►
From YouTube: 9-26-23 Planning Board Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
We're
not
asking
that
all
of
planning
board
collectively
vote;
rather
this
would
be
as
individuals
you
can
say.
Yes,
I
support
this
would
be
as
individuals
you
can
say,
yes,.
I
support
this
would
be
as
individuals,
you
can
say,
yes,.
I
support
this
request
to
council,
in
the
same
way
that
individual
board
members
are
allowed
to
endorse
candidates
for
council,
for
instance.
C
C
A
A
D
A
E
A
E
D
D
D
E
H
I
E
A
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
A
J
F
A
A
A
A
A
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
D
D
D
K
K
K
K
K
A
K
K
K
K
A
A
A
K
K
F
I
A
I
A
K
K
K
J
K
A
K
K
K
K
J
J
K
K
K
K
K
J
L
L
L
K
K
K
D
D
D
K
K
K
K
K
K
G
G
K
K
K
I
K
A
K
K
K
A
A
K
K
A
A
A
I
I
A
A
K
Okay.
we're
not
trying
to
incentivize
anything.
right
now,.
So
if
you
back
up
a
couple
of
slides,,
don't
don't
do
that
slow,,
but
you'll
remember..
We
said
that
all
all
4
sale
units
provided
on
site,,
which
again
is
not
going
to
be
very
many,
so
will
be
priced
at
middle
income.
And
yet
we
have
this
ones.
K
K
A
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
A
K
K
K
A
K
Alright,
then.
they're
not
they're,
not
building
for
sale,
middle
income
housing.
and
there
is
no,
you
know,.
One
of
the
challenges
with
that
type
of
housing
is
that
there
aren't
type
fund
like
all
the
funds
I
just
mentioned,.
None
of
those
can
be
used
for
4
sale,,
like
all
the
funds
I
just
mentioned,.
None
of
those
can
be
used
for
for
sale,
mail-income,
housing.
A
K
K
E
K
L
L
L
L
L
J
L
L
L
J
D
D
D
K
E
K
L
L
K
A
A
A
A
A
E
A
L
L
L
L
A
D
D
D
D
D
K
K
K
K
L
L
L
L
L
L
D
D
D
D
L
L
A
yeah,,
just
a
couple
more
slides
for
us
to
take
a
look
at
the
next
steps
is
that
we
will
go
tomorrow
to
the
housing
advisory
board
and
also
give
them
the
same
update
we're
giving
to
you
tonight
about
what
council
has
directed
us
to
do,
and
you
know
going
through
in
more
detail
about
what
council
has
directed
us
to
do,
and
you
know
going
through
in
more
detail
of
the
code.
Changes.
K
A
G
I
think
that's
an
entirely
appropriate.
to
make
given
more
information.,
but
my
question
is,
has
any
comparison
been
done
or
any
information
provided
to
any
comparison
been
done,
or
any
information
provided
to
city
council
about
you
know,,
given
that
we
still
do
want
to
create
middle
income,
home
ownership
opportunities,
through.
G
G
G
K
K
G
G
You
know,
for
example,
the
scatter
site
acquisition.
and
use
that
as
the
comparison
rather
than
the
ownership
to
rental,
because
that's
a
different
outcome
and
maybe
council
is,
is
happy
with
saying
we're
not
going
to
put
as
much
into
pursuing
ownership.
But
if
we're
still
going
to
pursue
ownership,
it
feels
like
we
should
be.
Comparing
ownership
to
ownership
and
the
costs
of
this
program
versus
this
alternative
versus
ownership
versus
rental..
L
L
L
L
L
L
G
G
G
L
L
L
M
K
A
J
K
K
K
K
K
J
J
K
K
K
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
K
Yeah,,
it
means
that
they're,
basically
on
the
on
the
edge
of
not
happening.
feasible,
means
that
all
the
investors,
you
know,.
So
it's
not
just
the
developer,.
It's
all
of
his
finance
people
and
you
know,
there's
a
lot
of
people
involved
in
a
development
and
it's
a
business
and
they
have
to
make
money
or
else.
Why
would
they
do
it?.
K
K
A
A
N
N
We
should
give
up
on
that,
and
essentially
they
did
that
and
their
september
seventh
meeting,
because
they
it's
more
expensive
to
develop
middle
income
housing
than
it
is
permanently
affordable,
housing
that
is
counterintuitive
to
a
lot
of
people,
because
you
think
of
middle
income.
Housing
doesn't
have
to
be
as
inexpensive
as
affordable,
housing.
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
B
A
A
A
A
A
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
J
J
J
J
J
J
So
that's
one
thing
that
I
would
like
to.
getting
here
the
other
thing-
and
I
raised
this
in
my
email
and
I'm
less.
I
guess
passionate
about
this,
but
this
there's
this
provision
9
13
9,
which,
as
I
understand
it,
allows
someone
to
build
a
house
and
then
there's
this
provision,
9
13
9,
which,
as
I
understand
it,
allows
someone
to
build
a
house
and
then
defer
cache
and
loo
on
it
and
first
of.
J
A
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
G
I
I
J
E
K
D
M
M
M
M
D
D
D
D
D
D
A
Okay,
thank
you.
and
my
comments.
Are,.
I
completely
agree
with
lisa.
and
I'm
gonna
propose
a
separate
motion
so
that
it
doesn't
get
tangled
up
in
the
the
main
motion
recommend
to
city
council
that
explored
that
it
explored
the
diversion
of
more
cash
and
new
funds
for
the
purpose
of
additional
scatter
site
acquisition
in
the
city.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
L
L
A
Okay,
would
someone
like
to
make
the
main
motion?
I'll
just
do
it.
okay.
the
motion.
Language
planning
board
recommends
that
city
council
adopt
ordinance,
8
6
0,
one
amending
chapter
9,
13
inclusionary
housing,
section
9,
dash
to
dash
14
site
review
and
section
9
dash
16
dash
one
general
definitions,
brc,
1,981
modifying
affordable
housing
requirements
and
incentives
and
setting
forth
related
details.
G
J
J
G
J
G
M
D
J
A
I
A
D
G
G
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
A
A
A
K
K
A
J
I
think
that
somebody
building
a
4,000
square
foot
house.
and
is
paying.
2
and
a
half
1
million
3
million
dollars
just
to
construct
the
house,.
They
can
afford
$250,000
of
cash,
and
I
think
it's
completely
appropriate
to
request
that
of
them.
They
will.
They
will
have
gardeners
and
cleaners
and
workers
coming
in
all
the
time
and
put
very
significant,
burdens
on
our
housing.
J
J
M
It
will
create
incentives.,
it
will
basically
inflate
the
entire
single
family
home
market..
I
don't
I
don't
know
again.
This
is
just
a
reaction
to
what
you
said.
So
I
I
just
think
we
should
be
careful
with
that
stuff
because
it
might
have
an
unintended
consequence
of
raising
the
entire
market,
because
it's
not
2
to
3
million
dollars
of
raising
the
entire
market,
because
it's
not
2
to
3
million
dollars
to
build
the
entire
market,
because
it's
not
2
to
3
million
dollars
to
build
a
4,000
square.
M
M
A
M
M
K
K
K
M
K
K
K
K
K
L
L
A
A
J
A
J
G
G
G
G
K
K
K
K
K
K
A
E
E
A
A
A
G
A
L
A
A
A
A
D
D
D
A
A
G
G
G
G
H
But
then
add.
a
comma
after
ownership.
and
say
like
including.,
potentially
or
something
or
including
scatter
side
acquisition.
That
way,
you
kind
of
keep
all
the
wording
ahead.
Fine,
so
motion
recommended
to
city
council
that
it
direct
city
manager
deliver
diversion,
but
more
cl
funds
for
the
purpose
of
additional
medical
income.
Home.
H
G
G
Yeah.
and
I
think
that
there
might
be
other
options,
such
as
encouraging
home
donation
or
encouraging
duplexes
and
triplexes
that
are
deed,
restricted
that
don't
necessarily
stick
to
diversion
of
cache
and
loopholes,,
which
is
why
I
suggested
changing
the
wording.
The
way
that
I
did,
but
I
completely
appreciate
what
you're
trying
to
do
to
keep
it.
Simple.