Carroll County, MD Board of County Commissioners Open Sessions, 2 Dec 2021

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Board of County Commissioners Residential Text and Map Discussion December 2, 2021

Description

https://www.carrollcountymd.gov

A

Good afternoon it is 1301 and for the next hour, or so, uh if it takes that long or even takes a.

A

Little bit longer we're going to be talking about the residential text and by request rezonings.

A

To date, we have had multiple work sessions. Two public hearings, one in the afternoon.

A

And one in the evening time frame got a lot of comments um during both those sessions.

A

And, as promised, we're going to have this session this afternoon to see if we are prepared at this.

A

Point to make decisions there'll be discussions amongst us and then the potential decisions and.

A

Moving forward and we'll take it from there um mary, I appreciate you providing the agenda.

A

And uh I do know that, linda as we all do is not seeing with you, uh but I think we.

A

Can handle it from here and you may be in close contact with her anyway, so um you provided an.

A

Agenda one through four one: you uh guide us through it and we'll we'll take it from there sure.

B

um I was going to go over the public hearing um what you just said, basically, that on november 18th.

B

We had two public hearings for both the map and the text. One was virtual, one was in person, we had.

B

22 oral comments on the map and two only two specifically on the text, but we did receive a.

B

Number of written comments- and those are all for you here in your packet. What we've done is we've.

B

Summarized them by the speaker or the person who wrote in the topic specifically if it's the map.

B

Stable or baby- and we summarize the comments now if they were a written comment, you've got all the.

B

Written comments actually in your packet, so to date, you've gotten all the written comments. These.

B

The ones in this packet are only from the public hearing to close of the record.

B

After 10 days throughout the process, we've been giving you everything else that we have received.

B

So you should have, you do have a complete packet of comments that have been received, since this has.

B

Been with the planning commission actually, so I'm not going to go through these comments as.

B

I said there's a total of 61.. um Some of them are duplicates if they commented on the text.

B

And the math or on two of the properties. So you have that for your review and consideration.

B

Really I was going to next just jump into the residential text.

B

Decision table and that's what we have been working on for two or three work sessions.

B

um This was the um table that we used with the planning commission, where we had it by topic.

B

We had a summary of the topic. What comments were received possible options? The planning commission.

B

Took a vote and then we've added columns that are the um work session direction to us and then today.

B

We are hoping to fill out that final column by having either a consensus vote or if you would.

B

Prefer on some topics to take an actual vote, um but some of these I think there was general.

B

Agreement on we just need to know before we go forward and um prepare the final clean version of.

B

The text amendment, so, are you looking for your packet in your packet? It's no okay,.

B

um So if there's no questions I'll just jump into the first issue was private kennels.

B

um As you know, the current code regulates the keeping of more than three dogs as a zoning matter.

B

There is considerable discussion about this, both at the planning commission and here.

B

um It appears that in your work sessions, your direction to us was that you would leave it as.

B

Proposed by staff and planning commission that it would no longer be a zoning issue, but that you.

B

Would discuss it as a board with the with animal control? So is there any change to what we think we.

B

Understood as the work section session direction, and do you want to do a consensus on that.

A

So from me, one more time we talked about going to animal control. Well, it's currently also with.

B

Animal control, it's with animal properties, yes, and it's also with zoning and it's based on and I'll.

B

Turn to jay if it gets any more deep than this we had. We had discussed about to have a discussion.

C

With animal control to see what their rules and regulations are right and then leaving this in.

C

Their lap, but talking about what what they do, what they don't do, what they enforce, because they're.

C

Actually enforcing arm of this- and it doesn't make sense to have this in zoning, but we do have a.

C

Session set up with animal control: do we have one yet or no, but we're going to very shortly, I'm sure.

D

um Yeah we could, um I mean this- is it's currently handled by animal control yeah, but I I want to.

C

Know and that's wha, I want to know how it's handled by animal control, so if we could have.

C

Them come in in after in january, something of that sort. I I think it'd be worthwhile to just.

C

Discuss it with them, because I'd like to see exactly what is or isn't happening with them,.

C

Because I I don't have the rest of you, but I do get complaints about too many dogs, dogs, barking.

C

Or cats and stuff like that and okay, who do I turn it to and what is the enforcement? I I would like.

C

To know that, so I think we do need to set up a session with them. I I have to remember frasier.

E

I'd like that, because there's a lot of lack of knowledge on this subject in the public.

F

Did you say, cats parking? That's it from cats, barking, okay,.

C

That's all I gotta say we better get out.

G

We we certainly can set up a joint meeting with with uh meeting and ask karen baker. Is.

D

The head of the humane society and and our animal control enforcement right as well to come in and.

D

Meet with the board, that's no problem. I, but are you interested? Is the board want to hold up on.

C

No adopting this is no, I don't want to hold it up. Last time we talked.

C

About it, we're going to take this out of control leave lead this way as presented.

D

Great okay, so I'll make that happen. Sorry.

F

So from a procedural standpoint, are we gonna I'm confused? Okay? Well,.

A

Why are you confused? Because I'm not sure if we made what decision we're.

A

Making on this, except we're not making a decision until we have animal control, come to.

E

He just wants public awareness on the subject right right. Well, I want animal control to come.

C

In so we can talk to them, but for this right here, I'm saying we take this out of the zoning.

C

Text amendment, which was uh the recommendation from staff because it should be held, it should.

C

Be kept with animal control. I just want to talk about control to find out what they actually do so.

F

Talking to them is not going to change you not going to change this. No.

F

Got that so then I was gonna ask from a procedural standpoint. We're gonna go right down through these.

F

One by one is that what we're doing here, I think it's safe. That was my hope, because that.

B

Gives us direction, then, when we're redrafting or drafting specifically with the board, got it okay,.

F

Just wanted to make sure that's where we were as long as there's no more barking cats.

C

So so we're going to say we're going to remove dog enforcement from chapter 158 as proposed.

C

Now, as we're making decisions, now we're going into the motion and procedure correct.

A

Right, yeah we're. We are now at a point of making motions right and going through the process, so I.

A

That motion to remove dog enforcement from chapter 158, as proposed.

A

Okay, is there any further discussion on this all in favor, aye, 500, okay, number, two: okay, the second.

B

Issue was storage containers. Originally this was as a permanent use, but there's really two issues.

B

Permanent use and temporary use as it worked its way through the planning commission.

B

They recommended that we put a definition in, which is what your draft has and, at the definition.

B

Specifically it's from baltimore county um and that we limit the time a storage container may.

B

Be used to six months, you in work session accepted that recommendation, but also set a size limit on.

B

It for the smaller lot zoning districts and at the last work session, we proposed saying that in the.

B

R 10 000 and our 7500 districts, self-contained storage units shall be limited to a length of.

B

20 feet, which is the smallest of the available storage units. They would not be allowed at all.

B

As a permanent use right now right, no permanent at all right, okay, um actually, we were brought it.

H

Up this morning, I guess when we're talking about uh you, know the storage units in some places they.

H

Make a whole self-contained hydroponic unit now and not popular in this area, but in new england.

H

They're using them like crazy, they don't even look like a storage unit, but I I you know some of this.

H

Stuff will happen in the future, I'm sure somewhere, but you ought to give the zoning administrator a.

H

Little flexibility on some of these see that's a problem. I've got a problem with this one.

F

uh And it's it's a problem based on an actual incident that occurred in my district there's.

F

A loophole here you can make these temporary all you want until somebody says all right.

F

I'm going to put tags on it now, it's a trailer.

F

And you've done nothing really to enforce anything. I I just think I think this is a problem.

F

Well, wasn't it your problem, I think, was what there was an out-of-state tag on it. Yeah can.

C

We require it if it's going to be a trailer. I don't know how to do that. But if it's a trellis.

C

Don't have a maryland tag on it, then that has to be inspected well yeah, then that's a different.

F

Thing I had suggested that, but I didn't know how deep into the weeds we wanted to get with this.

F

Because that could you know the issue, um but I've got. I just think, there's a there's a there's, a.

F

Loophole here that still uh keeps the door cracked open. That is a challenge for our zoning folks.

F

And I don't like it because these things are becoming more and more prevalent.

F

Because they're, cheap and quite honestly, I think they look like crap.

F

And there's the common sense: steve wants coming out.

I

I think that would be in the jurisdiction of the motor vehicle association yeah. Maybe overstepping.

I

Your bounds there right and that's that no, but I thought about that dennis I mean I I I.

F

But but um you're right, if it would have maryland tags on it, it would have to be inspected right.

F

And guess what it's not gonna pass maryland inspection? Isn't there sort of certain amount.

C

Of time that, if you have an out of state tag on it, then you have to get a maryland tag or.

C

There's anything like that: no, no, no, I just know everybody seems to live in maine yeah.

F

Yes, it must be yeah, so, interestingly enough, it's cheap and maine actually.

F

Uses it as a fundraising opportunity: that's how they do it. Oklahoma also yeah.

D

If I may suggest, maybe this is a way to go about it, because I think the board's interested in.

D

Not allowing take the take the trailer aspect out of the question at the moment.

D

um I think that not allowing these trail, these storage containers to become permanent. I think.

D

It's the first question you could answer and I think the board is in favor of not allowing.

D

Permanency here the second thing is: okay, you convert something to a motor vehicle, basically,.

D

A trailer motor vehicle. um What limitations should our zoning code have on parking.

D

Trailers and other large um similar items on the property. I see it as sort of two separate things.

D

There's a storage container thing and then and it could be, I know we do limit how many.

D

um Unlicensed and other kinds of vehicles, um certainly if it were unlicensed, it could be.

D

F

Mary is very lonely: well, you've been forced to go here.

F

I'll get her back.

A

Good afternoon jack good afternoon, commissioners, so could it be handled under the vehicle portion.

D

Of our zone, well, basically, what our vehicle section says that if it's a tag registered legal.

I

Vehicle you can park as many as you want on your property and any size. There's no nice limitation.

I

If it's a commercial vehicle, there are a limit to the number that you can have.

I

If you're under an acre, you can have one more than that you could have two once you get above.

I

10 acres, you can have four but um other than that. If they're all tagged, there's nothing.

I

We can do about it, we even actually have people who have cars that are totally junk.

I

But they tag them yeah I mean that means they're going to the state getting them.

I

Tagged registered insurance and everything and they're junk, but they're tagged legal vehicles.

I

We can't make a move right. There's no law that says you can't park a legal vehicle on your.

I

Property yeah, I I don't know what the answer is. I've had this conversation with jay because it.

F

Came up in my district and we didn't come up with any answers either, but we're trying to really lock.

F

Some things into place here that puts more teeth into to these to these items, as we move forward.

F

In the anticipation that we don't need to reopen them again next year to do the very same thing.

F

And when we have something, that's as blatantly in your face, loopholed like this one is, I think there.

F

Needs to be a a different approach and I'm not disagreeing with your commissioner. The only thing.

I

With this is that in the state of maryland, it's legal to build your own trailer as long as you get.

I

It inspected and titled. Then it becomes a legal vehicle. Regretfully in maine and oklahoma they.

I

Don't have to do that, it's just an application, but the state of maryland recognizes all other.

I

States licensing requirements and accepts them. So that's what we have to do right, how much of.

H

An issue is this: is this one out of a thousand or 100? Well currently, right now we have one case.

I

Which was supposed to go before the board earlier this week that was postponed due to an illness.

I

But really that's really the only case we have right now, someone converting storage.

I

Container into a trailer, you gotta think it's kind of ingenious in a way. Well, it is, but but.

F

You know- and I guess really when you get down through this uh somebody uh that is.

F

Well, versed in finding loopholes, they're going to find them in pretty much anything. We do.

F

And we fight that battle every day. I know you do, but that and that's why.

F

I'm saying what I'm saying this one's in our face: there's got to be a way to fix it yeah, but I don't.

F

Know what it is, and I don't think it's through the mva- uh it's not I. I thought that was the fix.

F

Until I got a couple people that that called me and said you know, I went oh yeah you're right so.

F

I I don't know um you're right identifying. It has to be a step process here.

F

I'm looking at it from my standpoint, if I had a neighbor that plopped one of these.

F

On their property near right near me, I wouldn't be too excited about that. But yet I it's all about.

F

Property rights- I I get that, don't don't don't get me off in the wrong branch of the tree here.

F

But it's temporary correct and that's when our regulations recognize that as temporary right now.

I

You can have one, but currently it's up to six months, a maximum of six months, then.

I

You have to get rid of it. That doesn't mean you can't bring one back. Six months later,.

I

And do the same thing again, good point, because it has you know it's once a year. You can do that.

I

And that was part of this case. They had it there for part of last year and then the new year came.

I

Around and they were able to extend it again so, like I said it was another loophole, but that's the.

I

Way it is yeah, I mean on the flip side, it could be masking three junk cars that are now tagged.

A

You know so I mean there's other things that could be put on property, which your point you.

A

Rather, it not be there next to your property, but there's other things that are out there yeah. I I.

F

Know- and I get that too so- I'm I'm perfectly- I'm I'm good with the language that as it currently.

F

States here- and I don't want to hold us up any longer here, but I just wish there would have.

F

Been a way in which we could have have closed that that uh that open door, that's cracked, open.

F

With this yeah, I understand your neighbor could paint vote vance on the side well, well, yeah! Well,.

I

My neighbor can paint whatever they want to in any building and there's nothing. I can do about.

F

It yeah, and actually that was suggested I mean suggested buffer zones and that kind of thing.

I

Do you know in that case that the proper owner is planning on putting some screening yeah, but.

I

Yeah, but that does take time- that's in the perfect world where they said yeah. Okay, we'll do that, but.

F

You know I can foresee in today's world where they'd say yeah, really I got your buffer zone.

A

One of these before is there a potential? Yes, that's what I want. What could potentially.

E

Happen because that could happen to us. People start living these things. Yes, it's a huge trend.

I

Across the nation, there's actually a hotel down in dc that was built out of 40-foot sea containers.

I

Correct as long as they meet the structural code and everything they can be used according to our.

I

Building department they have to meet whatever the code says, but you could put and I've seen.

I

Some of them put six or eight of them together and make them.

I

Actually, a very nice looking house, so they can go through the approval process and do this. But.

E

I'm worried about, like commissioner wayne's saying a neighbor puts one of these things in.

E

Next, you know they got a relative comes in and wants to stay in there or something well like I.

I

Say I mean to do that: that's going to take a lot to convert them, okay, but people do do that. I mean.

D

It would be a violation if they did it without the proper performance, correct something we could.

I

Keep an eye on it. Yes, and one thing you also have to remember- is we only act on these when we get.

I

A complaint right: that's: there are more of them out there in the county that we don't know about.

I

Because people haven't complained about right, so I mean that's in this one case: the neighbors.

I

Have complained loudly, but at this time nothing we can do all right. Well, I again.

F

I don't want to hold this up, but I guess it's food for thought for later down the road, but.

F

That that's a problem for me when it comes to this, and I know we can't eliminate all areas of.

F

Gosh well, if we do this, we can get by right. We can't do that. I understand that, um but maybe food.

F

For thought, for another another time when this is re-looked at or if they become more prevalent.

I

Well, one thing we have had happened in the past where we've had people who've had these trailers.

I

They've actually built a structure around them and kept them in the structure yeah, and if it's inside.

I

A structure or a building, we don't care yeah right, so we have had people do that too right.

F

All right, well, the rest of it's fine. I just that's so what we're doing with this one I.

C

Guess is limiting the storage container to be temporary no more to six months and then the r.

C

10 000 r 7500 districts can't be uh a limit of 20 feet on the storage container right, correct, okay,.

B

Did you want to vote on it, or is that just going to be consensus yeah? Are we good, I think.

E

Just to be safe, if you don't mind just I'll make those two motions.

A

Okay, I got the motion and I've got a second that says what now that we're going to limit this.

C

Motion is that the storage container continues to be limited to temporary use of six months or less.

H

Okay well- and I was going to we got that- oh I apologize okay, so there was a motion.

A

Second, on that, what's all one either way either way, whichever way you want that one.

C

Issue: okay: I got a motion on a second on everything that was discussed.

A

Okay, is there any more discussion on this? Yes, sir, seen here not all in favor, something.

F

Against I I mean I'm, I'm not okay with it; okay I'll go with it. I just it's a step. It's a step.

B

In the right direction: okay, okay, the next issue really wasn't discussed much by you, but it was.

B

Discussed by the planning commission, so it's um still being brought to you originally the.

B

Staff had proposed that private schools no longer be permitted. I'm sorry no longer be.

B

Permitted by right, but be conditional, there were a number of issues raised with existing schools.

B

That would become non-conforming. um The planning commission ultimately recommended.

B

Not changing the current code permitting all schools by right in the residential districts.

B

But also specifically, disallowing the variances from the minimum lot size requirements.

B

So that would it's five acres, so that would be a check on it being squeezed into a small.

B

Lot and too close to other houses, so you didn't really have any further discussion on that, but I.

B

Just wanted to make sure that that was since it was an issue that was raised originally.

A

Well, it says five acres by for elementary uh and ten for middle and high and ten yeah, okay, I'm.

B

Sorry, no five for elementary and middle ten for high and then ten for high school yeah right. Okay,.

G

They're bulleted here five acres for elementary ten acres and fifteen acres for college yep.

C

They're still allowed by right in in the districts where they are, it's not conditioned.

C

Okay, so this would leave the code the same no because they couldn't get a variance. Oh right,.

F

Right, okay, sorry, okay, got it okay, so it would make it a little more stringent yeah.

B

Changes make a motion that we go with. Planning commissions recommend changes as a second.

A

Okay, everybody understand this, you know no glove's done now go ahead.

H

Well, it's important dick because it is, he might have to go back to school. No, do you? I mean yeah.

A

Can you describe it one more time, yes, um currently in the code.

B

Private schools are permitted by right in all the residential districts. You just put.

H

Your restriction on anchorage on them correct yeah, allows for new variances to that. Yes, okay,.

A

Okay, the motion second still stands any other discussion, seeing here not all in paper.

B

Okay. Fourth issue is age, restrictive housing. I will go over this again because there was a lot.

B

Of discussion on this, the current code allows age-restricted housing, which is detached and.

B

Attached units, meaning single-family and townhouse up to six units, almost six units per dwelling.

B

Six units per acre thank you as a conditional use in all four residential districts.

B

The proposed text reduces the density to 3.5 dwellings per acre.

B

As a permitted you originally, it was as a permitted use in the r-20 r-10 and r-75 and.

B

No longer allowing it in the r-40, the planning commission changed that back to conditional use.

B

So that summary is a little deceiving at this point. um It's important to note that the adopted.

B

County and freedom area plans specifically permit this use up to 3.5 dwellings per acre in the.

B

Residential medium future land use definition, it is spelled out under the land use definition.

B

So that is why originally staff and then the planning commission made this recommendation.

B

So there's several individual issues regarding this. The first is density and we received.

B

Comments on both sides wanting more density and wanting density to be what the um underlining.

B

Underlying zoning really is um the planning commission after a lot of discussion, voted.

B

To keep the languages proposed at 3.5, but they wanted to allow flexibility for increased density.

B

In your work sessions you took or gave us the direction to eliminate that flexibility. There.

B

Was a finding to be made? We took that out of an interim draft and also adding language that.

B

Specifies that density may not be increased after the initial initial planning commission.

B

Concept plan it has approval here, but laura matthias has corrected me. What's the word.

B

Review and determination. So if you that that is what it would.

B

Say in two places in the code that we went over last time.

B

So that is the question before you is density and I'm going to lump in with that uses, because.

B

The other comment is regarding attached and detached, but it goes together with density, so.

B

If you, I guess the question is, do you want to make a change from the planning commission's.

B

Recommendation to keep it at 3.5, not keep it but reduce it to 3.5 dwelling units per.

B

Acre and allow attached and detached dwelling units with no finding for increased density.

H

So that's taking I apologize, I mean if we do that and follow the planning commission's.

H

Recommendations. Well, that's not exactly what they're planning without the financing. Oh yeah,.

H

3.5 3.5, no additional flexibility and and attached and detailed and attached and detached.

A

And that takes that takes out conditional uses. No, this would still be allowed. The community.

B

Felt very strongly and that's why the planning commission that's on the next page, under process.

B

Felt very strongly they should remain a conditional use and not permitted by.

B

Right because it does need that scrutiny, um so this would be a still be a conditional use.

B

The difference from the current code would be, it would be reduced density from 5.8 to 3.5.

B

um It's really the major difference from the current code 35.8 to 3.5.

A

Yes, oh and the other thing is, it wouldn't be allowed in the r40 000, as it currently is by.

B

Conditional usage period, it wouldn't be allowed there and multi-family would no longer be allowed.

B

And that's all in line with the freedom. This is in line with the freedom and.

A

It allows yes, it's, it does become more restrictive. Okay, yes- and you say that say that again, that it.

F

Is in line what, with the freedom yeah the freedom master plan? If this is in line with the freedom.

A

Master plan correct what is said here and what is being recommended, and it actually gets us to.

A

Become more restrictive on the dwellings units per acre down to 3.5? Yes, the concern I have.

A

Is conditional, but I can handle that as long as this is dealt with in primary use, so, okay.

A

F

So as so, I know we had discussed uh eliminating the flexibility of pc from this from from right. So.

B

If you were looking for a motion to make or not yet you're just well, no, but I mean.

F

That's part of this thing I mean right, we're lost here because there's so many moving parts.

F

To this one, the other ones were sort of right. Okay, that's fine, but this one has.

F

Other stuff attached, so I want to make sure we get them all here and not just make one.

F

Blanket right, so I think what I understood was that you may be in agreement with it.

B

Being reduced to 3.5 dwelling units per acre, that's in the r 20 000, not in the r 40 000 at all,.

B

um Attached and detached units, as is currently allowed and no allow it allowable finding for.

B

Flexibility, that's that weight awarded no finding for flexibility to increase that. So it's a set 3.5.

B

So taking out that one portion of the planning commission's recommendation, because once it once.

F

It's in it's in and not going back and say well, wait a minute now that that's yeah, that's what we.

F

Had discussed right and we did look at specific language last time that isn't in which you need.

F

To know the pc was interested in making sure they had that flexibility, but we're kind of saying no.

F

I want to make that clear here right.

D

You'd be adopting with the planning commission recommended, with the exception.

F

With the exception of that flexibility, correct and does the process part of it come into play here.

B

Process is just that, it's conditional, not I mean you could make that all part of the same motion.

B

Originally, staff recommended that it not be conditional. The planning commission after.

B

Hearing from the community wanted it to remain conditional and that's what's before you in.

B

The draft yeah and I kind of agree, I think, you're saying I don't like conditional but oh well. I just.

F

See I think, by making it conditional you get a chance to hear more input instead of just saying.

F

Okay, now right, they've got to do an extra step, that's kind of the way I look at it. No, it is no.

F

You're you're right, which I think is respectful of those that they needed the case to develop right.

F

I mean I don't want to lengthen it, but I do think there's a responsibility to hear from those.

F

Folks and if you just say it's not even going to be allowed conditionally, then there's no.

F

Chance at all for any dialogue, correct, really right, it's very clear. Just on site plan issues.

F

Yeah right and that that kind of, I think that kind of, while that step, can elongate.

F

The process, I do think that's an important step. You are it does this. You know this age restricted.

D

Being able to um have does get significantly increased density bonus, and so I think you know.

D

The conditional use step gives that additional opportunity for the neighborhood to make comments.

D

Yeah about that right there you go, you might have said it just a little bit better, but.

D

Never never the um the only concern I have is again adding conditional usage on.

A

These type of definitions like it takes another step to get through, but it.

A

um It takes away the expectations I mean people will start building the case on a conditional use.

A

And not on what the property is actually designed to be used for, and that is I mean every property.

A

That should be de that's out there, and zones should be designed for the way it is zoned period.

A

And shouldn't have well here's the primaries and here's some other ideas we can put in there.

D

I mean folks would argue that it shouldn't be in here at all.

C

I mean the residents would argue that you don't want it as primary to use. Do you.

A

I want 3.5 as primary use. I don't want increased.

A

Density, well, that is increased density, though, because you're talking about that, but you're right.

F

Yeah yeah, but it was no, it was five, no, but we're changing it to 3.5. We've already said that.

C

Right which is less dense than it was correct, correct! That's what we're changing to 3.5.

C

Or I think making a conditional use, it takes an extra step to get it through unless you want to.

C

Make it principal use, which means it's 3.5 and you got it, but the conditional use? No. No! That's.

A

Not the conditional use the conditional use is to increase the density, no, no, no, no! No! No.

D

No okay! No! It's just to allow the um eight to have.

D

That density of three point five here: it is the conditional use. Yes,.

F

3.5 is what it is period right, which I think honestly goes a long way in repairing some of what.

F

We would hear from non-conditional debates so keep in mind. The whole purpose of the conditional use.

D

The state of maryland set up the test um called schultz versus prince.

D

um It was about wonderful uh funeral homes uh here in the county, and um the test is, is it would the.

D

Impact of whatever you're trying to put there be worse here on this particular piece of property.

D

Than elsewhere in the in the same zone, someplace else, and so because you're getting in this case.

D

I would say because you're you, the developer, is getting such an increased density over what.

D

You would normally be able to put on the same track of land without the age restricted bonus.

D

Then the impacts could be worse depending on where you are. You know, road impacts and.

D

Other things, so it makes sense, I think, to go through that additional step of.

D

Condition, no, I I I I apologize. I was commissioner, I could say one thing when these initially.

I

For the planning commission for density approval and site site design, that's all the planning.

I

Commission is looking at it's actually, the board is learning appeals through the conditional use.

I

That is actually authorizing this used to be on that property, so the planning commission's.

I

Looking at just one thing, but the board is saying yes or no to that use and then they.

I

Have once again go to the site planning process, I'm tracking that as well. No I'm I'm good. I was.

A

Thinking a different way because, just like we did when we had the conversations with commercial.

A

Industrial employment campuses- it is what is the best use of that specific property and, let's.

A

Minimize the amounts of conditional usage for those piece of property and let's make industrial.

A

Industrial and commercial, commercial, it's the same thing here: let's make these residential.

A

And the densities of these residentials very clear that that's the best use of that property.

A

And we're going to get into that some more when we start looking at some of these maps.

A

Because that's where we get challenged so, okay, I'm but I'm good. And I I appreciate the.

A

Clarification so um there was a motion. Was there a second? I don't know if we had emotions.

B

The motion is to accept the planning commission recommendation for 3.5 with no increase possible.

B

In that density, allowing both types of units and with the conditional use process.

A

Is that your emotion, that's my money. Okay,.

A

Okay, I got a motion. I got a second on what mary so eloquently said.

A

Is there any discussion on this all in favor all right? Thank you.

B

Okay, the next issue is cluster subdivision provisions.

B

Again, both you and the planning commission had a lot of discussion about this issue. um Do you want.

B

Me to run through what the issue is on clusters, please: okay, um currently, cluster is allowed, but.

B

It is required that you submit that a developer submit a conventional design on which to calculate.

B

The density for the cluster subdivision, this increases both the cost and the review time.

B

Required this proposal eliminates that requirement versus middle of a conventional plan and.

B

Establishes minimum lot sizes for the first time there are currently no minimum lot sizes, um you've.

B

Got a couple good presentations from both david and laura, explaining how having the conventional.

B

Plan or not having the conventional plan doesn't change the outcome of what would be permitted on.

B

The property or I'm not what would be permitted, but the number of units that would be permitted.

B

It's now more of a calculation instead of a review of a plan by numerous agencies with the cost.

B

Involved so this is less work for the developer, a lot less work for us, because we have to review.

C

It twice so I'm going to make the motion that we keep the language proposed by staff by remove by.

C

Removing the conventional plan requirement and keep the minimum lot sizes proposed.

F

Oh sorry, okay well attractive yeah. I know you do um living through the discussions that the.

F

Planning commission had on this too. I think they were. I think they made some really good.

F

Points with this, I, I still have a problem with the word cluster, because, as soon as you say, cluster.

F

uh Everybody's radar starts to go off. I wish we could find a better word, don't change the bundle.

F

But we're going to say we're going to bundle it's like an insurance policy.

F

Just immediately uh ruffles the feathers michelle wentz, the only problem with not.

B

Using cluster is it's a very well recognized across the country in the state, we'll call it a.

F

Your mind just immediately goes to you know a whole bunch of stuff.

F

In a small area, yeah, okay, so that is what it is and I know that's sort of.

F

A universal word that you've told me that a couple times here, sorry.

A

From the community's perspective, does this go against the grain of what you.

B

Did receive comments that from the fdca that they would like to see the conventional plan.

B

Cut the requirement for the conventional planning process and that's what we want to do with this. No.

F

No, no, we want to remove that additional staff time from us, because we have to look over both plans.

C

As we were told in the presentation, the difference between having a conventional plan put up here.

C

And having the calculation done on the acres is virtually no difference at all the same amount.

C

Of housing units are going to be shown on that, so it doesn't make sense to do conventional plan.

B

And I think what was also brought forward was there's a little bit of a misconception.

B

That, when the two plans come before the planning commission and if laura wants to step up.

B

But when it comes to the planning commission, um they have a choice that they're choosing.

B

Between the two plans and they're, not it's simply a plan used on which to face the calculation for.

B

The cluster- and I think there was a lot of there- was a sort of some misinformation about that. Yeah.

B

Right, the only reason for the conventional plans to show how many housing unions could.

C

Be put on the airports combat your plan. You can do that with the mathematical formula or, however,.

C

Dealing with so it doesn't make any difference, it doesn't make any sense to have the conventional.

C

Plan without the same information, without all the sap type and extra time from the developer.

A

Without having a conventional plan in place, is there a sense of fast tracking the cluster.

A

Process still goes through the same process. It might take less time if laura wants to step up.

B

And find it it would still refuse to use that just you're on your own, um it it.

B

Probably would take less time because she doesn't have to send it out to 12 different agencies.

B

I would say that sign savings is exactly oh now you got to get up to the mic here.

J

I'd say the time savings isn't exactly. What commissioner fraser already pointed out is that.

J

The initial review isn't reviewing two plans right when it's initially submitted. You're, not.

J

Looking at two, the one just to verify yes, these are all viable lots. Yes, you can get a hundred or.

J

Whatever that number is right, so that's the time savings, but the plan itself will still go through.

J

The same process that it does in your opinion, which is the professional opinion on clustering.

A

Have we made mistakes in the past on accepting clustering uh in our communities.

J

I feel like that's an opinion for sure, but I will say the planning commission tends to authorize.

J

That cluster, a vast majority of the time, I'm trying to even think of a plan that they said no.

J

That's not the right direction to go so and and that's in the case where they've actually seen.

J

The two plants before them right, I'm just wondering if the conventional approach safeguards.

A

Any concerns that we may have on clustering and that, if errors have been made in the past,.

A

Is that what's the big issue with the ftca that they don't want to have those mistakes happening.

A

I mean, I know some of the communities down there, you know uh are clustered up on a hilltop and.

A

The open space is a cliff you know and which makes no sense for clustering um and other areas.

A

It's just could be perceived as misused open space in neighborhoods where clustering was accepted.

J

So I will say I don't think we have the full code section pulled out, but there.

J

Are I was just writing it today? In fact, there are provisions as to how.

J

Minimum requirements for open space and minimum percentages of that open space that must be.

J

Usable right, recreational use for the community: that cannot be those steep slopes, so you can.

J

Have up to, I think it was 50, because I did it today, 50 in steep slopes streams, flood plains.

J

Etc, but the other 50 percent has to be right, not would the would the conventional process.

A

um Be in play, while we're doing those calculations or determining the best use of that open space.

J

No, the open space requirement is only with the cluster plan as part of that right right. So.

J

I'm still not sure I'm following that, so so, if we we have a conventional process and then we have a.

A

Process that if we take the potential process out and it streamlines it, is there a chance? Is there a.

A

Chance that we're missing the opportunity to um appropriately design that open space I mean.

A

Or allocate that open space, if I can jump in here thanks yeah, it's not a conventional process that.

C

We're eliminating all we're eliminating is a conventional site plan that has to be put in.

C

It's not the process. The process would be the same because you're looking at the number of housing.

C

Units that could be put on this piece of land the way we're doing it right now, you're required.

C

To submit a conventional site plan with houses that make that, like she said it could be 100.

C

Right, you get the same 100 calculation by the mathematical formula that we're using.

C

That's the only difference, all the other. The other rest of the process is all exactly the same.

C

Makes no difference after that, then you can you're putting in your your clustering site.

C

Plan everything will be looked at at that point and if you're talking about the usable area.

C

For open space, that's all looked at this at in the clustering site plan. Well, but there's also.

D

I think what laura said: there's no requirement for open stage in a conventional plan. So that's.

C

Right right, so, if you put in a conventional plan- and you could do those magical hundred units, why.

D

Is it always 100 nice round number um you there's, you don't have to have any open space whatsoever.

D

But if you put in a clustered plan- and you want the same 100 units, you have to then show.

D

Open space, and no more than 50 percent of it right can be list slopes or sort of what.

D

You're referring to is unusable so, but this is reduced lot size in clustering could be. It is.

B

It's always reduced lot size, but this proposal to me the good thing about it is it's setting.

B

Minimums so they can't go all the way down. You know we looked at some other ones that.

B

In the r20 they went below 9 000 square feet. This sets that at a certain- and I think we probably.

D

Have some of those in the county? Yes, those are the ones we looked at yeah. This is a safeguard against.

C

Really small lot sizes because we have a minimum size for clustering. Well, that part I like.

A

Before that that that part, I, like it's, the taking out a conventional process, it's not the process.

F

It's just you're not going to have two plans: you're going to go you're going to go from two to.

F

One and the one that you're going to is actually going to show what the first one was going to get.

F

To in the second plan, anyway- and this is going to reduce the billable hours of the attorneys.

F

Well, I don't know about that part. I don't they'll figure out a way to get more out. I don't really.

A

Know, that's not really care about that part. I care about staff.

F

And the staff time the staff's gonna, the staff's now not gonna, have to go through a plan and then.

F

Get the next plan that the first plan already said, but now the second plan has the open space.

F

In it yeah, that's the that's the part, that's what I I could give a rat's petite about the attorneys.

F

And and their fees but they're disrespected all that anyway, I'm worried about our staff because.

F

Our staff and david, I think, presented it really well because potentially they're doing it twice.

F

And there's no need for that and in the end it winds up costing the consumer at the end.

E

Lord loves them the rest world, I'm not too sure about, and all the engineers all that keeps adding.

E

Up to the cost of housing for our citizens who live here so streamline, this is a good idea.

E

And I appreciate all the work I'm gonna put in this, both in our county staff and on the private.

E

Sector side because they've been frustrated as well. Okay, I asked that we um take a look at.

A

The planning commission vote and our final decision and if we can.

A

um Split a and d and make a motion on each separately.

A

So, in other words, I'll make the motion keep the minimum lot sizes, as proposed by staff when.

A

It comes to clustering. Second, I got a motion. Second on that action. Any discussion on that.

A

All in favor and then I'll make it okay I'll make the motion of the.

F

Keep the languages proposed by staff removing the conventional plan requirement. I will second that.

F

The emotion of that second, any further discussion, then you know not had all in favor aye.

A

No, I apologize I'm against 4-1. That was like automatic okay, so for one third, first of all,.

A

I appreciate the time spencer. Thank you. The next issue is the change in the zoning administrator.

B

Variance process- um basically, we've gone through this, so I'll just jump to the bottom. It removes.

B

The percentage limitation and allows the zoning administrator to grant up to 100 of a variation.

B

Currently, there are percentage limitations and also it changes the process that requires a.

B

Public hearing to posting the property and notification of adjoining property owners.

B

And if a hearing is requested after these notifications by any member of the public.

B

A public hearing will be held, so it basically shortens that process for the county as well.

B

As for the county, um that makes the process potentially much faster for the property or.

I

Not having to go through a public hearing, but if you still have to go through that here and.

I

If somebody requested it's going to be about the same length of time, yeah right and it also allows.

B

Jay to or the zoning administrator to approve more of a variance more of a variation before it would.

B

Necessarily go to the board of zoning appeals, so that also speeds up the process. Yes- and it's also.

B

Remains appealable to the bca so correct, not that there's not a remedy for remedy for his decision.

A

Until we get 17 of you, I think we need to do the best. We can. You know in taking care of you and.

A

The work you do and make you more efficient and that's kind of what this is all about.

A

So it's it's, it potentially could be a little more work for my staff, but for the public.

I

In general, it could speed up their building permit process if they need a variance from.

I

60 days down to 30 days, so it's a potentially a good savings for the public, but with this this.

C

Would change this would give you the ability to change the setbacks on buildings as well.

C

So yeah I have that authority to to a certain percentage to a certain percent right. But now you.

C

Could change it if it's a 40-foot setback, you can make it zero? Theoretically, yes, but that would be.

I

I can't think of any hearing that I've had that anybody's requested to go to xero unless they.

I

Go onto the board and I can't even think of any board decisions saying to zero. But even if they.

C

Requested that you still don't have to give it to you, you have your experience. Right fall.

I

Back on and say sorry, this doesn't make sense. I would go to 10 or whatever that's very good.

I

Like that, okay and then the appearance and the same things that the borders earning appeals, look.

I

At for their variances is the same things that I have to look at right to grandparents. So it's.

I

Like I say, if someone disagrees with my decision with, usually someone always disagrees with me, but.

I

They still had that option to appeal that correct. That's where I was going with the rest of it.

F

So I'm going to motion that we keep the languages proposed by staff on this one. Okay, I got a motion.

A

A second any further discussion: senior none all in favor, aye. Okay, let's talk about residential.

A

Zoning districts: okay: um there is discussion about the residential zoning districts. This was your.

B

Discussion, not the planning commissions about changing the names to clarify what citizens may.

B

Be expected to see in these districts, I guess was really what was being said. um We came up roughly.

B

With the r40 being residential, low, r20, being residential medium r10 being oh, that should be.

B

Residential high um and our 75 being residential multi-family. That was really just something we.

B

Threw out at the last work session, we looked at other jurisdictions and we really couldn't find.

B

Any better guidance on that. I do want to bring to your attention, though, that these definitions, I've.

B

Looked through they're, not just in the zoning and the land use codes they're throughout the.

B

Codes in different they're just referenced in different parts of the code, so um we'd have to.

B

Work with mr burke's office in identifying all those places and having a resolution that would.

B

Change them in all those places, um the other. We would also have to amend all zoning members.

F

Wow, which means about 1462 times that we have to sign stuff because we're going to have to we're.

F

Going to have to resign all those things, I'm not sure the the the uh the bark is worth the fight.

F

I mean I like the idea, but I I'm I one when you said that the last time we met I'm like wait.

F

What yeah and I've gone into it a little bit more there's it's in there a lot, and I think jay also.

B

Feels I don't want to speak for him that this is what it's known as in carroll counties.

B

From 1916. people are still going to reference it as r40. When we talk talk to them, I mean.

I

They say: that's just the way the public and the county recognizes yeah. The reason I like to change.

C

Is because it says residential medium, somebody would have to look up to see exactly what that.

C

Means- and you can cluster it here- you can do this. You can do that if it says our twenty thousand. Oh.

C

It means one house every half acre and I'm moving, there's a cost. What's going on, I don't know how.

K

I don't know this is the best way to address it, because, even if it says our uh residential.

C

Medium doesn't mean anybody's, going to look up to find out exactly what it means anyway,.

D

It's not necessarily going to drive people right any more.

I

And investigations when people do call my office and ask about zoning districts, there are a lot of.

I

Times they ask what else can we put there and we're more than happy to direct them to the.

I

Website where they can look up, what actually is in the ordinance, and we explain it as good as we can.

I

To them over the phone, that's those are the ones that call, unfortunately, not all.

B

We could also- and I've seen this in other jurisdictions- put a web page up that really.

B

Describes what each one of these districts is like when it says r40 like actually put yes, the.

B

Predominant use is one acre lots, but here's some other things I mean. I know everybody.

B

Doesn't go to websites, but maybe we could make it. I would like that training plan. I really do yeah.

B

Just as an educational thing, without changing the code, I think it's a step in the right direction.

A

Anytime, we can provide references for community um and we can put it a couple places planning as well.

I

Yes, developing review, I mean there's quite a few places: okay,.

C

I'll make the motion and keep the districts called what they're called right now, everyone's.

C

Saying thank you. You made mr burke happy. Are you making me happy I'll, get regular rubber stamps.

A

Okay, I'll second, uh any discussion on this all in favor all right.

A

Okay: let's talk about private, stable, okay: um this is one of the or the outstanding.

B

Issue with the last work session, um I'm going to turn this over to brenda and jay to discuss.

B

I think I should just do that.

B

Did you want to go over jay or do you want to? Yes, I can basically, after our.

I

Last discussion brendan- and I discussed this pretty well and we've come up with an idea.

I

We hope that you'll like um we're, recommending that a private stay.

I

Will only be allowed in your 40 and your 20s learning districts in the residential districts.

I

A minimum lot size of three acres for one animal unit or one horse.

I

A minimum fenced area of about two acres so you're protecting the house having an acre roughly around.

I

It and two acres of pasture for the horse and an additional acre required for each additional.

I

Animal unit, so if you start a minimum of three acres and you have one horse to have a second.

I

Horse you'll have to have four acres to have a third horse. You'll have to have five acres.

H

That's not much it's it's not. I I like the uh if, if the private, stable piece, if you wanted to have.

I

Five horses on a property with this proposal, you would have to have a minimum eight acres.

I

And currently in the ag zoning district? Yes, if you can meet the setbacks,.

I

If you have over three acres, theoretically, you can have as many animals on the property as you want.

I

If the barn can meet the setback, you can have as many.

H

Zero one acre lot in the action. I, like your minimum lot size of three acres.

H

Excluding house and buildings structures the structures, because people have abraham structures.

I

What we're proposing is that they have to have a minimum of two acres of that three acres fence.

I

For just the animals, so that leaves an acre for the house.

I

And it'll be a minimum two acres available for any of the animals.

I

Well, like I say, that's for one horse, two acres for one horse, the state doesn't have anything.

A

On this, not that I know of I've talked to some people on this and yeah. That's small.

I

Oh yeah, it's very small, it is it is I'm not disagreeing with that, and this is.

H

Dry lot area: this isn't pasture at this point because the horse is going to stop it and.

H

Trim the grass down to nothing in a very short period of time. uh I mean I got two horses. I can't.

A

Imagine them being on two acres, I mean well, you wouldn't be allowed to have two horses in one acre.

A

Or two acres, you know you'd be allowed to have one one it'd still be tough to have one I mean just.

A

Like you said you keep yourself down, I mean well, I mean one thing right now. Currently the code for a.

I

Private stable says that between three and five acres you can have up to five horses. It doesn't.

I

Place a limit if you have 3.01 acres and you can put five horses on that the way the code is.

I

Currently written so you could, if you have three and a half acres, you can have five horses on there.

I

The way we're proposing it to have five horses you'll need a minimum of eight acres.

A

Do other counties yeah determine this? Are there I haven't? I haven't seen anything I mean I just did.

I

You know brenda, it does just make me uncomfortable that we're determining this type of anguish.

K

I I don't have my listing in front of me of every county, but I did look at every county in the state.

K

And it was all over the place and there really wasn't a lot of um what we're talking about. Where.

K

Is requiring fencing certain amount versus you know a minimum acreage and then fencing a certain.

K

Amount, but it really was all over the place and as far as with the state, the state doesn't really.

K

Have anything either mda has a guidance that recommends a minimum acreage of like two acres.

K

Per horse, um more like four to five, but again it's just guidance. There's it's not a requirement.

K

And the extension service for the state didn't want to recommend like a a.

K

Number and we're actually talking about animal units, not just horses,.

K

They didn't want to recommend uh carrying capacity or um you know, amount of animals per acre because.

K

The whole thing that I mentioned last time with it being subjective in terms of you know.

K

How they're being cared for the quality of the land? You know, though,.

K

Yes, it's very difficult to find a specific recommendation or standard for acreage per animal.

K

Unit and and part of that is, like brenda, said, the care of the animal. There are some people who.

I

When three acres take tremendous care of their horses and animals and then there are people.

I

On hundred acre farms that are very bad about it, and that's something also that.

I

Animal control gets comes part of if the care is not up to good quality carrot, animal control.

I

Can do something and they have in the past, they've taken horses from farms and stuff in the past. Yes,.

D

So, like I say, that's part of where animal control would work with us. If you know the care is not.

I

There and you tell animal patrol, they look at it and they determine it's not there. They can do so.

I

All we're doing basically is saying to have one animal unit. You need three acres.

I

We're just telling you the minimum doesn't say you can't have more.

I

It's just what you need as a minimum for this, which I think is a good good good place, and my.

F

Question would be because we're going to keep beating this.

F

I'm not going there not going I was going to, but I'm not yeah.

F

What, if not what they're suggesting then what one other thing with these acreage requirements.

I

We're also asking to be no variances allowed to it, so you will need a minimum of three acres to.

I

Have that one horse correct, I will not be able to grant a variance to two and a half acres.

I

You need that three acres and what? What what you're suggesting dick is to make sure that it.

F

Doesn't include structures well, jake hendricks had two acres right yeah, because I can't come.

F

To you and say: well, I gotta have two acres of fencing. My house is in the fencing, that's it.

F

Because there's not a loophole, well, there's always a loophole. Commissioner, I mean we can't close.

G

Everything but, like I say, yeah, okay personally, I think this requirement over proposing now is.

I

Much better than what we have yeah, let's say it does give more room to the animals.

H

Well, let's not beat a dead horse I'll move that uh see I wasn't gonna go. He did. I think I.

H

uh The uh recommendation here a lot size of three acres for an animal unit and two acres of second.

H

Defense, okay, I got a motion in a second, I mean this is a challenging issue. We've had neglect of.

A

Animals in this county- and um it is not- you know something to tread lightly on so this strength.

F

Strength, no, it does, but I mean that's why it's important that we're doing this right.

A

Because of that neglect that recently happened- and I appreciate staff listening into us when we had.

E

This discussion he went back and researched it. I appreciate the fact he went overstate.

E

Look that there's other jurisdictions. Commissioner rolstein mentioned it, as that was my biggest.

E

Concern I'd love to see what type of templates out there. So thanks for putting so much work in it.

A

Okay, any further discussion here seniors, none all in favor aye. Let's move on to the purpose of the.

A

R 20 000 this one, I'm not sure you need to vote on unless you want to.

B

This was one in response to comments made by the fdca.

B

You basically already agreed to eliminate the reference.

K

Oh, that the it land in the r 20 000 um district be located within a dga that was in the original.

B

Purpose section and we had a discussion and they requested that that be taken out and.

B

Everybody agreed to that because, potentially in the future there could be r20. That's not going to.

B

Do ga so yeah it was just right, so I consider that somewhat technical, but if you want to vote on it.

A

I don't think it's necessary, I mean, I think it's just.

A

We'll do whatever commissioner fraser says: okay, next indoor recreational facilities into a.

B

Recreational facility- um this was not discussed by the planning commission, but it was brought up here.

B

That this type of use, which is defined in the code, it was defined in 2019 when you did the commercial.

B

And industrial districts- and it includes a number of different kinds of uses that it may.

B

Have adverse impacts on neighboring residential properties and you ask the consideration, be given.

B

To a limit on the size and setbacks, we couldn't find any guidance on size because there's so many.

B

Different kinds of um indoor recreational facilities, so that was a little tricky.

B

But we are proposing that there, um but there's currently no minimum lot area.

B

Or enhanced yard requirements in the code for this, so we are proposing that the minimum lot.

B

Size and increased yards be put in that are commensurate with elementary schools, 75 acres.

B

And the yard requirements be increased, might be 40.

B

Five acres and.

B

Pretty good side yards uh schools have a side yard of 100 front yard of 150 rear yard of 50.

B

And that's much more than it is now because, right now they don't have a.

B

Special section into a recreational facility, so they're just considered, like any other use.

B

In the residential districts, so this would put them on par with schools. Is that setback.

C

Included where they could put parking, can they put parking and setback is set back? Yes, you can.

I

Put parking within 10 feet of the property? Okay, I just I don't want to limit them to you. Yes,.

H

Okay, I'll make a motion to go to sac staff recommendation for indoor recreational facilities.

A

Commensurate with elementary schools.

F

Yes, exactly, I got a motion guys. Second, any further discussion on this scene here, none all in favor.

A

Okay, so the last tech change text change is um and again I consider this something you already.

B

Agreed to, but there was a um a reference to as an accessory, is the keeping of more than four borders.

B

And that is in the current code, it's been in there forever. It was agreed by you had a previous work.

B

Session that this is outdated and very difficult to enforce and that it should be eliminated.

B

um There seemed to be general agreement, but I didn't know if you wanted to reiterate that so.

F

I've changed my mind on this. I think jay should go out and inspect everything. That's all hit yourself.

B

So that is the end of the changes to the residential text. Unless you have.

B

Any more proposed that you want to discuss. That is all we have nope.

B

So did you want to move on to a math discussion, yep, okay,.

B

um We really had nothing clear stewart, um I'll trade places with you. There.

B

We really had nothing prepared, we have the two requests: fadi and zable pulled up. Both land use.

B

Okay and zoning, so for your discussion we also have an alternative proposal that was received.

B

Several days ago, where the baby property pulled up, can uh you pull up the baby first.

A

Yes, before and after well, okay, so that's the after! That's what happens! Where's the before.

A

So the before is r20 around the entire baby, property and and um commercial high in that kind.

A

Of squarish area, commercial, medium, I apologize commercial medium. um It's currently zoned. I won.

B

As is the property to the west, um do you want me to move on to what the alternative province I.

A

So now, if you go to the next, what's being proposed, is r40 buffer along bennett road. This has been.

B

Shifted a little bit and would remain i1. So that would not need a rezoning and then the.

B

Rest of it, some of it's already r20, but some of it to go to r20, and that was uh you know in.

A

Looking at across the street in the northern part of bennett is r40 the property to the uh east.

A

That's all r20 and then southeast and around is r 20.. So it's um whatever that word is. You know.

A

Continuous to I think or whatever that contiguous contiguous that big word to r20 um but uh giving.

A

A buffer of r40 in the north is what I was proposing. What about if you took r40 down to the.

A

Well, we could it's just um it gives me, it gives maximized use for the baby property for the.

A

Baby owners, um you know, and uh again it allows for that contiguous use uh of. What's surrounding it,.

A

Keeping it industrial is also um lessens the traffic uh going on to bennett and once and ever.

A

If georgetown ever extends that way, right switch, switching.

H

You have r20 in behind or 40 right here correct. You could um that's the proposal correct you. You.

A

Could there's got to be somewhere where r20 and r40 are going to meet right and that's.

H

Just down to a straight line out from the uh industrial out: well, the the reason: the change in.

A

My understanding is and correct us at industrial. The shape is different because of the topography.

A

Correct and and the property itself, I am not sure, there's no explanation. We just reported the.

G

Shift of it then okay, but then acres as they were, proposing.

A

Is the ability or progress way goes um west to east and then the shift? Because the topography.

A

Using the same amount of land to maximize the eye, industrial property, that's really all! It is sorry.

A

So I guess, um are we prepared, I think we're fair. I mean I mean we've heard.

A

From public that they wanted to lessen the r20 in this property, we hear a lot from public.

A

But the part that we did hear from was the buffer on bennett, um which I was like fine, let's, but.

A

Let's maximize the use of the rest of the property, so so I'll make the motion that we uh move forward.

A

With these amended boundaries for the baby property, I will second yeah. I want thank you for.

E

The amount of thought process you put into this- this is very heavy on your mind, your shoulders and.

E

I think you put a lot into it, so thank you, okay. I got a motion. I got a second any further discussion.

A

On this I'd like to draw that line down lower you have here, I I bet you when you look at it, it would.

A

Probably not even be used, I bet you'd be a buffer between that and um the industrial. I don't think.

A

There'll be a whole lot. There are buffers required in the code between industrial and residential.

A

So so they would be building an industrial buffer between that r40 and industrial yeah. So, okay.

A

Any other discussion on this all in favor, aye, aye, okay, so wait. I don't think mr.

D

Weaver I apologize I'd like to see more art, okay, so you're in a you're, nay.

A

Oh wait: that was the horses before the horses.

B

This is really just a drawing understood: okay yeah. I understood I hope so. Can we talk uh property.

A

Identified exactly yes exactly because it will be a zombie line. No, let's go.

B

On the screen, an alternative proposal to talk about.

B

At this point, there has not been an official alternative, okay, so pulling up the property. Okay.

A

So right now, what you have is the proposal for everything to be r20, correct.

G

11 acres of the conservation and 11 acres of conservation um is that the same conservation that.

H

Was originally designated into this, it's moved, it's moved, it's moved, it's moved to the left, yeah.

H

If you look at that conservation area, this is very important. Those areas were designated for a reason.

D

If you look at, if you look at this, the um bottom um left corner right here of that is green. It has.

D

That little red and white line going through it that's the conservation currently proposed.

D

The conservation on the current map um on the current plans is where mary's current.

B

The bottom right corner of the property and claire presented to you- and it's not in this, but.

B

Clearly, the environmental constraints are on this piece that is now shown as conservation.

B

And we're not, on the other hand, and that's follows the stream a little better too right.

G

And just for clarification, the the freedom plan followed or this this proposal follows the 2018.

G

Freedom plan that's adopted, um but it is not the same as the 18 acres that are currently.

G

Zoned conservation conservation, there's 18 currently and you're reducing that to 11.

G

Correct from the freedom plan, what does that? Okay from disabled? Not from just disabled property,.

G

Right from the table, property, okay, so that could impact water quality.

H

The reduction in seven acres: well, it could.

A

Well, well, well, you don't have to follow the same environmental guidelines just make sure.

D

It's currently there now is conservation in the bottom corner.

F

Okay say that again, this currently is the freedom plan, correct the 2018 freedom plan.

A

Is what we're looking at right now on the screen? Okay, the current conservation property.

A

Is 18 acres on the bottom right corner, correct, correct with the intent of the freedom 2018.

A

Freedom plan to move that conservation to what is shown on this map to 11 acres in that left corner.

A

Now a few issues- and you don't have it on this map- that I want to bring to your attention, you being.

A

Us here is that road that that red and white road is the extension of prothero road.

A

The challenge is that prothero road, the way it looks right now goes through a large part.

A

Of the conservation property, which would be very problematic one in creating the road and.

A

And disturbing the conservation, property, and also very costly so and not serve the community. Nearly.

A

As well so moving that prothero road to the top corner and minimizing impact on the conservation.

A

I think would be a very good idea now. It would still go through the a little bit of.

A

The conservation, the expansion, the extension of prothero yeah like right there well and.

B

And with all plant major streets, these are just planning level, correct, right, correct that would.

B

Be decided it's not planned based on understood right, but um then the other piece is. If I could.

A

Comment on that yeah yeah, I I I think the road should be realigned to to hit the least amount of.

C

Conservation properties, that's right, it's possible yep and I think that's a good. A good um adjustment.

C

I'm worried about water quality, especially in this area reservoir right right, and this keeps.

C

It away from the stream right, it's just a better alignment for the road. I do believe it is that it.

C

Will be, you know we're just talking about right now, it's not the final thing, but I just think.

C

It's a much better, much better place for it to go and really what you should do from what you need.

B

A point right exactly right: there was engineering involved right as long as it comes in one end goes.

C

Out the other, that's that's what's important, the other piece of this being all r20. The estimate.

A

Number of houses that was um given to us was between 220 and 240 homes.

A

In its entirety of r20, um if all of it was r40 we're looking at about 150 homes,.

A

In totality, if we were to similar to the baby property, make a buffer.

A

On ridge road, because above ridge, road on the north side is r40 and we made another buffer.

A

Of r40, I would like to see a mix of r14 r20 and get to no more than about 170 homes. I would like.

C

To see it mixed as well, can you point with the cursor where ridge road is because I don't? I can't.

A

On the south side, anything I do to help on the south side of bridge road.

A

And then make it kind of go all the way down. um Yep keep going down and make all that r40.

A

Because that would be that word contiguous again to addition to our 40 properties that are there.

A

um And then on the inside make it r20. We would be changing it from about 220 homes to about 170.

A

Homes and it would be a mix of r40 and r20, so so so, basically, you take from the top right corner.

D

Of the conservation zone and draw a straight line up through the center of the property.

D

To ridge road and then you want to go over to the left across bridge road, a small buffer like.

D

You had on on the beatty property. That's what commissioner ross is talking about.

C

Then you're going to come down and then, on the right hand, side of your line, basically it'll, be.

C

40 correct: okay: now I apologize mary going farther left. That's um bupre property! That's not! Oh! That's!.

A

All bupren, so we're looking in the blue, we're not looking to the left so to the left is.

A

Buper property and that road going down the middle of people, probably that's grangel's road, that's.

A

Not what we're talking about yeah? No we're not we're talking about where mary is now gotcha, so.

A

Yeah so basically going across ridge, road and then down to the conservation.

A

And making that all r40, that would be a mix of r20 or 40, and it would.

A

Reduce homes from about 220 to about 170, available home space, okay, so then.

F

It's already r40. No, it's hard. It's currently zoned r40, the entire.

A

Right, yes, they're requesting all of it to change the archways right. Okay, and I don't believe we.

H

Should do that which are 45 right and they want it. So this is a good copy yeah. Yes, this.

E

Is a compromise, a very good conference, and I mean I like the idea that we're changing some of it to.

C

R20, because the fact is it's designated for water and sewer, where else you're going to put over 20.

C

And they're a property owner- and this is right, so this is a place to put it in.

C

It's no one gets everything here, but I think it's, I think it's a good compromise.

D

Now um this map doesn't show up but keep in mind that that corner, um um let's go to the.

D

Next map, mary, it's also included in this able property, see that's that p, 232 yeah.

D

Because they're two separate parcels right, there's no sidewalks the destination is in this.

A

That's not um that's all! That's all associated with psych plan, yeah. Okay, it's on the checklist.

A

Mary, I apologize just, let me no don't don't move the cursor too late nope, I got it. Oh you got it.

A

Okay, so this is where the conservation is right now.

A

According to 2018 freedom plan, this is where conservation, 11 acres is going to go.

A

Currently, looking to go here, it would minimize its impact on conservation if it goes on to the top.

A

Corner here this is our 40. I want recommend our 40 all the way down to this being r40.

C

Down to where you never stop the cursor, I would it would go from 18 to 11.. Could we.

A

Maintain 18 acres of conservation, possibly by if we extend this conservation down here,.

A

To over here and make an l shape conservation- and that's uh I'm definitely not opposed to that.

A

And keeping making this because this right now is conservation.

A

Unless you know, if we look at um conservation like this and then up here and keeping it 18 acres.

A

Or 15 to 18 acres somewhere around there. I think may also be a nice compromise to what.

A

The community has been uh asking um a lot of the impact of folks have been in this area.

A

Lazy morning here pro throwing up here and we've been getting a lot of feedback from.

A

Their concern is the prothero road, but really is this right here is a quagmire.

A

Between ridge, road and marriageville 2. marriageville 2 will not get fixed.

A

There's nothing to do to marriageville 2, where we're going to change it. But this is just a.

A

Big quagmire and the developer will have to make some significant impact on ridge, road, marysville, 2.

A

uh Corner you know, um but yeah. That would be another compromise dick. If we.

A

Added conservation right here, I'm looking at the conservation, and that is all streams.

H

Right in this lower area, it would have to be uh like a y shaped conservation area.

A

And again it could be just a a buffer look conservation here.

A

That's fine, I think I think moving this road and um disturbing this less is going to keep.

A

The water clean- I mean it's going to keep things and right and keep in mind. Of course, the the.

D

Road's, just a concept right right, it's just right so again from here where my cursor is down here.

A

If it was r20, it would go to about up to 240 but 220 legitimate houses.

A

If we did what I'm asking it would go to about 170. if we put this into a buffer, you know.

A

uh Monkey math you're talking about 160 homes so but that's for them to decide.

A

Whoever's doing the work they'd be doing, but again doing that everybody gets something.

A

And uh yeah, if we made this uh green right here into conservation.

H

Actually, it's going up further, it starts up here. Goes this way. What's that you're talking.

A

About the topography you're talking about the road he's, looking it up here, being the stream.

C

Well, you have you, have setbacks where you can only go to places three minutes correct.

C

So you're going to be, I don't know what is 75 feet or so right.

A

What is it 100, yeah, and that was never designed to be conservation up here. This was never designed.

A

To be conservation up here, the conservation was down here. So if we do this, I think we're meeting.

A

You know so I mean you can design conservation but mother, no, no you're, right, you're, right, but earth.

H

Dictates where it is no, you you're absolutely right, but I mean this is much more sensible for.

A

Conservation than where it was because this is where the majority of the stream bed is yes, so.

A

um So that's my proposal is that emotion, that's a motion a whole second.

E

Beat you too I'm thoroughly impressed anything further discussion on this yeah I mean I still.

F

Think you're gonna I mean I I do think it's a good compromise, yeah yeah or a positive.

F

Compromise, if you will so just I don't know how good it is, but you're still going to increase.

F

You're increasing most of what they were talking about, those that were opposed to making an r20.

F

Are going to still be all in with that opposition? Because, while you're, while you're decreasing the.

F

Number of homes there you're you're you're, still creating a lot more than if you just keep it.

F

All at r40, if it was r40 all by itself, would be 150 homes, so we're going to closer to 170. yeah.

F

But I do again I'm not trying to. I just think that's you know. I'm still going to hear that.

F

And I do think it also allows for the property owners and I'm all about property rights.

F

To be able to to get some of what they had asked for right, the uh yeah, if it was all r40.

A

I'm being told by the developers that could potentially look into this space.

A

It'd be 107 or 150 homes. By doing what I'm asking us to do, we'd be getting down to about 170.

A

If it was all r20, which was the original, ask, we're talking 220 to 240 homes,.

A

And we're going to maintain 18 acres of conservation, the way we'd be doing.

A

That is by looking at that, like you said area down here, that's already conservation.

A

Okay, so that's my motion. I have a second anything further to discuss on this. All in favor.

H

Aye aye, okay, what else mr weaver.

A

I don't I try not to look at him. I'm sorry, I'm just saying yeah.

B

I'm sorry next on the agenda is next steps. Is there a need for any future work sessions.

A

I don't think so. I think we covered it. Will there be food? Are you sure.

B

And then the other thing that we bring to you at the time we bring the final drafts would be an.

B

Implementation resolution, similar to what you did with commercial industrial, that shows how.

B

The process would work out if it became effective 10 days later or on a certain date. It spells out.

B

Properties that are already in the development review process would be under the old code.

B

It was pretty well figured out in 2019 and we'll just be repeating it with new dates. If.

B

That's okay with you: okay and you're gonna, bring kind of finalized maps and maybe not.

C

Finalize maps but adjusted maps that we can look at and we might have to adjust again according to.

C

What we do, what our concept is without the cursor running around that thing, if you know what I mean.

C

And then I'd look at it and then okay, that's not exactly what I thought or whatever, but we.

C

Have a discussion at that point: yeah if you can prepare those from what was discussed.

A

And get them to us, I think that'd be definitely appreciated. So, okay, okay, you know.

A

huh Well, we could prepare what we think we heard today. Yes, the proposal yeah and then, but not for.

B

You to act on as no okay. No, no, but you know with what was discussed so so just so right. um So.

D

It's sounds like the board's made a decision that this is the way you want the maps to be if they're.

D

Gross if they're, you know, if they're, not in keeping with what the ford wants, then someone can.

D

Make a motion to redo them right, um but for our purposes they're. As long as they're accurate to.

D

Everyone's understanding than their decisions have been made right correct, but also with saying that.

A

And this is important to the community is again we do this in open sessions. Commission.

A

West continues to remind us for full transparency and opportunity to be responsive to the community.

A

So if the community does have comments and questions and concerns, please do not hesitate.

A

And we will continue to be responsive, because this is very important in getting it right. And then you.

A

Know it's taken a long time to get us there, but you know we believe we're getting trying to work.

A

Hard to get it right, so what else you got for us mary? I have nothing we can um regarding the text.

B

Get a clean version together with all the changes. That's probably the easy part at this point.

B

And bring it back to you with that said, I need a motion to adjourn.

H