[00:00:02]
HERE. OKAY, EVERYBODY, IS THIS ON? IS THIS ON? OKAY. HELLO, EVERYONE. I'M CALLING THIS
[I. CALL TO ORDER, CALL OF ROLL]
MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO ORDER. IT'S 4 P.M. ON MARCH 12TH. AND WITH US, WE HAVE JEFF HEALEY, MYSELF, LINDA ERD, GENE HARRIS, ENRIQUE LOPEZ, AND ANNE CLEATOR.AND I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM DAVE STEWART, BUT I. OH, HE'S HERE SOMEWHERE. OKAY. SOMEWHERE.
OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY CITIZEN COMMENT CARDS THAT HAVE BEEN TURNED IN? NO, NO. OKAY, THEN
[III.1. Routine Reports from City staff.]
LET'S MOVE ON TO ROUTINE REPORTS FROM CITY STAFF. AND THAT WOULD BE MISS STROHMEYER.PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AT THIS TIME. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF AN UPDATE WE CAN GIVE.
WE'RE STILL WORKING THROUGH EVERYTHING. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE CODE REORGANIZATION SUBCOMMITTEE IS BACK ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA NEXT WEEK FOR FINALIZATION ON THE GUIDELINES THERE. AND OF. AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN WORKING THROUGH SOME LOGISTICS WITH TREE ORDINANCES AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE ON OUR AGENDA. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING NEW TO REPORT. WE'RE JUST CONTINUING TO WORK THROUGH THESE PROCESSES. THANK YOU. AND MR. PRINCE, DO YOU HAVE A REPORT FROM THE CITY COUNCIL? I,
[III.2. Routine Reports from City Council Liaison.]
I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS TO MAKE. ONE IS A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT MARK DOUGLAS, MYSELF, HARMONY MACDONALD, WILL BE PLAYING AT THE BUNKER TOMORROW NIGHT. SO THIS IS A PUBLIC COMMUNITY INTEREST ANNOUNCEMENT, I GUESS. OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE SMOKIN ARMADILLOS. SO I INVITE YOU ALL TO COME. YOU DIDN'T SAY THE TIME THAT YOU'RE STARTING 6 P.M. TO 8 P.M. AT THE BUNKER AT THE VISTA GOLF COURSE. AND THEN THE SECOND THING IS ON. I KNOW THERE'S, I THINK MAYBE SOME CONFUSION AROUND PUBLIC HEARING. ITEM 5.1. AND THERE WAS EXTENSIVE CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION ON THAT. SO WHEN WE GET THERE, IF APPROPRIATE.LINDA, I CAN I CAN MAKE SOME BACKGROUND COMMENTS OF, YOU KNOW, WHERE WHERE THIS CAME FROM, FROM CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF, AND I CAN TEAM UP ON THAT. OKAY. WELL, THAT WOULD
[V.1. Open A Public Hearing For The Discussion, Consideration And Possible Action For An Ordinance Of The City Of Lago Vista, Texas, Amending Chapter 14 Also Known As “Zoning Ordinance” Of The Code Of Ordinances, Specifically Exhibit A, Part Iv, Table B (Use Table), By Adding A New Use Category For Indoor Inventory Storage And Allowing Such Use In All Commercial Zoning Districts; Providing For Purpose And Intent; Providing The Amendment; Providing For Use Description; Providing For A Finding Of Fact Clause; Providing For Severability; Providing For A Repealer; Providing An Effective Date; Providing For A Projects In Transition Clause; Providing For A Codification And Publication Clause And Providing An Open Meetings Clause.]
THAT IS NEXT UP ON THE AGENDA. SO I WILL MOVE ON TO THAT AGENDA ITEM. OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION. DO WE HAVE ANY ANY COMMENTS TURNED IN FOR THAT EITHER? NO. OKAY. SO I WILL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION FOR AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA VISTA, TEXAS, AMENDING CHAPTER 14, ALSO KNOWN AS ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, SPECIFICALLY, EXHIBIT A PART PART FOUR. TABLE B USE TABLE BY ADDING A NEW USE CATEGORY FOR INDOOR INVENTORY STORAGE AND ALLOWING SUCH USE IN ALL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. PROVIDING FOR PURPOSE AND INTENT. PROVIDING THE AMENDED AMENDMENT. PROVIDING FOR USE. DESCRIPTION. PROVIDING FOR A FINDING OF FACT CLAUSE. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. PROVIDING FOR REPEALER. PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. PROVIDING FOR A PROJECT AND TRANSITION CLAUSE. PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION AND PUBLICATION CLAUSE AND PROVIDING AN OPEN MEETING CLAUSE. AND I THINK ALL OF YOU, YOU WILL FIND THAT MATERIAL HAS BEEN PRINTED OUT FOR YOU PERTAINING TO THIS AGENDA ITEM.SO THERE IS THE THE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION TO, TO FORWARD THIS ITEM TO, TO FORWARD THIS ITEM TO PLANNING AND ZONING. SO. JORDAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE A STAFF REPORT OR WOULD YOU LIKE MR. PRINCE TO TALK ABOUT HIS COUNCIL INPUT FIRST? SO FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, THERE WAS AN IDENTIFIED GAP WITHIN OUR USE TABLE FOR THIS INDOOR INVENTORY STORAGE. WHAT IT REALLY COMES DOWN TO IS WE HAVE RETAIL, WHICH IS DEFINED AS CUSTOMER SERVICE FORWARD FACING.
YOU GO IN, YOU CAN BUY SOMETHING, YOU CAN WALK OUT SIMILAR TO ANY GENERAL RETAIL THAT WE HAVE. AND THEN WE HAVE A STORAGE CATEGORY, WHICH ISN'T CLEARLY DEFINED AS FAR AS TO WHAT IT IS. AND SO THE THOUGHT IS THAT IT CAN BE OUTDOOR, INDOOR, IT CAN BE COVERED, IT CAN BE NOT COVERED. AND THERE'S CAVEATS THROUGHOUT THE CODE THAT, YOU KNOW, DICTATE SOME OF THAT. BUT THERE WAS THIS GAP IN INDOOR INVENTORY STORAGE. AND SO THROUGH CONVERSATIONS, STAFF HAD PROPOSED SOME KIND OF DIRECTION ON WHICH WAY TO GO TO ADDRESS THIS GAP. AND THAT'S WHERE IT GOT SENT TO COUNCIL. AND SO I'M GOING TO LET MR. PRINCE. YEAH, THAT'S THAT'S GOOD BACKGROUND. SO I WOULD SAY THAT IN LOOKING AT THIS APPLICATION AND THE POTENTIAL
[00:05:06]
USE OF THE PROPERTY, THERE WERE SEVERAL THINGS THAT COUNCIL DISCUSSED AND AGREED ON. NUMBER ONE, IT SEEMED LIKE WHAT THEY WERE WANTING TO DO WAS APPROPRIATE USE OF THE PROPERTY AND WAS IN FACT, LESS DISRUPTIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAN OTHER BUSINESSES WHICH ARE ALLOWED UNDER C ONE, WHICH IS THE EXISTING ZONING. THE OTHER OBSERVATION WE HAD THAT THE APPLICANT SAID, WELL, IF WE CAN'T DO THIS AS C ONE, THEN WE'LL APPLY FOR A CHANGE TO C TWO. WE FELT WE AS COUNCIL FELT THAT IT DIDN'T SEEM THAT MAKING THAT AC2 PROPERTY SO THAT IN THE FUTURE IT COULD BE SOLD AND BE TURNED INTO SOMETHING MUCH MORE THAN C ONE. THAT DIDN'T SEEM APPROPRIATE EITHER. AND STAFF HELPED US, YOU KNOW, OUT OF THE CONUNDRUM BY SAYING, WELL, WE COULD CREATE A NEW CATEGORY OF SORT OF A SPECIAL TYPE OF STORAGE, WHICH IS WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT, AND MAKE THAT AN ADDITIONAL ALLOWED USE FOR C ONE. AND THEN IF THAT'S ADDED TO THE TABLE, THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THIS BY RIGHT, IF YOU WILL, RIGHT AS AS ONE OF THE ALLOWED USES. NOW, ONE OF THE IMPORTANT THINGS FOR YOU ALL TO CONSIDER IS IS THERE ANYTHING THAT STAFF AND COUNCIL DIDN'T THINK ABOUT? YOU KNOW, ARE WE ARE WE DOING SOMETHING HERE THAT HAS SOME POTENTIAL SIDE EFFECTS WE MAY NOT HAVE CONSIDERED YET, BUT, BUT THAT WAS SORT OF THE BACKGROUND WAS WE FELT LIKE THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS AS THEY DESCRIBED IT, WAS REALLY NOT MORE DISRUPTIVE THAN OTHERS ALLOWED C ONE USES. AND IT JUST IT'S IT'S NOT CURRENTLY DESCRIBED IN THE TABLE AT ALL. AND SO BY PROPOSING TO ADD IT TO THE C ONE USE TABLE, THAT THAT SEEMED TO SOLVE THE DILEMMA FOR THIS THIS CASE. SO THAT'S HOPEFULLY HELPFUL BACKGROUND AND I'LL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY. AND I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, JORDAN, BECAUSE ON THE ON THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE, THE THE COUNCIL DIRECTED THIS, THE USE TO BE ADDED TO C1, C2 AND C3, C3 CATEGORY. AND ON THE.THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS ADDED TO THE ORDINANCE, IT ADDED TWO MORE CATEGORIES THAN. THAT IS.
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
IT SHOULD JUST BE ONE, TWO AND THREE. THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL THAT WE HAVE ALREADY PERMITS THIS TO AN EXTENT, AND IT WOULD BE GEARED MORE TOWARDS OUTDOOR STORAGE ANYWAYS. AND SO THE INTENT WAS THAT ONE, TWO, THREE IF THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO MAKE IT ACROSS, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY AN OPTION. BUT THE THE MOVEMENT FROM COUNCIL WAS FOR C ONE, TWO, THREE AND THAT WAS THE INTENT. SO THE ORDINANCE THAT'S IN THE PACKET REFERS TO THIS AMENDMENT AMENDED DOCUMENT. AND SO THIS AMENDED DOCUMENT THAT SHOWS MORE THAN C ONE, C2 AND C3.
THEN WE WOULD NEED TO MAKE A MOTION ELIMINATING SOME OF THESE CATEGORIES. NO. SO THE ORDINANCE ITSELF IS NOT REFERRING TO AN EXHIBIT IN OUR CODE. OUR USE TABLE IS REFERENCED AS EXHIBIT A. AND SO THE THE ORDINANCE IS JUST SAYING WE'RE ADDING THIS USE.
IT'S ALLOWED IN C ONE, TWO AND THREE. HERE'S OUR DEFINITION OF WHAT THIS IS WHICH WOULD GET ADDED TO THE CODE AS WELL. BUT IT'S NOT REFERENCING AN EXHIBIT. THIS IS THE ORDINANCE ITSELF IS THE EXHIBIT. IF THAT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO INCLUDE THE TABLE BECAUSE THE TABLE IS NOT THE BEST. AND SO THIS IS A CLEAN WAY TO DO IT WHERE WE'RE ADDING A CATEGORY TO THE TABLE AND WE CAN TRACK EVERYTHING, BUT WE'RE NOT HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT FORMATTING A TABLE FOR THE CODIFIERS. SO ORDINANCE IS CLEAR THAT IT'S JUST C ONE, TWO AND THREE. YES. AND IF IT'S NOT CLEAR BY ANY MEANS, MORE THAN HAPPY TO ADDRESS THAT BEFORE IT GETS FORWARDED TO COUNCIL.
COUNCIL. BUT THAT WAS THE INTENT IS THAT WE'RE ADDING THE CATEGORY, WE'VE DEFINED THE CATEGORY AND WE'VE IDENTIFIED THE THE ZONING THAT IT'S ALLOWED IN. AND THAT IS OUR EXHIBIT. IT'S NOT AN EXHIBIT. THERE IS NOT NECESSARILY A RED LINE TO BE HAD BECAUSE WE'RE ADDING A CATEGORY AND WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING. AND SO THE CLEANEST WAY TO DO IT IS BY JUST PLAIN ORDINANCE. BUT OUR ZONING CODE REFERENCES EXHIBIT A, WHICH IS THE USE TABLE. OKAY.
[00:10:01]
THE ORDINANCE HERE SAYS AND PUBLISH THE ATTACHED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES, THE ATTACHED AMENDMENTS. AND SO THEN I SENT YOU AN EMAIL AND SAID, PLEASE PROVIDE US THE AMENDMENTS THAT WILL BE ATTACHED. AND THEN THIS IS WHAT WE GOT. SECTION TWO IN THE ORDINANCE WHERE IT SAYS AMENDMENT IS THE ATTACHED AMENDMENT. OKAY, WELL, THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY ATTACHED. IT'S IN THE AMENDMENT. SO AND WE CAN CLEAR THAT UP ON THE LANGUAGE OF THE ORDINANCE ITSELF. BUT THE INTENT WAS NOT TO SEND IT WITH AN ATTACHMENT. THE INTENT IS TO SEND IT WITH THE LANGUAGE BAKED INTO THE ORDINANCE ITSELF. OKAY. THEN. THEN WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS REVISE THE LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE THAT'S IN THE PACKET. OKAY. JEAN, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT? YEAH. WHAT YOU SAID GOES RIGHT INTO WHAT I WANTED TO SAY. THE ORDINANCE STATES ALLOWING SUCH USE, SUCH USE IN ALL COMMERCIAL ZONING. WELL, THERE ARE MORE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS THAN C ONE, TWO AND THREE. THERE'S CA, THERE'S CR TWO, THERE'S CM. SO THE WORDING IN THE ORDINANCE HAS AN ISSUE RIGHT THERE I THINK. AND THE OTHER THING IS THE THING THAT THAT WASN'T EVEN WHAT I INITIALLY WAS GOING TO BE. I THOUGHT I'D TALK ABOUT TONIGHT, BUT I JUST LOOKED AT THAT AGAIN. BUT THE OTHER THING IS WE HAVE A LAND OR A STRUCTURE USE TITLED WAREHOUSE AND A WAREHOUSE. ACCORDING TO MERRIAM-WEBSTER'S. IS A STRUCTURE OR ROOM FOR THE STORAGE OF MERCHANDISE OR COMMODITIES. A COMMODITY IS SOMETHING USEFUL OR VALUED. SO THESE DECORATIONS ARE SOMETHING USEFUL AND VALUE THAT ARE GOING TO BE STORED IN A WAREHOUSE. WHY NOT JUST PUT AN EXTRA LITTLE V IN WAREHOUSE? TO ALLOW, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE THAT WAREHOUSE APPLY TO C1 AS WELL AS C3 OR ANY OF THE OTHER COMMERCIAL USAGES THAT YOU MIGHT FEEL NEED TO BE UPDATED. INSTEAD OF ADDING ANOTHER LINE TO OUR CODE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO STREAMLINE AND DO ALL THIS STUFF, JUST ADD A COUPLE LITTLE CHARACTERS ON THE TABLE AND THE TABLE IS GOING TO GET UPDATED. SO IT'S KIND OF ACCOMPLISHED THE WHOLE THING. SO I BELIEVE THE CONCERN WAS THE FACT THAT WAREHOUSE IS AMBIGUOUS AS FAR AS OUTDOOR INDOOR STORAGE AND THE SCALE AND COMPLEXITY OF WAREHOUSE CAN BE. I DON'T KNOW.IF THERE WOULD BE CAVEATS TO HAVING THAT, BECAUSE ONE IS OUR LOWEST COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT. WE WANT IT TO BE LOW INTENSITY. WE WANT IT TO BE LOW IN SCALE. WE WANT IT TO BLEND WITH NEIGHBORHOOD AND TRANSITION BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOOD AND C2. AND SO WAREHOUSE HAS BIGGER IMPLICATIONS, INCLUDING THAT OUTDOOR STORAGE. AND SO I THINK THE CONCERN CAME FROM THE FACT THAT THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE STRICTLY INDOOR. YOU DON'T SEE IT. YOU DON'T HAVE HEAVY TRAFFIC. WAREHOUSE TYPICALLY ALLOWS FOR HEAVY TRUCK TRAFFIC AS WELL. DELIVERIES IN AND OUT AT A LARGER SCALE THAN AN INDOOR INVENTORY, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF. I'M NOT SURE IF WAREHOUSE IS. A MORE SIMPLE WAY TO DO IT, OR IF IT WOULD POTENTIALLY CAUSE MORE ISSUES TRYING TO WANT TO SEE ONE, BECAUSE THERE'S THE INTENT IS TO NOT NECESSARILY BEEF UP WHAT IS ALLOWED IN C1, BUT COVER A GAP THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN OUR CODE. AND SO I THINK THIS WAS THAT HAPPY MEDIUM IN THEORY. OKAY, I KEEP TALKING BECAUSE, OKAY, THERE'S ANOTHER CATEGORY CALLED OPEN STORAGE. AS FAR AS A STRUCTURE USE, I DON'T HAVE THE ALL THE DEFINITIONS FOR THE VARIOUS THINGS, BUT, AND I THOUGHT THERE WAS ONE TITLED OUTSIDE STORAGE, BUT I FOUND ONLY OPEN STORAGE. SO IT'S. AND I WOULD. CONSIDER OPEN STORAGE, MEANING OUTSIDE IT'S OPEN, WHEREAS A WAREHOUSE IS A STRUCTURE. OKAY. TO GO BACK TO THE AMENDMENT ON THE ORDINANCE.
OKAY. SO SECTION EIGHT REFERS TO PUBLISH THE ATTACHED AMENDMENTS. BUT SECTION TWO SAYS AS REFLECTED IN EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO. AND THERE IS NO EXHIBIT A TO THIS ORDINANCE,
[00:15:11]
WE CAN CLEAN THAT UP EITHER DIRECTION. IF WE WANT TO ATTACH AN EXHIBIT, THAT'S FINE. WE CAN ATTACH THE EXHIBIT AFTER WE'VE DETERMINED THE ONE, TWO AND THREE, OR WE CAN FIX THE ORDINANCE TO REMOVE ANY REFERENCE TO EXHIBIT A IT. EITHER WAY, IT'LL WORK WITH THE CODIFIERS. AGREED. OR. OR JUST WHERE IT SAYS ALL, JUST SAY WITHIN C ONE, C TWO, C THREE.JUST SLIP THAT OUT AND REMOVE THE EXHIBIT REFERENCES EITHER DIRECTION. WE CAN WE CAN MODIFY IT. THOSE ARE MINOR CHANGES. IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS. DO WE HAVE A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. OKAY. I MOVE THAT THE AMENDMENT BE AMENDED TO SET FORTH EXACTLY WHICH COMMERCIAL ZONES ARE TO BE IMPACTED, CHANGED, AND TO GET RID OF THE EXHIBIT A PART, BECAUSE THIS REALLY IS ONLY REFERRING TO TABLE B, AND THAT INSTEAD OF ADDING A NEW STRUCTURE, USE JUST ADD ADDITIONAL TICK MARKS ON THE EXISTING WAREHOUSE TO COVER C1 AND C3. BECAUSE C2 AND C, A FOR THAT MATTER, ARE ALREADY COVERED BY WAREHOUSE. IS THAT THE BRIEFEST MOTION YOU CAN MAKE ON THIS? TRYING TO COVER IT ALL? HEY, I'M NOT SAYING IT'S ENGRAVED IN STONE, I HAVE ONE. IT'S OPEN TO DISCUSSION. COMMENT YOU HAVE TWO SECTION TWOS IN YOUR. NOW THEREFORE. SO YOU HAVE A LITTLE CLEANUP TO DO. YEAH, THERE'S A LOT TO DO. YEAH.
WELL, CHAIR, MAY I MAKE A COMMENT? I UNDERSTAND YOUR MOTION, JEAN. IT WAS COMPLICATED, BUT YOUR MOTION DOES NOT ADDRESS THE CONCERN THAT COUNCIL HAD, WHICH IS IF WE JUST ADD THIS CATEGORY TO C1, WE'RE AFRAID WE'RE OPENING A CATEGORY THAT IS TOO HEAVY FOR C1. AND SO WE WERE LOOKING TO STAFF AND PLANNING AND ZONING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT IS A LIGHTER WEIGHT VERSION. NOW, MAYBE WE'VE GOT IT WRONG, BUT I MEAN, THAT WAS THE CONCERN. AND YOUR MOTION IS IS IS MERGING THE TWO CATEGORIES INTO ONE. IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY. WELL, I'M JUST I JUST AND I'M NOT SAYING I'VE GOT THE ENTIRE PICTURE BECAUSE I WASN'T AT THIS MEETING. I'M NOT PRIVY TO EVERYTHING. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE A WAREHOUSE IN MY MIND COVERS IT. AND THE BRAND NEW ONE TO ADD IN TO SOMETHING WE'RE TRYING TO TRIM DOWN AND STREAMLINE. I JUST DON'T FEEL IT'S NECESSARY. I WOULD LIKE TO AMEND YOUR MOTION, ALTHOUGH I DON'T KNOW IF MY MOTION IS A MOTION TO AMEND, IT'S PROPER OR NOT. SO I'LL ASK THE PARLIAMENTARIAN HERE. YOU CAN'T. AND WHEN A MOTION IS MADE, I BELIEVE THE THE PROCEDURE IS IT FIRST NEEDS TO BE SECONDED OR IT DIES. OKAY. AND IF IT'S SECONDED, THEN AMENDMENTS CAN BE REQUESTED TO THE TO THE MOTION. OKAY. SO I GUESS DO WE WANT TO PUSH YOUR BUTTON PLEASE. SO I GUESS THE QUESTION IS DO WE WANT TO REWORD THE MOTION OR JUST SECONDED. SO ENRIQUE, I'LL SAY AGAIN, I THINK THAT IF IT'S NOT SECONDED THEN THE FLOOR IS OPEN TO A DIFFERENT MOTION. BUT BUT I THINK FIRST OF ALL, IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION AS MADE? AND IF IF THERE IS A SECOND TO THE MOTION IS MADE, THEN DISCUSSION CAN BE HAD ABOUT AMENDING THE MOTION. CAN YOU REPEAT THE MOTION? LET ME SEE IF I CAN MAKE IT MORE. I MOVE THAT INSTEAD OF ADDING A NEW LAND USE OR STRUCTURE, USE INDOOR STORAGE THAT THE EXISTING WAREHOUSE STRUCTURE USED BE UPDATED. TO REFLECT THE ADDITION OF C1. AND C3 AS APPROVED USES. IS THERE A SECOND? OKAY, IF THERE IS NO SECOND, THE MOTION DIES. I'D
[00:20:06]
LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. MY MOTION IS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A. NEW ORDINANCE DRAFTED AND BROUGHT TO US FOR EXAMINATION, BECAUSE THIS HAS TOO MANY. CONCERNS. IT HAS TWO SECTION TWOS. SECTION TWO AMENDMENT. SECTION TWO. USE DESCRIPTION. IT REFERS TO. AN EXHIBIT A ATTACHED. THERE IS NO EXHIBIT A ATTACHED. IT REFERS TO. IN SECTION EIGHT. PUBLISH THE ATTACHED AMENDMENTS. THERE ARE NO ATTACHED AMENDMENTS AND WHAT WAS FURNISHED TO US JUST THIS AFTERNOON SHOWS PERMISSION FOR THIS INVENTORY IN MANY MORE CATEGORIES THAN C1, C2, AND C3, WHICH IS WHAT WAS SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED BY COUNCIL. SO I THINK THAT THIS REALLY NEEDS TO BE REDONE. AND MY MOTION IS THAT THIS AMENDMENT BE ORDINANCE, BE REDRAFTED AND BROUGHT TO US AT OUR NEXT MEETING FOR CONSIDERATION. OKAY. I SECOND IT. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? OKAY. THAT'S UNANIMOUS. NOW WE HAVE AN ACTION ITEM DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION AWAIT. I COMPLETELY OVERLOOKED THE THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR FOR ITEM FOUR BECAUSE AFTER AFTER LISTENING TO YOU THEN I WENT RIGHT INTO[IV. CONSENT AGENDA]
ITEM FIVE. LET'S GO BACK UP TO THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR ITEM FOUR FOR THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE FEBRUARY 12TH AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE FEBRUARY 26TH, 2026 MEETINGS.I'LL MAKE. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM FEBRUARY 22ND, 12TH AND MINUTES FOR 26TH FEBRUARY 26TH. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL. SECOND. WELL, I HAVE A DISCUSSION. OH, SO WE HAVE TO REALLY PULL IT OFF THE CONSENT AGENDA. I'M SORRY, I WANT TO I WILL HAVE TO ASK THAT IT BE PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA, BECAUSE I DO HAVE COMMENTS TO MAKE ON BOTH ITEM ONE AND ITEM TWO. BOTH SETS OF MINUTES ARE JUST ONE OF THE TWO YOU WANT TO PULL. I ACTUALLY WANT, I REALLY HAD I HAD AMENDMENTS ON BOTH. OKAY, THEN THEN YOU'RE YOU'RE PULLING BOTH FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. YES. OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE THE PASSWORD TO THE WI-FI? BECAUSE I'M DISABLED? SO PERTAINING TO THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING ON FEBRUARY
[IV.1. Approval of Minutes for the February 12th, 2026.]
12TH, 2026, THE, THE, THE CHANGES THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ARE ON THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE JEFF HEALY'S NAME ADDED AS THE PRESENTER, BECAUSE WE HAD DAVID MONTGOMERY SCOTT'S NAME ADDED AS A PRESENTER ON THE PARKLAND DEDICATION AND FEE IN LIEU PRESENTATION. AND SO I WOULD LIKE JEFF'S NAME TO BE ADDED AS THE PRESENTER ON THE TREE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT. AN ITEM FOUR, IT SAYS MOVED BY LINDA AIRD, SECONDED BY ENRIQUE LOPEZ TO TABLE MOTION TABLED 5 TO 0. I WOULD LIKE IT TO SAY MOTION APPROVED. 5 TO 0, NOT MOTION TABLED 5 TO 0. SO THOSE ARE THE TWO CHANGES. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHICH ONE ON THE FEBRUARY 12TH 2026 AGENDA I FOUND IT. YEAH. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO ASK THAT ON ALL FUTURE. LETTERHEAD FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING THAT IT LISTS MYSELF AND THEN JEAN HARRIS AS CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR, BUT THEN HAVE THE OTHER MEMBERS IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER. OKAY. IS SO I'VE MADE A MOTION TO HAVE THOSE TWO ITEMS CHANGED ON THE FEBRUARY 12TH MINUTES. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. THANK YOU. AND JUST TO CLARIFY,[00:25:11]
WAS THAT MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES WITH THOSE AMENDMENTS? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD[IV.2. Approval of Minutes for the February 26th, 2026.]
CATCH. THANK YOU. OKAY. ON THE ON THE FEBRUARY 20TH SIX MINUTES. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO MAKE TWO CHANGES. SO I'LL JUST MAKE A MOTION PERTAINING TO THAT. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 20TH SIX MINUTES. WITH THE CHANGE OF UNDER THREE STAFF AND COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS, NATURE'S POINT ORDINANCE REFERENCE. SO THERE'S A TYPO THERE. THEN FURTHER ON DOWN, IT SAYS COUNCIL REQUESTED ADDITIONS OF ZONING USE TABLE TO THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT, BUT I WOULD LIKE IT TO READ CONSISTENT WITH THE COUNCIL REQUEST. AND THE COUNCIL REQUEST WAS TO AMEND THE ZONING USE TABLE TO THE CURRENT C1, C2 AND C3 CODE. SO THAT WAS A THAT THAT CHANGE IS ACTUALLY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE COUNCIL REQUESTED. AND SO MY MOTION IS TO MAKE THOSE TWO CHANGES. IS THERE A SECOND.WHAT WAS THIS? WHAT WAS THE SECOND PART? THE SECOND PART WAS. UNDER STEFAN COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS. IT SAYS COUNCIL REQUESTED ADDITION OF A ZONING USE TABLE TO THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT CODE. BUT THE COUNCIL ACTUALLY REQUESTED AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING USE TABLE TO THE CURRENT C1, C2, AND C3 CODE. SO I'M JUST ASKING THAT THIS BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT COUNCIL REQUESTED. AND YOU MADE YOUR MOTION? I MADE MY MOTION. I'LL SECOND THAT. ANY DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OKAY. THAT'S UNANIMOUS. IF MAY BE APPROPRIATE. THAT WAS A LITTLE COMPLICATED. STAFF. IS THAT CLEAR? THE DIRECTION. OKAY, GOOD. OKAY. NOW I WILL GO BACK
[VI.1. Discussion, Consideration, and Possible Action on the January 8th and 22nd, 2026 Meeting Minutes.]
TO ACTION ITEMS SIX DISCUSSION, CONSIDERATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE JANUARY 8TH AND 22ND, 2026 MEETING MINUTES. AND DO WE HAVE A STAFF REPORT ON THAT? NO, MA'AM. AS THIS ITEM WAS CALLED FOR BY YOURSELF. OKAY. OKAY. SO THEN I WILL MAKE THE REPORT ON THAT. AT THE FEBRUARY MEETING, WHEN WE WERE ASKED TO APPROVE THE JANUARY 8TH AND JANUARY 22ND MEETING MINUTES, I REQUESTED SOME CHANGES TO BE MADE AND THE CHANGES THAT I REQUESTED TO BE MADE CONCERNED. RECITATION OF THE SPECIFIC MOTION THAT WAS MADE TO NAME THE PERSON WHO MADE IT, THE PERSON WHO SECONDED IT, AND TO SPECIFY WHO VOTED IN FAVOR AND WHO VOTED AGAINST. AND THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION, AND THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED BY PAZ MOTION. I MADE THE MOTION TO CHANGE THAT, TO ADD THAT TO TO BE CLEARER, TO BE MORE SPECIFIC, P AND Z UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE MOTION TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES ON THE MINUTES.SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, I WAS TOLD BY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES THAT THAT WAS NOT CONSISTENT WITH WHAT CITY MANAGER WEST WANTS TO SEE IN MINUTES. MY CONCERN IS THAT WE AS A REGULATORY COMMISSION HAVE THE RIGHT TO SPECIFY WHAT WE DO WANT IN THE MINUTES, AND WE MADE A UNANIMOUS MOTION TO HAVE THE MOTION AND THE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR AND AGAINST IN THE MINUTES.
AND THEN WE WERE TOLD AFTERWARDS THAT STAFF DID NOT PERMIT THAT. SO. MY CONCERN IS THAT WE DON'T EXPECT STAFF TO AFTER WE MAKE A MOTION TO TO SAY WE CAN'T DO WHAT WE WANT TO
[00:30:06]
DO. AND GIVEN THAT WE ARE A REGULATORY COMMISSION, GIVEN THAT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS THAT GO TO COUNCIL HAVE TO BE CLEAR, BECAUSE COUNCIL CAN'T CONSIDER SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE CONSIDERED WITHOUT HAVING A REPORT FROM US. SO A REPORT FROM US IN ORDER TO BE CLEAR AND COMPREHENSIVE, THEY HAVE TO KNOW WHAT THE MOTION WAS EXACTLY. AND THEY ALSO SHOULD KNOW WHO VOTED FOR AND WHO VOTED AGAINST. BECAUSE COUNCIL, COUNCIL APPOINTS US AND THEY SHOULD KNOW HOW WE'RE VOTING. AND FURTHER THE MISSION AND VISION STATEMENT THAT THE COUNCIL HAS HAS PUT FORWARD HAS AS A CORE VALUE THAT WE CONDUCT CITY BUSINESS WITH TRANSPARENCY AND THAT WE COMMUNICATE PRECISELY. SO TO BE PRECISE AND TO COMMUNICATE WITH TRANSPARENCY, THE MINUTES SHOULD REFLECT WHAT WE HAVE VOTED ON, EXACTLY WHAT THE MOTION WAS AND WHO VOTED FOR IT. SO I WAS TOLD THAT THEY WOULD PUT OUR MOTION IN THE FEBRUARY MINUTES, BUT WE WANT THEM IN THE JANUARY MINUTES SO THAT WHEN PEOPLE LOOK AT THE JANUARY MINUTES, THEY KNOW WHAT THE MOTIONS WERE AND WHO VOTED FOR AND AGAINST PUTTING THEM IN THE JANUARY. THE FEBRUARY MINUTES DOESN'T ADDRESS WHAT TOOK PLACE AND WHAT SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE MINUTES FOR JANUARY. SO ARE THEY OBJECTING TO THE WORD UNANIMOUS? I THINK THEY DON'T WANT TO LIST WHO VOTED FOR AND AGAINST. AND THEY THEY SAID, OKAY. ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS TOLD IS THAT THEY DON'T DO THAT FOR OTHER BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, BUT THAT'S NOT MAY I PARDON THE INTERRUPTION, BUT IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE TO TO GIVE STAFF A CHANCE TO COMMENT.I THINK WHAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS YOU WOULD YOU NOT JUST YOU, BUT YOU COLLECTIVELY BASED ON YOUR VOTE, WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE VOTING RESULTS AND MOTION RESULTS RECORDED IN PRETTY MUCH THE SAME WAY THEY'RE DONE WITH COUNCIL AT THIS POINT. EXACTLY. AND SO IF THAT'S YOUR REQUEST AND STAFF, IS THERE AN ISSUE WITH THAT? DO WE NEED TO TAKE THAT? CAN WE JUST DO THAT IN THE MINUTES PER THEIR REQUEST? SO THERE HAS BEEN SOME. SOME DEBATE REGARDING THE FORMAT OF THE MINUTES SPECIFICALLY. AND SO THE WAY THAT THE FORMAT OR THE WAY THAT THE MINUTES ARE LISTED NOW AND YOU'LL SEE THAT ON THE AGENDA IS IT HAS THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WAS LISTED THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT. IT SAYS WHAT THE VOTE WAS, WHO FIRST, WHO SECONDED, AND THE RESULTS OF THAT VOTE. I THINK THE, THE, THE POINT OF CONTENTION IS WHO VOTED FOR YES.
AND WHO VOTED FOR NO, WHICH IS CLEARLY LISTED PER THE MOTION WORD FOR WORD IN THE NEXT MONTH, IN THE NEXT MEETING MINUTES, BECAUSE THAT'S THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE AT THE TIME FOR THOSE MINUTES. AND SO IT'S NOT A DEBATE OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S BEING STAFF IS BY NO MEANS CHANGING MINUTES. THE DETAILED MOTION IS ON THE MEETING MINUTES IN WHICH THE MOTION HAPPENED, AND THE REGULAR MOTION ON THE ACTUAL ITEM IS THE WAY THAT ALL OF OUR OTHER MOTIONS AND ACTIONS ARE LISTED WITH THE DIFFERENCE. I THINK THAT THE POINT OF CONCERN IS WHO VOTED YEA AND WHO VOTED NAY. AND THERE WAS SOME STAFF LEVEL DISCUSSION WITH THE CITY MANAGER REGARDING THAT. FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, WE HAVE NO PREFERENCE. BUT IF THE PRECEDENT IS SET THAT IT'S NOT THAT SPECIFIC, THAT'S WHAT STAFF WAS INSTRUCTED TO FOLLOW THE SAME STANDARD ACROSS BOARDS. AND SO THAT THAT'S WHERE WE HAD LEFT IT OFF. BUT THE INFORMATION AND THE ACTIONS ARE REPRESENTED BETWEEN THE TWO MONTHS. SO YOU HAVE THE FIRST AND HOW IT HAPPENED, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE SECOND WITH THE DETAILED MOTION THAT WAS MADE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES, SPECIFICALLY WITH THE REALLY DETAILED INFORMATION IN THERE.
OKAY. THAT'S NOT HOW IT'S DONE FOR COUNCIL. COUNCIL WHEN, WHEN, WHEN A MOTION IS MADE TO AMEND SOMETHING, IT'S AMENDED IN AT THAT IN THOSE MINUTES. AND FOR CITY COUNCIL, IT DOES SAY WHO VOTED IN FAVOR AND WHO VOTED AGAINST. SO WE'RE ASKING TO HAVE THINGS DONE CONSISTENT WITH COUNCIL. NOW BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES HAVE NOT BEEN POSTED FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS, BUT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES ALSO MUST LIST MUST BY STATE LAW MUST LIST THE MOTION AND WHO VOTED IN FAVOR AND WHO VOTED AGAINST. SO WE'RE NOT ASKING TO HAVE ANYTHING DONE
[00:35:05]
INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT PNC HAS BEEN DOING FOR YEARS. ALL OF OUR EMOTIONS HAVE BEEN REFLECTING WHO VOTED IN FAVOR AND WHO VOTED AGAINST FOR YEARS, CITY COUNCIL SHOWS WHO VOTED IN FAVOR AND WHO VOTED AGAINST CURRENTLY. AND WHEN BOA'S MINUTES ARE POSTED, THEY WILL.SO WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING UNIQUE. AND WHEN WE MAKE A MOTION, A UNANIMOUS MOTION, WE WE ARE VERY TAKEN ABACK WHEN WE LEARN, FOLLOWING THE MOTION, THAT STAFF IS JUST GOING TO DENY US WHAT WE REQUESTED. SO TO GET BACK TO WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR TODAY IS WE'RE ASKING FOR OUR MINUTES TO REFLECT THE MOTION IN THE IN THE MONTH THAT THEY'RE MADE ON THE AGENDA ITEM, THAT THEY'RE MADE TO REFLECT THE MOTION THAT'S MADE AND WHO VOTED IN FAVOR AND WHO VOTED AGAINST, NOT IN SUBSEQUENT MONTHS, BUT IN THAT EXACT MONTH. IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, I THINK WHAT I HEARD YOU RESPONDING TO JORDAN WAS A DIFFERENT THING THAN I THINK SHE'S ASKING FOR. SO LET ME LET ME SEE IF I'VE IF I'M HEARING THIS CORRECTLY, YOUR RESPONSE, I THINK, WAS ABOUT THE MOTION ON MINUTES SPECIFICALLY AND THE FACT THAT IT WILL BE A MONTH DELAY TO CAPTURE THAT. I THINK WHAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT IS NOT MOTIONS ON MINUTES, BUT MOTIONS ON EVERY SINGLE ITEM OVER THE COURSE OF THE MEETING SO THAT THE MINUTES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TONIGHT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE MOTIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THOSE MINUTES FOR ALL PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED ITEMS, I THINK THE REQUEST IS TO TO CLEARLY STATE WHO MADE THE MOTION, WHO SECONDED. AND IN COUNCIL'S CASE, THE WAY STAFF DOES IT IS THEY THEY EITHER NOTE IT'S UNANIMOUS OR IF IT'S NOT UNANIMOUS, THEY NOTE WHO VOTED AGAINST IT. THEY DON'T ACTUALLY THOSE MINUTES NEVER ACTUALLY SAY WHO VOTED FOR IT. BUT YOU CAN TELL OBVIOUSLY BY IF IT'S UNIQUE.
YES. AND SO SO THE ONE MONTH DELAY COMMENT I THINK IS REALLY ABOUT JUST THE MINUTES. BUT I THINK SHE'S ASKING FOR ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE CONTAINED WITHIN THE MINUTES, NOT THE MINUTES THEMSELVES. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO AND THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE ONLY THING THAT'S MISSING IS THE WHO VOTED FOR AND WHO VOTED AGAINST. AND THAT'S THE POINT OF CONTENTION.
AM I? WELL, THAT'S IN. WHEN WE DO THE MINUTES. EVERYTHING THAT IS SAID AT THE TIME OF TAKING THE MINUTES IS WHAT IS REFLECTED IN THE REPORT. AND SO THE ONLY POINT THAT WE'RE I GUESS, IS MISSING OUT OF THIS IS WHO VOTED FOR VERSUS WHO VOTED AGAINST. SO. ON THE BOARD THAT I'M ON IN J-TOWN, WHAT WE DO IS WE PUT DOWN THERE WERE SEVEN I'S ONE NAY WITH THE GUY'S NAME AND. IF THE OTHER GUY WASN'T THERE, HE DOESN'T SHOW UP. HE SHOWS UP AS NOT PRESENT. SO WE KEPT IT PRETTY SIMPLE. WE NEVER LISTED WHO VOTED FOR JUST WHO VOTED AGAINST AND WHO ABSTAINED. AND WE ASSUME YOU'RE INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO FIGURE OUT THAT SOMEBODY WASN'T THERE. THEY DIDN'T VOTE. OKAY, BUT THERE WAS A MOTION MADE. THERE WAS A MOTION MADE, A VERY SPECIFIC MOTION WAS MADE, AND IT WAS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. AND SO THE ISSUE IS THAT MOTION THAT WAS MADE BY THE THE COMMISSIONERS AND PASSED SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE MINUTES AS IT WAS VOTED TO BE IN. WELL, I WOULD SAY YOU COULD EITHER PUT DOWN THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUS, WHICH IS WHAT I SEE ON THE OTHER BOARD. OR IF A PERSON WAS MISSING, THEN IT WAS. IT WAS PASSED 6 TO 0, BUT UNANIMOUS IMPLIES A MISSING PERSON WAS THERE. SO IF A PERSON'S NOT THERE, WE'LL PUT DOWN 6 TO 0. IF ALL SEVEN BOARD MEMBERS ARE THERE, THEN WE PUT UNANIMOUS. THAT'S NOT HER POINT. SO THIS. WELL, I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S HER POINT. AND THIS HAS GOTTEN VERY COMPLEX. ARE WE CALLED SAYING GIVE THE NAMES OF THE COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS AT LATER REPORTS OR JUST THE INITIAL MINUTES? WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN THE MOTION, SO WITH THE MINUTES ARE SAYING HERE IS MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY ENRIQUE LOPEZ. MOTION PASSED 4 TO 2. JEFF HUGHLEY AND ANNE CLEAR SO THAT THE ASSUMPTION IS THOSE TWO WERE NOT IN FAVOR. BUT THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE AND WHAT TOOK PLACE AT THE MEETING, SAID DAVE STEWART SAID HE WOULD HAVE
[00:40:06]
SUPPORTED IT IF HE HAD BEEN ABLE TO VOTE. HE HAD NOT BEEN SWORN IN AS A COMMISSIONER AND COULD NOT VOTE AT THIS MEETING. THAT'S LEFT OUT. SO AT THE AT THE CONSENT AGENDA, WHICH IS ITEM FIVE PRIOR TO THE ITEM SIX PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA, WHERE WE HAVE MOTION PASSED 4 TO 2, WE'VE GOT MOTION PASSES 7 TO 0, 4 TO 2 IS SIX. MOTION PASSES 7 TO 0. I'M ASKING FOR. BASICALLY WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS FOR STAFF TO COMPLY WITH THE MOTIONS MADE BY PLANNING AND ZONING. AND IF IF STAFF IS NOT GOING TO COMPLY WITH THE MOTIONS MADE BY PLANNING AND ZONING, PLEASE LET US KNOW IN ADVANCE WHAT, WHAT MOTIONS OR WHAT ACTIONS WE WILL OR WILL MAKE OR RECOMMENDATIONS WE WILL MAKE THAT WILL BE SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY STAFF SUBSEQUENT TO OUR PLANNING AND ZONING HEARING. AND SO IF YOU'LL NOTE AND THE CALL TO ORDER IT SAYS DAVE STEWART ARRIVED LATE BUT WAS PRESENT, COULD NOT BE SWORN IN AND THEREFORE COULD NOT VOTE ON ANY ITEMS. THE ISSUE WITH THE 7 TO 0 IS A TYPO AND THAT'S A MISCOUNT AND THAT'S A THAT'S A SOMETHING THAT WE CAN FIX IN PART OF THIS. BUT IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT HE WAS NOT SWORN IN AND COULD NOT VOTE AT THIS MEETING. I WAS ASKED IN THE HEARING IF HE WOULD SUPPORT IT, IF HE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO VOTE. AND SO THAT SHOULD BE IN THE MINUTES. BUT I'M NOT SURE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW, IF THAT WAS MADE WITH THE MOTION OR IF IT WAS A COMMENT MADE DURING DISCUSSION, IT WAS BECAUSE THIS IS THIS IS WHAT THE MOTION WAS RIGHT HERE BECAUSE I HAD IT TYPED OUT AND I READ IT INTO THE RECORD, AND THEN I GAVE IT TO YOU TO SO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE IT WORD FOR WORD TO TYPE. AND THOSE ARE REFLECTED IN THE MINUTES FOR THIS MONTH THAT WE JUST APPROVED ON CONSENT. THAT DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE MINUTES IS IN THIS MONTH'S CONSENT ADDENDUM FOR SIX OF TONIGHT'S PACKET. IT HAS I BUT WE MADE IT TO BE. BUT WE MADE THE MOTION TO AMEND THE JANUARY 8TH MINUTES, AND IT'S NOT IN THE JANUARY 8TH MINUTES. OKAY, SO IF THAT'S WHAT THIS IS ABOUT, THE VOTE OCCURRED. AND THEN ENRIQUE, AFTER THE VOTE WAS OVER, ENRIQUE LOOKED DOWN AT ME AND SAID, DAVE, HOW WOULD YOU HAVE VOTED? AND AS I UNDERSTOOD WHAT WE WERE BEING ASKED TO VOTE ON, WHICH WAS A VERY SIMPLE THING. IT WASN'T APPROVED. THE WHOLE 65 FOOT THING. IT WAS A VERY FOCUSED REQUEST. I SAID THAT I WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR IT, BUT I WAS ASKED AFTER THE VOTE WAS TAKEN.THAT'S MY MEMORY AS WELL. I THINK THIS HAS GOTTEN REALLY MORE COMPLICATED THAN I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE. SO THE, THE, THE FACT THAT THAT AMENDMENT WAS PROPOSED TO THE MINUTES IS CAPTURED IN IN TONIGHT'S WHAT WE'VE APPROVED TONIGHT. I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THE MINUTES, THE ACTUAL MINUTES FOR JANUARY 8TH, WHICH ARE POSTED ON THE WEBSITE AS THE PERMANENT RECORD OF THE JANUARY 8TH MEETING, SHOULD CONTAIN THIS LANGUAGE, BUT DO NOT. RIGHT.
GIVEN THAT THE REQUEST WAS MADE AFTER THE VOTE WAS CAPTURED AND TAKEN AND IT WAS SETTLED, I'M NOT SURE WE CAN PUT THEM ON THE MINUTES FOR THE MEETING THAT IT HAPPENED AND. MR. MR. STEWART'S COMMENTS WERE MORE AFTER THE MOTION, BUT THE REST OF THIS IS ACTUALLY WAS THE REQUEST TO CHANGE. I MEAN, YOU'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND WATCH IT AGAIN PROBABLY, OR LISTEN TO IT, BUT MY MEMORY IS ALIGNED WITH MESERET ON THIS, THAT THAT THERE WAS A SPECIFIC REQUEST TO CHANGE THE MINUTES, WHICH WAS VOTED ON AND APPROVED, AND THOSE MINUTES DID NOT GET CHANGED, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. SO MY MOTION TODAY IS THAT WE NOT APPROVE THE JANUARY.
8TH OR JANUARY 22ND MINUTES. AND THAT THIS BE CORRECTED FROM A PROCESS PERSPECTIVE. I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO DO IT. YOU'VE ALREADY VOTED TO APPROVE IT WITH AMENDMENTS. AND I THINK THE COMMENTS TONIGHT ARE WHAT'S BEEN POSTED TO THE CITY WEBSITE DOES NOT REFLECT THE AMENDED MINUTES WHICH WERE APPROVED. SO WHAT'S BEEN POSTED ARE NOT APPROVED MINUTES BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ACCURATE TO WHAT YOU SAID WAS GOING TO BE WAS YOUR APPROVING. SO I DON'T THINK YOU NEED A NEW MOTION. I THINK STAFF JUST NEEDS TO GO FIX THE ONLINE MINUTES TO REFLECT WHAT YOU ASKED THEM TO BE. WELL, I NEVER SIGNED THE JANUARY MINUTES SO THEY SHOULDN'T BE POSTED. WELL, MAYBE THEY'RE NOT. I HAVEN'T LOOKED, THEY HAVE NOT BEEN POSTED. OKAY. THE FACT YOU DIDN'T SIGN THEM IS APPROPRIATE. STAFF CAN NOW UPDATE THEM AND
[00:45:01]
GET THEM TO MATCH WHAT YOU SAID THEY SHOULD BE AND WHAT YOU ALL AS A COMMISSION SAID THEY SHOULD BE, AND THEN YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SIGN THEM, RIGHT? SO THE MINUTES, THE MINUTES THAT ARE IN THE, THE JANUARY 8TH AND 22ND MINUTES THAT ARE IN THE PACKET, WE WILL NOT TAKE ACTION ON TONIGHT, NOT TAKE ACTION. IS THAT IS THAT A BETTER STATEMENT, MR. PRINCE? I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY FAIR. RIGHT. SO THE THE ACTION ON THESE TWO MINUTES IS BEING DEFERRED UNTIL THE MINUTES ACCURATELY REFLECT WHAT YOU ASKED THEM TO CONTAIN. OKAY. SO IS THERE A MOTION OR IS THAT JUST IT'S JUST OKAY, I THINK YOU'VE GIVEN I THINK THE INSTRUCTIONS ARE CLEAR AT THIS[VI.2. Establishment and Appointment of Members to a Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee.]
POINT. OKAY, THEN LET'S MOVE ON TO OUR FINAL ACTION ITEM ESTABLISHMENT AND APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUBCOMMITTEE. SO AS EVERYBODY KNOWS, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME. WE'RE THE COMMISSION AND COUNCIL IS VERY MUCH IN A VERY MUCH ANXIOUS TO GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED. AND SO IN ORDER TO SEE IF WE CAN EXPEDITE IT AND HAVE IT READY FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE ENTIRE COMMISSION AT THE APRIL MEETING, I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER APPOINTING A SUBCOMMITTEE AT THIS MEETING. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT OR DISCUSSION? ANYBODY IN FAVOR OR NOT IN FAVOR OF APPOINTING OF A SUBCOMMITTEE? WHAT WOULD THE COMMITTEE BE? HOW MANY, HOW MANY MEMBERS OR WHAT THREE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE? BECAUSE WE CAN'T WE CAN'T HAVE MORE THAN THREE. OKAY. AND IS THAT A ON A SET SCHEDULE TO MEET ON A SET SCHEDULE OR JUST AS A CASE BY CASE BASIS? WE WILL BE MEETING. WE WILL BE WE WILL BE MEETING WHENEVER WE CAN, BUT WE WILL BE WORKING ON THIS ON THIS DOCUMENT ON OUR OWN, COMPARING NOTES AND PUTTING IT TOGETHER ON THE ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD FOR ANYONE TO COMMENT ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. BUT THE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PRESENTING A COMPLETED COMP PLAN AND A COMPLETED FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO THE COMMISSION AT THE APRIL MEETING. I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM CADENCE FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO MEET. YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT BE TWICE A MONTH OR WEEKLY ONLY BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SUBCOMMITTEES IN THE PAST WHERE SOMETIMES I THINK WE'VE LAGGED AND NOT MET OFTEN ENOUGH TO ACCOMPLISH OUR PURPOSE. OKAY. I THINK I THINK THAT IS TRUE. I THINK THAT NOW WITH THE DISCUSSION BOARD. WE MAY BE ABLE TO DO IT WITHOUT REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETINGS BECAUSE NOW WE HAVE A DISCUSSION BOARD, AND I WOULD JUST GO BACK TO MY EXPERIENCE WITH WITH THE CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE. WE DIDN'T MEET IN BETWEEN, BUT WE WE ACCOMPLISHED DOCUMENTS TO PRESENT FROM MEETING TO MEETING WITHOUT ACTUALLY HAVING SUBCOMMITTEES MEET. YEAH, I WOULD, I WOULD, I THINK AGREE THAT THOSE VIRTUAL PARTICIPATIONS COULD, COULD ALSO COUNT AS YOUR, AS YOUR MEETING. WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE SOME KIND OF MINIMUM CADENCE TO MAKE SURE THINGS KEEP GOING FORWARD. I THINK THAT'S THE IDEA IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOES MOVE FORWARD MORE QUICKLY. SO WE GET THIS DONE. RIGHT? RIGHT. SO I GUESS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THEN IS CONSIDERING YOUR POINT, JEFF, IS TO SAY THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WHO, WHO WOULD BE APPOINTED TODAY WOULD COMMIT TO DOING WHATEVER IT TAKES, HAVING AS MANY MINUTES, MEETINGS AS NECESSARY OR AS MUCH ONLINE OR EMAIL DISCUSSION OR WHATEVER AS IT WILL TAKE TO PUT TOGETHER A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE APRIL MEETING. LINDA, MAY I SUGGEST YOU AND OR STAFF, MAYBE BOTH MIGHT WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE SCOPE OF WHAT THIS SUBCOMMITTEE WOULD WORK ON AND AND WHAT KIND OF WHAT THE TASK LOOKS LIKE. I'M NOT SURE, ESPECIALLY FOR OUR NEWER COMMISSIONERS. I'M NOT SURE THEY WOULD NECESSARILY UNDERSTAND THAT IN THE SAME WAY.YOU UNDERSTAND. OKAY. WELL, TO TO ELABORATE ON WHAT MR. PRINCE SAID, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HAS PUT TOGETHER A DRAFT COMP PLAN DOCUMENT. AND SO WHAT WE WOULD BE DOING IS TAKING THIS DRAFT COMP PLAN DOCUMENT AND MODIFYING IT, REWRITING IT, REVISING IT HOWEVER WE THINK IS
[00:50:03]
NECESSARY, OR ACCEPTING IT IF WE THINK THAT THAT IS WHAT'S WARRANTED AND PRESENTING OUR CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT TO TO THE MEETING AND IN. EXCEPT WE WOULD NOT REALLY ADDRESS THE PARKS AND RECREATION SECTION, RIGHT? NO, WE WOULD NOT. SO IT WOULD BE A PART ONE, TWO, FOUR, FIVE, SIX AND SEVEN. I THOSE SECTIONS THAT ARE IN HERE. YES. MORE SPECIFICALLY, EVEN MORE SO THAN THAT ONE, TWO, FOUR, FIVE AND SIX SEVEN IS SUPPOSED TO TAKE ALL THE DATA THAT HALF IS PRESENTED TO US. ALL THE, THE STUDIES THAT THEY'VE DONE, ALL OF THE DATA GATHERING AND JUST PUT IT ALL IN SOMETHING THAT'S READABLE. SO REALLY CONTENT WISE, IT'S GOING TO BE ONE, TWO, FOUR, FIVE, SIX AND PARKS IS DOING THREE. AND THAT'S THAT'S ON THEM. THAT'S ON THEIR SCHEDULE WITH THEIR SUBCOMMITTEE. AND THEY WILL ESSENTIALLY LET US KNOW WHEN WHEN IT'S READY. I'VE SPOKEN WITH THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION AND THEY'RE WORKING ON IT. ARE WE ALSO ADDRESSING WHICH WHAT ITEMS MIGHT GET PUT INTO THE APPENDIX RATHER THAN THE MAIN BODY OF THE DOCUMENT? SO WHAT WE'VE DONE ESSENTIALLY IS TAKE IN THE DRAFT, TAKE THE MEAT, THE THE MAPS, THE THOROUGHFARE PLAN, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THE THE HIGH LEVEL CONCEPTS, THE GOALS, THE, THE THINGS THAT WERE DEFINED IN THE, THE ORIGINAL PLAN AND PUT THOSE AS THE MAIN PARTS OF THE DOCUMENT. AND WHAT WE'LL DO IS REFERENCE BACK THE DATA AND THE CASE STUDIES AND THE THINGS THAT HAFTED IN SECTION SEVEN.THAT'S REQUIRING A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEANUP. SOME OF THE DATA IS NOT VERY WELL ORGANIZED, AND SOME OF THE CASE STUDIES ARE THE SAME. AND SO THE INTENT IS YOU HAVE THE MEAT. BUT IF YOU WANT THE POTATOES WE'LL REFERENCE CHAPTER SEVEN, CHAPTER SEVEN. SO IF WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SUBCOMMITTEE, I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST AN. ON THE OTHER QUESTIONS, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION, HENRIK? WELL, YES, I'M. I GUESS ONE OF THE REASONS IS, IN MY LINE OF WORK, I BECOME A LOT BUSIER IN MY TIME. RESTRAINTS ARE A LOT MORE STRINGENT, AND THOUGH I'M HAPPY TO DO THIS, I JUST NEED TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE GUIDANCE AS TO. I GUESS THE PLAN WOULD BE TO, YOU KNOW, TACKLE ONE PART AT A TIME AND THEN PROCEED AS WE GO. SO BASICALLY, WE WOULD HAVE ONE ONE MEETING, LET'S SAY FOR PART ONE OR THE COUNTY COMMUNITY VISIONS AND VALUES. AND THEN ONCE WE HAVE THAT, WE BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION. OR DO WE ARE WE GOING TO BRING IT ALL TO THE COMMISSION AT ONCE? WELL, THE SUBCOMMITTEE WOULD BRING IT ALL TO THE COMMISSION AT ONE TIME IN APRIL. AND GIVEN YOUR SCHEDULE AND I KNOW THAT YOU'RE THAT YOU'RE VERY BUSY. I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE AN CLEATOR AND JANE HARRIS AND MYSELF AS THE SUBCOMMITTEE, AND THAT WE WOULD BRING IT ALL THEN TO THE COMMISSION IN APRIL.
YEAH. I THINK TO ADD TO THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN WORKED ON ALL OF LAST YEAR, NOT JUST BY THE PREVIOUS SUBCOMMITTEE FOR PNC, BUT ALSO BY THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE FOR THE COMP PLAN, WHO ORIGINALLY DREW UP THE DRAFT. SO WE'RE DOING THIS CONSTANT REVISION. AND WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE, THE IDEA IS TO GET IT DONE. IF NOT, LET IT DRAG OUT FOR THE REST OF ANOTHER YEAR. RIGHT? RIGHT. AND SO I, JEAN, DO YOU. YEAH. I'M JUST I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY.
REGARDLESS OF WHO IS ON THE SUBCOMMITTEE, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THOSE WHO AREN'T TO BECAUSE I HOPEFULLY THE SUBCOMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE WILL BE COMMUNICATING ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD PERIODICALLY SO THAT TO KEEP PEOPLE UP TO DATE. AND IF IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID, SPEAK UP ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT'S THERE FOR. WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT VIOLATING ANY OPEN MEETINGS ACT BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT ELECTRONIC MEANS TO COMMUNICATE BETWEEN THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND THOSE WHO AREN'T ON IT. I THINK IT'S A IT'S A MATTER OF GETTING ACCUSTOMED TO USING THE DISCUSSION BOARD. I THINK ONCE WE ALL START PRACTICING AND USING IT LIKE, IT WILL BECOME SECOND NATURE TO BE CHECKING TO SEE WHAT'S ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD. AND THE DISCUSSION BOARD HAS A THING THAT WILL, YOU CAN, YOU CAN LIKE LET IT KNOW THAT YOU WANT IT TO NOTIFY YOU WHEN SOMETHING HAS BEEN POSTED ON A DISCUSSION YOU'RE FOLLOWING, SO YOU CAN KEEP TABS ON IT. THAT
[00:55:05]
WAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO ACTUALLY GO IN AND CHECK. IT'LL ACTUALLY LET YOU KNOW. SO YES, TO JEAN'S POINT, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE, WE WANT EVERYONE TO COLLABORATE ON, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF PUTTING THE BURDEN OF PRODUCING SOMETHING BY APRIL ON THE ON THE THREE SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS. AND HOPEFULLY WITH ENOUGH DISCUSSION IN THE INTERIM ON THE DISCUSSION BOARD, BY THE TIME WE GET TO THE APRIL PRESENTATION, IT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY'S ALREADY KIND OF BOUGHT INTO, OR WE HAVE CONSENSUS ON. YEAH.OKAY. SO WITH THAT, I WILL MAKE A MOTION, IF I HAVEN'T ALREADY, TO NOMINATE ANNE CLEATOR, JEAN HARRISON AND MYSELF AS THE SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THE COMP PLAN AND THE CATEGORIES TO WORK ON A DOCUMENT TO PRESENT TO THE COMMISSION AT THE MARCH OR APRIL 2026 MEETING. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND ANY DISCUSSION. ALL IN FAVOR, I. OKAY, SO THAT'S UNANIMOUS. NO ONE IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THIS. WE ARE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.