Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

That proposed pylon sign does not have to be that height. It could be lower. So that meets everybody's needs. You can see a sign, but it's not as tall. Procedurally, how would the applicant tell us what that would be? That lower pylon sign. They've proposed two different heights, right? So you have the opportunity. So we have an opportunity to suggest in a motion to approve the waiver a height that we choose. Uh yeah, what we're comfortable with.

But how it would take someone to tell us to be able to see that sign from the road how high it has to be. I don't know. And procedurally speaking, I'm not going to, you know, I'm I'm I'm not an expert on this. If if what would the procedure be if we asked the applicant to uh come back with something in between these two not 20 ft tall but not as low I because you can always

you can always uh ask the applicant if they would like a continuence and um actually if you if you're going to be rejecting uh their application entirely then that's a requirement that you give them that option. But uh you always have the option to ask the applicant if they would like to have a continuence and uh they can always bring you back more information when they reopen the hearing at the next meeting. Just for clarity of purposes, we're just we're having a discussion about this. We're not making that decision.

Site visit or you know or a driveby. One of the things that we could ask for uh would be to have uh a better representation of what it would look like from the roadway if we asked if that was my difficulty. Right. And and we have elevations but not in the context of where they sit on the road. Uh how far back they sit.

Right. Right. Uh again the fact for me the fact that the applicant came in with a variant you know when when you consider a variance or a deviation from the prescribed code and the pres prescribed code is 6 feet. Uh so when you consider a variance or to prescribe code you want to make uh variance to be as least uh what's the word that I'm looking for intrusive we want the variance to be as as minimal as possible. So, the fact that the applicant is presenting a variance uh alternative to the 20-oot sign with an eight-foot sign, I believe tells me that they are willing to make a a a more minimal impact on the variance from the prescribed code because you we may we may come out of this and we have to you know, we we this is the way that this is the code that we're stuck with right now. We may decide as developes to develop on its fringes, especially in commercial business type areas, commercial industrial areas, that maybe 6 feet isn't tall enough. But that doesn't that's not a possibility. We're not we're not here to to amend the code in order to accommodate this. We need to consider it under the the uh uh the applicable code as it's written. So again, you know, my opinion is since they are making two alternative proposals in this variance request to choose the one that is the lesser impact is the way to go. That's my opinion. And see, I'm almost willing to

acknowledge that if we're below grade, you know, if this sign is off the road quite a ways and we're below grade, that maybe something in the middle, say 12 feet, 15 ft would be more appropriate. 20 and maybe when I saw it on if I saw a presentation of it and kind of how it looked, I might change my mind. But without knowing that um just based on what I was given to look at, I would say somewhere in the middle makes more sense. The continuence just allow the applicant to answer this question for us. That simple.

Come back and and give us a a better representation of what the visual impact is going to be. An alternative to what we did. Is that simple? Yeah. Okay, I'm good with that.

So, question for for staff. What is the impact if again if we if if and this will be a decision that we make. Someone will move and we will second and we will make we'll make a decision to ask the applicant to continue to a future meeting to present something less than the 20 ft pilot. Is there an impact? Is there an additional application fee, Chase? Is there it would just it would just the only impact would be the time between now and when we considered something different for approval.

Yes. And uh we are still uh well within the 120day time limit specified by law. So um if we if we did a continuence, it would not uh pose a problem from that standpoint. Yeah. So I again procedurally speaking moving forward I believe that it's not appropriate for us right now to ask the applicant if they would consider that. I think we need to vote on that and make and and make the ask official. Is that correct?

I'd say so. Yeah. Yeah. So, what we're discussing is asking the applicant if they would like to continue the hearing and to present more information and better visual uh uh evidence and propose something lower than the pylon sign is presented. Okay. We don't need to reject the 20 foot sign in order to go with that alternative. I don't believe so. Okay. Because with the continuous we can decide on what is presented to us. There will then be three options at least. Mhm.

So staff recommend that the sign code exception application be requested a continuence to present more visual information on a sign that is between 8 and 20 ft. That's your motion. That's my motion. Second. Okay, let's do a roll call vote on this. Commissioner Schulty. Commissioner Kash, yes. Commissioner Grove, yes. Commissioner Swanson, yes.

Commissioner Newell. Okay. So, interestingly, the motion does not pass or fail. Uh, we we have unanimously decided to ask the applicant to continue. And this is something that you'll go through with staff. So basically, uh I'm going to close the public the public hearing is closed, but the request will be to the applicant to continue this application at a future meeting and present us with an alternative that was not part of the application. And I believe we were also concerned with with better examples, either pictures or drawings of what it's actually going to look like from the road. Is that

Yeah. Okay. So, we're not just looking for other alternatives. We want to see as presented what it looks like so we can have a better idea. Okay. So, we have moved and agreed to ask the applicant to continue the hearing at a future planning commission meeting. Specifically, the second Thursday of November. Specifically, the second Thursday of November. I don't have in front of me what what date that would be. That's okay. Uh the 13th. Okay. Believe it's in the agenda.

Oh, yes. Yes, it is. Okay. So, next planning commission will be uh November 13th. So my follow-up question is if the applicant says no to that then what happens then you proceed with the information that you have in front of you back and make a decision based on this application. Thank you. Uh the folks that live in the vicinity that had interest in this will there be another round of notifications?

No. uh their presence here tonight is their notification that the hearing is continued to November. Um so to have gotten notice of that, you had to have shown up to this one. Um doesn't mean that, you know, the neighbors here can't speak to one another and spread the word, but um legally we don't normally send a second notice if it's announced at the hearing itself that it's been continued. No, because the hearing will be reopened at the next session. Our testimony both from the applicant and also from the public. Yes. Or on the phone. Excellent.

Any more ask questions? Yeah. What would have been better? How could I have changed my application such that you could leave? Because in my experience, me going out there and taking photo of where driver's eye would be and then trying to superimpose on that photo some idea as to what sign is a exact science. Um so I guess what do you want? What would we make a decision on um any any of the sites signs what you just described does what you just described because it's better than nothing

that I was even thinking like a video maybe just somehow to get a better perception do you have 3D modeling software you know Yes. Pardon me. It's just it it's procedural. It's procedural. So So I I I I think it's I just want to make sure we're we're feels a little outside the norm. I I think we're fine, sir. I'll just go outside and ask staff. Yeah,

that's okay. Well, I I I just hope that it's clear that we're trying to to take into consideration everybody's concerns. You know, we take these decisions seriously and so the decision has been made to continue. Any questions that you have, you can ask of staff outside of this because we're now we we've closed this hearing and continued it till the next meeting. So, that's that's where we're at. Thank you very much. Yep. And you can always submit testimony in writing if it's a burden to to attend the ne the next meeting. I apologize that we couldn't come to a decision this evening, but that's how we're

think he's talking to public, not you, but you could do that too, I suppose. But we'd like having you here. Anybody? Yes. Yep. Yep. And you can and if you want to put something on the screen, make sure that Chase has it well in advance of the meeting. And just bear in mind that with any presentation you make, you are held to roughly 5 minutes. Okay. Thank you. Move. Moving on. Okay. It's uh Do we want to take a a a fivem minute recess, folks? It's five. No.

Yep. Yep. We've got one more. one more uh one more public hearing. So, we're going to take 5 minutes. We're going to reconvene at 7:40. I appreciate you folks waiting your turn. Was interesting.

use permit number 257, a conditional use for the establishment of a church on Southwest River Drive. So, as before, we'll go through the same process. Uh, this is a public hearing regarding property located at 174 Southwest River Drive. This is an official public hearing before the Dallas Planning Commission and I now declare the public hearing open at 7:40 p.m. As this land use application is subject to proceedings recognized by state law, I read the following statement. Failure to raise an issue with sufficient detail to afford the planning commission and the interested parties an adequate opportunity to respond to each issue precludes appeal to the state land use board of appeals based upon that issue. So, please direct your testimony to the record and the applicable criteria that are found in the staff report or to criteria in the Dallas Development Code you believe applies to the decision. Uh applicable approval criteria are found in the chapters of the Dallas Development Code 4.4.040A conditional use permit approval criteria and 4.2.060A site design review approval criteria. At this time, I'll ask any members of the planning commission if they have a conflict of interest, a site visit, or an exparte contact to declare regarding this conditional use permit. Seeing none, we'll move on. This hearing will be conducted in the following manner. We'll begin with the staff report followed by questions of the staff from planning commissioners. Thereafter, we'll hear from the applicant, including members of the applicant team, for a total of 15 minutes. and this may be followed by questions from planning commissioners. Thereafter, we'll hear from all other interested parties in presenting

testimony on the item before the commission. Each person will be provided five minutes to testify. Uh if there is any testimony, the applicant, if they so choose, uh will be provided with 5 minutes to rebut any testimony that was heard. After we've heard all the testimony, I will close the hearing and ask the commission to deliberate and then ask for a motion in response to the application. In this case, the planning commission's decision is final unless the decision is appealed. So, let's have the staff report, please.

Indeed. Yes. So, uh as mentioned, this is at uh 174 Southwest River Drive. that's over in the southwest part of town um in the vicinity of City Park. You can see uh from the air photo the ball fields there at L Elementary School off to the side. Um this property uh is, as you can see, developed with a uh a building and parking lot. It was uh previously uh occupied by a church uh for a number of years and uh that use discontinued in 2020 or 2021. I forget uh exactly which one off the top of my head. Uh but it has not been a church for a number of years and uh conditional use approvals uh expire after 12 months. So the previous approval for the uh church that used to be there has expired. Um the structure was remodeled into a single family home and uh so now they are remodeling it back into a church. Um and that requires a new conditional use permit which is the subject of this application. uh given that the site uh previously was a church and served as such for a number of years. Um that I think speaks very strongly to the approval criteria that we have uh for conditional uses. Um in that the site is uh of adequate uh size uh and configuration for that proposed use um and that any negative impacts could be mitigated um and the public facilities have adequate capacity to support uh development uh of the of the site. Um, conditional use permits also include

uh uh with um site design review and so the staff report also has language uh regarding the site design review uh criteria. Um and so in this one we notice that uh there are no sidewalks on the uh the streets abudding the property. Um so typically when we have land use applications uh such as this that is the trigger for um those kinds of improvements to be installed. So there is a recommended condition of approval that uh within 12 months of the uh approval by the planning commission uh street improvements be installed abuing the property including curbs and sidewalks or uh alternately that a waiver of monstrance and consent to local improvement district be recorded for the future construction of uh such uh improvements. Um given that uh they don't necessarily connect to other improvements in terms of curbs and sidewalks um the uh construction uh of those on this particular site uh doesn't in and of itself provide additional uh safety and capacity. So it would be eligible for that uh uh waiver of monstrance and future improvement guarantee. uh review of the site itself also found that uh the parking lot uh directly abuts kind of the building and doesn't have the uh necessary uh protection features uh between the building and the uh the parking lot. So another condition of approval is that within 12 months uh raised curbs, bullards, wheel stops or other such design feature um be installed around the the building to uh to protect it from being damaged by vehicles. Um and so that uh essentially is the uh conditions

that the city is is looking for as well as our standard boiler plate. you know, must have the appropriate building permits, uh, change of occupancy, uh, that we have for kind of every application. Um, certainly happy to answer any questions that, uh, commission may have for staff. Otherwise, uh, yeah. Is that the Head Start building? Um, no, the Head Start building is further down on River. Um, this one, uh, was the Evangelical quiet or something.

Um, yeah, the Evangelical Baptist Church uh occupied the site until 2020. Um, it's, uh, been occupied. I don't know how much of this I want to say. Uh, it has been occupied by the Dragonfly Preschool. Um, you may not recall having issued land use approval for that, and that's not because your memory is faulty. Um, suffice it to say, they're not there anymore, so it doesn't matter. Um, but if you've driven by the site recently and seen a sign out front for Dragonfly Preschool, that would be why. Um, so yes.

Is there any uh how the original conditional conditional use for a church at this location? How I know that it expired. When did it start? So that is a good question and I will be honest I did not attempt to research that. Um the uh age of the structure is such it's entirely plausible that the use predates the conditional use permitting process. Um since the building was built uh in the early60s. So, um,

like I'm just wondering why the sidewalks weren't required to be put in at that time, but if it's that old, that's why. Yeah. Like they should have been put in as part of the subdivision back in that era, but it wasn't. So, here we are. Water well under the bridge. Well, under the bridge. Yeah. regarding since you're mentioning sidewalks, it appears from the aerial that there that there are sidewalks on the the street to the south. I guess that is. So, River Drive has um which one's River? The one the north south. Yes.

Um it's very interesting in its sidewalks uh throughout its length. It has them and then doesn't have them in seemingly random order. So there is no continuous sidewalk anywhere on river but there are individual properties and groups of properties that do have them. Um it's very curious south that runs east west is what's that street and is that uh that is about getting improvements that is a VZY street I think. Um yeah and so yeah the uh the the street improvements would be on on both street frontages. Yeah.

Sidewalks on the property immediately to the east. Uh, no. No. Looks like that. It it may from this air photo, but it does not actually have that on the ground. I can pull up the Google Earth imagery if you'd like to see that more directly.

It's really hit and miss at the beginning of river from my memory. Any other questions for staff on the staff report? Okay, we now move on to a hearing from the applicant. So applicant, please step forward. Whoever whoever is the applicant that wants to present on behalf of the applicant, property owner, who wants to represent this application? Excuse me. I've been under medical uh procedures. Uh I've have uh been eye surgery. So if I'm keeping my eyes a little bright light, so take that in consideration. I was blind in March and they were able to restore my sight.

Wow. Congratulations. Yeah.

Um I'm uh Timothy Richards. Uh I'm senior pastor for Victory Life Church. We are currently in Salem, Oregon. uh the building that we are in are new development is being planned by the property owners and so we were searching for another location. We were able to meet with the property owner which is here today and um uh look at the the building and we found out that uh we were needing occupancy permits and uh also taking in consideration of the the zoning for a church. And so we are prepared to occupy and let the um a strong community support for religious and community support systems uh such as caring for the public and um you know food and clothing and things like that as well. But um being in pastorial work and been in ministry for 42 years, uh I'd like to bring our church and establish here in Dallas and uh be able to operate in this facility in which uh is available.

Okay. Anything else you'd like to add? Previous meeting. Awesome. I I like to say it's like we do this every month, but a lot of people don't get the experience of of the public process. So, I appreciate your patience and and your and your application. Commissioners, do we have any uh questions of of the applicant based on their presentation? I know he was supposed to say his address, but it's on his application. I'm not I live in Salem, Oregon, 4140 12th Street Southeast. So, it's on the application. There you go. Sorry about that. Just just making sure we check all the little boxes.

Check all the box. Uh does the applicant have any objection to the staff recommendation for the sidewalk improvements? I think it would be uh actually uh something good for the city as well as entrance into the church. Wanted to ask. Thank you. So you're saying you want to build a sidewalks? Well, I didn't say I want to build one. I'm say that if the city chooses to uh add a sidewalk, it would be appreciative. Objections. Okay. You understand that's not what the condition is in here.

So, if they're requiring the church to pay for a sidewalk in front of the church, then that's something that the property and owner and I would have to address. And I don't know if there's a financial I know there's a financial future obligation for that but yeah well again I was under then when it was presented possibly the city was having any city planning and that they were wanting to to do that cuz I was it needs to be Yeah. Yes. It's entirely possible that there would be a larger scale project at some point in the future. And so that's the benefit of the future improvement guarantee is you get kind of the benefit of the economy of scale doing it as part of a larger project.

Still have to pay for your piece, but the cost would be smaller than if you have to do it yourself because you don't have to design it and you don't have to just build a little piece. Although nonprofits like churches sometimes they're able to come up with uh volunteer labor and materials. So maybe they can get it done cheaper than we can. Who knows? Any rate, that was my question. Thank you very much. Any any other questions of the applicant before we move on in the public hearing?

Hearing none, stand by. Now's an opportunity for anyone that has that's in attendance tonight that would like to address the planning commission on this item. If you'd like to testify on behalf of this application, raise your hand. Seeing none and our person that was on the phone has dropped off unless they're back. Uh so there's no public testimony on this. Uh so there's no uh need for the applicant to rebut any testimony. Do we are there any final comments or questions uh or or comments, I'm sorry, from staff or the city attorney on this application?

Not for me. Staff. Okay. So, I'm going to declare this public hearing closed at 7:55 p.m. So, commissioners, uh, any discussion or deliberation on this conditional use application? Again, to kind of set the table, a church is a permitted use in any zoning district by conditional use. It's been a church in the past and the desire is to have that property to continue to function as a church property. Any deliberations, thoughts, questions, opinions? Okay.

Is that on the record? It's exciting stuff. Yeah. Yeah. I I'll move to approve the conditional use permit with the conditions stated in the staff report. I'll second. Okay, we've got a motion and a second to approve the conditional use as presented with the staff recommendations for the conditions attached to that conditional use. Let's just do it with a voice vote. All those in favor say I.

I oppose the same sign. The motion passes unanimously. An order reflecting the commission's decision night will be mailed to all the applicant and all the participants of record within 10 business days. So, thank you very much. You bet. You bet. Good luck. Good luck. Send no more. Yeah, I don't think you can say that. I just did. I was a Catholic, you know. I can't use Catholic. I get it.

Okay. So, that concludes our public hearings for this evening. So, let's move on. Uh let's move on to agenda item number five. Uh commissioner comments. Uh I want to report to the planning commission that Commissioner Schulty and I had an opportunity to meet with city manager Brian L the week before last. My gosh, I seems like it was the day before yesterday to me, but uh we had a meeting with him regarding uh the opportunity, possibility, and desire for the planning commission to function uh within this the the governance of the city of Dallas at a higher level than simply hearing public hearings for land use decisions. uh to do more outreach, to do more uh more more communityoriented uh things. John made an excellent presentation to Brian. Brian I got was was very amendable to the planning commission that it's well within our right and uh and it's proper for us to operate above and beyond the bare minimal planning commission requirements to hear land use decisions. And I'm gonna hand it over to John for just a synopsis of that meeting and perhaps next steps as to how that will look. So go ahead, John. It's getting late. The way to keep this crisp is there's a draft of a memo uh covering what and let me just go through that real quick and it'll give a flavor and I'm going to paraphrase some of it.

Great.

So the the meeting was to talk about a commissioner training committee. We all know that. and a planning commission best practices committee. So, we've been through that several times. We just wanted to ask the city manager if we did this, would it be something would be of interest to him? And the answer was a resounding yes. But, uh, a couple of preface things. One is to remember that post SB537, our workload is going to go like this. So it creates the opportunity or the space for us to take on some additional responsibilities and that's important an important prefence pref preface to this uh and that nothing changes how we do formal hearings. They're they're off the table. So we talked through um the idea to create those two two committees and basically what Brian said was yes we have every right to do that. it would be very welcoming for us to do that. But he had a suggestion is that rather than forming committees and kind of doing a whole bunch of different things that we focus on one specific thing and do it. Don't talk about it. Don't think about it. Do it. And the one specific thing that he suggested is that we go through the process of formally creating something called the Dallas Committee for Citizen Involvement or CCI. That is required under law. It is required under law in the Dallas Municipal Code. in the statewide planning goal number one. There's an OS 197 something and it's in the comprehensive plan. So, what we're talking about doing is not optional. It's required by law. Did I say that right?

Y that a CCI is required by law. This city has to have it. Signed it to someone. So, we're taking it back from whomever that is. Right. I can't answer your question. And as this is working from memory and I'm sorry if my memory is faulty, but they took the citizen involvement committee away from the planning commission and gave it to somebody else.

Ryan's comment was that by default it belongs here. It doesn't have to be here. It could be an independent body. It could be assigned to the uh city council. But his recommendation is that it come back here. Not necessarily. So the idea would be you walk through this door with one hat on which is a planning commissioner and after this whole meeting hearing is done you take that hat off and put on another one and you go through the same process but that so and it doesn't necessarily have to have the same leadership doesn't have to have the same members. It'd be in the same room. So I think your point is correct. I I think we just lost sight of this and nobody's been doing it.

I don't think that's true. I think there was something. I I'm not sure. I I clearly remember seeing flyers or something about it. I I can tell you this. Our for our city I can tell you.

Okay. I what I know is our city manager said yes, please do this. Okay. Not that it's his to approve because there's a law that says we we have to do this. So the idea behind that pardon me committee would be to formulate a plan for extensive outreach and citizen involvement with respect to land use policy to be the conduit of those citizen needs to the city council which is what I've been arguing for for two and a half years. In my view, it is the other half of our responsibility that we've never done. The half that we've done, we've done exceptionally well. This is the other half. And let me let me just kind of get to the bottom of this because it's getting late here. This is not a trivial undertaking. And my understanding, I've done so much research since we talked all through chat GPTI uh chat GPT. So it's all AIdriven. There are so many uh angles to this considerations to this. The thing we don't want to do is to create a monster and that has happened in other committee other cities around us. What I suggest h next step is for me to have a long conversation with Melissa Erenss who's our representative at DLCD. a long conversation to go through how other cities do this, what is required by law, what flexibilities we have, and to put that in an organized way to present to you so we understand is this thing bigger than a bread box or smaller than a house and what what would we actually do and who would actually do it and and to get to that point of making that presentation is going to take some real homework and I'm happy to do it or

if one or two others want to be with me on that. It's probably just a conference call. I'd be more than happy if there were a couple of volunteers to do that, but Brian warned us not to do that kind of thing where there's the danger of requiring a quorum. So, he said you can have one or two people doing stuff outside of here and reporting back here, but we can't have five of us outside of this room. So I I propose to have a long conversation to come back to you with a project plan that says this what is what this would look like. But if anybody wants to join me, you're very welcome to do so. It would just be at my house on a on a speaker phone. I

city manager Lada also approved uh us inviting Melissa. Yes,

Melissa uh the representative from DLCD to come and uh give a presentation and that would be probably something that would be on the project list to do an orientation or a training. So, uh, Commissioner Schulty is taking this on, and I think and I commend him for it, and I I think it's great. And I I also really am comfortable with Brian Lada's recommendation that we keep it in this room on these nights. We now have we're going to have the bandwidth to handle some of this stuff now that some of these decisions that we've been making for years are no longer going to be in our hands, but they'll be staff administrative decisions. Uh I will participate to as much as I can, but I do evening meetings for just like this for my for my job, not as a volunteer. I think it's kind of funny that I talk about taking off one hat and putting on another. Uh so uh I I'll contribute and participate as much as I can and obviously I'll participate on planning commission meeting evenings. Uh I can't commit to doing too much outside of school. Uh so other than you know if it is possible let me know when you're going to meet with Melissa and see if maybe I can't patch into that discussion too because I'd like to be on it from the front end. But nobody's got to make a decision tonight. We don't need to vote on anything. We don't need to do anything. We're just going to uh we're reporting on our conversation with the city manager. Commissioner Schultzy is going to take the lead on this and we will we will follow enthusiastically. Thank you, John.

Is there any reason why I can't have that conversation with Melissa so that I can report back to you on some of the specific? Absolutely.

Okay. And and just just one more comment if I may to to create a box around this. Uh there could be a lot of involvement with this function. What I want to get out of it personally is going to be this big, not that big. That we don't create a monster here. So I just want that expectation to exist is that we don't we don't create I have one specific thing that I've been looking for for two and a half years that ultimately I'm going to propose to you in detail. I'll tell you right now what it is really really simple that we have a consulting organization that takes the temperature of the people of the city regarding what they want their future to be. basically that is the having the structure in place to do that and the budget to do it is really what I'm looking for to me that would be the meaning the missing piece that we've had and I just want to make sure the budget is there it's done technically and legally and all the rest of that stuff so we don't we don't trip over ourselves but that that is the expect at the end of the day that's what I'd like to see happen for this for so long finally kind of like get it.

Yeah. The surprise to me is that we're required by law to do this. So, all right. Thank you.

Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. And I'll also um I had another point that came out of that meeting with Brian. Uh I express the desire to see better and more interaction between the planning commission and the city council. Uh I I was delighted when we had the opportunity several months ago to uh get together and participate in that joint meeting that's on that mill site redevelopment plan. Uh and I got to tell you I was disappointed by the outcome of that. It seemed it was we checked a box. It was required that the planning commission and the city council have a joint meeting on that particular issue. They did it. We had it. Uh we never got to introduce ourselves. We never said,

you know, I I I

very com but they've got more on their plate than we do. And they're the ones that put themselves out there and put their name on signs in people's yards and get themselves elected. We don't do that. But I would I I think that this is an opportunity to create a better communication and more collaboration with our elected officials between them and us because we do a lot of their heavy lifting for them. And uh I I I think that there ought to be a little bit more of a direct link between us and between them. And I think this is an excellent vehicle for that. the opportunity for a member of this committee to be from the city council and from the economic and community development director. So that

to the point where we've developed a plan I think I think and you can mention this to Melissa. I think that when we come up with some kind of a plan to go forward that we get on the city council agenda and make a presentation to them on on this issue. So that's where we're at. Thank you, John. really appreciate it. Okay, moving on. Staff any Oh, I'm sorry. More commissioner comments. Andy? Yes. Uh, the transportation system plan open house is listed down here. There's a date, but not a time or a location. Do we know those yet?

I would consider that date to be tentative at this point. Um, there's some discussion that we may end up pushing that, but since it was before our next meeting, if there was a time and a place, I wanted to know what it was. I didn't keep an eye out. I didn't notice that. Yeah, the the idea was that it was going to be here. Uh, it would probably be in the uh 4 to 6 kind of time frame. Yeah. But uh it the date that was selected uh isn't necessarily the best for a number of the people involved. So, we may end up pushing that.

So, the the date was the date was firm when the packet went out and then we had an additional meeting where we found out that it wasn't going to work with ODOT and everyone else. So, so you can you send an email out if that of course happy to include everyone here. Okay. Thank you. It's good. Good catch, Andy. That's all I wanted to say. Okay. I don't want to slow it down. Any more any more comments from commissioners before we conclude this evening? staff, anything. Okay, it's the thing that I was gonna say, so it's all good. Okay. And yeah.

All right. So, at that, uh, thank you very much. We're going to adjourn until November. We'll have a continuation of their hearing, whatever's on the list, and I anticipate we'll hear more from John going forward on our