For those who are watching the recording, this meeting was called to order. We called the role and I apologize for not hitting record. That's on the roll. >> Call the role one more time just for the record. >> Okay. Mayor Harrow >> here. >> Council member Engelhart >> here. Mr. Campion >> here.
>> Miss Gin >> here. >> Miss Whitesman >> here. >> Miss Swingle >> here. >> Mr. Schlanganger >> here. >> Mr. Dashna >> here. >> Mr. Hayne >> here. >> Mr. Favors >> here. >> Engineer clerico >> here. >> Attorney Wilhelm
>> preser Kyle attorney Kazinski engineer Troutman and Mr. Eckle are all excused. >> Thank you. And again that's me being rusty. So we didn't have anyone on public comments. The mayor deferred to council vice president Angelhart
or is yours. >> Oh okay. So not I got a bit flustered when you said the long report. I just wanted to report that myself and Councilman Levit attended the county's
uh kind of open final report on the bike um kind of plan for the entire county. Um it was really interesting and um the mayor reported last night that she and
um the chief of police had also had met with the county. They actually noted that in at the meeting um which was great. Um and uh the chief of police had a ton of really great um feedback for
the county. Um the mayor reported yesterday. So, like I said, Councilman Levit and I did attend the roll out. I want everybody to um make a point if you have a chance to take a look at the county planning um board website and the
bike report is on there and you can kind of zoom into the Wellington area. And I got pretty uh jazzed up. There was I think it was very well done. Um, and there was a lot of opportunity, I think,
for maybe our planning board to incorporate some of the recommendations via our approvals process or our master plan. Um specifically, one of the things they said in the meeting was that we may
want to consider um maybe adding um to the checklist or to the process of site plan approvals that the applicants have cross reference fee um by the the countywide bike plan and how that kind
of overlays on our um bureau and um then and therefore require the applicants to incorporate some of the recommendations. It can be as simple as, you know, bike racks, which I know we always do
encourage, but things more um that might be um also be able to be captured as things like rideaways and and bike lanes along specific roads. So, just encourage everybody to look at it and um I think it's a really good opportunity for us to
um kind of encourage encourage this. That's all. >> Okay. I have to step back in then. We directly question the county to um work on an ordinance to send to the council to create an easement along the railroad
from Stangle to Route 31 so that there can be an interactive walkway because the easement there is too narrow right now owned by the railroad. So they are looking for us to create an easement legally through ordinance >> pedestrian or multi-use bike.
>> It's now we can figure out later. >> I can send you the email from the county asking us to do that. >> Okay. >> So it should originate here going to the council. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And that wasn't like directly discussed at the meeting I attended just that the one that mayor attended. So um
yeah if you could copy us on that um on that correspondence that would be great mayor. >> Okay. Uh thank you. Uh for the record, Dennis is on the meeting. Uh he got here about two minutes ago. So if you want to
>> It was 7:07 my clock. So uh HPC comments. Dennis. >> Yeah. Sorry I was late. Um we didn't have a meeting since our last planning board meeting. Um, so the only thing I have is just a reminder about the
historic house and garden tour that's scheduled for Saturday, June 6 from 11 to 5. If anyone's interested in volunteering, let me know. They get a free ticket. Thanks. >> Thanks. Any uh anything else for Dennis?
I will it's just just to mention we'll get we'll get to this in the in in chair items. We are having as a reminder joint HPC planning board meeting on June 9th. Uh um environmental commission Melissa >> we have not had a meeting since our last
meeting. So the only reminder I have is our cleanup day is May 30th from 10 to 2 any amount of time or hands willing to uh show up meet us at the DPW shed and we will be grateful for anybody's help.
>> And you are cleaning up specifically. So, we're going to try to target the burough owned areas around the historic properties that are featured on the house tour. >> And where's the DPW? >> Do we have to RSVP? >> You can just show
>> us. >> Where is the DPW shed? >> It's between Maine and Broad Street at parking lot. >> Big big. >> Yeah. >> Great. Thank you. Uh, item six on the agenda this evening, professional reports. Our attorney is not here and
I'm assuming our conflict council has no report to give. Um, >> all present. >> That's good. All right. Bob, do you have anything? >> Okay. Um, and uh, planner and traffic engineer are not here. Uh, we do have item seven, approval of minutes. We are
backlogged on minutes. I'm going to ask the board's indulgence. We will get to that hopefully next meeting. If not, the meeting after. We're going to try to catch up now. K's back working. So, we'll take care of that. Uh, item eight on the agenda is resolution memorializing board action on
application 202502 for car wash. That was uh uh approvals were granted at our last meeting. We do not yet have the resolution. Carrot may have it for the next meeting and she wasn't sure when I spoke to her on Friday. So, we'll see about that. Uh item nine on our agenda
is a complete determination for JA Global LLC which is block 45 12 um 54 12 that's confusing. Um so if uh you just turn the camera on um the little video
button on there we go >> and you're good. >> And there I am. Yes, sure. That back a little. >> Stephen Ruenberg on behalf of Jaza
Global LLC who's the applicant and owner along with my co-consel Mr. Lee Roth. uh on behalf of the applicant. This is our application for D2 bifurcated variance relief uh in order to um allow for an
expansion of a pre-existing warehouse distribution and an improvement of that site uh which we think will be a real benefit to the bureau. Uh this is a Dvariant so uh unfortunately the mayor and uh councilwoman can't participate in
these proceedings. Um we have Mr. Clerico's uh second completeness review and I'm prepared to address those items in his completeness review that I think needs discussion. Um and I'm sure he'll
interrupt me if I need to, but I think he is going to go any further. Can we just clarify for the records if there had been an accus? >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Well, you want to stick around with the audience? I'm happy to do that. >> You don't have to. If the applicant's okay with it, I want to make sure it was
acknowledged. Thank you. probably start to cross. >> So, um, on page three of his report, he is recommending certain waiverss to be granted. Now, I'll go to the ones that he's saying either denied or deemed
incomplete. Um, and the first waiver request was M dealing with the provision of prior resolutions of approval or denial. I provided with Mr. Clerico, our Oprah request that we just made honestly
today uh requesting that information. So, we will have that in time for a public hearing of response and we would ask that that be waved for purposes of completeness only. >> Now, we putting in a temporary wa category. >> Thank you. And then number 29, I have
Mr. Ruthin here with me to discuss this if need be, but this is a bifurcated application. Um we are not seeking site plan approval. If we have to come back before the board, if we um receive use variance approval, devariance approval, we're going to have to have a
preliminary and final site plan application. And that's really where you would get into the nitty-gritty of the proposed grading plan. Um right now, we're just seeking a bifurcated plan. So, at this point, we are going to ask that that be waved. um which is
consistent with having a bindated uh application for use variance purposes. The only comment I would have there is that this isn't a flood plane. Uh and it was difficult for me to figure out what what the existing building floor
elevations were on the site. Um, again, I don't know that the applicant's not asking for any relief at this time from the flood plane regulations, but I think it would be appropriate to at least have some idea of they they have added the flood plane uh delineation
lines, the new and the enhanced ones on the drawing for the elevations. Um, but excuse me. Uh as far as the the real critical improvement of the building itself, I think we should have some idea of what the elevation of the current building and the proposed building first
floors are. Even though they're not asking for relief, just have some idea that the building would conceivably conform with uh you know flood plan >> and and that we can provide in in lie of a proposed grading plan. we can provide that additional information um with
respect to the uh current elevations uh and that would be part of our testimony at the public hearing. you know, we deferred the board. They felt they needed more grading information, but I think it was from our standpoint at least at this stage and knowing that would be some critical >> knowing the grading per
>> knowing that floor elevations or the building and because that again they're not asking for any relief under the flood plan regulations. We probably wouldn't be granting it at this stage. Uh would be doing that if we were going to do it at in conjunction with the um site plan itself. Um, but I think it
would be helpful to at least have some knowledge of whether we'll be dealing with it. >> Yeah, we should provide that um elevation information as opposed to a whole proposed grading plan. Correct, Mr. Ruth? >> Yes.
So, we would ask for a waiver uh from that um requirement condition upon us providing that elevation uh information to Mr. Clerica. >> That would be a partial waiver. um you want to make it temporary to so that's up to you if you take partial
>> correct and the rest of the items I think honestly our ministerial that I can have Mr. roof drain that we can deal with. But it's checklist item five um was having the
proper name of the owner of the property be consistent throughout on the plans. I mean that's just changing it from WMDA which he already has done on his plans right here that we can deliver to Mr.
Clerico 11D um the site triangles and easements associated with them. I understand that Mr. Rain and Mr. Clerico had a conversation where the sightelines are actually provided and there wouldn't be sight easements because they're entirely
within the right of way. Um the are the the sightelines are on the plan within the right of way. I didn't see them. I'm not sure that exactly the ordinance, but they do have information on the plan. So from completed standpoint, it's complete. When we get into the review of
the application, we may have comments about that. But for this for this state for this purpose it's complete. >> Thank you. >> That would be 11D. >> Correct. Um 14 is meets and bounds for municipal boundary not shown or tied into property boundary. I'm going to
have to have Mr. Ruth Narin explain that situation and he's what we need to do there. >> So who usually swear? >> You do. >> Okay. You want to swear for completeness? >> Yeah. Okay. So, uh, please raise your
right hand. Do you swear affirm the testimony you'll give in this matter will be the truth to the best of your ability? >> Yes. >> All right. State your name and spell your last name, please. >> Certainly, Eric Rrookner. R U P N A R A I N. >> Thank you, Mr. Rupner. Um there was the
comment about the meets and bounds for the municipal boundary not shown or tied into property boundary. Can you explain that comment and conversations? >> Certainly. Um so part of the survey that my office completed there was an
original file map that was shown and recorded for this property and it shows where the municipal boundary line is but it doesn't provide any dimension from either the rare property line or from the public rightway. So there's aside from graphically depicting where they
believe on that file map the municipal boundary line is we do not have any further information. I spoken to Mr. Maro earlier today and what we're going to have to do in order to provide definitive delineation of where the burrow line is. We have to start looking through other deeds and other properties
to find out if there are monumentation along the burl line that we can then extrapolate into this property to find exactly where the municipal boundary line is. Um I've checked with um Bor and Borne who I'm also associated with to see if they have any information. They
haven't been able to come up with anything. Um I'm not quite sure if the burrow has any information on old survey monumentation um that might be available but we are in the process of reviewing whatever public information is available to try to figure out where that
municipal boundary by this. >> So I guess the point is that that's really all site plan issues that we would deal with in terms of site plan and we're really bifrocated this application to deal with the use variance issue first. Correct. >> Correct. And I think you're okay with
that. >> Again, it is a bifated application. It is a check that's required though for a bicated application. So you have a graphical representation of the line, but it's not tied into anything. Uh I think maybe for the purpose of deciding on the use of the property whether it's
line was 5t or 10t off. I don't make much of a difference in making your decision. That's up to the board honestly. Uh but clearly when we get to site stage is really we need to know that I believe this line I know Eric your office did wasn't this line established
uh by the up by the uh the other property up close to the circle the rest I forget the guy's name um >> so it's the same f map that I referenced is the one that we had available when this survey was done and the other survey and I believe
>> did they physically establish it up there with a meets and balance description thought they did and in any event and it obviously has to be tied in at some point in time. um whether you want to consider uh for purposes of this bifurcated application permanent waiver if you want to consider temporary waiver
that's that's really up but I don't out of the gate I don't think we know need to know exactly where that line again if it moves 10 ft one way or the other I don't think it's going to affect your decision on whether or not you're going to grant the the use and we would ask for that
>> and the last item is the calculation in square feet and 1/ 1000 of an acre for the existing >> which item is asking >> uh 16 I'm sorry >> 16 >> and um you're asking for the area of disturbance calculated in square feet
and 1/ 1,000 of an acre and we have to add two zeros correct >> yes so we provided the calculation but to 1 100 I think just to a tenth of an acre >> to a tenth of an acre so we can add a few zeros you've already done
>> I you actually gave us that information is on the plan. The area of disturbance >> it's listed as I think it's 4.6 6 acres but an actual physical delineation around the property you know that's not on but an actual what I anticipate they're going to disturb within the burl there is I think it's on sheet number
four right by the title block >> so what's on the sheet the uh the delineation or >> just the acorage >> the acreage of the service >> yes >> so the checklist item is is the calculation not the delineation is that what I'm understanding
>> uh you calculate well the net gross area of disturbance Eric is saying it's on the plan but it's only on the plan in acres correct take his word for it's on it's on the plan I didn't see it we can it's
something that's we can provide it to 1 1000 of an interest I said that right >> so with that relief we would ask that you grant those waivers and deem this application >> so I'm looking at Mr. clerico's letter
and under on page four sorry page 304 I3 or whatever it is uh it's also checklist item two it says two and five which is which so which one is the owner applicant question >> oh I'm sorry I missed that um it's the
owner applicant is Global LLC >> right but like what's what's the missing checklist item because because Mr. Remember it said five with the owner information consistency not >> well you know what maybe we just simply recheck just what we're doing with it.
So um we uh recommending approval on item uh I which was filing with the utility services. We're recommending a denial on with the OPA request. This the applicant is providing their request for an OPA. Um
so that'll be a temporary waiver. Um uh we said uh item two was incomplete. That's the owner applicant issue, the conflict. They're going to they're going to deal with that. I haven't seen it. Then deal. They're going to revise the plan. Perhaps you have with you tonight. Okay.
So, they're going to revise. We haven't seen it yet. They're going to revise the plans. As of right now, item two is incomplete. Um item uh five is the uh again, it's an owner to owner applicant issue. Um it's incomplete as of now, but
they're going to they're going to rectify that by giving us a revised plan tonight. Uh item 11D was um the um what uh the site triangle issue. We're going to we're going to say that's complete. Um
and again, we'll get into the merits of that as part of the review. Um item 14 uh is the um is the municipal boundary line issue. Um and the board agrees we're going to do a either a waiver or a
temporary waiver for the purposes. Um I I would I guess I would suggest you just make it a waiver for now. Uh because it is a bifurcated application. If somehow in the course of the hearing that becomes a critical issue for you to make your decision, obviously you fell
out, you got to have the information. But but for now, I think you could probably put that in in a category of a permanent waiver for the purposes of this bifurcated application. Uh that was item 14. Uh item 16 was the
area disturbance. They're going to they're going to provide that. Uh item 26 being was the um I was recommending a waiver. That's construction detail standards, the burrow and county standards. I was recommending a waiver. That' be part of your action.
Um the proposed grading, they're we're going to do a a partial waiver. They just going to provide us with additional information about the building floor elevations. >> I think that was it. >> Okay. So, let me So, make sure I got
have this right. Bob, your recommendation is your letter is to grant waiverss for I 17 and 26 as in your letter. We are you're also saying the meets and bounds of the burough deadline which is missile line
which is 14 to be a waiver. You're saying that 11D is actually complete as is 16 because the area of disturbance is on the plan and that >> on the plan 2000. They're going they're going to modify that >> modify that and that uh a temporary
waiver on M um which is the opener request for the prior stuff and >> right they made the request they have to provide the response >> provide response and then so that's temporary waiver and that 29 would be a partial waiver um that instead of doing
the full grading that they would provide the the elevation am I catching everything? uh was two and five. >> And then two and five is those are contemporary waiverss. >> What would they get? >> Owner information. >> Yeah. Technically incomplete. You're going to give us a plan. It's going to rectify it. But as of right now, we
don't have a plan to talk about. So it becomes what you normally done in the past on stuff like that. You say it's incomplete. You become complete upon providing the documentation. They provide it tonight. I could issue a report or something tomorrow. Say if those items have been addressed. I mean
that's the I I would argue that it's actually complete. It might be there might be an incorre correction that needs to be made but we did provide the information and >> well that's true if the information is there it's just conflicting >> right so we've now resolved the conflict
>> if you want to consider that complete you can certainly um >> we have a plan that says the owner and applicator is different corporation from the application which says it's somebody else >> so they technically provided information
>> they provided It could the tenant was listed on the plan, but the owner and the the information of the applicant being the same as the owner was listed throughout the application
and in my addendum. Um, and and in the correspondence, it was just uh and and we've corrected that. I mean, Eric's going to provide that to you. >> There's one entity is both the owner and the object though, is it? Correct. >> Okay.
>> Okay. So for the purposes of just to make so so it sounds like please >> if you want if you want to consider those temporary wavers you can do those too. >> Okay. Temporary where they're going. So it sounds like you've got so your your your report which recommended to deem it
incomplete based on missing documentation. It sounds like we covered all of those things to your satisfaction. Am I understanding that correctly? >> Yeah. I just went through them point by point. >> Yeah. So we're we're covered. Okay. Um can I so that so we can have some board discussion just can is there can I get a
motion on completeness >> I'll second complete >> yes >> okay >> waver waver right waivers okay so that's swingle and second whitesmith okay so
discussion uh those who can anybody online have anything you want to and feel. Okay. Uh so the roll please. >> Yes.
>> Miss Gib. >> Yes. >> Miss Whitman. >> Yes. >> Miss Swingle. >> Yes. >> Mr. Scho. >> Yes. >> Mr. Schlanger. Yes, >> Mr. Bossha. >> Yes,
>> Mr. Eckle. >> Oh, it's not here. Sorry, Mr. Hayne. >> Yes, >> Mr. Pavers. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Now, the big question when should I do this meeting? >> Okay. So, will I will I will let you
know a couple things. We have we have a meeting next week. Obviously, that doesn't help you. Um June we have two meetings uh uh noticed for June. June 9th, we are having a joint meeting with our um HPC um on some expansion or some
clarification on some properties in the historic district. So that's a that that's a full that's a full meeting and not a full meeting, but it's there's already stuff on the agenda for that meeting. And then June 23rd is the other notice meeting in June. Um and you know
that's you're you're >> I'm just going to speak up on the 23rd. I'll be out of town. So the 23rd is not a good day. So >> So then if we I don't have July in front of me written down, but >> So the 9th is a no-go. >> We It could be on the 9th. I'm just
letting you know we have to have a we have a will soon to be noticed joint meeting of the HPC and because it involves clarification of properties in the historic district. I cannot tell you with any certainty as to how many members of the public are going to want
to participate. Um, so it could be a full meeting and it may not be. I that that I have to I don't have an answer for you unfortunately as to what that's going to look like. >> What What days of the month are your meeting? >> Second and second and fourth Tuesday.
>> Okay. >> General. Okay. >> Second. >> Oh, July 7th would be the meeting following >> that would be July 14th would be the following month. But we're we're not meeting >> on the schedule July 7th.
>> We moved a few meetings around over the summer dealing with holidays. So it's July 7th and July 28th, right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Um I have a conflict on the 7th. I could commit to July 28th. Um, can we notice for June 9th
and then play it by ear to see what the schedule looks like that night if it really is going to be jammed up and if need be we can make an announcement to continue it to another meeting. We have
no problems announcing to carry with no further notice. We do that all the time. I'm just, you know, for for your applicant, you know, the expense of having your professionals here ready to go. They may be sitting here for a while. And just uh we have updated our bylaws and we don't start new businesses
any any new items past 9:30 and we're done at 10. So, I'm just giving you fair notice on that. We we I don't think there's a problem noticing for the 9th, but you're gonna just I want you to be in full awareness of what the reality is. >> July 28th.
>> I won't be there. >> Well, we didn't have to do it. We had to do it sometime. >> Yeah. >> Are you available July 28th? >> Yeah. >> 28th. >> All right. So, we will we will kind of pass again for that.
All right. Thank you. Thank you. Much appreciated. I'm not gonna go back in. >> No, no, you're good. It's fine. Um item 10 on our agenda this evening is the witness determination for West Allen Street LLC block 13 lot five. Um that
was uh just for members of the board. Um we do have um there was a report issued um there was updated materials that was that I've sent out to everybody with the
agenda and then there was um uh the updated report came out yesterday or today I think. >> Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I could probably make this quick. Go ahead. um we u received the report um and we're going
to have to deal with some of the issues in the report. So rather than going line through line, I understand that the board previously deemed the application complete, you can continue it to be incomplete this evening and we'll come back um after dealing with Mr. Clarico's correspondence. It's not like I'm
agreeing to everything in the correspondence, but rather than wasting everybody's time right now, um there's certainly things that we have to provide and I think you you would deem us incomplete anytime. you want to deal with wavers recommended? >> I would rather us not actually. I'd rather us deal with all those when we get to this.
>> Yeah. And I don't have people here to be able to respond to each and every waiver request. >> Okay. So, um can I get a motion to deem this application to complete >> Mr. uh not super thanks. Mayor,
>> yes. >> Council member Lang, >> yes. >> Miss, >> yes. >> Miss Whitesman, >> yes. >> Miss Wingle, >> yes. >> Mr. Mr.
>> Mr. Hay, >> Mr. papers to death. >> We got more. >> All right. >> Thank you all very much. >> So, uh item 11 on the agenda are chair items. So, um, because Miss Bazinski
could not be here, um, uh, and, uh, I I I'd like for us to push the, uh, chair election to our next meeting, uh, on the 19th, uh, so that we, so Carol can be here. I'd also Carol was going to report
back out on u kind of was going to circulate some redlinined comments on the U, escrow update stuff. So obviously I want her to be here for that. We also um the bylaws committee has been meeting um and
Jim's got some wants to we need Jim to make a report of that. >> Master I said bylaws >> not bylaws. Sorry it's master plan. Sorry. >> Okay. >> No no no bylaws. Sorry. Um master plan
subcommittee. Um so we're going to do that on the next meeting. So there isn't any nor any development applications there. Um and I think that um we'll if that's okay with everyone. I know we there was something floating around about possibly not having a meeting next
week because of agenda items, but we have these other things that are kind of out there that I'd like for us to not lose steam on because we are going to have a full meeting on June 9th. Um if that's okay with everyone. So um that's the kind of plan for the 19th. We don't
because it we'll need Jim for the for the master plan committee and Cara for the escro requirements, but I don't think we're gonna need Bob or Jay for for for next week's day. Um and then June 9th is joined with HPC. Um
circulating around is the um report from uh John Hat and the the notice is going to go out. That's all getting coordinated. there's we don't need to talk about it now, but just to make sure that everyone understands that that's happening in that meeting and if there's
anything else that comes in at once the 9th, but I it's going to be a full meeting uh with that. Um and then we have >> Excuse me. >> You wouldn't need me for that one either. >> I unless unless um the only I can think of is if West Allen Street comes back
with completeness, there could be conceivably if they if if Mr. Grimberg has that taken care of letter. The other application that's sitting out there that I just don't know is the YMCA application community pool. We don't know where that is.
>> One of the items, not that one of the items can take us some time. >> Understood. So if so if if there's if so June 9th if we don't, you know, we certainly need um our planner and our uh attorney, but I if there's not something
else, I think you're you're probably fine. Um, and then, uh, because we're getting into the summer season, just if folks know that they're going to miss meetings, just please make sure that you email, uh, Caitlyn so that we can keep track of and we make sure we have forum
for applicants who are coming in, things like that. U, any other chair items? >> Um, I don't know the right time, bring up, but the right time. >> Okay. Um, so I >> need the microphone. Yeah, just
>> online. >> Um, so I did go to the training uh I guess it was three weeks back. So I thought I'd just give a quick update on what I heard um at the training. So couple things. Um, Judge Menon was there. He actually gave a talk at lunch. Um, some of the things that he kind of
stressed was um a couple things that stood out to me. Um, testimony should reflect the rationale. Uh so this is if there is a resolution review. Um he specifically was call calling out uh to let your
boards know that um it's why the board did what it did and what the board did um is what should be in the testimony that should reflect the rationale of whatever decision was made. Um because they only have the documentation from
the record and the transcript to actually go by. um deliberation doesn't count and public comment should be sworn in per judge minute which I know there was some debate maybe during the session for the training that was actually given
of whether that needs to be or not but I figured the person who's going to actually do the review of anything that would be a resolution said it needs to be. So I thought that was something I wanted to bring back to the board for consideration. >> So a member of the public raising their hand should be sworn in. >> Yes. >> If they're testifying if they're testifying.
>> If they're testifying. So they're providing comment. >> So so question it's >> like we had the other day though. Yeah. >> So if someone's giving someone's making a public comment because it's going to be part of the record for the board's decision they should be sworn in. Yes.
What is what I've heard >> on an application because for instance a neighbor might say uh you know what was all testified to by the applicant is untrue. Here's why it's untrue. So so you want that sworn testing >> kind of was like a smart car wash. >> Yeah. Yeah.
people asking questions on it, right? Questions, no, but comments. Yes, that was what he was, >> which isn't a hard thing for us to get to the habit of doing. We just It has been our practice to do that here. >> Yeah. >> I take it back. There have been a couple of applications where we
>> It's not a common practice in my experience anywhere, but I think Judge Ben makes a good point. >> I guess we've asked sometimes when we've been asking for like name and address. That's >> I know it's different, but I feel like is that one we >> we could I mean it's not Yeah, we could
we could certainly do that. The the name of the address is is has other has under saturary reasons um >> why we need to know who's within 200 feet or not and all those other things. >> Thank you. >> Yeah.
Um some other things that came up he did stress of course uh guiding principles arbitrary precious reasonable um is what it all always goes back to there was a number of questions in the room that asked about what do you do in this case but in this case and it was the same
answer time um I really already know that uh the other things that came up not related to his talk but I thought were interesting is there was a conversation during one of the sessions around data centers um and there was a recommendation uh that if it's not
currently called out in our ordinances um whether we want it or we don't want it to make it explicit. So not just as a non-use but be very explicit so that um we're covered. So that may be something for consideration. Um >> that's something that Rington board is
looking at right now as well. >> Okay. >> We may want to check in with them. I I'm Yeah, I think we should bring this to the >> the faster. >> Yeah. Well, doing this. Yeah. I mean, we've got these big lots where you want good stuff and data centers and not
public >> can enjoy themselves at. So, >> generally >> generally know. >> Yeah. I just encourage you to kind of check in with the maybe the planners can touch base with each other, see what they're going through right now. >> I'll send it out to Joe to ask him to
Yeah. Um, and then I think the last thing I was going to bring up, there's affordable housing was a very hot topic given current situation. Um, so very interesting conversation around there. Um, >> just because most municipalities are in trouble, but Timber is not.
>> Exactly. We've we've been in compliance for four rounds now. >> We're in compliance. >> And there was a lot of concern about how they're going to make it work. we should be concerned about how they're going to impact their time that's in compliance. Our neighbors all around us.
>> Uh so those were the big ones, but I thought it was a really great training overall. Gave a packet that probably starts like every single time so when I hear a different thing back, but um learned a lot and I felt like the first meeting back, last meeting that I came to, a lot of things made a lot more
sense. So highly recommend. >> Thanks. >> Yeah. >> Did you pass the test? >> I did. Well, >> I'll find out. See, you'll let me know in like a couple months. >> They'll tell you like there. >> What's that? >> They don't say there.
>> No, they just send me the certific. So, if I didn't pass, then oh boy. All right, that was great. >> Yeah. >> All right. Uh, anything else under chair items for anybody? >> Great. Um, Kevin sent out bills a little
while before the meeting. Um, >> one of them is >> What do you got? >> It's the one from I just question >> whether it goes to us or not. Sorry. Yeah.
>> Which invoice? >> Yes, >> it's okay. >> Um, it's the one that has to do with uh rescue squad. >> Yep. That's us. >> That's not us. >> That's not us. >> The other one the other one.
>> It says project rescue squad prepare for an attend meeting. That was >> that's not the council or the plan. I think that might be the climate should be and will
have an escro for that. >> Okay. But what are they doing over there? I thought they were building a place over >> I'm not sure what that is, but there was a meeting rescue squad put up some escro. They had an informal that was >> ago.
>> Well, they they were supposed to move to some place off of like case or something like that. road was off train tracks there somewhere. They were selling bricks and stuff. >> Yeah, I don't know. So, let's Okay, so let's pull that out and let's if you can
follow up with that just ask >> um >> you can pull it out and approve the rest. >> Yes, we can. So, get a motion audit to to audit the bills with the exception of invoice 7919 from >> All right, those two got it.
>> I'm sorry, that was motion. Mayor Carol second. Mr. Schler. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Mayor Carol. >> Yes. >> Hart. >> Yes. >> Mr. Champion. >> Yes. >> Miss Gifin.
>> Yes. >> Miss Whitesman. >> Yes. >> Miss Swingle. >> Yes. >> Mr. Sh. >> Yes. >> Mr. Schwanker. >> Yes. >> Mr. Dash. >> Yes. Okay, that's all we need. >> All right, thank you. Uh, we have no I
we do not need to go into executive session. So, uh, get a motion to adjurnn. Favor >> say I take good care.