►
Description
Topics of Discussion Include(d):
Resolution 18.22.21R: RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL CONFIRMING THE REAPPOINTMENT OF JEFFREY SPERRY AS A MEMBER AND THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE ALBANY PARKING AUTHORITY
Ordinance 46.122.20: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 375 (UNIFIED SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE) OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF ALBANY BY RENUMBERING SUCH CHAPTER
B
C
Okay,
welcome
everyone.
This
is
the
wednesday
march
3rd
2021
meeting
of
the
council's
planning
economic
development,
land
use
committee
council,
member
committee,
members
present
alfredo
ballerin
council
member
tom
hoey,
councilmember,
judy
doshay
and
myself,
kathy
fahey
and
I
know
councilmember
joyce
love
is
having
some
technical
difficulties
and
plans
on
joining
us.
C
Council
president
corey
ellis
is
also
here
and
so
we'll
start
tonight.
We're
going
to
be
doing
a
few
different
things
on
the
agenda,
but
we'll
start
with
the
reappointment
of
jeffrey
sperry,
as
member
and
chairperson
of
the
albany
parking
authority,
welcome
jeff
and
matt
peter
from
the
albany,
the
direct.
What's
your
title,
matt
director
of
the
albany
parking
authority.
E
E
The
I've
seen
I've
seen
the
prosperous
times,
and
this
past
year
has
been
a
real
difficult
year
for
most
businesses
and
the
parking
authority
was
not
left
out
on
the
rumble.
We've
had
to
do
some
major
layoffs
and
we're
hoping
now
with
some
of
the
improvements
in
the
event
downtown
and
possible.
Some
new
tenants
coming
in
we'll
get
back
to
some
semblance
of
normality.
E
E
Signage
and
murals
and
helping
clean
up
the
community
a
little
bit,
and
this
is
really
going
forward
now
to
me,
it's
like
we're,
starting
all
over
from
zero.
We've
got
to
go
back
and
reinitiate
all
the
programs
that
we
have.
We
don't
have
the
availability
of
the
capital
that
we
had.
We
had
in
our
finances
right
now,
because
we
use
that
to
keep
alive
and
make
our
bond
payments
for
the
parking
garages,
but
we're
looking
forward
to
it.
We've
got
a
mat.
A
great
leader.
C
D
Jeff,
can
I
take
this
one
yeah
so
so
we
had
temporary
layoffs
we
had
about.
We
had
five
furloughs,
they
were
brought
back,
but
we
are
currently
under
a
hiring
freeze
for
the
non-reimbursable
positions.
I
say
that
because
there's
the
enforcement
staff
that's
reimbursed
by
the
city,
but
for
us
we
have
about
five
vacancies.
D
On
our
non-enforcement
side.
We
typically
have
around
18
to
20
individuals.
Now
some
of
that
is
just
you
know:
people
we
normally
employ,
for
you
know
overnight
shifts
and
things
of
that
nature,
but
demand
for
events
and
other
stuff
meant
that
we
just
didn't
renew
the
positions
or
higher.
As
people
left
we've
been
under
that
hiring
freeze
since
march,
we
see
that
continuing
our
staff
has
done
a
very,
very
good
job
of
operating
what
they
can
at
the
minimum.
D
But
it's
you
know
it's
probably
between
20
and
25
percent
of
our
non-enforcement
staff
is
currently
vacant.
But
again
we
did
bring
back
our
the
individuals
that
were
furloughed,
but
at
one
point
we
had
an
additional
five
individuals
furloughed.
So
that
was
ten
total
open
positions
or
nearly
50
percent
of
our
non-enforcement
workforce,
and
we
still
did
everything
we
could
to
to
continue
to
provide
the
services
that
we
do
for
the
city.
D
I'm
sorry
april
mark,
you
know
it
started
in
march,
but
then
you
know,
as
we
shut
down
the
meters
for
about
a
month
and
a
half,
we
had
some
additional
furloughs
so
between.
So
we
had
five
open
positions
and
five
furloughed
positions.
We
then
brought
the
furloughed
individuals
back,
but
we
retained
the
hiring
freeze
so
again
we're
still
at
about
for
our
non-enforce
for
our
non-enforcement
staff
we're
at
about
where
we
see
we
have
a
vacancy
rate
of
about
25
at
the
height
of
pandemic.
D
D
B
I
D
E
B
C
I
Oh
okay,
nice
to
meet
you,
mr
sperry.
What's
your
feelings
about
unions,
I
noticed
that
you're
on
the
albany
medical
center
board
and
I
know
they've
been
trying
to
unionize
there
for
a
while.
I'm
just
curious
what
your
position
is.
I
see
also
capitalize
albany
corporation
and
you
know
which
is
supposed
to
create
jobs,
and
I
know
several
instances
where
unionized
jobs
were
done
away
with
because
of
the
you
know
the
ida
money.
E
E
I
ran,
I
ran
a
truck,
my
family,
I'm
the
third
generation
in
the
trucking
business.
I
ran
the
business
with
my
father
for
35
years
and
we
never
had
a
problem
and
we
were
teamsters,
but
we
they
understood
our
costs
of
operation
and
what
we
needed
in
a
work
ethic
from
somebody
and
as
long
as
they
met
those
guidelines,
we
were
very
happy
to
meet
their
guidelines.
I
D
D
D
We
currently
have
no
outstanding
grievances,
and
you
know
the
unionized
atmosphere
is
great.
You
know
in
the
parking
authority,
at
least
from
from
management's
perspective,
and
again
we
have
a
really
good
working
relationship
with
cwa.
We
think
they're
a
great
union
to
work
with
and
again
so
our
contracts
are
completely
settled
until
2025.
H
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
bill
in
the
senate,
there's
a
bill
in
the
assembly
that
would
do
some
changes,
one
of
the
and
I'm
interested
in
hearing
a
little
bit
about
that.
My
understanding
is
that
mr
peter
may
be
providing
us
with
some
information,
but
it
includes
five
thousand
dollars
a
year
compensation
for
the
board
members.
We
have
a
lot
of
boards
operating
in
the
city
and
a
lot
of
them
put
in
a
lot
of
time.
E
If
it's
getting
it's
getting
more
difficult
to
get
board
members
to
come
and
give
up
two
or
three
hours
of
time,
even
if
it's
only
once
a
month,
we
are
I'm
in
constant
contact
with
matt.
So
it's
a
little
bit
different.
I'm
used
to
it
and
sitting
on
the
going
to
capitalize,
albany
board
and
albany
medical
center.
E
E
J
E
D
D
You
know
we
want
to
make
sure
that
those
who
are
serving
on
boards,
generally
speaking,
are
compensated
for
their
time
equally.
If
no
boards
in
the
city
receive
compensation,
then
fair
enough,
but
if
some
boards
do
some
boards,
don't
this
seemed
like
an
opportunity
to
at
least
make
it
equal
to
some
of
the
other
efforts
that
are
going
on
again
up
to
the
5000,
especially
since
it
didn't
come
from
city
coffers.
D
I
believe
the
water
authority
and
water
board
are
compensated
at
five
thousand
dollars
and
that's
where
we
took
the
number
we
tried.
You
know
again:
it's
authority
to
authority,
it's
another
bond,
bond-based
entity,
it's
the
same
generally,
the
same
fiduciary
responsibilities
and
things
of
that
nature
and
again
it's
an
up
to
it
hasn't
been
decided.
Assuming
this
passes,
what
people
would
be
compensated
at
it
again.
H
So
the
reason
why
I'm
asking
is
because
I
agree
with
your
statement
about
being
unfair
to
compensate
people
who
are
putting
in
a
similar
amount
of
time
for
their
board
service
and
not
compensating
others
who
are
putting
in
a
similar
amount
of
time,
and-
and
so
I
was
hoping
since
you,
since
you
indicated
that
there's
other
boards,
I'm
aware
of
the
board
of
assessment
review,
getting
three
thousand
dollars
a
year.
Can
you
tell
me
about
any
other
boards
that
you're
aware
of.
D
B
H
H
K
Thank
you
and
thank
you
again,
mr
speech
for
signing
up
for
difficult
tasks
and
difficult
times,
because
it's
not
it's
not
an
easy
time
to
be
in
any
position.
You
know
leadership.
I
did
have
one
question
you
you
so
this
year
is
probably
one
of
the
toughest
years
economically
that
we've
seen
in
probably
since
the
great
depression.
K
You
know
where
we've
seen
so
much
loss
of
jobs,
opportunities
and
shifting
from
traditional
office
setting
to
the
new
remote
type
working
environment-
and
some
of
this
is
going
to
stay.
Some
of
this
remote
working
is
is
is
is
not
going
so.
The
question
is
with
this
new
reality
that
we
may
not
have
as
many
businesses
in
the
downtown
area
and
in
many
of
our
areas
where
we
have
busiest
parking.
E
Our
company
is
part
of
a
international
real
estate,
firm
cbre
and
we've
done
as
many
studies
as
most
large
real
estate
firms
in
the
country
and
and
internationally,
and
it's
we're
still
getting
the
same
feedback
that,
in
order
for
some
bit
some
businesses
to
operate
and
function
properly,
it's
got
to
be
face
to
face.
It
can't
be
on
a
zoom
call
or.
E
E
I
think.
If
you're
going
to
see
more
companies,
maybe
it'd
be
a
variation
rather
than
a
five-week
you're
out
of
the
office.
It
might
be
two
days
or
one
day,
you're
out
of
the
office
and
the
rest
of
the
time
you're
going
to
be
working
from
home,
or
vice
versa.
We
don't
know
the
answer
to
that.
Yet
I
can
tell
you
the
bigger
firms
that
shut
down
during
the
pandemic.
E
Some
are
still
shut
down,
but
they're
tending
to
look
at
may
to
june.
To
reopen
and
we'll
see
what
happens.
My
my
son
works
for
goldman
and
sachs.
They
have.
He
has
been
home
since
may
11
march.
11Th
of
last
year,
he
is
now
going
into
the
office
about
three
days
a
week
and
they
expect
by
september,
to
have
everybody
back
in
their
chairs
because
they're
like
us.
They
need
that
face-to-face
comments
and
working
with
that
in
their
teams,
and
you
lose
some
of
that
continuity.
E
When
you,
when
you
don't
have
that
personal
relationships.
What
we're
seeing
locally
is
that
lawyers,
the
law
firms
that
shut
down
they're
now
going
all
back.
Those
are
that's
one,
big
one.
The
state
is
now
just
starting
to
come
back
in
they
used
february.
As
a
begin
month,
they're,
saying
april,
everybody
be
back
in
their
seats
again
and
we've
stopped.
E
E
E
J
Thank
you,
madam
chairman,
welcome
mr
sperry,
so
I
want
to
get
a
little
bit
of
or
explore
a
little
bit
more
in
terms
of
what
the
authority's
thinking
is.
I
mean
I'm
going
to
somewhat
the
role
of
the
authority
and
what
your
thinking
is
in
terms
of
expansion
and
being
more,
let's
say,
proactive
or
active
in
the
economic
development
role,
which
is
what
the
legislation
also
touches
on.
J
So
I
don't
know
if
that
kind
of
colors,
where
we
were
last
year
versus
when
this
was
you
know,
this
direction
was
being
looked
at
versus
where
we
are
today
and
the
opportunities,
but
that's
kind
of
a
broad
question,
but
I'm
just
trying
to
get
the
philosophy
philosophy
of
the
authority
and
the
board
members
in
terms
of
that
direction
and
what
they
see
is
the
opportunities
and
how
that
contributes.
Potential
growth,
not
just
downtown,
but
in
other
parts
of
the
city.
E
D
Thank
you
and
thank
you
councilman
county
for
the
question,
because
I
think
it's
an
important
one
for
us.
We
kept
one
of
our
biggest
things
and,
as
we
started,
getting
involved
in
murals
and
and
beautification
projects
is
our
existing
legislation
was
very,
very
sparing
so
like
it's
basically
like.
If
it's
not
adjacent
from
a
parking
facility,
we
couldn't
touch
it.
D
So,
logically
speaking,
if
we
see
a
crosswalk
where
we
know
our
customers
are
going
and
it
needs
beautification,
and
that
would
help
us
retain
customers,
we
couldn't
actually
pay
for
it,
despite
it
being
in
our
benefit
and
the
city's
benefit
and
the
revenue.
Let's
say
that
there
was
a
crosswalk.
We
could
literally
only
pay
for
the
part
of
it
that's
adjacent
to
our
facility.
D
But
in
order
for
people
to
feel
comfortable
accessing
that
and
then
going
to
where
they're
going
to
go
and
expanding
foot
traffic,
which
of
course
helps
the
city.
We
need
to
make
sure
that
there's
murals,
that
the
sidewalks
are
repaired,
that
there's
lighting
and
things
of
that
nature,
and
if
the
parking
authority
can
take
some
of
its
revenue
and
help
and
partner
with
the
city
where
it
makes
sense-
and
it
still
has
to
be-
it
still
has
to
be
parking
like
somewhat
parking
related
like
it's
not
like.
D
That
mission
statement
to
your
point
is
how
can
the
authority
both
make
revenue
for
itself
in
the
city
but
also
use
any
of
its
excess
revenue
when
available
to
do
infrastructure
improvements
that
help
the
long-term
stability
of
both
that
the
area
where
we
are
partners
in
right,
like
our
garages,
are
just
not
the
garages
in
the
direct
area?
Anyone
who's
coming
into
our
garages
are
walking
throughout
downtown
and
the
better.
The
experience
for
the
parker,
the
more
likely
they'll
come
back.
D
I
I
believe
it
does,
and
and
for
example,
like
what
we've
been
doing
in
some
of
the
lots
and
things
of
that
nature
have
been.
You
know
better
fencing
and
beautification
efforts.
Our
hope
is
that
once
revenues
come
back
and
again,
our
revenues
are
severely
diminished,
so
this
might
be
a
couple
years
until
this
even
matters.
D
You
know
it's
like
the
tree
planting
initiatives
right,
making
sure
that
trees
and
green
space
are
part
of
our
initiatives.
Next
to
our
meters,
right
meters
are
not
the
most
attract
the
most
attractive,
but
if
there's
areas
that
look
more
walkable,
including
murals,
that
neighborhoods
want
to
see
throughout
it
helping
put
ev
chargers
in
lighting
in
things
of
that
nature
directly
around
our
garages,
for
example,
we
did
led
lighting
where
there
were
issues
with
it
being
too
dark,
and
we
got
complaints
that
it
was
uncomfortable.
D
J
So
I
assume
your
reserves
have
been
significantly
diminished
because
of
the
the
lack
and
which
puts
you
in
a
very
different
position
now
than
you
were
a
year
ago.
That's
correct
and
really
puts
restrictions
on
your
ability
to
do
more
things
like
this,
and
I
don't
know
when
that's
we
don't
know
when
that's
really
going
to
turn
around
and
that
you
might
be.
You
know,
downtown's
going
to
come
back
in
a
way
that
will
increase
your
revenues
just
on
the
into
the
long
term.
Do
you
have
any?
D
D
But
it's
not
lost
on
me
that
things
above
30
years,
that's
typically
the
shelf
life
of
a
garage
unless
substantial
repairs
are
made
and
we've
made
those
repairs.
But
we
have
to
be
ready
in
case.
We
need
to
do
either
substantial
repairs
or
we
need
to
replace
those
garages
and
that's
something.
That's
very
important
and
key
on
our
mind.
Moving
forward.
J
I
think,
with
new
developments
and
the
conversion
of
downtown
office
space
you're
there's
some
involvement
there
in
terms
of
those
new
apartments
working
with
the
developers
to
create
that
space.
But
I
think
in
this
case
we're
talking
about
you-
know
smaller
units
that
have
been
there
for
a
while.
I'm
thinking
along
you
know,
elk
street
near
city
hall,
pine.
Those
areas
which
are
always
a
problem.
They
don't
know
what
to
to,
and
all
those
streets
are
now
metered,
so
the
residents
are
put
at
its
distinct
disadvantage.
D
We
obviously
can't
do
that
where
there's
meters,
you
can't
charge
someone
one
thing
and
not
someone
the
else,
someone
else
something
else,
but
we
do
offer
discounts
for
residential
parking
in
the
garages
and
lots
to
try
to
to
make
it
as
affordable
as
possible,
but
that's
really
the
limit
to
what
we're
able
to
do
we're
consistently
looking
at
if
other
cities
are
are
trying
to
do
it.
We
do
end
our
meters
relatively
early
and
we
don't
do
it
on
weekends,
so,
for
example,
in
downtown
our
meters
are
eight
to
five,
the
other
areas.
D
It's
eight
to
six.
No,
we
don't
have
the
meters
out
on
the
weekends,
so
you
know
we
try
to
be
as
thoughtful
as
we
can
on
that.
We
just
don't
really
have
a
solution
and
I
I
completely
understand
the
pressures
that
are
are
back
and
forth
and
there's
no
easy
answer
to
that.
I
wish
I
had
a
better
solution,
but
I
don't
at
this
point:
okay,.
C
D
Certainly
so,
there's
three
major
changes
in
our
enabling
legislation-
and
we
had
discussed
this
with
council
leadership
last
year,
just
to
let
them
know
sort
of
what
we
were
thinking
why
we
were
thinking
it.
I
believe
it
was
discussed
at
caucus.
Maybe
last
year
I
wasn't
there,
but
I
believe
it
was
and
I
apologize.
D
D
If
someone
has
a
good
experience
parking
but
then
a
bad
experience
walking
to
their
destination,
they're
not
going
to
park
again
on
revenue
and-
and
we
really
see
that
as
an
interconnect-
the
second
part
of
it
is
again
just
allowing
our
members,
if
so
done,
approved
by
our
board
to
receive
a
stipend
similar
to
what
the
water
authority
gets.
Again,
that's
an
up
to
not
an
exact
and
it
it
could
be
that
our
board
votes,
that
they
don't
want
to
do
that.
It's
just
giving
us
the
ability
to
do
that.
D
The
third
and
final
part
is
expanding
our
bonding
authority.
Specifically,
I
apologize
just
getting
up
right
now.
Our
our
aggregate
principal
amount
is
50
million.
We
would
like
that
to
go
to
75
million
and
again
I
sort
of
bring
up
the
fact
of
if
two
of
our
garages
need
to
be
bonded
at
the
similar
time
or
we
need
to
to
fix
up
one
of
our
garages
while
trying
to
build
another
one
that
would
completely
eliminate
our
bonding
authority.
We
couldn't
actually
build
it.
Even
if
we
had
the
revenues
to
support
it.
D
The
original
bonding
amount
was
established
when
we
were,
I
believe
in
84.,
and
so
you
know,
obviously,
inflation
other
things
and
expenses
have
gone
quite
a
way
up.
You
know
and
that's
sort
of
just
the
other
part
to
it
and
again
our
bonding
has
nothing
to
do
with
the
city's
finances,
and
so
much
as
that,
our
bonding
is
purely
based
on
our
revenues
and
our
our
bond
rating.
I
C
C
C
C
C
L
Yeah,
I
think
we
have
general
consensus.
We
were
able
to
run
a
let's,
not
really
check
changes.
The
pdf
version
of
track
change,
changes
that
compare
of
the
the
original
pdf
document
that
I
think
we
had
all
been
working
on
from
2020
february,
2020
to
the
one
that
general
code
sent
us
this
year,
and
we
really
didn't
find
many.
If
any
inconsistencies
there,
there
were
a
lot
of
notations
that
showed
up,
but
that
was
mostly
due
to
content
and
formating
within
the
document.
H
I
think
that
there
are
two
housekeeping
questions
that
I
have
before.
We
actually
move
to
pass
this,
and
this
is,
I
think,
directed
at
jr
jr.
You
mentioned
something
about
seeker,
and
my
gut
is
that
this
committee
doesn't
need
to
have
that
particular
seeker
document
approved
by
us
for
this
to
be
for
us
to
vote
this
out
with
the
favorable
recommendation.
Am
I
correct
about
that?.
A
C
A
A
C
C
A
H
So,
okay,
the
second
housekeeping
question
is
there
are
provisions
in
the
usdo
that
talk
about
what
we're
supposed
to
do?
What
findings
we're
supposed
to
make
when
we
pass
something
like
this,
I
I
think
because
all
of
these
changes
are
essentially
clarifying
changes.
I
don't
think
that
there's
any
issues
with
that,
but
you
know
we
have
done
that
for
some
of
the
usdo,
and
I
am
not
sure
that
I
adequately
covered
those
when
I
did
edits
to
the
sponsor's
memo.
A
A
C
K
L
K
C
B
H
B
C
C
G
C
L
A
L
You
know
one
of
the
the
positive
aspects
of
you
know
waiting
so
long
to
do
our
six-month
review
is
we
have
a
little
bit
bigger
body
of
evidence,
it's
not
a
huge
body
of
evidence,
but
we
have
some
case
load
to
take
a
look
at
in
terms
of
projects
we've
reviewed.
We
do
keep
some
data
as
we
as
we
review
cases
to
just
sort
of
you
know,
track
them
and
see.
L
You
know
what
the
consistencies
are
inconsistencies
as
well
as
to
reflect
on
them,
for
you
know,
as
we
move
forward
with
the
the
code
review,
some
of
the
issues
that
may
be
causing
recurring
problems,
and
so
the
basis
for
this
was
you
know.
The
code
speaks
to
an
annual
report
to
the
council
subsequent
to
the
six
months
review.
L
This
largely
uses
that,
as
a
framework
in
terms
of
the
information
to
be
provided
list
of
area,
variances
use,
variances
conditional
use
permits
development
plan
reviews,
as
well
as
speaking
to
a
couple
items
that
were
either
left
in
flux
or
unfinished
as
we
finalized.
The
original
code
in
2017-
and
that
was
the
issue
of
potential
for
accessory
dwelling
units,
as
well
as
the
the
affordable
housing
provisions
and
incentives
that
were
put
into
the
code.
You
know
towards
the
end
of
that
adoption
discussion
period.
L
So
you
know
the
memo
here
is
is
sort
of
it's
sort
of
rudimentary.
I
don't
draw
too
many
conclusions.
I
kind
of
want
to
just
put
the
data
out
there
and
you
know
there
are
some
sort
of
comments
based
upon
my
my
experience,
having
a
little
bit
of
a
history
prior
to
the
code
and
how
maybe
things
have
changed
since
so.
Looking
at
area
variances
one
of
the
areas,
I
think
we've
made
a
really
big
improvement
with
this
code
is
the
decline
in
the
number
of
variants.
L
L
You
know
a
lot
area
in
depth,
regulations,
parking
and
various
things
of
that
nature,
where
we
were
seeing
a
lot
of
cases
prior
to
the
usdo.
Is
you
know
the
the
the
proposed
or
the
required
lock
configurations
were
really
not
consistent
with
the
lock
configurations
that
already
are
pre-existing
in
albany?
L
So
if
someone
go
to
build
a
house
on
a
40
by
100
lot,
you
know
it
may
not
meet
the
the
setbacks,
the
lock
coverage
or
even
a
shed
in
a
lot
of
cases
or
a
deck,
the
houses
that
are
the
the
the
houses
on
the
property
and
the
in
the
the
existing
structures.
There
were
already
over
the
allowable
lock-up.
So
literally
any
addition
they
wanted
or
small
improvement
they
wanted
to
make
to
their
property.
They
would
need
to
go
to
board.
L
Zoning
appeals
for
varying,
sometimes
multiple
variances,
it's
time
cost
and
money
for
the
homeowner.
There
are
variances
that
that
affect
larger
projects
as
well.
Typically,
we
do
our
best,
especially
now,
so
that
we
have
a
code
that
you
know
speaks
to
what
we
want,
instead
of
in
some
cases,
what
we
don't
want
again,
we're
always
working
to
perfect
that.
But
you
know
typically,
we
don't
want
to
see
people
getting
variances.
L
They
have
to
show
some
sort
of
a
hardship
or
a
relief
to
be
able
to
apply
for
those
and
be
granted
those
by
the
board
of
appeal
and
just
look
at
some
of
the
types
of
cases
that
we
have
gotten
for.
Variances,
not
uncommon.
A
lot
of
them
relate
to
the
dimensional
standards
that
we
were
talking
about,
but
getting
into
some
of
the
finer
details.
L
You
know
front
yard,
setbacks,
we've
seen
a
number
where
you
know
properties
are
through
lots,
so
they
may
have
frontage
on
two
streets.
They
may
be
200
feet
deep
and
there's
a
principal
street
along
the
front
and
a
secondary
street
in
the
back.
That's
really
not
a
functional
street,
but
per
the
regulation
of
code.
They
need
to
meet
maximum
setback
or
they
need
to
be
built
within
a
certain
distance
of
gold,
and
that's
nobody
knows
practical.
So
I
think
that's
a
that's
a
issue
that
we
can.
L
You
know
kind
of
clear
up
or
try
and
clean
up
as
we
move
forward
with
the
amendments
principal
building
height
as
well.
We've
seen
a
handful
of
those.
A
couple
of
them
in
particular,
were
related
to
the
half
story,
provisions
that
we
have
in
some
of
the
commercial
districts,
I
think
practically
with
modern
construction.
L
A
lot
of
these
are
mixed-use
developments
and
they're
they're
doing
a
commercial
use
on
the
ground
floor,
residential
above
or
in
some
cases,
they're
doing
a
level
parking
on
the
ground
floor,
but
there
really
aren't
too
many
that
come
in
the
situation
of
half
stories.
So
I
think
that's
something
we
want
to
take
a
take.
A
look
at.
We
may
also
want
to
look
at
applying
you
know
a
height
in
terms
of
feet
as
well
as
number
stories.
You
know.
L
I
think
that
what
some
proponents
or
or
some
applicants
for
variances,
that
we
reviewed
put
forward
was
that
a
three
and
a
half
story-
building,
for
instance,
because
of
the
manson
root
style,
would
actually
you
know
be
taller
than
than
the
the
then
allowing
an
extra
story.
Full
extra
story,
because
you
know
again
the
configuration
of
that
style
of
architecture
or
roof
structure.
L
You
know
practically
a
three
and
a
half
story.
The
half
story
can
accommodate
up
to
70
percent
of
the
floor
area
as
the
full
story.
So
you
know
three
and
a
half
story
is
really
kind
of
three-quarters
of
the
way
to
being
a
fourth
story.
But
in
any
case
you
know
that's
something
that
I
know
that
we're
going
to
talk
about
looking
at
signage
maximum
sign
size.
L
I
don't
think
there's
a
there's
really
a
surprise
there
that
no
matter
how
much
we,
you
know,
discourage
some
individuals
they're,
going
to
think
that
they,
you
know,
need
a
larger
sign
and
in
some
cases,
that
that
may
be
appropriate
if
there's
a
historic
type
of
building
or
type
of
a
sign
band
on
a
building
that
accommodates
a
particular
size.
Sign
you
know
that
may
be
something
where
a
variant
is
reasonable,
as
well
as
a
number
of
signs
per
frontage.
L
You
know
there
was
a
a
pretty
significant
oversight
in
our
in
our
code
as
we
drafted
it
with
respect
to
multi-tenanted
properties.
Really,
when
you
read
the
code
it
speaks
to,
you
know,
each
property
gets
a
sign
of
x
square
feet.
Well,
you
know
some
properties
have
multiple
tenants
or
multiple
storefronts,
and
you
know.
Does
that
mean
that
you
know
if
the
allowance
is
24
square
feet
and
you
have
four
tenants
that
each
tenant
only
gets
six
square
feet,
whereas
the
guy
in
the
next
building
over
gets
24
because
he's
the
only
tenant?
L
That's
not
really
fair.
So
the
way
we
have
been
applying,
that
is
a
per
tenant
allocation
of
the
signage.
You
know
and
that's
something
that
I
think
as
we
move
forward
too.
Another
thing
that
comes
to
mind
is
you
know,
I
think
it's
you
know
when
we
make
those
sort
of
interpretations
in
some
cases
we
need
to
do
a
better
job
of
making
sure
those
are
documented
and
aware
to
everybody.
L
You
know
a
lot
of
those
are
pretty,
I
think,
pretty
respectful
of
the
code
intent
and
they
are,
you
know
minor
in
nature,
but
you
know,
I
think,
for
transparency.
You
say
you
know
we
do
want
to
be
a
little
bit
more
clear
in
the
code
as
to
when
interpretation's
been
made,
that
everyone's
aware
of
that,
and
potentially
that
there's
an
ability
to
to
that's
codified
in
writing
and
their
ability
to
you
know
confess
that
in
some
form
of
fact,
with
respect
to
fencing
maximum
height
and
opacity.
L
L
You
know
variance
is
usually
something
that's
for
a
unique
circumstance
and
really
you
know,
every
quarter
lot
in
the
city
has
two
front
yards
in
that
case,
what
a
lot
of
people
think
of
as
their
side
yard,
because
the
side
of
the
building
is
up
against.
That
is
up
against
the
right-of-way
or
street.
It
counts
as
a
front
yard.
So,
whereas
everybody
else
has
you
know,
yard
behind
their
house,
it's
clearly
their
backyard
corner
properties,
really
don't
have
backyards
or
they're
not
as
large
as
a
lot
of
people
think
they
may
be.
L
You
know,
I
think
a
lot
of
homeowners
are
confused
by
that
and
you
know
they
want
that
privacy
that
comes
with
a
backyard,
and
I
think,
there's
a
balance,
because
you
know
the
defenses
do
sort
of
obstruct
the
use
shed
of
either.
You
know
a
particularly
nice
row
of
houses
looking
down
the
street
or
in
some
cases
for
safety
as
well.
L
You
know,
is
there
someone
you
know
or
something
that
could
be
behind
that
fence,
that
maybe
you
wouldn't
see
if
it
was
a
solid
fan
or
if
it
was
a
higher
of
a
six
foot
height?
So
that's
something
that
you
know.
We
should
probably
take
a
look
at
have
a
conversation
about
you
know.
Maybe
you
know
making
some
modifications
there
or
fine
tuning
a
little
bit
to
allow
for
exceptions.
L
L
L
I
think
nine
of
the
withdrawn
cases
were
cases
where
people
concluded
that
they
could
meet
the
standard
and
busted
their
application
to
do
so.
So
you
know
in
some
cases
those
would
have
been
denied,
but
I
think
37
speaks
to
the
fact
that
you
know
the
board
has
seen
some
cases
where
someone
puts
forward
a
reasonable
case.
L
L
I
gotta
move
the
I'm
looking
so
again.
I
I
kind
of
spoke
to
some
of
this,
but
you
know,
I
think
the
board
of
zoning
applios
has
played
a
really
big
role
and
a
good
role
in
really
enforcing
the
standards.
So
you
know
it's
clear
that
everyone
is
treating
the
tr
being
treated
fairly
when
they
go
before
the
board
and
the
standards
are
being
equally
applied.
L
I
do
acknowledge
that
in
the
past
that
that
may
have
been
somewhat
more
difficult
because
the
standards
didn't
reflect
what
we
wanted
in
every
case.
So
it
was
much
more
easier
to
justify
a
variance,
because
some
cases
granting
the
variance
was
was
the
better
outcome
for
the
city
significant.
I
think
I
actually
covered
pretty
much
all
of
this,
so
you
know
I
guess
I
would
just
stop
really
quickly
and
ask
if
anybody
had
any
questions
on
the
area,
variance
side
of
things,
all
right,
I'll
jump
right
into
you,
nope
shoot.
H
Whereas,
if
you
look
at
the
dimensional
standards,
all
there
were
25
applications
and
only
seven
of
those
were
denied,
so
the
percentage
is
closer
to
something
like
77
or
something
like
that.
That
have
been,
I
think,
or
maybe
it's
73,
that
have
been
approved
and
again
some
of
those
you
know
you
know
from
what
I
know
about
that.
H
L
Sure
yeah
I
mean
I
think
another
case
with
the
fencing
is
you
know
you
know
there
were
seven
of
those
it
wasn't.
You
know
it
wasn't
really
they're,
not
a
unique
circumstance.
So
I
think
that's
another
reason
where
the
board
sees
these
sort
of
identical
cases.
You
know
I
do
think
you
know
maybe
speaks
to
the
fact
too,
that
you
know
oftentimes
a
one
or
two
family
homeowner.
L
You
know
struggles
to
put
forward
the
same
quality
or
level
of
application
as
a
developer
can
in
terms
of
responding
to
the
criteria
you
know
again,
I
think
we
can
certainly
look
at
kind
of
teasing
those
out.
I
will
kind
of
underscore
that
you
know
zoning
is
not
supposed
to
be
about
the
applicant,
but
about
the
the
use
or
the
impact
on
the.
B
L
L
You
know,
I
think,
that's
really
a
policy
change
when
this
is
made
for
any
other
purpose,
then
a
unique
financial
showing
of
hardship
where
the
the
property
owner
truly
has
no
other
use
for
the
land
and
that
the
board
is
granting
only
the
minimum
necessary
variance.
Like
I
said,
looking
back
historically,
those
numbers
were
higher.
L
You
know
I
certainly
took
issue
with
with
some
of
those
numbers,
but
there
were
practical
difficulties
of
you
know
a
a
church
or
a
school
or
a
a
storefront
in
a
neighborhood
that
couldn't
be
utilized
because
that
was
owned
solely
residential
and
there
were
no
options
available
to
it.
So
when,
when
you
were
faced
with
you
know
a
church
being,
you
know
falling
down
or
being
torn
down
as
opposed
to
granting
a
variance
for
a
reasonable
reuse.
L
So
I
do
appreciate
the
board
of
zoning
appeals
working
closely
with
us
on
closing
that
that
that
loophole
there
and
as
well
as
the
code,
which
really
kind
of
allowed
at
least
some
available
options
for
those
types
of
properties
that
you
know
to
make
sure
that
they're
not
in
a
situation
of
getting
a
variance,
because
whether
or
not
that
variance
was
granted.
You
know
that's
it's
time
and
money
that
has
to
be
spent
to
you
know.
L
L
To
see
such
a
drop
in
the
numbers
here,
pre
usda,
we
were
at
about
32
per
year
and
post
usdo
we
had
11
per
year,
so
conditional
use
permits
are
sort
of
the
in
between
uses
between
something
that's
explicitly
permitted
and
something
that's
not
permitted,
so
something
that
would
require
a
use
variance.
Let's
say
you
know:
they're
looked
at
on
a
case-by-case
basis.
L
I
think
the
zoning
law
speaks
to
generally
those
you
know
being
approved
with
conditions,
or
at
least
you
know
it
speaks
to
their
general
compatibility
or
that
you
could
be
compatible
within
his
own
district.
But
you
know
there
may
be
circumstances
where
it's
not.
You
know.
I
think
there
was
a
case
recently
the
board
of
appeals
with
a
pro
stuart,
where
this
was
actually
forgive
me.
L
The
planning
board
proposed
stewards
that
wanted
to
do
a
vehicle
fueling
station
in
a
mixed
use,
neighborhood
center
district
and
the
board
felt
and
that
district
at
that
location
really
wasn't
designed,
or
maybe
the
appropriate
use
for
that
location.
Given
the
purpose
statement
that
was
set
forth
for
that
own
district,
so
that
application
was
rejected.
However,
well
I'll
get
to
this.
L
Most
of
these
applications
were
approved,
so
we
we
should
take
a
close
look
at
that.
There
are
some
recurring
themes
here.
One
of
the
I
think
you
know
compromises
that
we
made,
and
it's
not
that
we
don't
support
this,
but
you
know
I
think
it
was
a.
It
was
an
important
issue
for
neighborhoods.
You
know
when
we
adopted
the
code
was
the
conversion
of
dwellings,
existing
dwellings,
adding
additional
units,
those
do
in
the
rrt
and
r2
districts
as
well
as,
I
believe,
the
rm
district.
L
So
that's
two
family
district,
townhouse
district
and
multi-family
district.
You
guys
have
been
looking
at
the
code,
so
you
all
know
this
now,
but
in
any
case
you
know
those
require
to
add
additional
units,
a
condition
use
permit
in
order
to
apply
for
the
conditional
use
permit,
there's
certain
criteria
that
you
have
to
meet.
Otherwise,
in
addition
to
the
conditional
use,
you
would
need
a
variance.
So
typically
most
people
don't
apply
if
they
meet
the
criteria,
but
I
think
you
know
a
lot
of
these.
Are
you
know
in
the
rt
districts?
L
L
There
weren't
many
recurrences
otherwise,
bar
or
tavern.
You
know,
we've
had
some
bars
or
taverns
sort
of
bottle
shop
style.
Things
that
have
opened
more
recently
that
are
smaller
scale
may
not
have
the
same
type
of
an
impact.
So
in
some
cases
we
may
want
to
look
at
whether
there's
a
certain
case
where
those
can
be
as
of
right
uses
as
well
as
personal
services
in
muni.
L
You
know,
I
remember
a
case
of
a
of
a
hair
salon
on
on
2nd
avenue
that
that
had
applied
for
a
condition.
Use
permit,
took
them
a
couple
months
to
go
through
the
process
and
they
were
basically
had
the
whole
neighborhood
out
cheering
for
them
to
to
open
their
business
in
the
storefront.
So
you
know
that's
something
we
want
to
take
a
closer
look
at
as
well.
As
you
know,
I
think
we
want
to
look
at
you
know.
L
Conditional
use
permits
can
be
used
in
a
way
that
you
know
allows
a
little
more
oversight
or
guidance
into
some
of
the
uses
that
you
know.
Maybe
have
you
know,
council
members
have
been
have
been
surprised,
are
allowed
by
right,
or
in
some
cases
you
know,
may
want
to
have
a
little
bit
more
influence
in
you
know.
I
think
this
is
a
tool
that
we
can.
We
can
potentially
use
in
that
capacity,
and
for
this
too,
we
do
have
the
the
average
duration
of
review
for
these.
The
average
duration
was
around.
L
H
L
I'd
like
to
think
about
that,
to
be
honest,
I
I
had
I
had
thought
of
the
statement.
I
hadn't
really
thought
of
the
the
particular
uses.
I
guess
I
maybe
turned
that
around
and
asked
ask
council
members,
but
I
think
it's,
I
think
my
my
greater
point
was
that
as
go
through
the
code,
you
know
there
are
tools
that
we
can
use
to
to
address
some
of
the
some
of
the
concerns
that
have
been
haven't
raised
right.
H
L
Development
plan
reviews
so
pre
usda.
We
were
at
about
29
a
year
and
post
usdo
34,
so
we're
pretty
consistent
there.
You
know
we
didn't
change
the
the
thresholds
for
requiring
a
development
plan
review
too
much.
When
we
adopted
the
code,
we
did
create
major
and
minor
categories.
A
major
category
requires
a
public
hearing
and
a
planning
board
makes
the
decision,
whereas
a
minor
is
a.
Is
a
staff
review
that
the
chief
planning
official
is
charged
with
making
the
decision?
L
Typically
the
same
review,
same
criteria
and
you
think
you'll
see
that
as
we
go
through
the
you
know,
the
average
duration
for
the
review
we're
actually
a
little
bit
disappointed.
I
think
the
idea
for
a
minor
review
was
for
it
to
be
a
little
bit
easier.
These
are
smaller
projects.
For
instance,
you
know
it's
any
new
construction
or
so
for
someone
building
a
single-family
home.
L
L
You
know
we
get
a
lot
of
public
feedback
and
I
think
you
know
sometimes
you
don't
hear
a
lot
from
the
planning
board
members,
because
those
are
becoming
quite
long
meetings.
So
I
think
we
do
kind
of
want
to
tease
out
some
of
the
cases
that
maybe
go
into
the
planning
board
as
a
major
review
that
really
aren't
generating
as
much
attention
and
maybe
getting
them
into
the
minor
category
might
help
free
up
a
little
bit
more
free
time
for
them
to
do
a
more.
L
That's
just
the
nature
of
you
know
the
development
situation
in
albany.
I
did
note,
too,
that
there
are
some
commercial
industrial
projects
that
are
outside
of
the
city's
jurisdiction.
I
mean
a
good
example
would
be
the
e-tec
building
very
significant
building
that
you
know
would
have
bumped
this
square
footage
number
up.
Quite
a
lot
had
it
been
included,
but
you
know
this
is
a
state
project
that
you
know.
L
While
we
are
often
notified
or
consulted
that
that
review
is
taking
place
in
the
state
level,
you
know
it's
not
within
our
jurisdiction
to
bring
before
the
planning
board.
It's
not
our
decision
to
to
make,
and
you
know
also
noting
the
new
construction,
outpacing
rehabilitation
and
that's
primarily
due
to
there's
a
lot
of
rehabilitation
projects.
Two
three
family
dwellings
rehabs
fit
ups
of
office
space
that
don't
require
development
plan
reviews,
so
that
isn't
included
here.
L
You
know
that
be
a
more
question
that
you'd
have
to
get
from.
Maybe
building
permit
data
concern
to
look
at
that.
But
I
think
the
important
thing
to
convey
here
was
just
the
types
of
projects
that
the
planning
board
has
been
reviewing
so
that,
as
we
go
through
the
the
code
review
and
update,
we
may
be
taking
a
closer
look
to
make
sure
that
you
know
if
we
get
pressed
for
time
we're
addressing
the
the
things
that
are
going
to
to
matter
most
and
have
the
most
meaningful
impact.
L
Development
plan
reviews,
so
the
general
frame
framework
development
plan
review,
is,
is
geared
towards
endorsement
of
projects
that
comply
with
with
the
standards.
It's
essentially
a
site
plan
review.
Are
you
putting
the
building
in
the
right
place
in
the
site?
Does
it
have
appropriate
sufficient
water
sewer
other
service
capacity
to
to
support
the
use
you?
If
you
get
to
a
development
plan
review?
That
means
you've
already
checked
the
box.
If
you
don't
need
a
variance,
you
don't
need
a
conditional
permit,
you
don't
need
variances,
really
area
variance
is
related
to
the
dimensional
standards.
L
So
I
think
in
some
cases
this
is
where
we've
had
a
little
bit
of
consternation
with
some
of
your
constituents
and
with
the
community
when
projects
come
before
the
board
for
a
development
plan
review
some
cases.
This
is
the
first
time
that
that
people
have
seen
them,
and
you
know
I
think
people
feel
that
they're
just
you
know
the
planning
board
is,
is
you
know
not
giving
it
enough
attention
or
that
it's
just
a
thumbs
up
thumbs
down
process?
It's
really
not
the
case.
So
again,
that's
looking
at
you
know.
L
What
do
we
want
to?
You
know
we
do
want
this
to
be
a
seamless
process,
so
we
want
to
make
sure
that
the
projects
that
are
getting
to
the
board
are
projects
that
that
we
want
to
see
approve.
You
know,
because,
that's
generally,
the
outcome
of
the
development
plan
review
process-
and
I
wouldn't
expect
it
to
change-
that's
generally
been
the
case
in
albany
since
the
inception
of
landing
board.
So.
L
L
That
provision
requires
that
for
projects,
50
units
or
greater
five
percent
of
the
dwelling
units
be
set
aside
at
at
least
100
of
the
or
excuse
me
at
not
more
rental
value
than
100
percent
of
the
city's
median
income.
There
is
distinction
there.
Most
of
these
calculations
used
area
median
income.
The
city's
median
income
is
lower
than
area
median
income,
so
that
100
figure
is
a
is
you
know
it's
relevant
to
consider
whether
you're
tying
that
to
the
city
or
the
area?
L
Immediate
income,
also
a
list
of
projects
that
have
been
subject
to
this
provision.
There
was
a
six-month
sort
of
period
when
the
code
was
adopted
that
this
provision
was
not
applied.
Pursuant
to
the
code,
once
we
started
applying
that
there
were
a
fair
number
of
projects,
some
of
these
have
not
been
fully
constructed
or
occupied.
In
fact,
most
of
them
have
not
so
we're
we're
only
recently
getting
into
the
administration
and
enforcement
aspects
of
this
policy.
L
L
L
You
know
one
can
easily
build
studio
units
that
you
know
fit
within
that
category
and
meet
the
criteria
without
necessarily
lowering
the
rents,
all
that
much
that
is
potentially
affordable
housing.
Although
people
have
spoken
to
you
know
needing
more
two
four-bedroom
apartments,
things
of
that
nature.
So
when
we
did
put
out
guidelines
last
year,
we
did
qualify
that
the
units
set
aside
for
the
inclusionary
housing
units
had
to
be
commensurate
with
the
overall
unit
breakdown
within
the
property.
L
So
that
will
be
a
part
of
our
enforcement
guidelines
moving
forward.
You
know
I
do
think
we
need
to
have
a
conversation,
particularly
if
there
is
a
desire
to
expand
this
provision
about
administration
and
enforcement.
You
know
that's
going
to
occur
through
acda,
so
I
can't
speak
to
that
all
that
much
but,
depending
upon
you
know
how
how
much
this
program
is
utilized.
L
You
know
there
could
be
a
significant
enforcement
responsibility
there
and
also
wanted
to
just
stress
the
limits
of
this
sort
of
policy.
You
know
I
do
think
we
need
to
talk
about
a
multi-faceted
policy
to
you
know,
create
more
affordable
housing,
which
is
a
nationwide
issue.
The
costs
of
construction
are
really
outpacing,
the
ability
of
people
to
pay
for
the
the
houses
or
the
rent
or
the
the
units
and
the
rents
that
those
are
required
to
offset
that
construction.
L
So,
in
a
lot
of
these
cases
there
need
to
be
subsidy
and
in
the
case
of
inclusionary
housing,
it's
really
an
internal
cross
subsidy,
so
you're
you're
lowering
rates
of
some
of
the
units
and
to
make
up
for
that
you're,
typically
increasing
the
rates
on
some,
but
there's
only
there's,
there's
well,
there's
a
there's.
There's
a
ceiling
on
how
much
you
can
increase
the
the
units
that
you're
that
you're
bringing
up.
So
I
think
that
has
to
be
considered-
and
I
think,
particularly
the
the
lower
end
of
the
income
scale.
L
You
know
30
percent
of
ami
there's
a
pretty
significant
need
in
albany
for
that
type
of
housing
that
meet
that
need,
and
you
know
the
amount
you
would
have
to
raise
the
the
the
units
to
make
up
for
that.
Low
number
you
know
is
very
difficult.
I
mean
that's.
Those
are
typically
units
that
are
get
gotten
at
through
through
you
know,
federal
housing,
programs
or
low
income
tax
credit
financing,
and
we
do
have
a
number
of
those
in
the
city
too.
I
don't
want
that
to
be
lost.
L
J
J
L
Right
are
we:
are
we
doing
the
administrative
paperwork
for
those?
If
they're,
you
know
essentially
tied
to
a
state
tax
credit
program
that
requires
them
to
be
affordable?
I
think
we
should
maybe
just
articulate
in
the
code
that
should
they
provide
x,
y
and
z,
documentation
that
you
know
they're
regulated
through
another
agency
at
those
rents
are
lower.
Then
maybe
you
know
that
doesn't
fall
within
what,
under
our
oversight,.
L
J
L
No
projects
have
taken
advantage
of
that
so
far.
I
think
some
of
that
may
have
been
because
there
are
other
incentives
that
are
easier
to
meet,
such
as
the
green
blue,
roof
incentive,
which
has
been
adjusted
and
the
blue
roof
component
has
been
taken
out
entirely,
but
even
with
that
change,
we
haven't
seen
anyone
really
taking
advantage
of
this.
So
the
question
is,
you
know:
is
it
not
beneficial
enough?
We
should
probably
revisit
that
and
maybe
craft
an
incentive
that
it
does
sort
of
generate.
L
I
think
the
goal
here
is
to
use
incentives
to
to
get
favorable
outcomes
when
we
wrote
the
code.
You
know
this
was
very
much.
You
know
a
green
code,
so
I
think
a
lot
of
our
incentives
spoke
to
sort
of
you
know
green
initiatives
that
we
wanted
to
encourage,
but
that's
certainly
not
the
limitation
of
incentives.
You
know
there
does
become
a
point
where
no
incentive
is
great
enough,
though,
so
some
of
these
problems
can't
be
solved
through
zoning
as
the
only
tool.
L
And
then
this
is
sort
of
in
between
here
you
know
accessory
dwelling
units.
You
know
this
is
something
that
we
looked
at
when
we
initially
put
forward
the
usdo.
These
are
relatively
small
sized
units
that
often
can
be
accommodated
within
existing
dwelling
over
a
garage
in
some
cases
involves
the
construction
of
a
small
structure
in
a
rear
yard
area.
L
L
In
addition
to
you
know
a
lot
of
times,
the
infrastructure
is
already
really
there,
so
it
can
be
more
cost
effective
to
you
know
and
less
you
know
impactful
on
the
neighborhood.
You
know
it's
also
been
put
forward
in
some
cases.
The
you
know
there
are
a
lot
of
other
benefits
that
could
come
of
this.
L
With
respect
to
you
know,
homeowners,
you
know
being
more
ably
easy
to
pay
their
mortgage
or
to
accommodate
family
member
for
an
older
resident
to
potentially
move
into
the
adu,
and
you
know
rent
out
the
house.
You
know-
and
I
think
there
are
there
are.
A
lot
of
concerns
have
been
expressed
too.
So
we
kind
of
left
this
open-ended
as
something
that
you
know
with
the
right
standards
might
be
able
to
work.
There
is
state
legislation
also
that's
been
introduced.
L
L
You
know,
as
I
read
it
at
the
most
basic
level,
essentially
overrides
the
community's
ability
to
prohibit
these
types
of
units
in
the
in
the
essence
of
creating
affordable
housing
and
opening
up
some
of
those
sort
of
alternative
living
opportunities
that
that
I
was
speaking
to
that
said
that
that's
all
I
had
for
the
presentation,
I'm
happy
to
take
some
questions.
And
again
I
try
not
to
draw
too
many
conclusions,
but
I'm
happy
to
dig
deeper
into
the
data
if
anyone
is
looking
for
additional
information.
C
H
L
Sure
I
did
want
to
add-
and
I
see
richard's
question
too,
but
I
did
want
to
add
that
we
were
able
to
put
together
a
map.
That
kind
of
you
know
shows
all
the
various
projects
and
where
they're
located
in
the
city.
So
if
you
want
to
get
an
idea
of
what
type
of
projects
may
have
you
know
occurred
in
your
neighborhood
or
you
know
types
of
appeals
that
that
you
know
any
information
on
the
individual
cases
feel
free
to
follow
up
with
us.
L
Yeah,
no,
that
hasn't
been
discussed.
I
do
know,
there's
a
separate
tax
classification
code,
yeah
215
for
those,
so
you
know
that
that's
one
of
the
ways
you
know
a
lot
of
people
will
will
have
a
concern
about
them.
Turning
into
two
two
family
dwellings
and
and
being
rented
out
in
the
property
in
its
entirety,
I
think
that's
one
way
to
potentially
prevent
that
from
occurring,
but
also
you
know
another
issue
that
I
think
judy
has
brought
up,
that.
L
I
think
it's
inevitable
that
we
talk
about
as
short-term
rentals,
in
that
you
know
if,
if
all
the
adus
that
were
created
were
solely
for
the
purpose
to
rent
out
an
airbnb,
I
don't
know
that's
necessarily
accomplishing
a
larger
goal
either.
So
you
know
I
don't
know
how
you
initially
address
those
those
issues.
Without
you
know
tackling
tackling
goals.
J
I
don't
know
how
you
control
the
use
once
it's
the
housing
units,
the
housing
unit.
I
don't
know
if
you
put
restrictions
on
it,
it's
only
for
a
family
member
or
it
can't
be
short-term
rental
or
or
anything
of
that
nature,
but
it'd
be
interesting
to
know
how
other
communities
have
dealt
with
that
issue.
C
L
L
So
yeah
for
schedule-
I
I
think
you
know
kind
of
the
most
basic
way
to
lay
it
out-
was
try
and
tackle
one
one,
article
or
or
larger
chapter
per
per
month,
and
I
think
there
are
a
couple
that
will
take
a
little
bit
more
a
little
bit
less.
You
know
judy
had
a
really
good
suggestion
of
you
know,
maybe
tackling
two
and
four
together
and
going
one
three
and
then
two
two
and
four,
which
I
think
makes
sense,
because
there's
a
lot
of
consistent
content
content
between
two
and
four.
L
C
L
Yeah
I
mean
I
I
I
don't
know
you
know,
I
think
the
county
is
on
the
18th,
so
whenever
the
next
the
council
meeting
would
be
that
you
can
adopt
that
you
know
I
could
get
general
code
to
push
a
button
and
have
it
go
live
so
that
would
be
the
easiest
way
to
do
it.
That
would
be
great
if
we
could
do
that.
C
L
H
As
basic
when
you
start
reviewing
something,
it's
good
to
put
it
on
the
agenda,
get
get
the
actual.
I
want
to
say
the
cover
ordinance.
It's
you
know
it's
just
basically
saying
okay,
so
here
we
are
amending
this
usdo
to
read
as
follows:
you
put
in
that
template
language
it
gets
introduced
and
then
and
then
we're
essentially
clearly
putting
the
public
on
notice.
We
are
starting
this
process
of
having
these
regular
meetings
to
actually
look
at
changes
to
the
usdo
to
feed
into
that
particular
legislation.
H
So
it
shouldn't,
be.
I
mean,
I
think,
between
your
office,
jr
and
brett.
It
shouldn't
be
a
big
issue
to
get
that
just
introduced,
so
that
then,
when
we
are
scheduling,
committee
meetings,
we're
referring
to
that
ordinance,
but
then
we're
also
talking
about
what
provisions.
You
know
what
article
in
the
usda
we
are
then
looking
at.
H
H
H
And
it
it
can
to
some
extent
you
know
I
don't
know
if
we're
gonna,
I
don't.
I
don't
think
our
goal
is
to
do
a
repeal
and
replace.
We
may
go
wind
up
going
that
direction
because
keeping
track
of
the
track
changes
can
be
challenging
in
the
documents.
But
but
we
have
you
know.
Essentially
we
have
the
existing
ordinance
for
the
repeal
and
replace,
and
it
can
be
something
maybe
like
that
you
know
taking
off
from
that
particular
legislation
or
the
prior
version
of
this
legislation.
C
So
if
people
could
take
a
look
at
judy,
I
thought
you
must
have
looked
at
planning
board
schedules
and
everything,
because
the
dates
look
good
that
you
picked.
But
I
don't
know
if
other
committee
members
yeah,
I
was
having
trouble
even
finding
the
calendar
on
the
new
website,
so
alfredo
and
joyce
is
in
here
tom.
I
see
you,
you
could
take
a
look
at
the
dates
that
judy
set
out
and
youtube
brad.
I
don't
know
if
you've
had
a
chance
to
glance
at
them,
so
I.
B
H
H
G
K
B
H
So
I've
suggested
june
30th
as
being
one
of
the
caucus
nights
for
us
to
do
a
general
briefing
to
the
to
the
full
council
and
then
another
one
on
september
1st,
and
I'm
hoping
that
by
june
30th
we
will
be
having
something
coming
together
and
a
clearer
plan
of
action
with
regard
to
what
we're
doing,
but
that's
you
know
so,
I've
thrown
this
out
and
here's.
You
know
the
thing
it's.
I
want
to
reserve
a
whole
bunch
of
dates.
H
L
No,
but
I
I
I
think,
like
for
our
stat,
I
just
need
to
get
a.
I
need
to
get
a
game
plan
worked
out.
I
mean
the
dates
are
helpful
and
you
know
to
sort
of
get
a
protocol
in
place
internally,
because
I
think
you
know
just
given
the
the
night
meetings
and
stuff
we
may
have
to
adjust
some
schedules
and
just
to
get
a
schedule
working
internally
I
mean
the
15th
is
pretty
tight.
I
think,
if
you,
you
think
the
num.
The
date
I
saw
was
the
22nd
which
might
be
doable.
C
H
C
H
And
maybe,
and
maybe
at
that
point
you'll
have
one
or
two
things.
You
also
want
to
ask
us
about
with
regard
to
where
you're
going
on
article
2
or
article
3.,
whichever
you
know
at
that
at
that
point
you
know
I,
the
big
thing
is
I've
thrown
out
some
specific
dates
to
get
accomplished
to
a
month,
and
you
know,
and
let
us
you
know,
get
moving
forward
on
it,
how
we
then
divvy
up
the
work?
You
know
what
I've
suggested
there
is,
you
know
incredibly
flexible.