►
From YouTube: Oklahoma City Planning Commission - August 27, 2020
Description
The regular meeting of the Oklahoma City Planning Commission, via video conference, for
August 27, 2020.
A
A
Before
we
get
started,
I
want
to
read
a
number
of
announcements
relating
to
how
we're
conducting
the
meeting
today.
This
relates
to
why
we're
not
having
in-person
meetings
so
bear
with
me
if
the
video
conference
is
disconnected
at
any
time
during
this
meeting,
the
meeting
shall
be
stopped
and
reconvened
once
the
audio
connection
is
restored.
A
The
agenda
and
documents
are
located
on
okc.gov
and
if
you
have
any
questions
about
how
to
access
those
documents
or
any
trouble
accessing
those
documents
on
okc.gov
oklahoma
city
staff
is
happy
to
assist
you.
The
number
there
297-2289
again
297-2289
preview
of
coming
attractions.
This
is
like
a
bad
infomercial.
You'll
hear
that
phone
number
several
more
times
this
afternoon
for
anyone
wishing
to
speak
about
an
agenda
item
or
speak
under
citizens
to
be
heard.
A
Hopefully
you
have
previously
notified
staff
by
phone
or
email
or
by
signing
up
online,
and
I
will
call
on
you
to
speak
at
the
appropriate
time.
I
will
call
on
people
first,
who
have
signed
up
to
speak
and
then
I'll,
ask
if
there's
anyone
else
that
wants
to
be
heard.
I
will
also
briefly
allow
for
public
comment
on
each
agenda
item.
A
If
you
call
in
after
your
item
has
been
heard,
you
will
be
allowed
to
speak
under
citizens
to
be
heard,
and
speakers
will
be
allowed
a
limited
time
to
comment
and
I'll
brief
you
as
we
move
through
the
agenda.
Accordingly,
when
you
call
in
staff,
will
be
muting
your
line
at
the
outset.
Please
keep
your
lines
on
mute
to
avoid
background
noise
and
disruptions
to
the
meeting
until
you
are
recognized
to
speak
to
unmute
your
phone.
A
If
you've
joined
us
by
telephone,
you
use
star
six
if
you've
joined
us
by
zoom
meeting,
please
make
sure
your
device
is
not
muted
and
you
can
use
the
space
bar
to
unmute
or
you
can
simply
click
the
microphone
to
mute
yourself.
I
ask
that
all
participants
accept
the
commission.
Members
keep
their
lines
on
mute
until
they're,
recognized.
A
Commission
members
will
be
allowed
to
speak
or
ask
questions
at
any
time
during
the
meeting,
because
that's
why
they're
here
and
please
remember
that
only
one
person
can
be
heard
at
a
time
if
more
than
one
person
speaks.
We
won't
be
able
to
hear
both
folks
for
anyone
speaking
today,
including
commission
members,
please
be
sure
to
identify
yourself
when
you
start
speaking
and
remember
if
you
are
an
applicant
or
member
of
the
public.
Please
give
us
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
I'll
ask
for
those
any
generation.
A
There
will
be
a
roll
call
every
15
minutes
if,
for
some
reason
we
feel
like
there's
a
commissioner,
that's
not
present
or
we
lose
somebody's
connection,
if
that's
necessary
and
if,
for
some
reason
our
prime
voting
system
is
not
working,
we
will
accept
voice
votes
from
commissioners.
So,
with
all
that
in
mind
again
welcome
to
the
oklahoma
city
plan,
commission
we're
glad
to
have
everybody,
and
especially
under
these
conditions,
we
ask
for
your
patience
and
we're
going
to
try
to
be
a
real
bastion
of
civility
in
these
difficult
times.
A
B
A
C
A
D
A
Could
you
please
change,
commissioner
hinkle's
vote
to
yes
and
those
minutes
are
received
just
for
the
public's
benefit?
I
I
I
can't
recall
if
you
well,
I
know
if
you're
on
the
phone
you
can't,
we
have
a
voting
system
that
allows
these
votes
to
be
recorded
and
preserved
in
the
record,
and
as
we
go
through
this,
there
could
be
delays
with
that
system,
allowing
us
to
process
those
votes
so
bear
with
us
we're
trying
to
do
this
as
responsibly
as
we
can
next
item
on
the
agenda
are
continuance.
Requests
previously
received
staff.
A
Those
were
previously
uncontested
requests
so
for
the
benefit
of
the
public.
This
is
item
number
17
on
today's
agenda.
Spud
1244.
is
there
anyone
that
wanted
to
be
heard
on
that
item
today,
I'll
pause
just
a
moment
before
I
accept
a
motion.
First
reminder
star:
six
on
your
phone
spacebar
on
your
computer.
F
F
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
A
F
A
A
E
Yes,
item
one
is
case:
number
c7192,
a
final
plat
of
water,
stone
blocks
one
and
two,
it's
a
replat
and
that
is
located
east
of
northwestern
avenue
and
north
of
northwest
150th
street
and
the
second
and
last
item
on
the
consent.
Docket
is
case,
number
c7197,
the
final
plat
of
maps,
three
lower
downtown
park
and
that's
located
west
of
south
robinson
avenue.
G
A
I
will
point
out
to
the
commissioners
and
applicants
that
are
new,
since
this
is
the
first
item,
even
though
it's
consent,
our
new
drainage
and
detention
requirement,
comments
are
presented
in
the
applications
today,
I'm
assuming
that
everyone's
had
a
chance
to
review
those.
They
appear
in
each
and
every
case
in
our
agenda
today,
but
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
they'll
be
approved
as
a
part
of
this
first
set
of
consent
items.
B
D
A
E
A
H
H
I
At
some
point,
subsequent
to
the
approval
it
was
discovered.
There
was
some
kind
of
an
error
with
the
legal
description
that
required
that
it
come
back
through
the
process,
so
you're
just
seeing
this
application
over
again,
nothing
has
changed.
It
mirrors
the
regulations
of
the
existing
spud
1181.
It
just
corrects
a
discrepancy
in
the
legal
description.
A
A
We
did
receive
a
letter
of
protest.
I'd
note
that
for
the
record,
as
mr
chambliss
indicated,
I
would
also
note
we've
seen
this
case
before,
and
we've
sort
of
had
the
discussion
I'll
pause
a
moment
to
see
if
there's
new
information
that
anyone
would
like
to
share
from
the
public
I'll
pause
now
for
that
star,
6
on
your
phone
or
spacebar
on
your
computer.
If
you'd
like
to
be
heard
and
I'll
pause,
just
a.
A
A
A
A
D
A
E
A
A
C
A
I'm
sitting
in
that
office
park
as
it
were,
so
I
can
second,
your
your
thought.
There
I'll
pause
a
moment
to
see
if
there's
anybody
from
the
public
that
wanted
to
be
heard
on
this
item
again
just
to
confirm
this
is
pud
sp
1443
star
six
on
your
phone
spacebar
on
your
computer.
If
you
are
joining
us
as
a
member
of
the
public
and
you'd
like
to
be
heard
on
this
item,.
A
A
A
E
L
They
are
proposing
public
streets,
storm,
sewer,
sanitary
sewer
and
water
treatments.
With
this
flat,
the
plat
is
zoned
single-family,
residential
and
spud
1182
with
a
c3
base.
The
r1
allows
for
six
thousand
square
foot
minimum
lot
sizes
lots
in
this
flat
range,
approximately
between
11
000
and
14
thousand
square
feet
so
larger
than
what
is
required.
L
M
L
A
A
A
M
A
I
have
a
motion
and
a
second
to
approve
the
preliminary
plan
for
c7195.
Commissioner
coffee
seconded
that
motion
there.
You
go
cast
your
votes
when
available.
Commissioner
hinkle.
Yes,
please,
commissioner,
hinkle
votes
in
the
affirmative.
All
votes
have
been
cast
and
the
application
is
approved.
Good
luck
with
the
development,
sir.
E
L
Access
to
this
subdivision
will
be
taken
from
access
point
off
of
northwest
178th
street
street
stubs
are
provided
to
the
southeast
and
west.
There
are,
I
believe,
three
tvs
on
this
one,
that's
correct.
The
applicant
has
agreed
to
provide
a
emergency
access
point
back
to
portland
avenue
from
one
of
their
street
stubs
that
they
are
providing.
This
will
line
up
with
a
with
the
street,
that's
planned
in
the
next
phase
of
the
development,
and
so
they
are
in
agreement
with
that.
H
So
I'll
take
it
david
box,
522
call
cord
drive,
no,
nothing
to
add.
We
did
just
want
to
emphasize
that
we
did
get
the
emergency
access
issue
not
only
to
mr
martin,
but
also
mr
wilson,
with
the
fire
marshal's
office.
So
with
that,
we
do
agree
with
the
tes
with
respect
to
te2.
It
will
be
the
emergency
access.
Therefore,
we
don't
need
a
variance.
A
We're
I
I'm
in
agreement
that,
although
this
is
ward
8,
so
I'll
jump
in
for
the
purpose
of
the
record,
the
design
of
this
final
flat
is
in
conformance
with
the
requirements
of
pud
1768
and
the
approved
preliminary
platform
knox
farm.
We
discussed
in
the
pre-staff
meeting
just
in
the
yes
disclosure,
the
te2
as
it
was
drafted.
Commissioners
will
recall:
we've
had
a
number
of
discussions
about
suppression
systems.
I
asked
staff
to
clarify
that.
A
Should
the
applicant
be
willing
to
agree
to
te2
what
they
are
agreeing
to
is
that
if
they
provide
a
secondary
emergency
access
point
or
a
permanent
access
point,
then
the
balance
of
that
technical
evaluation
does
not
apply.
They
agreed
with
that
interpretation
of
that
language
and
the
applicant
is
in
agreement
as
well.
So
at
this
point,
are
there
any
other
questions
of
commissioners
of
the
applicant
on
this.
A
A
Hearing
none
I'll
ask
if
there's
anyone
joining
us
from
the
public
today.
That
would
like
to
be
heard
and
again
just
for
your
benefit.
This
is
c7193.
Item
number.
Six
on
today's
agenda:
star
six
on
your
phone
space
bar
on
your
computer
be
sure
your
device
is
unmuted,
any
technical
problems,
four,
zero:
five:
two:
nine
seven,
two,
two,
eight
nine
hearing,
none
it's
my
word!
I
can't
make
one
otherwise
I'd
make
a
motion
to
approve
it.
If
someone
would
like
to
make
a
motion
I'll
receive
it.
A
A
L
L
The
site
is
currently
zoned
single
family,
residential
r1,
with
6
000
square
foot,
lobby,
minimum
the
lots
in
this
flywheel
range
between
6
000
and
10
000
square
feet.
Access
shown
on
the
preliminary
plot
is
to
come
off
of
a
street.
That's
currently
under
construction
called
thomas
drive,
which
will
be
dedicated
separately
that
comes
off
from
the
south.
L
L
L
It's
a
little
bit
more
complicated
than
the
last
one
in
that
they
are.
They
are
agreeing
to
provide
that
access
prior
to
30
certificates
of
occupancy
being
granted
for
for
their
first
phase
of
the
development,
but
they
are
agreeing
to
that
access.
Dean
coletta
with
civil
and
environmental
consultants
is
on
the
line
in
case
there
are
any
questions.
A
L
A
L
A
Okay,
perfect
well,
this
is
my
word
I'll
just
note.
If
that
is
all
in
agreement,
then
this,
according
to
our
staff
reports,
meets
the
subdivision
regulations.
So
I
don't
have
any
other
questions
or
comments.
Commissioners,
any
questions
or
comments
on
this
one
hearing,
none
I'll
open
it
up
to
the
public.
This
would
be
your
chance
to
comment
on
c71
preliminary
flat
for
country
colonnade,
residential
I'll
pause.
Just
a
moment,
star
6
on
your
phone
spacebar
on
your
computer.
A
A
E
L
L
L
G
A
Fair
enough
I'll
just
know
for
the
record.
The
design
of
this
preliminary
plan
conforms
to
the
subdivision
regulations
as
they
relate
to
subdivisions
with
30
lots
or
less,
and
with
that
clarifying
point,
commissioner
claire,
this
is
your
award.
Do
you
have
questions
or
thoughts
or
comments
on
this
one.
N
A
A
A
A
A
L
All
right,
so
this
one
was
on
our
last
meeting
located
at
rockwell
northwest
122nd.
They
are
proposing
to
subdivide
an
existing
retail
shopping
center
into
nine
commercial
office.
Lots
it's
a
26
and
0.7
acre
site
access
is
planned
to
take,
be
taken
off
of
rockwell
and
northwest
expressway
and
also
glade
avenue.
Those
are
existing
access
points.
L
They
do
not
agree
with
t
number
two
that
that
deals
with
the
the
desire
potential
desire
of
the
city
to
close
one
of
their
access
points
and
in
conjunction
with
a
traffic
project,
to
to
to
help
the
traffic
at
that
intersection
of
northwest,
expressway
and
rockwell.
That
project
is
currently
under
design.
A
Mr
box,
before
you
jump
in
or
mr
max
before
you
jump
in,
I
would
just
add,
for
the
purposes
of
the
record
of
playing
commission
members.
The
design
of
this
final
plaque
informs
the
subdivision
regulations
as
they
relate
to
non-residential
development.
It
also
conforms
to
the
zoning
requirements
of
the
i2
district.
We
did
discuss
this
item
last
week,
quick
refresher.
We
continued
it
two
weeks
we
asked
actually
encouraged
them
to
take
four.
A
They
didn't
want
to
my
understanding
from
that
at
the
time
was
that
the
city
was
very
close
to
a
to
sort
of
a
a
resolution
for
this
intersection,
which
is
why
we
allow
time
I
spoke
to
mr
box
briefly
about
this
item
and
he
basically
indicated
to
me
that
that
may
not
be
the
case,
which
certainly
changed
changed
my
view
about
how
long
we
should
hold
this,
mr
box
or
mr
maddox.
Do
you
guys
have
anything
to
add
to
the
introduction
or
those
comments
I
just
made.
H
H
The
drive
that
is
there
has
been
there
for
decades.
It
is
very
important
to
the
viability
of
the
shopping
center
that
drive
meets
all
spacing
requirements.
As
the
chairman
rightfully
pointed
out,
the
plaque
conforms
to
all
subdivision
regulations
as
such.
It
must
then
meet
all
spacing
requirements
or
access.
H
H
Well,
I
appreciate
you
calling
me,
commissioner,
but
you
I'm
sorry.
I
have
an
elevation
for
my
status.
I
don't
know
it
has
been
there
for
decades.
I
grew
up
in
northwest
oklahoma
city
and
frequented
the
shopping
center
and
it
has
been
there
for,
I
think,
more
than
two
decades
that
access
drive
has
been
there
for
quite
some
time.
There
are
out
parcels
that
are
fast
food
restaurants
that
depend
upon
that
specific
drive.
M
A
N
A
C
C
G
L
Traffic
might
be,
might
be
better
to
take
this
one,
but
my
understanding
is
that
that
the
it's
potential
interference
with
the
current
drive
with
a
right
turn
lane
that
they're
looking
at
putting
in
that
location,
and
they
don't
want
the
drive
to
come
out
into
that
right
turn
lane.
You
know
if
this
were
an
existing
subdivision
that
had
already
been
planted
years
ago,
when
this
was
developed
and
the
city
wanted
to
to
make
an
improvement
at
this
time.
L
A
You
know,
and
just
since
you've
got
this
up
on
the
screen
for
the
for
the
commission
benefit
of
the
commissioners,
especially
commissioner
pence
is
asking
these
questions.
Whoever's
got
control
of
the
the
exhibit
here.
If
you
could
scroll
your
mouse
over
the
top
of
the
map
to
where
this
drive
actually
is
it's
not
where
you
think
it's
actually
east
of
that
keep
going.
H
A
Okay,
I
just
want
to
make
sure
you
see
that
commissioner
pennington,
because
it
it
when
you
look
at
that,
exhibit
it's
a
little
unclear,
because
the
outline
seems
to
show
you
that
that
sort
of
outcropping
that's
further
west,
it's
actually
the
entrance.
That's
there
a
little
little
further
to
the
left
a
little
further
right
there.
That's
it
right!
There.
N
P
Yes,
this
project
is
to
add
a
second
left
turn
lane
from
northwest
expressway
onto
rockwell.
When
we
do
that,
we're
going
to
have
to
widen
the
road
to
the
south
which
will
move
the
right
turn
lane,
that's
existing
another
12
feet
further
south
and
cause
conflicts
with
the
driveway.
That's
my
understanding.
I've
only
seen
the
plans
they're
65
developed
and
the
project
was
part
of
the
2017
bond
issue.
So
that's
where
it's
coming
from.
As
far
as
I
know
and
traffic
is
not
developing
it.
I've
only
seen
the
plans
once
so.
A
A
A
A
E
E
L
L
L
The
lots
in
this
plot
will
range
in
size
between
six
thousand
and
ten
thousand
square
feet
with
a
front
twenty
foot
building
line.
They
will
take
access
from
one
median
divided
connection
with
southwest
29th
street
and
one
meeting
divide
connection
with
south
check
hall.
Road
properties
on
the
other
sides
have
been
previously
developed
with
five
acre
rural
subdivisions,
so
they
aren't
providing
stubs
in
those
directions.
L
P
A
I
would
also
point
out,
commissioners
just
as
a
reminder
that
we
did
see
the
zoning
application
for
this,
which
was
recommended
for
approval
at
our
may
14
2020
meeting,
and
I
asked
a
question
in
our
meeting
today
in
advance
with
staff
about
te
number
four
and
te
number
two
jared.
If
we
so
I
wanna
make
sure
we
understand
this.
A
H
Sure,
david
box
522
call
cord
drive,
so
we
did
have
an
opportunity
to
meet
with.
I
believe
it
was
four
residents
that
had
previously
submitted
a
few
protest
letters.
I
do
want
to
point
out,
I'm
not
sure
if
you'll
be
able
to
really
see
it
with
the
the
map
that
is
on
the
screen
right
now,
but
it's
worth
pointing
out
that,
along
the
west
side
of
this
plat
there
is
a
40-foot
buffer
that
will
be
common
area.
H
H
We
recognize
that
to
the
west
of
us.
They
are
larger,
acreage
lots.
Those
lots
were
developed
at
a
time
in
the
city
in
which
there
was
not
sewer
and
water.
Clearly,
we
now
have
sewer
and
water,
which
is
why
we
had
a
conference
plan
change
as
well
as
a
rezoning
case.
That
was
not
only
recommended
for
approval
by
a
planning.
Commission,
ultimately
was
approved
by
the
city
council,
but
with
that
said,
recognizing
the
larger
lot
to
our
west.
We
do
provide
that
40-foot
swath
along
the
west
side.
H
There
was
also
some
drainage
concerns.
There
are
some
pre-existing
drainage
problems
that
exist
out
there.
Our
development
is
downstream,
you
know,
so
our
development
is
taking
the
items
that
are
already
there,
not
pushing
it
on
them.
So
we
are
downstream.
We
will
be
able
to
clean
up
that
common
area
and
hopefully
provide
for
slightly
better
drainage.
So
we
do
want
to
delete
te2
going
back
to
that
te4
constructing
a
sidewalk
across
the
creek
is
problematic.
H
I've
never
seen
that
requirement
before
we
do
agree.
As
mr
martin
said
that
you
know
on
the
side
of
the
street,
where
it's
adjacent
to
common
area,
there
will
be
a
sidewalk.
There
will
be
a
sidewalk
along
the
arterials.
There
will
be
a
sidewalk
throughout
the
neighborhood.
It's
just
that
constructing
a
sidewalk
across
the
creek,
given
the
fragile
nature
of
the
drainage
in
this
area,
I
think,
is
perhaps
problematic.
H
H
A
N
A
Their
concern
is
just
that
the
common
areas
are
going
to
be
accessible
for
pedestrian
purposes,
that
the
actual
you
know,
people
that
live
there,
are
going
to
be
able
to
get
access
to
this
and
you're
in
agreement
with
that.
Is
that
correct?
Yes,
sir?
Okay,
so
and
then
on
your
comment
about
the
detention
requirements,
the
detention
determination,
which
is
item
number
o
on
page
five
of
10.
It
is
our
understanding
that
that
memorializes,
what
is
existing
in
the
current
code
today
and
that
you're
held
to
those
standards.
A
A
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
at
this
time,
I'll
open
it
up
to
members
of
the
public
that
are
here
today
to
be
heard
on
c7178
I'll,
tell
you
at
the
outset
and
for
the
purpose
of
the
record.
We
did
receive
a
letter
dated
july
1st
in
opposition
that
letter
points
out
the
concerns
of
property
values,
traffic
noise
and
crime,
road
capacity
limits
and
infrastructure
pressure
and
drainage
issues
which
the
applicant
addressed.
A
I
had
a
chance
to
sort
of
examine
these,
as
I'm
sure
other
commissioners
did
as
well.
So
we
are
aware
of
these
concerns.
We
also
received
today
mr
grubbs
and
mr
box
for
your
information
and
record
a
number
of
signatures
in
opposition
to
this
that
was
signed
on
a
consistent
letter.
I
did
not
count
the
number
of
signatures,
unfortunately
beforehand
I
would
estimate
and
that
there
are
at
least
40
primarily
dealing
with
infrastructure
and
drainage
related
issues.
A
A
C
M
A
I
don't
recall
specific
concerns
now
to
be
fair.
I
do
believe
this
letter
was
in
our
previous
packet,
which
is
was
written
on
july,
the
1st
which,
which
was
actually
in
your
packet
as
printed,
which
addressed
some
of
those
things.
You
know,
I
think,
just
for
preserving
it,
the
and
and
documenting
this
for
the
record.
We're
keenly
aware
of
the
infrastructure
challenges
as
development
grows
into
this
area.
I
don't
think
it's
been
our
policy
that
you
know
we're
going
to
limit
development,
because
you
know
bond
issues
haven't
gotten
there.
A
Yet.
I
think
we
all
have
learned
that
you
got
to
put
people
someplace
if
you
want
infrastructure
to
come
because
they're
not
going
to
build
it
unless,
unless
people
were
there,
the
drainage
issue
staff
addressed
it
our
pre-meeting
and
talked
it
and
talked
you
know
at
some
length
and
and
frankly,
the
new
comments
helped
preserve
that
the
ordinance
would
be
enforced,
and
I
would
just
point
out
too
in
your
staff
reports
on
that
comment.
Since
you
know
no
one
did
call
in,
but
I
wanted
to
reflect
that.
A
We
understood
the
concern
and
addressed
it.
There
are
two
places
in
the
staff
report
where
detention
and
drainage
related
issues
are
addressed.
The
first,
as
the
applicant
pointed
out,
is
item
o
on
page
5
of
10
under
subsection
2,
which
addresses
the
detention,
determination
and
there's
also
a
comment
as
well
on
item
h
under
part.
A
Two,
which
says
plans
for
drainage
improvements
within
private
drainage
reserves
and
recommendaries
must
be
submitted
for
review
and
payment
of
inspection
fees
shall
be
made
prior
to
construction,
so
these
things
will
be
looked
at
and
and,
as
we
know
and
should
be
comfortable
with
at
this
point
are
a
part
of
the
development
process.
I
don't
see
anything
else
in
there
that
are
something
that
we
can
really
justify.
Concerns
on
in
terms
of
whether
or
not
this
development
is
going
to
create
crime
or
affect
property
values.
So
other
thoughts
on
that,
commissioner,.
A
A
J
A
A
I
All
right,
this
is
an
application
to
rezone
46
acres
of
undeveloped
property
on
the
east
side
of
mustang
road,
just
north
of
northwest
expressway
from
a
current
pud
that
allows
urban
scale
single
family
and
duplex
development
to
the
ra
district.
The
owner
developer
is
interested
in
it's
securing
a
larger
lot
size
and
that's
the
reason
for
the
ra
zoning
staff
found
it
to
be,
in
conformance
with
the
comp
plan
and
recommend
approval
and
dwight
butler
represents
the
applicant.
A
Q
A
A
I
All
right,
this
is
a
eight
acre
site
developed
with
a
single
family
home.
It's
on
the
south
side
of
northeast
122nd,
just
west
of
bryant
and
we're
rezoning
from
r1
to
double
a
to
permit
growing
of
medical
marijuana
staff
found
it
to
be,
in
conformance
with
the
comp
plan
and
the
surrounding
development
and
recommended
approval.
O
A
C
Role-
and
I
am
deeply
concerned
about
this
development-
and
I
visited
with
councilwoman
nice
this
morning,
who
shares
my
concerns,
so
I'm
I'm,
echoing
not
only
my
concern
as
a
planning,
commissioner,
but
a
sign
of
things
to
come,
as
this
application
goes
forward
to
the
city
council.
My
first
question
and
is
about
the
fact
that
we're
moving
to
we
want
to
permit
medical
marijuana
growing.
C
I
think
there's
some
very
serious
concerns
about
how
that
will
impact
the
surrounding
area
when,
typically,
when
we're
talking
about
a
straight
zoning
application
for
to
aaa
we're
looking
at
turning
down
the
intensity
of
the
use.
So
there
is
a
there
is
a
letter
in
the
packet
of
objection
from
from
neighbors,
but
I
just
really
like
to
hear
from
the
applicant
what
they
have
in
mind:
what
plans,
if
any,
they
have
to
mitigate
and
understand
that.
I
need
that.
C
O
O
Yes,
sir,
yes,
I
understand
your
concern
and
I
and,
and
you
know
I
currently
grow
for
medical
purposes
and
I
sometimes
yield
more
than
I
use,
and
I
just
would
like
the
opportunity
to
sell
to
a
friend's
dispensary,
I'm
not
going
to
have
any
employees,
I'm
it's
going
to
be
a
total
diy
venture,
just
a
small
indoor
project.
So
so
it
sounds
very
intimidating.
Whenever
I
read
it
too,
it
scared
me.
I
was
like
oh
wait,
that's
not
what
I
want
to
do.
A
I
would
echo
commissioner
pennington's
concern,
would
just
be
that,
while
you
may
have
great
intentions,
understand
that
when
we
approve
a
rezoning
request,
we
are
making
a
permanent
change
to
the
use
of
the
land.
In
this
case
that
request,
although
you
intend
to
limit
it,
would
allow
for
eight
acres
of
cultivation.
So
at
some
point
someone
could
come
in
and
and
use
the
entire
eight
acres
for
that
purpose.
A
There
are
other
tools
within
you
know,
zoning
that
would
allow
you
to
really
limit
this
use.
It
would
be
the
the
implementation
or
the
adoption
of
a
pud
or
an
spud
type
format
for
the
purposes
of
allowing
this
use,
but
giving
commissioner
pennington
the
neighbors
and
what
sounds
like
councilwoman
nice,
the
ability
to
put
some
protections
in
place
for
the
surrounding
uses,
but
maybe
allow
you
to
have
a
quasi-personal
use,
I'm
not
saying
or
indicating
or
suggesting
that
that
would
be
approved,
but
that's
probably
a
better
approach
here.
A
A
Your
options
here
would
be
to
press
forward
and
have
a
discussion
on
the
merits
of
the
case
as
it's
presented
or
to
essentially
withdraw
this
item
and
you'd
have
to
reapply
and
and
provide
new
notice
again
to
the
neighbors
for
an
sp.
I
guess
it'd
be
a
pud
because
of
the
size
of
the
acreage.
Would
it
jj?
A
O
A
I
A
A
C
C
C
A
C
And
let
me
just
say,
mr
hoffman
and
and
I'm
sure
I
think
I've
got
your
phone
number
and
email
address
in
the
staff
report,
so
I
will
reach
out
to
you.
I
think,
there's
probably
a
lot
more
openness
to
what
you
have
explained
here
at
the
commission
meeting
than
there
was
to
to
the
application
as
presented.
So
I
hope
you
don't
think
the
door
is
closed.
I
think
we
just
need
to
have
some
more
discussions
about
how
we
can
how
we
can
make
this
work
so.
A
A
It
okay
hearing
none
commissioner
pennington.
I
I
I
will
ask
if
there's
anyone
that
wants
to
be
heard
on
this
item,
the
item's
being
continued.
So
I
would
ask
that
unless
it
pertains
to
a
to
a
disagreement
with
the
continuance
that
you
withhold
your
comments
until
the
items
hurt
on
the
merits
at
a
later
date
with
that
I'll
pause
a
moment.
This
is
for
members
of
the
public
on
item
number
13,
pc106,.
A
C
A
A
I
I
This
was
reviewed
by
the
downtown
design
review
committee
and
they
recommended
that
the
spud
incorporate
the
regulations
of
the
dvd
district
and
be
subject
to
design
review,
which
it
does
staff
found
it
to
be
in
conformance
and
compatible
with
the
uses
in
the
area.
We
recommend
approval
with
four
tes
and
jonathan
russell
represents
the
applicant.
A
R
R
S
Real
real,
quick:
this
is
commissioner,
hi
smith,
can't
we
you
know
as
part
of
this.
Don't
we
just
keep
these
tes
in
if
he's
in
agreement
at
time
of
redevelopment,
we
just
keep
them
in
and
they
go
with
the
zoning
and
at
the
time
that
it's
that
they
actually
do
the
development.
That's
when
we
would
enforce
those
improvements.
R
A
R
Now
my
concern
is:
is
developing
a
bunch
of
landscaping
on
land
that
we're
just
about
to
develop
when
this
fuse
is
really
just
confined
to
this
building
and
nothing
and
nothing
changes
with
the
building.
We're
not
we're
not
using
that
land
out
back
and
it's
about
to
be
developed
so
to
go
out
there
and
create
berms
and
sprinkler
systems,
and
all
of
that
sort
of
thing
just
to
tear
it
back
out
doesn't
doesn't
make
a
lot
of
sense
to
me.
I
A
I
A
I
A
S
A
S
A
Hearing
none
I'll
ask
if
there
are
members
of
the
public
that
are
with
us
today
that
wish
to
be
heard
on
item
number
14
on
today's
agenda,
which
is
spud
1243
I'll
pause
just
a
moment
star
six
on
your
phone
spacebar
on
your
computer.
Please
be
sure
your
device
is
unmuted
and
since
it's
been
a
minute,
297-2289
is
the
phone
number
you
can
use.
If
you
have
any
technical
concerns
or
problems
today,
again,
297-2289.
S
Okay,
I'm
gonna
give
it
a
go.
Let
me
know
if
I
screw
up,
I
make
a
recommendation
of
approval
with
the
following
changes
to
tes
te1
would
read
in
accordance
with
dvd
regulations
prior
to
new
construction
and
guidelines
and
shall
be
met
prior
to
the
issuance
of
a
certificate
of
occupancy
for
the
site
items.
Two
and
three
will
be
accepted
as
written
and
item
for
any
new
parking
lot
provided
provided
shall
be
paved
and
landscaped
according
to
dvd
standards.
A
D
A
I
This
is
a
two
and
a
half
acre
parcel
undeveloped
on
the
south
side
of
northwest
expressway
east
of
piedmont,
road
requesting
to
go
from
r1
to
a
spud
with
a
c3
base.
It's
all
found
to
be
in
a
conformance
and
consistent
with
the
surrounding
commercial
development.
That's
already
in
the
area
recommend
approval
with
three
tes.
I
Q
Q
The
t
number
one
we
would
just
ask
that
that
be
modified
state,
that
this
site
proof,
screening
and
the
five-foot
landscape
of
her
not
be
required
where
adjacent
to
aaa
or
residential
along
our
south
boundary.
Unless
a
final
plot
adjacent
to
our
south
boundary
is
submitted
prior
to
a
building
permit
being
issued
for
the
property
spud
in
question,
we
would
agree
to
the
site,
proof,
screening
and
five
foot
landscape
buffer
if
a
final
flat
was
filed.
Q
A
final
plan-
may
not
be
filed
on
that
for
10
years
and
if
lots
were
to
come
in,
they
were
they're
going
to
want
new
site-proof
screening
anyway.
So
I
see
no
reason
to
for
that
to
be
constructed
at
this
time.
This
is
the
same
language
in
our
spud
is
consistent
with
the
spud
to
the
west
of
us,
and
therefore
that's
why
we
put
that
language
in
there
t2
is
in
the
spud.
A
Q
And
you're
right,
it's
the
triangular
shape
in
nature
is
gonna
only
make
it
more
difficult.
The
west
side
of
the
property
has
quite
a
bit
of
drainage
coming
through
it,
the
medical
facility
to
the
west
discharges
onto
us.
We
have
drainage
coming
from
the
south,
so
therefore
it's
it's
pushing
the
development
in
that
triangular
track
to
the
east.
Therefore,
I
wouldn't
really
want
to
agree
to
the
50
feet
so.
A
A
50
is
a
little
bit
like
requiring
the
150
foot
distance
for
the
drive-through
windows.
It's
just
an
accommodation
as
a
compatibility
mitigation
measure
for
adjoining
residential.
So
anytime
we
can
get
that
50
feet.
We're
going
to.
I
think
again
again,
I
don't
speak
for
other
commissioners,
but
it's
just
been
our
practice
to
push
for
that
50
feet.
So
I
wanted
to
jump
out
in
front
of
that
as
it
relates
to
te1.
Commissioner
claire.
This
was
discussed
briefly
at
the
staff
meeting
and
I
think
staff
makes
a
good
point
on
this.
A
Mr
grubbs,
they
said
look.
The
screening
is
not
as
big
an
issue
if
it
if,
if
and
when
it's
developed
as
residential,
require
the
screening
but
the
landscaping
by
putting
it
in
now,
it
gives
it
at
least
some
opportunity
to
mature
and
actually
be
somewhat
effective
at
creating
a
mitigation
measure
between
the
commercial
use
and
the
potential
residential
use
of
the
south.
That
seems
awfully
practical
to
me.
It
seems
to
make
some
sense.
A
Q
A
N
We
saw
a
couple
of
similar
things
last
meeting
about
both
buffers
and
dumpsters.
I
I
don't.
I
understand
that.
That's
that's
undeveloped
to
the
south
and
it
might
be
for
some
time,
but
I
think
basically
putting
the
burden
on
that
developer
to
to
to
do
that
buffer,
and
that's
the
way
that
I
I
interpreted
your
explanation,
mr
grubbs,
is
that
they'd
want
to
do
something
different,
so
we
just
don't.
You
know,
need
to
do
anything
right
now.
N
I
don't,
I
don't
think
that's
fair,
but
I
I
do
like
chairman
craven's
idea
and
staff's
idea
that,
at
the
very
least
the
landscape
should
should
go
ahead
and
be
installed
at
this
time.
So
it
gives
it
time
to
mature
and
maximizes
that
buffer
and
then,
at
a
later
time,
the
salt,
the
site-proof
screening
of
either
a
wall
or
fence.
C
Yeah,
mr
chairman,
just
quickly,
I
yes,
sir,
I
appreciate
you
bringing
out
the
dumpster
issue,
because
I
think
we
should
always
take
very
careful
consideration
to
that
every
time,
but
I
I
agree
and
respect
what
mark
said
about
that
this
site
in
particular.
They
can't
accommodate
that,
and
I
respect
that.
So
I'm
not
gonna
make
an
objection,
but
I'm
glad
that
we
are
having
that
conversation
and
I
hope
that
we
continue
to
make
sure
that
we've
made
every
effort
to
move
the
dumpsters.
If
we
can.
A
Well,
it's
it's!
It's
a
it's
a
common
thing:
that's
requested
from
adjoining
property
uses
and
it
seems
like
a
reasonable
mitigation
and
accommodation
to
those
folks
to
try
to
create
separation
there,
and
the
reason
I
wanted
to
bring
it
up
to
mr
grubbs,
just
in
general,
is
because
he
appears
before
the
commission
about
every
meeting,
and
I
wanted
him
to
be
aware,
as
he
looks
at
future
applications
from
a
planning
perspective
that
that's
something
that
at
least
this
commission
has
sort
of
adopted
a
policy
of
trying
to
do,
because
so
many
people
request
it.
A
It's
really
a
response
to
what's
being
requested
by
neighbors
and
protestants
and
applications.
We
see-
and
it's
consistently
done,
I
mean,
as
you
point
out,
we
had
one
last
meeting
with
the
apartment
complex,
and
that
was
a
big
issue,
for
them
was
all
those
dumpsters
and
it
seemed
very
reasonable
to
me
they
would
have
those
concerns
so
anyway.
That
was
the
reason
I
brought
it
up
at
this
time.
I'll
turn
it
over
to
the
public
to
see.
A
If
anybody
wanted
to
be
heard
on
this
item
today,
just
again
for
the
purposes
of
the
record,
this
is
spud
1241
item
15
on
today's
agenda
at
11820,
northwest
expressway
star
6
on
your
phone
space
bar
on
your
computer.
Please
be
sure
your
device
is
unmuted.
If
you
want
to
be
heard
now,
is
your
chance
and
I'll
pause
just
a
moment.
N
I'll
take
a
shot
at
it
and
you
can
jump
in
if
I
miss
anything
but
happy
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
spud
1241,
subject
to
the
technical
evaluations
amending
technical
evaluation,
one
to
read,
landscape
landscaping
shall
be
provided
along.
The
south
line
in
the
coordinates
with
code
requirements
deleting
te2
te3
is
good
and
adding
te4
that
says
site
proof.
Screening
shall
be
installed
along
the
south
boundary
line
in
the
coordinates
to
code
requirements
at
the
time
of
residential
development,
parcel
development
to
the
south.
A
A
Oh
there
we
go,
all
votes
have
been
cast
and
that
application
is
recommended
for
approval
unanimously.
Good
luck!
Thank
you.
Real
quick
before
we
go
to
item
16
staff,
mr
pittinger
pettinger.
Forgive
me
if
I'm
saying
it
wrong
wanted
to
be
heard.
Last
time
we
had
a
six-hour
meeting.
He
not
surprisingly
hung
up.
We
had
as
an
accommodation
agreed
to
telephone
him
as
we
got
close
to
the
end
of
the
agenda.
A
I
This
is
an
application
to
rezone
a
single
family
lot.
It's
developed
with
a
single
family
home,
it's
on
the
north
side
of
11th
street,
just
west
of
portland
we're
going
from
r1
single
family
to
c3
to
permit
auto
detail
shop,
the
site,
abuts,
a
commercial,
auto
sales
lot
on
the
west,
but
is
surrounded
by
r1
single-family
homes
on
the
other
three
sides.
I
K
K
They
said
that
they
couldn't
be
done,
but
we
already
have
someone
that
wants
to
take
the
house
and
move
it
two
streets
over,
so
the
house
would
stay
in
the
same
neighborhood
and
we'd
be
okay
with
I'm,
not
removing
any
trees,
we're
just
wanting
to
extend
the
fence
line
to
the
existing
property.
That
is
to
the
east
of
there.
K
No,
no,
the
the
house
would
be
removed,
but
it's
there's
someone
that
wants
to
put
it
on
his
lot.
That
are
that's
just
two
streets
over,
so
the
house
would
be
removed
from
there,
but
it
would
be
removed
in
two
streets
over
and
staying
in
the
same
neighborhood
and
something
else
that
it
said
that
the
committee
had
said
were
the
conference
considerations
is
that
there
would
be
the
trees
would
be
another
thing
that
church
trees,
the
trees
would
be
left
alone.
K
K
J
A
A
C
Just
mr,
mr
chairman,
commissioner
pennington
I
I
think
that
I
agree
with
you,
especially
from
the
standpoint
of
straight
zoning.
As
I
said
in
the
issue
in
my
own
ward,
I
think
the
only
way
we
could
consider
something
like
this
is
in
the
form
of
an
s:
p:
u
d
or
p?
U.
I
guess
it
would
be
an
s
p,
u
d,
for
the
size
of
the
lot,
but
I
think
we
need.
C
We
would
need
to
evaluate
to
evaluate
the
mitigation,
because
if
all
he's
looking
to
do
is
continue
the
auto
sales
that
is
on
portland,
maybe
there
is
a
tactful
way
to
to
do
that
to
extend
the
fence
line
and
and
mitigate
I
I
I'm
not.
I
guess
I
just
don't
want
to
close
the
door
entirely,
but
but
in
its
current
form
I
I
completely
agree
with
you
so
well
the
point
you're.
A
A
A
A
The
given
the
the
size
of
this
and
the
way
that
it
lays
out
you'd,
have
to
take
the
entire
city
block
from
liberty
to
11th
and
then
come
back
in
with
a
with
an
application
that
shows
me
you're
going
to
buffer
the
whole
thing,
so
we're
sort
of
setting
a
new
block
line
before
I
could
even
listen
to
it.
That's
just
me
speaking.
I
don't
again.
I
don't
speak
for
the
commission.
I
just
conduct
a
meeting
on
their
behalf,
so
other
commissioners
want
to
speak
up
and
provide
feedback.
A
A
Other
commissioners
have
comments
hearing
none
I'll
ask
if
there's
anybody
from
the
public
that
wanted
to
be
heard
on
this
item.
Today
again,
this
is
item
number
16
in
our
packet
on
the
agenda:
pc10678
application
to
rezone
3709,
northwest
11th
street
I'll
pause
just
a
moment
to
see
if
anybody
wants
to
speak
up
or
add
anything
to
our
discussion
star
six
on
your
phone
space.
Far
on
your
computer
make
sure
your
device
is
unmuted.
A
A
All
votes
have
been
cast
and
that
application
is
denied.
Mr
mindrose,
I
would
encourage
you
to
look
at
the
application
and
visit
with
staff
and
think
about
a
path
forward.
I
don't
want
you
to
think
that
our
vote
for
denial
is
any
sort
of
vote
against
your
business
or
our
hope
that
you
can
continue
to
grow
it
and
flourish
here.
This
is
just
a
difficult
site
and
a
difficult
location
to
make
a
business
like
this
work
without
impacting
the
neighborhood.
A
A
Thank
you
very
much.
That
is
the
last
item
for
consideration
on
our
agenda
today.
So
we
move
to
additional
items.
At
this
point
planning:
commission
committees,
the
drainage
committee
has
been
disbanded.
I
made
that
decision
on
an
executive
basis
and
so
there's
nothing.
There
planning
commission
members,
commissioner,
claire
anything.
D
A
S
E
S
C
C
I
think
that
each
of
us
generally
are
contacted
by
members
of
the
community
when
those
complex
contentious
applications
come
up,
but
I
think
it
would
be
a
good
idea
for
us
to
sort
of
come
up
with
a
standard
way
that
we
inform
the
rest
of
the
commissioners
about
those
controversial
issues.
So
we
can
really
drill
down
and
make
sure
that
the
commission
meeting
is
about
what's
actually
where
the
actual
points
of
contention
are.
C
So,
for
example,
last
time
we
dealt
with
an
issue
on
on
classen
and
whether
or
not
to
add
a
a
medical
marijuana
facility
to
on
the
street,
and
we
were
dealing
with
an
issue
whether
there
could
even
be
commercial
development
on
on
that
part
of
class
and
based
on
where
it
was,
which
was
not
even
an
issue
that
the
commission
even
needed
to
address
it
all
because
obviously
we're
addressing
it
through
the
sbud.
And
so
that's
just
one
example
of
where
we're
off
dealing
and
allowing
the
public
to
deal
with
an
issue.
C
Is
that
could
commissioners
make
it?
Could
we
as
commissioners
inform
the
rest
of
the
commission
when
there
is
a
controversial
application
and
perhaps
get
staff
to
share
the
the
mds,
the
application
with
us,
so
that
we
can
start
to
be
aware?
Could
we
start
requesting
that
neighbors
and
applicants
prior
to
hearing
their
case
provide
some
kind
of
statement?
Cl
cost
did
that
for
for
the
issue
that
we
had
in
in,
of
course,
I've
forgotten,
then
I
was
about
to
say
military
park
helms
farm
for
the
issue
in
helm's
farm.
C
A
A
You
know
one
of
the
things
that
we
can't
do
in
these
online
meetings.
Is
you
know
when
we
were
in
city
hall
at
the
horseshoe,
we
could
say
hey
by
show
of
hands
who's
here
for
this
item
and
agrees
with
the
speaker.
There's
no
real
way
to
do
that
here
effectively,
which
makes
it
a
challenge.
So
I
think
you
could
engage
with
them
in
that
regard,
but
you've
got
to
be
careful
not
to
not
to
lead
them
to
believe
that
you're
negotiating
their
item
outside
the
confines
of
these
meetings.
A
The
other
thing,
I
would
say,
is,
obviously
you
can't
have
a
quorum
in
a
meeting
I
mean,
I
think,
and
and
you
don't
want
to
send
an
email
out
to
all
the
commissioners
or
a
quorum
of
commissioners
about
a
specific
case.
That's
before
us.
So
what
you
want
to
do
is
you.
I
think
what
the
right
thing
to
do
is,
commissioner,
pennington.
A
So
I
I
agree
with
you
your
sentiment
there
and
I
think
there
are
things
we
can
do
as
a
commission
to
help
each
other.
I
want
to
reiterate
this
point
that
I've
made
before
I
view
my
job
as
the
chair
as
running
this
meeting
to
your
to
your
liking
and
so
any
feedback
you
have
or
thoughts
that
you
have
that
we
can
use
to
move
things
along
or
to
do
differently,
so
we're
better,
more
professional,
more
friendly,
more
welcoming
to
the
public
et
cetera.
A
I
I'm
all
ears
to
that
and
I
think
we
should
have
those
discussions
and
there's
no
sort
of
pride
of
authorship
or
pride
of
oversight
from
me.
I
welcome
your
criticism,
your
feedback
or
ideas
that
you
have
on
that
front
at
any
time.
So
I'd
share
that
as
well.
I
I
appreciate
your
comments.
I
think
that's
spot
on.
Mr
brummett
did
I
say
anything
wrong
that
you
disagree
with,
or
do
you
think
we
should
do
that.
A
Okay,
all
right,
fair
enough.
Thank
you
kamal
very
much,
commissioner
laforge
nope.
I
do
not
sweat
thanks
man.
I
just
have
two
quick
things.
One.
I
want
to
thank
the
the
staff
so
much.
I
didn't
know
this
until
I
started
working
to
put
the
meeting
together
but-
and
I
don't
mean
to
exclude
anyone
at
all,
but
whether
it's
cindy
doing
all
the
pre-meeting
work
reaching
out
to
people
answering
questions.
A
A
Those
people
do
it's
a
super,
thankless
job,
but
they've
done
it
so
efficiently
and
I
never
realized
how
much
work
they
actually
do
until
I
was
sort
of
helping
get
ready
for
the
meetings
on
that
side
of
things
and
I'll
just
tell
you.
They
do
incredible
work
and
I'm
super
appreciative
for
all
of
it.
So
and
then
the
last
thing
is
this
was
circulated
to
me
once
upon
a
time.
This
is
a
copy
of
a
set
of
updated
bylaws.
Nobody
throw
anything
at
me.
I
our
bylaws,
are
in
desperate
need
of
update.
A
So,
if
everybody's
in
agreement
with
that,
I'd
really
like
to
have
mr
butler
circulate
the
most
recent
draft
of
these,
and
we
can
all
review
them
and
then
maybe
at
the
next
meeting
or
before
that
we
can
have
staff
set,
send
out
an
invite
for
like
a
lunch
and
learn
or
a
study
session
type
deal
to
discuss.
Is
everybody
good
with
that.
A
E
E
We
did
several
of
those
all
the
way
from
industry
members
to
to
neighborhood,
I
guess
advocates
or
residents,
and
then
we
proceeded
to
develop
an
approach
which
we
presented
to
the
stakeholder
advisory
team,
which
of
which
there
are
three
planning
commissioners
and
three
city
council
members
on
and
several
other
members
of
the
community
professionals
in
various
fields
having
to
to
do
with
development,
and
we
we
actually
now
have
well
so
backing
up
a
little
bit.
So
we
we
got
some
feedback
from
the
stakeholder
advisory
team,
which
was
fantastic.
E
So
we
went
back
and
worked
with
our
consultant
to
try
and
come
up
with
something
that
we
feel
like
addresses
everybody's
concerns,
so
that
we
can
come
as
close
as
possible
to
to
having
something
that
everybody
can
be
happy
with
or
if
not
happy.
At
least
satisfied
with
can
live
with
under
no
illusions
that
we're
going
to
get
something
that
everybody
will
love
because
there
are
so
many
diverse
views.
E
And
that's
that's
a
good
thing:
we've
gotta
we've
had
a
lot
of
good
comments
and
perspectives,
so
your
your
participation
has
been
appreciated.
So
we
now
have.
We
just
actually
got
our
first
rough
draft
tuesday,
so
staff
will
be
going
through
that
and
just
kind
of
making
sure
that
it's
you
know
that
it's
what
we
all
think
we
agreed
to
with
the
consultant.
E
What
we
think
is
what
the
stakeholder
advisory
team
and
the
planning
commission
and
city
council
would
feel,
is
appropriate
and
then
we
will
bring
it
forward
to
the
stakeholder
advisory
team.
This
this
whole
back
and
forth
takes
a
while
because
we
need
to
involve
multiple
departments,
staff
members,
city
managers,
office,
etc.
E
To
start,
but
it's
it's
worked
out.
Okay,
I
think
we've
managed
to
do
that
as
somewhat
of
a
pilot
project.
So
that's
that's
just
fine
anyway,
once
that
is
done,
we
will
go
ahead
and
move
on
to
the
zoning
code
itself
and
looking
at
the
approach
that
that
would
best
fit
the
needs
of
our
community
and
we'll
get
going
on
that.
So
you'll
be
hearing
more
about
that
later
on
this
fall,
but
first
we
have
to
get
through
the
sign
code.
E
E
It's
it
kind
of
sits
up
and
you
can
you
can
adjust
it
to
be
whatever
angle
you
want
it's
it's
big,
but
not
too
big,
so
I
think
it'll
be
and
you'll
be
able
to
toggle
back
and
forth
at
your
leisure
between
your
computer,
which
has
your
notes
from
your
digital
packet,
and
you
know
whatever
is
on
screen,
whether
it
be
somebody's
presentation
or
something
so
it
looks
pretty
it.
It
will
work
pretty
pretty
slick.
P
E
Oh,
is
everybody
still
there
yeah?
Okay,
we
lost
your
video
all
right
for
some
reason.
My
screen
changed
on
me,
but
if
you
can
hear
me,
then
I
guess
we're
good
anyway,
I'm
optimistic
that
it
will.
It
will
help
out
applicants
and
their
representatives
because
they
can
give
us
things
in
advance
and
we
can
show
them
on
a
large
screen.
They
can
point
to
things
with
their
mouse
instead
of
having
to
bring
you
know
the
the
foam
core
boards
and
so
forth.
E
So,
but
I
it's
up
to
you
this
body
of
course,
but
it'll
I
expect
maybe
a
while
before
we
get
there
our
authority
to
run
meetings
like
this
will
run
out
likely
on
november
15th.
I
believe
the
date
was,
and
that's
that's
all
I
know
at
the
moment.
So
let
me
know
if
you
have
any
questions
about
about
that
or
anything
else.