Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Heat. Heat. Down. Down. Okay, let's call this meeting. Hazel planning commission order. First item of business is a roll call.

Williams here. True here. Coleman here. Aser here. Wallace. Rinky here. Blood here. You still working on Jimmy or not? He's not here. Okay. I guess if he shows up, let us know. Next item of business is the presentation and approval of minutes to October 23rd, 2025. I move we accept the minutes as sent. [clears throat] Second motion and second to approve ascent. Any no corrections? rely on you for that, Dad.

Any other discussion? No. Question. Williams. Yes. Troop. Yes. Coleman. Abstain. Asia. Hi. [clears throat] Hi. Blood. Hi. No public forum. Uh, yes. I gave you one speaker card. Did you want to speak now or he wanted to speak on that item for Okay. So, I'll make sure we get it for that. On our old business, we have a review of the 2026 capital improvement plan.

Do you guys need a recap of this? Are there any questions for the city manager or any questions that Georgie might be able to answer? Or are you good to make a motion tonight? Made a motion. I'll uh I'll move to recommend the approval of the 2026 capital improvement plan as presented. I'll second the motion and second to approve as presented. [clears throat] Question Williams I troo I Coleman I Asia I Ricky I blood

hi. Under new business, we have an area of influence review or conditional use to allow vehicle storage generally located at the west side of South Grove within 300 3/4 mile north of East 79th Street, specifically 7401 and 7415 South Grove.

Yes, thank you. Brad Etherly with MAPD. We are discussing uh case con 2025-0000152 tonight. For this case, the applicant is requesting a conditional use to allow vehicle storage yard on properties zoned RR, rural residential. It's a 4.65 acre property that is located uh at uh 7401 and 7415 South Grove Street. Uh it is currently developed with a single family residence with several agricultural outbuildings. The applicant is requesting the conditional use in order to store operable vehicles on the site for more than 72 hours. So, the unified zoning code defines a vehicle storage yard as [clears throat] uh keeping uh outside of an enclosed building for more than 72 consecutive hours of one or more motor vehicles, um boats, trailers, or unoccupied recreational vehicles. So, if the vehicles were inoperable, that would be classified as a wrecking salvage yard, which is not allowed in the RR zoning. Uh, or if the vehicles were parked for less than 72 hours uh on site, then it would be classified as commercial parking area, which is not allowed in the RR zoning. So, vehicle storage yards are also subject to supplementary use regulations that are found in the zoning code, and those are listed in the staff report. If approved, the applicant would need to comply with all of those requirements uh and regulations. If you take a look at the site plan, uh it shows that the applicant intends to utilize the back half of the subject site, which is the west western half of the of the site for the storage yard. Um where there's currently pasture for farm animals. Uh the site of the vehicle storage yard is currently accessed by a crushed concrete road or driveway. Screening is required for all

non-residential uses when they are abuing require or residential zoning and this subject site does abut residential zoning on all sides. Um the zoning code does allow for landscaping to replace solid screening at the front set in the front setback or in the street side setback or rear setback. Um in this case, a dense line of mature trees uh surrounds the property and uh the applicant would need to submit a landscape plan to the planning department to see if the existing vegetation would meet the requirements of landscape code. Um the character of the area is agricultural. Properties to the north, south, east, and west are [clears throat] all zoned RR. They're all in unincorporated Sedric County and are in agricultural use. Um property approximately 58 ft northeast of the subject site is zoned RR and developed with a single family residence. As far as case history, the subject site is not platted and because the applicant does not intend to build anything, no platting would be required. In 2012, the MAPC did approve a conditional use for a kennel uh in boarding, breeding, or training. And in 2016, this conditional use was adjusted to increase the number of horses allowed on site from 8 to 14. As far as public services go, it does have access to South Grove Street, which is a gravel county arterial street with open ditches, and the property does use on-site sewage and wellwater. As far as conformance to plans and policies, the requested zone change, I think, conditional use actually is in partial conformance with the community investments plan. The future growth

concept map identifies the area um as uh part of the rural growth area. Um and that's why we're here. It's in the city of Hazville's area of influence. Uh the city of Hazesville's uh land use plan map identifies the site as appropriate for residential uses and even though the requested uses [clears throat] and is commercial in nature uh it will continue to have residential use on the site and the current and proposed commercial uses on site will not require any additional buildings. Um and then the site could also be converted to strictly residential uses in the future. As far as land use compatibility goes, one of the guidelines states that industrial and commercial uses located in rural areas should be separate and distinct from lower intensity uses and should provide appropriate screening and buffering to ensure compatibility among land uses. Again, with the densely lined mature trees that surround the property, we feel that that meets that uh compatibility guideline. Um the request is in conformance with the city of Hazeville's comprehensive plan. The plan states that impacts generated by various land uses such as traffic generation are minimized by the regulation of intensity and the location of a development so that traffic does not congest the street serving a development. The supplementary use regulations uh which include the area limit the vehicle storage yard and compatibility noise standards are designed to mitigate the potential detrimental impacts to nearby properties. So staff does recommend that the uh request be approved subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. And I can tell you that we have not received any public [clears throat] comment from any of the neighbors. And with that I can stand for any questions. the existing conditional uses on that

property, [clears throat] those are still being used in that way. And and you can have multiple conditional uses on the property. So, it is still being used for boarding and training horses. Correct. At a number between 8 and 14. This is an additional use on top of that. Correct. Okay. Any questions? discussion. A motion. I'll [clears throat] move to recommend the approval of the conditional use to allow vehicle storage uh subject to staff conditions 1 through 7.

I'll second motion and second to recommend approval. Question. Williams. I Drew. I Coleman I Asia I Rinky I blood hi. [clears throat] Next item of business is in another area of influence conditional use to allow oil and gas drilling generally located on the south side of 63rd Street between Murdy and Synica. This is south and north of 63rd though right 1600 block of West 63rd Street.

Yes. Once again Brad Etherly with MAPD. Um, we are discussing case con 2025-0000148. And again, for this case, the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit oil and gas drilling on a portion of their property. The applicant owns uh two parcels. One is north of West 63rd Street and the other is south of West 63rd Street. Uh, and so total the amount of acreage equals roughly 73 plus acres. Um the application area is zoned RR rural residential and SF uh 20 single family residential which generally permits [clears throat] uh agricultural activities larger lot residential uses and limited uh set of non-residential uses. However, per the unified zoning code, oil and gas drilling uh is allowed per conditional use in the RR and SF20 districts. If you take a look at the site plan, it shows the proposed well to be placed approximately 918 ft south of the front property line uh and uh south of West 63rd Street south uh and approximately 213 ft west of the east side property line. The east property line does abut property that is owned by the city of Witchah and the south property line abuts the MS Mitch Mitchell floodway. Um a tank battery is proposed to be located on the western portion of the property line to the north of West 63rd Street South as well as a saltwater disposal well um to be located southeast of that tank battery. Um the UZC requires structures to maintain a minimum 85 foot setback from the center line of the section line roads. Any placement of storage tanks would need to adhere to that. The site plan doesn't show any proposed location

of any storage tanks. So if there are any to be placed on site, staff would need a revised site plan showing those on the on the property if it were approved. The zoning code requires solid screening for all uses other than single family or duplex when they're abudding across the street abudding or across the street from residential zoning districts. Uh so in this case the applicant would be required to screen on all sides with a minimum of a 6 to8 foot uh screening fence. [clears throat] However, screening can be installed in the immediate area of the use as opposed to screening the entire 73 acre property. Property to the north is within and owned by the city of Witchaw is zoned SF5 single family and is an agricultural use. Property to the east is partly within and owned by the city of Witchah zoned SF5 and RR and is used as a drainage ditch to the the floodway. Um other property to the east is zoned RR and is developed with a single family dwelling. Property to the south is the floodway. Properties to the west are split between being in the city and unincorporated Cedric County and are zoned RR, SF5 and TF3 and are in agricultural use and uh one single family dwelling. The subject site is unplatted and platting would not be required for the intended use. The site has access to West 63rd Street South. [clears throat] Um if needed or required, water services would be provided by the city of Witchaw and sewer services would be provided on site. As far as plans and policies go, um oil and gas drilling is in partial conformance with community investments plan. The future growth map identifies the area in which the site is located to be appropriate for small city urban

growth area, which is why we're here. And um after reviewing the comprehensive plan to identify the proposed future land use, it shows that it's appropriate for residential. Uh although considering the use is typically a temporary land use and the fairly remote area the request is located within staff feels that the request is appropriate. As far as the South Witchah Hazesville area plan, the required reszoning u or the requested con conditional use is partial conform compliance with the plan. Um it is an older plan so it may be out of date, but it does show that it is um uh appropriate for low density residential development as well. uh and again uh we we feel that the relative remoteness of the area should make the use appropriate. So staff does recommend the approval of the conditional use subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. And again, we've had no public comment on this request. I can stand for any questions. Any questions?

I have a question about the fencing. Solid fencing. Sure. Why would you want solid fencing around a tank that's 15 foot tall or 12 foot tall from a security standpoint and from a gas standpoint? So if I mean sorry if the if you can't see in there and somebody goes in there and messes with those lines and leaks oil all over the ground but you can see them from the road I don't know why you'd want to screen it. And then there's a bunch of articles that I've read that said if you have solid screaming around those tanks that it can collect in the corners if the wind's correct and cause more of an issue with people walking in.

So the zoning code doesn't specify what uses except for non-residential uses. So they don't they don't break it up between, you know, if it's a restaurant, it's okay. If it's oil and gas, it just basically says if it's non-residential abuing residential, it needs to be screened. And it's really for the aesthetics of it. If if this body feels like um uh a uh screening fence is not needed uh for this particular uh case, then you can add that as a as a condition or or uh something like that to to not make that a requirement. and then the the board of county commissioners would take that into consideration.

Got it. Thank you. Any other questions? I I you probably said this and I didn't catch it. How close will the area that um he's referring to that might need screening, how close is that to residential?

Sure. So, it would actually be pretty far away from any residential use. Um, of course it's it's going to be surrounded by residential districts, but if you take a look at the site plan, um, page seven, um, you can see that the the well, uh, itself is is very far south, almost u next to the to the floodway. um the the battery and the saltwater. Um I don't remember what the D stands for, but that uh those two are on the north side closer to the western edge of the property. Um and so uh really we would just be concerned about screening in that immediate vicinity. um you know uh so it would be a pretty good distance from the residential property kind of to the northeast on on the south part but um I mean this is a it looks smaller compared to the property to the north but I think it's uh almost 900 ft from the front property line so it's a good distance.

Okay, thank you. Why why is the tank battery and salt water so far from the well location? That would be a good question for the applicant. Next, if you guys are ready to make I don't do this where I do this part. Any other questions for county staff? Okay. Uh Dick Shrimmer. Hopefully I pronounced that correctly.

Say [clears throat] I'm Dick Shramer. I I formed Bear Petroleum 40 years ago here in Hayesville, Kansas. We had the same mailbox here for 40 years since 1985. So, we're a local company and I've been I've lived in the area since 1979. I showed up tonight more to be here to answer any questions you might have such as this. Uh the well that will be drilled is up against the big ditch just 200 feet north of the big ditch but the tank battery facility and the disposal well will be 1300 ft north of 63rd Street approximately. The reason we are doing that is because the well is existing. The well was drilled in 1984. uh pipe with cemented from from the bottom to the top, three different layers of casing. And so we have proposed to reenter that well and make a disposal well out of that well. So that's why the battery

the one to the north, the one to the north. Yeah. Okay. So that's why they're up there by themselves because that's uh where the disposal will be and it keeps it farther away from the street, not in the middle of farm field. I'm going to estimate closest house might be 1300 feet or more to the east. Nothing to the west. Did you have any response to his question about the fencing?

Yeah, I we had the same question when we did the well on Broadway third 60th and Broadway before the Metropolitan Planning Commission and then again in front of the uh central county commissioners. And the word I used there was silly. I thought it was silly to put a fence in, a six or eight foot fence in, and you've got 12 and 15 foot tall tanks inside the fence. I don't know what you're blocking the view from. Uh, I think we're looking for trouble inside those fences. Um, or at 60th and Broadway, we didn't do we did the fence. I think you've probably all been by there. I think it's a good looking installation. But just in the trees next to it to the south, we had homeless people. Just a few months ago up at 47th and Broadway behind the Pizza Hut, there was a well, submersible pump well that you can't really see it. It pumps below ground, but the tank battery sits back to the south behind the strip mall. And that is plagued with homeless people back there. And it's got a chain link fence locked and surrounded by trees. So that's good cover for them. So, we don't need people inside these fences and we'd like to be see be able to see if they are inside the fences. Plus is you can always drive by and see what's going on in there, not have to stop and unlock a gate to get in to see what's happening.

Does that cover your question? All right. Yeah. Yeah. Any other questions for this gentleman? Any other discussion? Is there a motion? I could uh I'll move that we recommend the approval of the conditional use to permit oil and gas drilling at the 1600 block by 63rd Street South subject to staff conditions 1 through nine with the exception of the fence thing. Um I'd like to see a transparent translucent see-through fence. Did I say that right? Well, I guess my question would be what's the value of a see-through fence? Well, chain link sometimes you can you can see through it.

So, still a fence, but not still still a fence to keep trouble out, but you should be able to see through it as this point. I think the issue that will create is it's it's not screening. So, I don't know how that I we can present it to the board of county commissioners however you want. But if the if the purpose of the fence in the first place is screening and we're taking off the screening of it, then do we need the fence at all? I think is the question. would be screening. Yeah. Yeah. And and if that's the intent, then great. I just want to make sure we understand what we're talking about. Yeah. The intent would be to to secure it, but be able to see through it. Okay.

I'll second. I have a motion in a second. Uh question. Williams. I. True. Hi. Coleman. I Asia. I Ricky. Hi. Blood. Hi. Thanks, sir. Um, I've not seen the other exclusions or what did you call them? Um, yeah, they're just conditions. Conditions, I'm sorry. They're very similar to what was at the other. Okay. They're in the staff report. If you want to just take those, they're at the end of the staff report. So,

let me just glance at them real quick just in case there's a problem. But if it's the same as what we had in the past, I'm sure we're fine. Pretty clean stuff. if you want to keep that. Okay. Thank you. All right. That's all I have. Thank you.

Next item is uh review of a text amendment to zoning regulations changed to article three general regulations and article four zoning districts.

So I've brought back the last part of the general regulations from last month that covers the special use standards and the use chart. The special use standards are some specific regulations for specific uses that used to be listed in the condition section of our use chart. I've now replaced it with actual text and you just refer to this text from the use chart. Um, all of these standards were already in the zoning regulations besides the standards for ATMs, vehicle and equipment sales outdoor and vehicle storage yards. There any questions on the standards? I've got I've got a couple.

Okay. So, on 404E special use standards under two I it says containers shall not exceed a height of 8 foot nor occupy a greater than 800 square foot. It's like at the bottom of the page. Okay. Page 51. What's what's considered a container? Is that a like a ConX container or just like a like a trash container? Because you can't get a ConX under 8 foot. Like one of the big storage containers, you can't get them under 8 foot tall. Okay. They're 8 foot six or 9 foot six. I haven't seen a private recycling collection station in Hazville yet.

Um so I'm not super familiar with what that's referring to. I just know it was already in the zoning regulations. Okay. Um, are the containers you're refer referring to something a commercial recycling classification would use or do you think a private one would use? This is private. Private? Yeah, we might have to look at that then. So, you think the containers can't be that? Well, I don't know what you classifying as a container. If it's like a rolloff container for a trash recycle thing, you know, they wouldn't be over eight foot high.

Since this was previously in the code, I'm wondering if it used to be like the This is going to date me. The telephone ones they used to, you know, the yellow ones they used to have for recycling that they used to have out there. I think this might go back to that. Okay. And so probably the II on the next page where no power driven equipment shall be used to bail crush is the same thing.

That one I think we should keep in there because this is a private one. something you would see like as an accessory used to a different structure. You wouldn't want them to do the crushing at a different location. You'd want them to take the container and move it to the commercial recycling station. Okay. Any other questions?

I probably can answer my own questions here, but So on the 404E still, there's a whole bunch in here like 3B, 3F, 4B, 4B, 4 C, 4 C. Like one of them says hard or all weather surface, one says hard surface, one says hard surface. I mean, is there a reason that's defined in the code itself? All weather surface can be gravel. Um that's a good example for the crushed rock. Hard surface would be asphalt, concrete, something completely solid.

Yeah. So like 3B is construction sales and service. It has to be hard or or all weather. Either one. Correct. But 3F vehicle equipment sales outdoor has to be hard surface only.

This is a new standard that I was proposing. Um there's a lot of staff time that goes into monitoring our outdoor sales yards um because they are all all weather at this point and grass and weeds do grow through them quite often. Um and that is a nuisance and also a zoning violation. So a lot of staff time goes towards enforcing that and if it we require them to do a hard surface that would eliminate staff regulation. Okay. I have a question. Will that go back to businesses that are that have been um operational for a while? Will will they be grandfathered?

They'll be considered legal non-conforming uses. So, yeah, grandfathered. We wouldn't require them to install a hard surface just because we adopt this. But if they were to um redevelop their property and make a significant amount of improvements, I think it's more than 50% of the property value, then we would require them to conform to this hard surface. But they are um the expectation is for them to keep the um foliage off of that property even though Yeah. It's still code violation if they don't more. Yeah. Yeah. Go. That's fine. Sorry.

That's what we're here for. Um, so like on uh 4B, the II, all storage, and this is industrial manufacturing. All storage is screened from view of the public rideway. So, how are you going to screen a semi-trail from the rideway? This was already in the zoning regulations. I know we've already talked about that the oil tanks, they're taller than a fence would be and a lot of stuff you'd put in an outdoor storage yard might be taller than the fence would be. Yeah. But um the current code still requires them to have a solid screen.

I would argue for outdoor stores like that, something's better than nothing. And I don't want to require a 20ft fence either, you know. Yeah. I think it's it's a decent compromise for for what it is. And if it's already existing code, I don't know that it's worth if it says it needs to be screened and say it's a 12 foot tall thing. Um, does the whole 12t have to be screened or do we just have to have six foot screening and call that good? The fence code puts limits on how tall your fence can be depending on your zoning district. Georgie, do you know how tall it can be in industrial? So ind industrial can go up to 10 feet. So 10 foot's the max height of fence can be

and so with a violation in the past they have had to screen higher because of um storage behind it. So we could look at the wording for that um for that 43 V3 and try to figure out a compromise because this is review of course. This isn't set in stone yet, but I I do understand what you're saying, trying to figure out that that middle ground for screening. Yeah. So,

I mean, you know, somebody was nitpicking if you got a 15 foot storage, you got a 10 foot fence limit and it says you have to screen it. Well, do you have to screen the entire 15 or are you limited to the 10 foot? you just park in a semi-trail, you know, you're still going to be over that. And then uh the other one I had was the on 4C I II. It's like one sentence that talks about uh screens the yard from the view of adjacent residential and public rideway. But on the four B, I I and I, I I, it's two sentences. I didn't know if that needed to be rewarded. Does that make sense?

Yeah. I didn't even realize that it was two sentences in one sentence. They both say the same thing. Yeah, they both say the same thing. I thought we want to make them match. Well, actually, C3 probably makes more sense to have it in one line. Well, adequately screens if that's what we're looking for. So, adequately instead of completely screening. We probably need to review that a little bit more. I think you should specify the fence height. Well, I think the reason they didn't because it's in the other other code

because somebody might be an industrial and only have something that needs a sixoot fence. They may not need a 10ft fence and well, you can you can specify a max requirement, you know. So, not to exceed 10 foot or not to exceed what the the fencing limit is. That way, it answers the question, if I got a 15 foot thing, I only have to go 10 foot high with the fence. And I don't have to pick between the two. You can just defer to the Well, I think what she's saying is you don't pick now. The fencing requirement maxes out at 10. That decision is made for you. You can't go to 15 without violating that other requirement. If we want to change that, that's a different thing. But when you say something needs to be screened, if it's a 15 foot thing, screening to me means I can't see it. If I can see the top, you know, five feet of it, well, I can see it.

Yeah. Right. So, I'm going to violate the fencing code or I'm going to violate this code. Which one? Right. But if this code says to the limit of the fencing code, then you're covered. I like that wording. Adequately screen screening to the max height that's allowed in the fence code. Yeah, we need to look at that a little bit. So yeah, we can reward our screen. That way we're not double dipping. Does that cover you? That would cover me. Yeah, because that is a tough one where you may be screening your storage, but you may not want to screen your semi that's parked back there, which that's Yeah. Where I'm getting hung up is what if it's 30 foot tall? Yeah. What if it's one? Do we allow it? Two, do we have to try to screen it because Yeah,

that becomes ridiculous at some point. And but that's where that Yeah. Yeah. where it says adequately at the required fence height. If it's 10 feet, then that is the screening that's required even if it's 30 foot tall. Agreed. Yeah. Okay. And then just the other thing that you've you'd want to please review is the difference between a hard surface and an all- weather surface. Okay. I think that's clearly defined in other parts of the code, but it is clearly defined, but it's it doesn't make much if you look at one thing like so a construction sales and service to a vehicle storage. You're saying consistency inside this, not necessarily the definition of correction.

The consistency might come into play in the actual zoning district. I know you guys haven't seen the zoning regulations for commercial. You've only seen industrial. Um, but the standards for each district might make it more consistent. And the use may play a part too where I mean I'm going to use a car sales. It's going to be on the front road I mean road rightway. It's going to be facing that where the construction sales and services is most likely going to be behind or on the side of the building I guess. So that plays a little bit of part in what you're looking at isn't it? Yeah.

So that is one thing to kind of take in consideration with that but we can look at it more. Yeah. Just with the amount of hard surface that's required for some of it, it makes it unforeseeably doable for a 2acre piece of property or a 3acre piece of property that has to be hard surfaced or water detention pond if you know what I mean. You're put in a Walmart parking lot at that point. Yeah. I mean, who's got that money? Any other questions on the standards? [sighs]

I can't find it now, but I thought there was a reference to striping being required. It was orderly for I thought it was outside vehicle storage, but maybe it's not. It's vehicle storage area. The last one. Yeah. 4C1 outdoor storage shall occur in an orderly manner with clearly delineated parking stalls. And that one has hard service as the only option. Yes. I just want to make sure we weren't trying to make them strike crushed rock or something. If that's the only occurrence of that, then I think it's fine.

My only other thing on this would be the um use type for a micro brewery under MFA isn't allowed by the state. It's only allowed under uh a commercial or business, not under multif family. Oh, that's regulated by state statute. Yeah. Do you know which one? I don't, but I've been told it. I'll have to look that up. Good catch. Yeah, that's a change. Yeah, because we've had Yeah, sorry.

I know. I don't remember talking about state statute last year. Um, but yeah, any questions on the use chart or any recommended changes? to the U chart from what I've proposed. You need any motion for anything? We're still doing review. Okay. So, this will come back. I'm excited about that.

Yes. the whole I think next month we're going to do the last of our zoning districts and then January should be everything in one go. Yeah. Okay. Anything else on item B? No, that's everything. Uh under correspondence we have a memorandum on the golden factors. Um you have review of Can we review the subdivision regulations? Oh, yeah. Sorry. Item D, review of subdivision regulations.

So, this is our annual review of the subdivision regulations. I read through them yesterday. Um, and found some things that we might want to consider changing or amending. Um, spring 2026 is our proposed amendment. Um, that'll be a public hearing. Notice will be in the newspaper and online. Um, but always correcting some grammatical errors and making sure the references in the regulations are actually referencing what we want them to reference. Um, reviewing the exemptions, the definitions. Um, reviewing the approval procedures for final plats for small tracks. That's actually a one-step final plat. We just don't call it that. um and actually making that a onestep final plat because that is the terminology other jurisdictions use and that's the terminology other developers are familiar with. Um for streets we might require some additional street connections to unplanned tracks. This could reduce the strain on just one central collector street in a subdivision and also maybe reducing the required roadway width to our absolute minimums. They're currently quite wide. Um and on our collector streets they provide for off streetet parking that is very rarely used. Um might consider some pedestrian access easements to introduce our pedestrian infrastructure. This goes along with our bike and pedestrian plan. Um, and then there's two to be determined ones which are considering the adoption of an access management policy that's consistent with the South Meridian plan that we reviewed last month. And then also maybe considering requiring some traffic calming measures or complete streets in our new subdivisions.

We still don't have traffic studies are at the discretion of planning coordinator. Is that right? Yes, I believe so. In the review process, Has that been reviewed by other city staff at all? Has what been reviewed? The changes that you're talking about? Um, not yet. Okay. This is just a plan.

Yeah. I was just going to bounce it off. PC staff and make sure the collector thing I think we need to talk about. Yeah, it's still a little ways off. So, well, make sure that fire is good with it, too.

Okay. This is just Yeah, this is just a plan. It's not voting on it or anything. a plan for the spring for what we hope to address. Any other questions on subdivision regulations? Okay, now memorandum on the golden factors.

I thought I'd just include this as a nice refresher from last month. Um, please read it if you haven't already. Um, at the end there's a sample motion. This is slightly different from what's usually in your public hearing scripts and we'll try to put those into the staff reports um and give a couple more options for what those sample motions could be if um you're approving based on staff recommendation or denying against staff recommendation. Any questions? General discussion also I guess here [clears throat] uh off agenda next meeting date

December 11th item nine I move we adjourn I'll second that. Thank you. Thank you D. We were going to be here forever. Motion second to adjurnn. All in favor? I thank you everybody.