[00:00:04]
[ROLL CALL]
EVERYONE.AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING US FOR TONIGHT'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AT THIS TIME.
WE'LL HAVE THE ROLL CALL, MR. HOLCOMB, CHAIRMAN WARREN OF WASHINGTON HERE, HERE, COMMISSIONER, MR. ADDISON AIR COMMISSIONER, MR. ALLEN COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONER ALLEN.
COMMISSIONER ELLIS, MR. COLLINS LEWIS HERE.
MR. ELLENDER, MR. HAWTHORNE HERE, MR. HILL HERE, COMMISSIONER STERLING.
HERE WE HAVE, WE HAVE A QUORUM FOR
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES THERE.A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES BY THE VICE CHAIR.
IS THERE A SECOND THAT KIND OF DOCUMENT STATUS AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER ADDISON, ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO APPROVING THE MINUTES? SAY NONE OF THESE ITEMS HAVE NOW BEEN APPROVED AT THIS TIME? I'LL ASK THE VICE CHAIRMAN
[RULES FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARINGS]
OF READING THE RULES FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARINGS, BOLSTER CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARINGS, CERTIFICATION OF INABILITY TO OPERATE DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH EXECUTIVE PROCLAMATIONS, J B E 2020 DASH 30 AND 2020 DASH 33 ISSUED BY GOVERNOR JOHN BEL EDWARDS ON MARCH 16TH, 2020 AND MARCH 22ND, 2020 RESPECTIVELY.THIS NOTICE WILL SERVE AS A CERTIFICATION OF THE PLANNING.
COMMISSION'S INABILITY TO OTHERWISE OPERATE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOUISIANA OPEN MEETING LAW DUE TO A LACK OF A QUORUM AS A RESULT OF THE COVID-19 PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY PURSUANT TO SECTION FOUR OF JBE 20 DASH 30, THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE AND THE PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE WILL PROVIDE FOR ATTENDANCE AT ITS NEXT MEETING, WHICH WILL ONLY CONTAIN BUSINESS GAME TO CENTRAL TO GOVERNMENT BUSINESS.
ON MONDAY, JULY 20TH, 2020 BY A VIDEO CONFERENCE, A GATHERING OF THE ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE PUBLIC AND NECESSARY STAFF WOULD VIOLATE GOVERNOR EDWARDS ORDER.
THE ITEMS APPEARING ON THE AGENDA HAVE BEEN DEEMED AS CENTRAL TO THE CONTINUED CONDUCT OF BUSINESS BY THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE, PARISH OF EASTBOUND.
CONSIDERING THE FOREGOING IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROCLAMATION NUMBERS.
JBE 2020 DASH 30 AND JPE 2020 DASH 33.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON MONDAY, JULY 20TH, 2020 AT 5:00 PM MAY BE HELD BY VIDEO CONFERENCE IN A MANNER THAT ALLOWS FOR OBSERVATION INPUT BY THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AS SET FORTH IN THE NOTICE POSTED NICE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IS BEING HELD BY A VIDEO CONFERENCE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING ON CITY POWER'S WEBSITE, METRO METRO 21 COX CHANNEL 21 AROUND THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE.
FACEBOOK PAGE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ANY OF THE ITEMS WERE ACCEPTED BY EMAIL AT PLANNING, IT'D BE BRL LA.GOV ONLINE FORM PHONE, OR BY MAIL BEFORE 4:00 PM TODAY LIKE THE VICE CHAIRMAN OF UP GIVEN THE CURRENT COVID-19 EMERGENCY.
I HEAR ROB MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RULES AS SET FORTH THAT'S OKAY.
AND THEN BY THE VICE CHAIR, THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS THAT WE WILL NOW MOVE
[CONSENT AGENDA]
ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.MR. MORIN, THE CONSENT AGENDA.
THERE ARE NO CONSENT ITEMS FOR WITHDRAWAL CONSENT ITEMS FOR DEFERRAL ITEM 12 CASE 28, 2096, 79 AIRLINE HIGHWAY DEFERRED TO AUGUST THE 17TH BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ITEM 12, I SPOKE FOR 20 MURPHY EXPRESS FOR TWO AUGUST THE 17TH BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ITEM 18
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE OUR CONSENT ITEMS FOR APPROVAL ITEM 14 CASE 29, 2095 95 AIRLINE HIGHWAY TO RESENT REZONED FROM HEAVY COMMERCIAL C TO COMMERCIAL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE RESTAURANT
[00:05:01]
USE DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES COMMERCIAL OFFICE RETAIL RESTAURANT AND HIGH DENSITY.RESIDENTIAL USES ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HIGHLAND ROAD, WEST OF KENILWORTH PARKWAY AND SOUTH OF MENLO DRIVE ITEM 16, CUP FOUR DASH 20 ST.
THOMAS MORE CATHOLIC CHURCH PROPOSED ADDITION OF THREE BUILDINGS TO AN EXISTING CHURCH AND SCHOOL LOCATED NORTH OF GOODWOOD BOULEVARD, EAST OF DARK MOORE DRIVE, SOUTH OF SHERBROOKE DRIVE IN WEST OF SYLVIAN DRIVE ITEM NUMBER 17, AND IT SAYS SIX 20.
THE IRA YOU DEAR ARMAND PROPERTY FLAG, LOTS SUBDIVISION PROPOSED FLAG, LOT SUBDIVISION AND LOCATED WEST OF GREENLAND SPRINGS ROAD AND LACK LAWN AVENUE, ITEM 19 ASSETS, EIGHT 20 P S GURNEY TRACK FLAG, LOT SUBDIVISION PROPOSED FLAG, LOT SUBDIVISION LOCATED NORTH OF GREENWOOD SPRINGS, PORT HUDSON ROAD AND WEST OF TUCKER ROAD AND ITEM 2313 DASH OH SIX.
HE COULD PLACE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, PUBLIC ROADS, A REQUEST FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION ON THE VALIDITY OF A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
THANK YOU, MISS SOME RANT PERMISSION MEMBERS, YOU HAVE HEARD ALL THE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT WILL BE TAKEN WITH ONE VOTE.
ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHO HAVE AN ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE POOLED AND TO BE HEARD AS PART OF THE REGULAR AGENDA? BYE SHARON MCGRAW QUESTION OR COMMENT.
AND THAT IS, UH, WE'RE 15, WHICH IS THE LOW ROSA REVISION ONE THAT DOES GO TO COUNCIL.
IT DOES REQUIRE THAT I'M FEELING GOOD.
IT DOESN'T REQUIRE PLANNING COMMISSION AND METROPOLITAN COUNCIL APPROVAL.
IT'S AUTOMATED FOR PROOF TONIGHT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WOULD GO TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ZONING MEETING ON AUGUST 19TH.
COMMISSIONER COLLINS LEWIS AS IS SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HAWTHORNE.
ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO APPROVING THOSE ITEMS? SAY NONE OF THOSE NIGHTS, THOSE ITEMS HAVE NOW BEEN APPROVED.
WE CAN NOW MOVE ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA
[Items 2 & 3]
CHAIRMAN.THE NEXT TWO ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN TOGETHER.
AT THIS TIME, WE'LL HEAR ITEMS. NUMBER TWO, PLAN AMENDMENT 10 2013, FIVE 11 PERKINS ROAD AND ITEM NUMBER THREE, CHASE 26, 2013, FIVE 11 PERKINS ROWE
THE APPLICANT
THE REQUESTED FUTURE BR LAND USE DESIGNATION IS MIXED USE.
THE CURRENT ZONING IS RURAL WITH THE REQUESTED ZONING OF LIGHT COMMERCIAL ELSIE PA 10 2013, FIVE 11 ERKENS ROAD.
WITH RELATED CASE 26 STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT BASED UPON EXAMINATION OF THE AREA AT A FURTHER LEVEL OF DETAIL AND STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUESTS MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING.
IF THE COMPANION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IS APPROVED, BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES AND CONFORMING TO UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRE MR. CHAIRMAN MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THESE ITEMS WERE DEFERRED AT YOUR JUNE 15TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
THE APPLICANT HAD RECENTLY AMENDED THEIR APPLICATION TO LLC LIKE COMMERCIAL ONE.
WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED ONE COMMENT IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT AND IN EIGHT COMMENTS IN OPPOSITION THAT WILL READ INTO THE RECORD AT YOUR LAST POINT IN THE COMMISSION MEETING, WE HAVE SINCE RECEIVED AN ADDITIONAL TWO COMMENTS OF SUPPORT FOR THESE ITEMS AND RECEIVE 13 NEW COMMENTS AND OPPOSITION.
THEY'LL BE READ INTO THE RECORD FOR TONIGHT.
I ALSO SPOKE WITH COUNCILMEN WHITE HUDSON TODAY.
WE'D LIKE, WE'D LIKE TO SHARE THAT HE IS IN SUPPORT THE LIGHT COMMERCIAL ONE REZONING REQUEST STATING
[00:10:01]
THAT HE HAD PREVIOUS CONCERNS ON THE ORIGINAL LLC THREE REQUESTS.HE FEELS LIKE COMMERCIAL ONE, LLC.
ONE IS COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING ZONING IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
THANK YOU MR. HOLCOMB, COMMISSIONER MEMBERS AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BEGAN BY READING IN THE SPEAKER COURT FROM THE APPLICANT.
IT READS DEAR PLANNING, COMMISSION MEMBERS.
PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHED NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS FROM THE SURROUNDING HOA.
SEVERAL ATTEMPTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO WORK WITH THOSE WHO OPPOSED THE ZONING REQUEST.
THE ACREAGE WAS DECREASED FROM 18.27 TO 7.44 AND THE LC THREE WAS LOWERED TO LC ONE.
THE LAST CONVERSATION WITH THE OPPOSITION CONSISTED OF THE OWNER, PROVIDING A DEED RESTRICTION DOCUMENT FOR A POSSIBLE NEUTRAL RESPONSE.
HOWEVER, WITH SO MANY STIPULATIONS CONCERNING PRIVATELY ON PROPERTY, IT COMPROMISES.
UNLIKE THE CONCERNS ARE TOO NUMEROUS TO ADDRESS AND THE DIRECTORS FOR THE REMAINING PROPERTY ARE UNWARRANTED.
ALSO THE OPPOSING AREAS IN THE PROPOSED CITY OF ST.
GEORGE, THE PROPERTY FOR REZONING AS AN EBR PARISH, SHOULD THOSE WHO PASS THE VOTE TO LEAVE VBR, HAVE AN INFLUENCE ON ZONING AND EPR AND SHOULD AN HOA HAVE REGULATING AUTHORITY OVER PROPERTIES THAT ARE NOT WITHIN THEIR ASSOCIATION BOUNDARIES, YOUR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL FOR THE RESULT OF REQUESTS WILL BE APPRECIATED.
WHY SHOULD THIS REQUEST BE PENALIZED? WHEN ON ADJACENT PROPERTY, ADJACENT PROPERTIES HAVE ACQUIRE COMMERCIAL OR MIXED USE ZONING AS SEEN ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP FOR EBR AT THE REQUEST FOR LC.
ONE IS THE NIGHT PLEASE APPROVE TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR 13 FIVE 11 PERKINS ROAD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO THE FRONTAGE BEING MIXED USE AT THE SAME DEPTH AS KIND OF T DRIVE.
THANK YOU, PEGGY ANDERSON AT THIS TIME, I'LL READ IT.
THE COMMENTS FROM THE OPPOSITION.
THE FIRST IS FROM DOTTIE TORONTO, REID'S PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS.
THANK YOU FOR HEARING MY CONCERNS REGARDING THE REZONING OF PROPERTY AT 13 FIVE 11 PERKINS GROVE, THE APPLICANT OWNER OF THE PROPERTY HAS NOT MET WITH HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION ARE CONCERNED BUSINESSES SINCE THE JUNE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, WHEN THE CASE WAS DEFERRED.
THEREFORE WE STILL DO NOT KNOW ANY MORE THAN WE DID IN JUNE.
WHAT IS BEING PLANNED OR INTENDED FOR THIS PROPERTY? I'M CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY AND INTEGRITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AS WELL AS THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC THAT THIS WILL PLACE ON PERKINS ROAD, BOTH PERKINS ROAD AND HOLLAND ROAD HAVE HEAVY TRAFFIC WITH DELAYS BECAUSE ROAD IS NOT BEING WIDENED UNTIL LATE 20, 23.
I WILL THIS AFFECT RESPONSE TIMES FOR EMS AND ST.
WHEN THERE ARE NO SHOULDERS ON PERKINS ROAD AND MOTORISTS CANNOT PULL OFF THE ROAD, I CAN REZONING AND CHANGING OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BE APPROVED WHEN THERE IS NO INFORMATION AND TELLING WHAT WILL BE DEVELOPED ON THIS PROPERTY.
I'M RESPECTFULLY REQUESTING THAT YOU DENY THE REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.
THE NEXT IS FROM RUSSELL GOLDEN.
PLEASE ACCEPT MY OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING OF THESE TWO PROPERTIES.
THE APPLICANT HAS REFUSED TO MEET WITH ANY OF THE NEIGHBORING ENTITIES TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL PLANS FOR THE PROPERTY.
WE'RE VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE POTENTIAL OF ANY HIGH DENSITY, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ON PROJECTS ON THIS PROPERTY.
AND CONSIDERING THE LACK OF INTERACTION ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THIS PROPERTY AND HOW IT COULD AFFECT OUR DAILY INTEREST.
IN ADDITION TO THE ADDED TRAFFIC POTENTIAL DRAINAGE AND EAGERNESS INGRESS, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.
AGAIN, I EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING OF THIS PROPERTY UNTIL THE APPLICANT MAKES AN EFFORT TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS.
NEXT IS FROM NELLIE BROUSSARD, TO WHOM THIS MAY CONCERN, I'M WANTING TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF PURPOSE ROAD, PROPERTY, WANTING TO REZONE FROM RURAL TO LC.
WHAT WOULD YOU, THE PLANNING COMMISSION STRONGLY CONSIDERED DENYING BOTH APPLICATIONS, PA 10 20 AND CASE 26 20.
THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS THAT CONCERNED ME ABOUT THIS SUBJECT PARKER'S WORLD ALREADY HAS HIGH VOLUME OF TRAFFIC BACKED UP AT TIMES.
ALSO EXISTING SUBDIVISIONS TRYING TO ENTER ON PURPOSE ROAD IS DIFFICULT NOT KNOWING WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS FOR THIS PROPERTY IS A MAJOR CONCERN.
FOR INSTANCE, MORE APARTMENTS OR OTHER SIMILAR STRUCTURE WOULD ADD MORE PROBLEMS, DISCUSSION OF THESE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN REFUSED BY OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY.
AND WHAT DOES DEVELOPMENT COST ST.
GEORGE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S ABILITY TO RESPOND TO EMERGENCIES? THANKS FOR CONSIDERING THE ISSUES THAT WOULD FOLLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY.
THE NEXT CARD IS FROM KATHERINE PALERMO, PLANNING COMMISSION.
I'M OPPOSING THE REZONING OF THE ABOVE CASE FROM RURAL TO LC.
ONE, MAINLY WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE PLANS ARE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY.
WE ALREADY HAVE UNSOLVED ISSUES WITH SPEEDING TRAFFIC CONGESTION, NO SHOULDERS
[00:15:01]
TO PULL OVER OR OFF PRIME, ET CETERA, DRIVERS ON HOLLAND ROAD DRIVE LIKE IT IS AN INTERSTATE.THEY DO NOT GO THE SPEED LIMIT.
THEY DON'T EVEN STOP FOR THE SCHOOL BUSES BEFORE I CAN BE IN AGREEMENT OF SUCH REZONING.
I WOULD HAVE TO SEE IMPROVEMENTS AND ISSUES BEFORE GOING FORWARD.
THANKS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION IN THIS MATTER.
I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY CONCERN ABOUT THE SAFETY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
RECENTLY, OUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION HAS INFORMED US OF REZONING ISSUES ON PERKINS ROAD.
I AM ASKING THAT YOU PLEASE DENY THIS REZONING.
THE THOUGHT OF MORE TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION IS OVERWHELMING TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PERKINS ROAD AND HOLLAND ROAD ARE MAXED OUT WITH TRAFFIC.
NOW, THE THOUGHT OF NOT BEING ABLE TO GET TO MY DESTINATION ON TIME, OR GOD FORBID, IF MY FAMILY NEEDED EMS ST.
GEORGE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND OR THE POLICE, AND THEY COULDN'T GET TO MY RESIDENTS WHEN NEEDED IS DEVASTATING.
PLEASE LET THIS EMAIL SERVE AS MY VOTE AS BEING AGAINST THIS REZONING.
THE NEXT IS FROM LOLA DUNKIN WHITE.
I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT THE REZONING BE DENIED.
THE OWNER HAS NOT SUBMITTED A PLAN TO ADDRESS THE ZONING CHANGE.
THE NUMEROUS ISSUES CITED AT THE LAST MEETING STILL EXIST AND HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.
RESIDENTS AND BUSINESS OWNERS TRIED TO MEET WITH THE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY, BUT WERE UNSUCCESSFUL.
THE LETTER WAS PRESENTED TO THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE, WISHING TO WORK WITH THEM, BUT WE WERE DENIED ANY COMPROMISES AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS OUR CONCERNS WITH THEM FROM PREVIOUS MEETING.
SO FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING, WAS THAT BEEN WRITTEN OR, OKAY, BRANDY RESPONDING ON BEHALF KENSINGTON ESTATES, HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION, BOARD MEMBERS.
WE WOULD LIKE TO OPPOSE THE REZONING OF PERKINS ROAD IN CASE PA 10 20 AND CASE 26, 20 WE AND OTHER SURROUNDING HOS HAVE MANY CONCERNS THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS REFUSING TO ADDRESS.
WE'RE REQUESTING THAT YOU DENY REZONING OF THE PROPERTY AND CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
NEXT IS FROM MARK REILAND FOR APPLICATIONS PA 10 20, IN CASE 26, 28, CONCERNING REZONING OF A PERKINS ROAD PROPERTY.
I AM OPPOSED DUE TO CONCERNS THAT THE INTENDED USE OF THE PROPERTY IS UNKNOWN AND THE POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACT TO TRAFFIC SAFETY, AS WELL AS DRAINAGE AND SEWAGE MANAGEMENT.
I ASKED THAT YOU DENIED THE REQUEST FOR REZONING OF THE ABOVE APPLICATION ON PERKINS ROAD, BECAUSE THE APPLICANT HAS REFUSED TO MEET WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE NEIGHBORING HOMEOWNERS IN THEIR ATTEMPT TO REACH A COMPROMISE AGREEMENT.
THIS REFUSAL INDICATES THAT CONTEMPT FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS OF CONSULTATION ON ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE AREA.
I BELIEVE ALL LEVELS OF OUR GOVERNMENT FROM APPOINTED OFFICIALS TO ELECTED OFFICES SHOULD NOT ENCOURAGE SUCH DISREGARD FOR ITS CITIZENS.
I REQUEST THAT THE REZONING OF THESE TWO PROPERTIES BE DENIED TONIGHT.
THERE IS NO DISCUSSION AMONGST NEIGHBORS ABOUT SITE CHANGES THAT WILL AFFECT THE RESIDENTIAL NATURE OF THE AREA, INCLUDING INTRODUCTION OF MULTI-STORY APARTMENTS, BUSINESSES, TRAFFIC FLOW, COMPROMISES TO THE RESPONSE TIME OF THE ST GEORGE FIRE DEPARTMENT, ET CETERA.
THIS COULD HAVE EASILY BEEN DONE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS RATHER THAN A BRUTE FORCE APPROACH.
PLEASE DENY THE APPLICATIONS OR AT LEAST POSTPONE THE DECISION FROM JONI FALSE.
I'M AN OPPOSITION TO THE REZONING OF APPLICATIONS PLAN AMENDMENT 10 20 IN CASE 26 20, AND ASKED THAT BOTH OF THESE BE DENIED.
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY BY THE DEVELOPERS.
THEY HAVE NOT PROVIDED ANY DETAILS REGARDING THEIR PLANS AFTER SEVERAL REQUESTS, BY NEIGHBORING HOMEOWNERS AND SUBDIVISION REPRESENTATIVES TO MEET AND DISCUSS THEIR PLANS.
PERKINS ROAD HAS ITS SAFE, ITS TRAFFIC AND SAFETY ISSUES.
SINCE THERE ARE NO EMERGENCY LANES AND NO TURNING LANES, IT'S SEVERAL DENTS, SUBDIVISIONS, NO PLANTS THAT HAVE BEEN SHARED WITH THE AREA COMMUNITY MEMBERS AS TO HOW FIRE MEDICAL AND EMERGENCY RESPONSES WILL BE ADDRESSED OR HOW THE AREA RESIDENTS CAN BE AFFECTED BY A DRAINING OR FLOODING CONCERNS.
PLEASE, THE NOD IS A REZONING REQUEST UNTIL WE CAN, UNTIL WE CAN BE MORE PROPERLY INFORMED FROM CHASE RAINEY.
I AM OPPOSED DUE TO NOT KNOWING THE INTENDED USE OF THE PROPERTY AND TYPE OF DEVELOPER CONCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC.
IF APARTMENTS ARE MULTIFAMILY, HOUSING IS PROPOSED FINALLY FROM JOE THERETO AS PRESIDENT OF THE PQ PERKINS AND HIGHLAND HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.
I'M WRITING TO EXPRESS OUR OPPOSITION TO THE PLAN OF MARRIAGE 10 20 AND CASE 26 20, THE REZONING OF PROPERTY AT 13 FIVE 11 PERKINS ROAD.
I'VE ALSO BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH SEVERAL OTHER RESIDENTS AND HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS IN THE PERKINS ROAD AREA TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES AND CONCERNS THE COMMUNITY HAS REGARDING THIS CASE.
I HAVE CONTACTED THE APPLICANT MS. ANDERSON AND HAVE REQUESTED THREE
[00:20:01]
TIMES TO MEET WITH HER SO THAT WE CAN DISCUSS OUR CONCERNS.AND I EVEN OFFERED A ONE ON ONE MEETING DUE TO COVID-19 CONCERNS.
SHE HAS REFUSED OUR REQUEST TO MEET.
SO I EMAILED HER A COPY OF OUR CONCERNS WHEN I CALLED HER TO DISCUSS THE ISSUES.
SHE SAID THAT THERE WERE TOO MANY ITEMS ON THE, ON THE LIST AND SHE DIDN'T WANT TO DISCUSS THEM BECAUSE THEY COULD CREATE PROBLEMS SELLING THE PROPERTY, THEREFORE, NO NEGOTIATIONS OR AGREEMENT WHEREVER POSSIBLE.
THEY CANNOT PROVIDE US WITH ANY INFORMATION REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY OR THE INTENDED USES WITHIN IT.
TWO OWNERS REFUSE TO MEET WITH OUR REPRESENTATIVE TO DISCUSS OUR ISSUES AND CONCERNS.
THREE ORCAS ROAD IS A HEAVILY TRAVELED ROAD WITH A LARGE NUMBER OF SOUTHERN DIVISIONS AND SIDE STREETS AND VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY TO EACH OTHER.
REZONING PRESENTS HUGE TRAFFIC SAFETY ISSUES FOR ALL MOTORISTS FOCUS ROLE FOUR LANE WORK IS STILL SEVERAL YEARS AWAY FROM PROJECTED COMPLETION.
NUMBER FOUR, ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT ST.
GEORGE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S RESPONSE TO FIRE AND MEDICAL EMERGENCIES.
FIVE OTHER CONCERNS ARE SEWER AND WASTE WATER TREATMENT, RAINWATER RUNOFF STREET ACCESS INTO AND OUT OF THE MINI SUBDIVISIONS AND OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE AREA WITH CONCERN FOR THE SAFETY INTEGRITY AND THE WELLBEING OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY.
WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUESTS REGARDING PLAN AMENDMENT 10 20 AND CASE 26 20.
AT THIS TIME, I WILL READ IN THE REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT, DEAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS, WHILE I DID NOT PHYSICALLY MEET WITH THE OPPOSITION.
I DID HAVE SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS WITH MR TORONTO TO TRY AND WORK WITH THE OPPOSITION.
THAT'S THE THERETO INFORMED THE HOS OF OUR CONVERSATIONS.
THE ATTACHMENT WITH MY LETTER, WHICH WAS TO BE READ AT TODAY'S MEETING WAS SENT TO ME FROM THE OPPOSITION WITH RESPECT TO THEIR PRIVACY.
THE COVER LETTER WAS NOT INCLUDED AS EMAILED TO MR. TORONTO.
THE STIPULATIONS ARE TOO RESTRICTIVE TO JUSTIFY MEETING.
PLEASE NOTE THAT MY REQUEST IS NOT UNREASONABLE CONSIDERING THE CURRENT ZONING FOR THE SURROUNDING AREA.
AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION COMMISSION MEMBERS.
AT THIS TIME, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, UH, FOR THE COMMENTS FOR THIS PROPERTY OR THIS CASE.
THERE'S TWO CASES, EXCUSE ME, VICE CHAIRMAN GROW FOR THE DIRECTOR AT THIS TIME.
AND WE CAN NOT LOOK AT, AT STIPULATION ON INTENDED USES AT THIS TIME.
THIS IS SIMPLY AS THIS IS SIMPLY IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, SIMPLY A STRAIGHT REZONING AND, AND, UH, A CHANGE, A CHANGE IN LAND USE, BUT THIS IS NOT A DEVELOPMENT.
THIS IS NOT A PRELIMINARY SITE PACKAGE.
SO THE, THE, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE LOOKING AT TRAFFIC AND DRAINAGE OR ANYTHING AT THIS POINT, ARE WE? NO, THAT'S CORRECT.
THIS IS A STRAIGHT REZONING IN A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE CATEGORY.
ANY FEATURE DEVELOPMENT ON THE SIDE WOULD REQUIRE A PERMIT, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE A DETAILED DRAINAGE STUDIES, ENGINEERING SURVEYS AND ADDITIONAL PERMITS, AS WELL AS THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT WOULD LOOK AT THE, UH, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND OR ANY TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE.
THAT'S KIND OF PUTTING A CART BEFORE HORSE, IS THAT CORRECT? THESE TWO ITEMS ARE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO CHANGE THE LAND USE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONER ADDISON.
THANK YOU MUCH MR. CHAIRMAN, BUT WHAT LEADS THE ITEM THAT WE WERE WAITING ON? THE RESPONSE FROM PUBLIC WORK REGARDS TO WHEN PERKINS ROAD WOULD BE, UM, IMPROVED THAT WE DEFERRED TO BEFORE TRY TO GET ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT, AS WELL AS FROM PUBLIC WORKS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS ON PERKINS ROAD THAT WE DID A MONTH OR SO AGO, TWO MONTHS AGO, ALMOST SOME TIME MR. ADDISON.
I GAVE THAT INFORMATION AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
THERE WAS THE REASON, THE REASON IT WAS DEFERRED THE FIRST TIME THE ANTICIPATED FUTURE BE A MOVIE OR PROJECT, OR THAT SEGMENT OF PERKINS ROAD IS SCHEDULED TO BE IN, IN DESIGN AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION IN 2022.
[00:25:01]
OKAY.WELL, I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE IN THAT WE DIDN'T GET A, WE DID GET AN UPDATE ON THAT PART OF IT, BUT I MEAN, WE CERTAINLY WOULD LIVE PROHIBITED FROM MAKING THAT AS A PART OF THE PROCESS OF BEING SURE THAT WE EITHER DENIED OR WHATEVER, BASED ON A FUTURE IMPROVEMENT OF A ROAD PROJECT.
WELL, I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THAT AND CERTAINLY KIND OF LIKE MR. GROUTEN REGARDS TO WHAT WE ARE LIMITED IN DOING IT.
IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A FUTURE FOR THEM TO TAKE A CHANCE, TO LOOK AT DRAINAGE AND, AND, AND TRAFFIC AND ALL THOSE OTHER THINGS.
AND THIS IS JUST THE REZONING AND COMPETENCE PLAN AMENDMENT, I'D LIKE TO MOVE FOR APPROVAL ON THE ITEM ON TWO ITEMS, MR. CHAIRMAN, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE THESE ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON.
DO YOU HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. GROSS SECOND FROM MY AS CHAIRMAN GROUT, ARE THERE ANY, UH, OBJECTIONS TO APPROVING THESE ITEMS, SAY NONE OF THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN APPROVED IN THE NEXT TWO
[Items 4 & 5]
ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN TOGETHER.THANK YOU, MR. HOGAN PERMISSION MEMBERS AT THIS TIME, WE WILL HEAR ITEMS. NUMBER FOUR, PLAN AMENDMENT 1220 5,800 TO 9,100 BURBANK DRIVE NIGHT IN NUMBER FIVE, CASE 31, 2050 800 TO 9,100 BURBANK DRIVE.
YAY, 1220 5,800 TO 9,100 BURBANK DRIVE WITH RELATED CASE 31 20 PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BURBANK DRIVE WEST OF SYDNEY, EVA MEMORIAL DRIVE COUNCIL THREE LOOP.
THE CURRENT FUTURE BR LAND USE DESIGNATION AS RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE REQUESTED FEATURE VR LAND USE DESIGNATION IS COMPACT NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE EXISTING ZONING AS RURAL AND THE REQUESTED ZONING IS LIKE COMMERCIAL
RESIDENTIAL PA 12, 2050 800 TO 9,100 BURBANK DRIVE WITH A RELATED CASE 31 20 STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PLAN AMENDMENT BASED UPON EXAMINATION OF THE AREA AT A FURTHER LEVEL OF DETAIL AND STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING.
IF THE COMPANION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IS APPROVED AND CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES AND CONFORMING THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS, WE HAVE THREE COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THIS ITEM.
THANK YOU COMMISSIONER MEMBERS AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND READING THE COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT LEAVING.
MY NAME IS JOE LOBBY AND I AM WITH QUALITY ENGINEERING AND SURVEY.
I REPRESENT OUR CLIENT ON THE LAND USE AMENDMENT FROM RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS TO COMPACT NEIGHBORHOODS.
THE 21.5 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED ON BURBANK DRIVE WEST OF SAY DIVA MEMORIAL DRIVE NEXT TO ELBOW BY YOU.
WE ARE LOOKING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE GROWING AREA OF THE PARISH AS THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ALONG BURBANK TO THE EAST AND WEST OF THIS PROPERTY HAD THE SAME FUTURE LAND USE.
WE ARE REQUESTING YOUR SUPPORT WITH THIS CASE AND APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL.
MY NAME IS JOE LABIUM WITH QUALITY ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING.
I REPRESENT OUR CLIENT ON THE REZONE FROM RURAL TO LIGHT COMMERCIAL.
YOU'LL SEE TWO AND LIMITED RESIDENTIAL 83.2 FOR A 21.5 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED ON BURBANK DRIVE WEST TO SAY, DAVE OR YOUR DRIVE NEXT DAY, ELBOW I, YOU, AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE BURBANK CORRIDOR, THE PROPERTY LOCATED RIGHT TO THE EAST RIGHT ACROSS THE DEVON MEMORIAL DRIVE IS SIMILAR IN ZONING.
ALONG WITH THE PROPERTIES ALONG BURBANK IS I DESIRED TO PROVIDE A HIGH END MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH AN UPSCALE RETAIL AND APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT, SIMILAR TO WHAT HAS BEEN DEVELOPED RECENTLY ALONG BURBANK, WE ARE REQUESTING YOUR SUPPORT WITH THIS CASE, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION FULL APPROVAL ON THAT I'LL READ IN THE COURTS THAT ARE IN FAVOR OF AS ITEM OF THESE ITEMS VERSUS FROM THOMAS TAYLOR.
IT READS THE REZONING IS IN LINE WITH WHAT ELSE HAS BEEN DONE IN THE AREA ALREADY AND SHOULD BE ALLOWED.
ALSO FROM THOMAS TAYLOR, REZONING IS IN LINE WITH WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE.
THE NEXT IS FROM ANDREW WATSON, SIMPLY READS.
THE NEXT IS FROM TIMOTHY LEARY.
SOME OF THE FUTURE LAND USE SURROUNDING THE AREAS COMMERCIAL USE.
SO THE COMPACT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'RE BRINGING MORE OF AN ADVANTAGE
[00:30:06]
MISSION MEMBERS AT THIS TIME.I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR EMOTIONS FOR THESE ITEMS. MR. CHAIRMAN, MR. ADDISON, A LIGHT MOMENT WHEN YOU READ IN THE PUBLIC RECORD THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT THOSE APPLICANTS WHO WERE IN FAVOR, UH, SOMETIME WROTE TWICE, I GUESS THAT TRIGGERED.
IF YOU WRITE MORE TIME, YOU GET MORE.
FAVORIBILITY TRYING TO UP THE COUNT, I SUPPOSE.
I CAN MOVE ON TO TWO ITEMS, PLEASE.
THERE'S A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON TO, UH, APPROVE THESE ITEMS. THAT MOTION IS SECONDED BY REQUEST.
AND WE HAVE A QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER ELLENDER, PLEASE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO ASK THE QUESTION.
SO THIS, THIS PROPERTY IS A HUNDRED PERCENT IN THE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD ON THE BURBANK AREA.
I, UM, THE WAY THIS AREA HAS BEEN DEVELOPING, UH, JUST BECAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED ALONG THAT AREA THAT ARE SIMILAR TO IT, IT'D BE A HUNDRED PERCENT IN THE FLOOD HAZARD AREA.
I LIKE TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION.
THERE IS, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE THIS ITEM FOR PERMISSION TO ADDISON THAT MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HILL.
AND WE HAVE AT LEAST ONE OBJECTION FROM COMMISSIONER ELLENDER.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL OBJECTIONS TO IMPROVE IN THESE ITEMS SAYING ON THOSE ITEMS THAT ARE APPROVED? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, THE NEXT THREE ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN AGAIN,
[Items 6 - 8]
COMMISSIONED FARMERS AT THIS TIME.WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SIX, PLAN AMENDMENT 13 2013, SEVEN 1713 EIGHT HUNDREDS OF 13, 1913, 913, 600 TO 14, 900 JEFFERSON HIGHWAY ITEM SEVEN CASE STUDY TWO 20 AN ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, SUBDIVISION TWO 20 RAVANA TOWNHOMES.
HE EIGHT 1320 13,600 TO 14,900 BLOCK JEFFERSON HIGHWAY WITH RELATED CASE 32 20 AND
ROBERT IS THE CURRENT FUTURE BR LAND USE DESIGNATION IS EMPLOYMENT CENTER WITH THE REQUESTED FUTURE BR LAND USE DESIGNATION OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE CURRENT ZONING IS LIKE COMMERCIAL C1, HEAVY COMMERCIAL C TO AND OFF STREET PARKING WITH THE REQUESTED ZONING OF TOWNHOUSE, A 2.5 FOR A RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT WITH 34 LOTS PA 13, 20 13,600 TO 14,900 BLOCK JEFFERSON HIGHWAY WITH RELATED CASES, 32, 20 AND S TWO 20 STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PLAN AMENDMENT BASED UPON EXAMINATION OF THE AREA AND A FURTHER LEVEL OF DETAIL STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING.
IF THE COMPANION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IS APPROVED, BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES AND CONFORMING TO UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS, STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REQUEST MEETS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE UDC FOR CONSENT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION.
IF THE COMPANION CONFERENCE OF LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONING ARE APPROVED, MR. CHAIRMAN MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, WE HAVE RECEIVED ONE COMMENT TO THESE ITEMS BY THE ADVOCATE CHAIRMAN.
WE'VE RECEIVED ONE COMMENT IN SUPPORT FOR THESE ITEMS FROM THE APPLICANT THERE'LL BE READ INTO RECORD.
THANK YOU MR. HOLDEN COMMISSIONER MEMBERS AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BREED IN OUR SPEAKER CHORD FROM THE APPLICANT THAT READS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WILL BE A NATURAL TRANSITION BETWEEN THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE COMMERCIAL USES IN THE AREA.
WE HAVE ADDRESSED ALL COMMENTS ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF AND THE DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT.
OUR DETENTION PONDS ARE OVERSIZED TO ACCOMMODATE DRAINAGE, AND WE HAVE PROVIDED MORE THAN THE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE.
WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE ALL THREE PARTS OF OUR SUBMITTAL AND ASK FOR YOUR APPROVAL AS WELL AS, AS I MISSED THE WHOLE CONVENTION, WE HAVE NO ADDITIONAL SPEAKER CORE.
SO AT THIS TIME I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR EMOTIONS FOR THESE ITEMS. GENTLEMEN, COMMISSIONER ADDISON.
[00:35:01]
AS A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON TO APPROVE THESE THREE ITEMS. SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER HAWTHORNE.ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO APPROVING THESE ITEMS? SAY NONE OF THOSE ITEMS HAVE NOW BEEN APPROVED CHAIRMAN THE NEXT ONE, AGAIN, THIS MAY BE TAKEN TOGETHER.
[Items 9 - 11]
MR. MEMBERS AT THIS TIME, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER NINE, TEXT AMENDMENT FIVE 20 CHAPTER EIGHT, ZONING DISTRICTS.THIS AMENDMENT REPEALS THE ENTIRE CHAPTER AND REPLACES WITH NEW LANGUAGE REORGANIZING CHAPTER BY INTENSITY OF USE ELIMINATING SOME ZONING DISTRICTS, MAKING OTHERS INACTIVE AND RESTORING ONE DISTRICT TO ACT ABUSE, ITEM NUMBER 10, TEXT AMENDMENT SIX 20 CHAPTER NINE.
THIS AMENDMENT REPEALS THE ENTIRE CHAPTER AND REPLACES WITH NEW LANGUAGE.
CREATING EASY TO READ TABLES OF PRINCIPAL USES ELIMINATING APPENDIX H AND ITEM NUMBER 11, TEXT AMENDMENT SEVEN 20 CHAPTER 11, DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS.
THIS AMENDMENT REPEALS THE ENTIRE CHAPTER AND REPLACES WITH NEW LANGUAGE, CREATING EASY TO READ TABLES OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
ELIMINATING APPENDIX F STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED ON CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE NEED TO CREATE A MORE USER FRIENDLY UDC.
THESE THREE TEXTS AMENDMENTS ARE ALL RELATED AND HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE GROUP WHO WILL LISTEN AND THE FEDERATION OF GREATER BEDROOMS, CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS WITH NO ADVERSE COMMENTS.
THESE ARE THE LAST THREE SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE.
THESE AMENDMENTS REPRESENT A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF WORK THAT HAS BEEN DONE BY THE STAFF, WORKING WITH VARIOUS OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS, STAKEHOLDERS TO UPDATE THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE ORGANIZING SECTIONS AND REWRITING ENTIRE CHAPTERS TO MAKE IT EASIER TO UNDERSTAND AND MORE USER FRIENDLY.
NOW WE'VE NEVER RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON THESE AUDITS, MISS MEMBERS AT THIS TIME, I'LL I'LL ASK IF THERE ARE ANY, WE DON'T HAVE ANY COURTS WHATSOEVER FOR THESE ITEMS, CORRECT? NOPE, NO COMMENT OF COURSE FROM THE POPE.
I'LL INVITE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, EMOTIONS FOR THESE THREE ITEMS. YEAH, I'LL SAY, UH, I KNOW WE ALL HAVE A PRINTED OUT COPY OF UDC AND UNDERSTAND WHAT A SIGNIFICANT UNDERTAKING THIS WAS FOR STAFF.
SO I WANT TO OFFER AN APPRECIATION FOR ALL THE WORK THAT WENT INTO THAT, THE HOME STRETCH HERE THAT'S BEFORE US.
AND I'LL, UH, CAP THAT OFF WITH A MOTION TO APPROVE THESE THREE CHANGES.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ALBERT I'LL SECOND.
THAT WAS A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER ALLEN TO APPROVE THESE ITEMS. I BELIEVE THE FIRST SECOND WAS FROM COMMISSIONER GROUT.
DID YOU HAVE DIFFERENT COMMENT AS WELL? I JUST WANT TO COMMENT THAT AS SOMEONE WHO HAS TO USE THE UDC DAILY AND HAS A LOT OF, UH, THERE HAS TO EXPLAIN THIS TO MY CLIENTS, THIS REVISION THAT WE'RE DOING THIS LAST PIECE OF IT IS, UH, IT'S, WHAT'S BEEN NEEDED FOR A LONG, LONG TIME.
SO I WANT TO THANK STAFF, UH, THE DIRECTOR, UM, THE PREVIOUS DIRECTOR AND ALL THOSE WHO'VE WORKED FOR SEVERAL YEARS TO GET THIS DONE.
I THINK THIS IS MUCH MORE READABLE USER-FRIENDLY AND WE MUCH BETTER UNDERSTOOD BY THE PUBLIC.
AND I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM WE'VE HAD WITH DDC IS THE PUBLIC HAS A HARD TIME GRASPING IT.
SO I THINK THIS IS EXCELLENT AND WHOLEHEARTEDLY A SECOND, THIS AND WANTING TO PASS GREAT COMMISSION MEMBERS.
THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS, A COMMISSIONER'S ALLEN AND VICE CHAIRMAN ROUTE.
AND THANK YOU TO THE STAFF, ALL YOUR HARD WORK AND, AND GETTING THIS ACCOMPLISHED.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL, UH, COMMENTS ARE WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND? ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS, SAY NONE OF THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN APPROVED.
MR. CHAIRMAN, THE NEXT TWO ITEMS MAY BE ALSO TAKEN TO GET THE COMMISSION MEMBERS.
[Items 21 & 22]
THIS TIME, WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 21, WT ONE 2018 T SMALL CELL WIRELESS FACILITY, 58, 80 PERKINS ROAD AND ITEM NUMBER 22 WT TWO 28 AND T SMALL-CELL WIRELESS FACILITY, 55, 10 PERKINS BROKE WT ONE 28 AND T SMALL CELL WIRELESS FACILITY IS 58 80 PERKINS ROAD WITH RELATED CASE WT TWO 20 AT 55 10 PARKING PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF PARKIN'S ROUTE AND EAST OF POLLARD PARKWAY ON TRACK CC, ALL SIDE PLANTATION[00:40:01]
COUNCIL, DISTRICT 12 ROCCA.THE APPLICANT IS CHIP LINES WITH AT AND T MOBILITY.
THE FUTURE BR LAND USE DESIGNATION HAS THERE BEEN NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE EXISTING ZONING IS HEAVY COMMERCIAL C TO THE PROPOSED TOWER HEIGHTS ARE 31 FEET WITH THE REQUESTED WAIVER OF UDC, SECTION 14.2 0.1 SEAT FOR LOCATION OF A PROPOSED TOWER WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF AN EXISTING WIRELESS TOWER OR FROM A BUILDING TALLER THAN THE PROPOSED ALLIANZ IN SUPPORT OF THESE WT ONE 20 WT, TWO 2018 T SMALL CELL WIRELESS FACILITY, 58, 80 AND 55, 10 PERKINS ROAD STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE LOCATION WAIVERS DUE TO THE APPLICANT'S CERTIFYING.
THE SMALL CELL FACILITIES ARE NEEDED BASED ON THE FACT THAT THERE ARE NO SUITABLE STRUCTURES BEING LOCATED IN THE AREA TO CO LOCATE AND STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR WIRELESS SAUER TOWER SITE PLAN BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES AND CONFORMING.
THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS PROVIDED THE WAIVERS ARE APPROVED.
YOU WILL RECEIVE TWO COMMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THESE ITEMS THAT WILL BE READ INTO THE RECORD.
AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND READING THE COMMENT.
THE COMMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, PLEASE ACCEPT THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC.
THERE WERE BUSINESSES AT AND T MOBILITY FOR WT ONE 20 BY JOHN F CHIP LYONS.
THIS MATTER IS ITEM 21 ON THE AGENDA FOR THE JULY 20 20TH, 2020 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING.
I ASK THAT YOU CONFIRM RECEIPT OF THESE COMMENTS BY RETURNING.
NO SINGULAR WIRELESS IS PROPOSING TO BUILD TWO NEW FACILITIES AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 58 50 PURPOSE ROAD AND 55 10 PURPOSE WORLD.
EACH FACILITY IS A PROPOSED 31 FOOT POLE WITH THEIR REQUIRED ANTENNA AND EQUIPMENT MOUNTED ON THE POLE.
EACH FACILITY HAS A LOW PROFILE UNOBTRUSIVE SOLUTION TO INCREASE COVERAGE AND CAPACITY IN TARGETED AREAS.
IN THIS CASE, CFH DISTRICT BR PARTNERS LP OR THE PROPERTY OWNER AS REQUESTED THAT THE APPLICANT INSTALL EQUIPMENT THAT WILL IMPROVE THE COVERAGE AND CAPACITY TO THE RESIDENCE OF THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY.
THE APPLICANT HAS DETERMINED THAT INSTALLING TWO SMALLER FACILITIES IS THE MOST EFFICIENT AND LEAST INTRUSIVE WAY TO PROVIDE THIS SERVICE.
IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THE 31 FOOT POLES WILL BE VISIBLE FROM PERKINS ROAD AS AGE AS GREATER THAN 200 FEET FROM THE STREET.
ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED FACILITIES ARE MUCH SMALLER THAN TYPICAL CELL TOWERS.
THEY ARE BEING PLACED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, NOT IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
CONSEQUENTLY, THE PROPOSED FACILITIES MUST ADHERE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 14.2 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES OR THE UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT THE SMALL CELL OR THE PROPOSED FACILITIES MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 14.2, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SECTION 14.2 0.1 0.2, WHICH PROVIDES THAT WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS SHALL NOT BE LOCATED WITHIN 1,320 FEET OF ANY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED OR EXISTING WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TOWER OR ANY BUILDING TALLER THAN THE PROPOSED WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TITLE.
BECAUSE EACH PROP PROPOSED FACILITY IS ONLY 31 FEET HIGH.
IT HAS A LIMITED RANGE AND THEREFORE MUST BE LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY WITHIN 1,320 FEET OF EACH OTHER TO PROVIDE THE NEEDED COVERAGE AT THE PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, NEITHER PROPOSED FACILITY IS WITHIN 1,320 FEET OF A TYPICAL MACRO TOP.
ADDITIONALLY, THE PROPOSED FACILITIES ARE, OR WERE THEY ON 1,320 FEET OF A BUILDING THAT IS SOLIDATED THE APPLICANT EXPLORER PLACING THE ANTENNA ON APARTMENT BUILDINGS.
HOWEVER, DOING SO WOULD CAUSE A SIGNAL TO EMIT OUTWARDS FROM THE BUILDING DOES NOT HAVING THE DESIRED EFFECT OF IMPROVING COVERAGE AND CAPACITY IN THE BUILDING, THE NEED FOR SUFFICIENT COVERAGE AND CAPACITY FOR CELL PHONE AND DATA USAGE THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED BY THE PROPOSED FACILITIES AS BECOME NOT ONLY A MODERN NECESSITY, BUT A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE AS OF 2016, ROUGHLY 396 MILLION MOBILE DEVICES WERE IN USE WITH JUST OVER HALF OR 58, 50.8% OF AMERICAN HOUSEHOLD HAVING ONLY A MOBILE VOICE CONNECTION BECAUSE OF A PROLIFERATION OF CELL PHONE USAGE IN THE UNITED STATES AND ESTIMATED 80% OF ROUGHLY 240 MILLION EMERGENCY CALLS IN THE U S 192 MILLION CALLS PER YEAR OR 525,000 CALLS PER DAY COME FROM MOBILE PHONES.
HALF OF THOSE NINE 11 CALLS FROM MOBILE PHONES ARE MADE IN DOORS AS A RESULT, INSUFFICIENT COVERAGE AND OUR CAPACITY IN AN AREA AS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE AT THE SAME TIME, APPLICANT WANTS TO ADDRESS THE PERCEPTION THAT CELL PHONE TOWERS CAN CAUSE HEALTH ISSUES, CELL PHONE TOWERS, INCLUDING THE LOW PROFITABILITIES
[00:45:01]
LOW-PROFILE FACILITIES CURRENTLY PROPOSED OPERATE WITHIN FCC SAFETY LIMITS AND RADIO FREQUENCY ENERGY FROM ANTENNAS RESULT IN EXPOSURE.WELL BELOW THOSE FCC SAFETY LIMITS, THESE LIMITS ARE BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY AND EXPERT NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS.
THE WIDELY ACCEPTED SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS IS THAT TOWERS POSE NO KNOWN HAZARD TO NEARBY RESIDENTS.
AND AS THEY FCC NOTES, THE POSSIBILITY THAT A MEMBER OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC COULD BE EXPOSED TO ART LEVELS IN EXCESS OF THE FCC GUIDELINES IS EXTREMELY REMOTE.
MOREOVER, NEXT GENERATION FIVE G DEVICES SUCH AS THOSE CURRENTLY PROPOSED OPERATE ON MILLIMETER WAVE SPECTRUM, WHICH DECADES OF STUDIES IS SUBJECT TO THE SAME FCC REGULATORY VIRGINIA, BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE MILLIMETER WAVE SPECTRUM, 5G DEVICES OPERATE AT THE SAME OR LOWER OR LEVELS THAT FOUR G NETWORKS TYPICALLY EXPOSURE TO 5G INFRASTRUCTURE SUCH AS THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED FACILITIES IS COMPARABLE TO BLUETOOTH DEVICES AND BABY MONITORS EXPERTS HAVE FOUND THAT ANY HAZARDS WERE REQUIRED EXPOSURE TO RF ENERGY AT LEVELS FAR ABOVE ANYTHING THAT WILL BE POSSIBLE WITH ORDINARY CELLULAR TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT, SIMPLY PUT FIVE G INFRASTRUCTURE PULLS.
NO, NO ONE HAS THIS TO NEARBY RESIDENTS AND OPERATE AT THE SAME OR LOWER RF LEVELS THAT FOUR G NETWORKS AND CONCLUSION WT ONE 20 AND WT TWO 20 WERE INITIATED BASED ON A REQUEST FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER TO IMPROVE CAPACITY AND COVERAGE TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE APARTMENT COMPLEX, LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY IN RESPONSE TO THAT REQUEST, THE APPLICANT DESIGNED TO LOAD PROFILE ON THE TRUTHS OF FACILITIES TO MEET THIS NEED, NEITHER OF WHICH SHOULD BE VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY AND MEET THE REQUIRED SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THEIR LOW PROFILE, THE PROPOSED FACILITIES HAVE A LIMITED RANGE.
IT MUST BE PLACED IN RELATIVELY CLOSE PROXIMITY TO PROVIDE IMPROVED COVERAGE TO THE PROPERTY.
ADDITIONALLY, IT IS NOT TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE TO MOPEY ANTENNA ON A NEARBY BUILDING AS SUCH THE APPLICANT RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THAT A WAIVER OF SECTION 14.2 0.1 0.2 BE GRANTED SO THAT EACH PROPOSED FACILITY CAN BE PLACED WITHIN 1,320 FEET OF EACH OTHER.
AND 1,320 FEET OF NEARBY BUILDINGS THAT ARE TALLER THAN THE PROPOSED FACILITIES.
OUR SPEAKER CHORD AND FAVORS FROM JILL ROBINSON.
MY NAME IS JOE ROBINSON AND I LIVE IN THE PLEASANT RIDGE TOWNHOUSES.
I AM 28 AND LIVING IN MY TOWNHOUSE BY MYSELF.
I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT I HAD NO SERVICE UNTIL I WAS IN THE INSPECTION PROCESS OF BUYING MY TOWN HAS MADE ME EXTREMELY NERVOUS AS I DO NOT USE A LANDLINE THERE ANYMORE.
AND I WANT TO KNOW THAT I BE ABLE TO CALL NINE ONE, ONE OR ANYONE FOR THAT MATTER IN AN EMERGENCY, I BOUGHT AN ATNT MICRO SALE THAT BOOSTS MY SIGNAL IN MY HOUSE, BUT IT WILL STILL DROP CALLS IN MY HOUSE ON A NORMAL BASIS.
I NEED THE CELL TOWER TO FEEL MORE SAFE AS A SINGLE FEMALE TO MAKE SURE I HAVE RELIABLE PHONE SERVICE WHEN I'M HOME IN CASE OF EMERGENCY.
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO READ MY CONCERN COMMISSION MEMBERS.
AT THIS TIME, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR EMOTIONS FOR THESE ITEMS. THAT'S CHAIRMAN MR. ADDISON LIKE THE MOVE FOR APPROVAL.
THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON TO APPROVE THESE ITEMS. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER COLLINS, LEWIS, ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO HAVING THESE ITEMS APPROVED? SAY NONE OF THOSE ITEMS HAVE BEEN APPROVED MISSION MEMBERS AT THIS TIME.
[COMMUNICATIONS]
WE'LL MOVE ON TO COMMUNICATIONS BEGINNING WITH THE DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS.THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICE RECENTLY RECEIVED THE 2021 BUDGET REQUESTS FROM THE MAYOR'S OFFICE ADMINISTRATION HAS ASKED ALL DEPARTMENTS TO SUBMIT A STANDSTILL BUDGET, ELIMINATE ELIMINATING FROZEN POSITIONS IN ANTICIPATING ADDITIONAL REDUCTIONS DUE TO THE COVID-19 STAFF IS PREPARING THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET AS REQUESTED.
OUR TOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT SURVEY WAS RECENTLY COMMITTED, COMPLETED THE SURVEY REVEALED 517 HISTORIC STRUCTURES IN 38 DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL STYLES THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF MET WITH THE BEAUVOIR TOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ON JULY 15TH TO GO OVER THE SURVEY RESULTS AND DISCUSS PROCESS OF DEVELOPING DRAFT DESIGN GUIDELINES AND NEXT STEPS.
SO THANK YOU MR. HOGAN, MR. MEMBERS AT THIS TIME, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS AND I WILL START BY FIRST GIVING A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR SELECTION PROCESS OR AN UPDATE ON, ON THEIR PROCESS.
OUR FIRST MEETING WAS A WEEK AGO TODAY ON MONDAY, JULY 13TH.
AND IT WAS THAT INITIAL MEETING WAS AN ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING AND WE WERE BASICALLY
[00:50:01]
TRYING TO ALLOW ALL THE MEMBERS TO KIND OF GET A GRASP ON THE GENERAL PROCESS AND WHAT THE SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS WOULD ENTAIL.SO THAT INCLUDED TALKING ABOUT THE, UH, GETTING READY TO DISCUSS RATHER THAN DETAILED THE JOB DESCRIPTION AND ANY REVISIONS THAT MAY NEED TO BE NEED TO BE MADE TO THAT IN ITS CURRENT FORM, UH, ADVERTISEMENTS AND JOB POSTING, HOW AND WHEN AND FOR HOW LONG THOSE, UH, THAT POSITION WOULD BE POSTED.
UH, HOW WOULD WE, WE WOULD REVIEW THE APPLICATIONS, UH, WHAT THE ACTUAL INTERVIEW PROCESS WOULD ENTAIL.
AND, UH, WE DECIDED TO SCHEDULE OUR NEXT MEETING FOR JULY 27TH.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT? UH, SO FAR THE, UH, SUBSEQUENT UPDATES, WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE A LOT MORE, A LITTLE MORE DETAIL.
IF NOT, THEN I WOULD LIKE YOU ALL TO JOIN ME IN CONGRATULATING.
MEGAN WIN WAS A PLANNER ONE AND THE CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AS SHE IS OUR LATEST EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH.
SINCE JOINING THE PLANNING COMMISSION, MEGAN HAS READILY ACCEPTED ANY TESTS THAT SHE HAS BEEN ASSIGNED, EXPRESSING HER DESIRE TO LEARN MORE MEGAN'S ATTENTION TO DETAIL, REVIEWING COMPLEX PLAN DEVELOPMENTS AND HER WILLINGNESS TO ASSIST OTHERS HAS MADE HER A VERY VALUABLE EMPLOYEE IN ALL OF HER ASSIGNMENTS.
MEGAN DISPLAYS A POSITIVE ATTITUDE AND WORKS TO ENSURE THAT ALL TASKS ARE COMPLETED ON TIME.
SHE'S BEING RECOGNIZED FOR OUTSTANDING CUSTOMER SERVICE AND HER CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE TEAM.
PLEASE JOIN ME IN CONGRATULATING, MEGAN.
IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YES, CHAIRMAN COMMISSIONER.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, UM, YOU GAVE AN UPDATE ON THE, ON THE SEARCH COMMITTEES, UM, A REPORT, UH, AS TO WHAT Y'ALL WHERE YOU GUYS ARE.
UH, DO YOU HAVE AN ANTICIPATED TIMELINE ON WHEN WE POSSIBLY GONNA HAVE AN IDEA WHEN IT COMES BACK TO THE COMMISSION AND YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT WHEN THEY, WHEN WE WOULD GET A RECOMMENDATION, HOW, HOW LONG, HOW LONG ANTICIPATED TIME, HOW LONG WAS THAT YOU THINK AS YOU, I KNOW YOU AND YOUR INITIAL STAGES RIGHT NOW, BUT WHEN SOME OF THIS STUFF ABOUT COMPANY HEAD SURE.
AND PRELIMINARILY, WE'RE LOOKING AT TRYING TO, TRYING TO MAKE AN OFFER FOR THE POSITION BY THE END OF THE YEAR.
NOW THIS WILL BE, THIS WILL BE IN THE NOVEMBER TO DECEMBER TIMEFRAME.
IT COULD BE LATE DECEMBER, BUT AGAIN, IT'S THE INITIAL MEETING ORGANIZATIONAL.
WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ALL THE THINGS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN BEFORE WE CAN GET TO THAT POINT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARRANGEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE MADE, HOW WE CONDUCT THE INTERVIEWS.
AND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT TALKING TO DETAIL ABOUT THESE THINGS BECAUSE WE WERE TRYING TO WRAP OUR HEADS AROUND THE ENTIRE PROCESS.
SO AGAIN, THIS WAS INITIALLY AN ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING.
THESE DATES CAN BE FURTHER REFINED AND DRILL DOWN AND SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS.
AND THAT INFORMATION WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE DISTILLED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ARE WE HAVING WHO'S THAT WHO'S GOING TO HR AND IS ENGAGED IN THIS INITIATIVE RIGHT AT THIS STAGE.
THIS IS NOT OUR FIRST RODEO IN TERMS OF SELECTING OUR ART DIRECTOR OR ANY OTHER MAJOR PERSONNEL POSITION PARISH GOVERNMENT.
SO SOME PERSONNEL, HIS OFFICE, THE CASE, AND THIS INITIATIVE AT THIS STAGE, THE DIRECTOR OF HR, BRIAN BERNARD, IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.
WELL, THEY CERTAINLY COULD BE A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THAT ENTIRE PROCESS BECAUSE THEY, THEY DO THIS EVERY DAY IN TERMS OF THE CITY PARISH PERSONNEL, PARTICULARLY IF THERE'S BEEN LIKE THIS AND WE'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH IT, BUT WE CAN ELIMINATE A LOT OF THE PRELIMINARY PROTOCOL.
IF WE HAVE GUYS WHO ACTUALLY DO IT EVERY DAY IN PARTICULAR HR, WHETHER IT'S BRIAN OR ANYBODY ELSE IN THAT STAFF OFF.
UM, AND THAT'S WHY I'M JUST TRYING TO GET AN IDEA OF, CAUSE WE KNOW FRANK HAS BEEN GONE NOW AND WE KNEW BEFORE HE LEFT AND TO SAY, WE JUST GOING TO TRY TO FILL THE EFFICIENT FIRST PART OF YEAR SEEMED TO BE A LITTLE, VERY LONG TIME, GET A SIGNIFICANT POSITION LIKE DIRECTOR'S OFFICE FIELD.
WE CAN DISCUSS IT MORE, BUT I JUST THOUGHT THAT WE WOULD BE MUCH FURTHER DOWN THE LINE IN TERMS OF KNOWING WHEN FRANK LEFT AND KNOWING WHEN WE'D GOT TO FILL THE POSITION OF A RECORD, YOU KNOW, UM, AND THEN CERTAINLY HR CAN BE A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN THAT, IN THAT BEARABLE EVERY DAY.
IF I CAN, IF I CAN JUMP IN HERE, THIS IS CLIFF, UH, I'M ON THE COMMITTEE.
AND WE WERE LOOKING AT THOSE TIMELINES AS WE HAD A NUMBER OF FACTORS WE HAD TO CONSIDER.
FIRST OF ALL, IT'S, COVID UH, HOW THIS HAS PLAYED OUT.
THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WE'VE HAD ISSUES WITH TRYING TO GET THIS TOGETHER.
BUT, UM, THE TIMELINE WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, IS IF YOU WILL.
[00:55:01]
YOU.UM, I WAS PUSHING THIS INITIALLY FOR, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHY CAN'T WE GET THIS DONE QUICKLY? THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES THAT DO HAVE TO BE INVOLVED.
WE DO HAVE TO GET THE ADVERTISEMENT OUT THERE.
THERE DOES HAVE TO BE TIME FOR THE ADVERTISEMENT TO BE OUT THERE.
WE HAVE TO RECEIVE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO RECEIVE, UH, UM, RESPONSES TO THE ADVERTISEMENT.
THAT OF COURSE IS WHERE HR COMES IN.
THEY WILL HAVE TO VET THE ADVERTISEMENT THAT DOES TAKE TIME.
AND THE PROBLEM IS, IS WHEN YOU RUN INTO THE END OF THE YEAR, YOU KNOW, YOU RUN INTO HOLIDAY SEASON.
PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO WANT TO BE COMING TO INTERVIEWS IN NOVEMBER, DECEMBER.
SO, UH, WE'RE TRYING, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT PUSHED MUCH, MUCH MORE AGGRESSIVELY.
UM, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE REASON WE'VE HAD THIS ISSUE IS WE, WE, WE, WE NOT SO MUCH WAITED.
WE KNEW FRANK WAS GOING, BUT WITH COVID, IT WAS VERY HARD FOR US TO GET TOGETHER UNTIL WE FINALLY HAD TO SAY, THIS HAS, THIS PROCESS HAS TO MOVE FORWARD AND NOW WE'RE MOVING THAT FORWARD.
UM, AND YES, HR WILL BE INTIMATELY INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS, BUT FIRST WE HAVE TO GET TO, WHAT DO WE, WHAT DO WE WANT AS A DIRECTOR? WHAT IS THE JOB DESCRIPTION? AND JUST TAKING THE JOB DESCRIPTION FROM BEFORE AND STICKING IT IN THERE AND STICK IT IN AN ADVERTISEMENT.
I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO WORK.
SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WE'RE MEETING AGAIN ON THE 27TH, WE'VE ALL GOT OUR HOMEWORK TO DO.
WE'VE ALL GOT A GREAT DEAL OF RESEARCH TO DO.
AND EACH OF US HAS A TASK TO TAKE CARE OF COMMUNICATION, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, UH, RESEARCH, A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS WE'RE ALL LOOKED AT DOING.
THIS IS NOT SOMETHING WHERE WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA DRAG THIS OUT.
IF WE CAN MOVE, WE CAN ADVANCE THIS.
I WANT TO GET THIS RESOLVED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
SO AT THIS POINT WE'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY A 90 DAY TURNAROUND.
WE'RE ALREADY AT THE END OF JULY.
WELL, IT SOUND, WE CAN MEET AGAIN AT THE END OF JULY AND WORKING ON A JOB DESCRIPTION AS CLEAR AND CONCISE, AND WE'D GET THIS OUT IN AUGUST.
SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER TO HAVE ALL OF EVERYBODY VETTED INTERVIEWS DONE AND BRINGING SOMEBODY IN, WHETHER IT BE ZOOM OR HOWEVER WE'RE GOING TO BRING THEM IN.
AND WE'RE ALREADY AT THE END OF OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER, WE'RE PLANNING TO MAKE AN OFFER.
SO I, I CAN'T SEE US GETTING ANY TIGHTER THAN THAT UNLESS WE RUSHED THIS AGAIN.
SO AUGUST WE CAN GET THE JOB DESCRIPTION TIED DOWN AND WE CAN PUT IT OUT THERE.
I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG WE ADVERTISE LAST TIME.
I FORGOT WHAT WE SAID IF IT WAS TWO WEEKS FOR 30 DAYS.
SO IF WE DO THAT, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT MID AUGUST, GO AHEAD, CLIFF.
YOU REMEMBER THE LAST TIME I BELIEVE IT WAS 30 DAYS IS WHAT WE, SO EVEN IF WE GET THE JOB DESCRIPTION AND WE'RE PREPARED BY THE AUGUST OF 15, SO NOW YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OCTOBER THE 15TH FOR 30 DAYS GETTING THE MEAN AT THE END OF OCTOBER.
SO I THINK THAT THIS AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER TIMEFRAME, 90 DAYS IS TIGHT FOR EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE IN PLACE THAT WE NEED TO DO TO GET IT OUT.
IF WE'RE ADVERTISING IT FOR 30 DAYS, THE NEXT 90 DAYS IS NOT, IT'S REALLY NOT AN UNREALISTIC TIME.
I WISH WE COULD HAVE DONE IT SOONER, BUT, UH, AGAIN, UH, AS IT RELATES TO COVID, WE DIDN'T REALLY KNOW WHAT WE WERE DOING IN TERMS OF TRYING TO MEET ON THIS, UH, WHICH WE COULD HAVE DONE IT SOONER, BUT WE ARE WHERE WE ARE NOW.
AND I THINK IN THE NEXT 90 DAYS THAT WE SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING IN PLACE BY THE END OF OCTOBER, EARLY NOVEMBER, READY TO MAKE AN OFFER OR BRING SOMEBODY DOWN FOR A FINAL INTERVIEW.
SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THE TIMELINE OF AWARE OF SENIOR.
UM, I, I, YOU GUYS, WHEN YOU SAY DO THAT FINAL INTERVIEW, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS OF TWO TO THREE NAMES OR FOUR NAMES TO THE COMMISSION FOR THAT, THAT PROCESS OF WHAT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? THEY'RE NOT, NOT JUST THE MATTER OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
NO, WE'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND THAT WE WOULD RECOMMEND, I BELIEVE IT WAS AT A TOP THREE.
THE COMMISSION WOULD MAKE A DECISION THAT WOULD GO ON TO, UH, TO BE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL.
IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THE FINAL PROCESS.
WELL, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, IT JUST GOES TO COMMISSION.
COMMISSIONERS ONLY MAKE THE SELECTION, THE COMMISSION, THE COMMISSION MAKES THE SELECTION.
IF IT'S MAKE, HE WAS GOING TO FINAL THREE, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, I'M NOT SURE WHO SAID THE FINAL THREE.
AND, BUT BONES, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, UH, THE SEARCH COMMITTEE THAT GOT US FRANK WAS SIX TO NINE MONTHS.
SO, SO THIS, SO GET GETTING IT DONE IN TWO, THREE.
UM, IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING I WANT TO DO, BUT IT'S ALL, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
I'M NOT QUESTION, HOLD ON, GUYS.
I'M NOT QUESTIONING WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING AT THIS STAGE.
I'M SAYING, IF WE TALK ABOUT WHAT WE HAD WITH FRANK OR ANY OTHER DIRECTOR AROUND THE PARISH SYSTEM, THAT IS NOT WHAT I'M DOING, I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MOVE HIS BALL DOWN THE ROAD AND WE HAVE NOT MOVED SINCE FRANK MADE HIS ANNOUNCEMENT TO LEAVE, NOR DID WE MOVE IT SINCE THEN.
AND SO AGAIN, WE NOT ONLY, WE WASTED A LOT OF TIME, IN MY OPINION, IN TERMS OF HOW WE FILL THE POSITION, YOU KNOW, AND I UNDERSTAND KOVAC, I UNDERSTAND ALL OF THAT.
I'M QUITE AWARE OF THE SITUATION WE'RE IN, IN REGARD ABOUT OUR SOCIETY, YOU KNOW, BUT AGAIN, THE SAME THING, THE PARISH
[01:00:01]
STILL HAS TO WORK AND WE STILL HAVE TO MOVE THINGS FORWARD.AND SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET A REAL DEFINITIVE TIMELINE BECAUSE AGAIN, IF WE GO MONTHS UPON MONTHS, WITHOUT, WITHOUT MOVING THINGS FORWARD, WE ARE GOING TO BE IN DECEMBER, JANUARY, FIRST OF THE YEAR AND STAFF AND EVERYBODY ELSE NEED CONSISTENCY.
AND I, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT HERE TO CHALLENGE WHAT THE COMMISSION IS DOING, NOR MY CHALLENGE IS WHAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE IS DOING.
BUT I, AS A MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION, I NEED TO HAVE A MORE DEFINITIVE ANSWER ON WHERE ARE WE GOING? WHAT'S GOING ON? AND SO AGAIN, I DO UNDERSTAND IT QUITE CLEARLY.
I MEAN, THAT'S WHY I ASKED ABOUT HR BECAUSE HR DOES IT EVERY DAY.
IT'S NOT A MATTER OF WHETHER WE IN COVID OR ANYTHING ELSE.
IT'S THE EVERYDAY JOB FOR THOSE GUYS.
AND THEY SHOULD BE ONE OF THOSE.
AND HONESTLY, WHEN THE CHAIR MADE THE APPOINTMENTS AND HR WAS GOING TO BE A PART OF THAT SUB COMMITTEE SIDE, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO BE ADVISING? BUT THE REALITY OF IT IS IT IS WHAT THEY DO.
IT IS TO HOW THEY DO IN TERMS OF MAJOR POSITIONS, OUR PARISH SYSTEM.
AND I'M NOT HERE TO CHALLENGE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
AND I DON'T WANT TO DO IT AT THIS COMMISSION TIME.
AND NOW WE CAN TALK PRIVATELY TALK WITHIN STAFF, AND I'LL CERTAINLY LISTEN TO WHAT THE STAFF AND WHAT YOU, UM, SUBCOMMITTEE IS DOING.
I JUST WANT TO HAVE AN IDEA OF WHEN IT WOULD COME BACK TO A MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION AND WHAT FORM OF BECOME BACK TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
SO AGAIN, I'M, I'M DONE WITH THOSE COMMENTS, MR. CHAIR, I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY, BUT THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO REVISIT THAT AND HAVE MORE IDEA OF WHEN WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THAT STAGE.
THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS, COMMISSIONER ADDISON, AND ALSO FROM A COMMISSIONER GROUT, VICE CHAIRMAN, GROTON COMMISSIONER COLLINS, LEWIS, LIKE, LIKE I SAID, THE PREVIOUS PROCESS WHEN WE HIRED THE, UH, WHEN WE HIRED FRANK, UH, TOOK SIX TO NINE MONTHS AND WE'RE LOOKING AT, WE'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY A SIMILAR TIMEFRAME WHERE WE TOOK, WELL, WE HAD A THREE, AT LEAST THE THREE MONTH HIATUS, AS WE WERE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE COULD, WHAT, WHAT OPERATIONS WOULD EVEN BE FEASIBLE THROUGHOUT THIS COVID PANDEMIC? NO ONE, NO ONE, ACTUALLY, NO ONE HAD A PLAYBOOK FOR HOW TO OPERATE A GOVERNMENT OR ANY OPERATIONS THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS.
SO, UH, WHETHER WE, WHETHER WE MOVED AS FAST AS WE POSSIBLY COULD THROUGH COBRA TONIGHT, WE DIDN'T KNOW AT THE, AT THE TIME AND HINDSIGHT IS 2020, BUT WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WE HAVE STARTED MEETING.
NOW WE ARE MAKING PROGRESS AND WE HAVE OUR NEXT DATE AND WE ARE WE'RE OUTLINING WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN AND WHEN IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
AND AS THAT INFORMATION, UH, FURTHER REFINED, WE'LL CONTINUE TO KEEP THIS ENTIRE COMMISSION APPRISED OF THAT, AND HOPEFULLY LOOK TO BRING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE THREE SOLID CANDIDATES, UH, THAT, THAT THIS COMMISSION CAN MAKE THE BEST HIRE DECISION FOR.
SOUNDS GOOD, MR. CHAIR, WHEN YOU SAY IT, YOU GUYS, THANK YOU.
SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS, IF NOT, IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN, MOTION TO ADJOURN, BULLSHIT FROM COMMISSIONER COLLINS, LEWIS SECOND FROM A BELIEVER VICE CHAIRMAN.
UH, ANY OBJECTIONS, IF NOT, YOU ALL HAVE A GREAT EVENING.
THIS MISSION, THIS MEETING IS A CHURCH, RIGHT?