WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=jqMCyatvWDA

Part: 1

1
00:00:04.640 --> 00:00:21.680
other names that I have in the list that I have them in. If you could raise your hand when I call your name. Deb Harper. Oh, we're all for one. Deb Harper. How about John Hickman? There's John. Dana Symbolic. There's Dana. Very good. Chris

2
00:00:21.680 --> 00:00:39.120
Wickland. Hi, Chris. Mark Hansen. There's Mark. Sally Ness. There's Sally. Kevin Johnson and Amber Mathwig. All right. So, what we'll do, we're just going to start working our way through and if I'll call if I see an uh

3
00:00:39.120 --> 00:01:06.720
additional people show up, we'll we'll just try and fill people in as much as we can. So, we're going to start uh we don't have Deb Harper here, correct? So, we're going to start with John Hickman. John, come on up. And you can sign in when you're done. John, John, John, why don't you sign in when you're done? Yep. We'll try and

4
00:01:06.720 --> 00:01:24.960
keep it as tight as we can here. Good evening and welcome. >> Good evening. My name is John Hickman. I live on the creek about halfway between the Gas for Less and Moyer Park. >> John, you got to get right into that microphone. Hello.

5
00:01:24.960 --> 00:01:41.119
>> There you go. Right into that microphone. Okay. I live on the creek about halfway between the Gas for Less and Moyer Park. I'm here to talk about the NineM Creek project and to request action by the council.

6
00:01:41.119 --> 00:01:57.360
Luckily for all concerned, I thought the time limit was three minutes. So, here we go. Before the referendum was voted on, I asked a city staff person what the $20 million would be spent on. The response

7
00:01:57.360 --> 00:02:12.879
essentially was, "We don't know." Several residents told me they got the same answer. Only after the referendum passed did it become known that the city wanted a bike path. That brought about a period of

8
00:02:12.879 --> 00:02:27.280
serious distrust. But then came the plan to re-meander the creek upstream from the historic mill area. The written plan was clear and the city conducted an open house and a

9
00:02:27.280 --> 00:02:43.280
guided tour. Trust was reestablished, which brings us to the plan to transform some heavily wooded upland areas into oak savas. This plan was not presented at open

10
00:02:43.280 --> 00:02:59.040
houses. There was no guided tour. It's mentioned in the environmental assessment worksheet, but not in enough detail for reviewers to make an informed comment. Over time, different city maps have

11
00:02:59.040 --> 00:03:15.120
demarcated different areas. Detailed information was recently provided in an RFP, but that document is not easily accessible to residents and provides no opportunity for feedback.

12
00:03:15.120 --> 00:03:32.400
The result is a return to distrust. There is a way to restore trust again. The city needs to expand on the same approach that it used for the mill area. In the mill area, there was really no

13
00:03:32.400 --> 00:03:47.680
alternative. Once the city explained it to residents, we could see that the work proposed needed to be done for the Uplands project. There are any number of alternatives.

14
00:03:47.680 --> 00:04:05.120
For example, transform the area into an oak savannah or eradicate just the buckthorn and leave the rest of the woodlands as is. What's the best plan? We truly do not know.

15
00:04:05.120 --> 00:04:21.199
We do know one thing. This decision is not one that should be made by city staff alone. Citizen input is essential when what's being proposed is a radical change to the crown jewel in the city's park

16
00:04:21.199 --> 00:04:38.000
system. I request that the council initiate a two-part process that will restore trust and restore the woodlands. First, city staff should conduct a guided tour and soon after a public

17
00:04:38.000 --> 00:04:55.840
meeting. Allow plenty of time for Q&A. Second, establish a task force consisting of staff, residents, and outside experts. Something like six minutes, six meetings over two months should enable the group

18
00:04:55.840 --> 00:05:13.039
to develop recommendations. The result will be a plan that is good for the woodlands and trusted by our residents. Thank you. >> Thank you, John. Council, any questions for John? I appreciate you coming in.

19
00:05:14.560 --> 00:05:29.919
We have a general rule. I appreciate your supporting what John has to say, but we have a general rule of no clapping because if we allow clapping, then we have to allow booing. And I'm not going to allow booing in a meeting. So, we're not going to do that. We're going to And I appreciate it. I understand you support him, but we're going to we're going to stick to those

20
00:05:29.919 --> 00:05:49.360
rules if we can. Thank you so very much. Thank you, John. Uh Dan Good evening and welcome. And as I said, if you could get right into the microphone so everybody in back can hear you. >> Hi, my name is Dana Symbolic and I live

21
00:05:49.360 --> 00:06:06.560
on 13th Avenue South and I'm here um concerning the Adora project. It's a 52 apartment building that they're trying to build at the end of 13th Avenue and American Boulevard.

22
00:06:06.560 --> 00:06:22.880
And um I'm speaking on the behalf of the residents on the street and um I I just want to be clear that we support affordable housing and recognize the

23
00:06:22.880 --> 00:06:40.160
importance of creating housing opportunities for people of all income levels. Our concerns are not about future residents or the goal of expanding housing access. Our concern is whether this specific location can

24
00:06:40.160 --> 00:06:55.680
realistically support a development of this size without causing serious harm to the surrounding neighborhood. The most urgent issue is parking. Georgetown is already overwhelmed with

25
00:06:55.680 --> 00:07:10.560
vehicles. Existing apartment complexes have created s significant parking shortages and street parking is already overflowing into residential area. We always have cars parked in front of our

26
00:07:10.560 --> 00:07:26.160
houses that don't belong to us and we can't park our cars, you know, so or people that come to visit us. Uh despite repeated concerns raised by residents, the current parking situation has not

27
00:07:26.160 --> 00:07:43.599
been um addressed or enforced, cars already flood our streets and in many areas there is simply no capacity left. Um adding another highdensity apartment building would place an enormous strain on already overburdened neighborhood. It

28
00:07:43.599 --> 00:07:58.560
would significantly worsen parking congestion, increase traffic, and negatively affect daily life for residents. Our neighborhood cannot absorb a large increase in vehicles without serious consequences.

29
00:07:58.560 --> 00:08:14.639
And we strongly urge the city to require a comprehensive parking and traffic impact study before approving this project. The study should evaluate current parking demand, projected increases, traffic flow, pedestrian

30
00:08:14.639 --> 00:08:32.159
safety, and the impact of both existing and proposed developments. Public safety is another major concern. Increased density means more traffic, red, reduced visibility, more pedestrian risk, and potential delays for emergency

31
00:08:32.159 --> 00:08:48.240
vehicles. We are also concerned about infrastructure capacity including drainage and storm water management. Nearby properties have already experienced maintenance and flooding issues.

32
00:08:48.240 --> 00:09:04.000
Additional development should not worsen existing infrastructure problems. Residents in this neighborhood have invested heavily in their homes and build and in building a stable community. We asked the city to carefully consider the long-term effects

33
00:09:04.000 --> 00:09:19.600
this development may have on neighborhood character, livability, property values, and overall quality of life. We also believe development should provide meaningful benefits to the broader community. As proposed, this

34
00:09:19.600 --> 00:09:35.440
project offers limited publicly uh accessible benefits for existing residents. We respectfully ask the city to consider whether alternative uses for the site may serve may better serve community needs such as additional

35
00:09:35.440 --> 00:09:52.320
parking, public parking, green space, or other amenities that improve quality of life for both residents and transit users. There's a bus stop at the end of like right there. So, a full p public parking and traffic

36
00:09:52.320 --> 00:10:09.920
impact study. We we would like if the project moves forward, we request the following. A full public parking and traffic impact study, a public safety evaluation, strong parking mitigation measures, enhanced storm water

37
00:10:09.920 --> 00:10:25.279
management and infrastructure planning, long-term property maintenance requirements, meaningful community green space and public amenities. We believe affordable housing and strong neighborhoods can coexist, but only when

38
00:10:25.279 --> 00:10:42.160
development is thoughtfully planned, datadriven, and responsive to community concerns. We respectfully ask the city to ensure that any decision on this project is based on careful analy analyzis of parking, traffic, public

39
00:10:42.160 --> 00:10:58.079
safety, and infrastructure capacity. For the past few weeks, we've been I mean, I don't know how to enforce it. Nobody is enforcing, but there are semi trucks parked at the end of the street

40
00:10:58.079 --> 00:11:14.079
like five in one day. I They don't live there. They also don't live there. They just get picked up and >> drive away and their trucks, their cars, and semis. >> Right. Thank you, Dana. Thanks. Thanks

41
00:11:14.079 --> 00:11:28.480
for your input. And I think as we talked about last time, we are literally at the starting line of this project right now. And a lot of what you just talked about there is part of the whole development process and those will be considered as as we move through this process. But I appre appreciate you bringing those forward.

42
00:11:28.480 --> 00:11:54.560
Thank you. >> I saw a couple of people come in. I just want to double back to the top of our list. Deb Harper, are you here yet? >> No Deb yet. All right. Uh, Chris Wickland. >> Good evening and welcome.

43
00:11:54.560 --> 00:12:11.200
>> Hello. Can you hear me? Okay. >> Yes, we can. >> All right. Probably don't need this microphone, but we'll use it. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and city council members and other people attending this listening session tonight. I'm Chris Wickland, longtime Bloomington resident,

44
00:12:11.200 --> 00:12:29.040
and this is my daughter, Madori. I'm here to discuss a very serious health risk to my family, my friends, and my beloved pets. The symptoms of this health risk include crushing migraine headaches, nausea, and serious vomiting.

45
00:12:29.040 --> 00:12:44.720
Not even a joke. This is actually happening to my friends and my family. This is while we are outside trying to enjoy our beautiful yard in Bloomington. This forces us to remain indoors through all of our Minnesota seasons every single day. Why these symptoms, you

46
00:12:44.720 --> 00:13:01.839
wonder? Because the neighbors have been allowed to use a labus. I don't know the pronunciation. Lubatus. Lubatis. Highfrequency shrier or screamer, which is used to scare away dogs, my dog, cats, coyotes, deer, and other animals.

47
00:13:01.839 --> 00:13:16.480
Do you remember the movie Dumb and Dumber? Anybody? Where Jim Carrey says, "Do you want to hear the most annoying sound in the world?" Goes something like this. Okay, I'll spare you the drama. Sorry. I'll let you hear from Madori in just a

48
00:13:16.480 --> 00:13:32.320
minute. Um because she can hear this crazy annoying sound. This is a terrible and debilitating shriek that is only audible to pets, animals, and very young ears. 20some, 30some. My young friends can hear it and they're miserable from

49
00:13:32.320 --> 00:13:47.040
the sound. My daughter and all of her friends can hear it and they're miserable. Our pets are neurotic from this sound when we are out in our yard. This is all very sad to me as a 35 plus year Bloomington homeowner and I would like action taken very quickly to

50
00:13:47.040 --> 00:14:04.160
resolve this, shut down the devices and not allow them to be used any longer. Yes, we've talked to the neighbors. It has fallen on deaf ears. Yes, we have called the Bloomington police many times when we've been out trying to enjoy our yard asking them to ask to be shut down.

51
00:14:04.160 --> 00:14:20.880
No, nothing can be done because this is at a decibel that cannot be like recorded or heard by the average person, only the young ears and the animals. Please help us resolve this health risk. Here's my daughter to speak from her perspective since she can hear it.

52
00:14:20.880 --> 00:14:37.279
>> Thank you, mom. Thank you, Mr. for mayor and city council. So, I appreciate you listening today. When I walk into my mom's yard, I hear a loud beeping noise, like shrieking noise from the device, and it does give me a

53
00:14:37.279 --> 00:14:53.519
migraine, and it does make me feel lightheaded and nauseous, especially if I want to spend more than 5 minutes in the yard. My mom is having some friends over in a couple weeks for a bonfire and I don't feel like I can even go to the bonfire because I can't comfortably sit in her yard with um out hearing this

54
00:14:53.519 --> 00:15:08.720
loud noise. I can't really spend time with her friends back there due to the frequency of the noise. Um the device is triggered by motion. So my mom did put up a panel to block it, but sadly the neighbors have now brought in a second

55
00:15:08.720 --> 00:15:26.720
device and also installed it facing our yard on the property line. Um, it's very sad for us and it's sad for our pets and it would be fantastic if action was taken quickly and the device was removed. So, back to my mom.

56
00:15:26.720 --> 00:15:43.199
Um, I'd say in closing, please help us resolve this serious health risk. It is not a joke. It is very serious to my family and my friends and our pets. We request the shrieking devices be shut down and removed immediately and possibly further ordinances be put in place to prevent this from causing

57
00:15:43.199 --> 00:15:58.959
further harm to additional residents, friends, family, etc. Um, questions anyone? >> Well, I'll just I'll congratulate you because this is a new one. This is not heard this one before and so very well done. Uh I I honestly don't know what to

58
00:15:58.959 --> 00:16:15.639
even respond because I've not heard this one before and I don't know uh what there is in terms of regulation or or how it works or so I'm going to look to staff and figure out how we can >> Okay. >> Uh figure out a way to get our arms around this. >> Sure. >> Council member Disandro question.

59
00:16:17.519 --> 00:16:34.320
>> Sure. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. How do you I Thank you for being here. Um, how do you know that these these are what these things are? I I've never heard of >> We looked them up online. >> Okay. So, you can see the devices. >> Yes, we can see the device. It was right on my property line. And as soon as I confronted her about it and said, "Hey,

60
00:16:34.320 --> 00:16:50.880
can you turn this off when we're in our yard?" She moved it back a few feet. >> But then, >> but you were able to identify it as a particular online. It says that they're high frequency for keeping out nuisance, you know, coyotes and wolves and dogs and cats basically. >> And I without disclosing your actual

61
00:16:50.880 --> 00:17:06.160
address, what part of town are you in? I'm over on the east side on Portland and 95th. >> Okay, thanks. >> Yeah, thank you. >> Yeah, and I do have pictures of the device. I didn't know if I could share those with somebody at some point. I'm happy to do that. >> Well, I I hope you've signed in ways a way that we can get a hold of you and

62
00:17:06.160 --> 00:17:20.799
and the staff will staff will be reaching out to you. We'll see what we can figure out with this because like I said, this is uh I think we're plowing new ground here. So, appreciate you bringing it forward. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Mark Hansen, are you here?

63
00:17:20.799 --> 00:17:49.760
>> There he is. Good evening and welcome. >> Good evening, mayor, council members. Um here for the olive edition. I live about four houses west of there, but um I'm not going to give you my feelings. I'm going to talk to you about a couple

64
00:17:49.760 --> 00:18:04.720
of items that you may not be aware of. I I stopped at the city planning department about three weeks ago when they walked through the new subdivision rule where we lowered where we lowered the subdivision

65
00:18:04.720 --> 00:18:21.280
requirements on single R1 from 11,000 ft down to 7,800. That was the first time I'd heard of it. My background, I am a licensed or was a licensed land surveyor. worked in the city for 46 years. I think I know a few things about

66
00:18:21.280 --> 00:18:36.559
subdivisions. I think we might have got hoodwinkedked on that one and it really wasn't put out there. It's neither here nor there. This particular subdivision is four houses west of my house. It's not in my backyard, but from a neighbor's standpoint, I think it's

67
00:18:36.559 --> 00:18:53.840
wrong. Now, if you take the address, it's off Amston Ridge. I don't know if any of you have your packets or if they'll be at council tonight. Um, the address is off Amston Ridge Drive. The driveway is off Ammerson Ridge Drive. It is on a corner lot. So, when I was

68
00:18:53.840 --> 00:19:10.320
talking to the city, they explained the corner lot rules. Fine and dandy. I said, "Oh, yeah. Well, there's not much we can do about this. There is one thing that got overlooked, though. Underneath this garage, there used to be another garage.

69
00:19:10.320 --> 00:19:27.440
The backyard was filled in from the excess off 169 bridge when it was built. So about 15 years ago, that landowner that owned that house at the time, they may be here this evening um had that backyard filled in. They put an egress

70
00:19:27.440 --> 00:19:44.480
window in the back where the garage door used to be and converted that space to living space. Now, we all know a tuck under is a garage underneath the house. What is a garage overhouse? What do you call it?

71
00:19:44.480 --> 00:20:01.520
A bonus room, but it's still part of the house, right? When it's accessible from the basement and used as a basement. Okay. Okay. Well, it requires a 30-foot setback if it's part of the house off what they're calling now is the

72
00:20:01.520 --> 00:20:18.400
backyard, which a garage, yes, can be in that backyard, but part of the house cannot be in the backyard, which would make the setback for this new lot 30t off the back of the existing house from the address side looking backwards,

73
00:20:18.400 --> 00:20:32.960
which makes the lot that they want to subdivide too small and unbuildable. I think it would be kind of hard for the city to approve something that violates their own setbacks. So, I'm asking you to have it pulled,

74
00:20:32.960 --> 00:20:52.039
tabled, or whatever to take it, cut it down. >> I don't disagree with you and I don't disbelieve you, but I don't know that the details and the specifics on that. And so, we'd have to look for staff. Uh, I see council member Nelson with a question. >> Nope.

75
00:20:56.640 --> 00:21:11.280
I just want to clarify. I appreciate you bringing the information and appreciate your experience on this. Um, it's the existing house. >> Do I need to just talk into it more? Apparently, it was me. Not a surprise to

76
00:21:11.280 --> 00:21:28.320
anybody. Um, so thank you for bringing that forward. It's the existing house you have a concern with, correct? >> Yes. It's now under the garage which >> Okay. But how does that apply to the new lot? I mean, the existing house would be

77
00:21:28.320 --> 00:21:44.640
my knowledge legally nonconforming if it was nonconforming. Um, and that situation would not change by subdividing that lot. It would still not meet the set the setback either way. Am I do you see that differently?

78
00:21:44.640 --> 00:22:00.159
>> No, I see it completely differently. I com I see it as 30 feet to a living space or occupied from a living space. You can't that's the backyard they're considering as a backyard. It's now only 9 10. So what you're saying is because

79
00:22:00.159 --> 00:22:16.480
the back space of the one on uh Amden is a front yard and then the new one will be on Vaness. Is that right? And so you're saying that the backyard of the Amson will be too close. Is that >> No, I'm Well, if you if you hold 30 ft

80
00:22:16.480 --> 00:22:34.080
off the house, what I'm claiming is that you've got a garage that is over the top of a living space and you have to be 30 ft off. >> So, my specific question is, does that change with the splitting of the lots? >> Yes. Drastically, >> does only No. But is it non-conforming

81
00:22:34.080 --> 00:22:49.360
now? >> I don't know if it is or not. That's the city the the planning commission. I stopped and talked to him Thursday. I don't know what they're going to bring forward tonight. >> Fair enough. Fair enough to everybody, but I don't I don't think it's conforming either way. >> Okay. So then I don't know that my

82
00:22:49.360 --> 00:23:09.080
that's what my question is is the splitting of the lot making it nonconforming or not? >> If you hold the 30foot set back off the house, it it wouldn't be large enough to subdivide then. All right.

83
00:23:10.640 --> 00:23:25.840
Um sir, I think you might be the gentleman who brought um this information to our city staff. I think you mentioned that a moment ago. Um our our city staff did go out to the property and council. This is the issue I emailed you about last week,

84
00:23:25.840 --> 00:23:41.679
but um their inspection of the property, and I'm just going to read to you from their memo here. Based on the records described above and all the information received to date, city staff has no reason to determine the proposed plat is not compliant with the zoning code at this time. Absent new information

85
00:23:41.679 --> 00:23:58.080
contradicting the assessing and building records, city staff still recommends approval of the preliminary and final plat. >> Okay. Well, then I would say that every tuck under garage you've got here doesn't comply. I I think they need to go back and look at their code and see where is it written that you can have a

86
00:23:58.080 --> 00:24:15.120
living space under a garage and still be 30 feet less than 30 feet from the back property line. You're you're again as as as Mr. >> Without a picture in front of you, it's difficult to explain. I think it needs to be tabled until it can be addressed where everybody can see the picture.

87
00:24:15.120 --> 00:24:39.760
>> Okay. I appreciate it. We're over time now and I want to make sure we get another chance. Thanks much. Back up to Deb Harper, are you here? All right, Deb's not going to be here. Uh, Sally Ness, at the June 16th listening session,

88
00:24:39.760 --> 00:24:55.600
mayor states at about the 527 mark, there are three reasons why we can terminate the agreement. And that's what Mr. Walker responded to you in an email on at least one if not two occasions. Yes. And on both occasions he did not

89
00:24:55.600 --> 00:25:11.919
answer my question. I asked the city manager if the city can opt out. Opting out is not renewing when the term expires. So I asked the city manager if the city can opt out of the agreement. It cannot. Alazari

90
00:25:11.919 --> 00:25:28.880
can opt out. The city cannot. And that should not happen. I asked the city to address this so it does not happen again. Again, the city manager did not answer my question about whether the city can opt out. Instead, the city manager sent me information and how the agreement can be terminated. And again,

91
00:25:28.880 --> 00:25:45.200
that is not what I asked. Again, Alazer can opt out and the city should be able to as well. The city should be able to opt out and it can't. That should not happen and the city should address this so it doesn't happen again. The city's manager sent me how the shared agreement

92
00:25:45.200 --> 00:26:01.039
can be terminated. And yes, as the city as the mayor said, there are three reasons. Termination one, mutual agreement. The parties may at any time terminate this agreement upon mutual agreement of the parties. This mutual agreement does not allow the city to opt

93
00:26:01.039 --> 00:26:16.480
out. If the city wanted to discontinue the parking lot for any reason, it cannot. It must continue to plow and light the parking lot according to the agreement. There is no reason Al Jazari would agree to terminate use of the parking lot because it doesn't have to contribute to its maintenance and it

94
00:26:16.480 --> 00:26:31.600
wouldn't need to construct the parking spaces lost. Two, so that that is not the city really being able to terminate it. That is all under Al Jazari. Number two, by Al

95
00:26:31.600 --> 00:26:48.720
Jazari, Al Jazari may terminate this agreement upon a 60-day written notice to the city. Again, Al Jazari can opt out. the city cannot. So one and two aren't the city being able to get out of the agreement. It is all relying on Alazari. And then the third way that can

96
00:26:48.720 --> 00:27:04.880
be terminated by the city. The city may terminate this agreement upon the following. If Alazeri's conditional use permit is amended to no longer require use of the city parking areas, the city may terminate this agreement upon 30 days written notice to Alazari.

97
00:27:04.880 --> 00:27:22.000
If the city applicable issuing authority approves a change of the condition to Al Jazari's conditional use permit in effect at the time of the termination, the city may terminate this agreement upon 30 days written notice to Alazari. The issuing authorities approval of change of condition must be based on

98
00:27:22.000 --> 00:27:39.279
upon finding that Alazari is in breach of this agreement. So they have to be in breach and then we have to get rid of the requirement of the conditional use permit provided. However, the city may not initiate change of condition until 60 days have elapsed after the city provides Alazar written notice of breach

99
00:27:39.279 --> 00:27:54.960
and Alazari has not taken action to cure the breach. And as you all know, Alazari has been in breach from the day they opened. To sum that up, the city can terminate the agreement if it removes the parking requirement determined in the conditional use permit as needed to

100
00:27:54.960 --> 00:28:11.279
protect the neighbor from the neighborhood from injury. And if Alazari is in breach, what they have been again since they opened and the city does not address it again. The city should be able to opt out and it can't. That should not happen and the city should address this so that it does not happen

101
00:28:11.279 --> 00:28:25.840
again. To sum this up, the mayor said there are three reasons why we can terminate the agreement. There is only one and that is if Alazar is in breach and the city removes the parking spaces required in the conditional use permit to protect the Smith Park and

102
00:28:25.840 --> 00:28:46.559
surrounding area from an injurous use. >> Thank you, Sally. We have about a minute. I I've got one more name. Kevin Johnson. There he is. You're gonna have to talk auctioneer fast. Kevin already went over it. Okay,

103
00:28:46.559 --> 00:29:02.799
good evening. If you could just identify yourself for the record and get right into that microphone so everybody can hear you. >> Yeah, Kevin Johnson calling about the Olivia expansion. I am the exact neighbor to the expansion. Trying to figure out how this is legal to have living space

104
00:29:02.799 --> 00:29:18.320
less or less than 30 ft from a property line. That living space is 7.9 in from the property line. If they're trying to say that they're going to reroute what is now their front door to the other

105
00:29:18.320 --> 00:29:33.840
side of the house and say the garage is now in the back, but there's living space under there. I don't know how this can possibly go through. I mean, you can't just do that any anywhere else. I mean, that's it there. Like, how we just break the rules and allow it. You know, I know you're saying you already read an

106
00:29:33.840 --> 00:29:49.120
email that someone looked at it and said, "Yeah, it's it's BS." Like, someone has to come out there and look. I mean, you're pretty adamant about this and trying to pass this. You clearly said you don't know the laws or rules, but like, can we have like something going on there that people can be like,

107
00:29:49.120 --> 00:30:05.919
"Here it is. It's not making sense. There's a full basement under there, a furnace. You access it from the house. There's a 6' wide egress window with a ladder escape in there. I've been in there. I've shot pucks down there with their kids. It is a livable, usable

108
00:30:05.919 --> 00:30:22.000
basement. So that's what I have. It needs to be tabled, held off. It cannot go through or there's a lot of stuff that's going to be pushed through that's not supposed to be. >> Thank you. I appreciate it. I appreciate your getting to the point. Appreciate

109
00:30:22.000 --> 00:30:37.440
that as well. And um I I think as Mr. Walker said, based on the information that we received and based on the review that was done by staff, uh it looks like some a lot all of your concerns, I think staff has said that they can still move forward. This can still move forward.

110
00:30:37.440 --> 00:30:55.120
So, but I appreciate you being here. >> If uh if that's what has to happen, if that's what has to happen, but council, we are at 6:16. We are past our time. Uh I appreciate everybody being here tonight. I would look for a motion to adjurnn and head down to our meeting

111
00:30:55.120 --> 00:31:08.559
council. Motion by council member Robertson, second by council member Dallas to adjurnn. All in favor, please signify by saying I. Opposed? Motion carries 6. We are adjourned. Again, thanks all for being here tonight.