001to the Tuesday August 20th 2019 City Planning Commission meeting will begin the meeting with a roll call Thank You Commissioner Abram here commissioner Ackerman Commissioner Briggs Commissioner Gabe Randall here commissioner Hammersmith Commissioner Mills your Commissioner meals team here and we have evidences of commissioners sobei and woods but we have a quorum thank you moving on to introductions do we have any this evening not this evening right approval agenda do have a commissioner that will move move by Commissioner Mills second by Commissioner gay Brando any discussion on the agenda all those in favor please say aye minutes of previous meeting before us this evening we have the August 7th 2019 meeting minutes do have a commissioner that will move move back missioner Abrams seconded by Commissioner Brandel any discussion or changes all those in favor please
002say aye opposed it is approved now we are on to reports from city administration City Council Planning Manager Planning Commission officers and committees written communications and petitions commissure Ackerman is not here so we don't have a report right now from City Council miss Julie oh do you have a report for the planning department nothing to report this evening thank you Planning Commission officers and committees and then written communications and petitions I believe we received one piece of communication so please take a look at that we will go back in time for a minute since we're getting reports from various people we will take a quick second and get a report for Commissioner Ackerman from City Council welcome thank you very much I apologize I was running late from another meeting City Council had a short
003meeting last night but actually a number of items of your interest to you first excitingly the city approved a contract with the Smith group jjr to do a public engagement around what is our vision as community for the 415 West Washington property if you don't know 415 West Washington is along derelict and underutilized city-owned property that sits across the street from the YMCA so this is an exciting step forward and and better utilizing that as an asset for the community another more clerical item on an annual basis the city of Ann Arbor updates its fee and Lew for affordable housing formula this is a formula used for the PUD zoning district if people are mandated by that zoning district to include affordable housing in their property they're allowed to pay a fee and LU which
004we've discussed and we updated the formula and the the fee table in turn some ordinance amendments at first reading the glen PUD the hotel and glen Street across from the hospital passed at first reading upon second reading a few clerical edits to the UDC fixes that were caught that weren't quite translated from chapter 55 to the UDC correctly and then one change to front line step back front lot setback passed at second reading so they are now part of our code the garnet at three to five East some it you'll remember was a c1 a conditional rezoning was postponed at second reading general compliments about the site plan and the building itself but some philosophical qualms with the zoning district being used c1 a being a near campus commercial district and so staff and the
005petitioner will be discussing alternatives owning districts and then 2705 Newport Road was an X and rezone from Township to an r1 district two other items of adjacent relevance to this body I have to do with rotary configurations Road diets green so I should say first on August 5th City Council reviewed three plans for potential Road diets which would increase the safety for pedestrians and cyclists on those streets of those three one moved forward on traver would - or voted down on green and Earheart the one on green was is going to be brought back through a revised plan that hopefully will be consensus reaching at the beginning of September and then Traver would the one that was passed will be brought back up I believe at a similar meeting some council members and staff I
006understand and I have reached some agreement about slight revisions that will maintain the road diet and the bike lanes but make alterations so a lot happened last night in a short meeting and more will come in September right thank you we now move on to audience participation if there's anyone in the audience who wishes to address the Planning Commission regarding an item that is not on our agenda and the only item on our agenda for this evening is pretty much marijuana so if you're here to about an item that's not on our agenda please come up to the podium state your name and address for the record and you'll have up to three minutes so dress the Planning Commission seeing no one will move on to public hearing scheduled for our next business meeting thank
007you we have two public hearings that will be held next business meeting hideaway Lane planned project site plan for City Council approval a planned project site plan for council to revise the seventeen unbuilt homes from single-family to to family dwellings at two thousand Traver Road so 4.6 acre site currently contains a nine unit apartment building and one single-family house as well as one partially built single-family house and foundations for two single-family homes the proposal includes sorry the proposal increases the number of dwelling units on the site plan from 29 to 45 no change to the site layout or an increased number of buildings as proposed each new home will have an attached garage stormwater will be detained on site and access will be from traver Road it is zoned R for a multiple family dwelling
008another public hearing for Vic village south site plan for City Council approval a proposal for a new 13th story mixed-use building containing first floor retail space and 133 residential units at 1111 o for 1108 11 12 and 1114 South University Avenue and 609 East University Avenue and 610 Church Street parking provided for 67 cars below the building and for surface spaces the site is zoned d1 downtown core with South University character overlay zoning thank you we now move on to our regular business and the first item is the unified development code amendments relative to the Michigan regulation and taxation of marijuana act and we will begin with staff report then we'll open up for a public hearing and we'll go into discussion about thank you there is a staff report in the packet along with
009ordinance with strikeout language this presentation follows neither exactly but it was prepared to help summarize and explain what is going on a tiny bit of history we have started addressing marijuana in our in our zoning ordinance in 2008 in 2008 the following terms were introduced and regulations established for patients caregivers medical marijuana home occupations medical marijuana dispensaries medical marijuana cultivation facilities in 2016 the medical marijuana facilities Licensing Act was implemented and through that or at that time we inserted medical marijuana growers medical marijuana processors medical marijuana secured transporters medical marijuana provisioning centers and medical marijuana safety compliance facilities and so now in 2018 we are implementing the Michigan regulation and taxation of marijuana Act this we are now introducing designated consumption establishments marijuana micro businesses and marijuana retailers sorry I will first go through the
010amendments by term or by category what were what we're doing and then I'll follow it up by amendments by section so amendments by term regarding the term medical we the amendments on the two on the floor are to remove the term medical from most terms or definitions example medical marijuana facility is proposed to be marijuana facility and you can see this little table these are proposed to just make it more broadly applicable next designated marijuana consumption facility we are adding a definition which is essentially essentially where customers may come to consume via smoking ingestion or other means marijuana's individually purchased through a state-licensed provisioning center marijuana retailer or marijuana micro business will be allowing these designated consumption facilities in the C 1a c 1b c 1a / r d1 d2 c 2 B and C
011three districts they must be located 100 I'm sorry thousand feet from a school and we have included some parking requirements for this new land use for marijuana retailers this is the second of three new terms including a definition which is a commercial entity that purchases marijuana from a grower or processor and sells supplies or provides marijuana to customers we are treating it as an extension if you will of the marijuana provisioning center so it is being tacked on by a comma and treated as the same it will be allowed as a special exception use in the C 1 C 1 a C 1 B C 1 a /r D 1 D 2 C 2 B and C three districts it is allowed with special exception use as incidental or accessory to growers and processors in
012the M 1 M 1 a and M 2 districts they must be 600 feet from another provisioning center slash retailer a consumption facility or micro business a thousand feet from a school we are proposing that the currently approved medical marijuana provisioning centers shall be deemed to also include approval for a marijuana retailer and because they would be under that same umbrella they would be counted as one in terms of maximum number of licenses and a different chapter of code authorizes the city to issue 28 licenses so as proposed there would be no increase in the number of places that sell and as say this as an umbrella term places that sell marijuana they the places SL would be capped at twenty-eight or remain capped at 28 whether they be solely a retailer solely a provisioning
013center or a combination retailer provisioning center and the third new term that is introduced is marijuana micro business it is a we're adding a definition a facility that cultivates processes and sells or transfers marijuana directly to consumers and note that it's um and they do all of those things they cultivate and process and sell right there it's not exactly like a farm-to-table operation because there's no consumption but it is a it's a little bit more one-stop shopping than the previous they will be allowed as a special exception use in the c3 re o RL m1 m1 a and M two districts they must be six hundred feet from another provisioning center slash retailer consumption facility and micro business they must be 1,000 feet from a school the ordinance on the table says that 25 percent
014of their energy must come from solar panels but we are proposing an amendment when this moves forward to city council of 10% we have been advised by the sustainability office that 25% is is almost physically impossible given the this the energy uses that they need and the average size of a facility and then how much square footage of solar panels are necessary and we've introduced a parking requirement for this land use same topic but if it helps to think about it a different way amendments by section of code so this does match more closely to the amendments in the packet but we are proposing amendments to section 5 point 15 in the permitted use table we're adding the designated marijuana consumption facilities adding the marijuana retailer adding the medical marijuana micro business and we are
015proposing to remove the marijuana grower from the mixed use districts in the table the mixed columns are the see the commercial districts they would still be permitted the growers would still be permitted in the special-purpose districts districts such as the manufacturing districts section five point sixteen point three G is the use specific standards area of the code specifically commercial in this section of the code we are proposing to strike the most of the the word medical we are inserting the references to the MRT ma which is the Michigan regulation and taxation of marijuana act we are specifying that a marijuana retailer may operate where a medical marijuana provisioning Center has been approved adding micro businesses and retailers to the section that requires 600 feet separation we are referencing and clarifying the maximum number of state
016licenses per lot we're inserting a table to make that just clearer we are not changing the number the maximum number permitted and when I say reference so for example in this in that sentence in that subparagraph we're adding the term micro business or adding the term retailer clarifying and referencing the facility limits that are established by chapter 96 we are exempting consumption facilities from the consumption ban adding clarifying and revising the required statements for growers and micro businesses and adding clarifying and revising the additional information required with special exception use applications in the off street parking section we are adding standards for the designated consumption facilities and marijuana micro businesses and finally in section 5.30 7.2 we are striking most references to the word medical adding MRT ma adding the definition for designated marijuana consumption
017facility revising the definition of grower rabbi are adding marijuana micro-business adding marijuana retailer revising marijuana infused product processor revising safety compliance facility and revising secure transporter so the as I mentioned this this was to help clarify and help make sense of this package of amendments that are scattered several sections of the code and to sort of get at the high level explanation of what we're doing I'm happy to answer any additional questions or make clarifications I'm also happy to if there is a section that you feel needs to be a little bit further amended or revised I can I can help us this with that and I with that I would turn it over to the chair thank you at this time I'd like to open up the public hearing on this item is there
018anyone in the audience who wishes to address the Planning Commission on this item if there is please step up to the podium set your name and address for the record and you'll have up to three minutes to address the Planning Commission in regards to this agenda item seeing no one I'll close the public hearing and I will read the motion the in Harbor City Planning Commission hereby recommends that the mayor and city council will approve the amendments to chapter 55 unified development code section 5.15 table 5-15 section 5 dot 16.3 section 5.1 9.2 table 5 : 1 9 - 1 and section 5.3 7.2 to provide land use regulations for the recreational uses created I'm sorry recreational marijuana use is created by the Michigan regulation and taxation of marijuana act 2 a commissioner I'll move
019move by Commissioner millisecond Abeka missionary Brandel we are in discussion commissure Ackerman Thank You mr. chair I good well I guess only two quick questions now for the consumption facility and I think at the work session this was kind of left as a staff was going to come back to us with some recommendations and I feel like those are the recommendations now which is permitted uses in Hershel districts for the most part and I just wanted to toss out there to the group the possibility of that being a special exemption use instead of permitted I just feel like it's gonna be something where we're gonna want a little bit more discretion are gonna want a little bit more control over the work they put into their facility it's it feels like more control would be
020better than less control for these I just want to put that thought out there to the group might be a little bit more work for us but I think will be better for the community then thank you for the answer on the 10% for energy that's great and then honestly at this I had a question about have all of our H's become Jays I would say that this we will be doing staff we will be doing a another once-over the council for for example making sure that all the medicals that we wanted out were out and but the ones we want to keep her in and things like proper cross referencing and formatting and auto numbering and so forth yeah okay thank you I think overall in terms of the use tables I think we
021have the right uses permitted in the right districts for the most part and when I say permitted I mean allowed in any form and the I think it's reasonably in line with what we did with medical and also as we introduced the new dimension of recreational treats it similarly to other substances that are out there and publicly available for adults yeah and so again I would just insert I think a big a big piece we want to talk about but but would be a quick edit would be just the special exemption use for those consumption facilities other than that I'm very grateful for all the work that's gone into it and I feel like we've had a lot of good discussion already commissioner Mills I had the same list as commissioner Ackerman on my kind
022of what I wanted to discuss as well and I really support your idea of moving to a special exception you so I won't make the motion here the question that I had is about whether we have the ability to limit the number of licenses like we have done on the provisioning centers I mean I know that's not in zoning but is that on the table at all which would be for that other section of code that where we have said that we're limiting the number of licenses of petitioning centers for specifically for the consumption facilities I don't think that this that is the purview of this body I think that certainly you can perhaps make a resolution and to a recommendation for council pass along your thoughts but it is not part of the UDC
023and so no amendments to that are on the table okay and there hasn't been something being discussed in here alone that you're aware of not that I'm aware of okay so I think that that leads me even more so to suggest that putting a special except what it treating the consumption facilities a special exception uses is in order just I don't I have no idea what kind of demand there would be for this but that kind of is some sort of check on how many we could see in any given time just because they have to get through our process but it also means that we might continue to be talking about this for a long time the I appreciate understanding why you're recommending the moving from 25 percent to 10 percent because when I
024read the 25 percent I thought this is a de facto ban at the same time I've recently been at conferences talking about how out of control the energy usage is for grow facilities and so one thing that your presentation didn't know but I checked in that hear it and it's true it's both for these mic whatever they're called my micro businesses but also applying to growers like this this energy requirement and so if the sustainability office is saying that they're okay with 10% then that's okay I'm worried honestly a little bit that this is gonna make it a lot harder for us to meet our climate action plan if we end up with the whole a growers I don't think that we're going that we're really the place where people are going to be growing
025a whole lot but I think that we need to be be explicit about that that there is a large concern among people who are worried about climate emissions that that medical that the marijuana industry particularly the growing industry is really stressing our existing energy infrastructure so to that end what is the I know that these facilities have to go through annual licenses like license renewals is there any way that we can write into here that we need to make sure that they are actually achieving that then they don't lowball how much energy they're going to use when they apply for this permit and then end up using way more energy than what they are actually providing via solar because we're we the city can you know we see the water bills we don't necessarily see
026their electricity bills and so is there a way that we can build that into their permit renewal I cannot at a high level I it seems plausible to be able to put that into the permit at a high level it seems plausible that that could be added into the permit requirements this body does not do the permit requirement so I'm not an author of that document the the UDC does contain some penalties for non-compliance I'm thinking of the premium section none are currently proposed on the table I would just that we could make sure that City Council knows that this is an important area for the Planning Commission and that they can we can ask that some a little bit more of the ordinance and penalty section be fleshed out whether the and what and
027to determine maybe in conjunction with the attorney's office what would be the best place for those for those provisions okay yeah the the word that struck me and I don't have page numbers and goodness in Section six I don't know it's I don't know it anticipated when we're when you're talking about the elected da energy requirements you say 25 percent of the marijuana facilities anticipated energy usage and it shouldn't be anticipated but yes to initially go through us it's anticipated but then I think it's really important that we say and like that I don't have the language I think that you're right i I is if as long as we convey this intent like I think it I feel strongly that it needs to be reviewed annually sure Gabe Randle City Council is that a
028growing facility just to put it in perspective and one professional who studies this thought that for them to be Net Zero they would have to have 18 times the floor area of their facility and solar to be able to make it work so that's pretty sobering the lighting levels match those in hospital operating rooms and are 500 times what's recommended for reading and there are 30 hourly area changes that happen in these facilities so it's crazy intensive and I also am really concerned about the impact on I mean a city of Ann Arbor but just generally speaking because an another person who studies this said we can basically nullify any of the gains that we had from the Paris climate Accord with medical with marijuana alone with the trajectory that it's taking and so we
029need to kind of get serious about this and part of me is thinking is there a way that so these these places are an m1 basically right there in manufacturing can we just require that the entire roof be covered I mean because there's not a lot of light issues in those places they're single-story they're not next to some high-rise instead of the whole kind of ten percent business can it just be we require the entire building be covered in it I mean just max out whatever you can that's maybe one possibility another possibility this would take more work and I'm not sure whether this whole opting out opting in in terms of how we're studying it that maybe it would give us some time to be able to think about this but I know some
030folks are really interested in doing community solar and is there any way that they have to kind of start to support that to buy into that and you know the whole marijuana industry is not this is not this is like the only healthy thing in retail right now basically and so they have they can afford this and they're also taxing our system and we have to do something this in terms of its impact and so I kind of feel like maybe we can be bold here and say this is how we could get some sort of community solar off the ground is to be able to make something like this happen maybe that means that the none of them will settle in Ann Arbor maybe that's what that means but I just want to open
031it up as a possibility because when I started looking deeper at this - at the statistics it was pretty sobering in terms of where we could go with this and there's only they can do a lot in terms of getting tighter with their efficiencies and all that kind of thing and Massachusetts has done this with limiting their wattage so instead of requiring a certain percentage you can only do so much wattage and what that's forced is a whole lot of hyper efficient design around energy use and lighting and all kinds of things like that I'm not saying we do that I'm just bringing up other ways that people have been dealing with this as an issue but it when I start looking more deeply I just felt like maybe we need to be a little
032bit more bold with this so anyway I just wanted to put that out there as food for thought as this moves forward Commissioner Briggs these are great suggestions in statistics um I concur with everything I was at the Michigan Environmental Council meeting right before coming here and one thing they mentioned but I I was coming here and this was on the agenda was up the energy usage and so I think it's definitely an issue I'm wondering if in Section E where we have required statements from growers or micro businesses if we might add a condition for that requires annual energy reports and that perhaps that could be elaborated on by staff to identify what those energy reports are required but it seems like what I think that we can do is also help contribute to
033the research on this in the sense that we don't know how many places are actually gathering this data so we don't know how many facilities we'll actually have but that seems like an easy way to start gathering information on exactly how much energy they are using - and then it's not just the anticipation so I don't know if that seems like something that we could include right now or what your thoughts are on that as the commission desires we could do spend a moment wordsmithing or it could be amended directing staff to add a provision that an annual report be submitted whatever the body would prefer shall we awards men I will leave the wordsmithing up to somebody else if they have any sort of better suggestions I'm sort of at annal annual energy worst
034worst and I know that there are some amongst us Kushner mills that are really good at this sort of thing but I'm also think that there's there's benefit of just asking staff to add an additional you know recommendation that that we add this number four before it gets to City Council and then there's some time and thought that can be put into this to make sure that it says what we I think our intent is clear and what's incorporated into that probably takes a little bit of thought and probably maybe coordination with the sustainability office as well we feel comfortable voting on this in favor of this we let the staff yeah I've already made a note in the document mr. Mill's I did speed draft something as a starting point and and maybe some
035nodding it doesn't have to be this exact thing but some nodding might help staff see if it goes in the right place so the change would require in item three the three eyes to strike out anticipated and just say that we're requiring the 10% of energy use and then the new item four or IV would be an annual report of the facilities and our use of energy usage demonstrating compliance with the perceiving item demonstrating that they're providing 10% of their energy use the trim solar commission breaks I guess I would love to see it go be an eel and she report go beyond that to document what their actual water usage is just act like a clear report not just on sort of energy but all sort of you know just that we're getting a
036report on that sounds I didn't hear that part but it was beyond energy so I think that's fantastic sorry yeah it's not clear in my so I don't know if you need a motion in that or it sounds like you've I would I am personally following it in terms of procedures I think that the motion to approve would have to be noting as amended to include mention of annual reports of actual energy and water consumption do we have a commissioner that I'll move that Commissioner Mills seconded by Commissioner breaks and discussion Commissioner burns sorry quick question what's the mechanism by which that report gets reviewed and or evaluated and like that's not something this Commission this body does so this is something they do to renew their license then it's that's my guess I think
037it will have to apply a little thought to it and work with folks like the sustainability office and the attorney's office about the best place to submit that and process it maybe it's also the clerk's office but we'll have to take a look and and find the right home but that's something that would go in the code or that or in licensing requirements that at this point I think that the Planning Commission has said that they would like it included as a required statement that you that that information is provided I think the next level that we don't have it right at this moment is provided to whom but that can be that will be fleshed out by the time it goes that council per the direction of Planning Commission okay thank you and I'm
038assuming it would go to the clerk's office to renew their life but anyway the clerk's office would then pass it on to whoever the appropriate latias mm-hmm all right Department okay for their discussion on that amendment all those in favor please say aye hi post all right that amendment is approved back to the amended motion mr. Ackerman I'm gonna go ahead and move an amendment to for in the use table designated marijuana consumption facility it's currently marked as permitted in c 1a c 1b c 1 AR d 1 d 2 C 2 B and C 3 I'm gonna make a motion to change each of those permitted uses to a special exemption use seconded by Commissioner Mills further discussion on that assurance my memory from the working session was that the rationale behind that that
039we heard from the Planning Manager was that they were being considered similar to bars and that they I'm just trying I just maybe I'm wondering if people who are there at the working session of a similar memory they were they were going to kind of be considered like bars except that you cannot purchase marijuana out of consumption facility so you kind of BYO em and then came on the premises right I don't know if that changes anything or not but I wanted and then I thought maybe boss say I'll say this actually not not part of this amendment mr. Mill's that's why I asked about the number of licenses because bars are limited the number of bars is limited by liquor licenses and while I understand that they're not providing new marijuana at these facilities
040like in or again one of the ways to limit how many there are is to make sure that with each one we consider it carefully in the context of its surroundings and give it additional you know review so so I'm sure that that's what led it to be permitted just like bars are but because there's no other look that then that's why I asked about the number of limits so I think that that's why they're yeah and I'm in favor of this I'm primarily just because we've done so much work around so many of these sites recently and we've made them better that I'm all for special use attention further discussion all those in favor please say aye aye opposed all right we're back to the main motion the back back to the main amended
041motion assurance I had another question about the you stable concerning marijuana micro businesses and marijuana growers noticing that in the c3 zone micro businesses are allowed a special exception but growers are not my understanding that micro business includes growing so I wanted to just understand a little bit that disparity and then in the M 1 M 1 a and M 2 again why a grower would be a permitted use and a micropenis being a special exception the the rationale would be in the seat although growers grow or might I'm sorry micro businesses also grow they are limited is it a hundred and fifty plants yeah but there's a number there a limited number of plants and so I think the rationale was the because of the limitation on the number of plants they'll be a
042little bit smaller more manageable and the c3 fringe commercial for sort of our big box zoning districts they couldn't fit in and be compatible with that district they also have the retail element and so that that's commercial district the flipside is although they do some retail sales but because they do retail sales and that's why it's special except use in the industrial districts not every industrial site may be appropriate for that retail component you know some have adjacent uses where the traffic deliveries that thing it's maybe it's not appropriate for retail customers now that is all open for debate but that was our reason for proposing it this way okay thank you for their discussion sure Hamish ring I have two questions and I'm gonna apologize in advance and they missed the working session this
043could have come up then one is just a clarification on the micro businesses or understanding this is probably not part of what we do but is that counted under these 28 licenses since they also sell that what I wasn't clear on that I don't think they are counted under the 28 okay there I think they are a different type of license okay is there doing up there's a cap on that is anything that's important well everything supports well right yeah I don't know if there's a because I my familiarity is with chapter 55 not 97 I would have to follow up okay but that's not something that we necessarily need to worry about right okay good to know that they might be exempt from that to meet licenses my other question is just since this
044is a new thing newer thing in Michigan but other states obviously there's some like benchmarking and Massachusetts like did you guys look at any you know best practices in codes with marijuana facilities to come up with some of this like I'm just wondering if there's already some language around like some you know pushing the envelope in terms of like energy requirements or anything like that that could potentially be borrowed from there are any best practices out there my my gut says that it's a little bit too new in Michigan to have Michigan des Prairies it has yeah I believe that and I believe that much of our regulations is sort of inserted because of the language and the requirements of the samr of the retail marijuana Act and it is new I don't I don't
045know I can't speak for the planning manager about how much research that he did but I I feel confident that he used the best resources that he had available at the time Thank You mr. Ackerman I just get a comment there hasn't been any discussion at the City Council table which is where a cap would need to be discussed and implemented on the micro businesses and so well not immediately relevant to this body if there never is a cap zoning code can be a means to which you limit the impact on the community so for example one of the early regulations we put in place for medical marijuana retailer provisioning centers was distance limitations so they had to be 600 feet away from each other I can't remember what it started with but it landed
046on 600 feet away from each other and a thousand feet from schools public schools K through 12 so I think I don't want to put this on mr. Leonard but I recall from our working session that he indicated that early because they're kind of are already these 28 or will be these 28 medical marijuana provisioning centers that are going to most likely transition to full recreational that the growth we see in the market locally likely would be through the micro business until caps are readjusted or we learn more and have to respond accordingly I also recall and only mentioning this because of the working session maybe council member Ackerman or Commissioner Ackerman can help me out the micro business is 150 plants and one person in the industry said that that might that might take
047up around 20,000 square feet in building size and that with the 20 or 150 plants wasn't it something like you could harvest like every three months and the harvest would be getting like 50 pounds the only yeah I can't remember exactly is it was 50 to 75 like 200 yeah I'm the only the only piece of data I remember was that it came to an average an average of about five visitors a day I was like you would they've got to have producing enough product you know and it's because you're limited to two and a half ounces to be legally carrying it came out to in the order of one hand they would produce enough to sell by two five customers per day commissure Millis and i would just add that now now that you've
048had us look at the table which is really helpful this is one where they are special exceptions so all these micro businesses will have to come before us and so we'll have some sense of how we as a Planning Commission will have some sense of how many are out there as well for better first alright further discussion are we ready for a vote all those in favor please say aye opposed it's approved with the amendments we now move on to audience participation if there's anyone in the audience who wishes to address the Planning Commission this is your opportunity to do so you'll have three minutes to address us if you'd like to address us please step up to the podium say your name and address for the record seeing no one will move on to
049Commission proposed business is there any Commission proposed business do you have a motion to adjourn move Becca sure bills seconded by Commissioner Briggs all those in favor we are adjourned thank you you