[00:00:01]
TO ORDER.[Planning Commission Regular Meeting on August 13, 2025.]
MR. TYLER AND MR. GALE.ABSENT, UM, LOOKING FOR ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY ADDITIONS OR SUBTRACTIONS TO THE AGENDA HEARING NOW MOVE THAT WE ADOPT.
I HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO ADOPT AS WRITTEN.
WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE MINUTES OF WEDNESDAY, JULY 9TH, 2025.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS? OKAY.
HEARING, MOVE THAT THE MINUTES BE ADOPTED AS PRESENTED.
I MOTION AND A SECOND TO ADOPT AS WRITTEN.
I WILL MENTION ON THE MINUTES THAT WE'RE WORKING ON GETTING BACK TO, UH, THE SUMMARY MINUTES, SO HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS YOU'LL GET MUCH MORE, YOU KNOW, SHORTER SET OF MINUTES, OKAY.
AS WE, UH, AS WE LEARN THE AI AND JUST TRY TO GET THAT BETTER FOR YOU.
I CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
SO WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND MOVE ON TO THE NEW BUSINESS.
WE HAVE A CONSIDER AUTHORIZING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT RECOMMENDATION FOR DUNCAN MANOR, LLA DASH 0 0 0 1 0 8 DASH 2 0 25.
THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, UH, LEE PBA, DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
AND THIS IS JUST A BRIEFING ON AN APPLICATION THAT WE RECEIVED ON JULY 2ND FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT.
DUNCAN MANOR IS LOCATED JUST OFF OF, UH, MARKET STREET.
SO IF YOU KNOW THE HOUSES DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE HOSPITAL, DUNCAN MANOR IS THAT SUBDIVISION DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET.
AND THE, UM, AND THE LOTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE BEHIND THOSE HOUSES THAT FRONT ON MARKET STREET.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, THIS IS THE TYPICAL, UH, TYPICAL TABLE OF INFORMATION.
THE APPLICANT IS MR. CARBAUGH WITH THE ATLANTIC GROUP.
THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR ALL OF THE LOTS IN QUESTION OR THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES RATHER, UH, IS THE OSKY GROUP.
UH, THERE ARE SEVERAL, UH, MULTIPLE TAX PARCELS, SO THEY'RE NOT ALL LISTED HERE INDIVIDUALLY.
WE WILL HAVE THOSE LISTED INDIVIDUALLY FOR THE PURPOSES OF, UH, NEXT MONTH'S PUBLIC HEARING.
IF YOU AUTHORIZE ONE, IT IS IN, UH, DISTRICT SEVEN.
CHAIRMAN PHILLIPS AND COMMISSIONER GALE ARE THE OFFICIALS OR THE, UH, ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS IN THAT DISTRICT.
THE TOTAL SITE AREA ACREAGE IS JUST UNDER 60 ACRES AT 58.59.
AND THE ZONING OF THE SITE IS A MIX OF ZONING.
SO THERE IS A BUSINESS THAT FRONTS ON, UM, THAT FRONTS ON MARKET STREET AS WELL AS THE LOTS BEHIND THERE.
ZONED BUSINESS ACROSS THE STREET ON, UH, DUNCAN MANOR ROAD IS AGRICULTURAL, AND YOU'LL SEE A MAP OF THAT HERE IN JUST A SECOND.
NOW, THE FUTURE LAND USE RECOMMENDATION IS VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AREA, WHICH, AS WE ALL KNOW MEANS HIGHER DENSITY.
AGAIN, THE REQUEST AT THIS TIME FROM STAFF IS TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING TO OBTAIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE 29 LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT.
SO THERE ARE, ARE A NUMBER OF LOTS THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THIS ONE, BUT ULTIMATELY THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE, UM, 29 LOTS, NO OVERLAYS, ADJACENT ZONING.
AGAIN, OUR BUSINESS AND AGRICULTURAL, THE SITE IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE TOWN OF ONLY, AND THE, AND THE ZONING WITHIN THE TOWN IS ALSO BUSINESS ADJACENT USES.
WE'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH MARKET STREET, BUT FOR THE RECORD, THERE IS A, UH, PREPONDERANCE OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, SOME VACANT AGRICULTURAL AND, UH, AND SEVERAL COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS.
HERE IS YOUR FIRST OF THREE MAPS.
THIS IS THE AERIAL VICINITY MAP, AND THE OUTLINE IN RED IS THE, UH, IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THERE.
SO THIS IS THE ENTRANCE TO THE HOSPITAL.
YOU CAN SEE THE HOSPITAL IN THE LOWER LEFT HAND CORNER OR SOUTHWEST OF THE, OR SOUTH OF THE SITE.
AND THIS IS THE MAIN INTERSECTION, ROUTE 13 AND, UH, AND, UH, MAIN STREET AND ONLY, AND OF COURSE IN, UH, UH, UH, OUT OF TOWN, UH, BOUNDARIES.
THIS IS THE ROYAL FARMS. UH, AND THEN THIS IS THE, UM, SHOPPING CENTER.
[00:05:01]
NO, SIR.THE OLD AIRFIELD IS ACTUALLY NORTHEAST OF THE SITE.
THIS IS THE OLD AIRFIELD HERE.
I THOUGHT IT LOOKED LIKE THE OLD AIRFIELD, BUT THE WAY IT'S LAID OUT.
THIS IS THE ZONING MAP, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, UH, WE DO HAVE SOME AGRICULTURAL HERE, BUT TO THE NORTH IS THE, UH, IS THE RECENTLY REZONED OR I GUESS REZONED LAST YEAR, COASTAL SQUARE AND RESIDENCES SITE.
SO THAT IS VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WITH PROFFERS AND, UM, UH, COMMERCIAL HERE.
SO THAT IS THE OLD, UH, BANK HEADQUARTERS.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE HOSPITAL SITE AND EVERYTHING WITH THE, WITHIN THE TOWN OF ONLY, WHICH IS DEPICTED HERE IN GRAY.
SO THAT IS NOT TO SAY THAT THAT IS A, UM, IT'S NOT AN INDUSTRIAL SITE, WHICH WOULD BE BLUE.
GRAY IN THIS CASE MEANS IT'S AN INCORPORATED TOWN, NOT SUBJECT TO OUR ORDINANCE OR OUR JURISDICTION.
AND LASTLY, FOR THE MAPS, THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE, FUTURE LAND USE MAP, AND IT IS A DESIGNATED VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AREA.
SO JUST TO RECAP, UH, WE DON'T SEE THAT HERE, BUT, UH, THE ZONE, GOING BACK TO THE ZONING MAP, THIS HATCHED AREA IN BROWN IS VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AREA.
AND YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING BASICALLY TO THE EAST OF, I'M SORRY, TO THE WEST OF THE TOWN OF ONLY IS DESIGNATED VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AREA.
I'M GONNA, WELL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND SHOW YOU, UH, THIS SLIDE HERE.
UH, THIS IS THE STREET LEADING INTO DUNCAN MANOR.
AND ALL OF THESE LOTS HERE SOUTH OF THE STREET ARE ZONED BUSINESS.
AND THEN THESE LOTS HERE ARE, ARE ACTUALLY ZONED AG.
ALL OF THESE PROPERTIES HERE ARE ALSO OWNED BY THE OSKY GROUP.
BUT IF I GO BACK TO, UH, YEAH, WE'LL GO BACK TO THIS MAP HERE BECAUSE IT SHOWS THE BUILDING FOOTPRINTS, BUT, UH, YOU CAN SEE THAT, UH, SEVERAL OF THE LOTS NORTH OF DUNCAN MANOR ARE, UH, ARE NOT OWNED BY, UH, BY THE OSKY GROUP AND ARE NOT PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
BUT THERE ARE HOUSES BACK THERE ALREADY.
SO WE THERE, SO THERE ARE ALREADY SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES BOTH TO THE NORTH OF DUNCAN MANOR AND ALONG MARKET STREET TO THE SOUTH.
THEY INTEND TO DEVELOP THIS FOR SINGLE FAMILY, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING, WHICH INTERESTING ENOUGH INTEREST, INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, IS ALLOWED IN THE BUSINESS DISTRICT BY A, BY A QUIRK OF AN S THAT SAYS SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, UH, BY SPECIAL USE PERMITS.
SO THEY WOULD ULTIMATELY HAVE TO GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN ORDER TO, UH, IN ORDER TO PUT HOUSES THERE.
NOW, THE NUMBER OF EXISTING LOTS JUST WITHIN THE, THE, UH, OUTLINED AREA IS ACTUALLY 38.
HOWEVER, THEY ARE PROPOSING, UH, 29, UH, 29 LOTS RIGHT NOW.
THOSE LOTS ARE 50 FEET IN WIDTH, BUT THEY WANNA MAKE THOSE JUST A LITTLE BIT WIDER TO MAKE IT EASIER OR TO PUT THE TYPE OF HOUSE THAT THEY WANT ON THERE.
SO, UH, SO THAT IS, THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED AN IMPROVEMENT NOW BECAUSE, UH, SEVERAL OF THESE LOTS, MOST OF THESE LOTS ARE ZONED BUSINESS.
THERE IS NO MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS, BUT THEY ARE, UH, THEY ARE, UH, INTENDING TO PUT SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS THERE.
THE STREETS WILL BE PRIVATE AND THEY WILL BE BUILT TO VDOT STANDARDS PER THE COVER SHEET ON THE, ON THE SITE PLAN.
AS FAR AS THE UTILITIES ARE CONCERNED, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER AND PUBLIC WATER IN THIS CASE IS THE TOWN OF ONANCOCK AND SEWER WILL BE SERVED BY HRSD OR THE HAMPTON ROAD SANITATION
UH, THAT'S HOW THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN.
WE'VE ALREADY DONE ONE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW, UH, EARLIER LAST YEAR, UH, FOR THE SAME DEVELOPER.
BUT, UM, WE WOULD REQUEST THAT BE AUTHORIZED FOR SEPTEMBER 10TH, AND WE WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH A FULL STAFF REPORT WITH SOME RECOMMENDED
[00:10:01]
CONDITIONS, UH, IN, IN THE NEXT PACKET.UH, JUST FOR THE RECORD, I HAVE BEEN OUT FOR THE PAST THREE WEEKS, AND UNFORTUNATELY I WAS NOT ABLE TO, UH, TO, TO TEND TO THE PACKET.
AND TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL, I DID HAVE A DEATH IN THE FAMILY, BUT I WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH, UM, WITH A FULL STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS IN THE NEXT PACKET.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION, AND I CAN TRY TO FIELD ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE AT THIS TIME.
THERE IS, IS THIS, UH, SUBDIVISION NEAR THE, UH, OLD LEY FAIRGROUND? UM, NOT BEING A LOCAL AND NOT KNOWING WHERE THE OLD FAIRGROUNDS USED TO BE.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT THIS IS THE HOSPITAL HERE.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE HASLEY FAIRGROUNDS ARE, BUT AS SOON AS YOU GO DOWN MARKET STREET, YOU PASS WHERE THE TAYLOR BANK THING IS, RIGHT? MM-HMM
SO IS THIS A DEVELOPMENT BEFOREHAND FROM WAY BACK? THESE LOTS WERE, UH, WERE RECORDED SEVERAL YEARS AGO, SO THEY'RE, THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN RECORDED.
AND WHAT THE DEVELOPER PRO PROPOSES TO DO IS TO, UM, IS TO RE SUBDIVIDE THEM INTO SLIGHTLY LARGER LOTS GOING FROM 50 FEET WIDE TO 60 FEET WIDE.
AND HE'S PROPOSING 29 TO DO THAT TO 29 LOTS, 29 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
DIDN'T GIVE YOU IDEA WHAT IT, WHAT KIND OF HOME HE WAS PROPOSING ON THAT.
BUT CHANTE, IF WE COULD ZOOM IN ON, ON ANY OF, UH, OOPS.
ON ANY OF THESE LOTS HERE, LIKE MAYBE JUST RIGHT HERE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, THE BUILDABLE AREAS, UM, ARE ALSO, UH, ARE ALSO INCLUDED.
SO THEY'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT DUPLEXES OR ANY KIND OF ZERO LOT LINE ATTACHED.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I WAS, SO THESE ARE DEFINITELY GOING TO BE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS.
IS THERE, I THINK YOU MENTIONED IT IS ZONED AS BUSINESS AS WELL AS AGRICULTURE.
IS THERE A REASON WHY THAT, I THINK IT'S THE SECTION TO THE RIGHT THAT WAS ZONED AS AGRICULTURE.
IS THERE A REASON WHY THEY DIDN'T REQUEST IT THAT BE REZONED AS BUSINESS? WELL, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE, UM, COMMISSIONER TAYLOR IS THE EXISTING ZONING, THEY'RE, THEY DO NOT, UM, ESPECIALLY FOR THESE LOTS DOWN HERE, THEY DON'T REQUIRE ANY KIND OF REZONING MM-HMM
UM, FOR THESE OTHER LOTS UP HERE.
THAT WAS NOT THE SUBJECT OF ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION THAT WE'VE RECEIVED.
AND NO ONE HAS REQUESTED A REZONING FOR ANYTHING ELSE AT THIS TIME.
BUT AGAIN, THIS IS ALL EXISTING ZONING.
ARE THEY BUILDING IN THE WHITE AREA? THE, TO THE RIGHT, THEY ARE NOT SHOWING ANY KIND OF, UM, ANY KIND OF ADJUSTMENT.
SHANTE, IF WE COULD, UM, ZOOM IN ON THIS AREA HERE.
NOW AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS VERY LIGHT GRAY LINE HERE REPRESENTS THE EXISTING LOT LINES IN THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY.
SO THIS IS THE RIGHT OF WAY RIGHT HERE.
AND AS THEY ARE ADJUSTING THE RIGHT OF WAY TO GET SOME DEPTH ON THESE LOTS, THEY'RE ACTUALLY CUTTING THESE LOTS SHORTER.
AND ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE GONNA BE PROPOSING, I'LL JUST GO AHEAD AND LET YOU KNOW THIS NOW, IS THAT THEY CAN CONSOLIDATE ALL OF THESE LOTS FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, FOR THE FUTURE, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THEY REALLY WANTED TO, I, THEY, WELL, I'M, I'M GONNA STOP RIGHT THERE AND NOT PAINT OURSELVES IN A CORNER MM-HMM
BUT, UM, UH, AS YOU CAN SEE THESE LOTS HERE, THE, THE ZONING LINE WOULD ACTUALLY FOLLOW THAT, I BELIEVE.
BUT IN TERMS OF THE SUBDIVISION, AS YOU CAN SEE, UH, IF WE COULD ZOOM IN JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE, UM, MS. RIDLEY STILL ON THIS END, OR, YEAH, THAT'S FINE.
YEAH, SO YOU CAN SEE JUST REALLY, UM, JUST VERY LIGHT WHAT THE EXISTING LOT LINES ARE DOING THROUGH HERE.
AND THESE ARE ALL 50 FOOT LOTS.
SOME OF 'EM ARE WIDER THAN OTHERS, BUT YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY GENERALLY MIRROR WHAT YOU SEE DOWN HERE THAT'S FRONTING ON MARKET STREET, 50 FOOT LOTS.
THEY WANNA MAKE 'EM BIGGER AND A LITTLE BIT LONGER DOWN HERE.
ARE THERE HOUSES IN THE ONES THAT BORDER MARKET STREET? IS THERE ANY HOUSES THERE OR ARE IT JUST BROKEN UP INTO LOTS? THERE ARE A FEW HOUSES.
[00:15:01]
THIS IS A GOOD ONE.SO YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ARE ALONG MARKET STREET.
AND WHEN YOU TURN IN HERE TO, UH, DUNCAN MANOR AND COME TO THE END OF THE STREET, UH, I BELIEVE THE STREET, LET ME GO BACK HERE.
YEAH, THE STREET ENDS RIGHT HERE.
IT, IT, IT, I THINK IT ACTUALLY, IT MIGHT END UP HERE.
CAN WE ZOOM IN RIGHT THERE? MM-HMM
THAT'S WHERE, YEAH, IT LOOKS LIKE IT ENDS RIGHT HERE.
BUT YOU CAN SEE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 HOUSES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF DUNCAN MANOR.
AND OF COURSE YOU HAVE ALL OF THESE HOUSES HERE, UM, FRONTING ON MARKET STREET.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE OBSERVATIONS HERE IS THEY WANT SINGLE FAMILY, THERE'S EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY THERE.
SO WHAT IS THE LOT SIZE THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING? SIZE ACREAGE.
IF WE COULD, UM, GO BACK DOWN HERE.
SO WE'D ACTUALLY HAVE THE FULL PLAN HERE.
UM, THEY'RE GENERALLY UNIFORM, BUT JUST ZOOM IN ON, LIKE IN THE AG SECTION.
WHAT'S THE LOT SIZE GONNA BE RIGHT HERE? YEAH.
CAN YOU ZOOM THERE? IS IT GONNA BE FIVE ACRES? ISN'T THAT THE, UM, MINIMUM IS FIVE ACRES IN AG.
RIGHT? BUT THESE WERE RECORDED LONG AGO.
WE GO BY THE RULES TODAY, RIGHT? MM-HMM
WELL, OR SHOULD THIS BE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT? WHAT WE WOULD DO IN THIS CASE, AGAIN, WITH THE, WITH THE AG SECTION, ONE OF MY CONDITIONS IS GOING TO BE THAT THEY CONSOLIDATE ALL OF THOSE LOTS IN PRACTICE.
IF THEY HAVE A NON-CONFORMING SITUATION AND THEY'RE MAKING THAT NON-CONFORMING SITUATION BETTER, BUT THEY STILL DO NOT COMPLY, WE WOULD STILL, AT LEAST FROM AN ADMINISTRATIVE STANDPOINT, ALLOW THAT YOU'RE MAKING A, YOU'RE MAKING A NONCONFORMING SITUATION BETTER.
BUT IF WE WANTED TO GO BACK TO, LET'S SEE, HOW CAN WE PUT CONDITIONS ON A PERSON THAT'S NOT GOING THROUGH REZONING OR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT? ISN'T THAT AGAINST THE RULES? HOW CAN YOU MAKE CONDITIONS ON A DEVELOPER? YOU CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AND, AND YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, BUT ARE WE MAKING CONDITIONS OR RECOMMENDATIONS? YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION.
AND IF YOU FEEL LIKE THAT SOME CONDITIONS SHOULD BE ATTACHED, WE WOULD CERTAINLY, WE WOULD CERTAINLY HEAR THOSE.
SHOULD THIS NOT BE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT? NO, THIS IS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
THIS IS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT BECAUSE HE'S DOING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS PRIMARILY IN THE BUSINESS DISTRICT, WHICH IS AGAIN, A BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ACTION.
THE DEVELOPER, IS HE NEW TO THE AREA OR ARE THEY NEW TO THE AREA? NO, SIR.
UM, MR. CARBAUGH HAS, UM, HAS COME BEFORE THIS BODY IN THE PAST.
NOW IF CONDITIONS NEED TO BE LEVIED, THEN WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT ALSO THROUGH THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AS PART OF THEIR SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
SO THERE ARE WAYS TO GET THE CONDITIONS ON THERE.
SO IN THE PAST WHEN WE RE, YOU KNOW, HAD SOMETHING ZONED BUSINESS AND THERE WAS A TRAILER OR SOME KIND OF MOBILE HOUSING ON IT, WE, WE MADE THE PEOPLE MOVE THE HOUSES BECAUSE OF THE ZONING.
WHAT, WHERE IN BUSINESS DOES IT SAY THE SINGLE? IS IT BY RIGHT.
CAN WE CLICK ON THAT LINK? YES.
UM, WHAT MS. RIDLEY'S DONE IS TAKEN US TO THE CODE SECTION THAT IS APPLICABLE.
SO IF WE SCROLL DOWN TO THE, UH, ACTUALLY NO, RIGHT HERE.
NUMBER SEVEN, RESIDENTIAL USE IS INCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, NOT AS AN ACCESSORY TO AN APPROVED USE.
SO, UH, THAT IS THE, UH, THAT IS THE CODE PROVISION.
FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE, IT SAYS SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, MEANING MULTIPLE MM-HMM
AND A A, UM, A PLAIN LANGUAGE, BLACK AND WHITE READING OF THIS CODE SECTION, UH, INDICATES THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO THIS.
HOW CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINES ARE THEY ALLOWED TO BUILD ON THIS? UH, THINGS CAN YOU SPIT OUT THE WINDOW AND HIT YOUR
[00:20:01]
NEIGHBOR OR, RIGHT.SO IF WE GO BACK TO THE, THE PLAN OR THE, THE SLIDE DECK, FIRST OF ALL, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IN THE BUSINESS DISTRICT, THERE ARE NO SETBACKS.
THAT'S WHY THERE ARE NO SIDE YARD SETBACKS IN THE BUSINESS DISTRICT.
HOWEVER, THEY ARE VOLUNTARILY, UM, THEY ARE VOLUNTARILY INDICATING, I WANNA SAY, UH, A 10 FOOT SETBACK.
SO IF YOU ZOOM IN ANYWHERE HERE, SO IT'S ACTUALLY 20 FOOT BED BETWEEN THE HOUSES, RIGHT? 10 FOOT, IT WOULD BE 20 FEET BETWEEN, UM, IT WOULD BE 20 FEET BETWEEN THE HOUSES.
SO THEY PROPOSE THIS, GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, AND WHEN THEY BRING THE FINAL PLAT AND THEY ALL ARE, UH, LESS THAN QUARTER ACRE PLOTS, AND THEY CHANGE THE DESIGN DRASTICALLY, DO WE GO BACK THROUGH THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT OR DOES THE ADMINISTRATOR JUST APPROVE, APPROVE IT? I THINK WE WOULD GO BACK THROUGH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW, PRELIMINARY PLAT, UH, UH, IF, IF THEY HAVE CHANGED IT SIGNIFICANTLY, IF THEY'VE SHORTENED THE LOTS, IF, YOU KNOW, BUT THAT WOULD BE THE, THAT WOULD BE THE PROCESS THERE.
THE FINAL PLAT HAS TO MATCH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IN THIS CASE.
A LOT CHANGING THE, CHANGING THE LOTS MEANING WHAT? SIZE WISE.
YEAH, I KNEW IT WAS IN MY HEAD.
I SO MOVE THE DEVELOPER, UH, REQUEST FOR WHAT HE'S ASKING ME.
GRANTED SECOND MOTION IS SECOND.
SO WE WILL ADVERTISE THAT FOR A WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10TH PUBLIC HEARING.
AND, UH, THAT IS A ONE PUBLIC HEARING.
THERE ARE NO SUBSEQUENT PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
THE WAY THAT THE, THE, THE WAY THAT THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN IS THAT THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD ACTUALLY BE COMING BACK TO THE SUBDIVISION AGENT WHO IS ME.
SO WOULD YOU HAVE, WHEN YOU COME BACK NEXT TIME, SOME KIND OF PICTURE OF THE HOUSE THAT'S GOING ON THIS LOT THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING? WE CAN REQUEST, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE, WE COULDN'T HOLD AS, YOU KNOW, WE, WE COULDN'T HOLD'EM TO, TO THAT IDEA.
BUT WE COULD GET A ROUGH IDEA.
I CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THAT REQUEST OF THEM.
UNLESS THEY'RE PUTTING A YEAR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S JUST SUBDIVIDED.
BUT SO THE FINAL, UM, THE PLATE DATE SHOWING WILL HAVE LIKE LOT SIZES AND STUFF? ABSOLUTELY.
LOT SIZES, EASEMENTS, ALL THE DIMENSIONS.
UM, THE, THE FINAL PLAT WOULD PROVIDE MUCH MORE DETAIL THAN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, BUT ALSO WITH THE FINAL PLAT, HE HAS TO SUBMIT A SUBDIVISION CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR HIS IMPROVEMENT OF THE ROADS, THE INSTALLATION OF WATER AND SEWER, CURB, GUTTER, UH, ANYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT.
STORM WATER, OF COURSE, GOT A CENTRAL WATERING SEW IN THAT AREA.
NOW WATER IS AVAILABLE ACROSS THE STREET AT THE HOSPITAL, AND HE'S BEEN IN CONTACT WITH PUBLIC WORKS TO FIGURE OUT A LOGICAL ROUTE FOR THE, FOR THE WATER LINE.
AND SEWER, OF COURSE, IS ALSO AVAILABLE.
DO THE ON TOP OF THE LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT, THAT IS ALREADY GOING BACK THERE, RIGHT? YES, SIR.
THIS, THE SEWERS, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS IS ALL GOING TO BE INTO MAN COX SEWERS SYSTEM, OKAY? MM-HMM
WILL THE ADJACENT LANDOWNERS BE CONTACTED FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING? YES.
GOOD WITH THAT, WE CAN MOVE ON TO
[00:25:01]
OPENING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE, DO WE NEED TO WAIT UNTIL SEVEN 30? DID YOU ADVERTISE SEVEN 30 OR SEVEN? NO, WE ADVERTISED SEVEN O'CLOCK.ALRIGHT, WE CAN OPEN UP PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 78 SUBDIVISIONS AND CHAPTER 1 0 6 ZONING REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISIONS.
UM, THESE ARE TWO PROPOSED ZONING, UH, AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS THAT, UH, WE'RE FINALLY BRINGING TO A CLOSE.
UM, MY BRIEFINGS ON THIS ARE GOING TO BE EXACTLY THAT BRIEF.
WE DID, UH, WE, WE DISCUSSED THESE OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS, AND OVER THE, OVER THE PAST, I WANNA SAY, WELL, LAST MONTH WE PROVIDED THE, THE FINAL LANGUAGE THAT INCLUDED, UH, THAT, THAT, THAT INCLUDED COMMENT FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.
AND ALL OF HER COMMENTS HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO, UH, BOTH SETS OF THESE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS.
SO AGAIN, WE'RE, WE'RE HOLDING TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS TONIGHT, AND I'LL JUST TAKE THESE ONE AT A TIME.
THE FIRST ONE IS WITH REGARDS TO THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISIONS.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE MAIN THING ABOUT THE CURRENT DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION IS THAT IT DEFINES A SUBDIVISION OF SPLITTING ONE LOT INTO THREE.
AND THAT HAS CAUSED THE STAFF PROBLEMS IN TERMS OF NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE ALL OF THE SUBDIVISION PLA THAT ARE BEING RECORDED IN THE COURTHOUSE.
SO WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS WE'RE, WE'RE CLOSING A, A, A LOOPHOLE AND, UH, AND, UM, THE MAIN THING ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT IS TO, UH, CHANGE THAT AS A SPLIT FROM ONE LOT INTO TWO OR MORE LOTS.
AS I PREVIOUSLY PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS PROVIDED ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE, WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN INCORPORATED IN THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS IN YOUR PACKET THIS MONTH, AS WELL AS LAST MONTH.
THAT CONCLUDES THE STAFF'S REPORT.
ON THIS, I CAN FIELD ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ON THIS AMENDMENT.
UM, IT SAYS THE VISION OF ONE SUCH CLUSTER LOT SHALL BE SHOWN ON REC AND RECORDED PLAT AND APPROVED BY THE COUNTY.
SO THE COUNTY, IF YOU HAVE CLUSTER LOTS AND YOU WANNA PICK ONE OFF AND MAKE IT DIFFERENT, THE COUNTY APPROVES IT THAT YOU DON'T NEED A, UM, ACTUAL ENGINEERING TYPE DRAWING OR, UH, A SURVEY.
LIKE IF YOU HAD FIVE ACRES AND YOU WANTED TO DROP IT, YOU KNOW, THE CLUSTER LOT SEEMS LIKE IT'S MORE LENIENT THAN TO THE REST OF THE RESIDENTS.
AND THE, THE POINT BEHIND CLUSTER LOTS IS TO INCENTIVIZE OPEN SPACE.
NOW, WHAT IT SAYS HERE IS THAT, UM, THAT CREATING A CLUSTER LOT WILL REQUIRE A SURVEY.
SO WE'VE GOTTA SEE THAT BEFORE IT'S RECORDED IN THE COURTHOUSE.
BUT CLUSTERING IS A, IT'S, UM, IT'S A TRADITIONAL KNOWN AND, UH, WIDELY USED TECHNIQUE, NOT JUST HERE, BUT ELSEWHERE IN VIRGINIA, IN THE COUNTRY, TO WHERE IF WE INCENTIVIZE SMALLER LOTS, THEN INSTEAD OF HAVING FIVE ACRE LOTS, MAYBE THEY COULD HAVE A SERIES OF THREE, UH, UH, 30,000 ACRE OR 30,000 SQUARE FOOT LOTS, EXCUSE ME.
UH, AND THAT WOULD PRESERVE MORE OPEN SPACE.
SO THE CLUSTER LOTS WOULD BE MORE IN A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, OR DO SUBDIVISIONS HAVE CLUSTER LOTS DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE SUBDIVISION CLUSTER.
LOTS COULD ALSO, WE'VE, WE'VE ACTUALLY APPROVED SEVERAL ADMINISTRATIVELY OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S GENERALLY AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS WITH THE NUMBER OF LOTS THAT FOLKS ARE TRYING TO SUBDIVIDE.
SO ANYWHERE FROM, YOU KNOW, UH, 10 OR BELOW IS JUST AN INFORMED GUESS.
OF COURSE, I CAN GET YOU MORE SPECIFICS ON THAT, BUT WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY SIGNIFICANT MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S REVIEW, UH, WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT.
UH, MOST OF THEM ARE, ARE SMALL IN SIZE AND THEY'RE JUST LOOKING TO, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, THEY'RE JUST LOOKING TO GET SOME SMALLER LOTS.
THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.
AGAIN, IT IS INTENDED TO INCENTIVIZE OPEN SPACE.
[00:30:02]
WE CAN CERTAINLY PROVIDE SOME, UH, SOME GRAPHICS AS TO HOW THAT WORKS, IF YOU WERE, IF YOU'RE MORE INTERESTED IN THAT.BUT BASICALLY WHAT THIS IS DOING IS, UM, SO HERE ON LINE TWO 19, NUMBER NINE, CLUSTER LOTS, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY COPYING WHAT IT SAYS IN THE AG, UM, ZONING PROVISIONS AND JUST PUTTING THAT HERE.
NOW, IS THERE A DIFFERENCE THE BETWEEN, UH, SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND PUBLIC SEWER SYSTEMS ON THESE KINDS OF CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS? YOU KNOW, DEFINITELY.
SO YOU'RE NOT TYPICALLY GONNA SEE A 30,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT IN AN AREA THAT IS SERVED BY SEPTIC BY, WELL, I WAS GONNA SAY BY PUBLIC WATER OR SEWER.
UM, UH, 30,000 SQUARE FEET IS STILL PLENTY ENOUGH SQUARE FOOTAGE TO ACCOMMODATE A SEPTIC TANK AND DRAIN FIELD AND HAVE THE SEPARATION FROM A WELL.
UM, BUT JUST WHAT I'VE JUST OBSERVED ANECDOTALLY WITH LOTS THAT ARE, THAT ARE CLOSER INTO AREAS WITH PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER, UM, THOSE LOTS ARE GONNA BE MUCH SMALLER THAN 30,000 SQUARE FEET.
UH, CLUSTERING IS TYPICALLY A, AN AGRICULTURAL TECHNIQUE OR A, A TECHNIQUE THAT'S USED IN AGRICULTURAL OR RURAL AREAS FOR OPEN SPACE.
THAT'S THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE.
WE CAN OPEN IT UP TO ANYBODY SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE CAN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, I GUESS, AND YOU WANNA, ANYBODY WANNA MAKE A MOTION? WHAT YOU'RE, WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS RECOMMEND, AND BY THE WAY, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.
UM, WHAT YOU'RE DOING AT THIS POINT IS RECOMMENDING OR NOT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
AND, AND YOU NEED A MOTION TO THAT? YES.
I SO MOVE MADAM CHAIR, UH, WHATEVER THAT LANGUAGE IS.
SO YOU MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE, UH, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS? YES.
AND WE HAVE A SECOND, I'LL SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND.
DO YOU WANT ME TO WAIT ON THIS? OKAY.
WHO MADE THE MOTION? UH, MISS, UH, COMMISSIONER ROGERS UHHUH.
AND WHO MADE THE SECOND MR. SPARKMAN, COMMISSIONER SPARKMAN.
AND THAT WAS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL? YES.
HAVE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
SO WE WILL OPEN UP THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING FOR AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 1 0 6 ZONING REGARDING THE PERIODS OF VALIDITY FOR CERTAIN APPROVALS.
THANK YOU AGAIN, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
UH, THIS NEXT PUBLIC HEARING IS FOR IN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, UH, ESSENTIALLY SETTING HOW, UH, YOU KNOW, HOW LONG CERTAIN APPROVALS ARE, ARE, UH, GOOD FOR THE BIG ONE THAT, THAT THE STAFF HAS BROUGHT TO YOU IS THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES NOT SPECIFY HOW LONG A SITE PLAN IS GOOD FOR.
NOW, STATE CODE INDICATES FIVE, UH, UH, FIVE YEARS, AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING FIVE YEARS TO BE PUT IN OUR ORDINANCE JUST TO MIRROR THAT.
UM, WE COULD ALWAYS DEFER TO STATE CODE, BUT IT'S BETTER IF WE HAVE IT IN OUR OWN ORDINANCE SO THAT WE CAN BE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT.
AND WE CAN ACTUALLY PUT THAT EXPIRATION DATE IN, UH, IN APPROVAL LETTERS.
AND ON THE, UH, AND ON THE SITE PLAN, IS THIS COMMON PRACTICE, LEE, I MEAN, FIVE YEARS IS A COMMON PRACTICE THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF VIRGINIA.
FIVE YEARS IS TYPICAL BECAUSE IT DOES COME DOWN FROM STATE CODE, OKAY? MM-HMM
THE WAY THAT IT HAD BEEN HANDLED PREVIOUSLY BY MY PREDECESSOR WAS BY POLICY.
BUT THAT KIND OF THING REALLY NEEDS TO BE, UM, UH, HARD CODED INTO THE ORDINANCE RIGHT NOW.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, UH, IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE, UM, WE'VE HAD THE QUESTION ABOUT THE TIMING OF THE, UH, OF THE PUBLIC NOTICES, RIGHT? SO I WANTED TO MAKE
[00:35:01]
SURE NOW THAT WE'RE ALL TOGETHER TO, TO COVER THAT.NOW, WHAT I HAD DONE LAST MONTH WAS TO ESSENTIALLY START FROM THE ULTIMATE DATE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH AS WE ALL KNOW, IS THE SECOND WEDNESDAY OF THE MONTH.
AND, UH, WHAT STATE CODE SAYS NOW IS, OR ACTUALLY WHAT OUR ORDINANCE SAYS NOW IS, UH, OH, HANG ON, IS, UH, 10 DAYS BEFORE THE, UH, 10 DAYS BEFORE THE, UM, THE PUBLIC HEARING.
THAT'S NEWSPAPER NOTICE, NEWSPAPER NOTICES, RIGHT? UH, AND ALSO WHAT WE HAD WHEN WE FIRST STARTED ALL OF THIS, WE HAD MENTIONED FIVE DAYS, BUT CODE OF VIRGINIA NOW SAYS THAT WE CANNOT HAVE ANY ADVERTISEMENTS WITHIN SEVEN DAYS OF THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO THAT'S WHAT THIS RED BAR IS, IS SEVEN DAYS BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
NOW, ON TOP OF THAT IS A, UH, IS A REQUIREMENT WHERE IT SAYS DOWN HERE, THE LOCAL PLANNING COMMISSION SHALL NOT RECOMMEND, UM, NOR THE GOVERNING BODY ADOPT ANY PLAN, ORDINANCE, OR AMENDMENT THEREOF UNTIL NOTICE OF INTENTION TO DO SO, HAS BEEN PUBLISHED TWICE IN SOME NEWSPAPER PUBLISHED, OR HAVING GENERAL CIRCULATION IN THE LOCALITY WITH THE FIRST NOTICE APPEARING NO MORE THAN 28 DAYS BEFORE.
AND THE SECOND NOTICE APPEARING NO LESS THAN SEVEN DAYS BEFORE THE DATE OF THE, UH, MEETING REFERENCED IN THE NOTICE.
SO AGAIN, UH, WHEN WE GO HERE, THAT'S THE SEVEN DAYS RIGHT THERE.
THAT'S, YOU KNOW, WE CANNOT ADVERTISE ANY LESS THAN SEVEN DAYS FOR THAT, UM, UH, FOR THAT SECOND NOTICE.
AND THEN THAT FIRST NOTICE, UH, CANNOT BE MORE THAN 28 DAYS BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IN GREEN IS OUR ADVERTISING WINDOW AND ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER NOTICE WINDOW.
OH, I DON'T SEE THAT UP THERE.
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LETTERS ARE MAILED, OKAY? MM-HMM
WHAT DATE, HOW MANY DAYS PRIOR IS THAT? BECAUSE THIS IS FIVE, WE GENERALLY TRY TO, UH, PUT THE ORDER IN FOR THE, FOR THE NEWSPAPER NOTICE AND SENDING OUT THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LETTERS AT THE SAME TIME.
IF WE'RE LUCKY, THEN THOSE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WILL READ THE LETTER BEFORE THEY READ THE NEWSPAPER.
BUT THE INTENT THERE IS TO GET THOSE BOTH ORDERED AT THE SAME TIME, ORDERED AND SENT OUT AT THE SAME TIME.
SO THIS IS A TWO STEP PROCESS.
THE SECOND ONE YOU'RE RECOMMENDING 10, RIGHT? IS THAT WHAT I'M GETTING FROM THIS? WELL, WE'RE, WE'RE JUST RECOMMENDING THAT WE FOLLOW STATE CODE ON THIS, WHICH STATE CODE SAYS AGAIN, UM, UH, FIRST NOTICE APPEARING NO MORE THAN 28 DAYS BEFORE, WHICH MEANS ALL OF THESE DAYS HERE, WE COULDN'T ADVERTISE BEFORE.
THIS IS 28, EXACTLY 28 DAYS BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THEN THIS IS SEVEN DAYS BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO AGAIN, EVERYTHING THAT'S IN GREEN IS OUR WINDOW FIRST NOTICE APPEARING NO MORE THAN 28 DAYS BEFORE SECOND NOTICE APPEARING NO LESS THAN SEVEN DAYS BEFORE.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO ILLUSTRATE HERE.
OKAY? BUT I THOUGHT YOUR RECOMMENDATION WAS 10 DAYS.
IT, WELL, IT, IT, THAT'S WHAT IT SAID IN THE ORDINANCE.
THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS IN THE ORDINANCE.
NOW, THEN IN THE, IN THE, I'M TRYING, I'M NOT TRYING TO CONFUSE YOU HERE, BUT WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, EVEN LAST YEAR, UH, IT WAS FIVE AND THEN, AND THEN THE LEGISLATURE CAME UP WITH SEVEN, WHICH MAKES SENSE TO US.
HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A QUIRK BECAUSE THE NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION ON THE EASTERN SHORE IS ONLY PUBLISHED ON, YOU KNOW, ONCE A WEEK ON FRIDAYS, ONCE A WEEK, RIGHT.
SO TWO, WE'LL GIVE YOU TWO WEEKS.
SO, UH, THIS RIGHT HERE WOULD BE OUR SECOND NOTICE, WHICH WOULD ACTUALLY APPEAR 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 DAYS BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
IF, IF WE HAD A, A DAILY NEWSPAPER OR ONE THAT WAS PUBLISHED THREE TIMES A WEEK OR TWICE A WEEK, EVEN MAYBE ON TUESDAYS AND FRIDAYS, WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET IN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER.
BUT THIS IS WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE USING THIS TO TRY TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT OUR WINDOW IS
[00:40:01]
AND WHEN WE ARE REQUIRED JUST BY CIRCUMSTANCES OF A, A NEWSPAPER CIRCULATION AND PUBLICATION THAT WE HAVE TO PUBLISH, UM, A LITTLE BIT EARLIER THAN MOST.BUT WE DO HAVE A LONG WINDOW TO, TO ADVERTISE IT, TO SEND OUT NOTICES.
SO MY QUESTION IS, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YES, MA'AM.
SO ONLINE YOU WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FIVE DAYS.
THE FIVE DAYS IS ONLY FOR, UH, CERTIFIED LETTERS BY MAIL, BY THE DEVELOPER.
IN THIS PROCESS, YOU SEND OUT THE LETTERS.
SHOULD WE NOT PUT IN HERE WHAT WE DO AND, AND INTO THE PROCESS.
THE PROCESS IS YOU PUT 'EM OUT 20 DAYS AHEAD OF TIME.
THIS CODE SHOULD SAY THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S OFFICE OR WHATEVER, OR WHOEVER SENDS OUT THE NOTICE 20 DAYS PRIOR, NOT FIVE DAYS IN CERTIFIED MAIL, WHICH MAY NOT GET THERE.
SO FIVE DAYS JUST ISN'T ENOUGH.
I WOULDN'T THINK SO WITH THE MAIL NOWADAYS, NO.
SO ONLINE, WHICH LINE ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? 5 84.
SO IT'S PAGE ANGELA, UH, 14 OR 15 ON THE BOTTOM, BUT IT'S LINE 5 84.
IT'S FOR THE CERTIFIED LETTER.
I THINK IT STARTS, UM, 5 79 IS WHERE, YOU KNOW, NOTICE SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL TO THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS OF EACH SUCH OWNER.
SO WHAT I'M DOING IS READING, STARTING AT LINE 5 76, JUST GIVE ME A MINUTE TO MM-HMM
GO THROUGH THIS WHOLE SECTION HERE.
ALL THAT SAYS IS THAT, UM, OKAY.
NO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITHIN FIVE DAYS OF ANY SUCH.
NOTICE IF WE HAVE IN, IN MY OPINION, IF WE HAVE, IF WE ARE CON, IF WE HAVE SENT OUT NOTICES WITHIN, IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S NOTICE SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL AS IT READS.
THIS IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT, HOW STATE CODE READS.
BUT WE ARE, WE ARE NEVER GOING TO, WE ARE, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO RUN AFOUL OF THIS CODE PROVISION BECAUSE WE SEND NOTICES MUCH EARLIER THAN THIS.
WELL, I'M JUST SAYING STATE CODE JUST ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH.
RIGHT? FIVE DAYS IS NOT ENOUGH TIME FOR SOMEBODY TO GET A CERTIFIED LETTER, TAKE OFF WORK, COME TO A PUBLIC HEARING.
IT'S JUST, IT'S JUST NOT AT LEAST MM-HMM
AND THAT'S WHY WE SEND 'EM OUT TWO WEEKS IN ADVANCE.
OKAY, WELL, LET'S PUT 14 DAYS CHANGE.
SEE FROM, YEAH, I DON'T WANNA HOLD YOU TWO TO 14 DAYS, BUT 10, I MEAN 10 WAS IN THERE.
BUT I DON'T, SHE'S SAYING THAT'S DUMB, NOT, OKAY.
I ONLY KEEP BRINGING IT UP BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I GOT CERTIFIED MAIL ONE TIME AND DIDN'T READ A NEWSPAPER.
IT'S OKAY TO RECOMMEND THAT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 14 DAYS IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ARE.
ARE YOU GOOD WITH 14 DAYS? DOES THAT PUTS YOU IN A BIND? 14 DAYS? IF THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING HERE, UH, ON THE, WHAT IS THAT? APRIL 9TH FOR EXAMPLE MM-HMM
SO WE'RE GONNA SAY RIGHT HERE, THAT'S SEVEN, THAT'S 14 RIGHT THERE.
I WOULD STILL LEAVE IT UP TO OUR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES TO HANDLE THAT BECAUSE WE ALMOST ALWAYS, I MEAN, WE ALWAYS SUBMIT THOSE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER LETTERS AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE DO MM-HMM
[00:45:01]
SO WE ARE NEVER GOING TO RUN AFOUL OF THAT IF WE, IF WE STAY TRUE TO OUR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES.NOW, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A STRICTER TIMEFRAME AND WRITE IN 14 DAYS, THEN AND CERTAINLY RECOMMEND THAT TO THE, TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
I'M JUST SAYING THAT OUR ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES WOULD NEVER, UH, WE WOULD NEVER RUN AFOUL OF THIS, UH, OF THIS FIVE DAYS.
'CAUSE I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
THAT, UH, STATE CODE MIGHT IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S IN THIS COMMISSION'S OPINION WOULDN'T BE GOOD ENOUGH IF WE WERE TO EVER BE THAT LATE NUMBER ONE.
I WOULDN'T FEEL REALLY GOOD ABOUT IT BECAUSE I THINK THAT AT THAT POINT WE HAVE, UH, WE HAVE VIOLATED SOME OTHER SECTION OF THE, UH, OF THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.
BUT AGAIN, WE ALWAYS SEND THESE A PO LETTERS OUT THE SAME TIME THAT WE ADVERTISE IN THE NEWSPAPER.
WHICH REQUIRES US TO, TO DO THAT AT LEAST 14 DAYS IN ADVANCE.
WHEN YOU'RE IN CHARGE, YOU MAKE THE RULES, BUT MM-HMM
WHEN SOMEBODY ELSE COMES ALONG AND, AND IF YOU GET THAT, YOU KNOW, GRAVY JOB SOMEWHERE ELSE, YOU KNOW, AND SOMEBODY ELSE COMES IN HERE AND THEY SAY, I GOT FIVE DAYS RIGHT.
IS, IS EVERYBODY ELSE IN AGREEMENT? YOU KNOW, MORE DAYS FOR THAT.
COULD IT STAY UP TO 14 DAYS? WOULD THAT COVER IT INSTEAD OF JUST SPECIFICALLY FIVE OR TWO? IT COULD SAY UP TO 14 DAYS, SAY UP.
I WAS GOOD WITH 10, BUT YOU KNOW, OR I JUST, YOU KNOW, FIVE IS JUST VERY TIGHT.
SO I DO HAVE YOU TALKING ABOUT TIME.
I THINK 10 WOULD BE REASONABLE.
I, AS THE PROPERTY, ADJACENT PROPERTY UNDER QUESTION TO BE NOTIFIED PROPERLY.
SO WOULD THAT CHANGE YOUR OFFICE IS ISSUING THE LETTERS, WOULD THAT DATE CHANGE IF YOU DON'T SIMULTANEOUSLY NOW? NO, SIR.
SO THE OTHER NOTICES THAT, THAT WELL, GOING IN THE NEWSPAPER, WOULD THAT BE SIMULTANEOUS TO THE LETTER THAT YOU SENT OUT? IF IT'S 14 DAYS? 14 DAYS WOULDN'T CHANGE OUR ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES.
AND WE HAVE THOSE WRITTEN DOWN SO WE COULD PASS THOSE DOWN TO, UH, YOU KNOW, FUTURE PLANNERS AND, AND THE ADMIN ASSISTANTS TO, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE DOING THAT.
AND WE WOULD EVEN HAVE, WE COULD EVEN HAVE A FOOTNOTE IN THERE SAYING, LOOK, YOU KNOW, THIS IS, THIS IS STATE CODE, THIS IS WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS RECOMMENDED BACK IN 2025.
AND, UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WILL SAY IS THAT AKIMA COUNTY TAKES PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS VERY SERIOUSLY.
THIS IS A PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS, UH, UH, PROVISION.
SO IF WE MESS THIS UP, THEN WE HAVE ACTUALLY ADDED A MONTH TO THE ENTITLEMENT PROCESS OR THE REZONING PROCESS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, BECAUSE WE CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT APPLICATION WITH A FAULTY NOTICE REQUIREMENT OR, OR NOTICE.
THE DANGER HERE ISN'T, OH, THE, THE APPLICATION COMPLETELY GOES AWAY.
THE DANGER HERE IS IT'S DELAYED A MONTH WHILE WE ADVERTISE AND DO EVERYTHING CORRECTLY THE WAY WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THE FIRST TIME.
OR YOU WANNA DO 14? LIKE UP TO 14? YEAH, I LIKE TO 14.
THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR? NOPE.
I, UH, WHERE'S THE MOTION AGAIN?
WE'VE GOT A MOTION WRITTEN OUT FOR YOU.
YEAH, BUT YOU'D HAVE TO PUT THAT IN THERE UP TO 14.
IF YOU PUT UP TO 14, THEN YOU, IT KIND HAS TOO MUCH LEEWAY.
UNLESS YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT 14 DAYS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING.
YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT BEFORE, RIGHT MR. PAM.
UH, I GUESS WE'RE DISCUSSING 14 DAYS OR WERE YOU GONNA PUT UP TO 14 DAYS? 'CAUSE I GUESS UP TO 14 DAYS WOULDN'T WORK.
'CAUSE YOU NEED A, YOU NEED A DEFINED DATE DAY.
I MEAN, ON THE, UM, LINE 5 84, ARE YOU GONNA PUT WITHIN 14 DAYS? WITHIN 14 DAYS? OKAY.
UM, NOT TO, NOT TO CLOUDY OR, OR NOT TO MUDDY THE WATERS HERE, UHHUH, BUT I THINK 10 WOULD
[00:50:01]
ALSO BE, NOW I KNOW IT SAYS 10 HERE.UM, WE'LL JUST GO WITH WHATEVER YOU WANNA RECOMMEND.
IF YOU WANNA RECOMMEND 14 DAYS, WE'LL WE'LL FORWARD THAT ONTO THE, UH, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
IS EVERYBODY COMFORTABLE WITH 14 DAYS? IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE PROCESSING.
THIS GIVES MORE TIME TO THE HOMEOWNERS.
REALLY? NEIGHBORS AND THE MAIL SYSTEM.
UH, OKAY, I'M JUST WAITING FOR YOU GUYS.
THAT'S THE ONLY, IF THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE.
IN YOUR STAFF REPORT, THERE IS A RECOMMENDED MOTION.
OF COURSE YOU'D HAVE TO MENTION THE, THE CHANGE TO LINE 5 84 OR SECTION 1 0 6, 2 34 1 E WHAT PAGES, HERE'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MOVE THAT THE ACK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER.
SO I GUESS IT'D BE, YEAH, YEAH.
I'M SORRY, MY HANDWRITING RIGHT HERE.
SUBSECTION ONE E TO, TO CHANGE THAT FROM FIVE DAYS TO 14 DAYS.
YEAH, BUT THIS IS, WE'RE AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 78.
WE'RE NOT IN THAT PUBLIC HEARING RIGHT NOW.
YOU TALKING ABOUT THE SECOND PART.
SO I DO SKIP OUT THE 78 AND JUST DO CHECK, UM, THIS ONE WAS FOR SECTION 78 4 78 9 AND THEN CHAPTER 1 0 6.
SO WHERE YOU THE VALIDITY OF CHANGE APPROVAL? MM-HMM
YOU WANT ME JUST READ THE WHOLE THING? GO HERE.
IT MAKES IT, THIS IS THE AMENDMENT THAT JUST OVER.
SO THIS IS WHAT WE JUST WENT OVER.
I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE, THAT THE AKIMA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 78 TITLED SUBDIVISION SECTION 78 DASH FOUR AND 78 DASH NINE AND CHAPTER 1 0 6, SECTIONS 1 0 6 THROUGH 2 2 6 AND 1 0 6 DASH 2 3 4 AND 1 0 6 DASH 2 3 5 AS PRESENTED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE AKIMA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WITH CORRECTIONS TO LINE 5 84, SECTION 1 0 6 DASH 2 3 4 OKAY.
TO CHANGE FROM FIVE DAYS TO 14 DAYS.
ALRIGHT, MOVE ON TO THE STAFF REPORT.
UM, SUBDIVISION AGENT, WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED DUNCAN MANOR.
UH, THE 116 LOTS WERE REFERENCED IN HERE WAS FOR ALL THE LOTS THAT WERE SHOWN IN THE SITE PLAN THAT WEREN'T SUBJECT TO THIS.
UH, WE'RE, WE ARE STILL GONNA STICK WITH THE 29 LOTS THOUGH.
SO, UH, THAT IS, WE'VE ALREADY COVERED ALL OF THAT.
[00:55:01]
AND THEN FOR THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR REPORT, UH, YOU HAVE HERE, UH, WHAT THE BZA HAD DONE LAST WEEK.THEY'VE APPROVED FOUR SPECIAL USE PERMITS.
THEY'VE GRANTED ALL OF THEM WITH CONDITIONS.
A LOT OF THEM ARE FOR, UH, WELL ONE OF 'EM WAS FOR A TRAVEL TRAILER.
AS YOU CAN SEE, NEXT MONTH IN SEPTEMBER.
ON SEPTEMBER 3RD, THEY WILL BE CONDUCTING, UH, FIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS, FOUR OF THEM DEALING WITH TRAVEL TRAILERS.
THE DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT.
UM, AGAIN, I AM BACK FROM AN EXTENDED ABSENCE.
AND, UH, IN TERMS OF STAFFING, WE HAVE SEVERAL APPLICATIONS IN FOR, FOR OUR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER POSITION.
AND, UM, HOPEFULLY WE WILL CONDUCT THOSE INTERVIEWS WITHIN, UH, NOT NEXT WEEK, BUT THE WEEK AFTER THAT.
WE ALSO STILL HAVE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR POSITIONS OPEN AS WELL.
OTHER THAN THAT, I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER ITEMS TO REPORT FROM, FROM STAFF.
QUESTION ON YOUR, IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, PROMOTE FROM WITHIN TO FILL THE, UH, INSPECTOR UH, POSITIONS? OR IS THAT TOO WE'RE WE'RE PRETTY, UH, OUR BENCH IS PRETTY SHORT THERE, UNFORTUNATELY.
SO WE'VE GOT TWO INSPECTORS RIGHT NOW, AND THEY'RE BOTH, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE OBVIOUSLY BOTH WORKING THE ROAD AND THEY'RE DOING PLAN REVIEW AND THEY'RE ALSO STUDYING FOR CERTIFICATIONS.
UM, EVERYBODY ELSE IS ALREADY TASKED.
YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT ADMIN ASSISTANTS, WE'VE GOT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT A PLANNER TWO IF YOU WANT TO COUNT ME.
UH, UH, WHERE WE'RE ALSO REALLY THIN IS IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS, BUT WE'RE STILL GETTING IT DONE.
WE STILL HAVE THE RESOURCES TO ACCOMPLISH THE MISSION.
HOWEVER, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, UM, VICE CHAIR, WE UNFORTUNATELY DON'T HAVE ANYBODY ELSE WHO COULD KIND OF STEP IN ON, ON STAFF.
NOW WE DO HAVE A LINE ON A, UM, ON A, UH, A CONSULTANT THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE SOME OF THOSE SERVICES ON A TEMPORARY BASIS.
WE HAVE DONE THAT BEFORE, YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF TONIGHT? ALL RIGHT.
OUR NEXT MEETING IS SEPTEMBER 10TH AND WE CAN HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.