Planning & Zoning - Regular Meeting

honored to be your new chair. And I do want to take this brief moment to recognize Jim Boyd who was an excellent chair of this commission. And uh I know that uh we're going to be recognizing him when he's able to come back with us. But in the meantime, I just want to say thank you to him for everything that he did for this commission. He served for many years before he became the chair and he did a wonderful job. Okay. Could I have someone give us a prayer this morning? All right. Um could we bow our heads? Thank you Lord for gathering us this morning. help us to see uh how to um fulfill your will in all our actions today and guide us for the betterment of our city and county. And we ask this in your name. Amen. Amen. The next is to call for approval of the minutes. Can I have a motion in regards to the minutes? Please, I'll make a motion. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. All right. They'll be approved then as distributed. Um, Mr. Mannon, would you give us the financial report? Yeah, if you turn it to the financial report. The second column in is actually the March yearto date column. You'll forget what the headline says, but it's March. And then of course the column really all the way to the right is our budget amendment for the year which is our most current thinking as to what we're going to do in fiscal year 2425. And if you look down to total

commission revenue you'll see the year to date our whole commercial revenue is 190,677 and there are total year current forecast for revenue is 223,78. So we're at 85% of revenue and we're 75% through the year. So we're over revenue in terms of a pace. And if you flip to the next page and just drop all the way down to total commission expenditure, you can see to year to date through the first nine months of the of the fiscal year, our expenses have been 169,784. If you go over to the last column, which is our current projected for the total year of 244 of 605, we're actually at 69% of our total projected expenses compared to 75% if we were right on. So, we're over on revenue under expenses. Really nothing else to report that we haven't talked about in the past. We do need a motion to accept. I'd like to make motion we accept that. Thank you. Can I get a second? Second. Thank you. All those in favor, please say yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. Thank you. And I think we need to remind ourselves use the microphone so people can hear us. Is that is that me or Mr. No, we just have all of us do it in general. We turn our heads and it goes away from the microphone. Okay. Thanks a lot. Okay. Uh construction shies. Can I get some information about that? Um, Mr. Lynon Smith. Uh, yeah. This is my first time doing construction here. The,

uh, this was for Stonegate Developers. Um, they have a letter of credit in the amount of $656,325.82. Um and they are looking for a construction contract approval uh with approval for the chair to sign. With approval for the chair to sign High Cliff Properties, they're renewing a letter of credit in the amount of 863,516. uh and Hunt Farm section 7 accept letter of credit in the amount of 357 305,000 and provide a motion allowing the chair to sign the construction contract the u that particular one which one is that one Joe I don't see it on my list is the reason I asked what's that the hunt farms hunt farm hunt farms I have an updated agenda laying in front of you. Oh, you tricked us. Tricked us. Well, uh, it does not include the table, the updated table with Hunt Farm on it. That's what I was the This is the graphical table. I was expecting to see it on there. No, I haven't updated the table. It'll be updated next time around. Okay. If we uh make these changes, then go on to it. Thank you very much. All right. I'd like to make a motion we accept those changes. I'll second it. So, does that include uh I think Yeah, we need to authorize the chair to sign.

Yes. Does that include the um motion to allow me as chair to sign in both of those? Yes. Okay. I'd like mine to include the signing. Okay. All those in favor, please say yes. Yes. Henry, are you keeping us honest? You're trying. It's I have a question that's is is about the contract. And I don't think it's in front of you, but No. Um, Lisa, I just wanted to check and make sure that this paragraph three where it says the developer agrees and stipulates that the sum of that that reflects, you know, not just the bond, but the full amount of improvements um on Stonegate. Yes, ma'am. You're looking at the previous contract. I haven't done the current contract yet, but it will be based on a phase one total estimate, right? Yes. And and and that that total estimate number, not just the 20% or the 10%, but the the total amount should be listed in that paragraph. Yes, sir. Okay. Which is an amount that is here. No amended motion required. Just wanted to clarify that. When you update the the chart here, Lisa, that'll reflect the phase one. Is that type of wording you're going to put in here? Yes, sir. Okay. For clarity, it's easy on the records that way. Thank you. Thanks, Lisa. Okay. So, the construction shies are um accomplished uh with those motions. Uh do we have any subdivision approvals? I don't see any on the agenda. No. Okay. So, now we're going to need to go into a public hearing. We have two items for that. I need a motion to go into the public hearing, please. So, moved. Second. Thank you. All those in favor say yes. Yes. Okay. Now we're in the public hearing and the first item is the home two suites. Uh Mr. Smith,

can you go over this for us, please? Yes. Um this property is uh located at 195 Shannon Way. It's um applicants are requesting approval from the planning commission for a site plan to construct a hotel. The property is located in the highway business zoning district. Uh we had this in technical review. A summary of the comments were for a hydrant to be located near the entrance of Shannon Way. Uh, an EV charging station should be located away from the building, possibly the other side of the parking lot area, and I believe they have submitted an updated plan that includes that. Uh I don't know that we have a copy of that but Okay. But that's okay. As long as you have it there on record, it's fine. Okay. Yeah. So, may I have someone come forward to talk about this uh application? Your name, address. Good morning, Kendall Wise. Good morning, Vantage Engineering. So, I'm working with the architects and we're providing the site design for the project and obviously the development plan. Grab that microphone. Move it around a little bit so it catches your voice. Okay. I'm going to give you a copy of a rendering of what the hotel would look like. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Pictures are always fun. We can I'll hold it up for you if you like. Thank you.

So this is a home two suites. It's a a Hilton product, you know, a chain hotel. Um something that's I guess a new fairly new. I mean, you you're starting to see them in all the major cities. Um uh it has it's more it's got several suites in it. It allows for some extended stay, but at the same time, if you just want a night, spend a night, you know, it's it's available for that. But um the same group is building this project that owns the Hampton in and the Holiday in Express. Okay. Um [Music] under Sorry about that. So the I think at tech review we had some comments from the fire chief and we've made some revisions. I've spoke with him. We've added to the plan another fire hydrant. So, there's an existing fire hydrant on the front left corner of the property. We've added a new fire hydrant to the front right corner of the property. So, so the fire department will have an easy way to to fight a fire without having to go around the building or, you know, it's all right there. Um the uh the fire chief also had a concern about the EV charging station being located near the building. We recently did with this same group of developers, we did a home two suites in Richmond and it just got completed. It's funny because that that planning and zoning board asked us to move the EV charging station next to a handicap space which is always near the front of the building so that we didn't discriminate against who could

use a EV charging station. So it's not consistent. I agree. it. So, in order to satisfy the fire chief, we have since relocated the EV charging station to the outer part of the parking lot. That's fine. Yep. His his concern because I was at the meeting was pretty clear about he his preference is not to have it adjacent to the building, right? It's a separate item isolated and could be if there's an issue, it could be dealt with there. So, so we've we've we've made that change to the development plan and the construction plans. Uh the street light uh layout has been added to the site development plan. Um the utility uh signatures have been acquired for for the from the city and from the electric company. Those things have been added to the site development plan. And there was a question about the storm water detention for the property. And this this property is located in a in a subdivision. And the subdivision itself had a storm water retention basin designed several years ago. U and it's that it's that pond you see which has some additional storm water storage on the top of the water surface that's there. So that design was taken care of for a certain acre acreage of or a certain watershed. Um, I talked to, you know, we all of the, uh, commercial properties that are there now that have been built, those all go into the storm sewer and that storm sewer carries the water to that retention basin. Um, so there's there's a certain number of those commercial lots that already have storm water detention provided for them. And so we're just that's so we're not going to have any of that on site. that's been

taken care of with this regional retention basin. And I shared uh a letter with Josh Morgan about that early on because we've been talking of course we've been corresponding with the city for several months about this one, but I don't mind to share this letter. Yeah, you during the meeting on the tech review, that's one of the items that was discussed heavily is that that that has been addressed and It would be good though if you would share a copy of the letter so that we can have it with our records. Would any of you want to see it or let me see it and then I'll give it and then we'll keep it in our file if that's ours to keep. Kendall. Yes, that's that copy. you can have. Okay. So, the revised site development plan was just submitted to Lisa yesterday. So, that may I'm sure that's the reason you don't have revisions in your packets. It's I put it in front of them. Okay. Now, the the other comment is you for those that don't know, there's a retention wall at the back of the property. That's why there's a hillside and other issues. So there's no exit or entrance in the back side of that property. It's off the main front area retaining wall certain height on the back. Yep. Variable height I think. So you know I'm going to ask about traffic uh and if there was any need for a traffic study. I know it's part of an existing um area. Any issues around traffic? Was that discussed? Well, we've been myself and Josh Morgan have been corresponding with the state highway department about 150 and they're

doing their study to um look at ways to possibly reduce the number of entrances and and improve safety on 150 and that includes Ghost Pike. And for those we're we're letting them take the lead on that. Yes. And for those that aren't looking, this is on Shannon Way, which is parallel to the main road out in front. And I we're talking about the traffic that would be resulting to into the main road. This this property is behind Auka. So, and Cattleman's. Yeah. In that. Yeah. I mean, I I just recently put together a report or basically a trip generation. We estimated what the whole project would generate in terms of what we could project would be built there and what what those trips would be and shared all that with the state recently. So doing what we can to help traffic. It's there's still just the one entrance, right, Kendall? Is that the traffic light there? Is that the only I would say no. I mean the the streets are being constructed right now that would connect it to Ghost Pike and then there would be two new entrances on 150 that that have been permitted by the state. Yeah. Okay. So there's three points of access to the I was there yesterday. It's not open now. No, but you can clearly see what the intent is that it will be. Okay. Thank you. Mhm. Anything else? No, I don't don't have anything else. Would anybody else like to speak in favor? Would anyone else want to speak in opposition to this?

Okay. So, uh, we then need a motion for approval of this. I don't think there's any I don't think there's any conditions or anything else that we have to do special there. I'd like to make a motion we approve it. I second. Okay. All those in favor, please say yes. Yes. Thank you. Now, we'll go on to Kentucky Solid Surfaces. Do we have someone to speak to that? Kendall again, Kendall Wise from Vantage Engineering. So, we're doing the site site design for the project. the the the property was originally developed by Jim Davis uh metal business there and and they were look the the buildings for the most part look like warehouses. Um since then uh Mr. Arnett purchased the property and open and moved his uh granite and countertop business into one of the buildings. Another building has a landscaping business in it and they also sell mulch and landscape rock and things like that. Uh and then there's another building that's leased and is a warehouse space. And so the three buildings are there and then we're proposing to add um it's a it will be used as a general office space, professional office, and it will also be leased to a separate group. All of these things being on the same property, but they're just they all are used for different businesses. Um, so we're adding adding parking to accommodate the, you know, the professional office use.

Um, outside of that, I don't know what more questions you might have, but I think we I think we had a conversation with the fire and safety about the road areas in there. There was some question we had about um having another building with the corresponding people coming and going and the parking on there whether there was a an effective way to turn a fire engine around at the end of the the road adjacent next to next door. So the recommendation on our side was to add a gravel turnaround which was acceptable to fire group so that they could if they pull a truck in they can turn around or ladder truck for some reason in the buildings. That was the only unusual thing I think it was in the candle we had on it. Well, Dave Co Drive was installed many years ago and it's it's public street with a 50-foot rightway. Mhm. So, um, you know, it wasn't terminated properly then with a hammerhead or any such thing to and so at this point it just seems a little bit wrong to ask the people who own lots adjacent to it to make changes to the public rightway. Um, I mean, the fire the fire department has access into and onto the property that we're proposing to make changes to. I don't I just don't feel like asking Mr. Arnett to make changes to a public street seems appropriate when that street's been there for 20, 30 years. Well, the the item was to ask to just have gravel spread arrangement such that the vehicle could back on it and back around. That's all it was. Not not restoring it to a black top or a um the road criteria that we have today. Provide a turnaround region at the end. Okay. If he puts gravel at the end of the road

to provide a way for someone to turn around, who who then maintains gravel? Because the city doesn't maintain gravel. I mean, they expect it to be paved. So, if he puts a mess of gravel at the end of the road just so someone can make a maneuver and then the gravel needs maintenance, who maintains that? I I just don't I feel like it's an ask that is not I mean, the lots have been there. Both sides. And we own property on the east side, I guess, of Dave Co Drive. There's other people that own property on the west side. Um, it's a public rideway and I just don't think adding gravel a gravel turnaround in a public rideway seems appropriate. You know, if you're going to do something, I think it needs to be so and it's, you know, a solid fix, a paved hammerhead or something like that. And I'm not offering our client to do that because that's a very expensive and it is the our little short conversation is we spent a fair amount of time in that hour that we had there talking about this topic specifically and I'm not sure we resolved it back then but it has been noted in the minutes here that uh a hammerhead or turnaround with gravel surface was added as comments that were made at that meeting and that's why I bring it up here and I can I personally can appreciate what the situation is, but this is a request from our safety equip and fire equipment is what this request. Well, I think the city has to address it. I don't I don't think it's our responsibility to provide a way for the fire department to turn around at the end of a public street. JJ. Yeah. Come on up, JJ. Hi, JJ Harris. Danville Bo County Development Corporation. Um, this is just forformational purchases purposes. the economic development authority which is the city county has now purchased the

reading track which is directly behind this. So I think we might be able to I'll have to take it back to city county to the EDA board and try and help address this matter. So that that kind of doesn't really help the situation. That's right. That was a recent acquisition. It was a recent acquisition. So I think that we can probably help do something to alleviate this concern because I think there is a farm gate there at the end of the intention was not the gravel is not so support what you were doing although we love what you're doing I do it's just to have the ability to do it and if it's going to happen we'll try to make something work I think like JJ's saying I mean they the industrial foundation wouldn't have bought the property to farm it So obviously the street is going to be extended into their property in future and it's just a matter of time before something more significant than a gravel turnaround is going to happen there. But it's it's what you're saying to me is very reasonable question. It is a request and if JJ if you would please appreciate your offer just make a note of that if that's achievable. Seems like a reasonable approach. Anybody have comments on the board here, commissioners? I mean, I think if JJ were to allow the public to come onto his property and turn around on a gravel space, I don't know if that's appropriate either. I mean, it needs to be a public rideway that people are making maneuvers on. Um, private property, which without the gravel, the truck will have to try to turn around into the parking area in front of the building in the entrance in the area there. So, and and like I said, they have a firet truck would have no issue coming into and onto the property

through the the paved driveway that we have at right the I did have one question on the application mentioned a possibility of this building being a medical building. I and medical buildings to me are people coming and going quite frequently, right, with lots of cars. To my knowledge, it's professional offices related to medical services. Is that how they're set up on here? I don't know that it is a urgent treatment center or anything like that. I I had no idea. I have no way to judge that, right? Because if you're going to do some of those things, getting people in and out can also be um parking will be a can be a concern. Number of parking spots, but I know you've addressed it the way you've done here. Parking issue. Yet parking is there and but the entrance there on the is a single entrance on the the left side of our plot or from if you face the building looking at it the area the right side next to the road next to the street there. So that would be the only other turn turnaround spot with that's available if I understand the area right without the gravel. It's going to be in that type of tournament. Is that what we have? That's right. So they would either pull into into and onto the the Kentucky solid surface property. There's I mean semi trucks can make maneuvers in their on their in their parking lot. There's all kinds. That's what I was getting to. It's not like we got a small lot here because you got semi delivery with a solid surface stones and things. Okay. Just making sure we're addressing for for the public. This property is the stone um property behind Walker Trail. So, and it's a section an additional building in that property. Do you have anything else? There was another question perhaps that came up at tech review about storm water for this. Okay. And the this the city's

storm water rags are very detailed and there's a lot to it. But in uh in a situation where a development area is less than one acre, they don't recommend providing storm water detention basin just because small ineffective storm water detention basins are just that they don't really do their job and they're more of a maintenance problem than than the city recommends developers put in. Um, so we've we've corresponded with Josh Morgan, the city engineer, about that and and uh that so we won't be adding a storm water detention basin for this small increase in impervious area. You you went through the necessary checks and make sure and rec. Yeah, I think those are the only technical review comments that ended up in the meeting minutes. Okay. Be glad to answer your any other questions, but that's all I have. Thank you. Nice job. Thank you. Thank you. Does anybody else want to speak in favor of this particular item? Would anyone want to speak in opposition to this item? If not, I'm ready for a motion for approval. I'll move to approve. I don't since the meeting minutes called out that these two comments should we approve it with an understanding we addressed a storm sewer and the gravel surface Henry was was there an agreement that that would be addressed that's what I was going to say we need to clarify that with your motion all right do you have a suggestion what what I what I heard was that I'd like to prove a understanding that the storm water calculations were addressed

effectively to satisfaction of of our group and that the the recommendation to have a gravel surface not be a requirement but to look at other methods to have that added beyond this particular situation that Henry would you you're thinking the two things do we need anything else on there I I think that supports I didn't know if you were going to be suggesting further uh burdens to put on the applicant or other conditions. It doesn't sound like you are. These are just findings that things have been addressed. These are just findings that were investigated. We've resolved those. That's appropriate. So, Mr. Collier made a motion. Can we uh have a second? I'll second. Thank you. Everyone in favor, please say yes. Yes. Thank you. Can I get a motion to come out of public hearing, please? Move to come out of public hearing. Second. Second. Okay. All those in favor say yes. Yes. Yes. All right. We're going to go to new business then. I don't believe we have anything from the advisory committee. Is that correct? No. Uh budget committee. Anything from the budget committee? No. We presented our revised budget to the city commission last week. Seemed to be accepted. Okay. Um personnel committee. The only thing that I really have in relationship to the personnel committee is that there is an ad hoc um uh director recruitment group that has been working uh to look at recruiting a a director and um we have um looked at the salary recommendations related to that

and we had help from um Henry Smith in updating our ad uh for the director. We have one uh applicant who uh I did a just a screening interview with uh but we want to look to see if we can have more than one applicant uh for the position. So, we're still we're still in that um search. And for you, Madam Chair, we did post the the national ad. The national APA, our Kentucky APA ad shows the correct form once you click on it. It unfortunately still reflects our previous salary on the front of the web page despite much correspondence. There's no professional staff for Kucky's APA chapter. It's all volunteers and I'll keep working at it. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Uh other new business um refund of difference in prior and current review slashadministrative fees. Who is going to address that issue please? Okay. Uh I've got numbers on that. The uh original fee this is this is for JLS Stonegate actually. Stonegate. Okay. Stonegate Developers under construction shies. Uh the original review fee was $13,79146. Uh what they're doing now is a stage one or a phase one portion of that. Their current assessment would be for $5,966. Uh, which they've chosen to take in form of a refund for $7,824.86.

Okay. Do we need to is this simply an announcement or do we need action to be able to direct the two? All right. So, I'll accept a motion to approve that refund. I make the motion. Thank you. Can I have a second? All those in favor, please say yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Smith. Uh I do want to make an announcement. uh JLS Investments uh who had made an application for a zoning map amendment uh at our previous at previous meeting uh for 29.923 acre located at 901 Shakertown Road in Danville from agricultural and single family residential to single family residential R1C that has been forwarded to the city commission without recommendation of the planning and zoning because the planning and zoning commission allowed 60 days to lapse without a decision made in this matter. So we just wanted to make sure that everyone was aware of how that occurred. I do also want to ask at this time for an update related to the comp plan. Mr. Collier, Mr. Nolette, can you give us an update? Sure. Um so status of the comp plan um we our subcommittee is still meeting to work on that and we have we're actively drafting the comp plan. The revisions to the proposed flume have all been made and those are available on the website. So, if the public wants to look today on the

planning and zoning website is the um proposed revisions to the flume after the last public hearing. So, that that would represent what we would propose to bring to the full commission for approval. Um the comp plan itself is being um is being drafted. I would say we're making progress. Sam and I met yesterday with Josh Morgan to go through the quality neighborhood section. Sam's working on the housing section. Um, I would say we're on track at at least at this point to have something in June or July is kind of our target to be able to come to the commission with with a draft for everyone's consideration. And it's been it's been extremely helpful to have the new flume set up on here as a as a reference point so it becomes part of the picture and telling the story which is really what we're doing in the written text is one of those very carefully labored you can go in way too far or way too shallow but that's just the way it is when you're writing some of these text arrangements on there right the housing numbers as Dan knows has tremendous amount of data from the US census and that is a laborious task has to pull out of the database, folks. But we'll get this get to something that flows and makes sense. Uh in broad characteristics, as most people know, Boil County in total didn't grow that great different from 2000 than 2010. And so that's a really interesting starting point on there and perspective on that particular one. So be it gives great indications that uh that we're okay. We're not losing. great for one thing, but we're not growing tremendous

numbers. So, writing the text to go with it, I think we're we found with our group of four that we have on here, if two of us write, the four of us can comment better and come down to a better picture and perspective. It just takes time is what it is. Not a surprise on that. Uh I invite anybody on the commission want to join the group, that's just fine. But otherwise, we'll pl we'll push along, right? We're pushing ahead. Yes. Okay. Sounds very a little easier to have um writing done by one or two people. Very promising. Yeah. Thank you. I understand that there is a comment from the public. So, at this time, do you want to come forward? State your name and your address, please. I'm put in your face. This brings back lots of memories. Bring your microphone. Oh, I surely will. Now, can everybody hear me? Okay. I'm Sarah Ballamp, 875 Shadelland Drive, Danville. I'm speaking today as a member of Smart Growth Bo, but however, a representative of many Danville and Bo County citizens who have been concerned about the general comp plan, but specifically about the property owned by Nukem Oil Company on the north side of town, bounded by Highway 34 and Old Lexington Road. And the very first thing I want to say is how much I appreciate all that you all have the way you've handled these revisions on the comp plan and your willingness to listen and and respond to those. Now I will admit I didn't look at the online version within the last week. Has it changed? I mean okay it the well then I assume that your recent decision involving from the small committee to change that designation for that property that we're concerned with

from village neighborhood to garden neighborhood which ensures residential development no commercial. Did that get changed? That's correct. Oh, thank you. And I don't want to be repetitive because I know I said some of this at the public meeting, but am I am I being on will I be online? I know people like to watch these meetings, believe it or not. Am I still being Yes. Okay. Well, if that's the case, then I'm going to repeat just a few things for the general public. Um the issue of constructing this service station at this location has been a concern for eight years. When it was first proposed at that time, residents in that area opposed it and they had a petition and the plan was denied. I just learned that recently. Um but this continues to be a possibility. We know there are many reasons why there should not be commercial development on this property and I'm just very quickly going to repeat them. The Kentucky Transportation Department requires that the station have access on Old Lexington Road and that is a very uh established neighborhood with three streets involved there. And um so the that the old Lexington Road would have to be widened and those neighborhoods are threatened. They're already two five-star stations in Danville, both located within 12 miles along the bypasses. A big thing is traffic congestion. It would increase because think of all the roads that are just in that small area. Lexington Avenue, Old Lexington Road, Gagan Lane, Keer Lane, Waterworks Road, Highway 34, and Highway

2168. That's a lot of traffic in that small circle. And another thing to think about is our tourism business in Danville that is increasing and that we certainly want to support. And many people who come into Danville for our shopping, our historic areas, our festivals, most many come in from the north side of town. And we want to keep that entrance attractive and not have the lights and other things from a service station. So, that's the reasons why we want this. I'm going to leave with you um some petitions that we've been circulating both online and doortodoor and we have over 300 names already. We probably could get more with more time, but um I want to thank you for your time and we hope that you will continue to support the designation of Garden Neighborhood. Now, I just learned some things when I got here today. Henry told me that you make the final decision on the comp plan. You don't have to have it approved by the governing bodies of board. That's correct. That's correct. Yeah. So, the buck stops with you all and we do appreciate all you're all you're doing and um we'll support you however we can. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. I think Bunny Scotchfield wants to come up for me. Good morning. I'm Bunny

Scotchfield, a resident on Lexington Avenue, and I have a petition here. It says, "We the undersigned wish to express our desire to oppose the Flume designation as village center, which would allow commercial development, including retail, restaurants, offices, and personal surfaces on the property on US Highway 34 known as Lexington Road, which is located east of the save a lot property. There are a number of reasons that this concept is a bad idea. This is opposes the idea of infill taking farmland on the outskirts of our community for commercial development. This would take away business from our downtown business district which uh already challenged by the bypass development. There is presently a large shopping center green leaf nearby as well as a grocery store and gas station that provides all the services that a residential community might need. Examples: restaurant, barber shop, dentist, liquor store, shopping, car repair, doctor's office, all within walking distance from this proposed property. This is presently vacant um in Green Leaf uh SA save a lot. Uh the surrounding neighborhoods, Green Acres, Indian Hills, Williamsburg Village, and

Indian Hills Christian Church would have to contend with noise, lighting, water, pollution management that goes with commercial development. Traffic is already a major problem with frequent accidents around the present development adding to the already overcrowded byway. This is the entry portal for a large number of tourists coming from the east. And the beauty of the present area of 34 with the country club, golf course, homes with large landscape uh property and farmland would be diminished by this commercial development. Uh we have 44 signatures today with 28 that we'll bring to the commission in the next week already completed. Um I'm certain it could get at least 50 to 100 more signatures uh if allowed to do so by the neighborhood to res an opportunity to respond. Um, Scott had a computer glitch this morning and was unable to get the 300 signed signatures um to come up, but I do have some right here. So, I submit this to the You want to give it over to um Mr. Smith and Mr. Smith? Could I see it for a minute first? Thank you. Thank you very much. Yep. Anyone else wish to speak this morning? Madam Chair, if I might just briefly to

the members of the public, we're always grateful for the degree of engagement in this community. It's um a hallmark of a a healthy community. I do want to say that to the extent that we're discussing specific properties going forward, I'm probably going to have to counsel the commission that those kinds of discussions happen upon notice and advertisement just so that there's no problem um with our votes going forward. Thank you, Henry. I was We can talk about that afterwards if need be. Yeah. Thank you, Henry. Thank you for that comment. I do know that these folks did come forward and ask in the planning and zoning office if they would be allowed to speak this morning. So, but your council is very wise. Thank you. And in the context of the revisions to the flume, which we have not approved yet, um so we have in front of us and what you'll see on the website is the revisions that have been made. So to the garden neighborhood discussion that was changed to the discussion about the village center that was re retained as village center in the proposal coming forward. So we'll see where that goes when the full that full um change comes back to the planning commission for approval. Okay. Um, I understand that there is a need to have a closed meeting at this time. So, I am going to ask for a motion that we move into closed meeting to discuss litigation. To discuss litigation. May I have such a motion? I'll make a motion we go into a closed session to discuss litigation. Second. All those in favor, please say yes. Yes. Thank

Go ahead and stand up. Does that allow us to be out of the meeting entirely? As soon as we're back online, we can have a vote to Okay. Okay. Okay. I need a motion to adjourn our meeting of planning and zoning commission. I make a motion to Oh, and now All right. All those in favor now stand up. Thank you.