Consultants show 'suburban retrofit' for Engles/Goodwill and an alternative Twin Lakes plan; residents press for site‑specific protections

Consultants presented two illustrative site strategies aimed at translating the new character‑district rules into buildable projects: a "suburban retrofit" for the Ingles/Goodwill strip center that adds mixed‑use buildings, a neighborhood green and internal block parking, and a master‑plan alternative for the Twin Lakes parcel that mixes live‑work buildings, six‑unit 'mansion flats', townhouses and lake‑facing single‑family houses.

On the Ingles/Goodwill concept, the presenter described how existing large parking fields could be reorganized into blocks with buildings placed up to the street, "liner" storefronts in front of larger tenants, and a civic green at the core — while leaving anchor tenants such as Engles and Goodwill in operation. The consultant said such a retrofit could add residential units above commercial spaces without forcing immediate removal of existing businesses.

For Twin Lakes the consultant showed a plan that traded some unit count compared with the site's original developer proposal but added commercial space and a connected park network. The presenter said the consultants' layout was about "17 units short of what they had in their original proposal, but we also got all of the commercial space on the ground floor of the live works and the civic spaces." The plan included stormwater treatment designed as an amenity and houses oriented to the lake rather than presenting rear yards toward the water.

Audience members pressed for specifics. One resident asked how many units or a numeric density would be permitted in a character district; the consultant replied that the code will rely on measurable standards (lot widths, building heights, frontage types and parking requirements) rather than an arbitrary units‑per‑acre figure, and that those metrics will reveal feasible intensity at the site‑plan stage. Participants also asked whether the moratorium and mapping could "lock" certain downtown R44 parcels into a large‑lot district (CD3L); consultants said they will review individual parcels when creating the zoning map and that property owners can still request rezonings under state law.

Site‑specific expectations were a recurring theme: residents asked the city to require robust submittals (graded plans, tree surveys, renderings) so the community can see what will be built and avoid 'bait‑and‑switch' builds. The presenter said the city can set a clear checklist for required submittals and noted examples where thorough initial submissions led to smoother approvals.

Next steps: the illustrations are not proposals and would not be adopted as regulations without the normal rezoning/site‑plan and public‑hearing processes. Consultants said the public‑draft ordinance will clarify technical metrics and submittal requirements that determine how those concepts could be implemented.