►
From YouTube: (2022)) 11-15 - Planning Commission Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
B
A
A
C
C
It's
got
a
small
little
retail
building
on
there
now
the
properties
currently
under
some
Redevelopment,
and
so
what
before
is
before
the
Planning
Commission
this
evening
is
a
COA
for
the
central
business
district
to
allow
for
the
renovation
of
that
site
renovation
of
the
building
and
to
allow
for
a
restaurant,
so
the
site
plan,
the
applicant
prepared
for
us
shows
and
I'm
going
to
try
to
use
my
laser
pointer
here
through
this
little
spot
right
here.
So
the
this
thing
building
here
is
located
on
the
on
the
western
side
of
the
site.
C
That's
oriented!
This
is
oriented
east
west,
north
south,
so
the
existing
buildings
here
the
applicant
proposes,
is
to
cover
the
covering
area
in
front
of
the
building
and
add
some
container-like
buildings
in
the
front
as
an
accent
to
the
actual
operation
of
the
restaurant
itself
and
they're
going
to
add
some
lighting
and
some
other
features
here
and
Planters
in
the
front
I'm
sure
the
applicant
can
expand
on
this
better
than
I
can.
C
But
it's
a
complete
renovation
of
the
site
to
allow
for
the
restaurant
they're
proposing
again
to
use
some
container
type
buildings,
as
in
like
an
Adaptive
reuse
of
those.
Those
structures
for
seeding,
as
I've
shown
here
on
the
screen,
I
think
they're,
going
to
cut
those
out
and
put
in
some
Booth
seating
and
I
think
the
mirror
side
of
that
would
be
some
type
of
service
area,
alcohol,
service
area,
but
I'm
sure
the
applicant
can
expand
on
this
more
than
I
can.
But
the
recommendation
is
see
approval
estimated
without
conditions.
A
D
E
Would
they
be
under
power
with
full
HVAC,
or
are
they
just
going
to
be
open?
How
do.
D
One
of
them
will
have
will
contain
a
bar,
a
service
bar
for
food
and
drink,
so
it
will
have
powered
water
and
you
know,
meet
the
all
the
health
department
regulations.
D
It
will
have
a
fan
system
installed,
but
no
AC,
because
it's
it's
open
to
the
elements
essentially
I
mean
when
it's
open
for
business.
It's
open
to
the
air,
not
dissimilar
from
the
barbecue
restaurant
that
we
created
over
there
in
that
you
can't
really
heat
or
cool
it,
because
it's
open
sure,
okay,
another
the
other
container,
very
similar
to
what
you
see
at
strange
Taco
on
the
inside.
D
D
There
will
be,
it's
I,
forget
the
number
of
seats,
but
there
will
be
so.
A
D
E
So
the
current
parking
lot
will
be
completely
removed
for
all
of
the
that.
D
Area
the
property
is
going
to
be
graded.
You
know
nearly
level
with
some
retaining
walls
that
deal
with
the
topography
but
it'll
where
the
containers
are
it'll,
be
level
to
where
the
building
is
and
then
a
retaining
wall
will
help.
You
know
contain
the
dirt
to
get
up
to
the
Wayne
Street
level.
Okay,.
E
B
A
A
C
You
Mr
chairman:
this
is
the
first
certificate
of
appropriateness
that
this
commission
will
see
on
likely
several
other
future
developments.
But
this
is
this
is
the
first
one
for
the
out
lights
at
the
Pavilion
and
it
is
proposed
for
a
restaurant.
They
have
submitted
their
a
complete
site
development
package
to
us
for
review
for
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
on
the
screen
behind
you
is
their
site
plan
that
shows
an
entrance.
C
They
have
provided
a
pretty
detailed
landscape
plan
that
complies
with
all
the
requirements
for
our
certificate
of
appropriateness.
All
of
the
outlots
in
the
Pavilion
are
a
little
unique.
They
have
two
road
frontages,
so
they're,
subject
to
our
COA
requirements,
basically
on
two
fronts,
and
they
have
provided
all
the
required
Landscaping
to
meet
the
criteria
of
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
for
the
corridor
design
overlay.
C
They
have
included
some
substantial
details,
I'm
only
showing
you
some
snapshots,
but
they
had
several
other
slides
and
plans
that
were
in
your
packet
that
showed
the
detail,
this
plan
for
the
building
itself,
but
it
was
substantial
in
nature
as
far
as
compliance
with
our
Corridor
design
overlay
requirements
included
in
their
package
also
was
their
entire
sign
package
and
they
have
that
and
some
pretty
great
detail
all
of
their
basically
all
of
the
elements
that
will
be
added
to
the
building
were
including
the
package
itself.
C
It
was
the
only
area
in
the
review
that
staff
noted
that
there
were
some
issues
with
compliance
on
the
lighting,
and
that
was
where
we
proposed
a
condition
at
the
end
that
the
signs
could
not
be
internally.
Illuminated
and
part
of
that
is.
The
reason
is
that
your
Corridor
design
overlay
standards
do
not
permit
that
and
their
Pavilion
pattern
book
discourages
internal
illumination
of
all
their
Outlet
signage,
so
that
was
that
was
our
review.
We
recommended
approval,
subject
to
that
one
condition:
Mr
chairman.
A
Thank
you
is
there
anyone
present
to
speak
in
favor
of
this
recommendation.
B
B
A
A
E
A
motion
to
approve,
with
the
one
notation
of
the
backlit
sign
only.
A
A
C
C
C
Right,
no
I
did
want
to
point
it
out
tonight,
because
this
hasn't
been
done
here
before
historically
that
I'm,
aware
of
so
what
we're
proposing
we've
looked
at
the
calendar
for
next
year.
We
try
to
I,
think
was
it
it
was.
It
was
last
year
or
the
year
before,
I
can't
remember
where
you
know
we're
meeting
on
weeks
of
holidays.
So
this
is
a
pretty
standard
calendar.
It's
every
third
Tuesday
in
on
the
calendar,
except
for
November,
where
that
third
Tuesday
falls
on
the
week
of
Thanksgiving.
Okay,.
A
C
We're
proposing
that
that
meeting
that
meeting
be
moved
to
November
16th,
which
will
be
the
Thursday
prior
to
Thanksgiving
week
that
way
it
gives
the
planet
commission
and
you
you
guys
and
your
families.
You
know
the
opportunity
not
be
obligated
to
this
meeting
staff
as
well.
You
know,
if
that
be
the
case.
I
I
just
think
it's
a
good
idea.
There
are
no
conflicts
that
we're
aware
of
with
the
city's
calendar
to
have
it
on
that
Thursday.
So
I
would
just
ask
that
you
guys
you
know,
plan
appropriately
for
that
particular
month.
A
Sounds
good
everybody
in
agreement
with
that.
Well,
then,
we'll
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
that
then
motion.
E
C
Yeah,
it's
just
and
I
think
that
even
we
looked
at
even
the
next
year's
calendar
at
fall.
We
have,
we
may
have
been
doing
a
switch
on
Thursday
I
mean
yeah
Thursday
for
Christmas
and
Thanksgiving
the
following
year,
because
it
falls
on
a
weird
week
and
then
HPC
Falls,
like
the
day
after
Christmas
this
next
year,
we
yeah
we're
not
doing
that's
I,
think
it's
a
chance
to
people
be
with
their
families
anyway,
moving.
C
Thank
you
Mr
chairman,
so
the
first
we're
amending
the
development
regulations
for
the
first
time
in
some
time
it
looks
like
this
is
the
sixth
update,
so
we
are
proposing
to
and
I
wish.
This
was
a
little
bit
bigger
on
the
screen.
I
thought
it
would
be
when
I
put
this
PowerPoint
together.
So
please
rely
on
your
packets.
C
If
you
want
to
be
able
to
read
this
stuff
in
detail,
so
in
section
7.2,
this
is
your
preliminary
plant
specifications
currently
there's
it's
kind
of
open-ended
as
to
when
these
pulmonary
flats
are
supposed
to
be
processed
and
then
the
actual
content
quality.
What
have
you
being
processed
for
to
this
commission
and
then
on
the
city
council?
So
this
is
an
addition
to
the
beginning
section
of
the
plenary
plant
requirements.
C
They
basically
outline
specifically
when
plants
are
supposed
to
be
submitted
to
the
city,
the
time
frame
by
which
we
have
to
process
them
and
get
them
to
the
Planning
Commission
itself.
It
also
obligates
the
applicant
to
come
in
with
a
complete
submittal,
because
now
you're,
currently
and
since
I've
been
here
we're
processing
those
with
corrections
moving
forward
and
that
I'm
not
going
to
be
specific
with
any
project.
C
But
one
has
come
through
that
made
it
all
the
way
through
an
entire
year,
with
corrections
never
being
done
and
at
the
end,
when
the
corrections
came
up,
they
were
upset
that
their
plant
had
expired.
So
this
one
this
this
kind
of
eliminates
that
that's
anomaly.
It
puts
more
on
the
applicant
to
have
a
complete
pulmonary
Platinum
metal
I
mean
for
the
most
part.
They
do
come
in
with
only
technical
changes,
so
these
would
give
the
staff
a
chance
to
make
those
technical
changes
present
them
to
you
without
Corrections
and
on
the
council.
C
For
for
that
reason,
and
without
Corrections
all
right
on
the
same
page,
there
in
7.2
we're
gonna
I'm
gonna
use
my
laser
point
here.
We're
going
to
drop
down
the
page
sizes
here,
I
don't
have
a
desk
because
enough
for
this
neither
does
Laura
if
you've
been
in
her
office.
So,
but
we
need
to
have
a
standardized
paper
size
coming
into
the
city.
24
by
36
is
pretty
standard
across
most
jurisdictions.
C
Moving
on
you
can
see
we're
going
to
change
some
wording
here.
There's
a
problem
with
the
actual
approval
stamp.
It
says
sketch
and
we've
changed
that
and
you
know
with
our
applicants
now,
but
we're
going
to
put
that
in
the
development
regulations
to
have
the
correct
word
of
preliminary,
not
sketch.
C
Let's
see
I
want
to
remove
the
actual
Planet
commission
void
Year
date
and
enhance
the
one
done
by
the
council,
because
when
this
commission
approves
those
pulmonary
Flats
you're,
not
actually
the
final
word,
the
council
is
so.
The
wording
on
these
are
a
little
confusing
when
it
says
one
year
from
this
date
and
then
one
year
from
this
date
we're
going
to
finalize
the
wording
on
that
to
just
be
limited
to
the
council
and
keep
the
Planning
Commission
at
the
recommendation
level.
If
that's
okay,
we
have
a
Stampin
here
that
was
unnecessary.
C
The
water
and
gas
Authority
does
not
approve
anything
at
the
preliminary
flat
level
and
then
the
wording
at
the
at
the
mayor
and
Council
level.
It
we're
going
to
solidify
and
Define
when
plots
expire,
which
still
is
one
year
from
the
date
of
approval
if
they
do
nothing
or
the
expression
of
their
site
development
plan.
So
if
they
get
a
preliminary
plant
approved,
we
go
through
a
period
of
whatever
number
of
months
and
then
a
year
comes,
but
they
have
site
development
plans,
approved
and
they're
working.
C
Then
the
the
plaque
continues,
but
if
they
cease
activity
with
proof
site
development
plans,
then
the
expression
of
that
plot
and
then
we'll
expire,
the
plat.
If
it's
been
more
than
a
year,
hopefully
this
language
does
that
I've.
Just
in
my
discussion
with
a
few
folks
internally,
this
has
been
the
policy
of
the
city
for
years.
This
has
never
been
codified,
so
we're
actually
putting
this
on
the
cloud.
C
So
it's
clear
to
the
applicant
developer
and
everyone
that's
involved
what,
when
and
where
these
things
are
terminated,
so
moving
on
into
section
7.4,
very
similar
requirement
very
similar
standard
for
a
final
Platinum
metal
time
that
staff
has
to
review
it
and
time
the
applicant
has
to
respond
and
then
getting
in
that
on
Council
level.
You
guys
don't
see
final
plats.
It
goes
straight
to
council
so,
but
we're
just
showing
them
up
with
the
same
requirements
as
a
preliminary
flat.
We're
also
standardizing
that
sheet
size
24
by
36,
see
moving
on
page
after
page.
C
C
Then
we're
going
to
clean
up
some
of
the
existing
stamps
here,
there's
actually
the
one
the
stamp
you
just
showed
I
just
showed
you
that
was
being
removed
from
the
Thunder
plat
is
actually
needing
to
be
added
to
this
section,
so
there
should
have
been
probably
with
some
cut
and
paste
errors
years
ago,
where
that
that
occurred,
but
we're
going
to
get
that
cleaned
up
where
the
utility
stamp
is
actually
in
the
the
right
part
of
the
development
regulations,
lots
of
fun
stuff
going
on
with
these
development
regulations,
just
some
technical
cleanup
and
so
in
the
minor
Subdivision
plat
2
we're
moving
on
to
this
section
here.
C
7.5
we're
doing
the
same
thing
as
approved
by
code
enforcement
officer.
You
know,
we've
got
all
kinds
of
random
sized
plats.
Some
of
them
call
them
coming
as
small
as
11
by
17.
If
someone
has
a
scale
smaller
than
that
that
should
be
subject
to
the
code
enforcement
officer's
review.
Planning
Commission
does
not
see
minor
plats,
that's
approved
at
the
administrative
level
and
then
we're
oops
we're
standardizing
that
sheet
size
again
we're
trying
to
keep
those
sheets
down
to
a
reasonable
size.
C
Moving
on
we're
going
to
get
rid
of
the
unnecessary
stamps
for
minor
Flats,
they
do
not
go
in
front.
The
owner
is
not
required
to
sign.
We
can
leave
this
on,
but
it's
not
necessary.
I've
not
seen
a
plant,
yet
that
I've
approved
that
had
that
and
then
they
do
not
go
in
front
of
American
Council.
So
we
can
remove
those
and
then
we're
going
to
clean
up
some
of
the
language
here
for
the
enforcement
part.
We're
already
using
this
language
now
has
been
used
for
years.
C
C
It's
nonsense!
Taking
that
out,
doesn't
apply.
It
doesn't
comply
with
your
current
comprehensive
plan
that
has
encouraged
connectivity.
So
we're
going
to
remove
that.
Let's
see
section
9.16
has
some
section
numbering
issues.
It
starts
with
the
letter.
A
in
that
particular
section,
I
didn't
show
all
of
it,
but
that
whole
section's
got
some
numbering
issues
and
then,
finally,
a
policy
situation
in
the
retreat
we
had,
if
you
guys,
will
remember
Council.
C
We
discussed
this
one
specifically
about
removing
bonds
as
a
performance
Surety
for
development,
so
we're
going
to
limit
those
to
letters
of
credit
from
a
bank
or
cash
and
escrow,
so
we're
going
to
move
the
insurance
bonds
from
the
requirement,
and
that
was
all
of
the
development
regulation.
Amendments.
A
Okay,
under.
A
None
for
me,
you
know,
entertain
a
motion
that
I
want
to
ask.
F
Lee
Rowell
here
this
is
just
for
a
matter
of
record
I,
wanted
to
discuss
the
B3
warehousing.
That's
in
your
packet
right.
There
is
that
on
there
now.
A
Okay,
hearing
none
from
the
opposition,
then
I'll
entertain
a
motion
to
approve
motion
to
approve
a
second.
It's
like,
oh
in
favor,
say
aye
aye
aye.
All
opposed,
then
that
it
is.
It
is
approved.
A
So
item
number
five
zoning
text,
Amendment
number
14.,
Mr
code
officer.
C
Thank
you
Mr
chairman,
so
this
is
the
this
was
also
some
of
the
ones
we
had
discussed
in
our
planning
retreat.
But
this
is
the
formalization
of
some
of
those
that
we
had
talked
about
plus
some
of
the
things
we're
showing
up
from
our
comp
plan
approval
this
past
summer,
so
the
First
Amendment
you're.
Seeing-
and
this
is
in
section
620.3-
this
is
in
your
commercial
land
use
table.
C
We're
we're
going
to
continue
to
allow
self-service,
Mini
Storage
in
B3,
but
we're
adding
a
note
and
if
it's
yeah,
it's
legible,
on
the
screen
behind
you,
but
we're
going
to
specifically
limit
the
location
of
many
self-service
warehouses
to
places
that
are
are
not
within
the
federal
opportunity.
Zone,
that's
within
the
northern
flank
of
the
city
and
our
Urban
Redevelopment
Authority
boundary.
C
You
need
to
see
a
drive,
there's
a
lot
of
M1
there
and
there's
a
lot
of
M1
zoning
near
Vine,
Street
and
South
Broad.
So
we're
going
to
allow
that
to
be
continue
to
be
permitted
in
those
two
locations
as
a
use
by
right
for
many
self-service
warehouses
moving
on
into
section
644.2.
This
is
in
your
overlay,
District
requirements,
so
the
644
section
deals
specifically
with
the
mhdo
or
the
Mars
Hill
Way
off
on
that
one
Monroe
Walton
Mill,
some
old
zoning
Wheels.
C
Still
turning
in
my
brain
from
another
jurisdiction,
the
Monroe
Walton
Mills,
historic
overlay
District.
This
is
the
nanfield
district
that
had
we
admitted
last
year
to
allow
four
units
per
acre
or
down
to
four
tenths
of
an
acre,
but
in
all
the
requirements
in
there
when
we
talked
to
those
who
wish
to
develop
there,
they
don't
realize
that
those
are
condominium
requirements.
So
this
is
a
clarification
statement.
C
That's
in
the
applicability
paragraph
because
there
are,
there
are
no
lot
standards
for
mhdl
development,
they're
all
condos,
because
we're
trying
to
get
more
density
into
a
smaller
space,
and
so
they
have
to
be
condominium,
not
loted.
So
this
is
just
a
clarification
statement,
so
645.3
I
think
it's
on
the
same
page.
C
Here
you
can
see
we're
adding
single
excuse
me
existing
two
family
and
duplex
dwellings,
there's
a
lot
of
those
inside
the
city
that
are
on
mult
single
Lots,
multiple
duplexes,
and
you
have
new
owners
of
these
duplexes
that
are
coming
in
just
wanting
to
divide
them
and
they
cannot
because
they're
zoned
R2
and
they
are
not
permitted
to
be
infill
lot.
So
we're
asking
that
existing
two
family
and
duplex
dwellings
be
added
to
the
infant
overlay
District,
so
they
can
benefit
from
this
requirement.
C
C
See
moving
on
to
section
700.2,
this
is
we're
amending
this
section
of
your
commercial
zoning
District
dimensional
standards.
Basically
we're
adding
a
note,
we're
not
changing
any
of
the
standards,
but
we're
adding
a
node.
You
can
see
it's
going
to
be
note.
Number
eight
we're
going
to
allow
zero
lot
line
setbacks.
This
was
just
allowed
in
your
Pavilion,
the
Monroe
Pavilion
amendment
that
was
done
this
past
summer.
One
of
their
options
was
to
allow
zero
lot
line
for
their
building,
so
they
could
subdivide
it.
C
At
the
same
time,
we've
had
other
inquiries
in
the
city
and
multi-tenant
Commercial
settings
that
are
shopping
center
level
type
situations
that
have
big
parking
lots
they've
approached
the
city
to
allow
them
to
be
subdivided,
so
they
can
have
fee
simple
ownership.
Your
cut
prohibits
that
now
because
they
have
to
have
setbacks
that
have
to
be
met,
so
this
would
allow
a
multi-tenant
commercial
location
similar
to
a
shopping
center,
so
keep
in
mind
something
like
on
the
Napa
on
East
Spring
Quality
Foods.
C
What
I'm
to
do
a
fee
simple
lot,
and
then
they
have
to
have
a
shared
parking
requirement
if
they
do
so
that
way,
we
can
maintain
continuity
and
seamless
environment
for
those
locations
if
they
do
go
fee,
simple
Lots.
C
See
I'm
trying
to
read
the
screen,
so
that's
8
10
in
this
section,
so
we're.
Actually,
you
can
see
the
requirement
above,
and
this
is
an
existing
requirement.
We
require
five
adjacent
designs
or
five
different
designs
on
adjacent
lots
and
any
new
subdivision
and
from
a
permitting
level,
it's
kind
of
a
nightmarish
when
they
come
in
and
they
they
do
one
at
a
time
and
and
pull
those
down.
So
we
have
to
keep
track
of
those
to
make
sure
we're
in
compliance
with
that
requirement,
as
well
as
the
applicant.
C
We're
not
asking
if
there'd
be
more
designs
required.
This
is
just
simply
to
make
sure
that
that
requirement
above
is
going
to
be
complied
with,
and
then,
if
you'll
recall
too
from
our
Retreat.
This
was
direction
of
counsel
to
add
a
requirement
for
new
single-family
subdivision
developments
that
they
shall
be
rezoned
and
not
to
stand
onto
their
current
R
zoning
or
what
other
zoning
they
may
have
underneath
them.
C
Then
moving
on
to
the
final
Amendment
for
the
zoning
ordinance
tonight,
that
is
section
910.
This
is
your
single
family
standard
section
we're
asking
to
remove
the
this
trellis
extension
language
here
is
a
little
vague.
It
basically
has
been
able
to
allow
it's
been
interpreted
to
allow
the
city
to
have
pergolas
and
things
of
that
nature
to
comply
with
this
requirement.
I,
don't
think
that's
ever
the
intent
when
you
read
the
language
about
primary
and
front
entrances
being
recessed
and
then
having
roof
extensions,
shed,
roof
extensions.
C
Trellis
extensions
are
open
and
they're,
basically
shade
structures
or
garden
outdoor
Garden
type
structures,
so
we're
going
to
remove
those
from
being
allowed.
We're
going
to
actually
require
there
to
be
roofs
where
I
think
the
actual
original
intent
was
roofs
and
finally
there,
in
that
same
section
we're
going
to
modify
the
garage
standard
for
the
city
completely
in
these
developments.
C
There
are
some
great
examples:
I
could
point
to
where
the
side
and
rear
requirement
under
number
eight
currently
is
not
functioning
properly
and
has
created
an
unusual
design
or
probably
an
unwanted
design,
one
from
its
original
intent,
and
that
requirement
was
written
so
based
on
our
discussion
at
The,
Retreat
and
recent
variances
that
the
council
has
seen
regarding
garage
location
or
mending
this
section
to
dictate
that
garages
be
located
20
feet
behind
the
front
of
the
heated
floor
of
a
dwelling
or
a
front
door.
C
Whichever
is
greater,
basically
is
what
the
language
in
this
requirement
says,
and
this
should
alter
you
know
some
home
designs
and
some
new
developments
and
hopefully
encourage
A
Better
Home
Design.
The
goal
of
this
requirement
is
to
make
the
home
of
the
focus
focus
of
the
lot
and
not
the
garage,
and
that
was
an
explicit
feedback
that
the
city
had
received
in
the
comp
plan.
C
Update
with
photographs
that
had
been
presented
for
us
to
get
rid
of
garage
dominant
appearances,
part
of
it
is
too,
is
that
developments
themselves
would
be
designed
around
the
car,
not
the
house.
So
this
pushes
the
garage
to
the
back
hopefully
would
encourage
some
rear
alley
type
access
we're
actually
we're
asking
that
to
be
preferred
and
not
a
shall
requirement.
C
C
We're
just
going
to
strike
that
all
together,
because
we
want
this
to
be
applicable,
subdivision
wide
and
not
allow
cul-de-sacs
not
encourage
cul-de-sacs
number
one
because
they're,
just
basically
subsidized
driveways
and
and
get
rid
of
that
requirement
all
together
to
make
these
garages
20
feet
behind
the
heated
area
or
the
door.
C
And
that's
all
the
fabulous
amendments
we
have
before
you
all
tonight.
A
Now
you
know
I
need
to
speak
in
opposition
just.
F
It
is
currently
zoned,
B3,
commercial,
all
the
property,
that's
north
of
Monroe
Pavilion
up
to
Monroe
High
School,
which
is
about
300
acres
of
B3,
is
currently
in
existence,
as
you
see
it,
and
for
the
record,
Brad
and
I
spoke
on
this
matter.
Yesterday,
I
was
concerned
about
the
warehousing
functionality
there,
as
you
see
under
B3,
which
just
for
clarification,
I,
think,
Brad
and
I
agree
that
we
wouldn't
want
to
see
something
large
like
a
large
industrial
Warehouse
sitting
there.
You
know
between
Monroe
Pavilion
and
the
high
school,
for
example.
F
F
C
So
yeah
and
Lee
and
I
did
we
had
a
pretty
robust
conversation
about
this
because
I
mean
obviously
this.
Wouldn't
he
he's
a
stakeholder
that
could
be
impacted
by
this
because
of
the
amount
of
undeveloped
B3
blend
he
has
so
we
talked
about
what
Warehouse
means
now
you're,
not
seeing
an
amendment
now
in
the
future.
You
will,
where
we're
going,
to
incorporate
the
naics
into
our
land
use
table
which
would
make
it
easier
on
Lee
and
us.
It
says
the
warehouse,
the
warehouse
that
we're
striking
from
B3
here
is
the
85
Corridor.
C
C
He's
an
end
user
of
the
products
he
actually
is
going
to
install
into
a
final
location.
He
may
have
a
storage
facility
and
his
location.
This
is
not
the
type
of
Landings
we're
talking
about
striking
here,
so
we
would
allow
that
continuously.
I'll
continue
to
allow
that
and
those
are
permitted
uses
in
the
B
District.
C
Currently
now
you
have
a
host
of
those
contractor
and
developer
offices
contractor
and
developer
offices
with
facilities,
Office,
Center
and
I,
believe
it
says,
building
supply
store
wholesale
so
that
that
those
are
not
those
are
going
to
continue
to
be
allowed
there
and
I
and
I
interpret
the
contractor
with
facilities
as
being
that
guy.
That
has
space
that
he
receives.
Maybe
a
semi
truck
load
worth
of
stuff.
You
know.
D
C
D
C
In
the
future,
though,
I
think
there's
going
to
be
more
resources
for
the
city
for
lead
for
us
as
a
staff
to
rely
on
like
the
naics.
As
definitions
of
saying
this
is
the
scale
that
we're
talking
about
here.
In
fact,
we
would
code.
These
land
uses
would
have
a
code
that
has
the
nas
yes,
so
we
could
raw
out
in
the
future.
I'm
talking
about
Amendment,
you
don't
see
yet,
but-
and
there
will
be
a
future
round
of
amendments
in
the
early
2023
that
in
where
we're
switching
our
lane.
F
Yeah
and
I
was
trying
to
Envision
something
like
the
Gwinnett
Progress
Center
that
you
might
have
seen
out
near
Boggs,
Road
and
85
and
316
in
that
area.
There's
a
lot
of
that
type
usage
where
you've
got
office
and
then
you
know
some
Warehouse
in
the
back
that
type
of
thing,
so
I
just
want
a
little
bit
of
clarification.
If
that
was
appropriate,
is
that
I
think.