The Chesapeake Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 14, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber. The commission considered nine applications, including continuances, consent agenda items, and three regular public hearing items. All formal votes were 8–0 (Commissioner Harold Gilbert excused). The meeting adjourned at 8:36 p.m.
Good evening, everybody. The planning commission pre-meeting for August 14th is now in session. Welcome to our pre-meeting tonight. Thank you for taking part in the business of our city. First order of business this evening is the agenda overview discussion. Tonight we have a total of nine applications, and we have one that's being proposed for continuance. Yes, we have one item for continuance, and that is Project Genesis. And you probably noticed in the update that the letter from the Navy asked for ninety days. Commissioners, any questions or comments regarding this item. So the first item is item number two, PLN use twenty twenty-three zero eighteen Saint Joseph's Church. Mr. McKay. I have no update on the application, then public contact. All right, thank you. Any commissioners have any conflicts with this application? Any questions for staff? Any discussion? All right. Since staff is recommending denial, this item will be placed on the regular agenda. All right. Next item is item three. PLN use 2024 019 sewell massage therapy. Ms. Neal, any updates for us? Good evening, Commissioners. I have no updates. We did receive one phone call, just general inquiries. And other than that, I'll stand by for questions. Okay. Thank you. I think the uh numbering might be off just a little bit. So yeah, that's item number two. That's right. Okay, commissioners. Any conflicts with this application? Any questions for staff? Any discussion? All right. Hearing none, any objection to placing on the consent agenda? All right. Seeing none, item two will be placed on the consent agenda. Mr. Chairman. Yes, just to clarify. So in the um staff report that is listed as item three, and it's only on it's only on the summary that's item two. So you uh we might want to rectify that it's on the agenda as item on the agenda as item two. Yes, because agenda item number five, I believe it was, was moved to number one. It has a cascading effect on the remainder of the agenda, and due to the lateness of all the updates, not all of our documentation was able to be updated in time. Okay. So let me so that's just something we'll have to be aware of.