[00:00:03]
[I. CALL TO ORDER]
ONCE AGAIN TO COME TO ORDER.MS. CONNIE, WILL YOU CALL THE ROLE PLEASE? CHAIRMAN MARNER.
DO WE HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD OR DELETE FROM THE AGENDA FELLOW MEMBERS? NOPE.
[IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
MINUTES OF JANUARY 15TH ARE IN NEED OF APPROVAL.I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 15TH, 2025 REGULAR MEETING AS WRITTEN.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
IS THERE A DISCUSSION? MINUTES ARE ACCURATE? I WILL CALL THE VOTE.
UH, AT THIS POINT, THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS ON ANY SUBJECT PERTAINING TO LAND USE.
UM, I DON'T HAVE A LIST IN FRONT OF ME.
I DON'T SEE ANYBODY STANDING IN THE PODIUM.
IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO MAKE A GENERAL CITIZEN'S COMMENT? HE IS.
I DON'T SEE ANY CITIZENS HERE, SO I'LL CLOSE THAT.
[VI. CONSENT AGENDA]
ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA.THE CONSENT AGENDA TO PUBLICLY ADVERTISE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN MARCH AS PRESENTED.
AT WHICH POINT WE WILL MOVE ON TO
[VII. NEW BUSINESS]
NEW BUSINESS.THE FIRST ITEM UP IS ITEM NUMBER TWO FIVE QUADRUPLE ZERO TWO.
EXTERIOR RENOVATIONS ON NORTH NANDO AVENUE.
MR. WARE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BRING US UP TO SPEED ON THIS PLEASE? APPLICATION 25 0 0 0 0 2 IS EXTERIOR EXTERIOR RENOVATIONS TO THE STRUCTURE LOCATED IN THE ENTRANCE CORRIDOR, LOCATED AT 1355 NORTH SHENANDOAH AVENUE, IDENTIFIED AS TAX MAP 20 A TWO, SECTION FOUR, BLOCK 57 PARCELS 23 THROUGH 34.
THE PROPERTY IS ZONE C ONE COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT.
UH, THERE'S THE ARROW VIEW OF THE PROPERTY OUTLINED THERE.
UH, FORMERLY, IF YOU RECALL, THAT'S THE FORMER BB AND T BANK THERE AT THE INTERSECTION.
UH, THERE'S THE, UH, GIS MAP OF THE PARCELS.
UH, THEN WE HAVE AN APPLICATION FOR EXTERIOR RENOVATIONS OF THE BUILDING.
UM, SO THE TOP PART OF THOSE, THOSE ARE THE NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATION DRAWINGS.
UH, THE, A-FRAME OF THE BUILDING WOULD REMAIN AND THEY'RE PROPOSING TO DO, UH, METAL PANELS, UH, SOME STUCCO AND SOME, UH, CEDAR SIDING ON THE EXTERIOR.
UH, THAT'S THE NORTH AND SOUTH VIEW OF THE BUILDING.
UH, AND OTHER RENDERING OF THAT, UH, SHOWING THAT THOSE WILL, THE METAL PANELS WILL SET OFF OF THE CURRENT FACADE OF THE BUILDING WITH NEW, UH, COLUMNS IN THE GROUND WILL COME UP WITH THE METAL PANELS THERE, UH, SHOWING WHERE THE SIGN IS, THAT WOULD BE STUCCO.
AND THE LOWER PORTION THERE WOULD BE CEDAR SIDING.
UH, SO THAT'S THE PRESENT LOOK FROM THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
SO THE MAIN PART OF THE A-FRAME THAT YOU SEE IN THE PREVIOUS ILLUSTRATIONS WOULD REMAIN.
THAT'S THE NORTH SIDE, AND THAT'S THE PARKING LOT SIDE ON THE SOUTH SIDE.
AGAIN, THAT A-FRAME WOULD REMAIN WITH THE STUCCO AND A NEW EXTERIOR B UH, CLAD IN THE METAL PANELS, UH, SHOWING HERE ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE.
AGAIN, METAL PANELS DEPICTED THERE, YOU REMEMBER FROM THE, UH, WORK SECTION.
SO THOSE ARE THE METAL PANELS, THE STUCCO AND THE SIDING, UH, DOWN HERE WITH THE TIE BROW, UH, THERE ON THOSE
[00:05:01]
BUILDING ENTRANCES, AGAIN, THOSE WOULD BE ADDED AWAY FROM THE BUILDING WHERE THESE METAL PANELS GO IN PLACE.UH, THERE'S THE VIEW FROM THE WEST PART OF IT, OF THE EXISTING BUILDING AND THE, UH, EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
SO AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE THE EXISTING BUILDING HERE.
THEN THEY WOULD PUT A NEW COLUMN IN AND PUT THE METAL PANELS UP FROM EXTERIOR.
AND THOSE ARE DEPICTED HERE AROUND THE BUILDING.
SO THE NEW FOOTER GOING IN WITH THE COLUMNS COMING UP THAT WILL PUT THE METAL PANELS AND THE EXTERIOR, THE NEW EXTERIOR FACADE IN THE PLACE.
UH, WE DISCUSSED THIS AT LENGTH AT THE WORK SESSION ON THE DETAILS OF IT.
SO, UM, MOST OF IT'LL BE WITH THE, UH, CEDAR SIDING, METAL PANELS, AND EXISTING STUCCO.
THINGS THAT YOU SHOULD CONSIDER WITH THIS APPLICATION, SINCE IT'S IN THE EX UH, ENTRANCE CORRIDOR IS THE, IF THE METAL PANELS THE FINISH ON THE METAL PANELS, UH, YOU SHOULD PROBABLY CONSIDER THAT THOSE WOULD NOT CAUSE A GLARE.
AND THE PAINTED FINISHES SHOULD BE OF A EARTH AND TONES.
UH, YOU HAVE A PACKET WITHIN THE WORK, UH, THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AT THE WORK SESSION.
AND WITH THE STAFF REPORT WE PUT TOGETHER THE CONDITIONS FOR THE ENTRANCE CORRIDOR FOR THIS TYPE OF A BUILDING.
UH, YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FOR THIS? ANY QUESTIONS? NO, I'LL GO BACK.
WE, WE GIVE YOU A RENDERING PROBABLY THERE.
THAT'S THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH, UH, VIEW OF THE BUILDING.
I SHOULD STATE THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
UH, IF WE CAN HAVE A MOTION, WE CAN OPEN THE FLOOR TO DISCUSSION BEFORE, BEFORE WE HAVE A MOTION.
DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO SPEAK BEFORE OUR DISCUSSION? UH, I JUST WANNA LET, I'M, I'M HERE TO JUST ANSWER WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
SO, UM, I CAN TALK ABOUT THE PROJECT OR THE SPECIFICS OF THE BUILDING.
WELL, WHY DON'T YOU, WHY DON'T YOU COME AND TELL US ANYTHING YOU THINK WE NEED TO KNOW? BECAUSE ONCE WE ACTUALLY HAVE A MOTION, THEN WE, THEN WE CAN'T, UH,
UH, WELL, FIRST OF ALL, MY NAME'S RICK HEUNG.
I'M WITH SHEAR HEUNG ARCHITECTURE.
I'M THE PROJECT MANAGER, UH, FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.
UM, AND SO I KNOW THE ONE QUESTION THAT, UH, MAY COME UP IS WHY TO DESIGN IT THIS WAY.
UM, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THAT BUILDING IS A MASS, HAS A MASSIVE ROOF.
AND SO THE IDEA WAS TO GIVE THE BUILDING A MORE MODERN, CONTEMPORARY SMOOTH LOOK.
UM, THE INTENT WITH THE, THE METAL PANEL IS TO HAVE A MAT FINISH SO IT WOULDN'T BE REFLECTIVE, BUT YET SOMETHING THAT WAS GONNA BE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING.
ALSO SOMETHING THAT WAS GONNA LAST, UH, FOR A LONG TIME.
UM, THE, THE OTHER AREAS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE EFIS WITH THE STUCCO FINISH IS INTENDED SO THAT AS A TENANT MAY MOVE IN OR MOVE OUT, IT WOULD BE EASILY, UM, REPAIRABLE IF THEY CHANGE THE SIGN.
SO, UM, THAT'S BASICALLY THE INTENT.
UH, WE'D LEAVE THE ROOF INTACT, UM, SO THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, MAKE ANY DRASTIC CHANGES.
THE, UH, WATER AS IT RUNS OFF CURRENTLY WITH ALL THE SYSTEMS GOING DOWN THE DOWNSPOUTS AND INTO THE DRAINS WOULD ALL REMAIN INTACT.
UM, AND SO THIS PART OF IT IS PURELY AESTHETICS TO, UH, JUST GIVE IT AN UPDATED CLEAN, UH, CLEAN LOOK.
UM, AND THEN OF COURSE, THE, UH, THE, A ADDITION OF THE STOREFRONT SYSTEM IS JUST TO GIVE IT A MORE OF A RETAIL, UH, RETAIL LOOK AS WELL.
UM, AND WE ARE, UH, PAINTING THE BUILDING TO KIND OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING TO JUST BLEND INTO THE BACKGROUND OF THE, WHAT WE'RE CALLING THE SCREEN WALLS.
SO THEY WOULD BE, UM, WE'RE INTENDING IF, UH, CHARCOAL OR SOME KIND OF A BROWN COLOR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHICH IS UP TO DISCUSSION AS LONG AS WE'RE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, CHANGE IF WE HAVE TO, TO ACCOMMODATE SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS MIGHT FEEL IS MORE APPROPRIATE.
UM, BUT THE IDEA IS JUST TO MAKE THE, THE BRICK AND THE EXISTING, UM, STUCCO THAT RUNS ALONG THE BOTTOM OF THE ROOF TO KIND OF JUST LET IT BLEND INTO THE BACKGROUND AND LET THE NEW SCREEN WALLS KIND OF BE THE FEATURE OF THE BUILDING.
[00:10:01]
IT COMES TO SOMETHING LIKE THIS BEING IN THE ENTRANCE CORRIDOR, UM, HOW WERE THE, YOU KNOW, OTHER BUILDINGS, UM, THAT ARE CURRENTLY EXISTING IN THE ENTRANCE CORRIDOR CONSIDERED WHEN IT CAME TO THE DESIGN, UH, ELEMENTS OF, OF THIS HERE? OR WERE THEY YEAH, THEY WERE, UM, THE, THE FIRST THING WE NOT, WE DID NOTICE THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF MASONRY BUILDINGS, UM, BUT WE, WITH THE EXISTING BRICK AND TRYING TO KIND OF GIVE IT A DIFFERENT LOOK, WE WANTED TO KIND OF MODERNIZE IT.UH, WE NOTICED THAT ACROSS THE ROAD IS, UM, UH, I BELIEVE IT'S VERIZON.
UM, THAT ONE IS I THINK ALL STUCCO OR EFIS.
UM, AND I, I THINK THAT'S KIND OF, UH, MORE ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT WE WANTED THIS TO LOOK LIKE.
WE OPTED TO GO WITH, UM, THE METAL PANEL JUST BECAUSE, UH, THE LONGEVITY OF IT AND THE, THE CLEANER, SHARPER LOOK TO IT.
UM, BUT WE THOUGHT IT WOULD LOOK GOOD WITH IN PROPORTION TO THAT BUILDING, PARTICULARLY SINCE IT WAS RIGHT ACROSS THE ROAD.
UM, AND AS YOU COME DOWN THE MAIN, UH, YOU KNOW, THE MAIN DRAG AND MAKE THAT TURN, UM, IT JUST KIND OF SEEMED LIKE THAT WOULD FIT, FIT IN A LITTLE BIT BETTER SHORT OF JUST DOING EFIS, WHICH, WHICH WE ARE OPEN TO AS WELL, IF, IF YOU FELT THAT THE METAL PANEL WASN'T ACCEPTABLE.
UM, BUT WE, WE JUST THOUGHT IT MAY, MAY BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CLEANER, MORE URBAN, UM, LOOK AND, AND I THINK IT WOULD LOOK GOOD IN THE CORRIDOR.
UM, I DID PROVIDE A, UH, SOME SPECS ON THAT, JUST IN GENERAL.
UM, WE DO KNOW THAT HAS THE DARK SKY LIGHTING.
SO ON EACH ONE OF THE COLUMNS, UM, WE'LL HAVE A DARK SKY SCONCE LIGHT.
AND THEN IN THE RI IN THE, ON THE CAP OF THE, THE TOP OF ALL THE WALLS, THE CAP WILL COME ACROSS AND, AND HAVE A CONCEALED, UH, LIGHT THAT WILL JUST GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF A GLOW TO, TO THE OVERALL SHAPE OF THE BUILDING.
UM, AND WE HAVE NO INTENTION ON HAVING ANY YARD LIGHTS POINTING UP AT THE BUILDING INTO THE SKY JUST ENOUGH TO JUST HIGHLIGHT THE BUILDING ITSELF.
AND THEN ALSO, IF YOU SEE, UM, TO THE RIGHT, YOU'LL SEE THERE'S A CANOPY OVER EACH OF THE ENTRANCES, THE MAIN ENTRANCES.
UH, WE'RE GONNA HAVE RECESSED LIGHTING IN THE ROOF OF THAT.
UH, SO IT, IT WOULD JUST BE BASICALLY JUST FOR SAFETY AND LIGHTING UP THE ENTRYWAY.
AND THOSE ARE GONNA BE ALL GLASS FLOOR TO CEILING ON THE FRONT SO THAT WHEN THE RETAIL INSIDE IS OPEN, THOSE WILL ALL BE LIT.
THE, I MEAN, WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY'RE IN BUSINESS, WHEN THEY'RE IN BUSINESS AND THEY'RE OPEN FOR BUSINESS, THE LIGHTS WILL BE SHINING FORTH FROM YEAH.
THE LIGHTS WILL ACTUALLY BE ABOVE THE GLASS.
THE, THE STOREFRONT SYSTEM DOES NOT GO ALL THE WAY TO THE ROOF.
EXISTING, UH, STEEL I-BEAMS THAT RUN ALONG THE PERIMETER.
I THINK THEY'RE ABOUT 16 INCHES.
UM, AND THAT'S ACTUALLY WHERE WE'RE GONNA TIE THE STRUCTURALLY, WE'RE GONNA TIE THE SCREEN WALLS INTO THOSE I-BEAMS. BUT THE TOP OF THE, UH, STOREFRONT WILL BE BELOW THAT.
AND SO YOU WON'T ACTUALLY NECESSARILY, IT WON'T, WON'T HAVE A DIRECT GLARE I SUPPOSE.
IF YOU GET CLOSE ENOUGH, YOU'LL OBVIOUSLY SEE, AND THE FURTHER, THE CLOSER YOU ARE, YOU'LL SEE THEM.
BUT, UM, ON THE, THE FRONT TENANT SPACE RIGHT ON THE CORNER, UM, WE HAVE AN ENGINEER.
THE ENGINEERING IS, HAS DONE AT THIS POINT, WE JUST HAVEN'T SUBMITTED.
'CAUSE WE DIDN'T WANT TO, WE DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WERE GONNA HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING.
BUT, UM, BUT THE LIGHTING HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
IT'S LED LIGHTING, UM, WITH APPLICABLE LUMINANT TESTING AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT I MOVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO PROVE THE PROPOSED EXTERIOR MATERIALS FOR THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
NUMBER ONE, ALL METAL PANELS WILL HAVE A FINISH OTHER THAN GLOSS NOT TO CAUSE GLARE OR DISTRACTION.
NUMBER TWO, ALL PAINTED FINISHES WILL BE MUTED EARTH AND TOS.
SECOND, I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED IT OURSELVES.
OKAY, MS. POTTER, CAN WE CALL THE QUESTION PLEASE? COMMISSIONER MARRAZZO? NO.
THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM NUMBER 2, 5 0 0 0 2 2 2 2
[00:15:01]
FOR HAPPY CREEK KNOWLES.MR. WARE APPLICATION 25 0 0 0 2 2 IS A REQUEST FOR REVISION TO F-R-S-U-B 1521 DASH 2019 OF THE SUBDIVISION PLAN FOR HAPPY KE CREEK KNOLL.
SECTION FOUR REGARDING LOTS 4, 5, 6, 29 AND 30, UH, SUBMITTED BY MIRANDA HOMES INCORPORATED.
UM, LOT OF BACKGROUND ON THIS APPLICATION THAT WE DISCUSSED AT LENGTH AT THE WORK SESSION, SO WE'LL KIND OF CONDENSE THAT A LITTLE BIT.
BUT OUR TOWN CODE 1 48 3 15 FOR MAJOR SUBDIVISION SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES, UH, FOR A STATES IN REVISION TO THE APPROVED SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT PLAN MUST BE APPROVED BY THE TOWN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURES OF THIS CHAPTER.
PRIOR TO MAKING DESIGN CHANGES IN THE FIELD, THE EXTENT OF THE REVISIONS WILL DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE REVISION CAN BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY OR REQUIRE REVIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND RE-APPROVAL BY TOWN COUNCIL.
THAT'S, SO THAT'S WHY THIS ITEM IS COMING BEFORE YOU.
WE CANNOT, WITH THESE FIVE LOTS APPROVE THIS ADMINISTRATIVELY.
UH, THE ISSUE HERE IS UNDER 1 48, 8 60 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS UNDER, AND WHICH IS IN CONTAINED IN YOUR PACKET.
YOU'RE GIVEN THIS PART OF THE CODE CONCERNING WHAT THE CODE REFERS TO AS STEEP SLOPES.
AND THERE'S CONDITIONS WITH THE STEEP SLOPES THAT THE, UH, DEVELOPER WOULD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT, UH, PRIOR TO PLAN APPROVAL.
SO THIS PLAN HAS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED IN 2019.
SO THEY TOOK THAT IN CONSIDERATION, UH, AND THEY HAD TO ESTABLISH THE SEEP SLOPE AREAS BASED ON THE TOWN CODE.
UH, SO THEY HAD TO IDENTIFY THOSE CA UH, SLOPES, UH, ALL AREAS OF SLOPES BETWEEN 15 AND 25% THAT CONTAIN HIGHLY ERODIBLE, HIGHLY PERMEABLE OR SHRINK SWELL SOILS, UH, IN ALL OTHER SLOPES GREATER THAN 25%.
SO THEY HAD TO DO THAT WITH, WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN, AND THEY HAD TO CREATE THE SLOPE OVERLAYS, WHICH IS ON THE ORIGINAL PLAN THAT WE, UH, IS CONTAINED IN YOUR PACKET.
UH, SO THAT'S PART OF THE PLAN REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY HAVE TO SHOW THOSE AND HOW THEY'RE GONNA SAFELY DEVELOP THOSE STEEP SLOPES.
UH, THEN WE GET TO THE BUILDING PHASE.
SO THE PLAN WAS ALREADY PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WITH STEEP SLOPES.
THEY DID A, UM, ENGINEERING REPORT OR A, UH, SOILS ANALYSIS ON THE RE, UH, FOR ECS DID THAT IN OCTOBER OF 2018, UH, WITH THE CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE TOWN'S PLANNING COMMISSION IN MAY OF 2019.
SO THEY TOOK THAT IN CONSIDERATION.
AND AFTER THESE ARE APPROVED, YOU GO TO THE SECTION SIX, WHICH IS THE BUILDING SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
UH, SO UNDER A, YOU HAVE SITE DEVELOPMENTS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN A MANNER THAT REQUIRES MINIMUM AMOUNT OF ALTERATIONS OF THE STEEP SLOPES.
UH, THEY SHOULD TRY TO, THE EXISTING VEGETATION SHOULD BE KIND OF PRESERVED TO MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE.
UH, BUT ALSO THEY CAN DO ANOTHER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT IF, IF THEY DESIRE TO DO SO.
UH, BUT ALSO UNDER E UH, RETAINING WALLS ARE ENCOURAGED TO TO REDUCE THE STEEPNESS OF MANMADE SLOPES.
AND THERE'S A CATEGORY THERE THAT WE REVIEWED DURING THE WORK SESSION, WHICH IS CONTAINED IN YOUR, YOUR PACKET AND STAFF REPORT.
ALSO AT THE END, UH, THEY WILL HAVE TO SUBMIT AN ASBUILT PLAN ON THESE STEEP SLOPES WHERE THEY HAVE ALTERED THE SLOPES FROM THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED, UH, PLAN.
SO THOSE ARE THE FIVE LOTS THERE LOTS, FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN.
AND 29 AND 30 THEY'RE AT THE TOP.
THAT'S AN, AN AERIAL VIEW FROM THE COUNTY'S GIS SYSTEM.
UH, SO THERE'S THE, UH, APPROVED PLAN, UH, FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAN FOR HAPPY CREEK KNOLLS.
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THERE UNDER THE IMPACT OF IT THAT THE OVER LOT GRADING IS MINIMIZED IN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF HAPPY CREEK KNOLLS DEVELOPMENT PLANS THROUGH THE USE OF SITE SPECIFIC ADAPTIVE HOUSING.
FURTHER EXPLAINED BY PROPOSING FINAL GRADES IN CONJUNCTION WITH EXISTING GRADES THAT ARE MENTALLY ADJUSTED TO ACCOMMODATE THE HOUSE CONSTRUCTION AS OPPOSED TO GRADING TO THE LOT TO FIT THE HOUSE.
THAT WOULD REQUIRE EXTENSIVE GRADING EXCESSIVELY STEEP DRIVEWAYS AND OR RETAINING WALLS.
[00:20:01]
COMMISSION IN 2019 TOOK THAT IN CONSIDERATION.SO THOSE AREAS THAT ARE SHADED, THOSE ARE WHERE THEY WERE IDENTIFIED, THEY WERE STEEP SLOPES ON THE PROPERTY.
AND YOU CAN DEVELOP THOSE ON THOSE STEEP SLOPES BASED ON THE CONDITIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND PART OF THE TOWN CODE.
SO THOSE SHADED AREAS ARE STEEP SLOPES SO YOU CAN, UH, ALTER THEM, UH, TO CREATE THE HOUSING.
UH, SO THESE HERE AS THE SECTION ON THIS PAGE OF FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX THERE AT THE BOTTOM THREE, THESE THREE LOTS HERE, AND 29 AND 30 UP HERE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THOSE WERE SHADED.
UH, THOSE AREAS WERE ALREADY IN THE STEEP SLOPES.
AND ALSO WITH 29 AND 30, UH, THAT DESIGN FOR THOSE HOUSES WERE SPLIT LEVEL HOMES.
UH, AND THE SLOPES OUT FRONT WERE, UH, BASICALLY ABOUT A 10% SLOPE.
SO THOSE SPLIT LEVELS HOMES, YOU WOULD HAVE A STEEPER FRONT YARD THAN YOU WOULD A BACKYARD ON THIS DESIGN THAT WAS APPROVED.
HOWEVER, WE DO NOT, UH, DICTATE THE STYLE OF THE HOMES FOR CONSTRUCTION.
SO THIS, HOW WAS THE GENERAL DESIGN, UH, ORIGINALLY APPROVED? UH, SO THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED, UH, PROPOSED HOUSE LOCATION SURVEYS FOR LOTS, FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX.
WE REVIEWED THOSE PLANS AND, UH, THEY, UH, CAME OUT WITH A RETAINING WALL TO BE INSTALLED ON LOTS 4, 5, 6, 29 AND 30.
THAT'S THE DARK LINE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN.
AND ALSO ON THE ORIGINAL PROPOSED DRAWING.
UH, THOSE SLOPES, UH, BY THE GEOTECHNIC REPORT AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL, NO SLOPES WERE TO BE CREATED GREATER THAN A THREE TO ONE RATIO.
SO WHEN THEY, WE HAD THESE PLANS COME IN FOR PROPOSED HOUSE LOCATION SURVEYS, UH, THE HOUSES ARE BASICALLY IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING ENVELOPE AND ARE ACTUALLY SMALLER THAN IN SIZE THAN THE HOUSES ON THE, UH, PROOF PLAN.
UH, BUT THE FRONT AGAIN IS FLATTER, SO THEY'RE GRADING MORE INTO REAR OF THE LOT.
SO THAT DARK LINE AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE IS A RETAINING WALL.
AND FROM THE RETAINING WALL TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, UH, THEY WERE GONNA MAINTAIN A THREE TO ONE SLOPE.
SO, UH, THAT WAS FOR LOT FOUR.
THERE IS LOT FIVE THAT WE APPROVED.
LOT FIVE HAD TWO RETAINING WALLS.
AND YOU CAN SEE THERE THAT THE ENGINEER, UH, SHOWS A THREE TO ONE SLOPE GOING FROM THE RETAINING WALL TO THE BACK OF THE HOME.
UH, THERE'S LOT SIX WAS APPROVED, AGAIN, ANOTHER RETAINING WALL AND THE FINISHED SLOPE FROM RETAINING WALL TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE AT A THREE TO ONE.
SO THOSE WERE APPROVED SAME WAY WITH LOT 29, UH, TWO RETAINING WALLS THERE ON LOT 29 IN THE BACK.
AGAIN, ANOTHER THREE TO ONE SLOPE ON THE FINISHED GRADE.
AND APPROVAL FOR THAT ON LOT 30, UH, TWO RETAINING WALLS ON LOT 30 WITH A THREE TO ONE SLOPE ON THE GRADE.
UH, THEY GOT THEIR BUILDING PERMITS FOR WARREN COUNTY.
THE HOUSES CAME UP OUT, UH, COME UP OUTTA THE GROUND WITH CONSTRUCTION.
AND AFTER THE HOUSES ARE NEARLY COMPLETE, UH, THE APPLICANT DECIDED TO DO ATO A SLOPE ANALYSIS ON LOTS FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX AND 29 AND 30 AFTER THE FACT OF THE APPROVAL, UH, INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET IS A GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FROM THEIR ENGINEER THAT ANALYZED THE STEEP SLOPES ON THOSE LOTS.
SO THEY GAVE THE REPORT THERE AND THEY GAVE A CONCLUSION THERE.
THAT IS IN THEIR PROFESSIONAL OPINION, BASED ON THE RESULTS OF OUR EVALUATION, THAT THE SLOPES WILL BE STABLE, UH, SINCE THERE'S NO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON TOP OF THE SLOPE, MAN, CAUSE FACTORS WILL ONLY AFFECT THE SURFACE OF THE SLOPE.
SO THAT'S IN THE REPORT THAT WAS INCLUDED.
UH, SO THERE'S LOT FOUR WITHOUT THE RETAINING WALLS.
UH, SO THEY PROPOSED TO ELIMINATE THE RETAINING WALLS BASED ON THE SOILS ANALYSIS THAT THEY HAD CONDUCTED BY THEIR, UH, ENGINEER.
SO WE TOOK THAT, UH, DRAWING THAT THEY'RE CREATING THOSE SLOPES TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA ON A CROSS-SECTIONAL VIEW.
SO THEY'RE PROPOSING A SLOPE TO GRADE IT.
BASICALLY WHAT WE CAME UP WITH, UH, STAFF DID IS ABOUT A 2.2 TO ONE SLOPE RATIO, MEANING IT WOULD RISE IN ELEVATION ONE FOOT VERTICALLY FOR EVERY 2.2 FEET.
IT TRAVELS, THAT'S SHADED IN THAT, UH, AREA THERE.
AND THE DARK LINE IS THE GRADE FOR A THREE TO ONE SLOPE FROM THE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE, UH, TO THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.
SO YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF DISCREPANCY
[00:25:01]
THERE BETWEEN THE THREE TO ONE SLOPE AND THE PROPOSED 2.2 TO ONE SLOPE THERE.SO BASICALLY FOR THAT, WITH THE HOUSE SETTING THERE, UH, THEY CANNOT PUT IN A THREE TO ONE SLOPE.
IT'S NOT POSSIBLE AT THIS POINT JUST WITH GRADING.
UH, SO THERE'S THE VIEW OF LOT FOUR, UM, THERE FROM THE REAR OF THE HOUSE.
THAT'S THE LOT NUMBER FOUR THERE WITH THEY HAVE, THE CONTRACTOR HAS COME IN THERE AND HAS GRADED THE SLOPE BASED ON THIS DRAWING HERE THAT THEY SUBMITTED.
AND SO WE TOOK THAT DRAWING AGAIN AND CAME UP WITH THESE RATIOS TO CONFIRM THAT.
UH, SO THEY DID THE SAME FOR LOT NUMBER FIVE, ELIMINATING THE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADING FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE BACK OF THE HOME.
UH, THAT RATIO IS ABOUT A 1.1 TO NINE SLOPE, OR CLOSE TO A TWO TO ONE SLOPE, MEANING IT WOULD RISE ONE FOOT IN ELEVATION FOR EVERY TWO FOOT YOU TRAVEL HORIZONTALLY.
SO THE DARK LINE THERE IS THE THREE TO ONE RATIO WHERE YOU HAVE TO TIE INTO THE EXISTING GRADE AT THE BACK OF THE LOT AND PUT THAT SLOPE OUT AT A THREE TO ONE.
AND YOU CAN SEE THERE THAT WAY THE HOUSE IS SITUATED.
NOW, UH, YOU COULD NOT PUT IN A THREE TO ONE SLOPE.
UH, THAT IS THE BACK OF LOT NUMBER FIVE.
THAT'S A PICTURE TAKEN TO THE HOUSE.
THAT'S THE HOUSE WITHOUT THE SIDING, JUST WITH THE WRAP AROUND IT.
SO YOU CAN SEE THE SLOPE THERE ON THE BACK.
AND IT APPEARS IT'S LITTLE NOT AS STEEP AS THE DRAWING BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE, UH, FROM THE PHOTOGRAPH, UH, WE GO FORWARD HERE.
UH, THEY HAVE A LITTLE BIT LESS ROOM AT THE BACK OF THE LOT THERE FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE TO THE SLOPE THERE.
UH, ON IN THIS DRAWING THEY WOULD HAD A LITTLE BIT MORE.
SO THAT TELLS ME THE SLOPE IS LESS.
WELL, IT'S, IT'S NOT AS STEEP AS THE 1.1, 1.91, THE RATIO THERE.
'CAUSE THEY HAVE A LESS OF A BACKYARD THERE ON LOT NUMBER FIVE.
AGAIN, THE PICTURE OF LOT NUMBER FIVE AND THAT'S LOT NUMBER FIVE THERE AGAIN WITH NO SIDING AND LOT NUMBER SIX TO THE LEFT OF THAT.
UH, SO LET, UH, LOT NUMBER SIX, SAME THING.
THEY, UH, PROPOSED A GRADE TO SLOPE FROM THE EXISTING BANK TO THE BOTTOM OF THE, NEAR THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.
UH, CREATING ABOUT A 2.5 TO ONE RATIO ON THAT ONE.
AND LOOKS LIKE ABOUT EIGHT OR 10 FOOT THERE FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE TO THE TOE OF THE SLOPE.
AND AGAIN, THE DARK LINE REPRESENTING THE THREE TO ONE SLOPE RATIO.
AND THERE IS LOT NUMBER SIX WITH A DECK IN THE BACK.
UH, SO THE BACK OF THE DECK IS BASICALLY AT THE TOE OF THE SLOPE THERE ON THAT LOT.
UH, ANOTHER VIEW FROM THE TOP OF THE BANK.
LOT NUMBER SIX ON THE LEFT, LOT NUMBER FIVE TO THE RIGHT AND A VIEW FROM UP TOP.
THERE'S LOT NUMBER SIX AGAIN WITH THE DECK.
ANOTHER VIEW OF THOSE THREE TOGETHER WITH THE SLOPE THAT THEY PUT IN.
AND A VIEW FROM SIX GOING WITH FIVE IN THE MIDDLE AND FOUR FURTHER FROM YOU THERE.
SO THAT'S A VIEW FROM SIX FIVE AND FOUR, UH, FIVE, AGAIN BEING IN THE MIDDLE.
UH, SO THEY DID A SLOPE OF SPILLED ANALYSIS FOR LOTS 29 AND 30.
THAT'S INCLUDED IN YOUR REPORT.
UH, IN THEIR CONCLUSION, AGAIN, UH, IN THEIR PROFESSIONAL OPINION BASED ON RESULTS OF THEIR EVALUATION, THAT THE SLOPES WILL BE STABLE.
UH, SO THERE IS LOT NUMBER 29, UH, GRADING WITHOUT THE RETAINING WALLS.
AND UH, THAT ONE WITH THAT, UH, DRAWING, IT CAME OUT TO ABOUT A TWO AND A HALF TO ONE SLOPE RATIO, AGAIN, WITH A THREE TO ONE SHOWN IN THAT DARK LINE.
HOWEVER, IN THE FIELD, BECAUSE THIS SHOWS THE GRADING HAD TO GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE PROPERTY LINE TO ACHIEVE THAT GRADE.
UH, THIS TELLS ME HERE THAT THEY DID NOT GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE PROPERTY LINE.
NOW THAT SLOPE THERE IS STEEPER THERE ON LOT 29, UH, WITH A FLAT SPOT THERE IN THE BACK.
UH, SO THEN WE HAVE LOT NUMBER 30, UH, WITHOUT THE RETAINING WALLS.
UH, SO THAT CAME OUT TO ABOUT A 1.4 TO ONE SLOPE RATIO.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE DARK LINE AT A THREE TO ONE, UH, THAT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED WHERE THE HOUSE IS SET ON THE LOT.
THERE'S SOME PHOTOGRAPHS OF LOT NUMBER 30, THIS IS RIGHT AT THE END OF THEIR GRADING, PART OF THEIR EXCAVATION THAT IS THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE HOME.
[00:30:01]
EXISTING SUBDIVISION THERE IN THE BACK, AGAIN, THE SLOPE IN THE REAR OF THE HOUSE.AND AGAIN, OUT THE BACK HERE AT THE RIGHT REAR, LOOKING DOWN THE SLOPE THERE THAT THEY GRADED BASICALLY UP TO THE TOP OF THE, THE RE OR THE PROPERTY LINE AT THE TOP OF THE BANK THERE.
AND ANOTHER VIEW OF THE SLOPE FROM ON TOP OF THE, THE BANK THERE TOWARD THEIR BACKYARD.
UH, A LOT OF INFORMATION ON THIS, UH, ON THE, SO THEY DID SUBMIT THE SOILS REPORT.
UM, WE CANNOT APPROVE THESE ADMINISTRATIVELY.
THIS IS A REVISION TO AN ALREADY APPROVED PLAN.
UM, SO THIS IS, UH, COMES BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, FOR UH, Y'ALL TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I KNOW A LOT OF INFORMATION TO TAKE IN.
WE INCLUDED THIS GOOD BIT IN THE WORK SESSION AND IN YOUR PACKET.
SO WE KIND OF CONDENSED THIS DOWN FOR THIS PART OF THE, UH, REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY, NOT FOR STAFF, BUT FOR THE APPLICANT OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE.
IF HE'S HERE, I'LL, UH, GO BACK TO WHICH ONE YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT.
BUT, UH, WELL SOME OF THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS I THINK ARE PROBABLY THE MOST TELLING.
UH, WE'LL GO, WE'LL GO BACK TO A LOT.
I CAN SWITCH THESE WHEN YOU WANT TO.
I THINK THERE'S A VIEW OF LOTS, FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX THERE TOGETHER.
PLEASE, YES, PLEASE COME AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF.
I'M, UH, MARTY ROSE, THE VP OF CONSTRUCTION FOR MIRANDA HOLMES.
SO I'M HEADING UP THE WHOLE CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT FOR MIRANDA.
I HOPE I DIDN'T SAY THAT IT WAS LIKE A FRAUDING SLIP.
UM, WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT, UM, UH, DO YOU WANNA TELL US ANYTHING BEFORE WE START ASKING QUESTIONS? SURE, YES.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF HISTORY TO THIS.
UM, WHEN WE COME INTO THESE PROJECTS, WE CAME INTO THIS PROJECT SPECIFICALLY WE'RE, WE'RE PAYING A DEVELOPER FOR FINISHED LOTS, SO IT SHOULD BE ON GRADE TO ACCEPT OUR HOUSES.
UM, HE ACTUALLY PUT US IN TOUCH WITH THE LOCAL ENGINEER THAT WAS HELPING US CITE THE HOUSES.
HE WAS THE ONE THAT BASICALLY TOLD US ALL OF OUR HOUSES COULD FIT ON CERTAIN LOTS.
WE SOLD THE HOMES, MOVED FORWARD GETTING THOSE HOUSES ON THERE.
SO WE ACTUALLY, IN FINDING THAT SOME OF THE LOTS THEY, THINGS WEREN'T GONNA WORK OUT BECAUSE BASED OFF OF HIS INACCURACIES, WE SWITCHED OVER TO RACI ENGINEERING.
THAT'S WHO WE WERE USING CURRENTLY.
AND THAT'S WHO'S DONE ALL OF OUR SIGHTINGS OUT THERE NOW.
SO ONCE WE MADE THAT SWITCH, THEY CAME OUT AND DID A FIELD ANALYSIS BASED OFF OF HOW, UM, MR. RAMSEY LEFT THE LOTS.
'CAUSE HE DEVELOPED ALL THE LOTS FOR US.
UM, WE WEREN'T AWARE OF ANY OF, UH, SLOPE CHALLENGES OR ISSUES ON THAT ORIGINALLY.
THE REASON THIS ALL CAME UP, WE HAD FOUR LOTS AROUND THE CORNER FROM HERE.
THOSE ALL THAT WAS WHERE THE, THE FIRST QUESTION CAME UP ON SLOPE CONCERNS.
SO WHEN THAT CAME UP, WE HADN'T SUBMITTED THESE YET.
UM, FOUR PLANS BECAUSE WE WERE IN THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH OUR SALES PROCESS.
SO THE FIRST FOUR, WHEN IT CAME TO QUESTION SET, WE ACTUALLY HAD ALREADY STARTED A HOUSE AND HAD AN APPROVED LOT AND WE'RE TOLD WE HAD TO STOP AND GO BACK AND GET A REVISION TO INSTALL A RETAINING WALL BECAUSE THE, THE SLOPES WERE, UM, EXCEEDED THE ALLOWABLE SPACE, WHICH WE WEREN'T AWARE OF.
SO WE WENT BACK AND, AND WORKED WITH OUR SOILS GUYS TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.
I'M NOT SURE IF YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN TO THE SITE TO SEE IT, BUT YOU SEE THE RETAINING WALLS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED BEHIND THOSE FOUR LOTS.
UM, SO SEEING HOW THAT WAS LEFT AS WELL AND WITH THE CONCERN, WE KIND OF KNEW THAT WE FELT LIKE THE BACKYARD WASN'T GONNA BE AS MUCH USABLE AS, AS THAT IS, AS THESE ARE GONNA BE AS IT DOES.
WE FELT LIKE THIS WAS GONNA GIVE US A BETTER CHANCE FOR THE CUSTOMER, LESS MAINTENANCE FOR THE CUSTOMER DOWN THE ROAD.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT MAINTAINING A RETAINING WALL OR ANY CONCERNS DOWN THE ROAD.
SO WE CONSULTED OUR ENGINEERS ON THESE.
WE DID MOVE FORWARD, UM, WITH RETAINING WALLS ON THE APPLICATIONS.
'CAUSE WE WERE TOLD WE COULDN'T GET PERMITS UNLESS WE HAD RETAINING WALLS BECAUSE WE EXCEEDED THE SLOPES.
SO WE, WE, AND WE WERE TOLD WE COULD GO BACK FOR REVISION.
SO ONCE WE GOT THE ENGINEER'S REPORT, 'CAUSE JOHN HAS SENT US THE, UM, WHAT IT SAYS, BUILDING SIX C WHERE IT SHOWED YOU CAN GO BACK WITH THE GEOTECH REPORTS.
SO WE HAD TO GO START THAT PROCESS.
SO THAT TOOK MULTIPLE WEEKS TO GET THAT DONE.
SO WE, WE'VE CONSULTED THOSE GUYS.
THEY CAME OUT TO DO ALL THE SLOPE ANALYSIS AND THE MEANTIME WE MOVED FORWARD WITH THE RETAINING WALLS ON ALL THESE LOTS SO THAT WE CAN AT LEAST GET THE CUSTOMER'S HOME STARTED WITH THE ANTICIPATION AND HOPE THAT WE COULD GET THESE APPROVED WITH THESE, UM, SLOPE CHANGES AND TO, TO REMOVE THE WALLS FOR THE CUSTOMER'S SAKE.
SO THAT'S WHERE WE, THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO THIS POINT.
SO AS FAR AS I KNOW, AS FAR AS, IT SEEMS LIKE THE APPLICATION WE, WE DID APPLY FOR THESE WITH WALLS TO KEEP THE PROCESS MOVING FOR THE CUSTOMER SO THEY CAN GET INTO THE HOME.
UM, IT, IT MENTIONED IN THE REPORTS THAT IT WASN'T
[00:35:01]
COMPLETE AT THE TIME.THERE WAS SOME ONE PART OF THE ANALYSIS THAT HADN'T BEEN FORWARDED.
IT HAD TO DO, I THINK WITH THE SOIL.
THE SOIL, UH, WAS THAT EVER COMPLETED? AND THEY, THEY MENTIONED IN THERE THAT IF, IF THAT CAME IN, IT MIGHT ALTER THEIR OPINION.
THE, UM, THEY, THEY CAME BACK MULTIPLE TIMES BECAUSE THEY FINALIZED THE REPORT.
SO I'M NOT SURE IF THAT WAS IN MY REPORT THAT WAS IN THERE OR IF THAT WAS WHERE THAT WAS IN THE REPORT.
I CAN HONESTLY SAY IT, IT WAS IN THEIR, THEIR CONCLUSION.
THEY ME MENTIONED THAT, THAT THEY WOULD REEVALUATE ONCE THEY GOT THAT INFORMATION.
WAS THAT ON ALL OF THESE OR WAS IT JUST ANYONE IN PARTICULAR? UH, I'LL SAY ALL, BUT I'M, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS IN EACH, AND I BELIEVE IT WAS ALL, BUT ANOTHER THING, THE, UM, WHERE THE CORE SAMPLES WERE TAKEN WAS TAKEN AT THE LEVEL OF THE HOUSE, NOT AT THE LEVEL OF THE HILLSIDE OR UP ON TOP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
WHY, WHY DO YOU FEEL THAT IS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE STABILITY OF THE, THE SOILS AND THE SLOPE? SO THEY BASIC, BUT, AND I'M NOT A SOIL SCIENTIST, SO THAT'S WHY WE CONSULTED THE, THE PROFESSIONALS ON THIS.
BUT THEY, THEY COULD LOOK AND SEE, THEY WERE JUST TAKING SOILS FROM THE SAMPLES AND THEY COULD SEE WHERE THE VEINS OF THE SOIL RAN AND THEY COULD TELL THAT IT WAS THE SAME SOIL TYPES THROUGHOUT THOSE WHOLE AREAS.
SO THEY COULD DETERMINE WHERE THEY NEEDED TO PULL THE SOIL SAMPLES BASED OFF OF WHAT THEY SAW ON SITE.
UM, SO THAT WAS THEIR DETERMINATION BASED OFF OF THAT.
THEY WERE THE ONES, YOU KNOW, PUTTING THEIR NAME ON THIS AND THESE, THIS IS A GOOD COMPANY.
WE'VE USED THIS IN MULTI MULTIPLE AREAS FOR SOILS ANALYSIS AND ALL.
BUT THEY, THEY COULD DETERMINE THAT ALL THE SOILS WERE THE SAME IN THOSE AREAS.
AND THAT'S WHY THEY HAD TO TAKE EACH ONE AND EACH LOT INDIVIDUALLY AND DO DIFFERENT, UM, DIFFERENT AREAS VERSUS JUST A GENERAL OVERALL SOILS REPORT.
IT, IT ALSO MENTIONED, UM, THAT THERE WAS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AT THE TOP OF THE HILL.
THEY, THERE WAS NO PLANNED FUTURE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE TOP OF THE HILL.
BUT WITH THE STEEP SLOPES THERE, UH, WHAT, UM, WHAT WOULD BE INTRUSIVE FOR DEVELOPMENT? UH, ARE WE LIMITING THE PEOPLE ABOVE TO DO SOMETHING LATER ON? UM, NOW AGAIN, IS THAT, IS THAT A PART LOT SPECIFIC THAT REPORT? IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE ALONG THE, THE THREE LOTS THAT, THESE LOTS THAT ARE SHOWING HERE.
BECAUSE I MEAN, I THINK THERE, I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY MADE THE COMMENT ABOUT THAT.
THERE'S, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THE BACKSIDE OF THAT GOES ALONG.
I CAN'T RUN INTO THE ROAD THAT GOES BACK THROUGH THERE.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ACTUALLY ANY DEVELOPMENT PLANS OR YOU CAN DEVELOP ANYTHING BACK THROUGH THERE.
UM, BUT IS THAT YOUR QUESTION AS FAR AS IT'S, AS FAR AS IT MADE THE STATEMENT MADE THE ASSUMPTION THAT NOTHING WAS EVER GONNA HAPPEN UP THERE.
YEAH, WELL THERE'S, AND THE PLANS, IT DOES SAY THAT THERE'S GENERALLY LIKE A TREE CONSERVATION AREA BACK THROUGH THERE AS WELL.
SO THAT IS NOTED ON THE OVERALL PLANS.
AND WE SAW THAT WHEN WE SAT DOWN WITH JOHN.
HE HAD, HE HAD POINTED THAT OUT.
WE SAT DOWN WITH HIM IN HIS OFFICE THAT THERE'S A TREE CONSERVATION AREA THAT BACKS UP BEHIND FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX.
SO THAT WOULD LEAD ALLUDED TO THE FACT THAT THERE PROBABLY ISN'T GONNA BE ANYTHING BUILT BACK THROUGH THERE WITH THE TREE CONSERVATION AREA.
YEAH, I KNOW THEY HAD THE SOILS ANALYSIS AND THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SAND AND THE SAND CONTENT AND ALL THAT.
BUT THIS IS PRIMARILY CLAY THAT IS GOING THROUGH, YOU COULD ALMOST MODELING CLAY IMPORTANT IN THIS.
MUCH OF THIS HAS BEEN CUT AWAY AND THEN REPLACED AND THEN DRIVEN OVER TO MAKE, MAKE THE NEW SLOPES.
UH, WHY IS THAT STABLE? SO THIS AREA, THIS WASN'T ACTUALLY BROUGHT BACK IN.
THIS WAS ALL CUT BACK OUT THROUGH ON, ON THESE AREAS THROUGH HERE.
I I, I WATCHED AND KNEW IT WAS CUT OUT AND THEN THEY WENT TO THE TOP OF HILL AND CUT OFF THE TOP AND DUMPED IT DOWN AND THEN FILLED IT TO MAKE IT SO, AND FILLED IT BACK IN.
AS FAR AS ON THE INITIAL, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST ON, SO ON THE TOP LAYER SURFACE IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YEAH, BUT WHAT FOR STABILITY? 'CAUSE IT'S NOT COMPACTED.
SO THE, THE GENERAL, WHAT THEY'RE SAYING TOO IS WE, THEY DID A LITTLE, A THIN LAYER ON THE TOP.
WE ARE GONNA STABILIZE THIS, WE'RE MATTING THIS, SO BY MATTING THIS AND GETTING SOMETHING TO GROW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO, WE DON'T WANNA PUT MATTING ON ROCKS.
SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF TOP SOIL, IF YOU WILL, ON THE SURFACE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GET SOMETHING TO GROW AND TO, TO, TO TAKE ROOT AND HELP STABILIZE IT AS WELL.
BUT WELL, THE SOIL IS PROBABLY CONSISTENT ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE FILL BASED ON HOW YOU, HOW YOU DID IT PER SE.
AND WITH THE, THE NATURE OF CLAY AND THE WAY WATER FLOWS MM-HMM
IT, IT HAS A RISK OF FLOW GOING DOWN SOME NUMBER OF FEET AND THEN FLOWING DOWN TO CAUSE IT TO SLIP.
AND I THINK THAT'S A BIG CONCERN HERE.
ON, ON THE, THESE SLOPES ON THIS, THESE PICTURES RIGHT HERE MM-HMM
AND THE, UM, OF COURSE THE, UH, LOT WHERE IT'S ALMOST VERTICAL, UH, BEHIND THE HOUSE THAT, UH, RIGHT.
I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE JUST TO SUPPORT, TO SUPPORT YOUR POINT.
UM, THE, UH, MATTER YOU WERE ALLUDING TO IS IN THE REPORT OF DECEMBER, THE LETTER OF DECEMBER THE NINTH TO MR. MARTY RHODES.
AND THE SENTENCE IS, UM, AND THIS IS THROUGH THE REPORT ON ALL, ALL THE PROPERTIES.
UM, AT THE TIME OF THIS REPORT, WE ARE STILL AWAITING THE RESULTS OF SIMPLE DIRECT SHEAR TESTING ON SOIL SAMPLES TAKEN IN SHELBY TUBES DURING DRILLING.
IF THESE RESULTS DIFFER FROM OUR ASSUMED VALUES, WE WILL CONDUCT THE SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS AGAIN AND REISSUE THE REPORT WITH UPDATED RESULTS.
AND THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT REFERRING TO? YEAH.
DID THEY, DID THEY REISSUE THE REPORT? DID THEY RE REDO THE STUDY? THEY DID NOT HAVE TO REISSUE ANYTHING BECAUSE
[00:40:01]
IT, EVERYTHING CAME BACK.BUT I THOUGHT WE SENT, DID WE NOT SENT THAT UPDATED TO YOU ALL? THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD THAT UPDATED FINALIZED REPORT THEY GOT SENT IN WITH THIS APPLICATION.
SO I GOTTA DOUBLE CHECK AND SEE.
THAT SHOULDN'T BEEN IN A, IN A SENSE IT'S A LITTLE LESS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S BASED ON THE TUBE SAMPLES THEY TOOK AT THE LEVEL OF THE HOUSE, NOT INTO THE HILLSIDE.
SO IT, IT KIND OF IS IRRELEVANT IN SOME WAYS TO, TO HAVE IT, 'CAUSE THIS WAS ALL FILLED FROM THE TOP.
SO IT, THAT'S WHERE THE, THE CONCERN COMES IN AND, UM, OKAY.
OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD.
ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WISH TO ADD? NOT THAT I CAN THINK OF.
UM, BUT AGAIN, I WOULD JUST, IF YOU ALL HAD GOTTEN A CHANCE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE, TO SEE THE COMPARISONS BETWEEN THE ONES WE HAVE EXISTING WITH THE WALLS AND THE ONES WITHOUT, TO GET A GENERAL IDEA OF KIND OF TO SEE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AS FAR AS THE SLOPE GOES.
I DON'T SEE THERE'S MUCH DIFFERENCE FROM WHAT'S BEHIND THAT RETAINING WALL BEHIND THE OTHER PREVIOUS LOTS THAN WHAT WE HAVE HERE.
AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE WERE THINKING IN THE, IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS.
AND WE'RE LOOKING OUT FOR WHAT'S BEST FOR THE CUSTOMER.
AND THAT'S WHAT I TOLD JOHN IS WE'RE LOOKING FOR ONE TO GET THE CUSTOMERS IN THE HOMES ONE, BUT TWO GET, GIVE THEM A BETTER PRODUCT.
BUT THE RETAINING WALL ITSELF, YOU GUYS DON'T HAVE PICTURES OF THAT, BUT WE DID REDO, WE DID INSTALL WALLS BEHIND LOTS 23 THROUGH 26.
BUT THEY STILL HAD VERY SIMILAR SLOPES BEHIND THAT RETAINING WALL, SO IT REALLY CHANGED NOTHING AND THEY GOT LESS, LESS YARD OUT OF THE END OF THE DAY AT THE END OF THE DAY BECAUSE OF THE WALL.
SO, SO, SO YOU'RE MAINTAINING THAT LIKE ON THAT PARTICULAR PROPERTY THAT IF YOU PUT MATS DOWN AND PLANT SOMETHING THAT THAT SOIL THERE WILL BE FINE.
THESE ARE PRETTY STEEPLE ON THIS.
I KNOW THE ONES FROM FOUR, FIVE AND SIX ARE, THOSE ARE FOR ALMOST FAIRLY CLOSE TO A THREE TO ONE AND THAT REALLY, BUT VERY, IT IS CLOSER, BUT THESE ARE STEEP.
WE'VE, WE'VE HAD OUR GUYS LOOK AT THESE.
I MEAN, IF WE WERE TO PUT, WE WERE DEBATING ON THIS BY LOOKING AT, AT AND JUST RECENTLY, IF, IF ANYTHING WE COULD LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF WALLS ON THIS ONE TO NOT TO INCLUDE A, A COUPLE LAYERS OF WALLS.
BUT IF WE PUT ONE DOWN AT THE BASE, WE CAN STILL SHOULD BE ABLE TO LIMIT THAT, UM, SLOPE A LITTLE BIT MORE.
IF WE ADD FOR LOT 30, 29, LOOKS LIKE WE CAN GET THIS GRADED OUT TO WHERE IT'S ACCEPTABLE.
GRADE 30 IS TIGHT, I WILL ADMIT THAT.
SO AND THE ONE WE WERE JUST AT BEFORE YOU, BEFORE YOU CHANGED THE PICTURE, I MEAN THE TREES AT THE TOP OF THAT ONE, UH, ARE THEY ON THE PROPERTY OF THIS HOUSE OR THE PROPERTY BEHIND THE HOUSE? THEY'RE, THEY'RE ON OUR PROPERTY AND I'M NOT SURE THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROPERTY.
THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN REMOVED PRIOR BY, BY THE DEVELOPER.
'CAUSE THAT WAS PART OF OUR LAND AGREEMENT, SO I DON'T KNOW WHY THOSE WEREN'T REMOVED.
UM, SO THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALREADY PUT ON GRADE FOR US.
SO IT WAS THERE AND OUR GUYS, I THINK THEY, IN TALKING WITH THE CUSTOMER, THE CUSTOMERS ONE OF THE TREES.
SO OUR GUYS DIDN'T WANT TO REMOVE 'EM AT THIS POINT.
SO AT THIS POINT, THE ROOTS OF THOSE TREES ARE I AGREE.
I KNOW, MAN, BUT I, I, I MEAN TO MY, IT FEELS THAT WE WOULD HAVE A BETTER, A BETTER PRESENTATION OF A SLOPE IF WE COULD REMOVE THOSE TREES.
BUT IN THE CONVERSATIONS OUR GUYS HAD WITH THE BUYER, THE BUYER WAS PREFERRING THAT WE WOULD KEEP THOSE TREES IN PLACE.
SHALL WE HAVE A MOTION IN ORDER TO DISCUSS? YEAH, I'LL START IT.
I, I MOVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION FORWARD RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL TO THE TOWN COUNCIL FOR APPLICATION NUMBER 2 5 0 0 0 2 2 FOR REVISIONS TO THE APPROVED SUBDIVISION PLAN, F-R-S-U-B 1521 DASH 2019 FOR HAPPY CREEK KNOWLES.
SECTION FOUR REGARDING LOTS 4, 5, 6, 29 AND 30.
TAX MAP NUMBER 20 A 21 DASH THREE DASH FOUR SUBMITTED BY MIRANDA HOMES INCORPORATED.
SECOND DISCUSSION? YEAH, UM, I DON'T, THE, THE STUDIES ARE NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE RISK THAT I SEE HERE.
UH, THE HILLSIDE, I, I CAN SEE NO WAY THAT A RETAINING WALL IS, IS NOT NEEDED OR SOME SORT OF ENGINEERED STRUCTURE TO, TO HOLD THIS BACK.
AND, UH, WATCHING THE EROSION FROM THE LITTLE BIT OF RAIN AND STUFF WE'VE HAD, IT ALREADY SHOWS UP, UP IN THAT SINCE IT'S BEEN, UM, IT'S FILL, IT CHANGES THE WHOLE GAME.
AND THAT PART OF OUR CODE IS TO MINIMIZE HOW MUCH LAND DISTURBANCE THERE IS.
AND THERE'S BEEN SUBSTANTIAL DISTURBANCE HERE.
UH, SO AT, AT A MINIMUM, UH, SOME OF THESE LOTS THAT YOU HAD FIVE, UM, UH, LET'S SEE, IT'S 5 29 30 HAD HAD, UM, TWO WALLS THAT ORIGINALLY ON THE PLAN THAT, THAT FOR IT, IF THAT IS STILL TO BE THE CASE, THAT TOP WALL WOULD NOW HAVE TO BE BUILT ON FILL DIRT, WHICH ADDS A WHOLE NEW DIMENSION.
SO IF SOMETHING HAD TO BE LOOKED AT, BUT I, I SEE THE RISK TO, UM, THE FUTURE HOMEOWNER FOR A MUDSLIDE INTO THEIR, UM, KITCHEN OR WHATEVER'S OFF THAT BACK DOOR OR INTO THE BASEMENT AS WELL AS THE LIABILITY TO THE TOWN IF WE WERE
[00:45:01]
TO APPROVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS.SO THAT, ANYWAY, THAT'S MY REASONING FOR THE REQUEST.
I SYMPATHIZE WITH A DEVELOPER NOT, UH, DELIVERING THE LAND IN WHAT YOU WOULD THOUGHT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE.
THAT'S, THAT IS A ROUGH THING TO, TO, TO DEAL WITH.
SO, UH, REGARDLESS THOUGH, WHEN IT COMES TO THE, THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GONNA BE LIVING IN THESE HOMES, UH, I HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, AGREE, UM, WITH, WITH NEIL HERE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE BEEN, WHAT WE'RE SEEING, WHAT'S IN THE REPORTS, UM, AND YOU KNOW, THE ACTUAL GRADE OF THE LAND VERSUS, UM, WHAT IT MAY IT BE ABLE TO BE WITH, WITH SOME WALLS IN THERE, AT LEAST BETWEEN THE WALL AND, AND THE CLIENT'S HOME.
IS THERE A WAY, CAN WE GO BACK? OH, CAN I, JOHN, TOMORROW WE PAUSE FOR LEGAL CONSULTANT.
I THINK THE ONLY ISSUE, UH, FOR THE APPLICANT AT THIS POINT IS WHETHER OR NOT THE APPLICATION'S BEING WITHDRAWN.
NO, I AGREE WITH WHAT'S ALREADY HAS BEEN SAID.
I MEAN, I KNOW, I'M SURE THE HOMEOWNERS ARE EAGER TO MOVE IN AND THEY'VE PROBABLY BEEN WAITING FOR THIS FOR A WHILE, AS HAS THE DEVELOPER.
HOWEVER, WE NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE REASON WHY THE CODE IS WRITTEN AS IT IS.
AND MR. WORD DID A VERY GOOD PRESENTATION AND I THINK THAT THE ONLY ANSWER IS TO DENY THIS.
I THINK YOU WERE VERY ARTICULATE, MS. LAZO.
I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DISAGREES WITH THE MOTION TO DENY CALL THE ROLL.
NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS 2 5 0 0 0 2 3 FOR A FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE MAJOR SUBDIVISION SUBMITTED BY ALI BLUE.
SO APPLICATION 25 0 0 2 3 IS REQUEST FOR A FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAN APPROVAL FOR A MAJOR SUBDIVISION SUBMITTED BY ALI BELU FROM ONE 3.5 ACRE PARCEL INTO EIGHT RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH ONE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT LOT AND A RESIDUE LOT, WHICH IS LOCATED AT 3 3 6 WEST STRASBURG ROAD IDENTIFIED AS TAX MAP 20 A 11 SECTION FOUR PARCEL 23 B.
UH, THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R TWO RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.
IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROPERTY, THEY SUBMITTED A PRELIMINARY PLAN THAT, UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED PREVIOUSLY.
THERE'S THE, UH, PARCEL OUTLINE THERE IN, UH, RED, UH, THE, UH, GIS VIEW OF THAT, UH, FROM THE COUNTY'S UH, GIS WEBSITE THERE SHOWING THE LOT.
NOW THESE LOTS WILL F COME OFF OF FOREST HILL DRIVE WITH THE RESIDUE REMAINING OFF OF WEST STRASBURG ROAD.
UM, SO IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROPERTY, WE DID THE PRELIMINARY PLAN THAT YOU APPROVED.
SO THIS IS THE SUBDIVISION PLAT, THE NEXT PHASE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, CREATING THE LOTS.
UH, WE WENT OVER THIS AT GREAT LENGTH AT THE WORK SESSION.
SO THOSE NUMBERS REPRESENT THERE ON THIS PLAT COINCIDE WITH THE CHECKLIST, WHICH IS INCORPORATED IN THE TOWN CODE.
SO WE WENT OVER THIS TO WORK SESSION AND THE APPLICANT HAS, UH, WITH THEIR FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT MET ALL THE CRITERIA FOR, UH, A FINAL PLAT FOR A MAJOR SUBDIVISION AS NOTED WITH THESE NUMBERS CORRESPONDING WITH THE CHECKLIST.
UH, AND WE REVIEWED THIS AT THE WORK SESSION AGAIN, UH, THEY MET ALL THE CONDITIONS OF TOWN CODE FOR THIS SUBDIVISION.
UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF REGARDING THIS? NO, SIR.
SO THE NEXT STEP FOR THIS PROJECT, JUST TO KEEP YOU ABREAST, UH, YOU APPROVE THE FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAN.
THE NEXT THIS STEP IS PART TWO IS THE FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT, THE NEXT PHASE AND THE FINAL PHASE WOULD BE THE
[00:50:01]
SUBMISSION OF THE SUBDIVISION PLAN.NOW THAT PLAN WOULD BE, UH, REVIEWED BY WARREN COUNTY, UH, FOR EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL AND FROM DEQ FOR STORMWATER AS WELL AS PUBLIC WORKS ENERGY SERVICES AND THE ZONING.
SO THIS IS THE SECOND PHASE OF A THREE PHASE OF THE PROJECT.
SO I'M ASSUMING ONCE THE PLAT GETS APPROVED BY TOWN COUNCIL, YOU'LL BE SEEING THE SUBDIVISION PLAN COME BACK TO YOU.
THANK YOU MR. WARE AND NO APPLICANT IS PRESENT OR WISHING TO SPEAK OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE.
UM, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION FORWARD OF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO TOWN COUNCIL FOR FINAL DIVI SUBDIVISION PLAT APPLICATION NUMBER 2 5 0 0 0 2 3 LOCATED AT 3 3 6 WEST STRASSBURG ROAD, IDENTIFIED BY TAX MAP NUMBER TWO ZERO A ONE ONE DASH FOUR DASH 23 B.
SECOND DISCUSSION NOW THIS, WE'VE BEEN OVER THIS, OVER THIS WELL TERRITORY.
MS. POTTER, PLEASE CALL THE ROLE CHAIRMAN MARNER.
CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIRMAN NEIL? YES.
[VIII. ELECTION OF OFFICERS]
AND THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS THE ELECTION OF OFFICERS.THE CODE REQUIRES THAT THE OFFICERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION BE ELECTED EACH FEBRUARY, AND SO WE HAVE A CHAIRMAN AND A VICE CHAIRMAN TO BE NOMINATED AND ELECTED THIS EVENING.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE, UH, CONNIE MARNER TO RETURN OR TO STAY IN THE, UH, THE CHAIRMAN POSITION.
MS. POTTER, PLEASE CALL THE ROLE COMMISSIONER MARRAZZO? YES.
THANK YOU DEAR COLLEAGUES, FOR YOUR TRUST IN ME.
AND NOW THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR NOMINATIONS FOR VICE CHAIRMAN MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE TO NOMINATE VICE CHAIRMAN NEIL AS THE VICE CHAIR.
DO YOU ACCEPT THE NOMINATION? YES.
MS. POTTER, PLEASE CALL THE ROLE.
CONGRATULATIONS MR. VICE CHAIRMAN.
[IX. COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS]
THERE ANY COMMISSION MEMBER REPORTS? JUST ONE.WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE THE CITIZENS ACADEMY.
TOMORROW IS THE, UM, ELECTRICAL, UH, WE DEAL WITH ELECTRICAL IN THE TOWN.
I'LL, I'LL GENERATE SOME REPORT FROM THAT AND SEND IT OUT TO THE GROUP.
COULD YOU FIND OUT HOW I CAN GET INVITED TO THOSE PLEASE?
UH, THANK YOU FOR THAT REPORT.
[X. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORT]
MS. PLANNING DIRECTOR, DO YOU HAVE A REPORT FOR US? YES, I DO.UM, SO FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY WE HAD 150 WALK-INS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT.
UM, WE ISSUED ONLY 15 NEW, UM, ZONING PERMITS.
HAD TWO NEW DWELLING UNITS AND TWO LAND USE APPLICATIONS.
BUT WE DID ISSUE, UH, 13 NEW BUSINESS LICENSES, WHICH I THINK IS A GOOD THING.
UM, AND WE'VE HAD A LOT OF MEETINGS AND I THINK THAT THERE'S A LOT OF, UM, LAND USE APPLICATION SPECIAL USE PERMITS THAT ARE GONNA BE COMING TO YOU IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS.
UM, AND STAFF IS WORKING ON UPDATING THE CURRENT DRAFT TO INCORPORATE THE PREVIOUS CHANGES THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS REQUESTED IN THE WORK SESSION.
SO I'VE BEEN REDLINING THE DRAFT DOCUMENT, ADDING IN CHANGES.
I'M GONNA TRY TO SET UP A MEETING WITH GEORGE TO REVIEW WHAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR BEFORE WE START THE NEXT SECTIONS.
THE NEXT SECTIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE ARE THE ACTUAL ZONES THEMSELVES, WHICH I THINK THIS IS THE REAL MEAT AND POTATOES OF THE ORDINANCE.
THIS IS A REALLY IMPORTANT SECTION, SO I WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYTHING ADMINISTRATIVE IS BUTTONED UP BEFORE WE PROCEED TO THAT PORTION.
UM, I'M ALSO WORKING ON FINALIZING UPDATES TO THE CIP, WHICH WILL, I WILL, WHICH I WILL BE BRINGING TO YOU PROBABLY MARCH, APRIL, IS WHAT I'M HOPING.
UM, AND I THINK THAT THAT'S ABOUT EVERYTHING I HAVE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO.
[00:55:01]
OKAY.HEARING NO OTHER BUSINESS, UM, DO I HEAR A MOTION TO ADJOURN? MOTION TO ADJOURN.