[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:02]
I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS MEETING FOR THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26TH, 2026. ROLL CALL PLEASE. MR. BRESKO? HERE. MR. WAYMACK? HERE. MR. PAHL? HERE. MR. MCDONOUGH? HERE. MR. MAYTON? HERE. MISS CANEPA? HERE. MR. HOWELL? HERE. SILENCE FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
AND NOW WE'LL MOVE TO THE ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA.
[ADOPTION OF AGENDA]
MAKE A MOTION WE ACCEPT THE AGENDA AS ADOPTED, AS PRESENTED.SECOND. ADOPT A MOTION BY MR. PAHL. SECOND BY MR. BRESKO. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MR. MCDONOUGH? YES.
MISS CANEPA? YES. MR. PAHL? YES. MR. BRESKO? YES.
MR. HOWELL? YES. MR. WAYMACK? YES. MR. MAYTON? YES. ALL RIGHT. WE NOW HAVE REACHED THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
NOT SEEING ANYONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS. WE HAVE REACHED THE COMMISSIONER COMMENT PART OF THE AGENDA.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANYTHING THEY WOULD LIKE TO SAY? I WILL CLOSE THE COMMISSIONER COMMENTS, PERIOD. WE'RE NOW AT OUR ORDER OF BUSINESS. FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS ADOPTION OF OUR JANUARY 22ND,
[ORDER OF BUSINESS]
2026 WORK SESSION. MAKE A MOTION WE ACCEPT. SECOND.MOTION BY MR. PAHL, WAS THAT YOU? AND SECOND BY MR. HOWELL. IS THIS THE REGULAR MINUTES? THE WORK SESSION.
JANUARY 22ND. ROLL CALL, PLEASE. MR. PAHL? YES.
MR. MAYTON? YES. MR. MCDONOUGH? YES. MR. BRESKO? YES. MR. HOWELL? YES. MR. WAYMACK? YES. MISS CANEPA? YES. WE'RE NOW AT THE ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 22ND, 2026 BUSINESS MEETING.
I HAVE A CORRECTION. THE FINAL VOTE, VOTE ON THE ADJOURNMENT.
ADJOURNMENT. IT HAS STILL HAS ANDERSON AND BROCKWELL AS VOTING.
WE'LL FIX THAT. YEAH. OTHER THAN THAT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT THE MINUTES BE APPROVED, AS WRITTEN WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE CORRECTION.
SECOND. WHO SECOND THAT ONE? MOTION BY MR. BRESKO.
SECOND BY MR. MCDONOUGH. CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? MR. MCDONOUGH? YES. MR. HOWELL? YES. MR. BRESKO? YES. MR. PAHL? YES. MR. MAYTON? YES. MR. WAYMACK? YES. MISS CANEPA? YES. AND NOW WE'RE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT.
MR. GRAVES IS GOING TO COME UP AND TALK TO US ABOUT THAT. GOOD EVENING, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. WE TALKED BRIEFLY ABOUT THE ANNUAL REPORT AND DURING OUR WORK SESSION, IT'S IN YOUR PACKET UNDER TAB FOUR, WHICH HAS BEEN POSTED ONLINE.
[00:05:04]
THE ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2025 IS DESCRIBING THE ACTIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DURING 2025.SO IT'S A REQUIREMENT OF THE STATE CODE THAT YOU PROVIDE AN ANNUAL REPORT TO THE BOARD.
SO IF YOU ARE READY TO ACCEPT THAT ANNUAL REPORT, THEN YOU CAN, YOU COULD VOTE TO ADOPT IT.
I MEAN, APPROVE IT AND SEND IT TO THE BOARD. AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? OTHERWISE I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE.
SECOND APPROVED BY MR. MAYTON. SECOND BY MR. MCDONOUGH.
CAN YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? MR. BRESKO? YES.
MR. WAYMACK? YES. MR. MAYTON? YES. MR. PAHL? YES.
MISS CANEPA? YES. MR. MCDONOUGH? YES. MR. HOWELL? YES. ALL RIGHT. AND NOW WE ARE AT THE FINAL ORDER OF BUSINESS BYLAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE UPDATE BY MR. GRAVES. RIGHT, AND ALSO IN YOUR PACKET IS THE DRAFT REVISED CHANGES OR REVISIONS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BYLAWS AND RULES OF PROCEDURE. WE ALSO DISCUSSED THIS DURING THE WORK SESSION, AND WE IDENTIFIED THE, THE COMMISSION IDENTIFIED SOME THINGS TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT.
SO STAFF IS GOING TO WORK ON THOSE SOME MORE.
IT WILL BRING THAT BACK TO YOU AT A FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE.
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE ARE NOW ENTERING THE PUBLIC HEARINGS PORTION OF TONIGHT'S AGENDA.
[PUBLIC HEARINGS]
EACH PUBLIC HEARING CORRESPONDS TO AN APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE COUNTY FOR REVIEW.VOTES BY THE COMMISSION ARE ADVISORY ONLY. AFTER AN APPLICATION IS FORWARDED TO THE BOARD, THEY WILL HOLD ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE MAKING A DECISION.
IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN SPEAKING DURING A PUBLIC HEARING. WHEN THE TIME IS ANNOUNCED, YOU MAY APPROACH THE PODIUM, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. THIS IS GOING TO BE REZONING RZ-25-0008, AND I THINK, MR. GREENSTEIN.
ALL RIGHT. SO THIS IS REZONING RZ-25-0008. THE APPLICANT IS RYAN MARTIN AND JOHN BARKSDALE, AND PROPERTY OWNER IS LIBERTY UNIVERSITY.
AND THE INTENT BEHIND THIS REZONING IS TO DEVELOP A MAXIMUM OF 309 TOWNHOUSE DWELLING UNITS, AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF MIDDLE ROAD AND MANCHESTER PARKWAY.
IDENTIFIED BY THOSE PARCEL NUMBERS LISTED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INDICATES THE PROPERTY IS PLANNED FOR RESIDENTIAL, MULTIFAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL USES.
AND THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED FURTHER DEFERRAL, WHICH THEY'LL BE ABLE TO SPEAK ON.
BUT THIS IS A, THIS WAS ADVERTISED AS A PUBLIC HEARING.
SO THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP SHOWING WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED.
SATELLITE VIEW SHOWING THE PROPERTY MORE ZOOMED IN.
[00:10:03]
AND THERE'S THE ZONING MAP, WHICH SHOWS THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE B-1, BUT WITH A SLIVER OF R-2. AND THEN YOU GOT R-A, R-2 AND, AND R-3 IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. AND THERE'S THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH SHOWS THAT THE SUBJECT PARCELS ARE PLANNED FOR COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, MULTIFAMILY AND SURROUNDING IS PLANNED FOR RESIDENTIAL.AND THEN AGAIN SUMMARIZING THE REQUEST, REZONING 43 ACRES FROM B-1 AND R-2 TO R-TH IN ORDER TO DEVELOP 309 TOWNHOUSE DWELLING UNITS WITH ENTRANCES OFF MIDDLE ROAD, PRINCE GEORGE DRIVE AND BRANDCHESTER PARKWAY AND LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE MANCHESTER APARTMENTS. INVOLUNTARY PROFFERS WERE SUBMITTED.
THIS IS THE LATEST VERSION STAFF HAS SEEN OF THE CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT.
AND THESE ARE THAT CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.
SO TO SUMMARIZE, THE PROFFERS IN THE FULL LIST IS IN YOUR PACKET, BUT JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW.
GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE CONCEPT PLAN. A MAXIMUM OF 309 UNITS.
GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS.
HARDSCAPE DRIVEWAYS AND FRONT WALKS. EXTERIOR MATERIAL STANDARDS.
$3,500 PER UNIT CASH OFFER. AMENITIES SUCH AS DOG PARK, PLAY AREA, BENCHES AND A WALKING PATH.
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION TO MAINTAIN STORMWATER AND OPEN SPACE.
AND THEN A PROFFER ABOUT SEVERANCE.
SORRY. SO TO SUMMARIZE, PLANNING, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S COMMENTS STAFF FOUND THIS REQUEST TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING ZONING AND COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING LAND USES.
THERE ARE ANTICIPATED OFF SITE IMPACTS WHICH ARE DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT, SUCH AS ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, AND VDOT HAS RAISED THAT CONCERN. STAFF CONCURS WITH VDOT THAT A TIA IS NECESSARY TO UNDERSTAND TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT. AND THEN ALSO ADDITIONAL DEMANDS ON PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, WHICH ARE DETAILED MORE IN THE STAFF REPORT. TO GO OVER STAFF'S COMMENTS ON THE PROFFERS STAFF HAS NOT CONDUCTED AN IN-DEPTH REVIEW OF THE LATEST PROFFERS BECAUSE THE UPDATED MATERIALS ARE EXPECTED TO BE SUBMITTED, SO THEY'RE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. BUT GENERALLY, STAFF CANNOT SUPPORT THE FIRST PROFFER ABOUT TYING THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN BECAUSE THE VDOT COMMENTS NOTE THAT THERE WOULD BE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES REQUIRED TO THE LAYOUT TO MEET CONNECTIVITY REQUIREMENTS. AND JUST TO NOTE, THE CASH PROFFER AMOUNT IS 17% OF THE MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED AMOUNT PER THE ADOPTED CASH PROFFER POLICY. WHAT OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES HAD TO SAY? VDOT NOTED THAT TWO CONNECTIONS ARE REQUIRED FOR THE NORTHERN SECTION AND THREE FOR THE SOUTHERN SECTION, AND THEY RECOMMENDED THAT THE COUNTY REQUIRE A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WITH TURN LANE WARRANT ANALYSIS, AND THAT SIDEWALKS WILL BE REQUIRED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET, AND THAT SITE PLAN WILL BE REQUIRED.
AND THEN JUST SOME WHAT SOME OTHER DEPARTMENTS SAID.
UTILITIES NOTED PUBLIC WATER AND WASTEWATER CONNECTION REQUIREMENTS.
[00:15:10]
NEED FOR BEAZLEY TO BE REPLACED. NO WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE RECEIVED PRIOR TO PUBLISHING THE STAFF REPORT AND PRIOR TO THIS PUBLIC HEARING.BUT THIS WAS ADVERTISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE CODE.
STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS POSTPONEMENT. AND STAFF NOTES THAT IF THE APPLICANT DOES NOT WISH TO POSTPONE AND RESOLVE THE TIA AND CONCEPTUAL PLAN CONCERNS, THEN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE DENIAL.
BUT THE APPLICANT HAS NOTED THAT THEY DO WISH TO DEFER THIS AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THAT.
SURROUNDING ZONING AND IS COMPATIBLE WITH LAND USES ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, BUT NOT ALL.
CONCERNS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AND ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED, SO THAT'S WHY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS TO POSTPONE TO TO ALLOW MORE INFORMED RECOMMENDATION. SO AGAIN, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING.
AND I THINK THEY HAVE SOME CHANGES TO THAT AND I'LL LET THEM SPEAK TO THAT.
ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE INVITE THE APPLICANT UP? SORRY, MR. GRAVES, ARE YOU GOING TO SAY SOMETHING? I, I'M TRYING TO CONFIRM.
WOULD THERE BE A VOTE ON THE DEFERRAL FIRST? NO.
OKAY. IT'S JUST A VOTE ON THE ITEM. BUT THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED DEFERRAL.
DOES APPLICANT WANT TO COME UP AND EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR THE DEFERRAL? MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, MY NAME IS JEFF GEIGER HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
I APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION AND THE INTRODUCTION TO THE DEFERRAL REQUEST.
WE WERE ORIGINALLY THINKING OF ASKING FOR A DEFERRAL TO APRIL.
WE WOULD LIKE A DEFERRAL UNTIL MAY. THE REASON FOR THAT IS WE CONTINUE TO WORK ON THE ADDRESSING THE STAFF'S COMMENT ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND THE TURN LANES. WE HAVE DONE THE ENGINEERING.
WE'VE FIGURED OUT WHAT RIGHT OF WAY WE NEED. WHAT RIGHT OF WAY WE DON'T HAVE.
AND SO WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO TALK TO VDOT AND RESOLVE VDOT'S COMMENTS AND THEN HAVE ADDITIONAL TIME TO MAKE SURE VDOT HAS TIME TO REVIEW, AND THE STAFF HAS TIME TO REVIEW SO THAT WE'RE READY TO COME BACK BEFORE YOU IN MAY.
SO ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, WE'D APPRECIATE A DEFERRAL UNTIL YOUR MAY MEETING.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
IS MAY GOING TO GIVE YOU ENOUGH TIME? YES, SIR.
ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU.
WE ARE NOW IN THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF TONIGHT'S.
IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS APPLICATION, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR. LOUIS LEE JR. 6457 BLAIR COURT PRINCE GEORGE, VIRGINIA.
Y'ALL ALREADY OWN IT WAS EGRESS. SO WE ALREADY GOT THE SCHOOL ON MIDDLE ROAD.
AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY Y'ALL LIVE IN THAT AREA, BUT WHEN YOU GET TO MIDDLE ROAD AND 156 AND YOU'RE TRYING TO GO LEFT OR RIGHT, IT'S ALREADY GOING TO BE CUMBERSOME. SO I'M ALREADY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO WORK THAT OUT. SO I THINK WITH THE WITH THE POSTPONEMENT AND PUSHING THINGS OUT THAT MAYBE WOULD GIVE ME A I CAN ATTEND THE MAY MEETING, IS THAT STILL OPEN WHERE I CAN COME AND LISTEN.
YES, SIR. AWESOME. WHAT'S TIA? TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.
THANK YOU, I HAD NO IDEA WHAT THAT WAS. AND LET'S JUST SAY EVERYTHING GETS APPROVED IN MAY.
IS THERE ANY OTHER TIME FRAME THE, WHEN WILL GET STARTED TO TAKING DOWN TREES OR IS IT TOO EARLY? I'M HONESTLY NOT SURE. ONCE WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION, IT GOES TO THE BOARD AND THEN THEY HOLD A PUBLIC MEETING.
[00:20:05]
SO USUALLY THEIR MEETING IS THE NEXT MONTH. BUT IT DEPENDS ON THEIR AGENDA.THERE'S SEVERAL STEPS IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. I WOULD IMAGINE IT IS.
I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED WHEN THEY TAKE TREES DOWN.
YOU CAN HAVE SLOW MOVING VEHICLES OUT THERE WITH PEOPLE ALREADY ON 56, AND I'M NORMALLY OUT THERE PICKING UP TRASH AND STUFF, SO I'M JUST CONCERNED. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE OKAY AND THAT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO CRAM TOO MUCH IN ONE CORNER.
I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST? ALL RIGHT.
ALL RIGHT. ANY, OKAY, RECOMMENDATION FROM THE COMMISSION? I DO. I MAKE A SORRY. I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE APPLICANTS REQUEST FOR DEFERRAL ON RZ-25-0008 TO APRIL 23RD, 2026, AND WISH TO PROCEED WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING AS SCHEDULED FOR FEBRUARY 26TH, 2026.
SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION THAT NEEDS TO OCCUR ON THAT MOTION? OKAY. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MR. HOWELL? YES. MR. MAYTON? YES. YES. MISS CANEPA? NO. MR. BRESKO? NO. MR. PAHL? YES. MR. WAYMACK? YES. MR. MCDONAGH? YES. THE MOTION CARRIES. SO SINCE YOU DID THAT AS A ITEM.
SO NOW YOU STILL WILL STILL NEED TO ACT ON THE MATTER BEFORE YOU.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I DO. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE FORWARD. I'M SORRY. LET ME START THIS OVER.
I MAKE A MOTION THAT I MOVE TO FORWARD REQUEST RZ-25-0008 TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, DUE TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS CURRENT CAPACITY BEING AT ITS CURRENT CAPACITY AND THE LACK OF PROPER FIRE APPARATUS, SUPPORT AND STAFF IN THAT DISTRICT. SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. PAHL AND A SECOND BY MR. MAYTON. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE COMMISSION? PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. MISS CANEPA? NO. MR. BRESKO? NO. MR. HOWELL? YES. MR. MAYTON? YES. MR. PAHL? YES. MR. WAYMACK. YES. MR. MCDONOUGH? YES. MOTION CARRIES.
ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE REACHED THE COMMUNICATIONS PORTION OF OUR AGENDA.
[COMMUNICATIONS ]
ALL RIGHT. LET ME GET MY THOUGHTS TOGETHER HERE.AFTER FILLING IN AS A ROLL CALL PERSON FOR A MINUTE.
ACTIONS OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS. WE DID HAVE A MEETING THIS MONTH.
IT WAS JUST THEIR ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING BECAUSE THEIR OTHER ONE GOT CANCELED DUE TO THE ICE STORM.
OR SO THEY ELECTED THEIR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.
THAT'S ALL THE ACTIONS THAT THEY DID AT THAT MEETING.
REGARDING THE ACTIONS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, YOU HAVE A COUPLE RECAPS IN YOUR PACKET IN THE COMMUNICATIONS SECTION, TAB SEVEN. UPCOMING PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR NEXT MONTH.
HELP ME OUT, JACK. YEAH, WE HAVE A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST FOR FAMILY AUTO AND TOWING IMPOUND LOT, AND THEN A SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT.
WAIVER. WAIVER. YEP. SO WE HAVE TWO, TWO ITEMS BEFORE YOU TO CONSIDER NEXT, NEXT MONTH.
[00:25:04]
UPDATES ON SPECIAL PROJECTS. SO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THAT WAS ANOTHER ACTION OF THE BOARD.THE BOARD HAD THEIR PUBLIC HEARING ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EARLIER THIS WEEK ON TUESDAY, AND THEY VOTED TO POSTPONE ACTION UNTIL MAY. I THINK IT WAS MAY 26TH.
AND THEN THAT ITEM WILL COME BACK TO THE BOARD WHEN IT IS READY WITH SOME POSSIBLE CHANGES THAT THEY CAN THINK ABOUT, BUT THEY WEREN'T QUITE READY TO ACT ON OR MAKE A DECISION ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED IT. BUT THEY HAVEN'T MADE A FINAL DECISION YET ON THAT. SO THAT'S THE UPDATE ON THAT.
WE'RE STILL WE'RE KIND OF ON HOLD ON ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS, EXCEPT FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, WHICH WE'RE STILL WORKING ON, THAT. THAT'LL BE THE FIRST ONE COMING ALONG.
OUR ENERGY IS STILL ON THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SINCE IT IS CONTINUING.
THOSE ARE THE MAJOR SPECIAL PROJECTS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON. I'LL REMIND YOU THAT WE PRODUCE A DEPARTMENTAL MONTHLY REPORT, AND WE POST THAT ON THE WEBSITE EACH MONTH. AND WE SEND THAT OUT VIA EMAIL TO THE COMMISSION, I THINK GETS THAT RIGHT. SO WE'LL KEEP DOING THAT AND YOU CAN KEEP AN EYE ON WHAT WE'RE DOING THAT WAY.
AND THEN THE PUBLIC CAN AS WELL. SO THAT I THINK THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMUNICATIONS I PREPARED.
DID YOU DID YOU WANT TO ADD ABOUT THE BOARD ACTIONS, ABOUT THE THE PUBLIC HEARING THEY HAD FOR THE REZONING? DID YOU MENTION. THANK YOU. THERE WAS ANOTHER REZONING THAT NIGHT. THEY DID.
THEY ACTED ON THE. SOUTHERLY RUN. SOUTHERLY RUN, AND THEY DENIED THAT REQUEST.
SO. YEAH. AND THAT WAS YOU KNOW, THAT WAS TUESDAY. SO WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED A RECAP YET.
IT'S TOO SOON. SO I WILL GET THAT TO YOU WHEN THAT COMES.
SO YEP. ANY QUESTIONS OR REQUESTS OF STAFF DURING THIS TIME.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. GRAVES. THANK YOU. ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECOND. MOTION BY MR. PAHL. SECOND BY MR. MAYTON. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
MR. HOWELL? YES. MR. MAYTON? YES. YES. MISS CANEPA? YES, MR. BRESKO? YES. MR. PAHL? YES. MR. WAYMACK? YES. MR. MCDONOUGH? YES. MEETING ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.