 Oh, I'm sorry, Mike, you ready? Call the meeting to order. First item is changes to the agenda. Sorry. That's OK. Yes, I'm ready. No changes to the agenda. Take it. Public comment? Sarah, anything that you want to say? No, thank you. Approve previous meeting minutes. We actually have two sets of minutes to approve. The May 23rd meeting was our last more formalized business meeting, and then the June 13th meeting, we formally had a meeting. But it was the East Allen Street Scoping Study local concerns meeting number two. So both sets of minutes in your agenda for tonight for approval. OK, so when folks have had a chance to look through that, I look for a motion to approve. We can do both at the same time. If you'd like, or we can separate them out. Emotionately approve them. My only, just small amendment is that my name is spelled with an E, not an A. Oh, jeez. Wait, was that me? No, that was me. It's not working. It's not working. It's not working. It's not working. Yep, sorry. I mean, that wasn't you, Joe. I'm always doing that, though. Is there a second to that motion? Was that a second? OK, out. Any further discussion? If none are all in favor, please say aye. With the correction. Opposed? OK. Minutes are approved. So discussion on draft work program. Yes, so your agenda is a copy of a draft work program for this year's activities of the Planning Commission. This is something that we've loosely been discussing and working on over the past couple of meetings that we've more formally put into a document based off of the strategy session that we had with Council, that leadership team had with Council back June 1st, and also some discussions with Council at their meeting on June 17th. As you may recall, at a previous meeting, we identified several key items that we wanted to advance forward to get Council's endorsement on regarding specific activities. And this document is intended to reflect those discussions from Council and what they've identified that they would like to see the Planning Commission work on for this year. So what I wanted to do with this first draft was give you all an opportunity to look at it to see, one, if it makes any sense in the format that it is in, or any clarifications, things like that. And therefore, are there any changes that are needed, any additional detail, any additional information to include, things like that? And then if you're comfortable with what's here, then start looking at potentially an order of operation for how to start implementing this work program. These aren't in any specific order right now, just kind of how I put them together. So that's really the intent here. For this item on discussion tonight, it's just to kind of give you all an opportunity to start to establish the big goals, I'll say, for the big actions and activities for the Planning Commission to work on over the next year. That's not to say this is the only work we'll do. We may do other things as time allows, but this is really kind of to set the framework and give us a direction moving forward. So. Okay. Comments? And I don't know, I'm sorry, I don't know if the mayor wants to add anything on their discussions at Council and how that reflected in this document. Yeah, I would just say this does really well reflect what we discussed at the Council meeting and at the strategy session in response to the items that you all brought forward. It was well written, Eric. Thank you. So at least there's consistency. Yes, good. Only thing I, if this is a work plan, we've talked about over the years, revisiting zoning and tweaking different parts of it. I know some of that's in here, but I mean, I don't know about, there might be specific areas of zoning that we want to attack and review. Yeah, absolutely. And so I don't know, I'm thinking that should be in here without any specific maybe. Just kind of general zoning updates. Yeah, because you've identified some issues that come up from time to time. Right. We've also, we've talked about things that not sure we want to get into, but like Gilbrook, Casarab Park, those are the things. Right, and that's something we could look at as well if we want to consider adding that in other, as either part of just general zoning updates or specifically looking at those land use, future land use components, which we did identify in the master plan as something for future discussion or because they will have the broader context of what the zoning is in those locations. So we could either look at that in conjunction with zoning updates or as a separate item and just focus directly on those specific areas. So yeah, we can have that discussion as well. So I don't know if you want to go through the document item by item or I'll leave that up to you all as the planning commission for how you want to discuss this or just say, yeah, looks great. Well, I mean, I guess, you know, there are certainly some things that have been brought to us before that seem like they're more important or bigger priorities than maybe some other stuff. I mean, I'm thinking of parking regulations. We've had that discussion, form-based code. We've had that conversation, historic preservation. I guess they're basically all the ones here, but... Right. Or to put them in, you know, I don't know. Well, I think the one new item that we haven't really talked about much is item number three, the incentives for development priorities. And I think that might be a broader discussion to have is what are some of the development priorities for the community and what we can do as a planning commission or what we can do from a regulatory perspective to help incentivize those priorities. And I guess that kind of, all these other things will fall under that. You know what I mean? They all seem to be, have commonalities. When we start talking about incentives for development and we're going to be talking about parking, we're going to talk about historic structures. We're going to talk about form-based code because that's really where new development, you know, incentivizing developers is going to happen at least initially in the form-based code. Well, yeah. I mean, it could also happen in other districts for sure, but that's where the incentive is now. Yes. That's where the incentives are now and that's where development is primarily happening now. There's a couple, you know, there's the one on the Claire Street that is that ever going to happen? I don't know, I guess. But, you know, other than that, so really the focus seems to be for new development in the gateway districts in the form-based code centers. So I think, I don't know how we, how we get specific on these topics because I think they're all going to overlap. That's my thing. I don't know what anyone else thinks. Joe, do you think I'm crazy? No, I'm kind of thinking of what I'm thinking of. A lot of thoughts and percolating. Are you feeling like we need to prioritize them to move through them? I guess that's kind of my point is I don't know if we need to prioritize and we're just starting getting into it, but I guess the question is where do we start? Well, that might be, yeah, maybe it's less of a question about priority than what is the most important item to start really engaging with. I feel like the parking in the form-based code or what rises to the top for me, just because at the pace of development, it would be nice to get a handle on those two things as they affect the structure of our community. The historic preservation and the incentives are both important, but if I were to prioritize Joe he probably has a different listing of priorities, but I'd like to get a better form-based code and now we're seeing what it looks like on the ground and if we're not happy with it, I sort of feel some urgency to make corrections. I'm not sure how others share that. I agree with you. At the same time, though, I feel like. It affects that one too. I feel like we need to do something about historic preservation before there's no historic left to preserve. And I do think that the place to start, though, is reviewing form-based code, but I don't know if we can do those two at the same time. I think so, because this one calls upon a consultant, the historic preservation one. It's really not something we do per se, versus I feel like the form-based code is something we would actually dig into. So I guess just where are we in terms of city-seeking grant funding for historic? Well, so one of the grants that we've identified is something that a project like this would fit nicely into is the Municipal Planning Grant, which generally they announce the application cycle, I think in September is kind of when they open it with grant announcements towards the end of the year. It changes a little bit every year, depending on kind of funding availability what the state has going on. But that's one of the primary items that we've identified. It doesn't necessarily need to just rely on grant funding, though, I think, depending on the activities. It could be that the Planning Commission could engage in some community forums or getting just general input from the community on these issues, whether or not it's hosted by the Planning Commission or some other venue to start kind of setting the table for what the priorities might be. However, that may be more appropriate to allow someone with, how do I say this? Not that you don't have that ability, but someone with more specific facilitation skills to engage the community more directly on some of those issues. I think what we had talked about at the council level in particular was historic preservation is important, but we don't really have a good handle on the resources that we have right now. I think the last survey that was done was in the late 70s, Joe, is that right? 79, I think? Yeah, so we don't know what's still out there, and most of that survey was just a building and structure survey. So maybe there's districts, maybe there's specific landscapes or viewsheds or locations that are of significant historic importance to the community, that we wanna make sure we have an inventory of what the resources are first to be able to then figure out how we wanna preserve and protect those resources. So, and we didn't feel like we have anywhere near the expertise to be able to do that, which is why bringing somebody else on board to do that work is gonna be, I think, critical. With that said, the Planning Commission, I see the role of the Planning Commission is to take that work and then craft the regulatory framework around it to make sure that that then gets incorporated into the regulations to be able to have a mechanism to implement that protection of resource. So it will take a little bit of time, I think, yes, which is, you know, that's one of the challenges with something like this, but at the same time, I think without knowing what the resources are that we're trying to protect and kind of the direction we wanna go for protection, it makes it difficult to start, it makes it difficult to put regulations in place that are gonna be effective. Yeah, that is kind of like, and I said when we were working on the master plan there was kind of a broad stage of preserve historic buildings, like that was what it said, but you can't really preserve them if you don't know what they are, because every time I've heard something really significant in the city being destroyed or dramatically altered, it's like, well, that wasn't really historic, it's like, well, then what is? So it kind of, it's catch-pointy-do, but it should be said as well is that these aren't really that revolutionary and idea to have a design review board to make provisions for this. Burlington has this, a lot, a number of other communities has it. Something to consider. So I wonder if to start this, we just talk about maybe, I think we're Abby started, what we've seen in the Gateway districts, the good, the bad, the ugly, and then get into from that. That's where I think all these things are gonna overlap because we're gonna get into parking, we're gonna get into historic structures, we're gonna get into maybe incentives for developers. Yeah, because there should be rehabilitation incentives for historic buildings that people wanna make them viable and like I said this before is that like the buildings on the west side of Main Street is like, that's kind of where we see the hustle and bustle of the city, those are all historic buildings that are being well used and maximized. But it does extend beyond the Gateway corridors too. Like one of the things I heard recently was, I met the pastor of the Faith Baptist Church on Platt Street. He was talking about, that's a state historic register structure. He was saying, yeah, we wanna demolish the steeple on this. He's like, we're gonna put an addition with new bathrooms in the front and so on. And he's like, the only reason that we didn't do this is because we went to the zoning administrator and they said because it would be expanding a non-conforming structure. But if the lot had been a little bit bigger, he totally would have been able to do that, which would have really erased the character of a really significant building in that neighborhood. Just an example. Right. So I guess my thought is we start with the discussion of what we've seen in the Gateway districts and the form-based code districts and see where that takes us. Yeah. Does that make sense to folks? Yeah, I guess I'm just curious about where we left the discussion about the split zoning on that. Did we, was there ever a conclusion to that? I know I missed a meeting. There was not. Okay, because that's something I think that's part of this conversation. Which again, I think can be captured in that discussion of what we're seeing in the form-based. To me, I think that the pressure is the form-based code where we're seeing all the development and is this what we envision, is this what we want? Is this still our vision? Do we need to tweak it, leave it alone? What are we going to do with the form-based code? And I think all those things are going to come up. So it's going to be, I think it's going to be a conversation that's more than five minutes at one meeting. And so split zoning is addressed in form-based code or can be addressed in form-based code? I think we'll have to address it because that's one of the issues that's popped up with form-based code. And I think it's important to know that we may be, we may look at the form-based code over that vision and the changes that come out of or proposed changes that we come up with, I think we should be looking at the entire city, not just on our gateways, because things like split zoning can happen anywhere, not just in the gateways. So we want to make sure that we're, at least from my perspective, as the zoning administrator, the less complex the regulations are to enforce and to interpret the easier it is for me to do my job. So I guess that's a way of saying, we should think of it as split zoning city-wide, not just split zoning in the gateway and then split zoning everywhere else as a secondary thing. Same with historic structures. Exactly. It's going to be city-wide. So as we get into, as we identify these issues that have popped up in the form-based code, we'll have to look at how do they relate to the city as a whole? I mean, because there are some things that are going to be specific to the gateway districts or the form-based code, and some things that, like you say, are going to be relevant to the whole city. We just have to deal with it as we go along. Well, any other comments that all make clear as mud, is that the term? Someone brought up the parks, zoning for the parks. Does that fall under any of these categories? What was that, zoning for the park? Yeah, zoning for parks is Parkland. Does that fall under any of these four areas? I think what I'm suggesting is we start looking at the form-based code stuff and the park stuff. Just keeping it on the radar? Yeah. Yeah, I was going to add a fifth item of just kind of general zoning updates. General zoning updates. Yeah, include things like the parks and some of the other just miscellaneous updates that we've discussed, additional definitions, referential updates that are incorrect in certain spots, things like that. So just more of the administrative type changes that are easy to get. Anything else on this? Well, I guess the only other thing is I would just ask if there's any more detail or any other information that you feel would be important to include in this document so that we can, I guess more formally put this out as this is what the planning commission is going to be working on this year so that people know what to expect and kind of give us a framework for the to set up basically the year. And I guess to that point, if there's any other big projects that you think we need to take on, not that this isn't enough already. Well, I'm not sure based on the previous discussion, I guess this is kind of, these are some of the things we're looking at but not necessarily how we're going to do it. You know what I mean? Because if we're, it would seem to me that maybe we put out, okay, we're going to take a look at form-based code. And as part of that, we'll be looking at these items. Or maybe it's our plan is to go through zoning and look at different areas as they relate to these. You know what I mean? Right. So someone has to pick it up and say, oh, okay, you're going to talk about historic preservation. You know, or you're going to talk about parking. Yeah, we're going to talk about it, but you know, not specifically, I don't know. I think I know what you're saying. I'm glad you do. These are all, because they are so interrelated, we're not talking about them exclusively as individual silos of discussion topic. And they will kind of reach out into one another. So it's starting with one topic potentially and then that kind of cascades into other. Yeah, so maybe it's something like as the planning commission, you know, reviews zoning and works this year, we'll be looking at how these items are being addressed. Does that make sense? Or am I just kind of talking to circles to myself? Well, like you said, it makes sense to me. Okay. Well, I would say that like the discussion that we had on a Saturday meeting was, I feel like it started in form based code and then like parking came out of that and the incentives. So kind of the way Mike is describing it of like that's where it began and these were broken out of there. So like I could see the sort of the order of operations being, you know, what are the things, what are these things that have popped up that we're concerned about? And then working through that with like incentives and parking being on that list. And is this plan like we need to get it in now to be able to deal with this in fiscal year 2020? Like if it's not on here, is it not something that we're gonna touch? I don't think so. I don't envision this being a exclusive work program that if something comes up that we need to shift gears, we can obviously shift gears to address those items. Yeah, because I would like to see us do some work on like complete streets. It's sort of could maybe fall under the parking because it talks about alternative transportation options, but like things like that that are pretty specific and not like big lifts. Like these are much bigger concepts and visions, but I just wanna make sure that it's not something that needs to like we need to sort of speak up about these programs right now to be able to work on them or make sure they're prioritizing the coming year. I mean, I think that's a good question. Initially I would say it doesn't hurt maybe to, obviously there are items you'd like to see on here that we could put on the work plan, but at the same time, maybe it'd be better to just add an item that's just a or add a statement that this is, this will help guide the direction of the planning commission, but not the exclusive direction of the planning commission, because I see something like complete streets potentially coming out of discussions with public works commission and they may leave that discussion, but then bring forward an item to the planning commission and then would get incorporated into the zoning regulations. So that would be something to come out of public works. I think that's probably where it would start, but then we would be, we would figure out how that gets incorporated into the regulatory mechanism of the zoning ordinance. So... Because it'll come up in form is code, obviously, and in parking, but... Right, right. Okay. Yeah, so I think it's interrelated as well, but I think to the point, yes, this is not going to be a, this is the only chance you get to look at this and if it's not on this list, we're not doing it this year. At least that's in my opinion. Chair sets the agenda, it's not going to be so. Let's go with the flow. Nothing concrete. So, anything else you need from us on this? I don't think so. Other than, you know, I'll make some changes to this and bring you back an updated version that incorporates some of this discussion. I mean, I guess as long as there's enough detail here for you all to get an understanding or feel comfortable with what the tasks at hand are, then I think that's what I need to know and yet we can take it from there. Any other thoughts on this? Great, okay. Thank you. Appointments to the Planning Commission. So we have some open. Thanks. Yeah, so I think this is, wanted to put this on the agenda for several reasons. One, we've got two openings officially now, I think. So was that being, Harka was also no longer? Harka, correct. Is that Harka? Correct, yeah. So Lindsay, well Lindsay got replaced. So who are they? Lauren, sorry. Palis. Oh, Palis is no longer. Right. I miss that. As of July 1st, she was moving to South Bronx. So she's moving. Yeah, the meeting on the 13th, she mentioned. Yeah. I totally missed that. Whoa, how did I miss that? Yeah, I don't know. You guys weren't here? Where you guys are? I'm not here. Yeah, I was here. Yeah. I just missed that last one. She mentioned it to you folks, but I guess I didn't hear it as like a proclamation. It wasn't like, she didn't come out and say I'm leaving. It was kind of like, by the way, I'm moving. So I'm going to step down. Yeah, because at our last, like I missed the update, the sound with one before that, she was staying on the problems that she was having with her neighbors and I didn't hear anything about her moving. Yeah. I think what she told me, she was hoping to find something in Ruzki, but she found something, I think South Bronx. It's not Burlington, yeah. Patrick wrote her someplace. Near the new market street. Because of the situation with her neighbors, I was just not getting any better. Yeah. Okay. Is Amy still with us? Yeah, she's in Spain right now. So we need two people. Well, I think part of it, part of the item is that I wanted to at least talk about is yes, we need, we're down two. I mean, we have a complement of members to hold quorum since we only need three technically. The membership is five. We have two alternates, two alternate positions. So I guess I just wanted to confirm that everybody else is still interested in continuing to serve on the planning commission as well before we put out a notice to the public to say, hey, we're looking for members. I am, you know, just want to make sure that everybody is, is, everybody that's currently serving is still interested in continuing service. Can you say there's three members and two alters? What's the current makeup? So it's five members and two alternates. So seven members total. So a quorum for us is three members. Yeah. So right now the regular members are Mike. Mike, you, Abby, Amy. Okay. And Palace was another regular member. And Joe is filling Lauren's vacated seat as an alternate and Harco was the other alternate. And did Harco give an explanation? Like, why is he not? He was just too busy with his kids and family and stuff. That's too bad. Yeah. So he hasn't been able to make it. He just said, I can't. Yeah. And his first response, I emailed back said, so are you saying you're done? It wasn't really clear. Yeah. He basically said yes. Okay. So that said, everyone's interested. I think we should promote Joe to. Well, and that's something else I was gonna suggest as well is that it might make more sense to promote Joe to a regular member. And then we look for two alternates. To appoint. What are the terms again? I know. What are the standard years? Yeah. I've already served 49. Oh, yeah. And you've already served 60. I believe they're two year terms. And I meant to bring the list of people's appointment dates and expirations. Changed it to go from by fiscal year, so July 1st. Yeah, July 1st. Yeah. But I just couldn't, I think I'm in, this is going into my second year of my term, but I'm not sure. So it'd just be interesting to know like where everybody is with their terms. Just so if people are wanting to stay on or leave or whatever. Right. And I believe at one point, Mike, your term expired, but then you were kind of intramely reappointed for a period or, I'm not exactly sure how that, that was all before I came on stage. Is there like a set number of terms that you can serve or? I don't think there is. I don't think so. I don't think so, yeah. You know, at one point, at one point when I was on the council, we, I don't know if it was for all these commissions, but you serve one, you get to do another one. And after the second one, it goes out to the public. And if no one's interested, you can be reappointed, but I don't know if that falls for the plan. That's, I was just reading the bylaws. I didn't see that in there. Okay. Maybe we're not doing it anymore. You know, I ripped it out. Seth ripped it out. Anyway, but it would be good to know what our, what our terms are. Yeah. I can provide that information to folks as well, because yeah, I think before we, before we put out a call for members, it'd be good to know how many members we're looking for and so that. What position, how long those terms are for. Exactly. Yeah. So, okay. And just if, Joe was going to take over Palace's position, is that just for the remaining term of her position or is that two years starting with July 1st? That's a good question. I think that's something we can, I'm not sure. I'll have to look into see if there's any guidance in the bylaws on that or not. When they moved you into this position, did you have to go through that interview process? I went through a city council hearing. There was, there was kind of an appointment, right? Yeah. So I think with Joe, we, we did talk. So we, normally we would interview people. Right. The process is that the applications are submitted. There's a discussion between myself and the chair and I believe the mayor as well or the liaison, council liaison, to review the applications, to see who we want to potentially consider. And then that those candidates are interviewed with Joe, because he had been participating in so many meetings and was here so much. We had a conversation with the mayor and the chair and basically just agreed to forego the interview process and just appoint Joe. And I had like a long standing application actually for the developer view board. And so I think that kind of got rolled over to this. Right. Yeah. So he did submit an application. He just dispensed with the interview just because he had been to so many meetings and was engaged in the discussions over such a period of time. So, but yeah, okay. We'll put out a call for looking for two members of the planning commission and then we'll let you all know about your appointments and I guess reappointing folks as needed. The council. The council will. Oh yeah. Sorry, yes. Council will reappoint folks as needed. Okay. Discussion of officers. So I, so I think with our, the way our bylaws are written is that the first meeting of, the first meeting in July, the commissions will elect officers, but I don't know if we want to do that tonight. Just because it's not everybody's here. And with, I believe Palace was the vice chair. Palace was the vice chair and we've been talking for two or three years about her taking over as chair. No. And it never happened. So I have continued this role, which I will continue to do unless someone really wants to do it. Don't look at me, Mike. I'm looking at you. Stop looking at me. Anyway, it's out there, but we do need a chair, a vice chair and a secretary. Yeah. Yeah. So I mean, I guess we, but why don't we, why don't we, at our next meeting, take that? Look at that. Take that up. And in the meantime, folks, whoever's interested, can contact Eric and say, hey, I want to boot O'Brien out of there and be the chair after all these years. Or whatever. Whatever. And you and me. Hey, like I said, I'm happy with whatever people want to do. I'll sit here. The original thing was I would be chair for a year until Palace got up to speed or people got up to speed because nobody had to chair a committee or sat on a committee before. So here we are. And then back to square one. And that's, that's fine. It's not a big deal to be the chairperson. Just throw it out there for folks, you know. So if someone wants to do it, please feel free to step up. Someone wants to be the vice chair, please step up. And if someone wants to be the secretary, please step up. Only Terry does. No, I'll continue if no one else wants to. Gotcha. All right. So before the next meeting, if you can just make your wishes now to Eric, that'd be great. Yep. And I will. And there's no cool or anything like that. It's just. No coup officially yet. No official, no official coup. Right. It will be planned out this morning. That's pretty. I hope you're packing it to the next meeting or so. God, scary. Okay. So how about department and city updates? So just a few updates. Let's see. Next week, the development review board will be meeting. There's two items on their agenda, conditional use approval for 276th Island Street, the hillside park. Looking to put a school in out there. So that's an item that was actually came forward last year, right about the time I was coming onto staff. They were contemplating, they were contemplating moving out there, but weren't able to get everything in process to be able to start the school year. So now they're hoping to, they do it again this year. So. Where is this? It's the industrial park out on East Allen Street, right by the gas stations. Yeah, the one that we talked about, multiple meetings. All that, no one knew was behind the gas stations. Oh. If you're leaving. Oh yeah, yeah. So they want to put a school? Yep. There's an existing building towards the back that was an office, I think, at one point that's been vacant for several years, it sounds like. And so they're wanting to do some... Do they know about the noise? Yeah. About the what? I don't know. It's like right in the 70 decibel. Yeah, that's, I don't know, but they... What school is it? It's the Belvedere Academy. Which is a preschool? What is it? I'm not exactly sure. I'm not exactly sure what it is, but I don't believe it's a preschool. So anyway, so they're coming in for conditional use and then there's another appeal on our agenda for a project on West Spring Street. Some concerns about stormwater with the approval that went forward, so that'll be on that agenda also. But anyway, that's next Thursday. Outside the form-based code? Correct. What's the project on West Spring Street? It's... Somewhere. Read about the property where the warehouse was that... Storage units? Yeah. The redevelopment of that property. Basically, a duplex is in the back, or a duplex in the back, that one of the neighbors has some concerns about the stormwater plan for the project. What is there now? Is there a duplex there now? And then these storage units? So there's a home on the front and then was basically the whole rest of the lot was. So it's a very deep narrow of the lot, though. Basically the whole rest of the lot was this warehouse. So it was just one of the duplexes. I used to drive down on streets and I was like, how did this happen? Yeah. Yeah. I knew you were on that street. Yeah. Wasn't it, I think it would clear, but not with Claire, but like Archambault that they used to have a furniture store? Oh, did Louis Lasage live there? I think so. Okay, maybe he did that. Yeah. Okay. I want to think it was associated with like furniture store or something out there. I could be. Yeah. Anyway. It's usually an explanation for how these things play out, huh? Yeah. So I just want to warehouse my backyard. But it basically consumed pretty much the entire lot. So they're going to remove that and they are allowed to do a duplex back there. So they're putting that in. It's a great justification for zoning, you know, because otherwise that's what you had at that point. That's just a random storage unit in the middle of a neighborhood. Yep. So a few other updates. Let's see. Oh, the DRV issued a decision on the appeal to the main mansion project that went out Tuesday, I think. Well, it was signed on Tuesday. So we mailed it out on Tuesday. And? Yeah, I said the same. And? I won't put it in the minutes, but I'd like to know what it is. Let's. I would encourage you to read it. I read it. Isn't it basically they supported you except for the use of 18 Manchester Street as a parking lot in, because it's an IRC zone? So they, they, they denied the appeal in the law consolidation. They denied the appeal. Which means that the law will be consolidated. Correct. Okay. Well, I mean that could, caveatting this, the DRV decision is going to be appealed to the environmental court. They denied the appeal on the development, on the zoning approval for the development on the portion of the property in the gateway zoning district, but remanded the decision back to me to re-review the portion of the project in the RC district. So can you explain that in layman's terms, please? They want me to re-review the project but only on the RC portion of the newly consolidated lot. So the former, what will be the former 18 Manchester Street lot to make a determination of consistency with the regulations. So if it can be used for parking, that's the way I read it. And if, because that's what it was being used for. In essence, kind of, yes. And, and what I also read is if you determine that no, it can't, then the whole thing comes back to, does it meet parking? The whole project meet parking. Anybody? I'm not sure about that. I don't, I mean, I don't know. I'm still, I'm still trying to figure out some of the nuance of the decision as well. And how, what my role is moving forward. I was, because it was an appeal of my decision, I wasn't involved in any of the discussions or deliberations. So the city's attorney wrote the decision and helped guide the DRV through those discussions. So I hadn't, I don't know what the thinking was behind any of it or what the involvement was. So I still have a few follow-ups, but that's the long and short of it is that they, I guess my interpretation of the decision is for the most part, the DRV denied the appeal except for a small portion of the lot. So basically it's gonna move forward as long as the parking can be met. Is that, did I understand that correctly? They are asking me to re-review The parking portion. Just, well, not the parking. It's not only parking, but the portion of the project that's in the RC zoning district for consistency with our zoning regulations basically to make sure that that's what's being proposed and there is still consistent or is consistent with our regulations. So that's kind of where that landed. So that's like, not a decision because that's just basically saying you do the same thing again. Well, the way I read it was the DRV looked at it said wasn't sure that the use of 18 Main Street as a commercial parking lot is consistent with zoning regulations. That's how I interpret it. And that's why they sent it back to Eric to say, does that meet the regulations as written for the RC zone? That's how I interpret it and who knows if someone else might interpret it. I also interpret it to also say that if that doesn't, then does the whole project meet the parking regulations required? Right. Yeah. They seem intertwined. Like the developer's not gonna move forward until he knows whether you can put a lot, parking lot on that property. Like they're not gonna move forward with a gateway lot until they meet zoning code which requires a certain amount of parking. Well, if Eric decides that they can do it then it can move forward subject to an appeal of the DRV decision. If Eric decides that, oh, now I guess you can't do that then they've gotta, they can appeal it but barring that, they would have to redesign the project so that the parking requirements are now met. I think that's... I mean, I interpreted it a little bit differently but in essence the way I think... But you're wrong and I'm right. I think what the DRV ultimately landed on was our form-based code has a mechanism in it whereby if a project meets the regulations of the form-based code it gets issued a certificate of conformity. What the DRV, I think, what they were what they were concerned about was because the entire property, the consolidated property is not all within the form-based code that portion in the RC district shouldn't be covered by the certificate of conformity and should be covered by some other review mechanism. And they wanted that, they want that to be reviewed under some other mechanism and documented as such for how the review is conducted. Is, I think is kind of what they've said. So does this set a precedent on split zoning then? There was some language about that. That was discussed at the development review board meeting was that people were saying, you know, this will set a precedent for how things move forward and what other developers are allowed to get away with. That's why we had kind of put... Meg, I don't know. I don't know, I think there's a lot of things I'm still not clear on quite frankly. So anyway, they issued their decision. It's public, it's been recorded. I'd encourage you to all read it if you're interested. Is it on the website? It is not. I'm waiting for... So it's been formally recorded. I'm waiting for the clerk to give it back to me after she makes all the copies for the books and gets it in the books formally. But it is a public document. We have it available. I think we probably... I don't know if we have a place on the website to put it. So I don't just want to throw it out there. So if I was to say in here or someone's watching us right now, where would they find it? Well, they can come to City Hall. And... I would think that you could put it under the DRB. Well, we may. And like I said, there's not a place currently for that type of information. So it could go there or it could go under the Project Review Committee page with the other project documents. It's more a matter of just where to put it if we're gonna put it out there. And then does that mean we're putting all these decisions out there for everything? So anyway, it's precedent. We can provide the document if people are interested, I guess is another way to put that. So there was some interesting discussion at that DRB meeting. And one of the things I found a little bit troubling about it was when Mr. Gamache was making his remarks about the project is that one member of the board actually asked, well, how do you consider this a neighborhood? And it was like, how do you not consider it a neighborhood? It was really bizarre. And then that was actually responded to in some of what I read from that. It's like, well, you can't really consider this a neighborhood. Well, what do you consider a neighborhood then? It was just, that was a little bit alarming to me is that just from a perspective of how the Delmer View Board makes decisions. That's like a darling neighborhood. It's a neighborhood. Yeah, I don't know how you don't consider that a neighborhood. Neighborhood. Anyhow. Let's see, other updates. I think those might be the only updates I have. Christine there. At this point. Where did we last? It's been a while. May, wasn't it May? The Planning Commission or the Council? Planning Commission. I'm trying to think of what has happened since then. July 13th was the, well, the east out of the street. July 13th? June 13th. Sorry, June 13th. But the last, our last real meeting was May 23rd. I thought May was the month we skipped. No, June. We skipped the end of June. April. April, and then we skipped the last meeting of June. There weren't enough people. Anyhow, I don't remember everything that's happened since then, but we did submit public comment official, like an official city comment on the noise map and noise capability program. And I have met with the chair of the South Burlington City Council and the mayor, can you remember that word? Burlington. So we started some discussions about how we can work together with them, just surrounding the whole noise program since it's a weird ownership situation there. Yeah, there's some receptivity. Yeah, yeah. So I think that's, that stuff is, feels like it's on a good track right now. And what's like next steps for the noise mitigation and funding? The airport is submitting, they plan to submit the map by the end of August. So we had requested that they add like daycares and make sure it's schools and the community center and stuff around there. And then there is some sort of review period with the FAA that's longer than you would like it to be. And then they will respond to the map and then do the noise compatibility program. So I think it's gonna be several months before we actually get to the part that matters. And do we play a role in nudging along the process? Well, we can try. Okay. Like I said, Gene, he submits all that because it's on the map, so just like checking in. It's us checking in with him, yeah. Everything else. I don't think we would reach out directly to FAA. Yeah. Okay. But you just talked about just talking with our congressional delegation. Oh yes, I've been doing a lot of outreach there. Yeah, what's that look like? Some meetings are getting scheduled. Okay, so you haven't met with them yet? Not yet, no. Okay. But we are in the works. I think they'll take several. And we need to coordinate, there's a lot going on. Some meetings involving congressional delegation, getting our state representation together as well. And we just, and I met with the school board chair at Superintended as well to discuss this and how we can partner together on that and see if we can help them out with their project and mitigation for the school in some way. That, I feel like, is the biggest thing that's taken place over the last two months. Good. Joe, you look like you want to say something. Oh, I was just thinking about it. I was flying back from Charlotte, North Carolina last week and it was pretty clear. It was actually on the 3rd of July and you could see fireworks and so on. But it was like in the plane. I was like, oh, that's Waduski. Wow, we are close. Yeah. You can see downtown very distinctly from the plane. I could just find your house. Yeah, you can. I told you I know where my house is. People have joked coming over to my house. Wow, you can check the tire pressure on those planes as they're coming over your house. Yeah. I heard a chat on Tuesday. Yep. Yeah, what was that? F-16, wasn't it? It looked like it. It was a 16. I haven't heard. My son said that on the, I guess, the National Guard sent out that an F-16 from South Carolina, North Carolina someplace came in and then took off. So they haven't gotten rid of them completely? Well, we have, except for, well, no, I mean if, you know. I know we have, but nationally, I thought they had phased them all out. No, they are phasing them out, but it's just gonna take years. I mean, I thought they've been phasing them out for years, but okay. There's a lot of them out. Yeah. We're shipping them off to, you know, who knows. Afghanistan. One other thing that I think we discussed in our last official meeting was the, maybe Abby and Terry know something about this. They're rolling out of the pilot project for the bike lane on East Spring. Is that still moving forward this summer? Yeah, that's a great question. Yeah, we were talking about that right there on the meeting. Is it Pam who chairs the walk-by committee? No. Meg. Meg. And I can't remember. And then Allegra from locomotion. So we need to do some follow-up because I think Allegra was waiting for Meg to schedule a meeting. Another meeting, yeah. And I was kind of surprised there wasn't one for June or July scheduled yet. Usually we would meet right before this meeting, but oddly, we haven't. So I guess one of us can reach out and find out what's happening at that. As far as I remember, it's still planning for September, right? Oh, September. Yeah, just because it was back to school. People were back. People were back for vacation. It can be so hot. Because I was kind of curious about how, when we had that, it was like, oh, that sounds like a really cool idea. And then I started thinking like, but if the CAS event overlook project wasn't done yet, it was still, like, what would that lead you into? Oh, sorry, it's not on East Island. It's on East Spring, she. East Spring, yeah. Did I say East Island? Sorry, I meant East Spring. Okay. Yeah, like, where do you go when you get to go to East Spring? Yeah, I want to be great riding and then all of a sudden, you know, no man's life. We're still trying to get John to repaint the lanes that exist on East Island, right? Because they have bike lanes currently. So at least you can funnel into Winnieski off of East Spring fairly easily and put the other direction has some challenges. I have another item I just thought of. Okay. We are going to, at our August 19th Meet the City Council meeting, honor Rita Martell with a resolution. So I don't, do you all know her, she? She participated in the first scoping study, East Island scoping study effort. She's an older lifelong resident who's just been very involved for a very long time. Worked on this, is she still in the historic society? Yeah, she's still in the face of president, yeah. She lived on East Spring. She lived on the corner of Hood and East Spring. She has sold them. Yeah, yeah. Sold them like two days or three days. Oh, is that the house that's right? Oh, it did sound. Yeah, she's been under contract. Yeah, right at the corner. With the nice flowers. Yeah, oh yeah. And she also, she's the one that does the flowers across the street and the little dip. Oh no, who's gonna take care of us now? Well, The new one? No, no, she and, and, what's the, And the Yates. And the Yates. And her mother-in-law's former house is up for sale now. And then the house on the other side of Rita on the East Spring is for sale now. Yeah, I saw that. I didn't even know there was a house there. And I'm like, oh, they're selling an empty, oh, there's a house up there. Which is actually on Hood Street address, I believe. Yeah, because there's no driveway out there. Yeah, it's kind of an odd. Even though the house next to it, there used to be a driveway up there, a very steep driveway for the East Spring that eventually got filled in. But continue, that was very interesting. Well, so I was gonna say, for you, Joe, and Mike, I would ask you, what's that? Is she leaving when you sleep? Yeah, she's moving into, Bulliston Place, I think it's called. Yeah. How to Blair Park. A new, it's a new senior house. Like a senior housing situation. What town, in Williston? Yeah. So yeah, I was gonna ask Joe and Mike if you wanna contribute to help us out with this resolution and what to say. And if there's anyone else you think I should contact, let me know. Well deserved, boy. Well, you guys have a fascinating life. The resolution, but like. It's just like honoring her service, like long service to the city. She's like in her 90s and been. Okay. Provected. I think she's old. I think she's 89. Yeah. Oh. She's 89. We'll do it. Cut that, please. Yeah. She's an octogenarian. Yes, yes. She has done a lot of sort of, like decades of service for the city, so. Wonderful. Okay. Any other business? Can I just? Absolutely. And I never, I'm never quite sure where certain topics, you know, we bring them up in, but so the form-based code stuff, the, one of the meetings I went to, I don't remember. I think the big long Saturday meeting, just, we were talking a little bit about how you, how we reach out into the community more to have input from people is, like how are people feeling? I mean, we all have the opinions about how we feel at this table about form-based code and how buildings being developed and built along. But are we coming up with ideas of how we're going to reach out to more of the community? Is that being done? Is there, you know what I'm talking about? Do you need help? You know, I mean, is there, yeah, how do we get the voice of how everybody in the community is feeling about it? Yeah, and that's the age-old problem is you and I had this discussion. You call a public hearing and you get five, maybe 20 people. Maybe you fill the room if it's a really controversial topic. But how do you, you know, when you get a room full of people who are all on the same page or you get 10 people who are all on the same page, how do you know that reflects the whole community? So one thing I was wondering, did we talk about this in our ongoing, about possibly at the farmer's market, you know, just having a stand with some right back of a postcard or some questions or just something that just gets, you know, in a more casual way, is there a way to get discussion going that's sort of friendly and abundant? If we're at a crossroads for this right now, because I think, again, correct me if I'm not quite hearing what you're saying, but some of this form-based code, these buildings are growing up and some of us are kind of like, oh my God, this is what we want. And in a sort of, yeah, a more informal way, can we, is that voice, are other people in that community, in the community having that voice? I observed, and I think I mentioned it to Mayor Lott, was that attending the East Allen scoping study, I was pretty disappointed by how many people showed up for that. Just considering what a major impact of that will have in the city, you really considered how many people were there, it was very small. And you know, like I remarked, for instance, how many people alone live in city lights on East Allen Street? And I can't think of anyone from that building who showed up at that meeting. And it does seem like there's a missing piece here. Yeah, it's more like the outreach to get people to talk. I mean, like I've said before, this is always sort of uncomfortable to come to these meetings and speak. I mean, it's not, you know. It's not for everyone. It's not for everyone. And so is it a changing of the format that makes it a little more easy to reach out to people. And we do have things like the farmers market and when you see now there's a lot of events. Is there a venue to put forward in which we can talk more casually and people might have something? It's hard to make meetings. I mean, and I think that getting out to people where they're already at and stuff like that. So we've done that for other initiatives at the farmers market. And I certainly think we should or could do that for this. But I agree that people that aren't here often are the ones with kids or the ones who have evening jobs or the ones who, you know, have other commitments. That doesn't mean they don't care. And it's not being represented in the decisions. I think that's a good suggestion to get out there and just, I mean, we could start with a simple question like how do you think form-based code is going? Something, you know. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. What do you think of your recent one? What anyway is, you know. Something just kind of general to get people to come in and maybe it's something also that we throw it on front porch form. Oh boy. Cause I know. Oh boy. But that is a good idea because- You're going to put stuff on front porch form. Well, but it's a good idea because people do, people are more likely to pipe in from the safety of behind their screen than they are to come to me like this. And I've actually been thinking about just sending out one of those on front porch form to saying, so now that we're seeing this form-based code and the buildings go up, how do people feel? I mean, I thought- You can be our plan. I did that in the mansion house and look at that on YouTube. Yeah. I think you have to go, I think you have to frame it something like, look at the crap going up on main street form-based code. Is it stink or is it just me? But you see- And then you're still getting people. Yeah, you could do that, but you also don't want to, I mean, if you ask the question, how are people feeling? I mean, people love to give their opinion. Yeah. Just to open any question. And setting yourself up for a target, that isn't really- Yeah. I don't want to do that. I mean, and it seems like our front-page form is a great way to get a message about, like if we're at the farmers market or if we want people to come to a specific meeting, but to get input, I would think a survey would be a better format. So it's not like people feeding off of each other, but it's like honest opinions. It's anonymous, it could be anonymous. And then that's one way to collect it. And then for the people who may not be online, like going to the PTA meeting at the school or doing the farmers market or doing the free lunch, like going to where the free lunch is, like some of those other pockets of people. I think I've mentioned this before. To me, the big news key is that there's a gap that's not being filled by a local newspaper. Like when I go into Essex, I always pick up a copy of the Essex Reporter and they're covering whatever's going on at city council meetings or what's going on as far as development projects in the city. So people are a little more informed about what's progressing and how things are taking shape. You have to get into the school fire here, right? Yeah, and then even then it's in, I don't know, many people do read it closely, but I think a lot of people don't realize that's really good stuff. You like the school paper? Yeah, I love the school paper. I do too. So we're actually working with them to like shift to like 50-50 ownership over time and build that out, expand it so it's more like. Clear. And make it more obvious that it's not just school information. Yeah, it's great. That'll take time. We're not doing that. Yeah, because it could be simple. I mean, I feel like the contents in there is just simple reformatting and rebranding of it and then utilizing that. And they just hired their communications and fundraising position at the school that they brought on for this next fiscal year to help with, mainly with the capital projects. But they're also gonna work with Paul, our communications director on that newsletter. Rebranding and expanding that. So some progress. Because part of it too is I've been following these like meetings in more recent times, but like when I first bought my home and form-based code was being proposed, I really didn't know what that meant. And I didn't realize that these meetings were going on, that things were gonna be etched in stone that would dictate decisions going forward for the next, however long. I think sometimes people don't come to the meetings because they think, oh, it's just kind of a hypothetical planning, digitting meeting. It's not necessarily, this is what will determine how things go forward. I think sometimes that's not clear. And I don't know how we make it clear. That's a really difficult. Well, like I said, I would like to volunteer to help do something at the farmers market if we wanna, if there's group of people that would be happy to put some postcard questions first, stuff that together that if you guys wanna edit or come up with a different idea, I don't know. Yeah, that's a problem. It's good to volunteer to do it. So, thank you. So anyway, if you wanna discuss that sometime. How do we go about getting a booth at the farmer market? Just, you just ask. Talk to the city. Do you think you can get one for free? They're telling you for a reason to go to the market. They're usually generally pretty good about just letting us set up a space for the table. I mean, we'll take, we have a tent and tables that we take down there. That's what we did with the master plan. We did it for the master plan. We did it for the branding of the city. Right. Yep. So, yeah. And how was the response? Yeah, the response. Like, because I don't know. It always, so sad, but I love this farmer's market, but it's just kind of sad. It's a good one. Compared to Burlington. For the master plan, we had a steady stream of people coming up to ask us, basically to ask us what we were doing there. We went, I believe, we went to the farmer's market with this specific question about neighborhoods and what people kind of identified as their neighborhood. And most of the folks that came to talk to us didn't wanna talk to us about that, but wanted to talk to us about everything else in the city. Whether it be the schools or the airport or traffic or the potholes on Main Street, and they were just coming to talk to us. Which does feel like we wanna talk about it. You know, so it's like having. So, I mean, I think the challenge was, though, even though we had a focused kind of, there was specific information we were trying to get. We weren't getting that information, but we were getting everything else, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. So it was, you know. So would it make more sense, and I know it's just work for somebody to do, but maybe to do someone set a survey, you know? Just to. Well, and we may. Just about, do you know what form-based code is, you know? And how do you feel about it? What do you like about the development coming up? What don't you like? Right. Well, I think as we start to get further into the work program, those are the type of mechanisms we will use to try to help inform our discussions. So it's not that we aren't going to do those things. It's just, I think first we need to know what we're asking. And a lot of the, I mean, the form-based code process was pretty expensive. The master planning process was pretty expensive with lots of different avenues for public input. I think what we're trying to do is now make the form-based code reflect what the intention was originally and identifying areas where it's not being reflected. So I do think there was a robust outreach process for both of those land documents. And now it's like, okay, not everything's working the way we had hoped to work. Like what needs to be fixed. So I don't know necessarily if we have to start from scratch or if we revisit the public process and information we got back to create those original documents. Cause we just finished our master plan. And that was a long process with lots of public input. I mean, I feel like that's kind of some of the framing that was in our council discussion is like we, you know, there was a vision and a process that created this. Are we meeting that, right? So maybe do we have the, what do we have for documents from the development of the form-based code? There was a report that was put together kind of at the end of the whole vision process that I believe is on our website that talks about all the shirats that were done and all the community meetings that were held and has some of the kind of the whole process of having those community meetings to talk about what was important to the community and how the code was developed off of that input. So there was a kind of a summary document that was put together after the code was written. So it seems like maybe the first thing we need to do is get back and revisit that and understand what the vision was then. And then say, okay, this was the vision three years ago, four years ago. For code, it's relatively new. What's that? I mean, that's pretty new too. Yeah, yeah. But okay, this is what was envisioned. Now we know what's happened so far in four years. How does that match up with what we envisioned? Or what we envisioned, maybe in other words, what we envisioned is that what we're seeing going on. And it may be that you see things on paper and these nice pictures and then when you see it actually happen, was that what I really saw on the paper? You know what I mean? Does the two translate equally? Also, how was the discussion steered in a direction that might have led to certain assumptions? Yeah. And we should also talk about where the mainstream revitalization, how that fits into it. The streetscape was all part of form-based code as well. Okay, so is that something, I guess we can look at it on the website and maybe that's how we start our, I mean, I can send that on Cal to the group for that document. Okay. And other business? Falls in the city updates or whatever. I actually, I did have a question. I was reading the Business People magazine and there's an Act 250 like summary of what's going on here. And there's one applied for World View LLC Winooski. It's a $2 million application, 19-unit residential building associated parking area. And I was just kind of curious, what is this project? I looked up World View LLC and so it's made to Jess's company. But what is there an Act 250 permit going through for a 19-unit building? I'm gonna guess that's the 243 East Allen at the Corner Manson East Allen Street. Okay, where they've already grouped the house down. Yeah, we've got most part of the foundation is in as well. I would guess that's what that project is. So I'm just curious, I thought that Gateway District projects didn't go through Act 250 process, that was the- So Act 250 is a completely separate world where it's, I mean, it's a state process. And the rules for Act 250 are what, when a project goes into Act 250 is dependent on several items. And one of them is a certain amount of development by the same person in a certain radius of other projects in a certain amount of time. So because he's done other projects, he has to go through the Act 250 process. Okay, if that makes sense. That's, I knew that there wouldn't be an explanation. So I thank you for providing that. So the big one in East Allen is how many units? The one that was done. I want to say 39. Oh, 39, so and then it's 19 across the street. It's actually 24 is he amended the application. He was approved originally for 19 and then amended it to add a couple more units. And then the one that's on the other side of Mans. So what's the development plan for that? Other side of Mans, so. The Dian House, you could have taught him about the break house up on the hill. Yeah, his other property that he's redeveloping. There's no plan right now. I think he's working on something. But there's not anything that's, nothing's coming to us anyway. Where is that? You know what? If you turn off of East Allen onto Maslow Street, it's on the left. It's a brick or a cast. It sits up on top of the hill. Right, it's kind of a cross from. Cross from where it's body shot. Yeah. Word right next to the other one is on the other corner. Yes. Yeah. Wow, that guy was on the street, huh? And I don't know if he still has a project planned too for, across from CCB, Kitty Corner on East Street. Oh, yes. Yeah, I don't know if that's moving forward. He has an approved zoning permit for that. I don't know where he is in that process either, but that was basically an addition kind of onto the back of the building, keeping the primary facade and primary building in task. He wasn't a retainer structure. Correct. Yeah, I believe that's what he had presented. Actually, I had a couple other items to cover as well. Too late. I wasn't here chatting. Oh, sorry, I didn't know if you were finished. Okay. So this is more city updates? Well, I was kind of, it's kind of other business as well. Okay. What are your other business then? If we're there. Just kind of a follow-up on an email that I forwarded out to everybody with a document from South Burlington. You mentioned that at the top of the meeting. Mike, there's really nothing for you to do unless you want to do something with it. So when amendments are proposed for, when zoning amendments are proposed in adjacent municipalities, all the municipalities need to be notified. Those notifications go to the planning commission for any potential input or comments back to the host means the property. So as part of the process, I forwarded out to all of you in case you're interested in reading it and providing comments, we can send those back to, in this case, South Burlington. But it's not, that wasn't intended for you to sit down and start reading through that full amendment update unless you really want to. And I didn't, but I thought it was interesting if I remember right, there's a provision to eliminate required parking. I thought that might be interesting when they get through it. Yeah, I mean, that is a trend that we're seeing more and more of in planning circles is eliminating parking requirements or limiting minimum parking requirements so that, and just allowing the projects to determine what their parking needs are and build to that. So I mean, it's actually, it's been, it's being done in a lot of communities and it's- I know, I- In general, it seems to be working for the most part. You know, a project won't get financing without parking from a bank. So they're gonna have to put some parking in and they're, you know, generally speaking, developers are, they're going to have the best information on the type of project they're building and the type of tenants that they're anticipating for a building and established parking that is going to meet the needs of those tenants. So they're not overbuilding, they're not underbuilding, they're basically putting in what they need. And because, and I think it's in reaction to a lot of communities have parking standards that are in many cases excessive. Their minimum parking standards are for that worst case scenario of it's a mall and it's the holidays and so we're gonna be fully parked out, but every other day of the year, you know, a third of the parking is being used. So it's kind of the way to balance that out and also part of that does take advantage of municipal facilities, such as parking garages and on-street parking and things of that nature for it's a way, you know, for municipalities to take that public infrastructure that they own and use it to generate money to help maintain that infrastructure so that when there's pop holes that need to be fixed, there is a revenue stream to help fix and maintain those roads or put in additional facilities like bike lanes or bus pull-offs and things like that so that it's not just a function of let's get rid of parking minimums and just walk away. There's other parts and pieces that generally need to function with it to make it work properly. So I'm just so interested in this whole thing I've read about it on both sides and I'm just, I don't understand, no matter how many times I read about it or somebody like you explains it to me, I don't understand how eliminating parking requirements is gonna solve the problem because like, for instance, on Wendyski Avenue and Abby, you probably know about this, they're trying to, in Burlington, eliminate on-street parking so that they can provide bike facilities and there's an uproar on the neighborhood about it because all of the landlords use the on-street parking because they don't have any parking and so I don't understand how eliminating parking requirements is gonna solve that problem especially when the landlords rely on. That's the fatal flaw in it because I think everything else makes sense but if they're building the project that has on-street parking, like if they know that there's on-street parking and that's how they're determining how many number of parking spots that's where it breaks down. If they're building a project that doesn't allow on-street parking then absolutely, if they're gonna build it or whatever they can sell it or rent it out for they're gonna make sure they have that but if there's existing on-street parking they're building it saying okay, my tenants can park on the street and then it becomes really hard to get rid of on-street parking when you wanna do something like put a bus pull-off or put bike lanes. So unless the on-street parking already accommodates the bike lanes and bus pull-offs, being able to take away parking after the developer has developed based on their being on-street parking is super hard. And I think some of that too comes in with parking management. So charging for that on-street parking and enforcing that for specific times of day and potentially even different rate structures throughout the day. So I guess these are things just to, that I feel like we should really be thinking a lot about when we're talking, when we go to that parking part of the conversation that we're gonna have. Yeah, absolutely. Because I already think that there could be more paid parking in the city around developments particularly right in this area where there's landlords that are using the on-street parking even though they have certain requirements. So we can have that discussion but that falls to the city council to decide. To have, yes, yeah, yeah. No, I know, I know. I just feel like I hear you and I've heard other planners say that parking requirements can be eliminated and they've done it in other places and it's been successful but then I see the other side of it as a bike commuter and I'm just like, how does that really work? I've read some, there's some circular logic in that too. I know, that's why I don't understand it. I was saying that it was to promote like a greener landscape. I'm like, but that doesn't mean you get a greener landscape, it means you get a bigger building on the site that's not parking. And then perhaps you get more congested streets because you didn't have on-site parking. So how does that make a greater landscape? And a parking lot can always be converted back to a grassy lawn that can be green space again. When a building is built there, it's very unlikely that that will become green space again. Yeah, anyways. Okay, so that was one item. Another item that I wanted to bring up is the folks at the Winooski partnership for prevention reached out to me earlier this week. And I passed out a handout to all of you at the start of the meeting. They did a survey starting last year and in the beginning of this year on tobacco and alcohol advertising and provided a summary of the survey results which is what I've provided to you all and they noted that they'd be available to come in to speak and to maybe do a more formal presentation on the survey and the information. So I wanted to give this to you all now. It's just a handout so you can look it over maybe this is actually a schedule for a future meeting if you wanna look at it more closely. We did incorporate some of their discussion in the master plan if you recall. So there is some crossover in that regard. And then the only other item I wanted to mention was that our next meeting if we're still on the two meeting per month schedule will be July 25th in this room. And they came and presented their last survey to us that it was really similar content. Are we the regulatory body that could affect where advertising happens? Like advertising is tricky because there's a lot of case law primarily from the Supreme Court about First Amendment rights with signs. And generally what it comes down to is if you have to read it, then if you have to read it to know if it's allowed then it's a violation of the First Amendment is generally what some of the rulings have come down to. So sign regulations typically will focus on dimensions and placement. So we could propose limits on the number of signs and the size of signs, but as far as I think we would be in very difficult legal waters if we looked at prohibiting specific types of advertisement. So they seem to be bringing us to us because they think that we have some ability to... I mean, we can amend our zoning regulations on signs. I mean, that is incorporated in our zoning regulations but again, I think it is gonna depend on... Can it be like no advertisement of products signage, no signage or advertisement of products outside of the building? Like you can have your store name. Like can you get like that sort of specific? So you'd have to be even more specific that can be read from the outside because I can put a sign inside my building on the window right after you walk by, you see it. So yeah, something like that where it's not saying specifically tobacco alcohol products that you can't do your ho-hos in your Coke either. Yeah, right, exactly. Yeah, so I mean, sign regulations are very challenging for sure, but it is something that could be incorporated into the zoning regulations because that's where we already have... That's how we regulate signage is in zoning. So... I think content though is a tough one, right? Content is very tough, yeah. And then you get into the question of... If we say no advertising, no advertising. Still, I think it's, I think it's, it's, it's... I think Eric's right, you're in some tough waters because how do you say to a store, you can't put a sign advertising anything. Yeah, because then like a boutique in the Winooski block can't have like a sign for a, you know, for a set off sale. Yeah. So I guess, I mean, the reason I ask it is because there, I haven't been on the planning commission that long, the second time they brought this to us. So like what, what, like what action items are they expecting? What was, is within our realm to do, or is it just like FYI? My sense was when they initially came, and I think they initially came to the city council a number of years ago, they were looking for regulations to stop any kind of alcohol or tobacco advertising in stores, especially up by the school where kids walk by. Yeah. And I think they understand that that's a hard road to go down. So it's more of an education thing and trying to do all we can to limit or restrict those sides. Which is nothing, right? Which is not much. And I think they got that. I mean, it's literally nothing. Yeah, I think the message was sent to them. And it's still, I think what they're trying to do is just get out in the public to get the public opinion behind them that, hey, this shouldn't happen. And maybe put pressure on store owners to not advertise cigarettes, you know, through kids walking by for school or, you know, that kind of thing. Could this organization distribute these to like the business owners in the city? That might be what they need to do. It's just kind of a plea, not saying, you know. The Wyniewski Business Association. Don't we have one of those? I think it's just the downtown. That's all we have. Okay. And so Eric, we have talked about one of the things in the South Burlington updates or zoning changes. Is there anything else worth mentioning that? So I haven't gotten through the whole update yet myself. But I guess I just wanted to mention, I just wanted to bring it up in the context because I didn't really have a lot of context when I sent it out to everybody. That it's not, we don't need to comment on this if we don't want to. It's more just a, it's, I don't want to say it's a procedural thing that it goes to you all, but primarily it needs to be sent out to the Planning Commission so that you have the opportunity to comment if you want. So when you do read it over, if there's things that you think should be brought to our attention, can you just send an email? Yep, absolutely. It is useful though, because often we do talk about, you know, what our other plans are doing about this. And that's what I see with this. I don't see us commenting on it because quite frankly, it's South Burlington. Yeah. Well no, and what I mean by that is if we propose regulations, do we want Burlington or South Burlington or Colchester coming and saying, you can do that, that's stupid. Do we touch South Burlington? Yeah. Just barely. Where? Patched by the interstate. Yeah, it's kind of a river. And rolling corp. It's really not patching road. It's actually the up by where the interstate goes through. Oh, it's like the natural area touches. Yeah, because as you come over the river, you see the back of Burrard Drive, the industrial park up on the hill. And I think technically the only connection, I don't think there's any land that actually touches. I think it's just we own part of the river, they own part of the river and it happens to touch. Gotcha. I guess this is one other thing I wanted to say about that, the parking thing in South Burlington. I have to say, like anytime South Burlington is redoing a road, they're doing a really, really good job with putting bike lanes. Complete streets? Yes. Even though they're not protected bike lanes, like every place that they're redoing the roads, they're putting a nice wide bike lane. And they got their pennies for paths to fund it, yeah. So, just saying. Now if they could fix Dorsey Street during the Christmas rush, that'd be great. Anyway. Okay, any other business? I will not be at the next meeting. I may not be at the next meeting. Yeah. Okay? We may not have a quorum, though. Tentatively scheduled next meeting. Tentatively, I swear to you. I put it down here that the next meeting is your life. I'm leaving for the next day, so. You're leaving for where? Italy. Oh, really? You won't be here, either? Huh? No, I'm leaving in the 26th. Oh, did you plan to interact with us? He's scheduled recording, right? Dr. Sue would find out if she's scheduled on this. Uh-uh. Anyway. So, having no other business, and it's eight o'clock, the laughter, and I have a motion to adjourn. No one wants to leave, huh? Thank you very much. How are your days? A second. All in favor? Opposed? I heard all that everyone said yes, so we're officially adjourned. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Thank you.