[0:50] Yeah.
[1:15] Where's that coming from?
[1:17] When I turned it off, I could hear it. I
[1:19] thought it was me.
[1:22] Awesome.
[1:37] Thank you.
[1:52] Almost.
[2:31] Good evening. We'll get uh tonight's
[2:34] meeting of the Scranton City Planning
[2:35] Commission called to order.
[2:40] Don, would you go ahead and do roll
[2:41] call, please?
[2:45] Mr. Fehey
[2:46] >> here.
[2:47] >> Mr. Flanigan
[2:48] >> here.
[2:49] >> Miss Davis
[2:50] >> here.
[2:51] >> Mr.
[2:52] >> here.
[2:53] >> Mr. Chair
[2:54] >> here.
[2:58] » All right. Uh, first item under old
[3:01] business is review of the preliminary
[3:03] final land development plan for the Copa
[3:05] Cabana Glamping Complex, Morgan Highway.
[3:09] Any updates on that project, Don or
[3:12] Casey? Uh, no. We got a uh review back
[3:16] from the soil conservation service and I
[3:19] think they had some comments, but that
[3:21] was the only item I've seen on that
[3:24] since uh the last few months.
[3:26] >> Okay.
[3:28] >> Where are we at? Um, as far as
[3:30] extensions that uh
[3:33] >> uh they gave us an extension. I'll have
[3:34] to go back and look at the day.
[3:36] >> Okay. Where we're at. I think I think
[3:38] it's good through September.
[3:40] >> Okay. Um,
[3:43] I mean, obvious I don't remember when we
[3:46] first looked at at the project, but you
[3:49] let us know if we get to a point where,
[3:51] you know, we might need to just
[3:54] seek, you know, have them resubmited at
[3:56] some point. I mean, if the project's
[3:58] moving along or we're still getting some
[4:00] things coming in, that's one thing. But
[4:02] if we're not here much either,
[4:05] >> yeah, I I'll reach out to them to talk
[4:07] to them.
[4:08] >> Okay.
[4:12] All righty. Any questions from anybody
[4:14] on that project?
[4:19] All right. Then we'll move on to review
[4:21] of the preliminary final land
[4:22] development plan for the construction of
[4:24] a warehouse facility on a parcel located
[4:27] on a 56.86
[4:29] acre parcel between Boulevard A and
[4:31] Elephant A south of Interstate 81. The
[4:35] proposed improvements for construction
[4:36] are two warehouse facilities totaling
[4:39] 495,000 square ft, car and truck parking
[4:42] facilities, and associated storm water
[4:44] conveyance and infiltration facilities.
[4:50] Anything on that?
[4:53] I have been in contact with the
[4:56] engineer. Um we we issued a draft letter
[4:58] to to them um because we had had several
[5:00] preliminary meetings with the uh with
[5:03] their concept plans and just they were
[5:05] bouncing different ideas off us but they
[5:06] did submit officially and we did accept
[5:09] the plans. I don't remember what month.
[5:11] Um, we created a draft letter and we
[5:13] discussed it with them because there was
[5:14] a traffic item that we wanted them to
[5:16] address and they subsequently addressed
[5:18] that by showing they can make the truck
[5:21] turns at Boulevard and Main Street in
[5:24] Dixon City. Um, they've also reached out
[5:26] about several other comments that we
[5:28] made, but we haven't gone officially on
[5:29] the record. So, I need to do that
[5:31] immediately um because I'm anticipating
[5:33] they're going to respond to that draft
[5:34] letter. Uh and and it's still valid
[5:37] minus the traffic comment that we made
[5:39] that they um responded to. Okay. So,
[5:43] they're they're active and I think we
[5:44] should I'll encourage them to come in
[5:46] next month. Um assuming they've
[5:48] responded to the review letter that we
[5:50] send, which I'll do this week.
[5:53] Okay, great. No, I think that sounds
[5:56] like a plan.
[5:58] Uh, Don, did you have any comments on
[6:00] that project?
[6:01] >> No.
[6:02] >> Okay.
[6:04] >> Working through them.
[6:05] >> All right, sounds good. Anything from
[6:07] planning commission members?
[6:10] >> Yeah, I think if they're ready and and
[6:12] available next month, um, we can have
[6:14] them in, invite them in and
[6:17] take a look at the project.
[6:20] All right, on to the third item under
[6:23] old business. Review of preliminary
[6:24] final land development plan for the
[6:26] development of 14 apartments with 4,000
[6:28] square ft of office space and 4,000
[6:31] square ft of retail space at 1800 North
[6:33] Washington A as part of the
[6:35] redevelopment of the former state school
[6:37] for the deaf site. Look like we have
[6:40] somebody here uh on the project. So come
[6:42] on up and introduce yourself for us
[6:45] again. And
[6:45] >> good evening. Good evening. Dave Leaka
[6:47] with Ruther and Bowen.
[6:50] Um,
[6:52] we're the engineers for the project. We
[6:54] did receive prior to last month's
[6:57] meeting comments from your engineer,
[6:59] which at this point I believe we've
[7:01] addressed. Uh, there naturally is still
[7:03] a few outstanding items that we need to
[7:06] um, well, I guess he needs to look at. I
[7:08] don't know how much you got to look at
[7:09] it, Casey, but I know a lot of the a
[7:11] good portion of them I think we've
[7:13] addressed other than I think planning
[7:15] module, which I did submit to um to Don
[7:18] and he did get back to me. Um we finally
[7:21] got a resolution from PA American as to
[7:27] what was previously utilized from a flow
[7:30] standpoint and what we're proposing. Um,
[7:35] so I did provide that uh information to
[7:38] Don. He signed off on the city side of
[7:41] it. We're just waiting for Dumbore
[7:42] Burough to sign off on their side and
[7:44] we'll actually submit it to to D
[7:47] um formally once we have sign off from
[7:50] Dumbore Burough.
[7:53] Um
[7:56] there were a number of comments. Um and
[7:59] again I I believe we went through and addressed probably 90% of them.
[8:06] There are some outstanding items. Um
[8:09] we had some comments received from
[8:12] conservation district. Um we've
[8:14] addressed those and resubmitted to them.
[8:16] So, we're kind of waiting for their
[8:18] response, [clears throat] excuse me,
[8:20] back um as to whether or not they have
[8:23] anything additional um or if they're
[8:26] ready to issue a permit. Um Lacawana
[8:30] County Regional Planning Commission. We
[8:32] submitted to them and I provided a
[8:33] letter to the city uh stating that they
[8:37] did not need to review it because
[8:40] there's really no new buildings. It's
[8:41] really just parking and storm water. So
[8:44] it it's excluded from from their review.
[8:47] So they did provide a letters stating
[8:50] that uh you guys have a copy of that. Um
[9:03] we are still waiting for a lighting
[9:06] plan. Uh I talked to the developers. We
[9:08] didn't really have um locations shown on
[9:12] our utility plan that showed lighting.
[9:14] So, I believe they're engaging
[9:16] electrical engineer just to lay out
[9:19] lights and actually provide a
[9:20] photometrics plan uh showing there's no
[9:23] overshot on to neighboring properties
[9:25] and whatnot.
[9:27] And the landscape plan is in the process
[9:29] of being developed as well.
[9:34] Um there were a few and I don't know we
[9:37] didn't waivers at the last meeting.
[9:39] Correct.
[9:41] >> I don't Yeah, I don't remember. I was
[9:42] going to ask. I have them listed here.
[9:43] >> So, yeah. So, so I did um provide a
[9:46] letter um of the waivers were
[9:49] requesting. Uh there are three waivers.
[9:52] One of them has to do with scale. One in
[9:54] equals 50. Our believe our plans are at
[9:56] 1 in equals 30, which is actually a
[9:58] larger um a larger scale, a little
[10:03] easier to read, but we're rest
[10:05] requesting a waiver on the 50 1 in
[10:09] equals 50 foot requirement.
[10:12] Um requesting a waiver on the minimum
[10:15] pipe size of 15 in. the major like
[10:18] pretty much all the pipes uh within this
[10:20] project are
[10:23] um
[10:25] going to be owned and maintained by the
[10:27] property owner. There's nothing that
[10:28] we're extending out into into a street
[10:31] somewhere that's going to be a
[10:32] requirement of the city. Um and I
[10:35] believe we're going from 12 or from 15
[10:38] to 12. We have a 12-in um outlet pipe
[10:42] that
[10:45] really didn't need to be a 15 in because
[10:48] there the flow is pretty small. Um and
[10:51] the other one was the improvement
[10:52] guarantee being that there is no
[10:54] improvements that the city needs to take
[10:56] over. Um
[10:59] we would like to request a waiver from the guarantee. Um, and typically
[11:04] that's when you're working and doing
[11:06] stuff uh within the public right away
[11:08] that's going to get dedicated to the
[11:10] city. None of there's nothing here
[11:11] that's going to be dedicated to the city
[11:13] for this project. So, uh, that would be
[11:16] the third waiver. So, I believe that
[11:17] would probably be the the first item
[11:19] that we would need to to address from your side, the waivers.
[11:24] Um, let me just go through here quickly
[11:28] just to see if there's anything
[11:31] that I'm missing.
[11:35] Dave, we we have a we'll have a couple
[11:37] follow-up comments on some of the
[11:39] responses, but you know, they they've
[11:40] done a really good job of of, you know,
[11:43] responding to these comments. You
[11:44] mentioned lighting and landscaping is
[11:46] outstanding. Their outside agency permit
[11:48] with the conservation district. Um, I
[11:50] think the only item that I still want to
[11:52] discuss and maybe I thought we talked
[11:54] about it last time, but maybe we
[11:55] weren't. Um, maybe we worded it wrong,
[11:57] but the internal circulation with the
[11:59] sidewalks. I think what we were trying
[12:01] to to say last time is we we wanted to
[12:04] ensure that you had a decent connection
[12:08] to the the local streets and I I think
[12:11] on the plan that doesn't happen in some
[12:13] locations.
[12:17] Uh so I just I it's something I I'd
[12:19] really like you to look at. Um
[12:21] >> we we could certainly do that. Um I I
[12:23] could even give you a call and we can
[12:25] talk about it quickly.
[12:26] >> Yeah. because we've drawn them out and
[12:27] there's lots of internal path, but I I
[12:30] think we would like to go the extra step
[12:31] and make sure they they hit the city
[12:32] streets
[12:33] >> since there's going to be, you know,
[12:35] residents here that that would want
[12:36] >> Sure. No, we can definitely do that.
[12:38] >> Okay.
[12:39] >> I I mean there I don't think that's a
[12:41] big deal in the overall
[12:42] >> I don't either. I just I just want to
[12:43] make sure we take it off. the two
[12:45] comments um and I I think we talked
[12:48] about them briefly
[12:50] last month with regards to zoning were
[12:53] the requirements from the FAA and Pendot
[12:56] for
[12:58] um Bureau of Aviation clearance. No,
[13:03] it's it's zoning one and two. We're not
[13:05] building any new buildings. So So from
[13:08] my perspective, if we're not going up
[13:11] with building heights, I'm not sure that
[13:13] there there's a need for us to get
[13:17] um any type of approval from PennDOT or
[13:21] the FAA regarding
[13:23] height
[13:24] >> because the buildings are increased.
[13:26] >> Yeah, that won't that won't be returned.
[13:28] Comment understood.
[13:33] » Um I think that that was it. I mean if
[13:37] whatever additional that you guys have
[13:40] and especially the connectivity uh we
[13:43] can definitely discuss that and come up
[13:45] with a solution on that shouldn't be an
[13:48] issue.
[13:48] >> Yeah, it's a minor item compared to the
[13:50] overall scope of work. So
[13:57] » all right. So I I yeah I mean I I'm
[14:00] assuming at this point you guys need to
[14:02] address the three waivers um because
[14:05] from our end of it if you guys approve
[14:08] those waivers we'll note them on the
[14:09] drawing so when they are approved
[14:11] everything is recorded um that states
[14:15] the waivers were granted. So
[14:18] >> okay any uh do you have any other
[14:19] comments Casey?
[14:22] Just just some follow-ups on some of the
[14:24] other comments but I don't think it's worthy of discussion at this point.
[14:27] I think they've addressed substantially
[14:29] addressed the comments and and regarding
[14:31] the waivers, their scale, minimum pipe
[14:33] size, and this uh improvements
[14:35] guarantee. We have no objection to those
[14:37] waivers.
[14:38] >> Okay. Um so we can go ahead and approve
[14:40] the the waivers tonight.
[14:42] >> Yeah, I recommend.
[14:44] >> Okay. Um I don't have uh I don't have
[14:46] those in front of me. I jotted down
[14:49] >> some notes on the the three of them, but
[14:55] thank you.
[15:05] Okay. So, we'll be looking for a motion
[15:08] first to approve a waiver requested for
[15:10] relief of plan scale from 1 in to 50
[15:13] foot to 1 in 30 foot to provide greater
[15:16] detail the proposed plans.
[15:20] >> Do we have a motion?
[15:21] >> So moved.
[15:23] >> Have a second.
[15:25] >> Second.
[15:25] >> All right. All in favor say I.
[15:28] >> I.
[15:28] >> Any opposed?
[15:31] Motion passes. Uh second waiver. We'll
[15:34] be looking for a motion uh requesting
[15:38] uh waiver from the minimum 15in diameter
[15:40] for the proposed 12in storm pipes.
[15:44] Do we have a motion?
[15:48] » So moved.
[15:49] >> Thank you. Second.
[15:51] >> Second.
[15:52] >> All in favor?
[15:54] I
[15:55] >> I
[15:56] >> any opposed?
[15:58] All right, that waiver is approved. Um
[16:00] and the third waiver is uh from the
[16:03] improvement guarantee requirements uh in
[16:06] the SAO uh for the reasons that were
[16:08] discussed.
[16:10] Do we have a motion?
[16:13] >> So moved.
[16:14] >> Second. All in favor say I.
[16:17] >> I.
[16:19] Great. And the um Casey, the uh I know
[16:22] we had talked about the FAA approval.
[16:24] So, is that does that require a waiver
[16:26] or is that um
[16:28] >> that's a zoning? I'll take a look at
[16:31] that, but yeah, I I don't think that
[16:32] needs a waiver from the commission.
[16:35] >> It was a zoning comment.
[16:36] >> Okay.
[16:37] >> That I just don't think applies because
[16:40] we're not building up.
[16:43] >> Okay. Um great. Okay. So, you've got
[16:47] your waiverss. Um, it sounds like
[16:49] there's a little more work that still
[16:50] needs to be done and then we'll
[16:53] take a look at the project uh maybe next
[16:55] month.
[17:00] Sound like a plan,
[17:02] >> I guess.
[17:05] Is that I mean, is that all right? Were
[17:06] you looking for
[17:06] >> No, I mean naturally a conditional
[17:09] approval would be great, but if you guys
[17:11] feel as though we need to come back with
[17:13] some of those couple other items, we we
[17:15] could certainly do that. What are uh I
[17:18] mean what what's your recommendation
[17:20] Casey? Is there I mean I know you
[17:21] mentioned um you know some of the the
[17:24] sidewalks and the circulation. We
[17:26] haven't seen the the lighting plan or
[17:27] landscaping plans.
[17:33] Yeah. I mean our our our biggest items
[17:36] remaining I guess would be the some
[17:39] follow up on some existing sewer just
[17:40] showing the connectivity internally. Um
[17:44] you know there's a number of buildings
[17:45] on site and that's not necessarily
[17:48] outlined. I don't know if that's an
[17:49] issue or not. Maybe, maybe not. Uh
[17:52] lighting, landscaping,
[17:54] uh the the sidewalks,
[17:58] uh and a couple storm water comments
[18:00] just about
[18:02] some of the means and methods, we'll
[18:05] say, of of what was done. I mean,
[18:07] substantially they're they they meet the
[18:08] ordinance, but there's there's just some
[18:10] questions we have about design storms
[18:12] and things like that. So, I mean,
[18:14] they're they're in a good place. Um we
[18:17] if they have their MPDS is it like a
[18:20] technical review or is it or is it just
[18:22] >> that was we addressed comments back
[18:25] >> regarding that. So um that was
[18:28] resubmitted. I'm hoping to hear back
[18:29] from them within the next week or two.
[18:31] >> Right. And this this project just as
[18:33] just to kind of go back a bit is is
[18:36] a small part of it is in the city of
[18:38] Scranton. It's um you know joint jointly
[18:40] with Dunore Burough. I don't know how
[18:41] that's going on that end. I haven't
[18:44] >> they didn't have a meeting last month.
[18:45] So I'm going to our first meeting this
[18:48] week for for Dumbward Burough.
[18:51] >> I mean so for so for the portion that
[18:52] lies within the city of Scranton it may
[18:54] be appropriate to I mean it's at your at
[18:56] your pleasure to entertain that but
[18:58] >> and we did actually receive comments
[19:01] from Dunore Bureau's engineer and have
[19:03] addressed those as well and sent those
[19:05] back. So, I'm hoping at the Dunmore
[19:09] meeting next week that we can get
[19:11] conditional approval because we did
[19:12] address the majority of their comments
[19:15] uh other than the MPDS permit and a
[19:18] couple other minor ones. So,
[19:19] >> Mhm.
[19:22] >> Okay.
[19:24] Um, I mean, it sounds to me like
[19:25] there's, you know, probably a few things
[19:27] at least the planning commission would
[19:28] want to see the the additional
[19:30] sidewalks, the landscaping plan,
[19:31] lighting plans, and and whatnot before
[19:34] we um provided conditional approval or
[19:38] final approval in that case. So, um,
[19:41] yeah, why don't we wait?
[19:43] >> We'll go and we'll provide another
[19:44] review letter. We received a
[19:45] resubmission uh recently and we'll go on
[19:47] record with that and that will likely
[19:49] clear up most of these comments. So that should be a non-issue next.
[19:53] >> Yeah. And I I'll I'll give you a call
[19:55] and we can talk about the connect or
[19:58] connectivity uh issue and we'll we'll do
[20:01] what we need to do to to address that.
[20:03] >> Okay. Thank you.
[20:04] >> Okay. Sounds good.
[20:06] >> Thank you.
[20:07] >> Yeah. Thank you. Appreciate the update.
[20:15] » All right. Under new business, uh we
[20:17] have the review of preliminary final
[20:19] land development plan for the
[20:20] development of an 1,858
[20:23] square foot building proposed as a cigar
[20:25] bar at 1545 Albbright Avenue.
[20:30] Don or Casey want to provide a little
[20:33] info about this project?
[20:36] >> Yes, this in addition to an existing
[20:38] building. They're right in there behind
[20:40] AutoZone off Greenidge Street. It's
[20:42] going to be a cigar bar and uh golf
[20:46] simulator
[20:49] facility.
[20:50] Uh it's in a flood zone, but they have
[20:54] provided us with the the flood
[20:55] information.
[20:57] Uh I think they still have a number of
[21:00] comments that they're still working
[21:02] through.
[21:05] Yeah, we issued a letter earlier this
[21:06] week. Um, obviously the the the flood
[21:09] the elevation certificate was one of one
[21:11] of the comments which they provided
[21:12] today. Um, we had a question about
[21:15] zoning because there there's not a
[21:17] permitted use in the light industrial
[21:18] zone, but I think that's resolved.
[21:21] >> Yeah. Yeah, we're we're okay on the
[21:22] zoning. So
[21:24] >> So they have some some buffering to
[21:25] provide uh based on the zoning
[21:27] ordinance, their sewage planning. Um,
[21:30] they don't really have a storm water
[21:31] plan because this is this site is almost
[21:34] entirely impervious in the existing
[21:35] condition. Um, and they're using like a
[21:38] pvious
[21:39] pavement of like pavers of some sort to
[21:42] reduce their impact. So
[21:44] >> that's what the true grid uh the true
[21:47] pavers are. Yeah, I had a question about
[21:48] that.
[21:49] >> Right. So the letter was really light. I
[21:50] mean it was a it was a good submission.
[21:52] Uh we accepted it last month. So I guess
[21:54] we can encourage them to come in next
[21:55] month as well to
[21:57] >> so they can I don't want to misrepresent
[21:59] what they're doing. Um so they can talk
[22:01] about it to us. But uh did we accept
[22:03] this one last last month?
[22:06] the person it came in like literally the
[22:09] day of or the day before the meeting. So
[22:11] I don't I don't know if we did.
[22:12] >> Yeah. I don't think we we did so we
[22:14] could formally accept it.
[22:15] >> It's complete tonight
[22:16] >> for sure. Yes. I would recommend that we
[22:18] accept it and start the review clock.
[22:20] >> Okay.
[22:23] >> All right. Um initial questions from
[22:25] anybody on this project? Anything Casey
[22:26] might be able to answer for us?
[22:32] Uh there is one uh yeah very close to this.
[22:40] » Yeah.
[22:42] >> There you go.
[22:45] I believe the owners of this property
[22:47] produce manufacture these manufacture
[22:50] their own cigars. Right.
[22:52] >> Is that there's No, I'm not sure.
[22:54] >> I think so. Yeah. Yeah.
[22:59] Um, I'm not sure. I'm not sure where
[23:02] they
[23:13] » go. I'm sorry I missed your question
[23:16] there.
[23:16] >> Do you do you know are they physically
[23:19] making cigars?
[23:21] >> No, I don't I don't believe software.
[23:23] Yeah, just store. Yeah. Uh they're going
[23:25] to have a large humidor
[23:27] and uh like I said a golf simulator
[23:31] and some other simulator I think
[23:36] >> more of a
[23:40] it's elevated in part because zone
[23:44] >> yes
[23:44] >> that's why handicap ramp
[23:47] >> Yes. Yeah. I was talking to the
[23:48] contractor today said yeah to make the
[23:50] handicap ramp work I had to do like
[23:53] >> three
[23:56] loops around
[23:59] in sense of like how many stories the
[24:01] building is
[24:03] >> it's only a one-story building but it's
[24:06] going to be I think about looking at the
[24:08] plans it's about five feet higher than
[24:10] the ground level
[24:11] >> yeah similar
[24:18] » They uh for a commercial or
[24:20] non-habitable building, they have the
[24:22] option to flood uh floodproof or
[24:26] elevate. They chose to elevate.
[24:34] So, it's still a flood zone even though
[24:37] there's the trail there
[24:40] of engineers
[24:42] along
[24:45] >> like the flood the floodgates and the
[24:47] levy despite despite that. Is that what
[24:49] you're asking?
[24:50] >> Yeah, it's still considered a flood zone
[24:51] even though there's all this work that
[24:52] was done.
[24:54] I'm sorry.
[24:57] Uh there was a the Armor Corps of
[24:59] Engineers has done a ton of work along
[25:00] the Lacuana River with the with the
[25:03] heritage trail and so that's like on
[25:05] that side of the river there's a very
[25:08] high flood wall on the trail.
[25:10] >> Yeah. Yeah, there is. But it it's still
[25:12] uh
[25:13] >> it's still a flood zone and that that
[25:15] portion of the levy hasn't been fully
[25:18] certified by FEMA yet.
[25:20] >> Oh, okay.
[25:23] All right.
[25:28] Other questions about the
[25:30] project?
[25:32] All right. If not, then uh we will
[25:34] entertain a motion to accept the plans
[25:36] for review.
[25:39] » So moved.
[25:41] >> Have a second.
[25:43] >> Thank you. Um all in favor or before
[25:46] that any further questions?
[25:50] Not all in favor say I.
[25:53] >> I. Any opposed?
[25:56] All right. Plans are accepted for
[25:57] review.
[26:00] Uh those are all the plans that we had.
[26:03] Um I don't have any I don't think I have
[26:06] anything for general commission
[26:08] business. Did you have anything, Don?
[26:12] Okay. Um anything uh from the rest of
[26:15] the planning commission?
[26:21] All right.
[26:23] Go ahead. Go ahead.
[26:30] » Um, yeah. Any uh any follow up on that,
[26:33] Don? I think the last um last we had
[26:36] talked about that. I know we arrived at
[26:42] » um Gus asked about the uh complete
[26:44] streets policy.
[26:48] » So, I think we have a we have a policy
[26:50] that we were happy with. I think um I
[26:52] think you were going to follow up to
[26:54] kind of see what the next steps in the
[26:55] process might might be.
[27:14] » Okay. Yeah, I think um yeah, if you
[27:16] could get some information about what uh
[27:18] you know what the process might look
[27:19] like. I don't know if something like
[27:20] that would go through the law department
[27:22] first and you know how that
[27:34] Right.
[27:50] » I don't know.
[27:58] intern
[28:23] also talked about public input.
[28:27] council.
[28:33] What? Okay.
[28:50] Yeah. Uh I'm happy to work with with Don
[28:53] in between uh between now and our next
[28:56] meeting we can yeah get a little more
[28:58] information about what the you know what
[29:00] kind of the the appropriate process
[29:03] would be for all of this. Um you know
[29:05] any law department reviews, community
[29:08] engagement um up to and including you
[29:11] know getting legislation to city council
[29:12] and how that all would work out.
[29:16] I think this new new territory for our
[29:18] planning commission since uh at least as
[29:20] long as I've been on the planning
[29:21] commission. Uh we we haven't proposed
[29:23] any sort of uh legislation policies
[29:27] before. So
[29:28] >> why I want
[29:33] y
[29:39] agreed. Thanks for bringing that up.
[29:42] Appreciate it.
[29:44] All right. Anything else?
[29:48] If not, we will entertain a motion to
[29:50] adjurnn.
[29:54] So,
[29:56] >> thanks. We have a second.
[29:59] >> All in favor say I.
[30:01] >> I. Thank you very much.