Welcome to Toffy TV, joined by Andy. We're just going to have a little chat about Wilfred Tahrar. Obviously the saga is still ongoing. Everton is obviously heavily interested in bringing them to Gwreson Park, Crystal Palace, so far not so keen on letting them go or playing their cards close to the chest and trying to get more money. So we're just going to have a little chat with Andy about what would Wilfred Tahrar bring to this event and why he thinks Marko Silver wants Zahar so much. So obviously we know Zahar is an approving Premier League player 27 later this year. Why do you think Marko Silver's and Marcel Brands are going all out for them, it seems? Obviously with the start of the summer the room was looking for a left footed right wing because I think eventually Marko Silver probably sees as playing the 4-3-3 and usually one inverted wing is left footed, a right footer on a left wing, left footer on a right wing. But I think with Zahar the opportunity presented itself on Arsenal and for Pepe and they probably realised that they do like the player, they always like the player. And the opportunity arose where I think we had a bit of leverage in the DLM because we only want a team bidding and with the possibility of Arsenal being involved to push the price up to sort of leverage their palace out to come. Obviously palaces are still being difficult because Zahar could be the difference between them being relegated or not so it's a big risk if they sell them and I think they probably want the right amount of money so they can go out and buy a quality replacement they are trying to get to Zahar from under Watford's noses for example. So that's the, but why Marko Silver wants them? It's partly because he's stepping into the team day one, improve the side because he's played in the Premiership before and also he adds something different to the team that we currently don't have. He adds to the creativity, the fact that he can beat a man, break the lines of teams and he also plays in a real hard run system. Now I know he's not a super defensive, he's really hard on the team, he's way hard, way creates good. So he'd fit in to have it inside quite well in that sense. He gave us, I suppose he gave us something that we haven't got. You know, we're obviously last season and particularly the last 10 games of the season when we were at our best. We were explosive on the break, really obviously Bernard was up to speed then and in the Lucidim we're flying. Sheamus had a big good finish to the season and obviously the Charleson when he went over off the right hand side. The Charleson had a good season, had a little blip in the middle but he was good anyway. But when he was on the right hand side getting into those areas and then with Dominic Calvert-Luban we were a real threat on the counter attack with me. But Wilfred T'Harr is different again, a different profile I would suggest and certainly the Charleson has got the natural ability to score goals and is quite strong runs with the ball but I don't think he doesn't do what T'Harr doesn't say he's taking it off. No, it's not as good as the dribble. He's quick, he's strong, but in terms of skill going past the man Charleson's not quite there yet, it's not going to get there. The explosive and the sum of T'Harr can go past three or four men in a time. That's what we sort of lack at times. Bernard, Henry Charleson, both decent to good driblers but that top level ability to dribble to break the lines to beat a couple of men which then stretches the defence to create causes panic. That's what's hard to bring to the side. And he's quicker. It's top level speed. You're watching on the counter attack, you can carry the ball so quickly. The advantage he creates as well having him on the ball. You watched me in the Liverpool last year as you said that we spoke before on the field. Just frightened on the break. And if we're going to play on the break against bigger teams and away from home, perfect person for him. I mean, it surprised me. Again, you just mentioned it before and again it's all about options presenting themselves. You know, everything like you said before quite clearly but looking at a number of left-footed right-wings, I think they added down to a good short list of who they wanted and obviously made sensitive enquiries about what the demands were. And then this presents itself and you know, obviously sometimes a proven Premier League player can present himself. I've seen a lot of people on social media saying and suggesting along with journalists that he could be a real game changer for Everton this side of sign. I mean, he's had a good age. He obviously had the Manchester United experience which went there at 20 and it probably wasn't the right time for him to be there. I think he only started two games for this. The things that Simon did and then Moe's became manager. That can be a problem now because if you don't sign a player as a manager, you haven't got that affinity to want to play them. And maybe Moe's could be quite a safety face at times and probably sat out being a young player. He didn't want to take that risk because obviously a lot of pressure United would show if somebody got to sign. But yeah, that's it. And from then to impact to Palace, if you look just your raw statistics and ways played, year on year, he's got better continually. Every year improves his goals, improves his, all round game gets better. And at Palace, people can judge him how he plays at Palace, but think about it when he's at Everton, he's got a child, so I'm on side, Keam, Sigurdson, other quality players.  And that's what it creates. He will occupy defence and be able to stretch teams, but also he will then be able to express himself more because he won't have as many people marking him as well. You can understand Chris, the Palace's point of view. He's a fantastic player for this. He could be the difference between struggling maybe more. 10 goals and five assists he's taken on. He also won them five penalties. Willa Voivic, basically, works his goals, come off those penalties. So is contributions that side nearly 20 goals on all? That's big to take it out. They can't probably sign a 20-goal wing or a 20-goal striker, so that's the difference. And that's why they're driving such a hard bargain? I've got no problem with that. When you're the buying club you want it. You should just let us have them, but we've been on the other end of it. It's not nice. Well, let's just, before we finish, let's have a look at some of the stats. So, we've got some of the stats up here. Yeah, I've got Ramza, I've got a friend of mine off Twitter. It's RamS. He does some great work like this. Great visual, data visuals. He wants to check them out. Basically, this is a hard data. This is a lot of it, what we call advanced data, because obviously people understand goals and chances of creating statistics. But this is a lot of stuff like extra shot selection, non-penalty goals, which is important. When you're golden, your ratio of your goals from non-penalty is obviously, you don't rely on non-penalty, that Nicholas Pepe's side for Arsenal scored 22 goals last season, but eight of them were from penalties, so it can make quite a bit of a difference. You don't get the same amount of chances of penalties, you don't have the same effect as a player. So, you look at, obviously defensive metrics, but he's a winger, not really even looking to that. Passer-wise, it's progressive passes. Progressive passes for wingers is because the space is shortened and he can make them passers. They generally don't have high numbers, so that's not such a worry. He is a bit below average in terms of the premiership numbers, but the way he plays, it's not such a big issue because he carries the ball, so he's not looking to flip balls through constantly and try and find gaps in the team. He's looking to take it on himself and be that one. Running top 10% in the league in terms of making progressive runs, whether that's from his own half into another half, or making progressive runs for them or making three metres into a team's penalty. So, as you can see, even just with the basic statistics, 10 goals, 5 assists, 52 chances created open play. As I said on Twitter, that would be 12 more than both Bernard and Sigurd Samargin to open play last season. So, we really would add something to our team creatively in terms of being able to break the lines. Teams would naturally have to cover him because he's so good on the ball. It creates opportunities for other players, so I think we'd be getting a really good player. If you look at, in terms of in depth, the top 10% for a winger. Just for everyone. If you look at the lines, they're basically the average across the Premier League. So, the percentile rank essentially is where he ranks. So, in the top 10%, you're obviously one of the best, but if you look at his dribbles, he's in the top 1% of dribbles in the league. That's incredible. It is incredible, yes. So, that's the type of player we're getting. Obviously, some numbers are a bit below. Shot selection isn't great because a lot of the time, he's looking to cut in off right winger to expect lots of shots. And everything, he's probably going to get better opportunities because he's got more space to set. A lot of the time, faced with two attackers, it's two defenders, so it'll make it easier to have a bit more chances to shoot. As they pass on, I'm not too worried about. Passes into the penalty area. It's excellent in terms of the number of passes he's getting into the penalty area. So, that's what we need, someone who can break those lines. When you're facing your family, you can take three to two, three players up the game as they call pack, and nowadays it's a lot to do stats. So, you pack three players, you have problems in the box, they lose their shape and that's a good chance for us. The interest in the success of through balls as well, which is above average, because from a wide play, being able to thread balls through as well as take people on. I think there's like a statement about Sarah that he's just a dribbler. He's actually quite a talented footballer. He does create a lot of chances, maybe, and he's because he does obviously so good at dribbling. He can remove players from the game and create chances that way, but he is a good pass for the ball. I just want in terms of his main trick, his step over, isn't it? He's so good at it, so why not? Why does he need an array of tricks if he's got one that's very successful? You know, one that's very successful, but just those stats there give you the better indication as well of just how good a footballer he is, really. He is a very good footballer, yeah. I know people, some of you might have seen some of the big data websites saying he's not a top six player. Disa is only one half of the pitch. You can see the eye test. Disa doesn't measure how explosive he can be as well on the ball. Now, how much defenders fear him. He doesn't suggest that two players are marking all times. Now, basically, he is mostly apart maybe from Andrew Stans and their whole attack. And now, for example, as well, Patrick Van Aanholt really benefits for him, because them two players include the fullback on the wing that covers the heart. He's always in round the back and that's his goal. So, it will help you look at Dean as well. Yeah, I think... Sometimes when those metrics are thrown out, he's not a top six player, you have to remember where Chris the Palace has been as well in terms of the league. We had a relevant look at Dean. People were like, he's not as good as the fullbacks at the top of the league. They were pools being put. You've got better sense of role. He's crossing to Lerente and Yncholeth and he's growing everywhere. He's looking at 15 or 16. Stats can be fairly effective. That's why I don't like assists. I've always said this. Assist are only predicated on how good the finishes are. So, you've got the best finishes in the league. You can have loads of assists. But you could be the world's best creator and if you've got Llewman, he has fluff and chances up front. You're not going to get many assists. So, it's a lot of context. But there's no doubt. At any point in his context, he's a fairly good player. I know he does 10-27 and people say it doesn't fit it, but he's 10-27 in November. He's got 4 full seasons. He's still got 33-31. I still got a play. I'll have to see whether or not Crystal Palace are interested in letting them go. If they're not, you don't understand why when you look at the stats there. Let us know what you think in the comments section below about Wilfred Zahar. Is he the one you want to do everything you need and can he be the difference maker at the top end of the pitch for everything? Can he take everything from outside the top six into the top six? Is he that good? Let us know in the comments section below. Big thanks to Andy for joining that. Big thanks to our Rames for his stats there as well. Make sure you subscribe.  Join us on Patreon. Become part of our ToffeeTV Patreon community. Thanks for watching. See you later.


The other members from my right are Rob Goodwin, Ryan Cain, Tom Kester. And this is the meeting for Monday, March 4th. We're starting a little after 7 PM. The first order of business is the approval of the agenda. There are one application and some DRB trading that is scheduled. Does anyone have any adjustments, additions, attractions that they wish to make? Hearing none, all in favor of approving the agenda as printed, please raise your right hand. It is approved. No comments from the chair this evening. The other item of pre-application business is the minutes from February 19th, myself. So we will put those off to the next meeting. And that brings us to the first item of business, which is 29 College Street. It is a two-lot subdivision. This is a sketch plan. The applicant will come forward. I'll simply explain. Because this is a sketch plan, there's no formal testimony being taken or decision being made tonight. In a subdivision application, there's a two-step process. The sketch plan is basically for the board to ask questions, give a little bit of preliminary feedback. If any of the neighbors or interested people are interested in giving feedback as well, this is a good time. It gives the applicant an opportunity to incorporate some of that feedback or engage by such feedback or as they see fit. But we don't make any decisions tonight. Following the sketch plan, we then go, I think it's a two-week gap until we do the final subdivision. So whenever they get it. Yeah, whenever they get it. At least. Yeah, it's good for you. It's usually a month at least. Yeah, it's usually a month. It's good for a year. But this is the first stage of the process. So we're really here to, at this point, hear the application, go over some of the details and voice any issues that we may have with it or questions or things that need to be fleshed out for the final subdivision. Any questions? Good. So we don't put you under oath, but would you please introduce yourself for the record? Sure. My name's Katie Gustafson, and I work at Vermont College of Fine Arts. So, Kate, if you wouldn't mind giving us an overview. And is anyone here in the audience here to speak on this application? OK, just if you change your mind, that's OK. You're not either bound to say anything or not. But I'll make sure that there's an opportunity knowing that there are people. So Kate, why don't you give us an overview of what you're proposing to do? Sure. So we are looking to, well, we've been looking at the entire college campus for quite some time in terms of excess space that we have. And we have quite a bit of it. And for 10 years, we've held on to the entire campus. And we've come to the conclusion just based on a variety of factors that we need to strategically look at pieces of the campus that we can divest up. Frail House is basically a standalone house. And so we are moving forward with attempting to put that on the market to sell it. And in order to do that, it actually shares a lot with the Crowley building, which is the newest building on the campus that was built back in 2015, the glass front little cube building. And so therefore, I'm here submitting the application to subdivide that lot. So the end result would be to take the spring portion off? Right. It's that lot. It's called the frail lot. Oh, the frail. We are hoping to divide it in half so that the house on the corner, which is sort of an old Victorian home, can be sold as a private residence. And what is the house currently serving? We house faculty there. Occasionally, we need to use it maybe four weeks a year. And need, I say loosely, there is one program. It's our largest program, the writing program, where we have 25 faculty members. So we can fill that building along with several others with them, but we have other room for those 25 people in other places on campus. So it's being used primarily as a residential structure. So one of the threshold questions that we have is that it has gone over with this, but doesn't exist as an entity. And so there. So we're in the process of developing a new master plan. It is an outgrowth of the previous master plan, trying to look further down the road since it will no longer be a document that needs updating every five years, but very much in the same spirit and many of the same ideas that were in the last version of the plan. So it's a, because of the change in regulations, it's a separate process. They can't go through a renewal, a short-term renewal. And so I've actually seen a first draft of the new master plan, but it's going to be a whole new campus PUD that'll have to go through sketch plan signs to the full campus parking plan, to landscaping, to every potential. It's intended to be. That's this question, and this is intended to just clarify this lot that would be subdivided, what's identified as Lot 1 on your survey. Is this the end of the campus? So as I'm looking, Kemphav, property across the street is a private loan, I think this is the end of the campus. So this is really sort of a, we're not talking about changing the middle of the campus. This is really. So as a board, and I don't know if any of the other board members have a question, to help with this, one of the determinations we have to make is whether we want to make the college submit a final subdivision application after obtaining the campus PUD approval under the 2018 regulations, or if we allow the college to move forward with a subdivision application process, despite being this sort of limbo, the old AI PUD. If this were amending an old permit granted under the old regulations, we'd be found by the old regulations. But a plan is not a regulation. So I could see how. Very similar. Just a second. Any other thoughts from the board? I mean, I would kind of in considering the purpose of this no development may occur until a new AI PUD requirement from the previous regs, I think my reading of the intent is that unless they have a new master plan, they can't do a new building, change in use, that type of development. What we presented with here is simply subdividing off a residential. It's a change in ownership. It's not a change in use. It's not a new building. So this doesn't seem like the type of development that would be prohibited by that prior section to me. Yeah, except the history of this, and Kevin was here, he made sure that the campus stayed of certain properties being sort of carved off. There'll still be academic use. Our contentious hearings we had was when the building that now houses Lee Laid, Harris Hall, which had been pushed out of the AI PUD, went to its next logical phase, which was away from an academic building. It slipped out of that. That was a concern of the AI PUD. That's one of the changes I think with the campus PUD is that it's not as, under the old AI PUD, a serious question. Let me ask the applicant this. I'm sorry to have to, but this is the public process. Is this something that it makes sense to do a master plan before the subdivision? Or is this something that the subdivision really needs to happen first? Strategic ideas about the way we need to use the resources that we have at our disposal. It's an incredibly challenging contusion. It's pretty much in the same boat. VCFA is doing OK, but there is urgency to look at all of our resources, use them in a way that's going to ensure the long-term stability of the college. So we have urgency to do this.  And it just takes some time to work through that process. The way my understanding and the way my thinking goes is that under the old regulations, as well as the new regulations, subdividing is something that could happen in either set of regulations. Granted, we are in this limbo in terms of the campus master plan being not current. But there's not really a scenario in which either is where you would never be able to do such a thing. So whether we go with the old regulations or the new regulations, the college would very much like to work through that process with us now, rather than waiting for it. Just so you can hear better. Having heard that, I'd like to just echo what Deb said. I think if we have any inclination that we might be interested in requiring an amendment or requiring approval of a new master plan prior to considering the subdivision application, that we get a legal opinion saying that we have the authority to do that. Because it's not obvious to me that we do. It's not obvious to me that we don't, which is why it would be great to have the city's attorney answer that question. But that said, my inclination is still that even with what you said, Dan, we're not talking about a change of use. We're talking about a residential building that is on the outskirts of the campus that would remain a residential building. It would just be subdivided and sold. So I mean, I'm not suggesting that we should require them to have approval of the new master plan prior to considering this application. But if we would like to do that, I think we should get clarity on whether that's appropriate legally. Let me add to that. I fully agree with both board members. Let me add to that that it might be helpful to have an understanding of the different standards for subdivision that the old AIPD rules would require versus the new campus. And this comes into a question of student rights. Understand as Ms. Vestefsens mentioned, this was allowed under the old rules because I think given what she's also said, that the college, you know, this is something that is a high priority for the college or high residency program, an understanding of, it would be silly to wait on a master plan that would simply say what it's going to do on this particular corner. Did the subdivision, I think, is where the board is starting to think if we are empowered in our shoes that would drive this type of subdivision under either the old rules or the new rules. David Rue can consider or maybe merit it. So I don't know how much further we can go. I know there was a question from the public. In 2017, June 4th, 2017, so before the new zoning regulations took effect. So it's interesting to consider what would be the situation if there actually was a master plan that was in effect now or rather when the new zoning regulations went into effect. It seemed to me that if the college had applied for a five-year plan, there'd be a good argument that it would carry through. I was also just going to comment that unfortunately, this is a situation that we've been in before. For some reason, the AIQD process has been difficult for the college to reapply for. I don't know if no one puts it on their tickler file or if the city fails to remind them. But I've been here in this room before in other years where changes have been anticipated and people look and say, oh, the master plan hasn't been updated in seven years and expired two years ago. What are we going to do? So A, there may be some precedents there that you could look at, although of course the zoning changes didn't change. But B, it really would have been great if the college had kept up with the master plan process. And although it is put forth as a really onerous step, I will say again from being here in previous years that the master plans often look very much like the previous master plans. There aren't that many changes and they tend to look very similar. The final comment I would make would be about the plans for this particular property. And it would be interesting to know from the applicant it was decided that this was a surplus property because living in the neighborhood, I know that that building was just very recently renovated and in fact integrated into the new square cube building. I saw a lot of the promotional materials about that. And it was really designed, it was done, that square building was designed by a very high powered, nationally known architectural firm. And it was designed to integrate with the Dutch colonial building that's their flail house. It was painted a similar color. You can see on your plans that there was courtyards that were designed to link them together. It was very much seen as a linked project, one project. So it's sort of interesting to see that the college has now decided that they only use it four times a year, which does question the planning process involved. Why would they go through all this high powered work to design a building that's only being used four times a year? Those are my observations and comments. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Do you want to, or we can wait till later? Did you want to? Well, I thought I was asked a direct question, but do I wait until the end? So I'm happy to wait. You're welcome to respond. I mean, you don't have an obligation to necessarily respond either. These are, I think, feedback points at this point, but if you wish to. Well, I was going to just say that in terms of the building being renovated in 2015, what we did was paint the building. That was Martin House, which sort of sits behind. So it really did, and you are absolutely right, but it was looked at as sort of the three buildings together as sort of a cohesive unit of buildings and in fact, there were additional plans to even create sort of a breezeway that may have been like a three-season porch to connect the two buildings, which also didn't happen. And again, I think in a perfect world, if we weren't in the challenging times that we are in, we might not be looking at this, but the reality is that higher ed is in a really precarious situation right now. And so, well, you know, that may be, but the same people who were leading the college at the time of the renovation and this project and this vision are the same ones that are college in terms of our long-term stability and looking to do things that create a hotel or a, so anyway, I just wanted to say in terms of the renovation, sadly, that one really, just to the truth of the matter is there are only three houses, the one that's set back. Are you, can I come look at what you're looking at? She's actually ill, so I'm concerned that BCFA has purposely chose in the time when their master plan has lapsed and the city is changing its ordinance to do this. It means that we cannot know what their intent is for the property to spans our entire front yard to see this issue tabled until BCFA has a functional master plan in place for the city. Barring that, I would ask the property, one subdivided be subdivided to be submitted to the zoning board to be rezoned as residential is currently mixed-use residential. In keeping with the surrounding properties and the character of the neighborhood, this property should not be sold as mixed-use residential. Is the very outer back edge of BCFA with our home and the Kellogg residence next door where once dormitories from our college base were sold, they reverted back to family residences and continued and they contribute to the character and the community of the Saban Street neighborhood. This home should be no different. If there's some intent to sell this property, which there is, and to develop for some commercial use, we were told, I was told, that a cafe was going to, going in, form its negative impact on our quality of life. We have put a great deal of time to restoring our home and never intended to live across the street from any busy commercial enterprise. Unfortunately for us and our neighbors, there's no way to know what the intent is to BCFA currently. This move without any context threatens our day-to-day peace or assign tables of allowable uses where somebody has, for example, if it is a residential use and it sounds like it's largely been a residential, you devise it and once use it as a different use that's permitted and see where we could have a subdivision even with a master plan, just as your neighbor next door could all of a sudden decide they don't want to live there anymore, if they want to turn it into a truck stop. Maybe if the truck stop is permitted in the district, permitted, it's not. So, I haven't heard anything from your neighbor. But that's an example of, you know, the zoning can only go so far. That's to control uses. I just wanted to be clear about that. I understand. My concern really is that in a space of limbo, it's a concern for me to live across street. Well, and, you know, I don't want to get too tied up in the master plan in that sense in that, look, we don't have master plan police in the city of Mount Pylir, who immediately turned on the siren once the master plan goes out of date, does the college. It's certainly important to keep it up to date. But, you know, this was coming into a period in which the zoning bylaws were changing. And so, if you have an expense like that, you can see where people might make rational business decisions to say, we need to wait and see what the new impact is before we invest in the process. It's quickly not, and it was by that time clear that the AI-PUD was not gonna be part of the new zoning. So, you know, I think, I understand the concern of zoning and I think this is what we're wrestling with as well, but I don't think it necessarily behooves to be too hard up on PCFA for making a decision that, you know, may have been logical at the time. I was alerted when I first started this job about two and a half years ago that the campus master plan would be expiring and having a, and it wasn't you at the time. We do. I forget what the person's name was, but saying that things were going to be changing. And so, you could, you know, if you wanted to keep the AI-PUD, you'd need to reapply before it expired and then it would just roll forward. Never ending, I believe, if we continued to reapply every five years, but the other option was to go ahead and let it expire and then apply, you know, create under the new PUD. And so, with all the other things going on, that just, that was sort of the direction we went in. There was absolutely no, like, oh, this is a great time to, like, I wish I was that clever to be like, this is a great time to try to sneak this in. That's absolutely not it. And our hope is to sell it as a single-family home. I mean, that's, we've had it assessed and, you know, we've talked to realtors and that is our plan. We have no other intention. And there's, nobody has talked to us yet and so there's no cafe, there's nothing. I don't know, you know, where your wife heard that or, I don't know where they got that idea, but certainly, our plan is to sell it as a single-family home. It's a beautiful house and somebody will be there. There's friction here and there once in a while because the college obviously is looking out for residents and neighbors have to look after our interests. So, you know, across the street, across the college street. I understand. As a homeowner, I totally understand. I am also a homeowner in Montpelier, so I understand. I mean, you guys were shoveling, for instance, you were snowing to, from that pergola into my property this winter until I stopped the drivers. And it was, so as a neighbor, I feel sometimes that, I don't know, I can't take you as they have to know exactly what your plans are, because it makes me a little nervous as a college. Well, I'm sorry to hear that somebody was doing that. Well, they stopped. Had I known, I would have stopped it immediately. Well, there'll be opportunity, I'm sure. Go ahead. Across the street, and our only concern was, only concern was, refers to it being a abuse. That's where it becomes a concern. It's very crowded and especially in the winter, it's very narrow and dangerous. It's a dangerous corner, that's all. That's our concerns. Full of questions? Sure. On the threshold. And just to clarify, the parking for this would still be on college. Correct. I'm looking at the drawers would come to the carport. I would imagine one would fit under the carport and another could fit. As if it is a single family. So, the other plans I know from the application is that you're going to sort of peel back the patio that connects the two properties. Would that be to the property line or would that get rid of that patio area? Do you mean the patio area in front of Crowley? The corner? Well, I presume the patio that's facing college street would stay as is. But there's, I'm just looking there's like a. A connector patio. A little connector patio. Yeah, I mean, so on that point, I think that I would be looking to the board for potentially recommendations. One option is certainly to take it up. The other option that could work is to leave it as is and that, you know, the college could then know exactly what you would call it, but would agree to take care of it in perpetuity. If it made sense to not disturb. I mean, it does have a share of retaining wall that holds up the back. Yeah. Taining wall that goes from the frail house over to the Crowley house. So would the intent be to leave the fence, the retaining wall would obviously stay, but the surface of the patio would be broken up for like a visual division? If we were required to, I think that my preference would be to leave it as is and have the college agree to maintain it in perpetuity. But if that was not either agreeable to the board or, you know, if it was approved, if it was not agreeable to a buyer, we would certainly change that. For me, this... The patio, it was more of a joke. It was for make sense. But actually, when you asked, that spot right now has a light hole. We're moving it. We're in the process of moving it. I mean, that's not what's being represented in the plans and that's why I said I think it's not allowable under if somebody buys it, is that? Well, anyone can apply for a curb cut, but that's not us. That's not something we can necessarily control. There's nothing being proposed. I think it's helpful and maybe you may assuage some of your concerns if there's a clear representation. If it supports, it's like anything. If I have a driveway that supports all my needs, I'm not gonna build an extra.  I mean, a lot of this is feedback for the applicant to incorporate into the next phase. So certainly, I think that's a fair concern, but I can't make, no one can make representations as to what, but at least as far as I understand the applicant is saying they're not proposing to subdivide this with any extra driveway that exists seems to support. So let's. Just a note about the patio. Technically, to meet accessory structure setbacks, the patio is supposed to be five feet from the property line. So that's, no, fences can go right up too. Fences, yeah, fences can cross. Fences have zero setback, but that's where we were coming into some issues with the patio. Oh, okay, and we're talking about the front patio. Well, the front patio, but also that shared patio, the connector patio, even though it goes over technically, it's any patio is supposed to be five feet from the property line. I know it's a weird. So the connection is considered a patio. So it looked more like a path than that. It's really a path. Okay, even though, sorry. It was saying patio. Rocks zero feet. So yeah. It's not a second share out kind of patio. True. It's a space for them to get connected to. So that makes sense. Never mind. Extensive comments about the driveway, but I think that there was some concern about whether or not, when it has reestablishing. Right. We had some concerns about whether or not it was going to be a new curb cut. And I confirmed with Katie via email that you've gotten the packet that it's not a brand new curb cut. So I think that, you know, we're just going to need to make sure that Department of Public Works takes a look to make sure that what's there currently fits with any new, any current chain requirements. But I don't know, Katie, how, because it says reestablished. Do you know how long ago it was used as a driveway? 2015. I mean, I think it was right around the time that we did that whole area in the new building was when it stopped being used because the carriage house, which used to be where the square cube building is, we used to park in front of that and come in and out. I don't know. I think that was just, I've been out a lot with my kids. So I haven't had a chance to talk one on one with Mike. I'm just wondering if we're under this old. Oh yeah. We're still under the old regime right now. So one of the issues with the old regime, well, new old regime is there's a landscaping requirement. And so it would, we've been wrestling with it and it talks about, and I think this is one of those projects where it's reasonable to have that analysis of what's existing there for landscaping as far as trees and shrubs. It calls for a certain number of trees per square footage. That's site plan. What? That's site plan. Oh, site plan. Oh, sorry. There's separate subdivision landscaping questions. Oh, sorry. That's okay. I'm going back in tomorrow. Yeah, no, this is just on page 13. It's under design and layout of necessary improvements. Yes. So the applicant has to design the subdivision to maximize existing mature vegetation and then provide additional landscaping as necessary. And really the issue here would be maintaining and providing privacy for adjoining property owners in between lots. Right. And so really that's just an analysis of what exists as landscaping. The analysis is actually very similar to what I was going to go into, which just equation, but really it looks to, we need to understand what landscaping exists there now. Given that you are separating this out, what landscaping you might necessary or reason why such additional landscaping isn't necessary to effectuate the subdivision. The microphone and just state your name for the wreck to use zoning from earlier. The only thing. That's our concern. Okay. Well, the only thing that I said before is that, you know, the use is what they, when you subdivide, there is usually a current use of the property that subdivision doesn't affect. Now they may, the applicant may choose to list it as a residential or a mixed use. But my point is, is that after, if that subdivision happens and the property goes into the stream of successive owners, that owner is not, we cannot at subdivision bind those future owners, that specific use, if there are other permitted uses in that district. So just as you own your house and you could change the use tomorrow to another permitted use going through the application process, of course. So too could this lot owner take the use that they have and change it to another permitted use. Now the idea of zoning, of course, is to try and come up with permitted uses that fit within the neighborhood. So if you look at your particular neighborhood, what's listed for permitted uses, I think you would generally find to be copacetic with the existing residential character of the neighborhood. You won't find industrial or fishery listed as a potential use in the neighborhood because they're not compatible with the residential uses. But there are other permitted uses within your neighborhood and we can't necessarily as a zoning board say, well, you have that one use, that's all we're gonna let you have as a condition of subdivision. It just isn't something that would, even if we did it, it's inconsistent with our bylaws, and it wouldn't be sustained if somebody chose to challenge it. And it would be something that down the line could potentially be challenged. And that was my only point, was that ultimately if the applicant, as they're representing today, and I don't mean to open up a can of worms that the applicant doesn't want to, I just simply wanted to respond to one of the earlier points, which was to say, we can't control what future users of this property will do. Just as we can't control what VCFA will do consistent with the regulations, the subdivision, the ownership has no bearing on what somebody is allowed to do with their property. That's under the zoning bylaws, which we have no authority to change, we just apply. So the route to kind of limit the use of that property from what's I guess currently a mixed use to just residential is through the planning commission, and ultimately the city council to actually rezone it to change that boundary line. But that's not something that this board can do. We can just apply the subdivision regulations, which really just make sure that there is a use compatible with the lot, that the lot is of an appropriate size and shape and has access, and those sorts of things, which nobody's raised any concerns with. The question, the concern really seems to be about the use, which if a cafe is a permitted use or a permittable use, well, if it's a conditional use, you'd have to go through the zoning regulations. Somebody proposing to put a cafe in. That, well, if they would put it, if somebody proposing some change of use, they're gonna have to go through some process and you could participate in that. If you wanna, if you wanna, nobody's, if somebody were to propose an application for something, that would come here. But nobody is doing that. If you want it to be rezoned, that would go to the planning commission. Just don't let this whole family, family, family, but we're not, if somebody proposed a restaurant, you would be notified of a change in use by the city, if you're a budding landowner, then you could participate in that process here. But the point is that, this group, yes, if it, but the point is that that's not what's happening, that the use of the property is not part of this proceeding. If VCFA wanted to change the use of the property, VCFA could change the use of the property. But they'd have to come here, if they were talking specifically for a restaurant, they would have to come here because it's a conditional use. If any of you wanna come down to our office, we can give you a list of the uses that would require a DRB hearing. But the ownership doesn't, it's irrelevant to, if it's VCFA, if it's a future owner, if somebody wants to change the use, they would have to come here. But the subdivision does not impact what uses could, the property could be put to. That was my only point. So you don't have to subdivide those two properly. Right, because that's, because that's what it's zoned for. And then we just want to prevent that. Sure, sure. Right, there is a select number of uses where they could just come down to the, my office, zoning administrator's office, and get a permit to change it from residential to something else. So like a, sorry, I'm looking at my chart. Like a home day care for example. A home day care they could do without, any of your neighbors could just do. If it's under a certain number of kids. So well, we would be warned if that's the case. And you would have an opportunity to participate. But if it were to be sold, for example, and became a single family resident, the next time they were looking at the zoning bylaws, you could also ask the planning commission to change the boundary. So that it's in the Kemp Street boundary instead of the VCFA. That's not really reasonable, but that's not this board. So there's two, the laborer point. But we're really talking about two different processes. There are the base level of rules that we have to apply. We don't get to decide which rules to apply. They just are there. The planning commission is the one who writes the rules. The planning commission is the one who determines what are known as, so there's three types of uses. There's permitted uses. There's conditional uses and there's not allowable uses. So when I was saying before, somewhat tongue-in-cheek about the idea of an industrial or a fishery in this neighborhood, that's a good example of a non-allowable use. It's not allowed. You don't get to go past go. The two uses that I think you're concerned about are permitted uses, which as I said, if you look at the chart for your neighborhood district, I think you would find that they are largely copacetic with the uses, like a daycare facility that fit in with the residential character of the neighborhood. And then there are what's known as conditional uses. And what conditional uses are, they do require hearing before us. And what the premise of a conditional use is, to say there's a way this use could fit within this neighborhood, but it probably needs conditions. Hours of operation, noise level, all these other type of factors that obviously are things that neighbors are concerned about that affect the character and quality of the neighborhood that spill out beyond the property. And in those situations, and I think restaurant or cafe would fit into that category here is what Meredith is saying, is that if this property, whether it's VCFA who owns it or owner number one after VCFA or owner number two, three or four, all of them are gonna have to come before us and you'll have an opportunity. And at that point in time, they'll be proposing something and it's a little bit easier to get your hands around to say, this will have an impact on me as opposed to I'm concerned that this will have an impact on me. And I think that's a legitimate concern. That's why we have conditional use hearings is to have neighbors talk about these things, to raise issues to say, this is a really quiet neighborhood. Anything after 9 p.m. is gonna be a real disturbance and to this area or parking is very tight, traffic is very heavy. Those kind of things are classic conditional use hearing issues that people raise. But the one thing that I think we're trying to refocus on is that at least in the subdivision application, unless they were saying, we wanna subdivide and change this to a specific conditional use, we don't necessarily look at the potential conditional use, it's the use that's on the ground. And really, as Ryan had indicated, we're looking to, does this create a sustainable lot that can function and live on its own as a separate lot? Because once subdivision occurs, it is now and forever a separate lot that can be sold and deeded outside of the chain of the surrounding land that once was a part of. And we wanna make sure that the lot we create is sustainable and the lots that remain in the larger parcel are sustainable and we're not creating problems for either owner or their successors down the line. Does that make sense? Good. I'm glad I'm not seeing hands like I did before. So, campus met PUD master plan, it seems like by reading the way the use would change, it would just revert to the use at which it wasn't spelled out as something different, it would revert to what's already the perfect use, not open the door to do something less. I certainly understand the neighbor's concerns and I think the applicant hears it. If anything, we've made it more complicated by talking as a board, but I think there's always that fear, what comes next? If this change occurs, our houses are our biggest single investment outside of what poultry savings we've accumulated. This is important to everyone, but it's also important to the applicant as well because this is by far their biggest chunk of investment and they're trying to manage it wisely. So it's a matter of making sure that I think both sides are heard, but ultimately it's driven by portion. I think, did anyone have any other issues on a subdivision? I think that was around the, what is not, and this is my, just to note, make sure that, because it still says patio, so just change that to walkway or sidewalk, yeah. I made that note. I think that removes the whole steep slope issue as well. Yeah, that removes the whole steep slope issue, and then. We were talking a little bit about landscaping and I would just suggest, like just as one board member, I think it could use some additional landscaping to provide some sort of comments or questions from audience members. I would just love to understand what your next step are legal reads, so just in terms of time. So here's how I would anticipate this playing out on this threshold issue, which really is a green light. I'm getting a sense from the board that we're comfortable with going forward on this. The problem is, is we can as a board meet outside of what we're looking for as guidance to address this issue. Subdivision final hearing. In which case, through before, where sometimes that can be a bifurcated meeting. And so if there's a thorny threshold issue that we need to hash out in public, meeting, honestly, I see that as the driving issue here. The rest of it is fairly straightforward. I step forward. In the meantime, of course, Meredith and you, does legal, because legal counsel may say, oh no, it's very clear path. This is how you do it. Which case that will get incorporated into our next meeting. If Meredith communicates to you that it is not so clear that there may be these issues, you may see a different second opinion from your own counsel, still come forward with the hearing here and say, well, I know your lawyer's saying this, but those board members really don't seem to take orders so well. I think I can risk it. But that is to suggest that the public meeting is the next step. But I think what we're trying to do is resolve these procedural issues so we don't spend a lot of time haggling over them or guessing. Good. Any other questions? Hearing none, thank you all for coming very much. Okay, the next item of business is. The regulations say. There may be court decisions here and there. That allow for things like the written decision doesn't have to come out within 45 days. It just means a decision. So Dan circulated, I don't know if he, did you circulate it to everybody or just to me? The court case about, or just to me. So there's a series of court decisions that say that when the board makes a decision in an open public hearing and lets the applicant know what all the conditions are, you've issued the decision. Actually, you can even do it. Well, right, but and the other thing is if you even do it in session, as long as there has been even just some attempt to give them oral notice of the decision, it's done. And so some courts have found that that was enough. Yes, you have to follow up with the written decision eventually, but failure to get that written decision in 45 days isn't gonna avoid the whole thing, as long as there's been some decision and the applicant has been notified. So, you know, but this layout of what the deadlines are, what the process is, is based strictly on the regulations. There may be some leeway here and there, but this, it is too complicated to try and go that full into that in a simple presentation. All right, so tonight, it's gonna be a really just, what you've got here is a really brief overview on the preliminary application process and what I do before a permit gets up to you. The DRB process, if something goes to DRC, but doesn't actually come to you. A slide about how things are dealt with if they have to be reviewed by the Conservation Commission and then what is a technical review committee because I know that question has come up before. So, here is your abbreviated decision map. First step, especially with anything complicated that I really try and meet with just about every applicant, either myself or Audra, the zoning assistant, to have some sort of meeting with us to figure out what their application type is, what the fees are, what district they're in and discuss with them the process so that they have an overview of what they're gonna be doing. Then they submit their application and then I still have an additional seven days to figure out where the application needs to, whether or not the application is complete and then after application's been determined complete, there's an additional 30 days to figure out where it goes. I can approve it, deny it, or refer it to the DRB. And really, it's not just referring to the DRB. If it gets referred to the DRC, if it gets referred to the Conservation Commission, I've met my 30 day window, I've sent it somewhere. Like here, DRC? It's just a decision. It's just deciding that it has to go to the DRB. The way Montpelier works, we don't have a issue a letter that says I'm referring this to you. It's basically, put it on the calendar. And we let them know where it's going.  I can't do this as an administrative permit. Then we let them know where it's going because we get surprises. Or I'm digging through the application thing that can be administrative and I find some funky thing in the regulations that I can't make a determination on. And so then I let the applicant know that, oh wait, it actually has to go to the development review board. So I have a 30 day window to do that after determining that the application's complete. It can sometimes be a little fuzzy, whether or not something's complete, but we do our best. And this just, I've tried to throw in here what happens if an action doesn't happen in time, as well as flag in what the appeal periods are. So for zoning administrator process, if I've determined it's an administrative application but I deny the permit, there's a 15 day appeal period. And that 15 day appeal period also applies and you'll see it later. If I issue a zoning administrative permit, there's a 15 day appeal period. Next one, which is the DRB process much longer, clearly. I've tried to color code things here a little bit, but it might have made it a little too busy. So shortcuts to the complete zoning permit application submitted for the first block. And then there's, we usually have a little window of time to review that application in its complete state before we have to submit the notice of public hearing. But it can be a couple of days, it can be four days, it depends on how the calendar has all worked out and when they've given us the application. I put in here, when hearings have to be noticed, when things have to be submitted to the Times-Argus, when things have to be submitted to a butters just so you have that all in here if there's any questions about that. I've included when DRB agendas are posted in case anybody has questions about that. I think that's more for the public really than board members, but just so it's all mapped out here for you. I think you're pretty familiar with the DRB process, but do you have any questions on how your process works once it gets to you? As far as the butters, that's something that you, the advocate doesn't have to collect that information, you do that. Technically, they are supposed to provide us with the butters' information. Technically, it's their responsibility. What we typically do is they can ask us to give them a starter, a butter list. So we can pull that information, but what we're getting is what we have for the most recent grand list for property owners that's not necessarily up to date. So we get that to them if they've, it's a complicated situation or if they ask for it and we usually offer, and then they'll take that and go to the assessor's office to update it or to track down that's their responsibility and then they have to provide us with self-adjust stamped envelopes and then we mail out the notices. Some towns put that notice all on the applicants. Montpelier's pretty big and can be complicated, so I don't think it makes sense to have them mailed it. We wanna make sure we know it gets mailed. That's like in some towns, the notice that has to be put up on the property about there's gonna be a hearing as you notice. Some towns, the zoning administrator is the one who actually goes out and puts that up on the property. We can't do that here. We just don't have the bandwidth. So that gets mailed or hand delivered to the applicant and it's their responsibility to put it up. But it is important to have it. So we will give them a starter list. Every time we let them know that it's not, this is not necessarily the official list or so and so condoized and there's actually five owners there now. Cause we don't, as long as the number of units haven't changed, we don't care if something gets condoized. Okay, so. Is it a consumeristic thing or do they have to? No, not necessarily, it's when it actually gets issued it's sometimes just kind of fluctuates with when everything is going on. But it can be issued the exact same day we get the written signed decision, depending if there's no conditions. But there's also something. So you issue a decision. The decision says within 60 days you have to submit to the zoning administrator X, Y, and Z. Or you have 60 days to get your master agreement that includes all of the easements. We're not gonna issue the permit before that comes in if that's a condition on the decision. So the window is flexible. It depends on what the conditions are that have been placed on the decision. I guess my question is. We're not gonna wait, it's two separate actions. We don't need to wait for the decision appeal period to then issue the permit. It doesn't, if the decision gets appealed and the permit's already been issued, then the permit's basically on hold.  Jurisdiction's been taken away by the court. Right, so I mean that's. Right, the permit's been issued. Right, I mean, I think, correct. We issue a permit, and that's so that. Right, but there's the separate permit. That's the, what the time frame is. So I've worked to the zoning administrator and now they're telling me to support attorney. Like, don't do those, don't shoot. So I'm just trying to understand. I mean, that would be the super careful way to do it. I don't think you have to do it that way. So there has been instances where people go ahead right away because they feel confident about the permit they just got. Right, and that's at their own risk. And that they lose, and that they've got to undo what they've built. It's rare, but it has happened. Yeah, right. So I was just curious on how long pillier fell with like, stay safe and stay on the line. Yeah, I mean, it's, we just, right. We get them their permit once they've met any potential conditions on the decision is the way it's been going since I've been, you know, before I've been here. Yeah.  Right, like just so you know. If there's an appeal period, you know, even though nobody came to the hearing, they could, they could, you know, appeal it. And so it's at your own risk. So that window of having an approved done deal really varies. I'm sorry, I'm not sure I'm following which thing you're asking is scrolling. So there's not, it's very permit specific. Right. I guess that's what I was trying to better understand is that there's no, there's no clear timeframe. It is very permit specific based on when. Right. And that's, I think because we make sure everything has what their appeal periods are on it. So the. But it's issued the decision. So for example, like the chair signed it, that gives them their purpose. Because that's our final decision. It just means that there's 30 days that are running. Now low risk or for whatever reason, not as if Meredith's gonna say, oh, that appeal period hasn't run yet. Yeah, you can't get started. This sort of running at least the way I've always been. There's conditions that they have to meet before it becomes absolutely final. Those aren't necessarily going to be conditions that are gonna hold the appeal period. Well, they wouldn't hold the decision appeal. I mean, technically, when there's that kind of a gap, there's a separate sort of more, my understanding is that there is a separate like appeal window on the permit we've issued based on that decision. But it's more just to sit that there's the, there would be more of an appeal of what you issued here in this permit isn't consistent with the decision. It's not an appeal of the whole decision. Wait, and it, I mean, believing in here is comprehensive. The big one here is the 30 day appeal period. And that's what gets lagged for people. That's what everybody looks for. Yeah. Any other questions on the ERB process? And you can also, you know, we can have individual questions and stuff later too. And this will be something that'll be tweaked as needed. So design review, this is design review committee flow chart and administrative process when the DRB is not involved. So if something comes in, it's an administrative permit or maybe, you know, it's just design review committee. That's the only thing that's flagged. They're coming in, they want to put, you know, a sign in and there happened to be in the design overlay district. So usually those, we can get an application for a design review and get it on the immediate next hearing. So it could be, you know, just 10 days later that it gets in. And because design review committee is an advisory committee, we just have to post the agenda, you know, 48 hours before the hearing. Usually it's about three days ahead of time. And there's no notification of a butters, nothing like that. They just have to put up a notice of the property. They don't have to mail anything. And then we then take it in and taken what DRC has said, if that goes through and then issue our permit with, we usually include something similar to what you guys see for a staff report. If it's something, if it's a minor site plan, if it's just design review, we usually just attach the design review recommendations and issue that with the permit. It's pretty straightforward. Now, this is new from the 2018 regulations, the conservation committee having formalized review process. There are very specific instances in the regulations when application needs to be forwarded to the conservation committee. It's most often has to do with PUDs or subdivisions that have some sort of wetland or vernal pool or something that's identified on Montpelier's map, the natural resources inventory map. It has to be on the natural resources inventory map, almost 100% of the time. So if somebody convinces, hey, there's actually a vernal pool there. If it's not on the NRI map, we don't have jurisdiction over it. They would have to then go and get that map updated. So that's just a big picture thing to keep in mind. So they have some really, we haven't had to deal with this yet and figure out how to actually make this work with the DRB public notice process. So it's gonna be interesting to see how much this actually delays things. We actually had a meeting with a member of the conservation committee last week to just talk about this so that they have an understanding of what their scope of review is and whether or not they need to draft some of their own regulations to figure out how this is gonna work with regard to the determinations that they're gonna need to make about undue adverse impact and how they're gonna make that kind of determination because there are criteria within the regulations to help them with that, but they're supposed to be the experts. And so we, both the general administrator and myself and you will be relying on them to provide that information. I have to catch that it needs to be referred to them and then I'll be referring it to them, but how that's gonna work with the DRB process, like the timelines they put in here are a little funky because the way this is set up, I would need to notify the conservation committee commission at least three weeks before their hearing and their hearing is gonna have to happen before your hearing and hopefully enough in advance so they can work their comments into a staff report. If not, it's just gonna be bringing them to you at the DRB hearing.  And so figuring out how this is gonna work in practicality is gonna be interesting. And because the, so it's three weeks, 21 days before the CC, before the conservation commission hearing, they're supposed to get the application referred to them and then they have an additional seven days after the conservation commission hearing to get comments to me and to you. So that's a four week window before the DRB hearing. So it's gonna slow the process down for sure. Usually when I send something to Department of Public Works or call a technical review committee, which is all department heads, I can do that within a week, two weeks, get seven days, we're gonna get this, just make this happen. Or sometimes they just send comments to your email. This is gonna take a lot longer. But it is also for bigger projects, typically. So I think the applicants are gonna have to just point to live with it or petition to get it changed. I don't know, we'll see how it works out. We haven't had a whole lot of PUD requests so far, which is when this is gonna, I think, be the biggest issue. So if they were expecting maybe something, it'll come in on savings pastures at some point. And so this would be an example of where it might. Yeah, so there's that, there's, I don't know. It's been in the press here and there about a new, oh, I don't even know what they're calling it. But a new plan unit development that was gonna be for like small homes. I can't remember the group. The tiny houses. Yeah, and we weren't necessarily gonna be tiny houses, but very close to that. Cottages, like cottages. Yeah, cottages. And we're, I think it was in the press about them thinking up, yeah, they're potentially coordinating with the city about a city park type thing. And so that has the, there's a potential to maybe make use of the conservation PUD for something like that. So that would require a conservation commission. So that would, if that's something that's on, yep. That would be something that would be considered. So I've mapped it out sort of decision tree here, but it's how it's actually going to affect the processes. Well, in one of the, in addition to those, the other big one, any request for a waiver to remove woody vegetation from within myperium buffers has to go to the conservation commission. So we haven't gotten one of those yet either. That would be a smaller, in some instances a smaller project could qualify for that. And we'll see how it all. It's a very specific type of. Yep, that's a very specific one. But we'll see how it all, how it works. And then I know that there have been questions about the technical review committee and how that actually happens. So I tried to sort of outline it here. And that it's an advisory staff committee. So it's city staff representatives from city departments. It is not, you know, it's not DRC, it's not the conservation commission. So there's no public notice of meetings. There's no requirement for minutes. You know, I usually take some sort of notes for my own edification and to be able to summarize things and get comments from the department head sometimes in writing. And so, you know, we've had instances where the public have put in public records requests and specifically said, hey, we want minutes. There are no minutes. I can, you know, if I've written something up, I can shoot it to people. But typically the main department that I work with really is department of public works. They're the ones who have concerns on almost every application. But for a full technical review committee, that would be for a big plan unit development, stuff like the city garage, it's department of public works, police department, fire department, building inspector, health officer, community development specialist sometimes, if you're dealing with something where maybe it would be helpful to get additional, help the applicant with some additional grants or just advise them in things where it might need to be coordinated with something that's going on in the city. The TRC has specific boundaries. And they're just like the design review committee, their comments and recommendations aren't binding unless the DRB rolls it into a condition on a permit. And I usually try and summarize what's said within the staff report, but then when they've given me written comments, I try and attach those as well for the staff report, just so it's all part of the record. Have we had questions about TRC before? Does anybody have any tonight? No, no. So most applications, I will just shoot off, hey, here's the application, here's the packet. These are the things I think you might wanna take a peek at. Usually it's department of public work, sometimes fire chief and police chief will get that as well when I'm just like, can you take a quick look? Cause I wanna make sure you don't have any issues with this.  And when you do a meet in person, usually we have the applicant come as well and any other major players that need to be there. So the city attorney's not part of this? Right, at least so far. I mean, there might be an instance where we do pull in the city attorney. So you have the ability to take it. Oh yeah, and I probably should have done it for this one ahead of time. Honestly, not my finest hour, but yeah, I have authorization to go to city council, the city's council anytime I need to for a quick question. And there's several times where I've done that, just be like, can we actually do this? And that's also, it's helpful. I also consult a lot with the planning director with Mike Miller to sometimes he'll know, he'll have something just in his history where he knows that we've gotten an opinion from the attorney before that something is okay or shouldn't be allowed, but we're also dealing with new regulations. So it makes sense to put the question before us and frankly it would sketch plan this for us. Well, and that's because this was a sketch plan, it felt like, yes, there's enough attorneys here that maybe somebody would know. Okay, did anybody have any questions on that? Are you sure? I have a question on, like the, what's the application is complete? So whether they instructed to come into the office to review so it's not available, because the staff reports are available when the agenda is posted. So the application materials or as soon as we have them in the office, they're available for public view. Once we have, and people can come in, they can, we can make them copies. If we have stuff electronically, we'll send it to them if they ask. And once we've, usually once we've sent out the public notice, we try and close the application in the office. If nobody has come in to ask any questions and the applicant is responding to something we asked them for, sometimes we'll put it in, but typically then close. Someone does have to request or to come in. Yes, yeah, they can come in anytime, anytime the office is open. And say, hey, what do you have for applications? Because we also have a big, have you been in the office? I have not, no. I should come by. So there is a, I call it sort of like the hearing table. So there's a table that's set up with rows for DRC and DRB where we have all the applications for those committees laid out. And then there's a big whiteboard on top of it that has the hearing dates and says what applications are up for what dates for which committees. So anytime the office is open, people can come in and take a look. And then they also can look at agendas that are posted online. Jamie handles the front porch forum for the city. And I'm not. Listing two of the agendas already within this building, high school. I just like wonder like how do people know about that? So the city, the city website and people can subscribe to be notified when things get posted on the city website for specific committees. Oh, so you have to go and like sign up yourself. There's that. So basically when you sign up for any of the notifications you get to choose all of them from all of them. So if you want to be notified, choose that you could choose to have notifications for things every day if you want to do. Something to explore. Go ahead.  Then if you miss it and post it on this site where I was expected to not realizing the difference between what they're legally obligated to do and the question of are there a lot of people saying, I want to know more about these, there would be a reason to spend on this board that the interest in this board really grows or wanes with the specific application of people and a lot of discussion. The front porch forum had no problem posting about that because everybody was really concerned about it. Whereas tonight there was some attention for the VCFA but most exciting thing in the world sometimes we're just permitting people to do what they want. Especially if it's a municipal project and it's really big, like with the garage there's a lot of nation with Jamie, with the city to make sure that the city website is completely full of everything that's going on with the forecast of here's the upcoming potential hearings and here's the process because there was a lot of need for it. My concern with front porch forum is like you said, and also that front porch forum does have more discussion that might end up going to Jamie or somebody else versus in our office. Yeah, I mean there's a lot of administrative stuff that still needs to get dealt with. But it's something to think about whether or not where things get posted should at some point get tweaked. Is the high school really a good place still? Or would someplace else make more sense? Right, that to me just seems like a weird place to put a stint there because you're like, how? It's also a question I think of Ben the school fund very, very, very long. The city got a website and started posting on the website. I don't know when they last changed or anything. So heads up, the other two things that you got? Yeah. So the little green sheet. This is more something that is that Audra had developed for applicants to give them really a just broad step back from the picture what's going on and how do we make decisions. It lets an applicant know what's going on. Does your project even require a permit? If it does, because it already comply with the zoning regulations, if so, then you're just gonna get a quick administrative permit if it doesn't comply with the regulations, then you may need to get basically, go through a full application process and go to the DRB hearing or go to a DRC hearing. This is really big picture simplified. And then of course you have from the zoning administrator's handbook, your great big complicated here's everything flow chart that takes a while to piece through. It has references to state statutes, whereas my other, my PowerPoint had references more to our monthly or zoning regulations. This is really handy and helpful, but it's even more depth than what big picture plus detail. This is where to go. Sorry, that took a little longer than I intended. No, that was really helpful, it's good. We drove it with a lot of questions. Our next regular scheduled meeting is Monday, March 18th, 2019 at 7 p.m., our normally regularly scheduled time. Do I have a motion to adjourn? Or does anyone have new business that we should continue this meeting? Like a motion to adjourn. Motion by Rob, do I have a second? Second. Second by Tom. All those in favor, please raise your hand. We are adjourned, thank you all very much.


This is Witchspace news for Friday the 21st of January 2022, I'm CMDR Buur In Elite Dangerous News this week, 3 weeks into the new year, just why are FDF so quiet? We learn how much of the galaxy has been uncovered by CMDRs, the mystery of what happened to the Alexandria Megaship is finally solved and there's a Tesla electric car with its own frameshift drive. To make sure you don't miss any of our videos hit like and subscribe and remember to click the little bell icon and select all notifications and if you'd like to help directly support this channel you can also join our patreon via the link in the video description. Just a quick heads up the first story we're covering this week contains some minor plot spoilers but I've linked in the video description to an index point further into the video if you want to skip past the first item. After the regular Thursday server bounce this week, some CMDRs started receiving cryptic messages in their cockpit inbox from Professor Albert Tesro, formerly of the recently defunct and some would argue largely ineffectual Aegis antithargoid agency. The messages directed their recipients to begin searching a specific 15 light year bubble of space after a tip-off from an unnamed source. 15 light years is a fairly small area to cover in the grand scheme of things and the search was over in short order after a drifting debris cloud later revealed to be the remains of the Alexandria was discovered. The debris contained audio logs from the commander of the Aegis Megaship that was hauling guardian artefacts due to be studied by Aegis to aid in their research. Whilst the Alexandria was being pursued by Thargoids who apparently were drawn by the presence of so much guardian technology the source of their fate is not quite as straightforward as it might at first seem and without giving too much away has some serious ramifications for the still ongoing azimuth and salvation themed plot lines running in the game currently. If you want to pick up the fully voiced audio logs from the Alexandria yourself I've put the target system you'll need in the video description. A shout out to commander Halo Jones this week who posted an extraordinary video of their own Tesla Model 3 electric car playing a sound synchronized light show featuring frameshift and hyperspace sound effects from Elite Dangerous. A recent software update to the vehicle added compatibility for the Xlights.org light sequencing and show scheduling software and with that update installed commander Halo Jones went to work. I've linked the amazing NV inducing video below and in it you'll hear effects sample directly from commander Halo's own original Kickstarter backer Cobra. Just brilliant. It's a generally recognized fact that the galaxy of Elite Dangerous contains something in the region of 400 billion stars. If you didn't know that already then I'll give you a brief moment to absorb that number before we move on. A tweet from Frontier yesterday revealed just how much of that 400 billion or so star galaxy has been discovered. Brace yourself silly numbers approaching. Commanders have uncovered 222,083,670 star systems that's approximately 0.05% of the galaxy so far explored in the last eight years or so. That's some staggeringly high numbers followed almost immediately by a hilariously low number. We're guessing that by discovered what Frontier mean is at the very least a commander arrived in a system and then moved on immediately without then necessarily having been a full scan of a given system done. The tweet was followed up by a retweet from commander Wotherspoon of YouTube's Galnet News Digest noting that at the current rate of discovery in just 140 years we will have uncovered the first 1% of the galaxy and in just 14,000 years in December of the year 17,300 we'll have finally uncovered it all. Yay team! After having built up some considerable momentum coming into Christmas Elite Dangerous is about to enter the final week of the first month of a new year and Frontier developments themselves have been noticeably conspicuous by their absence. Whilst the expected community goal to install stations into the Colonia Bridge and earn some pre- engineered FSDs in the process happened on the 6th of January a hotfix patch was released into Elite Dangerous Horizons on the 11th of January and a further community goal entered the game one week later and as we've reported today the audio logs detailing the mystery of what happened to the Alexandria arrived this week. Frontiers usually very visible community management team have been uncommonly quiet. To add a further layer to the puzzle the expected release of the FSDs resulting from the aforementioned community goal haven't appeared in the game as of this recording and queries from the community on social media regarding their expected ETA are being met with a very non-committal reply of at a later date with no further details given. The community management team's regular schedule of live streams and weekly forum posts detailing the expected week ahead have also been noticeably absent for the entirety of January with no explanation given. This unusual silence has all fallen with the backdrop of the release of the company's half-year financial performance report that we covered in last week's news and in particular the unsurprising commentary that Elite Dangerous Odyssey had performed significantly below expectations following its generally negative reception by the community. In particular a line in that financial reporting has us wondering if the report itself and FDEV's current silence are more than a little related. The line in question from FDEV's stockbroker Liberum reads quote FDEV continue to support the game and we believe management is reviewing plans for the Elite Dangerous franchise following the disappointing 2021 unquote. If Frontier is reviewing its plans for Elite Dangerous then without a shadow of a doubt one of those plans has to be the launch of Odyssey onto consoles. Pre-Christmas when questioned on the subject all Frontier would say is the line that we're all now used to on an almost daily basis across their social media platforms which is that they had nothing to announce just yet. Post-Christmas they're now not saying anything on the subject but of course they're not saying much about anything at all so that could all mean nothing. In his pre-Christmas holiday message on the forums community lead Arthur told me did state that they were reviewing and assessing a number of issues that the community had raised such as the engineering process alongside noting that the development team are working hard on new features such as the new settlement defense missions and that they would leave those details for January. Given that information it is of course entirely possible that FDEV are merely lining up their ducks for the coming years still and that they want to ensure given the concerns around consoles and the future of the game that they get their messaging absolutely right. They will without a doubt going into this new year want to be absolutely positive that what they are saying is considered and accurate for whatever the road ahead has in store for 2022. Off the back of new content in Odyssey and the various patches we saw last year there was a notable upturn in player sentiment toward the game and frontier so much so that it was also mentioned as part of the report to the stock market. Given that and their previously hinted at imminency of update 10 and then update 11 bringing with it fleet carrier interiors it would make sense that frontier would want to capitalize on those hard fought gains. Whatever their reasoning we're hopeful that frontier will surface from their silent running sooner rather than later and continue the much improved flow of information and communication that we'd become accustomed to in the latter half of last year. Do you think frontier are simply lining up some ducks for the year ahead or is there a bigger announcement on the horizon? Are you planning on making your car sound like a dying Thargoid when it pulls up to a set of traffic lights? Let us know in the comments below. That's it for now thanks very much for watching we'll be back later this week with more videos until then 07 commanders follow the greens on the way out and do keep clear of the toast rack we very much look forward to seeing you next time


The last four years we've been working closely with teachers and other academic staff at the university to use predictive analytics, the best possible way to support our students and it seems that with this award today they recognize the value of the project and the contribution we made. For the last five years we've been really focusing on how the predictive analytics can help the teachers and we still want to go further with this work but we really want to focus on getting even closer to students so we would really like to deliver the analytics directly to the students in the next years.