[0:05] Okay, welcome everyone.
[0:10] » Yeah, so got my hand. Oh yeah, banana
banana.
[0:14] » Okay,
so uh yeah, welcome to our September
[0:19] work session. Uh thanks for coming
tonight. That's a hot day. Sorry,
[0:25] so let's get started. Um let's see. All
business there is not an automated
[0:29] business agenda first.
>> Sure. We do have a conditional use
[0:34] hearing recommended uh for approval from
planning commission and our thousand
[0:39] square foot gross floor area uh attached
garage. So that is on the back of your
[0:45] agendas. Uh everything else is
relatively uh routine. We will discuss
[0:52] Northland Public Library a little bit
later on the agenda explain what that
[0:56] resolution is.
We've got
[1:00] everything else has been added, but we
will kick off the event with presation
[1:06] to Sergeant.
Is that all lined up? Everything's good
[1:09] to go.
>> We're good to go.
[1:12] » Months later, we're good to go.
>> You're in possession of the yellow
[1:16] brick.
>> I am.
[1:17] » All right.
not
[1:20] » but wanted to ask we have new council
junior council welcome
[1:25] » is there like swear in something happens
>> they do the pledge the mayor will um do
[1:34] the pledge with Elena at the regular
meeting
[1:36] » okay
>> but we always it's uh I forgot to put it
[1:40] on there you are correct it's not on
there um so that will be at the regular
[1:44] meeting
>> okay cool
[1:47] » have any questions on the agenda Just
yeah one this start me thinking about
[1:51] that the thousand square foot
conditional use thing. Is there a
[1:54] practical reason why after planning
commission looks at it that it comes to
[1:57] council for the additional use for the
thousand gross that's building. Is there
[2:02] » practical or reason for
>> so this started when when detach garages
[2:09] started to brew and grow and we had an
issue with the way gross area was
[2:13] defined. So it was two stories that
didn't have it. Uh so several years back
[2:19] um made amendments and more restrictions
on accessory structures uh one of them
[2:25] being this process uh primarily to alert
the neighbors as to what's going on. Um
[2:31] there are standards in the zoning
ordinance with respect to placement on
[2:36] the lot ability to subdivide in the
future everything like that but it's why
[2:43] we go through it. any conditional use
requires a recommendation from the
[2:47] planning commission uh and a public
hearing
[2:51] to do. We don't have any special
exceptions, nothing for the zoning
[2:53] hearing boards to do it by right is the
other avenue would just be a zoning
[2:59] permit session. No.
>> So the public hearing is really what
[3:04] what's key here. So everybody knows
what's going on. They're concerned about
[3:08] the size of the the garage. They can
come in.
[3:12] » Yes. And
It is difficult if they meet the
[3:16] requirements when the burden shifts and
they have to prove that there's
[3:20] something about the property that makes
it not appropriate for that size. That
[3:24] is difficult. But you do have the
ability through conditional use to place
[3:28] additional conditions and safeguards not
related to off-site transportation or
[3:34] traffic improvements. Otherwise,
uh if there are certain concerns that
[3:38] are brought to through public hearing
process little
[3:44] » what
>> a little funnel.
[3:47] » Yeah. The community kind of like brings
it to us and then we can consider at
[3:50] least some other
>> Yeah. I got and you lose that if you
[3:55] just go to the planning commission.
Planning commission doesn't do a public
[3:58] hearing. You wouldn't go to the planning
commission if it was
[4:02] » otherwise
would
[4:07] be building zoning permit cross the
table. So that would just be as
[4:12] » y0000
[4:22] square feet. It it depends on the size
of the lot uses regulated by lot size.
[4:30] So um if if it's I believe it's if it's
40,000 square 40,000 square feet or
[4:36] greater than the thousand over 1,000
square feet that's process um when you
[4:42] start going down in square
foot area then you're looking at it you
[4:48] know 800 square ft 6
[4:53] was an acre
>> 40,000
[4:56] about 300 something
>> okay I was curious like a shot.
[5:01] » Okay. All right. Uh yeah,
>> good good questions.
[5:07] Okay. Uh all right. So, uh yeah, moving
on. Uh course staffers
[5:17] have my uh written report and happy to
answer any questions. Um
[5:23] not privileged.
[5:30] Okay. Any questions?
[5:35] » Okay. I did not uh submit a report
because not much has changed from last
[5:38] months. We're working on the budget and
uh processing incoming and outgoing
[5:43] employees.
What's happening in the county?
[5:50] Thanks.
Yes. Along with my report, the only
[5:54] thing I uh have to mention is u
if uh emails from your residents about a
[6:00] large tree on road uh by the Bliss
housing plan. It's in between memory
[6:06] lane and Washington Lane. This tree is
extremely big. Uh there's wires
[6:11] involved. It's in the rightway. Um we're
probably going to have to take it out.
[6:16] Uh we've run into this before um with up
here along Taylor Rachel one time a
[6:21] couple years back. uh when we tried to
get the state to take this the tree out
[6:25] was coming down over there. uh they come
back and told us that we didn't take it
[6:29] out that they were going to take it out
charge for it. So we ended up one of we
[6:34] actually had to shut down take this tree
down because it was you know it was
[6:39] leaning pretty good and was going to
fall. Anyhow, this tree is extremely
[6:42] large probably I I would I I didn't
measure it out but I'm probably about 48
[6:47] inches in diameter at the base on this
tree. Large oak tree that probably 3/4
[6:52] of it maybe 90% of it maybe is dead. Uh
there's only a small portion of it
[6:57] that's uh has some leaves on it. Um but
it's uh it's it's definitely uh at some
[7:03] point going to start coming down.
Haven't had any limbs fall off it yet at
[7:06] this point, but uh it's pretty soon it's
going to need something taken care of.
[7:10] So I was talking to Zach about that.
We're possibly talking maybe fall here.
[7:15] We
maybe get it check the bridge maybe see
[7:20] might be able to do that outside
services or some possibility.
[7:25] possibility there. So if anybody's down
there way looking at I mean it's it's
[7:29] it's a big tree
and I'd probably say probably pricewise
[7:34] probably looking maybe I'm not sure what
they charge all the time but probably
[7:38] 5,000
[7:44] » that's other than that that's all I have
[7:49] » um as developer respons
[7:55] Yeah.
[8:09] when they find
[8:27] I have a quick question. I saw in your
report and Zach you mentioned this
[8:30] briefly last time about the 15 mile per
hour signs on King John. Yes James
[8:36] » that those were actually never well not
never it's been a long time since
[8:39] they've been enforcable.
>> They never been.
[8:42] » They were never.
>> Yeah. So whenever those streets were
[8:44] adopted by ordinance everything was 25
mph. At that time there was a speed bump
[8:50] or early speed bumpy. They put 15 mile
signs on each side to slow cars down
[8:55] until they hit it. In the 90s, we were
removed that's antic. Uh, and the signs
[8:59] were never taken out. Uh, and so they've
been up and uninforceable for 20 plus
[9:06] years, plus years. So, um, as we were
kind of working through uh, the field
[9:10] club issue, uh, we we identified that
uh, and because it's on forceful, we
[9:15] remove them and 25.
>> That makes sense. I just want to make
[9:20] sure I'm clear. I know you mentioned it
on the reasoning, but that's probably
[9:24] hear about that. Make sure
>> I think it was a speed bump in the 15s
[9:29] on both sides for the other street and
then remove it the speed bumps. But I
[9:34] got
>> Yeah. Yeah.
[9:36] » Gary was saying that was what in the 90s
correct?
[9:39] » Uh when they were removed.
>> Yeah. uh early
[9:44] » 2000 at some point they were last time
was paying
[9:51] out. public and then we are putting up
other other 25 mph signs in different
[9:57] places throughout those plans and that
plan to do so. You know, if anybody gets
[10:02] any questions on why other signs are
going up, it's all due to the signage
[10:06] and it's being put over here on calls.
A lot of a lot of plans aren't marked
[10:12] and you know trying to probably keep up
with start to place.
[10:20] They don't have an update yet on any
possible solutions on field
[10:28] » about hopefully we'll find out here.
>> Yeah, we're working for I think by the
[10:31] time we back next week something maybe
[10:43] » so uh this month the county hearing
board has um two new applications for
[10:50] the vote for yard encroachments
additions and then there's going to
[10:55] there was a table uh application
for information that the planning
[11:02] commission doesn't have anything under
so
[11:09] » they didn't they they didn't
they asked
[11:18] and
ask questions.
[11:30] » S uh you have my report. The only thing
to add is we did get the blueberry patch
[11:37] playground started on Monday. So that
started on time. Weather other than
[11:43] being hot has been good to us. So
everything's moving smoothly. Couple
[11:48] structures have started going in
already. So, everything's removed.
[11:52] Couple structures in. Um they'll work
again tomorrow, be off for a few days,
[11:56] and we should have as long as weather is
right, we should have a lot of
[12:01] structures in by the end of next week.
Um so, it is going well.
[12:07] » Um I'll post some um pictures of
progress, things like that probably on
[12:11] Friday, kind of give a weekly update as
we go. Uh the only change to the closure
[12:18] is originally the sandbox was going to
stay open with the heat with the shading
[12:24] over there. We closed the sandbox,
closed the shade area so that they have
[12:29] somewhere to be and out of the sun a
little bit. Um so that was the only
[12:34] change we made. the upper portion, the
two structures up top are still open for
[12:39] public use, but it has drastically
reduced people coming in. Um, I've only
[12:46] seen one or two families there from the
few times I've been out on the site. So,
[12:52] that's the update on that.
[12:57] » Any other questions? Can can you touch
on uh some of the the fall programming
[13:03] uh that you were trying to do for the
youth? Um
[13:07] was the little builders and the
littleers. Can you give also a little
[13:11] bit of an update on what that is and
what you're trying to do?
[13:14] » Yeah, so we're trying to with partners
with uh coach Dave Gray, we're trying to
[13:20] bring some preschool uh kindergarten
kind of programming. So we're starting a
[13:26] program called Little Builders. Um that
will be on Tuesdays in the activity
[13:31] center. We're going to have a morning
session and afternoon session. Um and
[13:35] then we're also doing little hikers. Um
which is going to be on Fridays. That's
[13:41] only going to be one session in the
morning. Uh Little Builders is a
[13:48] just basically that preschool age,
kindergarten age to try to get some of
[13:52] these parents. Obviously with NA being
half day kindergarten, preschool is
[13:57] pretty much half day as well. It gives
them an opportunity to have their child
[14:01] join into a program um when they're not
in school. That's why we're offering two
[14:05] sessions of that. Uh the little hikers
is going to be kind of like our eco camp
[14:11] that we run in summer, but obviously a
lot shorter time. That's also to
[14:17] um that is going to be a child,
parent, guardian, however, whoever
[14:23] brings them. That's going to be an
integrated class with a grown-up and a
[14:27] child together. But getting out,
exploring uh eco, which we are hoping to
[14:33] build their interest at this age so that
they transfer into our camps when
[14:37] they're of age, which for Eco Adventure
is six years old. So, a lot of them if
[14:44] they can do the class now, we can build
them into uh campers for even next year.
[14:49] And then we're hoping to run it as like
a monthly offering. So, most months when
[14:56] school is in probably other than really
December, we're hoping to offer it as
[15:00] like four-week classes every month
moving forward uh through the school
[15:04] year. try to get a little more
engagement that younger group um that we
[15:09] don't get in our summer camp offerings
uh because all those started six years
[15:14] old. Um so just try to dip a little
younger into the age group of the
[15:18] neighborhoods.
>> So is this new or just like have have we
[15:24] had this before?
>> No.
[15:26] » No. So that's new, right?
>> Yeah. years
[15:30] probably 10 15 years ago they used to
run a program that was called kinder
[15:36] sport which was again more athletic
sport based for that for a younger group
[15:42] this is nothing athletic based it is eco
and it is building dexterity things like
[15:51] that um so it's it's a little it's also
a different grouping in that as well um
[15:58] might get a different kind of group in,
but also at three, four, five years old,
[16:04] they're not that despite what some
parents think, they're not star athletes
[16:08] yet. So, it it gives them a broader
horizon of avenues to explore.
[16:13] » So, this this information has been
posted on the on the website, right? the
[16:18] can and residents can easily get that
information.
[16:23] » All the descriptions are on our program
guide, the pricing, the times, all that
[16:27] is available and they can sign up now.
Um, and then like I said, we will start
[16:32] the first week of October.
>> Y
[16:34] » for that. So that way it gave us a
couple week to send emails, promote it.
[16:40] You know, anytime you run something
brand new, it takes a little buildup.
[16:45] Um, so we're hoping
Like you said, we get a few enrollments
[16:50] this time. Parents will talk, parents
will spread the word, and we'll continue
[16:54] to grow the program throughout the year.
>> I know a lot of young parents will be
[16:58] happy, you know, to have this because,
you know, usually, you know, and
[17:04] preschool is just half day, you know,
they always work, but like they can send
[17:09] their kids.
[17:14] As long as there's no reason not to, I
might pull some information off the
[17:17] site, then shoot it out to to my
incl.
[17:24] It's all available there. Um there's
some description on the Facebook post,
[17:30] but especially like Little Hikers,
there's a lot more you'll see on the
[17:35] website when you click into the program.
Um because that one our hope
[17:43] is that we can eventually start working
into like family eco so that we can
[17:49] bring out the whole family at one time
for hikes, things like that.
[17:54] » Um and grow it into that eventually as
well.
[17:56] » Be awesome.
>> A little different. Yeah, probably more
[17:59] evening class when the older kids are
out of school. Sure. But this is step
[18:03] one. We'll see how this
>> be a taste. see how this works and kind
[18:07] of grow from there.
>> Awesome.
[18:12] » I have a question. Could you like
advertise like through the school
[18:15] district as well? Because I feel like
for example like back when I was younger
[18:19] like my parents would often look at like
school newsletters to see if there's
[18:23] anything to
>> I know school district does like their
[18:27] weekly newsletters. They are usually
pretty strict if it's not a school
[18:34] related function or a district related
function. So they will generally put out
[18:40] like the sports or the clubs that are
specifically aligned with NA. We partner
[18:48] with NA, but we're not really
an NA
[18:54] use, you know, we we don't have like NA
doesn't have any fields or any buildings
[18:58] within the furrow um that we do
crossover programming.
[19:04] We can certainly ask especially for like
you're saying that kindergarten group. I
[19:08] just know and every it usually goes
through the PFA, PTO, whatever each
[19:14] building individually calls themselves,
and they all have different rules um for
[19:19] what can and cannot go into their
newsletters. So, it's a little a little
[19:24] tricky, but we can certainly at least
give the ads. Doesn't hurt to ask ever.
[19:29] » At the bottom of the district, we can
community flyer section, which has like
[19:34] Boy Scouts, other stuff that's not
necessarily NA related. I know there's a
[19:38] fee for that. That might
>> be fun.
[19:58] Okay, my report um just off of what Zach
was saying with the blueberry patch
[20:03] talking with the contractor today. He
was telling I should be able to have our
[20:07] guys in middle to late next week to get
our drainage in. We should have most of
[20:12] the structures so we'll get our drainage
in. That way he can finish up his work
[20:16] the following week or so after and
hopefully be button up in a couple weeks
[20:19] here. Um, and other than that, the golf
course uh revenue was down for August
[20:26] just because the amount of rain. We lost
a lot of days with no carts and air on
[20:31] the side. I mean, just the the we all
know the multiple backtoback rains that
[20:35] we had. Uh, really saturated the course.
Um, we just lost 20 days of revenue. We
[20:42] were down about 1,400 rounds per
compared to last year, which is a lot.
[20:47] But you just you just you lose and don't
get back. But overall, the course is in
[20:51] decent shape. There's some there's some
minor issues, just old farm drains and
[20:56] where water's just coming out of places
that never have before, but but for the
[21:00] most part, the course is in good shape
and uh
[21:04] is still going strong. So,
any other questions?
[21:08] » Can you give an update on Acorn, please?
Yeah. So, Acorn, uh, especially this
[21:13] week with the help of some of some of
Gary's help and his guys, uh, the around
[21:19] the bathroom, the, um, the concrete's
in, uh,
[21:23] the public works help with some of the
back filling. Um, so that should be we
[21:27] still finish up the landscaping here
shortly. Uh, the bridges are all
[21:31] connected, so we'll be able in the next
couple weeks finish the plantings and
[21:35] the ribarian buffer that we need to
install. And uh so we're inching ever
[21:41] closer to being complete. Um there's
some some uh some decks, overlook decks
[21:47] on the trails to build. That's probably
the last big structure that we put in.
[21:51] And other than that, we're close. I'm
just talking to Sean. At some point here
[21:56] soon, we want to walk through make sure
we have all our fees crossed and we'll
[22:01] be set hopefully by end of the year if
the grant runs out. So hopefully we
[22:05] don't have to push again.
the deadline.
[22:17] » Thank you. Um actually not much to add
to our report this evening. Obviously
[22:21] big one um out there is the
public work garage opening for the end
[22:27] of the month. So we'll have that for
discussion at this meeting next month.
[22:30] Hopefully the favorable number for
award. Um
[22:36] from that uh a few miscellaneous
development items we did close out the
[22:41] um seal code project across the standard
u. So that was complete
[22:48] and I think other than that
answer
[23:00] » happy to answer any questions about my
report or anything else.
[23:08] » Okay. Um,
[23:14] » yeah. Should be it for everybody.
>> And I have a quick question for you. On
[23:18] your report, you talked about the fire
inspection reports and the $25 fee for
[23:23] pass fail. Is that whether you pass or
fail or only if you fail?
[23:28] » Pass or fail.
>> It's a $25 fee for the matter.
[23:32] » Because one of the things that tends to
happens whenever you don't do that is
[23:35] you become their maintenance manager,
right? And that's opportunity.
[23:42] » Maybe we did a reinspection and pass
your payment twice,
[23:45] » right?
>> Or how many times
[23:51] it's the same?
[23:58] We good?
Yeah, everyone can go
[24:16] » over there.
>> Yeah, let's go.
[24:22] » Yeah, sure. Um, you guys have my
reports. Uh, MS4, everybody's still on
[24:26] permanent angle. working through
comments now hopefully to have those
[24:30] resolved by the end of the year. Um for
the
[24:36] uh Dur Road grant that was submitted on
time. The uh GEDF uh I made an
[24:43] oversight. Um I thought I could apply
for anything under 100,000. It was
[24:46] $150,000 minimum. uh was able to apply
using the same uh grant package that we
[24:54] did for the multimmoal grant which was
276,000.
[24:58] Uh talked to the county, they're fine
with us uh submitting a resolution late.
[25:02] So we'll have an updated one on this uh
regular meeting um which I believe is
[25:07] already on there. Uh this there's no
match component to this. So this is just
[25:11] us trying to find funding. Um but we
have that executive session. Uh Kathy
[25:18] and Aaron uh met with the uh the
regional discussion for deer management.
[25:22] I wasn't here. I was on vacation. Um the
uh the group of managers, so this is
[25:27] McLaren, Liz, uh Hampton, Ross, and
ourselves all have deer issues. Um which
[25:34] seems to be the North Hill region's
problem. Um and the discussion was to
[25:38] try to bring this into the North Hills
COG uh to get that regional organization
[25:43] to get everybody on the same playing
field. Everyone's doing something to try
[25:47] and mitigate uh deer management because
we're going from one community to the
[25:51] next and bouncing from round to round.
Uh and so trying to get everybody
[25:55] playing by the same set of rules and
then from there working to to get
[25:59] permits through the state to to advance
some sort of sharpshooting program. Um
[26:05] Another one for executive session. Uh
[26:14] um the hedges. Uh I'll let Andy kind of
run on that um here in a second. Um but
[26:21] that that's my report. You guys have
everything. I'll start getting the the
[26:25] drop down items. The uh Northland
library, we talked a little bit before
[26:29] that the uh the articles incorporation
were going to expire. Um they sent over
[26:34] all the information. Max talked to their
lawyer. So I don't know if you have any
[26:39] anything to add.
>> Just municipalities authorities act.
[26:42] Municipal authorities have 50 years life
to renew them. Their board needs to
[26:48] authorize it first and then the
incorporating municipalities pass
[26:51] resolution resolution just uh they'll
take care of it from there. they have to
[26:57] apply articles of amendment to purple
states that will get approved for
[27:02] another 50 years to
[27:06] » um next would be the uh the hedges on
the corner of West Englemore and Brans
[27:11] Road kind of went you okay this is your
your base
[27:14] » this this was actually one of the NOVs
that we had back when at the exact same
[27:18] time the Oakley plane situation went in
so we decided we tap the plane situation
[27:22] then come back and revisit this so this
double gear more growth on these trees.
[27:27] But the bottom line is when you're
coming down West Singar Road to Branch
[27:30] School at that intersection. Um there's
a radius on the right hand side. The
[27:35] stop signs back in those trees. Um and
they're doing some trimming on it right
[27:41] now. There was a concern that the stop
sign's in the wrong place and uh so on
[27:46] so forth. So the bottom line is we've
got a dangerous situation there that you
[27:51] can't really be a pedestrian at
intersection and all walk around those
[27:55] trees because there's nothing on the
shoulder that you can walk by on certain
[27:58] areas of it. Um,
>> okay.
[28:01] » If I can make a comment, I mean, I live
right three doors down from there and
[28:08] nobody can walk on any aspect of Western
and those people who live at the corner
[28:18] uh planted those trees for a buffer for
sound. And no, nobody's walking there
[28:25] because there's no sidewalks on West
Sigma Road. So, I'm a little bit
[28:29] confused.
>> Again, the trees are in the public
[28:31] easement where they should not be. It's
the bottom line.
[28:35] » The line of sight is the biggest
>> the line of sight is our biggest issue.
[28:37] » I go that the stop sign is in the wrong
place. Actually makes the situation even
[28:43] worse on our end because when I looked
it up, it is in the wrong place. stop
[28:47] sign should be moved closer to Grant to
West Road and and Branch Hole which
[28:54] means it's even further around that turn
which now sight line situation be tree
[28:59] trunks that have to be removed not just
tree branches
[29:03] and that meets the state DT
that information is in the packet.
[29:07] » How many trees?
[29:11] » Uh it's about nine trees if you remove
the stop sign.
[29:15] If you lose a stop sign the way it is
now, you could probably keep the trees,
[29:20] but the brush underneath needs pretty
much cut back.
[29:24] » Yeah.
>> The minimum height for a stop sign is 9
[29:26] ft. So, you need to make sure when
they're coming down the grade, you can
[29:29] see this little stop sign.
So the stop signs for location
[29:35] you could trim the trees
down to
[29:41] » they could be potentially be trimmed all
the way back to the trunk in probably
[29:44] most cases. Okay.
>> If we do not move the sign,
[29:48] » if you do not move the sign,
>> if we move the sign, it's going to take
[29:52] it around the turn enough that probably
the one hardwood tree in the front yard
[29:55] there that I marked on that diagram as
well as some of those pine trees will
[29:59] wind up just basically on that wall see
from the 300T site distance.
[30:06] » So there's potential in that space
there's potential for some trees.
[30:11] There's the potential for some. Again,
I'm operating off of our GIS apps and
[30:17] everything that's on here. I went in the
property when I got the ordinance when
[30:22] we adopted the road from CAP that
happened in 2010. I can't find anything
[30:26] from 2010 that there was a survey done
as to exactly where the easement was at
[30:29] that time. You go all the way back to
the late 70s, early 80s, there's a
[30:34] survey there that's representing a
different easement. But I don't know
[30:38] what has changed. We've got a current
survey there to say why the county is
[30:43] showing that as a 50
on their GIS's.
[30:48] But either way, even if it was a
slightly lesser easement, all that would
[30:53] grow is you still have the branches
still slipping in the intersection.
[30:56] » Trees planted in the late 80s.
>> Sorry,
[31:01] » the trees were planted in the late 80s.
Uh, that's the
[31:06] » 2007, but they're in the pictures.
>> Google Maps, right?
[31:10] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. 2007.
[31:13] » And they were a little hard to do this.
>> I have it in here off of the uh review.
[31:18] » Yeah. 2007. It's page seven on the side.
And just so this was a county road until
[31:27] 2010 just because we are on it
maintaining it. Otherwise, we just it's
[31:33] somewhat unusual, but something they
have to do. They essentially dedicated
[31:36] it to us. So, we were not involved in
the original laying out or inspections
[31:41] or anything that we do for Burough
Street. And say, I mean, I'm just
[31:46] refreshing back to 2010 when we did
that. There was no oral survey, whatever
[31:52] was attached to the ordinance. Um, been
about it. It was existing road. It's
[31:58] just became our responsibility.
You're talking about or brand school.
[32:05] » Brand school is not ours at all.
>> And this all started
[32:12] in 2025. They had a NOV for
>> the NOV both for trees in the public
[32:18] easement as well as branches of trees
reaching into the east.
[32:22] » You could see stuff.
>> And they cut the trees back at that
[32:25] point. I would say
>> they did do the significant cutting at
[32:28] at that time where they notched back in
that you can see
[32:31] » and I remember it was completely
different because I know the people who
[32:35] have that lot and they planted very
small trees in the late 80s and they
[32:43] then grew obviously um so I'm
remembering a very different scenario.
[32:50] » Well I have photographs here from
Google.
[32:53] » Do you have the the small
was
[32:59] packed on Google.
>> Do we have a replacement like we had oak
[33:04] leaf some big thing?
[33:11] » No idea.
>> Um,
[33:15] » yeah. Yeah, they're just they've gotten
too big. We need to figure out what
[33:17] we're going to do, right? Whether that
be we're talking in circles. Um whether
[33:21] that be we asked them to plant behind
their bushes now, let those grow up and
[33:25] then remove what's what's in the area or
based on our ordinances enforce what
[33:31] should be enforced. Um or you know
ignore it and continue ask them to try
[33:35] and trim back until it gets to the point
where these trades are too big. But that
[33:39] can't happen.
[33:45] I think one of the possibilities is to
lollipop and so like this
[33:51] » and so that preserves the trees right
where they are. Y
[33:54] » and just take the lower branches down
>> specifically on West
[34:00] site.
>> Yeah.
[34:01] » I think if that's a viable option that
would be good because I know the trailer
[34:05] currently I drive that twice a day.
[34:09] It's gotten better, but it's it's still
less than ideal. And you know,
[34:14] especially if you look at some of the
stuff up closer to the church now that
[34:18] way, was it James?
>> James, you know, that's the the concern
[34:22] that we got from a resident from James
Drive. We can't see up uh because that
[34:27] hatch is so high now that if someone
comes out of Westing fast, you're trying
[34:32] to come out. Uh there's a noticeable
blind spot because they're stuffed in
[34:35] the right way.
I think if it's if it's agreeable to but
[34:39] it's worth trying to lollipop lollipop
at least if that works before you start
[34:45] » but if the purpose of them is a buffer
from the road lollipops open
[34:49] » well it's no longer
>> but if you remember from our our prep
[34:52] ball sound study expert trees don't you
know blocks ends
[34:58] lane
>> blocks line yes
[35:01] » I mean there's also the conditions and
lots requirements and zoning which was
[35:04] exciting to just want to talk better
than I
[35:10] would affect.
[35:16] » Is it similar to the Oakley compromise,
right?
[35:18] » It's very close.
>> It's a burrow strategy or position
[35:22] go around treat.
[35:27] » So, all we're doing is public safety.
We're saying lollipop the trees. We're
[35:31] saving the trees. We're not taking them
out. Theresa actually, you can see in
[35:35] the picture, they're on their I think
they were put on their property
[35:37] originally moved on to the
>> most of them were on their property.
[35:42] Yeah, exactly. They look like they were
>> probably in the easement based on the
[35:47] information from GIS.
>> Yeah.
[35:49] » But the bottom line is they've grown out
for all those years.
[35:53] » Yeah. I mean, I like the approach of
let's save the trees and save little
[35:59] lollipop.
Okay. So just so everyone knows the
[36:05] lollipop is cured back.
>> Yeah.
[36:07] » Right.
>> But it saves the it saves the tree. All
[36:09] you're doing is taking branch stuff to
make the line of sight so it's not in
[36:13] the way.
>> The alternative is full removal.
[36:15] » Are you are we saying Well, I don't know
if that's the alternative. But are we
[36:18] saying that they have to clear the
entire bottom of the tree or they can
[36:22] just carve out
one side?
[36:25] » Whatever's for the one you start up see.
>> Yeah. Which is different. clearing all
[36:32] the way.
>> Yeah. It wouldn't be the whole
[36:34] » My thought would be the the external
side, right?
[36:37] » Yeah. So they can still leave everything
down to the ground on the
[36:40] » intern
far side West Ingamar and Brold
[36:46] trim back to the
all the way back to the base. So then
[36:51] you've got your blind side. Yeah. I
think we we say the trees in we've got a
[36:55] blind side. So we would ideally
>> Are we okay with that approach?
[37:00] » Yes. That sounds like the alternative
for moving.
[37:02] » Don't like that at all. Still
>> I don't think it's accurate to say that
[37:06] is the alternative. There are multiple
alternatives. But
[37:10] » so hold on. The goal here is sight lines
both as you're coming down West toward
[37:16] Brand School and if you're coming
northish
[37:20] » road
like if you're turning off of Brand
[37:24] School, I'm sorry, off of James Drive
onto Brand School. Headache north.
[37:28] » Yeah, that's right. I the the three-way
intersection isn't really a problem,
[37:31] right? It's a three-way stop. Everyone's
stopping, right? You're going to see
[37:34] them when you're stopping.
My main issue is is James Drive. You
[37:38] can't see. Uh
>> so everything just comes out like from
[37:41] nowhere into the line of sight is
>> Yeah.
[37:44] » Okay.
>> So they're ducking out slowly to try and
[37:47] see them, but then
>> it's all the way out to the the road
[37:50] already, so you can't see anything. All
the cars on West are backed up hidden
[37:54] behind there. So those people are
blindly pulling out. uh with the hope
[37:58] that whoever's on West Indian bar is
coming out slow. though
[38:02] » may not be the case when you've got the
when you've got the four-way stops,
[38:05] right? People are taking their turns.
Yeah. Somebody's bound to turn to get
[38:09] their turn. Pay attention to James turn.
>> Okay. So, James Drive is our primary
[38:14] concern here.
>> Correct.
[38:15] » And we are needing to balance
>> we still need to be able to see from
[38:20] Westmore the stop sign, right? Which so
that's got to be turned back to keep
[38:24] that line of sight. Then on the opposite
side of for James, you can't see
[38:29] anything because of
>> right. I just am very hesitant to get
[38:32] into the business and we talked about
this admium
[38:36] going through the oak thing. I'm very
hesitant to go around the burrow and
[38:39] start saying all these trees have to go.
>> Yeah.
[38:42] » Because they're in the rightway or have
been for how many years? Do they need to
[38:45] eventually be on the rideway? Yes. And
if it's a public safety issue, we need
[38:49] to come up with some ideas about it. You
also keep in mind these folks that's
[38:54] huge for their property value.
for my quality of life.
[38:58] » Uh so
>> my thought is to ask
[39:00] » we need the plant back, right?
>> Yeah. To already start when we
[39:05] » to prepare for the inevitable that these
are going to have to go.
[39:07] » We talked about this too, like okay,
plant a second row now.
[39:11] » Yeah.
>> And then while we're waiting on whatever
[39:14] happens to the other tree to at least
have get that growing time. Yeah.
[39:17] » That might be something we need to at
least talk to them about. But u in the
[39:22] meantime, I think trimming, especially
the ones along Brand School Road, is a
[39:27] reasonable start.
>> Yeah.
[39:29] » Yes. I'm with you. I don't want to
experiment on cut down, but I want to
[39:33] get on because you know,
>> I mean, have we had I understand pulling
[39:39] out of James Drive is tricky and we want
to prevent accidents before they happen,
[39:43] right? We don't want to be reactive to
accidents, but short of trimming the
[39:47] trees, do we seriously have a very
serious safety issue.
[39:52] » Again, that's not the standard for
enforcing our ordinances. I realize
[39:56] » I think the potential is very much
there.
[39:58] » We're just balancing.
>> Yeah. Coming out of nowhere, the only
[40:02] time to react. Line of sight is bad.
That's just ask bad. Yeah. It's a bad
[40:07] design.
>> And Oakleaf was was never a line of
[40:10] sight
>> issue. Yeah, as an approach with the
[40:13] wall that was low the trees in the right
of way into the street top of the
[40:18] utility line. Are there utility lines on
that side?
[40:24] » No, now I'm talking about
[40:31] » But yeah, that
other ones that we've had in terms of
[40:35] issues have been sighteline issues on
Bane. One guy bushes were coming into
[40:42] there. um that they're
[40:48] didn't have that issue,
>> right?
[40:52] » Okay. So, please
[40:57] » try that in that in that deck. The very
last picture
[41:03] solution
and Gary isn't here, but I already
[41:06] talked to Gary about it. The very last
picture is actually club and sandburst.
[41:11] There's a 70 foot east there. those
trees sticking up. It's in bad shape. I
[41:14] had conversation on the property over
there and if uh we pick them up when we
[41:19] do the brush chipping this fall, we can
have them for the most part. So, we'll
[41:22] get that one clean up for one or two of
you mentioned that one too. So, I'm
[41:26] working more on getting that
accelerating solution rather than
[41:29] decision. I think you got that one
wrapped up.
[41:31] » Wait, what was what's happening with
that one? You're taking the bush out or
[41:35] » take the two pine trees out, leave the
rest of the flower. It's the very last
[41:38] one.
>> Yeah,
[41:41] » okay. But I talked to a property owner.
He said if you guys want to take the
[41:44] trees and do your chip.
>> Okay.
[41:46] » As long as he's still venable for that
that one. So
[41:50] » that's good. Well, that property is a
little bit different. They're they're
[41:53] kind of protected by like the slope of
the land anyway. It's not really
[41:57] protecting a lot.
>> Nobody's turning head putting headlights
[41:59] really. Well, one direction I guess
>> may be coming.
[42:02] » But you still have your shrubberies. You
just won't have big big pods.
[42:06] » And again, it was the property owner
that has the father. I talked to Gary
[42:10] and Gary
10 minutes from my guys change
[42:15] our question.
[42:19] » Okay.
>> Yeah. Um last thing, uh the D growing
[42:23] greener grant. Um Reach had applied and
been awarded a grant by D back in 2023
[42:29] for Fish Run. Um that was set to expire
here uh in October of 2026. All
[42:37] constructions be done. uh we haven't
started construction or even been um
[42:43] because of all the property issues that
we've had uh that have now been resolved
[42:48] um our amended uh
uh permit application with BP hopefully
[42:54] that'll be passed through soon um so I
requested an extension uh for a year in
[43:01] order to try to get this work done I I
asked for more than a year uh the DT
[43:05] told me that only thing they'd be
willing to give is one here our our
[43:09] completion date for fish run would be 10
927
[43:14] uh which
uh makes our timelines complicated with
[43:18] my intention to use penvest funding uh
for this project um this project is
[43:24] estimated at uh $779,000
$200,000 uh is being given to us for the
[43:32] D for a grant uh and so as we get into
budget season um region and I are going
[43:38] to have to really uh dig into this and
and determine um what our best course of
[43:43] action is. Uh for us to be able to get
this project done based on that timeline
[43:47] to keep this grant, uh we're going to
have to move to bid probably February of
[43:53] 2026 or 2027, which would not give us
the amount of time we need to pend
[43:57] funding. Uh so that would mean either
one, uh we don't do a whole lot of
[44:01] capital improvements next year than
storm water uh and really trim back our
[44:06] budgets. uh we find extern external
sourcing uh via uh a loan from someone
[44:12] other than Penvest uh or some
combination of both uh or we abandon the
[44:18] $200,000 grant uh and go through the
Penvest process because we know that the
[44:23] interest rates are are really good. Um
and so that decision will be something
[44:28] that we'll talk about uh as we move to
the budget process
[44:32] » as a project.
[44:36] » Yeah. Yeah. We can't say that
>> as a
[44:41] » just when you thought you got the budget
moving in the right direction.
[44:44] » Yeah. The wheels.
>> Yeah. So um you know what's the rate of
[44:51] department versus
>> uh
[44:55] I think this is what%
first five years another four the next
[45:02] one. Um
so but once we have the budget set and I
[45:08] can kind of see how much money we have
disposable uh if we trim the fat is an
[45:14] aren't essential um where we come land.
So
[45:18] » okay we'll see what our options are.
Yeah, but those will be uh you know you
[45:22] guys will be proposed options to go
through the process. Just keeping you
[45:24] guys in the loop of uh where we kind of
stand right now
[45:31] for
[45:36] » uh no the rest is okay. Uh the next item
is a high school visit. So who would
[45:42] like to go visit the high school?
This was a part of our
[45:48] » council. Shaunie um had emailed some
dates. She's um and Elena, did she speak
[45:56] with you? Are you involved with this as
well?
[45:59] » Okay. Because that's what we wanted to
make sure that you were involved as the
[46:02] new junior council person.
>> Um she was looking at Monday, November
[46:07] 2nd,
Thursday, November 5th. You know, these
[46:11] are all options. uh Friday, November
6th, Monday the 9th, Wednesday the 11th,
[46:18] or Monday the 23rd.
She also gave me Thanksg.
[46:25] » Um she indicated the lunch periods are
10:33 to 12:45.
[46:32] So her thought was 10:00 a.m. to 1:15.
I'm guessing
[46:37] she thought you'd get there before the
kids and stay until they clear out.
[46:44] » Was the intention to have, you know, x
number of us there the whole time or
[46:49] kind of stagger it or I know
[46:54] » don't want
[46:57] sunshine by saying if two people want to
go, I can go as a third.
[47:04] Yeah, I'll go.
>> Everyone's here.
[47:08] » I'll go now before my children get
there. [laughter]
[47:12] » Make fun of you.
>> What were the days?
[47:16] » But yeah. Uh, can you repeat the dates,
please?
[47:17] » Yep. Monday, November 2nd.
>> No.
[47:20] » Thursday the 5th.
>> That's election. I mean,
[47:23] » the day before
>> November 3rd.
[47:26] » Thursday the 5th.
>> Thursday the 5th. Friday the 6th.
[47:30] Monday the 9th. Wednesday the 11th,
Monday the 23rd, which is Thanksgiving
[47:36] week. Fifth or sixth is good for me.
[47:44] » Can anybody
[47:51] » Yeah, school's out.
[47:56] » That wouldn't make sense.
[48:01] Sure.
[48:04] She didn't look at the school calendar.
>> Personally, she's had Saturdays.
[48:09] She looked at the wrong.
[48:16] » All right. So, she's looking for
counsel, you know, to choose the date so
[48:21] she can she and Elena can get back to
the principal to I guess get it
[48:28] scheduled so everybody knows. So, do you
want to choose a date tonight? Do you
[48:34] want to talk about it again next meeting
in two weeks?
[48:39] » If I had my brothers, I'd choose
Thursday. I'm off on Thursday.
[48:44] » There's only one Thursday. What? What?
>> Yeah.
[48:54] » And I'm sorry, what time did she say?
>> 10.
[48:56] » She said 10:00 a.m. to 1:15.
[49:01] » The lunch periods are 10:33 to 12:45.
[49:07] » Good question.
>> Donnie and I
[49:12] just report it on something.
$250.
[49:16] » So if you have three people, I assume
you don't need me.
[49:19] » Not unless you just really want to.
>> I didn't come a high school teacher for
[49:25] read.
>> Okay. So
[49:28] first Laura Curtis, Thursday the 5th.
[49:33] » Two council people and a mayor is uh
>> not
[49:38] four council me.
>> Okay. Elena, what I'll do and you can as
[49:42] well. I will since um Ashani had emailed
I will respond to her email with this
[49:47] information. I will copy your junior
council person email as well.
[49:51] » Sounds good.
>> You think you don't want to go? It's
[49:54] right up your alley. All
>> teach about
[49:58] science class last time.
[50:05] They must have been thrilled.
>> He did his diligence.
[50:12] my days. I was always grateful for
whenever there was either Bill and I
[50:15] video or guest speaker.
>> Yeah. You guys enjoy it.
[50:22] » Okay. Okay. All right. Sounds good. Uh
council mayor first.
[50:28] » Yeah. I'll just kind of touch on the
chief target. We were talking last time
[50:34] about the uh snow on bread with the uh
the gas line replacement. That's uh
[50:39] while it's still a bit of a mess, it
actually has kind of exceeded my
[50:43] expectations and there's not been an
overwhelming amount of grief that I've
[50:46] gotten directly from the neighbors or
anything. They're doing their best. You
[50:50] know, I assume they're going to patch it
up and, you know, blow a tire on what
[50:54] they have left, but uh craft control is
decent for for what they're having to
[50:59] do. So, all in my home stretch, my boys,
pretty much what I have.
[51:08] you know,
do you support or anything, but do you
[51:14] » any questions? Me and Shai were talking
the other day, and I know she mentioned
[51:18] to you guys the creation of like some
sort of junior council thing, like not
[51:24] just the council person, but having like
a group of youth. And I thought that was
[51:27] really interesting because I was like
down in North Carolina this summer with
[51:31] like the department of state and we got
to go into Kerry, North Carolina and
[51:35] they had like a town view council and we
got to do some activities with them and
[51:39] I just thought the concept was really
cool because they gave a lot of service
[51:43] opportunities and like civic, you know,
engagement opportunities to youth. Like
[51:48] they got to volunteer, do a lot of like
park cleanup and like really interact
[51:52] with their elected officials there. And
like it was like pretty cool because
[51:56] there was like 900 plus like members.
They're like one of the largest like
[52:00] teen youth councils in like the United
States. So I was like wondering if
[52:06] something like this comes to Christian
like in our group.
[52:10] » I think we we touched on that a couple
meetings ago with Shnie. There's there's
[52:14] no legal reason that we couldn't have
maybe some of the unsuccessful
[52:17] applicants get together start a club and
go out and do things in the community
[52:22] and talk with each other. you
>> union contracts. So
[52:27] » now we talked about that there there
aren't a lot of things for them to do.
[52:32] » Yeah. Yeah. Because like we had
discussed about
[52:35] » post fireworks for uh Oh, that's where
we have we're doing clean up, right? But
[52:40] we call the worst guys in for overtime.
We do clean up the next day.
[52:44] » So can't take work away from the union
once it's settled.
[52:51] Yeah, in your to work state compared to
the other state.
[52:55] Maybe the first step
>> to start is if you think of some ideas
[52:58] that you might like to see the
>> group do and then we could kind of
[53:03] reverse engineer it to see if that's
something that would be feasible both
[53:06] legally within our you know contracts
and that we would actually
[53:11] » we've had like uh projects we worked on
like whether that be the uh Boy Scouts,
[53:15] Girl Scouts uh where they propose
projects which are advancements uh which
[53:20] isn't so much maintaining or maintenance
that the union doesn't really have a
[53:23] problem with. So
>> like the community garden that was
[53:26] correct,
but when you take away from like the
[53:29] regular work,
>> that's where you have problems. So
[53:32] » I don't think you're talking about just
manual labor, right? Like
[53:36] » be like brainstorm and come up with
ideas of like things you can do to
[53:41] » Yeah, I'll do that.
[53:47] » Yeah.
[53:52] » Yeah. me. Okay. Well, I've got a couple
easy things and then the elephant. Um,
[54:00] so first, uh, there's a veterans
breakfast coming up. Um, I understand
[54:05] that Dennis, uh, was very passionate
about that. So, I'm I was supposed to be
[54:12] out of town that weekend, but I'm kind
of working through things and I might,
[54:16] uh, go do a welcome and then head out of
town. But, I'm working through that um,
[54:21] because I know it's important to the
community. Um,
[54:25] uh, I also need to get with, um, Donna
or Zach, I'm not quite sure who, um, to
[54:32] get some social media out there for
hunger month of September. Um, since
[54:38] made that proclamation at the last
meeting, we need to get some stuff out
[54:41] there on social media now that we are
into September. Um,
[54:45] » yeah, just send it to to Don at CCB and
we'll get it set up.
[54:49] » Perfect. Thank you. Um, I also had email
just prior to this meeting um from a
[54:57] group and I talked to Chief uh Leech um
it is a group um that
[55:06] honors and respects first responders
each year um and they are planning this
[55:14] in um
I can't remember the date but um I am
[55:20] working with the chief
to make sure that we have some police
[55:24] there. It's going to be at the fire
station um that they want to honor first
[55:30] responders, both fire and police. So, um
I'm working on that to coordinate.
[55:35] » Is it a group within Franklin Park or
it's a larger group and they just come
[55:38] into communities?
>> Let me tell you, um I know that this has
[55:44] been going on for like nine years.
Um and uh she was was very familiar with
[55:53] it.
>> Um
[55:54] » that's fine. I'm just curious. You can
>> It is It is a Hindu group.
[55:59] » Okay.
>> Um
[56:03] it is a Hindu group HSS.
Um it's a nonprofit socio cultural
[56:11] organization.
Um, and they celebrate each year
[56:18] honoring first responders and so we'll
do that. So, um,
[56:25] » sorry to interrupt you. September hunger
month or anti-hunger month. I'm not sure
[56:30] the exact time.
>> Yeah, sorry.
[56:31] » Might be something that Elena can help
with.
[56:33] » Oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'll get in
touch with you. Um,
[56:38] okay. This this um first responder
recognition is Thursday, September 10th
[56:45] at 7 p.m. at the fire department.
[56:52] Um okay. And then um
who wants to have a cup of coffee at
[56:58] four quarters? [laughter]
[57:05] So Chris and I talked about this a
little bit
[57:09] last week. I was a little too late till
I got support
[57:15] for a little bit picture
and thoughts here
[57:21] the owners reach out to Kristen and
I actually will probably join them which
[57:26] should be wise
right
[57:30] um so just thinking through some of this
a little bit more and just go through
[57:36] you know compromise
hub for it. Um, and just looking through
[57:44] past emails, one of the things for
setting all that out. So, your inbox
[57:49] should have like all the sort of
documents. Um, you know, a couple of
[57:53] things and you can chime in as well, but
just looking through what they're trying
[57:59] to do. vision is not what is best as
important like discussion like you know
[58:04] people have different ideas or what not
but we have a long stating not long
[58:09] stating but a long property has a lot
stated right so what is interesting this
[58:14] person is
I guess the requirements or whatnot
[58:19] right so you kind of want to know start
this and think through like hey is there
[58:24] something to think through here in terms
of we don't have very many of these but
[58:28] we also
situations, right? So, do you require a
[58:32] full land development or is it land
development like express?
[58:42] » Okay. I had like 10 pages of but
>> do you mind if I jump in real quick? Go
[58:46] for it. Um Max and I had a conversation
after the meeting last time and I just
[58:50] wanted to kind of reiterate what I what
Max and I talked about
[58:54] » um along these same lines. At our last
meeting when Mr. Cooper spoke at the
[58:58] end. We obviously saw he was all very
passionate and frustrated. And for my
[59:03] part, I regret and apologize to Matt
that Max that I did not step in and stop
[59:08] that before it went as long and as far
as it did in the wrong direction. Um, I
[59:13] regret because first of all, I strongly
believe and still after having gone back
[59:17] and watched the video again, I strongly
believe that
[59:22] u Mr. Cooper had a misunderstanding of
what Max said and what Max meant. And I
[59:27] wish I would have stepped in and said
and said that in the moment instead of
[59:30] letting it go on as long as it did. So I
did talk to Mr. Browning, not Mr. Mr.
[59:35] Browning after the meeting. He called me
and I said as much to him. I said, "I
[59:39] think you all have a strong
misunderstanding of what Max said and
[59:43] what Max meant and Max's intent." And he
said, "Well, you know, this is what
[59:47] people were telling us that was being
said." And I said, "Okay, well, I was in
[59:51] there. I disagree strongly." and he
said, "Well, okay, we'll go back and
[59:55] watch it." I haven't spoken to him again
since then. But anyway, before we get
[59:58] before we jump into this, I just wanted
to publicly once again say, "Max, I
[1:00:02] apologize for not
attempting at least to stop that
[1:00:06] sooner."
[1:00:10] » And you handled yourself tully as you
always do. You didn't need me in any
[1:00:14] way. But you it was not right to let
that go on that long and in that
[1:00:19] direction especially
feeling that it was he was had been
[1:00:24] misinformed about Lisa.
>> And as an aside I'm not either
[1:00:28] deliberating nor participating this
conversation
[1:00:32] » because I filed a you know a refusal and
so
[1:00:37] » now back to the meat.
Um,
[1:00:42] okay. So,
[1:00:46] what are we trying to do? Are we trying
to as a burrow
[1:00:54] give every opportunity
for them
[1:00:59] to just have goals they cannot meet and
we are looking for reasons why they
[1:01:06] cannot let this happen?
Or are we trying to facilitate a
[1:01:13] conversation
so that we can both sides understand
[1:01:18] what
their vision is? And all they're asking
[1:01:24] for is to
start small.
[1:01:31] And then
if by chance they make this a hu a huge
[1:01:39] success and they have to expand the
parking lot and they have to do
[1:01:43] different things then okay then they
will have the money to do it. But right
[1:01:48] now all they are trying to do is start
with a small coffee shop and dump and
[1:01:56] they have their variance
um which did not have any conditions
[1:02:01] attached to it in writing um from my
understanding and they just want a
[1:02:08] permit to start. I mean,
I have not heard
[1:02:15] any
negative comments from any neighbors,
[1:02:21] any residents of the community.
We are here. If you look at the org
[1:02:26] chart, and I've said this before, who's
at the top of the org chart? The
[1:02:31] residents. The residents want this and
they want to make this happen from a
[1:02:39] small business owner
perspective.
[1:02:45] It seems to me that we are just looking
for ways like, "Oh, no, no, no, no.
[1:02:51] Here's another ordinance. No, no, no,
no. Here's another ordinance." instead
[1:02:55] of facilitating with a resident to make
this happen for the community.
[1:03:03] I I I don't know what um
council's greatest fear is if if council
[1:03:13] would decide, okay,
grant them a building permit so they can
[1:03:17] get started on their small their small
vision that will hopefully grow.
[1:03:24] What's what what is what's the biggest
fear? And why can't we come to some
[1:03:31] understanding of okay if that fear that
biggest fear happens comes to fruition
[1:03:39] all right let's put a condition on it
but they'll fix it if that fear comes to
[1:03:44] be I it just it comes back to their
argument to me is common sense and what
[1:03:54] the community wants and common sense
and looking for all these little reasons
[1:04:04] just frustrates them. And I know it
frustrates everybody in this room,
[1:04:09] but I don't think we're using common
sense.
[1:04:13] And I am not I do not believe
I I caution myself
[1:04:21] that I am not naive
that they are pulling one over.
[1:04:28] I've met with them and talked with them
enough times that they have a heart for
[1:04:36] bringing coffee and deli sandwiches to
Franklin Park and the burrow is not
[1:04:42] helping them.
If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But
[1:04:51] I I think we need to have some common
sense. It it's really hard to issue
[1:04:56] permits. No applications have ever been
made.
[1:04:58] » Whatever it is
>> for building or for development.
[1:05:02] I don't know how we're supposed to give
cart blocks per building if if we don't
[1:05:06] get anything on.
>> They're not building. They are not
[1:05:09] changing the footprint.
>> Like I said, they're not changing the
[1:05:13] footprint. What do they
>> I don't know. You tell me. They don't
[1:05:17] know
>> anything.
[1:05:18] » They don't know. Max
[1:05:22] » because they they from a ground point
they do not feel that the underlying um
[1:05:29] issue [clears throat] is that they do
not have to go through the land
[1:05:32] development process. So they do not want
to go through that expense and that cost
[1:05:38] and all of that if they don't have to.
So they cannot have they do not they
[1:05:45] have not had [gasps]
I'm sorry. I'm sorry I'm getting a
[1:05:51] little bit um vocal.
They do not feel that they have had a
[1:05:57] venue to speak with counsel or with
whomever in the burrow to actually
[1:06:06] understand
and have a voice.
[1:06:11] They have asked to speak to council.
They have not had that opportunity.
[1:06:17] They want to understand and they told me
Kristen if you come back to me and say
[1:06:26] this is it you're done they will respect
me if that's the answer but I don't
[1:06:32] think that's the right answer. I think
we need to find a way to make this
[1:06:37] happen for Franklin Park.
[1:06:45] » Well, uh, I'd say first and foremost,
yes, we have given them audiences. I
[1:06:52] mean, I came out, drove out here. We're
not getting reimbured. They don't have
[1:06:56] an application. Uh, at the meeting in
miday, we had some takeaways. We don't
[1:07:02] get information back with respect to
that. Overall, the issue is this was a
[1:07:09] subdevelopment.
[1:07:19] » I don't know if that's a good omen or
bad,
[1:07:21] » but
the
[1:07:25] issue
though was a subdivision.
[1:07:29] We don't have original land developments
that would have set forth traffic
[1:07:36] circulation and everything else with yes
they're doing a change of use. Yes,
[1:07:42] they've gotten a use variance, but
because they're changing the use,
[1:07:46] they've got playground equipment all
through the back. They got a swimming
[1:07:50] pool. They have a parking lot that is
not designed for an eating place. And my
[1:07:57] biggest concern and I told them this
that is health, safety, welfare. You are
[1:08:01] going to be a community feature like
they want to be that they want people
[1:08:06] you know in the neighborhood not to have
to drive there and they don't care about
[1:08:08] the parking or otherwise but to walk
over there and there is no pedestrian
[1:08:14] connection and no sidewalks and anything
else and you've got a jumble of a
[1:08:20] parking lot right now that somebody's
going to get. So that's at least my view
[1:08:26] of why we do land development, you know,
at all, public health, safety, welfare.
[1:08:32] » And I disagree. I mean, when young roll
was there, oh my gosh, there was how
[1:08:37] many parents with cars and little kids?
>> Yes. But how many people were walking?
[1:08:41] » This is going to be people going in for
a coffee.
[1:08:44] » Well, so different.
>> In fact, when you
[1:08:47] » safer, we keep hearing they haven't
applied for anything. It's true. They
[1:08:51] haven't applied for a land development.
Although in one of the emails they did
[1:08:54] say that they did, but then they weren't
sure of the cost. They're not convinced
[1:08:58] about it.
>> Oh, yeah. They they returned away at the
[1:09:00] front desk
because the front desk didn't know how
[1:09:04] much to charge them.
>> No, they weren't.
[1:09:07] » That wasn't the impression I got from
the email. I got the impression that
[1:09:10] they were going to get either him or
somebody else is going to get back to
[1:09:13] the boss, but the application was
actually taped. That's
[1:09:15] » Yeah. Well, I have a letter to that was
written months ago that specifically
[1:09:20] tells the feast.
>> Okay. Well, the crux of the issue is
[1:09:25] they according to the ordinances that
they're looking at don't believe that
[1:09:29] development this is development under
our ordinances.
[1:09:33] » They they hire legal team to prove that
and we have yet to receive anything from
[1:09:37] that legal team to say on the ones.
>> Okay. But what do we do have things from
[1:09:42] them in terms of plans? I don't know if
we have an actual application
[1:09:44] [clears throat]
that may be accurate,
[1:09:47] » but we do have plans from them. a Google
map screenshot with parking lines
[1:09:54] plastered onto it by an engineer did not
give us any information we need to do an
[1:09:59] actual review like we would normally do.
>> Okay. Maybe I just want to ask the
[1:10:04] documents and artifacts they sent how
are they engineering that provide
[1:10:09] documentation to
>> they're not they're not engineer
[1:10:15] drawings they're survey drawings they're
just best
[1:10:17] » but they're stamped
>> best guesses no they're not
[1:10:21] » the plans I saw were some
>> what they gave us
[1:10:26] » if they were if they were of the same
>> that's why everything goes through the
[1:10:28] burrow so that we have it they're going
through council members and shown you
[1:10:32] guys different information than us. How
can we do our
[1:10:35] » then emails I think that Chris is
referring to at least Tim was copied on.
[1:10:39] But hold on, we're getting into the
weeds here. So again, their argument is
[1:10:44] this is not development.
The burough's argument is that it is
[1:10:49] development, but
because there never was a land
[1:10:54] development plan filed. But months ago
when they were asking for all this
[1:10:59] stuff, that was not the argument from
the bureau. The argument was, well, you
[1:11:03] have to do this and that and this and
whatever is.
[1:11:06] » And this afternoon it was a different
argument, but and maybe they never did
[1:11:09] those things. But maybe let's look at
what exactly is it that is required
[1:11:17] and kind of move forward that way
because I don't I think at least maybe
[1:11:22] council and
maybe them and maybe you all have a
[1:11:26] different understanding of what actually
is required. I'm not sure anyone
[1:11:30] actually knows. I mean,
>> let me say this just before anybody
[1:11:35] understands before when this was just an
idea in their heads, they came in and
[1:11:39] talked to me at least two times before
they went to the zone, right? And I
[1:11:44] spent a lot of time with them explaining
from A to Z what they're what they're up
[1:11:49] against. Um, land development. I told
them about sidewalks. I told them about
[1:11:53] parking. I told them about
>> storm water. I told them about
[1:11:58] landscaping and and they were very
receptive to that. I also told them
[1:12:02] about building code issues and they
understood that they didn't know which
[1:12:05] way to go. They had that and I I advised
them that they probably have two
[1:12:10] directions to go and they can either go
to council and ask them to change the
[1:12:14] ordinance for them. So they could do
that use there or they could make an
[1:12:17] application for a zoning variance for
use variance. They did try to go to
[1:12:22] council. Um they did ask for for
allowance to go in there, change of of
[1:12:29] use, whatever zoning change there, it
went to planning commission. The
[1:12:33] planning commission came back and it
that fell flat flat in its face. So,
[1:12:37] they made the application to the zoning
hearing board. The zoning hearing board
[1:12:41] heard their concerns. They heard the
concerns of the public um initially. Um
[1:12:47] they they heard my discussion
reiterating the fact that they will have
[1:12:52] to go through a land development
process. There will be storm water that
[1:12:56] they'll have to address. There will be
parking that they have to address. There
[1:12:59] will be sidewalks they'll have to
address. There have to be building codes
[1:13:03] they have to address.
>> This is none of this none of this is a
[1:13:07] surprise for them.
>> And and it's not writing.
[1:13:13] » Are you in the transcript that say
>> it's in a transcript
[1:13:17] » but not in the documents they were
given. Well, it doesn't need
[1:13:21] » there's no documents that they were
given for use in the final order from
[1:13:25] the
>> they could have specified much more but
[1:13:28] you don't need to those conditions that
you do are usually things that are not
[1:13:34] in the ordinance just like we talked
about with the conditional use. We have
[1:13:37] a list of requirements there. But if the
specifics of a use variance,
[1:13:43] conventional variance or conditional use
require additional condition, that's
[1:13:47] when we added in and
>> it should have been in writing,
[1:13:52] » not a trans.
>> Okay. So this is where we are now to
[1:13:56] learn but what are we actually
acquiring?
[1:14:01] You know, because we did a phased
approach of strengthening it. So there's
[1:14:05] some things some things here on the
sidewalks right
[1:14:09] and there's going through the process
requested modifications of which council
[1:14:15] based on the wants of the community
>> made those decisions but that was post
[1:14:19] application post process
>> yeah that's the issue we can't get past
[1:14:24] square one and I I mean regardless of
what happened out there and some of the
[1:14:29] vitriol that's there want to see this
thing developed we had our fights with
[1:14:34] Young World that was fine. We were able
to address some issues there. It was
[1:14:38] always a problem. We always had issues
with how many kids they had there. This
[1:14:43] would be a community asset, but that
doesn't give you the right to just sort
[1:14:50] of, you know, not apply for anything or
just go in and do whatever you want
[1:14:55] because it's good for the community in
the short term. Uh, and I think
[1:15:02] » you tried to lay it out. Well, they come
and talk. They put the banners up, not
[1:15:07] citing them for the banners. Uh, we had
the meeting. We told them what our
[1:15:11] expectations were talked to them. And I
think part of the problem is they, as
[1:15:16] they've said before, they're not exactly
sure what they're going to do. And their
[1:15:20] parking count is driven by the number of
seats. So, how many seats are they
[1:15:24] » The parking count has changed.
>> How so?
[1:15:28] » Because when I was at the meeting with
you,
[1:15:30] » Yes.
>> here. Um it went from two to one to four
[1:15:34] to one
>> because we pointed out to them there are
[1:15:37] two provisions in the
>> no problem with with parking
[1:15:42] » pointed out to them. Yes. And we told
them you get the least restrictive one
[1:15:46] and they asked again recently and we
repeated that it's in the parking table
[1:15:52] as opposed to in the conditional use
requirements for an eating applied but
[1:15:58] they don't know how many seats they want
to have. and what is their trade going
[1:16:02] to be at least in terms of those
discussions we've had and
[1:16:07] » so
[1:16:12] they don't know what to provide because
my understanding is that as soon as they
[1:16:19] spend all the money and do this land
development plan and submit everything
[1:16:25] that is going against their argument
that they don't need to do that in the
[1:16:29] first place. So they don't want to have
to go through that cost because they
[1:16:34] don't believe that they have to do that
in the first place.
[1:16:36] » So I just want to ask like in the emails
is like just do some search was the
[1:16:42] application fee looks like $980 plus
that correct
[1:16:47] » something like that.
>> Okay. So that is the land development
[1:16:51] fee rate the application.
like the total the total the output
[1:16:58] what's that look like is that
>> that is just for us that they will have
[1:17:03] to pay an engineer to design and do
>> what it is more so than a Google
[1:17:09] » so when you do something like this
you're going to need three different
[1:17:11] professions you're going to need an
architect because they have to they have
[1:17:14] to design changes for interior the
structure they need a a civil engineer
[1:17:21] to design the site an important with our
ordinance and they need a surveyor to
[1:17:26] show boundaries and the setbacks
property.
[1:17:31] I'm not sure what type of engineer that
they had. I don't believe he was a civil
[1:17:35] engineer.
Pretty darn sure he wasn't surveyor and
[1:17:38] he wasn't an architect. The information
that we had was just blown up pictures
[1:17:43] with overlays and the information
surveys I have pre previous
[1:17:51] don't match where he's showing property.
So
[1:17:55] » that's I just want to ask so those are
three artifacts that the bureau requires
[1:18:00] » that that's three things that you need
when you went to
[1:18:03] » if you're doing land development but
that is the core question.
[1:18:06] » Okay. So I just just sticking to this.
So the architectural broads are like the
[1:18:11] exterior, right?
>> Okay.
[1:18:13] » So similar to what Franklin
>> because we saw seating
[1:18:18] » well they're going to need an architect
to design
[1:18:22] » that's when they're going and
even though they have existing parking
[1:18:27] that parking is not going to be adequate
for accessibility. accessibility is
[1:18:32] going to take flat portion of the lot
repaved, rebraided to make it accessible
[1:18:40] to build an entaring lot into there. So,
you know, and and the parking that they
[1:18:46] showed was was stacked. It was in the
right of ways. Not all of it, but but a
[1:18:52] significant amount of. And um I don't I
don't believe they have they're actually
[1:18:58] showing the pictures when I matched it
up to the actual survey that I have. So
[1:19:02] there's a lot of questions about
>> So those are three documents that they
[1:19:07] need.
>> Yeah. And and there's there's definitely
[1:19:10] issues they have council
>> and I know that coffee shops and
[1:19:16] renewable natural gas plants are two
different things. But, you know, in my
[1:19:19] day job, you know, these people that are
looking for loans to build these kind of
[1:19:23] plants and look to have them insured,
they don't have, you know, those kind
[1:19:28] of, for lack of better term, basics.
They're not going to get that insurance
[1:19:32] and they're not going to get that low
here.
[1:19:36] And our our planning commission has made
it very clear. They want sidewalks. They
[1:19:39] want for sidewalks. We did their
comprehensive plan. That was
[1:19:42] connectivity was one of one of our main
priorities even with Franklin in where
[1:19:47] they don't have sidewalks either side
reinforce sidewalks
[1:19:51] without going to the the permanent
processes.
[1:19:54] » So connect me and the sidewalk from my
house to the people at the corner with
[1:19:59] trees
>> but you're not redeveloping
[1:20:01] » and we could if we wanted to assess a
footront basis but the council's done.
[1:20:08] Okay.
>> So the development would require
[1:20:12] If let's say we're going through the
development process, it would require
[1:20:15] sidewalks at the minimum and probably
more sidewalks.
[1:20:18] » They can request modifications just like
anybody else, but they still have to
[1:20:21] plan sidewalks, storm water,
landscaping.
[1:20:27] » I mean, I'm talking exterior. I know you
still need architectural drawings and
[1:20:31] stuff.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, they're going to
[1:20:34] have to
follow you and say and and if they don't
[1:20:38] have I mean, if council wants to say
ignore the ordinance to these guys, I'm
[1:20:42] fine with that. I don't live here, so
you know, whatever. That's fine. But
[1:20:47] there's going to be zoning issues that
>> I don't have to do that.
[1:20:52] » We should do that
or change the ordinances. We can change
[1:20:57] the ordinances. Don't require these
things for land buildings. But again,
[1:21:01] you can't be selective and and that's
that's I think the issue, one of the
[1:21:07] issues here and and the other thing is
this this is that none of this is any
[1:21:13] surprise and it shouldn't be.
>> I think it's fair to say this is we're
[1:21:17] being selective. I think this is a very
unique property and unique situation and
[1:21:22] perhaps I I know you and I read the
transcript of the zoning hearing board
[1:21:26] hearing. I know you settle these things
to them that might not have they might
[1:21:30] might not have realized the scope of
that. That's not your issue. That's
[1:21:33] their issue. Uh
but I think we need to look at how does
[1:21:39] this move forward one way or the other.
Whether it moves forward with their
[1:21:42] project, whether we do something else
like Kristen said this or maybe you said
[1:21:46] this, this property has been vacant for
a while now. It's an eyes sore and the
[1:21:50] community wants something there. So what
do we do on our part to move forward?
[1:21:57] » Regardless, there's a variance for that
property that runs with the land. So
[1:22:00] even if they don't develop it and they
sell it, there will still have the
[1:22:04] capacity of a non through the eery or
non drive-thru eery to go in there. It's
[1:22:09] just how fast that process takes.
Um but we, you know, they've been told
[1:22:14] by the department head, this is the
process they need to go to. They've been
[1:22:18] told by myself, which is your your
administrator, it's the process they
[1:22:21] need to go to. told by our lawyers the
process that we need to go through and
[1:22:25] so now they're going to the the last
council
[1:22:29] uh and so um
>> I actually started with counsel but I
[1:22:33] realiz
>> but we've gone through all the steps
[1:22:35] this is you know
>> I think their frustration and not to
[1:22:39] speak
put words in their mouth but I think
[1:22:42] their frustration is and you've seen
some of these emails they're pointing to
[1:22:46] several ordinances that they argue show
that it is not development And I think
[1:22:52] the issue that that it that we don't
have a site development plan didn't come
[1:22:56] up until later. And so
again, as I understand it, their
[1:23:02] frustration is that they felt like they
kept being told this was development,
[1:23:07] but they weren't able, no one was able
to nail down why. And then all of a
[1:23:10] sudden, we're like, "Oh, wait. It's
because we don't actually have land
[1:23:14] development for this. It's not because
all these other reasons that we were
[1:23:16] arguing before." And I think that is a
big part of their frustration, which I
[1:23:20] completely understand, but again, the
issue comes down to what are we getting?
[1:23:26] » Well, the other thing too is if they
don't feel that they have to comply with
[1:23:30] with zoning requirements, there's an
appeal process.
[1:23:33] » I don't think again they don't feel they
have to comply. I think they disagree
[1:23:38] that that is what applies to them. And
whether that is them, that's an appeal
[1:23:41] process.
>> Right. I agree. But what I'm saying is I
[1:23:44] don't think they're saying they don't
have to comply. I think they're saying
[1:23:49] that something else applies to
>> and that land devel I mean I'll take
[1:23:52] ownership. I mean, I did not get
involved in this until their first
[1:23:55] attorney reached out, right, April or
something. And that's when I started
[1:23:59] pulling together and going through
saying, "Well, okay, where's the land
[1:24:02] development that they got originally?"
Oh, it never had one. So, that's I was,
[1:24:06] "Well, here's the provision that says,
you know, any land development, whatever
[1:24:11] one I own otherwise, that's on me coming
late to discussion and sitting down."
[1:24:18] Yeah. In the process of their
Yeah, I
[1:24:23] » in the main discussion we had talked
about uh you know parking was a concern
[1:24:28] right where
>> yeah we we had hop that you know the
[1:24:32] right of entrance and exits were
approved by pendot that the a survey was
[1:24:37] done with where the ultimate setbacks
are so that we know parking's out of the
[1:24:40] rightways like those details that we
need in order to move forward. So there
[1:24:46] I'm trying to think like the Timson
appeal process everything else we're at
[1:24:50] such a fundamental you know basis of how
do you even proceed or not proceed or
[1:24:56] otherwise it's all these other
modifications waiverss adjustments come
[1:25:02] with a an application
they say we don't do it and MPC does
[1:25:08] have a mediation process uh there in in
it you know so that's one consideration.
[1:25:16] Nobody has used it in years. They'd have
to dust it off. I don't even know. I've
[1:25:20] never been through one. Um, but it does
set forth a process mostly for zoning,
[1:25:26] but I think there's cross references to
uh subdivision and land development. So
[1:25:32] barring like litigation where there's a
declaratory judgment action filed others
[1:25:38] there be some split costs you can have a
mediator
[1:25:43] essentially review certain issues. This
might be one of those types of a neutral
[1:25:52] paid by both sides and deal with
whatever they say in terms of
[1:25:58] like I said is not often used. It's
there might have a per vision of it in
[1:26:03] our zoning ordinance but um that's one
thing to perhaps consider rings more
[1:26:08] expense. They want to do anything that's
less expensive than an actual full-blown
[1:26:13] um plan development plan survey and
everything else.
[1:26:18] » I just
common sense.
[1:26:23] » So they're going to do a survey,
>> right?
[1:26:25] » You said they were in May. We never
received that.
[1:26:28] » So let's pretend they're going to do
that right now.
[1:26:30] » Okay.
>> That's a farmland development process
[1:26:32] setting. Great.
>> I understand that's part of it.
[1:26:37] » And so that's That's already checked.
The other item, the other two items like
[1:26:42] architectural drawing, would they need
that anyways?
[1:26:46] » The architectural drawings they'll need
for their for their building permit.
[1:26:53] » And aren't the engineering drawings? Are
they a part of anything other?
[1:27:01] » That's where all the design is going to
come from. That's for all their
[1:27:04] specified landscaping their details to
their sidewalk there.
[1:27:10] » If they did not do that, that would not
be they would not be doing that, right?
[1:27:14] Correct.
>> Okay.
[1:27:16] » But I'm pretty sure
>> So they're still going to have to
[1:27:20] » they're going to do that stuff, right?
>> Whether they want to go through the
[1:27:24] formal process or not, they're going to
generate the fun.
[1:27:28] » They are.
Okay.
[1:27:31] Uh yeah. As far as parking goes, I mean
like I said
[1:27:35] that session
was like
[1:27:40] issued there. Um
[1:27:45] yeah, so they all stuff with the
application and ask for like these 10
[1:27:48] wers
[1:27:53] in writing have a basis.
>> Okay.
[1:27:57] » But they can't meet parking standards.
They can apply for
[1:28:00] » they can apply for a reason.
>> Okay.
[1:28:03] » I think we I feel like we had worked
through the parking.
[1:28:06] » Yeah.
>> And I don't remember when at this point
[1:28:09] there's been a lot of conversations
about this, but I feel like they
[1:28:13] submitted their parking plan
>> was a stamped engineer draw.
[1:28:17] » Correct. But at that point, I think
someone reviewed it and the last comment
[1:28:21] was, "We just need this on a survey to
show us that these are in the proper
[1:28:26] locations." And we I realize we never
got that. Um and once we get that, maybe
[1:28:32] we'll see.
>> Our last meeting she said to Anela
[1:28:36] thinks that their lawyer said they were
going to supply us, right?
[1:28:40] » Uh to prove that what they want to do
could work, right? We've never received
[1:28:44] anything since.
>> Yeah, I remember Max sending an email
[1:28:47] following up saying these are the open
items still.
[1:28:51] » Um
>> and I don't know that we've
[1:28:53] » Well, we did. I mean, yes, we got a copy
of the consent order that we entered in
[1:28:58] the enforcement action over the the
playground.
[1:29:04] That was essentially a land development
approval, council approve, wasn't that
[1:29:11] just listed again pendant information.
Was there a land developer they found in
[1:29:17] their title search? Um,
>> survey
[1:29:20] » and survey. you know sort of issue. Uh
and yes in the last you know couple days
[1:29:25] they just asked again about provisions
why there two or which one applies the
[1:29:31] same answer we did
one space for every four of seats plus
[1:29:39] for one each peak employee
shift. So that's the thing that how do
[1:29:46] you figure that out when you don't know
how many seats you're going to have, how
[1:29:49] many employees you're going to have.
It's sort of a
[1:29:52] » well then we specify 18 seats
>> 18 seats
[1:29:55] » um at at one point.
[1:30:00] So uh problem is that there was
almost half parking spaces either in the
[1:30:07] right away or weren't parked on
in position where they met our
[1:30:14] ordinances as far as
location.
[1:30:22] So yeah, I'm just curious and uh because
we asked them to do and a few things and
[1:30:27] uh they probably
uh they either you know didn't do it or
[1:30:32] because of some other reasons and they
choose like not to do it is it's because
[1:30:37] that is very expensive to complete those
things.
[1:30:42] » Well, I I mean we don't we don't set the
prices for somebody else to do the
[1:30:45] engineering. So I mean that's that's
something that they have to do. you
[1:30:49] know, our fees our fees are um
[1:30:54] about $7,500 bucks. I I don't remember
exactly what the number was, but we have
[1:31:00] um application fee of $900. And then we
have an escro fee for um reviews to
[1:31:07] happen um from our solicitor from our
engineer and anyone solicitor who we
[1:31:13] draw off of for um review and
preparation of agreements and things
[1:31:19] like that. But that also has to be kept
up. And on a lot of cases, if you don't
[1:31:25] have a good engineer, your expenses, and
we're going to ask you another word of
[1:31:29] stops because that whittleles away
quickly. You know, it it's not it's not
[1:31:34] cheap for our engineer to spend hours,
you know, reviewing it or our solicitor
[1:31:40] to spend hours preparing, you know,
whatever he needs to do um for the true
[1:31:45] process. So a lot of times we do have to
go back to the till and say you know we
[1:31:50] need more money here.
>> So this is just cost on the borrow but
[1:31:55] they need to have
>> they need to pay us they need to pay
[1:31:57] their professionals.
>> They also need to pay like a architect
[1:32:00] or like an engineer or
>> Yeah. So they'll pay them and then
[1:32:03] that's on that's before they can even
obtain a building permit and start work.
[1:32:14] health department
[1:32:20] cost.
>> So it'll be six figures to do all that.
[1:32:24] » Sure. And but you know this was going to
be a very big business for and if if
[1:32:30] they're selling good coffee, good food,
it's going to be very busy then. Um you
[1:32:35] know honestly
if they if they decide
[1:32:40] as they stated that what happened.
They're going to walk away from this.
[1:32:43] They're going to sell it without
somebody.
[1:32:53] » Okay. Anything else to add? Does this
seem like you have anything else?
[1:32:59] » I don't think so. I mean, if we're going
to meet with them, I guess let's just a
[1:33:02] clear understanding.
So they have sent submitted documents
[1:33:08] over I mean probably a year ago now that
included parking which that was later
[1:33:14] but what would what did they originally
submit? Do you remember what was what
[1:33:19] would you have? They have submitted
four.
[1:33:21] » But they hard to remember.
>> They submitted things and then they
[1:33:24] submitted more things with some some
changes.
[1:33:28] » Were those
>> it was almost like they only
[1:33:31] » No, there was no there were there was no
the application isn't complete.
[1:33:36] So
>> is not complete unless they're flooded.
[1:33:40] But
>> the size of the of the drawings and
[1:33:42] everything um the type of drawings
information on the drawings is not was
[1:33:47] not what they needed. I mean honestly if
they they would have paid their fees
[1:33:51] they would have got probably
75 comments from me and the engineer
[1:33:57] because there was just they weren't they
weren't your typical engineer drawings
[1:34:01] for site plans
>> before
[1:34:04] » what they said they turned in was their
development site development plan before
[1:34:08] that the documents that they submitted
what were they submitting for
[1:34:13] they applying for something or
>> well they they were trying to show us
[1:34:16] how the site was going to Was
that required?
[1:34:21] Assuming
that under their assumption they were
[1:34:25] not going through the development
process. I guess my
[1:34:27] » they were trying to show us how how how
it's going to work without going through
[1:34:30] the development process, but that's
that's not the thing.
[1:34:39] » So there's just these free floating
documents that they were submitting to
[1:34:43] the burrow without any kind of
outside of any formal process.
[1:34:51] » They're really formal
trying to disturb the process.
[1:34:56] » Well, I don't think that's fair to say.
Again, their understanding based on the
[1:35:00] ordinances that they quoted and sent uh
at the time their argument was, you
[1:35:06] know, this not land development because
in addition to an existing
[1:35:10] non-residential structure that totals
less than 10% of the total gross area
[1:35:14] floor area, the existing non-residential
structure on the site is not land
[1:35:18] development. So, I think that's what
they were going with or at least looking
[1:35:22] to not go through the land development
process. So, I'm just wondering what
[1:35:25] again I'm getting this isn't really
central to the issue, but I don't
[1:35:29] understand why they were submitting
things if they were outside of any kind
[1:35:34] of process.
[1:35:39] » Yeah. I mean, I think it's
somewhat typical, Tim, just in terms of
[1:35:43] you talking to any types of developers
or anybody coming in that just wants to
[1:35:48] do a residential, you know, addition.
They might have draft plans and might
[1:35:52] show you here's a concept that I'm
working with. We have a pre-application
[1:35:56] process. Somebody can go without
applying, go to the planning commission,
[1:36:00] get comments beforehand. So that's what
at least when
[1:36:04] understood it was sort of that back and
forth of or get you comfortable that
[1:36:08] this is not a develop.
>> Yeah.
[1:36:16] So I I mean I you know
they're trying to gauge what they're
[1:36:22] interested in what what are they going
to be up against what what they have to
[1:36:26] do with
>> fine with what they heard at the zone
[1:36:29] hearing board and original discussions
and maybe thought was a little less
[1:36:34] formal. It was okay it's my drawing that
I'm standing there as an application
[1:36:39] process
>> and I what I don't understand is what
[1:36:41] they're hanging their head on saying
that they they don't have to go through.
[1:36:46] I mean, who's advising?
>> Well, I can't answer that. I can just
[1:36:50] read the email that they sent and
highlighted parts of the ordinance.
[1:36:53] » What I saw from there, the the
commercial attorney
[1:36:58] beforehand,
you know, I think it was some, you know,
[1:37:01] comment letters from the engineer they
had sort of at the time of just pulling
[1:37:05] parts from the web page or definition of
development and just saying that this
[1:37:10] this doesn't meet it. not making that
other
[1:37:14] I'll say leap but other idea that there
was never a land development for this
[1:37:19] unique property say that been daycare
1980
[1:37:25] » so if there had been a land development
site or plan for this site
[1:37:31] » before which I don't understand how we
never did but that's a separate issue
[1:37:36] » um if there had been one or if we found
one would they need to
[1:37:41] I think we would look at it to see was
it was it there in terms of the parking
[1:37:46] or or otherwise
then you might be the overall layout or
[1:37:52] others. But the complicating feature I
think is going to be the the changes to
[1:37:57] particularly building codes since then
and how you do accessibility in terms of
[1:38:02] parking. I don't know if they would have
had
[1:38:06] cap parking in a 1970s plan development.
Well, plus plus there was no there was
[1:38:12] no continued non-conformable
because because the the building
[1:38:20] also
addition to the
[1:38:23] » I don't talk about the storm water.
because it wasn't storm water. It wasn't
[1:38:28] an issue.
>> They were unable to prove that they
[1:38:32] could do the pardoning
>> before he before they got their own.
[1:38:37] » Yeah.
>> There was no
[1:38:39] do I really have to pay this?
[1:38:46] » But you you mentioned some level of like
phasing. Is that an idea? say like until
[1:38:53] they open as like a popup temporary use
for a little bit and then
[1:38:58] » um
>> they they they have short-term vision
[1:39:02] and long-term vision depending on how
things go. um you know um short term
[1:39:09] they want to just sell coffee and some
sandwiches and um in the future there's
[1:39:15] upstairs where there's a large office
and then also some other rooms that they
[1:39:23] thought you know in the future maybe we
can like have like rent it out or or
[1:39:30] maybe not rent it out but just like
space for businesses you you
[1:39:35] an extra room,
>> an extra room for, you know, my
[1:39:38] husband's meet with a client um over
coffee and a sandwich and have like a
[1:39:42] designated room that people could
reserve. Um, but for now they just want
[1:39:48] to open up to have coffee counter and a
deli counter
[1:39:55] with some tables
and then whatever brings the future to
[1:40:01] expand and whatever they may need to do
in future to expand.
[1:40:07] » Well, the concern is what happens if
they fail. You just have to get through
[1:40:10] the whole process without
doing anything.
[1:40:15] What do you mean? like like if they want
to do like a small scale open
[1:40:20] don't have to do the full development
because test run that test run fails
[1:40:24] then the building never got better
business failed and it never went
[1:40:28] through processes
>> right I'm failing to see the
[1:40:33] » I jumped in so I'm going to do the same
thing so I'm not
[1:40:37] » Yeah
[1:40:44] » business owners might but Yeah.
Municipalities. Yeah.
[1:40:47] » Yeah. Well, I don't think we need to
walk through hypotheticals, but um it's
[1:40:53] an important sub.
>> Yeah.
[1:40:56] » Um
>> so yeah, didn't want to keep it this
[1:41:00] long for a non topic thing, but um I
want to make sure we discuss this. So
[1:41:07] sounds like we're going to meet with
them actually. Um you know, some ideas.
[1:41:12] » Yeah. Uh in my mind it sounds like basic
application would be the handful of
[1:41:18] things that you are looking at as a two
obligation.
[1:41:32] » We need to know what they need relief
from.
[1:41:34] » Yeah. Yeah.
>> Because we don't have enough good
[1:41:36] information to make those turn
>> with standard. Yeah. with standard
[1:41:39] office with the Franklin, they submitted
everything without modifications. We
[1:41:43] told them what modifications would be
beneficial to them
[1:41:46] » and would be that they needed they
adjusted their site.
[1:41:51] » It's not like we're not trying to help
the program. Can't help you if you
[1:41:53] don't.
>> We told them what modifications would be
[1:41:56] helpful for them.
>> Yeah, we told them what modifications
[1:41:58] they need. They wanted to release
>> what they were doing
[1:42:02] » because they were obligated to do a lot
of stuff. They and they changed the site
[1:42:06] the site considerably um and eliminated
things and readjusted things, parking,
[1:42:14] exterior improvements, things of that.
>> So, can we come up with a kind of like
[1:42:21] detailed list of things?
>> Yes. Once we know what they're
[1:42:25] proposing, but I can't tell you what you
can or can't do unless I know what
[1:42:30] you're going to do and I can't design
for it. It's not mine.
[1:42:33] » No, I don't think you're saying what
would it require like
[1:42:37] » uh yeah something like that and just uh
as what we have discussed for example
[1:42:41] and we and we need some information from
architecture for like inner like design
[1:42:48] or something and also engineer for the
you know popping out or something like
[1:42:53] water and some other things and we just
at least you know at this moment I think
[1:42:59] that the owners will probably minim want
to know
[1:43:04] uh ext you know and they really want to
know like what exactly stuff that they
[1:43:10] need to work on uh I think that they I
don't understand their frustration and
[1:43:15] with the whole process because they are
not expert in this kind of field even
[1:43:20] probably they have I'm not saying that
[clears throat] I'm trying to kind of
[1:43:24] like say there something maybe they have
a bad or something like not like you
[1:43:28] guys you know so Right. [laughter] So,
and what I'm saying that they just like
[1:43:34] we know that they are trying to set up
and the coffee shop and the Danish shop
[1:43:38] or something and come down. So what
exactly and the stuff that and they need
[1:43:43] to prepare and and what will be the kind
of like process a little bit detail and
[1:43:50] uh we don't need to negatively and if we
can somehow like wave something and
[1:43:56] that's and I think that and the council
is open to that and for example I
[1:44:02] postpose some fee and if
uh uh if it's kind of too much we can
[1:44:07] you know lower that fee or something
like that and we can talk about this
[1:44:12] content but at least know we need to
give them something like you know they
[1:44:18] they know that what they need to do next
because right now I'm not so sure and
[1:44:24] what's going on with that they uh
communication I think that they and
[1:44:28] sometimes
uh I feel like they communication and
[1:44:33] kind of like got lost uh and uh I I'm
I'm not so sure what is happening Well,
[1:44:39] I everything that they gave me, I
responded to the issues that I saw so in
[1:44:44] writing. So, uh they do have that
information.
[1:44:48] » Some the lawyers up communication with
the lawyer is not misp.
[1:44:53] » Oh, okay. Yeah. The lawyers may be
sometimes they know. Um so you know that
[1:44:59] the the information that we have um we
have from past owners of the property
[1:45:06] isn't in in concert with what they're
providing either. So setbacks and
[1:45:11] property lines and like that just
different. Um, and you know, they do
[1:45:17] they do fix some of the things that we
call out, but other things are still the
[1:45:22] same way
and fix would be more expense. Um, and
[1:45:29] so I I think that some of those items
because the expense would be more to
[1:45:34] address them are just more. Um,
and again, you know, I mean, my
[1:45:41] interpretation of the code says they
have to do these things. His
[1:45:45] interpretation of the code says the same
thing that I've been over countless
[1:45:49] times. The solicitor's um interpretation
of the code, same thing. So, you know, I
[1:45:55] mean, they whoever's advising them isn't
giving them any meat to do it. But
[1:46:01] additionally, you know, if we feel that
this is too extensive for them, then
[1:46:06] maybe we need to deal with a change in
ordinance.
[1:46:10] And when you're talking about fees, I
mean, I guess we have a fee schedule. A
[1:46:14] developer does pay an escrow. It gets
drawn against. Nothing says the bureau
[1:46:18] needs to draw against the escrow.
It's council's will. That's not going to
[1:46:24] make Zach happy, not going to make, you
know, reach happy, but
[1:46:28] » we would be paying through the process
so that they're paying rent
[1:46:32] » at least for the reimburseable portion,
you know.
[1:46:36] » Yeah.
These fees cover our cost,
[1:46:40] » you know, otherwise otherwise the
>> they don't want it.
[1:46:45] » Otherwise, the residents are paying the
costs.
[1:46:47] » Yeah. Yeah. These these are passives
typically not property on this,
[1:46:52] » right? They're covering them.
>> Yeah. I mean just because next time when
[1:46:55] you guys meet and the owners and
and you may need to have some
[1:47:01] information, you know, and not like a
talking, you know, and we can have
[1:47:06] something like ethnicity, you know, in
writing and or something like little bit
[1:47:11] like information and ethnicity, you
know, because I'm I'm not the expert in
[1:47:15] this field. But right now I can
understand that at least there are three
[1:47:19] things that you know you have to ask
like you know expert to prepare like
[1:47:26] architect or engineer
or survey or something like that is
[1:47:31] something like and they we need to work
on so and give them like a kind of like
[1:47:39] some thumbs up that they need to if they
decide okay to be honest if they decide
[1:47:44] oh yeah we're not going to do anything.
So that means this mean nothing that the
[1:47:49] world can do. or not just one of can we
since sounds like we're meeting to
[1:47:55] actually
we have it sounds like three services
[1:48:03] what you need to get the information we
need to
[1:48:08] » okay I don't I mean I can't speak to our
spirit discussion there but I don't
[1:48:19] discuss
Everything's
[1:48:22] in the subdivision land and subdivision
ordinance lays out.
[1:48:28] » All right, I'll write something.
Yeah,
[1:48:33] » because I think that and sometimes you
know and we have ordinance but sometimes
[1:48:39] there are a lot of ordinance and with
that a lot of information you know and
[1:48:45] sometimes people get confused especially
if they are not you know expert so what
[1:48:54] we can do is just probably right now
some something like really important you
[1:49:00] know and for them to move on if if like
those are kind of things that is very
[1:49:06] less but if they decide yeah we're not
going to do that so that means and you
[1:49:11] know there's really nothing we can do
you know you know I mean just but if you
[1:49:15] go very detail like for example and you
have to uh design the parking lot and
[1:49:20] just like whether you have and 18 and
the parking spot or like 16 and that's
[1:49:26] that's really some sometimes you know
it's a I know but And uh to be honest,
[1:49:31] you know, when I look at this one,
if I'm an owner, I get tired of looking
[1:49:37] at this things. And so, uh it's just so
many things and the people kind of like,
[1:49:44] you know, they're like ah don't want to
do that. So, that's why I I mentioned
[1:49:48] that we give them some information. for
example, just that I like what is ide
[1:49:53] like like three things like and we just
discuss a lot and uh to see what the
[1:49:59] owners you know would like to do at
least know and if they if they say like
[1:50:05] okay we're not going to do that we don't
want to do at all and so that means
[1:50:12] technically we're done with this and
they
[1:50:15] » you're asking them to do land
development is that what you're saying
[1:50:17] » yeah yeah yeah something
the interview are the third things.
[1:50:23] » Yeah.
>> You'll be to do
[1:50:25] » you're saying the things that land
development would require. uh yeah at
[1:50:28] least you know something like you know
so something like that and just we have
[1:50:33] discussed and just mentioned because
that's okay and I think that the main
[1:50:39] one of the main and the reason is the
cost because nobody want to spend like
[1:50:45] six figure number of the uh money on
something you know and but if
[1:50:53] if it's necessary and you know that
every business can come with a risk
[1:50:57] So whether they know they would like to
take it or not and that's a good thing
[1:51:04] because I still believe that they the
costly is the main reason because so
[1:51:09] that's why they talk about the large
company and they can spend like like
[1:51:16] 2020 or $500,000 on something they big
company you know doesn't care but for
[1:51:24] you know small business owner I know
they care about the cost and whether
[1:51:30] they would like to spend that amount of
money on this kind of thing that
[1:51:35] problem.
[1:51:38] » Yeah, that's a
>> I think you so do that.
[1:51:44] You want me to write the bolts by what
you ask
[1:51:49] some guidance on like hey survey
architecture plans like standardized
[1:51:53] like what are the expectations right
[1:51:58] » I mean that's what that's what we've
been doing I've been responding in
[1:52:03] quoting from chapter verse my responses
>> okay is there is there an application on
[1:52:07] evidence
>> yes online the application
[1:52:13] email that you
do want to ask a general question. If
[1:52:17] Starbucks are coming to you that thing
would be discussion
[1:52:24] » I wouldn't like Starbucks that's that's
if they were the buyers of that property
[1:52:30] of other variance wouldn't we be
discussing
[1:52:34] discussing this?
[1:52:38] » No, I don't think so.
Yeah.
[1:52:42] Just curious because I mean I see this
as a community benefit which is why I'm
[1:52:46] discussing it
>> but also these I think those two things
[1:52:50] are definitely not apple to apples.
These are community members who live in
[1:52:54] Frankard and so I I sort of see it both
ways. When they're coming to council
[1:52:59] asking for help would I entertain that
from a large corporation? No. But the
[1:53:06] flip side of that is they are residents
and we all represent them. And so this
[1:53:11] process has been frustrating to them. Um
and so
[1:53:17] do we want to try to help where we can?
Yes.
[1:53:19] » Okay.
And we are trying to address
[1:53:30] » what happens when as your communities
grow and your bigger uh and your
[1:53:34] regulations to enforce the the large
companies kind of grow how we have done
[1:53:38] here, right? Uh the the private
businesses, the small business centers
[1:53:42] don't own their buildings anymore. The
developer builds the plaza and then the
[1:53:47] small businesses rent from them, right?
So, we're kind of at that plateau where
[1:53:52] our code requires a high standard. Uh,
and so sometimes it's not feasible for
[1:53:57] small business owners. Um, but there's
properties still be developed. Those
[1:54:01] small businesses still have
opportunities. It's just not the
[1:54:03] property owners.
See this is
[1:54:11] » you're saying and again I don't know if
this is central to the issue but you're
[1:54:14] saying a big corporation could come buy
that and small local businesses right
[1:54:18] there that have their
>> you still have you know a small non-pop
[1:54:23] business uh just in a different fashion
uh and we still enforce our normal
[1:54:28] ordinances as we
>> I can't imagine that's what most striker
[1:54:32] park residents would for whether we can
control capitalism, how it happens, you
[1:54:37] know,
>> and then that's where this board has the
[1:54:39] the option to change your codes
>> to guide the community how you want it.
[1:54:46] » But based on what we have now, there's
three professionals said this is what we
[1:54:50] believe is correct.
>> And I agree and I your point of view, I
[1:54:54] think their frustration lies and that
answer was different before the
[1:54:58] attorneys got involved. No, no. Yeah.
>> Insult to you, Max. Um, and now the
[1:55:05] answer is something different. And so
they they feel like the goalpost keeps
[1:55:09] moving. And I understand that
frustration. And I think now at least we
[1:55:13] can communicate clearly to them to say
these are the goalposts. This is maybe
[1:55:19] ways we're willing to work with you, but
we still need to like we did with the
[1:55:22] Franklin in the goal is compliance one
way or the other.
[1:55:28] So
>> all right. Very good. [laughter]
[1:55:43] » Anything else?
[1:55:48] » Um,
that's everything I have on my list.
[1:55:54] » Okay. All right. So, uh,
thank you so much. Thank you. Sorry. Um,
[1:56:00] take a session.
session.