All right, it is 700 p.m. >> It's 7 p.m. We'll call the March 23rd meeting of the Hastings Planning Commission to order. Is there um has everyone reviewed the minutes from the previous meeting? Any questions, feedback, changes? All right, we'll consider those approved. The first item of business is a public hearing. John, we'll turn this over to you. >> Thank you, >> Planning Commissioners. Tonight, we've got an action on a piece of property located here. It's a little over 10 acres located between 15th Street, 14th Street, West of McConnell Drive. There's a proposal for a reasonzoning, preliminary plat, and final plat. I'll go through each of these actions individually. Uh the actions that we ask tonight is that you hold a public hearing to get comment on the proposals tonight and then uh take any action that you see necessary for recommendation. So what we have first of all is let's look at the setting of the property here a little bit more. We've got the resoning of the property which would consist of reszoning this from agriculture which it is right now to what's termed R3. R3 would be this portion of the property going north. The property to the south here is being developed at what's termed an outlaw, which means it's being held for future development. However, that future development is not determined. Since that determination has not been made, we're not recommending any resoning at this point. We look at the resoning when final determination is is made there. So, the reasoning to R3 PRD would be consistent with the rest of this development here. This is the Sunset West development developed mostly within the early 1990s. This was meant to be a third phase of the development. Obviously, that didn't happen in in a timely fashion. The developer today, Greg J. Holmes, is proposing a new development here, which be single family homes about 26 lots altogether with the preliminary plat with 14 lots going forward in the first phase, the final plat. So this is what the entire development would look like here under the preliminary plan. North is to the west here to the left. So we kind of turn this on its side. 15th Street's over here. This outlot B here is undetermined at this point and would stay agricultural as is. Future action would come forward with a public hearing and recommendation by the commission. And then we would have this Sunset Drive which is a stub street off of Okonnell Drive going into a culde-sac at this location with about 14 home sites located along this street. Outlot A here is a storm water basin and then the continuation of 14th Street West here with another excuse me 12 lots located here. At the end of 14th Street would be a temporary culde-sac with 14th Street being developed further west in the future. There's no plan determined as to when that might happen, but uh we will look at that in the future. So this is the preliminary plan of it. So this is the overall design of the development as we know of it today. What the developer is planning to do is to phase this into two phases. Uh first one being this one, the Sunset Drive Culdeac. So the final plat would only be for the first 14 lots that we see here. This outlot C would be developed into future lots of the future that would come back before the planning commission for review of that one. So that's what we're looking at for the development itself. Our review of the development when we look at the existing conditions, everything to the east of the development is zoned R3 right now, consistent with what's being developed here. These are single family lots. The development over here is single family lots, albeit the lot sizes are a little bit smaller on this one. They're designed to be more of a villa home type than a traditional single family home type of lot on that. So, we are recommending approval of the resoning, albeit not for this portion down here. And bear in mind on the plans that you receive, there are some conceptual planning done on this outlot here for some sort of senior housing or apartment building in the future. We are not taking any credence into what is being constructed there or what might be constructed there or any approvals that you're granting tonight or recommendations would not include any thing that would that would give any approvals to development in this fashion. What we're going to do is in the future come back take a look at that holistically have a public hearing renotify people of what that might be in the future. So essentially when we look at the plans on this one, we're ignoring what's on there. We'll look at that in the future as it moves forward. The uh development is also on the edge of the city here. We've got the township to the to the west. We've got town homes with Pur Ridge to the north here. So the comprehensive plan designates this for a low density development, which this falls within. It's low density under the comp plan is 3 to six units an acre. This is about 3.4. So it fits within there and fits within the zoning of the surrounding properties here. So we are recommending approval of that. When we're looking at the preliminary plat here, we looked at the lot line layout of this one. Thought that that was appropriate for what you could do. This is the a piece of property here that has is pretty limit limited as far as how it can be developed. The stub street comes off here into Sunset Drive. So, we're we're comfortable with the culde-sac. It meets our our maximum length requirements. And 14th Street going west, we want to be able to keep that available for future extension if we need to do so in the future there. So, we are recommending that with the lot layout itself. Under the zoning, we've got lot sizes here under this district. There's a 5,000t minimum lot size. The lot sizes here range from about 6,800 square ft up to about 16,000 square ft. So, it does meet the minimum requirements of that. We're fine with a street layout street layout. We are requesting that a pedestrian access from Sunset Drive be constructed to 15th Street to provide access there in the future. Landscape plan, we've looked at that, reviewed it, beats our requirements. There are some significant trees on the site towards the west end of the development primarily. So we are looking for some modifications within the tree preservation plan to meet our requirements there. Our city engineer has taken a look at the grading, drainage and erosion control plan and uh finds that that meets our requirements. There are going to be some specific additions that he'll need to make upon the final approval of the civil plans there. So we are recommending approval of the preliminary plat the requirements in the staff report here for the final plat we're looking at a smaller portion of it with just this one here. So with the preliminary plat will go through the grading plan review the engineering review for everything. What we do with the final plat is this is what the lots will be subdivided in a particular phase. We essentially look at match the final plat to the preliminary plat and make sure that that is consistent which this is here. The uh other things that come into play with the final plat is the official creation of lots outlots and uh storm water drainage. So there would be a storm water pond here that would be either the responsibility of an association that the developer would create or the city would take that over. There's a couple of options that would would need to be taken care of. Those would be memorialized through a development agreement that would be executed between the developer and the city on that. Also, with park dedication, there's requirements at the final plat stage that that be be taken care of. Our park and recreation commission did take a look at this a couple of years ago when they looked at another single family development plat for this and recommended the payment of cash in lie of land dedicated. So instead of a park being created in this subdivision here, there would be park fees paid for future park improvements in this development. And that would be a fee of about $50,000 altogether here for this phase. Other phases would have future payments of that. And I think that's most of what I had here as far as the review of the development goes. Again, we are recommending approval of the resoning for most of the property, albeit outlot B, and the approval of the preliminary plat. This is a public hearing, so if you uh you can open it up at this time, or I can stand for any questions. Thank you. >> Are there any questions right now from commissioners? Otherwise, we'll open the public hearing and then we'll ask for questions later. follow questions right away. Just go ahead and question your pause. >> Um you you mentioned that you talked you talked about possibility of type homes. Is it is they um anything about a PUD at all or is it just a standalone with no association or have they talked about that yet or? >> Yeah. As far as the the homeowners association goes, there would need to be one to take care of the the culde-sac island here in Sunset Drive at a minimum. My understanding is the rest of the development, the the lawn maintenance, uh driveway maintenance would be taken care of individually. So, the only thing they're planning would be for that would be for that uh culde-sac island. I don't believe that they're looking to have to have ponding responsibilities be taken on by the association, but we we have to make a final determination of that. questions. Anyways, we'll open the public hearing and we'll have time to ask questions and discuss. All right. Um then we'll open the public hearing if you would like to come up and make a statement, ask, you know, share anything. You're invited to come up to the podium. We just ask that you state your name and your address and then um share whatever you'd like to share with us. Good evening, Teresa Oj at 1926 14th Street West. Thank you for what you do. Um, it's not a surprise to me to hear of this development. I've been at a city council me meeting not too many not too long ago in which a um uh the city council had hired a firm to talk about the development of this area and extending all the way to Jacob and north of 55 etc. What surprises me is this is not what was presented at that time. Now, he didn't go into a lot of details, but these are much more in number of homes than we were led to believe. I live on 14th Street, and so there's only one way to get to these, and so you're going to have a lot of traffic that will come. Um, my concern is that we want to think about how we expand our our city. We have a huge water problem right now and I would really like the city to make that its focus. We're talking about a potential water treatment plant in this vicinity also just in the in the neighborhood. So I you know aesthetically we want to make sure that it's appealing to future buyers and I think that that should be settled before any decisions made on this. Um, and that's being done over by CE's property there, which is just off of 15th. Um, and they're not the prettiest. The other thing I want you to think about is as we expand the city, we also have to think of the cost it's going to take to hire additional firefighters and police so that our ratio stays that we can make sure we're being public safety for those um entities as well. And and lastly, I I um while I'm not opposed to expanding, you look at the the lots and they're almost two homes to the size of what we currently have on 14th Street. That's a lot. That's really big. You go from these big homes or big spaces and now you have them really close together. So, aesthetically, a lot of traffic there, a lot of concern, and then, you know, the water, the pressure, all of that is is a concern. So, thank you. I'm Alan Schmaltz, 1420 O'Connell Drive in Hastings. Um, I guess first I I just want a point of clarity. Maybe it's just my ignorance, but um in like 20 2024, maybe it was the end of 2024, there was a a public uh survey that was sent out and this area was was originally talked about, I think it was the one that you were citing. It was talked about single family homes and um and then it extended all the way out to Jacob like like she was saying, but the the the zoning the reszoning from to R3 c can you can you explain the difference between R3 and R2 and R1? So, if if we're going to if if the proposal is for single family homes, the outlot B is going to be for future use, but the proposal right now changes it to R3. Why why not go to R1 or R2? Cuz if if I maybe I don't understand it correctly, but is R3 like you could put apartments, town homes, and all that on there? I don't I'm I'm just I'm wondering. We're looking for some clarification on the different zoning. >> I can help answer that one here. The R3 zoning is is can be a mixture of things. Single family development in the larger developments, it may have apartments on there, too. The R3 zoning designation is the exact same zoning designation as the single family homes to the east of there. When that was developed in the 1990s, it was developed a single family with some twin homes along Seat and Court. So because of those combinations on there, that area was zoned R3. And then the area to the north of it, which is is town homes, the stuff that's just south of Highway 55 is zoned that same way as well. The what the R3 district does is it caps the number of number of units you can have as density. So you wouldn't be able to put, you know, a large apartment complex within here within Outlaw B itself. if that was to be reszoned R3, which we are not recommending today. I mean, that might be another 25 or so on that one. So, I don't know if that answers your question. >> Okay. So, the current like um 14th and then Okonnell Drive and those are all already zone R3, >> correct? >> Okay, that that helps. And then to the point of the park, the um the cash in lie of a of a park. So again, back to that survey, that public survey that was put out, it showed a park in that area. And we've had residents that that have talked about there there's no park. The city prides itself in parks and having a lot of access to parks in different areas. And currently there's no parks at all on the west side of General Sean. you have to you have to cross General Sabbin to get to a park. So cash in lie of a park doesn't really help the citizens that are west of General Seaban. So that's that's something that I'd like I'd like the the planning commission to think about when you're making this decision and I'm probably missing some things and I'll sit down and think about it. So and I could comment a little bit on the park too. We had the we have our park and recreation commission that makes recommendation on whether a park should be situated or cash and move of land should be paid. And they took a look at at this subdivision in an earlier form about 3 years ago with about maybe 50 homes on it at that time and recommended that cash and loo. One of the the reasons for that is we have on our comprehensive plan identifications of where future park locations would be and not on this property but just to the west of it in the township. We do have a location for a a park in the future. So when the land west of this develops, the thought is we would put a neighborhood park in at that time. And so the commission was asked, well, should we should we put it in in this location or or should we wait? The thought that the park commission had at that point was the area to the west will be a larger parcel so we could have a a better park over there as opposed to this 10acre parcel. So that was kind of the rationale for their decision. And there's Sarah Thompson. I'm at 1952 14th Street West. Um, can you give me an understanding of what these homes are going to look like? Will they be on slabs? Will be the two stories? Are we going to have the same kind of square footage that we're currently at based off of the houses on that west side of town? >> I would ask the developer to address that question. I think I saw him come in here. There he is. And we'll um if you have more to say, we'll let you answer that question, but if you have more, you're welcome to um share more comments after he answers that question. I just don't want you to think that your time is done. >> So, >> Sure. And then, well, this is another question for you, too. What's the intent of the properties? Are they intended to be rental homes or are they intended Okay. And then timing wise. So, when will phase one be started and expected to be completed? When would phase two be started and expected to be completed? And the last and then if you if you can please state your name and address as well. >> I'm Nick with Greg J. Homes. We're at 3475 Vermillion Street. Uh we intend these to be villa homes. Some may have a basement, some may not. Uh some will be on slab. They will be slightly larger than some of the villas we build. Now the plans are actually able to be seen on our website. Uh they are for sale, not for rent, and they definitely match the quality and kind of consistency of the neighborhood. Definitely trying to not stand up, let's put it that way. Uh as far as starting construction, we are looking at construction this year if this goes forward. So, um potential street construction, uh home construction could be late this year into next year. And then the rental question, I think I John, did I catch them all? Yeah, I just curious about square footage, price range, anything you might be able to share on that. >> So, with the land cost up here, I think the price range is going to be um in the mid 500s starting. So, we're definitely, you know, with these lots being larger and um prime location that we figure um they're not going to be uh starter type things. They're going to definitely be in that mid-range um you know, billet kind of mentality. >> And phase two, when you expect that to happen? >> Uh we don't actually have a plan for phase two that will follow phase one. This could be a couple couple three-year project for us. We don't build a huge amount of houses a year. >> Phase two is out C. >> Uh phase two would be out lot C and phase three would be out lot B. Um they could both happen at the same time. We don't know that yet. >> What are you going to know? >> Uh that will depend on the market. So we we could uh we could have somebody that came to us and wants um more. This could sell out really quickly. It could sell out and it could take time. >> Excuse me. If you have more questions, we invite because we'd love everyone, this is also on Zoom, to come up to the podium, state your name, address, ask your questions. Okay. Thank you so much. So, you'll have a chance in just a moment. >> My name is Bob Hoffstead. I live at 1938 14th Street West. I have a lot of the same concerns as the others, but one in particular is water pressure. Uh just over five years ago, I moved from a block west of Pleasant Drive to a block west of Seban Drive. And when I called the city concerned about the low water pressure, I was told, "Oh, but your elevation went up over 100 ft from where you used to live to where you moved into." And uh I was looking at the city elevations and what I can tell is less than 50 ft elevation. And so water pressure is a concern with all the additional houses being put in even though there's been talk about another water tower. And I'm sure there must be uh it's not just gravity flow. there's some pressurized system that uh uh is involved in in the water pressure, but it it hasn't changed. I think I'm just getting used to the water pressure we have. So, thank you. >> And does anyone else want to come back up? >> Again, the Thompson, 1952 14th Street West. I will mimic the water pressure issues. About five years ago, we stopped our water stopped miduse with the challenges that we had. So, water pressure is definitely a concern. Traffic is a concern. When you're adding a ton more cars on that narrow street, there's young children in that area. People speed like crazy. What is the intent at the end of 14th Street once we complete this outlaw C to extend it? Are you extending it all the way to Jacob? Is that the goal? >> Yeah. I'm not sure how far 14th Street would extend, if it would go all the way to Jacob Avenue or where it would go. Uh, we did want to provide an access point to future development west of this, but I'm not sure how far it would go from that point. >> Okay. And if you look back to the 2040 comprehension plan survey that we were asked to review and to submit feedback on, this original lot had an exit on 15th Street, but there was dead ends throughout the rest of that outlot. So, why did that change from where we were at now to these higher density homes? Originally, it was supposed to be 41 homes planned when we were all surveyed. >> Uh, the developer had a modification in this for what is being shown today. I think when he came forward with the plan a couple of years ago, it didn't I don't think it went very far down. I didn't think it got to this point of going to planning commission at that point. >> So, correct. I I don't know anything about how this works. So when we were all surveyed and asked those questions, we provided feedback and now how does that get amended that 2040 plan get amended so that it changes to this when we all were under the the expectation that it was to look like the 41 homes on that 10acre lot without any kind of thoroughfare on 14th Street. >> And I'm I'm confused by by the survey. Tell me a little bit more about that cuz I >> the city of acing sent out a survey in August or through December of 2024 asked for feedback for the whole expansion of that 2040 comprehension plan going through and looking at high medium low densities plus indust industrial. >> Okay. Was that looking kind of in the area of highway 55 Jacob Avenue broad more broader than this property? >> Oh very much so. Yes. Yes. So when you look at the individual outlot that's sectioned here, it was designated or surveyed to be low density 41 homes was the plan and it connected at Sunset and 14th Street, but it exited at 15th Street. >> So there was not 14 was not to be a thoroughare. We were supposed to be large lots that fit the same aesthetics that we currently have in our neighborhood. >> That's what was presented at the city council meeting. >> Got it. Yeah. Okay. Now I know familiar with what you're speaking of now. Yes. It was the that highway 55 and Jacob plan that we were doing independent of any other development there. We had our consultant provide some some uh conceptual plans of of how property could develop, but there wasn't based upon any specific plan at that point. So, understand your concerns about 14th Street going through there and the traffic that would go in uh and then the the unknown aspect of that as we go west of this development. So, and again, I apologize. Help me understand how does that change? I know it was a preliminary plan, but going from that to where we're at now, does that mean the rest of the the plan that we were all shared as a community is going to change as well as the bigger picture? >> What that plan was was mostly looking at the density of development, not getting down to the fine grain of where streets would go and where streets would end. It would basically be should this be low density, high density, commercial, industrial, parks, that sort of thing. that that's what that was the basis of that plan. Not getting into the excuse me the the fine grain development of of how streets and lots are going to be developed and this is still falls under that low density. >> Thank you very much. >> Is there anyone else who had a comment here or feedback? Was there anyone else wanted to speak at the public hearing? All right. Is there anyone on Zoom, John? All right. Then hearing no further um anyone indicating that they'd like to speak, we'll close the public hearing and then open it up to discussion among commission members. Commissioner Miles. >> Um, so has uh the city engineers looked at um the um capabilities for water and sewer uh in that vicinity to whether or not uh they feel that the current systems can handle that increased density. >> Commissioner, as far as the capacity of water and sewer in that area, yes, it it does have the capacity. the issues that were brought up tonight about uh the pressure especially in the water. I I have heard that in areas in this vicinity that there have been issues with that. That that is something that I will check in further with them to see how this would affect existing development on there because I know from areas that we're looking at developing further west and north of here that was a concern that was brought up by our engineers. Um, and then John, I had a question. You've given some of the feedback and comments about traffic in the area. Is this the type of development that would have required a traffic study? And if so, was one conducted conducted? >> The development here would would not meet the requirements for a traffic study. The the total amount of watts that would be going in here would be 26. Usually we're not going to get into a traffic study for a development unless it's going to be a hundred or more units on that one. So no none required and and none conducted on this one. Then just also to aid in my understanding, I remember when we were looking at that Jacob Avenue um highway 55 plan and we did discuss the park aspect. There would be a park that would eventually go in within the proximity of this development as development would expand to the west. Is that correct? Okay. >> Yep. That's our plan is that when property was would develop further west of this and we don't have a time frame for when that would occur at this point. It all be based upon developer desire and uh current owner desire to sell the property for that. But that's our plan. >> Commissioner Swy, >> on a similar vein as Commissioner Peters, um, if they were to not have a cash offering for the park dedication and instead it was a land offering, how much of this 10acre lot would actually be a land donation? Like, how much park land are we losing out on if this was instead a land thing instead of cash? >> Maybe maybe an acre. So you take a look at an an acre park, which is a very tiny park, as opposed to if you had a a larger development and you could do a neighborhood park of about 5 acres, which I think is typically what we like to see. >> Commissioner Depal, >> I was wondering if I could ask this of the developer. Um, it would be very helpful if you would for the audience. Do you have any photos or pictures of what these homes will look like so they can imagine that? And then you mentioned the price point that you're looking at. Is there a particular audience of persons or families that you're looking at for this type of development? >> I wouldn't say we have a particular age group or audience. Um, the folks that are going to be looking at what we're building here are usually in the second half of their lives. This is not usually a younger buyer, but it could be. We don't we don't know that. It certainly could be. Depends on your lifestyle. Um, John, do we have any of that available on this? And I can go to our website or do you have photos of what we said? So, let me just take a look here for a second. Just go see if there Oh, yours. >> Thank you. So this is one of our artist renderings of obviously based on our landscape plan. Um this is the type of homes that we're looking at generally one level rambler type homes. Um the one on the right is 1,860 ft. One on the left is just over 2,000 and it's fully built out. So, they're not small homes. Um, but as far as visibility and design, that's where we're at. >> I'll leave that off, John. Okay. Thanks. >> Any other um comments or feedback from the commissioners? And just to to make sure that all of us are under the same understanding, we're looking at the reszoning of this area. Um, by the recommendation of staff excluding outlot B and then we're looking at the preliminary plat and final plat and as our role as planning commission, does it meet all of the requirements? Does it follow the comprehensive plan? Um, does it, you know, is it zoned properly? And then this will go forward presumably to the to the city council with either our recommendation or not. And then John at that point is there another opportunity for a public hearing? >> This would be the public hearing here. Okay. So at city council it would be a public item that they would have. It really be up to the discretion of the mayor at that point whether she would take any comments at that point. >> Any other comments or discussion from the commission? Um, so I know this is 10 acres is not a huge area. So I'm assuming that this did not mandate an environmental impact report. Um, but generally for this area is adding something like 26 houses going to affect the environment in the area like is that going to be detrimental in any way? Do we know or do we have any context for that? Yeah, I mean anytime you're going to be developing a piece of property, there's certainly going to be impacts within it here. When we take a look from a from a city planning standpoint, really take a look at, you know, the roads that are going to be going in here, traffic patterns, and the number of homes and the the density, you know, how many homes per acre would there be in this. Uh the amount of streets that would be going in this development are pretty minimal. The amount of homes that would be going in here would be about 3.4 per acre. What that means to to most people is that's generally a single family density. This would be about the same type of development as you would see at that uh development near Northridge Drive and Pleasant Drive that went in where they had a lot of of these type of homes that went in. I think that would be a very comparable type of development from what I've seen here as to what was put in there. From a market standpoint, we don't really get into the market of how much a home would be worth. That's beyond our purview as a planning commission on that one. I know from a market standpoint, we there always seems to be a desire for for more slap on grade single level living from what I've heard from individuals that are looking for that in the market. other comments or discussion. Um or if we're ready to put forth a motion, we can treat this as a single motion or multiple motions to address the resoning in one and the preliminary and final plan in another. Commission, >> can I can I make a request to separate the motions, please? >> Oh, you can just make a motion. >> Can I make a motion to approve the reszoning of Goodness, sorry. Um, Sunset Hills resoning plat. I would like to approve the reszoning of the plat or the area. >> Um, R3. And are you including or excluding outlet B? >> Excluding outlet B. Okay. Sorry. So there's a motion to reszone um the Sunset Hills area from agriculture to R3 excluding outl. Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Commissioner Mills. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed? All right. Motion carries. All right. Then the the part that's remaining is regarding the PL commissioner most turning it off. Okay. Like to make a motion. Commissioner Moss, did you >> Yeah, I will. I do that. Um, I guess I I'll maybe just we'll we'll just just take them one at a time. Then I'll I'll move to um uh approve the preliminary plat of um that would be uh lot B. Was that right? No, >> it would be Sunset Hills preliminary plat of Sunset Hills, a repat of Albot C. Sunset >> C. Okay. I want C. Okay. Thank you. Um and then um then with any recommendations and I'd also like to um subject to um a a review by the city engineers regarding um water pressure and that type of thing. >> All right. So you're just looking at the preliminary plat subject to re >> Well, I guess that would have to be on the final plat. Yep. >> Thank you. >> I guess that would have to be on the final plat. So, why don't we just go with the preliminary plat first and then we'll >> Okay. >> So, there's a motion to approve the preliminary plat with uh staff recommendations as outlined in Sunset Hills number 2026-07. Is there a second to that? We'll second. >> So, Commissioner Sodine seconds. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> I. >> Oh, sorry. Let's try that again. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. Okay. All right. So, we've um now we're at the final plat. So, is there anyone who wants to make a motion regarding the final plat? Commissioners, I'd like to make a motion to amend the conditions on the final plat subject to a review of utility usage, especially concerning the water concern uh the water issues brought up tonight by city engineers. >> Um I think we can just add that as a condition. So if you want What's that? >> Do we have to make a motion to amend it or no? Just >> this is the original motion. >> Yeah. >> Okay. You're all good. >> Sorry. So then I would like to make a motion to approve the final plat of Sunset Hills. Um what you said 2026 final plat with the recommendations from city staff in addition to add a review of city engineers for the utilities, especially the water. that that is going to be feasible and not affect the current residents nearby. >> All right. So, there is a motion to approve the final plat um 202607 with staff recommendations and an additional um condition to review utility usage, specifically water in the area. Is there a second? >> Second that. >> Commissioner Mo seconds. All right. All in favor of the final plat 2026-07 with staff recommendations and also um city engineer review of utility specifically water usage. All in favor say I. >> I >> opposed. >> All right. Motion carries >> and commissioners. This recommendation will be brought forward to the city council for their action at the April 6th city council meeting. >> Thank you everyone for your comments and for attending tonight. Um other actions. Were there other other business tonight? >> Nope. I had no other business here. I know we've our next planning commission meeting coming up here is on April 13th. We've got a five Monday month this month. So, it'll be a little bit of time. We may have a couple of things that may land for that one. So, I think we will be holding it, but I'll let you know as we get closer to it. From the meeting we had last month on Pleasant Valley Farms, still working on that project. No applications have officially come forward with it. However, we are working on some of the annexation details of that which will require uh some meetings and some uh action by Nature Township as well as our council. So that continues to move forward, albeit we don't have an application yet for it. And I think that's all I have. >> There a motion to adjurnn. Someone want to commissioner diploma. >> So we have a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second that. >> Second by Commissioner Rose. All in favor? I I >> Thank you everyone.