Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

In Jesus name we pray. Amen. Amen. This is item C. This is going to be approval of agenda. Approve agenda for September 8th of 2025. I'll move to approve the agenda for September 8, 2025. Second. All in favor? I I approve. Very good. This is item D, citizens comments. At this point, we would allow chair open up the meeting for citizens comments. You're allowed three minutes. Obviously, distinguished gentleman behind us is a mayor of the city. So, Mr. Chair, at this point, you want to open up citizens comments. Very good, Mr. Mayor.

I'm good. Thank you. Appreciate all your service. Welcome. Thank you. We're still open for sponsorships. All right. Mr. Chair, at this point, you're welcome. closest installments. Closest installments.

Very good. I'm going to move on. This is E consent agenda. So, just as a reminder, we had a variance regard trails in which is variance 25-1. We have parking minimums modification, parking requirement removal, preliminary recloud of our trails and third edition. Final recloud regard trails and third edition. This is approved minutes from August 11, 2025 regular planning commission meeting. The joint workshop meeting that will be considered in October. So, they're being written by the city clerk right now. I will make a motion to approve that minute. I'll second. All in favor? I I

Very good. Any opposed? This item F, board of zoning appeals. So this is F1, letter of credit removal and reduction. So as city grows from time to time, it is best practice to review policies and regulations in terms of if any changes should be made to allow it to be more competitive in the market. In having discussions with developers, banks, and other cities, it has come up several times about the policy the city has in place when releasing letters of credit for infrastructure serving developments. Planning Commission with the city council discussed this item at the joint workshop on August 27th. So the planning commission is a policy amendment to article 12 of the city subs regulations. an outline of what we're detailed at the joint workshop is listed below. And if you guys have any questions about that, then feel free to ask me at any time. But I'm just kind of going through kind of a brief uh review of what was discussed. So with city finances and infrastructure that is necessary to serve a development, it is part of the city's policy to require the developer to find a financial guarantee called letter of credit. The letter of credit is fin as a financial pledge from the developer's bank that holds some developers cash in reserve for a specific amount of time required by the city. The amount that is held is 35% of the total cost of improvements and it is held in case of failure by the developer to finish the project. If the developer walks away from a project that has been financed by the city, the city is obligated to make payments for the general obligation bonds used when it is permanently financed until such time as bank takes over the project and assumes the payments. The interim period between the developer failing to pay the special assessments and the bank taking ownership is when the city would draw on that letter of credit for to fulfill our obligations. To release a letter of credit is in the city's policy to require development to have a certificate of occupancy for 50% of the phase locks to release 50% of the letter of credit. To release 100% letter of credit requires 80% certificate of occupancy. The city would like to remove the letter of credit polishing from the submission regulations and add it to the

city code to modify more expeditiously in the future if the need arises such that it only need to go to city council for modifications. The city would also like to reduce the requirements of letter credit to allow a full release at 50% of the lots having a certificate of occupancy instead of 80% to emulate some of our neighboring cities to make us more competitive in the development market. And there would be no pre-release either. It would just be a full 100% at 50. There's a small publication caution of public hearing and ordinance after consideration by city council. Legally, it's approved as the form. It is recommended the planning commission have the plan commission chair open the public hearing to receive comments, close the public hearing and approve the changes to article 12 the subs and regulations as pertains to letters of credit and no release. So without further ado um Mr. Chair of the public hearing Mr. Mayor you have any comments about letters of credit and the release?

50 seats appropriate. 50 seats appropriate close the public hearing close public hearing at this point. planning commission deliberations questions.

There's no way the city could be out any money on this, is there? There's always a possibility city could be out money. Absolutely. There there's always a risk factor in terms of if our liability, you know, ex let's say that there is the bank starts to take over ownership and there's a delay or a process there. There's a very real possibility that we our obligation to pay that debt extends beyond the value of the line of credit. Now that's rare. It's very rare. But that doesn't mean it's impossible. So I don't want anybody come under assumption that if you know this reduces or there's no such thing as any risk possible. There's always potential for risk and you don't know how long it would take for a bank to take ownership of land. So yes,

you know, we don't have any idea what the cost would be either. No, the problem is and this is something that um Commissioner Hayden brought up at the joint workshop uh is that can we come up with a calculation and we're trying to come up with a calculation now. It just depends on the development because 35% of a development you could have a small development like Willow Willow Ridge development which is only 8 acres and you have a bigger development like God of Trails in which is 80 acres. And so that 35% of the improvements could vary dramatically. And then the 50% release could be 100 lots. So you know that could be literally 50 lots of out of 100 have to be released or five. Do you know what I mean? And so there's such a wide range in there. So really, this is just kind of making the city more competitive. In terms of risk, it's low, but not in not

But there's still risk there. There's always going to be risk. Yeah. Yeah. Because we don't know how long it'll take for a bank. Our attorney said a year or two years possibly. Typically, given the amount of cash flow you would have from a letter of credit, it should cover that. But I can't you can't guarantee. I can't look at every development and say if we reduced it now to 50%, you know, would we be able to cash flow back? Anyway, that's it. I think I think it's also worth noting that we had the question was asked have we ever had to use it and and those that were present at the meeting couldn't recall the time. So just just for

Yes. I mean, in my in my time, I haven't obviously you guys have been some of you have been here longer than I haven't. I haven't. I heard maybe that when R that where Rust Creek is now, when Hopper was potentially doing the second phase that maybe that developer um couldn't finish it and maybe we had to roll those letter credits, but I can't substantiate that. So, but I just want to make that aware. Is is there any intent to make this retroactive for the developers that currently have

Yeah. So, it would be retroactive immediately because we in fact I emailed the bank today and said, "Hey," they said, "We're going to renew this letter of credit. Um, do you want to reduce it? Do you want to keep it as is? What do you want to do?" And I said, "Just hold on to it and we'll see what happens tonight. We'll see what happens with city council on the 15th." If nothing changes, then just renew it at its current rate. If it does pass, then at this point, and this is for Rusty Creek, they're well beyond 50% for a certificate of office to be released. So, yes. So, it' be retroactive. Does this follow like what Maze is doing?

Yes. No, it's a very good question. And so we have we looked at all the peer cities. The one that's the least restrictive is Witchah. They do a full release at 35% and they don't even require certificate of occupancies. You can have framing them and they'll release it. And so that's very relaxed. the probably the most extreme was well I can't remember exactly which one was the most extreme we were probably up there is probably one of the more extreme ones maze I'm trying I can't remember off the top of my head how many cities you know which ones each one was if you look at a previous the previous uh joint workshop agenda you'd see which one each one was but some of them were at 50% full release so we emulated them some were at like I said witch was at the low end Cedric County is at the low end at 35% full release. Um, one city in particular, I think had a 50% full release, but they required 50% better credit. So, they actually asked for more money up front, which is kind of interesting. Um, obviously that there'll be some hurdles that developers have jump over from that one, but yeah. So, in terms about this basically puts us in the middle. We were kind of on the high end. This brings us closer to the middle of the middle, but And most of them only had a single I shouldn't say most handover had a two-step process. Derby had a twostep process like we have currently. Kchai had a twostep. There's there's is a 50% 75%. So very very similar where just a high number.

I'll make a motion to approve the change. I'll second it. All in favor? I I I. Any opposed?

Thank you very much. This will move on to the city council on September 15th and then they'll make a planning decision. F2. This is the oversized infrastructure removal and modification. So as city grows from time to time is best practice to new policies and regulations determine if any changes should be made to allow to be more competitive in the market. Planning commission with the city council to discuss this item at the drawing workshop on August 27th. Titans doing a policy amendment to article 12 study sub regulations outline detail the joint workshop is listed below. So once again conversation developers cost of running infrastructure to a potential development comes up frequently. It comes up quite a bit came up today. The discussions tend to circle around what type of infrastructure is necessary to serve the development compared to what the city would like to see in expectation of future growth. What this looks like is a developer might want a 10-in water line because this is all that is necessary to serve that development versus the city wanting a 12-in water line to serve that development and any other potential developments that may show up in the future. In the past, the city has contributed the cost of certain infrastructure either in whole or in part. Recently, the city adopted a policy in the subdivision regulations on how it would handle the cost participation of oversizing. City staff would like to remove that policy from the subision regulations, placing it under city code and modifying it to change how the city would contribute to cost participation. Excuse me. The participation will be an atlarge funds unless cost savings occur from the low bids and the amount of unspent no proceeds is equal to or to or in excess of the city's contribution. So there's a small publication cost for the city for the public hearing and the ordinance after consideration by the city council. Legally it's approved as the forum. It is recommended the plan commission have the plan commission chair open the public hearing receive comments close the public hearing. Approve the change to article 12 and regulations as it pertains specifically to the cost of oversizing. So uh Mr. Chair at this point open the public hearing.

Open the public hearing. We got any comments on this one? Seeing close the public hearing. Very good. And at this point, we'll allow deliberation, discussion, and feel free to ask questions. I really want to discuss question. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve the um changes article 12 of the subdivision regulations as it pertains to the cost of oversizing. Second.

Give you just want to make sure. All in favor? I

I Any opposed? Very good. Moving right along. So this is item F3. This is the R2 block regulations and lot size modification. So the city has encountered more developments recently wanted to do a mix of single family residential and two family residential. When this happens, it is typically the recommendation of the community development director being myself to reszone the land to an R22 family residential since the zoning classification allows single family and two family under that zoning classification. So a developer says I want to do single family. I also want to do duplexes or twin homes. And what should I do, Mike? What zoning? I go, do R2. Do the whole thing R2 because that's preferable. That way you can deal with one zoning classification. It handles the whole thing instead of having to do peace meal like additional use permits or portion of it being R2, a portion of it being R1, it's preferable for it to be all R2. However, in the event the developer would like to do smaller lots that are less than 50% wide by 100% deep, it triggers a requirement of a variance to minimal lot sizes and bulk regulations. So R2 says that for a duplex you can do 35x 100. And why 35x 100? Cuz originally when we had drafted the R2 and we changed it to allow 35 by 100, that was for lot splits. But then we changed article 10 that says you can basically do any type of lot split you want as long as it's related to twin homes or multif family. that type of thing. So now what we're seeing is that developers are saying we want the duplexes, but we also want single family and we want the single family lots to be smaller. And so this is what came upon Trails in. This is what you saw very recently and this is what you saw for those who were here on August 27th um for John Wetn's development. He's asking for duplexes and single family lots that are smaller.

And so if you go less than 50 by 100 in an R2, you can't do it. I say you can't do that. You have to come to the planning commission. You have to ask for a variance. And so this this has happened once now and it potentially with John Le's making again. And so the idea is that if a developer is proposing this, we allow that under law 2 and we don't have to approve a variance every single time. Discussions about duplexes, modified sepexes come up as well, and it would be possible to change a lot sepex allow duplex to straddle the lot line with a 5-ft separation between one duplex and its neighbor or a single family house to straddle the lot line with a 5ft separation between itself and its neighbor. Since the discussion of mixed land uses has come up several times, city has drafted a modification to R2, which you're looking at today. Two family residential allow smaller lots and setbacks for all acceptable land uses within the R2 classification. This proposed change is being presented tonight and this is kind of what it looks like. Plus review policy amendment article 4 city sub regulations potential to R2 family residential. So what we're saying is that minimum lot area of all pered uses within an R2 shall be 4,000 ft. Minimum lot width is 40 which is interesting because that's a 5ft increase for duplexes but it's a um 10t decrease for single family. Minimum lot depth is 100. That's generally hasn't changed. bulk regulations maximum structure height is 35. I think that actually should be 45. I think we did 45.

It should be 45. That being said, I don't know 45 is, you know, I don't think I see it's 45. I don't think it's 45, but you never know. Minimum front yards 20 ft on all sides of Buddy Street except that on a corner lot of the front yards may be reduced to 15 ft. provided that a driveway to a parking space must maintain at least a 20 foot 20 ft from the front lot line. This is what corner lots. We always see corner lots. So you if we say that 20 ft has to be on the front and you have a corner lot and it's 20 ft on both sides. But we're saying well you know since a corner lot it's kind of rough because everybody else is going to have smaller sideyard. stuff for that corner lot, you can reduce it to 15 and let's just stick your driveway on that side and you'd have to keep it 20 because 20 is at least the minimum for driveway. Minimum side numbers are zero. However, a building must maintain a 5ft separation from its neighboring building unless approved by a variance. Exceptions will be for those buildings that have an approved lot. So, obviously, if you have a duplex, you split down the middle, it's it's a zero lot line. This is saying kind of similar to what you saw about our trails end. You can build a house on the lot line, which is a zero setback because you're right on the lot line. There's no setback there. However, your neighbor has to be at least 5 ft away. And this is the best way I thought of handling that question about minimum setbacks without saying it's a minimum setbacks. If I say 5 foot is the minimum setback, then you're on the lot line. You have to have minimum 5 foot setback. So, if you want to be on the lot line and have a 5 foot here, how do you write that as a setback? where you just simply say that every building within that R2 has to have a 5 foot separation without having to accomplish that fact. So that is kind of the language around it. Exceptions would be for those mills that approve laws. Minimum rear yard is 11.5. I'm emulating Auburn Lakes off of 135th and 54 which had a minimum rear yard of 11.5 to allow 1.5 additional feet on top of a 10ft easement. And a building may occupy all that space not required by the setback. This allows you to build bigger

buildings on a lot to maximize the tax revenue back to the city and allow a developer or or custom home builder to build a house bigger on a smaller lot. This this uh the agenda packet says 15 on the minimum area. Yes. Okay. It should be 11.5 on that one. Okay.

So be asking for 11.5 on that one. Small publication cost of the public hearing and the ordinance after the consideration by city council approved as form. It is recommended the plan commission chair have the plan have planning chair open the public hearing receive comments close public hearing and approve the changes to article 4.105 of subdivision regulations so chair open the public hearing. All right Mr. Mayor, no comments. 15 or 11:5. 11:5. Okay. Close here. Very good. This will be deliberation.

The 115. Is that on the rear yard? Is that from the utility easement from the property line? So that's from property line. From the property line. Yeah. So yeah. What is the the width of a utility ement? 20. So it's 10 on one side, 10 on the other.

Yeah. So typically you'll see a 20 foot utility ement. It's drainage and utility ement. It's pretty typical, but you'll have it straddle your rear lot line. So if any of you guys see, you know, an AT&T person or an IV tent person in your backyard, we don't manage them, but there's an easement back there. So there's a 10ft easement on your neighbor's side and a 10ft easement on your side. And so we're asking for 11.5 so that it captures that easement plus another 1.5 ft to the back of a house or home. Yeah. Whether it be duplex or single family and if they have a 10ft patio back there and they have to come in and dig it up who repairs the patio if they have to tear it up.

It depends on who's tearing up the patio. If the city tears up the patio, then we replace the patio. Yeah, if it's AT&T or somebody else, then they have to replace the patio. If it unless it's in the easement and then but if you have 10t utility thing or 15 or 11.5 ft off the property line, your patio would be a foot and a half wide to stay off the utilities. Correct. And it would need to Yeah. Yeah. So no patios potentially. Permanent structures on these one are not your problem.

Permanent structures are my problem. Technically a patio is not considered a permanent structure. Yeah. What you a building is considered a permanent structure. So you are not allowed to build on the easement. But a patio is not considered a permanent structure. You can dig that up. You can remove a shed there. This is even with the existing lots that we have now. Season St. Andrew Spring Hill. Even with the 20 foot setbacks and the 10 foot easements, people still put flower beds, patios, concrete slabs, sheds, there are easements all over the city. And so most of the time you don't need to get back there. Most of these just stay as is. Most people will bore, especially telecom, they'll just simply bore underneath your lot. They want actually they have to dig it up. We're not really going to get somebody's backyard unless something's leaking severely and then something's going to get done up. If your patio is there, it's going to get done up for sure.

Yeah, but you're still only a foot and a half off the utility. True. That's the back of your home. Yes. Yes. And just as a reminder, this is a minimum. So that doesn't necessarily mean that everyone's going to be straddling 11.5 all the way to the end. Most people push their house closer to the front. And so if you have a 100 foot width of deck on your lot and your house is closer to the front, you're still going to have a lot of space in between your house and stay. That was my No, that's a good point though. That's a good question. I mean, you can't do anything on the back of your home if you build that close.

If your home I mean, remember this, the minimum depth is 100. So, your house would have to be pushed all the way back to the edge of your lot with a big line to hit the back, which would be abnormal. Most people push the house all the way over to the front, straddle in that 20 foot setback and have a big backyard. That's That's And what's the width on the yard? 45 40 40 40. So you're matches our R1. Yeah,

it matches the R1. It allows both of them under the R1 basically similar to R1 where the single family and the two family can have the same setbacks. So this allows those sort of custom developments that are going to be a mix of duplex and single family. These all the questions again comparing to other cities. What are what are you seeing?

This is emulating Auburn legs in Witchah which they I took the 11.5 on the step back and I apologize about the typo on the it is 11.5 so I just want to make that clear. uh 11.5. I'm taking that from Auburn Lakes because they platted Auburn Lakes with an 11.5 to keep 1.5 and have a 10 foot easement and their minimum was it looked like 50 or 45 as a minimum but it's hard to say minimum exactly like the regulation but Auburn Lakes is off 135 and 54 and that allowed for 5T breezeways and that's what they had over there and I think that was also PD so they used to do that as well. I can't say definitively what other cities I haven't looked at all of their sub regulations. So any other questions, comments? All right. I'll make a motion to approve the changes to article 4.105 105 of the subdivision regulations.

Second. All in favor? I I. Any opposed?

Very good. Thank you very much. G, old business, there is none. H, new business, there is none. This is a staff report. So, you may have heard, but on September 2nd, the city council agreed to the annexation of Rachel Brooks Estates and development located off of 167 and central on the northeast corner along with two tracks of land roughly 73 to 77 acres each located off of 167 above the city limits. Land now being in city lines falls under the regulation of the city including the variances, conditional use permits, site plans or reszonings which means that now since it's an act of development, it's under purview of the planning commission. So we have ex extended our city limits further to the north. So this is the annex land here. This is raw land. This is raw land over here. This is 73 acres. This is 77. This is Rachel Brooks estate. You can see it's platted already. They have active developments. There's permits being pulled already in here. So we are now in charge of those permits and so we're collecting the permits and we collecting the permit fees, the electrical permits, plumbing, mechanical, etc. If anybody now, let's say hypothetically somebody in here was like, I want to build a detached garage and I want to build it at 2,000 ft. That's going to trigger a conditional use permit and now they have to come before you guys. So if you guys see people coming from here with conditional use permits for Rachel Brooks, that would be why it's in the corporate city. So how does that work with um like city water city utilities? I mean that that neighborhood already that's maybe fed by water.

Yeah. So we simply don't serve them water. We don't serve them water or sewer. Most of them are going to have septic and they have rural water. And so at some point in the future, if our water lines were to trail up this way on 167 and they were to petition us, which would require 51% of them, because maybe some of them don't want to petition us with water, but since we're so far away, they're not close enough to us to be served by water. Unless they petition us, then we're not going to serve them water. But as a water line, if we drag the water line north as we grew, let's say for the north and they petitioned us 51%, then we would serve the water and we would special assess the properties.

You know, initially what their thoughts are on the I mean this this gets this all comes in as an R1, right? Yes. Do we know do you expect them to stay with R1? 100%. I have no doubt they're going to stay R1. I encourage you guys all to drive through Rachel Brooks Estates. It is 1 to3 acre lots, $800,000 homes. They're going to stay all the most expensive permit I saw pull was $950,000.

It's very nice. Yeah. There's a specific area over here, you can can't really see it, but that's a private drive. It is gated. So, that portion over there, since it's a private drive, um is not being maintained by the city. It'll be maintained by HOA. In terms of road ownership, I had this conversation with the metropolitan area planning department and our attorneys because I had some questions about the legality of linear roads within development, but they just convey they're dedicated to the public just on all the plats like we have. Roads are dedicated to the public. So, since we're now a controlling interest public entity, the roads become ours with the exception of the arterial road which is 167. we would have to work with the county to annex that portion. So, at some point, we'd probably have a legal description drafted. We would take it to the city council to approve it and we would take it to the board of county commissioners to ask for 167.

So, so 167 is counting the roads inside the development R.

Correct. Yeah. So our you will see our snow plows head up 167 and drive around in here and then back out again because we're not going to touch 167 north south that far north. We're only that up to the county. Now the county can force us to annex that technically which was a surprise to me cuz I didn't know that when I was interpreting state law not attorney but I was reading state law. They cited a portion of state law as a justification to force us to annex arterial roads and our attorney agreed with their interpretation. So technically at some point if the county says wait a minute you're touching 167 on up down right here they may say you have to annex 167 at which point we would oblige because we're all by state law but you know at this point I will leave it as is and then we'll have internal discussions of when we want to annex it for the police if they was a teen here at this intersection here at 167 they'd prefer if we had 167 public works probably doesn't prefer prefer that because that's just more road miles from the plow, they're less likely they'll want to do that. Um, so it's just kind of pros and cons, more salt obviously, more salt cost with that, but obviously now with the annexation, we're now immediately starting to capture not only their compensating use tax with online sales, which I immediately notified the Kansas Department of Revenue and say, "Hey, we annexed this. We need a 1% sales tax for all the construction material, those $800 to $900,000 homes. We want that 1% sales tax, but we also get property tax for $900,000 houses, which is nice. So, and immediately too as soon as it's valued as being, you know, there house that we get that property tax. [Music] I got apartments. So, I don't know if you guys saw, but Rock Construction has pulled apartments permits for our apartments that are now under active construction. The apartments are

comprised of four buildings totaling 108 units and are located directly next to the Sandbox restaurant. This is a conceptual drawing that was provided by their architect back in site plan review and approval. So, they're starting with this one, then they're jumping to this one, and this one, this one. So, they're doing the pads first, but this one will be built first, second, third, and fourth. This is the larger one, but total there's 180 units right here. Four. Obviously, it's been raining quite a bit, so it's they'll start and stop and then start and then stop, but that is under active construction. Now, last but not least, oh, excuse me, I3 permits updates. So, to date, the city has issued 71 residential building permits for new construction and nine commercial/industrial new builds. We have collected 124,575 in permit fees for all building permits including remodels and alterations. We have collected 395,000 329,000 in tap fees, 98,000 in sewer equity fees, 90,000 in water equity fees, 24,200 in storm system maintenance fees, valuation added per year. So here's 2019 2020 21 exact. This is a total of of the last couple years. You can see the 2025 we're not done, but we're still doing pretty good all things considered. 2024 was an exceptional year. I don't think we're going to get anywhere near that, but 26,000 we're still beating 2022. We're beating 2020. So that that's going pretty good. So we're actually having a pretty good year considering all the rain and the weather and the slow start, but we're doing pretty well all things considered. And in terms of valuation, so valuation, just to make that clear, you know, somebody subsmit, they say, "Hey, this building permit is worth $350,000 for this new single family house." That's the valuation. So if you sum all that up, that's what we're looking at. And that includes, you know, the valuation of apartments, the valuation of any industrial buildings or commercial buildings, all that summed up together. This is what it looks like. And then, of course, it's converted into taxes. So that's what for property taxes purposes.

2025, like I said, we're doing pretty good. It'll be in 2022. It'll be 2020. Like I said, 2024 was an exceptional year. 2019 was also an exceptional year in terms of taxes because we have a lot of commercial money. commercials appraised at 25% and residentials at 11.5%. So, for example, if you had one year of a million dollars of valuation and another year of a million dollars in valuation and that first year was only residential at 11.5, then you'd have $115,000 and the next year was only commercial at 25%, then you'd have $250,000. So, there's a difference there. And more commercial we have, the more taxes we generated. So that's kind of one reason why you see this kind of up and down, up and down, up and down. Depends a lot on how many commercial building permits are pulled and how many residential building permits are pulled. Okay. Last but not least, new planning commissioner Preston Black is happy to announce Preston Black is join the planning commission. Mr. Black is appointed by the mayor confirmed by the governing body in September 2nd. He will fulfill the term of Chris Williams until the end of 2025, which he will have to be appointed to another three-year term. Preston has lived in daughter since 2006 and serves on mayor's advisory committee as well as on the Lions Club. So congratulations Preston on fulfilling that role.

Thank you. And that is it. I'll move on to item J. Commissioner comments.

Who's replacing Bere when they vacate? RV Kettson is replacing Verier. So Vermeier is going to Park City and RV Kettleen out of Iowa is replacing Verier and they're doing fifth wheelers, horse trailers, campers, that type of thing. They're out of Iowa and they have they have bigger facilities, I guess I would say, with the land and whatnot, but it's a perfect spot for them being on 54 and having all the land cuz Ramir actually owns not just those sections up front, but those back sections as well. And so it's perfect for them to put their inventory on this back section. It'll be fifth wheelers, campers, horse trailers, that type of thing. That's what RV Cal is about. Verier should be moving most of the inventory out the end of this month until the end of the year at which point you would then start seeing changes to building in terms of the signage and everything else as they convert to RV C. Mexican restaurant.

Do Migos had everything. Mexico. Yeah. Do Amigos had everything approved. Um, permits have been pulled. I think they ran into a stag with metropolitan area building and construction department where they wanted another AC unit from what I understand. And so not sure what happened there particularly and but I haven't followed up on the details of that. That's the last I heard is that they do that process is still on pace that way.

Casey's is going incredibly fast. I don't actually think they sleep over there. Um yeah, it's incredibly fast. I think they all want to be done before Thanksgiving starts is kind of my guess. But I've never seen them go so fast and they're just I mean they're incredibly respectful too and very professional. So I'm, you know, kudos to Zernco for all that they're doing, but they're really building their cases as fast as they possibly can. So that goes back to that assessment valuation. It's a million dollar building. So that's, you know,% $50,000 additional, not to mention all the breakfast pizza, the local sales tax that comes with that. So pretty excited. Pretty excited about that. All right. So, just to be clear, October 14th, which is a Tuesday, at 7:00 p.m. will be the next plantation meeting because we have Columbus Day, which is the 13th, on a Monday, and the city hall's closed. So, if you guys think that you're not going to be there, just let me know. Um, if Tuesday doesn't work for anybody, just let me know and then I'll just obviously follow up on Friday. And in the case in the event that if hypothetically we don't have a quorum and we only have like three show up cuz I need at least four for planned mission. Let's say hypothetically just two or three or even one shows up, you would simply say we close, we don't have a quorum and fill out the business. But I'll try to get a form and see who can make it Tuesday night at 7. So this happens anytime you have a holiday or see your parents holiday just the next day. I don't know if that's

I don't know if that's life. Yeah,

right. No, I make a motion we have a second. All in favor? I