Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[00:00:02]

ALRIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON.

[1. Call Meeting to Order]

WE'LL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.

IT'S 3:30 TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17TH, AND WE'LL CALL THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER 19TH.

I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. SIR.

WE'VE TAKEN ATTENDANCE BY SIGNING IN, AND WE HAVE A QUORUM.

ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS? SEEING NONE.

PUBLIC COMMENT.

IS ANYBODY HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT ANY NON AGENDA ITEM? SO IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS REGARDING ANY ITEM THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

ALL RIGHT. AND ALSO ITEMS THAT DON'T HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO IF ANYONE HAS A COMMENT ON A DISCUSSION ITEM OH VERY GOOD I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED THAT.

SO IF YOU WE HAVE SOME DISCUSSION ITEMS THAT DO NOT HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM.

SO IF YOU'RE HERE AND YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS REGARDING THOSE, NOW'S YOUR TIME.

ALRIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD, TO NEW BUSINESS.

[5. 23P-093 (Adjacent to 1201 and 1228 Harborside) Request for an Abandonment of approximately 3,800 squarefeet of alley right-of-way. Adjacent properties are legally described as M. B. Menard Survey, Lots 8 - 14, Part of adjacent 12th and 13th Street, Block 732, in the City and County Galveston, Texas. Applicants: Robert W. and Mary T. Jones Adjacent Property Owner: Robert W. and Mary T. Jones Easement Holder: City of Galveston]

WE HAVE 23P-093.

23P-093 THIS IS ADJACENT TO 1201 AND 1228 HARBORSIDE.

THERE WERE 18 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT.

ONE OF THOSE RETURNED, IN FAVOR.

THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS FROM ANY CITY DEPARTMENTS OR PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES.

IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN ABANDONMENT OF THE REMAINING 3800FT² OF ALLEY RIGHT OF WAY ADJACENT TO 1201 AND 1228 HARBORSIDE.

IMPACT AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STAFF FINDS THAT THE ABANDONMENT WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM, IMPACTING PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES.

NO OBJECTIONS WERE RECEIVED FROM PUBLIC OR PRIVATE UTILITIES.

PLEASE NOTE THE CRITERIA FOR PERMANENT STREET CLOSURES ON PAGE TWO OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.

STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUEST GENERALLY CONFORMS TO THE, PERMANENT STREET CLOSURE CRITERIA DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE SUBJECT RIGHT WAY HAS NOT BEEN IN USE AND THERE WOULD NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO THE TRAFFIC FLOW OR PUBLIC SAFETY.

THE STREET SEGMENT IS NOW LOCATED WITHIN A POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND THEREFORE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST WITH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS ONE THROUGH FIVE AND STANDARD CONDITIONS SIX THROUGH EIGHT.

AND NOW WE HAVE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS.

THIS IS A ZONING MAP.

ALSO SITE PLAN OF THE SUBJECT SITE.

THIS IS A SUBJECT PROPERTY.

AND HERE ARE THE PROPERTIES, IN THE VICINITY TO THE WEST, EAST AND SOUTH.

AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ADRIEL.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE ONE REAL QUICK.

DID WE DO AN ABANDONMENT ON THIS? THE OTHER ANOTHER PORTION OF THIS? YES, SIR. YOU SAW AN ABANDONMENT A FEW MONTHS AGO FOR THE, FOR ONE HALF OF THE 13TH STREET.

RIGHT OF WAY FOR THE SAME APPLICANT.

OKAY. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. YES, SIR.

PLEASE. ANTHONY. SO THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN TURNED INTO PARKING FOR THE ROYAL CARIBBEAN, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. OKAY.

SO THE ALLEY IS NOT EVEN THERE, BASICALLY THERE ANYMORE.

THERE'S CARS PARKED ON TOP OF IT.

WELL, NO, IT'S STILL THERE.

GOOD. AND ON PAPER, STILL THERE.

ON PAPER IT'S STILL THERE. BUT THERE'S CARS PARKED ON TOP OF IT.

NOW, THAT WHOLE THING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW IS PARKING LOT.

THE AREA HAS IMPROVED. YES.

RIGHT. OKAY.

SO IT'S THIS IS JUST THE ABANDONED AREA.

YES. THEY'RE ASKING. YEAH.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

ALRIGHT. SEEING NONE WE'LL OPEN THE MEETING TO THE PUBLIC.

HEARING AT 3:34.

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES, SIR.

[INAUDIBLE]. BUT PLEASE COME FORWARD, SIR.

STATE YOUR NAME. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER, MY NAME IS MARCUS HILL AND I HAVE THE PLEASURE OF REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT IN THIS PARTICULAR MATTER.

AS WE LOOK AT IT, WE SEE AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE THE 3800.

AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT HARD TO READ BECAUSE OF THE COLORING, BUT IT'S 3800FT².

THAT'S A TRACK THAT IS TEN FEET WIDE, ABOUT FROM CHAIR TO CHAIR, AND IT'S 380FT LONG.

AND SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IS THE PORT HAS WORKED WITH US AND LEASED FROM US AND SAID THAT THEY WERE HAPPY FOR US TO DO IT BECAUSE IT MAKES A COMPLETE RECTANGLE OF THE AREA.

AND WHAT WE'VE DONE BECAUSE THE PORT WAS GOING TO HAVE TO PUT SOME GREEN SPACE WHERE YOU SEE THE 3800.

WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE WORKED WITH THE PORT AND DOWN HERE, AS YOU GET CLOSER TO THE STREET, AS YOU COME A LITTLE SOUTH, THEN THAT'S WHERE THE GREEN SPACE IS THERE, WHETHER IT'S GRASS OR A PALM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD BE.

COMMISSIONER IS CORRECT.

WE HAD, THERE WAS AN ABANDONMENT.

WE PAID FOR IT. WE DID WHAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO.

IT WASN'T ONE OF THOSE ABANDONMENTS THAT WENT SOUTH.

WE PAID FOR IT. WE DID WHAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO DO, AND WE WERE IN GOOD SHAPE THERE WITH REGARD TO THE WESTERN END OF IT.

BUT JUST SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, THE 3800, THE LITTLE BITTY TEN FEET AND THEN 380FT LONG, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR, THE ABANDONMENT.

[00:05:08]

WE STAND READY TO CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING THE APPRAISAL, THE PAYMENT AND WHAT HAVE YOU.

AND THIS IS SIMPLY A COMPILATION SO THAT YOU HAVE A NICE RECTANGLE.

AND IT IS ALL WE OWN IS ALREADY UNDER LEASE TO THE PORT.

OKAY. AND WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT FOR THE REST.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE. THANK YOU SIR.

COMMISSIONER, DO I SIGN IN? PLEASE DO. I WILL.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE HERE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:35 AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR ACTION.

YES, SIR, MR. PEÑA, I WILL.

I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE.

ITEM 23P-093, AS WRITTEN.

AND I'LL SECOND THAT.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

AND A SECOND 23P-093 AS PRESENTED.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION.

SEEING NONE WE'LL TAKE THE VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

AND I THINK THIS GOES TO CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY THE 25TH FOR THE FINAL APPROVAL.

IS THAT CORRECT, CATHERINE? OKAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON.

[5. 23P-090 (1915 Avenue M) Request for designation as a Galveston Landmark. The property is legally described as M.B. Menard Survey, Lots 5 and 4 and East 10-9 Feet of Lot 3, Northeast Block 19 Galveston Outlots, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Lori Sheridan Mitchell Property Owner: Lori Sheridan Mitchell]

WE GOT A LANDMARK CASE 23P-090.

THIS IS 1915 AVENUE M REQUEST FOR DESIGNATION AS A GALVESTON LANDMARK.

31 NOTICES WERE SENT.

ONE RETURNED, THAT ONE IN FAVOR THE PROMINENT ATTORNEY WALTER GRESHAM BUILT THIS ONE STORY, FIVE BAY CENTER HALL COTTAGE IN 1886 AS TENANT RENTAL PROPERTY. THE HOUSE REPLACED A HOUSE LOST IN THE 1885 FIRE.

A WALTER GRESHAM MOVED TO GALVESTON IN 1866.

AFTER SERVING IN THE CONFEDERATE ARMY AND GRADUATING FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA, HE OPENED A LAW PRACTICE AND MARRIED JOSEPHINE MANN TWO YEARS LATER.

IN ADDITION TO HIS LAW PRACTICE, HE SERVED AS DISTRICT ATTORNEY, STATE LEGISLATOR, AND LATER US STATE CONGRESSMAN.

DIRECTOR OF THE GULF, COLORADO AND SANTA FE RAILWAY, AND CHAIRED THE DEEPWATER COMMITTEE KNOWN AS THE BISHOP'S PALACE.

GRESHAM'S PERSONAL RESIDENCE STANDS AT 1402 BROADWAY.

BUILT IN 1892.

THE ARCHITECT WAS NICHOLAS CLAYTON.

IN THE GALVESTON ARCHITECTURAL GUIDEBOOK, AUTHORS STEPHEN FOX AND ELLEN BEASLEY NOTE THAT NICHOLAS NICHOLAS CLAYTON DESIGNED TENANT HOUSES FOR GRESHAM AT VARIOUS PERIODS.

THERE'S NO DEFINITIVE PROOF THAT 1915 AVENUE M WAS AMONG THEM, BUT IT IS POSSIBLE.

THE LANDMARK COMMISSION REVIEWED THIS YESTERDAY AT THEIR REGULAR MEETING AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.

AND STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

AND THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

AND THEN WE HAVE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU CATHERINE.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:38.

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? ALL RIGHT. WOULD ANYBODY ELSE HERE LIKE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THIS CASE? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 339 AND BRING THIS BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR ACTION. YES, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF 23P-090. ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

AND A SECOND. 23P-090 AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. WE'LL TAKE THE VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

23P-090 PASSES.

AND THAT WILL BE HEARD BY CITY COUNCIL ALSO ON JANUARY 15TH.

I'M 25TH. THANK YOU.

[5. 23P-092 (Adjacent to 1307 27th Street and 2702 Ursuline/Avenue N) Request for a License to Use to encroach the 28th Street right-of-way, for placement of elevator tower in conjunction with new GISD stadium press box. Adjacent properties are legally described as M.B. Menard Survey, Northeast and Southeast Block 15, and Adjacent Abandoned Part of Avenue M ½, Galveston Outlots, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Ed Ramirez, PBK Architects, Inc. Adjacent Property Owners: ISD Galveston Easement Holder: City of Galveston]

SO WE'LL GO TO 23P-092.

THIS IS ADJACENT TO 1307 27TH STREET AND 2702 URSULINE/AVENUE N.

AND THERE ARE 54 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT.

NONE OF THOSE RETURNED.

NO OBJECTION FROM CITY DEPARTMENTS OR PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES WITH A COMMENT FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ON PAGE ONE OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.

THE APPLICANT RECEIVED APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON MARCH 7TH, 2023 FOR AN AERIAL ENCROACHMENT AS PART OF THE PROJECT TO RECONSTRUCT THE EXISTING KERRVILLE STADIUM, PRESSBOX, ADJACENT TO THE 28TH STREET RIGHT OF WAY.

THE ENCROACHMENT EXTENDED FOUR FEET, NINE INCHES INTO THE 28TH STREET RIGHT OF WAY, AND THIS REQUEST, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING TO MODIFY THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL TO ADD A GRADE LEVEL ELEVATOR TOWER THAT WILL ENCROACH SIX FEET, TEN INCHES INTO THE 28TH STREET RIGHT OF WAY.

THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PROPOSING TO ADD STAIRS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PRESS BOX.

[00:10:01]

THE PROPOSED STAIRS WILL NOT TERMINATE AT GRADE AND ARE DESIGNED AS AN AERIAL ENCROACHMENT, WITH ITS LOWEST POINT BEING 12FT TEN INCHES FROM GRADE.

PLEASE NOTE THE APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION ON PAGE TWO OF YOUR STAFF.

REPORT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS CASE, WITH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS LISTED AS ONE THROUGH FIVE AND STANDARD CONDITIONS SIX THROUGH 11.

AND NOW WE HAVE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS.

THIS IS AN AERIAL IMAGE OF THE SUBJECT, PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

VARIOUS ANGLES FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

AND HERE ARE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST.

AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF REPORT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ADRIEL.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? [INAUDIBLE]. CERTAINLY.

GO AHEAD STEVEN. I'M SORRY CATHERINE.

OH, YOU TOOK THE. CAN YOU GO TO THE PICTURE OF THE BACK OUT THAT WAY? RIGHT THERE? YES. SO THE PRESS BOX IS GOING TO KIND OF, I GUESS, CANTILEVER OFF OF THE, THE BACK OF THE? THE TOWER.

OKAY. THE STAIRS WERE CANTILEVER SORT OF OVER THE EXISTING BLEACHERS.

YES. THE TOWER WILL ENCROACH FURTHER INTO THE 28TH STREET RIGHT OF WAY, INTERSECTING WITH AVENUE M AT THAT POINT, OR M AND A HALF, I BELIEVE.

SO YES, THAT'S AND WHAT ABOUT THE ELEVATOR SHAFT WILL THAT WILL ENCROACH SIX FEET INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY.

IS THAT GOING TO BE BEYOND WHAT WHERE THAT CURB IS? WELL YEAH. SO IF YOU LOOK AT EXHIBIT, B YOU'LL NOTICE THAT THERE IS A SORT OF A BUMP OUT RIGHT ON 28TH WHERE IT INTERSECTS M AND A HALF AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, BEING PROPOSED APPROXIMATELY ALTOGETHER ABOUT TEN FEET OR SO, GIVE OR TAKE, FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

SO THERE'S GOING TO BE THE ELEVATOR TOWER AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL SIDEWALK, SURROUNDING THE ELEVATOR UNIT THERE.

OKAY. IS THAT, STILL GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIT CARS? AND YEAH, THEY HAVE APPROXIMATELY 11FT OR SO LEFT.

THE I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT.

WE'RE HAVING TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES AND WE NEED TO CONFIRM THAT THE MEETING IS BEING RECORDED.

OKAY. WE'LL HAVE TO RECESS UNTIL WE'VE GOT THAT CONFIRMATION.

WE'LL CALL A RECESS. [INAUDIBLE] SABOTAGED [INAUDIBLE] . YEAH, AND IT'S A REQUIREMENT.

THE MEETINGS HAVE TO BE RECORDED.

SO [INAUDIBLE] AND WE NEED IT FOR OUR RECORDS AS WELL, [INAUDIBLE] I KNOW WE'RE CLIPPING ALONG [INAUDIBLE] SHALL WE SING SOME CHRISTMAS CAROLS ? [INAUDIBLE].

IT'S SO QUIET IN HERE.

[INAUDIBLE] NO COMMENT.

I'M SORRY.

OH, OKAY. LOOKS LIKE WE CAN PROCEED.

OKAY, WE'LL CALL THEM.

WE'LL BRING THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER AT 3:44.

AND WHERE WAS I? ADRIEL WAS IN THE MIDST OF TELLING US THAT ROAD WILL STILL BE TRAVEL IT.

YEAH. IT'S STILL REMAINS.

THERE MUST BE APPROXIMATELY 11FT TO 12FT OR SO, TO TRAVEL SO THAT THE FOLKS ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE CAN ALSO ACCESS, THEIR PROPERTY.

AND THE FIRE MARSHAL DID NOT OBJECT TO THAT.

ALSO, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS PHOTO RIGHT HERE.

IS THAT STRIPED AS PARKING RIGHT THERE ON THE RIGHT SIDE NEAR THE CURB?

[00:15:04]

YES. SO THAT'S CURRENTLY PARKING RIGHT THERE IN THE BUMP OUT WILL BASICALLY TAKE THOSE PARKING LANES WHERE THE TOWER IS GOING TO GO.

YOU GOT IT OKAY.

LOOKS GOOD OKAY.

YEAH. THAT WAS MY QUESTION WAS, IS THERE A REQUIREMENT FOR THEM TO PUT SOME PARKING OR SOMETHING ALONG THEIR STRIPE IT SO THAT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THAT'S A ONE WAY.

SO YEAH, IT'S ALREADY STRIPED.

I MEAN AND KEEP IN MIND THAT THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE TO COME BACK FOR A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT TO SORT OF RECONFIGURE THE CURBS.

OKAY. SO THAT WILL CATCH ALL OF THAT.

THAT'S WHEN WE'LL CATCH IT THEN. OKAY.

THANK YOU. ADRIEL.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES. YES, SIR. SO THE PRESS BOX ITSELF IS JUST GOING TO STICK OUT A LITTLE BIT AT THE TOP OF THE STADIUM.

THE, PRESS BOX ITSELF, IT'S ALL WITHIN THE PRIVATE PROPERTY LINES.

IT'S JUST THE TOWER ITSELF.

IT'S JUST A CONCRETE ELEVATOR TOWER.

CORRECT. OKAY AND ALSO THE STAIRS ON THE SIDES.

ON BOTH SIDES.

OKAY. THAT SORT OF CANTILEVER TO A DEGREE.

OKAY. RIGHT.

YEAH A SIDE VIEW ELEVATION THAT THEY HAVE, IT STICKS OUT A FEW FEET INTO THE STREET.

CORRECT. OKAY. SO THEY CAME AND THEY GOT AN APPROVAL RIGHT THERE.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

ALL RIGHT. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:46.

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? YES, SIR.

PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN FOR US, PLEASE.

I'M ED RAMIREZ WITH PBK SPORTS.

WE'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE WITH THE INITIAL, RIGHT TO USE OR LICENSE TO USE AGREEMENT.

SO WHAT THIS PRESENTS, AND WE HAVE FLOOR PLANS AND THAT PACKAGE THAT SHOW THE EXTENT OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR AS FAR AS THE ELEVATOR TOWER COMING OUTBOARD OF THE INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND BASICALLY TAKING UP A PARKING SPACE.

AND WE'VE SITUATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF 28TH STREET AND AVENUE M AND A HALF IN ORDER TO MITIGATE ANY SORT OF PINCH POINT.

SO IF SOMETHING WERE TO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF COLLECT IN THAT AREA, A EMERGENCY VEHICLE WOULD BE ABLE TO BYPASS ON THAT.

SO WE'RE NOT GETTING INTO THE DRIVE LANE, BUT ONLY INTO THE PARKING SPACE THERE.

SO ALSO, AVOIDS TAKING UP A SPACE IN FRONT OF ANY HOMEOWNER ALONG THAT STREET.

SO WITHIN THEIR RIGHT OF WAY, STRAIGHT ACROSS, THEY CAN PARK THEIR VEHICLE ACROSS.

SO WE'RE MAINTAINING FULL ACCESS TO THOSE PROPERTIES ALONG THE I BELIEVE THERE'S MAYBE TWO ALONG THAT STREET THAT ACTUALLY FACE 28TH STREET.

THE OTHER PROPERTIES GO OFF TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SIDE STREETS.

VERY GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SEEING NONE. THANK YOU SIR.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:47 AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR ACTION.

ALL RIGHT. I WILL MOVE THAT.

WE APPROVE 23P-092 AS WRITTEN AND I'LL.

AND WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER RIOS.

AND TO APPROVE 23P-092.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

WE'LL TAKE THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

23P-092 HAS PASSED.

THE NEXT CASE, 23P-051.

[5. 23P-051 (3027 Broadway/Avenue J) Request for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay District to construct a “Restaurant, Drive-In / Through”. Property is legally described as M.B. Menard Survey, Lots 1 & 2, Block 150, in the City and County of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Ernesto Quintanilla Property Owner: World Wide Land Devel Corp c/o Ryan LLC]

THE APPLICANT HAS SENT A REQUEST TO HAVE THIS CASE, DEFERRED AGAIN UNTIL OUR JANUARY 9TH MEETING.

IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER.

23P-051 UNTIL THE JANUARY 9TH MEETING.

SECOND, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO DEFER.

23P-051. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, WE'LL TAKE A VOTE.

THOSE IN FAVOR? AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

SO WE'VE DEFERRED 23P-051 TILL JANUARY 9TH.

[5. 23P-084 (13241 Oceana Way and Vacant Tracts located East and West of Pabst Road, North of the Bermuda Beach Subdivision, West of 11 Mile Road, and South of San Luis Pass Road/FM 3005) Request for a Preliminary Plat to establish a new subdivision. Properties are legally described as: The Preserve at West Beach, Section 8 (2010), Abstract 121, Acres 39.6264; The Preserve at West Beach, Section 8 (2010), Abstract 121, Block 4, Lot 1, Acres 3.8736; The Preserve at West Beach, Section 9 (2010), Abstract 121, Acres 21.5022; and Abstract 121, Hall & Jones Survey, Portion of Lot 457 (457-1, Trimble & Lindsey, Section 2 AKA Portion of Blocks 74, 77, & 84, Nottingham Subdivision; in the City and County of Galveston Texas. Applicant: Kahala Services, LLC Property Owner: Green East Realty, LLC; Jakovich Interests, LLC; and Jaks Beachfront LLC]

ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON.

23P-084 IS A PLAT.

THIS IS 13241 OCEANA WAY AND VACANT TRACTS LOCATED EAST AND WEST OF PABST ROAD, NORTH OF THE BERMUDA BEACH SUBDIVISION, WEST OF 11 MILE ROAD, AND SOUTH OF SAN LUIS PASS ROAD/FM 3005. THERE WERE 117 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT.

NO OBJECTIONS FROM CITY DEPARTMENTS AND OR PRIVATE UTILITY, COMPANIES, WITH A COUPLE OF COMMENTS FROM THE COASTAL RESOURCES DIVISION AND THE PUBLIC WORKS, CITY ENGINEER.

AND THOSE ARE ON PAGE ONE OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.

THIS REQUEST IS TO ESTABLISH A NEW SUBDIVISION CONSISTING OF 162 RESIDENTIAL LOTS, A LARGE AMENITY AREA INCLUDING A POOL AND A CLUBHOUSE, PROTECTED NATURAL SPACES AND OTHER

[00:20:08]

RESERVES, AND CREATING FOR NEW PUBLIC STREETS.

IN NOVEMBER 2023, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM VARIOUS ZONING DISTRICTS TO TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THIS PARCEL.

THE SUBJECT SITE AGAIN IS LOCATED EAST OF EAST AND WEST OF PABST ROAD, NORTH OF BERMUDA BEACH, WEST OF 11 MILE, AND SOUTH OF FM 3005.

PLEASE NOTE THE ZONING AND LAND USE INFORMATION ON PAGE TWO OF YOUR STAFF REPORT LOT AND BLOCK CONFIGURATION.

ALL OF THE PROPOSED LOTS MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR WIDTH, DEPTH, AND AREA FOR THE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DISTRICT.

PLEASE NOTE THE BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION AND BEACH ACCESS EASEMENTS ON PAGE TWO.

ON PAGE THREE OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.

VARIANCES FROM THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ESTABLISH TWO BLOCKS THAT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH OF 700FT.

THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PROPOSING A PERMANENT STREET WITHOUT A TURNAROUND OF AT LEAST 50FT OUTSIDE STREET RADIUS.

THE PRELIMINARY PLAT SHOWS SEAWORTHY DRIVE AND ROSETTE BEACH DRIVE ARE BOTH EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH ALLOWED, AND THE SEAWORTHY DRIVE FROM THE WESTERN PORTION DOES NOT MEET THE TURNAROUND RADIUS REQUIRED.

THIS REQUEST. STAFF RECOMMENDS 23P-084 BE APPROVED WITH SPECIFIC CONDITIONS ONE THROUGH EIGHT AND STANDARD CONDITIONS NINE THROUGH 14. AND NOW WE HAVE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS.

THIS IS THE AERIAL, IMAGE OF THE SUBJECT SITE.

THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

AND HERE ARE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST.

AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ADRIEL, IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, SIR.

THE REPORT INDICATES THAT, 121 PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED.

WHERE ARE THOSE TO BE LOCATED, OR HAVE THEY BEEN IDENTIFIED YET? TIM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TACKLE THAT QUESTION? YES. COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS ACTUALLY SOMEWHAT OF A UNIQUE SITUATION IN THAT THIS IS ALREADY A PEDESTRIAN ONLY BEACH IN FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY AND WHEN THAT HAPPENS, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY CLEAR THAT PARKING IS STILL REQUIRED TO MITIGATE IT.

SO WE'VE PUT IN A CALL UP TO THE GLO TO ASCERTAIN THEIR POSITION ON THIS.

AND THEY'RE STILL WEIGHING IN ON THIS.

BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THE MAXIMUM THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED, SHOULD IT BE MANDATED, IS THAT AMOUNT AND THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS A SPOT FOR THOSE, SPACES UP IN SECTION THREE OF THIS PLAT, THE THIRD PHASE.

SO, WE'RE GOING TO FIND OUT, YOU KNOW, WELL BEFORE THE FINAL PLAT, WHETHER THE GLO MANDATES THAT AMOUNT OR SOME OTHER AMOUNT, PRIOR TO THAT FINAL PLAT COMING BACK BEFORE YOU.

OKAY, I'VE GOT A QUESTION FOR, KYLE.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF BEACHFRONT LOTS.

AND IT APPEARS FROM THE PLANS THAT THE DUNE PROTECTION LINE IS WITHIN THE LOT BOUNDARIES.

THE LOT CORNERS ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE ARE CLOSER INTO THE WATER AND YET IT SHOWS A TEN FOOT REAR BUILDING LINE.

SO HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE A REAR BUILDING LINE THAT IS WITHIN THE DUNE PROTECTION AREA? THANK YOU. THANK YOU, [INAUDIBLE] . COME TO US FOR THE BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE, WE WOULD STILL DENOTE THE 25 WE RUN ACROSS THAT IN OTHER AREAS WHERE THEY DO HAVE BUILDING LINES THAT GO WITHIN THE DUNE CONSERVATION AREA, BUT WE FOLLOW OUR STANDARDS TO SAY THIS IS WHAT'S REQUIRED, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH THE BUILDING LINE FALLS IN WITHIN THE DUNE PROTECTION LINE, THEY CAN COME IN FOR AN EXEMPTION TO ACTUALLY BUILD WITHIN THERE FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

SO EVEN THOUGH IT'S DESIGNATED, WE STILL MAKE SURE THEY FOLLOW ALL THE OTHER RULES OF THE OUR BEACH ACCESS PLAN.

I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO, FILE A PLAT, KNOWING THAT THE BUILDING LINE IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF WHERE THE CONSTRUCTION CAN ACTUALLY TAKE PLACE?

[00:25:01]

WELL, THEY CAN THEY CAN ACTUALLY BUILD IN THERE IF THEY COME IN AND GET AN EXEMPTION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

SO IF THEY WANTED TO BUILD WITHIN THE DUNE CONSERVATION AREA, WE HAVE IN OUR BEACH ACCESS PLAN THAT THEY CAN REQUEST AN EXEMPTION TO BUILD WITHIN THE DUNE CONSERVATION AREA.

BUT WOULDN'T THEY HAVE TO SHOW A HARDSHIP TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT, THAT THERE'S NO OTHER? WELL, WE HAVE WE DO HAVE STANDARDS THAT THEY HAVE TO MEET.

IT'S NOT A HARDSHIP, BUT WE HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY WENT THROUGH, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE SITTING OF THE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, TECHNOLOGY TECHNIQUES, THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY COME IN FRONT OF Y'ALL AND Y'ALL GIVE THEM AN EXEMPTION, THEY CAN BUILD WITHIN THAT, WITHIN THE DUNE CONSERVATION AREA.

OKAY, FROM THE PLANS THAT I HAVE, I COULDN'T SEE IF THERE WAS A LOT DRAINAGE PLAN.

PERHAPS THAT'S, IN THE WORKS NOW AND IN THEIR WITH THEIR ENGINEERING, BUT, WITH THESE LOTS, BE SUBJECT TO BEING CLEARED SINCE THEY HAVE THE NORTH TAIL OF THE DUNE IS WITHIN THE LOT BOUNDARY.

AND IF THEY DID THAT, THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO FILE SOME TYPE OF MITIGATION PLAN I WOULD ASSUME.

YEAH. ANY, ANY WORK WITHIN THERE WOULD HAVE TO COME, YOU KNOW, WE'D HAVE TO GET SOMETHING FROM US.

SO IF THEY CAME IN AT A SITE CLEAR, THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SITE CLEAR WITHIN 25FT NOR TOE OF THE DUNE.

BUT IF SOMEBODY CAME IN ON AN INDIVIDUAL LOT AND WANTED TO CONSTRUCT IN THE BUILDING, WITHIN THE BUILDING LINES WITHIN THAT DUNE CONSERVATION AREA, THEY CAN ASK FOR AN EXEMPTION. OKAY.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

ANY OTHER? YES, MA'AM.

NO. GO AHEAD.

WELL, THAT PRETTY MUCH COVERED ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD.

THE SECOND QUESTION I HAD IS, WHAT? WE KIND OF TOUCHED ON THE DRAINAGE AREA.

I THINK LOOKING AT THE WESTWOOD ONE, WE WERE NOT.

WE'RE SPEAKING OF GRANDLY THE WEST SIDE OF THAT, BUT THE EAST PROPOSAL, WE ALREADY HAD SOME COMMENTS ABOUT PEOPLE, CONCERNED ABOUT THE DRAINAGE COMING OFF OF BERMUDA BEACH AND HOW WILL THAT BE TAKEN CARE OF AND MITIGATED? WELL, AGAIN, THIS IS STEP ONE.

STEP TWO IS TO COME IN AND SUBMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND THAT'S WHEN THAT WOULD BE TACKLED BY OUR CITY ENGINEERING DIVISION.

OKAY. ANY DRAINAGE ISSUES OKAY.

TO HAVE THAT APPROVED BEFORE FINAL PLAT WOULD BE APPROVED.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE A COUPLE.

IS THERE AN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT FOR.

I KNOW WE CHANGED THE ZONING ON THIS TO A TEN, CORRECT? YES. AND, TYPICALLY THE LDR DOES NOT GET INTO SPECIFICS, BUT FOR THE TN, DESIGNATION, IT DOES HAVE AN 8% OF THE TOTAL TRACT.

SO IN THIS CASE IT'S 70 ACRES.

SO THAT'S ABOUT 5.6 OR SO.

YEAH. AND THEY'VE GOT 0.8 MORE THAN THAT.

EXACTLY. AND THEY'RE EXCEEDING THAT OKAY.

SO THE RESTRICTION IS BECAUSE IT'S TN.

CORRECT. OKAY.

I NOTICED THAT IN RESERVE A IS AN UNRESTRICTED TRACK.

IS THAT WELL, I GUESS IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER IN THEIR OPEN SPACE STUFF.

SO THEY'RE? RIGHT.

IT DOESN'T AFFECT THEIR OPEN SPACE, REQUIREMENT.

THEY'RE ALREADY EXCEEDING EVEN WITHOUT RESERVE A OKAY.

AND THEN ACTUALLY I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS REALLY MORE FOR THE APPLICANT.

SO I'LL ASK SOME OF THESE OF HIM, BUT I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

ANY OTHER ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE A QUICK ONE.

KYLE BACK TO JOHN'S QUESTIONS ABOUT GOING INTO THE DCA.

SO WITHOUT I CAN'T LOOK I CAN'T TELL HOW DEEP THESE LOTS ARE.

SO WOULD THEY HAVE TO GO IN? AND YOU HAVE TO I CAN'T BELIEVE I CAN'T REMEMBER THIS, BUT WE HAVE THE 25 FOOT, YOU KNOW, LINE IN THE SAND.

DCA IS BEYOND THAT.

IS THAT CORRECT OR IS THAT WITHIN THE 25FT? YEAH. OUR DUNE CONSERVATION AREA.

YEAH. THAT'S OUR DUNE. THE 25 FOOT LINE IS WHAT WE CALL THE DUNE PROTECTION LINE.

PROTECTION LINE OKAY.

AND THE DUNE CONSERVATION AREA IS FROM THAT LINE SEAWARD I GOT YOU.

SO EVEN THOUGH HIS IN THEORY, THE BUILDING LINES COULD BE IN THE.

THIS IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO FOLLOW ON YOUR COMMENTS IS IF THE BUILDING LINE IS IN THAT TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, THE BUILDING LINE WOULD ACTUALLY END UP BEING BIGGER FOR THOSE GUYS TO STAY OUT OF THAT THOUGH, THEY COULD COME IN TO THE DCA, BUT THEY'RE NOT.

THEY'VE GOT APPARENTLY THEY HAVE PLENTY OF ROOM FOR WHERE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO GO INTO THE PROTECTION AREA.

[00:30:02]

WHAT'S THAT? MY QUESTION IS A LITTLE MORE SPECIFICALLY, I'M SORRY.

I'M CONCERNED THAT WE'RE NOT DOING LOTS AND I'M PRETTY SURE THIS IS NOT THE CASE, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT DOING LOTS THAT DON'T HAVE A DEPTH THAT IS ADEQUATE ENOUGH SO THAT WE HAVE APPLICANTS COME TO YOUR DEPARTMENT AND ASK TO HAVE THEIR HOUSE PUT IN THE PROTECTION AREA.

I UNDERSTAND THE DCA, WE DO THAT ALL THE TIME.

SO HOW AND I GUESS I COULD ASK THE APPLICANT THE DEPTH OF THE LOTS.

I MEAN, IF THE LOTS ARE 100FT DEEP, IT'S NOT LIKELY HE'S GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM.

I BELIEVE THERE ARE 120 ACTUALLY.

OKAY. AND THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION.

AND WHEN WE RECEIVE A BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE APPLICATION, WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THE DEPTHS OF THE LOTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

WE'RE LOOKING AT THE 25FT.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE WORKING WITH THE APPLICANTS ON OF, OKAY, THIS IS WHERE YOU'RE AT OR YOU'RE WITHIN THAT.

THE ONLY TIME THAT WE REALLY LOOK AT YOUR BUILDING, YOUR BUILDING LINES IS IF THEY ARE COMING FOR SOME TYPE OF AN EXEMPTION.

SO WE CAN COME IN FRONT OF YALL AND SAY THEY HAVE TO PUT IT HERE BECAUSE THEY'RE BUILDING LINE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE LOT OR THE WEST SIDE OF THE LOT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THIS IS WHY THEY HAVE TO BUILD HERE.

BUT WHEN WE GET AN APPLICATION IN.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THE BUILDING LINES.

WE'RE LOOKING AT NORTH TOE OF THE DUNE.

RIGHT. DUNE, YOU KNOW, THE 25 FOOT OFFSET, THE 75FT, WHICH KIND OF SETS UP WHAT Y'ALL'S JURISDICTION IS.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THE DEPTH OF THE LOT UNLESS WE GET INTO AN EXEMPTION SITUATION.

YEAH. AND IT BECOMES MORE OF A PROBLEM WHERE THEY HAVE LARGE BUILDING SETBACKS ON THE FRONT OF THE LOT.

THAT MAKES THEM PUSH THE HOUSE CLOSER TO THE BEACH.

SO IF THEY'RE 120FT, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT PROBLEM THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE'LL STAND.

NO. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:04.

IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? HI, BRUCE REINHARDT WITH KAHALA SERVICES.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF Y'ALL THAT WASN'T IN THE PACKET, BUT THIS IS THE WEBSITE.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO.

Y'ALL CAN PASS THIS AROUND, AND THAT'S WHAT IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

[INAUDIBLE] WHY DON'T YOU PUT A BIG STRAIN ON IT? OH, IT'S. I THOUGHT IT WAS ALL I THOUGHT IT WAS ALL THE SAME.

SORRY IT HAPPENED ALL THE TIME.

AND SO, BRUCE, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, NOT TO DO.

THESE GUYS ANSWER MY QUESTION, AND I KNOW THAT YOU WOULDN'T DO THAT.

I JUST HE BRINGS UP A COMMISSIONER LIGHTFOOT BROUGHT A VERY VALID POINT AND I JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.

BUT WE DO HAVE THOSE.

IF THERE ARE 120FT DEEP ON THE BEACHFRONT, WHAT ARE THEY OVER AT YOUR, BEACHSIDE VILLAGE? BEACHSIDE VILLAGE? VILLAGE.

WELL, THE THOSE END UP GOING OUT WAY INTO THE DUNE TOO, SO ABOUT 200.

SO THEY'RE MUCH LONGER, BUT THEY GO MUCH FURTHER OUT, HELD US BACK.

AND SO THEY GO.

THEY WENT OUT TO THE PROPERTY LINE THAT WAS PLATTED, THAT WAS THERE AT THE TIME.

SO THAT'S WHY THEY'RE DEEPER.

BUT THEY'RE NOT ALL USABLE, ONLY ABOUT 120FT.

IT'S PROBABLY USABLE.

OKAY. SO AND THIS IS I MEAN, YOU'VE HAD SOME GREAT SUCCESS WITH YOUR BEACHSIDE VILLAGE PROJECT.

AND WOULD IT BE A FAIR ASSESSMENT TO SAY THAT THIS IS KIND OF THOUGH IT'S NOT YOU'RE HELPING THESE GUYS AND YOU'RE VERY MUCH INVOLVED.

IT WOULD BE A FAIR ASSESSMENT, THIS TO SAY, KIND OF LIKE A BEACHSIDE VILLAGE 2.0.

I MEAN, IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY SIMILAR IN IT'S SIMILAR IN THE OPEN SPACE BECAUSE WE'RE FOLLOWING THE [INAUDIBLE] REGULATIONS.

BUT THAT IS WHAT THE EXTERIOR IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE IN THOSE RENDERINGS.

SO IT'S A DIFFERENT STYLE.

IT'S A MORE MODERNISTIC STYLE.

OKAY. I'VE SEEN IT A LOT IN WEST U, I'VE SEEN IN DIFFERENT AREAS.

I'VE SEEN THAT STYLE.

NOT MUCH OVERHANG.

AND YOU CAN SEE GLASS OR STAINLESS STEEL CABLES AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

SO IT'S A TOTAL DIFFERENT LOOK.

I GOT YOU THE CONCEPT.

LET'S SAY THE CONCEPT'S THE SAME, BUT THE DIFFERENT THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVESWILL BE OF A DIFFERENT STYLE OF ARCHITECTURE.

WE ARE PUTTING ALL OF THE AMENITIES THAT YOU SEE THERE.

THERE'S THREE BUILDINGS THAT ARE, IN THERE, AND THEN THERE'S ONE TO THE LEFT THERE.

AND THAT HAS BEEN CHANGED.

THAT'S GOING TO BE A RESTAURANT AND SO AND THE POOL AND THE PICKLEBALL COURTS ARE ALL BEING PUT IN AS WE, WHEN WE START CONSTRUCTION.

[00:35:05]

OKAY. I KNOW THAT THIS.

DONNA, MAKE SURE I DON'T WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M NOT GOING THE WRONG DIRECTION ON THIS, BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB WITH STR'S OVER IN, BEACHSIDE VILLAGE. SO I'M GOING TO ASK THE OBVIOUS QUESTION IS, AND MAYBE YOU'VE ANSWERED THIS BEFORE WHEN YOU CAME TO ASK FOR YOUR ZONING CHANGE, CAN YOU SHED A LITTLE LIGHT ON HOW YOU GUYS WOULD MANAGE STRS IN THIS COMMUNITY? THIS IS REALLY KIND OF, NO? OKAY. I KNEW YOU WERE GOING TO TELL ME THAT.

SO GOOD, I HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A BRAIN FOG, BUT NOW I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OKAY, YOU DON'T HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT.

AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO.

AND IT'S JUST IT'S, YOU KNOW, BRUCE, IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE POLITICAL HOT POTATOES THESE DAYS, AND I JUST.

I THREW THAT OUT THERE.

SO PUT OVERLAY.

YEAH, EVEN MORE SO, THE BEACH PARKING.

SO MY UNDERSTANDING THE WAY THAT THE BEACH PARKING WORKS HERE, IS THAT REALLY YOUR SUBDIVISION NOW HAS PROVIDED THE BEACH PARKING FOR THIS COMMUNITY IN AN ESSENCE IS THAT I MEAN, BECAUSE THERE IS NONE REQUIRED THAT WE'RE AWARE OF, RIGHT, IN THE COMMUNITY TODAY.

CORRECT. AT THIS MOMENT.

THERE, LITERALLY IS NONE REQUIRED BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ASKING.

IT'S ALREADY BEEN NEEDED AS AN AUTO, I'M SORRY, A PEDESTRIAN ONLY BEACH.

AND IT ALREADY IS THAT, NOW WHEN WE TAKE THIS UP TO.

PARDON ME.

NO. OH. I'M SORRY, WHEN WE TAKE THIS UP TO THE GLO FOR THEIR OFFICIAL COMMENTS, OF COURSE THEY WILL WEIGH IN.

SO WE HAVE TO BE COGNIZANT OF WHAT THEY SAY.

AND WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED THAT WORD YET.

RIGHT. OKAY.

OFFICIALLY, I CAN GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE OF, YOU KNOW, PARKING WHEN WE DID, SANS KAHALA SUBDIVISION, THE BEACH WAS CLOSED THEN AND THIS ISSUE WAS BROUGHT UP AND BABE SCHWARTZ WAS, MY ATTORNEY AT THE TIME, ALONG WITH STEVE SCHULTZ.

AND SINCE NO PARKING WAS REQUIRED, WE HELPED THE CITY OUT BY A FEE AND HELP THEM PROVIDE SIGNAGE FOR THE WHOLE WEST END.

SO THERE COULD BE SOMETHING LIKE THAT COULD COME BACK AS US PROVIDING SOME SIGNAGE OR SOMETHING TO HELP OTHER PARTS OF THE WEST END THAT DON'T HAVE IT.

AND THAT'S A GREAT SEGUE INTO MY NEXT COMMENT.

BECAUSE I CAN TELL YOU, I THINK REALLY THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN YOUR COMMUNITY NOW HAVE MITIGATED THE PARKING FOR THAT IN THEIR COMMUNITY.

THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO LOOK AT IT THAT WAY, AND I WOULD JUST ONLY MAKE THE.

I KNOW THAT YOU HAD MADE A COMMENT ABOUT WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY NEXT DOOR, AND THEN I'M, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY ALSO HAS SOME PROPERTY OVER THERE, AND I'M JUST THROWING A NUGGET OUT THERE THAT I WOULD HOPE YOU GUYS WOULD TRY.

AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THERES SOMETHING YOU CAN DO WITH THEM TO PROVIDE SOME MORE PARKING, BUT, I'M SORRY ON THE COUNTY LOT OR THE, ON THE COUNTY STUFF, YOU KNOW, AND I MEAN, YOU DON'T OWN IT.

I MEAN, HONESTLY, YOU'RE UNDER NO OBLIGATION.

THIS IS A FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT, BUT I'M JUST WE THE COUNTY HAS SOME PROPERTY THERE, AND I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAS CONTACTED THEM TO SAY, HEY, CAN WE DO SOMETHING TOGETHER TO DO SOME BEACH PARKING THERE? YOU'RE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO DO IT.

IT'S JUST SIMPLY A COMMENT.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT'S IN THE WORKS TO BE REBUILT.

OKAY. AND THAT'S PROBABLY THE REASON THIS IS A PEDESTRIAN ONLY BEACH IS BECAUSE THAT'S THEIR BIG PARK WAS THERE, SO IT COVERED IT.

AND I'M SURE IF YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT, YOU GUYS WOULD.

SO YEAH, I THANK YOU, BRUCE.

THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I'VE GOT A FEW YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF, BEACH ACCESS POINTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IS THAT WHERE THE WALKOVERS WILL BE BUILT? HOW MANY? 6 OR 7.

I HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PLAT REAL QUICK.

I THINK IT'S SIX. AND SUPPOSE WOULD BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE HOA.

YES, SIR. OKAY.

DO YOU ALLOW INDIVIDUAL LOT OWNERS TO DO THEIR OWN WALKOVERS? A PRIVATE WALKOVER? YOU KNOW, WE HAVE WE DO THAT IN BEACHSIDE VILLAGE ZERO.

ONCE THEY FIND OUT HOW MUCH IT COSTS, THEY DECIDE TO GO ON THE [INAUDIBLE].

YEAH. BECAUSE THEY BEACH THOSE DUNE WALKOVERS GET EXPENSIVE TO BUILD.

AND SO IT REALLY WORKS OUT BETTER.

AND THEY ALL MEET AT THE DUNE WALKOVER.

IT WORKS GOOD. BUT YES, IT WOULD BE ALLOWED IF THEY WANTED IT.

OKAY.

THERE ARE A COUPLE OF RESERVES THAT ARE BLOCKED OUT THAT JUST SHOWS, RESIDENTIAL RESERVE.

WHAT EXACTLY DOES THAT INVOLVE?

[00:40:02]

WELL, IN A T&D. A RESIDENTIAL RESERVE IS KIND OF COVERS A WHOLE LOT OF DIFFERENT STUFF.

IT INCLUDES IF THERE WAS TO BE, THERE'S A WHOLE LONG LIST OF THEM THAT CAN BE DONE.

IT COULD BE MORE SINGLE FAMILY.

IT COULD BE, DUPLEXES.

IT COULD BE DIFFERENT THINGS RELATED TO THE SERVICES OF A T&D.

SO A TOWNHOMES WOULD BE A POSSIBILITY FOR THE FUTURE.

YES. OKAY.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

BRUCE. I'M AVAILABLE IF ANYBODY.

CERTAINLY. THANK YOU.

CALL ME BACK.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT? THAT'S HERE ON THIS CASE? YES, MA'AM.

PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN.

HI THERE. I'M SUSAN STEP.

I'M ACTUALLY A HOMEOWNER IN BERMUDA BEACH.

AND SO I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR WHOMEVER.

AND THIS MAY NOT BE THE APPROPRIATE FORUM.

YES MA'AM. SO JUST KEEP IN MIND YOU CAN I GOT THREE WE CAN POINT YOU IN A DIRECTION, BUT IT'S NOT A Q&A.

THANK YOU.

SO I HEAR THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PEDESTRIAN ONLY BEACH AND NO REQUIREMENT FOR PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

SAME BEACH IN BERMUDA BEACH, BUT WE'RE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE STREET PARKING.

SO WHERE HOW DOES IT DIFFER? THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED FOR ANY.

AND HERE WE'RE HAVING TO WORRY WITH PARKING, YOU KNOW, ON OUR STREETS.

[INAUDIBLE].

OKAY, THAT'D BE GREAT.

I MEAN, JUST POINT ME IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

YES, MA'AM. AND THEN I ALSO HEARD ABOUT [INAUDIBLE] PARKING.

THE 121 SPOTS BEING PROVIDED IN SECTION THREE.

IS THERE NOT A REQUIREMENT THAT THE PARKING AT LEAST BE IN SOME CLOSE PROXIMITY TO WHEREVER THEY'RE PROVIDING IT? BECAUSE SECTION THREE IS PROBABLY FIVE BLOCKS AWAY? AND AGAIN, I CAN.

THAT'S PERFECT.

I JUST SOMEWHERE BECAUSE THERE.

YOU KNOW, YOU CAN ANSWER MY QUESTIONS AND I'M SURE, YOU KNOW BETWEEN TIM AND KYLE, THEY CAN CERTAINLY ANSWER SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.

I'M NOT QUALIFIED.

YEAH, WE DO HAVE THE WORST BEACH EROSION [INAUDIBLE].

MA'AM, IF YOU'D LIKE, YOU CAN COME FORWARD AND AND GIVE YOUR SIGN IN.

AND YOU CAN DO YOUR.

JUST REMEMBER, IT'S NOT A Q AND A.

WE'RE HAPPY TO HEAR YOUR COMMENTS.

AND WE'LL WE'LL GET SOME STAFF TO ANSWER SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

PERFECT. WE'LL GET IT FROM HERE.

YOU HAVE TO SIGN IN OKAY.

THE THING IS, IN SECTION THREE, STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE, MA'AM.

BARBARA STEPP. THANK YOU.

SECTION THREE HAS THE WORST BEACH EROSION.

IN FACT, IT'S BEEN COVERED WITH WATER IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS AND DEBRIS.

SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT ALL THE PARKING BEHIND SECTION THREE, THE PEOPLE WILL COME THROUGH US.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO WALK OVER TO SECTION ONE AND USE WHERE YOU'RE PUTTING IN THE CROSSOVERS.

THEY'RE GOING TO COME TO SECTION THREE, WHICH IS ALREADY THE WORST.

AND THE EXPANDED BEACH PARKING GOES FURTHER ON SECTION THREE THAN IT DOES IN SECTION TWO.

SO THE PARKING ALL BEHIND THE SECTION THREE IS NOT A FAIR THING FOR THIS PROPERTY PEOPLE TO DO.

UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU MA'AM.

ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE HERE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO COMMISSION FOR ACTION AT 4:14.

GO AHEAD. ANTHONY. OKAY.

SO I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE 23P-084 FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT.

AND BEFORE WE VOTE, CAN I MAKE A COMMENT? WE'LL HAVE SOME DISCUSSION.

SO WE GET THE MOTION WE'LL HAVE SOME DISCUSSION.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE.

DISCUSSION, MA'AM? AS PRESENTED.

THAT'S CORRECT MA'AM.

COMMISSIONER LIGHTFOOT, I THINK IT'S WORTH MENTIONING THAT, AT A PRIOR MEETING, OF THE COMMISSION, WE HAD A APPLICANT THAT, REQUESTED, THEY HAD A DEAD END DESIGN ON THEIR PLAT.

AND, THIS IS THIS SITUATION HERE IS A LOT DIFFERENT.

IN MY OPINION. IT'S MINIMAL BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT A CORNER THAT IS ONLY ABOUT 200FT AWAY.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE NOTE OF THAT, THAT I SEE THIS AS A VAST DIFFERENCE, IN NOT HAVING THE CUL DE SAC I DON'T SEE AS AN ISSUE IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION. AND I WOULD AGREE THERE'S CIRCULATION WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

SO I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ALSO THAT WAS A PUD AND THIS IS A PLAT.

[00:45:02]

SO YES MA'AM.

THAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE ALSO.

YEAH. OKAY.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE'LL TAKE THE VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

SO 23P-084 IS APPROVED.

[5. 23ZA-005 Request for a text amendment to the Galveston Land Development Regulations, for new and unlisted land uses of “Airplane Hanger” and “Charging Station” and Article 2, Uses and Supplemental Standards to modify requirements for Permanent Commercial Uses. Applicant: Development Services Department]

AND MOVING ON TO OUR TEXT AMENDMENT 23ZA-005.

THIS IS RELATED TO A PREVIOUS TEXT AMENDMENT WHICH WAS 23ZA-004.

DURING DISCUSSIONS ON THAT CASE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTED STAFF TO RESEARCH THE ADDITION OF AIRPLANE HANGAR AND CHARGING STATION AS NEW LAND USES AND TO MAKE ADDITIONAL CHANGES FOR REQUIREMENTS OF PERMANENT COMMERCIAL USES.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE.

WE HAVE ADDED AIRPLANE HANGAR AND CHARGING STATION AS NEW AND UNLISTED LAND USES, INCLUDING THE ADDITION OF DEFINITIONS, INCLUSION IN THE LAND USE TABLE, AND NEW LIMITED STANDARDS FOR CHARGING STATION.

WE'VE ADDED AIRPLANE HANGAR, PARKING STRUCTURE OR LOT INCIDENTAL TO MAIN USE AND PARKING STRUCTURE.

MIXED USE AS USE IS EXEMPTED FROM PROVIDING A RESTROOM FACILITY AND ADDED CHARGING STATION AS A USE, EXEMPT FROM PROVIDING A PERMANENT BUILDING AND A RESTROOM FACILITY. IN ADDITION TO THOSE ITEMS, WE ARE RECOMMENDING A COUPLE OTHER CHANGES TO MODIFY THE AUTO SERVICE FUELING OR CHARGING STATION LAND USE TO REMOVE THE CHARGING COMPONENT, WHICH WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE NEW LAND USE OF ELECTRICAL VEHICLE CHARGING STATION, AND THEN A CLEAN UP WITHIN THE LIMITED STANDARDS OF AUTO SERVICE FUELING OR CHARGING STATION. THAT CONTRADICTS ANOTHER LIMITED STANDARD AND THE CHANGES ARE LISTED FOR YOU ON THE SCREEN.

STAFF'S RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

ALL RIGHT.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE A QUICK ONE.

HAVE WE HEARD IS I DON'T SEE MR. GARDNER HERE.

HAVE WE HAD ANY COMMENTS FROM HIM ON THIS? OR MAYBE I SHOULD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SO.

WELL, IT'S A STAFF QUESTION.

I DIDN'T REACH OUT SPECIFICALLY TO MR. GAERTNER, HE I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY.

OKAY. JUST WONDERED.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. IF NOT, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS CASE AT 417.

DOES ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ON THIS ITEM.

SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 316 AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR ACTION.

YES. LADIES FIRST.

GO AHEAD. REJONE.

I RECOMMEND WE PASS 23ZA-005 AS I'LL SECOND.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO APPROVE.

23ZA-005 AS PRESENTED.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, WE'LL TAKE THE VOTE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

SO WE HAVE THE APPROVAL OF 23ZA-005.

AND THAT WILL BE HEARD BY CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY THE 25TH.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO WE HAVE A DISCUSSION ITEM.

[6. Discussion Items]

AND I'D HAD THIS PUT ON OUR AGENDA ABOUT, OUR PUDS AND WHAT I, WHAT I'M REALLY WANTING TO DISCUSS WITH YOU GUYS IS, THAT, AS AND I'D JUST LIKE TO BUILD SOME HAVE SOME CONSENSUS IS WHEN WE SEE THESE THESE, YOU GOT TO KEEP IN MIND THAT PUDS ARE A TOOL IN THE TOOLBOX.

SOMETIMES THEY NEED A SCREWDRIVER, AND THE PUDS IS A SLEDGEHAMMER.

BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME TOOL IN OUR PLANNING THAT ALLOWS PROPERTY OWNERS TO COME AND REQUEST A VARIANCE OR A DEVIATION.

SO THAT'S WHY I THINK WE SEE A LOT OF THESE WHERE IT'S WHY IS THAT A PUD, AT LEAST FOR ME.

THE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO DISCUSS WITH YOU GUYS IS THAT AS WE SEE THESE, OUR WE ARE TASKED WITH PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL.

SO WHAT I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE US DO MOVING FORWARD IS, YOU KNOW, THE VOTE UP OR DOWN IS A CONSENSUS VOTE.

BUT I THINK THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE SEND THESE TO COUNCIL, WHETHER WE APPROVE THEM OR NOT, WITH OUR RECOMMENDATIONS.

AND I THINK THE MORE SPECIFIC WE CAN BE WITH THOSE, I THINK THAT WOULD HELP OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS BECAUSE, REMEMBER, EVEN THOUGH WE VOTE UP ON IT, THAT DOESN'T MEAN WHEN IT GETS TO THEM THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THE SAME ACTION.

SO I THINK IF WE WOULD SEND THESE TO COUNCIL AND MAKE AN EFFORT TO HAVE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS, GO WITH THEM. AND I'M JUST GOING TO USE AN EXAMPLE.

YOU KNOW, WE HAD THE MARGARITAVILLE PUD AND ONE OF THE COMMENTS WAS DRAINAGE.

WELL, IF WE COULD DISAPPROVE IT.

[00:50:04]

BUT I THINK OUR WHAT WE I'D LIKE TO SEE US DO IS IF WE MAKE AN APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL, HAVE A RECOMMENDATION THAT, YOU KNOW, THE DRAINAGE PLAN BE REVIEWED AND STUDIED OR A TRAFFIC LIGHT INSTALLED.

I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S A PROBLEM.

AND YOU GUYS COACH ME A LITTLE BIT OF THIS.

IF WE'RE SPECIFIC WITH THIS STUFF, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT.

BUT YOU GOT TO REMEMBER AND YOU HELP ME OUT HERE TOO, JOHN.

THESE GUYS ARE SEEING THESE CASES.

WE ONLY SEE THEM FOR A DAY OR TWO BEFORE WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION.

BUT I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE ARE HERE TO ASSIMILATE THAT STUFF, TAKE THE PUBLIC'S COMMENT AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

WHAT COUNCIL DOES WITH THAT IS COUNCIL'S BUSINESS.

OUR JOB IS TO KIND OF DO A LITTLE BIT OF THE HEAVY LIFTING, AND I ONLY PUT THIS ON HERE BECAUSE I'M WOULD LIKE TO SEE US INCLUDE SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THESE WHEN WE HAVE THEM AND WE'LL DISCUSS THEM.

I THINK THEY NEED TO BE ITEMS THAT JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, WE COULD HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND WE COULD HAVE DISCUSSION AND THINK, HEY, WE SHOULD HAVE THIS. AND I THINK THAT WE COULD HAVE THAT ADDED AS AN AMENDED ITEM.

AND WE DISCUSSED IT SO THAT IT'S NOT JUST SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY THINKS IS A GOOD IDEA AND WE TACK ON THERE, BUT THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE A CONSENSUS WITH.

AND I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD HELP OUR FRIENDS OVER AT CITY COUNCIL.

JOHN, IS THIS A GOOD DIRECTION FOR YOU? ABSOLUTELY. OKAY.

SO I JUST WANT TO GET SOME FEEL FROM YOU GUYS AS TO, IF ALL THIS MAKES SENSE TO YOU MOVING FORWARD WITH THESE PUD APPLICATIONS.

ALSO REMEMBER, THEY'RE ASKING FOR STUFF.

THERE'S NO REASON FOR US TO ASK FOR SOMETHING BACK, AND WE CAN PUT THOSE AS RECOMMENDATIONS.

BUT THEY'RE SIMPLY THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR DUTY STOPS STOPS THERE.

SO ANY COMMENTS FROM YOU GUYS ON ON ANY OF THIS I'LL JUMP IN.

I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA.

ESPECIALLY WITH SPECIFIC SOME SPECIFICS TO IT BECAUSE THEN IT TAILORS IT A LITTLE BIT MORE.

IS THERE I KNOW THERE'S NOT A TIME FRAME TO OUR MEETINGS BY ANY MEANS.

BUT WILL THAT IS THAT SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO FIT WITHIN OUR.

BECAUSE THE PUDS THAT WE'VE SEEN, I MEAN THERE ARE SOME WHERE IT'S A COUPLE DIFFERENT ITEMS. BUT THEN THERE ARE SOME WHERE IT'S A PRETTY LENGTHY, DEVIATION REQUEST.

IN ORDER TO GO THROUGH THE MAJORITY OF THOSE, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT FOR LARGER PUDS THAT MAYBE WE LOOK AT IN A WORKSHOP OR IS THAT SO WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHT.

HERE'S MY THOUGHTS ON THIS.

AND DONNA, THIS IS A DONNA QUESTION.

MOST OF THESE CASES, THESE PUD CASES, THEY COME TO US AND IT WE USUALLY WILL HAVE ANOTHER MEETING BEFORE THEY GO TO CITY COUNCIL.

NOT ALWAYS, BUT TYPICALLY THEY DO.

WHAT WOULD BE BECAUSE I'M GOING TO TELL YOU SOME OF THE BIGGER CASES AFTER I SLEEP ON THEM THE NEXT DAY, I'M LIKE, WELL, YOU KNOW, MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE DONE X. WHAT WOULD BE, WOULD IT BE FEASIBLE FOR US TO HAVE THEM JUST MERELY AS A DISCUSSION ITEM ON ANOTHER ON THE NEXT MEETING, JUST TO SAY, HEY, IS THERE ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FOR THIS SPECIFIC PUD FOR RECOMMENDATION AND IT'S FOR RECOMMENDATION ONLY.

I'M NOT LOOKING TO OPEN THE CAN BACK UP AGAIN.

BUT WHEREAS IF SOMEBODY SLEPT ON IT FOR, YOU KNOW, A NIGHT OR TWO AND THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COMES BACK AND IT WARRANTS A RECOMMENDATION WHEN WE SEND IT TO COUNCIL, DO YOU GUYS THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE? [INAUDIBLE], SO I'M GOING TO MENTION A COUPLE OF THINGS.

OKAY. I HEAR A LOT OF WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT CITY COUNCIL IS AWARE OF THE WISHES OF PLANNING COMMISSION IN MORE DETAIL THAT I BELIEVE NEEDS TO BE DONE AT THE MEETING WHERE THE CASE IS BEING DISCUSSED.

AND THE REASON WHY I SAY THAT IS REMEMBER YOU, THIS IS, A PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD, AND THERE ARE RULES THAT GOVERN BOARDS. WHEN THERE IS A SPECIFIC CASE ON AN AGENDA, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DISCUSS IT AMONGST EACH OTHER BEFORE THE MEETING.

AND IN GENERAL, AFTER A MEETING, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DISCUSS IT WITH EACH OTHER, ESPECIALLY IF IT GOES TO CITY COUNCIL.

[00:55:03]

WE STILL DON'T WANT TO, ENGAGE IN THE WALKING QUORUM TYPE OF DISCUSSIONS THAT MAY BE OCCURRING.

WE HAVE BEEN TO MEETINGS WHERE THEY'RE VERY SHORT AND WHERE THEY'RE VERY LONG.

I THINK THAT WITH THE APP, WITH THE STAFF REPORTS GOING OUT IN ADVANCE, THAT IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT KIND OF HITS THE COMMISSIONER THAT THEY WANT TO REALLY DISCUSS ON THAT THEY NEED TO LET STAFF KNOW AND THEN SAY, WELL, THIS WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS POSED TO CATHERINE OR WHOEVER IT IS THAT'S HANDLING THAT.

CAN BE BROUGHT UP ON THE STAFF REPORT IN THE MEETING, ETC.

IN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OR IN OUR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.

OKAY. UNDERSTOOD.

AND THERE IS OPPORTUNITY IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WANTS TO INFORM CITY COUNCIL OF MORE SPECIFICITY AS TO WHAT OCCURRED AT A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, THE CHAIRPERSON CAN DO THAT.

OR IF THE CHAIRPERSON IS NOT AVAILABLE TO SPEAK AT A CITY COUNCIL MEETING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN NOMINATE OR ASK SOMEBODY TO DO THAT AND SAY, THIS IS THE PERSON WHO'S GOING TO BE REPRESENTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

YOU ALWAYS HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY AS WELL, TO SPEAK AGAIN IN PERSON TO PLANNING COMMISSION OR SEND THE COMMENTS IN THE CITY COUNCIL.

THEY ALWAYS READ ALL THE COMMENTS THAT ARE RECEIVED, I'M SURE.

BUT PART OF WHAT I HEARD AND HOPEFULLY I DIDN'T MISS SOME OF THIS, WAS WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES A RECOMMENDATION.

TYPICALLY IT'S IN LINE WITH THE STAFF REPORT AND STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

IN THAT REPORT, PLANNING COMMISSION CAN PUT ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS, TYPICALLY ON THE ITEM AND WHEN THE STAFF REPORT IS PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL.

THERE'S TYPICALLY LANGUAGE THAT SAYS PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIFICALLY RECOMMENDS ADDING THIS AS A CONDITION.

SO DON'T SLEEP ON THE FACT THAT YOU CAN ADD THINGS OR REMOVE THINGS, OR MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON WHATEVER, AND HAVE THAT PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL AS WELL.

I JUST HAVE AN ISSUE WITH TRYING TO BRING A CASE THAT'S EITHER NOT HEARD YET.

OR, THAT MEANS WE CAN'T WORKSHOP A SPECIFIC CASE.

YOU CAN'T WORKSHOP IT BEFORE IT'S BEING PRESENTED AND THEN AFTER IT'S BEING HEARD, TALKING ABOUT IT AFTER THE FACT, THAT'S WHERE KIND OF AND I UNDERSTAND AND I'M WITH YOU ON THAT, SO I GET THAT.

SO THAT WOULD MAKE MY QUESTION CLEARLY A NO, AND I UNDERSTAND WHY BECAUSE IT WOULD BE DISCUSSION OUTSIDE OF THE, I GET IT. SO WE DO HAVE PLENTY OF OPPORTUNITIES.

SO COMING BACK TO COMMISSION WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK ABOUT THIS.

YOU KNOW AND ON OCCASION WE DO HAVE SOME BIGGER CASES.

AND YES SIR.

WELL I KIND OF WANTED TO DO THE THING ABOUT MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS THAT TO ME IS A VERY YOU'VE JUST MADE A VERY BROAD STATEMENT.

I CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS.

THEY HAVE TO PUT AN AMERICAN FLAG UP.

I CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS.

THEY HAVE TO HAVE CARPORTS.

WHAT IS THE LIMITATIONS? AND SHOULDN'T THERE NOT BE LIMITATIONS ON HOW YOU TRY TO TELL SOMEBODY HOW TO DEVELOP? BOARD MEMBERS IS ONE.

YEAH. YOU WILL HAVE A MAJORITY VOTE.

YEAH. AND SO WHATEVER IT IS YOU PUT IN AS CONDITIONS, AND I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH DONNA THAT YOU SHOULD DO THAT AT THE MEETING.

I MEAN, TAKE AS MUCH TIME AS YOU NEED AT THAT MEETING.

IT'S CRITICAL THAT YOU DO THAT YOU GUYS HAVE STAYED HERE LATE BEFORE.

YOU'RE NOT UNFAMILIAR WITH THAT? SO THAT'S THE FORUM AND THE TIME FOR IT.

AND THEN AS TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU CAN GET AS SPECIFIC AS YOU WANT.

I MEAN, THE PUD DOESN'T HAVE A WHOLE HECK OF A LOT OF PARAMETERS FOR THE APPLICANT, BUT IT ALSO DOESN'T HAVE A WHOLE HECK OF A LOT OF PARAMETERS FOR YOU.

I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THERE HAS TO BE A KIND OF A RATIONAL NEXUS.

THAT'S WHAT I'M KIND OF CONCERNED WITH.

YOU KNOW, I USE THE RECOMMENDATIONS I DID.

IT'S LIKE, WELL, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE, WE START GOING INTO YOU COULD MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WOULD MAKE IT COST PROHIBITIVE FOR THE PERSON TO ACTUALLY PERFORM AND DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THEIR PROPERTY.

YOU GOT TO REMEMBER STAN, IT GOES.

OUR RECOMMENDATION GOES TO CITY COUNCIL.

SO IT'S GOING TO GET THAT.

I THINK THAT'S WHERE THAT COMES TO AN END.

AND I WOULD ALSO I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT FOR US AS A COMMISSION TO HAVE CONSENSUS ON THESE RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO IF YOU THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE FIVE FLAGPOLES AND REJONE THINKS THERE NEEDS TO BE TEN, YOU KNOW, MAYBE OUR DISCUSSION AS WE DO SEVEN.

[01:00:05]

SO I DO THINK THAT THESE ARE ITEMS THAT WE DO NEED TO TRY AND DISCUSS.

I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO SEND RECOMMENDATIONS IN LIEU OF JUST AN UP OR DOWN VOTE, BECAUSE THAT DOESN'T THAT JUST SAYS COLLECTIVELY WE DON'T LIKE IT DOESN'T GIVE ANY REASON.

AND WHEN IT GETS TO CITY COUNCIL, THEY'RE STARTING FROM GROUND ZERO.

THEY'RE STARTING FROM WHERE WE STARTED.

SO THIS IS JUST HOW I SEE IT.

AND I'M NOT TRYING TO REINVENT THE WHEEL BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION.

AND I WOULD ON YOUR COMMENT, IF WE DO HAVE SOME LARGER ONES, WHICH WE HAVE HAD, IF THERE IS CONSENSUS THAT, HEY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE COMMISSION SHOULD PROBABLY GO AND MAKE SURE THAT OUR WHAT WE SEE AND WHAT WE HEARD IS REPEATED. REMEMBER, THE SAME PEOPLE THAT SHOWED UP HERE ARE SHOWING UP AT THEIR MEETING TOO.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO HEAR A LOT OF THE SAME THING.

BUT I THINK THATS JUST A DIRECTION I WOULD LIKE TO GO.

AND IF WE HAVE A DEAL, WE'D LIKE TO DO THAT.

I THINK THAT'D BE GREAT. YES, SIR.

SO LET ME ASK, THIS IS MORE DIRECTED TOWARDS STAFF.

SO LET ME BACK UP HERE A LITTLE BIT.

SO THE SHORT TIME THAT I'VE BEEN ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, 2 OR 3 PUDS HAVE COME UP WITH ALL THESE REQUESTS FOR DEVIATIONS FROM THE LDR, THE APPLICANTS, TO MY RECOLLECTION, HAVE STATED THAT THEY WERE GUIDED BY STAFF TO USE A PUD WHEN A COUPLE OF TIMES I, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, THEY COULD DO WHAT THEY WANTED WITH THE EXISTING LDR, AM I.

IS THAT YES? NO? AM I READING THAT WRONG? CAN I? I'M JUST TRYING TO REMEMBER BECAUSE THIS COMES UP A LOT.

LOOK, AND I'M GOING TO USE THE LAST CASE, WHEN THOSE APPLICANTS COME TO STAFF'S JOB IN MY OPINION, IS TO GUIDE THEM THROUGH THE LDR'S AND THROUGH THE RULES TO HAVE SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN HAVE APPROVED.

I GET THAT. SOME.

YOU'VE NEVER HAD AN APPLICANT COME AND NOT LISTEN TO WHAT YOU TELL THEM, ADRIEL.

HAVE YOU? NO COMMENT OF THAT.

ALL RIGHT. I'M JUST BRINGING THIS UP BECAUSE IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, A COUPLE OF APPLICANTS HAVE STATED THAT.

NOW, WHETHER. AND I DON'T KNOW, BUT BEAR IN MIND ABOUT THAT, THAT'S A MEETING THAT THESE FOLKS ARE GETTING GUIDANCE.

OKAY. THEY'RE COMING AND REQUESTING GUIDANCE FROM STAFF.

AND REALLY, IT'S NOT OUR POSITION TO SAY, HERE'S WHAT YOU SHOULD DO, RIGHT? OUR POSITION IS TO SAY, HERE'S WHAT THE LAW ALLOWS YOU TO DO IF YOU WANT TO, YOU KNOW, TAKE IT DOWN THIS PATH OR THAT PATH.

WE GIVE THEM THE OPTIONS.

THEY END UP CHOOSING WHAT THEY'RE ALLOWED.

AND THEN, OF COURSE, THE A COUPLE OF TIMES.

RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY.

BUT THE COMMENT ALWAYS COMES BACK TO, YOU KNOW, IT APPEARS THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDED IT.

THE STAFF RECOMMENDS BASICALLY ANY FORM OF COMPLIANCE TO GET TO A POINT, YOU KNOW, FROM POINT A TO POINT B.

I SHOULDN'T SAY ANY, BUT ANY REASONABLE, MEANS OF, YOU KNOW, COMPLIANCE OR COMPLIANCE IN LIEU OF WITH ADDITIONAL, YOU KNOW, MITIGATION, MITIGATING FACTORS OR WHAT HAVE YOU.

BUT WE GIVE THE SORT OF THE REALM OF POSSIBILITY, AS TO WHAT THEIR OPTIONS ARE AND THEN THEY SELECT THEM.

YEAH. AND I'LL JUST ALSO NOTE THAT A PUD IS ONLY REQUIRED IF YOU NEED DEVIATIONS FROM WHAT'S ALLOWED IN YOUR ZONING DISTRICT.

SO THERE ARE TWO REASONS TO GET A PUD THAT YOU HAVE.

YOU'RE REQUESTING DEVIATIONS OR YOU WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A PRIVATE STREET OKAY.

SO THEN OKAY I GET THAT.

THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS ABOUT THE SHORT TURNAROUND TIME WHEN WE GET THESE DOCUMENTS VIA EMAIL TO OUR MEETING, IT'S, THREE DAYS, RIGHT? IS THERE CAN WE GET IT? USUALLY WE SEND IT OUT ON FRIDAY I BELIEVE FRIDAY MORNING, BUT IT'S STILL SHORT.

IT'S STILL SHORT FROM FRIDAY TO TODAY WE REALLY STRIVE TO WEDNESDAY AND THURSDAY IS PROBABLY PRETTY TYPICAL AND FRIDAY IS THE CUT OFF TIME.

YEAH. OKAY. IS IT POSSIBLE TO GET THOSE A LITTLE BIT EARLIER.

WELL WHEN WE DO THAT THOUGH THERE'S AN UPSTREAM EFFECT TO THE APPLICANT'S SUBMITTAL BECAUSE THEN, YOU KNOW, STAFF NEEDS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME TO REVIEW AND ADEQUATELY COMMENT AND GENERATE THE REPORTS AND IF YOU BACK IT UP TOO TERRIBLY FAR, THEN WE'RE ASKING FOR THE INFORMATION.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAVING TO MOVE THOSE DEADLINES BACK AS WELL OR FORWARD.

HOWEVER, YOU'D HAVE TO MOVE THOSE DEADLINES, YOU KNOW, TO AN EARLIER DATE FOR THE APPLICANT.

AND THEN THAT CAN SOMETIMES CAUSE PROBLEMS. THIS IS REALLY OUR THOUGHT AND WHAT BEST WORKS.

AND, PLEASE DON'T HESITATE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ON WHAT YOU MIGHT SEE FROM US TO GIVE US A CALL IN

[01:05:02]

ADVANCE OF THE MEETING, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.

WE CAN CERTAINLY TALK YOU THROUGH ANY OF THESE THINGS.

OKAY? YES, MA'AM.

IN THE PAST, WE HAVE ADDED THINGS TO THE PUD, LIKE, YOU KNOW, LIKE, I THINK ONE.

WE HAD SOMEONE HERE NOT THAT LONG AGO TO TALK ABOUT.

WE WANTED A FENCE LINE.

WE PUT A FENCE LINE, AND THEN THE GUY CAME BACK AND SAID, WELL, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULDN'T WORK WITH ME.

SO WE HAVE IN THE PAST ADDED SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO THE PUD.

SO IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T THINK WE DON'T KNOW WE CAN DO IT.

I THINK A LOT OF TIMES IT'S JUST SO EXPANSIVE THAT WE'RE WE GET LOST IN THE MINUTIA OF ALL THE THINGS THAT A PUD IS REQUESTING, YOU KNOW? AND THEN WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT WE PROBABLY DON'T GET OUT WHAT WE WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, AT THE END.

BUT IF WE I THINK PART OF IT IS, IS I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE THE PUDS EARLIER.

MAYBE WE REORDER THE WAY WE DO THE, YOU KNOW, THE AGENDA.

BECAUSE IF WE REORDER HOW WE DO THE AGENDA, THEN WE CAN TAKE THE TIME WE NEED FOR THE PUDS AT THE BEGINNING.

THAT WAY WE'RE NOT RUSHED, YOU KNOW, THINKING, OH MY GOD, EVERYBODY'S LOOKING AT THE CLOCK.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT DOING THAT.

YOU KNOW WE'RE GIVING IT ALL.

IT'S JUST TIME.

AND ANY QUESTIONS THAT ANYONE HAS DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME CAN BE ANSWERED.

SO MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD DO THAT WOULD GIVE US A BETTER WE'D BE BETTER SERVE OUR CONSTITUENTS THAT WAY.

I THINK THAT'S AN EASY FIX AND ANTHONY, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I THOUGHT OF WHAT YOU MENTIONED.

THE DEAL IS THE PROCESS HAS TO START SOMEWHERE.

AND AT SOME TIME AND AGAIN, REMEMBER WE'RE NOT MAKING THE FINAL DECISION ON THIS.

WE'RE COLLECTING ALL OF THE INFORMATION THAT WE CAN AND SENDING IT WITH A RECOMMENDATION.

YEAH, I'M WITH YOU.

I COULD USE A WEEK.

I COULD USE TWO WEEKS.

BUT THE PROCESS HAS TO START SOMEWHERE.

AND IT STARTS WITH US.

AND YOU GOT TO REMEMBER, IT COMES HERE.

AND THEN USUALLY IT'S ALMOST A MONTH BEFORE CITY COUNCIL GETS IT.

SO THAT'S USUALLY WHEN THE BALL GETS ROLLING IF THERE'S A BALL TO ROLL.

SO I'M WITH YOU.

I CAN MAKE TWO COMMENTS.

YES, MA'AM.

WITH THE AGENDA, THE CHAIRMAN HAS THE ABILITY TO SHIFT THE AGENDA AROUND.

AND I WOULD, YOU KNOW, WORK WITH STAFF TO SEE IF THERE'S SOME THINGS THAT CAN DEFINITELY GO IN THE BACK END OF AN AGENDA IN THE NORMAL COURSE.

SOME PUD'S WILL GENERATE A LOT OF FOLKS COMING IN AND SOME PUD'S SIMPLY WILL NOT.

AND SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO READ THE ROOM, SO TO SPEAK, BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT SOMEONE WHO HAS PRESENTED AND WANTS TO PRESENT THEIR LANDMARK COMMISSION CASE.

SITTING HERE AS 30 PEOPLE ARE EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THE PUD.

THEY WANT TO BE HEARD TOO, RIGHT? NOT NECESSARILY AT 6:30 AT NIGHT WHEN IT'S REALLY A FIVE MINUTE, INTERACTION FOR THEM FOR THE MOST PART.

SO I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO READ THE ROOM.

STAFF IS WILLING TO STAY IF THERE'S NO OTHER FOLKS FOR THEIR CASES.

SO IF YOU WANT TO SAY, WELL, IT'S ONLY KYLE.

KYLE, YOU GET TO STAY HERE BY YOURSELF.

I'M HERE. I MEAN, JUST READ THE ROOM.

THE OTHER NOTE THAT I MADE WAS REGARDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL, AND YOU SAID JUST THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR, I THINK YOU SAID FOR APPROVAL, IF YOUR RECOMMENDED.

NO, YOU MEANT ALL RECOMMENDATIONS.

YES, MA'AM. EXCELLENT.

BECAUSE WHAT I WROTE WAS EVEN THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DENIAL.

YOU SHOULD HAVE THEY SHOULD HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THEM I AGREE.

THAT'S ANOTHER WAY TO COMMUNICATE TO CITY COUNCIL.

BUT WHY DID PLANNING COMMISSION? PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND DENIAL IN THIS CASE.

YEAH. AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU KNOW ANOTHER THING THAT YOU CAN JUST ADD.

AND IT COULD ALSO HAVE A DENIAL WITH A RECOMMENDATION AND THE RECOMMEND.

IF THE RECOMMENDATION WAS DONE, WE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE MADE IT AN APPROVAL.

I MEAN, WHO KNOWS. BUT I DO THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT, IS THAT NO MATTER WHAT THEY ARE, THEY NEED TO GO UP WITH SOME RECOMMENDATIONS.

SO IF WE DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT, SHOULD WE, MAYBE BE A LITTLE BIT MORE STRUCTURED IN LOOKING AT EACH INDIVIDUAL WAIVER THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING IN THE PUD? IN OTHER WORDS, JUST LET'S GO DOWN THE LIST AND AND DISCUSS EACH ONE AMONGST US TO GET A YAY OR NAY ON THAT, BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF WHAT IN ESSENCE, IF WE SEND A RECOMMENDATION TO THEM, WE NEED TO BE HAVE A CONSENSUS ON EACH INDIVIDUAL RECOMMENDATION.

TRUE. I THINK THAT WOULD JUST KIND OF BE THE NATURAL FIT.

AND THEN THERE ALSO MAY BE SOME.

REMEMBER, STAN, WE CAN ALSO HAVE OTHER THINGS THAT WE SAY.

SOMEBODY SAYS, HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY SHOULD HAVE A CAT PARK WITH THE DOG PARK.

YOU KNOW, I'M JUST BEING FACETIOUS, BUT SAME THING.

SO WE CAN DO THAT.

YEAH. KIND OF CHRONOLOGICALLY GO THROUGH THE, YES.

WAIVERS ARE REQUESTING AND THEN MAYBE HAVE A POINT WHERE WE CAN SAY, OKAY, ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT.

[01:10:07]

YES, SIR. OKAY.

COUNCILMEMBER LISTOWSKI, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT SIMPLY THAT IF SOMEONE WERE TO REVIEW THIS CASE, THAT THEY COULD NOT SAY THAT THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS.

THAT'S WHAT IT COMES DOWN FROM LEGAL STANDPOINT.

YOU HAVE PROPERLY REVIEWED IT.

AND IF YOU MAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS, YAY OR NAY AND YOU GIVE THE REASONS BEHIND THAT RECOMMENDATION, THEN WHATEVER IT MAY BE, THAT KIND OF QUASHES THAT, YES, IT DOES IN COURT.

OKAY. UNDERSTOOD.

COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI.

YES, SIR. I WOULD ECHO THAT, AND SAY THAT TRY TO STAY CONSISTENT ON THESE PUDS.

YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WE'VE SEEN ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT PUDS AND I WOULD SAY THEY ARE NOT CONSISTENT.

AND WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO THE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE ON THEM, FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS COUNCIL DEFINITELY WOULD LIKE RECOMMENDATIONS, WHETHER YOU DENY IT OR APPROVE IT.

I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY PUDS HAVE BEEN DENIED HERE AND THEN GOT APPROVED AT COUNCIL.

AND SO ANY MORE INSIGHT THAT YOU CAN GIVE COUNCIL WILL DEFINITELY HELP YOU KNOW, YOU MENTIONED ABOUT A WORKSHOP AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO DEFER THESE CASES IF YOU DO NEED MORE INFORMATION.

BUT I WOULD SAY LOOK AT THE TIMELINE.

AND IF YOU DO HAVE ANOTHER MEETING IN BETWEEN WHEN IT GOES TO COUNCIL, THAT MIGHT BE A TIME WHEN YOU COULD DEFER IT AND NOT SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS.

SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE INFORMATION, THAT'S A GOOD IDEA TO MAKE A CASE, TO MAKE A DECISION, THEN CHECK OUT THAT TIMELINE.

IF IT DOESN'T SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS, THAT MIGHT BE AN OPTION THAT YOU DEFER.

IT COMES BACK TO YOU WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, AND THEN YOU CAN MAKE A BETTER DECISION TO SEND TO COUNCIL.

YOU KNOW, THESE PUDS SEEM LIKE THEY'RE GETTING A KIND OF BAD RAP.

JUST WHEN PEOPLE SAY PUD IT REMINDS ME OF WHAT WE USED TO HAVE.

[INAUDIBLE] THOSE WERE WORSE.

PEOPLE, LIKE, HATED SUP AT THE END OF THE AT THE TIME PERIOD WHEN WE HAD THOSE.

AND SO IT THE PUD IS BECOMING.

LIKE THE SUP.

IT SEEMS LIKE AND IT'S BECAUSE THERE ARE INCONSISTENCIES IN THIS PROCESS.

I MEAN THE DECISIONS ARE A LITTLE BIT ALL OVER THE BOARD.

YOU KNOW WE'VE SEEN SMALL LOTS GET APPROVED.

WE'VE SEEN SMALL LOTS GET DENIED.

WE'VE SEEN, YOU KNOW, ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT THINGS GO BOTH WAYS.

SO JUST TRY TO STAY CONSISTENT.

YOU KNOW, AND REMEMBER THAT THE PUD IS BASICALLY A ZONING CHANGE.

YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE PUD'S GET PUSHED OR SOME OF THESE CASES GET PUSHED IN THE PUD DIRECTION BECAUSE AN OUTRIGHT ZONING CHANGE WOULD GRANT THEM THE ABILITY TO DO WHAT THEY NEEDED TO DO.

BUT YOU DON'T WANT TO OPEN UP THAT DOOR FOR A FULL BLOWN ZONING CHANGE AND NOT KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON THE PROPERTY.

WITH THE DEVELOPMENT WITH THE PUD, YOU'RE ABLE TO SEE THE DEVELOPMENT UP FRONT.

YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO GO THERE, YOU'RE ABLE TO CONDITION IT.

AND I THINK THE CITY GETS A BETTER DEAL AT THE END OF THE DAY BY GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS THAN GOING THROUGH A REZONE AND OPENING UP ALL THE USES THAT COULD BE WITHIN THAT ZONING CATEGORY.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S A GREAT TOOL TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S PUDS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH THAT HAVE ASKED FOR MINIMAL VARIANCE REQUEST THAT HAVE BEEN DENIED.

AND NOW WE'RE SEEING THESE PROJECTS GET DEVELOPED ANYWAY THROUGH OTHER MEANS, AND WE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THEM AND WE DIDN'T GET THE THINGS THAT WE COULD HAVE GOT BY GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS.

SO THAT'S MY UNDERSTOOD.

I THINK THIS APPROACH DOES INCREASE THE BURDEN ON THE COMMISSIONERS TO LOOK AT THESE CASES AND NOT JUST BE THINKING IN TERMS OF YAY OR NAY, BUT ALSO IS THERE A BETTER WAY TO GET THERE AND, YOU KNOW, HELP THE APPLICANT ACCOMPLISH THEIR OBJECTIVES, BUT ALSO MEET OUR OBJECTIVES AT THE SAME TIME.

SO, A LITTLE MORE TIME, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE NICE.

ANTHONY. YOU KNOW, SO WE'RE NOT IN A PRESSURE SITUATION, BUT I THINK AS WE GO FORWARD AND WORKING WITH THIS, YOU KNOW, WE'LL ALL START TO GET MORE COMFORTABLE.

AND I'M 100% ON BOARD.

I THINK IT'S A DEFINITE POSITIVE MOVE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

AND IT'S A TOOL.

AND YOU KNOW WE ONLY HAVE SO MANY TOOLS IN THE BOX.

[01:15:04]

BUT AND IT IS I CAN TELL YOU IT'S BETTER THAN SUPS.

YEAH. SO AND I WILL ADD, MR. CHAIRMAN, TO THAT, POINT THAT IT'S A TOOL.

VARIOUS CITIES USE DIFFERENT TOOLS.

YOU KNOW, IT COULD BE A VARIANCE, COULD BE THE SUP, COULD BE A PUD.

A PUD IS PRETTY TYPICAL IN MOST CITIES.

IN MANY CITIES AT LEAST AND IT'S YOU DON'T WANT TO GET TO A POINT WHERE YOUR REGULATIONS ARE SO, PRESCRIPTIVE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT NARROWS DOWN THE DEVELOPERS OPTIONS ON WHAT THEIR PROJECT CAN EVEN BE WITHOUT AN ALTERNATIVE MEANS.

THE ALTERNATIVE MEANS IS REALLY WHAT THE PUD IS.

AND IT'S AN ALTERNATIVE MEANS TO STILL ACHIEVE ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE DISTRICT IS SEEKING WITH, YOU KNOW, FAIRLY MINOR, YOU KNOW, VARIANCES.

I MEAN, IT'S JUST IT'S A PROCESS THAT'S NECESSARY.

I MEAN, WITHOUT SUCH A PROCESS IN PLACE, THE CITY COULD BE OPENED UP TO LAWSUITS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ABOUT THE UNIQUENESS OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES THAT COULDN'T DEVELOP WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF THAT.

SO IT'S AN IMPORTANT TOOL.

IT'S A PERFECTLY, YOU KNOW, USED TOOL IN MANY CITIES.

THE REAL RISK COMES AT AT WHAT POINT, YOU KNOW, DO YOU GRANT, WHAT SHOULD BE A FAIRLY MINIMAL AMOUNT OF DISCRETIONARY.

WHAT'S THE WORD, DISCRETION MAYBE VERSUS, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF GIVEN THE SHOP AWAY.

I MEAN, YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT EITHER, BUT IF YOU DO IT, EVEN A LITTLE OR A LOT, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, COME BACK WITH A SYSTEM THAT ALSO GETS A LITTLE OR A LOT TO MITIGATE THE OFFSETS.

THAT'S REALLY WHAT THE TOOL IS ALL ABOUT.

UNDERSTOOD. AND I THINK WE DON'T LUCKY FOR US AS PLANNING COMMISSION, WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

YOU KNOW, WE JUST DO A LITTLE BIT OF THE HEAVY LIFTING.

BUT THE ELECTED OFFICIALS MAKE THE CALL AT THE END OF THE DAY.

AND I THINK WE HAVE A CONSENSUS THAT AND LOOK, WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON THIS BECAUSE IT'S WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT PERFECT THE FIRST TIME BY ANY MEANS. BUT AS WE SEE MORE AND MORE OF THESE I THINK EVERYBODY'S ON BOARD.

THIS IS A DIRECTION THAT WE NEED TO GO WITH THESE, MOVING FORWARD, AND WE'LL MAKE A MISTAKE, I CAN PROMISE YOU THAT.

BUT AT LEAST WE'LL, HAVE A QUESTION.

YES, SIR. SO I HAVE A QUESTION.

THE COUPLE OF PUD THAT, WE HEARD THE TOPIC THAT ALWAYS COMES UP IS PUBLIC SAFETY.

SO WHAT CONFUSES ME THEN, IS IN THOSE REPORTS, IT INDICATES THAT OUR PUBLIC SAFETY PEOPLE, THE POLICE AND FIRE SAID WE HAVE NO OBJECTION, BUT THE PUBLIC COMES HERE AND RAISES ALL KINDS OF OBJECTIONS AROUND THAT ONE ISSUE OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

IS THERE SOME WAY THAT WE CAN ADDRESS THIS BEFOREHAND AROUND ALL AROUND PUBLIC SAFETY, IN THE GUIDANCE FOR THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPER OR INVESTOR TO SPEAK FOR STAFF? AND I KNOW STAFF SHOULD RESPOND, BUT I MEAN, THE STAFF REPORT IS CLEAR IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION AND STAFF WILL ALWAYS RESPOND TO, WELL, WHAT DID THE FIRE MARSHAL SAY OR PUBLIC WORKS SAY? THE REASON WHY I KIND OF JUMPED IN THERE, BECAUSE.

THE PUBLIC OFTENTIMES.

THEY ARE NOT AWARE OF THE IN-DEPTH WORK THAT GOES TO PRESENT THESE CASES, NOT ONLY THERE ARE PREDEVELOPED MEETINGS THAT STAFF WILL HAVE WITH THE APPLICANTS, BUT THE NUMEROUS.

REVIEWS OF WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED TO THEM, AS WE KIND OF DISCUSSED ALREADY, AND I DON'T EVEN THINK PLANNING COMMISSION IS FULLY AWARE OF THE WORK THAT STAFF DOES JUST TO PRESENT A CASE HERE.

AND SO THE PUBLIC, THEY'LL LOOK AT THINGS LIKE PUBLIC SAFETY BECAUSE AND LET'S BE CLEAR, WHAT I KIND OF HEARD IN MOST OF THOSE MEETINGS WAS THAT DREADED THREE LETTER STR.

I MEAN, IT KIND OF REALLY CAME DOWN TO FOLKS'S FEELINGS ON THAT.

MAYBE THAT'S THE ONLY WAY I KIND OF RECEIVED SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT I MADE, BUT IT'S KIND OF WRAPPED UP IN A LOT OF THAT.

SO I'LL LET STAFF ANSWER THAT, OF COURSE.

BUT REALLY, WHEN THE PUBLIC, THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSIONERS ON JUST HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT THE PROJECT, WHETHER IT'S SAFETY OR WHETHER IT IS AN STR ISSUE OR WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, THEY JUST DON'T WANT THEM IN MY BACKYARD BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BLOCK MY VIEW.

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO PRESENT THAT BUT I WOULD HARDLY ENCOURAGE TO LISTEN TO STAFF ASK YOUR QUESTIONS OF STAFF.

[01:20:07]

IF YOU DO NOT GET AN ANSWER, STAFF DOESN'T KNOW THE ANSWER.

THEN ASK FOR THE FIRE MARSHAL TO COME IN.

YOU CAN DO THAT AS WELL.

AND IF IT NEEDS A DEFERRAL OR IF STAFF IS AWARE OF IT BEFOREHAND, SAY, HEY, I WOULD LIKE THE FIRE MARSHAL OR REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO BE PRESENT AT THIS MEETING. STAFF WILL ENDEAVOR TO DO THAT.

USED TO DO THAT.

AND YEAH, AND WE CERTAINLY CAN UPON REQUEST AT ANY TIME, AND ESPECIALLY IF YOU CALL US EARLY, BEFORE THE MEETING AND SAY, HEY, I'VE GOT A CONCERN ABOUT THIS, COULD WE HAVE THE FIRE MARSHAL ATTEND? WE CAN CERTAINLY STRIVE TO GET THEM THERE.

OR THE CITY ENGINEER OR WHOEVER IN THE LOOP.

THERE'S A NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THAT LOOP THAT LOOK AT THIS STUFF.

AND I WILL SAY ONE THING ABOUT MAYBE THE DIFFERENCE IN WHAT YOU HEAR FROM THE GENERAL AUDIENCE VERSUS WHAT YOU HEAR FROM THE STAFF.

THE STAFF IS MOTIVATED TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE CITY.

OKAY. AND I THINK MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING UP HERE FROM THE AUDIENCE ARE DOING THE SAME THING AS THEY PERCEIVE IT.

OKAY? SO WHAT THEY PERCEIVE MAY NOT BE THE SAME THING THAT STAFF PERCEIVES.

YOU KNOW, I'LL JUST GIVE THE LATEST EXAMPLE OF THE ISSUE OF THE EAST END PROJECT THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THAT THEY HAVEN'T ANNOUNCED FORMALLY YET BY NAME.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO PUT A NAME IN IT, BUT THAT EAST END PROJECT, THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT DENSITY COMING FROM THE PEOPLE WHO WERE FOUR TIMES AS DENSE AS THE PROJECT WAS INTENDED TO, AS THE SUBJECT PROJECT WAS.

SO THEY HAVE THEIR OWN MOTIVATIONS.

THEY'RE NOT ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, THEIR COMPELLING MOTIVATIONS, THAT THEY'RE THE MOTIVATIONS THAT THEY SEE AND THEY FEEL AND, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE HEARD, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN ALL THIS.

BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, WHEN THE STAFF AND ALL THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE IN THAT LOOP OF REVIEW ARE LOOKING AT THIS, WE'RE DOING IT FROM, YOU KNOW, A SORT OF A, YOU KNOW, A I DON'T KNOW HOW TO BEST SAY IT FROM A PERSPECTIVE THAT'S BACK LOOKING AT IT FROM A CITY STAFF POINT, IT JUST IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU SEE FROM SOMEBODY THAT MIGHT BE LOOKING AT IT AS AN AFFECTED CITIZEN NEXT TO THEM.

AND WE'VE MADE A RECENT CHANGE TO THE STAFF REPORTS THAT YOU'LL HAVE SEEN ON THIS ROUND, WHERE WE USED TO JUST SAY CITY DEPARTMENTS AND PRIVATE UTILITIES HAD NO OBJECTION.

AND NOW WE'VE GONE BACK TO LISTING ALL OF THE REVIEWERS SO THAT YOU ALL KNOW EXACTLY WHO'S LOOKING AT IT.

AND ALSO THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHO'S LOOKING AT IT.

SO THE PUBLIC WILL BE ABLE TO SEE IN THE STAFF REPORT.

OH, THE FIRE MARSHAL HAD NO OBJECTION.

SO YOU'LL BE SEEING THAT IN YOUR STAFF REPORTS, MOVING FORWARD.

AND I'LL SAY ONE THING ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO, YOU KNOW, STAFF AND, THE RECOMMENDATIONS THEY GIVE, THEY DO A FANTASTIC JOB.

AND WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FIRE CONCERNS, THE FIRE MARSHAL DOES A GREAT JOB.

AND HE IT'S NOT LIKE HE JUST ARBITRARILY SAYS YES OR NO TO THIS.

I MEAN, THESE, DEVELOPMENTS GO THROUGH PLAN REVIEW.

AND IF THEY DO NOT MEET THE CRITERIA THAT IS IN THE NATIONAL FIRE CODE, THEY DON'T GET APPROVED.

SO WHEN YOU HEAR PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE COME UP AND TALK ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY AND FIRE ISSUES AND FIRE LANES AND PARKING AND THAT HAS GONE DOWN THE LIST OF CODES AND REQUIREMENTS, AND IT EITHER IS APPROVED OR IT'S NOT APPROVED AND IT'S NOT APPROVED.

THE FIRE MARSHAL OR THE OTHER PUBLIC SAFETY STAFF IS NOT GOING TO SEND YOU SOMETHING UP HERE THAT DOESN'T MEET OUR CODES, BUT THE PUBLIC CAN GET UP HERE AND SAY WHATEVER THEY WANT, NO MATTER WHAT.

AND YOU LISTEN TO IT, OF COURSE.

AND BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU GOT TO MAKE A DECISION ON IT.

AND. USUALLY WHEN I HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION, I LISTEN TO THE PROFESSIONALS THAT KNOW THE CODE AND BASE MY DECISION OFF OF THAT.

SO PUBLIC SAFETY IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, IS GONE OVER THE HEAVIEST WHEN THEY REVIEW THESE PLANS. ALL RIGHT.

ANYBODY ELSE GOT A COMMENT? SO THANKS, EVERYBODY, FOR YOUR INPUT ON THIS.

AND WE'LL MAKE AN EFFORT TO KIND OF CHANGE THINGS UP JUST A LITTLE BIT MOVING FORWARD.

I THINK WE ALL HAVE AN IDEA THE WAY WE'RE GOING TO GO.

SO THANKS AGAIN.

LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

I DON'T HAVE THAT PAGE, BUT I THINK IT'S [INAUDIBLE] YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU WHAT DID RICKY BOBBY SAY? IS VERY SHORT.

THE AGENDA ITEM I WANT TO [INAUDIBLE] OH, MEETING PROCEDURES AND DECORUM.

THANK YOU [INAUDIBLE] I THINK I MAY HAVE GOTTEN A LITTLE MIFFED AT THE LAST, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND I ADDRESSED SOME OF THE COMMISSIONERS IN

[01:25:10]

REGARDS TO HOW THEY WERE TALKING TO THE AUDIENCE.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO REMIND THE COMMISSIONERS THAT ESPECIALLY, ONCE A MOTION IS MADE, THAT DISCUSSION IS AMONGST THE COMMISSIONERS, AND IT MAY JUST BE HABIT FORMING THAT YOU LOOK AT THE AUDIENCE.

BUT WHEN YOU LOOK OUT AT MR. SMITH, MR. SMITH THINKS YOU'RE TALKING DIRECTLY TO HIM AND HE'S GOING TO WANT TO RESPOND TO YOU I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WANT THIS PROJECT TO GO FORWARD TODAY, BUT, YOU KNOW, I JUST FEEL THAT MR. SMITH IS GOING, OH, I UNDERSTAND HOW YOU FEEL.

I'M GOING TO HE'S GOING TO WANT THAT BACK AND FORTH ONCE THAT MOTION IS IN PLAY.

IT IS A DISCUSSION AMONGST THE GROUP.

I DID GET A QUESTION ABOUT, WELL, IF THE DISCUSSION AMONGST THE BOARD MEMBERS NEEDS TO END BECAUSE A QUESTION EITHER FOR STAFF OR MAYBE EVEN FOR THE APPLICANT HAS ARISEN DURING THAT DISCUSSION, HOW DOES THE BOARD GET ANY OF THOSE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ANSWERED? THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT IS FOR SOMEBODY TO MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THE DISCUSSION BASED ON.

WE NEED TO ASK STAFF OR TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION.

A MEETING WILL SORRY A MEETING A VOTE WILL NEED THAT WILL NEED TO BE SECONDED AND A VOTE WILL NEED TO BE TAKEN.

AND IF IT IS TABLED, THEN YOU CAN GO BACK AND EITHER ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF.

I TAKE THAT BACK. YOU CAN ALWAYS ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF, BUT IF IT'S ASKING QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR I WOULD ONLY ASSUME IT WOULD BE THE APPLICANT. IF THERE'S SOME NECESSITY TO OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT AGAIN.

THEN AGAIN, BASED ON THE MOTION THAT'S BEEN MADE AND SECONDED AND VOTED FOR THE PUBLIC, COMMENT PERIOD TO BE OPEN, THAT'S THE BOARD'S DECISION AT THAT TIME.

SO IF THERE'S A TIME WHERE YOU NEED TO ADDRESS THE PUBLIC AGAIN, YOU HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO IF YOU NEED TO ASK STAFF ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, I BELIEVE YOU CAN.

I WOULD PREFER FOR YOU TO TABLE IT AS WELL AND ASK STAFF OF THOSE QUESTIONS.

JUST BECAUSE THERE IS AN ACTIVE MOTION THAT'S IN PLAY, AND IT REALLY SHOULD JUST BE DISCUSSION AMONGST THE BOARD MEMBERS.

BUT I UNDERSTAND HOW SOMETIMES IT CAN BE [INAUDIBLE], CAN THEY DO SUCH AND SUCH, OR IS THE THIS HEIGHT SUCH AND SUCH? I UNDERSTAND WHEN THOSE SITUATIONS CAN ARISE, BUT JUST TRY TO REMEMBER THAT THERE IS A PROCESS FOR THESE THINGS.

THE OTHER THING IS, I KNOW THAT WHEN APPLICANTS COME UP HERE, IT IS VERY COMMON THAT FOLKS KNOW WHO THEY ARE AND THEY'LL SAY, HEY, BRUCE.

HEY, JIM.

HEY, WHATEVER.

PLEASE TRY TO ADDRESS THEM BY THEIR LAST NAMES OR EVEN JUST THE APPLICANT OR AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT.

AT LEAST INITIALLY, LET'S JUST AT LEAST INITIALLY SAYS MY NAME IS BRUCE SO-AND-SO.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD, BUT IT JUST WHEN SOMEBODY LISTENS TO THE RECORD, BECAUSE THESE THINGS ARE RECORDED, IT ALWAYS GOES BACK TO, WELL, IS THERE SOME SORT OF RELATIONSHIP OR SOMETHING THERE JUST ON A FIRST NAME BASIS HERE? NOT VERY OFTEN, BUT YOU'D BE SURPRISED AT HOW MANY TIMES FOLKS ARE.

STAFF AND LEGAL ARE ASKED THOSE TYPES OF ISSUES, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S A HOT BUTTON TOPIC THAT'S BEING PRESENTED TO YOU GUYS. YEAH, I THINK THOSE WERE KIND OF ABOUT IT.

[INAUDIBLE].

DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT.

I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK YOU COVERED IT.

YEAH. WHEN COUNCIL MEMBERS APPEAR TO PRESENT BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS, THEY ARE TYPICALLY PRESENTING THEMSELVES IN THEIR OWN PERSON. IF WE CAN BE COGNIZANT NOT TO CALL THEM COUNCILMEN.

SO. AND SO WHEN THEY COME UP TO THE DAIS AND PRETTY MUCH.

AND COUNCILMAN LISTOWSKI WILL HE KNOWS VERY WELL I CAN'T REALLY RECALL TOO MANY COUNCILORS, COUNCILMAN IN MY YEARS HERE THAT WILL COME IN AND SAY I REPRESENT SO AND SO, AND I'M PRESENTING AS COUNCILMAN SO AND SO.

UNLESS THEY HAD THE, VOTE OF THE ENTIRE CITY COUNCIL TO SAY, YES, YOU CAN GO AND REPRESENT ME IN THIS MATTER.

SO IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE VOTE OF CITY COUNCIL TO BE A REPRESENTATIVE CITY COUNCIL, THEN THEY'RE JUST COMING UP HERE AS THEIR OWN PERSON AND THEY'LL SAY, MY NAME IS SUCH AND SUCH AND I DON'T LIKE THIS PROJECT, OR I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT, PLEASE DO NOT REFER TO THEM AS COUNCIL PERSON.

[01:30:06]

YES. I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

I'VE HEARD A COUNCIL PERSON COME AND SAY I'M COUNCILMAN AND SO AND I'M REPRESENTING MY DISTRICT.

I'VE HEARD THAT A COUPLE TIMES.

SO ARE THEY NOT ARE WE NOT ALLOWED TO COMMENT TO THEM AS A COUNCIL PERSON WHEN THEY STATE THAT'S THEIR STATED GOAL? NOW THAT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE IF THEY'RE REPRESENTING THEIR DISTRICT, THEIR DISTRICT VOTED THEM IN AS A SPOKESPERSON FOR THAT DISTRICT.

IF A COUNCIL PERSON IS COMING IN HERE SAYING, I'M A COUNCIL PERSON AND I'M SAYING ON BEHALF OF CITY COUNCIL, THEN THEY CANNOT DO THAT UNLESS CITY COUNCIL HAS SAID, YES, YOU CAN DO THAT.

I CANNOT REALLY WELL, I GOT TO I DON'T KNOW IF I'VE SEEN COUNCIL PERSONS COME IN AND UNLESS THEY'VE [INAUDIBLE].

YEAH MAYBE I HAVE TO GO BACK BUT I MEAN COUNCIL I MEAN YOU'RE THE EX OFFICIO.

WOULD YOU GO INTO A MEETING AND SAY YOU REPRESENT YOU DO YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME SORT OF HOA OR WHATEVER? I DON'T KNOW, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THE LAW LIKE YOU DO, OF COURSE, BUT I WOULD THINK THAT I COULD COME IN HERE AND SAY, HEY, I'M COUNCIL MEMBER LISTOWSKI, I REPRESENT DISTRICT FIVE AND I'M, YOU KNOW, THIS IS HOW I FEEL ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT WITHIN MY DISTRICT.

IN THE DISTRICT. RIGHT? AND IF MY CONSTITUENTS DIDN'T LIKE THAT, THEY COULD VOTE ME OUT OF OFFICE NEXT GO ROUND.

BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE.

I THINK THAT WILL HAPPEN.

I'M NOT GOING TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE.

I MEAN, BUT I YEAH, I THINK IT'S HOW THEY PRESENT THEMSELVES.

IF THE PERSON, SPECIFICALLY RECOGNIZES THEMSELVES AS A COUNCIL PERSON, THEN I'M LISTENING VERY CLOSELY AS TO HOW THEY'RE GOING TO PRESENT. BUT AT THE AT IN PARTICULAR, AT THE LAST MEETING, THAT PERSON DID NOT IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AS A COUNCIL PERSON.

THEY JUST CAME AS A PERSON.

SO WE JUST GOT TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT.

AND I'LL WORK ON THE LAST NAMES.

WELL, I CAN'T.

I KNOW A LOT OFDONNA'S.

I DON'T.

I CAN'T REMEMBER THE LAST NAMES.

I KNOW A LOT OF TIM'S, TOO.

I'LL WORK ON IT. MA'AM, I HEAR YOU.

MY WIFE TOLD ME THE SAME THING, SO I'M GETTING IT FROM TWO ENDS.

[INAUDIBLE]. AND YOU KNOW.

AND THAT DID BRING UP THAT QUESTION THAT I ADDRESS MOST EVERYBODY UP HERE BY THEIR FIRST NAME.

AND, YOU KNOW, EXCEPT FOR MR. MONTALVAN OVER THERE.

TO YOU, SIR. YOU KNOW, SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PROCEDURES, YOU KNOW, THE LAST MEETING, WE DID ALLOW A ZOOM CALL IN HERE, RIGHT? WE ARE NOT DOING THAT ANYMORE.

RIGHT. WELL, THAT'S UNDER REVIEW, OKAY.

THAT'S UNDER REVIEW.

AND AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, THIS WAS JUST A REQUEST THAT CAME FROM CITY SECRETARY TO SET UP A ZOOM CALL.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS EVEN PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF THAT SAID, YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO ZOOM THIS PERSON IN.

SO BUT THAT IS UNDER REVIEW.

THAT ISSUE IS UNDER REVIEW.

SO OKAY. AND WE DON'T HAVE SOME POLICIES THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE REGARDING THAT ISSUE IS UNDER REVIEW.

BUT COMMISSIONERS CAN ATTEND THE COMMISSION MEETING BY ZOOM MEETING.

YOU DON'T COUNT AS I KNOW THERE'S SOME OTHER RULES.

BUT ANYWAYS. OKAY.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

APPRECIATE THE CLARITY.

YOU GUYS ALL HAVE A WONDERFUL CHRISTMAS AND WE'LL BE ADJOURNED.

YES MERRY CHRISTMAS ALL.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.