re. I'm supportive of Ensuring that there's an analysis of the impact on street parking and that that's taken into account But I don't think it's going if this language like this Is going to make it impossible to be useful. So some mitigating language like maybe Um, uh and to demonstrate that the pros proposal has Um, analyze the impact analyze and minimize The impact on street parking What if it just said would not impact street parking if feasible? I don't think that's quite worked because I I I agree with the goal um, but I feel like, um It's important and I think claire put it, um, really well in technical language But I I feel like we we want it to be Um analyzed we want it to be taken into account um, but uh A hard stop like that is going to make it hard to move forward. Yeah, claire. Do you have an idea on language? Yeah, well my other note with her would be also I like the point about to maybe analyze and And present to the decision-making body and sarah. They don't remember what level of review this is here But I think that there are some cases that you will Accept you may accept that there will be On street parking issues and that may be that you're getting a certain type of housing or certain type of project That is worse to trade off Having some potential spillover and it may be 100 affordable housing or some other supportive type housing that you want to get and so I think Acknowledging that you can analyze it and and have that information Be made available with the intent that it's minimized But leaving it open for your decision-making So I like that language. I'm just adding this. This is this would be my suggestion here in purple I don't know if uh, uh, where you where you want to go. I can take notes on whatever you want to do Uh, this this language we flag is something that I can support Is that it Seconded it Um, I did Sorry question. Oh, I oh, sorry, and I am I needed Um, I think I guess um So that I guess my question is is that you what you're trying to accomplish is is that you you want to You you want an analysis Is I guess is the analysis not required or just I mean because I say may be required So it doesn't mean that it would actually be required in all cases. Is that Is it is true? And Okay, go ahead Claire Yeah, I can assist you on that. So what we're we're going to make a matrix for this It's going to be a TDM matrix and it is going to have Reduction factors associated with it. So previously in our code We had you could get a 10 percent reduction in parking if you Substitute car parking with bike parking and a 10 percent reduction if you did TDM measures Unqualified what they were and a 10 percent reduction if you did Share the cooperative parking there. So we're going to have it be More mimics to the recent SD 743 policy language that council adopted which uses capillar guidelines Which are research-based to the amount of reduction that you can actually get as a result of TDM measures Which is a really technical way to say that many of these things can be measured And if something else is proposed that can't be measured that would be a time when we may pull in this analysis here If it's something that we don't already have an established standard on how much we would reduce So if someone comes in and they're proposing something really innovative or different that we haven't contemplated before I would love to pull in an outside expert that has experience in that to say Here's the amount of reduction that we can give but it would be more specific It would be more the exception than the rule is how I see this working out Okay, so I guess what I'm the way I understand that then is that this is kind of a Like you said it's more the exception than the rule and And just by the virtue of their analysis being done that's going to be reviewed by the decision making party full body and They can make decisions about Whether it meets the needs or the goals or or if it has impact So I don't feel like we need this additional language So you're not willing to accept that amendment? No, I don't I don't think it's necessary Okay, um Any other comments the motion is added to just support the staff recommendation. Are there any other commissioner comments? Yes commissioner greenberg You're muted commissioner greenberg. You're muted. I feel like there's a couple of different meetings that I have system that we're today Um, I appreciate what the transportation planners have been doing and I feel like We are entering into a new era where there are going we can't always anticipate you know the potential of forms of ride sharing and of You know van pooling and other alternative transportation approaches um, the younger generation is Very pro transit in a way that the older generation was not So, um, I think we should be open to that and encouraging that in every way we can and so Having some kind of um, I agree with the spirit of where we're going here That having a sixth hard stop on impact on street parking is not taking into consideration these potential future approaches and that we shouldn't be afraid of that and that things can change and that it can be in a good direction here and Even while we need to be aware of different parts of town And I do hear this the concern about you know the distinction between places that have infrastructure on the downtown versus areas that that don't as much and so And I think that's something that the transportation planners are really taking into consideration here And through the staff report By support any other comment from commissioners Well, I'm not going to support the motion. Um, I don't uh Consider myself as someone who can predict the future one way or the other Unlike loads of other people when I was in graduate school I was told we'd have driverless cars within 10 years And so, you know Who knows what's going to happen next and when young people get older young people may not Older people may have values for people Have an attraction you know have uh, uh a need and uh Been a commitment to their uh, their mode of transportation the way they get around I my Fine objection to this That nor the quality of life in neighborhoods And I'm very unfortunate direction for the city to be going in and it's both for additional Um friction opposition And you know when the when Pro housing people like to complain about the nimbies Well people in neighborhoods Oftentimes what they're really worried about is The quality of life based on how it is how able they are to get around their neighborhoods. So I think this is Uh Most of this I could go along with But the overall philosophy I don't agree with and so I'm going to vote no So let's have a roll call vote Mr conway Yes Dawson Yeah Greenberg Yeah Nielsen I know That is the motion passes six to one Um And we would now we will now move on to the next item Um Can I ask the clerk whether there are people waiting to speak to this item? The same speaker that spoke to the last item had uh raised their hand again Um, I don't know if you're moving on to the new item. You've just disposed of that one But somebody else just raised their hand You talk about the parking ordinance item Uh, well, you just you just wrapped that up. So um as you did that someone just raised their hand So I don't know how you want to proceed with that Well, we're done with the parking ordinance item. I'm afraid. Um, the since the commission has already acted on it They may be waiting for the next one chair. I'm not sure We can find out when you get there Okay, well, we're kind of here and um Um, we could have a whole staff report, but I have a uh a fundamental brown act concerned with the uh public of this item um, it does not mention the The essential gutting of the slope regulations Is not this is not a cleanup ordinance. This is an ordinance that's fundamentally changing out the city slope regulations It's changing, um the landscape and open space requirements for the The the adu ordinance There are a number of changes in this Proposal that I don't think in any way shape or form could be justified as cleanup and I I We can have the public we can have the staff report We can have the public hearing, but I think that the way this ordinance is noticed to the public Is fundamentally a violation of the brown act. There's no way that a member of the public reading this notice Could know that uh that the slope regulations are going to be so fundamentally would be so fundamentally I also think there's significant secret issues the staff report talks about the fact that the general plan and its eir covered everything I don't think the general plan covered removing the restriction on development on slopes over 50 So I I I think that there are some serious problems here But my basic problem is the the brown act one that we're We would be going forward with a with an ordinance that makes major changes to the zoning To vary zoning ordinance provisions without being clear about what those changes are so I I I I could open the public hearing um And hear from the public and we could get a staff report, but I think there really are Brown act issues here that would and this is particularly the case because The the slope regulations the way the slope regulations as I understand that are proposed to change It would essentially overturn and make moot lost city Lost on regarding a development on ocean street extension without any notice to the people in that area who What that what that lawsuit so I think it there are really legal legal problems I don't know whether staff wants to respond to those Um But I really am basically I really think this item should be continued for re noticing in a way that Clarifies what's being proposed Um, I sure I can speak to that chair um And I would agree that as far as the the slope the slope discussion goes That could that word could have specifically been mentioned in the notice However, we did include the specific section in that notice So we do feel that it's it's covered from from a legal standpoint Um, and in terms of the slope discussion as well The changes were bringing forward A number of them are goals in the in the general plan So we do feel like There there is there is some reasoning for these to be included Uh as part of the cleanup items um we have Sam hasher here as well our senior planner who could also Provide some more input on on why those are specifically cleanup items as well If you need further comment on that um But if if you would like to move forward with the rest of the the presentation Uh, the rest of the the work outside of the slope Uh, we could also move forward with that too Well, it's not a it's not a pertinent item. So, uh, if that needs to be continued that's certainly Up to you From my perspective, I think it's very ironic where I'm told I can't Submit in writing items for public To the public conversation correspondence agenda before a meeting In writing without violating the brown act But somehow it's adequate public notice to quote a code section Assuming that members of the public would understand what that code section is I don't think that's the intent of the brown act Uh, in terms of providing adequate public notice so If the commission is supportive and the staff is supportive I'd be willing to move forward with the rest of it if if uh The proposed changes to the slope regulations were continued And we'd come back at a At a subsequent Meeting commissioner Conway Chair I appreciate your thoughtfulness on it I'd like to receive a staff recommendation on the whole thing and have this conversation Um, after we've heard the staff recommendation About uh, whether we were withhold the slope modification But I'd like to hear the staff presentation Any other commissioners It's getting a little late, but I'm willing to do that commissioner Conway. I mean dorsen Yeah, I I would just like to um echo what chair Schifrin said, you know, I I have experience with Regulatory packages and in Sacramento and when the language cleanup is used That's usually specifically to add precision to an existing ordinance So say you have a gps boundary to something you add some Additional digits to the precision of that this is There's certainly with the slope, but I feel like there there's some fundamental changes In the way that we do things that isn't just removing um No longer valid parts of the ordinances and so, um, I also feel like there This was not noticed properly for for the public to actually Understand that there were are some substantive changes in here. So, um, I would propose that we just continue Certainly the slope, but honestly, I think the whole thing um, this is Katherine Donovan the senior planner with the advanced planning division and Matt did address the notice that I also want to mention that We sent the notice to our city attorney for review and He told us that We had specifically entered the Chapters that we were revising that that was adequate notice unbelievable Any other commissioners? I want to weigh in I don't know if anybody wants a motion to continue this or we've got our recommendation from commission at Conway to Get a staff report commission in Nielsen. Did you want to add something? Yeah, I just would I think it's appropriate for us to have a staff report on us I don't think we should be doing anything before we have a staff report If there's no objections, then let's have a staff report Okay, let me share my screen with you. I apologize my Computer is a little slow here or possibly a lot slow. Here we go. Okay. Can you hear me? My phone is making strange noises. Yeah, so we can hear you Cleanup ordinance amendment So why a cleanup ordinance? We do these ordinances periodically And unlike Commissioner Dawson who was describing the definition That the state used for cleanup We include a variety of things in our cleanup ordinances Um, and actually a prime example happened earlier today when Chair Schifrin Noted that there was not a definition for the affordable rent for moderate income household That's the kind of thing that makes it into this ordinance and I actually made a note of that And it will come to our next cleanup ordinance Um, so in this ordinance in particular um, we have a number of items Some of which will improve and streamline our development processes We also have Ordinances that clarify confusing or abbreviated language We're removing redundant sections of ordinances providing internal consistency in one area of the Um ordinance with another and also, um, bringing it into consistency with state law We're updating updated descriptions concepts and regulations Um, and also addressing new uses technology and ways of life And improving the ordinance to better meet the needs of the city's residents so Here are some examples of improving the process um, we currently Require a design permit for any structure or addition and we're proposing to um, remove that to make an exception For structures that are additions that are less than 120 square feet And we chose that number because that's the number If you have it, um, if you're building a structure that's less than 120 square feet And does not have electricity or plumbing Um, it does not require a building permit. It seems like a good threshold for Not requiring a design permit Um, we're also proposing to reduce the number of findings for design permits We currently have 16 findings to make for design permits And for each project that comes through the planners have to describe Why This how this project meets those standards. It's typically communities have four or five Design findings that that need to be made you can imagine this is Three to four times the number that is normal there we're also Removing the slope modification permit I'm using a combative combination of geotechnical reports and design permits Instead, okay, I'm sorry. This is going so slow. I'm going to Stafford you need me to share? from my computer Yeah, I think so. I just it's frozen for me. Let me see if I can stop sharing I can't even stop sharing I'm sorry. My computer is frozen at this point Okay, Matt, if you could Pull that up for me that would be great. Just been over it. This is the next one Okay, um, we also have clarification examples. Um, they include For our outdoor storage display and sale of merchandise We simply moved other similar activities which was sort of in the middle of the list of things that you could do to the end of the list We also clarified what is included in the lot coverage Calculations for large homes and single-family areas And we moved all the sign definitions From the definition section of the code and from the downtown sign section of the code Into the general definition in the sign ordinance Next slide Consistency examples include um, there is a list of public hearing requirements What what type of uh projects need a public hearing and there's also a table that shows um, the decision-making body with final authority for those projects And we are updating those both to reflect the changes in That other changes that were made in the ordinance but also because There were some Areas where those two things were inconsistent with other sections of the code already We're also updating the density bonus section To conform to the requirements of state law And that includes We currently require a pro forma um for Some inclusionary uh requirements and they State law state density bonus law says um, that you cannot require a um a report that would not otherwise Be provided by the developer and um So what we did was we said, uh A pro forma or other reasonable documentation, which is the term of art that's used in the density bonus statement density bonus law another section of the density bonus Law that we updated was um There are times when there is not a specific um An explicit that I should say density in either the um general plan or the zoning ordinance for a particular district and so we have um been using what we call an implied density Which is based on the development standards for the property um And the way the way we've been using it is when uh developer comes in with a project We calculate um The density of that specific project um, and then based the density on the actual Based the density bonus on the actual density um also uh require that the average Size of the unit be for the density bonus unit be The same as the average size for the non-density bonus Next slide These are some examples of improvements that we're making with this ordinance um, we currently Restrict the amount of opens rooftop open space that can be counted toward the usable open space calculation um to 25 percent and Since if you actually have a usable rooftop garden um That that is really High-quality open space and so we're removing that 25 percent restriction um We're also setting a limit on the amount of impervious surface allowed in the front setback um, we we have a limit on the amount of uh the Percent that the driveway can cover but this would um Compliment that by allowing just um 10 percent more for any other kind of Needle walkway or whatever And and leave 50 percent to be non-paved And another improvement is that we are expanding the closing time for cannabis retailers from 9 p.m. To 10 p.m. And this was a along with a number of other items that went before council um for direction last September and at the time we had said we would bring it back um in the late spring given our The schedule of what we had on our plate and then uh carnivine at coronavirus interfered and Delayed and we're just bringing it back now Next slide Other things we're doing in this ordinance are are updating things um our home occupation regulations are Quite outdated they they predate people Working from home and basically we're talking about people doing things like you know crafts from their home so we've Updated that quite a bit particularly around The difference between working from home when you're actually an employee of a business and also Where we would allow One employee at the home who does not live there, which is is new and we would also we are also Increasing the number of trips that would be allowed Because this when the the trips were originally set that was Pre online ordering So that has changed the world quite a bit another example of updates Are that we've added some new definitions including a definition of e-bike Of inoperable vehicle and of motor vehicle the the second The last two are are not new concepts, but they were never defined in our code before Next slide. I'm sorry. You're probably seeing these slides a lot more quickly than I am um, so I'm sorry if there's a long delay before I Address what's on the screen Um, do you want me to cover the slide? Do you have a captain? I got I think that's finally coming up So Since the packet was delivered to you we have a couple of updates that we wanted to make in the staff report We talked about the community meeting and said that there were no comments on this item and that was actually incorrect There were a number of comments. They included Reducing suggestion to reduce the minimum lot size for our one five districts we have A large number of substandard lots and the suggestion was if we lowered the lot size That that would reduce the number of substandard lots in the city um That we also had a suggestion to change the large house definition To be based on the floor area ratio rather than the square footage And those two items we we both we we thought both of them had A lot of merit, but We needed more time to consider the the implications and to to talk about how we would go about doing that before we brought them before Forward so they didn't make it into this This version or this this ordinance um, a third comment was also that That relocation assistant discourages improvement um and our city council has has Indicated that they strongly support relocation assistant Um, so we did not make any changes based on on that format And then the final comment was a suggestion to allow one employee for home occupation And we all thought that was a good idea and it was pretty easy to do so we included that in this The in this ordinance Another comment we received an email today after about 5 30 this evening and that was Too late for our admin staff to include it in the packet But I can give you a high level summary of of the content um This was from ellen aldrich um And she was concerned about the notice not saying modifications to slope regulations and You know as it was discussed The the note the Notice was general and included some things that did not include everything um And we could have included that and Perhaps should have and probably will for our city council Notice she also desired more rationale for the proposed changes Which we can discuss In more detail and she um requested information on various On various changes, which um, I don't have the specific information about that And she requested that we um continue that item Saying that it isn't urgent although I would not say that it's urgent. We do have a couple of code cases That this item relates to and I know of at least Two people who two of our current planners have told me that they have development projects That could be affected by this But it's not You know, it's nothing that a week A one meeting delay or possibly two meeting delay would Have a significant impact on And I believe that was it on that note on that And then finally As I mentioned in the staff report at the As we were getting ready to put the packet out We realized that Someone noticed that there had that there had been changes in state regulations related to large family daycare centers and It would it's a it's a relatively simple change The changes that it previously we Had to follow the same for the large family daycare centers We could require an administrative use permit and the changes now that they need to be Allowed by right in any district that allows housing And as you may know, we have I think nine districts that are residential districts and then Four or five other commercial districts that also allow residential. So it was just too many changes to Include in this ordinance at that late date Next slide and then After we had put out the packet the planning the director deputy director and the principal planners and I had a zoom conference about the slope or slope regulations and Came up with additional amendments or revisions to the amendments we'd already made And the revisions would comply with sp 330 which is the housing accountability act They would clarify When a design permit is required And we transferred the findings from the slope permit Flip modification permit into the design permit because we had originally Um included a finding that we had written specifically for the slope regulations, but sp 330 does not allow any new Um subjective standards To be or subjective findings to be included after january 1st of 2020 However, you can continue to use existing subjective standards. So we deleted The standard we had written for the ordinance and brought the old findings back we also Updated the stormwater conditions lightly based on recommendations from our stormwater manager We also further clarified projects that are exempt from a design permit And we removed the unbuildable lot condition because there's a Condition in the subdivision chapter that covers that that issue Next slide. Um, so I wrote I know this is a very long recommendation but I wrote it out because it would include the Including the revisions related to large family daycare centers and the new revisions to the slope regulations provided on september 17th 2020. Um, so If uh, you Decide to delay the slope regulations, then we would leave that section out We hope that we can go forward with the large family daycare center Uh changes because there's pretty um It's just bringing it into compliance with state law. We wouldn't be making any other changes And I do just want to reiterate here um, if if funding commission chooses to move forward with The recommendation or any portions of it Uh, we'll consider those comments and and improve upon Um, our public noticing for those for when those uh recommended items go to council I'd be happy to take any questions. We we talked about Um, if there are a lot of questions about many different sections of the ordinance How how best we might address this? Um But I don't know I don't know how you would like to do this. We can bring up each ordinance and go through things one by one We can bring up the Summary sheet and look at individual sections um, whatever Whatever you'd like to whichever way you'd like to do it Does that include the staff report? That includes the staff report. Okay. Thank you very much. Um I guess uh, my approach would be to Go around and have commissioners. I have lots of questions Myself think there's a lot that's good here um Clarify I think or if I'm right is uh planning commission subject to the brown act I'm sorry. Can you say that again? Is the planning subject for the brown act? Yes So Is it sufficient just to clear up the noticing requirements at the council when they were not appropriate at the planning commission? Just wanted to well according to According to our city attorney The noticing was was fine um, if you would prefer to delay the public hearing and Require re noticing we can do that um Given the length of the notice and the amount of time it takes to get in the paper That would probably mean it would go In the second meeting of october Well, I think you know that the commission does have the responsibility to follow the brown act and I respectfully disagree with the city attorney that Mentioning a code section Provides the public with proper notice of what the commission is going to be talking about but that's um up to the rest of the commission Or a majority of the commission anyway, and if we want to um Take question go through a normal procedure Take questions hear from the public and then discuss what we're going to do That's fine by me. Does anybody want to do anything different? So why don't we start with commissioner questions for staff? The commissioners have questions who would like to start Yes commissioner conway This is actually very minor in light of the whole thing. I just wanted clarification about the updates to the large family uh daycare um, I was just a little confused Catherine um, you're saying that they They came late, but you're proposing to include Those check those changes for consistency And the way that you're proposing noticing them covered we're covered there going to the city council Or could you clarify how how you're being handled how you handle, you know, you're right that we We should bring those back later because they would not be covered in The the notice Okay So that's a piece that so if if we are pulling apart We can we we could send a significant amount of this to council Potentially, but um, we have we may have some pieces that need revisiting is that an Awkward or excessively expensive way to handle this um your opinion Yeah, it's a little awkward, but it I would I would love to divide this up and be able to Take these steps forward and if there are um, particularly this the slopes and the family daycare Um, could come back that would be fine. I mean we we got slope changes to you very late um And we're much happier with the end result, but we realized that you didn't have much time to look at it Well, I'm just cognizant of the um expense to the city And I just I just wanted to know The impact of of how we decide things so I'd look for advice on that But I would be if that isn't awkward I would be comfortable with that And thanks for clarifying that about childcare. I couldn't quite wrap my head around it And I'd like to hear from other commissioners Well, since nobody's popping up I'll go through mine since I have a number of them In terms of internal consistency Am I interested directly that the proposal is to reduce the public hearing requirements and changing the review by body For major modifications to a project Um, and for a major modification, there would only be requirement for a zoning Uh, as administrative decision by the zoning administrator. Am I understanding that correctly? Um Let me I should also admit that I did not make all of these changes myself This was definitely a group effort and I am I'm just the shepherd on some of these so I need to look up some of the Specific well again, one of the problems is the staff report doesn't have page numbers So it's you know, I could refer you to exactly where it is But take me an hour to find out or I actually I found it, but I don't it's I don't give me the code section in page Um of the staff report where it's under internal consistency consistency with state regulations I can answer that for you chair shifrin if if you want to sure um, and and sam Hasher at our principal planner and current planning can chime in if if I'm getting any of this wrong because I know she was Working on a number of these things, but uh that Change would occur if the original hearing or if the original decision-making body was the zoning administrator It would not occur if the original decision-making body was The planning commission then it would go back to the planning commission. Did I gather that correctly sam? That was my recollection Yes, that's correct. So, um, this really was you know by them The original code section required that I believe it requires that all of them went to a public hearing We really wanted to make sure that it went back to a public hearing if it was heard by it was heard If it was heard in the original permit was heard in a public hearing But we didn't want to require every modification to go back to a public public hearing if it wasn't warranted So or a major modification of a project that was approved by the zoning administrator it would But what the code said I think is that it would be approved by the zea administratively and It was unclear to me one Does that mean it wouldn't be at one of the zea's public hearings and two Would that administrative approval be appealable? um What's your the answer to your second question is that yes the approval would be appealable The administrative review would be appealable. Um, that was your first question Whether it would be a public hearing at the zea or whether somehow it would be some other administrative Action on his part or her part Um, so we have we have two things here We have minor modifications and we have major modifications and it sounds like you're referring to the major modifications Answer your question chair Yes, yes, if if this was approved by the zea and was coming back due to a modification of The streamlining in this would would then Make that an administrative approval by the zoning administrator That would not it would it would not be a public hearing correct How could there be public notice so someone could appeal it? Does that mean it's not appealable? That would mean that a major modification could be approved administratively with no Opportunity for the public to appeal it. I'm just trying to understand what the Consequences of the proposed changes would be Our administrative approvals are appealable, but you're correct that there is no public notice for that How would anybody know that the approval has been have been given or the administrative action had been taken Is there some Requirement of it or something that would allow the public to know about it And do we post those actions online? We have a list of the permits that we Have in process Are my our major modifications one of those that we post online Would be posted online and then somebody would have 10 days to Appeal it or how would that process work? I'm asking Sam that question. I'm not sure if it is We don't we don't now post those online, but right now major modifications all over require public hearings Even if the original approval was made administratively So if the original approval was administratively the original permit was an administratively approved and you wanted to do a major modification to that It would now require a public hearing We're proposing that it requires a public hearing if the original permit required a public hearing But if the original permit didn't require a public hearing then the major modification would also not require a public hearing Okay, so we have permits that are approved administratively with no public notice That's correct. Yes Okay, thank you for the clarification um, my next question has to do with calculate calculating densities when none are in the code and as I staff report is particularly true in the downtown that Process that the staff has been following has been It's now going to be codified In terms of it's been explained several times by the playing director. I will not try to repeat it. I think I understand it, but Am I understanding that correctly? Okay, there are a couple of changes in the ordinance the adu ordinance Based on an htd interpretation and there's a letter from the htd saying they agree with our Interpret they are changes They're conformed to their Their perspective what legal authority does the htd have to require the city to follow their interpretations are they are they identified in state law as having the ability to Require jurisdictions to conform to their their interpretations Well, they're generally the agency that Um implements land use And planning regulations and um this This arose when um There was a we were bringing this ordinance Saranoisey had updated our ordinance with the latest state regulation And we were bringing it to the coastal commission and there was a conflict between what what the Changes to the state regulations for adu For adu said and what the coastal commission wanted us to do and so htd became the Spokesperson for the Changes to the adu regulation and um Sam became Sarah became the ping-pong ball between the coastal commission and And htd I understand the problem. There are a number of these laws that the coastal commission the coastal act Doesn't require that they be followed But what i'm really asking i'm not so concerned about The the change to allow larger adu's based on the htd interpretation But i am concerned about the change that would eliminate all open space and landscaping requirements um, and in the ordinance there are two um two sentences one sentence says You know Some kind of reasonable open space and landscaping should be provided the second sentence says And the private the neighbor neighbor privacy should be considered I could see why the second second section Sentence isn't really consistent with the state law, but i don't see why All open space and landscaping requirements have to be taken out. Um, and so I'm just wondering whether if the city decided that well, we want to keep in the first sentence Is that would that be considered a violation of state law? Or you know could could htd say no, you're not allowed to do that It's unclear what their I know what their role is in the housing element And but i'm not i'm not aware of what their role is as the implementer of the adu adu law whether they're they can provide guidelines and Um suggestions or whether their word is essentially like the sequel guidelines their word is law So do you have the answer to that what their role is? So there is a statement in the statute that uh some of the recent adu statutes that speaks to hcd actually reviewing local jurisdictions ordinances for consistency with state law You know sarah noisy is Our specialist on that and she'll be on in just a second. She can speak to the uh landscaping question specifically unless um Matt sounds like you know, he may have something to add to that as well Yeah, not not on the landscaping specifically. I think sarah would have to address that But but I do know there there is quite a bit of communication between her and Hcd to conform to the requirements My question is really a legal question, but I am just you know, I'll wait for Sarah to get on the line too. Yeah, we can jump back to that topic in just a minute if you don't mind chair shifrin not at all. Um, I Think the relocation assistance changes are really excellent and one of the staff for including those Um my my biggest Well, I'll leave the I'll leave my slope regulation concerns for a moment on page nine of the coastal zone ordinance This is a numbers Under design permit standards While non residential projects must be compatible with and not adversely affect the degrade the surrounding neighborhood This isn't true for residential projects which which need to only need to comply with objective standards um Couldn't some of those non residential Standards be converted. Is that going to be some of the could that be looked at and as part of the contract for objective standards to Deal with those kinds of issues. It just seems kind of arbitrary that a non residential Um, uh, project can't degrade or adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood But uh, a residential project can I think somehow that It makes sense to try to Integrate those in some meaningful way And we originally had it that it was just projects development projects, but um Um That you're exactly right. It was the um subjective standards issue and so we divided it out and We will be doing our best with our with our objective standard process to Include that kind of concept But um, you know, it will it's not an easy thing to put in objective language And looks like sarah's here. Maybe she can address your adu question Sorry, i'm just tuning in. What is the question we're trying to answer It's it's just really what regulatory role does hcd have in the implementation of the adu Law because um, um, I don't have a problem with the larger adu Fine But I did I was concerned with the open space and landscaping requirements, which i'm now trying to find um Because it seems to me that Could totally eliminate any concern about open space and landscaping Really Was not appropriate and so I there were two sentences in the Uh I could find um, and um, I was thinking that The eliminating the second span since which had to do with uh, neighborhood You know neighborhood Impact on neighbors. I could see that adu law wasn't really concerned about that But having some, um Recognition of the desirability of open space Part of an adu project Was seems reasonable to me So could you you remember what the code section is i'm trying to find it here You know what i'm talking about? I do. Yeah, I know what you're talking about. Um, so Oh, yeah, thanks captain. That's helpful. So, um, this is our first question Oh, sorry. Go ahead captain. What were you saying? I'm just saying it's on page 10 of the non cc Of non coastal commission ordinance Okay, and I've got the screen shared here Yeah, thank you for doing that Okay, great. So, um to answer your first question about the specifically what's the role of hcd They are the ones that determine whether an ordinance Uh complies with state law and the the statute the government code section that we are Implementing here contains language that states Any ordinance that does not comply with the statute is invalid and unenforceable Or words to that effect So Sarah, I lost your audio did others lose sarah's audio. I lost I did too Yeah, sarah, we can't hear you. We can't hear you now We lost your audio But what sarah was saying, I think a reminder That the state code Does indicate that If the ordinance is uh found to be inconsistent If our local ordinance is found to be inconsistent with state law Then the entire ordinance is nullified and we revert back to state law Requirements itself. And so we do have a lot of things in here that are in addition to or expand upon state law. And so Um, I I think that's really the the key Point to your question chair shifrin and uh, thanks sarah for for reminding us that we might have your audio back Let's see. Yeah, it's can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you Okay, so that was weird. I don't know what's going on. So, um answering your second question one of the key pieces that's also in the state law Is that this is a ministerial review? So ad use cannot be subject to any sort of discretionary review Anywhere outside of the coastal zone anywhere in the state of california Um, and it's debatable whether they can be subject to that within the coastal zone But let's not go down that rabbit hole. Um, so the concern of The of hcd was that some of the standards the way they were written in here They were subjective. They were subjective to the point where We might be, you know conditioning or denying a permit that really we are obligated to approve an issue so, um In the case of some of those privacy ones I did go ahead and try to just write some objective standards of like what does privacy mean? It means we're obscuring views. It means we're including, you know, transom windows instead of You know, just normal windows I wasn't able to come up with anything that really got at this piece about open space and landscaping also because This is this piece is also a bit more complicated now that ad use are allowed on multi-family property. So, um The way that open space and landscaping might be described and We might write some code language for a single family situation Might doesn't necessarily translate well to multi-family context and given the limitations on what we are able to regulate in terms of the size Um, I couldn't really find a way to make this standard Work in an objective way that would fit all the different contexts that it has to fit So if i'm understanding what you're saying with number six, um The the concern is that even just to say the site site plan shall provide open space And landscaping that are useful for both the accessory unit and the principal single family Welling just by itself would make it Discretionary because somebody could determine what's useful and what's not useful Right. They were concerned about that word useful and and who who decides what's useful It just seems very unfortunate that we're not able to have any That these units are not going to be required to have any open space or landscape Landscaping requirements. I don't know whether it's possible to stick in Something that would you know would be a performance standard. So it wouldn't be subject to um To a discretion action That's still recognized as desirable to have open space and landscaping in these developments But I think I understand what the answer to my question is So let me go to um The slope regulations I'm sorry. Yeah, this is the clerk We'll need a motion to extend the meeting to end at a time certain past 11 o'clock Our bylaws require our meeting adjourned at 11 unless you Entertain and pass a motion to adjourn at a time certain I'll move I'll move that we go until 11 15 the second a second Any discussion? I'm not going to do a roll call all in unless somebody votes no all in favor I I I received today um changes to what we had received previously on the the slope regulations and Um, I really have not had that much of a chance to read them over But it seemed to me that the the rationale for the changes if I understood the staff report is that Under spv 30 it really isn't appropriate to change standards that were in effect Before the law passed and now that uh after the law is that am I understanding that? directly that The objective standards that were there before the law um really Are the ones that we so that's that's why all the relationship to the Some of the the new language was put in um, right I'm just trying to understand what's going on. Um I don't I have fundamental sort of policy problems with the proposed changes in terms of weakening The city's long-standing environmental commitments. Um, I think that The Some of the changes are you know represent sort of bad public policy But because I really think that the sequa Review was inadequate Given how significant some of these are and my concern with the noticing um, if somebody would uh, if a commissioner would be willing to make a motion to Continue this the proposed changes for the slope regulations and the family daycare homes to a Later meeting That may save time and maybe we would actually be able to get out of here by 1115 So Commissioner Dawson Yeah, I would go ahead and move that we continue the family daycare and the slope regulations to a future meeting Is there a second? See commissioner max will raise the stand. Are you seconding it? Head yes Is a discussion on the motion to continue these Sorry, I will second To a subsequent meeting. So maybe we should have a roll call vote All in favor of the Let's have a roll call. I for support it. No for deny it Give me sir conway I Dawson I Greenberg Hi Nielsen Hi Salman different Hi, and um, I really I just realized that after complaining about the process Ad nauseam I screwed it up by not allowing the Not asking for public testimony after the report and our questions So, uh, I apologize to whoever's there from the public. We have Agreed to continue the slope regulations and the family daycare Item, but if there's anything on this item if the person is still there that they want to speak to they Three minutes, and I apologize for To do that Please identify yourself and you have three minutes go ahead We can't hear you Collar you're on the line Collar you're on the line. I'll be so happy when we're back at the chambers Because it's so trying Was that the only person who uh had their hand up to you now they're gone And now they must have woken up and then bailed To the ordinance There's nobody in the public who wants to speak So let's have discussion of the other Changes to the to the to the ordinance Yes, commissioner Dawson. Yeah, I um, I would just like to ask staff to consider in the future Um Just being a little bit more selective about what they bundled Having having a group to consider that has Things related to signs or removing parts of the code that are no longer valid Along with things that are going to fundamentally change kind of how Santa Cruz will Um, I I think it's really challenging as a commissioner And I can't imagine what it would be for the public to try to follow So I really have a hard time Uh with this package generally and I I'm not going to support it because I just feel like it's it's Even though there are parts within it that I agree with I think just the approach is the wrong way to go. Thank you Other commissioners commenting on the ordinance the The ordinance line goes before us commissioners spellman Yeah, I would just say yeah, I think it is a challenging approach albeit as someone who Works with this code, you know on a daily basis. It is refreshing to Have what are considered minor revisions that Make the code much more legible and Transparent to the public and users is a very useful process It is a little awkward. There is a lot of stuff here if you want to dig in and really understand it but I think It really is aside from a slope issue, which we're not going to discuss You know sort of baby steps to make this a more user-friendly document and So I I am in support of The staff recommendation for the rest of the items that we are that are before us tonight And I'm willing to to make a motion to Approve those and send them on to the council Is there a second to the motion? All right, we'll second Go ahead christian Okay Discussion on the motion any Other commissioners want to weigh in I'm kind of mixed between Commissioner Dawson and Commissioner Spellman Overall, I don't have big problems with it. I think there there are lots of improvements. I do some things differently The the I have problems with having districts that don't have density calculations in them I wish we didn't have to live with implied densities and we could let the public know what the Total densities might be but I know that's a losing battle at this point I would suggest in terms of the public noticing That rather than sticking all of this all of the changes in one paragraph It might be more helpful to the public to sort of break them out To say they're going to be changes to the tentative subdivision map to use permits design permits and So it's not so Overwhelming to to sort of read through a bunch of numbers and It just makes it more difficult. I think for the public to Have any sense of what's being proposed And then maybe having the staff report that would really deal with them on a Chapter by chapter basis, I think would be helpful in you know and having the members of the public be able to understand What's being done in terms of the the The changes I've raised some of my concerns my work my biggest concerns are with the slope regulations, which I'm you know, I appreciate Being continued so I'm willing to support the motion I think overall it's It's it's helpful It's not Exactly what I would like by any means, but many of the things are really what's being required by state law and You know, I can understand that the city's discretion is ever more reduced. Are there other Commissioners who would like to comment on the ordinary the motion on the floor Do we have a roll call vote a roll call vote, please Commissioner Conway I Dawson No Greenberg I'll take that as an eye even though I couldn't hear it. Hi. Sorry um neilson felman I different I The motion passes six to one We're now at information are there any information items? This is usually when the plane director tells us what's coming up next Yes, thank you Chair shifrin and commissioners We are expecting that the economic development department will have a presentation for you and for your consideration regarding the work And the associated er at your meeting on october 1st and then Later in october. We are currently anticipating on the 15th. We had one item that was continued today the section 8 items So that could be back on the 15th if the subcommittee is ready to present and then we're also expecting the housing matters Project, it's 120 single room occupancy Small units at the coral street site on the housing matters campus So that'll be in front of you likely on the 15th as well and There there may be some other things that become ready. We'll take another look at the the slope items as well and re-notice those as well as the the Large family daycare So that may be back for back in front of you on the 15th or it could get pushed out further as well But those are the things that are up in the immediate future Okay, are there any subcommittee or advisory body reports? I guess I should report that the technical advisory committee on the Coastal resilience project is going to be meeting sometime soon And it sounds like they're getting close to finishing up with their recommendations I'm lost to specifics. So if any of our if any of anybody from staff can let us Has any further information? Hopefully after that meeting I'll be able to give a more substantive report Items referred to future agendas referred from the from the planning director. Does anybody else have any items they'd like to Have on a future agenda Okay, seeing no, thank you all for your perseverance And a long meeting and we're adjourned So stay healthy Goodbye


A very good morning and warm welcome to all of you who've joined today. My name is Shivani and I'm joining from the lands of the Darug people. And with me today are my 21C student partner colleagues and Dr. Tai Peseta, who's the academic lead of the 21C project. And we're super glad to be here this morning. Before we dive into the keynote, it's so, so important that together we acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land, our First Nations people. I acknowledge that the campuses of Western Sydney University lie on the unceded lands of the Darug, Daruwal, Iora and the Wiradjuri peoples. We acknowledge them as traditional custodians of those lands and pay our respects to the elders past, present and emerging. We celebrate the diversity of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and their ongoing cultures alongside their stewardship of the lands and waters of New South Wales. These lands were never ceded and this was and always will be Aboriginal country. Today, I am here with Dr. Tai Peseta, Lily Rose Saliba and Jackson Edwards. And although you see just us and we are here today presenting to you, you must know that we're a part of a larger, very fun and very special team of student curriculum partners at Western. There are more of us, undergrads and postgrads, trainee teachers, psychs, medicals and scientists, and our work builds on all of their work and the SCPs that have come before us too. Here at Western, we are student curriculum partners on an institutional project called 21C. 21C is one of those five-year strategic projects that ask some tough questions about the nature, scope, size, relevance of our curriculum and teaching for our 21st century world. And it has three parts, transforming teaching, transforming curriculum and innovating alternative credentials. And our work sits within the transforming curriculum stream with Tai. And we basically do two things. We co-create transdisciplinary curriculum with staff and external partners. And then we also co-create mechanisms to grow student staff partnership at our university. And both of these are enormous responsibilities. The 21C project has been going since 2017 and lots of people have worked on it over the years. So it's a pretty big project by student standards anyway. So over the past five years, we have had over 40 students from different degrees and stages of their university journey. Join us as SCPs, student partners from science, medicine, business, the humanities, all the way to education, law, psychology and social science.  But the thing that brings us all and has brought us all together is this, that when we look back at our university experiences, we realize that things could be better and that we have a role in contributing to making our experiences better. So that's the context of our student staff partnership work. What we're keen to do in this particular presentation today is a couple of things. We want to share with you our questions and puzzles about preparing students for student partnership, drawing on our experiences of being student partners. Then we really want to share what we discovered when we looked around at what other unis were doing in this preparation space. And then we want to share the things we have co-created at Western Sydney University to prepare students for student partnership. And that's where the gold of today's presentation lies. So let's not fiddle with while Rome burns. So I'll hand over to Lily Rose. Thanks, Shivani, we don't want to pretend that we've cracked some magical formula about preparing students for partnership. But what we do want is for you to think critically along with us for the next 15 or seven that we've got left. So when we started off as student partners, there were some ideas that we had to confront about the work. And we're going to discuss four of those ideas as a way of thinking about the question of preparation. The first one is this, shifting from them being the university and staff versus us, us being the students, to transitioning to we, being us together. When you first come into partnership work, it might look a little something like this. Students are grouped together on one side, staff are grouped together on the other side. And when the university invites us into partnership, it all feels a little bit weird and strange. But over time, partnership shifts the dynamic to something a little more like this. It's staff and students alongside each other. And as Ty wisely says, in partnership, we teach each other our version of the university. Quite often, staff underestimate just how strange and weird this is for students, but they can overestimate the effects of being invited into partnership in one context, whilst all the other contexts remain mostly transactional. And so that then brings us to our second point. Partnership challenges how we come into the university. We come into the university ready to be transactional, because that's how we've learned to succeed in our studies. When we come into partnership, though, we're no longer being told what to do. We're expected to bring our A game and to take initiative to be curious, to explore, to learn, to ask questions, to not assume the certainty of our positions and to collaborate rather than to compete. Again, let us just underscore how odd this might be for many students. Here's our third idea. One of the most difficult questions to answer might actually sound like one of the simplest. How do we begin to define the role of a student partner? What is it exactly that student partners do? And how do we describe a role to students that they can't feasibly see? We're not just called in to provide feedback, although that's important too, but it might seem a little transactional now. In partnership, we're actually given a seat at the table to work alongside staff to create solutions, to create incredible content and resources, concepts to encourage staff and ultimately to try and improve the university experience. It's because of our curriculum partnership that we've been able to engage with the educational politics of our university more than we ever would have in our lives as regular students just going to class and studying. And there's a notable shift that happens there. You move from being a student to being a student partner. Because of this transition, our ideas about being a student expand. And importantly, our ideas about who staff are and what they do, they also expand. And now we know a lot more about the contexts and the conditions that our teachers work in as they make decisions about our learning. And we've come to recognize that it's a lot. In our curriculum partnership with staff, we've learned just how much we rely on each other for education to be the transformational experience that universities promise. If anything, we've also learned just how relational partnership is and how more than anything, this conversation is an ongoing one. The fourth interesting thing is this interplay between experience and expertise. And it's something that we talk quite a lot about within our team. We know that staff are interested in how we experience our learning. We know that when we co-create curriculum alongside staff that we have expertise that they might not have, whether that be technical, designed focused or practical skills. But we also quickly confront the limits of our own expertise as students. Students aren't really experienced navigators of the university. Many of us don't have an institutional gaze. As students, it's quite hard to think and operate across layers of the university. We don't always understand what goes on for academics as they teach us. So when we use the word expertise, we do so in inverted commas and with caution. And that's in part because we recognize that expertise is earned. It has status, it's peer reviewed, and it's often conferred by others in a community. Expertise is amenable to challenge. And typically it's also paid for. So for us to use the word expertise, we try and be intentional and precise. And so that leads us to the big question. How do you prepare students for work that looks like this? Naturally, we started by looking around at what other Australian unis were doing in this space and here's a snapshot of what we found. So I'm going to hand over to my colleague Jackson now to take us through that. Thanks for that, Lily Rose. Anyone who looks into this space will see that there's a lot going on. We've had a look at how other unis are involving their students to enter partnership and found a myriad of useful ideas and effective strategies. At the University of Queensland, student partners can access professional development and networking opportunities. And student feedback is fed back into future iterations of the student staff partnership initiatives. They also have the student fellows program and the supporting student reps program both rated highly by the student participants. Curtin University has a set of values it inducts into student partners, such as inclusivity, shared values and understandings, consultation, recognition, and building knowledge. They have also created several initiatives across the country, like consultative communities, peer support, and contribution to focus groups. Although it's not clear to us how students prepared for this work. At Victoria University in Melbourne, there are a network of meetings and roundtable discussions to engage their students and stakeholders with ambassador programs, mentoring, and learning hubs. So while there's a lot going on in terms of professional development, networking opportunities, and guiding principles, we don't get a sense of what these do to prepare students for a partnership approach. Here's what we're doing at Western Sydney. We've created and developed the student staff partnership curiosity bot to introduce students to the partnership mindset, to guide them as they shift for being just a student to a student partner ready to take a partnership approach. So let's start with this idea of a partnership mindset. The partnership mindset is a work in progress. It's been our attempt to make sense of the co-creation work we've been doing together over the past five years and to consider what it takes to prepare new students for the work of partnership. We've been playing with this notion of curiosity. What helps our work get started is being curious about how our partners see the work and the partnership itself. Why do they see it that way? What can they see that I can't? Being curious causes you to pause, reflect, and to ask rather than to brush in with your own views or expertise. It's about starting from a position of interest, humility, and generosity. We think partnership, sorry, we think purpose is an important commitment too. It's about partners having a chance to find their why, being intentional about their decisions, and then communicating them. You're asking yourself, how do others in this partnership matter to me? This part is underpinned by ideas of trust and significance. To be in partnership with someone else, you're inviting them to matter to you. The co-creation part is also pretty critical. It's where things get done. This is the chance to get your hands dirty and make creative and meaningful things together. This process is often messy, frenzied, and uneven, but because you matter to each other, you trust that things will resolve smoothly. Paying attention to transformation is essential as well. Noticing what's changed about how you see yourself and your capacities is so important to the partnership mindset. Next up is recreation. From our perspective, once you have a good experience of partnership, you want more of it. Partnership begets partnership, and that recreates the boundaries of what's possible within the university. And finally, legacy. Now, this includes both the big and small L legacy. The capital L is the question of impact, the critical threshold between what you do and the change that it generates for others. Small L legacy focuses on the artifacts and the assets that result from the partnership. These artifacts will make their way up, down, and across the university, quietly lodging themselves in the consciousness of others. So that's our working model for a partnership mindset. For us, this mindset has been so important to our curriculum co-creation efforts. We've definitely realized that there is a challenge ahead in supporting the new student partners to engage with the partnership mindset. Now, I'll gladly hand things over to Ty to finish us up. Hi, folks. Here's a snapshot of our Curiosity pod. This is a piece of curriculum that sits within our university's online learning management system. It's 15 to 30 hours of student volume of learning. And when students finish it, they get a digital badge or a credential. The Curiosity pod is available to any student who wants to take it. And it's also embedded in a subject, a subject that we call... We are the university students co-creating change. So if a student is already enrolled in that subject, they will also do the Curiosity pod as a matter of their course of learning through that subject. Or if a student has done the Curiosity pod and wants to later enroll in the subject, then their digital badge earns them prior learning. So what we're trying to do in this Curiosity pod is really start a conversation about the cultivation of a partnership mindset. And it's an important thing to remember that it's the start of the conversation. It's not all of the conversation and it's certainly not the end of the conversation and nor is it the whole process. The Curiosity pod is structured in three modules. And it's a very Western focused, as you might imagine, Curiosity pod. Because we're trying to induct students into what student-staff partnership looks like at Western. So we have discover, explore and partner. And students have access to an array of resources, videos, readings, and they contribute their learning to a collective and public student-staff partnership journal which is embedded in the Curiosity pod. And it's the accumulation of those student reflections that constitute the work they do to complete the Curiosity pod. It's important to note, I think, from our perspective that the Curiosity pod can sit on its own. It can be an unbundled piece of curriculum. And it can be used for other initiatives in the university to underscore their preparation. But it also integrates into a more in-depth partnership process. And we need both those things for a coherent and convincing narrative for students and staff. So it's a way for us to think about how to design institutional mechanisms that allow partnership to grow. But that growth needs to happen without us. We can't be everywhere. But so we need to provide the things that allow the university to kind of anchor their partnership practices off. And while we've made the Curiosity pod, we are also in the process of creating partnership that kind of moves along step two and step three here, as you see. Just a couple of weeks ago, we launched a new initiative called the Partnership Exchange Hub. And it's an opportunity that allows more staff and more students to engage in a supported partnership process. We funded seven projects, so not a huge number. And we gave out 20 scholarships to students to partner on those projects. And our team, my colleagues here with me today, the team of people who were supporting the staff and students in those projects to work in partnership. And in the PX Hub, the Curiosity pod that we've just talked about is the students' preparation. It's important to note that we've also made something for staff because preparing staff for partnership is also an important component of students and staff kind of partnering together well. And it's the start for us of encouraging new student partners to engage with this idea of a partnership mindset. And so those students are about to start that Curiosity pod. And that will generate a lot of questions for us about the adequacy of the Curiosity pod to prepare students for partnership as those teams proceed through those projects. But I'm coming up to the end now, and I just want to share just one lesson, I think, that we've learned as a team and thinking about this question of partnership and preparation. And it's this, the act of making curriculum with others is what has prepared us for partnership. It's not only the Curiosity pod that we've made together, it's the range of other curriculum co-creation that we've done over the past four years. In other words, what prepares students for partnership is the act of being a partner and showing up ready to be the best partner that they can be. And by being makers together, we are compelled to learn about the context that we're making in and who we are making for. And we are imagining ourselves alongside those new students and thinking about the kind of engaged learning experience that excites them about partnership. Because these students that I work with today, they were those students who were new to partnership. And they were them pretty recently. And so in making curriculum together, we've had to dig around for resources, for readings, for videos, to think about what makes good quality, to think about how we sequence all those kinds of things that teachers do when they make curriculum are things that we do together with students. And all the time we're trying to think about how do we induct students into these resources as a way of scaffolding them into this idea of a partnership mindset. And this has been our development together and it's also been our preparation. And one of the lovely effects of our commitment to making together for others is that we have made an intellectual community for ourselves. And it's based on our partnership model. And you'll often see our team like this hanging out. And here we're taking a break from a piece of work that we've done together. We were at the university's open day recently in August, talking about our curriculum to prospective students. And so it's one of the lovely things about the work that we do that we get a chance to do this. So I'm going to close there. Thanks, folks. Thank you so much, Tai and team. And congratulations on going correctly to time right on the minute. So we've got, yeah, about five minutes left for questions. So did anyone want to ask the team anything over audio or over chat? Hi, can I ask a question? Yeah, thanks. Hi, I'm Mara, ever since I've been at the University of Canberra. I was just wondering, is the team brought together and are the students paid to do this work? Is it voluntary? Do you think there's a difference? Do you think there's one way it should be or shouldn't be? Or yeah, what are you thinking? I'll say it's paid. It is paid. But then I'll ask the students here to come in with their view on that. Yeah, like Tai said, we're paid. And I think from a student's perspective and the conversations that we've had, both within our team and in different settings at different conferences or with other colleagues at the University who are trying to implement different strategies to get students on board, I think one of the largest barriers they have to student participation is time and is the willingness of students to participate. And I think that when you're working with students, there's got to be some sort of recognition there that students are studying and they might have other commitments. So I think paying students is a mechanism, I guess, to kind of get them more on board to recognize their time and their experience. And I mean, we love the work that we do, but because we're paid, we are able to devote so much more of our time and attention to the work. Thank you, Lily. And we've also got a question in chat from Alex. So what has the engagement slash uptake been from? Are the staff professional and academic in the partnership space at Western Sydney? Has there been any resistance and do you have any tips for helping the staff component of the partnership mindset? Yeah. We'll open that up and everyone's to respond. I might take that one. The work that we've been doing together is on a kind of five-year strategic project and what that project has been doing is kind of setting the groundwork for the idea of business as usual. And so what that means is that while there's partnership at the university, it's been contained as part of this kind of strategic project. Some of the things that those strategic, that strategic project has done, though, is changed, for instance, changed policy settings for how curriculum gets developed. So when new subjects or courses go up for approval, they have to be co-designed with students. And that's a direct effect of the work that we're doing together. So there are some, there's still work for us to do, absolutely. But there are some institutional mechanisms that have changed that have the potential to grow partnership as a result of the work we're doing. And that's been a lovely byproduct, I think. I would say people want students as partners at our place. It's not really about, we haven't had much resistance at all. And that's because staff get to see the quality of what students make and they want it. And that's really cool, I reckon. That's amazing. And I like, I love how in your example of the Curiosity pod, you spoke about how it's scalable. So it's not just for your team or in isolation. It's really designed to broaden across the university. So that's really impressive. So we've probably got time for one more question.  Let me just get it. Yes, Freda. Did I say that right? Pedro, that's all good. Close. I was going to say thank you. That was amazing to kind of hear and have the students talk to some of this as well. I think I'm from ANU, so we're kind of right back at the start of putting together a student and staff partnership group. So I was wondering if from a student perspective, walking into that first session, kind of that kickoff workshop or meeting, what was something that you really valued or wish that had happened in that first kind of meeting? I'll take that one. In the first, I think when I first started off being a student partner, one of the first meetings, I remember feeling, I still feel like an imposter, but the imposter syndrome is very real and what I really valued and appreciated in those meetings with staff and students is just communicating that this is sort of new territory. We're all working together. We're making things together. And so it's about being... I really appreciated that patience and... What's the word for it? Just a full transparency and openness that we're here to make something together. And so we're here for each other. That's very, very important because students can often feel like an imposter and not know what to do because it's all foreign territory for them. They're so used to being in a transactional kind of a learning teaching environment where they're told what to do, right? For marks or credits or whatever that is. Whatever that may be. So in the first meeting, I think that's very important just to communication, number one. Yeah, I think the others might have something to add. I think, like Ty, just underscoring what Ty said at the end of our presentation. And this is a conversation that we've had. You know, how if we were to go back what we tell ourselves or what's a better way that we can kind of induct people into the process. And A, I think it's, firstly, it's important to be, to get comfortable being uncomfortable because ultimately you do learn to be the best partner by just kind of throwing yourself in and getting involved and you pick it up as you go and you might fumble along for a little bit and the staff might fumble along with you as they're learning too. But ultimately just kind of throwing yourself in, having a go and like Shivani said, just having those open lines of communication and learning together. Yeah, really being generous colleagues is what really helps, knowing when to ask for help and raising concerns when something's difficult and when things are not working productively, just making sure that that's all sort of laid out. That's very important in the first initial meetings and throughout, but yeah, particularly at the start.


Wow. What's up everybody? Once again is brand man Sean and I got to talk about the fact that it does bring a lot of value to your performance. If you start off practicing in smaller environments. Now this is the last video of a performance series that I started a few months ago. So just to get really clear on this one, we're going to go over edge sharing. We've touched on Bruno Mars, Travis Scott. For you guys who haven't seen the last videos, you can definitely check them out. I'll put the links in the description below. I'll even make a playlist. But when it comes to edge sharing, a lot of people don't understand the fact that the guy started off in some very small environments when he was performing. Talking about the bars. Speak easy like clubs late at night, just like so many other artists have started off playing. But not only that, this guy started off street performing as well. If you don't understand the value of something like this, then just check this video. First of all saying that edge sharing really didn't think that he was going to be as big as he is now. My music doesn't really hit everyone. Otherwise, I'd be a very lucky man. It should hit some people today, hopefully. You don't know the numbers. We're going to put some numbers up on the screen just to see his accolades, the Grammys he has, just the numbers he's sold.  But back to the point of this video, the value of doing something like that is when you look at someone like edge sharing, this guy does not jump around. He doesn't have antics. He doesn't crowd serve. Not much of that at all. He's really just a true singer, old school style.  Probably people would say they got better voices and Ed and all that kind of stuff. However, controlling and moving a crowd with your voice and really entertaining without having to move much. Just being able to do that is a gift in itself, but it's also a skill in itself. Luther Van Dros used to be amazing with it. Man, he was too big to even move much at all back in the day. Adele does it very well. You see a lot of comedians that do this incredibly well. And what comedians oftentimes start performing in very small environments. So don't rob yourself of getting a true performance experience. Taking yourself to performance college by trying out performing in small environments, trying out performing on the streets. If you can stop people in the street, there's been quite a few people who have actually been street performers and become bigger stars. If you can stop people from their regular day life, that part alone shows you have something and then you really get the idea of how you can move a controller's crowd. I hear street performers say all the time, a lot of them will woo people in with cover songs and then once they got them, then they'll slip in one of their original songs and that gives them a crowd to test with. You have people online. They're just trying to get somebody to listen to their stuff, but other people are getting real feedback in the streets by just spending some value showing them a song or entertaining them. However, and then next thing you know, they slip original in and once they do that original, they can get a vibe of, is this something I can get people to like for real? For real?  I know quite a few who are doing it. I've talked to quite a few people who are doing it and they're finding some interesting success, oftentimes making a lot more money than other artists who are just online and saying they can't figure out how to make money. Give it a try. I would like to know you guys thoughts on even the idea of yourself doing it. First of all though, you know, what would that look like for you? Because I know some people see dancers all the time or you see people with instruments and even singers, but do y'all see rappers do street performance a lot? I've seen quite a few of them, but just put it in the comments. Give me your thoughts as always. I want to know what you think. I'm going to get down there and discuss with you and just a reminder to you guys for the rest of the year, the rest of 2018, I will be answering questions on my Instagram page at brandmanshawn on Sunday. So follow me and ask away. Other than that, if you like this video, go ahead, hit that like button. If you like it, you might as well share it. And if you're not subscribed, you know what to do. Hit that subscribe.


All right, more factors, rules, all right. Good thing to always use is rules. All right, again, we've talked about this. This is verbal stuff. If you say, here's what's going to get you reinforced, or I'm sorry, here's what's no longer acceptable and will not get you any attention, but here's what will get you attention. That's a good way to do it, right? So the extinction is set up. It's very clear as to what you expect as the behavior modifier. It's clear to the person that's involved in your change program. Extinction produces aggression. It also produces frustration. Frustration is related to aggression. So sometimes it's gonna fit in, and people are gonna get pissed. Think of it this way. You've been doing something for X number of years. You've always been getting away with it. You're getting a reinforcer for it. And all of a sudden, you're no longer getting a reinforcer for it? You're no longer getting something out of it? Yeah, you probably be pretty pissed too, right? Or at least at the very least, frustrated. In fact, frustration, when you start to analyze it, what it really is, is failure to access a reinforcer. So frustration is really a very natural byproduct of extinction because with extinction, you're withholding access to a reinforcer which will automatically produce frustration. Because in the past, you've been reinforced for it. So behavior acts no longer gonna work because now it's on extinction, but you were always reinforced in the past.  Think about the pop machine, right?    And then if you keep pressing the button and it doesn't work, you're gonna start to get really frustrated, right?  You might even make a little sign and stick it on there. Some people get aggressive and kick the machine, right? Or shake it or do something like that. But those are all normal things that happen as a result of extinction. This even happens in the animal world, by the way. It's not just a uniquely human thing. All right, let's look in more detail at this extinction burst because that's gonna be useful things. We're gonna look at our baseline here. There's our extinction phase. So there's the burst right there, bingo.  You see the behavior get worse? You're on the right track, don't give up. Too many people try to use extinction. They see it getting worse. And then what do they do? They give up, right? Because the behavior got worse. So they conclude, incorrectly, by the way, they conclude extinction didn't work. It's a useless process. It doesn't work. It sucks, blah, blah, blah. Well, no, the extinction procedure was working because the behavior got worse before it got better. Here's the danger. If you give up, so think of the kid in the store. All right, so the kid in the store, right over here, during a baseline, you throw in a temper tantrum, right?  But the idea is, again, we got a kid in the store. They're throwing a tantrum. So they got a pretty serious tantrum going on. Parents have had enough, so they decide, I'm gonna try and put this on extinction. So by extinguishing it, they're not gonna give the kid the M&Ms, right? So that's a tasty M&M.  So they made an agreement to stick with it and be serious about it. They heard about extinction, so they're gonna give this a shot. And what do they know the tantrum gets worse? A behavior analyst is gonna say, good, it means you're on the right track. Keep it up. But somebody that's not completely familiar with extinction is gonna think that they just ruined the behavior. So what they do, they give in because they want that behavior to go away, right? So there's your giving in, right there. The moment you give in, now, you can get an idea of what's gonna go on here, right? So your baseline was at one level. Now you just reinforce behavior at a higher level. Guess where your new baseline's gonna be? That's that extended line there. And then now you as the parent realize, oh my gosh, this is just getting worse. I want to extinguish it again. Well, guess what? It's gonna get even worse yet. So the red line that intersects the y-axis there is basically showing you how high that behavior went from baseline. So it was already a problem at baseline. And then you started extinction, you didn't wait, you didn't let it continue, right? And bingo, you made the behavior worse. Ultimately, what's going on here is this is the power of intermittent reinforcement, right? So you put the behavior on the behaviors of baseline, the kid throwing tantrums, and then you put it on extinction, no reinforcers, right?  So now you went from maybe a situation where the kid was only getting reinforced every once in a while for the, or getting reinforced for the tantrums quite regularly. That was the baseline stage and you started extinction and you, which basically, which by definition then means you're now on an intermittent situation. You've got no reinforcers coming for that behavior. But then at that red point, you actually reinforced it. So now you set up from a continuous, possibly during baseline, to an intermittent schedule of reinforcement. Intermittent schedules are much harder to extinguish than continuous schedules and they hold more behavior, so to speak.  Number one, you reinforced the behavior at a higher rate. And then you also put the behavior on an intermittent schedule which makes it more resistant to extinction in the future, making your problem that much harder to deal with. So if again, you'll see that extinction versus second time and it takes even longer for it to carry out. So that's the problem with doing this stuff. So it's the extinction works. There's no question about it. Once you have control of the appropriate reinforcer, you'll know because the behavior is getting worse. That's a good thing. Because it's about ready to get better. So the fact that it's getting worse signals to you that you found the correct reinforcer, stick with it.  And why might it be that people give in? Think about that for a second. You're the parent in the store, right?  They're going absolutely insane. What are you gonna do? You're gonna be embarrassed, right?  But you're the parent, you know what's going on. Don't worry as much about those other people if you can. The problem is, they've got control over your behavior too. So actually implementing an extinction procedure in that type of setting can be very difficult. But people do it, regularly people do it. So the next time you're in the store and you see a parent, and you've got their kid on extinction and the behavior that the kids just screaming away, go up and give the parent a reinforcer because trust me, they need it, right? Because the kid's screaming is definitely not reinforcing their behavior of using extinction, trying to get the kid to stop screaming. So drop up, give them a reinforcer, say, hey, I know what you're doing, keep it up, something like that. Who knows? It might work, it might not.


5-1, so the 30th of January and pike fishing today on the Bristol Avon. Must be about three or four years since I last did it. But yeah, I'm not good and there's a time and place for everything. I should be doing my tax end of year tax return. So I'm going to get set up as quickly as I can. Starting off with my chair. It slowed down nicely. Still a reasonable pace and a little bit of colour, not much. But the weather is absolutely spot on. It's now 14 degrees. I've chosen the spot where I've got my dog leg in the river. So I've got a slack on my inside line where I'm going to put the float out. There's plum in the depth. I'm not using the plum here. I'm using the two ounce lead. That's actually plum depth. I've got a three pound Tesco carp rod. I won't use the bait when I function on it because it's going to be my float rod. Oh yeah, so 18 pound line is a minimum. A large specimen net and it's nice and cheap. I've cut holes in it, I will, and to get trebles back. So at the terminal end, I'm fishing half a mackerel, single hook at the top. That is barbed and treble into the dorsal fin at the top where there's a little bit more bristle for the hook to stay in. Other two points are barbless. That's a size 8 or a size 6. SSG is in a good lead on a separate piece of amnesia line. That's to stop the abrasion of the lead. And then I've got a sliding pipe bar. I'm using a 35 gram sliding float. I've got a bead above it and then I've got a stop knot and that's tied with power gum. I've already plumbed the depth. It is important to plumb the depth with all deep hooking. Layed out there, I've got my own hooking mat. I've also got a wasling, some snips, long nose foresets and some standard foresets. There's no point using long nose foresets if I can see the hooks nice and close to the front of the mouth because they're less effective. My plan is to fish with a bait just to spend it off the moment. It's very snaggy down there, so I'm going to move my stop knot down by the length, same length of the trace so it's just off the bottom. So that's drifting round in the eddy in circles basically. Any food coming down if any dead fish that have been killed by the frosts, recent frosts or floods I hopefully be pulled up in this area. The baits I'm using today are mackerel. They're still a bit frozen but I'd much rather than be frozen than defrosted if I'm honest. I want them to be as fresh as possible. Pike don't like resistance. That's why you'll see a lot of pike anglers fishing with their pike rung flat on the surface, slightly over depth and in the depths of winter I've found that pike can sit there, eat the bait and the float not move, so that's why I'm not doing that today. A ledger bait set up. It's on an 18 inch long running trace and I've elasticated the the hooks down onto the mackerel and I'm going to flatten these barbs down. Be really careful when cast out to make sure that the bait lands away from the main line otherwise you could end up really damaging the pike. I thought it set up high as possible to get the line out the main flow. Alright now it's passed, nothing's going on so I'm just going to move down to the next corner where it's a little bit slacker, a little bit shallower. You can see it slows down a little bit more, I've got much more of a slack. I'm obviously not the only one that fishes here because shells on the bank are hotter. As I said, I've only got an hour left, that's going to pick up my sun and the winter these fish can sit their dormant doing nothing but weeks on end. So you do sometimes just have to get mobile and find them. There's a definite bit of pike movement up on the surface, just another 20-30 yards down where it really slows down the flow. Now you get that niggling feeling and the more you think about it, the more it won't go away. I need to move, even though I've only been here for about 10 minutes, I need to move. You see from the huge amount of silt that's deposited down here that when this reverse really chugging through, it's all being dumped on this bend. It settles up nicely on that silt bank. As far as to put money on which bait were to get hit first, not that either necessarily will be hit, it would be the float just because it's moving around a little bit more naturally in this current. If I was to put money on which lines most like to get snagged, it would be the float just moving around and it's going to find a snag and I won't know about it until I try and wind it in. So I don't leave it out for more than about 15 minutes. We don't see any point in fishing further away than what's necessary. I like to be able to have a good vision on the float and also on where the line ends to the water. I'm using a lead. Just looking at my pike bung and I'm wondering whether maybe something's picked that up. If I am going to strike, I'm going to strike really hard. Yeah, that was a definite bob. Right, let's get this going. Well, I'm open. That's going. It's a jack. Now, bold accounts there should be loads of huge fish in this stretch because there's shoals of stream here between four and seven pounds. So somewhere out there, you'd think there's a huge 20, 30 pound fish. So I'll just check in some mouth for any hooks. I know there's none, but they are. It's a pike. That's great. Let's get it back. I'm not going to use the net. I'm going to put this one back in my hand. But I'm not going to be treading on that silt because it looks lethal. Instead of some damage to bind his gill on the other side, I think there might be, you know, maybe a heron or a cormorant that's tried to get it get hold of this fish. Otherwise, it's like a very healthy fish. But yeah, just behind his gill plate on the right hand side. There we go. He is gone. Good stuff. Well, I was right about the float going first, wasn't I? Must be right about something for once. I wonder how Jesse's getting on. He had a fantastic fish when I fished with him last time. That's what inspired me to come out and give it a go myself. Do you know what I think? I've got another bite. That float is travelling upstream. That's a run. That's a bit of fish, isn't it? Yeah, that's a bit of fish that's staying deep. God, Limey's woken up. Oh, you missed all that. The camera's facing the wrong way. And that was out for about five minutes after that little one. Well, it's bigger than I thought, actually. Yeah, nice fish. Possibly pushing on double, of course, lively. I'm trying to do is turn him upside down. There you go. Lift the gill plate. I can see the hook is actually in the gill. So I'm quite careful here. It's out the gill. Take the treble out, get some forceps on the treble just so that if he flashes around, it's in the forceps, not me. I might have to do this single is a flat in the barb to get that out. There we are, that's out. So we'll see he's easily pushing on double figures, fracking fish. That's what's coming out for a net. It's worth changing spots until you find the fish. I will use the net to put this one back. I won't weigh him. All right, it goes great. I'd better go home and pick up my son from school and then do my tax return. Cheers for watching.