Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Master Plan Continuation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ad Hoc Master Plan Committee holds brief meeting to remain active, plans UDO/UDL reviews
Summary
The Ad Hoc Master Plan Committee met briefly to avoid automatic disbanding, agreed to continue and to schedule focused reviews of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO/UDL) once guidance is received from Mr. Baer’s office; no substantive votes on policy were taken.
Speaker 1 opened and called to order a brief session of the Ad Hoc Master Plan Committee to keep the group active while staff prepares guidance on forthcoming Unified Development Ordinance (UDO/UDL) amendments.
The meeting’s primary purpose was procedural: to prevent the committee from lapsing. Speaker 2 said, "Because if my memory serves me right, after 90 days, if we don't meet, it becomes disbanded, and we're within, or pretty close to that 90 days." The assembly took a voice vote to approve the agenda and later voted to adjourn after a short discussion; the transcript records audible agreement but does not record formal roll-call vote tallies for either motion.
Members agreed to await specific direction and materials from "Mr. Baer’s office" before scheduling substantive review sessions. Speaker 3 said the committee should determine meeting frequency and diagnostic scope once staff provides materials, and Speaker 1 estimated some guidance and scheduling discussions "in the next few weeks" or "probably a month or so." Several members urged a focused approach: "divide and conquer," they said, favoring smaller, topic-specific sessions rather than repeated full rewrites of the master plan.
Speakers also emphasized coordination with staff to produce a more agreeable draft product earlier in the process, referencing prior master-plan and data-center reviews as models for efficiency. Speaker 1 confirmed future sessions will be held in the same public room to ensure transparency. Speaker 2 noted one member, John Giancola, was absent while recovering from surgery.
No formal decisions on UDO/UDL content, specific code changes, budgets, or timelines were adopted at the meeting. The committee’s next steps are procedural: staff is to supply guidance from Mr. Baer’s office and the group will schedule focused follow-up meetings after that material is available. The meeting was adjourned shortly after those procedural matters were addressed.
