and move to the next slide, please. Thank you. Okay, so now we're going to explore the uses and the standards in the Unified Land Development Code. for the mixed use district. So this is what has been prepared to date. There are four main use types, permitted uses, limited uses, uses by special review, and accessory uses. So what is different here is the addition of a limited use category. The business district does not have this category. A permitted use is a primary use that's permitted by right. A limited use is also a primary use permitted if specific conditions are met. These specific conditions would be objective and prescriptive in nature, more black and white. A use by special review is a primary use permitted if special conditions are met, but typically these conditions are discretionary and performative in nature. An accessory use is a use permitted to support a primary use. You would not be able to put an accessory use on a property without first having a primary use established. Next slide. Thank you. Here is a table of the uses permitted in each use category set side by side. So the majority of uses are permitted, and these uses are commercial uses. There are a few limited uses, which include multifamily residential. and even fewer uses by special review. All limited uses and uses by special review have use specific standards, which is an extra layer of standards required for their approval. We've had several study sessions on these use specific standards. And based on your feedback from these study sessions, staff is now refining these use specific standards. And of course they will be presented to you as they are completed. Next slide. Okay, so this is a closer look at the permitted uses in the mixed use district. These are, again, in addition to the multifamily residential component, which are limited uses. But as a reminder, permitted uses is a primary use permitted by right, no extra standards. So as we think about these uses, we want to think about heights and what heights might be needed for particularly an office or a hotel and even the multifamily residential and where you could imagine these uses. and heights in the mixed use district. Next slide. Okay, so this is a snapshot of the limited uses, the uses by special review and the accessory uses. Again, limited uses are primary uses permitted if specific conditions are met. Uses by special review, again, are also primary uses. If specific conditions are met, those conditions, again, are more discretionary and performative in nature. And then these are a list of the accessory uses. Again, that would be permitted only if a primary use is established on a lot. I did move parking structure from a limited use to a use by special review and also identified it as an accessory use. The reason I did this is when you think about a limited use, it's a primary use if objective standards are met. This would mean that we could have lots in the mixed use district that just contained parking structures. We do not, this is not what we want. If a parking structure is needed, it would need to demonstrate what it's needed for and it would have to go through a use by special review process for a very close look. So that is one thing that I'm gonna take the liberty to change. Did anyone have any questions about? these uses or the movement of the parking structure? I think that makes sense. OK. So go ahead and go to the next slide. Thank you. I wanted to go over the review and approval standards for these uses. So for permitted use, we would follow standard rules of development. Planning Commission would review and decide on these site improvement plans for these uses. For a limited use, we would follow standard rules of development and they would also have to comply with additional standards, which again are prescriptive, black and white. Planning Commission would make the decision. With a use by special review, they will have to follow the standard rules of development, comply with additional standards, which are more discretionary in nature. Planning commission would review and make a recommendation, but city council would decide. Next slide. Okay, so these are the standards that are proposed for the mixed use district. Heights at 60 feet maximum. We also are describing heights for first floor areas for commercial. So a 15 minimum ground floor height for any retail store and a 12 foot minimum ground floor height for office. So if those uses are on the ground floor, we want them to be at taller floors heights instead of lower heights. So setbacks are not prescribed right now for I-25. So I do want to ask you about that. Now, the setbacks from Castle Pines Parkway are proposed at 20 feet. This is half of what the business district does now. It is also 10 feet for a collector. So again, for Legay Road. Also that is half of this setback for the business district now. A five foot setback is proposed for any other non-residential use within the mixed use district. And there is a 60 foot residential setback. So this would be a setback from any residential that's outside of the mixed use district. The ULDC does propose a minimum lot size of 1,000 square feet, however, no minimum lot width. And just like the business district, the intensity of a project would be driven by how the project would meet the standards of development for height, setback, as well as landscaping and parking. And would you mind flipping back six slides? I think it was six. Thank you. So just another reminder, we wanna really understand what the setback should be from Castle Pines Parkway, what the setback should be from I-25, what the setback should be from Lagay Road, what heights should be, and should they be different for certain parts of the mixed use district than others? Okay. Hey, Donna, I have a quick question regarding the setbacks. The setbacks are measured from property line, correct? Correct. And in general, on Castle Pines Parkway or Lagay, do the property lines go right up to the curb? Or is there usually a right-of-way already set and then the property line, like a right-of-way for a sidewalk and then property line? Sure. So typically, every bit of the right-of-way is used for the asphalt, gutter, sidewalk. So it would go straight. So you could expect that the property line goes to the sidewalk. And what do we typically have, like on Castle Pines Parkway, for example, from the curb and gutter, there's a five foot walk? Yes. Is there a tree line? Not in the right of way. It's usually, if there is a tree lawn, it would be, well, no, I don't think we have any tree lawns on Castle Pines Parkway. We have medians. Okay. So it's a five-foot walk? Yes. So essentially, if a property is set back 20 feet from Castle Pines Parkway setback requirements, it would be... maybe 25 from the edge of the curb because of the right-of-way sidewalk. It would be 25 feet from the sidewalk. Okay. Also, Donna, along those lines, are there any of these roads where it doesn't measure from the sidewalk? Because I know in some areas it measures from the center of the road. Is that any case within what we're talking about? No. So the setbacks are measured from the edge of the property line. And so along Castle Pines Parkway, the edge of the property line is typically at the sidewalk. We don't measure from this. We typically don't measure setbacks from the center of a road. And then that's the same with Lake A as well? That's right. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Good questions. Any other questions about setbacks? So Couch Plans Parkway, it's a major arterial. In other jurisdictions, a 20-foot setback, I'd say, common or is 40 more common? Obviously, we're trying to maybe push businesses and expand their development area of their lot. And then does that provide kind of maybe some room for a landscape buffer as well still? Because I know that's kind of the general feel that we have going down Castle Pines Parkway that we probably want to keep. I'm just curious to hear your thoughts on how that setback's handled in other jurisdictions. You know, Commissioner, I haven't done any research to compare what other jurisdictions do. I imagine that within the county, we would see a lot of this 40-foot setback from those arterials just because that's the standard that we kind of inherited from them. And if that is going to inform your research, opinion on the setbacks, I can certainly look into that. That's not a problem at all. No, I just think it was just kind of good to talk through. The other one I was curious about is the five foot interior setback. Yeah. And possibly, you know, is it a situation where we do like a zero lot line setback where we can have some buildings or properties maybe road together to create a little bit more of a, you know, streets of South Glen, I know that's all one parcel owned by one person. But then I also understand maybe if you own a business, you don't want somebody building right up to their property line. You may want a little buffer. So just food for thought. Yeah. And you're right. A lot of business districts do a zero foot setback requirement, but they are trying, really trying to create a more dense environment and depending on how dense you want to see our mixed use district that may or may not be appropriate. It also doesn't allow for as many like pass-through areas or potential connection points through the district. So that's just kind of what you have to think about. Yeah. And from a construction and code perspective, you know, if you have one building building, I mean, IBC, they're going to require a lot line or else you have essentially a firewall with no windows on the lot line and whoever got there first. Right. Then the next guy can't build attached like touching it. So I think I think the five foot interior is good because we want to avoid like windowless walls. as much as possible. Yeah, that's a good perspective. Yeah, hadn't thought about that. Windowless walls. Yeah, I agree with that as well. And then just the last thing that I wanted to just touch on was building heights. I feel like 60 feet could probably accommodate a hotel and maybe some four stories of... residential on top of a commercial level. That's probably pretty close, especially if we're going to count like mechanical equipment on the building or anything. But, you know, I'd be curious too about everybody's thoughts on, you know, having a higher height, you know, a limitation closer to the highway. And then as we transition into the more neighborhoods, if that comes down to 40 or 50 feet to, you know, kind of buffered into some of the residential. So yeah, I'm just curious about that. Yeah, I do like that idea. Sorry. I'm sorry, Dorothy, go ahead. I was just going to say, I think that's a good idea with the buffering, you know, some of the other zoning codes. If you're next to a residential district, they'll require at an upper story. So if, you know, if five stories is allowed, for example, anything above 25 feet then has to step back. And then anything above the next tier has to step back even more so that you're not just like a giant five story building or eight story, whatever, six story building right next to a single family. So what I mean, so what are your thoughts about having or allowing taller buildings closer to I-25? could a building go taller than 60 feet or is that still, is that too much? I mean, some of the hotel projects I've worked on, I mean, they're going 80 feet and they're not incredibly dense hotels, you know, they're candlewood suites and stuff. So, you know, if that's something that, you know, somebody maybe want to redevelop closer to I-25, certainly I think we're kind of discussing pushing that limit as we get farther away from the residential. Yeah, I would agree with that. And another thought and pseudo question for you, Donna, along the lines of what was being said earlier about the kind of the progressive setbacks, so to speak. But it's been a minute since I've seen the actual landscaping plan that was developed for Castle Pines Parkway as part of the Gateway and Monument Project. But I believe... I believe it's worth considering maintaining the setbacks along Castle Pines Parkway because of the actual plan that exists and the intent behind the designed landscaping, so to speak, that is part of the Gateway Monument, which is going to trickle its way down Castle Pines Parkway as budget allows. And what's the look that you guys want to see as you're traveling west on Castle Pines Parkway entering into our residential communities? And that's fair. Do you want it to start encroaching, or do you want to keep it the same? And if we keep the setbacks the same, would you be willing to go taller in height? I'd be in favor of just uniformity unless there was a, again, a developer or a vision where everybody got on the same page to redevelop to, you know, encroach closer to Castle Pines Parkway. But I think that the uniformity is important for the rest of the development along Castle Pines Parkway. And then just jumping back just a little bit. I personally would like to see, again, uniformity even along I-25. I know we're all residents and we came here for maybe different reasons, but I just envision 10, 20 years down the road. I'm trying to futuristically think of what I-25 corridor is going to look like down in the area. And I want Castle Pines to be different. I want it to be that kind of retreat place that makes us special as it is today. I just see even Ridgegate, you know, it's coming down south. It's coming. I know that with those taller buildings. But again, I just my personal vision and vote would just be to to keep it more uniform and a little bit more space. So that's why I would, again, be an advocate for keeping a three or four. level building height over the 60 feet. And also keep in mind that we do have variance processes that somebody could use to request a little closer setback to Castle Pines Parkway or greater height. So we can make sure that those options are still available if that wonderful development comes in that we want to accommodate. Right, yeah, thank you. Hey, Donna, quick question regarding height. How is height measured? Is there a base plane of some sort that's calculated and it's measured from? Yeah, so it's an average height as measured 10 feet around the building. So you take spot check heights from, again, every 10 linear feet around the building and average that out to calculate height. OK. And currently, do we have, I know we have a 60 feet height requirement, but is there a number of stories requirement? There is not. Okay, so I feel like that might be something that we should have in relation to the height, right? Because I would say that kind of puts us at that max five story with the 60 feet. But I don't even know because if you're requiring 15 feet for the ground floor commercial, then you're left with 45. And if you divide 45, you know, by four, you're at 11 feet. and a quarter each floor to floor height, which seems a little short if they're trying to squeeze in a five story. But I feel like usually with your buildings, you're, you know, it's kind of that five story is the, the mark. And then the next one kind of jumps to eight. I feel like perspective, you know, so you see a lot of three stories, um, three to four stories, uh, cause you can kind of keep that still like wood construction. Right. And then even five stories maybe. So, um, I would propose that we maybe have, you know, a max height and a story, right? Like max height is 60 feet or 65 feet. And then max story is four stories or five stories or whatever that is. Commissioners, what are your thoughts about introducing a story regulation? I'm not opposed to it. I think I would need to learn a little bit more about how that is going to help control. What is it controlling? The story requirement in addition to the height. Is it a design? Yeah, and I think it's a density thing. Cause I think with some of the comments from the commissioners earlier, you know, I don't, I don't envision Castle Pines Parkway being a corridor where we have eight, eight story tall buildings. Right. And I would say five is even probably pushing it in my opinion. Now on the other new side, maybe a different story, but so I, you know, and, and I think there's a difference. if you're saying 60 feet is your max, a commercial building versus a mixed use with commercial on the ground floor and residential above, right? Because you can get lower floor to floor heights with the residential building. You can get four stories above and a 15 foot commercial floor to floor on the first floor. And then a little over 10 foot floor to floor on the other floors for, but I don't know if someone tries to squeeze in. I'm not sure. I just, I see that a lot together and I don't know if someone's going to try to with the 60 feet. I don't, would someone try to squeeze in a six foot or I guess you do have the requirement with the 15 that kind of takes care of it. Cause usually it's like, would you try to squeeze in six stories of. 10 foot floor to floor, you know, but that's not allowed, right? Like that wouldn't be possible. So I think in a mixed use integrated building that the floor height requirement for retail or office would help keep the design that we're looking for on the ground. Let me ask you this. Do we prevent parking allowed on the ground floor? We haven't got there yet. Okay. Because I think that kind of correlates to this story height thing, right? So just food for thought. Okay. So let me take some few notes here. Okay. Thank you. Are there any comments on the standards? of the proposed standards for the mixed use? Okay, so I do wanna just kind of summarize what I've heard. We do wanna keep the consistency, sounds like we wanna keep the consistency and the uniformity of the development along Castle Pines Parkway. I'm not hearing that anyone is really against 60 feet, but that it would be more appropriate along I-25. So that there's a more comfort level with that. So again, we want to kind of maintain the setbacks that we have in the business district along Castle Pines Parkway. How about Lagay? Are there any comments about that? Is that something we're more flexible with? Are we okay with like a 10 feet? Are you talking about the setbacks, Donna? Is that the same as what you mentioned regarding castle plans where the measurement is at the back of the sidewalk? Correct. Okay. I mean, I would be okay with that. I think that's appropriate because you still have the sidewalk, at least five feet of sidewalk separation, and then 10 feet back from there, which 15 feet is, I think, sufficient. Yeah, I think part of the challenge with Legay is when you look at Parkway Plaza there, there's retaining. So even if we did 10 feet, the retaining wall is further than 10 feet back. So you don't, like 10 feet I think is the minimum, but I think structurally they're not going to be able to do 10 feet anyway. Gotcha. And then the closer we get to that traffic circle, now we're hitting that residential. Okay. So we're more comfortable with the reduction in the setback from Lagay Road. than we are Castle Pines Parkway. We're gonna keep the setback from Castle Pines Parkway the same. We can be open to the 10 foot for Lagay. I mean, everything right now is developed over there. But again, we're trying to think future, right? Long term. Okay, thanks. And then the five feet between lots within the mixed use district. So, you know, to have a little bit of space, more connectivity options. Is that fair? No windowless walls? Okay. I agree with all those. Okay. All right. Let's move to... Well, let's keep here. All right. So... Thank you. I do have your feedback on height in terms of character, location. And we even had some discussion about feasibility, what developers and builders need for their development. So that was very helpful. We did talk about the distance from I-25. So one thing I want to point out about the distance from I-25, on this map that you see, north of Castle Pines Parkway to the east of where the cobblestone car wash is, there are a series of lots there. And if they were to have to meet a 60-foot setback from Castle Pines Parkway, it may render the lot undevelopable is that off-ramp part of the uh cdot right-of-way would it be 60 feet because we'd only do 40 feet off of castle pines parkway but that that off-ramp being in cdot's right-of-way does i could see what you're saying yeah I mean, so 75 feet might be too much. If we're keeping 40 at Castle Pines Parkway, I mean, is there some room to be a little bit closer to I-25? Can we almost work backwards and figure out kind of that lot width and what might be a good developable area? And maybe it's 40 or 50, you know. Okay. Certainly going to solve the puzzle. Yeah. I like that idea. And I'm just going to throw my two cents in there about the 40 fee from Castle Pines. I feel like 40 is, I know that's what it currently is, but I think just thinking about how we want that gateway to feel and look, you know, I think the further setback, the more it, renders to more parking facing the street and from a visual perspective you know like would it make more sense to meet somewhere in the middle between the 20 and the 40 so that it would be nice to see buildings you know instead of parking lots first then building behind if that makes sense that's just that's my opinion but Right, I see what you're saying. An example is that 7-Eleven. Or the Walgreens. But is it, I mean, part of the charm that I have heard some planning commissioners say is that it is, there's green area, there's room for trees. There's not a lot of parking right now addressing the street. We could instill landscaping that says, hey, you got to put landscaping between any parking in the street. Yeah, I mean, I think it just to Michelle's point about consistency, right? Like when you go up Monarch, there's landscaping and monuments at the entrance of every village or not village, every neighborhood. And trying to keep that consistent feel, not only for the west side, but across both sides so that there's a sense of belonging between the east and the west side. That's one thing that we've always kind of concerned about is with I-25 running down the middle, how do you maintain some cohesiveness in a city feel with the new side of the city and an old side of the city, a legacy side, so to speak? And I think one of the ways that you can do that is just with your cohesive visual appearance. So that vegetation and stuff helps do that. So, I mean, that could be a standard that we have. Like if you're building along Castle Pines Parkway, you need landscaping between the right of way in your building and or parking, that sort of a thing with that. I think we could get there, get to it, but there to reduce any, you know, parking views from Castle Pines Parkway. Yeah, I like that idea a lot. Okay. Yeah, again, with consistency and then I think it, yeah, great idea. I agree. Donny, let me know if you can hear me. But the net effect of that, right, it kind of hides this retail area, right? So if you have a 40-foot setback, like, is that the goal? Do we want to make it so you drive down Castle Pines Parkway and don't even realize that there's a retail area there? Or the retail that you see, more likely than not, will be 40 feet off the street, a layer of trees, and you'll probably be looking at the back of the buildings. Mm-hmm. One of the things I don't like about the way it is now is when you're coming down Castle Plains Parkway, all you see is the back of the buildings, the trash cans, the employee parking. It's really not very aesthetically pleasing. So if our goal is to hide the retail district, then we should be pretty prescriptive about how you do that. And it could be even more than just a few trees, right? Maybe we would want to put berms up or make it almost physically impossible to see that retail district. That's where I'm not exactly sure what our vision for that space is, which led to my earlier question, right? Of how prescriptive are we trying to be here? I mean, so it's a balancing act. So there are some mixed use districts that are highly visible. All the buildings are brought to the street. there's signage everywhere and that there, and there are other mixed use areas that are a little less visible, but, or are signed in a different way to kind of get you back there. So it's, it's, it's the balancing act that we're doing for Castle Pines Parkway or Castle Pines, right? There's nothing. When reading the comp plan, there's nothing that says that it has to be super visible or any design standards right now that say that you have to address the street. Nothing like that. What we have is what we have. And it seems like most people, planning commissioners, are comfortable with the visual and the feeling that you get right now going down Castle Pines Parkway. And part of that is because everything's set back. Yes, you see back of houses, but you also see a lot of pine trees, drainage tracks, like it looks open. I'm just thinking like... Commissioner Green? If we somehow manage to develop that over time, is that something you hide or is that something that you want to showcase to draw more people in? Commissioner Green, do you cut out for me? Did anybody else hear Commissioner Green? We lost most of it. Okay. He's very, very quiet. I can't hear him barely at all. Karen Hollweg, Could you could you let me know what your your thoughts were again, Mr green or Commissioner green, I want to make sure I just might take notes, let me know if you can hear me, but my comment was you know if we actually are successful in building like this really engaging mixed use area okay. Karen Hollweg, Do you want to hide that or do you want to showcase it right like. And that's just kind of where I'm struggling a little bit with what the clarity of the actual envision is is What what we're talking about right where it talks about like we're the way we're talking about we're kind of hiding this retail area is what we're what we're going down. Which quite honestly, if there's one part of town that you want to be a vibrant retail area, it would be this part that we're talking about right now. And that's where I'm struggling to kind of put the pieces together of what exactly are we, what's our exact vision for this space 50 years from now? And do these criteria align with that 50 year vision? I'm gonna drop and come right back. I'm getting some connectivity issues. I'll be back in 30 seconds. And that is the discussion. What is this mixed use district vision? I mean, for me, it's, you know, you have Rhino, which has maximum setbacks, right? So you have to shove the buildings up on the lot lines and really tall buildings. And it kind of creates a whole different environment than you have Castle Pines, which is much more bedroom community, kind of, you know, nice and peaceful to go through. And so, you know, I think those are kind of the two conflicting, you know, mixed use areas that still accomplish the same thing. So, you know, for me, I like... kind of a little bit more peaceful, you know, buildings not slammed up on the street as I kind of come down the road, you know, and so that's just my thoughts on it. Yeah, I think I just need to reference some previous applications that we've had, just knowing that the screening is important. Believe me, as a business owner, I know it's... It's a bit of a deterrent for sure. You know, I wish trees weren't there. I wish it was a little bit more visible. But at the same time, I get the feel of it. And I get that in the past, what commissioners have voted is they would like a little bit more screening. Now, does that mean tree after tree after tree to completely like block all signage? Absolutely not. Just again, more again, more space, as Commissioner Robra was saying, with trees. some screening and those a little bit more set back to the street. And did we get Commissioner Green back? I don't see him yet. But Donna, can you clarify when we're talking about the 40 feet, Is that the current requirement on just this side or on the other side? Nope, in the business district on this side. Okay. What is it on the other side? A Long Castle Pines Parkway? Yeah. I'd have to check. Okay. Let's see. Donna, I think with these, it would be helpful maybe for all of us if, when you're going through the slides, just to have, hey, here's what we're proposing, and then here's what we currently have, and then also a reference to the east side of the highway, just as a quick chart comparison on setbacks, maximum height, that kind of stuff, just on one slide. So the business district to the mixed-use district to the canyons, mixed-use? Is that what you're saying, Commissioner? Correct, yeah, specifically on Castle Pines Parkway. Oh, I see what you're saying, okay. So you have like a comprehensive understanding of how development can occur along Castle Pines Parkway? Right, and what is being proposed as changes, how big of a change that is compared to what we currently have, just as a reference would be helpful. Sure, but side by side. Right. Yeah, because I'm trying to remember all these numbers in my head. Yeah, no, that makes sense, Commissioner. Okay. So let's talk about vertical or horizontal integration. What do you envision for the city? Do you feel both options should be available? Or do you want to encourage one option over another? I think given the current layout, we should probably give ourselves enough flexibility to opt for both. When you look at, I'm just thinking out loud here, but when you look at the Safeway area, for example, if there's anything prime for redevelopment, it's probably that area right there. And that probably... Go ahead. I was going to say, can you flip back to the city of Castle Pines, Ariel? Just for our discussion. Which slide? Oh, am I on the wrong slide? Sorry. Are we back? Am I going forward or backwards? You're going backwards. Nope. Where is it? Is that it? Yes. Yeah. That one probably lends itself to both. Right. You can see a little redevelopment opportunity over there where that Safeway is. Correct. OK. And it could be integrated horizontally or vertically. OK. OK. Yeah, just given the general size, don't remember what those two businesses are right next to castle pines parkway wendy's is one of them i forget what the other one is but it's a bank i believe yeah i think it's yeah okay that's that's right um any other thoughts on that okay thinking about that one right that one almost you could almost do that enclosed little thing there and and maximize that footprint right next to the on-ramp and Castle Pines Parkway. So I think having that flexibility allows us a little bit more opportunity to fit with the kind of wavy nature of what we have going on in the business district right now. Yes, flexibility. And so I understand what we're talking about is like if there's two commercial properties and somebody wants to come in with a cool townhome, project. It's all residential. We would allow that. Is that right? Okay. Yeah. I'm for that. Okay. So they could either integrate vertically or horizontally. We're okay. We want to keep that flexibility. Okay. And And like you said, if that's a safe way to redevelop, there'd be a lot of opportunity and we wouldn't want to restrict what they could do. Okay, so let's talk about public amenities, public space, pedestrian amenities, vision wise. Are we wide sidewalks? yeah commissioner rob said it earlier but i think you know looking at this map there's opportunity to connect pathways so that you could walk from um whatever that little townhome community is right on lagay with the traffic circle like it doesn't look like there's much of any connectors in there but to be able to connect foot traffic all the way up into the business district and easily navigatable pathways with wayfinding and all of the stuff that the city has in that gateway and wayfinding plan to make it seem like a cohesive effort there but you know smartful uh smartphone i just made that word up smart um signage uh or monuments in there that have you know if we have a couple anchor businesses that highlight uh highlight the path to some of those to encourage that walkability and then advertising opportunities for smaller businesses there as well. I mean, I think thinking through all of the connectivity issues to encourage that walkability with all the requisite things like lighting and whatnot to make it inviting for people to do the walking that is envisioned. Let me ask a question. Should there be a requirement for a developer to provide a public space depending on how big their development is? What do you mean public space? An area where the public could hang out, but it would still be developed on their private property, like perhaps like a square in front of their building. Again, if it's a big development. Yeah, so kind of like open space requirements for residential, just in this sense, it's considered public space. Correct. Okay. Then, yes, I would be in favor of that. Okay. Yeah, I think it would be a pretty large parcel. Right. Yeah. And then a percentage. I think Wheat Ridge has something like this. Well, actually, a lot of a lot of districts do. But I think they call it like public amenity space. Yes. I get a little torn about that because. Just because you provide it doesn't like just because you provide a plaza. to, you know, are people going to use it? So I feel like if we are going to require it, it should be pretty strategic in how and what is required. I think we should consider cash in the loo as well. I mean, all these little tiny small public spaces, you know, maybe contributing to one larger space that there's a little more continuity to it. I think Commissioner Green also mentioned that, too. OK, yeah, so I mean, I like the idea. But implementing that, well, if we make it a site improvement plan requirement for the mixed use district, then they do one or the other. Okay, I see where you're going. I see where you're going, Commissioner. Could that dissuade development, though? Yes. Increase the cost, yeah. Well, I think we need to figure out a threshold for the size of the lot. Like, it has to be over, you know, like... Agreed. Three quarters of an acre or an acre. I don't know what that, you know. But, like, anything under half an acre shouldn't... be required. Agreed. And Sherry, you're right. It's a balancing act. We don't want to dissuade development. We wouldn't want a developer to walk away because they don't want to provide a... It's too small to provide a cash and lure public amenity. Okay. Okay. So we've got that. Tell me about lot size. What do we think about lot size? We were proposing 10,000 square feet as a minimum lot size. 1,000. Oh, 1,000? Mm-hmm. And just for your reference, there was no minimum lot size for the business district, Commissioner Wiley. What are the current lot sizes for some of those smaller ones back there? Or what is the smallest? Yeah, let's see. I will check for us. Tell me. So which. Who's got the video? Who's got control? Is that you, Toby? Yes. Can you can you wander around and. who has an idea of what a small lot is? What about that vacant lot right there at the corner of Castle Pines Parkway and Billy Square Lane? Oh. You want to go to slide six? It has like the lot divisions. It'd be easier for us to see that. And do you mean six from the beginning? One, two, three, four, five, six? Sorry, you missed it. It was the aerial, but it has the dots. Yeah, there you go. Gotcha. I mean, if we think about like a residential lot could be 50 by 100. Maybe a 5,000 square foot lot. I mean, you could fit a small business on that. But you would have to fit parking, I guess. Maybe that gives it some perspective of needing double that. And landscaping. So maybe 100 by 100 feels about right. Which is... Okay, so you think that, all right, let me just kind of take a look. Well, that's, let me take a look at one, these green lots, right? See those green dots with, those are vacant lots. So the vacant lot I'm gonna look at is the vacant lot at Castle Pines Parkway, south of Castle Pines Parkway, across from 7-Eleven. That lot, Like generally, does that look small or big? It looks bigger than the one right next to where the city offices are. Okay. So this is 0.653 acres. That's 28,444 square feet. 28,000. So wow. A 1,000 square foot lot. I just don't know where that number came from. I don't know where 1,000 square feet. Yeah, 1,000 is tiny. Yeah. Like you can't even fit. Yeah. I would say like 3,000 is the smallest you could fit like a little urban duplex on. So. But yeah, I'm curious, what is the smallest size that we have parceled? Right. So why don't I do some let's like for the purposes of uniformity and consistency, I will look at these these lots and see what the smallest one is. And then let's start from there. Perfect. I really just don't know where 1000 came from. It's. Maybe you meant 10,000. Oh, wait. That sounds a little more consistent. But... No, it's 1,000 square foot minimum. Yeah, that's tiny. It's tiny. Okay. All right. I'll do a homework on that. And I'll come back with a recommendation. But, yeah, I would say... Who was it earlier that said, was that Kevin? 10,000, probably somewhere around there. Sounds about right, in my opinion, size-wise. 8,000 to 10,000, maybe, as the minimum minimum. All right, we'll have to make a note of that. Let us know what the smallest one is. Okay, so did we come to an understanding about the setback on Castle Pines Parkway? Uniformity important? I think if you can let us know what the setback is on the east side, that would be helpful to determine uniformity. OK. OK, got two things. OK. And then, um, Donna, while you're looking up the canyons PD for next meeting, the height over there, I'm pretty sure they can have really tall buildings. I'd just be interesting to know. I think they can go over a hundred feet on this, but just be interesting to know as we're talking about like the overall character of what we think house plans will be and do we want these two sides to be a little different and that's okay. You know, just so anyway, thank you. Yeah. I'll look at that. And then so I will come back with the answers to these questions. And we'll talk a bit about it next or on the fourth Thursday. And then let's come together and kind of see if we can come to a path forward. So that is all I had on the agenda for tonight in terms of our questions. study session on the mixed use district. Did anybody else have any questions? No. Okay. Oh, Donna, if you can also be able to look into the landscape requirements that we talked about earlier, that would be helpful. Oh, we would create them. Okay. We don't have one. Okay. Yeah, we would create them. Yeah. The only thing that I think that we do have, Donna, is that plan, that gateway and wayfinding plan that has the vegetation for what was envisioned with the original gateway that was built on the southbound exit ramp. Because that whole thing is planned out with vegetation. Yes, correct. And it would be going across the Plains Parkway. So that's probably the only plan that exists right now for some sort of prescriptive vegetation, which goes through the business district. Right. And that's a city project. That's a capital improvement project. But we want to make sure, but we could use that to inform us of whatever kind of standards or regulations we want to put in place for landscaping that would enhance that, what we're trying to accomplish. Okay. Okay, great. Anything else? Well, I appreciate your time tonight. We will meet again the last Thursday of the month. Thank you. All right. Thank you.