Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

No one can hear me. All right, we will call to order the January 20th, 2026 board of zoning adjustment meeting. You could call roll, please. Ethan Reed present. Alexander Bainy I'm present. Mark Ferguson. Jensen Tilkkey present. Brooks Davis here. Kina Hagood present. Cassidy Cook. Kevin Gabriel. Lorie Quinn. Grace Reigns present. Mark Ferguson. have a quorum.

So, we will begin tonight uh with a variance review. It's a request for zoning variance to allow a commercial accessory structure greater than 160 ft in size for property located at 1965 East Oak.

Hi everyone. Um and I do want to reiterate BZA items um if approved tonight do stop here. They do not go to city council for final approval. So, we have two tonight. The first one is a variance to allow a greater than 160 foot commercial accessory structure located at 1965 East Oak Street. If you drive that area, I'm sure you've seen they've been clearing it a bunch over the last few months. This portion of the port of the property that's been subdivided and cleared is 1.35 acres. It is zoned C3, which is our highest commercial zoning. There is not an existing structure on the lot. It isn't an overlay. It's our Oak Street ahead corridor plan. And what the developer and the owners of the the two developments have come together to um propose does work with the mixeduse commercial infill proposed with a cross access drive that runs across all four of those lots. So it does align with our Oak Street ahead corridor plan which is great. The requested variance is for the greater than 160 ft building. What's being proposed is a 1,000 square foot um detached canopy that will be used for a drive-thru for that restaurant there. There is an attached canopy on the structure, but they do have one to the south also for ordering as well. So, they're asking for a variance to increase that area by 840 square ft. And as the boarding of zoning adjustment, y'all are to hear and decide variance requests from the literal provisions of the zoning code in instances where enforcement of the code could cause undue hardship based on circumstances to individual property owners. So, as stated before, this is for an eating place with drive-thru. We know ourselves that 160 square feet for a commercial accessory structure is almost impossible to do and we are trying to get that updated in our code that we've just had some bigger issues going on the last year. So we know this is a problem area. We've seen it in a lot of commercial sites where we actually do have an ancillary structure to a primary use that it is a problem with the size. So we are requesting that you allow the variance to be approved for the 1000T structure. It does meet

all the zoning code requirements for accessory structures and C3 zones for accessory structures. We do have two uh proposed conditions that it will be constructed as submitted on the elevations for site development review and it will become lapsed and void if construction has not began at the site in 18 months from approval of the variance permit. Does anyone have any questions? Thank you. Thank you. Right. Is the applicant here to speak in favor of this request? If you could please state your name and address for the record.

Good evening. Jose Castro, 5359 Tyler Street. So, we're here requesting a variance um for a structure uh for a restaurant. Um it's going to be just trying to provide uh some protection from the elements for for our employees. Do you have any issues with the two conditions that the the staff has listed? No, that we're fine with that. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay, you're good. Thank you. Is anyone else here to speak in favor of this request? Anyone here to speak in opposition of this request?

Seeing there is none, we'll bring it back into commission. Commissioners, I'll make a motion to approve as presented with the conditions. Second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Any absentions? Motion passes. All right. Our next item is a request uh for the extension of an expired variance permit at 1695 South German Lane.

Correct. So, our last BCA item of tonight, and some of y'all have probably remembered this one. This was heard back at the June 17th, 2024 planning commission meeting where we granted multiple variances for a church at 1695 South German. If you can just look at the site on the map already, you can see there's some topography constraints by many streets. The site is very narrow. There's a lot of bedrock on the north side of the church. So, we granted this variance due to a future expansion for their fellowship hall. And if you look at the site, there's not a lot of locations they can go. So they were proposing to do an addition at the south side of the church. So this report is literally the exact same report from June of that year. It's the exact same conditions as proposed. I just want y'all to be aware um we did not write any new conditions or change the report. But a little bit of history for the church. It was reszoned from A1 to S1 last year due to the need for multiple variances for development of the site. They did that. That reszone was approved and then they applied for a variance permit. They were asking for reduced minimum lot depth. They were asking for reduced front and rear setbacks and a reduced 25- foot landscape setback. So the new proposed staff conditions are the four res or zoning variance approvals from June of 2024. There are nine conditions per the ninth condition. If they had not construed or started construction within 18 months that variance would be null and void and as of December of 17th of last year it was expired. Um, I spoke with the applicants just due to some um some monetary and some project issues with getting this the project started. They just didn't have the ability to get the project going within that 18 month, but they would like to start that again. Um, they did submit for subdivision review as required by one of the conditions. It just kind of also fizzled out due to the variance. Um, knowing that they had some issues beyond what were they could grant

with the variance at that time. So all that to say, we are requesting that the variance permit be extended for 18 months with the exact same conditions as proposed by variance 05240067. And there's a copy of the approved variance permit as well as the subdivision that they submitted for review. Um if you have any questions on those. Any questions? Thank you. Is the applicant here to speak in favor of the request? And if you could please state your name and address for the record. Hello.

Michael Hampton, 1695 German Lane. Uh we as as she stated, we did have some financial constraints that kept us from building in the 18 months, but uh we would love if you guys could help us out and get that extended for us. Thank you. Any questions for the applicant? Thank you. Appreciate you. Thank you. Anyone else here to speak in favor of the request? Anyone here to speak in opposition of the request? Seeing there is none, we'll bring it back into commission. Commissioners, make a motion to approve. Have a motion. I'll second. And a second. All those in favor? I.

Any opposed? Any abstensions? Motion passes. Right. And I will now take a motion to adjourn the board of zoning adjustment meeting. So moved. Have a second. Second. All in favor? I. All right. We have adjourned. Now we'll call to the order uh the January 20th, 2026 city of Conway Planning Commission meeting. If you would call the role again, please. Yes. Ethan Reed, I am present. Alexander Bainy, present. Mark Ferguson, present. Jensen Tilkkey, present. Brooks Davis, here. Ina Hagen, present. Cassidy Cook. Evan Gamrell. Lorie Quinn. Grace Reigns, present.

Right, we have a quorum. I will take a motion to approve the minutes from our December 15th meeting. Move to approve. Second. All those in favor? I.

Any opposed? Right. So, just a few housekeeping notes. The Conway Planning Commission makes recommendations to the city council on public hearing items. Items reviewed on this agenda will be considered by the city council as early as January 27th, 2026. Items not approved by the planning commission may be appealed to the city council within 30 days of the date of denial. All public hearing items, the applicant uh will get to have 10 minutes to speak. Uh subsequent speakers will have three minutes and any opposed, the first speaker will have 10 minutes. Subsequent will have three minutes. We will try to keep it to three speakers per. So if you're here with a group, please consolidate and have a representative from your group speak. All right. Our first item tonight is a request to reszone property at 2125 College Avenue from 03 to C2. All right. So, our first resone tonight is 2125 College. It is currently zoned 03 which is restricted office and the applicant is requesting C2 which is neighborhood commercial. It's right there at the southwest corner of the Donnagy and College Avenue roundabout. You probably drive by three times a day and don't even realize it. Adjacent zoning to the north is S1 in the form of the come regional campus. To the east and west is R2A in the form of um housing for UCA. And then to the south we also have MF3 for housing for UCA. There is an existing 7500 foot shopping center building. It is located in the historic overlay suburban zone for the Conway Design Overlay District. Our comprehensive plan indicates it for single family. Projected traffic impact um with the reszone to C2. That's obviously a commercial zone. It's a higher classification, so there's probably going to be some more traffic. The highest allowed by right use in C2 would be a restaurant, not an eating restaurant, a drive-through restaurant, a sitown restaurant, or a medical clinic. Based off of the site, the existing building dimensions, the leasable space, most trips, um, we could

calculate for a day would be around 413. There are 15,000 annual daily traffic trips just to the west of Western Avenue and College, uh, Colony Regional. There is no FEMA zone that we are located in. All services appear by Conway Corp to be present at the site. The master street plan indicates college as a minor arterial and Augusta A as a collector and there are no improved street intersection area improvements at this time that we are aware of. So it's the intent of the applicant to reszone this parcel of land most likely for commercial development. It's our understanding that the reszone is going to allow them more flexibility in lease options. Most likely anything they do bring in will not require any outside appearance changes to the structure. It's already developed. There's parking. There's landscaping. There's a drive-thru. Everything's there. Um most likely that any any tenant would most likely need. The property itself was reszoned from a residential zone 203 in 1999. Um the applicant at that point said it was no longer desirable for residential area due to the adjacent hospital and offices and the area has only grown substantially since 1999. The zoning code designates 03 as a zone to convert older structures that are no longer useful, serviceable, or desirable to office use, which is what it is now. And the C2 zone is used for retail, trade, and personal service enterprises for surrounding neighborhood residences. Generally, they're located at arterial and collector street intersections, very much like this site is. The property is bound by Augusta, which is a collector, and a minor arterial in College Avenue. Some of the most high highly impactful C2 zoned uses that we could find in the zoning code would be as much as a clothing antique store, an art gallery, a bakery, a bank, a beauty shop, childcare facility, a clinic, a pharmacy, a dine-in restaurant, a food store, hardware store, gym, laundry mat, office or retail restricted uses as defined by the zoning code. There are a lot of abuing land uses. We have the hospital to the north. We have a lot of

multif family in the form of sorority housing and a great village to the west. The comprehensive plan indicates this area for single family, but a large majority of the area around here is not that. Um, a large majority of the area that's further southwest of here is also indicated for single family, and we just know that's not really appropriate for this area anymore. So, that is the staff report as written. Does anyone have any questions?

Thank you, guys. Thank you. Right. Is the applicant here to speak in favor of the request? And please state your name and address. Bryce Richardson, 2405 Prince Street. Uh, so this building has actually already been operating as a C2 for the past 15 years through the conditional use permit for the pharmacy. So basically from a leasing perspective, I've actually already filled the middle unit. We've got it signed. It's an office tenant, so it's not a big deal. But we are in active negotiations with retail. I'll just say it's something sweet, something you can eat um for the Encap. So for the space specifically, we're just looking to get the reszone to open up to new potential tenants that could also introduce new franchises into the city. So yeah,

any questions for the applicant? Thank you. Anyone else here to speak in favor of the request? Anyone here to speak in opposition of the request? Seeing there is none, we'll bring it back into commission. Commissioners Thoughts? Someone want to make a motion? Motion to approve the request. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Any abstain? Motion passes. All right, we will move on to our next item, which is a request to reszone property at 51 Southerntherland Road from A1 to R1.

Thank you. The property is as stated um currently A1 with the request to reszone to R1. It is um at the intersection of Middle Road which is an arterial and then Southerntherland which is a collector. The adjacent zoning is A1 to the south. We have um MF2 also to the south, I1 to the west and A1 surrounds it on the southern and eastern side. Then there is a PUB to the north which is a high density or higher density uh single family residential planned unit development. There is one existing out building on the property. The compreh comprehensive plan designates this as single family. The a reszone to R1 could result in a maximum of 183 single family homes on this site. The site is 31.52 acres with an estimated traffic generation of 1,759 vehicle trips per weekday. The traffic would go onto Southerntherland and Middle Road. The current traffic counts are 3,200 near the northwest corner of the property that is up on Middle Road. Uh the site is not within a FEMA flood special flood hazard area. The developer will need to coordinate utilities with Conway Corp. Um as stated the middle road is a minor arterial which is 80 feet of rightway and then the southerntherland is a collector with 60 feet. There is a round roundabout proposed or excuse me is um in the planning stages at the southern terminus of Southerntherland Road at the Dave Ward Drive intersection. So the A1 zoning district is designed to

preserve and protect uh prime agricultural lands and to protect undeveloped areas from intensive uses until a use pattern is approved. Um the R1 zoning district is designed to provide quiet lowdensity areas for single family living and related recreational, religious and educational facilities. Um as um I talked about the site is sort of in the center of a mix of uses. So in regards to the A1 zoning district is acts both in to preserve prime agricultural lands as well as to be a holder until use pattern is established and right now we have this mix of uses where you have industrial as well as multifamily plan unit development and the continuation of the A1 zoning districts um surrounding um about two sides of it. Um the maximum number of lots that could be developed on the site is 183. Now that is just the way the math maths out. However, when someone goes through the subdivision process, they need to make sure that they adhere to the subdivision ordinance, which in that is an adherence to the drainage criteria. So they will need to ensure that there is proper drainage on the site. And when you do that, oftentimes lots are lost for detention. So it is when you take into consideration the um the drainage as well as easements on the property that right now there is an easement that runs through a portion of the property um as well as topography. It is very unlikely that you're going to see 183 lots. Currently under review is a 96 lot subdivision um that is going through the subdivision review process. And that is uh that concludes my staff report. Is there any questions?

Had a question about the proposed 96 lot subdivision. Which direction from this track that we're talking about is that new one. So Oh, that's on the site. It's an additional Yeah. So right now it's a concurrent uh review. Okay. So um it is under review at this point in time. It just hasn't come to planning commission yet. They've made the application and it is going through it's being reviewed by transportation, fire, planning, Conway Corp. Right. Thank you.

So, just to be clear, the 180 some odd houses that it can hold, it won't hold. What's proposed is is 96. Okay.

Thank you. Any other questions for staff? Thank you. Is the applicant here to speak in favor of the request? Please state your name and address for the record. Good evening. Roy Andrews, 200 KC Drive. U work with Hallway Engineering and we are the applicant on this and we have worked several months with planning staff. um looked at several uses uh other zonings for this property um that were much more dense. The 96 lots is all we can fit on this there. Um like Terara said, there's a uh transmission line on the south part of that property and the topography on it that prevents us from uh being able to utilize that piece. So, it's just going to be open green space. Plus, we have a detention pond in that upper corner. Y'all would be seeing that tonight, but we needed to do to address a few more staff comments. So, that'll be before you next month um for y'all to look at the actual plat on that. Um but this with the industrial, the multif family, the higher densities to the north seem like a good fit for this area. and um staff and Conway Court really pushed us to um not go any denser than the the R1 allowed and that we were able to kind of get that to fit and work out. Are there any questions that I can answer?

I don't think so. If some come up, we may call you back up. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Is anyone else here to speak in favor of this request? Is anyone here to speak in opposition of this request? Please state your name and address for the record.

Good evening. Uh Lacy Lions. I live at 43 Southerntherland Road. This development would be my northern neighbor. Um good evening, Mr. Chairman and commissioners. Thank you for your time and thank you for the service you do for our city. uh planning commission is important work and I I do appreciate the seriousness that you guys take um for this role. My family and I live at 43 Southerntherland Road and I'm here representing us as well as several other families on the road. Some are here and some who are unable to attend. Um in a support of my previously submitted letter, I have um some neighbor signatures that I will um give to the planning staff as well. Um, my family and I bought our home in 2014. It was built by a Southerntherland in the early 70s. Um, and even though we've been there over 10 years, we are among the newest neighbors on the road. Um, we didn't even have lines on Southerntherland until we got resurfaced last year. Um, we as the Southerntherland neighbors are not anti-growth. We're not here to stop development, but we do request that you push for um a development that reflects the quality and stability of our neighborhood. Um and that the commission has set a very high standard for planning and development and we would like that you continue that in this issue. We want a neighborhood built for the long haul with neighbors who love living on Southerntherland as much as we do. So, I have a few key issues I'd like to outline. Uh first is how this fits with the comprehensive plan. Yes, this is marked um for low density residential use which the plan describes as quiet areas protected from from high impact activity. The R1 request with lots at 6,000 square ft does not fit that description. This is a 30 acre tract and it is one of the last chances to build a

high quality residential anchor on the east side of Conway. Um for years, west side has received custom large lot neighborhoods and the east usually gets high density overflows. Um we don't want another neighborhood that people settle for. We want one that drives long-term residency. Straight R1 zoning is a blank check for density that is direct path to high turnover rentals. We ask that you uphold the plan and and request that this developer come with back with a PUD that supports a stable neighborhood. Um I sympathize with the commission uh and I and with the developer. We don't seem to have a lot of flexibility in the R level zonings in in this city. Um, but R1 would present permit at least 96 units. That's what they're saying is in development, but my understanding is if you approve the R1 zoning, they can kind of do whatever they want after that. Um, and I'm also aware of a new state law that pro that went in January 1 that permits a second dwelling unit on each lot. So, there could rapidly be close to 200 houses or living units built on this property. Um the 100 foot energy easement um does provide some protection across my property line which is wonderful. Uh but it also causes these units to be shoved over um to the north and and condensed on an even smaller square or amount of acreage. Traffic is always an issue when we're talking about adding big developments like this. There are exactly three ways to reach this corner of Southerntherland and Middle. Um perhaps we're going to get a roundabout at the East German Dave interchange. Right now, Southerntherland is that weird fifth point that comes in.

Um and most people think it's just the driveway to the convenience store. Um so it's kind of very difficult. Um Amity Middle is very overburdened already and needs a roundabout some kind of bad. That one will be a pretty easy fix once it reaches the top of the priority list. And then the the third option is where middle hits German, but the creek is there and it's very lowlying and low visibility and no easy traffic solutions on that side. And so all three directions to get to this are already kind of overburdened um and cause for issues. So adding another hundred or so households to this is going to create a traffic trap with no easy solutions. and we ask that the commission con consider similar matters that have come before in the past. Um in October of 2023, a highdensity development was proposed near Eagle Wing and Lake View acres. Um and those folks uh came and presented similar arguments, right? We have large tracks, custom homes, and cramming a 100 houses on really less than 30 acres of usable land does not match the density of the rest of the Southerntherland neighbors. And so we would ask that you deny R1 and encourage the uh developer to come back with a PUD that meshes with um the reality of the neighborhood along Southerntherland. So, in closing, uh, please choose a 50-year win for East Conway, one that brings a neighborhood for families to live in for the long term over a quick win for the developer. Thank you.

Thank you. Is anyone else here to speak in opposition of this request? Please state your name and address for the record.

Hi, my name is William Simmons. My wife and I live at 18 Southerntherland Road. Our main concern is the traffic on our road right now has enormously increased in the last several years with all the development around our area and people are using our road as a a cut through or a shortcut to get away from going through the roundabouts uh over by um Sam's Wholesale. So, with a development of this type, we feel like this traffic's really going to increase a lot more, which is going to further congest our road. And it's already unsafe. When we go out to check our mail, we have a slight hill to our right. You have to watch when you're going out there. Our mailbox is across the street. So, you have to look very carefully before you go out there because people come through our road really fast. And sometimes they'll top that hill. They don't see you till they're right up on you. So, you got to really be careful checking your mail. So, you know, safety issue. There's lots of trash getting thrown out thrown out on our property and all around us. So, I just don't want to see our neighborhood get even worse traffic-wise and trash wise.

Thank you. We appreciate it. Is anyone else here to speak in opposition of this request? It is Sanders and my husband and I own the property across the road from it. You state that address, please? Yes. 64 Southerntherland Road. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. And um the traffic issue is the biggest concern. We have so much traffic on Middle and Southerntherland anymore. We have Conway Christian across the hill. It is a nightmare at certain times during the day. You have the people that cut through there by the grocery store from the mall to go that way and get around the ones coming down the uh Amity Road. It's just we have traffic concerns. Um the road is finally got paved or something a couple years ago. Finally striped a year ago. So it's not like the city of Conway bothered with our side of town to begin with. I used to walk Southerntherland Road all the way to the store. I will not do it anymore because it's too much traffic. It's dangerous. I now walk over to the church and down Amity. There's sidewalks. It's a whole lot safer. But certain times during the day from our house to get to Middle Road to the sidewalk, you have to really watch. Middle Road is like a super freeway and we have nobody out there enforcing the speed limit. They're going all they want. I can sit from my living room window and watch the bus stop and see cars go by the bus. So just consider what y'all are doing here. You can't stop progress. I know that. But at least give us the benefit. We're East Conway. We're not West Conway. Give us something nice that you're going to put there that the developer wants to put there. Not more low housing, a lot of people on a few acres. That's all.

Thank you. Right. We have heard our three uh opposition speakers. So, we will bring it back into commission now. Commissioners, any questions for anyone? Any comments, thoughts? Got a question for planning staff. So currently the progression is A1 to R1. Is there talks of adding another density in there?

We have talked about it and but right now it's just kind of in the talking phase. We haven't we haven't put anything in front of you guys or council um to address the issue. But it has been discussed. Large lot R1. To answer your question, no. Not at this time. Yeah. How's that addressed currently? Like if could that be a condition of a R1 or a development or is that No conditions on a resone. So,

so reszone is strictly we're reszoning it for use. So, you know, just a reminder, we we don't control the roads, unfortunately. Um, planning commission does not have that power. We also do not have the power to tell people what they, you know, can use the houses for. So, we can't tell people they can rent them or can't rent them. Nowhere in any zoning can we tell them that. Um, so we just have to remember that at the end of the day, A1 is our standard single family zoning and they would have to meet all of our subdivision requirements. um all of our building requirements and you know we end up having to put covenants and restrictions in that would have to be approved. Um so again A1 is a reszone not a conditional use of any sort and it is the basic single family.

To answer to answer the other question though A1 you can put one house per acre. So if they wanted larger ones you wouldn't come in with a PED. You believe it zone day one. Typically we see PUDS we want to be higher dense than R1 would allow. And looking out west it looks like Centennial St. John's all those older neighborhoods are all zoned R1. Those were not all PUDs. No correct or A1. Or A1. That's correct.

And and it's up to the developer how big he wants to make the it. Our minimum standard is 6,000 square feet in an R1. So, but if a developer wants to make it bigger, we're certainly not going to tell him he can't. So, and I'm assuming I have not looked at this as at this record that we currently have. Terra's been reviewing that. I'm certain there's probably an HOA. Uh do they are they going to require sidewalks along Southerntherland?

Yes. Uh sidewalks will be that is a planning staff comment right now on the plat that sidewalks are required on uh middle and southerntherland or anywhere that because there at the current configuration is there's green space between the single family residential lots and those roads and per the subdivision ordinance it is the developer's responsibility to construct sidewalks where there's the unbuildable green space. Okay. So, there will be sidewalks. There will be an HOA that that addresses upkeep and the entrance and all the all those things. So, just FYI. Thank you. Can I ask a question? Yes, you can.

Um, so true, we have submitted a site or a plat and that is going through the planning process. There were questions and in an effort to make sure we answered all those correctly and made planning staff, engineering staff, everyone, comic corp, everybody happy. Um, that did not come before you tonight. It'll be coming at your next meeting. Would it be helpful? I mean, 96 lots, that's all we're getting. Uh, we're not getting any more on that because of the entries, the topography, um, just the detention pond, other things like that. have an entrance. Would it be helpful if I asked to table this until the next meeting and give you a chance to see that plat so that you could see what we're proposing? It's not high density. An R1 is not a high density type of development.

And I can tell you that planning staff was not going to allow more than that regardless of who's doing it unless somebody comes in here with an a multifamily request. it if it's R1, it's only going to get that many houses. Lauren, correct me if I'm wrong, but by the bylaws, once it's brought back to commission, we we ha we have to vote on it. We cannot table it. We have not brought it back. I think you did say let's bring it back into commission just to be clear, but yeah, I think he did. I think we are back in commission. Yes. So, we have we need to take action.

Yeah. Yeah, we have to we'll have to take action. So, what what's the average lot size? It's going to be 6,000. I mean, we can't be less than that. That's the minimum. They'll be It'll be a little bit larger than that because of corner lots and um stuff like that, but no, it's going to be right at that. Are there any other questions for for the applicant right now? Okay. Thank you. All right, commissioners. Any other comments, questions? We'll give you a clar moment of clarification.

Thank you for allowing me to clarify. Um, he did mention this is not high density and in developer real estate speak. I understand it's not right. This is not multif family units they're trying to bring in, but they're proposing 96 roughly 6,000 square foot lots on le right at 30 acres. And so for our road in our neighborhood where we have 3 acre tracks, 5 acre tracks, custom homes that have, you know, been established for a long time, it feels like high density. Um, and so those traffic effects, we're going to fill them. Um, and again, the secondary residential unit per the state law, it may be 96 lots, but they may put a mother-in-law suite on each one, creating kind of a secondary household per. So, just wanted to clarify that when high density means different things to different people.

Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. So again to clarify this our R1 this is our least dense residential that we have um you know in a in a spot of town with high density to the north. Um so as we look around um we have a mix of uses so increasing density down to the south as well. Yes. Yeah. We got some apartments down to the south that are that are as well. So just things to consider. Questions further comments from the commission. the referenced change in state law around out does that is that affected by our zoning requirements?

No, it the the state passed a law that you that anybody in an R1 zone can have an accessory dwelling unit behind their home. A POA maybe can or HOA can probably address that. I'm guessing I haven't talked to Mr. Holloway about it, but and that's not something that you guys would do here, but you can't fix that. Yeah, those are civil matters. Yeah. Yep. Any further discussion? Okay, with that, I'll make a motion to approve as presented. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second.

Uh, we should let's voice vote on this one. Do you want to call roll? Back to my roll. Ethan Reed, yes. Alexander Bainy, I vote yes. Mark Ferguson, yes. Jensen Tilki, yes. Brooks Davis, yes. Kina Hagod, yes. Is absent. Kevin Gro is absent. Grace Reigns. Yes. Right.

Motion passes. Just a reminder, this will be heard by city council next. Right. Planning staff, any further business? There is a little bit um the uh statement of financial interest that everybody please understand she cannot accept those after the 31st and your name might be in the paper. I'm just saying those have to be here before the 31st. Um Courtney is our new planning tech. Courtney, can you wave to them? Okay. So, you'll be seeing Courtney a lot. She took back a spot. Um, she is a notary. I'm a notary. If if I'm not available, Courtney's Courtney's one, too. I would urge you before the snow hits over the weekend, please get those in. Um, also, if you're not aware of it, uh, Lori Quinn's father passed away and his visitation is tonight, which is why she's not here. And the service will be tomorrow. So, if everybody would keep her in their prayers, I know the family would appreciate that. And with that, that's it.

Anything else, commissioners? Right. I'll take a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second. Second. All in favor? I