►
From YouTube: November 17, 2022, Claims Committee, Public Works Committee, and Ordinance Committee Meetings
Description
November 17, 2022
Claims Committee
Public Works Committee
Ordinance Committee (Audio Only for Ordinance Committee)
A
I'll
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
of
the
minutes
of
the
September
and
the
October
claims
committee
meetings
so
moved.
Second,
all
in
favor
say:
aye
aye
aye
eyes
have
it
at
this
time.
There
are
no
business
before
the
committee
carried
over.
At
this
time,
I
will
entertain
a
motion
to
enter
into
executive
session
pursuant
section
42
46
582,
pending
litigation,
so
moved.
A
D
B
D
Yes,
the
first
item
on
the
agenda
is
committee,
business
matters
carried
over
and
we
have
something
that
I
put
on
the
agenda
for
the
Garden
City
Alliance
people
and
director
pazulo
I.
So
graciously
come
to
offer
to
speak
about
this
for
five
minutes
about
it's
about
an
update
on
Costco
being
developed
in
Chapel
View
in
in
traffic
concerns,
so
director
pazulo.
If
you
would
please
speak,
thank
you
very
much.
F
My
pleasure,
okay,
first,
congratulations!
All
of
you
on
your
your
recent
victories.
It's
a
crazy
season,
then
it's
finally
over
okay.
So
let's
talk
about
soccer,
NASA
Crossroads,
so
for
Costco
there
is
no
proposal
for
Costco.
At
this
point,
there's
no
further
information.
That's
been
submitted
other
than
the
application.
That
was
what
was
that
2016-2017.
So
we
haven't
got
anything
new
to
have
been
discussions,
though,
at
this
point,
the
master
plan
for
that
big
box,
whether
it's
Costco
or
whoever.
F
The
condition
on
that
was
that
the
applicant
would
need
to
come
back
to
the
playing
commission
for
an
ad
hoc
stage.
They
need
to
come
back
before
they
can
even
go
to
the
next
phase,
which
is
preliminary.
They
have
to
do
this
ad
hoc
stage,
which
was
specifically
conditioned
on
them.
Looking
at
traffic
in
the
area,
traffic
and
studying
all
of
the
intersections
in
the
area
for
the
impacts
on
the
on
the
road
Network.
F
F
F
So
you
know,
37
has
finally
started
to
take
shape
that
was
years
and
years
in
the
making.
So
quite
a
bit
of
the
status
quo
has
changed,
since
we
did
that.
So
all
this
is
going
to
have
to
be.
You
know
reviewed
in
in
full
detail,
and
it
would
be.
You
know
fully
engineered
detail
at
that
point
and
then
we
would
we
move
forward.
So.
G
D
E
Through
the
chat,
common
I
appreciate
you
putting
this
on
there
and
we
all
know
something's
going
to
go
there.
It's
not
going
to
stay
a
pile
of
dirt
and
traffic
is
a
huge
concern,
especially
in
that
area.
The
development
has
been
wonderful
there,
it's
helpful
for
the
city,
but
we
have
to
have
the
infrastructure
to
support
it.
Well,
people
would
are
going
to
stop
going
to
these
places.
E
Sockonastics
sakanasa
crossro
is
a
tough
road
right
now
it's
nearing
it's
near
capacity,
I
would
I
would
say
we
don't
want
any
more
traffic
in
or
out
of
there.
So
whatever
new
comes
we
have
to,
we
have
to
find
a
new
way
to
move
that
traffic
through
I.
Don't
think
that
the
route
37
updates
are
the
end-all
be-all,
but
I
think
it.
It
immensely
helps
the
situation
right
just
and
also
that
that
lane
that
line
on
Pontiac
Avenue
down
to
down
past
Burger
King.
F
And
I'd
just
like
to
say:
we've
already
approved
the
master
plan
for
the
big
box
there.
So
that's
already
gotten
master
plan
approval.
This
is
a
big
issue
for
the
plane.
Commission,
that's
why
they
took
at
the
time
it
was
an
unprecedented
step
to
make
them
go
into
an
ad
hoc
phase,
a
phase
that
doesn't
exist
in
the
code
or
on
the
state
law.
They're
saying
that
you
can't
even
can't
even
apply
until
you
get
this
next
phase
done.
F
I
would
say
the
fountains
when
we
say
the
fountains,
that's
the
site
between
Chapel,
View
and
100.
Stockton
asset
is
really
the
last
net
generator
of
traffic
on
along
this
this
stretch,
so
you
know
the
stretch,
has
a
lot
of
activity
has
a
lot
of
activity?
Has
you
know,
literally,
you
know
close
to
a
couple
million
square
feet
of
activity
in
this
area.
So
when
we
talk
about
congestion,
when
we
talk
about
traffic
moving,
there's
a
lot
of
bit
jobs,
there's
a
lot
of
businesses.
F
There
I
think
one
thing
that
people
are
upset
about
when
we
talk
about
traffic
is
that
traffic
for
no
reason
like.
Why
does
why?
Is
it
congestion
when
this
should
be
none?
When
we
have
a
couple
million
square
feet
of
activity?
Yeah,
that's
that's
kind
of
a
reason
why
we
can't
expect
a
buzz
to
remove
sock,
an
asset
like
there's.
F
No,
you
know
no
stopping,
so
we
have
to
calibrate
our
expectations
in
terms
of
this
is
you
know
these
decisions
have
been
made
for
for
larger
scale
impact
developments,
especially
100
sakanas,
like
top
top
golf,
all
the
all
the
nine
yards,
but
we
also
factor
in
things
like
Citizens
Bank
manufacturing,
not
manufacturing
industrial
facility.
That
is
closed.
That
was
four
thousand
employees
in
one
in
one
shot.
F
F
D
H
Evening,
everyone
and
congratulations
and
look
forward
to
the
incumbents.
You
know
we
have
differences
and
all
that,
but
everyone
is
a
good
person
on
this
Council
and
everyone's
heart
is
in
the
right
place
and
just
having
that
is,
is
something
to
look
forward
to
and
I'm
sure
that
the
people
made
the
right
choices.
H
So
we'll
certainly
look
forward
to
working
with
you
and
ever
in
the
members
that
I'm
here
this
evening
and
that's
with
all
sincerity
yeah
after
the
Budlong
pool
with
within
the
week
or
two
we
should
have
the
architectural
drawings
if
you
will
or
Renditions
of
of
a
pool
concept
and
I
believe
along
with
that.
Maybe
some
cost
estimates.
So
we
don't
have
that
now.
I
think
we've
reported
the
last
time
that
it's
sukosha
sukosha
is
doing
some
drawings
with
the
instruction
from
director
bernado.
I
D
H
That's
a
councilwoman
Jermaine's
also
she'll
be
she's,
probably
noticed
it,
but
it
has
been
installed
an
expensive
one,
as
we
mentioned,
because
you
had
to
cross
two
streets,
we
had
to
construct
the
sidewalk,
it
has
been
completed.
We
got
it
and
got
it
in
before
the
the
winter
weather.
So
it's
like
it's
installed
concrete
the
handicap
accessible
pads
that
are
in
place
along
with
the
sidewalk,
so
it's
completed.
H
H
D
D
L
You,
my
name,
is
Pauly
DeRosa,
97,
Cypress
Drive
good
evening
council,
president
and
council
members
I
just
wanted
to
say.
I
do
appreciate
doc,
director
pazulo's
remarks,
and
we
do
understand
that
the
potential
for
Costco
is
in
the
far
distant
future,
but
it
is
important
that
we
address
this
now
and
I
do
want
to
make
a
statement
in
2000
and
2001.
L
L
So
we
are
a
bit
perplexed
about
how
the
potential
for
a
Costco
warehouse
some
20
years
later
would
be
an
acceptable
development.
Given
the
fact
vehicular
traffic
has
increased
in
ways
we
could
not
have
imagined
in
Chapel,
View
and
Garden
City
Center
have
both
seen
intense
growth
over
the
years
in
2016,
there
was
mention
of
a
big
box
store,
such
as
a
Home
Depot
in
Lowe's
Mr
Kelly
coats.
Now,
president
of
the
carbonado
group
stated
at
that
time
quote.
L
Those
particular
stores
would
not
fit
the
environment
that
copy
NATO
seeks
end
of
quote,
but
at
a
planned
Commission
meeting
in
2017.
The
traffic
study
for
the
fountains
was
to
include
the
following:
intersections
Sacramento
Crossroad
at
Chapel
View
phase,
two
slash
Costco,
West
driveway,
and
also
the
same
for
a
Costco
east
driveway.
L
We
believe
there
will
be
a
significant
surge
in
transient
Vehicles
as
well.
I
will
repeat
myself
once
again,
along
with
Topgolf.
The
addition
of
a
Costco
warehouse
is
over
development
at
its
worst
residents
demand
their
council
members
give
this
potential
major
Land
Development
intense
consideration
and
scrutiny,
and
do
the
right
thing.
L
D
D
E
D
Okay
can
I
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
block
before
we
before
the
motion.
I
just
want
to
tell
you
that
every
time
we
have
pull
requests
I
do
talk
to
director
Bernardo
and
he
sends
out
Justin
the
engineer
to
check
all
the
locations
to
make
sure
that
there
aren't
any
obstacles
or
anything
that's
been
in
the
way
and
I
have
not
received
any
correspondence
on
any
of
these
polls
like
I
do
sometimes
so
just
before
so
do
I
have
a.
Would
you
like
to
speak
director
Marty.
B
D
I
D
H
H
Would
be
glad
to
hear
it
it'll
be
quick
yeah.
There
were
basically
three
utilities
doing
work
there
for
sewer
gas
and
water.
The
sewer
slip
lining.
It's
called.
Basically,
it's
like
putting
a
having
a
catheterization
in
your
heart.
It's
it's!
Basically,
it's
a
new.
It's
a
newer
process,
less
expensive.
Instead
of
having
complete
removal
and
installation
of
facilities.
Now
that's
been
completed
in
terms
of
Province
water.
H
They
had
some
work
that
needed
to
be
done,
describing
it
as
95
complete,
basically
just
removing
some
some
steel
plates
and
some
patches,
but
that
work
will
be
done
very
very
shortly,
probably
within
a
week
or
so
as
to
you
know,
there's
also
some
gas
lines
that
require
some
work.
Some
gas
leaks,
it's
probably
going
to
take
over
the
winter
time.
D
H
H
If
I
have
it
correctly,
if
the
utility
companies
initiate
it-
and
it
is
not
for
tie-ins
tie-ins
would
be
a
different
story
where
patching
is
acceptable,
but
if
they
were
to
you
know
to
do
the
the
work
and
their
schedule,
then
the
answer
is
absolutely.
Yes.
We've
asked
to
expedite
that.
If
you
will
so
I'm,
not
quite
sure
and
any
work
in
the
area
we
wanted
to
complete,
so
we'd
have
to
find
out
to
be
sometimes
there's
a
trade-off
with
with
them.
E
B
E
N
B
E
E
C
N
N
G
E
Thank
you
at
this
time
we
are
going
to
take
public
comment
on
each
issue
separately
and
the
first
matter
before
us
tonight
is
ordinance
9-22-01,
and
that
is
the
change
of
zone
of
747
Pontiac
Avenue,
in
which
I
sponsored
I
just
wanted
to
to
take
take
a
minute
to
explain
any
zone
change
that
anyone
puts
forth.
They
need
to
have
a
sponsor
on
so
generally,
the
legal
department
will
call
one
of
us
if
it's
in
their
area,
solicitor
Ralston
had
thought
this
was
in
Ward
six,
so
he
called
me.
E
I
am
happy
to
sponsor
anyone's
ordinance
that
has
no
inference
as
to
what
I
will
that
whether
I
will
approve
it
or
not.
It's
just
a
courtesy
so
that
everybody
has
an
opportunity
to
be
heard.
So
with
that
I
understand,
there
is
a
presentation
that
the
planning
department
wants
to
do,
and
director
pizzelle.
F
Q
O
All
right,
good
evening,
committee
members,
sorry
for
the
technical
delays.
We
thought
it
would
be
valuable
just
to
give
very
brief
five-minute
staff
overview
of
this
ordinance
petition
and
provide
you
with
some
of
the
slides
that
give
you
some
graphic
examples
of
surrounding
conditions,
as
well
as
a
site
plan.
Any
of
these
slides
I'll
move
through
quickly
but
they're
here
as
a
resource
so
that
you
can
revisit
any
members
of
the
public
or
the
applicant
can
revisit
as
they
see
fit.
O
What's
before
you
tonight
is
an
ordinance
for
zone
change.
The
subject
property
is
747.
Pontiac
Avenue
the
zone
changes
to
change
it
from
the
A6,
which
is
a
single
family,
Zone
designation
to
C2,
with
conditions
and
I'll
get
into
the
details
of
what
those
are
as
we
move
forward,
but
essentially
the
applicant,
in
conjunction
with
the
zone,
change
has
proposed
a
master
plan
application
that
Master
Plan
application
is
seeking
to
re-utilize
this
existing
office
building
for
apartment
complexes,
they're
seeking
for
a
total
of
18
apartment
units.
O
They
would
be
a
mix
of
one
bedroom
and
Studio
units
and
there
is
a
requirement
that
15
percent
of
the
units
would
be
affordable,
housing,
deed,
restricted
as
affordable
housing
to
meet
the
state
requirements
so
moving
through
the
graphics
actually
before
we
get
into
any
of
the
visuals
just
for
the
purposes
of
this
committee
as
well
as
anyone
interested.
This
is
the
review
process
that
has
taken
place
as
well
as
where
it
will
go
from
here.
This
has
been
subject
to
a
pre-application,
a
joint
sitewalk
between
the
council
and
the
plan
commission.
O
Just
two
nights
ago,
it
was
reviewed
by
the
plan
commission
for
both
an
ordinance
recommendation,
which
was
a
positive
wreck
as
well
as
the
master
plan
application,
and
it
was
approved
at
the
master
plan
stage.
That
leads
us
to
tonight,
which
is
the
ordinance
committee,
and
then
you
can
see
the
schedule
moving
forward,
certainly
ordinance
consideration,
and
should
the
ordinance
petition
be
successful,
it
will
move
through
several
more
series
of
review
of
the
development
scheme
itself
through
both
of
the
development
plan,
Review
Committee
and
the
plan
Commission
foreign,
some
brief
Graphics.
O
O
There's
an
aerial
3D
view
of
that.
In
a
sense,
the
the
petition
is
is
seeking
to
keep
that
existing
building
there
and
just
reutilize
the
the
existing
footprint.
The
existing
shell
of
the
building.
All
of
the
changes
to
the
building
would
be
interior.
There
would
be
no
new
buildings
added
as
part
of
this
petition.
O
There's
a
street
view
to
give
you
a
better
sense
of
how
that
looks
from
the
street
on
Pontiac.
This
is
a
zoning
map,
so
this
is
important
to
consider.
You
can
see
the
subject.
Property
and
the
surrounding
properties
are
all
zoned,
the
same
they're,
all
zoned
A6.
Again,
that's
a
single
family.
Zoning
designation
I
would
note,
there's
a
series
of
non-conforming
properties
in
the
area.
This
current
property
is
non-conforming,
it's
an
office
use.
So
that's
that's
essentially
not
consistent
with
the
existing
Zone.
O
Here's
the
future
land
use
map.
This
is
from
our
comprehensive
plan.
It
outlines
what
the
city's
vision
is
for
this
property
moving
forward.
You'll
note
that
it's
pink,
whereas
a
lot
of
the
surrounding
properties
are
yellow,
yellow,
indicates
that
the
city's
Vision
through
the
comprehensive
plan
is
to
keep
that
residential.
The
pink
indicates
that
the
city
had
indicated
this
property
could
be
rezoned
to
Neighborhood
Commercial
Services,
so
I
would
say
that
out
of
the
range
of
neighborhood
Commercial
Services,
that
indicates
a
C1,
C2
or
C3
zone
are
appropriate.
O
Those
would
be
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan.
What
the
applicant
is
seeking
is
a
C2
designation.
So
in
effect
this
is
bringing
the
property
into
greater
conformance
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
that
those
C2
condition
does
have
or
the
C2
does
have
those
conditions.
The
two
conditions
are
that
you
get
the
uses
a
lot
at
C2
with
the
ability
for
this
applicant
to
seek
the
18
residential
units
and
also
that
15
of
the
units
should
be
deed,
restricted
as
affordable.
O
O
This
is
a
staff
analysis.
It's
a
wordy
slide.
Some
of
the
content
I've
already
covered
I'll,
just
note
that
we
have
reviewed
this
for
consistency
with
the
city's
comprehensive
plan.
It
is
consistent
with
that
future
land
use
map.
That
was,
that
map
that
allocated
this.
With
that
pink
designation,
neighbor
of
Commercial
Services,
we
found
it's
also
consistent
with
the
totality
of
policies
within
the
plan's
housing
element,
which
is
supportive
of
density
bonuses
and
affordable
housing
and
circumstances
like
this.
This
project
is
unique
because
there
is
very
limited
development
that's
being
proposed.
O
The
plan
commission
recommendation
that
was
voted
and
approved
just
on
Tuesday
night
and
it's
a
wordy
slide,
but
it
basically
says
based
on
the
required
findings,
that's
the
finding
that
it
is
consistent
with
the
comprehensive
plan
and
that
it
adequately
addresses
the
purposes.
That's
detailed
in
the
zoning
purposes.
Section
that's
1704.010.
O
An
additional
context
here
is
that,
based
on
the
fact
that
the
proposal
is
a
reuse
of
an
existing
building
with
no
new
building
additions
or
major
site
changes
and
based
on
the
fact
that
the
proposal
includes
15,
affordable
housing
to
further
the
city's
State
at
affordable
housing
goals
and
then
upon
motion
the
city
plane,
commission
voted.
It
was
not
a
unanimous
vote,
but
did
vote
six
to
two
to
send
a
positive
recommendation
on
this
ordinance
to
the
city
council.
O
E
I
O
Give
you
my
best
description
of
what
I
think
their
reasoning
was
I,
don't
want
to
put
words
in
their
mouth
that
don't
see
either
of
them
here
tonight.
I
think
that
it's
fair
to
say,
while
the
majority
of
the
commission
felt
and
agreed
that
this
you
know
was
consistent
with
the
spirit
of
the
comprehensive
plan
and
that
it
was
compatible
with
the
neighborhood
I
think
they
had
perhaps
didn't
have
that
same
feeling.
They
felt
that
it
perhaps
wasn't
compatible
with
the
neighborhood
I.
Think
really.
O
I
So
thank
you
for
that.
My
other
question
is
I
think
you
had
mentioned
there
is
that
condition
right
where
you
they
are
coming
before
us
for
that
zone,
change
with
a
18,
I,
think,
apartment
or
I
think,
as
noted
in
the
documents
as
well,
possibly
21,
18,
one
bedroom
apartments
and
then
the
rest
of
Studios.
O
It's
an
important
thing
to
just
to
know
and
distinguish
so
the
applicant
is
actually
only
seeking
18
units
tonight
and
they
have
a
master
plan
proposal
that
is
only
seeking
18
units,
City
staff
and
reviewing
this
in
an
abundance
of
caution.
While
the
applicant
was
conceiving
what
this
could
be
and
they
were
drafting
their
ordinance,
City
staff
said
you
may
want
to
add
the
ability
to
develop
more
units,
and
if
they
were
to
do
that
there
would
they
would
need
to
come
back
in
front
of
us
for
more
development
review
process.
O
I
think
this
was
the
idea
to
give
them
a
bit
of
a
buffer
above
what
their
ask
was
that
applicant
is
not
seeking
21
units
at
this
time.
They're
only
seeking
the
18
out
of
the
18
units
15
would
be
one
bedrooms,
three
would
be
studio
and
that
that
applicant
may
change
that
mix,
but
they
know
it's
going
to
be
one
bedrooms
and
Studios,
and
we
know
out
of
the
entire
18
mix,
3
or
15
percent.
It
would
be
affordable.
O
O
Well,
no
they're
seeking
the
ordinance
right
now
is
baked
in
the
seek
21,
but
if
they
wanted
to
up
from
their
current
ask
of
18,
they
would
need
to
come
in
front
of
the
city,
but
that
would
go
in
front
of
the
plan.
Commission,
essentially,
the
zone
changes
is,
is
asking
for
a
bit
of
a
buffer,
the
applicant's
not
seeking
that
buffer
at
this
time,
and
they
may
say
that
they
don't
see
it
in
their
Vision
in
the
future.
I
think
when
they
were
considering
it.
O
E
O
E
I
I
really
really
would
like
to
know.
Okay
wait
a
minute.
Let
me
ask
the
question
sure
sure
why
and
is
it
even
in
your
powers
to
say,
hey,
build
more
they're
asking
for
18..
We
know
we
have
a
neighborhood
who's
upset
about
this
and
our
city
staff
says
hey.
Why
don't
you
do
do
more
I?
Don't
that's
really.
F
Well,
based
upon
well,
it's
we're
reviewing
this
based
upon
the
mix
of
the
site.
Single
in
studio.
Studio
would
have
less
parking
requirements
if
they
wanted
to
change
their
mix
to
more
Studio
than
single
a
single
bedroom.
We
would
have
essentially
what
the
site
would
work
for
parking
for
those
those
types
of
units.
F
We
typically
do
this
to
give
applicants
Headroom
whenever
we
do
zone
changes
so
that
we
don't
have
to
go
through
this
rezoning
process
again,
Doug's
absolutely
right.
Their
proposal
is
18,
but
if
they
change
the
mix
to
more
studio
and
they
could
fit
out
with
the
with
the
limitations
on
the
site
for
parking,
then
they
would
be
able
to
do
the
21.
again.
That's
not
the
ask.
This
is
common
whenever
we've
done
special
rezones
Garden
City,
Chapel
View,
it's
very
it's
very
common
for
us
to
say.
F
If
you're
asking
for
50
foot
height,
why
don't
we
put
60
into
the
code
just
so
that
we
don't
have
to
go
back
to
the
city
council
if
it's
51
or
52.,
because
these
are
zone
changes?
These
aren't
variances
so
that
that
sums
it
up
it's
within
your
purview
to
just
you
know,
change
a
number
backed
out
18
and
staff
I.
F
O
So
based
on
15,
if
they
had
18
units
15
of
them,
would
mean
that
that
three
of
those
18
need
to
be.
If
they
actually
ended
up
building
more
I,
think
if
they
got
21,
then
they
need
to
give
us
four
affordables.
So
essentially,
if
the
applicant
kept
building,
the
15
remains
static
and
we
always
round
up
if
that
makes
sense,.
O
Once
you
trigger,
you
know
the
need
to
go
more
than
or
if
it
doesn't
hit.
Even
you
round
up,
so
they
always
I
know
at
21
units
if
they
did
build
that
actually
they'd
owe
us
four
of
those
21
would
need
to
be
affordable
and
keep
in
mind
it's
not
for
additional,
it's
four
of
the
unit.
So
out
of
the
18,
it's
not
three
additional,
it's
three
of
the
18
that
need
to
be
affordable
and.
I
O
O
More
units,
so
if
this
was
not
to
pass,
then
they
are
left
without
the
ability
to
do
apartment
complex
at
all,
multi-family
at
all,
so
there's
no
version
of
putting
apartment
units
in
that
building
that
could
move
forward.
What
they
would
do-
and
this
was
part
of
the
discussion
we
had
two
nights
ago-
was
the
developer-
was
currently
you
know
working
on
renovations
to
that
building.
They
certainly
want
to
bring
that
building
into
greater
utilization.
That
building
has
needed
some
help
for
a
while
and
they're,
injecting
some
money
into
it.
O
O
O
If
the
zone
change
doesn't
pass,
their
Vision
I
think
the
developer
bought
this
with
the
vision
to
want
to
do
Apartments.
But
they
understand
that
if
the
this
zone
change
doesn't
pass,
then
they'll
work
with
the
next
highest
and
best
used,
which
I
think
they
would
they
would
utilize
it
try
to
fully
occupy
it
for
office.
Okay,.
I
I
O
It's
a
good
distinction
to
bring
up
if
this
zone
change
does
pass,
but
the
developer
you
know
decides
they
don't
want
to
move
forward
with
that
concept,
then
they
can
move
forward
with
other
uses
allowed
in
the
C2,
so
the
C2
grants
them
a
range
of
other
uses,
the
developer's
vision
and
they're
moving
forward,
and
that's
why
we
tie
the
plan
commission
decisions
to
the
ordinance.
The
developer's
vision
is
a
specific
one
for
the
apartment,
complex
they've
spent
their
time
and
energy.
O
Investing
into
that
con
concept
and
they've
essentially
reached
the
first
stage
of
approval
of
that
concept
with
us
now.
Moving
forward
is
contingent
upon
this
zone
change
passing
but
they're,
giving
you
the
vision
of
what
they
would
do
with
the
property
which
C2
does
allow
multi-family
by
right.
So
essentially,
even
if
this
passed
and
they
didn't
build
18
units,
they
could
still
build
other
multi,
another
range
of
multi
or
other
commercial.
Their
vision
is
to
build
this
with
the
18
units
based
on
their
research.
I
H
I
Thank
you
and
then
I'll
give
it
back
to
you,
chairman
and
I'll.
Ask
my
other
question
afterwards,
if
you
have
remarkable
for
it
thing
down,
step
questions,
so
my
other
question
is
the
way
it's
been
proposed
in
terms
of
the
planning
that
we
have.
That's
that
yellow
lot.
That
was
highlighted.
That
is
the
actual
lot,
but
there
is
another
additional
like
lot
right
behind
it.
That's
not
part
of
this
yeah.
O
I
can
show
you
so
essentially,
if
you
see
that
yellow
highlight
that's
the
subject
property,
this
property
had
been
subdivided
earlier
this
year.
They
did
break
off
one
lot.
It's
don't
think
my
cursor
is
it
there.
It
is
it's
showing.
Do
you
see
this
lot
right
here?
Yes,
that
lot
had
been
subdivided
and
that
lot,
the
applicant's
intent
and
they
they
own,
both
the
lots
and
their
intent
is
to
build
a
single
family
home
on
that
that
single
parcel.
O
That
parcel
does
me
code
that
parcel
fits
with
the
the
neighborhood,
so
their
goal
was
to
build
a
single
form
family
home
there
and
then
utilize
the
remaining
section
which
that
subdivision
has
occurred.
So
now
we're
only
focused
on
the
singular
lot,
the
yellow
lot.
That's
in
front
of
you,
that's
the
only
lot.
That's
subject
to
this
zone
change
and
they're
using
that
single
lot
to
basically
accomplish
their
project,
it
leaves
them
with
enough
parking.
O
So
essentially
our
code
calls
out
that
for
multi-family
Apartments,
you
owe
us
two
parking
spaces
for
every
unit.
So,
although
these
you
know
units
are
smaller
scale
and
they're,
one
bedrooms
they're
giving
us
two
parking
spaces
for
every
unit
and
that
is
accounted
for
even
with
a
bonus
extra
space.
The
OS
36
they're,
giving
us
37
within
the
the
confines
of
that
lot
highlighted
there
in
yellow.
Hopefully
that
answers
your
question.
It.
I
O
O
They
would
owe
us
a
full
landscape
plan
at
the
next
stage
of
development,
as
well
as
all
of
the
engineering
details,
stormwater
reports
and
the
like,
and
they
could
certainly
I
think
the
applicants
could
speak
to
their
vision
for
landscaping.
We've
reviewed
some
of
their
other
projects
that
they've
done
and
they
typically
do
make
a
project
that's
attractive
to
the
neighborhood
they've
stated
in
public
meetings
that
they
do
intend
to
enhance
Landscaping,
but
they
could
speak
specifically.
If
there's
a
tree
that
you
were
looking
at
or
any
any
certain
questions.
C
O
Traffic
report
was
provided,
and
we
generally
don't
require
a
traffic
report
if
the
change
in
the
use
is
essentially
known
to
reduce
traffic.
So
what
we
have
on
the
ground
if
this
office
was
fully
outfitted,
that
that
would
probably
cause
us
to
want
to
understand
if
they
were
changing
it
to
another
commercial
use.
If
they
were
going
from
residential
to
office,
that
would
cause
us
to
want
a
traffic
report.
We
would
want
to
see
how
the
increase
in
traffic
could
be
accommodated.
O
R
Okay,
I
I
only
asked
because
I
got
several
calls
from
Neighbors
who
who
see
it
a
little
differently,
because
if
it
was-
and
you
know
and
I
can
understand
so
I'd,
like
you
know,
professional
opinion,
and
if
it
was
an
office
building
and
people
are
coming
to
work.
Nine
nine
to
five
say
they
might
come
in
the
morning.
Leave
for
lunch,
come
back
and
then
leave
at
five,
whereas
it
becomes
a
residential
apartment
unit.
People
are
coming
in
and
out
all
the
time,
because
people
work
different
jobs.
O
I
can
tell
you
that
with
office,
we
generally
would
also
account
for
us,
not
just
the
people
working
in
the
office.
But
a
series
of
you
know
how
many
visits
would
they
get,
how
many
customers,
how
many
clients
the
range
of
office
services
they
have?
You
know
if
if
there
was
a
a
nail
salon
in
there,
if
there,
you
know
with
some
other
service
that
had
a
higher
turnover,
you
might
see,
customers
coming
in
and
out
more
frequently,
but
in
general
residential
as
a
use
doesn't
generate
that
many
trips
we
did.
O
For
example,
in
other
projects
where
we've
done
multi-family,
you
might
recall
661
Park
Ave
the
legion
Bowl
project
that
included
a
request
as
part
of
the
special
Zone
to
reduce
parking
to
one
and
a
half
spaces
per
unit.
They
gave
us
a
lot
of
background
information
to
show
that
that's
actually
even
still
conservative.
They
were
showing
us
that
they
could.
They
could
do
it
at
one
and
a
quarter
spaces
per
unit,
because
in
general
these
one
one
bedrooms-
mostly
it's
a
single
occupant-
maybe
there's
a
couple.
O
You
know
some
couples
in
there
that
have
a
couple
of
cars,
but
in
general
it
you
know
it's.
Some
people
might
not
even
have
a
car
they're,
not
asking
for
parking
relief.
They're
saying
we're
going
to
give
you
the
two
units
per
space.
So
you
know
I
know
that
that
was
something
that
also
came
up
was
discussed
quite
a
bit,
so
you
know
there.
O
But
you
know
we
do
find
that
in
general,
residential
is
less
traffic,
less
trip
demand,
You,
probably
have
less
frequency
of
trips
in
sometimes
people
will
be
in
and
out
of
their
house
five
times
a
day,
but
often
most
times
it's.
You
know
two
or
three
times
a
day
that
someone's
coming
in
out
of
their
house
that
can
be
far
less
than
a
business
that
has
a
high
turnover
rate.
R
Oh,
that
totally
makes
sense.
I
can
see
it.
You
know
from
both
sides,
because
I
can
see
that
at
night
it
might
have
you
know
more
traffic
in
and
out
than
somewhere.
Even
if
you
had
nail
salons
that
stuff
doesn't
open
past
seven,
you
know
what
I
mean
so
I
think
that
people
are
maybe
thinking
that
way.
I
would
ask,
would
I
have
to
go
through
the
police
department,
perhaps
to
get
you
know,
accident
data
right
on
Pontiac
Ave
over
there.
This
was
a
concern
of
someone
specifically
who
called
me.
R
O
O
You
know
full
full
use,
whether
it's
office
or
whether
it's
residential,
if
it's
left
in
full
use
as
office
I.
Think
my
estimation
is,
you
know,
while
they
wouldn't
know
us
anything
that
actually
would
be
just
hey,
they
go
right
back
to
business
and
they
find
tenants.
That
would
be
where
you'd
really
want
to
understand
if
they
were
really
utilizing
that
building
for
office.
What
are
those
traffic
impacts?
O
So
the
same
question
is
so
trap.
You
know,
accidents
and
the
like
I
think
those
questions
will
be
also
merited
when
you
have
higher
trip
frequencies
with
commercial
types
of
uses,
but
I
mean
the
the
police
would
be
a
source.
If
you
wanted
to
ask
when
we
were
doing
our
review,
it
didn't
come
up
to
us
and
no
information
came
to
us
in
terms
of
that
that
specific
concern
or
anyone
asking
for
that
research
from
our
purview.
R
Thank
you
and
I
promise.
I
would
have
already
done
it
if
I
didn't
get
the
call
like
late
in
the
day
yesterday.
My
final
question
is:
if
this
did
stay
as
an
office
use
you
had
mentioned,
you
know
a
nail
salon
randomly.
Would
it
be
able
to
be
any
kind
of
office?
Usually
they
could
have
all
different
units
a
nail
salon,
an
accountant
masseuse.
So
anything.
O
Could
be
there
yeah
I
mean
essentially
they're
granted.
What
was
you
know,
grandfathered
in
so
they're,
working
with
the
understanding
that
you
know
office
was
allowed
and
there
was
a
range
of
different
office
uses
in
there
I
understand
there
were
some
personal
service
types
of
offices
in
there
as
well.
So
the
you
know
what
has
occurred
in
there
in
the
past
can
occur
and
it
can
occur
with
you
know.
O
If
they
could
fit
it,
it
could
be
10
different
nail
salons,
it
could
be
one
Nail,
Salon
One
Insurance
office,
one
physical
therapist,
there's
a
lot.
You
know
at
one
dental
office
there's
a
wide
range
of
what
they
might
accomplish
and
it
really
at
that
point
just
becomes
like
how
would
they
outfit
the
building
differently?
What
would
the
various
tenants
want
in
terms
of
space,
but
they
would
be
grandfathered,
essentially
those
the
same
range
of
uses
that
have
occurred
in
that
building
in
the
past.
O
So
we
certainly
understand
that
the
building
right
now
is
not
being
fully
utilized.
I
think
that's
a
probably
a
reflection
on
the
condition
of
the
building,
but
we
understand,
if
they're,
bringing
that
building
into
greater
conformance,
they
could
outfit
it
to
meet
a
number
of
different
potential
tenants.
E
O
Yeah,
it's
a
separate
property,
so
the
subdivision
has
occurred
and
that
lot
is
set
up
so
that
that
could
be
done
through
a
building
permit
process
that
I
don't
know
where
they've
done
I
don't
think
they've
established
it
I
think
they
know
that
they
had
stated
at
a
previous
meeting
that
it
was
their
intent
to
build
it,
that
they
were
going
to
build
it.
They
may
sell
it.
You
know
once
they
have,
but
I
think
they
were
going
to
be
the
builders
I.
E
E
In
this
regard,
the
proposed
zone
change
is
consistent
with
the
city's
comprehensive
plan,
as
the
proposed
C2
zone
is
better
aligned
with
neighborhood
Commercial
Services
designation
as
compared
to
the
crime.
So
my
question
is
even
though
I
think
anybody
would
agree.
An
apartment
is
not
a
neighborhood
commercial
service,
so
this
plan
does
not
confirm
conform
with
that.
But
are
you
saying
it's
the
policy
that
if
it's
closer
it's
okay,
it's.
O
O
There's
a
number
of
parcels
across
the
city
that
aren't
currently,
in
conformance
with
the
the
vision
for
the
city
moving
forward,
but
if
they
came
to
the
door
and
any
applicant
and
that
had,
let's
just
say
a
certain
Zone,
but
the
future
land
use
map.
The
comprehensive
plan
says
it
should
be
a
different
and
they
came
knocking
on
the
door.
We
would
say:
yes,
that's.
Actually
the
vision
of
the
city
is
to
rezone
that
that
particular
parcel
in
that
direction.
O
I
think
in
this
case,
you
know,
when
I,
when
I
made
the
statement,
that
a
comprehensive
plan
change
isn't
needed.
It's
essentially
because
the
comp
Prince
of
plan
is
saying
yes,
please
make
this
neighborhood
Commercial
Services,
ironically,
the
C2
Zone,
which
is
allows
for
a
range
of
commercial
uses,
also
allows
Buy-Rite
multi-family
development.
So
it
allows
the
use
of
multi-family
by
right.
The
only
conditions
that
we're
looking
at
is
to
allow
them.
O
You
know
more
density,
more
units
in
that
use,
so
you
know
granting
them
C2
would
grant
them
by
right
to
develop
apartment
units,
which
would
be
more
consistent
with
the
vision
and
the
comprehensive
plan
they
are
asking
to
be
able
to
build
18,
which
requires
that
that
special
condition
that
zone
change.
It's
the
city
that
has
urged
to
say,
okay,
we'd
also
like
to
see
15,
affordable
housing,
and
that's
because
it's
a
stated
goal
of
the
city
to
to
achieve
affordable
housing
in
projects
like
this
does.
E
O
So
yeah,
sometimes
when
you
get
a
rezone,
we
also
say
this
needs
a
comparable,
comprehensive
plan.
Amendment.
Let's
say
you
were
rezoning
something
from
commercial
to
Industrial,
but
the
comprehensive
plan
said
it
should
remain
commercial
and
would
say
the
you
know
we
in
our
wisdom,
Say
No
it
should.
It
should
go
to
Industrial
that
we
also
change
the
comprehensive
planned
Vision
to
say
the
comprehensive
plan
says
industrial.
O
The
zoning
will
stay
Industrial
in
this
case
the
zone
changes
actually
bringing
it
into
alignment
with
what
the
comprehensive
plan
says,
and
the
ironic
part
is
that
the
comprehensive
plan
is
saying
bring
it
into
a
commercial
Neighborhood,
Services
type
of
designation.
Those
are
the
C1
C2
C3.
They
allow
a
range
of
commercial
uses,
but
the
C2
allows
multi-family.
We
understand
that
C2
zones
and
neighborhood
commercial
service
designations
when
they're
called
out
in
the
comp
plan.
That
includes
the
possibility
to
build
multi-family
by
right.
So
hopefully
that
helps.
O
O
E
S
This
is
an
office
building
in
a
residential
neighborhood,
and
we
now
have
an
opportunity
to
turn
that
office
building
into
homes
and
obviously
we
all
are
aware
of
the
housing
crisis.
That's
going
on
in
Rhode
Island
right
now.
Access
to
housing
is
a
critical
issue.
We
want
our
community
to
thrive
and
based
on
those
two
considerations
having
a
healthy,
thriving
community
and
giving
people
access
to
housing.
I,
don't
see
how
the
committee
could
turn
down
this
very
reasonable
proposal.
S
The
only
thing
that
I
would
change
about
the
proposal
is
the
fact
that
this
proposal
allows
only
the
minimum
number
of
units
to
be
affordable
and
the
City
of
Cranston
is
nowhere
near
any
Target
number
and
terms
of
our
goal
for
affordable
housing.
So
I
really
wish
that
the
city
in
considering
proposals
like
this
would
work
with
developers
to
increase
the
number
of
affordable
units.
S
Q
P
P
P
P
Obviously,
there's
got
to
be
a
change
to
this
building.
Can
we
make
this
an
ex?
You
know
a
good
change
for
the
community
and
that's
it
I'm
more
interested
in
what
what's?
What
will
this
look
like
and
I'm
not
down
on
it,
but
at
the
same
time
I'm
not
like
yeah.
This
is
a
great
idea
because
I've
seen
great
ideas,
big
disasters,
okay,
so
there
I
am
thank.
B
N
That's
all
that
would
be
so.
The
idea
I,
because
I
was
involved
in
a
lot
of
single
family
building
for
my
career
and
a
lot
of
it
was
subside
housing
and
they
were
all
individual
houses
dwelling
no
50
years
in
the
business
we
never
GM
20
families
into
one
small
building,
never
once
this
is
strictly
a
monetary
benefit
to
him.
That's
all
what
it
is
so
again:
I
I
applaud,
William
passion
that
we
should
accept
more
people
but
give
them
a
home,
not
a
gulag.
That's
all
that!
N
That's
going
to
be
it's
not
going
to
work,
it's
and
the
Reds
and
the
idea
of
a
traffic
control.
The
statement
that
you
have
more
traffic
when
it
was
when
it
was
Office
Buildings.
Unless
when
it
says
it's
a
false
I've
lived
across
the
street
but
30
for
almost
34
years,
and
we
never
saw
that
part
to
unlock
them.
N
It
was
when
it
was
Office,
Buildings
and
the
traffic
was
minimal
and,
of
course
nobody
was
there
after
5
PM,
when
people
move
into
this
place,
we
live
in
the
U.S
1821,
whatever
he
says,
he
has
no
control
over
who's
going
to
live.
There
they're
going
to
live
there,
either
strictly
out
of
absolute
necessity,
they're
not
going
to
think
about
families
or
anything
like
that.
It's
not
going
to
happen.
We
all
know
that
it's
too
small,
it's
and
to
make
it
worse.
N
You
allowed
him
to
break
up
9
000
square
feet,
which
is
that
a
lot
that
he
was
explaining
that
he's
going
to
build
a
single
here
on
your
own.
You
notice.
He
also
did
that
before
he
applied
for
this
Zone
chain,
because
he
knew
that
that
would
be
an
obstruction
if
you
try
to
do
it
after
good
move.
Very
great,
very
bright
move.
N
I
say
that
at
minimum,
if
you
want
to
give
them
20
units
18
units
then
make
them
dig
deep
back
that
9
000
feet,
leave
it
green
and
grass
at
least
those
people
would
have
something,
because
when
people
have
a
home
like
this
woman
from
David,
said
she's
right,
but
every
home
has
a
little
yard
a
little
something
you
can
pay
beautiful,
not
four
walls
in
a
bay
that
doesn't
make
a
hole
he's
wrong.
She's,
idealistic
God
bless
him.
N
So
the
traffic
was
an
issue-
that's
that's
false,
but
you're
going
to
have
more
traffic.
We
all
know
that
everybody
in
the
neighborhood
knows
that
and
you
also
have
a
different
type
of
homeowner.
It's
a
passion.
You
should
be
a
homework.
Every
homeowner
who
has
to
pay
the
taxes
and
pay
the
world
is
sincere
to
the
home.
N
I
was
involved
in
these
again
in
single
family
and
they
were
a
lot
of
subsidized
and
what
happens
was
somebody
comes
along
and
they
own
the
subsidy
obligation
they
own
they
own,
getting
really
snow.
They
get
rid
of
the
trash
they
mow.
The
lawn
the
people
that
live
in
those
units
and
I
know
they
have
to
understand,
but
don't
have
to
do
anything,
nothing.
You
don't
have
to
remove
the
trash.
They
don't
have
to
mow
the
lawn.
They
don't
have
to
pick
up
fat.
N
E
T
T
Do
you
want
it
because
we're
getting
rid
of
it?
I
said
yeah,
I
love
the
building,
so
I
bought
it.
It's
a
very
small
building
in
our
world.
What
we're
doing
the
redevelopments
that
we
do,
but
I
love
the
building
and
I
think
it's
a
great
area,
so
we
bought
it.
I
think
the
highest
and
best
use
is
residential
for
sure.
T
We've
proven
that
in
Providence
we're
doing
a
lot
of
this
we've
done
a
lot.
It's
been
very
successful.
We
converted
a
similar,
larger
office,
mom
and
pop
office
type
building
on
Atwells
Ave
into
Apartments.
It
was
extremely
successful
and
we
are
we
just
converted:
Our
Lady
of
Mount
Carmel
Church
in
Federal
Hill,
it's
a
49
Apartments,
we're
doing
the
old
Citizens
Bank
on
Westminster
Street.
That
bank
alone
will
have
52
apartments
in
it.
This
is
the
way
things
are
going.
T
We
have
a
great
need
for
residential
housing,
not
everyone
can
afford
to
buy
a
single
family
house.
That's
one
of
the
reasons
why
the
apartments
Market
is
thriving.
The
rents
are
so
high
because
people
need
a
place
to
live
and
we're
10
000
units
behind
in
the
state.
We
need
10
000
over
the
next
10
years,
just
to
catch
up
with
demand.
So
it
was
an
office
building
run
down.
We
gutted
it
out.
We
didn't
got
it
out
because
we
knew
for
sure
we're
going
to
turn
into
Apartments.
T
We
got
it
all
because
we
know
one
way
or
another
we're
going
to
rent
it.
We
carved
off
the
the
lot
next
to
it,
because
at
the
end
of
the
day,
yes,
it's
about
making
money,
we're
Developers
we're
in
business
to
make
money.
We're
not
a
non-profit,
so
I
think
it'd
be
great
for
the
city
to
have
the
apartments
there,
but
it's
not
going
to
be
the
end
of
the
world
if
it's
not,
but
if
it's
an
office
building
it's
going
to
rent
to
whomever
is
in
there
it's
when
we
bought
it.
T
There
were
22
offices
in
there
there
were
three
tenants,
but
there
were
22
officers
so
whether
it
be
who's
doing
eyebrows
here,
massage
therapy
psychologist,
it
will
never
be
a
dentist's
office.
It
will
never
be
a
doctor's
office.
It
doesn't
have
the
handicap
accessibility
for
that
it'll.
Never
be
that,
so
it
will
be
a
mom-and-pop
type
office
building
with
with
whatever
offices
we
can
get
to
go
in
there
and
whatever
sizes
we
can,
that
will
work
in
a
neighborhood
and
right
now,
after
the
pandemic,
everyone's
working
from
home.
T
We
don't,
sir.
We
also
we're.
We
have
41
parking
spaces
for
18
units.
We
have
absolutely
positively
no
plan
to
go
with
more
than
18
units.
It
could
be
restricted
to
that,
not
a
problem.
It's
exactly
the
way
it
we
we
want
18
and
that's
all
it's
going
to
be.
It
cannot
be
any
more
than
that
they
would
be
too
tiny.
T
We
have
41
spaces,
we
we
rent
majority
one
bed,
Studio
very
few
two
bed
units
in
all
of
our
buildings,
75
percent
there's
one
person
in
the
apartment
and
they
have
one
car.
If
they
have
in
the
city,
there's
always
a
service
center
Mick
does
all
our
rentals
that
doesn't
have
a
car
at
all,
and
then
there
are
people
that
have
a
significant
other.
So
there's
two
cars
but
41
it's
way
over
in
Providence
you're
required
to
have
one
per
unit.
We
have
more
than
two
per
unit,
so
we
haven't.
U
V
Microphones
at
home
come
here,
so
these
one
bedrooms
and
Studios
will
primarily
and
not
always,
but
you
know,
they're
typically
single
occupant,
so
we
do
find
that
it's
usually
one
car.
In
some
cases
there
may
be
two
in
other
cases,
there's
someone
who
is
commuting
so
I
would
say
on
average
I
think
dug.
It
maybe
mentioned
this
before
that
Park
Ave,
they
were
saying
1.25
spaces.
You
know
I
think
even
reasonably
one
and
a
half
spaces.
V
T
Had
to
change
the
size
of
the
parking
spaces,
so
I
was
wrong,
but
I
was
right
before
so.
Also
in
this
area,
it's
important
to
know
that
in
walking
distance,
there's
hundreds
of
apartment
units,
hundreds
persons
alone
on
Pontiac
Avenue,
Willow
Glen,
the
Willow
Willow
Brook,
hundreds
of
Apartments,
it's
it's
very
in
his
six
eight
ten
unit
buildings
all
over
the
place,
so
I
think
that's
it.
If
you
have
any
questions,
love
to
respond.
Thank.
C
E
D
O
I
from
planning's
perspective,
I,
don't
know
if
there's
any
set
limit
that
might
be
a
building
code
issue.
If
there
is
I
can
tell
you,
I
mean
they
may
be
cautious,
because
they
don't
want
to
answer
something
that
they
would
then
be
in
a
policy
where
they
would
have
to
Prejudice
themselves
against
someone.
If
a
couple
came
in
there
and
then
the
couple
had
a
baby
and
suddenly
having
a
baby
made
them
ineligible
to
live
there,
because
there
was
a
three-person
or
a
two-person
limit
in
the
third
I.
O
Think
that's
what
they
that's
their
domain,
where
they
understand
that
you
know
they
have
to
be
conscious
of
making
the
housing
equally
available.
There's
a
housing,
Equity
issues,
but
I
that's
more
of
a
building
code
issue.
So
I
really!
My
answer
is
that
I'm
not
positive.
If
there
is
any
way
to
limit
the
number
of
people
they
could
probably
speak
to
and
all
of
their
other
uses
what
they
typically
see
for
these
types
of
units.
T
I,
don't
believe
we
can,
and
recently,
if
you
may
have
read
the
news
that
in
Narragansett
it
was
struck
down
again
where
they
tried
to
limit
how
many
people
could
live
in
a
rental
apartment
for
the
colleges.
So
I'm,
not
a
lawyer,
I,
don't
know,
but
we've
never
had
that
issue
when
we've
been
doing
this
for
years
is
I
mean
they're
small
they're,
not
like
real
big
one
beds,
where
you
can
kind
of
set
up
so
they're
small
units.
D
A
W
Just
to
expand
a
little
bit
on
what
what
the
gentleman
was
talking
about.
There
was
a
similar
ordinance
in
Providence
which
tried
to
limit
the
number
of
unrelated
individuals
that
could
reside
in
a
single
unit.
That
was
done
largely
in
response
to
the
problem.
They
were
having
at
Providence
College
with
the
students
and
the
same
thing
with
Narragansett
I,
believe
it
was
URI
students.
W
But
the
short
answer
is:
if
you
try
to
place
some
type
of
limitation,
you're
going
to
be
subject
to
some
type
of
strict
scrutiny,
analysis
by
the
courts,
meaning
is
there
a
legitimate
underlying
reason
that
you're
putting
the
limitation
on
now?
As
I
said,
the
ordinances
in
Narragansett
and
Providence
I
believe
were
worded
to
the
effect
of
limiting
unrelated
persons
from
residing
together
didn't
apply
to
a
family
unit.
That
opens
up
the
question:
how
do
you
define
family
so
it
can
get
really
tangled,
really
messy
and
it
could
raise
issues.
T
I
got
a
follow-up
because
I
just
remembered
something
and
confirmed
it.
We
do
have
it
on
leases
that
if
any
adult
that's
living
in
the
apartment
has
to
be
on
the
lease.
So
if
we
rent
to
a
single
person-
and
they
have
a
significant
other
that
wants
to
move
in,
they
have
to
go
through
our
same
process
and
they
have
to
be
added
to
the
lease.
So
they
have
to
qualify
the
same
way.
We
qualify
everyone.
It
is
essentially
because
we
know
there's
a
relation.
T
U
V
V
I
And
I
guess
as
a
follow-up
to
that
the
15
of
affordable
housing.
That's
been
added
to
that
is,
is
part
of
this
whole
consideration
right
now,
I'm
just
curious,
if
you
would,
even
if
we're
keeping
it
at
possibly
18.
Let's
just
hypothetically
say
that:
that's
what
it
is
because
you
we've
actually
said
it
would
be
18
and
nothing
more
than
that.
So
that
would
be
roughly
three
four
three.
C
T
O
We
are
above
it,
but
we're
close
to
slipping
below.
That
is
why,
as
a
city,
we're
very
careful,
if
we
add
rental
units
in
any
project,
if
we
don't
keep
adding
affordable
rentals,
we
will
slip
below
that
threshold.
The
threshold
is
at
15
and
I
think
by
the
last
calculations,
I
think
if
we
were
at
something
like
15.2
percent,
so
if
we
keep
adding
rentals
without
adding
affordables
at
the
same
time,
then
we
make
ourselves
subject
to
a
comprehensive
permit,
I
hope
that
answers
your
question.
T
Would
have
to
go
back
to
the
drawing
board
and
look
at
making
them
all
studio
apartments
which
we
wouldn't
want
to
do,
but
it
has
to
be
affordable
to
build
and,
as
everyone
knows,
you
don't
have
to
be
in
construction
to
know.
What's
going
on
with
the
economy
and
inflation
every
year,
the
cost
of
construction
is
to
the
moon,
and
if
you
watch
the
news
you
know
it.
T
O
All
right,
the
the
location
of
the
affordables
isn't
something
that
we
would
regulate.
It's
actually
something
Rhode,
Island
Housing
would
review
so
I
think
the
applicant
can't
specify
exactly
because
they
may
be
subject
to
Rhode
Island
Housing
talking
about
how
they
their
vision
would
be
in
terms
of
spreading
them
through
the
the
units,
but.
O
That's
a
local,
so
we
asked
for
15
because
we
think
it's
important
to
keep
up
15
is
what
we
asked
for
in
the
most
recent
comparable
project,
which
was
that
Legion
Bowl
project,
you
know,
City
staff
is
not
opposed
to
more,
but
I
think
we
were
trying
to
be
consistent
with
what
we've
asked
other
projects.
If
that
makes
sense,.
T
I
O
R
U
R
V
R
O
The
how
Rhode
Island
Housing
would
say
that
this
is
their
maximum
amount
that
could
cost
and
when
they're,
giving
this
rent
keep
in
mind
that
this
number
from
Rhode
Island
Housing,
which
a
one-person
household
will
be
1354.
A
two
person
is
1500
1547,
so
the
number
of
people
in
the
household
is
what
increases
it.
That
includes
utilities,
so
Rhode
Island
Housing
says
that
their
rent,
plus
utilities
can't
add
up
to
more
than
that
number.
O
However,
if
the
applicant
wanted
to
rent
for
less
than
that,
they're
welcome
to
that's
a
maximum
that
Rhode
Island
Housing
is
is
instituting
making
sure
it
can't
go
above
that
amount
if,
for
some
reason
they
had
someone
that
came
in-
and
you
know
they
said-
hey
Rhode,
Island
Housing
says
our
Max
rent
is
1500.
Your
policy
is
13..
They
could
allow
that
person
to
rent
for
less
than
Rhode
Island
housing's
maximum.
When
it
looks
like
that
answers,
your
question.
R
T
R
More
so
trying
to
figure
out
how
adding
one
more
unit
at
the
affordable
rate
would
lower
your
profit
so
much.
That
would
not
be
worth
it
for
you
to
do
this
project
anymore,
because
that's
kind
of
what
you
just
said
to
councilman
councilman,
Vargas
and
I'm,
just
I
that
doesn't
make
sense
to
me
and
maybe
I'm
ignorant.
That's
why
I'm
asking
so
many
questions,
but
it
doesn't
seem
like
it's
that
much
difference
well,.
T
R
T
T
Anyways,
it's
not
low
income.
Let
me
give
you
an
example.
He
may
go
through
50
applications
before
he
picks
one
that
we'll
accept.
In
this
case
it
could
be
hundreds
because
with
today's
you
know,
employment
people
are
making
making
good
money.
So
there
could
be
so
many
people
that
just
don't
qualify.
O
And
that's
right:
it's
basically,
if
you
did
restrict
the
unit,
which
is
the
purpose,
is
to
set
these
units
aside
for
people
that
really
need
them.
Just
to
give
you
the
numbers.
Current
numbers
in
Cranston
is:
if
you
wanted
to
be
eligible
for
an
affordable
unit
at
the
threshold
that
we've
set
here,
which
is
80
of
the
area
median
income,
a
one-person
household
can't
make
more
than
fifty
four
thousand
a
two-person
household
can't
make
more
than
sixty
one
thousand.
O
So
that
gives
you
a
sense
of
that
if
they
deed
restrict
them
they're
limited
to
a
pool
of
people
that
would
also
need
to
be
verified
through
Rhode
Island
Housing,
their
their
income
eligibility
would
be
verified
through
Rhode
Island
Housing.
There
would
be
an
agency
that
would
monitor
it,
but
they're
I
think
what
he's
trying
to
relay
is
they
are
limiting
their
pool
of
applicants.
O
R
I
guess
we'd
have
if
we
need
affordable
housing,
it's
because
there
are.
We
have
identified
that
a
population
we
have
a
population
of
people
who
would
qualify
for
affordable
housing.
First-Year
teachers
don't
make
fifty
four
thousand
dollars
a
year,
so
I
mean
first
second
five-year
state
workers,
don't
make
fifty
four
thousand
dollars
a
year.
So
therefore
I
don't
think
that
they
would
have
a
problem
feeling
one
more
unit,
and
it's
not
you
know
what
I
mean
you're
just
still
going
to
get
qualified
people
with
good
credit.
I
I
hate
to
keep
dragging
on
this,
but
is
is,
it
is
potential
information
for
Rhode
Island
Housing
to
actually
provide
to
the
council,
even
if
it's
two
three
years
down
the
line
for
any
development
that
comes
before
us
that
we
vote
saying.
Yes,
they
came
before
us
there's
a
stipulation,
it's
on
the
deed
that
there's
that
15
of
it
will
be
affordable,
housing,
I'm,
just
curious
on
that
accountability.
F
F
Q
N
G
D
G
I
So
you
know
as
we're
voting
on
any
development,
whether
it's
this
one
or
any
one
of
them
and
they're
coming
before
us,
and
stating
that
in
fact,
they
would
provide
15
of
their
development
to
affordable
housing
down
the
line,
the
accountability
or
the
enforcement.
What
I'm
trying
to
get
at
is
any
if
someone
comes
before
us
and
that's
what
we
are
voting
on
who's
to
say
that
in
fact,
two
three
years
from
now,
they
are
now
not
at
15.
They
could
be
at
10
right
or
five
so,
where?
Where
is
that
fine
line
of
enforcement.
G
When
there's
a
deed
restriction
on
these
developments,
what
it's
for
a
period
of
years,
you
know,
usually
it's
a
99-year
restriction,
long
time
they
can't
do
it,
I
mean
if
they
do
it,
they
jeopardize
financing,
they
jeopardize,
they
jeopardize
the
property.
I
mean
Rhode.
Island
Housing
does
have
an
enforcement
mechanism
to
monitor
these
things,
but
the
reality
is
there.
Are
there
are
confidentiality
Provisions
built
into
that
to
protect?
G
The
the
percentage
thrust
threshold
of
affordable
housing
relative
to
Apartments,
as
opposed
to
the
minimum
10
threshold
for
low
to
moderate
income,
housing
and
affordable
housing
as
a
whole
at
10
percent.
You
know
that
we're
not
at
10
so
for
those
of
you
who
are
not
familiar,
I,
believe
it's
Roger,
Williams
University
that
hosts
the
the
Housing
Works
think
tank.
That
produces
that
annual
book
that
can
provide
you
with
much
of
that
information
I'm
happy
to
forward
it
to
the
council
people,
not
in
the
context
of
considering
this.
G
But
you
know
if
you
look
at
imposing
in
this
case
it's
affordable
apartments
as
a
percentage
of
the
overall
project.
If
you
will,
you
know
having
worn
the
other
hat
for
developer,
there
is
a
certain
economic
feasibility
and
infeasibility
and
that's
the
test
that
courts
would
look
at,
particularly
with
respect
to
affordable
housing
as
a
whole,
and
it's
a
little
and
it's
a
different
analysis
for
a
for-profit
developer
versus
a
not-for-profit
developer.
G
You
know
you've
heard
from
the
developer,
who
said
you
know
they
have
economic
feasibility
concerns
and
infeasibility
concerns
which
I
don't
know
the
economics
of
their
project.
It's
not
my
business
to
get
into
that,
but
I
would
I
would
draw
the
analogy
for
the
council
to
imp
to
impact
fees.
Every
developer
that
comes
before
you
there's
a
certain
economic
impact
and
I'm.
G
Not
talking
about
this
development
in
general,
in
developing
you
know,
homes
and
whatever
you
when
municipalities
get
behind
in
terms
of
their
imposition
of
impact
fees,
oftentimes,
they
try
to
play
catch-up
by
overburdening
subsequent
developers
with
impact
fees
on
a
particular
project
in
a
loose
sort
of
way.
If
you
draw
the
the
analogy
between
you
know,
saying
we,
the
the
planning
department
says
we
we
want
15
of
these
to
be
affordable,
you're,
not
putting
any
more
of
a
burden
on
this
particular
developer.
G
It
would
turn
in
you
know
in
layman's
problems
to
an
absolute
circus,
and
you
don't
want
that.
The
the
overall
discussion
of
the
10
threshold
on
affordable
housing
is
not
before
us
tonight.
It's
a
separate
issue
and
it's
a
problem
around
the
state,
but
we
have
a
housing
problem.
We
have
a
the
rental
stock
issue
in
this
state
plain
and
simple,
so
I
I,
hope,
I've
answered
your
question
to
some
degree.
If
I
haven't
yeah
I'm
happy
to
assist.
I
E
E
Thank
you
at
this
time.
I'll
close
public
comment
and
I
will
entertain
a
motion
at
this
time.
I
think
we
have
a
few
options
before
us
I'm
not
going
to
tell
anybody
what
to
motion
for,
but
there
we
can
vote
to
approve
it
vote
to
deny
it
but
either
way,
and
let
me
just
get
clarification
from
Council
either
way.
Does
this
go
to
the
to
the
full
Council?
Even
if
it's
denied
yes
or
this,
we
could
also
vote
to
move
it
forward
without
a
recommendation.
A
Like
not
a
lawyer
in
the
art
city
council
attorney
can
answer
this,
but
my
understanding,
though,
that
if
the
council
were
to
send
this
with
a
negative
recommendation
to
the
full
Council,
it
would
require
a
two-thirds
majority
of
the
city
council
to
approve
if
the
city.
If
the
committee
were
to
send
this
to
the
full
city
council
with
no
recommendation,
it
would
take
the
city
council
a
two-thirds
majority
to
approve
it.
That's
correct!
I
Councilman
Vargas
yeah,
so
I
I
guess.
My
question
is
whether
it's
through
our
Council
attorney
or
the
city
solicitor,
given
the
fact
that
the
recommendation
and
everything
here
notice
said
that
it's
either
18
to
21
units
and
the
developers
are
saying
that
they
don't
want
the
21
units
they
actually
just
want
the
18.
G
D
D
We
have
a
housing
crisis
in
the
state.
We
have
a
housing,
affordable,
housing
shortage
in
the
city,
it's
for
residential,
let's
face
it.
Nobody
rents
office
space
today,
so
you
have
a
building,
that's
empty,
that
they
want
to
spend
a
lot
of
money
on
fixing
up
to
put
people
into
Apartments
that
they
can
hopefully
afford,
and
they
have
a
lot
of
experience
doing
this
I
would
vote
in
favor
of
approving
this
project
tonight.
Thank
you.
A
A
D
C
A
I
You
just
echoing
what
the
council,
vice
president
has
said,
as
well
as
council
member
Donegan
and
even
the
solicitor
who
said
it
as
well.
You
know,
there's
definitely
a
a
housing
crisis
right,
there's,
there's
a
need
for
apartments
and,
and
then
you
know,
I
I
think
that
there's
also
oh
I
know
that
there's
a
just
in
general
Apartments,
whether
it's
regular
Apartments,
whether
it's
affordable
apartments
throughout
the
entire
country
in
our
state
here
in
our
city.
I
I
R
Thank
you,
I
agree
with
my
colleagues.
I
was
able
to
go
through
to
the
sitewalk
and
I
did
look
up
and
go
actually
physically.
Go
to
Federal
Hill
to
look
at
some
of
the
developers
work
so
I
think
that
it
they
do
build
lovely,
you
know
apartment
buildings
and
we
do
need
housing
stock.
I
do
wish
that
one
more
affordable
unit
could
be
there
because
I
don't
believe
that
affordable
units-
you
know
by
definition,
are
actually
necessarily
affordable
and
going
to
help
the
people
that
actually
need
a
place
to
live.
R
Often
stay
upset
even
after
this
could
be
developed
and
they
lived
there
and
they're
not
going
to
go
away
and
they
shouldn't
go
away
and
they're
going
to
continue
to
come
here
and
we're
going
to
continue
to
bring
up
the
problems
and
I
want
this
all
to
go.
Well,
so
that's
something
I
would
definitely
consider.
Thank
you.
E
E
E
E
We
do
need
to
balance
that
against
this
housing
crisis
that
we
have
and
certainly
more
adding
more
units
to
the
stock,
helps
that
and
specifically
for
the
neighborhood
I
have
an
issue
that
this
is
going
to
be
done
in
us
in
a
large
majority
single
family
zoned
area,
because
these
residents
they
when
they
bought
the
house,
said
all
right.
Looking
at
the
zoning
I'm
only
going
to
either
live
next
to
an
office
or
a
single
family
houses.
Now
we're
flipping
that
on
them
and
we
have
to
have
a
good
reason.
E
E
This
isn't
Providence,
so
I
don't
want
to
compare
specifically
us
to
Providence,
because
I
want
to
respect
the
fact
that
Cranston
is
a
suburb
and
that
and
that's
okay
and
I,
also
respect
the
developers
saying
that,
yes,
they
are
developers
they.
This
is
America
there
in
this
for
a
profit,
and
that's
I
I,
understand
that
so
and
I'm
glad
that
they
did
say.
Oh,
but
not
not
at
this
time.
So
I
am
glad
that
they
did
say
that
they
were
fine
with
the
18
units,
because
I
think
we
should
restrict
it
to
that.
E
That's
what
they
wanted.
That's
what
they're
going
to
build
I
I
hate
when
we
approve
things
here
and
I
believe
planning
has
said
this
well
they'd
had
we're
approving
them
to
do
C2
we're
not
just
approving
that
they
build
this
specific
building,
we're
proving
them
for
C2.
So
we
don't
want
the
road
getting
pulled
out
from
us
either.
Whatever
we
approve
is
what
they
should
build,
so
no
one
should
have
to
have
the
need
to
come
back
and
add
more
units.
That
makes
absolutely
zero
sense
to
me.
E
I'm
not
in
that
field,
so
I'll
defer,
but
they
said
they
want
18.
We
need
to
amend
that
to
give
them
the
18.,
so
I
do
want
the
entire
I'm
still
really
not
sure
where
I
want
to
go
with
this,
but
I
do
think
it's
important
that
the
entire
Council
takes
a
look
at
it.
So
for
that
reason,
I
am
going
to
vote
to
pass
this
on
to
the
full,
Council
and
I.
Don't
think
it
would
be
fair
to
put
them
under
two-thirds
two-thirds
burden.
E
So
for
that
reason,
I
will
be
voting
to
put
this
forward,
but,
like
I,
said,
I
I
strongly
feel
that
single
family
zoning
is
important
in
Cranston
and
this
could
create
a
precedent
when
they
say
when
they
come
for
the
next
one
and
they
come
for
the
next
one,
because
right
now,
I
think
it
was
referred
to
as
it
was.
It
was
a
great
term.
E
Special
reasons
special
rezones
I
mean
basically
it
could
be
considered
spot
zoning
that's
illegal
and
we
have
to
worry.
We
have
to
be
careful
of
that,
so
every
application
that
comes
before
us.
We
have
to
respect
the
comprehensive
plan
and
I
do
appreciate
that
this
does
put
us
closer
to
what
the
comprehensive
plan
is
so
I'm,
just
I'm
a
little
torn,
but
I
am
going
to
put
this
forward
to
the
I'm
going
to
vote
to
pass
it
through
does.
Is
there
any
further
comment,
seeing
none
when
I'm
clerk?
Please
take
the
role.
D
E
B
C
E
J
E
E
C
I
I
You
know
he
agrees
with
the
need
to
reduce
the
number
of
judges
and
agrees
with
the
change
to
the
10
years
minimum
of
years
in
practice.
As
an
attorney,
the
though
ordinance
sorry
the
ordinance
before
us
this
evening,
you
know
I,
just
I
was
one
of
the
ones
who
actually
wanted
to
increase
it
last
year
and
and
looking
at
this
ordinance,
there's
just
absolutely
no
need
to
have
five
associate
judges
at
all
in
the
city.
I
R
X
Marino
sure
thank
you.
10
years
is
standard
and
specifically
with
respect
to
a
municipal,
Court
Judge,
where
the
10
years
came
from
is
that
in
the
state
of
Rhode
Island,
for
you
to
just
be
an
arbitrator
which
is
a
much
lesser
degree
than
a
judge,
you
need
a
minimum
of
10
years
of
practice
as
a
lawyer
in
good
standing.
So
that's
why
to
have
two
years
is
really
insane
to
be
honest.
I
Thank
you
if
I
can
add
to
that.
You
know
we
we
want
experience
as
well
attorneys
that
are
coming
in
as
judges
I
mean
just
because
its
Municipal
Court
doesn't
mean
that
just
two
years
is
going
to
check
the
box
and
do
it.
I
personally
would
feel
confident
that
any
case
come
in
before
any
municipal
judge,
whether
it's
the
chief
judge
associate
judge
in
general
has
that
area
of
expertise
to
be
able
to
bring
it
into
the
actual
City
before
they
hear
any
of
our
our
cases.
R
Thank
you,
and
and
because
I'm,
not
a
lawyer.
This
is
why
I'm
deferring
to
to
lawyers
in
front
of
me
and
two
lawyers
over
there
is
there
any
significance.
Would
it
be
important
for
the
chief
judge
to
have
perhaps
more
experience
than
a
associate
judge
or
no,
it
doesn't
really
matter.
10
years
is
10
years
and
that's
10
years.
G
G
Arbitrators
is
councilwoman,
Mourinho
alluded
to
have
to
have
to
be
practicing
for
10
years
and
there's
something
to
be
said
for
the
for
the
skills
required.
You
know
we,
you
know
you
can
watch
some
of
some
of
the
judges
on
television
that
you
see
it
makes
for
Sensational
television.
But
if
you
look
at
someone
like
judge
Caprio,
he
lets
the
game
come
to
him
a
little
bit
because
he's
seasoned
enough
to
do
so.
G
He
has
some
very
interesting
things
in
your
lower
level
courts
more
so
than
you
do
in
your
higher
level,
courts
and
folks
advocate
for
themselves
and
usually
they're
quite
emotional
and
passionate
and
perhaps
even
irrational
about
it,
and
you
have
to
have
a
certain
amount
of
emotional
intelligence
as
a
judge
to
sort
through
that
I
think
back
at
my
career,
I,
don't
think
I
would
have
had
that
two
years
into
it.
So
that's
just
my
two
cents.
W
Yeah,
just
to
expand
a
little
bit
on
what
Steve's
saying
I've
been
in
this
business,
a
very
very
long
time
and
the
judicial
selection
process
on
the
state
level
and
I
am
talking
from
the
Rhode
Island
Supreme
Court,
Superior,
Court,
District
Court
doesn't
have
any
such
requirement
and
that's
been
a
subject
of
the
bait.
I
think
Steve
would
agree
for
many
years
amongst
the
bar
amongst
lawyers.
W
Some
say
you
know
you
should
not
be
appointed
to
this
period.
Court
of
the
district
court
unless
you've
been
in
some
type
of
Private,
Practice
I
know
from
my
experience
and
Steve
would
probably
agree
with
this.
That
maybe
I
would
say.
30
percent
of
the
judges
that
are
appointed
were
never
in
private
practice.
They
were
either
in
some
State
capacity.
W
W
Not
so
great,
but
my
position
has
always
been
I
think
that
experience
counts,
I,
I
really
do
and
I
I.
Think
10
years
is
a
fair
amount
of
time
for
someone
to
become,
let's
say
seasoned,
it's
it's
not
just
it
isn't
just
knowledge
of
the
Lord
that
that
counts
and
and
Steve
pointed
out
that
there's
a
certain
emotional
component
to
it,
there's
a
certain
social
component
to
it.
W
R
R
E
Thank
you,
yeah
I,
think
last
year
or
the
year
before,
when
chief
judge
Smith
said
that
they
was
expecting
a
backlog
and
I.
Think
that's
why
we
all
gave
that
but
I
mean
he's,
come
forward
and
said
that
this
is
sufficient
to
run
his
core
and
manager's.
Court
I
think
he's
done
a
fabulous
job.
Man
I,
wouldn't
I,
would
defer
to
his
expertise
on
this.
As
for
the
experience,
I
100
agree,
you
know
me
in
my
first
year
to
me
now
there's
a
big
difference.
E
Most
people
come
to
Municipal
Court
are
what
they
refer
to
as
per
se
they're
representing
themselves,
and
they
don't
really
know
the
law,
so
maybe
I
I
think
this
is
a
a
step
in
the
right
direction
and
even
though
the
state
doesn't
require
it
and
they'll
throw
a
robe
at
anybody,
I
think
the
city
of
Cranston
can
do
better,
so
I
would
definitely
support
this.
Thank
you
and
if
there's
no
further
comment,
I
will
ask
the
clerk
to
take
the
role.