[00:00:02]
IT'S 10:00. WE'RE GOING TO GO ON APPLE TIME TODAY. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. GOING TO
[I. Call To Order]
CALL THE. MEETING TO ORDER FOR THE JANUARY 8TH. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AND PLANNING COMMISSION. PLEASE SILENCE YOUR PHONES AND. ANNOUNCEMENTS. WASN'T PREPARED. OKAY.[II. Announcements]
ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR TODAY. THE APPLICATION THAT YOU HEARD, THE APPLICATIONS, THE TWO APPLICATIONS THAT YOU HEARD FOR REZONING AND THE SPECIAL USE WERE APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AT THEIR MEETING ON LAST TUESDAY. AND. AND THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AND PLANNING COMMISSION'S NEXT MEETING WILL BE FEBRUARY. THAT'LL BE ON FEBRUARY 12TH.YEAH. OKAY. FEBRUARY 12TH, NEXT MONTH. AND THEY WILL BE GOING BEFORE THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON THE FIRST TUESDAY AFTER THEY. ALL RIGHT. AND THE FIRST APPLICATION IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY IS A NOPE. NOPE. WE GOTTA APPROVE THE AGENDA AND DO THAT FIRST.
[III. Approve the Final Agenda]
THAT'S RIGHT. ALRIGHT. OKAY. OUT OF OUR ANNOUNCEMENTS, WE NEED TO APPROVE THE FINAL AGENDA. MOTION'S MADE AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. TODAY'S AGENDA HAS[IV. Approve Minutes of Last Meeting]
BEEN APPROVED. WE NEED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING. SO MOVED. SECOND.MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR? MINUTES HAVE BEEN APPROVED. NOW WE NEED
[V.A.1. VAR - 010826 - McGhee - 2942 Mobley Bridge Rd (APN 0244C008004) 1st Reading - Vote Eligible]
TO MOVE INTO A PUBLIC HEARING. DO I HEAR A MOTION? SO MOVED. SECOND. MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED TO MOVE INTO A PUBLIC HEARING. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. WE ARE NOW IN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALRIGHT. NOW, JAKE. ALL RIGHT. THE FIRST APPLICATION IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY IS A VARIANCE REQUEST, THE 2942 RIDGE ROAD. AND THIS IS REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO PRIMARY STRUCTURES ON A 1.5 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IN SUBURBAN MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. AND AS I SAID, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR A PRIMARY STRUCTURE IN A SUBURBAN MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING, AND THE ADDITION WILL EXTEND APPROXIMATELY 16 OR EXACTLY 16FT TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE PARCEL, PER THE SITE PLAN ATTACHED. YOU CAN SEE ON THE STAFF REPORT THE STANDARDS FOR GRANTING VARIANCES AND IF THE IF THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS APPROVED, THE ADDITION MUST BE CONSTRUCTED IN PLACE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED. ANY SIGNIFICANT DEVIATION FROM THE APPROVED SITE PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR REVIEW. ALL PERMITS MUST BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, AND THE APPLICANT OR THE REPRESENTATIVE ARE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU ALL HAVE THEM. I SEE THE SETBACK FROM THE CENTER LINE AND FROM EACH CORNER, BUT I DON'T SEE SETBACK FROM THE ADDITION SQUARE TO THE PROPERTY LINE. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE FOOTAGE IS, WHAT IT WAS AND WHAT IT WILL BE? 33 61. IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN, IT SAYS 68.94FT LINE WITH THE FROM THE CENTER LINE STRAIGHT TO THE PROPERTY TO THE 80 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY. SO APPROXIMATELY SUBTRACT 40FT AND BE 28.94FT FROM THE CLOSEST CORNER OF THE PROPOSED ADDITION TO THE PROPERTY TO THE PROPERTY LINE. ALL OF OUR FRONT YARD SETBACKS ARE MEASURED FROM THE CENTER LINE OF THE ROAD. FOR OUR ORDINANCE. THAT'S NOT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. IN THE FRONT IS FROM THE CENTER. OKAY. DO I HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM ANY OF THE BOARD? ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE LIKE TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL? HEARING[00:05:05]
NONE. SEEING NONE. DOES ANYBODY REALLY WANT TO GET UP AND STAND AND TALK? SEEING NONE. HOW, SAY YOU THE BOARD, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. SECOND MOTION HAS BEEN MADE TO APPROVE AND SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. NOW, PLEASE DO NOT FEEL LIKE YOU NEED TO SIT AROUND AND WATCH. FOR YOU. IT WOULD BE GLAD TO HAVE YOU STAY, BUT WE'RE JUST GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT SOME. YEAH, YEAH, REAL EXCITING STUFF. CHICKENS.HERE WE GO. CHICKENS. OKAY. SO NEXT IN FRONT OF YOU IS THE TEXT AMENDMENTS. AND THESE ARE
[VI.A.1. Text Amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance (Poultry Raising, Commercial & Foundations Survey) 1st Reading - Vote Eligible]
THE TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT WERE TABLED AT THE LAST OR PREVIOUSLY. AND THEY ARE BACK IN FRONT OF YOU FOR POULTRY AND THE FOUNDATION SURVEY FOR YOUR REVIEW. OKAY. SO I THINK ON THE POULTRY WE JUST LEFT IT THE SAME. SO WE'RE BACK IN FRONT OF YOU IS WHAT WAS IN FRONT OF YOU BEFORE. AFTER CONSULTING WITH STAFF AND LEADERSHIP THAT THEY WANTED TO KEEP IT AS IT WAS. SO NO, THERE WAS NO CHANGE. SO WHAT YOU SEE ON THE COMMERCIAL POULTRY, WHICH IS BIG CHICKEN HOUSES, IS THE SAME AS WHAT YOU SAW LAST TIME, WHICH IS IF YOU REMEMBER WHAT WAS IN OUR PREVIOUS ORDINANCE, IT JUST ACCIDENTALLY GOT LEFT OUT. SO WE'RE JUST PUTTING IT BACK IN EXACTLY THE WAY IT WAS BEFORE PRIOR. SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS CONCERNING THE POULTRY THING. FIRST OF ALL, I STRONGLY FEEL THAT IT SHOULD BE LEFT IN AGRICULTURE BECAUSE IT IS AGRICULTURAL FUNCTION. AND I UNDERSTAND THE REASONING THAT SOME PEOPLE DON'T WANT POULTRY, BUT IT'S A AGRICULTURE PROCESS JUST AS MUCH AS CATTLE RAISING, HOG RAISING, ANY OTHER LIVESTOCK PURPOSES. AND IF YOU CHANGE, IF YOU CHANGE OR REQUIRE THE PEOPLE TO REZONE, THEN THEIR TAX BURDEN ON THEIR PROPERTY GOES UP SIGNIFICANTLY BY ZONING IT TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, ACCORDING TO THE ARCHITECT. WITH THE TAX PEOPLE, THEY DIDN'T GIVE ME ANY EXACT NUMBERS BECAUSE THE GUY WAS OUT. BUT BUT BASICALLY, I JUST THINK IT'S A IT'S AN UNDUE BURDEN ON PEOPLE. AND I THINK IT IS AGRICULTURAL PROCESS AND IT NEEDS TO STAY IN AGRICULTURE. THAT'S JUST MY, MY OPINION. BUT WHILE I'M TALKING, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE SETBACKS. SO THE VERBIAGE IN THE SETBACK SAYS THAT IF A STRUCTURE IS LOCATED WITHIN 50% OF ANY REQUIRED SETBACK, IS WAS GOING TO REQUIRE, BUT IT SHOULD BE 150%, BECAUSE IF IT'S WITHIN 50% OF THE SETBACK, IT MEANS IT'S ALREADY INSIDE THE. YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT. THAT'S THE WAY THE MATH WORKS FOR ME IN MY HEAD. UNLESS YOU'VE GOT A DIFFERENT EXPLANATION OF HOW YOU ARRIVE AT THAT. I GUESS THE WAY WE WORDED IT WAS THE WAY THE MATH WORKS IN OUR HEAD WITH SO THAT IF YOU HAD A SITE PLAN, WELL, THEN IT'S WE ADMIT IT'S TOO SUBJECTIVE BECAUSE ANYBODY THEN COULD HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION ABOUT WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS, RIGHT? I GUESS WE CAN CHECK AGAIN WITH OUR ATTORNEY, MARK DE JANEIRO, AND SEE WHAT HE THINKS. SO. RIGHT. BUT THE WAY WE READ IT IS IF SOMEONE SUBMITS A SITE PLAN, THAT'S THE WAY IT WOULD FUNCTION IF THEY PULL IT. BECAUSE EVERYONE WHEN YOU GET A BUILDING PERMIT, YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT A SITE PLAN. AND SO IF THEY SUBMITTED ONE AND I'M JUST GOING TO USE SAY YOU WERE 50% SIDE SETBACK, WHICH I 50 FOOT, SORRY IF YOU HAD A 50 FOOT SETBACK ON YOUR SIDE LINE AND YOU TURNED ONE IN, THAT SHOWED YOUR SITE PLAN WITHIN 50% OF THAT. SO IF IT WAS SHOWING 60 FOOT OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE, WELL, YOU'RE ONLY TEN FOOT FROM THE SETBACK. AND THAT'S THAT'S LESS THAN 50% OF THE SETBACK. YOU'RE YOU'RE MORE THAN 50% FROM THE SETBACK BECAUSE YOU'RE 60 FOOT, I THINK 100. AND I THINK THE 150%, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, WOULD BE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO WE'RE SAYING THAT YOUR, YOUR, YOUR, YOUR SITE PLAN WOULD SHOW THAT YOU'RE WITHIN 50% OF THE SETBACK LINE IF YOU FOLLOW NOT FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, YOU USE AN ANALOGY THAT WOULD BE MORE REALISTIC, LIKE 20FT IS A[00:10:02]
NORMAL SETBACK, SIDE SETBACK AND THEN SOME HIGH DENSITY AREAS. IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE MORE LIKE TEN FEET, RIGHT? SO IF YOU SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN THAT SHOWED THAT YOU WERE CLOSER THAN 50% OF THAT, THEN, THEN YOU'D BE REQUIRED TO. SO AGAIN, IF IF IT WERE TEN FEET, YOU'RE SAYING IT WOULD BE 15FT, RIGHT? RIGHT. BUT THE SITE PLAN, SITE PLAN SHOWED YOU WERE WITHIN FIVE FEET OF SETBACK LINE. YEAH. BECAUSE YOU KNOW HOW ON SURVEYS OR PLATS OF SUBDIVISIONS, IT'LL SHOW THE SETBACK LINE ON THERE ON YOUR LOT. I'M JUST I MEAN I WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING. IT'S JUST HOW YOU WORK. RIGHT. WELL, IF YOU DO THE MATH IS IT'S NOT 50%, BUT THAT IF THAT'S THE WAY YOU WANT TO LEAVE IT, I JUST WE'LL CHECK WITH MARK DE JANEIRO, OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY, AND SEE WHAT HE BELIEVES. WELL, THEN WE CAN'T VOTE ON THIS TODAY THEN. I THINK YOU CAN VOTE ON IT. WITH RESPECT TO THE INTENT OF WHAT WE'RE SAYING, THE INTENT. THE INTENT IS IF YOU IF YOU SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN AND YOU WERE WITHIN 50% OF I DON'T THINK WE CAN VOTE ON SOMETHING UNLESS IT'S CLEAR WHAT, WHAT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF HOW WE DEFINE IT. SO, WELL, YOU CAN TAKE IT AGAIN THEN, AND WE'LL GET WITH MARK AND FIND OUT WHAT HE THINKS THE PROPER LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS OF, I THINK I DON'T KNOW IF SOME OF YOU ARE ADDING AND SOME OF YOU ARE SUBTRACTING. YOU'RE GETTING TO THE SAME PLACE. YOU'RE JUST DOING IT DIFFERENT WAYS. YEAH.LIKE BACK WHEN YOU'RE IN SCHOOL. AND THEY WOULD GIVE YOU THE WORD PROBLEMS FOR MATH INSTEAD OF THE, YOU KNOW, AND THEN YOU HAD TO INTERPRET THE WORD PROBLEM. THIS IS THE TRAIN THAT'S LEAVING PHOENIX AND GOING TO GET TO LOS ANGELES. I DON'T CARE WHAT TIME IT GETS THERE, BUT ALL RIGHT, SO THE MORE WE LOOKED AT IT AND WE THOUGHT OF DIFFERENT SCENARIOS.
ALL RIGHT. WHAT IF SOMEONE TURNED ONE IN. THAT WAS THIS SCENARIO. WHAT IF SOMEONE TURNED IN ONE THAT WAS THIS IS THAT WE GOT AWAY FROM THE ACREAGE THING. I THINK THAT IT JUST IT JUST NEEDS TO BE BETTER DEFINED. OKAY. AND WE JUST WENT WITH THE FACT THAT THE ACREAGE DOESN'T MATTER. SOMEONE COULD HAVE 100 ACRES AND STILL TURN IN A SITE PLAN FOR WHATEVER REASON, BECAUSE A BUNCH OF IT'S FLOOD ZONE OR WHATEVER, STEEP AND HILLY, AND THEY COULD SHOW THAT THEY'RE WAY OVER ON THEIR PROPERTY LINE WITHIN 50% OF WHAT THEIR SETBACK IS. AND SO IF THEY'RE SHOWING A SITE PLAN WHERE THEY'RE WITHIN 50% OF WHATEVER THEIR SETBACK IS, EXPLAIN YOUR 50%. SO IF THE SETBACK IS 20FT, 50% IS 1010. SO THAT'S CLOSER THAN TEN FEET FROM THE 20 30FT. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT 30FT RIGHT. WHICH IS THE SAME AS 150%. AGAIN IT'S JUST HOW YOU WORD IT. OBVIOUSLY THE SMALLER THE SITE THE MORE CRITICAL THIS IS. I MEAN SOMEBODY GOT 100 ACRES. THEY'RE GOING TO PUT A HOUSE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE 100 ACRES. THEY PROBABLY SHOULD BE RELIEVED FROM DOING A FOUNDATION SURVEY, UNLESS THEY'RE FOR SOME INEXPLICABLE REASON, THEY'RE RIGHT. THEY'RE RIGHT UP ON THE RIGHT. AND THIS AND THIS, THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, OF COURSE, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DO THE MATH IS EFFECTIVELY WRITTEN THAT WAY.
IF SOMEBODY HAS 100 ACRES AND THEY PLACE A HOUSE IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, THERE IS NO FOUNDATION SURVEY REQUIREMENT. THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN OUT IS IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO PLACE A STRUCTURE. IN ADDITION, A NEW BRAND NEW HOUSE WITHIN 50% OF THE REQUIRED SETBACK. THAT'S WHAT WE JUST WHAT WE APPROVED HERE. YES. YEAH. IT REQUIRES A FOUNDATION SURVEY THEN AND THEN READING THROUGH IT, IT REQUIRES IT TO BE BY A LICENSED SURVEY. IS THIS APPROVAL GOING TO REQUIRE FOUNDATION SURVEY OR IS IT BEYOND THAT? I MEAN, HOW WERE YOU? I WOULD SAY NO, BECAUSE WHAT YOU APPROVED IS THE FACT THAT THEY CAN ENCROACH. RIGHT. BUT ARE WE GOING TO LIVE WITH THE FACT THAT THEY MAY ENCROACH MORE OR EVEN LESS THAN WHAT THE APPROVAL IS? HOW DO WE KNOW YOU GO OUT THERE AND MEASURE 20FT OFF THE BUILDING. THAT'S WHAT THEY SUBMITTED. IF THEY. WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT. NO, BUT I'M JUST SAYING I'M JUST SAYING SOMEBODY IN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, WHOEVER THEY SUBMITTED THE PLAN TO, SOMEBODY SHOULD BE CHECKING WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. WELL, THIS THAT ONE IS EASIER BECAUSE YOU CAN MEASURE RIGHT OFF THE THE PHYSICAL BUILDING. YEAH, YEAH. OR IF YOU DON'T HAVE A BUILDING THERE YET AND YOU'RE BUILDING A HOUSE IN THE MIDDLE, THEN IT'S HARD TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE MEASURING OFF OF.
RIGHT? BUT IN THAT CASE, YOU'RE RIGHT. YOU COULD THERE'S THAT BUILDING'S THERE. YEAH. I THINK THE CONCEPT OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS FINE. I THINK THE DEFINITION JUST NEEDS TO BE EXPANDED TO MAKE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. SOME PEOPLE, SOME PEOPLE UNDERSTAND IT. THAT'S IT. OKAY. THE WORDS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, IT'S KIND OF LIKE IF YOU SAY ADD 50% VERSUS SAY MULTIPLY BY 1.5, I MEAN ADDING YOU DIDN'T SAY, YOU DIDN'T SAY ADD 50%. YOU SAID WITHIN 50%. YEAH. WITHIN 50% MEANS IT'S A DIFFERENT. BUT
[00:15:06]
ANYWAY IT'S A NO NO. WE DIDN'T MEET. Y'ALL GOT TO DECIDE. YOU WANT TO PASS THIS AS IT IS WORDED OR DO WE WANT TO TABLE IT AGAIN. CAN WE TABLE IT AGAIN OR DO WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S SOME RULES ABOUT TABLING THINGS TWICE. TO MAKE A DECISION AND FORWARD IT TO THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS FOR THEM TO MAKE THE FINAL DECISION. AND IN BETWEEN THIS BOARD AND THE NEXT BOARD ACTION CAN TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT THEY'VE SAID AND MAKE THE CHANGES AND FORWARD IT TO THE COMMISSIONERS. MAKE SENSE? I'M GOOD WITH THAT. YEAH. WHY NOT? I THINK EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THE INTENT. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF DOUBLE CHECKING. I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE INTENT. I JUST DON'T WANT SOMEBODY. IF I WAS READING IT, I JUST EXPLAINED TO YOU HOW, YOU KNOW, I'LL JUST CALL IT TO THE. RIGHT. Y'ALL FIGURE IT OUT. IT'S 150% OR 50% ANYWAY. BUT ANYWAY. AND THE POULTRY THING, I JUST I MEAN, THAT'S JUST I AGREE WITH YOU ON POULTRY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT HAS TO BE AN INDUSTRY. WHY WHY IS POULTRY NOT JUST IN AGRICULTURE? THE SUPPLEMENTAL REQUIREMENT, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE SOME KIND OF SETBACK FOR THE HOUSES, YOU HAVE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. WHY WAS THIS CHANGED AND WHERE WAS IT CHANGED? BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT US. IF SOMEBODY COMES IN WITH WANT TO DO COMMERCIAL AND I MEAN, WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LETTING EVERYTHING COME IN THESE DAYS, THE CITY. SO WHY WOULD WE STOP A CHICKEN HOUSE IN AGRICULTURE? WHEN DID HE GET MOVED TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR HEAVY INDUSTRY IN, IN THEN YOU'RE GOING TO BE DOING SPOT ZONING. EVERYBODY'S GOING TO BE RAISING CAIN. OH YOU CAN'T DO THAT SPOT ZONING. AND IT'S GOING TO COME FROM Y'ALL. YOU CAN'T DO SPOT ZONING. AS I'VE SAID SEVERAL TIMES, THIS IS THE WAY IT WAS IN OUR PREVIOUS ZONING ORDINANCE. WELL, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN WRONG. BACK THEN. YOU JUST YOU JUST ASKED WHEN WAS IT CHANGED? OKAY. WE JUST RECENTLY CHANGED IT. IT WAS NOT OKAY. IT HAS BEEN ZONED THAT WAY SINCE BEFORE I EVER STARTED WORKING FOR THE COUNTY. IT'S BEEN THAT WAY. I THINK FROM THE TIME THE ZONING ORDINANCE WAS FIRST ADOPTED IN 86, IT'S BEEN THAT WAY. SO WERE CHICKENS ALLOWED IN AGRICULTURAL ZONING, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE YOUR PERSONAL CHICKEN HOUSE. YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE PERSONAL CHICKENS ON YOUR FARM FOR YOU, FOR YOUR FAMILY. YOU CAN YOU CAN DO THAT ALL DAY LONG. IT'S THIS SPEAKS TO COMMERCIAL. IT'S THE BIG COMMERCIAL, LIKE WHERE YOU SEE SEVEN, TEN BIG OLD HOUSES AND BUT YOU BUT YOU DON'T LIMIT, LIMIT THIS WITH COWS. THEY CAN COME RIGHT UP TO THE FENCE LINE. I MEAN COWS, COMMERCIAL CATTLE OPERATIONS ARE IN AGRICULTURE AND THEY GO RIGHT UP TO NEXT, YOU KNOW, NEXT DOOR. AND THERE'S NO RESTRICTION ON HOW MANY YOU CAN HAVE ON PER ACRE OR ETC. EVERYTHING I'VE EVER.SO WERE YOU PREJUDICED AGAINST CHICKENS? EVERYTHING I'VE EVER HEARD THAT NO ONE HAS A THAT I'VE NEVER HEARD A PERSON IN THE COUNTY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH, WITH COWS OR HORSES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THESE LARGE, BIG COMMERCIAL CHICKEN PLACES, YOU CAN SMELL THEM FROM 20 MILES AWAY AND YOU DON'T WANT TO LIVE NEXT TO ONE. THAT'S RIGHT. AND SO THAT'S WHERE THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE, IN MY OPINION, BETWEEN A LARGE COMMERCIAL CHICKEN PRODUCTION OPERATION VERSUS 100 COWS, 200 COWS. I MEAN, IT'S IT'S COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. AND SO AND THIS IS JUST I'M SPEAKING TO WHAT THE CODE SAYS. AND THAT IS WHY IT HAD FROM THE BEFORE I WAS EVER WITH THE COUNTY, WHY IT WAS WHERE YOU HAD TO HAVE A SPECIFIC ZONING BECAUSE IT WAS A HIGHER IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY. IT WAS A HIGHER IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORS. IT WAS A HEAVIER USE WITH WITH THE POTENTIAL NEGATIVITIES. AND SO ANSWERING THE QUESTION, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN LIKE THAT FOR AS LONG AS I KNOW. AND IT WAS BECAUSE HEAVIER USES, HEAVIER EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD, REQUIRE A HEAVIER ZONING. I'M NOT SAYING YOU HAVE TO LIKE IT. I'M JUST SAYING WHY. WHY IS IT I DON'T LIKE IT? HOG PARLORS ARE NO DIFFERENT. THERE'S NO RESTRICTION ON HOG PARLORS. IF YOU HAD A BIG COMMERCIAL HOG PARLOR, YOU'D HAVE A SIGNIFICANT I DON'T RUN OFF, ETC. I, I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED. I GUESS IT'S NEVER COME UP, BUT I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF SOMEONE SAID, LET'S ADD HOG TO THAT, THAT, THAT I JUST I JUST THINK IF YOU IT'S AN AGRICULTURAL FUNCTION AND IT SHOULD ALLOW IS MY OPINION. AND LIKE I SAID, YOU CAN REQUIRE PEOPLE ASSUMING THAT SOMEBODY HAD THE PROPERTY AND THEY WANTED TO GO THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS, THEY
[00:20:01]
GOT TO CHANGE THEIR PROPERTY TO THE LIGHT OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. AND IT'S A DIFFERENT TAX RATE.AND IT'S NOT FAIR FOR SOMEBODY TO HAVE TO PAY, BUT IT'S A COMMERCIAL PROCESS. SO THE TAX RATE SHOULD BE, WELL, CATTLE OR COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURE. IT'S NO DIFFERENT. YOU'RE NOT TAXING.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHICKEN HOUSES HERE. WE'RE NOT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL I UNDERSTAND I UNDERSTAND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AGRICULTURAL FUNCTIONS. AND IT'S NO DIFFERENT IF IF YOU GOT IT'S A BUSINESS. SO WHERE DO YOU THINK CATTLE IS NOT A BUSINESS.
BUSINESS. BUT THE HOGS ARE A BUSINESS. DO YOU THINK A DAIRY IS NOT A BUSINESS? THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN HOW THEY'RE OPERATING. NO, THERE ISN'T COWS. COWS DON'T CAUSE ANY IMPACT OTHER THAN THEY DO CAUSE IMPACT. YOU HADN'T BEEN READING ENVIRONMENTAL ON US. DO WHAT? ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. YEAH. THEY DO. YEAH. ALL THE COW FARTS. DO YOU NOT DO YOU DO YOU DON'T THINK THAT THE RUNOFF AND STUFF FROM THE. I'D LIKE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE THE CHICKEN HOUSE TEXT OR. I HADN'T CALLED FOR A MOTION YET. GIVE US TIME. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE CHICKEN INTO AN ENVIRONMENTAL DISCUSSION. I DON'T EITHER. I DON'T EITHER, BUT. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE GOT AN OPINION OR THOUGHTS? ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE LIKE TO SPEAK BEFORE OR AGAINST WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE? THIS ORDINANCE UPDATE. NOW SEEING NONE NOW I'LL ACCEPT A MOTION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. WE APPROVE THE TEXT AMENDMENT HAVING TO DO WITH POULTRY, AND THAT WE ADD A PROVISION ON THE FOUNDATION SURVEY THAT BETWEEN NOW AND THE NEXT MEETING, COUNTY ATTORNEYS WILL FURTHER DEFINE THE DEFINITION, AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED, TO GO BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS. SECOND, OKAY.
MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED. I'M ASSUMING EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT.
OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. OKAY. MOTION. MOTION CARRIES OKAY. SO NOW DOWN TO OUR INTERNAL STUFF. INTERNAL. IT'S TIME TO ELECT. ELECT. SO SOMEBODY. TELL ME IF ANYBODY AM I ELIGIBLE TO BE REELECTED. IF ANYBODY WANTED TO REELECT ME BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER HOW.
ACCORDING TO THE NEW ORDINANCE, IT SAYS THE CHAIRMAN MAY NOT BE ELIGIBLE JUST AND MAY NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR SUCCESSIVE TERM. THE VICE CHAIRMAN MAY BE ELECTED. ELECTED SUCCESSIVELY.
YEAH. IT DOESN'T SAY CAN. IT JUST SAYS IT DOESN'T SAY CAN'T IT JUST SAY MAY NOT. YEAH. YOU CAN THROW ME OUT IF YOU WANT BECAUSE I'VE BEEN ONE TWO YEAR TERM OR TWO. IS THIS MY. THIS WOULD BE YOUR YOU ALREADY HAD ONE TERM SO THIS WOULD BE ONE TWO YEAR TERM. IT'S ONE TWO YEAR TERM. YES. AND I'VE ALREADY HAD THIS IS THE END OF MY SECOND YEAR TODAY. YES OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. SO Y'ALL HAVE TO DECIDE WHO WHO YOU WANT TO NOMINATE AS CHAIRMAN I'LL MAKE A MOTION. WE KEEP THE CURRENT SLATE OF OFFICERS SECOND. MOTION. NOBODY SPOKE. YOU JUMPED SO FAST. I WAS TRYING TO KEEP SOMEBODY FROM MAKING MOTION AGAINST YOU. OH, I WAS HOPING SOMEBODY WOULD. RUTH, WHO'S THE VICE CHAIR? VICE CHAIR IS CHARLES MILLIGAN, I COULDN'T REMEMBER, I JUST. YES, SANDY SAID, THE CURRENT SLATE. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE KNEW WHO THE CURRENT SLATE WAS. CHARLES, YOU WANT TO DO THIS AGAIN? I IT'S ALRIGHT WITH ME. OKAY. MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED TO RETAIN THE CURRENT SLATE OF OFFICERS. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. ALL OPPOSED? RAISE YOUR HAND. OKAY. SO Y'ALL, ANOTHER TWO YEARS NOW JUST PASSING OUT THIS THING. SINCE I'M THE NEW CHAIR. Y'ALL TOLD ME I COULDN'T APPOINT COMMITTEES A COUPLE MEETINGS AGO WHEN I TRIED TO APPOINT COMMITTEES TO DO A STUDY TO WORK WITH YOU, YOU ALL SAID, NO, YOU CAN'T APPOINT COMMITTEES. WELL, I CAN'T APPOINT COMMITTEES. AND I KNEW I COULD SO BE ON THE LOOKOUT. SO. AND I DO. CAN YOU POINT TO ME THE DISCUSSION PROCEDURES ON HOW TO RUN THIS? WHEN WE GET THE PITCHFORKS OUT THERE, I'LL SEND THAT TO YOU. IT'S ACTUALLY IS IT IN THIS IT IS SECTION. YES. IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO GO DOWN AND IT TELLS YOU HOW SHOULD GO ARTICLE B12 ADMINISTRATION. YES. YEAH. AND FIND OUT WHAT THE PROCEDURES ARE, WHAT THE HOW LONG WE'RE LETTING PEOPLE TALK AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE
[00:25:04]
BECAUSE WE NEED THAT PART IS IN THERE THAT NEEDS TO BE SAID. IT ALSO AT THE BEGINNING, IF YOU WISH TO. I WANT IT IN WRITING BEFOREHAND. OKAY. SO I'LL HIGHLIGHT IT THAT WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR AND SEND IT TO YOU OKAY. BECAUSE I SEE. TROUP COUNTY BECOME VERY CONFRONTATIONAL ABOUT SOME OF THESE THINGS COMING UP. AND I DON'T WANT TO BE, AS AN EXAMPLE, DATA MINING CENTERS AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. SO THE WAY I ACTUALLY LOOKED THAT UP FOR THE WAY THAT ORDINANCE READS IS EACH SIDE OPPOSING OR FOR IT'S NO LESS THAN TEN MINUTES AFTER THE TEN MINUTE MARK OF EITHER SIDE. IT IS UP TO YOU ON WHEN TO WHEN TO STOP THE CONVERSATION. OKAY, SO WAS THAT TEN PER SIDE OR TEN PER PERSON? TEN MINUTES PER SIDE? HOW DO THEY IF THEY'VE GOT TEN PEOPLE OVER HERE. BUT THE 11TH ONE DOESN'T WANT TO BE WITH THAT TEN PEOPLE ON THERE ON THE SAME SIDE, THEY'RE ON THE SAME SIDE, THEY'RE ON THE SAME SIDE. SO THEY'RE EITHER FOR OR AGAINST, CORRECT. FOR OR AGAINST ARE THE TWO SIDES. IT DOESN'T MATTER.THEY CAN APPOINT ONE PERSON. IF THEY DECIDE TO COME TOGETHER, THEY CAN ALL TALK. BUT ONCE THAT TEN MINUTE MARK HITS, NO MATTER WHO SPEAKS FOR THE ONE SIDE, AFTER TEN MINUTES, YOU ARE. YOU ARE THEN ALLOWED TO STOP. OKAY, YOU DECIDE ARE YOU GOING TO LET IT SPEAK OR ALLOW IT TO PROCEED, OR ALLOW IT TO PROCEED OR ALLOW IT TO PROCEED? YEAH, WELL, IT DEPENDS ON WHO'S GOT THE SHARPEST PITCHFORK THAT DAY, I THINK IS HOW THAT PRETTY MUCH GOES. BUT BASICALLY IT GIVES YOU THE POWER TO BE ABLE TO SAY WE'RE PAST TEN MINUTES OR WE'RE AT TEN MINUTES OR WHATEVER, AND THEREFORE WE'RE GOING TO END IT. SO I JUST DON'T WANT TO END UP ON YOUTUBE.
JUST NEED TO TELL THEM AHEAD OF TIME WHAT THEY GOT. WELL, THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE DO. WE KNOW WHAT WHAT WE CAN DO AND CAN'T DO AND THAT THEY KNOW IF WE SEE WE WE'VE WE HAVEN'T REALLY HAD THE PROBLEM YET. EVERYBODY'S BEEN KIND OF, YOU KNOW, CIVIL, CIVIL ABOUT IT. BUT WE'RE LOSING CIVIL DISCOURSE EVEN IN THIS COUNTY.
AND THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETINGS DURING MY TENURE HERE, WHEN THEY KNEW IT WAS GOING TO BE A CONTROVERSIAL I MEAN, THEY KNEW IT WAS BIG CROWD AND THEY KNEW IT WAS GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, PRETTY THAT THAT THAT THE CHAIRMAN HAS MANY TIMES AT THE VERY BEGINNING SAID, ALL RIGHT, HERE'S THE RULE. WE'RE GOING TO FOLLOW IT. MAKE SURE EVERYONE KNOWS IT. IF YOU WANT TO APPOINT ONE PERSON, FINE. IF YOU DON'T, JUST MAKE SURE YOU KNOW YOUR TEN MINUTES OR YOU'RE AT, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER, WE'RE GOING TO STOP IT. SO SO I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT I'VE SEEN THAT AT OTHER COMMISSIONERS MEETINGS WHERE THEY KNEW IT WAS GOING TO BE CONTROVERSIAL, WHERE THEY WENT AHEAD AND KIND OF NIPPED IT IN THE BUT AT THE BEGINNING, JUST TO LET EVERYONE KNOW WHAT THE RULE WAS. YEAH. YEAH, THAT'S IF WESLEY THAT WE'RE GOING TO LAY OUT THE RULES AND YOU'VE GOT TEN MINUTES, YOU'VE GOT TEN MINUTES. AND THEN IF NOTHING ELSE, IF ALL POINTS HAVE BEEN MADE, WE'LL CALL THE DISCUSSION AND LET THEM KNOW, YOU KNOW, YOUR TEN MINUTES IS HOWEVER YOU DECIDE TO DO IT. IF YOU WANT TO PICK ONE PERSON, GO AHEAD. IF YOU WANT TO HAVE FIVE DIFFERENT PEOPLE, GO AHEAD, BUT YOU'RE STILL AT TEN MINUTES. SO IF YOU HAVE ONE PERSON RUIN THE WHOLE TEN MINUTES, THAT'S WE GIVE THEM TIME TO HUDDLE UP AND DECIDE WHO'S GOING TO DO WHAT. ALRIGHT, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'VE SEEN THAT.
COMMISSIONERS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. ANY OTHER AGENDA ITEMS TO DO? NO, SIR. WE'RE CLOSED. YEP.
OKAY, THEN WE NEED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC MEETING, PLEASE. SECOND MOTION HAS BEEN MADE AND SECONDED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC MEETING. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND. PUBLIC MEETING IS CLOSED. AND MAKE A MOTION TO
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.