[00:00:01]
          ALRIGHT, COMMISSIONS READY? I'D LIKE TO CALL ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR MONDAY, 
          [I. Call To Order]
NOVEMBER 21ST CAN HEAR THE ROLL, PLEASE. MR KIRBY, PRESIDENT. MR WALLACE. PRESIDENT MR LARSON. 
          PRESIDENT MR SHIP, MR MICHELLE. MISS BRIGGS. MR SHELL. MR CHAIR . I HAVE FOUR MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBER ABSENT. THANKS THIS ITEM THREE ACTION OF THE MINUTES FROM SIP OCTOBER 17TH, AND IT'S ALSO 
          [III. Action of Minutes]
LISTEN. NOVEMBER 7TH. WE HAVE NOVEMBER 7TH MADE IT. I DIDN'T SEE IT. I JUST SAW THE ONCE IN A MINUTE. I WOULD SUGGEST WE WERE AFRAID OF HERSELF. SO UM. UM WHICH ONE DO WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US? WE'VE GOT TO MAKE A MOTION TO TALK THROUGH 17 DIFFER. YEP. GO AHEAD. I DIDN'T HAVE ANY CHANGES TO HE OCTOBER. 17TH OF ANYBODY ELSE DO ALRIGHT MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 17TH 2022 MEETING AS SUBMITTED, AND TO CONTINUE THE. CONSIDERATION OF THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 7TH 2022 MEETING UNTIL THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING. DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. ON THE MINUTES. HEARING NONE. MAY I PLEASE HEAR THE RULE? MR KIRBY? YES, MR WALLACE. I THOUGHT I MADE EMOTIONAL RIGHT. YES YOU SHOULD. 
          THAT'S OKAY. JUST CIRCLE THAT ROLE. UM PROCEDURALLY. YOU START WITH THE PERSON WHO MADE THE MOTION IN THE SECOND IN THAT ORDER, AND THEN RANDOMLY FROM THERE, PLEASE. THANK YOU. SORRY. 
          MR WALLACE? YES, MR KIRBY. YES, MR LARSON. MR SHELF. TAKES US TO ITEM FOUR ADDITIONS OR 
          [IV. Additions or Corrections to Agenda]
CORRECTIONS TO THE AGENDA. DO WE HAVE ANY FROM STAFF? NONE FROM STAFF, OKAY? WITH ALL WITNESSES WHO WISH TO SPEAK TO COMMISSION TONIGHT, PLEASE RISE. DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU. AND LET US SILENCE YOUR PHONES. TAKES US TO OUR FIRST 
          [VII. Cases]
CASE. UM. ARE ONE OF 3 2022 VARIANTS RECONSIDERATION. CAN YOU HEAR FROM STAFF, PLEASE? THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. SINCE ALL THE CASES I RELATED TONIGHT STAFF WAS GOING TO DO A PRESENTATION AND OVERVIEW OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AT THE SUBDIVISION TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND AND RELATION THERE, BUT THAT'S ALL RIGHT WITH POINTING COMMISSION. 
          SO I'M GOING TO DO A QUICK TRIP BACKGROUND ON THE CREATION OF SUBDIVISIONS. IT WILL BE A LITTLE MINOR EDUCATIONAL THING IN CIVICS, WHICH I FIND EXCITING , BUT SO ONE OF THE MAIN STEPS OR INITIAL STEPS IN CREATING A SUBDIVISION. IS THE PLANNING PROCESS. AND SO THIS IS A COVER LETTER OF A TYPICAL PLATT FOR ANY OLD SUBDIVISION IN NEW ALBANY. SO THIS ONE IS FOR EVERINGTON, THE SUBJECT SUBDIVISION FOR TONIGHT'S VARIANCES, AND SO PLATS ARE CREATED AND DESIGNED BY PRIVATE DEVELOPERS. DEVELOPER COMES IN. THEY WANT TO CREATE A SUBDIVISION. THEY HIRE AN ENGINEER TO DESIGN THINGS LIKE THE STREETS. THE PUBLIC LOTS. 
          UH, AND ALSO THINGS LIKE EASEMENTS AND TRAINING EASEMENTS TO ENSURE THAT THOSE LOTS CAN BE PROPERLY SERVICED SO YOU CAN SEE THAT YOU KNOW IT'S SIGNED BY A PRIVATE ENGINEERS SAYING THAT THIS MEETS ALL OF THE CITY'S DESIGNS FROM REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS. AND THERE'S LOTS OF CITY SIGNATURES ON HERE, ONE OF WHICH IS THE CITY ENGINEER, SAYING THAT WE REVIEWED THIS AND IT MEETS ALL THE CITY'S STANDARDS. SO IT'S DESIGNED BY A PRIVATE ENGINEER AND REVIEWED BY CITY STAFF AND SORRY. I'M HAVING TROUBLE WITH THIS CLICKER. BUT SO THIS SHOWS A TYPICAL PLANTS SO YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S THE STREETS THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE PLATTS AND AGAIN. THE PLAN IS THE LEGAL DOCUMENTS THAT'S RECORDED WITH THE COUNTY AND THEN AGAIN, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF EASEMENTS. THE FIRST ONE ARE TYPICAL UTILITY EASTMAN'S THAT ARE LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE SUBDIVISION. THIS ENSURES THINGS SUCH AS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITY, SO CABLE INTERNET ELECTRICITY CAN BE SERVICED AT ALL THE LOTS. THE OTHER TYPE OF EASEMENT IS DRAINAGE EASEMENTS, AND THESE ARE SPECIFICALLY FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. AND SO ALL THE LOTS IN TONIGHT'S VARIANCE. APPLICATIONS ARE AROUND HANDY'S LOOP HERE, AND SO ALL OF THESE LOTS TONIGHT WITHIN THIS ENTIRE BLOCK ARE ENCUMBERED WITH THE SHARED DRAINAGE EASEMENT ALONG THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY LINES THAT'S BEEN DESIGNED BY THE PRIVATE 
          [00:05:05]
ENGINEER. TO BE LOCATED HERE. AND SO RIGHT AROUND THE SAME TIME THAT A PLANT OCCURS. 
          THERE'S ALSO WHAT WE CALL THE ENGINEERING PLANS, OR THEY'RE TECHNICALLY CALLED STREET STORM AND WATERLINE IMPROVEMENTS. SO THIS PRIVATE ENGINEER HAS CREATED THESE EASEMENTS AND THESE ROADS, AND THEN THEY APPLY THE SPECIFIC DESIGN SO THE ACTUAL LINES AND WHERE THOSE SERVICES WILL BE LOCATED WITHIN THOSE EASEMENTS. SO THE PRIVATE DEVELOPER DESIGNS HOW AND WHERE THOSE SERVICES WILL BE LOCATED. THESE ARE THINGS SUCH AS WATER, SANITARY, SEWER AND STORM SEWER WILL BE INSTALLED WITHIN THOSE VARIOUS EASEMENTS. AND SO AGAIN , THE CITY ENGINEER AND OUR ENGINEERING TEAM REVIEWS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH CITY SPECIFICATIONS. AND THEN IN THIS CASE, THIS IS ONE SHEET OF ABOUT 30 WITHIN THAT PRIVATE SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN, AND THIS IS ONE THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN FOR TONIGHT'S VARIANCES, SO THE YELLOW AGAIN HIGHLIGHTS THIS DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT'S LOCATED ALONG THE REAR OF ALL THE PROPERTIES. SO HANDY'S LOOP. ARE THESE LINES THROUGH HERE, SO THIS SHOWS THE EDGE OF THE PUBLIC STREETS. SETBACKS AND OTHER VARIOUS UTILITIES. AND THEN AGAIN, THERE'S TWO TYPES OF DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THIS HIGHLIGHTED DRAINAGE EASEMENT. SO IT RUNS FROM THE EAST SIDE, AND THEN IT FLOWS. 
          IT'S DESIGNED TO FLOW TO THE WEST SIDE. SO THIS IS SORT OF THE HIGH POINTS THE TOP OF THE MOUNTAIN AND THEN BASED ON THESE GRADING CONTOUR LINES HERE OVERALL, IT'S MEANT TO START COLLECTING WATER, AND THEN IT RUNS WEST ALL THE WAY TO HERE, SO WE'VE USED WORD THROUGHOUT TONIGHT'S PRESENTATION WHEN SIERRA PROVIDES A SITE BY SITE ANALYSIS FOR THESE IMPLICATIONS. 
          WE'LL TRY TO USE THESE SAME COLOR INDICATORS, SO THERE'S CONSISTENCY THROUGHOUT, SO THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS ARE INCLUDED WITHIN THIS DRAINAGE EASEMENT. AND SO THE FIRST ONE IS HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE HERE, AND THIS IS A BURIED UNDERGROUND STORMWATER PIPE. AND SO IT RUNS FROM THIS HIGH POINT HERE, AND THEN IT'S MADE TO COLLECT WATER WITHIN THE WITHIN INLETS. AND THOSE ARE THESE RED DOTS HERE THROUGHOUT AND SO AGAIN, WATER STARTS COLLECTING APPEAR AT THE HIGH POINTS AND THEN IT GOES INTO THESE INLETS AND THEN AS IT'S RUNNING, AND IT'S COLLECTING MORE AND MORE WATER, IT GOES FROM 12 INCHES TO 18 INCHES TO 24 INCHES. THEN IT GOES UNDER THE STREET AND THEN ULTIMATELY TO A STORM WATER BASIN AND WITHIN THIS AREA NOW THE STRATEGIES MEANT ACTUALLY HAS ADDITIONAL DESIGN CRITERIA IN ITS HAS MAJOR FLOOD ROUNDING CHANNELS. SO THESE LITTLE RED ARROWS HERE AND THESE CIRCLED RED AREAS SHOW US THAT THIS DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS DESIGNED FOR MAJOR FLOOD ROUTING. AND SO WE HIGHLIGHTED THIS HERE BECAUSE THIS SHOWS SPECIFIC CONTOURS WHERE THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS FOR THESE MAJOR FLOOD ROUTING CHANNELS, AND SO YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT IT REALLY IS TRULY DESIGNED TO HAVE A SWELL SO THE GRADING IS SUCH THAT WITHIN THIS DRAINAGE EASEMENT AGAIN HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. IT'S MADE TO COLLECT WATER THROUGHOUT. BUT IT IS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO BE CHANNELED TO COLLECT WATER IN MAJOR STORM EVENTS. SO NOT ALL DRAINAGE EASEMENTS HAVE THIS. BUT IN THIS CASE, THIS DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS DESIGNED FOR THAT UNDERWATER COLLECTION AND THEN IN A MAJOR STORM EVENTS THAT'S ACTUALLY MADE TO FILL SO THE PIPE WILL FILL UP AND IT'S ACTUALLY MEANT TO FLOOD GO TO THE SURFACE AND THEN WATER WILL COLLECT. WITHIN THIS YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED AREA AND IT WILL BE ROUTED AND CONVEYED OFFSITE THROUGH THESE CHANNELS OR THIS SWELL HERE AND SO YOU CAN SEE. 
          THIS IS SHOWING THE WHIP AND THE DEPTH AND THIS ENTIRE AREA FROM START TO END HERE IS WITHIN THAT MAJOR FLOOD ROUTES. SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF STARS ON THE SHEET HERE. SO TONIGHT'S, UM, AGENDA HAS THREE ITEMS, SO IT'S A RECONSIDERATION OF THE LOT HERE AND THEN THERE'S TWO NEW VARIANCES ON LOTS 44 45. NOW THERE IS TO GIVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION SOME CONTEXT. THERE WAS ONE OTHER PARCEL IN THE EVERINGTON SUBDIVISION WITH IMPROVEMENTS, UM WITHIN THE TRAINING EASEMENT, SO LANDSCAPING AND FENCING, AND THAT'S INDICATED WITH THIS GREEN STAR HERE SO THIS PROPERTY IS AN ACTIVE CODE ENFORCEMENT. AND THEY HAVEN'T SUBMITTED A VARIANCE YET, BUT THE CITY IS WORKING WITH THAT PROPERTY OWNER TO REMOVE THE FENCING AND LANDSCAPING THAT'S WITHIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT TODAY. AND SO UM, JUST AS A QUICK HIGHLIGHTS SO THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF EASEMENTS. THERE'S GENERAL EASEMENTS. THOSE ARE TO ACCOMMODATE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE UTILITIES THAT ARE UNDERGROUND AND THESE CAN HAVE MULTIPLE UTILITIES IN IT, SUCH AS CABLE AND INTERNET AND ELECTRIC, AND THOSE CAN HAVE FENCES AND 
          [00:10:04]
LANDSCAPING BUILT IN IT, AND SOME OF THESE PROPERTIES DO HAVE BOTH GENERAL UTILITY EASEMENTS AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ON THEM. AND SO YOU CAN PUT FENCING AND LANDSCAPING IN THE STERNAL EASEMENTS, AND THAT'S WHY WE AND I'M SURE YOU SEE THE COMMERCIALS ON TV ALWAYS SAY COLLEGE HOOPS BEFORE YOU DIG TO MAKE SURE YOU DON'T HIT THOSE UNDERGROUND THINGS, BUT OTHERWISE THERE'S NOTHING ON THE SURFACE THAT'S PROVIDING SORT OF A UTILITY OR AN IMPROVEMENT THAT SERVES PROPERTIES NOW. DRAINAGE EASEMENT ARE ACTUALLY DESIGNED TO COLLECT AND CONVEY WATER FROM MULTIPLE PROPERTIES. AND SO THERE ARE ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS AND PLATINUM NOTES THAT REQUIRES THAT THE IMMUNE MUNICIPAL ENGINEER REVIEW ANY IMPROVEMENTS OR OBSTRUCTIONS OR REALLY ANYTHING THAT GOES WITHIN THOSE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THE SURFACE OR THE GROUND IS ACTUALLY SERVING AS AN IMPROVEMENT TO SO IT'S ALWAYS MADE TO COLLECT, WHETHER IT BE A MAJOR FLOOD ROUTES OR NOT. AND IN THIS CASE, IT IS A MAJOR FLOOD RELATIVES. SO THIS IS NOT ONLY MEANT TO COLLECT YOUR TYPICAL RAIN EVENTS. BUT THESE MAJOR STORM EVENTS TO, UM ALL THE WATER WILL GO TO THAT HIGHLIGHTED YELLOW AREA, AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S ADDITIONAL PRECAUTIONS AND REVIEWS BECAUSE IT'S NOT INTENDED OR DESIGNED FOR OBSTRUCTIONS TO BE LOCATED WITHIN ITS SO THE PLATTE LANGUAGE AGAIN SAYS THAT NO IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS CAN BE MADE UNLESS APPROVED BY THE MUNICIPAL ENGINEER. IN THIS CASE, THE CITY ENGINEERING TEAM HAS REVIEWED AND DENIED REQUESTS TO INSTALL A VARIETY OF LANDSCAPING AND FENCES WITHIN THOSE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED DRAINAGE EASEMENTS THAT WAS SHOWN ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE. BECAUSE THAT IS A MAJOR FLOOD ROUTES. AND SO THE APPLICANTS TONIGHT HAVE REQUESTED A VARIANCE AS THEIR MECHANISM OF RELIEF. AND SO WITH THAT I'LL HAND IT OVER TO THE CITY PLANNERS HERE CRADDICK SMITH HERE TO GO OVER THE CASES ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. I JUST WANT TO TELL THE COMMISSION OF THIS IS A RECONSIDERATION FOR A VARIANCE THAT WAS CERTAIN SEPTEMBER AND THERE'S A COPY OF SOME OF THE INFORMATION IN MINUTES IN FRONT OF YOU FOR REVIEW, JUST IN CASE UM, SO THIS IS AN APPLICANT WHO WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THE RECONSIDERATION OF A VARIANT SUBMITTED IN SEPTEMBER. THE LOT IS LOCATED AT 698 CAN BEAST LOOP. AND REQUESTS OF BLACK ALUMINUM FENCE BE BUILT INTO A PLANET DURING THE EASEMENT. AS HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE. THE FENCE WOULD BE LOCATED ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE, INCLUDING THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT, WHICH IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THERE ARE STORM WATER INLETS LOCATED IN THE CORNER OF BOTH OF A CORNER OF THE BACK OF THE LOTS, AS INDICATED BY THE RED DOTS. ALSO THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS A MAJOR FLOOD ROW AND ABOUT 12 12 FT IN WITH ON THIS PROPERTY. THE REASON THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD LIKE A RECONSIDERATION IS FOR SEVERAL REASONS, THE FIRST BEING CONCERNS FOR CRIME IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND. THAT MOVING THE FENCE WOULD DECREASE THE LOT SIZE. THE REASON IT WAS DENIED IN SEPTEMBER IS BECAUSE IT DID NOT MEET REQUIREMENTS IT WOULD NEGATIVELY AFFLICT AFFECT THEIR NEIGHBORS, AND IT WOULD GIVE SPECIAL TREATMENT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS. HMM. THAT'S ALRIGHT. OOPS. SORRY. ACCORDING TO CODE. IT STATES THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN RECONSIDERED, DENIED VARIANTS ONLY IF THEIR PROPERTY OWNERS CLEARLY DEMONSTRATE ONE OF THE FOLLOWING TWO CATEGORIES ON THE SCREEN. IF THE PC FINDS THAT ONE OF THE CRITERIA IS MET, THEN STAFF RECOMMENDS TABLING THE HEARING OF THE VARIANCE UNTIL ITS NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING. THE APPLICANT LETTER OF THE REQUEST IS INCLUDED IN THE PACKETS AS WELL. AND STAFF IS HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF. AND THIS IS FOR STAFF LEGAL COUNSEL. I WAS WAITING FOR MIKE TO GO LIVE. THERE WE GO. UM, IF THESE WERE ALL APPROVED AND CONSTRUCTION TOOK PLACE IN A FLOODING EVENT HAPPENED THAT CAUSED DAMAGES. WITH THE VILLAGE BE LIABLE FOR GRANTING THE VARIANCES THAT ALLOW DAMAGES TO TAKE PLACE THAT HAD THE OBSTRUCTION NOT BEEN PRESENT WOULDN'T HAVE TAKEN PLACE. THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT GO INTO LIABILITY. BUT IF WE APPROVE SOMETHING WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THERE'S POTENTIAL FOR THAT TYPE OF ISSUE THAT TYPE OF DAMAGE. I COULD CERTAINLY SEE A CLAIM BEING BROUGHT AGAINST THE BILL VILLAGE THAT SCENARIO OR THE CITY. THANK YOU. WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE SUBMITTED WITH US APPLICATION FOR 
          [00:15:02]
RECONSIDERATION OTHER THAN THE ONE PAGE LETTER THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. NO THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S REQUIRED PER CODE IS JUST A LETTER AND OUTLINING THE REASONS FOR THE RECONSIDERATION, SO JUST TO BE CLEAR SO TONIGHT THIS REQUEST THAT THE PROPERTY EDITOR IS REQUESTING THAT THE APPLICATION BE RECONSIDERED. SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION NEEDS TO DETERMINE IF THIS VARIANCE SHOULD BE RECONSIDERED BASED ON THE CRITERIA ON THE SCREEN THERE. 
          AND THEN IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES DETERMINE THAT IT SHOULD BE RECONSIDERED. STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT, UM, THE VARIANTS BE TABLED IMMEDIATELY TO THE NEXT MEETING. THAT WAY WE CAN WRITE A FULL STACK REPORT AND PROVIDE NEIGHBOR NOTIFICATIONS, UH, PER CODE REQUIREMENTS. WELL, MY POINT IS THIS IS THAT TWO STANDARDS. EVIDENTIARY BASED. FIRST ONE BEING SOMETHING HAS CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND THE SECOND ONE BEING THAT THERE IS NEW INFORMATION. AND I JUST I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT SUPPORTED EITHER OF THOSE STANDARDS IN THE PACKAGE, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE COULD LOOK AT TO MAKE SOME SORT OF DETERMINATION THAT EITHER OF THOSE STANDARDS HAS BEEN MET OR CAN POTENTIALLY BE MET. THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT STAFF IS AWARE OF HIM. I'M NOT SURE IF THE PROPERTY OWNER IS HERE TONIGHT, BUT THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO OFFER SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. YEAH, I KNOW. WELL LET ME LET ME DO A QUICK CHECK ON OTHER QUESTIONS. I WILL ASK YOU TO PRESENT YOUR CASE HERE IN A BIT. WERE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION BEFORE PERCENT. I HAVE ONE. THERE'S A CURIOSITY FOR STAFF IF THE FENCE WAS TO BE BUILT UP TO INTO THE EASEMENT. WOULD THERE BE RIPPED TO PUT A GATE OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD ALLOW ACCESS INTO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY IS THAT ALLOWABLE FURTHER COACH. YEAH I THINK THAT IT'S ALLOWABLE. THAT IS ALLOWABLE PER CODE. JUST CURIOUS. THANKS. OKAY? CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, PLEASE? OKAY THANKS AND GOOD TO SEE EVERYONE AGAIN. UM. YOU ASKED IN REGARDS TO WELL, FIRST OFF. I'VE HAD SOME OBSERVATIONS SINCE OUR LAST MEETING AND ONE OF THOSE IS , UM OBVIOUSLY AREA CONCERNING SECURITY, SO YOU THINK WELL, WHY WOULD THERE BE SECURE? WELL, ESSENTIALLY WHAT YOU'RE BUILDING IN THE BACK BAR HOME SPEAK SINCE WE ALL WANT TO MEET FENCES, CONSIDERING WE HAVE CHILDREN, DOGS, SO ON AND SO FORTH, WOULD LIKE SWIMMING POOLS. THINGS OF THAT NATURE IS YOUR BUILDING A 26 FT ALLEYWAY IN OUR BACKYARDS. UH, ON OCTOBER 20TH. THERE WERE POLICE IN MY BACKYARD. SO THE CONCERN I HAVE, AND I HAVE THE POLICE REPORT RIGHT HERE. IS THERE MORE THAN ONE COPIERS? SORRY I DID ONLY BRING ONE. BUT I DO HAVE A DIGITAL COPY. THE CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT WE LIVE IN A HIGH TRAFFIC AREA. THERE'S CONSTRUCTION EVERYWHERE. THERE ARE PEOPLE IN AND OUT OF THE AREA. SO OBVIOUSLY A HIGHER, UM, HIRING COMMUNITY. UH YOU ALREADY IS GROWING. THERE IS A LITTLE BIT MORE CRIME GOING ON IN THE OUTSKIRTS OF THE CITY TO HAVE AN ALLEYWAY WHERE INDIVIDUALS COULD GO INTO A BACKYARD PEEK INTO OFFENSE. IT JUST IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. AND PLUS FROM A SECURITY PERSPECTIVE. WHAT IF SOMEONE'S IN MY BACKYARD JUMPS THE FENCE? IT'S AN EASY ACCESS OUT WHERE IF I HAVE A BACKYARD CONTAINED IN MY ENTIRE PROPERTY LINE. IT'S GOING TO BE MORE SECURE. AS FAR AS OTHER NEIGHBORS. THERE'S THREE OF US HERE, BUT THERE'S MUCH MORE THAT ARE INTERESTED NOW. GRANTED, THEY'RE NOT HERE TODAY. THIS IS A HOLIDAY WEEK. 
          UH SO THE CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT FROM A SECURITY PERSPECTIVE, WE ALL BUILD DEFENSES. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN ALLEYWAY THERE. ALSO IN THE LAST MEETING WAS BROUGHT UP THAT YOU KNOW THERE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO BUILT PROBABLY AT 70 TO 9. UH IT WAS INDICATED IN THE GREEN STAR. I HAVE THE APPROVAL LETTER HERE, WHICH I KNOW THERE'S SOME MAYBE A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PROPERTY OWNER. BUT YOU KNOW, I COULD SHARE THAT WITH YOU AS WELL. IF YOU COULD SUMMARIZED YOU'RE SAYING THAT THIS THAT'S THE APPLICATION THAT 70 TO 9 HANDY'S LOOP AND I BELIEVE I HAVE THEIR ADDRESS. CORRECT. HAD HAD SUBMITTED AN APPROVAL FOR BOTH LANDSCAPING, WHICH YOU COULD SEE VERY CLEARLY AND FENCING SURROUNDING THEIR PROPERTY LINE. THAT WAS ACTUALLY APPROVED IN NOVEMBER OF 2020. MY HOUSE DIDN'T EVEN SEE OR BY NEKO HRC. THAT'S BY THE CITY, OKAY? THAT'S THE CITY DOCUMENT. UH MY HOUSE DID NOT BEGIN CONSTRUCTION UNTIL MAY OF 2021 SO. MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE AND BE ABLE TO BUILD IT. AND ALSO THEY HAD HAD NOT 
          [00:20:06]
RECEIVED ANY SORT OF NOTICED HAVE TO TAKE DOWN THEIR FENCE. UNTIL 2022. SO IT WAS THERE TWO YEARS WITH NO ISSUE. SO IT MAY HAVE BEEN AN OVERSIGHT. I'M NOT SURE. BUT REGARDLESS, IT'S IT WAS SHARED IN THE LAST MEETING THAT IT WAS NOT APPROVED. I CONSIDER THAT AN APPROVAL MYSELF. QUESTION FOR STAFF IS GONNA ELABORATE ON THAT SURE. YEAH THAT'S ALL TRUE THAT THAT IS A PERMIT ISSUED BY THE CITY. IT WAS ISSUED IN ERROR, THOUGH THE CANDIDLY THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT WE'RE ONLY HUMAN AND THAT WE DID MISS THAT LANDSCAPING BEING WITHIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT THERE. IT WASN'T LABELED ON THE SITE PLAN . WE STILL SHOULD HAVE DOUBLE CHECKED THAT AND CAUGHT THAT. BUT THE FACT REMAINS WE WORKED WITH OUR LEGAL CONSULTANT, EVEN THOUGH THAT CITY STAFF HAS ISSUED A PERMIT FOR THAT, UM IT THIS STAFF OR YOU KNOW, ANY GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND THE LAW. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE WORKING WITH THAT PROPERTY OWNER TO REMEDY THAT AND HAVE THEM RELOCATE THAT FENCE AND THAT LANDSCAPING OUTSIDE OF THE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS. IT WASN'T BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION UNTIL RECENTLY WITH THE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING AND FENCING THAT WE BECAME AWARE OF IT, AND THAT'S WHEN WE STARTED A CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE ALONG AGAINST THAT PROPERTY, AND I HAVE OPEN DIALOGUE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNERS NOW TO ADDRESS IT IS THE SUBMISSION MADE THAT WAS APPROVED DEFICIENT BECAUSE IT LACKS THE EASEMENT. SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS. UM IT DOESN'T IT DOESN'T SHOW THE EASEMENTS. UM SO THAT'S ONE FACTOR. WE ALSO HAVE A DIFFERENCE IN INTERPRETATION. THE LANDSCAPING , I WILL SAY THAT WE DID, MISS. 
          UM BUT THE HOMEOWNER AND THEIR CONTRACTOR BELIEVED THAT THAT THAT SITE PLAN SHOWED THAT IT INCLUDED FENCING ALONG THE PERIMETER. WE DISAGREE. WE DON'T THINK THAT WAS INDICATED ON THE SITE PLAN, OR EVEN WITHIN THE SUBMITTAL THAT SHOWS, UH, FENCING BEING STARTUP INSTALLED ALONG ALL FOUR SIDES, SO WE INTERPRETED THAT PERMIT TO INCLUDE FENCING AND PILLARS JUST ALONG THE FRONT SIDE PROPERTY LINES, I THINK THEY SAY, LIKE 90, FT. UM AND SO THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE IN INTERPRETATION. THE CITY DOESN'T GO OUT AND INSPECT FENCING OR LANDSCAPING. 
          SO LET'S NEVER CAUGHT SINCE ITS INSTALLATION UNTIL NOW, UM UM, WHEN? WHEN WE RECEIVED INQUIRIES ABOUT IT. STEVE LET ME JUST BE CLEAR. SO WHEN THE CITY REVIEWED BUT WE'VE ASKED DIFFICULT SO WHEN THE CITY IS APPROVING THIS SORT OF THING. THEY LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN. YES SO WE LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN AND SO AND WHAT EXACTLY IS THE SITE PLAN? THE SITE PLAN IS PUT TOGETHER BY THE DEVELOPER OR THE PROPERTY OWNER , THEIR CONTRACTOR, AND SO THAT PROVIDES STAFF A SCALE DRAWING OF WHERE THEY HOPE TO INSTALL IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS CASE, FENCING AND LANDSCAPING. UM WHILE THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS PREPARED BY THE CONTRACTOR, UH, DID NOT SHOW THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT. THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT JUST STILL WASN'T CAUGHT. WE DO REVIEW THE SITE PLANS AGAINST PLATZ, AND THAT ONE JUST FELL BETWEEN THE CRACKS FOR THAT ONE HANDEDLY FOR THE FENCING. WE JUST DID NOT INTERPRET. YOU KNOW , IF YOU LOOK AT IT, THERE'S A BUNCH OF LINE WORK TO US. WE DIDN'T READ OR INTERPRET THAT THAT FENCING WAS INTENDED TO BE INSTALLED ALONG THE SIDE AND THEIR PROPERTY LINES. YOU HAVE IF THE SITE PLAN HAD BEEN FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE MORE FINISH. VLY MARKED. AS A FENCE. WOULD THAT HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE? YES, I BELIEVE SO THAT WE WOULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT AND WE WOULD HAVE DENIED THE PERMIT. IN STEVE. OBVIOUSLY. AT THE TIME. IT WAS NOT CAUGHT SO, THEREFORE, NO VARIANCE WAS REQUESTED, THEREFORE, NEVER CAME IN FRONT OF PLANNING COMMISSION. THAT'S CORRECT. AND THEN THE CURRENT OWNER, I DON'T HAVE THE ADDRESS. OFFHAND. HAVE THEY BEEN WILLING AND OPEN. TO WORKING WITH THE CITY. SO WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE MEETINGS WITH THEM. YEAH AND WE'RE HAVING ACTIVE DIALOGUES NOW ABOUT, UM HAVING THEM RELOCATE THOSE THINGS. UH THEY STILL HAVE A RIGHT TO REQUEST A VARIANTS. SO UM, I THINK THEY ARE DETERMINING IF THEY WANT TO TAKE THAT COURSE OF ACTION. BUT RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT TIMING AND CITY PARTICIPATION IN THE RELOCATION OF THAT, AT LEAST THE LANDSCAPING PORTIONS. UM, SINCE THAT WAS ON THE PERMIT. THANK YOU. COULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR THE CITY TO UPDATE OUR SOME MIDDLE REQUIREMENTS SO THAT EASEMENT LINES ARE MANDATED ITEMS AND THEN THAT WOULD PUT THE ONUS ON SUBMIT ER TO INCLUDE THINGS LIKE THAT, SO THAT WOULD 
          [00:25:06]
BE MORE EASILY CAUGHT, AND IT ALSO PROBABLY BRING IT TO THEIR ATTENTION FASTER, KNOWING THAT THEY HAVE TO DROP THE EASEMENT LINES ON THERE. ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT AS PART OF OUR CONTINUING CODE UPDATES. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. UH, IT WAS ALSO ANOTHER OBSERVATION I MADE IS UH, AND I BELIEVE THAT MAYBE CORRECT ME, BUT IT'S NOT THE ROAD CANDIES LOOP ITSELF FLOODPLAIN AS WELL. YEAH. YEAH YES. SO YOU'RE RIGHT , SO IT IS VERY TYPICAL FOR STREETS TO CONTAIN MAJOR FLOOD ROUTES AS WELL. SO IF THERE WAS A MAJOR STORM EVENT, WATER IS A AND THEIR SUBDIVISIONS ARE DESIGNED TO CONVEY WATER OFF OF , UH, PRIVATE PROPERTIES INTO THESE DRAINAGE EASEMENTS, BUT ALSO ONTO THE STREETS, AND THAT'S WHY THERE'S A CAN'T SEE IT FROM HERE. BUT THERE'S THE TYPICAL CURB INLETS FOR STORMWATER AS WELL ALONG ALL THE PUBLIC STREETS IN NEW ALBANY. AND THE ONLY REASON WHY I ASK IS BECAUSE HINDI'S LOOP THE ROAD THAT IS IN FRONT OF MY HOME, WHICH I BELIEVE THAT THE HERO SIGNIFIES WATER BANDAGES, 24 FT WIDE WE'RE IN MY BACKYARD. IT'S 26. SO I JUST THOUGHT THAT WAS INTERESTING OBSERVATION OF, YOU KNOW, JUST THE SIZE OF THE PURE SIZE, LOSING 13 FT OF YARD 26 FT OF YARD HOW DOES HOW IS THAT ACTUALLY SMALLER THAN THE STREET TRAPPED IS SUPPOSED TO GO DOWN AND CARS ARE PARKED HOUSE ACQUIRE MUCH DIFFERENT THAN OFFENSE ITSELF, SO I'VE ACTUALLY LOOKED INTO SPEAKING WITH SOME CIVIL ENGINEERS. THEY'VE SAID THAT MANY INSTANCES, MANY OTHER MUNICIPALITIES, ACTUALLY, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY PUT IT ON THE ORDER TO THE OWNER TO REMOVE THE FENCE BEING REMOVED IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, SO I'M CONTINUING TO REACH OUT TO THEM BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, OBVIOUSLY IT'S IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF MULTIPLE INDIVIDUALS LIVING ON THIS, UH IN OUR AREA. ALSO YOU KNOW, WE KNOW OF AT LEAST FIVE OTHER NEIGHBORS THAT ARE PERFECTLY FINE AND PLAN ON PUTTING A FENCE UP AS WELL. SO I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING FOR HERE IS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THIS PROCESS IS OBVIOUSLY EXTREMELY FORMAL, BUT WE WANT TO WORK WITH THE CITY. YOU KNOW, THESE ARE EXTREMELY HIGH END HOMES. MANY OF MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS HAVE PUT IN SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENTS. THERE'S ACTUALLY BEEN APPROVALS, SO WE JUST WANT TO FIND A WAY TO KEEP ALL OF OUR IS MUCH YARD AS POSSIBLE, ALSO ELIMINATE THE ALLEYWAY IN A VERY HIGH IN COMMUNITY WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE MORE DIFFICULT TO MAINTAIN. AND ALSO YOU HAVE TRESPASSERS GO THROUGH THERE AT EDDIE'S. SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT CAME TO MIND SINCE HER LAST MEETING, AND, YOU KNOW, I HOPE THE COMMITTEE REALLY UNDERSTANDS THAT WE WANT TO WORK WITH ALL OF YOU WITH THE CITY TO COME TO A CONCLUSION THAT WORKS WELL FOR EVERYONE. QUICK QUESTION. WHEN YOU BOUGHT THE HOUSE WAS WAS THAT DISCLOSED. EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND. THERE'S AN EASEMENT BACK. IT WAS NOT DISCLOSED. ACTUALLY WHEN BUYING THE LOT. I SPOKE WITH MY BUILDER AND, YOU KNOW, THEY SAID IT WAS FINE. IF THERE WAS A FENCE IN MY BACKYARD THAT WAS SITTING THERE FOR TWO YEARS WHERE THEY WERE ON THE PROPERTY LIKES. IT'S MY REAR NEIGHBOR WHO HAS THE FENCE SO OBVIOUSLY I SPEAK WITH THOSE WHO I'M PAYING MONEY TO BUILD A HOME. I'M ALSO MAKING AN ASSUMPTION. GUESS IF SOMEONE HAS A FENCE, IT'S ALLOWED. AND LANDSCAPING AND THEIR INVESTMENT WAS, YOU KNOW, IN THE SIX FIGURES. THIS ISN'T A SMALL INVESTMENT ON THEIR PART, AND I KNOW THAT THEY DID NOT GO INTO IT LIGHTLY BECAUSE I'VE SPOKEN WITH THEM. DID YOU HAVE LEGAL COUNSEL WHEN YOU PURCHASE THE PROPERTY? I EXCUSE ME. DID YOU HAVE LEGAL COUNSEL WHEN YOU PURCHASE THE PROPERTY? I DID NOT KNOW. WHEN YOU HAVE THE TITLE COMPANY DID THEY NOT INCLUDE A PLOT MAP WITHIN THE DOCUMENTS THAT 1000 PAGES THEY MIGHT HAVE. I MEAN, IF ANYONE HAS NEVER BUILT A HOME BEFORE. IT'S YOU GET A LOT OF DOCUMENTS. SO YOU KNOW I THEY POTENTIALLY MAY HAVE BUT I WASN'T AWARE OF IT. THEN I'M I GUESS I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THE STANDARD HERE. UM SO AS I SAID BEFORE ITS EVIDENTIARY BASED. I DON'T. I DON'T SEE THE EVIDENCE HERE FOR THE RECONSIDERATION. BUT. I DON'T QUITE GET THE. THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN GRANTING IT AND MAYBE LETTING THEM COME IN WITH EVIDENCE THAT THE NEXT MEETING VERSUS WHAT WE KIND OF HAVE HERE, WHICH EVEN IF THEY CAME IN MY VIEW IF THEY CAME IN WITH THIS EVIDENCE IN A MEETING IN 30 DAYS FROM NOW, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD CUT THE MUSTARD ANYWAY. BUT SO I DON'T KNOW HOW WE SHOULD REACT TO THIS. WELL YOUR MM. YOU'RE RIGHT. THERE'S NOT MUCH IN THE STANDARDS WITH RESPECT TO WHAT WAS THE EVIDENTIARY LEVEL FOR MOTION TO RECONSIDER RECONSIDER MATTERS SO 
          [00:30:02]
WHAT YOU WOULD NEED TO DO IS WHAT YOUR COMFORT LEVEL IS WITH PRESENTED IN WAY THAT EVIDENCE THAT'S PRESENTED TO YOU IS WHETHER IT HITS THAT BURDEN BY GRANTING THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT YOU'RE GOING. TO GREAT THE VARIANCE WHEN THE TIME COMES UP AND YOU HEAR IT. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF WHETHER THEY MET THAT INITIAL HURDLE TO LIE TO RECONSIDER IT. THERE'S NOT MUCH GUIDANCE AS FAR AS WHAT THAT MEANS. OKAY, THANK YOU. UM COME TO MY CONSTITUENTS AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. MY NAME IS JAY HOLIDAY MET 6976 HANDY'S LOOP. JUST A QUICK QUESTION. MR WALLACE IS UE ONGOING CONFLICT AT 17 TO 29. THAT THE GREEN STAR HOME. IS THAT NOT ESSENTIALLY NEW EVIDENCE BEING THAT, UM THE HOME AS AS PRESENTED. THE HOME WAS GIVEN A CITY APPROVAL AND APPROVAL. IT WAS ESSENTIALLY THE PRECEDENTS FOR ALL OF US BECAUSE WE WERE IT WAS THERE BEFORE WE CAME IN. WE LOOKED AT THEM AS THE PRESIDENTS OF OH, THEY HAVE OFFENSE. THEY'VE GOTTEN CITY APPROVAL. UM IS THAT EVIDENCE TO IS THAT THE NEW INFORMATION TO SATISFY THIS REQUIREMENT? THAT'S JUST A QUICK QUESTION IN REGARDS BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THAT ARGUMENT. I UNDERSTAND THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED. HE STATED THAT YES, THE CITY IS IN CONVERSATION WITH THE FAMILY. HOWEVER, WE'VE ALSO BEEN IN CONVERSATION WITH THE FAMILY AND IT TO OUR UNDERSTANDING. IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE ALL SUNSHINE AND RAINBOW. 
          THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME CONFLICT. UM YEAH. YES ABSOLUTELY. THEY ARE ON AND, UM WITH THAT SAID, TOO. SO YOU KNOW THE CITY OPENLY, YOU KNOW, MISS SOMETHING, YOU KNOW FOR WHATEVER REASON THAT THAT'S A WHOLE DEBATE. YOU CAN GO BACK AND FORTH ON, YOU KNOW, HE SAID. SHE SAID, HOWEVER, AT RISK THIS IS A SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT. THERE'S ABOUT 25 TREES THERE AN OFFENSE PROBABLY $50,000 AND WORK THAT NOW SOMEONE HAS TO BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHETHER IT BE THE FAMILY. OR THE CITY. YOU KNOW, AND WHO'S TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT? BECAUSE THEY PUT IT, YOU KNOW, INSTALLED THIS THIS WORK. UM WITH THE CITY APPROVAL. AND NOW WHAT IS IT? I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WAS FOUR YEARS OR SIX YEARS LATER, THE CITY COMES BACK AND SAYS, HEY, WE MADE A MISTAKE. IT'S GOTTA GO WAIT A MINUTE, WHO SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINANCIAL MEANS OF MAKING THOSE CHANGES. BUT WITH THAT SAID, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THAT PROPERTY WERE ALSO VERY HESITANT TO MAKE ANY MOVES BECAUSE NO ONE WANTS TO BE THE FIRST. WANT TO ACT WITH THAT SAID. I FEEL LIKE THAT IS THE NEW INFORMATION BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE SETTLED, AND IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO SERVE AS THE PRECEDENTS TO OUR ARGUMENTS. SO I JUST WANTED TO PRESENT THAT IDEA THAT MAYBE THIS. THIS REQUIREMENT IS SATISFIED BY THE ONGOING DISPUTE THAT IS UNSETTLED AT THAT PROPERTY, WHICH SERVES AS A PRECEDENT FOR THE ENTIRE ARGUMENT. WELL. YOUR APPLICATION IS COMING UP NEXT, RIGHT? WELL, YOU'RE IN A DIFFERENT SITUATION BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT ON RECONSIDERATION FROM THE LAST TIME. YOUR APPLICATIONS COMING IN FOR THE FIRST TIME? SURE SO THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT SITUATION. SO THE PROBLEM THAT. CURRENT APPLICATION HAS IN MY VIEW IS THE SECOND PART OF THAT SENTENCE, WHICH IS COULD NOT WITH REASONABLE DILIGENCE HAVE BEEN PRESENTED THE PREVIOUS MEETING, AND I THINK THIS DISPUTES BEEN ONGOING FOR A WHILE, BUT I MAY BE WRONG, STEVE, HOW LONG IS THE DISPUTE BEEN GOING ON WITH THE SO THE IT WAS, YEAH. IT WENT INTO CODE ENFORCEMENT AROUND THE SAME TIME THAT MR DEAL REQUESTED HIS VARIANCE IN SEPTEMBER. SO IN CONCURRENTLY WITH THAT VARIANCE REQUEST, WE ALSO STARTED THE CODE ENFORCEMENT ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. ALL RIGHT . WAS THAT MENTIONED IN THE MINUTES? JUST REALLY CURIOUS NOW. I THINK YOU JUST TAKE EXPLANATION MINUTES JUST FOR THE RECORD ON THE SEPTEMBER 19TH 2022 MEETING IN THE STAFF REPORT ON PAGE 45 NUMBER 10. IT DOES REFERENCE THAT OTHER HOMES WITHIN THIS VICINITY WITH FENCES RATHER, IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT ARE CURRENTLY IN CODE ENFORCEMENT, SO I'M NOT SURE THAT'S ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN NEWLY PRESENTED TONIGHT. CLEARLY IN THE RECORD HAS NOT NEW COLOR. IT DIDN'T WORK THE WAY WE GET TO THE MIC FIRST, MARTIN 697 TO HANDY'S LOOP. I THINK THE POTENTIAL NEW INFORMATION IS FROM MY KNOWLEDGE AND YOUR LAST MEETING HERE. THEY SAID THAT THERE WAS NO FENCES IN OUR AREA WITH THE CITY OF APPROVAL. WE FOUND THAT TO BE INACCURATE. THERE IS 70 TO 9 DOES HAVE CITY APPROVAL, CITING IN HIS SITUATION FOR THE RECONSIDERATION. YOU KNOW THAT THAT IS NEW INFORMATION THAT IS AVAILABLE THAT WE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT JUST STATED THAT ON PAGE FOUR THAT THAT WAS KNOWN AT THE 
          [00:35:04]
TIME. THIS WAS HEARD THE FIRST TIME. HMM THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT ACCURATE BECAUSE IN THE LAST MEETING IT WAS ASKED OF MR MAYOR. IF. IF ANYONE ELSE HAS GOTTEN APPROVAL, AND THEY SAID NO. THEY ARE CURRENTLY IN QUOTING FORCE MINT, WHEN, IN FACT IF YOU LOOK AT THE DOCUMENT, THEY'RE NOT ENCODE ENFORCEMENT. IT WAS APPROVED. SO THAT'S NEW INFORMATION. I NEVER SAW THAT DOCUMENT UNTIL AFTER MY LAST MEETING. WELL, NOT TO ARGUE WITH YOU. BUT IT ISN'T CODE ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE THE CITY FOUND OUT THAT THE DEFENSE AND THE LANDSCAPING WAS IN RIGHT AWAY. AND SO IT WASN'T CODING FORCE MINT. WHAT'S HAPPENING IS DURING THE CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS. APPARENTLY THE HOMEOWNER SIMPLE. WAIT A SECOND . WHY ARE WE IN CODE ENFORCEMENT WHEN YOU GUYS APPROVED THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE, SO THAT'S HOW THE DISPUTE CAME UP. SO IT IS ENCOUNTERED FORCE MAN. AND IT DOES AFFECT YOU, BUT IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT SITUATION WITH THE OTHER TWO APPLICANTS SO ANYWAY. I DON'T MEAN TO ARGUE WITH YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S FINE. 
          I WOULD STILL DISAGREE, BECAUSE IF I'M BEING TOLD THAT SOMETHING IS IN CONTROVERSY, THEY HAVE APPROVAL. OKAY? IT JUST SEEMS THAT IS NEW INFORMATION BECAUSE I HAD NEVER SEEN THAT DOCUMENT BEFORE. OTHER QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS ON THE RECONSIDERATION . ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO HAS NOT SPOKEN WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS WITH QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. UM I WANT TO GO OVER A LITTLE BIT OF ROBERT'S RULES SO THAT WE'RE ALL CLEAR ON THIS, UM YOU KNOW? SO WE ARE REQUIRED TO ACT. WITHIN A CERTAIN TIMEFRAME, CORRECT AND THAT WOULD INVOLVE AT LEAST THE SOMEONE MAKING A MOTION IS CONSIDERED ACTING. TO MAKE A MOTION AND IT'S NOT SECOND. IT DIES. BUT YOU TAKE ACTION BY MAKING THE MOTION. HOWEVER MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO SECOND IT AND TAKE IT TO A BOAT, SO IT'S CLEANER RECORD THAT WAY. THANK YOU. I JUST I DIDN'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE DOING ROBERT'S RULES AND FOR HOW LONG, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT MIGHT FELLOW MEMBERS WERE AWARE OF HOW IT ALL WORKS. SO IF WE'D SECOND WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO VOTE VOTE EITHER ACCEPTED FOR ANOTHER SESSION. THE RECONSIDERATION MOTION. NEEDS A SECOND. SO THAT IT CAN BE VOTED ON. IF IT IS MOVED ON IN THAT SECOND, IT DIES, WHICH IS NOT THE PREFERRED WAY FOR THE VILLAGE TO DO BUSINESS, CORRECT. BUT BUT SO IF YOU VOTE VOTE TO ACCEPT THE RECONSIDERATION, THAT'S ALL YOU'RE DOING IS VOTING TO RE HEAR THE MATTER SO TO SPEAK. YOU'RE NOT APPROVING OR DENYING THE REQUEST. FOR THE VARIANT. YOU'RE JUST REQUEST APPROVING OR DENYING THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION. COME BACK ANOTHER MEETING, AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE AN OFFICIAL VOTE. ON THE VARIANTS ON THE VERY CONSIDERATION WOULD BE VOTED TONIGHT, RIGHT? THANK YOU. THANK YOU BASICALLY GOT TO DO OVER. YEAH TONIGHT'S VOTE IS DO WE PUT A DO OVER ON THIS? AND WE HAVE TWO NEW APPLICATIONS FOR SEPARATE BUT SOMEWHAT RELATED. SORRY I GOT YOU. SO MY I GUESS MY CONCERN AT THIS POINT, THEN MAYBE YOU CAN CHINA AND IF YOU THINK I'M WRONG, BUT SO WE HAVE THIS ISSUE. OF THIS PRIOR APPROVAL. WHICH FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE IT WAS AN ERROR. BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THE CITY IS TAKING FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT ERROR BECAUSE THE WAY IN WHICH THE SITE PLAN WAS PRESENTED WAS AMBIGUOUS AT BEST, AND MAYBE MISLEADING AT WORST, AND SO IT MISLED THE CITY INTO APPROVING IT WHEN IF IT HAD BEEN MORE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED. WHAT WAS GOING ON IN THE CITY WOULD HAVE REJECTED IT. PUTTING ASIDE HOW THAT'S GOING TO TURN OUT. UM WHICH WE DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S GONNA TURN OUT. I THINK IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE UNFAIR TO VOTED. MR DEALS, RECONSIDERATION APPLICATION DOWN. WHEN THINGS MIGHT CHANGE FOR THE OTHER TWO APPLICANTS, AND HE'S IN A SIMILAR SITUATION BECAUSE IF WE GRANT THE OPERATION GETS A DO OVER, AND HE'S BASICALLY IN THE SAME POSITION AS THE TWO NEW PEOPLE TO NEW APPLICATIONS, RIGHT, CORRECT. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A LITTLE UNFAIR. DO YOU WANT THE AGENDA CHANGE. THAT IS THE LAST THING WE'RE HERE TONIGHT. THAT MIGHT MAKE SOUNDS, I GUESS. SO THEN THEY ALL COME IN WITH BASICALLY CLEAN. WELL, WELL, NOT YES, THERE ARE DIFFERENT IF WE IF WE VOTED TO RECONSIDER. THE STAFF HAS SUGGESTED THAT WE NOT HERE ANYMORE TONIGHT THAT WE ON THAT ONE. WAIT 30 DAYS FOR THAT ONE SO THAT WE CAN GIVE NOTICE AND NEIGHBORS AND ALL THAT STUFF. AND THEN NOT NOT DISCUSS. THE OTHER ONES TONIGHT ALSO KNOW WE CAN FULLY PRESENT WE NEED TO DISCUSS THE OTHER ONES AND DO SOMETHING THAT WE COULD TABLE 
          [00:40:02]
THOSE OR OR ACT ON THEM EITHER ONE. UM. GET THEN? NO, BUT TO NEIL'S GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY, IS WHICH ON GREEN STAR HERE THAT THAT'S THE PROPERTY? DO YOU FEEL LIKE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT WAS IN THE PRIVATE RECORDS? MR DEALS, CLAIMING HE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT WAS IN CODE VIOLATION AT THAT TIME. DOES THAT INFORMATION? MEET THE CRITERIA FOR NUMBER TWO IN YOUR LEGAL. I WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S NOT NEW INFORMATION BECAUSE IT WAS IN THE RECORD LAST TIME AROUND THAT IT WAS IN CODE ENFORCEMENT, UM UNDERSTANDING. THAT'S HOW I REVIEW IT. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE APPLICANT HAS A DIFFERENT TAKE ON WHAT THAT MEANS, BUT I THINK IT'S CLEARLY IN THE RECORD THAT IT WAS ENCODED FORCE MINT AND THE CITY WAS IN DISPUTE WITH IT. 
          WHY DON'T WE WANT? WHY DON'T WE MOVE MR DEALS CASE TO THE END AND WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE OTHER TWO? BECAUSE KNOWING WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE OTHER TWO APPLICATIONS MAY IMPACT HOW THE BOARD VIEWS THE RECONSIDERATION ALICIA WOULD PERMIT WOULD YOU MIND IF YOU'RE HEARING THIS HERD LAST OF THE THREE TONIGHT TONIGHT. SO WE WERE JUST RECONSIDERATION. CONTINUE RIGHT HERE 2040 MINUTES LATER. WE'RE RIGHT BACK HERE, RIGHT WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW. THAT'S FINE. OKAY DO WE NEED EMOTION COMING IN FROM ARIZONA? BUT THERE WON'T BE IN UNTIL 8 30 BECAUSE WE OPENED THIS CASE. DO WE NEED A MOTION TO CLOSE THIS CASE? YES I THINK THAT'S THE CLEANEST WAY TO HANDLE IT WAS TO TABLE UNTIL 2040 MINUTES LATER. I MOVE THAT WE REARRANGE THE AGENDA, CLOSING THIS PARTICULAR CASE IN PUTTING IT AT THE END OF OUR REGULAR CASES. NOT SURE WE SHOULD CLOSE THE CASE. I WOULD CALL IT TABLING TABLE TABLE UNTIL THE AFTER THE OTHER TWO, OKAY? PEOPLE ARE SECOND THAT MOTION TO TABLE TWO LATER IN THE MEETING. AND DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO TABLE THIS TO THE END OF THE CASES. CAN I GET A ROLL, PLEASE? MR KIRBY? YES MR WALLACE? YES MR LARSON? YES, MR SHELL. 40, WHICH TAKES US TO VARIANTS. 1 28 2022 . THIS IS 697 TO HANDY'S LOOP. 
          CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF, PLEASE? YES. SO THE NEXT APPLICANT, UH, WILL ALSO BE LOCATED IN EVERINGTON, THE PROPERTY OWNER OF 69 17. HANDY'S LOOP IS APPLYING FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE FENCING, THE FENCE AND LANDSCAPING TO REMAIN ON THE PROPERTY WITHIN A PLANTED DRAINAGE EASEMENT. FOR CONTEXT. 6972 IS LOCATED ON MY 40 FOR THE ORANGE HIGHLIGHTED DASH LINE IS THE PROPERTY LINE AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS LOCATED WITHIN A MADE WITHIN A DRAINAGE EASEMENT, WHICH IS A MAJOR FLOOD GROUND. THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW AND THE HIGHLIGHTED BLUE IS A STORM WATER PIPE. EACH OVAL REPRESENTS A FLOOD ROUTE DESIGN. THE EXISTING FENCE IS BLACK ALUMINUM AT FOUR FT AS SHOWN ABOVE AND IT IS LOCATED IN RED HIGHLIGHT. IN ADDITION, THE THERE ARE THREE TREES LOCATED IN THE EAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY, AS YOU CAN SEE , THE EASEMENT VARIES IN LENGTH FROM 11 FT IN THE WEST CORNER OF THE REAR TO THE EAST CORNER AT 18 FT. AND IT APPEARS THAT PROBLEM CAN BE SOLVED BY SOME MANNER OTHER THAN GRANTING A VARIANCE CONSIDERING THE SIZE OF THE LIGHT. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S THIS SUFFICIENT BUILDABLE REAR YARD SPACE FROM 10 FT. TO 42 FT. DON'T KNOW. OOPS. SO IF YOU LOOK AT MY PARTNER AT THE FAR EAST CORNERS ABOUT 10 FT. AND THEN IT IMPROVES BY 20 FT. AND THEN FROM EACH END IS 40 FT. 42 FT. SORRY. HISTORICALLY THERE HAS NOT BEEN AN APPROVAL OF VARIANCES SIMILAR TO THIS BECAUSE THE FENCE AND LANDSCAPING IS LOCATED IN A MAJOR FRONT ROW, SO THE REQUEST TO BE APPEARS TO BE SUBSTANTIAL. IN ORDER TO ALLOW DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO FUNCTION AS DESIGNED . IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THE FENCES LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE EASEMENT IT'S ENGINEERING DESIGN FOCUSES ON PRECAUTIONARY PROTECTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IF OBSTRUCTIONS ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT. THIS COULD BLOCK STORM WATER FROM GETTING INTO THE CATCH BASINS, THEREBY PROHIBITING THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT FROM FUNCTIONING PROPERLY. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, STAFF IS HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. OKAY. CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, 
          [00:45:05]
PLEASE? IMPORTANCE 697 TO HANDY'S LOOP. GET OUT OF MY MEDS. ALRIGHT SO I AM APPLYING FOR A VARIANCE INSTRUCTION. THE CITY IN COORDINATION WITH THE ENTIRE BLOCK. I THINK WE SAY THE ENTIRE HANDY WITH HAS BEEN SPOKEN TO FOR WORK. PRETTY PRETTY CLOSE TO IT. UM DO YOU HAVE THAT WRITTEN SOMEWHERE? WE WILL PROVIDE ALRIGHT. THE REASON WHY ASKING IT'S SERIOUS IS BECAUSE IT'S THEIR DRAINAGE. AND POSSIBLY THEIR BASEMENTS THAT ARE ON THE LINE IF WE SCREW THIS UP SO WE CAN WE HAVE SPOKEN TO EVERYONE, AND THEY SAID THEY WOULDN'T SIGN THE DOCUMENT. 
          CORRECT. YEAH, OKAY. TO RECONSIDER THE EASEMENT RESTRICTIONS, GIVEN THE PREVIOUS HISTORIC APPROVAL AT 70 TO 9 AND THESE LOOPS. BY THE CITY AND THE H O A. AND BY THE H O A AT 6976 HANDY'S LOOP AND MY ADDRESS, WHICH IS 6972. I'M ALSO REQUESTING RECONSIDER RECONSIDERATION OF THE EASEMENT AND SUPPORT OF THE INTENTIONS OF FUTURE REQUESTS TO BUILD FENCES BY THE, UH YOU USE THE WORD RECONSIDERATION. CAN YOU WALK THAT BACK ONCE, AND SO I MAKE SURE I HAVE PARSED WHAT YOU JUST SAID. WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT RECONSIDERING THE EASEMENT RESTRICTIONS THERE. UM I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY RECONSIDER? DEFINE THAT TERM, PLEASE DIRECTIONS, SO WE ARE LOOKING TO WE ALL WANT TO HAVE A FENCE IN OUR BACK YARD. WE ALL HAVE TO DRAINAGE EASEMENT. ALL OF US ARE APPLYING FOR A VARIANCE SO WE CAN HAVE A FENCE IN THE IN THE IN THE APPEASEMENT? YES. YOU'RE LOOKING . OKAY? YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A VARIANT. I THINK THE WORD RECONSIDERATION MIGHT IS NOT PART OF YOUR APPLICATION AT ALL . OKAY GO AHEAD, SO BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT ASKING US TO TRY TO CHANGE THE DRAINAGE. CORRECT CORRECT SITUATION. YOU'RE JUST CONSIDERATION WAS PROBABLY THE WRONG WORD. OKAY ALRIGHT. WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT THERE. GO AHEAD. ALL RIGHT, SO HERE ARE SOME POINTS TO SUPPORT WHY WE ARE APPLYING FOR VARIANTS. UM WE BUILT OUR HOUSE WITH THE PRESIDENT AT 70 TO 9 AND BEES LOOP WHEN WE SPOKE TO OUR BUILDER ABOUT BUILDING THE FENCE , UM HE BELIEVED THAT, UM THAT THE 70 TO 9 HANDY'S LOOP CITY APPROVAL WAS THE PRESIDENT'S FOR US TO HAVE THE FENCE IN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT. UH UM. FOR THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IF WE CANNOT HAVE WITH A DRAINAGE EASEMENT CAUSES A SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION IN OUR YARD SIZE, SO I UNDERSTAND THE UM THE FLAT HERE AND THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED IS THAT THERE'S PLENTY OF ROOM FOR US TO HAVE A YARD IF YOU SAW THE WAY IT IS CONSTRUCTED. AH, WE WOULD LITERALLY HAVE LIKE EUROPE. THE WAY OUR LANDSCAPE HAS BEEN CONSTRUCT. LET ME JUST ASK YOU A QUICK QUESTION. IT'S THE LOCATION OF THE FENCE. THAT REDUCES THE SIZE OF YOUR YARD. NOT NOT THE LOCATION OF THE EASTMAN CORRECT? YES WE FOLLOWED THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT RESTRICTIONS DEFENSE WHERE IT WILL BE CONSIDERED APPROVED IN THE DREAM. WE'RE NOT IN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT. WE WOULD LITERALLY HAVE ZERO. UM THE WAY OUR LANDSCAPING IS CONSTRUCTED. OF THIS. I DON'T HAVE THE LASER POINTER HERE, BUT OFF THIS BACK PIECE HERE TO THE RIGHT. WE HAVE A BRICK PATIO. SO THIS IS OUR REAR COVERED PORCH. BECOMING OUR BACKYARD. THIS IS OUR PATTY BRICK PATIO WITH A FIRE PIT. WE WOULD ESSENTIALLY HAVE. THIS IS A YARD, WHICH WOULD BE VERY MINIMAL. COMPARED TO WHAT WE UME MENTIONED THE POLICE AND HIS BACKYARD. HE LIVES TWO DOORS DOWN FOR ME. I WAS NOT PRESENT FOR THIS. BUT HE EXPLAINED TO ME THE SITUATION. ALL NEIGHBORS ARE IN AGREEMENT, UM, FOR THE DESIRE TO HAVE A FENCE. AND WE ARE ASKING FOR SOME SORT OF WE WANT TO WORK WITH THE CITY AS HE MENTIONED SOME SORT OF COMPROMISE, 26 FT. SEEMS PRETTY , UH, PRETTY LARGE WHERE AGAIN? A LOT OF US WOULD NOT HAVE YARDS AND I LIKED HIS POINT ABOUT THE 26 FT ALLEYWAY WHERE TRESPASSERS KIND OF SET. THAT'S JUST WHAT I 
          [00:50:05]
HAVE TWO YOUNG KIDS. BEAUTIFUL WIFE HERE IN ATTENDANCE. UM MY JOB AS A HEALTH ORDERS TO PROVIDE AND PROTECT MY FAMILY. AND I WANT TO DO THAT IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE. SO I THINK THIS FENCE FURTHER. PROVIDES IT. AGAIN, NOT TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE. RIGHT? IF YOU HAVE A FENCE THAT'S CLOSER TO YOUR HOUSE. DOES THAT NOT SERVE AS YOUR CRIME PROTECTION. REQUIRE YOU ANY BETTER PROTECTED IF YOUR OFFENSE IS NOT 10 FT. DEEPER, SO FREE FOR THAT POINT IF THE FENCE WAS CLOSER. WE WOULD HAVE A NEW IT IS NOT NECESSARILY A GREAT ARGUMENT. OKAY? OFFENSE AT WE? WE COULD STILL HAVE A FENCE. UM BUT AGAIN , WE WOULD HAVE LITERALLY NO YORK ESSENTIALLY APATHY DEFENSE DOWN. YEAH. THIS WAS NOT APPROVED. THERE'S NO POOL IN YOUR BACKYARD. FOR MAKING THIS EASIER WILL PUT ONE IN O, FIRST DIFFERENCES. IF THERE WAS A POOL, YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A FENCE AROUND. YOU WOULDN'T FIT ANYWAY FROM BASICALLY LOOKING AT YOUR YARD. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YEAH. WE ORIGINALLY HAD PLANS TO PUT UP WITH THAT'S A GOOD THING. YOU DID? YEAH. UM DID YOU HAVE LEGAL COUNSEL WHEN HE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY? I DID NOT OKAY. IS IT THE SAME, SO THE LOT WITH THE GREEN STUFF? EXACTLY THE SAME BUILDER THAT HAD THE DIFFERENT BUILDER. WE HAVE USER AND GARNER. I BELIEVE 70 TO BATTLE. YEAH. SO LET ME WALK THROUGH THE PERMISSIONS HERE. UH UM. WE HAVE IT IN THE PRESENTATION THAT YOUR BUILDER CONTRACTED WITH HAMILTON'S FENCING. HAMILTON'S FENCING WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR REQUIRING ALL THE PERMITS. CORRECT. OKAY? LET ME ASK STAFF WAS ANY PERMIT FROM THE CITY ISSUED FOR THIS PROPERTY. NO THERE WAS NO PERMITS SUBMITTED OR ISSUED BY THE CITY OR NO PERMITS SUBMITTED BY THE CONTRACTOR. NO PERMITS WERE ISSUED BY THE CITY. SO WE HAVE. I'M NOT A LAWYER, SON ABOUT TO SAY THINGS. I'LL LET THE LAWYERS TELL ME. I'M WRONG. UM, WE HAVE A CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION TO ACQUIRE THE PERMITS AS PART OF THE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BUILDER AND THE SUBCONTRACTOR. WHICH THEY DID NOT DO, PUTTING THEM IN BREACH OF THEIR CONTRACT. IF I UNDERSTAND THAT TERM CORRECTLY. 
          IF THEY HAD AN OBLIGATION TO PERFORM A DUTY AND DIDN'T PERFORM IT. THAT WOULD LIKELY BE A BREACH HAVE FOUND THE POINT OF WHERE THE BALL GOT DROPPED. IT'S THERE. AND SO THE DAMAGE THE CITY IS NOT THE BAD GUY HERE. UM IT'S YOUR FENCE GUY WHO DIDN'T GO THROUGH AND ASK THE CITY. FOR THE PERMIT, WHICH BY NOW UM LIKE I CAN'T PREDICT FOR APRIL OF 2022. UM IF IT HAD BEEN OCTOBER. 
          I WOULD HAVE SAID CITY IS DEFINITELY GOT THIS ON THE RADAR. TWO. THAT'S FOLKS DON'T PULL A PERMIT. AND THEY BUILD. AND THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PULL OUR PERMIT BY THEIR CONTRACT. 
          CORRECT SO THAT'S A YES OR NO QUESTION, SIR. FROM WHAT HE SAID THAT WOULD BE YES. OKAY I DON'T KNOW THAT. WELL, I GUESS I WANT TO BE CLEAR. I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S IN YOUR CONTRACT. BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT WOULD BE IF THAT WAS IN THERE. I'M USING THE LETTER DATED 10 21 IS. FIRST BIG FAT PARAGRAPH IN MIDDLE OF PAGE FIRST PAGE THIRD LINE. READING HAMILTON'S FENCING WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR ACQUIRING ALL PERMITS. I'M SERIOUS. IT WAS THE SECOND PAGE OF THAT LETTER. THE FIRST PAGE FIRST PAGE COVER, PAY THE FRONT PAGE OF THAT LETTER. OKAY? I'M WITH YOU NOW. OKAY? YEP. ALL RIGHT. SO THE CITY IS NOT ON THE HOOK ON THIS ONE. PER SE. LET'S SEE. YEAH. DO WE KNOW MUCH ABOUT HAMILTON'S FENCING? DID HE DO A DECENT NUMBER IS HAMILTON'S PASSING TO A DECENT NUMBER OF JOBS WITHIN THE CITY OF NORMANDY? THE I DON'T KNOW THE NUMBER. THEY ARE REGISTERED CONTRACTOR IN THE CITY OF NEW ALBANY. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT EACH PROPERTY HAD A DIFFERENT FENCE CONTRACTOR, SO IT WASN'T THE SAME PARTY FOR EACH OF THESE PROPERTIES. BUT THEY SHOULD KNOW NATURE OF APPROVAL IS NOT THE SAME AS THE CITY APPROVAL. FAIR TO SAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER THAT. OTHER QUESTIONS. I'M SORRY WE'VE DONE THAT WAS ON MY YEAH, LET'S LET'S GO THROUGH OTHER 
          [00:55:08]
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. JUST A QUICK QUESTION. HAVE YOU SPOKEN WITH HEY, MILTON. SO I HAVE SPOKEN WITH VIEWS. OH, AND GARNER. UH I AM TECHNICALLY STILL UNDER MY BUILDERS CONTRACT . WE JUST MOVED IN APRIL, BUT THEY'RE STILL FINISHING PUNCHLESS ITEMS AS THEY WILL CRY FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS TO BUILD A HOUSE. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? UM I KNOW J HAS SPOKEN DIRECTLY WITH HAMILTON'S FENCING BECAUSE THIS SITUATION IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. WHERE KEEP PURCHASED THE HOUSE. UM WITH ALL OF THAT ALREADY IN PLACE TO MY KNOWLEDGE, SO HE'S TALKED TO HAMILTON'S FENCING ABOUT ALL THAT MINE. I'VE TALKED TO THEM AND GARNER AND WHAT THEY HAVE STATED IS THAT HAMILTON'S FENCING HISTORICALLY HAS NEVER SUBMITTED PERMITS OR ANYTHING FOR THE FENCE. THEY'VE JUST THAT'S THIS IS WHAT COMING FROM HIM SO AND I THINK WHAT MY BUILDER SAID, BECAUSE I MEAN I FOR THIS. I MEAN, I GOT INTO IT WITH HIM, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, I MEAN, YES. UM AND HE SAID THAT WITH THE 70 TO 9 HAVING THE FENCE AND I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS A GOOD ARGUMENT OR BAG ARGUMENT, BUT HE SAID WITH HIM HAVING OFFENSE THEY THOUGHT IT WAS, YOU KNOW, OKAY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, TOO. I HOPE YOU ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME ATTITUDE THAT BECAUSE SOMEONE PULLED A PERMIT THERE. WE DON'T HAVE TO WHO TOLD YOU THAT ABOUT THE OTHER GREEN STAR LOCATION THAT ONE MORE TIME? WHO TOLD YOU THAT? YOU MADE A STATEMENT JUST A MOMENT AGO THAT SOMEBODY TOLD YOU THAT BECAUSE THE FENCE SAID THERE WAS FENCING IN THE OTHER PROPERTY. WHO WAS THAT AGAIN, BUILDER. SO MY BUILDER STATED THAT HE DIDN'T GIVE THAT EXAMPLE . HE JUST SAID THAT OTHER HOMES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD FENCES. SO UM, ON THE PROPERTY LINE, SO THAT WAS HIS QUOTE UNQUOTE. PRECEDENTS TO MOVE FORWARD. OKAY? BECAUSE WHEN THEY TALK TO HAMILTON'S FENCING, THEY WERE LIKE I MEAN, WE NEVER STEVE. IS A PERMIT REQUIRED TO BE OBTAINED TO PUT FENCING AND LANDSCAPING IN LIKE THIS. SO FOR FENCING. YES YES, BUT JUST FOR NORMAL LANDSCAPING. THE CITY DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY PERMITS FOR LANDSCAPING, SO ANY PROPERTY OWNER CAN GO DOWN AND CUT DOWN TREES OR INSTALLED FLOWERBEDS OR LANDSCAPING WITHOUT ANY TYPE OF CITY APPROVALS. THERE'S LANDSCAPING INCLUDE TREES. IT DOES. MHM. 
          OTHER QUESTIONS AND COMMENT FROM THE COMMISSION. COMMENT WOULD BE THAT AS FAR AS LIKE THE USE OF YOUR YARD COULD HAVE IT, WHERE THERE'S GATES AND STUFF OPENING UP TO ALLOW ACCESS TO YOUR YARD . THAT'S I MEAN, IF THAT'S IF WE COULD KEEP OUR FENCE, WHERE THAT CURRENTLY AND JUST INSTALL THE GATE. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THE LIVER BACK TO THE EASEMENT? BECAUSE PART OF THE WAY I'M HEARING THIS, YOU LOSE PART OF YOUR YARD. YOU MOVED YOUR FENCE BACK TO THESE MEN, BUT THEN HAD ACCESS THROUGH SLIDING GATES OR SWINGING GATES. YOU WOULD STILL HAVE ACCESS TO THAT. SO THAT JUST KIND OF YEAH, CLARIFY THAT PART. IN THEORY, YES. I MEAN, I THINK THAT MIGHT LOOK A LITTLE NOT GOOD BYE FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM. AESTHETICS IS A DIFFERENT PART, RIGHT? BUT IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE ACCESS WAY TO THE MICROPHONE. GOD NAME NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. CHELSEA MARTIN 6972. HENRY SLEEP HIS LIFE. WE ALSO HAVE VERY YOUNG CHILDREN. SO WHILE WE COULD PUT THE GATE THAT THEY COULD GO IN AND OUT, THAT'S DEFINITELY NOT SAFE. AND AGAIN IF WE DO HAVE THE ALLEYWAY, PEOPLE WHO WE DON'T KNOW WE DON'T TRUST CAN BE ACCESSING THE BACK BEHIND THERE AS WELL. SO WHILE WE DO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADD A OPTION FOR THEM TO GO OUT AND USE THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHO'S COMING UP TO THEM, WE DON'T KNOW WHO COULD BE WALKING THROUGH CONTRACTORS OFF THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO THE SAFETY PEACE WITH THE YOUNG COVERED AS AN ISSUE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. IT'S MY WIFE, EVERYBODY. HMM. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHICH DO IT? HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT TO ADDRESS THIS. IT COMES TO MY CORSET DOT I SHOULD COME ON. AGAIN J HOLIDAY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR AT 6.76 MUSIC, AND I'M CERTAINLY NOT TRYING TO JUMP IN ON THE SAME THING, BUT I DID JUST WANT TO. WE WANTED THAT BACK TO THE 
          [01:00:03]
BEGINNING ABOUT THE RECONSIDERING THE WORD RECONSIDER. UM ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO KIND OF SUGGESTS AND ASK AS A GROUP. FIRST OF ALL WHEN IT CAME TO THE EASEMENT IN THE BEGINNING OF THE PRESENTATION. IS THERE A LEGAL? UM REQUIREMENT FOR ITS SIZE ITS WITH AS WE NOTED. THE OR, AS RYAN NOTED THE STREET WAS ROUGHLY 26 FT. 24 FT AND. I COULD BE INCORRECT HERE. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT THE IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE RULES ESSENTIALLY STATE THAT THE EASEMENT IS 13 FT OFF OF EACH PROPERTY LINE, SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GETTING THE 26 FT NUMBER. AND SO OUR QUESTION IS WHEN WE USE THE WORD RECONSIDER IS THAT 13 FT NUMBER HARD NUMBER BY REGULATION OR LAW THAT SAYS IT EASEMENT HAS TO BE THIS BIG. CAN IT BE A DIFFERENT SIZE? AND IF YOU COULD, COULD YOU PULL UP THE DIAGRAM OF THE WHOLE EASEMENT AGAIN? YEAH SO IF YOU FOCUS IN ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PAGE, DO YOU SEE HOW THE HIGHLIGHTED YELLOW IS 11 THICKNESS DIMENSION AND THEN WHEN IT GETS BETWEEN THE TWO HOUSES ON THE FAR RIGHT, IT'S A THINNER. SO DIMENSIONS. SO, UM JUST SEEING THAT I'M I'M QUESTIONING HIM ASKING THE QUESTION. CAN THE EASEMENT BE SMALLER? SO EVEN IF WE DO MHM MOVE OUR FENCES INSTEAD OF MOVING THEM TO 13 FT. INSIDE OF OUR PROPERTY LINE. CAN THEY MOVED, THEY MOVED TO 10 TO 8 OR SOMETHING TO SHRINK THAT EASEMENT FOR US TO SALVAGE OUR YARD AS MUCH AS WE CAN, BECAUSE AT THIS TIME CRITICALLY, SOMEONE COULD DRIVE A TRUCK. RIGHT THROUGH THE BACK OF THAT. SURE LET ME TAKE A SHOT AT THIS AND THEN FIND OUT HOW WRONG I AM, UM THAT EASEMENT IS CURRENTLY RECORDED WITH THE COUNTY. I'M BETTING AND SO IT TAKES A NONTRIVIAL AMOUNT TO VACATE AN EASEMENT AND THEN ANOTHER AMOUNT OF TO PUT IT BACK IN AND YOU WOULD NEED IF I'VE GOT THIS RIGHT 100% APPROVAL FROM EVERYONE THAT EASEMENT TOUCHES AND THEN BECAUSE IT'S DRAINAGE. 
          THIS GETS EVEN TOUGHER. UM I BELIEVE IF NOT OHIO, BUT THE VILLAGE PRACTICE CERTAINLY IS IMPOSSIBLY CODE IS THAT YOU CAN'T CHANGE YOUR NEIGHBORS. DRAINAGE. THAT'S THE LAYMAN'S WAY OF SAYING HOW WE DEAL WITH STORM WATER, WHICH MEANS THAT ANYBODY WHO'S UPSTREAM AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE TOPO LINES END GOING UPHILL TO THE RIGHT. BUT IF THERE ARE PEOPLE FURTHER UPHILL FROM YOU, YOU OWE THEM. THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT PROVIDES AND ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CHANGE THAT. NOW I'M GONNA BE QUIET AND LET STAFF CORRECT ME. NO I THINK THAT'S A VERY GOOD DESCRIPTION. 
          I THINK RYAN CAN ALSO PROVIDE SOME FURTHER EXPLANATION AS TO WHY THE PARAMETERS AND THEY ARE SURE AND YES, SO THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. SO THERE WOULD BE A HUGE THERE WOULD BE A PROCESS FOR THAT, BUT EVEN MORE SO, UM ARE IT'S CODIFIED IN OUR ORDINANCES THAT THESE HAVE TO BE DESIGNED TO CONVEY 100 YEAR, UH, BRAIN EVENT. AND SO THAT'S WHAT IT'S DESIGNED TO CONVEY THAT STORM. 
          SO IF YOU WERE TO CHANGE THAT THE WHOLE, YOU KNOW THE WHOLE SYSTEM WOULD HAVE TO BE REDESIGNED AND RECONSTRUCTED. SO WITH THAT STATED ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO MENTION TODAY, WHETHER IT BE LOGICAL OR NOT, WAS TO HAVE ANOTHER ENGINEER, THIRD PARTY ENGINEER OR SOMEONE ELSE, WORK AT THE PROCESS AND SEE IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DONE. IF IT'S REASONABLE, IF IT'S LOGICAL , UM WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT MIGHT BE A HUGE TASK TO REDESIGNED TO REGRADE THAT, BUT WE WANTED TO ENTERTAIN THAT IDEA. AND WITH THAT SENSE UM. I GUESS. USE THE WORD TABLE, THE FINAL VOTE TO THE FINAL DECISION TO GIVE US MORE TIME TO CONSIDER THAT AS AN OPTION IF IT IS AN OPTION. WE'RE NOT ENGINEERS. WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE REDESIGNED. SO WE WANTED TO GO GET, UM EXPERT ADVICE. SAY HEY, COULD YOU LOOK AT THIS? IS THERE ANOTHER OPTION FOR US TO ACCOMMODATE OR TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT WE WANT TO ACCOMPLISH COLLECTIVELY TO ENGINEERING FIRMS HAVE TAKEN A SHOT AT THIS ALREADY. SO THE DEVELOPERS ENGINEERING FIRM PROPOSED IT. THE CITY IS ENGINEERING FIRM APPROVED IT. UM. NOW YOU'RE NOW THAT THE THOUGHT IS. CAN WE DO THIS WITH DIFFERENT CRITERIA TO STILL CARRY 100 YEAR FLOOD? CORRECT. THE NEW ALBANY COMPANY . I'M SURE WOULD HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO SAY, BECAUSE. OPTIMIZING IT FOR GIVE ME A BIGGER BACKYARD SUGGEST MAY SUGGEST TO THE ENGINEERS, THINGS THAT THE VILLAGE DOESN'T WANT AND CERTAINLY DOESN'T WANT IN THE BACK OF A HIGH END HOUSE LIKE A SIX FT DIAMETER PIPE. WHICH WOULD PROBABLY CARRY A LOT OF WATER. UM I LIVED IN A SUBDIVISION IN UNION. WE HAD THESE WHERE THAT'S HOW THEY SOLVE THE STORM WATER PROBLEM, AND THE KIDS WOULD GO RUNNING THROUGH THE STORM WATER PIPES ALL THE TIME AND RIDE BICYCLES IN THEM, HAVING DONE IT MYSELF AS A KID. THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO CARRY A LOT MORE STORMWATER 
          [01:05:03]
THAN A NICE, GENTLE SWELL WHERE YOU CAN'T TELL WHETHER THE AS LONG AS YOU DON'T PUT A FENCE UP. YOU CAN'T TELL WHETHER SWELL IS VERY NEARLY WITHOUT GETTING ON TOP OF IT. THIS THIS WELL BEHIND MY NEIGHBORS ACROSS THE STREET IS ABOUT TWO FT DEEP AND IT'S VERY PRONOUNCED, AND IT CARRIES MORE WATER I SUSPECT BECAUSE OF ITS DEEPER AREA. AND I'M MY. I'M NOT THIS KIND OF AN ENGINEERING, AN ENGINEER. BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHEN YOU ASK AN ENGINEERED OPTIMIZED BECAUSE THE THINGS THEY HAVE TO TRADE MAY NOT BE THINGS THAT YOU'RE THINKING OF. UM AND THIS CERTAINLY CAN'T BE CHEAP AND IT WOULD INVOLVE COOPERATION FROM A LOT OF MOVING PARTS, ALL OF WHOM HAVE INSTANT VETO. LIKE ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS, THE VILLAGE, PROBABLY NEW ALBANY COMPANY AND THE FOLKS RELATED. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR COVENANTS ARE. UM THAT'S A REALLY BIG CAN OF STUFF TO OPEN UP AND SAY, LET'S GET A REDO ON. IT'S NOT. I'M SAYING IT'S I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT IS POSSIBLE. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF CAUTIONS TO THAT. 
          ABSOLUTELY AND WE RESPECT THAT AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, UM AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE COMING HERE TODAY TO REQUEST IS ESSENTIALLY MORE TIME TO INVESTIGATE AND CONFIRM THAT UM , FROM THE I GUESS. THE EXPERT ENGINEERS SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE ONE OF THE THINGS, UM, IN TERMS OF HAMBLETON, UH, FENCING AND THEIR ACTIONS, BOTH OF US, DAN AND MYSELF. BOTH USE HAMBLETON FENCING. UM ME? WELL BEFORE DAN I MOVED IN WHAT DANCE HOUSE WAS STILL BEING BUILT, AND HAMILTON'S DID MY FENCE AND THEN I THINK THE BUILDERS KIND OF SAID HEY, YOU KNOW WHO DID YOURS, AND THEY USED THE SAME WHEN I SPOKE TO THE OWNER OF HAMPTON FENCING, IT WAS HIS UNDERSTANDING THAT THE H O A IN THE CITY WHERE COMPLIANCE AND SO THAT'S WHY HE DID APPLY TO THE GOT APPROVAL, BUT IN THE WAY IT WAS EXPLAINED TO ME IS THE OWNER AND WHO SAID OKAY, GO UP. GOING AHEAD WAS THAT THAT WAS THE CASE THAT THE H O A WAS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY. AND SO THEY RECEDED, SO I DON'T THINK IT I DON'T WANT TO HANG THEM OUT TO DRY IN THE SENSE OF THEY JUST KIND OF SAID OH, THERE'S A PENCIL OVER THERE. SO WE'RE GOOD. YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK IT WAS QUITE YOU KNOW THAT, BUT JUST TO KIND OF GIVE A LITTLE MORE CLARIFICATION AGAIN. I'M NOT TRYING TO JUMP A LOT OF DANCE CASE HERE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO, I GUESS SPEAK AND MENTIONED THOSE POINTS. THANK YOU APPRECIATE IT. ONE OF THINGS I CAN ASK RIGHT NOW BECAUSE YOUR CASE IS UP. IF YOU WISH US TO TABLE THE CASE. PLEASE SAY SO. YES, WE COULD HAVE MORE TIME THAT OKAY. HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED? WE ARE. THE TYPICAL AMOUNT IS LIKE ONE MONTH WE GOT CHRISTMAS AND STUFF COMING AND I DON'T KNOW HOW EASY IT IS TO SCHEDULE ENGINEER 12 OR THREE MONTHS IS THAT TYPICAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE ASK OF US, UM. IT'S THREE MONTHS REASONABLE. WELL, LET'S ASK, UM, SIERRA AND STEVE IS THREE. THREE MONTHS DOABLE. OR IS THAT GOING TO CAUSE SOME PROBLEMS WITH THEIR CODE ENFORCEMENT? FOLKS. SO. YES FAR AS TIMING GOES, IT'S HARD TO SAY THERE'S A LOT OF VARIABLES THERE . I MEAN, THERE'S THE DESIGN ENGINEER WHO CREATED THE WHO CREATED THESE PRIVATE SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS IN THE PLATTS . I CAN'T SPEAK FOR AN ENGINEER . UM WE WERE JUST CONVERSING ON THE SIDE HERE. CERTAINLY THE REDESIGN OF THE STORMWATER CONVENES AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS A DIFFERENT MEANS TO THE SAME ENDS. SO IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT WORD TO TAKE ACTION ON THIS VARIANCE THAT WOULDN'T PRECLUDE THE PROPERTY OWNERS FROM SEEKING AND WORKING WITH AN ENGINEER AFTERWARDS AS AN ALTERNATIVE MEANS TO ADDRESSING, UM THE. THE I GUESS THE SIZE AND LOCATION AND INSTALLATION OF IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT STRATEGY EASEMENT. SO IF WE HEAR THE VARIANCES, WE PRECLUDE A REDO ON THE ON THE WHOLE THING AS AN INTEGRATED PLAN. IF. IF WE APPROVE OF VARIOUS, I SHOULD SAY THAT WOULD CREATE IT WOULD MAKE IT EVEN HARDER. TO REDO THE ENTIRE DRAINAGE. SO IF YOU APPROVED OF VARIANCE, THEN I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WOULD NECESSARILY NEED TO REDESIGN FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE THEY'D BE ALLOWED TO PUT IT IN THERE. I THINK THE REDESIGN WOULD ADDRESS THE YOU KNOW THE WOULD BE A DIFFERENT DIFFERENT MEANS TO THE SAME ENDS. BUT I WOULD SAY, HISTORICALLY, WE'VE TABLED ITEMS FOR 1 TO 2 MONTHS AND THEN ASKED FOR APPLICANTS TO COME BACK AND GIVE UPDATES AND DETERMINE. UM WHAT IS A SUITABLE AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL TIME NEEDED 123 MONTHS WAS NOT DRAWN OUT OF A HAT. THAT'S WE HAD A DISCUSSION. AGES AGO ABOUT DEVELOPERS WHO WERE TABLE NG 
          [01:10:04]
MONTH BY MONTH BY MONTH BY MONTH BY MONTH. THEN WE ASKED WHAT WERE THE REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME AND WHAT WE GOT FOR US 123 MONTHS OR GET IT OFF THE AGENDA WAS WHERE THE COMMISSION WAS COMFORTABLE WITH IT AND LOOKING AROUND. I'M THE ONLY ONE WHO'S THERE, THEN I DON'T REMEMBER THAT AT ALL. I LEAST 10 YEARS. YEAH, YEAH, UM SO. THAT'S WHERE THAT CAME FROM, AND DOUBLE CHECKING STAFF HAS COMFORTABLE WITH THREE MONTHS. WELL, WHAT? WHAT I HEARD WHAT I HEARD YOUR STAFF SAYING WAS THAT THE. GRANTING OF VARIANCE. WOULD BASICALLY OBVIATE THE NEED TO CHANGE THE ENGINEERING ENGINEERING. SO THAT'S THAT SORT OF WE DENY THE VARIANCE. THAT THEY ARE STILL FREE. TO SEEK ENGINEERING ASSISTANCE TO COME BACK WITH A DIFFERENT DRAINAGE DRAINAGE PROPOSAL. AND HOWEVER, THAT WOULD BE REVIEWED BY THE CITY WHETHER IT'S HERE OR THROUGH THE CITY THAN THEY COULD DO THAT, SO DENYING THE VARIANCE DOESN'T PRECLUDE THEM FROM DOING WHAT THEY WERE THINKING THEY MIGHT TRY TO EXPLORE THAT THEY CAN DO UM SO THAT'S WHAT I HEARD. THAT'S WHAT I HEARD STAFFS. OKAY THANK YOU. CLASS OF CLARIFICATION ON THAT. SO THE IF THEY WENT WITH THE ENGINEERING SOLUTION, BUT IT STILL BE A VARIANCE AT THAT POINT, AND WOULD THAT GO THROUGH A DIFFERENT PROCESS? SO I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE A ADMINISTRATIVE SO A STAFF PROCESS OF PLATTS DO ALLOW CITY STAFF TO CHANGE EASEMENTS, BUT SO THE PLATZ AND THE PRIVATE SITE IMPROVEMENT PLANS HAD TO BE MODIFIED BY PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER THAT THEY WOULD HIRE AND THEN UM, MR KIRBY IS CORRECT THAT, UM, IT IS CITY POLICY THAT IN ORDER TO CHANGE THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT, UM ALL THE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO ARE INCOME BIRD BY THAT EASEMENT WOULD HAVE TO SIGN OFF ON THAT PLATTER AND THEN IMPROVEMENT IN ORDER TO UM, UNDERTAKE THOSE CHANGES. SO IF WE WERE NOT TO APPROVE IT, WHETHER WE TABLE IT OR NOT, THERE'S NOT THE VARIANCE ISN'T THE THING IN THE FUTURE. THE VARIANCES. REGARDLESS OF THAT. THE ENGINEERING SOLUTION. 
          THE VARIANCE DOESN'T CHANGE THE REQUEST FOR VERY ANSWER, RIGHT, SO TABLE IN IT. FROM A VARIANCE POINT OF VIEW DOESN'T GAIN THEM ANYTHING. THAT'S RIGHT. I WOULD SAY. YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH SO THAT'S WHY I DON'T SEE THE VALUE IN TABLE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THE SECOND. THE SAME THING. THEY JUST SAID IT. YES SO IF OUR QUESTION IS AS IF WE TABLE THIS DO WE GET MORE TIME TO COME BACK? ROUTE THINGS. WELL, WELL. WHAT PROMPTED THIS DISCUSSION WAS THE SUGGESTION THAT THE EXTRA TIME WAS NEEDED TO GET SOME ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ADVICE. BUT THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING ADVICE WOULD BE GEARED TOWARD UH REDESIGN OF THE EASEMENT AREA IN A WAY THAT DIDN'T IMPACT YOUR PROPERTY AS MUCH BUT YOU CAN DO YOU CAN DO THAT, WHETHER IF WE DENY THE VARIANCE REQUEST, YOU CAN STILL DO THAT. OKAY? IT'S NO DIFFERENT. OKAY IT DOESN'T REALLY BECAUSE IF YOU COME IN AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO REDESIGN IT, AN ENGINEER SAYS WE CAN REDESIGN IT AND WE STILL HAVE YOUR VARIANTS FOR WHAT'S THERE NOW AND WE'D SAY NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU A HEADS, GO AHEAD AND REDESIGN IT, SO IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE. YEAH. PERFECT. SORRY JUST JUST BY NOT RYAN. DEAL 608 HINDI SLEEPER. YOU GUYS HELP ME , I THINK OBVIOUSLY, THE PREFERENCE, YOU KNOW GROUP IS OBVIOUSLY REDESIGNING IS A BIG COURSE OF ACTION, BUT I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN, HOWEVER. YOU KNOW, UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'VE HEARD TODAY, MOVING BACK TO PREVIOUS, UM, APPROVALS. 
          SECURITY WHICH I KNOW YOU. YOU STATED WHAT? WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? THE DIFFERENCE WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE LIKE AN ALLEYWAY THAT WOULD JUST WALK THROUGH THE BACKYARD. IF EVERYONE DID HAVE A FENCE OF WHICH I THINK MOST FOLKS WOULD SO IT WOULDN'T STOP FOOT TRAFFIC. UNWANTED FOOT TRAFFIC INTO THE POINT OF, UM MY NEIGHBORS. YOU KNOW, THERE IS A LOT OF FOOT TRAFFIC. AND THERE'S FOLKS THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU WOULDN'T WANT YOUR BACKYARD, YOU KNOW? HENCE THE POLICE REPORT I SHARED SO THAT BEING SAID, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY. WE'RE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE CITY DO WHAT'S POSSIBLE AND, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY YOU CAN UNDERSTAND OUR PERSPECTIVE ON THIS. JUST CLARIFY ABOUT ONE THING ABOUT BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND. UM WHAT YOU'RE SAYING WE CAN STILL EVEN IF YOU SHOOT IF YOU SHOOT DOWN THE VARIANCE NOW WE CAN STILL GO SEEK LEGAL ADVICE. HOWEVER THE ONE THING I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY IS IF THE VARIANCES DECLINED NOW UNDER THE CURRENT PROCEEDINGS. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. UM I THINK RYAN, I 
          [01:15:06]
BELIEVE IS ON AN APPEAL. AND I THINK DAN AND I ON VARIANCES, RIGHT GETS SHOT DOWN. THE NEXT STEP IS APPEAL. RECONSIDERATION IF YOU CAN COME UP WITH NEW INFORMATION IS ACTUALLY HANG ON. 
          THERE'S MULTIPLES STAGES TO WHAT COULD BE DONE, ONE OF WHICH IS AN APPEAL, AND I'M GONNA TURN TO VILLAGE OR CITY COUNCIL. ON HOW DENIED VARIANCES ARE APPEALED BECAUSE I THINK THAT GOES TO COURT BUT I CAN TELL YOU GOES TO THE COMMON POLICE COURTS POLICE COURT. SO WHAT? BUT MR DEAL IS DOING IS HE'S COMING BACK TO COMMISSION SAYING TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT YOUR DENIAL BECAUSE THINGS HAVE CHANGED ONE OF THE TWO ISSUES TO STANDARDS OF THE NEXT STEP IS IF WE WOULD DENY THAT TONIGHT IF WE DID NOT YOURS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK TO ASK US AGAIN. YOU JUST GO RIGHT TO THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND ASK A JUDGE TO RELOOK AT EVERYTHING AND TELL US WE WON'T YOU ABUSED OUR DISCRETION OR WHATEVER LISTENING SURE. SO MY QUESTION IN REGARDS TO THAT PROCESS. IS THERE A LIMIT LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME. SO IF WE WERE TO GO DO THAT DO WE HAVE TO DO THAT WITHIN 30 DAYS? AND THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING IS IT BETTER FOR US TO TABLE IT? SO WE HAVE THREE MONTHS TO SEEK LEGAL ADVICE OR TO SEEK, UM, SORRY EXPERT ENGINEERING ADVICE. OR IF WE VOTE? NO THEN WE'RE UNDER THE THIRD. POTENTIALLY A 30 DAY TIMEFRAME TO APPEAL OR GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CLARIFY IS A DECISION THAT WE MAKE HERE. DOES THAT BECOME RAISED UTAKATA? IF NOTHING, NOTHING CHANGES. I WOULD CERTAINLY. WELL, OBVIOUSLY. YOU CAN ALWAYS VOTE DIFFERENTLY, BUT I THINK IT BECOMES RAISED DUE TO CARD AND WOULD BE BECOME DEFECTIVELY. THE RULE THAT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW SO UM, I TEND TO AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT ONE. AS FAR AS WHAT YOU DO NEXT, I GUESS. THAT'S SOMETHING I DON'T KNOW. THE CITY REALLY SHOULD BE ADVISING YOU AS FAR AS WHAT YOUR NEXT STEP IS IN THE PROCESS. SO YOU JUST OKAY? OKAY HEARD LEGAL GO BY THAT. I DIDN'T PARSE WHAT WAS JUST SAID RAISED UTAKATA MEANS THAT THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED. OKAY IT'S APPEALABLE. YOU GO UP AGAIN AND YOU CAN'T COME BACK. YOU CAN'T COME BACK AND ASK AGAIN. AND THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS. BUT IF THIS ONE WHEN THIS BOARD MAKES THAT KIND OF DECISION. IF IT'S NOT APPEALED. IT'S OVER. THEY CAN'T REALLY BRING A VARIANTS BASED ON THE EXACT SAME GROUND BECAUSE IT'S BEEN DECIDED. YOU CAN'T CAN'T KEEP COMING BACK AGAIN AND AGAIN. THAT'S WHAT THE LAW SAYS. UM AND IS THERE A CLOCK THAT GOES TOWARDS HOW FAST YOU HAVE TO GET IT TO COURT? I WOULD SAY I'D HAVE TO LOOK AND SEE IN THE RULES AS TO WHAT THE TIMELINE IS. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S 30 DAYS. 90 DAYS I'D HAVE TO AGAIN. I'D HAVE TO CHECK THAT. ALL RIGHT. IT'S A SHORT PERIOD. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HESITANT BECAUSE WE TALKED ABOUT HAVING THE THREE MONTHS BUT THEN, IF WE VOTE NO THEN WERE SUBJECT TO THAT SHORT PERIOD. 
          BUT THAT WOULD NOT PRECLUDE YOU FROM GOING THE ENGINEERING ROOM. NO BUT EVEN IF WE DID, AND YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY SHOT IT DOWN. UM THE NEXT STEP. IF YOU GUYS VOTE NO, WE'RE GOING TO GET A LETTER FROM THEM SAYING YOUR FENCE BETTER BE MOVED BY THIS TIME, OR ELSE YOU'RE GONNA GET A $200 DAILY FINE. THAT'S A BIG, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S GOING TO KIND OF PUSH US TO. ALRIGHT I'VE GOT TO MOVE MY FENCE WOLF. I'M GONNA MOVE MY FENCE. I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THE WORK TO GO THROUGH AN ENGINEER, REDESIGN IT ALL AND THEN HAVE IT MOVED BACK. I MEAN, AGAIN. THAT'S A HUGE, HUGE TASK. ANOTHER THING THAT I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF BRING DIMENSION. UM IS THAT THE IT'S A THE WHOLE LOOP IS STILL IN DEVELOPMENT, AND WE'VE TALKED TO THE FAMILIES MOVING IN. MANY OF THE FAMILIES MOVING IN. UM HOWEVER, IT'S TO MY KNOWLEDGE THERE'S SOME HOME FIRST HOMES ARE STILL FOR SALE. HOMES ARE BEING BUILT AND NOT SO IF WE WERE TO GO TO COURT AND HAD THIS BIG PLAN OR WHATEVER IT SOUNDS LIKE IT COULD EASILY BE SHOT DOWN BY THE MERE FACT THAT EVERYONE HAS TO AGREE TO IT. BUT THE PROBLEM IS EVERYONE. IS NOT PRESENT YET. SOMEBODY ELSE EVERY PIECE OF PROPERTY ON THAT LOOP. I'LL BET SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY BUILDER WOULD HAVE TO AGREE TO IT IF THE HOME IS NOT BEEN FOR SALE. CORRECT. WHAT. OKAY JUST CLARIFYING QUESTIONS. 
          ALRIGHT, SO LET US RETURN TO THE CASE IN FRONT OF US. THAT'S IT. HMM. UM. I THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED BETWEEN YOU AND STAFF THAT'S HAPPENED YET. OH THAT THAT IS. WE DON'T TOUCH THAT AT ALL. YOU KNOW, UM AND I'LL LET STAFF CHARACTERIZED HOW THEY WOULD YES . SO THERE IS A ARE CODIFIED ORDINANCES DO INCLUDE A FINE AMOUNT ON A DAILY BASIS. OUR GENERAL PHILOSOPHY, THOUGH, IS WE'RE ALWAYS TRYING TO WORK WITH YOU TOWARDS RECONCILIATION AND TO ADDRESS THE CODE ENFORCEMENT 
          [01:20:06]
MEANS SO CERTAINLY WE WOULD ONLY TAKE ACTION ON THAT FINE AND EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES. SO CERTAINLY IF YOU KNOW IF THERE WAS COMMUNITY ACTIVE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ALL PARTIES AND ENGINEERS WERE ENGAGED. AND OF COURSE, THAT WOULD BE A PROCESS THEN YOU KNOW , WE WOULD, UM, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY GO DOWN THAT, UM, EXPLORATORY PATH YOU TO SEE IF THAT WAS AN OPTION PRIOR TO TAKING ANY OTHER FURTHER, LIKE LEGAL ACTION OR FINES? UM BECAUSE WE CERTAINLY WANT TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS TO SEE IF THERE'S SOME OTHER WAY TO ADDRESS THAT. BUT ULTIMATELY WE WOULD. THERE WOULD BE A TIMELINE WHAT THAT IS, YOU KNOW, IN ORDER TO ADDRESS AND REMOVE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE DRAIN ACHIEVEMENT. HMM OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, I THINK WHAT MAKES THIS HARD RIGHT? IT WAS A UTILITY. HE SPENT. THAT'S ONE THING, BUT THIS IS ABOUT THE LIFE SAFETY OF YOUR HOUSES. THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND PROPER POTENTIAL PROPERTY DAMAGE OFFENSES WERE THERE AND THINGS GOT CAUGHT AND PLUGGED THE WATER UP. I THINK THAT'S WHAT MAKES US SUCH A DIFFICULT CONVERSATION IS THAT THE LIFE SAFETY HEALTH OF YOU AND YOUR NEIGHBORS. IN HERE. AND ALSO THE POTENTIAL LIABILITY OR OPENING THE CITY UP TO WE GO AGAINST AN ENGINE TO ENGINEERS AND AT THIS POINT AND SAY, I WOULD JUST NOT GOING TO WORRY ABOUT WHAT THEY THINK. AND THERE'S 100 YEAR FLOOD THAT FLOODS EVERY SINGLE HOUSE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE APPROVED IT GOING AGAINST AN ENGINEERS. REPORT THAT'S A DANGEROUS GROUNDS FOR US. YEAH. OKAY? I MOVED FOR ACCEPTANCE AND THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS INTO THE RECORD FOR THE ER. 1 28 2022. I'LL SECOND THE MOTION AND NEO FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO BE SURE THAT IT INCLUDES THE POLICE REPORT AND THE LANDSCAPE MATERIALS, AGREED. 
          THE 17 29 HAND PROPER OKAY? IS THE MOTION CLEAR. FOR SOUTH YES, THANK YOU. WHICH ONE IS THIS ONE? 1 28. GO GOT IT. CAN YOU HEAR THE ROLE FOR THE DOCUMENTS? MR KIRBY? YES, MR WALLACE? YES? MR LARSON? YES, MR SCHELL? YES? DOCUMENTS ARE IN THE RECORD. THEY'RE YOUR EMOTION ON THE APPLICATION ITSELF. WELL, I MOVE TO APPROVE APPLICATION VIA OR 1 28 2022, BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND STAFF REPORT. AND THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORTS SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL CONDITIONS. I COULD BE WRONG. JUST READING WHAT THE MOTION IS THAT THERE IS NO COMMISSION CONDITIONS. THEN THERE WOULD BE NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE EMOTION. DO I HEAR A SECOND? I WILL. SECOND THAT. AND DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE. THE RULE, MR WALLACE. 
          NO. MR KIRBY. MR LARSON. MR SHELL. MOTION FAILED 04. FOR THE RECORD. YOU SHOULD PROVIDE SOME EXPLANATION AS TO WHY. NO UM YOU CAN ALMOST PICK OFF THE ONE FROM THE ORIGINAL VARIANTS. JUST DOWN THE ROAD. UM THIS HAS A DETRIMENTAL. LET ME PULL DUNKIN CRITERIA SO I CAN DO IT FROM SCRATCH. THERE WE GO. DUNCAN'S RIGHT. YEAH. UH, I FIND THE VARIANTS TO BE SUBSTANTIAL. AND, UM. THAT'S WHY HE'S ABOUT CHANGING THE NEIGHBOR STUFF OF THE NEIGHBORS AND I HATE SMALL I TALENT TO, UM. YES SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT. THIS IS DRAINAGES, 100 YEAR. DRAINAGE. UM GOVERNMENT SERVICES. IF DRAINAGE STORM STORM IS SOMETHING WE PROVIDE AS A GOVERNMENT AND THAT WOULD BE IMPAIRED. UM WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THE ZONING RESTRICTIONS. I'M NOT SURE ABOUT UM SO, BUT SOME MAN OR OTHER THAN A VARIANT? YES, I BELIEVE SO. THE CONDITIONS ARE NOT PROCURED TO THIS PIECE. THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS THIS. OKAY, I'LL STOP THERE. THANK YOU. DAVE MAKE IT CLEAR WE'RE WE'VE GONE FROM THE TABLE IN GROUND. YES. RIGHT BECAUSE WE THINK WE CONCLUDED THE TABLING DIDN'T REALLY DO WHAT YOU WERE HOPING IT. IT MIGHT DO I AGREE WITH MR KIRBY'S ASSESSMENT IS, IT'S NOT MEET DUNCAN REQUIREMENTS. IN ADDITION, IT 
          [01:25:03]
IT'S A DRAINAGE EASEMENT THAT HAS PARTICULAR CHARACTERISTICS THAT PRECLUDE THE INTRODUCTION OF OBSTRUCTIONS IN IT BECAUSE IT CAN CREATE ALL KINDS OF ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS FOR THE NEIGHBORS. THE APPLICANTS IN THE CITY ITSELF. SO FOR THOSE REASONS I HAD TO VOTE NO AND ALSO FOR PRESIDENTIAL PURPOSES. WE'VE ALREADY PREVIOUSLY DENIED A SIMILAR APPLICATION. UM AND. 
          IT'S CERTAINLY LIKELY WE'LL SEE AT LEAST SIX OR SEVEN OTHERS WHEN THE NEIGHBORS COME IN. SO FOR THOSE REASONS TO VOTE, NO BUT UNDERSTAND I FEEL FOR YOUR PREDICAMENT. UM AND I DON'T THINK THAT THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN ERROR. APPLICATION MAKES A DIFFERENCE WITH REGARD TO THIS VARIANCE. CHRIS NOBODY WOULD KNOW FOR THE SAME REASONS AS MR KIRBY AND MR WALLACE AND JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. IN ADDITION TO THAT, IT'S ABOUT I BELIEVE IT WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. YOUR PROPERTY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE AREA AND THAT'S PRIMARY REASON AS WELL. IN ADDITION TO THAT YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH WHAT WAS SAID PREVIOUSLY. I DON'T NEED TO BUILD ANY FURTHER, BUT WE KNOW THESE ARE TOUGH SITUATIONS WE NEED YOU GUYS AREN'T TOUGH SPOT AND HE GIVES US NO JOY TO DEVOTE BUT WE HAVE A JOB. WE HAVE A JOB TO DO. AND THIS ONE IS JUST THERE'S TOO MANY ROWS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THIS TAKES US TO VERY MUCH 1 29 2022. CAN WE HEAR FROM STAFF, PLEASE? SEE YOU. 76 YES. SO THE NEXT APPLICANT WILL ALSO BE APPLYING FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE FENCE AND LANDSCAPING TO REMAIN ON THEIR PROPERTY WITHIN A DRAINAGE IS A PLANET TRADE ENERGY EASEMENT. 
          LOCATED ON 6976 HANDY'S LOOP. FOR CONTEXT. 6976 IS LOCATED ON LOCK 45. THE ORANGE HIGHLIGHTED DASH LINE IS THE PROPERTY LINE AND AS YOU CAN SEE WITHIN THE IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT, WHICH IS A MAJOR FLOOD ROUTE. THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW THE HIGHLIGHTED WAS THE STORM WATER PIPE, AND EACH OVAL REPRESENTS A MAJOR FLOOD WRAP DESIGN. THE EXISTING FENCES. BLACK ALUMINUM AT FOUR FT. AS SHOWN ABOVE IT IS LOCATED IN THE RED HIGHLIGHT. IN ADDITION, UP TO FIVE TREES ARE LIKE ARE LOCATED IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY. ONE IN EACH CORNER, AS INDICATED IN THE SQUARES. AND THREE LOCATED AT THE BORDER INDICATED BY THE CIRCLES, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE EASTBOUND VARIES IN LENGTH FROM 18 FT IN THE WEST CORNER OF THE REAR TO THE EAST CORNER AT 12 FT. OKAY? IT APPEARS THE PROBLEM CAN BE SOLVED BY SOME MANNER OTHER THAN GRANTING A VARIANCE, CONSIDERING THE SIZE OF THE LIFE AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S SUFFICIENT BUILDABLE REAR YARD SPACE FROM SEVEN FT. 50 TV AND DEPTH. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN KIND OF SEE, BUT IT IS A LITTLE TIGHT SEVEN FT RIGHT HERE. AND THEN THE 52 FT FROM EASEMENT TO BACK AT THE HOME. UM. HISTORICALLY THERE HAS NOT BEEN APPROVAL FOR VARIANCE SIMILAR TO THIS BECAUSE THE FENCE AND LANDSCAPING IS LOCATED IN A MAJOR FLOOD GROUND. SO THIS REQUEST APPEARS TO BE SUBSTANTIAL. IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO FUNCTION AS DESIGNED. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT DEFENSE IS LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE EASEMENT . IT'S ENGINEERING DESIGN FOCUSES ON PRECAUTIONARY PROTECTION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 
          IF THE OBSTRUCTIONS ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT. THIS COULD BLOCK STORMWATER FROM GET GETTING TO THE CATCH BASINS. THEREFORE, PROHIBITING THE JOURNEY EASEMENT FROM FUNCTIONING PROPERLY. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, STAFF IS HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM NOW. OH, YEAH. UM AND JUST IN CASE IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION. THAT THESE TWO TREES WERE BUILT BY THE CITY. BUT WE JUST WANT EVERYONE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IS THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE CITY NORMALLY DOES. IT'S ACTUALLY THE DEVELOPER. SOMETIMES HE COMES IN AND ADD SERIOUS ADDITIONAL SPOTS. AND AS FOR THE THREE TREES AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY KIND OF BORDER THE EDGE. UM IT WOULD BE GREAT, TOO. YEAH AND IDEA, MAYBE IN THE FUTURE OF WHERE THESE ARE LOCATED TO CONFIRM THAT'S TRUE, BUT AS FAR AS THE PLATE IS CONCERNED IN THE CYCLONE IS CONCERNED THIS DOES MATCH UP. WITH THE PROPERTY LINE. OKAY? ANY QUESTIONS TO STAFF. YOU HEAR FROM ME UP AGAIN? HI AGAIN. I'M FOR THE RECORD. I'M J HOLIDAY 6976 HANDY'S LOOP. WE'VE ALREADH 
          [01:30:11]
IN TERMS OF DEFENSE. UM THEY DON'T WANT TO GUESS. TAKE AWAY FROM MY PEERS ARGUMENTS AS WELL. 
          HOWEVER MY SITUATION IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF THE LANDSCAPING AT THE THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING. UM JUST SOME KEY POINTS THAT I WANTED TO KIND OF POINT OUT. UM THAT I GUESS BASED ON THE DECISION OF THE PREVIOUS VOTERS IRRELEVANT. WHEN UM WHEN SHE POINTS OUT, HEY, THERE'S STILL ROOM FOR OFFENSE. MIND YOU I COULD BE WRONG. BUT UNDER THE GUIDELINES, EACH FENCE HAS TO BE, UM, PERFECTLY RECTANGULAR, SO WE CAN'T HAVE A BUNCH OF FENCES THAT ARE ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT ZIGZAGGING THROUGH. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THESE ANGLES, AND YOU LOOK AT THE CLOCK TO GO TO THEIR HOUSES, YOU KNOW ONE FENCE IS GOING TO GO AT THIS ANGLE. ONE FENCE IS GOING TO GO AT THIS ANGLE. IT'S NOT GONNA WORK. SO WHEN YOU SIT HERE AND SAY, OH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S PLENTY OF ROOM HERE. 10 FT. THAT'S NOT EXACTLY TRUE, BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE APPROVED. 
          BASED ON THE PERFECT RECTANGULAR CRITERIA. THE A. I GET THAT'S IRRELEVANT TO THE SAFETY POINTS THAT YOU MADE. BUT I WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT THAT WHEN SHE SAYS, HEY, YOU KNOW THERE'S STILL PLENTY OF ROOM. THAT'S NOT COMPLETELY THE CASE AND THAT'S I THINK WHY? YOU KNOW WHAT DAN WAS SAYING, LIKE, LOOK, MY YARDS BEING DECIMATED. AND THE POINT WITH ME IS THE SAME THING. IT'S LIKE YES, ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF MY YARD. I HAVE A LITTLE YARD FOR OFFENSE IF YOU DEEM IT WORTH YOU KNOW, FENCING IN, HOWEVER, I'M LOSING TWO THIRDS OF MY YARD, WHICH IS THE SPACE TO THE LEFT AGAIN, JUST POINTING THESE OUT AS TO WHY IT'S SALT IN THE WOUNDS TO SPEAK. IT'S A BIG DEAL. UM. IN TERMS OF THE TREES. I HAVE A I BOUGHT THE HOME. I'M NOT SURE IF I'M THE SECOND OWNER OF THE THIRD UM, I HAVE NOT MADE ANY ADDITIONS TO THE LANDSCAPING OF THIS HOME. OTHER THAN THAT FENCE AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE BASED ON THE PICTURES AND PHOTOS OF THE ORIGINAL SALE OF THE HOME ON REAL ESTATE WEBSITES, ALL OF THE LANDSCAPING THERE IS ORIGINAL TO THE BUILDER. I DID CONTACT THE BUILDER AND I ASKED THEM I SAID, HEY, YOU KNOW DO YOU HAVE PERMITS FOR THE LANDSCAPING BECAUSE I RECEIVED A NOTICE FROM THE CITY SAYING, UM, YOU MUST RULE THE FENCE AND THE LANDSCAPING. HOWEVER THE LANDSCAPING WAS NOT. IT'S NOT CLEAR WHAT WE'RE REFERRING TO. 
          AND THE OBVIOUSLY THE SQUARES ARE IN THE EASEMENT. WHAT'S THOSE WHATEVER THEY CAN GO, NOT A CONCERN. BUT THE CIRCLES ARE STRING OF EVERGREENS THAT PROVIDE PRIVACY. THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL, AND THEY'RE VERY MATURE, EXPENSIVE TREES INITIALLY PLANTED THERE BY THE BUILDER, I GUESS SLASH DEVELOPER . THIS IS NOT SOMETHING I CAME IN AND PUT THEIR THIS IS SOMETHING I BOUGHT THE HOUSE AS IS THEY'VE EXISTED THERE FOR SIX YEARS. NOW I'M THEORETICALLY IF IT'S DEEMED THAT THESE HAVE TO MOVE, THERE IS A DISCREPANCY OF YOU KNOW THEY'RE THEY'RE RIGHT ON THE LINE. THE HAMILTONS FENCING GUY. I ASKED HIM. I SAID, LOOK, ASSUMING THIS IS NOT GOING TO GO. WELL COULD YOU PLEASE COME OUT AND YOU KNOW, MAKE UP A PLOT OF WHAT DEFENSE COULD LOOK LIKE YOU KNOW, ACCORDING TO IT TO BE APPROVED, AND HE BASICALLY CAME OUT AND THE LINE THAT HE DREW JUST WENT, LIKE, RIGHT. RIGHT THROUGH THE TREES. LIKE SO WE'RE TALKING LIKE THEY'RE JUST LIKE RIGHT THERE ON THE 13 FT EDGE. HENCE WHY I ASKED IS THESE EASEMENTS RESTRICTIONS, YOU KNOW? CANNOT TREAT BEYOND THE BORDER OF IT. AND AGAIN, IT'S GONNA BE VERY DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE WHERE EXACTLY THAT THAT LINE IS. UM AND AGAIN, IT'S THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO NOT ONLY TO. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF THESE TREES WOULD SURVIVE BEING DUG UP AND MOVED. ASSUMING YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S EITHER WAY IT'S THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. AND NOW I'M GONNA HAVE TO TAKE ON THE THAT EXPENSE. UM FOR SOMETHING THAT'S EXISTED THERE FOR SIX YEARS THAT THE ORIGINAL BUILDER BUILT, AND THE ORIGINAL BUILDER ALSO CLAIMS THAT HE HAD HOH AND CITY APPROVAL. I ASKED THE BUILDER I SAID, COULD YOU PLEASE PRODUCE THESE? THEY SAID NO. I WENT TO THE CITY MYSELF PAID FOR ALL I SAID, I ASKED. COULD YOU PLEASE PRINT OUT ALL PERMITS AND DOCUMENTS? UM AT THE ORIGINAL APPROVED PLANS PAID FOR IT OUT OF MY POCKET, YOU KNOW? AND I SPENT MY OWN TIME YOU KNOW, GOING THROUGH IT. COULDN'T FIND IT. UM. I IMAGINE IF I TRY TO PUSH ANYTHING WITH THIS WITH THE BUILDER AND GO BACK AND SEE IF YOU GUYS SAY, HEY, THE TREES GOTTA GO TO EVERYTHING'S GOT TO GO. AND I'VE GOT TO TAKE ON THIS EXPENSE SIMILAR TO MY NEIGHBORS THAT THE OTHER ADDRESS THAT WE WERE TALKING TO I'M GONNA HAVE TO. YOU KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO SAY NO. ASSUMING MAKE US I'M GOING TO SPEND MORE MONEY ON LEGAL FEES, THEN IT'S WORTH DOING IT ALL AND AT THE END OF THE DAY. I'M JUST AH, I DON'T KNOW WHAT A PROPER WORD BUT THEN I'M GETTING SHAFTED IN THIS SENSE BECAUSE I BOUGHT A HOME THAT'S DEVELOPED BY THE ORIGINAL 
          [01:35:07]
BUILDERS SUPPOSEDLY APPROVED BY THE CITY AND THE DEFECT WITH THE HIDDEN DEFECTS, YOU KNOW, SO TO SPEAK SO, BUT AGAIN, IT'S HASN'T BEEN CLARIFIED AS TO WHAT SPECIFIC LANDSCAPING HAS TO MOVE IT. BUT AGAIN, MY ARGUMENT IS STILL WANT TO KEEP THE FENCE. I WANT TO KEEP THE YARD. UM YOU KNOW, AGAIN IN TERMS OF PRECEDENCE WE LOOKED AT, UM 70 29. WE TALKED TO, YOU KNOW MY REAL ESTATE. I DID NOT HAVE LEGAL COUNSEL WHEN I BOUGHT THE HOUSE. MY REAL ESTATE AGENT SPOKE WITH UM OTHER NEIGHBORS AND OTHER REAL ESTATE AGENTS WHO TOOK PART IN THE AREA. UM AND AGAIN, IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WENT TO HAMILTON'S. THEY SAID, HEY, WE'LL TAKE CARE OF ALL THE, UM PERMITS THAT WAS PART OF THEIR CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT. THEY WENT TO THE H O A. UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THE H O A. WAS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY. UM HE I THINK HE QUOTED ME AS LIKE, HEY, OVER 80% OF TIME. THAT'S HOW IT WORKS. HE GOT APPROVAL FROM THE U A CONVINCED ME THAT WE'RE GOOD. I WANT TO MOVE. THE DEFENSE HAS BEEN THERE FOR A YEAR WITHOUT YOU KNOW ANY COMMENTS? NOTHING I'M NOT SURE HOW A COMPLAINT CAME UP WHERE? UNLESS IT WAS THE BUILDER THAT BEHIND ME WHO'S ALREADY KICKED IN THE FENCE FROM THEIR OWN, YOU KNOW, MACHINERY AND EVERYTHING GOING DOWN. BUT THAT'S HOW THAT ALL KIND OF WENT DOWN. SO AGAIN . I'M NOT ONLY HAVE ANY MOVE MY FENCE, REDUCE MY YARD TO A THIRD OF ITS SIZE, BUT ALSO THE TREES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR YEARS FROM THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT. I'M LOSING THE BEAUTY OF THOSE THE PRIVACY OF THOSE PROTECTION OF THOSE, UM AS WELL AS YOU KNOW, AND IT'S NOT ONLY YOU KNOW, I HAVE DOGS RUN AROUND. MY NEIGHBORS HAVE A BUNCH OF KIDS. WE ALL WANT THAT PROTECTION. I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT MY DOG. RUN OUT THE DOOR AND POTENTIALLY BITING A KID WHO'S RUNNING IN MY YARD CHASING HIS BALL, YOU KNOW, KIND OF THING. THE SAME THING WITH THE SAFETY 26 FT. YOU CAN DRIVE. 
          TRUCK THROUGH THEIR YOU KNOW, RUNNING EVERYTHING CLEAR IN ITS PATH. I MEAN, IT JUST SEEMS RATHER EXCESSIVE, BUT I UNDERSTAND. I'M NOT AN ENGINEER. AND I RESPECT MY NAIVE AND IN THE MATTER BUT THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS. I WANTED TO POINT OUT, UM THE RECTANGULAR YARD FURTHER REDUCES THE SIZE OF THE ARTS, WHICH I THINK DEVALUES OUR PROPERTY. YES, WE STILL HAVE THE SAME YARDAGE, BUT JUST LIKE WHAT DAN'S WIFE MENTIONED, ARE YOU? YOU KNOW, AND I UNDERSTAND IT'S A BAD ARGUMENT. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO GO PLAY ON THE OUTSIDE OF YOUR FENCE? YOU WANT TO PLAY INSIDE YOUR YARD INSIDE YOUR HOME? AND I IMAGINE YOU GUYS WERE THE SAME FOR YOUR FAMILY AND I WANT THE SAME FOR MY DOGS. I DON'T HAVE KIDS YET, BUT THEY ARE MY KIDS. SO I'M SEEKING CLARIFICATION. IF THE FENCES DO HAVE TO MOVE. THE NEXT OTHER THING INVOLVED WITH ME IS THESE EVERGREEN TREES? THE TWO IN THE CORNER? WHICH KIND OF EXACTLY ARE THEY ARE THESE ARBOR VTR. 
          THESE SPRUCES, ARE THEY I'VE BEEN TOLD EVERGREEN, BUT I'M NOT 100% SURE. CHRISTMAS TREE. YES HOW FAR DOWN DOES THE BRANCHES GO? DO THEY GO TO THE GRASS? YEAH. THEY GO DOWN AND THEY'RE PRETTY. THEY'RE PRETTY, YOU KNOW , THEY'RE LIKE THIS WIDE EACH I PUT CHRIS CHRISTMAS LIGHTS AROUND THEM. UM MY DOGS LOVE TO PEE ON THEM AND SNIFF AROUND THEM. AND THAT'S ANOTHER DOWNSIDE TO IT IS EVEN IF EVEN IF THE TREES CAN STAY AND I DO HAVE TO MOVE THE FENCE THE NEXT QUESTION IS ALRIGHT, CAN DEFENSE GO ON THE OUTSIDE OF SAID TREES , OR DOES IT HAVE TO COME ON THE INSIDE OF SAID TREES, AND OBVIOUSLY THAT REDUCES MY YOU KNOW THE FUN FOR THEM, AND THEY ARE JUST BEING ON THE OUTSIDE. IT'S A DIFFERENT THINGS COME TO ASPECT, BUT AGAIN. THE KEY POINT OF THIS IS NOT SO MUCH MY TREES AS IT IS ALL OF US IN THE EFFORT TO HAVE FENCES AND THE MOST YARD POSSIBLE. WE UNDERSTAND THE SAFETY RISKS AND THE CHALLENGES THAT IT FACED, BUT WE'RE TRYING TO WORK. COLLECTIVELY WITH EVERYONE IN A PEACEFUL MANNER. YOU KNOW, IT IS LIKE I SAID THAT THE HOME. ONE OF THE CAVEATS FOR ME PURCHASING THIS HOME WAS HAVING A YARD FOR MY DOGS. MY FIANCE WOULDN'T HAVE IT IF IT WASN'T AND WE DID. SO WHEN WE SAW 70 29 HAVE THAT BIG, BEAUTIFUL YARD AND YOU KNOW THE APPROVAL OF IT. WE LOOKED INTO IT BEFORE WE EVEN PURCHASED THE HOUSE SAYING YES, WE HAVE THIS CHARTER AND BY THE YARD, WE MET THE WHOLE THING. NOT JUST THE BRICK PATIO TO THE RIGHT. WHICH AGAIN IF YOU STRAIGHTEN OUT THOSE ANGLES EVENTS IS BASICALLY GOING TO GO UP THE RIGHT AND COME ACROSS TO THE BACK GARAGE UNLESS YOU WANT A LITTLE BASICALLY, THAT'S THAT'S WHERE IT'S GOING TO COME AND THE TREES. YOU KNOW AGAIN, I GUESS. 
          DEPENDING ON THE ANGLE OF THAT. EASEMENT. BUT AGAIN, THE FOCUS IS ON THE FENCE. NOT SO MUCH THE LANDSCAPE, BUT I DO NEED CLARIFICATION ON THE LANDSCAPE EVENTUALLY, SURE, LET'S DEAL INTO SOMETHING. UM DOES THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE A SEPARATE A LIKE, DO YOU HAVE LIKE THREE? A LEVELS HERE? THIS IS COUNTRY CLUB. YOU'VE GOT COUNTRY CLUB MASTER. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY 
          [01:40:03]
LEVELS OF H O. YOU'VE GOT YOU GUYS HAVE ANY IDEAS? I MEAN, WE'RE. YEAH WE'RE PART OF THE COUNTRY CLUB. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S DIFFERENT LEVELS OF EACH WAY. I'M JUST NOT FAMILIAR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE'S TWO OR THREE LEVELS, PROBABLY WHERE YOU LIVE. IF THERE WAS A YEAH, OKAY, THAT I THINK IT'S JUST TOO. IT'S TOO. OKAY. UM ONE HANDLES THE STREETS OR ONE PAINTS FOR LIKE SIX PEOPLE. THE REASON WHY I ASK IS THAT YOUR WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD IS PROBABLY WANTING TO HAVE A REAL HEART TO HEART WITH YOUR H O ABOUT RULES ON FENCES AND CIRCUMSTANCES THERE BECAUSE OF THE EASEMENT THAT IF YOU. ABSOLUTELY GOT TO HAVE A FENCE AND YOU DON'T GET A VARIANCE. THEN. YOU DON'T HAVE TO RUN TO THE H O A AND SAY THE FEDS YOU APPROVED CAN'T BE INSTALLED LEGALLY. WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT EVENTS CAN BE APPROVED. FROM THE WAY. YOU KNOW AND SEE IF YOU GET ANY TRACTION THERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW BIG OF A ORGANIZATION. IT IS, BUT I SUSPECT THEY WOULD ESPECIALLY LISTEN TO THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD SAYS WE GOTTA RETHINK HOW THIS IS DONE. BECAUSE THE RULES DON'T WORK. FOR THE H O A. LIKE YOU SAID THEY APPROVED THIS SPENCE. 
          BUT TH WAY IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY. THE CITY THAT IS COLIN POWELL. SURE. UM ALSO FOR STAFF. UM. DO WE HAVE THE WELL, I SAY. FOR THE TREES. HOW FAR OVER IS OVER. IS IT? THE CENTER OF THE TREE IS OVER THE LINE. THAT TREE IS IN THE ZONE. IF IT'S THE EDGE OF THE TREE, IT'S IN THE ZONE. SO I DO BELIEVE WE'VE LOOKED AT THE TYPE OF TREE AND THE IMPROVEMENTS, EVEN THINGS LIKE MULCH BEDS WE'VE LOOKED AT BEFORE FOR ENCROACHMENT, AND WE'VE COUNTED THAT AS AN IMPROVEMENT. SO THAT'S SOMETHING ELSE WHERE WHERE WE HAVE DRAWN THE LINE, AND THEN I THINK TO JUST LOOKING AT OUR CITY ENGINEER HERE, IT DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF TREES. SO IF IT'S JUST YOUR TYPICAL, YOU KNOW, TRUNK TREE WITH BRANCHES THAT GROW UP OFF THE TOP. THEN YOU KNOW THAT THAT TRUNK NEEDS TO BE COMPLETELY OUTSIDE OF THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT. I THINK IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT KIND OF SPREADS OUT AND DOWN, YOU KNOW AND COULD, UM YOU KNOW, IMPACT, OR I SHOULD SAY OBSTRUCT THE FLOW OF GROUNDWATER. UM THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE NOT ALLOWED HISTORICALLY, WITHIN THOSE STRATEGIES MINTS, SO THOSE ARE ALL THE TYPE OF THINGS WE'VE WE'VE LOOKED AT FOR THESE CASES AND SIMILAR CASES THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY WHEN DETERMINING UM, TO ALLOW THOSE TYPE OF IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THESE STRATEGIES MINTS. YEAH I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING, STEVE SAID, AND BASICALLY IT'S UNFORTUNATE, BUT IT'S IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S BARELY OVER THE LINE. BUT IT'S OVER THE LINE. AND SO WE'VE BY PRESIDENTS AND PAUL LIKE INTERNAL POLICY. 
          WE'VE HELD THAT LIKE A HARD LINE FOR ENCROACHMENTS. THE CANOPY OF THE DECISION TO ASTRI, UH, LIKE YOUR BASIC OH, CLIPPED UP TO SEVEN FT AS A SOCIETY AS A STREET TREE IN A STREET TREE THAT REACHES OVER THE SIDEWALK. DOESN'T TOUCH THE SIDEWALK. IT'S SEVEN FT HIGH, AND NO ONE CARES HOW MUCH IT LEANS OUT. BUT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S. LIKE ARBOR VITAE. THAT'S NOT PARAMETERS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT CHRISTMAS TREE STYLE THAN IT DOES IT HAS BRANCHES IN THE FLOODWAY. WELL I THINK THAT'S A GOOD WAY OF LOOKING AT IT, NEIL, IF YOU IMAGINE A SIDEWALK THAT PEOPLE WALK. IF THERE'S A TREE BUT THE. UPPER BOWELS GO OVER THE SIDEWALK. THEY DON'T INTERFERE WITH WALKING ON THE SIDEWALK FOR TREE. AND THE DOWN AND THE LOWER BOWELS OR ON THE SIDEWALK. PEOPLE WALKING ON THE SIDEWALK COULD TRIP OVER THEM OR OTHERWISE. SO THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. SO I THINK THAT'S I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING FROM STAFF AND THE ENGINEER. SO FOR SOME OF THESE, I THINK, AND THIS IS, I THINK, JUST BY LOOKING AT WHERE THE CIRCLES ARE, WHICH I SUSPECT IS APPROXIMATE. YES THE PROXIMITY THAT IF YOU TRIM THEM UP, THERE WOULD BE OKAY. THERE'D BE SOME HEIGHTS, AT WHICH POINT THE CITY WOULD SAY. ALL RIGHT, THAT THE FLOODWATER AT THE EDGE OF THE EASEMENT IS THIS DEEP? YOU'RE ABOVE THAT YOU'RE NOT INTERFERING WITH THE WATER CURING CAPABILITY OF THE EASEMENT TREES FINE. YOU GOT A PROBLEM IF THE TRUNK IS IN THE EASEMENT, AND THAT'S THE HARD LINE THAT WE JUST HEARD. BUT IF NOT ALL OF THOSE ARE TRUNK IS IN THE EASEMENT. THEN TRIMMING THEM UP MAY SAVE THEM. WELL, AT LEAST , YOU KNOW, SALVAGING WHAT WE CAN FROM THIS. UM CAN I ASK WHAT HAS BEEN DONE TO I GUESS, CONFIRM OR ACCURATELY ASSESS. THEIR LOCATION, WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE TRULY IN THE EASEMENT ON 
          [01:45:05]
THE BORDER OF THE EASEMENT OR HALF AND HALF OUT. SO OUR EVALUATION IS BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US, SO THIS WAS SUBMITTED TO US, SO THIS IS WHAT WE EVALUATED , AND SO WE HAVE NOT FIELD VERIFIED THE LOCATION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS. WE WERE ACTUALLY WORKING TO TRY TO FIND A TIME TO GO OUT THERE AND FEEL VERIFY THOSE ITEMS. WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DO SO, BUT WE'RE OPERATING UNDER THE ASSUMPTION BASED ON THIS SITE PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT THAT IT APPEARS THAT THERE'S AT LEAST FOUR UP TO 85 TREES WITHIN THAT DRAINAGE EASEMENT. UM AND SO, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO GO OUT AND FIELD VERIFY AND CONFIRM EXACTLY WHICH TREES NEED TO BE, UH, TAKEN OUT EITHER AFTER THIS, BUT I THINK THE VARIANCE IS TO ALLOW THOSE ENCROACHMENTS. IF THIS VARIANCES DENIED, WE CAN CERTAINLY STILL GO OUT THERE AND FIELD VERIFY EXACTLY WHICH ONES NEED TO BE TAKEN OUT. UM IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCES, AND IF I MAY, IF WE'VE GOT THIS CITY OUT THERE, THE CITY HAS GOT TO BE ABLE TO SPOT WHERE THE EASEMENT LINE CROSSES THE PROPERTY LINE, I PRESUME. SO WE DON'T HAVE SURVEY EQUIPMENT, BUT WE KNOW FROM THE PLANS THAT ARE SCALED SO WE CAN MEASURE OFF JUST LIKE WE DID HEAR FROM THE HOUSE VARIOUS DISTANCES SURE VERIFIED. THE HOMEOWNER DESPERATELY WANTS TO KNOW I AM BETTING THAT THEY REALLY, REALLY WANT TO KNOW. LIKE OH, I'M GOING TO TAKE A SMALL ROD THAT'S TALL IF I DON'T HIT IT WITH THE MOWER, AND I'M GOING TO DRIVE THAT AS A PINS, I KNOW WHERE THAT EASEMENT ENDS. 
          WHILE WE'RE WORKING THE ISSUES, SO THEY SAY, OKAY, I WANT THESE DEPENDS. I KNOW WHAT'S IN. I KNOW WHAT'S OUT. WE'VE DONE IT BEFORE IN PRESERVATION ZONES. I DON'T THINK WE WANT REAL OBVIOUS MARKERS BECAUSE THEN IT WILL LOOK LIKE AN ALLEYWAY IF WE HAD A BUNCH OF MARKERS ON THE PROPERTY LINES AT THE EASEMENT LINES, BUT AT LEAST TO MAKE SURE THAT UM WE HAVE TO KNOW THAT THE CITY HAS TO KNOW THAT FOR ENFORCEMENT MIGHT AS WELL TELL THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AFFECTED BY IT. HERE'S WHERE THE SPOT IS. IT'S UP TO YOU IF YOU WANT IT MARKED OR NOT, OR TAKE A PICTURE OR SOMETHING SO THAT YOU KNOW WHAT THE LINES ARE, SO THAT YOU'RE FULLY INFORMED. YEAH, AGREED. I GUESS THE OTHER AGAIN. JUST A SIMPLE QUESTION IS THE FINANCIAL RAMIFICATIONS. SAY YOU GUYS COME OUT THERE AND SAY YEAH, ALL THOSE TREES ARE BETTER MEET MOVED. IT MEANS THAT I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR THE THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO MOVE THOSE TREES UNLESS I GO AND SUE MY BUILDER FOR PUTTING IN SOMETHING. HE CLAIMS HE HAD APPROVAL FOR. I'VE YET TO BE FIVE TO FIND IT, NOR HAVE I HE NOR HAS HE PRODUCED IT. UM I'VE ALWAYS CHATTED, CHALLENGED IT ONE TIME. THEY SAID, COULD YOU PRODUCE IT? SORRY. IT WAS SIX YEARS AGO. YOU KNOW, LOOK IT UP IN THE CITY AND LIKE I SAID, I PAID VERY MUCH. IT WAS TO GO GET ALL THE CITY DOCUMENTS I COULD TRY TO VERIFY MAKING THE EFFORT IN GOOD FAITH. UM BUT IT'S JUST A REALLY BAD SITUATION AND FOR ME, BUT I FEEL MORE FOR MY NEIGHBORS AND 70 29 BECAUSE THERE WE'RE TALKING 25 TREES PROBABLY $1000 APIECE, PLUS DEFENSE. I MEAN, THAT'S A HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY. OFF OF A YOU KNOW SOMETHING THAT WAS MISSED. AND AGAIN, I'M BUT IT'S JUST IT'S A SIGNIFICANT THING. I WISH I HAD A REAL EASY SOLUTION, BUT THERE ISN'T ONE I UNDERSTAND IT ALL AND I IT'S PARTICULARLY DIFFICULT WHEN IT'S SAFETY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. HANS MENTIONED YOUR IT'S THAT'S THAT MAKES IT REALLY, REALLY. BECAUSE WE ALL WOULDN'T IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A BRIDGE OVER THE WIEN, WE WOULDN'T BE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE MAKE IT A LITTLE LESS SAFE, YOU KNOW, SO WE WOULDN'T WE WOULD NEVER EVEN THINK OF DOING THAT. BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. HERE IS THE SAFETY THAT'S REQUIRED FOR ALLOWING, YOU KNOW. FLOOD WAND. THE RARE TIME FLOODS AND MY GOODNESS THE WAY THE WEATHER HAS BEEN CHANGED IN THE LAST 10 YEARS. WE'RE SEEING WE'RE SEEING 500 YEAR ONCE EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS NOW. SO WE CAN'T IT'S JUST DIFFICULT. OTHER QUESTIONS. COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONER. I MOVE. WE ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORTS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS IN THE RECORD FOR VR 1 29. CLEANED UP. INCLUDING THE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS SUPPLIED. THEY'VE MENTIONED. IN DISCUSSION OF THE DOCUMENTS MOTION. CAN YOU HAVE A ROLE, PLEASE? YES. YEAH. YES. YES. YES. YES. DOCUMENTS PAST 40. DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE VARIANCE ITSELF? TO APPROVE APPLICATION VR 129 2022 BASED ON 
          [01:50:13]
THE FINDINGS, STAFF REPORTED WITH ANY CONDITIONS THAT MIGHT BE LISTENING TO STAFF REPORT. DO I HEAR A SECOND? SECOND. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. I CAN HEAR THE ROLL, PLEASE. NO. NO. 
          NOW. NO. MOTION FAILS 04 BENEFITS SUFFICIENT TO RE JUST SAY WE REITERATE THE INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE, INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THE REASONS FOR DENIAL THAT WERE SET FORTH. AGREED PRIOR APPLICATION. UM. VR 1 28 2022. YEAH, I THINK THAT'S SUFFICIENT. I CONCUR. TAKES US TO THE RECONSIDERATION THAT WE STARTED WITH. BEN, IS THERE A DIFFERENCE? IF WE, UM IF NOBODY MOVES TO ALLOW IT, OR SHOULD WE MOVE TO ALLOW IT AND THEN VOTE ON IT. I THINK YOU SAID EARLIER, MAYBE, OR DID WE TALK ABOUT THIS? I WOULD MOVE. UH I WOULD SECOND THE MOTION REGARDING THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND THEN VOTE ON THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION. OKAY I'LL SECOND THE MOTION IF IT HASN'T BEEN SECONDED. WE HAVEN'T EVEN MADE THAT YET. WE NEED THE DOCUMENTS FIRST. WE DIDN'T NOT YET, OKAY. I MOVED TO ACCEPT THE DOCUMENTS AND STAFF REPORT DOC ACCEPTANCE, THE STAFF REPORTS RELATED DOCUMENTS IN THE RECORD FOR THE RECONSIDERATION ONE OF THREE, INCLUDING THE POLICE REPORT. IN THE LANDSCAPING DIAGRAM. ONE SECOND. AND DISCUSSION ON THE DOCUMENTS MOTION. CUBA ROLL, PLEASE. MR KIRBY? YES MR WALLACE. MR LARSON ? YES MR SCHELL? YES DOCUMENTS PASS FOR ZERO. DO I HEAR A MOTION ON THE RECONSIDERATION ITSELF HERE? RECONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION VIA OUR 103 2022 PATIENTS. FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORTING THE APPLICANTS LETTER REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION. I'LL START GET IT. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. DO I HEAR ANY DISCUSSION? CAN YOU ROLL, PLEASE? MR WALLACE ABOUT YES, ON THE RECONSIDERATION APPLICATION. MR LARSON? YES. MR KIRBY. I MEAN, VOTING? YES MEANS WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A VOTE ON WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO RECONSIDER THAT. I GET THAT RIGHT? DESIGNER STOOD THE VOTE YES WOULD BE TO HEAR THE VARIANCE VARIANCE AGAIN. YEAH, OKAY, WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT THE MOTION SAID. THE MOTION SAID TO HEAR RECONSIDERATION. SO AND I READ THE MOTION, BUT I READ WHAT WAS IN THE APPLICATION , SO I THINK ROLLED SO DAVID BRUCE, DO YOU WANT TO ALL RIGHT. 
          I WAS THINKING WE REOPENED IT AND THEN WE VOTED ON IT. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU'RE REVISING US. SO I THINK I GO. LET'S START WITH THE PERMISSION OF DAVID BRUCE. LET'S ROLL THAT BACK AND REDO THE MOTION AS WE THOUGHT WE WERE DOING IT, UM, GOT MY PERMISSION. OBVIOUSLY OKAY, SO, DAVID, HE WAS STATE THE MOTION. LET ME WANT ME REMAKE THE MOTION . UM HMM. SO, UM I MOVED TO RECONSIDER. APPLICATION BY OUR 103 2022 BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND THE STAFF REPORTING THE AFRICANS LETTER REQUESTING APPLICATION REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION. AND ABLE TO ASK QUICK QUESTION. SURE. UH AND I WANT CLARIFICATION OF WHAT? YOU'RE VOTING ON TWO BECAUSE FIRST, IF WE HAD A SECOND OPINION OF A CIVIL ENGINEER, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A STRUCTURE, PEOPLE WERE ASKING FOR A FENCE THAT THAT IS WATER CAN TRAVEL THROUGH SOME TREES THAT WATER ACTUALLY THE ISSUE ON THIS ONE. THE ISSUE HERE IS THERE NEW MATERIAL THAT WE DID NOT SEE? LAST TIME? THAT IS THE ONLY ISSUE BEING VOTED ON. OKAY? SO IS THERE IS THE VOTE THAT IF THEY WERE THE VOTE IS DID THE BOARD FEEL THAT WE'VE BEEN PRESENTED WITH SOMETHING NEW THAT WOULD HAVE INFLUENCED OUR LAST VOTE WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY BEFORE US? I'M GOING TO CHECK WITH LEGAL COUNSEL RIGHT THERE AND MAKE SURE I GOT THAT RIGHT. IT'S WHAT THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE CHANGED, OR WHETHER THERE'S NEW INFORMATION AVAILABLE THAT COULD NOT HAVE WITH REASONABLE DILIGENCE BEEN PRESENTED AT THE PREVIOUS SERIES, NOT THE MERITS OF THE CASE. IT IS WHAT GOT PRESENTED AS BEING VOTED ON. THANK YOU. OKAY SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO BRUCE. SECOND ATTIC, PLEASE. I'M SORRY. SO WE HAVE THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER. MADE BY DAVE 
          [01:55:05]
SECONDED BY BRUCE ANY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION. SO AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE ON THIS SAYS WE WILL RECONSIDER THE VARIANTS AT A FUTURE DATE. NO VOTE SAYS WE WILL NOT RECONSIDER IT AT A FUTURE DATE. MY APOLOGIES FOR MESSING WITH CAN I HEAR THE RULE? MR WALLACE. NO. ONE RECONSIDERATION. MR LARSON, NO AND RECONSIDERATION. MR SHELL. MR KIRBY? NO. MOTION TO RECONSIDER FAILED 0 TO 4. DO WE NEED TO STATE THE REASON FOR THE RECORD SOME RATIONALES. WHY THE NOTEBOOK? UM I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE MATERIALS THAT WERE SUBMITTED MEET THE STANDARD FOR RECONSIDERATION. I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WAS ANY NEW, SIGNIFICANT MATERIAL THAT WAS SUBMITTED, UM IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION THAT WASN'T AVAILABLE PREVIOUSLY. WHEN WE HEARD THE. 
          MOTION OR IN THE ROOM WHEN WE HEARD THE VARIOUS REQUESTS LAST TIME, BRUCE THE SAME REASONS AS MR WALLACE STATED, AND NOTHING THAT WOULD HAVE CHANGED THE OUTCOME OF THE DECISION. 
          REGARDLESS. HUNT AGREEMENT. SAME REASONS, DAVID STATED. I DO NOT FIND THE MATERIAL SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO RECONSIDER. I'M SORRY. UH UM. WITH THAT THOSE ARE CASES. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE THE COMMISSION TONIGHT? YES WE DO HAVE A CODE UPDATE UNDER OTHER BUSINESS FOR REVIEW AND STEPS ASKING FOR FORMAL, UM, ACTION ON THE CODE OF DATE. WELL COME TO MIC AND BE QUICK. DANIEL MARTIN 17 HANDY'S LOOP. CAN WE GET CLARIFICATION ON WHAT OUR APPEAL PROCESS IS TOUCH OTHER RAVIN OOZE THAT WE CAN GO. MY UNDERSTANDING IS FOR THE DENIED VARIANCES. UM. WE'LL TALK TO YOUR MAYOR. WE SHOULDN'T BE IN COURT. BUT BEN, SHOULD WE BE EVEN COMMENTING ON THAT AT ALL? YEAH I WOULDN'T GET TOO INVOLVED WITH PROVIDING GUIDANCE . ALTHOUGH I WOULD SAY IF YOU CHECK THE CODIFIED ORDINANCES IF YOU CHECK CODIFIED ORDINANCE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE, I THINK IT'S 11 13. OH, EIGHT TALKS ABOUT THE PROCESS, OKAY? UH, BECAUSE I KNOW WE'RE ALL TRYING TO WORK HERE. AND WE'RE SAYING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO WORK TOGETHER SOME SOME SORT OF COMPROMISE. 
          YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO WE'RE TRYING TO HANDLE DOT CO SPEND TONS OF MONEY, GET LEGAL COUNSEL AND GET OBVIOUSLY WE KNOW WE GOT TO PAY FOR A SIMPLE ENGINEER. BUT YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU GUYS CAN EMPHASIZE WITH OUR CURRENT SITUATION. YOU GUYS ARE THE EXPERTS HERE WE ARE NOT UM, SO WE'RE TRYING TO LOOK FOR SOME GUIDANCE HERE, AND I UNDERSTAND IT. THAT MAY NOT BE PROPER PROCEDURE. BUT IF ANY GUIDANCE COULD BE GIVEN, THAT WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED. SEEK LEGAL COUNSEL AND LOOK AT WHAT YOUR OPTIONS ARE. OKAY LET US ADJOURN FOR OR JOURNEY FOR, LIKE, FIVE OR 10. MINUTES YEAH, 10 MINUTES. READY. NOW I WILL ADMIT THAT I TOOK ONLY THE BRIEFEST GLANCE AT THAT, SAYING THERE'S NO MATTER HELPING MIKE. I THOUGHT YOU CONCLUDED THIS, SO WE KNOW HOW TO CONDUCT THE MEETING TONIGHT. OH YEAH. I GUESS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ALL 
          [VIII. Other Business]
KINDS OF WAIVERS, WAIVERS AND VARIANTS. PROCEED, PLEASE. WELL I GUESS YEAH, LITTLE BIT MORE ON LIKE CIVIC. SO I GUESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOESN'T SEE THESE, BUT THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT KINDS ARE OF APPLICATIONS IN ORDER TO SEE RECEIVED DEVIATIONS FROM CODE REQUIREMENTS. SO ONE IS VARIANCES TO THE CITY'S CODIFIED ORDINANCES THAT YOU GUYS PLANNING COMMISSION SEE ALL THE TIME AND THE OTHER ONE IS WAIVERS. SO WAIVERS IS WHAT OUR CITY ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD USES TO REVIEW DEVIATIONS FROM THE CITY'S DESIGN GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS, AND THOSE ARE THE ARCHITECTURAL AND DESIGN. OPPONENT OF OUR CITY COVE. SO THIS IS THE WORDING STRAIGHT FROM OUR CODE. SO, IT SAYS, FOR PER 11 13 SO WAIVERS LIVE IN THE SAME SECTION AS OUR VARIANCES, UM, JUST IN A SEPARATE SUB CHAPTER, AND SO IT SAYS IT CAN ONLY BE, UM AWAY THAT CAN ONLY BE APPROVED IF IT MEETS THE FOUR FALLEN CONDITIONS. AND SO HERE IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN OUR VARIANCES BECAUSE THERE'S AN IN CLAUSE SO IT'S A TEST THAT ALL FOUR OF THESE HAVE TO BE MET. AND SO YEAH, HIGHLIGHTED THERE, SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT, BUT THAT'S JUST TO PROVIDE YOU GUYS IN CONTEXT OF WHAT THIS CODE DOES AND HOW IT OPERATES. NOW THE CODE UPDATES THAT WE WERE ASKING WHAT WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT FROM OUR CITY ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD, AS REGARDING THIS LANGUAGE HERE THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN RED AND BOLD. AND SO THE THIRD CRITERIA THAT A WAIVER HAS TO MEET IN ORDER TO GET APPROVED IS THAT IT HAS TO BE NECESSARY FOR REASONS OF FAIRNESS DUE TO UNUSUAL SITE SPECIFIC CONSTRAINTS. AND SO THE THIS 
          [02:00:04]
THIS AND THIS WORD SITE SPECIFIC HAS, UM SOMETIMES BEEN MISINTERPRETED, AND WE THINK IT IS A LITTLE BIT UNCLEAR THAT SITE SPECIFIC, UM, MEANS BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES AND IT HAS BEEN INTERPRETED IN THE PAST TO ME AND JUST BASICALLY THE GEOGRAPHY RIGHT OR THE LAND THAT IT'S ON, AND WE DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT. SO THE CITY STAFF WE WORKSHOPPED THIS WITH THE AIR B. WE LOOKED AT DIFFERENT OPTIONS, AND SO WE CAME UP WITH A COUPLE OF OPTIONS HERE, SO WE LOOKED AT THE WORDING, ADDING WORDING. UM, IT WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT CLOSER. WE TOOK SOME CUES FROM THE VARIANT SECTIONS, SO SOME OF THIS MIGHT LOOK FAMILIAR TO USE THINGS SUCH AS CONDITIONS OR OTHER CONDITIONS OR CIRCUMSTANCES THAT DOES NOT RESOLVE FROM THE ACTION OF THE APPLICANTS. AND SO THAT WAS SOME ADDITIONAL WORDING WE DID, AND THEN THE OTHER CODE UPDATE WAS CHANGED THIS WORD CONSTRAINTS AND SO ALL OF OUR VARIANTS CODE SECTIONS AND WE TALKED TO OUR CITY LAW DIRECTOR HERE AND HE RECOMMENDED THAT WE USE THE SAME WORDING THROUGHOUT . SO WE ARE PROPOSING IN THE AIR . B UM, LIKED ADDING THE WORD OR I'M SORRY. I SHOULD SAY, EXCHANGE THE WORD CONDITIONS INSTEAD OF CONSTRAINTS, SO IT'S CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT 11 13. AND AFTER WORK SHOPPING THIS WITH OUR AIR B. THEY THOUGHT IT WOULD BE BEST IN ORDER TO USE THE WORDING THAT SAYS BUILDING STRUCTURE OR SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS. AND SO, UH, WE THINK AND WE AGREE THIS WAS OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT BUILDING STRUCTURE SITE IS APPROPRIATE TERMINOLOGY BECAUSE THE ARCHITECTURE REVIEW ZONING DISTRICT ONE. IT'S REGULATES THE D. G. R S. THAT'S ACTUALLY THE SAME TERM IT USES WHEN TALKING ABOUT ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS , SO IT USES THE TERM BUILDINGS , STRUCTURES OR SITES AS WHAT THE ARB LOOKS AT. AND SO WE, UM , S STAFF FEEL THAT OPTION TWO IN THE AIR B ALSO ENDORSED OPTION, TOO. UM AS THE RECOMMENDED, UM, UPDATE TO CODE, SO THE CONDITIONS AGAIN, IT'S JUST FOR CONSISTENCY THROUGHOUT THE WAIVER AND VARIANCE PROCESS AND THEN BUILDING STRUCTURE SITE IS INTO ADD CLARITY. AND SO IT'S CLEAR THAT THE INTENT IS THAT BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES OR SITES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR REASONS OF FAIRNESS WHEN THE AIR B IS A EVALUATING WAIVERS. AND UM AND AGAIN, THAT'S TO USE CONSISTENT LANGUAGE FROM 11 57, WHICH SETS THE GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS AND ADOPTS THE TDRS BY REFERENCE FOR THE AIR B. AND SO I WILL ALSO ADD THAT WE HAD A GOOD WORKSHOP WITH THEM. YOU KNOW THE VILLAGE CENTER, CERTAINLY WHERE WE HAVE THE STRICTEST AND HIGHEST STANDARDS WITHIN THE CITY OF NEW ALBANY. UM AND SO WE HAD THE FULL PANEL THERE OR WITH THE MAJORITY OF THE PANEL THERE, AND SO IT WE HAD UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT WE DON'T FEEL THIS IS GOING TO OPEN UP, YOU KNOW, AND MAKE IT EASIER TO GET WAIVERS THAT WILL CERTAINLY NOT THE INTENSE AND THE REASON FOR THAT IS JUST TO GO BACK. IS THIS IN CLAUSE EVEN THOUGH WE'RE CLARIFYING THE INTENT OF THIS WORDING RIGHT HERE. THERE'S STILL A LOT OF OTHER FOR LACK OF BETTER TERM SORT OF FAILED STATES AND STRICT CRITERIA THAT ALL FOUR HAVE TO BE MET TO IMPROVE THOSE WAIVERS AND OKAY, GO AHEAD, AND I'LL JUST LEAVE YOU AT AND WE DO IN THE AIR B HAS IN THE PAST ONE AND TWO AND HAS, YOU KNOW LOOKED AT BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES WHEN , UM, EVALUATING WAIVERS BECAUSE CERTAINLY YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DESIGN A DJ. YOU KNOW, ARCHITECTURE REQUIREMENTS ARE TOUGH, WRITES. IT'S TOUGH TO BE PRESCRIPTIVE AND THINK OF EVERY SINGLE SCENARIO. YOU KNOW, THE AIR B AND IN A CITY STAFF WERE ALWAYS SUPPORTIVE OF GOOD DESIGN . AND SO YOU CAN CERTAINLY MEET THE MERITS AND THE INTENT OF THE GRS AND STILL, BUT SOMEHOW, MAYBE NOT MEET SOMETHING THAT'S STILL WARRANTS. GOOD DESIGN. AN EXAMPLE, WE SAID, IS THAT THERE IS NOT BUILT YET, BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE A NEW CONDO SLASH APARTMENT BUILDING. UM THAT'S GOING TO BE SORT OF THE END OF RICHMOND SQUARE THERE. THERE'S A SIGN UP RIGHT NOW AND 62 THERE. AND SO THEY NEEDED A WAIVER BECAUSE THEY WERE DOING UNDERGROUND PARKING AND THEY'RE EXCEEDING THE PARKING CODE. AND SO IT WAS THAT EXCEEDING THE PARKING NUMBER THAT THEY NEEDED A WAIVER. AND SO HE SAID, WELL, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE BUILDING. IF YOU'RE GOING TO PUT THAT ALL UNDERGROUND AND NOBODY'S GOING TO SEE IT, THEN YOU KNOW WE'LL BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT ALL DAY. 
          IF YOU'RE HIDING THE PARKING FROM A FROM STAFFS PERSPECTIVE. SO THAT'S ONE INSTANCE THAT WE LOOKED AT. UM BUT I'LL JUST LEAVE THAT BACKGROUND. UM FOR YOU GUYS. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER. NO. OKAY I HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS. UM WHY WAS THE LANGUAGE AND OPTION THREE? THAT SORT OF MIRRORS THE DUNCAN IDEA THAT IT'S YOU KNOW, IT'S SELF INFLICTED. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU AN OUT. WHY WAS THAT SORT OF NOT DECIDED TO BE INCLUDED? AN OPTION TO. SO WE DID FEEL THAT, UM THAT MAY BE ACTUALLY MADE IT A LITTLE BIT 
          [02:05:07]
TOO BROAD, I BELIEVE IS HOW WE THOUGHT AND THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THERE'S ONE WHERE A SIGN SO SOMETIMES BUILDINGS IN THE VILLAGE CENTER . I KNOW THERE'S LIKE THE NEW DAYCARE AND THE NOAH'S OF EVENTS CENTER, WHICH IS NOW A CHURCH. SO THE AIR B ALSO SEES SIGNAGE. 
          AND SO THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE THERE IS EXISTING BUILDING LIKE BRICK DESIGNS. UM THAT THE APPLICANTS, YOU KNOW, WANTS TO PUT A SLIGHTLY LARGER SIGN BECAUSE IT FITS SORT OF SCALE WISE WITHIN THAT SPACE, AND SO WE FELT BY LIKE ADDING THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES ON THERE THAT MIGHT HAVE MADE IT A LITTLE BIT TOO BROAD OR A LITTLE BIT TOO EASIER TO APPROVE THOSE, AND WE WANTED TO REMAIN THAT STRICT SCRUTINY AND THE OPTION TO TEST OKAY. I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. 
          UM. THE SO WE'RE GOING BACK TO THE HAMLET THAT WE PROVED OR RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR LAST WEEK, THE LAST SECTION OF THE OF THE HAMLET CODE, TALKED ABOUT WAIVERS THAT WE WOULD REVIEW. IS THIS. DOES THIS CREATE ANY PRESIDENTIAL ISSUES THAT WE MAY NOT WANT TO DEAL WITH? WITH REGARD TO ONE? WE'RE LOOKING AT WAIVERS. THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION . SO THIS IS THE SAME LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE WAIVER ARMS. THAT'S THE SAME WAY GO INTO THAT IS IN THE HAMLETS. UM P U D TEXT BECAUSE WE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN WORKED SHOPPING THIS WITH THE AIR B FOR A FEW MONTHS. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE DOING CONSISTENT LANGUAGE EVEN WITH THIS HAMLET AND ARE ANTICIPATED CITY CODE UPDATE, UM WAS THE OTHER THE BUILDING STRUCTURE SITE AND CONDITIONS? UM, WITHIN THAT WAIVER REQUEST. WHERE THIS IS GORGEOUS. THAT'S CORRECT, SO THIS WOULD APPLY JUST TO AIR B. 
          THE WORDING THAT MR WALL'S TALKED ABOUT WAS IN THE HAMLETS SPECIFIC PD ZONING TEXT. OTHER QUESTIONS, NOT NOTHING MORE FOR ME. THANK YOU. NOT FOR ME. OKAY AND IT'S NOT THAT EASY TO GET ONE OF THESE. GREAT. WHEN WE DID MY BARN. THIS IS WHAT IT WAS. THAT WAS ONE OF THOSE CASES. 
          YEAH, THAT ACTUALLY UH, ACTUALLY, THAT WAS BROUGHT UP. THAT WASN'T ONE OF THE EXAMPLES THAT WE USE. BUT WE DID HAVE A DISCUSSION WHERE WE DO THINK THAT IS A AN EXACT EXAMPLE WHERE THERE WAS A BUILDING OR STRUCTURE. WE WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR REASONS OF FAIRNESS. OKAY SO WE NEED TO RECOMMEND THIS TO COUNSEL. DO I HEAR A MOTION TO RECOMMEND A COUNSELOR? COUNCIL THE PROPOSED UPDATE TO CEO SECTION ELECTRIC 2.11. DO I HEAR A SECOND? ONE SECOND. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. MY MIC WASN'T ON WHEN I MADE THAT MOTION, SO I'D BETTER DO IT AGAIN. UM MOVE THAT WE RECOMMEND A COUNCIL. UM REGARDING THE UPDATE TO CEO SECTION 11 30. LOVELY 13.11 REGARDING WAIVER CRITERIA BALANCE IN THE MARKET. AND I'LL SECOND THE MOTION, ALL RIGHT? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION. AND ROLL, PLEASE. MR WALLACE. MR LARSON? YES, MR KIRBY. MR SHELL. PASSES 40. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL MEMBERS ARE COMBAT HUNTS. YES, SIR. FIRST IS PAUL MEMBERS FOR COMMENTS PART OF THE MEETING. 
          HAVE A QUESTION. GO AHEAD. BECAUSE I'M FOR QUESTIONS TONIGHT JUST VERY QUICKLY, AND I KNOW IT'S LATE, BUT I WAS CURIOUS. I DIDN'T I WATCHED LITTLE PIECES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING REGARDING WONDERING IF STAFF HAD A REACTION TO THAT THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO SHARE WITH THE COMMISSION. SO THE CITY COUNCIL HAD FIRST READING. AH AT THEIR LAST, UH, MEETING WHICH WAS ON THE 15TH. SO DURING FIRST READING OR I SHOULD TAKE A STEP BACK. SO THIS IT'S A RESIGNING, SO IT GOES TO COUNCIL VIA AN ORDINANCE. SO ORDINANCES HAVE TWO READINGS, THE FIRST OF WHICH , UM REQUIRES OR I JUST GUESS IN CAPITAL AIDS, A PRESENTATION BY STAFF AND THEN THE DEVELOPER CAN ALSO ANSWER QUESTIONS OF COUNCIL . HOWEVER THERE IS NO PUBLIC INPUT COMPONENTS OF FIRST READINGS IN GENERAL, SO THE SECOND READING IS SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 6TH AND THAT'S WHEN COUNCIL WILL HAVE PUBLIC INPUT REGARDING THAT'S REZONING, AND THAT'S ALSO WHEN THEY'RE SCHEDULED TO TAKE ACTION ON IT. IT WASN'T THEIR SUBSTANTIVE PUBLIC INPUT. ANYWAYS THERE WAS 
          [02:10:01]
YES, THE JUST LIKE HERE. THE ROOM WAS FULL. WE ANTICIPATE A LARGE CROWD AGAIN FOR THE DECEMBER SIX CITY COUNCIL MEETING. WHAT WAS? WHAT WERE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL HAD. DO YOU REMEMBER? SO AS MANY OF THE SAME QUESTIONS, UM AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION, SO THERE WAS SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SCHOOL STUDENTS RATIO NUMBERS, SO WHAT THE APPLICANT WAS PROPOSING VERSUS THE SCHOOL DATA JUST TO PUT CLARITY ON THAT AND THEN I THINK MOSTLY THERE WAS A LOT OF QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE TRAFFIC STUDY. AND TRAFFIC GENERATION, SO WE ALSO HAD DAVID SAMUELSON, WHO CAME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING. AND SO THERE WAS, UM HE ANSWERED A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND GAVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE DEVELOPERS TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AS WELL AND HIS FINDINGS OF THAT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. IT WAS THE DAY OF DECEMBER 6TH DECEMBER 6TH THAT'S CORRECT. WE WERE DOING THE FORMER SHOULD COME AT BRUCE. NO COMMENTS. I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION. NO, I'M GOOD FOR IT. I'M THE GUY THAT GETS EVERYBODY
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.