Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I call this meeting to order. This is the May 28th, 2026 meeting of the Franklin Municipal Planning Commission. And we'll begin with roll call. Commissioner Harrison. Present. Commissioner Allen.

Present.

Commissioner Franks.

Present.

Commissioner Lindsay is absent. Commissioner Orr is present. Commissioner Mann. Here. Commissioner McLemore.

Present.

Commissioner Williamson.

Present.

Alderman Peterson.

Here.

All right. We're all here and ready. So now's the time for citizen comments. This is open for citizens to be heard on any issue or concern. If you'd like to speak on a specific item on the agenda, please wait until that item comes up. For all other citizens, we'd like to hear from you now. Fill out the speaker card, hand it to staff, come up to the microphone, state your name and address, and limit your comment to two minutes. Do we have anybody? I see none. All right. Go to the approval of the minutes. Item number one, consideration of approval of the April 23rd, 2026 FNPC minutes. Do we have a motion?

Move approval.

Second. Okay.

It's too fast. Too fast. I can't get your microphone on.

We have a proper motion and a second. And does anybody like to pull any of these items off? Or any edits to the minutes? No? All right. End with roll call voting. Commissioner Harrison? Aye. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks? Aye. Commissioner Lindsay is absent. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson?

Aye.

Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

Ayes have it. The April minutes are approved. Item number... Two, consideration of approval of items three through six and eight through 12 on the consent agenda. Have a motion? Move for approval. All right. Second?

Second.

Have a proper motion and second. Does anybody like to pull an item off the consent? I see none. We'll vote. Commissioner Harrison? Aye. Commissioner Allen?

Aye.

Commissioner Franks? Aye. Commissioner Lindsay is absent. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson?

Aye.

And Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

Ayes have it. The consent agenda is approved. Item number seven, consideration of resolution 2026-36, the resolution approving revised development plan for Tugaway PUD subdivision with two modifications of development standards sidewalks for the property located west of Lewisburg Pike and south of Bowman Road located at 1190 Lewisburg Pike. Staff?

Thank you. The applicant has submitted a revision to the Tuckaway PUD subdivision that includes two modifications of standard requests for required sidewalk connections. The previous revision to the development plan permitted the development of a church campus on the property with the existing house to remain used as administrative office space. The PUD also has one approved MOS for the removal of the required cross-access connection to the southern parcel. The plan remains in line with the recommendations of Envision Franklin. No new square footage or additional entitlements are being requested with this provision. There is a reference in the plans to a MOS number two for deferral of Northern Cross access connection until phase three of the plan. Staff has determined that this MOS is no longer needed and the applicant has requested to remove that MOS from consideration. So as such, in my presentation and in the accompanying resolution, MOS number three in the plans is referred to as MOS number two, and MOS number four in the plans is referred to as MOS number three. Everyone got that? Something like that. We can review as needed. So for MOS number two, The applicant is requesting to allow the required pedestrian connection to the front door only and to permit alternate materials such as mulch for the internal sidewalk and that sidewalk construction be deferred until the installation of the sidewalk along Lewisburg Pike. The zoning ordinance requires a sidewalk connection to be provided between each building's main entrance and the nearest street or internal drive. Sidewalks are defined as a paved path for pedestrians, so any alternate material such as mulch or gravel would not be considered a sidewalk. Installation of a mulch path is not an acceptable substitute for a sidewalk, either for ADA accessibility or for compliance with the City of Franklin development standards. Any deferral for construction of a required sidewalk should be understood to be for a sidewalk as defined by the zoning ordinance. In the event a sidewalk requirement is waived, a mulch path may be installed in its place but cannot be considered as a sidewalk for the purpose of national code compliance or city development standards. There's also not a regulatory system or mechanism in place for deferral of construction of the sidewalk except through the next modification of standards. So therefore staff recommends disapproval of MOS number two. MOS number three is the applicant is requesting to defer construction of the required sidewalk along Lewisburg Pike until such time that Lewisburg Pike is widened for a period of 10 years or for a period of 10 years, whichever occurs first. Sidewalk construction along the frontage of developing properties is intended to be met by the developing property owner at the time of their development, except in limited circumstances where fees in lieu may be applied. The zoning ordinance states that fees in lieu of a required public sidewalk may occur only when the timing of the installation of the sidewalk would result in its removal shortly thereafter due to a fully funded street widening, streetscape project, or other capital improvement project. Lewisburg Pike along the frontage of this property does not meet this criteria. Additionally, it is not clear when the 10-year clock is intended to start or by what mechanism the city would compel the developer to submit plans for and commence construction of the required sidewalk prior to the suggested deadline. In the event that the MOS number 3 is approved, construction of the sidewalk along Lewisburg Pike frontage will require the approval of a revised site plan prior to construction. Staff recommends disapproval of MOS number 3. And because staff is recommending disapproval of both MOS requests as written, we are recommending disapproval of the overall development plan revision. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you. All right.

Thank you. Anybody from the public like to comment on this item? Seeing none, have an applicant.

Hello, my name is Greg Gamble. I'm representing Fellowship Bible Church, and I have an applicant presentation. Joey, do I know what I'm doing here?

No. Okay.

Thank you all for giving us this opportunity tonight. Modification of standards number one was approved with the original development plan and it removed a cross connection requirement here to the south that would eventually connect to the neighborhood. That was really at our neighbor's request, and that was granted by the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. Modification of Standards 2 has been removed, and Modification of Standards 3 has been renamed. I'm going to come back to the Modification of Standards 2 on the next slide, but for Modification of Standards 3, this is for delaying the construction of the sidewalk on Lewisburg Pike until Lewisburg Pike is improved or a period of 10 years. Love to hear you discuss and vote on this. Staff is concerned about a mechanism by which this would be enforced, and it was recommended by Jimmy Wiseman, and Amy and I still need to have a conversation with him, but recommended by him today that the Planning Commission could make a condition of approval that this go to BOMA with a development agreement. and that a development agreement would be more of a tool by which the City of Franklin could make sure that, one, a date is set as to when that sidewalk would have to be installed, what does 10 years mean, and would give them, I guess, more enforcement. We're certainly open to that. My client's open to that. If a development agreement can be tied to this modification of standards, that would be great. Regarding modification of standards number two, in this request, we have a requirement to construct a sidewalk alongside this entrance drive that would tie back to the sidewalk that would be constructed when Lewisburg Pike is built someday. The Comment has been made several times about ADA accessibility. This sidewalk connecting from the church campus out to Lewisburg Pike is not required to be ADA accessible. ADA accessibility must occur from the ADA parking spaces to the front door. To the front door. If you drive through a lot of the neighborhoods in Franklin where we have sidewalks along the street, if a street is 10% slope, the sidewalk's gonna be 10% slope. Anything greater than 5% slope is required to be a ramp if it's ADA accessible. So you can imagine on this seven and 8% drive that goes to the church's campus, how many 30 foot ramp sections and landings we would have to have in order to make this ADA accessible sidewalk to get from Lewisburg Pike back to the church. The church on its own said we want to be behind the tree line. We want to be behind the existing house. We want to use the existing house for our church offices. And that's because they want the campus to feel like a retreat. They don't want it to feel like it's the Grand Poupon on top of the hill. It's pushed off of Lewisburg Pike. It's back off of Lewisburg Pike. So for the church to have not just a mulch trail along the road, but other places where there could be mulch trails to create this park-like environment, that's their goal. That's what they're trying to achieve. If they built a concrete sidewalk today, it doesn't connect to anything on Lewisburg Pike. Now, I know that there would be one one day and we've acknowledged that through this modification of standards. And we're not trying to get out of creating pedestrian connectivity. We're not trying to get out of creating ADA accessibility from the parking spaces to the doors that are around this campus. We've highlighted those here in blue. These are the accessible... These are the accessible routes that are shown here in blue around the building. We can accommodate that, and we know that we can accommodate that, but the sidewalk to Lewisburg Pike is not needed to be that connection. Have I left anything out? Happy to answer any questions that you may have. We'll be available.

This is not working. What's the distance of that sidewalk? 1,500 feet. 1,500 linear feet.

Let's get a motion that we can discuss. Sure.

Oh, I'm sorry. All right.

Do you have a motion on this project?

I will now.

Anyone? I have a motion to approve. To the Board of Mayor Alderman.

To the Board of Mayor Alderman. I recommend favorable approval to the Board of Mayor Alderman.

All right.

I'll second.

All right. Have a proper motion. The second will move on to the modification of standards. And then come back to the main motion. So MOS number two on our list is request to allow required pedestrian connection to the front door only. Permit alternate materials such as mulch for the internal sidewalk. Sidewalk construction to be deferred until the installation of the sidewalk along Lewisburg Pike. And that would be during that roadway improvement project.

If I might, the whole discussion is, this motion is MOS 2 and 3 though, right? That's all. Am I not correct?

You still have to make a recommendation for the development plan revision.

Okay.

It is the resolution. The MOSs are just a component of it.

Okay.

But you're correct. Nothing else about the plan is changing except for these two MOSs. That's what I'm saying.

That's all that's changing. Because if I'm reading correctly, staff is recommending that this entire Because the entire thing before us is only MOS 2 and 3. Am I not correct? Okay.

Yes. Because we've recommended disapproval of the two MOSs, and there's nothing about the plan that changes otherwise. That's why we've recommended disapproval of the entire plan.

So that's what I'm saying, that's it.

Because if the whole, I will say, if the whole development plan revision ends up getting disapproved by the Board of Mayor and Alderman, it does just result back to the previous one.

That's what I'm saying, because it's like we're getting ready to take something By what you were saying to me, it seemed like we were considering something in addition, but that's all we're considering. I just want to make sure that we're correct on that. Okay. But the two roll back up into the hole. into the whole, which is, so we're not considering anything separate is what I'm saying, because they already have an approved plan. They've just come before us with two things tonight. Right, so it's not gonna stop what's going on. We're just considering, okay. So I guess what I was, what I wanted to point out is we approved this plan already, okay? And it had modifications of standards, which we went through all of those. And within this plan, it said that they were gonna have sidewalks. And sidewalks are, as defined, paved paths for pedestrians. And that's modification of standard number two. And there's going to have connections between these buildings where people will walk on paved paths. And now, to me, it seems like we went through all of this. And this was approved. And they're coming back and say instead of doing paid pass for pedestrians, they're going to do like mulch and all of that. And I understand that it's not required.

Before you get too deep into it, can we get a motion in a second? No, that's for the main. We already have it. No, that's just the main. We've got to do it on the MOS.

I thought the whole thing we were considering was. Okay, never mind.

Same thing as usual. Main motion. Then we're taking each one individually. But we haven't made a motion on MOS number two. Right. Okay.

It's for discussion. Because it says consideration of resolution to approve a revised development plan.

And that main motion has been made for approval first and second.

You haven't voted on the main motion. So there are two things before us. I thought there was only one thing before us. Never mind. Okay.

No, you're fine. Do we have a motion to approve? What was it? A motion to approve.

Recommend to approve. Okay.

Do I have a second on that?

Second.

All right. We have a proper motion and a second, and that is to approve now. Discussion? M.O.S. number two.

Okay, so I'll go back to that. Even though it's not required by law that these connections between buildings be ADA accessible, I think they should be. I think that someone who is in a wheelchair or whatever, I think since we approve sidewalks, that they should be sidewalks, paved paths. And so I'm not going to support MOS number two. I'll just stop then. Geez, I'm confused.

Obviously. I think they should be approved that way.

I think they should be. That's how I'm done.

Chairman, would you mind if I made a comment real quick?

Let's get a little more discussion and then we'll refer back to you.

Well, I have a question that might help also. Can you show me what you're actually what sidewalk you're proposing to not construct right now? And then help me understand this mulch path connection line you have shown on this screen okay all of the

Blue, those are concrete sidewalks connecting the buildings. All the paths from parking to building doors are concrete. What we're talking about is not constructing the concrete sidewalk from this area right here at the front of the existing house out to Lewisburg Pike.

That's what I thought.

And then we're suggesting that we could have a mulch path across the field. And maybe it's circular. Maybe it's a trail. It could go along the road. It could come across Lewisburg Pike. But giving a place for the patrons or the people who are attending the church, give them a place, an outdoor space, kind of like a park, where they'd have a place that they could walk and relax.

I can make one comment to that question.

Sure. The other piece of it is in the back, and this is a comment for you too, Ms. Allen, but is all that is ADA accessible? Every bit of that on the back. We're talking about from Lewisburg Pike where there's not a sidewalk now. all the way to our back buildings, which is 1,500 linear feet. We're just talking about that section, which has not been required to be ADA approved and has a massive slope up the hill and back down. People are not going to be walking that, especially when they're not walking Lewisburg Pike, State Highway, all the traffic, et cetera, et cetera, and there's no sidewalks there. So to your question, that's the concern, is from Lewisburg Pike only all the way to the back buildings, not just to the house in front, Mrs. Cross's house, but all the way back.

So I would, I'm not supportive of MOS request number two, only because there's almost, there's two parts to it. I'm fine with omitting the sidewalk from Lewisburg to the front door, but it says, and also to permit the use of alternative materials such as mulch in lieu of, that's the piece that, I mean, if you want to put that mulch connection, that's fine too, but the way it's written, I can't, I'm not going to support doing mulch in lieu of the paved sidewalk. So I'm not going to support the request number two. I guess if I... I would make an amendment to MOS request number two to approve removing the sidewalk from Lewisburg Pike to the front door, but not making alternative pedestrian materials such as mulch in lieu of paved sidewalk.

Well, the mulch materials would be a temporary sidewalk until the actual concrete sidewalk is built, Lewisburg is built, the last sentence. would be the concrete sidewalk, if I understand this correctly.

You were not talking about that.

It's from the house down to Lewisburg along the access drive. The very last sentence of the MOS number two would be that that construction would be deferred until Lewisburg gets approved. So it will be concrete. Yeah, and I'm fine with just concrete.

You're asking for it to be mulch permanently. No. Okay.

Can we get the applicant back up to explain their intentions here? Because it sounds like the way this is written is a little bit confusing. Tell us what you want to build now. Tell us what you're wanting to build later.

So the zoning ordinance requires, and it's from here, a sidewalk from the back building all along the entrance drive all the way out to Lewisburg Pike. We are proposing that that mulch path not be required to be installed until the Lewisburg Pike is constructed. But it would be mulch instead of... Mulch.

Okay.

Is what we're proposing.

So it is wrong. Which I'm not supportive of.

If I might make a comment on that as well. The reason that the mulch portion came up was because we came up with some ideas on how to do sidewalks and other things. We asked staff and some aldermen, got some feedback individually to say, hey, we'd like for this not to be a requirement in the short term for us to build a sidewalk when there's not one out there. Some of the feedback we got was, well, would you be willing to do a mulch path instead? And we said, well, sure, if that's something that would be helpful. But if you don't want the mulch path, we don't have to do the mulch path. That's something we could choose to do internally as a walking path or whatever.

I guess I'm fine if you do a mulch path, but it's not going to be considered a sidewalk. It's not in lieu of. We're just not going to do the sidewalk.

Right.

And then if you want to do a mulch path, I don't want that confusion to be that we're substituting mulch for concrete.

And that is confusion, too.

No, that's exactly what they're doing.

Staff?

Just to clarify the MOS and then some other things. Please do. So the applicant is asking to utilize alternate materials for the sidewalk and for that sidewalk to be installed once the sidewalk along Lewisburg is installed. Now, just to reiterate, the city does not classify mulch or gravel as a sidewalk. It has to be paved concrete. So to Commissioner Mann's point, even if it were to be recommended to the Board of Aldermen, it would still not meet the city standards and classification or definition of a required sidewalk. Now the applicant is free to do mulch paths and gravel paths just as they wish, but that would not go towards their required sidewalks for internal external connectivity. All right.

Thanks for that. That should clear up confusion, I hope.

Commissioner yes, just a comment because I know there's a couple of things that about sidewalks nadia excessively and if you can put up the slide that shows the blue and the Things like as it was pointed out all those have to be ad a compliance when we look at sidewalks on streets and everything ad compliance on those there's a very specific slope and cross slope and Most sidewalks in the city in Tennessee are never going to be ADA. It's just the slope, it has to be just right on there. So I just want to clarify that even if they did that sidewalk out to the street, likely, even though it might be paved, it's probably not going to be technically ADA accessible from the slopes. um so just want to say that and then i think too on this one you know if they're waiting for lewisburg pike or this 10 years to hit they put a sidewalk in and then they come back and put a sidewalk by definition which will be concrete to there you know we're getting we're getting the sidewalks it's just kind of a time delay and i think you know we're planning commission we have to think long term Long term, we're going to get probably something better if we're waiting for road improvements. Hey, if they don't happen in 10 years, it's going to be built anyway. So I think we're getting what we want. Maybe just the timeline is shifting to hopefully get road improvements. I think that makes sense from a planning point of view. Yeah, would I like it like next year? Yeah, probably. But also, there's not going to be too many people taking strollers or bikes or sending their kids out there when there's not a sidewalk on that road anyways. So that's my viewpoint from it.

So let's revisit what number two is saying again. If we approve that, that means there will not be a sidewalk from Lewisburg paralleling the access drive all the way to the existing house ever.

That's correct.

No, I'm sorry, point of order. If you approve MOS number two, you're approving them to delay the sidewalk installation until a sidewalk on Lewisburg Pike is constructed. There's no timeline on that?

We would also be allowing whatever they build in to not be concrete.

Correct. So if you approve it flat out, you're approving that it not be built until Lewisburg Pike sidewalk is built, and you're allowing existing and alternate pedestrian material such as mulch in lieu of a paved sidewalk. The way it is written. So, Commissioner Allen.

In listening to what everybody's saying, and then with, I was going to call you Szilagyi, I'm sorry, Commissioner Williamson, I'm sorry. Maybe to reach something that's best for maybe everybody, including the church. And compromising. And what you said was right. Getting a sidewalk, because the Lord knows I'd love to have it on my street. It never happened. But if we could tie in maybe, which is a compromise with the church, sounds like they've been willing to make, where we did delay it and send a contract, maybe a proposed contract to the Board of Mayor and Alderman, propose it, that it's delayed for 10 years, whichever comes first, the sidewalk, and have a concrete sidewalk You have them built in tandem, right? Concrete sidewalk from the building to Lewisburg Pike at the same time that they build a sidewalk along Lewisburg Pike, right? I think that would be the best compromise because as you're saying, Chair, if we don't, if we approve what's on the floor now, there would be forever a mulch sidewalk, right?

That's what they were asking for.

Right, right. Yeah. No, they're asking for a mulch forever sidewalk.

No, they're not.

Yeah, they are.

The way the language is written.

That's not what they meant. I'm really sorry. They got it wrong. But if we could maybe send it that way where we have a concrete sidewalk, but they don't build it until they build the one along Lewisburg Pike, I think it would probably be the best.

A little of clarification there. They're not only asking, they're asking to relocate the sidewalk from the front building away from the main drive and do an alternative path to Lewisburg Pike. So it's not only changing materials, it's changing location.

But what I would propose is that we go back to the way we had approved it, forever concrete and But in tandem, in time-wise, with when it's built along Lewisburg Pike, which is a compromise for all of us. Just what I would...

You'll approve the relocation of the path, but it has to be concrete.

Has to be concrete, which I think also would satisfy also the city, too. Right. So it's compromise all the way around for all of us. Just my suggestion. Commissioner Williamson, I'm sorry.

Yes.

I think you illustrated that, yeah, that long-term paved and... Thank you for clarifying, all of you, for what it's actually saying. Just for the reason that, you know, you have a mulch path. You can walk on it. You can't push a lot of wheeled vehicles on that very easily.

My client would agree to getting rid of the word mulch and would agree to delaying the construction of a sidewalk until the time that Lewisburg Pike sidewalk is constructed.

Yes, but it needs to be pulled in.

So right now I have a motion and a second to approve it as it's written. And the motion was made by Commissioner Franks. Is that something you would consider amending or withdraw? Okay.

So it's withdrawn? And she takes her second. It's withdrawn. Is there a motion?

So now...

I would move that modification of standard number two that we amended to have concrete sidewalk constructed With the new location as proposed by the applicant, but to not be constructed until the sidewalk along Lewisburg Pike is constructed.

Well, we already approved the sidewalk on the main boulevard down to Lewisburg Pike. So why would we allow them to move it anywhere else? If we've already got it approved, If it's already been approved to run a sidewalk now, I totally agree it doesn't need to be handicapped accessible. All that's great to do there, but as far as delaying it or as far as adding a mulch path, put a mulch walking trail anywhere you want to out there. If you don't need our approval for that, I wouldn't think.

Okay. Well, let's go back to the motion that you were trying to make.

So, staff, did I say... Staff, did I... Staff, does that motion incorporate what we just talked about?

Would you reread?

I will try to reiterate. I did not write it down, but I will try to reiterate what you said, that you're recommending approval with the following amendments.

Modification number two.

That the material be required to be concrete for the sidewalk. and you are permitting the alternative location as shown on the plan for the sidewalk location, so therefore not along the existing road, but in the area that they've shown there, and that the sidewalk not be required to be installed until such a time that the sidewalk along Lewisburg Pike

Right, because we're going to address that in modification number three. Yes.

So that was the motion. We do not have a second yet.

I'll second that.

Yes. Okay.

Okay. Hold on a second. Okay. We have a motion with amending the language. Would you mind reading that one more time?

Oh, my gosh. I just said it out loud. I didn't write it down.

No, we got it.

You got it? Okay. Okay, got you.

Question. Are you ready for comment? I need a second. You got a second? We got a motion and a second. And we know the language. Yeah. So my discussion is why would you want them to run out in the middle of nowhere a concrete path when all they want to do is add a mulch path? We're already satisfied with them delaying the concrete along the main entrance path. So part of that modification is to allow them to hold off on putting that concrete sidewalk in until Lewisburg Pike's developed. And it really should parallel the driveway. And it parallels the driveway. It does. But to force them to put a concrete path in a site, in an area that's off that hillside versus a mulch path, it's more of a walking trail and it's more temporary to the final.

Would you like to amend your motion to restrict the location of this concrete sidewalk to be parallel to the driveway when Lewisburg is improved?

I'm giving the applicant what they asked for. So that's totally up to them. Commissioner Williamson, I'll get the phone to you. I'm just giving them what they asked for.

We're fine with the concrete path going to the front door of the house. Whenever you have perpendicular parking, you're required to have sidewalks in front of it. But if the requirement were to have that sidewalk from the front of the house out to Lewisburg Pike concrete when Lewisburg Pike is built, we're fine.

Okay, so we're good. But you want it running parallel with the drive.

It can run parallel with the drive. Not with the orange. Not with the orange. We're fine with it. We're fine with it going parallel. Front door of the house to Lewisburg Pike, it can be parallel to the drive. We're fine.

They said it could be okay.

So do you want to amend your motion?

Do you want me to say parallel?

Yes, please.

I mean to be parallel with the draft. And you second. All right.

We have what we think is what we believe is an approved or a proper motion and a second. Let's vote. Commissioner Harrison? Aye. Commissioner Allen? Aye. Commissioner Franks? Aye. Commissioner Lindsay is absent. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williamson?

Aye.

Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right, the ayes have it. MOS number two, as corrected and amended, is approved. Recommended for approval to the Board of Mayor and Audit. Yes. M.O.S. number three, request to defer construction of the required sidewalk along Lewisburg Pike until the time that Lewisburg Pike is widened for a period of, or for a period of ten years, whichever occurs first.

I'll make a motion. Well, we'll have a motion first. I move.

I would like to make a motion to move to recommend approval to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen with the condition that they enter into a performance agreement for the sidewalk. All right.

Development agreement.

Thank you. Second that motion. All right.

Discussion. I think that the applicant said that he had a discussion today, and they were saying something about entering into a contract. They had a specific date because there's a concern about monitoring this or whatever. Did we, or did you just cover that with Joe?

I believe the development agreement.

Okay, that's it. I just wanted to make sure we were. All right, so that's it. All right.

Any other discussion on MOS number three? As corrected, amended. No? All right. Let's vote. And this is a motion to approve for the board and mayor and alderman.

Yes.

Commissioner Harrison. Aye. Commissioner Allen.

Aye.

Commissioner Franks. Aye. Commissioner Lindsay's absent. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann. Yes. Commissioner McLemore.

Aye.

Commissioner Williams.

Aye.

Alderman Peterson.

Yes.

Ayes have it. MOS number three is... voted to approve a recommendation to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen. Let's roll back to the main motion, which is the consideration of these two MOSs to be incorporated into the already approved development plan. Do we have any additional discussion on these? We already have a proper motion and second. All right. Let's vote. Commissioner Harrison. Aye. Commissioner Allen.

Aye.

Commissioner Franks. Aye. Commissioner Lindsay's absent. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann. Yes. Commissioner McLemore.

Aye.

Commissioner Williams.

Aye.

Alderman Peterson.

Yes.

All right. The ayes have it. Item number seven is recommended approval to the Board of Mayor and Alderman with the two modification of standards. Finally. Any other business?

No.

All right. I have a proper motion and adjournment. Let's vote. Commissioner Harrison? Aye. Commissioner Allen? Aye. Commissioner Franks? Aye. Commissioner Lindsay's absent. Commissioner Orr votes aye. Commissioner Mann? Yes. Commissioner McLemore?

Aye.

Commissioner Williams?

Aye.

Alderman Peterson?

Yes.

All right. Adjourned.