[00:00:01]
YEAH.I NOW CALL TO ORDER THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FOR MARCH 19TH, 2026.
UH, MS. PARKER, DO WE HAVE A QUORUM? YES, MA'AM.
IF EVERYONE COULD PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
PLEASE REMOVE ALL, UH, NON-RELIGIOUS HEADGEAR.
AND THEN FOLLOWED BY OUR INVOCATION, I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, INDIVISIBLE FOR LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
LORD, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR GATHERING US HERE TONIGHT.
UH, HELP US HAVE WISDOM, UH, TO ACT ON WHAT'S BEST IN THE COUNTY.
HELP US TO HAVE PEACE KNOWING THAT YOU ARE GOOD AND THAT YOU LOVE US.
UM, AND HELP US TO HAVE, UM, QUORUM AND UNDERSTANDING.
UM, WE DO HAVE ONE, UM, AMENDMENT TO THE EVENING'S AGENDA.
UM, WE ARE GONNA MOVE ITEM 9.1 RELATED TO THE VIRGINIA SPORTS PARK AND TRAINING CENTER DEFERRAL REQUEST.
IT'S GONNA BE CONSIDERED AFTER THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UH, THIS AMENDMENT WILL REQUIRE A MOTION AND A VOTE.
MADAM CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE DRAFT MOTION, MOVE THE COMMISSION.
AMEND THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA ITEMS TO MOVE.
ITEM 9 1 9 0.1 RELATED TO THE VIRGINIA SPORTS PARK AND TRAINING CENTER DEFERRAL TO BE HEARD AFTER THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
HAS EVERYONE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO READ THE MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 19TH, 2026 MEETING? ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS, UH, CHANGES OR IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? MOTION TO APPROVE MADAM CHAIR.
UH, IT IS NOW TIME FOR THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UM, UH, MS. SHERRY, SORRY, I WAS LOOKING OVER THERE.
I WAS VERY EXCITED ABOUT MY REPORT THIS EVENING.
TONIGHT'S DIRECTOR'S REPORT IS MEANT TO INFORM THE COMMUNITY ABOUT UPCOMING PUBLIC HEARINGS AND COMMUNITY MEETINGS ASSOCIATED WITH ZONING APPLICATIONS.
THESE MEETINGS ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND I ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO ATTEND AND TO PARTICIPATE IN THESE MEETINGS.
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS SCHEDULED TO HOLD THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON APRIL 14TH, 2026.
THESE WILL BE HELD AT 6:00 PM HERE IN THE BOARDROOM AT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING.
I DID WANNA NOTE THAT, UH, THIS MONTH'S MEETING IS ON APRIL 14TH, WHICH IS THE SECOND TUESDAY OF THE MONTH.
USUALLY IT'S THE FIRST TUESDAY OF THE MONTH IS WHEN THE BOARD HOLDS THEIR PUBLIC HEARINGS, BUT A SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD FOR THE BUDGET THAT EVENING.
SO THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD THE FOLLOWING WEEK.
UH, THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING THAT EVENING IS IN DISTRICT THREE IS AN APPLICATION BY BJ HAULING LLC TO REZONE, APPROXIMATELY 2.16 ACRES TO ALLOW FOR AN OFFICE OUTDOOR STORAGE FOR A TRUCKING BUSINESS LOCATED ON TRIPLE T LANE.
THE SECOND HEARING THAT EVENING IS IN DISTRICT THREE.
IT'S AN APPLICATION BY DENNY AND CHERYL J FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A HOME-BASED BUSINESS, SPECIFICALLY FOR FABRICATION OF CUSTOM PARTS AND TOOLS FOR ELECTRO MECHANICAL AND FLUID POWERED SYSTEMS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON PLEASANT HILL LANE.
THE LAST PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 14TH IS IN DISTRICT FOUR.
IT'S AN APPLICATION BY MICHAEL AND KAITLYN OP.
IT'S AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTING A SCHOOL LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF 800 BROAD STREET ROAD AND THREE CHOP ROAD.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS SCHEDULED TO HOLD ONE PUBLIC HEARING ON THURSDAY, APRIL 16TH AT 6:00 PM THAT IS ALSO HERE IN THE BOARDROOM OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING.
THE APPLICATION IS IN DISTRICT THREE BY REBECCA AND CHRISTOPHER MILLER.
IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DETACHED ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT, AND THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON BROAD STREET ROAD.
[00:05:01]
ONE COMMUNITY MEETING SCHEDULED AT THIS TIME.UH, THE PROPERTY IS IN DISTRICT TWO.
IT IS FOR A PRE-APPLICATION BY MONICA MORMON REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DETACHED ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON RIVER ROAD WEST.
THE COMMUNITY MEETING WAS ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED FOR LAST WEEK, BUT DUE TO THE WEATHER IT WAS RESCHEDULED.
THE MEETING WILL NOW BE HELD ON MONDAY, APRIL 20TH, 2026 6:00 PM RIGHT HERE AT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING IN ROOM TWO 70.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
UH, DO WE HAVE ANY REQUESTS FOR DEFERS ADDITIONS, DELETIONS, OR CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE PUBLIC HEARING? ONE CU 20 25 12 APPLICATION BY VIRGINIA SPORTS PARK AND TRAINING CENTER ED GLIN REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR S***T SHOOTING RANGE OF COURSE, OR COURSE AND OTHER SIMILAR RANGES, OH, SORRY, LET ME START THAT OVER.
DISTRICT ONE CU 20 25 12 APPLICATION BY VIRGINIA SPORTS PARK AND TRAINING CENTER AT GLAND REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CUP FOR S***T SHOOTING RANGE OR COURSE AND OTHER SIMILAR RANGES OR COURSES ON AN APPROXIMATELY 85 ACRE PORTION OF 372.967 ACRES ON WALTON ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 0.4 MILES NORTH OF THREE CHOP ROAD ON TAX MAP NUMBER 6 1 0 9 A AND A PORTION OF TAX MAP NUMBER 6 1 0 7 0 AND 6 1 0 57 T THE PROPERTIES ARE ZONED AGRICULTURAL GENERAL A ONE.
THE CUP IS REQUIRED BY COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 15 1 0 2.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS AREA AS RURAL ENHANCEMENT AREA AND THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED DEFERRAL OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING APPLICATION TO THE JUNE 18TH, 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
I MOVE THAT THE COMMISSION APPROVE APPLICANT VIRGINIA SPORTS PARK AND TRAINING CENTER AT GLAND'S REQUEST, UH, FOR A CON FOR CONSIDERATION OF ITS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CU 20 25 12 APPLICATION TO THE JUNE 18TH, 2026 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
I'LL SECOND THAT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IT IT IS, IT IS THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.
IT IS NOT THE COUNTY'S REQUEST.
AND I SEE THAT IT'S, LET ME, LET ME, YEAH, IT'S THE WAY THAT THAT IT, IT'S VIRGINIA SPORTS PARK AND TRAINING CENTER AT GLAND.
IT WAS NOT AT GLAND'S REQUEST.
IT WAS THAT WAS PART OF THEIR NAME.
YOU IS THE APPLICANT HAS MADE THIS REQUEST ORIGINALLY WAS TO, UH, THE MAIN MEETING AND EARLIER THIS WEEK WE RECEIVED RE THE REQUEST TO EXTEND IT TO THE JUNE CLAIMANT COMMISSION MEETING.
WAS THERE A SECOND? YES, MR. PATT, I SECOND IT.
AND FOR A ROLL CALL VOTE MR. DEAN.
THE MOTION TO DEFER PASSES ON A FIVE OH VOTE.
THIS CASE WILL BE HEARD BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON JUNE 18TH, 2026.
AND BASED UPON THE CHANGE, UH, TO THE PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE AND THE DEFERRAL OF CU 20 25 0 0 0 12 RELATED TO VIRGINIA PARK AND TRAINING CENTER TO JUNE 18TH, 2026.
UM, IF YOU DID COME HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON THAT MATTER, YOU MAY SAVE YOUR COMMENTS FOR THE JUNE PUBLIC HEARING OR IF YOU WISH, YOU CAN SPEAK THIS EVENING DURING THE CITIZEN COMMENT, UH, PER THE PLANNING COMMISSION BYLAWS.
SECTION FOUR, ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION.
GENERALLY, ALL PERSONS WHO SPEAK BEFORE THE COMMISSION DURING THE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD OR A PUBLIC HEARING SHALL DO SO FROM THE LECTERN AND FURNISH THEIR NAMES AND ADDRESSES TO THE COMMISSION.
A SPEAKER SHALL ONLY SPEAK ONCE ON ANY ITEM UNLESS THE COMMISSION ASKS THE SPEAKER TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
NO PERSON MAY ADDRESS THE COMMISSION UNLESS THEY HAVE FIRST BEEN RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIR.
EACH PERSON WHO DESIRES TO SPEAK SHALL BE GIVEN TIME TO PRESENT ORAL OR WRITTEN COMMENTS.
COMMENTS SHALL BE DIRECTED TO THE COMMISSION AND NOT THE AUDIENCE.
THE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD PROVIDES A PUBLIC FORUM FOR THE COMMISSION TO HEAR FROM CITIZENS ABOUT MATTERS PERTINENT TO THE ACTIVITIES, ISSUES, OR POLICIES OF THE COMMISSION.
THE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD IS LIMITED TO MATTERS THAT ARE NOT SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA.
UM, IF YOU DO WISH TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
UM, YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK WHEN THE GREEN LIGHT GOES OFF.
THAT'S THE BEGINNING OF YOUR THREE MINUTES.
UH, WHEN THE YELLOW LIGHT COMES ON, THAT MEANS YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE REMAINING AND THEN WHEN THE RED LIGHT COMES ON, THAT MEANS YOUR TIME IS UP.
I LIVE AT 58 88 COMMUNITY HOUSE ROAD, COLUMBIA, VIRGINIA, WHICH IS IN GLAND COUNTY IN THE WESTERN SECTION DISTRICT ONE.
I'M COMING TONIGHT BECAUSE THERE
[00:10:01]
WAS A BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING IN LOUISA WHERE THEY PUT FORTH A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE TRANSMISSION LINES FOR JOSHUA FALLS TO YT SHOWING THAT THEY ARE GOING TO OPPOSE IT BEING LOCATED ANYWHERE IN THEIR COUNTY.UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S GONNA BE A PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE.
SO IF GLAND COUNTY DOESN'T WANT THESE LINES, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO SOMETHING TO STOP IT.
I HAVE DRAFTED A RESOLUTION THAT IS MIRRORED BY THE LOUISA COUNTY RESOLUTION.
I THINK EVERYONE'S GOTTEN A COPY.
UM, I'M NOT SURE IF I NEED TO GIVE IT TO ANYONE ELSE.
UM, I'D LIKE THIS TO BE READ INTO THE RECORD BECAUSE I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
UM, SO I'LL READ IT, BUT I ALSO WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S ATTACHED TO THE MINUTES.
WHEREAS VALLEY LINK, A JOINT VENTURE OF DOMINION ENERGY, FIRST ENERGY TRANSMISSION AND TRANS SOURCE ENERGY HAS PROPOSED THE JOSHUA FALLS EAT PROJECT.
IT'S 115 MILES 765 KILOVOLT HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINE SPANNING NUMEROUS COUNTIES IN CENTRAL VIRGINIA, INCLUDING GLAND, WHEREAS CURRENTLY PROPOSED ROUTES.
ALTERNATE ROUTES FOR THE PROJECT INCLUDE MILES OF NEW TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR THROUGH GLAND COUNTY AND INCLUDING NUMEROUS ALTERNATE ROUTE POSSIBILITIES UTILIZING STEEL LATTICE STRUCTURES APPROACHING 160 FEET IN HEIGHT, EQUIVALENT TO A 10 TO 16 STORY BUILDING AND REQUIRING SIGNIFICANT AND PERMANENTLY CLEARED RIGHT AWAY BY USE OF CHEMICALS.
WHEREAS THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FINDS THAT AN OVERHEAD 765 V LINE WOULD CAUSE SIGNIFICANT AND IRREPARABLE HARM TO GLAND COUNTY'S RURAL CHARACTER AGRICULTURAL HERITAGE FARMING FOREST LANDS AND WOULD PASS WITHIN 500 FEET OF NUMEROUS HOMES AND WOULD DECREASE PROPERTY VALUES FOR HUNDREDS OF RESIDENTS.
WHEREAS THE PROJECT IS INTENDED TO TRANSMIT BULK POWER FOR INCREASING DEMAND IN AREAS OUTSIDE OF GLAND COUNTY AND WILL PROVIDE NO DIRECT BENEFIT TO THE RESIDENTS OR BUSINESSES OF GLAND COUNTY WHO WOULD BEAR THE BURDEN OF ITS PRESENCE, LOSS OF LAND USE, LOSS OF RURAL CHARACTER, SCENIC VIEWS, AGRICULTURAL USE, FARMING, AND POSSIBLE ELECTRIC SERVICE COST INCREASE.
WHEREAS THE AGRICULTURAL FORESTAL FARMLAND AND RURAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE OF THE COUNTY OF LOUISA RECOMMENDED THAT THEIR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FORMALLY OPPOSE THE PROPOSED ROUTE AS PRESENTED, THE G LOUISA COUNTY IS JOINED TOGETHER IN OPPOSITION OF THIS HIGH VOLTAGE TRANSMISSION LINE, WHEREAS IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED THAT THE OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED MARCH 5TH BE MADE PART OF THE RESOLUTION BY THE GLAND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THEY ADOPT THE STATEMENT AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE GLAND COUNTY RESOLUTION.
WHEREAS THE GLAND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FURTHER REQUEST THAT THE STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION REQUIRE UTILITIES TO EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES THAT MINIMIZE IMPACTS TO WORKING AGRICULTURAL FARMS. FORESTRY LAND INCLUDING ROUTING ALONG EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDORS OUTSIDE OF GLAND COUNTY AND THE ALTERNATIVE TRANSMISSION LINE PLACEMENTS BE REMOVED FROM THE JOSHUA FALLS TO Y PROJECT, WHEREAS PART OF THE ALTERNATIVE LINE ROUTE INTERSECTS AND CROSSES ROUTE SIX IN GLAND COUNTY, A VIRGINIA STATE SCENIC BYWAY THAT WOULD DESTROY THE SCENIC NATURE AND VIEW OF THAT DESIGNATED ROUTE SIX.
WHEREAS CITIZENS OF GLAND HAVE EXPRESSED OVERWHELMING OPPOSITION TO THE OVERHEAD CONSTRUCTION OF THIS LINE DUE TO ENVIRONMENTAL AESTHETIC AND HEALTH IMPACTS, IT IS DEAR HEREBY RESOLVED THAT THE GLAND COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FORMALLY OPPOSE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS VALLEY LINK.
JOSHUA FIELDS YEET 765 KILOWATT TRANSMISSION LINE AS A PROPOSED AS PROPOSED INCLUDING ALTERNATIVE ROUTE IN GLAND COUNTY, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THE BOARD STRONGLY URGES VALLEY LINK, VIRGINIA STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION TO PRIORITIZE ALTERNATIVES THAT DO NOT IMPACT GLAND COUNTY OR AT MINIMUM REQUIRE THE LINE TO BE PLACED UNDERGROUND TO ATE ITS DEVASTATING IMPACT ON THE COUNTY'S LANDSCAPE IN RESIDENCE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED.
A COPY OF THIS RESOLUTION BE FORWARDED TO THE VIRGINIA STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION, GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA MUTUAL COUNTY'S REPRESENTATIVES IN THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
I'VE PROVIDED THIS TO THE BOARD.
I'D LIKE TO HAVE IT PUT INTO THE RECORD AND I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE BOARD OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO VOTE POSITIVE ON THIS TO TO PUT THIS IN TO THE PLANNING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THEIR APPROVAL AS WELL.
THEY'VE TOLD US THAT THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO, BUT OBVIOUSLY LOUISA WAS ABLE TO DO IT AND I THINK WE NEED TO FOLLOW SUIT.
LOUISA IS ALSO ASKED FOR THE ADJOINING COUNTIES TO JOIN THEM IN TRYING TO FIGHT THIS.
HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET COMPLETELY MOVED OUT OF THE STATE.
UH, WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT.
[00:15:09]
GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR AND, UH, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.I WON'T BELABOR IT SINCE THE VSP THING IS, CAN I GET YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FIRST PLEASE? YEAH, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
UM, ONE POINT I HEARD FROM, UH, MY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE DURING REBUTTAL BACK, UM, IN JANUARY WAS, UH, KIND OF POINTING OUT HOW IT WAS FATAL TO, UM, THE COMMUNITY'S, UH, POSITION THAT, UH, THERE'S A FEW DATA POINTS THAT SHOW PEOPLE HAVE PURCHASED, UH, HOMES A MILE, THREE QUARTERS MILE OUT OR SO FROM THESE OTHER RANGES, UM, THAT EXIST HERE IN THE, IN THE STATE.
UM, BUT I THINK THAT WASN'T SO FATAL BECAUSE, UH, AND AGAIN, LEMME SAY I'M NOT PRIVY TO ANY INFORMATION ABOUT, UH, THE RANGE MOVING EASTWARD, SO I DON'T KNOW.
I'M JUST GONNA SPEAK TO HOW IT WAS IN JANUARY.
UM, AND THERE'S ABOUT 10 HOMES OR SO THAT, UH, ARE IN THAT QUARTER MILE RADIUS AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY OTHER DATA POINTS IN THE STATE THAT, THAT SHOW THAT THAT, UM, UH, THAT THAT KIND OF PRECEDENT HAD EXISTS BEFORE.
SO I DON'T THINK THAT WAS QUITE, UH, SO FATAL AS MY FRIEND MAYBE, UM, MAYBE PORTRAYED IT.
UH, ALSO BACK IN JANUARY AROUND, UM, FIVE HOURS, 29 MINUTES INTO, INTO THAT RECORDING, UM, IN ORDER TO, TO ALLAY CONCERNS ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, NOISY AMMUNITION THAT MOST PEOPLE ARE GONNA FIRE THIS QUIETER AMMUNITION.
YOU KNOW, HE MENTIONS, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE FIRING 80, $90,000 SHOTGUNS.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S WONDERFUL.
THAT KIND OF WEALTH IS WELCOME AND IN THE, IN THE COUNTY, UM, IT GOES ON TO SAY MAYBE 70% OF PEOPLE WOULD FIRE THE SLIDER AMMUNITION.
I'M, I'M CERTAIN HE WASN'T IMPLYING THAT 70% OF PEOPLE HAVE HAVE $90,000 SHOTGUNS.
BUT I BRING THIS POINT UP JUST TO EMPHASIZE IS, IS THAT MIDDLE CLASS COMMUNITY REALLY THE BEST PLACE IN ORDER TO SURROUND AND AND HOUSE, UM, RANGE LIKE THAT? AGAIN, I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT ACCESSIBILITY AND, AND GENEROUS OFFERINGS TO THE, THE COMMUNITY AND MY FRIEND MIGHT COME UP HERE AND TOTALLY KNOCK THIS POINT OUT OUT.
UM, UH, BUT IT WAS JUST A CON A CONCERN OF MINE, NINE $90,000 SHOTGUNS WHEN YOU'RE AROUND THESE MIDDLE CLASS HOMES.
UH, IT, IT JUST, IT DIDN'T QUITE, UM, UH, MATCH LIKE THE, THE, THE FLAVOR OF THE COMMUNITY.
UM, AND SO I JUST WANTED TO, TO SAY THAT HAVE A, HAVE A GOOD EVENING.
UH, WOULD ANYONE ELSE CARE TO SPEAK? OKAY, WE'LL NOW CLOSE THE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD.
UM, CAN WE HEAR OUR FIRST APPLICATION? YES MA'AM.
THERE IS NO UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
OH, THERE IS NO UNFINISHED
AND OUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING IS IN DISTRICT FIVE CU 20 26 3 APPLICATION BY STEVEN W AND KAREN S DASH REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP FOR AN ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT DETACHED ON 8.862 ACRES AT 12 5 9 MANNEQUIN ROAD ON TAX MAP NUMBER 57 1 0 53 0.
THE PROPERTY IS OWNED AGRICULTURAL LIMITED A TWO AND THE CUP IS REQUIRED BY COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 15 1 12 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 15 2 85 A.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS AREA AS RURAL ENHANCEMENT AREA.
I'M STAFF WITH THE COUNTY'S PLANNING AND ZONING TEAM AND BEFORE THE COMMISSION TONIGHT IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY STEVEN AND KAREN DASH TO ESTABLISH AN ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT ON ROUGHLY 8.8 ACRES AT 1 2 5 9 MANNEQUIN ROAD IN THE AGRICULTURAL LIMITED ZONING DISTRICT.
THE GENERAL VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY IS SHOWN ON THE MAP, UH, ON THE LEFT WITH THE RED CIRCLE.
AND WE ARE IN DISTRICT FIVE OFF OF MANNEQUIN ROAD, ROUGHLY HALFWAY BETWEEN BROAD STREET AND RIVER ROAD.
AND TURNING TO THE AERIAL PHOTO ON THE RIGHT, YOU CAN SEE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CIRCLED IN RED AND IT IS ACCESSED BY A PRIVATE DRIVEWAY OFF OF MANNEQUIN ROAD INTO THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH PASSES THROUGH A PORTION OF OPEN SPACE FOR THE BROAD RUN SUBDIVISION BEFORE IT ENTERS A SUBJECT PROPERTY, AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, AND CAN SEE, UH, THE MAP ON THE LEFT, THE ZONING IS AGRICULTURAL LIMITED IN THE GREEN COLOR AND THAT IS TRUE FOR SURROUNDING PROPERTIES IN THE, IN THE NEARBY AREA AS WELL.
TURNING TO THE MAP TO THE RIGHT, THIS IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION OF RURAL ENHANCEMENT AREA, WHICH APPLIES TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD.
SO THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPED WITH A TWO STORY DWELLING NEAR THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
I SHOWED THE DRIVEWAY LEADING TO THAT, TO THAT HOME AND MY UNDERSTANDING IT WAS BUILT ROUGHLY IN 1900.
AND THE PROPOSAL IN FRONT OF YOU TONIGHT
[00:20:01]
INVOLVES A CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW DWELLING TO THE SOUTH OF THAT EXISTING DWELLING.UH, THE EXISTING DWELLING WOULD BECOME THE ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT TO BE USED BY FAMILY MEMBERS AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD MOVE INTO THE NEW HOME.
SO THE NEW HOME WOULD BECOME THEIR PRIMARY RESIDENCE AND THE USE OF THE EXISTING DWELLING WOULD BE CONVERTED TO THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
I FEEL LIKE I MAY HAVE FLIPPED SOMEHOW TO THE WRONG SLIDE HERE.
AND WHAT I'M EXPECTING TO SEE FOR THE NEXT SLIDE WOULD BE THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND IF NEEDED, I DON'T KNOW IF WE COULD BACK OUT TO THE, SO I JUST WANNA TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO THANK MEMBERS OF THE, IN THE AUDIENCE FOR COMING TONIGHT.
I KNOW IT TAKES TIME AWAY FROM YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS TO COME, BUT WE COULDN'T DO THIS WITHOUT YOU.
I WANTED TO APOLOGIZE TO THE FOLKS IN THE FRONT ROW.
I FEEL LIKE I'VE PICKED A SPOT THAT BLOCKS BOTH SCREENS FROM ALL OF YOU.
SO I'LL THINK, I'LL THINK SKINNY.
AND I PROMISE TO SHOW YOU THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
SO THIS CONCEPTUAL PLAN SHOWS THE EXISTING DWELLING.
THE APPLICANT CIRCLED IN RED TOWARDS THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
UH, THE NEW DWELLING TO BE CONSTRUCTED DOWN HERE TO THE SOUTH.
I BELIEVE IT'S ABOUT 175 FEET TO THE SOUTH.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY COMES TO THE NEW PROP, TO THE EXISTING DWELLING.
PART OF THIS PROPOSAL IS TO DECOMMISSION THAT EXISTING ACCESS POINT AND MOVE IT FURTHER SOUTH TO BETTER SERVE BOTH PROPERTIES AND ALSO MOVE THE DRIVEWAY ACCESS POINT TO A SAFER LOCATION ALONG THAT ROAD AND ALSO ENSURE THAT IT'S FULLY CONTAINED ON THE PROPERTY WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH OPEN SPACE TO THE SUBDIVISION.
AND THIS HAS ALL BEEN PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT.
A COMMUNITY MEETING WAS HELD ON JANUARY 12TH OF THIS YEAR AND ATTENDEES INCLUDED NINE CITIZENS BOARD MEMBER MEMBER LYLE AND PLANNING COMMISSIONER, DEAN, UH, AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO THE TOPICS OF DISCUSSION AT THAT MEETING INCLUDED HISTORY OF THE EXISTING HOME, THE LOCATION OF THE, UH, THE NEW, UH, DWELLING TO BE CONSTRUCTED, AND THEN QUESTIONS ON WHETHER THE APPLICATION INVOLVED THE CONSTRUCTION OF A THIRD HOME OR SUBDIVIDING THE PROPERTY AND STAFF CLARIFIED AS PART OF THE COMMUNITY MEETING THAT NEITHER OF THOSE SCENARIOS WERE ON THE TABLE OR COULD BE AUTHORIZED THROUGH THE APPLICATION THAT'S IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT.
SO AGAIN, THE PROPOSAL IS TO ESTABLISH A SECOND DWELLING UNIT ON THE PROPERTY WITH NO SUBDIVISION PROPOSED.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THIS PROPERTY I MENTIONED IS RURAL ENHANCEMENT AREA WITHIN THE PLAN THAT IS DEFINED AS EXHIBITING A RURAL CHARACTER WITH LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL FOREST, OR OTHER USES WHICH ARE NOT PLANNED FOR PUBLIC OR CENTRAL UTILITIES.
RESIDENTIAL USES SHOULD INCLUDE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE, LIMITED, UH, LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF GRADING AND NATIVE PLANT REMOVAL AND CREATE MINIMAL VISUAL AND OTHER IMPACTS.
SO I'D LIKE TO BRIEFLY SUMMARIZE THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
CONDITIONS ONE AND TWO ESTABLISH THE NATURE OF THE APPROVED USE AS BEING NO MORE THAN ONE ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT ON THE PROPERTY, UH, TO BE CONDUCTED WITHIN THE EXISTING DWELLING.
THE, THE OLDER STRUCTURE, THE OLDER DWELLING ON THE PROPERTY ONCE THE NEWER IS ESTABLISHED AND, UH, TO BE OCCUPIED ONLY BY FAMILY MEMBERS OF THE PRINCIPAL DWELLING OCCUPANTS CONDITION THREE ESTABLISHES A PROHIBITION ON USING THE ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT AS RENTAL AND CONDITION FOUR REQUIRES A WORKING CARBON MONOXIDE AND SMOKING DE SMOKE DETECTOR TO BE MAINTAINED IN THAT ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
CONDITION FIVE REQUIRES THAT THE RELOCATED DRIVEWAY BE FULLY CONTAINED WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE PROPERTY ONCE IT'S
[00:25:01]
RELOCATED, BUT IT'S NOT TIED TO THE SPECIFIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DETAILS TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY IF IT NEEDS TO MOVE SLIGHTLY FOR CONSTRUCTION REASONS.AND CONDITION SIX REQUIRING, UH, THE PROPERTY IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS CAPABILITY TO THE ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT CONDITION SEVEN AND EIGHT.
THESE ARE STANDARD CONDITIONS, SETS A 10 YEAR PERMIT EXPIRATION DATE WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO RENEW.
AND THEN FINALLY THE LAST CONDITION.
EIGHT ESTABLISHES NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS TO THE COUNTY AND ALSO ANY NEW OWNER OR LEASE IN THE EVENT THAT THE OWNERSHIP CHANGES SO THAT ALL PARTIES ARE AWARE OF ANY LIMITATIONS THAT MIGHT BE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PERMIT.
THAT CONCLUDES WHAT I HAVE PREPARED FOR YOU TONIGHT.
I'M AVAILABLE TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS AND THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE AS WELL TO HELP.
ADAM, I HAVE A, A QUESTION ABOUT YOU.
YOU, YOU'VE SPECIFIED THAT THE NEW HOME WILL BE THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE AND THAT THE OLDER HOME WILL BE ACCESSORY.
UM, BEFORE THE NEW HOME IS BUILT IT HAS TO BE THE ACCESSORY, CORRECT? I MEAN, 'CAUSE YOU ONLY HAVE ONE STRUCTURE.
I MEAN, ARE WE ABOUT TO DESIGNATE AN EXISTING HOME ACCESSORY TO A NON-EXISTENT HOME? IS THAT A PROBLEM? SO I I CAN RESPOND.
UM, SO THE ORDER OF OPERATIONS WOULD BE THAT ONCE THE, UM, NEW HOME HAS BEEN, UH, CLEARED FOR OCCUPANCY AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS MOVE IN, THAT WOULD BY DEFAULT, UH, CONVERT THE OTHER STRUCTURE IF THIS PERMIT IS APPROVED TO THE ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
SO UNTIL BOTH DWELLINGS ARE, YOU KNOW, TECHNICALLY DWELLINGS UNDER THE CODE, I I DON'T SEE THAT THERE WOULD BE A CONFLICT.
UH, BUT I APPRECIATE THAT I, I'M, I'M THINKING ABOUT THIS AS A STAGING QUESTION, RIGHT? IT MIGHT THERE BE AN INADVERTENT BECAUSE WE'RE ABOUT TO DESIGNATE THE EXISTING HOME AS AN ACCESSORY.
I MEAN, IF IT SEEMS LIKE THAT.
AND, AND, AND SO ONE, ONE OPTION IS IF THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT SORT OF THE STAGING AND WHEN THAT TRIGGER IS FLIPPED, IF THE COMMISSION HAD A RECOMMENDATION, RECOMMENDATION ON A CLAR CLARIFYING LANGUAGE, I GUESS I'M WONDERING WHY YOU FELT NECESSARY TO DECLARE THE NEW STRUCTURE TO BE THE ACCESSORY.
WHY DON'T WE JUST SAY OR TO, TO BE THE PRIMARY, WHY DON'T WE JUST SAY THAT THE NEW BUILDING IS GONNA BE THE ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING? OH, SO, UH, THE, THE CONDITIONS REFLECT THE APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE COUNTY WITH THE INTENTION OF THE EXISTING HOME BEING USED BY THE FAMILY MEMBERS, NOT THE PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE.
SO IT'S TRYING TO ALIGN THE CONDITIONS WITH THE APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED.
IS THIS SOMETHING I NEED TO BE, DO WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS OR NOT? I'M, I'M LOOKING FOR A LEGAL, THIS DID GO THROUGH ME.
THE STAFF REPORT DID DISCUSS THIS WITH THE, THE PLANNER.
WE DON'T NEED TO WORRY ABOUT IT AND IT'S A TIMING NO, ADAM WAS EXACTLY CORRECT.
YOU CAN'T HAVE AN ACCESSORY UNTIL YOU HAVE A PRINCIPLE.
THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING.
BUT SO WHAT HAPPENS IS THE EXISTING HOME WILL BE DESIGNATED AS THE ACCESSORY, BUT IT CAN'T BE DESIGNATED IN THAT, THAT UNTIL THE NEW HOME, WHICH IS THE PRINCIPAL HOME IS BUILT.
SO BY DEFAULT IT, THIS CUP ACTUALLY CAN BE APPROVED BUT CAN'T, CAN'T, AND DOESN'T SORT OF COME INTO BEING UNTIL THAT SECOND HOME IS BUILT.
AND THAT WAS THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THAT THE EXISTING HOME BE USED AS THE ACCESSORY.
YEAH, I I I DO UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
UH, WITH MOVEMENT OF THE DRIVEWAY, DOES THAT UH, INCREASE, YOU KNOW, THE SIGHT LINES OR IS THERE ANY CONCERN WITH THAT THAT IT'S ON? I MEAN IT ALMOST LOOKS LIKE IT'S PROBABLY BETTER MOVED.
COR, AM I CORRECT IN THAT BY THE, WELL, SO I WOULD DEFER TO VDOT AND VDOT HAS ISSUED A PERMIT IN NOVEMBER TO, TO RELOCATE THE DRIVEWAY AS PROPOSED.
WOULD THE APPLICANT, UH, LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK? NO.
YOU COME UP AND JUST, I MEAN NAME, HE'S PREPARED A TWO HOUR PRESIDENT.
SO, UM, I'M STEVE DASH 1259 MANNEQUIN ROAD.
UM, WE HAVE, UM, BEEN IN GTO NOW FOR TWO YEARS.
UM, WE LIVE IN THE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT, OR I GUESS IT'S NOT
UM, AND WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO, UH, HAVE THIS HOUSE BEING BUILT.
WE'RE, IT'S OUR FOREVER HOUSE IS WHERE WE'RE PROBABLY EVENTUALLY RETIRE AND, UM, WE'LL BE ABLE TO HAVE ALL OUR FAMILY TOGETHER.
SO WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS.
[00:30:02]
UM, ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, OR, UM, ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? YOU NEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.WE CAN NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR THIS, UH, APPLICATION IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.
I'LL NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
UM, NOW DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, CONCERNS? WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? MADAM CHAIR? I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT THE COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CU 20 26 0 0 0 0 3 APPLICATION BY STEVEN AND KAREN DASH SUBJECT TO THE IMPOSED CONDITIONS AS PRESENTED.
THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL PASSES ON A FIVE OH VOTE.
THIS CASE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON MAY 5TH, 2026.
IT MOVES FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
OUR FINAL PUBLIC HEARING ITEM THIS EVENING IS IN DISTRICT FOUR, CU 20 25 11 APPLICATION BY JOSE CARMEN CORREA ARIANO AND ANNA ISABEL RAMIREZ.
ANO REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP FOR AN ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT DETACHED ON 2.01 ACRES AT 2202 MANNEQUIN ROAD ON TAX UP NUMBER 47 9 0 3 C.
THE PROPERTY IS ZONED AGRICULTURE LIMITED A TWO.
THE CUP IS REQUIRED BY COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 15 1 12 IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 15 2 85 A.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS AREA AS RURAL ENHANCEMENT AREA.
MADAM CHAIR, I AM GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS CASE.
UH, GOOD EVENING MADAM CHAIRWOMAN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION FOR THE RECORD.
I'M A PLANNER WITH THE COUNTY.
FOR YOU IS AN APPLICATION BY JOSE CARMEN CORREA OREO AND ANA ISABEL RAMIREZ.
ANO, UH, FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
DETACHED, UH, THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON ABOUT TWO ACRES AT 2 2 0 2 MANNEQUIN ROAD IN DISTRICT FOUR.
THE MAP ON THE LEFT SHOWS THE GENERAL VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE COUNTY.
THE MAP, THE MAP ON THE RIGHT SHOWS THE PROPERTY OUTLINE OF RED.
THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES EXHIBIT A RURAL CHARACTER.
THE PROPERTY IS OCCUPIED BY A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH, AS WELL AS A DETACHED GARAGE.
THE CURRENT DWELLING IS LOCATED RIGHT HERE AND THE DETACHED GARAGE IS LOCATED RIGHT HERE.
THE PROPERTY AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES ARE ZONED A TO AGRICULTURAL LIMITED AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES THIS PROPERTY IN THE SURROUNDING AREA AS RURAL ENHANCEMENT AREA.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT AN ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT UPON APPROVAL OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
THE APPLICANT CURRENTLY ACCESSES THE PROPERTY THROUGH A SHARED DRIVE THAT IS SHARED BY ALL THREE PROPERTIES.
BUT AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE PLAT TO THE RIGHT, THIS DRIVE DOES NOT FOLLOW THE PLATT RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH IS OUTLINED IN GREEN.
THE CURRENT SHARED DRIVE IS LOCATED RIGHT HERE.
IN ADDITION TO THE RIGHT OF WAY, THERE'S ANOTHER ISSUE INVOLVING THE ACCESS CONNECTION.
ON JULY 2ND, 2024, UCHIN COUNTY UPDATED ITS PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS.
THESE NEW PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS INCREASE THE MINIMUM ROAD WIDTH FROM 16 FEET TO 20 FEET.
THE DRIVEWAY IS CLASSIFIED AS A PRIVATE ROAD AS IT PROVIDES ACCESS TO AT LEAST THREE LOTS.
THE ROAD CURRENTLY DOES NOT APPEAR TO MEET THESE CURRENT STANDARDS.
THE APPLICANT HOSTED A COMMUNITY MEETING ON JUNE 16TH AT THE GLAND FIRE RESCUE STATION THREE EIGHT CITIZENS ATTENDED.
THE APPLICANT EXPLAINED THE PROPOSAL AND DISCUSSION INCLUDED, UH, TOPICS SUCH AS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED DWELLING, THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED DRAIN FIELD TO THE NEIGHBORING WELL, VISIBILITY OF THE PROPOSED DWELLING, UM, SETBACKS, LAND DISTURBANCE, SIZE, AND HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED DWELLING AND WELD TYPES.
TWO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC EXPRESSED CONCERN WITH THE PROPOSAL WITH AN ADDITIONAL MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC EXPRESSING SUPPORT.
THE JANUARY 15TH PING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING CONCERN WAS EXPRESSED ABOUT THE RELOCATION OF THE PRIVATE ROAD AND THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE ACCESSORY DWELLING.
IN RESPONSE TO THESE CONCERNS AND THE DISCUSSION AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, STAFF HAS AMENDED AND CREATED NEW CONDITIONS INVOLVING ACCESS SCREENING AND THE LOCATION OF THE DWELLING ON THE RIGHT INCIDENT EXHIBIT TO THE NEW CONDITION THAT WOULD LIMIT THE PLACEMENT OF THE NEW ACCESSORY
[00:35:01]
STRUCTURE, UH, ACCESSORY DWELLING BEHIND THE BUILDING LINE.SHOWN HERE UNDER THIS NEW CONDITION, THE NEW DWELLING COULD BE PLACED ANYWHERE BEHIND THE LINE WHILE STILL MEETING ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS.
SO THIS GENERAL AREA, SUBSEQUENTLY, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED TWO NEW CONCEPTUAL PLANS.
PLEASE NOTE THAT NEITHER OF THESE CONCEPTUAL PLANS ADHERE TO THE PROPOSED NEW CONDITIONS, UH, WHICH FOR REFERENCE ARE LOCATED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
NEITHER OF OF THESE CONCEPTUAL PLANS ARE CONDITIONED.
THEY ARE CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE.
AS MENTIONED, STAFF HAS MODIFIED THE CONDITIONS SINCE THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
CONDITIONS ONE THROUGH THREE ARE STANDARD CONDITIONS AND RELATE TO THE USE OF THE PROPERTY.
CONDITION FOUR HAS BEEN REMOVED AS A WORKING SMOKE DETECTOR AND CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR ARE REQUIRED UNDER THE UNIFORM STATEWIDE BUILDING CODE.
NOW, CONDITION FOUR UM, RELATES TO PUBLIC SAFETY.
IN RESPONSE TO THE COMMENTS AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, STAFF HAS SIMPLIFIED THE CONDITION ABOUT THE EXISTING ROAD.
IT NOW READS THAT IT MUST BE BROUGHT INTO ZONING COMPLIANCE BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE ACCESSORY DWELLING.
ADDITIONALLY, THE SCREENING REQUIREMENT HAS CHANGED FROM A VEGETATIVE SCREENING REQUIREMENT TO A WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE.
JEFF ADDED A NEW CONDITION REGARDING THE LOCATION OF THE ACCESSORY DWELLING.
UM, THE PLACEMENT OF THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY DWELLING HOUSING UNIT MUST BE LOCATED BEHIND THE BUILDING SETBACK LINE AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT A.
AND THAT WAS THE, UM, EXHIBIT I SHOWED YOU EARLIER.
STAFF HAS ALSO MODIFIED THE CONDITION, UH, THE DATE FOR CONDITION EIGHT.
AND LASTLY, UM, CONDITION NINE IS OUR STANDARD TRANSFER AND LEASE LANGUAGE.
AT THIS TIME, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION.
YOU SHOWED TWO OPTIONS, OPTION A AND OPTION B.
UH, B AND UH, THIS IS A AND UM, C, B AND CR.
SO WHICH ONE IS EITHER ONE? NEITHER, NEITHER.
THESE ARE JUST SUBMITTED AT THIS TIME.
THESE ARE JUST SUBMITTED CONCEPTUAL PLANS.
GOT AS PART, UH, AS A, AN EXHIBIT TO THE APPLICATION.
CAN YOU SHOW US APPROXIMATELY ON EXHIBIT B OR C, UM, WHERE THE FENCE WOULD GO AND HOW WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AND THE FENCE, UH, PRESUMABLY WOULD GO ALONG THIS PROPERTY LINE? UH, THE REQUIREMENT, AND I WILL GO TO THE EXACT LANGUAGE, UM, IS THAT IT MUST, UM, SCREENING MUST BE ACCOMPLISHED BY A WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE AT LEAST SIX FEET IN HEIGHT.
AND THE FENCE MUST BE IN PLACE BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF THE DETACHED ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT.
UH, AND ACTUALLY THE FIRST SENTENCE, THE DE DETACHED ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT MUST BE GENERALLY SCREENED FROM THE VIEW OF THE ADJACENT DWELLING.
UM, SO WHO DETERMINES THE LENGTH OR IS THAT JUST SUBJECT TO, UH, AZO? UM, ZONING WILL GO OUT AND INSPECT, UM, AS PART OF OUR NORMAL INSPECTIONS FOR BUILD THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION.
UM, AND AS LONG AS WE FIND THAT IT MEETS THE GENERAL REQUIREMENT, UM, OKAY.
SO IT'S KIND OF TO BE DETERMINED.
WE, AS, AS CONDITIONED CURRENTLY, UM, WE ARE, THE CURRENT CONDITIONS ALLOWS THEM TO PLACE IT ANYWHERE.
SO PLACING EXACT LOCATION FOR THE FENCE AT THIS TIME, UM, MAY NOT MAKE THE MOST SENSE.
SO WE'RE ALLOWING FOR FLEXIBILITY AT THIS TIME.
SO WHAT WE WERE BEING, WE'RE, WE'RE BEING ASKED TO CONSIDER HERE, IS WE'RE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE THAT A SECOND DWELLING CAN BE BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY BEHIND THAT, UH, BUILDING LINE AND UM, TO BE DETERMINED.
SO ALL, ALL WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DO IS TO APPROVE THAT A SECOND BUILDING COULD BE BUILT BEHIND THIS LINE.
THAT THE USE OF THE PROPERTY MAY ALLOW FOR A SECOND DWELLING WITH THE ATTACHED CONDITIONS, ONE OF WHICH IS YES BEHIND THIS BUILDING LINE WITH SCREENING.
AND ANY DETAILS ABOUT THIS ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE WOULD BE HANDLED IN, UH, PERMITTING ADMINISTRATIVELY DURING BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW? YES.
[00:40:01]
UH, TWO STORY BUILDINGS ARE APPRO OR ARE ARE ACCEPTABLE? YES.THERE'S NO HEIGHT RESTRICTION FOR STRUCTURES IN THE AGRICULTURAL LIMITED DISTRICT.
SO ARE WE, ARE WE NOT PICKING A, B, OR C? NO, WE'RE NOT.
WE'RE JUST APPROVING THAT THAT A, A STRUCTURE UNLIKE A AND C COULD BE BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY.
A IS CURRENTLY PART OF THE CONDITIONS THAT STAFF HAS PRESENTED TO THE COMMISSION, UM, WITH THE, YOU KNOW, THAT THE CURRENT CURRENTLY THEY JUST NEED TO BE PLACED BEHIND THIS LINE.
SO IN THIS GENERAL VICINITY MM-HMM
MM-HMM
WE WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE IF WE WERE SAYING WE WERE OKAY WITH B OR C.
IF A MAJORITY OF Y'ALL ARE OKAY WITH B AND C, UH, AND UH, AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONS WILL BE NECESSARY.
UH, WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK? GOOD EVENING.
UM, MY NAME IS JOHA GONZALEZ AND THIS IS MY HUSBAND DANIEL AND WE ARE HERE REPRESENTING MY IN-LAWS, UM, AT 2202 MANNEQUIN ROAD.
SO DUE TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERN WITH THEIR PRIVACY, MY FATHER-IN-LAW IS WILLING TO MOVE THE NEW HOUSE CLOSER TO THE STORAGE, WHICH WOULD MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE AND IT WOULD BE MORE TOWARDS THE RED DOTTED LINE THAT YOU SAW ON EXHIBIT A.
SO THEIR INITIAL PROPOSAL FOR THE LOCATION OF THE HOUSE WAS IN THE MIDDLE OF THEIR LAND DUE TO THE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE EXISTING USE OF THE AREA NEAR THE STORAGE.
THIS AREA IS CURRENTLY, THE AREA NEAR THE STORAGE IS CURRENTLY BEING USED BY THEIR BUSINESS, WHICH HAS TRUCKS, EQUIPMENT, AND MATERIALS.
SO BY NO MEANS IS MY FATHER-IN-LAW TRYING TO INFRINGE ON HIS NEIGHBOR'S PRIVACY AND IS WILLING TO COME TO TERMS ON AN AGREEMENT FOR BOTH PARTIES.
IF ANYTHING, I BELIEVE MY FATHER-IN-LAW HAS LESS PRIVACY DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE LAND.
UM, SO ESSENTIALLY HIS NEIGHBOR, SO THE LAND IS PRETTY MUCH ON A HILL.
HIS NEIGHBOR IS CONSIDERED, I WOULD CONSIDER IT FOR HIM TO BE LIKE ON THE TOP OF THE HILL AND MY FATHER-IN-LAW WOULD BE ON THE BOTTOM.
SO THAT BEING SAID, MY FATHER-IN-LAW IS ASKING IF HE WOULD ALL CONSIDER THE HOUSE BEING BUILT APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET FROM THE GARAGE.
THIS MEANS THAT PART OF THE HOUSE WOULD BE LOCATED AROUND FIVE TO 10 FEET AWAY FROM THE RED PROPOSED LINE ON EXHIBIT A.
DUE TO THE COUNTY SETBACKS AND THE LIMITED SPACE, THE ORIGINAL HOUSE PLANS WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE USED DUE TO THE DIMENSIONS, UM, THAT WE HAVE TO PLAY AROUND WITH.
SO THEIR NEW PLAN IS FOR THE HOUSE TO BE A TWO STORY HOME INSTEAD OF ONE.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
ANY QUESTIONS? SO AS I UNDERSTAND IT THEN, YOUR IN-LAWS, YOUR FATHER-IN-LAW AND MOTHER-IN-LAW ARE, ARE ASKING THAT THE RED LINE NOT BE A CONSTRAINT.
IS THAT CORRECT? AND THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ASKING FOR APPROVAL OF ONE OF THE, UH, OPTIONS, B OR C HERE, THAT ARE ACTUALLY IN FRONT OF THAT PART OF A PART OF THE PRO, UH, STRUCTURE WOULD BE IN FRONT OF THE RED LINE, IS THAT CORRECT? YES.
SO EXHIBIT C WOULD BE MOST COMPARABLE TO WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR.
UM, I KIND OF DREW THE PROPERTY HERE ON A PIECE OF PAPER IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT.
SO YOU WERE AGREEING TO BUILD THE HOME WITHIN THE PROPERTY GUIDELINE, CORRECT.
THAT WAS SHOWN IN RED, RIGHT? YEAH.
THE ONLY ISSUE IS THAT PART OF THE HOUSE DOES COME OUT OF THAT RED DOTTED LINE AROUND LIKE FIVE TO 10 FEET.
AND I'M NOT SURE EXHIBIT C IS WHAT? CORRECT.
SO WOULD THAT BE AN ISSUE? JUST COME RIGHT THERE? YEAH.
BUT THAT RED DOTTED LINE COMES FROM THIS CORNER AND GOES RIGHT ACROSS.
THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE SAYING ABOUT FIVE FEET.
SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE BEING, WE'RE ARE WE BEING ASKED TO AMEND THIS? NO, NO.
WE'RE BEING ASKED IF WE AGREE THAT A SECOND HOUSE WILL BE BUILT WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THAT RED LINE AND IT'S CLOSE MM-HMM
I I I DO BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS ARE ASKING
[00:45:01]
YOU TO AMEND THE CONDITIONS BEFORE YOU, UM, AND UM, TO MOVE THE RED LINE AT LEAST FIVE FEET NORTH.IF, UH, IF THE, IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO GO WITH THAT.
UM, I DON'T HAVE MATERIAL READY FOR, UM, SHOWING A THE RED LINE IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION.
UM, I HAVE PREPARED DRAFT LANGUAGE THAT WOULD REQUIRE GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH ONE OF THESE TWO CON, UM, EXHIBITS.
UM, BEFORE YOU, UM, WE DON'T HAVE TO AMEND.
WE DON'T HAVE TO AMEND, BUT THERE THE APPLICANT IS ASKING US TO AMEND WHAT? NO, Y'ALL ARE NOT UNDER ANY OBLIGATION TO AMEND THE CONDITION BEFORE STAFF, BUT THEY HAVE ASKED FOR YES.
BEYOND THE RED LINE THEY, THEY'RE WANTING BE A LITTLE ABOVE THAT RED LINE, RIGHT? YES.
AND GO TO TWO STORE, RIGHT? YES.
THEY'RE ONE OPTION TO C BASICALLY.
CAN WE REFERENCE EXHIBIT C IN OUR MOTION IF WE MAKE ONE TO AMEND? UH, OR IS THAT NOT? YES.
IF Y'ALL ARE INTERESTED IN AMENDING ONE OF THE CONDITIONS, UM, I HAVE ALREADY DRAFTED, UM, YOU WOULD NEED TO STRIKE THE EXISTING CONDITION.
PER PRESENT AMENDMENT ALONG THE LINES OF THIS.
I WILL NOW OPEN UP THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR THIS CASE.
IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME FORWARD WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
KATIE MARTIN, 2200 MANNEQUIN ROAD.
I WANNA START OFF BY THANKING YOU GUYS.
THANK YOU FOR MAKING THAT AMENDMENT.
I THINK THAT WILL DEFINITELY WORK BETTER.
UM, AS FAR AS OUR PRIVACY IS CONCERNED, UM, MOVING THE PROPERTY BACK, UM, OBVIOUSLY IT DOES EXCEED PAST THAT RED LINE.
UM, I THINK AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, UM, I WOULD ASK THAT MAYBE THAT WE COULD KEEP THE VEGETATION THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED SINCE IT IS GOING TO A TWO STORY HOME.
UM, I THINK OTHER THAN THAT, UM, THAT, THAT IS ALL I HAD.
UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER CONCERNS OR, I THINK THEY ADJUSTED VERY WELL.
ALRIGHT, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
UM, IF THE RED LINE IS MOVED UP TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR OPTION C, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE SAYING YOU APPRECIATE THEM DOING? IS THAT SOMETHING YOU'RE WILLING, YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH? SO ASSUMING THAT, THAT THEY'RE COMFORTABLE GOING WITH OPTION C? 'CAUSE IN THE BEGINNING, OPTION A WAS I UNDERSTAND.
IF, IF OPTION C GOING FIVE TO 10 FEET PAST THAT, I THINK WE'RE OKAY WITH THAT.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S AN ISSUE.
I IT, IT IT'S LIKE ALMOST COMPLETELY ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
SO IT'S, IT'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
UM, WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? I NO CLOSE THE UH, PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
UM, CAN WE DO FENCE AND VEGETATION? I THINK THAT'S, I MIGHT, THAT'S, DOES THAT BOTHER YOU THAT TO NOT BUILD A FENCE AND JUST PUT NO, BOTH, NO FENCE AND VEGETATION.
LEAVE THE VEGETATION THAT'S THERE AND ADD A FENCE CEILING I PAINTING AS WELL.
IS THERE ANY LIKE LIMITATIONS OR LIKE SPECIFIC GUIDELINES THAT YOU WOULD BE IN LIKE PUTTING IN PLACE FOR THE HEIGHT OF THE VEGETATION? THE EXISTING VEGETATION? RIGHT.
WELL IT MIGHT BE BECAUSE THERE IS EXISTING VEGETATION RIGHT THERE.
I MEAN THERE'S TREES THAT ARE PRETTY BIG, SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT OTHER LIKE VEGETATION WE COULD INCLUDE IN THERE.
YEAH, YOU DON'T, YEAH, I'M, I'M YOU'RE JUST SAYING KEEP EXISTING EXISTING VEGETATION AND THE FENCE.
JUST CLEARING LIKE THE PATH FOR THE FENCE.
NOT TO LIKE CLEAR CUT AND REMOVE ALL THE TREES AND YOU KNOW.
YES, IT WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT.
UM, ARE WE, WE'LL WAIT FOR THEM TO, YEAH.
UM, STAFF WAS DISCUSSING THAT IF YOU UM, IF WE ARE Y'ALL ARE INTERESTED IN UH, REQUIRING VEGETATION
[00:50:01]
INSTEAD OF SCREENING, UH, PROBABLY THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE TO JUST UM, GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL CONDITION THAT STAFF PRESENTED IN JANUARY.UM, WHAT IS NOW CURRENTLY NUMBER SIX? I DON'T THINK YOU WERE NO, I WAS, I WAS ADDING IT.
ANYTHING I WAS JUST SAYING I THINK IT'S HEARING BOTH SIDES.
IT SOUNDS LIKE LEAVING THE EXISTING VEGETATION, PROBABLY THE TALL MATURE TREES AND ADDING THE FENCE IS WHAT'S PREFERRED.
I DON'T THINK IT SAYS IN HERE THAT WE HAVE, THEY HAVE TO LEAVE THE EXISTING VEGETATION.
SO IT'S A COMBINATION OF, OF BOTH.
ARE WE, CAN WE GO BACK TO THE SLIDE WHERE IT HAD UM, THE YES.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? I MOVE THAT THE COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CU 2 0 2 5 0 0 0 1 1 APPLICATION BY JOSE.
JOSE CARMEN CORREA
DO YOU NEED TO ADD THAT AS WELL? AND CONCEPTUAL PLAN? THE LOCATION OF THE ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT MUST GENERALLY CONFORM WITH THE ATTACHED CONCEPTUAL PLAN LABELED IN EXHIBIT C, YOUR HONOR, THEREFORE STRIKING THE CURRENT CONDITION.
SEVEN TO REPLACE IT WITH THE CONDITION SEVEN THAT BEN HAS PUT, I'M SORRY THAT MR. ELLIS HAS PUT UP ON THE BOARD HERE.
AND THEN THE ONLY THING I WAS NOT CLEAR ON WAS WHETHER YOU LANDED ON KEEPING THE CURRENT VEGETATION AND ADDING THAT INTO THEY MUST HAVE A FENCE AND VEGETATION JUST THE FENCE OR JUST THE VEGETATION BECAUSE WE WILL NEED TO AMEND ANOTHER CONDITION HERE.
WHAT I WAS SAYING IS THAT YOU KEEP THE CURRENT VEGETATION AND ADD THE FENCE, WHICH I THINK CAN YOU GO TO THE OLD SIX? THAT'S WHAT WE ALL AGREED ON.
YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I HAVE NO LANGUAGE ABOUT REMOVING VEGETATION.
YEAH, THAT'S, I JUST GONNA SAY.
IT COULD BE IF THEY PUT IN THE FENCE, THAT COULD BE A POSSIBILITY THAT AS CONDITIONED THAT COULD BE A POSSIBILITY.
YOU STRUCK CONDITION SIX BEFORE, RIGHT? CAN I MODIFIED? UM, CAN I SEE THAT I MODIFIED CONDITION? SO IT SAYS HERE, WHAT STRUCK HERE IS EXISTING VEGETATION MAY BE USED BUT ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS ARE REQUIRED, UH, TO, UH, A VEGETATION THAT DIES OR DESTROYS MUST BE REPLACED.
SO IS IS THAT THE LANGUAGE WE WANT? I WAS THINKING THAT THAT SOUNDS LIKE, THAT SOUNDS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS BEING APPROVED BY THE APPLICANT.
THEY WOULD LEAVE EXISTING VEGETATION.
YOU WOULD PROBABLY LIKE TO SAY EXISTING VEGETATION LEAVE EXISTING VEGETATION AND THEN VEGETATION THAT DIES OR IS DESTROYED MUST BE REPLACED.
I THINK THE TWO PARTIES AGREE IT'S JUST OUR LINE LANGUAGES.
WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE CONFUSION ACTUALLY.
[01:02:09]
UM,[01:02:09]
DO WE NEED TO DO, I GUESS ARE WE COME BACK IN SESSION? WE ARE NOW BACK IN SESSION.UM, DO WE NEED TO AMEND OUR MOTION OR IS THIS GOING TO BE PUT INTO THE PROPOSED CONDITIONS AS YOU HAVE CHOSEN A MOTION THAT ALLOW, YOU HAVE CHOSEN THE MOTION THAT ALLOWS YOU TO AMEND THE CONDITION.
I BELIEVE MR. KIMBERLY, YOU STARTED, YOU STARTED WITH THE MOTION THAT SAID, I'M SORRY, MR. PAT, MR. PATAK YES.
STARTED WITH THE CONDITIONS AS PRESENTED.
THE MOTION IS REALLY THAT NOT THE CONDITIONS AS PRESENTED, BUT THE CONDITIONS AS AMENDED.
SO YES, I BELIEVE YOU NEED TO WITHDRAW THAT MOTION AND START OVER.
AND THEN WE WILL NOTE THE CHANGES MADE FOR CONDITION NUMBER SEVEN, CONDITION NUMBER SIX AND CONDITION NUMBER SEVEN.
DO WE NEED TO READ THIS CONDITION OUT LOUD WITH THAT? YES, I WOULD READ IT INTO THE RECORD.
SO I GUESS WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION FIRST.
YEAH, I'LL JUST DO THE, I MOVE THAT THE COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CU 2 0 25 DASH 0 0 1 APPLICATION BY JOSE CARMEN CORREA HANNO AND ANNA ISABEL RAMIREZ HANNO, SUBJECT TO THE IMPOSED CONDITIONS WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS.
UM, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE, THAT SO I CAN READ THAT FIRST SENTENCE, I'M SORRY.
UH, WITH AMENDMENT TO, UH, CONDITION NUMBER SIX, SCREENING, THE ATTACHED ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT MUST BE GENERALLY SCREENED FROM THE VIEW OF THE ADJACENT OF THE ADJACENT DWELLING ON TAX.
MAC NUMBERS FOUR SEVEN DASH NINE DASH ZERO DASH THREE DASH ZERO.
SCREENING MUST BE ACCOMPLISHED BY THE PRESERVATION OF THE EXISTING VEGETA VEGETATION AND BY A WOODEN PRIVACY FENCE AT LEAST SIX FEET IN HEIGHT.
THE FENCE MUST BE IN PLACE BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF THE DETACHED ACCESSORY, UM, HOUSING UNIT.
CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY DEED OR DEED AND DISEASE VEGETATION MUST BE REPLACED.
THE LOCATION OF THE ACCESSORY FAMILY HOUSING UNIT MUST BE GENERAL, MUST GENERALLY CONFORM WITH THE ATTACHED CONCEPTUAL PLAN LABELED EXHIBIT CI SECOND.
ALL RIGHT, MR. MCLAUGHLIN AYE.
MR. KIMBERLY AYE, THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND AS A RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS AMENDED PASSES ON A FOUR OH VOTE.
THIS CASE IS TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED TO BE HEARD
[01:05:01]
BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAY 5TH, 2026.IT MOVES FORWARD WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS AMENDED FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND IF THERE IS NO OTHER BUSINESS, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.