►
From YouTube: (2023) 07-18 - Planning Commission 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
A
We
will
call
the
meeting
of
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
July
the
18th
2023
to
order
roll
call
in
at
the
record
reflect
that
all
members
are
present.
C
D
A
Minutes
are
approved
report
for
Mr
code
officer.
A
E
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman.
This
is
a
preliminary
plant
request
for
a
total
of
four
Lots.
These
are
for
infill
Lots.
Had
this
property
not
done
just
a
small
division
lasts
I,
guess
it
was
in
late
2021.
Then
this
would
have
been
eligible
for
a
straight
administrative,
infill
Platt
for
the
four
Lots.
It
was
two
existing
lots
that
were
off
of
Church
Street
here
and
you
can
see
on
the
screen
and
then
they're,
proposing
the
two
new
Lots
off
of
Bell
Street
south
of
those
properties,
and
because
it
was
a
minor
subdivision,
Platinum
2021.
E
D
B
Hey,
my
name
is
Patrick
Stewart
and
I'm,
the
owner
of
these
properties
right
here.
So
as
far
as
questions
you
do,
you
have
any
questions
along
with
the
plot
on.
Does
anybody
have
any
questions?
B
A
E
Mr
Mr
chairman
this
is
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
requests
for
a
fast
food
restaurant
with
a
drive-through.
This
is
one
of
your
one
of
your
Outlets
out
in
the
Monroe
Pavilion
development.
This
is
adjacent
to
a
lot
under
currently
under
development.
Now
for
a
Whataburger.
This
is
just
west
of
that
it
is
for
a
Panda
Express,
and
you
see
on
the
screen
here.
E
They've
shown
both
sides,
but
their
site
is
to
the
West
here
on
their
left
side
of
the
screen
here,
and
it
will
have
parking
on
the
east
side
of
the
lot,
with
drive-through
Lanes
going
around
the
building
to
the
western
side
of
the
building
itself.
Those
will
be
dual
drive-through
Lanes.
The
dimensions
shown
on
their
site
plan
meet
with
all
of
your
corridors
on
overlay
District
standards
for
the
Pavilion
Parkway
in
78.,
they've
included
a
landscape
plan
also
with
the
request.
All
of
it
meeting
the
requirements
of
your
landscape
requirements
in
the
squirrel.
E
Designer
alert
District
includes
20-foot
landscape
buffers
on
both
Pavilion
Parkway
and
along
78
and
they've
had
to
encumber
a
greater
distance
than
that
because
there's
a
existing
raw
water
line
easement
for
the
city
going
through
the
southern
portion
of
this
property
and
they
were
able
to
accommodate
that
and
their
site
plan.
The
proposed
architectural
renderings
that
you
see
on
the
screen
before
you,
those
all
comply
with
your
requirements
for
materials
in
the
corridor,
design,
overlay
District.
E
This
is
a
look
I
believe
the
north
side
is
looking.
The
left
side
of
the
north
image
is
looking
East
and
I
believe
the
the
right
side
of
that
is
facing
north
and
then
the
back
of
that
the
ones
on
the
bottom
are
your
drive
through
window
Lanes
they've
included
a
comprehensive
sign
package
that
appears
to
comply
with
your
sign
requirements
for
the
corridor
design,
overlay
District.
E
The
recommendation
is
approval,
and
these
are
the
two
identical
conditions
that
you
would
solve
for
human
Magus,
because
we're
dealing
with
this
complexity
of
Pavilion
Parkways
pattern
book
and
our
excuse
me
the
Monroe
Pavilions
pattern
book
and
the
corridor
design
overlay
standards
they
mesh
in
an
unusual
way
and
one
requires
illuminated
signs
or
allows
illuminated
signs,
and
one
doesn't
so.
These
conditions
are
reflective
of
the
identical
approval
we've
placed
upon
I
believe
it
was
Huey
Magoo's
not
too
long
ago,
and
also
Whataburger
is
allowed
to
do
these.
E
This
exact,
exact,
same
sign
scheme,
which
basically
says
and
I'm
not
going
to
read
it
word
for
word:
they're
allowed
to
illuminate
their
signs
facing
Pavilion
Parkway.
That
includes
their
Monument
sign,
but
any
signs
on
the
walls
of
the
building,
basically
they're
visible
from
78,
need
to
be
backlit
or
Halo
aluminated,
and
that's
all
that
I
have
Mr
chairman
very.
F
Good
evening
Eric
Houston
Erik
h-o-u-s-t-o-n
Smyrna
Georgia,
with
ingenium
Enterprises
we're
the
site
civil
designers.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
comprehensive
introduction
and
explanation
of
the
site.
As
you
can
see,
it's
a
reasonably
standard,
qsr
setup,
drive-through,
Lane
horseing
around
the
building
parking
field
to
the
east
side.
F
F
It'll
end
up
being
more
for
the
sign
company
in
the
end,
but
we
do
understand
the
illumination
request.
Yes,
okay,.
F
E
A
G
H
H
F
C
A
All
opposed
motion
is
passed,
the
request
is
passed.
A
Item
number
three
is
a
request
for
conditional
use
permit
at
113
North
Broad
Street
for
beer,
slash
wine
retail
store.
Thank.
E
You
Mr
chairman
the
request
before
the
Planning
Commission
for
a
conditional
use
of
approval
is
for
retail
wine
sales,
and
this
will
be
a
component
of
a
business
that
will
also
have
other
items
for
sale
in
their
area
and
the
photographs
on
your
screen.
This
will
occur
inside
the
basically
the
Monroe
Mercantile
building
at
113
North
Broad,
and
this
will
occur
inside
of
the
building
itself.
E
It
will
not
be
its
own
storefront
that
something
I
think
this
will
be
in
the
Loft
area
of
the
business
itself,
and
the
applicant
includes
other
items
to
be
sold
with
this,
but
it's
a
conditional
use
and
your
central
business
district
overlay
and
requires
conditionally
approval
to
have
retail
sales
of
wine.
That's
required
to
get
their
license.
I
My
name
is
Adrian
Vines.
We
are
looking
to
bring
in
an
olive
oil
shop
very
similar
to
one
that's
in
Covington
Georgia.
They
do
sell
wine
as
a
component
of
the
shop
itself.
It
is
not
the
primary
offering,
but
it
does
comprise
roughly
40
percent
of
the
sales
and
in
order
to
offer
the
things
that
we're
looking
to
offer,
we
do
need
that
approval
to
be
able
to
get
our
liquor
license
and
be
able
to
offer
wine.
The
beer
component
really
is
not
an
issue,
it's
simply
wine
that
we're
looking
at
carrying.
I
C
A
E
I
do
apologize
for
any
confusion
in
the
staff
report.
I
did
continue
to
list
the
way
it's
worded
exactly
in
the
ordinance
of
conditionally
used
retail
sales
of
beer
and
wine,
because
that's
basically
the
Lumpkin
is
one
use
but
right
right,
but
the
proposal
was
just
retail
sales
and
wine
as
the
applicant
indicator.
C
A
Motion
the
request
is
approved.
A
E
You
Mr
chairman:
this
is
a
request
to
reason
the
property
from
R2
to
PRD.
They
are
proposing
to
develop
the
site
with
five
single
family
residences.
There
is
currently
one
existing
single-family
residents
on
the
property
now
they're
in
the
process
of
in
renovating
this
is
inside
the
historic
preservation,
Nova
district
and
they've
gotten
their
approvals
for
all
of
the
home
types,
including
the
renovations
to
the
residents
itself,
and
so
they
are
now
asking
to
rezone
this
property
to
a
PRD.
E
This
property
is
also
located
in
your
Monroe
and
Walton
Mills,
historic
district
and
the
development
parameters
that
are
outlined
in
that
which
this
development
is
similar
to
that
it
forces
the
property
to
be
developed
as
a
condominium,
and
in
this
case,
it's
more
reasonable
for
this
property
to
be
developed
with
single-family
Lots.
So
they're,
proposing
a
unique
component
in
their
request
is
that
these
homes
will
be
on
their
own
feasible
lot
as
opposed
to
being
required
to
be
condominium,
and
so
that
makes
this
plan
development
relatively
unique.
E
As
you
can
see
on
the
plan
behind
you,
that
it
will
go
behind
three
of
the
lots
that
will
face
on
Norse
and
then
there'll
be
two
lights
that
will
be
accessed
on
the
north
side
of
the
property
from
the
common
drive
with
one
of
those
having
that
that
Frontage,
the
existing
residents,
the
Furniture
on
South,
Madison,
Avenue
and,
as
I
said,
these
have
the
homes
have
their
historic
preservation
approval
already
and
they
included
those
designs
in
their
their
pattern
book.
That's
included
with
the
reason
request
itself.
E
They've
also
included
all
of
their
development
controls.
So
this
will
be
like
your
other
planned
districts
in
the
city
that
have
it
has
its
own
specific
architecture
and
controls,
and
they
included
some
other
sample
photographs
of
the
proposed
development.
But
this
will
be
a
unique
incremental
development
for
the
city
and
the
recommendation
is
approval
estimated
without
any
conditions.
G
C
E
It
should
be
pretty
straightforward
at
that
point.
Their
development
construction
should
be
limited
as
far
as
site
development
is
concerned.
They
already
have
an
existing
resonance
there
and
I
don't
this
is
not
your.
This
doesn't
require
any
public
dedication
of
roadways
or
infrastructure
or
anything
of
that
nature.
It's
basically
building
a
driveway.
B
E
You
Mr
chairman:
this
is
a
renewal
of
any
previously
approved
preliminary
plant
for
the
Brooklyn
Commons
project
on
Good
Hope
Road.
It
does
include
a
total
of
142
Lots
on
approximately
43
Acres.
There
are
no
changes
to
the
previous
approved
preliminary
plant
at
all.
In
fact,
I
think
the
actual
one
change
was
they
removed
the
phasing.
That's
on
the
development
because
it's
been
completed
at
this
point,
but
they
need
the
preliminary
plot
to
be
reapproved,
so
we
can
reissue
the
ldp
and
they
may
finish
the
incomplete
the
development.
It's
pretty
straightforward.
H
Yes,
sir,
my
name
is
Ed
Lane
with
Smith
Planning
Group
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
project
as
Mr
calender
outlined.
That's
exactly
right.
We're
just
renewing
this
preliminary
plant
because
the
ldp
has
expired,
and
we
want
to
reissue
that
so
that
construction
can
be
completed
in
the
final
plat
obtained,
which
the
the
they
are
pretty
close
to
to
getting
so
we're
here
available.
If
there's
any
additional
questions,
but
that's
that's
it
and.
D
J
Good
evening
I'm
Bill
Schmidt
McKinley
homes,
it
will
be
in
the
350s,
might
might
even
bump
the
fours
out
there
on
some
of
the
single
family
stuff.
J
A
Being
none
entertain
a
motion
then.
C
E
D
E
Don't
know
y'all
might
have
some
questions
for
me
now.
This
I'm
gonna
try
to
keep
these
brief
for
you
guys,
but
we
had
a
proposed.
This
was
the
biggest
legal
description
I
had
written
for
an
amendment
since
I've
been
here.
That's
for
sure
yeah.
We
I
had
a
trove
of
amendments
that
were
proposed
so
you'll
see
a
lot
of
them
tonight
deferred.
So
I'm
not
I'm,
going
to
spare
you
a
lot
of
time,
because
there
were
a
lot
of
amendments.
E
We
had
coming
down
the
pike
so
I'm
just
going
to
start
off
the
bat
by
deferring
the
first
three
that
we
advertise,
which
were
cross
street
parking
all
Street
loading
requirements.
We
were
going
to
amend
some
things
that
we're
going
to
wait
because
we're
going
to
go
into
a
form-based
code
review
for
the
next
year
and
having
some
discussions
with
our
Consultants,
so
the
Amendments
that
you're
seeing
that
are
deferred
could
impact
that
there's
no
sense
in
walking
through
this
process
amending
our
ordinance
and
literally
turning
around
and
having
the
consultant
say
Hey.
E
You
probably
shouldn't
have
done
that.
So
in
this
case
we're
going
to
pull
us
back
and
that
way
we
can
have
another
second
look:
we
may
actually
move
forward
with
the
ones
we
had
written
as
after
we
confer
with
that
consultant,
but
we
don't
want
to
go
through
the
steps
and
then
change
it
again
and
again,
if
we
don't
have
to
so.
Those
first
three
are
are
deferred
to
the
next
time.
E
We
have
some
amendments
so
moving
forward
to
some
actual
amendments
that
need
to
occur
now,
and
this
is
in
relation
to,
if
you
saw
the
council
meeting
last
night,
they're
amending
some
of
their
alcohol
ordinance
requirements
turns
out
in
your
zoning
ordinance.
None
of
those
alcohol
uses
are
actually
listed
as
being
in
anything
in
our
ordinance.
E
So
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
add
those
land
uses
in
there
and
you
see
in
the
top
there,
where
we've
kind
of
expanded,
the
category
of
alcohol
and
beverage
to
include
those
uses
and
we've
a
beer
and
wine
there.
Beer
and
wine
is
that
you
heard
tonight
we're
just
going
to
move
the
name
of
that
retail
store
down
to
that
actual
use.
And
then
we
will
include
the
five
alcohol
uses
that
you
see
there
in
this
case
we're
proposing
them
in
the
commercial
districts,
but
none
of
them
are
going
to
be
allowed.
E
This
is
only
to
create
consistency
with
the
remaining
parts
of
our
commercial
portions,
of
our
ordinance
and
I'll.
Explain
that
in
a
minute,
but
these
are
the
five
uses
that
are
in
the
code
of
ordinances
now
and
have
been
for
years.
We've
licensed
these
facilities.
Well,
some
of
those
types
of
facilities
in
the
city,
and
now
we
are
adding
those
in
and
adding
a
reference
to
those.
The
only
thing
that
we
are
adding,
that's
that's
going
to
be
permitted
by
right
will
be
tattoo
parlors
in
B3.
E
Currently
that
uses
all
out
well
was
allowed
in
the
city
we
have
one
in
the
city,
but
that
useless
at
some
point,
Struck
from
our
code
and
so
and
if
that
person
ever
moves
expands
burns
down,
we
can't
let
them
be
replaced
because
they've
been
removed
from
our
ordinance
but
I'm
going
to
move
on
and
come
back
to
those
alcohol
uses
there
so
you'll
see.
Now
this
is
the
industrial
district,
we're
starting
to
get
into
where
the
code
of
ordinances
itself
actually
starts
to
speak
to
certain
types
of
uses,
that
being
Brews
and
distilleries.
E
Those
are
specifically
listed
in
the
code
of
ordinances
as
being
allowed
only
in
industrial
zoning.
So
those
you
see
here
listed
as
permitted
by
right
breweries
and
distillers,
we're
talking
about
Anheuser-Busch,
Jack,
Daniels
types,
sized
operations
being
an
industrial
only,
and
we
are
also
proposing
to
remove
the
conditional
use
of
residential
nm1,
which
right
now
that
is
a
general
category
and
not
specific.
E
If
you
look
through
your
ordinance
under
the
R1
and
the
B
districts,
you
have
very
specific
uses
to
the
residential
components
under
the
residential
category,
like
single-family,
single-family,
detached
duplex,
townhome
and
and
a
whole
lot
well.
This
is
just
a
general
category,
so
this
tells
you
that
in
anything,
an
M1
could
be
conditional
if
it's
residential-
that's
that,
doesn't
that's
not
consistent
with
the
rest
of
your
ordinance,
so
we're
proposing
that
that'd
be
struck.
E
Moving
on
so
we're
going
to
defer
the
corridor
design
overlay
amendment.
That
would
be
the
procedures
you
just
went
through
the
amendment
procedure
to
add
time
to
that
last
month.
We're
going
to
leave
that
alone.
For
a
moment
until
we
go
through
the
form-based
code
requirement,
we
are
going
to
make
a
change
to
your
CDL
requirements.
E
It's
one
simple
word
being
struck
in
materials
we're
going
to
allow
ifas
currently
ephus.
You
couldn't
tell
ifas
from
stucco
if
you
stead
and
stood
in
front
of
it
right
now,
it's
they
do
it
pretty.
Well,
it's
easily
replaceable
it's
easily
to
maintain.
So
this
material
is
is
something
we
should
be
allowing,
instead
of
restricting
and
prohibiting
from
being
on
a
building
very
simple,
we
were
going
to
change
some
parking
requirements
in
the
mhdo,
we'll
defer
those
two
but
moving
on
to
an
actual
Amendment.
So
we've
copied
and
pasted.
E
Basically
the
amendment
that,
if
you
recall
some
months
ago,
we
changed
the
garage
requirement,
then
section
910.
This
is
that
requirement
verbatim
placed
into
this
into
the
info
overlay
District
we're
trying
to
keep
them
consistent
together
it.
This
had
just
gotten
by
me
when
we
did
those
amendments,
I
didn't
realize
we
had
a
garage
requirement
there,
and
that
was
the
old
language
from
910.
E
So
we're
striking
that
going
to
add
that
in
there
moving
on
so
we're
now
into
the
CBDs
over
the
district,
now
you're
going
to
see
some
of
those
other
alcohol
uses
come
to
life
where
they're
actually
being
proposed
within
the
city
and
where
they
are
not
currently
licensed,
where
we
have
some
of
them.
So
we're
going
to
make
brew,
pubs,
Allowed
by
right,
micro,
breweries
and
micro
distilleries
and
based
on
the
code
of
ordinances,
that's
where
they
were
intended
to
be
in
the
first
place,
we're
not
going
to
change
beer
and
wine.
E
C
E
Moving
to
section
820
I,
don't
think
I
skipped
anything.
It
looks
like
everything's
everything's
on
track.
It
just
had
to
pause
there
and
I
felt
like
there
was
some
issue
with
the
screen,
so
I
had
proposed
to
add
the
words
multi-family.
This
is
what
we
advertised
in
this
section
and,
what's
shown
on
the
screen,
is
not
what's
in
your
packet,
though
I
had
to
add
the
words
greater
than
five
units
on
the
screen.
That
was
actually
not
included
in
your
packet,
we'll
make
that
correction
for
Council.
E
But
the
proposed
amendment
here
is
to
kind
of
clean
up
that
Amendment.
We
just
approved
back
in
April
we're
requiring
all
these
new
developments
to
become
planned
districts.
So
this
one
kind
of
clarifies
that
we
need
to
take
out
multi-family,
because
someone
could
do
an
R2
by
riding
the
city
and
we're
not
trying
to
prevent
that
from
happening
and
include
that
as
a
requirement
to
be
a
plant
District
that
has
its
own
standards
in
R2.
That
are
very,
very
specific.
E
So
this
is
to
accommodate
an
infill
development,
not
too
dissimilar
from
what
you
saw
tonight
in
Arizone,
and
that
rezone
is
different
than
what
would
be
allowed
here.
They
could
actually
have
pursued
that
in
a
plant
district
and
we're
not
saying
anyone
can't
go
through
a
plant
district
rezone
for
five
units,
but
if
I
have
an
acre
and
a
half
on
in
the
infill
overlay
district
and
I'm
allowed
by
right
to
create
three
lives.
The
way
it's
technically
worded
now
they'd
have
to
go
through
a
planned
district
rezone
and
that's
nonsense.
E
That
was
not
the
intent
of
that
planned.
District
rezone
requirement
we're
actually
adding
an
option
below
that.
It
says
it's
optional,
we're
not
going
to
make
you
do
it,
but
if
you
can
comply
with
the
IOD
standards
or
the
CBD
standards,
then
you
can
take
that
route.
We're
not
going
to
force
you
to
do
a
plan
District
if
you're
five
units
or
less,
if
that
makes
sense
that
was
very
fast
and
quick
and
I
apologize.
E
E
Not
I
don't
this
is
this
is
only
about
land
use.
This
is
because
right
now
they
don't.
Where
are
they
allowed
in
our
city
right?
We're
licing,
we're
licensing
these
uses
and
that's
fine
and
I?
That's
not
there's
no
objection
to
that,
but
we
need
to
clarify
where
they're
technically
allowed
in
our
city
right
from
a
landing's
perspective.
Only
that
is
that's
a
deeper
conversation,
I'm
more
than
welcome
to
come
to
council
and
watch
those
the
next
two
months.
E
I
B
A
The
next
number
seven
develop
oops.
You
know
what.
E
E
A
E
I
apologize,
I
thought
I
was
done,
I
definitely
need
a
pair
of
eyeglasses
is
what
I'm
learning
right
now
at
this
juncture
of
the
evening.
But
this
is
an
amendment
in
section
1000,
it's
very
unusual,
but
right
now
in
our
zoning
ordinance,
if
you
have
a
compliant
single-family
home
in
the
city
of
Monroe
and
you're
on
B2
B3
doesn't
matter
where
we
allow
a
single-family
home,
not
everybody
can
have
an
Adu
if
they're,
a
compliance,
see
you
on
family
home.
E
The
actual
intent
in
this
section
for
an
accessory
dwelling
is
to
allow
a
single
family
home
to
have
an
Adu.
So
there
are
many
homes
in
the
city
about
a
third
of
my
estimate
of
how
their
Zone
cannot
have
an
successful
dwelling
based
upon
our
current
requirements.
This
cleans
that
up
and
gets
rid
of
that
problem.
I've
got
several
people
in
the
city.
Who've
approached
us
based
on
their
underlying
zoning.
E
They
either
are
prohibited
or
require
a
rezone
or
require
conditional
use
just
to
add
an
Allowed
by
right
feature
to
the
property
and
we're
going
to
take
that
problem
away.
So
if
someone
has
their
valid
home
on
those
known
properties,
they
can
get
an
Adu.
They
meet
these
standards
that
are
already
in
your
code.
It's
pretty
straightforward,
we're
not
adding
you're
changing
these
standards
in
any
kind
of
way.
E
E
A
Okay,
any
questions
on
17.
rewind
hearing
on
they'll
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
a
motion.
D
A
E
That
sentence
makes
absolutely
no
sense
whatsoever
and
it
is
impossible
for
staff
to
make
a
reasonable
determination
when
dealing
with
developers
of
when
a
permit
expires.
Does
it
expire
in
the
11th
month?
Do
they
start
activities
and
keep
going
on
forever?
It's
not
clear!
It's
very
unclear.
The
interpretation
currently
including
the
second
sentence
that
struck
in
red
means
that
they
basically
have
15
months
to
complete
a
project.
The
second
sentence
says
that
we
can
grant
one
three-month
extension.
The
issue
for
staff
has
always
been.
E
What
is
that
three-month
extension
attached
to-
and
the
interpretation
has
been
the
12
months,
so
we're
going
to
clean
this
language
up
entirely,
remove
those
very
vague
and
unusual
sentences,
we're
going
to
actually
increase
the
time
that
a
development
can
be
granted
time
for
an
ldp
to
be
active
by
18
months.
So
now
it's
currently
15
12
with
one
three
month
extension
we're
going
to
give
them
18
months
to
complete
and
we're
going
to
clarify
the
language
of
when
an
actual
permit
expires.
E
We
just
don't
foresee
an
anomaly
that
would
prohibit
someone
starting
within
six
months,
typically
they're
chomping
at
the
bit
to
us
to
get
their
ldp
in
hand
because
they
have
their
cruise
line
up
ready
to
go,
and
so,
when
we've
granted
the
lap,
we
fully
expect
as
the
city
for
development
to
commence.
If
they
don't
commence,
then,
six
months
later
it
will
expire
after
we
issue
the
ldp
or
if
there's
a
period
for
45
days,
where
there's
a
lap
in
development
activity.
E
C
E
A
new
ldp,
yeah
I,
know
I'm,
sorry,
all
right
and
just
don't
know
we
had.
We
had
some
some
robust
discussion
this
afternoon
about
that.
I
mean
right
now
we're
saying
that
at
15
months
they
have
they
need
to
have
the
development
complete
and
a
final
plate
like
in
the
building
submitted
and
ready
for
Council
consideration.
E
So
it
to
answer
your
question:
if
they
are
in
the
17th
month,
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
reissue
the
ldp
at
the
end
of
18
months,
they're
going
to
have
to
re-initiate
the
pulmonary
plot
process,
because
the
LD,
the
pulmonary
expiration,
is
hinged
on
that
ldp
expiration.
And
if
that
expires,
the
preliminary
plants
expired.
They
both
expire
simultaneously
and
the
only
way
we
can
grant
a
new
ldp
is
if
they
have
a
pulmonary
flat
approved
by
plenty
by
city
council.
E
It's
tough!
It's
tough
I!
If
you
guys
want
to
think
that
18
months
is
not
long
enough.
If
you
want
to
grant
them
more
time
for
someone
to
finish,
I'm
open
to
that
and
Council
may
be
open
to
that
as
well.
I
may
not
certainly
I'm
open
to
that
discussion.
I
think
we're
giving
the
developers
now
a
pretty
limited
window
with
15
months.
E
So
that's
why,
when
we
I
discussed
this
with
Pat
and
just
dealing
with
some
of
the
issues
we've
dealt
with
I'm
like
well,
let's
just
add
them
three
add
three
months
to
it:
if
they're
not
getting
done
in
15,
then
maybe
they
can
get
it
done
in
18,
because
the
biggest
issues
we
saw
were
Transformers
taking
a
year
Well,
you
start
developing
and
you've
got
your
ldp
and
it's
taking
a
year.
You
got
six
more
months
to
get
in
final
plot
to
us.
That's
that
was
our
mindset
in
thinking
of
the
18
months.
E
Oh
yeah,
now
yeah,
assuming
they've,
submitted
their
pulmonary
plan.
They
could
yeah.
Theoretically
it
would.
It
would
take
some
strategic
timing
on
the
developers
part
to
go
hey
I'm
in
month,
15.
conceptually
it's
possible,
oh
yeah,
I,
would
say
yeah
and
I.
Think
that
will
be
a
goal
of
the
city
is
to
have
a
community
conversation
with
that
developer
and
go
look
or
where
you
at.
Are
you
on
your
final
flat
path
or
not?
And
if
not
go
ahead
and
get
your
preliminary
platin
here?
E
So
we
can
get
this
thing
approved
and
they
could,
theoretically,
as
Laura
describe
be
on
the
track
to
renew
that
ldp
without
delay
in
their
development.
It
would
take
some
strategy
into
planning
ahead
on
the
part
of
the
developer,
really
if
they
know
they're,
not
gonna,
get
it
done
in
18.
They
already
should
know
that
they
need
to
be
having
a
conversation.
C
E
They're,
either
going
to
be
scrambling
to
get
that
final
plant
to
us
and
like
I
I've,
had
discussions
with
Pat
as
well.
Is
that
okay,
let's
say
that
the
developer
is
on
the
site
and
he's
in
month
17.
and
he's
done,
and
we
utilities
good
I'm
good.
You
know
we're
all
good
the
site's
done
streets
are,
you
know,
top
and
all
and
stuff
they
got
everything
submitted
and
ready
for
development,
and
we
would
allow
finalplus
to
be
submitted.
E
The
ldp
could
last
at
that
point,
I,
don't
think
we
have
an
issue
with
that
if
they
have
submitted
a
final
plan
for
consideration,
so
there
could
be
some
overlap.
Where
we
we're
not
going
to
say
you
can't
do
a
funnel
plat
now,
because
your
ldp
expired.
That
would
be
nonsensical
if
that
makes
sense.
So
someone
it.
It's
always
a
challenge
for
us.
E
We
don't
want
to
see
people
rush
in,
but
they
all
it
seems
like
there's
always
some
issue
that
would
push
people
into
a
point,
not
necessarily
procrastination
but
world
the
factors
you
know
the
environment
economy.
All
kinds
of
things
will
push.
You
know
development
to
the
Edge
of
Time.
It
seems
like
and
of
course,
we'll
try
to
work
with
the
developers
as
much
as
we
can.
I
just
feel
like
that.
E
E
Okay,
it's
not
like
a
I
guess
and
let
me
clarify
it's
not
like
a
building
permit.
Where
we
can.
You
know
re,
you
know
it
takes
two
years
to
build
your
house
or
whatever
that's
no
big
deal,
that
is
a
site.
That's
been
developed,
we're
not
there's
not
there's,
not
a
need
for
there
being
land
disturbance,
inspections
going
on,
including
the
installation
of
Utilities
in
the
ground
in
a
manner
that's
going
to
be
dedicated
to
the
public.
So
there's
a
big
difference
between
that
type
of
construction
and
Land
Development.
A
F
A
E
D
A
Right
I
would
need
to
see
if
there's
anyone
here
to
speak
in
opposition
to
this
request,
speak
no,
no
entertainment
motion
motion.