Okay, I'd like to call this Self-Burlington City Council and Self-Burlington Planning Commission joint meeting to order It's Tuesday, February 11th, 2020 and our first order of business is a pledge of allegiance Just to go you want to start that for us please? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands One nation under God Indivisible with liberty and justice for all Before we go to item two I want to apologize to the audience. It's very weird to have my back to you But we're going to have a lot of presentations and this is really designed as a conversation between the Planning Commission and the City Council so it got Organized this way in addition to the filming so the public can Get a better sense, I guess of our expressions or something Rather than and the audience is at the same time so I apologize this I don't know if that's of my better side or not, but whatever It's the side to get tonight Okay Item two instructions on exiting the building in case of emergency All right in case of an emergency tonight folks Please leave the building by one of these two doors that will take you out into the parking lot proceed Into the parking lot behind the building to the south of us and gather there In case for one reason or other Back out into the lobby and out the front door and around to the same parking lot to the south We have other people in the building Paul Conner and I will make sure that the building is clear so everybody please Thank you Item three is the agenda review or are there any additions deletions or changes in order of agenda items that anyone has? Seeing none We'll go on to item four which is comments and questions from the public not related to the agenda Was there any? Okay, seeing seeing none Item five is the consent agenda for the city council And we have one item to authorize a city manager to negotiate and sign an agreement With the recommended consultant stand tech to design and engineer the shared use plan on the south end of The Dorset Street project So I would entertain a motion for approval The second so any discussion Okay, all in I Do not right now, but I will find that out and get back to you No, I think that will come up in the discussions once we choose We lock into a copy Could we just know that it will close the gap between Nolan farm drive and old cross road and Sadie Lane That might be just for the public's information Since we've discussed I know Tom will support this he's been anxious for this little piece to get moving No, no, no, we all will use it Okay, there's no further discussion all in favor I So that is passed We'll move on to item six, which is the planning Commission presentation followed by a joint discussion of approach to and status of the land development regulation amendments prioritizes part of interim zoning and before we start that I just would like to Make a few opening Comments to really help clarify for the public Why we organized and have are having a joint meeting on this? topic so the purpose of this joint meeting is for the council to understand the Planning Commission's Perspective about where they are with vetting the IZ reports and potentially drafting land-use regulations that reflect those findings We need to hear where they are with draft regulations for the PUDs We need to understand if you require additional time to meet your expectations of final and approved PUD language for land development regulations Additionally, we'll hear the status on the studies related to economic assessment of conservation and development and Finally discuss and assess this information to determine if interim zoning should be extended Clearly there are different points of view on what's best or needed and I suspect the spectrum swings from stop all development on open space to We have enough already no additional regulations are needed The balance in my opinion lies somewhere in between I'm hoping we can find that But I ask that everyone try to really listen Including the public We tend to only hear what we want to hear We look for information that supports our biases only and sometimes we discount the rest We need to try and understand from the Other person's perspective We need to honor that as valid and Find a way to move forward together This community is all of ours So let's be civil respectful and thoughtful So Jessica, it's all yours So I am Jessica Luizos. I'm the chair of the Planning Commission I'm gonna stand up here. So I don't have my back to anyone Not that I'm I'm not trying to make it more formal than it needs to be but just the way the room set up otherwise I've had my back to some people so We are We've been working on many different regulations and planning pieces for many years and Some of you have been seeing pieces of that along the way Some of that work including the work on protection of natural resources and new regulations for planned unit development was included in the interim zoning Kind of mandate from the council and that has been our big focus. So we're going to be talking about where we are with all of that I'm going to try to present an overview of And touch on a lot of the bigger policy decisions that we've made so far We have kind of compiled and affirmed most of You know the policy behind what we're presenting tonight, but Many of these pieces are still in draft format So this is kind of a direction of where we are I'm going to try to update you on it kind of where we are on specific pieces and then There's a presentation of the schedule that we're on Kind of towards the end. So as I go through these are kind of guiding policies and some of which need kind of the deeper dive to get the exact exact language Which is very close from our consultants. So The first thing that I wanted to look at was just to bring us back a little bit So as the planning commission, we are working towards implementing the city's vision And the city's vision is outlined in our comprehensive plan. We worked for many years a few years back on a full override of the comprehensive plan and Kind of boiled down with community input and the city council's input at the time into four kind of overarching principles or goals and that's to have a community that's affordable and community strong walkable Green and clean and opportunity oriented. So as we do our work on the planning commission We need to balance each Proposed Regulation change with how it fits towards the city's goals, and that's what we've been trying to do as well as take kind of continuing input so if we move on the This is a map that I think most of you have probably seen I know the council seen it. This was part of our presentation a few years or a few months back And I show this now because we're going to use this as kind of a base map To show some additional information throughout tonight's presentation. So just to give an overview of what we're looking at So this is the city the parcels and the city are outlined kind of with the gray outlines and then Each parcel has been at least generally categorized a few different ways So the blue parcels are considered to be kind of already built or small So small means they are less than four acres Or it's a parcel that's bigger than four acres and has more than ten percent impervious surface It's just a metric to be able to say it's been developed Because we had to pick something So the blue is developed the various shades of green and yellow are various kind of categories of conservation or open space and then The white parcels are generally the larger parcels that are still available for For development. So and this isn't a new map This was shown before interim zoning started and I know that this has been the basis of some of the interim zoning committee work including the open space committee So this is kind of the base. So the big thing that we've been working on is how to kind of meet the city's goals and By doing that we're looking at a kind of a new structure of development where we're looking at thoughtful patterns So first off taking a look at the natural resources on the property As part of our work, we have some additional. We've done quite a bit of work on What's in our chapter 12, which is the natural resource protection? land development standards and looking at multiple different types of natural resources and Including scenic views which at this point has kind of been pushed into the future We don't have specific new language on that beyond what we have as our current view corridors And then once you know what it's going on with your natural resources Then looking at making sure that we have efficient infrastructure that we can maintain and really use our land well And create the communities that we want to live in so a lot of this Kind of piggybacks on the back of the work that was done for the form-based code and city center You know at the time we did a lot of visioning throughout the city And there was a lot of interest in place making and community making not just in city center But throughout the city So as part of that what we're trying to do is create Some change in our land development Standards that's going to get us towards creating the great neighborhoods that we've visioned and we have information and details about in our Comprehensive plan, but haven't quite gotten that into our land development regulations yet So we have multiple approaches that we're taking towards changes to land development regulations I Know we've sometimes called this project the PUD project PUD is our planned unit developments and that is one form of development that can be done through our land development regulations, but our project is actually bigger than that and You know one of the biggest things is that with any new development that would come before the city There'd first be a look at the context of of the area of the parcel and Taking a look at the natural resources on the parcel you know identifying connections what things are next door and Kind of then from there going Making sure that things are thoughtfully integrated so one piece of that is PUDs So then we'd have a PUD type if it would be that type of development and really making sure that The process takes into account neighborhood making components, so So as I was saying planned unit developments are one piece of this We're also proposing Changes to a traditional subdivision So making sure that in a traditional subdivision You also have some place-making Components included as well as some changes to the master plan So I know that this chart is not readable, but the idea is just that You know we're kind of incorporating these community aspects into subdivision regulations planned unit development regulations and master planning which would come into play if there's multiple phases to a development so PUD types, so I know there's a lot of words up here and what this basically means is that when we're When a development would come forward as a planned unit development Right now our planned unit development regulations are often used as a Way to get a waiver There's a lot of flexibility, but our standards are relatively Loose in kind of what the city and the community is getting In exchange for that flexibility So the new regulations that we're proposing would specify Kind of predictable development patterns and with that there's four different types of Kind of neighborhood patterns that could be chosen so four different PUD types And the idea is that each one of these would have a certain type of development pattern That would be done in a predictable way So the four categories are traditional neighborhood development. We'll dive into that a little bit as an example with a few slides Then also the neighborhood center The conservation and the campus business park so each of those we can go on to the next slide So each of these Would have a few different components so as an example so the traditional neighborhood development There's a picture of what it might look like here and then a land use allocation so for each of the PUD types There's an allocation of how the land would Be kind of broken up so in this case The yellow would be residential so in this one it would be mostly residential But still have kind of non-residential components Open space and open space also would include Some resource land and some civic space so that's kind of place making Items so an area of land that set aside for for communal use And then unallocated there's some flexibility in each of these so unallocated land could go kind of into any of the other categories To provide some flexibility So kind of to have the specificity just gives more predictability on both sides as to what You know what the development might look like So zooming out I know that not all of these details are Exactly readable, but you know you have the four types and you can see generally that the land Allocation changes based on the pie chart where the conservation PUD at the top kind of has a larger Open space or civic space allocation You know the campus and the neighborhood commercial center have more of the blue which is the the commercial or non-residential lands and Then kind of a look at within each of those categories what the breakdown might be With looking at You know so in the tip neighborhood development You know there's an allocation of types of housing as well so single and two family versus multi-family You know to have a mix So some of those percentages are still under discussion So this is a repeat of the previous slide just to kind of bring us back into thinking of this across the city so the idea here is that If developed the parcels that are shown in white would follow PUD type of development to have kind of that predictable smart community-based development on them and then the smaller parcels would you know blue So say some of the smaller parcels that are here shown in blue it might be redeveloped You know if they were they would need to use the updated subdivision standards and Then any parcels across the city that would be Proposed for development would need to adhere to the new natural resource protection standards That would be in chapter 12 and apply kind of city-wide So looking at the natural resources we have a a little bit different approach to what's currently in our zoning many of The natural resources we're talking about are in the in the regulations already with a few additions I'll get into on the next slide, but the idea is that there is a Kind of a hierarchy of how they're treated and Hazards are Traditionally regulated Most of which have a hazard component so they're typically they're floodplains Wetlands things like that will look at the list in a second but the idea is that those would be a no-build area and Would not count towards buildable land density so they would be taken out of density calculations So there's there would be no buildings on them no no development on them and they wouldn't count towards buildable area There could be potentially some what we call restricted infrastructure encroachment, you know in places where there's no other access or Or something like that. Maybe there's a utility crossing that needs to happen because there's no other options In the Okay good just the pipes So and there there's specific criteria Written in what actually would qualify for that encroachment So then looking at other resources level one and level two resources are additional resources that are Kind of valued by the community for a variety of reasons And we've broken them into level one and level two Level one being very similar to hazards. They would have limited impact for infrastructure In PUDs the land it would be included for density calculations, but in subdivisions They would not be court counted towards density calculations And then level two resources. There's Specific language on types of encroachment Kind of where on the property those would be located and they would be prioritized for the open space allocation That you saw in the previous pie charts So here we are back at a city-wide map The pink color represent the hazards and you can see the list of them there floodplains Class 2 wetlands and buffers streams and setbacks and those have been Regulated in our Our standards already what we're adding is some a new language on exactly how the top of bank is Calculated on a plan and then we recently added river corridors and that has been adopted a few months ago and steep slopes are Proposed to be part of those resources as well And then level one resources in the red we have habitat blocks And another category of steep slopes shown on there So just to show what we're calling habitat blocks. I thought it would be important to actually show Show this now we're not going to get into this This is actually part of number nine on the agenda to find an additional meeting time To really delve into the results of this report. It was done by arrow wood It was done by arrow wood a consultant we got the results very recently and I think we're gonna have an additional joint meeting where we could Actually hear from the consultant the specific details of this and really delve into it But so that was shown in red on the previous map and we're gonna have a follow-up discussion focused on that piece The next slide So what does this look like all together? So this was the map that we looked at previously now with the hazards in level one Overlaid on top so this is generally for reference Some of the Some of the resources would be field delineated and might change a little bit so some of these are approximations of what they look like So there are still white areas left some of which have been Covered up by some of the natural resources So just to start to look at what this might look like on a specific property I mean, we know no properties are really shaped like this. This is obviously Generic development parcel So the idea is that the orange represents the hazards So those would be our floodplains wetlands river corridors where there would be no development And the next area would be excluded from density calculations There may be some exceptions to that we've been talking about with you know if you use a conservation PUD type Then we have level one resources shown in the green so that could be the habitat areas or steep slopes and you know, so this would be no development except infrastructure and The density might be able to be used other places depending on the type of development going on So we said that there were proposing a difference between if you use a traditional subdivision versus a PUD and how that's calculated Then we have kind of a blue strip in the middle that represents the level two resources So the idea is that some of those Depending on the case and the individual resource may actually be kind of part of the area of the property that's considered developable But there's kind of specifics on each type of resource there and then the remainder of the parcel would be developable per the zoning so You know either through the PUD or the traditional subdivision development So if we start to look at this What all the numbers mean? I know that those pie charts we looked at before a little difficult. So here's an example for the Traditional neighborhood development. So this is a hypothetical 50 acre parcel So we have a chart up here at the top, which the first little part of it seems to be cut off But what you can't see is right up there. It says hazards ten acres So the idea is that this parcel has ten acres that are hazards, maybe a flood plain And then there's two acres that are a level one resource So maybe that's a habitat block and now what does that mean for the rest of the numbers? So so now we're looking here. So we have our We have our 50 acres. We have 10 acres of hazards two acres of level one resource So there's 40 acres of developable land on the parcel So then going back to our PUD type. There's allocations of land For that developable land. So that's kind of looking at this chart here and this pie chart so of that there's 70% Residential so that's kind of our big blue area. So of the land there'd be then 28 acres residential And an even distribution of the other types of non-residential open space and Unallocated which could be allocated to any of the different land uses Then kind of delving a little bit deeper so that we don't have kind of monoculture developments There's some allocations of types of buildings and types of residential units within that so that there's a range of housing types As well as just the fact that it's housing And then also within the the civic space or open space Kind of a distribution of kind of a more developed kind of civic space park space versus More of kind of an open space natural resource element so a piece of this that is also new is the idea of Minimum density as well as maximum density our current land development regulations Contem use maximum density Where you might hear that the land is allowed to have four units per acre so that would be a maximum so what we're proposing In order to really have efficient use of our developed land So in areas where we're we're impacting and we're making the commitment as a city to run Utilities and sewer and water to those locations. We want to make sure that that's really Used efficiently so we're proposing to have a minimum density at all as well Which in our opinion, you know if there's kind of a range of a minimum density and a maximum density It gives kind of everyone in the community a a little bit more Predictability about what they may expect on the land Both from a tax base as well as neighbors being able to know Kind of the range of what kind of development might be able to be nearby so There are some notes here on how those are calculated Maximum density is kind of what we're used to for the most part So it's the 50 acres, you know the the area of the land In this case, we're talking about subtracting the hazards So that would be spots where it would be dangerous Or kind of unreasonable develop to develop so that's the flood plains the wetlands the other things I've listed under hazards, so you'd subtract out that and take that times the Available density for the land so in this case in the same way we put in four units per acre here So we had our 50 acres 40 or developable times four units per acre and that gets to us to 160 units Which is the maximum density So for our minimum density What we did kind of in this in this draft for your comment is took the The total area and then subtracted out both the hazards and the level one So kind of this whole area and took our developable area times the four units per acre. Oh No, yeah times the 70 percent residential. So it's basically this piece of the pie times the four units per acre You know that this is a Concept, so so it's 70 percent of the dark blue Seventy percent of the dark blue is this medium. That's what that's so that whole pie Represents how you're dividing up the developable property. Yes So the hundred and twelve is the Yes homes units yes, so these four acres Ratios acres Units per acre units. Sorry. We didn't have all of them. They're not all labeled very well And we don't need feedback right this minute, but this is something that is new. There's a few new concepts here Right, and that's what the traditional neighborhood developments. There's four there's four different PUD types and the general idea is similar the percentages Would be different and then obviously the weighted units Underline density changes depending on where you are in the city So, you know, there are some spots where you know, it's seven years per acre. There's different We just picked us an example One more question just want to understand the graph so that little square that has the residential unit Distribution is that the allocation for that lighter blue? Um, those are the types of houses. Yeah, so see this this kind of medium blue The medium blue the 28 acres is then split up into single-family attached multi-family and Some flexibility So in addition to having the land allocated in the way that we just talked about there's also what we would call kind of design standards or or types of a Few different things so we have some examples here of what those look like So the specific types in this case, we're looking at open space types There are graphics and examples As well as specific details so in the open space area, you know, there's a general Chart it has types, you know, plaza green pocket park kind of which of the PUDs these would be acceptable in and then specific details on What each of those includes and then for each of those open space types like a whole sheet that describes? Kind of what needs to be included are their benches? What size does it need to be just there need to be shade trees are their picnic tables? Like what kinds of things you would expect in that type of open space? This is very similar to what we have already in city center That we have been using already. So what these are, you know, now we're looking at street types So for each of these typologies, we took What's already being used in city center kind of expanded the options? Included some additional graphics to make it more applicable to other areas of the city You know some of these type choices were relatively narrow because we're really just talking to city center the first time we put this together So now there's more options that are kind of more applicable to rural areas The idea is that these kind of charts and details on the types would be applicable Eventually across the city not just in city center and the PUDs where we're talking about having this apply now So then the last kind of typology on the next slide is the street types You know so with street types we have things like where sidewalks, what are the bike accommodations? Charts on kind of where things lay out as well as dimensions So then we also have building types So there's there's a lot shown on here. This is actually three sheets So there's a row house townhouse sheet a cottage cluster sheet and a neighborhood storefront sheet so the idea is that there may be a Certain number of building types that might be act that probable in different areas of the city or different PUD types Maybe not all oh, yeah, so I'll just mention this is this is a type not an architectural review So we're not gonna have like the design a design review or architectural review, you know, there's just kind of general types So this is I know completely unreadable, but so at our level I just want to say so everything We just looked at has been kind of reviewed in pieces The PUD the text of the PUD Types we've reviewed in kind of outline form The consultant has been working and Swiss staff extremely hard to get us the the actual LDR language associated with these and we're expecting to get that In the next two weeks So So All the pieces we've been kind of working on in pieces and we're close to having it all completely together and So Helen did Ask For me to work with staff to see Kind of where we are on the timeline and where we could be in the next short bit of time This is so this is new over the weekends. The planning Commission has not seen this timeline yet So this is this is new information right here. I Was asked if we could be done and ready for adoption in 90 days Obviously, we're not ready for adoption tonight. So that's not news I guess based on what I just said, but so we have two different timelines for looking at here So this is a little complicated. So we start in February where we are tonight. We come across May through June We have the top line is our aggressive schedule And then we have a very aggressive 90-day schedule I Guess I feel like From talking with staff and really thinking through what we typically do with public outreach I feel like the 90-day schedule is not realistic. I think we wouldn't have the opportunity to have the appropriate amount of public feedback and leave overview and everything that goes into You know really making sure that we're on board with our decisions So I think I would say that, you know the aggressive schedule, which is the top line which has us Kind of bringing you something in June is Probably more in line with our fast track at this point. We want to make sure that we have kind of the time To really get public input and which we need to do So even this aggressive schedule would require multiple additional meetings It would require kind of a different approach that we often have to public input So what we would be envisioning with the aggressive approach is to have Kind of a series of listening sessions with the public on specific topics We may not be able to do that within our typical meeting schedule So that may be kind of subsets of us kind of focusing on some of those specific topics Sometimes with our public input we wind up having a lot of back-and-forth like Answering questions in the moment You know I feel like with this aggressive schedule We're not going to necessarily be able to have that back-and-forth that I know you're good at your level of not doing that of kind of taking input and then You know having a discussion, I think we're going to try to do that With this with moving forward and I think it would also take us not Kind of continually going back and revisiting a lot of topics kind of once we've kind of gone through something I reviewed it and got public input having that be where we're at on something You know, I think sometimes we can take a really long time and get to a point where we're 100% Unanimous and we're everything's perfect and we've had ten analyses on things and that's where we love to be for you So that by the time it gets to you, there's no questions left So the aggressive schedule might not have us at that point It might have us at the point where we have a majority We've been talking about it for two years. We feel quite good, but You know you might still have questions, but Which sometimes is the way things go So I just wanted to be clear that the aggressive schedule is aggressive and Kind of what that might mean for us with extra meetings and some lessening sessions So let's see. So there are some things that we have talked about having a commitment to as next steps Knowing that not every single thing we'd love to do. We can always do it one time. So we have a phase two components Including the things listed up here. So a scorecard for PUDs Making some changes the underlying zoning districts to really make sure that the underlying zoning districts are perfectly matched with the PUDs and our new requirements Continuing to work on small lot subdivisions a lot of the PUDs and things we've been working at are kind of for larger areas With the land allocation the way it is so there might be some work that needs to be done to make sure that makes sense for smaller lots As I talked about with the building and open space types, we love the idea of having that applies city-wide and not just in the PUDs Looking at some additional updates to the site plan standards and then in chapter 12 at this point We have some reserve sections. We Had gotten feedback from the city council and some other committees a few years ago that about looking at some scenic views and that's been kind of on The side burner for a long time. So, you know actually looking at some of those Is on the next steps list and then the planning commission recommendations from the transfer of development rights report so those would be our committed next steps and Just to follow up on that last item Back in December you got you received the Your your TDR committee's Report and you had asked at that point for us as the planning commission to kind of look through those recommendations and come up with some Steps for what our short-term next steps would be from the report recommendations This was in your packet. So this is not new information. You should have gotten this on Friday So we took The TDR committee's finished work I ended with a list of recommendations So the planning commission reviewed those recommendations in balance with Kind of the other comrades of goals and the work we're doing And voted on a modified subset. So so there are some additional recommendations from that report that actually fall more within Kind of your purview of the city council level So we focused on the ones that were specific to the land development regulations kind of in this list As Kind of a path for the next steps So we're not going to get into this in great detail tonight But know that this is the the approach that we want to kind of move forward with After we get through our very aggressive next few months of the PUDs to finish that work up So and just as an acknowledgement some we got a lot of feedback while we were talking about the The TDR recommendations there were a few of them that referred to the open space report and the parcels and I kind of at our last meeting we were very clear that You know the TDR report came out for the open space report. So those recommendations weren't Meshed perfectly. So one of the Items here so Yes, three so land within parcels identified by the open space IZ committee as priority for conservation Could be an optional sending area. So within this We weren't kind of mandating any TDR change on those parcels There was some confusion as to how the two IZ Reports were going to mesh together. So this is definitely for additional work So the other interim zoning Committee on an open space Finish their final report present it both to you and to us We have received quite a few Questions on kind of what our path forward for this is I Know we're not going to get into a lot of detail tonight But because we heard a lot of feedback on this we thought it'd be important So just an overlay of the preview one of the previous maps So I showed earlier the hazards and the level one resources in the pink and the red and just for reference the The parcels that were identified in the open space committee were are now kind of overlaid over that in blue Just so you can kind of see how they might Kind of fit together So I think that this is probably a discussion for our future joint meeting when we will be talking about the Arrowwork parcels and kind of if you have other tools you might want to use for conservation But as part of kind of our list of kind of affirmed approaches it was in your packet Just to be clear on what we're recommending for our work related to these is that The portions of the parcels so not the parcel but the portions of the parcels That are delineated as natural resources and regulated under chapter 12 Would be just that regulated under chapter 12 So from our perspective as the planning commission We're not planning on using the parcel boundary as a delineation of a natural resource And then we recommend that the city council review the parcels with the results of the The earth economics report that you're going to be getting back and Consider if there's additional conservation tools that you at your level might be interested in pursuing You know that are outside the LDR. So if appropriate, so that was I know there was some confusion I know anytime people see something on a map You know you can jump to conclusions, but that's for for the regulation of the natural resources that's Okay, and this is our generic parcel that says what I just said hopefully so So say in this case our generic parcel happens to be one of the parcels identified in the report What we will be doing is the planning commission just like any other parcel the hazards would be regulated level one will be regulated The level two resources would be Regulated to the extent that they're regulated and then the remainder of the parcel Could be developed using our exciting new PUD tools and or potentially With your work you may choose a different To pursue a different path for some of those So, you know, whether that's work from the economics report or looking at the comprehensive goals, there may be some kind of other action on your space fund or or otherwise so that I think is kind of a Precursor to kind of a future meeting when you might have all that information. I think that's it So thank you, I'm sorry. This was more of a Presentation I like to do. Are there any questions that are you know burning? I thought that was very clear and helpful Five questions, but I'd keep us here all night. So I'm gonna write an email afterwards to Jessica It's basically basically on the hazard land exclusion. I'm just curious if that's a departure from our current practice And I'm also really interested to understand these minimums more So what we have now and what the possible implications are from forcing TDR acquisition But I don't want to keep us here all evening and I'd love to hear from some of the public So I think we have five minutes until your public hearing starts So I can answer the minimum question So we did want to make sure that no one would be required to buy a TDR To meet the minimum so the minimum would never be more than the the as right to that one Anything else Summary on what you call winners and losers So if you if you were holding a piece of land in the city right now And it crossed several these boundaries How would that change the potential development of that site? You know would it be fewer units or the same number of units, but they had to be smaller because they had to be in a smaller space But you know an advantage could be more open space So that kind of a summary that says these are the changes that are going to affect different people in different ways Nice to see that summarize but staying within her timeline that she put it on I'm just saying So we've we've that is something we've talked about how the effects and that that's an analysis that I think for Us to be comfortable with putting some something forward. We want to have an idea of kind of exactly what those are also That's why we can't do it in 90 days I think it was the that was we just want to make sure we have time to do what you're saying So what you're saying is you need six months till June? Is that right everybody's okay with very? Like six Yeah, it's not quite six That's four and a half But in your time extra meetings didn't you complete it possibly by June 28th the end I think was what a third oh 23 A hundred and so I I mean it might wind up being a meeting or maybe a listening session where we're not all there, but we clean Something Yes, I understand this is just the PUD These PUDs could be in fact approved outside of interim zoning that is a possibility that is not against the rules or the law correct They would apply citywide Regardless of areas that the city has designated as interim zoning or not in terms Commission's charge But even if interim zoning ended tonight you could still enact these PUDs Right, but between the time we end IZ and they're enacted the old rules rule So would not be these so Interim zoning as a tool exists for This reason so the idea where we've kind of put all our cards out there So that there's not a Development development like scramble to like get in under the wire So I'm not saying that you should do something one way or the other, but the specific tool Exists for the reason where we have kind of talked about a new development plan or new regulation to kind of give time to Enacted so that's just to piggyback on that on this chart You'll see the last thing on each of them is city council hearing notice. That's the day in which New regulations are legally in effect So when when you vote to put her to held a public hearing and then it gets published in the other paper The day is published in the other paper is the day It's in effect of pending your action. So that's why this timeline goes to they Any reason to believe there would be a scramble like is that historically something that happens I Don't I don't know but I I do know that the tool exists so that that doesn't happen. So I think Sometimes it happens. I don't know an example. I mean we just went through a tremendous amount of work putting forward the inclusionary Inclusionary zoning that was a tremendous amount of work And if you look at the timing that's required for the public hearings that we can't control With the inclusionary process There was an incredible amount of feedback that came in from the public from the development community from landowners That was very valuable to that process and it made the end product. I think everyone would agree It made the end product much better so having the feedback during those times does result and I wouldn't call it a scramble but important improvements That come from that feedback and if that is compromised or If people you know it that that's where an overall policy can miss some opportunities to be as as thorough and beneficial as possible so Tom in response to that that The Planning Commission at the last meeting Resident stood up and said When I see ends I'm working with a group of those 25 property owners and we will be ready to submit proposals for development I don't recall that you know said that I I do and it was Arroborated in a phone call after By how I'm strong it was Michael Simona. I don't know who the group group was he's working with but he Literally said This is my plan. So that I loved your opening speech about the open mind I'm asking these questions to truly come I'm trying to understand the applicability and the requirement and necessity I don't this is news to me And I just want to understand if a scramble is truly something we need to fear if there's precedent for it So I have an open mind on this. We had president the last Izzy. There was a scramble for development We have we have an email I believe And he became forward stating that So, I mean, I think that's a real possibility And that's the whole point of the interim zoning law to avoid that So I think if we Close the door Before things are in place A lot of this work might be for naught. Yes, they could keep going on it, but you know, it wouldn't apart To everyone you look at that schedule I may I look back. I've been on the Commission for 25 years, but I look back and the project started in August of 2016 when the consultants presented their phase one Report, that's almost four years ago. So this is not an easy project to complete and Jessica said it's aggressive and it surely is and I have some doubts Given what I've observed that it can be done by June. We will try like hell to do it, but you know this This subject has been on the Planning Commission agendas more than 25 times and since the middle of 2018 So we we've worked at it, but it's still not done I'd like to offer two two points and one is I understand a little bit about this other working group actually great idea Okay, so I want to tell you what I know about that working group But the second thing that I would say is that now these minimums is an example Okay, and I've tried to personally explain this when we're in public meetings. There are It's might be worth very worth the time of landowners to allow this process to complete Especially in defining minimums and maximums because it will make their process simpler If that has not worked out in advance what so many people have been working with and it's been a frustration to both the people developing and the people that are upset about the development is that there's a Misunderstanding about what should and should not be allowed and this process is going to stream like that if this process It will anyway when it's done But any project that doesn't wait for this to happen will be in that same boat And they're going to go and try to do something and they won't have a minimum written in the book to work with So that that's that will be their option to deal So I'm just putting that out as an example of why it's there are benefits. I think to everyone involved To let these new This new work come to fruition Is the hope and the second thing I would just add about this working group Which I think really is very smart is that I It gets to this white and blue area of the map Which I think will there was a lot of stress in the community when they saw the parcels thinking that an entire Parcel was going to be pulled and we've all made it very clear that that's not what any regulations that we're working on Will include and from what I understand this working group Which is actually made of a very diverse group is looking at of those parcels I Will interpret it as saying what are those white and blue areas and what might have the greatest opportunity? So there's not I think it's actually a very smart follow-up and it happens to be a volunteer group. That's my understanding of it So I just wanted to put those two things out there Thank you Really underscores the importance of the minimum and the maximum number which currently does not exist And I think that is a question that's been in many people's mind. How many more units are we going to build? I think that's a really I think useful Detail Okay, I think this is a logical time to go into the open here the Public hearing it's scheduled for 7 30 to 8 o'clock And it's we're five minutes late, but I think all of this conversation is helpful for that So I would entertain a motion to open a public hearing Related to hear comments related to the possible extension of interim zoning in those areas currently covered Any discussion about going having a public hearing And I want to thank you for all your hard work and what looks like future hard work Whether or not we've interim zoning or not this PUD plan. I think really is very important Okay, so are you ready to vote now? Okay all in favor? Okay, so we will open the public hearing Can we we can are you? Planning to stay for are you done you're gonna stay Part of the audience so we should turn around Should we Oh Yeah, we have a little table And we need a bite to Okay Okay, so can I um Have some quiet and can I have a show of hands of how many people would like to comment? Understanding will limit And it doesn't mean you if you don't raise your hand now could just keep them up so I can count just briefly So we forget an idea It looks like about 16 or 17 people and there possibly will be more So I would like to set a limit of two minutes so we can Get through this and I think some of it might be Could possibly be repetitive so try not to do that so we get sort of a full spectrum of thought And I have a timer so Let's just start please please state your name and Your comments briefly a lot of community members have volunteered a lot of time And I think it would be foolish to end IZ right now and let all of their work go to waste before their recommendations are implemented Last time with IZ it was really a fail because nothing came of it So I know that for people that you know like the developers that want to go forward They you know are frustrated But if we look at the future of South Burlington, which is a pretty long time Three months or six months or whatever it is is really just a blink compared to the future of South Burlington Which I think is really important and it's obvious that there's a lot of community members that are really Having a lot to say about this not a lot of people like public speaking I sure don't but it is important enough for me to say that I have to speak up to say that we really need to pay attention and Let the committees finish and implement what they're saying for the future of our city Thank you Someone else yes, please Peter Khan Question of the planning Commission on that you had the four different PUD types How are those determined as far as like what type goes with what? area so we have there is a Different zoning districts are going to have different ones that are applicable. So not all like it fits on Shulmer Road might conservation might not make sense. So so we do we have a good map available for that So would that be a zoning so there would be a rezoning into that PUD type applied to that region is that I mean we've talked about having choices too so choices of different PUD types on the same in the same area Generally, it is supposed to relate to what is the zoning district today? So if it's a district where you can build 40 units an acre that tends to line up with a traditional neighborhood If it's a Shelburne road area Units an acre then it tends to be neighborhood commercial That's the way the map kind of lines up and then there's some areas that are sort of seven or eight It's an acre like a long Kennedy Drive and that might be a bridge between where you could be one way or the other way That's kind of with how the Commission so it would be it would be And it would be it would correlate with the current zone to largely yes, there are a few areas where The Commission for the last several years has been talking about making changes Those those are general in the areas that are really super fuzzy on the at first the comprehensive plan future Like those are some of the areas where there's some change Well in Jessica the conservation PUD which we didn't get into in detail though It was a great example of how everyone this can all come together very nicely and that that as of right now Though it hasn't been finalized would start when a Development parcel it has 50% Within the hazard and and level one and then by using the cons the conservation PUD It immediately gives a lot of clarity about what can happen there And that's a great example of Allowing that to be worked out first I think will bring a lot of clarity to both the development community and the would there be a choice on which PUD to use as far as so if it's zoned for a certain PUD so there might be a choice of Of which PUD could be used I mean I'm guessing a lower like if you wanted to go with a lesser Impact pd In some areas it may not be the middle of Shelburne Road may not Allow for four units an acre that because the city policy is to have Some other areas not so not so much. Okay. Thank you. I thank you I'd like to try to keep the questions I think that was a good one But a lot of these questions will be answered as you continue your work on these and sort of stick to the topic Of whether we should expand the timeline for um, I see who would like to be next Mike I hope you can hear me. I've got a cold. So I may not sound too Lucid Here I've had the opportunity to look at the open space report the TDR report Been following the PUDs Anxious to see the cost-benefit analyses that are going to be done and All of these things are Supposed to be There's an effort being made to kind of integrate them by the planning commission and then come up with some recommendations and Fundamentally, I I would just like for the council to Kind of get straight with everybody out there in the community those who support interim zoning those who do not I Look at the those studies and I see a lot of heavy lifting left personally When I look at the stuff now, maybe the PC has Got an idea there and they're confident that they can expedite this within the time frame that that's up there But we know that things ordinarily take longer than you think they're going to So I would like to have the council tell the community right now whether it's their intention To keep interim zoning in place as long as it takes To get this stuff done with these studies Up to the three-year period of time that I understand we're limited to having interim zoning by law I think it would I think that everybody out there in the community would appreciate knowing what your intentions are Because a few days ago where it on the street was I see was done And there's a little campaign to change people's minds and now we are pretty sure that it's not done So just be straight with us. What are your plans? Can you answer that question? Well, hope we will have that conversation and discussion. Thank you. I think that's item 10 And that's when we will have that conversation Next we would like to speak Sure. Thank you. My name is Kelly Lord and I just want to mention a couple questions I had after hearing the presentation In the maps it shows a lot of areas of hazards and level one conservation I see a lot of like fragmented colors that all symbolize our natural resources But going going pretty far back We had great presentations about things like the wildlife corridors and the connectivity for wildlife And I don't understand how when you just look at each parcel In isolation and what can happen to that parcel how the wildlife corridors and the connectivity for wildlife Will be protected and preserved and considered throughout this whole process I'm seeing individual lots of individual parcels and individual resources being talked about I'd like to hear more about The wildlife corridors that we have in place and how the connectivity is going to be preserved That's my first question. The second question has to do with the open space committee I understood that they spent a lot of time Taking a look at the parcels that are still open in South Burlington and really prioritized Not just resources Individual resources, but which parcels the the city may want to keep open and left in their natural state but now what I'm hearing is that The open space report will have really identified those areas But they're not going to be used in any way Incorporated into LDRs So other than basically serving to sort of tip-off developers in terms of ooh these areas We might want to look at closely right now I'm really wondering how all the work of the volunteers on this committee is going to turn into anything How are these open spaces that are so precious to people in South Burlington going to actually be preserved and maintained as Open spaces What was the purpose of that committee if it doesn't then take those spaces and not just a portion of those those parcels but those parcels and Actually turn it into something that's maintained as open I like to see people volunteer for the city and I'm on one of the committees myself to tell their work actually turn Into something and this is one where I hear yeah, this is great We've identified all these parcels But we're actually not going to really do anything with them and we see them on the map But we're actually going to treat them just like any other parcel We're going to break them down into this little quarter has this resource and this can all be developed When the whole purpose of this committee was to identify open spaces that were a priority to the city left open Really open not a small piece open, but open so that's one thing that I want to mention But you're and and I wrap this up. Yep And the other comment that was made is that maybe that's not going to be the planning Commission I'm turning that into an LDR But maybe that's going to come back to the city council to say okay, what are two? What are the tools do we have? How can we listen to what our residents are saying and what this committee recommended and say we want to leave This open is not necessarily through an LDR But you have other tools available to you and being on the TDR committee We definitely have talked a lot about sending areas receiving areas Maybe if these parcels all that important to the residents South Burlington Maybe they should be sending areas not receiving areas Maybe somehow these different interim zoning committees can come together and say this This work from the open space committee was important now If we can't use it directly through an LDR to preserve these open spaces then I challenge you to look at What other tools you have available from the city council perspective? Thank you Someone else yes Um, oh, I'm sorry Brad and then Andrew I have a question if I'm Brad. Will you tell us who you are? Yeah If I started the development before I can Resone that now or come back in for me If there was a so the point in time that everything matters for the purposes of this conversation is When there's a preliminary plat submitted? So if there's a preliminary plat that was submitted prior to any regulation coming into effect whether it's interim zoning or a new set of regulations, that's That's the day in which those are the regulations in effect if the preliminary plat is submitted Or site plan is submitted after a new bylaw is been Warned or councils adopted interim zoning then that's in effect. So that would be that's the timeline that is relevant So I can't come back in I don't know where your project was. That's why I'm generalities Heinsberg Road, right? I know I know physically where the project is but I'm not sure where in the timeline it was if it If it's not actively you can check with that. Yeah, but if it's not actively in front of the DRB, it's probably not Vested unless it got it previously in approval. Thank you Andrew hi, my name is Andrew tonic. I just have two observations suggestions. So I was on the TDR committee so familiar with you know our thought process and From my perspective, I don't really think there was confusion. I think it's probably unanimous among that Folks on the committee that we understood the open space committee would be identifying highest priority parcels And we said you unanimously those parcels should become sending areas at a minimum at a minimum They should no longer be receiving TDR density the open space committee identified those parcels as a whole Right using biofinder science as important parcels to conserve and a minimum They shouldn't be receiving TDR density, and I don't think it was any confusion in the committee as to how that should work The second thing I would suggest is that You know I was a little concerned just echoing Kelly's comments That it doesn't seem the planet commission is really taking into account the results of the open space committee And one other way it seems to me to link it up would be the parcels identifies harsh party should automatically become conservation Right because there's there's lots of resources on those parcels that have not been identified as level one level two there's all the repairing areas and all the fields that you know for pollinators for raptors for amphibians for You know water filtration all really really important attributes of those parcels which the open space committee took to account That's not Really, you know well defined in the level one level two resources and for that reason those parcels should be conservation Someone else yes in the back hi So my name is Jen Marway, and although I would say that I think in terms owning should end because I think People's lives are just being affected. I don't really see how that can really occur today based on what I'm looking at I do have a Concern that the city council put out a charge of wanting to have all of these open space and TDR committees and arrowhead and All these committees come through so that they have a really good vision for the city And I look at the arrowhead report in the open space report and they almost mirror Each other But then I look at planning and zoning and it's completely different. They've added They didn't put in a lot of what you know the city council had is They're by changing the 12 a or 12 B or whatever it is they didn't add in a lot of The things into hazards and level one and level two that city council felt was important like forest blocks like we just talked about But they added in instead slopes and steep slopes, which completely if you look at the map is About almost half of what is pink and red and it's it's not something that the city council had on their list of like what's important But it is important to the planning and zoning and that's that's concerning to me It's also concerning to me that we look at the list The planning and zoning was talking about anything that's considered a hazard a level one or a natural resource not receiving a TDR because the way that they looked at it was that they shouldn't you couldn't build there so there shouldn't be a TDR That's very Concerning to me that all these people are going to lose all their TDRs that have now also been an interim zoning So they get that they couldn't it just is changing the values of these properties hugely So I would say that I realize that in terms zoning is probably going to go a little longer than it currently is But I would ask the city council to maybe either Really kind of put together a charge as to if they're if this was what the point of the term zoning is is what your charge was Why is it not mirroring up with what? Planning and zoning is doing seems to be mirroring up with what you're seeing on the other committees But not planning and zoning. So I think there's like currently really big disconnect and last piece is that when you look at the Open space committee, they have you know level they have the 25 that they showed in blue Are there 20 parcels something that are highest priorities, but they have others in there that are I don't know if it's level one or level five But like they're really important and those aren't being shown on that list So part of what you're seeing in white as being able to be developed is not because when you look at open space committee, they are not There's natural resources there. There's things that they want to do But it's not listed in their hazards because it's not the forest blocks and the other things from the air reports So they're not all coming together. So what you're looking at is oh look, there's still more space to develop But there's there's not when you start putting all the reports on I don't know how it's to say that but so Thank you Anyone else? Yes Evan Langfell with O'Brien Brothers This is kind of a general and kind of a broad statement But while open space is certainly a priority of the city and of the comprehensive plan It should be of the planning Commission There are other priorities as well that also need to be considered housing being one of them and by keeping interim zoning in effect And by the way our property at O'Brien Brothers is not impacted. So this is again an unbiased opinion here By keeping interim zoning in place It's only exacerbating our housing crisis a week and a half ago An article came out by the Economist comparing the greater Burlington area to San Francisco being one of the hardest Areas in the country to develop new housing Look at how that is impacting the community There's a like I said There's a lot of objectives in the comprehensive plan open space being one But there are others access to housing and affordability should be Contemplated when you're making this decision. Thank you. Thank you Anyone else? Yes, Leo name is Leo NATO and Been a resident here in South Burlington for I'd say close to 50 years And obviously love it and hope to continue here for a while longer But in reference to interim zoning one thing that concerns me is that my understanding is some folks in this room On a council have indicated in the past that the reason for establishing it was due to the overload On our emergency services and infrastructure in South Burlington I Along with many people that I know feel that the real overload To our city are and will continue to be created from areas outside the SEQ So with the high rises that are going to be built The hotels are going to be built in this community. That's going to have major impact already is I Check with the representative from the fire department police department They informed me by far most of their request for services has occurred outside the SEQ so I think it's important that the board in the future when you're talking about Interim zoning the why the reason for it to be enacted It's just you shy away from saying that it's because of the Impact that the SEQ is having on the police services and infrastructure because to be honest That is not the case. I think a lot of people would agree with you The data that would be collected from the police department fire department would also reflect that So that would be my my point Just to let you know, we are going to have an update after this from kevin. We are having a A study done to really look at that the cost of development versus Information to address some of those concerns I I agree with you the The committees we've heard from in the reports don't touch on that but that wasn't there What we asked them to do but this other report we hope will give us some helpful information to Drive our policy correctly and your Conclusion may be what the report finds. I don't know But thank you Oh, yes, I'm sorry My name is daryl and peters. I'm very short And all I wanted to say is I've watched as All of the citizens have This is a really hard thing you're doing This is hard work You've had all of your work and your meetings all of these citizens all of these committees And you announced when you created izi That it would be for naught if you didn't end up with actionable items updated and revised ldrs that if we just Got more paper to put in the file cabinet That would be A terrible conclusion So what i'm asking us all to do is to have a little more patience It's hard. This is really hard. Everybody wants to you know, get it done get it off the table Go on to other things, but there's been a huge investment In dealing with hard issues And trying to think about it from all aspects of the community And it deserves the respect Of everybody a respect for that work that's been done To get to the point where we have actionable items In the great history of recorded time It's not that long and we need to do this So that's just a passion Passionate request that you please just everybody give them a little more time Thank you. Thank you Anyone else Yes, I can't see the face with the hand. Yes, sarah My name is my name is sarah dop I think the case has been made very very clearly by jessica and others from the planning commission about the need for more time You folks have just worked enormously hard to get us to this point. So I think that point is Is well made and I don't need to really reiterate it um As to the housing The need for housing and the need for affordable housing. I think the affordable housing thing has been Kind of co-opted um I think it's something of a red herring in a way because who could be against affordable housing I'm certainly not but I don't think it needs to be built in our natural areas um So the amount of affordable housing that would be built In conjunction with additional development projects is fairly minimal and it will be the absolute minimum that they can get away with and Many of us feel that the formulas that are developed by the state to define affordability Don't square up very well with the ordinary person's Actual day-to-day existence and income and the amount they can spend on housing Of an affordable house is Not necessarily what's defined as affordable to many of us So I think that whole thing is is being co-opted in a way by the development community to Argue for a segment of the community's Interests as opposed to the people who live here Um, the other one point that I wanted to make was that I too have been around here an awful long time since 1951 Um, I haven't been involved with city affairs For more than about 20 years other than voting but in that time When I started to be involved you would come to a meeting like this and there might be one member of the public present There was total apathy Total unwillingness to get involved and now we've turned that around to our credit as a community and a lot of people are involved Many people spend enormous amounts of their personal time In these committees both interim and ongoing committees They provide a wonderful public service for us all and we should be thankful for it So I would hate for us to Throw this back in their faces by saying thanks for the work We'll just move on now Thank you Hello, i'm lesley mckenzie. I am kolderbanker hickok and mormon realty on a property in south burlington And uh, I don't think anyone has to co-opt the the issue about affordable housing or housing in general I think we truly have both an affordability crisis going on in schittenden county and in south burlington in northern vermont We have a housing crisis in terms of the availability of housing And I think uh delays even well intentioned or just continuing to add to it And this isn't an issue that just developed this year This has been one that's going on for the last 10 to 20 years And uh, although well intentioned. I think unfortunately it just continues to get worse So we live in a community with less than 2 vacancy for people looking for rentals We live in a community that there's a bidding war is on almost anything that anyone would consider affordable in the marketplace And that's probably 350 to 400 000 in under there was just a Um group of forums that were put together by the vermont futures project a group that's looking to try and really Create economic vitality for romp for the long haul And they gathered group of young groups of young professionals to get together and the biggest challenge And why 40 percent or more say that they're going to move out of the community is because of The gap between what people can make and what they can afford to buy They came up with a cost of living challenge assessment of where the typical vermont young family of three is right now And that's saying that their median income is in the $80,000 range And that allows about $1400 a month for housing with the other obligations that they have And I think most of us would look around and say there isn't housing available You can't get a two-bedroom apartment for $1400 often in south brillington Or in northern vermont and that would give you buying power of around 250 000 right now. There's probably two two properties in south brillington on the market for 250 and below And the availability is only getting more challenging. So the realities of what they can afford of where we can live Aren't there and I don't think this is an issue That's just about people wanting to move in and people feeling threatened about who wants to join their community It's people who live here and want to make changes or want to be able to Move to a house where they can raise a family versus what they currently live in I think it's affecting really everybody in the community Not just certain groups, but I think delays continue to exasperate the problem And I think we should be greatly concerned that Our demographics are getting more and more challenged and that It affects our schools. It affects our quality of life. And so I ask you just to give strong consideration to quality of life on all aspects And I think how we live and where we live is an important aspect of that So whether it's a decision you make tonight or decisions that you make in the coming months as you continue to look at this I hope you take that strongly into consideration. Thank you. Thank you very much Hello Duncan Murdock I was on the open space committee and I just hope that you take our work our hard work and do account and you make some some solid Decisions around that And do that in the amount of time that you need to do it I I I'd hate to see that you know everything and just now or soon and not have those incorporated I also just want to say that we're a community of And there's such a thing as Natural communities. So we're not the only Community here. There are other species here And we're talking about where are we going to live? We need to talk about Where are all the other species going to live and how can we accommodate them? We need to talk about not only how are we going to use these Natural resources, which I don't like the term But how are we going to give back to these so-called resources? What are we doing to enhance our natural communities right now? We're taking And one way to do that is through conserving large areas of land For those other species That are out there that we live with we're not the only species And so large areas for habitat And the happens could happen to be large areas for us to Find our peace and quiet and to restore our well-being So I really hope that you take that into account And this conversation continues and I think that we need more time to To do that in a very deliberate way. So thank you for listening. Thank you So anyone else? Yes Hi, I'm Jeff Nick. I didn't plan to speak today, but when I'm hearing about the open space plan Does give me some concerns It's been somewhat vague as to how this plan is going to be used And I did a little research. I looked back in the history of South Burlington It looks like you've spent over the years about 3.8 million dollars to preserve about five properties in town Over the last 20 years The open space plan looks like it contains properties that could be worth upwards of 100 million dollars So i'm not sure how you're going to preserve those properties It might appear in listening to westman said tonight that there's a kind of a back door taking going on And these properties will be remained open through a regulatory process. That's still unknown So that's my concern. I think there might be some other concerns similar to mine But it'd be nice to understand how this plan is going to be used And in the last four or five meetings I've attended. I haven't really gotten a clear answer to that question. So Thank you Thank you Yes I'm frank cokeman. I'm a former member of the drb. I'd like to address Points made by two of the previous speakers sara spoke about Developers co-opting the issue of affordable housing my concern is I Am distressed by the polarization between what looked to be two What I'd like to think of as benefits in communities the affordable people concerned with affordable housing and people concerned with preservation of natural areas Uh, it is there is some truth to what sara said Uh, using the term co-opting however, I find divisive and unhelpful. It is true That a developer who simply wants to enlarge his development Can do a minimal amount of so-called affordable of housing that is defined as affordable within a very At a very fairly high level of income And he shouldn't be allowed to use that as a weapon against The intelligent preservation of natural areas on the other hand the reality is not addressed at all by this city For the most part Uh, is that real affordable housing Housing affordable to people who really can't afford a place to live Can't be accomplished these days Without subsidy and that's what should be fostered when you're talking about affordable housing real subsidy Subsidy that are working that is enough so that a working person has a decent place to live Not a sixteen hundred dollar a month apartment for two people for example Uh, the other thing I wanted to address was at the other with the other gentleman said the gentleman who just spoke I think that the The report that I've looked at is useful as a As an inventory that's a very very useful exercise To the extent that it reflects a point of view, which I think it does in many places I find it less useful when he talks about a hundred million dollars worth of property and a back door taking That has some resonance. I think you need to be very careful as you go forward Not to put yourself I'm sorry inadvertently Because you can't afford to buy the parcel parcels in the position of Essentially unconstitutional takings through a back door regulatory process you need to be careful about what you regulate So regulating entire parcels out of development would be a bad idea, for example That's one way to read what's being advocated. I hope that that's not what you're doing You could have reasonable regulations that require people with sensitive with sensitive areas within a parcel To take appropriate steps But if you can't afford to buy the parcel You can't substitute for that At what amounts to a confiscatory taking? I think that's the concern that the gentleman was expressing. I share that concern I close by urging Everyone to take a close look at affordable housing a reasonable look Not line up in two opposite camps understand that From the standpoint of the afford of land affordability You're going to have to open up some of the land you're talking about To make it available For genuine affordable housing Thank you Frank Anyone else? Yes Yes, rosanne I can't really see everyone's head. So Just our hands My name is rosanne greco. I'm a resident of south burlington Thank you very much counselors for taking this on. This is not a pleasant duty It's But it's crucial and it's important I urge you to take a broad view a long-term view. We're talking about Our lives our sustenance. We're talking about planetary change. We're talking about climate disruption All the things that we need to live Are given to us on the land if we pave it over we don't have those Duncan mentioned about communities. We're not the only ones living here And so I hope that when you make your decisions You keep the big picture. We talk a lot about economy. We should be talking more about ecology There are things that are wants. There are things that are needs. We need clean air. We need clean water We need good soil So I urge you to keep that in mind I went through today and I pulled out I don't have enough time to read it but here are all the reports That were done with taxpayer dollars Very good reports one two three four five six seven eight nine ten eleven two There's about 13 reports here All of these are have to do with our open spaces Some are narrowly focused Like on the the birds Or there were some earlier ones here on our trees Your most recent report the arrow would report was a focused on habitat block Some of them are broad brush give the whole the whole environment The most recent one is the most comprehensive and that was done by the interim zoning open space committee that looked at the the magnitude of the natural resources For the first time they actually gave you a prioritized list. All these other ones talked about it What all these reports have in common Is They say that our open lands are precious. They're vital. They're essential and they urge the city to preserve them But as the reports goes on they also make comments that there's fewer and fewer areas to preserve They were never codified. Most of these were never codified. You did the natural resource protection areas But that's not conserving or preserving them. That's one zoning vote away from them being developed So the area that's actually legally conserved and preserved is very very small So I brought these up here to show you Please don't make this report just added to the pile That action never gets taken on Because first of all, we're going to run out. This would probably be the last interim zoning because we're running out of land As you look at what the first report was back in may of 1972 a mini blueprint for the southeast I guess it didn't call a quadrant in those days Through if you go and you see what we had then and you see what we have now There won't be much left So I urge you not to just add the arrow wood or the izzy report to the pile and it goes on a shelf And nothing ever gets enacted So and thank you very much for doing this. Thank you Yes, is there anyone else besides this gentleman come come on up Are there others me?  Okay I mean, yeah, that's fine Good evening My name is daniel seff a 14 year resident of south burlington First I want to thank everybody for their service to the city and the hard work and the late nights and everything that you do Uh to make the city a better place. So thank you I do want to respond directly if I may to a question raised by mr Chittenden, which is whether there's going to be a scramble I think that was the word that was used um Of applications for development if izzy is lifted and I have Some firsthand information and knowledge on that that I think may be useful to the council I think the answer is yes, and I'll tell you why Uh, I personally I'm an attorney in the area and I'm personally handling two cases right now on behalf of Neighbors who are opposing projects that were filed just under the wire of izzy one The last time izzy was adopted and this current one. So it's absolutely You can take it to the bank if izzy is lifted There's going to be a scramble to have applications for development filed before the regulations are changed So I feel confident in saying that and you can expect it to There is a real problem right now in the city On the subject of tdr's that needs to be worked out and resolved before izzy is lifted And let me address that briefly I've been looking at the question of tdr's for over 10 years In fact in 2010 I went before the city council and I said that the 2006 tdr by-law was unconstitutional and should be Reformed nothing happened a group of neighbors hired me and my firm. We challenged the by-law 2019 the court struck it down as unconstitutional. We have a problem right now where the current tdr by-law which was adopted in 2019 In response to that court decision Makes Areas in the southeast quadrant receiving areas for tdr's that are actually Parcels that have been identified by the open space committee as highest priority for preservation It's completely incongruous. It's completely counterintuitive to have a high priority conservation area be a receiving area for tdr's This needs to be worked out The tdr izzy committee has come up with some great suggestions about having tdr's being sent out of the secu into areas along population corridors And that needs to be I think looked at and resolved before izzy is lifted Otherwise what's going to happen is there are going to be more applications for Precious open spaces in southeast quadrant being built with excess density. So It Yes, there's going to be a bum rush of applications And we're going to have the parcels that the committee identified as being highest priority for preservation Overbuilt with excess tdr's if you do lift izzy before the tdr issue has worked out And i'm happy to answer any questions on this subject. I've been looking at it for over 10 years Okay, thank you very much. Thank you Michael mitigie wants to speak and then um, why don't you come up? First and then because you'll have a chance And is there anyone else I'd I'd like to we've gone a little bit longer But I think it's important to have any everyone speak who wishes to So if there's anyone who still wants to speak, please let me know so we can manage this Sandy you want to okay, so it's okay jenna. Hi jenna bella vance I'm thank you for taking the time to listen to the people and balancing conservation and development Is daunting and we understand the many forces that um, you have to play against and reconcile And we applaud you imposing in-term zoning to address the challenges thoughtfully And hope that you extend it tonight to ensure that all the study information is synthesized and considered for new Your regulations to be put in place We hope you use the committee research as well as the arrowhead report to take action and envision the future of our city On another note in response to a couple of issues that have been brought up I believe that affordable housing is a national issue As is wage stagnation It's a shared responsibility of towns in chitin and county Us being one of them And also in response to how will we pay for open land or high priority land The south burnton land trust Came up with a proposal and spent many hours on it see for see sense for conservation And that's a proposal that we wanted to put forth to the voters and at some point Hopefully that can happen and that the people will vote for what they value the people will pay for what they value And I think that's what this open public forum is about hearing what people value and they're willing to pay for So thank you for taking the time listening Thank you sandy I'm sandy duly. I live on east terrace and I've lived there since 1974 Just wanted to say a few words about sort of the interplay between The desire for open space and the need and the need for open space preservation or natural resource preservation. I think is The way I look at it So and affordable housing the It's pretty clear from the people on our committee Affordable housing committee that interim zoning does depress the the production of housing and therefore Um results in and actually exacerbates the cost of housing But that may be a price that we're willing to pay for our goals right now But I just wanted to say a few words about affordable housing The inclusionary zoning rules are one tool And they their primary goal is inclusion That is that all of our neighborhoods will at least have some Um Housing that is affordable to a range of incomes. Maybe not all of them Uh, and they're focused on what With the incentives that are provided which right now are offsets In terms of increased density that a private developer can build Without subsidy um, I certainly agree that there are Families within our community that can't afford the prices that interim zoning inclusionary zoning Targets because They they don't they aren't subsidized But we do recognize that the nonprofits have to be involved and the place the city has Addressed that is the creation of the housing trust fund Uh, so I do think that we also need to uh It has provided some funding for Affordable housing that is subsidized and therefore it reaches Families that are like 60 of the area median income are 50 or 70 The area that inclusionary is focusing is Um For rentals under 80 percent of area median income for ownership up to 100 percent of area median income So I think one of the things we need to think about in the future is more money In the housing trust fund because one of the major costs Of development of housing in south brilington is the cost of land and I know the nonprofits both Cathedral square. Um, we're going to have some habitat housing. Thank god in south brilington so in hindsburg wrote and Champlain housing trust would would all partner And love to have our city have more money In our housing trust fund So that I just want to speak for that need but I think we we need to work to find ways that these two Goals complement each other and I think that's possible Thank you Michael you wanted to make a statement Unless there's somebody else who wants to go i'm in a privileged position. I think that was it from the i'm in a privileged position here um So before we close this I just wanted to Say that it's worth remembering that interim zoning was enacted in response to a very strong demand by A majority of south brilington residents who felt that south brilington was developing too rapidly And especially development in our remaining open lands and wanted those lands saved from from development or conserved in some way The work of the open space committee and the tdr committee If it doesn't lead to some form of regulatory outcome We might as well junk it And the two years of work that have gone into it by Many many volunteers hours and hours of work night times homework galore So it's it's very important that Interim zoning be extended so that these at least The interim the tdr committee Can complete its its work and draft have draft regulations by the end of IZ It's the open space committee and the tdr committee are really the only ones that Can produce some meaningful land conservation The pud won't do it although a conservation pud Will perhaps conserve some land in a particular development and inclusionary zoning won't do it much as we need it so If we don't do something with what we've what we've produced We don't use the open space committee and I I understand now that it's been Sidelined, but I think it's a mistake. I mean the earth economic study Is based on the parcels identified by the open space committee The parcels the habitat blocks in the arrow would habitat block study In part overlap with the with the parcels identified by the by the open space so Ignoring that word Somebody else said putting it in the filing cabinet and forgetting about it Would be a tragedy so I'm asking the We'll ask the planning commission again Extend interim zoning. Otherwise we've done This time what we did last time and That would be a terrible tragedy Thank you Yeah, if I one thing if I if I might um A couple of folks spoke about the work of the open space committee. It's identifying Lands that should never be developed and that was never the intent Of the charge to the open space committee The open space committee was charged with identifying lands that had the most valued natural resources in the city from a critter wildlife carter water And vegetation perspective and they did quite the stellar job with that But it was never in the intent to say that these lands should never be developed even allen Um, if I might quote you is what I read in the paper It if a development has to go on one of these parcels anything we can do to minimize the damage To natural resources is really important in thinking about not only following regulations But also trying to think about doing this in a way that's as carefully crafted as possible So all I'm saying maybe we can find ways to buy some of these lands But only if there's money available to do that or a creative way to do that um Otherwise otherwise what happens on those lands? Um will happen according to regulations, but at no time I want to be clear And I think if everybody should understand did we intend to say Um, or do we even hint at saying those open spaces should never be developed? Um, I just thought it was important to uh to clarify that Okay, yeah I I didn't say and I I meant to that landowners and developers Also have this the same concerns that all of us have About conservation mitigation of climate change and and global warming And so that when I say we should have a regulatory outcome That doesn't mean that there cannot be any compromise There may well be compromised with a land owner and a developer who understands the value the ecological value of the land and might agree After negotiation that x amount of this will be conserved for ecological reasons. It's not a It's not a Back-at-white situation There are opportunities to work with landowners and developers for a better outcome than we've seen so far Thank you Um, if there are no other Yes Out Yeah That was 135 days or whatever was on the schedule I showed earlier. We're hoping like 140 days. I think it was Like June kind of have that conversation earlier because I feel like part of that is that open space and TBRs, they all have One thing that they're focusing on and then the planning commission is adding in their own scope of what they would like other teams have their areas Which then completely changes what you're going to be able to develop later So yeah, well, I I think the the work of the planning commission is a A little broader than the reports from IZ the reports from IZ were intended to provide some really good information You know, tom's been talking forever about I want to know Where the really important natural resources are in our community? Because then we can potentially have a plan and a process to Potentially save that purchase it do something With that so that the lake sham plain doesn't continue be to be denigrated. We have um We avoid catastrophic Runoff and flooding from different Um Things that happen That we have a handle on that and so but that alone wasn't all that the planning commission. I mean, I think some of those Our regulations hopefully will take into consideration what we learn both with that and the economic Report but Uh, I think they're they're um connected But they're not it's not all a set of ldr's Just want to comment on that. Uh, I degree at times I have supported this open space report And I still do have the reason to be happy that we have a list of properties now So if one of these 25 properties owners chooses to put it on the market and sell it Now we can go to this list as a council and say we have identified this as a piece of land I know the langs they live across the street. They're one of the 25 parcels Now I feel like if the langs want to sell their land Any council now or in the future could feel very good about a committing open space dollars to that I'm very concerned if we try to purchase all 25 of these properties. It's just not feasible A lot of the reasons that we're involved in previous Yes, I'm not saying that but I my point is this I'm supporting that I like this list that we know and we can justify when something comes on the market when it's not the five of us Sitting on this on the in these seats. That's somebody at some point in time Collective group of individuals said this is a parcel that we should acquire from the city So if there's no other comments Um, I would entertain a motion to um close the public hearing second all in favor I So we'll move on to Excuse me to number eight and that is the status report of studies related to the economic assessment Of conservation and development Kevin. Helen. My report's going to be very quick We expect to hear back with a draft report from earth economics Which is one half of the study By the end of the week And we expect to hear back from john steward who's conducting the other half of the study for us By the end of the month So we'll have that both pieces by the end of the month this month Okay, great question on that. Yes, will those be publicly available? Um, yeah, I mean they're going to be yes, they'll be publicly available presented to us They'll be published by the end of the week. So it's something that can be shared and um I Before we put it out I'd like paul and I'd have a chance to look at it and ask some questions But we would put it up immediately upon understanding Uh, what the earth economics process as far as I can see is Is a little complicated But we absolutely are going to put it up so people can see it sooner or later. Yeah. Oh, yeah, absolutely Absolutely and john storage as well Okay, and his is at the end of the month. Okay, and those are related to the parcels that were identified in open space My remembrance is the top 20 the top 20 Okay, thank you um, number nine then um Determined actions and schedule follow-up meeting for additional work Do are you taking that? Sure. I'll start it maybe In preparing for this evening, uh, the commission did sort of a a dry run on some of this about two weeks ago and the Feeling was that there's a lot in here. Um, and so the commission recommended that The not to try to put 10 pounds of flour in a five pound bag and do everything in one shot And so there were a a few very important pieces that are not That that sort of complement the work that jessica presented tonight that um They're recommending have some follow-up. The first is jessica alluded to the arrowwood environmental habitat block assessment Lots of great information in there as part of their contract with us they Have any of the presentation and answer questions about how they came up with the methodology The commission is recommending this that they do that and if council is interested in having that be To both both groups because as proposed by the commission. It's a pretty foundational element of future regulations And then secondly as jessica said, um, there are a whole slew of of there There's areas from the open space reports that are That are not proposed to be part of the land development regulations, but there are other tools For those parcels that Council can begin to engage in and what how you want to go about doing that Whether you want to involve the planning commission or not It's really up to you with that, but there there's a follow-on discussion for you about one of the tools available to you for the remaining portions of those 25 parcels Do you have a time frame of when you would like to meet with us to Um Identify that well, you know, pretty heavy schedule. It seems going forward, you know, it's a good question because I guess I And it's actually written here On our part of the economic assessment I'm not sure if that means to be available first to kind of be part of that conversation or not and I mean, I think that's maybe separated Um That was valuing the natural capital Of 20 parcels I guess I'm I'm not clear on if we need to wait for that to have one one discussion about all of it or if we could Talk over the parts we have now, which is the arrow wood environmental and the open space and kind of Non ldr portions of the open space and maybe there's some tdr report recommendations that aren't necessarily in our preview I don't know if you want to get into that too doesn't the economic assessment have more to do with city council decisions and not Regulatory it feels to me like that's not That's not our It'd be nice if we did it in the short term so that we can Wrap up some of our work. Okay, so certainly the arrow wood we would recommend as soon as possible because For that timeline There's no weeks to be lost and so if there's feedback on that report, okay ASAP Yeah, I agree. I think monica's right about the application of the economic report Timeline's aggressive. I would encourage you to do to move this along Okay, next week Well, we have a Council meeting next monday And then what's the next day? Tuesday, Tuesday, excuse me Monday is a president's day One of the not even one of the presidents, right? Isn't it just the day? It's any for all the presidents So our agenda potentially could we talk about that on the 17th? I think it is It would be the 18 because the monday is the 17th Okay Kevin, what do you 18th is tuesday? Yeah. Yeah. Are you saying do it that night? Well, they want to sort of move on it pretty quickly. I downloaded it today and read part of it anyway. I think it right now Probably getting out about nine o'clock on two on tuesday in your in your regular meeting Well, that's pretty early for us The next tuesday that's our meeting. That's our meeting. It would be great to have feedback You could do 18th. So you're saying 18th will be good. Yes, we can follow up on the 21st Okay, why don't we plan on that we can include it in the agenda and With 18th 45 minutes or I don't know how long we'll take Maybe we could trim the rest of the stuff in the 18th back a little bit Okay What is not available Okay Well, if I'm 25th or 28th 21st is a friday, but I can come 23rd is a sunday. They can come to our planning commission Can we come to their planning commission meeting on the 25th? What date? Give it And you've got a meeting on the 25th You're not available. So 25th through the 28th 28th through the 28th Well, can we work on this offline and not do it in a public setting to find a date? Well, as long as we know that was the next step of having that meeting with you to do that Okay, we will find a time. Good. Okay. Thank you Thank you Okay, moving on to item 10 consider and possibly approve extending interim zoning in those areas For a three month period although I think we're really focusing on the PUDs main focus Tom so I'm just going to make my little statements on this So I didn't I'm just going to jump to the punch here because we get all out of here An reasonable hour, but I didn't vote for iz so I'm not going to vote to continue it And I just want the voters to know why so what my rationale is I'm just I'm not convinced that there will be a development scramble The arguments I've heard tonight that I haven't seen it The the statement that because there were two applications that came in just before iz which inspired iz that That doesn't tell me that or prove to me that there's going to be a scramble when it ends And everything you're doing. I love what you're doing with the PUDs. This makes a lot of sense I support the PUDs. I just I don't think iz then is necessary nor is it now So I could I would not vote to extend it I'm also concerned with the possible paths that these non ldr approaches for conservation can go it could go I would echo frank copeman's statements The confiscatory taking I have no reason to believe that we're definitely going to go down that path I'm just hearing people call for it So it's important to know that we calibrate expectations with the path that the council can and can't take And I personally am not going to support any type of taking of personal assets because there are lawsuits that will come to that And I I hear stewarding the resources of this city. So I'm sensitive to those concerns And I I feel like it's important for the voters to hear that that that's something that I'm very cautious of And then lastly, I'm just really concerned that this process has not been balanced in the consideration of all of our competing interests So I think it's been very important and focused on open space And if you look at our comprehensive plan, we also are opportunity oriented and we also focus on affordability And so I just think those voices need to be heard as well And I I'm concerned as this goes forward that we're not weighing all of those different interests So I'm not going to vote to extend in terms only tonight because I don't think it was necessary to begin with And I just want to say that but I'm not trying to convince this council because the more I try to convince them The less convincing I am so that's just my statement and I'm going to be done Okay, I would just assure you That Tom Even if and I don't believe we are going down a path of confiscating people's land Um, it would always come before us for a vote So you would always be able to say I don't want this to happen And I think you probably have four other Counselors who would also say that's not the plan that isn't what we anticipate So, you know Going forward with IZ might get us to the point where there is a Positive or a purposeful Regulation or policy that we adopt around TDRs and all these other things That we could have public hearings about and you would have every opportunity to make your case And I I think we're all looking for something that really can work and meets Not one single camp's view, but really Where's the middle? Where can we find a way to? Balance all those competing needs in a way that works for this community Even though it won't please everyone fully in this community I mean we talk about affordable housing and I could If we had developers who were anxious to build 167 Units of affordable housing real affordable housing in this community I would not be standing in their way But that isn't what happens So I mean I think and I a big supporter of affordable housing I was throughout my legislative career and I am now But I I just don't see I don't buy that IZ is preventing affordable housing from being built Because the housing that is being built has if it has any affordable Component it's a pretty slim Job and it's so it's not meeting the needs We're building housing potential But we're not building affordable housing to the extent that This county needs so I I think that's Yes, and that we lost in fact, I don't know if you Mentioned 167 because that's the number of homes that we lost due to the airport Taking may I use that word? And it is also housing that is irreplaceable that is when the 3.3 vacancy rate Felt below 2% that was in 2017 because 100 homes were demolished that year So I just want that to be clear that IZ is not the reason why we're below 2% vacancy rate And I also want to say that this council Added affordable housing not to IZ But to this Process when the affordable housing committee came before this council asking us to look at transit areas Since that is something that we left open for development And I thought the planning commission was going to delegate that to the ccrpc and lo and behold you've been spending You know a lot of time on and making a very comprehensive Plan and which we just received Last week so affordable housing has definitely Not been forgotten here over all these months and and that I see is a real testament to us trying to You know meet these Complementary goals of our comprehensive plan So I just wanted to say that Hey, Tim so, I mean I just want to say I support extending the interim zoning for another 90 days I was A week ago I was going to come in here and not vote to extend it but Because of the plan that was presented by jessica jessica for the planning commission I just want to remind people that we went into IZ The three main things we were looking for was this plan All right was the PUD master plan subdivision changes right to encourage Smarter use of land that need to be better conserved All right, and that was my number one priority for going into IZ Second thing was a TDR analysis because nobody understood how the TDR system worked We had a really good report and now we have some recommendations I don't know if those will be able to be put into the LDRs before we come out of IZ or not I'm not sure that matters. We could probably all argue about that The third thing was a very comprehensive analysis of our remaining open space So that we could probably work together as a city to understand what our options were for conserving them That could be outright purchase working with the land trusts in the state other conservation agencies And even the landowners themselves because some of them are conservation minded in the first place And they might even feel like putting that land in some kind of conversations themselves So we don't have a hundred million right now to go conserve all that land unless you want to add it to the 209 million dollars across the street in which case and your tax is going to go up $2,500 for a $302,000 house over the next 30 years So that's not going to happen, but there are a lot of other options out And as far as housing starts Okay, let me review for you our grand list grew by 1% last year Sider mill has all of its foundations in the ground and they're framed or they're getting ready to be framed South Village phase three is ongoing and still building and so is phase two Rye is ongoing and is still putting in foundations Hillside farm is building now city center Added two four-story buildings worth of affordable housing senior center and affordable Don't tell us we're not doing anything about housing and don't tell me that is to stop any Sider mill two is through active active 50 and they're ready to go for financing That's over 100 units granted. It's not affordable right But the point is is that there is a lot of housing that is either in the ground planned or ready to go And I haven't even talked about spear meadows and dorset meadows, which mr. Seth knows very well about So my point is that I will vote to extend because I want to see this Pud plan get put into the ldr's before we get out of izi because it's the best way To do a smart reorganization of how we develop those remaining properties where there are people that have land that want to sell them and develop Okay, that's Well, yeah, can I go can I go before you? Yes, we'll get to your turn again Yes But I but I haven't been sitting here as long as you have I don't have bill done. Well, I'm not going to be as eloquent as you that was pretty darn good but uh I don't know I think I want to say Taking of land is never going to happen. And I don't know I don't I don't call what prompted you to bring that up. But that's that's that's Not going to happen. We don't need to talk about just say though We've received about as council 30 emails where residents are asking us to do that. So that's where it's coming from I didn't read I didn't so I'll stop there. But that's where it's coming from I just want to reassure folks that that would never happen as long as this council is sitting where this council is sitting Um, and but I'd like to say I'm not overjoyed with the timeline the planning commission Um has in mind because I had hoped it'd be quicker than that I kind of run out of patience on occasion, but I totally appreciate the hard work that the planning commission has done And they've tackled an extremely difficult project They have uh, they've created opportunities To which which have to be fine tuned. It's still a work in progress But they've created opportunities to both develop and conserve with the best possible outcomes And the planning commission is done in in michael's words a very large tackle very large and challenging project That is just not quite done yet. And I think it's only appropriate the project be completed My perception based on on what I've seen what I've learned and my experience is the development will proceed with better information When their work is complete and better information Always leads to better outcomes for all parties involved And and so I'm not concerned that they're going to be losers here. I think everybody's going to be a winner And um, and we need to wait to get that that work done because the outcome is going to be best for everyone um, and and I do sure I hope you can complete that in 135 days and um To put a touch of humor at the end of this 135 days all of interim zoning We're still going to have something in place a whole lot faster than the city of burlington still in that hole in the middle of the city That's for sure So are you supporting a three month extension or a hundred and can we go 130? Well, they said they needed 135 days Why don't we just go 135 days? Can we go three months? I don't know what we're allowed to I don't know what we're allowed to do I think you're the way you didn't you adopted the original bylaw with every three months Okay, so I would propose that we do three months And then get another report with a status readout from the planning commission in some form or another About where you are and where you think you are in your schedule. Yeah, that's fine. Thank goodness So do we have yes? I just want to pick up on something that uh council Which is priority one PUD Yeah The planning commission has worked on the PUD project for four years and We have Paul Conner and caffeine La Rose and one consultant To do all this work There's no way in hell They can get it done. They need help. They're understaffed They don't have The technical expertise that they can rely on other consultants There's just not enough Manpower to get this done to get both of those items done in 90 days So I'm making a plea to the council help them We hear you So I would entertain a motion to extend IZ for three months Second Okay, is there any further discussion? All in favor signify by saying I I those opposed Okay, it passes four to one. Thank you very much Is there any other business to ask the question? Yes, because Michael brought up a point. They need extra assistance If they were able to hire somebody or some bodies for a short duration of time to provide that extra Assistance for specific projects. Would that speed you up or is that impractical at this point? I'm just asking because then my next question if you said yes I had asked Kevin if we can probably lose any money from somewhere to to help that process We're still in session. So would you please leave quietly? So David, I think what I I think what it could do is it could help to advance That's why that had a lot of stuff about what to evaluate with tdrs That would certainly help advance that the pods is basically drafting at this point So on the tdr piece If if there was I can't hear you I know that would it be better to tackle it sooner or doesn't matter I don't I think we need help Well, we have I mean, it's important to know there is an existing tdr program in existence today Whether or not it's the best plan we could have Is another question that the committee has addressed but the reality is you have a tdr program Which will go back to the supreme court probably It may it may but we think that it may changes in the tdr program that can withstand Congress or a constitutional challenge that being said Program needs to be But as it relates to the priority between the pd Project and the tdr project, I think you know the answer to that question with the pd so Paul's looking at them and seeing Yeah So is there any other business all right, so I would retain a motion to adjourn all in favor