GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE, AND THANK YOU FOR JOINING US FOR TONIGHT'S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL HAVE THE ROLL CALL. MR. HOLCOMB. CHAIRMAN WASHINGTON. HERE. VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. HERE. COMMISSIONER ADDISON. COMMISSIONER BATTS. COMMISSIONER BOYD. HERE. COMMISSIONER COLEMAN. COMMISSIONER ELLENDER. HERE. COMMISSIONER FOWLER. HERE. AND COMMISSIONER MAXEY. HERE. WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR HOLCOMB. COMMISSION MEMBERS, AT THIS TIME, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JULY 20TH MEETING? MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER MAXEY, SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER ELLENDER. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO APPROVING THE MINUTES? SEEING NONE. THESE ITEMS HAVE NOW BEEN APPROVED. AND AT THIS TIME I WILL ASK VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT TO READ IN THE RULES FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARINGS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. RULES FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARINGS. THIS IS A PUBLIC MEETING. ANY INTERESTED MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO COMMENT ON AN ITEM FROM THIS AGENDA MAY COMMENT IN PERSON AT CITY HALL, 222 SAINT LOUIS STREET, 3RD FLOOR 348 DURING THE MEETING. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK ON A PARTICULAR ITEM SHOULD REFER TO A MEETING AGENDA AND COMPLETE THE NECESSARY INFORMATION PRIOR TO THE MEETING BY FILLING OUT A REQUEST TO SPEAK CARD INDICATING WHICH ITEM YOU WISH TO SPEAK AND PLACE IT IN THE DESIGNATED LOCATION PRIOR TO THE MEETING. APPLICANT AND APPLICANTS REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE PROPOSAL WILL SPEAK FOR A TOTAL OR COMBINED PERIOD OF NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES. PROPONENTS WILL SPEAK AND THEN THE OPPONENTS. EACH SPEAKER WILL NOT BE ALLOWED MORE THAN THREE MINUTES. SPEAKERS ARE REQUESTED TO LIMIT THEIR REMARKS BY AVOIDING DUPLICATION IN THEIR PRESENTATIONS. APPLICANT WILL BE ALLOWED A TOTAL OF FIVE MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL. OPPONENTS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO REBUT ITEMS PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. STAFF WILL NOT HAVE TIME ALLOCATED FOR SPEAKING UNLESS THERE IS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AT THE MEETING WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM. IN SUCH CASES, THE PROPOSAL WILL FOLLOW THE STANDARD PROCEDURE. MR. CHAIRMAN. THANK YOU, VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. AT THIS TIME, WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA. MR. BALDWIN. CONSENT ITEMS FOR DEFERRAL. ITEM 9. S 126. LORDIA LORDIA'S GROVE SUBDIVISION, 8150 HOOPER BOULEVARD. PROPOSED MAJOR RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WITH PRIVATE STREET LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF HOOPER ROAD, WEST OF HICKCKOK DRIVE. DEFERRED BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TO OCTOBER 19TH. CONSENT ITEMS FOR APPROVAL. ITEM 5. CASE 2926. 7122 FLORIDA BOULEVARD, TO REZONE FROM HEAVY COMMERCIAL C-2 TO COMMERCIAL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE RESTAURANT CAB1 ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FLORIDA BOULEVARD, EAST OF CROYDON AVENUE. ITEM 7, CUP 6-26. 2340 TULIP STREET. PROPOSED ACCESSORY DWELLING ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF TULIP STREET, EAST OF DREHR AVENUE. ITEM 8. CS-9-26. DOLLY TUCKER AND ALICE WESTBROOK PROPERTY. 14987 PORT HUDSON ROAD. PROPOSED FLAG LOT MINOR SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PORT HUDSON ROAD, WEST OF ROBINSON ROAD. ITEM 10. SS-3-26 ALBERT AND MARY BENNETT PROPERTY. 12707 PORT HUDSON ROAD. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WITH A PRIVATE STREET LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PORT HUDSON ROAD, EAST OF COOK ROAD. ITEM 11. SS-4-26. JUNE HUNT KENNEDY PROPERTY. 22838 AND 22800-22900 PLANK ROAD. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION WITH A PRIVATE STREET LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PLANK ROAD, SOUTH OF WELCH LANE. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF CERTIFIES THAT ALL OF THESE ITEMS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE. WE'VE RECEIVED ONE MESSAGE IN SUPPORT FOR COUNCILWOMAN AND COMMISSIONER CAROLYN COLEMAN ON ITEM 7. CUP 626. 2340 TULIP STREET. THERE WILL BE TWO ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND HURTING REGULAR AGENDA ORDER. THOSE TWO ITEMS ARE ITEM 10. SS-3-26. ALBERT AND MARY BENNETT PROPERTY. AND ITEM 11. SS-4-26. JUNE HUNT KENNEDY PROPERTY. AGAIN, THOSE TWO ITEMS WILL BE PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND HEARD IN REGULAR AGENDA ORDER. THANK YOU FOR THAT UPDATE, MR. HOLCOMB. COMMISSION MEMBERS, YOU HAVE HEARD ALL OF THE REMAINING ITEMS THAT ARE PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT ARE TO BE TAKEN WITH ONE VOTE. ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION WHO HAVE AN ITEM REMAINING ON CONSENT THAT THEY WOULD ALSO LIKE TO BE PULLED AND HEARD AS PART OF THE REGULAR AGENDA? DO WE HAVE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC PRESENT WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON ANY OF THE REMAINING ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NONE, IS THERE A MOTION? WE HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON, SECOND BY VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO ACCEPTING THE ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NONE, THESE ITEMS HAVE NOW BEEN APPROVED AND WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA. MR. CHAIRMAN, THE NEXT TWO ITEMS MAY BE TAKEN TOGETHER. ITEMS 2. PA-5-26. AND ITEM 3. COMPANION CASE 23262826.
PA-5-26, 17060 FLORIDA BOULEVARD. RELATED TO CASE 2826. PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FLORIDA BOULEVARD, EAST OF SOUTH STEPHEN DALE ROAD. COUNCIL DISTRICT 4. MOAK. THE APPLICANT IS STEPHEN LACOUR. FUTURE BR LAND USE DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMERCIAL WITH A REQUESTED FUTURE BR LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL. THE EXISTING ZONING IS RURAL WITH A REQUESTING ZONING OF LIGHT COMMERCIAL 2. ALC2. PA 526. 1706 FLORIDA BOULEVARD RELATED TO CASE 2826. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL BASED UPON EXAMINATION OF THE AREA AT A FURTHER LEVEL OF DETAIL AND COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING USES. STAFF ALSO CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING, IF THE COMPANION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IS APPROVED, BEING COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES AND CONFORMING TO UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS. AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES. GOOD EVENING, SIR. GOOD EVENING. STEPHEN LACOUR WITH [INAUDIBLE]. WE SUBMITTED THE REZONING APPLICATION FOR THE OWNER. THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY IS RIGHT NOW WORKING WITH AN APPRAISAL AND GETTING THE PROPERTY ZONED TO MATCH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE REASON FOR WHAT HE'S DOING AT THIS POINT. OKAY. THANK YOU, SIR. WE HAVE SEVERAL SPEAKER CARDS THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION. THE FIRST IS FOR CHAD COOPER. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR THREE MINUTES, SIR. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CHAD COOPER. I HAVE PROPERTY AT 17067 FLORIDA BOULEVARD. I JUST HAVE A FEW CONCERNS REGARDING THIS PROPERTY BEING REZONED. AS MR. LACOUR SAID, HE JUST WANTS TO GET COMPATIBLE WITH THE OTHER ZONING NEARBY. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT UNTIL JUST NOW, SO I JUST HAD SOME CONCERNS FROM THE ANALYSIS THAT WAS DONE FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, APPROXIMATELY 100% IS LOCATED IN THE FLOOD ZONE AE, WHICH MAY REQUIRE ELEVATION OF BUILDING PADS, FINISHED FLOORS AND STRUCTURES ABOVE THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION. AS WE ALL KNOW, IT'S FLOODS THERE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE OWNER IS IN THE GAS STATION RETAIL BUSINESS. I DO HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT IF HE DOES PUT SOMETHING THERE LIKE THAT POTENTIAL, YOU KNOW, FUEL TANKS BEING IN THE GROUND, COULD BE A POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE DUE TO THE FLOODING. ALSO I SPOKE WITH THE BUDDHIST CHURCH, WHICH IS THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. IT COMES OUT ON OLD HAMMOND HIGHWAY, BUT THEY'RE ADJACENT TO THAT PROPERTY AND THEY WERE AGAINST IT. ALSO I SPOKE WITH THE VETERANS HOME, WHICH IS ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY, AND I THINK MR. CUOMO IS HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON THAT. SO I JUST HAVE SOME REAL CONCERNS ABOUT THE FLOODING, POTENTIAL GAS TANKS, ETC. BEING IN THE GROUND BECOMING AN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE. AND SECONDLY, THE 100% OF IT IS LOCATED IN THE FLOOD ZONE, WHICH WOULD HAVE TO BE, TO MY UNDERSTANDING, ELEVATED TO ABOUT FOUR FEET. SO THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT CARD IS FOR BYRON CUOMO. HE DOESN'T WISH TO SPEAK. OUR NEXT CARD IS FOR GERALYN RUIZ. GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING TO MAKE THESE CHANGES TO.
ACTUALLY, MY BACKYARD IS TO THIS PROPERTY. I'M THREE DOORS DOWN FROM WHERE THEY WANT TO BUILD THE DRIVEWAY, LIGHT COMMERCIAL. I HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS AS CHAD DOES BEING BACK TO THAT PROPERTY. THERE'S A DRAINAGE DITCH THAT GOES THROUGH THERE BETWEEN THOSE PROPERTIES. WHAT IS IT GOING TO DO WITH THAT? IS THAT GOING TO CREATE MORE FLOODING FOR US? ALSO, I HAVE CHILDREN. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE ADDED TRAFFIC. I HAVE A SPECIAL NEEDS CHILD. I WORRY ABOUT PULLING OUT EVERY DAY BECAUSE OF TRAFFIC ON OLD HAMMOND HIGHWAY. THERE'S NO SERVICE ROAD, THERE'S NO ROOM FOR ERROR, AND YOU PULL OUT. I HAVE TO WAIT ON THE KINDNESS OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE TRAVELING ON THAT ROAD TO LET ME IN AND OUT WITH MY SPECIAL NEEDS SON. THIS IS GOING TO CREATE MORE TRAFFIC, MORE DANGEROUS AREA, EVEN FOR RIVERVIEW. THERE'S A SUBDIVISION THAT'S DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM IT. I TOOK PICTURES TOO, SHOWING THAT WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS LIGHT COMMERCIAL. I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS IS GOING TO OPEN A DOOR FOR SOMETHING ELSE. HEAVIER COMMERCIAL. THIS IS IN A RURAL AREA. ALWAYS HAS BEEN. WE FLOODED HORRIBLY IN 2016 AND LOST EVERYTHING. WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO TO GUARANTEE THAT THAT BUILDING UP IS NOT GOING TO CREATE FLOODING FOR EVERYONE ELSE? I AM DEFINITELY OPPOSED. OLD HAMMOND HIGHWAY CANNOT HANDLE THE TRAFFIC IT ALREADY HAS ON A DAILY BASIS. MY KIDS EVEN BUILT A LEMONADE STAND BECAUSE THEY'RE AT A STANDSTILL FROM 5:30 TO 7:00 IN THE AFTERNOON. IT'S RIDICULOUS. AND TO BUILD A ONE DRIVE FOR CONVENIENCE STORE. NOT ONLY ARE WE GOING TO HAVE ADDED TRAFFIC, BUT WHAT OTHER PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH THIS RURAL AREA WHERE FAMILIES AND CHILDREN LIVE? I'M DEFINITELY OPPOSED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT CARD IS FOR AMY FILES. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR THREE MINUTES. HI. MY NAME IS AMY FILES, AND I'M A RESIDENT ON RIVERVIEW DRIVE. I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY OF THE PICTURES THAT SHOW THE LAYOUT THAT WAS POSTED. BUT THE DRAINAGE DITCH RUNS RIGHT NEXT TO RIVERVIEW DRIVE AND THROUGH THIS PROPERTY WHERE SUPPOSEDLY THEY WOULD WANT TO PUT A REAR DRIVE. WE DO HAVE CONCERNS. THERE'S PROBABLY A 50 PLUS RESIDENTS HOMES ON RIVERVIEW DRIVE. AND WE HAVE, LIKE MISS JERILYN SAID, TERRIBLE TROUBLE GETTING IN AND OUT FROM THE BACK UP FROM COMING FROM DENHAM SPRINGS, THEY TURN ONTO OLD HAMMOND. THEY HAVE NO STOP SIGN, THEY HAVE NO NOTHING. AND WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE A LIGHT, THEY JUST COME. THEY CAN COME FOR UP TO 3 TO 5 MINUTES BEFORE YOU CAN HAVE A CHANCE TO GET OUT OF RIVERVIEW DRIVE. NOW, IF YOU TAKE A RIGHT AND GO TOWARDS FLORIDA, YOU CAN TURN ON THE SERVICE ROAD, IF THERE'S A BRIEF MOMENT AND GET ON TO FLORIDA BOULEVARD THAT WAY. SO OUR MAIN CONCERN AS RIVERVIEW CITIZENS IS THE DRAINAGE, WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO TO BACK UP ON TO THE PROPERTY. I HAVE SEVERAL FAMILY MEMBERS THAT LIVE ON RIVERVIEW DRIVE. MY STEPMOTHER IS ACROSS THE STREET. SHE HAS FOUR PROPERTIES ON RIVERVIEW DRIVE. THE DRAINAGE DITCH ACTUALLY RUNS THROUGH HER PROPERTY. AND MYSELF, MY SON HAS A RESIDENCE THERE AND MY BROTHER HAS A RESIDENCE THERE. AND THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER RIVERVIEW ASSOCIATION PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE THAT HAVE MULTIPLE FAMILIES ON THAT SAME STREET. SO MOST OF US KNOW EACH OTHER. WE'VE BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME, AND OUR FAMILIES HAVE COME BACK TO LIVE THERE, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE LIVED THROUGH THE FLOOD. AND WE ALL KNOW THAT IT FLOODS. THAT IS OUR HOME, BUT WE STILL WANT TO BE ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT OF THERE. I WORK IN THIS BUILDING. I HAVE TO COME HERE EVERY DAY. SO I FIGHT THE TRAFFIC, WHETHER IT'S FLORIDA BOULEVARD OR THE INTERSTATE. SO JUST GETTING OUT ON A LIMB IS AN ISSUE. SO OUR CONCERNS ARE, WHAT WOULD THEY DO IF IT IS ALLOWED TO DIVERT THE TRAFFIC THERE FOR US TO BE ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT? WOULD THEY BE HELD RESPONSIBLE TO MAKE HAMMOND WIDER OR WHAT? WE DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T REALLY SAID WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT CARD IS FOR SCOTT SCHAEFER. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR THREE MINUTES, SIR. HOW ARE Y'ALL? I FEEL LIKE THIS IS POINTLESS BECAUSE I'VE BEEN TO THESE MEETINGS BEFORE, AND IT'S A RUBBER STAMP FOR PROGRESS. THERE'S A PROPERTY AT FLORIDA BOULEVARD AND OLD HAMMOND HIGHWAY THAT WE'VE HAD ISSUES WITH. THEY CAME IN, BROUGHT LOADS AND LOADS OF DIRT.
WE REPORTED IT. THEY CAME OUT, FIND THE GUY AND HE'S STILL DOING IT. I MEAN, NOBODY CARES ABOUT. I MEAN, AND I REALIZE PROBABLY MORE THAN HALF OF Y'ALL FLOODED IN 18. OUR STREET, RIVERVIEW, HAS FLOODED NUMEROUS TIMES. NUMEROUS TIMES. ONLY ONCE HAS IT FLOODED THE WHOLE STREET. BUT I IMPLORE Y'ALL TO PLEASE THINK ABOUT EVERYBODY ELSE AND NOT JUST WHOEVER IS WANTING TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY AND PUT WHATEVER ON IT, ALONG WITH THE TRAFFIC ISSUES AND FLOOD ISSUES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE HAVE SEVERAL MORE SPEAKER CARDS THAT ARE IN OPPOSITION, BUT HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK. THOSE ARE FOR JUDITH BUCKLEY, SCOTT SCHAEFER. I'M SORRY. SCOTT SCHAEFER FILLED OUT ANOTHER CARD WHERE HE DID WANT TO SPEAK. AND BRITTANY MATHERNE. OKAY. SO AT THIS TIME, I'LL INVITE THE APPLICANT BACK FOR A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL. WHAT YOU CAN HEAR EVERYONE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT POSSIBLE DEVELOPMENT AND FLOODING ISSUES. THIS IS A REZONING CASE TO CORRECT THE ZONING TO MATCH WHAT THE PARISH IS ALREADY WANTING TO DO WITH FLORIDA BOULEVARD. BOTH ARE ALL ADJACENT PROPERTIES THAT ARE ALREADY ZONED COMMERCIAL. THAT'S ALL. THANK YOU, SIR. AT THIS TIME, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION. VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS. CAN THE APPLICANT. CAN YOU COME BACK UP, PLEASE? A NUMBER OF THE CONCERNS I'VE HEARD. I MEAN, THIS PROPERTY FACES FLORIDA BOULEVARD, WHICH I GET. IT'S FINE. BUT THE CONCERNS I HAVE IS THE PROPERTY TRICKLING INTO OLD HAMMOND. AND THERE ARE SOME RESIDENTIAL AREAS BACK THERE. WOULD YOU ALL BE IN AGREEMENT TO MAYBE TAKE SOME OF THAT PROPERTY OUT OF THIS OR TO DO SOMETHING WHERE THIS IS NOT PART OF THE COMMERCIAL SIDE? WHAT THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, AND I UNDERSTAND IS THEY DON'T WANT ACCESS OR CUT THROUGH FROM FLORIDA ONTO OLD HAMMOND. IS THERE A POSSIBILITY OF COMING BACK WITH A REVISION? YES. OKAY. IN FACT, INITIALLY THAT'S ALL WE WERE TALKING ABOUT WAS MATCHING THE ROAD FRONTAGE ON FLORIDA. RIGHT. BUT SINCE THE WHOLE PROPERTY IS ONE TRACK. RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND, SO YOU'RE TAKING YOU'RE TAKING THE PROPERTY AND HAS A NATURAL BARRIER, RIGHT? SEPARATING THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY FROM THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WITH THE DITCH. BUT I THINK THE CONCERN IS THE ACCESS ONTO OLD HAMMOND FROM THE PROPERTY. THERE COULD BE THAT. IS THERE. YEAH. I'D SAY THE PROPERTY OWNER IS NOT CONCERNED ABOUT ACCESS TO OLD HAMMONG AT ALL. HE'S JUST WORKING OFF OF FLORIDA BOULEVARD. MR. DIRECTOR, I KNOW WE CAN'T ADD CODICILS AND SAY, OKAY, YOU CAN DO THIS, BUT YOU CAN'T. YOU CAN HAVE THE REZONING, BUT YOU CAN'T DO X. IS THERE A WAY TO. OR DOES HE NEED TO COME BACK WITH A REVISED PLAN, TAKING THAT PIECE OUT OF. MY ADVICE, IF THE APPLICANT'S OPEN TO DOING THAT OR CONSIDERING THAT WOULD BE TO POTENTIALLY DEFER THIS ITEM, HAVE THE APPLICANT GET WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF AND LOOK AT OPTIONS FOR A LESSER PORTION, REMOVING THE REZONING REQUEST FROM THE PROPERTY FRONTING OLD HAMMOND. YES, WE COULD DO THAT. OKAY. WE INITIALLY HAD SPOKE ABOUT DOING THAT. SO YES, THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM AT ALL. I WOULD ALSO ENCOURAGE YOU TO GET WITH THE COUNCILPERSON IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE THAT ALREADY. 30 DAYS WOULD BE FINE? DO WE THINK. WOULD THAT BE SUFFICIENT? WOULD THAT BE SUFFICIENT? 30 DAYS WOULD BE FINE. OKAY. THEN I MAKE A MOTION WE DEFER THESE TWO ITEMS FOR 30 DAYS. OKAY. THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT TO DEFER THIS ITEM FOR 30 DAYS. I BELIEVE THAT MOTION RECEIVED A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FOWLER. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. THOSE TWO ITEMS HAVE BEEN DEFERRED FOR 30 DAYS. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4. CASE 27-26. CASE 2726. 3680 AND 3696
DALTON STREET. PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF DALTON STREET AND WEST OF NORTH 38TH STREET. COUNCIL DISTRICT 7. HARRIS. THE APPLICANT IS DARRYL HAMILTON, SR. FUTURE BR LAND USE DESIGNATION IS RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE EXISTING ZONING IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL A2 WITH A REQUESTED ZONING OF NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, NC. CASE 27-26. 36 80 AND 3696 DALTON STREET. THE REQUESTED ZONING CONFORMS TO THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS AND ALIGNS WITH FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION. HOWEVER, STAFF IS UNABLE TO CERTIFY THE REQUESTED REZONING AS IT MAY CHANGE THE EXISTING ZONING PATTERNS IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. THANK YOU. COMMISSION MEMBERS, AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES. GOOD EVENING, SIR. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS DARRYL HAMILTON. THIS IS MY WIFE, TAJA HAMILTON. AND WE ANTICIPATE ON OPENING UP A SNOWBALL STAND IN THAT AREA WHERE WE COULD FEED THE KIDS WITH SNOWBALL NACHOS, HOT DOGS, POPCORN, WHATEVER. AND WE SEE IT'S AN EXCELLENT OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO GET BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY. BEING THAT BACK IN 2007, WE WERE VICTIMS OF A VIOLENT CRIME RIGHT IN THAT SAME AREA, 70805 AND WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A LACK OF RESOURCES THERE THAT CAN PROVIDE THE KIDS SOME MENTORSHIP AS WELL. SO THAT'S WHY WE LOOKED INTO THIS PROPERTY. AND WE WANT TO TRY TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY ON BEING ABLE TO HELP BRING THAT AREA UP AND WHERE WE CAN REACH SOME OF THE KIDS AND SOME OF THE COMMUNITY ALL TOGETHER. WE ACTUALLY WE HAVE A STOP THE VIOLENCE ORGANIZATION THAT'S BEEN AROUND FOR 15 YEARS, CALLED ONE VOICE, ONE DREAM, ONE TEAM, WHERE WE'VE BEEN IN THE COMMUNITY EACH YEAR, GOING TO ALL THE BRICK PARKS WITHIN THAT AREA, MAKING A DIFFERENCE AND REACHING OUT. SO THAT'S OUR MAIN FOCUS ON TRYING TO BETTER THE COMMUNITY VERSUS HURTING THE COMMUNITY. AND I THINK I KNOW IT MAY BE SOME CONCERNS ON WHAT ACTUALLY WILL TAKE PLACE, BUT WE HONESTLY KNOW WHAT OUR PLAN IS AND WHAT WE PLAN ON DOING. AND LET'S SEE. YEAH, LIKE I SAID, WE PLAN ON TRYING TO USE IT AS FAR AS MENTORING THE YOUTH, BECAUSE IN ORDER TO REACH THEM, WE HAVE TO SEE THEM. AND THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO SEE THEM. YOU GOT SOMETHING YOU WANT TO SAY? I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN HEAR ME. I KNOW I HEARD SOME REBUTTAL ABOUT LIKE CHANGING THE ZONING AND STUFF. AND, YOU KNOW, IN THAT AREA. I DON'T KNOW WHAT. BUT I WAS JUST THINKING MAYBE WE CAN PROPOSE SOME TYPE OF CONDITION TO THE ZONING TO WHERE IT COULDN'T BE UTILIZED AS ANYTHING ELSE EXCEPT FOR THAT TYPE OF BUSINESS IN THE FUTURE. IS THAT EVERYTHING? OKAY. THAT'S EVERYTHING. THANK Y'ALL. I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL CARDS. WE'VE RECEIVED NO OPPOSITION, NO PHONE CALLS AT ALL SINCE WE POSTED THE PROPERTY. SO WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU COULD HANG OUT BY THE MIC. WE SAW THAT THERE'S BEEN A BUILDING THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. CAN YOU GIVE ME A LITTLE BIT MORE HISTORY? YEAH, IT'S ACTUALLY A SNOWBALL STAND. IT WAS ALREADY THERE. AND WHEN WE PURCHASED IT, WE KNEW THAT IT WAS A SNOWBALL STAND. BUT I KIND OF FIGURED THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE TO DO THE ZONING AND THEY TOLD US THAT IT WAS BASICALLY GOOD TO GO, WHICH I KIND OF KNEW IT WASN'T GOING TO BE GOOD TO GO. SO WE WANT TO TAKE THE PROPER STEPS AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING THE LEGAL WAY, THE RIGHT WAY. BUT THAT'S WHAT THE BUILDING BEEN THERE, I GUESS IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR SOME YEARS. AT LEAST FIVE, SIX YEARS. OKAY. VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. I KNOW YOU SAID THE BUILDING HAS BEEN THERE A FEW YEARS. ARE YOU LOOKING TO. I MEAN, YOU'RE LOOKING TO BASICALLY DO THE SAME THING. ON SITE SNOWBALL STAND, ETC. GATHERING PLACE. OKAY. I WILL TELL YOU THAT OVER THE YEARS ALWAYS HAD CONCERNS WITH PEOPLE COMING IN WITH A SPECIFIC ITEM WITHIN A NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND I KNOW THIS WITH THE BEST OF INTENT, BUT THE CONCERN IS WE'RE GOING FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. AND, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE A BUNCH OF THINGS YOU COULD DO THERE. AND THE NEIGHBORS SEEM TO BE HAPPY WITH WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. I'M NOT UPSET WITH IT AT ALL. I JUST WANT THE NEIGHBORS AND YOU TO BE AWARE THAT YOU GO TO NEIGHBORHOOD. EXCUSE ME. YOU GO TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. IT'S NOT JUST GOING TO BE A SNOWBALL STAND AND, YOU KNOW, A SMALL PLACE FOR GATHERINGS. I MEAN, I KNOW. ASK THE DIRECTOR. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. I JUST WANT THE NEIGHBORS TO BE AWARE THAT IF THIS DOESN'T FLY, IT COULD BE SOMETHING ELSE. I THINK WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS FINE. YEAH. BUT YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT. AND I KNOW THE IDEA TO LOOKING FOR A ZONING THAT WOULD LOCK YOU INTO THIS. I THINK IF THE NEIGHBORS HAD CONCERNS, I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING YOU SHOULD GO FOR. BUT THE NEIGHBORS DO NOT, THE NEIGHBORS SEEM TO BE IN SUPPORT. SO FOR ME, I HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF CONCERN. AND OVER THE YEARS, I'VE ALWAYS BEEN THE GUY WHO SAID, YOU KNOW, YEAH, YOU WANT TO DO, YOU KNOW, A SNOWBALL STAND OR YOU WANT TO DO A, YOU KNOW, A SHOOT A SHOE PLACE OR SOMETHING, THAT'S FINE. BUT IT COULD BE A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER THINGS IF YOU DON'T DON'T SUCCEED. AND, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO HURT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THIS SEEMS TO BE A POSITIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO JUST FOR THE NEIGHBORS TO BE AWARE THAT, YOU KNOW, OTHER THINGS CAN HAPPEN. BUT I THINK THAT FOR WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, I'M FINE. I DON'T REALLY SEE THE. SINCE THERE'S NO OPPOSITION, I DON'T REALLY SEE THE NEED TO GO FOR LIKE AN EYE SPUD, WHICH WOULD LOCK YOU IN. SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. I APPRECIATE IT. THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE THIS ITEM FROM VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. I BELIEVE THAT MOTION RECEIVED A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MAXEY. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? LET ME ASK YOU, HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REACH OUT TO COUNCILWOMAN HARRIS REGARDING THIS? ACTUALLY WE DID. MY WIFE REACHED OUT TO HER THROUGH HER EMAIL AND HER ASSISTANT CALLED ME. SO I SPOKE WITH HER ASSISTANT AS WELL. OKAY. AND THEY'RE FULLY AWARE OF WHAT WE PLAN ON DOING. MATTER OF FACT, I CALLED THEM THIS MORNING. OKAY. BUT YEAH, I SPOKE WITH THEM. CERTAINLY. OKAY. BECAUSE THIS ITEM IS ABOUT TO PASS AT THIS COMMISSION LEVEL, BUT WILL ALSO REQUIRE COUNCIL APPROVAL. SO JUST DEFINITELY MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAD SOME THOROUGH DISCUSSIONS AND MAKE SURE THAT SHE UNDERSTANDS EXACTLY WHAT. YES. THAT'LL BE BE THIS WEEK TOO. SO. WHAT'S THIS WEEK? NO, THIS MEETING GOES TO. IT REQUIRES COUNCIL APPROVAL. THAT MEETING DATE IS SEPTEMBER 16TH. OKAY. THAT'S THE FOLLOWING. IT'S A GOOD IDEA. I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND IT. YEAH. WE WILL. MATTER OF FACT, OUR REPRESENTATION WILL SEE OVER THERE NOW. SO SHE'S KIND OF GETTING FAMILIAR WITH WHAT TO DO. SO. OKAY. OKAY. I'LL REITERATE THAT THERE WAS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE THE ITEM FROM VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT, SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MAXEY. THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS AND NO NEED FOR ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. SO THAT ITEM IS APPROVED. APPRECIATE IT. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 6. MCUP 126. MCUP 126. 7740 AND 9400-9500 PETTIT ROAD. PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH AND WEST SIDE OF PETTIT ROAD, NORTH OF COMITE DRIVE. COUNCIL DISTRICT 2, KENNEY. THE APPLICANT IS EDWARD C. BRADFORD. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A SAND AND GRAVEL MINING OPERATION AND A PROPOSED FUTURE POND. FUTURE BR LAND USE IS AGRICULTURAL RURAL. MCUP 126, 7740 AND 9500-9500 PETTIT ROAD. STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR A MAJOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES AND CONFORMING TO UDC REQUIREMENTS. PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICE HAS RECEIVED ONE MESSAGE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS ITEM, AND WE RECEIVED A PETITION OF SUPPORT WITH 13 SIGNATURES FROM AREA RESIDENTS. THANK YOU. COMMISSION MEMBERS, AT THIS TIME, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES. GOOD EVENING, SIR. GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU. ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS COMING BACK IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS. WHAT HAS CHANGED LAST TIME FROM WHEN WE WERE HERE IS, WE DO HAVE, AS MENTIONED 13 SIGNATURES FROM THE ADJOINING AREA THAT HAVE HAD SIGNED OFF AS A LETTER OF NO OBJECTION.
WE ALSO HAVE THE OWNERS HAVE SPOKEN WITH THE COUNCIL MEMBER IN THIS AREA. AND WE WERE TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, GET A GARNISH AS MUCH SUPPORT AS POSSIBLE. SO ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS MAY HAVE FOR US? OR. ANY MORE INFORMATION? OKAY. THANK YOU. WE DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKER CARDS FOR THE ITEM, SO I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION. OKAY. THE THREE I HAVE ARE LISTED AS THE APPLICANT. YOU ALL WANTED TO SPEAK AS THE APPLICANT? YOU CAN COME TO THE PODIUM AT THIS TIME. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS HEATH MORRIS. I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR POSTPONING THIS A MONTH AND GIVING US A MONTH TO KIND OF LEARN OF OUR WAYS, I GUESS, AND YOU KNOW, REACH OUT TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND HAVE SOME DIALOG AND SOME CONVERSATION. WE DID SIT DOWN WITH COUNCILMAN KENNEY, HAD A REALLY GOOD CONVERSATION, EXPLAINED TO HIM WHAT THE OPERATION HAS DONE FOR THE PAST 12 YEARS, AS WELL AS, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE FUTURE, WHICH IS THE SAME THING. WE ALSO DID GO AROUND TO THE NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY, THE PEOPLE THAT OWN THE LOTS THAT BUTT UP TO THE FACILITY AROUND PETTIT ROAD. WE MET WITH A BUNCH OF LANDOWNERS. NOBODY HAD ANY OBJECTIONS THAT WE SPOKE TO. EVERYBODY THAT WE SPOKE TO SIGNED THE DOCUMENT ON A SUNDAY. THEY WERE VERY MUCH PRO. THEY SAID, Y'ALL GUYS, Y'ALL DO A GOOD JOB. SO WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE US ANOTHER MONTH TO TALK WITH EVERYBODY AND EDUCATE EVERYBODY. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE LET US KNOW. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DOES THAT CONCLUDE THE REMARKS FROM THE APPLICANT? OKAY. WE HAVE NO ADDITIONAL SPEAKER CARDS. DID HE FILL OUT A CARD? HE WOULD. SO, COMMISSION MEMBERS, AT THIS TIME, I'LL CONCLUDE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION. THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM COMMISSIONER CRAWFORD TO APPROVE THIS ITEM. COMMISSIONER ELLENDER SECONDS. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, THAT ITEM IS APPROVED. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM. I'M SORRY? I'D JUST LIKE TO ADD FOR THE RECORD, THIS ITEM IS SCHEDULED BEFORE THE COUNCIL TWO DAYS FROM NOW ON WEDNESDAY AT 4:00. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR HOLCOMB. I BELIEVE WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 10. IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT. ITEM NUMBER 10. SS-3-26. SS-3-26. ALBERT AND MARY BENNETT PROPERTY. 12707 PORT HUDSON PRIDE ROAD. PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PORT HUDSON PRIDE ROAD, EAST OF COOK ROAD. COUNCIL DISTRICT 1, NOEL. THE APPLICANT IS BRIAN JOHNSON. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A RESIDENTIAL MINOR SUBDIVISION WITH A PRIVATE STREET AND THREE LOTS. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS AGRICULTURAL RURAL. SS-3-26 ALBERT AND MARY BENNETT PROPERTY. 12707 PORT HUDSON PRIDE ROAD. STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION. COMMISSION MEMBERS, AT THIS TIME, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES. GOOD EVENING, SIR. GOOD EVENING. I'M SORRY? OKAY. WELL. SIR, COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF? I'M THE PROPERTY OWNER. OKAY. THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO GO FIRST. THIS IS FOR THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK. HI, EVERYBODY. I'M BRIAN JOHNSON. I'M HERE JUST TO FINISH UP A SURVEY FOR MY FAMILY AND THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO GET SOME A HOME BUILT. WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS MAP FOR A PRETTY LONG TIME NOW, AND WE'RE FINALLY GETTING SOME PROGRESS TRYING TO GET SOME PROGRESS DONE. I'VE SUBMITTED ALL THE DOCUMENTS TO SHOW THAT I HAVE OWNERSHIP OF THAT PROPERTY INTEREST INTO THAT PROPERTY I HAVE. I ALSO SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS THAT THE DEFENDANT HIMSELF DOES NOT
HAVE ANY INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY ALSO. SO I'M JUST HERE TO GET ALL THE MAPS APPROVED SO I CAN MOVE ON WITH MY PROCESS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR. OUR NEXT CARD IS FOR DANA DIXON. DANA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO. WHO ALSO DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK. WE HAVE ANOTHER CAR FOR LEWIS NORTH, AND HE'S ALL IN FAVOR THAT DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK. WE HAVE TWO CARDS IN OPPOSITION. THE FIRST IS FOR KEVIN BENNETT. THAT'S YOU, SIR. YEAH. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR FOR THREE MINUTES. THANK YOU. AS I STARTED TO SAY EARLIER, I HAVE A 25% INTEREST IN THIS PROPERTY ON LOT NINE. I ALSO HAVE INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY BEHIND LIGHT NINE LOT. LOT FIVE. I HAVE INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY ON LOT FIVE. I ALSO HAVE INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY ON LOT NINE BEHIND LOT FIVE. I WASN'T AWARE. I DID NOT RECEIVE NOTICE OF THIS MEETING. ME AND SEVERAL OTHER OF MY FAMILY MEMBERS. MY MOM THAT DON'T WANT TO SPEAK AND SOME OF THEM THAT JUST COULDN'T MAKE IT TODAY. SO I'M HERE IN OPPOSITION TO IT UNTIL WE CAN GET MORE INFORMATION ON WHAT'S TRANSPIRING AS FAR AS MY INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY MAINLY, THAT'S WITH THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE. I'VE ALSO SPOKEN WITH AN ATTORNEY FROM THE. THE ATTORNEYS THAT HAVE BEEN HANDLING THAT PROPERTY FOR YEARS ARE RIGHT HERE DOWNTOWN. SACHSE AND WILLIAMS, WHO ARE PREPARING A PETITION TO PARCEL OUT THE PROPERTY, SEPARATE. SO WHATEVER MR. JOHNSON'S DOING OR WHOEVER'S DOING ON THEIR LOT DOESN'T AFFECT THE PROPERTY TAXES ON THE ACTUAL WHOLE LOT. WE'RE DOING THE SAME THING DOWN ON LOT FIVE, JUST ADJACENT ON THE SAME ALBERT BENNETT PLOT. AND YEAH, I JUST ASK THAT ANY MOTION TO GET THERE OR ANYTHING TO. THAT THIS NOT BE APPROVED UNTIL MORE INFORMATION THAT. I'M NOT PREPARED AT ALL. I JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS. BUT IT DOES IMPACT MY PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. ALSO MY COUSINS ADJACENT PROPERTY. I'VE BEEN BUILDING FOR 30 YEARS. I'VE BEEN LOOKING AT. I'VE SEEN THE PLAN. I MET WITH THE SURVEYOR OUT THERE. SOME OF HIS NUMBERS, AS FAR AS TOPOGRAPHY AND KNOWING HOW BUILDING UP THIS CERTAIN AREA IS GOING TO IMPACT ANY OF US, ESPECIALLY THE DELICATE ROAD THAT LEADS, AS I KEEP MENTIONING, BACK PAST THE PROPOSED PROPERTY. THERE'S ONE ROAD THAT LEADS BACK INTO FOUR OTHER LOTS. AND YOU HAVE ABOUT 30S, SIR. SO JUST IN OPPOSITION TO ANYTHING HAPPENING UNTIL WE COULD GET SOME MORE INFORMATION ON WHAT'S. AND PETITIONING FOR THE SEPARATION OF THE LOT IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO BRING IN. THANK YOU, SIR. WE HAVE ONE OTHER SPEAKER CARD THAT IS IN OPPOSITION FOR DONALD BENNETT, BUT HE HAS INDICATED THAT HE DOES NOT WISH TO SPEAK. SO AT THIS TIME, I'LL INVITE THE APPLICANT BACK FOR A FIVE MINUTE REBUTTAL. WELL, AS FAR AS THE PROPERTY IN LOT NINE, IT'S IN EAST FELICIANA PARISH. IT'S NOT EVEN IN EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH. SO IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH. THAT'S ONE. AS FAR AS THE PARCEL, THAT IS MY AUNTIE'S PIECE. HER SON IS HERE TO REPRESENT HER. SHE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHATEVER THEY HAD GOING ON. I DON'T KNOW, BUT I'VE SUBMITTED THAT PAPERWORK SHOWING WHAT TRANSPIRED BETWEEN THEM. AND I'M JUST HERE TO GET MY MAPS APPROVED SO I CAN GO IN AND START DOING WHAT I NEED TO DO. SIMPLE. SO I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT IF Y'ALL GRANT THIS APPROVAL SO I CAN MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU, SIR. AT THIS TIME, I'LL CONCLUDE THE PUBLIC HEARING. BEFORE I ASK FOR COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION, THIS IS OBVIOUSLY AN INTERESTING ITEM AS THEY'RE DISPUTING OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY. AND THIS BODY OBVIOUSLY IS NOT SET UP TO HANDLE THOSE DISPUTES AND WHATNOT.
RYAN, I'M ASSUMING YOU'VE HAD SOME. DIRECTOR HOLCOMB, I'M ASSUMING YOU'VE HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. IF YOU COULD JUST KIND OF QUICKLY SUMMARIZE WHAT THE STANCE IS ON THAT AND OBVIOUSLY AND REITERATE WHAT OUR ROLE ON THIS COMMISSION IS AND HOW THAT'S AFFECTED. WOULD BE AFFECTED BY THE DISPUTE IN QUESTION. CERTAINLY, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. EVERYTHING WAS IN PRETTY GOOD SHAPE UP UNTIL FRIDAY. AND THEN WE HEARD FROM EVERYONE. THIS PAST FRIDAY. AS CHAIRMAN WASHINGTON STATED, THIS BODY IS NOT EQUIPPED AND DOES NOT GET INTO VERIFYING OWNERSHIP AND PROPERTY DISPUTES. THIS PROPERTY IS UNIQUE AND IN FACT, GOING BACK IN OUR RECORDS, THIS VERY SAME APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED IN 2018 BY THE SAME APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER. IT WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY BY THIS BODY. THOSE PRELIMINARY PLATS ARE GOOD FOR THREE YEARS. THAT APPROVAL HAS EXPIRED. I BELIEVE THAT'S WHY THE APPLICANT IS BACK NOW, REVISITING THE SUBDIVISION OF THE PROPERTY. WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY? THE INFORMATION WE HAVE. WE HAVE NO OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION THAT WOULD SPEAK TO, YOU KNOW, ANY DISPUTE OR WOULD SAY OTHERWISE THAT THE APPLICANT CANNOT MOVE FORWARD. IN FACT, THE DOCUMENTATION WE HAVE FROM WHO STATED AS THE OWNER, THEY PROVIDED AN ACTIVE DONATION WITH THE SOLE SAME NAME ON THE APPLICATION. THIS BODY HAS PREVIOUSLY ACTED AND APPROVED FOR THE SAME SUBDIVISION. A RECOMMENDATION ON FRIDAY THAT I PERSONALLY SHARED IN MY STAFF WITH BOTH SIDES WAS TO DEFER THIS ITEM BECAUSE I'VE BEEN DOING THIS A LONG TIME, I DON'T THINK THERE'S GOING TO BE VOTES ONE WAY OR THE OTHER TONIGHT, BUT TO DEFER THIS ITEM AND WORK THINGS OUT, GET AN ATTORNEY IF NEEDED. BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE ARE NOW. IF THIS BODY DOES CHOOSE TO ACT AND VOTE TONIGHT, THE INFORMATION I HAVE AND THAT THE PARISH ATTORNEY'S OFFICE HAS REVIEWED, I THINK WE'RE IN GOOD STANDING. I DON'T HAVE ANY DOCUMENTATION THAT SAYS OTHERWISE, BUT I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO THE COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE I'M NOT A VOTING MEMBER. THANK YOU FOR THAT, DIRECTOR HOLCOMB. COMMISSIONER FOWLER RAISED HIS HAND FIRST FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS, AND THEN WE'LL ASK VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT TO SHARE HIS COMMENTS AFTERWARDS. COMMISSIONER FOWLER. DIRECTOR HOLCOMB, DID YOU SAY THAT YOU HAVE OTHER OWNERS WHO HAVE CONVEYED THEIR OWNERSHIP IN WRITING FOR THE PART OF THE APPLICATION? NOT IN WRITING. THERE WAS VERBAL STATEMENTS MADE OVER THE PHONE. ARE YOU AT LIBERTY TO SAY WHO THOSE PEOPLE WERE? I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. THAT'S FINE. CAN I HAVE THE APPLICANT COME BACK UP, PLEASE? DO YOU HAVE ANY OWNERSHIP PAPERWORK THAT SHOWS THAT YOU'RE THE SOLE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY? YES, SIR. I HAVE SUBMITTED THE PAPERWORK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. LIKE THE CASH SALE THAT SAYS YOU. IT WAS AN ACT OF DONATION. ACT OF DONATION. AND YOU HAVE THAT ON RECORD. SO. YES, SIR. CAN I ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS? DANA JOHNSON, WHO'S THAT? MY SISTER. WHO'S KEVIN BENNETT? I DON'T KNOW. YOU'RE KEVIN BENNETT? AND YOU'RE DANA? YEAH. AND WHO IS MARTHA PETRIE? MY AUNTIE. YOUR AUNT? YES, SIR. OKAY. SO IF WE DON'T. I MEAN, WE DON'T HAVE THE. WE NEED THE ACT OF DONATION TO KNOW WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY, BECAUSE ACCORDING TO THE. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSOR'S SITE, IT'S STILL SHOWING THAT 25% IS OWNED BY EACH OF YOU. OKAY. I SUBMITTED THE ACT OF DONATIONS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION VIA EMAIL, AND I ALSO HAVE THEM HERE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. KEVIN, CAN YOU COME UP? YOU ARE KEVIN BENNETT? YES, SIR. 25% OWNER? YES, SIR. HAVE YOU GIVEN YOUR 25% DONATION TO BRIAN JOHNSON? I HAVE NOT, BUT I DO HAVE MY DONATION AND MY RECEIPT FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY. THAT YOU RECEIVED THE OWNERSHIP? THAT I RECEIVED THE OWNERSHIP. SO YOU STILL OWN 25% OF THIS PROPERTY? YES, SIR. IN YOUR OPINION? NO, AS A MATTER. I HAVE ALL MY OKAY HERE. I CAN SHOW YOU FROM THE SUCCESSION OF MY. ON TO HER DAUGHTER, MISS PETRIE, WHO HAS PASSED. THERE'S BEEN NO SUCCESSION SINCE MISS PETRIE HAS PASSED. SO MISS PETRIE IS. MARTHA PETRIE IS THE AUNT THAT'S PASSED. YES. AND HER PORTION IS TO WHO? HER PORTION IS TO HER DAUGHTER. BUT IT HASN'T BEEN SUCCEEDED YET. SO THERE'S NO BEEN NO SUCCESSION.
NO SUCCESSION AT ALL ON THE PORTION OF HIS PROPERTY. OKAY. THANK YOU. VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. OKAY, THIS HAS GONE WAY BEYOND PLANNING COMMISSION. THIS IS AN INTERNAL STRUGGLE IN A FAMILY. WE CAN'T SOLVE IT HERE. AND I THINK YOU ALL NEED TO WORK SOMETHING OUT. THERE'S A SUCCESSION OUT THERE. IT HAS TO BE DONE EITHER THROUGH PROBATE, HOWEVER. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DEFER THIS FOR 60 DAYS AND LET IT COME BACK WHEN YOU ALL HAVE GOTTEN THIS THING SETTLED OUT. OKAY? NO? IT NEEDS TO BE 30 DAYS. 30 DAYS? 30 DAYS. SIR. EXCUSE ME. YOU DON'T HAVE THE FLOOR. THANK YOU. THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM COMMISSIONER GROUT TO DEFER THIS ITEM FOR 30 DAYS. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? THERE'S A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER JODY. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? YES, SIR. OBJECTION. THERE'S AN OBJECTION FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON. ANY ADDITIONAL OBJECTIONS? I'D LIKE THE FLOOR, SIR. YES, SIR. ABSOLUTELY. I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU. WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THIS IS A LEGAL MATTER BETWEEN FIRST AND. THAT'S NOT A PLANNING COMMISSION ISSUE. IF WE'VE MET THE CRITERIA FOR THIS APPLICATION, IT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE DEALING WITH. DISPUTE BETWEEN PERSONAL OWNERSHIP. IT'S NOT WHAT WE DO WITH THIS COMMISSION. WE'VE NEVER DONE IT THIS COMMISSION. AND THIS SHOULD NOT BE THE NIGHT WE START. WE CAN HAVE PEOPLE STOP ME ALL DAY, SAY THEY HAVE OWNERSHIP OR SOMETHING. WE ARE MEETING THE CRITERIA OF THE UDC AND THE APPLICATION PROCESS, AND OUR STAFF HAS TOLD US HE MET THAT. SO I'M GOING TO WALK IN TONIGHT AND AT THAT MICROPHONE AND SAY, I'M THE OWNER AND WE DENY OR REJECT. I THINK WE OWN. THAT PUTS THEM ON SHAKY GROUND. BECAUSE LEGALLY THEY MET THE CRITERIA. IF THEY DID NOT, WHEN THEY FILED THE APPLICATION, THEY WOULD HAVE SAID THEY DIDN'T HAVE A PROPER STANDING FOR PUTTING THEIR NAME ON THE APPLICATION. THAT'S A STAFF HAD VERIFIED FOR US. FOR US NOW TO SEND IT BACK AND SAY THEY SHOULD COME HERE AND PROVE TO US WHO OWNS IT? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT AS A SUBSTITUTE. MOTION ON THE FLOOR FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON TO APPROVE THIS ITEM. IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION? I'LL SECOND THE MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON FOR APPROVAL. I DO AGREE THAT. AND I THINK WHEN WE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ON HERE, THERE WAS SOME MENTION THAT THE ACTUAL. WHAT'S BEING REQUESTED HERE HASN'T BEEN OBJECTED TO BY EITHER PARTY. IN WHICH CASE, I AGREE THAT THE ACTUAL PROPERTY OWNERSHIP CAN BE SORTED SEPARATELY FROM WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO, WHICH IS DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS APPROPRIATE IN TERMS OF HOW IT SERVES EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'LL SECOND THE MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO OBJECTIONS, SO. I'LL WITHDRAW MY MOTION. SO THE ORIGINAL MOTION HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO OBJECTIONS. SO WE'LL DO A ROLL CALL VOTE ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ITEM. BUT FIRST WE HAVE SOME ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION FROM COMMISSIONER FOWLER. DIRECTOR HOLCOMB, WHAT IS THE VERIFICATION PROCESS FOR AN APPLICANT? SIMPLY TO SIGN AS THE OWNER. SO IF. TWO SIGNATURES, ONE AS THE APPLICANT AND ONE AS THE OWNER. THEY CAN BE ONE IN THE SAME OR IT CAN BE TWO SEPARATE INDIVIDUALS. SO IF I OWN 1% OF COMMISSIONER ADDISON'S PIECE OF PROPERTY AND I SUBMIT THE APPLICATION TO REZONE HIS PROPERTY, I HAVE THE. HE CAN DO NOTHING TO STOP ME BECAUSE I BECAUSE THE PROPERTY ITSELF MEETS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR REZONING? YOU HAVE TO BE IN GOOD FAITH SIGNING AS OWNER AND IN CONTROL. I WOULD DEFER TO THE PARISH ATTORNEY ON THAT. NOT SURE WHY THIS IS NOT ON. BASED ON WHAT RYAN IS SAYING, THEIR PROCEDURES ARE IN THEIR OFFICE. IT SOUNDS TO ME. I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY SOMEONE SHOULD BE IN GOOD FAITH, BUT I ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR POINT. IF SOMEONE COMES IN WITH SOME SMALL INTEREST, THEY COULD SEEK TO PARTITION THE PROPERTY BASED UNDER THAT CRITERIA. UNLESS THEY HAVE TO HAVE A MAJORITY SHARE, WHICH IS KIND
OF WHAT HE JUST ADDED AT THE END OF THAT. GOOD FAITH THAT I OWN THE PROPERTY AND. MAJORITY CONTROLLING INTEREST. OH, I DID NOT EVEN HEAR RYAN SAY THAT. EXCUSE ME. SO I'M GONNA JUMP IN REAL QUICK. ON THE REZONING APPLICATION, THERE IS AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT IS SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE OWNER WHERE THEY'RE ACKNOWLEDGING PRIVATE DEED RESTRICTION COVENANTS MAY EXIST ON THERE. THEY RECOGNIZE THROUGH THAT AND THAT THE CITY PARISH DOES NOT ENFORCE THAT. IT ALSO HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY THE APPLICANT HAS TO DETERMINE ANY OF THOSE RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY AND ARE AWARE OF ANY VIOLATIONS THAT ARE SUBJECT AND OR PROPERTY OWNER TO LITIGATION FROM OTHERS. SO DOES THAT MEAN THAT IF HE JUST HAS TO SUE IF WE APPROVE IT? IT'S A CIVIL MATTER AT THAT POINT. AND IF IT. JUST WHETHER THE PROPERTY ITSELF FITS THE CRITERIA, THE MINIMUM CRITERIA FOR THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY. IS THAT WHAT I'M BEING. THAT'S CORRECT. WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. WE ARE MAKING NOTHING ABOUT OWNERSHIP. WE ARE JUST ABOUT THE APPLICANT. HE'S BEEN APPROVED AND WE ARE MAKING THAT BASED ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. IN A PERFECT WORLD, THOSE ISSUES WOULD BE RESOLVED AHEAD OF TIME. BUT IN THIS CASE, THEY'RE NOT. I CAN TELL YOU THAT ON RARE INSTANCES BEFORE THERE ARE MECHANISMS TO FORMALLY RESCIND A SUBDIVISION, IF A JUDGE OR THERE'S A. OKAY. AND WE HAVE NO LIABILITY ON THIS FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE ON THIS OWNERSHIP? IT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS COMMISSION. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. THERE'S ALREADY A MOTION. YOU WERE ONE OF TWO NOTED OBJECTIONS. ARE YOU WITHDRAWN? WOULD YOU ALSO. IF LEGALLY, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS, WE CAN'T COME BACK ON US. AND THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL ARE SAYING. AND THIS IS NOT PART OF OUR APPROVAL REALM OUTSIDE THEN, I MEAN, I CAN'T TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT. I AGREE. OKAY. VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. COMMISSIONER ELLENDER HAD A VERY GOOD POINT. I THINK COMMISSIONER ADDISON BROUGHT UP A VERY GOOD POINT. THESE KIND OF DISPUTES REALLY ARE OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW. WE HAVE TO GO WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE ARE PROVIDED IN THE APPLICATION. AND IF WHAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED IN THE APPLICATION MEETS THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE, I'M, YOU KNOW. INITIALLY I WAS OPPOSED TO DOING ANYTHING MOVING FORWARD, BUT I HAPPEN TO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER ADDISON. THIS GETS WAY OUTSIDE OF OUR REALM. AND SO I'M GOING TO SUPPORT MOVING THIS. EXCUSE ME. MOVING THIS FORWARD. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS IS JUST AT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT STAGE. THERE WILL ALSO BE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS, POTENTIAL SITE IMPROVEMENTS. AN ADDITIONAL FINAL PLAT APPROVAL WILL HAVE TO TAKE PLACE. THERE WILL HAVE TO BE SIGNATURES, AND THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AS WELL, ALONG WITH ANY INSPECTIONS BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. SO THIS IS A VERY EARLY PRELIMINARY PLAT STAGE. THERE'S CERTAINLY ADDITIONAL PHASES LEFT. THANK YOU, MR. HOLCOMB. SO, COMMISSIONERS, I WILL RESTATE THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR SO THAT WE'RE ALL CLEAR. THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ITEM. THAT MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER ADDISON. I BELIEVE IT WAS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BOYD. I WILL YEAH, OKAY. I DIDN'T IT WAS ME. ACTUALLY, IT WAS ME, I APOLOGIZE. I APOLOGIZE MOTION ON THE FLOOR. COMMISSIONER ADDISON SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WASHINGTON. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT MOTION? ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, THAT ITEM IS APPROVED AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 11 THAT SAYS 4-26. SS-4-26. JUNE HUNT KENNEDY PROPERTY. PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF PLANK ROAD SOUTH OF WELCH LANE. COUNCIL DISTRICT 1. NOEL. THE APPLICANT IS ELLEN C. JACKSON. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A RESIDENTIAL MINOR SUBDIVISION WITH A PRIVATE STREET AND SIX LOTS. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS AGRICULTURAL RURAL SS-4-2. JUNE HUNT KENNEDY PROPERTY. STAFF CERTIFIES THAT THE PROPOSED REQUEST MEETS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR PLANNING.
COMMISSION CONSIDERATION. COMMISSION MEMBERS, AT THIS TIME, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO SPEAK. EXCUSE ME FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 15 MINUTES. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT? GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING. ELLEN JACKSON WITH MCLEAN TAYLOR INCORPORATED. I REALLY DON'T HAVE MUCH TO SAY UNLESS THERE IS SOMEBODY HERE TO OPPOSE IT. WHICH IS THE OWNER? YEAH. OKAY. AND WE HAD A. IT WAS A MISTAKE. SIR, IF YOU COULD SPEAK INTO THE MIC THAT WAY WE CAN GET EVERYTHING ON RECORD. WE APPRECIATE IT. MY NEIGHBOR CAME DOWN, BUT HE. HE MADE A MISTAKE WHEN HE FILLED OUT THE FORM. HE HAS NO OPPOSITION TO IT. HE'S RIGHT HERE. HE SAID HE SIMPLY MADE A MISTAKE HERE EARLIER. RIGHT, RIGHT, SIR, YOU'RE MICHAEL COLLINS. OKAY. OKAY. IN THAT CASE, WE HAVE NO, NO NOTED OPPOSITION. SO EVERYTHING'S OKAY? YEP. HAVE YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO SHARE WITH THIS COMMISSION BEFORE I CONCLUDE THE PUBLIC HEARING? WE'RE GOOD. OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. COMMISSION MEMBERS, AT THIS TIME, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR MOTIONS REGARDING THIS ITEM. MOTION TO APPROVE. MOTION FOR COMMISSIONER BOYD. APPROVE THIS ITEM. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER ADDISON HAS SOMETHING TO SAY. WE HAVE A LOT OF. WE HAVE A LOT OF FIRSTS HERE TONIGHT. THAT'S THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER SEEN IT. I BELIEVE THERE'S A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER ADDISON. ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS? ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, THIS ITEM IS APPROVED. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL MOVE ON TO COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS, MR. HOLCOMB. I'LL BE QUICK IF YOU. A FEW REMINDERS FOR THE COMMISSION. THERE WILL BE TWO UPCOMING TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT WILL COME BEFORE YOU IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. CERTAINLY BY THE END OF THE YEAR, THE FIRST BEING A RESTRUCTURING AND RECLASSIFICATION OF OUR EXISTING COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS IDENTIFIED IN THE WORK PROGRAM WE APPROVED IN JANUARY THIS YEAR. THE SECOND IS A COUNCIL INITIATED REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF DATA CENTERS AND WHAT ZONING DISTRICTS THEY WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IN. AGAIN, I'LL KEEP YOU UPDATED ON THAT AND FORWARD YOU ANY DRAFT DOCUMENTS AS SOON AS I CAN ON THOSE ITEMS. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICE WILL BE CLOSED ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 7TH FOR THE LABOR DAY HOLIDAY. I WANT TO ANNOUNCE THE NEXT MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL BE MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 21ST. AND I'D LIKE TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO WISH A HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO COMMISSIONER BONES ADDISON. HAPPY BIRTHDAY, SIR. [APPLAUSE]. HAPPY BIRTHDAY, COMMISSIONER ADDISON. AT THIS TIME, WE'LL MOVE ON TO COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS. AND AT THIS TIME WE'LL RECOGNIZE MASHENKA TAYLOR, WHO IS A SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE SPECIALIST IN CURRENT PLANNING AND THE VITAL ROLE THAT SHE PLAYS IN COORDINATING TASKS TO ENSURE ALL LEGAL REQUIREMENTS ARE MET FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS. HER RESPONSIBILITIES INCLUDE MANAGING LEGAL ADVERTISEMENTS, MAILING PUBLIC NOTIFICATIONS AND POSTING PUBLIC NOTICES. SHE ALSO PREPARES MEETING MINUTES AND ASSISTS IN COMPILING MATERIALS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS. IN ADDITION TO HER PRIMARY DUTIES, MASHENKA PROVIDES VALUABLE BACKUP SUPPORT TO THE EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT IN AREAS SUCH AS PAYROLL AND HUMAN RESOURCES. HER RELIABILITY AND DEDICATION HAVE MADE HER AN ESSENTIAL TEAM MEMBER, ESPECIALLY WHEN ADDITIONAL SUPPORT IS NEEDED. FOR HER OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS AND CONSISTENT SUPPORT, MASHENKA TAYLOR HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED AS THIS MONTH'S EMPLOYEE OF THE MONTH. PLEASE JOIN ME IN CONGRATULATING HER. [APPLAUSE]. ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION? IF NONE, IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? MOTION FROM VICE CHAIRMAN GROUT. SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER MAXEY. IF THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS, THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED. THANK YOU, EVERYONE, AND GOOD EVENING.