We're live. All right. It's now three or four minutes after 7.30. And I'll call to order the regular meeting of the Charlotte County Planning Commission scheduled to Thursday, September 19th. So with that, Mr. Wells, would you offer an invocation? Oh, yes. Good about what he is. I have your father, we come before you this afternoon. Thank you for health and strength. Thank you for allowing us to see another month that we might be able to conduct a business of Charter County. We pray that you be with us through this meeting, God and the records. And after which we ask for a safe journey to our residents, all these and other blessings, we ask them to use their name, Amen. Amen. All right. You have before you the agenda to monologists, same agenda to distribute it online, there's a copy available out in lobby, there's a motion with regard to the agenda. Motion to approve. I'm a motion. Second. I have a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of approving the agenda as presented. And you have a sent-i. I. Opposed. Hearing none, the agenda is approved as presented in the packet. For those of you who have an attendance, there's a copy available out in the lab. So we have before us the July minutes. I was not in attendance, so I cannot load on this. Oh, okay. It says, recess for joint public hearing. You're not having a joint public hearing. That's probably a carry-out from the lives of the gentlemen. All right. Note that kind of as a point of order, since we just, I guess that, Miss Ellie, you want to make a, when we do, redo the vote on the agenda or we're fine. Just strike a straight join all right Okay, with that in mind Yeah before you the minutes from the July meeting And then they were in the packet and comments on the minutes motion on the minutes We approve minutes, the motion on the minutes. We approve minutes. Okay, I have a motion. Second. I have a second. Any further discussion on the minutes? All right, with that, mine, I abstain. All those in favor of the approve of minutes as presented in K. B. St. I. Posed, or here none. Minutes are approved as presented. We now recessed the regular meeting. The favor of a joint public hearing has announced and advertised for zoning amendment application with regard to battery energy storage systems. I'll now call that public hearing to order. I'm sorry. This is not a joint public hearing. I'm just reading. Thank you. Appreciate it. I'll call it to order a hearing only of the Charlotte County Planning Commission with regard to zoning amendment for application for battery energy storage systems as a use used. First sub-item on the agenda under the public hearing is to hear be that of a summary in the state. Well, that'll be beneficial to have that for votes that are at home. Yeah, if you have an up-and-up on the way, just to publish. So just, just, just not going to. Okay. So some of you have seen this before. We did present information on the matter in the New York and May, but since this is the public hearing, we've already got back over that. We did a couple of things in it. The infrastructure is limited, provided with their properties, that are introduced to the original facility. We've been allowed to get on to the original with the big advisory present name. Battery and these orange questions are banks of batteries that are connected to the Green Earth of the collect power from either renewable sources or traditional energy sources and then can be used that power can be used for the needed and traditional problems. This is a photo of an actual storage container there that's an exit. It's a couple of points that I think are keyed, and a lot of times are overlooked. These are often paired with the new ones, but again, that the new decal is still a facility for the property and housing businesses. What is those? I dislocated the business into its upstation. On the Arugia House, I've been to the store containers, a lot of times with the old cities. I would complex monitoring systems. They can also be in standalone buildings as well. The largest operational facility in Virginia currently is the 20 megawatt drop-bridge project, which contains 109,000 batteries and 21 containers. In our visit, we did talk a little bit about that. It's taken with dominion. We are seeing some larger applications. I think there's a lot of applications out there now in the 50 to 125 megawatt range. Based on the research, at the end, I found that projects in the 50 to 100 megawatt range usually occupy about five to 10 acres. It does depend on what we're in setback requirements. The journal right there illustrates the rapid growth of this battery-introduced storage industry in 2020 in the US. It was approximately 1500 megawatts battery-introduced industry in 2020 in the US. It was approximately 1,500 megawatts of battery-introduced storage available in the US. Based on contracts that are already existing, the project degree of the 2024 is about 30,000 megawatts. It's just 2,000 megawatts in the 2020 increase. As the reason for this process to a lot of going into the energy needs, the data centers, the medical, the vocational intelligence. They do support for new, global energy. So as you see in places, energy sources and just balance that out. They provide a call settings for energy providers. They also offer resiliency on the grid, and it is part of your thing to clean and finally act as well. So the reason we're having this public hearing tonight is we do have a governing amendment application. This is a protection amendment. I do want to make it clear that while it is tied to a specific property under at this point any protection amendment, we'll talk to all properties in that district. So it is applicable and, like, for all of our sentences, not a specific project application. If you approve this or allow this, you will see applications and you'll see more than this one probably we have received inquiries from additional developers because those are walking here which is a point energy. They are acting as agent from Garrett, Virginia and Carolyn Neal. They're requesting the addition of battery introduced storage systems and allowable use and residing ordinance allowed by our right in the general industrial and intensive agricultural districts, allow as a conditional use in the general agricultural districts, and then they're also recommending adoption of associated development regulations and they have provided some draft regulations. Your decision is really fourfold. The first part is whether or not this should be allowed to use. If you determine that, that's kind of the end of the conversation there. But if you determine it should be an allowable use, you also need to consider which districts it should be allowed in. Whether it should be by rider conditional, and then what regulation should be in place for development. We look to our comprehensive plan for guidance, only in use in development, but currently, the battery or use source sectional there, mainly talks about the needs of developed policy. It talks about the evaluation of potential benefits and impact, considered development of policies for these facilities and then allow section clear guidelines in their comprehensive planning policies. There are three alternatives you can consider. The first is to make their changes to the design ordinance which would be battery energy storage and not permitted. You also could allow limited development and this is something up on Sussex County. They allow them as an accessory to renewable energy projects, to substations, into other power generating facilities, or as a primary use of properties that are adjacent to the three things. So that's kind of a allows for some development of battery and resource, but in the very little sense. On the third opportunity is to allow either its bi-ripe or conditional use in specific for its issue with staff. Looking at the benefits, the first three things are the economic benefits that are insatiated with battery and a D-score, or that associated with RAM and benefits, as well as local revenue, and in the cost savings for utility providers. Again, they do provide resiliency on the grid. They help stabilize the grid during disruptions and it supports Virginia's renewable energy coales. Looking at a little closer at the little plugs for FD economic considerations, there's income for lease and purchase agreements through land owners, but the size of the boxes involved are a lot smaller. There's also a society agreement payments for Charlotte County as well as real estate taxes. There's business opportunities during construction, which like there is with solar. And then I also noted that there's more than $380 million in county revenue already anticipated from solo development over the next 40 years, based on projects that have already been approved and the site improvements that have been established. There are a number of challenges associated with this use that need to be considered. There's a lot of variation in projects and sites that make them more difficult to review and requires a lot of consideration when you're looking at mitigation efforts. There's some variety in technology while lithium ion batteries are currently the primary type of use. There's some pilot projects out there and there's interest in switching to some new technologies that offer better efficiencies. And there's also limited historical data, this is a rapidly growing industry as the graph showed earlier, so there's not a lot of information out there. And there's a need for experience developers, installers, and inspectors as well as for ongoing monitoring and maintenance. There's a fire risk associated with it, which we'll talk a little bit more about in a minute. And then there's some community impacts and concerns that need to be considered and the large volume of approved and few related projects that we already have. Looking at fire risk, the estimated fire incident rate as of April of 2023, and this was the most recent data I could find, was around 2.9 percent. This is from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for Fort, that they did for the US Department of Energy. The average age of the facilities involved was under 18 months, and they indicated with new installs that incident rate could increase. There's been eight additional fires in the US at a 4.2023. There is an online database that's publicly accepted in this information. But we do have to consider our alliance on volume care fire informants. A lot of times these facilities rely on the lead barn approach. What special broaders are rounded to protect adjacent properties. facilities for law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and the law and in your packet that are more specific. There are a lot of regulations that need to be considered and incorporated into your data board. If you're going to allow the shoes, I think speaking for the county of Minnesota myself, I can say that both of us would recommend if you're considering allowing the shoes that you work with staff and the county are trying to develop regulations and using a developer on providing the regulations. So the next steps, tonight we're looking at having the initial public hearing of course, and then we are requesting some directions from you all. You do have to make a recommendation. They're later than October 31st. That's a pretty quick turnaround. If you are recommending that it be allowed and need additional time to develop policy, you can always make a recommendation to allow to provide time that you're going to come back with those recommendations of policy. We do need to draft regulations, draft the comprehensive plan amendment, and then we need to have a public hearing on this draft since we're not presenting that information tonight publicly. The board would also need to have a hearing, and then they need to ask by the last 23rd or 24th time. I can take questions now if you want to weigh in. You're probably going to talk to Mary that's fine. You mentioned districts. Is each district going to be second? Well, certainly districts are in this state. Okay. That would be a district like Baltimore. No, it would be by 70. Okay. And they have made some special requests for different districts. I think one of them was by right, or industrial and general agriculture. And I did do a review and I mentioned that in the report that you all have in the packet, but I was not able to find any that actually loud battery introduced to origin, any of their goods are asked by rites. So that's not something I've seen before. Everything I saw was the only thing I knew about the most. I'm especially pleased. For the benefit of the folks who weren't there, fresh mind memory, how many acres was the driver's site? Do you remember? That's 21. We asked you. Yeah, it was less than 20, but I'm not sure, because he mentioned that the buffers and the stormwater management facility were additional, so I'm not sure, because he mentioned that the buffers and the stormwater management facility were additional. So I'm not sure what that title was. So there is a, I mean, according to the letter from East Point Energy. There are already, are rating in the process of developing a battery energy storage project. It's not even allowed to use it. What they have interested in and probably have options, but they understand they can't develop but until it isn't incorporated into years after. What's the letter says they're currently developing? And that may be preliminary planning. And they're here and going to drop the draft. We're going to let them make the next. Yeah. Hold that question because they're going to get to address us and then we'll have questions as we do along, I think. Is that right? So we can refer to staff at any point in meeting. Is there any further direct questions for staff on what was presented? Okay, well to move things along since Mr. Warkins already kind of has an applicant question. I'd like the applicant to step to the microphone Good evening, everyone Do we have another presentation? Yeah, I do have a slide deck. Why is it not coming up? Oh, good. Marcus Slasper is very thorough. So some of mine is repeat information. Hopefully not. It's going to be here. This is our, when we say we're actively developing a project that, that means we're at step one which is submitting this, uh, meant to the ordinance and, uh, meet with all of you. So it's good to be here. Um, this is an update. I know I was here, uh, back in the spring to sort of introduce our application. Since then, we made an amendment to the application based on feedback we've heard from community members. So that's where we're at. But if we could go to the next slide here. Jen, just in case there are folks here who were not at the first meeting, did provide some overview on what battery storage is. Again, Monks' presentation did a really good job at hitting those points so we can move to the next slide. What is grid scale storage, like Monika said. We really call Swiss Army Night for the Grid. This is the picture of the driver's facility, a number of benefits. You can go to the benefits slide again. Don't need to repeat information here. But the goal would be to contribute to local economy, stabilize the grid, do so, and stay in a responsible way. And we'll get into some of those regulations in a minute here. As was discussed previously, there's this conversation about storage and solar. We understand solar has been quite a hot topic in Charlotte County, and so we wanna make sure that, in the ways we're different, we're highlighting those. We are much less acreage impact for the driverage facility. I was a member of the public at that meeting. I believe that the entire plot of land there that's been subdivided for the facilities about 15 acres. The actual disturbed area on the side, I believe, is three acres. I didn't measure that before we went. So we do, especially with sites being built now, tend to believe that about 10 megawatts of energy storage can fit on one acre. Again, with solar, you kind of have the inverse of this. So the general of site impacts are going to be much smaller. Then solar, and so you're going to have a much bigger economic investment per acre than you would have with solar. So what's happened between now and perhaps the last time you saw me we had a number of in-person meetings with concerns citizens. You'd go back one slide thank you sir. We got phone calls. We've done our best, and perhaps there are ways to put them. It's better, but done our best to blast our phone numbers, our emails out there. We tried to talk to everybody who wanted to talk to us to hear from concerned citizens and people that had an interest in this and what their concerns were and how we might be able to address that in the proposed ordinance change. I also was able to meet with about 15 plus numbers from the volunteer fire department down here in Charlotte Cointouse and begin having those really high level initial conversations with them about questions they have. Obviously safety is a concern for these fires are concern and one of our biggest jobs is developer with these technology is to make sure that everybody on that side of the house is kind of on board or at least has an opportunity to ask questions and get answers from us. Based on those conversations, that informed the updates we made to the ordinance. We understand that again, this is a very early stage and more updates are likely required by county staff. But we're trying to make sure that citizens, volunteers, far safety, everyone knew that their comments were heard and often reflecting what we're submitting to the county. Just highly of a few of these. We're proposed a 30 acre size constraint on projects. Again, this is something we heard, that in a no solar there were some pretty massive projects and that was an area of concern. Increasing setbacks to 100 feet, we understand there might be a preference for that to continue increasing. And that's some small things, you know. This is a beautiful county, a beautiful place and making sure that our projects, to whatever extent possible, don't impact the view shed in the natural scenic pastoral beauty of this place. So adding requirements about what types of species, what types of setbacks, how are these things going to be protected from public view? We have as much been interested in any one and making sure these are very much setback in not disturbing Again, there are a few requirements about protecting the environment. We added a pre-development, contamination, soil contamination due to diligent requirement. We have a requirement for a third party funded decommissioning cost estimate. I have it in here is cost. It is planned, but cost estimate so that there would be a third party reviewing any decommissioning plan and verifying that that would be paid for by the developer. So that would be part of this. And then again, calling out that all projects needed here to all DEQ store water and contamination requirements. And then if you go to the last slide here in terms of practices for fire safety. So these will be advanced, there will be monitored at all hours, all hundred plus thousand batteries will be monitored. In the case anything there was any sort of animal activity happening in one of the batteries, there would be someone responding to that, powering the battery systems down. It really makes sure we're doing everything to prevent an incident. Also, as we call it, both the ordinance, but as industry best practice, we'll be hearing to all FPA-855 code. That is the national electric fire safety code for these facilities. The code is evolving evolving as technology evolves, as best practices evolve, and as we learn things from incidents that have happened, and or what's currently being put in the ground. So that we want to make sure, you know, beyond just the safety requirements that we could call out, that we are attached to a national code that's continuing to evolve. Again, part of this process, we had our first meeting with local first continuing to evolve. Again, part of this process, we had our first meeting with local first responders that fall into your fire department. But that would be the first of many, in the case, again, that this is an allowable use. And that we continue developing a project and get a few more stages down the road. There would be many meetings around site plans, around what emergency management and emergency response plan would be, and also having a conversation about resources. We understand that staff can be constrained, that equipment can be constrained, so ways that East Point can provide those to the county so that they would feel comfortable with the potential for a battery storage to be installed in a given location. And again, the technology, as Monica pointed out, this is a fairly new industry. And that's likely why we're the first ones to appear in front of you talking about it. But as these technologies evolve, there's a lot of development in battery storage, and they're evolving to be both denser and also safer and quieter. So the goal is, again, for us to be able to put more energy in a smaller land impact. And for the safety risk associated with these to be reduced. And I'm sure if we were to develop batteries in the word to go on the ground four or five years from now, East Point or any other company, it would be in the best interest to use the safest available and most efficient available technology at that time. So that's all I have. I don't know if questions got after you. Well, let's do what's keeping parallel with what we're doing. Is there any questions at this time for Apple? We want to hold your questions until we hear from the public. We want to call you back to the stand. Okay. Okay. So that's all from advocate. We have public comments. This other is going to look at the sign up sheet. Is there anyone feels they want to speak to did not get on? I'm not going to speak to you. Did not get on the... Did you do? I'm sorry. Did you? Yeah, I could arrange your name. Yeah, I did. Okay. Who I raised my hand, I thought we could just ask him a question while I was standing. Oh, hang on just a minute. Who? Yeah, I can... Did you use my three minutes on this? I have my three minutes on this. I'm not here. I have my first answer. OK, tell you what, there are two separate public comment periods. In order to resolve this, this longer being... I can't see you. I'm going to ask you to take the third slot in the public comments. Here, to my add your name, if that's OK. Go ahead. And then you can... I'll add you for this. Remember, by the time I get up here. OK, so, OK. Well, I have to work to remember anything. But that's OK. OK. So we're going to add you, now Ms. Longerie, you're going to be on both comment periods. I'll call on you for both. All right, so, but the first person on the battery, energy, storage, public hearing comments is Mr. Tim's. Mr. James, is he, um, Purchase microphones. All right. George Thun, saxophone, Jr. Um, when the whole industry started in Charlottes County, I've come to the public comments here. It's in complaints. And I complained that it was not farming. Gave a number of complaints. But an attorney also come here with an array of information. Morning about the invasion of the data centers. The somewhere, the battery storage was all in, loaded together. We got a lot of dismissalism and a lot of claims that, oh no, and it was well, we're going to limit all of this, and we know that the battery is a toxic. But the Dow Center, so would be totally scale, until the scale solar and battery storage all went on the length. Last night was a Sierra meeting in Chafes City and I didn't see any officials there from Mecklenburg County, Charlotte County. This year, group is concerned about the extreme expansion of the data centers. And I think all the y'all are out of your pay grade, and y'all keep listening to vendors coming here with their salespeak, and nobody's getting them nailed down with legal speak. And I keep getting confronted when I'm having one-on-one debates with the board members members and there seems to be an argument that I have to bring them proof for everything and I don't see that level of that demand of proof or that level of proof be a demand and when these vendors shell up to the county to sell a sell-a-sum. Drone footage has been provided to prove some stuff and I commented yesterday that Mr. Whip that there are allegations of solar panels being thrown in dumpsters that broke me old and he said, well where's your proof? Well I said in the last bullet meeting and observed that they got real critical about the photo ticket and they knew knew about asked questions about that. Some real critical questions, but it was in contrast, I didn't see the same kind of criticism when the money was being flashed out of the salt. And these batteries are dangerous, they're toxic. And this industry, the whole industry and the whole agenda is years ahead of all of us. Their whole divide and conquer scheme is way ahead of all of you's favorite. And by the way, in case you want to wear, Charles County just got served with another suit because you all seem to have run the So because y'all same to a wrong stamp to a Dead thought that it already been healed now a day How many of you were aware of that Thank you mr. Jones, mr. Daniel Dixon Daniel Dixon landowner and Madisonville, Virginia, and Chairman of Friends, Charlotte. As you all are aware, battery storage is a serious business. I spoke to that subject a couple of months ago, which led me to meet the gentleman from East Point Energy. And they were good enough to contact me, ask what kind of questions that our research trick become up with that they might be able to address. So we took them up on that issue and put about 12 very important subjects in front of them. And at the end of the day, when they put their zoning text amendment in there, I think there was only one item that we did not come, although we respect one another about it, we did not close the circle one. But another about it, we did not close the circle on. But anyway, it is a serious business because of phrases like thermal runaway, you'll hear those types of phrases associated with battery storage. It is going to be something that you're going to have to deal with in the wake of all the solar that's been approved because of the instability of solar and it's an ability to provide capacity. Its rating is like 20% as related to nuclear, is like 92.8%. So that's one of the reasons you're gonna see this. It's not necessarily associated, but definitely is linked because of the weakness of photovoltaic. We asked them to take a look at setbacks. I think their original setback came out of the National Fire Protection Association, A55, which recommended 10 foot setbacks. That's like an urban type setback. Most often, most often, been done in urban areas. Thus far, the rural areas were just learned how to deal with them. So we looked at those. So you all might want to study that a little bit more. We asked them about size and proximity. We wanted 25 because of our petition. We circulated. They said how about 30, so we're not very far apart on those types of things, on the decommissioning side because of the way that professional liability flows in the Commonwealth of Virginia. We have been advocating for the county to take a position to do third party decommissioning and that the developers should pay for that. They can produce their investment, but a professionally liable person needs to be who speaks to whether the amount of money is sufficient or not to do the project because of liability, the tax mayors pay face them. That's a whole no to subject. We ask them about to employ pre-development contamination testing because of things like having a clean baseline and cleaning up public and fire safety. They're willing to do the 855 standard. I wish there was a standard like that for photovoltaic, but it's not a static sound lighting. We ask them about dark-scale lighting. We ask them to do black powder-pattered fins. We asked them to do native species trees in the barriers. We asked them to do a non-combustible zone. But basically, everything we asked them to take a look at, that we thought was serious. They treated it very seriously, very respectfully, and they employed all those things. And I would say they could do the same for anything you want to do. Okay, thank you, Mr. Dickson. Ms. Longerbeam, Chair, takes the option to add in this Longerbeam to this public comment, leaving your name on the general public comment as well. I just had a few questions, not being here all the time. Cindy Longer being my live down here. I'm Lockinshade for 15. I've lived in the county for 40 years. My husband and I picked this for the Agil-Cultural status. I just wanted to know why you all picked agricultural land for this and the other question was where else are you? Do you set up anywhere else or are we just the guinea pig area? The first one, you're just trying out on us so we can have all the problems of this whole thing so you can experiment on us so if there's an accident we're the ones that get the problem. And also we'd like to know what the county is getting at in this. What are we getting at? Are we getting some kind of thing at this or are we just going to let you come in here and do whatever you want? Good for you, you know. We're going to change our agricultural land into batteries. And that's what I want to know. I don't think we need to change our agricultural land into batteries. I don't see any reason for that. We work so hard for 40 years and more, hundreds of years to keep it agricultural. And here we are going to make batteries out of our corn fields and everything else shame on you guys. Thank you miss Longer Bing. That's the only folks that were signed up to speak the first public comment period. So I'll close public comment period and'll return to Commissioner questions and comments and I'll make a statement that the commissioners obviously can't respond during the public comment period but you're welcome to reiterate any questions that were generated from the public comments. Maybe I'll hear them in the newspaper. Somebody want to start. I had a question about, I know there's a project being developed. And it was my understanding, I know it's been a couple of months ago. But I thought you said 28 was underconcrete. Is that right for that project? Behind Fencing under concrete? Yes, so the chair recognizes that's a question for the applicant? Yes. For the second order maybe we'll try to ask the applicant to return the microphone and we can ask them any applicant questions as we can. Is that fun? I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Oh, I'm happy to answer that. Here's your question. Well, let's just, in theory, we are this in open meeting that's being broadcast on Zoom Connections. Is that correct? And this is recorded. So the microphone is at white hanging microphone policies. It would just be better for the public record-curdness. I don't mind sending here. The current project is, we're still at a very initial stage in terms of actually developing the site plan. This has been a priority work with the county. I do believe the land will disturb the area impact right out of about 20 acres. But again, we're not pursuing a conditional use permit or special use permit right now. We're really just here to hopefully answer your question about better storage. I'll just say an initial disturbed land for this specific project and we're talking about the orders in general but it would probably be less than 20 acres. It also depends though on all the things that you might put in the ordinance that we might be required to do that we'd also have to then add, et cetera. So, and there's a, I will say very preliminary. All that said is that we're very, very initial stages like I think of my colleagues. I know, but a couple of months ago, I asked the question and you did have an answer for that project. So that's what I was just trying to verify. Because maybe I misunderstood, or you misunderstood my question a couple months ago. But I asked how many acres were under concrete because I looked at the project and I said all of that's going to be under concrete behind fencing under concrete. And it was my understanding yes it was 20 acres was under concrete so if I'm wrong I mean I just want to know because I had that in my head. Well I could say if you're under concrete but we're not going to pave over a whole piece of land. One you usually use gravel I think I was like as you see so there's not being concrete. Now okay gravels and purities you you still need to, you know, get an app storm water that would need all that, those requirements, et cetera. Again, we just did some initial other initial due diligence on our site, trying to understand what one's at, et cetera. We still have to understand from when we start developing things right, you secure a piece of land, and then you have to go get your discretionary permit. And so in this case, we're going to that. And then we have to go to the utility company and do an air connection study, which tells us how much more equipment than we have to add to our project, which adds to the potentially to the side of how much land we need to disturb. So we usually go big. This is one site. I think what we suggested in the ordinances up to 30 acres disturbed. The parcel of land where we're going to be again where we have a site option on basically your option to release or purchase is more than 20 acres. I believe it's 50. Okay, can I then I just need to clarify a guess from my head. Battery sitting on under rock. Grab a fan stand. That look is 20 acres. Yeah, the fence disturbed gravel acreage. At this point, it has to be about 28 acres. OK. We had that just early stage to go big. And then, you know, that was my first time. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. That's not a huge acre of fan stand right Thank you. But that's not the case. Agres, Finns, then, right there. No, that's about two or three. And you're going to be bigger or smaller than that. And this part, you're going to be my 50th finger. This is the second. 20A cruises bigger than three. Right. So we all agree those of us that went to what we saw was about three eggs, right? Are you guys, are you guys any agreement on that? Yeah. And so to clarify, you're saying you don't typically, probably for cost reasons, I'm guessing, you use concrete, but it is packed gravel, so technically it's an impervious surface. Because I want to, I want to say, from an engineering storm water perspective. From an engineering storm water grid, but it's packed gravel. Okay. The containers on concrete pads. That's a good question. Yes. In some cases, in our concrete, sometimes they're not the ones we have that are here in Chesterfield, are you see a fairly small concrete pad that you can kind of simply put in the containers? Yeah, yeah. Other things now are pile on as that are drilled in. There's a lot of different technologies and getting defense on the site with the soil type is and what you're dealing with with a lot of different things. I think we're all just trying to help clarify your question. Oh, I think you clarify it. Thank you. Is this just, or the microphone is just a little hot? That's where I was. Got a little feedback. That's where I'm going to feed that. That's a skill. I heard you correctly, did you met with the final offer? Yes, sir. What did they take? Generally, I would say the impression was things went well. They brought a lot of good questions. There's 15 plus of them. This was at 8 p.m. so it's very impressed. Everyone was willing to give up their time on a weeknight evening. Their general impression was positive, or at least positive is probably not the right time, but there are concerns I think we're able to respond with questions to. That's the thing they understand. I was able to articulate where we are in the phase, and what sort of interaction we would need to have with them down the road in order for one of these to be safely installed. So that was very much my introduction, both to Mr. Russell and that members of the team here. They asked questions about how to respond to these things, similar to when we were in Chesterfield and we got some feedback that they advised their fire department to sit back behind the fence line, make sure no members of the public get curious and make sure the situation's not getting worse. You know, we're kind of passing on that information to the domed days. They seem to respond positive to that. This month's go chasing the van over the fence. It's in Charlotte County. Yep. So you talking chasing the van over? We've not yet talked to Chase City. I was able to, and they could have perhaps had representatives. I met everybody. I got their names. I got where they're from. I did not write down necessarily. I got some from Chase City. But it seemed like we had a good representation from different parts of the county. I know Mr. Russell was able to kind of send out a message and everyone came who was able to. So you met with Mr. Russell from this camp? Yes, OK. Mr. Russell from this county, then all of the folks he was able to, I think, use some messages out and then everyone who was able to come came. Again, if we were to move forward, again, this is very down the road. We would be having lots of meetings and really making sure we're meeting them with their team flexible because we understand I spent a volunteer department. We're meeting them with their, being flexible because we understand a special college here in the department, it can be challenging to get people's time, making sure that they have the resources and information they need. And likely hiring third parties. Again, to come, we're here to give you the best information we can, but we understand our position in this. And so making sure we're providing third party analysis, support, best practices, and any resources they request and third parties that we would be providing that for. Who's close to the public? Jason, if I was one of them, they can just take into the street. Okay. It's a good question. So do you have any concern about eight, I mean four, the nine? I would say there's some. I would say there's some. As a volunteer firm in here in the county, a situation like that would be a mutual aid column where they would call out both fire departments if not more. And mutual aid in this county is extremely good. The fire departments work very well. And if I may say, I believe there's a police one representative there from Chase City, Fire Department. And if he is closer to making district fire department than it is to Chase City Fire Department. I don't know which. Just saying, if he puts important here, though, is that we are thinking about the ordinance. And what do you want in that ordinance? And what would the fire department want in that ordinance, basically? And we laid out in that ordinance is a lot of steps and checks along the process of a development that would ensure that the fire department and the fire marshal's office is participating in the site plan and the creation of the emergency response plan. Additionally, when we there have there before become operational, there's a role in there against like illegal specific serve that you were concerned about that there would have to be a training for example before done with the local part department before it can get turned on. All those things are things that again from a fire perspective and safety for them but also training perspective like we tried to build into the ordinance for you. I think it's standard practice. I'm sorry I'm not trying to recognize. Go ahead. I'm trying to look up something. I just have one question if you would speak briefly and I think it will answer one of the questions that was asked. Would you tell us your experience in dealing with these batteries storage? In the years you've been in business, how many you have, what is the biggest one? So East Point is a Charlotte's no-base company. We're founding Charlottesville in 2018. And we have a number of battery projects that we have developed. None that we actually right now own an operating in Virginia. That we did just for season final discretionary permitting up in Northern Virginia. So I can assure you all, as much as this is a special place, you're not the only ones where we are building these in Virginia. So we have a few projects that should be operational the next few years in Loud-In and Prince William County. We developed the project Dry Bridge, which is the largest currently operating system in Virginia. We have sighting agreements in projects that we are kind of late-stage permitting in Lynchburg and Pitzelvania County. So all around here and when we were when we identified sites you know similar to other energy developers were looking at transmission lines and that's how we ended up entering to an option with folks down here in Sharmer County and that's really what kicked off this process. I think there is I think 10 operating barriers in storage projects across the state. We developed the first one in Brokenburg which with Revanhanna electric cooperative has been operating for at least more than three years now. You haven't had any fire safety issues in any of the battery storage projects in Virginia that have been operational. So you are not to get anything. So you can talk to the state, environmental, he knows all about all these and any. So there is, I think Mr. Tixie can you show the, there's what's called the National Fire Protection Agency's 85, there is a, basically, guideline specific of battery disorders that are developed with first responders, fire industry representatives that is basically utilized not only for how to respond but how to design, implement these projects, what type of batteries, what testing the batteries have to do and happen before they put in the closure's haul on this phone. And this is what we, and we put in the order to suggest that. So the state actually, the Fire Marshalls Office doesn't regulate this. There's a higher level. And then they basically, we look to the Fire Marshalls Office at the jurisdictional level and decide how this implemented for each site and projects. Do I answer your question? It's on the mic. OK. Do I answer your question? Tell them the right. Okay. I'm sorry there's to me, again, the state, final marshal does not regulate the design of each project. That makes sense. Mr. Chair. Yeah, go ahead. So just get in my mind this process, and I know there was a slide up there, and I wish I could look for a packet. First step is to allow it, or not allow it, correct? The second step is to consider whether it's a by-right or a special use or conditional use, right? And then which sort of element? There's your slide, then's say, there's your slide. Okay, thank you. So my question is, what is y'all's thought process behind swinging for the fences, going for the by-ride versus just working on a conditional use permit for each air area. So sir, I believe we only have by right as suggested for industrial and tensile agriculture. Our understanding is there's quite literally maybe just five or six of those parcels in the county. So we were trying to put things out there in the general ordinance that we borrowed from other ordinances, we've been heavily on Pennsylvania's ordinance. We understand in almost every case in Charlotte County, we're going to be talking about AgZone land. And I think Chris and I would agree that that should be good for conditional use in a regular tariff process. And that's what we propose, sir. We propose a conditional use permit and discretion permit process for any project on the agricultural zone. So the application is for and I get and I would say yes for industrial zone. Okay, we don't have a lot of that but anyway that and I got a dumb question. What is the difference between a intensive agriculture and general agriculture? And I should know this. The hog farms. How old were probably would be intensive? OK. There's in the zoning, it's animal units per acre. OK, now it's OK, now in there. OK. Thank you. And we're suggesting commissional use. We're for commissioners. He's run along here. Yes, the battery's energy story is an allowable use, okay? Permitted by right and general industrial. I'm kind of okay with that. And intensive agricultural districts. So it's by writing those two and conditionals in the third. Okay. I understand correctly, 96% of your land is on agriculture. Correct. Okay. Okay. Currently, we do not have any zone intensive to do a sense of aid. You would have to do residing. Industrial is only about 0.2%. You do need to consider that industrial is industrial because it has the means and the infrastructure they are to support businesses that can employ people. So do you want to make an avalanche in somewhere that's designed specifically for people? It's got the range, it's got the well-inceptive, all the plumbing, water, and septic. So those things are important to consider when you look at the conditions you're considering in a liability. And as far as the regulations they did file a pizzerleventures a lot, I did do a comparison analysis there. I'm not sent that to you. I didn't know how far in the week. You wanted to go with it. There are some significant differences. And we really need to look at those if you're considering. There's a lot of shells that became shoots. And I know Mr. Dixon mentioned things. They wanted to put in there. They became shells. It should as well, and should an ordinance is discretionary. When you look at an zoning ordinance, it's about 100 pages, should appears in there maybe three times, and it's related to discretion that the planning commission or the board or staff has relating to applications. It's not about a regulation. Either that is a concern, the guarantee options work a little bit differently than the commissioning. There's things like that that are small, but when you get to looking at projects, they can be really big and a big difference. So that's why there's staff that's recommended that we spend some time developing right-get-lashes that are in a best interest in talent, and that's a good thing. Is that four different steps? I know you got four different actions. It does have to be acted on separately for those of the question you need to be thinking about those. Because it is more than just what we are allowing it. It is where we are allowing it. What kind of application process do we want to require and then what regulations? I want to recognize Mr. Wells here in a second, but continue on this thought. Those are four steps to even make it an allowable use on the use matrix. We're not even there yet. That's what this public hearing was about, whether or not we want to proceed with having staff develop a in ordinance, which may or may not have a lot in common with the proposed ordinance presented by a full private entity. The subsequent to that, for any given, so or from including the hypothetical, wherever many acres under concrete discussion, that is a hypothetical that would then still have to have a conditional use if that district were to have it added conditions. So that will be a whole other public hearing, right? That's correct. And you really aren't the first stage. And the first question needs to be asked before you really think about the other. It shouldn't be allowed. An agriculture is 96% of the county. It is limited to locations near the transmission line. So that does change that picture a whole lot. I don't have no versus to how much acreage that is a law transmission line. But you have to consider that I've set also listed in locations near where some of the development is already happening to communities that are being hit by solar development right now are going to see battery energy storage coming into communities as well. Mr. Wells, you're a topic. So you are in the process of a project in Pennsylvania. How long are you in that process? Sir, we've secured a piece of land. We've done some initial due diligence to make sure it's on a wet land and we can actually do something with it. And then again, the next step is to get the discretionary permit. In this case, we need to get ordinance, you know, a kin that will allow us to apply for a discretionary permit and they come back to you and actually present a slight plan and everything else. We would have to come through the planning commission. You said that Pennsylvania County, the property of any county, in two weeks that will be presenting hearing, sorry, hearing from their planning commission, we have a sighting agreement that's up in October 15th, and we would think if everything goes properly, we would be in board zoning appeals in mid-November, and that would be our final step. And they just approved one of these projects I think three months ago. So long ago they're in their data centers. So, Pets of Randy County, it's the closest to us. At least that word developing. Oh yeah. Okay. Yeah, I have a question about that. So, soitzel-Vandee County has language in their comprehensive plan that addresses better storage. Is that what is here? Is this an account? The state mandates all the developers to do what's called the 223 to comprehensive plan compliance check. I think you guys have to do these with your solar approach, right? So if it's not specifically in the comp plan, they can then basically, we have to go to present to them. The other way around that, in this case, what we're doing in Pennsylvania County, is as part of the signing agreement, they waive that. So we've signed a signing agreement with them, in which case they said, we believe this, you know, again, as part of all these different things in addition to having to go through the special use permit process with them and it meets the comprehensive plan. So what you're asking us is to go further with our comprehensive plan that Disability and the County has already gone. I think what we're asking for you is to have basically very similar process. That makes sense. Now you can decide to, and again as part of your negotiations, if you want with your your your attorney and your your staff to have a comp use compliance, built into deciding agreement, and then we still have to get your conditional use permit. So Pitzbrang County in other words Pitzbrang County is the only other Southside County who has anything like this going on. Only other Southside County. I mean we just got some stuff done on Lynchburg. I don't know if you can see that outside or not. There is something in Martin'sville already. It's been operating with their municipal. And then those are the ones that I know of. And just to be clear along that point, you were involved in the driverage one at least, so how? We were the initial developers for that. So we secured the site, we did the initial design, we got all the permits from the county, we did the studies with the utility company, and then at that time, when we were very new company, we did not have a big balance sheet, we sold it to Dominion. And then Dominion took it from that stage with all those permits, modified the design slightly, constructed it, and now I'm going to operate it. Okay, I didn't know that until tomorrow. So I didn't know that after he does. I will know that the idea of talking to the fits of Dany County Planner and Bayer, they do actually have a craft. I don't know if the battery introduced to an ordnance that they're looking at now, if it's something that's putting in the same ordinance, they have not adopted it either. They will online it. So what I understood, when I spoke to them, it looked like they were thinking probably will be going to run before they actually adopted the tract ordinance that they hadn't actually done. Do you know if any county has any existing ordinances already been approved addressing battery damage? Yes, there's a lot of them out there. And I mentioned that in my own board. I think I looked at stuff sticks and maybe punched the order, King George, and then a million halves won. There's a lot of facts that were really large. There was a lot of variation in it, but a lot of good stuff too. And I do not have a comparison chart. I just like have to, because we're on that top line of the chart right there with this, should it be allowed? I didn't send you a lot of regulatory stuff to look at tonight, but I have done that. And that's the reason I think the recommendation, you know, that if you're moving forward with the allowment that you let staff in your attorney, you'll work on that. We've heard a little bit from other counties about how some counties have a 2232 for solar the way we do and we, because we do 2232, conditional use, then conditional use of the board supervisors, then side agreement, more or less last year in parallel. Is that correct? For some counties, way 2232, do side in in 2232, and then do conditional use, and then do final approval by the board. Is that accurate? There's language in the state code that allows you to waive the 2232 with a side agreement. Which we do not typically do for a solar. We wait until side agreement is last. The cup is last. The signing agreement is next to last. Oh, OK. Thank you. OK. So signing agreement. So typically you're negotiating signing agreement in between the planning commission cup and the board of supervisors' cup meetings. OK. Mr. Adams, does that help you? Good. Some of the counties in Virginia, Wave 2232 and do the citing negotiation up front. The law provides them to do that. The Charlotte's chosen not to do that for solar. And the reason, from A. Yeah, please. The reason that I do that is I want the Planning Commission's decision based solely on land use. And I don't want you looking at a dollar sign saying, oh, we can't turn this down. So I do the setting agreement once you've made the recommendation to the board based on the best, the information that's provided to you for land use. And candidly, you'd be in the middle of a lot more signing agreement negotiations in parallel if you did it the other way around. So you want to propose since we've shared recognizing now. To can you address Mr. Adams' question, Dan, about the, or either Urimonico in Stas report, a minute ago, there was a mention of addressing the comprehensive plan in the midst of this process. Because the confidence of plan basically says you need to formulate a policy on batteries, whatever decision you make here is going to indicate a policy. And so that was the reason I was recommending a amendment to the component to put in. To hold break whatever your policy is that you come up with, especially if you and the Zoolord align that because it's something you would recommend that they would have to approve. Because right now, we just says consider policy. So we don't have the authority to make the county's determination of whether or not it waives 2232 in a sign agreement. And hypothetically, those that do have that decision decided to operate in parallel with the solar process, or congruently with the solar process, I congruently with the solar process. I guess it would be better with something. In which case, we would need language in the comprehensive plan in order for any applicant to make a 2232 application. Does that make sense? In other words, if we wanted to address this and put it as a land use, but we were proposing that land use needed 2232, then wouldn't we need to address the conference of plan before we could hear it 2232? Before on a condition of use of plan, but again, whatever that policy needs to be changed in there, that's why that was part of that process. I think it the last one in the steps part of it was drafting and governance of playing them in that. We don't have, I could just be told in front of you now you're just talking about the order. I was trying to address Mr. Adams' question. Miller, see where I'm out on that. Unless we don't have the authority to waive 20 to 32, the state gives that authority to waive 2232 the state gives that authority to either the board of the administration off the planning commission is that right Dan yeah and we would have to if they chose to do it the similar they do solar then it would fall back to us to do 2232 reviews we can't remember rather than what applicant is asking for we can't we can't make that decision not planning commission And as you stated closest tie-in to it Is you have a very extensive Part of the comprehensive plan now related to solar and renewable energies if you tie battery storage to that in some form of fashion You could come back with a yeah it's in compliance but what I'm stating is you do need more you in the best interest of the county you should look at the comp plan and have a policy for a battery storage like we did for as the same reason we added such an extensive amount of language in the comp plan related to solar because basically Here are how Berkeley group Berkeley group took the Comprehensive plan and said the county supports renewable energy and created a whole that was basically the only language in the comp plan. We needed more, we have more. Staffs recommending we need more related to battery if that's a direction that the planning commission feels it will. So my agenda here says amendment. Let's take that word. What are we looking to omit? You would be, there's already a section in the comprehensive plan in the special policy issues, I think which is chapter five, on battery energy storage. And right now it says you should work to develop a policy. So that would be what you would be omitting that section to take out a recommendation on developing policy and actually putting policy in place. I think he was referring to the agenda item that says consider battery energy storage zoning amendment application. It's called a text amendment because you are amending your zoning ordinance. In fairness to Mr. Adams' point, that was also how the public hearing was advertised. But I don't necessarily know that the public understands that you're amending, in effect, we're amending the zoning process because you would have to amend or add a use under the use matrix and have to mend to the comprehensive plan. Is that correct? The hearing goes on amending the zoning ordinance to incorporate this use that they have requested for based on their application, which is called a union application. And that process is still now in the field. You don't have to deal with it, if you're an agent, a whole analyst. The planning commission can make a recommendation to look at it. The board can report the event there. The process is still now in the field. You look at the event and the ordinance as it exists to add another use. And then we would then also have to amend the I'm sorry. We have to amend the 20232. I mean we also have to amend the, I'm sorry, we have to amend the 2232s. I mean, we would have to amend the comprehensive plan as well, probably in a public hearing. It would be advisable to amend the comprehensive plan to reflect the policies that come out of these conversations, so that it aligns with what the current policy is, runs the same we should adopt a policy. Because you got nothing to judge the 2232. Yeah, no, I'm completely. I'm trying to get it. I agree with you. And I don't agree with what I think with what both of you are saying. I'm just trying to get it outlined in the, in my own mind. And in the minds of, it seems like we have to decide whether we want staff to work on language for zoning. And then we would have to have a hearing about that and we would necessarily need to work with staff to amend the conference plan so that we could hypothetically have future 2232 reviews. But in order to amend the conference plan, we would have to have a hearing about that. Both of those would have to have either the same hearing or separate hearings for the Board of Supervisors before we could ever hear, before staff could ever deem an application complete. Staff right now can't even accept an application because it's not it's not used. We would have to have at least two more hearings on two different things to change enough things for staff to even accept an application. Is that correct? You could change just the one and not do the comp plan but we need to get the comp plan done before 2232. So you need to be moved towards that and it would help whoever's applying if they understood what your comp plan requirements are. I mean that's supposed to be moving towards that. And it would help whoever's applying, if they understood what your common flavor requirements are. I mean, that's supposed to be a guideline development in the county. Even if you decide you don't want this use, it's advisable to change your common flavor reflect that policy. Whatever your policy is about battery or your storage, you should consider moving from the common plant to capture that language. So it's clear. So one doesn't have to be known before they're all that they could be? The conflant doesn't have to be invented before the... No, if you're moving in the direction though of amending the ordinance, you should also be moving in the direction of getting the conflant on because somebody's going to be ready to put in an application and you want to have that language and place put in plain. And with all due respect to applicant for the benefit of the public, neither of those things could happen without public hearings and public hearings of the board of supervisors level and votes by the board of supervisors. Right. It is a process and they can be joint public hearings between the Planning Commission and the Board. But staff can't move forward. Anything without having guidance from you on. We don't know whether we need to draft anything. So we decided to move forward and you would come back with some language that we would vote upon in order to go forward. Is that your recommendation or your request is for staff to work on the attorney for Apple Language all in half that please certainly vote for a comment. What is the October 31st deadline? So you have 100 days to act on an application and they originally submitted back in May. They submitted a revision though in July 23rd and did agree to restart that 100-day clock at that point. So, the October 31st is 100 days from that day. Yeah, that's not going to happen, right? And that's just to decide whether we want to allow the user. Right. You can make, you need to provide something to the Board of Supervisors, but it can be that we're recommending we approve the zoning text amendments with Development regulations that currently have not been completed yet. So subject to staff and attorneys input Right, and that stops the clock or that gets us off the You have made a recommendation at that point and the board has a year from the time so they have more time you know to complete that so you can say I recommend you give me more time so before we get too far down this I think I'm going to be earlier well I was just wondering could we comment and make talk about the actual whether we are going in which direction we're going in instead? I mean, I know we need to be. But we start that, can we let the applicant sit down? Are you all having any more questions for applicant? No. Is this, you understand the conversation? I would say I have one question where you understand the conversation or understand what staff, the line of the discussion, what staff said. Yes, sir. Okay. That's fair. I think that's what I want to mention. Along with what she's saying, the only decision you're all making tonight is yes, we want to have battery storage or no, we don't. And we do, then we direct staff to start developing language. Yeah and we are really the only thing we can ever do is we want to recommend to the board supervisors that they direct staff to the board. That's the decision that we can make before the 30th. So we can recommend that yes we recommend that we have battery storage and then we come back and say it shall all be gold-plated with public stars on it in the zoning district it consists of two acres yeah I mean seriously we're not we're not we can say yes, we're for it and then either Make it perfect, you know or make it or Perfectly infeasible. Yeah, yeah Feasible at that time Ordnance is tonight We're not recommending ordinances tonight. We're just directing staff in such direction. You're right. We're talking about, you know, it's informal tonight. It used to be really informal three years ago before code got us on our formal track. Miss, miss, strong. Yeah, because I wanted to discuss the fact, you know, we are a planning commission like Dan said, we are supposed to consider what's best for the county and for the land in the county and not consider all these other little details. But I would like to say that these battery energy storage can be anywhere along the grid, which means outside of Charlotte County. It can be anywhere. It doesn't have to be here. It can be where these data centers are. It can be anywhere else. But we have jumped on board with solar and I would just like to say there's so much where you don't know what's going to happen with solar. And I think the county's done a great job to try to mitigate anything. We don't know. And I think to jump in on something else too that we have no clue about is reckless as a planning commissioner. So I just wanted to throw that out there. Great. Do, you 100% Thank you. So what a motion to be in I wanted to deny the application. I'll see it. Oops. Yeah, we have public hand in hand. I'm sorry. So if there are no other questions for the comments or the folks that had the presentation of the public hearing, now I'll adjourn the public hearing, reconvene the regular meeting, and which brings us to the next bullet point, which is consider battery industry storage, zoning amendment application, which is just to restate that as I understand is an application to consider battery energy storage subject to rules that have not been written. So is there any? Do you want to open the discussion or you'd like to open discussion with emotion? I think you were making motion with. Chair, I'll hear an intertension with emotion. Okay, I'll, Chair will entertain a motion. Go ahead. I'm gonna move that we did not consider the better energy storage amendment application as presented. I'll second motion. Okay, I'll move. Motion at a second. Any discussion on the motion? I think the county wanted us to include any reasons, so I would like to include the challenges that were stated. Limited historical data, associated fire risk community impacts and concerns and the large volume of energy related projects already approved Okay The list was longer than that but the staff caught that for the minutes Okay Mr. Adams the great as to that as a minute. You're my turn. Sure. All right, second on the amendment. Yes. Okay. So amended with reasons noted, a subset of the challenges presented in the public packet. Any further discussion on the motion. Just as a devil's advocate down here and I might say in, I might want to give away which way I would vote on this. Are we being nearsighted by just looking at the negatives along with just saying no. We're shouldn't we for let's just say the benefit of a landowner who has all these reasons to do this to his land and I don't want to get into a native or lands right person or whatever. But shouldn't we at least consider the positive things of it instead of just nope, not have it. Shouldn't we, at least, even if we still come to know, shouldn't we think about the benefits or to whatever, because it was a slide that had benefits? Tell them the flag will own water. I wouldn't. I would like to say that I think that if this is a great deal, a great idea, we'll have opportunities in the future once it's been implemented somewhere else. Just like with the solar, I mean, at a time, if this is a great thing like a lot of people or several people want you to think or believe, it'll prove itself and the more opportunities will be there. I just don't understand why we have to and I know as a planning commissioner I think we have to look at the whole county and not the individual landowner personally. And I understand you're saying benefits. Yes, but in light of both of those questions, kind of staff a question. So procedurally, one would imagine that right now we have no use. If this motion carries, we're in the middle of discussion of motion, the motion carries, and we still have no use. Procedurally, how much time elapses before someone else can ask us to have this use? I don't think there's any ordinance that's about that a lot either. There may be something in the state can but I'll have to research that. I would think we'd want to have a robust debate over the stuff on the slide and at least have a debate over and discuss it and democratically vote yes or no whether we each one of these steps and it starts with should it be allowed and it's no, well then that's the end of it. and it's no, well then best in indomitable. So you haven't looked at this. You haven't researched or you haven't looked, or this is all new to you. Because I was assuming I felt that everybody probably already has, like we went to the battery and they talked to us there. We've received this months ago. We've got it now. I'm not clear. I'm talking clear. The democratic process and the process of going through the, the, the gives it at least its, its due consideration. And again, I'm not saying I'm ford against it. I don't want to say right now, but can I ask another procedural question? To, I'll ask staff and then I'll tend to ask this moment Smith, a similar question. Regardless of our recommendation, board zero risers might still, they have to vote on our recommendation even for this item or is this unique? No, they were, you were just an advisory committee, so we would be the same type of situation. All right, so, and would you be the same type of situation? Not modifying your motion, but with all, with respect to all of you, any motion from this body effectively is preceded by the phrase to recommend to the Board of Supervisors. We all understand that, that's mostly stated for the Board, Supervisors. We all understand that. That's mostly stated for the Board of Benefit of the Public. And with that in mind, would you like to send it back to you to read this? We're just like we did to do that. We're just using up the April program. Okay, so, would you like to comment in the discussion on the motion? I think you're allowed to comment even though you won't be voting. I mean, you're looking for a comment as to what I think the board of supervisors are correct and man I do not know. Okay. But I agree, you know, I think all aspects of it opinion, not forward, my personal opinion is I think it's wrong to just say no right off the bat. I think. But that's what we're asked to do here tonight is Upper Dam. Yeah. You know, does that upper dam, and I guess the concern that I have is with a lot of this Even even those proposed that are saying the technology is so neat It's developing we say you know five years from now this thing happens It may be a totally different kind of battery. We're just in such an unknown gray area. I do think it's reckless to accept it for the people of the camp. And I agree that this is kind of putting the cart before the horse. We're asking to upper down on a specific request where we don't even have the background to even give it a due consideration. If we had all these things resolved, then I think there would be, then you ask, can I do this? Kind of a situation. Respectfully I ask a question. I imagine I can guess the answer, but would the folks make an emotion, be willing to amend their motion to add a time period of which point would be reconsidered? I don't think that would be proper. I just thought it'd take a stab at it. I'll sit, yeah, I just don't take stand. I'll sit yeah, I'll sit yeah, I think everybody made good points, but I don't think I need to weigh in as the chair. I mean, we're a Charlotte County, we're not an urban area and permanent is needed by Restorge big time. We don't need I don't think we need in Charlotte County. Why do we need it? I mean to support somebody else, the people that need it need to put these battery storage units where their most needed is just the thought. And we don't need the revenue with all the solar What benefits would you like to bring out Mr. Ben That you want us to consider or think about that Can we put this light on up? And I'm not agree with them. I might say and I agree with them. I'm just saying That and I think it's kind of I don't know know, we have the East Point Slides that you refer to on the one of us. There was a lot of criticism. You guys are just rubber stamping, yes, approved along solar and you don't even have a comprehensive plan and you don't even have guidelines and you don't have this. You're just rubber stamping, yes. Here we're kind of doing the opposite. We're rubber stamping, no know without having guidelines and again I think we're if this is kind of unfortunate or good that you've brought this up that that we're kind of putting the cart before the horse here a little bit and at the end of the day it may be there are absolutely zero benefits it could be that I know my wife is in my ear about it so she has a very strong opinion on this of course there's going to be benefits but is it worth the risk that's I know my wife is in my ear about it, so she has a very strong opinion on this. Of course, there's going to be benefits, but is it worth the risk? That's what we should debate. That's what we should debate. To it. Okay, and keeping in mind that we're supposed to look for what's best for them. I didn't say it's agreed with. I said debate. We should debate and then come up with it with the thing is and again, I've prefaced everything I'm saying with I'm not saying I'm for against Okay, I'm just in the overall process I think that's wise, but I'll be quiet. Well, no, then you should bring it start the debate then what is it? How do we debate? It is I'm a decision maker, not a proponent at this point. It's not, I don't think it's my responsibility to advocate one way or another for one position or the other at this point. That's what the bait is, I think. Rept. And I think we should have that. But I thought you said you're not going. Then you just say you're not going to? He said it. And not at this point. So would you recommend more information then? Or what? I think that's what this is giving us the opportunity to do. If we vote, yes, for it, it looks to me like it gives us the opportunity to think through that process and develop these regulations or- But it doesn't give us the opportunity to say no then. Well that's a great question. If you want to address that staff because I'm unclear on that. Tonight you do not have to say yes or no. You can say we're requesting staff provide more information on these specific things. Provide us some draft items. Whatever it is you think you need from staff. Just staff needs guidance on what it is that you need to make. The first question you're trying to answer is should it be an allowable use. But if you don't have all the information to do that, we need to know what you're doing. You know, if you want to look at staff draw recommendations or regulations, you know, we can work on those, but we just need to know that's what you want. If we vote tonight to recommend to the board, to the motion the table, to recommend, if I'm a try to say, to recommend the board supervisors that we not consider battery storage as they use conditional otherwise. If that motion carries, we don't know what the law says or the ordinance about how soon someone can ask us to reconsider. First thing, on the other hand, if that motion did not carry and a hypothetical opposite motion were to carry, I think asking a question that I kind of heard in the discussion here. At that point, have we, airgo agreed that it's a use? If the opposite motion carried, would that be agreement that we, it would ultimately become a use? Or would we still at some point be able to decline it as a use? If you were looking at allowing it and drafting regulations, you would need to have a public hearing with those regulations out there for public to actually comment on. I mean, we don't even have that right now. We just have a draft that has been provided by the applicant. So if you are not using what they've been provided, it won't be draft your own. And where I'm in is only ordinance to include something. We've got to have a public hearing of what we're planning on changing in the ordinance. Because right now that hasn't been advertised unless it's what they're specifically asked. But could we go that far and it's still and and then still decline it as you use in its entirety. You could but you shouldn't be voting right now to allow it you should be voting or recommending staff to the rather than voting to allow the use that's not should be the question on the table. But I accept an emotion that we vote to not allow it. Is that a legitimate motion given the public hearing that we have? Because you're not acting on something that wasn't advertised. You're not recommending they change the ordinance to some way that hasn't been added. So it's after paying in the motion as valid. All right. Is there any further discussion on the motion? Just, I just have one more question. Okay. The recommendation is to not allow battery storage as they use the input. We also need to any of the board accepts that recommendation. Then we also have to amend the comprehensive plan from where it says we need to consider it to where we say in the comprehensive plan it's not an allowable use in Charlotte County. It would be better to wait to add to the board take action and And once that's finalized, we would be working on comprehensive. Is there any further discussion? Okay. Here in no discussion. And simply because we're we have a large number here tonight. Would staff like to do a roll call vote? I have one member call for a roll call vote. I don't know the procedure. Commissioner Adams? Yes. We've been to motion again. The motion is to recommend to the... Would you like to repeat the motion? No, no, yeah. The motion is to recommend the board supervisors that we not consider battery storage, battery energy storage as a use under our current zoning regulations? Is that accurate? Yes, that's correct. OK, thank you. We understand a motion. OK, I'm sorry. You were saying understand a much. Okay. I'm sorry. You were saying Mr. Adams is voted. Commissioner Watkins. Yes. Commissioner Cunod. No. Commissioner Vaughn. Yes. Commissioner Strong. Yes. Commissioner Price. No. Commissioner Nichols. No. Commissioner Watt. No. Commissioner Watt. Commissioner Watt. No. Commissioner Price? No. Commissioner Nichols? No. Commissioner Wells? No. Commissioner Ben? No. Chairman Cawwell? No. Chief Cawwell? Commissioner, I will give it to you. Can we hear an alternate motion? Can we hear an all-terrant much. Mr. Ben, you suggested conceptually on those lines. You want to make a motion? I make a motion that staff draft potential and or proposed language related to the use of battery storage and charge. Is there a second on that much? No second. Okay, I have a motion in a second. Is there any discussion? I have a question for State. Where would that leave us with the October 31st deadline? I have done a lot of research on this already. And we'll finish a lot of courses. It depends. We would want it to get it before we leave. We'll cancel it to review, so I think that it's going to be the time constraint. I don't know whether they have to look at seeing if there's a possibility for some type of extension or something to give you all time at least to consider if we need to have a public hearing. Because I don't know that we would be ready to do that in our entire work. I'd say the ad will go to the minimum also in a running more time. Okay, so on the record applicant stated that they'd be amenable to provide more time. Further discussion, motion is to recommend that the Board of Supervisors direct staff to develop ordinance, draft ordinance for allowing some form of use, which would be better energy storage. Is that close? I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Okay, here are no further discussion. Could you roll call vote on this? Commissioner Commissioner Kim Commissioner Wells Commissioner Adams no Commissioner Coutive Commissioner Vaughan Commissioner Strong no Commissioner Price yes Commissioner Nichols. Yes Commissioner Watkins. And Chairman Carlaw. Yes. All right. So, the mission carries 6'4. All right. So, we just moved to the next agenda item. Is there anything staff would like to ask Before we leave this with the question staff has for commission with regard to the motion All the seven three all the seven three All right, I'm a mistake. All right. I'm in the state. All right. So, um, uh, read state that the staff of chair spoken errors, folks, seven, three. Um, all right. Uh, is there any questions that staff This can't be a administrator for us. Next item is the general public comment theory. General public comment, period 1st person, 1st person signed up is Mr. George Tins. Now, George Turnips acts again. Mr. Bands, you didn't disappoint. You still got to add a thousand on the rubber stand, though. Congratulations. This is most disappointing. It's also disappointing that those of you that already signed up in solar did abstain. Since this is all tied to the industry, there are a number of you that did abstain from the voting. That already involved in picking option agreements with salt. The whole industry has had the apple and the whole push seems to be tired of the apple. It seems like, seems like since the drone footage was captured of panels being stolen properly in the county. It seemed like some board members won't advise on buckshots. See me after meeting and I'll be glad to supply you with some buckshot if you want to eliminate transparency in the county. This is most disturbing. This is incredible. The guy quite you didn't know anything about this. This is sitting on the head waters of the Blue Stone. We got bugs I will like right down there and look at all the beautiful docs. Some of those docs down there are 60 to 200,000 dollars a piece. Maybe we need to get them people in the into the situation and here we go with all the promises again. Charlotte County, that was language from vendors and language from within the talks. We're not going down the road with just battery storage. We know that's toxic. But we're having a hard time convincing board numbers that the pounds of toxic. So I guess I'll have a non-EPA, a non-DEE, key test, and trust convincing everybody that the battery storage is coming under the wire, the toxicity level is what it's all over with. And then when fire happens and fire departments show up and whatever talks come out, maybe it'll be like a fertilizer plant down in Southfield. You all got to go on on. Keep a rubber stamp going. Oh, y'all gotta go on on. Keep her up, stand still. Okay, missed longer bean. Cindy longer bean from Charlotte Courthouse. The first thing I want to talk about are dogs killing chickens. And in this county you have a limit on how much a chicken gets paid for and when a dog kills it is $10. Well like to tell you you go to track your supply and you a little chip and you pay $10. And you raise that little chip up to 22 weeks or it starts to lay an egg. You want to get $10 for it when a dog kills it. Now that's not reasonable. You all need to raise the price of that. I just had 15 chickens, the French chickens are called Brazettes. And there are $100 a piece that costs $200 in France. They're the best chickens that are tasty in the world. I paid $200 for a pair of our connoisseurs at the Ohio State Fair. I'm going to get $10 a piece for those for the two dogs that broke into my pan and killed them. That's ridiculous. There's got to be something you all can do about the dogs that killed my chickens. They know who the owner is. She only has to pay ten dollars a piece for them because that's what the county says. That's not right. You all have to change that. And that's what the dog warden goes over and tells her you only have to pay $10 for chicken and that needs to be changed especially when you buy a chicken for $10. I've paid over $200 for 30 eggs. That's stupid. You all need to do something about that. Now I have something to say about the Amrish building rules, where the building inspector wants to go over there and look at all their building codes and violations and everything else to make sure everything's right. When you send him over there you better make sure you send him down to the Muslims. I want to see him go down to the Muslims and look at all their buildings. The Amish have farms. They make a farm before they build anything. And they should be going by the agricultural rules of building, not just building anything they want and then making agricultural growing things. And go down to the Muslims. You treat them the same as you treat the Amish. You want the Amish to build their stuff to buy code. You make the Muslims build their stuff by code. And when you do that, you go down there to the um the shepherds in Pampling. they put no little houses all over and pretty soon they're going to be like the muslims because nobody's ever looked at their backgrounds and how the guy who runs that place came from another state because he had to get out because he was hoarding guns, machine guns, other guns and you all let him come down here, welcome him in. He charges his people $10 just to take him down to an Amish stand. He charges him $10 to take him over here to look at this. He's got on his website, the picture of an Amish going down the road which is against the Amage rules. But you all like him and you're going to let him build all these little buildings all over his farm. And pretty soon, he's going to have a haze head going to have to have sewer. He's going to have to have water. And he's going to be just like the Muslims who were third year to go. And you all going to have to help him get all his stuff in. And that's what I got to say and I'm probably over my screen minutes. Thank you very much. Take a back here. Okay. That ends the general public commentary. So now we will take up like border quests for review of the lot size. The minimum lot size, there's three bullet items here, they are distinct. The minimum lot size for family subdivisions in the general agricultural district, the minimum lot size for the village center district, the minimum lot size in the general residential district. All right, so starting with minimum lot size for the general residential district. All right, so starting with minimum lot size for family subdivision, the general agricultural district, with staff like to apprise us of, I'm assuming these bullet points came, this way this is broken out, came out of the recommendation of board supervisors and this from Smith and McCall and you missed. But. Sure. So after August 14th, warning, the county administrator did present the recommendation regarding the general and district law sizes. As part of that conversation, these issues did come up with several questions that led to this. The first one is the middle of lotsides for family subdivisions, which is something we had looked at as an alternative for the general ag district to begin with. The county attorney has said that this is something that could be done. Supervisor Smith, Davis and Bailey, all three words they wrote. Established in a enrollment on lot size for that family subdivision district. I'm going to quote the family subdivisions in the Ag district. And the county attorney has indicated that that is something that's allowed. We just have to incorporate it into the subdivision ordinance. I have copied a section of that, including all today, or if you could one, that already includes a number of defulations, that actual times the huge families of the vision, the environment, the foreign trends, the future, some of the afternoon, that those types of things are still be applicable. The lot size is what they are asking you to look at. In discussing the lot size, we also mentioned in conversation that the lots of we also mentioned in conversation that the bill of the center district lots of was one and so right now these are the second little community for the most offices or these to be close offices in some cases and they are not incorporated tango so they don't have any public utility or in vain. And who that didn't walk or express the suspicious concerns regarding that. Lots of and it being potentially successful. He felt like it would protect land owners more. He had a larger lot of time in the village center district. Since they did not have access to public utilities. So one anchor was to fall and it could create issues in the future when your end feel started failing. In conjunction with that, I'm sick about your Davis recommended the board also look at the one and half A. Grimman and Laugh Chisel and General Red's Industrial District in combination with these other two and consider whether we could do something consistent potentially across these stories. He did note that there are some people that live in the general residential that would have access to public utilities and they may need to be given additional consideration. And at the end include a little chart there, on page two with your report, that shows how many customers there are in each town that have water only, which is a federal 42, a sewer only, and a strip one, and then there's oil that's a water and sewer. And in looking at lot sizes previously, we did see where the lot size might be two acres, but for those who have a public utility that might be a little small, because it happens to many of these evapotry patients. So you have until December 28th to make a recommendation that you adopt a resolution at their meeting this month regarding that. That is attached. Staff is seeking input from you all these. We're also recommending that you consider things like the setbacks of the frontage requirements. If you're going to lie on lots of edges, you start leaning to look at a line and then speed up and work together. I think the frontage and the single edge on the three-acre line right now is 275 feet and so on the other districts looking at only 50 feet. So we do need to make sure that those things line up, especially if you're looking at something that's more consistent. Once we ask you directions from you, you can look at grass and language, working with local families to get that done. It's going to public here as we require and this would be a certain movement and a certain traditional movement in the same way that the application of the value of the origin of the unit. Any questions for staff? One comment. To probably be consistent, these are three completely different situations. I don't know do you can be? How about the different consistency between one, two, and three? These different districts. They thought it was possible, I mean, we're fairly close together already on the village center and the lot size. Because of how far apart your entrance is, I have to be for, I mean, 50 foot lot width isn't going to meet your entrance width, your entrance separation for the 55 mile hours ends. I apologize. Can I interrupt you? Again, I told, I said I would give you an opportunity to comment on what the board said not for cop Did you want to comment on the direction from the board? Okay, so you agree with staff? I'm sorry does your governor well There are a lot of Information here that we just all saw the last pocket here. I'm sure we have time for night to discuss all this. But I asked one question on the General Agricultural District, section three, dash three. Why is there a minimum footage on an existing road and different from a nearly construction? I'm assuming. That's not very consistent. I don't know what the reasoning was. I'm wondering if they didn't think the duress like to need more respect and current respect whereas older reds could mean a lot of different things. But I don't know what the logic was behind that. That's one place I can say more things. Consistency, come here. Make a vote the same. If you look at the requirements, a lot of them, there's a lot of inconsistent things. And it has kind of challenges for me and the zoning administrator, or a lot of times. Some of it relates to the frontage, and the front setback is one particularly. If you look at how you measure the front setback, there's some variation between the three as to what is measured wrong and the line was a different. Could that be referring to some of these areas that have been subdivided and a road was built to a certain spec and then lots were put off a boat south. Green Pym Lane is an example of one that was done. Now there are others around the county too. So could what those are mentioned there be specific to those situations? It could be but I don't know that it narrows that they also didn't truly specific enough to limit it to that as the issue I think does the intent of the language I think you're going to be. Does this affect subdividing or building? Because they're already subdivided. That's kind of the same question. But is this rules affecting cutting a lot down? Because if they're already subdivided, these rules don't even apply, right? the only one this would be on sub-divide is more about the general ag and the family exception or the family exception. Okay so section 3 it would apply to the ones that Mr. Adams is talking about. The other ones we're talking about lots and lots and that. So if we if we change these or even the way they're written now, do they not make certain lots unbuildable because of the setback? There's an exception in the ordinance for existing lots. We would make sure that it's referenced all those tricks, but I think it already does that. I think that's under the non-conformity section where they're built of what's long as they meet the setbacks. So that would not be an issue. We will double check that language to make sure that the rest of the phone is on. I'm going to say meet the step-axe. So that would not be an issue. We will check that line. We're just going to get the dress of the ball. To a long notice point, we're going back to something Mr. Wacken said, under 3.3, there's a loophole. Because it talks about existing and getting them to give us a different size. You see what I'm getting at? I think that's your point. The combination of what Mr. Watkins and Mr. Adams said is the 3.3 becomes a loophole. You can get a subdivision on a dirt road if you somehow manage to turn it into a state road you've grandfathered yourself. And I was just blunt that out to an example. So it's not consistent. Right. And there are several challenges regarding that. I think like one of the things you run into is the frontage issue there. Within the general act, it's pretty much frontage, specifically on state maintained roads. And then also privately maintained roads. But there's a lot of properties that don't have for in front of it at all. And they're good stuff that kind of stay here. So when you look at the work on somebody, but you have access to your work per saying, you have out bar, clean bill, where you need to build off of that property line. So there's some guys that they're just using. So those are some of the types of things that you do that get dressed as part of it, but they're really focused on the lot size. That's what they are asking you to do. Mr. Trump. So not only Joe Howl, I mean. No, I was just highlighting the theory that related to reference, but there were quite really related to blocks out to this very district. And I understand two setbacks because I was contacted and all to for us to look at the setbacks and perhaps becoming more uniform throughout the different districts because it's strictly based on Sony but now you're saying it's based on speed limit, but it's everything and AG has More stringent setbacks than the residential. No, I was sitting with this is speed limit Roadfronted with under three dots, but I was asked that we all you know consider And which would make it more sample. Staff is solving on changing 3.3 if that's of any benefit. Well, can it be. Mr. Arm, if you're done, or recognized Mr. Bench, that is a terrible. Is it appropriate, and I'm just asking, will it be appropriate? Is it appropriate to ask staff to draft a potential motion? Because I've read this three times, and we could look at here to a two o'clock in the morning to answer all these questions and debate. Can you tell us what, because the where-as is, aren't real specific, what do you want? Can we just say, hey, we want to change paragraph three to say three acres and paragraph two to say one acre, and then we can say, make it two and a half, four, yeah that's fine. looking for some guidance on what April you're considering. Are you thinking two x-rays is appropriate? Are you thinking one and a half is appropriate? Give me tell them that last meeting, didn't we say, even on auction? That wasn't in the line industry. That was not on the table right now. Okay. We're looking at these other three areas. Let's stand, it you get draft regulations? You know, if you want to say that and then look at aligning, setbacks, frontage and addressing those things, we're shortly happy to do it. Because that gives us something to look at. Get that again. Can I solicit a motion on the first bullet point addressing only section 2-6-1 on the yellow and their company. Is that right? Or do you have to change all of this in order to do the family one? Well part of the packet applies to the family one, stuff. The family one, the stuff that is highlighted in the attachment that goes with that is just trying to show you some of the things that are already placed in the ass of the person. So that's not anything you would be thinking. You would be adding what's in there that provides instructions on the lot side because it's the light right now. So we're, we're you, because it's all stapled together. I draw everyone's attention to there's a heading attachment B and attachment C. So, this is how they're like. A attachment C. So C is highlighted for a different reason than B. B is the changes. A is a bit more so it's a little bit confusing. It should be effective. Sorry. There is no A. The last thing I have a 4B is the cover letter. Oh, excuse me, the direction letter from the board suit voucher. That's okay. Or one presents its A. Is there an A that didn't get printed? Is that an A? No, she said an an an a member of the hangout. Oh, it's a taxiffy. I'm sorry, the resolution is a taxiff A and then a taxiff B is accepted in the ordinance. B is just the sectional family. It is just the sectional, take away under the enormous. But B is just the sectional family. It is just the sectional, taken away under the same control unit. So it would be put into this section of the government. The thing that our highlights are just the students showed you some of the craft area that are already in place on family work, because it would still apply to this in lots of sections. OK. just to still acquire to this in lots of exceptions. OK, so I'm just trying to solicit individual, which you all don't have to play along with this, but I'm going to try to get us out of here by solic in individual motions on just the lot size for family subdivisions. What is that? What do I get? Well, there is no family subdivisions, lot size. Right now, it's three acres in a generalier cultural. So if we limit the motion to just the general agricultural, just the newly proposed family subdivision, would we be willing to consider a subdivision of less than three acres subject to the front and back only of attachment B? Is that helpful staff? Okay, so right now there is no attachment fee. It's entirely created for this purpose. Is that all right? What's on attachment fee doesn't exist or no family subdivisions in our. Oh, we have it. We just don't have it for different lot-sauce. Okay. Or what is the highlighted yellow represent on the? It shows you the criteria that all these citizens do. Okay. You know, what would constitute family who would walk in? Who can not hold it before you can sell it to non-family. Only one allow. So for the purpose of moving this along, if you address your attention to the highlight areas, which are the relevant parts of the existing family subdivision, understanding that in the general agricultural district, which this family subdivision may apply in other places, but wearing it applies in the general agricultural district, throwing back to the agenda, the first bullet item, I'll spake it out by the bullet items. Is there any appetite for a less than three acre of lots? Subject to the family subdivision ordinance that's represented by B. Now, I get to see you. Is there any appetite for less than three acres? Definition of family subdivision. I refer you to the yellow highlights on B and the the second page of it. So you have to take for that less than three acres Sound like I'm running it. I know that the boat that's what the board wants and I would say yes And I think though that we need to incorporate as far as determining That size along with the village center district in the general residential Residential was my understanding because they kind of wanted some Consistency. Okay, but but right, but we could go around all right, so I'll I'll entertain discussion on that without a motion. Would you would you like to Hypothasize a number less than three acres Because we're already two That's fine, right? If we make two in the red, but then they want it consistent, so should it be one and a half to be and then make all of them one and a half. For residential and village centers. So right now they- That's how I understood it. They are three, they are three, one and one and a half in the order that they're on. Is that correct? Right. Right now, if you look at your bullet points, if you write three next to the first one, one and a half, one next to the middle one and one and a half for general residential, general residential being the little bands around the current towns, which kind of doesn't have that in jurisdiction. the current towns which kind of doesn't have some endure-ish. The village center is a little dots out. Colin is the village center. General residential surrounds the town that extends the four of them out in the town hall. Anything within a four and a half, half and three. And that's why there's some there that do have some public utility down there. And some of the rest public utility. It is one and a half right now. There are some that might say one and a half, but if you have public utility, you have even one acreage from it or two. And if you have public utilities, it's one and a half acre. You know, if you wanted to do something like that, it's basically. I'm going to recognize Mr. Vaughan because I think he has a hand on it. It's not going to always stay family. There's a section, I agree. There's a section that says that the property under the most place restrictive covenant on the sub-divide of property and would prohibit the transfer of the properties and non-memory the immediate family for a period of five years. Five years. That legal? You're real estate. You're real estate trained. Ms. Donna's real estate trained. I bet there's some qualifier for bankruptcy. And the, yes, that legal. That's very standard language. We give, we re-work this in 2014. There was a legal team whose specializes in playing it and I'll share a pin that. That assisted with that process. So it's something that's coming now, I was saying. And it said the five years can be reduced, including what things such as forefathers would get to this whole sale. Yeah, that has a great long list. And exceptions to the five years. Thank you. So, let's try to break the point. I'm not really in a question to do this because there are things some questions about it. Right, because when we looked at the other lot of sizes, first of all, the families self division was one of the main concerns in the general ag district. It was an opportunity to address that. So they wanted us to go back and revisit it. And then when we mentioned the village center district being one acre, it just wasn't concerned that that wasn't sufficient. And eventually people with homes would have drainfield failures and will not have you know a solution not only if they will have a room is it? They are a quarter of a mile square so they are not very large but there are some of these areas did you have a number of lots of lots of? So for frame of reference I think that I live on an acre. I have town water. It was impossible to put in a new drain field without going down to five feet to get below the existing drain field for our house. An acre is pushing it for a drain field, then well. Especially if you were bounded by an acre lot on either side. If you were in close on three sides with acre lots, which is what this family subdivision suggests, it's hard to have a drain field and the well for each house. I don't think the family subdivision is just an acre. I think we were looking for an acre and a half like the other area. What's the other area that's going to be? The channel that's going to be in the middle of the individual. I think the options are an acre and a half or two acres. The one acre was seen as being too small. So they definitely want to go up the layer. So there's one and a halfcleay her. So there's just one that has two acres but there's a potential mention in the board. But there was a new recommendation. My absence to come was to play some mission at Sparkpeak or Sparkpeak, but let me just go to the next slide. Well, yeah, I recognize the county minister. Thank you. I just know magic behind them all three being the same. So I don't think there's any, you know, if the village center and the general residential are one and a half, so you move the belt from one and a half to, or from one to one and a half, and you send the family subdivisions to, that's, there's nothing wrong with doing that. You think that's the best thing to do, there's nothing wrong with that. And you also, you don't have to make a decision. Those are said, we've got a lot to chew on here, and this is a whole lot of information that we just got. You have to, in December, make it decision. Okay. You can continue this discussion and look at it and request more information from Santa if you need. Well, this is one thing in response to that. One thing that I would like, and I don't really want to make a motion, I would have someone else make a motion. But it seems that when we look at C, I know I told you all this, let's stick to B first, but when we look at C, staff has identified a number of things that staff believes are, create difficulties. At the very least, we could direct staff to start work on the identified concerns. Some of those concerns are independent. If we didn't change any of the lot's houses, is that correct? We're keeping a list. Oh, but we are. We're keeping a list. Okay. We have a list. Keep in a further record. We're keeping it at least. Okay. Well, let's open this up even further so that the next time we meet, we have a fourth bullet point. I'd entertain a motion to do something on this. That staff would come to us with a list and potential corrections for areas where the current zone is difficult and forced or has creates conflicts. We're inviting. We're going to make that as a mission. Well, there's four issues here. They want us to reduce a lot size for family subdivisions only in general agricultural. They want us to consider, it says minimal, but do something with a lot size village center already at 1A. They want us to look at the lot size in general residential. That's the band around the town is already at 1.5 acres and staff brings our attention specifically in attachment C, that there's a fourth issue which to your point Mr. Wyckens earlier on there's potential for loopholes and conflicts in the ordinance as it stands and this issue to bring that to forefront. Is there any way staff can recommend some consistency that could be added. Second, we can bring back just leaving those numbers in there for you all to decide, but bring back some consistency in the language that we would recommend if we could. If you did that, we could have a motion at some point in the future, maybe December, in the form of like, you know, not 3, 1-1.5, but three other numbers separated by commas and leave the rest of it to staff. And if that's the general consensus, I mean, you know, staff can do that. It doesn't have to be for the nation. And if that's the case, then it's just for staff to work on it. Is there any consensus? Correct. Can you do it by next month? I think that's what I said. I have an interview. This is how it went. You know, you've tried to get it all the way around until the end. Let's stay up here some more. All right. The general consensus I'm hearing is that we move beyond this bullet item. We move beyond this agenda item. We're staffed to leave us with his little decisions to make as possible. And leave us focused on little decisions to make as possible and leave us focused on lots of things that staff would like to change. Is there any objection to moving in the next item? All right the next item is the staff report which is Thank you. I do not think that the bottom of the community, if anybody is interested in the Certified Planning Commissioner program, they can drop that and already come to town and connect here on that. There is one thing on the early on, you can also talk to Bullying Duff for a hearing about it. They both recently attended this program and they've been able to work inside our list. I made on enter place of an advertisement, and all the presenters make a false-held community solo, that's where it's a national purpose, so you can have that. And then the only other thing I want to tell you is we do have a clear webby, and my A recognition ceremony, you're on the front wall, the floor, I don't know how to block. The activity for this day now is two, which is going to be the one that's going to be going. And then there's a couple of things that I'm going to do. What time is that Monica 11? It's going to be a little bit. I don't know. They have a lot of it. Okay, that was staff reporting questions for staff. All right. Commissioner Tom's and Commissioner have anything they like to say. A little with here. Can we go to 7 o'clock? Yeah. I'm 5 o'clock. Is there a consensus to start meeting at 7 o'clock? I think you do with a data favor time. Do we change it to data favor time? It does, but it's usually the number one. Yeah. The black pepper. So, the yellow one. Do 7 next time you can advertise this Make that a motion. God has to be a motion. You're my commotion. Octo-leaving your- Sixth sir or seven? Well, seven. Seven or two. You're going to say that. Octo-retool, a future date and until daylight savings. All right, it's emotion for October. But when we go back to Saturday is when. They let's say it until next. Please. Good point. Okay, I got Second one. Von, Ms. Von, has a motion. Mr. Wyke in second. All those in favor indicate by saying hi. Hi. I'll pose. Mod, you go from office. Here, here, no, and we meet at seven. Is there any other commissioners points? I heard a motion to the general. Oh, I got one. Oh, I'm sorry. I just want to state that I am generally opposed to battery storage. I just want to at least hear all the points and at least to do our big deal. To at least hear everything. Again, I'm generally opposed to it. I just want to hear Yeah, you're all the the the benefits and to be able to weigh them and again, you know vote up or down, but I just wanted to state that That's where I was going with my discussion that if you call on me to make a motion again, Mr. Chairman. I'm done for this year. I'm just joking. Oh, well, I'm playing. That's fair enough. The point will be taken. Is there any further comments? Okay. Here none. I earlier heard something about it, Jory. It's probably something about Jory. All right, second. All those in favor indicate by saying aye. I opposed. Here none. We adjourned. I'm just going to say, you have a hand.