1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:06,840
wax or something, but I bought the
cleaning kit. Nothing works. So,

2
00:00:38,559 --> 00:00:43,960
Nice to meet you.
>> Hello.

3
00:00:45,600 --> 00:00:50,280
I don't
I don't

4
00:01:13,119 --> 00:01:16,119
know.

5
00:01:26,240 --> 00:01:32,040
talked
You should actually

6
00:02:10,800 --> 00:02:14,120
How are you?

7
00:02:17,440 --> 00:02:23,040
» Did you get an answer?
>> No.

8
00:02:20,959 --> 00:02:29,120
» I can't hardly hear this.
>> Didn't I get a acceptable answer that

9
00:02:27,120 --> 00:02:35,239
The question is why did they suddenly
change all this R1 zone

10
00:02:32,080 --> 00:02:35,239
to R2?

11
00:02:36,000 --> 00:02:41,000
» No, the orange area is R4.

12
00:02:41,280 --> 00:02:47,440
Well, there's two shades of yellow. And
that's probably

13
00:02:45,360 --> 00:02:51,680
part of this confusion here because
there's two shades of yellow. So, if you

14
00:02:49,680 --> 00:02:57,840
look at it quickly, it all looks yellow,
but there's two shades of yellow. So why

15
00:02:54,879 --> 00:03:02,239
why did they change some homes when that
all goes

16
00:03:00,000 --> 00:03:08,879
and do these homeowners
care that this is being discussed?

17
00:03:06,400 --> 00:03:12,360
» Well, I know R1 is just single family.
R2 is

18
00:03:13,440 --> 00:03:22,000
» but these are R1 right now and they
didn't change their density. So, so you

19
00:03:18,400 --> 00:03:27,120
effectively you can have a subdivision,
let's say Kingsbridge, and somebody

20
00:03:23,920 --> 00:03:30,799
finds out they they're now zoned R2.
>> All right. Good evening everybody. We'll

21
00:03:28,480 --> 00:03:35,280
go ahead and get started with our
special meeting, special planning

22
00:03:32,720 --> 00:03:40,737
commission meeting for September 8th. We
will get started with the pledge of the

23
00:03:37,760 --> 00:03:44,799
uh pledge of allegiance.
[clears throat]

24
00:03:42,000 --> 00:03:50,799
I pledge algiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the

25
00:03:47,360 --> 00:03:57,400
republic for which it stands. One nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and

26
00:03:53,840 --> 00:03:57,400
justice for all.

27
00:03:57,439 --> 00:04:01,519
» All right, Katie, could you please call
the role?

28
00:04:00,480 --> 00:04:02,720
» Sure.
>> Baker

29
00:04:02,239 --> 00:04:03,519
» here.
>> Bill

30
00:04:03,120 --> 00:04:04,400
» here.
>> Cox

31
00:04:04,080 --> 00:04:06,400
» here.
>> Fzone here.

32
00:04:05,599 --> 00:04:07,760
» Hutchinson
>> here.

33
00:04:07,040 --> 00:04:11,040
» McCarthy
>> here.

34
00:04:08,080 --> 00:04:13,599
» Payatt here. Upholder. Dicks
>> here.

35
00:04:11,840 --> 00:04:16,400
» And I just want to make two reminders to
turn your microphones on and that to

36
00:04:15,200 --> 00:04:20,600
pull your phones away from those
microphones so we don't get that static.

37
00:04:22,160 --> 00:04:28,880
» Okay. Do we have to motion to excuse
absent members?

38
00:04:26,800 --> 00:04:31,440
» Motion to excuse the absent members.
>> Second.

39
00:04:29,520 --> 00:04:34,560
» Moved and supported. All in favor say I.
>> I.

40
00:04:32,080 --> 00:04:40,560
» Any opposed?
Okie dokie. Uh, one quick. So, we'd like

41
00:04:38,880 --> 00:04:44,479
to thank everyone for coming out
tonight. It's always so fun for us to

42
00:04:42,479 --> 00:04:49,680
see our community engaged in what we're
doing here at the city. As a reminder,

43
00:04:47,199 --> 00:04:55,919
what we'll be doing tonight is reviewing
the city of Gibralar zoning ordinance

44
00:04:52,000 --> 00:05:01,520
amendments, chapter 44, zoning that the
city has been working diligently on over

45
00:04:58,320 --> 00:05:05,919
the past year and a half or so. Um, we
will not be having any discussion on

46
00:05:03,360 --> 00:05:10,639
data center tonight. And if you ask the
commission any questions, they will not

47
00:05:07,840 --> 00:05:15,199
be able to respond. We are working on
the data center ordinance as a separate

48
00:05:13,039 --> 00:05:18,160
ordinance amendment at the moment. Thank
you.

49
00:05:15,840 --> 00:05:21,199
» And it's currently held with legal,
right?

50
00:05:18,560 --> 00:05:26,080
» Yep. It's currently being reviewed by
legal and going back and forth between

51
00:05:23,440 --> 00:05:31,120
legal and our planning team.
>> Got it. Um,

52
00:05:28,960 --> 00:05:34,960
okie dokie.
Do we have any public comment for this

53
00:05:33,280 --> 00:05:38,240
evening?
Uh please uh go ahead and step up to the

54
00:05:36,800 --> 00:05:43,120
podium. Please state your name and
address. Uh just as a reminder too uh

55
00:05:41,759 --> 00:05:45,280
when we get into the hearing, it's three
minutes per person that comes up to the

56
00:05:44,639 --> 00:05:47,680
podium and
>> and be professional.

57
00:05:46,880 --> 00:05:53,039
» And be professional.
>> So I live on 2887

58
00:05:50,240 --> 00:05:59,199
L Street. Um
this is the most donkey brains decision

59
00:05:56,320 --> 00:06:04,000
that this small community could do.
Bringing in big government when you guys

60
00:06:01,600 --> 00:06:12,000
have all basically failed on even
managing small businesses is the worst.

61
00:06:09,039 --> 00:06:17,199
One way for this is for example their
legal teams are outfunded. So guess

62
00:06:14,319 --> 00:06:21,680
what? Yeah. Endicon sued. Okay which is
fine. I like that you guys got sued

63
00:06:19,360 --> 00:06:27,360
because that's what they do. Every time
you give them an inch they'll take a

64
00:06:23,680 --> 00:06:32,000
mile. Do not bring this into here. We
have two wildlife refugees over here.

65
00:06:30,160 --> 00:06:36,160
Refugees.
Okay. I'm just Yeah, I don't know what

66
00:06:33,600 --> 00:06:41,360
the plural on that is, right? It's a
It's a hard word. Okay, but I'm just

67
00:06:38,560 --> 00:06:47,680
saying this is the donkey brains dumb
disgusting idea. This is a small town,

68
00:06:44,319 --> 00:06:53,840
sleepy river, Lake Eerie town. We do not
need jet freaking kerosenefueled

69
00:06:51,360 --> 00:07:02,240
turbine engines
firing computers over here for you know

70
00:06:59,120 --> 00:07:06,160
what they do with it. Okay, but
this is not appropriate.

71
00:07:04,479 --> 00:07:09,199
We don't want air pollution. We don't
want them using our water. What they'll

72
00:07:07,759 --> 00:07:13,440
do is they'll come in and say, "Oh,
we're going to do a closed cooling

73
00:07:11,759 --> 00:07:17,919
system." And then what they're going to
do is they're going to overbudget. And

74
00:07:15,280 --> 00:07:22,560
by that point, you gave them zero taxes.
No tax back to us. No money back into

75
00:07:20,720 --> 00:07:29,280
our coffers.
And guess what? We end up with the

76
00:07:25,039 --> 00:07:32,880
storm. Sorry. Apologize for my French.
Uh where we have no tax base. We have

77
00:07:31,520 --> 00:07:37,120
all the pollution. We have all the
problems. We They suck our water. They

78
00:07:34,720 --> 00:07:43,440
do it that we got kerosene fumes because
the freaking DTE. Obviously, if you know

79
00:07:39,360 --> 00:07:49,360
Gibralar, we have zero reliability with
uh energy here, which is why I installed

80
00:07:46,000 --> 00:07:54,479
a generator myself.
They will destroy this community and

81
00:07:52,240 --> 00:08:02,080
it's not worth the money. We have enough
millage based off of tax base alone.

82
00:07:59,759 --> 00:08:07,280
Please do not do this. This is the
dumbest donkey brains idea that you

83
00:08:04,960 --> 00:08:12,240
could ever think of is bringing big
business into a city

84
00:08:10,000 --> 00:08:18,160
that cannot even control small business
like JPs or something. Okay. And Captain

85
00:08:16,000 --> 00:08:22,879
Gyms.
So why would you think that this would

86
00:08:20,639 --> 00:08:26,879
be appropriate to bring in freaking
multinational

87
00:08:24,400 --> 00:08:31,840
multinational corporation basically? And
by the way, that's how they do it. They

88
00:08:28,560 --> 00:08:36,719
LLC and then they LLC and they LLC. So,
you don't even know who you're dealing

89
00:08:33,039 --> 00:08:41,519
with. And then they come in, you guys
screw up. Guess what they do? They sue

90
00:08:38,880 --> 00:08:46,480
the city of Jiala again. And do you
think you have the money? Do any of you

91
00:08:43,120 --> 00:08:51,120
have the money to defend that lawsuit?
None of you do. And the city of Jiala

92
00:08:49,040 --> 00:08:58,480
does not have it.
Keep this a peaceful, tranquil

93
00:08:55,200 --> 00:09:03,200
riverside lake eerie town like everyone
wants.

94
00:09:00,080 --> 00:09:06,480
Kick the data center out. Put it in the
middle of the desert where it deserves

95
00:09:04,560 --> 00:09:11,120
to be.
I hope you understand this. I will not

96
00:09:08,720 --> 00:09:15,920
stop fighting for this. Get this. Get it
out. Oh, by the way, the closed loop

97
00:09:13,040 --> 00:09:19,760
thing they always say closed loop like
like I I know. I got this. By the way,

98
00:09:17,839 --> 00:09:24,080
this wasn't me.
This was this was not me. This was

99
00:09:22,080 --> 00:09:28,640
another concerned citizen. Beautifully
written. Everything's put down. But I

100
00:09:26,080 --> 00:09:31,279
love the Actually, sorry, wrong piece of
paper. I made my mistake.

101
00:09:30,080 --> 00:09:33,760
» Just as a reminder, you're at the 3
minutes, but I'll let you finish here.

102
00:09:32,399 --> 00:09:39,920
» I think you should give me 30 more
seconds. But they say reporting a closed

103
00:09:36,480 --> 00:09:44,880
loop system. That's what they always do.
We're going to do a closed loop cooling

104
00:09:41,680 --> 00:09:50,480
system. Hm. like Fermy.
This is a bubble that's gonna burst just

105
00:09:47,040 --> 00:09:55,279
like the.com bubble. And and by the way,
why we live in Jibralter, Michigan. Why

106
00:09:52,640 --> 00:09:58,839
are we uh why are we praying to Palo
Alto, California?

107
00:09:58,959 --> 00:10:03,316
» Thank you for your comments, sir. Thank
you. [applause]

108
00:10:11,120 --> 00:10:18,160
» Lenor Bolthouse, 30567 Young. I'd just
like to go over some dates and different

109
00:10:16,560 --> 00:10:21,920
things. I understand you're not going to
talk about the data center, but

110
00:10:20,079 --> 00:10:27,040
everything starts here with the planning
commission, so I have to come here. On

111
00:10:24,480 --> 00:10:32,560
March 9th, council set for set forth a
morator moratorum to place access uh to

112
00:10:30,800 --> 00:10:37,839
place the access of the potential data
center coming into Gibralar. On March

113
00:10:34,720 --> 00:10:42,480
23rd, council agreed to have McKenna do
to start a data center ordinance with

114
00:10:40,160 --> 00:10:46,959
the planning committee. In that letter,
McKenna stated that they would have

115
00:10:44,160 --> 00:10:50,320
their first draft in April at the cost
of them doing this would not exceed

116
00:10:48,800 --> 00:10:54,800
$6,000.
How much of that has been paid so far?

117
00:10:52,640 --> 00:11:00,320
Planning committee meeting in April
cancelled was on the agenda but the

118
00:10:57,600 --> 00:11:05,519
meeting was cancelled. May meeting first
time seeing the draft of the data center

119
00:11:02,320 --> 00:11:09,680
ordinance. Okay, that's great. It you
have to see the first draft. June

120
00:11:07,680 --> 00:11:15,120
meeting, no discussion whatsoever
regarding the data center and it's no

121
00:11:11,760 --> 00:11:19,120
longer appearing on your agenda as
unfinished business. It's always been on

122
00:11:17,279 --> 00:11:24,240
there as new business, but it should be
under under that as unfinished business

123
00:11:21,839 --> 00:11:30,560
because it is unfinished. You did talk
about it in May. July meetings

124
00:11:27,360 --> 00:11:35,680
cancelled. August the data center still
not on the unfinished business agenda

125
00:11:33,279 --> 00:11:41,279
and we're only going and in August we're
only going to discuss the MHDA housing

126
00:11:38,959 --> 00:11:46,480
readiness incentive grant which is what
we're talking about today. And that's

127
00:11:43,600 --> 00:11:50,720
because what the grant money I know we
got grant money for it and apparently we

128
00:11:48,560 --> 00:11:54,880
are running up against a deadline that
we have to have it done. It was just

129
00:11:52,800 --> 00:12:00,880
said that we've been working on this uh
ordinance since about a year and a half.

130
00:11:58,480 --> 00:12:06,480
Okay, I'm sorry. I need to ask this
question. Does it really take a year and

131
00:12:03,120 --> 00:12:10,399
a half to do rewrite our ordinances? How
much longer are we going to have to wait

132
00:12:08,160 --> 00:12:15,440
for the data center ordinance? And
please do not tell me that it's because

133
00:12:13,200 --> 00:12:20,399
of the moratorum that no one's working
on this data center. Where do I need to

134
00:12:18,000 --> 00:12:25,360
go? Who do whose buttons do I need to
push? I have to start with you guys

135
00:12:22,880 --> 00:12:31,519
because I know the ordinances all come
here first. So I'm not specifically

136
00:12:28,880 --> 00:12:35,760
anger with you. I'm frustrated that I
don't know where to go. Somebody tell me

137
00:12:33,519 --> 00:12:39,600
where to go because I want to know where
it is. I'm not waiting a year and a half

138
00:12:37,920 --> 00:12:44,448
as a resident for a data center
ordinance.

139
00:12:42,428 --> 00:12:44,448
[applause]

140
00:12:57,200 --> 00:13:06,240
My name is Jeffy Taylor. I live at 30669
Young.

141
00:13:03,200 --> 00:13:12,880
I'm very upset with the proposal of the
data center.

142
00:13:08,160 --> 00:13:18,560
Um I haven't attended many civic
meetings here, city meetings,

143
00:13:16,079 --> 00:13:25,079
which is my fault. I don't know how long
this has been in progress.

144
00:13:22,079 --> 00:13:25,079
Um

145
00:13:26,079 --> 00:13:38,320
I really feel that this is not a good
thing for our city.

146
00:13:32,959 --> 00:13:44,320
It's going to destroy our nature center
that's just 500 ft away.

147
00:13:42,160 --> 00:13:51,839
And if you don't think that's important
there, people move here because of the

148
00:13:48,079 --> 00:13:58,240
tranquility. They move here for
recreation, water recreation. They move

149
00:13:55,360 --> 00:14:02,079
here for the wildlife.
They move here to get more in touch with

150
00:14:00,320 --> 00:14:09,279
nature.
I have never heard any data center

151
00:14:06,160 --> 00:14:17,279
community that feels they're not
affected by this.

152
00:14:11,920 --> 00:14:27,040
I feel that we need more information.
I feel that I don't know why this

153
00:14:22,399 --> 00:14:33,040
wasn't allowed to be put on an election,
a public election,

154
00:14:29,360 --> 00:14:38,420
because we hire you.
You don't hire us.

155
00:14:36,400 --> 00:14:38,420
[applause]

156
00:14:41,760 --> 00:14:53,600
We hire you to do a job to represent us.
I can only see in the future along with

157
00:14:50,160 --> 00:14:59,680
the noise and the compromise of the
water which you may not think that's

158
00:14:57,040 --> 00:15:07,519
important. We're in a we're in a global
crisis and I'm sure you all know that

159
00:15:03,839 --> 00:15:13,040
and this is not going to
positively affect our water which

160
00:15:10,240 --> 00:15:19,720
Michigan is known for. We have a lot of
boat recreationists fishing uh people

161
00:15:16,000 --> 00:15:19,720
that like to fish.

162
00:15:20,399 --> 00:15:29,360
I have heard
that this is just for financial gain for

163
00:15:25,760 --> 00:15:37,360
the city. Whether or not that's true, I
don't know. I would propose that perhaps

164
00:15:33,839 --> 00:15:44,560
we work better on our budgets. I don't
know how much the board is making. I

165
00:15:41,199 --> 00:15:50,240
don't know how much the governor, the
mayor of the city is making,

166
00:15:47,440 --> 00:15:55,040
but in a family when you have problems
with the budget,

167
00:15:52,560 --> 00:16:02,560
you work on your budget. You don't go
out and buy something that's going to

168
00:15:57,839 --> 00:16:06,560
destroy the community.
In the future,

169
00:16:04,880 --> 00:16:12,240
I don't know if this is going to affect
me. I am an older person, but in the

170
00:16:09,040 --> 00:16:17,279
future, I can only see that should we
bring these big data centers and

171
00:16:14,240 --> 00:16:22,720
everything that destroys our community
and our our our public waterways and

172
00:16:20,560 --> 00:16:26,639
everything that we treasure about
Gibralar.

173
00:16:24,720 --> 00:16:31,680
Um,
it's going to lower our property rates,

174
00:16:29,199 --> 00:16:39,480
our property
uh values. And with the decrease in

175
00:16:35,839 --> 00:16:39,480
property values,

176
00:16:39,541 --> 00:16:41,561
[sighs]

177
00:16:41,600 --> 00:16:52,240
it's not going to be the same Gibralar.
Um, it's going to be like

178
00:16:48,720 --> 00:16:58,480
a mini Detroit or Ham Tramik.
Property values are going to go down and

179
00:16:54,480 --> 00:17:02,560
people won't care about our community.
Um, it's it's just the way it's going to

180
00:17:01,279 --> 00:17:06,400
be.
Uh I have a lot of concern about all

181
00:17:04,480 --> 00:17:12,240
this.
I feel that

182
00:17:09,520 --> 00:17:17,520
the public, the community hasn't given
its due justice. We pay our taxes and

183
00:17:14,959 --> 00:17:24,480
everything and we haven't been given our
due justice

184
00:17:20,079 --> 00:17:28,160
to investigate along with you. It's just
this is how it's going to be and that's

185
00:17:26,559 --> 00:17:36,720
that.
So I really

186
00:17:32,000 --> 00:17:41,120
I really hope that you
would pay attention to this moratorum

187
00:17:39,039 --> 00:17:47,280
because it's not an attack on the
community and it's not attack on on the

188
00:17:44,000 --> 00:17:52,320
board members. It is to say we need to
have more information. We need to know

189
00:17:49,280 --> 00:17:56,400
where we're going with this because we
love our community and I'm sure you all

190
00:17:54,320 --> 00:18:01,120
love your community too. Otherwise, you
wouldn't work so hard to try to get

191
00:17:58,880 --> 00:18:06,640
things done.
So, my question is, why are we bringing

192
00:18:04,080 --> 00:18:13,280
this here in the first place?
Why do we need AI in the first place?

193
00:18:10,799 --> 00:18:18,400
50 years ago, we didn't need AI. And
just because your neighbor has something

194
00:18:15,600 --> 00:18:24,080
doesn't mean you have to have it. Do you
know what I mean? Uh,

195
00:18:22,377 --> 00:18:26,960
[applause]
thank you.

196
00:18:26,962 --> 00:18:28,982
» [applause]

197
00:18:40,000 --> 00:18:48,400
» Hello. Um, my name is Laura Shunk. I'm a
resident in Island Estates. Um, pro

198
00:18:46,480 --> 00:18:53,039
probably about a half a mile from the
data center. So, um I don't know if

199
00:18:51,280 --> 00:18:56,799
you're aware of it or not, but there's
currently [clears throat]

200
00:18:53,760 --> 00:19:02,400
a lawsuit uh that's that's been filed in
Dwajak against the data center there.

201
00:19:00,160 --> 00:19:08,640
And the reason for that is because of
the noise. The noise is constant. I I

202
00:19:05,919 --> 00:19:14,720
just pulled an article up and the
facility runs around the clock and so

203
00:19:11,679 --> 00:19:20,640
does the noise. It says a constant noise
that registers between 50 and 62 dB all

204
00:19:18,880 --> 00:19:25,600
hours.
A lawsuit has been filed with the US

205
00:19:22,960 --> 00:19:31,039
District Court for the Western District
of Michigan against the data center

206
00:19:27,840 --> 00:19:36,160
company that created unlawful noise
nuisance that has damaged the health,

207
00:19:33,360 --> 00:19:41,760
property values, and the quality of life
of residents near Dwajak. We all, and

208
00:19:39,760 --> 00:19:47,120
what I've read, the little bit that I
know, and I haven't researched it at

209
00:19:43,600 --> 00:19:52,960
length, anyone within a mile to two and
a half miles of these data centers is

210
00:19:48,960 --> 00:19:58,000
affected by this noise. Constant noise.
So, we have this beautiful, quiet

211
00:19:54,880 --> 00:20:02,880
community that we all love, and we're
going to throw it away for what, a

212
00:20:00,000 --> 00:20:07,520
little extra tax dollars. I remember
years ago they were looking at the same

213
00:20:04,880 --> 00:20:11,440
thing with that dump and that that was
all because they wanted more revenue and

214
00:20:09,280 --> 00:20:17,520
more tax dollars. They were going to
expand it and people smart people

215
00:20:14,080 --> 00:20:21,520
stepped in and stopped it. And I don't
want to see the same thing happen here.

216
00:20:19,440 --> 00:20:28,080
This is this is not going to benefit the
community in the short term or the long

217
00:20:24,559 --> 00:20:32,320
term as a nation. Maybe. But we don't
need it in our backyard. there are other

218
00:20:30,480 --> 00:20:37,760
places that they can build these data
centers. It doesn't have to be right

219
00:20:33,760 --> 00:20:43,600
here within a mile, less than a mile.
And then the the um refuge too is

220
00:20:41,039 --> 00:20:49,039
another thing. You know, that's 500 feet
from this place. So, it just it makes no

221
00:20:46,799 --> 00:20:53,200
sense to me at all. [snorts]
And maybe you all can help us understand

222
00:20:51,200 --> 00:20:58,979
how this is going to work, but it
doesn't seem feasible to me. Thank you

223
00:20:55,600 --> 00:20:58,979
FOR YOUR TIME. [applause]

224
00:21:01,544 --> 00:21:03,564
» [applause]

225
00:21:04,240 --> 00:21:13,919
» ANTHONY Arminiac 30003 3033 MAR. Uh
first question I have is on the downtown

226
00:21:11,200 --> 00:21:17,919
waterfront overlay district. I there's
nothing to address in the ordinances

227
00:21:15,840 --> 00:21:22,480
that we need an environmental impact
statement. This is adjacent to the

228
00:21:20,000 --> 00:21:27,440
Detroit River as well as adjacent to the
Detroit International Wildlife Refuge. I

229
00:21:25,200 --> 00:21:31,760
think it needs any development on that
space will need an impact statement

230
00:21:29,360 --> 00:21:37,120
environmental. We also need some proof
of environmental compliance on certain

231
00:21:34,640 --> 00:21:40,799
uh things such as part 31 of the water
resource protection of the natural

232
00:21:38,640 --> 00:21:46,559
resources and environmental protection,
part 91 of soil erosion and settlement

233
00:21:43,360 --> 00:21:53,840
control, part 301 inland lakes and
streams, part 303 wetlands, and part 365

234
00:21:51,039 --> 00:21:58,240
endangered species protection and any
other laws that apply to that because

235
00:21:56,240 --> 00:22:01,840
anything that you do on that space is
going to have a direct impact on both

236
00:21:59,760 --> 00:22:07,120
the wildlife life refuge and the Detroit
River and the canals. The other question

237
00:22:04,559 --> 00:22:12,960
I have is on the Riverwalk. It does not
clearly state who's responsible for the

238
00:22:10,480 --> 00:22:19,919
project. Will this end up in the DDA
responsibility or is the

239
00:22:16,799 --> 00:22:23,520
uh the individual um property owner
responsible for the riverw walk? Who's

240
00:22:21,760 --> 00:22:27,679
going to maintain it? Who's going to be
liable for it? And make sure all the

241
00:22:25,840 --> 00:22:32,960
safety precautions are put into that
riverwalk.

242
00:22:29,679 --> 00:22:36,799
Regarding the M1 district, I think we
need to probably consider some adding

243
00:22:34,640 --> 00:22:41,360
some other things in there. Um, such as
maybe commercial green houses uh need to

244
00:22:39,360 --> 00:22:46,880
be uh looked at as a possibility for
that because that's a new coming thing

245
00:22:43,440 --> 00:22:50,960
that we kind of need. In the M2 zone, I
would look at again some of the ones

246
00:22:48,880 --> 00:22:56,400
that we had in the previous zone, large
scale utility, solar farms, uh public

247
00:22:53,919 --> 00:23:00,480
owned buildings and public uh uh
buildings and telephone exchanges,

248
00:22:58,080 --> 00:23:05,840
things like that. Um there was also the
shipyards at one time for manufacturing,

249
00:23:02,880 --> 00:23:10,880
repair and loss since for boats. Uh
sanitatory uh sewage systems, water

250
00:23:08,320 --> 00:23:15,280
plants and electric power generation and
again adding in commercial green uh

251
00:23:12,960 --> 00:23:20,240
green houses. Uh add in the new
technology of battery energy storage

252
00:23:17,360 --> 00:23:25,701
systems and the advanced automation
green tech assemblies. Thank you.

253
00:23:23,681 --> 00:23:25,701
[applause]

254
00:23:30,720 --> 00:23:39,280
Hi everybody. I'm Carrie Valadz, 29925
South Jib. So what I'm hearing from a

255
00:23:37,120 --> 00:23:44,080
lot of like the constituents here is
that there's lack of transparency even

256
00:23:41,520 --> 00:23:49,679
with this meeting here tonight. You have
to go digging and lurking around to be

257
00:23:47,120 --> 00:23:53,760
able to find what you're looking for.
And what I I don't really understand all

258
00:23:52,159 --> 00:23:59,120
of this how this works, but we're
reviewing our overall ordinances,

259
00:23:56,880 --> 00:24:03,919
not just the data center ordinances. So
why aren't we making modifications

260
00:24:00,960 --> 00:24:08,640
within these current ordinances now that
would control some things that we are

261
00:24:06,640 --> 00:24:13,279
fearful about with the data center such
as noise? I think our decel rate I mean

262
00:24:11,279 --> 00:24:17,919
we only had a very short amount of time
and it took me getting it from Mr.

263
00:24:15,600 --> 00:24:23,039
upholdser who isn't even here tonight.
To be able to review 181 pages in two

264
00:24:20,720 --> 00:24:27,679
days is a lot to ask citizens to pull a
thoughtful discussion and decisionmaking

265
00:24:25,360 --> 00:24:32,080
into how our communities running. This
is a huge lack of transparency. You guys

266
00:24:29,760 --> 00:24:35,600
won't answer questions. You meet in the
dark. We understand that you guys can

267
00:24:34,000 --> 00:24:40,080
have your off-site meetings, but we
should understand what's going to happen

268
00:24:37,600 --> 00:24:44,159
with our lives moving forward. We should
understand what's going to be in our

269
00:24:41,600 --> 00:24:48,000
backyards. I mean, it's some of you
won't even look at us as we're talking

270
00:24:45,840 --> 00:24:51,919
up here. It's very rude actually for us
to take the time out of our evening to

271
00:24:50,080 --> 00:24:56,960
come and speak to you about the
community that we care and love and we

272
00:24:53,840 --> 00:25:01,039
don't even have some of your attention.
That's all we're asking for is

273
00:24:58,640 --> 00:25:06,159
transparency. And I that's what I don't
understand is why aren't we given time

274
00:25:03,760 --> 00:25:11,039
to address the needs of the proposed
data center in our current ordinances

275
00:25:08,480 --> 00:25:14,880
that M1 and all that district overlay
now. And I mean right now you guys are

276
00:25:13,440 --> 00:25:18,880
looking to sell out the marinas
basically with adding living space.

277
00:25:17,039 --> 00:25:22,240
Well, you have you just like all of
these other companies that we're dealing

278
00:25:20,320 --> 00:25:25,679
with. You give one an inch and they're
going to take them out. What the hell's

279
00:25:23,679 --> 00:25:30,097
going to be over here? I mean, we're not
even going to want to live here anymore.

280
00:25:27,200 --> 00:25:32,117
Neither is anybody else.
>> [applause]

281
00:25:34,682 --> 00:25:36,702
[cheering]

282
00:25:42,960 --> 00:25:51,000
» Okay. Any other public comment?
>> All right.

283
00:25:47,840 --> 00:25:51,000
» I do.

284
00:25:54,240 --> 00:26:03,120
My name is Paul Lavin and I live at
13442 Grand View Drive. Been here for

285
00:25:59,840 --> 00:26:07,120
about 45 years. We open this up just
now. I mean, I've never come to a I've

286
00:26:05,120 --> 00:26:13,200
come to one council meeting about water
about 50 30 years ago. Um the meeting

287
00:26:11,600 --> 00:26:19,360
started out with we didn't want to talk
about the data center, but yet I'm

288
00:26:16,080 --> 00:26:24,559
sitting here and that's all anybody
wants to talk about. And I I just can't

289
00:26:22,240 --> 00:26:33,600
help but to think I've been a union rep
where I work for over 20 years. And it's

290
00:26:27,760 --> 00:26:38,480
my job to support the people that I was
responsible for that I represented. And

291
00:26:36,400 --> 00:26:44,159
all that I'm hearing and all that I ever
see when I read the social media and

292
00:26:42,000 --> 00:26:50,720
when I talk to my neighbors, when I talk
to people around here is how much we

293
00:26:46,880 --> 00:26:55,919
don't want it. It's bad. you I read I've
read so little positive about it that

294
00:26:53,600 --> 00:27:02,080
it's kind of scary and like all of you
guys were voted in to protect our

295
00:26:58,720 --> 00:27:08,880
interest and to help us when some big
entity like this comes to try to take

296
00:27:04,960 --> 00:27:15,520
over and that's all I'm hearing is
people are trying to appeal to you to

297
00:27:12,000 --> 00:27:20,799
please don't let this come here nobody
seems to really want it and even though

298
00:27:17,679 --> 00:27:27,760
it might generate some more tax revenue.
I think what I'm hearing is please, even

299
00:27:24,080 --> 00:27:33,679
if we don't have all the fancy newest
technology that every other that that

300
00:27:30,159 --> 00:27:40,240
that that Bloomfield Hills has, I think
that we'd rather have a simple life and

301
00:27:36,080 --> 00:27:45,679
be clean and safe than to have something
like a data center that we really don't

302
00:27:42,720 --> 00:27:52,234
know what it's going to do to us and our
wildlife and our community. And that's

303
00:27:48,559 --> 00:27:54,254
just all I'm hearing. So, thank you.
[applause]

304
00:27:56,819 --> 00:27:58,839
[applause]

305
00:28:01,200 --> 00:28:06,679
» Okay. Next, we have uh approval of the
agenda.

306
00:28:06,880 --> 00:28:10,279
» One more statement.

307
00:28:13,919 --> 00:28:18,640
» One more.
>> Do we have a hand

308
00:28:16,159 --> 00:28:22,720
» for public comment?
Don't like as in like did any of you

309
00:28:20,480 --> 00:28:29,200
guys like do you really want
>> We can you can we can only do one

310
00:28:24,880 --> 00:28:33,679
comment per person per public comment
>> just to be fair to the

311
00:28:30,559 --> 00:28:39,200
» I'm just saying
no one here is in support of the data

312
00:28:37,440 --> 00:28:45,440
center.
You are also elected officials that are

313
00:28:42,399 --> 00:28:48,480
subject to repeal. We're not elected,
but let us carry on with the meeting.

314
00:28:47,360 --> 00:28:50,399
We're going to follow so that we're
consistent in our meeting.

315
00:28:49,440 --> 00:28:53,200
» I will sit down, but
>> thank you.

316
00:28:50,960 --> 00:28:56,200
» No one here is in support of the data
center.

317
00:28:57,734 --> 00:29:01,000
[clears throat]
>> Okay.

318
00:29:02,480 --> 00:29:06,240
» How did you get your job?
>> You're appointed.

319
00:29:04,960 --> 00:29:08,640
» We're appointed.
>> You were appointed by who?

320
00:29:07,360 --> 00:29:15,520
» We're appointed.
>> The mayor appointed you.

321
00:29:12,159 --> 00:29:21,520
Uh it's depending on the timing.
Many mayors.

322
00:29:17,679 --> 00:29:24,080
Um next we have approval of the agenda.
>> Motion to approve the agenda.

323
00:29:23,520 --> 00:29:26,720
» Second.
>> Moved and supported. All in favor say I.

324
00:29:26,080 --> 00:29:31,120
» I.
>> Any opposed?

325
00:29:29,120 --> 00:29:36,240
Uh next item five, we have discussion
and review of the city Gibralar zoning

326
00:29:32,880 --> 00:29:40,240
ordinance amendments chapter 44 zoning.
Uh

327
00:29:37,760 --> 00:29:46,080
do you have updates from previous? I can
go over some notes that

328
00:29:42,720 --> 00:29:49,760
um I put down really quickly.
>> Yeah, if you if you make the through to

329
00:29:48,159 --> 00:29:52,880
the chair I can just kind of give a
recap where we left a recap where we

330
00:29:51,600 --> 00:29:54,960
Yeah. And then we can jump in.
>> Sure.

331
00:29:53,200 --> 00:29:58,640
» Okay. Uh good evening commission. Good
evening public Donovan Smith. Um so at

332
00:29:57,919 --> 00:30:01,679
the last
>> your phone

333
00:29:59,679 --> 00:30:05,440
» Oh, sorry. [clears throat]
>> At the last planet commission meeting,

334
00:30:03,200 --> 00:30:09,440
we reviewed the last two changes.
>> Do you want to present your presentation

335
00:30:07,600 --> 00:30:14,720
» after the discussion? I think Oh, yeah.
after we start this work. Um we left off

336
00:30:12,240 --> 00:30:22,000
with two changes uh as it relates to
storage of vehicles you during the

337
00:30:18,080 --> 00:30:27,600
winter hours if I'm correct and also for
the changes to the waterfront overlay

338
00:30:24,080 --> 00:30:32,080
district and that reszoning process kind
of overall. So, within the current draft

339
00:30:30,559 --> 00:30:37,600
that I sent you first, I just want to
kind of go over what that process is u

340
00:30:34,720 --> 00:30:41,480
for the waterfront overlay district and
let me just pull it up here.

341
00:30:45,039 --> 00:30:53,520
Um, so this would be section 3.21,
the downtown waterfront overlay

342
00:30:50,960 --> 00:30:59,600
district. So, currently that district
sits as an overlay. So there is a

343
00:30:56,799 --> 00:31:04,320
underlining district and then the if you
want to allow what this uh overlay does

344
00:31:02,320 --> 00:31:09,279
is when you want to have public access
improvements. If you want to allow a

345
00:31:06,880 --> 00:31:14,720
resoning in exchange for public access
improvements to allow residential units

346
00:31:12,720 --> 00:31:19,039
above the first floor, which was the
core of of the objective of that

347
00:31:16,640 --> 00:31:24,480
ordinance, a couple things need to
happen. The reasoning is one process and

348
00:31:22,559 --> 00:31:27,440
your site plan approval is a different
process.

349
00:31:25,600 --> 00:31:32,320
The way this describes that process,
they would come to you for a preliminary

350
00:31:29,679 --> 00:31:37,039
site plan. You would get all the details
about what the project is supposed to

351
00:31:34,000 --> 00:31:42,720
be, how the public access is supposed to
work, what the unit mix, what the layout

352
00:31:40,480 --> 00:31:47,120
of the site and development will be, and
you can discuss that at a preliminary

353
00:31:44,480 --> 00:31:50,799
site plan level. That process is already
currently in your current ordinance. So,

354
00:31:49,200 --> 00:31:55,039
we're just saying you can apply it to
this situation

355
00:31:52,799 --> 00:31:59,919
at that time. Once you make all your
initial determinations, you can make a

356
00:31:57,919 --> 00:32:04,880
preliminary site plan approval with
conditions. One of those conditions are

357
00:32:02,320 --> 00:32:08,559
that they do a development agreement
ultimately throughout uh with city

358
00:32:06,480 --> 00:32:13,279
council and they do a public access
agreement. And then you can add other

359
00:32:11,039 --> 00:32:17,919
conditions to the site plan at that
time. And then the last condition is

360
00:32:15,919 --> 00:32:23,200
they have to go through the resoning and
actually require the downtown waterfront

361
00:32:20,799 --> 00:32:29,120
overlay district. So it's site
preliminary site plan conditions one of

362
00:32:26,159 --> 00:32:34,559
those conditions get your reasonzoning
and then you kind of close that phase of

363
00:32:30,880 --> 00:32:39,519
the work then you start the reasoning
process to do your standard resoning

364
00:32:37,600 --> 00:32:44,720
that goes through here public hearing
recommendation city council approval

365
00:32:41,679 --> 00:32:48,640
that preliminary site plan still stands
and if they are approved for the

366
00:32:46,960 --> 00:32:52,960
reasonzoning then everything you
discussed prior to would be standing as

367
00:32:50,960 --> 00:32:57,279
they go forward. So everything in that
initial site plan, the development

368
00:32:55,039 --> 00:33:02,640
agreement, the public access plan, all
of that would go forward through uh from

369
00:32:59,919 --> 00:33:07,440
you, I'm sorry, from you to city council
at the end of that process. And and

370
00:33:04,880 --> 00:33:11,200
that's essentially the whole process.
Whereas where it kind of reads before

371
00:33:09,760 --> 00:33:16,799
and the kind of challenge with
administrating it, it said do the

372
00:33:14,399 --> 00:33:20,320
resoning. You'd get the resoning, but
nothing guarantee guarantees that you

373
00:33:18,720 --> 00:33:25,120
kind of get the product that you asked
for. Um, so what this does is it gives

374
00:33:22,799 --> 00:33:29,279
you that preliminary site plan process.
You can flush out all the hairs and

375
00:33:27,039 --> 00:33:32,640
needles and then say that's what we're
approving and then go get your resoning

376
00:33:31,440 --> 00:33:37,600
and then you can address the
reasonzoning individually and not

377
00:33:34,799 --> 00:33:41,840
conflate it with the site plan process
and then I guess I'll pause there for

378
00:33:39,360 --> 00:33:47,519
questions.
I'll just comment like I mentioned the

379
00:33:44,320 --> 00:33:55,279
last meeting and I think there was some
discussion amongst the commissioners the

380
00:33:52,720 --> 00:34:00,240
the thought or plan has existed in the
city plan for a while as Jeff had

381
00:33:58,159 --> 00:34:08,320
mentioned. However,
allowing that has never existed in the

382
00:34:02,559 --> 00:34:12,560
ordinance. So by approving that change
in the marine district, we would be

383
00:34:10,159 --> 00:34:17,040
adding the capability for that to exist
there, which currently does not exist as

384
00:34:14,480 --> 00:34:22,399
an ordinance only in the city plan. The
ordinance is the last line of defense

385
00:34:19,679 --> 00:34:25,040
for expanding that. That's my thought on
it. So I just I wanted to make that

386
00:34:23,760 --> 00:34:28,879
clear because that was like that's a
discrepancy

387
00:34:26,639 --> 00:34:32,639
from what we said last month. It's not
it's not ever been in the ordinance.

388
00:34:30,720 --> 00:34:37,280
It's been in the site or in the city
plan like the future plan.

389
00:34:34,879 --> 00:34:43,040
» It actually is. Correct me if I'm wrong,
Donovan, but section 44895 of the city

390
00:34:40,879 --> 00:34:47,520
ordinance is the downtown waterfront
overlay district

391
00:34:45,200 --> 00:34:52,720
which was brought into the city
ordinance in I believe

392
00:34:50,399 --> 00:34:55,040
2013.
>> Yep. [clears throat]

393
00:34:53,440 --> 00:35:00,079
» And what was the discussion that we had
the last time we brought it? So I

394
00:34:57,839 --> 00:35:03,760
believe a lot of the discussion at our
last meeting was some of the changes

395
00:35:03,229 --> 00:35:06,000
[clears throat]
>> that were

396
00:35:04,800 --> 00:35:08,640
» it's the bill. Oh, it's the
>> it was the residential

397
00:35:06,880 --> 00:35:10,079
» above the residential above change.
>> Y

398
00:35:08,960 --> 00:35:12,960
» yes
>> cuz currently um see if I can double

399
00:35:12,000 --> 00:35:15,280
check it here.
>> That's the change that's really

400
00:35:14,640 --> 00:35:22,160
» Yes. And
>> the only concern anyways in my opinion

401
00:35:17,680 --> 00:35:29,280
but that's what we're here to discuss.
>> Yep. So, as currently constituted in our

402
00:35:24,480 --> 00:35:36,320
zoning ordinance, um, if you look at
K, it says that,

403
00:35:34,160 --> 00:35:38,720
uh, oh, wait, I just lost it. Sorry.
>> Yep. I have it here if you want.

404
00:35:37,760 --> 00:35:42,560
» Thank you. Go ahead.
>> So, under K, building height

405
00:35:40,240 --> 00:35:48,320
requirements and bonus to get the
building height bonus, the exchange was

406
00:35:45,359 --> 00:35:52,160
to allow residential units above.
Currently in your current draft for the

407
00:35:50,320 --> 00:35:56,800
waterfront overlay district, it does
allow residential units on the upper

408
00:35:54,079 --> 00:36:01,040
floors. So the question during the last
meeting was do we want to keep that or

409
00:35:59,359 --> 00:36:04,880
there was question should we take it out
and not allow residential units above it

410
00:36:03,040 --> 00:36:10,480
at all. It's currently within your
ordinance. The improvement you get in

411
00:36:07,200 --> 00:36:13,760
this draft is the process that kind of
gives you a bit more teeth into getting

412
00:36:12,240 --> 00:36:18,400
that final product that you want. But
the current doesn't

413
00:36:16,079 --> 00:36:22,000
» we give me one second.
>> It's actually under M permitted uses.

414
00:36:20,400 --> 00:36:28,200
Keep going down.
>> Yeah, it's under that second table.

415
00:36:25,200 --> 00:36:28,200
» You

416
00:36:29,920 --> 00:36:33,880
say residential uses.

417
00:36:35,839 --> 00:36:41,119
» What page is that?
>> Page.

418
00:36:39,680 --> 00:36:43,280
» Oh, it's not in there. We're in the
ordinance.

419
00:36:41,680 --> 00:36:47,920
» Oh, yeah.
If you pull up the zoning ordinance,

420
00:36:45,520 --> 00:36:50,480
just type in water overlay district.
>> Okay.

421
00:36:48,480 --> 00:36:56,000
» Click on that section and scroll to the
very bottom.

422
00:36:52,240 --> 00:36:59,599
» Yep. Section 44-895
subm

423
00:36:57,760 --> 00:37:04,079
is permitted uses in the waterfront
overlay district. Currently, those are

424
00:37:02,160 --> 00:37:10,079
all the uses permitted in the C1
district. boat, libraries, marinas,

425
00:37:06,720 --> 00:37:14,480
retail sales, uh buildings and uses
customarily accessory to other uses,

426
00:37:12,720 --> 00:37:19,280
publicly owned buildings, residential
units on upper floors of buildings,

427
00:37:17,119 --> 00:37:24,640
professional offices, restaurants, bars,
canoe and kayak facilities.

428
00:37:21,119 --> 00:37:29,119
» What was our who else was on here? What
was our previous discussion that we had

429
00:37:26,079 --> 00:37:34,079
like a year ago then when they came that
was the discussion was allowing business

430
00:37:31,440 --> 00:37:37,680
commercial on the first floor and
residential

431
00:37:35,599 --> 00:37:41,760
on the second floor. We deferred the
discussion and then it came up at the

432
00:37:39,760 --> 00:37:45,839
last meeting
10 months later.

433
00:37:44,240 --> 00:37:50,320
So, I wasn't here.
>> I I don't I can't remember the

434
00:37:48,079 --> 00:37:55,359
» I wasn't here for that discussion, but I
do I believe I recall what building

435
00:37:53,200 --> 00:38:01,200
you're talking about. And I think part
of the problem was with the water

436
00:37:57,920 --> 00:38:08,320
overlay district, this commission has to
approve that

437
00:38:03,440 --> 00:38:13,839
applying to any building. So it it's not
necessarily okay. It's automatically

438
00:38:11,599 --> 00:38:18,480
zoned to have residential in the second
floor. It has to go through the process.

439
00:38:16,480 --> 00:38:24,400
And the changes that McKenna is
recommending to us is to tighten up that

440
00:38:20,800 --> 00:38:29,119
process to make sure that no one can
skip steps and the planning commission

441
00:38:26,720 --> 00:38:32,480
has more control throughout that process
>> than current.

442
00:38:30,079 --> 00:38:41,200
» Yes. And if I recall correctly, again, I
wasn't here, but learning about it after

443
00:38:36,160 --> 00:38:46,079
the fact, it wasn't something that was
initially coming through during like the

444
00:38:43,760 --> 00:38:50,800
building stage. It was an after the
fact, hey, there's residential units

445
00:38:48,640 --> 00:38:54,960
there. How do you want to handle it kind
of deal?

446
00:38:51,520 --> 00:38:58,720
» Yeah, pretty much.
Um, [sighs]

447
00:38:56,640 --> 00:39:03,040
okay. And then if I may add through the
chair, this is also in exchange for the

448
00:39:00,720 --> 00:39:08,960
two additional stories. So if you want
the two additional stories, the exchange

449
00:39:05,680 --> 00:39:13,200
was the public access and the
residential or the uses that come with

450
00:39:11,599 --> 00:39:17,359
the overlay
>> which requires the

451
00:39:15,440 --> 00:39:20,800
riverfront walk and all the other stuff.
>> Yes.

452
00:39:18,880 --> 00:39:25,520
And and that's why this at least this
over overlay is a little unique because

453
00:39:22,960 --> 00:39:30,720
it the intent of it is to provide uh
public access. whereas other overlays

454
00:39:28,160 --> 00:39:34,400
kind of strictly just permit additional
uses. This one and that's why you have

455
00:39:32,880 --> 00:39:38,480
to have the development agreement and
the public access components. So as you

456
00:39:36,880 --> 00:39:41,359
go through that process, you're you're
hitting all those boxes.

457
00:39:39,359 --> 00:39:44,720
» So it still allows public access access
so folks can see the river and

458
00:39:43,760 --> 00:39:47,280
» yes,
>> etc.

459
00:39:45,520 --> 00:39:52,079
» Have to a couple concerns about the
public access and the riverwalk.

460
00:39:49,920 --> 00:39:56,240
If someone was going to come in and
develop that all at once, then the

461
00:39:53,839 --> 00:40:02,240
Riverwalk would probably look nice. But
if we have um developers that come in

462
00:39:59,280 --> 00:40:07,359
sporadically and develop the Riverwalk's
going to kind of be a mismatch and who's

463
00:40:05,119 --> 00:40:13,119
responsible for that riverwalk. I don't
think we've really discussed that in

464
00:40:09,839 --> 00:40:17,440
detail. I mean, are the the owners of
the building going to be responsible for

465
00:40:14,640 --> 00:40:20,400
the riverwalk? Does the city What about
snow shoveling? you know who's gonna get

466
00:40:19,680 --> 00:40:24,880
are they gonna
>> that's some of that stuff that I

467
00:40:23,280 --> 00:40:26,480
» I have some do you want to keep going or
do you want me to cover some of the

468
00:40:25,920 --> 00:40:28,400
stuff that I
>> I can answer that one and then we'll go

469
00:40:27,760 --> 00:40:33,839
to yours. Okay.
>> So through the chair so currently

470
00:40:31,280 --> 00:40:37,599
» in that initial step the ordinance in in
most cases won't address all of those.

471
00:40:36,000 --> 00:40:41,760
You will have to go through the
development agreement to identify

472
00:40:39,599 --> 00:40:46,000
because that's going to have to be a a
give and go with staff the

473
00:40:43,839 --> 00:40:50,480
administration and the property owner or
the developer. So that will get

474
00:40:48,240 --> 00:40:54,000
addressed in your preliminary site plan
phase. So before you get into the

475
00:40:52,079 --> 00:40:59,760
resoning, before you get into your final
site plan, you can have those initial

476
00:40:56,640 --> 00:41:05,839
conversations publicly with the the
developer or property owner about

477
00:41:02,400 --> 00:41:09,680
access, uh, maintenance, you know, what
this property, how is it going to

478
00:41:07,200 --> 00:41:12,160
function adjacent to this property? That
does give you the opportunity to have

479
00:41:11,200 --> 00:41:15,040
all those conversations.
>> I thought that's what we were trying to

480
00:41:13,200 --> 00:41:20,880
get away from. I thought that part of
the reason we wanted to get this in

481
00:41:16,960 --> 00:41:26,319
writing was so we could say yes your
sidewalk will be like this you'll the

482
00:41:23,520 --> 00:41:30,480
maintenance will be done by this person
you know versus let's negotiate this I

483
00:41:29,200 --> 00:41:36,000
thought that's what we were trying to
get away from so we had guidance in

484
00:41:33,920 --> 00:41:41,440
place
>> in your current ordinance you didn't

485
00:41:38,000 --> 00:41:46,079
really have the the process to to do any
of those things so now you have the

486
00:41:43,200 --> 00:41:51,040
process to ask those questions and get
them included within the plan itself.

487
00:41:47,920 --> 00:41:53,280
» Ask those questions versus
>> standards.

488
00:41:51,920 --> 00:41:58,240
» What you're getting at is what I
brought. So, I I sent uh some notes. I

489
00:41:56,560 --> 00:42:03,280
broke it into five categories of things
that I think should be included in the

490
00:41:59,520 --> 00:42:08,720
ordinance. Um the first one's fis a
fiscal impact review. So, before final

491
00:42:05,359 --> 00:42:12,960
approval, this would be included in the
ordinance in my opinion. Uh before the

492
00:42:11,280 --> 00:42:17,280
final approval of the zoning map
amendment, require the applicant funded

493
00:42:14,960 --> 00:42:23,599
information, projected taxable value,
property tax revenue, the impact to

494
00:42:19,920 --> 00:42:30,960
police, fire, DPW, water, sewer,
required public improvements, any

495
00:42:26,240 --> 00:42:34,319
requested tax abatement type stuff um or
city obligations. So that would be like

496
00:42:32,720 --> 00:42:37,680
one line item that you would add in
there. Another one would be like require

497
00:42:36,319 --> 00:42:42,319
the planning commission and city council
to consider whether requested overlay

498
00:42:39,440 --> 00:42:46,079
benefits are supported by the identif
benefits such as increased taxable

499
00:42:44,160 --> 00:42:50,800
value, public waterfront access,
infrastructure improvements. Um we would

500
00:42:49,040 --> 00:42:54,319
add in a development agreement. So
require city council approved agreement

501
00:42:52,720 --> 00:42:59,920
when a project uses the overlay
incentives or creates a public access

502
00:42:57,520 --> 00:43:04,079
infrastructure phasing maintenance or
financial obligations. The agreement

503
00:43:01,520 --> 00:43:07,520
should identify the timing,
the easements, and the continuing

504
00:43:05,920 --> 00:43:10,640
responsibilities.
The next one would be cost and

505
00:43:08,800 --> 00:43:14,720
maintenance. So state that overlay
approval does not obligate the city to

506
00:43:12,319 --> 00:43:19,920
construct, finance, operate or maintain
the project related improvements unless

507
00:43:17,599 --> 00:43:25,359
city council agrees
uh expressly agrees in writing and then

508
00:43:23,200 --> 00:43:30,560
a traffic review. So like traffic impact
study which is part of site plan kind of

509
00:43:28,000 --> 00:43:36,400
but to your point
and it's probably a

510
00:43:34,000 --> 00:43:40,160
an overstep but with all the things I
put here but in my opinion like I

511
00:43:38,560 --> 00:43:44,160
mentioned last month for me to make a
decision on an ordinance that could

512
00:43:41,920 --> 00:43:50,480
potentially impact the city and either
be a taxable gain to offset tax gaps we

513
00:43:48,560 --> 00:43:53,520
have it's tough for me to make a
decision on an ordinance if I don't know

514
00:43:51,680 --> 00:43:58,240
if we're going to actually like if it's
going to be posit positive or negative

515
00:43:54,880 --> 00:44:01,520
for the city. Um
so

516
00:43:59,760 --> 00:44:05,520
recommend adding a fiscal financial
review before the overlay resoning

517
00:44:03,119 --> 00:44:09,520
approval. Require development agreement.
Clarify riverwalk ownership so that we

518
00:44:08,079 --> 00:44:14,000
know who has to take care of it after
it's built. And then confirm the project

519
00:44:11,760 --> 00:44:19,839
related infrastructure costs are not
shifted to general taxpayers.

520
00:44:17,280 --> 00:44:25,760
Those are the things that I wanted added
to it. And I agree with you. Now, after

521
00:44:23,280 --> 00:44:30,400
talking, it does add another layer, but
to Maryanne's point, it's not explicitly

522
00:44:28,160 --> 00:44:34,480
documented. So, let's say tomorrow
Garrett's like, "You suck at planning

523
00:44:32,800 --> 00:44:39,520
commission. You're not here anymore."
Uh, I'm joking kind of. Um, then someone

524
00:44:38,000 --> 00:44:43,839
else will be here, right? Or if anybody
shifts, if we don't remember that down

525
00:44:42,000 --> 00:44:47,520
the road, no one will ask the question
in the site plan review or going to city

526
00:44:46,160 --> 00:44:52,160
council. So if it's not explicitly
documented as a process, it doesn't

527
00:44:50,560 --> 00:44:58,240
exist in my opinion. That's that's just
the way that I think about stuff. So I

528
00:44:54,480 --> 00:45:01,520
would have it defined so that we can
make sure we're doing it.

529
00:44:59,920 --> 00:45:05,280
» Okay.
>> What happened? I mean, we know we've had

530
00:45:03,440 --> 00:45:08,800
a hard time in JIB to bring small
businesses and then keep them alive and

531
00:45:07,359 --> 00:45:13,920
sustainable, right? We got a bunch of
empty buildings. Businesses now they

532
00:45:11,200 --> 00:45:16,960
come in. So, we get businesses, we build
the residential, then the businesses go

533
00:45:15,760 --> 00:45:21,760
under and you got a bunch of empty
commercials. Is there nothing in the

534
00:45:19,520 --> 00:45:24,640
ordinance that controls that or I think
the first thing they do is come back and

535
00:45:23,200 --> 00:45:29,119
say, "Well, we can't get businesses, so
I want to put more housing on the first

536
00:45:26,400 --> 00:45:33,040
floor and get away from commercial."
That's probably be the first thing after

537
00:45:31,200 --> 00:45:35,520
a short amount of time. It's tricky
because you got to build it in a way

538
00:45:34,079 --> 00:45:38,560
where the business can evolve to make
money but at the same time doesn't

539
00:45:37,040 --> 00:45:43,040
change the
>> culture of the city and the impact

540
00:45:40,960 --> 00:45:45,520
impacts like
all the resources we have. It's a

541
00:45:44,560 --> 00:45:48,800
challenge.
>> Yes.

542
00:45:46,720 --> 00:45:54,160
» At the same time, if they close, you
still get they still have to pay

543
00:45:50,319 --> 00:45:59,160
property taxes, right? Technically, it
just looks bad.

544
00:45:56,160 --> 00:45:59,160
» Yeah.

545
00:46:01,920 --> 00:46:05,680
Go ahead. Do you want to share your
presentation or is there more

546
00:46:04,720 --> 00:46:12,800
discussion?
>> I can respond to your five points. Um,

547
00:46:08,640 --> 00:46:18,240
so for the fiscal impact, you could fit
it in your uh site plan approval

548
00:46:15,359 --> 00:46:23,119
standards for the overlay as a
recommendation going for in the process.

549
00:46:21,280 --> 00:46:27,280
And the reason why it would have to be a
recommendation

550
00:46:24,640 --> 00:46:33,280
is because for for within what you're
permitted to review within a site plan,

551
00:46:29,839 --> 00:46:37,599
the fiscal impact starts to creep on
just outside of that. And and that's

552
00:46:35,920 --> 00:46:41,280
that's the challenge in trying to
require traffic impact studies are a

553
00:46:39,760 --> 00:46:45,920
little different because that is
directly included within the site plan

554
00:46:43,200 --> 00:46:49,520
elements. the fiscal impact. I would say
you can include it as a recommendation

555
00:46:47,839 --> 00:46:52,640
for consideration in the development
agreement. And I can fit that language

556
00:46:51,119 --> 00:46:55,440
in here pretty explicit.
>> You can put it in there.

557
00:46:53,599 --> 00:46:58,640
» I can put that in there because that
says when you go through your

558
00:46:56,560 --> 00:47:04,079
preliminary agreement and you require a
development agreement, which it does say

559
00:47:00,400 --> 00:47:09,200
is required in that you can request city
council include a fiscal impact study.

560
00:47:07,040 --> 00:47:13,760
That is doable. and through the chair. I
thought we were going to see that

561
00:47:11,599 --> 00:47:17,680
» on this copy.
>> I thought that was already a given that

562
00:47:16,240 --> 00:47:21,280
that was going to be updated.
>> That sentence is the only thing that's

563
00:47:19,520 --> 00:47:24,720
not in there. All the other aspects are
in the current draft because we're we're

564
00:47:23,280 --> 00:47:30,079
just discussing it now. So, that
specific sentence that I can require uh

565
00:47:27,920 --> 00:47:32,720
the fiscal impact to be included in that
development agreement as a

566
00:47:31,280 --> 00:47:36,560
recommendation from planning commission,
city council, I can put that in. They

567
00:47:34,640 --> 00:47:41,920
couldn't put it in with me sending it
without discussion of

568
00:47:38,560 --> 00:47:45,760
» the broader group, which is good.
>> Um,

569
00:47:44,319 --> 00:47:49,119
and then what about the cost and
maintenance? So that like

570
00:47:47,280 --> 00:47:51,359
» cost and maintenance is spelled out in
your development agreement

571
00:47:49,920 --> 00:47:53,359
» that they're required.
>> Yes.

572
00:47:51,680 --> 00:47:57,040
» To handle all of it.
>> It's to be sorted out in the development

573
00:47:55,200 --> 00:48:03,040
agreement because it right now you don't
know exactly what that is. So if you say

574
00:48:00,319 --> 00:48:06,079
yes, they have to do all of it. you I
just don't know what that exact case may

575
00:48:04,640 --> 00:48:09,920
be when it comes about.
>> Well, I think this is where it's like,

576
00:48:08,480 --> 00:48:14,319
you know,
>> it's tricky. I mean, and so the public

577
00:48:11,440 --> 00:48:19,599
knows like we're not uh we're not
elected

578
00:48:15,839 --> 00:48:23,680
people in this board, city council is um
not everyone went to school for being a

579
00:48:22,319 --> 00:48:28,079
planning commissioner and things like
that. So over time, you gain knowledge

580
00:48:25,760 --> 00:48:33,599
of doing it. My concern is if it's not
clearly documented what folks should do

581
00:48:31,440 --> 00:48:38,079
for the betterment of the city, then if
you have the wrong folks there, nothing

582
00:48:36,319 --> 00:48:41,760
against them, they may not know. So then
you could skip something and then you're

583
00:48:40,079 --> 00:48:46,079
stuck with what you have, right? So I
like to have it listed.

584
00:48:43,599 --> 00:48:50,160
» And I get that that's probably not
standard across cities, but in my

585
00:48:48,000 --> 00:48:56,400
opinion, that's the way that you set a
standard and it sticks for many years.

586
00:48:52,960 --> 00:49:01,359
other otherwise it'll be like you know
eventually we'll change right

587
00:48:58,240 --> 00:49:05,839
» and I I can uh respond to that and then
I'll read just this this subsection

588
00:49:04,000 --> 00:49:08,880
» um it says the develop this is under
development agreements within the

589
00:49:07,359 --> 00:49:12,079
waterfront overlay the development
agreement it shall incorporate the

590
00:49:10,400 --> 00:49:15,839
applicable conditions of the site plan
approval which is that preliminary we

591
00:49:13,760 --> 00:49:20,480
discussed address the design
construction timing phasing completion

592
00:49:18,000 --> 00:49:25,359
maintenance and inspection uh of the
required public access impro access

593
00:49:22,240 --> 00:49:29,440
access improvements, uh, responsibility
for construction and maintenance such as

594
00:49:27,520 --> 00:49:34,319
improvements and dedication of granting
and required easements or other public

595
00:49:31,280 --> 00:49:37,440
interest. All that would be required in
your development agreement

596
00:49:35,520 --> 00:49:41,760
» to discuss, but it doesn't explicitly
say that the builder or investor is

597
00:49:39,359 --> 00:49:47,280
responsible for those. That means that
if at some point planning commission or

598
00:49:44,880 --> 00:49:52,400
city council could say the taxpayers
could be responsible for a portion of

599
00:49:50,160 --> 00:49:56,960
the investment in a property that
someone bought

600
00:49:54,240 --> 00:50:00,480
» if council chose to agree to that in
that development agreement.

601
00:49:58,319 --> 00:50:08,240
» So this is our opportunity to
>> not allow that. If you were to say it

602
00:50:03,680 --> 00:50:14,079
has to be 100% provided by the paid for
by the private side,

603
00:50:10,400 --> 00:50:17,599
» would we ever would I don't know
>> like would we ever

604
00:50:15,920 --> 00:50:22,559
» you don't know just yet.
>> And the reason if you put it in, you

605
00:50:20,640 --> 00:50:27,520
can't have the other situation because
you've outlawed it. If you say it has to

606
00:50:24,880 --> 00:50:31,920
be 100% private, everyone has to be
private. And if there is a situation

607
00:50:29,839 --> 00:50:35,520
where there's a tradeoff or a benefit,
you really can't explore it because

608
00:50:33,440 --> 00:50:40,000
you've locked yourself out of the
option. If you leave it open, it still

609
00:50:38,319 --> 00:50:43,119
has to go through public discussion and
legal review and here and that either

610
00:50:42,400 --> 00:50:46,319
way.
>> That's fair.

611
00:50:43,680 --> 00:50:50,319
» I mean, if it's 100% private when they
have the decision what it looks like,

612
00:50:48,960 --> 00:50:54,720
could you have the city council say it
looks like this and we want gold handles

613
00:50:52,960 --> 00:51:00,000
and that's going to be on the developer
or would the developer take full? That

614
00:50:57,680 --> 00:51:05,880
would be a part of the negotiation. Once
you get into that development agreement

615
00:51:01,599 --> 00:51:05,880
phase, it is a negotiation.

616
00:51:06,079 --> 00:51:12,800
» And and this ordinance doesn't
necessarily create a full blown out

617
00:51:10,960 --> 00:51:17,520
development agreement ordinance. It just
says in this case when you want to do an

618
00:51:14,880 --> 00:51:21,280
overlay, you have to do a development.
So ultimately without opening

619
00:51:19,359 --> 00:51:25,520
» forcing the development discussion, what
we include in the development discussion

620
00:51:22,880 --> 00:51:29,440
are recommendations.
Ult I'm sorry because ultimately it has

621
00:51:27,680 --> 00:51:31,839
to go to city council and they make the
final decision. You'll make a

622
00:51:30,720 --> 00:51:35,280
recommendation
>> of all the things that should be in it

623
00:51:33,359 --> 00:51:40,000
but ultimately is city councils cuz
they're going into an agreement with the

624
00:51:36,800 --> 00:51:43,000
developer for public access.
>> Okay.

625
00:51:43,760 --> 00:51:50,400
» Um another piece we also discussed were
changes. So if there is a change to a

626
00:51:48,079 --> 00:51:55,240
site plan uh after you've approved it
within the overlay that comes back to

627
00:51:51,920 --> 00:51:55,240
you as well.

628
00:51:55,599 --> 00:52:03,400
Um, and those are all the changes. The
last piece, uh, let me go here to our

629
00:52:00,400 --> 00:52:03,400
table.

630
00:52:03,440 --> 00:52:11,440
Um, in your table of permitted uses, so
this is page 31. If you're looking at

631
00:52:08,079 --> 00:52:16,640
the draft itself, there are a few uses
that we missed. Um, marinas, we caught

632
00:52:15,040 --> 00:52:21,680
we caught that at the last meeting. I
think one of the commissioners brought

633
00:52:17,760 --> 00:52:26,160
that up to me. Um, accessory buildings
and structures and uses. I highlighted

634
00:52:23,359 --> 00:52:31,760
these in yellow. Um, so if we could kind
of populate that one. Hotels and lodging

635
00:52:29,680 --> 00:52:37,480
facilities and laundry and dry clean
establishments. Those are the last three

636
00:52:34,000 --> 00:52:37,480
that we missed.

637
00:52:38,640 --> 00:52:43,800
» Bless you.
>> Do we want to

638
00:52:44,559 --> 00:52:51,119
» down on page
>> and it starts at 32 actually.

639
00:52:48,960 --> 00:52:54,400
» Down on 54 though. I think you'll have
to add marinas in that section also

640
00:52:53,520 --> 00:52:58,960
» to the big table.
>> C3 marina commercial where it says

641
00:52:56,240 --> 00:53:02,640
permitted uses special accessories.
>> I gota

642
00:53:00,480 --> 00:53:09,119
» just
it's more detail over the

643
00:53:06,720 --> 00:53:16,160
» I guess I guess we didn't I mean that's
up for discussion also, right? Do we

644
00:53:11,520 --> 00:53:18,240
want to include hotels and lodging as a
permitted use? Is that that's what we're

645
00:53:17,680 --> 00:53:22,400
saying, right?
>> Yes.

646
00:53:19,839 --> 00:53:26,079
I'm a pretty heavy no on that one
personally

647
00:53:23,920 --> 00:53:28,240
» and and you if you don't want it at all,
I would just remove that line all

648
00:53:27,599 --> 00:53:32,240
together.
>> I mean, it's a discussion with us,

649
00:53:29,920 --> 00:53:35,839
right? I But I
>> I would agree with you.

650
00:53:33,280 --> 00:53:40,079
» I'm a pretty I'm a I'm a big no on that
one personally. Um

651
00:53:38,000 --> 00:53:45,319
» that might be why it's not highlighted.
It was probably a discussion item we

652
00:53:41,920 --> 00:53:45,319
never got to.

653
00:53:50,160 --> 00:53:53,559
Oh, I see.

654
00:53:58,880 --> 00:54:03,720
» I added Marina to that C3 table.

655
00:54:07,680 --> 00:54:13,559
» Do we Do we want that in there? Should
Do we have to

656
00:54:13,839 --> 00:54:23,920
You you can do a motion to remove hotels
and lodging facilities

657
00:54:19,760 --> 00:54:25,440
as a permitted use in its entirety.
>> You got to talk a little bit louder,

658
00:54:25,119 --> 00:54:29,160
please.
>> Oh, I ap I apolog.

659
00:54:30,000 --> 00:54:36,880
I'll make a motion to remove hotels and
lodging from the proposed

660
00:54:34,319 --> 00:54:42,160
» permitted uses of the C3 overlay
district

661
00:54:38,720 --> 00:54:44,000
» or in in its entirety cuz right now the
way

662
00:54:42,400 --> 00:54:49,920
» it entirety
>> I'll second that.

663
00:54:47,440 --> 00:54:51,520
» Moved [snorts] and supported. All in
favor say I.

664
00:54:51,119 --> 00:54:54,880
» I.
>> I.

665
00:54:51,920 --> 00:54:57,920
» Any opposed?
>> Okay.

666
00:54:55,200 --> 00:55:03,720
» Okay. I feel better now. Do you want to
do the same for laundry and dry clean

667
00:55:00,720 --> 00:55:03,720
establishments?

668
00:55:04,160 --> 00:55:09,280
» I don't.
>> They might need that as a business

669
00:55:06,640 --> 00:55:12,000
underneath the [laughter]
>> Yeah, they might need that at the bottom

670
00:55:10,800 --> 00:55:15,280
of the
>> residential

671
00:55:12,800 --> 00:55:18,640
» thing if we do that. Yeah.
>> Yeah, we should. I would think we'd

672
00:55:16,800 --> 00:55:23,760
remove it. I mean, it's close to the
water. You don't know what'll happen

673
00:55:21,040 --> 00:55:26,960
with any toxic
>> runoff

674
00:55:24,319 --> 00:55:30,400
» chem runoff or chemicals they use there.
>> So that would have to be a motion

675
00:55:28,559 --> 00:55:34,880
specific. Someone would have to make a
motion specific to the C3 Marine Overlay

676
00:55:33,040 --> 00:55:37,920
District to remove
>> No, this is just in general. So this is

677
00:55:37,440 --> 00:55:40,800
just
>> Oh, this is the full general one.

678
00:55:39,119 --> 00:55:44,800
» Yeah. Okay.
>> So you can either add it to C1, C2, C3.

679
00:55:44,319 --> 00:55:48,799
You can add it.
>> We have to make motion it because this

680
00:55:46,960 --> 00:55:51,760
isn't approved yet. So why do we have to
make a motion to remove

681
00:55:50,720 --> 00:55:54,240
» just to get agreement
>> collective agreement

682
00:55:53,119 --> 00:55:59,920
» through the chair? I apologize.
>> Yeah, I'll make a motion to remove

683
00:55:56,640 --> 00:56:02,240
laundromats from the C3 Marina Overlay
district.

684
00:56:00,559 --> 00:56:04,880
» From the entire ordinance, not just the
C3.

685
00:56:03,119 --> 00:56:06,880
» Yeah, it's from the entire ordinance.
Sure.

686
00:56:05,280 --> 00:56:09,839
» Well, that that means they can't do it
anywhere else. That's what

687
00:56:08,400 --> 00:56:15,359
» correct. Do you want it removed where
like someone couldn't buy

688
00:56:12,559 --> 00:56:24,079
a bank and turn it into a laundromat or
do you want it where it just can't be

689
00:56:18,000 --> 00:56:28,960
underneath the C3 overlay or in Humbug?
>> Well, I know there's they use a lot of

690
00:56:25,520 --> 00:56:33,119
chemicals in mats. Um,
I mean, I would make the motion so we

691
00:56:30,960 --> 00:56:38,000
don't have a laundromat
throughout our ordinance

692
00:56:35,599 --> 00:56:43,839
if that's if everyone is in agreement
with that. If not, then I would go for

693
00:56:40,160 --> 00:56:51,119
just the C3 overlay
Marina district.

694
00:56:47,280 --> 00:56:56,079
» For the entire city. Okay. So your
motion is to laundromats as permitted

695
00:56:54,880 --> 00:56:59,200
use
>> throughout the city. Correct.

696
00:56:58,079 --> 00:57:03,000
» Dry cleaners.
>> Dry cleaners. Yes.

697
00:57:03,680 --> 00:57:09,520
» Any other discussion?
>> I

698
00:57:08,240 --> 00:57:15,359
I'm just thinking of like the other
parts of the city like over by the

699
00:57:12,559 --> 00:57:19,760
um Dollar General there's the vacant
building that used to be like the

700
00:57:17,280 --> 00:57:21,680
veterinary clinic like 20 years ago.
Dennis,

701
00:57:20,400 --> 00:57:25,599
» I don't know if you could separate dry
cleaning from laundromats. Laund mats,

702
00:57:24,160 --> 00:57:28,640
someone's washing machine breaks down or
they don't have one and they go wash

703
00:57:26,960 --> 00:57:31,040
their clothes like all of our houses do
on a daily basis.

704
00:57:30,000 --> 00:57:34,400
» I don't think it's any difference
whether your business now dry cleaning,

705
00:57:32,799 --> 00:57:43,160
yes, there might be chemicals, but to
say it to remove laundry mats,

706
00:57:37,920 --> 00:57:43,160
» it's just not feasible to support.

707
00:57:43,520 --> 00:57:49,440
» That's up to the business owner, though.
>> If I could open it, I could come in and

708
00:57:47,680 --> 00:57:52,400
open it. If I go broke, I go broke.
>> Yeah, that one doesn't really

709
00:57:50,640 --> 00:57:55,760
» Doesn't the marina already have washers
and dryers

710
00:57:54,079 --> 00:57:57,440
where the men's and ladies room are in
that building there?

711
00:57:56,880 --> 00:58:01,920
» I don't know.
>> It's probably a good point. I'm not

712
00:57:58,880 --> 00:58:06,400
sure, but possibly. But I'm not against
washers and dryers, everybody. It's not.

713
00:58:05,280 --> 00:58:09,760
» Yeah, [laughter] that one doesn't bother
that one doesn't bother me too much. We

714
00:58:08,160 --> 00:58:12,240
have to
>> Yeah.

715
00:58:10,160 --> 00:58:14,960
» I mean, we all put in the same gray
water sewers and and everything like

716
00:58:13,680 --> 00:58:19,760
that. I can see if they're dumping it on
the ground, but

717
00:58:17,680 --> 00:58:23,599
Yeah, I remember
>> and uh yeah,

718
00:58:21,520 --> 00:58:27,200
» it what I could recommend if you wanted
to allow them in in some limited

719
00:58:25,680 --> 00:58:31,680
capacity
uh to allow them in the C1 district,

720
00:58:29,440 --> 00:58:36,880
which is your least used commercial
district, you really only have it at the

721
00:58:33,920 --> 00:58:41,520
intersection of uh Jefferson and
Jialter, I believe, and there's one on

722
00:58:39,119 --> 00:58:45,520
Gibralar. Um, I would not recommend it
in your C3, which is your marine

723
00:58:43,599 --> 00:58:51,040
district, and then you have a lot more
C2 general commercial, um, which may add

724
00:58:49,200 --> 00:58:56,000
more of it or allow more of it than you
may initially want. So, if you did want

725
00:58:53,920 --> 00:59:01,680
to allow it, you could leave it as a
permitted or special land use in the C1

726
00:58:59,119 --> 00:59:06,160
district that allows it if somebody
wants to make it work.

727
00:59:03,839 --> 00:59:11,920
» That's a fair compromise. That's fair.
>> But not for a dry cleaner. effort dry

728
00:59:09,119 --> 00:59:15,200
cleaner.
>> Laundry mates don't bother me as much as

729
00:59:13,520 --> 00:59:19,200
a dry cleaner does.
>> Understood. Is Is that the agreement to

730
00:59:17,839 --> 00:59:23,760
allow
>> someone would have to make a motion?

731
00:59:21,520 --> 00:59:29,440
» Already on the table
unless you'd like to amend your motion.

732
00:59:26,240 --> 00:59:34,160
» Well, we didn't vote on it. So, um you
want to vote on it and then if it

733
00:59:30,880 --> 00:59:40,720
doesn't pass, I'll amend it.
>> Moved in. So just for clarity, Maryann's

734
00:59:37,520 --> 00:59:45,040
original amendment was to remove
laundry and dry cleaning from all

735
00:59:43,359 --> 00:59:48,400
districts
>> as a permitted use.

736
00:59:46,079 --> 00:59:51,440
» As a permitted use. That's what we're
voting on right now.

737
00:59:49,839 --> 00:59:54,079
» Both laundry and dry cleaning.
>> Yes.

738
00:59:51,920 --> 00:59:58,319
» That's for everywhere.
Moved and supported. All in favor say I.

739
00:59:57,040 --> 01:00:02,400
» I.
>> Any opposed?

740
01:00:01,440 --> 01:00:06,240
» Okay. Let me call.
>> I'm I'm Okay. Okay. Baker,

741
01:00:05,440 --> 01:00:07,920
» no.
>> Bil,

742
01:00:07,040 --> 01:00:10,400
» no.
>> Cox,

743
01:00:08,559 --> 01:00:12,079
» no.
>> Hutchinson,

744
01:00:11,119 --> 01:00:13,440
» no.
>> McCarthy,

745
01:00:12,960 --> 01:00:14,880
» yes.
>> Hyatt,

746
01:00:14,079 --> 01:00:16,319
» yes.
>> Dicks,

747
01:00:15,440 --> 01:00:24,240
» nope.
>> Thank you. Amen. The motion for just the

748
01:00:19,040 --> 01:00:30,280
dry cleaning to eliminate a dry cleaners
from being able to establish business in

749
01:00:27,280 --> 01:00:30,280
districts

750
01:00:31,599 --> 01:00:35,280
in all districts. Yes.

751
01:00:37,760 --> 01:00:41,480
I don't know what's going on.

752
01:00:46,079 --> 01:00:51,040
» Can you say that one more time? I'm
sorry. We

753
01:00:48,000 --> 01:00:56,799
» making a motion to eliminate the use of
establishing a dry cleaner in any of the

754
01:00:53,599 --> 01:01:01,440
zoning districts that would allow for
that.

755
01:00:58,559 --> 01:01:04,319
» I could second no dry cleaners.
>> Moved and supported. All in favor say I.

756
01:01:03,839 --> 01:01:06,720
» I.
>> I.

757
01:01:05,440 --> 01:01:08,960
» Okay.
>> But that's

758
01:01:07,920 --> 01:01:10,480
» Any opposed?
>> No.

759
01:01:09,920 --> 01:01:13,200
» Opposed.
>> I'll call the vote. Baker.

760
01:01:12,240 --> 01:01:14,240
» No.
>> Bill.

761
01:01:13,760 --> 01:01:15,760
» Oh.
>> Yes.

762
01:01:15,119 --> 01:01:19,177
» Pax.
>> No.

763
01:01:16,960 --> 01:01:22,160
» Hutchinson.
[clears throat]

764
01:01:20,079 --> 01:01:23,839
» Um,
no.

765
01:01:22,960 --> 01:01:25,599
» McCarthy.
>> Yes.

766
01:01:24,960 --> 01:01:30,119
» Hi.
>> Yes.

767
01:01:27,119 --> 01:01:30,119
» Yes.

768
01:01:33,760 --> 01:01:37,920
I'mma get us there
>> because it doesn't include the

769
01:01:37,119 --> 01:01:40,240
» I'm I'm following.
>> Y

770
01:01:38,559 --> 01:01:43,359
» it's not specific to the marine.
>> It's not specific to anything right now.

771
01:01:42,000 --> 01:01:47,000
Right.
>> I'mma get us there.

772
01:01:47,342 --> 01:01:54,160
[snorts]
>> Passed.

773
01:01:50,480 --> 01:01:57,839
» It passed. Okay. So, if I may just to
clarify, so what that established is

774
01:01:56,240 --> 01:02:03,760
that we don't want dry clean
establishment. So, that's clear. Now we

775
01:02:00,799 --> 01:02:09,040
have to address where we want uh laundry
facilities. The recommendation was to

776
01:02:06,559 --> 01:02:12,640
allow them as a permitted use
>> by right in the C1. That's my

777
01:02:11,359 --> 01:02:19,480
recommendation.
>> Make a motion to allow laundry mats in

778
01:02:14,880 --> 01:02:19,480
the C1 district.

779
01:02:22,079 --> 01:02:26,400
» Moved and supported.
>> All in favor say I.

780
01:02:25,599 --> 01:02:30,400
» I.
>> Any opposed?

781
01:02:28,400 --> 01:02:30,400
All

782
01:02:30,880 --> 01:02:34,160
right, we got through this.
>> Okay, I I was going to get us through

783
01:02:33,680 --> 01:02:38,799
it.
>> Take that as a win.

784
01:02:35,520 --> 01:02:43,920
» All right, and the last one uh is
accessory buildings and structures and

785
01:02:40,640 --> 01:02:48,640
uses. Uh that one is currently and
that's the first one. So, I just want to

786
01:02:46,400 --> 01:02:56,000
jump down um just kind of save
conversation. Starting at section 309,

787
01:02:52,319 --> 01:03:03,520
it currently outlines the districts that
allow accessory uses. So 309, 310, 311,

788
01:03:01,440 --> 01:03:08,160
those individuals tables currently do
that. So I don't think it's necessary to

789
01:03:06,319 --> 01:03:13,040
either have it as a line item in the
table of uses because the individual

790
01:03:11,280 --> 01:03:18,400
descriptions of what's permitted for
accessories is in that table. I can

791
01:03:15,359 --> 01:03:24,640
either remove one from the remove the
table item or I can make the these uh

792
01:03:21,440 --> 01:03:28,319
individual sheets match that table. They
both will eventually say the same thing.

793
01:03:26,640 --> 01:03:32,480
This is because it's listed in the
actual zoning in specific areas.

794
01:03:31,839 --> 01:03:35,599
» Yes.
>> Yeah. It's in

795
01:03:33,520 --> 01:03:39,599
» and it's already described there. So
instead of us going through that motion,

796
01:03:37,280 --> 01:03:43,520
I could just take it as it's described
and just make it match that row

797
01:03:41,839 --> 01:03:45,920
» and that kind of makes this a little
easier.

798
01:03:44,240 --> 01:03:48,799
» So it would be gone out of the table is
what you're saying.

799
01:03:47,359 --> 01:03:51,200
» I could leave it in the table and make
it match.

800
01:03:49,839 --> 01:03:52,400
» Oh, you're saying make it match with
where it's allowed.

801
01:03:52,079 --> 01:03:55,599
» Yes.
>> Oh,

802
01:03:53,839 --> 01:03:58,880
» I don't have any issue with that. It's
the same ones that have been there for

803
01:03:57,039 --> 01:04:04,079
» correct. It's the same ones.
>> I also think that would make it more

804
01:04:01,440 --> 01:04:06,400
clear to our residents if they could
just reference it at the table.

805
01:04:05,920 --> 01:04:11,119
» Yeah.
>> Instead of having to

806
01:04:08,400 --> 01:04:14,960
» and and currently accessory buildings,
structures, and uses are permitted in

807
01:04:13,280 --> 01:04:17,200
all the districts where where
appropriate.

808
01:04:15,760 --> 01:04:19,599
» Yep. And then there's more specific
writing around setbacks and all the

809
01:04:18,720 --> 01:04:23,440
other stuff.
>> So it would just be a P going all the

810
01:04:21,440 --> 01:04:28,160
way across. So maybe just to clarify,
the motion would be to permit accessory

811
01:04:26,480 --> 01:04:33,440
buildings, structures, and uses across
all districts as described.

812
01:04:31,200 --> 01:04:37,839
» Yeah, I'll make a motion to allow
accessory buildings and structure

813
01:04:35,200 --> 01:04:43,240
structures and uses in all districts as
described in the following ordinances.

814
01:04:40,240 --> 01:04:43,240
» Correct.

815
01:04:44,400 --> 01:04:52,680
» Motion to approve accessory buildings,
structures, and uses in all districts as

816
01:04:48,559 --> 01:04:52,680
described in the following ordinances.

817
01:04:54,960 --> 01:05:01,920
We need support.
>> I'll support

818
01:05:00,319 --> 01:05:09,200
» moved.
>> Um, you said in the following district

819
01:05:05,760 --> 01:05:12,880
» in all in all districts listed in the
following ordinances

820
01:05:11,440 --> 01:05:16,000
because in the specific ordinances it
gives you the setbacks and all the Yeah.

821
01:05:14,480 --> 01:05:22,240
» So, we could probably word it somehow.
Instead of the word following, do you

822
01:05:17,920 --> 01:05:25,440
want to change it to um just listed in
the amended ordinances or

823
01:05:24,720 --> 01:05:29,119
» the allowed?
>> Yeah, the allowed ordinances.

824
01:05:26,960 --> 01:05:31,200
» In the allowable ordinances. Yeah,
that's fine.

825
01:05:29,680 --> 01:05:36,319
» That way Katie doesn't have to write out
the ordinances as following.

826
01:05:33,280 --> 01:05:40,160
» Yeah, that's extra. Don't do that.
>> Okay. Moved and supported. All in favor

827
01:05:39,119 --> 01:05:42,960
say I.
>> I.

828
01:05:40,559 --> 01:05:45,920
» Any opposed?
>> Okay.

829
01:05:43,920 --> 01:05:49,920
» Okay. Thank you, commission. That
handles all the remaining edits to the

830
01:05:48,240 --> 01:05:54,480
ordinance. Um,
>> um, I found a concern I have on the

831
01:05:52,640 --> 01:05:58,480
draft zoning map. Do you want me to
bring that up now or after your

832
01:05:56,240 --> 01:06:02,319
presentation?
>> That was that was the one we talked

833
01:05:59,920 --> 01:06:05,119
about earlier. The schools are one's a
C2 and one's a

834
01:06:03,520 --> 01:06:08,559
» Let's do Let's do it now. I can catch it
now.

835
01:06:06,000 --> 01:06:14,480
» Okay. So So what I saw when I looked at
this map, okay, R1 is light yellow and

836
01:06:11,920 --> 01:06:19,359
R2 is medium yellow. So they kind of
blend. So unless you really look at

837
01:06:16,720 --> 01:06:26,240
this, you might not notice
>> that they took a lot a chunk of houses

838
01:06:22,160 --> 01:06:32,640
in Kingsbridge and converted and want to
convert them to R2 zone property. They

839
01:06:30,160 --> 01:06:39,839
convert according to this draft zoning
map. There's several houses on Navar

840
01:06:36,960 --> 01:06:45,839
that have been changed into R2 that are
currently R1. There's several houses on

841
01:06:42,799 --> 01:06:50,880
Jefferson that are currently R1 that
they changed to R2. And then the

842
01:06:48,000 --> 01:06:59,039
mismatch with the schools where Carlson
is zoned R2, Parsons is zoned C2.

843
01:06:56,160 --> 01:07:03,520
So I mean that's a concern because I
don't think [snorts] the people whose

844
01:07:01,119 --> 01:07:11,119
property is potentially going to be
reszoned

845
01:07:05,280 --> 01:07:17,839
know this for one. And why would only
certain homes be reszoned R2 where

846
01:07:15,440 --> 01:07:23,200
others say they R1.
There's no

847
01:07:19,680 --> 01:07:27,000
um reason that I'm aware of that they
need to be zoned R2.

848
01:07:28,799 --> 01:07:35,680
» I hear you, Commissioner. I'm checking
the answer for you.

849
01:07:32,000 --> 01:07:41,680
» Okay. So, I I don't think that we would
should move forward till this is

850
01:07:38,720 --> 01:07:47,359
reviewed and corrected. You know, I
don't think we should just arbitrarily

851
01:07:44,079 --> 01:07:53,920
change zoning on people without
notifying them. They might say, "Well,

852
01:07:49,520 --> 01:07:59,119
this meeting was on social media."
But if someone is living in an R1 zoned

853
01:07:57,440 --> 01:08:04,240
area, I don't think we should just
arbitrarily change their zoning. It used

854
01:08:01,920 --> 01:08:08,079
to be where if someone's zoning was
going to change like this, they would

855
01:08:05,520 --> 01:08:13,200
get a letter in the mail. So even if
they weren't paying attention to social

856
01:08:09,520 --> 01:08:19,440
media, they would know their house was
being targeted because this looks

857
01:08:15,359 --> 01:08:25,359
targeted. This is a targeted resoning.
But what is the justification behind it?

858
01:08:22,960 --> 01:08:30,640
I think the after thinking about it just
now and I looked it up that the

859
01:08:27,759 --> 01:08:34,400
Kingsbridge is next to the apartments
that are there

860
01:08:33,199 --> 01:08:42,080
already. I forgot what they're called
now, some new name, but uh R2 allows for

861
01:08:39,120 --> 01:08:46,799
multif family homes and those types of
uses. So if it's adjacent,

862
01:08:45,199 --> 01:08:51,839
the question is if it's adjacent, does
it have to be R2 because it's next to

863
01:08:49,520 --> 01:08:54,719
the apartment? It doesn't. But but
shouldn't the people be notified?

864
01:08:53,440 --> 01:08:59,199
» You're asking should they be notified
that their their property is going to be

865
01:08:56,880 --> 01:09:02,719
changed because then the rules might
change for their property and they might

866
01:09:01,199 --> 01:09:08,960
not even know it.
>> Correct. So a couple things. One, I want

867
01:09:05,600 --> 01:09:14,880
to note that the elementary school is
currently your zoning map C2. So in the

868
01:09:12,560 --> 01:09:20,080
new map and current map, it's zone C2.
So that didn't change. um in your

869
01:09:17,520 --> 01:09:25,847
current table, schools are permitted in
that district via special annuals. So

870
01:09:22,799 --> 01:09:29,040
from a uh conformity standpoint, it
[snorts]

871
01:09:26,719 --> 01:09:35,679
still confirms historically and
currently in the draft. The high school

872
01:09:32,319 --> 01:09:42,239
site is in your current ordinance zoned
R1. Let me get the name right. R1 one

873
01:09:39,120 --> 01:09:48,640
family residential. What your new
ordinance does and this comes out in the

874
01:09:44,799 --> 01:09:55,440
presentation is that it splits the uh
single family and two family. So you

875
01:09:51,920 --> 01:10:01,920
have a R1 single family and then you
have a two family district. So it does

876
01:09:57,840 --> 01:10:05,679
go from R1 to R2 which is low density
residential which allows the single

877
01:10:04,239 --> 01:10:07,440
families in the twos which is I think
what you were describing.

878
01:10:06,719 --> 01:10:13,040
» Yeah.
>> So it doesn't change it. when we did the

879
01:10:10,640 --> 01:10:18,320
reorganization of the ordinance, we
properly allocated what districts should

880
01:10:15,840 --> 01:10:21,360
have which uses and then the map just
reflects that. So,

881
01:10:19,199 --> 01:10:25,440
» but if you have houses that are R1,
okay, they're zoned R1, they've been

882
01:10:23,520 --> 01:10:29,840
zoned R1,
they've always been R1, we're suddenly

883
01:10:27,760 --> 01:10:34,320
changing them to R2. I mean, you can
say, yeah, the I mean, I'm talking about

884
01:10:31,679 --> 01:10:40,080
houses by the school, too. There's a few
houses there. They're all zoned R2, but

885
01:10:37,280 --> 01:10:45,920
they weren't zoned R2 previously.
>> Their standards remain the same.

886
01:10:43,520 --> 01:10:50,960
» The standards did remain the same. Only
the name changed. So that that's why I

887
01:10:48,719 --> 01:10:53,920
didn't go to any other kind of
outrageous

888
01:10:51,520 --> 01:10:57,760
» district. But but why did only certain
houses get targeted? That's what my

889
01:10:55,600 --> 01:11:04,000
question is. Like the standards are the
same for R1 and R2. Then why aren't all

890
01:11:00,560 --> 01:11:10,400
the houses zoned R2? This is definitely
targeted. the the maps are essentially

891
01:11:08,159 --> 01:11:13,840
the same. I I don't see I'm looking at
I'm going back and forth now. I don't

892
01:11:11,920 --> 01:11:16,480
see any specific parcels that would
change that would not be consistent with

893
01:11:15,520 --> 01:11:19,920
the other parcels.
>> Okay. But let me reexain this.

894
01:11:18,320 --> 01:11:23,920
» These ones right here that are across
from Carlson, that's the high school.

895
01:11:22,320 --> 01:11:28,080
All of these, there's actually houses
there that were R1 before.

896
01:11:26,080 --> 01:11:32,159
» Yep. So these that were R1,
>> these were R1. These across right here.

897
01:11:30,400 --> 01:11:34,880
» Yep. So the question is there's a couple
that were R2, but the question is which

898
01:11:34,000 --> 01:11:39,679
is that
>> why would you change those all to R2? So

899
01:11:37,760 --> 01:11:41,679
now they could become multif family.
>> Yeah.

900
01:11:40,000 --> 01:11:46,560
» Right. So if you're going to change some
of the houses to R2, just to be fair to

901
01:11:44,560 --> 01:11:50,239
the city, all the houses need to be
changed to R2.

902
01:11:47,760 --> 01:11:55,280
» That doesn't it should just say R1.
There's no reason. It's no one is coming

903
01:11:52,719 --> 01:12:00,480
in here saying I want my lot reszone to
R2. So why are we just arbitrarily doing

904
01:11:58,000 --> 01:12:06,320
it to them? We're not arbitrarily.
Currently, your ordinance has R1.

905
01:12:03,679 --> 01:12:11,920
» All of the residential, that means those
uh on the canals and the land, the

906
01:12:09,440 --> 01:12:18,159
residential land on land, they all share
the same R1 zoning, but your canal

907
01:12:15,760 --> 01:12:25,679
properties are smaller than your
residential properties everywhere else.

908
01:12:20,400 --> 01:12:28,239
» Not 100%. [snorts] No, some houses on
>> are very big.

909
01:12:26,560 --> 01:12:33,360
» I'm not saying individually. I'm just
saying collectively all of your canal

910
01:12:30,560 --> 01:12:39,199
properties are different than your
mainland properties. Your current zoning

911
01:12:36,640 --> 01:12:46,400
map classifies all of them to be the
same. So what you're seeing going from

912
01:12:42,000 --> 01:12:53,520
R1 to R2, R2 in this sense is the same
as your R1. The only distinction now is

913
01:12:49,679 --> 01:12:59,120
that your mar your canal properties are
R1 small lot residential which matches

914
01:12:56,640 --> 01:13:04,800
their standards and all the other
property is R2 the same as it was before

915
01:13:03,840 --> 01:13:09,920
the name
>> Frier White Mar Lis those aren't water

916
01:13:08,159 --> 01:13:15,600
properties
um and there's several other you know

917
01:13:12,159 --> 01:13:20,000
like most of these rose right Gerald
they're all these they're not water

918
01:13:17,280 --> 01:13:28,159
properties. So why are they staying with
the R1 zoning but Kingsbridge Navar

919
01:13:23,440 --> 01:13:34,159
Jefferson are being resone to R2?
>> They'll only change in name the

920
01:13:31,120 --> 01:13:39,120
» and I don't agree with that different
guidance for R1 and R2. If they're only

921
01:13:37,199 --> 01:13:43,360
changed in name, why are we changing
them?

922
01:13:40,880 --> 01:13:48,640
» Currently all, like you said before, all
of your residential properties are under

923
01:13:45,840 --> 01:13:54,560
one zoning district. R1,
your canal properties have standards for

924
01:13:52,960 --> 01:13:58,320
those properties and then everything
else has standards for non canal

925
01:13:57,520 --> 01:14:02,000
properties.
>> Can I ask you a question? Have you gone

926
01:13:59,760 --> 01:14:05,840
around and checked each of these houses
that you're speaking to?

927
01:14:03,679 --> 01:14:09,920
» We check we did check the lot.
>> What you're saying is not true. There's

928
01:14:07,760 --> 01:14:15,120
several house there's several streets on
here that are zoned R1 that are not

929
01:14:12,640 --> 01:14:18,400
canal properties.
several of them yet they're being

930
01:14:17,040 --> 01:14:25,520
grouped in with the are they're
remaining our one which they should be.

931
01:14:20,880 --> 01:14:28,239
So my point is why are the others not
>> remaining the way they're zoned?

932
01:14:27,040 --> 01:14:32,080
» Are you referring to
>> Yes.

933
01:14:28,960 --> 01:14:37,600
» So you could those properties between
the water and King Street are we you we

934
01:14:35,520 --> 01:14:40,320
could make them R1. I mean if you want
to do that you could.

935
01:14:38,960 --> 01:14:44,640
» My I see what you're saying. If you want
to you could change them.

936
01:14:42,159 --> 01:14:52,280
Why are they changing to R2? If they
were remained R1 like they are right

937
01:14:46,960 --> 01:14:52,280
now, I wouldn't be discussing this.

938
01:14:52,480 --> 01:14:55,840
» They're being
>> Are you talking about the ones across

939
01:14:54,640 --> 01:14:58,960
from Carlson, too?
>> The ones across from Carlson, too? Yes.

940
01:14:58,320 --> 01:15:02,800
Yes.
>> Kingsbridge, Navar, Jefferson, all the

941
01:15:01,840 --> 01:15:07,520
way down to Woodri.
>> Those and those because there's an

942
01:15:05,520 --> 01:15:11,840
apartment complex here. This is a vacant
lot. That's a vacant lot. That's fine.

943
01:15:09,840 --> 01:15:14,080
But these ones,
>> right,

944
01:15:12,320 --> 01:15:19,440
» these ones and these ones. So if you
left the school, changed all these right

945
01:15:17,120 --> 01:15:25,120
here, these are vacant, too. Changed
these to R1's, then it would suffice

946
01:15:22,880 --> 01:15:27,440
» the ask and it wouldn't really impact
any.

947
01:15:26,000 --> 01:15:31,679
» If you would like to, we can change
those to R1.

948
01:15:28,480 --> 01:15:35,840
» Okay. Like them to remain what they are
now unless someone comes and asks for

949
01:15:34,000 --> 01:15:41,840
them to be reszoned. You know, if they
live in a home and it's zoned R1, it

950
01:15:39,679 --> 01:15:47,280
should just remain R1 unless they're
requesting it to be R2.

951
01:15:43,920 --> 01:15:50,320
» Why is mine bright yellow and yours is
dull yellow?

952
01:15:49,040 --> 01:15:53,040
» Are you looking at the old one?
>> The old map.

953
01:15:51,199 --> 01:15:55,600
» Old one was bright yellow. The new map,
it's the dull yellow.

954
01:15:53,840 --> 01:15:58,719
» Oh, this is in the our packet.
>> The new Your packet has the new map and

955
01:15:58,080 --> 01:16:01,679
the old map.
>> Displays the colors differently.

956
01:16:00,239 --> 01:16:06,159
» If you're looking sticks out more on
here, you can really see where they're

957
01:16:03,199 --> 01:16:10,800
zoning. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. The old map
looks like one color, that dull yellow.

958
01:16:08,400 --> 01:16:16,560
The new map, it's two yellows, a bright
one and then a kind of dull one.

959
01:16:14,640 --> 01:16:24,159
» Let me new colors.
So if if you like fuchsia

960
01:16:20,400 --> 01:16:28,880
» the properties north of Gibralar between
Jialter and Jefferson and the water in

961
01:16:26,640 --> 01:16:33,920
Jefferson if you want those to go back
to R1

962
01:16:30,960 --> 01:16:37,440
» and there is like one R2 and one R3 in
there I believe but everything else is

963
01:16:35,840 --> 01:16:42,480
R1 already.
>> Yeah. Everything that went from R1 to R2

964
01:16:39,600 --> 01:16:45,920
if you wanted to go back to R1
>> north of the vet

965
01:16:43,760 --> 01:16:50,239
» the floor south of South Gibrala road
too by the

966
01:16:47,600 --> 01:16:51,679
» Yeah, there's some south road should
change those

967
01:16:51,120 --> 01:16:56,000
» these two
>> those should be R1. Yeah.

968
01:16:52,880 --> 01:17:00,880
» Yeah. Donovan, it may be helpful for you
to just start by explaining what the

969
01:16:58,400 --> 01:17:05,520
difference is between the new R
district, specifically small lot

970
01:17:02,960 --> 01:17:10,719
residential and low density residential
to help give everyone an understanding

971
01:17:08,000 --> 01:17:16,000
of why this change was made.
>> Yes. So the so as I mentioned currently

972
01:17:14,400 --> 01:17:21,280
your ordinance, if you look at the old
map where everything is light yellow,

973
01:17:18,400 --> 01:17:26,000
all the homes are classified the same in
terms of their properties. So, if your

974
01:17:23,520 --> 01:17:31,120
lot is 40 ft wide and you have a
standard home, it's considered the same

975
01:17:28,320 --> 01:17:36,239
as the property next to you that may be
60 ft wide with the same house. It

976
01:17:33,679 --> 01:17:40,320
they're considered the same, but they're
not considered the same because the lot

977
01:17:38,080 --> 01:17:44,640
themselves are different. Technically,
they're different. You have a 40ft lot,

978
01:17:42,000 --> 01:17:49,920
you have a 60ft lot. You shouldn't treat
those all the same,

979
01:17:47,120 --> 01:17:53,520
but your current ordinance does. And
particularly when you have those

980
01:17:51,760 --> 01:17:57,920
residential properties that are in the
canal, those are all if you look at your

981
01:17:55,920 --> 01:18:02,480
zoning map, you have some tiny lots, you
have some big lots. There's a lot of

982
01:17:59,360 --> 01:18:09,120
variation in those lots versus if you
look at um I'll just give an example.

983
01:18:05,679 --> 01:18:13,600
The property on Sugar Island, those are
kind of traditional that's a traditional

984
01:18:11,840 --> 01:18:19,360
street grid. Those lots are pretty
consistent the entire way around. So

985
01:18:16,239 --> 01:18:23,840
because you have areas that have
uh for lack of better words random lot

986
01:18:21,440 --> 01:18:30,239
widths and you have standard lot widths,
it makes sense to separate those because

987
01:18:26,800 --> 01:18:34,880
you don't administrate them the same. So
what this draft does is it separates

988
01:18:32,400 --> 01:18:39,679
those canal lots. It calls them small
lot residentials. all the same

989
01:18:36,480 --> 01:18:44,480
standards. And then you have the R2
lots, which are your pretty much all

990
01:18:42,159 --> 01:18:50,080
your other lots that were not the canal
ones before. And then those standards

991
01:18:46,880 --> 01:18:54,960
just match those lots. So that's why you
have different lots. What it ultimately

992
01:18:52,880 --> 01:18:59,360
solves is if you have one district that
describes all your lots, I'll look this

993
01:18:57,199 --> 01:19:04,800
way, too. If you have one district that
describes all of your lots,

994
01:19:02,640 --> 01:19:10,960
if you have a case where your current
standard says your buildable lot is 40

995
01:19:07,920 --> 01:19:16,800
uh I'll say 50 ft wide. If you have a 40
that exists, you can't rebuild on it

996
01:19:13,679 --> 01:19:22,880
because you that 40 is the standard
across the entire city. So by separating

997
01:19:20,560 --> 01:19:29,360
them, those standards that would be more
specific and unique to canal properties

998
01:19:25,840 --> 01:19:32,880
are R2 low residential district. Those
residential standards or those property

999
01:19:31,600 --> 01:19:39,920
standards because this is really about
your lot. Those lot standards that would

1000
01:19:35,920 --> 01:19:48,239
be more attuned to property not in the
canal is zoned R1. But in this case,

1001
01:19:43,040 --> 01:19:52,400
like on Windsor, those houses on the one
side of Windsor are on a canal, but

1002
01:19:50,719 --> 01:19:58,320
they're zoned R2.
>> Windsor is zoned, we're talking about

1003
01:19:55,199 --> 01:20:03,679
south of Jiala, right? Windsor is zoned
uh R3 right here. Right.

1004
01:20:00,480 --> 01:20:09,120
» Windsor Drive is zoned R3.
>> In your current map, it is also zoned

1005
01:20:06,400 --> 01:20:12,880
R3.
>> R3. talking about the condo portion, not

1006
01:20:11,920 --> 01:20:14,960
the house portion.
>> Yeah. So, that didn't that didn't

1007
01:20:14,480 --> 01:20:16,719
change.
>> The house portion.

1008
01:20:15,440 --> 01:20:18,880
» She's talking about the house portion to
the left of it over here. Windsor runs

1009
01:20:18,239 --> 01:20:24,080
through.
>> So, she's talking about these houses.

1010
01:20:20,880 --> 01:20:26,800
This over here, these are Windsor goes
across.

1011
01:20:25,040 --> 01:20:31,440
» These are condos. So, that makes sense.
>> So, I'll just ask this follow-up

1012
01:20:28,400 --> 01:20:36,640
question. The homes you're referring to,
would you describe those properties as

1013
01:20:33,600 --> 01:20:39,600
the same as the canal properties?
>> Yes.

1014
01:20:37,679 --> 01:20:44,719
» Then they should not. You would not.
>> I would not because dimensionally those

1015
01:20:41,600 --> 01:20:46,880
homes on Windsor are a lot larger
lot size.

1016
01:20:45,679 --> 01:20:49,440
» Well, they're deeper than
>> Yeah.

1017
01:20:47,440 --> 01:20:54,960
» Well, they're deeper and wider. I mean,
if you look there, there's no 40 foot

1018
01:20:51,760 --> 01:20:59,040
lots on Windsor. Um, so I think that
would attribute it more to um

1019
01:20:58,239 --> 01:21:01,760
» R2
>> and and that is the key reason why

1020
01:21:00,800 --> 01:21:04,239
» states,
>> right?

1021
01:21:02,080 --> 01:21:08,880
» And that is the key reason why it is
separated, right? if if those lots that

1022
01:21:06,800 --> 01:21:12,719
those properties you were describing
>> were more sim

1023
01:21:11,199 --> 01:21:17,199
» so we probably should fix that.
>> I'm just saying from the lot conformity

1024
01:21:14,960 --> 01:21:23,440
size I think I think what Donovan's
trying to uh relay to us is that um the

1025
01:21:21,199 --> 01:21:28,159
distinction and the differences is
because you have a lot of very unique

1026
01:21:25,360 --> 01:21:34,400
properties within water frontage here
and they can range anywhere from 40 feet

1027
01:21:30,000 --> 01:21:40,719
to 100 feet and anywhere in between. Um
he's trying to we are trying to define

1028
01:21:38,239 --> 01:21:44,480
that more readily within separate
districts.

1029
01:21:42,080 --> 01:21:47,280
» You're basically grandfathering the old
city with

1030
01:21:45,120 --> 01:21:49,679
» those nonconforming lots.
>> You will not be non-conforming now.

1031
01:21:49,120 --> 01:21:55,920
You'll make it.
>> So you're not telling them they have to

1032
01:21:52,239 --> 01:21:59,199
» change for everything or buy the lot or
buy the lot next door.

1033
01:21:57,520 --> 01:22:04,320
» Correct. This this does fix your
nonconformity issue for residential

1034
01:22:01,199 --> 01:22:08,239
lots. And also later in your non in your
nonconformity section, it kind of

1035
01:22:06,400 --> 01:22:13,840
explicitly says that cuz a lot of
communities have that issue. You have a

1036
01:22:10,960 --> 01:22:19,679
old build grid and when you
progressively update your ordinance, it

1037
01:22:16,320 --> 01:22:25,040
happens all the time. you accidentally
reduce the minimum lot size requirement

1038
01:22:22,239 --> 01:22:29,760
and it makes portions of your housing
stock non-buildable which creates a lot

1039
01:22:27,840 --> 01:22:34,639
of issues with rebuilding. If you get
into a fire, you can't rebuild it. What

1040
01:22:32,560 --> 01:22:39,360
this does is it says essentially what
you were saying, your historic fabric

1041
01:22:36,880 --> 01:22:45,120
that was the marina or the canal
properties that is now conforming. And

1042
01:22:43,120 --> 01:22:48,800
technically now if you catch fire, you
can rebuild because you'll be in

1043
01:22:46,480 --> 01:22:52,000
compliance. In your current ordinance,
that may be a challenge. If you have a a

1044
01:22:51,120 --> 01:22:56,000
really small
>> some of the canal houses are some of the

1045
01:22:53,600 --> 01:23:01,520
biggest houses in the city. I mean, I'm
not I'm not convinced of what you're

1046
01:22:58,960 --> 01:23:06,480
saying. those people own four lots, not
just one. Okay? So, if you're one per if

1047
01:23:04,560 --> 01:23:12,880
you have one lot and as Donovan been
saying, if your house burned down

1048
01:23:08,800 --> 01:23:17,280
» and we don't have um the structure in
order, what's going to happen is that

1049
01:23:14,639 --> 01:23:20,639
person can't rebuild their home on the
lot that they had there because it was

1050
01:23:19,120 --> 01:23:24,560
destroyed by, you know,
>> because it if you didn't combine your

1051
01:23:22,480 --> 01:23:28,960
lots as a variance, then you'd be
screwed. In in your current ordinance,

1052
01:23:27,120 --> 01:23:33,679
if that were the case and you were a
canal property, because all of your

1053
01:23:31,440 --> 01:23:40,800
properties are under the same district,
you would be forced to build to the

1054
01:23:36,320 --> 01:23:45,520
standard that non canal homes are, which
may ultimately change the character of

1055
01:23:42,880 --> 01:23:48,639
that area because all the canal
>> the size of the home. It could be a lot

1056
01:23:46,960 --> 01:23:49,679
of things if it's the setbacks aren't
met.

1057
01:23:49,199 --> 01:23:54,960
» Yeah.
>> But but wouldn't this potentially cause

1058
01:23:52,159 --> 01:24:02,639
people to be assessed differently? No.
>> If they're if their zoning is different,

1059
01:23:59,760 --> 01:24:08,080
if they're zoned for a higher potential
on their lot than they currently have,

1060
01:24:05,600 --> 01:24:13,280
they have there's a chance that they
would be assessed differently. And what

1061
01:24:10,960 --> 01:24:18,239
is going to stop someone, let's say
they're they live in an R1 neighborhood,

1062
01:24:16,400 --> 01:24:22,480
but their house burns down, so they
decide to build a duplex in the middle

1063
01:24:20,400 --> 01:24:28,320
of their neighborhood. their neighbors
don't have any real they can't do

1064
01:24:25,520 --> 01:24:32,880
anything because it's zoned for that.
They've allowed it to be zoned and they

1065
01:24:30,639 --> 01:24:37,199
didn't even know they weren't informed
unless they were reading social media

1066
01:24:35,040 --> 01:24:38,800
that this was happening.
>> So

1067
01:24:37,679 --> 01:24:44,400
» just a good example
>> two points changing your zoning does not

1068
01:24:42,159 --> 01:24:49,520
change your taxable value. Your taxable
value is made at the assessing level.

1069
01:24:46,560 --> 01:24:55,280
That's all taxation and assessing and uh
land value not zoning. They have two

1070
01:24:52,560 --> 01:25:00,080
different classification codes. So taxes
are not impacted by zoning.

1071
01:24:59,199 --> 01:25:06,080
» To your second
>> uses do change though. deep.

1072
01:25:02,960 --> 01:25:12,880
» You know, I I think if you know, if even
if I was on a large lot R1, and then my

1073
01:25:10,560 --> 01:25:17,600
lot gets zone R2 and my neighbors gets
zone R2, now all of a sudden they can

1074
01:25:14,719 --> 01:25:21,199
build a private club next door to me. I
don't think I'd be too happy about that

1075
01:25:19,199 --> 01:25:25,360
after I've been in my R1 neighborhood
for 30 years.

1076
01:25:23,360 --> 01:25:29,600
» No, she makes a good Can answer the
second point. So, could could you if

1077
01:25:26,960 --> 01:25:34,560
it's zoned R2, if you tore your house
down, build a duplex in that Now that

1078
01:25:32,159 --> 01:25:37,679
it's changed from R1 to R2, if that's a
permitted use,

1079
01:25:36,239 --> 01:25:43,440
» I'm looking right now
>> because that then could drive

1080
01:25:40,400 --> 01:25:48,239
» changes in not taxable value, but value
of the home

1081
01:25:44,719 --> 01:25:52,159
» in the R2. You could uh two family
dwellings are permitted in the current

1082
01:25:50,320 --> 01:25:57,280
draft.
>> Yeah,

1083
01:25:54,159 --> 01:26:01,199
» that's that's an issue. it you
>> I just don't all I would ask is that we

1084
01:25:59,360 --> 01:26:04,639
just leave that zone the way it is
unless the owner comes in and asks to

1085
01:26:03,440 --> 01:26:08,800
have it reszoned
>> and let me just answer one more question

1086
01:26:06,960 --> 01:26:12,960
» residential area
>> is there is there another way to do what

1087
01:26:11,760 --> 01:26:19,520
» can you just
>> and Donovan said where you buy the lot

1088
01:26:16,000 --> 01:26:24,239
size somehow but don't allow
>> yeah what if you just don't allow two

1089
01:26:22,239 --> 01:26:28,560
family residential and R2
>> that's what I was going to ask

1090
01:26:26,560 --> 01:26:34,400
a standard subdivision. This is where I
live. The lots are not huge and small.

1091
01:26:32,000 --> 01:26:40,480
It's exactly like Island Estate, always
been R1. We have a huge apartment

1092
01:26:37,679 --> 01:26:45,440
complex next to us. It's own properly,
but Marian is spot on. It should stay

1093
01:26:42,560 --> 01:26:48,719
R1. The residents of that subdivision
are not going to be open to the idea of

1094
01:26:47,120 --> 01:26:51,600
changing their zoning, too. I can tell
you that.

1095
01:26:50,320 --> 01:26:55,199
» Thank you for letting me speak.
>> And they don't know about this. They

1096
01:26:53,360 --> 01:26:58,639
don't know about this. So they they if
they don't know about this, how can they

1097
01:26:56,400 --> 01:27:01,120
come in and comment on it? And so how
can we approve? How can we

1098
01:27:00,560 --> 01:27:05,199
» Yeah, I agree.
>> request that this be approved when so

1099
01:27:03,360 --> 01:27:07,760
many people don't even realize their
zoning is going to change.

1100
01:27:06,560 --> 01:27:11,679
» I agree with you. I'm glad you brought
it up because if I was living there and

1101
01:27:09,920 --> 01:27:16,960
then someone built a duplex directly
next door and then you go to resell,

1102
01:27:15,440 --> 01:27:21,840
someone's be like, "That's not going to
go over good." Can I just ask two

1103
01:27:19,040 --> 01:27:27,280
follow-up questions because I'm just
>> all the permitted uses in R2 or not all

1104
01:27:24,560 --> 01:27:31,440
but the difference between R1 and R2
actually went into say for example

1105
01:27:29,360 --> 01:27:34,159
special land use
>> you you could

1106
01:27:32,320 --> 01:27:38,400
» and if somebody wanted to do something
other than a single family home they

1107
01:27:36,080 --> 01:27:42,480
would have to come to planning and get
special use

1108
01:27:39,760 --> 01:27:46,800
» you you could special land use it. Yes.
Are all of the homes on Windsor or that

1109
01:27:45,600 --> 01:27:48,159
neighborhood, are those all single
family homes?

1110
01:27:47,600 --> 01:27:53,120
» Yes.
>> Yes. Yeah.

1111
01:27:48,960 --> 01:27:56,800
» Is that under a your kind of traditional
subdivision or is it

1112
01:27:54,800 --> 01:28:00,639
» it has a um
>> 45 years?

1113
01:27:58,480 --> 01:28:05,840
» Very very uniform lots.
>> Uniform. And does it have a uh the

1114
01:28:03,520 --> 01:28:10,000
agreement the operator's agreement? This
sub it's governed by its own board.

1115
01:28:08,080 --> 01:28:12,480
Correct.
>> No,

1116
01:28:10,480 --> 01:28:16,400
» it doesn't have a board. It is a city.
It there's no association.

1117
01:28:14,480 --> 01:28:20,159
» There's no association. Yeah. So they're
just individual standard lots

1118
01:28:18,880 --> 01:28:24,400
themselves. They're not governed
collectively. One person owns

1119
01:28:22,560 --> 01:28:28,159
» that has that as in here.
>> Got you. So what I would Thank you for

1120
01:28:26,480 --> 01:28:31,040
clarifying. I would just go ahead and
down zone it to R1.

1121
01:28:30,400 --> 01:28:35,120
» Okay.
>> And then there's two other areas.

1122
01:28:32,320 --> 01:28:42,320
There's Navar Street and I guess even a
house on Young, but Navar Street's all

1123
01:28:38,159 --> 01:28:45,760
being reszoned as well.
>> Oh, I take that back. Okay. It's not

1124
01:28:44,239 --> 01:28:51,120
It's not the way I across the street,
right? It's across the street. Right.

1125
01:28:47,120 --> 01:28:56,719
And then Jefferson, there is one R2 and
then R3, but the rest of those are all

1126
01:28:54,080 --> 01:29:00,080
R1 right now.
>> That's she's talking about across. Yeah,

1127
01:28:58,400 --> 01:29:02,719
the ones I showed you earlier
>> and all the way down to Woodroof are all

1128
01:29:02,000 --> 01:29:05,120
R1.
>> What are they currently?

1129
01:29:03,920 --> 01:29:08,320
» Regular R1.
>> There's one in here. There's a We'd have

1130
01:29:06,960 --> 01:29:12,400
to You'd have to show them the specific
lot where that apartment is that

1131
01:29:09,679 --> 01:29:16,159
» there's one R3 and one R2, but all the
rest are

1132
01:29:14,880 --> 01:29:19,920
» I don't know which one of these lots. It
might be that triangle one. There's

1133
01:29:17,360 --> 01:29:22,480
actually like an apartment there, like
small one.

1134
01:29:20,560 --> 01:29:27,120
» If if you want to just put them all back
to our one, that that's totally fine. I

1135
01:29:25,120 --> 01:29:30,320
mean that I would think that's what we
would need to do because we haven't

1136
01:29:28,480 --> 01:29:34,400
notified any people that
>> Well, or you could or you could change

1137
01:29:32,320 --> 01:29:36,719
what's allowed in an R2
>> to remove the other stuff.

1138
01:29:36,320 --> 01:29:40,239
» Yeah.
>> What you're going to what you're going

1139
01:29:37,840 --> 01:29:43,679
to allow is any empty lots that we have
R2 right now. They can build on a 40

1140
01:29:42,159 --> 01:29:45,520
foot lot, which we're saying we don't
want that in the future.

1141
01:29:45,199 --> 01:29:50,000
» Yeah.
>> So, you're opening it up to everybody to

1142
01:29:47,440 --> 01:29:54,080
build like we are in old Gibralar with
40 foot lots, put a house on it. you got

1143
01:29:52,000 --> 01:29:59,520
less square footage, less, you know,
each one comes with your lot size. So,

1144
01:29:57,520 --> 01:30:04,800
it's,
you know, in people want to build in in

1145
01:30:03,120 --> 01:30:08,719
the old part of Jib, they we say their
lot, they come to ZBA because the lot

1146
01:30:06,719 --> 01:30:12,639
size is too small. Well, it's as big as
it is. I'm going to build and we're

1147
01:30:10,719 --> 01:30:17,520
trying to say in the future we want the
R2s. You're going to require this much

1148
01:30:15,520 --> 01:30:22,080
lot size to build in the new lots that
they have. So there's you almost want

1149
01:30:20,080 --> 01:30:24,480
like an R1A which I think we might have
had when we're trying to reduce it to

1150
01:30:24,080 --> 01:30:27,920
say
>> oh

1151
01:30:25,120 --> 01:30:30,800
» you know it's still single family and
you have this size requirement build

1152
01:30:30,480 --> 01:30:36,639
requirement
>> a reduced R1 that makes more sense than

1153
01:30:33,199 --> 01:30:42,800
to change every all of this to R2.
So what you could do and which was a

1154
01:30:39,520 --> 01:30:49,520
good point instead of reducing that area
from R2 to R1,

1155
01:30:45,280 --> 01:30:53,760
you can put back an R1A
which is single family without the

1156
01:30:51,199 --> 01:30:59,600
duplexes and at least that preserves
that area in consideration of the larger

1157
01:30:57,280 --> 01:31:03,760
more uniform lots. we had, wasn't it?
>> Well, I was thinking when when he said

1158
01:31:01,360 --> 01:31:08,400
R1A, what I thought he meant was
>> to go to this the small lots that this

1159
01:31:06,719 --> 01:31:16,800
is being
thought out for and have that be R1A for

1160
01:31:12,560 --> 01:31:23,560
a smaller lot. Leave the R1 lots as R1.
And if they're being targeted because

1161
01:31:18,719 --> 01:31:23,560
they're small, then create an R1A.

1162
01:31:23,840 --> 01:31:33,520
That makes more sense than to change R1
lots to R2.

1163
01:31:30,480 --> 01:31:39,199
» Yes, we can change those specifically
the ones along Windsor, North Windsor

1164
01:31:36,639 --> 01:31:44,480
between the water and Kingswood
if we can make those R1A to accommodate

1165
01:31:43,120 --> 01:31:47,679
those lots.
>> No, I thought you were talking about the

1166
01:31:45,920 --> 01:31:52,960
ones over I thought you were talking
about the the original ones you were

1167
01:31:50,239 --> 01:31:56,320
talking about on Bay View. I thought you
meant Dave you point.

1168
01:31:55,440 --> 01:32:00,400
I thought that's what
>> Oh, you referred to them as canal homes.

1169
01:31:58,560 --> 01:32:04,639
» Canal homes.
>> No, you should leave those as uh you

1170
01:32:02,320 --> 01:32:09,840
should leave those as R1. I would
recommend you leave those the same.

1171
01:32:07,679 --> 01:32:16,480
» Okay. Well, then why can't what? See,
this is my point is that why are you

1172
01:32:13,760 --> 01:32:18,800
changing R1's to R2 for no real reason?
There's no real reason here other than

1173
01:32:17,840 --> 01:32:24,400
the lot size.
>> The lot size. But in but if you want to

1174
01:32:21,920 --> 01:32:29,440
target the smaller lot size, target
them. Don't target the people that have

1175
01:32:27,840 --> 01:32:32,320
been having R1.
>> We're not targeting them. You're

1176
01:32:30,880 --> 01:32:36,239
allowing the people with the smaller
lots to build rebuild their house if

1177
01:32:34,400 --> 01:32:42,719
they need to or put a shed on if they
need to or you know today's the R2s are

1178
01:32:41,040 --> 01:32:49,040
saying you need this much lot size, you
need this much coverage and they you

1179
01:32:45,679 --> 01:32:54,000
know and the they come to ZBA for
variation or deviation in the zoning.

1180
01:32:51,760 --> 01:32:58,400
So, this would allow them to come under
ordinance and add their shed on their

1181
01:32:55,520 --> 01:33:01,920
small lot and we don't want that going
forward. So, they're trying to control

1182
01:33:00,080 --> 01:33:06,719
the new where you can build new houses
and all the new ones in the larger lots

1183
01:33:04,239 --> 01:33:12,239
and say R2, but I agree it shouldn't
have the duplexes and multifamily. But,

1184
01:33:10,080 --> 01:33:19,520
and if you made an R1A, there'd just be
a small section there that would

1185
01:33:15,679 --> 01:33:25,199
less instead of doing all algebra. Yeah,
the challenge is the middle ground

1186
01:33:22,719 --> 01:33:32,080
between what you have currently and and
where you need to get to. So, currently

1187
01:33:28,080 --> 01:33:37,120
you have R1 the same across the entire
city. And it does need to be split. I

1188
01:33:35,199 --> 01:33:42,560
mean, that's kind of just the fact
because all your residential lots are

1189
01:33:38,960 --> 01:33:46,400
not the same. So, we did the split. I
think where we are now is how do we

1190
01:33:44,560 --> 01:33:53,040
address
those that subdivision between the water

1191
01:33:50,159 --> 01:33:57,360
frontage and Kingswood. I think that's
the part that

1192
01:33:54,480 --> 01:34:02,960
» yeah that and along and in Jefferson and
then the schools are

1193
01:34:00,320 --> 01:34:09,760
zoned differently but
>> if you at least it relates to the Kings

1194
01:34:07,840 --> 01:34:16,159
sorry Kingsbridge the water and
Jefferson if you bring those down to R1

1195
01:34:14,080 --> 01:34:21,679
small lot as it's described in the
current draft

1196
01:34:19,199 --> 01:34:26,239
those lots don't exactly meet those
standards standards. They meet the

1197
01:34:23,600 --> 01:34:30,320
standards as we describe them in the R2.
But the challenge that was brought up in

1198
01:34:28,000 --> 01:34:32,320
discussion is R2 allows duplexes and you
don't want duplexes,

1199
01:34:31,920 --> 01:34:36,239
» right?
>> So you can either remove duplexes

1200
01:34:34,960 --> 01:34:41,520
essentially from the ordinance
altogether because currently it's only

1201
01:34:38,400 --> 01:34:48,880
permitted in the R2 district, which is
why it's the other districts.

1202
01:34:45,040 --> 01:34:52,800
If you don't want duplexes,
then you would just remove them all

1203
01:34:50,400 --> 01:34:57,520
together or you'd have to create a
specific residential district just for

1204
01:34:54,800 --> 01:35:02,320
those that subdivision,
which is okay. There's nothing that says

1205
01:34:59,920 --> 01:35:06,960
you can't do that if it serves and meets
the purpose of your you intend, which is

1206
01:35:04,480 --> 01:35:10,080
to preserve those homes and not conflate
the character of that neighborhood with

1207
01:35:08,800 --> 01:35:12,800
what the character of all the other
neighborhoods should be.

1208
01:35:11,280 --> 01:35:16,960
» I was just thinking this is actually
wrong, too, because aren't those Those

1209
01:35:14,880 --> 01:35:21,120
houses on Adams
are duplexes

1210
01:35:18,800 --> 01:35:25,280
» and and Stolled and uh
>> and the one on the corner of LOL and

1211
01:35:23,520 --> 01:35:29,840
Middle Galter is a duplex. There's a
bunch of duplex.

1212
01:35:25,920 --> 01:35:31,840
» Well, Stolled and Adams is those rental
properties too. I don't know if they're

1213
01:35:31,199 --> 01:35:36,800
duplexes.
>> Yeah, there's still duplexes in here

1214
01:35:34,400 --> 01:35:40,080
like along
>> and those would be legally

1215
01:35:38,159 --> 01:35:41,199
non-conforming.
>> Okay.

1216
01:35:40,880 --> 01:35:45,600
» And
>> the old one are though. They're they're

1217
01:35:43,120 --> 01:35:48,560
marked out in the old map, right?
>> Yeah. They're currently legally

1218
01:35:46,719 --> 01:35:54,960
non-conforming, so that didn't change.
>> Yeah. And essentially what could happen,

1219
01:35:51,440 --> 01:35:56,560
say those duplexes get demolished, for
instance,

1220
01:35:55,600 --> 01:36:00,080
» they have to go away.
>> They either have to go away or they have

1221
01:35:58,320 --> 01:36:06,159
to come before you and ask for a
reasonzoning or for a special variance.

1222
01:36:04,560 --> 01:36:07,280
» And if that's what you want to happen
there, then

1223
01:36:06,880 --> 01:36:11,360
» yeah,
>> that that's what would happen. So

1224
01:36:09,520 --> 01:36:15,920
essentially one of the things you're
doing with this is you're looking into

1225
01:36:13,679 --> 01:36:23,280
the future and you're thinking, okay,
what would our perfect community look

1226
01:36:17,920 --> 01:36:27,520
like? And um if it includes no duplexes
anywhere in your perfect community, not

1227
01:36:25,520 --> 01:36:33,360
saying you get rid of them today because
that wouldn't happen, but you get rid of

1228
01:36:30,000 --> 01:36:37,920
the possibility of them in the future.
>> So try to think of it. I know it's a

1229
01:36:35,679 --> 01:36:41,280
weird way to look at this, but
>> it is because I forgot the apartment

1230
01:36:39,520 --> 01:36:42,320
complex too at the corner of Stofl and
Adams.

1231
01:36:41,920 --> 01:36:44,480
» Yeah.
>> Has like eight.

1232
01:36:43,760 --> 01:36:47,840
» Yeah.
>> Yep.

1233
01:36:45,199 --> 01:36:52,960
» The easy middle The easy middle ground
would be to make it a special annu. And

1234
01:36:50,480 --> 01:36:58,159
at least you see it. You can say no. The
residents of that neighborhood will get

1235
01:36:54,480 --> 01:37:02,320
notified 300 ft. As residents, you
understand what the intent of that area

1236
01:37:00,080 --> 01:37:07,040
is supposed to be. And so you can do a
special annual if somebody Yeah, if

1237
01:37:05,360 --> 01:37:12,719
somebody wants to do something, it at
least comes to you. Um, so you have some

1238
01:37:10,159 --> 01:37:18,639
control there. Alternatively, is to
create a residential district for that

1239
01:37:15,679 --> 01:37:22,320
subdivision.
>> Yeah, I I just don't think we, like I

1240
01:37:20,800 --> 01:37:27,040
said, I like the idea of the special
land use. Uh, of course, you guys all

1241
01:37:24,719 --> 01:37:32,320
know I'm kind of like a progrowth guy
for the city, and I really hate to

1242
01:37:29,280 --> 01:37:36,480
eliminate any form of housing, period.
Uh, but I don't have a problem with

1243
01:37:34,480 --> 01:37:40,320
putting it in, for example, special land
use. It gives us more time to talk about

1244
01:37:38,159 --> 01:37:44,960
it. Gives everybody opportunity for
input to like do all we want this

1245
01:37:43,440 --> 01:37:50,080
another apartment building here. Do we
want a duplex here or a quadlex? To just

1246
01:37:47,920 --> 01:37:55,840
eliminate it, I I think would be a
mistake. uh you know especially if this

1247
01:37:54,000 --> 01:38:01,840
thing gets approved and our waterfront
overlay gets approved and 20 years from

1248
01:37:59,119 --> 01:38:05,520
now it's successful and people want to
come and enjoy the waterfront and want

1249
01:38:03,920 --> 01:38:08,800
to spend money in our restaurants and
somebody says you know what I wouldn't

1250
01:38:06,639 --> 01:38:14,719
mind living here but we don't have any
housing available I just that's just how

1251
01:38:12,560 --> 01:38:19,360
I think anyhow I I just believe if a
community doesn't grow eventually it

1252
01:38:16,719 --> 01:38:25,159
peters out so
>> yeah I think that's a fair middle ground

1253
01:38:21,600 --> 01:38:25,159
special use.

1254
01:38:27,440 --> 01:38:33,760
» Okay. So, are we going to move the are
we going to revert back to the original

1255
01:38:32,239 --> 01:38:38,480
zoning?
>> Based on your current draft, my

1256
01:38:35,920 --> 01:38:45,119
recommendation would not be to revert it
back because it creates nonconformity

1257
01:38:42,080 --> 01:38:51,040
issues. to address the concern that was
raised, which is allowing the duplexes,

1258
01:38:48,000 --> 01:38:55,119
which R2 does, would be to change it
from permitted by writing the R2 because

1259
01:38:53,600 --> 01:39:01,920
everything else about that district is
essentially the same.

1260
01:38:57,679 --> 01:39:06,639
» If duplex is the only difference,
then why don't we just have one zoning

1261
01:39:04,719 --> 01:39:09,760
for homes?
>> The duplex,

1262
01:39:07,760 --> 01:39:14,320
» the usewise, that's the difference. the
lot sizes are still a valid reason for

1263
01:39:12,080 --> 01:39:18,960
the split.
So if the duplexes are the concern, then

1264
01:39:17,040 --> 01:39:23,280
I would recommend special land use to
duplex. That gives you the teeth you

1265
01:39:21,040 --> 01:39:28,639
need to allow them or not allow them,
and it maintains the integrity of having

1266
01:39:25,760 --> 01:39:32,080
the two districts that respect your
canal properties and your non-anal

1267
01:39:30,639 --> 01:39:36,800
properties.
>> Every other community I've known, their

1268
01:39:34,159 --> 01:39:41,840
R2 is duplex.
That's their zoning. there. R2 is duplex

1269
01:39:40,159 --> 01:39:45,760
area.
>> R1 is single family housing.

1270
01:39:44,803 --> 01:39:47,920
[clears throat]
>> It's not a standard, but it's common.

1271
01:39:47,600 --> 01:39:55,360
Yes,
>> it's common, right? And I don't see that

1272
01:39:50,880 --> 01:40:00,960
the lot sizes in Kingsbridge are
that much different than the lot sizes

1273
01:39:57,520 --> 01:40:04,159
on some of these other streets where
they're remaining zoned the way they are

1274
01:40:03,040 --> 01:40:09,199
now.
So [snorts] in that case, when that item

1275
01:40:06,800 --> 01:40:13,679
would come to you as a special land use,
you could deny it for that reason.

1276
01:40:12,000 --> 01:40:18,239
That's the extra teeth. They still have
to come to you. They couldn't just My

1277
01:40:15,600 --> 01:40:21,520
house burnt down on Kingswood today. I'm
going to be with a duplex tomorrow. They

1278
01:40:19,920 --> 01:40:24,880
have to come and ask you if it makes
sense.

1279
01:40:23,280 --> 01:40:29,360
» Okay. But I'm more concerned about the
people not knowing we're doing this.

1280
01:40:26,719 --> 01:40:35,119
That's my main concern. They they if
they looked at social media and they dug

1281
01:40:32,800 --> 01:40:42,080
into this deep enough to look at this
draft zoning map and they said, "My lot

1282
01:40:39,360 --> 01:40:45,679
is changing, then they might be here."
But I really don't believe that many

1283
01:40:43,840 --> 01:40:51,679
people in the community actually do
that. So, we're going to go reszone this

1284
01:40:49,040 --> 01:40:57,040
without their knowledge. I don't agree
with that. So, just to clarify, this is

1285
01:40:54,880 --> 01:41:01,040
a public hearing, which meant we had to
follow the Michigan laws revolving

1286
01:40:59,360 --> 01:41:06,639
around public hearings for planning
commissions, which meant not only did we

1287
01:41:03,600 --> 01:41:12,400
have to publish the agenda 15 days in
advance, but we had to publish it within

1288
01:41:08,719 --> 01:41:17,360
the newspaper to notify everyone. Um, we
also started a new thing earlier this

1289
01:41:14,639 --> 01:41:23,760
year where the entire packet for the
planning commission is online along with

1290
01:41:20,480 --> 01:41:27,520
council. And this same ordinance draft
was discussed at the last planning

1291
01:41:25,440 --> 01:41:33,119
commission meeting as well. So that
packet was publicly available as well.

1292
01:41:30,080 --> 01:41:38,159
So we did follow all laws ensuring that
we um properly notified our public about

1293
01:41:36,480 --> 01:41:42,880
the public hearing and the opportunity
for people to come tonight. So I do just

1294
01:41:41,040 --> 01:41:47,920
want to clarify that we weren't hiding
this and we did follow the proper

1295
01:41:44,800 --> 01:41:51,280
protocol for notification.
>> Yeah. And I'm not saying we didn't. I'm

1296
01:41:49,679 --> 01:41:56,960
just saying I don't believe people
understand this is happening to them.

1297
01:41:53,600 --> 01:42:03,600
That's my point. Um
>> I I don't think anything's happening to

1298
01:42:00,080 --> 01:42:07,760
the people that have uh these
>> but it's not that they would just become

1299
01:42:05,679 --> 01:42:12,400
a nonconforming
use if there's a if there's a difference

1300
01:42:09,760 --> 01:42:16,880
between their lots. It's not
um

1301
01:42:14,080 --> 01:42:21,760
they're not being penalized for changing
this or we're not altering their

1302
01:42:18,480 --> 01:42:24,159
lifestyle based on it. It would be after
the fact.

1303
01:42:22,560 --> 01:42:28,119
» Correct.
If anything, this preserves

1304
01:42:28,159 --> 01:42:35,199
the existing housing that exists. It
allows those lots that were

1305
01:42:32,320 --> 01:42:38,639
non-conforming to be conforming.
Currently, those homes in that

1306
01:42:36,719 --> 01:42:42,719
subdivision are going to continue to be
conforming. the [snorts] single families

1307
01:42:40,560 --> 01:42:47,920
that are currently are permitted.
Nothing about what happens in that

1308
01:42:45,280 --> 01:42:52,639
neighborhood today changes.
>> I think a bigger concern should be the

1309
01:42:50,239 --> 01:42:57,040
fact that we have situations right now
that residents if they were to lose

1310
01:42:54,400 --> 01:43:01,199
their home from something don't have the
opportunity to build again under our our

1311
01:42:59,360 --> 01:43:04,560
structure the way it is right now.
>> Correct.

1312
01:43:01,760 --> 01:43:06,320
» Um we're trying to align that the right
way. So,

1313
01:43:05,840 --> 01:43:09,679
» y
>> I think we should consider that

1314
01:43:08,080 --> 01:43:12,679
» and that is a big challenge in a lot of
communities.

1315
01:43:19,040 --> 01:43:28,000
So, the question uh that was raised is
for the R2 district, do you want to

1316
01:43:25,840 --> 01:43:30,960
uh change the permissibility of two
family dwellings from permitted to

1317
01:43:29,600 --> 01:43:34,960
special land use?
>> Yes.

1318
01:43:33,520 --> 01:43:37,960
Can I just do that or do we need a
motion?

1319
01:43:38,000 --> 01:43:42,560
» Can you make a Have them make a motion
just so

1320
01:43:40,880 --> 01:43:46,501
» I'll make a mot.
>> Um, please repeat what you said,

1321
01:43:44,960 --> 01:43:49,920
Donovan, so I can try to get the wording
[laughter] accurate.

1322
01:43:47,840 --> 01:43:54,000
» It is the recommendation based on uh
planning commission conversation to

1323
01:43:51,679 --> 01:44:00,800
change the permissibility of two family
dwellings in the R2 district from

1324
01:43:56,560 --> 01:44:04,239
permitted by right to special land use.
>> Did you get that?

1325
01:44:03,679 --> 01:44:08,400
Um,
>> first two words

1326
01:44:05,119 --> 01:44:14,800
» make a motion to
change the do I want to say multifamily

1327
01:44:11,280 --> 01:44:18,560
dwelling? Will that work or dual family
dwelling?

1328
01:44:15,679 --> 01:44:22,880
» It's It's in the ordinance. It's called
two family R2 in the R2 district.

1329
01:44:22,159 --> 01:44:27,520
» Correct.
>> Two family.

1330
01:44:25,760 --> 01:44:35,760
» Mhm.
Special land use in the R2. to special

1331
01:44:31,360 --> 01:44:36,639
land use in R
two.

1332
01:44:36,320 --> 01:44:40,000
» Correct.
>> Correct.

1333
01:44:37,840 --> 01:44:43,280
» Does that cover the apartment complex
too? Like on Adams and Stollet where

1334
01:44:41,920 --> 01:44:46,639
it's multiple more than two.
>> No, those are what do you call it? Legal

1335
01:44:45,600 --> 01:44:50,119
» R3.
>> Is there a second?

1336
01:44:50,560 --> 01:44:55,119
» Second.
>> Thank you. I don't know where that area

1337
01:44:53,760 --> 01:45:00,320
» discussion
>> discussions

1338
01:44:56,960 --> 01:45:02,639
» Jim was asking about on Adams the over
here there's an apartment complex there

1339
01:45:02,159 --> 01:45:06,400
there's a
>> apartment complex

1340
01:45:04,400 --> 01:45:11,040
» this action does not impact those though
they would continue to be legally

1341
01:45:07,920 --> 01:45:15,280
non-conforming as they currently are
>> then what if somebody does want to build

1342
01:45:12,639 --> 01:45:24,080
a duplex they used to have a way to do
that by having their lot zoned R2 so now

1343
01:45:21,679 --> 01:45:28,880
what would how would they get to have a
duplex? They would have to get a a

1344
01:45:25,760 --> 01:45:36,480
higher zoned lot and then build down
>> if you're a canal property. Yes.

1345
01:45:30,800 --> 01:45:39,920
» Of getting zoned R3 or R4. R3 because we
just changed our R3 is going to be our

1346
01:45:38,320 --> 01:45:44,560
duplex zoning now. It used to be
apartment buildings. [clears throat]

1347
01:45:41,840 --> 01:45:46,480
» R3 is not duplex. R3 doesn't allow
duplexes.

1348
01:45:45,199 --> 01:45:49,920
» Well, you could still do it in R2. It
just be a special use.

1349
01:45:47,679 --> 01:45:55,360
» Right. Your original question was they
come to you. I think what you're asking

1350
01:45:51,920 --> 01:45:59,840
is for the canal properties currently
duplexes are not permitted in the canal.

1351
01:45:57,760 --> 01:46:05,600
» Yeah. Well, okay. When you say canal
properties, I just don't see that on

1352
01:46:02,800 --> 01:46:10,639
this map. Okay. There's so many streets
on there that were included that

1353
01:46:08,159 --> 01:46:13,360
remained R1 zoning that are not on the
canal.

1354
01:46:11,280 --> 01:46:17,600
» Saying the ones that are in the middle
between View and Adams canal that

1355
01:46:15,440 --> 01:46:22,800
remain. are considering anything that's
on one of the islands that's surrounded

1356
01:46:20,719 --> 01:46:26,400
by a canal but might not be waterfront
property is considered a canal property.

1357
01:46:25,119 --> 01:46:30,520
» Correct.
>> That's what they're calling canal

1358
01:46:27,520 --> 01:46:30,520
properties.

1359
01:46:31,600 --> 01:46:37,719
» That is that is correct. So if it's
touching the water

1360
01:46:38,159 --> 01:46:44,159
» all the residential
>> by adjacent

1361
01:46:40,880 --> 01:46:47,040
» everything south of Navardi I'm sorry
I'm nar

1362
01:46:46,560 --> 01:46:50,960
» Navar
>> I haven't heard that before I like that

1363
01:46:48,159 --> 01:46:53,178
one. Oh, it's a it's a double R from now
on

1364
01:46:51,440 --> 01:46:56,880
» Nvart.
[laughter]

1365
01:46:53,920 --> 01:47:01,760
» Everything south of Navar uh and south
really everything south of Gibralar.

1366
01:46:59,119 --> 01:47:06,560
» But Kingsbridge is south of Gibralar and
so are all these lots on Jefferson.

1367
01:47:03,760 --> 01:47:11,440
That's why I'm saying if you just let if
they just remain what they're zoned now,

1368
01:47:09,520 --> 01:47:16,639
there wouldn't be a problem. I I
understand the the challenge with what

1369
01:47:13,520 --> 01:47:21,840
you're requesting is those lots are not
the same size as your canal property

1370
01:47:19,199 --> 01:47:27,119
lots. If I were to go and make those
lots the same district as what we're

1371
01:47:24,159 --> 01:47:30,560
proposing, it's very difficult to go
back and just say just do R1 because we

1372
01:47:29,840 --> 01:47:33,760
allocated
>> I don't think a lot of lots in

1373
01:47:31,679 --> 01:47:38,800
Kingsbridge would be that different than
the lots you're talking about.

1374
01:47:36,239 --> 01:47:42,080
» I'm looking at them. They are very
standardly different.

1375
01:47:42,480 --> 01:47:52,080
the the best solution at this stage
without creating a new district would be

1376
01:47:47,360 --> 01:47:57,119
to special land use the duplexes that
addresses the concern and it allows

1377
01:47:54,880 --> 01:48:03,600
everything to continue as it is today
without changing the map may change

1378
01:47:59,600 --> 01:48:09,119
nomenclature and titles but functionally
they're remaining the same when you

1379
01:48:05,840 --> 01:48:09,119
special land use duplexes

1380
01:48:12,639 --> 01:48:18,239
I get what you're saying. I think to
Marian's point, like these houses right

1381
01:48:15,679 --> 01:48:21,760
here
have narrow lots. It might not look like

1382
01:48:19,920 --> 01:48:27,119
it on the picture, but they're like the
same size as these.

1383
01:48:24,560 --> 01:48:31,840
» The these are big houses to Rick's
earlier point and wider lots, but these

1384
01:48:29,840 --> 01:48:36,960
aren't. So, it's tough because it only
it would vary by parcel. Eight. They got

1385
01:48:35,679 --> 01:48:39,920
deeper. They're deeper.
>> Yeah. But consistently they're

1386
01:48:38,719 --> 01:48:42,320
» Yeah. Like where Tom lives.
>> Where I used to live. Yeah. Had a deep

1387
01:48:41,679 --> 01:48:46,800
lot.
>> Consistently these lots are more

1388
01:48:44,320 --> 01:48:51,040
standard in size than these lots.
>> 100%. Yeah. That's fair.

1389
01:48:48,159 --> 01:48:55,040
» And that's still why they're different.
>> I get that. That makes sense.

1390
01:48:53,440 --> 01:48:59,840
» But I understand the concern about
duplexes. If you want to avoid those,

1391
01:48:57,760 --> 01:49:02,639
the only way to do that without creating
the district themselves would be the

1392
01:49:01,520 --> 01:49:06,080
special land use.
>> Motion for special land use. That's on

1393
01:49:04,639 --> 01:49:08,080
the table. I'll second it.
>> Oh yes,

1394
01:49:06,560 --> 01:49:12,695
» it's already been second.
>> So that called a vote.

1395
01:49:09,840 --> 01:49:17,960
» So there was discussion.
[snorts]

1396
01:49:14,320 --> 01:49:17,960
» Should that be R2?

1397
01:49:20,639 --> 01:49:25,440
» You could. Yeah,
>> those are much bigger.

1398
01:49:23,040 --> 01:49:31,199
» Yeah.
Yeah, you could do Sugar Island as R2.

1399
01:49:28,000 --> 01:49:36,639
It would make it would make sense.
>> It would fit the intent standard. And

1400
01:49:34,560 --> 01:49:40,880
then if you make special land use duplex
is it consistent?

1401
01:49:38,080 --> 01:49:46,679
» Okay. Special land use in R2 was moved
and supported. All in favor say I.

1402
01:49:42,800 --> 01:49:46,679
» I. Any opposed?

1403
01:49:47,440 --> 01:49:52,320
» Okay.
>> Okay.

1404
01:49:50,080 --> 01:49:54,719
» Do you also I hate to open up a can. You
want to make Sugar Lane now that we've

1405
01:49:54,000 --> 01:49:58,400
made that change.
>> If you're making that change then you

1406
01:49:55,920 --> 01:50:01,600
have to be consistent. So it would if
it's by lot size those are much bigger

1407
01:50:00,719 --> 01:50:07,600
lots.
>> Okay. So I will

1408
01:50:05,600 --> 01:50:14,320
let me review it. If it is consistent,
I'll adjust it if that's amable.

1409
01:50:12,719 --> 01:50:20,560
Okay.
Um that's all my initial zoning

1410
01:50:17,360 --> 01:50:26,080
ordinance updates. It took took an hour
and a half. Um I do have a brief

1411
01:50:22,960 --> 01:50:30,239
presentation if you want to hear it. Um
otherwise I could streamline it or I can

1412
01:50:28,400 --> 01:50:33,280
just kind of go straight to the motion
I'm requesting.

1413
01:50:32,719 --> 01:50:37,199
Uh feel
>> like most of the public got the gist of

1414
01:50:35,440 --> 01:50:40,800
it, but I do have just a few highlights
I can go over.

1415
01:50:38,080 --> 01:50:46,880
» We still have to do the
>> public hearing, right? Yes.

1416
01:50:43,840 --> 01:50:50,080
» So I
one question I have before we move on.

1417
01:50:48,719 --> 01:50:56,480
all of the things that we proposed that
you said you were going to add like the

1418
01:50:52,960 --> 01:51:03,040
potential island estates to R2 the stuff
that I had mentioned earlier in the C3

1419
01:50:59,600 --> 01:51:07,760
marine district overlay
>> about your five comments. Yes, you're

1420
01:51:05,520 --> 01:51:11,520
gonna add in the fiscal like is that all
documented and then when will we be able

1421
01:51:09,440 --> 01:51:14,639
to see that
>> because before we get to the public

1422
01:51:12,960 --> 01:51:21,199
hearing and then potentially a
recommendation to approve or whatever.

1423
01:51:18,239 --> 01:51:23,679
» Do you have a meeting next week?
>> I don't know anymore.

1424
01:51:22,159 --> 01:51:29,679
» So, okay. [laughter]
So, let me outline the timeline because

1425
01:51:26,320 --> 01:51:35,119
um so essentially what we're hoping to
do tonight if uh the commission is ready

1426
01:51:32,560 --> 01:51:43,040
and able is for the commission to
recommend um with all of their um

1427
01:51:39,119 --> 01:51:50,080
necessary changes uh the draft ordinance
to council so that council on Monday uh

1428
01:51:47,360 --> 01:51:55,679
which would be the 14th can do their
first reading. You guys do have a

1429
01:51:52,639 --> 01:51:58,080
scheduled meeting for Tuesday of next
week.

1430
01:51:56,480 --> 01:52:02,800
» Now,
>> um it it's helpful to have two council

1431
01:52:01,360 --> 01:52:09,040
members and the mayor in the room for
this conversation because if you guys

1432
01:52:05,360 --> 01:52:14,560
are not ready tonight, um which I hope
you are with your proposed changes and

1433
01:52:11,119 --> 01:52:20,080
Donovan can get that over and we can get
um the draft recommendation to council

1434
01:52:17,440 --> 01:52:25,599
as soon as hopefully Thursday, possibly
Friday. We're going to do our best. If

1435
01:52:23,199 --> 01:52:30,560
you're not ready for that and you need
next Tuesday, what we would then do on

1436
01:52:28,239 --> 01:52:35,440
the administration side is go to council
and request a special meeting so we can

1437
01:52:33,119 --> 01:52:39,840
get the first read and the second
reading done at the council level by

1438
01:52:37,760 --> 01:52:43,760
September 30th.
>> Okay.

1439
01:52:40,239 --> 01:52:45,440
» You guys hold the cards right now. So we
don't What?

1440
01:52:44,560 --> 01:52:46,560
» That's how we like it.
>> Yeah.

1441
01:52:45,920 --> 01:52:49,040
» I'm joking.
>> Yeah.

1442
01:52:47,199 --> 01:52:51,280
» No, it's fair. No, it's fair. I mean,
you're you're the planning commission.

1443
01:52:50,480 --> 01:52:56,000
That's your job.
>> 100% joking.

1444
01:52:52,159 --> 01:53:01,280
» Um, but what I will say is while we do
have this timeline,

1445
01:52:58,159 --> 01:53:04,800
we don't want to force you guys into a
decision or rush rush you into a

1446
01:53:03,119 --> 01:53:10,480
decision. You are making very big
decisions for our community. So, if I

1447
01:53:07,760 --> 01:53:16,560
have to go to council and beg them to do
a special meeting, I will. I I want you

1448
01:53:14,480 --> 01:53:18,960
guys to feel comfortable with what you
recommend to council.

1449
01:53:18,239 --> 01:53:23,840
» Got it.
>> I agree. Um,

1450
01:53:21,520 --> 01:53:28,000
what's the team think about seeing the
the the deck that he prepared? Or are we

1451
01:53:26,400 --> 01:53:33,920
good based on the conversations that
we've had? Are we good

1452
01:53:30,800 --> 01:53:36,639
with the discussion portion of section
five?

1453
01:53:35,520 --> 01:53:40,719
I'm comfortable with it.
>> I think we had a deep discussion.

1454
01:53:39,360 --> 01:53:45,440
» I guess let me ask you a different I
>> I'll go with it based on the suggestions

1455
01:53:42,639 --> 01:53:48,400
that you also added to it, you know.
>> Okay.

1456
01:53:45,840 --> 01:53:52,800
» And I can provide I'm sorry. Um, I can
provide at your next meeting if you push

1457
01:53:50,639 --> 01:53:56,719
it forward today. I can just include a
follow-up memo at your next meeting that

1458
01:53:54,719 --> 01:54:00,560
just includes the changes and if there's
anything or discrepancy, you just meet

1459
01:53:59,040 --> 01:54:02,639
meet me at city council.
>> That would be that would be good.

1460
01:54:02,080 --> 01:54:05,360
» That works.
>> And just highlight what you added in.

1461
01:54:04,320 --> 01:54:10,320
» Yeah. Okay.
>> I can do that.

1462
01:54:06,159 --> 01:54:14,800
» Okay. [snorts] All right. Moving on to
um

1463
01:54:12,480 --> 01:54:18,000
section six. We are going to Sorry,
guys. I haven't been home from work yet.

1464
01:54:16,320 --> 01:54:22,800
Uh we're going to move on to public
hearing. Um this is on uh the city of

1465
01:54:21,119 --> 01:54:28,400
Jialter zoning ordinance amendments
chapter 44 zoning. I could I get a

1466
01:54:25,520 --> 01:54:32,080
motion to open the public hearing to
consider this city of Jialter zoning

1467
01:54:30,320 --> 01:54:35,520
ordinance amendments chapter 44.
>> Motion to open the public hearing to

1468
01:54:33,760 --> 01:54:39,679
consider the city of Jialter zoning
ordinance amendments chapter 44.

1469
01:54:39,040 --> 01:54:42,719
» Second.
>> Moved and supported. All in favor say I.

1470
01:54:41,760 --> 01:54:46,800
I.
>> Any opposed?

1471
01:54:45,280 --> 01:54:50,840
Okay.
Public hearing is open.

1472
01:54:54,080 --> 01:55:00,560
» Yeah.
Do we have any Sure. Please state your

1473
01:54:58,400 --> 01:55:07,280
name and your address.
>> Anor both house 30567 Young. So I want

1474
01:55:03,280 --> 01:55:13,360
to understand what you just agreed to. I
heard all your changes that you all

1475
01:55:09,520 --> 01:55:20,880
discussed. I I I get it.
When is the public going to be able to

1476
01:55:16,159 --> 01:55:25,199
see the revised as well? Is that not
going to be until the first reading with

1477
01:55:22,960 --> 01:55:30,239
the council? And I'm not sure if you'll
answer my question or not, but I would

1478
01:55:27,280 --> 01:55:36,159
really like to understand when will the
public be able to see what you're doing,

1479
01:55:33,840 --> 01:55:41,840
especially
for me, especially with making the

1480
01:55:38,639 --> 01:55:46,560
change to the R2 district and not
allowing or special land use for

1481
01:55:45,040 --> 01:55:50,159
duplexes.
So, I would just like to understand

1482
01:55:48,639 --> 01:55:56,560
when's the public going to be able to
see that document in either the planning

1483
01:55:53,280 --> 01:56:00,800
commission's meeting packets or like
whatever. I I want to understand when

1484
01:55:58,560 --> 01:56:03,119
I'm going to see it.
>> Can I answer that?

1485
01:56:02,239 --> 01:56:09,040
» Go ahead.
>> Uh through the chair, the current draft

1486
01:56:06,159 --> 01:56:12,719
with these changes will be at the next
city council meeting if that's the

1487
01:56:10,639 --> 01:56:17,840
action that's taken this evening. the
current draft less the changes discussed

1488
01:56:15,679 --> 01:56:22,560
today are in the planning commission
packet two meetings back

1489
01:56:20,880 --> 01:56:27,599
» as well as this meeting
>> or online

1490
01:56:23,679 --> 01:56:32,400
» online. So if you go this actually
>> I know where to go but I know that the

1491
01:56:29,840 --> 01:56:37,599
meeting packet for this meeting wasn't
published until yesterday.

1492
01:56:34,800 --> 01:56:43,040
» Yes, that was a clerical mistake. our
clerk was out of town and so it was on

1493
01:56:40,320 --> 01:56:49,679
me. So I apologize, but it's the exact
same information that was in the last

1494
01:56:44,960 --> 01:56:56,159
meeting. Um, now it depends on what this
body does tonight. If they recommend it

1495
01:56:53,679 --> 01:57:01,760
to council, it will be in the council
packet. Now again, I want for Monday's

1496
01:57:00,400 --> 01:57:06,960
meeting. Now, I want to caution
everyone. Historically, we've been able

1497
01:57:04,400 --> 01:57:13,199
to get packets out on Wednesday. With
all of these changes, and it still has

1498
01:57:10,000 --> 01:57:17,599
to go after it's after Donovan's done,
then our attorney has to put it into a

1499
01:57:15,119 --> 01:57:23,360
specific format. So, with all of these
changes, it likely won't get out until

1500
01:57:19,840 --> 01:57:28,880
Thursday or Friday. Now, that's if this
body recommends it. If not, it would be

1501
01:57:26,480 --> 01:57:36,400
in the next planning commission's
meeting packet, which is for Tuesday. So

1502
01:57:32,239 --> 01:57:39,920
quick turnaround. Um but we we do
recognize and that's why we are

1503
01:57:38,080 --> 01:57:43,599
publishing packets online now. We
weren't previously doing that. We want

1504
01:57:41,760 --> 01:57:48,159
to be transparent for our community and
we want them to be aware of what we're

1505
01:57:45,360 --> 01:57:52,080
discussing. So we promise we will get
all of this information and these

1506
01:57:50,320 --> 01:57:55,920
changes to the public as soon as
possible.

1507
01:57:53,520 --> 01:58:00,639
» Question through the chair. Um, don't
don't we have to before a and correct,

1508
01:57:58,719 --> 01:58:03,920
please correct me if I'm interpreting
this incorrectly, but don't we have

1509
01:58:02,560 --> 01:58:07,760
» Sorry, we're still in our public hearing
right now.

1510
01:58:04,400 --> 01:58:11,320
» Oh, okay. Thank you.
>> Any other comments?

1511
01:58:13,119 --> 01:58:20,560
» Good afternoon. I'm Kathy Le Point. I
live at 29874

1512
01:58:17,199 --> 01:58:27,520
Kingsbridge Drive. I'm a council person
for this fine city and late appointment

1513
01:58:23,920 --> 01:58:31,840
to the um zoning committee. I went to
one meeting and looked at this. I want

1514
01:58:29,520 --> 01:58:36,800
to commend and thank uh Commissioner Pay
for picking up on that art too. I I

1515
01:58:34,800 --> 01:58:41,840
really didn't catch it. I didn't see the
difference in the color of yellows. I

1516
01:58:38,880 --> 01:58:47,119
didn't know that um our subdivision was
being targeted or not targeted but uh

1517
01:58:44,239 --> 01:58:51,199
considered for changing R2. So this is
all new information. And I'm trying to

1518
01:58:48,560 --> 01:58:58,719
understand I think that what I heard was
if you're R1, you're a small residential

1519
01:58:54,320 --> 01:59:05,199
lot and and so the assumption there is
that the lots in Kingsbridge are bigger

1520
01:59:01,920 --> 01:59:10,639
than R1 normal traditional lots and
that's a problem. I don't know why it's

1521
01:59:08,159 --> 01:59:17,840
a problem. It's been R1 for since I
bought there 45 years ago. However,

1522
01:59:13,360 --> 01:59:22,639
we'll just assume that it is correct. So
would that also mean that our lot sizes

1523
01:59:20,960 --> 01:59:27,920
are
So I'm looking at Island Estates, those

1524
01:59:24,880 --> 01:59:32,800
are bigger homes, bigger tax dollars. So
would the assumption be that Island

1525
01:59:29,520 --> 01:59:37,360
Estates therefore has 40 foot lots and
Kingsbridge has 60 foot lots.

1526
01:59:35,360 --> 01:59:41,679
» I asked them to change that to R2 as
well.

1527
01:59:38,480 --> 01:59:46,880
» Oh, okay. So now, um, Island Estates
will be R2 also. Okay. So, I'm just

1528
01:59:45,040 --> 01:59:50,880
going to encourage this commission to
slow down. I know we're up against a

1529
01:59:48,639 --> 01:59:54,800
deadline because of Grant, but there
have been a lot of conversations. I feel

1530
01:59:52,639 --> 01:59:59,760
like there's a lot of misunderstanding
and our residents right now are at a

1531
01:59:57,199 --> 02:00:04,239
point where a breaking point, not not
your fault, but other things that are

1532
02:00:01,199 --> 02:00:09,280
going in on our community. So, I would
as a council person or and a resident,

1533
02:00:06,880 --> 02:00:14,400
take your time, look at the changes. We
have a new gentleman, Mr. Smith here um

1534
02:00:12,719 --> 02:00:19,520
that wasn't present at all the meetings.
So, make sure your changes are made that

1535
02:00:17,520 --> 02:00:23,840
the residents have one more opportunity
to so that you can explain to the people

1536
02:00:22,080 --> 02:00:28,480
in these two major subdivisions what
this change means to them. Because when

1537
02:00:25,920 --> 02:00:32,719
I'm looking at this um two family
dwellings are allowed in the R2 private

1538
02:00:30,560 --> 02:00:37,520
garages or community garages, private
clubs, fraternities and lodges. Is that

1539
02:00:35,679 --> 02:00:40,800
what I want myself? I already have a
huge complex next door that's

1540
02:00:39,040 --> 02:00:45,040
apartments. We have the condos. We have
a little planned unit development

1541
02:00:42,320 --> 02:00:49,760
anyway, but my neighbors are going to be
a little concerned. So, I think then we

1542
02:00:46,800 --> 02:00:54,639
changed it to, okay, now you have to ask
for special land use, which I don't

1543
02:00:51,840 --> 02:00:59,920
understand, but there are people in our
community that in vacant lots that

1544
02:00:57,119 --> 02:01:04,880
people want to build on. So, it's
possible that somebody could say, "Can I

1545
02:01:02,639 --> 02:01:10,239
get a special land use and put up a
duplex in a residential single family

1546
02:01:08,480 --> 02:01:14,000
neighborhood?" It doesn't make sense. So
anyway, thank you for your time this

1547
02:01:11,760 --> 02:01:20,199
evening. I know this isn't easy and I
thank you all for your work.

1548
02:01:16,960 --> 02:01:20,199
» Thank you.

1549
02:01:22,560 --> 02:01:25,960
» Any other comments?

1550
02:01:29,280 --> 02:01:37,159
» Uh do we have a motion? Any other
comments? I'll do one more quick coming

1551
02:01:34,159 --> 02:01:37,159
up.

1552
02:01:38,880 --> 02:01:46,960
» For years, Wayne Brandon 30490 South
Jialter Road. For years, you had people

1553
02:01:43,760 --> 02:01:52,080
living in Hanbug Marina. You've got
people living, I believe, right now

1554
02:01:49,360 --> 02:01:55,119
above Hanbug.
They told them they couldn't build it.

1555
02:01:53,440 --> 02:01:59,679
They went ahead and built it anyway.
Things have been going on here for years

1556
02:01:57,760 --> 02:02:03,360
and nobody's done anything about it.
stuff built without permits, without

1557
02:02:01,520 --> 02:02:08,960
planning.
Nothing was done. People made millions

1558
02:02:06,000 --> 02:02:13,040
of dollars, walked away.
We've been getting screwed for a while,

1559
02:02:11,040 --> 02:02:16,040
and we don't need these changes. Thank
you.

1560
02:02:19,599 --> 02:02:24,280
Do we have a motion to close the public
hearing?

1561
02:02:24,320 --> 02:02:29,520
» Motion to close the public hearing. I'll
second.

1562
02:02:27,199 --> 02:02:33,520
» Moved and supported. All in favor say I.
>> I.

1563
02:02:30,320 --> 02:02:35,679
» Any opposed?
>> Uh

1564
02:02:34,080 --> 02:02:39,920
» may I make a followup?
>> Sure.

1565
02:02:36,480 --> 02:02:47,199
» Um what a good point that was raised was
the in the R2 district uh public private

1566
02:02:44,639 --> 02:02:52,960
clubs were permitted and that might have
been a carryover. So I would recommend

1567
02:02:50,239 --> 02:02:58,960
removing uh private clubs from the R2
district. So my question will be if we

1568
02:02:55,599 --> 02:03:03,040
remove those from the R2 district, what
is going to be the difference? Why are

1569
02:03:01,280 --> 02:03:07,440
we going through this instead of just
leaving it R1? You know, the leaving the

1570
02:03:05,360 --> 02:03:16,000
homes that are R1
still R1. I think we're making um

1571
02:03:11,199 --> 02:03:21,520
» a lot of this is not um a bad move for
us to do this. There's unless someone is

1572
02:03:18,719 --> 02:03:30,159
coming in asking to be reszoned, why are
we reszoning them? And like one of the

1573
02:03:25,920 --> 02:03:35,679
uh residents was saying, when are when
are the residents going to see the final

1574
02:03:32,960 --> 02:03:39,119
um version of the document before it's
approved?

1575
02:03:38,239 --> 02:03:42,800
» I think that
>> because I really don't think the

1576
02:03:40,239 --> 02:03:48,159
residents realize about this R1 and R2
zoning. Marian's concern I think is one

1577
02:03:45,840 --> 02:03:53,599
the lot size thing makes sense but there
may be other spots in the city where an

1578
02:03:50,480 --> 02:03:58,800
R2 district makes sense where you should
be able to have a club or a

1579
02:03:56,880 --> 02:04:03,280
whatever duplex.
>> However, if you remove it holistically

1580
02:04:01,199 --> 02:04:07,119
from the R2 district, then you can't
have that in those other spots where we

1581
02:04:04,880 --> 02:04:10,239
would potentially benefit from it. So,
in the locations where those houses

1582
02:04:08,960 --> 02:04:14,960
currently exist that have always been
R1, those people are going to be pissed

1583
02:04:12,320 --> 02:04:19,119
if it's R2, if it's inclusive of a club
or a duplex, but there might be another

1584
02:04:17,599 --> 02:04:23,760
spot like over here where that makes
sense or over here where that could make

1585
02:04:21,520 --> 02:04:30,480
sense. So, I think that's the problem.
We're we're we're using R2 specifically

1586
02:04:27,599 --> 02:04:35,280
to decipher between smaller lot sizes
and larger lot sizes, but an R2 district

1587
02:04:33,199 --> 02:04:39,920
may make sense to have the other stuff
that we're going to remove. Or

1588
02:04:37,440 --> 02:04:42,400
» do you push that to an R something else?
I don't know.

1589
02:04:40,560 --> 02:04:49,840
» Currently, private clubs, fraternities,
and lodges are permitted by right in the

1590
02:04:44,880 --> 02:04:53,840
R2, R3, and the C1 district. I would
again my recommendation

1591
02:04:52,000 --> 02:04:58,000
I just wouldn't allow private clubs and
fraternities and lodges in residential

1592
02:04:56,000 --> 02:05:01,040
dis sorry in residential districts
overall.

1593
02:04:59,520 --> 02:05:05,679
Um
so that just probably should just be

1594
02:05:03,520 --> 02:05:09,679
removed. Everything else you say you
stated would be consistent.

1595
02:05:07,679 --> 02:05:12,960
» Just keep the permitted uses the same on
R1 and R2.

1596
02:05:11,280 --> 02:05:17,280
» It's not going to be permitted at all in
R1 and R2 p. These are private clubs,

1597
02:05:15,679 --> 02:05:21,360
fraternities, and lodges. First thing,
keep R1 and R2 permitted uses as exactly

1598
02:05:19,760 --> 02:05:24,239
the same. The only
>> the only difference now is you're

1599
02:05:22,560 --> 02:05:29,520
designating lot sizes.
>> Correct.

1600
02:05:25,679 --> 02:05:33,360
» You could do exactly the same.
The only difference I'm just going to

1601
02:05:31,520 --> 02:05:36,239
highlight the difference is uh boarding
and lodging would be

1602
02:05:35,360 --> 02:05:40,000
» what is that?
>> Uh that's like um

1603
02:05:38,880 --> 02:05:45,440
» Airbnb,
>> not necessarily like a boarding house.

1604
02:05:42,159 --> 02:05:52,480
So you could rent out bedrooms instead
of units. So the bedrooms are units, not

1605
02:05:49,599 --> 02:05:57,119
like a a full dwelling unit.
>> So you could have a four bedroomedroom

1606
02:05:54,960 --> 02:05:59,920
home and you could rent it out to four
individuals.

1607
02:05:58,000 --> 02:06:04,719
» I don't think people want that in their
neighborhood, especially without their

1608
02:06:01,840 --> 02:06:06,960
realizing that this is what the city is
trying to do to them.

1609
02:06:05,599 --> 02:06:09,199
» That's been that was a carryover though,
wasn't

1610
02:06:07,760 --> 02:06:11,679
» that's been there and it wasn't caught
before.

1611
02:06:09,760 --> 02:06:13,840
» Right. So, some of this isn't us adding
things. Some of this stuff is what you

1612
02:06:13,040 --> 02:06:16,880
currently have.
>> That's been there forever. We just

1613
02:06:15,360 --> 02:06:20,719
nobody ever did it or maybe they are
doing it. We don't know about it.

1614
02:06:19,119 --> 02:06:26,000
» Probably some people are doing that.
>> That's [laughter]

1615
02:06:22,480 --> 02:06:30,239
that's the difference. Um, horse stables
are in the R2, so you wouldn't be able

1616
02:06:28,000 --> 02:06:36,639
to do them on the canals.
Uh, private garages or community garages

1617
02:06:32,960 --> 02:06:41,360
are permitted in the R2. Um, which is I
guess that might be a carryover.

1618
02:06:39,280 --> 02:06:47,199
Uh, cemeteries are special land use in
the R2. Child care centers are uh,

1619
02:06:44,320 --> 02:06:49,679
special land use in the R1.
>> Honestly, I don't think this is well

1620
02:06:48,880 --> 02:06:52,239
thought through.
>> They're pretty consistent.

1621
02:06:50,719 --> 02:06:57,679
» We're taking everything out of we're
taking certain things out of R2, leaving

1622
02:06:54,560 --> 02:07:02,400
certain things in. We haven't done a
side by side to see, okay, what is

1623
02:06:59,520 --> 02:07:08,000
permitted in R1, what makes sense in R2?
Why are we doing this? It's not

1624
02:07:04,719 --> 02:07:13,280
necessary that we do this and impact so
many potentially impact so many lots in

1625
02:07:11,520 --> 02:07:18,800
the city of Gibralar.
>> If I could just come full circle, if we

1626
02:07:16,239 --> 02:07:23,840
don't do this, we go back to what your
current ordinance has, your current map

1627
02:07:21,119 --> 02:07:30,480
R1 for all residential lots. You can go
back to that. The challenge and to doing

1628
02:07:27,599 --> 02:07:36,320
that is you are
continuing the nonconformity of your

1629
02:07:33,280 --> 02:07:40,400
existing lots which puts pressure on
residents if their existing lot is

1630
02:07:38,320 --> 02:07:45,360
nonconforming and something happens to
their house. They either have to come to

1631
02:07:42,800 --> 02:07:50,639
you every time to get a variance which
fires don't happen every day. Knock on

1632
02:07:48,239 --> 02:07:54,239
wood. So, it's not like you'll
immediately get overloaded with

1633
02:07:52,079 --> 02:07:58,960
application for variances so people can
put back their homes that currently

1634
02:07:56,159 --> 02:08:02,079
existed. You can go back to that.
>> I mean, I think that's a lesser.

1635
02:08:00,480 --> 02:08:05,280
» Have we ever denied somebody from going
back to what they wanted? You've been

1636
02:08:03,520 --> 02:08:07,119
the most experienced.
>> Yeah. So, like,

1637
02:08:05,920 --> 02:08:12,800
» but you're going to allow future
building under non-conformms. So,

1638
02:08:10,079 --> 02:08:17,599
someone could buy that section along
middle jib and make 40 foot lots and put

1639
02:08:14,960 --> 02:08:21,520
houses in in R1. back to the small size
that your brother doesn't like

1640
02:08:19,360 --> 02:08:23,520
» or allowing it. We're trying to stop it
from going forward.

1641
02:08:22,800 --> 02:08:27,360
» Yeah.
>> We're not punishing anybody for having

1642
02:08:25,360 --> 02:08:31,360
small lots. We're allowing them to do
more with their lots without having to

1643
02:08:29,280 --> 02:08:34,800
come for the zoning board for pay a
hundred bucks or whatever.

1644
02:08:32,960 --> 02:08:38,560
» But isn't that a lesser problem than
let's say reszoning several houses? I

1645
02:08:37,280 --> 02:08:43,199
don't even know how many are reszoned
here. And then potentially having a club

1646
02:08:41,280 --> 02:08:47,760
be built in the middle of the sub. I I
like Bill's thing is again if you make

1647
02:08:45,440 --> 02:08:51,520
an R1A and make everything exactly the
same except for you know

1648
02:08:50,400 --> 02:08:57,360
» lot sizes.
>> Yeah.

1649
02:08:54,320 --> 02:09:01,599
» And and you could do that. The like I
said currently the only difference is

1650
02:09:00,159 --> 02:09:06,960
boarding and lodging which is a
carryover. So you would just permit that

1651
02:09:03,520 --> 02:09:11,360
everywhere in R1 and R2. Horses and
stables you could permit that in R1 and

1652
02:09:08,880 --> 02:09:15,599
R2. But again, these are things being
permitted into the canal district. So,

1653
02:09:13,679 --> 02:09:20,159
do you want boarding and lodging houses
in the canal district? That would be the

1654
02:09:18,320 --> 02:09:23,840
question. No. So, now we have
>> What they're saying is add a R1A. And

1655
02:09:21,840 --> 02:09:26,320
the R1A is representative of the larger
lots.

1656
02:09:24,560 --> 02:09:28,960
» Oh, you want the R1A?
>> I think that's what they're saying.

1657
02:09:27,920 --> 02:09:31,840
» So, we were just talking
>> for the subdivision lots.

1658
02:09:30,639 --> 02:09:37,360
» Yeah. The bigger lot.
>> Then you're then you're able to separate

1659
02:09:35,840 --> 02:09:39,840
» small lots and big lots. you just have
an extra one, which I know is probably

1660
02:09:38,800 --> 02:09:43,360
annoying, but
>> it solves the problem and then it

1661
02:09:41,199 --> 02:09:47,360
removes the discussion. And then
>> those houses are exactly the same as R1

1662
02:09:46,000 --> 02:09:49,119
except they're 60 foot instead of 40
foot

1663
02:09:47,599 --> 02:09:53,760
» and they need to build a certain way
when they build a new house on it or

1664
02:09:50,800 --> 02:09:58,639
move forward in the future.
>> Okay. So, you want a

1665
02:09:55,520 --> 02:10:04,880
» I'd make a motion to
Sorry, Katie. Any of the residential

1666
02:10:02,000 --> 02:10:08,960
lots
residential. Let me let me think about

1667
02:10:07,280 --> 02:10:14,400
this.
>> Any of the existing lots where homes

1668
02:10:12,639 --> 02:10:18,719
I'm trying to make it where
>> is it just the two subdivisions?

1669
02:10:16,079 --> 02:10:23,599
» It is because it is because this should
stay R2 like the places where people

1670
02:10:21,040 --> 02:10:29,040
could actually develop and put a duplex
makes sense. But these ones right here

1671
02:10:26,880 --> 02:10:31,920
where they were R1 and then [snorts]
island estates

1672
02:10:30,639 --> 02:10:36,079
» those should be R1A.
>> Yeah. You need you need a traditional I

1673
02:10:34,239 --> 02:10:40,560
call them traditional single families.
>> So in in my motion is for the

1674
02:10:38,320 --> 02:10:49,280
traditional single family R1's that were
shifted to R2 make those R1A

1675
02:10:45,840 --> 02:10:52,800
on the zoning map
>> one more time.

1676
02:10:51,280 --> 02:10:56,560
» The traditional sing
>> I can word it if you want or do you have

1677
02:10:54,880 --> 02:11:00,159
to say the physical?
>> You can word it. Go ahead.

1678
02:10:57,679 --> 02:11:05,599
» You word it and he repeats it.
>> Go ahead. Let's hear how good you are.

1679
02:11:02,320 --> 02:11:12,239
» So, this would be the subdivisions on
Windsor Drive and Kingsbridge Drive and

1680
02:11:08,480 --> 02:11:19,079
Sugar Island Court to uh develop a
zoning R1A district suitable for those

1681
02:11:16,079 --> 02:11:19,079
properties.

1682
02:11:19,280 --> 02:11:24,159
» And to there are more.
>> Yeah.

1683
02:11:21,520 --> 02:11:27,520
» And the houses that run along Jefferson
north and south of South Jalter Road

1684
02:11:26,320 --> 02:11:31,280
» all the way to Woodruff.
>> Okay.

1685
02:11:28,639 --> 02:11:39,360
Sugar Island Drive,
South West Jefferson,

1686
02:11:34,320 --> 02:11:43,376
Kingsbridge, and Windsor Drive.
Rick's blood pressure is [laughter]

1687
02:11:44,239 --> 02:11:51,040
» This is why you only do this once every
20 years.

1688
02:11:48,560 --> 02:11:51,920
» And then you repeat. [laughter]
>> Come on.

1689
02:11:51,599 --> 02:11:57,679
» All right.
>> Okay. All of the All Okay. the homes in

1690
02:11:55,119 --> 02:12:04,079
uh Sugar Island Court, New Subdivision,
the homes along Windsor Drive, uh the

1691
02:12:01,840 --> 02:12:07,520
homes north and south of South Jalter
along West Jefferson that were

1692
02:12:05,280 --> 02:12:12,480
previously R1 will now be designated as
R1A on the zoning map.

1693
02:12:10,400 --> 02:12:16,719
» And so my question is if that's what
we're going to do, don't we need to

1694
02:12:14,560 --> 02:12:20,639
bring this to the resident's attention
and let them know what the change was

1695
02:12:19,119 --> 02:12:22,400
will be?
>> Well, it doesn't change anything. It's

1696
02:12:22,000 --> 02:12:24,880
just it's
>> first of all, is there a second?

1697
02:12:23,679 --> 02:12:26,719
» Uh, yeah, that was my motion.
>> I'll second it.

1698
02:12:25,599 --> 02:12:29,599
» Thank you.
>> Um,

1699
02:12:27,199 --> 02:12:35,280
» discussion.
>> So, don't we need to inform the

1700
02:12:31,760 --> 02:12:40,800
residents that their zoning is changing
and at least give them the facts on what

1701
02:12:38,880 --> 02:12:45,599
has changed about their zoning because
R1 and R1A won't be the same.

1702
02:12:44,079 --> 02:12:50,239
» So, the lot, you're saying we should let
the residents know that their lot size

1703
02:12:47,840 --> 02:12:54,320
designation changed their zoning. Well,
I mean, it's really not that crystal

1704
02:12:52,159 --> 02:12:57,599
clear what is the difference between I
mean, do we have a list?

1705
02:12:55,440 --> 02:13:04,239
» They fall under the current one, the
zoning, the square foot lot size. Now,

1706
02:13:00,960 --> 02:13:08,079
it's the old ones that are getting the
change that now they'll be able to do

1707
02:13:06,159 --> 02:13:13,520
something without being out of
ordinance.

1708
02:13:10,719 --> 02:13:19,440
» The the change you requested, the intent
is for it to operate how it currently

1709
02:13:16,239 --> 02:13:24,880
is. So there wouldn't be a change to
their district. They get a name change.

1710
02:13:21,119 --> 02:13:27,440
They'll go from historic R1 to new R1A,
but everything's going to be the same.

1711
02:13:26,159 --> 02:13:34,199
» I guess to Marian's point, is there any
way to communicate that? Like is there a

1712
02:13:29,840 --> 02:13:34,199
forum like a like a forum?

1713
02:13:36,637 --> 02:13:41,599
[sighs]
>> Short answer. Short answer, no.

1714
02:13:40,960 --> 02:13:46,880
» Is so
>> well I mean you can

1715
02:13:43,440 --> 02:13:52,239
» So again, it goes back to this meeting.
We follow the state of Michigan gives

1716
02:13:49,599 --> 02:13:58,719
very specific guidelines in how you
notify people about certain events. So

1717
02:13:56,159 --> 02:14:04,000
for a public hearing for a planning
commission, we follow the state of

1718
02:14:01,679 --> 02:14:11,760
Michigan guidelines, which means you
publish it 15 days in advance.

1719
02:14:07,520 --> 02:14:16,480
We met that burden with this. Um, we So
you publish it online, you publish it in

1720
02:14:14,159 --> 02:14:23,520
the newspaper and any other method of
communication for us to

1721
02:14:20,239 --> 02:14:28,400
» go doortodoor for us to do a largecale
mailing

1722
02:14:24,960 --> 02:14:33,760
» for every one of these residents would
cost thousands of dollars.

1723
02:14:31,199 --> 02:14:38,560
And then the question becomes, okay, if
we're going to mail them something, what

1724
02:14:35,440 --> 02:14:43,360
are we going to say? In reality, if
you're going to send someone a piece of

1725
02:14:40,320 --> 02:14:49,840
mail, you want to provide some sort of
information that's beneficial to them.

1726
02:14:46,159 --> 02:14:57,280
You'd likely be looking at a few pages,
a few pieces of paper. That's going to

1727
02:14:52,960 --> 02:15:03,040
cost even more money. Um, that's why the
state has very, I don't want to say

1728
02:15:00,400 --> 02:15:07,599
broad, but they have standards of
publish in the newspaper. And when it

1729
02:15:05,760 --> 02:15:10,719
says publish in the newspaper, it's
published in the newspaper that is um

1730
02:15:10,303 --> 02:15:14,079
[clears throat]
>> local

1731
02:15:11,280 --> 02:15:20,719
» local the local newspaper that people in
your community are going to read. Now

1732
02:15:17,520 --> 02:15:25,440
again, we have made really great steps
in the last few months of making sure

1733
02:15:23,040 --> 02:15:30,639
our residents have access to information
like the packet information. Residents

1734
02:15:28,159 --> 02:15:35,599
before had to come to city hall and ask
for that information. We now put it all

1735
02:15:33,119 --> 02:15:45,040
online. Um people can still come to us
and ask and we will provide that. But

1736
02:15:39,679 --> 02:15:51,199
to go and notify notify every resident
that hey the city is considering this

1737
02:15:48,239 --> 02:15:58,040
change at this public hearing or at this
meeting this date would be almost cost

1738
02:15:55,040 --> 02:15:58,040
prohibitive.

1739
02:15:58,719 --> 02:16:06,960
I I really struggle with that. if we're
meeting the um

1740
02:16:04,000 --> 02:16:14,560
if we're meeting the state's guidelines,
if we are providing our residents with

1741
02:16:09,360 --> 02:16:19,119
more access than ever before, and it I I
struggle with the idea of spending

1742
02:16:16,719 --> 02:16:25,920
thousands of dollars
to let them know that the title of their

1743
02:16:22,639 --> 02:16:30,239
zoning has changed when substantially
what we've done is provide a benefit to

1744
02:16:28,239 --> 02:16:37,200
them by saying, "Hey,
If you in this area are now designated

1745
02:16:34,559 --> 02:16:43,280
as a small lot size residential, which
means if something happens to your

1746
02:16:39,679 --> 02:16:50,639
house, you don't have to go on a roller
coaster ride,

1747
02:16:45,359 --> 02:17:00,399
you can rebuild as it was. I I'm
ultimately that's uh all of that to say

1748
02:16:56,240 --> 02:17:06,399
if this body feels it is imperative that
we send out a um letter to every single

1749
02:17:04,719 --> 02:17:12,719
resident
regarding this change. We can do it. But

1750
02:17:09,519 --> 02:17:17,439
that is going to cost a significant
amount of money and it's going to take a

1751
02:17:14,479 --> 02:17:24,559
significant amount of time. So just
consider that if that is your direction

1752
02:17:20,160 --> 02:17:28,160
to us. All that to say. Yeah. Sorry.
>> And I just from the beginning of this

1753
02:17:26,399 --> 02:17:32,479
meeting on a different topic, all I
heard is resident after resident, it

1754
02:17:30,319 --> 02:17:36,080
takes you so long to make a decision.
And now we're about to make a decision

1755
02:17:34,240 --> 02:17:40,760
and we have a little push back not to
make a decision and take more time to do

1756
02:17:37,760 --> 02:17:40,760
it.

1757
02:17:44,479 --> 02:17:52,240
» I don't know. IC R1 and R2 if we
eliminated the two family dwelling,

1758
02:17:49,679 --> 02:17:56,719
private garages, private clubs, they're
essentially the same.

1759
02:17:55,040 --> 02:18:00,399
The only difference would be under
special land use where it allows

1760
02:17:58,399 --> 02:18:03,359
boarding and lodging in horse stables.
And you're not going to have a horse

1761
02:18:01,519 --> 02:18:10,240
stable unless you have a minimum of 25
acres. U I I think if we eliminate the

1762
02:18:06,960 --> 02:18:16,240
last three bullets under R2 on permitted
uses,

1763
02:18:12,399 --> 02:18:19,240
R1 and R2 are identical.
Correct.

1764
02:18:20,960 --> 02:18:25,679
» Just a reminder, there's a motion.
>> There's a motion on the table. Yeah. To

1765
02:18:23,439 --> 02:18:30,080
do the R1A.
Any other discussion?

1766
02:18:28,479 --> 02:18:36,639
» I
I mean, why don't we make them identical

1767
02:18:32,800 --> 02:18:40,639
then? I mean, and leave the special uses
>> because then there's other properties

1768
02:18:38,479 --> 02:18:46,559
though, like up here where you'd want an
R2 to be capable to potentially either

1769
02:18:42,800 --> 02:18:49,920
be houses or have a club or down here.
So, you have to decide if

1770
02:18:48,240 --> 02:18:52,639
» do you want those I'm sorry. Do you want
those clubs in the R2? Is that the

1771
02:18:51,760 --> 02:18:55,760
intention?
>> No.

1772
02:18:53,679 --> 02:18:57,760
» Then you don't want them there anyway.
>> So, you wouldn't put those clubs in the

1773
02:18:57,280 --> 02:19:00,960
R2?
>> I guess you're that's true. So, you

1774
02:18:59,200 --> 02:19:03,760
could just say, well, that's what we
said before. just delete everything out

1775
02:19:03,040 --> 02:19:08,160
of
>> No, they're permitted in your other

1776
02:19:06,240 --> 02:19:13,760
districts. So, the private clubs
specifically were permitted

1777
02:19:11,200 --> 02:19:16,240
in the R3
and the C1 district.

1778
02:19:15,840 --> 02:19:19,679
» So,
>> it doesn't make sense that they're in

1779
02:19:17,599 --> 02:19:25,280
the R2 unless you want them there.
>> I mean, I don't want I don't but So,

1780
02:19:23,280 --> 02:19:28,800
then you're saying just make the R1 and
the R2 exactly the same.

1781
02:19:26,719 --> 02:19:34,926
» Yeah. under permitted uses basically
make R1 and R2 the same.

1782
02:19:31,040 --> 02:19:36,945
» Which amend my motion?
[laughter]

1783
02:19:37,280 --> 02:19:43,439
» How does that address the duplexes?
>> Donovan R1 the permitted uses are

1784
02:19:41,920 --> 02:19:44,399
currently what we have now anyhow.
Correct.

1785
02:19:44,000 --> 02:19:46,240
» Correct.
>> Yes.

1786
02:19:44,800 --> 02:19:52,800
» So we're not changing any of the
permitted uses if we make them the same.

1787
02:19:49,680 --> 02:19:58,080
» Okay. So no duplexes at all.
>> And the ones that are there today are

1788
02:19:56,000 --> 02:19:59,760
out of
Correct.

1789
02:19:58,560 --> 02:20:05,120
» There was already a motion about
duplexes, right?

1790
02:20:02,640 --> 02:20:10,479
» Am I forgetting?
>> Is the homes currently or currently um

1791
02:20:08,000 --> 02:20:13,439
designated as R1 will now be R1A?
>> No, we did duplexes from permitted to

1792
02:20:12,640 --> 02:20:15,200
special use.
>> Yeah, we did.

1793
02:20:14,720 --> 02:20:17,760
» Yeah.
>> So, we're covered. That was an earlier

1794
02:20:16,800 --> 02:20:21,520
one earlier in the meeting.
>> Oh, okay.

1795
02:20:19,120 --> 02:20:27,600
» Okay. Okay, I'm going to amend my motion
to align permitted uses in the R1 and

1796
02:20:25,040 --> 02:20:32,720
the R2 district.
>> Align last raise concerned

1797
02:20:31,439 --> 02:20:40,479
» uses
>> we previously we special land use two

1798
02:20:37,120 --> 02:20:45,439
family dwellings in the R2.
If we're making them the same, are we

1799
02:20:42,479 --> 02:20:50,560
allowing special land use duplexes in
the canal properties or are we saying

1800
02:20:47,680 --> 02:20:54,960
the opposite where R1 currently doesn't
have two duplexes? And if we make it

1801
02:20:53,120 --> 02:20:59,439
match, we're going to override our last
decision and not allow duplexes in the

1802
02:20:58,399 --> 02:21:03,359
R2.
>> That's why I made the R1A.

1803
02:21:02,399 --> 02:21:13,200
» Correct. [laughter] Which is why you
made R1A. Alternatively, you could um

1804
02:21:08,640 --> 02:21:20,319
you could amend your motion to match R1
permitted uses with the exception of the

1805
02:21:16,319 --> 02:21:22,720
addition of um duplexes as special land
use,

1806
02:21:21,439 --> 02:21:25,040
» which would be the only difference
between the two.

1807
02:21:23,680 --> 02:21:30,319
» Yes. Or just
>> or just make the R1A like I had it and

1808
02:21:27,040 --> 02:21:35,520
then it covers R1, R1A and R2. I think
it's a better idea for the R1A. I think

1809
02:21:33,200 --> 02:21:41,280
we should leave R2 as is because there
could be a use for that because we've

1810
02:21:38,000 --> 02:21:46,080
just butchered R2.
>> R2 had a purpose.

1811
02:21:42,960 --> 02:21:50,560
» If Yeah. If they start building along
Fort Street or out there, they could

1812
02:21:48,479 --> 02:21:54,960
come and ask for reasonzoning, too.
>> Correct.

1813
02:21:52,080 --> 02:21:58,080
» You know, say, "Hey, I'd like to go to
our

1814
02:21:55,760 --> 02:22:02,240
» keep the
>> No amendment." No amendment.

1815
02:21:59,680 --> 02:22:07,520
» Okay.
>> Do I have support? Do you want to

1816
02:22:04,160 --> 02:22:10,160
» uh Built supported you?
>> Hold on. I crossed out a bunch of

1817
02:22:09,760 --> 02:22:13,200
things.
>> So, what are we doing?

1818
02:22:11,520 --> 02:22:19,040
» R1A,
R1, R1A, and R2. And all those houses.

1819
02:22:16,800 --> 02:22:23,840
Remember I said the long one like
>> the Sugar Island Court new houses, the

1820
02:22:21,280 --> 02:22:28,160
Windsor Drive houses, the houses along
Jefferson north and south of South

1821
02:22:25,600 --> 02:22:32,000
Jibralter that were originally R1 will
now become R1A, which is specific to lot

1822
02:22:30,960 --> 02:22:39,680
size only.
>> The R1A permitted uses will match the

1823
02:22:35,200 --> 02:22:43,240
existing R1. The R2 will remain as as
>> it is.

1824
02:22:40,240 --> 02:22:43,240
» Yes.

1825
02:22:43,359 --> 02:22:47,359
» All right. Moved and supported. All in
favor say I. I

1826
02:22:46,640 --> 02:22:52,640
» I
>> Any opposed?

1827
02:22:50,479 --> 02:22:55,520
» All right. [laughter]
>> All right.

1828
02:22:53,280 --> 02:23:00,240
» So, R2 stays the same.
>> Yes.

1829
02:22:57,520 --> 02:23:02,399
» Just not on the map.
>> What was the last sentence?

1830
02:23:01,359 --> 02:23:07,359
» Just not on the map.
>> You're happy.

1831
02:23:04,720 --> 02:23:14,800
» Okay.
Any There you go. Any

1832
02:23:12,880 --> 02:23:16,960
Did I get that right?
>> Yes, sir. Plus

1833
02:23:16,080 --> 02:23:18,880
» plus plus up there.
>> Gotcha. All right, we're on the same

1834
02:23:18,560 --> 02:23:23,960
page.
>> I love snippet.

1835
02:23:20,560 --> 02:23:23,960
» Uh okay.

1836
02:23:25,280 --> 02:23:32,000
» The next thing would be if folks are
comfortable to make a recommendation

1837
02:23:30,240 --> 02:23:38,240
um
the council for their first review

1838
02:23:36,960 --> 02:23:40,880
» of
>> with changes

1839
02:23:39,200 --> 02:23:44,240
» with Yes.
>> Oh, I'm not saying the motion. I'm just

1840
02:23:42,479 --> 02:23:48,000
saying like the next thing would be
>> because I'm temporarily hopefully

1841
02:23:46,319 --> 02:23:52,080
temporarily hearing impaired. I'm
writing my notes. So the R1A is going to

1842
02:23:50,319 --> 02:23:53,200
have the same permitted uses as
>> R1.

1843
02:23:52,479 --> 02:23:57,120
» R1. Okay.
>> Yes, sir.

1844
02:23:55,040 --> 02:24:01,280
» Thank you. So potentially we could make
a recommendation

1845
02:23:58,960 --> 02:24:05,520
to council
um

1846
02:24:03,760 --> 02:24:12,960
once all of our proposed changes are
added

1847
02:24:08,399 --> 02:24:17,680
uh to have their first review
of our zoning ordinance amendments.

1848
02:24:15,680 --> 02:24:22,160
The motion would be to, if you were to
take action today to forward, it would

1849
02:24:19,680 --> 02:24:29,280
be to make a recommendation to city
council to approve the draft ordinance

1850
02:24:25,760 --> 02:24:33,920
with the changes discussed via motion in
this meeting. That way, it would go

1851
02:24:31,359 --> 02:24:36,960
forward with everything we discussed.
And then I'll also give you a follow-up

1852
02:24:35,920 --> 02:24:41,000
memo next week
>> at our meeting.

1853
02:24:38,000 --> 02:24:41,000
» Yep.

1854
02:24:42,240 --> 02:24:45,880
» I'll make that motion.

1855
02:24:47,680 --> 02:24:52,560
support.
>> Moved and supported. All in favor say I.

1856
02:24:52,160 --> 02:24:56,520
» I.
>> I.

1857
02:24:53,280 --> 02:24:56,520
» Any opposed?

1858
02:24:56,720 --> 02:25:01,680
» Okay.
>> Uh, next would be a motion to adjurnn.

1859
02:25:00,399 --> 02:25:04,800
» Motion to adjurnn.
>> Second.

1860
02:25:02,560 --> 02:25:09,600
» Moved in supported. All in favor say I.
>> Any opposed.

1861
02:25:06,720 --> 02:25:15,280
» Did Garrett leave the meeting?
>> Thank you everybody. I appreciate you.

1862
02:25:12,080 --> 02:25:18,840
» We don't have that tonight. Oh, no.
>> Oh, that's right.

1863
02:25:19,200 --> 02:25:23,000
» Welcome to the club.

1864
02:25:23,520 --> 02:25:32,200
You got a picture of a deer and that's
your kids. I got his ass, too. I don't

1865
02:25:27,439 --> 02:25:32,200
even know where that came. Look, just a