Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'm calling the planning and zoning committee to order. And our third party will be here shortly, so he told us to continue on. So that's what we're doing. OK, I would like to make a motion to suspend the rules to move item number five to number two. So all in favor. OK, so. That is the next item.

Could you repeat that? I can hardly hear you.

OK. Can you hear me now?

Yeah. Can you repeat what you just approved?

OK. So I moved item number five to number two. So I want to make a motion to approve, or do I have a motion to approve the minutes?

Motion to approve the minutes of May 6, 26, Planning and Zoning Committee meeting.

Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Can you still hear us? No? Okay. Yeah, I can hear you. Okay.

Thank you.

All right. So we're going to talk about the discussion regarding data center standards. And we had several items that we were working on adding to the ordinance. Laura, do you have a report on that?

Sorry, yes, Madam Chair. Well, I have a report on some of that. So you guys gave me...

Okay, now I'm having trouble here. Okay. Yeah, okay.

I'm sorry.

We've got to get a technical... Maybe we need to pass these around.

Would you like one?

You can get them at the door when you come in. You know, like you do in church. There can be a little basket. Okay. All right, Laura, continue on.

Yes, ma'am. Some of the items that you all asked me to look at are not problematic at all. One of those was compliance with state law. County ordinances are already required to comply with state law and to the extent someone believed they weren't, there would ultimately be a challenge to that. But as a general rule, all county ordinances comply with state law. You had asked me to look into some rate making issues and more specific discussions on data centers and whether they can generate their own power, studies on specific aspects related to noise, separate and apart from the nuisance ordinance that already exists, and generator use limitations. Things like noise, vibration, heat and issues like that are already, those have been worked into the pending ordinance after a second reading by county council. But to the extent you all would want to dive in further and really put some finer points on some of this, My suggestion would be that you consider getting someone to look at those items and what is the best way to implement those if you want those in a zoning ordinance. Some of those are very specific and part of that would probably require looking at how other jurisdictions have specifically addressed those and the extent to which they could address those.

OK, it looks like that we still have some work to do and and looking at the additional. These additional things, so we might need a little bit more time. What do you think, Tom? I do.

Yeah, I do too. So I. I make a motion in that we recommend to the council to approve a nine month moratorium until we get more research done on the issues then.

OK. I second that motion. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any opposed? No. So that's what we're going to do. OK. Moving on. So now we're going to look at this item. Well, it would be number three. Now the existing ongoing existing townhome rezoning to RMX six. Jonathan or no. Diane, don't don't get me confused. I'm crazy.

Good evening, everybody. I just wanted to give you an update for the RMX six townhome rezonings that we are moving forward into the next phase. And for the RMX six, we recently completed our department's rezoning about 18 months ago. And so the purpose here is to rezone the existing townhomes because they're currently non-conforming. And we've broken them down. There's 29 communities throughout the county that are going to be rezoning, about 3,000 parcels. We've broken them down into 10 different batches because there's a lot of parcels each time. And so we actually had the first batch come through earlier in March, and that's going for third reading coming up on June the 1st. anticipate bringing forward these remaining 10 batches or nine batches over the next two years because it does take a while to go through that process not to overwhelm you and staff as well and so i've listed them here the majority of the town homes this right now are in districts number one and seven so we're going to tackle those first then we're going to go to district two and find up follow up with districts four and six i wanted to give you a picture that you're aware you'll be seeing these radically over the next two years

Okay, I have a couple of things since we got to start with this, and we had some little nervousness with these communities. So what is your method of letting them know what this is all about? Because they don't understand it. They just see that little sign out there, and then I get... dozens and dozens of phone calls, which I'm happy to take, but I just think that we need to get this information.

We put out a certified letter to every homeowner that goes to their house, and we give them a very detailed, but yet try to make it user-friendly synopsis of what we're actually doing. And that has my information, my phone number, my email. If they have any questions, they can give me a call. And I did get probably maybe six or seven phone calls about what was going on. They were curious as to why they received this letter and what this actually is doing. And then we also typically follow up as required with signs in the neighborhood. We don't put a sign in front of every home. That would just be sort of silly. We put them in front of the entrances and throughout the communities.

Yes.

And then we also send out postcards so that it goes to both the neighbors surrounding them as well as the homeowners. So we take care of all this. And then, of course, the the article or the ad in the paper.

OK. All right. So.

But OK, go ahead, Tommy.

I have another question.

But in doing this, though, we won't be actually adding any more town homes or nothing?

No, no. These are all existing homes. These are all built-out properties, so there will be no new town homes constructed. It will just put them in the appropriate zoning district if they actually had their uses categorized. That will help them sometimes if they go to refinance. If they were to call, they would be considered legal nonconforming and just will take out that potential hurdle if they ever go to refinance it.

okay and like if someone buys one of these areas and changes ownership and everything can they change the like change the whole area put in more town homes or

So townhomes are owned individually. So there's not like one person as an apartment complex who owns the entire thing. And so they'd have to purchase every single townhome to be able to, any kind of redevelopment through there. So you won't be seeing that.

Okay.

Okay. Well, those were questions that were asked and I wanted to get answered. OK, so this is is this just just for information, just nothing, no motion, no motion required.

And our goal with this is these things keep coming up and we want to make sure to talk with the committee about it. So as they do come up, you all are familiar with the broader project that we're trying to accomplish. Correct.

So it's just trying to correct like we all split zoning stuff.

OK, awesome. Thank you, guys. OK, so let's take a look at the Newport area. Small area plan.

Good evening, Tom Couch, assistant county manager. This particular plan, and let's see. Okay. Yeah, we do have slides. Let me get back to the beginning. Thank you. Made it. All right. The conversation surrounding the Newport Area Plan originated in the Economic Development Committee probably as early as the fall, but it began to pick up steam as we approached December. And what I'm showing you is somewhat of a modified version of what we discussed at the ED Committee meeting in December of 2025. And As the budget process has progressed, it's still a plan that's within the budget, but it would be one of two plans that would be paid for out of the Economic Development Fund. What I want to show you this evening as briefly as I can is the scope of the work, the area that we're looking at, and so forth. And if you look at this particular slide, which is the potential area of study, what we're trying to do with the small area plan is also look at doing some corridor planning for transportation purposes. And if you look at the boundaries in the white, that represents a corridor running roughly from Newport approaching just a few miles out of the city of York. And then we'll say the purple boundary looks at the broader area of what we're trying to define as a scope of work for a potential consultant. And the reasons that we're proposing this are those before you on the slide. We're trying to look at all of the issues as we know, particularly when you get into the Newport Commons area And then going up Hands Mill Highway and then 161, there's some obvious growth pressures. And even though we're experiencing some growth back at the core at the lower end of those boundary diagrams there, we still feel like with the rest of the study area that we can get ahead of growth by going ahead and putting this plan together and ultimately implementing it. And the timing is good. It's in conjunction with many of the other plans that are under consideration by council in the upcoming budget this year. I think it's an element, not an element per se, but I think it's a plan that could very much complement the comprehensive plan. And as you know, there's also a proposal for I-77 corridor plan south of Rock Hill. So these would both kind of work in sync as a comprehensive plan is being developed. This is just a very brief slide. It's sort of a crosswalk of how this plan fits with the county strategic plan, the county comprehensive plan, and how it would be then supplied after their completion. But it addresses a lot of the planning elements both in the strategic plan and the comprehensive plan. Again, very complimentary. Now, the scope of work Overview on the left, deliverables on the right, they really kind of overlap with each other, or they may seem even identical. But what we're trying to do is get enough intelligence in all of these areas so that we can make the comprehensive plan effective. And there's a timeline and a staffing plan we presented to the ED committee. It could take approximately 10 to 12 months to complete from initiation to adoption. And again, we're trying to coordinate a number of different plans. So the comprehensive plan ultimately will take 18 months, give or take. And the comprehensive plan, though, will ultimately share a good representation of the other planning work that we're doing and will help you in the future with developing different policies, whether it's through zoning, whether it's through capital projects appropriations. It gives us kind of a blueprint, and in particular, how to deal with the Newport area and those corridors I mentioned going up 161 and Ansmill at 274. We have a preliminary engagement plan developed. We may have to rethink a little bit if the prospect in the budget of cutting back on the long range planner doesn't come to fruition. But we will have to assign existing personnel into a lead project manager, which may ultimately fall on Ms. Dill to my right and your left. but we will have to mobilize existing personnel to coordinate not only this project, this project with the other planes that I previously mentioned. So this again is another version of the timeline, assuming that we get appropriations approved in the budget, we would begin immediately in finalizing the scope of work. We may have to make some slight adjustments to it because in what I presented in the previous slides, I'll go back to one or two in particular. We may have to adjust the scope somewhat with regard to the budgeted funds that we would have available. We may take out the housing element. We may not dive quite as deeply into natural resources. And those are things that could actually fall back into the scope of work of the comprehensive plan, giving consideration to the Newport area. But I feel like we would have to make some slight adjustments to the budgeted figure that we would have available. Oops, wrong direction again. So, Ultimately, that's it. Are there any specific questions that you would have about the proposed Newport area plan?

Yeah. I do. Might be talking out of base, but I'm going to ask it anyway. Has anybody reached out? with Rock Hill and seeing what their plans are as far as any more annexation, because they're right there.

Yeah. Now, Rock Hill recently completed their comprehensive plan update. And I don't know if Jonathan or Diane have I've gone deep into it. I've done a perusal of what they're proposing on their fringe areas. I don't think I see anything aggressive coming into the study area that we're looking at, unless you both differ in your opinions. Ultimately, however, I think whether we're updating our own comprehensive plan or doing this new port plan, we still need to open and maintain a conversation with Rock Hill for what their future plans would be and not necessarily give them a seat or a voice at the table, but we would like to collaborate with them and make sure that we're all singing off the same page. but to answer your original question i don't get the sense from reading their conference plan that they're going to be overly aggressive and say coming into our study area so that gives us the opportunity to look at what we want to do with transportation utilities and so forth because we do have some utility availability down in that area and prospects for growth

Just to also add to that with the utility services boundary, that's right at the church. So the opportunity for annexation going westward and northward for Rock Hill is not on the table at this moment until those boundaries are adjusted.

Valid point.

You got something? OK. I don't know this is a lot to comprehend and I just we just got this information. I would like to be able to study it a little bit more so I can even intelligently ask questions about it.

Well, it may be worthwhile to speak to the members who are on the ED committee because they've kind of gone in lockstep with the process. But we felt like it was important to give some awareness pending the adoption of the budget to the P&Z committee.

And it was the request of the ED committee that we share this with y'all too. This was one of those and I believe it was one of our early workshops that this was identified as a project and then it was one of those rare ones that crossed over multiple committees. So we're making sure that both committees are aware but obviously it came from the ED committee but we wanted y'all to be in the loop in case you wanted to add to the vision.

So this is more just information.

But the ED committee wanted you all to have it so you could speak into it, too, from your committee's perspective, because it really is a joint. As staff, we've always seen this as a joint agenda item across multiple committees.

And I think, Mr. County Manager, as we go forward, that we're going to report in lockstep with this plan as we go forward to both the ED committee and P&Z committee coterminously at the same time.

Well, if we could, I mean, what do you think? What do you guys think?

The way I understand it ain't no action.

There's no action to take?

No, ma'am. And if it proceeds with adoption in the budget, again, we'll be reporting to both this committee and the ED committee on its progress on a regular basis. OK.

Thank you. Thank you. OK. Looking at a follow-up discussion regarding industrial uses,

Good evening. So this discussion is part of an ongoing discussion about industrial uses in general. Really two parts to this. The first was a vote out of your meeting in November to add certain uses to certain districts, mostly to the ID district. So to add building material and supply stores, farm and garden supply, vehicle service, repair and customization without overnight storage, parking areas and. Boat and RV and motor vehicle storage, all adding all of those uses to the industrial district and to add trade services. to the general commercial district. So you asked for a draft of what that would look like. So all of those changes would just add those letters P and C in the one case as a text amendment. So if you're comfortable with how that looks, we would ask for a vote to send that on the planning commission as a text amendment.

Okay, so the changes are which ones?

Yep, so I stripped down the use table. So these are the only uses that were read out last time and you're meeting in November. So you can see in the ID column where there's a teal P with an underline. Those are uses that are not currently allowed in the industrial district, but would be allowed through this text amendment and boat and RV storage as a conditional use in ID and then to allow trade services as a permitted use in cheese.

Have you got any questions or suggestions? Tommy.

Still wrapping my head around.

This is a long time ago. That's all I'm going to say.

Jonathan, could you maybe explain the benefits as part of the refresher as to why we were proposing this?

uh well this was mr linton's motion to add these uses specifically so i defer to any of your logic behind those uses specifically so the idea behind it was you know these are allowed in the li and ri zoning uses already so um you know why did we have them just excluded from you know from id uses uh in particular i have a uh property that they do wanna use their ID for one of these and they don't wanna go through the whole thing of rezoning it for something that's a lighter use or less intense use than what they already have. And as we discussed in the previous meeting, when it comes to rezonings, we wouldn't, staff wouldn't be directing people to rezone to an ID if they wanna do building supply. You would rezone to something that was compatible with the area. So it's not gonna generate more industrial spaces. It just allows the owners of the industrial spaces that do exist to have some more opportunities for business than those really intense areas without having to rezone.

OK. The areas that are ID where this is going to change, you know, we're going to add it to ID with. This relate to any like residential areas, would they be close to? I mean, no more so, I guess, than light industrial, right?

So I think you're asking maybe where ID property is located.

It's always a concern.

There are far less properties that are zoned ID than Ally.

Okay. That's kind of what I was asking. Okay. So any questions from you, Mr. Tommy? I do remember the conversation in that.

Do we, are we gonna make a motion on this tonight or can we have some time to?

You can do whatever you would like. If you'd want more time to discuss it, you can certainly do that. And if you'd like to take this on to Planning Commission for their recommendation, we're ready to do that also.

So that would be the next step is to Planning Commission.

But this right, so far though, this chart here is just these uses for it.

Just adding these uses to the ID zoning classification.

So do I have a motion?

Motion to approve and send to Planning Commission.

I mean, as long as there ain't no residential involved here, I don't really have a problem with it.

Yeah. So you're going to give me a second. OK. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? OK. So just. Oh, yes. Oh, OK. You're not finished. Nope.

So this is the second part. I was hoping you were finished. So the second part of this discussion that you all had about the industrial uses in that conversation from November. was you had voted to ask staff to come back with an explanation and an example of how the industrial definitions that we have in code could be improved through the use of more explicit use of the NAICS system. So I think it would be helpful to get over what that is so we can see how that might be useful. So the North American industry classification system, it's a federal government interest instrument that sets all these businesses and all types of industry into different categories. So they can be tracked. And naturally, if you're sorting industry. That's a really useful tool for zoning purposes when you're trying to separate uses from each other into separate districts. So almost without fail across the board, a lot of zoning codes rely on NAICS, whether they're directly referenced or they're based off of NAICS terms. particularly when we're talking about manufacturing uses because they get so specific and there's a million different things that you could manufacture and you certainly don't want to put a million different terms in your zoning code be as long as the dictionary right so here's an example of how that hierarchical structure works in NAICS So everything starts out with a two-digit sector number. And just as an example, I'm using you all as a committee here. You're in the NAICS classification as well. So your top level sector is public administration. And then you dive down into subsectors, industry groups, industries. And a national industry is the bottom. So you go from a two-digit number to a six-digit number. That's as specific as it gets. Some things don't go all the way down to six numbers. Some things do. So in this example, as county council, you're a legislative body. So you would fall under the NAICS code 921120. So that's how that works. Any questions on that? So here's a couple of examples of how some zoning codes reference this directly in their use table. So, for example, in the town of Clover, every single use in their entire use table has a NAICS reference number in it. Some places do that. Not a lot do that because you can see where it might be helpful for certain industry, but certain things like residential, you don't necessarily need a NAICS code to help you interpret what that means or to figure out exactly what that means, whether you're on the developer side or you're on the staff side of trying to figure out what it is. Another example, city of Camden, same thing. They list a NAICS code for every single use in their table. It's a very conservative way of doing it. There's a couple of other ways to get at it. Chester County, for example, and Pine Ridge, they reference the NAICS codes when it's more helpful. So specifically here, Chester County, they list their special exceptions for manufacturing. You can see those NAICS codes that are listed there. So that helps you try to figure out exactly what these terms might mean and which industries are going to fall into that bucket. Uh, so that's really, um, in the same example here in Pine Ridge, you can see they got their next codes for different types of manufacturing. Very common approach. And there's even looser terminology in some places. Gasson County is another example of another neighbor here. So, you know, they have a scant few references to NAICS in their uses here. Again, manufacturing, that's honestly that's most helpful and most prolific use is when you're trying to figure out different manufacturing terms. And they also reference in their code that you're relying on makes when you're trying to determine whether an establishment is primarily engaged in that type of product. So somebody is manufacturing a few different things along their chain. You know, their code says, well, it's all of those things in your code and they have to all of those things need to be allowed in that district in order for them to be able to do that process. So just as an exercise here, we've got some shoes, a lot of shoes these days, a lot of different materials, not all leather like it used to be back in the day. So if you were to look at our zoning code, you know what might be a guess that you would have as to what type of use that manufacturing these shoes might be. Don't feel obligated to have a guess, but I thought it might entertain some of you to figure out what that might be. Any guesses? Well, if you were thinking, um, leather and allied products, manufacturing. It might be a good place to start if you're thinking leather shoes, traditional shoes. You know, dress shoes, that type of thing you read the definition. It's very specific, right? It says establishments that transform animal hides. Into leather by tanning or curing a fabricating the leather into finished products or goods. A lot of shoes don't use any leather. Does that really match that definition? No, on its face it doesn't. That's a problem for a lot of folks because there isn't a single jurisdiction in this country, I guarantee it, that says shoe manufacturing as a use in their use code. That's why NAICS is very helpful for this. You look down into the hierarchy, you see, well, sector and manufacturing, and here we have a one-for-one terminology, leather and allied products manufacturing is a subsector in NAICS. They keep drilling down. What does that mean? Well, there's an industry group called Footwear. There's a industry called Footwear Manufacturing. You get all the way down to the national industry, that six digit number, Footwear Manufacturing, and that captures sneakers and flip flops, all those things that are made without leather. So using NAICS, we would say, okay, well, Skechers are coming in, you're making products that maybe you've got one or two that use leather, but predominantly you're using rubber or other synthetics. Well, according to NAICS, you're a leather and allied products manufacturing. So you would look at the use table to see where that's allowed, where they're, you know, if they were coming in new, wanted to go somewhere, we look and see if that's allowed in RI and ID. So that would be their options of locating in York County. So, an example of how a clarifying definition might be accomplished very straightforward. We would suggest just putting in this definition includes establishments that are captured in that sub sector. 316 that's got the same exact name as the use that's already in the code. And that's because the use of the code came from NAICS. So it's just a matter of clarity for the community, for industry, for staff. Everyone's on the same page. We know exactly what this thing is in the zoning code. When we're trying to start a new business, expand a business, or you're a neighbor and you're concerned what might be possible next door. And this approach is consistent with what your county already does for some of its use definitions. So you can see non-metallic mineral product manufacturing. There are NAICS codes listed throughout that definition. That's an existing definition. Same for trade services. And we even have a catch-all miscellaneous manufacturing, which literally says if you cannot define it in NAICS, then whatever you're manufacturing is miscellaneous manufacturing. uh and that's a special exception in id so it's very conservative approach there so this type of change would be in alignment with what some of our existing definitions already do So here's just more examples of what that would look like. You can see fabricated metal product manufacturing. There's an exact term in NAICS already for that. So just referencing that section. And there are some others in our code that we drill down even further in our zoning code than the subsector does. So for example, fiberglass manufacturing, that goes all the way down to the six-digit number. And in the NAICS, that's mineral wool manufacturing. You might be making fiberglass, you might be making insulation, but that's the same thing in zoning and in the NAICS industry. So here again we've got food manufacturing, that's another one for one. And furniture manufacturing, you're making a lot of different things there, so NAICS captures that as furniture and related products as well. So those are examples of what that looks like. So happy to take any questions that you have.

um so i guess i have just a couple questions say similar to what we have with the miscellaneous manufacturing would there be a overall inclusive or exclusive sentence in there that says if this isn't covered in our definitions then it's not allowed period or would we allow anything that's covered in the NACE code to be done? Good question.

That phrase already exists in code. It does? Yes. So there's a phrase in code that says if a use is not defined herein, it's not permitted. Right.

But if we go into the NACE code, would it

would that that sentence still apply or would yes yes so um it would just reduce the instances so you know if someone came in and they wanted to make those shoes right and said well you know there's nothing that says shoe manufacturing so we would turn to that phrase and say well it's there's no shoe manufacturing in york county so you can't come here Well, we got companies that are already in your county that have been recruited, that they make hand tools, they make doors, things like that. So we don't have any of those terms. So obviously they are one of the industry terms that we already have this change to add more terminology to the existing definitions. So it wouldn't change any of the uses that are or are not allowed. All it would do is clarify what exactly you are when you're coming to the county and saying, hey, can I can I be here or can I not?

So building on that, inclusive and exclusive and those type of things, would it be a, I guess, wholesale change of the use table or would we just add the codes for the things that we already have and then would they get, more conservative on their labeling so with the shoes you know the shoes that we currently have is 316 but if you go into actual footwear manufacturing you know that's three levels down would we stay at the higher level or would we move all the way to another level i mean

Yeah, that's a good question. And so I've got one of your handouts and one that's got the blue lines all over it. That's got all the terms that I would recommend adding these NAICS references directly into the code in addition to the ones that we already have. And in general, the less you drill down the better because you're being very very specific and then you're kind of obligating yourself to drill down and you could but I wouldn't recommend that in this particular change would just be clarifying but if you wanted to drill down to more specific uses and define those and either exclude them or only allow them in a certain district under a special exception you could do that also but the change proposed here would just be to existing definitions to add more clarity as to what they mean okay yeah because i mean some of the products that could be used one place could be used multi-places and something totally different and

I don't know how you'd still figure out. But tell me this, when they were doing the dreaded recode, did y'all refer back to any of this? During that time?

Almost all of the industrial definitions were carried over. There were hardly any that were modified, including the ones for nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing that has a lot of NAICS references in it. That was from a prior ordinance in, I think, 2017. In RICO, there was a lot of carryover of those definitions.

Well, I know we had talked about just adding, you know, these definitions, clarification, but the more I had thought about it, I was wondering if based on where we're at today with just, you know, some additional, would it be worthwhile kind of rewriting the use part to be clearer, to get rid of, to try to clarify some of this stuff that's really old definitions. I know they still apply, but just to kind of update it some. Or is that really a whole lot unnecessary work for not much benefit?

Well, it depends on what type of scope you'd like us to take a look at. You know what I brought back tonight is just the scope that we discussed last time. So we're certainly happy to do more. Just let us know what the scope is and what the charge is. And we do have a lot of outdated terms in the code some you know I'll go through and they're not referenced at all so why are we different defining a term that's not referenced in the code things like that so yeah you know as with any ordinance it's worth refreshing and you get some dated definitions and things like that whether they become offensive or they're not referenced or they need to be revised because something has changed over time it's always good to take another look

I don't want to add work if it's not going to be beneficial to staff and for what y'all do every day. If this works, which is kind of how this started anyway. But anyway, it's just an idea.

And I think one of the other benefits of everyone knowing what all the terms are then it becomes that much easier for you all to change which district these are allowed in today you know if you wanted to you know as you did with the previous item add some of these uses to light industrial based on your reading and understanding of all the products that that could allow or going the other way take you know some things out of light industrial apply special exceptions whatever it might be it's a lot easier to do that if everyone knows what those things are gotcha

But we can have a little more time to look over this, right? That whatever you would like to do.

Yeah. I wish I'd had this about a week ago. Yeah. I would like to make a motion that we refer this to our next meeting. So to give us time to digest this. And I like Andy's suggestion. Maybe an example or two of what he was talking about with clarity, upgrading verbiage from a long time ago. I mean, maybe you don't do the whole thing, but if we can just have some examples.

Yeah, if you could give us a charge, something that you're looking for specifically, or something to help us with the scope, because we have hundreds of terms and definitions.

Do you have an idea of anything that you were thinking about?

I didn't have anything in particular other than I was looking at Clover's and Camden's and they were pretty specific on just using the NACE code with just a simple thing. But then you, one of the things I dislike about reports is when you repeat information in multiple places. then it either doesn't get updated and starts conflicting with each other or things of that nature. So I was just thinking if they could clean it up, especially when he said this was carried over from, and wasn't rewritten for the recode, but it was just carried from all the previous versions, maybe it just needed to be cleaned up. But I haven't found something in particular.

Could this help clean up some of our headaches in the recode?

I don't know that it cleans up headaches other than maybe it prevents potential future headaches from someone, whether you're a staff side, a developer side, because the harder it is to define from a developer or an industry, if they can't figure out by just a quick reading of our code whether they're allowed or not, and it's a dialogue and it's a conversation and that adds complexity and uncertainty, so there's a chilling effect that they just might not come at all and it might be a very good valid project that they've abandoned because our code is unclear as to whether or not they're allowed. Yeah.

Madam Chair, a point of order. I'm late on it, but here it is. I think we had a motion and I don't think we had a second. Right. We need a second.

Okay.

Do I have a second? Second.

Okay. All in favor? Aye. Do we want to talk about it now? Or give him a charge? We need to give him a charge.

I was wondering if we needed to change the motion to help Jonathan know exactly what we were doing.

You have the motion, you have the second, and you are welcome to continue on with discussion.

Okay, okay. So, and we're just, we're going to refer it to the next committee meeting, and your charge would be to, I mean, I don't think you need to do the whole thing. Maybe, do you have items that people have real problems with? I mean, in all the things we have, I'm sure you have some things that are event venues.

OK, so I mean, I mean, yeah, so maybe now's a good time to mention that, you know, staff is also working simultaneously on a much larger project than this, and that's to have an annual omnibus process where we're taking a wholesale look at everything that's going on in our development codes. And staff at the ground level, they see where the common problems are. And so we've already had meetings about what are some topics that we need to address in the code that goes well beyond definitions. It's all the actual meat and potatoes of the code about what you can and can't do, the requirements, things like that. So we're already working through that. So that'll be a much bigger project. Council will obviously be involved. This committee will be involved and we'll have some public input on that as well. So if you're looking for additional scope on this item, I would limit it to more of the, as we started this discussion on industrial uses, the industrial use table, the industrial definitions, things like that.

Which would go back to this, right?

That was part of this ongoing conversation about the use table, yeah.

I mean, I understand this. This is pretty clear. Right. It's this that's the problem. Okay, so.

I don't really know what the additional charge would be other than there's a, I know you mentioned there was some definitions that existed but didn't, that we don't have uses for. Maybe, I don't know if you would know one of those often, you know, that you could come up with in, you know, 10 minutes in your office or something. maybe one of those would be an example of what we could clean up through the definition and uses change, but other than that, just adding the codes to the definition is good enough.

How big is this NAICS code?

The NAICS code itself, I've never seen it in published form. I primarily used it online, so I'm not sure how big it is in paper format. As with most federal publications, I expect it's quite large.

Okay, so we're just going to... Yeah, we'll see it next.

Okay. Okay, so all in favor? Aye. Hopefully, that's as clear as mud to you, Jonathan.

I think I've got it.

It's kind of clear as mud to me. OK. So Andy. Before you got here.

I was updated.

Oh, you were updated.

Karen sent me a text to let me know that it had moved.

OK. All right. So.

Laura, do you want to explain to him what you said?

I can catch it after the meeting.

Yeah, okay. Okay, so do we have anything for executive session? Okay, so do I have a motion to adjourn?

Motion to adjourn.

Second.

All in favor? Aye.