Source: http://forum.reachingforthetippingpoint.net/index.php?topic=310.0
Timestamp: 2020-04-03 20:24:13
Document Index: 571047041

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 4', 'art 5', 'art 6']

Planning Commission Meeting, July 16, 2009
Author Topic: Planning Commission Meeting, July 16, 2009 (Read 2924 times)
« on: July 17, 2009, 18:40 »
Video will be up soon, hopefully, and will allow people to watch what happened and what the decisions were.
There were 5 residents who lined up to speak, including our Ultrapoet at the end. The first was an architect, who had studied the parking requirements of SS, and had assessed the building size. He had determined that the building size was about 1500 ft2 larger than the 43,~~~ ft2 size being given at the meetings and on the application, and therefore would require more parking than was initially calculated. Next up were 2 ladies, the first of which represents a 500-resident association, of whom all are opposed, and the second of which was President of the Round Hill Condominiums, and who has spoken in opposition at every meeting. She is concerned about the traffic increase at the intersection, because she was in an accident there a few years ago. Then Robin Beechy, a older man with a charming English accent (I'm a sucker for a nice English accent) spoke. He ran out of time about halfway through his speech, and the PC voted to allot more time so he could finish, and so Ultra could give her speech. Even with the extra time, unfortunately, Ultra was unable to finish hers, which had some comments that were different from any presented by anyone at the prior meetings. Maybe she will post it in here for us to appreciate.
Nancy Leathers, Director of the Department of Community Development, had a brief but polite dispute with Galloway over what the law says about assessing necessary parking spaces, but her being the govt. and he being a mere attorney, she won.
5 spaces per 1000 ft2 at 11,153 ft2: 56
3 spaces per 1000 ft2 at 17,065 ft2: 51
« Last Edit: July 18, 2009, 14:26 by ethercat »
Re: Planning Commission Meeting, July 16, 2009
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2009, 19:17 »
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkVWfTvBoDM
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXeSiqgTvaY
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT2rxBuFZA4
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quYuvMBHFts
Part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2QJVbaRKg8
Part 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1LjzKFMM7o
« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2009, 19:21 »
Very nice summary, EC
Don't forget, Bob Adam's information was not to be considered in the PC decision because they failed to submit this ahead of time.
I agree that Bob's information was basically useless for Scn. If anything, I think it hurt rather than helped his case.
Ultrapoet did a lovely job with her speech but unfortunately got cut short due to time limitations.
Final observation: The Scn crowd looked like a very tired and older bunch for the most part. I did not see one young person amongst them.
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2009, 19:33 »
Quote from: mefree on July 17, 2009, 19:21
Oh yes! I forgot about that! Thanks for reminding me, and letting the readers know.
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2009, 20:30 »
Oh em Gee .... It seems another great meeting to me! Even if the approval goes through, there will be SO many restrictions, the place will basiclly be locked down!
« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2009, 21:04 »
Not the outcome they had hoped for.
« Reply #6 on: July 17, 2009, 23:01 »
Can't wait to watch the videos. *glee*
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2009, 04:25 »
* (Joking:) We aren't going to make them ADD spaces.
Again, things I misunderstood or misrepresented, plz. correct. I have slight middle ear (crowd) deafness, and when everyone gets to mumbling and interrupting and talking over each other, I have issues.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2009, 04:51 by Lorelei »
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2009, 08:46 »
Sounds like the knee deep in BS i heard @ the meeting. I only wanted to hear the motion from the PC. It was a good one. The recommendation goes to the mayor and city council for a final vote.
In synapses, what did C of S gain after 6 months of legal wrangling and financial expenditures? Answer is NOTHING! C of S of Ga is right back where they were five years ago regarding this property.
They are back to square one. Please go back to the end of the line and try again.
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2009, 10:47 »
Wow Lorelei! You get my vote for stenographer of the year! Thanks for the hard work!!
I listed to all 6 videos. Admittedly my ADD started to kick in, especially when the Rev. explained the usage, but here is what I'm understanding between the videos and everyone's comments:
Apparently the zoning rule is that parking must accommodate the max capacity of the major purpose function. For a regular church, that is the population of the sanctuary, cause no one is in the office or in the classrooms during services. The building has no main sanctuary, or has a small one that present parking accommodates.However, CoS wants to use the basement, close it in and use it as a sanctuary. A large one that blows away the parking accomodations.CoS also brought in the Rev. to explain that most of the usage is the classrooms, and half are used during the day and half at night (why not use the same rooms, since the morning and evening shifts do not overlap?)Since usage is the classrooms, and only half are used, CoS claims the parking is adequate.Council voted the way they did understanding that as the classrooms sit today, it grandfathers that parking is adequate, therefore they can rezone into a church.HOWEVER, they cannot build the sanctuary in the basement. (CoS earlier claims the sanctuary is critical to the life of the org.)
So... I though we lost since they got the rezoning, but apparently CoS feels like they lost because they can't build the sanctuary. Why is a large gathering hall so important to them? As I understand from you guys, they don't have a major "church service"? Are they planning big conventions to be held here?
Again, this is all my conclusions based on my noob understanding of the org, and my ADD challenged analysis of the video.
FWIW - The engineering company that did the parking analyses is probably Kimley Horn & Assoc. consulting engineering firm. http://www.kimley-horn.com/kha/Only guessing but came up on google. I thing the Rev. called them Kimberly Horn.
« Reply #10 on: July 18, 2009, 14:30 »
Quote from: ethercat on July 17, 2009, 18:40
I've been informed that these were the old recommendations, and are no longer applicable. The new recommendation is 3 spaces per 1000 square feet.