Plan and Design Commission - Regular Meeting

Everybody, I'm going to call to order the meeting of the Highland Park Zoning Board of Appeals for Thursday, November 6th. Um, Patrick, may I get a roll call, please? Yes. Member Arnoff, here. Member Weissberg, here. Member Chase here. Member Trishansky here. Member Zeransky here, Vice Chair Yablon here, and Chair Bay here. We have a quorum. Thank you. Okay. Um, first item on our agenda is the approval of the minutes from the October 16th meeting. Has everybody had a chance to review the minutes? Yes.

Yes. Appears as such. Uh, I would entertain a motion. Uh, Vice Chair Ablon makes a motion to accept the minutes as drafted. Can I get a second? A second. Okay. All in favor of approving the minutes, please say I. I.

All oppo opposed. Seeing none, the minutes are approved as drafted. Third item on our agenda is business from the public. Is there anybody here who has anything that they would like to bring before the board that's not on our agenda. We'll get to the stuff on the agenda in just a moment. Um, but okay. Nothing nothing no business from the public. There is no old business which brings us already to new business. One item of new business is V-20225- [clears throat] excuse me 000056 property address 2789 Oak Street Appalant Megan Coyle and I will ask staff if there is a presentation please. Yes. Okay. So 2789 Oak Street applicant Megan Coyle on behalf of the owners uh proposal is for a fence site variation. The property is in both the R4 and R5 zoning district and is a new single family home that is being constructed on the property. The requested relief is to exceed the maximum allowable fence height of 4T while within the required front yard by 2 feet for a total of 6 ft in height. Here's the location. It is a property along the lake and it is also a corner lot. There's my mouse. Uh so it has frontage on Oak Street here. Uh but this is also right ofway. Uh this is a parking lot here, which I'll switch the aerial uh parking lot here. And this is the water facility for Highwood. So this is a rideway for the city. So it require it holds a required front yard um requirement. So it has two frontages. Uh here is the plat of survey again. Uh this is a corner lot according to the zoning code. Uh this is the property uh standing in

front of Oak Street here looking straight at the property. Uh this is the newly constructed home. And here's uh the foundation kind of line for where the fence uh is going to be located on the property. So the proposed work uh along Oak Street, the fence will be 40 ft back, which 40 ft is the required front yard setback for this property. uh it will be six feet along here but it is allowed to be six feet at that height as it is not within the required front yard. However, that fence in yellow here uh will be continuing on and extending into this front yard uh along kind of the Walker A uh ride ofway here. This will also be 6 ft. In this area, it's only allowed to be 4T. So, they're requiring a variation request. Uh again, this is the parking lot where people use uh people use it for the open lands park that is nearby. Here is a elevation and just kind of a material for the fence. Uh it will be 6 ft above grade and it's this stone type of material. There were two public comments. uh they were posted in the packet uh for you to review and there were no other additional comments from city staff. So again, the requested relief is to exceed the maximum allowable fence height by 4 feet while within the required front yard by 2 ft for a total of 6 ft and the board should be using chapter 173 standards of approval. And that's all I got for you.

Let me know if you have any questions, Patrick. If the if this were not deemed to be a corner lot, would that and there was another lot on the other side of the where the proposed. So, yeah. So, if this was an interior lot, that would be an allowed fence. That would be an allowed fence. Okay. So, it's because it's a corner lot and there's ostensibly two front yards. Correct. Good.

Anybody else have any questions for staff? Seeing none, say thank you, Patrick. I will ask if there's anybody else here that would like to be heard on this matter. If so, please approach the podium. We could have the applicant speak first, then maybe residents. Okay.

If I could ask you to please state your name for the record. Yes, sir. One second. Got the tape issue. My name is Megan Coyle. Okay. And I'll ask if you'll affirm or attest that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Yes. Please proceed.

Thank you. So, as I said, my name is Megan Coyle. I represent Roll Studio. We are the architect for the new construction single family home that's going up on this residence at 2789 Oak Street. Um, with me tonight is Howard Dardick, uh, the CEO of Tiptop, the general contractor, as well as Jimmy Po, who is the site superintendent for this particular project. So, we we brought a couple people to answer questions if you have them. Um, as Patrick mentioned, and thank you Patrick for for preparing and helping us get this to the floor, and thank you guys for your time tonight. Um, we as part of the new construction permit application for this project for this single family home, we had included this fence as part of as part of that approval process. Um, the area in blue on the south side and the west side facing Oak Street were approved for 6 ft. Um, they are currently in construction as the photographs show. Um we we we followed the rules as much as possible and um submitted for the 4 foot fence in that northmost um front satback that faces Walker Avenue um to the north north. Um in our drawing it was it was red. It looks like it's changed to yellow in this particular instance. So again, as Patrick had pointed out, um that is that is the specific variation that we are asking or requesting um approval for tonight is basically just to change the height from 4T to 6 ft to make it consistent with the rest of the property. Um as part of the variation, I understand that our obligation is to basically prove to you that this is an

irregular condition um that is sight specific. Um, so in order to do that, what I want to point out specifically is that Walker Avenue doesn't exactly function like a normal street in this particular instance. If you look at Oak Street, you have a couple um kind of qualif qualifications for that particular area. You have a sidewalk, you have a landscape setback, and you have traffic that's flowing on a on an operational street in that instance. So there's these levels of buffers and kind of use um that that would be a norm and that you would normally see on a street. Walker Avenue in this particular instance, in this particular lot, does not function in the same way that Oak Street does. Um there are two main functions for this area. One is a parking lot um for the Lake County Forest Preserve. So instead of having just kind of a coming and going in the street, you have a parking lot. That parking lot is actually directly adjacent to the site to the point where it abuts the property line. Some of the cars could actually extend over the property line onto 2789 Oak Street. You can kind of see the the back of the pickup truck in that particular image. Um that's kind of bump going out onto what is 2789's property. The other use for the site, if you wouldn't mind flipping back to the site plan. Thank you. [snorts] Is a private I think I'm pretty sure it's private. A private access drive down to Highwood's water treatment facility. There's two different barriers of fencing that basically block off part of the parking lot and then block off access to that roadway down to the water treatment facility. So there's there's some barriers and level of privacy that that are produced in this. It is the parking lot is considered public during daylight

hours. Um but there is what we measured to be a 7ft chain link fence around the front at the front face um facing west of that particular parking lot. So, if you go past the two um wheelchair access or handicap um spots, there is a chain length fence before you actually get to the parking lot. So, that's all to say this isn't really a typical um street or roadway that you would normally see. Um it doesn't have the qualifications that would normally kind of warrant it to be a corner lot like the rest of Highland Park, per se. Um, in researching this further, according to the zoning code, any vehicular use area is usually um obligated to have a 5-ft landscaping buffer around it when it abuts a residential lot or property or district. So, a 5ft lamp escaping buffer in order to kind of give it literally a buffer and then a a um fence or a wall that is to the maximum height possible. So, those two qualifications for this particular parking lot and it is existing condition does not have that. We're not asking you to put it in place, but we're asking for relief for us to basically create similar circumstances. Um, mainly for the reason of creating a little extra privacy, a little bit of a buffer between what is kind of a a public area and a private residence between the two of those spaces. 4T. I'm I'm not that tall. 4T's not super high. It's kind of easy to scale. it doesn't, you know, you can see over it when you're sitting in your car. So, there's just a sense of wanting to have a little bit more um opakqueness between the two

between the two properties. That's that's the um that's the basis of our case for this evening and then I'll I'll go on just a little bit more. um [clears throat] some of the qualifications that we've researched um at least in the outline of this case. There's kind of a couple checkpoints that you have on your zoning um list. Is this material materially detrimental to the public welfare? I would say probably not. It's something that is normally adjacent to a public parking lot or a vehic vehicular use area in the in in Highland Park. So, it seems aligned with that thinking. Does it increase congestion? No, it does not. Does it increase danger of fire? No, it does not. Does it endanger the public safety? I would argue it might actually make the space more safe by having a barrier that should be there. Does it substantially diminish or impair property values? I'm sure this one will be a little bit debated tonight. Um, we would say no. Absolutely not. I think that it's it we're the intention is for it to be a beautiful um established wall with landscape plantings in front of it much nicer than what's there right now. [clears throat] Will it alter the essential character of the neighborhood? We're putting in a single family home. This is a single family home neighborhood. We again say no. We don't we don't believe that's the case. Um, is the proposed variation in harmony with the spirit and intent of this chapter? I think so. Based on the fact that the code is written where there should be a barrier between uses in this particular instance. So,

okay. Uh, a couple questions for you. Um, is the fence that you're proposing going to be uniform in height and appearance all the way around?

Good question. Okay, so there's a couple variables here. Um, in uniform in height, no, there is topography as is natural with Highland Park. So, we're going to have to step it down to move with topography. So, at the maximum, it's 6 feet, but then it gets shorter and then it it steps as you go. So there will be some variation in terms of height per se but the maximum is 6 ft. Um in terms of the the style uh we are proposing stone for the portion facing Oak Street and then turning the corner. Once we do have a steep slope zone on this particular property. So once we hit that steep slope zone, it will transition to a wood fence um in order to basically just be more flexible and allow for any sort of grade changes um that need to happen in the area also because it's just a more sensitive geotechnical area.

Okay. Is there I'm wondering where the access to the I'm assuming where it shows a driveway on the plan that there's going to be some type of gate there. Uh yes, it's it's covered up by a uh red and blue line in this particular at this particular scale. Um I think if you can Does your cursor show up? I'm not sure exactly. Um right between at the red and blue line by the driveway, there would be a gate that would obviously be automatic open and shut um for ACT vehicle access. There are no proposed um driveways on the north side on Walker Avenue. [clears throat]

Okay. So if you I'm just I want to be clear that I'm understand. It looked like what you showed the the picture [clears throat] of the proposed fence really was kind of more like a a wall in in essence. Is that a fair statement? It's it's opaque. It's solid. Um based on the definition of fence um in the zoning code, we believe that it still complies and that's not an issue for us to address. I'm just I'm just talking from an appearance purpose that they It is it's it's solid. It is an opaque structure. Okay. And the And that structure is going to be the same until you said it will transition to a wood fence towards the back of the lot. Correct.

Okay. If you wouldn't mind going back to the drawing of the um the stone. There we go. So in order to manage the elevation change, you can see there are two peers in this particular drawing to break it up a little bit so that you don't have kind of this big long length. Um it also helps us elegantly manage those steps and elevation in order to have um you know just clean cut lines instead of kind of zigzags in the wall. Patrick, how is the how is the height of a fence determined? Is it determined by the actual height of the fence or is it how far above grade it is or

uh yeah, it's just measured from where it's installed. Um it doesn't go off of like average grade of the entire property. It's just measured um by where it's installed and it's just the highest point of the fence. So the property goes uphill, the fence can still be four or six feet above correct wherever it's installed. Okay. Thank you. Um anybody have any other questions for this one? Cheerio.

Um, can you talk about why you need um a a six-foot fence versus using landscaping to do something similar? I believe it contributes to the sense of privacy just by basically creating a little bit of a stronger barrier that it a little bit more difficult to climb over. Um, keeps keeps kids safe a little bit more. This family has um three small children and in this particular area on the site plan there is going to be kind of a big playyard in that in that you know on the north side of the property. Um so they're they're just interested in making sure that they have a little a little bit more um structure between them and anyone you know sitting in their cars watching the site.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anyone? I've got a question, but it might be a question for Patrick. I guess to the north of the property. I see that there's I'm I see that there's a parking lot. And then is that And this is marked as a private drive that what is east of the parking lot towards the lake. Is that in fact a private drive or is it a publicly open street? Uh well, so this is public rideway, but it is a private drive down to the Highwood Water Station. There is a fence here, so people just can't access the the water station.

Do you have one of my photographs by chance that I have? We have to wait, sir. I'm sorry. We have to wait for you to be sworn in before you testify. Thank you. one of those. Yeah, that's it.

There you go. So, it's So, this is the fence that uh this is the end of the parking lot and then that's going down to the water station. And this is the parking lot. Here's the um handicap spaces. And then Oak Street is like just right here. But that's public parking, correct? Okay. But then on where that yellow gate is, then it becomes it's no longer public way after that. It's a ramp down to the beach. Yeah. But it's But is it is it It's not open to the public. It's No, that portion's not open to the public. Okay. Thanks.

Any further questions? Okay. If you have nothing left to add at this point, we'll ask if there's someone else who wants to be heard on this matter. Please change teams. Just want to add one thing. Okay. I could ask you to state your name for the record, please. My name's Howard Dick. I own Tiptop Builders. I'm building the house. Okay. And do you affirm or attest that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, all truth, and nothing but truth? I do.

Please proceed. If if we are not allowed to have this fence and it stays at the 4ft height, the fence in front of the house is going to be higher than this fence. If nothing else, it's going to look weird going around and it won't be continuous going around the house. So, it's going to come across the front at 6T, drop down the four and make a turn. So, 6T makes the most sense for privacy. If anything, but nothing else in in, you know, beauty, it should be the same height all the way around. Okay. Have you spoken to any of the neighbors? Any of the neighbors here that are going to be speaking tonight or I have not. Nobody's spoken to any of the neighbors. I I have. Yes.

You have? Would you care to tell us what the neighbors opinions are? I'm I'm sure to summarize a little, but obviously you can speak for yourself, too, so I'll fill in the gaps. Um, but I

if they're here to speak, they can speak for themselves. Um so a couple of the points of feedback that we got were um limitation of views. Um and if if you weren't mind going to that last slide. Yeah, there we go. Um it was limitation of views was one of the points of feedback that we got. Um these are images in aerial from 2018 when there were four institutional buildings on this property. There were no views from across the street or adjacent to this property. So, um, we actually think that, you know, we're actually improving the views quite a bit, especially from a vantage point that is slightly higher from across the street. As the topography goes up, each of those houses should have a view equal to or similar to what you have right now. Um, so, you know, beautiful landscaping coming in, this nice wall. We think that it's just a really nice vista. It's meant to um limit views of people next to the parking lot and from the sidewalk, but none of the other neighbors hopefully will have any sort of significant contribution or you know be detrimental to their specific views. Um you still have beautiful trees, open space, and um borrowed views from a higher elevation. That was one point. Um the other point, um there's been a bunch of questions about the construction, which you've kind of already mentioned. Um the fact that it is a stone wall or I mean a stone fence. A lot of people are calling it a wall. Um based on the definitions that we have, it is it is a structure that complies with fence, a solid fence right now. Um so we don't necessarily think that's an issue. Um those are those have been the main points was that um you know it's it's uh it doesn't strictly follow code yet it is a unique

circumstance um and a request based on very unusual conditions that don't exist in a lot of other sites. So this is this is a sightspecific request for this particular property in this particular area. Okay. One of the variations or uh standards that we consider which I don't think you touched on if you did I I must have missed it so I apologize was number one that the requested variation will contribute to the favorable environment of the city and is suitable and compatible with the character of neighboring buildings and structures. Would you care to address that a little bit? That one's quick.

Actually, I think Howie um had just addressed this. It It is compatible with the existing structures that are going up on the property right now. Um, and it is more beautiful than the chainlink fence that current currently exists at the public parking lot adjacent to it. So, we think that a beautiful stone wall with nice landscaping in front is a contribution to this particular area over other ways to solve this this um lack of uh landscaping buffer and fence. Are you are you in fact the the or the lot where the lot line is the the northern lot line is immediately north of that that's no longer Highland Park. Is that correct? Is that Highwood or Fort Sheridan or do we do we know

I'm still unsure actually. Uh the public right away at least when we were determining is um is is Highland Park although Highwood is occupying part of it. So that was why there was a lack of clarity from our perspective. Um Patrick might know better whether the area that is kind of Lake Forest Lake County forest preserve. My money's on Patrick also. Yeah. [laughter] Come on. It goes down the middle of water.

Well, this this is certainly the last lot of record in going north in High Park. Yeah, this that whole area is still High Island Highland Park. Um, it is kind of like the Fort Sheridan beginnings of it.

Uh, but let's just do this. So, Highland Park is here and then Highwood is Patton Road splits High Highland Park and uh Highwood. So this is how I would and then

one of the reasons I'm asking Patrick is I'm wondering based on the proximity as to whether there had to be notice provided to either officials of Fort Sheridan or or of Highwood or whatever governmental body might control the Yes. Yes, they do. Okay. And they and proper notice was provided to Yes. whomever. Okay. Both Highwood and Lake County Forest Preserve. Thank you. Any other questions? Yes. And for the has any portion of the brick fence been built yet?

Footings uh based on the photograph, no portion of the actual fence has been built. We just basically have the foundation um in the works at the moment. So the location of the fence is um has been poured um but the height um in kind of the structure building up from there has not. Okay. So, for example, if you wanted it to be uniform, it could be four feet everywhere. Yes. Okay. Thank you. And you don't you don't have any renderings done yet to show us exact We do not. No, we do not have renderings prepared.

Okay. All right. Any other questions for anybody who's spoken so far? Seeing none, I'll once again ask if somebody else wants to be heard on this matter. Please approach the podium and state your name for the record, please. Okay. Hi, my name is Julie Gartner and I live across the street from this house. Okay. I'll ask you if you affirm or attest that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the street. I do. We do. Please go ahead. I just wanted to clarify what Mr. Tiptop said. I'm sorry, I forgot your name. That it is allowed 40T back to have a 6ft fence.

So, that's going to be there no matter what. Turns. Yeah. 4 feet. So that makes sense. I mean that's comforting to me to know that. Okay. A lot better at the same height. Right. Okay. I just wanted to clarify that. So okay, that was all the questions I had. Thank you. No. No questions for that witness. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else have anything to say? Again, sir, if you could state your name for the record, please. My name is Mino Passini. I live at 2740 Oak Street in Highland Park. And I will ask you if you affirm or attest the testimony you're m a ss i n i.

And yes I do. You affirm or attest that the testimony you're about to give will be truth all truth and nothing but truth. I do. Thank you.

The parking lot next door to this house is owned by the city of Highland Park and it is leased or in a way leased to the uh Lake County Forest Preserve. Me and Mrs. Manfredini um and Mr. Parach made sure that Open Lance was going to have that parking lot because it was closed up and the visitors to the park were parking all over the street and all over the neighborhood. And I clarified it with the city manager Scott Korn in Highwood who exactly owned the lot and who had used of it. And also in the meetings here, uh, city council meetings, Gita and the city attorney, uh, clarified it. As far as the 6 foot along Walker Avenue, I have no objections to it. Um, I worked at Dean Becker's house at 55 Sycamore in his house um on the side yard uh backed up into uh Mard Park I believe it's called and he had a sixoot fence there also and it kept visitors out from going into his pool into his yard and just coming and looking around. He also had a very unusual estate with a historical estate with a little bridge and ravines in there and very similar to what these people are building. And so it was kind of like a just like an attractive and nuisance. And without that 6ft fence, we would have had a lot more visitors. And I worked there for probably about 10 years before he moved away. [snorts] Um so I have no objection to it. As far as it being a wall, this came up about I think about 35 years ago when the temple expanded and they were talking about how to screen it all out from the street and my

mom suggested, well, why don't you just put up a wall and it'll keep the sound um dead and year round and also all that's going on behind it that if you built a wall instead of just landscaping. So, uh, it's not something that hasn't come up before. And again, I have no objections to it being a wall. I most of the houses that I did were in Lake Forest and most of all the estates had walls around them, the old estates. So, it's nothing unusual. Um, and we were Mrs. Manfredini and myself and Mr. Karachi were the ones who uh fought every non-conforming variance proposal uh since uh it was sold and uh we were hoping it was going to be uh at the at the least two houses, but we accepted as many as five. Uh so we have no objection of what's on the property. That's what we were going for was to keep the neighborhood uh single family homes because we had proposals of all sorts of things like a 120 unit uh senior hotel, 37, 39 town houses, multiple cluster homes, etc. So, uh I think we can give them a little slack and allow them to uh continue on with their project. It's a good thing there's also a planning commission to prevent things like that, right?

Yes, it is. Thank you. We're just the zoning board. Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Um, anybody have any questions for this witness? No. Okay. Thank you, Patrick. Just out of curiosity, when does a a fence become a wall legally? Do you know? If you don't know, you don't have to answer. Uh, you All right. So typically staff um anything thicker than 1 ft um starts going over to wall territory if it's thinner than 1 ft. We it keeps the fence code regulations. Fair enough. Thank you. Anybody else here have anything they'd like to say?

Seeing none, I will pull the board and see where we stand. And we'll start with member Zaransky. I can tell he's he can say something.

Um I I think it it it makes a whole lot of sense. I think it's uh it it it goes with the character of the area. I think it is a unusual um lot. And that's the hardship is it would be silly to force a short fence along a public parking that is so close and there's a lot of um you know trucks and municipal vehicles that come in and out of there. And uh it really is a functional sideyard is what it is. And um you're not asking for a front yard variance to move the fence up. That's you know commendable. I think it's a good-look fence um wall whatever we're calling it. But it's it's uh anyway I think it's a good plan and um I think it's a good presentation and I support variation.

Thank you. Memor. Um I think the fact that it's only a twoft variance and there's going to be a fence there anyway and and that variance does not create uh anything detrimental to the project or to the area is fine and I would support it. Okay. Member. Yeah, I agree as well. Um, you know, if the variation was being requested on Oak Street, I think it might be a little different conversation because, you know, the neighbors are directly across, but given uh what's on the other side of Walker, I'd before approving. Thank you, Member Chase.

My only question is I just want to and I think Jamie, you're getting at this. I I just want to confirm that it is a fence because we're using the fence standards to grant the variance and the applicant has indicated that's going to be uh 1 ft or less. So if it's 1 foot or less then it's offense no matter what the material used to construct. Mhm. Okay. That was really my only question is that if if this if they're using the proper standards

Yep. Yeah. I mean it's not uncommon to have like brick fences and things of those natures as well. Um they're allowed to have um a wood fence that would be um full board. So uh no there's no standards on um we don't do design standards for single family. Okay. Would you care to otherwise?

Okay. Well, if if if this is a fence, it um does look to me like the standards have been met. They mention they talked about the character of the structure with the existing building. None of the neighbors who came have have opined that they don't think it fits within. Uh what's all you know the structures already there. Um and I doesn't sound like it sounds like it fits with the other two parts of the standard. So I'd be inclined to assuming it's fence I'd be inclined to uh grant it. Thank you. Member Trusanski.

Yeah. Um I think the standards have been met. My only question was would there be any push back from neighbors and if so to what extent? Uh and since there is really no push back, I I think this is a no-brainer to accept it.

Vice Chair Yla. Um, I I agree with the other board members that I believe the standards have been met. I would like to remind the board though that when we give permission for a 6-ft fence that's in perpetuity, whatever material, whatever they want, they can do at any time. Just have that be part of it. Thank Thank you for that admonition. Um I

No, no, it's it's a it's a fair point. It's a I'm I'm not as concerned if since it's kind of, you know, on the side as opposed to in the front, obviously. So that's that's only true as to the portion that says where where the variance is requested. So um having said that, I would say also I appreciate your presentation. It was a good presentation. Um, obviously put a lot of thought into this. Um, I again agree with member Trashansky that I was very curious to hear what the neighbors had to say and seeing no opposition. See if anything they're voicing a favorable attitude towards the variation, I would be inclined to support it as well. Um, having said that, I would entertain a motion. Vice Cherry Ablon makes a motion to adopt the amend the variances drafted.

Okay. Can I get a second? I'll second. All right. Patrick, may I get a roll call vote, please? Yes. Okay. Uh, member Arnoff, yes. Member Weissberg, I. Member Chase, I. Member Trashansky, I. Member Zuransky, I. Vice Chair Yablon, I. and Sherbet. Hi. Congratulations. You have a variance. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. All right. Moving on. We have the staff report, which I guess is kind of a continuation of the attempted staff report from the last meeting. And I'm looking at a

folks, if I could ask you, we still have a little business to take care of. So, can I do this? Good. Excuse. All right, I'm gonna start throwing things. Folks, here I can. Folks, excuse me, folks. Excuse me. We're still having We're still having a meeting. If you could take it out in the hall, please. Or downstairs would be even better. [laughter] Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Good luck. Okay. Wow. Yeah. This first time I first time I've ever used the gall and it was I thought it was forcible.

All right. I'm sorry. Back back to business. Staff report. Uh the 2026 meeting resolution, which I think everyone has a copy of in front of them now. Uh I didn't print a copy for everyone. I have I guess I have the copy, but there is one on the on the display. Uh yeah, I removed the April 3rd meeting. So, uh thank you. Those are the only comments. And yeah, if this is acceptable, um, just make a motion to approve and then Babe will sign it. I'll sign it as well and it'll be posted at city hall. Okay. If everyone has now taken a look at the resolution, um, I would uh I guess we need a motion to approve it.

I'll move to approve the uh what do we call this? The meeting notice, the meeting resolution. Yes. Resolution setting the schedule of regular meetings. I like setting the schedule of regular meetings as presented. Can I get a second? I second. Uh, all in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? The resolution shall be adopted and signed. Okay. Um, anything under miscellaneous, Patrick? Uh, no, I have nothing. Okay. We need to update the official clock. Yeah. No, it'll stay like that. [laughter] I thought this meeting was short, too. Okay. All right. Um that leaves us with adjournment. Can I get a motion? Motion to adjurnn.

Second. All in favor? Any opposed? No. Okay, we are ajourned. One last