Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

It doesn't. We can put it in one of these portable ones. Maybe

goes. He got it. There we go. I believe we do.

All right. Call the meeting to order at 10 seconds after six o'clock. Um would you please call the role? Thank you, Vice President. Commissioner Newell, Commissioner Schulty here, Commissioner Kash, Commissioner Grow here. Uh, President Swanson, let me know. He wouldn't be here tonight. And we're expecting Commissioner Banford anytime. The quorum's present.

Sounds good. I will entertain um approval of the minutes. Anybody have a chance to look over it? I didn't see anything. Would someone like to make a motion? Once you have a chance, I'll I'll move to uh accept the minutes as written.

Seconded. And there he is. Just in time to vote. Did you have any concerns with the minutes? Okay. And we'll do a voice vote. All in favor say I. I. Opposed. Same sign. None. Minutes are approved. All righty. We will start the first public hearing. This is a public hearing regarding the property at 529 Northwest Crater Lake Drive in Dallas, Oregon. This is an official public hearing before the Dallas Planning Commission. I now declare this public hearing open at 60, we'll call it two. Uh as the application is subject to land use proceedings recognized by state law, I will read the following statement. A failure to raise an issue with sufficient detail to afford the commission and the parties an adequate opportunity to respond to each issue precludes appeal to the state land use board of appeals based on that issue. Please direct all testimony to the record and the applicable criteria listed in listed in the staff report or to criteria in the Dallas Development Code you believe applies to the decision. Applicable approval criteria are found in Dallas Development Code Chapter 4.4.040. This time I will ask if any member of the planning commission has a conflict of interest, site visit or exparte contact to declare Anyone? Seeing no one, we will continue. This hearing will be conducted in the following manner. We will begin with a staff report followed by questions of staff. Thereafter, we will hear from the applicant including members of the applicant team for a total of 15 minutes. This may be followed by questions from the commission. Thereafter, we will hear from all others interested in presenting testimony on

this item before the commission. Each person will be provided five minutes to testify. We will then provide the applicant with five minutes for rebuttal. After we have heard all testimony, I will close the hearing and ask the commission to deliberate and then ask if there is a motion in response to this proposal. In this case, the commission's decision is final unless the decision is appealed. At this time, we'll start with the staff report. May we have the staff report, please? And unless the applicant shows up, we'll probably be going straight through that. Um, please, if you would continue.

Yes. Uh, so, as you mentioned, this is a short-term vacation rental, 529 Northwest Crater Lake Drive. Um, short-term vacation rentals are allowed in all of our residential zones here, but, uh, they do require conditional use permit, and so that is what brings it to you today. Um the Google aerial imagery as you can see is a little bit out of date. So you don't have the picture of the house there. Um but you can see from the drawings that it is uh a single family home uh typical of of that area. [snorts] The uh approval criteria that we have um for conditional uses um talks about the the subject property being uh suitable for the use and uh negative impacts of that use on adjoining properties being able to be mitigated. Um we have uh additional uh special approval criteria for uh specifically for uh short-term vacation rentals. um regarding the provision of off- streetet parking. Uh maximum occupancy of one person per 200 square ft. Um uh big pardon. Uh so yes. So uh and then providing services for uh garbage and solid waste collection and having a designated local representative. Um and so the the written staff report goes into uh some greater level of detail on all of that, but uh the summation of that is that all of those approval criteria um either have been met or can be met through reasonable conditions of approval. So um staff are recommending that uh the uh conditional use permit be

approved uh subject to uh conditions of approval. um specifically that the project uh is completed as shown to the planning commission. Uh the applicant complies with all building and fire code requirements. Uh the applicant register with the city finance office for the collection of transient lodging tax. Uh the maximum number of occupants be limited to nine persons and that a local representative uh be designated to manage the rental. So uh with those conditions uh staff are recommending approval. very much. Um, are am I correct in assuming the applicant has not shown up?

Yes, they said that they had a family emergency be flying out of Portland this evening. So, all right. Um, then we move on to all others interested in presenting testimony on this item before the commission. Does anyone like to say something about this short-term vacation rental? Seeing none, do we have anyone in the queue? We have no callers. Okay,

then we will move on. U no rebuttal. Um so I guess I will close the actually I'm not sure if it's appropriate to ask a question of staff um as part of the staff report at this point. I think that usually happens. Um, I noticed in the uh agenda it only refers to Dallas development code 4.4.040, but in the actual staff report it also refers to site design review approval criteria under 4.3 and special use standards under uh 2.2,

right? And so those are called uh by reference under uh 4.440. So, but by citing the 4.4, all the rest are covered. Okay. Wanted to make sure we hadn't missed anything. All righty. In that case, uh we will move on and close the hearing at 608. Probably one of the fastest hearings we've had in a long time, which is just fine. [laughter]

All right. Okay. Uh let's see. We did that. And does any does the commission have any questions for staff? Oh boy. Okay. Um, we'll now hear from the Wait a minute. How come it says I don't I'm messing up my my thing. It looks like it says to go. Never mind. Okay. All right. Uh, no questions of the applicant. None of that. Nobody else wants to testify. I already did all that and then I closed things. Okay, so everything's fine. Uh, any final comments from staff of the city? Wait a minute. How come it says that I closed the hearing first? All right. I'm sorry. I'm But

we're hopefully Okay. Um, all right. Uh, were there any comments from the city attorney? I did not do that. Okay, sounds good. Uh, we'll now have deliberations. Does anyone have anything to say about this particular item hearing? None. I don't have any. Uh, is there a motion by the commission? The conditional use permit with the conditions stated in the staff report. I'll second.

Moved and seconded. Uh, is there any discussion? Probably not. Uh, we'll now vote on the motion. Motion is to approve the conditional use permit 25-08 with the recommended conditions in the staff report. Uh we'll have a uh voice vote. Uh all in favor say I. I. I.

Opposed? None. All right. The Okay, the motion passes. uh unanimously. An order reflecting the commission's decision tonight will be mailed to the applicant and all participants of record within 10 business days. Oh, I got through that one. So, before we move on to the next one, uh yes, we did uh forget to introduce our our special guest here. So, he has a name tag. I know he even has a name tag. Go ahead and introduce yourself.

I am Daniel Mestus. I am a member of the Youth Advisory Council and it's a pleasure to be here. I apologize most profusely. I'm glad you remembered to do that. We even talked about it. Okay. So, one down, one to go. Alrighty. This public hearing we're going to start. This public hearing is regarding the property at oh boy 1985 Sky's the limit way. Uh this is for var variation var v what is it

variance thank you I somehow I got stuck on that word 25-05 um and SGN2501 fuel station sign permit exception uh this is a continuence from last month's meeting I will still get to read this wonderful dialogue public hearing is regarding the property at just said that This is an official public hearing before the Dallas Planning Commission, I now declare this public hearing open at 6:12 p.m. As the application is subject to land use proceedings recognized by state law, I will read the following statement. Failure to raise an issue with sufficient detail to afford the commission and the parties an adequate opportunity to respond to each issue precludes appeal to the state land use board of appeals based on that issue. Please direct all testimony to the record and the applicable criteria listed in the staff report or to criteria in the Dallas Development Code you believe applies to the decision. Applicable approval criteria are found in Dallas Development Code Chapter 3.6.120. At this time I will ask if any member of the planning commission has a conflict of interest site visit or exparte contact to declare Seeing none, uh this hearing will be conducted in the following manner. We will begin with a staff report followed by questions of staff. Thereafter, we will hear from the applicant including members of the applicant team for a total of 15 minutes. This may be followed by questions from the commission. Thereafter, we will hear from all others interested in presenting testimony on this item before the commission. Each person will be provided five minutes to testify. We will then provide the applicant with 5 minutes for rebuttal. After we have heard all testimony, I will close the hearing and ask the commission to

deliberate and then ask if there is a motion in response to this proposal. In this case, the commission's decision is final unless the decision is appealed. At this time, we'll start with the staff report. May we have the staff report, please?

Yes. Uh so the printed staff report that you have in front of you uh is the same uh staff report that we had from last month. Uh so there are no changes to that. Um staff were uh recommending that the sign code exception be approved. Um finding that uh the request was necessary to prevent a hardship. uh that the granting of the exception would not uh result in material damage or prejudice to the property of the vicinity [snorts] and that the request would not be detrimental to community standards and the appearance of the city. Um at the uh hearing last month uh planning commission did uh request that the applicant provide additional information. Um and so I do have uh display uh materials of that. um they were submitted after the uh um after the uh uh publication of the printed report. So I don't have that uh in front of you, but I do have it here on our screen. So let me pull that up for you. Maximize that. Get rid of that. maximize. So, um as we uh discussed last month, there were two proposals uh to be considered, a 6-ft monument sign and a 20ft pylon sign. Um applicant has now uh shown proposal for sort of an intermediate option with a 15- ft uh monument sign. So, there is that uh revision to the proposal. And then the uh commission was asking for some information on what this proposal would actually look like on the ground. And so uh we do have uh some visualizations of that here. So um at this point I would

be inclined to turn this over to the applicant to discuss uh the visualizations that they have prepared um if uh coun uh city uh planning commission is prepared to do so. Um do we have any questions at this point for staff last meeting what was the hardship just that is set back?

Uh good question. Yes. So the hardship uh relates to the uh sort of the overall uh site configuration um and the fact that the planning commission has already approved um an oversized uh directional board um listing the tenants at the site. Um so it's an exception to the total number of pylon signs allowed um as well as the increase in in the size. So um but yes the uh [clears throat] fuel stations they have somewhat of a a unique requirement to display uh pricing. So um that is a a a constraint that uh most other businesses do not face. Um and so given the geographic constraint of the site having a very small frontage um yeah that seemed a reasonable um hardship to be avoided.

If I may interject and ask another question, I believe from the applicants materials from before they stated that this um sign is actually on a separate lot. So the issue of two signs on the same lot, it seems to me is a moot point and not an issue at this time. So the two signs are on the same Well, no, cuz I guess the one is on the right of way. Yeah. Yeah. So the the display board with all of the tenants was placed in the right of way.

So it's not on the lot. So we don't have that issue at all. So the issue was only realistically the height of the sign was the main um and if I can regurgitate some of the issue um the um area where the sign is to be placed is 6 ft below the level of the road surface was one of the more salient points. And so the idea of a 20ft sign to get it high enough to be able to see from enough distance to be able to react. It does have the prices on the sign um so that one can see that. Um and there were some issues about whether the um it being high or low uh would be a distraction for drivers on the road. So, I think that's most of the reason we asked for continuance for more.

The other thing is um there were a couple neighbors that commented they thought it would be it would be light pollution cuz it might go into their houses or shine in their backyards. It was unclear whether that was the case or not. That was part of the reason that we asked for placement.

That get you ready to go. All right. We will ask for the applicant. Enter and sign in please. Uh Charles Fischer representing the applicant. Um I'm with Lock Engineers here in town. Um a continuation from last month's meeting. Um you asked for mockups and kind of what things were going to look like uh to be able to make um an informed decision. So, I have prepared um a number of different uh mockups. I'll start with just a general kind of what the sign looks like in place um and then go from there to to show kind of what um drivers would see as they approach the as as they approach the site. Um so, this is taken about 50 ft looking as if the driver was going to be going westbound. This is the 20 foot tall pylon sign sign and the base of the sign is about five feet below the center of Cloud Corner Road. Um, and you'll notice it's set back quite a ways and that's because uh the additional ride ofway there. Um, Clow Corner Road is centered within a 60 ft portion of right-of-way. And then there's an an old county ride ofway of 40 ft to the north of that 60 ft. And so this sign uh the edge the the roadside edge would be 63 feet from edge of pavement, the north edge of pavement. So it sits quite a quite a ways back. Um, these mock-ups were generated with a uh basically a a calibrated uh calibrated

2x4 as much as a calibrated 2x4 can be uh of 20 foot long um with a uh a plate at the top that was of a particular size and then the math was done from there based upon the different locations. So, and you can see here the uh the the tenant sign that's [clears throat] is in the right of way uh fully within the right of way. Uh the right ofway line is basically where this orange silk fence is just for um so this is the 15 ft uh sign at that same location. You can see that calibrated uh 2 foot by 3 ft piece at the top of the sign that was used to do the math. Um and then uh glare was also something that had come up uh quite a bit previously. Um the the as the you know the price gets closer to the driver's eye, I think the glare would actually become more of an issue. So, um, and we we, uh, we make no bones about the fact that if we are forced to do a monument sign of some sort, whether it be to code or whether it be the proposed monument sign, which is 8 foot uh, tall by 10t wide. Um, with a large portion of that actually just being a gray background. Um, as you can see, u, we would be building that up some. Um, I I think a 4-foot burm may actually be uh more than we can realistically do uh based on the fact that we've got little strips of wetland on either side um north and south of us. But this is kind of um you know the highest I would expect any sort of monument sign to go. Um

so then uh let's see. I can barely see that. So then as far as the driver's eye, we'll go to the furthest. This would be 450 ft uh to the east. So for the westbound driver, um each of these photos was taken at the center of the lane at 3 and 1/2 ft above the road surface as would be the um you know the the height and location that you would normally use for uh like um stopping sight distance calculations. And so at 450 ft, uh, the only sign that's visible at all is the the 20 foot pylon sign. And it would be just the just the M of Marathon Fuel would would be the only thing you'd be able to see at that location. at 330 ft. Um 330 is about the distance for a a rather slow uh deceleration to be able to safely turn in from 50 mph because this is this is 50 mph uh posted um speed limit. At this point, the 20ft pylon sign um can be fully seen. Uh prices um just basically fairly typical. This is, as you can see, um, lower than the treetops. Um, and, um, you know, kind of with the, uh, the depression that this is in, the 5ft depression, it's it's going to feel like somewhat of a lower sign even with the 20footer. So, the 15T, same idea. It's the the the prices on the 15T pylon sign are starting to get down. uh in line with where the driver would be looking down the road. And you can kind of tell this is a little small

based on the fact that it's a ways away, but the elevation that the that the that the lighted uh portion of the sign is basically in line with um you know oncoming traffic, you know, like lights um headlights coming at you, that sort of thing. And then the the the monument sign, the sign accepted monument sign 8 foot tall by by 10t wide on a 4ft burm um is fully seen as well. Um the the the the price is actually slightly higher than it is in the 15t just based on the orientation of the of the price and the and the the the the M for monument between the [snorts] you can kind of see this mouse is really touchy. Then from uh the other direction eastbound at that same 330 ft, you can't even see anything due to the vegetation. Um and this the vegetation that's in the way is is technically repairarian. We're not nobody's supposed to remove it. I mean, things do get removed, but uh and that's due to um the ditch is actually a tributary of the east fork of Ash Creek. Um if you were to zoom in, you would Whoops. If you were to zoom in, you would barely be able to see um the the 2x4 kind of through a gap in the tree. It's back in here. So, uh, the next closest, um, shot I took is 250 ft. And at that location, there's still vegetation in the way. And just, uh, you know, assuming that this vegetation were to be to removed or

trimmed back by by the neighbor because we that's that's not it's actually this portion is actually in the rightway, but it's on the neighbor's frontage, I believe. Um, you know, so I mean I showed this where it would be if that vegetation were gone. Um, and there's the 15t pylon sign at 250 ft eastbound. Again, um, the price is about in in line with the the driver's eye and then the 20 foot assuming vegetation removal. Um just the top of the sign is visible of the 20ft sign and one of the prices is visible if this vegetation were were still here. The diesel I guess you know just wouldn't be seen quite yet. But as far as um the different sign options go, um you know, we think that the 20 foot sign is the best for for you know, for us and the best as far as getting it out of kind of the plane at which the driver's eye is going to be. But um yeah, any any questions? Is anybody want to see anything? Okay, this is only about the sign, but usually with gas stations, you have the canopy covering that's also lit, probably has pricing. So, I mean, I'm struggling with the hardship. I think it's visible, but there will be also the the lighting most likely logos and pricing on the canopy as well. Is that the case?

Sure. There will be on on the canopy the the canopy due to that wetland. And do we have the ability to see the the site plan? So, I don't believe I have the site plan on this USB drive, but I can go and get that. I don't want to go into it too much. I don't want to deviate from what you're discussing, but it's hard for me. I'm just bringing it up in context because, you know, of course, the sign by itself. Um you I think you did a great job presenting it, but I mean there's lighting and other things that will contribute to the visibility of the the canopy itself is going to be set back significantly. It's it's I

Yeah, I was just raising it as a discussion as a point. I would just commend you for taking the challenge and doing it very well. It's very very helpful. Anybody?

Now hear from those in attendance tonight who would like to address the commission on this item. Please raise your hand if you'd like to testify and state your name and address for the record once you're up by the microphone. Go ahead. Wait till you get there. So, you're by the microphone.

Hang on just a second, Ben. It doesn't look like her microphone's on. It's not turning red. Bring that um a little bit closer. Microphone down so it points to your mouth. There you go. There you go. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Sorry. Okay. Do I need to state my name again, please?

Okay. Elizabeth Underwood. And I'm back on Cord and Court. Um thank you for doing the 15 foot sign for as the commuter. I commute 140 miles a day. Um I think of any of the signs, the 15 foot would definitely be the most appropriate. Um there are neighbor houses that aren't in the layout that you can see. So there's houses on either side of that. There's houses across the street that should probably consider be considered with the the sign and the lighting. Um I think the 20 foot is is just way too high for out there. Um the street lights in at Godsy Road, that's another consideration. And there's not even street lights out there for what a half a mile before this gas station sign will be. So it's pretty dark. Um I comm I drive that road regularly. Tonight coming back from Monmouth there were maybe 15 cars on the road at 6:00. Uh Saturday night there's maybe four or five. So I don't see it as a as a station that's going to be open all night. Um, one of the things I would like to say, and I don't know if you can add these provisions in, is that the um, if you do approve the sign that it's to be powered off when the station's not open, maybe um, that would be helpful to the neighbors that are trying to sleep. I don't know if you can add those additions in. Um, I think the 20 foot's too too tall. I think the 15 foot of all the options is probably the most appropriate as somebody who drives a lot and drives back roads and and things like that. So, that's where I'm at.

Thank you. Anyone else? Do we have anyone in the queue? Ben, we do not.

Okay. If there are no other persons who would like to speak, um, let's see. And we didn't have any questions for her. Sorry I didn't give you a chance. Okay. Um, we will now have the applicant 5 minutes for rebuttal. Just want to point out that the people that are directly across Cloud Corner Road will not even really see the sign because it's it's intended to point east and west. Um, I don't know exactly how wide those the sign is, but I'm anticipating it's going to be about about 12 inches wide, and that's all they would see really. Thickness? Yes, thickness. Right. Thank you. Alrighty. Uh, are there any final comments from the staff or the city attorney?

Not hearing. Seeing none, I now declare the public hearing closed at 6:33h [sighs] maybe we'll have deliberation on this topic by the commission. Would anyone like to begin? um from a marketing standpoint just uh and I actually drove that area recently and um at night and it is so dark um you can't see a thing. So I personally think that the 20 foot sign you know is would be extremely beneficial for the business whereas anything shorter than that you're just not going to see it especially at night. Thank you. Anyone [clears throat] else? Go ahead.

It's a classic case of caring about businesses very much. Uh which we really really do. That's where the tax money is. Uh but caring for the people who live here as well. It's their city and we have had a request uh for a smaller sign. You've provided an opportunity to do that and my opinion would be can we please accept that? It's a way of finding a compromise where nobody's materially hurt. That that would just be my comment. So there are three options we're discussing, right? The monument sign is one of them. So is that the correct?

I don't see anything but the monument sign. Personally, I think it's important to take into account the canopy that will be there that will be lit over the pumping stations. So, yes, right now, especially by itself, um, as its only thing out there, um, I I appreciate the demonstration. I think it's helpful to see what it look like approaching the sign, but I mean, people are from here. They get accustomed to it. If the prices are right, if it's a business they want to frequent, they'll know to frequent it. Um, so I think keeping it as minimal as possible, um, would be my position. want to say anything?

I I think 15 foot is where I land. Well, um from my point of view, um I think the 20 foot I agree is the easiest to see and the highest above driver's field of vision. So, it's not going to be it's going to be the least distraction and therefore I believe the safest. Um, yeah, it's pretty typical to have a a gas station sign be that tall.

Yeah, I I agree. Um, I mean, looking around town, a lot of them there are a lot of signs in town that seem to be that tall. Um, yeah. What else? Nothing else to say about that. Um, I do appreciate the applicant and the owner spending the money to have the applicant do all this. We I spoke on our previous meeting that I really hope we can be friendly to businesses and not, you know, burden them overly. Um, so the the business desire and and I agree that um with the concerns that we've heard both at this meeting and last meeting um I I put a lot of faith and credence in the engineer who's doing this and the way things have been done in the past. So I I would be in favor of the 20 foot sign as well. So we're probably going to have a very interesting vote. Does anyone else like to say anything? Just the just closing comment of the weight of public opinion and we kind of substitute our opinion for what we heard in testimony here and in representing the people who live there. I think it's fair to say that 15 foot sign would be their desire and and and it's our responsibility to listen to that testimony. So

listening to that. All right. If there's no more comments or deliberation, I will uh entertain a motion for one of the opport one of the options um presented.

15T sign 15T sign. Do I hear a second? Second. We have moved and seconded the option for the 15t sign. Is there any discussion? All right, I will call for a vote. Ben, would you please read the uh role, Commissioner Newell, Commissioner Schulty, Commissioner Banford, Commissioner Kash, Commissioner Grow?

No. I believe the motion does not carry. 3 to two. I will now entertain a second motion for one of the other two alternatives. Um,

is there a second? If no one else wants to second, I will second it. Motion has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? No discussion. I will entertain the roll call to be called for the vote. Commissioner Newell 20 foot sign. Commissioner Schulty, Commissioner Banford, Commissioner Kash, Commissioner Grow. Yes, we have not approved that one either. So I will now entertain a motion for the final option of the monument sign. The monument sign. Do we have a second? Second.

Moved and seconded. Any discussion on the monument sign as before? I will. Excuse me. I have a question. Quest away. None of them pass. Then what? Then don't see that we've approved any change to what they've requested. Yeah. Thank you. or after none of them pass, we can entertain a motion to try something else. Thank you. Okay, that helps. We're We're not done after this one. Okay.

Okay. At least not not according to my reading of how things are going. Basically, you have to get a feel for what all the conditions are before you can continue with a discussion. Anyway, is there any more discussion or questions? Hearing none. Ben, would you please call the role? And we are voting on the use of the monument sign, which is at ground level plus about a 4ft burm, which I don't remember being part of the earlier one, but it's good to know that at least it's a little more visible now. Please continue.

Commissioner Newell, Commissioner Schulty, Commissioner Banford, Commissioner Kash, no. Commissioner Gro also no. Okay, so we are now at an impass or at least we all know where we stand with the three options. Um, that one got one positive vote. Uh, so I will now entertain if someone wants to Well, do we want to discuss other options? Have Have we eliminated the monument sign as an option?

Okay. So, we're now only talking about a 15t or a 20 foot sign. I I would just excuse me

or denying the motion in alto together. Yes. I would just say in second thought if I can that I always I always try to take the account of the people who live in this city is very important. And one of the things I heard you say that I relate to is the issue of that price being at eye level in driving. And I would almost change my opinion to the 20 foot sign as being in the best interest of the people that live there even if they don't want it and safer. You think I'm convinced of that? And so if we took a vote again, I would change my think. That sounds encouraging. Try that. Shall we try that again?

I think we'll try that. would I would entertain a motion to uh propose the 20 foot sign. Yes. Is there a second and moved and seconded? Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, I would call for the Commissioner Newell, Commissioner Schulty, Commissioner Banford, Commissioner Kas, Commissioner Grow. Yes. Passed. Thank you. Three to two.

All right. The All right. Where am I? Uh, we did vote on the I did that. We did that. We did that. Motion passes. Not quite unanimously, but it passed. An order reflecting the commission's decision to authorize or allow the 20oot sign. Uh decision tonight will be mailed to the applicant and all participants of record within 10 business days. And I want to thank all the members of the commission and the members of the public who saw fit to come here and listen. Uh, we hope that it ends up being okay for people. I know. Yeah. Give it time till you see it hopefully. Anyway,

thank you. Thank you very much for taking the time and the 30 days to do this exercise. I appreciate and please tell the owners that we didn't take it lightly that they Yeah, it we really want to support our businesses and we really want them here and assuming you made some more money for the extra design you did at least we supported your business. Thank you.

Thank you very much for coming down. All right, we have finished with both of the official meeting or proposals. We're now looking at other business. The development code update uh regarding an adjustment to industrial zoning. Uh would you please is there's a little staff report in here. I assume you're going to address that. Uh

yes, there's actually a couple of bullet points that should have been under development code updates, but uh yeah, industrial zoning is kind of the hot button one that we've got. Um, we have gotten a a request from uh some business owners here in town um to uh uh basically be more flexible in where we allow uh gyms and other indoor recreation kind of uses um to be located. um specifically looking at uh uh [clears throat] being able to do those kinds of uses uh in the industrial zone. Um currently we don't have a a category specific to indoor recreation. Um these kinds of uses are classified as retail sales and service. um being a uh an entertainment uh or or personal service uh oriented kind of of service use. So um looking at ways that we could be more flexible in how we allow this. Um we have uh proposed the creation of a new uh indoor uh recreation category. Um and so there's a [clears throat] exhibit 6B there in your packet. uh kind of includes a a draft of what that definition might look like. Um and then uh we're looking at changing uh the table of allowed uh uses in the three uh main kinds of zones, the residential, the commercial, and industrial districts. Um all of them already list commercial outdoor recreation as as a use. Um, and so this would be adding uh commercial indoor recreation to those uh zone descriptions and uh specifying where they they are allowed and not

allowed. Um, as I'm staring at this um I'm seeing that the the proposal that was written down for uh residential districts uh has a copy paste error. Um it should be uh uh conditional use for all of the residential districts. Um I'm not sure why it was only conditional use for one and permitted for the others, but the idea was that it would be all um um conditional use for the residential districts and then permitted outright in the uh commercial and industrial districts with the condition or special exception um that in the industrial district uh any sort of repurposed buildings would require at a minimum a phase one environmental clearance from DEEQ. um that being sort of a specific call back to the gym that was built in West Salem that turned out to have been a former lead acid battery recycling facility. Um thus causing a public health emergency throughout Pulk and Marian counties. So um let's not repeat that. Um so we're repurposing an existing industrial space for a non-industrial use such as this. Um making sure that that building has a clean bill of health before doing so. Obviously, that wouldn't apply to new build construction, just uh repurposed buildings. Um, so as part of your your packet there, you do have those letters of testimony that we've gotten um as well as the uh brief little uh staff report that u uh Tyler Ferrari uh pulled together for for uh your consideration. Um so the way that we are proceeding with this um we would be looking to do um a public hearing for the proposal at the December planning commission meeting. Um and so we'd probably be

taking it then to city council assuming that this is moving forward um probably sometime late January just because of the holidays and the the times that are being taken off by council. So, um there's a little bit of a gap between when you would see it and when they would see it. Um it's possible it could move forward faster than that, but that's kind of a city manager level uh uh decision on that regard. Um but that's kind of what we're looking at for that. So, I wanted to bring that to your attention. if you had any discussion or thoughts on this. This would be a a reasonable time to have that discussion. Um, this is not a public hearing. It's more of a workshop session. So, you're free to speak and have thoughts.

Okay. Anybody else

have mixed feelings about it? I mean, on one side, it's nice to have old like existing industrial spaces because then they provide cheaper rent for new services like this, but as Chase mentioned, um, previous uses can make it difficult to transition a service use into that facility. And then also, um, taking up space from potential new industrial users. That's just one of the things that I have concerns about because then you have to find new space for industrial space because they're occupied with services. So, my preference would be to keep it. Yes, I I think it's a good point made um to have additional space away from downtown, but I think it's a better fit in commercial retail services. Personally,

short on industrial, so I'm worried about defraying the ability to use it for other businesses, particularly when we don't have enough businesses. Um people are going outside of the area to get jobs. It seems like we need to be careful about that. Now,

personally, what these folks are saying is they're going to leave our town if we don't do this. That's a burden the hand, and I hate to see that happen. And I understand their point. They they'll strangle where they are. So, I'd hate to see us lose. perhaps building. Shouldn't we build something? Not us. I think I think they're looking at something that would cost a little less than these people who own it. Obviously,

not for them specifically. I think I would I'm not sure if this is correct, but it's my feeling that these pe that that this kind of activity requires a fairly tall ceiling large area and I don't think that's typically what you find in commercial zoned properties. You you're typically looking at offices and and normal height things. So I agree with you and I agree with both of you that with all of us probably that we don't have enough industrial space but I can understand why Monmouth and Independence in this area and Salem as well um have included this exception because realistically indep industrial space is the only kind of building that would be able to serve this kind of client. rather than downtown.

Yes, I agree. Yeah, [laughter] for other reasons. Safety, you know, part of what their what their dilemma was was that they're growing and they don't have enough room in the area they actually managed to find that would serve their business. So, they found a place that's large enough for them to grow uh and can't do it. They were all set to do it from the the what we read. Um but the building department told them you can't do that in this in this zoning. So well planning department told them that. Excuse me. Planning department told them that. But yes, somebody did. Yeah. Okay. I'll take the blame for that. That's okay. That's my zoning code.

It's a whole lot better if somebody lets them do it and then you have to kick them out because then you're even more evil. That's just my comment. And so I'm glad you said we could say whatever we wanted, but you're not evil in any means, and I wouldn't want you to be characterized that way. Anyway, even if it is close to Halloween anyway, going on. Does anyone else have anything to say? But I think it's a great idea and I think I think being consistent with what other jurisdictions have done is a good direction and a good um ability for us to do and and pursue and find out what the community thinks and what the council thinks.

Salem, it's everywhere. So, it's nice to have that flexibility on the building owner side because they are always looking for tenants and so to be able to have that flexibility to have additional tenants with this type of use is good. But that's the downside is that um yeah, by filling that space, it precludes then an industrial user going in.

I would go both ways. I would also point out that we're talking about a place where kids are actually excited about having something to do that doesn't involve keyboards or screens. So, in this particular case, I think it's an excellent idea and would would really recommend would really hope that we can make this possible because that's one of the things we've been talking about in Dallas as long as I've lived here is what do kids do who live in Dallas? and it sounds like this business is providing something an excellent option for them. So, the fact that we can't let them do it bothers me a bit. [snorts]

Speaking of that, can I go off subject for one second? I don't know. The basketball courts go that were next to the [laughter] that were next to the city park. I can I can talk to that. I mean, I was on the parks board where we did that. The basketball courts are just going to go across the street. They're going to build new basketball courts that go and the old B because they were they were going to resurface the basketball courts. That's not a problem. I apologize.

And I will point out just cuz this was educational for me. Someone in the community asked, "Why can't we have lights in the basketball courts to allow us to use them more?" and the public works director said the parks are only open from dawn to dusk. Therefore, lights are not an option. So, that was very insightful for me and could come up again. So, anyway, any more discussion or whatever and where do we go from here?

I guess before uh before we jump on it, please. So, at the city council meeting where this was addressed a week or so ago, I can't remember if it was Brian, but one of the staff members discussed vacancy rates in commercial and industrial zones. Do you have that that info? Cuz if I recall correctly, um they discussed how the commercial buildings in town were essentially full and there's a a great deal of industrial zone which isn't being used. is that

so I don't have uh any current figures. Uh the best that I'd be able to site was our economic opportunities analysis from 2021. Um which did find that we had a surplus of industrial acreage and a shortage of commercial acreage. Um but of course how acreage translates into actual individual businesses as a whole complex process. So um broad level we were short on commercial and had a surplus of industrial but yeah

and that was 2021. So that's five years ago now. So [laughter] we still needed more investor. That's what I thought too from the last Yeah. comp plan amendment needs analysis. Yeah. Yeah. So, we maybe look that up.

Yeah. So, the the 2001 EOA, we had a a sizable surplus of industrial. Um the previous analysis to that had identified a shortage. Um but that was when the mill was in operation. That's when Prageter was still occupied and they did a UGB expansion to add even more industrial land. um that land was never developed and those two major uses have left. So um there's been some vacancy that has come onto the market. So I think an excellent point and I would recommend that we make sure that if we go to a staff report for this moving on that we have those kind of statistics available.

Yes. One of their one of the requirements uh of course would be to demonstrate compliance with a statewide planning rule and uh uh comprehensive plan. So reflected from the council meeting was we've got indust or commercial space and it's basically full which means that industrial space may be out there and there's extra but it's it's this particular location it's not being used. they can't keep a tenant in it. So, if we can have some use and uh occupancy information, if that's available, um I would recommend we have that in the report.

I can certainly see what information may be available. Um the best that my office has is which properties are developed versus undeveloped. Um, but it's entirely possible that the economic development office has more recent like actual occupancy rates will also be able to help you with that too. Yeah. So, I can certainly see what information we have. I understand the exception in here correctly that you're limiting it to 2,000 feet. Is that how I read that?

Have this range of 2,000 and 10,000. Is it being defined differently? Because that would be the other issue that I if it's doesn't have a limit, I would maybe suggest having something because if you create too big of a draw, it can be competing uses to industrial uses where they don't they're not exactly compatible. Uh the parking issues that come with that and then also just having trucks and things trying to interact with regular vehicles trying to get into the same space. It's just something to keep in mind.

Yes. So the uh the the exceptions there are talking about uh retail uses as part of uh the the recreation use. Um and so there's there's that. If it's more than 2,000 ft of retail, then the use itself is classified as retail sales and service, not indoor recreation. Um and then the one below that relates to uh meeting and exhibition areas. um if it's more than 2,000 square feet, it's classified as retail sales and service. [snorts] That's consistent with um other restrictions elsewhere in the code. And then if it's more than 10,000 square ft of exhibition and meeting area, then it's major event entertainment that also corresponds to um kind of the standards for for that zoning or that land use category. So that's that's where those numbers come from. It's to say that, you know, those are other uses defined as a a size. So,

the only thing we're talking about in this proposal is allowing commercial indoor recreation in the industrial zone. Is that correct? So, the proposal here would uh create the new category [snorts] um would allow it in the industrial and commercial zones outright and would allow it in residential uses as a conditional use. Now whether the commission and the city council decide to act ultimately approve that is a different question but that's the proposal that we've assembled thus far. So I

since there are you know uh former church buildings and things of that nature which could you know reasonably be converted into these kinds of uses without significant impact to the community. seems like a reasonable. So the the text above these three tables is just defining what commercial indoor recreation is. Yes. So uh chapter 1.3 of the development code is the definitions of the different categories. Commercial indoor recreation is not currently included. Correct. There is indoor recreation but there is no definition for indoor recreation. So this is the proposed text for adding to the development code. Yes.

Okay. So Andy, does anyone else want to talk about this subject? And can they? So anyone in the audience or anybody? It's your it's your meeting. It's not a public hearing. So it's not I assume. Were you guys here to talk about this by any chance or you just watching? Watching. Okay. You don't have to respond. And you can just hit that. It's totally fine. But yes, just offering

good here.

Yes. I think that um the the city needs to be looking at uh uh allowing some of this stuff to see stuff come to our town because I work in a different city and we've got my industrial area that's been open for 15 18 years and nothing's been put on it and a lot of the conditions restrict stuff from coming in And so you're going to have a lot of open land if we're not deepened in actually allowing some of this stuff to be variance. Sounds good. Well, thank you for coming, too. I hope it's been educational for both of you. It certainly has for us tonight.

Did you want to say anything, Daniel? And I don't know if you're I was going to ask before, are you allowed to say anything in our meetings? Maybe I'm just not allowed to vote on anything. I'm told I was able to join the discussion anytime. Okay. And I hope you felt okay with being part of the previous discussion if if you were so brave. [clears throat] That was that was a hot one. You weren't. Okay. Smart man.

I I do appreciate what you said about the youth um just frequently using these facilities cuz I frequently use them. A lot of my friends frequently use them and that is a like de facto place that a lot of student athletes go in the offseason. And I've noticed World Gym has become pretty popular. Like I go at the at the rush hour and if they had more room to put things, they they would. Um I I appreciate what you said about that though. Good. Well, good. Well, thank you and thank you for being here and putting in the time. Do we have any more discussion?

So, um as I mentioned, there were two other bullet points that um were inadvertently left off of the development code updates section. And so we talked about um indoor recreation facilities. Um there is also uh discussion around um changing the allowable uses in the commercial zone or the central business district I should say the downtown uh with regards to uh automotive services and industrial services. Um and so that is something that uh we will be bringing to you in the in the near future. [snorts]

Um so I don't have draft language on that yet but that is something that that uh is is a foot. Um [clears throat] and then we are also looking to uh enact uh development code update creating a new zoning district. So um the lockal uh master plan uh called for a mixeduse zoning district. We don't have such a district in our development code. the uh consultant prepared a draft uh uh of what that language would look like. Um and so now we're looking to actually enact that uh zoning district into law. Once we have the text on the books, uh we would then be able to start moving forward on the reszoning of the Lacrial area to match the master plan. Uh but can't do the reszoning until we have text of what that zone would be. So, um, we'll be bringing that to you, I believe, uh, in the December for a planning commission hearing as well. So, um, and then I'm not sure how quickly the, uh, uh, downtown uh, allowed uses list uh, will be coming to you, but that's, like I said, something that is a foot. So, um, those are the other two bullet points that I I I regret were uh, omitted from the agenda here. Um, [snorts] but yeah,

for the heads up. It's always good to know what's coming. So, Chase, do you think that was part of what was stripped out when uh we were revising all the nodes when we were Yeah. So, they're just saying we used to have this,

right? So, we never had a mixeduse zoning district. Uh, so there was always kind of the plan that there would be one. It was just never enacted. Um and then we were when we were back in July uh in creating the comprehensive plan update um there was discussion of doing uh this development code amendment at the same time and ultimately it was decided to push that off to a later uh date and so that later date will now be upon us. But I I I know I'm really ancient and been here for a little bit but that one point we had it. It's been a long time though possibly. So I know they

we had some provisions related to a node where you could do commercial or strip malls or whatever and we had some layout as to how you could do that. So the Lreal master plan area has always called for since it was created in ' 98 has always called for a portion of it to be designated mixed use. There was never any parameters around how that would actually function. Right. Definition. Right. So that's what we're looking to change now. Thank you.

Okay. Anything else? Well, thank you for bringing that to our attention. Um, do we have any commissioner comments? So, under other business, we do have a item B.

Oops. Commissioner Handbook. Thank you. I missed that. Not intentionally. [laughter] Uh I think you have a handout on this. How about if I just walk you through it real quick? John's not here. There's no point in spending a lot of time, but just a quick update for what's happened since our last meeting. So, by way of a quick refresher here, we agreed at the last meeting to do three things, or we had already talked to Brian, the city manager, to see what his feelings were toward the creation of a CCI here and committee for for citizen involvement. And he was very supportive. and what he suggested instead of doing just a um an overall effort to do best practices and planning commissions instead of that to actually make a CCI happen. His his comment was don't study it, don't think about it, do it, make it happen. So that was the outcome of that conversation. I agreed to be in contact with DLCD uh which I have done several times now to see what kind of help they can give us in the formation of this and I have to say [clears throat] we're going to melt our copers here if I keep printing what they're sending to me. We have what 350 pages or something so far

over 350 pages

and that's just the start. My answer is this. I don't think DLCD is going to be any help to us. say I say that because as we get into how CCI is supposed to be formed, it's very lacks in terms of it. It it it leaves a lot of authority here in the city. It's basically do whatever you want. I I exaggerate a little bit, but there's very little actual guidance in these 350 pages of stuff about how you do equitable engagements and toolkits and I don't know what that is. So, I don't think we're going to get much from DLCD. Uh, the third thing we agreed to do was to draft an announcement to the mayor and the city council. Basically say, we're in the process of studying this. We want you to know that this is happening. We want you to know what the probable outcome is going to be. Uh, John has signed off on that memo. Thank you for the correction that you gave me. So, that's ready to go shortly. So, the city council knows that this is pending. So let let me just give you a little bit uh beyond that. Uh because there is no statewide CCI handbook, it means we need to create our own rules here. I'm a great fan of chat GPT. I gave it the task of creating [laughter] a Dallas CCI handbook for us and it did that. It is a very rough, a very crude draft, but it's a place to start from and I think it's a really good place to start from. We're not going there tonight because it's detailed, but I just want to say that we have that as a discussion point for what at the end of this I'm going to ask for our next meeting, what our next meeting is going to look like. And that document is something that we would go through together for the first rough look at

what a CCI handbook would look like. We have that. Um, so the next step, what I'm asking for us to do, there is a lot for us to discuss. I've done a lot of homework. I'm asking that we create a meeting just on this subject, not shoehorned in with our regular planning. I don't know what you call it. If it's called a workshop or whatever it's called, that we have a separate meeting because there's so much for us to go through. And the other point is nobody's gonna do it for us. Hey Tori, you know, you asked the question, why do I keep bringing this up? Why do we I just asked if this is going to be a ongoing every

plan commission conversation. What I read the answer is it has to be and it sounds like a committee for citizen involvement is not planning commission. It seems like a separate committee. That's why we need a separate. It could be a separate committee. we have in our comprehensive uh our comprehensive plan says it'll be part of the planning commission. It says that we are involved in the comprehensive plan

and and it should be here but it doesn't have to be but that's that's the conversation that we need to have. But my my point is it's not elective whether we want to do this. It's the law and we have to be compliant with the law. In addition to which it's a fabulous opportunity for us to to provide greater value to this city and as we get into this more as I have been the value I think we can bring to this city is just so far beyond what we do right now. Um just a quick look here the kinds of things we need to discuss at that next meeting. So who owns this project? Who decides what to your question what form this is actually going to take? who's going to lead this and on and on and on. I've done a lot of homework to answer all of those questions, but we need to take the time to go through them together and to put some meat on the bones. At the end of the day, here's what I suggest is actually going to come out of this. What's going to come out of this is something very very simple that we have a laser focus for what this group is going to take on as an additional responsibility given the limited resources that we have. That's a reality and we have what we have. What I'm going to propose is so simple is to hire a consulting group to do much of the work for us to obtain stakeholder uh input on land use policy. It's provided for under the law. We have to have a bud that the city is required to have a budget for us to do that. And I'm saying rather than us trying to reach out into the community and gather input, we hire experts to do this do that for us. I have a list of who they are, what they cost, how we go about it, all that kind of stuff. We're not going to get into that tonight. So, in other words, we

don't have to be experts and going out and getting uh the feelings of the community. There are people who can do that for us. That we do that every three years, not every five years, not every year. I I'll give you the precedent for that when we have our meeting later. and that we provide the funding for it, which by the way in the material that chat GPT did, it gave us grants that are available to us to pay for that, which I thought that was kind of cool. So, um, [clears throat] at the end of the outreach where we have a we have a consulting group that goes out into all of our stakeholders, not just taxpayers, businesses, nonprofits, so on and so forth. I don't know if you remember, we met about a year ago. I talked about the the land use policy process in England. I don't know if anybody remembers that is exactly what I'm talking about here. They go out, they have experts that go out in the community, interview the stakeholders, mountains of data they come back with. Their charge is to boil that down to 10 bullet points that go on the wall in this chamber which effectively is the mandate from the people here of what we want our city to look like in 25 and 50 years. It's not dissimilar to what we do all the time here that here we have Dallas vision 2030 which is essentially the same thing. It's a deliverable that says in short, this is what the people who live here want their community to be like. That would basically be the end deliverable that comes out of this whole effort. And those findings would go to the city council. They'd go to the city council with recommendations on what if anything needs to change in our comprehensive plan codes or elsewhere to comply with that. And of course, it's up to the city council to decide what they do and do not want to change. So in a

nutshell, that's instead of getting involved in 500 pages of due process and bureaucracy and all that kind of stuff. I'm just saying every few years we do this survey and the deliverable goes to the city council with recommendations and in that way we get ourselves to the strategic level of land use policy and not just the tactical level. So the bottom line is the request for a full meeting where we can really get into this and I have to leave that in your hands. So

really finding my hiring my vision of us trying to put this together is the blind leading the blind. So that's a great idea. Thank you. anybody all the provision is there to do it. I It's not like we're inventing something. It It's recommended by the state that we do exactly what we're proposing to do. It's interesting that if this is a law, the land use board doesn't have any guideline for doing it and that we've never done it. I can't explain why that is or I say never. I think you pointed out

have done it in a limited fashion. It was part of planning commission and at some point uh community development in city of Dallas decided it needed to land elsewhere. So they took it from planning commission and moved it. I don't know where it went. It's not my problem to worry about that. I don't know if it went to city council. I don't know if it went to another organization, another group. I have no idea. I just know that's what happened. Maybe your first task would be to do whatever research you can to figure out where it went because if we start to do it and somebody else doing it

that's going to be a problem we have we have we have done that Brian if yes Brian has researched that for us oh and he said no he had given us the documentation that he got from the archives here he's provided that to us and The end result of all that is that what supersedes all of that is what's in the comprehensive plan which says that belongs here. So our go forward is already done. We don't have to we don't have to create anything else legally we're positioned to did he answer the question that nobody is doing it? Yes he did. Yes. Okay. No no nobody that's why he but no one else is doing it.

Correct. That's why that's why he is so that was my concern is that are we going to get down the road about 50% and then all a sudden we find out this other organization is doing it. It's one thing to have the legal ability and the justification for doing it that you can show in somebody's face but you don't want to have there be a face there that's saying hey we're doing this and and you don't want to have that political cloud of saying well it's ours so we're going to take it. I mean it's probably better to find out is is it belonging to someone else and maybe we need to bring it back and work through those without uh conflict.

So he has done that research and that is why he is he is so strongly recommending that because it just isn't any he's 100% in favor of Thank you. That helps. Yeah. And providing the resources to do

Yes. So I just have to leave that in your hands and but it's going to be a long meeting because there's a lot to discuss. Guess to that end if we're going to dedicate a whole meeting to it. There's been a lot of talk but not a lot of substance or detail. So hopefully that would be flushed out and we can be productive rather than a lot of the um I don't know conceptualization and get into the details and nuance. No, have they not?

I have I have I have for that next meeting uh a a summarized description of how this process works start to finish. I have that ready and that's that's the skeleton upon which we would turn to experts to put the flesh on this which by the way is really simple. This is not rocket science. It really isn't. The rocket science comes from the consulting group. All we're doing is defining a process and the funding of that process and getting this to uh the city council so that they they buy in as well as our city manager has. So,

and they're they're not just going to buy in, they're going to have some adjustments probably for what our focus is. And and that's great. That's fine. That's what they do. You know, the political spin and all the rest has to be included. Part part of the recommendation that we'll get to in our meeting is that we include people from uh the city a an individual from the city council to be on this task group as long as as well as from the economic development department that we be Mike volunteering. This is why you don't come to the meeting but please return. We promise not to volunteer.

We won't put you on the spot next time. Promise. [laughter] so that we're not in a hole digging a hole for ourselves. We're staying as as a community. Let's see if this if this initiative uh will move us ahead. So

that's the case. The way that that sounds like a committee is being structured is you'll probably have a couple members from plan commission, maybe one or two counselors, um people from various groups, maybe even people from the community. So it'll be a separate committee outside. I mean, yes, they will inform us of what being discussed, but it won't be an ongoing planning commission. And and there may be benefit to having it as a a separate body because it's entirely possible that there's community folks out there who would love to be part of this uh you know getting the the finger on the pulse of the community kind of thing the you know the social butterflies what have you who would have no interest in sitting through public hearings like we do for the other planning commission things. So, it's feasible that having it be a separate one could make some level of sense.

What to what extent you folks use chat GPT? It's unbelievably powerful research. It just blows my mind how it we literally can't get to it through our uh firewall here at the office. It just it just will fry your brain. the the answer all of these questions it has it has

it has created for us the menu of uh opport uh options for us to select from. So for example who runs this committee who's on it for what period of time who appoints them blah blah blah blah is given us all those options and it's given then a recommendation at the bottom so we have a lot of this homework done. So for example, it is possible if we want to do it that nobody on the plan it is possible that nobody on the planning commission is is on this committee or everybody or everything in between. So it's all those options are there for us and so I'm prepared to walk or GPT has prepared us to walk through that. A lot of homework's been done. A lot of homework's been done. I would urge caution using AI that it may give you all kinds of answers that sound very official and true, but you don't know where any of that came from or whether it's real.

Yes, I do know where they came from chapter and verse. And by the way, we have some experts here every step of the way with us. and and as we get in and as and as we get into this. So, one of the concerns is like who's going to do the work? And it's not like you're sitting around here all day with nothing to do. [laughter] Good. I'm glad you recognize that. Chase, it sounds like you're going to get more.

So, so what Brian said to us as we were leaving is that it's his responsibility and his staff to provide the services to us for this kind of an initiative. But if those resources are limited, we have to be very conscious of that. So, uh, the difficulty tonight is we want to get out of here and we we need a serious meeting so that I can share with you what we what we've already done. And and it's a lot, but when we get through with it, never lose sight of the fact. It's really simple. We have to we have to talk about a lot of things, but at the end of the day, what we're actually going to do is not rocket science.

I would like John Swanson to be here, too, since he's been with you as you go through this process. It would be nice to have him as a consistent feature in the conversation. Of course, he he knows everything I just said. Well, he doesn't know what this conversation is. He's been copied and everything. He's been in the meeting with me. So that's why I'm saying let's not go there tonight. Well, and I would say that with uh you know just staff schedules, holidays coming up, we probably wouldn't be able to schedule a special meeting until probably February at the earliest because we have uh you know Thanksgiving just around the corner and then you've got the whole December uh Christmas holiday thing. So in a real world, I know, right? So yeah,

one thing about government is that the wheels turn slowly. Well, if we don't have a lot on the next uh docket so to speak for our meeting there or let's break it into let's not have a number of items on next month's agenda. [laughter] Uh we'll also be having discussion on rent burdened communities. We do that every year for the December meeting. So uh

December's out. [laughter] our our our wonderful staff member knows of which they speak. [laughter] All right. Uh commissioner comments not about the previous discussion. No commissioner comments. All right. Staff comments. You're only Oh, Benjamin has his hand up. What can we do for you, Benjamin? Uh just a friendly reminder, uh Commissioner Banford, Commissioner Kash, December 31st, your term will be expiring. staff strongly encourages you to reapply if you'd like to continue. We've greatly appreciated your service here on the commission. How long

I will work on Carol. Carol, how long have you been doing this? Honestly, I don't know. It's been a very long time. Okay. Thank Thank you for that. And I hope you will be applying. I will. Otherwise, we'll have to draft some rules to draft you, but I don't think we're allowed to do that. This isn't that country yet. Anyway, all right. With no further comments, this meeting is adjourned. And thank you all very much. And especially thank you two for coming. I hope it was an educational and enjoyable if nothing