Remarks by Richard Collier
37 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 2
- Play at 19:29
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 19:45
“They were all from summer rest? Pretty much, yes. And so the drainage, I heard you say you have good infiltration and seasonal high, which is great. It's underground, are you gonna put some level of pervious concrete or pervious pavers there?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 20:26
“Right. I see the 75-foot COD marked, and you've got the building area, so you're, I presume, under all of the square footages for the 75 feet?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 20:51
“And I'm certainly glad to see that you saved as many trees as you did. It seems that the bulk of what you're taking down are really right in the apex of the driveway. I don't know what size those are, but...”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 21:20
“Okay, great. All right, thank you very much. Commissioner Adams?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 27:04
“Cindy, the only question that I saw just a second ago, flipping through it now, the water main on Canal Street is a two-inch main. How are we providing fire flow?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 27:46
“But I'm not the engineer, so I can't say the answer. But no, there is a fire hydrant. Where is the hydrant at? I'm assuming it's on the aerial picture.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 28:08
“Just past the buildings in the drive-thru or just before the mixed-use building?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 28:21
“Okay. Pretty, too, nice and red. All right, thank you.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 31:07
“Thank you. Yeah, I support the project too. I think it's a good use in this area. I may would have had a different opinion if a lot of the summer's rest folks had come out. But seeing that they are not, I am fine with it. I think it is really nice, really good use. Thank you.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 45:50
“While we're on traffic, though, the medical office before, their intensity was 64.2. Was that a limit, or was that just how much has been built?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 45:59
“Okay. So the 213, the proposed 213 change, that is a max number two, or that's a proposal, or it's just a max they could get with the ONICD?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 46:12
“And I agree with Chairman Lennon, too. It is more of a traffic, it's lessening of traffic more so than it is adding to it, I believe.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:11:03
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:11:14
“So what you're doing is you're being able to move some of the density into this one area more so than what you would have in 2013 or 2018 or 2023. Is that correct or incorrect?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:12:24
“But his conditions would not be outside of the conditions previously, correct? Like the 1375.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:12:34
“So you're saying 1375 in 2013 would have been a total, but today, if we agreed with this, it would be 1375 plus, I know 208 is just a number, but plus 208, correct?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:12:49
“That's right. All right. And I have no qualms that what's going to be built would be built in a professional manner. That is very evident of what's out there. I think everyone's just more discussing how the density side of it's going to be done. And if there was a limit on, if you said, okay, we're only going to go to 150, I don't know what the number is, but a number. that may make everyone more palatable. You also changed the uses to all uses in O&I except that, which the ones you accept that I thought were really good. So I don't know, I don't have any issues with what's going on, but I do…”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:14:17
“Is that the 44 you were talking about, is that all that's left on the third? I'm sorry, Matt, I didn't mean to cut you off. No, no, no.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:15:35
“And I agree. It is ideal for more density. I am not absolutely not debating that one with you at all. I think it's just how it seems that you're adding on the total that was approved in 2013 and we're adding to it. We're going over it artificially. And site plan or not, we're still going up over the cap that was agreed upon. So I'm not sure how to reconcile that in my mind. But you're right. This is absolutely the perfect place to put the density. You can go high if you want to. I think it's wonderful.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:17:21
“Would this be the last, in general, the last parcel that you would want to put that density on? Because right now what we're talking about only applies in yellow. That's correct. In the yellow boundary, right?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:18:31
“Will we only apply the 17 dwelling units an acre to the two green treat areas and not to the Wilmington Health parcel?”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:18:43
“So in your picture, you've got a big overall yellow area that is.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:18:48
“I don't know what that acreage is right now, but.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026
- Play at 1:18:51
“So then there's seven and a half left to be developed or thereabouts, eight acres, something like that.”
Planning Commission · Sep 2, 2026