[A. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:07]
>>> GOOD EVENING BECAUSE THIS IS OUR FIRST COMMISSION SINCE WE HAVE NEW COMMISSIONERS APPOINTMENT AND OUR BYLAWS STATE THAT EVERY SEPTEMBER WE WILL ELECT NEW OFFICERS, I WILL BEGIN BY CALLING THE MEETING TO ORDER. SO I CALL THE MEETING OF THE
[2. ANNOUNCEMENT/REMINDERS Live public access is available on TV15.]
SEPTEMBER 16, 2021, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER.I HAVE A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS. TONIGHT'S MEETING IS BEING SIMULCAST VIA TV 15. WE WILL BE MOVING SECTION H ITEMS FOR THE COMMISSION TO IMMEDIATELY AFTER SECTION E,
[3. Quorum Roll Call]
CITIZEN COMMUNICATIONS. BUT FIRST WE WILL START WITH A ROLL CALL. WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?>> GOOD EVENING. VIC CALDWELL.
ADAM DAUGHTERY. VICTOR MENDOZA.
[B. Introduction of New Planning Commissioners]
>> THANK YOU. SO FIRST I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE OUR NEW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS. WE HAVE ADAM DAUGHTREY, VICTOR MENDOZA, AND DANIEL MIKULENKA JOINING US FOR THEIR FIRST THREE YEAR TERM. ITEM C TRAINING FOR PLANNING COMMISSIONERS IS BEING POSTPONED TO THE NEXT MEETING SINCE WE HAVE SUCH A ROBUST AGENDA. ITEM D IS OUR ELECTION OF
[D. Election of Officers]
OFFICERS. SO I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR NOMIN NOMINATIONS FOR THE POSITION OFCHAIR. >> I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE GAYLE
HODE. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS AND ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? SEEING NONE WE'LL CLOSE THE NOMINATIONS FOR CHAIR.
>> ALL OPPOSED? SO GAYLE WILL BE OUR NEW CHAIR.
NOW WE'LL ENTERTAIN NOMINATIONS FOR THE VICE CHAIR POSITION.
>> I NOMINATE CINDY STALEY. >> I'LL SECOND.
>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? SEEING NONE WE WILL CLOSE NOMINATIONS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF CINDY BEING THE VICE CHAIR, PLEASE SAY
THE LAST OFFICER POSITION WE WILL OPEN NOMINATIONS FOR IS THE
POSITION OF SECRETARY. >> I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE DERRICK
HUNT FOR THAT. >> ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF DERRICK HUNT FOR SECRETARY PLEASE SAY AYE.
>> SO OUR CHAIR IS GAIL HOAD, OUR VICE CHAIR IS CINDY STALEY AND OUR SECRETARY IS DERRICK HUNT.
I'LL TURN THE MEETING OVER TO GAIL HOAD.
>> OKAY, HOPEFULLY I'LL FOLLOW IN ORDER LIKE I'M SUPPOSED TO.
WE WILL MOVE TO THE CITIZEN COMMUNICATION PORTION.
DO WE HAVE ANY CITIZENS WISHING TO SPEAK TONIGHT? JUST AS A REMINDER PLEASE ONLY SPEAK TO ITEMS THAT ARE ON THAT DO NOT HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AND CITIZEN'S COMMENTS WILL BE
[1. Variance Request for Commercial Driveway Radius for Texas Concrete Co....]
LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES. OKAY, SEEING NONE WE'LL MOVE ON.WE HAVE ONE ACTION ITEM WITHOUT A PUBLIC HEARING.
A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY RADIUS FOR TEXAS CONCRETE. CAN WE HAVE A STAFF REPORT?
>> YES, SO TEXAS CONCRETE COMPANY HAS REQUESTED A VARIANCE IN ORDER TO RECONSTRUCT AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING DRIVEWAY THEY STATED WAS IN USE PRIOR TO MAY 1, 2010, WHICH IS LOCATED AT THE CURVATURE OF THE INTERSECTION OF POLLY AND CRANE STREETS ON THE PROPERTY AT 4202 NORTH PLAIN STREET.
THEY WISH TO RECONSTRUCT THAT DRIVEWAY AS A ONE WAY DRIVEWAY WITH A RADIUS OF 15 FEET WHICH IS BELOW THE REQUIRED MINIMUM DRIVEWAY RADIUS. THE COMMERCIAL STANDARDS STATE THE MINIMUM MUST BE 20 FEET AND THE MAXIMUM NOT MORE THAN 30 FEET. THE PROPOSED 15-FOOT RADIUS IS BELOW THE MINIMUM REQUIRED RADIUS FOR THE COMMERCIAL ONE-WAY DRIVEWAY. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUIRED TO OF COURSE OBTAIN A DRIVEWAY PERMIT AND AS PART OF THE PROCESS THEY MUST SUBMIT AN APPLICATION ALONG WITH A SCALED
[00:05:03]
PLAN. AND THAT SCALED PLAN SHOWED OF COURSE THAT 15-FOOT RADIUS. THE PLAN ALSO SHOWED THAT THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY WAS TO BE CONSTRUCTED OUT OF HOT MIX ASPHALT BASE, HOWEVER THE CITY'S 2018 DESIGN GUIDELINES AND STANDARD DETAILS REQUIRE COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAYS TO BE CONSTRUCTED OUT OF CONCRETE. IN ORDER TO RECONSTRUCT THE DRIVEWAY, COUNCIL MUST FIRST APPROVE THE VARIANCE ALLOWING THE 15-FOOT RADIUS BASED OFF OF A RECOMMENDATION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE TO REVISE THAT PLAN THAT THEY SUBMITTED TO SHOW THAT THE DRIVEWAY IS CONSTRUCTED OUT OF CONCRETE TO MEET THE CITY'S DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE TO THE EASTERN CURVE RADIUS TO ALLOW A 15-FOOT RADIUS CONDITIONED UPON TEXAS CONCRETE SUBMITTING A SITE PLAN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PARKING AND SCREENING FENCE REGULATIONS SPECIFICALLY COMPLYING WITH SECTIONS 2195 THROUGH SECTIONS 21100. AND THEN COMPLETING ALL ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS ON THAT SITE PLAN THAT THEY SUBMIT.STAFF RECOMMENDS THESE CONDITIONS TO MITIGATE DEBRIS TRACT FROM THE SITE ONTO THE CITY'S THOROUGHFARES.
SCREENING FENCES STANDARDS HELP PREVENT RUNOFF FROM THE SITE AS WELL AS PROMOTE THE ORDERLY APPEARANCE OF DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY. SO FOR THESE REASONS, STAFF DOES RECOMMEND PROVING THE DRIVEWAY VARIANCE HOWEVER CONDITIONED UPON THE OUTLYING CONDITIONS THAT I JUST STATED.
SO I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY, IF NOT, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I WOULD MOVE THAT WE APPROVE IT AS CONDITIONED HERE WITH THE CONCRETE AND THE FENCING.
THAT'S VERY GOOD. >> I'LL SECOND.
>> OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> ANY OPPOSED? SO THE MOTION PASSES.
[1. Variance Request for Signage for Burger King and Dunkin' Donuts - 8401...]
NOW WE MOVE ON TO THE DEVELOPMENT ITEMS WITH PUBLIC HEARINGS. OUR FIRST ITEM IS A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR SIGNAGE FOR BURGER KING AND DUNKIN DONUTS.>> THIS PROJECT CURRENTLY EXISTS AS FOUR PLATTED COMMERCIAL LOTS AS PART OF THE RESUB NUMBER TWO. LOTS 5 AND 6 ARE BEING DEVELOPED INTO A DUNKIN DONUTS AND BURGER KING RESPECTIVELY.
THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO PLACE A MULTITENANT PILE ON SITE ON PLOT SIX.
BEING OVER THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SIGNAGE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS. LOT SIX IS ALLOWED TWO SIGNS BECAUSE IT IS A CORNER LOT AND THE MULTI-TENANT POLE SIGN WILL REPRESENT ALL ENTITIES ON LOTS 5 THROUGH 8 RATIONALIZING THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE. ADDITIONALLY APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE IS RECOMMENDED ON THE CONDITION THAT ANY ADDITIONAL FREE STANDING SIGNS ON LOTS 5 THROUGH 8 MUST BE MONUMENT OR DIRECTIONAL SIGNS AND MUST ADHERE TO ALL ORDINANCES OTHERWISE. STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT PREVENT THE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF THE SURROUNDING AREA AND THAT IT WOULD ACTUALLY PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF LOT 7 AND 8. I AM OPEN TO QUESTIONS NOW.
>> ANY QUESTIONS? WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK PLEASE COME FORWARD. PLEASE REMEMBER ALSO THAT COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO FIVE MINUTES.
OKAY SEEING NOBODY, DO WE HAVE A MOTION?
>> I'LL MOTION TO APPROVE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION, SECOND.
>> I'LL GO AHEAD AND SECOND THAT.
>> MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
[2. Variance Request for Off-Street Parking for Future Multi-Family Develo...]
OKAY, MOTION PASSED. THE SECOND VARIANCE REQUEST IS FOR OFF STREET PARKING FOR A FUTURE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.>> THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO PLAT THE DEVELOPMENTS INTO ONE LOT AND BE DEVELOPED INTO A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE SUBMITTED A PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN WHICH DEPICTS A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT WITH 324 AFFORDABLE RENTAL UNITS AND 610 OFF STREET PARKING SPACES. THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR THE SUBMITTAL AND APPROVAL OF SITE PLAN AND BUILDING PLANS WHICH DEPICT OFF STREET PARKING
[00:10:02]
BELOW THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, THE DEVELOPER HAS A HISTORY OF DEVELOPING MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF TEXAS AND HAS FOUND THEY WERE ABLE TO PROVIDE REDUCED PARKING ALLOCATIONS WHILE STILL SUFFICIENTLY MEETING PARKING NEEDS. ADDITIONALLY BECAUSE THIS DEVELOPMENT CONSISTS OF A HIGHER NUMBER OF 3 AND 4 BEDROOM UNITS COMPARED TO THE TYPICAL MULTI-FAMILY CONSTRUCTION, MOST RESIDENTS WHO LEASE THOSE APARTMENTS ARE FAMILIES WHO ONLY OWN 1 TO 2 TESTS. CITY CODE CALCULATIONS WOULD RESULT IN A LARGE AMOUNT OF EXCESSIVE PARKING WHICH WILL LEAD TO A REDUCTION OF AFFORDABLE RENTAL UNITS AND COMMUNITY AMENITIES THAT COULD BE PROVIDED INSTEAD.STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT PREVENT THE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF THE SURROUNDING AREA. I AM OPEN TO QUESTIONS NOW.
>> THIS IS A SIMPLE QUESTION. IS THERE A TIME FRAME THAT ONCE THIS IS APPROVED, WE HAVE A TIME FRAME WHEN THEY START DEVELOPING
OR BREAKING GROUND OR ANYTHING? >> SO THIS PROJECT IS SEEKING TAX CREDIT FROM TDHCA. SO THE TIMEFRAME IS EXTENDED AND VERY LENGTHY IN COMPARISON. SO WE'RE HOPING NEXT SPRING, THE DEVELOPER IS HERE SO HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT MORE IN DEPTH WHEN WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> THANK YOU. >> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE A QUESTION?
>> I DO. IS THIS THE FIRST TIME IN VICTORIA THAT WE ALLOWED THIS? BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES AND A LOT OF, HAVE WE HAD ANY TROUBLES? I KNOW I READ THE NOTES THAT THEY SAID THERE'S SEVERAL CITIES IN THE STATE OF TEXAS THAT ALLOWED THIS AND THEY NEVER REALLY HAD ANY ISSUES. I WOULD HATE TO SEE WE BUILD THIS PLACE AND THEN WE DON'T HAVE ANY PARKING FOR THE PEOPLE.
IT'S A CONCERN. DO WE HAVE ANY, IS THIS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE HAD A VARIANCE APPROVED IN VICTORIA? I DON'T REMEMBER BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF APARTMENT COMPLEXES
BUILT. >> I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND RESEARCH SO I DON'T LIE TO YOU. BUT LOOKING, THIS IS PROBABLY THE FIRST MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HAVE THAT HAS QUITE THE SAME NUMBER OF THE LARGE 3 TO 4 BEDROOM APARTMENT COMPLEXES. MOST MARKET RATE COMPLEXES THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT RECENTLY HAVE A MUCH HIGHER PORTION OF THE 1 TO 2 BEDROOM APARTMENTS AND SO I DO THINK IN OUR RESEARCH OUR PARKING REQUIREMENTS MAY BE A LITTLE BIT EXCESSIVE WHENEVER WE ADD THOSE EXTRA BEDROOMS BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY WERE WRITTEN TO ASSUME THAT THERE WOULD BE A LOT OF ADULTS LIVING IN EACH OF THE BEDROOMS AND APARTMENT LIVING IS NOT NECESSARILY JUST SINGLE ADULTS ROOMING TOGETHER ANYMORE. WE HAVE A LOT OF FAMILIES IN APARTMENTS AND SO I THINK THAT OUR STANDARD PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR 1 TO 2 BEDROOMS ARE PRETTY ON POINT.
BUT WHENEVER YOU START ADDING IN THOSE LARGER UNITS, WE MAY BE A LITTLE BIT EXCESSIVE AND PROBABLY NEED TO ADDRESS THAT IN OUR UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE.
>> CAN I JUST ASK ONE QUICK QUESTION OF THE DEVELOPER? CAN YOU GIVE US AN OVERVIEW ONE BEDROOM, TWO BEDROOM, 3 AND 4.
>> IS IT OPEN FOR -- >> IF YOU'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC
HEARING. >> OH YES, PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME TODAY. I'M THE DEVELOPER WITH THE NRP GROUP. THE BREAKDOWN IN 1, 2, 3, AND 4 BEDROOM UNITS IS 12 ONE BEDROOM UNITS.
134 THREE BEDROOM UNITS AND 36 FOUR BEDROOM UNITS.
SO SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS SAID. YOUR STANDARD MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENTS TYPICALLY CONSIST OF ABOUT 95% 1 AND 2 BEDROOM UNITS AND A FEW THREE BEDROOM UNITS.
BUT ON THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SIDE, WE ARE REALLY TARGETING FAMILY ORIENTED HOUSING AND THAT'S REFLECTED IN BOTH THE AMENITIES WE PROVIDE AS WELL AS THE SUPPORTIVE SERVICES FOR OUR RESIDENTS. THAT'S WHY YOU SEE SUCH A LARGE NUMBER OF 3 AND 4 BEDROOM UNITS. I WANT TO REITERATE THIS IS TARGETED TOWARDS FAMILIES. WE AREN'T LOOKING TO HAVE FOUR ADULTS WITH FOUR CARS FOR EACH HOUSEHOLD.
SO THIS IS A PRETTY STANDARD MIX OF 1 THROUGH 4 BEDROOM UNITS THAT WE'VE DONE ACROSS THE STATE AND OUR COMPANY HAS ADOPTED AN INTERNAL STANDARD OF ABOUT 1.75 SPACES PER UNIT AND WE ALSO END UP MANAGING THESE PROPERTIES AFTER THEY'RE BUILT AND OUR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT FIRM TELLS ME THAT ABOUT 25% OF THOSE SPACES STILL GO UNUSED ON A NIGHTLY BASIS.
SO THAT'S DEFINITELY A CONCERN OF BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE GOOD STEWARDS IN THE COMMUNITY.
WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE EXCESSIVE STREET PARKING OR CONCERNS WITH
[00:15:01]
THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SOMETHING WE'RE VERY COGNITIVE OF AS WELL AND TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT IN OUR DEVELOPMENT>> I'D ALSO LIKE TO FOLLOW UP THAT THE APARTMENTS ARE BASED ON INCOME TO BE ABLE TO RENT SO THE CHANCES OF HAVING FOUR ADULTS WITH FOUR VEHICLES MEETING THOSE LOWER INCOME REQUIREMENTS ARE
PROBABLY NOT HIGH. >> MY QUESTION WAS DEALING WITH WHAT WAS THE TIMEFRAME WE'RE LOOKING AT ONCE THINGS ARE
APPROVED. >> WE ARE SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION TO THE TEXAS BOND REVIEW BOARD FOR PRIVATE ACTIVITY BONDS ISSUED BY THE VICTORIA HFC.
THE TIMING OF THAT ALLOCATION IS UNCERTAIN.
OUR THOUGHT IS WE WILL MOST LIKELY GET THAT ALLOCATION IN MARCH WHICH ALLOWS US TO SUBMIT A TAX CREDIT APPLICATION TO TDXCA SHORTLY THEREAFTER WHICH WOULD RESULT IN CONSTRUCTION COMMENCES APPROXIMATELY THIS SUMMER.
>> WELL I DO WANT TO COMMEND IF IT DOES GET APPROVED AS A PERSON WHO HAS A LARGE FAMILY WHEN I FIRST MOVED HERE, I HAD A FOUR BEDROOM APARTMENT WHICH IS RARE OUT HERE TO EVEN HAVE.
AND SO I KNOW IT'S A NEED AND I AGREE THAT ME AND MY WIFE HAD A CAR. SO MAYBE TWO CAR, MAYBE THAT.
BUT IT WAS NEVER JUST YOU KNOW. >> ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS?
>> THE NUMBER OF THE BEDROOMS ESSENTIALLY, HAVING SUCH A LARGE NUMBER OF 3 OR 4 BEDROOM APARTMENTS MAKES THIS ONE
DIFFERENT. >> ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE ENCHANTED GARDENS, THE OTHER NEW PROJECT WE HAVE COMING IN OR
APARTMENTS IN GENERAL? >> THE MIX OF NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PER APARTMENT MAKES THIS ONE A LITTLE DIFFERENT.
I THINK WHEN WE EVALUATE THE ORDINANCE WE NEED TO LOOK AT GOING TO A PARKING PER UNIT OR PER BEDROOM.
>> I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT IT GOES TO ADDING TO THIS SOFT SIDE AND ADDING TO DEVELOPMENT DOWN THERE AND HELPING WHERE EVERYTHING LIKE YOU MENTIONED EVERYTHING THAT YOU NAMED WAS TOWARDS NORTH SIDE. SO NOW WE'RE SEEING SOME DEVELOPMENT AND BEAUTIFICATION DOWN THERE.
>> THOSE ARE ALL GREAT REASONS BUT THE GIST OF OUR RECOMMENDATION IS REALLY BASED OFF OF THE RATIO OF THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS AND HOW OUR PARKING REQUIRES PARKING TO BE BASED OFF OF NUMBER OF BEDROOMS VERSUS NUMBER OF UNITS.
>> THAT WAS MY CONCERN. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH PARKING DOWN THE ROAD.
AND LIKE I SAID THIS ISN'T THE FIRST RODEO Y'ALL DID AND YOU SAID IN YOUR NOTES THAT OTHER TOWNS AND YOU HAVE ADOPTED A RATIO. AND THEN WE'RE ABOVE YOUR RATIO ON WHAT WE APPROVE ON THE VARIANCE TONIGHT.
>> AND THAT WAS SOMETHING, COMMISSIONER, THAT I WANTED TO MENTION AS WELL. THAT WE WORKED WITH STAFF, I KNOW INITIALLY THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE NUMBER OF SPACES SO WE DID WHAT WE DID IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THE NUMBER OF SPACES WHILE STILL MAXIMIZING THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AND COMMUNITY AMENITIES WE WERE ABLE TO PROVIDE.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
IF NOT, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? >> I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE.
>> OKAY, SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND THAT.
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. >> THERE'S ONE ITEM ON THE
[G. Consent Agenda]
CONSENT AGENDA WHICH IS THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 19TH.I GUESS EVERYBODY HAS HAD A CHANCE TO READ THEM.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT? OKAY, VICTOR.
A SECOND, PLEASE? ALL IN FAVOR.
[1. Monthly Development Report]
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. THEN OTHER BUSINESS, MONTHLY
DEVELOPMENT REPORT. >> LAST MONTH SEVEN MINOR PLATS AND FOUR SITE PLANS WERE SUBMITTED.
[00:20:02]
IN ADDITION THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR HERNANDEZ SUBDIVISION WAS APPROVED IN CITY COUNCIL. PERMITS ISSUED AND PERMIT FEES CONTINUE TO SHOW AN INCREASE COMPARED TO LAST YEAR.ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MONTHLY DEVELOPMENT REPORT?
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS AT THIS TIME? IF NOT THEN WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.