Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I think you're our open meeting go-to. If I remember this theme, the breakdown of all you guys. Hold on, Rob. Let me get the audio on, and then I'm going to start the recording.

Recording in progress.

Welcome, everybody. It's 6 o'clock, July 1st. I'd like to call the Planning Commission meeting to order. Can we start off with determination of quorum, please?

Jim Barnes. Here. Michael Flick. Here. Linda Kennedy is on an excused absence this evening. Dan Lazareski. Here. Kate Nelson.

Here.

Rob Pierce.

Present.

Amy Owen.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Wonderful. Thank you. Will you all please join us for a Pledge of Allegiance? Would you do that? ALL RIGHT. CAN WE PLEASE HAVE THE ETHICS LAW ANNOUNCEMENTS?

Commissioners are reminded that if, with respect to any matter or any person coming before the commission today, number one, you've received a gift or loan, number two, you have a pecuniary interest, number three, you have a commitment in a private capacity such as a family, employment, business, or similar relationship, or number four, if you've provided representation or counseling before an agency to a person or entity for compensation within the last year on a matter that's being considered here tonight, please remember to disclose that gift loan, interest, commitment, or prior representation at the time the matter is being considered. And furthermore, please remember that you must abstain from deliberation or voting on the matter if it's clear that the gift, loan, interest, commitment, or prior representation would materially affect the independence of judgment of a reasonable person. Commissioners are also reminded that under the Planning Commission rules, if you've had any contact outside this meeting with any persons interested in a matter coming before the Commission today, please remember to disclose the nature of that contact at this meeting. I'm also going to go ahead and read these Zoom instructions. This meeting is being held in the County Commission Chambers. It's also being held via Zoom. For those of you who are attending the meeting via Zoom, you can log into the Zoom webinar. using the link that's found on the first page of the agenda. You can also join the meeting by typing zoom.us into your computer browser, clicking join a meeting on the Zoom website and entering meeting ID 842-7265. If anyone has any technical difficulties that are joining us via Zoom today, you can also join this meeting via telephone only by dialing 1-669-900-9128 and enter meeting ID 842-7265 9406 and pressing pound. In order to provide public comment today, you can log into the Zoom webinar using the link on the agenda and utilize the raise hand feature during any public comment period. To provide public comment via telephone only, you can press star nine to raise your hand and star six to mute or unmute. Thank you.

Thank you. Can we please have the appeal procedure, Mr. Lloyd?

Yeah, most decisions rendered by the Planning Commission are appealable to the Board of County Commissioners. If you disagree with the decision of the Planning Commission and you qualify as an agreed person or party, you may appeal in writing within 10 calendar days from the date that the decision being appealed is reduced to writing, filed with the Secretary of the Planning Commission, and mailed to the original applicant in the proceeding being appealed in accordance with Washoe County Code. Please call the planning staff immediately at 775-328-6100. for information on the appeal procedure and the application fee.

Wonderful. Thank you. Moving on to item number six, approval of today's agenda. I do not have any changes. If nobody else has any changes, then can we get a motion to accept as written?

Commissioner Lazarewski, motion to accept as written.

All right, this is Rob. I'll second it. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. All right, that passes. And then item number seven, approval of the June 3rd draft. Chair Pearce, I think we. Oh, I forgot public comment.

Yeah, public comment.

I did that just the second time in a row. I'm sorry. It's okay. Do we have any public comment?

We have no general public comment in chambers, no general public comment on.

I apologize. Okay, we did number six. Moving on to item number seven, approval of last month's minutes. I assume everybody has had a chance to look at that. Do we have any changes? If we don't have any changes, can I get a motion to accept as written? Okay. Commissioner Flick, second. Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say nay. All right. Motion passes. Moving on to item number eight, Regional Planning Commission RPC Alternate List. Mr. Lloyd, could you please read that?

Yeah, this is for review and possible action to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners set the order of alternates to represent the Washoe County Planning Commission on the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Commission in the event the regular appointed Planning Commission members are unavailable to serve. The existing Washoe County Planning Commissioners serving on the Regional Planning Commission are Michael Flick, Daniel Lazareschi, and Rob Pierce. The currently approved order of alternates is as follows. First alternate is Linda Kennedy. Second alternate, Amy Owens. Third alternate, Jim Barnes. And fourth alternate is Kate Nelson. Once reviewed and a recommendation is made, the Planning Commission is asked to direct the Planning Commission Secretary to transmit the ordered list of recommended alternates to the Board for its decision. After the Board's decision, the Planning Commission Secretary shall transmit the ordered list to the Executive Director of the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency.

All right. Do we have any discussion on this item? Everybody good with it? Can I get a motion to accept?

Commissioner Lazareski, I move to recommend the order of alternates to the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Commission as follows. First alternate, Linda Kennedy. Second alternate, Amy Owens. Third alternate, Jim Barnes. Fourth alternate, Kate Nelson. I further move to direct the Planning Commission Secretary to transmit the recommended list of alternates to the Washoe County Board of Commissioners for its approval.

All right.

Commissioner Nelson will second.

There we go. We have a motion and a second. Do we have any discussion? No? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. Motion passes. Moving on to item number nine, public hearings. This is amendment of case number WAC25-0007 for Prana Transmission Line Extension of Time for WSUP23-0003. Mr. Lloyd, could you please announce this one?

Yeah, certainly. Hearing discussion and possible action to approve an amendment of conditions for special use permit case number WSUP 230003, the Piranha Transmission Line. The request is to amend condition 1C for the approved special use permit in order to grant an additional two-year extension of time to obtain building permits for the construction of the project until May 12th, 2027. WSUP 230003 was approved for a five-mile-long, 345 kV, gen tie line connecting the Prana substation to the Fort Sage substation, which is a utility service use type. And representing Washoe County in this matter is Senior Planner Chris Bronzek.

All right, Chris, floor is yours.

Thank you. Chris Bronzek, Washoe County Planning. We're looking at Amendment of Conditions WAC 25-7, which is Prana Transmission Line Extension of Time. So before you is a rough site plan of the Gentile Line and where it's supposed to, where it's proposed to travel. So we've got the California State Line and Flanagan. The blue highlighted area is the proposed Gentile Line corridor that will connect the proposed Prana solar power plant to the Fort Sage substation. The Prana solar plant was heard for an extension of time before you in April of this year. So this is located within the high desert planning area and the zoning up in this area is general rural. Most of the surrounding parcels are undeveloped and privately owned. And the vicinity map that I provided here shows the rough outline of the proposed Prana solar power plant, which will go right up to the California state line. So the original request was for a 345 kilovolt Gentile line connecting the Prana substation to Fort Sage substation. And part of it was also to request and vary height standards as well as landscape requirements. The request before you as part of this application is a two-year extension of time that would increase the allowance to May 12, 2027. And the reason the applicants are requesting this two-year time frame is because they had previously gone through the large generator interconnection agreement through NV Energy. And once they got through that, there were situations where the investors pulled out, and they're trying to go through that process again. That process can take up to a year. And there are set application time frames. So public notice did go out to 175 unique property owners within 750 feet. That notice was the entirety of the Gentile line. Staff was able to make all the required findings associated with this application, and we are recommending approval with conditions. I'm available for any questions you may have.

Okay. Does the applicant wish to make a presentation?

I WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSION FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS CHARLES HOOPER FOR THE RECORD AND CURRENTLY I'M THE TRUSTEE OF THE HOOPER FAMILY TRUST THAT OWNS THE TRANSMISSION LINE. SO CHRIS EXPLAINED BASICALLY THE ROUTE OF THE TRANSMISSION LINE FROM Calneva, which is also in the Hooper Family Trust, and the original photovoltaic and battery energy storage system project that was to connect from Calneva to Force 8 substation for Nevada Energy. Now, a lot has changed. since our original proposal, which was originally a 150 megawatt project in totality. There have been other groups that have been developing that part of Washoe County, including Sun Seeker Solar, who I believe you've heard, and Shreem Brzee, another project, and another gentleman by the name of Bob Simmons. The conglomeration of all these projects and all have expressed their desire to use the Piranha transmission line, but the totality of power would be in the 800 megawatt to a gigawatt of energy, potential energy coming into Nevada Energy. Why do we think this line is important? Well, it's important for the state of Nevada and the energy needs of Nevada, which is continually growing, which includes data centers, which basically require massive amounts of energy. So not only would it benefit the citizens of Washoe County, but it would, I believe, supply power to those growing energy needs, which includes the data centers. Other things that I'll just mention. Engineering has been done on this line. And I'll just mention two groups that have done the preliminary engineering. One is TriSage Consulting out of Reno, who has done a lot of work with transmission in the state of Nevada. And there's another gentleman by the name of Kevin Fusey who is involved with TriSage and currently working with Mr. Bob Simmons and his project as well. So as far as technical questions, I'll do the best I can. But I would defer engineering questions to either TriSage Consulting or Mr. Kevin Fusey, who is more of a transmission engineer. Again, I appreciate this opportunity to present this, and I'll try to respond to any questions that any of the commissioners have.

Thank you. Does any commissioners have any questions at this time before we go into public comment? No? Okay, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Can we open up public comment, please?

I have people Smith and Chambers. Please state your person that's name for the record.

Hello, my name is April Smith, and I'm the daughter of Charles Hooper, the trustee of the Hooper Family Trust, which owns the transmission line. First, I want to sincerely thank the Planning Commission for your service and in the work that goes about in approving and doing important work in Washoe County. The commission approved this transmission line in 2023. I also want to say that I appreciate the help and collaboration of Chris Brunswick and Kat Oakley, who made the process of working with you much smoother for our family. I'm here tonight to strongly support the extension of the permit for the Piranha Transmission Line. I've been directly involved in the work to bring this transmission line forward, and I believe it's a meaningful step in helping meet Nevada's energy needs. This transmission line isn't just about moving power. It's about moving Nevada closer to its goal of 100% renewable energy. It's a project that supports growth, sustainability, and a cleaner future for all of us. Thank you so much for your time and for the important work that you do.

Thank you.

I have no further public comment in chambers. I have no hands raised on Zoom.

OK, closed public comment. Bring it back to the board. Does the board have any questions, comments?

Commissioner Lazarski, I just have a comment. I didn't have a problem making the findings the first time this came before us two years ago, and I don't have a problem making the findings now. I do strongly suspect that this is going to come before us a third time because a two-year extension when there's not yet an LGIA, given the timeline to get a generation interconnection agreement and then build the network upgrade facilities and everything – It's probably going to be five years before this line is online. So I'm not going to second guess the applicant's request, but I will say it would be better going forward if we set realistic timelines for the durations on these. Some of these projects are just really long lead. So that's all.

Anybody else have anything? OK, I'll open it up for a motion.

Commissioner Lazareski, I move that after giving reason consideration to the information contained in the staff report and the information received during the public hearing, the Washoe County Planning Commission approve amendment of conditions case number WAC25-0007 for Hooper Family Trust with the conditions included as exhibit A to this matter, having reaffirmed all five findings in accordance with Washoe County Code section 110.810.30.

Mr. Rob, I'll second it. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? No. OK. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. That brings us on to item number 9B, special use permit case number WSUP25-0011 for Indigo Basin Solar, Mr. Lloyd, please announce.

Yeah, for hearing discussion and possible action to approve a special use permit for one, the establishment of a 20 megawatt AC and 28.248 megawatt DC solar photovoltaic generation facility, which is an energy production renewable use. And two, major grading for approximately 130.5 acres of ground disturbance and 45,600 cubic yards of cut and... 44,665 cubic yards of fill and exporting 935 cubic yards. This project meets the standard for a project of regional significance because it will generate more than 5 megawatts of electricity. It will require approval by the regional planning authorities before any approval at the county level would take effect. The project will also need to comply with all federal and state approvals before any approval at the county level would take effect. And representing Washoe County in this matter is Senior Planner Kat Oakley.

All right, Kat, floor is yours. Thank you. Kat Oakley, Washoe County Planning. This is the Indigo Basin Solar Project, WSUP 25-0011. This project is located about 11 miles west of Reno on four different parcels. And you can see it's directly south of an existing solar development in the north of I-80 in the Truckee Canyon. also within a mile of the Truckee River. It falls within the Truckee Canyon planning area and is zoned both general rural and industrial, primarily industrial. The surrounding parcels are generally private and developed with industrial uses, including solar photovoltaic, another solar facility, and a data center, and I believe also an aggregate pit on one side. Other parcels a bit further out are federally owned and undeveloped. And then as I mentioned, it is within one mile of the Truckee River. And because of that, there is a recommended condition of approval related to drainage and mitigating potential impacts on the Truckee. The requests are for the energy production renewable use type with a capacity of 28 megawatts. And that is over the five megawatt threshold for a project of regional significance. So it will be going to the Regional Planning Commission for a conformance review. And there's also an associated grading request, which would include up to 130.5 acres of disturbed area, and then about 45,600 cubic yards of both cut and fill, a little bit more fill with two Ls. This is a draft site plan. So you can see the solar panels are in those darker color groupings. And it's close to the existing Apple data center and two substations. And the intention is to tie into the Claremont substation, which is there on the left side of the screen. On this plan, you can see highlighted in green some existing drainages. And then the darker colors show steeper slopes. And the site design is essentially to cluster the panels avoiding those drainage areas and those steeper slopes to limit site disturbance. You can also see in red proposed grading to add access roads, which is where some of that disturbed area is coming from. Again, this is for 28 megawatts. It's to support that nearby data center. And because of the amount of energy generation, it is a project of regional significance. So it's going to TMRPA. Since it is adjacent to existing substations and existing solar, it does not require a regional plan amendment, which is something that you usually see with these types of applications. So the reason you don't see that this time is because it already is at an existing utility site. There is ancillary infrastructure proposed, including fences, lighting, and transmission lines, all of which would be under 60 KB. And all of that infrastructure will, as proposed, meets our standards and will be required to meet our code standards. To look at the grading, there's approximately 130 acres of disturbance, and again, that 45,600 cubic yards of cut and fill, nearly balanced. The proposal is that the disturbed areas will be reseeded for stabilization. And because of that, there is a condition of approval requiring a vegetation management plan that would be coordinated with Truckee Meadows Fire Protection District to make sure there weren't any fire risk implications of that. And then again, you can see that the site design avoids steep slopes and drainages that exist currently on the site. Since there are multiple properties in play, there is one site with the existing site plan where solar panels are shown crossing a property line, which is something we generally don't do. And so one of the conditions of approval would require either compliance with the setbacks either way, but either by moving that property line through a reversion to acreage or a boundary line adjustment, or the moving of solar panels to meet those setbacks to make sure that the development is not crossing the property lines, even though they are owned by the same property owner at this particular moment in time. So look at some other code requirements for the energy production renewable use type. One parking space is required per peak employment shift. It is an unmanned site, so it's a peak employment shift of zero. No parking required. However, staff will be on site for as needed maintenance. And when they are, we'll use the roadway infrastructure for parking as necessary, um, in various parts of the site for landscaping. This use type has an exemption from our landscaping requirements when it is at least one mile from a residential dwelling that does apply to this site. So there are no landscaping requirements within our code. 20 agencies were sent this application for review and some responded with comments in conditions. And then 34 unique property owners were noticed within about 25,000 feet. Staff can make all of our standard findings, which includes consistency, adequate improvements, site suitability, issuance not detrimental and no effect on a military installation. And then also can make the three findings that are specific to natural resource development projects. And that includes that it's not unduly detrimental to the environment. As I stated previously, the surrounding properties are developed with other industrial uses, in some cases the exact same use. And that ties into the next finding, that there's no undue impact on scenic resources. Again, that solar development is already in this view shed from the major view corridors, so no new impact there. And then that there's appropriate measures in place for reclamation, and we do have conditions of approval to address that for when the site is decommissioned 20, 30 years down the line. So... With that, our recommendation is to approve with conditions. The applicant is also here and is intending to give a presentation. And I'm happy to answer any questions as well.

Thank you. Would the applicant like to make the presentation?

Do you have our presentation?

I think that you can pull up. Great. Thank you. Good evening. Thank you for this opportunity. My name is Katie Neddenrip. I'm a managing consultant with ERM based in Elko, Nevada, and I have some of my colleagues who have joined online as well. We've got a presentation prepared. Kat covered most of it, so we'll run through it. We don't have a lot of new information to share that Kat hasn't already presented to you, but we'll go through it. Like I said, my name is Katie Nednrip. I'm with ERM, a managing consultant in their social performance group. ERM is the sustainability consulting firm that EDP has contracted with to support them through this permitting process. I think Jonathan Leventhal is online and was going to introduce himself.

Jonathan, go ahead and unmute and state your first and last name for the record, please. Good evening. Can you hear me?

Just a moment. You're fine. We're going to turn up the video. Go ahead.

Great. Just making sure you can hear me one last time.

You're good. Go ahead.

Good evening. My name is, for the record, Jonathan Leventhal. I'm representing EDP Renewables North America this evening. And continuing on as a high-level summary of, you know, our company structure, EDP Renewables North America Distributed Generation is developing this project. We're under our parent company, EDP Renewables North America, which just for the commission's knowledge, it has been developing projects across regions within the United States for upwards of 20 years at this point. We've developed amongst our portfolio of solar, wind, energy storage, and other energy projects over 11,000 megawatts of renewable energy projects across the U.S. That would bring us in to be one of the top five renewable energy owner operators within the U.S., We're really excited to bring this project forward to the commission. And lastly, just to kind of emphasize this, this project is within our distributed generation portfolio, which to date we've got over 500 projects in operation. And yeah, we're excited to be presenting this with ERM. who's been great to work with, as well as Kat on the county side, who's been excellent in helping us prepare for this and present a solid project to the commission. Thank you.

Thanks, Jonathan. So we do have a project overview cats covered everything that's on this slide for the presentation She did know and we understand that it's in the one of the conditions regarding management of the property lines and Edp does intend to request a boundary line adjustment to make sure that they comply with the requirements for County codes Similarly, the project site setting, as noted, this is in an area that is surrounded by other industrial development, including other solar projects. So it's a type of infill of sorts for this particular location. And then Jonathan was going to speak to the preliminary site plan. Maybe.

You're good to go, Jonathan, as long as you're on mute.

Testing. You got it. We hear you.

Okay.

We can't hear you now, sorry.

Yeah, that's okay. I've got some notes on this. The one piece that I'll speak to here that was in some of the commentary in working with CAT in preparing for this and as the project has advanced is regarding existing transmission lines and other infrastructure that might be located in that project area. EDP has continued to work as they advance and evolve the site plan and the project design. to make sure that they are going to avoid those areas. So any of those existing pieces of infrastructure, the site plan is going to be developed around that to make sure that there are no conflicts or concerns in that sense. Also as noted regarding any potential environmental impacts, surveys and studies have been conducted. None of those have identified any significant environmental concerns requiring significant mitigation that causes any concern for the developer. EDP and ERM are working with NDOW and the other agencies that will be involved with regards to reclamation plans, environmental management, Any reseeding that might be done would be done in collaboration with both Washoe County and any other agencies to make sure that the appropriate seed mixes are utilized for that process. So we don't anticipate any significant environmental concerns related to the project. Like I said, they've done lots of technical studies and surveys. This is just a list of some of those that have been done, that have been completed to support the project in making sure that all considerations are identified for potential impacts in management. And then the benefits of this project, like I said, this is in an area that's surrounded by existing industrial development. So it's going to build on the benefits that Washoe County is realizing from those other facilities in the area as it relates to property tax revenues and that energy generation serving to meet those needs and stated goals of the county and the region. And we've identified no potential adverse impacts to public health, safety, or well-being. Lastly, this is the intended project schedule. So as long as all the permitting advances as we hope, they're targeting to start construction in Q1 of next year. Those seven phases are outlined there with a completion date in Q1 of 2027. I will do my best to answer any questions that you might have and then Jonathan will connect with him if we can. if there's questions I can't answer. Thank you.

Thank you. Does anybody have any questions right now? Okay, let's open up public comment. Do we have any public comment?

I have no public comment in chambers. I see no hands raised on Zoom.

Okay, close public comment, bring it back to the board. I do have a question for Kat. Kat, I was going through your contact list here and maybe I'm missing it, I'm sure I am, but I don't see that you guys talked with AT&T. I could be mistaken, but I think that there's a central office right there in the middle of one of those solar fields.

County planning.

Did I miss it?

I'm not seeing it either. I believe, and I hope the applicant can confirm this, that it is Apple that owns all of those parcels.

Right, but when I was working for Nevada Bell or AT&T, there was a central office right there in the middle of one of those fields from what I can see on your map, and they are going to need access to that. I know they have access to it right now through Apple, because I've personally been there. But I just want to make sure that they're still covered.

Katie for the record. Our notice, we did a community meeting open house utilizing the notice list that was provided by Washoe County. Nevada Bell was on that list. There's not a specific AT&T.

Okay, they're operating as Nevada Bell, but they're owned by AT&T.

Okay, Nevada Bell received a notice of the community information meeting that we held. No one attended that meeting. To my knowledge, we've not been contacted by anyone there, but we can certainly follow up with them.

But did you guys reach out to them and tell them that you were going to do this? Because there's a lot of phone lines under there, and that controls everything, including Apple. from all the telephones and everything.

I'm going to defer if Jonathan or Matt are available online.

Can you hear me at this time?

Yes.

This is Jonathan Levithal for the record. So I'm not certain how it would relate at this time, but if there are any underground facilities, we would engage through what I'm familiar as a crossing process to determine where those facilities are and review from a real estate perspective, you know, the rights and obligations that we would need to work out with those different parties in order to make sure that our facilities are installed in a way that's compatible with all the existing use of the ground. And in terms of the, you know, I forget how you had described it, but the potential facility, I believe that if there's two standing buildings that are to the north of where we're proposing this development and the access road, if I'm correct in assuming that those are the buildings you're referring to, they would retain the same access via the road.

Okay.

We'd of course have to confirm, but hopefully that addresses your question.

Okay. Yeah, I just want to make sure that they still have access because I didn't see their name on here and they are buildings and so. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. All right. Does anybody else have any other questions? No? Okay. If we don't have anything, then I'll entertain a motion. Go ahead.

Yes, Commissioner Flick. I'd like to make a motion. I move that after giving reason, consideration to the information contained in the staff report and the information received during the public hearing, the Washoe County Planning Commission approve with conditions special use permit case number WSUP25-0011. four, E-D-P-R-N-A-D-G-N-V-A-P-L-RENO-L-L-C.

Alphabet soup.

With conditions included as Exhibit A to this matter, being able to make all five findings in accordance with Washoe County Code Section 110.810.30, and the additional Department of Natural Resources findings in accordance with Washoe County Code section 1108, decimal 810, decimal 35.

Commissioner Owens for second.

All right, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. All right, motion passes. All right, that moves us on to item number 10, chair and commission items. Nomination and approval of the Washington County planning chair and vice chair from among the planning commission memberships to serve a term of one year or until a successor is approved. I want to take this moment to say these last two years have been remarkable and I want to thank you guys for putting your trust in me for being your chair. It has been an honor and privilege to be your chair. But as the law states, I have to step down, and so we need to open this up. I cannot be chair for another year. It doesn't say anything about anything else, but I have to step down as chair. So we need to open this up for a chair nomination. Who would like to be chair? I would like to nominate Dan, if he's okay with it, to be chair, if everybody's okay with

Well, seeing as you're termed out, I guess I will accept the nomination. Thank you.

Okay. Does anybody else want the position to be nominated for? No? Okay. With that, so I'll officially nominate Dan to be chair. Do we have a second?

Second.

All right. Mr. Flick, second it. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. That's all right, buddy. You're welcome. Congratulations. You're the chair. You have to do the vice chair. Because you have to, according to the rules, you have to take over right now.

Thank you so much. Do we have any nominations for vice chair?

I know I don't want to be vice chair.

I would do it if nobody else wants to do it.

I'd support that.

But then you guys have to make the nomination.

So I will support Rob being the vice chair.

I'll second that motion. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

All right, thank you. All right, you have to finish the meeting. Do you want this chair?

I'm good, thanks. We're on to item 11A. Mr. Lloyd, do we have any reports on previous item meeting?

Okay. Yes, I do. On the June 10th County Commission meeting, the County Commission affirmed the Planning Commission's decision for the partial approval of the abandonment. That would be WAV 240008, the Sweet Clover residence on Caswell Lane. And then on June the 24th, the County Commission heard the first reading of the DCA to amend Article 904 for non-conformance. The second reading is scheduled for July 8th, and that's all I have to report on.

Thank you. Ms. Gustafson, do we have any legal updates? Yes.

I do not have any legal updates, but I think we did skip over 10B and C, so let's go back and do those before moving on to number 12. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Do we have any future agenda items? Requests from the board? Any requests for information from staff? All right. Hearing none, number 12, do we have any further public comment?

I have no general public comment in chambers. I see no hands raised on Zoom. Excellent. We are adjourned.

Good job. Congratulations. Good.