[00:00:05]
>> WELL, SINCE EVERYBODY IS QUIET AND WE HAVE 15 SECONDS, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND START EARLY. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.
WE WILL BEGIN THIS MEETING BY HAVING THE SECRETARY CALL THE
>> HERE. >> ER WE HAVE A QUORUM.
IF THERE IS ANYONE HERE THAT WISHES TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR BRING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ATTENTION SOMETHING THAT DOES NOT RELATE TO AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA, THIS WOULD BE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO COME FORWARD AND DO THAT.
IF YOU DO, WE ASK YOU TO SIGN IN.
WHERE IS THE SIGN-IN SHEET? THE SIGN-IN SHEET IS ON THE OTHER TABLE THERE. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO FIVE MINUTES.
IS THERE ANYONE WISHING TO BRING SOMETHING TO OUR ATTENTION THAT IS NOT PART OF THE AGENDA ITEM? I SEE NO ONE.
WE WILL MOVE ON, THEN, TO OLD BUSINESS.
AND STAFF, THE CHAIR HAS NO OLD BUSINESS.
WHAT ABOUT STAFF? ANY OLD BUSINESS WE NEED TO
[CONSENT AGENDA]
DISCUSS? THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE FIRST ITEM OF THE AGENDA WHICH IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.WHICH ARE THOSE ITEMS THAT DO NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING, AND WE HAVE TWO ITEMS WHICH ARE MINUTES OF THE PACKET MEETING IN NOVEMBER AND THE REGULAR MEETING ON NOVEMBER 9.
>> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO APPROVE AND SECONDED. THE PACKET MEETING.
AND THE REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 9.
OF 2023. MINUTES, ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT
>> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO. AND THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED.
[1. Waiver - Mill Creek Data Center WZ-2023-009]
NEW BUSINESS. WE HAVE RIGHT AT THE TOP, WE HAVE THE WAIVER REQUEST. MILL CREEK DATA CENTER.WHO IS PRESENTING THAT? >> I WILL.
YES. THIS IS THE WAIVER FOR THE MILL CREEK DATA CENTER. THIS IS AN APPEAL TO DENIAL FROM THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FOR A WAIVER REQUEST.
>> ALL RIGHT. WHAT THEY WANT IS A WAIVER FOR
THEY REQUESTED A WAIVER OF THE ENGINEERING STAFF.
THE ENGINEERING STAFF ISSUED A LETTER OF DENIAL, GRANTING ONE
OF THE TWO WAIVER REQUESTS. >> ALL RIGHT.
DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS REQUEST? YES.
>> LEE THARP. THE CIVIL ENGINEER OF RECORD ON THE JOB. I'M REALLY HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION THAT Y'ALL MIGHT HAVE.
BUT I THINK THE BIGGEST THING TO POINT OUT, AND I KNOW IT WAS IN THE PACKET OF ALL THE INFORMATION YOU GUYS GOT, IT IS JUST THE NUMBER OF TRIPS IS THE REASON WHY WE ARE REQUESTING THE APPEAL TO THE WAIVER DENIAL. THE FACILITY IS NOT SUPPORTING A LARGE NUMBER OF TRAFFIC. OR HIGH NUMBER OF TRAFFIC.
LARGE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES. FOUR TOTAL EMPLOYEES PER SHIFT.
REALLY SMALL. ESPECIALLY FOR THIS KIND OF PROJECT. THAT IS WHY WE WANTED TO BRING IT BEFORE YOU GUYS. ANY QUESTIONS YOU GOT, I'M HERE
>> BEFORE WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS --
>> THIS IS JUST A RIGHT-TURN LANE.
ONE RIGHT-TURN LANE. THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING. AND DO YOU WISH TO DISCUSS THIS
FURTHER? >> I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT ALAN AND THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ARE RECOMMENDING THAT WE DENY THE EASTERN ENTRANCE, BUT THEY RECOMMEND THAT WE RETAIN THE WESTERN ENTRANCE FOR SAFETY OR WHATEVER.
>> OKAY. >> I GUESS I UNDERSTAND, TOO, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY-- WHAT'S BEHIND THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THAT IS THE ENTRYWAY TO THE INDUSTRIAL PARK.
THERE IS A LOT OF TRUCK TRAFFIC THAT GOES THROUGH THERE.
AND SO YOU KNOW, MIGHT BE TOO MUCH.
AT LEAST ONE IS USEFUL. ESPECIALLY-- YOU DON'T WANT TO BOTTLENECK THAT AREA. I WOULD LOOK FOR APPROVAL FOR
WHAT THE STAFF HAS PUT FORWARD. >> THEY ARE SEEKING AN APPEAL TO THE DENIAL. THE MOTION WOULD BE EITHER TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE DECISION BY THE-- OF THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. IS THAT BASICALLY --
>> IS THERE A HARDSHIP THAT WAS PRESENTED?
[00:05:05]
>> THE COMPANY THAT IS OPERATING HAS VERY FEW EMPLOYEES.
A LOT OF TRAFFIC. INCREASING TRAFFIC.
BUT THEY ONLY HAVE -- >> I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE AS PROPOSED BY THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. DOES ANYONE NEED AND EXPLANATION OF THE MOTION? IT IS CLEAR?
>> VOTING TO DENY THE APPEAL IS WHAT THAT MOTION WAS.
>> THAT IS RIGHT. THAT IS RIGHT.
A MOTION TO DENY THE APPEAL. OKAY?
ARE WE READY FOR THE MOTION? >> WE DID A MOTION.
>> I MEAN, NOT THE MOTION. BUT THE VOTE.
ALL IN FAVOR TO DENY THE APPEAL, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
[2. Preliminary Plat - Dawson Villas Phase 1 - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2023-029]
THE MOTION CARRIES. THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DAWSON VILLAGE, PHASE ONE.>> YES, SIR. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR TOWNHOUSES, AND THE REQUEST ALSO INCLUDES A WAIVER TO ALLOW A SUBDIVISION FOR LOTS ON A PRIVATE DRIVE.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE COX AND WIRE PDD.
IT ENCOMPASSES ABOUT 49 ACRES. THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION THAT WE ARE CONCERNED WITH TONIGHT TAKES UP ABOUT 16 ACRES OF THAT.
THIS IS THE REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PROJECT. IT SHOWS AN OVERALL UNIT COUNT OF 162. IT WAS APPROVED IN DECEMBER OF 2021 AS A MULTIPLE-UNIT DEVELOPMENT WITH THE UNITS LOCATED ON ONE LOT OF RECORD. AND THE PDD ALSO INCLUDES ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY AND COMMERCIAL SPACE UP HERE.
THE APPLICANT IS WISHING NOW INSTEAD OF A MULTIPLE-UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRODUCT TO DIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO TOWNHOMES.
IT WILL TAKE PLACE IN PHASES. THIS WILL BE THE FIRST PHASE AND INCLUDES 32 TOWNHOUSE LOTS. TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS.
A LOT FOR THE PRIVATE DRIVE, AND THEN A LOT FOR FUTURE
DEVELOPMENT. >> WHERE IS THE PRIVATE DRIVE?
>> IT TRAVELS HERE. AND THEN HERE.
THE APPLICANT WISHES TO KEEP THESE STREETS PRIVATE IN ORDER TO ALLOW GATED ACCESS AT THE ENTRANCES AT COX AND WIRE ROADS.
A PDD AMENDMENT IS NOT REQUIRED FOR THIS CHANGE IN PRODUCT TYPE AS PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, OR ALL TYPES OF PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS ARE PERMITTED.
AND THE PDD AND THE LAYOUT REMAINS THE SAME.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER AND THE PLAT.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> YEAH. OF THIS PRIVATE DRIVE, IT WOULD BE A PRIVATE DRIVE. HOW MUCH OF THAT IS BUILT TO CAPACITY OF A CITY STREET OR COULD LIVE UP TO THE STANDARDS
OF A CITY STREET? >> I BELIEVE-- I KNOW HERE OUT TO WIRE. I CAN'T RECALL IF THIS PORTION
HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED ALREADY. >> IT IS.
>> IS THAT PORTION THE ONE THAT IS NOT REALLY KIND OF UP TO SNUFF, STANDARDS FOR A CITY STREET?
>> I'M NOT CERTAIN OF THAT. >> YEAH.
>> SO OUR PRIVATE STREET STANDARDS ARE THAT THEY HAVE TO CONSTRUCT THE BUILD-UP TO OUR STANDARDS AND CERTIFY THAT IT IS BUILT TO OUR STANDARDS. BUT THEY DO THAT ON THEIR OWN.
NOW, THEY DON'T MEET ALL OF OUR DESIGN STANDARDS.
JUST THE BUILD-UP REQUIREMENTS. >> MM-HMM.
DO THEY SATISFY THAT RIGHT NOW? DO YOU KNOW?
>> I WOULD HAVE TO CHECK. I'M NOT ABSOLUTELY SURE.
>> MAYBE BRETT CAN ANSWER THAT. >> OKAY.
>> WE WILL NOTE WE DID HAVE A NUMBER OF STAFF COMMENT.
THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE A REVISED PLAT, A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT ADDRESSES THOSE.
>> SO IT DOES MEET AND/OR EXCEED CURRENT STANDARDS.
>> WITH APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER TO SUBDIVIDE OFF OF A PRIVATE
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. I'M SURE THAT THE DEVELOPER'S
[00:10:02]
REPRESENTATIVE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ONE.>> GOOD EVENING. WITH THE FORESITE GROUP.
I WANT TO BOIL THIS ONE DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
THERE IS A LOT OF CONFUSION. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THESE ROADS ARE DESIGNED BUILT TO CITY STANDARDS.
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THESE ROADS THAN THE ROADS ACROSS THE STREET. A FEE-SIMPLE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. WHEN WE DO PRIVATE STREETS, WE DESIGN THEM, BUILD THEM JUST LIKE THEY ARE A SUBDIVISION STREET, SO IT IS THE SAME. IT MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT. IN REGARDS TO, LIKE, THE REQUEST HERE, IF I BOIL IT DOWN, THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN WHAT WE ARE DOING. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS WHEN WE ORIGINALLY GOT INTO THIS PROJECT, WE WERE ENVISIONING THAT THE HOME OWNER WOULD OWN THIS IN A CONDO OWNERSHIP.
AND A CONDO OWNERSHIP, THEY BASICALLY WOULD OWN EVERYTHING FROM THE DRYWALL AND PAINT INSIDE THE BUILDING AND THE CONTENTS INSIDE. RIGHT? THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE ITSELF, THE ROOF, THE BRICK ON THE OUTSIDE IS ALL OWNED IN A COMMON CONDOMINIUM OWNERSHIP.
WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT NOW IS OWNING THEM IN A FEE-SIMPLE.
WHERE THERE WILL BE PROPERTY LINES THAT ACTUALLY SEPARATE THE UNITS. THESE ARE STILL GOING TO BE BUILT AS A QUAD. IT IS A FOUR-UNIT BUILDING.
ON ONE LEVEL. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WILL ACTUALLY OWN THE YARDS AND PART OF THE DRIVEWAYS THAT THEY ARE-- BEFORE, THEY WERE COMMON OWNERSHIP.
THE WAY THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION WOULD BE SET UP IS STILL JUST LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.
ALL THE EXTERIOR ROOFS, LAWN MAINTENANCE, ALL OF THAT IS GOING TO BE TAKEN CARE OF AS PART OF THE HOA.
BUT WHEN WE GOT IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS AND WERE BUILDING, THERE WAS A CHANGE. AND THE CHANGE CAME IN HOW THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY DEALS WITH CONDOMINIUM OWNERSHIP.
OR CONDOMINIUMS. IN REGARDS TO INSURANCE.
WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT CONDO ATTACHED, THEY DON'T LOOK ANYTHING DIFFERENT, WHETHER IT IS A 20-STORY CONDO BUILDING AT THE BEACH, A HUNDRED-STORY CONDO IN DOWNTOWN ATLANTA, OR A FOUR-UNIT QUAD HERE. THEY LOOK AT IT ALL AS THE SAME.
WITH THE AMOUNT OF NATURAL DISASTERS THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THE LAST THREE F YEARS BETWEEN FLORIDA, GEORGIA, AND ALABAMA, MOST INSURANCE CARRIERS HAVE EXITED THE INDUSTRY.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE HAD SOME BUILDING FAILURES DOWN IN FLORIDA. BUILDING COLLAPSE-- SO IT IS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO GET THAT.
SO THIS IS THE ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED IN DECEMBER, 2021. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NOW AND THEN IS WE ARE SHOWING MORE AMENITY SPACE.
THE UNITS ARE THE SAME. WE ARE NOT CHANGING THE NUMBER OF UNITS. WE ARE NOT CHANGING THE LOCATION OF ANY UNITS. THE ONE THING IS WE MOVE THE DOG PARK INSIDE THE AMENITY AREA. THAT WAS SLIGHTLY OUTSIDE.
YOU CAN SEE WE GOT PICKLEBALL COURTS.
WE ARE A COMMUNITY GARDEN. WE HAVE ALL THIS SUFFER THE IN THIS AMENITY AREA THAT IS MORE DEFINED NOW THAN BEFORE.
THE BIG, THE BIG ISSUE THAT-- THE SECOND BIG ISSUE WE ARE RUNNING INTO IS-- LET'S GO BACK. WE HAVE TWO ENTRANCES.
ONE ON WIRE ROAD AND ONE ON COX ROAD.
EVEN RIGHT NOW, WITH WHAT'S GOING ON, WE WERE BUILDING TO PRIVATE STREETS. THIS IS A 55 AND UP RESTRICTED COMMUNITY. THAT DEMOGRAPHIC TENDS TO LIKE SECURITY. WE WANTED PRIVATE STREETS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE G GATES. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE GATES ON PUBLIC STREETS. WHAT WE ARE HAVING OUT THERE RIGHT NOW IS WE ARE HAVING AN EXCESSIVE AMOUNT OF CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC. PEOPLE CUTTING THE CORNER TO NOT GO THROUGH THE COX AND WIRE ROUND-ABOUT.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS ABOUT 3,000 FEET, IF YOU GO AROUND THE EXTERIOR. YOU CAN CUT THROUGH, AND IT IS 1,300 LINEAR FEET. IT IS A BIG PROBLEM.
IT IS COMING BACK TO WHERE THEY HAVE PUT ROLLOFFS IN BETWEEN TO BLOCK THE PEOPLE FROM-- IF THEY ARE TRYING TO CUT THROUGH, THEY HAVE TO GO AROUND THE CIRCLE TO THEN CUT THROUGH TO MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT. SO YOU KNOW, IDEALLY, WE
[00:15:03]
WOULDN'T HAVE THE CUT-THROUGH TRAFFIC.BUT WE DO. IT JUST FURTHER REINFORCES WHY WE NEED THE GATES. I GOT-- I'M NOT AS UP TO SNUFF ON THE ACTUAL CHANGE IN THE INSURANCE, BUT I'LL BE HAPPY TO HAVE THE DEVELOPER COME UP AND EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
>> ANOTHER WARREN. ANOTHER WARREN.
(LAUGHTER). >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I'M THE OWNER. LIKE BRETT SAID, OUR INTENTION WAS FULLY TO DEVELOP THIS AS CONDO.
I HAVE DEVELOPED THOUSANDS OF CONDOS.
I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE RULES AND HOW THEY WORK.
THE OLD DAYS, 10-20 YEARS AGO, WHEN YOU GET A BULK CONDO INSURANCE, IT WAS ACTUALLY CHEAPER FOR A BIGGER PROJECT TO HAVE THE BULK INSURANCE POLICY. IT PAID IN THE HOA FEES.
TODAY I HAD THE CONDO INSURANCE SET UP.
WE HAD THE COMPANY SET UP. ALL THE DOCUMENTS.
WE HAD ALL THE RESERVE STUDY. ALL THE ESTIMATES AND WHAT IT WAS GOING TO COST FOR INSURANCE. WE HAD THE DISCLOSURE PACKAGE TO ALL THE RESIDENTS THAT WE SOLD SEVERAL IN THERE.
ALL OF A SUDDEN, WE GOT SOME CLOSINGS COMING UP.
AND THE RATE THAT WE HAD, THE CARRIER QUIT.
THEY SAID WE ARE NOT GOING TO COVER THE INSURANCE ANYMORE.
WE WENT TO DOGLE INSURANCE. PHILADELPHIA, TRAVELERS, NATIONWIDE, AMTRUST. ALL THESE CARRIERS HAVE LEFT THE MARKET FOR PROPERTY. I HAVE SOME OTHER PROPERTIES, AND WE TRIED TO-- YOU KNOW, INSURANCE IS CRAZY RIGHT NOW ON ALL PROPERTIES. MAINLY IN CONDOS, LIKE BRETT SAID. CONDO IS SEVERAL STORIES HIGH.
WE HAD THE FREEZE LAST DECEMBER. IF YOU GUYS KNOW, YOU HAD A LOT OF APARTMENTS DOWNTOWN THAT FLOODED.
CONDOS DO THE SAME THING. SAME THING WITH THE HURRICANES AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH FIRES. THEY ARE NOT COVERING THESE BIG PROJECTS. WE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE SECONDARY MARKET. THE INSURANCE IS ABOUT FOUR TIMES THE COST. AND THEN THE DEDUCTIBLE IS ABOUT FIVE TIMES THE DEDUCTIBLE. WE BUILT-- LUCKILY, WHEN WE BUILT THIS PROJECT, WE COULD HAVE BUILT THIS WITH ONE-HOUR COMMON WALLS AND CHEAPER CONSTRUCTION BECAUSE IT WAS AN AGE-RESTRICTED. WE WANTED TO DO A QUALITY PROJECT. WE BUILT IT WITH TWO R WALLS.
THEY WERE BUILT LIKE TOWNHOME CONSTRUCTION.
WE DID THAT. WE GOT FOUR BUILDINGS BUILT.
ONE UNDER CONSTRUCTION. AND THAT IS BASICALLY OUR HARDSHIP. WE CAN'T CONTROL THE INSURANCE MARKET. WE DON'T WANT TO PASS THIS ON TO OUR HOME OWNERS IN FUTURE YEARS. AND WHAT'S THE BENEFIT OF MAKING IT FEE-SIMPLE IF THEY CAN GET THEIR OWN INSURANCE AND PACKAGE IT WITH STATE FARM OR ALLSTATE AND SO FORTH.
WITH THEIR AUTO. IT IS JUST LIKE A HOUSE.
A CONDO, BY LAW, THE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION IS SUPPOSED TO COVER THE WHOLE COMMON ELEMENTS. THAT IS WHERE YOU CAN'T GET THE INSURANCE. AGAIN, THE CUT-THROUGH IS A BIG ISSUE. WE ARE ACTUALLY TRYING TO GET THE GATES WORKING NOW. BECAUSE PEOPLEFULLY THROUGH THERE. YOU WOULDN'T THINK-- FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T THINK PEOPLE LIKE THE ROUND-ABOUT, FIRST OF ALL.
YOU CAN SEE THE DISTANCE. HOW MUCH SHORTER IT IS TO CUT THROUGH. AND BEING AN ELDERLY AGE-RESTRICTED NEIGHBORHOOD, WALKABILITY IS FLAT WITH ALL THE AMENITIES THERE. WE WOULD LOVE TO KEEP YOU GATED.
>> ALL RIGHT. THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING.
WE WILL OPEN THAT PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
AND IF THERE IS ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO ASK QUESTIONS, OR MAKE ANY COMMENTARY REGARDING THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL, THIS IS THE TIME TO DO IT NOW. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS OPEN.
IS THERE ANYONE? I SEE NO ONE.
WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND WE WILL HAVE DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSION.
>> DO WE DO THE WAIVER SEPARATE? >> SEPARATE.
ONE IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL.
AND THEN THE OTHER IS THE WAIVER.
>> WHICH WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO FIRST?
>> WELL, YOU CAN HAVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL WITHOUT THE WAIVER. WHICH MAY NOT BE WHAT THEY WANT.
I THINK THAT THE-- WE WILL START WITH THE PLAT APPROVAL.
>> EXCUSE ME. SO YOU SHOULD CONSIDER THE WAIVER FIRST. YES.
CONSIDER THE WAIVER. THEN MAKE THE DECISION ON THE
OKAY. >> I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE
[00:20:02]
PP-2023-029 WAIVER OF ARTICLE 4. >> ALL RIGHT.
IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION?
>> I'LL SECOND. >> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. TO APPROVE THE WAIVER REQUEST TO ARTICLE 4. SECTION E-4.
>> SO LET'S HAVE A BIT OF DISCUSSION.
>> SO THE CONUNDRUM WE HAVE, IT LOOKS LIKE, IS THAT-- YOU KNOW, UNDER THE CURRENT GUIDELINES, YOU CAN'T SUBDIVIDE OFF OF A PRIVATE STREET. CORRECT?
>> IS THAT NOR FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT OR JUST TOWNHOUSES?
FOR ANY-- THING. >> AND SO IF WE HAVE A PUBLIC ROAD THERE, YOU CAN'T HAVE GATES.
RIGHT? SO WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS IF YOU APPROVE THE WAIVER, THEN WE HAVE A PRIVATE STREET, WE COULD
>> AND SUBDIVIDE OFF THE PRIVATE STREET.
>> WHICH IS AGAINST OUR GUIDELINES.
OKAY. I WANT TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND
THE WHOLE THING TO START WITH. >> I WANTED TO ASK WHY DO WE-- SO WE HAD THOSE GUIDELINES BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS ALWAYS HAVE ACCESS-- ARE ALWAYS ON THE STREETS. RIGHT? AND WE DON'T HAVE GATED COMMUNITIES.
>> YEAH. I GUESS I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE REASONING BEHIND WHY THAT WAS THE POLICY, BUT I KNOW INTERNALLY, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT FORMALIZING AND KIND OF GETTING ON THE SAME PAGE INTERNALLY ACROSS THE BOARD. I THINK THE PURPOSE BEHIND IT, THERE IS UTILITY CONCERNS. THERE IS ACCESS CONCERNS FOR THE PUBLIC. I MEAN, THERE IS CONCERNS WHY WE
STUCK TO IT FOR A WHILE. >> IIN THE PREVIOUS TIMES, WHEN GATED COMMUNITIES HAVE COME UP, THE CONCEPT OF THE PUBLIC STREET IS A PUBLIC STREET. ALLOWABLE BY ANYBODY.
SO BASICALLY, THEN, YOU CANNOT FENCE OFF A PUBLIC STREET.
THAT IS WHY YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE GATED COMMUNITY.
TO GET THE ACCESS. THEN IT WOULD BE A PRIVATE
STREET. >> RIGHT NOW A GATED COMMUNITY HAS TO BE A CONDOMINIUM TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT, ACCORDING THE OUR GUIDELINES. RIGHT?
YOU CAN'T HAVE FEE SIMPLE. >> SO HOW WILL THIS BE MAINTAINED? IS IT AN HOA?
>> HOA. >> IF IT REMAINS A PRIVATE DRIEFT DRIVE, HOW IS IT GOING TO BE MAINTAINED?
>> IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME. INSTEAD OF HAVING A CONDO ASSOCIATION, YOU HAVE AN HOA ASSOCIATION THAT MAINTAINS EVERYTHING. LIKE BRETT SAID.
EVERYTHING WILL BE THE SAME. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THE INSURANCE REQUIREMENT. YOU WOULD PUT THAT ON THE PROPERTY OWNER TO GET THE INSURANCE.
EVERYTHING ELSE, EXTERIOR, LANDSCAPING, AMENITIES IS THE
>> SO REALLY IT IS A MATTER OF WHETHER TO GATE OR NOT TO GATE.
>> IF YOU WEIGH-- IF YOU PASS A WAIVER, SINCE THE ROAD IS ALREADY BUILT TO STREET STANDARDS, TO THE CITY STANDARDS, FOR STREETS, WHEN THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO ALLOW A GATED COMMUNITY WITH FEE SIMPLE HOUSING. THAT IS A PRECEDENT WE WANT TO
SET? >> ONE OF THE UNCHARTED AREAS, MOST OF THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE TALKING ABOUT OR WAIVERS IS NOT OF THE DEVELOPER'S MAKING.
THE PROBLEM IS WE HAVE NEVER H HAD-- I MEAN, THIS IS AN INSURANCE ISSUE. HE HAS TO GO THE OTHER WAY TO
>> THAT IS UNUSUAL. >> YOU KNOW, I GUESS, DOES THAT CONSTITUTE WHAT WE CALL A HARDSHIP IN YOU KNOW, THAT IS
HOW WE MAKE OUR WAIVER DECISION. >> THAT IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
FOR ME, I DON'T THINK I CAN RECALL ANY TIME WHERE WE HAD TO MAKE A DECISION ON A HARDSHIP BASED ON THE AVAILABILITY OF INSURANCE. THAT IS A NEW WORLD.
>> LET ME JUST-- ONE THING I WANTED TO ADD IS IN REGARDS TO PRIVATE STREETS FOR TOWNHOMES, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST HERE AND YOU HAVE APPROVED, LIKE, FOUR OR FIVE WITHIN THE LAST THREE MONTHS.
IN REGARDS TO THAT. I MEAN, WE DID WOODWARD OAKS COTTAGES ORIGINALLY. WE ENDED UP SWITCHING TO TOWNHOMES. THOSE TOWNHOMES ARE DONE OFF OF-- THERE IS A PUBLIC STWREET ON ONE.
THE ONES IN THE BACK ARE SUBDIVIDED OFF A PRIVATE STREET.
WE HAVE DONE THE ARBORS OFF AFTER SHELTON MILL THAT WAS
[00:25:02]
RECENTLY APPROVED WITH PRIVATE STREETS.BECAUSE OF THAT. AND THEN THERE IS ANOTHER ONE OVER-- THERE WAS A FOURTH ONE. IT IS NOT LIKE WE HAVEN'T SUBDIVIDED OFF A PRIVATE STREET. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THE ONLY DIFFERENCE HERE IS WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A GATE.
IT IS GOING TO BE GATED ON PRIVATE STREETS.
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? THAT IS THE ONLY DIFFERENCE
>> ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE CITY HAS OFTEN ON PRIVATE STREETS HAS TO DO WITH THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON THEM, THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE MAINTAINED.
THEY EXPECT THE CITY TO MAINTAIN THEM EVEN THOUGH IT IS A PRIVATE STREET. WHEN THE PARTY THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THOSE STREETS DON'T MAINTAIN THEM, THEN YOU'VE GOT A PROBLEM. IT BECOMES A LITIGATION ISSUE.
THEN THE CITY HAS TO END UP TAKING THE STREETS OVER.
>> HOW OFTEN DOES THAT HAPPEN? THAT WE HAVE TAKEN PRIVATE
STREETS? >> IT DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN.
IT IS A PUBLIC RELATIONS PROBLEM.
WHETHER THE CITY TAKES OVER OR NOT.
>> WE GET PLENTY OF REQUESTS. >> WHAT ABOUT THE UTILITIES?
>> YEAH. THE SEWER-- AND THERE IS A PORTION-- CAN SOMEBODY GO BACK TO THE-- THANK YOU.
A PORTION OF THE SEWER THAT GOES THROUGH THE SITE, IF YOU COME OFF OF WIRE ROAD ON THAT DRIVE AND HANG A LEFT TO GET OUT TO COX ROAD, THAT PORTION OF THE SANITARY SEWER IS PUBLIC, AND THE REMAINDER IS PRIVATE. DID I GET THAT RIGHT? OKAY. THE WATER IS MAINTAINED HOWEVER
DEEMED NECESSARY. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION?
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> THE MOTION WAS MADE. AND SECONDED FOR THE WAIVER OF
THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. >> THE WAIVER.
FOR APPROVAL. >> FOR APPROVAL.
ARE WE STILL DISCUSSING THAT WAIVER?
ARE WE READY? >> I THINK-- I THINK THIS IS SUCH A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE. I COULD ARGUE THERE IS A LEVEL OF HARDSHIP TO THE PUBLIC WITH THIS.
YOU KNOW, BECAUSE OF THE REALLY HIGH, IT SOUNDS LIKE, INSURANCE.
I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THE WAIVER. >> YEAH.
AND ALSO THE FACT THAT IT IS GATED FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE OVER 55. IT IS THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AS OPPOSED TO A GENERAL DEVELOPMENT WHERE ANYBODY CAN OWN-- BECAUSE I WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT IT IF IT WAS JUST SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY COULD BUY.
BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO TURN AUBURN INTO A GATED COMMUNITY.
YOU KNOW, ANY TIME YOU HAVE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSES, IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT IT BE ACCESS FOR EVERYBODY.
THAT WE DON'T CREATE WALLS ALL OVER THE CITY.
FOR ONE PROJECT OR ANOTHER. I WOULD ADD THAT DIMENSION TO IT
AS WELL. >> THAT SHOULD SHOW UP IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS. SO WHEN WE DISCUSS IN THE FUTURE, WE WILL HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THAT.
ARE WE READY FOR A VOTE? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY
>> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO. AND THE MOTION CARRIES.
SO NOW WE HAVE A WAIVER APPROVED.
>> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE DAWSON VILLAS SUBDIVISION, PHASE
>> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
THE MOTION CARRIES. THE WAIVER AND THE PRELIMINARY
[3. Final Plat - Dawson Villas Phase 1 FP-2023-024]
PLAT. WHICH BRINGS US TO THE FINAL PLAT. FOR THE SAME PROJECT.SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS ANY NEED FOR --
>> NOTHING NEW. >> A PRESENTATION.
>> 36 LOTS. DAWSON VILLAS TOWNHOUSE
DEVELOPMENT. >> I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO APPROVE CASE FP-2023-024. DAWSON VILLA SUBDIVISION, FINAL
>> I JUST HAVE-- ANY DIFFERENT NOTES, COMMENTS ON HERE?
>> NO. THEY WERE ALL THE SAME.
THIS FINAL PLAT DOES NOT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
AND THE MOTION CARRIES. THE FINAL PLAT IS APPROVED.
[4. Preliminary Plat - Mimms Trail Subdivision 12th Addition – PUBLIC HEARING PP-2023-031]
THAT BRINGS US TO THE MIMMS TRAIL, I BELIEVE.>> THIS IS A REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF A PERFORMANCE SUBDIVISION CONSISTING OF 50 SINGLE-FAMILY
[00:30:03]
LOTS WITH ONE LOT DEDICATED TO OPEN SPACE AND ONE LOT FOR A LIFT STATION. ON 17.9 ACRES.IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE MIMMS TRAIL PDD AT THE CURRENT TERMINUS OF MIMMS TRAIL AND RUTLAND ROAD.
AND HERE IS THE PLAT SEEING THE 52-LOT SUBDIVISION.
ANDLY ADD THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT DID E DECEMBER, 2022. THAT IS WHY YOU ARE HEARING THIS AGAIN. I WOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMENTS ARE PRETTY NOTATIONAL.
>> NO CHANGES TO THIS EXPIRATION?
IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL THINGS YOU WANT TO SAY? BRETT? OKAY.
THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANYONE HERE WHO WISHES TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS OR ASK ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS PROPOSAL? THERE IS NONE.
ARE NONE. LY CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ISLY THE FURTHER DISCUSSION NEEDED ON THE, ON THE PROPOSAL? IS ANYONE PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION?
>> I MOVE TO APPROVE. PRELIMINARY PLAT, MIMMS TRAIL,
>> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
THE MOTION CARRIES. HERE COMES THE FINAL PLAT.
[5. Final Plat - Mimms Trail Subdivision 12th Addition FP-2023-023]
FOR MIMMS TRAIL. 12TH EDITION.>> BASICALLY THE SAME REQUEST. FINAL PLAT.
IS THERE ANY-- THERE IS NO HEARING.
ON THIS. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION?
IF NOT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> MOVE TO APPROVE CASE FP-2023-023. MIMMS TRAIL SUBDIVISION FINAL
>> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
[6. Conditional Use - 539 Airport Road Warehouse - PUBLIC HEARING CU-2023-044]
THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS.THE AIRPORT ROAD WAREHOUSE. >> THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR A COMMERCIAL SUPPORT USE, A WAREHOUSE. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 539 AIRPORT ROAD. IN THE CDD ZONING DISTRICT.
RIGHT DIRECTLY BESIDE AUBURN UNIVERSITY REGIONAL AIRPORT.
SURROUNDED BY SIMILAR TYPE USES. THE WAREHOUSE WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 7,300 SQUARE FEET ON 1.89 ACRES.
AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. >> OKAY.
IS THERE A REPRESENTATIVE OF T THE-- OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING.
WE WILL OPEN THAT PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
DOES ANYONE WISH TO ADDRESS THIS PROPOSAL? WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR ANY MORE INFORMATION WE NEED FROM STAFF OR THE REPRESENTATIVE?
>> I MOVE TO APPROVE CU-2023-044.
>> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.
A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. ANY DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION?
ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> AYE.
>> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO. THE MOTION IS APPROVED.
[7. Conditional Use - Beehive Park Lots 6 & 7 - PUBLIC HEARING CU-2023-045]
MOVING TO BEEHIVE PARK LOTS SIX AND SEVEN.THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR A COMMERCIAL SUPPORT USE FOR A WAREHOUSE.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON HIVE COMMERCE PARKWAY, IN A NEW COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION OFF OF BEEHIVE ROAD.
WELL, THE PROPERTY WAS ANNEXED AND REZONED EARLIER THIS SPRING.
AND THEN THE SUBDIVISION PLAT WAS DONE IN THE SUMMER FOR THE COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION. THIS IS A REQUEST TO CONSOLIDATE TWO OF THE LOTS IN THERE. THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE TWO ACRES. THE WAREHOUSE BUILDING IS APPROXIMATELY 7,500 SQUARE FEET. AND THERE IS ALSO AN ANCILLARY BUILDING IN THE REAR. THAT IS ALSO FOR THE USE.
THERE ARE SIMILAR USES THROUGHOUT THIS AREA OF BEEHIVE.
THIS IS THE FIRST USER WITHIN THIS NEW PARK.
WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE.
STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL. >> ANY NOTATION?
THERE ARE NOT MANY CONDITIONS. OH, NO.
SORRY. THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. WE JUST RECOMMENDED.
>> ALL RIGHT. DOES THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE APPLICANT WISH TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS?
[00:35:03]
OR ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> I'M NOT SURE THEY ARE HERE.
THIS DOES REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING.
IF THERE IS ANYONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT, ASK QUESTIONS, ET CETERA, ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL, PLEASE DO SO NOW.
ARE NONE. (LAUGHTER) ANYWAY, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS PROJECT?
OR IS THERE -- >> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE KCU-2023-045 BEEHIVE PARK. CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. WE FORWARD IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.
ALLLE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
AND THE MOTION CARRIES. ASHETON GLEN SUBDIVISION.
[8. Preliminary Plat - Asheton Glenn Subdivision - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2023-026 ]
>> FOR THIS REQUEST, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A 21-LOT PERFORMANCE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED OFF OF WATER CREST DRIVE AND U.S. HIGHWAY 280 IN THE CDD DISTRICT.
THE PLOT CONSISTS OF 19 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND TWO OPEN SPACE LOTS. THE SUBJECT SITE IS CURRENTLY WOODED AND UNDEVELOPED. APPROXIMATELY 76% OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY RESIDES IN FLOOD PLANE ADJACENT TO THE CREEK.
THE PLAT ORIGINALLY CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION IN JANUARY OF
2022 AND HAS SINCE EXPIRED. >> SO NO CHANGES?
>> THERE HAVE BEEN SOME ADDED NOTES, BUT THE REQUEST IS THE SAME. YES.
THERE HAVE BEEN MANY INQUIRIES FROM THE PUBLIC REGARDING THIS.
THEIR CONCERNS WERE THE EFFECT ON THE PROPERTY VALUES OF
ASHETON LAKES AND TRAFFIC. >> ON THE-- DO WE HAVE A BIGGER ONE? YEAH.
THE PART-- THAT IS NOT WETLAND. WHAT IS THAT?
>> THAT IS FLOOD PLANE, I BELIEVE.
>> IT IS FLOOD PLANE. SOME OF THOSE LOTS HAVE A VERY NARROW-- THAT IS BUILDABLE. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THEY JUST HAVE TO BUILD UP. >> THAT IS CORRECT.
WE HAVE A NOTE IN OUR STAFF COMMENTS THAT THE LOTS FOUR TO SIX AND 15-20 MUST PROVIDE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS.
>> OKAY. >> FOUR TO SIX AND WHICH?
GOT IT. >> WHERE IS THE-- I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THERE WAS A SOME SORT OF EITHER GREENWAY OR BIKE
PATH OR SOME KIND OF-- >> THAT IS CORRECT.
WHERE IS THAT? I CAN'T QUITE FIGURE THAT OUT.
>> ALONG THE CREEK, THERE IS A GREENWAY THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED
IN THE PLAT. >> I DIDN'T UNFOLD IT.
>> THE GREENWAY AND GREEN SPACE MASTER PLAN SHOWS THE PROPOSED GREENWAY ALONG THE CREEK WHICH CONSTITUTES A SOUTHERN BORDER.
A 30-FOOT GREENWAY EASEMENT PROVIDED WITH THE PROPOSED PLAT.
WE RECOMMENDED THAT THE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD CONSIDER PROVIDING ACCESS FROM THE SUBDIVISION TO THE EASEMENT, AND IT IS IN LINE WITH-- I BELIEVE IT IS IN CONNECTION WITH THE CITY'S GREEN PLAN, TOO. WHICH ABUTS IT FROM THE NORTH.
>> THAT WAS A COMMENT RATHER THAN A REQUIREMENT.
ON THE CONNECTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
>> THAT IS CORRECT. THEY WOULD JUST TAKE ACCESS OFF OF 280. HERE.
>> LET ME THROW MY BIKE OUT AS I GO BY.
>> SO TO THAT NOTE, COMMENTS, CONDITIONS-- I KEPT GOING BACK AND FORTH. IT NEEDS TO BE APPROVED WITH STAFF COMMENTS. RIGHT? IF WE MOVE THAT WAY TO MAKE A MOTION.
[00:40:02]
SO THAT THAT FOLLOWS IT. BECAUSE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ON THE ORIGINAL PLAT, I GUESS.>> TO MAKE THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE SUBDIVISION AND THE GREENWAY. OKAY.
IS ANYONE FROM THE DEVELOPER WISHING TO BRING ANYTHING TO OUR
WE ARE THE CIVIL ENGINEERS ON THE PROJECT.
IT WAS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL. Y'ALL ARE WANTING TO IMPLEMENT THE STAFF COMMENTS. OUR ONLY POINT IS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THESE TWO TO GO FROM O OUR-- THE CUL-DE-SAC IN THIS DEVELOPMENT TO THIS GREENWAY.
IT IS, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY 3,000 OR 4,000 FEET.
>> JUST ACCESS. I DIDN'T SAY TO PAVE IT.
>> I KNOW THAT. I MEAN, IF THE GREENWAY IS COMING DOWN CREEK, THE CITY SHOULD PROVIDE THE FACILITIES TO ACCESS IT. IT GOES BY ASHTON LAKES AND CARVES THROUGH ASHETON LAKES RIGHT OFF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THERE. THERE IS PLENTY OF PLACES TO ACCESS IT. YOU REALLY HAMPER THIS PARTICULAR AREA WHEN THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TRUDGE THROUGH ESSENTIALLY THERE IS NOTHING BUT WETLANDS BETWEEN THIS SIDE AND THE THING. IT IS REALLY NOT THAT FEASIBLE TO DO IT. YOU KNOW?
>> SO THE DARK IS ALL WETLANDS, THEN.
>> YEAH. EVERYTHING-- I MEAN, THERE IS --
>> THE FLOOD PLANE IS JUST UP THERE BY THE --
>> YEAH. THE FLOOD PLANE AND THE WETLANDS ARE ABOUT STARTING AT THE SAME PLACE.
EVERYTHING ESSENTIALLY BETWEEN HERE AND THE CREEK IS WETLANDS, UNDEVELOPPABLE LAND. NOT GOOD FOR MUCH.
>> I WOULD RATHER THEM PARK ON WATERCREST BOULEVARD AND GET
I JUST THINK, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SIDEWALKS INTERNAL HERE.
MY ONLY THING IS IF YOU PROVIDE A PATH GOING THROUGH THERE, IT IS NOT FEASIBLE THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WALK THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE, THAT FAR TO GET TO THAT WHEN THERE IS EASILY-- WHEN YOU GET INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THIS CROSSES BACK.
YOU CAN PARK AT THE POOL. >> OKAY.
IT IS NOW TIME FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS PROPOSAL.
IS THERE-- I'LL OPEN THAT PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
DOES ANYONE WISH TO ASK QUESTIONS, RAISE ISSUES WITH THIS SUBDIVISION? I SEE NO ONE.
COMING FORWARD. WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND CONTINUE ANY DISCUSSION NEEDED. WAS THERE ANYONE PREPARED TO
MAKE A MOTION? >> I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE.
THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, ASHETON GLEN SUBDIVISION.
>> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.
FOR APPROVAL. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY
>> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO. THE MOTION CARRIES.
[9. Preliminary Plat - Talmage Subdivision - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2023-027]
THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE SUBDIVISION.>> ALL RIGHT. THIS REQUEST IS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR A 7-LOT CONVENTIONAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 2042 BONNY GLEN ROAD. IT IS APPROXIMATELY 15.9 ACRES.
THE SMALLEST PROPERTY ON THE SITE FOR THE SUBDIVISION WOULD BE 1.04 ACRES. THE LARGEST WOULD BE 4.3 ACRES.
IT IS CURRENTLY ZONED RURAL. THIS PRELIMINARY PLAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN NOVEMBER OF 2019.
IT EXPIRED IN MAY OF 2021. BUT THIS PLAT THAT YOU ARE CURRENTLY SEEING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLANS. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH THIS REQUEST. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
IF YOU HAVE THEM. >> IS ANYONE REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER HERE THAT WOULD WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT? YES, MA'AM. YOU ARE HERE FOR THE PUBLIC
I'M SORRY. >> I'M THE DEVELOPER.
>> CAN WE HAVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE?
>> SHARON STICK. 242 BONNY GLEN ROAD.
[00:45:06]
THIS IS ACCESSED THROUGH SUMMERLAND.IT IS A FAMILY PROPERTY. BUILD SIX LOTS.
WE HAD IT APPROVED. I DIDN'T REALIZE THERE WAS A TIMELINE. SO WE ARE JUST NOW GETTING-- WE WEREN'T IN A RUSH. WE ARE JUST NOW GETTING TO BUILD THE ROAD. INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> I DON'T THINK SO. THANK YOU, MA'AM.
ALL RIGHT. NOW, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND SEE IF THERE IS ANYONE WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS THIS. NO ONE IS SHIFTING IN THEIR SEAT. WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND WE WILL CONTINUE ANY
DISCUSSION IF NEEDED. >> MOVE TO APPROVE THE
>> MOTION FOR APPROVAL HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
AND THIS MOTION CARRIES. IS APPROVED.
[10. Preliminary Plat - Bridgewater Phase 1B Redivision of Lots 37-46 - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2023-028]
BRIDGEWATER PHASE 1-B. >> THIS REQUEST IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL REQUEST TO REDIVIDE TEN LOTS INTO EIGHT SINGLE-FAMILYST RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE CAREY CREEK PDD.
SOUTH OF CAREY CREEK PARKWAY. IT IS APPROXIMATELY 4.48 ACRES.
THE PLAT TO APPROVE TEN TWIN-HOME HOUSES WAS BACK IN 2019. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
>> OKAY. IS ANYONE HERE REPRESENTING THE
DEVELOPER? >> I'M HERE TO ASK QUESTIONS.
>> ALL RIGHT. THIS REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING.
WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS THIS PROPOSAL? THERE IS NONE. WE WILL CLOSE THAT PUBLIC HEARING. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS? COMMISSION?
A MOTION? >> MOVE TO APPROVE CASE PP-
>> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND AND SECONDED.
THE SUBDIVISION BE APPROVED. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
THE MOTION IS APPROVED. BRIDGEWATER PHASE 1-B FINAL
[11. Final Plat - Bridgewater Phase 2 Redivision of Lots 37-46 FP-2023-025]
PLAT. >> IT IS THE SAME REQUEST FOR THE ITEM BEFORE. THIS IS JUST FOR THE FINAL PLAT NOW. NO CHANGES.
>> I MOVE TO APPROVE CASE FP-2023-025.
FINAL PLAT FOR PHASE 1-B. >> SECOND.
>> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
[12. Preliminary Plat - Northgate Subdivision, Phase 1 - PUBLIC HEARING PP-2023-030]
THAT MOTION CARRIES. NOW WE HAVE ANOTHER PRELIMINARY PLAT FROM NORTH GATE SUBDIVISION, PHASE ONE.>> THIS REQUEST IS FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR A 51-LOT SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED AND TOWNHOUSE PERFORMANCE SUBDIVISION LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF NORTH COLLEGE STREET AND SOUTH OF U.S. HIGHWAY 280. THE PROPERTY TOTAL-- THE SITE TOTALS 19.24 ACRES. APPROXIMATELY.
IT IS CURRENTLY THE NORTHERN PORTION, AS YOU CAN SEE.
OKAY. THE NORTHERN PORTION, AS YOU CAN SEE IS WITHIN CDD ZONING DISTRICT.
THE SOUTHERN PORTION IS WITHIN THE DDA ZONING DISTRICT.
BOTH CONTAIN A PDD OVERLAY. THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN IS PHASE ONE OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
THAT IS NOT IN HERE APPARENTLY. IT INCLUDES 38 TOWNHOME LOTS, 12 SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED LOTS, AND ONE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT LOT.
STAFF IS ALSO RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THIS REQUEST.
I'M WILLING TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> SIGNIFICANT COMMENTS? >> NO SIGNIFICANT COMMENTS.
IT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, AND IN FEBRUARY OF 2022 AND EXPIRED THIS AUGUST. 2023.
>> RIGHT. THERE IS NOT ANYTHING NEW.
>> NO CHANGES? >> NOTHING NEW.
IT IS THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT FOR PHASE ONE WAS SIGNIFICANTLY DECREASED FROM THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAT.
[00:50:03]
ANY REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE DEVELOPER WISH TO ADD ANYTHING?>> I HAVE NO COMMENT. >> DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? OKAY. WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS SUBDIVISION. ANYONE HERE WISH TO ADDRESS THIS SUBDIVISION? I SEE NO ONE.
WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE CASE PP-2023-3030, PRELIMINARY PLAT.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED FOR APPROVAL. ALL IN FAVOR-- DO YOU HAVE A
QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE A CONCERN.
BEFORE YOU SECOND IT. THERE IS GOING TO BE ONE ENTRANCE IN AND OUT OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
AT LEAST AT THIS POINT. IT IS OFF OF A STATE HIGHWAY.
IT IS DOWNHILL. TRAFFIC COMING OFF OF 280.
IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO MAKE A RIGHT TURN IN THERE, THEY ARE JUST GOING TO, YOU KNOW, SLOW DOWN AND MAKE A 90-DEGREE TURN.
IF THERE IS A STRING OF TRAFFIC WHICH THERE OFTEN IS, AND YOU DON'T KNOW IF SOMEBODY IS GOING TO TURN IN THERE AND THERE IS NO DECELERATION LANE, IT IS VERY DANGEROUS.
WE REALLY-- YOU KNOW, A BIT OF A CONUNDRUM HERE.
TRAFFIC ON THAT STRETCH IS VERY FAST.
IF YOU HAVE EVER DRIVEN UP THERE.
ESPECIALLY ON WEEKENDS, NEXT FALL FOR EXAMPLE.
WELL, ANY TIME THE STUDENTS COME BACK ON THE WEEKEND.
>> I TRAVEL IT EVERY DAY. >> MY CONCERN IS-- I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER. WE HAVE A REAL PROBLEM HERE WITH SAFETY. WITH CARS COMING SOUTH ON 147.
WANTING TO MAKE A RIGHT TURN IN. AND ACTUALLY, I'M NOT CLEAR-- MAKING A LEFT TURN IN, COMING NORTH, THERE IS NO CENTER LANE.
THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO STOP IN TRAFFIC.
AT LEAST IT IS UPHILL. I JUST HAVE CONCERN, WE ARE
CREATING A PROBLEM. >> THDOES THIS NOT REQUIRE A
DECELERATION LANE? >> IT DOES.
NORTHBOUND LEAFT IN AND A RIGHT TURN DECELERATION-- I KNOW YOU
CAN'T SEE ME. >> I LITERALLY CAN SEE NOTHING.
>> THERE WILL BE A DECELERATION LANE.
>> IT IS REQUIRED, BUT IT IS A STATE HIGHWAY.
IT IS NOT ON -- >> I UNDERSTAND THAT.
THE DEVELOPER HAS BEEN WORKING WITH THE DOT.
I THINK I MAY HAVE EXPLAINED THIS A LITTLE BIT ON MONDAY.
THAT THE DOT IS PREPARING TO RESURFACE 147, AND SO THEY ARE WORKING WITH THE DEVELOPER TO TRY TO TIME THOSE IMPROVEMENTS
>> WE WON'T LET THEM GET TOO FAR WITHOUT THOSE LANES BEING IN BEFORE OCCUPANCIES GIVEN ON STRUCTURES.
>> VRD GOOD. >> I'LL SECOND, THEN.
(LAUGHTER). >> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND DOUBLE-SECONDED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OF THE MOTION? THE MOTION IS FOR APPROVAL, IF I RECALL. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY
>> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO. AND THE MOTION THE APPROVED.
[13. Final Plat - Northgate Subdivision, Phase 1 FP-2023-026]
FINAL PLAT. NORTH GATE SUBDIVISION FINALPLAT. >> THE SAME SUBDIVISION REQUEST.
JUST MOVE TO FINAL. >> MOVE TO APPROVE CASE FP-2023-026, NORTH GATE SUBDIVISION FINAL PLAT.
>> SECOND. >> MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED FOR APPROVAL. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, SAY AYE.
>> AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED, SAY NO.
THAT MOTION CARRIES. THAT BRINGS US TO THE END OF THE
[ CHAIRMAN’S COMMUNICATION]
AGENDA. THE CHAIRMAN'S COMMUNICATION IS MERELY TO SUGGEST TO STAFF THAT WE, AT OUR NEXT PACKET MEETING, SHARE OUR PHILOSOPHY. LENT'S GO BACK AND TALK ABOUT OUR PHILOSOPHY OF WHEN AND HOW DO WE HAVE A FINAL PLAT ON THE SAME AGENDA-- THIS IS BECOMING MORE PREVALENT, MORE FREQUENT.I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE -- >> YES.
>> I WILL SAY FOR THE ONES TONIGHT, MOST OF THEM ARE FOR EXPIRED PRELIMINARY PLATS. THEY WERE COMING IN FOR FINAL AND WE WERE, LIKE, YOUR PRELIMINARY PLAT HAS EXPIRED.
>> YES. AND I THINK THAT IS ANOTHER THING THAT INTERNALLY, WE WANT TO LOOK AT.
AND KIND OF GET ON THE SAME PAGE.
AS FAR AS WHAT SHOULD CONSTITUTE AN EXPIRED PLAT.
IF THERE IS SIGNIFICANT WORK DONE.
IS THE TIMELINE THE ONLY THRESHHOLD-- THAT IS SOMETHING THAT ONCE AGAIN, REQUIRES AN INTERNAL REVIEW.
WE ARE GETTING ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT THAT.
>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY IN WELL, THEN, IF NOT, THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.