i think so yeah all right so i would like to call to order of the self trying to city council meeting of monday march nineteenth and we'll begin with a pledge to the fla the next item is instructions to exit the building in case of the emergency case of emergency this evening all members of the public and the council please accept to the right here out of one of these two doors and proceed to the parking lot on the south end of the building would think hopefully it would it would become a reality open planning sessions with city stakeholders in the public in order to prioritize financial investment yes i recall i am requesting to speak  o the idea of having open planning sessions in the public in order to prioritize financial investments in decisions we've had many people contact us about bike lanes a lot of playing fields recreation facility open space land purchase the community mental health initiative and other such items so i know i want fast so it's open planning sessions for just for us to be able to  is that whenever there is a policy decision if there is to be an amendment or a change the session has to be one of the members who voted in favor of that policy decision who requests that that be put on the agenda and so we have here i don't remember thirteen considering possibly amended decision related to the g c part kark i'm requesting that because tim made the motion pat seconded it and then i was added to the three members of the council who voted to approve the closure that we discussed that under other business and decide the agenda was not to reopen it but it was a question i raised with the city manager about taking the gates off and he was willing to thought it was a good idea because  would open up that part of the park to additional people but i felt that the council ought to discuss it and that's why it is an item it really isn't about re opening the dog it is about taking the doors off so if someone wanted to play with their kids in the air or sit on the benches of whatever it would not be you it's a pretty significant piece of the park in my estimation it is now chain linked off presented as an amendment it is linked to the original decision and so any amendment only be made the request by someone who voted in favor of th i didn't i thought we should discuss it i'm sorry that it was about amending the decision because i'm not certain it really amends it but we can move item thirteen into other business which is fine any other to another discussion with possible action related to j c part that's according to robert's rules and there's a reason otherwise it's like groundhog day that means that you're now i understand that this agrees she can or he can constantly bring up right and  policy to have it put on the ground i was pleasantly surprised to see it i'm just wondering if we can just as easily rephrase the wording so they can just be discussed what you talked about which is not amending that the approved policy but instead discussing what two hundred seventy change the wording of the agenda item is that sufficient that's discussion ok can we do that can we just change the i think i am to discussion yeah i think one of us can sense that's kind of emotional second that  k so discuss this the dog fence doors this issue ok and i have some other comments in terms of going forward with issues that are really tricky like this just to make sure that when you vote are taken that all five of us are here so if there is someone missing if we can and we did that quite a few times i think we were dealing with the airport because this certainly leaves me at a disadvantage i think and i couldn't even listen to the tape because it wasn't tape so that's just me and we don't need to discuss that i just think another view point there was not a public process prior to the opening of parks so i think that with discussion a process that's also an issue for us to think short and my issue is just making sure everyone's here unfortunately that will not be joining us tonight so do we not make decisions here well no i think it's just really challenging ones like we held off on a number of the airport decisions to make sure everyone was here good members then let the council chair know if they're items on the agenda that they would like that might be a good idea because they really want to be there going into an executive session to discuss legal issues real so i would entertain a motion to enter executive session to discuss legal issues related to current and propose restrictions on land use at the will or nature park as well as a potential purchase of property utilizing funds from the city's open space fund with paul paul paul connor davi favored route tom hubbard and kevin dorn joining the council i had a former counsellor as well as a member of the task or request to know why this had to be done in an executive the last time that the council was briefed on this i may have been on the twentieth outside counsel advised that he could not answer actually they were your questions meghan about the homestead  concession it was the opinion of legal counsel that this be done in executive session for reasons he will explain when we get into the executive session but when outside counsel or legal counsel advises us on matters like this i think we need to  understand exactly what restrictions and i do see his point that had the task force been apprised of these restrictions would have been held prior to them doing the work that they did over here is that possibility could be entertained i would strongly advise not i have another possible solution for you in executive session if you would like to pursue it and then talk about it in open session if you wish but i think will do a discuss and since he's here now can we make it three a i'm not the chair that would be fine with me unless well i guess the other issue is are there other people besides when we come back and he's requested i think so it sounds like we'll have a simple solution so when we come out of executive session we'll have a report back on the wheel or land park to so separate executive session meetings with committees that are interested and involved in one will be with the task force that was dealing with the wheeler nature nature park next the next time we meet april second and then we'll have a special meeting on the twenty twenty twenty eight wednesday march twenty eighth and that will be regarding the auclair property and it will include several of the standing committees planning natural resources and parks  rec as well as the all the parties that are part of this that i guess real estate conversation and the city council so  be publicly warned that it will be an executive session and probably there will not be any action after that meeting two people stadium picked up for that meeting right it will be a large me so that is what i can share from our executive session we are going to skip down to six the public hearing second reading and possible adoption of amendments in the city's public nuisance ordinance andrew ordinance in those in the amendments that were proposed and there was a restriction on the timing of when  persons keeping or harboring any dog or cat which by frequent and long continued noise and recently disturbs the comfort of persons in the vicinity that was changed to unreasonably disturbs the peace or health of persons in the city and is plainly audible between the hours of eight pm and six am it was later changed to seven am there was also discussion of noise related to trash pickup and removal and we heard a couple hollers come in and and discuss that and that has since been removed from the proposed amendments there was also the included exemption of noise from a permitted use in an unplayable zoning district of the city's land elenor regulations provided it complies with the regulations specific performance standards for that district so that again is taking out some of the  situations when there may be a permitted use in a sewing district and bringing it over to the performance standards of the l t r so those are the amendments that are in front of you now and i did receive comment from one member of the public voiced a concern about what about people that work during the evening and the next morning there's a dog around the yard barking incessantly and i looked at our care control of dogs and cats or nets and we actually have a a section that is broad enough to cover that circumstance for someone harbors first someone who owns a dog  the overwhelming majority of it was in favor of extending it one hour to seven am there were a couple of people who were reticent over the this safety factor that the two hauler administrators talked about of possible conflict well with children in bus stops and things like that but it least ninety percent of the responses were they would like to see it move till seven am or eight or nine or ten or  i would like and i believe there might be somebody in the audience who is here to talk about this event tonight i'm not sure where it's at as a couple so so this is a public hearing i mean i'd like to give them a chance to talk about it in and see if we can work on this part of it to open so are there to individuals there's more would you like to come up to that table please please state your name and speak into the offended and it's not so bad during the wintertime when the windows are closed so we can get around the school part of it there where they can start at seven o'clock during the summer time they still keep their six am during the winter months at the school you know to get around the whole school thing but during the i mean you know it's like a side of steve's the school school part of it let's be a let's have the quite i was at least the summertime people have their windows open and make you know make some contention for their po to them and also try to keep the peace of the community and that's why i have thank you very much myra i live over on east terrace i definitely support changing it to a seven am pickup as of now i move my family east terrorists back in september and when we first moved in my wife and i were woken at four thirty in the morning wondering what is that sound they are emptying the garbage at four thirty but at the cory hill properties and in the staples plaza i mean they are you know completely blowing the six am out of the water and i think seven am is is an easy  time frame for them to accommodate it really makes it like the last gentleman said that we can't sleep with our windows open in the summer which is something that vermonters i think really appreciate because our windows are closed so much for most of the winner and my kids both sleep on the back side of the house and we're having to shut their windows in in the summer and i don't really find that you know super acceptable when those properties are easily a quarter to a half mile away from me and i can hear the dumpsters being slammed you know way before six am so i hope you guys meyers all cycling casella are all serving the same area over gold years were both years it's for me personally it's thursday and friday mornings thursday morning being the biggest culprit for sure but two different profilers serving the same street i'm i would assume so i'm not sure who takes issue i just want to say i'm not opposed to this i was with the council armory and pulling it back next time because i just see a larger conversation to be had about how to do trash in south burlington were out of step and compared to the rest of this nation eighty percent of community balinese have some sort of consolidated service where in that twenty percent which translates to us paying more with greater inefficiencies wearing down our roads a lot faster and more noise problem so i'm not fully onboard with thinking about trashing a smarter way i'm just wondering if it's best to do it here or if we can get the  to talk about other larger possibilities but i mean the subject at hand right now is that open public hearing right just about noise right now you know anything else and and i'm sensitive to the haulers requests i mean i found some of the arguments just didn't make a lot of sense to me but maybe it's because i'm not on the truck saying what they see i understood what really caught my ear was the fact that that the transfer station closes it was four o'clock whatever right and so they're basing their business their daily business cycle on that closure but sometimes they leave the trucks full and then they go empty in the beginning and then they go out and start plec ting so i mean ultimately in my mind who is the customer haulers the people that they're picking up the trash from what are the customers what they don't want to be awakened in five thirty in the morning with a lot of banging around the i mean they just reminds me a time i went to florida once too and i was like right on the water and i was in this condo and  at five o'clock in the morning the truck was like back in a beeping and smashing you know that i'm like i was awake going that's a great vacation or a good way to start it right so this issue has bugged me even when i lived on middle road right and i have run out you know and stopped trucks and know the road and said you know it's five thirty you know a lot of being here until at that point i thought it was seven o'clock back in the late ninety's right and and i had succeeded in getting them to stay out just by virtue of be yelling at them you know and calling their offices and telling them to stay out of my neighborhood until whatever that you know that the times has to be so i would like to move it to seven am if if we have to compromise on that to six thirty any improvement over six am to me is good but then it's left up to the public to enforce it because the city has no understanding about where these trucks are at six thirty in the morning or seven o'clock it really is up to the public to pick up the phone that's the way that it needs to be played out the public has to be involved but the first thing is where do you set the mark to me seventy m is the place to sit if we change that we have to have another public hearing four weeks from now so if we do go that route tonight or we think it's two weeks i think right and we came here to a later date on this particular topic we probably want to reward it because it is a significant change to what was worn for this meeting so depending on when we could get the warning out it would either be two to four weeks so again i just think a better conversation to put this into is about consolidated service and trash collection in south really jim but i'm not opposed to i'm not i'm with you on where you are with this i don't know that that would save the time to be honest i think it would increase potentially that amount of time there on the ground but if you don't have to cover as much land if they probably one trucking one hauling service that takes care of it in my neighborhood there's association but there are also single family homes so you have one picking up for all the for all the you know the homeowners association and you have three others competing going flying up and down the road on the same day just going around in circles and in circles and trying to figure out where the one house is on royal drive that's their customer you know if it's a new driver so well one of the issues think they did race was the transfer station right which i think is a is probably a real issue but one of the haulers runs the transfer station i said once you just adjust the time of the transfers to so one conversation might be in the larger picture is to change the time of the the transfer station live be open till five o'clock and that then you could start at seven and you'd have over many hours that is an hour i don't have an update on this and again if the public wants to speak you go take priority right now but we met justin robidoux as well as trade and spencer the director of public works in burlington about a month and a half ago to flush out a possible burlington south burlington coordinated consolidated service discussion and that was going to come back up in this next couple of weeks i don't know if kevin has an update if you spoke with justin on this topic but again i just think this is a broader conversation that burlington is interested in for the organics issue also on the they want to get out of the recycling collection and they want to privatized that but do it in a smart ways that we don't have five dollars going through neighborhoods wearing down or streets wasting carbon emissions that don't necessarily need to be emitted and with lower prices so lower prices for consumers if we had staples at four thirty every tuesday afternoon you know with enough complaints i think then you can get some traction i'm just saying i i hope if they see them doing this when they're cruising around by chance they will do something but i think the reality is that squeaky wheels get the grease within why are the ordinances being enforced well let me give you a short term and force them you need to know when they're being broken right in the in the public is the one that is experienced in this what that's what this noise ordinance is for is for the public spent if it for example in my neighborhood they were building a new house on say the lane next to the site or mill and they started out there with their you know air compressed you know nail gun on the roof at about six fifteen am i heard it and i decided to go over later and talk to the builder but somebody in my neighborhood called the police right and so by the time i got there at seven thirty to find the foreman he goes i've already had a police car here to visit me to tell me that i started too early and i won't do that again and they didn't right so that was an instance where the so called the police did have a response they went and visited the know the construction site and they made them aware of what the little bit of participation in the system you know works out really well because i mean you know most people just keep doing something if nobody complains about it right so this is now you have it written in a rule this part of our ordinance you call eventually someone's going to get a call and well if we have that suggestion or maybe you want to go back to the seven am line and we continue the hearing and let the haulers come back in and maybe we can agree that they keep the transfer station open an hour later and i mean some a summer noise our ordinance like is not a bad idea because i mean that's when windows are open and people don't want to be awakened on a nice you know summer morning at five thirty m still leave it competitive and in the private in the in the free market for individuals and neighborhoods to choose who's going to provide it so there are solutions ok well i've suggest that we continue the public about the change in the noise ordinance because this conversation around trash was about minimizing noise for residents and the noise ordinance for dogs the change is actually reducing a restriction so that noise is more permissible  during the day from the hours of six am to eight pm and i'm a little confused as to why that might be i think i hope we can agree that the problem dog noise is a nuisance at night it's also equally as nuisance during the day if you're out in your yard if you're trying to have dinner if you've got a child sleeping if you're trying to work so i'm confused as to why we might relax be relaxing that standard during and health is disrupted on a regular basis during the day by hours of dog barking and so my concern is if we change the standard so it's if it's only at night then it's asking me to tolerate this barking during the day or go through a very cumbersome process to have something be done to address it i work with god i think you're right that we have two ordinances that are incurring conflict right so i don't i don't understand i'm not sure what resident concern this change is addressing i'm not sure that people are saying we want to hear more dog noise during the day i doubt that even that's kind of what it's what it's leaning towards and if it seems in direct contrast to what you're doing in terms of the of the trash hauling and as i said i'm i'm hearing this noise i work in a building that is near some some dogs and on thursday for example i heard four and a half hours of dog barking and whining which made it very difficult for me to work i work in a psychotherapy practice it disrupts my colleagues work it disrupts my clients work people are coming to  me and telling me what a concern it is i also own the building so i work in the yard because i'm a small business owner and when i work in the yard during the day i have to where i have to put on my i pod because the barking is so bothersome  it's truly a problem i'm two hundred seventy feet away from where this parking originates so it's quite loud so my concern is if you change the standard the ordinance in and of itself so it's only in effect at night that not only is it a problem for me but it sets a wide precedence for all of south burlington so that if there's dog barking during the day you've got to go through various hoops to get addressed and i'm concerned about that the second part of what you mention was something about if there permit it and then it's exempt and i'm not sure i understand that either you know i happen to be in a building that was permitted before the dog barking my i think your words are peace and and health i'm not sure why one is more important than the other where we are there's also a lot of other houses that are impacted by this as well so i guess i'm i'm just wasting a concern that this has wide reaching implications if you changed this and i'm just going back to tim i think it was you in one of the meeting notes about unrelated issues john clarke said something about how without some clear guidelines it's sort of forget your but it was sort of like evokes neighborhood conflict i think a good ordinance that's in place that sets what the rules are and everybody knows was there are really makes it clear what's ok and what's not ok and it produces the likelihood of conflict  right now if noise of dogs barking doesn't bother you during the day do you don't have to complain but if it does at least you have something that you can do about it you take that away and now nobody can do anything about it easily as my concerns thank you i guess the good news is there's another building going up in between the two that's soon enough but i mean i there is would i would have recorded it if you ever want to hear it inside my office i have recorded it i also have started lobbying just how long it is just to you know for my own sanity i mean literally four and a half hours on thursday and i don't know if you can imagine what that's like to hear that for four and a half hours i like music for four and a half hours this was not music to my ears i'm sure so if you want to hear the fence that they built believe it or not if you're looking at the building from my lot you can see the bottom sill the door so the fence is not hiding anything it's not you know protecting any sound and all i think that's the outside the main the fence was put up i'm assuming to help with some of the sound maybe to keep the dogs in the i'm not sure if the dogs are even allowed out of the i think over but anyway do you know  residences i didn't even think about the commercial buildings at that time right right but i so i guess just to continue one i'm sorry it was my attempt to build a building somewhere to you know the one that they're going to kind of match but it looks like a warehouse building might be better suited here with about a thirty foot wall to keep some of that somehow moved away from the rest of the neighborhood sixty six i don't think we can do that but it's just that at the airport we don't have anything planned right now but in the future you know we can put up either a warehouse building or an office building and we thought that to keep a little more with the neighborhood small office building work better but i don't know that i could read an office building forty  i'm building residence residential use is there we have a total of about fifty homes going in this building severely impacts i think the value and marketability of this project regardless what wasn't mentioned earlier was that it was noted in the permits of when that building was permanent the the dog daycare facility which unfortunately i'm not a budding landowner so i wasn't notified otherwise i would have been there at those meetings we don't know what's going in until the construction started so that was unfortunate but we have complained to the city of south carolinians police department about the noise we've complain to animal control and it's the same thing documented documented documented will play it will pay a visit but nothing's happening and when christine told me there was changes that potentially would less intense and the ordinance i was concerned i think we need more teeth in the ordinance and that's as far as relates to this because i feel that the police are just feel like they don't really have a real good ordinance to use to help us out with us i think that they feel that their hands might be tied but i don't know for sure but that's just my read on the situation so yes my name is elizabeth lee i am also an associate stonehouse associates and my office directly faces north and i do appreciate mr barrett's comment about wanting to have his windows open in the summer and i would like to have my windows open but right now as christine described when the nice weather comes i will not be able to open my windows because i hear we hear this noise with the windows closed i just want to be clear this is not with windows open even and i am a dog lover of dogs most of my life but when it impacts and we were there for a year before this building was even built and i'm just trying to understand the rational the reasoning behind this ordinance change because if i'm reading your ordinance and the in the purpose is very clear of making your city a very comfortable place for people and the way that word says right now there are no time limitations and so i'm not understanding the rationale for wanting to suddenly let dogs bark you know all day if they you know we've all lived near a dog parks all day it's not pleasant and this is fifteen and there was an article in seven days last year you can probably look up about this facility and they were talking about having fifteen dogs out in the yard time so that's that's what we're listening to and i would hope that you consider that you're moving away from the purpose of your ordinance by getting away from these times  the permit to develop that property with housing and having the town business businesses along the road was a single application  would work for other businesses that have noise where scheduled is it sounds like four consecutive hours is terrible but if there were a way to  schedule when noises could occur or something for businesses like that like if they were allowed to let the dogs out once every two hours for a period of time would that help the business but also helps of residents and the local to the businesses nearby was to be consistent with the rest of the noise ordinance but but that is correct it's it's the language is now different than the the other ordinance that for me scratch the hours  we're continuing this anyway so we can reflect on it and come back and but that but there's another orders for for inventory it's a little bit different so the one for animals is the care and control so that is directed at owners  this is directed at anyone owning or harboring so it's a little bit a little bit different i think the original purpose was original discussion around this was taking this question about nuisance and transferring it when it can't when it comes to uses of land and what is permitted in a specific joining district and and kind of putting that in the planning a investigation for potential notice of violation under our performance standards which do allow you violate it which would mean the noise violation yes under the performance standards there are specific standards related to no even if it's even if it's a permit what are they i have an i have them here we have that langley read the whole book that we did yeah burlington there are a number of loud speakers horn signaling devices radios exhaust broad category noise in general any noise which is seen objectionable because of volume frequency or beat and then there are specific standards related to that creation of permitting or operation of the above sets in such a manner as to be plainly audible a distance of fifty feet from the building a structure from which the noise nates and there's also some specific some more specific standards that talk about the weighted decibel our average we don't currently have any of that sound equipment but you could probably get one it's not calibrated you know so those are that so those are the specific standards as specific performance standards that this would fall under for uses that are otherwise permitted in his own district and when there are these conflicts between uses rather than between residents and and owners of dogs so that's kind of the thought process behind some of this well i'm glad to know that there are performance standards i know we had discussed them and  right i don't think that we actually discussed the specifics but the language was put into this ordinance and so i think one i would scratch the hours i would go back to the original language but to i think with regards to businesses and i understand i mean it was sixty three might have another group of people in here but when you make major investments you have to think about all kinds of things and i am very sympathetic to that but i think with the performance standards in place they're there for good reason i do agree with  dog businesses like this in town smoke one to find out what's happening in those places and whether or not there are complaints around those particular businesses and their locations from neighbors and then the other thing is maybe you want to ask the business how many dogs are actually outside at once you know that might be an issue too they've got twenty dogs out there versus five dogs or something you know kids because  that's that will make a difference not only in the noise level but just the dog behavior changes when there's crowds of dogs they kind of stand i mean i visited him doggie day care center decided against him because the dogs so many dogs here there's no regulations around how many dogs a dog the dog daycare has so that might be something you want to consider is looking at i mean it's a business i know you don't want somebody to lose money but it might be something to look at is really what's a reasonable amount of dogs to be in the space you know like that because i know right now there are no state couple time around how many dogs are in a space but i know i've gone to them in the dogs or just packed out there some in some some of these starkey daycares and maybe talk to the maid society around some of that i think our committee will be talking to them around the consulting with them around different things but i think as far as i can appreciate these folks on concerns and that facility in particular and in the area it's quite a place you know but i think a real big issue is how many dogs  tom i know we need to move on so just to wrap this up but would love to play in your mind there is currently a platform called rover dot com which is like an air b n b for dog sitting so i could see this problem starting to permeate into our neighborhoods if people start watching dogs for a business so i think as that's all right so i would if there's no other comments we need emotion to come out of the moves of the curing so all in favor i don't just give a shout out to barb service in california she emailed me about this issue and is want to say hi barb hearing that was scheduled to begin eight so we're a little late so i think with your permission we'll move on to number nine which is a public hearing and possible amendments to the land development regulations  will not be hearing from jessica we so some fortunately issued a skiing accident broke both her legs this weekend so but  so we are prepared to address the draft amendments to the regulations as you'd like to see as we traditionally do with other amendments to the regulations public hearing as you did we can provide you a brief overview if you'd like of what's in there or you can jump directly to public comments depending on what you'd like to do the seeming we can certainly there's there's a number of options and one of the basically going to take this from the letter that i had prepared that summarizes for you what the proposal is there are the overall amendments referred to the establishment of the housing preservation design overlay district some modifications to bicycle parking and then some other minor technical corrections under the point to housing preservation  requirement the proposed amendment would require that the preservation of housing in the city of south burlington for each dwelling unit removed in the applicable zoning districts a replacement whiling unit or financial contribution to the cit affordable housing trust fund be made with the goal of preserving workforce housing and affordable homes in the city so that's why we're doing this within the elegy r s there are multiple alternatives regulations it's the big the second would be to build a dwelling unit on a separate parcel and the third would be to make a contribution to the city's affordable housing trust fund  amount of as an elite payment of the contribution was established based on an assessment on the downpayment assistance that has been demonstrated as needed for affordable shared equity housing programs to be some people in the audience who want to comment on a few of the items i think i think the affordable housing is that right are there any other issues that people wanted to better the public that are here to well then let's do that let's hear from the people who are here sam come back again thank you ok so we can discuss  to take the council question yes go ahead all right i've said it before so it's not going to come as a surprise  main concern that i hold is that single family homes can be torn down replaced with apartment buildings or multiple units that do not at all attract  advance that goal we have a thriving public school system we have lost and will lose up to two hundred family homes single family homes it has impacted an area with a local elementary school there are multiple generational households in that neighborhood just to let the kids go to school in south burlington they clearly  need something to replace what has been taken away i raise the twenty five percent i do not see that the whole value of the house needs to go i know that was reported back in minutes from the planning commission but that was not my point but what i would suggest and the perhaps the planning commission and of course our planning and zoning director and staff they have the expertise but the land value  is different from one part of south growing to the other person so what i would like to suggest and again i'm coming with my very limited knowledge all right is that whoever tears down a single family for housing would if they do not rebuild they would pay the difference in the land value of the assessed land value based on where they're taking the home down and where we still have available land to build on so that's my suggestion again from my knowledge that is what it is the other thing that i we basis for the exemptions aren't clear why exemptions so i think that's a question for us the third thing is with regard to rebuilding i find unit too vague again i think that we need more family housing in south burlington i know we need senior housing in south burlington but if we want to have families move into south burlington we need affordable family housing  so i don't want to exclude group homes or duplexes but i'd like to find a way to promote single family homes so  this is just my suggestion and i'm not a planning commissioner but if someone tears down one single family home one single family home she felt hopefully quarter l quarter acre lot if there's a group or single family homes that are taken down i can see that there would be a percentage you know that would be single family homes i would like to or those issues discussed by the planning commission or maybe even the housing affordable housing committee in terms of the language that was selected i mean i know they gave you some recommendations of language i don't i haven't compared the two so i don't know how much you changed as a planning commission i can say respond to that is that this conversation started with the affordable housing committee and they are charged with affordable housing and that's a very specific definition and john is here and he can speak to it in its own beast because it's a for an affordable house it's affordable housing which has very specific records of at the mission lots of definitions but very very specific so that's where this started to create homes that are not under the affordable committees around so i think fairly the planning commission did not take their recommendations outside of portability is that a fair thing to say we do have on our work plan schedule for the spring a conversation about cottage housing and other work force that can be said that's a different topic so perhaps one way to look at it is this is affordability based the conversation about community preservation i would say is not the basis for us because and i understand that there are models and i have talked with two members of the affordable housing committee and i understand it has been prohibitive the model that has existed in burlington but i think we're dealing with a different animal altogether with the burlington international airport than with a developer and i think it's we were looking at a depletion of  single family homes back in the city and i see a reason for us to have a different set of regulations and burlington's can i follow up but does this is this excluding or exempting the airport neighborhood or just the homes that they bought so under see three and i can speak speak about c three and c five is a c three exempt certain zoning districts the affordable housing committee and then later the planning commission reviewed when went district by district to look to see what are the specific circumstances in different parts of the city in some areas such as the mix industrial commercial district the the airport and airport industrial those are districts that do not permit housing presently there are a handful of of preexisting homes in those districts the affordable housing committee in the planning commission both felt that in in those circumstances where the polis the formal policy in the city is that you cannot build a new there were a couple of districts where the the formal housing committee in the planning commission looked at way or what is the preponderance that district so swift street being a specific one looking to see has that district been going over the last twenty years this was three district is basically where clingers is with gases with it and there are a couple of the still and there's a couple of homes in there but for the most part that's a commercial district and that's the committee and the commission both felt that in that case it's really principally a commercial district at this point as opposed to some other ones that are much more balanced districts like the shelbourne road district or the village commercial district over by the market in delhi those are areas where the desired interest of the city is to balance and have both residential and commercial to answer your specific question about the airport neighborhood the airport neighborhood is in the are fo district and so it's not exempt as a whole from this standard the draft does however exempt the dwelling units that were proposed to be a choir or where the airport announced in september twenty sixth seen that they would be offering to acquire the thirty nine homes there plus  about four homes that have historically over the last ten years been in all of the eligibility programs but for which the individual homeowners for the last few years have decided that it wasn't right for them to sell to the airport and john can speak to this but i think generally speaking they felt that just because an individual homeowner near an airport decided not to sell that they didn't want to place a  restrictive requirement on then and then their neighborhood itself three years so those are the exemptions that exist is there language that protects you know new faces so this is the language in here specifically names the airport grants for which exemptions apply specifically references a two thousand and nine map that the airport had produced of eligible areas and then specifically lists the exempted property by street address so if ever there was to be proposed to be another by a program then that would not fall under any of those categories except as i said those three or four homes that had previously chosen they're not under the current grant that the airport has and so that that's why that was written that way but we also in five a it says under all of these groups that we did say the exemption exists whether or not these two island units have been purchased or removed as of january first two thousand and eighteen so any whether it be whether the home has been acquired or has not been acquired those those dwelling units are exempt exempt iow the lily lane homes are made for that area but so but i would like to take everybody back to about a year and two months ago when we decided to change our land development regulations because people living in little elaine some of them according to our land regulations couldn't sell to the federal government and we did change them because they were in a situation that was unfair compared to their need and so we years ago why am i being penalized and i foresee just like happened a year and two months ago that the council here is going to have its hands tied so i think by putting exemptions  here creating a precedent and it's my then have this at all we've already created a precedent i realize that that was my biggest argument here in two months ago this is a this proposal is it's complex because it has lots of implications and there are lots of things that you know you don't plan for but i mean other committees may have done this and perhaps some of their learning is in here and so i  known they would not not because it's in a different area opulence it's in a different area but because in that specific circumstance that was not  technically housing it was extended stay hotel and extended stay hotels are in a different category there are very few of those for meaning in the city but as a as a technical matter it would not have applied to this would not have applied to that in addition had it applied to it they the larkin terrace proposal built sixty what is in the process of building sixty one dwelling units where there had been sixty two ok and so even had it applied the first place standard is if you replace with the same number of units on the same property you're good so they were met the standard even had it apply to them airport would have paid twenty five percent of the value of the home penalty so it discourages the airport or at least makes the numbers more complex do we think this is a forcible with if a a by  fair and fair to the homeowners who are already in the goshi ation and also fair to the city so that if houses erection are torn down that we recover through  contribution to the housing trust money to be applied and not necessarily the multifamily housing bank and i have a dream at some point we'll have enough money in that house the interests of the city can actually buy some someone developed land and create cottage housing or some other kind of single family housing that's affordable under the you know with that i saw owning the land and perhaps having a turnkey or play housing trust maintaining ownership of the lady and coming up with some scheme so that by the city owning land we were able to direct the construction of affordable single family housing but having said that i don't believe this is a vehicle to get there because we had this thoroughly vetted and the one thing that got it were got balance back from the planning commission because there outside attorneys was they were very very look very carefully at housing replacement in lieu payment and did not want it to be seen as excessive and unfair and therefore leading to litigation so we've tried to craft something that does the job doesn't get us the money that we would really like to have on the other hand it allows the process to work and isn't that what we're trying to accomplish  in the sense that it most other instances where somebody wants to rip down a building that has units of it it's usually because it's really old and is decrepit and they want to build something new right worthy they have so for example on his bird road there was a proposal to put in several units replacing a single going to the head of the rock right and then there are other posts that are like that so so in the most of those instances when there's development going on just because somebody wants to rip something down to put something better its place or is it has more units you know some of us who are old enough to remember to shelbourne road when it consisted of a lot of large sleek single family homes of which it's only you know three or can just speak to that briefly i think that there are the there are some examples where that where it could apply elsewhere in the city there are as as john said some properties that are principally residential or entirely residential  long road and wilson road in mixed use districts where it's conceivable that in the next iteration of redevelopment maybe it becomes a mixed use building as opposed to going entirely commercial so that would be a retention of some housing on that property there are it's not too common but it does happen where in some of the areas of the city where there are some smaller lots historically somebody takes take the house down  adjacent to them to have a larger yard this would say that if you chose to do that then you can do that however you need to place into the forty thousand trust fund so there are some circumstances where that's happened and could happen very well in the future in some of our say our lake shore areas where there are some very small lots and somebody could say well that's an old house in front of my view and so if they choose to do that then then this would apply in that circumstance also so it's not it's an there are there are there are some other circumstances  but it's hard to prove a negative in the sense that if it hasn't been used that may mean that it's working because actually the way it would we want to be it has been used from time to time but not not that frequently suggestion that meghan had of looking at the payment the difference between the actual land value no actually i think of her first time i know we've talked what but i obviously we have more single family homes there will be more for everybody right so wouldn't it be more units would be a good question do you have drop all right are there any other comments from the public around the affordable housing gerri you need to come up with  the record help my name is james lease so i don't like to recommend that all the exemptions be removed and i think  megan made an extra very strong point that putting in exemptions invites more and more and more exemptions and you know we get to the end of it and this body will be drowning in requests for exemptions any time the rule has a chance of being applied particularly in the most egregious case we're talking about many many homes being taken away like what's happening at the airport and we've had it happen i've been in the meeting with dozens of people  say oh please please please and you can't resist that so i think i think the exemptions destroyed the rule but there's something else  exemptions even in the existing there's so many exemptions that swallows the rule you almost have to come up with a scenario that really is unlikely to happen that someone is going to buy their neighbor's house demolish it so they have a bigger ya it's pretty unusual thing to happen it could happen but that's what this rule with all its exemptions really boils down to the people who can pay they're exempt who are they the developers they're the people who can pay why exempt them ok so there's a few houses in a neighborhood left that are that's commercial well if someone wants to get those houses and make it commercial let them pay they've got the money they're doing development they have they're talking  figures of millions of dollars or whatever for their commercial development they have the money to put up another affordable home or to pay this fee to our affordable housing trust fund i got a an e mail from may to townsend that i'd like to read it's very short i cannot attend tonight but i do not understand why in the world at this point south burlington would want to give burlington a break on anything related to the airport the burlington track record to date regarding airport issues has been anything but that of a good neighbor that's from major towns and  yesterday afternoon so here's the situation with the airport they've demolished hundreds of homes but it's not just the ones they've demolished they've also put a thousand homes according to bring linton's only report the airport the air force report says more but burlington says a thousand it's still a lot of homes into wood zome which the air force says is on suitable for residential use so ok they're not demolished but they're in this terrible noise but there are ones that they still want to demolish so those thirty nine or forty four homes depending on  whether you include the extra ones i would give the housing trust fund two point six million dollars so the south burlington want to write a check to burlington for two point six million dollars because that's what the exemption does we write them a check for the money that they don't have to pay it's why would we do that what did they do for us by putting a thousand homes in unsuitable for residential use noisome and having all these people suffer and and we saw the emotion when people had the chance to get out they came here and they thought that's true for everyone and that noise and we're supposed to write a check for burlington for two point six million dollars how does that make sense isn't that encouraging them to do it again now burlington already gets a huge benefit it's not just that they get the tax the grants from the federal government in the state government they also get to keep the land they've got the land and they didn't have to pay a dime for it certainly they can pay this this  a money amount to the housing trust fund for each one of those for each one of those units so i think that if south burlington isn't all serious about affordable homes each and every one of them without exemption there should be a strong rule we don't have exemptions we'd protect our affordable homes that's a principle that's a value that's something though that what is the reason for giving an exemption when someone wants to demolish an affordable home there is no reason there is no reason protect the affordable homes without exemption thank you every question for andrew i guess in terms of the exempted dwellings my understanding is these thirty nine houses there are many there are most of them except for the four or five have already been purchased by the airport correct i don't know the current number on that i know paul did some research on background and well the only lame ones have been purchased yeah i know a significant i believe a significant number hoa i think it's a significant number of these have already been purchased so in terms of that but it was more of a larger a policy policy question so if we didn't exempt them then you're saying the risk is there's some risk i guess there's always risk right owners following risk could be the next time they do a sound a noise map and a bunch more homes are up for you know a potential buy out then we're going to be faced with saying yes to them also what do you mean by by you know i mean we didn't want the  airport to back out the homes this last round could motivate the early were we were fighting against that and then the lily home people i remember the the meeting were you know  example come in that that we're saying well if you're going to buy them then i don't ever the covenant but i sure as heck live right next door to a man it's just as noisy  yes but i think it might have the airports part so if they start doing the estimates on what these houses would cost to acquire and demolish with the support ability all the sudden a berm or a barrier or change of plans becomes  doesn't even our interests yes well i think this is protecting our cities angry too well i agree having the language i'm just so you're supportive of having the exemptions already did on this issue it sounds like you exhausted the subject land value difference i'd sure like to let them do that too exemption and the commission i think accepted we exacted their end and the affordable housing committee's consideration for exemptions was simply that to play for those houses that going to be just fine for the language but it was in consideration for the people who may already be in the process of selling to not complicate things for them but it housing committee when they first looked at this there there's a there was a there's a provision in some of the regulations for somebody to request of the d r v for a waiver essentially  formal housing committee reviewed it and ultimately decided that that opens up a pandora's box of well why did this person deserve it why did this person not it becomes a very potentially becomes very very difficult to make decision puts a dear be in a very difficult position on very emotional issues and so there is not a formal appeal process in this other than to challenge  decision so if somebody a applies to remove a house and they are requested to make this action and they refused to do so that permit would be denied they could appeal that was already an offer extended to these homes that obviously came from a set budget that the f a a may have had if this were to go into effect for those homes would the f a a no longer they be exceeding a was on the entire the whole housing algy i call the whole the whole the whole shooting match yes the whole thing are there any other comments or questions who you know it's getting kind of late we have a lot of other things and we have already agreed that we need to you know continue this yeah i think so and i think since at this point there doesn't seem to be a time cranston's all the homes  would be affected by the time crunch are exempted i would be willing to remove this one and go ahead and revisit the floor to remove what was affordable housing and what does that do to the remainder of it in terms of the time sensitiveness of it there's a little bit of it or an odd in between area that we're in right now where both the old and the new regulations are in effect  the criticalness of it over the period of a couple weeks isn't isn't a huge deal i would not recommend that the other amendments be out there in this in between area for months on end because applicants who are looking to do a project aren't quite sure the way meet these bike standards are these bikes that kind of thing but two weeks is not going to be making or breaking that subject so what i'm hearing is you guys to plow through the rest of it tonight and then potentially find out if we can come back to just the affordable housing section where i am i don't know the rest of it i don't have any does anybody why don't we know recess for a few minutes ok would you force sue and then come back and finish that's what i'm hearing you say you want to finish this tonight right oh  the at least for the timing for the next two weeks to continue the hearing as we want to set rather than to separate them out and create any questions around process there's there's enough other complexities to all this then to process later too so we can sort that out a little bit more thoroughly but for the time being i would recommend that they stay as one sect ok then can i ask that we get a a legal opinion on the effect of exempting eliminating the exemptions versus keeping them in and i think that would help us come to a decision on that i mean i can really see it both ways you don't know where it where i come down i mean my heart says one thing in my brain says another so the brain want to little more information so maybe i can go of my heart  like so can we are we finish then at this point with this conversation so are there other questions about other parts of the earth well i had one question and i can't i can't find out where it i can't find it but in one section you had sightings that were not acceptable yeah right i got most of them but i am curious why stucco was included in  that list i know lot everyone like stucco but it's i don't know and except that we have some rather old homes or sort of historic homes in the city of burlington and south burlington that are stucco so to just say speaking about city center here so that the modification is that the planning commission had received a request from a business that was reciting vinyl siding and the commission of valuated and felt that under the current regulations there are certain materials that are prohibited from use and that includes a reallocation of that the commission felt that there are some circumstances such as vinyl siding where they didn't feel that they wanted to discourage somebody from sprucing up a building so the they said that that was acceptable for vinyl siding at the same time as they were looking at the subject they found that it was odd that are that the form based code had material requirements on sides facing a street but not other sides of the building given that often times sa wrote as you're driving down the road you can see the side of the building just as well as you can see the front and so they apply the provisions that do exist to all sites to answer the question about why stucco was originally in there and i think it's before monaco so i'll just j it the prior city center central district zoning stated that material that the building needed to be natural materials so stone brick glass metal the cement is an unnatural material not not in that list and so the commission and there was a lot of intense design review associated  form based codes committee and the planning commission were evaluating how to translate that broad intent and those very detailed design review discussions into something that could be  administratively reviewed and so they looked and saw that there were some materials that tend towards better design and and a few materials that while they can be applied well often tend towards less good design and so that's why stucco and effects and vinyl siding were listed as not not acceptable materials for you know it's ok but that's just in the and then i had a nother question and it was again i i can't find it where i can't find where it is but you went back and forth about how many feet from the edge of the property you needed to have like a up an issue that the planning commission did discuss and we ended up having a split vote on that was even and so when there's a split vote the rule was to keep it without a change and without a reason that we had discussed it at all was because in we weren't spot zoning but we were looking at an entire district of the t v three and again in city center or in  so in that public hearing someone who was involved with the development of the market street homes and did a lot to afford space to put their front porch  front porches on were able to work with a five foot buffer in that one instance and was concerned about going to eight feet up and brought up this whole concept of once for that market street section and the rest of this t three would a five foot buffer perhaps provide more space for people to add carriage towns and whatnot so we did end up with a split vote on that and so we regulations that didn't specify a buffer but in working with the d p five as what they came up with the new form based code rules came in two years ago with an eight foot buffer the commission was making some tweaks to that language to clarify about headlights and things like that and the the individual came at the public hearing and asked about possibly changing that and without putting words in in all the commissioners mows i think that there was some discomfort with that's revisiting that question in the near future but they just didn't feel that making the change and then all the neighbors find out the other update is that we've been working with that particular property owner to see what solutions may exist yes thank you for filling in and we hope she has a speedy recovery ma ok that's a library so let's go back to number seven in the library grant applications grant from the national endowment for the humanities the grant is a infrastructure and capacity building challenged challenge grant which is designed to  create infrastructure that will support and promote the humanities the humanities include history literature culture art history things like that the study of  things the study of art the study of culture not necessarily the practice of and a lot of our library programs already do that and we would like to expand that we are focusing in the grant on spaces that will be available that will allow us to invite other community groups and to offer programs like that as well as being able to offer them ourselves and with a small emphasis on collections as well and the grant is for four hundred thousand dollars it's a three to one matching grant so we get the four hundred thousand dollars if the board of trustees raises one point two million so that is the grant proposal that we would like to see that if your support any questions or comments this is right in alignment with your fundraising for the library it certainly has a very nice addition and our fundraising consultant has indicated that she thinks that with the incentive of this grant if we get it that we definitely would be able that the board would be able to raise the one point two million great does that one point two million have to be new money or can you throw in  no i think if we didn't put it on the consent and gender so jennifer could come in and talk to some rather sizable undertaking by the board of trustees and i felt it was better for you to actually consider it and i would say and i'm happy to send a is specifically for capital costs so it is we're building which is very unusual my suspicion it is that they are concerned about national funding for the humanities and so they want to make sure that there are institutions around the country that are going to be built and ready to foster the humanities even if something you know even if they don't get as much funding a national level that is speculation the one thing that was not in that one page form that i filled out was that we do we will have we would have to abide by the davis bacon act so that is likely to cost us tens of thousands of dollars in order to comply but i've talked to justin rather do an online  and their feedback is that in the scheme of one point two million plus four hundred thousand we would still come out way far ahead and so that it was worth doing that if you get second   any projects require that people are paid at a certain rate and that that is monitored by the contractors and subcontractors so again from just in the sense i get is that in vermont the subcontractors are generally paid at the right rate the issue is that there's a lot of paperwork that the contractors have to do in order to prove that the law is being followed and that's where the added cost comes in that supports union wages higher wages prevailing wages all right if you're ready for the boat all in favor signify by saying i thank you very much sorry you had to wait so long but you got there and it's time enough i guess we should do additional rate the indirect the indirect rate because i don't know what additional costs are going to be subject do you know possibly what their indirect is lots of organizations are thinking of a standard  is that what you would like to get that answer i mean i don't know change like yeah i mean i think an indirect can be considerable and it's good to know that y pens holly baker recreation and parks maggie lugar's recreation of parks so we're going to just do a very quick timeline bullet rundown just to refresh everyone's memory and then i will pass it off to our consultant group so in february two thousand and thirteen the city purchased a sixty acre underwood parcel the corner of spear street and farm road fall of two thousand and fourteen c created to the underwood task force with five members at large one representative from buy compared one representative from the natural resource committee one representative from recreation and parks and then in november of two thousand and fourteen contracted with the s t group to form the framework that we've been working on so march two thousand and fifteen the framework was presented and adopted which indicated property key aspects and attributes of the of the land and some initial mapping of potential park elements and then in january two thousand and seventeen we contracted with the s t group again to go under the master planning process which we've been in that process has included an on site event where we got a lots of public input it's also been meetings with stakeholders and additional public input meeting several weeks ago and open survey so we're really excited about the public process that we've had so far in all the public input through the years and we're really excited to welcome to pollock bruce from s c group to do some updates on presentation right it's g and so this presentation we're going to run through a little bit of the public engagement in the planning process that holly kind of filled us in on quite a bit so i'll just touch on that for a moment we'll take a look at what program elements are in this master plan and so those are the design program there may be some confusion sometimes the recreation room over not talking about yoga we're talking about elements that will go into the design of the site we'll take a look at the site play and concepts and same information there is a little bit newer look at some the feedback that we heard a couple weeks ago and the fees and costs are all new so i think that's pretty exciting stuff and so let's get started so the the move and i really want to commend the city for approaching this project in this way where the vision framework kind of didn't have enough funding to go for the full master plan and was able to kind of set the vision and actually get people out using that park and they have been using it since two thousand fifteen and then now that we have more resources were able to finish the plan and so it was really nice to be able to kind of to go into pieces so i think the city should be really commended for approaching it in that way but what we found out is that  park should have this character that's covered in this word cloud that you're seeing it should be a a low key very natural park which should be sustainable and kind of showcase some of these sustainable principles like ecologically sensitive design low impact development and and really be a part of that shows that off here in south burlington multigenerational and multi dimensional and that multi dimensional actually becomes really important as in the process what we found was that there were three major themes that that this park needed to encompass and it's a little bit unique not every park has has elements of agriculture and natural resources to such an extent that this one does and so through the vision framework process we gave the public and we gave them kind of three different concepts that leaned in one of these three directions and that triangle you're seeing there is actually a picture that of the exercise do the public and you know there's there's general agreement that it should have some elements of all three and it should kind of be in the in the in the middle so that the master plan really kind of follows up with that and these are some of the guiding principles that came from the vision framework and having carried through into this master plan and so the mix of natural resources agriculture and recreation is really important  emphasis on conservation and sustainability the opportunities for education environmental awareness that showcase idea having diverse agricultural uses and so that's not just a community garden there is real desire to have some food production that serves the community on this site because it's kind of one of the last vestiges of that old use of the southeast quadrant and this has had farming happening there for a long time and then using it important that connectivity having that wide range of activities available to people in the park and such that multi dimensional aspect establishing a primary structure and there is really a lot of support in that  a wide spectrum of trail types out there so there would be the bike path or be some gravel paths and some some trails in the woods and kind of a wide variety of trails and so at that you have a fifty mile we kind of came up this bubble diagram that started to think about where these things may be located in space but it was really at a at a big picture level and so this process that we've been in for the past year or so to develop them the master plan really uses this as the starting point checks in with the community to say hey how does this stuff still make sense and really kind of diving deeper into that and so that's what we've done through the master planning process but i think the balloon brought in more people than anything else because of what's going on i saw the balloon and so there's a lot of people there's really great this image you see the two girls filling in you know stick it out exercise just makes me really excited because i love it when everyone from the community come out and give our give our thoughts and so that's pretty exciting there's a survey after that workshop asked the same questions of the workshop so people could make it there the opportunity to provide input we met with piece of public input before we finalize the plan so slow bit of background on the site you may know this already so we probably don't need to spend too much time with it but it is  just catty corner to overlook park and so it's on speer street in no wind farm road i think the really important thing to think about with this site is that it really has every layer of protection that the city has in place on this site and so there really is there's it's part of the view corridor or it's part of the great swamp wildlife corridor there are prime agricultural soils on the site it's part of impaired watershed really every layer that the city has in place so it's really special person with a lot of features to it and really the views there are pretty incredible as you know it has a similar view to overlook park which may be familiar with it's kind of the best thing i think over the park is the views but you know you often don't always turn around but from this parcel you can actually see mt mansfield you can see camels home on a clear day and so there are views really in three sixty degrees from this park and we did a view analysis to kind of see if you conceive through these two images as well that there are certain areas of the park where more of the houses drop away and you see mostly the lake and the mountains and there are certain places long distance so what are we what do we put into this plan so agriculture there is community agriculture and what we've heard from the public is that it should be community serving in some way they don't want to see a for profit private farmer farming just for their own pocket they want to see some sort of community serving our culture come in roots you know is an example of that but it could also be something like the intervale farm in burlington something that is a community serving food and so that was a piece that we included here traditional community garden plots there is a need there's a waiting list for those and so do there's a need to expand those a wildflower or a natural cutting garden and then some support facilities for those uses to a storage shed and those beds passive recreation and so trails are typically included within passive recreation and so a wide variety of trails are included there are a number of trails in the woods today they're in really good shape they're well built so we don't see changing those much at all  but there is opportunities there and the city has been doing some most paths out there now but there are opportunities to build some more trails bike paths connection picnic tables the shade structure which i think is a pretty exciting element that we can look at a moment here and a number of different places to do sunset viewing and so you know the experience at overland park today we go there pretty often the summer but there's a lot of other folks there joining it as well and so here at underwood we want to provide opportunities where kind of bigger groups simmers overlook could be kind of near this pergola patio space but then there are also benches that take that take advantage of use if you want to kind of hike out of the trail system and have more intimate you know picnic or something like that you could also have that opportunity to kind of enjoy the views and maybe a less populated area of the  park active recreation and so this is open fields and so what we've heard is that there's a need for non program field space where kids maybe can play pick up games you can just go out and throw a frisbee  different than the field space that you might have a veterans memorial park a natural playground and so this would be still you know c t certified you know playground structures but it's built out of natural materials  and it allows kids to have a different experience in the playground like you see here in the image and we still climbing on stuff and it's kind of similar feel but it does have different materials treehouse the trees that are in the woods there are not going to support a structure on its own but it can built on stilts in there and then a pump track which is a is a bicycle facility and so this is made out of dirt and it has rollers and kind of birds that's a turn with the bank turn there one in essex at the maple street park it's kind of in the woods there so that you kind of looking for you might not see it but it's a really popular facility there they're relatively that's only one chain in county so there's not a whole lot here in this area could support some of the camps you could do concerts you could you hear around farmers markets as well as you know some private events weddings family reunions things like that going to lot of feedback on the types of events that people felt were appropriate and  with multiple things happening at once and so that's some of the magic that came together with the design natural resources are a big element at this park and so this baby deer that you're seeing is not the greatest shot but actually took that with my i so you know this is a really highly traveled wildlife corridor and there's a real opportunity to experience that you know right there in the southeast quadrant so it's pretty exciting but making sure those things are protected is really important and so this plan really response to that stormwater project it's been in plans even i think before this park was acquired by the city potentially before the vision process started certainly and so it incorporates a larger storm water feature as part of a neighborhood feature as well  as strong water treating storm water on site on site for goes anywhere else and then there's some support sylvie's are included in that parking interior parking which is kept to a minimum an access road with a drop in a low level and so what are these things look like on the ground and these are some of the character images that were kind of going for with this design the upper left is actually on the grass and the and the and the stone there farm road and so we really want to kind of recreate the way people are seeing used to kind of entering the park from this way of oriented it in that way so this is known farm road this is  street and we're going to zoom in here in a loop in a moment and look at some of these and a little bit more detail but here's an agricultural field it's really where the prime soils cultural soils are located it's also where there's farming happening today this is that storm water feature the neighborhood storm water feature this is where the community gardens are would be located and it allows us to kind of share those same support resources as well as be fenced together as one thing we heard from common roots that's really important to make sure that entire farming and our cultures fenced because there are a lot of critters out there that like to eat the veggies apparently that surprising you're seeing a little bit of storm water feature here as well as some buffering trees we did have some the neighboring landowners came to some of the public meetings and they were very supportive of the planning of the project but you know this is something that was requested and we think makes a lot of sense from both  perspective and the neighboring landowners perspective to have had some buffering right there and we do recommend that kind of happened a little bit earlier on so it can grow up but you're seeing some perking small parking lot here with an access road and a drop off that would allow you to have just the a d a s cesspool parking here and you know administrative access for you know if you have a wedding or an event there caterers could get in and drop off and get back out things like that there's this is where the shade  and the wild playground next to each other and kind of close access to some of the parking so parents can kind of get into this pretty easily in another nice feature about this is does it kind of allow you know a private event could be happening here with  that to kind of grow back up with the and use of a should species removal there we can zoom in on some of these areas a little bit more yeah this is the the tool shed there would also have restrooms in it as well and so it would be storage administrators space for the city as well as for the farming and agricultural use but then also provide bathrooms which is very helpful in the phasing to when we get there you'll see that becomes really helpful public art could could be a really good location for some public art here interpretive signage is really a good opportunity throughout the park  there are so many kind of interesting things that could be taught here from the storm water management practices to the habitats to the opportunities for ecologically sensitive design in that zero so there's  agricultural uses that are happening there there's a lot of opportunity for interpretation here as well here we're looking at kind of a close up view of the park core where the event space might be stone wall here kind of helps divide up the space and make it filled little bit more intimate on the same token views are of critical importance here and so making sure that anything that's placed out there is not impeding views from elsewhere on the site is very important restroom in this location might might might make a lot of sense as well and that was some of that we heard from the public through the web form and at the public meeting and so that's not reflected here on the plans yet but that's something that we can show if you guys are through this area there is however an existing trail that does lead out that way there is private land here it's pretty short piece of private land and it's wooded as well there has been some conversation in the process about the winter use and the potential for this to be a staging area for cross country skiing snowshoeing and then because right right across you know farm road you can get on to the cart path system from  golf course which does allow as part of its stipulation the city i've heard allows access to for cross country skiing on the car pass but the parking lots are not certain not necessarily accessible in the winter and so this would allow people to park here and then kind of get on to that much larger system for nordic skiing that would would require negotiation of an easement across this parcel but it is only one parcel and it's fairly short isn't  right we have yeah absolutely and so there has been some vegetation added here where maybe a little bit thinner and kind of blocks some of the some of the adjoining properties we also think that kind of the way that  species that might host events or are oriented would would reduce the potential for that the berms as well of this is raised up a little bit would help reduce some of that we think as well as the scale event is really important you know i think and that was kind of some people talked about a lot is that they didn't want to see really large events and so i think one hundred two hundred fifty people was kind of the range that people were most comfortable with and we heard more so that one hundred fifty was about the right number but we think you know once bents kind of scale up larger than that you'll get more opportunities for not a nuisance impacts but it's relatively low relatively low key about it so we wouldn't necessarily see this place as the place for  you know city fest or some of the bigger kind of city events you might have some of the smaller events here but the parking and some of those other considerations would make places like better tomorrow maybe maybe better for those larger  all sides and so we heard from folks in there in south point we heard specifically from these two homes are in the most the closest proximity we heard from from neighbors in this area and and some people did raise concerns like that but for the most part what people said was we are supportive of events there but want to make sure that the size of the events is something it's considered and so we're trying to reflect that input through the through the size of the facilities the parking as well as kind of that that piece and so we did here was that we're supportive of that sort of use in general i'm not saying everybody in that neighborhood said that but we did hear from numerous people that they thought those uses would be acceptable but that they want to make sure that the question so it has been thought of as a good connection potentially for the by path to continue through this site is currently goes all the way down known farm road and snakes through over the park  now and so maintaining that this is as part of that bike path system paved to the same character as the as the bike path is here unknown farm kind of coming out into the south point neighborhood where there is  potential to eventually you know connect up to prove their point south south fillets and other locations have to really study that through this plan but keeping maintaining that connectivity itself point is critical in and of itself but then also maintaining that opportunity to continue the bike path network to the south right through this park is critical and it does allow folks to travel by bike to do this park with ease and really interesting we  asked people how they would like to arrive at the site and we heard overwhelmingly that that bike and pradesh access was really important and so i think trying to member the exact percentages but i think it was  it was forty earth thirty percent on each bike car and foot and so there's really high percentages of people who want to be able to walk and bike to park so we want to make sure we have those access points and so i'm one of the feedback that we heard at the meeting two weeks ago is making sure that there's sidewalk and crosswalk connection across to this neighborhood just across spear chute here as well as connectivity to the but so there is already a plan that would connect down to south religion then you've connected whole lot of houses to the regular bike so it's there there's a lot of potential there as for the more property i talked to know so there were there was a lot of conversation around athletic playing fields and what that should look like and so we had parks and rec and then we also in the vision process we kind of kicked that around an awful lot and and what we've heard is that  e there is high demand for programmable space you know space you can reserve ahead of time and have your games there is in even greater need for informal play space that is not consumed by you know  structured games and places where kids can play pick up games and things like that and so there is a lot of conversation around well should we make it rectangular and kind of put some some lines out there and what we heard was that no as soon as we do that even if it's not officially programmable they'll still take that space and so it was actually designed to be a regulation size field that would be really attractive to those life we did hear we did hear that there is dip high demand for that sort of speech spoke we did hear as well is that there's an even greater demand for this sort of space which also seemed to fit i think with a lot of people's minds that kind of the character of this park was more in line with that informal field space as opposed to the structured kind of recreation space and so i think it is good to think about this park in relation i think to veterans we're going to look at some phasing some of the costs and a few other pieces there but if we can move forward to some of the buildings you can try your luck and keep the ceasar here so this is the the main events building that we've all been talking about this is intended to occupy kind of  some i large grouping of people for different events there is support space here storage space really to be able to change the room enough for different types of opportunities there's a server here so you can serve foods wines beers whatever restroom facilities ministry of office and actually meeting in conference room space for smaller groups as well and the whole idea is that this whole entire space can kind of be opened up and become indoor outdoor so that the seasonally and anyway you can enjoy kind of larger events both indoor and outdoor and then there's a large  are some of the inspirational images that we're kind of used and presented in earlier meetings to in terms of relative scale and size use materials and context of  doing all right here we go so this path here is as you approach a little loop driveway was ready here this is as you come into the building on the north side of the building which is the main entrance and then on the opposite side of the building would be this fireplace element again lots of glass that can be opened up a little more south facing but it's a covered element on the south side and this is  from the northwest i'll say which shows the outdoor patio area the community gardens and such are going to be over in this location over here and the smaller our cultural building shed  be down to the north a little bit  fair amount of furniture furnishings out on that open patio yes absolutely and this is the this is the little agricultural building so there's agricultural storage  so moore's maintenance equipment those types of things go in here and then there's a garden storage area in here and then restrooms on the other side and then this is the eastern side of the building that life looks out towards the kind of committees initially we did explore the buildings oriented north south the building or north south and the building oriented east west and kind of saying it's not fair to characterize it as one is the solar and so it doesn't mean that the viewer in taishan has no solar capability it could actually probably potentially support the whole building oriented in that way and similarly the solar radiation does not mean the views go away either it's kind of a decision point of whether we want to capitalize on the views more strongly or capitalize upon the solar opportunities more strongly i mean what we heard was that the views were kind of most important elements of the park particularly knowing that solar that kind of be directed kind of towards that tree lined area rather than out over towards a road would help work with acoustics and other things more appropriately and by having the building oriented north south there's also going to be a little bit better presence from the from the main road from spirit street so we felt there be a better sorry and see if i can skip back  will revise the plans based on feedback tonight and this feedback that we've heard and so i think the number one thing that we heard was really overwhelming support for the concept in general and i think  pretty exciting some folks raise the thoughts about you know we can start fund raising for some of some of these elements and i've heard we've already got some fun summer some funds raised and so for benches and i pad which is pretty exciting and so there's a lot of people that i think were pretty excited that at the meeting a couple weeks ago around those opportunities we did hear that their direct path connections are streaming important to make sure we maintain that ability kind think about some of those outdoor spaces in particular and so we'll look at look at ways to kind of think about some of education placement and maybe some of stone walls to make sure we're corporate ing that the elements and shielding some of that wind pretty interesting ideas for a water catchment make sure we're kind of capturing rainwater reusing on the site in agriculture operations and it was a young guy that was about ten who came up to me with that idea which is pretty i was love that parcel just so there is a sidewalk on both sides making sure that that's shown on the plan correctly there's a lot of conversation around the dog policy at this park and we have heard a lot of feedback  from folks that that's important to allow dogs to have use of the park and so at the same token we have heard from a lot of people the importance of the natural resources on the site like i said there's that baby deer that i wouldn't  seen that a dog would have certainly sent it out instantly if he was off leash and so there are some considerations to think about around that policy but this plane allows for the city to approach that policy in the way that makes the most sense for the that it should be even though it's kind of in its infancy should be part of that discussion on the citywide taskforce on dog management in parks we did also hear that underground in any power and making sure that the light passive recreation opportunities and so making sure the patient species are removed and that's kind of an ongoing activity as well as the habitat protection and monitoring ongoing activity  that kind of starts right what they want and carries through looking at some of the street pump outs parking straight being sidewalk and cross walks and so pump outs are little parts of the curve that extend out and would  with that use a walking past system with the boardwalks across the butlins and that the pass in the woods should stay pretty much the way they are no new construction and there's not even you know cathy freeman the folks who are working on we knew a great job of those trails and so they're in really good shape not much needed they're getting that multipath primary park entrance sign in the secondary park entrance signs in the trail signs all in  along the entrance drive to kind of stablish that corridor and that is static and then they have the screening to screen the parking yeah well if you do the right fund raising it could be a net zero to the city's coffers but you've got to have a really good fundraiser so phase two this is where we get the gardening use in there we introduce the active recreation and we create some more of those viewing opportunities and so you get that pump track in the play area the wild play in the small law an area as well as the path connections to those those zones building the community garden the paths the berry hedge and the fence that's kind of all associated there with the community garden getting the farm and garden access rude and that's when we'll build the shed with the of the stone wall that's in there and then any store water that's necessary to accommodate that storm water stream water generated from that development and you've got about about a million explored everything from you know kind of the green machine all the way down to kind of many different opportunities for the way you could accommodate the restrooms and there was certainly interest in exploring that our recommendation is that we think the city should pursue those sorts of kind of innovative sustainable practices but maybe not at this site because you have you have your sewer right there known farm road it's very easily accessible and we think you should you should save those more expensive anything like that so from sustainability standpoint it makes sense to use kind of what's right there and then face three is where you kind of you get to day event facility and you kind of finish out the rest of the park and so you've got the event i think you have been to a couple of meetings i think translated what i heard a lot of public who came to those meetings granted it's a subset what what they envision or would like to see in their kind of wish list of how to use the land and i think i would know there were some folks that were really engaged and really excited and passionate and we saw them at every there on this steering committee in their every meeting but we did see different folks throughout that kind of four or five years and so we did see a lot of neighbors we saw a lot of people in the community i think related this project and so i was really turns out it wasn't always you know the same twenty people the room every time we had a meeting you know we got a lot of new if i think even within the phases there's opportunities to get people out of the site so it's already working towards that i think you know nudging regardless of the timeline because sure that you know those opportunities are continue to be all right so in a straight line method for counting were two thirds of the year through with kind of fifty we're still in good shape overall the general fund this side just over sixty percent spent in expenditures but sixty two percent in the revenues that's up from fifty six percent in expenses for january and i know a lot of margin there and the revenues were at fifty three in january so up to sixty two on the revenue side of the building inside government still tracking well we're at sixty seven percent here fire spec ssion revenue start to sign a little bit but it is at fifty two percent that's a little under the bridge action but much higher than it was last year which which got us into a bit of trouble and the ambulance billing is pretty much on target with your revenue needs on the winds and i just want to confirm which ones were tracking under the other so i will get that in the park make it one forty of our pack hardline and salaries over time so some of the some of the parks guys come in for plowing just has everybody to come in their part me vince employees so it's going to be reflected there we're just trying to more actual cost we've talked about whether we just have a line item for general over time for anyone like if it's plowing we're stormwater comes and public approve or you which was attached to the agreement that stipulates how much you pay so once if you were in agreement with the plan the operational plan i'm comfortable even if we do i think this is a reporter enough thing that i think there's a strong vote of support for it so i know we need to understand what the financial vocations are for this but i'm trusting enough in the process that it will come out i still feel that  this but i don't think that applies to council members or it's still a calling for yeah because because we have a we have a collective bargaining agreement with our dispatchers right now and so discussion of the under the umbrella that we all want to sell so i think now that now that we know that there are seven communities which ones they are will be able to have much better conversations and discussions about the operational part of this and develop that with the dispatchers the budget all those things we need to work before we because we think i really truly think that justice will be seen in this and i think it probably is of many ways as good for the dispatcher's good for their working conditions good for their career opportunities can i just ask you when you anticipate i mean what's the timeline in terms of coming back to us with this is the clothes the budget the m o you have a timeframe by i think it would be a stretch but it would be a good goal to have at least two communities start up by the end of the calendar i think but december so we if we were one of them and it's like i guess everyone would have to sign i mean you started out right so in september october kind of thing well i'm just curious to have to have the design done the plan done relating to the transfer of land at the south end the market sent markov's his main central school parking lot property to the city for these and construction of the community center and the transfer of a small parcel of land to the city on the east side of the central school property needed to construct to construct a garden street and the construction of a new guaranteed and permanent entrance to the central school community center or we will construct a road to connect the market parking lot to what will become the road on the side of the community center project he said and giving them guaranteed access and permanent access to the market street on that side and also in all likelihood access to garden bird to mary st we just asked them to please decide one way or other and the decision might be we are of time to take it up that's a possible outcome and then we can go to plan b and come up with write thanks for all that there was no tomorrow a board on tuesday night the twenty seventh at seven and that's over at the police department that's over of the community room with the police department who thought when i went out on that one of the chamber breakfast this morning the speaker and the president pro tempore they're talking about pending legislation pretty good profit actually this morning some major there are connected with and mark were there both of them i spent a lot of or a fair amount of time last week with should pay up to five times more than the other communities participating in this program understand that there's a need but if it's a need felt county why it should be cautious  we have a full conversation are there other questions that i mean i'm just i'm certain that as you present this you'll share with us how you determine those percentages and what is based on my understanding is that it is based on something not just our large yes but that would be helpful to know what will spend this  year and then moving forward in the future i would really like to have the council see something before it ends up on front pages as a done deal and shared the issues we have discussed at different times with trevor some of the concerns that we've had or he's having shared with us around the police force and walling acknowledges i recall on me most people were shaking their heads saying you need to address that that's nothing we should just ignore we then expanded our mental health services to the force so but but that didn't necessarily solve the issue solved or helped i hope w some of the police officers but i don't think it's the real issue at hand when away from the numbers and you know i mean i think well that may be true i just don't think it's fair to say that that's the first you heard of it first meeting in february when talking about the program and i think question that's not on the agenda tonight i know i know but i just i mean i'm not i need to know more about what we're looking here ok or are we doing the community health initiative paying twenty five percent years on ours which is a lot of money what are we going to do with a five f t e as we hear from our new police chief that he does want to recruit and hire you did police that we have so then what do we do i mean all these things that those are legitimate question we need some more data what what were the dollars what or what the usage so that we could make a decision on whether this was even something that had broad support before we went out to  of survey and i'm sure they've called you and talked to you about it and they came up for and i they did and we said go away and get some more information and some real hard numbers and then come back to us with a plan so they we will hear from them on the sixteenth i don't think that means that we have to decide that that that will be something in the budgeting thinking and spending thinking going into the future because that is in the future they just you know as they've said to you they think august would be a great time and that's a discussion that we would have to have right but i'm not sure we're going to have everything in the next five years clear to us before we have to make some decision forward with these big ticket items in time when i've been talking but we've got the one big ticket the community mental working on that right well this is this patch where we might have some overlap that's a chunk of change i mean we couldn't even get five thousand dollars of computers and whatever it was doing to the person you're just concerned that we're not close enough to these issues that we're not talking about them enough i really feel that i felt blindsided to be quite honest on the middle on the mental health side or talk about the master card so i need to know that i'm not going to be blindsided in the future really well then we can talk about the process but you know i think i agree with tim that we have a very structured and i think f l process to consider all the items in the budget i would also acknowledge that things come up ministry you know a ceiling or a roof goes off and you can say almost sorry you know we didn't plan that we didn't know that we don't have the money so that's why you have contingency funds and so forth so i think we will continue to have these conversations about  pending budget items and i i feel like we've been moving along in a pretty thoughtful way about that maybe the community mental health missed the boat for you but i do think we have talked considerably about and continue to gather information and data about the library and you know we put off that bond vote because we didn't have the time our charter to remove one side of fence just you know disconnected rolled up and taken away so that one side is without any fencing i probably would be amenable to you know because once you remove the thing it's no longer dark right now to get to all the fencing if you just remove the gates that people would struck the at the entrance and turn it back into a usable dog and then a friendly amendment would be removing the chain link and a distance sufficient enough so that it's no longer able to contain dogs but we can also say this from like the chair suggestion of letting the task force wrestle with this issue because i mean they're going to go into all the specifics so if we're going to respect the rules the rules are that tim gets to choose what the friendly amendment nay and if it's not a friendly amendment then we that we draft it we can never talk about that dog park ever again i mean no can never talk about j c park ever again so now i think there's a boundary to that robert's rules and it's within reason and if we want to discuss adapting and adjusting how our policies are affecting public lands we can do that and if there's still not three votes to make a change to something say lovey to the problem with the record i was really happy to see it on the agenda and i'd love that idea but after just taking the gate off so they can wander around in there but whatever yes yes