- Good evening, everyone. I'd like to call to order the January meeting of the Monroe County Plan Commission.
- Jackie, to get us started, would you please call the roll? Sure. David Bush. Here. Margaret Clements.
- I believe she was going to be attending virtually tech services. If you could promote Margaret Clements,
- I'm going to call her again after she's been promoted to speak. Toronto and Wright-Randolph.
- got Ferris here. Rudy Fields here. David Henry here. Thomas here. And I think Mr. Randolph was going
- to join via teams as well, but I don't see him, but you might want to keep an eye out for him. TSC Joe
- Van Deventer. Don't see.
- And then I'm gonna come back to Margaret Clements. Margaret could be able to unmute. Okay, regardless,
- we do have a quorum even without counting Margaret, we have six members in person in a quorum.
- Thank you, Jackie. Could you please introduce the evidence for tonight? Sure.
- I would like to introduce the following items into the evidence. The Monroe County Development Ordinance
- as adopted and amended. The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan as adopted and amended. The Monroe County
- Plan Commission Rules or Procedure as adopted and amended. And the cases that were legally advertised
- and scheduled for hearing on tonight's agenda. I think we have a motion to approve the evidence.
- So moved. Second. Been moved and seconded to approve the introduction of evidence. A vote yes is a vote
- to approve.
- Scott Ferris? Yes. Rudy Fields? Yes. David Henry? Yes. Jeff Morris? Yes. Julie Thomas? Yes. David Bush?
- Yes. I'll try again for Margaret Cummins. Okay, we'll wait on that. Margaret, you may need to log off
- and then rejoin if you aren't able to unmute yourself. Sorry about that. Introduction of evidence passes
- six to zero.
- Hey, do we have a motion to approve tonight's agenda? I moved. Second. It's been moved and seconded
- to approve tonight's agenda as presented. A vote yes is a vote to approve. Rudy Fields? Yes. Dave Henry?
- Yes. Jeff Moore? Yes. Billy Thomas? Yes. David Bush? Yes. Motion is approved. Scott Farris? Yes.
- Most is approved six to zero. Okay we have no minutes to approve tonight so we'll jump straight into
- administrative business and the first item is the CDO amendment prioritization list. Jackie are there
- any updates on that this month? I just wanted to give an update on the sliding scale text amendment
- that is actually going to be going this week for a final hearing by the commissioners so that was voted
- by the Planning Commission administrative
- majority to mark that as complete once it is completed on Thursday. So that's the only change to this
- document. Thank you, Jackie.
- We have no unfinished business tonight, so we'll move straight into new business. The first item is
- SSS-25-4. This is the May road sliding scale subdivision primary plat with a sidewalk waiver request,
- a street tree waiver request. And this is the preliminary hearing with the waiver of final hearing request
- requested. So Drew, I will turn it over to you. Thank you.
- All right, so this is a sliding scale subdivision petition at 4410 West May Roads in Van Buren Township
- section 25. It is a 10.38 acre property and it is currently unplatted. Zoned agricultural residential
- 2.5 and it's in the Monroe County urbanizing area rural transition according to the comp plan. Uses
- are residential and agricultural, the same for the nearby area as well as mineral extraction. And the
- other surrounding zoning districts are agricultural residential,
- residential one and mineral extraction. So the petitioner is proposing the sliding scale subdivision
- to create two additional lots from an existing 10.38 acres. Proposed lot one will contain 5.71 acres
- and include the existing single family residence and barn structure at 4410 West May Road. And proposed
- lot two will contain 4.67 acres and represent a vacant lot.
- Proposed Lot 1 will serve as the parent parcel remainder, which cannot be further subdivided for a period
- of 25 years, according to the Accounting Development Ordinance regulations for a deciding scale subdivision.
- Both lots maintain road frontage to West May Road. Proposed Lot 2 also exhibits road frontage to South
- Leonard Springs Road. And both lots will derive access from West May Road. And a new address will be
- assigned for Proposed Lot 2 as the standard process for subdivisions.
- The sliding scale primary plat includes two waiver requests, one for sidewalks and one for street trees.
- And I will say if the waivers are denied for both of those, that would result in 1,321 feet of sidewalk
- being constructed along West May Road and South Leonard Springs Road in total. And then a total of 22
- trees must be planted or preserved along West May Road and 11 trees must be planted or preserved along
- South Leonard Springs Road.
- Here we have the location map, Bamberne Township, South Rockport Road off to the west, excuse me,
- to the east. Here's the site conditions map showing the two foot contours. We do have a rise area over
- here. It looks like a closed contour, but due to that it's rising in the ground, it is not a sinkhole
- or a karst feature. And we do have some mineral extraction here to the south, however, across from May Road.
- and further down to the southeast of the property, hence all the contour lines down there. And there's
- no real slope concerns on this property either. They are not located in the eco area or the Lake Lemon
- overlay. There's also no floodplain, as you can see. Now on the screen is the urban service area boundary
- in pink. And this is what dictates a lot of subdivisions requiring sidewalks and or street trees, among
- other things as well.
- so that you can see they are just located in the southwest corner of this area and therefore are required
- to have sidewalks and street trees unless waved. So now on the screen I have chapter snippets from the
- county development ordinance this one's from chapter 818-1a this is from the sidewalk waiver or sidewalk
- chapter and I bolded item number 1b as the one that's being activated due to the
- proposed subdivision being located within the urban area boundary. And then here for the street tree
- waiver, the same thing, chapter 832-14C, indicating again that the proposed subdivision is within the
- urban area boundary, hence the requirement for street trees. Now on the screen, I have the table of
- the summary of details with respect to the subdivision itself, giving you dimensions and lot totals
- for lots one and two,
- as well as other details that are pertinent to the standard discussion. And then you will see we have
- utilities accounted for Duke Energy and Van Buren Water. We have the two subdivision waivers identified.
- We have existing structures on lot one. Lot two will be vacant. And again, the environmental condition
- of note in lot one is there's a rather large drainage easement that has been requested by the Monroe
- County Stormwater Program Manager, and that has been identified on the plat.
- We also have right of way activity permits filed for both as well, as well as septic permit minimum
- specifications documents accounted for. Now on the screen is the proposed subdivision. I have this version
- of it zoomed in a little bit more so you can see more detail. You can see that 100 foot drainage easement
- cutting through proposed lot one, which includes the existing residence and barn structure, as well
- as existing driveway.
- And then on the western side, we have proposed lot two. The septics are located on the plat. You'll
- see here on the south eastern corner of proposed lot one, the petitioner has identified a tree preservation
- area. This is not particularly a requirement when street trees are activated. It only really comes into
- concern or question if the normal requirements for a street tree are not activated. And then the ordinance
- says in lieu of
- being required to have street trees, please include a tree preservation area of a certain size based
- on your frontage somewhere else on the lot. So they went ahead and did that, although they are still
- required to plant street trees. So that is just part of the discussion that they do have a street tree
- preservation area identified, but just don't have those street trees identified or the existing ones
- or proposed plantings.
- All right, so now a few slides here of the property in question. This is West May Road, looking east.
- And this is looking up the driveway to that existing barn. This is all proposed Lot 1. More pictures
- there of the barn and the existing residence. And then this is a picture on Lot 1, looking south towards
- West May Road. And then on the right is looking towards West May Road, looking southeast. More pictures
- here. This is looking at proposed Lot 2.
- This is towards the back area. The front or south section of the property for lot two is mostly wooded.
- And then this is looking back at the lot one with the barn and the house. And then on the right is the
- road view of West May Road as you're traveling west towards South Leonard Springs Road. Then here's
- the corner of South Leonard Springs Road and West May Road. And then on the right is turning north on
- South Leonard Springs Road.
- So now on the screen, we have the findings of fact provided by the petitioner's representative, as well
- as a few additional findings of fact per the petitioner from the plaque committee meeting that was held
- earlier this month. So on the screen is just some of the rationale the petitioner's representative and
- the petitioner have given to support a sidewalk waiver and a street tree waiver. Simply speaking towards
- a sidewalk waiver,
- West May Road having the mineral extraction to the south. They're stating it's not quite the right area
- to have sidewalks. They've also noted that they do not see walkers or cyclists regularly using this
- area. Dump trucks are using South Rockport Road and cannot use South Leonard Springs Road or West May
- Road due to weight limits of the roads. And then for the street trees, site is approximately 70% wooded.
- and maintain the natural character of the property. They are requesting the waiver from street tree
- plantings. They've also touching on the tree preservation area that they've added on the property. And
- the petitioner is also willing to preserve trees on the property in the tree preservation area as detailed
- on the plot and would prefer not to plant new trees given that there are some existing trees along the
- roadway as well. And I'm sure the petitioner or the petition representative could speak more to these
- findings of fact,
- and support for their own waivers. Okay, that brings us to staff's recommendation. Staff recommends
- approval of the subdivision based on the finding that the proposed primary plat meets the county development
- ordinance subject to the highway and storm water reports. Also recommending approval of the sidewalk
- waiver request citing practical difficulties have been demonstrated and staff is recommending denial
- of the street tree waiver request
- I'm citing that preservation of existing trees can satisfy the requirements of Chapter 832-14C and be
- shown on the primary plat. I will now take any questions. Any members of the Plaint Commission have
- questions for Mr. Myers? For the record too, I noticed that Ms. Clements did join right at the beginning
- of the presentation. Okay.
- Seeing no questions, we can turn to the petitioner or petitioner's representative. Do you know if we
- have anybody representing this petition? Oh, OK. The one person in the room. I'm not sure if I missed
- that. Yes, I missed. There you are. If you could sign in and state your name, you'll have 15 minutes.
- It won't take that long.
- My name is Tracy Fox. I'm property owner. I've owned this piece of property for six or seven, maybe
- eight years, I don't know, in that range. I grew up just next door on the other side of Leonard Springs.
- So I've lived in this area my whole life for 60 years. So this property is probably going to stay in
- the family. And kind of the purpose of this request in general is that I have two kids that haven't landed.
- So just trying to develop a place for them that they want that they shall choose. Don't really know
- what they're going to do yet when my son still in college and my daughter's not got a permanent residence
- yet. So anyway, just trying to make available a spot. General comments I would have is the. The 10 acre
- piece is unusual because it lays on the road. You know, it's not a strip that's perpendicular to road.
- It lays with the road and has, you know, 1400 square feet
- linear feed of road frontage, which is unusual in Monroe County. So I think it lends itself to be subdivided.
- I wouldn't want it to be any smaller subdivision like to pursue anything further. So I think this is
- really adequate for my needs for future. It lays pretty good years ago.
- The quarry across the street, which is now dormant, has been for most of my life. The dirt pile that's
- on lot, proposed lot two that he identified, that Drew identified in the middle of that property is
- dirt from the quarry when it was excavated 75 years ago. And the fellow that lived in that house, it's
- on the property, he worked for the quarry. So he understood kind of all of it.
- kind of know the property and kind of want to keep it in the family and we know we played cards and
- softball in the field. You know there when I was a kid, so it's not going anywhere as far as I can.
- I'm concerned. The preservation of any particular trees. I'm I'm OK with that. I don't have any intention
- of. Like clearcut in the place or anything I'd like for the lot to look a little better. You know it's
- kind of overgrown and a lot of that dirt from the quarry is
- red clay and piled up there so it doesn't grow, you know, the right species of trees, sycamores and,
- you know, pulpwood, different kinds of trees. But there are some trees along the roadway, you know,
- maples and stuff that are presentable that could be identified as to stay. And I'm okay with the,
- you know, the tree preservation area. That's not, I don't have any intention of using that space for
- you know, any further structures or anything. You know, it's really a unique property when you drive
- by. I don't know if any of you are familiar with that area, but the house was a 1923 four-square. It
- came out of the Sears and Robuck catalog. You can find it in the catalog for $2,000. You can buy the
- whole thing. But anyway, it's just a unique property.
- So I just appreciate the opportunity to come and kind of learn the process. You know, I'm a, I'm a local
- builder, but I don't subdivide land very much. So, you know, Drew and Jackie have been helpful in trying
- to help me learn the process and bumps in the road, trying to figure it out because we're missing things.
- So it takes a little while, but anyway, just learning the process and just appreciate the opportunity
- to, to share, you know, just the request and hopefully we can work it out and
- move forward. So thanks. Thank you, Mr. Fox, for coming out and sharing your plan. Do any members of
- the Plan Commission have questions for Mr. Fox? I do. And it's great. Thank you for coming in. And I
- personally don't have any issue with the sidewalk waiver, because that would be cray cray. But I think
- my question is for both you and Mr. Myers. And the question is,
- Um, how do we meet? How much of the current tree canopy needs to be preserved in order to meet
- the requirements? Um, so that I just don't know where you put more trees in the street side, because
- you're also going to cut a driveway to May road. So, um, can you help with that? Is, is that section
- that's identified enough? Is it, could we, um, you know, what is, what is that number? What is that
- magic number?
- Yeah, so we're not looking specifically at canopy cover per se. We're looking at actual number of trees.
- I can't speak to how many trees would meet the diameter breast height requirement for a street tree
- that would be worthy of preservation along West May Road. So I can't speak to how many, especially along
- South Leonard Springs Road as well. As you will recall, I believe I said 22 trees along West May Road
- and then 11 trees along South Leonard Springs Road. So I would hate for the
- sidewalk waiver to be denied and say you must find trees to preserve. And there are then there not be
- any trees or enough trees to preserve. And they would be forced to plant some. Like I said before, the
- tree preservation area is not required per se for this particular subdivision because they are in the
- urban service boundary. But it is delineated on the property and they could find some trees in there
- that they could say these are being preserved or they can say we're planting trees in there as well.
- Okay. And also on lot two, like toward the back of, you know, beyond the meadow area, which is, which
- is a looks like where you're planning to build. There's a whole area of trees. I know that's not on
- the street, but, um, if, you know, I, I just don't know how to, um, clearly explain so we can get a
- commitment. You know, this is how many,
- You need to preserve somewhere on the property. So we could get a recorded commitment, and then we could
- do the street tree waiver. Looking at your primary plat, you can then identify those trees that you
- plan to keep. And we could come up with a good balance. And I mean, I could leave that to staff to judge
- that. So I don't know how to do that, because we don't have a number.
- I think that Drew's calculation is spot on here. So we need 33 trees to technically meet the requirement.
- So I think the choices before you are approve the street tree waiver with the condition that they do
- the tree preservation area rectangle as shown on the plat, or you can deny the street tree waiver
- and ask for those trees to be preserved or planted along the street frontage which we don't know how
- many those are i guess a third option could be approved with the tree preservation area with the condition
- that they preserve as many trees along the street frontage as possible that's the one okay thank you
- are you okay with that if that's i um like i said i don't have any real plan to remove any trees along
- the roadways the the
- where the driveway has been approved for the new lot. There is not any trees in that particular spot,
- but there are some large. I was missing the Drew. There have been some large maples along the road.
- A couple of them haven't weathered the storm because we were like in the peripheral of that tornado
- not too long ago, so they're not weathered the storm real well, but there are some decent trees through
- there on and north on on Leonard Springs. There's some decent trees. There's a couple of cherry trees
- and some some different things.
- I'm okay with. Okay. With leaving the roadway basically alone. So, okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Gellin.
- Yeah, Mr. Bush. Would it be possible to pull up a overhead showing that property? Cause I, I drove by
- there and I thought there was quite a few trees in place. Um, I think his estimate of 70% would, it
- is pretty close.
- what I was thinking. In the rear of the proposed additional lot, that's all a bunch of cedars and evergreen
- along that back. So on the north edge of that pasture field is, it would be a buffer for me because
- there's that property that's right behind is a rental. So I would just soon keep that for
- just some privacy, you know, so. So it looks to me like there's significant foliage on the property.
- So if the petitioner would be amenable to either designating a
- a series of trees or individual trees to come up with that 33, I would support this. Any other questions?
- Yeah. Mr. Ferris. How do you codify that? You codify that or you modify the motion or the suggested
- motion? I'm working on some language for you all as a suggestion.
- that's a good question. Thank you, Mr Fox. We'll turn to public comment now, which Oh, sorry, Miss Clements.
- I see your hand raised. Yes I'm sorry about this. I hear basically two ideas before us. And one of them
- as far as tree preservation is
- with the specific number 33 that the trees must be denoted on a deed. The second idea is to just leave
- the street trees that are currently there alone. I just want to make sure that we're aware of those
- two differences before we proceed, just because there are two different ideas that have been put forth.
- Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Clements.
- Okay, we can turn now to public comment, which seems unlikely since there's nobody in the room. If there's
- anybody online that wishes to speak either in favor or against this petition, please raise your virtual
- hand. Okay, seeing no one, we can come back to the Plan Commission for further discussion and or a motion.
- Jackie, are you planning to read your proposed language to us or are you going to type it up?
- I can hand it to someone for reading it, but I do think that Margaret's point is one for the commission
- to maybe consider as well. So with the plat that the petitioner has shown in exhibit three, he's showing
- supposedly 37 trees. The requirement is 32 trees. So if we're asking them to preserve, they're showing 33.
- In that requirement is 33 requirements. 33. Thank you. So if we're showing 37 as a tree preservation
- area, and then we can say, please preserve as many trees along West May road and South Leonard Springs
- as to the extent possible, you know, if they meet the qualifications of the ordinance, um, if for some reason,
- They want to only preserve one or two along the street's edge. Is that adequate? Because at some point,
- they're over the 33 required. Is there a number we're getting to? I think Margaret's point was just
- helpful in that discussion. I'm perfectly happy to, and I know that it takes us over the number, and
- that's why I was asking that question. I'm perfectly content that
- if you're willing to make that commitment to preserve as many trees along the street front as possible.
- And then we've got that area as well. It's going to be over the number, but I think it gives you that
- leeway of. It's pretty. Easy to see that there's more than 33 trees along. There's there's 700 feet
- of road frontage. There may be more 800 of around lot lot 2, so yeah, it's going to be easy to come
- up with that number, so I don't have a problem with either.
- with either of those scenarios or a combination. So it's whatever. If we get away from the numbers and
- we say preserve as many on the street as possible and keep that preservation area, that would work for
- you? That would be great. Fine with me. Great. Thank you. Thank you for your flexibility and your willingness
- to negotiate. It may not. It may not be something that I build on in the next 10 years. You know what
- I mean? So it's just forward thinking. Sure.
- that's a great idea. Okay, thank you. I lost track. Okay, so the recommended language is approve the
- street tree waiver with two conditions. One, show tree preservation area as on the final plat
- as illustrated in Exhibit 3 of the packet, and 2, the petitioner's surveyor add trees to be preserved
- along West May Road and South Leonard Springs to the extent possible if that meets the CDO requirements
- under Section 832-14. Anybody like to turn that into a motion?
- All righty. So with respect to. Triple S 25 for which is the May road sliding scale subdivision with
- primary plan to create two lots. The motion is to approve the subdivision based on the finding that
- the proposed proposed plant meets the county development ordinance subject to the highway engineer and
- to the stormwater program manager report. That's one. Two.
- approve the sidewalk waiver request, citing practical difficulties have been demonstrated. And lastly,
- okay. Deny the state, the street tree waiver request, which talks about the preservation of existing
- trees, which can satisfy the requirements of chapter eight 32 14 Charlie and can be shown on the primary
- plat. And it would be technically be approved straight to your waiver.
- with two conditions. What's that? Approve the Street Tree Waiver with two conditions. We're not denying
- the Street Tree Waiver. We're approving the Street Tree Waiver. He's got it. Move the Street Tree Waiver.
- That sounds better. With two conditions. As stated by the President of the Planning Commission. Do we
- have a second?
- I'll second. We're waiting. And we're also going to take a request or we're going to take it and waive
- the the final hearing. Does your second second Mr. Bush. Okay. Sorry for the rush.
- It's actually this whole process has been very interesting. You know, I've sat in a couple of committee
- meetings and stuff just and just hearing the perspectives of the individuals, you know, and just where
- you're coming from and where the rules read and just, you know, then thinking about those and how they
- apply. It's been an interesting process for me because it affects me and many others. So it's
- just interesting to see it on this side and not just
- frustrated when I go in and see Jackie at the planning desk. Let me let me go ahead and call the roll
- to get the decision final. Okay so there's been a motion and a second on SSS-25-4 which is the May road
- sliding scale subdivision primary plat. There's been a motion to approve the sliding scale, approve
- the sidewalk waiver, approve the street tree waiver with two conditions, and approve the waiver of final
- hearing requested.
- The two conditions for the street tree waiver hours follows show the tree preservation area on the final
- plat as it illustrated in exhibit three of the packet and to petitioner survey to add trees to be preserved
- along West May road and South Leonard Springs to the extent possible. If they meet the CDO requirements
- under section eight 32 dash 14, a vote yes is a vote to approve.
- subject to highway engineer reports and stormwater manager reports. Groody fields. Yes. David Henry.
- Yes. Jeff Morris. Yes. Julie Thomas. Yes. David Bush. Yes. Margaret Clements. Yes. Scott Ferris. Yes.
- Motion is approved seven to zero.
- Now you can celebrate, Mr. Fox. Thanks for your willingness to work with us. Thank you. Appreciate it.
- And I'll just get with my surveyor and we'll identify trees and get back with planners. That's good.
- All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.
- Item number two, REZ-25-7 on South Roger Street has been continued by the petitioner. So we will jump
- to item number three on the agenda, which is ZOA-25-5. This is the county development ordinance amendment.
- This is the preliminary hearing and waiver of final hearing has been requested. Okay, I'll go ahead
- and take this one.
- So I'm going to go through the edits that are proposed in the staff packet here on the screen. There's
- a revision page on the front and this gives you a good summary of what we will be doing in terms of
- edits. So there's some scrivener error fixes chapter 817
- chapter 823 also in chapter 823 we'd like to add an exception to some of the accessory structures that
- we're seeing as building permits from some of the eco provisions and then we're also requesting some
- text amendments to chapter 841 in terms of
- some house bills that have passed this is going to be helpful for reviewing building permits to require
- pre-designs and then adding exemptions for wireless communication facilities some Scrivener's errors
- and then also adding a definition to chapter 850 which relates to chapter 823 the eco chapter so i'll
- go ahead and walk through these so some of these simply are
- So I won't go over them too much just to match the actual table numbers in the signs chapter. And then
- under chapter 823, we did have some edits to the, let's make sure that was in there, for existing lots
- of record that matches our ordinance provision better than parcels of record. That's a Scrivener's error fix.
- And then standards for approving an exception for single family residences to separate it from below,
- which we are adding as a substantive text amendment. So I'll go ahead and go through this. Basically
- what we're asking for is for existing lots of record that already contain a single family residence.
- and that they would like to build an accessory structure or in addition to their residence, that they're
- able to do so if they propose those construction requirements or those construction proposals on completely
- flat ground and if they can follow the criteria below. If the total footprint of the proposed accessory
- structure permitted under this exception shall not exceed 1,000 square feet and or in the case of an addition,
- the total footprint of the addition to the home shall not exceed 1000 square feet and the lot must have
- at least 0.25 acres of contiguous buildable area around the single-family residence and then we state
- at the bottom in the event another development standard is not met such as setbacks or height restrictions
- then this exception would not apply. In addition this exception does not apply to accessory dwelling units so
- is the text amendment before you on the accessory dwelling or on the accessory structures in the eco
- area and then under the definition section we are asking that the area of a building measured from the
- exterior surface of the exterior walls including extended or cantilevered portions where a building
- is elevated above grade level the building footprint is the area the building would cover if it were
- located at the ground level so
- If someone wants to do an addition of a thousand square feet footprint, but they want to do two stories,
- we would be able to still count that under the exception because we're worried about land disturbance.
- So they could actually have an addition of 1500 square feet total between the two floors. If you were
- to make sure that the bottom ground disturbance is no more than 1000 square feet. So we've tried to
- accommodate that.
- then under section 841-1 we are asking to make it clear that before they apply for a ILP, an improvement
- location permit, that they fill out a pre-design as a prerequisite. This is serving the public in that
- we're helping to streamline the new process that took effect January 1st, 2026 which required
- essentially required the planning departments of both city and county to separate their permitting
- applications from the building department because of a state bill that requires certain timelines and
- certain prerequisites for completed applications. So the predesign helps people understand what their
- complete application is and so that we can make sure that people do it in the right order and help people
- through this process.
- then we also made an amendment to section 841-2 and we would like to see some language added which says
- a site plan amendment shall not be required in the case of a wireless communication facility modification
- within the approved fenced
- lease area that includes the addition of structures such as generators as long as they are otherwise
- exempt from the ilp permit requirements under this chapter so we are seeing wireless communication facilities
- be approved their fenced leased in area does not show a future generator location or utility cabinet
- And it's already on an impervious surface. They go to add that later and we're asking them for a site
- plan amendment. And we feel that within that fenced gravel or concrete area, we've already vetted it
- for impervious cover landscaping and other requirements. So we don't feel the need to do a full site
- plan amendment involving multiple departments because it's already a facility that's been approved.
- And then under.
- variances 841-4 we do want to make sure we have consistent language with the state code so we're changing
- standards for designs variance to development variance that matches the rest of the ordinance now and
- then importantly under criteria 1c we want to make sure we add the word not for our variance
- consideration criteria it was an omission Scrivener's error so we're adding that back in and that concludes
- all of the text amendments. Before we turn to questions Mr. Enright Randolph is joined online so if
- he could be promoted to be able to unmute and turn on his camera. Are there any questions for staff?
- Mr. Randolph is your hand raised to get promoted or did you have a question or comment. I just lowered
- my hand, sorry I was a little behind. Thank you though for bringing attention and I apologize for being
- late. Okay, thank you Mr. Randolph. Any other questions? If not we can turn to public comment.
- There's obviously nobody in the room. If there's anybody online who wishes to speak for or against these
- changes, please raise your virtual hand. Seeing no one, we can come back for further discussion and
- or motion. With respect to ZOA 25-5, which is a CDO amendment,
- I recommend we afford a federal recommendation to the county commissioners for approval. And we also
- waive the final hearing.
- Okay. It's been moved and seconded to send a favorable recommendation to the commissioners for petition.
- Zio a dash 25 dash five with a waiver of the final hearing. A vote. Yes. Is a vote to send the favorable
- recommendation and approve the waiver. David Henry. Yes. Jeff Morris. Yes. Julie Thomas. Yes.
- David Bush. Yes. Mark. Yes.
- I'm going to recuse just because I wasn't here for the full discussion. If the motion fails, I could
- ask a question and participate in the next round if needed. Scott Fares? Yes. Rudy Fields? Yes. Okay.
- That motion is approved by a vote of six to zero to one. Seven to zero to one.
- Thank you, Jackie. The next item on the agenda is public comment for any items not on the agenda. So
- if there's anyone online who wishes to speak, please raise your virtual hand. Seeing no one, we can
- come back and ask for any planning or legal reports. No report from legal, other than I would note just
- on the Huff case, the Court of Appeals affirmed the BZA's decision on that.
- Thank you, Mr. Schilling. Any planning reports? I would just have two things. One, I want to correct
- my statement at the beginning of the Planning Commission meeting about the CDO prioritization. The science
- scale amendment is actually not going this Thursday. It's going next Thursday the 29th. I apologize.
- I'll have that corrected. And then just a statement that we did attend the
- hearing this morning at the State House for House Bill 1001 and hopefully they take into account some
- of our comments that we have to help the bill become more clear. Thank you to the staff that attended
- that on a cold winter morning this morning. If there's nothing else do we have a motion for adjournment?
- So moved. Okay have a good evening.