Bloomington City Council Land Use Committee, August 5, 2020

let me go ahead and call to order this meeting of the land use committee of the city council for wednesday august 5th 2020 and we have one item on the agenda ordinance 2013 which would amend the preliminary plan and district ordinance for the thompson pud to add 8.46 acres to allow 70 single-family lots uh built by habitat for humanity uh mr garlick are you going to start us out with a presentation i am whenever you are ready just holler go ahead alrighty uh so i just want to make sure everybody can see my screen yes blink once if yes great um so this is a request for habitat for humanity to amend the district ordinance for the thompson pud to add approximately 8.46 acres to the thompson pud so shown on the right side of the screen is a general site location um real quickly i just kind of give an overview of of the site uh the site is currently undeveloped there is one house uh and garage that is on the southeast corner of the site at the end of guy avenue so a couple things to point out about this location that you can see there are five stub streets that extend into this property along the east side you have cherokee drive chambers drive duncan drive and guy avenue and then on the south side of the site you have bernard drive that stubs into the street stubs into this property just to the west of this you have the rca community park to the north of this is vacant land that is owned by the county and i’ll just script to the ariel real quick so you can see a couple things so on this land to the north that is owned by the county there is a large electric transmission line that runs through that property so you can kind of see that clearing that runs through there that is important because the parks department has been working on a plan to provide a multi-use path through this property uh this property and this transmission line stretches all the way over to weimer road to the west and connects to the clear creek trail is close to the wapahani park and what’s also important to note is this transmission line stops at rogers street which is almost the front door of the switch yard park so the parks department has been looking at this corridor for a long time for a multi-use path and they’re getting a lot closer to developing a plan for that um so this property that is being proposed to be developed right now as i mentioned is currently undeveloped um and here is a zoning map of of the entire area so you can get kind of an overview of what’s happening here so i’ve highlighted the thompson pud with the bold black line that kind of wraps around various parcels here so the site that we’re talking about is the the dashed area on the southeast portion so the thompson pud allowed for single-family residences along the southeast portion of the pud adjacent to these single-family lots because they recognized it was adjacent to the single-family area single-family loss were appropriate within this portion of the pud so the petitioners habitat for humanity are looking to expand the boundaries of the pud to add in an additional eight and a half acres to allow for this area to be developed in a uniform manner for 70 single-family lots so real quickly this is that site plan so the site plan shows connections to all of those stub streets to the east so they are extending through the site

with public street connections one of the things to note about those existing stub streets and i’ll just kind of show that real briefly if you can see that on this map here um the stub streets uh cherokee chambers duncan and guy are very narrow both in amount of asphalt and right-of-way some of them don’t even have dedicated right-of-way so one of the things that we struggled with with this petition as with all petitions is trying to connect a property with adjacent sidewalks streets in order to provide transportation routes for everybody vehicles pedestrians bicyclists so we ran into a lot of difficulty due to the narrow and in some cases almost non-existent uh right away on these existing streets to have sidewalk connections um so that kind of comes into play a little bit um as we directed the petitioner to work with the parks department on utilizing this uh proposed multi-use path along this electric line along the north side um to help facilitate pedestrian connectivity in this area um so i’ll just kind of go back to the site plan here so the site plan shows sidewalk connections on all of the internal streets um so even though there are not sidewalks to stub into currently um on the adjacent sub streets to the east all of the internal roads here are public and we’ll have sidewalks and tree plots on both sides um one of the other features that will be incorporated with this petition is a multi-use path uh that kind of runs east-west to the site that connects to the rca park to the west um there’s a little loop path that runs along the multi uh that runs along the rca park boundaries uh that this would be tying into so this provides a direct connection to some of the pedestrian facilities within that part as well as i mentioned there are sidewalk connections along all of the streets throughout the development uh that connect to those stub streets um so the proposed site plan has been laid out following the traditional subdivision um layout which emphasizes grid like network of streets and alley loaded garages um so the petitioner has an alley running through the middle of the site um the majority of those lots are all accessed from there’s another alley just to the east of that that those lots are accessed from so there are only a few lots within this development that don’t have alley loaded access and the main reason for that along these western lines is to preserve the existing trees so although there are not stands of mature trees on the interior site the perimeter of the site does have some good quality trees that petitioner will be saving so that’s one of the main reasons why they didn’t incorporate further alleys here along the boundaries was to preserve those trees so the proposed site plan that you see before you has a mix of attached and detached single-family residences these are being shown on small lots around 3000 square feet and the overall layout and design of this is is very similar uh to the other habitat project along the beeline trail on moribeck way so they’re following that same kind of successful model uh with this site as well so there are several renderings um that the petitioner has brought forward uh for the houses within here as with that other development along more vectorway they’ve got several different housing type options to try to get some diversity uh among the different residences here so you see a difference in porch design uh roof design um little things to try to introduce some diversity within these residences here so this rendering here is looking along that multi-use path that i mentioned that runs through the site and connects to the rca park to the west um so this is kind of how that would look with the trees along there and some of the residences as i mentioned they’re looking to incorporate as much diversity as possible so these are some possible renderings showing a couple different housing types for the attached and detached residences within here again variations in porch design roof alignment um and and just small little things that can help break up the diversity within the development so some of the things that make this pud unique or that they’re requesting to deviate from the r4 standards again are very similar to some of the things that were varied with the other development the rear yard setback has been reduced from 25 feet to 20 feet the minimum lot width is being reduced

from 35 feet to 30 feet the minimum lot size is being brought down from 4 000 to 3 000 square feet um and then one of the things that i mentioned was the number of lots that are ali served uh the traditional subdivision type requires 67 of the lots loss be served by the alley um and this petition proposes 57 um so the plan commission did review this petition um and they reviewed this based on a lot of the guidance that are in the comprehensive plan uh you know the comprehensive plan encourages connectivity uh as much as possible both vehicles and pedestrians which this petition accomplishes uh this petition has accomplished a good deal amount of tree preservation along the perimeter um this location is immediately adjacent to a community park as well as is very close to the switch yard park so this is an excellent location for single-family residences the reduction in the lot sizes and standards helps add additional density meeting a lot of the housing needs of the community certainly something that was certainly highlighted in the housing study that was just released this week so this petition accomplishes many of the goals in the comprehensive plan owner occupied single-family housing affordable housing so the planning commission voted nine to zero uh to forward this to the common council with a favorable recommendation and the six conditions uh that are listed in the memo to the council and also displayed on the screen here um so with that i’m happy to answer any questions that you might have thank you mr garlic um is there anybody here from habitat who would like to speak at this time yeah um this is nate from habitat for humanity could you please state your full name just for the rest yeah hold on just like can we turn i’m just kidding uh nathan ferreira i’m the director of land development and production with habitat all right we’re still getting that echo if you can do anything about that that would be appreciated can you hear it now yes if you have earbuds or earphones that might help you want to try that it’s fun oh that sounds better okay great um and i just wanted to give a little introduction about habitat if that’s okay um yes go ahead go ahead and share a screen here wait um so uh thanks for having us this evening um this has been a project that’s been years incoming um my screen is not advancing um kinds of technical difficulties hold on just a second well i’ll just jump right in um i can skip ahead a couple um spots there so um so habitat our goal is to build affordable housing for low-income families here in monroe county um our philosophy is there in front of you our families go through classes where they take financial planning classes home maintenance contribute sweat equity hours toward toward their houses and sorry i’m having a number of pop-ups here um as you know um our community is in great need of low-income housing um we’re known as the most expensive expensive place to live uh in the state there’s a couple stats there for you to share i’m going to jump ahead here our habitat houses currently average appraisals of 150 000 mortgage payments do not exceed 30 percent of the homeowner income um and i think one of the questions that came up beforehand is mortgages in excess of the homeowner payments are put into a second soft mortgage that are forgiven when the primary mortgage is paid off and those second soft mortgages average 50 000 another question that i understood we had beforehand was just um habitat retains the first ride of refusal um for buying back every habitat house for the life of the mortgage and i and nine times out of ten we put another habitat family in that house

um so those many of our homes we’ve been around since 1988 and the majority of our homes have remained low income because we continue to put habitat houses in those houses as we buy them back creating long-term affordability um as eric mentioned osage place will allow us to build out 70 units i’ll just add one thing to what eric mentioned with the paired homes we have six paired homes that will result in 12 units and um four of those lots uh would be the 30 foot width uh whereas all of the other lots in the community will be at 40 foot so that 30 foot is really just to make the the paired homes possible along that trail that leads into rca park another plus of osage place is the connectivity that eric mentioned the roads will allow great access and uh we have been in touch with the parks department we are planning to make a financial contribution to the portion of the trail to the north um of osage place that will connect osage place to switch yard park additionally we plan to build all these houses to zero ready energy standards this means that they are outfitted for solar and if families choose to put solar on in the future um they can gain that zero energy uh certification um our timeline right now is that we hope to well i should have updated that um our we’re hoping to be through the final plat app approval uh by this fall um so that we can start uh breaking ground on infrastructure next spring and in the fall uh that would allow us to start our first house on the first phase of the neighborhood which is lots one through thirty um and uh we’ll wait to start on infrastructure for phase two until the fall of 2023 and we will be building out those those first 30 houses uh in the meantime so um what questions can i uh answer as well that’s what we wanted to share all right thank you mr ferreira are there questions from committee members for either mr garlic or mr ferreira at this point could we have this screen unshared please thank you yes councilmember rosenberger i have a quick question from mr ferreira with the zero ready home just what exactly does it mean to have like solar be like ready for solar install is that just a roof i mean it’s anything special and then is there anything inside the house then that uh sets them up as well for that zero ready designation um so yeah so uh they will be wired for solar um which um essentially means um the solar for all program uh locally if a low-income family wanted to apply uh habitat houses would would meet that qualification and um uh basically be ready to go into that solar for all program um from the start um so they’re wired um there’s also design elements um that make it um zero energy ready um they’re also um oh what’s the word i’m looking for um um there are some things that we are doing with the hvac um system um that will allow it to be uh changes from what we do now um that will allow us to um be zero energy ready did you want to chime in um okay and part of the design of the neighborhood was that the all of the houses be oriented in such a way um with a south-facing roof that they would be perfect for accepting solar panels so that’s the predominant orientation yeah thank you um council member flaherty uh yeah and maybe follow up questions related to uh the uh energy readiness and yeah i noticed the orientation of the houses which is which is great um will they still be connected to natural gas is that still what we used for for heating are they going to be uh all

electric homes uh i just wondering in the context of again kind of a zero ready they will still they will still be connected to gas okay throughout the neighborhood council member volun um yeah i’m trying to find my notes here um why was the project i’m not sure if this is for mr ferreira for mr grulick but uh why uh wasn’t the project able to meet the 67 standard for being served by alleys why was it only 57 percent what about the design uh prevented that yeah um it’s a good question so that is related to the uh the tree preservation that i talked about that they were trying to accomplish along the property boundaries um so there’s a row of trees along the west side um that they would be saving with this petition um so incorporating the alley would impact those trees and make it much more difficult to save them or very likely not be able to save them so so that that tree preservation was pretty much the entire reason that an alley was not incorporated along the west side of the boundary to have all of those lots be alley loaded so it has nothing to do with the path that extends chambers drive west tell us more about that path there that goes to the park um yeah no the path was was certainly not the problem in achieving that alley along the back um it was the desire to save these trees that encroaches into this slot and then you know they’re not right on the property line some of them are right on it some of them are a little bit east of that so saving those trees and you can see the shaded area those are the trees sure it would be saved um so saving that was not possible with an alley along there so the decision was made to save the trees you know that helps the park helps this site as well um but certainly you know we could they could remove the trees and then incorporate the alley it was just a decision on their part to save the trees but uh so you wouldn’t consider the i take it that’s a non-car path between the extending chambers drive west that’s not considered an alley no that is yeah that is not a car path and that is not an alley for uh cars to drive on for ali access okay and uh there are of course there’s no room for garages anywhere in this project i’m assuming not not along the the west side of that site um so those would all be parking they would all be parking on the street um that’s why all those parallel spaces are shown there um you know the other lots that are on the alley certainly could have garages back there if they wanted them oh in other words well i mean maybe it’s the question for habitat does habitat intend to build anybody a garage uh no we that’s not part of our model um it’s mostly a matter of affordability and keeping the mortgages within range that families can um afford the house um however all of those yeah all of those alley access houses will have parking pads and um certainly habitat families over time um make additions to their homes and i would imagine many of them would add garages over time i guess i meant purely as a footprint issue that i mean when you have uh 4 000 square foot lots or smaller there’s not a lot of room for a garage um each of those parking pads uh our two cars um will fit two cars so i i believe um there would be so they could put they could they could house it in a garage if they wanted to yep okay um the other that’s fun thank you uh the other question i have i can find it again here um what’s the difference between a paired home and a duplex is there a difference not really no you know is it just a term of art is it a separate lot of record issue versus a single lot like these are separate lots are they not yeah you know so you know there are some duplexes are set up where they’re on their own lot some are on one lot some are you know you just own the ground that the house is in so lots of different arrangements in this particular situation uh there’s a property line that runs down that common wall so one unit is on its own lot and the other unit is on its lot as well but there is some kind of an agreement to make sure that the um the wall is protected and you know yeah there’s a there’s a homeowners association in trail view where we have paired homes and so if there’s shared uh costs

uh maintenance costs for those homes that’s part of what the homeowner association helps with and um so yeah there’s but that’s one association or there’s a separate one for each pair of homes uh there’s one association for the neighborhood and the paired homes i believe pay in a higher um amount to cover those additional potential maintenance costs over time very good thank you okay um i had a question uh about the i guess whether we need to state more clearly just for the legal record that these houses will remain will initially be and will remain affordable mr garlic the the uh the letter that we received from smith rehab of course says you know this is a habitat project and it’s uh geared to families earning between 25 and 80 of your ami but i don’t know if that letter is really an official part of the pud district ordinance because in the usually we look at the petitioner’s statement as the district ordinance am i right so i’m wondering if we need to put something about affordability in there um so certainly the petitioner statement is part of what governs this the district’s standards are the nuts and bolts of uh you know lot sizes setbacks that kind of thing so anything that’s in the petitioner statement is still binding um you know i think your concern is how many of these lots will remain you know as nathan mentioned you know habitat has the first rite of refusal but they could they could obviously say no we don’t want this it feels like your concern is more we want to make sure that a certain percentages remain in that program for a time period so that would be either something the petitioner would need to commit to in writing or a reasonable condition would need to be drafted to that effect obviously something hopefully that the petitioner is amicable too yeah right mr ferrera what do you think um i’ll just add that we’ve been in discussions for a few months with the mayor’s office and we were close to having a document um signed and agreed on we just we’re working out some of the finer details i will say habitat has committed to keeping at least 50 percent of the homes uh affordable for on a long term basis but it will be more than that uh it’s just we don’t have the documented and written out yet so it’s in process um uh we’re we’re aware that we need to have an agreement uh in place so we’re working on it i don’t know if if windy if you want to add anything else here uh i think that most of you are probably aware that um we are in a in an agreement with the city can you hear me yes could you just state your name for the record and your title if you have one sorry wendy goodlett president and ceo of habitat for humanity of monroe county uh welcome thank you so we have an agreement um a verbal agreement with the city for their participation in funding for part of the infrastructure costs of this project and that’s that’s where this legal documentation is coming into play is trying to work through the logistics of that the city has committed the lesser of 800 000 or 45 percent of the infrastructure costs and habitat will cover the remaining 55 so um that’s kind of the background of why we’re why we’re negotiating back and forth on the finer points of this um is because there are city and federal dollars that are coming through the city involved in the funding of it all right good so i i it sounds like this there will be an agreement because uh aside from this pud uh revision there’s another set of money that the city is uh willing to contribute to the infrastructure and that will need a legal commitment right okay very good are there other questions from committee members at this time yes council member vola uh what was the timeline on those commitments in other words they’re not going to be done before our second reading next week is that right we actually think they might be that’s what the attorneys are that’s their goal um is to have them ready prior to next wednesday we’re getting very very close

we would we’d be appreciate appreciative of that i didn’t expect it but that would be great okay thank you that’s our goal yep um i have a question just about design um the the images that we saw had um vertical siding and is that something that you’re committed to do because it doesn’t really match what’s in the rest of the neighborhood and i personally just don’t like it but it also seems kind of uh anomalous when you look at the the houses um nearby sure i’d be happy to address that i’m barry clapper from spring park spring point architects can you hear you’re echoing for one second we’re muting okay um i don’t know if they’ll be able to hear me though you sound you sound fine uh so habitat was hoping to distinguish this this uh development from some of their previous developments and because the site is a little bit more rural not as downtown as the trail view site we started to think about using a board and batten to change the character of uh of the neighborhood and in addition to that introduce some standing seam uh on the roof forms again to just kind of give it a little bit more of a a less urban feel and um so that is the reason that you see uh the vertical board and batten siding represented um as you do that’s that’s sort of uh where that came from and trying to create a bit of a unique character for this development mr garlic is there any um uh guidance from the udo or otherwise as far as the appearance of the homes no for for single family there are not anti-monotony standards um as long as you pick materials that are on the approved finishing list um there are there are not um you know requirements you have difference of finishing materials throughout the buildings um obviously with this being a pud this if that’s something that the council feels would be appropriate to address with a reasonable condition um you know something could be drafted to that effect may i add a point if you if i may yes miss clapper this is the first time that habitat will be using this material in this system and so of course since uh the labor is volunteer we’re going to have to see how that installation goes and how smoothly that goes so um we very might very well may have a mix of lap siding which is what they traditionally use and board and batten uh our images at this point just just show um the gordon batten but i don’t think that there’s anything that precludes a mix of the materials okay i was just curious i’m not here to judge architectural aesthetic council member volun uh miss clapper thanks for the presentation i to think though that board and batten is a phrase i’ve never heard before and i would like you to give us a gentle introduction please explain what does that mean exactly sure compare it to other sightings sure so lap siding which which people typically see around town is horizontal siding in its lap one on the other um borden batten is a vertical board um historically is tongue and grooved um in into the next vertical board and then there would be a baton which would be about a a small one by two that would go over the seam so it’s essentially a board and a baton and it’s that repetition um and you’ll start to see it now um now that you sort of know what it is but it is around town and it’s it’s something um that you see mixed in with a bungalow uh architecture type so i mean this is definitely to distinguish it i’m looking at a a picture of it here on google um from just a kind of a barn or a warehouse kind of metal building because that’s the the impression that i got from the illustrations it looked almost like metal buildings

yeah yeah so no actually it’s um we use it as a as a mix um with lap siding often um in all kinds of architecture it’s just another siding type and it’s actually it’s this will be a vinyl version of it rather than the horizontal lap siding trying this vinyl system and we know it’s going to have some complexities to it but um given the the more rural sense of of this site we thought it might be appropriate to try something a little new and also just to to change the product up a little bit i’m gonna make two requests of the petitioners for next week one of them is could you please bring us some photos that illustrate the board and batten style that you have in mind preferably in vinyl but just photos that illustrate it uh if there’s any around town or if you have uh you know just give us a little bit of a tour of the siding i think it’s gonna be a question for the council the other is um every time i’ve seen this is typical for petitions but uh every time i’ve seen this project i’ve seen just the land that the houses we built on i would really really like it in context if you can expand out the map about 50 feet in each direction just to see what the houses on the immediate edges already look like so that it’s in context because i’m trying to envision the difference between the east edge of the site for example and the existing houses the south edge of the site of the existing houses um if there’s some way that you can give us that context it would be much easier to envision the overall project do you think that’s doable i think so sure that would be great i’d really like to see that next week at the full council thank you council member flaherty yes thanks uh i have a follow-up from my earlier question and i don’t think this is for this project necessarily um because we’re you know fairly far along but just thinking about long-term energy use and uh you know the nature of a change of electric grid and that sort of thing um has has habitat considered all electric homes at all is that have you you know uh run numbers on that to see what costs would look like for folks and and thinking long term in in particular in the context of solar compatibility what that might look like to do heat pumps and electric stoves you know as opposed to connecting the gas yeah um um yes actually we are building a um kind of a pilot program right now that will be all electric a shipping container home um so it is something that we’re we’re looking into um uh our understanding at the moment is the price point for uh families of gas uh is still um the least expensive option in terms of their utilities and affordability is still top uh top for us of course um but it’s it’s something we’re open to exploring more um and um i don’t i don’t know that we’ve come to a final decision about it um honestly for osage place um but we’ve been um we’ve been moving toward including gas in the neighborhood so thanks all right are there any other questions yes council member volun um i’ve looked into the question of gas versus electric uh heating before and uh it seems that in climbs as far north it’s electric is kind of prohibitive is that a reason why you’re hesitant to go all electric or is it really purely a matter of ovens and stoves and hot water heaters um i i’m not sure i know that an accurate answer to that i can we can certainly research that um but yeah i mean the environment certainly does have um an impact um when it comes to heating uh in the in the wintertime um like i said we’re doing a pilot now um so i think we’ll have a better sense of that um any any thoughts on no i mean i mean it isn’t ideal for me to see homes go all electric you know like i’d like to be do that myself i just i mean i maybe uh mr flaherty can speak to heat pumps and the like i just uh i think your impression councilmember bolin is for sort of a previous generation of heat pumps uh that technology and those products have come a really long way in the last five to ten years and my understanding is now pretty much all climates in the u.s

um are you know uh heat pump compatible and fairly cost effective and cost competitive i guess um that may vary a little bit by location depending on just how cheap the gas is and that kind of thing but i think it’s doable as my understanding very good to know and that’s something i did not know thank you but mr ferreira if you had any other comment no i don’t have anything to add um but it’s something we will we’ll research and look into a little more so i mean just in general or were you planning to give us a a comment next week um i’m not expecting it i’m not worried about it either i didn’t know what you meant but i’m happy to try to be able to prepare a comment for next week so we’ll yeah it might help but it’s not not a big deal i just yeah i think it out loud all right thank you yep all right any other questions from committee members before we go to the public all right seeing none um we will go to the public for comment if any members of the public have a comment to make they can use the raise hand function in zoom or type into the chat that they would like to comment so this is for comments on the osage place development by habitat for humanity mr lucas are you seeing any hands raised i’m not no all right well let’s bring it back to the committee then um are there any comments from committee members yes councilmember um this seems like a pretty straightforward project it’s a good idea it’s uh uh certainly uh crucially needed um you know other than the uh finer points that uh that i’ve asked for uh to clarify and to give us a full uh understanding of the project um i think it’s a great uh uh project for on a number of dimensions not the least of which is uh that it’s good infield development uh it’s sensitive to its context and most importantly it provides affordable housing which is in very short supply so i’m uh looking forward to supporting it um without a second hearing just to make a recommendation tonight thank you thank you any other comments from committee members council member flaherty yes i share uh the views of councilmember volin and you know i think this is a great opportunity for for bloomington and to add some affordable housing to our mix and help help with infill um i think uh that’ll it’s really nice that it’s connected and very close to um uh the new switch yard park and enemies like the b line and eventually the multi-use path to the north uh so this is yeah i think an exciting project um i appreciate all the work that’s gone into it uh from habitat and from city staff and and uh thank you for your time tonight and also would be ready to make a recommendation this evening all right councilmember rosenbarker i’ll say same to those comments um just add one that i really like how aligned with the comp plan this is so appreciate you all really focusing on those goals you know 5-1 housing affordability and even transportation being connected to the beeline i think that’s really wonderful so thanks for that all right and i must also agree with my colleagues that i think this is a wonderful proposal in uh several ways i love the connectivity that we’re you know changing street stubs uh into streets that connect and uh extend that neighborhood and that we are um you know providing affordable housing is wonderful we definitely need more of that um especially for families and um this is uh a great uh use of space that is relatively close to to town and to various amenities um and it’s definitely bikeable and walkable um and it’s uh it’s a dense development so even denser in some cases than the r4 that that we recently approved in the udo so i really like to see that it’s an efficient use of land

so um i am ready if somebody would like to make a motion to send this i’d like to recommend the do pass all right so that’s a second okay can you clarify that motion council member volume it simply means that the committee recommends uh that the project be adopted uh which would uh send it out of committee to back to the full council very good all right well as we usually do in committee we’ll just do a straw poll and we’ll start with council member flaherty uh yes councilmember rosenberger yeah council member volun yes and i also say yes so thank you so much to um mr garlic and uh this mr ferreira and um miss goodlett uh for being here and miss clapper as well and uh we will send this back to the full council with a positive recommendation and appear on the 12th is that right yeah it’ll be at our meeting regular session next wednesday so i think that wraps up our business and we do have a little break then before the committee of the whole at 6 30. mr lucas it’ll be the same uh zoom link correct same zoom link that meeting starts at 6 30 so folks can either stick around or hop off and hop back on so very good recommended adjourn yes we are adjourned thank you very much thank you yeah bye you