[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:08]
,PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AND THANK YOU YOUR FLAG AS SERIOUS AS AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC WHICH IS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR YES. THANK OKAY FOR PUBLICATION NOTIFICATION HAS BEEN SENT WE
[4. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES – June 3, 2024]
HAVE MEETING MINUTES FROM THE MEETING ON JUNE 3RD. ARE THERE ANY TO THAT WITHOUT WITHOUT OBJECTION THEN MINUTES ARE APPROVED JUST BEFORE SIGNING A COUPLE OF ACTION[5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]
ITEMS TO WORK THROUGH ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE AGENDA NOW ? ALL RIGHT. SO WE'LL MOVE FORWARD. OKAY THIS IS THE PORTION OF THE MEETING WHERE CITIZEN COMMENTS PERMITTED THAT DO NOT PERTAIN TO THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING ON YOUR ACTION ITEMS. SO ANYTHING THAT YOU GENERALLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT YOU'VE GOT 3 MINUTES TO DO THAT. DO WE HAVE ANY CITIZEN COMMENTS NOT RELATED TO THE AGENDA ITEMS TONIGHT? NO.OKAY. AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE ACTION ITEMS. I'D LIKE TO ASK THE COMMISSIONERS IF I COULD IF WE COULD REVERSE THE TWO ITEMS EIGHT AND SEVEN UNDERSTAND THERE'S BEEN SOME SUBSEQUENT FROM THE APPLICANT ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT REQUESTING A DEFERRAL AND I THINK WE CAN TAKE CARE OF THAT IN SHORT ORDER AND ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT ANY QUESTION COMMENTS IF DONE. ALL RIGHT.
[8. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FOR 49.16 ACRES (R600 029 000 0005 0000, R600 029 000 0143 0000, R600 029 000 1194 0000, R600 029 000 0002 0000, R600 029 000 008A 0000, R600 029 000 008C 0000, R600 029 000 0006 0000, R600 029 000 0026 0000) LOCATED ON OKATIE HIGHWAY FROM T2 RURAL (T2R) TO NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE (C3)]
WELL WE'LL WE'LL START WITH ACTION ITEM NUMBER EIGHT CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP A NUMBER OF PIECES OF PROPERTY MENTIONED HERE LOCATED ON OKIGWE HIGHWAY FROM TOO EARLY TO TEE TO OUR NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED YOU SEE THREE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND REQUEST THE DEFERRAL FORMALLY ON THE RECORD MY NAME IS BARRY JOHNSON. I'M A ATTORNEY HERE IN COUNTY SOME 52 YEARS NOW I WAS RAISED IN BEAUFORT AND BACK IN THE LATE SEVENTIES WAS MY PRIVILEGE TO SERVE ON A PREDECESSOR OF THIS BOARD BACK THEN WAS A JOINT BOARD WITH PORT ROYAL IN THE CITY OF BEAUFORT AND I APPRECIATE YOUR SERVICE. I THINK EACH OF YOU HAS RECEIVED A COPY THE LETTER THAT WE SENT OUT I THINK ON THURSDAY AFTER RECEIVING THE STAFF REPORT ON TUESDAY LAST WEEK AND I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR THE TIME BUT WE DO NEED SOME TIME TO WORK THROUGH WITH THE COUNTY STAFF ON SOME OF THE ISSUES WE SEE THAT MAY BE SUBSTANTIVE AND WE APPRECIATE THE COMMISSION'S CONSIDERATION OF DEFERRING TO US OVER PERHAPS TILL THE SEPTEMBER MEETING.YOU WANTED TO SEPTEMBER AND THAT MEETING IS SEPTEMBER THE FIFTH.
ALL RIGHT. IT'S THURSDAY AFTER LABOR DAY NOT THE NINTH AS IT WAS IN YOUR LETTER. SO IT'S THE FIFTH SEPTEMBER 5TH.
I'M ALL RIGHT WITH THAT SAID, CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE DEFERRAL UNTIL SEPTEMBER COMMISSION MEETING SO OF DO I HAVE A SECOND, SECOND AND SECOND ALL RIGHT.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION IN YOUR HAND OPPOSED. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION PASSES FOR THE DEFERRAL.
THANK YOU, MR. JOHNSON FOR BEING HERE. I'LL SEE YOU IN SEPTEMBER.
[7. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (CDC): SECTION 3.1.60 (CONSOLIDATED USE TABLE) AND SECTION 3.3.50 (REGIONAL CENTER MIXED USE (C5) ZONE STANDARDS) TO ALLOW DWELLING: SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED UNIT IN REGIONAL CENTER MIXED USE (C5)]
THE OTHER ACTION ITEM ON THE LIST CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 3.1.60 CONSOLIDATION USE TABLE IN SECTION 3.3.50 REGIONAL CENTER MIXED USE C FIVE ZONE STANDARDS TO ALLOW DWELLINGS SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED UNITS IN REGIONAL CENTER MIXED USE C FIVE CHRISTIAN MIXTURE OF ALL RIGHT SO I'M JUST GOING TO JUMP RIGHT INTO THIS ONE. SO THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT SEEKS TO PERMIT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES WITHIN THE C FIVE REGIONAL CENTER MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICT THE CURRENT STANDARDS DO NOT ALLOW FOR THIS USE WHICH HAS CREATED NON-CONFORMITY WITHIN THE COUNTY SPECIFICALLY NORTH OF THE BROAD RIVER.[00:05:05]
THE CURRENT STANDARDS ALLOW A FULL RANGE OF RETAIL SERVICE AND OFFICE USES AND THE PROPOSED STANDARDS WOULD ALLOW A DENSITY OF 2.6 UNITS PER ACRE PRACTICING WITH ZONING DISTRICT C THREE AND THEN I'M GOING TO RUN THROUGH ALL THE CRITERIA SO IS CONSISTENT WITH AND FURTHERS THE GOALS POLICIES OF THE COMP PLAN. YES THE AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH AND FURTHERS THE GOALS STRATEGY 8.1 RECOMMENDS TO DEVELOP POLICIES FOR THE APPROPRIATE LOCATION AND QUALITY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. LET'S SEE A CRUCIAL ASPECT OF THIS OFFER OF AFFORDABILITY INVOLVES PROMOTING INFILL DEVELOPMENT WHICH ATTAINABLE THROUGH THIS AMENDMENT. ADDITIONALLY, THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT CORE VALUE NUMBER FOUR THE CURRENT PLAN EMPHASIZES THE ABILITY FOR LAND OWNERS TO PROFIT FROM THEIR LAND PRESENTLY NUMEROUS FIVE PROPERTIES ARE DESIGNATED AS NONCONFORMING AND FEATURE SMALL PATTERNS AND ABILITY TO BUILD SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON THESE LOTS DIMINISHES EQUITY BY RESTRICTING PROPERTY OWNERS CHOICES AND INVESTMENT POTENTIAL SO IT IS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT CODE . HOWEVER TO CONTINUE TO CONTINUE FURTHER CONSISTENCY IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT ZONING DISTRICT C FOURS ALSO AMENDED TO ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS AS WELL AND THEN ADDRESSES DEMONSTRATE COMMUNITY NEED. YES MANY PROPERTIES ZONED C FIVE ARE NONCONFORMING AND OR PLATTED PURPOSEFULLY TO HOLD SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THERE EXISTS A SMALL BLOCK PATTERN CURATED OF LOW DENSITY HOUSING THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED.IT IS NOT REQUIRED BY CHANGED CONDITIONS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE ZONING AND THIS DEVELOPMENT CODE YES C FIVE ZONING DISTRICTS PURPOSE IS TO CONTAIN MIXED USES ADDING SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED UNITS FOR THIS PURPOSE AND THEN SIX WOULD RESULT IN LOGICAL AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. YES THIS WOULD ALLOW PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT ESPECIALLY ALONG PARRIS ISLAND GATEWAY.
SO IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR SCREENS THOSE ARE A LOT OF THE THE SMALL PATTERNS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP. SO I DID WANT TO POINT OUT IT IS ESSENTIAL TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE MARKET WILL NOT SUSTAIN EXPANSIVE TRADITIONAL SINGLE NEIGHBORHOODS WITH 2.6 UNITS PER ACRE ON EXTENSIVE TRACTS ALONG MAJOR ROADS WHICH A LOT OF THESE ARE LOCATED ON.
AND THEN THE LAST ONE IT WOULD NOT RESULT IN IN AN ADVERSE IMPACT AND THEN THE REGULAR THEY HAVE TO ADHERE BY ALL OF THE CODE IN THE STORMWATER MANUAL AND AT THE END RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND THEN IF YOU WANT TO SHOW JUST WHAT WOULD CHANGE SO DIDN'T WANT TO GO OVER THIS SO TCP IS STRUCK OUT IT CAN STILL BE ALLOWED IN TCP IT IS NOW WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE IT THE SAME AS IT WITH C THREE SO RIGHT NOW C THREE HAVE ALLOWS IT IN A TCP AND ALLOWS IT PERMITTED JUST AS A PERMITTED USE BUT TO MAKE IT UNIFORM ON THE CHART THAT'S WHY IT'S STRICKEN OUT BUT. IT'S STILL ALLOWED THERE AND C SO THEN GO DOWN SO BUILDING HEIGHT IS THE SAME 2.5 STOREYS MAX AND THEN ALL OTHER BUILDINGS WILL STAY THAT THEY'RE THREE STORIES MAX. GROSS DENSITY IS THE SAME AS C THREE WHICH WOULD BE 2.6 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE MAXIMUM AND THEN OTHER BUILDINGS WILL JUST STAY THE SAME AND THAT IS ENOUGH QUESTIONS SORRY QUESTIONS.
YEAH JUST CHRIS AND I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FIRST THEN AND I HAVEN'T BEEN DOING THIS VERY LONG BUT TYPICALLY WHEN I SEE A CASE COME BEFORE US IT INVOLVES A TEXT AMENDMENT IT'S USUALLY STAFF THAT'S THE APPLICANT WHO IS YES. SO WE DO HAVE WE DO HAVE AN APPLICANT HERE SO AND SHE IS ONE OF THE LAND OWNERS OF ONE OF THOSE PARCELS THAT I SHOWED UP THERE AND THIS IS BECAUSE RIGHT NOW SHE'S NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON THAT PARCEL THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY CURATED TO HOUSE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS.
OKAY. SINGLE FAMILY HOME SORRY THE ONLY OTHER I GUESS BROAD QUESTION I HAD WAS FOR ME THE C FIVE ZONING DISTRICT SEEMS TO BE A PRETTY UNIQUE ZONING
[00:10:04]
DISTRICT IF YOU LOOK AT KIND OF WHAT'S IN OUR TOOLBOX AND THAT I HAD ALWAYS INTERPRETED IT UNDER TO BE YOU KNOW WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT REGIONAL CENTER IT'S REALLY THE PLACE WHERE WE'RE PROVIDING FOR LARGE BOX. YES, VIRTUAL AND HIGH DENSITY INTENSITY.CAN YOU USE THE ZONING MAP? YES YES. SO YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT.
I MEAN THAT'S DEFINITELY WHAT IT'S INTENDED. THERE ARE JUST A LOT OF OUTLIERS THAT WE'VE NOTICED SPECIFICALLY IN THAT AREA I DON'T KNOW THE BACKGROUND OF WHY THEY WERE ZONED THAT WAY SO I GUESS MAYBE THAT WAS QUESTION BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE IN TERMS OF WHERE WE'VE APPLIED C FIVE IN THE FUTURE LAND USE IT'S PRETTY LIMITED IN TERMS OF WHEN YOU TAKE INTO THE THE ENTIRE COUNTY WHERE WE'RE SAYING WE WANT THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT. YEAH AND MY INITIAL REACTION IS WOULD SOMEONE WHO LIVES IN THE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOUSE REALLY WANT TO IN A POSITION WHERE SOMETHING MUCH LARGER, MUCH INTENSE CAN BE DEVELOPED YET NEXT TO THEM? SO I GUESS I WAS JUST WONDERING ARE THERE OTHER TOOLS OTHER THAN ALLOWING FOR THIS TO BE INCLUDED IN C FIVE THAT INCLUDE EITHER DOWN ZONING THOSE OUTLYING LOTS OR THE LANGUAGE AND THE NON-CONFORMITY TO ALLOW FOR TYPE OF USE IN THOSE LOCATIONS RATHER THAN KIND OF A BLANKET CHANGE TO C FIVE AND POTENTIALLY YES I'M GOING TO LET THAT SO YEAH, IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
CAN YOU COME UP HERE? SURE. YEAH.
I'M SORRY. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO WANT DETAILS ON IT, YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR ABOUT IT. BUT THIS IS MORE HIGH LEVEL SO IT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
SO WHEN WE GET THESE THINGS YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY THERE'S THE AND THIS IS THE GENERAL AREA WHERE YOU HAVE THE C FIVE AND SO YOU CAN SEE THAT A LOT OF THOSE OLD LOTS WHAT IT WAS IS WHEN AS THOSE THINGS AND THERE APPLY TO THOSE LOTS WERE CREATED AND THEY PRIMARILY PROBABLY HAD SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ON THEM THEN THE ZONING OF THE C FIVE CAME AFTERWARDS ON TOP OF THEM CREATING A NON CONFORMING SCENARIO WHERE WE SAID HEY YOU'VE GOT THESE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY LOTS THAT WERE PLATEAUS. YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LOT OF THEM ARE SINGLE FAMILY AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO PUT C FIVE ZONING ON IT ESSENTIALLY RENDERING YOU NON-CONFORMING MOVING BECAUSE WE THINK THE LONG RANGE PLAN HERE IS THIS IS GOING TO REDEVELOP AND THESE SINGLE FAMILY USES WILL GO AWAY AND THEN SOMEBODY IS GOING TO COME AND BUY ALL OF THESE LOTS AND MAKE THEM ONE BIG LOT. THAT'S THE PLANNING MINDSET IN MY EXPERIENCE THAT RARELY HAPPENS. THE REALITY IS IS THE EXISTING LAND USE PATTERN OFTENTIMES STAYS SOMETIMES IT DOES HAPPEN. ECONOMICS DRIVE THOSE.
SO HERE WE HAVE A SITUATION WHERE YOU'VE HAD THIS C FIVE ZONING HERE IN A LOT OF THESE AREAS AND IT REALLY DONE MUCH TO THESE LOTS. YOU KNOW THEY'RE STILL THERE MAYBE TURN THE AREA ALONG WELL YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE PRIMARILY THE ORIGINAL WAY THEY WERE PLATTED AND USED STILL IN PLAY EVEN AFTER ALL OF THESE YEARS GIVE IT ANOTHER OR 50 YEARS SHAWN AND MAYBE THAT COULD TURN OVER AND YOU MIGHT GET SOME OF THAT.
BUT IN THE MEANTIME YOU HAVE PEOPLE HERE WHO OWN THESE LOTS WHO STILL WANT ARE MAKING A CHOICE. THIS ISN'T A REQUIREMENT. WE'RE SAYING WE'RE SIMPLY SAYING IN C THREE YOU HAVE THE CHOICE AND C FIVE YOU CAN ALSO HAVE THE CHOICE BASED ON THE APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED DOESN'T MEAN THEY HAVE TO DO IT IT'S JUST ADDING IT IN AS A PERMITTED USE. THEREFORE IF SOMEBODY COMES TO OUR ZONING DEPARTMENT AND REQUESTS A PERMIT TO PUT A NEW HOUSE ON ONE OF THEY CAN ISSUE THAT PERMIT OTHERWISE RIGHT NOW THEY'RE SAYING NO WE CANNOT ISSUE A PERMIT ON YOUR LAND BECAUSE OF THE ZONING.
SO WE COULD LOOK AT DOING AN EXERCISE ON LOGGING AND LOTS AND REZONING AND ALL THAT WE THAT TEXT AMENDMENTS SOMETIMES ARE JUST A GOOD CLEAN CLICK QUICK FIX AND JUST SAY LOOK THAT'S GREAT YOU'RE TAKE IT YOU CAN HAVE IT AS A USE THEREFORE IT'S JUST ANOTHER OPTION PEOPLE HAVE WE'RE ADDING AN OPTION IN THERE LONG RANGE. I SEE YOUR POINT THOUGH AND YOU KNOW THE AREA HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED FOR REDEVELOPMENT FOR THESE LARGER COMMERCIAL ELEMENTS. IT HASN'T HAPPENED. IT COULD HAPPEN OVER TIME AND THEN THOSE LIFECYCLES OF THOSE BUILDINGS WILL KIND OF DETERMINE THAT THAT'S KIND OF ECONOMICS OF THOSE THINGS. SO WE LIKE ZONING, WE LIKE LAND USE, WE'RE IN THE BUSINESS OF IT BUT WE DON'T WANT TO CHOKE PEOPLE OUT WHICH WE TO FIND IN BETWEENS AND I DON'T THINK STAFF REALLY TOOK MUCH CONCERN OF SIMPLY TAKING THIS USE AND MAKING IT ALLOWABLE IN C FIVE JUST SO PEOPLE CAN HAVE THE OPTION AND THAT GOES TO WHAT KRISTIN AND WE'RE SAYING
[00:15:05]
IS THAT IT'S ALREADY ALLOWED IN C THE APPLICATION RECEIVED AC5 SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS TO MAKE IT UNIFORM WHAT WE'RE SUGGESTING IS THAT THE RECOMMENDATION COME WITH WELL WHY DON'T WE JUST MAKE IT C FOR TWO SO IT'S C THREE OR FOUR AND C FIVE SO IT JUST ALL THE SAME ACROSS THE BOARD THREE C 45 ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY AS A PERMITTED USE AND THEY HAVE THE SAME STANDARDS. SO THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF WHERE STAFF LANDED ON IT AND I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IN MY MIND IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE FOR THOSE EXISTING SMALL LOTS TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS WITH THAT OPTION.AND I GUESS MY CONCERN MIGHT BE TOO STRONG OF A WORD BUT I THINK ABOUT WELL WHAT ABOUT THE EXISTING LARGE LOTS WHERE MUCH MORE LIKELY TO HOPE TO ATTRACT THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT YOU ANTICIPATED BUT SOMEONE IN AND SAYS I WANT TO PUT A SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED SUBDIVISION THERE IT'S NOT ABOUT DEVELOPING A SINGLE LOT. IT'S ABOUT DEVELOPING.
SO I THINK SO AGAIN ANYBODY CAN DO THAT AND IF THE USE IS THERE SOMEBODY WOULD BE ALLOWED DO THAT IF SOMEBODY CAME IN AND SUBMITTED THAT. BUT USUALLY THE ECONOMICS WHEN YOU'RE NEAR MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND YOU'VE GOT THE ZONING THERE WHERE THIS WE WOULD THINK THAT SOMEBODY WOULD BE MORE DRIVEN THE EXISTING LOTS YOU'RE ALLOWED VERY HIGH LEVEL RESIDENTIAL ALREADY IN C FIVE SO IF YOU'VE GOT THOSE LARGER LOTS WE USUALLY WHAT WE SEE IN THOSE IS THEY'RE NOT DOING THE SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, THE ECONOMICS AREN'T THERE AT A 2.3 DWELLING WHERE IT WAS A 2.3 TO 2 .62. THAT'S JUST ECONOMICS THERE ON THE SINGLE FAMILY IT'S SUCH A HIGH WIND IF I CAN GO DO APARTMENTS, IF I'VE GOT WATER AND SEWER AND I'VE GOT INFRASTRUCTURE I'M APARTMENTS THAT'S JUST THE ECONOMICS OF THAT TYPICALLY WHERE YOU MIGHT GET SOME MIXED USE, YOU MIGHT GET SOME APARTMENTS ALONG THE FRONT, YOU MIGHT GET SOME DUPLEXES, MAYBE GET SOME SINGLE FAMILY TOWARDS A LITTLE BIT IN THE BACK. BUT IT COULD HAPPEN THOUGH JOHN .
I MEAN THAT'S A BUT I WOULD SAY USUALLY THE ECONOMICS DRIVE THAT IF SOMEBODY COMES IN AND SAYS I'VE GOT THIS LARGE PARCEL AND I'M GOING TO DEVELOP C FIVE ZONING AT THIS DENSITY BECAUSE THIS IS JUST WHAT I WANT TO DO THEY COULD IT JUST USUALLY THEY GO FOR THE HIGHER DENSE IF INFRASTRUCTURE'S THERE TO SERVE IT IF IS NOT THERE TO SERVE IT THEN YOU MIGHT GET THAT LOWER DENSE PRODUCT I MEAN NON-CONFORMING LOTS ARE THERE AT THE MOMENT SO IT'S NOT SO MUCH SO THESE TWO THINGS ARE NON-CONFORMITY NON-CONFORMING THESE EXIST IN TWO WAYS YOU CAN HAVE A NON-CONFORMING LOT WHICH MEANS THE LOT THE PHYSICAL SPACE A LOT DOESN'T MEET THE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT BUT THEN YOU ALSO HAVE NON-CONFORMING USE THE YOU OKAY WELL I MEAN I DON'T I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF DID A SPECIFIC COUNT ON HOW MANY OF THEM ARE ALL RESIDENTIAL BUT I MEAN IF YOU CAN ZOOM YOU CAN SEE THIS THAT'S A WHOLE AREA JUST THAT'S ALL C FIVE AND IT'S ALL UP AND DOWN SO I WOULD SAY YOU'VE GOT A LOT CAN YOU TURN THE ZONING BACK ON? I MEAN YOU CAN KIND OF SEE IT THERE BUT A LOT OF THOSE IN THERE I MEAN YOU CAN REALLY SEE THE IN THAT PATTERN KIND OF MORE ON THE YEAH I THINK ALONG THAT LINE ON THE LEFT SIDE I THINK YOU GOT OVER SO LOT OVER THERE YOU GOT SOME OF THE LARGER PARCELS IF YOU KIND OF GO BACK A LITTLE BIT TO THE UPPER RIGHT AND THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF THE PARCELS AGAIN. SO YOU KNOW IF THIS WAS YOU KNOW IF THIS WAS A PLANNED EXERCISE AND THE COUNTY WAS THEN GOING TO FOLLOW IT WITH REESTABLISHING NEW ZONING LIKE WHEN THEY DID THIS BACK IN 2014 WE MIGHT LOOK AT POSSIBLY IS THAT WAS IS THE ZONING PROPERLY DONE AND KNOW THAT ZONING COULD BE THERE PLANNING COMMISSION TO INITIATE REZONINGS BUT THAT'S A LOT THAT'S A LOT OF WORK YOU DO THAT KIND OF STUFF WHERE THE TEXT AMENDMENT JUST ADDED IN ISN'T ALLOWED USE DOESN'T CAUSE PLANNING DEPARTMENTS HEARTBURN THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. THIS IS SORT OF THIS IS PRECEDENT SETTING AND C CORRECT . SO I'M SORRY IT'S PRECEDENCE YOU'RE GOING TO SET A PRECEDENT FOR THE APPLICANT'S AND C5R SO I WOULD IMAGINE AROUND THE COUNTY HOW MANY AREAS DO WE HAVE WOULD EVER SEE THERE'S NOT A TON I MEAN THINK THAT'S PART OF THE STUDY TOO I LOOKED AT AS YOU KIND OF REALLY LOOKED AT HOW MUCH REALLY C WAS AROUND AND IT'S NOT A BUNCH IT'S A COUPLE OF CLUSTERS YOU CAN SEE THE CODE THAT WAS LIKE THEM CAN YOU HEAR ME THAT WAS THE MAIN THING THAT HELPED WITH THIS IS A LOOK AT NORTH OF BROAD THE MAIN AREA WHERE C FIVE IS YOU HONE IN ON IT AND MOST OF THOSE ARE MADE UP OF THESE LOTS AND THEN WE SAW LITTLE BIT I THINK A LOT OF IT'S LONG TO 17 YEAH YOU CAN SEE IT'S LIKE LINEAR THERE AND THEN SORRY BUT SO GO
[00:20:05]
AHEAD WELL THEN I THINK THAT'S WHERE THAT'S GOING TO COME IN BECAUSE IT'S THE WAY THE SHAPE AND THE LINEAR OF THOSE ALONG 278 YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO SEE MORE AND YOUR INTENDED REDEVELOPMENT PARCELS SOME OF YOUR LARGER BOX COMMERCIAL DRIVEN TYPE OF TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT BUT EVEN THERE YOU'RE STILL GOING TO GET A COUPLE STRAGGLERS THERE WITH SOME OF THE SMALLER LOTS THAT ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE SOME POSSIBLE RESIDENTIAL USES ON THEM. AGAIN, IT'S JUST IT'S JUST AN OPTION OF A CHOICE AND YOU KNOW, LAND USE AND ZONING AND ALL THOSE RULES AND REGULATIONS ARE GOOD FOR A ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT. BUT WE ALWAYS TRY TO FIND THAT BALANCE OF WHEN WE MIGHT UNNECESSARILY ON AN UNINTENTIONALLY PREVENTING PEOPLE FROM USING THEIR LAND AND WE TRY TO FIND THOSE BALANCES AND YOU KNOW THAT'S WHERE JUST ALLOWING IT AS A PERMITTED USE IS NOT MIGHT GET PROBABLY A FEW OF THEM AND MOST WE DON'T HAVE IT AS I I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET A RUSH C FIVE SINGLE FAMILY PERMITS OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS BECAUSE OF THIS TAX MAN I COULD BE WRONG. YOU KNOW I HAVE A QUESTION UNDER NUMBER 1C1 YOU KNOW COMMENTS ON ON BRING YOU MIGHT NEED IS CONSISTENT WITH AND FURTHERS THE GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN USED THE RATIONALE OF EACH ONE DEVELOPING POLICIES FOR APPROPRIATE LOCATION QUALITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING AH THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO PROMOTE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I MEAN WHY DID YOU TIE YOU TO THAT ISSUE? I MEAN THAT IS A CRITICAL TO US IN THE COUNTY.YEAH WELL IT MOSTLY HAS TO DO WE LOOKED AT THIS AS AN EQUITY ISSUE OF PEOPLE HAVING THESE.
WOULD YOU SAY THAT IT'S BEEN IN YOUR FAMILY FOR WHILE? IN MY FAMILY.
SO IT'S VERY REMOTE SO IT'S MORE OF AN EQUITY ISSUE THAT WE COME ACROSS OF KEEPING FAMILIES WHERE THEY ARE. YOU PUT CFI RIGHT THERE AND THEY WANT TO ADD ANOTHER HOME.
THEY CAN'T WHICH CREATES AFFORDABILITY SO THAT WAY YOU CAN KEEP IT THROUGHOUT YOUR GENERATIONS. SO IT'S NOT IT'S A WAY TO CREATE CRAZY AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUT IT DEFINITELY HONES IN ON FAMILIES ON GENERATIONAL HOUSING, ABOUT SUPPLY AND DEMAND. A NEW HOUSE COMES IN THAT'S ONE MORE HOUSE THAT'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING HELPS MAKE HOUSE IT ALL MAKE IT AFFORDABLE WHATEVER YOU GOT OF ONE AT A TIME I WANT THAT OTHER QUESTIONS JUST ONE MORE. SO DID YOU BY CHANCE LOOK AT ARTICLE EIGHT AND WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A TEXT AMENDMENT LANGUAGE TO ADDRESS THIS AS PART OF A NON ISSUE RATHER THAN CHANGING THIS LAND USE UNDER YES SO THE NON-CONFORMING ZERO BUT AT THE END IF IT'S NOT A PERMITTED USE IT DOESN'T MATTER YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PERMIT SOMETHING IF YOU IF IF THERE'S A LOT THERE YOU MIGHT HAVE A NON-CONFORMING USE THE USE IS THERE YOU MIGHT HAVE AN EXISTING HOME IT STAYS THERE IT'S GRANDFATHERED IT CAN STAY THERE. WE'RE NOT GOING IF THERE IS A HOUSE ON THERE ALREADY WE'RE NOT TELLING PEOPLE YOU CAN'T YOU GOT GOT TO SHUT THIS DOWN. THAT'S JUST AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING GRANDFATHERED SITUATION BUT ON LOTS WHERE YOU HAVE EXISTING VACANT LOTS WHERE THEY'RE TRYING TO INTRODUCE A NEW HOME TO THAT LOT IF IT'S NOT A PERMITTED USE THE ZONING DEPARTMENT ISSUE A ZONING PERMIT THE NONCONFORMING WOULDN'T APPLY AT POINT IN TIME BUT THAT'S JUST UNDER THE CURRENT LANGUAGE. YOU COULDN'T GIVE A TEXT AMENDMENT UNDER NONCONFORMING TO SAY IN A CONDITION WHERE YOU HAD TO USE THOUGH YOU COULD USE THIS IS A USE WE'RE INTRODUCING A USE THE LOT ITSELF WOULD BE A SEPARATE ISSUE THAT'S WAY OF NON-CONFORMING LOTS AND THEN USE SO THIS GOING TO BE FOLLOW MORE ON ADDING A USE GROUP IN LIKE ADDING THE USE OF SINGLE FAMILY I DON'T KNOW YOU GUYS DIDN'T TINKER WITH THE LOT REQUIREMENTS IN THERE DID YOU. YEAH. OKAY SO IT WOULD BE INTRODUCING THE SO I'VE NEVER I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING WHERE WE'VE GONE NON-CONFORMITY OR GRANDFATHERING TO INTRODUCE SOMETHING AS A USE THAT'S ALLOWED WITHIN A SPECIFIC ZONING DISTRICT BECAUSE THAT TO ALL ZONING DISTRICTS SO THIS IS JUST WE'RE TRYING APPLY IT TO THIS ONE JUST LIKE WHAT'S ALLOWED AND C THREE WHAT'S ALLOWED IN C FIVE BUT I THINK WHERE WHERE THEY WENT WITH IT IS WE'RE GOING TO DO C THRIVE. WE RECEIVED AN APPLICATION ON C C 23 JUST DO THE SAME STANDARDS FOR C FIVE IT WOULD MAKE SENSE IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW ENOUGH HAVE CONTEXT AND I WAS READING LIKE WHY IS AN C FOR OF IT'S LOUDON C FIVE THAT WOULDN'T MAKE SENSE YEAH SO THAT'S WHERE STAFF JUST SAID WE MIGHT AS WELL YOU KNOW THAT WE DIDN'T FOR TWO IF THIS IS A IF THIS IS CONSIDERED SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY WOULD LIKE TO DO FOR THE QUESTION
[00:25:02]
RECOMMENDING ZONING DISTRICT CENTER MIXED USE C FOUR ALSO BE AMENDED BUT IT DOESN'T SHOW THAT IN THE ON THE DIAGRAM THAT'S RIGHT BECAUSE THIS IS AN THAT WE RECEIVED THAT WAS NOT A PART OF IT. SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING THOUGH IS IS THAT AS A PART OF THIS DISCUSSION, AS A PART OF THIS STUFF, STOP SAYING JUST WHY WE'RE IN HERE.WE WOULD SAY PROBABLY BE GOOD TO CONSIDER IT AS JUST THE SAME .
IT'D BE THE SAME LANGUAGE YOU'RE GOING TO SEE FOR IT THE SAME STANDARDS THAT YOU SEE IN C AS A CHANGE. BUT YOU DIDN'T CHANGE IT? NO, NO STAFF DID NOT DO THAT BECAUSE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A COMBINATION OF KIND OF AN APPLICATION RECEIVER STAFF OR C NOW THIS WAS A STAFF DRIVEN ONE LOT OF TIMES WE WOULD HAVE GONE IN AND DONE BOTH SO THAT WON'T GO FORWARD AS A CHANGE YOU CAN MAKE IT AS YOU RECOMMEND RIGHT PART OF YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU MARK. I SEE A NUMBER OF FOLKS FROM THE PUBLIC OR ANY OF YOU HERE TO TALK THIS ISSUE. NO.
OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION OR ANY OF THEM OR ANY OF YOU HERE FOR THE REZONING THAT CAME UP THAT WAS OKAY? YEAH, YEAH. ALL RIGHT.
FOR DISCUSSION AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS I JUST WANT TO ASK JOHN I THINK I'M FOLLOWING YOUR LINE OF THOUGHT AND MAYBE YOU DIDN'T EXCUSE ME. I'M GOING TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT OR I'LL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR APPLICANT. WELL, IT WAS A STAFF RECOMMENDATION. I DIDN'T THINK THE APPLICANT WOULD.
OKAY. I WAS JUST MAKING CIRCULATED QUESTIONS BUT AGAIN I'M JUST PROCEDURALLY GOING THROUGH THIS. DID YOU WANT THE APPLICANT TO ADD TO THIS COMMENT ADD I'M NOT SURE IF ANYONE HERE KNOWS WHAT THAT PROPERTY LIKE BUT I'M SORRY MA'AM COULD YOU COME UP TO THE UP TO THE PODIUM AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS? MY NAME IS RHONDA BRIAN. I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION AND THAT PROPERTY IS SEATED AND I HAVE NO I DIDN'T REALIZE IT HAD GOTTEN CHANGED TO COMMERCIAL BUT IT LITERALLY HAS NOTHING BUT HOMES AND MOBILE HOMES SITTING ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY.
THERE ARE NO BUSINESSES WHATSOEVER NEAR PROPERTY SO I'M JUST TRYING TO GET THAT CHANGED. I HAVE NO DESIRE TO PUT ANYTHING ON THE PROPERTY BUT IF I'D LIKE TO SELL THAT PROPERTY RIGHT NOW ANYBODY WHO WANTS IT WANTS TO PUT A HOME THERE.
SO IN ORDER TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR ME THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO IF I SHOULD IF I SHOULD DECIDE TO SELL THAT PROPERTY. SO BUT JUST SO YOU UNDERSTAND, THERE ARE NO BUSINESSES IN THAT AREA JUST MOBILE HOMES AND A COUPLE OF HOUSES, NO NOTHING COMMERCIAL WHATSOEVER.
OKAY. THANK YOU. JOHN IS JOHN I'M SORRY JOHN HAD A QUESTION. SORRY, I WAS JUST SO DO YOU WANT TO LAUNCH THAT? AH NO I OWN THAT LOT. WHICH ONE I OWN NON HAUGHTON TRAIL I CAN GIVE YOU THE NUMBER ON IT IF YOU NEED THAT. I KNOW IT'S ONE OF THE OKAY NO THAT'S FINE THANK YOU.
OKAY I NEED TO I APPRECIATE IT OVER HERE. OKAY, SO YOU'RE BACK TO.
YES. AND THEN I JUST WANTED TO ASK JOHN I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M PROCESSED AND THIS IN MY MIND YOU'RE LOOKING MORE TOWARDS FUTURE VISION.
WHAT KIND OF WHAT SHOULD BE THE MAIN BULK OF YOUR QUESTIONING WAS IS NOT JUST WHAT WE'RE HERE TO TRY AND HELP THIS YOUNG LADY OUT HERE WITH BUT VISION AS THE COUNTY MOVES FORWARD AND WHAT COULD POSSIBLY HAPPEN WITH THOSE LOTS I MEAN I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND HER PLIGHT BUT IS THERE SOME OTHER WAYS WE COULD ADDRESS IT INCLUDING REZONING HER PROPERTY TO ALLOW FOR SINGLE FAMILY? IN SOME WAYS IT FEELS LIKE BY CHANGING THE TEXT FOR ALL C FIVE AND POTENTIALLY ALL C FOUR WE'RE A LITTLE BIT OF THROWING THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER SO YOU KNOW JUST THINKING WHY WOULDN'T THE COUNTY INVOLVED IN DOWN ZONING THE PROPERTY DOWN ZONING JUST ONE PROPERTY YOU ALL OF THE PROPERTY IN THE THERE'S NO COMMERCIAL THERE NOW IS THAT THAT COULD PART OF SOMETHING THAT YOU'LL WANT TO LOOK INTO BUT THAT'S A LOT I DON'T KNOW I DON'T KNOW THE REASON WHY OKAY ALL RIGHT I JUST PROPOSE THAT IT'S NOT AS I'M UNDERSTAND THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE OF USE PERMITTED USE. YES YES SO WE HAVE A CLASS C FIVE WHERE CERTAIN THINGS ARE ALLOWED AND THEY WANT THE ABILITY BE ABLE TO ADD SINGLE
[00:30:02]
FAMILY HOMES TO IT. YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE MAP. IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S A HUGE PORTION BEAUTIFUL COUNTY BECAUSE NARROW STRIP BELONG TO EIGHT AND THE SECTION RIGHT HERE SO LOOKING OUT 50 YEARS OR SOMETHING IT'S NOT LIKE YOU KNOW A DEVELOPER IS GOING TO COME IN AND PUT YOU KNOW, WHATEVER HE WANTS TO PUT UP. IT'S STILL GOING TO BE A PERMITTED USE IN C FIVE. SO SO YOU CAN GO THIS WAY YOU KNOW DO IT PIECEMEAL STYLE.PIECEMEAL STYLE WILL TAKE FOREVER BECAUSE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A YOU KNOW, AN APPLICATION FOR IT. SO I'M NOT SURE I DON'T HAVE IT IN MY HEAD EITHER. WHICH ONE I GET WOULD JUST LET YOU GO RIGHT BUT I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING. RIGHT, RIGHT. OKAY.
JUST THROW IT OUT. NO, NO. I'M VERY EXPERIENCED SO OKAY, LET'S OKAY LET'S TAKE THIS ONE FOR EXAMPLE. SO THIS ONE IS BACK HERE 10.69 ACRES IS THIS ONE SO WITH JUST BY DENSITY I'M NOT INTO ACCOUNT ANYTHING WITH STORM WATER OR ANYTHING THIS RIGHT HERE WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE 27 HOMES IN THIS BILL AND SEE SO THAT I'M JUST LIKE ADDRESSING YOUR CONCERN ABOUT A HUGE DEVELOPMENT A LOT OF THESE ARE THAT ARE LARGE TO HAVE THESE GRAND SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENTS MY OPINION TO REALLY DO MUCH THAT'S MUCH OF A CONCERN IS JUST PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE YOU KNOW I JUST MY MY MY ISSUE IS THAT WERE SEEM TO BE ENCOURAGING MORE COMPLEXITY IN AREA SINGLE FAMILY HOMES COMMERCIAL RETAIL MIX AND THE QUESTION IS YOU KNOW WHERE IS THE GREATEST NEED FOR THE COUNTY AND THE USE OF THE LAND YEAH AND IF IF IT'S MORE TOWARD SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES AND AFFORDABILITY AND EQUITY FOR THE EXISTING HOMEOWNERS THAT WE'D BE BETTER OFF MOVE IN THAT DIRECTION TRYING TO JUST ADD ONE MORE USE YEAH BUT LIKE LIKE WE DISCUSSED THE ECONOMICS OF IT. YOU HAVE THIS PROPERTY RIGHT HERE? I MEAN IT'S NOT EVEN IT'S RESIDENTIAL VACANT THERE'S NOTHING ON IT AND LIKE THEIR PLANS I GUESS WERE TO BE RESIDENTIAL LIKE ECONOMICALLY IT'S NOT SOUND TO MAKE ANY OF THESE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS YOU WOULD USE FOR IT'S C FIVE USE MM. SO IT'S JUST KIND OF I JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THAT PART COULD SOMEONE YES WOULD THEY BE MAKING ENOUGH MONEY TO WHERE THEY WOULD WANT TO DO THAT.
NO NO WE HAD AN APPLICANT ABOUT FIVE OR SIX MONTHS AGO THAT WAS LOOKING TO PUT IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUT. IT WAS BRAND NEW. IT WAS CHANGING CHANGING THE ZONING IS AND WE ENDED UP TURNING IT DOWN BECAUSE IT DIDN'T HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ALL THAT, YOU KNOW. SO IT'S TO THE POINT ABOUT DOES THE COUNTY STILL NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING? THE ANSWER IS STILL YES. IS THIS A WAY TO DO IT OR NOT? YOU KNOW, WHICH IS A BETTER WAY TO GOING. WE BLANKET C FIVE WITH A DIFFERENT USE OR HAVE REPORTED JUST HER APPLICATION AND JUST FOR HER PROPERTY AND AND THEN ALL THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS YOU KNOW FOR THEMSELVES THIS HASN'T GOT ANY INFORMATION IT JUST GETS OUT TO THE PUBLIC YEAH SOMEBODY SAID OH LOOK WHAT YOU DID I CAN DO IT NOW DO YOU KNOW YEAH FROM THE FLIP SIDE OF IT I THINK IS OTHER THAN C FOR AND C5I THINK VIRTUALLY ALL OF OUR OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS YOU CAN SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED. YES.
SO IN TERMS OPPORTUNITY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I MEAN IT'S ESSENTIALLY EVERYWHERE EXCEPT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS SAID THIS IS WHERE WE WANT TO PUT OUR HIGH INTENSITY HIGH DENSITY LAND USES AND I GUESS MY WORRY WOULD BE THAT SOMEONE GOES IN
[00:35:01]
ON EXISTING SMALL LOTS, PUTS A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE THEN NEXT DOOR TO THEM SOMEBODY BUILDS A MUCH MORE INTENSIVE USE THAT'S ALLOWED UNDER THE C FIVE AND YOU'RE HE'S CREATED AN INCOMPATIBLE SITUATION BECAUSE WE'VE ALLOWED JIFFY LUBE UNSTABLE HOUSING SOMETHING YEAH YEAH THAT'S A GOOD POINT. YEAH BECAUSE WE HAD SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THAT TWO MONTHS AGO THE THE BOAT GUY WANTED TO BUILD HIS BOAT REHAB SPOT RIGHT UP THERE AND AND THAT WAS NEAR A LOT OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN ONE OF THE FOLKS THERE DID NOT WANT THAT IN THERE. YEAH AND YOU KNOW OBVIOUSLY IT WAS SHUT DOWN BECAUSE OF THE ZONING IT'S ACTUALLY NOT SO IT'S LIKE THERE IS IT'S ALREADY ALLOWING COMMERCIAL WHICH IS THE FRONT OF THESE ARE JUST THE FRONT OF YEAH RIGHT BUT THIS ONE IS ALREADY C FIVE SO YOU COULD IN FACT PUT OTHER COMMERCIAL TYPE ENTERPRISES THERE RIGHT.BUT THE QUESTION REMAINS DO WE ALLOW THE USE. YEAH FAMILY DETACHED FOR YOU 65 AND THEN YOU ALSO FOR C FOR I MEAN I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER I JUST WANTED TO SHOW DIFFERENT SIDE. YEAH THAT'S ALL BUT IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN I THOUGHT HEARD HIM SAY THAT THESE LAND OWNERS OR RIGHT NOW THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH THEIR PROPERTY THEY'RE NOT PERMITTED TO DO ANYTHING WE'RE PREVENTING THEM FROM BENEFITING FROM THE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY. SO YOU KNOW TO ME IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS TEXOMA WOULD HELP THEM TO BE ABLE TO USE PROPERTY THAT WOULD JUST SIT THERE. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A BIG BOX COMPANY COME IN AND WANT TO BUY UP ENOUGH OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TO PUT SOMETHING IN THERE. THEY'RE STUCK. I MEAN THEY'RE PAYING TAXES ON SOMETHING THEY CAN'T UTILIZE POINT THAT'S RIGHT. FURTHER DISCUSSION I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TO OUR BENEFIT BECAUSE I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
YOU ONE I'VE SAID ALL ALONG I I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE OF THESE EXISTING PLATTED LOTS THAT FOR WHATEVER REASON THAT WE STILL DON'T KNOW GARDENS ON C5I JUST DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BENEFIT US TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO WORK WITH STAFF TO FIND OUT IF THERE ARE IN FACT OTHER VIABLE OPTIONS. AND THEN JUST THE ONE THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING TODAY TO GO BACK ON WHAT WE WERE TALKING WITH EARLIER, I APPRECIATE YOUR POINT AND I DO APPRECIATE YOUR WANTING DO BUT I THINK WE'RE ALSO CHARTERED TO HAVE VISION AS FAR AS WHERE THE COUNTY GOES TO LOOK FORWARD SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE A PIECEMEAL APPROACH TO PEOPLE JUST LIKE GLEN WAS SAYING HAVING A JIFFY LUBE HERE AND A HOUSE HERE, WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO PROTECT THESE PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES AS BEST WE CAN. I THINK I'M ALSO LEANING TOWARDS WE MAY WANT TO RELOOK AT THIS AND SEE IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT WE CAN DO THAT'S GOING TO BE BENEFICIAL SO THESE FOLKS AREN'T HAMSTRUNG BY THE CURRENT ZONING BUT WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING AND I'M NOT SURE THIS IS A COME FORWARD PLEASE BUT I'M JUST COMING UP HAS THE QUESTIONS ARE YOU GOING TO THINK ABOUT IT OR I'M NOT SURE I I'M CURIOUS AS TO ON THESE WHAT HOW MANY OF THEM ARE CURRENTLY I WAS ASKING LOOKING AT WHAT HOMES ARE THERE ARE WE DOING THIS BECAUSE ONE PERSON WANTS TO SELL IT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T BUILD THE HOME ON IT OR IS THERE IS THERE A MAJORITY CAUSE THERE THAT WE TO PUT HOMES ON OR IS THIS ALL FOR JUST ONE MORE QUESTION AND TO QUESTION YOU I CAN'T ANSWER THAT BECAUSE I KNOW BECAUSE WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT WE HAVE A PROCESS WHERE SOMEBODY CAN APPLY FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT WE RECEIVED AN APPLICATION FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT AND STAFF WENT THROUGH ITS EVALUATION AND IT IS ALMOST OFTEN PROVIDED A STAFF WE WE SHOWED YOU OUR HANDS.
WE PLAYED OUR CARDS. IT'S YOUR ALL'S CHOICE WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO GO WITH THE APPLICATION OR NOT OR YOU COULD TABLE IT AND YOU SAY COME BACK TO US WITH LANGUAGE C-4 AS WELL YOU COULD KIND OF GO AND THERE'S OTHER OPTIONS I DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER OPTIONS BETWEEN IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT USES LIKE WE'RE ESTABLISHING USES USES ARE ESTABLISHED BY ZONING DISTRICTS SO YOU EITHER WOULD HAVE TO INTRODUCE A USE OR REMOVE A USE WITHIN A ZONING DISTRICT OR YOU WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE THE ZONING.
[00:40:04]
THOSE ARE YOUR TWO TOOLS THE ZONING IS THERE TO GO IN AND INDIVIDUALLY TAKE APPLICATIONS FROM OWNERS ONE BY ONE AND REZONINGS IS WAY MORE COMPLICATED THAN SIMPLY ALLOWING A SMALL P IN THE ZONING DISTRICT AND IF OVER TIME IT BECOMES ISSUES THAT WE HAVE BELIEVE ARE A CONCERN AND WE CAN ADDRESS IT FIRST POSSIBLY PERCEIVED ISSUES AT THIS TIME WE DO HAVE AN ISSUE THAT WE KNOW FOR A FACT THIS LADY ONCE BOUGHT A HOUSE ON A LOT. THAT'S A REAL ISSUE WE'VE GOT RIGHT NOW IN FRONT OF US AND WE MIGHT THINK THAT COULD BE SOME MORE IN THE FUTURE SO GOT A REAL ISSUE VERSUS PERCEIVED ISSUES CORRECTION SHE NEVER ONCE CAME FORWARD AND SAID SHE WANTED TO PUT A HOUSE.SHE SAID OH I WANT THE LOT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE YOU WANT THE LOT TO BE ABLE TO TELL YOU HOW HOW ABOUT THIS DO YOU WANT TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT UNTIL WE GET WE OH I'M SORRY.
OKAY. DO WE NEED MORE INFORMATION? I THINK WE DO.
I THINK WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON ONE. BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO SAY WE NEED MORE INFORMATION, WHAT INFORMATION IS IT? YEAH, YOU'RE GOING HAVE TO GIVE US DIRECTION THAT THAT'S COME BACK SOME MEANS ONE WOULD TO ME WOULD BE WHAT'S THE PERCENTAGE OF C FIVE FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTY IS IT LESS THAN 1% HALF OF A PERCENT AND THEN WE'RE NOT REALLY MAKING A BIG DECISION ABOUT A REALLY SMALL PIECE OF LAND AS IT RELATES THE ENTIRE COUNTY. IT'S NOT A LOT YOU KNOW, BUT IF YOU KNOW IT'S NOT A LOT YOU KNOW WHAT WHAT EXACTLY WE GET I MEAN IF YOU WANT IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU WE CAN WORK WITH YOU GUYS AND COME WITH SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF ACREAGES OF APPROXIMATELY OUT OF THE ENTIRE COUNTY ACREAGE OR WE COULD SAY IT'S C FIVE ENCOMPASSES APPROXIMATE AS MUCH THE LAND AND WE'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO CHANGE THE ZONING WE'RE BEING TO CHANGE THE PERMITTED USE. THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE RIGHT. I'M I'M VERY, VERY SYMPATHETIC WITH THE PEOPLE THEY WILL USE THEIR PROPERTY RIGHT. AND THAT TYPICALLY THEY HAVE THE PROPERTY TO PAINT I THINK I'LL HIT IT RIGHT ON THE HEAD. YEAH ABSOLUTELY AND BUT I DON'T WANT TO PUT THEM IN A POSITION WHERE SOMEBODY JUST WE'RE GOING TO PUT A SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOUSE HERE AND SUDDENLY THERE'S A JIFFY LUBE NEXT DOOR TO THEM. I MEAN IT'S YOU KNOW, THAT SEEMS INCOMPATIBLE AND LOTS OF TIMES LOTS THEMSELVES DRIVE THAT LIKE THE SHAPE OF THE LOTS BECAUSE A JIFFY LUBE IS GOING TO NEED SO MUCH ACREAGE OR JUST LARGER COMMERCIAL SO SOMETIMES DON'T I MEAN YOU NAME IT YEAH ALL THE PLACES ARE WELL I MEAN THAT'S WHAT MIXED USE IS MIXED I MEAN IT'S A MIXED USE I THINK I THINK THAT I THINK THERE HAS BEEN YOU KNOW IF YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF ZONING AND LAND USE THAT WE THOUGHT USERS AND SEPARATING THEM OUT WAS THE WAY TO DO IT AND THAT EXISTED FOR A WHILE AND THEN WE STARTED THINKING THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD START INTEGRATING USES A LITTLE BIT MORE AND MORE AND MORE AND THAT'S WHAT TRANSECT ZONING DOES. AND THEN IN OUR C DISTRICTS WHICH ARE CONVENTIONAL DISTRICTS IT DID KIND OF STICK TO THAT MORE EUCLIDEAN APPROACH SEPARATING THOSE USES OUT.
BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THOSE APPROACH THEN WHY DON'T WE LOOK AT ALL OF OUR TRANSECT ZONING IS THEN BECAUSE WE'VE GOT THAT PROBLEM IN EVERY SINGLE TRANSECT ZONING WHICH IS ABOUT 90% OF THE COUNTY IF WE'RE GOING TO START TALKING LIKE WELL BUT THERE ARE DESIGN STANDARDS, THERE ARE THOSE. ABSOLUTELY. SO THAT THEY'RE DONE IN A COMPATIBLE FASHION. YES, SIR. JUST ADDED AND I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING SO WHEN WOULD SEE FIVE ZONING HAVE BEEN APPLIED WAS 20 I THINK THE ZONING EXERCISE WAS DONE IN 2014 IS WHEN THEY RE ZONED THE COUNTY AND DID THE TRANSECT ZONING AND THEN IDENTIFIED YOUR C THREE, C FOUR AND C FIVES WHICH WAS YOUR CONVENTIONAL KIND OF ZONING.
SO THEY DID NOT GO WITH THE TRANSECT. THEY KEPT IT MORE THAT EUCLIDEAN KIND OF CONVENTIONAL ZONING DISTRICTS THAT KIND OF MORE YOUR SCALED LOWER KIND OF APARTMENT USE AS OPPOSED TO THE HEAVY C FIVE WHICH IS YOUR HEAVY COMMERCIAL USERS SO DO WE KNOW HOW BECAUSE I KNOW MS. RYAN SAID SHE HAD NO CLUE THAT HER PROPERTY HAD BEEN MOST PEOPLE MOST PEOPLE THESE ARE EXERCISES GOING IN SO AGAIN YOU GET YOU GO THROUGH THESE EXERCISES PLANNING AND COMP PLANNING. WE GO THROUGH THESE EXERCISES OF ZONING AND ZONING AND YOU DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN AT A HIGH LEVEL.
YOU DON'T WANT TO SOUND LIKE GREEN. YOU'RE GETTING DOWN ON THE GROUND. AND SO THIS WAS A SITUATION I GUESS AND WHEN THAT WAS PROBABLY OCCURRING BACK IN 2012, 2012 THREE, 2014 WHERE THE COUNTY SAID HEY THEY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE IN COMMON STATIONS ON WHETHER IT'S JUST B TRANSECT ZONING OR SHOULD BE CONVENTIONAL ZONING AND I MEAN AND SO ANYWAY THE PLANNING COMMISSION BACK HERE HELP OUT OKAY BUT SO YOU KNOW I'M SO I'M JUST GOING THROUGH AN EXERCISE OF PROBABLY WHAT OCCURRED AND
[00:45:03]
THEN THEY SAID NO LET'S JUST KEEP THIS A CONVENTIONAL DISTRICT AND YOU CAN ALL THE C THREE THAT'S THE YELLOW AND THEY SAID HEY WE'VE GOT ALL THESE ROADS HERE.THEY SAID HEY LET'S DRAW OUR C OR C FIVE AND THAT'S HOW THIS STUFF LANDS.
AND IT WAS IT WAS PROBABLY THEY KIND OF KIND OF LOOKED AT IT AND TRIED TO DO THEIR BEST THEIR CAN ON A PARCEL LEVEL AND THEY THOUGHT THAT THAT IT WOULD BE A GOOD AREA.
OBVIOUSLY YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LOT OF MUNICIPALITY LAND THAT WOULD PROBABLY ANNEX OVER TIME SO THAT I MEAN THAT WAS IT AND SO FROM THAT TIME GUESS OVER THE PAST TEN YEARS WE CAN GO LOOK AT THOSE AREAS AND HOW MUCH THEY'VE TRANSFORMED WITH THAT PARTICULAR ZONING A VERY HEALTHY PROBABLY ONE OF THE BEST TEN YEAR RUNS THIS COUNTRY HAS EVER SEEN IN AN ECONOMY.
I MEAN THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME DEVELOPMENT I DON'T THINK IT'S TRANSFORMED A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT SOME ROAD PROBABLY SOME RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITIONS INTERSECTIONS.
SO THIS KIND OF COMES INTO IS IS DOES ZONING THAT WAS LAID THERE OVER THOSE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY USES IN THOSE LOTS AND RENDERING THEM THE USES NONCOMPLIANT WAS THAT A GOOD EXERCISE AND THAT'S THE WE'RE HAVING WAS THAT A GOOD EXERCISE OR WAS DID IT GO A LITTLE TOO FAR BY NOT ALLOWING IF WE ALLOW IN THERE WE'RE ALLOWING THIS WAS ALLOWING RESIDENTS GOING BACK TO US IT ALREADY ALLOWS RESIDENTIAL USES SO WE'RE ALREADY ALLOWING PEOPLE TO LIVE NEXT TO PLACES WHERE WE HAVE THE STUFF ALL WE'RE SAYING IS WE'RE INTRODUCING THE RESIDENTIAL USE OF A SINGLE FAMILY BECAUSE THERE ALREADY ARE SINGLE FAMILY USES ALLOW SO IF A PROCESS WAS DONE SAY IN 2012 I THINK IT WAS ADOPTED IN 14.
I THINK WHAT WOULD PREVENT US FROM TODAY GOING BACK AND SAYING WE MADE A MISTAKE THAT'S WHY WE'RE GOING TO BE ZONED TO WHATEVER IS APPROPRIATE NOTHING.
WHY IS IT IS THAT MORE COMPLICATED YOU WOULD SORT OF COME TO THIS? WELL, I IT'S I THINK I MEAN, YES, THAT'S AN EXERCISE. SO WE PROBABLY YOU KNOW WE HAVE WE'D HAVE OUR PLANNING UPDATE WE WOULD LOOK AT THE PLAN OF COURSE WE WOULD LOOK AT THE PLAN. WE ALWAYS LOOK AT FUTURE LAND USE PLANNING AND WE AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT THEY USE TO DRIVE SOME OF THESE THINGS BACK WHEN THIS WAS DONE THEY ESTABLISH A ZONING WE JUST HAD A NEW ONE THAT DIDN'T REALLY TINKER TOO MUCH WITH THINGS WE WILL HAVE A FIVE YEAR PLAN KIND OF IN BETWEEN THE TEN YEARS YOU CAN START LOOKING AT IT THEN YOU CAN DO THEM ON THE TEN YEAR BUT IF THE COUNTY WAS TO DO OR THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS TO DO A PLANNING COMMISSION INITIATED REZONING THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO START DOING SOME KIND AREA STUDYING AND LOOK AT THIS THINGS AND AND KIND OF DOES IT MEET THE PLAN THAT WE KIND OF GET INTO THAT STUFF IT'S JUST IT'S A LONGER PROCESS IT'LL COST THE COUNTY MORE MONEY PROBABLY BRING IN SOME CONSULTANTS. IT'S NOT TO SAY, JOHN, THAT IT'S NOT A PLANNING EXERCISE THAT CAN'T BE DONE. IT'S JUST MORE TIME CONSUMING.
IT'S MORE STAFF BUT I WOULD SAY ON THE IF YOU GUYS ARE INTERESTED IN SOME OF THAT STUFF FROM THESE ISSUES WHEN WE BRING UP WHEN THAT FIVE YEAR PLAN MID-CYCLE COMES THESE ARE SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS THAT YOU ALL COULD BE IT'S COMING SOON IT IS IT'S GOING TO BE HERE I THINK IT'S NEXT YEAR. YEAH, NEXT YEAR. SO THESE ARE THE THAT WE GET THESE THINGS IN BETWEEN EXACTLY AS WE GET THESE THINGS IN BETWEEN HOW THESE DISCUSSIONS WE KIND OF LAND ON THESE THINGS EVERY FIVE YEARS OF WHEN WE WANT TO LOOK AT AND LOOK AT THESE KIND OF MORE OF A BROADER RANGE PLANNING EXERCISE. OKAY WE NEED TO WE NEED A MOTION EITHER TO REJECT IT TO TO ASK FOR FURTHER STUDY, LOOK AT SOME OPTIONS.
SO TO ME IT SOUNDS LIKE WE NEED A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION. SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WOULD DEFER THIS FOR ANOTHER MONTH AND HOPEFULLY GET SOME MORE INFORMATION FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. IS THAT YOUR MOTION? YES, WE'RE GOING TO NEED A LOT MORE CLARITY THAT SPECIFICALLY WHAT INFORMATION? ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SPECIFICALLY WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO WANT IN ADDITION TO THE BETWEEN THE APPLICATION WE RECEIVED AND THE STAFF REPORT WE HAVE PROVIDED SPECIFICALLY WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BECAUSE THIS RENEE THAT WE CAN BACK TO YOU SO WE CAN HAVE A PRODUCTIVE MEETING NEXT MONTH WHERE YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT AN AREA STUDY AROUND THAT AREA THAT'S ONE THAT ONE CAN PERCENTAGE OF SEE FIVE IN THE ENTIRE COUNTY IS THE SECOND ONE ANYBODY ELSE COME UP WITH ANYTHING ELSE OR THIS IS JUST THE MOTION THAT HASN'T BEEN SECONDED YET.
SO WE'LL GET TO TAKE IT TO DISCUSSION. YEAH.
SO I'M GOING TO SEE WHETHER THERE ARE ANY OTHER OPTIONS PARTICULARLY FOR NONCONFORMING PROPERTIES FOR THESE PEOPLE SO THAT THEY CAN KNOW STAY IN THEIR HOME AND THEN THEY CAN
[00:50:05]
ALSO SELL IT EVEN BECAUSE IT WILL BE IN CONFORMANCE. IS THERE AN OPTION TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN WITHOUT PUTTING THAT SPECIAL USE IN SEE FIVE OR AN ADDITIONAL USE I CAN ANSWER THAT NOW I WOULD SAY I MEAN I WOULD WE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE TO DIG DEEP.I'VE NEVER SEEN THAT LAW I'VE NEVER SEEN IT DONE IN THE ZONING CODE AND CONFIRM IT'S NOT A SPECIAL USE IT'S JUST A PERMIT WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT A PERMITTED USE ZONING CODE MOTION WOULD RUN OKAY I TRY FOLKS DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION APPROVE OUR MOTION THAT WE APPROVE WITH BRIAN'S APPLICANT FOR IT TAKES AMENDMENT THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE C FOUR AS WELL WHICH IS RECOMMENDED YES WE HAVE A AND A SECOND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR EMOTION RAISE YOUR HAND OKAY IT'S FOUR FOR THREE AGAINST MOTION PASSES FOR THREE YES OKAY FOR FOUR I WAS LIKE YEAH WE'RE GOOD. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. IT WAS A YEAH ALL RIGHT. I THINK THAT WAS A IT WAS YEAH . IS THAT WAS OUR SECOND ACTION ITEM I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT PARTIALLY ANYWAY ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER BURNING ISSUE YOU'D LIKE TO DISCUSS YOU GOT BEFORE TURNED OKAY. WITHOUT OBJECTION THE MEETING IS THEREFORE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.