►
From YouTube: Oklahoma City Planning Commission - September 10, 2020
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).
B
A
A
Are
you
gonna?
Are
you
gonna
voice
vote
today?
Yes,
please,
okay,
I'll
just
call
on
you
for
voice
vote.
When
we
get
there,
let's,
let's
go
ahead
and
get
started.
You
guys
continue
to
work
with
janice.
I
got
to
read
through
these
instructions
anyway,
so
let's
just
go
ahead
and
get
started
for
those
of
you
joining
us
from
the
public
good
afternoon.
Welcome
to
the
regularly
scheduled
meeting
of
the
oklahoma
city
planning
commission
for
september
the
10th.
We
appreciate
everybody
joining
us
today.
A
A
A
The
next
regularly
scheduled
planning
commission
meeting,
which
will
be
thursday
september
24th
at
1
30
pm,
and
that
meeting
will
also
be
conducted
by
video
conference.
The
agenda
and
documents
for
today's
meeting
are
located
on
okc.gov
if
you've
never
utilized
that
web
resource.
For
that
purpose,
you
can
call
297-2289
for
assistance
in
locating
the
documents
such
as
the
agenda
and
submitted
materials
for
anyone
wishing
to
speak
about
an
agenda
item
or
to
speak
under
citizens
to
be
heard
today,
hopefully,
you've
previously
notified
by
staff
by
phone
or
email
or
by
signing
up
online.
A
A
A
A
Commissioner,
wise,
please
remember,
announce
your
departure
and
your
return,
even
if
you're
interrupting
it's
important
to
let
the
public
know
you're
stepping
away
and
then,
of
course,
if
somebody
is
gone
for
more
than
15
minutes
or
we
fear
that
they
are,
we
can
always
institute
a
roll
call.
So
with
that,
I
will
call
this
meeting
to
order,
and
our
first
item
on
the
agenda
today
is
the
receipt
of
the
minutes
from
the
august
27th
2020
meeting.
Do
I
have
any
questions
or
concerns
on
those
minutes
or
a
motion
to
receive
them.
E
A
A
Voting
was
available,
commissioner
hinkle
and
I'm
assuming
commissioner
powers
is
not
yet
voting
with
us
correct,
okay.
She
would
just
be
absent
then,
from
this
vote,
but
we
have
all.
The
votes
have
been
cast
except
hers,
and
the
minutes
are
received
next.
Item
on
the
agenda
is
uncontested
requests
for
continuance.
A
E
A
A
Available,
commissioner
hinkle,
how
do
you
vote
commissioner
hickle
votes?
I
all
commissioners
have
voted
except
commissioner
powers
if
she's
absent,
please
mark
that
accordingly
and
the
continuances
are
approved.
Next
item
are
new
requests,
so
we
have
new.
I
think
we
have
a
few
items
for
new
requests.
A
I
I
On
item
14,
it
was
requested
by
commissioner
laforge.
He
had
received
a
call
from
a
neighbor
to
the
north,
asking
that
we
continue
it
to
allow
her
and
my
client
to
get
together
to
work
on
potential
access
issues.
On
item
25,
I
was
just
hired
recently
within
the
last
week.
There
is
quite
a
bit
of
protest
and
so
in
an
effort
to
be
able
to
find
a
time
to
meet
with
those
people
that
have
lodged
a
protest.
A
A
A
A
F
A
G
A
A
A
Okay
and
then
also
planning
commission
members,
it's
been
requested
to
me
to
remind
you
that
you
need
to
keep
video
on
at
all
times
during
our
meeting
today.
So
please
turn
your
video
on
if
it's
not
on
presently,
if
no
one
has
asked
to
be
heard
at
this
point,
I'm
assuming
they
don't
wish
to
be.
So
with
that,
I
will
take
a
motion
on
the
consent
agenda
as
read.
A
A
F
K
All
right
well,
thank
you
so
much
and
I
haven't
been
in
front
of
you
guys
in
a
year
or
so.
So
thank
you
as
always
for
your
service,
especially
in
the
in
these
unique
times.
We've
we've
had
a
lot
of
planning
items
come
to
council,
so
I
I
fully
recognize
that
your
work
did
not
slow
down
very
much
in
this
pandemic.
So
thank
you
for
that.
K
In
the
past,
at
least
in
modern
memory.
Mayors
who
have
been
elected
to
multiple
terms,
especially
three
terms,
have
received
a
similar
recognition.
So
it
is
certainly
not
without
precedent.
Around
city
hall
is
patience.
Ladding
circle,
just
to
the
north
of
this
location
along
robinson
robinson,
becomes
ron,
norrick
boulevard
for
a
block.
K
So
this
is
not
at
all
unusual
and
certainly
befitting
the
long
record
of
service
that
mayor
cornett
gave
our
city.
Why
this
particular
section
was
selected
is
really
two-fold
one.
It
is
very
fitting.
It
is
the
street
that
brings
together
the
park
and
the
convention
center
and
the
omni,
which
are
all
very
much
legacies
of
mayor
cornett's
tenure.
I
I
like
that,
as
you
walk
between
those
three
those
three
landmarks
at
the
intersection
of
robinson
and
fourth
you'll
you'll,
look
up
and
you'll
see
mick
cornett's
name
as
it
should
be.
K
You'll
also
have
good
visibility
for
the
name
over
there
on
on
gaylord
shields,
where
southwest
4th
meets
that
major
thoroughfare
more
practically.
I
always
like
to
win
renaming
streets.
I
much
prefer
to
do
so
where
it
is
a
stub
street
where
it
has
support
of
the
property
owners.
In
this
case,
the
street
is
very
short.
It
is
only
a
few
hundred
yards
long.
It
lasts
only
from
robinson
to
gaylord.
K
So
there
is
not
the
you
know
the
issues
that
sometimes
are
raised
by
public
safety
or
others
about
confusion
when
a
street's
name
changes
as
as
some
other
of
our
streets
do
here
in
oklahoma
city.
This
would
be
end
to
end
as
it
were,
and
also
the
property
owner
for.
98
of
this,
of
this
block
is
the
city
of
oklahoma
city.
So
obviously,
should
you
and
the
council
approve
this-
we
would
have
certainly
an
adequate
show
of
support
from
the
property
owner.
K
A
E
A
I
have
a
motion
in
a
second
to
recommend
approval
to
city
council
on
sn091.
Please
cast
your
votes
when
available,
commissioner
hinkle,
how
do
you
vote
a
well-deserved?
Yes,
commissioner
powers,
I
vote,
yay
votes
are
cast
and
that
item
is
recommended
to
approval
to
city
council
to
you,
mayor
holt,
so.
A
M
I
I
It's
actually
north
of
the
landfill,
where
we're
seeking
to
close
rockwell
is
on
the
south
side
of
the
landfill,
I'm
not
sure
if
the
individual
that
submitted
the
protest
letter
wasn't
able
to
look
at
the
map
and
see
exactly
where
it
was
this
stretch
of
rockwell
that
we
seek
to
close
again
dies
into
the
landfill.
There
is
no
one
else
that
would
be
using
this.
This
stretch
of
unimproved
rockwell
to
access
any
property,
so
we
did
reach
out
via
letter.
I
We
tried
to
get
a
hold
of
the
the
individual
that
submitted
the
protest
and
I
don't
think
we
were
able
to,
but
hopefully
seeing
the
images
that
that
you
now
see
before
you
they'll
realize
that
they're
actually
on
the
other
side
of
the
landfill
and
therefore
this
closing
actually
does
not
touch
or
concern
their
their
property
in
any
manner.
So
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
might
have.
A
Thank
you,
mr
box.
Just
for
the
purpose
of
the
record,
the
protestant
or
the
person
who
wrote
the
letter
of
concern
also
included
their
ad
valorem
tax
statement
and
provided
the
address.
I
reference
that
address
through
the
county
assessor
and
can
confirm
it's
on
the
opposite
side
of
the
landfill.
My
suspicion
is
that
the
notice,
in
order
to
reach
the
required
number
of
people
statutorily,
had
to
stretch
far
below
on
the
300
feet,
which
grabbed
it
which
grabbed
her
and
that
created
concern.
A
B
G
A
N
N
She,
my
mom,
was
just
concerned
that
that
was
gonna,
stop
the
the
easement
to
her
property
and
looking
at
it,
I
I
can
see
that
it
probably
won't.
So
I
think
she
submitted
like
they
submitted
an
offer
for
the
property
and
she
countered
the
disposal
company
and
then
they
she
never
received
anything
back
from
them,
and
she
just
thought
that
it
was
going
to
land
lock
that
piece
of
land
that
she
owns.
Yeah.
A
Understood,
as
I
said
it,
it
is
this
stretch
of
road.
That's
being
closed,
actually
dead
ends
into
the
landfill.
The
parcel
is
provided
in
the
in
the
protestant
letter
actually
is
on
the
opposite
side
of
that
landfill.
So
this
particular
application
won't
have
any
impact
there.
As
far
as
we
can
tell
from
the
information
you've
provided.
O
A
G
J
A
A
A
A
C
A
M
This
is
a
3.6
acre
site
located
at
the
northeast
corner
of
hefner
and
piedmont
road,
it's
going
from
r1
and
c3
to
c3
we're
basically
just
rearranging
the
existing
c3.
That's
at
the
corner
from
a
horizontal
to
a
vertical
configuration
staff
found
it
being
conformance
with
the
urban
low
comp
plan,
designation
and
recommend
approval.
Brad
reed
with
crafton
toll
is
the
applicant.
G
A
A
A
M
P
Bradley
craft
until
300
point
parkway
boulevard.
No,
it's
just
cleaning
up
that
c3
that
we
flip
to
the
other
side
and
then
the
double
a
zoning
that
was
there
was
for
an
old
golf
course
hole
that
was
planned,
but
we've
already
kind
of
taken
those
out
with
the
coeur
d'alene
and
south
fork
subdivisions
on
the
other
side
of
the
road.
So
the
last
one.
So
just
cleaning
that
up!
That's
all
it
is.
A
A
A
A
R
Yes,
frank,
mcclendon,
22,
495,
lindy
terrace,
edmond
oklahoma.
Thank
you
very
much
anything
to
add.
No,
sir,
I
don't
have
anything
to
add.
It's
pretty
straightforward.
I
believe
there
is
several
duplexes
multi-family
in
the
area
and
I
thought
it
would
fit
the
zoning
nothing
else
to
add,
and
I
would
be
glad
to
answer
any
questions
that
are
posed.
A
E
A
A
A
A
A
I'm
very
reluctant
to
move
forward
here
without
comment.
This
makes
me
very
uncomfortable,
given
the
meeting
format,
I'd
like
to
pause
a
moment
and
and
try
to
figure
out
if
we
can,
if
there's
anybody
else
in
particular
too
so
297-2289
is
phone
number
for
city
staff,
cindy
lakin,
it
can
assist
you.
I
would
request
that
you
call
that
number
if
you're
not
able
to
be
heard.
At
this
point
we
have
a
number
of
people
who
signed
up
on
this
item.
A
A
G
E
A
No,
I
believe
we
can
just
do
that
administratively,
perfect
by
moving
it
to
the
end
of
the
agenda
and
we're
going
to
move
on
to
the
next
item.
Just
with
a
number
of
people
signed
up.
I
want
to
make
sure
again,
if
you're
listening
to
the
call
today
and
you
are
unable
to
speak
and
you're
trying
to
please
call.
A
I
Yeah
good
afternoon,
once
again,
david
box
522
call
cord
drive.
This
is
an
application
that
would
allow
my
client
to
live
on
the
site
as
well
as
farm
the
property,
their
their
intent,
and
their
goal
is
to
have
a
seasonal
farm,
stand
type
of
operation
where
they're
able
to
sell
vegetables
and
have
maybe
fresh
eggs,
and
things
like
that.
It
is
a
property
that
has
been
problematic
for
quite
some
time.
I
That
needs
to
be
cleaned
up.
They
have
already
started
doing
that.
There
was
two
letters
of
protest
in
your
packet.
They
appear
to
be
husband
and
wife.
My
client
did
take
the
time
to
go
and
meet
with
them,
we're
not
sure
if
they
are
still
in
protest
or
not.
Our
understanding
was
perhaps
that
once
they
spoke
to,
my
client
realized
that
this
is
now
a
neighbor
and
what
their
intent
was
that
this
would
satisfy
their
concern.
There
was
another
individual
that
raised
him
concerned.
I
That
is
what
led
to
the
two
additional
tes
again.
The
two
tes
are
to
modify
that
mobile
home
use
to
the
point
8200.7
and
then
limit
it
to
no
more
than
one.
My
client
is
currently
living
on
living
in
a
mobile
home
on
the
site.
Now
their
goal
is
to
get
the
property
cleaned
up.
They
will
then
be
building
their
own
custom
home
on
the
property,
and
so
all
of
those
things
again
with
the
addition
of
the
the
limitation
that
medical
marijuana
if
ever
grown,
would
not
be
sold.
I
I
believe
satisfied
that
individual
we
do
need
to
have
the
retail
use
unit
because
again
they
do
intend
to
sell
vegetables
produce
other
things
that
are
grown
on
site.
So
with
that
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
might
have,
but
we
believe
this
will
be
a
a
positive
step
for
this.
This
particular
piece
of
property.
A
H
A
I
did,
I
would
just
add,
I
confirmed
with
city
staff
just
so
that
you
know
the
protestants
and
members
of
the
boat
that
may
be
with
us
are
aware
this.
This
item,
as
presented,
would
allow
for
the
cultivation
of
marijuana
on
the
site,
but
it
would
not
allow
for
the
sale
of
marijuana
because
of
the
limitation
that
the
applicant
is
placing
on
the
retail
sales
use
unit.
So
that's
the
way
the
application
has
been
reformed
at
this
time.
A
A
Well,
my
question
for
legal
would
be
given
the
last
item
and
that
we've
received
letters
of
protest
here
as
well.
If
there's
anything
that
you
would
like
for
me
to
do
during
the
contact
of
this
video
conference
meeting
to
ensure
that
members
of
the
public
are
able
to
comment,
please
let
me
know
what
that
is
via
message
or
email,
and
I
will
gladly
do
it.
I
A
I
E
Question
and
not
to
poke
the
bear
on
this.
So
if
there
is
a
quick
response,
I'm
just
curious
about
how
this
works
in
section
8
of
the
spud
application
dealing
with
signs
one
of
this
commission's
favorite
topics
and
the
use
of
temporary
or
seasonal
advertising
signs,
and
this
limits
the
thighs.
But
I
guess
not
the
number.
E
M
E
C
I
That,
by
greatly
reducing
the
the
size
that
the
lack
of
number
wouldn't
be
a
problem,
I
mean
no
more
than
four
feet
in
height.
You
know
you
they
envision,
perhaps
having
multiple
things
currently
for
sale.
You
know
at
different
times
of
the
year,
eggs
are
available,
eggs
aren't
different
times
of
the
year.
Certain
types
of
produce
are
available
and
are
not
again
no
more
than
four
feet
tall.
A
I
I
mean
in
all
honesty
I
I
just
it's
hard
to
predict
the
side.
Limiting
the
size
is
why
we
didn't
limit
the
number.
I
guess
we
could
say
one
and
go
much
taller,
but
if
less
than
four
feet
lots
of
signs,
if
you
think
about
four
foot
signs
a
lot
of
those
are
considered
directional
in
parking
lots
and
don't
even
require
permits,
and
so
frankly,
we
thought
we
were
being
overly
reasonable
by
limiting
it
to
four
feet.
A
Well,
commissioner,
privet,
I
you
know
I'll,
let
you
put
your
sort
of
period
on
this
discussion.
I
I
think
it's
a
fair
question.
I
think
you
know
34-foot
signs
that
are
30
feet.
30
square
feet.
Total
is
just
as
offensive
as
a
25-foot
sign,
that's
100
square
feet.
I
mean
in
terms
of
like,
if
we're
really
trying
to
regulate
it.
If
that's
a
concern
for
the
commission,
I
think
it's
fair
to
limit
the
number
of
signs
to
prevent
there
from
being
an
unlimited
number
of
temporary
signs.
H
I
A
H
A
S
Yes,
we
are
with
you,
we
were
just
going
to
by
michael
qualls
3201
south
coburn,
I'm
the
applicant.
Thank
you,
mr
cox,
on
my
behalf,
we're
just
going
to
indicate
that
we're
amenable
on
the
limitation
of
the
signs.
You
know
that's,
we
know
we
don't
expect
it
to
be
a
lot
of
signs
or
overly
obnoxious.
Anything
like
that.
A
A
J
A
A
J
This
is
jared
martin
in
development
services.
I'll
do
a
quick
intro
on
this
one.
The
developer
is
proposing
17
single-family
lots
on
19.87
acres,
yielding
a
gross
residential
density
of
0.85
dwelling
units
per
acre
public
street
will
be
constructed
for
the
subdivision.
Private
water
wells
and
septic
systems
will
be
used
on
each
lot.
J
J
There
are
seven
tes.
The
applicant
is
in
agreement
with
all
the
teas.
However,
they
do
want
to
modify
te
number
three
to
indicate
that
they
agree
to
provide
an
easement
for
a
street
stub,
but
not
construct
any
improvement
until
such
time
as
development
to
the
east
makes
the
stub
necessary.
The
subdivision
regulations
do
provide
for
that
alternative.
J
A
Mr
boxer,
mr
grub
anything
to
add
to
that
introduction
from
staff
nope.
Commissioner
privit.
This
is
in
your
award
before
we
get
your
comments
on
it,
I
will
say
I
spoke
with
staff
about
it
and
just
so
the
commission
is
clear
and
jj
if
I
say
this
incorrectly,
please
and
correct
what
I'm
saying
so
essentially
by
providing
the
easement
what
they're
doing
is
they're
bypassing
the
requirement
to
put
the
stub
in
today.
A
That
request
is
being
made
because
there's
a
belief
by
the
applicant
that
the
stub
probably
won't
ever
be
needed.
The
problem
with
that
as
it's
outlined
in
the
subdivision
regulations
according
to
mr
martin,
is
that
the
person
who
comes
along
behind
if
the
easement
is
there
would
be
responsible
for
constructing
the
connection
across
the
easement.
So
essentially,
this
applicant
is
kicking
the
can
on
having
to
build
the
stub
at
all.
It
will
fall
on
the
future
applicant.
Who
would
be
on
the
other
side
of
the
of
the
proposed
connection
in
the
past.
A
I
guess
there's
been
some
concern
with
people
then
coming
in
and
requesting
variances
for
that,
because
there's
really
not
a
stub,
it
would
have
to
be
built.
So
that's
kind
of
the
the
dialogue.
I
think
we
need
to
discuss
which
of
these
items
is
the
lesser
of
the
evils.
Is
it
creating
a
connection
with
an
easement
only
or
is
it
not
requiring
the
connection
and
leaving
it
as
a
cul-de-sac
in
line
with
the
variants?
A
I
A
C
I
Well,
it's
not
that
it
won't
be
developed
or
perhaps
they
they
get
a
variance.
When
you
see
these
rural
type
neighborhoods,
you
don't
often
see
interconnection.
If
you
look
miss
lincoln,
if
you
could
perhaps
put
up
the
exhibit,
that's
the
ariel
that
was
in
the
staff
report.
You
know
these
these
types
of
rural
subdivisions.
I
You
often
see
them
where
they
are
kind
of
independent
standalone
subdivisions.
Let's
see
if
we
can
get
that
image
up.
You'll
you'll
see
that
the
neighborhood
to
our
north
is
called
lay
chateau,
same
developer,
same
style
that
one's
larger
in
terms
of
number
of
lots,
but
it's
it's
a
similar
design
in
that
it's
a
cul-de-sac.
I
This
really
is,
I
think,
it's
just
allowing
us
to
provide
for
the
necessary
connection.
If
it
ever
happens,
we
have
our
doubts
that
it'll
ever
happen,
but
instead
of
having
a
random
street
that
is
paved
that
sits
there
and,
frankly,
end
up
being,
I
think,
eyesores
for
neighborhoods.
If
you
look
at
the
stubs
that
are
built,
you'll
see
oftentimes,
they
become
parking.
C
Well,
it's
interesting
that
you
mentioned
the
the
development
of
the
north
because,
as
I'm
looking
at
this,
I
mean
one
of
the
things
that
occurs
to
me
is
what
a
shame
that
this
isn't
able
to
connect
to
that.
I,
the
idea
of
you,
know,
sort
of
providing
the
basis
upon
which
a
variance
can
later
be
sought
by
saying.
Well,
you
know:
there's
there
was
this
opportunity,
they
didn't
press
it
and
there's
really
no
need
for
it.
I
I'm
not
entirely
comfortable
with
that
idea.
C
A
I
I
think
that
I
think
that's.
I
think
commissioner
powers
comment.
There
is
fair
and
that's
I
just
wanted
the
commission
to
be
aware
of
of
of
that,
as
they
think
through
how
they
feel
about
this
particular
item,
because
it
is,
it
is
something
just
to
be
mindful
of
from
a
policy
standpoint
of
promoting
connectivity.
A
I
But
if
we
think
through
the
process,
I
I
don't
know
how
providing
the
easement
to
allow
connectivity
somehow
grants
a
variance
to
someone
to
say
we
don't
want
to
connect.
Frankly,
I
think
it
does
the
opposite.
It
says:
hey
this
other
development
provided
the
easement
necessary
to
allow
connectivity
if
they
come
and
get
a
variance.
Your
subdivision
regulations
require
to
grant
a
variance.
I
I
know
we
don't
go
through
this
analysis,
like
those
of
you
who
have
been
on
board
of
adjustment
do,
but
the
subrags
actually
lay
out
that
the
process
for
analyzing
the
variance
of
the
subregs
is
very
similar
to
the
statutory
process
outlined
for
a
variance
in
the
board
of
adjustment
proceedings.
So
I
don't
know
how.
A
A
E
Ahead,
commissioner,
so
just
so
so
just
so
we're
clear
about
the
applicant's
rights
they
have.
The
choice
on
whether
to
request
the
variance
or
to
simply
grant
the
easement
that
easement.
That
is
their
statutory
right
to
then
do
that
as
an
alternative
to
providing
the
street
stuff
or
we
need
to
approve
their
ability
to
do
so.
A
E
A
I
I
You
know,
I
don't
believe
the
commission
has
the
authority
to
dictate
okay,
the
subreg
say
and
I'm
going
to
read
it.
A
developer
has
the
option
if
the
street
stuff
is
required,
which
we're
saying
it
is
to
construct
the
street
stub
or
to
grant
an
easement,
reserving
the
minimum
right-of-way
required
for
the
substrate
and
not
construct
it
or
any
related
utilities.
I
don't
know
that
it's
up
for
discussion
for
you
to
vote
on.
We
are
speaking
of
variance
to
the
street
stuff,
we're
saying.
I
A
It
I
was
well
it
doesn't
matter.
I
was
making
the
point
that
we
could
either
have
a
cul-de-sac,
because
that's
ultimately
what
you'd
rather
have-
or
we
can
create
this
fallacy
that
we're
going
to
allow
connectivity
when
we
all
know
we're
not
going
to
create
connectivity.
So
if,
if
you're,
if
that's
the
way
you
want
it,
then
that's
that's
fine
with
me
at
least
we
have
the
option
of
the
future
of
connectivity.
So
is
there
anyone
here
that
wants
to
be
heard
on
this
item
from
the
public.
A
A
I
A
E
There
are
a
lot
of
concerns
about
traffic
and
I
believe
that
has
been
addre.
Those
issues
can
be
addressed
as
well.
Noise
from
the
turnpike
by
removing
the
trees
is
another
big
issue
and,
finally,
an
issue
that
each
commissioner
will
have
to
decide
about
the
appropriateness.
It
is
the
lot
size.
So
I'm
sure
I
hope
that
the
david
that
you
will
address
all
of
those
issues,
because
I
know
that
those
are
the
things
most
important
to
the
neighborhood,
and
I
appreciate
the
meeting.
I
think
the
neighbors
were
excellent.
E
I
Sure,
david
box,
522
call
cord
drive
so
I'll
start
with
lot
size.
That's
why
I
wanted
this
exhibit
up.
So
you
know
we
are
at
that.
What
would
be
the
south
east
corner
of
the
turnpike
in
midwest
boulevard,
granted
that
the
the
neighborhood
to
our
south
is
a.a
in
five
acres,
but
as
you
go
to
the
west,
what
you'll
see
the
yellow
hashed
area
on
that
map?
Everything
you
see
that
is
yellow
is
ra,
so
one
acre
lots.
I
When
we
had
our
neighborhood
meeting.
I
had
expected
the
meeting
to
be
full
of
neighbors
that
were
on
large
acreage
type
lots
and
were
concerned
about
the
density.
What
we
found
was,
I
think,
everyone,
except
for
maybe
one,
perhaps
two
all
lived
within
these
yellow
areas
that
you
see
and
they
all
live
on.
One
acre
lots
our
average
lot
size
and
density
is
one
dwelling
unit
per
1.6
acres.
I
So
in
lots
of
instances
we
are
actually
greater
in
lot
size
than
the
the
folks
that
live
to
the
west.
The
two
concerns
that
came
up
the
most
frankly,
we
didn't
talk
about
density
that
much
it
was
water
and
traffic
traffic.
I
think
is
the
easiest
to
dispose
of
the
average
daily
trip
count
along
midwest
boulevard
is
1500
cars
a
day
at
1
500
cars
a
day.
That
is
almost
nothing.
That
is
a
very,
very
low
trip
count.
I
We
are
going
to
have
64
lots
over
104
acres.
It
is
not
anticipated.
The
64
houses
will
do
anything
to
even
bring
that
truck
out
up
to
an
area
that
would
be
considered
something
to
even
look
at
so
water,
the
the
first
probably
30
or
45
minutes
of
discussion
really
centered
around
water.
This
is
well
water
out
here
and
we
were
getting
some
concerns
from
some
of
the
neighbors
whose
neighborhood
name
escapes
me
at
this
point,
but
they
were
having
some
inconsistencies
with
their
water
output.
I
Through
the
course
the
meeting
it
became
clear
that
other
neighborhoods
that
are
directly
to
our
west
are
not
experiencing
that
and
have
a
wonderful
water
pressure.
Wonderful
gallons
per
minute.
We
went
back
talked
to
our
our
well
folks,
and
what
we
see
based
upon
well
logs
in
our
area
is
that
we
expect,
somewhere
between
25
to
35
gallons
per
minute.
That
is
considered
extremely
high
as
it
relates
to
well
water,
but
it
didn't
make
sense
that
some
neighbors
were
experiencing
problems
and
others
weren't
cindy.
I
If
you
could
display
the
the
fault
line
exhibit
we
did
further
some
further
investigation.
What
we
found
was
you,
the
exhibit
you
see
before
you
from
the
oklahoma
water
resource
board.
The
neighborhood
in
question
is
specifically
the
two
people
who
gave
us
their
address
that
were
speaking
as
to
the
problems
with
water.
Their
homes
lie
directly
on
top
of
a
fault
line.
I
It
would
also
explain
why
all
of
the
other
neighbors
that
were
on
the
call
that
live
in
neighborhoods
outside
of
the
fault
line
area
reported
that
they
have
never
experienced
any
problems
with
their
water.
There
was
one
individual
that
said
in
his
summers.
He
fills
up
his
pool
and
it
takes
him
two
days
to
fill
it
up,
but
that
he
never
experienced
any
decrease
in
water
pressure
and
all
of
the
times
he
has
filled
up
his
pool.
I
He
has
never
experienced
any
problem,
nor
have
his
neighbors
experience
any
problem
with
water
pressure,
so
water.
I
don't
believe
to
be
an
issue
based
upon
this.
I
understand
that
they
certainly
have
a
unique
problem
living
on
top
of
a
fault
line.
That
is
just
not
something
that
we
could
you
know
can
address
here.
I
The
well
logs
do
not
show
that
anywhere
outside
of
the
area.
On
the
fault
line,
experience
those
problems,
traffic's,
not
an
issue.
So
when
we
look
at
the
ra,
I
think
ra,
that's
next
to
ra
to
the
west
makes
makes
good
sense
cindy.
Can
you
go
the
one
last
exhibit
that
being
the
there
we
go,
you'll
see
that
we
intentionally
made
the
lots
on
the
south
side
of
this
development,
larger
those
do
butt
up
to
aa.
So
those
are,
you
know
approaching
three
two
to
three
type:
acre
lots
overall.
I
We
believe
that
to
be
consistent
with
the
area,
especially
considering
the
amount
of
ra
zoning
that
exists
to
the
west,
I
did
have
some
subsequent
emails
from
a
couple
of
the
neighbors
that
I
believe
mr
pennington
was
also
on
expressing
their
thanks
for
the
the
meeting,
but
also
expressing
their
support
now
for
the
development.
So
I
think
we
were
able
to
answer
the
questions
that
were
out
there
with
that.
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
and
we
would
ask
for
your
approval.
I
So
in
the
confines
of
traffic,
you
know
we
talked
about
the
fact
that
there
is
traffic
impact
fees
now
and
so
at
each
building
permit
there
will
be
fees
that
are
pooled
into
the
the
fund.
The
public
works
maintains
to
go
and
solve
global
traffic
problems
as
they
present
themselves.
You
know
in
in
the
future,
but
again
at
an
average
daily
trip
count
of
1500.
A
T
Every
single
lot
in
that
section
of
land
is
five
acres
plus
there
is
not
an
exception
to
that
so
to
go
in
here
and
say
that
this
is
consistent
with
the
zoning
of
the
current
area
is
just
not
reasonable.
Now,
according
to
the
300
feet,
rule,
I
guess
of
notification.
I
only
know
of
five
people
in
rock
spring
acres
that
was
even
notified
of
this
when
you're
out
in
a
rural
area
and
you're
using
a
300
foot
notice
area
that
300
feet
doesn't
even
get
across
the
lot.
T
So
the
people
on
129th
street
are
on
the
north
side.
They've
got
a
letter.
Anybody
south
of
129th
street
did
not
get
a
letter,
so
you
have
about
50
plus
people
in
this
section
of
land,
all
of
which
have
over
five
acres
of
land
that
were
not
notified,
and
you
know
it
just
would
not
be
consistent
with
that
quarter.
Section
of
land.
Now
you
can
move
around,
you
can
go
west.
T
Now
I
understand
that
the
other
issues
that
our
our
representative,
mr
pennington
has
stated
have
been
addressed
from
a
technical
point
of
view,
and
I
don't
argue
with
that.
I
can
see
where
current
ordinances
maybe
can
address
that.
But
nobody
has.
I
mean
there
is
no
way
that
you
can
address
the
compatibility
issue
without
considering
all
the
land
that
is
within
that
section
of
land.
That
is
the
majority
of
the
neighbors.
That
would
be
affected
by
this
and
and
it's
just
not
consistent,
so
that's
what
I
got.
A
U
A
U
Back
when
the
northeast
sector
was
put
together,
the
plan
for
the
northeast
sector
was
put
together.
I
served
on
that
committee
as
a
volunteer
citizen.
At
the
time,
our
property
and
the
property
across
the
street
was
zoned
as
a
luda
of
environmental
conservation
which
at
the
time
meant
five
acre
tracks,
so
I'm
not
too
sure
how
it
metamorphosized
into
two
acre
tracks.
U
A
E
Could
I
ask
a
question
of
staff
to
kind
of
put
some
color
to
some
of
the
the
comments
that
were
made,
and
I
appreciate
mr
bom
bom
meister.
I
apologize
if
I'm
not
pronouncing
your
name
correctly.
I
so
apologize
and
miss
gulik,
because
I
think
that
is
that's
a
very.
They
raise
excellent
points
about
density
and
compatibility
for
staff.
E
O
For
a
change
to
present
to
you
later
this
year,
we
we
are
proposing
that
we
change
it
to
the
rural
medium
landis
typology,
which
supports
lot
sizes
of
two
to
five
acres.
So
that's
why,
in
the
staff
report,
we
made
two
recommendations:
either
change
it
to
the
ra2
zoning
district,
which
has
a
density
that
aligns
with
that
rural
medium
or
continue
the
item
and
bring
it
forward
with
a
comprehensive
plan
amendment
to
so
that
they
can
be
heard
together
instead
of
separately
gotcha.
E
And
also
just
to
make
sure
that
we're
addressing
some
of
the
the
specific
concerns
that
were
brought
up
about
ms
gulick's
pond,
I
think
that
miss
gulick
and
is
wanting
to
make
sure
that
she
can
continue
to
maintain
the
pond
that
they
and
my
understanding
from
her
neighborhood
meeting
is
that
she
has
fish
in
the
pond
also.
So
she
wants
to
be
able
to
continue
to
have
that
runoff
that
goes
into
the
pond,
so
that
she
can
maintain
it
and
then
david.
Would
you
can
you
just
briefly
respond
to
that?
Yeah.
I
Sure
yeah,
so
this
is
certainly
a
different,
a
different
concern
than
what
we
hear
most
times
right
most
times.
We
hear
we
don't
want
water
here.
We
we
have
someone
saying
we
we
continue
to
want
the
water.
You
know
what
the
state
statutes
require
is
that
we
not
increase
the
historic
rate
of
runoff,
so
this
will
have
to
be
engineered.
These
are
likely
going
to
be
ponds
that
that
will
release
at
the
historic
rate.
So
we
don't
anticipate
drying
up
her
ponds
where
we're
going
to
allow
the
water
to
flow.
A
E
E
Yes,
sir,
okay,
just
so
we're
clear
about,
and
so
if
you
were
to
move
for,
as
mr
baumeister
mentioned,
if
we
were
to
move
further
east,
that
would
show
more
aaa
zoning
just
for
the
sake
of
the
commission
being
able
to
clearly
understand
what
the
area
looks
like,
but
as
far
as,
as
far
as
there
being
more
density
well,
this
is
directly
across
the
street
directly
across
the
street.
There
is
one
acre:
there
are
one
acre
tracks,
so
those
are
my.
Those
are
my
quick
comments
to
set
up
the
other
commissioner's
commenting.
C
This
commissioner
powers-
I
I
would
like
to
hear
from
commissioner
pennington
just
how
he
feels
about
the
density.
I
mean
you
know,
staff
is
indicating
that
they
believe
that
urban
reserve
may
not
be
appropriate,
but
but
that
what
would
be
appropriate
is
two
acres
here.
What's
being
proposed,
is
one
acre,
even
if
there
is
some
existing
in
the
area?
If,
if
we
approve
this
we're
just
sort
of
adding
to
that
impetus,
how
do
you
feel
about
that
level
of
density
in
this
area?.
E
E
So
if
those
are
all
if
we
are
making
the
the
assessment
that
those
bottom
lots
and
I'm
sure
we
will
deal
with
this
at
the
planning
stage,
if
those
bottom
lots
are
going
to
be
two
acres,
I
think
that
that's
an
appropriate
compromise,
that's
consistent
with
the
plan
that
the
staff
is
proposing
and
then
having
the
one
acre
tracks
be
right
next
to
the
highway.
I
think
that
that's
I
find
it
hard
to
believe
that
that
would
be
more
disruptive
for
the
neighbors
that
are
to
the
south.
E
A
So
I'll
just
add
to
this
I
think
you
know
kind
of,
like
the.
I
got
a
couple
things
from
today's
meeting-
that
I
think
we
need
to
talk
about
at
the
end
of
the
meeting
a
little
bit
more
in
depth.
But
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
that
bothers
me
is:
we've
developed
a
pattern
of
letting
applications
come
through
without
hearing
the
comp
plan
amendment
and
I
think,
we're
all
in
agreement
that
it
doesn't
necessarily
change
how
we
feel
about
applications.
A
But
it
is
a
part
of
the
process,
that's
being
left
out
and
it's
a
defined
part
of
the
process.
For
a
reason,
I
think
that,
as
a
commission,
we
need
to
decide
as
a
matter
of
policy
if
we
want
to
uphold
the
comp
plan,
which
is
part
of
our
our
charge
and
require
these
applications
come
through
with
those
amendments
as
opposed
to
bypassing
them.
I
think
the
argument's
been
made.
I
certainly
don't
put
words
in
mr
box's
mouth,
but
on
multiple
occasions
that
look
we
know.
A
What's
going
to
happen,
it's
going
to
be
a
recommendation
to
deny
the
amendment
to
the
comp
plan.
So
what's
the
point?
Well,
the
point
is,
it
is
a
part
of
the
process
and-
and
so
it's
almost
become
routine
for
us
to
to
to
skip
it.
I
think
we
need
to
be
thoughtful
about
that
precedent
that
we
set
there
and
I
think
we
need
to
be
thoughtful
about
keeping
those
things
linked
together
as
they
come
through.
I
don't
know
the
facts.
A
Someone
can
correct
me
if
they
know
you
know
if,
if
the
comp
plan
amendment
request
was
known
and
was
going
to
come
through
before
this
application
came
through
and
that's
why
it's
the
next
meeting
and
just
didn't
line
up
or
if
it
took
longer
or
I
don't
know
why
they
didn't
line
up
together,
but
it
seems
really
silly
that
we're
gonna
hear
this
and
then
in
the
october
meeting
we're
gonna
hear
the
comp
plan.
Sarah,
do
you
or
jeff
somebody?
Can
someone
clarify
why
that
happened?.
O
A
So
it's
happenstance,
yes
yeah.
So
just
I
mean
that's
food
for
thought,
guys
I
don't
I'm
not.
You
know.
I
don't
necessarily
know
that.
I
have
a
strong
opinion
about
it
in
the
sense
that
I'm
trying
to
advocate
here,
but
I
just
think
that
we
should
all
be
thoughtful
about
it.
I
I
would
say
I
think
we
should
try
to
keep
these
things
coming
through
as
companion
items
so
we're
discussing
them.
It
doesn't
change
our
ability
if
we
feel
like
the
comp
plan.
Amendment
is
a
request
for
denial
before
zoning
application.
A
C
Mr
truman,
I
this
commissioner,
paris,
I
I
think
you're
on
to
something
there.
I
do
think
it
is
appropriate
for
us
to
have
some
adherence
to
the
process
as
well
as
the
policy.
You
know,
it
seems
to
me
that
the
applicant
in
this
case
has
a
strong
argument
to
make
why
a
comp
plan
amendment
would
be
appropriate,
since
they
believe
that,
and
we've
heard
that
staff
is
going
to
be
suggesting
one
themselves
that
doesn't
quite
get
them
where
they
need
to
be
for
their
zoning.
C
A
I
don't
want
to
unnecessarily
hey
mr
rocks.
I
don't
necessarily
hold
up
an
application,
but
I
think
we
need
to
put
folks
on
notice
the
only
the
only
person
who
does
this
is
mr
box,
so
I'm
I'm
basically
sort
of
putting
you
on
notice
that
if
you
do
this
again,
I'm
going
to
feel
differently
about
how
we
do
these
things.
They
should
be
companion
items
you.
You
are
sort
of
bypassing
the
system.
A
We
recognize
that
the
ra2
doesn't
get
the
application
you've
brought
forward
where
you
want
it
to
be,
and
that's
that's
my
that's
why
I'm
sort
of
teetering
on
this
one,
but
I
don't
think
it's
appropriate
to
continue
bringing
them
through
and
ask
us
to
keep
punching
past
these
comp
plan
discussions
and
just
go
right
to
the
zoning.
So
again,
I
can't
speak
for
the
other
eight
commissioners,
but
for
me
this
will
be
an
issue
that
we
talk
about
more
thoroughly
as
far
as
I'm
concerned.
A
If
they
come
back
again
without
a
companion
item.
Commissioner
penny,
this
isn't
your
award.
You
ultimately
know
how
you
think.
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
this
item.
Based
on
what's
been
discussed,
that's
my
position
on
it.
No
commissioners
have
said
anything,
so
I
assume
we're
to
a
point
where
we're
already
talking
about
emotion.
If
you
are
I'll
leave
that
in
your
hands.
E
Yeah,
I'm
I'm
happy
to
to
do
so,
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
our
our
neighbors
are
on
notice
that
when
this
goes
back
to
the
planning
stage,
they
will
have
to
come
back
and
provide
even
more
specific
information
about
the
way
that
this
property
is
going
to
be
laid
out.
So
I
hope
that
you
will
just
know
that
you're
going
to
receive
that
notice
in
the
future.
E
So
that
is
something
to
really
consider
talking
to
your
state
legislators
about
is
different
standards
for
how
we
provide
that
notice,
but
we
are
following
what
the
state
law
tells
us.
We
have
to
do
as
a
city,
so
just
wanted
you
to
be
aware
that
those
are
circumstances
outside
of
our
direct
control,
but
that
I
I
agree
with
you
that
it
doesn't
seem
fair
that
everybody
that
really
is
affected
is
not
getting
the
the
notice
that
they
probably
should
so
just.
C
T
C
L
E
No,
what
I'm
saying
is
that,
when
it's
platted
the
way
what
we
gave
them
approval
for,
if
my
understanding
is
correct,
is
that
they
won't
all
be.
You
have
the
ability
to
have
one
anchor
tracks,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that
all
of
them
will
be,
and
my
understanding
from
the
plan
that
mr
box
has
is
that
the
lots
closest
to
where
mr
baumeister's
neighborhood
is
are
going
to
be
larger
lot
sizes,
and
that
would
be
wouldn't
we
be
able
to
see
that
in
the
flat.
E
A
A
T
A
T
A
Because
it
is
it's,
it's
based
on
a
view
of
whether
or
not
one
acre
lots
are
appropriate
for
the
area
compatible
with
the
area,
whether
or
not
the
streets
and
police
and
fire,
and
all
these
services
are
available
to
support
that
type
of
development.
I
mean
it's
based
on
a
litany
of
things
that
each
commissioner
considers
and
weighs
differently,
but
that
that
is
the
application
that
we're
voting
on.
Certainly.
T
But
mr
pennington
stated
that
that
he
would
approve
it
because
he
thought
by
using
two
acre
lots
on
the
south
side,
would
appease
the
homeowners
and
then
you're
coming
back
and
saying.
Well,
he
wouldn't
the
developer
would
not
be
limited
to
that,
so
he
could
go
ahead
and
put
in
one
so
he's
contradicting
himself
he's
a
he's.
A
he's
saying
he's
going
to
approve
it
or
he's
for
it
he's
for
it
because
of
the
sighting
of
the
lots
on
the
south
side.
T
A
A
Okay,
I
have
a
motion,
and
a
second
from
commissioner
claire,
to
recommend
approval
to
city
council
on
pc
one
zero,
six,
eight
zero.
Please
cast
your
votes,
commissioner
hinkle.
How
do
you
vote?
Yes,
commissioner?
Powers
have
you
vote,
nay,
votes
have
been
cast
and
that
application
is
recommended
for
approval
to
city
council.
Thank
you.
A
A
E
If
I
could
just
say
really
quickly,
sorry,
we
sometimes
when
we
have
issues
like
this,
where
we
don't
where
we
know
that
there
is
opposition
because
of
the
letters
we've
received,
I
later
get
brought
into
meetings
with
with
our
councilwoman
and
and
neighbors,
and
so
I
just
want
to
be
clear
that
it's
on
the
record
in
this
recorded
meeting,
we
received
these
letters.
We
have
read
them,
they
are,
they
are
available.
We
took
them
into
account
as
we
are
making
this
choice
as
we're
making
this
vote
so.
A
I
think
you
did
a
great
job
of
articulating
the
difficulty
of
not
approving
this
case.
There
is
r2
directly
to
the
west.
There
is
one
r1
residence
that
separates
the
two
of
them
I'll
go
so
far
as
to
say
that
it
would
be
a
bit
disingenuous
that
we've
gone
into
inner
city
wards
like
two
and
six
and
made
it
a
point
to
try
to
increase
density
and
allow
housing
options,
but
when
it
gets
this
far,
that
would
be
a
problem
as
a
matter
of
policy.
I
think
this
application
is
perfectly
appropriate.
A
A
A
They're
working
on
it,
okay,
it
is
available,
commissioner
hinkle.
How
do
you
vote?
Yes,
please
and
commissioner
powers?
How
do
you
vote
yay?
Thank
you
very
much.
That
is
the
last
item
on
separate
items
to
be
heard.
So
the
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
communications
and
reports
planning,
commission
committees.
I
don't
believe
we
have
any
formal
committees
at
this
point,
so
I'll
skip
that
planning.
Commission
members,
commissioner,
claire
anything.
B
A
H
G
H
E
A
E
Yeah,
just
I
I
just
want
to
echo
what
the
what
the
chairman
said.
I
I
agree
that
we
need
to
just
make
a
decision
about
whether
we're
going
to
enforce
it
or
whether
we're
not,
but
we
need
to
consistently
do
it,
and
I
think
it
is
fair
for
us
to
have
the
complaint
amendment,
because
a
lot
of
those
comments,
the
biggest
concerns
that
were
brought
up
were
about
that,
and
I
think
that's
the
time
to
have
that
to
have
that
discussion.
That
seems
appropriate.
So
anyway,.
A
Yeah
I
I
made
that
comment
to
mr
box
when
we
visited
about
the
item.
Just
that
look.
You
know
this
has
become
a
bit
of
habit
and
maybe
that's
our
fault
and
I'll.
Take
some
responsibility
there.
You
know
just
because
I've
never
made
it
a
big
deal.
I
just
wanted
the
commission
to
talk
about
it.
I
think
us
not
supporting
the
comp
plan
is
not
a
good
look
and
I
think
it
I
think
it's
perplexing
to
staff
as
well
as
how
to
handle
those
situations.
A
I
would
just
like
to
advocate
now
that
we
don't
have
an
item
before
us
and
we
sort
of
put
the
person
who's
doing
it
on
notice
that
we
just
I
think,
as
a
commission,
we
should
either
agree
or
disagree.
If
you
disagree,
please
speak
up
that.
If
an
item
comes
before
us
and
it
doesn't
have
a
companion
comp
plan
amendment,
we
continue
it.
A
Okay.
Well,
I
mean
you
know
we
could.
Obviously
it's
not
a
vote
here,
we're
just
having
a
discussion
as
a
commission,
but
I
think
we
need
to
remember
that
the
next
time
one
comes
up
and
just
and
just
hold
to
that,
it's
not
an
unreasonable
request.
Staff
is
alerting
them
to
the
need
to
do
that
so
they're,
aware
of
it.
I
think
it's
just
something
that
we
need
to
change
in
the
way
we
approach
it
and
again.
A
C
A
A
One
of
them
was
a
consent
item,
and
I
really
I
I
think
it
would
be
a
better
policy
for
us
both
in
terms
of
the
way
we
conduct
ourselves
with
the
public
and
in
the
way
that
we
try
to
maximize
the
efficiency
of
our
meetings
when
items
are
being
continued
at
the
last
minute.
I
think
we
should
hear
that
item
in
turn
and
I
think
we
should
give
commissioners
the
opportunity
to
provide
any
feedback
when
it
gets
continued.
At
the
last
minute,
everybody's
read
the
packet.
A
Everybody
knows
what
their
issues
are,
and
let's
just
say,
for
example,
that
the
issue
was.
You
know,
commissioner
pennington
was
concerned
about
signage
on
on
the
on
a
particular
case,
and
it
gets
continued
for
an
entirely
different
reason,
and
then
it
comes
back
two
weeks
later
and
we
actually
talk
about
it.
For
the
first
time,
and
now
it
comes
out
that
there's
a
signage
issue
and
the
all
of
a
sudden,
the
item
is
continued
again
well
as
we've
practiced
in
the
past.
By
giving
that
feedback
to
both
applicants
and
protestants.
A
I
think
we
do
two
things.
I
think
we
let
them
know
any
other
issues
they
need
to
talk
about
during
the
continuance
period
and
I
think
we're
putting
both
sides
of
an
issue
on
notice
of
where
the
commission
stands.
It
gives
us
a
chance
to
say
I'm
in
support
of
this
item
as
it
is
currently
prepared,
or
I
cannot
support
this
item
unless
there's
a
change
to
the
signage
and
here's.
Why?
A
I
just
think
that's
better
than
it
the
applicant
sort
of
saying,
okay,
we
agree,
because
there
are
issues
that
nobody
else
knows
about,
that
we
want
to
continue
it.
It
gets
pulled
out
of
the
meeting
early
and
it's
not
discussed,
I
think
we're
setting
ourselves
up
for
meetings
like
we
had
two
meetings
ago,
where
there's
just
item
after
item
that
has
to
be
really
litigated
out
on
the
commission,
and
it
certainly
contributes
to
it.
So
I
would
just
offer
up
that.
I
think
it
is
a
better
policy
for
us.
A
I'm
curious
how
other
commissioners
feel
that,
if
there's
an
item
that
gets
continued
as
opposed
to
it
being
on
the
requested
continuance
before
the
agenda
gets
printed,
that
we
keep
that
item
in
turn
and
we
discuss
it
to
provide
feedback.
I
just
think
that's
a
better
approach.
I'm
certainly
open
to
any
disagreement
on
it.
A
Agree,
no,
no,
not
at
all
it.
No
it.
It
was
that
there
were
two
other
items
that
were
that
were
individual
items
too.
That
were
not
consent
that
we
did
the
same
thing
with
and
those
were
continued
as
well,
but
those
people
didn't
get
the
benefit
of
any
feedback
from
us
having
just
prepared
for
the
meeting
and
that
and
that,
and
so
when
it
comes
back,
we're
actually
going
to
be
discussing
it
with
them.
A
L
Yeah,
that
makes
more
sense,
since
I
was
going
to
say
everything
you
said
would
also
hold
true
on
the
regular
docket.
My
only
question,
then,
with
everything
you
said,
my
concern
is
the
length
of
meetings.
I
get
that
everything
you
said
is
true.
There
would
be
more
feedback
all
those
things,
but
we
could
end
up
spending
an
hour
on
something
that,
from
the
very
beginning
of
that
hour-long
discussion
was
destined
to
be
continued,
so
I
would
be
concerned
only
because
of
the
length
of
the
meetings.
A
Yeah-
and
I
don't
think,
there's
anything
that
stops
us
from
saying
rusty
when
we
get
to
the
item
that
there's
been
a
requested
continuance
and
simply
have
the
discussion
by
saying
this
item's
been
requested
for
continuance
two
weeks.
Does
anyone
want
to
be
heard
the
same
way
we
do
when
it's?
You
know
when
it's
on
the
the
continuance,
docket
and
then
simply
saying?
Is
there
any
commission
or
feedback
that
someone
would
like
to
provide
on
this
item?
And
that
would
just
give
you
a
chance
to
say
I.
A
I
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
known
that
I
take
issue
with
it,
because
the
other
thing
is
if
one
commissioner
is
get
engaged
in
a
discussion
in
their
ward
or
just
generally
speaking
with
a
gr
with
the
applicant
or
a
group
of
protestants.
We
don't
necessarily
know
what's
being
discussed,
and
so
you
may
not
know-
or
I
may
not
know
that,
there's
another
issue-
you
have
with
an
item
and
that
would
be
the
chance
to
put
that
on
the
floor.
So
I
think
we
could
still
get
through
them
quickly.
L
I
think
that
makes
sense,
then,
as
long
as
we're
recognizing
it
could
be
a
slippery
slope
if
you
start
talking
to
them,
I'm
talking
about
them,
but
as
long
as
you
as
the
chairman,
remember
that
and
as
it
gets
three
four
five
minutes
in
you
just
stop
and
remind
folks.
This
was
one
that
we
wanted.
We
were
planning
to
continue.
This
was
for
really
brief
highlights
now,
so
that
people
aren't
surprised.
So
I
think
if
you
manage
that,
I
think
that
makes
a
lot
of
sense.
C
Mr
chairman,
this
is
commissioner
paris,
the
the
cons.
I
I
totally
get
what
you're
saying
and
I
think
it's
a
it-
is
a
very
valid
point
and
really
kind
of
a
good
idea.
The
the
one
question
I
would
have
about
it.
You
know
it
might
be
an
interesting
process
or
a
helpful
process
to
have
the
applicant
or
the
staff.
C
Whatever
circulate,
I
don't
know
you
know
drafts
as
they're
going
through
the
process
so
that
people
who
want
to
participate
or
offer
input
can
the
concern
that
I
have
about
about
doing
that
very
often
over
the
course
of
my
career.
You
know
I've
been
involved
in
cases
that
are
big,
huge,
controversial
cases
where
there
are
a
large
number
of
people
who
are
attending
meetings
and
to
have.
C
A
Is
there
anything
that
would
prevent
us
from
a
formality?
Standpoint
of
commissioner
powers
point
I
think,
that's
a
fair
one.
The
items
are
then
proposed
for
new
continuances
is.
Would
there
be
any
issue
with
us
having
the
conversation
I'm
proposing
at
that
point
by
just
saying,
look
we're
gonna
we're
prepared
to
continue
deciding
for
two
weeks
or
a
month
or
whatever
the
request
is.
Is
there
anybody
that
wants
to
be
heard
on
that
and
really
you're
just
having
it
you're
giving
time
for
an
objection
on
the
continuance
and
then
right
before
we
vote
just
asking?
V
A
L
Mr
box
mention
that
I
got
the
phone
call
well,
their
whole
reason
for
the
continuance
was
due
to
lack
of
sufficient
information.
It
was
a
holiday
weekend.
They
just
got
all
those
things.
Well,
maybe
most
times
the
continuances
are.
For
that
reason,
so
they
were
tremendously
relieved
that
they
did
not
have
to
scramble
find
a
lawyer.
Do
all
these
things
for
a
meeting
today,
and
so
when
they
heard
it
was
that
the
applicant
graciously
agreed
to
continue.
They
were
relieved
that
they
could
okay
great
well.
L
Now
we
can
take
our
time
if
it
would
have
been
a
situation
where
well,
it's
intended
to
be
continued,
but
we're
going
to
talk
about
it
and
then
they
would
have
been
right
back
in
the
predicament
that
chairwoman,
mr
powers
mentioned,
that
they
were
relieved
when
they
were
told.
Okay,
we
have
time
so
that
would
you
a
great
point,
scott
about
why
you
would
want
to
do
it,
but
I'd
need
to
think
about
that,
like
commissioner
powers
as
well.
A
Well,
I
look,
I
we
don't
have
to
do
anything
today.
Let's,
let's
give
some
time
for
everybody
to
stew
on
it.
My
only
thought
would
really
just
be
again
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
commissioners
only
to
provide
any
kind
of
feedback
on
an
item.
They
think
that
the
applicant
or
the
protestants
should
be
aware
of
before
it's
continued
to
aid
in
those
discussions.
That
would
be
the
intention
you're.
Absolutely
right.
That's
how
it
should
have
to
be
managed
to
to
limit
that.
A
F
A
F
A
No,
I
I
just
would
love
to
see
them
get.
You
know,
get
updated
to
a
modern
forum
and
give
people
a
chance
to
make
suggestions
and
changes
the
same
way.
We
just
had
the
discussion
about
how
to
handle
you
know
new
continuances
and
all
that,
so
let's
circulate
them
and
then
maybe
you
give
a
month
and
then
we
have
a
study
session
after
that,
and
that
should
be
more
than
enough
time
to
review
and
gather
thoughts.
But
that
would
be
my
suggestion.
F
V
V
Well
I'll
get
this
to
you
in
a
in
a
formal
email,
but
it
basically
has
to
do
with
the
new
statute
that
requires
you
to
either
say
you're
going
to
be
attending
by
video
conference
or
teleconference
or,
however,
you're
going
to
be
attending.
So,
if
you're
attending
my
video
conference,
you
need
to
have
your
video
on.
A
A
D
A
Susan
can
correct
me
here
when
I
say
it
wrong.
My
belief
or
my
recollection
is
that,
sometime
in
november,
the
statute
that
allows
us
to
meet
this
way
is
set
to
expire.
Unless
it
is
extended
by
the
state
legislature,
we
would
be
required
to
begin
in-person
meetings.
Once
again,
I
don't
recall
when
that
date
is
susan.
What
did
I
say?
That's
wrong.