1
00:00:00,599 --> 00:00:03,380
skate up

2
00:00:05,400 --> 00:00:12,840
too much to alligators 9250 with
literature roof I have several questions

3
00:00:10,980 --> 00:00:16,640
regarding the
procedure that's followed

4
00:00:15,240 --> 00:00:22,140
uh it's a
affirmation I guess but I'm a little bit

5
00:00:19,199 --> 00:00:25,400
more well first of all I wonder if the
application is available

6
00:00:25,439 --> 00:00:34,380
location by the applicant
Mr research is the application available

7
00:00:31,740 --> 00:00:38,399
the answer to that I don't know either I
mean

8
00:00:35,300 --> 00:00:43,260
well I believe that this request came in
directly to a building department Mr

9
00:00:40,800 --> 00:00:46,620
Finch's office and Mr Finch made the
request to Planning Commission I'll be

10
00:00:45,360 --> 00:00:49,100
happy to have that on behalf of the
property owners

11
00:00:49,200 --> 00:00:59,520
taking the form of the Africa the
African yeah the required Africa as the

12
00:00:56,160 --> 00:01:04,619
owner of the following property the name
press and Zoning class and proposaling

13
00:01:02,579 --> 00:01:10,100
class
the vicinity of the map is there a map

14
00:01:07,140 --> 00:01:16,920
available for the area
you know it's it says it requires I

15
00:01:13,500 --> 00:01:21,600
guess that the map and the
um all the information is available at

16
00:01:19,500 --> 00:01:26,700
the application is available at the
clerk's office yes the the math if I'm

17
00:01:24,299 --> 00:01:29,780
sorry the map and the uh the property
question has been available

18
00:01:30,000 --> 00:01:35,520
um
okay then

19
00:01:34,020 --> 00:01:39,960
let me just go through a couple of
things that I need wrapped some

20
00:01:37,500 --> 00:01:45,720
affirmation on
so the application is available but I

21
00:01:43,020 --> 00:01:50,700
think if we read the application we'll
find that

22
00:01:47,220 --> 00:01:53,659
section of zoning code 1201
applies here

23
00:01:58,860 --> 00:02:02,520
it's 1201.

24
00:02:04,020 --> 00:02:10,739
I guess there's been some controversial
Mr maestros about what 1201 really

25
00:02:08,340 --> 00:02:15,300
requires and I just want to and
note was I noticed the application here

26
00:02:12,959 --> 00:02:18,300
refers to the codified origins 1201 is
requirement

27
00:02:18,360 --> 00:02:24,379
and
hopefully that's why we're having a

28
00:02:21,780 --> 00:02:24,379
public hearing

29
00:02:25,520 --> 00:02:32,099
which 1201 requires
it's part of the ordinance it's in the

30
00:02:30,540 --> 00:02:35,420
legislation you look at that it will go
on the ballot the council approves

31
00:02:40,020 --> 00:02:47,040
it seems to be the authority
this is also Charter I mean the charter

32
00:02:44,819 --> 00:02:50,459
also parents staff which provides a
Planning Commission reviewed it November

33
00:02:48,840 --> 00:02:53,819
it's been sent to council and council's
right three times I think the reason

34
00:02:52,080 --> 00:02:58,019
that I'm bringing this up is there has
been controversy if you remember over

35
00:02:55,500 --> 00:03:02,819
the years 1201 requires this no it
doesn't require that but according to

36
00:03:00,120 --> 00:03:05,819
this it does require public hearing and
okay

37
00:03:06,540 --> 00:03:14,420
just to recap of what I understand
things to do now they say the current

38
00:03:11,580 --> 00:03:14,420
map is available

39
00:03:16,680 --> 00:03:19,760
is that the current map

40
00:03:20,159 --> 00:03:26,340
I don't believe that that one actually
is but the exhibits are attached if you

41
00:03:24,180 --> 00:03:31,379
go on your iPad all the the application
the requests the maps they're all

42
00:03:28,620 --> 00:03:36,060
attached to your legislation yeah yeah
very good now I understand

43
00:03:34,319 --> 00:03:38,940
and the reason I'm bringing the map into
play

44
00:03:37,319 --> 00:03:44,239
and I'll just get
okay so you know

45
00:03:40,860 --> 00:03:51,000
a lot of delay here
according to our current map as I see it

46
00:03:49,080 --> 00:03:54,260
and the latest map I can get a hold of
is dated

47
00:03:54,299 --> 00:04:00,420
as well
but in the area

48
00:03:58,319 --> 00:04:04,140
of C5 district is what we're talking
about

49
00:04:02,459 --> 00:04:08,700
there have been 60
66

50
00:04:05,760 --> 00:04:16,440
amendments to the code
and I don't think we voted on 60 houses

51
00:04:13,200 --> 00:04:21,540
I don't believe in that
um

52
00:04:18,299 --> 00:04:26,580
there have been originally there was 44
c5s on the old map and what I want to go

53
00:04:24,180 --> 00:04:31,500
back to is the reason I think this is
important is because it appears if we're

54
00:04:29,040 --> 00:04:34,320
using a map of 66 amendments that was
never simply objected

55
00:04:33,000 --> 00:04:37,500
to people
by this procedure that you're using

56
00:04:36,120 --> 00:04:43,759
tonight
which is a public hearing invoke

57
00:04:40,740 --> 00:04:43,759
and um

58
00:04:44,040 --> 00:04:51,900
I recognize that the city five districts
in my history I'm going to share it with

59
00:04:49,199 --> 00:04:58,820
you the C5 District was recommended by
the Planning Commission in 2007.

60
00:04:55,020 --> 00:04:58,820
and they outlined the area

61
00:05:01,740 --> 00:05:09,740
it's outlined and it was prepared by
Planning Commission January 25th 2007.

62
00:05:07,860 --> 00:05:15,300
it was approved
on April the 23rd two thousand

63
00:05:13,680 --> 00:05:24,240
seven
the map of May 18 2007 has all of this

64
00:05:19,380 --> 00:05:30,660
land rezoned C5 this is all full C5 this
is all new 60 Parsons

65
00:05:28,020 --> 00:05:36,960
I can't find an ordinance I can't find a
ballot and I can find anything on Walter

66
00:05:33,960 --> 00:05:42,800
drain report that identifies these
Parcels being rezoned by ordinance

67
00:05:40,259 --> 00:05:42,800
Terry

68
00:05:44,940 --> 00:05:54,180
all I'm asking is somebody have some
information that I can't get a hold of

69
00:05:50,460 --> 00:06:00,479
them and this is the procedure as I see
it that's followed in 2000 2012 and 13

70
00:05:56,940 --> 00:06:04,080
when we rezone land these are the
procedures that are followed the

71
00:06:02,220 --> 00:06:09,780
ordinance the Supreme Court of Elections
the ordinance the parcel number and

72
00:06:06,780 --> 00:06:13,380
address is all listed
without going to do is that a ballot

73
00:06:11,940 --> 00:06:17,699
that you have well this is from the
Board of Elections yeah these are the

74
00:06:15,120 --> 00:06:23,479
ballot issues okay you can't find a
valid issue for these 66 parcels

75
00:06:21,479 --> 00:06:23,479
um

76
00:06:25,319 --> 00:06:29,419
as I said the Walter green report

77
00:06:29,699 --> 00:06:38,300
is missing those 60
certified certified ordinances certified

78
00:06:35,460 --> 00:06:38,300
by wall of Missouri

79
00:06:38,759 --> 00:06:45,840
see I've been here a long time I see you
educate me on Walter green is it

80
00:06:43,440 --> 00:06:48,740
I'm not familiar with that term
s

81
00:06:48,860 --> 00:06:55,740
my fault I apologies I thought you were
talking specifically about some sort of

82
00:06:53,340 --> 00:07:00,680
standard that's the company that's the
publication of all the codified

83
00:06:57,240 --> 00:07:06,660
arguments my mistakes
the boundary changes according to

84
00:07:04,380 --> 00:07:09,560
ordinance
and um

85
00:07:12,419 --> 00:07:14,419
um

86
00:07:15,000 --> 00:07:20,780
that's what I'm here to find out you
know if you have any information

87
00:07:24,800 --> 00:07:30,500
relating to those topics so I'm going to
refer to my law director

88
00:07:30,960 --> 00:07:34,639
and we don't have an advantages

89
00:07:35,660 --> 00:07:41,300
I can share with you what I have
okay okay

90
00:07:43,400 --> 00:07:53,000
so I just want to uh
point that out

91
00:07:48,720 --> 00:07:53,000
before we can do any rezonings

92
00:07:56,580 --> 00:07:59,060
okay

93
00:08:00,120 --> 00:08:05,759
is there anybody else you'd like to
speak in regardless to more than 1226

94
00:08:04,319 --> 00:08:08,060
2000
winter

95
00:08:16,639 --> 00:08:23,240
704 Harbor Glen Drive Apartment 105 here
in clintonburg Ohio

96
00:08:26,280 --> 00:08:33,779
I've done some research also on this
because the comprehensive plan has been

97
00:08:31,440 --> 00:08:39,360
a key issue of topic here in town for
the last year or so during its update

98
00:08:36,320 --> 00:08:46,560
and as I understand this property is on
C5 probably was done back in 1989 it's

99
00:08:42,899 --> 00:08:50,760
one of the original C5 commercials
the basement

100
00:08:48,080 --> 00:08:55,920
voted on by the people in other areas
this is gaydosh

101
00:08:53,339 --> 00:08:58,620
I was looking into I also don't find
that on your Maps

102
00:08:58,019 --> 00:09:03,180
um
this property has been Zone C5 and the

103
00:09:01,200 --> 00:09:06,620
comprehensive plan is listed as a
transitional piece of property

104
00:09:07,560 --> 00:09:10,160
inspector

105
00:09:11,160 --> 00:09:20,100
I do understand the concept of
transitional zoning and the intrusion of

106
00:09:16,860 --> 00:09:23,100
a C3 zoning classification into the C5
mixed juice Pittsburgh

107
00:09:21,899 --> 00:09:30,420
uh
my opinion is is

108
00:09:27,000 --> 00:09:35,220
the property owner must be aware I'm
sure of the term caveat answers

109
00:09:32,839 --> 00:09:39,660
Let the Fire beware
they purchase this property

110
00:09:37,560 --> 00:09:45,720
therefore City Council in my opinion
should reject this zoning application if

111
00:09:43,800 --> 00:09:51,600
there is to be any validity to the
recently updated comprehensive plan

112
00:09:47,940 --> 00:09:54,899
which clearly shows that is a C5 mixed
juice District

113
00:09:52,680 --> 00:09:58,500
everybody in this room that I know of
the last year and a half that's all I've

114
00:09:56,760 --> 00:10:01,860
heard about is how we're going to have
our comprehensive plan and Downtown

115
00:10:00,540 --> 00:10:07,500
Development
now we're going to intrude the C3

116
00:10:04,320 --> 00:10:13,019
District into the N35 district and bring
that commercial Corridor right now

117
00:10:10,620 --> 00:10:16,320
not only that but also moving behind our
residential area

118
00:10:14,339 --> 00:10:21,240
the residentially zoned property
directly east of that uh this gentleman

119
00:10:18,720 --> 00:10:26,279
spoke in favor of it but he has his
issues with it when the traffic noise

120
00:10:23,580 --> 00:10:30,839
and headlights additional intrusions
into their property and the quietness of

121
00:10:28,320 --> 00:10:35,040
their area that they've grown to love in
their Community is going to be an issue

122
00:10:33,959 --> 00:10:37,339
then you'll probably hear a different
story

123
00:10:38,100 --> 00:10:44,339
it could possibly lead to evaluation
issues

124
00:10:42,060 --> 00:10:48,480
if the plan is simply abandoned
for any property owner is simply take a

125
00:10:46,740 --> 00:10:53,220
quick Dollar on the sale of their
property I'm at a loss in reading all of

126
00:10:51,959 --> 00:10:58,980
the minutes of the Planning Commission
meeting to hear our economic development

127
00:10:56,279 --> 00:11:02,640
director talked about this is primarily
for the sale of the Visa property with

128
00:11:00,839 --> 00:11:06,480
the property owner never even showed up
at the Planning Commission meeting

129
00:11:03,899 --> 00:11:11,540
because it was represented by our
director of Economic Development

130
00:11:08,399 --> 00:11:11,540
planning for our community

131
00:11:12,480 --> 00:11:18,360
Property Owners never made any comments
about that

132
00:11:16,200 --> 00:11:22,140
the property owners not wish to present
his case for resorting city council to

133
00:11:20,279 --> 00:11:27,240
reject this request
my opinion it bursts out unethical for

134
00:11:24,959 --> 00:11:31,440
our director of Economic Development to
represent a property own clearly is

135
00:11:29,700 --> 00:11:36,300
doing us to make money on the sales
property he's got somebody who wants to

136
00:11:33,899 --> 00:11:40,200
buy it and wants to have it rezoned and
they can give them an offer to continue

137
00:11:38,040 --> 00:11:43,380
to the rezoning process being taken
place

138
00:11:41,220 --> 00:11:48,320
I really do believe people in this
position should number one get their own

139
00:11:45,540 --> 00:11:48,320
independent Council

140
00:11:48,839 --> 00:11:54,720
personally pays substantial salary and
benefits for this director of a planning

141
00:11:53,100 --> 00:11:58,800
and development and it should represent
the city in my opinion understand they

142
00:11:57,120 --> 00:12:02,820
can talk about planning zoning
comprehensive plans but

143
00:12:00,720 --> 00:12:06,660
in no way represent them specific
Property Owners that's their obligation

144
00:12:04,620 --> 00:12:11,579
as a property owner
the application for rezoning was not

145
00:12:08,760 --> 00:12:16,440
accompanied by any deposit of funds to
betray the city's cost in this fair was

146
00:12:14,220 --> 00:12:20,339
absorbed by the city that's on the
application which I do have a copy of

147
00:12:18,420 --> 00:12:24,060
this evening so I did a records request
on it

148
00:12:21,360 --> 00:12:28,079
since the city does not own or have any
interest in this property to my

149
00:12:26,399 --> 00:12:33,959
knowledge you authorized the waving of
these fees Council I'll find that out

150
00:12:31,440 --> 00:12:38,220
diverges on the abuse of power
who in this community has right away

151
00:12:36,060 --> 00:12:43,019
fees can we get pardon me pick this way
the same way or you know who waves these

152
00:12:41,459 --> 00:12:45,300
things
um

153
00:12:43,860 --> 00:12:49,320
and if you're going to wave it just
because somebody uh took a piece of

154
00:12:47,760 --> 00:12:54,000
property that bought it using it for
business wants to rezone it at the very

155
00:12:52,320 --> 00:12:57,540
least if you're going to do that go back
five or ten years and find out who else

156
00:12:55,920 --> 00:13:01,680
may have paid for these rezoning
application fees and refunded to them at

157
00:13:00,240 --> 00:13:04,459
least they may not feel like they were
discriminated against

158
00:13:04,500 --> 00:13:09,540
um since this resorting application was
not unanimously recommended by the

159
00:13:08,279 --> 00:13:14,399
Planning Commission
in the Planning Commission units clearly

160
00:13:11,760 --> 00:13:18,480
shows this resorting appears to be I do
politically motivated more purely for

161
00:13:16,560 --> 00:13:23,160
the profitability and sales of property
since the city council must reject this

162
00:13:20,940 --> 00:13:27,980
request or admit to the city city of
that the city of twinsburg's integrity

163
00:13:25,380 --> 00:13:32,279
and planning is for sale
controlled by politics and not our

164
00:13:30,600 --> 00:13:36,300
comprehensive plan
if you're going to do that then you have

165
00:13:34,079 --> 00:13:41,519
for instance plan I understand there's a
plan subject to change

166
00:13:38,399 --> 00:13:45,779
it's a major issue if you're going to
have any integrity and what I've heard

167
00:13:44,339 --> 00:13:52,019
the family wants to do in Downtown
Development allowing people just to push

168
00:13:48,600 --> 00:13:57,779
C3 districts in from all directions
and if you're going to allow this

169
00:13:54,779 --> 00:14:03,480
property rezone C3 and no longer be the
transitional property to C5 you're just

170
00:14:01,320 --> 00:14:07,019
pushing that off onto the next property
owner and that next property owner is

171
00:14:05,579 --> 00:14:12,660
going to be entitled to come in and say
I want my results C3 too I would do the

172
00:14:10,680 --> 00:14:16,399
same thing
I would like to also verify that the

173
00:14:14,940 --> 00:14:21,600
public hearing this evening was
advertised and that adjacent property

174
00:14:19,680 --> 00:14:26,880
owners were notified for public hearing
take somebody ought to verify that

175
00:14:24,660 --> 00:14:31,800
Iowa City Council
deny the next request for these only to

176
00:14:29,519 --> 00:14:35,880
C3 on this corridor
has to ask yourself that question

177
00:14:33,660 --> 00:14:41,180
because proper planning and
discrimination did not go well together

178
00:14:38,060 --> 00:14:41,180
thank you

179
00:14:52,019 --> 00:14:54,500
oh

180
00:14:56,279 --> 00:15:05,220
I don't want to disagree with anything
that's been said there it's his opinion

181
00:15:01,740 --> 00:15:09,180
look we moved here 12 years ago we built
a house next to McDonald's

182
00:15:07,019 --> 00:15:14,339
we're building a we have a house that's
next to a daycare center this property

183
00:15:12,000 --> 00:15:17,120
has been commercially used next to our
property

184
00:15:20,279 --> 00:15:25,680
we don't have any problems with
McDonald's we aren't going to have any

185
00:15:23,820 --> 00:15:28,820
problems with the daycare center we
aren't going to have any problems with

186
00:15:26,940 --> 00:15:34,220
what can be developed on this project
the fact of the matter is is that your

187
00:15:31,500 --> 00:15:40,079
ordinances as they stand right now
provide protection between commercial

188
00:15:37,380 --> 00:15:46,019
and residential zones and these aren't
named pamby

189
00:15:41,779 --> 00:15:52,019
protections for example Lighting on any
commercial property has to be limited to

190
00:15:49,199 --> 00:15:56,220
the lighting on that property it can't
go over to order it doesn't matter

191
00:15:54,660 --> 00:16:04,139
second
no commercial dumpster no commercial

192
00:16:00,740 --> 00:16:08,040
disposal can be within 50 feet of any
residential property next to a

193
00:16:06,300 --> 00:16:13,320
commercial Zone
third

194
00:16:09,300 --> 00:16:19,800
there are mounding and screening and
fencing and wall requirements in the

195
00:16:16,560 --> 00:16:26,279
ordinances as they exist right now
between residential and Commercial zones

196
00:16:23,100 --> 00:16:32,160
fences eight feet high in some cases
mounting four feet high I'm up to 12.

197
00:16:30,480 --> 00:16:34,680
we know what we're doing where we're
living

198
00:16:33,120 --> 00:16:40,500
and what we were doing when we bought
the property and we're confident of what

199
00:16:37,680 --> 00:16:44,940
we've seen in the past 12 years that
whether it's the city or the adjoining

200
00:16:42,959 --> 00:16:49,320
landowners they're going to do the right
thing being nice to a residential

201
00:16:47,279 --> 00:16:54,060
property so I think that some of the
concerns that were expressed might look

202
00:16:51,120 --> 00:16:58,680
good in generalities I'm dealing with
specifics that live within every day and

203
00:16:56,519 --> 00:17:03,320
I know what I've seen I know what I
experience and it's been a damn good

204
00:17:00,779 --> 00:17:03,320
experience

205
00:17:06,660 --> 00:17:09,860
speak on this topic

206
00:17:09,900 --> 00:17:16,740
Mr maestros just if I could maybe try to
clarify some of the issues that were

207
00:17:14,760 --> 00:17:21,439
raised first of all the comment was made
that this property has been sown C5

208
00:17:18,360 --> 00:17:21,439
since 1989

209
00:17:23,579 --> 00:17:30,480
and I think
um we'll have to look at this but Mrs

210
00:17:28,380 --> 00:17:35,160
gayash made mention of 60 some of my
properties that were rezoned in a period

211
00:17:32,760 --> 00:17:40,500
of time I my guess is and I'll confirm
this is that when the city adopted the

212
00:17:38,220 --> 00:17:44,480
C5 zoning designation
I want to say it's been within the last

213
00:17:42,059 --> 00:17:49,260
five to seven years that that
C5 was established and that was

214
00:17:47,640 --> 00:17:53,700
established and established in certain
downtown districts which covered my

215
00:17:51,299 --> 00:17:56,700
guess is these same 67 properties is
probably the number of properties that

216
00:17:55,740 --> 00:18:01,980
were
covered by that but prior to that we

217
00:17:58,860 --> 00:18:06,360
didn't have the mixed use designations
it was a new mixed-use designation as

218
00:18:04,740 --> 00:18:08,400
adopted by the erect Murder By The
Planning Commission went through that

219
00:18:07,440 --> 00:18:12,780
process
when that destination came

220
00:18:11,280 --> 00:18:16,520
and like I said I'll try to find out the
date but my guess is within the last

221
00:18:17,100 --> 00:18:25,260
one and this property was
designated C5 at that time so and and

222
00:18:23,400 --> 00:18:27,720
I'll check Mrs gay I should be able to
check to see if that's when that

223
00:18:26,400 --> 00:18:30,380
happened but my
my thoughts

224
00:18:35,520 --> 00:18:41,940
I would also like to mention that
although the applicant was not at the

225
00:18:39,600 --> 00:18:45,900
Planning Commission meeting that with or
attention to the law director and myself

226
00:18:43,440 --> 00:18:48,679
and discussed the sampling and the
requested company

227
00:18:49,260 --> 00:18:53,179
okay Lauren safe stock again

228
00:18:53,760 --> 00:19:02,460
respectfully disagree with your law
director I think he goes back to 1989

229
00:18:58,919 --> 00:19:08,100
you will find that C5 is always and a
limited amount of regulations existed

230
00:19:04,679 --> 00:19:13,440
the personal property is on your map
1989 is C5

231
00:19:10,740 --> 00:19:17,460
your C5 mixed use districts didn't come
along until a considerable number of

232
00:19:15,059 --> 00:19:22,020
years later and therefore I just want
the record to be clear that needs to be

233
00:19:19,860 --> 00:19:26,340
verified in the fraud record can prove
that any substantiate that the council

234
00:19:24,120 --> 00:19:30,799
so you can have all the information and
active form on this issue thank you

235
00:19:37,760 --> 00:19:46,679
The Establishment for the regulations
for the ce5 district the ordinance was

236
00:19:43,140 --> 00:19:51,419
clearly before establishing regulations
the ordinance was just to establish

237
00:19:48,660 --> 00:19:54,179
regulations not to amend the man
your resolution to the Board of

238
00:19:52,980 --> 00:19:59,880
Elections
however was altered to include the net

239
00:19:57,360 --> 00:20:03,419
so the ordinance did not provide for
amending the map the resolution said and

240
00:20:02,520 --> 00:20:10,200
the map
and the map of

241
00:20:06,660 --> 00:20:14,940
to some history where Jordan 69 was
passed I know there were five six

242
00:20:12,600 --> 00:20:22,919
Apostles of land that were rezoned based
upon that order

243
00:20:17,720 --> 00:20:27,360
Ed by the courts 69. more than 69.
000

244
00:20:25,080 --> 00:20:31,860
feet
um

245
00:20:28,620 --> 00:20:37,559
anyway it was
and another point I want to make is I

246
00:20:34,140 --> 00:20:42,660
mean you can find all this out virgin 69
was establishing the regulations for the

247
00:20:39,600 --> 00:20:47,000
C5 District we call that Gary I was in
public hearing and I said what does

248
00:20:44,400 --> 00:20:47,000
organization

249
00:20:53,539 --> 00:21:01,080
at the time they questioned it in
October for the election and that was

250
00:20:59,400 --> 00:21:05,600
told and it was a matter of fact the
bulletin leader colony and they said are

251
00:21:04,200 --> 00:21:11,240
people there
and Mr maestros and Mr Finch both

252
00:21:08,580 --> 00:21:11,240
confirmed

253
00:21:21,200 --> 00:21:31,039
and the six Parcels of freezoning you
are establishing the map

254
00:21:27,740 --> 00:21:37,200
you're certifying commands
that was the opinion that if you approve

255
00:21:33,960 --> 00:21:42,419
the Morgan 69 and the six Parcels that
were ordered by the court you are

256
00:21:39,000 --> 00:21:47,039
approving the map as proposed by the
Planning Commission it's only a proposal

257
00:21:44,400 --> 00:21:51,179
as a matter of fact I go a step further
I was even in caution by one of the

258
00:21:49,740 --> 00:21:55,559
planning
oh

259
00:21:52,500 --> 00:22:00,360
we have a voted on this we proposed it
and three weeks after we proposed a

260
00:21:58,200 --> 00:22:04,320
council published around with the zones
already there

261
00:22:01,919 --> 00:22:07,320
so I mean that was a long time ago I
didn't make an issue of it because I

262
00:22:05,880 --> 00:22:12,419
thought well we'll work it out it'll
work itself out but it's not working at

263
00:22:10,380 --> 00:22:16,980
something and
I have to be here because procedures and

264
00:22:15,179 --> 00:22:21,260
rezonings and
you know my complaints

265
00:22:21,299 --> 00:22:29,220
you get it disgruntled
development

266
00:22:25,440 --> 00:22:33,419
or get one someday we'll get one we have
currently a property that's in front of

267
00:22:31,440 --> 00:22:38,700
us with legislation we're here for a
public hearing so

268
00:22:34,740 --> 00:22:43,140
that property is currently zoned C5 do
you agree with that

269
00:22:40,080 --> 00:22:46,860
yes and Facebook has been applied for
and improved the recommended by Planning

270
00:22:45,960 --> 00:22:50,640
Commission
that it'd be put on a ballot for a

271
00:22:49,200 --> 00:22:55,380
change in zone
are we okay with that no but I guess I'm

272
00:22:53,159 --> 00:22:59,480
okay with the whole thing I don't know
one way I just feel like that's why

273
00:22:57,539 --> 00:23:04,919
we're here tonight
this Parsley was land and having public

274
00:23:02,640 --> 00:23:10,460
hearing
on this particular issue

275
00:23:06,780 --> 00:23:10,460
you're using the face map

276
00:23:12,900 --> 00:23:16,400
of a certified map

277
00:23:17,039 --> 00:23:25,380
if it's a certified map
fed certified do what you have to do but

278
00:23:23,100 --> 00:23:30,500
I'm questioning whether or not
they can be certified if it hasn't been

279
00:23:27,659 --> 00:23:30,500
adopted by

280
00:23:30,840 --> 00:23:35,780
vote
that's my only concern

281
00:23:38,580 --> 00:23:40,580
s

282
00:23:42,360 --> 00:23:48,840
if this time I'm closing the public here
of

283
00:23:46,919 --> 00:23:52,140
negative if anybody would like to speak
in the