[I. Call To Order]
          [00:00:06]
          MORNING. I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE BOARD OF ZONING AND APPEAL. PLANNING COMMISSION. WE 
          [II. Announcements]
HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS? OH. I'M SORRY. YES. STAFF HAS ANNOUNCEMENTS THAT THE NEXT MEETING FOR BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS WILL BE JUNE 12TH. FOR ANY REZONING CASES THAT NEED TO GO BEFORE THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE HEARD TODAY WILL BE BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS ON JUNE 3RD. AND ALSO ANOTHER ITEM THAT I WANTED TO ANNOUNCE. WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS. AND RIGHT NOW WE HAVE SEVERAL PUBLIC MEETINGS THAT ARE SCHEDULED. I BELIEVE THERE MAY BE A FLIER AT YOUR SEAT THAT SHOWS THE ONES THAT ARE SCHEDULED. FOR THE MOMENT. THIS IS THE MAY ROSTER WITH 1ST JUNE MEETING, AND WE'LL ALSO BE ADDING A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL MEETINGS LATER IN JUNE. AND WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THE FIRST ONE, THE KICKOFF MEETING FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS, IS BEING HELD TODAY AT THE HOGANSVILLE LIBRARY FROM 330 TO 5:30 P.M. AND THEN FOR THE OTHER MEETINGS, IT WILL ALWAYS BE THE SAME CONTENT. WE'RE JUST MAKING SURE WE GET OUT THERE IN THE COMMUNITY AND HAVE A REALLY GOOD REPRESENTATION FOR ALL THE CITIZENS. SO IF ANYONE MISSES THE FIRST MEETING, THEY CAN COME TO ANY OF THE SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS AND HAVE THE SAME EXPERIENCE. AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR ANNOUNCEMENTS. THANK YOU. OH, AND I GUESS ALSO TO WELCOME OUR NEW BOARD MEMBER AS WELL. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HIS NAME. MR. LEE WASHAM. THAT'S CORRECT. YES. AND HE WAS NEWLY APPOINTED THIS WEEK AT THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING. THANK YOU. WELCOME. THANK YOU. CAN I 
          [III. Approve the Final Agenda]
GET A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA? SO MOVED. SECOND. BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. ALL IN FAVOR? BY SHOW OF HANDS. ALL OPPOSED. SAME SIGN. MOTION IS CARRIED. I GET A 
          [IV. Approve Minutes of Last Meeting]
MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING. SO MOVE. THERE IS A CORRECTION TO THE MINUTES. MADAM. I SEE. ONE SECOND ITEM FOR ME OR MISS REILLY DID NOT VOTE. OKAY. THERE WAS NOT A REQUEST FOR THE OPPOSITION TO THE VOTE. UNLESS THERE WAS THREE PEOPLE VOTED. 
          YES, IT WAS JUST MOVED. WAS THERE A CORRECTION TO ITEM FOUR? YEAH. OH, THE LAST ITEM. CLOSE THE MEETING. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE EVA. SO I'M FINE. OH, THERE WE GO. SECONDER. OH, YES THE SECONDER. WE'LL GET THAT CORRECTED. OKAY. CAN I GET A SECOND TO THAT MOTION. AND THE CORRECTION SECOND. MOTION. AND SECOND THAT WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE CORRECTION. ALL IN FAVOR BY SHOW OF HANDS. ALL OPPOSED BY THE SAME SIGN. MOTION IS CARRIED. 
          CAN I GET A MOTION TO MOVE INTO PUBLIC HEARING? BACK A MOTION TO REMOVE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          SECOND MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR? BY SHOW OF HANDS. ALL OPPOSED BY THE SAME SIGN. MOTION IS CARRIED. ALRIGHT, SO OUR FIRST APPLICATION FOR YOU TODAY IS A REZONING. IT IS ON 620 OLD 
          [V.A.1. Rezoning - 050825 - Kim Pilsun - 620 Old Hutchinson Mill Rd 1st Reading - Vote Eligible]
HUTCHINSON MILL ROAD. AND THIS APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THE REZONING OF 9.62 ACRE PARCEL FROM SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL. AND SO THAT IS THE PARCEL ON THE SCREEN THAT IS BEFORE YOU. THAT IS FOR YOUR REVIEW. AND WE ALSO RIGHT NOW HAVE THE ZONING TURNED ON. SO YOU CAN SEE THE ADJOINING ZONING FOR THAT LOCATION. SO THE APPLICANT IS KIM PILSON. ACREAGE AS I SAID IS 9.62. AND THE ZONING DISTRICTS SURROUNDING IT TO THE NORTH. THE SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY TO THE EAST IS SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO THE SOUTH, SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY TO THE WEST IS SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY WITH WHAT IS GENERAL INDUSTRIAL WITHIN THE CITY OF LAGRANGE TO THAT NORTHWEST CORNER. THE CURRENT USE IS 
          [00:05:03]
RESIDENTIAL, AND THE PROPOSED REQUESTED USE IS COMMERCIAL. ON THE CHARACTER AREA MAP THAT IS WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT DOES IDENTIFY THIS CHARACTER AREA AS URBAN. THE PUBLIC NOTIFICATION FOR THIS REQUEST WAS PUT IN THE PAPER ON APRIL 5TH, AND THE SIGN WAS POSTED ON APRIL 5TH. AND FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS REQUEST, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC COMMENT OR INQUIRIES. AND SO NOW I'LL JUST GET INTO THE ACTUAL BODY OF THE STAFF REPORT, UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS MOMENT. SO THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE REZONING OF 620 OLD HUTCHINSON MILL ROAD FROM SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL. THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THE REZONING FOR MANY STORAGE, STORAGE, WAREHOUSE, MANY WAREHOUSES, SELF STORAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL. YOU KNOW USE OF RESIDENTIAL SMALL PROPERTY. SAY YOU HAVE FURNITURE THAT YOU NEED TO STORE OR SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE. NOT FOR INDUSTRIAL USE OR COMMERCIAL USE ARE ALLOWED IN THE COMMERCIALLY ZONED DISTRICT. FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION. THE TROUP COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIRES A 50 FOOT BUFFER BETWEEN GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AND ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL ZONES, AND THIS AREA OF THE COUNTY, AS YOU WILL SEE ON THE ZONING MAP, DOES CONSIST OF SMALL, MEDIUM AND LARGE LOT SIZES WITH A MIXTURE OF USES. 
          THIS APPLICATION. THIS REZONING REQUEST, WAS REVIEWED BY LOOKING AT THE CONFORMITY TO THE ZONING STANDARDS. THE FIRST ONE LOOKS AT THE EXISTING LAND USE PATTERNS. LAND USE TRENDS IN THIS AREA REFLECT A DIVERSE MIX OF LOT SIZES AND COMPENSATING SMALL, MEDIUM, AND LARGE PARCELS. ADJACENT LAND USES PREDOMINANTLY CONSIST OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, WITH A GENERAL COMMERCIAL PROPERTY SITUATED TO THE SOUTH ACROSS OLD HUTCHISON MILL ROAD, AND AN INDUSTRIAL ZONED LAND LOCATED TO THE NORTHWEST, AND THAT INDUSTRIAL LAND IS WITHIN THE CITY OF LAGRANGE. FOR NUMBER TWO, WE LOOK AT THE POPULATION DENSITY PATTERNS AND POSSIBLE INCREASE OR OVERBURDENING OF PUBLIC FACILITIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SCHOOLS, UTILITIES, POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION AND STREETS. THE REZONING REQUEST TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL WILL NOT INCREASE THE POPULATION DENSITY OF THIS AREA AND WILL NOT OVERBURDEN PUBLIC FACILITIES. FOR NUMBER THREE, WHETHER THE PROPOSED CHANGE WILL CREATE OR EXCESSIVELY INCREASE TRAFFIC CONGESTION OR OTHERWISE AFFECT PUBLIC SAFETY. THIS REQUESTED REZONING TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL IS NOT EXPECTED TO EXCESSIVELY INCREASE THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION OR OVERBURDEN PUBLIC FACILITIES IN THE PROJECT VICINITY. FOR NUMBER FOUR, THE PROPOSED CHANGE SHOULD NOT CREATE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. AND NUMBER FIVE, WHETHER THE PROPOSED CHANGE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THE TROUP COUNTY'S COMPREHENSIVE TROUP COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLANS FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOWS THIS LOCATION AS AN URBAN CHARACTER AREA, AND NUMBER SIX, THERE ARE NO IDENTIFIED FACTORS THAT WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALITY, OR GENERAL WELFARE IN RELATION TO THIS REZONING REQUEST. FOR THIS APPLICATION. STAFF DOES HAVE SOME CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE BOARD. IF THE REZONING IS APPROVED, STAFF REQUESTS THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER REQUIRING A SCREENING OR PLANTED BUFFER OR NATURAL BUFFER ALONG PROPERTY BOUNDARIES CONTIGUOUS WITH THE RESIDENTIALLY ZONED LAND. IF THE REZONING IS APPROVED, STAFF RECOMMENDS PROHIBITING ACCESS FROM MCGRAW ROAD, AS IT IS A SUBSTANDARD ROAD PRIMARILY SERVING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND ALSO AS THE STANDARD LANGUAGE. ANY SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION FROM THE PROPOSED LOT CONFIGURATION OR USE MAY CONSTITUTE NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE REZONING APPROVAL, AND THAT IS THE END OF THE STAFF REPORT, IF I MAY ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. AND WE ALSO HAVE THE APPLICANT PRESENT AS WELL. SO DO WE HAVE A SITE PLAN OF WHAT THE PROPOSED USE FOR THE ROAD TO THE PROPERTY LINE, GIVEN THE YOU KNOW, WE DO NOT HAVE A SITE PLAN FOR THE ACTUAL INTENDED USE OF THE PROPERTY. SO VOTING FOR THE REZONING TODAY WOULD NOT PROVIDE FOR APPROVAL OF. IT, WOULD PROVIDE FOR APPROVAL FOR ANYTHING THAT IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT UNDER GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING. WHAT WILL BE STORED IN THESE BUILDINGS? THE APPLICANT CAN PROBABLY ANSWER THAT BEST. AS FAR AS ON THE APPLICATION, SHE WAS LOOKING AT SELF STORAGE LIKE THE SMALL MINI STORAGE WAREHOUSES, PERSONAL PROPERTY? YES. PERSONAL PROPERTY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY BULLET? THE TRACK THAT'S IDENTIFIED IS 
          [00:10:17]
ONE WAY THEY CAN HAVE. IS NOT PART OF THIS, OR IS IT PART OF IT AS BEING SOMETHING LIKE THAT? I REMEMBER THIS COMING BEFORE US. YES. SO THAT PARCEL THAT'S LOCATED, I GUESS, TO THE NORTHEAST HAS ALREADY BEEN SUBDIVIDED OFF OF THIS PROPERTY. I BELIEVE THERE IS A HOUSE THERE. SO THEY WERE KEEPING IT FOR RESIDENTIAL USE. SO IS THAT LIMIT OR WAS IT SOLD AS A. I BELIEVE THAT I'M NOT SURE THE APPLICANT WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO ANSWER THAT. APPLICANT COME FORWARD. YES. STATE YOUR NAME PLEASE. STATE YOUR NAME. PETERSON. KIM. 0620 OLD HUTCHINSON ROAD, LAGRANGE, GEORGIA 30240. THANK YOU. WERE YOU THE OWNER OF TRACK ONE? A ONE AND A HALF ACRES? YES. ARE YOU STILL THE OWNER OR DID YOU? YES. YOU ARE STILL GOING TO RENT THE HOUSE? THIS. I STILL OWN THE BOTTOM, RIGHT. YOU LIVE THERE OR ARE YOU GOING TO RENT THE HOUSE? I'M GOING TO LIVE THERE. OKAY. AND THE DILAPIDATED HOUSE IS ON THE LARGER TRACK TO BE TORN DOWN. IT'S IDENTIFIED AS A DILAPIDATED HOUSE WITH A METAL SHED. 
          I GUESS IF YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE. IT. IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY. THERE'S A. WHOLE. 
          YEAH, THAT IS A. MANUFACTURED HOME. MOBILE HOME THAT REMAIN ON THAT BEING SOLD. IS IT GOING TO BE TORN? THEY CAN REMOVE IT. OKAY. THAT ONE. THIS ONE IS A HOUSE BUILT IN 1933 SIX. SO IT'S IDENTIFIED ON THE SURVEY AS DILAPIDATED. IT HAS TO BE DEMOLISHED. DEMOLISHED. 
          UNLIVABLE CONDITION. IT FELL DOWN. YES. HOW MANY UNITS WILL THE SITE PLAN ALLOW? 4 OR 5. 
          SIX. SIX. SEVEN. 4 OR 5 STORAGE UNITS? YES. INDIVIDUAL UNITS? YES. IT'S THE SIZE OF THAT. 
          YEAH. WHAT? WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE INDIVIDUAL? YOU SAID FOUR OR 5 OR 6. OKAY. BUT WHAT IS WHAT IS THE SIZE. YOU KNOW, 12 BY 12 OR 12 OR 24. WHAT IS THE 200 SQUARE FOOT OR 150FT■!S EACH? Y. 
          AND THERE'S ONLY GONNA BE 4 OR 5 OF THEM. YEAH. MY PLAN IS LIKE A SEVERAL IT DEPENDS ON. LIKE THE ENGINEER. TALK TO THEM FIRST. WELL, THERE'S A WHOLE NOTHER PROCESS FOR THAT. YEAH. SO I'M NOT SURE IT WOULD BE A NEW COMMERCIAL BUSINESS. SO IT WOULD GO THROUGH THE SITE PLAN BY THE BUILDING INSPECTORS AND HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND FIRE MARSHAL. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK 
          [00:15:09]
YOU, THANK YOU. IS ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE AGAINST THIS APPLICATION? HEARING NONE. HOW WOULD THE BOARD LIKE TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPLICATION? I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY THIS APPLICATION BASED ON THE CRITERIA THAT IT'S NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING STANDARD OF SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY. AND IT'S SURROUNDED BY SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY. IT WOULD NOT BE. GOOD FOR THOSE NEIGHBORS. COULD YOU PULL UP THE ZONING MAP AGAIN? SO FOR CONTEXT. I'M SITTING ON THE BLUE. IS THE CITY OF LAVERNE. YES. THERE WE GO. THE PINK IS THE CITY OF LAGRANGE, AND THE GREEN IS RESIDENTIAL. AND THE RED IS COMMERCIAL, CORRECT? YES. SO YOU GO FURTHER BACK TOWARDS. THE INTERCHANGE IN THAT AREA THERE THAT YOUR CURSOR IS OVER THE CITY. BUT WHAT IS THE BUILD OUT ON THOSE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL. RIGHT. SO WOULD IS THE PLANNING POINT OF VIEW. WOULD YOU CALL THIS STREET THIS NEIGHBORHOOD TRANSITION? IT COULD BE OVER TIME AS WE SEE THE INDUSTRIAL AND THE COMMERCIAL USE, WE DO STILL HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL THOUGH TO THE SOUTH. IT'S DEFINITELY A MIXED AREA AT THE MOMENT. BECAUSE THE TERM YOU USED WHILE AGO WAS URBAN. FOR THE CHARACTER AREA MAP FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT'S AN URBAN URBAN AREA, AND SO THAT'S TYPICALLY SEES MORE DENSE NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH WE DO HAVE THE SMALL LOTS IN THERE. AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE A VARIETY OF COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE RELATED TO THE AREA. THE CITY OF LAGRANGE PROPERTY IS ZONED INDUSTRIAL OR COMMERCIAL I BELIEVE. SO THAT LARGE TRACK. I GUESS YOU CAN TAKE THE CITIES OFF NOW. YES, THE BLUE IS GENERAL INDUSTRIAL. THE LARGER GREEN AREA THAT THAT IS IN THE COUNTY AND THAT IS. YES, SINGLE FAMILY HOME OR MULTIPLE HOMES. I BELIEVE AT THE MOMENT IT MAY BE ONE HOME. AND THAT IS THE PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY. YES, IT'S CONTIGUOUS TO THE LIKE THE NORTHEAST. ACROSS THE STREET. IS THERE A I THINK IT'S A COMBAT ZONE. IS THAT A I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW, YES. IT'S DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET. IT IS, IT'S IF YOU GO BACK TO THE MAP, IT'S THE RED PARCEL, I BELIEVE. AND I THINK IT IS A PAINTBALL FACILITY. SO THAT PARCEL THAT YOU HAVE SHOWN THE RED ACCORDING TO THE COUNTY. TAX MAP SAYS IT'S RESIDENTIAL. WELL, IF WE HIT REPORT SO IS ZONED GENERAL COMMERCIAL. BUT FOR TAX CLASSIFICATIONS IT MAY BE DIFFERENT. YES IT IS A GC BUT IT'S CLASSED AS RESIDENTIAL OKAY. AND THE CLASS IS SEPARATE FROM ZONING OKAY. I HEAR A SECOND FOR A MOTION. IT WAS MADE. SECOND. MAYBE. MOVED AND SECONDED THAT WE DENY THIS APPLICATION. ALL IN FAVOR BY SHOW OF HANDS. ALL OPPOSED BY THE SAME SIGN. MOTION IS CARRIED TO DENY. CAN I GET. NEVERMIND, I GOT THAT THREE, TWO. ALL RIGHT, SO THE NEXT ITEM. SO 
          [V.B.1. Special Exception Variance Application - Joseph McAllister - 5911 Roanoke Rd 1st Reading -Vote Eligible]
          [00:20:23]
THE NEXT ITEM IS A VARIANCE APPLICATION. THIS WAS SUBMITTED BY JOSEPH MCALLISTER FOR 5911 ROANOKE ROAD. THE APPLICANT REQUESTS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION VARIANCE FROM ROAD FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS ON A PROPERTY PARCEL LOCATED WITHIN A LAKESIDE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. AND SO WE'LL PUT IT ON THE MAP FOR YOUR REFERENCE. ALSO IN YOUR PACKET THERE IS A PLAT SUBMITTED THAT SHOWS THE FIRST REQUEST, AND I WILL STATE WE DO HAVE AN ALTERNATIVE REQUEST WITH THE ONE THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET. AND THEN THERE'S A SHEET IN FRONT OF YOU THAT SEE IF I HAVE A COPY HERE. 
          THAT ALSO LOOKS LIKE THIS. AND I'LL GET INTO THE STAFF REPORT AND EXPLAIN THOSE. BUT JUST STARTING FROM THE TOP OF THE REPORT, THE APPLICANT IS JOSEPH MCALLISTER. THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY IS 5911 ROANOKE ROAD FOR THE SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS. IT IS ALL LAKESIDE RESIDENTIAL AND THE ACREAGE IS 35 ACRES. THE CURRENT USE IS RESIDENTIAL. THE REQUESTED USE IS RESIDENTIAL. ON THE CHARACTER AREA MAP FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT IS LAKESIDE RESIDENTIAL. THE NOTICE FOR THIS REQUEST WAS PUT IN THE PAPER ON APRIL 5TH, AND THE SIGN WAS POSTED ON APRIL 4TH. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY CALLS IN OPPOSITION TO THIS. SO FOR THE REPORT, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM ROAD FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARCEL LOCATED WITHIN THE LAKESIDE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. THE APPLICABLE STANDARD REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 150FT OF ROAD FRONTAGE. AND SO IF WE GO BACK TO THE MAP. YOU'LL SEE THE LOCATION ON THE BACK SECTION OF THE PARCEL, AND IT'S ALSO ON THE HANDOUT. IT'S IN THERE WHERE THE CURSOR IS AT. RIGHT THERE IS WHERE HE'S LOOKING TO CREATE A NEW LOT, AND THE APPLICANT IS CURRENTLY CONSTRUCTING A RESIDENCE ON AN EXISTING LOT WITH ROAD WITHOUT ROAD FRONTAGE. THUS, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED ROAD FRONTAGE TO ZERO. THIS REQUEST IS INTENDED TO FACILITATE THE CREATION OF A NEW TWO ACRE PARCEL TO SUPPORT THE COMPLETION OF THE RESIDENCE THROUGH A CONSTRUCTION PLAN. AN APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE TO SPEAK TO ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, SO THE FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION. THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS CURRENTLY ACCESSED FROM ROANOKE ROAD VIA AN ADJOINING 5.16 ACRE PARCEL, ALSO OWNED BY THE APPLICANT. ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICANT OWNS A SECOND ADJOINING PARCEL TO THE NORTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THAT SECOND PROPERTY IS 22.28 ACRES. SO WE DID LOOK AT IT FOR THE STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION, AND WE DID NOT FIND ANY. WOULD NOT CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC GOOD, WOULD NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT, WOULD NOT DIMINISH AND IMPAIR PROPERTY VALUES WITHIN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WOULD NOT IMPAIR THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THIS ZONING. WE DO HAVE ONE STAFF COMMENT BEFORE WE LOOK BACK AT THE PLATS THAT WERE SUBMITTED. SHOULD THE VARIANCE BE APPROVED, STAFF RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD INCLUDE A CONDITION PROHIBITING ANY FURTHER SUBDIVISION OF THE SUBJECT PARCELS, UNLESS ACCESS IS PROVIDED VIA A NEW ROAD CONSTRUCTED TO MEET ALL APPLICABLE COUNTY STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROADS. AND WITH THIS, THOUGH, WE DID REVIEW THE FIRST PLAT THAT'S IN YOUR APPLICATION. AND THEN WE ALSO MET WITH THE APPLICANT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE STANDARD IS THERE SHOULD BE SOME ROAD FRONTAGE. 
          AND SO WE HAVE AND THIS IS THE HOUSE AT THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS THAT IT IS RIGHT NOW. 
          AND SO WE DO HAVE TWO PROPOSED, I GUESS LAYOUTS FOR THE VARIANCE. SO WE HAVE THE ONE THAT IS IN THE PACKET THAT CARVES OUT THAT TWO ACRE PARCEL. AND THEN WE HAVE THIS ONE WHERE WE LOOK AT COMBINING BASICALLY ALL THREE PARCELS TOGETHER. SO YOU CREATE ONE LARGE PARCEL AND THEN YOU CARVE OUT THE TWO ACRE PARCEL. SO IT WOULD REQUIRE THAT ACCESS EASEMENT TO ACCESS THE 
          [00:25:03]
BACK. AND WE WOULD NOT ALLOW ANY FURTHER. WE RECOMMEND NOT TO ALLOW ANY FURTHER SUBDIVISION IF THIS IS GRANTED ON EITHER PLAN. YES. WHAT IS THE MERIT OF ONE OVER THE OTHER? IT'S REALLY JUST TO GIVE ALTERNATIVES TO IT. WITH THIS ONE YOU HAVE ALTERNATIVE FOR US OR FOR THE APPLICANT FOR Y'ALL FOR. SO FOR THE FIRST ONE YOU ARE CROSSING MULTIPLE PARCELS TO GET TO THAT BACK LANDLOCKED PARCEL. IF IT'S IN A LARGER. SO FOR ME WITH A LANDLOCKED LOT I MEAN HE OWNS ALL THE PROPERTY DOWN. SO WHAT'S THE PROBLEM? SO WHICH PARCELS DOES THE APPLICANT OWN? 030 ALL RIGHT. BUT THOSE THAT TO THE WHAT WOULD IT BE TO THE EAST THAT GO BACK TOWARDS THE NORTH. 
          HE DOES NOT OWN THOSE. OKAY. THIS PARCEL, THIS PARCEL AND THEN THE PARCEL. OKAY. BEYOND THOSE THREE. WELL HE DOESN'T OWN ANY TO THE RIGHT OR ANY TO THE NORTH BEYOND THE TWO THAT ARE ON THE RIGHT. AND THAT'S CORRECT. YES. AND SO PER THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS, YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE ROAD FRONTAGE. YOU HAVE TO HAVE 150 ACRES, 150FT OF ROAD FRONTAGE IN THIS ZONING. SO THAT IS WHY IT'S BEFORE YOU. AND HOW WIDE IS THE ROAD THAT YOU PARCEL? IS IT 150 OR IS IT LESS. 
          I MEASURE THAT A DOUBLE CHECK IT 16. AND SO OF COURSE THESE WERE ALL EXISTING LOTS WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION BEGAN. SO THE ROAD FRONTAGE WAS NOT INTO PLAY AT THAT POINT BECAUSE YOU CAN BUILD ON AN EXISTING LOT. BUT DO YOU KNOW HOW WIDE THAT EASEMENT IS? WE I THINK OUR ABOUT TO MEASURE IT ON THE ZONING MAP OR IS IT ON THE SURVEY? I DON'T SEE IT ON THAT SURVEY. I. HAVE NOT GIVEN ACCURATE. I WANT TO SAY IT WAS MAYBE AROUND 90. I DIDN'T BRING THE NOTES WITH ME. SO IT'S NON-CONFORMING IN AND OF ITSELF IN TERMS OF YES, THAT IS CORRECT. IT IS 60 FOOT VARIES FROM 150. WELL, THEY ASKED FOR ZERO. IT'S A ZERO ROAD FRONTAGE REQUEST BECAUSE EVEN IF THESE LOTS ARE COMBINED, THIS ONE IS STILL A SEPARATE PARCEL THAT WILL HAVE ZERO ROAD FRONTAGE IN THE BACK. AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO ASK THE LANDLOCKED LOT, RIGHT? YES, YES. 
          AND THAT'S WHY WE WERE LOOKING AT COMBINING IT INTO ONE LIKE THEY. OH HE OWNS ALL RIGHT. BUT IT'S STILL IT'S LANDLOCKED. THE TWO THE TWO PRIMARY PARCELS ARE. ESSENTIALLY. YEAH. WHAT'S HE NEEDS TO CONTROL THE QUESTION. I STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. JOEY MCALLISTER, 59, 11 ROANOKE ROAD, LAGRANGE, GEORGIA, 3240. THANK YOU. SO WHAT'S WHAT'S THE REAL PURPOSE OF SUBDIVIDING THIS? DO YOU LIKE THIS SO YOU CAN GET ONE? YEAH. SO BASICALLY IF YOU DEFAULT ON THE LOAN AT SOME POINT IN TIME, THEN THE BANK REPOSSESSES THIS PROPERTY, THERE'S GOING TO BE LANDLOCKED AND THEY'LL HAVE NO WAY TO ACCESS THAT PROPERTY OR SELL IT TO ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL. IF WE PROCEED ON THIS AVENUE. CORRECT? YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THE FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO THE ROAD ACCESS IS IN MR. CALPERS. CALSTRS. YES. YEAH. AND SO YOU WOULD ISSUE A SECURITY INSTRUMENT FOR HERE'S THE BANK RIGHT HERE FOR BOTH OF THOSE PARCELS. YES. FOR YOUR OWN PURPOSES. THANK YOU FOR THAT. SO THAT WOULD CARRY OVER TO. CROSS EASEMENT FOR. THE LARGER PARCEL. IT WAS LANDLOCKED BECAUSE HAVE AN EASEMENT ON. YES. RIGHT. OKAY. AND ALL ALL OF THIS ROAD THAT'S PROPOSED HERE IS ON YOUR 
          [00:30:14]
PROPERTY. YES. FOR ANYTHING TO MAKE IT LEGAL. NONCONFORMING. WE'RE NOT GRANTING APPEARANCE. 
          IT WOULD JUST BE A NON-CONFORMING. BUT IF THE TWO ACRE IS LANDLOCKED AND SOMEBODY ELSE ACQUIRES IT, THEY HAVE NO ACCESS TO IT. WELL, THEY CAN HAVE AN INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT ACCESS, BUT IT WOULD NOT HAVE FRONTAGE. ON THE SECOND PROPOSAL. THE ENTIRE TRIBE, THE LARGEST TRACT, WOULD HAVE FRONTAGE. ON THE SMALLER TRACK WOULD HAVE AN EASEMENT THROUGH THE LARGER TRACT. STILL, THE EASEMENT FOR THE THREE BIG TRACKS IS NON-CONFORMING ALREADY, AND YOU CAN HAVE MULTIPLE PEOPLE USING THE SAME EASEMENT, WHICH WE DISALLOW THAT IN SEVERAL OTHER INSTANCES. YOU WON'T LET PEOPLE THAT HAVE LANDLOCKED PROPERTY IN THE COUNTY SUBDIVIDE THEIR PROPERTY INTO MULTIPLE TRACKS TO ALLOW THEIR THEIR NEIGHBORS. IN OUR COMMUNITY, THERE'S PEOPLE IN THIS AUDIENCE THAT HAVE PROPERTY IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS THAT WE TELL THEM THAT THEY CAN'T DO THAT. SO. I DON'T SEE HOW THIS HAS BEEN AN ISSUE SINCE THE LAKE WAS IMPOUNDED IN THE LATE 70S. SO IT'S ALWAYS BEEN MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE COUNTY HAS WORKED WITH THOSE THAT WERE LEFT LANDLOCKED PIECES OF PROPERTY, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T DENY THEM THAT ACCESS. HE'S GOT ACCESS RIGHT NOW. HE JUST WANTED TO SUBDIVIDE IT. THERE'S NO REASON THERE'S NOTHING ABOUT IT OTHER THAN THE LAND. RIGHT. BUT HE WANTS TO BUILD A HOME. HE'S ALREADY BUILDING A HOME. HE DOESN'T WANT TO PUT UP ALL THESE LAND AGAINST THE LOAN. HE JUST WANTS TO PUT UP TWO ACRES AGAINST. NO, BUT I MEAN, IN MY OPINION, THAT'S THE SITUATION. 
          THERE ARE THREE PARCELS, ALL THREE OF WHICH ARE ARE NON-CONFORMING LOTS IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. AND UNDER HIS INITIAL PROPOSAL, HE WOULD CREATE A FOURTH LOT THAT WAS ALSO NON-CONFORMING. BUT UNDER THE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL, IT WOULD ACTUALLY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF LOTS FROM THREE NON-CONFORMING CURRENTLY TO TWO NON-CONFORMING WITH A VARIANCE. 
          IN THE. 
          QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. I WAS GOING BACK TO THE DISPOSAL BECAUSE THAT LOCATION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. WE APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR THIS SECOND SUBMITTED FLAT. HOW DO YOU WANT TO DO IT? OKAY. 
          ALTERNATIVE B ALTERNATIVE B, ALTERNATIVE B AND REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE FOR THE LEGAL NEEDS OF EGRESS AND INGRESS EGRESS FROM ALL OF THE PARCELS THAT ARE LANDLOCKED THAT HE OWNS. AND I HAVE A SECOND. YEAH, YOU GOT A SECOND. BUT COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? SO I'LL MAKE SURE. OKAY. WHAT HE JUST SAID. NO. THE LOTS. YES. SO YOU ARE APPROVING WHAT WE'RE GOING TO CALL ALTERNATIVE B OKAY. AND THAT WILL ALSO HAVE A CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO CREATE A LEGAL INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT TO THE LANDLOCKED PARCEL. I'LL SECOND IF I'VE BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED, WE APPROVED OR TURNED TO BE ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION BY SHOW OF HANDS. ALL OPPOSED BY THE SAME SIGN. MOTION IS CARRIED. 
          ALL RIGHT, SO OUR LAST APPLICATION IS ALSO OR OUR LAST VARIANCE APPLICATION. WE STILL 
          [V.B.2. Special Exception Variance Application - Charles Combs - 5525 Roanoke Rd (APN 0893 000031A 1st Reading - Vote Eligible]
          [00:35:05]
HAVE A SUBDIVISION AFTER THIS. OUR LAST VARIANCE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED BY CHARLES COMBS. 
          IT IS FOR 5525 ROANOKE ROAD. THE APPLICANT REQUEST A SPECIAL EXCEPTION VARIANCE FROM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON A PROPERTY PARCEL LOCATED WITHIN LAKESIDE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. SO WE WILL PLACE IT ON THE MAP AND WE WILL SHOW THAT THE SHAPE, THE GEOMETRY OF THE PARCEL IS PART OF THE REQUEST. AND NOW I'LL JUST READ THROUGH THE STAFF REPORT TO GIVE A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON IT. SO THE APPLICANT IS CHARLES COMBS. THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY IS 5525 ROANOKE ROAD. IT IS ZONED LAKESIDE RESIDENTIAL IN ALL THE PARCELS SURROUNDING IT ARE ALSO ZONED LAKESIDE RESIDENTIAL. THE NOTICE WAS IN THE PAPER FOR THIS APPLICATION ON MARCH 29TH, AND THE SIGN WAS POSTED APRIL 4TH. WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY PUBLIC OPPOSITION OR COMMENTS ON THIS APPLICATION, SO FOR THE REQUEST, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE PLACEMENT OF AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITHIN THE FRONT YARD OF A PARCEL LOCATED IN THE LAKESIDE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. THE SUBMITTED SITE PLAN INCLUDED IN YOUR AGENDA ITEM ILLUSTRATES THE PROPOSED LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF THE STRUCTURE. THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS A 30 FOOT BY 60 FOOT STRUCTURE, IS SHOWN AS A 30 FOOT BY 60 FOOT STRUCTURE WITH A HEIGHT OF 12FT, INTENDED FOR STORAGE USE. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO LOCATE THE STRUCTURE APPROXIMATELY 150FT FROM THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, 70FT FROM THE SOUTHERN SIDE PROPERTY LINE, AND 278FT FROM THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE. THE STRUCTURE IS ALSO SHOWN TO BE LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 160FT FROM THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE. FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION. THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THE PLACEMENT OF THE STORAGE BUILDING IN THE FRONT YARD. DUE TO THE LOT SHAPE AND DIMENSIONAL CONSTRAINTS WHICH LIMIT SUITABLE SPACE BEHIND THE PRIMARY DWELLING. THE PRIMARY DWELLING IS SITUATED APPROXIMATELY 320FT FROM THE CENTER LINE OF ROANOKE ROAD AND THE FRONT YARD. SETBACKS FOR THIS ZONING DISTRICT ARE 100FT. A SPECIAL EXCEPTION VARIANCE MAY BE GRANTED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AND PLANNING BOARD. FINDING THAT RELIEF, IF GRANTED, WOULD NOT CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO THE PUBLIC GOOD, WOULD NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT OR OF OTHER PROPERTY IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY. IT WOULD NOT DIMINISH OR IMPAIR PROPERTY VALUES WITHIN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AND WOULD NOT IMPAIR IMPAIR THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THIS ZONING ORDINANCE. 
          STAFF COMMENTS. IF THIS VARIANCE REQUEST IS APPROVED, THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED AND LOCATED IN SUBSTANTIAL ACCORDANCE WITH THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION. ANY SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED PLACEMENT OR DIMENSIONS MAY RESULT IN THE REVOCATION OF THE VARIANCE, AND MAY SUBJECT THE PROPERTY OWNER TO ENFORCEMENT. 
          AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR THE STAFF REPORT. THE APPLICANT IS. YES. YES, PLEASE. WOULD YOU STEP FORWARD? I'M SORRY. WHAT'S YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS? CHARLES COMBS, 5525 ROANOKE ROAD. DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I WOULD LIKE TO ADD ONE THING. JUST SO IT'S CLEAR, THIS IS 22 ACRE PARCEL. MOTHER LIVES TO THE RIGHT. SISTER. IT WAS ALL DEEDED. SO IT IS A WHOLE FAMILY PROPERTY. I JUST MARK THOSE TWO ACRES OUT FOR MY HOME FINANCING 20 PLUS YEARS AGO. SO IT'S STILL FAMILY PROPERTY. SO YES, IT'S NEIGHBORS. SO IF THAT HELPS MAKE SENSE OF THAT PROPERTY, IF MOTHER MOTHER'S ON THE HILL AND SISTER AND BROTHER IN LAW LIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE POND, WE OWN THAT WHOLE CORNER BLOCK. SO IF THAT HELPS WITH ANY OF THE PROPERTY LINES. SO THE PHOTOGRAPHS WOULD SUGGEST THAT IT'S WOODED. YES, SIR. AND I PUT PHOTOS IN HERE TOO. IT'S PRETTY THICK. WOOD LINE BETWEEN ROANOKE ROAD. IT'S STARTING TO GROW BACK. SO HOW VISIBLE WOULD THE NEW STRUCTURE BE FROM IF YOU'RE HEADING WEST? A BLINK OF AN EYE. IF YOU'RE GOING EAST BACK INTO TOWN, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK OUT THE BACK WINDOW TO SEE IT. YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE IT IN ONE OF THOSE. GO BACK THIS WAY. MISTER DRIVER. YES, I SHARE IT WITH ME AND MY MOTHER, AND WE'VE GOT AN EASEMENT ALL THE WAY THROUGH ON THE PROPERTY. IT'S. YOU CAN BARELY SEE THE HOUSE 
          [00:40:01]
OVER THERE. IT'S BACK THIS WAY, A LITTLE MORE. ISN'T THAT? KEEP GOING, KEEP GOING. THAT'S THE POWER LINE ENTRY. YOU CAN SEE MY ROOF LINE BACK THROUGH. IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE LEFT, PROBABLY 100 YARDS FROM THIS VIEW. AND WILL THE BUILDING BE PAINTED RED AS THE RENDERING SHOWS? IT'S GOING TO BE A BARN RED, A DULL BARN RED WITH A GABLE ROOF. AND LIKE I SAID, THERE'S A GOD. I FORGOT WHAT I MEASURED OUT. IT'S ALL TREE LINE. IT'S THICK. KIND OF SET BACK OFF. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT FROM THE ROAD UNLESS YOU REALLY SLOW DOWN AND LOOK IT. WOULD THE COUNTY REQUIRE SCREENING OF ANY PORTION OF THE ABOUT TO SAY THAT YOU COULD THE CONDITION OR I COULD THAT TREE LINE REMAINS AS A BUFFER. YES I MOST DEFINITELY. 
          CAN YOU MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION OF YOUR STAFF APPLICATION? THAT THE BUILDING APPLICATION ACTUALLY. WOULD ASK FOR THAT TONIGHT AND OR LATE EVENING. AND IT'S, IT'S PRETTY FAR. YOUR HOUSE IS PRETTY FAR OFF THE ROAD AND A VERY THICK BOOK SEVERAL YEARS AGO, WHEN A COLD FRONT CAME THROUGH AND IT ANNIHILATED THE WOOD LINE WHEN ONE WAS DROPPING OFF ALL THE WAY DOWN 109 FIVE YEARS AGO. IT'S ALL GONE RIGHT NOW. WE'VE PLANTED STUFF. AND I MEAN, IT'S WE LIKE IT TO STAY THICK. WE DON'T EVEN LIKE TO HEAR THE ROAD OUT THERE. BUT COLOR OF BARN, ANYTHING LIKE THAT. I MEAN, I CAN CHANGE IT, BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SEE IT. YOU KNOW THE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE AGAINST THIS APPLICATION? HEARING? NONE. I WOULD LIKE TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPLICATION. MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE A SECOND. GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND. ANY QUESTIONS? ALL IN FAVOR? BY A SHOW OF HANDS. ARE THERE ANY CONDITIONS BY STAFF? EXCUSE ME. YES. FOR? TO REQUIRE A SCREENING OR A BUFFER WITH THE. YOU HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION OF ROOM. NO NEED. IF THE YES APPROVED THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED AND LOCATED IN SUBSTANTIAL PORTIONS. YES. IF THERE'S ANY SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION OF THE PLACEMENT, THAT WOULD AVOID THE VARIANCE, COULD YOU RESTATE YOUR MOTION TO APPROVE THAT? YES, I BELIEVE INCLUDE IT. INCLUDE THE STAFF. YES. WE'RE GOING TO REVOKE. AND AMENDED BASICALLY THE AMENDED MOTION. NO. YEAH. BUT BUT THE STAFF OKAY. AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. WITH THE SECOND QUESTION SECONDED. YES, SIR. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION BY SHOW OF HANDS. OPPOSED THE SAME SIGN. MOTION IS CARRIED. ALRIGHT, TURN IT OVER TO BRUCE FOR THE SUBJECT. MORNING. THIS IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTED TO 
          [V.C.1. Preliminary Plat - High Pointe Subdivision - BC Stone Homes - Greenville Rd (APN 0060000017) For Review and Comment]
YOU FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE BCC STONE HOMES. THE SUBDIVISION IS HIGH POINT SUBDIVISION. WE'LL BE LOCATED OFF OF GREENVILLE ROAD, AND IT ALSO HAS AN IN ROAD CALLED HIGH POINT DRIVE. THE CURRENT ZONING IS AGRICULTURAL. RESIDENTIAL. TOTAL ACREAGE 48.456. AND WE ASSUME IT'S STILL TWO PHASES. THE TOTAL PROPOSED LOT IS 17. ALL PARCELS WILL BE SERVED BY PUBLIC WATER AND SEPTIC. THE POINTS RATING SYSTEM OF THE DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA FOR SINGLE FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY SCORED 11. THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT DID REVIEW THE LEVEL THREE SOILS REPORT, WHICH WAS WHICH WAS PROVIDED TO US. THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DID REVIEW THE PLAT AND DID NOT RECOMMEND ANY CHANGES TO IT. THIS IS THE FIRST READING AND IT IS BOTH ELIGIBLE. ANY QUESTIONS? SO RUTH, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPROVED THE SOIL. YES, HE HAS LOOKED AT IT. SO WHAT DOES THE 
          [00:45:02]
SOIL MAP NOT COINCIDE WITH THE PLAT? OR MAYBE YOU CAN EXPLAIN HOW IT DOES. SO WE CAN WE CANNOT. THAT IS TRUE. COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT. THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS YOU DO HAVE TO ASK THEM. IT. BENNY IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION TO THE SOILS. THE ONLY THING THAT WE LOOK AT IS THE LAYOUT OF THE SUBDIVISION. MAKE SURE THAT THE DRIVEWAYS MEET THE SITE DISTANCE AND THE DISTANCE BETWEEN DRIVEWAYS. THAT INROADS ARE GOING TO BE THERE. MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF ROADS AND ENGINEERING, AND THAT THE SCORES THEY MEET, THE SCORE THAT WE PUT ON. BUT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT IS THE ONLY ONE THAT CAN DECIDE YAY OR NAY WHETHER THE SOILS MEET THEIR RECOMMENDATION FOR SEPTIC WITH THE WITH THE MAP PROVIDED, THEY'RE GOING TO MATCH THE PLAT. 
          OKAY, WE DO HAVE. AND IF I CAN GIVE YOU A COPY OF THE ONE THAT THEY BROUGHT IN THIS MORNING, JUST HOW MUCH HELP WE HAD AN OVERLAY. OKAY. SUBDIVISION PLAT OVER THE SOIL. I THINK I LEFT IT ON MY DESK. OKAY, LET ME GET IT OFF YOUR DESK. OH. NEVER MIND. IS THIS. AND THAT IS THE ONE THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US. YEAH, WE GOT THAT. THIS IS THAT ONE? YEAH. SUBDIVISION PLAT. RIGHT. 
          THERE'S A LOT OF AREAS TO BE AWARE THAT EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A LEVEL THREE, EACH ONE STILL HAS. 
          ONCE THEY DEVELOP EACH LOT, EACH ONE HAS TO COME BACK WITH A HEALTH DEPARTMENT CERTIFICATE THAT SAYS YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND PUT A HOUSE ON THERE. WE CANNOT ISSUE ANY. WE DO NOT ISSUE ANY PERMITS UNTIL THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT PROVIDE US WITH ANOTHER HEALTH DEPARTMENT PERMIT. SO EVEN IF THIS IS JUST A PRELIMINARY PRELIMINARY OVERLAY, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE WILL BE ABLE TO DEVELOP EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT WITHOUT THAT PERMISSION. SO IT'S NOT A CLEAR CUT. THEY CANNOT CLEAR CUT. THEY ONLY CAN CUT OFF UNCLEARED AREAS FOR THE HOUSE AND THE YARDS. AND THEY HAVE ALREADY GOT POINTS FOR THOSE. SO IT WOULDN'T BE A CLEAR CUT ANYWAY. AND THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS IF YOU HAD OTHER QUESTIONS. WE HAVE MR. STONE HERE, BUT HE CAN ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS. YEAH, SURE. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, BRIAN STONE, D.C. STONE HOMES, 1360 LAFAYETTE PARKWAY. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I CAN START WITH THE SOILS. SO WE TESTED THE SOILS BEFORE WE STOPPED THE DALLAS MILL SIDE. SO WE HAD I MEAN, ALL THE LOTS WERE TESTED ORIGINALLY. I'M ASSUMING THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. THIS OVERLAY DOES NOT MATCH THE PLAT. THERE'S A BUNCH OF LIGHT. WELL, YOU DON'T TEST ALL THE SOILS ON THE WHOLE SITE. YOU ONLY TEST ENOUGH TO GET A CONVENTIONAL SYSTEM ON EVERY LOT. AND WE MEET THAT CRITERIA. 
          WE GOT A CONVENTIONAL SYSTEM ON EVERY LOT. WELL, SOME OF THE LOTS, MOST OF THE ORANGE WHICH. 
          BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT CONVENTIONAL. WELL, IT SAYS IT'S NOT SUITABLE FOR SEPTIC CONFIGURATIONS IN THE ORANGE. AND THE GOLD SAYS IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FUNCTION PROPERLY PROVIDED THE SYSTEMS ARE INSTALLED AT A SHALLOW DEPTH. HOW SHALLOW? 18 TO 24. I MEAN, PROBABLY HALF THE SYSTEMS IN THE AREA ARE 18 TO 24, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF THOSE TWO COLORS ON HERE. THAT'S RIGHT. THEY'RE JUST SAYING YOU HAVE TO APPLY THEM AT 18 TO 24 EVEN. I MEAN, SOME ARE 12 TO 18. AND YOU HAVE TO ADD FILL ABOVE IT TO GET ABOVE THE ROCK IN THE AREA. BUT THE SOILS FROM A YOU KNOW, PERC STANDPOINT ARE FINE. IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE AN OUT AND MOUNT BELOW. SO THERE'S A LOT OF ROCK AND A LOT OF AREAS. AND YOU HAVE TO ADD, YOU KNOW, SELECT FIELD TO GET THE FIELD LINES TO MEET THE CRITERIA. THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO BE ABOVE, YOU KNOW, THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE ROCK AND THE BOTTOM OF THE FIELD LINES. 
          AND MOST OF THE LOTS ARE HOW HAVE YOU DO YOU MEAN? BECAUSE IT'S ALL THE LOTS MEET THE MINIMUM CRITERIA FROM THE COUNTY ORDINANCE. AND I BELIEVE I MEAN, JAMES, YOU COULD CLARIFY, BUT I 
          [00:50:03]
BELIEVE THE PLAT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE. YES. WELL, I'M I'M OF THE THINKING THAT ANY LOTS AND SUBDIVISIONS SHOULD BE FIVE ACRES. IF YOU'RE ON A SEPTIC TANK OR, WELL, ANYWHERE. WE'RE NOT ON A WELL I MEAN, SO WE'VE GOT PUBLIC WATER AND WE MEET THE CRITERIA OF AG ZONING TO A MINIMUM FRONTAGE MEETS THE MINIMUM SETBACKS, MEET THE CRITERIA THAT THE ORDINANCE SPECIFIES. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY TO THAT. THAT'S I THINK. 
          EXCUSE ME. AS A REMINDER, THE ONLY THING THAT WE'RE APPROVING IS THE LAYOUT OF THE PLAT. WE CANNOT APPROVE THE LEVEL THREE SOILS. THAT IS JUST FOR HEALTH DEPARTMENT. WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT THE LAYOUT. AND LIKE I SAID, YOU CANNOT BUILD ANYTHING ELSE UNLESS YOU GO THROUGH THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT. OKAY. AND THEN YOU'RE FILLING IN WHATEVER YOU NEED TO BRING UP. OKAY. GOTCHA GOTCHA GOTCHA. SO UNFORTUNATELY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF YEAH I KNOW. SO AND I LAUGHED ABOUT IT BECAUSE I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE MOUNTAIN AREA. YEAH IT'S A LOT OF ROCK THERE. AND SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO FILL IN AND LEVEL OUT. YEAH. BUT THE PLAQUE IS WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT. ALL RIGHT. 
          ANYTHING ELSE? THANK YOU, THANK YOU. YOU HAVE TO DO. OKAY. IS ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE AGAINST THIS APPLICATION? HEARING NONE. I WOULD LIKE TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPLICATION. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND, BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. WE APPROVE THIS APPLICATION. ALL IN FAVOR? BY A SHOW OF HANDS. ALL OPPOSED BY THE SAME SIGN. MOTION IS CARRIED. 
          ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. CAN I GET A MOTION TO. MAKE THE MOTION? SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR? BY SHOW OF HANDS. ALL OPPOSED BY THE SAME SIGN. MOTION IS CARRIED. 
          THANK YOU. OKAY,
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.