[00:00:01]
COUNTY,[Board of Zoning Appeals on June 3, 2026.]
UH, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS.I CALL TO ORDER OUR MEETING FOR JUNE 3RD, 2026.
I'M GONNA ASK OUR PRESENT MEMBERS IF YOU WOULD, UH, INTRODUCE YOURSELF, UH, AS WE PREPARE TO CALL FOR COURT.
UH, WE DID WANT TO SAY IF WE HAVE FOLK OUTSIDE, IF YOU'RE HERE FOR, UH, THE BATTERY CASE, THAT WILL BE THE VERY LAST CASE.
AND SO IF YOU WANNA STEP OUT FOR JUST A MOMENT BECAUSE, UH, I THINK WE HAVE SOME FOLK OUTSIDE WHO DO HAVE CASES THAT MAY NEED A SEAT.
UM, AND IF YOU ARE ALREADY SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, UH, OTHER THAN, UH, THOSE WHO ARE PRESENTING CASES, YOU'LL BE LIMITED TO FOUR MINUTES.
AND SO WE ASK THAT YOU WOULD GET WHAT YOU GOTTA SAY CONCISE SO THAT WE CAN HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY FOR US.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE AGENDA AS PRINTED? I BELIEVE THERE BE MOTION BE AS DOCTOR WAS PRESENTED.
UH, WE WILL PROCEED WITH THE AGENDA AS PRINTED.
WE DO WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR BEING HERE TODAY, AND THE STAFF MEMBERS WILL, WILL INTRODUCE THEMSELVES AS THEY HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP, UH, OUR MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE, UH, BEFORE WE HAVE A MOTION TO RECEIVE THOSE, MR. CHAIRMAN? YEAH, I DID READ THE MINUTES.
UM, I SEE A FEW MINOR CORRECTIONS, BUT I, THOSE, WOULD THAT BE APPROVED? OKAY.
UH, THEY HAVE BEEN APPROVED AT THIS TIME WE'LL AS SYN IT TO COME FORTH, UH, THAT HE MIGHT PRESENT OUR FIRST CASE AS WE'RE MOVE TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
UH, THOSE OF YOU THAT DON'T KNOW ME, MY NAME'S, UH, GIN JONES.
I'M A CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR ZONING.
UM, WE'RE JUST GONNA GO RIGHT INTO THE FIRST CASE.
THIS IS N CAM M PROPERTIES, LLC VARIANCE 58 20 26, SINCE A FLOODPLAIN VARIANCE.
UM, ON YOUR, UH, IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU HAVE A LETTER FROM, UH, MR. SHERMAN, UM, THE ATTORNEY THAT'S, UH, DEALING WITH THE VARIANCE CASE ON BEHALF OF VAN KM, HE HAS REQUESTED ANOTHER CONTINUANCE TO THE JULY BCA HEARING.
UM, AS FAR AS THE COUNTY'S CONCERNED, WE'RE READY TO PROCEED.
OKAY, MR. CHAIRMAN? UH, WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE REQUESTS FOR CONTINUANCE AND I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DECLINE ALLOWING IT TO CONTINUE.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? SECOND? I'M HERE ON EVERY BEHALF.
SO WE ARE PREPARED TO MOVE FORWARD.
BUT, UH, THEY ARE REQUESTING A CONTINUANCE.
I TAKE THIS WELL, UH, CINDY, DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING BEFORE? BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD, THEN WE WILL HEAR IT AND THEN HEAR YOU WHEN IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO SPEAK.
KIND OF BASED ON THE CONTINUANCE AND WHY THEY WANTED IT CONTINUED.
UH, THE REASON THEY WAS ASKING FOR A CONTINUANCE WAS BECAUSE THAT, UM, WE'RE NOW IN THE PROCESS, UH, OF COORDINATING WITH THE COUNTY AND WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING THE BUILDING DESIGN.
I MEAN, THE BUILDING PLANS, UPDATING ALL THOSE, WE HAVE A REQUEST OF WHAT THEY WANTED TO THE COUNTY, UH, BAY ACT.
THEY WANTED SOME PLANS FOR THE HOUSE TO BE SUBMITTED.
UH, AND WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF HAVING ALL THIS DONE.
UH, WE DID SUBMIT FOR THE BUILDING APPLICATION AND ALL OF THIS, UM, AND THEY WERE JUST, UH, ASKING FOR A CONTINUANCE ON COOPERATION.
OKAY, MR. CHAIRMAN, SINCE THEY HAVE TAKEN THE EFFORT TO SEND SOME REPRESENTATION, I'LL, UH, REMOVE MY MOTION.
WELL THEN, THEN WE WILL HEAR, WE WILL HEAR FROM THE COUNTY, AND THEN WE WILL, UH, ACT ON THAT MOTION.
UH, MR. PITT'S HERE IN PLACE OF, UH, MR. SHERMAN.
UH, THIS IS AT, UH, 2 4 0 7 0 TALL PINES DRIVE OUTSIDE OF AN C**K.
AND IT'S TAX PARCEL 83 C DASH ONE DASH 23.
AND, UH, LOT 22, UH, ACRES IS APPROXIMATELY HALF AN ACRE.
UH, THE ZONING IS AGRICULTURAL AND THE REQUEST IS FOR, UH, FLOODPLAIN VARIANCES.
FUTURE LAND USE RECOMMENDATION IS AG AND THE CURRENT AND
[00:05:01]
PROPOSED USES ARE BOTH RESIDENTIAL.UM, ADJACENT ZONINGS ARE AG AND ADJACENT USES ARE SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS.
SO THIS IS THE SITE THAT IS THE ZONING, ZONING DESIGNATIONS, AG, UH, FUTURE LAND USE IS ALSO AG.
UH, THIS IS THE FLOODPLAIN, UH, LAYER, AND IT SHOWS SIX BFE, SO IT ISN'T A FLOOD ZONE.
AND THIS MAP'S KIND OF MISLEADING.
SO THIS, THIS RED LINE THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY THE START OF THE RPA.
THE RPA STARTS WELL BACK OF IT.
SO THE RPA LINE POTENTIALLY STARTS FROM HERE AND GOES BACK.
THERE IS A DECK ON THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY THAT DOES APPEAR TO BE IN THE RPA.
HERE IS A SITE PLAN OF EXISTING CONDITIONS.
AND THESE ARE SOME, UH, PHOTOS OF THE SITE.
THIS IS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THIS IS THE, THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
SO WE'LL GO INTO, UH, ZONING ORDINANCE CONSIDERATIONS.
UH, FIRST ONE IS, UH, 1 0 6 360 9 1, WHICH IS ANY MODIFICATION, ALTERATION, REPAIR, RECONSTRUCTION, OR IMPROVEMENT OF ANY KIND TO A STRUCTURE AND OR USE LOCATED IN ANY FLOODPLAIN AREAS TO AN EXTENT OR AMOUNT OF LESS THAN 50% OF ITS MARKET VALUE SHALL CONFORM TO THE VIRGINIA USBC IN THIS ARTICLE.
AND, UH, 1 0 6 360 9 2, WHICH IS THE MODIFICATION, ALTERATION, REPAIR, RECONSTRUCTION, OR IMPROVEMENT OF ANY KIND OF STRUCTURE AND OR USE, REGARDLESS OF ITS LOCATION IN A FLOOD PLAIN AREA, TO AN EXTENT OR AMOUNT OF 50% OR MORE OF ITS MARKET VALUE, SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN ONLY IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THIS ARTICLE AND SHALL REQUIRE THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE TO CONFORM TO THE VIRGINIA USBC AND THIS ARTICLE.
SO NOW WE'RE GONNA GET INTO CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE APPLICATION.
UH, NUMBER ONE, UH, STRICT APPLICATION SLASH UNREASONABLE RESTRICTION VERSUS ALLEVIATING HARDSHIP.
THE FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE DICTATES THE ELEVATION AND OTHER FLOOD RELATED ELEMENTS OF THE BUILDING BEING CONSTRUCTED.
AND THE APPLICANT CAN COMPLY WITH THESE REQUIREMENTS.
THE APPLICANT DOES NOT WANT TO DO SO WITH THE PROBABLE REASON OF COST.
UH, NUMBER TWO, GOOD FAITH ACQUISITION AND NOT A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP.
UH, NO, THE HARDSHIP WAS CREATED BY THE APPLICANT.
IT WAS THE APPLICANT'S DECISION TO RENOVATE THE STRUCTURE WITHOUT THE PROPER PERMITS AND RENOVATE THE STRUCTURE SUCH THAT IT NEEDS TO BE ELEVATED.
A BUILDING PERMIT WAS REQUIRED FOR STRUCTURAL ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING AND OTHER WORK.
AND IF THE APPLICANT HAD APPLIED FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, THE APPLICANT WOULD'VE BEEN ADVISED OF THE ELEVATION.
REQUIREMENT NUMBER THREE, SUBSTANTIAL DETRIMENT TO ADJACENT PROPERTY AND NEARBY PROPERTIES IN THE PROXIMITY OF THAT GEOGRAPHICAL AREA.
RESPONSE IS, YES, A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 1 0 6 360 9 0.1 WOULD MEAN THE COUNTY DOES NOT ENFORCE THE FREE BOARD REQUIREMENTS OF THE ORDINANCE.
THE COUNTY PARTICIPATES IN FEMA'S COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM PROGRAM HAS A CLASSIFIED AS A CLASS FIVE COMMUNITY QUALIFIED POLICIES IN UNINCORPORATED AKIMA COUNTY BENEFIT FROM A 25% REDUCTION IN THEIR FLOOD INSURANCE PREMIUMS. PART OF THIS SAVINGS IS A RESULT OF THE FREE BOARD REQUIREMENT.
THE COUNTY HAS AGREED TO IMPLEMENT FEMA REVIEWS, COMPLETED PERMITS FOR COMPLIANCE, AND SHOULD THEY FIND THE COUNTY IS NOT PROPERLY APPLYING, IT'S AGREED UPON HIGHER STANDARDS THAT DISCOUNT CAN BE REDUCED OR TAKEN AWAY UNTIL SUCH TIME, FEMA DETERMINES THE COUNTY IS PROPERLY IMPLEMENTING ITS ORDINANCE.
A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 1 0 6 360 9 2 WOULD MEAN THE COUNTY IS NOT EVEN ENFORCING BASIC FEMA MINIMUM STANDARDS OR THE BUILDING CODE.
IN ADDITION TO THE IMPACT FROM THE REDUCTION OF LOSS OF THE CRS DISCOUNT, FEMA MAY TAKE STEPS TO SUSPEND THE COUNTY FROM THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM.
BEING SUSPENDED FROM THE NFIP WOULD MEAN NEW FLOOD INSURANCE POLICIES AND UNINCORPORATED MACK WOULD NOT BE ISSUED, AND EXISTING POLICIES WOULD NOT BE RENEWED.
NO FEDERAL GRANTS LOANS OR MORTGAGE INSURANCE FOR DEVELOPMENT COULD BE MADE IN SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS.
THIS COULD POTENTIALLY IMPACT EVERY PROPERTY OWNER IN A FLOOD ZONE AND UNINCORPORATED IN AKIMA COUNTY AND NOT JUST THE APPLICANTS.
I DO WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO NUMBER ONE.
SO, UH, BASICALLY FINANCIAL HARDSHIP, THE COST OF DOING SOMETHING IS, IS NOT, IS NOT A BASIS THAT IS RECOGNIZED.
SO JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING COSTS 100, 200, $300,000, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED WHEN APPLYING FOR A VARIANCE.
NUMBER FOUR, GENERAL RECURRING NATURE TO AMEND ORDINANCE TO ALLEVIATE SITUATION.
THIS REQUEST IS SPECIFIC TO THIS CASE.
NUMBER FIVE, RESULT IN A USE NOT OTHERWISE PERMITTED OR PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE REZONED.
[00:10:01]
NO, THE PROPERTY OR THE USE OF THE PROPERTY FOR A RESIDENTIAL HOME WOULD NOT BE AFFECTED.AND NUMBER SIX, IS THE REMEDY SOUGHT AVAILABLE THROUGH SPECIAL EXEMPTION? AND THE ANSWER THERE IS NO, THERE IS NO OTHER PROCESS AVAILABLE TO HANDLE THIS REQUEST.
I JUST WANNA SAY, I KNOW THAT THREE'S LONG.
WE DO HAVE THE PERSON THAT MANAGES THE FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE AND HE CAN PROBABLY EXPLAIN IT BETTER THAN ME.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT SPECIFICALLY, WE HAVE THE GUY UTILITIES.
UTILITIES ARE ON TALL PINES DRIVE.
THERE IS AN EXISTING WELL IN SEPTIC ON THE PROPERTY.
UH, TALL PINES DRIVE IS A PRIVATE STREET.
UM, WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER POOR IS, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO GRAVEL.
IT'S JUST A PATH THROUGH THE GRASS TO GET TO THIS PROPERTY, BASICALLY, I WOULD ASSUME AT ONE POINT THERE WAS SOME SORT OF, SOME SORT OF BASE LAYER, SOME SORT OF A GRAVEL DRIVE, BUT THAT IS NO LONGER, THAT APPEARS TO EITHER BE LACKING OR JUST NON-EXISTENT ENVIRONMENTAL.
THE PROPERTY AND THE STRUCTURE ARE LOCATED IN A SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA THAT'S SIX BFE.
AND PART OF THE STRUCTURE IS LOCATED IN RPA THAT IS SPECIFIC TO WHAT WE BELIEVE IS THE WOOD DECK, UH, NOTICES WERE PROVIDED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND TO ADJACENT OWNERS PER STATE LAW.
AS A PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT, NO PUBLIC COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AND WE GO INTO STAFF FINDINGS.
THE APPLICANT HAS RENOVATED A STRUCTURE IN A FLOOD ZONE AND PARTIALLY IN A RESOURCE PROTECTION AREA WITHOUT APPLYING FOR PERMITS AND BEING ISSUED A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THESE RENOVATIONS.
MACK COUNTY CODE SECTIONS 1 0 6 360 9 1 AND 360 9 2 DEAL WITH RENOVATIONS TO A STRUCTURE THAT ARE IN A FLOOD ZONE.
UH, NUMBER THREE, THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PROPERTY ARE OVER 50% OF ITS, UH, RENOVATION ASSESSMENT.
UH, NUMBER FOUR, THE BCA AFFIRMED THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DETERMINATION THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS WERE OVER 50% OF ITS MARKET VALUE.
AND OF COURSE, THIS IS A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, STAFF USUALLY DOES NOT MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON VARIANCES.
HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT HAS NOT MET THE REQUIRED THRESHOLD TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE.
ALSO, UNDER VIRGINIA LAW OF FINANCIAL HARDSHIP IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFY THE ISSUANCE OF A VARIANCE.
HOWEVER, IF THE BCA WERE TO APPROVE THIS VARIANCE, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
UH, NUMBER ONE, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE TO THE COUNTY A COMPLETE BUILDING APPLICATION WITH ALL THE RENOVATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE AND ARE PROPOSED.
UH, NUMBER TWO, THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE RELEVANT, UH, HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF VDOT REQUIREMENTS.
NUMBER THREE, THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE RELEVANT RPA REGULATIONS THAT RELATES TO THE STRUCTURE.
NUMBER FOUR, THE APPLICANT SHALL ALLOW THE COUNTY TO MAKE REGULAR INSPECTIONS OF THE PROPERTY UNTIL A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS ISSUED.
NUMBER FIVE, THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS IN ACK COUNTY ZONING ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 1 0 6 AS IT RELATES TO FLOOD PLAIN REGULATIONS.
AND NUMBER SIX, A VIOLATION OF ANY OF THESE CONDITIONS SHALL RENDER THE VARIANCE NULL AND VOID.
I CAN TRY AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE MR. PITTS HERE AND ALSO CLUB PLAY MANAGERS.
UH, IS THERE ANY REASON THAT WE SHOULD NOT, UH, ADHERE TO THE REQUEST THAT WE PUT THIS OFF BEING THAT LEGAL REPRESENTATION CANNOT BE HERE TILL JULY AND WE HAVE A LETTER BEFORE US? I, I WOULD SAY THAT'S YOUR DECISION.
YOU KNOW, THE ONLY THING, I'M JUST ON YOUR PART.
I MEAN, IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO US DOING THAT? AND THEN I WANT TO HEAR FROM MR. PITTS AS WELL.
I MEAN, WE RECEIVED THE REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE.
WE MADE NO REPRESENTATION THAT WE WOULD TAKE ANY POSITION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
AND WE WOULD JUST LEAVE IT TO YOUR DISCRETION TO, TO, UH, GRANT OR, OR, OR DENY THE REQUEST.
I KNEW YOU GUYS WANTED TO PRESENT IT.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR GIN? HE'S KIND OF BROUGHT US UP TO WHERE, WHERE WE ARE WITH THIS BEFORE WE HEAR FROM MR. PITTS AND HIS REQUEST TO.
YOU HAVE, THEY HAVE IN SUBMITTING THINGS, UM, AS FAR AS WE KNOW, THEY HAVE, WE NOW HAVE A, UH, BUILDING APPLICATION THAT'S PENDING.
UM, AS FAR AS I'M AWARE, I'M NOT AWARE OF THE STATUS OF THAT, WHETHER IT'S BEEN ISSUED OR NOT.
IS THAT NOT BEEN, WAS THAT NOT REQUESTED? LIKE 90 DAYS AGO? IT DID IT, UH, LONGER THAN 90 DAYS AGO, TECHNICALLY.
I CAN ADD TO THAT PAUL WATSON, UH, HEAD OF BUILDING ZONING.
UM, WE DID RECEIVE A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION FROM NKM.
IT WAS CERTAINLY NOT COMPLETE.
UM, AND WE'VE ISSUED, WE ISSUED COMMENTS ON THAT, UH, MONDAY, UH, QUITE A LONG LIST OF COMMENTS, THINGS THAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE US, UH, TO MAKE THE BUILDING APPLICATION COMPLETE.
UM, I MEAN, WE'VE RE WE REQUESTED A
[00:15:01]
BUILDING APPLICATION.GOSH, UH, UH, 15, NOT EXACTLY SURE WHEN, BUT PROBABLY ABOUT 15 MONTHS AGO.
UM, ANYTHING ELSE LIKE MR. PITTS, WOULD YOU, AND WOULD YOU PRESENT YOUR REQUEST AGAIN AND THEN WE'LL DEAL WITH THAT? UH, I WASN'T HERE ON THE BASIS OF THE BARRS, UH, BUT I WILL SAY IF WE DID TRY TO APPLY FOR AVAILABLE PERMIT 15 MONTHS AGO AND WE WAS TOLD NOT TO SUBMIT IT, IT WOULDN'T BE APPROVED.
AND I'LL LEAVE THAT TO THE ATTORNEY AND EVERYTHING.
BUT WE DO HAVE THIS LIST HERE, AND THIS LIST HERE IS, UH, UH, IT'S NOT AS SENTENCE THAT IT SEEMS TO BE, UH, THE BUILDING PART IS THE BIGGEST PART OF IT.
UH, I JUST GO IN, WE'LL CUT OUT SOME.
UH, I'VE BEEN ON THE FIRST INSPECTION WITH MR. JACOB.
WE WENT THROUGH, WE FOUND SOME THINGS, I DID A DRAWING FOR HIM AND HE HAD SOME OTHER COMMENT AT THAT TIME.
I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WAS JUST PUT ON HOLD.
SO NOW WHEN WE RESUBMITTED, THEY CAME WITH THIS LIST.
I'VE TALKED TO MR. JACOB, UM, WE'RE GONNA GO OUT, I'M GONNA GO OUT, I'LL CUT, UM, DRYWALL OR WHATEVER NEEDED, EVEN ON THE BUILDING PLANS, THEY HAVE SUGGESTED THAT WILL RAISE THE, UM, AIR CONDITIONING UP TO THE, UM, RIGHT STANDARD.
SO WE'RE TRYING TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE, UM, THE THINGS THAT'S NEEDED IN THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS.
THE RPA, UH, WHAT HE SHOWED ON THE MAP, UH, I DID IT FOR A LONG TIME.
MOST OF THE WHOLE HOUSE IS IN THE RPA, IT'S JUST WHETHER OR NOT IT'S IN THE LANGUAGE SIDE OR THE SEAWARD SIDE, UH, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
UM, BUT OTHER THAN THAT, NOW WE FALL INTO THE RAMS OF THE FLOOD, UH, UH, THE VARIANCE.
AND I'M NOT HERE TO HANDLE THAT.
YEAH, I I JUST WANT YOU TO SPEAK ON IT.
WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN TO COMPLY WITH THE FIRST TWO.
DID ANYONE GET A CHANCE TO READ, THOUGH? OKAY.
DID ANYONE HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. PITT? OR, I'M SORRY.
MY, MY QUESTION IS, DO WE STILL HAVE TO VOTE ON THE CONTINUANCE? YES.
I WOULD SAY TO KEEP IT CLEAN, YOU SHOULD PROBABLY VOTE ON THE CONTINUANCE.
AND THEN IF THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IF THE CONTINUANCE IS DENIED, THEN WE MOVE ON TO VOTING FOR THE ACTUAL CASE ITSELF.
WE, BECAUSE THAT THIS WAS PRESENTED FIRST.
IT'S, IT'S MY OPINION THAT THIS HAS GONE ON, YOU KNOW, LONG ENOUGH AND WE'VE HAD DELAYS.
THIS IS A COMPANY THAT, THIS IS NOT THEIR FIRST, UH, CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.
AND ALL OF THIS WOULD'VE BEEN AVOIDED IF THEY HAD JUST GOTTEN A BUILDING PERMIT FROM THE GET GO.
UM, THEY WOULDN'T BE HERE RIGHT NOW IF THEY'D JUST GOTTEN A BUILDING PERMIT.
AND THAT'S CONSTRUCTION 1 0 1.
ARE YOU READY TO MAKE A MOTION ON YEAH.
ACCEPTING THE, AYE, THE I'M I'LL MOVE THAT.
DO I HAVE A SECOND ON IT? SECOND.
SO, WE'LL, WE'RE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL.
SO NOW WE GO TO THE, UH, RECOMMENDED MOTION.
UM, THERE ARE TWO, AND AGAIN, THE FLOODPLAIN MANAGER CAN EXPLAIN THIS BETTER THAN I CAN.
BUT, UH, ONE, ONE MOTION IS FOR, UM, ONE MOTION IS FOR THE WHOLE HOUSE HAVING TO BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE.
AND THE OTHER MOTION IS FOR THE GARAGE THAT WAS TURNED INTO LIVING AREA BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE.
YOU READY? A QUESTION? SO DOES THAT MEAN IF YOU VOTE YES ON THE FIRST ONE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO EVEN VOTE ON THE SECOND ONE? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
WELL, ACTUALLY IT WOULD BE, UM, IF IT WOULD BE THE OPPOSITE.
IF THE, IF YOU VOTED TO APPROVE THE SECOND ONE, YOU WOULD NOT NEED TO VOTE TO APPROVE THE FIRST ONE BECAUSE WE WOULD, THAT WOULD BE THE WHOLE HOUSE.
UH, TOM BROKE BRICK FLOOD PLAN ADMINISTRATOR.
I THINK FROM MY PERSPECTIVE IT WOULD BE BOTH.
BECAUSE IF YOU DENY HIM HAVING TO DO THE WHOLE HOUSE, THAT'S, UH, THAT'S RELATED TO THE SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT THAT Y'ALL ALREADY SAID.
IT'S A SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT THAT THE WHOLE HOUSE
[00:20:01]
WOULD HAVE TO BE BROUGHT UP INTO COMPLIANCE OUTSIDE OF THAT SECTION.ONE IS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION AS OPPOSED TO THAT CONVERSION OF THE SPACE THAT STILL OUT THERE AS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE TO CORRECT STANDARDS AND IT WASN'T.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF, IF THE COUNTY'S ATTORNEY HAS AN OPINION ON THAT, YOU KNOW, OR, OR NOT.
THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
JIM PROCTOR, COUNTY ATTORNEY HERE ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY AND THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
UH, I AGREE WITH MR. BROCKEN BROWN THAT YOU SHOULD ACTUALLY TAKE VOTE ON BOTH AND IT WOULD PROBABLY BEGIN WITH THE ENTIRE HOUSE AND THEN THE SECOND VOTE BEING ON JUST THE GARAGE.
ANY QUESTIONS? ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY.
I'LL BE READY TO MOVE FORWARD.
SO IT'D BE HANDLED IN THE ORDER THAT THEY'RE, SO IT WOULD TECHNICALLY BE HANDLED IN, WE WOULD DO THE, THIS ONE FIRST BECAUSE THAT SAYS ALLOW FOR THE ENTIRE DWELL DWELLING TO BE RENOVATED.
SO WE WOULD START WITH THE SECOND ONE.
I MOVE THAT TO AIMA COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, DENY VR 0 0 0 0 5 8 DASH 2026 IF VARIANCE PURSUANT TO AKIMA COUNTY CODE SECTION 1 0 6 DASH 3 6 9 2 TO ALLOW FOR THE ENTIRE DWELLING TO BE RENOVATED WITHOUT NEEDING TO COMPLY WITH THE FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE ON TAX PARCELS 83 C DASH ONE DASH 23 IN 83 C DASH ONE DASH 22.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT AS A POINT OF ORDER? YOU SHOULD PROBABLY HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AS WELL AS ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WANTS TO GIVE COMMENT.
THAT THERE WAS NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE, FOR THE FIRST ONE, BUT IF THE APPLICANT AND HE SAID HE'S, WELL, YEAH, HE SAID HE BEEN A LITTLE BIT PROBLEM WITH IT, SO I'LL, I'LL GO SPEAK ON IT AFTER I, I CAN'T, I DO UNDERSTAND, UH, THE WHOLE HOUSE BEING RAISED AND, AND THE COST OF IT.
I DO UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THE HOUSE WAS PART OF THE RPA PRIOR TO THAT THE, UM, GARAGE WASN'T, AND I'LL MEAN, AND I'LL TELL YOU THE, UH, AIR CONDITIONER WASN'T, BUT THERE WERE THE TWO FEES THAT REALLY COST THE PRICE TO GO UP.
AND I JUST LIKE THE COUNTY SAID, THOSE AREAS ARE THE AREAS IN QUESTION WHICH STARTED A WHOLE BALL OF WAX.
BUT, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT GETTING THE BUILDING PERMIT, UM, I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR A LONG TIME AND, UH, RAISING A WHOLE HOUSE AND I UNDERSTAND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE COST.
YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS AND THE, WHAT FEMA SAID, I SPOKE TO FEMA LONG WHEN THIS PROCESS FIRST STARTED AND WHAT THEY SAID, AND, UH, IT REALLY DOESN'T, UM, THAT AREA.
UH, I THINK IT'S, IF I'M CORRECT, UH, IT'S ALRIGHT.
I THINK IT'S MAYBE 1.3 FEET THAT NEED TO BE RAISED UP, UH, IN THAT AREA.
IN THE, YOU KNOW, THE AREA THAT WAS DEVELOPED, UH, THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE, IT WAS JUST PAINTING AND ADDING NEW EQUIPMENT, BUT WHEN YOU ADD THAT SECTION OF THAT GARAGE, IT KICKS THE PRICE.
BUT THAT'S THE ONLY AREA THAT I WOULD SAY ABOUT THAT WHOLE HOUSE THAT I ACTUALLY IN THE RPA IN THE FLOOD ZONE.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES ANY BEARING OF HOW YOU DECIDE THIS OR HOW YOUR BOARD DECIDES, BUT THAT'S WHAT I DO KNOW.
WE'VE, WE'VE HEARD THE MOTION.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THE MOTION? I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.
AND THEN, UM, THE SECOND PART, YEAH, I WOULD JUST, JUST TO BE SURE, WE MIGHT AS WELL VOTE ON, ON THIS JUST TO MAKE SURE OUR BASES ARE COVERED.
THE ACK COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DENIED VA R 0 0 0 0 5 8 DASH 2026 A VARIANCE PURSUANT TO AKIMA COUNTY CODE SECTION 1 0 6 DASH 3 6 9 1 TO ALLOW FOR THE GARAGE TO BE RENOVATED INTO LIVING SPACE WITHOUT NEEDING TO COMPLY
[00:25:01]
WITH THE FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE ON TAX PARCELS 83 C DASH ONE DASH 23 AND 83 C DASH ONE DASH 22.DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? I'LL SECOND THAT.
OKAY, WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT YEP.
SO, UH, THIS IS, UH, MR. JOHN MORRISON.
THIS IS SUSE 0 0 0 0 5 9 20 26.
AND THIS IS AN OFF-PREMISES ADVERTISING SIGN.
UH, MR. MORRISON IS THE APPLICANT.
THE PROPERTY OWNER IS, UH, THE OSKY GROUP.
UH, LOCATION IS THE 2300 BLOCK OF MARKET STREET, WHICH IS TAX MAP NUMBER 90 3D DASH A DASH TWO B.
ACREAGE IS APPROXIMATELY 26 ACRES ZONED AGRICULTURAL FUTURE LAND USE.
RECOMMENDATION IS VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AREA.
UM, THERE IS A SECTION OF GENERAL BUSINESS WHICH WE'LL SEE, UH, CURRENT PRO, UH, CURRENT PROPOSED USE.
UM, IT'S A VACANT AGRICULTURAL AND IT APPEARS THAT IT'S GONNA STAY THE SAME.
UM, ADJACENT ZONING IS A GENERAL BUSINESS IN AG AND ADJACENT USES IS A VACANT LAND AND A MIXTURE OF SOME SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES IN THE AREA.
THIS IS THE PROPERTY, UH, THIS IS FOR, FOR BEARINGS AND HANCOX OVER HERE ONLY IS OVER HERE.
UM, THE LOCATION OF THE SIGN IS APPROXIMATELY HERE IN THE GENERAL BUSINESS PART OF THE PARCEL.
AND THEN THERE'S AG IN THE BACK.
THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOWING A VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AREA, NOT IN A FLOOD ZONE.
THERE IS RPA IN THE REAR OF THE PARCEL.
HOWEVER, UH, WHERE THE SIGN IS GOING TO GO, THERE WILL NOT BE RPA.
UM, THIS ISN'T AFTER THE FACT, SO THE SIGN IS ALREADY THERE.
UM, THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
AND THIS IS MARKET STREET GOING BACK TOWARDS, UH, ONLY, AND THIS IS MARKET STREET GOING TO AN C**K.
AND THIS IS, UH, SITE PLAN SHOWING 15 FEET FROM THE ROAD.
IT IS THOUSANDS OF FEET BETWEEN PROPERTY LINES, PRETTY MUCH IN THE CENTER OF THAT PARCEL.
UM, USER ZONING ORDINANCE CONSIDERATIONS THAT DEAL WITH, UH, SIGNS.
UM, I WILL QUICKLY GO THROUGH ONE OR TWO OF THEM.
UH, BUSINESS SIGN MEANS A SIGN WHICH DIRECTS ATTENTION TO A PRODUCT, COMMODITY OR SERVICE AVAILABLE ON THE PREMISES.
AND THEN A GENERAL ADVERTISING SIGN MEANS A SIGN WHICH DIRECTS ATTENTION TO A PRODUCT, COMMODITY OR SERVICE, NOT NECESSARILY CONDUCTED, SOLD, OR OFFERED UPON THE SAME LOT WHERE SUCH SIGN IS LOCATED.
UM, THESE ARE THE FIVE, UH, WAYS THAT A SIGN CAN BE, UH, DONE BY WRIGHT.
UH, BEING AS THOUGH THIS IS AN OFF-PREMISES SIGN, IT IS NOT A USE BY WRIGHT, AND WE HAVE TO COME HERE FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
SO, CONSIDERATIONS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS.
UH, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, YES, GENERALLY ADVERTISING SIGNS NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, NUMBER TWO, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT PUBLIC UTILITIES, UH, NO ADVERSE IMPACT WILL RESULT.
THE INSTALLATION OF A SIGN DOES NOT AFFECT PUBLIC UTILITIES.
UH, NUMBER THREE, WELL PROPOSED USE WILL FACILITATE THE PRESERVATION AND CREATION OF AN ATTRACTIVE AND HARMONIOUS COMMUNITY.
UH, GENERALLY OFF-PREMISES ADVERTISING SIGNS DO NOT FACILITATE THE PRESERVATION AND CREATION OF AN ATTRACTIVE COMMUNITY.
THESE SIGNS ARE PROFITABLE FOR THE OWNER AND USER OF A SIGN AT THE EXPENSE OF THE ATTRACTIVENESS.
UH, NUMBER FOUR, WHETHER THE PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT THE ENVIRONMENT OR HAS OR SCENIC HISTORIC AND WATERFRONT AREAS, UH, NO ADVERSE IMPACT WILL RESULT.
THE PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED NEAR ANY OF THESE AREAS.
NUMBER FIVE, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT PROPERTY RIGHTS AND VALUES OF ADJOINING AND NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS.
UM, FOR THIS CASE, BECAUSE OF THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BETWEEN PROPERTY LINES, WE WOULD SAY NO ADVERSE IMPACT IS ANTICIPATED.
UH, NUMBER SIX, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE.
UM, THIS USE WILL NEITHER HINDER NOR PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE.
NUMBER SEVEN, WHETHER PROPOSED USES IN CONFORMANCE WITH GOOD ZONING PRACTICE AND WITH STATE AND LOCAL LAWS, ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS.
UM, THE NATURE OF OFF-PREMISES SIGNS IS UNLIMITED, ALLOWING OFF-PREMISES SIGNAGE HAS POTENTIAL OF ALLOWING THOUSANDS OF SIGNS THAT COULD AFFECT THE COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY.
[00:30:01]
WHETHER GRANTING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT WITH OR WITHOUT CONDITIONS IS JUSTIFIED BY PUBLIC NECESSITY OR CONVENIENT.GRANTING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS NOT JUSTIFIED BY PUBLIC NECESSITY OR CONVENIENCE.
UM, UTILITIES, UM, WE DO NOT SEE ANY IMPACT TO UTILITIES.
UH, MARKET STREET IS A STATE MAINTAINS SECONDARY ROADWAY, UM, AND I WOULD CONSIDER IT IN GOOD CONDITION.
AND THEN A PUBLIC COMMENT, UH, NOTICES WERE PROVIDED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND TO ADJACENT OWNERS PER STATE LAW.
AS A PREPARATION OF THIS SLIDE DECK, NO PUBLIC COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED.
UH, WE GO INTO STAFF FINDINGS, THERE ARE TWO.
UH, THE SIGN WILL BE ADVERTISING SERVICES THAT ARE NOT BEING PERFORMED ON THE PARCEL, THE SIGN IS CONSTRUCTED ON.
AND NUMBER TWO, OFF-PREMISES ADVERTISING SIGNS DO NOT GENERALLY FACILITATE AND ATTRACTIVE OR HARMONIES COMMUNITY.
ALSO GRANTING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS NOT JUSTIFIED BY PUBLIC NECESSITY OR CONVENIENCE.
SO WE'LL GO TO STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.
UH, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF, UH, SUSE 59 20 26.
UM, THIS SUP IS FOR OFF-PREMISES ADVERTISING AS OPPOSED TO ON-PREMISES ADVERTISING.
ON-PREMISES ADVERTISING IS LIMITED BY ITS NATURE AND THAT YOU CAN ONLY ADVERTISE ON THE PARCEL THAT THE BUSINESS OPERATES OFF-PREMISES.
ADVERTISING IS UNLIMITED IN ITS NATURE AS POTENTIALLY EVERY PARCEL IN THE COUNTY COULD HAVE OFF-PREMISES ADVERTISING.
THEREFORE, GRANTED THIS TYPE OF SUP WERE PERMIT WOULD LEAD TO THE AVAILABILITY OF ADVERTISING ON EVERY PARCEL IN THE COUNTY.
UM, AND THEN IN ADDITION, THERE ARE MANY SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS IN THE COUNTY THAT ARE CURRENTLY VACANT AND ADDING MORE SIGNAGE, ADD SIGN SUPPLY WHERE DEMAND IS NOT CURRENTLY PRESENT.
HOWEVER, IF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS APPROVES THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WE RECOMMEND THE FOUR CONDITIONS.
UH, NUMBER ONE, THE APPLICANT SHALL OBTAIN AN AFTER THE FACT BUILDING PERMIT FROM THE COUNTY'S BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
THE APPLICANT SHALL ALSO COMPLY WITH RELEVANT VDOT AND HEALTH DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS.
UH, NUMBER TWO, THE BUILDING APPLICATION SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THIS ONE.
NUMBER THREE, THE SIGN SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO FALL INTO DISREPAIR.
AND NUMBER FOUR, THE IMMEDIATE AREA AROUND THE SIGN SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED WHILE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS ACTIVE.
THIS IS THE MOTION I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
I THINK MR. MORRISON'S HERE AS WELL, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR SENATOR MR. MORRIS? ARE ARE YOU HERE, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH US? WOULD, YES.
WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME? JOHN MORRISON.
DO YOU, DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH ON ALL MATTERS BEFORE US TODAY? I DO.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE WITH US? OH, UM, I'M REPRESENTING MALLARD, THE SIGNED OWNER, I GUESS.
UH, I AM THE OWNER OF MALLARDS, ONE OF THE OWNERS.
UM, WE'VE HAD A SIGN ON MARKET STREET ACROSS THE ROAD, AND I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL EVER NOTICED IT GOING DOWN THERE, SAME SIGN.
UH, BUT THE OWNER OF THAT PROPERTY IS PREPARING TO SELL THE PROPERTY.
SO SHE ASKED US, YOU KNOW, TO PREPARE FOR THAT, UH, EVENTUALITY.
SO WE MOVED IT ACROSS THE STREET WITH PERMISSION OF THE OWNER.
UH, DIDN'T REALIZE AT THE TIME THAT IT WOULD BE A, SINCE WE ALREADY HAD A PERMIT TO HAVE THIS SIGN, DIDN'T REALIZE THAT IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION TO MOVE IT ACROSS THE STREET, REALIZE THAT NOW.
UM, BUT, UH, OF COURSE THE SIGN WILL BE KEPT IN GOOD REPAIR.
AND WE'VE HAD IT, UH, ON MARKET STREET FOR OH, 15 YEARS WITH YOUR APPROVAL.
UM, SO WE WOULD JUST ASK THAT YOU LET US CONTINUE, UM, TO ADVERTISE OUR BUSINESS.
ANY QUESTION, MR. MORRIS? SO IT'S BEEN THERE 15 YEARS, THE, THE OTHER LOCATION APPROXIMATELY? YEAH.
HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN IN THIS CURRENT LOCATION? PARDON ME? HOW LONG IN THIS CURRENT LOCATION? UM, I'D SAY ABOUT SIX MONTHS.
AND THE, THE OSKY GROUP GRANTED PERMISSION? YES.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR, UH, MR. MORRIS? OKAY, THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
IF NOT, I THINK, UH, LEE WOULD LIKE TO SHARE SOME SOMETHING WITH US.
LEE PAM, A DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
I'M ALSO THE DESIGNATED ZONING ADMINISTRATOR BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO, UM, FIRST OF ALL, UH, SUPPORT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OF A DENIAL.
BUT IN TERMS OF THE CONDITIONS, UH, WHEN WE PREVIOUSLY HEARD A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN OFF-PREMISES SIGN ALONG THAT SIDE OF MARKET STREET WITH THE ANDREA ZUBER SIGN, IF YOU RECALL THAT CASE FROM A FEW MONTHS AGO, WE HAD ADDED A CONDITION AT THAT POINT THAT, UH,
[00:35:01]
REQUIRED THE SIGN TO COME DOWN SHOULD THE PROPERTY BE, UH, SHOULD THE PROPERTY BE DEVELOPED.SO WHAT I'D JUST LIKE TO LET THE BOARD, UH, THE BZA KNOW AT THIS TIME IS THAT, UH, AS MR. GALE, WHO ALSO SITS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, KNOWS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE STAFF ARE CURRENTLY, UH, CONSIDERING THE DUNCAN MANOR MIXED USE CASE.
SO BASICALLY WHAT THIS IS, IS A, UM, IF I GO BACK TO THE, TO THE, UM, YEAH, THIS IS A, A GOOD MAP RIGHT HERE.
SO DUNCAN MANOR IS A MIXED USE, UM, PROPOSAL FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT, UH, ALSO ENCAPSULATES SOME OF THE OTHER LOTS ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF DUNCAN MANOR ON INTO THESE SEVERAL LOTS HERE.
BASICALLY, MY POINT IS THAT THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL UNDER, UH, UNDER CONSIDERATION NOW.
AND WHILE THE STAFF IS DEFINITELY CORRECT IN THAT, UH, IT IS CURRENTLY USED FOR AGRICULTURE AND, UH, FOR THE TIME BEING, IT WILL MOST LIKELY BE USED FOR THAT.
AND WE CERTAINLY AGREE WITH THAT, THAT THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL.
PART OF THAT PROPOSAL IS FOR A LANDSCAPED BERM ALONG THIS PORTION RIGHT HERE.
SO, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD CERTAINLY ENHANCE THE ENTRANCE COMING INTO AN C**K, BUT THE PRESENCE OF ANY OFF-PREMISES SIGNS WOULD DETRACT FROM THAT.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, I WOULD FURTHER RECOMMEND THAT YOU ADD A FIFTH CONDITION WORDED EXACTLY THE SAME AS FROM THE ZEBRA CASE FROM SEVERAL MONTHS AGO.
I DO NOT HAVE THAT WORDING IN FRONT OF ME, BUT BASICALLY IT'S SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT OF THAT SHOULD THE PROPERTY BE, UH, SHOULD THE PROPERTY BE DEVELOPED, THAT ANY OFF-PREMISES SIGNS BE REMOVED.
THAT CONCLUDES MY REMARKS, AND I CAN FEEL ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
AND SO IF DEVELOPED IT MEANS, UH, NOT ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION, CORRECT? NOT, NOT A, NOT, UH, APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT IN ORDER TO MAYBE AFFORD A LITTLE BIT OF GRACE IN THE, UH, YOU KNOW, IN FAVOR OF THOSE WHO HAVE THE SIGNS THAT ONCE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF THAT BERM, UH, UH, PROCEEDS THAT ALL THE SIGNS BE REMOVED AT THAT TIME MM-HMM
BUT THAT WILL BE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE TRIGGER FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THAT CASE WOULD BE THE APPROVAL OF A, UH, OF A, UM, UH, AN ENGINEERED SITE PLAN.
SO, AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SEVERAL STEPS THAT A DEVELOPER HAS TO GO THROUGH IN ORDER TO START TURNING OVER DIRT.
THE LAND USE ENTITLEMENT OF THE REZONING AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS GENERALLY THE FIRST ONE.
BUT AGAIN, IF YOU WANNA WRITE INTO YOUR CONDITION THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, UPON APPROVAL OF AN ENGINEERED SITE PLAN THAT ALL SIGNS HAVE TO COME DOWN OR THIS SIGN HAS TO COME DOWN, THEN UH, WE CERTAINLY WOULDN'T OBJECT TO THAT.
AND OF COURSE, WE WOULD BE WILLING TO COMPLY WITH THAT.
AND SO DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO, I HAVE A COMMENT.
UH, WOULD YOU PUT THE RECOMMENDATION BACK UP? YEAH.
AND, UH, AND SO WE WERE TALKING ABOUT ADDING THAT FIFTH ONE AND THAT WILL BRING US INTO CONSISTENCY WITH WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST AS WELL.
YES, MR. CHAIRMAN, I REMEMBER THE AMBER ZIMMER, UH, SIGNED PERMIT AND THE CONDITIONS, AND I MOVED AT THE MACK COUNTY FOR ZONING APPEALS APPROVE, SUSE 0 0 0 5 9 DASH 2 26, A SPECIAL USE PERMIT PURSUANT TO OMA COUNTY CODE 1 0 6 DASH 1 79, WHICH ALLOWS FOR SIGNS NOT PERMITTED BY SECTION 1 0 6 DASH 1 78 FOR TAX PARCEL NUMBER 90 3D DASH A DASH TWO B WITH FIVE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
THE FIFTH CONDITION BEING THE SAME AS AMBER BER.
IS THAT A, A MOTION? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
OKAY, SO NEXT UP WE HAVE, UH, MR. MASON.
UH, THIS IS, UH, SUSE 0 0 0 0 6 4 20 26.
AND THESE ARE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHOUT A PRIMARY STRUCTURE.
THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE, UH, MS. CARROLL ROLAND AND MARK MASON.
TAX MAP, 94 DASH A DASH ONE 17 A.
UM, IT'S, UH, APPROXIMATELY 11.7 ACRES.
[00:40:01]
IT HAS, UH, DUAL ZONING, SO IT'S GOT GENERAL BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL.WHERE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ARE IS THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION.
UH, FUTURE LAND USE RECOMMENDATION IS COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL.
UM, THE CURRENT AND PROPOSED USES, IT'S, UH, VACANT.
UM, BUT IN THE FUTURE I BELIEVE THEY WANT TO DO SOME SORT OF RESIDENTIAL USE.
UM, ADJACENT ZONINGS ARE RESIDENTIAL AND GENERAL BUSINESS AND ADJACENT USES ARE RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS.
SO, UM, THIS IS TAYLOR ROAD, UH, GOING TOWARDS WHAT I BELIEVE IS CHURCH STREET.
AND THIS IS TAYLOR ROAD GOING BACK TOWARDS THE ROUNDABOUT IN TALY.
UM, THIS IS, AND THEN THESE ARE THE TWO, UH, UH, CONEX BOXES THAT ARE BEING USED AS ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY, UM, JUST TO GET OUR BEARINGS.
UH, SANDPIPER MARINE IS RIGHT HERE.
UM, THEY'RE GONNA BE ON THE RESIDENTIAL PART OF THE PARCEL, WHICH IS OVER HERE.
FUTURE LAND USE IS, UH, GENERAL BUSINESS IN AG, NOT IN A FLOOD ZONE, AND NOT IN AN RPA.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, UM, SHOWING BOTH THE CONEX BOXES ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE PROPERTY WHERE, WHERE IT'S RESIDENTIAL ZONED OWNED.
AND THEN WE GET INTO CONSIDERATIONS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS.
UH, NUMBER ONE, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UM, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHOUT A PRIMARY STRUCTURE COULD ADVERSELY IMPACT THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
THE STRUCTURES ARE CONTAINERS, WHICH ARE NOT TYPICAL ACCESSORY BUILDINGS.
UH, NUMBER TWO, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT PUBLIC UTILITIES, UH, NO ADVERSE IMPACT WILL RESULT OVERHEAD.
NUMBER THREE, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL FACILITATE THE PRESERVATION AND CREATION OF AN ATTRACTIVE AND HARMONIOUS COMMUNITY.
UH, THE USE NEITHER PROMOTES OR HINDERS THE PRESERVATION AND CREATION OF AN ATTRACTIVE AND HARMONIOUS COMMUNITY.
UH, NUMBER FOUR, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT THE ENVIRONMENT OR HAS SCENIC HISTORIC AND WATERFRONT AREAS, UH, NO ADVERSE IMPACT WILL RESULT.
THE PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED NEAR ANY SUCH AREAS.
NUMBER FIVE, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT PROPERTY RIGHTS AND VALUES OF ADJOINING AND NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, NO ADVERSE IMPACT IS ANTICIPATED.
NUMBER SIX, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE.
THIS USE WILL NEITHER HINDER NOR PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE.
NUMBER SEVEN, WHERE A PROPOSED USE IS WITHIN GOOD ZONING PRACTICE.
AND THE ANSWER IS THAT YES, ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHOUT PRIMARY STRUCTURES ARE ALLOWED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WHICH IS WHY WE ARE HERE.
AND NUMBER EIGHT, WHETHER GRANTING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT WITH OR WITHOUT CONDITIONS IS JUSTIFIED BY PUBLIC NECESSITY OR CONVENIENCE, ANSWER IS NO.
THIS USE HAS NO BEARING ON PUBLIC NECESSITY OR CONVENIENCE.
UM, UTILITIES, THERE IS NO IMPACT TO PUBLIC UTILITIES.
OVERHEAD UTILITIES ARE ON TAYLOR ROAD.
UH, TAYLOR ROAD IS A VDOT MAINTAIN MAINTAINED SECONDARY ROADWAY.
AND, UH, THEN PUBLIC COMMENTS, NOTICES WERE PROVIDED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND TO ADJACENT OWNERS.
AND AS OF PREPARATION OF THIS SLIDE DECK, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS FOR OR AGAINST, UH, STAFF FINDINGS.
THE APPLICANT HAS PLACED, UH, TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY.
THE PROPERTY DOES NOT HAVE A PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND WOULD REQUIRE SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHOUT A PRIMARY COULD AFFECT THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
ALSO, I'D LIKE TO ADD, THIS IS AN AFTER THE FACT.
SO THEY WERE HERE AND NOW WE'RE HERE TRYING TO GET A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AFTERWARDS.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF SUSE 64 20 26 BASED ON A LACK OF BUILDING PLANS FOR FUTURE CONSTRUCTION OF A HOME.
NORMALLY IN THESE TYPES OF SITUATIONS, WE LIKE TO SEE, UM, YOU KNOW, I'M STORING MY STUFF HERE WHILE I'M BUILDING A HOUSE, FOR EXAMPLE.
UM, IF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS APPROVES THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WE RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING SIX CONDITIONS.
NUMBER ONE, THE APPLICANT SHALL OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED PERMITS FROM THE COUNTY'S COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
NUMBER TWO, THE APPLICANT SHALL BE IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPLICATION AND PLOT PLAN IS SUBMITTED.
NUMBER NUMBER THREE, THE APPLICANT SHALL ALLOW THE COUNTY TO MAKE INSPECTION OF THE SITE UNTIL THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION IS ISSUED.
UH, NUMBER FOUR, THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE RELEVANT VDO AND HEALTH DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS.
NUMBER FIVE, THE PROPERTY SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES WHILE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS ACTIVE.
AND NUMBER SIX, A VIOLATION OF ANY OF THESE CONDITIONS.
WE'LL RENDER THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT NULL AND VOID.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO TALK TO HIM, I CAN TRY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE AS WELL.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR CINDY BEFORE I JUST YEAH, GO AHEAD.
UM, DOES IT MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE IF IT'S IN A COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL AREA?
[00:45:01]
UM, IF IT WAS IN A COMMER, IF IT WAS COMMERCIALLY ZONED, IF IT WAS, IF THE CONEX BOXES WERE IN THE BUSINESS AREA, THERE IS NOT A MECHANISM WHERE THEY COULD JUST SIT THERE BY THEMSELVES WITHOUT SOMETHING ELSE ON THE PROPERTY.SO THE ANSWER WOULD JUST BE, HEY, THIS ISN'T ALLOWED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
UM, GENERAL BUSINESS ZONING DOES NOT ALLOW ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHOUT, WITHOUT SOMETHING ELSE BEING THERE.
SO SAME, SAME AS RESIDENTIAL? CORRECT.
BUT IT'S SPECIFICALLY, IT'S SPECIFICALLY LISTED IN RESIDENTIAL THAT, HEY, YOU CAN DO THIS WITH A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
WHEREAS GENERAL BUSINESS, THERE'S, THAT IS NOT THE CASE.
THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR CINDY.
UH, MR. MASON, WOULD YOU COME BEFORE US? WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME? THANK MARK MASON.
UH, MR. MASON, DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH? UH, SO HELP YOU GOD ON ALL MATTERS BEFORE US? YES, I DO.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE WITH US ABOUT THOSE TWO? UM, IN THE CODES FOR GENERAL BUSINESS, I BELIEVE IT SAYS STORAGE FACILITY AND ZONING.
COULDN'T THAT BE COMPARED WITH STORAGE FACILITY? HAVING THESE CON ACCESS? WHEN WE'RE LOOKING FOR STORAGE FACILITY, WE'RE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING LIKE, UM, MORE LIKE SELF STORAGE, LIKE SOME KIND OF DEDICATED STRUCTURE, SOME KIND OF DEDICATED STRUCTURE THAT IS FOR THE STORAGE OF MULTIPLE DIFFERENT ITEMS. OF COURSE, OF COURSE.
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE GENERAL BUSINESS REGULATIONS, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS BECAUSE IT'S ZONED RESIDENTIAL.
WELL, ACTUALLY I HAD ONE OF THE CONEXES IN GENERAL BUSINESS, THEY CALLED IT A STORAGE FACILITY.
AND I WAS TOLD TO MOVE IT AND I MOVED IT TO THE RESIDENTIAL.
BUT IT SEEMED LIKE THAT CONEX BEING A STORAGE UNIT WOULD BE BETTER OFF IN THE ZONING THAT IT WAS PERMITTED AND THE, UH, THE ZONING.
BUT NEVERTHELESS, I SHOULD HAVE CAME DOWN HERE FIRST THING AND ASKED WHAT I COULD DO WITH THESE STORAGE CONTAINERS.
BUT I TOOK MYSELF IN A JAM WITH MY PERSONAL STUFF AND I JUST, UH, I WAS LOOKING AROUND, I WAS LIKE ALL THESE CONEXES EVERYWHERE.
AND, UM, I JUST ASSUMED THAT WAS OKAY IN THAT ZONING TO PUT 'EM THERE.
AND, UH, AND THAT WAS A BIG MISTAKE.
IT'S PUT ME THROUGH A LOT OF HEARTACHE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR? SO, UM, IN THE PAST YOU'VE GONE THROUGH A LOT OF EFFORT TO CLEAR THIS PROPERTY? YES, I HAVE.
AND, UH, SO I WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT MEANS YOU HAVE INTENTIONS FOR FUTURE SALES OR USE? UM, I DO.
I'M NOT SURE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, BUT MM-HMM
WELL, I, I KNOW, BUT I'M SAYING YOU DIDN'T DO ALL THAT WORK FOR OFTEN.
YOU DIDN'T DO, DIDN'T ALL THAT WORK OUT THE GOODNESS OF YOUR HEART? NO.
SO I DIDN'T IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
AND, UH, SO THE PURPOSE OF THIS FACILITY THERE IS FOR WHATEVER THE ZONING PERMITS, BUT I MEAN, ARE YOU STORING MAINTENANCE OH, MY PERSONAL PROPERTY.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S NOT MOWING EQUIPMENT OR WHATEVER TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY.
UM, WELL, I DO HAVE, I DO MAINTAIN THE, A LOT OF THE PROPERTY AND MOW IT AND TRY TO KEEP IT DOWN SO VEGETATION DOESN'T TAKE BACK OVER.
AND I TRY TO KEEP IT UP KEPT AND LOOKING GOOD AND MM-HMM
UM, I JUST THINK A STORAGE FACILITY COULD BE A CONTAINER.
'CAUSE IF YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT A, UH, THE DESCRIPTION OF STORAGE, IT SAYS CONTAINERS OR EITHER MM-HMM
A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD MANY STORAGE BUILDINGS.
BUT THEY CAN AFFORD STORAGE CONTAINERS, WHICH ARE CONSIDERED STORAGE.
UH, WE COULD PUT A TIME FACTOR ON THIS.
WE'LL GET TO ANOTHER CONDITION.
I MEAN, I COULD SEE US PUTTING A CONDITION ON THERE IF WE ARE, IF HE IS SERIOUS ABOUT DEVELOPMENT, WE COULD SAY, HEY, THE CONTAINERS CAN BE THERE FOR THIS AMOUNT OF TIME OR UNTIL A BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED.
BUT THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S JUST AN IDEA.
[00:50:01]
BUT, WELL, YOU SEE MY POINT, I MEAN, THAT WAS A TOTALLY WOODED AREA.
THAT'S BEEN COMPLETELY CLEARED YEAH.
BURN OFF AND, AND IT'S NOW RECEPTIVE FOR SOME SORT OF BUSINESS TO COME IN ON THAT POINT.
WE JUST DON'T KNOW A TIMEFRAME.
WELL, I MEAN, NOT KNOWING WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH A PIECE OF PROPERTY, YOU NEVER KNOW.
UM, I'VE HAD INTEREST IN IT MM-HMM
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, HOW IT GOES.
THERE'S INTEREST AND THEN THERE'S NOT INTEREST.
AND I, IT'S BEEN A BIG HEADACHE AS FAR AS DOING THIS, AND I JUST THOUGHT THAT PUT A, I PUT, I PUT MYSELF IN A JAM WITH MY PERSONAL STUFF MM-HMM
AND I WAS LIKE, I CAN BUY THESE CONEXES.
I PUT MY STUFF IN IT AND IT'S 12 ACRES AND EVERYTHING WILL BE OKAY.
AND LIKE I SAID, I SHOULD HAVE COME HERE RIGHT OFF THE BAT AND ASKED QUESTIONS.
AND AS FAR AS, UM, MAYBE PUTTING SOMETHING THERE AS FAR AS A HOME, I WAS CONSIDERING IT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE AREA, KIND OF GET USED TO WHAT IT'S LIKE AT NIGHT, YOU KNOW? WELL, YOU KNOW, MY POINT IS, IS THAT PART OF THE PROPERTY ZONE COMMERCIAL? YES.
SO CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW THAT LOCATION WHERE IT IS.
AND THE PROXIMITY AND BUSINESSES ASSOCIATED.
THERE'S THE STORAGE UNITS RIGHT DOWN THE ROAD.
AND THEN JUST UP THERE, YOU'VE GOT THE PEP UP, A LOT OF BUSINESS, ALL THOSE OTHER PLACES AND EVERYTHING, AND IT'S TUCKED RIGHT IN THERE.
UH, I WOULD SAY IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED A LOCATION FOR SOME FUTURE BUSINESS TO POSSIBLY LOCATE.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE BOUGHT IT ORIGINALLY.
THINK THAT IT WAS A, A GOOD INVESTMENT.
BUT THANK YOU MR. I THINK LEE WANTS TO SHARE WITH US AGAIN.
LEE, PAM, A DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR.
UM, WHILE THERE IS NO DEFINITION, ACTUAL DEFINITION FOR STORAGE FACILITY AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AGAIN, THE LOCATION IS GONNA MATTER HERE.
SO, UH, THE, THE, THE CONEX BOX IS, ARE CURRENTLY ON THE RESIDENTIAL PIECE OF PROPERTY, UH, STORAGE FACILITY IN THIS CASE WOULD NOT APPLY TO A CONEX BOX.
IF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS WAS TO APPROVE THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT, THEN AT THAT POINT, IN MY OPINION, THAT YOU WOULD'VE SET A PRECEDENT THAT WOULD ALLOW OTHER CONEX BOXES TO SIT ON COMMERCIALLY OR RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PIECES OF PROPERTY ALONE WITHOUT THE PLAN FOR SOME SORT OF FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OR, OR CONSTRUCTION.
AS THE STAFF HAS, UH, BROUGHT SEVERAL OF THOSE CASES TO YOU BEFORE, UM, I WOULD ADVISE AGAIN, UH, UH, A DENIAL ON THIS.
BUT FROM A, UH, YOU KNOW, FROM A, UH, FROM A, FROM A COMMUNITY APPEARANCE STANDPOINT, THIS IS A HIGHLY VISIBLE PIECE OF PROPERTY.
VDOT IS WORKING ON A MAJOR INTERSECTION THERE WITH A, UM, UH, UH, UH, WITH A, A REDUCED CONFLICT U-TURN OR AN RCU.
SO THERE IS GOING TO BE, UH, THERE, YOU KNOW, THAT WILL CONTINUE TO BE A HIGHLY VISIBLE PIECE OF PROPERTY.
BUT THE FACT THAT IT'S, UH, THAT IT'S NOT ON THE COMMERCIALLY ZONED PIECE OF PROPERTY WHERE IT DOES INDICATE THAT QUOTE UNQUOTE STORAGE FACILITIES ARE ALLOWED.
IT'S ON THE RESIDENTIAL PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THERE IS NO CURRENT PROSPECT OR PLAN FOR A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OR CONSTRUCTION WHERE THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS HAS ALLOWED IN THE PAST A, UH, UH, AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITHOUT A PRIMARY STRUCTURE KNOWING THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE A PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT.
UM, UH, THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL IS, IS PROPER AND CORRECT IN THIS CASE.
UM, SO IF IT WAS, IF IT WAS MOVED OVER TO THE COMMERCIALS PORTION, IT WOULDN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE, IS WHAT YOU'RE NO.
EVEN THOUGH IT'S A, A STORAGE FACILITY IS SOMETHING A LOT MORE FORMAL THAN WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.
SO IF IT WAS A CONSTRUCTION SITE THAT PUT ONE OF THESE ON THERE, IT WOULD BE OKAY.
UH, I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE ALSO SOME REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY BE SCREENED.
THERE WOULD BE SOME VISUAL SCREENING THERE.
THIS, UH, WE'VE SEEN NOTHING THAT WOULD INDICATE ANY, UH, UH, ANY PROPOSAL FOR VISUAL SCREENING.
BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WITH REGARDS TO THE VARIOUS CRITERIA, I THINK THAT THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ASKS, UH, YOU KNOW, ASKS THE QUESTION OF THE, YOU KNOW, COMMUNITY APPEARANCE AND STAFF HAS ALREADY MADE A, A COMMENT ABOUT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
[00:55:01]
COULD, COULD I ADD SOMETHING? YES.THESE STORAGE CONTAINERS, THEY ARE STORAGE CONTAINERS.
THEY ARE STORAGE FACILITIES BECAUSE WHY DO PEOPLE HAVE 'EM TO STORE STUFF IN? AND IT CAN BE COMMERCIAL, IT COULD BE PRE UNUSED.
AND, UH, I KIND OF DISAGREED 'CAUSE I WAS TOLD TO MOVE ONE OF 'EM OFF OF THERE AND MOVE IT IN RESIDENTIAL.
AND I WAS LIKE, WELL, THAT'S RIGHT IN TO THAT ZONING AND THE, AND THE STORAGE FACILITY, IT IS A STORAGE CONTAINER.
IT MIGHT NOT LOOK LIKE A CONVENTIONAL ONE, BUT IT IS FOR STORAGE.
UM, SO WOULD, WOULD IT, WOULD ONE YEAR GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESOLVE? YES, IT WOULD.
UM, I'M TRYING MY BEST TO DO STUFF MM-HMM
YOU, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW THINGS ARE GOING TO GO.
BUT SO WE COULD PUT A, A CONDITION OF ONE YEAR.
AND I, I WOULD LIKE, I THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
UM, I, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT MORE PERMANENT EVEN IF I HAVE TO REMOVE THEM.
UM, IT'S A BIG PROBLEM DOING THAT.
UM, BUT YES, ONE YEAR WOULD HELP A LOT.
ONE, AND, AND I WOULD LIKE SOMETHING TO HAPPEN WHERE I COULD ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING WITH THAT PROPERTY.
I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE HOW THE NEIGHBOR HOOD IS LIKE YEAH.
I JUST, I THINK IF WE PUT A CONDITION OF ONE YEAR IN THERE, THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING WE CAN LIVE WITH.
AND THEN MAYBE HE CAN RESOLVE THIS SITUATION.
OH, YOU READY TO MAKE A MOTION? THANK YOU.
UH, COULD I SAY ONE MORE THING THERE, THERE ARE CONEXES ALL AROUND THE PALEY AREA AND ONLY AREA THEY, THEY DON'T, THEY'VE BEEN THERE A LONG TIME AND THEY DON'T HAVE SCREENING AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF THAT THEY'RE SAY THEY WANT.
AND IT'D BE KIND OF UNFAIR TO BE ZONED FOR THAT STORE FACILITY LABEL TO HAVE TO DO ALL THAT.
I MEAN, COULD I PAINT IT WHITE? COULD I PAINT 'EM WHITE? AND, YOU KNOW, WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, I, I THINK WHAT WE CAN WORK TODAY IS THAT FOR STARTERS, YOU KNOW, AND OKAY.
WHATEVER ELSE IS OUT THERE THAT'S NOT OUR, OUR BUSINESS TODAY.
SO WHAT WOULD I HAVE TO DO TO KEEP THOSE CONEXES ON THE PROPERTY? I, I THINK WE CAN GIVE YOU A YEAR.
WE'LL GO WITH THAT FOR STARTERS.
AND MAYBE YOU CAN GET THINGS RESOLVED WITH, WITH WHATEVER YOUR NEEDS ARE.
BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, UH, MR. PAM BID'S POINT IS QUITE VALID AND UH, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH, YOU KNOW, AND IT'S A BIG COUNTY WITH A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON.
AND SO, UH, WE'RE DEALING WITH YOUR CASE RIGHT NOW AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU GET YOU A YEAR AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
DID YOU WANNA SHARE ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE NOW I'M TALKING TO SEND YOU.
NO, I'M JUST SAYING IF THE RECOMMENDATION'S NOW GONNA CHANGE SEVEN CONDITIONS TO INCORPORATE.
WOULD YOU GO BACK TO THAT SLIDE? JUST, OKAY.
SO IT'D BE SEVEN CONDITIONS INSTEAD OF SIX.
UH, THE SEVENTH CONDITION WOULD BE THE ONE YEAR, UH, TERM.
THE ONE YEAR TERM ON THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
ARE WE READY TO MAKE A MOTION THEN? I MOVE THAT THE AKIMA COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS APPROVED SUSE DASH 0 0 0 0 6 4 DASH 2026, A SPECIAL USE PERMIT PURSUANT TO AKIMA COUNTY CODE SECTION 1 0 6 DASH 78 A 12 FOR ANY USE OF LAND AND OR PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY LOCATION OF ANY TYPE OF BUILDING OR FACILITY THEREON, WHICH IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED WITHIN THIS CHAPTER FOR TAX PARCEL WITH SIX.
THAT WOULD BE, PARDON? EXCUSE ME.
SO THAT WOULD BE, UM, 94 A 94 9 4 A DASH 1 1 7 A.
WITH SEVEN CONDITIONS WITH THE SEVEN CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY STATE.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I SECOND.
[01:00:01]
YOU A LETTER.WE'LL SEND YOU A LETTER WITH EVERYTHING.
THIS IS A DWELLING, THE GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, UH, APPLICANT'S, UH, JONATHAN MUD.
THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE MR. MUD AND UH, NOREEN MUD LOCATION IS 2 1 3 3 8 TAYLOR ROAD TAX PARCEL 94 A ONE AND TAX PARCEL 94 A THREE.
ACREAGE IS APPROXIMATELY 1.943 ACRES ZONE GENERAL BUSINESS FUTURE LAND USE.
RECOMMENDATION IS, UH, VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT.
CURRENT PROPOSED USES ARE, UH, COMMERCIAL AND THE PROPOSED USE IS GOING TO BE COMMERCIAL SLASH RESIDENTIAL.
ADJACENT ZONINGS ARE GENERAL BUSINESS AND ADJACENT USES ARE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND COMMERCIAL IN NATURE.
UM, PROBABLY GONNA HAVE A LITTLE DEJA VU WITH THIS ONE.
UM, THERE WAS AN SUSE 21, UH, FOR THE SAME DWELLING IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION.
UH, BASICALLY MR. MUD HAS DECIDED TO MOVE THE LOCATION OF THAT DWELLING AND REMOVE PROPERTY LINES.
SO WHAT YOU GET IN THE END IS A HOUSE THAT'S MORE CENTERED ON THE LOT AND IT'S MORE CONFORMING WITH THE SETBACKS AS A RESULT.
THIS IS THE PROPERTY ZONE, GENERAL BUSINESS FUTURE, UH, LAND USE RECOMMENDATION IS VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AREA.
UH, NOT LOCATED IN A FLOOD ZONE, NOT LOCATED IN RPA.
THESE ARE SOME PICTURES OF THE SITE.
THIS IS TAYLOR ROAD GOING ACROSS, UH, THREE 16.
THIS IS TAYLOR ROAD GOING TOWARDS FAIRGROUNDS.
UM, AND THEN THESE ARE TWO PICTURES OF THE SITE, APPROXIMATELY.
THE DWELLING WILL BE LOCATED BEHIND AND I BELIEVE TO THE LEFT OF THE RV.
AND THEN THIS IS THE SITE PLAN.
SO YOU'LL NOTICE THAT LINE IS NOW GONE.
HE HAS GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS OF VACATING THE LOT LINE IN THE MIDDLE.
SO THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LEFT WITH HERE.
A BUILDING THAT'S GOING 112 FEET AWAY FROM THIS PROPERTY LINE AND 42 FEET AWAY FROM THIS PROPERTY LINE.
SO WE HAVE, AND IT USED TO BE ABOUT RIGHT HERE-ISH.
SO WE'VE GOT, WE'VE GOT A DWELLING THAT'S GONNA BE MORE CENTERED ON THE LOT AND MORE CONFORMING WITH SETBACKS AS A RESULT.
THESE ARE SOME PICTURES OF THE HOUSE.
SO THEN WE'LL GO TO ZONING ORDINANCE CONSIDERATIONS.
UH, SECTION 1 0 6 4 0 3 7 PROVIDES THE USE.
THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL USES INCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, NOT AS AN ACCESSORY TO AN APPROVED USE.
THEN WE'LL GO INTO CONSIDERATIONS.
UH, NUMBER ONE, ADVERSE IMPACT TO THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, NO ADVERSE IMPACT IS ANTICIPATED.
THE SURROUNDING AREA IS A MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
NUMBER TWO, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT PUBLIC UTILITIES, UH, NO ADVERSE IMPACT WILL RESULT ELECTRIC SERVICES AVAILABLE ALONG TAYLOR ROAD.
NUMBER THREE, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL FACILITATE THE PRESERVATION AND CREATION OF AN ATTRACTIVE AND HARMONIOUS COMMUNITY.
UH, THIS USE WILL NEITHER HINDER NOR PROMOTE THE PRESERVATION AND CREATION OF AN ATTRACTIVE AND HARMONIOUS COMMUNITY.
UH, NUMBER FOUR, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT THE ENVIRONMENT OR SCENIC, HISTORIC AND WATERFRONT AREAS.
THE ANSWER THERE IS NO, THE PROPERTY IS NOT LOCATED NEAR ANY OF THESE AREAS.
NUMBER FIVE, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL ADVERSELY IMPACT PROPERTY RIGHTS AND VALUES OF ADJOINING AND NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, NO ADVERSE IMPACT IS ANTICIPATED.
THE DWELLING WILL OTHERWISE MEET THE REGULATIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
UH, NUMBER SIX, WHETHER PROPOSED USE WILL PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE.
UH, THIS USE WILL NEITHER HINDER NOR PROMOTE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE.
UH, WHETHER THE USE IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH GOOD ZONING PRACTICE, THE ANSWER IS YES.
DWELLING, SUCH AS THESE ARE ALLOWED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND THERE ARE OTHER RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES IN THE AREA.
WHETHER GRANTING THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT WITH OR WITHOUT CONDITIONS IS JUSTIFIED BY PUBLIC NECESSITY OR CONVENIENCE, THE ANSWER IS NO.
THIS USE HAS NO BEARING ON PUBLIC NECESSITY OR CONVENIENCE.
UH, UTILITIES ELECTRIC SERVICE IS AVAILABLE ALONG TAYLOR ROAD AND THIS SITE HAS EXISTING WELL AND SEPTIC.
TAYLOR ROAD IS A VDOT MAINTAINED SECONDARY ROADWAY, AND IT IS AN AVERAGE CONDITION.
AND THEN WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENTS, UH, NOTICES WERE PROVIDED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND TO ADJACENT OWNERS PER STATE LAW.
AND AS A PREPARATION OF THIS, UH, SLIDE DECK, NO PUBLIC COMMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED.
STAFF FINDINGS, THE APPLICANT WISHES TO CONSTRUCT A DWELLING ON THE PROPERTY.
UH, NUMBER TWO, DUE TO THE DWELLING
[01:05:01]
BEING ZONED GENERAL BUSINESS, A SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND NO DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS TO THE SURROUNDING AREA ANTICIPATED.THE OTHER FINDING I WOULD ADD IS SUSE 21 20 26 WAS FOR THE SAME DWELLING AT A DIFFERENT SPOT.
STAFF REP STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT ON THE BASIS OF OTHER RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES ALSO BEING IN THE AREA.
AND SHOULD THE BCA APPROVE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
UH, NUMBER ONE, THE APPLICANT SHALL APPLY FOR A BUILDING PERMIT WITH THE COUNTY'S COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
NUMBER TWO, THE BUILDING APPLICATION SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THIS APPLICATION.
THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH RELEVANT VDOT AND HEALTH DEPARTMENT REGULATIONS.
UM, NUMBER FOUR, THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT SHALL EXPIRE TWO YEARS AFTER THE DATE OF ISSUANCE IF THE USE HAS NOT COMMENCED.
NUMBER FIVE, THE PROPERTY SHALL BE PROPERLY MAINTAINED AT ALL TIMES.
NUMBER SIX, THE APPLICANT SHALL ALLOW THE COUNTY TO INSPECT THE SITE AT ANY TIME WHILE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS ACTIVE.
NUMBER SEVEN, A VIOLATION OF ANY OF THESE CONDITIONS SHALL RENDER THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT NUMBER NULL AND VOID.
AND NUMBER EIGHT, THIS SUP APPROVAL OVERRIDES THE APPROVAL GIVEN TO SUSE 21 20 26.
SO WE'RE REPLACING 21 WITH THIS ONE.
THAT IS THE MOTION I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE MR. MUTZ HERE AS WELL.
IS THERE ANY, MR. MUDD, IS THERE ANYTHING YOU WANNA SHARE WITH US? JUST REAL QUICK, UH, WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME? YEAH.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, HOLD THE TRUTH ON ALL MATTERS THAT ARE BEFORE? YES.
I'LL MAKE THIS SUPER SIMPLE FOR YOU GUYS.
MY SON WAS GONNA TAKE THE BACK.
ONE, WE'RE GONNA PUT HIS HOUSE ON THERE.
BUSINESS OR HOUSES OR, YOU KNOW, OUR LITTLE THING.
MY SON FOUND ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY AND I WAS TIGHT.
I MADE MYSELF TIGHT SO HE COULD HAVE HIS HOUSE.
I DIDN'T HAVE TO SEPARATE THE PROPERTY.
ONCE HE FOUND HIS OWN PROPERTY.
I WANTED TO MERGE PIECES TO TAKE MY HOME AND GET IT AWAY FROM THE SEPTIC, WHICH I HAVE ONE OF THEM ABOVE GROUND ONES THAT'S FANNING ALL THE TIME THAT YOU CAN SMELL 20 MILES AWAY.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO MOVE THE HOUSE AND JOIN THE LOTS.
JUST PUT THE TWO PIECES TOGETHER AND MOVE THE HOUSE.
JUST BEFORE WE MAKE THE MOTION, UM, 94 A ONE IS ONE OF THE PARCELS, BUT WHEN WE DO IT, IT SHOULD BE 94 A THREE AS WELL, BECAUSE WE WON'T KNOW WHAT, WHAT PARCEL ASSESSMENTS GOING TO KEEP WHEN THEY MERGE THE LOTS TOGETHER.
SO IF WE DO IT FOR BOTH, THAT SHOULD COVER EVERYTHING.
DATE, MR. CHAIRMAN, I MOVE THAT MACK COUNTY BOARD ZONING APPEALS APPROVE, SUSE 0 0 0 0 7 1 DASH 2026 SPECIAL USE PERMIT PURSUANT TO MACK COUNTY CODE SECTION 1 0 6 DASH 4 37 TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING ON PARCELS TAX MAP NUMBER 94 DASH A DASH ONE AND THREE WITH THE EIGHT CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF.
OKAY, THE MOTION? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
CAN WE TAKE A BREAK? WE'RE GONNA TAKE A QUICK BREAK IN BETWEEN THIS.
AND SO WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK AND WE'LL BE RIGHT BACK AND GET STARTED.
WE ARE RECONVENING THE ACAC COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING FOR JUNE.
I THINK AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA HEAR A STATEMENT FROM MR. LEE PAMBY.
I'LL JUST INTRODUCE HIM, SO, OKAY.
UH, LEE PBIT FOR HIS OPENING STATEMENT.
MR. CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
UM, I'M LEE HAMID, DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THE DESIGNATED ZONING ADMINISTRATOR BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
UH, THIS IS AN APPEAL OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION.
UH, CASE NUMBER, A PPL DASH, UH, QUADRUPLE 0 6 3 DASH 2026, UH, FOR SCOUT STORAGE, LLC.
AND, UM, MY OPENING STATEMENT AS FOLLOWS, UH, THIS APPLICATION ENTAILS A FOUR-PART APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS FOR DETERMINATION.
I MADE IN CONSULTATION WITH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ON APRIL 13TH, 2026, REGARDING THE EXPIRATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IN JULY OF 2025.
PRIOR TO MY INADVERTENT APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN ON MARCH 10TH, 2026, THE APPLICANT
[01:10:01]
APPEALED THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION THAT THE STOP WORK ORDER ISSUED ON APRIL 1ST, 2026 BY MYSELF AND THE SITE PLAN APPROVED ON MARCH 10TH, 2026 IS NOT VALID BECAUSE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT HAD EXPIRED PURSUANT TO CONDITION NUMBER 19 OF CASE NUMBER CUSE TRIPLE 0 2 6 8 DASH 2021.THIS APPEALS PROCESS IS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 1 0 6 DASH 2 54 OF THE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE.
IN SHORT, THE DECISION WAS BASED, UM, ON PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE CONDITION.
A RECENT CIRCUIT COURT PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HAS ALLOWED THEM TO CONTINUE WORK ON AND SIGNIFICANT, UH, ON INSIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT IN THE SITE UNTIL YOU, THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RENDER A DECISION ON THE VALIDITY OF THE CUP.
WE BELIEVE THIS IS BY DESIGN SCOUT REPRESENTATIVES HAVE ALSO STATED THEIR CONCERN THAT THE BATTERIES ON SITE ARE DEGRADING, WHICH ACCORDING TO THEM NULLIFIES THE BATTERIES, WARRANTIES AND RENDERS THE BATTERIES LESS USEFUL IF THEY ARE NOT ENERGIZED AND CONNECTED TO THE GRID.
THE COUNTY'S POSITION IS THAT WHILE ALL THAT MAY BE TRUE, THE CONDITIONS DEFINE COMMENCEMENT OF THE USE OF USE, UH, AS COMPLETION OF 20, UH, I'M SORRY, 50%, UH, OR MORE OF THE SOUND WALL WERE THE ACTUAL COMMENCEMENT OF USE BEFORE JULY 20TH, 2025.
NEITHER ONE OCCURRED PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE.
AS OF THAT DATE, NO PLANS HAD BEEN SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL, UH, AND NO LAND DISTURBANCE HAD OCCURRED.
THEREFORE, SINCE NEITHER CONSTRUCTION NOR THE USE HAD ACTUALLY COMMENCED, THE USE PERMIT HAS INDEED EXPIRED AS THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR.
I AM ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
WITH THAT WE ARE HERE PURSUANT TO THE SYSTEM IN PLACE, BUT I AM OBLIGATED TO ASK THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS TO UPHOLD MY DETERMINATION.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY REMARKS.
AND, UH, I BELIEVE THAT WE'VE GOT THE, UM, THE, UH, UH, THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATION TO, UH, GO NEXT.
WOULD, WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME, PLEASE? I WILL.
I'M A, A LAWYER FOR SCOUT FROM VIRGINIA BEACH.
WOULD DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH? I SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE WITH US TODAY? UM, NO, THE ISSUE IS, WAS THEIR DECISION, WAS IT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER'S DECISION? CORRECT.
AND IF WE COULD PULL UP, UM, TAB FOUR.
SO HERE'S THE LANGUAGE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
IS CONDITION 19 AND IS CONDITION 19 APPLY HERE? AND CONDITION 19 PROVIDES TWO ALTERNATIVES FOR THE EXTENSION TO CUP.
THE FIRST IS IF SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION HAS HAPPENED.
AND IF WE GO DOWN, UM, UH, TWO LINES FROM THE BOTTOM, IT DEFINES SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION AS CONSTRUCTION, 50% OF OR MORE OF THE SOUND WALL.
AND THE SECOND ALTERNATIVE IS, OR USE FOR WHICH SAID PERMIT WAS GRANTED, HAS ACTUALLY COMMENCED AND, AND IS PROGRESSING TOWARDS COMPLETION.
WE'RE NOT PROCEEDING UNDER SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION.
OUR POSITION IS THAT SCOUT IS COMMENCED USE AND IS PROGRESSING TOWARDS COMPLETION AND WAS PROGRESSING TOWARDS COMPLETION BY JULY 20TH, 2025 TO DATE.
UM, THE COUNTY CONTENDS THE CUP EXPIRED.
AND THE REASON WE SAY THIS, THIS IS NOT A TYPICAL, UM, PROJECT CONSTRUCTED BUILDING.
THESE BATTERY, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE UTILITIES ARE UNIQUE.
THE ONLY ON ONSITE WORK, UNLIKE A BUILDING THAT'S DONE HERE, IS THE CONSTRUCTION OF SIX CONCRETE PADS AND THE SOUND WALL.
THAT'S ABOUT 5% OF THE WORK TOWARDS THE PROJECT.
95% IS OFFSITE WORK, AND OUR POSITION IS THAT SCOUT ACHIEVED ABOUT 75% OF ITS CRITICAL PATH TO COMPLETION BEFORE THE DATE THE COUNTY CONTENDS THE CUP EXPIRED.
AT THE TIME, THE APPLICATION FOR THE CUP WAS SUBMITTED IN 2022.
AN ORIGINAL SITE PLAN WAS SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THAT SHOWING NINE PATHS, UH, FOR CONSTRUCTION IN SEPTEMBER, 2023.
UM, SCOUT CONCLUDED A WHOLESALE MARKET PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT.
THIS IS A REGULATORY PROCESS, FEDERAL, IT TAKES YEARS.
AND MR. PATTERSON, WHO IS HERE OWNER OF SCOUT, WILL EXPLAIN TO YOU THE EFFORTS TO OBTAIN THAT.
BY SEPTEMBER, 2024, SCOUT HAD OBTAINED, UH, AN INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT WITH A AND N.
THAT'S PREREQUISITE TO ALL OF THIS.
THAT'S ANOTHER YEAR LONG EFFORT.
MR. MR. UM, PATTERSON CAN EXPLAIN THAT TO YOU.
UH, IN JUNE, 2025, SCOUT OBTAINED ITS DEQ PERMIT BY RULE AND STARTED DOING SITE SURVEYS AND GEOTECHNICAL BORINGS.
AT THAT TIME, THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR INQUIRED BY THE CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE AND THERE WAS NO SUGGESTION
[01:15:01]
BY THE COUNTY THAT THERE WAS AN IMMINENT EXPIRATION.THE CUP UH, JUNE, FROM JUNE 25 TO THE END OF THE SUMMER, 2025, UH, SCOUT PARTICIPATED IN THIS ITERATIVE REVIEW PROCESS OF THE PLANS WITH THE COUNTY.
AGAIN, NO INDICATION DURING THAT TIME PERIOD THAT THE CUP HAD EXPIRED.
SO BY JULY 20, WE'D ACHIEVED 75% OF THE CRITICAL PATH.
AND AFTER THAT DATE, SCOUT OR THE COUNTY DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING TO US ABOUT AN EXPIRATION 'CAUSE SCOUT AND SCOUT BELIEVED THE CUP HAD NOT EXPIRED, AND IT APPEARED THE COUNTY BELIEVED THE CUP HAD NOT EXPIRED.
AND AUGUST, 2025 IN RELIANCE UPON THAT SCOUT MADE A SIGNIFICANT INVESTMENT.
THEY ORDERED THE BATTERIES THAT ARE TO BE INSTALLED.
THESE ARE $10 MILLION WORTH OF BATTERIES THAT WERE ORDERED AND WERE ULTIMATELY DELIVERED IN DECEMBER OF 2025.
IN JANUARY OF 2026 IN SEPTEMBER OF 2025, SCOUT AND RELIANCE, UM, ON THE COUNTY'S, UH, UH, ACQUIESCENCE SUBMITTED THE FULL DESIGN PACKAGE.
THIS WAS A MODIFIED REDUCED PROJECT.
THE SITE PLAN WAS SMALLER THAN THE ONE THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THE CUP APPLICATION.
THIS SITE PLAN HAD ONLY SIX PADS INSTEAD OF NINE.
AND AGAIN, THE COUNTY SAID NOTHING.
BELIEVING THE CUP HAD NOT EXPIRED.
UM, BY JANUARY, 2026, UM, THE COUNTY APPROVED EXECUTED AN ADDENDUM TO THE TWO, 2022 CITING AGREEMENT.
AGAIN, NOT, UM, GIVING US ANY INDICATION OF THEIR POSITION THAT THE CP HAD EXPIRED.
AND THAT ADDENDUM WE'RE ON, UH, PAGE FIVE OF THE, UM, PAGE FIVE, OH, THERE WE GO.
UH, EXPRESSLY RATIFIES THE 2022 AGREEMENT AND THE 2022 AGREEMENT, UM, REFERENCES AND INCORPORATES THE CUP.
THEN ON MARCH 10TH, 2026, THEY FINALLY ISSUED THE, UH, APPROVED THE SITE PLAN.
EVERYTHING'S GOING ACCORDING TO PLAN.
NO INDICATION THERE'S A PROBLEM UNTIL JUST BEFORE APRIL 1ST, 2026 WHEN THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS ISSUED.
WHAT THIS CHRONOLOGY SHOWS YOU IS THAT SCOUT ACHIEVED 75% OF THE CRITICAL PATH PRIOR TO JULY 20TH, 2025.
ALL THEY HAD TO DO AFTER THAT WAS ORDER THE BATTERIES A SIGNIFICANT EXPENSE AND POUR THE PADS, BUILD THE WALL, AND PLACE THE PADS.
UM, SO THE USE FOR WHICH THE CUP HAD BEEN ISSUED HAD ACTUALLY COMMENCED AND WAS PROGRESSING TOWARDS COMPLETION.
REMEMBER, THIS IS A UNIQUE PROJECT I SAID, WHERE 95% OF THE EFFORT IS DONE OFFSITE AND ONLY 5% ON SITE.
IT ALSO SHOWS YOU THAT THE COUNTY'S ACTIONS WERE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYONE'S BELIEF THAT THE CUP HAD NOT EXPIRED.
THE COUNTY ARGUES THAT THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE CUP DOES NOT SUPPORT OUR POSITION.
AND WHAT IT DOES IS IT, IT EQUATES COMMENCEMENT OF USE, PROGRESSING TOWARDS COMPLETION, THE LANGUAGE IN CONDITION 19 TO COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS.
COMMENCEMENT OF USE PROGRESSING TOWARDS COMPLETION IS NOT THE SAME AS COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS.
COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS SUGGESTS THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE, THAT THERE IS NO MORE PROGRESS TO BE MADE.
SO IT'S SOMETHING SHORT OF THAT.
AND THAT'S ALSO CONSISTENT WITH CONDITION 10, WHICH IS AT THE TOP HERE, WHICH SAYS THE ENTIRE SOUND WALL SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS.
WELL, IF YOU COMPARE THAT TO CONDITION 19, WHERE YOU HAVE THE SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION, WHICH IS ONLY 50% OR MORE, UH, IT SHOWS YOU THE INCONSISTENCY IN THE COUNTY'S LOGIC.
SO UNTIL AROUND APRIL 1ST, 2026, THE COUNTY OPERATED AS IF THE CUP HAD NOT EXPIRED.
WE PURCHASED THE BATTERIES, THEY ISSUED THE SITE PLAN, THEY ISSUED THE ADDENDUM TO THE SITING AGREEMENT.
UH, AND MR. PATTERSON, WHO OWNS SCOUT, WILL EXPLAIN TO YOU THE HARDSHIP THAT THIS RELIANCE HAS CAUSED SCOUT AND THE HARDSHIP THAT THIS DETERMINATION WOULD IMPOSE ON SCOUT IF IT WERE AFFIRMED.
THE INVESTMENT THAT, THAT THEY HAVE MADE.
UH, TAYLOR DUKES, WHO ALSO SPEAK WILL TELL YOU THAT WITHIN WEEK, WE'RE WITHIN WEEKS OF GETTING THE BATTERIES ENERGIZED WITHIN WEEKS OF GETTING THE PROJECT COMPLETED.
AND SO I WOULD ASK, I WOULD MOVE, UH, THE BOARD TO REVERSE THE, UM, DECISION AND AFFIRM, UH, THE, THE VALIDITY OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
UH, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
[01:20:01]
NO.THAT THE CUP GOES WITH THE LAND OR WITH THE OWNER? THE LAND.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME, PLEASE? YES, SIR.
AND HAROLD, DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? YES, SIR, I DO.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE? UH, I'LL JUST, UH, READ A FEW COMMENTS, UH, PREPARED.
MY NAME IS HAROLD PATTERSON, PRESENT OF PATTERSON CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPER OF THE SCOUT STORAGE PROJECT.
PATTERSON CONSTRUCTION IS A FIFTH GENERATION FAMILY BUSINESS.
WHEN MY GRANDFATHER PASSED AWAY IN 2007, I INHERITED THE RESPONSIBILITY OF LEADING THE COMPANY.
AT THAT TIME, WE WERE A SMALL LOCAL BUSINESS, BUT ONE THAT HAD ALREADY ENDURED FOR FIVE GENERATIONS.
TODAY, WE OPERATE THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES AND INTERNATIONALLY, BUT WE REMAIN GUIDED BY THE SAME PRINCIPLE THAT HAS SHAPED OUR FAMILY FOR GENERATIONS.
MAKE DECISIONS THAT HONOR THOSE WHO CAME BEFORE US AND BENEFIT THOSE WHO COME AFTER US.
BEFORE MAKING ANY IMPORTANT DECISION, I ASKED MYSELF ONE SIMPLE QUESTION, HOW WILL THIS AFFECT THE NEXT FIVE GENERATIONS? THAT PRINCIPLE IS WHAT BROUGHT US TO AKIMA COUNTY.
BATTERY STORAGE PROJECTS PROVIDE RELIABLE INFRASTRUCTURE, STRENGTHEN THE ELECTRIC GRID, HELP PROTECT CONSUMERS FROM EXTREME PRICE VOLATILITY.
DESPITE RUMORS TO THE CONTRARY, THEY'RE EXTREMELY SAFE, ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY, AND DO NOT CREATE NOISE POLLUTION.
UNLIKE A TRADITIONAL BUILDING PROJECT, HOWEVER, MOST OF THE WORK TO DEVELOP ONE OCCURS LONG BEFORE MAJOR SITE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS.
A TYPICAL BATTERY STORAGE PROJECT REQUIRES FOUR TO FIVE YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING SITE CONTROL, PERMITTING, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, INTERCONNECTION APPROVALS, ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT FABRICATION, AND REGULATORY COMPLIANCE.
THE VISIBLE CONSTRUCTION WORK IS ONE OF THE FINAL STEPS, NOT THE FIRST, AND IT ONLY STARTS AFTER FOUR TO FIVE YEARS.
THE PROCESS OF ADVANCING THROUGH THE PJMQ AND MANUFACTURING THE SPECIALIZED EQUIPMENT IT REQUIRES.
SO IF YOU WERE TO MAP OUT THE SEQUENCE IN PROGRESS OF A BATTERY PROJECT, LIKE SCOUT AND, AND PLACE IT ON A GANTT CHART TO TRACK CRITICAL PATH PROGRESS BY JULY, 2025, YOU WOULD SEE APPROXIMATELY 75% OF THE PROJECT COMPLETED.
THE COP STATES THAT IT EXPIRES UNLESS SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION OR USE HAS COMMENCED AND IS PROGRESSING TOWARD COMPLETION.
BY THE THREE YEAR MARK THAT IS BEING DESCRIBED AS THE SO-CALLED EXPIRATION BY THAT DATE, WE HAD SPENT YEARS ADVANCING THE PROJECT, REMAINED IN REGULAR COMMUNICATION WITH COUNTY STAFF, RECEIVED MULTIPLE WRITTEN CONFIRMATIONS THAT THE CUP REMAINED VALID AND ENFORCED, AND WERE ISSUED ADDITIONAL PERMITS BY THE COUNTY.
IN RELIANCE UPON THOSE ACTIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS, WE INVESTED MORE THAN $13 MILLION INTO THE PROJECT.
THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS, WE WORKED OPENLY AND COOPERATIVELY WITH AKIMA COUNTY.
WE FOLLOWED THE RULES, WE OBTAINED THE REQUIRED APPROVALS, AND WE ACTED IN GOOD FAITH EVERY STEP OF THE WAY.
OUR COMPANY HAS BEEN THE KIND OF PARTNER ANY COMMUNITY WOULD WANT, RESPONSIVE, TRANSPARENT, AND COMMITTED TO CREATING VALUE FOR THE PEOPLE WE SERVE.
AS I STATED, WHEN I FIRST STARTED SPEAKING, WHEN LEADING MY COMPANY AND MAKING A DECISION THAT AFFECTS ITS FUTURE, I ALWAYS ASK MYSELF, HOW WILL THIS AFFECT THE NEXT FIVE GENERATIONS? AND I WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU WOULD ASK YOURSELVES THE SAME QUESTION ABOUT THE PRECEDENT YOU COULD POTENTIALLY SET TODAY.
WILL YOU SET A PRECEDENT THAT INJUSTICE WILL NOT PREVAIL AND THAT FUTURE BUSINESSES AND FUTURE GENERATIONS CAN BELIEVE THAT WHEN AIMA COUNTY ISSUES PERMITS, PROVIDES GUIDANCE AND REPEATEDLY CONFIRMS THAT APPROVALS REMAIN VALID, THESE ACTIONS CAN BE RELIED UPON? OR DO YOU WANT THEM TO WONDER WHETHER THOSE APPROVALS CAN LATER BE WITHDRAWN? AFTER YEARS OF EFFORT AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF INVESTMENT, WHEN MY GRANDFATHER PASSED AWAY, I BECAME THE FIFTH GENERATION TO LEAD OUR FAMILY BUSINESS.
SINCE THEN, I HAVE TRIED TO MAKE EVERY DECISION BY ASKING ONE QUESTION, HOW WILL THIS AFFECT THE NEXT FIVE GENERATIONS? AND TODAY, EACH OF YOU HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK YOURSELVES THE SAME QUESTION.
HOW WILL THE DECISION YOU MAKE TODAY AFFECT THE NEXT FIVE GENERATIONS? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
[01:25:01]
DOES ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.COULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME, PLEASE? TAYLOR DUKES.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? SO, YES, SIR, I DO.
I, UH, AM THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR PATTERSON CONSTRUCTION HERE ON THE VIRGINIA EASTERN SHORE.
I CURRENTLY LIVE IN THE TOWN OF EXMORE.
I'VE BEEN ON THE SHORE ABOUT 15 YEARS NOW.
UM, JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE ARE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF IT AND, YOU KNOW, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE FROM THERE.
UM, WE ARE 80 TO 85% DONE WITH THE SITE.
UM, WE HAVE DONE ALL OF THE SITE WORK.
WE'VE PUT ALL THE ENS MEASURES IN, UH, GRASS IS GROWING, SO NO WATER IS LEAVING THE SITE RIGHT NOW.
UM, WE HAVE GONE AND STARTED THE FORMING OF THE CONCRETE PAD.
IT'S ABOUT A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT PAD THAT WE PUT THERE.
THAT IS THE ONLY STRUCTURE ACTUALLY BUILT ON SITE.
EVERYTHING ELSE IS BROUGHT IN, UM, AND LIFTED WITH A HEAVY CRANE.
UH, THE MATERIAL FOR THE SOUNDWALL, UH, HAS, HAS BEEN ORDERED.
SOME OF IT HAS ACTUALLY STARTED SHOWING UP ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO.
THE REST OF IT'LL BE HERE WITHIN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS.
UM, WE COULD NOT BEGIN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOUND WALL UNTIL WE HAD THE APPROVED SITE PLAN, WHICH WAS MARCH THE 10TH, THE DAY THAT WAS APPROVED.
UH, MARCH THE 18TH, WE, UH, GOT THE, THE QUOTES FOR ALL OF THE MATERIAL FOR THE SOUND WALL BECAUSE OF THE, UH, THE SITE WORK THAT HAD TO BE DONE TO GET THE WALL BUILT.
UM, SO I KNOW THERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS AND CONCERN ABOUT THE, UM, MORE CONCERN ABOUT THE SOUND.
UM, YOU KNOW, MR. PATTERSON HIT ON THAT.
THERE'S NO SOUND COMING FROM THE SITE.
UH, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BUILT ONE RIGHT HERE IN LEY.
UH, IT HAS A SOUND WALL AROUND IT AS WELL.
AND, UM, YOU GO INSIDE THE WALL, IT'S GOT A LITTLE BIT OF SOUND.
YOU COME OUT OF IT, IT'S ALMOST NONE.
YOU HEAR MORE OF THE TRAFFIC ON, ON THE HIGHWAY AND THE TRAFFIC ON LEY ROAD AND THE ROUNDABOUT THAN YOU WOULD HEAR COMING FROM THE BATTERIES OR ANY OF THE EQUIPMENT THERE.
UM, SO YOU KNOW FAR AS THAT IT'S, IT'S, UH, A QUIET SITE.
UM, I'VE COORDINATED WITH, UH, CHIEF AT ATLANTIC FIRE COMPANY TO DISCUSS WHAT THEY WANT FOR THE, UH, FIRE MEASURES TO GO IN FIREFIGHTING PLAN.
AND, UM, WE DISCUSSED THAT IT'S KIND OF HARD TO DO TRAINING ON A SITE WHEN IT'S NOT BUILT, SO THAT WHEN THE SITE IS DONE, UH, WE'LL BRING ATLANTIC FIRE COMPANY IN AND THE SURROUNDING FIRE COMPANIES TO DISCUSS HOW TO HANDLE IT IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION.
UM, WE ACTUALLY, UM, WHEN I MET WITH MR. UH, PBIT ABOUT THE THE STOP WORK ORDER AND, AND THINGS, YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A NEW ORDINANCE FOR BATTERY STORAGE FACILITIES IN, IN AKIMA COUNTY.
SO WE HAD TOLD HIM THAT WE WOULD GO AHEAD AND BUILD IT TO, UH, TO THOSE STANDARDS.
SO WE WENT OUT ON A LIMB AND WE'RE GONNA PUT IN THE, THE, UH, PERMANENT FIREFIGHTING SOURCE.
UH, THE SOUND WALL WAS ALREADY BUILT.
WE'RE DOING THE SOUND STUDY, UM, WORKING WITH ENGINEERS ON THAT NOW.
SO, ANY QUESTIONS? JUST ONE QUESTION.
IF YOU'VE ALREADY BUILT ONE, WHAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE IN YOU COORDINATING WITH THE COUNTY ON MAKING SURE ALL THE I'S WERE DOTTED AND T'S WERE CROSSED VERSUS THIS ONE? SO I STARTED WITH PATTERSON IN OCTOBER.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS IT WAS ALL TAKEN CARE OF AND THE COUNTY WAS WORKING ON A PATH FORWARD TO GET US TO CONSTRUCTION.
UM, ALL OF MY MEETINGS WITH COUNTY STAFF, WITH OUR STAFF, UH, WAS THAT, THAT IT WAS MOVING FORWARD AND WE WERE IN GOOD STANDING ON THAT PERMIT.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE TASING SITE WAS BY RIGHT? IT WAS BUILT BY, RIGHT.
THIS WAS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
ANYONE HAS HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
NORMAN, DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO I HELP YOU GOD? YES, I DO.
I'M THE, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT FOR PATTERSON.
UH, ON EACH SITE, I GET TO GO OUT.
I GET TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE SITE PRIOR TO THE SITE.
SO WHEN THEY HIRED ME, I WENT OUT AND I TOOK A LOOK AT IT.
IF YOU WOULD ASK ME RIGHT NOW, FROM A CONSTRUCTIONAL STANDPOINT, UH, OTHER THAN THE PADS, THAT SITE IS STABILIZED, YOU COULD ACTUALLY, THE GRASS IS GROWING.
THE STORM WATER FACILITIES ARE IN ALL THE PIPING SYSTEM WORK.
I TOOK IT UPON MYSELF AT LEAST ONCE OR TWICE A WEEK JUST TO GO AT THE SITE AND WALK IT BECAUSE IT IS A NEW SITE AND IT'S IN THERE IN THE PUBLIC EYE.
WHEN I LOOKED AT IT AFTER THE HEAVY RAIN, WE JUST HAD THE SAND BED STORM WATER SYSTEM WORKED PERFECTLY.
SO ENVIRONMENTALLY IMPACTS, THERE
[01:30:01]
ARE NONE.THAT'S NOTHING LEAVING THE SITE.
THERE WILL NOT BE ANYTHING LEAVING THE SITE.
IT WOULD ALMOST TAKE A HUNDRED YEAR STORM TO HAVE SOMETHING EVEN TO GO THROUGH THE SITE.
UM, IT WAS PERFECTLY DESIGNED FOR FROM A STORM WATER AND A, UH, SEDIMENT EROSION CONTROL.
UH, I'VE BEEN GOING UP THERE EVER SINCE THEY STARTED BUILDING, AND I'VE ONLY HAD ONE MINOR COMPLAINT.
MAKE SURE THAT YOUR ROCK BREAKERS GO FROM ONE SIDE TO THE OTHER.
OTHER THAN THAT, THEY GOT COMPLY 100% WITH ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND ALSO THE SALT WATER, UH, CRITERIA.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR ALL? THANK YOU.
EXCEPT ANY, ANYBODY ELSE FROM YOUR NO, NO ONE ELSE.
EXCEPT MY REBUTTAL, I SUSPECT.
UH, NOW I BELIEVE FOR THE COUNTY WE HAVE, UH, MS. PROCTOR HANDWRITING.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
AGAIN, I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR REPRESENTING THE INTEREST OF THE COUNTY UNDER VIRGINIA LAW.
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATORS DETERMINATION IS PRESUMED TO BE CORRECT, AND THE BURDEN IS ON SCOUT STORAGE.
TO REBUT THAT PRESUMPTION, THAT IS A HEAVY DUTY.
IT IS BY PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE.
AND I WOULD SUBMIT THAT THE, THE SPEAKERS AND THE ARGUMENTS MADE TODAY DO NOT REACH THAT PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT MR. PAM'S DECISION WAS WRONG.
THE ZONING ZONING DE DETERMINATION IS BASED ON THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE CONDITION THAT REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION OR USE TO ACTUALLY COMMENCE WITHIN THREE YEARS OF THE GRANT OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
AND THAT WOULD'VE BEEN PRIOR TO JULY 25TH, 2025, ALMOST A YEAR AGO.
AS OF THIS THREE YEAR, MARK SCOUT HAD NOT BEGUN LAND DISTURBANCE.
THEY HAD NOT BEGUN CONSTRUCTION, WHICH IS CONCEDED.
THEY HAD NOT BEGUN ACTUAL USE OF THE PROPERTY.
THEY HAD NOT EVEN SUBMITTED A SITE PLAN FOR REVIEW BY THE, BY THE DEPARTMENT, WHAT THE, THE LATTER HALF OF, OF THE CONDITION AT QUESTION STATES CLEARLY THAT THEY MUST BE DILIGENTLY OR ACTUALLY PURSUING THE PROJECT, THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SITE PLAN.
SO THAT PART OF, OF THE CONDITION, THEY ABSOLUTELY COULD NOT HAVE COMPLIED WITH.
NO APPLICATION, NO SITE MAN SITE PLAN APPROVAL, NO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION 10 OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
THE, THE APPLICANT APPELLANT WOULD LIKE YOU TO BELIEVE THAT HE CAN ADD EXTRA WORDS INTO THIS CONDITION.
THE CONDITION SHOULD BE CONSTRUED BASED ON THE LANGUAGE THAT IS THERE.
YOU DON'T ADD LANGUAGE UNDER THE RULES OF CONSTRUCTION, CONSTRUCTION OR INTERPRETATION UNDER THE RULES OF LAW.
BUT THEY ARE ADDING LANGUAGE THAT SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION MATTERS.
THAT THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE PERMITS MATTERS AND THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE GROOMED A, A CUSTOMER FOR THE EVENTUAL ELECTRICITY MATTERS.
NONE OF THOSE, NONE OF THOSE WORDS ARE IN THE CONDITION, NOR IS THERE REASON TO PRESUME THAT THOSE WORDS SHOULD BE THERE.
YOU ARE TO LOOK AT THE WORDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR COMMON EVERYDAY MEANING.
AND THAT MEANING WHEN YOU SAY CONSTRUCTION, AND IT'S FURTHER, FURTHER DEFINED IN THE, IN THE CONDITION THAT THAT MEANS BUILDING SOME PROPORTION OF THE SOUND WALL.
THEY DON'T EVEN CLAIM THAT HAPPENED.
THERE IS NOTHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE TO THIS SITE AS OF JULY 25TH, 2025.
AND THEY HAD THREE YEARS, THREE YEARS TO DO THIS.
NOTHING, NOTHING SUBMITTED TO THE, TO THE COUNTY.
GIVEN THIS, IT IS DIFFICULT TO SAY THAT THEY HAVE SHOWN BY THE PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE THAT THEY HAVE ACTUALLY COMMENCED THE USE.
[01:35:01]
THERE'S NO, THEY ACTUALLY DON'T QUOTE ANY LAW THAT WOULD SUPPORT THEIR POSITION.THAT INVESTING MONEY AND GETTING PERMITS IS SUFFICIENT TO COMMENCE THE USE.
AND IN FACT, THAT'S NOT THE CASE WITH ANY OTHER KIND OF DEVELOPMENT.
ALL DEVELOPMENTS HAVE TO INVEST BEFORE THEY BREAK GROUND.
THEY HAVE TO GET THEIR PERMITS PR APPROVED BEFORE THEY BREAK GR GROUND.
THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN ANY OTHER DEVELOPER COMING BEFORE THE COUNTY ASKING TO PURSUE A PROJECT AND HAVING TO PURSUE THAT PROJECT WITHIN A STATED PERIOD OF TIME.
THEY WERE THE, THE STIPULATIONS, THE CONDITIONS, THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN FAMILIAR WITH THEM.
THEY SAY THEY WEREN'T, BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE.
THAT BURDEN IS ON THE APPLICANT, NOT ON ON THE COUNTY.
THE COUNTY MADE MISTAKES IN APPROVING THE SITE PLAN AND THE LAND DISTURBING PERMITS.
HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT A EASY LEGAL CONCEPT TO ACCEPT.
BUT THE, THE COUNTY IS NOT BOUND BY MISTAKES SUCH AS THAT.
AND, AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, A DIFFICULT THING TO ACCEPT.
BUT IT IS, IT IS THE FACT OF THE LAW THAT THEY ARE NOT BOUND BY THOSE MISTAKES.
AND THE, THE FINAL ANALYSIS IS DESPITE THE MISTAKES AND THE SITE PLAN WOULD BE NULL AND VOID, BE UN UNDER THE LAW OF OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH SAYS NO COUNTY EMPLOYEE HAS THE ABILITY TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT IS CONTRARY TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
THAT SITE PLAN WAS CONTRARY BECAUSE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT HAD EXPIRED, THEREFORE, THEY COULD NOT HAVE LEGITIMATELY GOTTEN APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN.
IT IS NULL AND VOID A MISTAKE, BUT NOT BINDING ON THE COUNTY.
AGAIN, I KNOW THAT'S A HARD CONCEPT.
IT SEEMS UNFAIR, BUT IT IS THE LAW OF VIRGINIA.
SO SCOUT WANTS TO ADD THOSE, ADD WORDS TO THE CONDITION THAT AREN'T THERE.
THAT IS IN CONTRAVENTION TO THE RULES OF STATUTORY COM.
UH, CONSTRUCTION IN VIRGINIA, YOU DON'T ADD RULES, WORDS, YOU GO WITH THE WORDS THAT ARE IN, IN THE CONDITION AND YOU CONSTRUE THEM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR ORDINARY MEANING.
THEY INVESTED MONEY AND TIME, BUT THAT DOES NOT AMOUNT TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE USE, NOR DOES IT MEAN THEY HAVE A SITE PLAN THAT THEY WERE PURSUING AS OF JULY 25TH, 2025, FOR THESE REASONS.
AND ALSO NOT DISCOUNTING EVERYTHING THAT THE SPEAKERS HAD TO SAY, BUT AS FAR AS EQUITABLE STANDPOINT.
BUT AS FAR AS DETERMINING WHAT HAPPENED UNDER THE RULES OF LAW THAT GUIDE YOUR INTERPRETATION, THOSE, MOST OF THOSE COMMENTS DID NOT MATTER.
THEY WERE NOT RELEVANT TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT THE CONDITION ACTUALLY MEANS.
SO CONSTRUING THAT CONDITION IN, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF STATUTORY, UH, INTERPRETATION.
AND ALSO TO AVOID A VERY BAD PRECEDENT WHEREBY ANYONE COULD SPEND MONEY AND COME BACK AND SAY, OH, WE WE'RE VESTED.
WE DID OUR, WE DID OUR, WE STARTED WORK BECAUSE WE PUT MONEY INTO IT.
SO WE WOULD BE SUFFERING A VERY BAD PRECEDENT IF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATORS DETERMINE IS NOT UPHELD.
AND FOR ALL OF THESE REASONS, WE ASK THAT THE BOARD UPHOLD THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DETERMINATION.
AND I AM HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.
ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE, UH, SEVERAL QUESTIONS.
UM, YOU TALK ABOUT A PRECEDENT, IT'S NOT A VERY GOOD PRECEDENT IF THE COUNTY RENEG ON PERMITS AND LEAVES INVESTORS HIGH AND DRY.
THE STATUTE OF VESTED INTEREST FOR THE COMMONWEALTH TALKS ABOUT TWO THINGS, GOOD FAITH EFFORTS, WHICH BASED ON WHAT THEY'VE SAID THEY'VE DONE, AND A PERMIT BEING ISSUED.
SO, SO, SO UNDER THE LAW SUPPOSED TO BE DONE AGAIN, HARD TO ACCEPT, BUT UNDER THE LAW, THE APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN AND THE ISSUANCE OF THE LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT ARE NULL AND VOID BECAUSE THE APPROVAL WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE, WHICH SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT IF AN EMPLOYEE OR STAFF MAKES A MISTAKE IN APPROVING SOMETHING, THEY ARE NOT BOUND BY THAT MISTAKE.
[01:40:01]
THAT DOESN'T SOUND FAIR, BUT IT IS THE STATE OF THE LAW.AND AGAIN, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT, AT THE APPLICANT'S DUTY, THE APPELLANT'S DUTY TO BE AWARE OF THOSE CONDITIONS.
THEY WERE AWARE OF SEVERAL OTHERS.
IT'S, IT'S INCONCEIVABLE TO ME THAT THEY JUST ACTUALLY SKIPPED THAT CONDITION AND DIDN'T NOTICE AND DIDN'T ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR BEGINNING WORK IN A TIMELY MANNER.
THAT'S A TOUGH PILL TO SWALLOW.
'CAUSE WHEN I SIGN SOMETHING, I GET HELD RESPONSIBLE.
BUT THERE ARE SPECIAL RULES FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND I, THEY'RE RIGHT IN THE CODE.
UM, I THINK THEN MY SECOND QUESTION, DEAL DOES DEAL WITH SPECIAL, IT'S HARD TO REMEMBER, BUT THIS WAS BACK AT THE END OR THE TAIL END OF THE COVID.
I HAD A MEETING WITH THE PRIOR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, UH, RICH MORRISON AT THAT TIME, YES, OVER SOME TRAILER PARKS, AND MAYBE IT WAS A HOMETOWN CALL OR WHATEVER, BUT HE MADE IT VERY CLEAR THAT BECAUSE OF COVID AND THE SUPPLY CHAIN DISRUPTIONS, THE STATE WAS GOING LENIENT ON THE TIMELINE FOR PERMITS.
AND HE DIDN'T SAY IF THEY WERE STOPPING THE CLOCK OR JUST BEING GENEROUS WITH WHAT WAS BEING DONE.
BUT I LEFT THE MEETING WITH A VERY STRONG OPINION THAT I HAD 12 OR 18 MORE MONTHS 'CAUSE OF COVID.
SO IS THERE ANYTHING FROM THE COMMONWEALTH ABOUT THAT? SO THE COMMONWEALTH DID ADOPT OR ENACT SEVERAL PROVISIONS BASED ON COVID SAYING THAT IF YOU HAD A SITE PLAN APPROVED OR ANY KIND OF PERMIT APPROVED, THEY WERE GONNA EXTEND THAT THAT PERMIT WAS AUTOMATICALLY EXTENDED.
THE DISTINCTION HERE, THEY HAD NO PERMIT APPROVED.
THEY HAD, THEY HAD A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS THAT THEY DID NOT MEET.
AND THEY DID NOT HAVE A BUILDING PERMIT.
THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING, A LAND DISTURBING PERMIT, ANYTHING THAT WOULD'VE FALLEN UNDER THAT STATUTE AS BEING EXTENDED DUE TO COVID.
AND NOW THE APPLICATION OF THAT STATUTE IS NO LONGER IN EFFECT.
AND, AND THEY CANNOT TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT STATUTE.
SO YES, THE, THE, THE STATE DID PROVIDE RELIEF.
THAT RELIEF TRICKLED DOWN TO THE COUNTIES AND THE, AND THE LOCALITIES IN VIRGINIA.
BUT IT DID NOT APPLY IN THIS SITUATION.
WE DIDN'T HAVE A SPECIAL LAW, BY THE WAY, THE, THE COUNTY DID NOT ADOPT ITS OWN LAW.
HE SAID IT CAME FROM HIGHER UP.
IT DID, BUT IT DOESN'T APPLY IN THIS SITUATION.
I, BECAUSE OF COVID, YOU COULDN'T DO THINGS.
SO WHY WOULDN'T IT APPLY IN THAT SITUATION? BECAUSE OF COVID? I, I DON'T BELIEVE THEY COULD NOT HAVE GONE TO AN ENGINEER AND GOTTEN PLANS DRAWN UP.
I THERE ARE THINGS YOU COULD DO WITHOUT CONTACT BETWEEN PEOPLE.
I MEAN, THE WORLD DIDN'T STOP.
ENGINEERING STILL WENT ON, GOVERNMENT STILL WENT ON.
AND, AND THEY, AND COVID ENDED WHAT, LATE 2020, EARLY 2021, THE STATE, YOU STILL HAVE FOUR YEARS FOR THEM TO COMPLY.
THEY LIFTED IT IN 2023, THE COVID.
SO THEY STILL HAD TWO YEARS TO COMPLY TO GO TO AN ENGINEER AND SAY, WE NEED SITE PLANS TO GO TO PROVIDE A LAND DISTURBING PLAN TO LEE AND HIS STAFF SO THAT A LAND DISTURBING PERMITS COULD BE ISSUED.
HAD THAT HAPPENED AND THERE WAS LAND DISTURBANCE GOING ON, IT WOULD BE A WHOLE DIFFERENT FACTUAL SCENARIO.
WHY WAS THE PERMIT ISSUED THIS YEAR? THE, THE PERMIT WAS ISSUED IN 2020.
DO, DOES ANYONE KNOW? MARCH 10TH, 2025, THEREABOUT 20 20 26.
THEREFORE WE'RE LOOKING AT 2022 EXPIRED IN 25 IN JULY 25.
THE LAND DISTURBING PERMIT AND SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED, UH, MARCH 10TH OF 26TH OF THIS YEAR.
BUT THE QUESTION, THE QUESTION IS, I UNDERSTAND IT WAS WHY DID WE APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TWO YEARS AFTER COVID IS WHEN THIS HAPPENED? NO, I MEAN, WHY DID YOU APPROVE THE PERMIT? WHY WAS IT ISSUED IN 2026? IT WAS ISSUED IN 2022.
NO, THE PER THE SITE, YOU ACCEPTED THE SITE PLAN AND THE SOIL DISTURBANCE.
BUT AGAIN, HARD I I SEE IT'S HARD TO, TO UNDERSTAND, HARD TO ABSORB.
WE ARE NOT BOUND BY THAT MISTAKE BECAUSE THE APPROVAL WAS NOT AUTHORIZED BY,
[01:45:01]
BY THE MACK COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE.AND WE HAVE, WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, CODE SECTIONS TO VERIFY THAT WE HAVE CASE LAW THAT WILL TELL YOU ESTOPPEL DOESN'T WORK AGAINST LOCALITIES.
THERE'S ALL KINDS OF LAW THAT SUPPORT THE THREE YEAR EXPIRATION AND ACTUALLY ENFORCING THAT THREE YEAR EXPIRATION DESPITE MISTAKES BY STAFF.
WE ALL MAKE MISTAKES, BUT, AND YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK UP BARNES VERSUS MACK, WHERE THE COUNTY SENT MY CLIENT A LETTER SAYING THEY WOULD FIX A PROBLEM AND THEN TRIED TO RENEGE IT.
WE TOOK THEM TO COURT AND WE WON.
AND THEY AUTHORIZED THE ENFORCEMENT OF THAT LETTER.
WE'RE NOT KNOWING THE FACTS OF THAT CASE.
BUT THE FACTS OF THIS CASE ARE VERY CLEAR THAT THERE WAS NO ACTION TAKEN FOR THREE YEARS TO EVEN SUBMIT A PERMIT, MUCH LESS BEGIN DISTURBING LAND, MUCH LESS BEGIN CONSTRUCTION.
SO YOU'RE SAYING MUCH LESS ACTUALLY COMMENCE USE.
SO YOU'RE SAYING GOOD FAITH EFFORTS DON'T INCLUDE ALL THE SITE WORKERS.
THAT'S ALL A QUESTION OF VESTED RIGHTS.
THEY SORT OF VEER INTO VESTED RIGHTS.
THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT DETERMINATION.
THAT'S COMING BEFORE YOU, UH, MAYBE NOT NEXT MONTH, BUT THE MONTH AFTER, THEY'VE FILED A WHOLE NOTHER REQUEST FOR THAT DETERMINATION.
AND SO THAT THE GOOD FAITH DOES NOT PLAY INTO THIS CONSIDERATION.
THIS CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THEY COMPLIED WITH THAT CONDITION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THAT GAVE THEM THREE YEARS TO DO A LOT OF THINGS THAT THEY DID NOT DO.
CAN I ASK MR. MR. CHAIRMAN, DON'T ME INTO AN OFFICE, ARE WE GONNA BE GETTING A SERIES OF THESE APPEALS FROM THE SAME PEOPLE? NO, NO.
I, IT IT'S VERY UNUSUAL THAT THIS, THAT THIS SORT OF THING HAPPENED FROM THE, YOU WILL GET AN APPEAL ON THE VESTED RIGHTS, I'M SURE.
AND, AND THAT'S A DIFFICULT CONSIDERATION, BUT THAT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT SET, SET OF LAW LAWS AND REGULATIONS THAT DON'T COME INTO FACTORING HERE.
HERE IS INTERPRETING A CONDITION BY ITS PLAIN LANGUAGE, NOT ADDING LANGUAGE THAT'S NOT IN THE, IN THE CONDITION.
UM, SO WHEN WAS THE, UH, PROJECT PURCHASED FROM JUPITER? I, I HONESTLY WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TO THE APPLICANT.
SO THEY DIDN'T HAVE MUCH TIME, BUT THAT DOESN'T EXCUSE THE FACT THAT JUPITER HAD A LOT OF TIME MM-HMM
AND I WOULD ASSUME THAT, UH, PURCHASING THE PROJECT, THAT THE CUP WOULD BE A POINT OF DISCUSSION IN THE DEAL.
I WOULD ASSUME THAT THEY ACTUALLY REVIEWED THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE ATTACHED TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
BUT THAT IS AN ASSUMPTION ON MY PART.
I THINK A PRUDENT BUYER WOULD HAVE CERTAINLY DONE THAT.
AND THEY CERTAINLY ARE AWARE OF SOME OF THE OTHER CONDITIONS IN THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, JUST CONVENIENTLY, NOT THIS ONE ACCORDING TO THEIR TESTIMONY BEFORE THE COURT.
BECAUSE THERE WAS, YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN JUPITER HAD IT, THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK DONE FILED THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO GET THIS PROJECT OFF THE GROUND.
AND SO FROM THAT COMPONENT, THE COUNTY WAS IN SUPPORT TO IT.
WE WERE, WE WERE IN SUPPORT ON THE CONDITION THAT THAT WORK COMMENCED.
THE USE COMMENCED WITHIN THE THREE YEAR PERIOD.
THAT CONDITION IS BINDING, IS BINDING ON THE APPLICANT.
AND TO COME IN AND TRY TO REWRITE IT ESSENTIALLY TO SAY, OH, WE PUT MONEY IN, THEREFORE WE'RE ENTITLED.
THAT IS NOT A NORMAL OR ACCEPTABLE INTERPRETATION OF A CONDITION THAT VERY SIMPLY SAYS YOU HAVE THREE YEARS TO COMMENCE CONSTRUCTION OR ACTUAL USE AND PURSUE APPROVED SITE PLANS.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO TO THE, I'M SURE WE HAVE A REBUTTAL AND, AND I DO HAVE ONE OTHER POINT.
THEY HAD TIME TO REAPPLY, ASSUMING THEY, I AGREE.
[01:50:01]
HAD TIME TO APPLY FOR RENEWAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.THEY LET THAT DEADLINE GO AS WELL.
THEY HAD TWO MONTHS TO DO THAT.
ASSUMING THEY HAD DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE AND READ THE CONDITIONS AND KNEW IT WAS GONNA EXPIRE, THEY SHOULD HAVE JUMPED ON IT RIGHT THEN AND APPLIED FOR THE RENEWAL.
DID YOU NEED DO A REBUTTAL BEFORE WE GO TO THE YOU WANT ME TO DO IT BEFORE THE PUBLIC COMMENT? SURE.
WHAT I MEAN, DO YOU, YOU PICK YOUR TIME.
I, WELL, I'D RATHER DO IT AFTER.
WELL, WE HAVE, WE HAVE PLENTY OF PUBLIC COMMENT.
THE PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE LIMITED TO FOUR MINUTES.
PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU, YOU HAVE, UH, YOUR IDEAS CONCISE.
ARE YOU GONNA KEEP TIME FOR US? YES, SIR.
UH, FIRST I THINK, IS IT, UH, SHARON DAVIS, WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME? SHARON DAVIS.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? I DO.
WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE WITH US? WELL, I AM A PROPERTY OWNER ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY THAT THE APPLICANT OWNS.
UM, IN THAT PROPERTY, I HAVE 26, UH, FAMILY RENTALS TO LOW INCOME.
UM, I PROVIDE LOW INCOME HOUSING.
IT'S PROBABLY 60 RESIDENTS IN THAT WITHIN THE WATVILLE AREA, THERE'S PROBABLY 200, 250 MORE RESIDENCE HOMES WITHIN A HALF A MILE OF THIS PROPERTY.
AND SO, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ZONED INDUSTRIAL, UM, I THINK THAT ONE OF THE POINTS THAT WAS MADE BY THE COUNTY AND APPLICANTS BEFORE THAT HAVE BEEN HEARD TODAY, THE, UM, RIGHTS OF THE RESIDENCES AND THE RIGHTS OF A RESIDENTIAL AREA HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED.
UM, I WAS A PART OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, MEETINGS THAT HAPPENED BACK YEARS AGO.
UM, MR. GALE AND THE REST OF THE COMMISSIONERS LISTENED TO A LOT OF NEGATIVE COMMENTS AND, UM, IT STILL PASSED AND SO WE WENT AWAY.
BUT THOSE THAT SPOKE OUT AGAINST IT, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TODAY TO BE HEARD AGAIN, AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY.
UM, ONE THING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP, UM, MR. BOL BROUGHT UP ABOUT DURING COVID, THIS WAS DEFINITELY NOT DURING COVID BECAUSE WE ALL WERE IN THAT FACILITY AND THERE WERE NO MASKS.
AND, UM, I THINK THAT'S A REACH FOR THAT TO BE BROUGHT UP BECAUSE WE WERE DEFINITELY NOT INFORMED ANYTHING ABOUT COVID.
UM, IN THIS STATE, THERE ARE OTHER STORAGE, UH, BATTERY STORAGE FACILITIES.
UM, WE HAVE SOME ON THE EASTERN SHORE, BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT ONES THAT ARE OFF THE SHORE.
THAT HAPPENED BEFORE THESE FACILITIES WERE BROUGHT TO THE EASTERN SHORE.
THESE COMPANIES INTRODUCED THEM HERE.
I ASK YOU AS MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD, WOULD YOU WANT THIS SITTING IN YOUR BACKYARD OR YOUR FRONT YARD? THIS IS IN DANVILLE, DANVILLE, VIRGINIA.
THIS IS WHAT ANY RESIDENT THAT'S WITHIN THAT PROPERTY AREA IS GONNA OPEN THEIR DOOR UP OR LOCATE THEIR WINDOW AND SEE, AND I'LL SHOW IT TO ALL YOU OFF.
THIS FACILITY IS BUILT IN DANVILLE, AND I'LL HAND THIS TO Y'ALL SO YOU CAN PASS IT AROUND.
IT'S BUILT IN DANVILLE, UM, IN AN INDUSTRIAL AREA, BUT IT'S SURROUNDED BY OTHER INDUSTRIAL BUSINESSES, NOT RESIDENCES.
UM, ALSO THAT THERE IS ANOTHER FACILITY IN THAT IN VIRGINIA, UM, IT'S BERRY HILL, ANG SIDE OF DANVILLE.
THIS FACILITY IS IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE, BASICALLY SURROUNDED BY WOODS.
UM, GOVERNOR KIN WENT THERE AND HAS DONE THE DEDICATION YOUR TIME'S UP.
LAURA TWEER, WOULD YOU GIVE YOUR NAME? LAURA TWEER.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO.
AND I THINK, RAY, YOU'RE JUST FOR SUPPORT, RIGHT? HE IS.
[01:55:01]
CAN COME INTO THE RESTAURANT.I CAN TALK TO YOU ALL DAY LONG.
YOU PUT ME UP AGAINST ONE OF THESE AND I'M HAVING A HEART ATTACK.
SERIOUSLY, LIKE EVERYTHING'S EXPLODING.
SO A LOT OF WHAT I, UM, CARE TO ADDRESS REALLY ALMOST SEEMS INSIGNIFICANT BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF LEGAL WRANGLING THAT'S GOING ON WITH ALL OF THIS.
WE WERE PART, UH, LIKE SHARON AND SO MANY OTHERS, WE WERE PART OF ALL THOSE INITIAL MEETINGS BACK IN 20 21, 20 22, BEGINNING WITH THE INITIAL MEETING WITH SCOUT JUPITER AT THE FIREHOUSE BEFORE ANY OF THE PUBLIC MEETINGS EVEN TOOK PLACE.
MY CONCERN THROUGH EVERYTHING HAS BEEN THE SAFETY AND WHAT CAN ACTUALLY HAPPEN WITH THESE THINGS.
OKAY? THE EXPLOSIONS, THE CHEMICAL RELEASES, UM, I KNOW EVERYBODY WAS, WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE SOUND.
UH, SCOUT JUPITER HAD THE, UM, ACOUSTIC WALLS WERE SUPPOSED TO BE PUT UP ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND THE EAST SIDE BEFORE ANYTHING COMMENCED.
JUST RECENTLY, WE HAD THE CHANCE TO TALK WITH, UM, MR. DUKES, UH, JUST HAPPENED BY, DOWN AT OUR, OUR PROPERTY.
I GUESS I SHOULD HAVE STARTED WITH.
WE OWN FIVE PROPERTIES UP AGAINST THIS, OUR HOME, MY CHILDREN, MY GRANDCHILDREN, A RENTAL HOUSE, A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IS ALL ALONG, UH, FLEMING ROAD, UH, ADJACENT TO THIS, THIS BATTERY STORAGE.
OKAY? SO WHEN WE TALKED TO HIM, ONE OF THE THINGS HE DISCUSSED WAS HOW HE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH HIS WIFE ABOUT ONE OF THESE BATTERY STORAGE UNITS THAT'S ALREADY IN PLACE AND HOW IT LOOKED LIKE A PRISON.
SO THEY DISCUSSED AMONGST THEMSELVES THAT THEY THOUGHT IT WOULD BE BETTER TO HAVE LIKE A SHEET METAL WALL WITH SOME KIND OF INSULATION BEHIND IT.
UM, INSTEAD OF WHAT WE UNDERSTOOD TO BE THE ACOUSTIC WALLS THAT YOU SEE ALONG THE SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY, WHICH SCOUT JUPITER HAD DEFINITIVE PLANS FOR AND TO MAKE IT LOOK APPEALING.
NOT LIKE A PRISON, NOT A CINDER BLOCK WALL.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE, WHERE ALL OF THESE PLANS WERE ABLE TO BE CHANGED JUST ON A CONVERSATION, MAYBE AT A DINNER TABLE.
UH, I DON'T FEEL LIKE THIS HAS GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT THE INITIAL ONE WENT THROUGH.
UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE I WAS TOLD, YOU KNOW, THAT WITHIN A MILE WE COULD HAVE TO EVACUATE AND, AND, UH, MR. DUKE SAID, UH, NO, THEY'VE, THEY'VE SHORTENED THAT DOWN BECAUSE THERE'S SOMETHING WITH THESE NEW BATTERIES, BUT THAT WE MAY HAVE TO EVACUATE.
OKAY, SO WHERE ARE WE GONNA EVACUATE TO FOR HOW LONG? WHO'S IN CHARGE OF THAT? WHO DETERMINES WHEN THAT'S SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN? WHAT IF WE'RE WE RUN A BUSINESS? WHAT IF WE'RE NOT HOME AT THE TIME THIS HAPPENS, DOES THAT MEAN WE CAN'T GO HOME? YOU KNOW, WHERE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING YOU WANNA DO BATTERY STORAGE, YOU WANNA PROTECT THE GRID.
THIS IS A BUY LOW SELL HIGH TO THE CURRENT HIGHEST BIDDER ON AUCTION BLOCK AT PGM.
ALRIGHT? THIS IS NOT GONNA BENEFIT ANYBODY IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA.
WE'RE GONNA BE ACKNOWLEDGED TOMORROW AS A MATTER OF FACT FOR OUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THIS COMMUNITY AND THIS COUNTY AND THIS STATE.
I DON'T FEEL LIKE ANYBODY FROM TEXAS AND ARIZONA IS DOING ANYTHING FOR OUR LOCAL BASEBALL TEAM.
YOU KNOW, I JUST, I DON'T WANNA BE, I DON'T WANNA SOUND LIKE THIS IS JUST A PERSONAL THING, BUT IT'S, IT'S COMING INTO OUR BACKYARD QUITE LITERALLY.
IT'S COMING INTO OUR BACKYARD AND I, I JUST WANNA KNOW THAT SOMEBODY IS PAYING ATTENTION AND HAS SOMETHING IN MIND FOR OUR, OUR PROTECTIONS.
BECAUSE SINCE JANUARY, SINCE THEY STARTED DOING THIS IN JANUARY AND WE'VE WATCHED THE PROGRESS, IT WAS AS CLOSE TO A CONVEYOR BELT OF TRUCKS GOING IN THERE.
AND THIS WAS MORE TO US LIKE A SITUATION OF IT IS BETTER TO ASK FORGIVENESS THAN PERMISSION.
THAT'S WHAT THIS HAS FELT LIKE FOR THE PAST SIX MONTHS.
I LIVE, UH, JUST THE OTHER SIDE OF THE MILL POND.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? YES, I DO.
UH, THE ONLY GOOD THING I CAN SAY ABOUT THIS PROJECT, IT'S GONNA PLOP THE ROUTE WIDENING OF ROUTE 1 75 BECAUSE THIS THING HAS NO SETBACK TO TURN AROUND AND ALLOW 'EM TO EVER WIDEN 1 75 THROUGH THERE.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY GOOD THING I'VE GOT TO SAY.
UH, I'VE GOT CONCERNS ABOUT SAFETY.
AS YOU NOTED THE ALREADY REPORTED THAT THE BATTERIES ARE DEGRADING, THEY'RE HAZARDOUS EQUIPMENT.
SO WE'VE GOT A BUNCH OF HAZARDS.
LITHIUM SITTING OVER THERE DEGRADING
[02:00:01]
BY THEIR OWN WORDS.UH, THEY SAID THEY TURNED AROUND AND BROUGHT THE FIRST ONE BATTERIES OUT IN UH, DECEMBER.
WELL, UH, THERE'S STILL BEING ONLY TAXED $2,600 A YEAR, BASICALLY, MAYBE 27.
THEY HAVEN'T PAID 'EM YET THIS QUARTER.
WE HAD CHECKED THE WEBSITE THIS MORNING, BUT, UH, IF THEY GOT $13 MILLION INVESTMENT AND THEY'RE NOT PAYING ANY TAXES REPORTING TO PERSONAL PROPERTY, WE'VE GOT A PROBLEM THERE.
THEY HAVE NOT COMMENCED ACTUAL USE.
THEY'VE TAKEN STEPS TOWARDS IT.
BUT AS I SAID, YOU KNOW, BY THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE WALL'S NOT BUILT, WE DON'T HAVE A WALL.
THEY'RE NOT OPERATING IN GOOD FAITH.
THEY'VE DONE THIS BEFORE OVER IN THEY OPERATE, THEY BUILT TALY, BUT, UH, SO THEY KNOW WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO.
YOU KNOW, BECAUSE SOME LAWYER DIDN'T DO THEIR DUE DILIGENCE PROPERLY WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY FROM JUPITER.
THEY MAY BE FACING A MALPRACTICE CLAIM, YOU KNOW, AND OPERATING THERE AND MAYBE HERE ON THEIR OWN DIME.
UH, WE MENTIONED EARLIER WE HAD TALKED ABOUT ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.
EACH OF THESE, UH, FOR THE PREVIOUS EVENT, EACH OF THESE CONTAINERS WOULD THEN NOT BE AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY ON PERMITTED.
IT'S A HIGH VISIBILITY AREA WITH A LOT OF TRAFFIC THROUGH THERE.
THAT'S WHY THEY WANNA WIDEN 1 75, WHICH I OPPOSE ACTUALLY
UH, THERE'S ADVERSE IMPACT ADJACENT PROPERTIES, PARTICULARLY THE LOW INCOME TRAILER PARK RIGHT BETWEEN
I, UH, I DO LIKE THE FACT THEY MENTIONED THAT THEY WERE GONNA COMPLY WITH THE ABILITY TO HAVE SOME ONSITE FIREFIGHTING CAPABILITY, BUT THIS IS AN AFTER THE FACT DEAL AND WE KNOW THAT THEY'VE TURNED AROUND AND GONE AHEAD AND OPERATED.
SURE THE COUNTY MADE A MISTAKE, BUT THE LAWS PRETTY CLEAR ON WHAT THAT HAPPENS AS A RESULT OF THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NULL AND VOID.
SO WE NEED TO TURN AROUND AND, UH, END THIS THING NOW.
OH,
I GOT, IS IT BOLES? THAT WAS, THAT WAS ME.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU GONNA SIGN.
UH, TAYLOR DUKES HARD AND SPOKE.
MY NAME IS SANDRA BOWDEN AND I, UM, DO I NEED TO DO THIS? YES, YES.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? YES.
SO MY, MY CONCERNS ARE ALSO THE SAFETY.
I AM, UM, THE TREASURER FOR ATLANTIC VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY.
UM, AND I KNOW THAT MR. DUKES HAS SPOKE TO OUR FIRE CHIEF ABOUT TRAINING AND SUCH.
UM, BUT IF ONE OF THESE WERE TO EXPLODE, AS LAURA MENTIONED EARLIER, UM, WHO IS IN CHARGE OF, UM, GETTING EVERYONE OUT SAFELY IF THEY CAN, HOW LONG IS IT GONNA TAKE? MY JOB IS WITHIN THAT MILE.
I KNOW THAT THEY SAID THAT IT'S A LITTLE LESS THAN A MILE.
HOWEVER, WHAT ARE GONNA BE THE LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF A FIRE? UM, AN EXPLOSION OR SUCH? AND, UM, IF WE ALREADY HAVE A FACILITY IN HASSLEY, WHY CAN'T WE DO SOME TRAINING THERE? SO THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS IS THE SAFETY FOR EVERYONE AROUND.
LINDSEY, WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR FULL NAME PLEASE? MY NAME'S LINDSAY OMS. LINDSEY, DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO YOU GUIDE? I DO.
THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
MY NAME'S LINDSAY OMS AND I LIVE HERE ON THE EASTERN SHORE OF VIRGINIA IN WATVILLE, RIGHT BEHIND THIS PROPERTY.
I'M HERE TODAY TO OPPOSE THIS PROPOSED THE BATTERY STORAGE FACILITY PLAN FOR THE FIELD DIRECTLY BEHIND MY HOME.
FOR YEARS, THIS FIELD HAS BEEN MORE THAN JUST OPEN LAND.
IT'S BEEN A PART OF THE LANDSCAPE THAT MAKES THE EASTERN SHORE SPECIAL.
IT PROVIDES SCENIC BEAUTY, WILDLIFE, HABITAT, OPEN SPACE, AND A SENSE OF PEACE THAT MANY OF US HAS CHOSE THIS COMMUNITY FOR.
WITH THAT FIELD BEING CONVERTED TO AN INDUSTRIAL SCALE BATTERY STORAGE SITE, THAT CHARACTER IS GONE FOREVER.
[02:05:01]
IF YOU OR I WERE SPENDING MILLIONS ON ANYTHING, WOULDN'T YOU DOT YOUR I'S AND CROSS YOUR T'S, WOULDN'T YOU? THE PERMIT NEEDED TO BE RENEWED.THIS PROJECT IS BEING PRESENTED AS PROGRESS, BUT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE WITH ITS IMPACTS EVERY DAY DESERVE A CLOSER LOOK AT THE RISKS AND THE CONSEQUENCES THAT THIS COULD HOLD.
MY PRIMARY CONCERN IS THE SAFETY BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN FIRES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.
WHILE DEVELOPERS OFTEN EMPHASIZE THAT THESE EVENTS ARE RARE, THE REALITY IS THAT WHEN BATTERY FIRES OCCUR, THEY'RE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO CONTROL.
THEY CAN BE BURNED FOR EXTENDED PERIODS, REIGNITE AFTER A PERIOD AFTER APPEARING EXTINGUISHED, AND REQUIRE SPECIALIZED TRAINING AND EQUIPMENT TO MANAGE.
THIS BRINGS ANOTHER CRITICAL IN, UH, ISSUE OUR EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITIES.
THE EASTERN SHORE IS A RURAL AREA.
OUR FIREFIGHTERS WORK HARD AND SERVE COMMUNITIES WITH DEDICATION.
MANY ARE JUST VOLUNTEERS, BUT RESOURCES ARE ALREADY STRETCHED THIN.
MANY DEPARTMENTS RELY HEAVILY ON JUST THESE VOLUNTEERS.
RESPONSE TIMES CAN BE LONGER THAN THAT IN URBAN AREAS AND SPECIALIZED HAZARDOUS MATERIAL TRAINING AND EQUIPMENT THAT IS LIMITED.
IF A BATTERY STORAGE FIRE WERE TO OCCUR, WHO WILL BEAR THIS BURDEN? IT WILL NOT BE THE DEVELOPERS WHO LIVE HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF MILES AWAY.
IT'LL BE OUR LOCAL FIREFIGHTERS, OUR EMERGENCY PERSONNEL, AND OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO ARE ASKED TO RESPOND TO A HIGHLY TECHNICAL AND POTENTIAL DANGEROUS SITUATION.
BEFORE APPROVING THIS PROJECT, ANY FURTHER DECISION MAKERS SHOULD ANSWER SOME BASIC QUESTIONS.
WHO'S GOING TO FUND THIS TRAINING REQUIRED FOR OUR LOCAL FIREFIGHTERS? WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR THE ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT THAT NEED THAT IS NECESSARY? WHAT EMERGENCY PLANS ARE IN PLACE FOR RESIDENTS? THERE ARE ALSO QUALITY OF LIFE CONCERNS.
PROPERTY OWNERS WHO HAVE INVESTED THEIR SAVINGS, THEIR FUTURES INTO HOMES OVERLOOKING, OVERLOOKING OPEN FARMLAND ARE NOW FACING AN INDUSTRIAL FACILITY RIGHT IN OUR BACK.
MANY RESIDENTS WORRY ABOUT IMPACTS ON PROPERTY VALUES, VISUAL CHARACTER, AND THE OVERALL ATTRACTIVENESS OF THIS AREA THAT WE HAVE ALL BECOME COME TO CALL HOME.
THIS EASTERN SHORE ECONOMY DEPENDS HEAVILY ON AGRICULTURE, TOURISM, AND THE NATURAL BEAUTY THAT DRAWS PEOPLE HERE.
OPEN FIELDS, FARMS, WATERWAYS, AND THE RURAL LANDSCAPES ARE NOT OBSTACLES TO DEVELOPMENT.
THEY'RE VALUABLE ASSETS THAT ARE WORTH PROTECTING.
I'M NOT STANDING HERE TODAY OPPOSED TO ALL RENEWABLE ENERGY OR THE ADVANCEMENT OF OUR COMMUNITY.
WE WANT RELIABLE ENERGY FOR THE FUTURE, FUTURE, BUT SUPPORTING CLEAN ENERGY SHOULD NOT MEAN SACRIFICING THE SAFETY CHARACTER AND WELLBEING OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE EXPECTED TO HOST THESE PROJECTS, ALONG WITH FOLLOWING THE EVERYDAY RULES THAT YOU AND I WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW.
UH, COULD WE HEAR FROM SAVANNAH FULLER? WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME? SAVANNAH FULLER.
DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH WHOLE THE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO.
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND OTHER PEOPLE THAT HAVE JOINED US HERE TODAY.
TODAY I AM NOT HERE AS AN EXPERT ENGINEER OR A DEVELOPER OR SOMEONE TO ARGUE ABOUT LAWS.
BUT AS SOMEONE WHO GREW UP ON THE EASTERN SHORE OF VIRGINIA AND AS SOMEONE AS A CHILD WHO SPENT CATLESS DAYS IN THAT FIELD WHERE THIS BATTERY STORAGE PLANT IS BEING PROPOSED, WHEN I LOOK AT THAT FIELD, I DON'T SEE AN EMPTY PIECE OF LAND WAITING FOR DEVELOPMENT.
I SEE A PLACE WHERE I CHASED FIREFLIES ON SUMMER EVENINGS, PLAYED HIDE AND SEEK IN THE CORN, SPENT TIME BONDING OVER BUGS WITH MY BROTHERS, AND LEARNING TO APPRECIATE THE BEAUTY AND PEACE THAT MAKE THE EASTERN SHORE SO SPECIAL.
IT'S PART OF THE LANDSCAPE THAT SHAPED MY CHILDHOOD AND HELPED ME MAKE ME WHO I AM TODAY.
THE EASTERN SHORES SO UNIQUE PEOPLE DON'T COME HERE FOR INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES.
THEY COME HERE FOR THE OPEN FARMLAND, THE WILDLIFE, QUIET NIGHTS AND SENSE OF COMMUNITY.
ONCE THOSE THINGS ARE GONE, WE CAN SIMPLY NOT PUT THEM BACK.
I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF ENERGY AND THE NEED TO PLAN FOR THE FUTURE, BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT WHERE WE PLACE THESE PROJECTS MATTERS.
A BATTERY STORAGE FACILITY BEHIND HOMES AND IN FIELDS NEXT TO WHERE FAMILIES LIVE, CHILDREN'S PLAY AND GENERATIONS HAVE BUILT MEMORIES IS NOT THE RIGHT LOCATION.
MANY RESIDENTS HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT POTENTIAL FIRE RISKS AND THE IMPACT ON SAFETY PROPERTY VALUES, EVEN IF THE SAFETY MEASURES ARE FOLLOWED.
THE REALITY IS THAT THIS TYPE OF INDUSTRIAL PROJECT CHANGES THE CHARACTER OF A NEIGHBORHOOD FOREVER.
THE VIEW OF OUR BACKYARDS CHANGES.
THE FEELINGS OF LIVING IN A RURAL COMMUNITY CHANGES THE SENSE OF PEACE THAT DREW MANY OF US HERE CHANGES A CHILD GROWING AS A CHILD.
GROWING UP ON THE EASTERN SHORE, I LEARNED THAT LAND IS MORE THAN PROPERTY LINES ON A MAP.
IT IS WHERE FAMILIES GATHER, WHERE TRADITIONS ARE PASSED DOWN AND WHERE MEMORIES ARE MADE.
THE FIELD BEHIND MY HOME IS PART OF THAT STORY.
THIS MOR THIS MORNING I ASKED YOU TO CONSIDER NOT ONLY THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS BEING PRESENTED, BUT ALSO WHAT COULD BE LOST.
THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN GROWING UP HERE TODAY AND THE MEMORIES THAT THEY DESERVE TO MAKE.
THINK ABOUT THE GENERATIONS WHO
[02:10:01]
HAVE CARED FOR THIS LAND BEFORE US.THINK ABOUT WHETHER THIS PROJECT TRULY BELONGS IN THE HEART OF A RESIDENCE AND AGRICULTURAL COMMUNITY.
THE DECISIONS IN THIS ROOM WILL LAST FOR LONGER THAN ANY OF US.
PLEASE PROTECT THE CHARACTER, BEAUTY AND HERITAGE OF THE EASTERN SHORE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND LETTING ME SPEAK.
WE DO WANNA THANK ALL OF THE CITIZENS THAT SHOWED UP, UH, THAT ENDS, UH, THAT PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW.
SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GIVE US YOUR REBUTTAL? I APOLOGIZE.
WE'LL SLOW GETTING TO THE PODIUM.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AGAIN.
SO, UM, CAN WE TURN TO SLIDE NUMBER FOUR? UM, BACK, UH, GO BACK.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN THE CUP WAS APPROVED, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MADE THESE SPECIFIC FINDINGS.
AND THEY LISTENED TO THE CONSIDERATIONS OF THE COMMUNITY AS, AS WERE AGAIN, EXPRESSED TODAY.
AND THEY FOUND THAT THE, YOU KNOW, THIS PROJECT BENEFITS THE REGIONAL POWER GRID.
IT'S CRITICAL TO ADVANCING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT'S IN GENERAL ACCORD WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND IT WILL SERVE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE BY CONTRIBUTING TO THE EFFICACY OF ELECTRIC POWER FACILITIES.
SO THE, THE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ALREADY CONSIDERED THESE CONCERNS AND ISSUED THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ON THE, THE SAFETY ISSUE, UM, WAS ADDRESSED ALSO, BUT I'LL JUST RESPOND.
THE COMPANY WHOSE BATTERIES WE USE, UH, IS A DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGY THAN THE BATTERIES THAT WERE REFERENCED THAT CAUSED ISSUES.
ONE OF THE, THE PRESENTERS AND THIS COMPANY, GREEN, UH, POWER HAS INSTALLED TWO GIGAWATTS TOTAL OF ALL THESE BATTERIES WITHOUT INCIDENT.
SO I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN THAT THEY HAVE BASED ON REPORTS IN THE MEDIA, BUT THAT'S NOT A CONCERN THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE HERE.
UM, AS FAR AS, UH, WHAT MS. PROCTOR STATED, UH, THEY, THEY SAY THAT THEY MADE A MISTAKE, UM, AND THEY MAY HAVE MADE A MISTAKE, BUT I THINK IN INTERPRETING THE LANGUAGE, AND CAN WE GO FORWARD A FEW RIGHT HERE, INTERPRETING, WHEN THEY INTERPRETED THIS LANGUAGE UP UNTIL APRIL 1ST, 2026, WHEN THEY CHANGED THEIR MIND, THAT INTERPRETATION CAN BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD IN DETERMINING HOW TO INTERPRET IT TODAY.
AND CONTRARY TO WHAT MS. PROCTOR SUGGESTED, IT'S THE, THE SECOND ALTERNATIVE FOR EXTENSION IS NOT, UH, COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS.
IT IS SIMPLY USE HAS ACTUALLY COMMENCED AND IS PROGRESSING TOWARDS COMPLETION.
AND I THINK WE HAVE PRESENTED SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE FOR THE BOARD TO FIND THAT THAT HAS OCCURRED.
SHE TALKED ABOUT THE BURDEN OF PROOF.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE, WHICH IS MORE LIKELY THAN NOT, OR IN OTHER WORDS, 51%.
SO IF YOU ARE PERSUADED MORE LIKELY THAN NOT THAT OUR INTERPRETATION IS CORRECT, THAT IS SUFFICIENT.
UM, AND, AND AS IN OUR EARLIER PRESENTATION, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY DIDN'T RAISE THIS FOR NINE MONTHS.
NOT ONLY DID THEY NOT RAISE IT, THEY WORKED WITH US ON ITERATIVE DESIGNS OF THE SITE PLAN.
THEY APPROVED THE SITE PLAN, THEY APPROVED THE ADDENDUM, UM, UH, TO THE ORIGINAL SIGHTING AGREEMENT, UH, 60 DAYS PRIOR TO THEIR FINAL DETERMINATION THAT THE CUP HAD EXPIRED.
UM, THAT'S THE BACKGROUND HERE.
AND I THINK THAT CAN ALL BE CONSIDERED IN INTERPRETING THIS LANGUAGE.
THERE IS NO ADVERSE PRECEDENT, UM, WITH THE, IF THE COUNTY WERE TO, IF THE BOARD WERE TO FIND WITH US TODAY, BECAUSE THE CODE SECTION UPON WHICH CONDITION 19 WAS COPIED HAS BEEN AMENDED.
IT WAS AMENDED, I BELIEVE, IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR.
MAYBE IT WAS IN THE FALL OF LAST YEAR.
SO THIS ISSUE IS NOT GONNA COME BEFORE THE BOARD AGAIN ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THAT LANGUAGE.
'CAUSE THAT LANGUAGE IS NOT GONNA BE USED FURTHER.
UM, YOU ASKED, UH, UM, THERE WAS, UH, SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER VESTED RIGHTS, IF Y'ALL GONNA HAVE TO HAVE ANOTHER APPEAL FROM US.
WE HAVE ASKED THE, THE, UM, MR. HAMID FOR DETERMINATION ON VESTED RIGHTS.
WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED A RESPONSE YET TO THAT REQUEST FOR DETERMINATION.
UM, IF THE BOARD WERE TO AGREE WITH OUR POSITION TODAY, THAT ISSUE WOULD LIKELY
[02:15:01]
BE MOOT.UM, AND WE WOULD NEVER GET TO THAT.
UH, SO FOR ALL THESE REASONS, UH, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FINDINGS THAT THIS IS IN FOR THE HEALTH, UH, AND SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY, UM, I ASKED THE, I MOVE THAT THE BOARD, UH, FIND THAT THE DECISION OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, UH, DETERMINING THAT THE CEP HAD EXPIRED WAS WRONG AND REVERSED THAT.
DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? NO QUESTIONS.
OH, AND THEN WE DO SOME OF THE, THE, THE, UM, THERE WAS A COMMENT ABOUT THE, THE LAWSUIT THAT HAD BEEN FILED AND I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE Y'ALL HAD THE EXHIBITS TO THAT IN CASE, JUST TO BE PART OF THE RECORD.
SO MA I PRESENT THESE UP HERE.
AND IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LAWSUIT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE ALSO.
I'VE GOT A QUESTION, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHO IT'S FOR.
NOT WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA, BUT WHAT I'M HEARING, AND I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY, BUT A REAL ESTATE, DID, CAN A DECISION TODAY BE MADE IN A VACUUM WITHOUT THE VESTED INTEREST OPINION? I GUESS THAT'S TO MS. TAYLOR.
BUT DON'T THEY AFFECT EACH OTHER? IF I MAY, THE, THE WAY THE VESTED RIGHTS INQUIRY IS MADE, THEY BRING INTO THIS ARGUMENT THE WHOLE IDEA OF WHETHER THE, THE USE PERMIT REMAINS VALID.
SO THIS DECIDING THIS DECISION IS A PREREQUISITE TO DECIDING THE VESTED RIGHTS.
AND IF, IF THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT DECIDING THESE SEPARATELY, AND I EXPLAINED THAT IF THE COURT, IF YOU WERE TO, TO AGREE WITH US TODAY, THAT WOULD BE MOOT.
UM, UH, AND THEN WE'D GET A DETERMINATION.
WE COULD DEFER ALL OF THIS TO A LATER HEARING DATE TO HAVE IT ALL HEARD AT THE SAME TIME, IF THAT'S A CONCERN.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
DID, DID THE COUNTY HAVE ANYTHING TO SHARE BEFORE YOU PUT OUT THE, THE RECOMMENDATION SHE WANTED? I THINK SHE WANTED, I JUST WANTED A QUICK REBUTTAL.
IN COURT WE'RE USED TO, TO REBUTTALS AND, AND IT WILL BE VERY BRIEF, UM, MR. BOYLE STATED THAT WE HAD MADE A DETERMINATION REGARDING STIPULATION OR CONDITION 10 LONG BEFORE, LONG BEFORE THE INTERPRETATION WAS MADE.
BUT ACTUALLY THE INTERPRETATION WAS MADE ON WHEN IT WAS MADE AND THERE WAS NO DETERMINATION MADE BEFORE THEN.
UM, SO TO SAY THAT WE HAD MADE A DETERMINATION THAT IT WASN'T VALID, THAT, THAT IT CONTINUED TO BE VALID AFTER JULY 25TH, 2025 IS, IS A MISTAKE.
THERE WAS NO DETERMINATION UNTIL THE ISSUANCE OF MR. PAM'S DECISION.
UH, IF WE COULD KIND OF KEEP THE CONVERSATION DOWN SO THAT WE CAN HEAR WHAT'S GOING ON.
SO THAT WAS, THAT WAS ONE POINT.
THERE HAD BEEN NO DETERMINATION UNTIL MR. LEE, MR. LEE PAM'S OFFICIAL DETERMINATION, AND SECONDLY, THE CONCERNS YOU HEARD FROM THE CITIZENS.
I KNOW THAT MR. BOYLES BROUGHT UP THE POINT THAT, WELL, THOSE HAVE ALL BEEN HEARD, BUT THAT USE PERMIT IS GONE.
AND SO THE CITIZENS HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD AGAIN BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND TO, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TO VOICE THESE CONCERNS THAT MAY HAVE CHANGED OVER THE THREE YEARS THAT HAVE EXPIRED ACTUALLY FOUR YEARS THAT HAVE EXPIRED SINCE THE ISSUANCE OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
SO AGAIN, WE, WE ASK THAT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DETERMINATION BE UPHELD.
IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I HAVE A COMMENT, MR. CHAIR.
I HAVE HEARD THE COMMENTS IN PRESENTATIONS, AND I'M STILL NOT SURE IF I FULLY UNDERSTAND WHY THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THIS BOARD, SINCE WE WERE NOT INVOLVED WITH ANY, UM, APPROVALS, IT WENT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR
[02:20:01]
REVIEW AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVED IT.SO THEREFORE, I BELIEVE THAT THIS MATTER SHOULD BE REFERRED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AS THEY ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE CONDITIONS PLACED ON THIS USE.
MAY I JUST STEP FROM, JUST FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE.
UNDER THE CODE OF VIRGINIA, UH, A DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND BY RIGHT, THE APPELLANT HAS GETS TO FILE BEFORE THIS BOARD FOR A DETERMINATION WHETHER OR NOT MR. PAMED IS RIGHT.
SO IT IS WITHIN YOUR JURISDICTION.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT BY LAW YOU NEED TO DECIDE.
BUT DOES NOT OUR OPINION OR DOES NOT OUR DETERMINATION ALSO GO TO THE BOARD FOR FINAL REVIEW? THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO OVERRIDE US.
IT DOES NOT, IT, IT, THE APPEAL LIES WITH THE CIRCUIT COURT COURT.
BEFORE WE MAKE A MOTION, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WHAT WE GOT'S RIGHT.
'CAUSE I HAVE JULY 20TH UP THERE, BUT I'VE HEARD 25TH.
WE'VE, WE'VE HEARD FROM BOTH SIDES.
WE'VE HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY, OR ARE WE READY TO MAKE A MOTION? WELL, I'LL START WITH A COMMENT.
SO, UM, I ALSO SERVE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND WE WORK LONG, MANY MONTHS ON THIS WITH MULTIPLE HEARINGS WITH ALL THESE PEOPLE HERE.
AND SO IT, UH, A LOT OF THE PROCESS WAS NOT FUN.
UH, WE HAD HEARINGS IN OTHER LOCATIONS BECAUSE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PEOPLE INVOLVED.
UM, OF COURSE THAT AREA WAS ZONED BUSINESS, CORRECT? I THINK SO, YEAH.
IT WAS ZONED, IT WAS, IT WAS ZONED BUSINESS.
IT WAS ORIGINALLY AGRICULTURAL, IF I MAY.
YEAH, IT WAS REZONED INDUSTRIAL WAS STEP ONE IN TRYING TO GET THIS BATTERY STORAGE IN.
SO WE'RE, YOU KNOW, SO ANYHOW, IT WAS A BUSINESS CORRIDOR RIGHT THERE.
AND IN FACT, I THINK IT DIDN'T INCLUDE THE WHOLE FARM.
IT WAS JUST A PORTION OF THE FARM THERE.
SO, UM, AND WE REVIEWED ALL OF THIS AND THESE PEOPLE ALL SPOKE THEN, AND IT, AND IT, IT, IT WAS NOT, UH, UH, A FUND DECISION, BUT, YOU KNOW, WEIGHING ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND EVERYTHING AND, AND, AND ALL THAT, IT WAS SENT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND ULTIMATELY APPROVED.
SO, BUT THAT'S NOT OUR, OUR JOB TODAY.
AND UH, SO OUR JOB TODAY IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER, UH, TO UPHOLD THE COUNTY'S DECISION OR NOT.
UM, PERSONALLY, IF I WAS INVOLVED IN A PROJECT THAT WAS TAKEN ON IN APRIL AND THE CUP EXPIRED IN THREE MONTHS, THE FIRST THING I WOULD DO WOULD BE SEARCH TO EXTEND THAT CUP VERY FIRST THING.
'CAUSE THESE THINGS DON'T MOVE FAST.
AND, UH, SO ARE YOU READY FOR A MOTION? YES.
SO I MOVE THAT THE AKIMA COUNTY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AFFIRM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION THAT CUSE DASH 0 0 0 6 2 6 8 20 21 EXPIRED ON JULY 20TH, 2025.
THAT NO FURTHER WORK MAY BE UNDERTAKEN ON TAX MAP PARCEL 27 DASH A DASH 1 0 3 A OR ELSEWHERE IN AKIMA COUNTY IN PURSUIT OF OR RELATED TO SCOUT'S CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SCOUT SITE PLAN APPROVED ON MARCH 10TH, 2026 IS NULL AND BOYD AND SCOUT'S LAND DISTURBANCE PERMIT APPROVED ON MARCH 10TH, 2026 IS NULL AND VOID.
[02:25:01]
IF THERE'S NO SECOND, DO WE HAVE AN ALTERNATE MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN, I SECOND THAT MOTION.DO YOU HAVE IT PROPERLY MOVED? AND SECOND.
I MEAN, UH, WE AFFIRM THE DECISION.
WE, OUR REQUIREMENT TAKES THREE OF US TO, TO, TO VOTE.
AND SO IT HAS, WE DO AFFIRM THE DECISION MADE BY MR. CINDY.
UH, DO YOU WANT CONTINUE ON WITH THE YEAH, SO, UM, LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY SWIPED MY NOTES.
SO FOR NEXT MONTH WE HAVE TWO CASES.
IT'S, UH, ONE IS A FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE, THE OTHER IS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WITHOUT A PRIMARY.
AND, UM, WE ALSO HAVE ONE MORE THING TO BRING BEFORE YOU, UM, ROUTE 13 AUTO.
UH, UH, COULD, COULD WE KIND OF KEEP THE CONVERSATION DOWN UNTIL THE MEETING HAS BEEN ADJOURNED, PLEASE.
UM, SO THE TWO, THE TWO CASES AND THEN WE HAVE UM, SOME, A PREVIOUS APPROVAL FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR ROUTE 13 AUTO.
THEY HAD, UM, APPLIED FOR AND WERE APPROVED FOR LIGHT INDUSTRY IN ORDER TO DO A, UH, UH, AN AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE CENTER BASICALLY.
UM, AND THEY HAVE TWO CONDITIONS.
ONE HAS TO DO WITH A FENCE AND ONE HAS TO DO WITH NO MORE THAN FIVE UNLICENSED VEHICLES.
WE WANNA BRING THAT BACK TO YOU BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T COMPLIED WITH ANY OF THE CONDITIONS.
SO WE WANT TO BRING THAT BACK UP TO THE BOARD BECAUSE THE CONDITIONS HAVE NOT BEEN MET.
IS THIS THE ONE ON WHITES NECK ROAD? IT IS.
SO YOU KNOW WHERE THE OWL MOTEL USED TO BE? YES.
YEAH, FOR THE SERVICE STATION ACROSS THE, YEAH.
SO YOU GOT THE TWO CHICKEN HOUSE PROPERTIES AND THEN IT'S ACROSS THE STREET.
THERE'S MORE THAN FIVE CARS THERE, THAT'S FOR SURE.
UM, OTHER THAN THAT, I HAVE NOTHING ELSE.
AND, UH, THAT'S EVERYTHING FOR US.
UH, DO WE HAVE A MOTION THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED? SO DO WE HAVE SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.