Planning & Zoning - Regular Meeting

commission to order and um would someone like to give us an invocation this morning? Sure. Oh, thank you. Since I was late, I guess I get to do that. Oh, thank you. Our dear heavenly father, we thank you for this opportunity to um steward your creation. We pray that uh you guide and bless each and every one of us and uh grant us wisdom. In Christ's name we pray. Amen. Amen. Amen. Thank you, Darren.

So, we have minutes from the February 25th meeting. Um any concerns or issues with the minutes? Nope. If not, can I get a motion for approval of them? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes, please. Thank you. Can I get a second? Second. Thank you. All those in favor? I Okay, those will be approved. And although Terry isn't here, I understand there's something related to financial report. Is that

um I think just my apologies for making it so small this time around in the in the packets. Next time I'll make them bigger so you can see them. Um but no, yeah, no changes on the pl. Um we did that budget amendment last month and so no changes, but yes, I will update those next month to make sure you can see them. If you could see them, they'd be really good, right? Yeah. Okay. So, we really don't need to approve a financial report. We do need a motion to approve them, but there are no changes or uh concerns at Okay. All right. So, I need a motion. I'll move to approve the financial report. Thank you. Can I get a second? Second.

Thank you. All those in favor, please say yes or raise your hand. Thank you. Um construction charities. Yes, there are no changes with the construction shies this month. Um so, the letters of credit total is $3,518,88045. Um there are no changes on the cash bonds either and or the or or the performance bonds, but we are working me and the city engineer are working on um working with Danville host center estates to reduce that. So hopefully we'll have that reduction next month. Um we're just working on a line item right now and doing site visits to see what he still needs to add. Um so you'll see that next month, but right now there's no changes.

Okay. All right. So I don't believe we need approval of that. simply a report. Okay. And so we're going to move on to subdivision approvals. And Miss Hannah, can you take it away?

The first subdivision approval is Timothy Montgomery has applied for the consolidation of a combined 182 acre parcel known as 220 and 222nd Street, Pville. And the property is zoned central business. Um, and there is the purpose statement for the plat and the vicinity map of the plat as well. But there were no uh comments or concerns in tech review or no staff concerns at this time about this. Um, it really is just a consolidation of 3B tract number one, two, and three from parcel two, track number four, and parcel 3B. Um, henceforth described as partial four. So,

no concerns at this time about this one. Seems to me we've seen this before, like maybe a couple years ago. Um, potentially. No. Maybe something. We've done other one similar to this. Okay. This is not a new. Okay. So, uh, there being no issues from the staff staff report, do we need to have anyone speak in favor of this or can we move forward with this? Yes. Okay. I have a question. Yes, ma'am. Go ahead.

This is not related to the historic society, is it? We'll have someone who will answer that question. Your microphone up there. Yeah. I'm Kendall Wise from Vantage Engineering. The The only reason we're doing this is to accommodate a restaurant, which may or may not happen. But the plan before we submitted this was for there to be an Italian restaurant go into that space and we're just cleaning up property lines and

correcting some of the Well, I was recently appointed to the Royal Landmark Trust and I didn't want to get involved. Okay. Well, I know what you're referring to then. No, this doesn't have anything to do with that. That may come up next month. I just want to excuse myself. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thanks, gentlemen. Anyone have any other comments um in regards to this? Okay. Any questions or concerns from the commission? Can I get a motion? I'll move to approve subdivision.

Thank you. Second. And um all those in favor? Okay, we're good. The next is the estate of Danny Pike.

Yes. The estate of Danny Pike by Cynthia and Lois Pike co-admines have applied for the subdivision of a 61.583 acre parcel of land located at 1375 Carpenters Creek Road, Parksville. And the property is currently zoned agricultural. And you can see the purpose of the plat and the vicin um right there as well. Um there were no comments about this as well in tech review. and no staff concerns at this time. But I did want um to ask one question about it being on the border and I just wanted to clarify that if we need to do anything extra with that it being on that case county line not in the case of plats. Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. If it was a conditional use permit for the board of adjustment you have to notify the other governments but in this case it's not a requirement in statute. Okay. And I want to say that I appreciate having the purpose notes blown up on the PowerPoint. Thank you. Yeah, that is very helpful. I'll keep doing that. Anyone want to make any comments about this or questions? The the shaded area Hannah here is um that's all Floyd plane. Yes.

Anyone have any comments, concerns? Any questions from the commission? Can I get a motion to approve then? I'll make a motion to approve this, please. Thank you. Can I get a second? Second. Thank you. All those in favor. Okay, that's approved. Now, um, we're going to go into public hearing. So, I need a motion to go into public hearing, please. So moved and I need a second

and all those in favor. Okay. So we're in public hearing and the first item is uh Dale and Lisa Coffee. Yes. So this is a zoning map amendment um for lots 47 and 48 um on Taylor Road Brightben subdivision in Bo County. But this applicant has um asked for this to be tabled this month uh due to concerns about the lot line on the back side being incorrect. So he is going to work with the surveyor to get that corrected um before next month. Which which line is bad? It is the lot line to the back that is closest to the Kentucky Hydroele Electric Company. Yeah. Um his

concerns is that that lot line might be further closer to the lake, Harrington Lake. um and that the utility doesn't own that. So, he just wants to make sure that that's correct before. Okay. Yeah, that that wasn't in the tech meeting. So, no. Yeah. And he we just found that out yesterday, I believe. So, I just talked to Steve Carol right before this meeting and Yeah. So, we're just want to get that corrected. And we've we've seen this before. It's just a matter of consolidating. Yes. Before it was on the agenda, it was two months ago it was on the agenda and then tabled for consolidation and subdivision. Now, it's a zone change, consolidation and subdivision to allow for that smaller 40,000 foot lot. Sure.

Okay. So, this um is being tabled at this time. We don't have to take any action or take an action to do. I'd like to table this this particular I'm going to get it eventually. Okay. I move to table this for another day. Thank you. Can I get a second? Second. Thank you. And all in favor? Okay. So, it'll be tabled. So, just just a quick question. So when they do move that wherever that back property line ends up, are we okay with everything else? Until they found until they at the tech meeting that I attended like we did until we found they moved it, it was fine. Otherwise, there were Yeah. Okay.

There were no surprises. This this actually solved a lot of problems by combining in the way they were proposing to do. anything else in regards to this? So, we're going to talk just a little bit about advisory committee report and then we'll talk about numbers two and three and I was out of the uh state and so Dan yep is going to share about what occurred with the advisory committee and then we're going to move forward.

Okay. And so so for the advisory committee and for the public um just we started to meet and there's a number of things in front of us that will require us to make zoning text amendment changes to our ordinance. So zoda right zoning ordinance text amendments. Um the there are several things in several orders of priority. And so what what we're going to see today is number one of maybe four as we go forward. Um the one in front of us or that has the highest priority is required by Kentucky state legislation that comes active in July around um qualified manufactured homes. And so they passed in the state legislature a requirement that those homes have to be approved in all of our districts. And we can however put some additional requirements on those. And so we've talked about that and Hannah has a proposal for us to look at. Since that goes into effect in July, we need to consider it now because any amendment has to then be approved by fiscal court and and the three cities. So it has to go to all the legislative bodies for approval. The second one that we would want to consider and on our list of things would be um dealing with minor and major plats which you know we got a lot of feedback from the farmers about our initial proposal for one acre to 5 acre. Um that does not have to come to us today. So we have time to look at it and not take action today. we can we can look at

options for us and have further discussion. Um and there might be another um group that takes a look at that as well.

Exactly. Exactly. And then um data centers which we know about because of the controversy in Mercer County. Um, so there there's interest and Hannah's been researching language that we could take to consider what we would do to regulate data centers within the county and in and our areas. And then there's a whole lot of updates to the ordinance and improvements to the ordinance to make it more legible and more readable. All those second, third, fourth things are not required for us to deal with immediately. So that's the idea was we would take part one today and then stage forward maybe over the next few months as things are ready for us to consider. Does that make sense Hannah? Is that a good summary?

Yes, that's perfect. Honestly, yeah. So, just want to make sure that the time the one that has the expiration date for July 1st of 2026 gets to all the committees and or gets to all of the legislative bodies with enough time for them to review it um and then implement it so that we can have that in our joint zoning ordinance by July 1st and then all of the other amendments. Yeah, I I want to keep that open for as long as we need to keep it open to make it better for everybody and readable and userfriendly and um update some language and organize it. So, yeah.

So, I see more there'll be more action from the advisory committee over the next several months of meetings so that we can come back with clearer proposals, but you've got some idea of what we would want to look at. Yeah, we definitely have some top priorities. Just as prelude to yes, your may introduce something that happened at the last council meeting um Miss Douglas is is your microphone.

Our new policeman in junction introduced an ordinance that um where campers, RVs, whatever can come in and just set up on the side of the road or park on somebody's lot with, you know, without the proper health concerns of sanitation and water and all that. And our council voted that down. So, it's pretty heated right now over there over this type of ordeal. We've also learned there's probably some manufactured homes over there. So, this will be good. Okay. For us coming coming forward.

Good. Well, check. So, that'll be one thing. Will this overrule what junction ordinance says? We would ask junction to approve the changes we make here in addition. So it would it would take precedence I guess junction or ours. Yeah. I mean remember I don't understand. Yeah. Well, remember the intent I I think from what I've read, the intent of the legislature was to try to um allow more manufactured homes in more locations as part of dealing with housing and housing affordability.

That was the initial structure, right? Um it was not in this session of the legislature. It was previous session. Correct. And it's just being implemented. We've been doing battle in Junction City with manufactured homes. Yeah. Well, and you have more experience, I think, with that. And it's Let's see if the Let's see if the amendment helps or not. All right.

Well, I do want to uh Yeah. So, there is a new manufactured type. So, now there's a qualified manufactured home, manufactured home, modular and mobile. So, um there is different definitions based on the quality of the build. So qual qualified manufactured homes are allowed in every single district because they were built in the last five years per the definition. Um so hopefully these definitions will help with clarity on those ordinances to help there not be so many. That would be great. Yeah. Thank you. All right. So then we can move. Sorry, I didn't mean to. No, I No, that's good.

Understanding the categories is key. different categories of homes and that's how you're describing it. I like the use of the word qualified. It it has qualified in So, are we ready? We're set. Good. And thank you so much for um leading the advisory committee during my absence. And we're going to move on then to uh number two under public hearing.

Miss Hannah. Um, so the planning and zoning commission will consider zoning ordinance tech amendments to article one, article two, article three, and article four of the joint zoning ordinance. Um, so at this time I don't know the legal language, but I think we just need to adopt the changes to the manufactured housing with the um changes in front of you right now and table articles one and articles three and the rest of article two and for that are outside of the manufactured housing. This this whole thing is great to do but it is a great big textbook 500 pages and it takes time to do it. Absolutely.

We need to do the one that as you say that we have a time crunch on. So you can help us sort out which that is make sure we do the right one. So can you walk us through the changes that and and we have in front of us with red um so that we understand the immediate need. Yes. So I have printed out the immediate stuff that we would like action on today. Um and then the rest of the stuff because they're like 4,000 pages. I did not print those out and I will email those to you later and they will be on the website as well. So I'll have that available for the public. First I'm going to go over the action stuff that we are requesting action and then I'll go over the stuff that

um we don't need action today. We'll just discuss um Okay. So So let me understand then um the things we need action for today. We'll take a vote after you discuss those.

Yes. Yeah. And um I also want to state this is a requirement to update uh KRS 100.348 and so that was House Bill 160 from the 2025 regular session that changed that KRS. So that's what we are focused on um this month and so changes to or there's an addition of the def definition compatibility standards which goes along with the qualified manufactured homes. This way with compatibility standards, we can ensure that within a 1/8 mile radius of that neighborhood or that location that that manufactured housing or that manufactured home or qualified manufactured home is architecturally similar to the surrounding area and ultimately the surrounding village that will later be the future land use map.

Sure. So that compatibility standard just ensures that it it fits in with the rest of the neighborhood. Um there's an update to manufactured home because again the qualified manufactured home got added in. So we have to change manufactured home. Um then we added manufactured or mobile home lot manufacturer mobile home community again just to kind of get ready for more flexibility and incorporating the future land use map designations. Um mobile home definition got changed to manufactured prior to June 15, 1976. um modular home got updated as well. So Hannah just to for a definition. Yes.

And we need to say mobile home the term mobile home only applies to something be made before 976. Yes. Yeah. So that's really the biggest change is mobile home is pre76 before HUD federal regulation standards. Um manufactured home is post 1976 after HUD standards were um developed. And then qualified manufactured home is within the LA is manufactured within the last year and has higher quality materials. Yeah. Of a manufactured home. Um so it really just has to do with standards of the federal regulation on housing developments and not wheels. If it has wheels on it, it's um if it has wheels, it is a mobile home. I believe I believe the wheels are

that's that's not I read what I read and I didn't see that stated in here. That may be a conclusion that it's before 197, right? Yeah. Yeah, if it falls in the date time. So, yeah, the wheels category I think is less relevant to um defining the difference that might be like RV residence which I there's no provision for in our ordinance and perhaps is not something that we necessarily want to address or deal with.

Yeah. Well, so Rita, if there's another question like if the issue that junction is dealing with is RVs as by that definition, then local ordinance could take effect. So it wouldn't it wouldn't affect anything that we do here, but junction could still do do we already have an ordinance that says if you have a residential lot, you can't use an RV as a permanent residence. We do have an ordinance that says RVs cannot be used as residential units at all in campers. Okay. Yes.

Thank you. All right. So, that is the first of the items that we're going to Yes. Yeah. Um including per a change to permanent foundation and then that qualified manufactured home and uh an addition to underskirtting. So those are all of the additions to article two of the zoning ordinance text amendment having to deal with manufactured homes. Um and that would get us in compliance with that KRS statute and then we could move on to get that approved by our various Yes. bodies. Well, yeah, but we got one more piece to this. So it's

article four. Yeah. And so there's just a little bit of article 4. Really, the additions just add in qualified manufactured homes under under single family um residential section and ensures that wherever single family is allowed, that qualified manufactured homes are allowed as well. And 4.4.2b is just that table that shows you um R1A, B, and C qualified manufactured homes are permitted. Um manufactured homes are only permitted on R1C still. So though that hasn't changed at all and the addition of qualified manufactured homes in article 4 is really the only change. Um as well as the compatibility standards on section 4.4.4C and it kind of goes into detail about everything I was saying. Um within eighth of a mile of the proposed site compatibility shall be evaluated based on roof pit roof form and pitch no less than 412 pitch and a 12-in eve facade composition type and quality of exterior building materials. window and door placement and massing and building width. So, um this way it is in the same architectural style as the neighborhood and hopefully has the same village

um village as well. Yeah. Right. So, the compatibility standards then are the additional things we locally can require in order to make sure that it fits the neighborhood. Correct. Yeah. And so there are things that the KRA statute won't let us um regulate, but the things that we can regulate are roof pitch and um facade composition. So within our powers, this is how we can regulate them in the county.

Questions or comments? This is also at least 20 feet wide mean yeah the qualified manufactur it was the next item on your other standards in section four make sure it's not a single width it's a basically a 20 20 foot width talking about a structure that's brought in on two different two different trailers width of at least 20 feet

I think it always bears adding that um if a neighborhood had its own deed restrictions, those can still address qualified manufactured homes and maybe prohibit them. It's just that the zoning ordinance cannot do that under this new statute. Though I've also heard that they're not too much in the way of deed restrictions in this area in this area and HOA. Thanks. HOA is the other one that's going to say they they can be allowed because that's that's a private category. tiny home. Um, that's a good question. Pull your Terry, pull your mic up to you so we can record it. Where does the tiny home fit into the category?

I believe it would a tiny home based on how it was built could be considered a modular or manufactured home. Um, I know the size of those are a lot smaller. Yes. So, based on Kentucky building standards or or federal building standards, a tiny home is 400 square feet or less. Um, so Yeah, I think that would be a great next step to introduce that. Um, because a lot of people are going to those. Yes. Yeah. A lot of questions come to me as a as a builder. How close can I put it to my current dwelling? Right. Does it have to stick back past? Can it exceed the width length? Can it be as big? You know, can I put a driveway between, you know, just questions like that. Yeah. Yeah.

Proximity to current dwelling. That probably gets into I think for farms you can have a farm apartment but we don't have anything else addressing ADUs do we access allowed in there you go but they can only be 50% but I um you you were referring about like adjacent to property lines how close to pull them right or the requirements for a driveway in a they can be in front of the house there is no explicit statement saying that they can't be in front but in single family and other districts they have to be behind um the primary structure but I think that's the only explicit statement so

so a distance from the distance from the front basically it can't be buted up to the right side yeah um but are people interested in creating it closer and having that more flexible I guess from your some people want to tie to their home yeah Yeah, which that becomes part of the actual dwelling. Then when you tie them too, it's like attached garage part of the house. Yeah. For instance, in parable as a guy came to me, he has a tiny home on the property already in the city limits. It's roughly 20 something feet from the home equal to the distance at the front and he wants to add on to it.

Can he go closer to the home property lines? You know, what's that statue? Um, it depends on the zone, right? Um, so I know I'm sure it's residential because it's in Yeah. Yeah. It's probably either R1 or RM, but um, so it just depends on the zone uh, as far as but usually it's about five feet off the side and 10 or 25 feet off the back. Um, but I'll have to check on that. But yeah, so I think moving into the new zoning designations, I think our intention is to get more flexible with that with with home is going to be an issue everybody and a a solution I think in my opinion for

well you might so we might check to make sure that where what the what we currently say and then I think it's makes sense that we add tiny homes to the consideration of what we might update so would you want me to add tiny homes to the article two definitions and maybe article four somewhere or just the definition so that we can have it in play yeah or either either ask that or say whether that AD user include tiny homes or okay figure out how we include the language. Okay, forgive me. I thought ADU automatically is tiny homes. Am I talking about something different?

Um I would think that they would be two separate things because two separate things is just an accessory dwelling unit. It can be a tiny home unit of its own or it can be just like a efficiency and right the re I come from a perspective having mandatory training that you do here. I happen to be listening to some other states and they do it differently. They do the clarification should be we we probably do need to have it clarified better. I yeah we need to identify it as a principal use I think since they might not be accessory. Yeah. Yes. Exactly. Right.

That's the definition of wording on here is and that sets it to like a category that you anything you do for your principal home you'd have to do to the tiny home. Right. Okay. All right. So we should come back. So do you want to approve what we have at this time? I think and then add or do you want to add and bring this back?

I think that there's going to be several issues that we need to add in the future. This one doesn't need to be addressed right now, but it's it people are interested. So, it should be included in what we're doing. I think what we need to take action on today is the qualified modular home, manufactured home, qualified manufactured homes. But I will definitely add those definitions and those changes um to the next month's article two and article four because I think those are necessary. Yeah.

So this that is listed here and is under number two on our public hearings is uh what we need to take action on today. And so we need a motion uh in regards to this if we're ready. I will move to make the changes as we've outlined in the packet in front of us to deal with the qualified manufactured housing concerns and make us consistent with the state law. Okay. May I have a second? A second. Thank you, Terry. Um, any questions or concerns before

we're not we're not consider We'll consider the article four items as a separate motion. No article two and four. Two and four. Okay. I just make sure I clarify because I was trying to listen. Thank you. Two and four. Okay. All those in favor, please say yes or raise your hand. Yes. Thank you. It has passed. Now, what about number two on here? So, number three,

excuse me, number three. So, um number three is the planning and zoning commission will consider text amendments to article two and article four of the subdivision regulations. And um article two of the subdivision regulations is the minor and major definition. And so this one uh was our advisory commission or committee talked about this with Trilly or with Judge Bottom to discuss our plans after our stakeholder meeting with the county and with the county stakeholders. Um, and so we think a next step instead of increasing the minimum lot size in the agriculture zone is maybe looking at the major minor definition in the subdivision regulations. But the subdivision regulations don't go to the other legislative bodies for approval. So we want to make sure that we work with fiscal court to ensure that major minor definition is correct. Um, because it will affect the county mostly, but they don't have to vote on it. So we just want to make sure that we work with them before we pass it. um just so that we're working in step with them. So that is article two of the subdivision regulations. Article four is um updates to

So Hannah, for the folks that aren't on the advisory committee, I think it'd be good to summarize that. Um do you have the do you have the changes that were proposed for minor major? Oh, I um uh No, I don't have that because it was a lot of paper. Um, but I will email you all those that summary of the changes. This is kind of a summary of the summary. Um, but they get they get really long. Um, so I will email all of you um the details of the details of everything that we're just discussing today which includes zoning ordinance 1, two, three, and four and subdivision regulations two and four. Um,

and I I personally have not had enough time to absorb the other than this particular one that we just approved. Absolutely. So, I'm not prepared to do anything. Well, I think that So, so we've approved number two and and I think what we're we're going to suggest that we table number three once we get through the discussion of what's included in number three. Yes. Having that discussion sounds good. Yeah. So, talk a bit about as Darren asked, talk a bit about what this all might include.

The major minor definition in the subdivisions article two or subdivision regulations article two. Um I think the biggest change is maybe decreasing the amount of minors that can be done and subdivided by a parent tract within a fiveyear period. So, I think that's the biggest change, but also again just making it very explicit what the rules are. Um, the definition parent tract wasn't in the article 2 zoning ordinance definitions. So, stuff like that, just making making it readable, user friendly. Um, making it very clear when a minor is a minor and when is a major a major. Um, but hopefully that is the biggest goal is to decrease the amount of times the parent track can be divided within a five-year period. Um and then also put stipulations on a major track as far as what else is required. Um so that that are that is mainly the biggest most uh most of the conversation that we had in the advisory committee about that major minor.

Was there a large discussion on eliminate the use of a minor at all? Totally. Um I don't think eliminating the use of a minor I think really updating and ensuring that it is it can be understood um the major minor definition is important to well without ever having attended the meetings when you have when you talk about somebody not understanding this from the outside what happens is you you reduce the number of opportunities to apply a minor

that's ultimately the the the difference. So major and minor minor plat changes if they meet all the requirements get to be approved by the director and don't come to the planning commission. Okay. Major plat changes if they meet all the requirements come to the planning commission but were required to approve them right if they meet all requirements. So the thing you don't know is not a lot of difference. The thing you don't know in the future is the frequency of the that we're going to Exactly.

Yeah. And I think uh another big change into making it a minor is if the utility refuses to sign it'll automatically become a major. Um so that's the other thing we wanted to highlight is the you know utility concerns that we're seeing or the lack thereof. Right. We had a lot of discussion about utilities and that that were some of the requirements and trying to make that explicit on the plat. Right. Yeah. And I believe we also had a conversation about potentially having a road fund for that major minor definition which

maybe could go towards, you know, road fund in the county. Um so we've had several discussions, nothing nailed down yet, which is why we really want to work with the fiscal court on getting that nailed down. Um but we definitely have ideas about how to make that better. So, will we get to an opport a situation here where we want to send this back to the advisory committee and remove it from an agenda item? Um, I think it'll be tabled until right now you table you'll have it on the agenda every every month,

right? I think I I my thinking was that we would table it here and it would go back the advisory committee would bring forward to us at our next meeting more explicitly. Well, and I can appreciate the logistics that we have to go through. I'm just referring to as far as our actual agenda. Yeah. To have that item carry over month to month to month to month. It's great we're doing it. Yeah. Yeah, people may come and try to hear something and we table it. Again,

that was my biggest um hope is that we just allow the public to know about it, have public input, put it on the website. I honestly assume that people would show up. Um but so I think there are I I totally hear your point. I think the benefit of having it on the agenda each month is that we continue to let the public know that we're doing it and maybe give them more time to read it and digest it because there is a lot of changes. Um, but I understand it does look it does look cluttered by having it on the agenda every time. So, I'm open to

two points. This is akin to what we did with uh merchant uh electric solar generating facilities where we put on the agenda and kept it on there for several months and I think hopefully that can be a working and productive process with the public. The other is that I don't think that the advisory committee is prohibited from making updates and sending things forward just because it remains on the agenda. I think that that can I I agree with that. And if someone comes up for if it's on the agenda and somebody's here when it comes up on the agenda, we can ask if somebody has something to add. We can hear their comments this month. We may hear different comments the next month. Right. But they've still had the opportunity to make those comments.

Right. And and I think our intent was we would have further discussions with fiscal court before we had specific language approved come to us for approval. I'm willing to make it make try to make it work. Okay. But I'm also understanding that we can change our direction if we need to adjust it a different way. It's having that ability to truly say it's not ready for us to have it as a public item.

Right. Yeah. I think that the changes that we discussed around the number of plats and the frequency will allow greater scrutiny if someone wants to build a major, you know, a a home cluster out in the county and and address those concerns while still allowing flexibility for the farmer that wants to build one or two homes. uh you know adjacent off their off their property and address the concerns that folks had there. So um

either for their family or just to Yeah. Without putting, you know, we're not putting qualifiers on there that it has to be a family member that goes into the house because that's just going to create complexities later. But I I think it's uh finding a happy middle ground to those to those two concerns while still addressing um the concerns about uh utility availability and uh traffic safety uh and oh and um sanitation. Th those were kind of our big concerns is we wanted to make sure that they had the ability to have adequate sanitation be it uh hook up to sewer or a septic system and then uh at least make sure that the person buying the plat understands whether they're going to have water capability or not. If uh you know Parksville Water says they can't supply it, at least they have to know that ahead of time. They have to know the public safety. Can they have a septic system there or not?

Um, and fire and EMS as well. And what's that? Fire and EMS. Yeah, fire and EMS support, you know, so that they're so that they're aware of what services the county will be able to offer at that location. And then uh and then the other concern was like placement of driveways and so forth on some of these curvy roads to make sure we don't create uh dangerous situations for drivers and the people there.

This work is very important in clarifying our actions. It's also very important in linking us back to our comprehensive plan as well. It's a a good work in progress related to that. I think I agree. So we're looking at tableabling um and so I need a motion to table uh this. I'll I'll make a motion to table the further text amendments and to all the other articles of our ordinance.

Okay. Can I have a second? Thank you, Marina. All those in favor, please say yes. Yes. Yes. And go ahead, Henry. The my clarification is that we are not totally done with articles two and four. There were nonqualified manufactured home items in there. Correct. Any and there's you have we covered all the content you had for us?

Yes, we have. Yes. And thank you so much for listening and um when I send you these packets later after this um after this meeting. I'm sorry there is a lot. But um yeah, please review them and send me any questions or comments or yeah, we'll work together on them. So but that was it for today. I think that was enough. So, we need to move out of public hearing and I need a motion to do that. So, move. Thank you. Any second? Second. Thank you. All those in favor? Yes. Okay. So, now we're going to just look to see if we have any new business at all. We did talk about the advisory committee and I don't is there nothing additional? Uh I don't know about a budget committee.

Um no. Um we have a scheduled meeting after this. Nothing currently for the budget. Okay. Personnel? Nope. And any other new business? Nope. Or announcements? No. Okay. I need a motion to adjourn them. Thank you, Rita. I'll second it. Thank you. All those in favor. And thank