[00:00:01]
[CALL TO ORDER]
THE CITY OF DUBLIN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.YOU CAN JOIN THE MEETING IN PERSON AT 55 55 PERIMETER DRIVE OR ACCESS VIA THE LIVE STREAM ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
WE WELCOME PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, INCLUDING COMMENTS ON CASES AT THIS TIME.
IF YOU'LL PLEASE STAND AND JOIN ME FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE PEARL.
WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL OUR ROLE THIS EVENING? MR. GARVIN? HERE.
[ACCEPTANCE OF DOCUMENTS AND APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES]
I WILL, UH, ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD AND APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 22ND AND SEPTEMBER 5TH MEETINGS WITH THE, UH, AMENDED TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS SENT IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING.MR. W DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
UH, THE APPLICATION REGARDING RADIANT LIFE CHURCH WAS POSTPONED AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
SO ANYONE WHO WAS IN ATTENDANCE, WE CERTAINLY WELCOME YOU AND YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY, BUT THAT APPLICATION WILL NOT BE HEARD THIS EVENING.
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD TO CITY COUNCIL WHEN PLATTING A PROPERTY AND REZONING ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION.
IN SUCH CASES, CITY COUNCIL RECEIVES A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION.
IN OTHER CASES, THE COMMISSION HAS THE FINAL DECISION MAKING RESPONSIBILITY.
THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STATE THAT NO NEW AGENDA ITEMS ARE TO BE INTRODUCED.
AFTER 10:30 PM THE ORDER OF OPERATIONS FOR THIS EVENING, THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR CASE FIRST, FOLLOWED BY STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION.
THE COMMISSION WILL THEN ASK QUESTIONS OF BOTH THE APPLICANT AND STAFF, FOLLOWED BY PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE DELIBERATING ON EACH CASE.
ANYONE WISHING TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE INVITED TO COME FORWARD TO THE MICROPHONE.
PLEASE ENSURE THAT THE GREEN LIGHT IS ON.
STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
WE REQUEST THAT YOU KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES OR LESS.
AT THIS TIME, ANYONE WHO INTENDS TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION MUST BE SWORN IN.
IF YOU WILL, PLEASE STAND, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND ANSWER IN THE AFFIRMATIVE.
DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH IN YOUR TESTIMONY TO THIS COMMISSION? THANK YOU.
[Consent Agenda]
ELIGIBLE FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA THIS EVENING.THOSE ARE CASES 24 DASH 0 0 8 FDP AND CASE 24 DASH 0 0 9 FP FOR AVONDALE WOODS, SECTION THREE, FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND FINAL PLAT.
DOES ANYONE FROM THE COMMISSION WISH TO, UH, REMOVE THESE ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA THIS EVENING? IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THESE CASES? WE INVITE YOU TO COME FORWARD.
STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.
IF YOU COULD PRESS THE BUTTON TO TURN ON YOUR MICROPHONE, I WILL LET YOU KNOW WHEN IT IS ON.
I LIVE AT 5 2 2 3 ESTUARY LANE IN DUBLIN.
UM, I JUST HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR THE, THE, I LIVE IN THE CONDOS THAT ARE PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, AND WE WERE JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY PROVISIONS FOR A SECOND ENTRANCE AND EXIT FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT.
RIGHT NOW, IT ALL GOES OUT ONTO AVERY OFF OF, UH, AVONDALE, AND IT'S GETTING BACKED UP.
AND WITH MORE HOUSES GOING IN, IT'S ONLY GONNA GET WORSE.
UM, ALSO, THERE WAS A TRAFFIC SURVEY FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT DONE, UH, EARLIER, WELL, IN AUGUST ABOUT SPEED ON AVONDALE.
AND WE JUST WANTED TO KNOW IF THERE'S ANY, UH, WHAT THE RESULTS WERE AND IF THERE'S PLANNING ON DOING ANYTHING TO, TO CALM THE TRAFFIC THERE.
AND THEN ALSO, WHEN IS, IF THIS IS APPROVED, WHEN ARE THEY GONNA START THE CONSTRUCTION ON THE ROAD? UM,
[00:05:01]
SECTION TWO, THE ROAD IS IN, BUT NO HOUSES HAVE BEEN STARTED YET, AND THAT'S, THERE'S SUPPOSED TO BE MORE THERE THAN THIS NEW, UH, SECTION.THANK, THANK YOU, MR. WEBSTER.
UH, MS. MULLINAX, CAN YOU, FOR THE COMMISSION AND FOR THE AUDIENCE, CAN YOU STATE THE, UH, CONTENTS OF THE FINAL PLAT AND THE, THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE PURVIEW THAT WE ARE ENTERTAINING THIS EVENING? YES.
SO THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS SPECIFICALLY FOR SECTION THREE THAT OUTLINES THE GENERAL SITE LAYOUT AS WELL AS THE LOT REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICALLY FOR THOSE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS WITHIN THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UM, AS PROPOSED.
AND THEN THE FINAL PLAT IS ESTABLISHING AND SUBDIVIDING THOSE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, UM, THE EXTENSIONS OF THREE PUBLIC, UH, ROADWAYS, AS WELL AS THREE RESERVES.
UH, SO THE, THE SECOND ENTRANCE, THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THE ROADWAY IN SECTION TWO, ARE THOSE BEING ADDRESSED AT ALL THIS EVENING? UH, NOT WITH THIS SECTION, NO.
UM, BUT THERE IS A FUTURE SECONDARY EXIT OR ENTRANCE AND EXIT, UM, FURTHER NORTH.
UM, SO CONNECTING TO SECTION TWO THAT WILL BE DEVELOPED IN THE FUTURE.
SO, MR. WEBSTER, WE WOULD INVITE YOU TO TALK WITH STAFF.
THOSE ITEMS ARE NOT UNDER CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING, AND SO WE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT DOES NOT MAKE DAY-TO-DAY LIVING MORE COMFORTABLE, UH, NOR MORE NOR MORE PREDICTABLE.
BUT WE'D, WE'D INVITE YOU TO, TO BRING THOSE ITEMS TO STAFF.
LOOKING BACK TO THE COMMISSION, IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO PULL THIS FROM CONSENT? WITH THAT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
THERE ARE, I WILL THREE CONDITIONS ON ITEM, UH, LET'S SEE.
UH, MINOR TEXT MODIFICATION AND CONDITIONS ON AVONDALE WOODS, SECTION THREE.
AND THERE IS A SINGLE CONDITION FOR THE FINAL PLAT, SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION WITH THOSE CONSIDERATIONS.
WE ARE NOW MOVING ON IN OUR AGENDA.
IF I CAN GET MY PAGES CORRECT.
UH, AT THIS TIME WE ARE MOVING
[Case #24-012ADMO ]
ON TO CASE REVIEW, UH, 24 DASH 0 1 2 A DMO.THIS IS, UM, CODE AND I'M MISSING HOMEWOOD.
UH, HD CODE AND GUIDELINES UPDATE PHASE TWO PROPOSAL FOR AMENDMENT TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT ZONING CODE AND AMENDMENTS TO THE HISTORIC DESIGN GUIDELINES LINES.
WE CERTAINLY DON'T SEE YOU ENOUGH IN OUR, IN OUR MEETINGS, BUT WE, WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO YOUR PRESENTATION AFTER YOUR PRESENTATION.
BUT BEFORE DISCUSSION, I'D LIKE TO INVITE MR. ALEXANDER AS HE WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN SOME OF THIS, TO, UH, SHARE JUST HIS PERSPECTIVE ON HOW THIS CAME TO BE AND WHERE WE ARE IN THE PROCESS.
SO, MS. HOLT, I'LL TURN TIME OVER TO YOU.
AND, UH, GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.
I WANNA REINTRODUCE GREG DALE TO YOU.
UH, HE'S A VERY FAMILIAR FACE FROM MCBRIDE, DALE CLARION.
HE'S GONNA HELP WITH THE PRESENTATION TONIGHT, AND THEN I'LL JUMP IN FOR SPECIFIC THINGS.
BUT AT THIS POINT, I AM GONNA TURN IT OVER TO MR. DALE.
UM, IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE HERE.
OUR ROLE HAS BEEN TO WORK WITH THE CITY TO FACILITATE A LOT OF THE PROCESS AND PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS, UH, AS WELL AS TO, UH, WORK WITH STAFF TO DRAFT THE CHANGES THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE, BEFORE YOU, UM, SARAH AND OUR STAFF HAVE WORKED VERY HARD ON THIS, UM, WITH MULTIPLE, MULTIPLE REVIEWS, MULTIPLE, UH, DETAILED, UH, CONSIDERATIONS.
UH, AND WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU, I THINK IS A, IS A RESULT OF THAT.
SO, UH, WHAT, UH, YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU, THIS IS PHASE TWO OF A, OF A, OF A TWO PHASE PROCESS THAT, UH, HAS BEEN UNDERWAY FOR OVER, OVER A YEAR.
WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS FIVE DIFFERENT THINGS.
UH, ONE IS TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF THE, THE, THE KINDS OF THINGS THAT COME BEFORE THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD.
NORMALLY THAT COULD BE DONE AT A STAFF LEVEL OR AN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW.
UH, THAT WAS AN EXTENSIVE PROCESS.
AND I THINK WORKING WITH THE BOARD, UH, I THINK WE HAVE A REALLY PRETTY GOOD REFINED LIST OF THAT.
THE OTHER IS TO CLARIFY THE BACKGROUND
[00:10:01]
GUIDANCE, UH, IN BOTH THE CODE AND GUIDELINES AND WHAT, WHAT WE MEAN BY THAT.BY BACKGROUND, BACKGROUND, GUIDANCE.
YOU WILL RECALL THE SHIFT FROM THE NOMENCLATURE THAT WAS CONTRIBUTING AND NON-CONTRIBUTING.
AND THAT WAS CHANGED TO, UH, LANDMARK AND BACKGROUND.
UH, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE TRIED TO DO IS TO ARTICULATE A LITTLE BIT BETTER THE GUIDANCE IN TERMS OF REVIEWING THE BACKGROUND THAT IS THE NON LANDMARK BUILDINGS, AND FOCUS MORE ON THINGS LIKE CONTEXT, MASSING, SCALE, HEIGHT, ROOF SHAPE, WINDOW DOOR OPENINGS, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS.
UNLESS ON THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS THAT YOU WOULD BE INTERESTED IN WITH LANDMARK BUILDINGS.
SO THAT WAS A, THAT WAS A, UH, A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT ISSUE.
THE OTHER WAS SIMPLY TO PROVIDE A TIMEFRAME EXTENSION FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS.
UH, THERE, BASICALLY YOU HAVE A YEAR NOW, AND THIS, UH, ALLOWS THE STAFF TO GRANT THOSE FOR ANOTHER YEAR TO ALLOW FOR MORE FLEXIBILITY.
THE FOURTH ONE IS JUST CLEANING UP SOME THINGS, SOME, SOME, UH, ERRORS, SOME SCRIBNER'S ERRORS.
AND THEN THE OTHER THING, WHICH SARAH WILL TALK ABOUT HERE, UH, IN JUST A MINUTE, UH, IS THE, UM, IS THE, UH, CHANGE TO SOME OF THE VARIANCE LANGUAGE.
JUST BACKGROUND, I, I WON'T BELABOR THIS, JUST KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN UNDERWAY FOR OVER A YEAR.
UH, WE HELD, I, I HELPED CONDUCT A NUMBER OF PUBLIC MEETINGS, UH, CITIZEN-BASED MEETINGS.
I THINK WE HAD TWO OR THREE OF THOSE, UH, TO ALLOW CITIZENS TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE OCCUR IN TERMS OF IMPROVING THE EFFICIENCY AND USER FRIENDLINESS OF THE, OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT REGULATIONS.
UM, WE SHOW HERE APRIL, UH, ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD CONFIRMING THE DIRECTION OF THIS PROJECT.
ACTUALLY, A AT THE A RB HAD MULTIPLE, UH, MEETINGS WHERE, WHERE THEY CONSIDERED THIS.
AND THEN IN JUNE, THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS VARIANCES CAME UP.
AND SARAH'S GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT IN JUST A MINUTE.
BUT WHAT I DO WANNA SAY, REALLY JUST TO IN, IN GENERAL IS THAT THIS WAS, UH, RECOMMENDED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD UNANIMOUSLY, UH, JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.
AND I THINK I CAN SAY THAT BASED ON MY EXPERIENCE IN THOSE PUBLIC MEETINGS, THIS IS VERY RESPONSIVE TO WHAT WE HEARD THE CITIZENS AND PROPERTY OWNERS SAY IN, IN ALL OF THOSE MEETINGS.
SO I THINK IT'S A, A, A GOOD IMPROVEMENT.
SO WITH THAT, UH, SARAH'S GONNA JUST UPDATE YOU A LITTLE BIT ON THE VARIANCE ISSUE BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE DOING THERE.
UM, CURRENTLY WE HAVE A BIT OF A CUMBERSOME PROCESS TO ACHIEVE VARIOUS TYPES OF WAIVERS IN THE HISTORIC CODE.
AND TO GO OVER THAT BRIEFLY, ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTURES ARE WHERE NUMERIC, UM, CRITERIA ARE LESS THAN 10%.
SO THINGS LIKE SETBACKS, BUILDING HEIGHT, LOT COVERAGE WAIVERS ARE AT LESS THAN 20%.
AND VARIANCES ABOVE 20% ACTUALLY GO TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS.
AND WE HAD AN EXAMPLE OF THAT THIS SUMMER, AND IT WAS FELT THAT IT WOULD BE A LOT EASIER FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED IF ALL OF THOSE WAIVERS STAYED WITH THE A RB.
THE A RB HAS VERY UNIQUE CODE AND GUIDELINES BASED ON THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE STANDARDS THAT ARE NOT LIKE OUR TYPICAL SUBURBAN CODE, IF YOU WILL.
AND, UM, IT IS JUST SEEMS TO MAKE MOST SENSE FOR PROJECTS AND FOR APPLICANTS TO STICK WITH THE BOARD THAT KNOWS THE CODE, THIS SPECIFIC CODE, THE BEST.
SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS THAT ALL NUMERIC VARIATIONS FROM THE CODE ARE NOW CALLED WAIVERS, REGARDLESS OF THE PERCENT THAT'S BEING ASKED.
A NEW REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE WAIVER REQUEST IS THE LEAST AMOUNT NECESSARY TO GET TO THE DESIRED RESULT.
AND YOU STILL HAVE TO MEET ALL OF THE OTHER CRITERIA, INCLUDING, UM, BEING COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UM, NOT, UM, OVERBUILDING ON A PARTICULAR LOT, ALL OF THOSE KEY KINDS OF COMPONENTS.
BUT THAT SAVES THE APPLICANT A TRIP TO A DIFFERENT BOARD.
IT SAVES AT LEAST A MONTH IN THE PROCESS AS YOU'RE PREPARING FOR THAT BOARD.
AND IT ALLOWS THE BOARD THAT IS, AGAIN, MOST FAMILIAR WITH THE CODE AND THE GUIDELINES TO ACT ON THOSE REQUESTS.
SO WE'RE PRETTY EXCITED ABOUT THAT.
AND IT, IT SEEMS LIKE A GOOD COMMON
[00:15:01]
SENSE SIMPLIFICATION.WE'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF, UM, HELP FROM THE LAW OFFICE TO CONFIRM THIS APPROACH AND WE APPRECIATE THAT GREATLY.
SO, UH, WE JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT PARTICULAR EFFORT.
AND WITH THAT, WE'RE ASKING FOR A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TONIGHT FOR THE CODE AND THE GUIDELINES SO THAT WE CAN SEND THAT ON TO CITY COUNCIL WITH AN ANTICIPATED DATE OF THE 21ST OF OCTOBER.
AND WE'RE BOTH HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE DO QUESTIONS.
MR. ALEXANDER, DID YOU WANT TO PROVIDE ANY COMMENTARY? JUST A LITTLE BACKGROUND.
NOW, I CANNOT SPEAK TO THE LAST ISSUE, BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY COME UP SINCE I WAS ON THE BOARD, BUT YOU MAY HAVE REMEMBERED A FEW.
ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE DIFFICULTIES DEALING WITH THE CODE FOR THE A RB IS THERE WAS THIS SURVEY THAT WAS DONE YEARS AGO THAT CLASSIFIED JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING IN THE DISTRICT, REGARDLESS OF THE ARCHITECTURAL QUALITY AS A CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE.
SO IT, IT IMPACTED THE WAY YOU CONSIDER DEMOLITION.
IT ALSO IMPACTED THE WAY YOU REVIEWED THE PROJECT.
AND SO WE HAD A NUMBER OF BUILDINGS THAT WERE, WERE REALLY QUESTIONABLE THAT, THAT THEY WERE TRULY HISTORIC RESOURCES.
SO COMING OUT OF THAT, THEN THERE WAS A COMPLETE RECLASSIFICATION, WHICH WAS, WHICH IS REALLY WHERE THIS CAME FROM, THE RECLASSIFICATION THAT YOU ALREADY PASSED REGARDING BACKGROUND AND LANDMARK BUILDINGS.
AND THE NUMBERS CHANGED DRAMATICALLY.
SO THE NUMBER OF REAL LANDMARKS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN WHAT WAS IN THAT INVENTORY.
SO AS, AS WE WERE DOING THAT, SO WE'RE SAYING THE FOCUS IS ON THESE LANDMARKS, THEN, THEN THERE ARE ISSUES.
SOME OF THE ISSUES, UM, WITH THE BACKGROUND BUILDINGS REALLY COULD BE HANDLED BY THE STAFF.
AND, AND THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, AND YOU MAY HAVE MAY HAVE SEEN IT IN THE MINUTES, WAS WHY DON'T WE LOOK AT, IT WAS A LITTLE MORE GENERAL.
IT WAS LOOKING AT THINGS THAT DO NOT IMPACT THE MASSING OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO, SO THE PROPOSAL HERE IS PROBABLY BETTER BECAUSE IT'S NARROWER AND IT CLEARLY IDENTIFIES WHAT, WHAT THOSE THINGS WILL BE.
BUT AS, AS GREG SAID AND SARAH MENTIONED, WE'D HAVE PEOPLE COME TO OUR MEETINGS AND THEY WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT WE WERE DOING
SO THIS WAS REALLY IN RESPONSE TO TWO THINGS, THE CHANGE FROM LANDMARK TO BACKGROUND, UM, CLEAR IDENTIFICATION RESOURCES, BUT ALSO RESPONSE TO THE NEIGHBORS.
SO I, I, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S GREAT, ALTHOUGH I THINK IT PUTS A LOT OF PRESSURE ON THE DIRECTOR TO MAKE THE CALL ON ALL THESE, ON ALL THESE CASES.
SO IT, IT SEEMS TO ME IT'S, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF GRAY AREA THERE.
UM, BUT, BUT, UM, I, IT'S WHAT, IT'S REALLY WHAT WE, WHAT WE WANTED.
AND IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT UNUSUAL.
IT'S DONE IN SOME OTHER COMMUNITIES, SO IT'S NOT LIKE THIS IS, UM, YOU KNOW.
UH, WITH THAT, UH, LET'S DO QUESTIONS.
AT THIS TIME, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION FOR STAFF? ALRIGHT, IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? MS. ROUSH, HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS COME IN SINCE WE'VE BEEN IN? THANK YOU.
WITH THAT, UH, THIS IS A CODE CHANGE.
SO THE COMMISSION IS NOT THE FINAL DECISION MAKING BODY, UH, BUT RATHER RECOMMENDATION, UM, WE ARE LOOKING FOR A RECOMMENDATION THIS EVENING TO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL, THE APPROVAL OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT CODE AMENDMENTS AND GUIDELINES UPDATE FOR PHASE TWO.
I KNOW THERE WAS A, A LABOR OF LOVE THAT WENT INTO THIS.
[COMMUNICATIONS]
ON TO COMMUNICATIONS.I THOUGHT I WOULD, UM, IF, IF YOU WANT OR IF YOU WANNA DO MEETING DATES FIRST, UM, EITHER ONE.
SO I'M JUST GONNA HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION OVERVIEW OF, UM, OUR STAFF REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS AND SOME OF THE TAKEAWAYS WE'VE HAD FROM THE SURVEY WE SENT OUT.
BUT WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE THAT WITH YOU, BUT GET ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE ABOUT HOW WE'RE PRESENTING OUR STAFF REPORTS AND
[00:20:01]
PRESENTATIONS TONIGHT.AND THEN THE OTHER ITEM UNDER COMMUNICATIONS WAS, UM, REAFFIRMING THE MEETING DATES.
SO I DUNNO IF YOU WANNA DO THAT WITH MR. CHINOOK NOT HERE, OR, UH, WE CAN WAIT EITHER WAY.
YEAH, HISTORICALLY WE HAVE WAITED UNTIL THE COMMISSION IS FULL.
AND SO IF WE CAN DO THAT WHEN WE HAVE A FULL COMMISSION.
ALRIGHT, SO WE'LL PUT THAT TO THE NEXT MEETING THEN.
SO, HEY JENNY, THOSE, THOSE MEETING DATES JUST FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR? YES.
OR IS IT UNTIL LIKE, LIKE FEBRUARY OR SOMETHING? WE DO HAVE TWO IN, OR WE HAVE THEM UP TO FEBRUARY.
UM, BUT THO WE WILL RECONFIRM THOSE PARTICULAR DATES AS WE PROPOSE THE NEW ONES COUNCIL'S ABOUT TO DO THEIR SCHEDULE FOR NEXT YEAR.
SO ONCE BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR, WE'LL BE ABLE TO, TO LOOK AT THAT AND SEE IF WE NEED TO MAKE ANY CHANGES.
MM-HMM?
SO FOR OUR STAFF REPORT DISCUSSION, UM, I JUST WANTED TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, WHICH I HAVE ALLUDED TO, UM, IN OTHER MEETINGS, BUT SORT OF WHERE THIS CAME FROM AND WHY WE'RE, WHY WE'RE DOING THIS.
NOT THAT WE DON'T ALWAYS WANNA BE KNOWING HOW TO DO THINGS BETTER, BUT THERE REALLY WAS A DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THIS, WHICH, UM, IS RELATED TO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY, UM, THAT THIS, UH, CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED ALMOST A YEAR AGO.
UM, SO THAT WAS REALLY LOOKING AT HOW DO WE ENSURE OUR ECONOMIC VIABILITY AND WHAT'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND FOCUS, UM, IN THE COMING YEARS.
AND OUT OF THAT PLAN, THERE WERE MULTIPLE STRATEGIES.
AND THE ONE ON THE SCREEN IN FRONT OF YOU SPECIFICALLY IS HIGHLIGHTING HOW WE CAN MAKE OUR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS MORE TRANSPARENT AND PREDICTABLE.
UM, BECAUSE AGAIN, THAT'S OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, AS APPLICATIONS COME BEFORE YOU AND WE WORK WITH DEVELOPERS EVERY DAY, IT'S CHALLENGING.
WE HAVE VERY HIGH STANDARDS AND HIGH EXPECTATIONS, BUT HOW DO WE DO THAT IN A WAY THAT CAN BE MORE PREDICTABLE, MORE USER FRIENDLY, UM, WHETHER THAT'S INTERACTING WITH THE APPLICANT OR INTERACTING INTERNALLY, UM, AND, AND OR WITH BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
SO HOW DO WE MAKE THAT PROCESS BETTER? SO THAT WAS A BIG PART OF THIS.
SO THAT KICKED OFF A LARGER PROCESS AND DISCUSSION, UM, THAT WE ARE CALLING OUR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS.
SO HOW DO WE LOOK AT THIS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF SOMEONE HAS AN IDEA ABOUT A PROJECT SOMEWHERE IN THE CITY TO, I'M OCCUPYING THIS BUILDING.
SO IT'S REALLY LOOKING AT THE FULL RANGE OF THINGS THAT THE CITY ENGAGES INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY ON AND, AND BREAKING APART EACH ONE OF THOSE.
UM, SO IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE HAD, UM, SOME SIGNIFICANT STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT WITH INTERNAL WORKING GROUPS, BUT THEN WE ALSO PROVIDED SOME OPPORTUNITY FOR SOME EX EXTERNAL, UM, WORK SESSIONS WITH, UH, MEMBERS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, DEVELOPERS, ATTORNEYS, ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS, YOU NAME IT.
WE, WE INVITED THEM TO TALK AND BE CANDID COUNCIL MEMBERS.
UM, AND THEN, LIKE I SAID, STAFF MEMBERS TO SHARE, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT ARE THE PAINS THAT THEY'RE SEEING? UM, AND WE'RE, WE'LL GET INTO MORE DETAIL ABOUT WHAT ALL THAT IS.
I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE THE CONTEXT FOR THAT.
BUT AGAIN, TALKING THROUGH EACH ONE OF THOSE PIECES AND LOOKING AT THOSE OPPORTUNITIES, AND OUT OF THAT WORK CAME SIX FOCUS AREAS.
AND ONE OF THEM SPECIFICALLY IS RELATED TO STAFF REPORTS.
SO, UM, AGAIN, WE THINK WE DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB, BUT IF IT'S NOT HELPFUL TO YOU, THEN WE'RE NOT DOING A GOOD JOB.
SO HOW DO WE, HOW DO WE LOOK AT THAT, THINK ABOUT THAT CRITICALLY, UM, AND REALLY LOOK AT THAT REVIEW PROCESS AND HOW WE'RE COMMUNICATING WITH EACH OTHER INTERNALLY AND PROVIDING THAT INFORMATION AND WORKING TOGETHER AND HOW WE'RE INTAKING APPLICATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT THEN WHAT'S THE OUTPUT TO, TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS? SO, UM, I MENTIONED, AND WE HAD SHARED A SURVEY WITH COUNCIL AND BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS AND HAVE HAD SOME INPUT FOR THAT.
UM, AND THEN WE'VE ALSO DONE A LITTLE BIT OF INTERNAL RESEARCH AND BEST PRACTICES AND SHARED SOME INFORMATION, UM, IN YOUR PACKET A COUPLE WEEKS AGO ABOUT THAT.
AND YOU'VE ALL BEEN ON VARIOUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, SO YOU HAVE A LOT OF, UM, INFORMATION AND SOME OF YOU WORK IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS.
SO I THINK OUR GOAL TONIGHT WAS REALLY, UM, I'LL SHARE SORT OF WHAT THE QUESTIONS FOR THE SURVEY WAS, AND THEN WHAT SOME OF THE RESPONSES WERE AND WHAT OUR SORT OF INITIAL TAKEAWAYS ARE.
BUT I DEFINITELY WANNA GET YOUR INPUT ABOUT WHAT ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO SEE.
AND AGAIN, THIS IS WHY WE'RE EACH BOARD, 'CAUSE IT'S VERY SPECIFIC, RIGHT? WHAT WHAT YOU ALL MAY WANT IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT BZ AND A RB UM, MAY WANT.
SO ANY INITIAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.
SO IN TERMS OF, UM, THE SURVEY THAT WE SENT OUT AND THE QUESTIONS ASKED, THE QUESTIONS WERE PUT INTO SORT OF TWO, TWO CATEGORIES.
ONE RELATED STAFF REPORTS, ONE RELATED TO PRESENTATIONS.
SO I'M GONNA GO THROUGH THE STAFF REPORTS PART FIRST, WHAT THE COMMENTS WERE, WHAT OUR TAKEAWAYS ARE, AND GET YOUR FEEDBACK AND THEN WE'LL MOVE TO THE NEXT THING.
AND THEN, UM, AND THEN GO FROM THERE.
AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT NEXT STEPS.
SO FOR STAFF REPORTS, AGAIN, THE FOCUS OF THIS WAS, YOU KNOW, ARE WE PROVIDING INFORMATION? IS IT CLEAR WHAT'S BEING
[00:25:01]
PROVIDED AND WHAT STEP YOU'RE AT IN THE PROCESS? UM, AND OVERALL EVERYBODY FELT LIKE, YES, THAT WAS HAPPENING WITH STAFF REPORTS.SO THAT'S GOOD 'CAUSE THAT, THAT IS CHALLENGING SOMETIMES.
UM, THE NEXT QUESTION WAS CLARITY ABOUT THE PROJECT SPECIFICALLY AND THE SCOPE OF REVIEW.
SO AGAIN, LARGELY EVERYBODY FELT LIKE THAT WAS PRETTY CLEAR.
CONCEPT PLANS GOT A LITTLE, UM, HAD A LITTLE FEEDBACK ABOUT HOW TO PROVIDE SOME CLARITY BECAUSE WITHIN THE BRIDGE STREET DISTRICT VERSUS A PUD IS VERY DIFFERENT IN TERMS OF WHAT YOUR REVIEW IS.
SO HOW TO HELP PROVIDE SOME CLARITY ABOUT WHEN IT'S AN APPROVAL VERSUS WHEN IT'S JUST A DISCUSSION.
UM, ALSO MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE BEING CLEAR ABOUT WHAT COUNCIL'S VISION IS, THE CITY'S VISION IS.
AND AGAIN, I THINK WITH THE COMMUNITY PLAN THAT HELPS US WITH THAT GUIDEBOOK, UM, TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION, BUT HOW TO MAKE SURE THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ARE ALIGNING, UM, AND STAFF IS HELPING TO, HELPING TO GUIDE THAT.
UM, AND THEN AGAIN, MORE CONTEXT ABOUT CODE REQUIREMENTS.
SO WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S, WHAT ARE THE ISSUES WITH THE CODE? WHAT SHOULD THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS BE FOCUSING ON? AND THEN WHAT, I THINK WE'VE DEFINITELY HEARD THIS BEFORE, WHAT'S, WHAT'S STAFF'S DIRECTION, RIGHT? SO THAT YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE NOT POTENTIALLY SAYING SOMETHING COUNTER TO WHAT WE'VE BEEN SAYING OR THE DIRECTION THAT WE'VE BEEN GIVING.
SO TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO HELP SHARE THAT INFORMATION.
UM, AS WELL AS, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S IN THIS SECTION OR ANOTHER ONE, BUT WHAT'S OUR INTERACTIONS WITH THE DEVELOPER BEEN LIKE, RIGHT? LIKE HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE WORKED WITH THEM? OR, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAVE THE CHALLENGES BEEN? OBVIOUSLY IN A NICE WAY, BUT, YOU KNOW, HERE'S THE THINGS WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON OR WE'VE MET WITH THEM MULTIPLE TIMES, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO HOW TO PROVIDE THAT CONTEXT.
AGAIN, WHAT WE, BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT THAT IN THE TRAINING, RIGHT? LIKE WHAT YOU'RE SEEING, THAT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME THEY'VE SUBMITTED SOMETHING, RIGHT? THIS IS MANY REVISIONS INTO IT.
UM, THEN THE NEXT PART WAS, UM, OR THE NEXT QUESTION WAS THE RELEVANCE OF THE INFORMATION.
SO ARE THERE ANY THINGS IN THERE THAT ARE IRRELEVANT AND SHOULDN'T BE INCLUDED? OVERALL, EVERYBODY FELT LIKE THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION IS REALLY RELEVANT TO THE CONVERSATION, BUT OPPORTUNITIES TO ABBREVIATE THAT.
SO INSTEAD OF BEING SO NARRATIVE, ARE THERE OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKE THAT MORE SUCCINCT? UM, WHAT OTHER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS NEEDED? AGAIN, MORE REFERENCE TO THE COMMUNITY PLAN AS WELL AS OTHER PLANS AND POLICIES.
WE DO THAT VERY SIGNIFICANTLY WITH REZONINGS AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANS.
BUT THE COMMUNITY PLAN REALLY TOUCHES ON A NUMBER OF THINGS.
SO, UH, POTENTIALLY ADDING MORE.
THE RECOMMENDATION WAS TO MAYBE ADD SOME MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT AS IT'S RELEVANT TO THE DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS.
UM, APPRECIATION FOR WHEN WE PROVIDE A SUMMARY OF IT'S BEEN TO YOU BEFORE, THESE ARE THE ISSUES, HERE'S HOW THEY'VE ADDRESSED THEM.
UM, THAT DEFINITELY WAS SOMETHING THAT, UM, ONE OF THE RESPONDENTS FELT LIKE WAS REALLY HELPFUL.
THERE WAS A SUGGESTION, WHICH I'D LOVE YOUR INPUT ON THIS, ABOUT ELIMINATING PAPER PLANS.
UM, I WAS SURPRISED BY THAT HONESTLY.
UM, SO WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO GET PAPER COPIES, UM, THEN MORE INPUT AND INFORMATION ABOUT HOW WE INTERACT WITH DIFFERENT DIVISIONS, UM, AND HOW THEIR, WHAT THEIR ROLE IS AND THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM, BUT TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
SO AGAIN, MAYBE THAT'S MORE OF AN EDUCATIONAL, WE SHARE WITH YOU HOW THE PROCESS WORKS AGAIN, 'CAUSE WE DO INTERACT WITH EACH DIVISION, BUT JUST UNDERSTANDING WHAT THEIR, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEIR COMMENTS ARE MORE CLEARLY.
AND THEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER PREVIOUS SIMILAR DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OR HOW WE'VE DONE THIS HISTORICALLY, JUST FOR THAT BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT.
UM, AND THEN THE LAST TWO QUESTIONS RELATED TO STAFF REPORTS WERE, AGAIN, OTHER THINGS THAT COULD BE IMPROVED.
SO THERE WAS A SUGGESTION ABOUT MOVING SOME OF THE HISTORY AND BACKGROUND TO THE END.
THAT WAY THE BEGINNING PART OF THE REPORT REALLY FOCUSES ON WHAT THE BOARD OF COMMISSION NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSING OR MAKING A DETERMINATION ABOUT TO, TO, AGAIN, MAKING SURE THAT INFORMATION IS THERE, BUT MAYBE THAT'S NOT WHAT'S RIGHT UP FRONT.
UM, AGAIN, MAKING SURE THE INFORMATION IS SUCCINCT AS POSSIBLE.
REALLY USING, UM, SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO WHERE THERE ARE CONCERNS WITH THE CODE.
SO WHEN IT'S MET, IT'S VERY CLEAR AND EASY, THIS IS MET, BUT THESE ARE THE ISSUES THAT WE REALLY NEED YOU TO FOCUS ON AND TALK ABOUT.
SO HOW TO PROVIDE SOME CLARITY ABOUT THAT.
AND THEN THE LAST QUESTION WAS RELATED TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU ALL FIND THOSE TO BE BENEFICIAL.
MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THAT FILLED THAT OUT SAID YES.
THERE WERE A COUPLE THAT SAID THAT THEY DIDN'T THINK THAT THAT WAS NECESSARY, BUT, UM, FOR THE MOST PART EVERYBODY AGREED WITH THAT.
SO IN TERMS OF OUR TAKEAWAYS INITIALLY, UM, WE HAVE ALREADY STARTED INTERNALLY LOOKING AT OUR REPORTS TO LOOK FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO STREAMLINE THE INFORMATION AND PROVIDE THAT CLARITY ABOUT WHAT YOU ALL SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON UPFRONT.
UM, AND THEN INTEGRATION OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN AND OTHER INFORMATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
UM, SO THAT'S SORT OF OUR INITIAL TAKEAWAY.
SO OUR GOAL WILL BE TO, AGAIN, I WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU ALL THINK AND IF THERE'S OTHER THINGS TO TALK ABOUT AND INCLUDE, UM, SO WE'LL
[00:30:01]
TAKE ALL THIS INTO CONSIDERATION AND THEN BRING BACK SOME RECOMMENDED, REAL RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS FOR Y'ALL TO REACT TO.BUT AT THIS POINT, HAVING HEARD SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS AND THE QUESTIONS, WHAT, WHAT ELSE, WHAT OTHER CONCERNS, WHAT OTHER THINGS SHOULD BE INCLUDED? DO YOU AGREE, DISAGREE WITH ANY OF THOSE THINGS? MR. GARVIN? I THINK I SAW SOME OTHER HEADS NODDING, BUT THE ELIMINATION OF THE PAPER PLANS KIND OF STUCK OUT TO ME.
I CAN UNDERSTAND PEOPLE'S SUSTAINABILITY CONCERNS AND MAYBE YOU CAN HAVE AN OPTOUT PROGRAM FOR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND AND JUST FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, PREVIOUS CITY, WE UH, GOT RID OF PAPER PLANS, RELIED ON THE IPADS AND IT LASTED ABOUT TWO AND A HALF MONTHS.
AND THEN EVERYBODY WAS CLAMORING FOR PAPER PLANS BACK BECAUSE THE APPLICATION VARIES.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT A LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT AND YOU'RE TRYING TO SEE HOW MANY SQUARE FOOT OR WHAT THE SETBACK IS ON THE VERY DIFFICULT, GIVEN THE QUALITY OF THE DIGITAL COPIES, WE DO A VERY GOOD RECYCLING PROGRAM.
SO UNDER YOUR DESK WE'RE RECYCLING MATERIALS, SO THAT SHOULD GIVE US OKAY.
SO LET'S NOT ELIMINATE THIS LOUD AND CLEAR.
UH, THE, THE ONE THING I THINK YOU'VE HIT THE TAKEAWAYS AND I, I, I LIKE THE IDEA, ESPECIALLY WITH THE NEW COMMUNITY PLAN, ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION AND CLARITY OF HOW THE PROPOSALS MAY DIFFER OR DIFFERENTIATE FOR, FROM THE COMMUNITY PLAN.
AND JUST, I, I THINK YOU'VE DONE A GOOD JOB RECENTLY, BUT ESPECIALLY WITH THE NEW PLAN BEING INSTITUTED NOW GOING FORWARD, I THINK IT'S SUPER HELPFUL FOR US, UH, ESPECIALLY 'CAUSE IT ACTS AS A BASELINE FOR OUR VALUATION.
AND, UM, THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE I WAS GONNA SAY.
ARE YOU, DO YOU EVER DO ANYTHING WHERE YOU DESCRIBE OR BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE THE DISCUSSIONS YOU'VE HAD FROM A HIGH LEVEL PERSPECTIVE WITH THE DEVELOPER ABOUT AREAS WHERE THERE COULD BE CONCERNS KNOWING THAT, HEY, IF YOU BRING THIS FORWARD TO THE COMMISSION, YOU MAY, YOU KNOW, GET FEEDBACK ON X, Y, AND Z FROM A NEGATIVE PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE IT IS, YOU KNOW, EITHER AGAINST THE COMMUNITY PLAN OR IT MAY NOT ALIGN WITH SOME OF THEIR MM-HMM.
HONESTLY, WE, YOU TYPICALLY DON'T INCLUDE THAT.
AND AGAIN, NOT THAT WE COULDN'T LOOK AT, IT'S, AGAIN, WE WANNA BE TACTFUL ABOUT THE WAY WE'RE DOING IT, UM, AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S INCLUDED.
UM, THE REASON I ASK IS I THOUGHT THAT, AND, AND THIS IS PROBABLY COMING FROM BEING ON BZA, WHERE I ALWAYS WANT TO KNOW WHEN THE STAFF SAYS THIS IS NOT GONNA WORK, AND THE PERSON'S LIKE, WELL, I'M STILL GONNA BRING IT FORWARD.
WHAT ARE THOSE CONVERSATIONS? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT HAS OCCURRED OR WHAT GIVES THEM THE BELIEF THAT THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BE SUCCESSFUL BRINGING IT TO A FULL COMMISSION OR A FULL BOARD? UH, AGAIN, IF IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS HISTORICALLY BEEN DONE, I'M OKAY NOT ASKING.
WE CAN ALWAYS OF COURSE ASK THE APPLICANT WHAT CONVERSATIONS THEY'VE HAD.
I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THERE WAS, 'CAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION THAT TAKES PLACE.
AND I DON'T WANT IT TO BE MORE WORK ON STAFF TO TRY TO SUMMARIZE SOMETHING FOR US.
UM, I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THAT'S, THAT WAS EVER UNDER CONSIDERATION.
YEAH, I MEAN, WE'VE DEFINITELY HAD CONVERSATIONS, AGAIN, BECAUSE THINGS COME THROUGH OUR OFFICE AND HAVE MULTIPLE ITERATIONS AND HOW TO CAPTURE THAT EFFECTIVELY.
THAT WE'VE WORKED THROUGH THIS AND HAD X NUMBER OF REVISIONS AND HERE'S THE, BEEN THE STICKING POINTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND HOW THAT'S BEEN RESOLVED OR NOT RESOLVED.
I MEAN, WE COULD DEFINITELY LOOK AT HOW TO DO THAT IF, IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
BUT WE'RE ALSO NOT ASKING YOU TO REHASH ALL THAT.
BUT IT COULD BE HIGH LEVEL, RIGHT? I MEAN, IT COULD BE.
THESE HAVE BEEN, I, AGAIN, I FEEL LIKE THE CONDITIONS SOMETIMES SORT OF SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES TOO, RIGHT.
IT'S HELPFUL FOR US, OBVIOUSLY.
KNOWING THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME FEEDBACK PROVIDED, OBVIOUSLY FROM A CONDITION PERSPECTIVE, SO, OKAY, WELL LET, LET, LET'S, WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT AND SEE.
SO CAN I JUST, UH, I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT TO COME HERE AND ALSO MAKE THEIR CASE AND, AND IF WE HAVE TOO MUCH INFORMATION UP FRONT, I I, I'M WORRIED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.
I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY A SUMMARY OF KEY MM-HMM.
IF THEY HAVE ISSUES OR WHATEVER, THAT WE HEAR IT DIRECTLY FROM THEM AS OPPOSED TO A SERIES OF COMMUNICATIONS
AND, AND I, I'M GONNA PIGGYBACK BUT DEVIATE A LITTLE BIT.
SO I AM ACTUALLY NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF, BECAUSE THAT, BECAUSE OCCASIONALLY YOU'RE WORKING THROUGH AND YOU'RE THERE WITH THE HAMMER AND THE NAILS GOING THROUGH A THREE MONTH PROCESS WITH THE APPLICANT AND YOU SAY, FINE, OKAY, IT'S GOOD ENOUGH.
WELL, WE HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH THE THREE MONTHS, WE HAVEN'T
[00:35:01]
BEEN WORN DOWN, WE HAVEN'T.SO HAVING A CHART THAT SAYS MET CRITERIA, MET CRITERIA, MET CRITERIA, MET WITH CONDITIONS, YOU KNOW, HEY, THIS APPLICATION IS REQUIRING FOUR WAIVERS, WHATEVER THAT IS.
IF THERE IS NO DECLARATION OF STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, THEN THERE'S NOT THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE, WE'VE BEEN WITH THE HAMMER AND THE NAILS.
IT'S PART OF THE PUBLIC PROCESS.
AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS A BODY BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THE PROCESS.
SO THAT I, I APPRECIATE ALL OF THE, THE MM-HMM.
AND I AM NOT ABSOLUTELY NOT ADVOCATING FOR THE HERE ARE YOUR CRITERIA FOR RECOMMENDATION AND HERE IS HOW STAFF INTERPRETS THAT THEY'RE MET.
BUT THAT ONE SENTENCE THAT SAYS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, I I WOULD, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF REMOVING THAT PARTICULAR ONE.
BECAUSE REBECCA, YOU FEEL THAT THAT GIVES US A, A DIFFERENT VIEWPOINT WHEN WE'RE WE'RE EVALUATING IT.
UM, IT COLORS, I THINK OUR PERSPECTIVE THAT HEY, IF WE DO SOMETHING, WE FEEL LIKE IT HAS TO GROSSLY DEVIATE IN ORDER TO OVERTURN SOMETHING THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING.
BUT RIGHT NOW, I THINK THAT STAFF HAS TO SEE, HEY, THERE ARE SOME PRETTY BAD THINGS WITH THIS APPLICATION TO EVEN, YOU KNOW, IT HAS TO BE, IN MY EXPERIENCE ON THIS COMMISSION, PRETTY GROSSLY DEFICIENT IN ORDER TO GET THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS DISAPPROVAL.
AND WHAT I'M HEARING FROM HIGHER BOARDS IS YOU SAY YES TOO OFTEN.
I THINK, UM, I THINK YOU CAN READ BETWEEN THE LINES.
I, I, I THINK THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE REPORT.
AND HERE'S WHY THEY HAVE FAR MORE EXPERTISE THAN IF YOU TAKE THE EXPERTISE THAT THE STAFF OFFERS.
WE DON'T HAVE A CIVIL ENGINEER HERE.
WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY THAT UNDERSTANDS REALLY.
UM, YOU PROBABLY DO KIM STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TO THE EXTENT THAT'S IMPORTANT TO THESE PROJECTS.
WE DON'T HAVE BUILDING OFFICIALS HERE, WHICH IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THAN PRACTICING ARCHITECTURE.
WE DON'T HAVE, WELL, WE DO HAVE A PLANNER, BUT
THOSE ARE THE CRITERIA THAT THE APPLICATION HAS TO MEET.
AND IF WE DON'T HAVE THAT CRITERIA IN OUR CODE TO, TO HOLD, UH, HOLD APPLICANTS RES RESPONSIBLE FOR GOOD APPLICATIONS, THEN THAT'S ON US.
WELL, I, I, I, HERE'S THE OTHER REASON I THINK THIS STAFF APPROVAL IS IMPORTANT.
THEY HAVE HOW MUCH TIME EVERYBODY SPENDS MORE TIME REVIEWING THESE REPORTS THAN THEY DO HERE IN THE MEETING.
AND BECAUSE I, I FIND I READ EVERYTHING.
AND THEN I COME HERE AND SOMEBODY SAYS, WELL, DID YOU READ THIS? DID YOU READ THAT? THEY HAVE FAR MORE TIME TO STUDY THESE PROJECTS THAN WE DO.
THE EXPERTISE IS REALLY IMPORTANT WHEN IT COMES TO A BOARD WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE, AND I'M, AND HERE THIS WILL BE ON THE RECORD, BUT LIKE THE A RB DOESN'T HAVE A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL ON THAT BOARD.
NOW THEY NEED BOARDS LIKE THAT, THAT LACK EXPERTISE IN THOSE AREAS NEED SOME HELP.
SO I, TO ME IT'S THE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS REALLY ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PARTS.
SEE, AND I SEE THE OBJECTIVE CRITERIA, ALL OF THE INDIVIDUAL CRITERIA AS ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED.
THE SUBJECTIVE, HEY, THE TOTALITY OF THE APPLICATION, SUBJECTIVELY STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL.
I THINK THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S SUBJECTIVE.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE COULD MAKE A MODIFICATION.
AGAIN, I AM ABSOLUTELY NOT ADVOCATING FOR CHANGING THE STAFF REPORT WITH ALL OF THE CRITERIA WITH HOW DOES THIS APPLICATION WEIGH AGAINST THE CODE.
BUT JUST THE FINAL STATEMENT, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A SUBJECTIVE STATEMENT.
AND WE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WERE PUT IN PLACE FOR OUR SUBJECTIVE WEATHER QUALIFIED IN A PARTICULAR AVENUE, VERTICAL OR NOT.
WE WERE PUT IN PLACE FOR THAT REASON TO BE SUBJECTIVELY DON'T, WE DON'T NEED TO FOLLOW.
BUT I AGREE, I AGREE WITH THE ONE POINT YOU'RE MAKING THAT TOO MANY OF THE REPORTS SAY APPROVE, BUT THEN THERE'LL BE SEVEN OR EIGHT CONDITIONS APPROVED WITH, BUT WHEN YOU READ BETWEEN THE LINES, THE APPLICANT'S NOT GONNA AGREE TO THOSE CONDITIONS.
SO ESSENTIALLY IT'S ESSENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S PROBABLY GONNA GET TABLED OR IT'S NOT GONNA GET APPROVED AT THAT, AT THAT MEETING.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IIII THINK THERE'S A WAY TO SAY THEY DON'T WANT TO APPROVE IT BY HAVING ALL THESE CONDITIONS
[00:40:01]
THAT ARE ALMOST LIKE A POISON PILL.AND THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THEY READ.
I'D BE CURIOUS WHAT OTHER THOUGHTS ARE.
'CAUSE AGAIN, I THINK COUNSEL WANTS TO HAVE THIS LARGER DISCUSSION WITH ALL OF YOU.
UM, SO THIS IS HELPFUL INSIGHT.
I DEFINITELY WOULD LOVE TO HEAR WHAT, WHAT THE REST OF YOU ALL THINK.
SO I THINK ON LIKE BZA, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU DON'T NEED THE RECOMMENDATION AT THE BOTTOM BECAUSE IT'S CLEAR CUT.
YOU JUST COUNT HOW MANY OF EACH SECTION, UM, ON OURS.
I THINK THAT THE POINT THAT'S BEING, I THINK THEY'RE BOTH VALID POINTS.
ONE BEING THAT WE DON'T WANT TO BE INFLUENCED BY IT.
AND SO I THINK MY THOUGHT IS MAYBE THAT'S ON US TOO, YOU KNOW, TO NOT BE INFLUENCED BY THAT RECOMMENDATION TO COME TO OUR OWN CONCLUSION.
UM, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE ON THERE.
I, I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, IT IS, I, I THINK IN, IN MY MY OPINION, IT'S USEFUL IF YOU HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE ON THIS BOARD AS YOU DO, YOU SEE MORE AND MORE THINGS.
I THINK FOR, UM, SOMEBODY WHO JUST COMES ONTO THE BOARD AND SEES SOME OF THESE REPETITIVE ISSUES FOR THE FIRST TIME, I THINK IT, IT DOES HAVE SOME VALUE.
SO ONE MORE ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION.
IT ALSO, IF YOU ARE A RESIDENT AND YOU SEE SOMETHING ON AN AGENDA, YOU RECEIVED A PUBLIC NOTICE AND THE, THE CALL OUT AT THE BOTTOM BOTTOM WHETHER IT HAS SEVEN UM, CONDITIONS APPLIED OR NOT, IF THE CALL OUT ON THE BOTTOM IS STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL, THEN YOU SEE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME.
I, I SEE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME WHO COME IN AND THINK THAT OUR MINDS ARE MADE UP BEFORE THEY EVEN WALKED, SET FOOT THROUGH THE DOOR.
AND THAT STATEMENT IS WHAT GIVES THEM THAT IMPRESSION.
BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, WE WANT 'EM TO SHOW UP IF THEY THINK SOMETHING MIGHT GO THROUGH THAT A, A AGREED MS HARDER.
JUST ON THAT, UH, NOTE TOO, I WAS ALSO THINKING ABOUT THE APPLICANT AND WHEN THEY SEE THAT, UM, COME ACROSS, HOW HAS THAT BEEN TAKEN? AND ALSO LEGALLY TOO, I GUESS THE QUESTION COULD GO THAT WELL, THAT IN THAT AVENUE TOO OF SOMETHING SAYING IT'S ALREADY BEEN KINDA THAT THIS, THIS IS HOW THE CITY FEELS.
I, I, I DON'T THINK, AND I'LL LET THE ASSISTANT LAW DIRECTOR SPEAK TO THAT.
BUT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IS HERE FOR A REASON.
JUST BECAUSE STAFF SAYS, HEY, WE RECOMMEND, UH, APPROVAL DOESN'T GIVE THE, UH, APPLICANT ANY RIGHT TO THAT BECAUSE IT IS IN FRONT OF US FOR A REASON.
MR. HERMAN, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? YEAH, I WOULD AGREE.
IT OFTEN COMES UP THOUGH IN LIKE APPEALS, UH, OF CERTAIN THINGS OR IN LITIGATION THAT THE STAFF WOULD'VE APPROVED IT.
IT'S SOMEWHAT PERSUASIVE DEPENDING ON HOW MUCH THE COURT UNDERSTANDS THE PROCESS.
BUT WE ALWAYS HAVE TO POINT OUT THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION AND IT'S NOT THE FINAL DECISION MAKER OF THE CITY.
AND THAT'S JUST HOW THE PROCESS WORKS.
BUT GENERALLY IT SHOULDN'T BE ACCOUNTED FOR, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.
I GUESS MY FIRST PART OF THE QUESTION WAS MORE OF THE, UH, WHEN WHEN, WHEN THE APPLICANT FINDS OUT THAT THEY ARE APPROVED OR NOT APPROVED, THAT WHERE THE CITY IS THINKING THAT, UM, HOW DOES THAT CONVERSATION GO AND HAVE YOU RUN INTO SOME DIFFICULTY WITH THAT? TYPICALLY, IF WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, AGAIN, THEY KNOW, WE DEFINITELY HAVE PEOPLE THAT IT SEEMS LIKE A REAL SLAM DUNK CASE AND YOU'VE APPROVED EVERY OTHER, LIKE A CONDITIONAL USE FOR SOME TYPE OF USE THAT YOU'VE APPROVED SOMEWHERE ELSE.
WE WOULD LIKE A STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD MOST LIKELY BE APPROVAL.
BUT THEY ALL KNOW THAT THIS, AGAIN, WE'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION AND JUST BECAUSE WE'RE RECOMMENDING DOESN'T MEAN YOU'RE NOT GONNA FIND SOME OTHER PIECE TO THAT.
ON THE FLIP SIDE TOO, A LOT OF TIMES WHEN THE STAFF REPORT IS DONE, AND IF WE'RE RECOMMENDING DISAPPROVAL OF SOMETHING, MOST TIMES PEOPLE WILL TABLE BEFOREHAND 'CAUSE THEY KNOW IF DEFINITELY IF STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DISAPPROVAL, THIS IS GONNA HAVE A REAL HARD TIME AT WHATEVER BOARD OF COMMISSION THIS IS MAYBE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF BZA.
UM, BUT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION AND A RB, I DEFINITELY FEEL LIKE PEOPLE FOR THE MOST PART KNOW THAT THAT'S GONNA BE HARDER.
UH, ONE CALL OUT AND THEN ONE REQUEST.
UM, SO WHILE THIS IS SPURRED BY COUNCIL'S DISCUSSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THAT IS NOT WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF, OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, THAT GETS TRANSLATED TO US BASED ON THE COMMUNITY PLAN, BASED ON EVERYTHING ELSE.
SO WHILE, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT MAY SAY, HEY, THIS IS NOT ECONOMICALLY VIABLE, THAT IS NOT ONE OF OUR CRITERIA FOR DISCUSSION FOR EVALUATION.
AND SO, UH, WE AS A COMMISSION HAVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE USING THE TOOLS WITHIN OUR TOOLBOX TO WEIGH THE APPLICATIONS.
SO IF, YOU KNOW, IF SOMETHING LIKE THIS COMES FORWARD AND IT SAYS, HEY, THIS IS BURNED BY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT,
[00:45:01]
YOU KNOW, HOW ARE WE EVALUATING THAT? BUT WE ARE EVALUATING THAT WITH THE COMMUNITY PLAN.THAT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS COUNCIL'S TOOL.
THEY IMPLEMENT THAT THROUGH THE COMMUNITY PLAN.
THAT COMMUNITY PLAN IS TRANSLATED TO US.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE USE WHEN WE'RE TWO 70 IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE.
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE TWO 70 LOOP, WE'RE LOOKING AT IT BASED ON ITS ZONING CRITERIA.
WE'RE LOOKING AT IT BASED ON DEVELOPMENT TEXT, WE'RE LOOKING AT IT BASED ON ALL OF THE TOOLS WITHIN OUR TOOLBOX.
THOSE TOOLS GOT INTO OUR TOOLBOX BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANS OF CITY COUNCIL.
SO JUST UNDERSTANDING THAT CAN KEEP US OUT OF A LITTLE DIC AS APPLICATIONS COME FORWARD.
THEN THE OTHER REQUEST, UH, I KNOW THAT WE WANNA SEE INFORMATION EARLY.
SO IF WE'RE IN A CONCEPT PLAN, IT DOESN'T HURT ANYTHING TO GIVE US THE FULL PLANS, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SITE LAYOUT, THE BUILDING ENVELOPES, ALL OF THAT KIND OF THING.
BUT MY REQUEST WOULD BE, ESPECIALLY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE NEWER MEMBERS, TO PUT THOSE IN AN ADDEND SO THAT THEY'RE, UH, VISIBLE THAT, HEY, LOOK, WE'RE PROVIDING YOU ADDITIONAL MATERIAL.
IF YOU HAVE TIME TO EVALUATE IT, GREAT.
BUT THIS IS NOT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TONIGHT.
IT HELPS WITH CONTEXT, IT HELPS WITH VISIBILITY, IT HELPS WITH, YOU KNOW, UH, KIND OF WEIGHING ALL OF THE DETAILS AND, AND GETTING INTO THE MINDSET OF WHERE THE APPLICANT'S COMING FROM.
BUT IF IT'S NOT SUBSTANTIALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT EVENING, THEN KEEPING WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IN THE ITEM AND THEN HAVING AN ADDENDUM SECTION THAT ESSENTIALLY LISTS, HEY, HERE'S WHAT THE, THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED.
WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THESE TONIGHT, BUT HERE'S WHAT THEY'RE THINKING.
I HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THAT, BUT, OKAY.
I, YEAH, I THINK THE CHALLENGES AS THE APPLICANT PROVIDES A PACKET, WE'RE PROVIDING EVERYTHING THAT THEY GIVE US.
SO I GUESS I'M, AND IF THEY WANNA ASK ABOUT SOMETHING FOR THE FUTURE, I MEAN, THAT'S ALSO PART OF OUR INFORMAL DISCUSSION IS IF YOU HAVE A DEAL BREAKER YOU WANNA ASK ABOUT, THEY, THEY WANNA KNOW ABOUT THAT, WE WOULD INCLUDE THAT, EVEN IF IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE WEEDS THAN MAYBE WHAT YOU WANT.
I JUST THINK THAT THE ONUS, ESPECIALLY ON NEWER COMMISSION MEMBERS, BECAUSE I'VE SEEN QUITE A FEW COME THROUGH, UH, IT'S DRINKING THROUGH A FIREHOUSE.
AND SO BEING ABLE TO UNDERSTAND, OKAY, AT THIS POINT IN THE PROCESS, WHAT AM I ACTUALLY LOOKING AT? WHAT AM I ACTUALLY VOTING ON THIS EVENING? VERSUS, HEY, THIS IS GREAT TO KNOW AND IT GIVES ME CONTEXT, BUT I DON'T EVEN HAVE TO GET STUCK ON THE, THE, UH, FIRE HYDRANT PLACEMENT OR THE TURN RADIUSES OR ANYTHING.
IF I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE CRAYONS ON PAPER TONIGHT, MAYBE SOME CLARITY AROUND THAT AT EACH MEETING ABOUT WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE EXPECTED.
WELL, AND IT COMES THROUGH FOR THE ONE SLIDE, BUT BY THE TIME WE GET INTO QUESTIONS, YEAH.
THAT SLIDE IS SO FAR IN THE REAR VIEW MIRROR THAT NO, NOBODY'S REALLY FOCUSING ON IT NOW.
I, I, I, I DON'T THINK IT COMES THROUGH CLEAR ENOUGH BECAUSE I, I UNDERSTAND THAT SLIDE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT SHOWS PROCESS UP THERE AND IT SAYS, HERE'S WHERE WE ARE, AND THEN, AND THEN THESE ARE THE NEXT STEPS, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY, HERE'S WHERE WE ARE AND HERE'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT AS A PART OF THAT STEP.
SO I THINK I AGREE WITH BOTH OF YOUR POINTS, AND I'M SPEAKING FROM MYSELF BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T KICKED ME YET, BUT I'VE SEEN YOU REACH OVER A FEW TIMES
WE MAY HAVE TO REORDER, UH, THE SITTING HERE TO NOT, TO NOT COMMENT ON CERTAIN THINGS.
SO, SO I, I THINK IT WOULD BE REALLY VALUABLE.
YEAH, THAT'S VERY GOOD FEEDBACK.
YEAH, THAT WOULD BE EASY ENOUGH TO DO THAT.
SO, UM, A COUPLE THINGS, UM, ON STAFFER STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
I I JUST TAKE THAT AS GUIDANCE.
I NEVER TAKE THAT AS FACT, BUT I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR POINTS.
UM, I'M, THE OTHER BOARD I'M ON IS THIS OPERATES THE SAME WAY.
THERE'S A LIST OF CRITERIA, DID IT MEET IT? AND THEN THE STAFF HAS A RECOMMENDED AND I JUST SAY, OH, THAT'S THEIR RECOMMENDATION, BUT THAT DOESN'T HOLD ME BACK FROM, YOU KNOW, ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS AND COMING TO THE RIGHT CONCLUSIONS.
SO I'M, I GO, I CAN GO EITHER WAY ON THAT.
AND I THINK A LOT OF BOARD EXPERIENCE IN THAT TYPE OF A BOARD IS DEFINITELY HELPFUL.
I'VE HEARD OTHER COMMISSION MEMBERS WHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE ON OUR BOARDS WHO SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, IT'D HAVE TO BE REALLY BAD FOR ME TO GO AGAINST STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
AND SO THAT PERSPECTIVE AND PEOPLE WALKING IN THE DOOR SAYING, HEY, IT'S A DONE DEAL, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THAT THAT'S WHERE I TOTALLY APPRECIATE THE, THE POINT ABOUT THE COMMUNITY THINKING THAT WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED SOMETHING.
WE'VE HEARD THAT SEVERAL TIMES IN COMMUNITY INPUT, RIGHT? SO I THINK SOMEHOW WE, YEAH, WE NEED TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
AND THAT'S ACTUALLY MY NEXT QUESTION.
[00:50:01]
UM, WE DON'T, DO WE REQUIRE APPLICANTS TO ACTUALLY MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS OR THE COMMUNITY AROUND THEM? IT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT.WE, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN THE CODE THAT SAYS THEY HAVE TO, THERE'S NO CHECKLIST THAT SAYS YOU'VE MET WITH THE, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE, OH, I FEEL LIKE IT MIGHT BE, UH, WE MIGHT RECOMMEND IT ON OUR APPLICATION CHECKLIST.
I MEAN, WE MEET WITH EVERY SINGLE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL OR DEVELOPER GROUP THAT HAS A PROPOSAL THAT'S 100% SOMETHING WE SAY EVERY TIME YOU NEED TO MEET WITH THE, WITH THE NEIGHBORS.
AND WHO THEY'RE MEETING WITH, LIKE WHAT GROUP AND IS THAT BEING DISSEMINATED AMONGST YOUR NEIGHBOR? LIKE, AGAIN, ONCE IT GETS SHARED, AND I DON'T HAVE, YOU KNOW, WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD THIS CONVERSATION RECENTLY, RIGHT? I MEAN, THERE'S AN EXPECTATION THAT WE'RE GONNA LET EVERYONE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD KNOW AND THAT I HAVE EVERYONE'S PERSONAL EMAIL ADDRESS TO LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS HAPPENING.
AND WHO'S, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR PUTTING, YOU KNOW, SHARING THAT NOTICE.
AND THAT'S REALLY CHALLENGING.
BUT SO AGAIN, I THINK THE CASES THAT WE'VE REVIEWED WHERE THE APPLICANT HAS SPENT THE TIME TO MEET WITH THE COMMUNITY YES.
AND WHEN THE COMMUNITY COMES, THEY'RE COMING INFORMED.
THEY'RE NOT, THERE'S NO SUSPICION, RIGHT.
THEY DON'T THINK WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED IT YET.
AND THAT TO ME IS FROM A PROCESS STANDPOINT, ISN'T HEALTHY.
AND SO SOMEHOW GETTING THE APPLICANTS TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU MANDATE THAT, BUT YEAH, WHAT IF, BECAUSE THE ONUS, I MEAN, IS IS SIGNIFICANT.
WHAT IF WE CONTINUE WITH THE STRONG RECOMMENDATION BUT ALSO WITH TEETH INFORMED THEM THAT ONE OF THE VERY FIRST QUESTIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT REQUIRES AN ANSWER TO BE PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION IS HAS THE APPLICANT MET WITH THE COMMUNITY, WITH STAFF PRESENT? YEAH.
WELL, BECAUSE YEAH, THEY CAN SAY, HEY, WE MET WITH THE COMMUNITY, IT'S FOUR PEOPLE IN A ROOM.
AND WELL, WE JUST PICKED THE FOUR PEOPLE WHO WERE ALREADY ADVOCATES.
THAT'S A VERY DIFFERENT THING THAN WE NOTICED.
AND THAT ONUS IS ON THE APPLICANT STAFF WAS INFORMED, AWARE, AND PRESENT AT THE EVENT, AND THEREFORE WE HAVE FULL, UH, COMMUNICATION BACK TO THE BOARD.
IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'VE DONE BEFORE WHERE YOU'VE MET WITH THE DEVELOPER? YEAH, WITH THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS? YES.
YEAH, WE TYPICALLY LIKE TO KNOW WHEN THEY'RE DOING IT AND IF WE'RE AVAILABLE TO GO, WE GO AND JUST SORT OF STAND IN THE BACK AND HEAR AND CORRECT ANY PROCESS RELATED.
WE'RE THERE TO HEAR WHAT THE CONVERS WELL, NO, I KNOW.
I JUST WANTED, I DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE WHERE THERE'S SOME KIND OF ADDITIONAL RESOURCES NO.
I LIKE THE IDEA, BUT THAT'S HOW YOU GET THE RIGHT INFORMATION.
SO IT'S NOT TO GUIDE THE PRO THAT DISCUSSION, IF NOT GUIDE DISCUSSION, BUT BE THERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS OR KEEP IT ON TRACK WITH THE JENNY KNOWS ME WELL ENOUGH TO NOT I'M VOLUNT HOLDING HER TO YEAH, SHE KNOWS ME.
WELL, I GOTTA GO TO EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOW,
WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK AT HOW TO YEAH, I MEAN, WE DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE THAT AND THEY'RE ALSO PART OF THAT CONVERSATION IS THE COMMISSION'S GOING TO ASK YOU ABOUT, RIGHT.
THAT'S YOUR, THAT'S NOT JUST OUR EXPECTATION.
THAT IS YOUR EXPECTATION THAT THE, AND IF EVERYONE SHOWS UP ON UNHAPPY, THAT'S NOT GONNA GO WELL FOR YOU.
BUT I CAN'T, AGAIN, AT THIS POINT, I CANNOT REQUIRE THEM TO DO THAT.
I THINK, BUT WE CAN REQUIRE THAT, THAT BE AN ITEM ON THE STAFF REPORT PRESENTED TO, TO THE COMMISSION.
AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE THAT YEAH.
FEEDBACK LOOP AND THEN THE APPLICANT HAS TO ANSWER THE, WHY DIDN'T YOU MEET WITH THE COMMUNITY? CORRECT.
YEAH, ONE OTHER, ONE OTHER THING THAT HAS, UM, AS YOU KNOW, UM, I OFTEN ASK QUESTIONS AND ASK FOR THINGS TO BE DONE, LIKE PHOTOGRAPHS IN THE FIELD OR SOMETHING.
I ALWAYS FEEL KIND OF A LITTLE AWKWARD DOING THAT AND, AND STAFF HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY ACCOMMODATING OF THAT.
WHETHER IT'S INFORMATION ABOUT LIKE PROJECTS OR SIMILAR PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT OR, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE DIMENSION OF THIS WALKWAY THAT WE'RE GONNA NOW SHRINK DOWN TO BY TWO FEET? AND SO, AND GIVE, IS THERE, IS THERE A WAY TO MAKE THAT, IS THERE LIKE A FEEDBACK LOOP OR SOMETHING THAT WE, SO WE CAN EASILY ASK QUESTIONS AND OR ASK FOR MORE INFORMATION BEFORE WE GET TO THE MEETING OTHER THAN US JUST CALLING UP AND SAYING, CAN YOU DO THIS? AND, AND MAYBE IT'S IN A FORMAT WHERE ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS KNOW WHAT'S BEING ASKED.
NO, BUT I CAN BE, I THINK OUR CURRENT PROCESS WOULD BE FOR YOU TO REACH OUT TO THE STAFF PLANNER AND THAT THAT WORKS THE BEST TO BE HONEST.
BUT, BUT YOU CAN, THE STAFF PLANNER CAN INFORM, I, I'M JUST, YEAH.
SO I, THE QUESTION WHAT, IF ANY INDIVIDUAL COMMISSION'S MAKING REQUESTS THE RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST BE SENT TO THE ENTIRE COMMISSION? THAT'S WHAT I, THAT'S WHAT I WAS GETTING AT.
BUT THE CAVEAT, YOU WILL NOT RESPOND TO THE EMAIL.
IT'S JUST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN ADDED TO YOUR PACKET
[00:55:01]
FOR THURSDAY NIGHT.THAT, THAT'S ALL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN ADDED TO YOUR PACKET FOR THURSDAY NIGHT.
AND JUST SO PEOPLE KNOW THAT IT'S YEAH.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S BEING DONE, RIGHT.
WHY DID COMMISSIONER WAY ASK THAT? YOU KNOW, QUESTION, YOU KNOW? SURE.
SO, AND, AND THEN THE, I GUESS KIND OF RELATED IT'S, THIS IS KIND OF RELATED TO THAT, BUT JUST AGAIN, THE UM, THE EXAMPLES, JUST MORE EXAMPLES OF WHEN WE'RE REVIEWING A APPLICATION AND IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT'S ALREADY BEEN BUILT IN THE COMMUNITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S BACK TO THE, THE HOUSING DISCUSSION WE HAD ABOUT DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING AND YOU KNOW, HAVING LIKE A LIBRARY OF, YOU KNOW, OF EXAMPLES OF WHERE THINGS HAVE BEEN BUILT THAT ARE SIMILAR.
LIKE I THINK ABOUT THE, UM, THE SPLIT RAIL FENCE THAT'S ALONG HIGH.
AND WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT IS THAT A MATERIAL THAT WE USE IN THE CITY AND YEAH, IT'S BEEN USED.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST THINGS LIKE THAT, LIKE HAVING EXAMPLES OF, WELL THE APPLICANT'S ASKING FOR THIS.
UM, IT JUST, TO ME, THAT'S HELPFUL TO SEE EXAMPLES.
UM, MAYBE EVEN COMPARING, UH, A DEVELOPMENT, THE HOMES THAT ARE BEING BUILT BY THE SAME COMPANY THAT ARE LIKE FIVE, 10 YEARS, UM, AHEAD.
AND SO YOU CAN SEE HOW THEY'RE FARING.
COULD BE A, COULD BE ON TOP OF THAT AS WELL TOO.
I WAS ALSO THINKING ABOUT DEFINITIONS.
UM, WHEN YOU HAVE NEW PEOPLE OR JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT WHAT THAT DEFINITION IS, THAT MAYBE YOU TAKE A LOOK AND GO, IS THAT A DEFINITION THAT I JUST NEED TO CITE AT THE BOTTOM? THAT MAY BE SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.
AND MAYBE, UH, NEW COMMISSIONERS COME IN AND GET A LIST OF DEFINITIONS THAT YOU ALL USE ON A DAILY BASIS THAT KIND OF GETS, UH, SLIPPED INTO THINGS WHERE WE GO, I, I GOTTA GO HOME AND GOOGLE THAT.
ARE YOU REFERRING TO DEFINITIONS? LIKE THE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE CONTAINED IN OUR CODE OR SOMETHINGS IN OUR, OUR STAFF REPORT? JUST IN STAFF REPORTS OR DIFFERENT, UH, PLACES.
THEY'LL COMBINE A COUPLE OF WORDS.
AND DO THOSE MEAN THE SAME THING? WHAT I WOULD INTERPRET THOSE TO MEAN? UM, I THINK IF YOU JUST LOOK AT YOUR STAFF REPORT AND KIND OF GO THROUGH SOMETHING OR, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S HITTING ME SOMETIMES.
WHERE I'LL, I'LL TAKE OUT, TAKE A WORD I'LL, I'LL THROW OUT, I MEAN WE CAN TALK LATER ABOUT SOME OF THE WORDS MAYBE I GOOGLE YEAH, THAT'D BE HELPFUL.
BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THAT'S HARD 'CAUSE EVERYBODY HAS A DIFFERENT BASE OF KNOWLEDGE AND WE'RE SO JARGONY, LIKE WE KNOW WHAT WE MEAN, SO WHY DON'T, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THAT'S, YOU KNOW, I MEAN THAT'S, THAT'S A DOWNFALL OBVIOUSLY.
I DEFINITELY HAVE PLANNING AND ALL OF OUR ACRONYMS AND STUFF THAT WE KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.
ASK IF YOU DON'T MIND APPRECIATE SHARING WHAT THOSE ARE.
AND THE COMMISSION IN THE PAST HAS, HAS PROVIDED A LIST OF, HEY, WE NEED TO INCORPORATE THESE INTO DEFINITIONS WITHIN CODE.
AND SO THAT WE, WE HAVE PRECEDENT FOR THAT WHERE, HEY, WE NOTICED THAT THIS DEFINITION OF HOUSING TYPE OR WHATEVER, WE, WE CALL OUT X, Y, AND Z, BUT WE DON'T DO A, AND SO, YOU KNOW, DON'T BE SHY AND SUBMITTING THOSE BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT JUST HELPING YOURSELF IN DEFINING THINGS.
YOU'RE HELPING FUTURE BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, CURRENT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
SO PLEASE BE, BE FREE WITH THAT REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION.
MR. ALEXANDER AND I TALKED TO SARAH ABOUT THIS AND I, AND I PUT IT IN THE, UH, DOCUMENT THAT I SUBMITTED BECAUSE I KNOW YOUR, THE STAFF, YOU'RE PROBABLY SENSITIVE, YOU SOMETIMES HEAR THE COMMENT ABOUT YOUR MEDDLING IN PEOPLE'S DESIGNS.
AND SO THAT'S THE ONE AREA I WOULD SUGGEST YOU AVOID GETTING AN ANOTHER CONSULTANT WHO'S DIFFERENT THAN THE APPLICANT AND COMING UP WITH AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN OR CORRECTIONS TO THAT APPLICANT'S PLAN.
BECAUSE, AND I'M THINKING OF ONE CASE EARLIER THIS YEAR BECAUSE THE CONS YOU, I THINK IT WOULD'VE BEEN EASIER TO SIMPLY STATE AND IT WAS A CONCEPT REVIEW.
SIMPLY STATE, HERE ARE THINGS WE'D LIKE TO SEE CHANGED BECAUSE THE PLAN THAT YOUR CONSULTANT CAME IN THROUGHOUT ALL THE POSITIVE THINGS OF THAT APPLICANT'S CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
AND, AND SO THEN THE APPLICANT GOES AWAY.
AND IN THE A RB IT DEPENDED ON WHO THE CONSULTANT WAS.
THERE WAS ONE CONSULTANT WHO WAS REALLY GOOD FORTUNATELY, BUT THEN THERE WERE O THERE WAS ANOTHER WHOSE SKILLS ARE IN A DIFFERENT AREA PERHAPS.
BUT, UM, BUT I THINK IT'S INSULTING TO THE APPLICANT.
I THINK IT'S POTENTIALLY CONFUSING TO THE APPLICANT.
AND I THINK IT, UH, BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT THOSE TWO LANDSCAPE PLANS, THAT INDIVIDUAL WALKS AWAY AND SAID, WELL, THEY GAVE ME THIS PLAN AND NOBODY COMMENTED ABOUT ALL THESE OTHER THINGS IN THIS ALTERNATIVE PLAN.
SO, AND, AND THERE ARE ALREADY SO MANY PLANS THAT PEOPLE NEED TO RESPOND TO AND BE AWARE OF WHEN THEY DEVELOP THEIR PLAN.
[01:00:01]
BRING IT AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT AND DO ANOTHER PLAN, I THINK IS, I THINK IT'S REALLY PROBLEMATIC.AND I THINK THAT'S ONE AREA WHERE I THINK I WOULD RECOMMEND, LIKE I, I MENTIONED TO SARAH A BETTER SOLUTION AND THAT MIGHT'VE BEEN TO TAKE THEIR PLAN AND JUST SAY, MAYBE THERE'S A GREENWAY HERE AND MAYBE THERE INCORPORATES SOME TOWNHOUSES SOMEHOW, BUT THAT, THAT PLAN CAME BACK AND, AND THAT PERSON HAD BROKEN UP THE BLOCK STRUCTURE.
THAT PERSON, WHOEVER THAT OTHER FIRM WAS WHO DID THAT HAD CHANGED SO MANY THINGS.
AND, AND I FELT BAD FOR THE APPLICANT.
AND, AND SO I JUST THINK THAT'S AN AREA WHERE THAT COMMENT ABOUT MEDDLING, I THINK THAT'S A PLACE WHERE YOU PROBABLY NEED TO BE CAREFUL.
SO WE HAVE AN ARCHITECT, WE HAVE A CONSULTANT THAT WE USE FOR MATERIALS.
DO WE HAVE AN, A CONSULTANT THAT WE HAVE THAT KIND OF JUST JUXTAPOSES PLANS AND SAYS, HEY, HERE'S AN ALTERNATIVE.
SO A RB HA DEFINITELY HAS A HISTORIC ARCHITECT OR MANY VERSIONS OF THAT.
UM, BUT FOR THIS BODY, SO YES, WE DO HAVE, LIKE MARK FORD HELPS WITH MATERIALS, BUT IF WE WANTED HIS CONSULTATION ABOUT, 'CAUSE NO ONE ON PLANNING STAFF IS AN ARCHITECT.
NOW WE DO HAVE STAFF THAT HAVE ARCHITECTURAL BACKGROUNDS, BUT THAT WAS A COUNCIL DIRECTIVE THAT BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FELT LIKE THEY NEEDED THAT ARCHITECTURAL SUPPORT BECAUSE THEY DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE ON THE BOARD.
SO WE WERE DIRECTED TO HIRE CONSULTANTS TO HELP SUPPORT WHEN NEEDED AND PROVIDE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BECAUSE THAT WAS, AGAIN, IF THAT'S CHANGED, THEN THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO TALK ABOUT MAYBE WHEN WE'RE TOGETHER AT OUR JOINT MEETING.
'CAUSE THAT'S, I MEAN MARK IS THERE IF WE WANNA ASK HIM ABOUT THAT.
THIS WAS A LAND, THIS WAS A LANDSCAPE DESIGN FIRM OKAY.
AND I, AND I DON'T WANT TO OH YEAH, I, YEAH, I, SARAH'S SHAKING HER HEAD, SO I THINK SHE KNOWS THE PROJECT I'M REFERRING TO.
SO, SO, AND I'D LIKE LEGAL TO, THE APPLICANT HAS THE RIGHT TO BRING FORWARD THEIR PROJECT.
THE POINT WAS THERE'S A, THERE'S DESIGN ISSUE THAT WE CAN'T, WE KNOW DOES NOT LOOK RIGHT.
LIKE I CAN LOOK AT ME LIKE THAT DOESN'T LOOK RIGHT, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS THAT EITHER DOESN'T MEET THE CODE OR THE GUIDELINES.
AND THIS CONSULTANTS OR THE CONSULTANTS THAT WE USE ARE TO HELP US ARTICULATE A SOLUTION.
NOT THAT THAT IS THE ONLY SOLUTION, BUT THAT IS AN OPTION BECAUSE WE DO HAVE APPLICANTS THAT WE MEET WITH AND SAY, THIS DOES NOT MEET GENERALLY THIS, THIS AND THIS.
WELL, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WELL, THAT'S AN ANSWER TO THAT.
THAT DATES BACK TO WHEN WE HAD COUNCIL ON THE BOARD.
UM, MY RECOLLECTION IS THE, THE REQUEST FOR THAT ARCHITECTURAL AND, AND I AM COMPLETELY IN SUPPORTIVE OF, IN SUPPORT OF HAVING AN ARCHITECT WHO IS A CONSULTANT WHO CAN HELP US LOOK AT MATERIALS AND THAT SORT OF THING.
BUT TO COME FORWARD AND SAY, EH, WE DON'T LIKE YOUR PROJECT.
BUT AGAIN, THAT'S NOT ALSO, TO ME, THAT'S NOT THE INTENT.
THE INTENT IS TO PROVIDE A DESIGN ALTERNATIVE OR ALTERNATIVES OR OPTIONS OR THINGS THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS.
'CAUSE THAT'S SOMETIMES NOT OUR LEVEL OF EXPERTISE.
IT IS DEFINITELY NOT A RBU SHOULD APPROVE OR PLANNING COMMISSION.
THIS IS THE ALTERNATIVE DESIGN WE'RE GOING WITH.
IT'S THIS IS WHAT THE APPLICANT HAS PRESENTED TO YOU.
THIS DOESN'T MEET THE CODE OR THE GUIDELINES FOR X, Y, AND Z REASONS.
AND HERE IS A SOLUTION THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED TO RESOLVE THAT.
IF THAT'S NOT HOW THAT'S COMING ACROSS, THEN THAT'S A BIGGER PROBLEM.
SO IF WE COULD PUT THAT KIND OF AS A NOTE YEAH.
IN OUR PRESENTATION FOR OUR JOINT MEETING, I THINK THAT WOULD BE APPRECIATED.
I I THINK IT'S A REALLY SLIPPERY SLOPE IF WE'RE ACTUALLY THEN PROVIDING OUR OWN DESIGN INPUT.
I MEAN, MARK FORD IS, IS COMMENTING ON MATERIALS.
THAT'S THAT'S A TOTALLY DIFFERENT, AND I, YES, IT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT LEVEL OF EXPERTISE AS A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, I WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, I I WOULD BE, I'VE NEVER EXPERIENCED THAT IN MY CAREER THAT SOMEBODY HAS BEEN COMING AND, AND REDESIGNED SOMETHING UNLESS I GOT FIRED AND THEN THEY HIRED SOMEBODY ELSE
UM, BUT I MEAN THE APPLICANT IS WELCOME TO GO OUT AND GET A SECOND, ANOTHER.
I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
THIS IS, AGAIN, I DIDN'T MAKE THIS UP, SO I'M HAPPY TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION IF YOU ALL FEEL THAT THAT'S, AGAIN, EXPERTISE WAS NOT ON THE BOARD WHEN THIS WAS DISCUSSED.
I DON'T, IT'S PROFESSIONAL THAT EXACTLY.
I'LL REACH OUT TO THE COUNCIL LIAISON.
IT'S INSULTING TO OUR APPLICANT.
AND I'LL REACH OUT TO COUNCIL LIAISON.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UH, FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, I REALIZE THAT NO, THIS IS GREAT DISCUSSION.
HONESTLY, THAT'S VERY HELPFUL.
SO, OKAY, SO THEN ISBE, I APOLOGIZE IN ADVANCE FOR THE MEETING MINUTES BECAUSE THE DISCUSSION WAS SOMEWHAT CONVOLUTED.
[01:05:01]
OKAY.I DO HAVE, WE CAN TALK, DO YOU WANNA TALK ABOUT PRESENTATIONS NOW OR YOU WANT, WE CAN KICK THAT TO ANOTHER TIME IF YOU WANT LOOKING INTO THE COMMISSION, DO IT.
UM, SO THERE WERE ONLY THREE QUESTIONS ASKED RELATED TO THAT.
SO AGAIN, ARE WE PROVIDING THE INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED TO MAKE A DECISION? UM, IS THAT INCLUDED? AND THEN THE FEEDBACK WAS ULTIMATELY YES, BUT SOME SUGGESTIONS WERE AGAIN, HIGHLIGHTING HOW THE CODER GUIDELINES ARE MET OR NOT MET.
SO REALLY FOCUSING THAT AREA OF DISCUSSION, UM, PROVIDING THAT SITE SUMMARY, CASE HISTORY AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
UM, WE'LL USE THAT WORD LOOSELY FOR NOW.
UM, AND THEN, BUT DEFINITELY EMPHASIZING, NOT REITERATING THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION.
SO I KNOW THAT THAT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE ARE CONSTANTLY ADJUSTING, HAVING ADJUSTED THE ORDER IN WHICH PEOPLE PRESENT HERE.
BUT, UM, BUT THAT'S GOOD FEEDBACK TOO, TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT REHASHING THINGS.
UM, AND THEN THE ORDER OF PRESENTATION, A MAJORITY PREFERRED THE, THE APPLICANT PRESENTATION VERSUS, OR OVERSTAFF PRESENTING FIRST.
UM, AND THEN WHAT OTHER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION? SO AGAIN, PRECEDENT EXAMPLES.
SO WHERE ARE OTHER CASES LIKE THIS, WHERE HAVE THAT BEEN APPROVED? UM, ALLOWING AGAIN, THE APPLICANT TO PRESENT FIRST AND STAFF TO FILL IN THE BLANKS, UM, OR THE KEY DISCUSSION TOPICS.
MAKING SURE THAT THE FOCUS OF THE DISCUSSION IS ON THE RELEVANT PIECES TO THIS, TO THE PARTICULAR APPLICATION THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU.
SO THAT'S SORT OF WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT A MINUTE AGO.
UM, AND THEN AGAIN, SOME INTEREST IN, AGAIN, THESE BACKGROUND DISCUSSIONS WITH THE DEVELOPER.
UM, AND THEN OVERALL ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS IN GENERAL, AGAIN, CLARITY RELATED TO CONCEPT PLANS, OTHER DUBLIN SIMILAR PROJECTS OR WHAT OTHER PEER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING.
SO WE DO A LOT OF BENCHMARKING ABOUT HOW TO INCORPORATE THAT FURTHER.
AND THEN THE OPPORTUNITY FOR 3D MODELING.
SO THAT'S AGAIN, SIMILAR FOR STAFF IS CONTINUING TO REFINE THOSE PRESENTATIONS TO REALLY GET TO THE SALIENT POINTS THAT YOU WANNA, YOU NEED TO FOCUS YOUR DISCUSSION ON NOT DUPLICATING THE APPLICANT'S INFORMATION AND REALLY BEING CLEAR ABOUT WHAT YOUR FOCUS IS FOR THAT EVENING.
THAT'S OUR INITIAL TAKEAWAYS ON THAT, BUT I'D LOVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR FEEDBACK.
MR. DISHER? I, I THINK WHAT WOULD BE HELPFUL IS IT'S, IT FEELS LIKE, AND I THINK IT MAKES SENSE HERE FOR THE APPLICANT TO GO FIRST COMPARATIVELY TO THE BZA, WHERE I THINK IT MAKES SENSE FOR THE STAFF TO GO FIRST.
IT FEELS LIKE SOMETIMES DURING THE PRESENTATIONS, SOMETIMES THEY'RE, THEY FEEL FROM THE APPLICANT OFF THE CUFF, UH, SOMEWHAT CONVOLUTED AND MISGUIDED.
OTHER TIMES THEY'RE WELL DRAWN OUT.
IF THERE'S ANY WAY I KNOW THAT, AND THIS MAKES IT A LITTLE DIFFICULT, BUT IF THERE'S ANY WAY THAT THE STAFF COULD, THEY HAD THEIR PRESENTATION READY, BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S SAID BY THE APPLICANT THAT IS, I'M NOT SAYING INCORRECT, BUT MAYBE NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DISCUSSIONS THAT THEY HAD WITH STAFF, THAT IF THAT COULD BE BROUGHT FORWARD, BECAUSE NOW THAT'S GONNA REQUIRE MAYBE SOME QUICK NOTE TAKING AND THINKING ON YOUR FEET A LITTLE BIT TO ADDRESS THOSE THINGS.
BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE IT'S THE PRESENTATION FROM THE APPLICANT.
THEN WE HAVE STAFF GO OVER THEIR REPORT, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S WELL PREPARED AND EVALUATED AND IT PRESENTS THE CRITERIA FOR US TO EVALUATE, BUT WE'RE MISSING THAT, WELL YOU SAID THIS AND THAT MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE ENTIRELY ACCURATE AND HERE'S WHY.
'CAUSE IT GIVES US A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT PERHAPS OF THE DISCUSSIONS THAT OCCURRED, THE PRIMARY DISCUSSIONS, THE SALIENT POINTS THAT WE MAY NEED TO KNOW SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, MR. DESLER HINTED THAT THAT REQUIRES FINESSE, RIGHT? YOU, YOU DON'T WANNA SAY, HEY, YOU JUST TOLD A LIE, RIGHT? BUT AT THE SAME TIME, UH, HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY, THE, THE APPLICANT SAYS, YOU KNOW, HEY, WE CAN'T MEET THE STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE OF X, Y, Z.
AND STAFF THEN SAYS, WE DID DISCUSS WITH, WITH THE APPLICANT THE STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS.
UH, IT DOES NOT CURRENTLY MEET CODE.
THEY WOULD HAVE TO, IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS WORK, THEY WOULD EITHER HAVE TO LOSE SOME UNITS OR THEY WOULD HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, ASK FOR A WAIVER.
IT IS, BUT IT GIVES THAT CONTEXT.
IT MARRIES WHAT THEY'RE SAYING WITH WHAT'S IN OUR STAFF REPORT.
SO WE'LL, YEAH, WE'LL TAKE ALL THIS FEEDBACK, GO BACK AND SORT OUT SOME RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS FOR THIS, UM, AND THEN PRESENT SOME OPTIONS AND THINGS.
SO IF, YEAH, IF SOMETHING ELSE COMES UP OR YOU THINK OF ANYTHING ELSE, WE CAN DEFINITELY TALK ABOUT THAT.
AND, UM, YEAH, I DEFINITELY KNOW THAT COUNSEL WANTS TO TALK ABOUT THE RECOMMENDATION PART.
[01:10:01]
UM, SO THAT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE YOUR, YOUR INPUT ON THAT.ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS FOR COMMUNICATIONS THIS EVENING? ALL RIGHT, MR. WA MEETING ADJOURNED.