Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

It would say at the bottom. She say there she has an invite. All she has to do is join. I was just accepting the meeting invite. Good evening. Time to call the order of the plan commission, city of Franklin, Indiana. It's January the 20th, 2026, 6 pm. Uh we'll begin today with a roll call. Rachel Bill Carson here. Michael here. Suzanne here. Johny here. Irene here. Michelle here. Matt Mroy here. We have a Thank you. Also with us we have Joanna Tennel, planning director and Rachel Thompson, recording secretary. Uh we'll do the pledge of allegiance next. Please stand. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Uh next we have an election of officers. We're looking for a

president, a vice president, and secretary for this year. Uh you can propose a slate or individuals for individual positions. Do I have any recommendations? And members do not need to be present to be nominated. So we could keep keep the same slate as last year. You can. Can we do that? I I would make a motion to keep the slate the same as last year. Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. Okay, we'll move to a vote then. Uh, all in favor? I. All opposed. Members are elected. Uh, next we need to appoint a legal counsel for this year. Uh, if any of the members know a good lawyer. Do I have a nomination? I make a motion to keep Len Gray as our legal appointee. Okay. Second. All in favor? I. Approved. Uh, next is the approval of minutes from December 16th, 2025. Uh, do we have any amendments or changes needed? With no changes needed, I make a motion to move the minutes forward from the last meeting of Okay. Do I have a second? I second. All in favor? I I passes. Uh, next we'll be doing a swearing in. If there's anyone in the audience or anyone present tonight who would like to speak before the board either for or against the petition, uh, please stand now and be sworn in. Rachel, would you swear them in? Do you swear or affirm undery that the testimony or statements you

provide will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Okay, Joanna, we need a report of officers and committees, please. Um, yes. So, our last technical review committee meeting was held December 18th. There were two items on the agenda. The first one being uh the PD PUD detailed plan for Innovation Park at Franklin College. Property is located on the north side of Park Avenue, which is also known as Gradsburg Road and west of Umbarger Lane, also known as County Road 450 East. It's approximately 249 acres in size. It's currently zoned RS1 and RT1. That case has been before you with a concept plan. This is the second step of proceeding with the detailed plan and it's anticipated that they will be before the plan commission at February's meeting. The second item on the agenda is the city of Franklin for the sewer billing office. Uh we are proposing to construct a building separate from the DPW wastewater treatment plant on the vacant parcel located just southeast of the um DPW. That address is 800 South State Street. Property has been annexed and reszoned institutional and that has taken effect um as of January 1 and the um project is going out to bid. It's going to be bid at the end of this month. So, we should have a contractor on board by next month. Great. That is all. All right. Thank you. Uh on to old business now. I see PC25-31 and annexation and PC25-30 uh reszoning for Umbberger Lane

annexation and resoning and it's ready to be heard. Um property before you is 130 acres located at the northeast corner of Umbar Lane and County Road 75 South. The request is to annex the entire parcel and then reszone approximately 53 acres which is the wooded area um to agriculture and then reszone the remaining 77 acres which is roughly the tillable acreage uh to be zoned RS3 with commitments. Your packet of information did include those commitments that have been offered by the petitioner. Uh this project has been before the plan commission uh previously and a favorable recommendation for annexation and the resoning with commitments was forwarded to city council. Those were then heard by introduced by um sorry introduced to city council on August 4th of 2025 and the public hearing was held August 18th for annexation fiscal plan and reasonzoning. At that time, the city council did not approve the fiscal plan and the petition was withdrawn from the petitioner. They have refiled an updated annexation and resoning request. The area of the resoning um is exactly the same as it was before and some of the zoning commitments have been updated. In addition, the concept plan has been revised from the previous submitt. Uh we have contracted with Peters Franklin Ltd in order to complete a fiscal plan with the SB1 legislature and how it impacts uh tax revenue. They will be able to do that since they have a better

understanding of how that will impact the city. Um just for information sake, our city attorney is um present kind of uh she's watching the live stream and if there are any questions that has somebody has for her I can send her a message and she will respond um if we can't answer it in turn. Okay. Thank you. the board. Um, the petition is Oh, wait. We were going to go forgot that it was in the fire protection district. So, the area is in the fire protection district. Um, the petitioner has already went through the process of going before the board itself, which they did sign a resolution and adopted that as of April 14th, 2025. um that is still valid and should this proceed forward, they will then take that before the county commissioners at the timing that fits within um the annexation process because we do like that to go to public hearing prior to county commissioners hearing that case to see if it would be removed from the fire protection district. If it's not removed from the fire protection protection district, an annexation does not take effect until the 2nd January 1 following adoption. So, should the city council should the county commissioners not approve that being removed and city council approves the annexation, it would not technically be annexed and part of our jurisdiction until January 1 of 2028. Now it's ready for the board's consideration and action. Okay, thank you. Uh, who speaks for this petition? Okay, come forward, state your

name, and we're ready to hear. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Tony Bagato with Arbor Homes. Address is 9225 Harrison Park Court in Indianapolis. And if you could bear with me, we'll have a quick presentation. Um, I do want to thank obviously staff Joanna's time for working with us previously as well as currently and she's been very helpful in assisting us through this process. As she mentioned, this site was before you previously. We had support of the plan commission. I think through the city council, we heard some comments about um our open space we had was more spread out and not a uniform location and a need for more silverthorn. So when the annexation uh fiscal plan was not approved at uh the first attempt the hearing we withdrew and looked at the site to make some revisions and come back with a plan that we hope is more acceptable uh for the city council as well as the plan commission. Um so we can go to the next first slide. This is the site that you previously reviewed um at the northeast side of 75 and Umbarda road with I65 on our east boundary. Um, as pointed out by staff, there's a 50 over 50 acres of the wooded area that will be part of the annexation. The site plan focuses mostly on the part we're developing because the wooded will stay with the property owner, but the whole area is part of the annexation will come into the city limits. Uh, next one, please. So, the new site plan still proposes the same uh density or I'm sorry, same zoning of the R uh RS3 uh but we've changed the commitments to match the new site plan. Uh so it's most of the plan now shows uh there's 202 homes which previously we had 216. Um they're I'm showing a minimum here of 70 but they're all 77 foot wide by 130 for our Silverthorn homes. Uh we currently show 60% those are the yellow homes on the site plan. Uh now on this plan where previously it was at 49% with a commitment actually written at 45%. Uh so this is 15% more of the Silverthorn

home plans as well as then we added in still the Arbor homes with 81 homes there at 40%. Uh we feel that Arbor homes would be the better fit along the interstate side of the property. Otherwise we would you know consider 100% Silverthorn but in our conversations with staff our concern from sales all along has been that ideal land use would arbor would be more fitting in that area. Um, but with the redesign, the main focus also was in creating a more larger central green area, which which the last plan lacked. And I'll show that briefly. Um, so this new plan comes out at 2.62 gross units per acre. Our previous plan was at 2.8. So again, it was slightly uh more dense. And then if you show the next one, please, Joanna. I have a sidebyside comparison of the two plans. And so the one on the left is the new one we're presenting tonight with the middle open space area uh where we put our amenities and the other one was more spread out open space with some pocket parks. Um and again in that case we were working with staff on trying to intermix the product but from a sales perspective and just further conversations with our sales team and staff it's a challenge to try to sell product when it's intermixed at different sizes. And so with the larger commitment to Silverthorn staff was agreeable to working with the plan this way. It'll still all be one community. Um, and most likely it'll all be advertised to on the sale side as Silverthorn because the Arbor homes will have uh restricted to have higherend features on the exterior similar to the Silverthorn. So, from a buyer standpoint, we're still going to probably call from a product the all Silverthorn although the orange ones are more of the smaller lots at the 60 foot wide. Um, but again, now you see in the middle there we have our amenities with trail and open space area. Um, so the next one we'll show the other one again real quick with the different percentages. Is that possible?

Uh, this plan which was this plan has in the central area playground which we had in the previous one but again it was smaller and more confined. Um we have included a walking path as well as sidewalks and perimeter trails that'll be included and then we have passive passive open space now that contributes towards the site um as well as previously with the pond areas. Uh so this plan increase the open space area and then plan um our yep next we're just going to show our traditional homes that we build arbor that we've building here for 30 years. You know there's 12 different floor plans. Again, working with staff, we have a point system we committed to with this one so that there meet the elevations that staff was willing to accept. Uh we went through each elevation with staff and crossed out ones that they didn't want to see and ones that we thought would work for this the city. So, we created a point system to best best get there. And that's in those 20 commitments. Um we still have the option to do all 12 floor plans, but not necessarily all elevations will be included, but we still believe there's enough diversity with the anti- monotony with all of our homes that we'll still be able to offer. Uh these homes will be able to have options for sun rooms and if the lot's large enough for three-car garages and then the next one is just some more examples of the facades that could be built under Arbor. The next one, so then this is Silverthorn. This is again going to be 60% of the site now with there's 10 floor plan options here. Uh again, single and twotory ranch to twotory plans. Uh same thing here a little bit larger square footages on the base from 1,800 to 3200 square foot compared to 1,600 and I think 3,000 is our largest harbor. And then again has options here that can accommodate the site. Next one. So again just some more character exhibits. Again any home would have to meet the commitments under the point system we committed to. And then in conclusion, you know, staff has just been supportive of the annexation as well as the reszone and we've um discussed this criteria in the staff reports pointed out for the

support findings and we've been agreeable to all the commitments. Again, most of them are the same. There was just a couple revised to reflect the new site plan like like requiring 60% silverthorn um and a few tweaks like that, but other than that, everything else was changed or same. We did not change architecture or any other standards that we we focused on the first time around last year. So with that, I'll be available for any questions. And the entries are at the same exact point as um just a minute. Yeah. Do you want me to answer? Okay. That's ahead. Well, the entries Yeah. will be the same. So, none of the access points changed from the site plan previously. Okay. This time, is there anybody in the audience who would like to speak either for or against the petition before the board? Go ahead, sir. And please state your name and address and then there should be a signin sheet there at the podium. My name is I'm going to do it separately otherwise I try to do at the same time I'll my brain will stop working. My name is Derek Mobly. I live at 5925 West, 125 South in Bartersville. Um I'm here representing my parents who live at 4545 East and 75 South. So directly across from where this would be going in at. Um I'll note there was mentioned previously that there's another uh improvements being made from Franklin College that you guys will hear in the future. Um, and you'll note we're not here upset about that there would be growth or that there would be improvements and those sorts of things. It's that it's good positive growth that's going to be meaningful especially for the residents directly impacted i.e. my parents. Um, back in August I actually stood and presented or or spoke before the council. Um, and during that I mentioned

u what I view as a risk of a bait and switch down the road. And I I know there's commitments from Arbor with regards to the percentage of Silverthorn. Um however, at some point when those houses don't sell, which he mentioned that they feel Arbor Homes, not Silverthorn, is the better product for this space. At some point when those don't sell, will the developer be back in here asking you to change those commitments? That's the bait and switch that I had referred to back in August. And I think that remains there. There's not been a substantial change in what's being offered here. It remains 60% Silverthorn, which is an increase as the gentleman spoke of earlier, but it continues to be this kind of mixed product that eventually carries with it a risk that it's going to become just that product or more than just 40% that product down the road. I know that's something the council specifically spoke to during their comments following testimony of being a concern and I don't think this new proposal changes materially what that concern is. I think that remains. Um so want to point that out to me as a continued concern with that. Um further there's a number of things just in terms of this area in particular that I think need to be noted. I know it was spoken of earlier as far as the egress points or the exit points from the neighborhood. 75 South is country road right there. There's not space there and I know that there would be turn lane improvements and things like that that have been spoken of on Umbar Lane, but I haven't heard on 75 South and I don't know if that's included in the annexation. That's stuff that's beyond me as far as what all goes into that. But without that, that's going to be a major bottleneck point when you have cars that are muting each other. My kids play at my parents house every Friday night. That's a major safety concern for for my children being there. And so obviously would be especially for those who are there all

the time, not just me having children there part of the time. Um further Umbar as probably many of you know or lovers lane as we will forever affectionately call it. Uh it is a type of bypass when there's going to be accidents on 65 which inevitably happen. I mean, suddenly you you don't have to pull up Google Maps when you see the traffic on them or lane to know there's an accident, right? It's it comes flowing. And so, I know there'd be improvements and that would be very necessary because of those moments. Generally speaking, you know, not the most traveled road, but when those happen certainly increases and also just with 31 construction and things like that, folks coming from Ninevea, from Dfalger hitting 65 north, they can pass that way. So, I think that's also remains a concern. Um, beyond that, you know, one thing that was mentioned, um, back at the previous council meeting, um, was some comments that Arbor had made about the city of Franklin when presenting to bring a development to Center Grove and that something along the lines of Silverthorn homes weren't something that Franklin residents would buy. Um, it kind of bothers me. I grew up in Franklin, graduate from Franklin High School. I pastor a church here in Franklin and it kind of bothers me that I guess we were seen a little bit better than 49% of Center Grove but only 60% of Center Grove. I get what they're saying as far as sales and things like that and by the interstate, but if if Arbor wishes to have a development in our community, I I would like to see it be something that's improved beyond what they're offering here. And so again, not opposed to development, not opposed to growth, not opposed to development or growth in this area. I just think it needs to be wise. And I don't think that what they've red redesigned to bring back before you to bring back before the council actually changes materially what they offered previously. So I thank you. All right. The paper and then I'd just like to note that um

collectively anybody speaking in opposition or has questions is granted 20 minutes. We won't include the time that I'm speaking. Um after that the petitioner will have five minutes for rebuttal. At that time um the commission generally shuts or closes the public hearing and then they can ask questions at that point. Okay. Is there anyone else who'd like to speak, please? My name is Michelle Jackson and my family um has developed that area along 75 South, the Martis family. And I reside at 4839 uh west 75 South or East 75 South um there um right where this annexation is is planning for. Um, it's always been a quiet road. It's a dead end street. You know, we have farm animals, we have horses, we have dogs. Um, you know, Maggie Martis has had donkeys all her life and, you know, she's 84 years old and has lived there all this time. And, um, you know, I guess part of our concern is, you know, yes, we're okay for development coming, but I have to agree with Mr. Moy is that I don't think it's good enough. Um again, um it stung a little bit to hear that we Franklin wasn't good enough for the Silverthorn product. Um I don't like the lot sizes. I think we're cramming as million mil as many houses as possible in this

annexation. I think the lot sizes need to be considerably larger with less homes. Um, and in my opinion, that would be, and I'm sorry for saying Franklin's not worthy. Um, you know, it is again, like mentioned, both roads are small. Um, you know, the question in enlarging the road. I know they've mentioned we're going to enlarge the road. Are they going to enlarge their side of the road or are they going to take part of my property when they do this? and and that's just me speaking ignorant. I don't know how that works. Um, you know, of course I don't want to lose any of my frontage road. Um, so that is a concern. Of course, we've addressed the water issue that pours every time the snow melts and it rains, it pours over off of that land onto the south side of 75. Everyone down that road gets flooded and has standing water. I have a pond currently in my horsefield because of the water that runs off. I know they say it's not going to be any worse. Well, I'd like it to be better. I mean, maybe that's asking for too much. Um, but uh, you know, and I'm I'm with Mr. Mobley on bait and switch. You know, that is better in regards to 4060. Again, I don't like the lot sizes at all. I mean, a a baseball diamond size or a pee-wee diamond size to me is is is considerably going to take away from my value of my home. I own five acres. I don't like the idea of a baseball

diamond sized lot and 200 of them um across the street from me. Um, I mean, I think they should be double that size, but you know, that's that's my opinion. Um, I mean, yes, we can complain about farmland leaving and all that, but um I mean, we do need housing, and I do recognize that we do need housing on the east side. I do recognize that. But if it's going to be in my front yard, I want it to be something that I like and don't have to despise every day I drive out my front door. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, anyone else in the audience who'd like to speak? You can you can come back. We still have some time. remember this earlier had joged my memory with regards to property values and so in reszoning this is RS3 for highdensity housing there are numerous studies that show that when highdensity studies go into a place where there's already lower density houses already located that they do bring down the property values. I recognize that Arbor is going to tell you that they don't. I've got a litany of studies that I can share with the commission that show that they do as recent as 2022. And so that being the case, my my perspective and just watching out for my parents, right, someday I'll inherit their property as well, is that if this is going to be reszoned, reszone it all as RS2 rather than this being something that's saying, uh, we're going to trust our commitments and those sorts of things because you're kind of leaving people who have been active in the community, maybe not taxpayers to the city, but active,

valued, upstanding citizens of Franklin for 65 and longer years, you're going to leave them with decreased property values. And I I just that that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. And so I'd really if not that the commission wants my recommendation, but I was going to make a recommendation, it would be that it be all reszoned RS2 rather than RS3. So just wanted to add that. Happy to share those studies as well. Right. Thank you. Anyone else in the audience like to speak? Seeing none, we'll go back to the uh gentleman for a fivem minutee rebuttal. Yes, thank you again. Um I just want to first say if I said it was I I thought the site was ideal for Arbor, that was not my intent. I was just saying along the interstate side, we think that's preferable. We do believe that Silverthornne here can be successful the way we've planned it out. We've worked through our sales teams and our division president. Both myself and the division president have been here twice, several times to meet with Joan and the mayor to discuss this and feel that we can be confident that we can sell this and so this is the plan that we've worked through that we feel is the most you know approachable at this time. So for a bait and switch that's something that's a hypothetical at this point and would be a separate hearing to change these commitments. So, you know, again, right now what we're committing to, we feel confident we can move forward in the future. That would be a separate hearing. That would be another public hearing that the plan commission and city council could say yay or nay to. So, I I feel in some regard that's irrelevant irrelevant to this because that's not what's in front of you tonight. What you're seeing tonight is the plan before you with the 20 commitments shown as I've presented. Um, for the road improvements at this time, you know, this is a reszone, so it's fully conceptual. If the reszone's approved and annexation is approved, there will be another hearing with the primary plat that gets into more of the designing the engineering features. Uh but generally speaking, usually the improvements will do any any kind of uh exo detail lanes are going to be on our property only. Um if there's a city comment about trying to get something across the street, normally we have to

discuss that with the neighbor and only if they're willing and able to sell or provide that right away for that additional land, then that would be the only way it would happen. Unless in the future the city would choose an eminent domain, but I highly find that unlikely in this case, but that's not something that would be taken from her, at least from my experience, as well as um as those details will be worked out again at the plat level because that's not really handled at this time. But I would anticipate a typical XL diesel lane so that you don't have any issues coming in and out of the neighborhood um at least on our side of the road. And if there's a need for road widening, we can do it within our site given the frontage we have along the perimeter. Lastly, the the school comment was an unfortunate incident that was done said before I was here. I researched it to kind of figure out what was going on because it was brought up by a council member. I was unaware of it. Uh looking into the site further and what I know of the history of the site, the site was surrounded by industrial zoning. I don't know why the the other person said that the schools zone the school issue was why they weren't building Silverthorn. In my opinion, as a professional planner that I've been for 25 years, we were not putting so far in there because it was surrounded by industrial and the public works yard for the town of Bartersville was also kind of in the front of the site surrounding the area. And so from a land use perspective, it was not ideal to do Silverthorn because of the industrial zoning. Unfortunately, I can't change the words that that person said at the time, but we feel confident that we can build this plan the way it's presented tonight with the 20 commitments, and that's what we're asking for consideration of. With that, I'm available for again any questions. All right. Thank you. Anyone else from the audience? Last chance. Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing and we'll take questions and comments from the board. So, the the product that you're building currently out on the west side off of Le Ninember Road, what what is that? Is that Arbor or is that Silverthorn? That's Arbor. Yes, that's Arbor. Okay.

And it and it meets all these standards as well. No, those homes don't have these same standards. So, these ones will be higher architectural standards than those ones. Yes, I would believe so. Right, Joanna? Yes. Yeah. And do you anticipate the price point of these homes to be um with the commitments? Arbor is going to be in the high threes to low fours and Silverthorn will be in the mid fours up to even 500,000 we would anticipate. Okay. Thank you. So, I'm sorry. Sorry. In one of your commitments, you do say you do use the word comparable homes to Silver Thoone. Silverthorn. What are those comparable homes organization which which So that's actually um something that we asked them to add because should Arbor um not proceed with the pro project but somebody else then acquires it and it's already been reszoned they obviously wouldn't be offering an arbor or a silverthorn division. So that is put in there as whatever their line would be. It would need to be comparable to the Silverthorn, but they would be required to meet all of the exterior materials and standards as outlined. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions or comments from the board? So, I did sorry I did want to go through um just a quick exercise because I know that there was a number of members of the public um some members of plan commission and city council that had questions on specifically how the point system would apply because we've not had

a point system before. Um so I did want to kind of show you the difference. um in the Arbor line in the city of Franklin, the Bradford has been the most popular um elevate or model that's been provided. So, let me not zoom in. So, hopefully you can see this. These are examples of elevations of the Bradford that would not meet the architectural standards. Um, so for a one-story house, it would have to have four points. Um, you get two points if it's a tutor style, two points if the entire first story is brick and stone. That also includes any recessed entryways. If it has a brick or stone swaincot, that's only one point. or if that first level had um lap siding or vertical siding in the recessed entry then that structure would only get one point for that. Um vertical sighting, horizontal sighting, board and batten sighting, shake sighting all also are one point on the one stories only. If the gable is full brick, you get an additional point for that. And if there is a dormer, there's a point for that. So you can see with uh this one to the right, elevation A on slab, this structure would only have two points because you would get one for the brick WCOT and one for the horizontal sighting. So that would not meet the standard. However, the same house um if you can see this one, this one would meet the standards because you

would have one point for the basically the brick raincot with horizontal siding on that entry. So there's one the horizontal siding is 2. uh this board and batten material is three and then this gable being full brick is four points. So this kind of gives you a comparison. I wish this would zoom in. I don't know why it won't um of what the point system actually results in in the field. So there's a substantial difference of the look of something of this nature versus one of these. Um on the Silverthorn side, the Monroe is their one of their most popular. So on the two stories, uh the only difference between the point system is that if there is a gable that's full brick, they do not get a point for that. Um, and then if they add dormers, they do not get a point for that either. So, for example, in this one to the right, it would only meet two points with one for the brick Wayne Scott, one for the vertical siding. Um, so the two on the left would meet the requirements. On this one at the bottom, you get two points for full brick on the first story and then one point for the horizontal siding and one point for the board and batten. However, the one that's larger here would not meet the requirements because the Wayne Scott only gets you one point. Horizontal sighting is one point and the board and batten is one. So that only gets you three points. So these are kind of examples of

what you can see it being applied and we have more if you are interested in seeing them or if you have any questions. Okay. Thank you. Uh we are ready I think for a staff recommendation. Um staff recommends a favorable recommendation for the annexation and then also recommends sorry a favorable recommendation to reszone the 53 acres to agriculture and a favorable recommendation to reszone the 77 acres to RS3 subject to the commitments outlined in the attached Camry Hills zoning commitments stated 1027. 725. And if you could do each of those by separate votes. Okay. At this time, we're ready for a motion for the annexation. Yes. On the annexation first, please. I make a motion for PC25-31 Umbar Lane annexation to be sent to the city council for approval. Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. We will vote. Uh, Mr. Sponsberg, yes. Suzanne Finley, yes. John Kempky, yes. Irene Nally, yes. Michelle Stringer, yes. Matt Mroy, yes. And the chair votes yes. Reszoning to agriculture. Need a motion for resoning, please. I'll make a motion to reszone PC25-30 um Burger Lane reszoning to agriculture with a favorable recommendation. Yes, with a favorable recommendation sent to the city council.

Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second and we will vote. Michael Spawnberg, yes. Suzanne Finley, yes. John Kempky, yes. Irene Nally, yes. Michelle Stringer, yes. Mroy, yes. And the chair votes yes. Reszone to RS3 with the offered commitments. Do we have a motion on reszone? So, is that still PC 2530? Yes, it is. Okay. Um, I make a recommendation that PC 2530 to reszone RS3 be sent to the city council with our approval with the commitments. Second. Okay. Motion and seconded. We will vote. Michael Spong, yes. Suzanne Finley, yes. John Ky, yes. Irene Nally, yes. Michelle Stringer, yes. Matt Mroy, yes. and chair votes yes. Okay, all are approved. Uh moving on then, do we have any new business? Um just for housekeeping, this these petitions will be forwarded to city council for introduction. Um and that would be at their February 18th meeting, which is a Wednesday. So that was a little out of order from what we normally do because the holiday is on Monday. So that would be at 6 pm in this room. The legal ad for that will be ran in the daily journal. Individual mailings are not required um by Indiana code. And then from the introduction, it would be forwarded for public hearing anticipated on March 2nd.

And then official action March 16th. Okay. Any other business? Uh no other business. All right. It's time for an adjournment if someone would uh have a motion. I make a motion to adjurnn. Second. Okay. Motion and second. All in favor? I. All oppose stay.