mincow 04-28-22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Chair Litten discussed Council's desire to have its priorities reflected in the term sheet, noting that they would not have to be hammered out perfectly prior to Council's next regular meeting on May 2nd. Some of the concepts desired included the ability to expand the site where possible once market conditions change, and a desire for more density in the project. Councilmember Rader focused his comments on the sustainability of the project, noting that he had sent the term sheet around to various environmental organizations/stakeholders who largely approved of its vision. He suggested installing base minimums for energy efficiency standards that tie into the city's Climate Action Plan. Director Leininger commented that much of the discussion around incorporating sustainability measures into the project has been high level conceptually, with details still needing to be worked out. He noted various components such as a recycling program, EV chargers, bike shares, etc. that were likely to be considered in the project, along with a potential environmental building certification. Councilmember Kepple added support for sustainable landscaping to be incorporated into the greenspace designed for the site. Councilmember Bullock used the sustainability discussion as an example to gain insight on how larger budgeting conversations for the project play out. He noted that sustainability items that are already not baked into the budget may not receive action. He stated City Council should confirm its priorities now and look for construction on the project to aim for LEED level certifications. Director Leininger stated that the details for the plan get worked out through the next step in the process, which is design review. The term sheet lays out high level priorities, with flexibility built into them. He noted if Council feels a need to reach a LEED gold level, there's only so much capacity in the project for it and prioritizing that may affect other aspects of the development. The project goes through PC and ABR to figure out the details. He stressed that Council needs to be involved in those processes, and that the Planning Department can keep Council apprised of project development in Committee of the Whole meetings to make sure it has Council's fingerprints on it. Councilmember Shachner spoke to the expertise and quality of individuals on the PC and ABR boards and their ability to apply a critical lens to projects. He suggested not putting specific markers on how Council wants things done, as no members are experts on design or engineering. He stated his #1 priority since joining Council has been providing more space for people to live in the city. He added that he's interested in seeing more residential density, ensuring the public's ability to use the space, and having an affordable housing component to the project. Councilmember Kepple sought to work backwards from Council's stated priorities to reach outcomes, focusing on the ADA accessibility of dwelling units on the site. She noted that the committee learned in a previous meeting that 2% of units in the development are required to be fully ADA accessible and iterated a desire to see that number rise. In this case, Ms. Kepple stated that one of her focused outcomes for the project was to include more affordable and accessible housing for seniors, refugees, and those with disabilities to remain in Lakewood. She concurred with Councilmember Shachner about wanting to see a public space that which everyone can use. She concluded by noting that Council's job is not to be prescriptive with project components, but 2