Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

Evening everyone. Uh like to call the plan commission meeting of Tuesday, October 7, 2025 to order. And I'd like to have roll call. Madam Secretary, Chairman Culie, present. Commissioner Bellamy, Commissioner Goses, present. Present. Commissioner Oler, present. Commissioner Prince here. Commissioner Weise present. Chairman, you have a quorum. Thank you.

Do you have any communications? Um, the only thing I would I wanted to note just in case there's anyone here with time commitments in the audience, uh, the reasonzoning request Z2515 for the lot on the corner of 37th Avenue South and Poinset as the applicant has asked to postpone that to possibly the next meeting. Hopefully the next meeting. Okay. Thank you. Okay. All business. Um, we got a sketch plan submitted minutes. Oh, I'm sorry. I already checked that. Okay.

Thank you. I'd like to uh call for an approval of the minutes of uh September 16th. I I do have a change in the minutes. Yes, sir. on 6B. My comments were that because of the city properties along Long Bay, it appeared that we were creating a donut hole and I voted no.

Okay. Any other comments about those minutes? If there are no other comments, Commissioner, we will get those amended and put those amended minutes online for you. Thank you. You're welcome. Mr. Chairman, I move we accept the minutes as amended.

Second. Okay. The motion's been seconded. All those in favor? I opposed. Let's have it. Okay. Item 6B. I'm sorry. Yeah. 5B. 5 A. 5 A. 5 A. Okay. I'm losing my place here.

No worries. Um, item 5 A is sketch plan SUGB 2519. This is a sketch plan of subdivision creating 41 residential lots, open space, and public rights of way at Harper Valley off Tommy Chestnut Road. Uh you originally heard this at the August 15th meeting. Um and they postponed to allow them to provide additional information uh justifying the extent of tree removals proposed in the sketch plan. So a little bit of uh background for sketch plan. This is a a new uh step in our platting process to provide early feedback on the layout and design of a subdivision with a focus on preserving existing trees. Uh this is a 13.2 acre property. It's currently undeveloped and vacant accessed by Tommy Chestnut Road and it's currently two lots of record zoned R1A. Um there's a field inventory identifying all 8 in trees plus as part of the submittal. The conceptual layout is 41 residential lots for single family homes, open space and public rights of way. The the sketch plan shown identifies the trees to be removed in red. Um no details are provided regarding how trees to remain will be protected during construction. And that is fair because we we would just expect to see that at the preliminary plot level. And the layout is conceptual and intended to support early review of the site plan. Um particularly with regard to tree preservation, grading impact and infrastructure feasibility. The next part of the uh staff report is just an index of the trees to be removed by lot um and trees to be retained by lot. There are uh just to note a few trees shown in red in that list that even if you approve the sketch plan would still

have to go to BZA to be removed because they exceed that 24 in threshold. Um for the staff comments from planning staff notes that no measure of tree quality such as health or structural condition has been provided to justify the proposed removals or retention. The submitt includes a grading plan offered as rationale for widespread tree removals. However, grading plans are not required or appropriate at the sketch plan stage. Tree removal should first be considered and approved by the planning commission based on the specific trees in question and their condition. Um, by preparing engineered construction plans that incorporate grading and removals before receiving such approval, the applicant has proceeded at their own risk. And then the zoning division has no issue with the proposed sketch plan, but notes the following. At the preliminary plot stage of construction, all trees to be retained need to be shown protected through grading and details. No matter the outcome of the sketch plan stage, trees exceeding 24 inches shall not be removed unless an arborist recommends removal based on the condition of the tree or the BCA grants approval for renew renewal. And I just referred to that. I forgot about the arborist part, but that's an alternate path to removal for a 24-in tree. Remember public works. Um, a full technical review will occur during the preliminary plat and construction document stages, but they note the following. A drainage access easement will be required along the canal ditch measured from the top of bank from Tommy Chestnut to the inter coastal waterway. Final easement widths to be determined. Easement may affect the buildable areas of all lots adjacent to the canal ditch and the proposed tea turnaround named Marsh Mallow Court. Adjustment to the tea turnaround will be required where it conflicts with canal drainage easement. Uh proposed non-jurisdictional wetland field areas will require SCDESBC review and approval and water and sewer extensions have not been reviewed and the fire marshall has no concerns or issues with the sketch plan. I know we talked about it a lot this morning. The applicant is here this

evening and we do have the grading plan as um submitted as a part of your packet for review as well. Any comments by the commissioners? So, the last time we were here with the meeting, I thought that the applicant was going to provide us some photos to get a better idea of the topography, the trees, and stuff like that, but we don't have anything but a grading plan in our packet. Do we have any of that?

I do. I do not. I have not received anything else. All right. Can the applicant explain? Hey, good evening. Um, my name is Brady Gant with G3 Engineering and Surveying. Um, the agent for this property. Um, so if it's kind of hard to see, but I don't know if I can change the page, but on the grading plans, um, there are Okay, perfect. Um there are basically a full uh topography map on these plans showing all of the contours of the entire site both existing and the proposed contours. Um there's no we don't have any pictures I guess but I don't know if pictures would really help too much in kind of talking through what's going on. Um the main items that we have concerns on on site for trying to um you know retain uh some of the trees while um being able to do some of the development on the site is that there's a number of um undulations in the site, depression areas um being on the water. There's a number of contours on the back part of the site that make it difficult based off of the current lay of the land to try to save trees. Um what you actually see on this plan that's a little different is we have gone back through based off the comments of the last planning commission meeting and saved a number of trees. Um it's not shown on here, but you can kind of see on the grading plans. The trees along the waterway that I think were brought up as in the last meeting a number of the ones that are outside of any of the building envelopes have been saved on these plans. Um so we have gone back through the exercise of trying to um save some of the trees based off of the grading considerations we talked about last go round. Um, but most of the and any of the trees you see on the grading plans, if you're able to flip through them, all those are being saved on site. So, you can see how the um trees that are currently on site are being saved. There's basically number of trees within every single lot that have been saved. The only locations of trees really being removed now is anything that's currently in the middle of where the proposed roads were based off the initial layouts

that were approved here for the for the zoning of the property as well as any trees that are basically directly in the middle of lots where you'd have a house built. But anywhere in the backyards, anywhere there's um potential savings like around ponds or um like we talked about along the along the waterway, all those trees have been saved now based off of the plans. Again, I know it's kind of early for some of this grading considerations because this is supposed to be a sketch plan. It's not supposed to be um I guess a review of the grades, but we have gone back through to try to um save anything we can to make sure that we can do uh as as many tree saves as possible. I know we brought up the uh the means of trying to save the trees that are shown to be saved on the plan and we would make sure those tree protections brought up based off the drip lines of any of those trees. Um but really what we're here tonight for is kind of just to attempt to move forward with these um plans and get allow staff the chance to review the grading plans, the drainage plans and utilities. A number of the um trees are proposed to be removed because of utilities and roadway alignments and everything which I believe probably makes more sense for staff to look take a look at to make sure they're okay with it. um and talking with the developer, I know they have talked about potential for um increasing any landscaping requirements to kind of mediate some of the tree removals. So, if these are options for you guys that we can kind of do the best we can to not only try to save as many trees, but try to mediate on site with some new plantings, I think that's definitely something we'd be amanable to um do as long as we can move forward and and kind of get that as a staff review throughout the pre preliminary plat and development reviews. So, in reference to numbers, caliber inches, everything compared to what you initially submitted,

this photo that's here now to what you have now, what did you increase in savings as opposed to what was actually taken out on the plan? I can't tell you the exact number, but I'd say if you're looking at this in general, probably somewhere around uh 25% roughly. I mean, there's a lot of trees along these backyards here and all these trees back up here by the waterway, which um still make it a little difficult because of the grades, but are stuff we can work on. And then anything through the backyards here that we've are now shown in the grading plans that are now shown to save. I don't know exactly the numbers because I don't have the calipers of each specific tree in front of me, but I I I know there's a a large difference in what was planning to be removed prior to what we have now. Um and obviously with with staff, we can go through some of those numbers as well if we can get through tonight and um move forward with the development. But, um the goal here is to try to alleviate any of those removals if they don't seem like they're necessary. We will shift, you know, building pads and any of the house envelopes and anything necessary to make sure that everybody's comfortable with the plan as it is. I I still I still can't get a grasp on what kind of trees or what kind of border you're going to have between the Beverly homes to the right of the diagram and uh this project

and a buffer you said. Yeah. Are you going to take all of those down? There's a number of trees currently shown on this plan and I can kind of maybe show it on these plans that are still expected to be saved. Um I think that's a conversation we can have with um the developer and staff on trying to in include some sort of buffering between them. Um that's not something we've been at, you know, looking at this at this point in the process with it just being a sketch plan, but it's something I'm sure would be amanable with the developer of having some sort of buffer. Well, shouldn't that be a part of the sketch plan then? Sure. And again, it's just not something that's been brought up quite yet through the sketch ben process, but it's something we would definitely be amanable if including some sort of buffer requirement along the back of those lots in between the Beverly site and the um and those lots there. But that's why we asked for a sketch plan.

Yes, sir. We would like to know this before we talk about later on making changes and further on in. Yeah. And I guess kind of and I think that's I was not here for the meeting that you were here earlier for, but in reading the minutes, I think that's what you were asked for.

Yeah. And I apologize. I wasn't at the last meeting, but I my understanding was a lot of the the talks were about the tree saves. And again, I don't have any issue and I I believe the developer wouldn't have any issue with trying to include some sort of buffering between those pro properties. Um it's something we could definitely include in the provisions for any approvals to make sure we have a buffer in between. um just to make sure that it's something that uh you wouldn't see too much in between the this property and those Beverly properties right next door. Okay. As well as down on the Culdeac for

Raccoon Point Drive. If you eliminated those two lots, you'd save a lot of trees, wouldn't you? Um yeah, the only issue you have in that area there is there is a low depression that is um encompassing a lot of the property back there as well. All those existing homes, there's a depression in that area that uh is not really a benefit for I imagine the homeowners back there either. Having that depression is just water sitting back there. So leaving those trees, you know, that's fine, but the problem is that you're going to have sitting water in the back of those those houses that wouldn't really be alleviated through just saving the trees. And and we we would basically allow for with part of this development is um making sure we convey any of the water from behind those houses to make sure there's no issues there as there's been um wetlands back in that area that we could alleviate any outstanding issues on. And I'm sure that's something we can continue to look at. Um there are a number of trees back there, but again it's based off a topography that we would have issues um trying to um keep some of those trees, but again there is a buffer back there or at least an open space stretch back there. I think it'd be something we could easily um look at including in the approval process would be a buffering of those lots compared to those existing lots back there so that there's more of a gap in between the developments. Um the applicant didn't upload the revised sketch plan to the the place in the um in our software where the plaque goes and but looking at the number they say that the difference is uh 3850 trees to be removed versus 3227. Um, so 600 in they're roughly different, but I did not have that for the packet because it wasn't in the right spot and it wasn't emailed like the grading plan.

I would suggest postponing it until we get what we need. Any other comments?

I think providing exactly what a detail exactly what we're wanting so that they know what to come back with would be good. Now, just just to clarify, what would that be? Would that be a list of the trees qualities?

Earlier today, you guys talked about um the quality of the trees. And for example, I mean, I I don't have the best eyes, but I can't read where a on here where a 23 in cedar is. And if the um the pad of the home can be moved over, you know, five inches to save that 23 inch cedar or, you know, I think that's more of what the planning commission is looking for

so they can see exactly where those maybe not I don't know maybe I like gum trees but you know the cedars and maples and all those trees are to see if maybe there's a little bit different way to configure and not just do it based off the grading plan is things that I heard with you say were that you're willing to move the house pads to save some of the the trees depending if it needs to be up or back and I understand you need uniformity um to a neighborhood but I think that can still be achieved but I just think they can't see they see 885 trees being taken down

or 385. Did I say 800? 385. Sorry.

We talked about this morning, I know we discussed the Anchors Bay subdivision that's currently in the process of providing a tree quality assessment for y'all. They're going through and taking pictures and analyzing which what are the trees, what trees are worth saving, what trees are not worth saving, and that's what they're going to present to y'all. And I think you echoed that that's kind of what you wanted to see from from this subdivision as well. I guess the idea would be too in the trees that we're taking because there's no other option but maybe to take them or because of where the roads are, maybe what you're having to do. But then some kind of a plan for mitigation of what we can do to recover to make this a desirable neighborhood that that over the long term,

you know, as we look at the site today and we ride by it and taking a couple pictures, you know, it's there's a lot of trees out there. A lot of them are pines. Yep. But it's a it's a it's a forested site. Yes, sir. And and then then the whole idea of doing what we're doing is to say, okay, let us look at it the way it is and look at some kind of an idea about where we're going to be we develop this thing to protect some trees. And I guess what we're saying is it's it's hard to us to look at this and understand are we achieving that mission of protection.

Yeah. And I I and I fully understand that and I appreciate the response you guys have given. I think um it makes it difficult with it being at the stage it's at to know some of that stuff early um just because you know so many considerations. The grading stuff we're talking about theoretically shouldn't be part of this process right now because it's not a requirement and I don't think it's um you know something we're supposed to be submitting at this time. I know it was kind of justification from the last meeting we had but um some of those items are probably taken at more of a you know further into the process. But um and some of the stuff you're talking about with mitigation and you know new plantings and stuff I believe that's all items we'd have no issue providing I I imagine is probably not part of the sketch plan process typically for submitting any sort of mitigation plans. Um so you know stuff we can we can gladly uh assist with providing. I imagine it's probably not um something we we're supposed to provide early um just because it's not part of the sketch van process typically and it's um I know it's a new process but some of those items are things we would typically take care of during the development plans and the platting reviews that we talked about. Um so if it's stuff we need to do early um you know we would just like to have an idea of what that checklist would look like just to make sure we have everything covered on our end um so we can provide you guys everything we need to get this thing through. Um, we're at the point now we just want to make sure we're doing something that um, you know, is is something that's approvable for the area. We want to make sure everybody here is is on board with what we're trying to do and staff is as well. I think it's hard to provide all those considerations at this point through a sketch plan. Um, not fully knowing what the final product will be in terms of how the lay the lay of the land will be, utility layouts and all those items. Um, just because it's not that far enough into the process, but we will gladly take a look at whatever you guys need. Um, if there's stuff, additional reports we can provide, um, we would love to be able to move forward with with the staff reviews of the plans and and try to move some of those things in the staff review, but we will do anything we can to make sure you guys are comfortable

with the with the plans and how we can move forward the site. I noticed um that your building footprints seem to be very uniform and straight line. Um, is there any flexibility in there? In other words, in trying to save trees, can you move some over or twist others or whatever?

Yeah, I don't think that's too much of an issue. Um, I imagine, you know, in the early process of some of these projects, um, it's hard to know exactly what's going to be built on each lot. Um, it could be custom homes, it could be whatever. So, at this point, it's hard to know exactly what that would be. Um, we don't have an issue sha uh switching things around, moving lots around to make them work best for uh tree saves and and whatever else. um the locations you guys see are typically the um the uh the tree itself, not the drip line. So, some of those locations might have some some drip line issues if you were to try to move stuff over, but it's still not a you know, we we would gladly do that. And if if something we can move forward with, we would gladly make sure staff is able to review those so we can avoid any as many trees as possible when it comes to just, you know, changing the pad location or switching the pad into a different shape or or whatever. Um everything you see on the site plan now is is kind of just a standard template of how it's normally laid out because we're so early in this process. Um but again that's something we could absolutely u make sure we can have some input from staff on any input from you guys on and make sure we can address moving forward. So with this, what would be better, Suzanne, to postpone or decline with recommendations? What what's the best recommendation for them to move forward? Okay. Any other comments? Like to uh invite public any public comments on this request.

Hey, good evening. Uh Jay Lor with Paul Metal Harbor HOA president. So we we but up there to to the south end there. So we're here last meeting and um we're working with Chris Banning and them. But I think uh you look at the drawing where the culde-sac is there's a really nice line of trees and the nice buffer zone there. So um I think that would be a good I think we're going to work with them to you know to keep that buffer for our pond. But as if you look on the uh on the north on the on the other end there where the get you can see this end right here. So this is a this is our easement. We have like a a 100 by 300 foot uh it's all woods right here. It's it's protected. It's part of the HOA. So that's this is all be left tree. So they can't you know they can't touch that which is which is nice, right? So that's that's good. It's just it's just uh you know these houses here maybe creating some kind of buffer zone even if there's not there's not many trees right here. So you know maybe planting something there. But we would be we'll be okay with with you know doing a a nice buffer zone, a nice planting zone right here and then leaving some of these trees here because uh it is really thick and trees it's really nice. So I think uh we we we've been out to the site many times with the with the neighborhood and we think we can make something work and we think a lot of these trees are still on our property too. So uh we're not too concerned as far as um you know budding up the palm metal harbor. So just want to put that input in there. So we're we're okay with that. So, but uh and then you know I'm not a survey, but this line of trees right here with Beverly, it's really nice uh thick trees in the buffer zone. So, um and again, I think a picture would be a thousand words, but it there's definitely room there to leave something there for everybody to be happy. So, it's again, but it is pretty rough inside here. It's pretty it goes like this, right? We walked them several times. So, it's pretty it's pretty nasty in here, you know. So, they're going to do a lot of work to fix that. But again, uh, what we're seeing so far with man with Chris Manning and him, I think we're I think we're okay

with, you know, butting up the Paul Metal Harbor. So, just want a better input on that, too. So, so are you recommending um where it says James, Kenlaw, Timothy, Cords, having some type of buffer there? Yeah. some kind of planet buffer like like like Dell Web did, you know, over there as far as those homes buting up on on on an on and an street there. Something like that. Yeah. Okay.

That that would be that would be our perfect world if they can work something else like that. But uh again that that'll protect both both communities, right? So um and the two lots on the circle 29 and 30, these two lots right here. Yes, sir. Yep. eliminate those and save those trees. No, I think I think the homes the homes would work here. The homes can stay here. It's just it's just uh this this line right here. And uh you know, we have to we'll get with with the surveyor. I talked to um Chris Manning before we uh

David before we got here, but I think uh if most of these trees fall on our property line, we should be okay. And I and I think they do. I think they're pretty close. I think those big pines, if you ever if you drove by there and looked at it, those big pines that butt up to the to the uh to the lake, the ponds right here, if we can save that tree line, that would be huge. And I think uh most of those trees do fall on our property. So, I think we should be okay. But again, we don't we're not surveyor, so we haven't seen that actual line yet. But I think I think there's I think there's room uh that can definitely keep these two these two lots here. So, it's not not an issue for us. So, how wide a buffer or area would that be?

Well, I mean the, you know, if some of it is on your property line, how far into their property would that have to go to save to to make a decent wooded buffer? Yeah. 10 feet, 20 feet.

I mean, you can I mean, everybody says 20 feet, but I don't think that's realistic. I think uh you know if if these trees fall 5t on our side and another 5t on that side you know a 10 to 14 10 you know 10 foot buffer would be would would work it's really thick I mean it's really thick with the so I think that would be you know we don't asking for everything but I think I think a 10 foot would be if it works out where it's five and five I think that would uh that would be sufficient for us just gonna It doesn't I mean from the aerial which is not survey accurate but the trees are generally on this property. There aren't any prop on that property. Is this thing always like spot spot on?

Not sure. Okay. Right. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, I I think we can I think there's, you know, again, I think there's enough room there that we could keep most of these trees right here and and and uh I think everybody would be happy, you know. Uh this is kind of there's not really many trees right here, right? So, we would ask for some kind of, you know, kind of like what they did over Dell Web, something like some kind of buffer there. And then then this is our uh this one right here. That's that's a natural buffer for us. So that that stays there. So then we're we're okay.

Yeah. It looks like those property lines per this are shifted to the left per the map because they go through all the houses instead of beside them. Right. Both probably about 5 foot 10t off. Okay. I know we're going to talk about the other subdivision later on here. And again, we're working closely with them, too. So, I think we can long as everybody's agreement. I think we can we can make everything work and everybody be happy. So, you know, and and they they stress their importance of keeping the trees, too. So, I think it's uh so far so good, right? So, we'll see what happens, but Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. So if Palm Meadow Harbor, they're willing to get a buffer of a certain size and and area. What about on the opposite side? Would you do the same width of 10T?

Yes, sir. I think that's what we were kind of trying to lead on to be to begin with. I think we better off with the planted buffer just to have it uh you know straight line across the the property line there. that would be no issue. Making sure we have a planet buffer along those um existing residential houses on along those two spots especially. And then we could look at the Beverly side as well to make sure that's taken care of. Wait, so you're talking about taking out the trees on the Beverly side and then planting something? No, we would leave any trees along the property lines and the backyards we can through that spot, but there's not a lot of um you know protected trees through there. I'm sure there's probably some extra trees we could save that aren't shown on a tree survey, but we would um

Okay. If we can come through here and basically with a agreement that we can um provide buffering across any residential communities, that's that's not an issue. We don't mind leaving here tonight including that in the provisions for this. So, we still don't have a tree survey for that. Well, um to correct the tree survey is completed for the whole site, but the tree survey is only protected trees because that's the requirement to move forward. So there's a number of trees that aren't protected, mostly pines, I'm sure, that are not picked up on the tree survey. So that would be what's not currently shown on the tree survey. That's that you guys are showing the the trees on for the site plan.

How many of those uh that are the ones you saved, the 600 caliber branches we were talking about, are they between this property and the Beverly site? Are there many along that line that got saved?

Yeah. So, there's a number up here along the the beginning of the Beverly property. There's not many protected trees, but you can see one, two, sorry, three, four. It's kind of hard to see. There's glare, but there's a number of trees, probably 10 or so that are saved directly here. There's a number, there's a few in the backyard here that we can um make sure to take care of, especially if they're in that 10-ft strip, especially anything that's expected to be in those buffers, we can make sure to definitely um include any savings on any of those areas. But I imagine, and again it's kind of hard to see off of just the site plan, but um basically any tree within that 10-ft strip directly from the property line are probably saved already. And there's probably a couple that stick out just past that 10 ft that are saved as well. The only one I see on this site plan, which I'll have to um just verify, but there's yeah, basically any tree you can see through here, there's quite a few trees that are saved in that 10 foot stretch uh stretch right there that we could include as a buffer between um this property and Beverly's property. And then same on the on this side over here.

I'm just wondering if we'd be better off to look at something like requiring 1,500 caliber inches of trees to be planted along these sides because the piece beside them's clearcut. The other piece is developed. They need to be able to work inside of their confined shear. uh that if we did 1,00 or500 caliber inches that had to be put in these right in in these buffers that might help why don't

increase the tree count as well as protect the properties. Why why don't we wait to see based off of what we're asking for what all's left because we based off of what we're asking we might be able to save more than what they're thinking and they won't have to do a specific caliber inch because they'll have the natural trees that are already there. So, it'll save the de developer money, but just move the site a little bit to accomplish what we need without having to replant brand new trees. Or I mean,

or we could do 1,500 caliber branches and let the city staff determine how many of those they don't have to plant because they saved existing trees versus how many they're going to have to plant if they take out. But they wouldn't. That's Would that be something that y'all do? or no, you don't do that. If you bid 1500 trees, what would be the minimum count? I mean, you say with no tree being less than four, I don't know what would be the Yeah. And then we're getting into

being kind quality and and then telling one developer one thing versus another. That's that's where we don't have a standard. And that's what we're trying to do. You know, once things start shifting and they try to clear up this to do the lots, it's going to have some areas that if if we don't allow it, it'll be wet areas and it'll drown out whatever we have them leave. a while later it'll be drowned out and just a thicket of weeds or or shrubs versus the trees unless we were at this moment where we're at looking at a planned amount. But wouldn't that come later on the grading plan?

That's why I was just using a set amount of inches. But I'm saying if if we have if we have a if we have an agreement as to how where the trees are going to be saved and and what trees are going to be saved, then the grading can go from there and they can adjust their grading to that. I thought that was the whole point of the sketch plan. I don't want to see us get ahead of ourselves with these plans at this point. This is something new that's been relatively established and uh I think there's we need to be flexible as possible too. Uh so what would be the best way forward as developer is saying um approve the request as submitted with some uh comments?

No, it it was postponed. get the information that we're looking for. And then at that point with the information based off the trees that they show and they the quality they are, if they're savable, if it's, you know, a 12-in gum tree versus a 23in cedar, which one you'll save the cedar and move a a pad or a home pad over a little bit to save that? And then at that point, you know, them give us ideas on their buffers for the um the neighborhoods adjoining. And if that includes saving certain trees in that area, then that would minimize the amount of possible caliber in that we're thinking of. I think the idea really is that is that if we're presented with a plan that's showing us what we're doing and then and then and that plan while they're looking if they're asking to take stuff away that that that plan, you know, it's hard for us to come up with any kind of a mitigation plan as we're looking at this. So the I think the the real thing is and I don't know because this is like you said it's a new situation and do we even do we even at this point talk about what can be done to to mitigate something when when the whole but the whole idea of the thing is to save our trees and end up with more trees in our neighborhoods. they they will have mitigation requirements for tree removal that that can be dealt with at the preliminary plot stage. This is what are the quality of the trees, which one are we going to save, which ones are we going to remove and then move towards the preliminary plot construction plans once those decisions have been made. And the BZA actually takes care of that part of

the BCA takes care of allowing a variance for removal of a 24 inch or greater tree. They also allow variances for mass grading. That's the other element but or they they can issue a variance for mass grading which otherwise is not allowed by our ordinance. and they are, you know, the by the preliminary plaque construction set really all they're allowed to take out is what's in the infrastructure to to grade the home lots. That's why they have to go to BCA for. Um, so we're we need to postpone to get the information that Suzanne just said,

unless I'm missing something. I would I would much rather see a 22inch gum and a 14inch maple in their natural state. be saved than plant a 4-in maple as an afterthought. So, that's that's how I feel about this. Understood. See, we understand the position you're in. You're the first group that we're going through the sketch plan just as much as this is the first time that the board has to address it as well. Yes, sir. All right.

We apologize in advance. We apologize in advance. Yes, we do. It's just that we don't want to make rash decisions now and then later on it's not even close to what we could have done to protect as many trees as possible. Okay. So if if this is postponed because we would request the um quality of the trees, would that satisfy the commissioners? Yep.

Do we do it at that I guess when we say the how who would determine that? Where would they where would that information come from? G3 engineering. I guess for our side, just understanding what the quality means. Is that would you guys want a survey just very easily detailing which trees have been shown as removed or is it is it pictures along buffers or I think city staff tell you exactly what rather than continue to this up. I think staff could tell you exactly what they would want to see and we could go from there.

I think Bahama Island went to BZA recently and they came out with a list and these are the trees. This is the picture of the tree. this tree is it's been broken. It's it's not a good quality specimen of that species versus this is a tree in great condition. Um it's worthy of being saved. And that's the kind of information that I think this is supposed to elicit this whole process. Yeah. Introduce us to the trees. Okay. And I guess for product for you guys is is it a full report because it's going to be a very long report if that's if that's what it's going to take. Is that what it is? Okay.

I would say any questions on that? Ask city staff. They're more versed in this than we are. And I think Suzanne understands what we are looking for. I think it's a good idea. Any further comments? Any comments by the public? Okay. Um, we if we postpone this, we're going to postpone it with some comments.

What would the appropriate comments be, Suzanne? What is See, we don't exactly know. Call for a motion. I'll make it up. We don't need We don't need just to postpone it. Postpone. We'll handle it again in the workshop. We need to let them know what we're looking for. Alio, I'll make it up. Ready?

Okay. Any further discussion? I'll call for a motion. I move the planning commission postpone the sketch plan sub-25-9 prepared for Harper Valley as submitted contingent upon receiving a true sketch plan identifying the trees and the quality of trees per city staff um recommendations. Second. Okay, we have first and second. Last chance for comments. Call for a vote. All those in favor? I

I

opposed. I seven. Item 5B is the first public hearing regarding the first amendment to the DA for Lorett Associates track. Um this is the first of two public hearings. The second will take place on Monday, October 20th at city council along with first reading of ordinance. Um planning commission takes no action. They're just um hosting the hearing for public comment. This is between Beaser Homes and the city and it's regarding an amendment because the off-site road improvements, specifically the improvement of Long Bay Road from Water Tower Road to Champions Boulevard have been delayed. And this is to lengthen that DA to um or to lengthen the time for the developer to make those improvements to 12 months from the effective date of the amendment. Um, the amendment has to be delivered within 60 days of approval. And there's a couple of remedies the city has. Uh, default notice with 120 days to cure. um city that he may withhold building permits before beyond the first 200 units as well as as we talked about in workshop this morning, this DA is being revised to also allow the city to have a bond on those road improvements. So that that's another option the city has to move forward if if things don't aren't completed. Okay.

Anyone in the public would like to make a comment on this this first public hearing. The next public hearing be by city council at their next uh meeting, I guess. Any commissioners have anything to say on this? Last chance for public comments. I guess I'll close the hearing. 680.

Okay. 6A.

Okay. So, we have item 6A, preliminary subdivision plat SUV 2470, um, major preliminary plat creating 33 residential lots, open space, and rights of way in Hudson Creek at Pomemetto Harbor. Uh, planning commission recommended the annexation and zoning of this parcel to R1B on May 7th, 2024, and city council approved the annexation and zoning petition on June 17th, 2024. Uh this will be accessed by Cena Drive. The total area of the subdivision is 8.58 acres. Um and the subject property is currently seven lots of record. Uh and the parcel is unused and vacant currently. Um the smallest lot size is 6,000 square ft and the largest lot size is 9,776 ft. The density of the subdivision is 3.85 85 dwelling units per acre. All setbacks conform to the standards of the R1B district. And this plot will be creating Gator Waddle Way and Raccoon Point Drive. Both 50- foot wide public rides of way. All rides are all roadways are designed to meet city standards, including sidewalks and street trees. Um, as for staff review, there was no major issues. Um, we did just want to note that we did receive a request from the adjacent property, Pomemetto Harbor, uh, requesting a buffer, 15 to 20 foot buffer along the shared property line. And in response, the applicant noted that, uh, the existing trees were removed due to grading around the proposed pond, but supplemental plantings will be added along the rear property line to provide a vegetative buffer in accordance with the request.

Any comments or concerns by the commissioners? And you do have a plat of the proposed buffer. Yes. Would you like to see that?

Where does this go? and the adjacent property is amendable to that. What was that?

The adjacent property is amendable to that. They accept that as the an adequate buffer. um that I don't believe that we have sent them the buffer. Um but they are here. I don't want you're okay with that buffer. You're not okay with that buffer. Get public account.

They are not okay with that buffer. Um, and I do just want to note that there is not a requirement to have a buffer here. Rocky, you want to open it for public comment? Yeah. Okay. Public comments.

Thank you. So this this buffer that so we we're been talking to David and them through for through the past year since it started. So there is a very nice tree line here, right? We talk back to tree line. Um again uh full disclosure my house is right here, right? So a little bit interest in here but but there there is a full tree line here. So we're trying to save as many trees as we can. So, I'm not sure if this if this is if this is five or 10 feet, wherever this this proposed buffer is, we would like to keep as many trees as possible and then and then start to grade from there. I mean, that's I think they can be saved, but again, I'm not, you know, I don't know about the the um the way the grading has to go, but there if we can keep them, we want to keep them. uh again. So, uh we've been discussing with them that we would save as many as we can, but now this is new to us as far as a a new proposed uh you know, buffer here. So,

so again, you're asking for a more natural buffer that currently exists versus tearing it down and planting new trees. Yes, ma'am. Okay.

Yeah. And I think if you know, you know, if I know this is all new with the trees, but you know, if this if the city I don't know if the city can say that or or or but if when they do these plans, if they can say, you know, we're going to keep a 10-ft buffer around his whole property with the natural trees because if you if you look for that, if you go behind our house and look the buffer, you can't see 10t through the woods. So the natural buffer that's been there for years, if they can keep something like that, even if it's low vegetation and keep it there, it's way better than tearing it all down and and replanting and waiting 20 years again. Right. So that would be our our recommendation to keep trying to keep it as much as much as possible. Gotcha.

So you're thinking 10 feet is an adequate amount. Is that what you're saying? Well, I think you know I think re being realistic and you know looking at the plans it looks like there's you know there there's a you know there's there's a 20 foot buffer there but then there's a they want to do some road some grading but uh you know our ass would be you know at least 10 ft buffer uh you know and that's not that's not that much I mean it's only from here to the wall right it's not it's really not that much you know we would like a 20 foot buffer of course but I don't think we're I think that might be too much to ask here with with houses ago. But, uh, again, 20 foot would be perfect, but again, um, it's pretty thick back there. But that line of trees is really there's some nice nice big cedars, maples in there as well, too. So, call that a har speaking about the trees. I've heard a lot of talk about trees, about nice trees, big trees, certain species of trees. As a homeowner, when I'm looking out, I might see three or four really nice trees. That's great. I like looking at nice trees. But if there's also just green, I'm happy. I can't see the house on the other side. So, it doesn't necessarily need to be 30 ft deep. As long as is green, I can't see what's behind the green. And I think that's kind of what Jay was was alluding to is that strip, if it's there and it's left natural in its natural state and it does the job, then you don't need to pick and choose so much. Yeah, leave the beautiful trees in there, but you don't have to worry about a tree on every lot because when you're looking around you, you see green.

Allison, did you get his name and address? Sir, we need your name and address. Uh Dave Cardier, 148 Palmetto Harbor Drive.

Thank you, sir. Good evening folks. Uh, thank you for your time tonight. I'm Tommy Hill with G3 Engineering and Surveying. Um, as it was stated by city staff, there's not a requirement for a buffer here, but we did try to go above and beyond. And we actually added additional plantings to that area behind the pond there. And it is all cedar trees. It's maple trees is what was there. Um, the cedar trees grow really fast. I can tell you that from my own personal opinion. I put some between my neighbor and myself. And in two years, they've grown and they're very full. Um, so once again, that is the area that we are coming out and you can see at the very end that there's a a drain line. That's our outfall to where this water needs to the storm water needs to leave the site. And that was the suggested site by the city staff by public works of where this outfall needed to go. So the reason that that area can't stay undisturbed is because we have to put a drain line under that. but that we are willing to come back through and over plant that area to create that that vegetative buffer there. So that was the point and and the reason why we did what we did there.

So the drain line has got to go from lot number 11 all the way back to the back part of the pond. It's coming along the back of lot 10 right there and then uh in between lots 10 and 11 at the end of the culde-sac is the area that we have to outfall. How wide is that?

I want to We were adhering to the landscape buffers there, Suzanne. Is that 10 or is that 20 feet on that back side there on on behind the pond there? Yeah, I think it's 10. And like I said, obviously we I mean, I love trees myself and would want to save as many as we can. That's just whenever you to meet the storm water requirements that are put forth, you can't put more than 18 in of dirt around an an existing tree or take it away from an existing tree. It'll kill it. So that's why a lot of these trees have to go during development is because you can't put that much dirt around a tree and to meet the storm water requirements. Obviously, there areas where we have to cut dirt and then you have to bring dirt in in other areas. So that's that's it's the balance that we have to do as developers to try to make that work. And like I said, I really feel like we kind of went above and beyond with the extra plings that we were willing to put in between uh Palmetto Harbor and the pond there to try to to try to supplement that undisturbed buffer considering it's not required at all and the developer offered to do that. So I felt like it was a a nice gesture on their part. And then ultimately the pond is right behind it. So it's not like there's going to be a house built right up against that. The only lot that's going to even front that is lot 10 there. And of course they'll have to meet setbacks and things like that. So it's not like the the development is happening right along the property line there. How thick do those cedars? Because it's typically from the bottom is full from the bottom all the way up. Correct.

Well, they're similar to like a Christmas tree. Yeah. But so they're really wide at the bottom and then they get, you know, shallower at the top, but they do grow, you know, 20 ft. So, um, like I said, the ones we planted, we planted three foot trees and they're already 6 feet and it's been 2 and 1/2 years and they're really full. I mean, I can't see my neighbors at all. Any other comments by the commissioners? Any further comments from the public? Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, I'll Entertain a motion. I move that the planning commission approve the major preliminary plat of subdivision. Am I on the right one? 24-7.

Thank you. 24-70. Prepare for prepare for Hudson Creek at Palmetto Harbor as submitted with taking into consideration Palmetto Harbor as much as you can of their property line saving the trees. I second that.

Okay, you got a first and a second. Any last comments? Call for vote. All those in favor I opposed. I have it.

And just to note again in case anyone came in later, um the reasonzoning request Z2515 has been postponed by the applicant. Um and we'll need a vote to postpone that. Mr. Chairman, I move that we postpone the uh reszoning request Z25-15. Second. All those in favor?

I I Um, S6C, it's slowing down. There we go. This is a request for a major PDD amendment to the Gatorhole PDD, expanding the Walmart Super Center for online pickup and storage. The area that they are enclosing for online pickup is shown right here. I think it's currently the garden center. So, that's a 4900 square foot building expansion and they are modifying the parking area as well. In addition to adding some of the signage that we talked about this morning in the workshop and that is shown on the elevations. Outdoor pharmacy home and fashion. My favorite applicant may be here. I'm not sure. Okay. Okay.

Thank you. Okay. Anybody have any comments, questions? How's the time?

I have a few comments. I like the signage now. It's very minimal. You know which side to go in for grocery. You know which side to go into the pharmacy. You know where the garden center is and the auto center. Is there really a need for the sign outdoor auto care home and fashion? Because if people don't know what Walmart does at this point, I don't know what rock they've been living under it. And I understand that it fits within the criteria of this signage, city signage, but I think less is more. Um, that would be my my comment. If you do move this forward with a recommendation, it it goes to city council for approval. Just as a a reminder. Um and that would be October 20th be first reading. Now, we can provide your comments as comments. Could provide them to the applicant. I imagine it's a bigger process to get Walmart's signage package changed um overnight kind of thing.

I'm just saving them money. No, because right now there's three signs. the main Walmart to pick up and that small subway in the upper leftand corner. Now we're looking to fill in the other areas. Yeah, there was a pharmacy sign before. Oh, it's not there now. Really? Not there anymore. Just the three. I went there this morning just to

just to point out um the signs. There's the existing subway to remain. Uh I think grocery over the door to on this side. Walmart. The logo sign. Oh, now I can't read. That's home and fashion. Vision. Vision. Vision. Pharmacy. Oh, went too far. Pickup outdoor and auto care on the end kind of with an arrow pointing. But this would be the this is the face of the new addition. I mean, it doesn't look bad. It's just less is more for me personally.

I would I would think that they didn't just get creative and decide to start putting this probably corporatewide. Yeah. And they're probably going to have other stores comply with these signs in their neighborhoods or Yeah. you know, on a scale like that, you don't buy one because they're buying a thousand. Yeah. It's probably a prototypical design that they're using now, moving to be a Walmart. Yeah. Oh, absolutely. from whatever bad signage they feel like they need.

That's it's set back on the parcel away from 17. So, you know, it's not that much. All it is is a personal opinion. Walk in the exit door. Yeah. Most of these signs you're going to have to be in the parking lot before you really see them anyway. So, I don't really see it.

17. You really good. Thank you, deer hunt. Any further comments? Like to invite the public if there's any comments from the public. No further comments from the public. I'll entertain a motion. Mr. Chairman, I move that the planning commission recommend approval of the major plan development district amendment to Gatorole PDDZ-25-16 as submitted.

Second.

Okay, last chance for comments. All in favor? All in favor? I I I opposed. I have it.

Okay. Item 6D is zoning ordinance text amendment ZTX 2511. This amendment removes the definition and special exception associated with beach cabanas. Um this is uh specifically a definition um and the special exception within the R4 resort residential district. These provisions were originally adopted to accommodate certain oceanfront related amenities associated with large residential pra projects. Over time, this use has fallen out of practice and there's a very small number of cabana houses in the city because the use is no longer relevant or utilized. Staff has determined that the continued presence of the language in the ordinance creates unnecessary complexity. So, we're just striking that complete definition for Cabana House. Um and then striking the complete special exception allowing cabana houses in the R4 district and we we discussed it this morning. So any questions about this request? Comments? Any comments or questions by the public? None.

Okay. I'll call for a motion. I move that the planning commission recommend approval of the zoning ordinance text amendment PTX-25-11 as submitted. Second. Okay. Call for a vote. All those in favor?

I posted eyes have it. Item 6E is zoning ordinance text amendment ZTX25-12. This creates a conservation zoning district and an estate law zoning district and amends other sections of the code as needed for consistency or housekeeping type issues. Uh the 2018 comprehensive plan introduced a new future land use classification called conservation community. This was envisioned as an alternative development pattern for green field lands, especially those adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands, waterways, and marshlands. Um, the plan emphasized compact housing forms, common open space, and preservation of natural features to balance growth with stewardship and contextual development. And even though that was 2018, it's taken us this long to get there. But so this is the corresponding conservation zoning district. Um development pressures along our corridors are greater than ever. And um additionally, staff have recognized a separate need to provide a residential zoning option that allows for larger lot sizes than the current R1 zoning. So that's the R1E that's also in the in this ordinance. the conservation zoning district. This directly implements that conservation community land use CL classification. It provides a framework for clustered residential development that's higher in density in certain locations. But in exchange for that higher density, it provides significant open space in the project, protects natural resources, and incorporates architectural and design standards. Um it developments are required to include a mix of residential lot sizes in CR

including a minimum proportion of homes on larger halfacre parcels along alongside smaller lot single family duplex townhouse and multiplex options. street network is expected to include meandering roadways designed to fit the land rather than a rigid grid. Um, intended to in reinforce the rural residential character. R1E is just a lower density alternative to the existing R1 district. Requires larger lots that are limited more to 14,000 square feet, deeper setbacks. Um and then again the housekeeping revision. So it just to quickly walk through uh section 2316 that part of the amendment adds those two zoning districts to the list of zoning districts. Um then we go to section 2318.2 that creates the R1E. It's very similar to the R1 district. The single family dwelling size is 14,000 square ft. The minimum lot width is 100. That's up from the R1 which is 80. The heights are generally the same. There are um detached garages with finished rooms over the garage space are allowed to be 27 ft tall. The imperous surface requirements are the same as R1 and I believe almost everything else is just the same as R1 for that R1E that we created. Then we go through the R4. Um, this just adds CR and R1E

landscape buffer requirement to that. It protects them similar to the R1. Same with the next section. Section 2325, the business commercial district. The next section 2326, highway commercial district, general commercial district, resort RC resort commercial district. And then we get to section 2330, which creates the conservation residential district. Um within the CR district we have single family dwellings, semi- detached dwellings and duplexes, um duplex and triplex dwellings, townhouse developments, neighborhood and community parks and centers, golf courses and similar outdoor uses but not lighted for night use, publicly owned recreational facilities, churches, places of worship, religious institutions and accessory uses. and it including commonly owned equestrian facilities and ADUs provided that ADUs meet a set of criteria. Um when it's detached, it has to be separated from the principal structure by a minimum of 15 ft. They have to require they are required to have one additional parking space. The principal structure must be owner occupied and if the ADU is leased, it can't be rented for um less than 30 days. compatible u materials and architecture. Um minimum parcel size is 6,500 for those parcels. They count as one half of the standard dwelling unit. Um 800 square f feet uh maximum with a height limit of 25 ft. Then we have home occupations allowed, signs permitted, and community gardens. Maximum overall density in the district is four dwelling units per acre. Uh minimum size of the parent parcels 15 acres and 10% have to be half acre or

larger. Uh 5,500 foot or 6,500 square foot um lots for single family duplex 7,000 triplex 8,000. Town houses are 2250. I'm not going to I won't go through the setbacks but go to the commonly open space. um 35% of the total land area for common open space prioritizing wetlands and their buffers. 60% of the open space shall be in one contiguous tract. The non-wetland open space has uh uses of active uses commonly owned amenities on sites not less than half an acre in size, active recreation, a trail system, fitness courses, children's play areas, and the other uses are conservation of natural archaeological or historical resources. A project buffer of 20 foot minimum width shall be required around the perimeter of the site. Vinyl siding and unfinished concrete B block are prohibited. A usable front porch with at least 80 square feet of floor area not less than 7 feet in depth. Um not more than 40% of the total width of the front of the structural structure shall consist of garage doors for single family and duplex structures. The streets are expected to meander through the development and to avoid monotony. Let's see. All wetlands in the development shall be preserved except where necessary to cross them with streets or utility corridors. All landscape plans shall uh incorporate pollinator species and all landscape plans for buffers, amenity areas or townhouse units shall incorporate pollinator species and be entirely comprised of native species. And then the maximum building heights

are 45 ft for town houses, 25 for ADUs and detached garages or barns. Um 15 feet for accessory buildings and all other structures limited to 35 ft in height. Maximum herous surface for individual building parcel shall be 35% for the halfacre and larger parcels, 60 for all other residential parts, and 70% for parcels under the halfacre with an ADU. And then all open space and amenity areas shall be planted all at once in the first phase. Only 50% of the total number of residential units are permitted until all proposed amenities are fully constructed. And then we just get back to more housekeeping. Um the overlay zone for the traditional neighborhood development, it gives CR and R1E the same protections as R1. and the adult entertainment in section 237D3 gives those two new districts the same protections as R1. And I think the final is the accessory building and uses. It gives those two districts the same protections as R1. Talked about it at length and I believe the next step will be a workshop, a joint workshop with city council before it goes to city council for a vote. Suzanne, how is this to be applied? In other words, is it do we have parcels in the city that this will be dropped on or is this a a result of a request by someone who wants to change your zoning?

Well, there are parcels, for instance, on Little River Neck Road that have not been developed that are adjacent to contiguous to the city's boundary. The future land use class for those parcels is conservation and so conservation community and so this would be the appropriate zoning designation for those parcel should they come into the city the the conservation um residential R1E I'm not so clear on how there may be a neighborhood that comes forward to rezone to R1E or it may be it's another tool for um city council for annexations and zonings.

Earlier um we talked about at workshop section 23182 um under number three. Did we figure out why permitted uses has a rear setback of 25 and not 20 like single family? Sorry 23182. So renee is that the duplex and triplex one? Nope. It's the I'm sorry. That's okay. It's the R1E single family. The the rear yard or the side yard?

The rear is 5T more for other permitted uses. Just didn't know why that was different than the single family. Oh, I'm missing it now. 23 18.2 three and go B. Yeah. Y recall other permitted uses is the rear is 25. Oh, instead of 20. Yeah,

I think that was just copying that from the R1. Um, I spoke to Jim about the duplex and triplex that we talked about making that 10 ft for side and we're fine with that. We'll make that change for before city council. But the other one, it was just a the rear yard for other permitted uses and churches really comes from the R1 district. We were just copying those standards. Okay. All right. My other question was under 23-30 conservation residential

and it would be under number two under H number five. The detached accessory dwelling Oh yeah.

unit shall be located in the rear of the side. I think we'll take your comments and try to figure out a way to work with that so that it if if it does if it is a waterway or something oriented lot then it will work to create that kind of effect with like the golden mile thing that you're talking about and um you will see this again at the workshop when we when we have a joint workshop and it may go to city council for first reading first but there is there will be a joint workshop between the So, should we I mean, I think this is great. I really do. But the more I look at it, and I looked at it this afternoon, the more exhaustive it is. Um, should we postpone it and talk about it again in the next workshop and then pass it or I mean I'd like to have some sort of uniform understanding before we sat down with city council.

Is this where we make recommendations and continue to work with city council to go through? But this is what gets the ball rolling. Right. That's what I was wondering. It starts the time clock. So I was wondering, do you want to do it now or do we do it? We I would move it forward. I mean, we could do it the next meeting if because then then we would have a chance to everybody look through it and say, "Okay, this is my question. This is my question. This is my question." I would move it forward because city council is also going to have questions about elements and that way we can address everything and come to an understanding and everything. Fair enough.

Yeah. with the intent being a joint workshop for everyone to be on the same page. I think that's the best. They get all the players in the room so we don't have to do the same thing twice really. Any further comments? No more comments by the commissioner. We have anyone from the public like to make a comment? [Music] Dan asked me at workshop to make any comments. The only one I'll say there's some things that are similar to Conway's conservation subdivision and the fact that you're requiring platting the open space at phase one is going to be problematic because all those open spaces are not going to be exempt and they're not going to abut right away. So, we've had to go back on every subdivision in that ordinance and ask for an exception because of that. That's the only thing I see that's problematic.

Thank you. Thank you for that free attorney advice. Free advice.

Okay, you got that. Okay. Nice. And that would definitely be a a problem that we would not want to duplicate because it's basically we can't create lots that don't front on right away. For it to be exempt, it has to be 5 acres or more. But not all open space is going to be that way. So I we'll have to figure out a way to work around that. When do you propose working around it? In other words, we need to do it between now probably at city council. She'll probably have it figured out before city council workshop with us. I'm guessing.

Okay. So, the thing to do would be to uh move this forward as submitted as submitted or with an amendment to incorporate that so that we don't look like we're approving it knowing there's something different that needs to be done. That's what I was up whether we should postpone it and Ju just make a motion. I'll make it up. We should postpone it. Now that chef's gone, we're adding 40% open space to everything. Chef's going to die. There you go. Already gone. He's gone. Tell him too well.

He can't jump across the counter and check me out now. Yeah. All right, we got that settled, right? Yes, sir. Any further comments?

Okay, I'll call for a motion. I move the planning commission recommend approval of the zoning ordinance text amendment T Z as in Zeta, T as in Tom, X is in X-ray 252 as submitted with additional recommendations from future city council and fixing the rightway something or another issue. Yeah, the rightway issue adjacent adjacent thing that Shep brought up that Suzanne knows about and also I told you I make it up.

Yeah, real slow-mo. and then figuring out um the rear and sideyard requirements of the 23-30 conservation reservation or residential um accessory uses along with the conservation res residential section dealing with the setback acts for um single family lots, duplex and triplex lots instead of being 5 ft to 10 ft along with other recommendations for future. Told you I'd make it up.

I couldn't quite remember the wording that chef said. Do do I get a second on that that ramble second process? Okay. The first and second call for a vote. All those in favor?

I I opposed eyes. I think that's it. Anything else? Susan, that's it. Okay, I'll motion for adjournment, please. Chairman, I move we adjourn. Second. Second. Those in favor? I opposed. I have it. We are adjourned. I hear Suzanne can clean up that. Okay. Chap.