09:19:44 From Jay Rodenbeck : The current cases being heard are items #1 and #2, PR-2022-007623 09:56:45 From Jay Rodenbeck : Items #1 and #2, PR-2022-007623 have been approved 09:57:19 From Jay Rodenbeck : The current case being heard is item #3, PR-2022-007875 10:39:08 From Jay Rodenbeck : Item #3, PR-2022-007875 has been deferred to January 11 10:39:58 From Jay Rodenbeck : The current case being heard is item #4, PR-2021-006261 10:59:14 From jamessalazar : We state it so you are aware while you deliberate on your juristiction… you deserver a full picture 11:01:24 From jamessalazar : You plan to profit off of a heritage which doe not belong to you. 11:02:43 From jamessalazar : Your’e developing rentals in the guise of a cottage development, 11:04:08 From jamessalazar : There is no permanent community in rental development. Youre aiming you development to those who are outside of this community. You are the source of gentrification. And all you offer to the community as a whole is landscaping 11:05:51 From Frank Concini : Development is too large and too dense for the neighborhood . over 300 vehicles entering and exiting development at any one time. Impact on Griegos road would be hazardous. 11:05:53 From jamessalazar : Los Griegos is NOT Los Poblanos 11:07:45 From Gina Ogorzaly : My home at 1514 Griegos is terranas construction and is already being damaged by current traffic. I consider myself a preservationist. 11:07:46 From jamessalazar : Hes is injecting the agenda of an affluent neighboring neighborhood into a community of locals who’s who’s people have been disenfranchised by the colonization of the more affluent 11:19:01 From goodans : I am at 1850 Griegos Road. I appreciate that there is attention to making this a quality development with attention to scale and size - not usual cookie cutter development. However, the size and density will add to demands on multiple infrastructures: water, sewer, electricity, internet, and mostly access and traffic. 11:20:01 From jamessalazar : How old are the lines? How often are the lines in area requiring repair, even with its current usage? 11:20:12 From goodans : In addition - school resources and law enforcement services. All these need to be considered when the city approves an extensive development that is within an old neighborhood where services are already strained. 11:33:41 From jamessalazar : The development will utilize restidental roads which are already strained at peak hours. it is the San Isidro is a main artery to Griegos Elm and Valley High School 11:42:16 From jamessalazar : What protections are in place which prevent a developers from redefining a cottage development? can a developer simply suggests that their single development has been divided into 8 separate cottage courts? Is a developer simply allowed to replat and divide the land as a was to dodge the requirement of a cottage to be contained within a 2 acre space? 11:45:47 From jamessalazar : If this is a “project site a a whole” why is it allowed to be consider as 8 separate cottage sites? 11:49:38 From jamessalazar : This was not the intent of cottage development. This is a development taking advantage of missed definition by the IDO 11:50:58 From goodans : That is an important question when considering precedence. 12:00:14 From goodans : If the City can consider this as one project site with 8 separate internal sites, there should be a cumulative impact study requirement. 12:05:35 From Jay Rodenbeck : Item #4, PR-2021-006261 was deferred to December 14 12:06:49 From Jay Rodenbeck : There is a recess until 12:30 PM. At that time, item #5, PR-2022-007664 will be heard 12:33:04 From Jay Rodenbeck : The current case being heard is item #5, PR-2022-007664 12:55:57 From Jay Rodenbeck : Item #5, PR-2022-007664 has been deferred to December 14 12:57:02 From Jay Rodenbeck : The current case being heard is item #6, PR-2022-007416 13:01:11 From Jay Rodenbeck : Item #6, PR-2022-007416 has been recommended for approval by the City Council 13:01:37 From Jay Rodenbeck : The current case being heard is item #7, PR-2020-004645 13:12:20 From Jay Rodenbeck : Item #7, PR-2020-004645 has been approved 13:13:47 From Jay Rodenbeck : The current case being heard is item #8, PR-2018-001560 13:43:03 From Ellen Dueweke : Kevin also said that Cherry Hills put in a wall, so how can we say Pulte can't do it? But Cherry Hills went in 40 years ago. There was no consciousness of "wall canyons" back then, and there was nothing in the IDO about it. Mikaela said this was a new rule in the IDO. 14:16:51 From Ellen Dueweke : If no effort has been made from the original plat in August to the same exact plat being submitted today, that appears to be in violation of the rule. Otherwise, wouldn't approval be purely discresionary? 14:28:27 From Jay Rodenbeck : For item #8, the Waivers (VA-2022-00328, 329, 330, and 331) were approved. The Preliminary Plat, Sidewalk Deferral, and Vacations were deferred to February 1 14:43:01 From Jay Rodenbeck : The current case being heard is item #9, PR-2022-007081 15:02:29 From Jay Rodenbeck : Item #9, PR-2022-007081 has been deferred to December 21 15:03:08 From Jay Rodenbeck : The current case being heard is item #10, PR-2022-006908 15:32:10 From David Gutierrez : Coordination with Water Authority Cross Connection Section will be required to determine the appropriate containment device is installed for the proposed non-residential development. Contact at 505-289-3454