Remarks by Geoffrey Green
92 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 4 of 4
- Play at 46:15
“I think, Libby, respectfully, my issue is that if it's a multi-story building and you're on the fourth floor and you're facing the road, you can have 3,000 trees and it's not going to make a difference.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 46:33
“Yeah, but not the people who are living there.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 48:23
“I just wanted to comment that I think it's great that it has that access to the 1701 North or whatever that development is to the South. I appreciate that.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 48:42
“No, the access through that other building. I don't think we need to mention it. I just wanted to comment on that.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 51:50
“I'll say just two things. First of all, the requested modification to regulation states that the minimum tree canopy requirement is 40%. I'm not sure if that's wrong. But I think we need to think of this in context of what it's providing. And it notes somewhere in the narrative that it's adjacent to town-owned land that has additional trees in it. Um, so, you know, the goal of these minimum tree canopy requirements is to obviously preserve the tree canopy in the town. You know, the town could include as part of this project, some other piece of land that include that they don't plan on…”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:03:19
“Yeah, no, I think that's. I'm fine with that.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:03:28
“Yeah, I mean we can't make anybody do anything so everything is a recommendation.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:03:44
“I just don't, you know, I don't want a council member to say, well, you said it was 25% under 60. And, um, but the, this as, and it, it just, it was unclear to me. So I have no issues with, with limiting the requirement to under 80%. I just, yeah.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:05:50
“Yeah, I mean, Condition five states that 100% of the affordable units will be reserved for those households earning 80% or less of the AMI. And there's no indication of the fact that there's that 60% under, 25% under 60. So I just think that needs to be more clear. If the intention is that 100% will be under 80% and 25% will be under 60%, that should be said. But I thought the discussion, I thought the conclusion of the discussion was there might need to be some flexibility. And so the town didn't want to commit to hitting that 60% AMI mark.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:07:51
“I think my only point, and I'm happy. I personally am satisfied either way. But if the 25% at 60% is... is going to continue to be a condition that the development will meet. I just think that should be clearly stated in the ordinance because as written, it's ambiguous. So, John, that change you made, I would change the weather to that because we're hearing from town staff that, no, no, the change clarifying the ordinance, that, yeah. Because we're hearing from staff that they do intend to have that condition in the conditional zoning district.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:11:58
“Yeah, I just want to. I don't know if I should share. I don't know if everybody has had a chance to see the. Resolution of consistency with the comprehensive plan that was emailed to us. I could share my screen and throw it up or.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:12:18
“No, but I you know if people like to see what they're voting on.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:12:33
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:14:05
“I will move that the Planning Commission recommend that the Town Council approve Ordinance A, approving the conditional zoning application. subject to the recommendations included in the complete community matrix that we will attach to the recommendation i second that okay mike seconds so let's do a vote jeff yes um chuck yes libby yes mike yes”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:18:12
“Jeff? Yeah, I think it would be helpful if, I don't know if town staff know about the plans for the public hearing. I assume there will be some sort of presentation because they will be, you know, giving a presentation to the town council because this is a pretty big legislative undertaking. But I don't know what the plans are or if we will be getting an updated version. of the LUMO. I mean, at least I know there's a few typos in there which are inevitable, so I don't know if they're going to try to fix those and how much time we'll have to review before the meeting. I don't know if either of…”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:24:15
“I mean, we can always have the public hearing and then close it. We're required to have a public hearing, but we're not required to, you know, who knows how many people will come. There have been a number of emails about some of the, to town council about some of the changes in the draft update in LUMO. These people may want to only come speak to council. They may decide to come to us, who knows. But I think after they, after the public hearing, we can close the public hearing if we choose to or continue it and then have whatever discussion we want to have.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026
- Play at 1:25:04
“Yeah, right. And so we can have, I think we'll be able to have that kind of discussion at the meeting.”
Planning Commission · Sep 15, 2026