 Call the order. We're good. All right So approval of the agenda is the first thing on our agenda Everyone feel about that We have a motion Okay all in favor Okay Jenda approved Comments from the chair. So I have a few notes I let Mike know about some of these hopefully He's up to speed doesn't need to hear this So we I brought a copy of Leslie's letter did everyone see that everyone have that Kind of for everyone's information it's as far as I think as far as we're all concerned It's final, but but there's everyone sees what's going out One notable aspect of it though is that it has the August 13th date for The meeting, but I have not heard back from the schools That that's dates, okay They were supposed to check in to it to make sure that there's no other conflict going on Haven't heard back called today tried to email a couple different people today To follow up to try to get an answer for this meeting, but I did not They're the possibility we could go someplace like the building I think things I'm gonna work with Leslie tomorrow And if I can't hear from the school to verify that it's fine Try to get another venue real quick tomorrow, and we'll just let all of you know, but We don't want to hold this up So if the venue gets changed last minute, we'll just go ahead and change it on the letter and have it go out And Mike are you able to? Are you able to plug in the information to the committees and build us to? Yeah, if we've got as long as it's ready to go we can So so Leslie or I'll get in touch with you tomorrow about the venue to confirm one way or another and then Hopefully try to get it out tomorrow One note that Leslie had Mike was for your memo She requested that you put memo across the top and when I say Mike's memo, do you remember what was emailed around this week? Explaining the maintain of all transform stuff So did you catch that Mike took the memo across the top and put that with the letter when we send it out, okay? Another note I have is that there's the designer of you open house that everyone see that Thursday the 12th or 30 to 7 so I plan to stop in on that one so they have they have their draft document. I Don't know Yeah, I was sort of wondering if that would be attached to the invitation It wasn't from what I saw this is the preservation historic preservation is the Planning side of the design review committee Kind of so the HPC is a completely different group So which one is coming which one is having the meeting design review? Just design Yes, I was half I'm a little I'm a little foggy on what they do all the time. So I mean I plan to stop in and kind of ask Thursday the 12th 430 to 7th I have historic preservation open house. Yes historic preservation open house It's historic preservation and there's the designer of you they were viewing design review standards Historic preservation together to be included in the zoning, right? Yes. Yes. So they that was the do they have a document I Believe they're working on a draft one. I don't know if it's out and available yet, or whether that's what they're presenting Okay, so they're gonna actually have a presentation I'm half I haven't been fully following that one. So So you think the presentation is right at 430 because I'd be interested I think it was an open house So I think it was listed as open house. Yeah, just stop in. Oh, okay. So no, but yeah without Presentation why I was kind of confused. Yeah, I'd be like a poster the committee's there to talk to So it says please join the popular historic preservation Commission for a community open house Come learn about the city's design review regulations to provide your comments Meet the Commission, etc. Yeah, I don't think yeah, and it's entitled design review community open house Yeah, I think it's so I think it's designed to be an open You don't have to be there for the whole period. You can just come in at any time You can see the map see the options of what the maps could look like And I think that's what they're trying to be able to do is to start to have a dialogue Yeah, where do we want the boundary to be? What do we want our goals to be? So I think it was mailed to every member of Everyone who was in the does is it the design review or the historic I Would have to look up what her email was specifically on that one It wasn't it wasn't it mailed to everybody in the public But it was either mailed to everybody in the design review district or it was mailed to everybody that was in the historic district National register historic district, but it was mailed to one or the other group just to make sure everyone was aware And then all the yeah so the other the other piece I wanted to make sure I mentioned was This initiative between the high school and the city that's coming up soon called salons on boards Salons is in the the mascot for the high school on boards Solons I'm gonna say the owl the owls would be cooler anyway, I Think Leslie's gonna have to do a survey To find out what kind of participation we want to do but she asked me to bring it up And I looked at the survey and the two kind of questions that I thought that the group might be interested in I'll throw her out there right now is one how many students would we potentially like to have sitting at the table with us? I'm thinking one to two We used to have seats for students on the planning Commission That went away before I got here, but there were there used to be appointed Student representatives on the planning Commission. So this isn't exactly that. I think this is more of More of an observation Type thing but the second question I have is how could they be involved? So it sounds like it's a little bit up to us Anyone have opinions or thoughts Would they have a specific term or just come to a few meetings or unknown I Would suspect that it's probably semester based or something. Yeah, maybe this school year And is this just to the planning Commission or to all the different it's all the city boards are Responding and we think that the students asked for this I think based on our survey results the students may so like we'll have to put a description of what we do Yeah, and so the students would have to choose what they would want and So if we put down that we were willing to take the two students and we gave a description Of course, there's gonna be many students who are gonna be so interested in Mission that they'll have to compete in some way. I imagine probably like Hunger Games or something Yeah, so do we have any opinions on Salons on boards Yeah I think it yeah, I would be fine if one of them wanted to show up if they wanted to alter me Or something like that, okay because It is a sizable chunk out of there And this first participation, I mean they could be full Participate and talk They can't vote right they're not unless they were appointed as voting members by the council they would not have that authority One of us wants to just really push our vote Delegation I don't think you can delegate your your power Okay, well, I'll pass that on to Leslie and she can fill out the survey then That's all I have for comments and moving on to general business No one from the public is here. So it seems like we don't have any general business Mike Did you want to should we should we? Look at some of the website stuff Yeah, I mean for the city plan update. I thought we could just take a few minutes at least Kind of go over some of the things that came up last week John set up the Okay The Google Drive, which I guess is just more of a location where we would be able to start to store some of our shared documents as we move forward with this and Put a document there, right? I Put one document there so we can try it just as a placeholder to see if you can get there Yeah, if you can get there, that's what it would look like Or at least that's what it looks like on mine Yeah in the next Then you'll see is I'll set up basically there'll be a folder For the website for the plan In that there'll be different folders with the site assets in it. So the images or documents we want On the website And I can Walk us through that. I guess maybe once it's set up. It'll be easier and then show Show you the site I'm trying to make it as simple as possible so that anybody could edit it if they want And that it can continue to use it That's up to us how we want to deal with it We can deal with it plan documents separately sort of in this but I'll just keep the website stuff separately and we can link to documents wherever in the plan folder that we have I don't know if there's any preference on folder structure that you use or I don't want to deal with this. I don't know I'm really looking to kind of see where this goes because I don't I Don't have idea of where What's the right thing or wrong thing? So I think either advice from other people or trial and error Kind of see what starts to fit together Okay What's it called? So this is a Google Drive and we essentially have a folder that's owned by the city that we can use and The everyone in the planning commission and Mike have Editor access to this so we can put whatever documents we'd like we can edit any documents comment on them And we can also make them all publicly visible so we can give everyone View access but not necessarily let them Be able to edit or upload or change anything Uh, we can also create different folders if we want for any committees and give you know if we wanted to give the committee chair Editor access to just that folder if they wanted to manage anything in there It's really flexible Yeah, the energy committee has set one up A while ago because we kept getting documents from all over but I just met does this particular drive have a name Oh, it's I think it's called planning commission planning commission. Yeah, I think he just called it planning. Yeah, yeah So when I search for it, it's really easy right and it'll show up in your google drive as Drives likes someone shared with me and you can go and right click and add it to yours And that what that'll do is just have it Show up like any other folder in your drive so it might be easier to find Um Then something in the like shared with me mild You were able to do that for a while. So where where would So where would you on this one? For example, I've shared with me planning and you said I couldn't right click somewhere Yep, you should be able to You can see how much of a Let's see You might have I So add to my drive. Oh, okay And then when you go to your When I go to my drive your drive, you'll have all of my your folders all of my cats and folders So There folders planning Perfect Oh, there it is. Yes. Yes. Yeah, I'm sorry and if this works for us I feel like it'd be a nice kind of repository for Time having everything in one place that we can find Yeah, we'll definitely make it a lot easier Especially if we're doing a big document like the master plan the city plan we can Go through and know we've got somebody wants to look at the Open space or whatever the topic is we've got all the documents here as opposed to Having them on what we call the iDrive, which is the server which People wouldn't have access to Because it's where all the other city Documents are all of my documents back up the iDrive But having everything on the google drive is going to make it easier because we can actually all Continue to participate And add stuff to it Do we know how this interacts with the open meeting laws and what we should be aware of as far as making sure This will be publicly foya foya obel. That's a word So we'll just be accessible though like doesn't have to be accessible If people want to view it, I'm sure we would have to provide Certain amount of access to it But the point is that we want to eventually get to people that people can have Access to view any of these we just haven't gotten there yet They just wouldn't be able to edit it just adds a level of transparency and that anyone can take a look at what we're working on Right, we've had so many problems with the zoning that people said oh, I didn't have that particular issue of the zoning and so Technically when we make it available to the public anyone should be able to see our progress They won't see how we got there, right? They won't see all the steps For the final edit there is versioning so they could could be able to And We could also have it so you can on the website for example On the Montpellier website if you wanted to link to any documents you could use like the url from The google drive if you wanted to use that as sort of the authoritative source for any documents Yeah, we don't have to worry about you know different versions flying around and People saying they didn't get the latest version of this. Yeah, we could have a Certain file within planning that has the most up this this is the Most up-to-date city plan version is in this file within planning Yep, oh there one thing to do to be aware of in google drive is all the Um The files themselves will have unique IDs and unique URLs and they're managed at the file level So if you move it you change the name you move it to another folder. It doesn't matter It'll still have that same So you don't need to like pull things in or out of Uh a particular folder Because it doesn't really Looking externally So so you're talking about actually pulling that folder and putting it in planning or copying it into planning Right rather than getting access to the google drive I think weren't you talking about allowing people to get access to people to be able to get access to this To this one the google drive here. Yeah, okay. They would yeah, all right. Yeah right now my anything that generally with my computer Goes to the iDrive so we But that doesn't do the public any good they would they can't they can't see that and be able to edit it Because if they could see it they could edit it and that would you know, we don't want people going in and editing The old actual archived version So what we want to be able to do is to have a publicly accessible version where people can see it They won't be able to change it, but they can see it Meanwhile we can go through and make changes Are we thinking that We'll link to it from the city's planning commission page something like that as far as how the public could get there Specific pieces probably not all of it Like there's something or through this site like the plan site. I imagined that with the c's web page We'll link to our plan site the plan site will have Access to folders kind of for further on the folders. So if they do want to see all of it they can see all of them Yeah, or if there's some that are not great for public facing We can have one that's more like Documents that make sense and another sandbox Stuff that that would confuse people Like one that's just being developed in its early phases that could actually be pretty confusing right There's someone's notes without any context. Yeah, or multiple versions of something So sounds great Did anyone have thoughts on sort of the content of uh The website for the plan seems like you could have the first iteration of it focused more on the the process and there being we could have a community profile section with the maps and then Maybe a section on the process And peace asking for input And then the actual once we start drafting it the functionality of it can be more So you're just thinking more of what would the initial website have not necessarily what The plan would have but what the wet what the Plans website would look like right in the meanwhile We could have we could focus on just building website that's going for the final plan But it seems like maybe it's an opportunity to have one that's a place for people to go for information on where things are at How they can submit comments Yeah, that would be great to have it just how the way they could submit comments or just to introduce them To what the process is and so they'll feel like they're more engaged That's just a sub page on the city website For this i'm thinking of setting it up as it's basically its own like this is the Website for the plan This would be a mobiliar plan And the url will probably be like we can have it be plan dot mobiliar slash vt dot Get what the city's url is so it'll be It's in url, but it'll look it'll be its own site or we could get a different url if we want if we just wanted to be plan mobiliar dot or I think If you have a vision and you want to delegate to us, I think that would be a fine approach if you don't I mean like It's just like you know section of the process or explanation that you know you could assign to to one of us and You could think about that. Okay, because it sounds like like you have the vision so but I don't but There's no need for all the work to fall on you. So yeah, I can set up kind of the skeleton of it and we can look at it together and See who gravitates towards towards what Certainly if we can find some examples that was and that was what I was trying to do with my email last week with plan okc or anyone who got a chance to look at that one, which was Just to try to go and find some of these digital plans so we could start to go and look at them and say I like that. I don't like that You know, I think this is taking us in a good direction if we went in that, you know Whatever so that was just one that I happened to stumble across in some of my reading and so I thought that was a good one and My mouse working here I mean we can look at what they had kind of set up with theirs, but I'd have to I can turn the light out if we wanted to go through and look at I don't know Did anyone get a chance to take a look at that one? We can't dim the lights. No, we can't dim the lights. They would either be on or off But I can turn them off. We wanted to just take a look at Real recently what that is Switch things So some of this still I mean we have to decide what we're going to call it what sort of timeline we've got We have a lot of decisions to make before we can really have too much of a website I mean is the website Some place where we would also potentially link to other Things like if anybody found a recording of Ed McMahon's presentation I mean would be put links to other Public presentations in it as well. Yeah, it would be great to have a resources section and have you know A lot of the other documents that we'd be building on You think of like the economic development plan the net the net zero stuff Only one place that make it easier to find Yeah, I'd I'd come in there's a couple of pieces. I mean we'd have to at some point on the web In a document have an introduction Have we talked about the chapters that would be short and the implementation plans that would have to go along with them So when I was looking at the you know, they've got browse topics And browse by elements. So really the browse by elements was kind of how I had been thinking about things so for them The sustain okc is the land use plan connect us to transportation plan green is the environmental plan Or the natural resources plan Live I would kind of think is it's housing Enriched preservation appearance and culture. We don't have to use what they used Strengthen is their economic development plan serve is their So they they did In two parts so they had by topic So if you wanted to know about education education kind of links to There may be some parts of education that are in Sustain some that are in connect some that are in live. So you can see how by topic There's You can find something how are we going to implement? By topic Or if you Went down here you could go down to sustain and that would give you the plan for You know the more of the written plan for how we're going to accomplish the land use plan And that's kind of a short one that goes into the introduction The goals and the initiatives. So this was a little bit more of You know, maybe this the second one was a little bit more of how I thought it would eventually get to That we would be organizing by groups in this case. This is the land use plan There would be a short This is actually there's there is a written piece if you click somewhere in here the downloadable ppdf You'd end up with the written plan, which was about six pages long So it's not all that different than kind of what we had been thinking about They have goals and initiatives I Didn't like necessarily how they did their goals or initiatives. I thought they were still Less specific than what we had been talking about we were really kind of talking about being strategic being Very direct in what we wanted to see done as opposed to they were taking more of the general approach And then as you adopt an ordinance you would review the ordinance to the plan to go and see if it encourages More Vitality in the downtown, you know, as opposed to saying, you know, it's supposed to being more vague in general Which is what they did Their goals too, but so we're a little bit more general than Is there is there anyone in your office who's who's an employee who would be working on this? This is going to be mostly my Responsibility from a bit from a from a high level as it gets down to more of the specifics like housing we have Community development specialist kevin casey he would probably be working with the housing committee to work with them What i'm thinking is once the substance is developed i'm looking at this and it's really it's it's really a web design strategy really look where They conceptualize it two or three different ways here, but it really links all to the same content Yeah, so you can I mean once you have the substantive content, which is what we'll be doing and what mike will be doing It's easy to do this, but it also takes some like Know-how Yeah And my thought with this was simply to start going looking and let's if we can find some other plans Web-based plans or digital plans that we think we like or we think this was the only one i could find i spent a lot of time Trying to google keywords to try to come up with more of more plans that were really web-based This plan you can download and print and it's 500 pages long Which is what we've been trying to avoid is having a 500 page plan But and I think that's what they wanted to avoid was the 500 page plan They want it online. They want it where you can You know as they had here you you can kind of get in and understand what the goals are My glasses back on so I can And then you can hit the pluses and you can see click to expand related initiatives And you'd be able to really start to to work into the details if you were interested in the details If you're interested in a specific statistic we can pop up the specific You know this was how they it really is designed their plan is designed to be online It's designed to be digital and yes, it can be printed out into a 500 page document But they really want the community to interact with this plan digitally And I think that's what we've been thinking about is is We do have to have a printed document We will have a printed document, but ultimately we'd like to have a web presence because this ability to connect elements that are in the housing plan that Relate to the energy plan it would be nice to be able to put them in a single document where they can't be different because the there's a single plan for energy efficiency or policy or a program on weatherization That can be linked to from the housing because it makes housing more affordable and links to energy because this same program also works to accomplish our energy goals But it's a single program that is helping two different elements And that's where I think the And seeing where we overlap and And where we have items that miss and you know, so they they did it a little different But I think they had a lot of pieces here that kind of Started to get us or at least to get me thinking about what I liked And what I thought Could be improved on and and you know, they did this as part of their introduction why and how Why plan? I think these are all important pieces. But again, this this is stuff you could print out into a document into the introduction section But for these guys, they did it this way I also did a little bit of looking around The city of dover new hampshire actually Had these but did them as videos So rather than read the plan you actually could click on this and actually watch a youtube video of why This housing initiative is important and it's got the the city planner or the the housing people and they go through different things It's it's another idea that could be built on Again, we don't have to bite off everything all at once But it there were some neat ideas that if you start looking around for digital plans on the web You can start grabbing some ideas. It says We aren't there yet, but if we had the plan we had it done We actually could do videos that would help to tell the story to people who may not be interested in sitting down and Working through these or reading these they actually could click on What's the housing plan and you could watch a five minute video of what the housing plan is and why it's important And what we're looking at doing to accomplish it. So but that's John, do you know of any templates of any kind you must have looked at a million plans over time? Probably not millions However, I'm not aware of any Out-of-the-box Plans that would meet It'd be a good fit for vermont Vermont's a little unique in that We have all these tiny municipalities whereas Most of the country works at a regional level and therefore can put a lot of Resources into it, but but they also end up being fairly unwieldy and Not particularly useful and For me I I appreciate or I see an opportunity in being able to create a A tool for us to use as like a roadmap to where we want to go and track And have it be like a living Plan that we don't we don't do it and then we're like, oh we did the plan now. Let's Let's do work that's unrelated to the plan. We just did just thank god. We just finished the plan like it should be That's this design something that will be useful for us and and not worried too too much about It's it can be easy to be like mystified by Some functionality that a lot of these sites provide but when you like look at their site metrics or They're not they're not actually useful. They're just Really cool looking and I want to Like yes, our plan is going to look great, but It looking cool should be secondary to being useful and That if we keep our our focus I think on usability and what matters and how If we think of ourselves like two years down the line are we able Is what we're making creating right now going to be useful to us is a good question to Ask yeah, maybe we should write down those values at some point to go and say this is really what we're shooting for Is we want a website that does this does this does this or Then we can start to build make sure we're building towards that and not grabbing the next It seems like if we if we figure out the content in the substance the way that we want Like john's explaining That that you really can't take that content and then rearrange it in ways to give the functionality that we want like I think it's I mean I'm not a web expert, but it seems like it can come second So we can it's something that we can you know Deal with once we have our content I think that's fair The other piece is it is thinking about those the right metrics that would tell us whether or not we're meeting You know, we're getting to where we want to go and making sure that those exist so for You know American community survey or there's so many data sources out there that we can set it up to be automated So as new things come out they'll just update A lot of the problems plants have in verman is people set up metrics that they can't measure And therefore It's a nice list of things that will be cool for us to be able to measure, but We can't do it. It's not it's not going to help us And that's challenging oftentimes because of again, it's a question of scale and availability But but thinking of those and thinking of a few A few good ones, I think what like one of my favorite plans is the We started in New York City the vision zero plan right like their plan for For bike infrastructure and transportation infrastructure Basically had like one goal of zero deaths like that was very easy to understand like powerful Go there. That's it. It's literally the name of the plan and Something they measure so it could be just one thing if you pick the right thing Just be very effective. Sorry. What what are they measuring zero? Deaths traffic deaths. Oh deaths. Okay Just for like cyclists or for like all transportation. I think it was for for all transportation, but it's focused on that pedestrian bicycles and then the Picking picking what thing we measure is always very important because it's not always it Which one you pick ends up being? very important Because if you're chasing the wrong Sometimes in order to fix. I remember working in berry city Lots of issues What was going to be the thing that we were going to target on? to fix the storefront vacancies and The poverty and a number of the other metrics that were issues And the one that we focused on as our primary one was to put 500 jobs in five years Well, 500 jobs isn't filling any storefront vacancies and it's not doing it. It's not but If you're focused on you know The metric that we actually worked on was getting jobs in the downtown and our goal was 500 jobs in five years And the reason for that was because if we could get more Feet on the sidewalks during the day That would help The storefront to you know now we're putting customers there and now it's up to the to the economic development side to try To fill the storefront now that we've put customers there So that was kind of our metric was get get feet on the ground Rather than trying to say our goal is to fill the storefronts Which kind of was our goal, but we were going to do that That operationally we were going to do that by getting more jobs in the downtown. So we actually Were only counting jobs in the downtown and made the assumption that if we did this These other secondary benefits were going to be reduced poverty Reduced storefront vacancies and it actually worked as opposed to if you directly were trying to fill storefront vacancies you may have You know it so you may not have gotten what you had hoped for because you were trying to But ultimately your goal was your measurable metric was how many new jobs there were how many new jobs there were in the downtown Not necessarily Increasing the overall population of customers That was not part of that was not part of it. We just recognized that what we needed what what we were missing um was the fact that we didn't have The the parts of the downtown that had jobs Had full storefronts The parts of town that had vacant storefronts also lacked Jobs during the day so they had uh, they didn't have the second floors that had jobs They had a lot of vacant building lots um, so what we did In that particular case was to purchase the old ride aid building which was a vacant blighted building tear it down And then sponsored to have of what ended up being city place there We also had the other end of that same stretch of buildings was the cornerstone building that was privately purchased Um and fixed up which also added more jobs on that part of town. So the the point was If we got the jobs that these other issues that were in in existent in that area would also then be fixed As opposed to saying we want to reduce this we want to reduce this we want to fix this What we're actually going to do is is focus on one thing which was the jobs get them in the correct places and There's a little bit of hope that that would fix the problem in it, but it did a lot of that side of That particular street got fixed um In that in that case so sometimes as we talk about these things will have to be focusing on What we would talk about proximate and ultimate goals um if we get Fixing, you know, what should we be working on to fix a certain issue? but but I guess I could probably turn the lights on here with Um unless there are more pieces of the website, but it was an idea if you guys find other websites that Have plans, you know Share them. Let us know we can look through them and see but I I had a tough time finding them That actually kind of met what we were trying to do The other thing is photos if anyone has photos they can or A source of photos to include there's always sort of bring things to life Sometimes be an afterthought or hard to find I imagine a player live probably has a good A lot of photos we could probably use I think the city contracted when we'd set up our new website the city contracted with somebody To take pictures. So I think that we actually have us set of photos They were paid to take pictures year-round. So that way we'd be able to have you know when it scrolls by with the different You know pictures of the capital that it'll have spring pictures and summer pictures and winter pictures. So Is that all done or that's still I think it's I think it's I don't know if it's done yet, but I don't know where those pictures are. I would have to ask Seth probably where The archive of those photos is So just a question on I mean this just seems like a big Chunk of work. And so what would the timeline? I mean I echo what Kirby said about farming out bits because I don't have any technical expertise with websites, but I mean what would be our ideal timeline for putting this together? Realistically Realistically I've I've said to do the city plan and to do to do this new idea and to do it Right, it's going to probably take at least two to three years Probably two years. It'll take it. It took us a year and a half just to get through the public hearing process for zoning I wouldn't expect it to be any faster Even if we got it done in a year and a half And and I would like to As much as I'm always wanting to Do more and do everything if we Had our meetings with the various committees We developed a plan that just grabbed the top three top five things that everybody wanted to do and really built a plan around that knowing that we could We could have I mean this is probably a half million dollar plan if If we were able to just capture those big things and get that down into a format into a plan with Some targeted strategies just to just to fill the plan For all the different committees and we could start moving forward and then over the next eight years we could continue to You know kind of mine down in and and flesh out some of those plans that need more details You know if we've got the details in the energy plan We can build them in those connections between the energy plan and other plans other parts Those could be built over those will yeah and those those some of those may be built over time We may not have a hundred percent of I think when the housing group did theirs they had Five aspirations and they may have had 25 30 different strategies different tasks To work on some of them they would work on some of them They're not some of them are just linking to the energy plan or linking to the transportation plan but To do that much detail for all the plan chapters and all the committees Would take years, but if we just focus on really getting The skeleton and getting it built in and start To and then we can start to implement the plan rather than taking four years to build the plan and we aren't implementing Let's get the big pieces done So I guess that maybe I misunderstood. I guess I thought the website was going to be For the work in progress too or Yeah Oh, okay, so we'll So oh, okay, so we'll just have a very basic website and then I guess this is what This this website here is their final product these the the so it'll eventually look like this Yes Yeah, this Plan okay. See this was the the apa american planning association plan of the year this plan they had let's see the They hadn't updated their plan since 1977 And this is the end product Of some years of work that I think may have started Trying to see if they had the timeline in here. They didn't I'm going to guess this started probably three or four years ago And so this is what when they finished their planning they developed the website to kind of Have the planning quote document is is an online digital document as opposed to You know going up top and downloading What is a You know 254 megabyte plan Not including the supporting studies and plans so for them it was You know rather than having everybody going to say here's our official city plan. Let's put this on the shelf It's 550 pages long Their plan was to come out with this Online version so people could go through and say okay. How are we going to do transportation? How are we going to do energy? How can I look at this? How can I search this? well, thanks a lot mike I think that helps everyone kind of conceptualize We're going and for me it was a reminder of get the content you can map it out in all these cool ways and Yeah It's something we can we can shoot for but and I think one thing I would add though to erion's comment is Some of it's up to us how quickly we can get through I mean we could we could Decide to put more time into it in the short term and And move faster Totally something we can do we could do like a planathon and just bang it out in the weekend I'm sorry I just have a chance This is You Best we can do it two days we're going to adopt it Never mind that public comment Right, that's right. So you have to keep it very limited Well with with that we can move on to the punch list and try to get a chunk of it out I'm sure Leslie will be happy if we can do that I still try to figure it all out in the most part of the process Oh, yes So the second column are your comments I kind of did it's kind of a mix I didn't do as clean a job as I did last time Keeping the actual recommendation some of them kind of mixed together So Yes, remember what number we were on we finished part one. So we're on part two Floor is yours Mike your copy data. Sorry I was actually gonna add I had unplugged my computer and then it came upstairs I was like I should have printed out some more copies. No, I think I Sutter it again. Sorry. Thank you So some of these should be pretty quick So the 13 is just saying it just goes to the fact that it says that In design review the DRB shall approve them except that now according to the new rules the DRB doesn't approve all of them The ERB only approved some of them. So we just needed to amend how this was written To read under the processes established in 4 301 And the following rules So that's really kind of a technical fix The couple of these strike frontage build out we had eliminated Or the city council had eliminated The maximum front setback. So when brandy was here she had presented that In certain districts there was a minimum setback and a maximum setback And you had to have a certain amount of the frontage of your building appearing between that minimum and maximum setback The issue started coming up is that all makes great wonderful sense until You start having a building that already has its maximum front setback But then also wants to put a building in the back Maybe there's a carriage house that they want to renovate. Well, the carriage house doesn't meet that or The big one that we have was the hotel We already have a hotel at the front and they want to build a hotel in the back But according to the rules you can't build Unless you've got In that frontage so they would have to connect that new hotel to the old hotel In order to legally be allowed to build that hotel. So The city council eliminated the front setback Because it functionally wouldn't work in a number of cases Um, so is there any kind of negative policy outcome that come with this? No, we didn't have it in the in the previous version. Um, it's it Would we would have to go through and write some other Details and we have a number of other buildings that are similar to this on elm street We've got some buildings that are on the front It would be in the other side of the street where you up from from you but down towards town more where there's a primary building in front in a Primary building in back and that primary building in back doesn't meet the front the maximum setback requirement You know, maybe the primary original building does so Is it possible for us to write something that on it? We'd have to revise some rules and have much more detailed sets of rules And what we were trying to do with the fix was to go through and Just clean clean up where we have issues And so what we have now is um A frontage build out requirement, but we don't have a maximum setback. So you actually can't calculate that. So that's why 14 can't be done um, and you'll notice 16 17 also are the same thing Another one that came up From the city council is which is number 15 um We had some conversations about this among us about The fact that Were we going to regulate riparian buffers in the downtown and the planning commission said no Some members of the public convinced the city council um A lot of our Downtowns are already built up to the edge. We've got a lot of these things going on It wasn't a place where we could really make this work, but the city council Was convinced enough that in areas that had not been channelized We should still enforce the riparian setback So the question then came up is what's channelized? Um, and it's not defined So we may either need to come up with a map The the city council had pointed out. Well, look at the parking lot behind positive pi Um, abashans that stretched there. That's a perfect example of where we would want to have vegetated buffers It's not channelized the very first zoning application that comes up is The moat parking lot that the city owned and the drb looked at it and said well this area is already channelized So it doesn't need to meet the buffer setback. It's just because there's no definition of what a channelized area is so We should either produce a map Or we need to come up with a written definition of what channelized is and I recognize we weren't the ones that came up with it But we need to come up with something to The city council gave a last-ditch effort to prevent riparian buffers everywhere that we did actually come up with that language I think we did come up with the channelized language, didn't we? No, we actually exempted urban center one two And what became urban center three But when the city council Oh, yep changed it to riparian buffers. We wrote up some language real quick to kind of Counter that yeah, and I don't think it was sufficient I thought they did. I thought we won that one And so we did was actually reviewed by the council. Yeah, the language Right now the setback is zero from the river in downtown Well, this is saying except Where'd she say it's all of the area and not because we haven't defined the channelized is Yes, but in I think three zero zero five Section three zero zero five is riparian. I believe Yes, so I think point d one except in urban one two and three applicants may receive a waiver With within the un-channelized portions of urban center one urban center two and urban center three And within the entire riverfront district the riparian buffer shall be 15 feet Within the channelized portion of urban center one urban center two urban center three there shall not be a Buffered a buffer requirement So it yeah that kind of overrides what was in And you think definition of we Of channelized you think that we'll be able to map out what's channelized As opposed to the drb just in that case by case situation Looking at whether I mean it feels it feels like it's more precise for the drb to look each time And that's that's fine. We're we are pointing out this was pointed out by us as from an administrative standpoint that It's We have a clear gray area that certainly the city council thought it's going to be obvious the areas that are not channelized because areas just like Jacob's lot isn't channelized and yet that's the first application that comes up And the first case that they say that is channelized. Well, if jacob slot is channelized What would be un-channelized? And to some degree all then to some degree all of it is going to be but there's a difference between a slope and a completely vertical wall Yeah, and I would think the intent would be if it's a completely vertical wall We're going to call that channelized if it's a it's a rock face that's sloped Yeah, it's still channelized, but not not like between two vertical walls Yeah, and I think that's the the that was the legislative intent I believe as well, which was that they were looking at well We've got the areas that are North of the rialto bridge on state street and you can look up there and you can see there's stacked stone It's uh, it's clearly channelized the river's not going to be moving the riparian is you know The buildings go right up to the edge. We can't really be asking people to have a setback in those areas So could we write a definition? We could certainly be more specific I just we just wanted to point out the fact that as it's currently being applied It's almost being applied how we had written it as to planning commission because it's the city council that kind of tried to go through and split things out When they said well some of some of the urban center one will have buffers and setbacks and some of them won't ultimately we're kind of back to where we said which was this is going to be too complex to Is there a caveat for pre-existing to like if there's already something neighboring you that goes that far? We were trying to figure out how to do the pre-existing, but it was starting to get a little bit of What was pre-existing and how long was it pre-existing and what happens in this in a pre-existing case if something burns down or somebody tears something down Because we have proposals where people were looking at A building that was within that right on the river wall And they were proposing to come in we're going to tear down this building and we're going to build a new building And if it starts to be pre-existing non conforming then You tear it down and you now have to meet those buffers and setbacks So we were like well now we'll exempt those and you can build back because they're you're not non conforming because there's a zero lot line setback and What was the development for the jacob's lot like what what was the permit for to build the The parking lot so they were going to be tearing down the tks. So it actually wasn't the jacob's parking lot. It's actually downstream towards the railroad bridge So we purchased as the city the eminem beverage building And the association for the blind and we're tearing down those two buildings And there's going to be a new parking lot in back and the front lot was going to be developed Is this touching the north branch? It touches the north branch, but not the winewski Because it stops at the rail bridge and rail bridge behind Shaw's So is it just going to be a parking lot or is there it's still Going to be developed even though the parking lot still going to be developed because we still have to build the road We still have to build the bike path But the initial proposal that was going to be a private development didn't end up Going through so we're going to still own all the parcels as as things sit today But worse we still have to build that back parking lot It's going to still be developed with that rear parking lot We'll just have a a developable site up front that Maybe that'll be a parking lot Temporarily, I don't know at this point. It's just a building lot So the question was how far towards the river could that parking lot go How far could it go and does it did that have to meet the riparian? And it would okay, and it was going to end up having some Buffer buffer. I would imagine they're not going to pave all the way to the water But in the cases where there were things that they that they needed in that area They got permission because they could because it was not considered buffer It was just they just met the landscaping requirement for landscaping and not the 3005 riparian Naturally wooded vegetation requirement Is there is there any water management? Yeah, I mean that's going to have that's that was a requirement because it's Part of a bigger project. Yeah But I don't think we've received any testimony that suggests that we're improving water quality with the buffer in that location It's really just water management problem And the only way you can really build all the way up to the river is if it is a vertical wall You can't otherwise you can't right, but it's a It's a matter of degree but potentially could they have built a wall? If they if they if it's if they've got the ruling that there's no that it's it's not a riparian buffer Yeah, I think well, I mean depending on whether they meet the flood hazard flood way requirements They could they could have but I think where this ended up being an issue was instead of meeting the 15 foot naturally vegetated back You know they could be they may have encroached up to maybe 10 feet Which they still left some natural vegetation in there that they weren't going to remove but some of it was also planted and not You know kind of the Wild natural. Yeah, not the natural vegetation. It's kind of more landscaped So like bringing in fill would be a whole nother mass that they're trying to actually fill that wall Yeah in the floodway Yeah in the floodway that would would not have been possible but if it was out of the floodway then they would Be able to be as close as the flood hazard area would allow So your recommendation The recommendation on this one really was In this case, I didn't have a specific one Other than to think if we're going to do it, I think the cleanest thing would be to develop a map And I Didn't actually develop one But if you think that's the direction to go before I started to expend Time and resources I thought and there's a couple of these that are in here if you read through them There are a couple of them. I didn't really give a recommendation before I jump in and Can we write chunks? It's an open It's an open process any anything in the zoning can be proposed for changing We can certainly propose to change it back if that's the will of the planning commission otherwise Would there be a problem with developing a map? Yeah, I think it would be helpful for applicants Yeah, if I had a map, I mean, I'm looking I'm trying to keep my Administration glasses on and thinking if if we want to implement this if we want to meet the will of the council What would be the cleanest for me would be to have a map that would go and say this This bank is this bank isn't if people want to dispute the map We've got a map people can go and say I think the jacob slot is in fact channelized then we can Have a load when you drop properties on their lines Draw lines on their property that's different than their neighbors. Yeah, although these are mostly not Residential And the question comes up just means we do What do we do if there's missing, you know If it's going down one side and the wall had collapsed years ago And it's kind of this bank that's going in and it's channelized here and it's channelized here Is it channelized there even though it's not technically a wall Rest here, that's right So we have a little bit of channelized there, but yeah, definitely channelized. Yeah, have channelized Well, I will try to put together a map. I think the outcome From the drp decision is right. I don't see any harm caused by that decision So if we do map it, I would be inclined to follow that they're precedent if you want to call it that and Be liberal and we define as a just channelized Very least and another way to put it was map our original intent But I thought our original intent was that if it was already vegetated If it had vegetation on it, then it should have the riparian buffer The original intent was to not have riparian buffers and to let the stormwater handle it So we had Out of the planning commission was urban center one urban well urban center What what eventually ended up being urban center one urban center two and urban center three were exempt from the riparian standards Because they're already developed in the downtown and What we would end up managing was really the storm water through a different set of provisions But what we wanted to because currently under well, I say currently under the zoning that was in effect before 2017 We had no water setback requirements. We had no riparian buffers anywhere in the city So When we went to put in these new rules, there was a lot of questions of whether they're going to work and how they're going to work And so eventually the planning commission came to At least the way I always envisioned it was We will enforce this everywhere outside of the urban center We may in the future extend this into the urban center But the fact that it doesn't exist at all today And we will now be protecting 90 percent of our stream banks with this riparian buffer. The only things we won't be doing are these urban Sections which will probably be addressed through storm water The city council came in and said we should also enforce some places in the urban in the downtown And it was kind of left these gray areas that we don't know What's channelized what's not channelized? So I'll put together a map and we'll so the city council was influenced by some testimony from the public that kind of conflicted with the expert testimony that planning commission heard and Most of us I think were of the mind that The riparian buffer Change that the city council made Wasn't going to protect storm water anymore But it was going to possibly get in the way of development in the place most appropriate for development Which is are already urbanized downtown? and so so That was that's been our concern with it all along And I think putting our energy towards Non-regulatory means of restoring Addressing storm water managing it restoring the reporter where we can as opposed to A lot of effort into trying to find some sophisticated way of Of protecting or Regulating an area that's not going to provide us very much benefit in terms of water quality retakes resources better spent Yeah, that's completely fair. I mean adding a 15 foot buffer into a parking lot. That's already right. I don't do Anything I don't want to see further channelizing of the river. That's that's the perspective I'm coming from I don't want to see them out that wall if it's not already there Yeah Because it's already really bad so So the only discussion then is Referencing whether or not it would help water to storm water penetration Into the ground rather than any issues of setback The riparian setback providing a softer edge to the to the river Do we we never discussed that at all then right Infiltration no not not just relating it to water infiltration But relating it to as you stand on the real to a brick. Well, that's not a good example But if you're standing on the new bike path And looking down that it's no it's it has a softer edge And that's sort of my impression in some cases from what people of the some of the members of the public said That they you know They didn't want to see Development going right up to the edge and that they may not even have addressed the The storm water infiltration at all and we could do All of the storm water management that we want in my thing But the flooding that we have is not it's going to change much Because of that which is probably just a challenge to like Even if because we are so close to the river because it is channelized even if we start saying well Let's keep a little bit of water inside Well, that's all they're going to do so much I mean it's the floodway it's really determining that Okay, so I will put together a map and and I'll put that on my list and then we can debate whether we think the map is right Or wrong. I mean it really is a yes or no. Is this channelized? This is not channelized and the public can get their opportunity to Way in on what parts should or shouldn't be Um So number 18 is uh, actually we we had two cases that have come out surprisingly um on art studios Which does not appear anywhere in the zoning um And it's actually trickier than you would think because You have to decide what's art and You know painting landscapes will have no impact on your neighbors having a kiln or making sculptures out of Trash or welding or something else can actually be quite, you know, if you're gonna, you know, I had even your stone carving You know your art studio could be making granite statues and you're using pneumatic Drills and hammers that's going to be clearly If you know to go and send somebody who's doing landscapes to do a conditional use hearing See it kind of seems overkill. So we're we're trying to come up with and find out how other communities have handled these Isn't it do we have any for uh, we have a sound ordinance, right? We do have a sound ordinance and we could always use that as the kind of the The backup, but certainly from a zoning standpoint, they would some of the things that are Sort of described too as the difference between an art gallery and a studio where actual a workshop It really sounds like all of those discussions are more in terms of what people are working on and That to me seems like it's a light industrial kind of And that's actually what we ended up classifying it because we didn't have a definition For art studio We had to find something that it would meet the definition of and actually it it's light manufacturing because you're actually producing something But it seemed strange because it was somebody who was actually looking to do painting Were they selling were they were they were No gallery no gallery. They just they were renting No, they had they were taking in an office a vacant office In the downtown and they were going to use it to Just use as their art studio and they were going to they had a number of them That we're going to come in and they were just going to be able to have a place where they could Have their paints and their art and they would have a working space for artists Who want to go and work on this and we thought that's great But we don't have in this case. I think it was restricted just to painting but A studio when you start saying art studio you start getting into what's art And I think one of my examples in here was music. I mean somebody could go through and say I've got a rock band This is my art studio It's we can certainly regulate it through a noise ordinance, but I think If that's our if that's our approach we want to take we would just make an art studio something that's a permitted use and let the Impacts of that be regulated through the noise ordinance I would I would be okay with it, but you not I don't feel comfortable with that I would feel really upset to have somebody suddenly next door with heavy equipment It's certainly I mean It is producing something But I guess you're right that the art studio. I mean the painting studio could also be producing something I I just yeah I mean for one thing that the potential threat from different kinds of processes is going to be more significant So it seems it still seems to me like it's a light industrial use and You know if people if somebody came in with the painting studio and they wanted to argue that they could Ask for an exemption But is there a problem with putting it in as light industrial? No, we just needed to find out you know We were doing a zoning fix and so here we had an issue where two two times We've had applications and both times we've interpreted them both as light manufacturing Which meant they were going to have a heavier burden higher burden for Permits because they were going to have to go through and get conditionally used permits in The district that they were located so the question comes up that they were able to do that They they're in the process of applying and you know one of the questions that comes up is you know Did they want to wait for a zoning fix if it was going to get easier down the road? I I don't I'm dealing with this side of things Meredith and Audra deal with the actual permits and whether they're they're in but it was worth It was a worthy question that comes up when okay, we don't have art studio Do we want to make a specific use for it? Or do we want to roll it into the definition of light manufacturing, which is fine. That's what we're doing right now Just make it its own use with the definition and then in the downtown area like I mean abuse for that area Yeah, of course in the downtown Which anywhere probably by the time it reaches neighborhoods Those we would want to have associated with the occupant So you wouldn't have in this case. We're talking about things. It's not where people live. This is an art studio where People don't live there and I think by the time you get to residential 3000 neighborhood Somebody who's doing arts probably doing it in association with their house We wouldn't want them to have a separate art studio in a residential neighborhood Or we would I don't know Or maybe we would I don't know I think I think They'll be fine. They'll be fine. That's what I was thinking with the residential neighborhoods. It's the non Residential neighborhoods because I think if it's in the residential neighborhood it should be associated with their residents And we have rules that would allow an art studio In those home occupations and businesses Yeah, but the question is if it's really in a downtown location That's not So it basically you have looked at it as light manufacturing Yeah Which was giving them a higher So it's a conditional use in the downtown That note is Not occupying more than 20,000 square feet So it's a size limit So if you're considering like manufacturing, it's under that they already would be able to They would be able to an urban one two or three, but they would need to have a conditional use hearing Which isn't impossible again if you're doing landscape painting. That's not an issue. It just means We're sending you through a public hearing process Just to be in fact that we're have allowing for light manufacturing or light industrial here suggests that we should probably Our students Within the same classification, which no, I don't think the bar should be I don't think there's as much risk for an art studio for I don't see a whole lot needing from an art studio needing to go through Well, if there's welding or high high temperature kilns being used I don't think there's anything in the conditional use review that's going to change Well, at least there's other eyes looking at it in terms of But what I don't think these eyes have anything that will help us Make mobiliar a better place or help anyone's safety, right? Like I don't think the drb is going to have A whole lot to offer with regards to like kiln placement and Then give us a synopsis of what the drb would be looking at Well, I mean they're going to look at character of the area the impact on community facilities and traffic are the three The three big ones But impact on community facilities and services is where the fire chief has his public his ability to make comments I mean, it's doubtful any of these will have traffic impacts You know Yeah, but so in terms of that I think I Mean it's not an onerous requirement for them to go to a conditional use As other light manufacturing is It seems like if the use is at the level that you're like worried about That it might actually have crossed the line in the manufacturing if it's like a lot of welding a lot of machinery Do you have a definition for that? Yeah, I think definitions of what the cell is coming down to We do have a definition for light manufacturing Yeah, manufacturing light creation of goods entirely within an enclosed structure that do not rely on special power water waste water Disposal for their operations for example bakeries and small wood shops So we considered creation of art in these cases to be light manufacturing Which is again why they ended up rolling through conditional use For being in the downtown and again, that's Not impossible to get permits. We just wanted to point out where Could we I I think that our studio falls within that definition. Could we respond to this by Leaving that definition and in the tops of the scenarios that barb's talking about would fall within that required conditional use That could we add a painting studio as something that's a permitted use Or could we separate studio from workshop? We have neck clubs as permitted uses here I didn't say the rule for logical Well, you're saying it would go you put it under public assembly Yeah Yeah, I think in this case You can have a lab and technical facility as permitted use A lab High-five would be a clear way to put it Well, unless since it meets technically our light manufacturing we could leave it under Industrial Yeah, I would probably end up leaving it under industrial even though it kind of sounds strange that art is industrial But industrial is generally the production of new I would leave it there. I don't think it would make sense in the public But we certainly could go through and make a separate category for An art studio and then just to find the art studio as specific to a limited Range of what that art studio would be allowed to encompass But I think the difference is just a painting studio because that's pretty self Explanatory self limiting And it's it's at least doing something to make the the regs more art friendly I mean we could also we could try to find our studio further, but we're going to start to run into problems Where crosses into uh, then he's going to get somebody who wants to make jewelry If you want, you know wanting the studio classification Is there Is it something that a lot of towns do to find art studio or I've seen it in other and other communities, but I didn't find any that I liked I didn't Look as hard At that one. Um, we had had some folks do a public arts master plan and I kind of Punted to them And they got back to me last week, which I haven't had a chance to really look through What they had sent back on What other communities do? But at this point we had gotten it into the list of But I can certainly work on that without having us get too bogged down Permanently in this and it's just trying to get some direction of what people might like to see And I agree now it shouldn't fall under public assembly, but it doesn't sound like that's how they enjoy Well, the recommendation was to list it under public assembly Could be I would be fine with defining I make a permitted use, but I don't know if that's If we make a new definition if you define as you know Narrowly define a painting studio or art studio, and then if something is not an art, uh, it's not having Additional equipment so that it would open it up a little bit. So it's not just a Yeah, and I mean we there's some other things we can add. I mean John found this one from washington state Okay, yes, if you've got a couple Focus on any like noxious impacts that We're worried about and identify those As opposed to let's like not get into equipment But if you've got a good one in there just forward that on to me and I'll put it in my I'll make a recommendation because for for those of you who haven't who didn't get to experience the joys of Sony what I usually end up doing is is putting together a recommendation and You know, they truly are just putting something on the table to start talking about and if you know, I Try not to put any Pride or anything in them they're designed to be starting points because it's easier to beat up something It's in front of you than it is to talk about things in the abstract So we'll put something down and we'll just pull it apart and if it doesn't work We'll start all over again and if we've got something that we think we can fix we'll fix it So a new category under industrial Yep, and then it'll have a new definition. I think the idea is that it'll be a painting studio otherwise light manufacturing unless John gives me something that really seems like it Meets what we were trying to do So while we've got these Use tables opened up the last one on part two Talks about In the residential area. It was grouped in as one and two family three and four dwelling units And multifamily dwellings And I'll get back to that in a separate list some later on What we had was somebody who had a three-unit building they were going to a four-unit building and they argued it was not a change of use Because it's in the same category So because there wasn't a change of use that started to You know, did you even enter into development? Um And therefore could we even regulate it if you don't have enough Density for the four units does it not matter because you're already a permitted use There is no change of use and because there is no change of use There's no zoning permit because there's no zoning permit. You don't have to meet the zoning permit requirements including density But isn't there another section that Says that you can't add additional units that would make it non There are buckets. So your first bucket If when you do regulations, so the first bucket is this overall applicability statement and in for zoning It's the definition of development anything that is development Needs a zoning permit and you fall into that first bucket And then we go through and say except for these and except for these and except for the easy small things So we've got this big bucket that if you're in definition of development Including Change of use But if we've just said going from three to four units, it's not a change of use then You don't go on to the next step. It's a big flow chart. So If you are the definition of development, then you have to get a permit if it's not then you don't If you go from three to four units, that's not development. Therefore you can you can leave You don't get to go and say well because we're regulating you down here You therefore need a permit that doesn't work that way We have to actually get you to that regulation Through the flow chart for you to actually have to meet that requirement And so the issue we have is if it's not a change of use you're not going to need a permit If you don't need a permit technically you don't have to meet the density to make that shift Or meet the parking requirements or meet The site plan requirements or anything else. So what my recommendation here was that I just break this into different lines So there's going to be a line for One dwelling unit a line for two dwelling units a line for three dwelling units a line for four dwelling units and a line for multifamily dwellings Yeah, I mean right now You would be required to do something to go from two to three, but not three to four, which is very strange There's a whole slew of code differences in the code the billing code. Yes That get triggered in that case. Yeah, you would I mean I could certainly see separating three and four but I mean one and two are typically always lumped together And in building codes most other codes, but this isn't the building code. So why are we separating them all out? Like why do we have Multi three One two We had just grouped them into places depending on where the permits and the conditional uses would apply You know, so If we were looking at residential nine It's a permitted use administrative permit for one and two family units It's a conditional use for three and four units With this logic though anything over five units is not like going from five to 200 wouldn't be a change of use and the other option that we have is What we don't have in these regulations is a definition of change of use Which I have in my other zoning regulations, which I actually have as a draft And so the other option to doing this is to have A definition of change of use which is what I usually do and within that it is a change of the intensity of use Which would capture items like going from three to four units We would simply go and say well, that's a change of intensity And therefore you need to get a permit for that because it is a change of use because it's a change of intensity in the same way that Usually you talk about this in the context of Rural communities and gravel pits. That's your big one go from Average of 10 trucks a day to 12 trucks a day. Is that a change of use? And what if you have a kid now? What if you have a kid? Yes, that's a change of intensity It has changed the density Just a kid becomes a teenager It seems like overall it would be useful to have that definition in in our ordinance anyway So we could leave these and I could just go through with it and give you guys a change of use definition that would kind of I don't know. I don't like getting into this intensity thing. It seems like just saying including like increasing adding a housing unit and the definition of land development would be a lot easier But simpler although you could just say like this doesn't pass a straight face test Which I I get a lot of yes, and I think in other communities. I would be a lot more relaxed I just it's just incredible In the the months that I've been here the the details that everybody's either an attorney or knows an attorney and I get We get everybody Picking every little detail including the fact that somebody did actually come in and tell me I don't need a permit to go three to four units. So this isn't hypothetical. This is an actual case and I said Appeal it to court. We're gonna say you need a permit So then we don't do anything That would involve getting more lawyers involved but are already They haven't appealed it But we're just trying to point out where people have found places where we kind of went as barb said You know I can see that that's not a change of use and they don't need a permit Except that because it then it doesn't start to overlap with our allowing single family The single family units to be duplexed. Well, we expressly describe that which is why that's an easier case for us to To discuss we clearly said this is okay, and they need a permit to do it but This one started to fall into a strange gap because technically they were making the argument They didn't need a permit at all to do it Is there a way to say yeah as you said adding additional units is a change of use Residential units Yeah, I mean there are different ways to To fix this issue. I don't see this as a problem But if we want to do it then if you think we need to I would be a marvel I'm just yeah, I'm like you said them Yeah, I guess just for my own learning. I know I'm starting at a very basic level, but what's the What's the problem if somebody with three units just adds a fourth unit without a permit? What because because they might do something that doesn't meet code Uh, they would be they would be They would not be if they were exempt from the zoning they could do it without needing to meet the parking requirements Oh, they could do it without Meeting landscaping requirements because we have if you're for if you're a three or four unit You should get a site plan and generally if you went from three to four units We would ask for a site plan So you would show us what the landscaping is and if there's any screening that would be necessary from the neighbors Your point before is that they could be change into a non-performing You know they didn't have a lot size And in yeah, and in that case they could also because we aren't looking at it They actually may only have amount of land sufficient for three units And they want to go to four units But if they're exempt they can just go to four units because I don't actually get any opportunity to veto that application Or to deny that application I'm all for allowing this Making it as easy as possible Also not for making like a mockery of The I think the the intensity ideas seems like it would mean more judgment calls for you, which is what you're trying to avoid No, I mean it's it's clear we can go through When we put the definition of what a change of use is to go through and you can even go through and say for example A change from three to four units an additional unit would be a change of intensity Um increasing the number of truckloads of gravel would be a change of intensity It starts to get into some of these other cases as well because there's also some structural things For some changes of use, you know, if you are expanding Or what if we say in three to four unit without a change Then you're really getting into into details I mean it would be helpful to have a change of use definition Because I know that this came up with the fire chief in relationship to An insertion of a a business and it ended up not Qualifying as a change of use Whereas if it had been then he would have more Yeah, he's usually looking at building code though And their definition of change of use but for us We're usually looking at it from Because you don't have a definition of a change of use Then again, he may not get a chance to look at it In the same way Well, I mean we could solve the problem by your comment before john is just to say additional units Um residential units qualify as a change of use Or as land develop it's land development Yeah, it's going back to the first It could be another uh note on our table No, well technically be up in the definition of development Oh, all right So because we have to capture we have to capture them first So I'm clear though changing from one to two Will not be affected by this It would because it's still land development Right To go right to two okay in bit input with three we're going to clarify the three to four requires Permit and you could be denied for a few factors Yeah, and a couple of conditional requirements, but only in the rest Just adding a unit it qualifies as land development so you're not you don't all of a sudden become like example Yeah, so just so Everybody's kind of on the same page So the what the definition this is pretty similar to what's under state law land development means constructing installing demolishing reconstructing converting structurally altering Relocating or enlarging any structure Mining excavation filling or grading of land Removing natural woody vegetation from within riparian buffers Changing or extending the use of land or a structure Adjusting or relocating the boundary between two lots or dividing a lot into two or more lots Except in in this definition Oh changing or extending the use of land or a structure The question was Is that changing the use of the land if it's not changing changing its extent It could be yeah, I mean I think there's room for us to make the argument And I think some I think it would be hard pressed for the court But at the same time the courts can do funny things and if we know we've got an area that's gray That's why we kind of pointed out should we Clean that up or should we just leave it? I mean as we said we could put in here either in the definition of changing of use Or We could just add to specific comment that just says the increase adding another unit Fine with clarifying it there. Yeah, so adding it to the land development definition Clarifying it in the land development definition I think we can trust Mike's wisdom. We don't have to like build the semantics of what they should say Well, you'll get your second shot at it because whatever we get I can propose Throw an art studio in there throw an art studio in there and there we go Except that all our students can be Exempted from this Yes, so these If you didn't get a permit say this thing goes through and this guy has a Or woman has a four-unit building when they go to sell Would they have any negative consequences when they go to sell? No, because it's not a violation of the zoning so Technically wouldn't be Sort of become a non conforming Or maybe they were already it basically become non conforming Because it would be legally non conforming it exists legally and It doesn't conform to the zoning because Of a loophole. So we're creating more not potentially creating more non conforming Lots Yeah, and so the definition the definition of development is always really important Because it is the gateway that gets you into the zoning and once you're in then we can start to manage what's in there And occasionally we've had Questions come up That we really had to go and reflect hard on that I was working with the town of elmore and they had somebody who's building houseboats And people were living in the houseboats Well the issue is they float and we're talking about land development And therefore it actually didn't need a zoning permit for people to build houseboats and lived in them In lake elmore because it's not land development. It's water development and therefore we couldn't regulate it through the zoning Also elmore had people landing airplanes on the lake and for the same reason we could not regulate Because it wasn't landing on land. We could not it was not an airstrip It was it was landing in water and because as long as it was landing in water, it was not within our jurisdiction It ended up being the state's jurisdiction But it was as I was working for lamoille county at the time the questions were coming in from the town Well, can't we do anything about these people living in houseboats? And we look at protection Yeah, and that may well some of these things may have triggered Why they created some of these new rules because people were creatively finding ways that they could get around certain rules by Technically that would be a structure then What if you put water under it? Yes, yes, what if you put in a swimming pool? Yes, if you build a build a pool put the houseboat in it Technically we could regulate the pool, but not the houseboat You're here You're already flooding Yes, you've given people horrible ideas I'm waiting for the applications to come rolling in But that's that's a lot of when we start talking about these things We look at them and as I talked to my zoning administrators and new ones as they come in We talk about buckets and you have to fall into the first bucket to get to the next bucket to get to the next bucket Um, and then when we had talked earlier, um, brandy had proposed a lot of architectural standards That were there in the question that we had as administrators were when do these apply? We have rules just because the rules are there doesn't mean we apply them We actually have to find a place where the rules say At this point you now have to enforce those rules and in this case we attach them to major Renovations in the major site plan so The thinking of it as as buckets this one gets into this one then from this one Is it site plan as it conditionally uses it multiple so? I mean this is really helpful in terms of having actual examples of people who are making applications And we're going to have to see how our Our rules work Do one more keep doing a couple more here. Yeah, there's part three some easy ones Um, these are just changing some headers. They're they labeled the standards. They really weren't Or they were labeled as applicability and they're really not applicability statements. They were actually standards so Your applicability is your Who needs to meet this requirement? And your standards are what standard do you have to meet and it was labeled as one and really was the other Three zero zero two a reword the proposed development will be or was approved as a pud In accordance with the provisions of 440 or under the previous set of zoning regulations So This particular one I don't have what it currently reads as but that's what it was proposed to change as this came up because of We have a permit in place it going through the process right now from murray hill Which is a pud? And the question came up How do we process permits for puds? The proposed development will be or was approved as a plain unit development in accordance with the provisions Of chapter 440 so I think that currently reads the proposed development shall be approved as a plain unit development Yes, and so what this is saying is it's it's still okay murray hill is okay even though The way that's worded it because it was under a previous it was under a previous set of zoning regulations So this is really just kind of a technical fix So exactly yellow ones that you hit We're not color coded. Yeah, I didn't color code them this time. I should go through and color code more of these Point c remove buildable areas from the density calculations has turned into a nightmare for Administration because we lack slope maps with a table to tell us how much land is in the slope category for the purposes of calculating The number staff has had to send every subdivision request To add dwelling units to an engineer for slope for slope analysis um staff recommends explaining some of these areas From to exempt from the analysis to include some areas of higher density including urban already urban center riverfront and mur exempt consider 1503,000 or others So the issue So the lygar map is not really giving You an accurate enough always giving us a very accurate map, but the issue is If you look at a parcel with those lines and I said how much of that property is over 30 percent I mean just pick any parcel on that map. There's no specific one there. It's It's everything that's in red is over 30 percent So But we can't I mean yes, I mean In a computer program that would be very easy to do and it's not very easy to do In fact central vermont can't do it UVM can't do it We have officially stumped everybody we we don't have a table And we can't do it for for all of these we just need we we can't do it We haven't been able to figure out how to do this yet and it's really been stumping us. It's not too complicated Um Part of the problem when I tried doing some of this is that our parcel data A lot What may look nice a lot of the lines don't Either cross so there's gaps so when you run it it just breaks Breaks the model So it's the property lines that become an issue The the short amount of time I tried doing it. That's the first problem I encountered Um, I think the city will be updating their parcel data to meet the state standard this year So We'll be able to do that But if there are maybe specific parcels And when we get in tight the other issue that starts to come up is that that doesn't exempt that picks up a lot of stuff That's noise So it will show 30 slopes at the edges It overroofs and on retaining walls and rock walls and So we end up with some odd Areas that end up being defined as more than 30 slope We've been able to kind of work around for a number of these cases and get it to work But slopes are going to come up a second time later on as well, but that's just One of the options was Um, because it has been expensive every single Change of residential use You know, we try to be easy. Let's take single family homes and duplex. So that that's that one is allowed Based on That one exemption we put in there, but as we start going to some of these other Add a development unit you have to hire an engineer to do the slope analysis When you get down to these smaller parcels For new for adding on Yeah, so for example bob gowens on main street He's around the just around the corner past the school. So you start going up the hill He's on the right hand side. He wanted to to subdivide to put in another unit He needed to hire an engineer to put in a slope analysis Because the map that's here Showed a lot of stuff that was over 30 and it turns out a lot of the stuff over 30 with his house His house is actually a retaining wall. It's High on this side and he's got a walkout basement on the other side So this is all 30 slopes But it's not it's his house is basically the retaining wall So he had to have pay for an engineer to do that analysis the neighbor is also trying to do the same thing most of that one is also Over 30 in that one they had to hire an engineer. There was a subdivision on spring hollow They had to hire an engineer Because they you know we could look at this and we could By our eye go and say I don't think this is You know I can guess it's it's not going to They're going to have enough density to develop a way to exempt the You know steep slopes that are falling Uh inside existing structures. I mean that's your point, right? Yeah, it's just becomes a very complicated It's not as easy of an idea as you as you might think when you look at this to go and say oh just remove the buildable area That's over 30% It almost always involves hiring an engineer to do the analysis to make that determination. So what seemingly appear to be simple projects But maybe they're not so good projects because it's a 30 slow you know that um, but we're not even talking about whether it is structurally Any structures or building retaining walls are making it developable to make it work We haven't even gotten to that part yet. This is just whether you have the density Can you use that land that's over 30 and count it towards your density to allow you to have a three-unit building Rather than a duplex For every 1500 square feet for every 1500 square feet you own In residential 1500 you get another development unit and so 1500 square feet is not a whole lot of area and if you're close We really need to know whether you have the land We know you have the parcel big enough But now we have to start excluding steep slopes So are you talking about within an existing structure not at not as part of new construction not adding up No additions. You're just yeah within within existing structures If you wanted to just go and add another unit or you wanted to take a garage and Take your garage and put another unit over you got a duplex with a garage You're going to put a unit in the garage. You're going to go from a two-unit to a three-unit Well, we need to calculate density and we have to look at the steep slopes and we get into this Sorry So that's where these things come up and we just have to keep going back And that's that's the hard part that we keep coming up is just and and this is going to come up again This isn't the only time slopes come up slopes come up for the unbuildable slopes later on when we get 3007 as well So it's actually number 32 a little bit farther down. So Maybe we'll hold off a decision here till we get there, but this is a separate one Do we count land over 30? Towards your density Yeah, we can all think about it Part of that Yeah, we haven't been counting yet we we have been saying that's not 30 slow But it shows up on the map, which is why the map becomes useless pretty quick But outside the footprint outside the footprint it does It is pretty evident in terms of a different situation No, we still have more We have to consider minutes first We consider the okay Did everyone have a chance to put up the minutes for June 25th? I don't think we have a copy of the May 14th ones here Uh, I would have to bring them back in I didn't print out new copies of the May I wasn't paying attention. Can we just approve both at once? Your motion Okay, all in favor Okay, approved. We have another motion Do we have a motion to adjourn? Yes. Okay, Stephanie and John and that's it