 finally found a date. I know we've been trying for a while. So for those of us in the room, emergency exits, you can go out the back of the room, either door and either direction down the hallway to the exits, either end of the hallway. Are there any agenda changes for this evening? I don't have a change to ask, but I did have a comment to make that is based on the last point in our agenda, but kind of as relevant to, yeah, well that right before that one, but for once the number six. This conference will now be recorded. Okay. That would that would relate to what we're talking about together, so when it's appropriate I can do it during announcements or? Yeah, I think so. So I guess it's a really good point. So the first part of tonight's meeting is a joint meeting with the City Council, and then once that meeting adjourns we have a short Planning Commission only additional agenda two items it looks like. So open to the public for items not related to the agenda. Does anyone have anything? If you are joining us online you can unmute or turn your video on, not seeing anything. So announcements and staff report. Do you want to go ahead, Monica, with what you were? So just two things. I wanted to just get it out there. This is, we're coming up on a month away from when a 14-year-old in our community was struck on Dorset Street, and I had a really helpful conversation with Tom of the, yes, sorry, of Public Works. Thank you. That's what I couldn't find about what the process is for seeking some improvements, and it was noted that since that happened a year ago, in fact no specific investigations or of engineering anything like that has happened in that area. So I was happy to understand what the process is, and I do think that he did some, he looked at the solar collector to determine when lights turn on, so maybe something changed there, but I just wanted to remind everybody that that we're coming up on a year from that, and there might be some interesting things within the process that can be improved to help the city respond to such things. But the second thing I wanted to just make a comment about was, I think in our last planning commission meeting, the concept of the planning commission working in a nimble manner came up, and we have worked in a nimble manner regarding to what we're going to talk about in item six, which is relating to a brand named Tesla, and we also worked in a nimble manner relating to something that was not directly connected to beta, but in response to betas being here. But I just want to remind that when Habitat for Humanity came to us, we rejected acting nimbly. And so I bring that up now just as a comment that while we're all here together, I really look forward to better understanding under which circumstances the planning commission should function in a nimble manner versus not, and I think maybe some strategic direction on that would be helpful. Other comments or announcements from either body? Okay, then we can move on with our agenda. Anything from staff? Okay. So I think staff did a really great job of laying out in the memo in the packet, kind of an overview and some background about the comprehensive planning process. As Oh, yes. Yes. So we are in general tonight going to be talking about the comprehensive planning process. Our next plan needs to be adopted by 2024, which does sound like a long time away. But it means that we have to have it ready for formal adoption by August of 2023. So there's a lot of things we need to talk about as a community and as a group in the next, I guess, less than, I guess, 10 months that winds up being. And for tonight, you know, we have an agenda or a memo in the packet that I think we're going to generally follow. It starts out with some background about the process. And I didn't know if Paul, you had anything else you want to add to what was already in the memo or things you wanted to point out specifically. Only just that the sort of overall that the two sort of major themes coming into this plan is one that the 2016 plan was a massive lift by the by the community, and that the commission is thinking of the 2024 plan as a update as a refinement as a sharpening of a pencils, but not as a let's throw the whole last plan out and start over. And so that's that's one. And then two, that the commission is hoping to take an approach that is sort of top of the funnel to the bottom of the funnel, which leads directly into your conversation tonight of establishing broadly the values, vision and goals for the community. The updated version there of that can then help shape the rest of the conversation for the next year. It's I think from from staff's perspective, there's some room for that to be nimble to the extent that if you hear a lot of feedback over the next year of some piece that should be adjusted, then that of course should be done. But that broadly speaking, having the values vision goal goals largely outlined will help all the committees help yourselves to have a framework around which you're doing the work. So those are the couple of things that I just wanted to highlight. Jesse, go ahead. Just to tack on a few other things to highlight. It's loud down here. This is a fun vantage point. In the vein of post the Big Rewrite in 2016, and all of the very exciting initiatives and projects that are currently going on in the city and double down doubling down on those successes with the next comp plan and really seeing them through to fruition into the next phase of our community. I also think it's really important and Paul has outlined this well in the memo to remember how we are actively using our current plan to align our annual policies and strategies process and the annual work plan for both our staff and committees. And our intention is to continue that and do it even at a deeper level with the next plan. So this really, while it's a high level comprehensive plan of where we're going as a community, it's really the staff expectation of what drives our work day to day over the next eight years. So again, thinking about that, what are the high level values and visions that we're doubling down on with this plan to operationalize in the years to come? Thanks. Great. Anything else before we dive in? Can you just remind me when the next update is approved? How many years does it run? Is it five? It's now eight. It's eight. Thank you. Thanks to, I believe it was a senator really helped a few years ago to modify that. See, I can forget things. Pointing out. The entire planning community thanks you for that. Now I remember the number. Right. How many years? So eight. So I think the memo outlines the different stages of work. And, you know, if you, if you look in there, there's 10 different stages between this initial conversation of affirming the values and goals and adoption at 10. Just a few of which have been highlighted for discussion tonight. So as was mentioned in the memo, we're going to focus on the areas that were really highlighted in the red text starting at the top with the kind of affirmation of vision or values and goals. So to that end in the packet, there was the 2016 comprehensive plan vision and goals as well as kind of following multiple commission conversations where we discussed priorities and vision and goals as well as just general feedback that we've had, you know, over the many years it's been in place. Staff took a first crack at some draft potential new language for the 2020 24. Now what we're draft calling the values vision and goals. One of the things that came up in our discussion as a commission was that there was maybe not as much focus on our values and us as people in the community. And it was a little more focused on more physical aspects. So, you know, we were one of the things that we wanted to do was really focus more on on the people as well. That was one of the themes that had come out of our discussions already. And I think one thing to point out is that what's presented in the packet with the red lining is not, it's not something that the commission came up with and voted on and we're bringing forward as like a, this is our recommendation. It's kind of a compilation of different conversations for discussion kind of in this bigger group. And I think our goal for tonight is to specifically get feedback from the council as well as all of us kind of discuss kind of what we're thinking and give ideas. And it would be nice if at the end of the discussion we could at least have feedback from the council and possibly a kind of an affirmation that this this makes sense to move forward with community outreach knowing that whatever we bring forward to the community as part of that process, you know, would still be up for for adjustments through that process. So, so I guess what I was thinking is it might make sense for each of us to kind of have a few minutes and just present if there's any comments or questions or things that you think are missing things that you is maybe in there but you really are feel very strongly about keeping in there. And then maybe after each of us kind of gives our ideas and thoughts then we can kind of see if there's common themes or things that seem like they're generally missing and we as a group want to kind of add in or make changes to that seem like a reasonable approach. Okay, I mean I guess we can just kind of go down the line or maybe maybe hear from commissioners first because we're maybe putting the counselors on the spot a little bit us as commissioners have been able to think through it a little bit so maybe I don't know Michael you want to start we'll go through commissioners first and then hear from counselors. Sure. First of all, I read with interest the submission that the ideas that Andrew Chalnyk sent us and I can't argue with them I fully endorse those ideas particularly the addition of fair and just in the first bullet point but I also feel that climate change has to be bright and bold and right up front in this visions and goals page. It's the page that sets the tone for the whole plan. So I have a few suggestions to make based on Andrew's submission but I'd like to change a few things or propose a few changes. Michael, would you like to have what Andrew put up on the screen for folks or do you want to work off this version that was in the packet? No, you can work off what Andrew sent in it's easier I think. So just as background so that everybody knows what is happening here Andrew yesterday sent in some markups that he proposed and the way that this reads on the screen is he accepted all of the red line that was in the packet and then made proposed modifications to it. So this language that you're seeing in black is not the current adopted it was what staff presented in your packet. That's in the red line. So first of all you know the most likely climate change impacts that we will see around here are floods and droughts and floods will threaten life and property and floods and droughts will both threaten our food supply our ability to grow stuff here. So I'd like to change what Andrew wrote is climate change climate change focused to something like climate resilience and food secure, climate resilient and food secure. South Burlington should be climate resilient and food secure and then it follows from that emphasize sustainability for the long-term viability of a climate resilient and food secure South Burlington. I think and it should go as far up maybe not the top bullet point but maybe the second one since it's so crucially important to us. So this is under human scale. I'm confused about the third one. Climate change focus. Okay, but the resilient sentences in the one before that's what's. So I think what he said is he liked the change to fair adjust in the first one and then thought that the one that used to be called climate change focused should be sustainable. That's the one I'm suggesting that we should change to climate resilient and food secure as the title as the title for that bullet. Yes. The rest of the points are okay. I was going to add a few things to the bullet about conserving and protecting our wetlands. I would add conserve and protect our natural environment including our wetlands, grasslands, forests, meadows, natural areas, open spaces, aquatic resources, air quality, agricultural resources. I think we need to have a big attempt there and cover all those items because they all have a bearing on our ability to be sustainable in the face of climate change. The only other one that I'm proposing is the last bullet which is of address under opportunity oriented. The third bullet there, change that to read make decisions that explicitly consider the implications of tomorrow's, of today's decisions. Make decisions that explicitly consider. I see the first bullet point because I don't remember. I can send these afterwards in writing if you wish. Okay, thank you. I know it's hard to keep track of. That was all I had on this particular page draft of the vision and goals, the bullets. But I do want to say something that I think has been missing in our conversation. Every economist or agronomist or climatologist will tell you that our lands and our oceans have a finite carrying capacity which we have been exceeding for many, many years. We are consuming and depleting our planet's resources at an unsustainable rate. To survive we have to find a way to match consumption and capacity, I guess, carrying capacity. That means water, land, air, the sea, what we've got. What population can be supported by what we have in the way of water and land and clean air and energy resources? Too many people and maybe in our case too many cows are degrading these resources and along with that the quality of life, public safety, health and welfare which we claim to be our goals in this plan. Our waterways are already impaired. Lake Champlain is poisonous. I have not swam in it for seven years and before that I swam in it almost every single day in summer. I think a lot of people are in the same boat. I don't know the answer to this question but I think we all have to think very hard and deeply about the carrying capacity of South Burlington before we overwhelm it. How do we measure those resources, the resources that we have? How much water do we have or how many people can we support with the water we have? I think we are complacent if we think Lake Champlain is our ace in the hole. We share Lake Champlain with New York and Quebec. They all have a claim on it and if there are continuing droughts and we start to use water from Champlain for agricultural scale irrigation, it's not that big. So we need to bear these constraints, finite carrying capacity in mind. I don't know how we measure them. If we know the limits of those resources what policy options do we have to address our finite carrying capacity? I just felt that this has to be said in this forum. It may be something we include in other parts of the comprehensive plan but we can't ignore it. I think we all have to give it some thought and do a little reading. I think there's a lot of... There's some economic theories, no growth economics and doughnut economics that lay out a kind of scenario for that. But that's all I wanted to say. I wanted to get it out and get it into our minds. Thank you. I think that that last part we can think about if there's something specific to add to the list for under item three, where we're identifying areas for more study. Yeah, once we get further in. Duncan, did you want to talk about the goals and vision? Yeah, I'm going to take a slightly different track than Michael. Climate change is incredibly important. It's one of the overarching themes in our existence right now. But it's interesting because we mentioned that we have competing agenda items sometimes in the COMP plan. And I'm more thinking on the human scale thing in terms of housing. We have a huge housing crisis. It's everywhere, but we have it here. I think of my business trying to hire people right now. There's nobody out there. I don't know if people aren't working, they can't move here. They can't find a place to live. Housing is one of the most important things. And I'm not discounting climate change, but I really would like to look at our community and say what can we commit to trying to make housing more affordable for our population? And there are going to be folks moving here. It's still a desirable place to live. But to me, that's one of the overarching themes along with climate change is what can we do so that this place doesn't become an exclusive enclave? I'm not sure how we bear that out in the COMP plan, how we mentioned that. Again, I think that's an area where we need community feedback. What are we willing to do as a community to address that challenge? Because I think it's a huge challenge. Talk to any employer in town. It's a major issue. So I'll be very brief. That's probably one of the overarching, along with climate change, that's one of the overarching themes that I think we really need to look at. Through infill, we have to look at every different way. So I'll be much briefer than Michael. Andrew? I'll try and go quick as well since I sent in the... Yeah, I think it's helpful to have the visual there. So I just to maybe explain quickly. So I was thinking what, you know, for me what would be my guidepost if I tried to be equity oriented. And I couldn't... It just didn't seem to me that I knew exactly. I know what that was intended to mean, but I just didn't know exactly how I'd determined whether my actions were equity oriented and I think what we mean is fair and just. And I think I know how to figure out whether I'm being fair and just. So that was my thought process behind changing those words. And I think that's supposed to mean the same thing. So that was that. In the next section, humor scale, you can see I just added some words there. And my thought process here and kind of thinking about Duncan's comments and Michael's comments together. I grew up in Brooklyn. I lived a time in New York City where folks from all different income strata lived side by side in a pretty dense environment that was very vibrant, right? There's restaurants and their shops and people mixing and a really good strong community because of that diversity. I would love to accomplish the goals that both Michael and Duncan are talking about by trying to build our built areas in that diverse way where you have people from different income strata, different walks of life, living together, living closely and creating that vibrancy. So that's why I added those words vibrant and diverse there to that second bullet. At the same time, I think we need to protect our natural resources. I think we should be sacrificing our green fields and build like in spear meadows, housing starting at $700,000. That's not accomplishing anything for the housing crisis, and all it's doing is converting another green field to a parking lot. So that's how I would balance it and that's some of the reasons why I wrote the words in that section. I didn't put this in my comment. I don't quite love the bullet human scales. I'm thinking about how this would look in an ad or these are the four things we stand for, right? We stand for inclusivity, human-scaled. We can talk about sustainable climate change focus and opportunity. Human-scaled jumps out and is like, what exactly does that mean? I might want to think about replacing that word with something like community. I like the old words community strong. I think that's what we're getting at there, but I'm not exactly sure. I just didn't love the title of human scale. I don't know what to think about. The next section is where I made most of my suggestions. I personally like the word sustainable. I think it accomplishes the broad reach of what we're talking about in different aspects, both long-term challenges and short-term challenges. All the things, right? We need to live sustainably. I think that's a good umbrella honestly for all these different challenges in this section. I think in my mind just food security and even just climate change honestly is a little narrow for me for this section. I wrote the word sustainable. I throw that out there. I thought we should emphasize a little more of the wildlife. We did a lot of work on wildlife. I think it deserves to be here in this section because it's not just about us. It's about the living creatures that share this world with us. Then I pulled out of the old bullet that talked about conservation, about conservation of various resources and historic and recreational. I thought there was apples and oranges. Which of these don't belong with the other? I thought it was a different thought. We want to conserve our environment. Separately, we want to protect historical site structures and provide recreation. I pulled those two thoughts out because I thought they were probably just a little different. I think it's a little different. I think we should be able to do it. We should be able to make a real sense by mashing all that together. That's basically it. Great. That was helpful. We're going to go with commissioners first so you can collect your ideas just because we've sprung this format on you. I'm so excited. We're excited to hear from you. We had a little more time to prepare. Ted, did you want to go next? you know, their points. I don't disagree in any way with what the three of you have is your focus. Not to be redundant. One thing with regard to Duncan's point, I think it gets to the the area where the city just really has to spend money and buy land and it has to be some, it has to be some kind of arrangement like that because the land is too expensive. We're kidding ourselves if we're going to talk about affordability. You know, it just ain't there. Anyway, so one of the issues that I have, we've been talking about in film and you know, I agree with the concept, but we're also in the same voice talking about preserve our unique features of our neighborhoods. And then one of the bullet points of our goals is number two, keep unique features, maintain and enhance the quality of life existing neighborhoods. My point is, is that I worry that a neighborhood like Mayfair Park, which is very unique. If every single one of those houses then has an apartment or an infill, you have twice the population, you have twice the traffic and you change the dynamics of the neighborhood. So, I think we have to be very careful where and how we go about preserving the neighborhoods in some way of their new uniqueness, but then also creating the infill. I don't have the answer to that, but I would really like to be careful about how we address that. Infill Shore in City Center under, you know, north of Williston, north side of Williston Road and so on, but gets a little dicey and the neighborhoods also are going to have some real issues, I think, with that. When suddenly you say, well, suddenly, you know, well, we have a former Mayfair Park resident in the audience right now, but I think the residents will really wonder if they want that changed. The other thing that we're talking about connectivity of the neighborhoods and so on, that may be maybe jumping ahead, but when I hear connectivity, I suddenly worry that that means roads that go through neighborhoods instead of drive through. And I like to consider, you know, highlighting our idea of pedestrian walkability, that if we talk about connectivity, that we prioritize it, that would be more for pedestrian bikes as opposed to meaning that we have to have cars go from one neighbor to do another. I don't see any benefit of doing that. So those are just two and I had some other points, but I think time, it's all past the baton. All right. I appreciate being able to go so late in the list here because you guys, I agree with so much of what everyone said. Monica, could you also pull your mic to you? Thank you. Absolutely. So I did send some thoughts and I will rephrase them now. But first of all, and I just, my nature is to think more conceptually and not necessarily where things should go and exactly how it should be said. It's just more conceptual. But I do feel that whenever we are talking about affordability, specifically, which is in some of the draft, I'd really like to see how we can tie that directly to dignity at every step. And I can't tell you exactly what dignity means to everyone. I mean, it can mean different things. And it's something I would love for us to further study and understand. But in terms of trying to be people focused, what have we done well to ensure or to strive for ensuring that every resident of South Brillington has a dignified and a dignified experience here that makes them want to stay here forever, right? And what does that mean? Does it mean safety, equal access to EV charging stations, private outdoor access, X number of walking distance to a park, a peaceful sleep, food access, healthy food access without a car? What does it mean? And if we can identify what those things are, besides all of the how big is a place, how many bedrooms does it have, what are the key things that we can work on as a community to make sure that every resident has what they need? And so they want to stay, which ties into some of what Michael was saying, and perhaps this came from Andrew's, but let's go beyond that too. What is it almost like a bill of rights for every resident that we would aspire to? What have we done well and what can we do better? And if we clearly communicate that, I do believe it will help us when talking to the community about difficult decisions like infill, because I know that that will be a difficult conversation. So if we can clearly articulate what we're looking for in terms of providing the dignity, I do think it will help us. The second thing I wanted to point out is referenced, I kind of mentioned earlier in my comment about my concerns about we're coming up on the year of this near fatal accident of our 14-year-old. But I know that through IZ, we ended with a lot of support for trying to move to a big push of residential within our transit overly district. I believe that right now there's only one of us here who lives in the transit overly district. And I think that's Paul, but you're like on the outside of it probably. I don't know if any of us live in the transit overly district. I don't think any of us live in perpetually affordable housing. And I think a few of us live in homes or properties that could currently house two to three families. So I just wanted to put that out there that it's really important that we understand what it means to be living in the transit overly district. And what can we do to make it great? To Andrew's point, I too lived in the New York experience. What are we doing wrong? What can we do better? And this last point of not only do our residents deserve to be safe and live well here, but also our passersby and our visitors deserve to have a safe experience here. And the other end of what happened with this 14-year-old is that he was struck by someone who's not from here and not familiar. So when I was driving here tonight again at Dorset in Kennedy, one car was waiting in the intersection that we all knew. When you get your light, yeah, go because no one else goes. They didn't know that. They thought the opposing side was also going to go. And so they waited to turn left and everyone got mad. So when they finally turned left, there was a lot of aggro driving happening very quickly past the high school of people that were just mad that this person didn't know. So I had to wait for a second light. Next light comes up. Someone's waiting in the right lane. We all know that you go in the left lane to go to Dorset because the right lanes turn only, right? Well, this person didn't know that. And so again, they go straight and the person next to them was pretty upset about that and they had to show that no, actually this is my place to be first. And again, there's speeding happening past simply because I think there were two incidents of people not being familiar with the roads because it's a transit overlay district. And I bet there's a lot of people that are not familiar in these districts. And this is where we want to put housing. So I just bring that up and I will continue to do so in hopes that we and I don't know where it goes in the plan, but I really I would love to find the solution and study how we can be safe for our visitors and passengers by so they don't have to deal with aggro espiers who are upset that people aren't doing what they're supposed to do and that our residents can be safe. And especially with the U mall, hopefully something awesome will happen there soon that will bring in even more on Wilson road on Dorset and into Shelburne road. So those are my overall comments. Okay, so I'm really curious to know if I live in the transit overlay district. I don't know where the line is. It's a quarter mile from from where we have major transit service. So if you're within a quarter mile of Shelburne road, which I think you are, then yes, the idea is that that's a walkable distance. It's not necessarily ideal for everybody, but it is sort of accepted distance. Okay, well, that's good to know. My thoughts are more on how we go about doing this than than even what we do. And I would really like to see us I'd like to see us take advantage of this opportunity of the comprehensive plan to really involve the citizens of South Burlington in their government. We have the technology now, I think to do that. I mean, we're kind of zooming along here at every meeting. And, you know, people can participate from their homes like never before. So and we've got public relations, people and staff that we didn't use to have. So I would really like to see this kind of as a community organizing effort around, you know, building the comprehensive plan, which is the foundation of everything that happens in South Burlington. So that is that's kind of my issue. And of course, I'll put a plug in for the for the Chamberlain neighborhood in their 2016 plan that they wrote that's never been implemented. And I would like to see that included and implemented. And I'd like to see other neighborhoods to similar efforts like the like the Chamberlain neighborhood. And I think that's it. Thanks. Okay, so I have a few thoughts, I think almost all of them are echoed of things we've heard before I really like being more broad with the sustainable, like, instead of just focusing on climate change, your idea of calling it sustainable, I think makes a lot of sense. Michael brought up floods and droughts. And it feels like maybe something that's that's missing. I know we use the resilient in a few spots, but maybe being specific about like things we could do to actually prepare for the changing climate itself, specifically floods and droughts, which I think we're most susceptible to here. I think there's a lot of things in there already about housing. It does mention safe and efficient transportation system. But maybe that's an area that we need to be more strong with how we're we're wording it. And then I liked Monica's idea of dignity. And I guess I'm not sure exactly where to, like, add that in. You know, that Andrew had had the idea of maybe fair and just being good words to add. I think either dignity or fair and just maybe kind of including in that first title makes a lot of sense. So those were just a couple of thoughts. And I guess we can keep going around, Tim. Yeah, I'll try to keep this short. These are all great ideas. I guess the points I wanted to make were that, you know, the comprehensive plan is aspirational. And I think what we're facing now is some incredible rate of change internationally that we haven't experienced in a long time, right? I mean, we've been pretty stable for quite a while in terms of energy prices and food availability. And, you know, additions to housing stock and stuff like that. But we're going undergoing right now a very strange time with a lot of geopolitical churn, geo energy churn, amazing and unfortunate climate change. And that's driving costs for all types of things that people need. And it's also, you know, we have this vulnerability to disease spreading quickly across the whole planet. So all these things that we do to at least maintain or improve our quality of life is important. But to get to Michael's point about carrying capacity, I am worried a little bit about, you know, if we're more susceptible to drought and GMP buys half of its power from Hydro-Quebec, and there's this extreme drought in Quebec, and the Legrond don't produce enough power like you have in Lake Powell right now, not producing enough electricity. And at the same time, that affects our ability to pull water out of the lake. And then we also, you know, process wastewater and send that back to the lake. The Seabrook, New Hampshire license is going to expire in a few years. Will they renew it? I don't know. But those are really good questions like water, sewer, electricity, those types of energy. Do we have, do we think we have enough for the next, you know, five, 10, 15, 20 years? And then that funnels in really closely to this amazing demand for housing in South Burlington, because we have a lot of demand for it. And I think that we all agree there is not a lot of new green field left to build. I mean, with the LDR changes that were passed back in February, there is less green field land that you can build on. And so whatever is left that gets built on is going to have to be more compact, because if you want to be more inclusive, you can't have single family homes with four bedrooms on quarter acre lots on the remaining property that's out there. But keep in mind that that green field that gets developed, right, is going to be running at the same time with a lot of redevelopment that's going to happen, as we've already seen on Shelburne Road, right? You know, Joe Larkin redid that, you know, the whole Larkin apartments right on the corner of Fayette Drive. And that was a whole new building there. And I'm sure that the Pizza Hut is going to be redeveloped too. So you're going to see a lot of new buildings showing up on some of those major thoroughfares. The fact that they have housing them can be, you know, I mean, it's not great to have it so close to a high transportation area. But I just want to say one more thing. My sister came here from Halifax Nova Scotia and visited for four days. And that four days she walked me ragged. We walked the Wheeler Park. We walked from Overlick Park to Samansky Park for the opening of the Pickleball Courts. We walked the Chalot Nature area. We walked down the Waterfront in Burlington to Lakeview Cemetery and then did the Rock Point Loop. And then we also did a bunch of Dorset paths, right? And so I just want to stress this point that we have a lot of very beautiful natural areas. And it's really important that they be maintained and enhanced. And if we have more areas to grow and connect those paths, like we probably will, with property conservations that are happening, access to the Scott, you know, property, we want that, we want to send those tentacles out so that people have more areas to enjoy that are natural. So I think I covered everything. The last thing was to get to Monica's point, signal optimization, right? So I know that we still have a lot of cars. I spent a lot of time sitting in electric mode in my car waiting for lights to change at intersections. And I just go, these are moments I can't get back for my life forever. So I mean, there is a lot of traffic signalization technology out there that knows when to make decisions better than what we have today. So the Dorset Street improvements are going to help with that. I hope, I really hope so. That's all I have. Thank you. Thanks. Sure. I think I'm in the transit overlay district. And I have to say that I live there specifically to be in that area where I have the options of taking one bus or another bus to work, depending on where I need to go. And I, at the same point, at the same time, I wouldn't live in New York City. And I think that having a son who lives in New York City, who wants to get out of New York City, it's not the panacea. And so I really hope that we won't become New York City. And I think that cities are going to not be the most resilient places during the years of challenge that we will have, the decades of challenge that we will have. So I want us to really think about what I've been seeing in this document, which is how can we develop in a way that does not deprive citizens of being able to teach their kids how to ride their bikes in their neighborhoods. More narrow streets. Even in my part of town, there are wide streets within our neighborhood with all kinds of slow down signs. So really think very carefully about how to human scale. I can see why it doesn't speak to you, but I understand the word. And, you know, there's something to be said for the 15-minute community, if I don't know if that's the exact term for it. But, you know, being able to walk to get groceries, being able to walk to get the services that you need to get on a bus to go to work, that this is something that I saw in the human-scaled section that I thought was really important. And I think it's going to be critical for society to go that way in order to be resilient. So, yeah, I think that you're definitely on the right track. There was nothing that was, you know, shining out at me as this is something I'd want to avoid. I didn't come prepared to wordsmith. Yeah, yeah. So, but I like all that's been said here. And so keep carrying on with the- so I'm going to clean up better. And I even hate baseball, so I don't know why I use that analogy. You're on a roll tonight. Oh my God. But anyway. Just one thousand votes. Yeah, right. I appreciate all the comments, and I think they're excellent. My comment is something that is, I think really missing, and that is any real conversation about how education, it's important. I mean, it's mentioned, but precious few times. And when you're thinking about a comprehensive plan for a community that doesn't have some good stuff about education, I think you're missing, one, a very large expenditure of taxpayer dollars, but also something that's really, really important to everyone who lives here and anyone who has a business. So, and I'm not sure, it's hard to bring up because education is really not the bailiwick of the Planning Commission nor City Council. We have a whole other set of people that work on education. And I don't know exactly how to bring them into the conversation, but I think they need to be part of the solutions, if you will, or the conversation. So I think that's when we talk about sort of the process, Paul, of how do we engage the public? I think we really need to think about how, and I don't know how you have engaged the school board or the school administration in the Complan of 2016, but I think going forward, that's an important piece to be part of the conversation and decision making in the Complan. So that's all I would add. Couldn't we ask the school board to write a section for the new Complan on education or draft one? I know the Complan is supposed to cover certain areas. It seems like an important, I was looking, like there's a short section about the schools, but I guess I'm not sure how education fits in in the past. It is one of the elements that's expected under statute to be addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, so that is a component. I think that's really good food for a thought, for us to consider how to best integrate them, having them participate by helping to write that section I think is an important step, but I don't know that that's the end point of it either. I think similarly we have started to engage with our fire department and our police department as it relates to the Comprehensive Plan, and they've participated in the past in writing their section, but I think that there's so much of an opportunity that we've been learning and talking with them about the way that they interface with our community that is very different from how I interface, and we can learn from them from their experiences that maybe we can draw something like that from the schools also, not just about schooling, but about their interface in the community and what the changing face of the community that they're seeing is. So just a thought on that. Along with that, we are creating potentially more housing, and that means more children in the schools, so it's a layup that we really have to engage them, because they might say we can't take another 1,000 or another 500 or 300 more students, we cannot do that. They are saying that. Okay, I have not heard that and I'm glad they are in a sense, but that's planning. What we do here is suddenly a $400 million bond vote or something, so we have to be very privy to, you know, in two years time, three years time, so we got to engage them. Helen, did you have more comments? Just to follow up, I do think it's more than asking them to write a chapter. I think it's maybe that's where we start, but it's really a much broader conversation to pull them into the housing issues, the transportation issues, just having open space. Maybe where do we cite a new school? Carrying capacity. Oh, absolutely. So I think it's an important conversation to have and not just write as a paragraph so we can stick it in and meet the state obligation of mentioning education as an important piece of a comprehensive plan. Are you done with your comments? I am, yeah. Okay, we didn't discuss anyone else's yet, but go ahead, Paul. You said Paul, didn't you have your hand up? Yeah, go ahead. Okay. We've added two people from the school side of things to the charter committee with a thought in mind that the school board reflects the city council, so any changes you make in the city council probably will be reflected in the school board, so they would have to consider whether they wanted to be elected from wards, how many there would be, all those kinds of questions, so there at least is a starting point there to bring the school side of things into our planning and into our structure of city government, really. I have a question that is kind of tied into this, but also not, but I asked, I feel like a number of meetings ago about understanding our demographics, and I know that the school has done demographic studies forecasts, but I'm wondering if in 2016 for population, like not necessarily focused on school, were their population forecasts done in 2016, and can we do some now, because I think another thing that we need to understand is what are our demographics right now, and given, you know, everything that Tim brought up, and we know that there's going to be, we know that eight years from now the next comp plan is going to be a whole new ball game. I mean, hopefully it'll be very quiet on the roads because everyone will be driving a Navy, but there are big changes coming, and so are there some newer forecasts that we might be able to better understand? All of New England is an older population. Vermont definitely is. What are we thinking eight years from now looks like, since that's really even more than that, because our comp plan goes eight years, but we're still three years out of it, so I'm like, what is 10 years from now expected to look like in terms of demand, in terms of not just in South Burlington, but, you know, the region? I think it would be very helpful for us to understand that, because even if we have the same housing stock that we have right now, we might have a very different kind of demographic within us in 10 years, and it would be very good to understand what that looks like. Not to put Jesse on the spot, but I mean, I think the council has had some of those conversations about the demographics, and we are attempting to work with the school, so maybe you can bring us up to date on where that might stand. Sure, and I'll get to that in a second. I mean, Paul, maybe just try and speak for you. I think a demographic review is an integral part of the update of the comprehensive plan, so I think looking at both the 2020 census, well, you know, other data points that we know, I know Paul and his team are working on that anyway, so absolutely yes, that this plan needs to be data-driven and reflect the data that we have available to us. What Helen has specifically talking about is Paul and I have been working, we were working with David Young and now working with the interim superintendent on developing some South Burlington-based models of what we know about our growth and the impacts on the school's district. So nationally, there are lots of models about this type of development leads to this type of impact on the schools and we see that data reflected in Act 250 permits currently from our development community. I think there's some mistrust of those data points, what it means to bring on Champlain Housing Trust building versus a multi-family building of studios and one-bedroom apartments, so we are going through a process where we look at what we know about development over the past X years, provide that data, that address data to the school district and then enable them to overlay their enrollment data by address onto that. Obviously, we can't know what students of what ages live in what buildings, they have that data so we can feed them the permit and development information, they can overlay the student information and we hopefully can develop some South Burlington-based models and check those assumptions about what we know and the national trends of development and then use those as we understand, as we model forward what's going to be happening in our community. Paul, do you want to add anything to that? No, I think that captures it really well. I did want to add something just briefly to what Monica said, which is that we did in 2016 have some projections about where we would be in population and those have been pretty much born out where we thought they were going to be. From staff's perspective, I think that this next plan, really thinking and tying our anticipated 10-year, 20-year, longer-than-that population change, whether that's added people or different types of people or different stages of life people, connecting that to what does that mean in all of the areas of the plan in terms of the services, the infrastructure, etc., that we need to be prepared for. So I think to me that's an area of focus from the staff perspective. Yeah, I think that that's kind of covered under some of the steps that were listed out in the memo, but not necessarily highlighted for a big discussion tonight, like the idea of updating those numbers and getting that inventory information together. So we made it partway through our affirming values and goals by having kind of that initial discussion and ideas. One of the things that I thought we could try to do to kind of coalesce over things is, we have the draft. I think there's a couple themes, things that people mentioned more than once as we were going around. Kind of the idea of some changes to maybe to the green fields, how they're discussed, safe transportation, how to talk about dignity or equity, whether that's changed to fair and just or kind of how that's discussed, nuances of neighborhood infill, carrying capacity and kind of reinvestment. So those are some of the things that kind of jumped out at me as we were going around about maybe either adding or kind of adjusting how they're talked about in the draft. Michael? I may have to bail out fairly soon, but I wanted to pick up on something that Andrew and maybe Monica brought up about the diversity and dense living conditions in Manhattan or Brooklyn or Saint Denis and Saint Laurent in Montreal or Chicago. We can't hope to replicate what you find in a big city that's developed over many, many years, but I think we could make a start by making South Burlington a refugee-receiving city. That will certainly advance diversity, vibrancy, innovation, creativity. Look at the old North End. They had the old housing stock, which we don't have, but I think with creative and courageous zoning, we could perhaps create the place where such people could come and my friend here would be able to get somebody to work for him because they could afford to live here. These would be high-rise multifamily buildings, and if we zone it properly, I think builders will build them. It'll take time. We aren't going to be the old North End overnight, but I think it's a direction we can go, and maybe that first step is making South Burlington a refugee-receiving city. That's worked for Burlington in the old North End for sure. With that, I would like to excuse myself. I'm very tired. I have to go. Thanks, thanks, Michael. Tom, I don't know if we need to put you on the spot, but we did just go around, and we just did go around, and just if people had their individual comments on the draft values, vision, and goals, they expressed their thoughts. You don't need to do that if you're not ready, but if you did review those and had a few thoughts, you can… I really liked and appreciated what Monica Otsby sent out earlier today. Other than that, I don't have anything to add at this time. Very good. Thank you. Can I ask a couple of questions? I mentioned, I don't think I put it in writing there, but the concept of this aspirational bill of rights, it shouldn't be called a bill of rights, but I don't know that we've created something like that before, and I'm curious to know how something like that might play in, or if there's an interesting conversation to have there. What, going even back to what Michael just said, say, we do that, but still, the people that would come in from wherever, if they come to South Burlington, it would be very nice to know that our aspiration is to ensure that every resident here has… And I think it would be so interesting to talk at some point about what something like that might look like, because that can drive so much of what we do as well. I'll just say that's what the 15-minute community, I think, gets at, is that people have access to what they need. You don't have food deserts, you don't have places without parks, that there is a community that develops within a 15-minute, by foot, radius, that is, I think, a nice way to kind of get at what you're saying, that there's mobility, there's access, services, all kinds of qualities that I would put in a bill of rights for our citizens. Helen, do you have thoughts on a good way to proceed with getting some of these ideas in? I mean, so, I mean, like I said, there's a few things I just listed off that seem like themes, many of which already have a bullet point. It seems like there's probably some wordsmithing, some different suggestions on titles. I think the goal is to have something that we can bring forward to the community for feedback that we've maybe not voted on because it's not a final thing, but there's general consensus on. We have notes on individuals, some kind of themes that jumped out. I guess I'm wondering how do we get to a point where we're kind of comfortable with something, and is that possible in this meeting? I think they were, and maybe Paul can pull it together. I don't know. There certainly was several comments, and it seemed to me there was some agreement that humans scaled. That term is a little unclear, I guess, and maybe just, is that reflective of what other people think? Or I know, Megan, you said I understand what human-scaled is, and I think we all kind of did, but I think Andrew, was it Andrew's point? You have four bullets, and human-scaled is a weird bullet, I think, for a comp plan, and these are sort of our goals. Helen, I think I've got sort of a partially formed thought around that. So, human-scaled was an evolution of the word walkable, which was sort of a, it was in the last plan as a statement of let's try to be, let's move from being quite so auto-oriented. That was sort of that one, and then human-scaled was trying to take that a next step. I think what I'm hearing from some folks here is that the, that whole section is sort of focused on transportation, and maybe a slight reorientation of that to talk about that something along the lines of that the purpose of human-scaled was to say that the car shouldn't dominate the way that we move, but I think that what I'm hearing here is our built environment should be, should be oriented to the human experience more fully, whether we're talking about the movement of people, or some of the other things that Monica talked about of, you know, feeling like they can sleep through the night, and all the other aspects of that. And I don't know, I don't have the exact words, but that's sort of the theme that is coming up to me a little bit, is, yeah, I don't, I have to think about what the, what the actual words would be, but is that, is that what I'm hearing? People-focused community, or something like that? I think you said community strong, which used to be the name of our first one, but it almost... But it doesn't quite capture it, like it's more about resident people focused or human-focused community, something like that, like we're talking about a community that's focused on the individual, right, rather than around the car or around... Right. Right, around, that the infrastructure serves the people, not the other way around, is what I'm sort of trying to say. Yeah, yeah, and maybe saying it very clearly that it's not auto-focused, automobile focused, it's walking and people focused. Tim? Yeah, I think it has to do with functional experience and aesthetic experience, right, and the aesthetic can be not just being able to walk down bike paths and ride your bike and and be down in Red Rocks area, it's got to be the walkable experience of just where you live. So if you live in a neighborhood of four-story, you know, apartment buildings, it would be nice if that experience was not like what we have in another community nearby with this new neo-modern, you know, vinyl, you know, hardy-backer, bored brutalism, right, which is just a four-story block, blump, blump, blump, blump copied over and over again. And that's like the last thing I would want to see happen here. As we say, oh, we have to build a lot of, you know, compact housing, you've got to make that trade-off so that you at least give people the chance to live in a building that looks nice, that's different, that's interesting, that has some angles, that has some unique character. That's the point. You know, these, this new, the new things that come in have got to present character to the community and make it enjoyable to drive through or walk through, especially, you know, if you're, if you're, you know, walking by it, and especially if you live in it. And that, I think that's really important that we forget is that the aesthetic presence of new architecture is just like public art in some ways. And that's really important that we not, like, just let the big plastic rubber stamp come in and repeat itself over and over again. Ten? One of the things that Adnazium I mentioned, I think, in our Planning Commission meetings, and people are probably sick of me talking about it, but one of the things I fear as we get density north of, you know, like behind Zachary's pizza and that, that section there is that we want to have equity. And instead of thinking as silly as this is, people living in that area, they're probably never going to be able to grill a steak on a grill. Whereas all of us have that luxury, we all live in single family homes. So what does that mean? Well, that means, again, that go to New York City, or do you go to Minneapolis, major cities, a lot of times there are parks with actual grills, where the family can go and have a, you know, have a grill, picnic. So I think we have to really, I keep thinking we have to build the amenities first, or at least conceptually, and then build those buildings. Because I really fear they'll plop these up, or we check that off, we have now more affordable housing, what's good to go. But I think we really have to be creative and make sure that the, that people who are living in those different areas have a positive experience and really have actually green grass that they can touch and feel, a place where they can maybe grill that they cannot grill. So that's all part of the mix. Can I add to that? And this is actually something good that we did, that it's a great example. If we can do this every time, it would be nice. We were looking at our new regulations for civic space, when we were talking about the Shelburne corridor or whatever. But we said if you're within X number, a quarter of a mile or something from a park, then maybe you don't need to have so much on your property. But then we said, but only if it's on the same side as a freaking four or five lane road as you. But if it's across, even if it's right across that, that doesn't count because that's not safe. And I think, I think that, how do we, what do we do in the comp plan that says every time, consider the people that are going to be there? And is it, is a quarter of a mile the same thing when you also have to cross a five lane road? No, it's not. So whatever that is, that would be awesome to do every time. Well, and to just to pick up on that to what Jesse said at the very beginning of the evening. That's fundamentally the importance of the conversation tonight, because the four major themes or however many you choose, become the themes of all of the work plans for the next decade, the categories by which work is done. And so, you know, naturally, those titles, those, those sort of bullets become the sort of the magnet that draws everybody's attention and should be that that's so. I guess I just wanted to, you know, thinking about Tim was saying and what Ted said and what Monica said, the one word that keeps coming back to me and it was one of the first things I mentioned when we said what was what didn't we see in that initial list of stuff is neighborhood. To me, that's, that's the essence of human scale is neighborhood is something you belong to that sense of belonging and community. And I think that's really, that's really what we're trying to get at in a lot of this, you know, because ideally that that's what we all want. We want that sense of neighborhood, the city's a neighborhood, hopefully, you know, but that I know Paul, you were big on this and I think it's a great idea, you know, involving the neighborhoods because for a lot of people, that's, that's their sense of community. You know, and how do we translate that to the city as a whole? You know, that's, but neighborhood is to me that that encompasses what you were talking about, Tim. But I think to build on Monica, that neighborhood, I think we have to think more expansively about what a neighborhood is. And if it's a four story apartment building, then when you think about what makes a neighborhood the sidewalks being able to teach your child how to ride a bike grilling, maybe, or just having a place to sit and converse with with your neighbors, that doesn't require you inviting them to your, your home is part of the planning process when I mean, I think this would be really hard. But you know, when you have your LDRs about what you can build and what kind of amenities a builder needs to consider when they say I want to put this affordable housing or dense housing on Shelburne Road or wherever. There are all these other parts that make that a neighborhood that make that a quality of life equitable feeling like you belong to the community. So it's I mean, we all build on little neighborhoods we grew up in, perhaps, but I think we need to think more broadly or differently about that and be a little more creative on how we define that, which I guess is always hard in regulations because it's black or white. I love the word belonging. I think that's great because when you feel like you belong, you feel like you want to stay and you feel like you want to participate and you feel like you want to make it better and you want to go talk to somebody about it and you that everybody here that is that that's it. I mean, that's if you feel you belong. That's it. And so is does every, you know, what are the characteristics that neighborhoods have that create that sense of belonging and are there neighborhoods that don't have that right now and what can we do about that? And not everyone's going to have the same pickleball court or whatever it's going to be, but but what what is it that makes one feel like they belong and what can a comp plan do to help make that happen? Right. Future. Yeah. I love that term neighborhood. Maybe livable neighborhoods would work. I just googled livable neighborhood and it says it means livable neighborhoods support the physical and mental health residents are clean and safe, promote social inclusion, sociability, livable neighborhoods are well served by parks, playgrounds, plazas and great ways and greenways, trees and plantings are integrated into livable neighborhoods. We're done. I actually pick up right on that point because I think that's that's really it's a great point and I think the commission's had a little bit of this conversation, but I think it's valuable to maybe bring up as a whole group here of to your point of a livable neighborhood. We've talked somewhat there's been action in the infill in the sort of perspective of a Shelburne Road or Williston Road sort of right on the major routes where we're talking potentially large buildings. I think there's a little more nuanced conversation that's been happening around what does the evolution of our historically largely single family neighborhood single family home neighborhoods look like to meet the needs of tomorrow, whether that's the individuals in homes or it's looking at housing needs or it's looking at reinvesting in neighborhoods. What are your thoughts on what livability might reflect in there? Does that open what I guess to the point of protecting neighborhoods but also investing in the future? Are you what are your thoughts on beginning to engage the community about what change looks like in those neighborhoods that are historically single family? I can give an example. I'm hearing some different thoughts on that tonight so I think that's I'm just going to hit all the buttons. I can give one example. If a neighborhood's going to go through a change or a zone or whatever if we understand what is cherished about its current state then work to protect it while meeting a new goal and I think there's ways to do that because some people might just say well no it's this way and it's just should be that way but if you break that down a little bit and say well what is it about that that is that we want is there a viewscape is there a this is there like what is there what is the special thing that that is a broader good that can be that one can feel is is still you know while working with it to create more infill opportunity I mean I think there's there's definitely a balance there so I guess a specific question so like the draft was in the packet says preserve our unique features while investing in enhancing and adapting our neighborhoods to meet future needs so it has that and then it also has in another spot invest in neighborhood infrastructure to promote infill development those are the two that are specific to neighborhoods along with the other the other goals about walkability and and such like does that feel like it between those two statements kind of captures some of the different thoughts I know people brought up some different points about neighborhoods I just want to make sure we're talking about this you know if we're gonna make a change it'd be good to refer back to what's in there now Ted well I was gonna say I really it's a real dilemma of trying to figure out how to take a neighborhood again like Mayfair Park and then have a infill project throw out I mean I just I'm not I just don't know how one goes about that and that there's no amenities in other words if suddenly there are not the backyard for the children to play in then where would Mayfair Park have a little park or something to accommodate the suddenly change in dynamics and the reason people are there and move to South Burlington in many cases is because there's some land doesn't have to be a lot but at least it's land that's why we moved from Burlington and I know three other people in the city council would be from Burlington moved out here because of land so if you don't have land then now suddenly you're gonna have to change that whole neighborhood so there's a park right there so I don't have a good answer Paul yeah I think you know I talked earlier about an organizing effort with the comprehensive plan and I think that we'll learn the answers to these questions by asking people you know by reaching out and actually asking people you know what they think about what where they live and what their lives are like and what their neighborhoods are like you know we always are I guess pontificating from on a high here and I think it would be good for us to really talk to people and really find out what they're thinking and you know what their neighborhood needs are I mean I know what our neighborhood needs are and I think probably everybody else does too yeah something just to keep in mind is the the rules with regard to impervious surface you know if for instance and I'll speak about my neighborhood that people have wet basements and so if you're going to add more impervious surfaces that mean they're going to have even wetter basements right so I think it could be redeveloped for that reason that's you know potentially an argument for redeveloping but just thinking about the topography of the land and there's an underground stream in that part of of South Burlington and so just sensitivity I would say to the geography of the place and I think that's just something I don't want to have lost you know I keep thinking back to Chris and I'm blanking on his last name that you sorry Trombly no no the chair of the board of civil authority thank you Chris Shaw who said and I can't remember what was the trigger but all of a sudden people in his part of Oak Creek got water in their basements right and so we just have to really be mindful about why those rules are in place for how much impervious surface can be on a parcel so rather than building more this way build more this way you know so the rebuild is something that would potentially be what's needed yeah so I think you know two things that I kind of mentioned as themes before was carrying capacity like understanding standing like what what the carrying capacity is across multiple things like for you it's you know you just mentioned impervious surface Michael had specifically mentioned water quality related to carrying capacity earlier and then you know I think it almost like overlaps with what Ted just said about parks and open space like making sure we have kind of covered the bases on all those things and you know as we're adding more so like a reinvestment in our existing neighborhoods before just adding infill is that one kind of what I'm hearing I don't want to skip Andrew oh sorry I want to pick up something Paul just said and I think would also connect to what Ted raised earlier and something I've raised on council before some time ago a really bright Burlington City Councilor Burlington City Councilor saw the need for neighborhoods to have a say and a voice in their communities their areas of the city and so they have in Burlington neighborhood planning associations and I see South Burlington to now be of the size where that would I think serve a lot of purposes to get those voices in a structured manner in a in a useful manner to have them meet on a regular basis and to speak with more of one voice for each of the segments of our city I'd love for Chamberlain to have a neighborhood planning association I'd love for Eastwoods to have a neighborhood planning association or the south end of Burlington the southeast quadrant so just have some structured leadership they usually meet every other month they invite these city counselors for their wards I'm not saying we need wards but I'm saying neighborhood planning associations would be a way to get the voices of the city around the table and speak in a unified voice to give the planning commission greater clarity as to what these areas are looking for usually successful so I agree with all that I'm wondering whether it makes sense to fold some of that into these words so particularly the the bullet Jessica that you focused on where we say promote infill it should probably be with with community feedback from from the folks that live there right do they want infill or not right we shouldn't just kind of hop down assume that that they would or that it makes sense but it should be with their voices at the table to determine whether it's appropriate I think we should say that here in terms of the topography that too yeah that even if they say yeah infill is great and then we build it and then all of a sudden everyone has like add something like with with the impacted community's feedback so some words to that effect of that bullet yeah I'm I'm actually curious about that because I mean I'd like to hear I wasn't involved with the last comp plan and I would like to hear like what how much of the comp plan would be driven by like what if what if there was a a strategy put together and it really didn't get current support from the majority of the community how have you dealt with that in the past but but like let's say you saw a bigger long-term purpose for it and felt that it was the right thing to do I don't know what where do you how do you adjust I mean some hard decisions will have to be made you know it's not so how do you how does that work in this process I'm curious yeah I mean I think one of the things I mean it was a an issue that a lot of people brought up was like the the strategy on the east west roads in the city like there was a lot of feedback on that and you know we actually changed how it was worded to look at studying it more you know but you know instead of just saying we need more east west roads you know that was something that was changed the wording and the approach on that so I mean I I think in the past when there was something that was kind of just felt off and we got feedback we made adjustments as part of the process so I think sorry go ahead in our neighborhood we had the Liberty Motor and as you probably all remember and when the Liberty Motor in was purchased and destroyed our neighborhood was involved in planning for what would replace that area and so now we have the administrative offices for UV a medical center and I'm I wasn't involved because I was on the city council at the time but and so I'm not you know completely wild about the idea that there's a whole corner that's just a parking lot but that's what the neighbors the neighbors really wanted Paul I'm sure you remember that and you're involved but there is a little park there's this little area uh in back of the and back of the building and there's a parking lot in back of the building but then the other corner is just parking lot and that's that's kind of a right but the motel was like a drug and prostitution center so it was almost like a parking lot would be probably be an improvement it's worked out for everybody that no one has any complaints I mean everybody is happy with the way it is you know so you know I guess um you know I think one thing that just came up was kind of qualifying some of some of these things so like invest in neighborhood infrastructure to promote promote influence development where the carrying capacity makes sense where water quality can handle it where the neighbors agree and you know I guess when I look at all of these we haven't necessarily qualified all of them or some of them you know I think in this draft it says conserve our important natural environmental you know different resources or some say focus on safe and efficient transportation systems so some have like a like a strong descriptor um so I guess when we think about it like where we put qualifications in like I think we want to make sure we're being intentional about that you know so to that point and so last points and trying to mirror what Paul did earlier to ask a question to get you just kind of talking about things one of the things I'm hearing in this conversation is a is a very healthy tension that's taking place in many polls many policy tables in our state in our neighbor in our community municipalities in state around what's best for neighborhoods what neighborhoods want and what's best for the municipality and the region and the state and I think South Burlington is very uniquely positioned to be at the the uh Venn diagram of some of those conversations so when we think about qualifying what we want as a community and what we want for our neighborhoods how do we do that locally while also you know there are lines in here about making the best decisions for tomorrow South Burlington for Chinden County and for Vermont if we're gonna if we're going to make a big impact on climate change is that just in our 20 square miles or is that as a regional hub where we have the jobs and we have the housing demand so I guess I would challenge the council and the planning commission to think about how do we how do we document that in our plan or how do we reflect that in our plan that we have resident and neighbor pressures we also have regional pressures and state pressures and to what extent do we want to be intentional intentional about meeting the housing crisis about addressing climate change as a regional leader and not just what you know one to five neighbors want or do we just want to do what one to five neighbors want and that that changes how we play in the regional sandbox so I'm not sure you I'm not sure you focused us or not well and that's that's not a question to be answered tonight I think that's a set of a framing I think we are going to have to address in the next year as we develop this plan and as we think about where these policy rubs are between you know conservation and housing between neighborhoods and a regional leader you know I think that's a that's a framing that might help you know I think one one qualifier to the infill that it seems like a lot of people have touched on is the livability of it you know and I think Monica this comes up in your idea of the dignity and I think um Andrew you had brought up livable I mean maybe that's something to add where we talk about infill just it's kind of a theme that I've heard a couple times that didn't get us past the human scaled slash walkable title and you know I guess I'm not sure it's hard for me to know like if we should try to like rename these titles to something that we all agreed on now as a group or if that's something that we've heard a lot of my suggestion would be to let us let staff think on what you've given us themes um not to spend you know we're not it would be surprising if somebody came up with the precise words on the spot and I think as policymakers you've got big weighty subjects to work on and we can talk with people who are really good at wordsmithing I did want to bring up sort of along those lines we talked about this neighborhoods and what it means to have infill I think another area that is sort of going into the next topic but also addressed here is some of the proposed language that Andrew and Michael brought forward does push the envelope further on the subject of natural resources in our community and what the plan what the intention should be there and maybe that's not something that can be completely answered tonight I think Jesse sort of framed that nicely in terms of the the overall needs but we did want to sort of flag that I think as a um important discussion for these groups these bodies and the community overall as to being intentional for um in what your what your goals are for the community I have a comment on that too was that directed at anybody or anybody sitting here or at home well I just I have a comment on that because um our question I asked her uh reminder that when we went into IZ we were faced with um something in the last comp plan the fuzzy map hopefully we don't have a fuzzy map anymore we worked very hard in IZ to have a more definitive map but the nature of there being it's that we're stuck because a comp plan needs to be a visionary tool that guides us but went but we did work very hard to try to be more definitive about things that were a confusion in the community and I do want to say that I've seen now a couple of times this a comment about conserve and protect our wetlands grass grasslands meadows and agricultural lands and I'm just I'm bringing it up because that's the same language that was in our last comp plan to an extent and then we addressed it in IZ and I worry that if we're there were reasons that we used it in a different manner in our conservation PUDs I do worry that if we try to reinsert something whether it's this or something else that creates a vagueness again we're going to be setting ourselves up for something that we just spent a long time trying to be more clear about and I've seen this come up a couple times and I'm not I mean I it's here so I'm commenting on that yes I'm all for really trying to avoid the fuzzy map scenario because I think it creates confusion for people so whatever we can do if you know whatever language we do put in every word will matter to people and how they interpret it and so my comment is particularly to that line I feel that the work that we did in IZ unless there is something unsatisfactory with it is was intentionally resolving some of that and I think putting a more generalized line about certain resources will only reintroduce confusion that we worked hard to put to rest so that was that's my comment I just want to see if I can address a couple of things so one I think when we when I was on the energy committee we had a Burlington consultant who worked on their plan to come talk to us about how to reduce miles traveled and what he told us is that you only really reduce miles traveled if people can walk to their services building homes in Greenfield where people still have to get in their cars doesn't really reduce miles traveled so I don't really see a tension between us you know um accomplishing the goals as a city in terms of our you know our particular goals and and our regional you know being in the region I don't see a conflict there because we talk about climate change we're talking about miles traveled right and the building Greenfields doesn't really reduce miles traveled so I don't really see that the tension I think Jesse that you were kind of trying to articulate I was not suggesting we build homes in Greenfields okay okay okay I mean I guess I just don't sort it out I don't see a tension between preserving our environment here and also being you know a good citizen in the regional community I guess I just I don't see that tension um in terms of the this this one sentence let me I did because I didn't really spend time on it when I went through um I know that a lot was done in Izzy but I don't think everything was done and there was certainly important resources that was shown that still shown are shown in the existing 2016 comprehensive plan that that are not protected and I think that we owe it to ourselves to to look at those resources right we I mean you know you guys did a great job during Izzy with the time you had um and there's you know potentially more to do so I don't think we should exclude the possibility um that there's that there's more to do right there was a lot of work done particularly on this map seven and eight over many many years with many reports to identify you know important natural resources and some of which remain unprotected and that's what I was trying to capture here right because it's still aspirational to try and do all that if we can yeah I mean I can as the one example I can just use grasslands I mean there was a lot of conversation about that and there is a lot of different definition and defining of grasslands that literally made it very complicated to regulate around it we're using an LDR which is why we ended up going the strategy we went which was to add it to a list that could be included in a in a conservation puny which is covering the seq right now practically grasslands they're outside the seq I'm sorry there are some areas that are outside the seq they're not covered that I think we owe it to ourselves to look at well I'm just I'm but but when it's when it's general like that it is implying as you said that it was not looked at and we spent a lot of time looking at it so I understand was it citywide was it if it's a general statement it can reintroduce so maybe it's the way it's worded maybe we can find a more specific way to discuss those specifics but I just I every time I see that line I'm going right back to Izzy and a good point I mean what citywide what is specific area I just want to say what Monica said I mean we we had a long conversation about grasslands farmlands agricultural and I think we we settled on incentivizing conservation but not regulating conservation on those and I guess to me that that seems like we're going back on what we just decided to do and we spent a lot of time talking about that and had strong feelings on both sides of it you can go ahead different topic oh um well I guess you know many I guess what I'm seeing is like many of these other statements are broader than the specific wording that Andrew brought up in your comment which was very specific and I guess I wonder if it's still appropriate to be a little more broad about you know conserving important natural areas or however we want to word it but to still be a little more broad in this vision and goals which has generally been like kind of a broad framework um yeah one other reason I reworded it is because it wasn't clear to me what the word important qualified um whether it was the class of resource or whether it was a parcel based important determination that was being made and I guess I wanted to clarify that these are the important resources it's not a it's not a parcel based like is this particular wetland important versus that one so that's that's why I kind of shifted some of those words as well yeah yeah and I guess um it's a good point and I think it's one for for the the grouped way and I mean I think the the rewording that you made might be taken as every inch of every one of those listed categories should be protected and you know our current rules have some exceptions they have some qualifiers different areas like city centers treated a little bit differently um you know I think there's nuances and even our current regulations and maybe what we might want to do in the future with some of those that I guess I just wonder if your wording is a little stronger than we might want to have on this page and I mean we could have stronger goal like you know maybe in the objectives and things so can I one follow though I think what Andrew is bringing up here though is opening the idea that are there things that we did during Izzy focusing on the seq that would make sense to go broader on I mean we don't have a conservation beauty outside of the seq yeah right am I missing am I yeah I'm gonna bring that correctly so like so are there aspects of what we did do in the seq which was a tremendous amount of work that might make sense in certain and help with I can think of an example of where something like that could be really beneficial and it's not in the seq and so it's not an option right now so um or not a requirement I guess so maybe it's it's the general which doesn't like that here this gets into nitty gritty but is there learning from izzy that focused on one area that we can perhaps expand maybe that would yeah I just wanted to comment on um the the um what jesse was trying to say about the the regional and state um pressures and and I think they are very real and they're hard to um navigate you know we have a regional planning commission that has designated certain housing requirements or goals for South Burlington now I know we're part of the regional planning commission but it's sort of like another group imposing on this community well you're where all the jobs are so you need to build all the housing and forget about open spaces or wanting to have you know whatever we want in terms of natural resources that that's more important and that's a force that you know that the city council has to resist or recognize I think it's true certainly with the climate change I mean we're not in this alone we have to do things um you know collectively but there's also things that as a community we can really focus on so it's a it's a very fine line I think to walk and be kind of part of the region um but also listen to and respond to our citizens I mean yeah we have a lot of jobs here we have two industrial parks so there's probably more jobs that are going to come because I don't think either of them are all filled up so that puts more pressure on well we now now you need to supply housing so you know there's all those goals we have them in here all of them are really very real and very important and I think the challenge for our comprehensive plan is to um respond to the needs or the desires or what's best for south burlington but not forget that we're part of a county a region and a state and that sometimes those demands intersect and they may make demands on us that we're not really happy with and how do you you know kind of walk that plank does our current comp plan even talk about the regional I'm not thinking that I had seen that in our comp plan the regional like whatever the regional coast plan is what I'm referring to that so it it does because under Vermont law communities have to be consistent with regional plans the regional plan tries to as best they can in chitin county reflect what their communities are after but they their objective is also to be looking at a county-wide level as to what is happening what they're what the patterns that they're seeing and um but we don't have something as specific in our current comp plan that says well here's what the region wanted and but here's what we're doing to address it but also where we differ like I mean that would be kind of interesting I think and I don't know how far out that yeah regional plan looks because we're looking out now basically 10 years are they doing the same and it would just be interesting for us to have a really good understanding of that because you're so so many different reports I I can't even recall but they try to be looking on a 25 year horizon I would say that that is also our goal to be looking at 25 years plus the plan is valid for eight to 10 years and that's what we you know operationalize as to our actions but um I think from our staff's perspective we're trying to lay out a plan that you know the roads that get built tomorrow will exist 100 years from now and probably a thousand years from now so we well might need to be repaid but the rights of way well um is there anything else so it sound it sounds like maybe um staff can kind of take a lot of our discussion and come up with a new draft for review does that make sense I think wordsmithing might be beyond us we are before we move on thank you Paul do you want to just one other thing I think there are inconsistencies in the existing camp plan that we should look at um I remember when we were having the discussion about the hill property and I found a section that said this land must never be encroached upon and I thought that's it I found it you know and Paul had another section of it that said pretty much the opposite of that you know so I really think we have to look at those things of issues in the plan great um I think that's a really good uh really good point Paul on a great challenge um you know even just in the last six minutes of conversation things popping off in my head are the question of the important question of um say grasslands and also the question of the business parks because those are in the same areas and so being clear in this plan as to what is the objective going forward um and the tool may be regulatory it may not be regulatory but that's that's an exact example of or hill farm this is another good one and I'm not trying to stick to geography but that's what popped in my head when you said that um so we've had a very uh commission and councils centric um discussion so far on the values visions and goals and that was um pretty intentional in the you know we're trying to come up with a a draft to then bring out for public comment but I just wanted to make sure there was no one um trying to give some input at this level um kind of this kind of broader level things that you want us to be keeping in mind as we go kind of finish up this draft any comment the audience yes from the audience Sarah would you mind coming up to the mic so that fix it folks at home can hear also and hitting the little green button thank you um I'm no longer ready to say anything specific I was taking notes like mad I spent the afternoon preparing to make some comments many of which were made by others and that's great um but then I kind of got the vibe just emailing with Michael earlier I specifically said is there going to be an opportunity tonight for you know public input because we had had a land trust meeting to discuss this yesterday trying to get our hit our head together about comments we might make anyway Michael's uh feeling was that that wasn't really what tonight was about it was about you guys talking which you've done you've just acknowledged that so I'm no longer you know revved up to a fever pitch to be able to share what what came into my mind all this afternoon and while you were talking I you know was wishing I could speak every other minute because I either really agreed or really disagreed with something so I mean you're you've had a great discussion it was very in livening and uh good for me to hear but I don't think I at this point in time make any helpful comments I'm sorry we have plenty of opportunity I just wanted to make sure we weren't like really I appreciate that there will be a time when we'll want to and maybe I'll even email some of it to some of you thank you Sarah thanks so I think what the other thing that I think would make sense to talk about is the next section that was highlighted in red which was areas of potential competing policy and we have talked about some of these already you know I think Paul brought up the very important idea that you know really checking through and making sure we're being consistent on particular issues I think we talked some about the environmental protection standards so I guess this could be a place where if there's some other topics we want to talk through now we can we have the opportunity to do that and then I think because this could be an amorphous conversation a little bit I just want to put out there we could also at this point mention areas of potential policy discussion within the plan so there were a few things that we bullet listed here under this item three already which were identified by the planning commission as areas where we wanted to make sure there was some more focus either because it was missing in the last plan or we feel like there's been more recent information and I think we had a few things identified already tonight that we would want to add to this so this would be education and kind of specifically reaching out to the school board and schools to make sure we're getting good input not only on their section but also how schools may affect other sections like land or housing or anticipated needs that might not only be about the school building itself but kind of the broader community and then we had also talked about carrying capacity might be a topic of importance too so I think those were the two I wrote down so if we identified something else that should be on this key subject area list and isn't on here already make sure you bring it up would that include either of them the demographic information so I think yeah so if you kind of look through the whole bigger list I think that the carrying capacity information would be like number six updates to the inventory analysis and conclusions so kind of putting in new information that could be demographic it could be about our housing stock it could be you know many different things kind of updating the numbers is that how you see that section call yes I think the way I know Michael's not here this any longer this evening but the way he framed it was also sort of a question that will be a difficult question to answer which is what does it mean to have it is how does one arithmetically consider what the carrying capacity of a place should be I think his starting point was globally his that were our consumption of resources exceeds the carrying capacity I think that we can take a good first step in that in this plan it may also be something that gets posed as somewhat of a question in this plan too just as you know the the 1979 plan posed the question of what does a city center look like to a south berlin you know these are evolutions I don't know that that's necessarily one unless that is advanced as a subject area across the country and across the world as to what this means but I think it's a great question to be posing I'm wondering if the comp plan should include either reference or giving standing to the open space committee report that identified you know during interim zoning specifically said look at all these properties tell us you know where the most sensitive I guess environmentally sensitive land is which could then be used to inform the city council or the city about what um parcels if they come up for sale would be appropriate to go after or save our money for it or go to the people and say would you when you want to sell you know would you give us first refusal or whatever the process is and I don't we didn't have that report in that work prior to the last comp plan and I'm wondering if it should be included or embedded or referenced in this comp plan since it's a piece of work that the city paid for and answered some questions that had been raised with some definitive ideas are you talking about the earth economics or the open space iz well it could be both but well arrow wood is from an even another generation but I wonder like with the opens space report it was used maybe outside of the secu in particular opens but within the secu it was used with all of the well really was used citywide with all of our habitat blocks and I think there's a lot of the land that's been added the thousand acres that's been added of habitat block is on a lot of that open space land so it would it would be a question of looking at of the part that isn't protected or something is it worth right right like not the okay I understand you know it actually might be good to have guidance from either um the council or or maybe city attorney like if if there are certain parcels that would be a priority to use for the open space fund is that something that we would want to be in the comp plan or is that something that would be like a secret list for acquisition I don't know what are those secret lists so we don't talk about in public yeah I mean I feel I don't have secret lists but that's the best no wait a minute there's nobody I don't want to talk well the planning commission doesn't have secret lists so but um you know I I know when there's acquisition discussions it's it's handled really separately and I guess I just wonder if um like we have the um I can't even the map official we have the official map which is very specific about purchases but um like I wonder if there's natural resource lands like where that would fit into all of the documents like the planning documents or well might because might the reverse be that we're looking at if we're looking at the creating the feeling of belonging and identifying an area that may be lacking an opportunity to belong say that using your example of a neighborhood that may take more infill then and then it's like we want to create a place for people where there isn't a place right now maybe it's our just putting a priority on those areas regardless of whether it's on another list or not and then if it happens to be on that list that can become a discussion for the city council really I guess of of is that an offered or a recommendation that the commission makes I don't know but it seems like maybe it starts by looking at how are we creating the belonging and where is there a what's missing out there that we would suggest the city target right does that make sense well it's both though I mean I think there's the belonging so if you really need to find land that would provide the um communal open space for a new neighborhood or an existing neighborhood that we change with infill that's one issue I think the money that we collect from the taxpayers for the open space is much more focused on um conservation of important natural resource areas although sometimes it's for recreational as well but it's like a pool right um but it's um so they're sort of a little bit different but but from our conversation tonight I think we need to think a little more broadly in terms of that neighborhood um Duncan can you turn your mic on I would think we would want to state it more generally I know andry this might be a question for you but I would think if we call out certain parcels is that that could be an issue is it yeah I mean courts time and time again especially the you know Vermont Environmental Court has talked about and again I'm not the city attorney just just to be clear about this but yeah and happy to play one on two yeah right um um you're a lawyer though right um but yeah the environmental court time and time again has talked about the comp plan has no binding effect on decisions that are uh or applications that from the drb that go before it um and so if the city attorney was here uh city attorney may say something along the lines of um and I think we did this in the last comp plan is had sort of disclaimer language about this this is an overarching policy document the things that are binding from a legal standpoint those are the the regulations that are later drafted through the ldr's of course informed by the comp plan but yeah getting that granular I don't think that's the purpose of of a comp plan rather the broader statement of you know this is important this is an important preserving open spaces but maybe that that statement of referring to that report and referring to open space near existing neighborhoods that don't have parks I mean those are two those seem like two important things that were identified tonight it's Sarah I don't want to come up again simply to say isn't there a way of just making reference to documents such as the open space plan within the comp plan saying simply there is this document and the direction for us if we make decisions another example that I found this afternoon is this thing was a reference maybe to the declaration of inclusion that you guys recently so I would say all of that makes a lot of sense and I would also challenge this whole group to make sure that we're holding what Paul said a few minutes ago to make sure that we're not inadvertently saying one thing from one supporting thing and saying a completely opposite from another supporting thing that that we challenge ourselves to identify where those points are and address that because I think that's you know one of that's a really important point other either missing policy discussion items or competing policies we want to talk about just wanted to say something about secret lists I think you mean executive session they go into executive session to discuss purchases of properties yes yes yes the the council I'm I am not on the council and do not know exactly when the executive session needs to happen and when it doesn't so that's really what I was referring to thank you Paul any other thoughts I know one thing that staff had put in here was transportation systems which may or may not point to the 12b topic I don't know if we need to talk about that now that's how I understood that paragraph so thanks for confirming that yeah I had a can I just go back to carry capacity again with um because I don't really know how that calculation would come through but I guess one thing I also think about we've talked about this before is um when you're looking at carry capacity you know we've talked about this concept of a residential unit being of a certain square footage rather than talking about this or this or that that you would you create a and if somebody wants to have a home larger than that square footage then it kind of counts as the the two or whatever what if we went that way we've talked about this over the years when you're talking about carry capacity how can we look at uh the size you know I don't know the the square footage per person or something like is it you know we we talk about we treat in our plans we treat in our conversations a studio equal to you know a six bedroom house so I guess I'm just wondering how can we how can a carry capacity um report help us with that because we've talked about you know are there should people have the ability if they're you know if a house can fit three families should it be allowed to how can we and what is that you know um so I don't know does that how is that fit into carry capacity because is it responsible for two people to have something that um can carry a hundred more people right while we're trying to all be environmental um so I I hope that makes sense when we're looking at carry capacity you know like the opposite almost of like allocation yeah not to say you can't but just to really understand so we can all be personally you know held accountable to I know we're um over the time we had a wadded is there anything else anyone wants to address before we say thank you to the council um I do see on the agenda that we also had an overview of the committee role is that a staff item yes I was just going to very briefly say that um the some some of the committees have been inquiring as to what their role is going to be um I think setting this piece for them was a key was and will be a key element and that it is an objective of the planning commission to be providing the committees with a framework of discussion that they will be strongly encouraged to have and to bring their policy recommendations back in in the spring so that's that's all I wanted to say was to get it on the record to say that it is um anticipate that they will have a significant role over the winter great well thank you yeah thank you I think this was very helpful oh I'm sorry yes I don't mean to interrupt Helen though she can finish go ahead I think I was probably going to echo the same thing Helen was going to say which is this was a really fabulous conversation I feel like I said this to some group recently I feel like you guys are functioning at like municipal government 401 level or something this is this is hard stuff where you really unpack um what municipalities can do to shape community and I'm just really impressed with the tenor of the conversation I think you've given us a lot of direction as staff to go and put some things together for you all and the community to respond to I think we still have some pretty big discussion points for the for the commission and the council to ultimately grapple with but really thank you sincerely for the thoughtful conversation tonight I'll just add if there's anything that the planning commission feels they need anything more from the council in terms of direction or thinking you know responding to something you might be talking about please let us know we're more than happy to weigh in or provide that increase in pay when to be nimble and when not to be that's true yeah that's a good one okay well thank you all very much and the planning commission is going to stay we have some additional agenda items perfect thank you I'm still on so update we only have one of the items because Sue and I the minutes aren't in the packet they'll be in your next meeting okay we're going to skip the minutes but we can move on to item six which is consider approval of the planning commission report and warning of a public hearing for the amendment to the LDRs LDR number 22-7 to modify the boundaries of commercial one residential 15 commercial one auto and commercial two zoning districts in the vicinity of the Shelburne Road corridor and I before somebody makes a motion I realized I put in the pack but I didn't put in there also LDR 2208 that would allow for municipal uses in C2 district that makes it so that the fire station can remain a conforming use okay so if you're okay with that yes um so I suppose we could move right into a motion or and then we can have discussion just that so we'll make a motion yes second you could read the motion can you open your microphone sorry Sue you want me to start again I moved to warn a public hearing on LDR 2207 and LDR 2208 for Tuesday October 25th 7 p.m. as presented in this meetings packet and to approve the accompanying planning commission report so I'm sorry second okay we have a motion to second um to warn a public hearing um any discussion on the motion I don't go ahead I don't have discussion on that well well I guess an extension of that motion not to change it a reminder that in our last meeting we did say that we had as a priority an interest in ensuring that certain health and safety and environmental codes are brought up to a higher level on all auto and we agreed to make that a priority we know that the new company that wants to come in actually has a very excellent plan in place they are being sued for sexual harassment and the codes from the top down at the company so just want to point that out however it's very bothersome however they do happen to have a good environmental plan and I don't know that all of our others do particularly the one that's bordering the elementary school so we made the commitment that we would make that a priority and I would hope that we can agree to when we will take that up after this okay auto safety um I I believe that the motion that passed last month was to last meeting was to look generally at the question of environmental not specifically at auto just to be clear because I think that was the thing that was removed from the motion no we what we've removed from the motion was the third point which was um to look at whether we should diminish the amount of auto but part two of the part two that did remain was committing to improving environmental regulations for auto is how we worded it okay okay particularly when that's around housing make sure that the minutes are correct okay that's I I have a slightly different recollection than you do on that monica I thought we took out the part you just asked about and said yes we would talk about study we would talk about it at a later date but I don't remember it being in the motion I thought we took it out of the motion well I've just distracted the conversation because it doesn't relate to tonight's motion but I would we can we should go back to the recording of the conversation because that was a three part and we agreed to take it down to a two part and the the third part was reducing auto all together so what we'll do is we'll go back to the tape and make sure that the minutes that you see in your next meeting reflect motion exactly the motion okay and then we can at that point take up if it was agreed to that we would hopefully get that priority on the table so we'll check the tape thank you okay any other discussion on the motion Paul um there was a a time in one of the iterations of the um proposal that the building had to be empty for two years does anybody remember that I don't think we we didn't go that round we didn't we didn't so we just didn't go that route so that's not no it's your main to this motion okay Paul I guess a question on map two and probably should have raised this earlier but the um kind of the trees you know the left of hanaford and those um do we need to include that in the in the auto zone that's the parcel is that the parcel Paul right so we need to either remain in the c1 auto sorry remain in the c1 r15 or go into the c1 auto that's the existing zoning right can we leave that that that piece red I mean I would hate to see another auto dealer come in and tear down that forest I guess because this kind of leaves it open to do that right isn't that the stormwater ponds I think that is a stormwater oh well if it can't be built in any of it but it's right I mean we have our hopefully our seed truly my recommendation would be that we're happy to take a look at that question um if you wanted to advance the topic generally I would recommend that you warn it as shown and then under state law you are welcome make any changes you choose after the hearing but if you change it now yeah that becomes trickier for warning the hearing we did talk about adding protection for trees of a certain canopy exactly which is what I'm saying but if that were to pass it would it would take place on this land as well so if this um we change the zoning and now this does not have to be specifically evie auto it can be any okay so if um tesla is out of her you know the people who wish to rent it decide to bail we could have you know any other you know big trucks dealers or whatever so it couldn't be big truck but it could be a new car or a used car dealer i guess yep not in f-150s oh i thought it was big trucks like mac trucks no yes it could it could be um a hummer dealership yeah but i guess i might comment to that is what um what this did was it took basically existing acreage if you will that was auto and simply moved it because that the current auto has non-auto wanted it has the residential some of the new work it could have been auto so we didn't expand auto but we moved it and moved it off of the main we moved it away from yeah where right other discussion um any discussion from the public on the motion okay um all in favor of the motion which is to warn the hearing hi um that is unanimous of the commissioner's present um so the public hearing is warrant warrant for october 25th the end of your agenda um okay yeah because we don't have minutes we don't have too about it okay no minutes so we are adjourned thank you all very much thank you ladies thank you thanks everyone thank you get too many apples on your property no no bike by your house all the time