Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Ready? All right. Good evening everybody. Thank you all for coming to the city of a planning commission meeting for August 12th, 2025. We're going to go ahead and get started with the public hearing. Uh but before we do, I'm going to read the guidelines for public comments uh for our meeting tonight. Meetings are public forums in which many opinions are expressed and the business of the city must be conducted. As such, discipline, honorable and professional decorum is paramount, courteous and respectful communication is required. During public comment periods of the meeting, all questions and statements from the public shall be directed to the chairman. If you wish to speak, raise your hand and the chairman will recognize you. Please approach the podium and state your name and address. In order to allow an opportunity for everyone who wishes to address the commission, speakers should limit their comments to the agenda item or the application being discussed. Each speaker will be given five minutes to address an issue and may only address an issue once unless questions from the commission are posed to the speaker. I know a lot of you have some comments tonight on some of these applications, but I would ask you to be mindful of the fivem minute uh clock that you'll see on the screen so that everybody has a chance to uh to comment tonight. Uh our first order of business tonight is the approval of the minutes. We have two two sets of minutes. Um the first one we'll consider the first one the approval of the special called work session minutes for July 8th of 2025. Um do I have a motion or any comments?

Okay. Uh if you'll uh uh Yes, sir. I want to separate this. Um do I have a motion for approval and then you can do your thing? Motion to approve the special call work session of July 8th. We need a second. Somebody make a motion. Oh, he made a motion. Yeah, I'm I made a motion special call meeting minutes. Uh do I have a second? There's a second. All right. uh discussion.

Mr. Chairman, there's two two notes I'd like to u have the minutes revise. Uh first, under members present, Sam Herb was not present. So if you could strike his name off the also at the meeting we did discuss the concept of traffic studies and I'd like to add a paragraph at the very very end or sentence at the very end saying that the board discussed requiring a traffic impact study be submitted at the time of concept plan submitt not after. All right you got that. Okay so he made his motion to revise that. Are you okay with the I am okay with that.

Okay. All those in favor raise your hand and the special call work session minutes are approved. Uh now for the um work session and regular meeting minutes for July 15, 2025. Do I have a motion? Uh Mr. Chairman, yes. Uh I accept as written. Okay. Do I have a second?

All right. Second, Commissioner Connor. Um discussion, any changes? Okay. All those in favor raise your hand. And the regular minutes passed unanimously. All right. Um I did want to draw to the public's attention uh tonight that applications um B number 25-200042. So an annexation request by Metro Manor over at Whiskey Road and West Drive has been with withdrawn by the applicant tonight. Uh so we will not be discussing that application tonight. The next application is from the same applicant. It's application number 25-60015. Um this is a reasonzoning request uh over on um Boardman uh road. Uh that application has been withdrawn. And then the last application number 25-230005. This is a request for a plan residential concept plan by Metro Manor. The same U applicant and this is at Whiskey Road and West Drive in Borman. These three items have been withdrawn by the applicant. we will not be discussing them tonight. So, if you had any comments or concerns about these three, um you'll have to come to another meeting uh because these are not part of our review tonight. Okay. Uh our first application tonight is application number 26-20001. Uh this is an annexation requestation request uh at 2912 Katala Street Northwest, tax partial number 104-19-35-012. They're currently in the county under residential single family conservation and looking to come into the city uh under RS15 residential single family. Is the applicant here tonight to discuss this? Okay. Any anybody for or against this application tonight? Any comments? Okay. I'll entertain a motion for this application.

Mr. chairman. Uh concerning application 26-20001 for annexation request uh proposed city zoning is single family RS15. I say we move to city council for approval.

Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Herb. Do I have a second? Second, Commissioner Reps. Thank you. Any discussion? All those in favor raise your hand. And the motion passes unanimously. Okay. So, we're going to scroll all the way down to um item E and F. Uh this is application number 26-20002. It's an annexation request and application number 26-220001. And this is a concept plan approval request. This is located on Toolback Road and Woodward Drive. Tax parcels number 137-19-01-00003 and 137-19-01-006. They're currently in the county under urban development and we'll be have will have to come into the city as plan residential. This is a 157 lot single family residential development. Uh is the applicant here tonight wants to speak on behalf of this application? Okay. What?

Okay. Well, he'll have to jump in later. Um, anybody for uh is he outside? Thank you. If you don't mind. Thank you.

No problem. Good timing. Um, if you will give us just an introduction to your application, what you're looking for. Um, and then if we have any questions, we'll

Yes. My name is David Banks. I'm the project engineer for this project. The developer is here if he needs to speak. Um, we're requesting for a um a um annexation into the city for 200 157 lots. Um, and this this project three or four years ago, we did get sewer extended to this property. And um, we'd like I was told that we needed to go ahead and provide that annexation request now and that's what this is. Um I believe we dropped the number of u residential lots approximately 80 to 90 residential lots. I don't have the numbers in front of me.

Um and you know to meet more current demands to meet the city's regulations for spacing of residential lots. Um, this development is this is the same developer that did the Diodor subdivision which is basically Caddy Corner from on Tolbeck Road. It's basically the same type of development. It's just a extension of that. It will not be called Diodor obviously, but um the same type of development which I think has been pretty successful in the city.

Okay. And uh you're aware of the uh I spoke about this in the work session, but you're aware of conditions number one through seven and are okay with those.

Uh I I would um I would like to request that the consideration of the tool I mean the the Woodward uh road dirt. I think it was commented. I don't know if it was a condition but it not be part of the um be part of be a condition for this. Um Woodward um road is a dirt road is serviced by other people that are agricultural. The rightway there is only like 40 feet wide. It'd be very difficult to put a pity street through that. um the access there I really would don't see it being needed but you know

well that came from the fire marshal so well the fire marshall requested just um just emergency access which is a 26 foot wide asphalt pavement to the road and then that be gated but I hope that is not an issue we we're fine with that okay but if the access is required by the planning commission and the city council. You know, I would hope that would you you keep saying access versus entrance? Full access? Yeah, we're we're talking about emergency access right now. Emergency access.

No, we we hadn't brought up that condition yet. So, but my question to you is you're okay with one through seven as it's listed in this application, but for three. Give me a second if you don't mind. Look at uh look at number three. Number three. Yeah. Yeah, we're we're fine with the with the with the Well, this vehicle access Woodward Drive is not. Is that Hold on just a sec. Is that what number three is saying? Number three is actually saying full access. Hold on. I'm going to let the director clarify.

So number three is just saying that that the city is requesting full access with a median on the entrance but not to built to city standards but not Woodward Drive itself. So in other words, Woodward Drive would remain dirt. That's the way that's reading. It's only the entrance itself we're addressing. I mean, don't mean you have to like it. I just want to make sure that they understand. We understand that. And it's I think I mean I Yeah. I just want it for us as commissioners to understand more or less too.

Yes. I think what he's asking is that he would prefer that that possible condition be removed such that then we only have the emergency access. Okay. I have a I have you have more uh questions from the commissioners to the applicant. Commissioner,

I mean I have a problem with that because of the fact that um it's so far away from the main entrance. If there were a fire at the main entrance um and that road is blocked due to that fire and then there's a heart attack patient that needs an ambulance, that ambulance wouldn't be able to get there in timely matter. I like the idea with 157 homes that there be two entrances. That's the way I personally feel. We're kind of a policy that anything over a 100 dwelling units would have a secondary access, a full secondary access.

Okay. The emergency access is it's got a a gate and a key that's called a lock box, right? Not right. And all emergency access people have a key to that. That's the whole point of that. If you go online, I didn't know anything about it till about three years ago and they kept calling this knockbox thing and and it's a emergency access that is their point for that one particular reason for to stop people that live there from going in and out but allow for emergency access. Um I mean is this a deal breaker for us or we like no yeah we'll put access in. We just don't want to have to pay for drive. Well, it's down here as a condition and I kind of like Okay.

Yeah. I mean, I I I probably wouldn't want to live back there and have to drive on a dirt road to my paved road and driveway and bring tracking in and out. Um, but that would Well, I think the cons and I think there's folks that agree with you on leaving Wordward as it is, but as a condition, that's what the city's asking for on that just on that one area. Yeah. I mean, I think you ought to bring it up with city council. They're they're going to have the final say. I mean, the price of a I think somebody mentioned in the in the premeating in the work session that um you know, the cost of the culde-sac, I mean, it it doesn't matter, right?

That if y'all want us to do that and and the people that live in the neighborhood off of Woodward Drive are okay with that, we're we're fine with doing that. We're not questioning. Any other questions for the This is of the applicant. Okay. Engineer. I would like to address one thing about open space and common um Yes sir. The um the active area. I would like to know kind of what that we were looking at there. Yeah. Fire pit, you know.

Um so so this I'll let I'll let our plan director respond to that as this is what he's what he's talking about folks is there's a condition about uh open space. Um, and if you look on the map right there, the majority of it's in the um front area, there's not a lot in the back. Yeah. And we we try to keep open spaces active away from homeowners that are don't want it. You know, I wouldn't want it next to my house. All right. Well, well, let let's let Mario and and it could be passive. I think we're just trying to spread the share the love around the neighborhood a little bit more instead of, you know, congregating all with you a lot. So, I'm fine with Yeah. I don't think kind of want us. I don't think they want a pickle ball court or anything. No, we're not asking for a pickle ball.

Okay. All right. Well, and I've I anticipate that we're going to hear a lot of concerns about how this is going to be perceived along the highway. Yeah. And these lots for example that above this entrance. Uh if you traded that as open space for something toward the other entrance, you might assuage some of their concerns in terms of preserving. I mean we're I mean I think that the city requires a 10-ft landscape non-disturbed buffer. We're already at 20. So I mean

if we have to increase that a little bit, you know, I think it's not Yeah, we could doing something that that nature. I mean, we're not opposed to it, but we kind of want to know. We don't If you said 150 ft, I would be Yeah. Well, I mean, you've got you've got all this passive space beyond your detention center. I mean, your detention facility. What's to move the two lots there at the end of that culde-sac and put some passive space along that buffer of the highway? again what what magnitude are we talking you know 30 foot had taken 30 feet of land and like putting in common space and

we we would like to see something that's actually usable for the residents to to on that portion of the so other words whether it be a small park pocket park or whatever now I do want to pay attention to the fact that you've got easements running around that detention pond so there could be some issues with swapping things around so but yeah again looking at something toward the north side of the Yeah. Okay. Uh any other questions for the applicant from the commission?

Okay. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. If uh if there are any sir, if there are any questions or comments from the public, I would like for you to come up after um if you don't mind. So to the public who wants to respond, I know you're going to have questions for us, but if you have certain questions for the applicant, please ask direct them to us. We'll make sure we record them and then we'll give him an opportunity after everybody speaks to respond to any of them. Okay. So, we'll try to keep this as orderly as we can. All right. Is there anybody here in favor of this application that wants to speak? I don't think so. Um, anybody against this application? All right. Yes, ma'am. Right on the front. We'll start in the front row and we'll work our way back.

Hello, my name is Samantha Melamemed and I live at 375 Fox Pond Road. I'm a resident of Aken County and a very active member of the Aken County government um attending meetings and we really have appreciated everything that the city's done, how welcoming you've been tonight. So, um I live uh in the Mont Morreny area and a couple of things. One is we've been uh very active in the comprehensive plan for Aken County and uh looking at what updated zoning and making comments in this area. And a few things that have come up consistently in the comments, I went and refreshed and looked at them tonight is this is a rural area. This is very much prized as one of the last tracks of open land. Um I drove to Stable View today so on Highway 19 and I've seen where the sewer lines and others the other utilities have gone out there and the housing development and what's that's done to the traffic and um as we've um worked on the comprehensive plan that we're hoping that the county finalizes this summer. We keep asking um that this being able to maintain this as a rural area is a key character. And we know that if the shoreline goes out here and we have a subdivision that's approved, then um as the cotton fields potentially are bought and the sewer line continues to go that it'll very much change the nature of it. And the point of having a comprehensive plan is to be able to um have large um blocks of land that have a specific purpose. That's one thing. The other thing is my husband actually is at the US78 um corridor meeting that is happening right now at this time. Um when we had that meeting at the church um a couple months ago, this type of traffic in these subdivisions are not at all accounted for. It's already read. Um

there's been deadly accidents there. And so as we look at adding more pressure um between the the railroad and the um the you know we have the fire station. Um it's not really clear what they're going to be able to do there. And so that's kind of the context I wanted to bring from a county resident um into what we're worried about um as this type of plan. And we know we go to the planning commission for Aken County. So we know that it's really critical that we um make a show here. Our neighborhood's been very active as soon as we saw um the article on this come up. And so thank you again as a county resident and a big fan of the city for everything that you do and thanks for listening to my comments tonight.

Yes. Question. Yes, please.

Go ahead. No. Yeah. Yeah. Sure. with a that would generally meet city standards, meaning you'll have double entrance, a sign, etc. dumping onto Woodward, uh, which would at this point per the application still remain dirt. Do you have a preference whether that be the case or whether rather than require that which we normally would that that simply just be an emergency access with a knockbox and then therefore you wouldn't have the ability to eress out of the parking lot onto Woodward and beyond. So I live on a dirt road and and fought to keep it a dirt road because of one we have a lot of conservation properties and the runoff is quite significant in the change between a dirt road and what it allows versus a paved road. And so in general I I think one of the key characteristics of Aken County is to remain dirt. I do think having an emergency just as a person I think that that's a very smart thing to do. I don't want anyone um burning or uh having a heart attack. So, I think that's a great but I do think keeping it as a dirt road and maintaining the character of the area makes a ton of sense to me. I and I do I have to say as as you're driving in on 78, um thinking about having a buffer there that is keeping it at the rural character as well, I think is is a great idea. Ma'am, is is would you what would you say your overall concern is any development going further down the corridor

and and honestly it's the city it's the city it's the the development and then what city access you city utilities being extended because I I go to all the county planning meetings every single one and what I hear all the time is oh we can just tap in and then it's just it's one more and it's one more and then the pressure that these farmers feel that it's going to be a development ment and you know before particularly because the Aken comprehensive plan the county is not done they've did the comment session in January trying to get that in place before this kind of roar development comes to that to maintain um what is like important in there

and the the utility request for this track has already been I know yeah that's not the petition yeah yeah understanding but but I do think that being in the city and and all of that. But but I will say like we appreciate I your level of enforcement of the buffer zones and all that as well is maybe in the county. So So but yeah that our concern is that the utilities running down there and then the more and more going and then just that also the traffic and the overall for the Aken County comprehensive plan. No, we I think we understand where you're coming from.

Yeah. Okay. Well, and thank you for the clarifying questions. Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate you talking tonight. All right. Next. Yes, sir. I'm just going to go straight I'm gonna go straight down this side, guys. And I'm gonna come on this side and we can be here as long as y'all want to be.

My name is Rick Preston. I am not a city resident. I'm a county resident, a neighbor of Sam's. And um I too live in Mont Morreny. Have a rural property. And um when I ride out 78 and u coming from just about any other area of this town, I feel blessed. I'm relieved of the of because of the rural nature of the property. is bucolic and where I live uh down west road toward Fox Pond, it's about as good as it gets in terms of development and lack of development. Um, as far as this particular development is concerned, I'm against it. And um, you all have a tough job right now because the because the the the residents of Aken County and and the city of Aken are awakened and they were awakened by the hotel debacle. It turned a lot of heads around and and people are now paying attention to where they live and what's important about how they live. And so that's about all I'm going to tell you. Um, couple of little items about this particular development. I didn't hear too much about covenants. I asked the question, but uh, covenants like can people add on to these houses? Can they build sheds? Can is there any sort of color co, you know, style coordination, color coordination, trees? I mean, there are all kinds of things you can do. Uh there there in the application there are renderings of the house and I don't think he's just putting up

okay junk. But um but they in his concept plan when he applies he has to have these type of elevations for us to Well, they look just like all the rest. They're fine. I mean I have a problem. I mean they're a dime a dozen. I don't disagree with you. I'm done. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. We'll just keep I'm gonna go right on down this side and I'm gonna come right on over you guys. I promise you everybody's going to have an opportunity tonight. All right. on this side over on my right. Ma'am, okay. Uh, I'll go to this side. Yes, sir. Hi, my name is Mr. Ganos. Uh, I own property Mount Morens, approximately 380 acres. I'm less than two miles from this development, which is currently in the county and zoned RUD. The only reason we're here tonight is for an annexation request on the belief that that 10-ft strip in dotted lines there is forcing an annexation into the city despite them having a services agreement to have sewer as an RUD piece in the county. So, I'm going to ask that we hold over this application from a vote until certain questions of fact are answered and distributed to the public. Number one, is their sewer agreement still good? They indicated tonight in the work session it may or may not be. Why are we even here if they have an expired services agreement given the capacity constraints of the plant at the present time? And would this application even be entertained if they had to go and seek services as RUD or a city-owned piece of property or would they be put on a waiting list? I need to see some facts that you have the capacity to service this and their sewer letter and any expiration dates are not in your package. Why are you voting on this? Secondly, there is a lot of color around that 10-foot strip that

they did not ask and were unaware of the city purchasing back in 2020 under Mayor Osborne's administration. and whether or not that forces an annexation. I will tell you that personally I am in support of the application and this site plan given the right conditions and that it's done as RUD under the county zoning and does not become city property. I will support that application and I will work with the developers to get it done for them. I don't have an objection to the density. Everybody spoke to the road, the dirt road and not seeing it from Route 78 with proper buffering landscape, no fences. So when you go by, you don't know it's there. they can then deal with the county on the traffic issues on Tulbeck and any other conditions. But I'm not against it. I am against this annexation and how that 10-ft strip came to be and whether or not they got legit sewer service. So why would you be voting on this tonight unless you can tell us absolutely that their services agreement is good to go? Why would this even be going in front of the city council, which is going to change in November, and you're going to have several new members who are going to look at that 10-ft strip and determine if it forces this annexation. So, what are we doing here tonight when there's questions of fact that need to be answered? Thank you.

Thanks, sir. Um, do you want to respond to those? So just for for clarity, the utility request is only done when the developer would like to develop utilize city utilities. Um they have to go through utility request to do so and still remain in the county. Now whether or not that has expired, I'll be honest, I'm not 100% certain. And I believe there's a time limit on those. As far as capacity, we wouldn't be here if there's not capacity. um that's that's not an issue. We can we'll make sure that engineering is present to specifically answer that at city council, but we would not be here because they do review these. It's not just planning, it's also engineering that reviews these plans. So, they're aware of their capacity.

Thank you, Mario. Um next. Yes, ma'am. evening, chairman. I'm sorry. And everyone on

the board up there. My name is Linda Murphy. I'm an attorney and I live at 514 West Road, which is in the county, also neighbors with the people who have spoke. I also have a house in the city, my husband and I. He's over at the Highway 78 Planning Commission tonight. First, I'd like what I'd like to see is the city follow the professional recommendations from the report submitted by the Aken Land Conservancy regarding land use. They recommended high density residential development be located in the northwest section of Aken where infrastructure can be suitably focused. They recommended that the east side of Aken be dedicated to agriculture and equestrian and left open uh supporting farming and the equestrian community. As we know the equestrian community is what makes Aken unique and it substantially supports the businesses economically and the city should consider that in its planning. Further, I'd like to see the city not using 10-foot loopholes to annex to the city. That is how Aken creates undesirable sprawl. And that's what I think we need to avoid is having sprawl with developments here, there, and the next place having it be more planned and more focused. The proposed development is not considered in the upcoming comprehensive plan either. It is not being considered by the current Highway 78 corridor study. And I'd like to see the city bring the sewage treatment facility up to speed before adding additional highdensity development. Finally, and this maybe doesn't pertain exactly, but when the county gives tax breaks to companies like Meta who bring in one employee and they use our resources like

our electric electricity and water in huge amounts that further stretches our researches resources and should be taken into consideration. one only needs to look as far as Whiskey Road to see what can happen when there's a lack of planning. I really consider uh would hope that you table this until you can look at the um impact of the urban sprawl that would happen by development out this direction. Um, therefore, it is my request that the city deny the annexation of the land across from AGI, AGY and this housing development. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Anybody else on this side? All right. Yes, ma'am.

To the chairman, to the committee. Uh I'm Pastor Wesley Gton. I live in um North Augusta, South Carolina, 1185 Willow Spring Drive. But I do pastor in Aken County. I pastor uh Randy Branch and Oakwood Baptist Church here in Aken. And not only that, but we uh the Randy Branch Church, we own nine acres of land right there off Woodward Drive. And uh we've had that land for several years now. And uh we intent is to build a religious and educational facility there. That's our intent. And uh so uh I rose because I kind of missed it when you first said about being in favor. I kind of missed that part. Oh, that's okay.

But anyway, I just wanted to say something because I know it's going to affect us as well by having that property right there off of Woodward Drive. Yes, sir. And uh so uh I'm not opposing of it because I know this is not our my first meeting of us attending because you've talked about it before and we've seen the plans also and I do know when you first talked about it it was the housing was much more than it is now correct cut down housing uh because before it was like between two and 400 I think it was some but now you cut down on that but I rose because I'm I'm not against it because I realize that Achen is growing and people are moving here from all across Yes, sir.

nation

and uh whether or not we uh address it or not or whether or not we're in favor or not, Achen is going to grow. Uh and so we can't stop it. I mean, we might pause it for a little while, but it's going to happen. And uh like I tell my folks at church that you all need to learn about technology because it's here and it's here to stay. And so why not get involved with it and stay up with it? So I'm just saying the same thing for our community. Why not embrace the growth of the community that can benefit us all? Because I don't feel that if we approve this housing development, I don't think it's going to hurt Aken no kind of way. Because I just went to a meeting just the other night at uh St. John United Methodist Church and the whole meeting was about the homeless here in Aken. And so to me, if we're building more houses, that's given opportunity for people to have more places to live at. And at the same time, once they become uh that they can stand on their own, then they going to need somewhere to go. And so with this project, I I feel like it'll be a great project because at least uh I see there Sanger dwelling. So again, I believe it'd be more affordable than some of your larger houses that we do have in the community. So I just want to say that that I'm in favor of it and I and I hope that this project will go through. It may have some bumps right now, but uh I hope our uh the contractors and uh engineers, I hope they'll follow it through because it's very necessary for the community because uh people are growing, people uh coming into the area. Uh they're graduating and they're looking for a place to stay. So, I'm hoping that we can attract our young people to stay here and not move away because I fall in that same bracket. I got young men, my wife and I, and they just move away because they feel like ain't nothing here to stay for. But if

we can set up something, address and lure them in, I believe that we have a better place to live in.

Thank you, sir. We appreciate that. Thank you very much. Um, any other comments? Oh, okay. Um, so commissioners, we will entertain I'll entertain a motion for uh this is the annexation request and a concept plan approval request. Um, so in order to discuss, we'll need to make a motion in a second. So if somebody wants to make a motion, we can discuss it. I'm on call on you here in a minute now. I'd like to discuss it. So, I'll make the motion. There you go.

You can amend the motion. Yeah, exactly. Um, so, uh, with regard commissioner, with regards to application 26-20002, annexation request and 26-22001 concept approval request. Uh I would like to uh uh I would like to amend the application. Uh but I would like first to move to have it accepted and sent up to city council for approval but subject to the discussion.

Okay. So well you you made a recommendation for approval for annex and the concept with the with the conditions listed for now. Is there a second? Okay, there's no second. So, does somebody else want to make an al or do you want to make an alternate motion? I can do that if it'll open up for discussion. Why don't you Nobody's seconding yours. So, make your amend amend your motion to what you want to say and then

Sure. Uh I would like to uh uh uh amend the uh motion to include removal of uh condition possible condition number three. Uh and therefore and just allow for the emergency access uh to the development as required by the city fire marshal or whomever. uh with the knockbox entrance and therefore not require the second entrance onto Woodward Road into this development. All other possible conditions I believe uh should be okay approved.

So your motion is to approve the annexation and concept plan application uh but to remove the possible condition number three. Correct. So items one, two, four, five, six, and seven as is. Okay. Do I have a second? Well, I'll I'll second it. Okay. The the sewer now we'll open up for discussion. Okay. The sewer agreement I mean the sewer that they got how many years ago? I think it was a couple years ago. Okay. And you think that's active? I am honestly not certain if that is

expensive. That's why I don't you I'd like to know. Well, that that is based upon a utility request with when they were in the county and there was no need to annex at that particular juncture. There was no it was not adjacent, right? It was a utility request. It went through city council and you know, so that was sitting out there. But as part of that utility request, once they become adjacent to the city, they need to annex. So it sort of started the clock all over again and plus there was such a time lapse in changes as well.

I would have serious concerns about reigging on a utility service request that was granted. Correct. The developer then went and spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, coming up with concept plans, having that vetted, etc. Understood. And then uh it's not like that wouldn't be granted if it came before us today if this were the application. So I do have I think the idea of reigging on a plan that developers relied upon uh would be very problematic. I'm not reigging on it though. I just want to make sure it's still active. That's all I'm saying.

Well, at this point again, it it sort of changed because now that they are adjacent to the city, it it becomes an annexation. That was my reason for holding back that and I and I do in terms of discussion just for the public's based off some of the concerns that we've heard the city this development can occur as is if not even more dense. Correct. Under the county as is. I mean in the current condition that's in they could just build this without the city's involvement at all. Is that correct? That is correct. Well, well, sir, thank you.

The sewage is required because the city owns property now, which is what triggered the need for I think that's what she's saying. Uh we're going to discuss it amongst the panel here. Okay. Thank you. It's my understanding based off what you've said is now because the city owns adjacent property that the utility in terms of provision of those services would be required and or with the annexation annexation would be required. That's that's actually part of the utility request whether or not so there's two things here. One, let's assume the initial utility request was still active. Whatever part of that language in that utility request is the moment you become adjacent, you have to annex.

Correct.

Okay. So they just had never finished going through with everything. So it sort of stalled. Second would be um let's assume the utility request is null and void and too much time has passed. Still again they're adjacent. They have to come back and they have to annex into the city. Understood. So, so my next comment again is just simply with the city annexation that then allows for the exercise of more control over the nature of the development including larger open space requirements, larger buffers, and as we've already seen be smaller lots. I mean I'm sorry large fewer homes than what was originally proposed under the county. Is that correct?

That is correct. Once um once they annex or they request annexation our requirements do become more strict and we do absolutely have we have full control at that point because they're annexing into the city. Okay. So my recommendation again is to approve the concept plan including the special conditions which would include obviously the reallocation of some of that open space

uh and given the concerns expressed regarding the nature of the road that being Woodward Road the goal to preserve a buffer rather than an entrance that would then be dumping traffic onto that road and creating a visual point into it versus just a consistent I agree. Look, well, I I mean I I second it because I agree. Yeah,

I agree with you. We're trying to maintain the corridor and the corridor is under rural development RUD now. I mean, there's nothing saying a developer can't continue to go buy property and develop further further out. Um, obviously you folks have been diligently working with the county and the comprehensive plan to to protect that and I I applaud you for that. Um, but for tonight, um, we're not trying to decide what's developing down 78, although many of us probably agree with you on way think it should look, but tonight this is what we're voting on. So, okay. Um, coming

this is this is not a cotton field across from a beautiful force farm. This is a piece of land between an industrial facility and a neighborhood that looks just like this. Um, so that is different than further down the highway. It is. Yes, sir.

Few comments. I think the big elephant in the room is I think when I was studying this property, looking at the aerial photography, looking at the area, uh I did see it was fairly remote, very rural. It does have that one subdivision directly to the west or so

that was similar. Uh and then again hearing what everyone has to say this evening. I think this is if we do approve this again adjacent to the other one that's very similar we're we're it's the typical urban sprawl and it's something that we should not be doing especially in this neck of the woods if we want to call it that. I mean these lots are still 7,000 square feet to 20,000 square feet and that's extremely small. Um, the PR zone does not given any rights to zoning. It may say the maximum of 12 units per acre, but it say it says what's applicable and appropriate for the area it's in. I think much larger lots, you know, maybe clustered inside to give more of a buffer, one, two, 300 foot buffers. and then you put your your housing development maybe one acre houses in in this location and to preserve that corridor.

Uh so I think the whole concept this whole concept plan is we've seen this every month we see 7,000 square foot lots and coming at us all the time and sometimes when they're near Whiskey Road or in the vicinity of high density areas it makes sense. In this location it does not make sense to me. So, the zoning is not appropriate. Um, and go going back if the board decides to go uh with an approval uh which I'm not inclined to do tonight. Uh I think we we had a a policy of always having two access points for every development over 100 units. It just cries out. It makes sense. uh if you live on one end by the Knox, you have to drive all the way through in front of everybody's homes and everyone's kids playing or whatever just to get out. And here, if you wanted to go to Pine Log Road and Rudy Mason, you have to go west all the way around to go east, uh where there is a road there. And and you heard me at the work session, uh that I think it's appropriate to have, um Woodward Drive paved at least to Delo. It's only at about 1 th00and feet to pay that. So these residents here again we we're inviting the developer is building and we're we will have 100 or 157 homes. That's 300 people um using these roads. Um so we have to be cognizant of of what they're going to be driving on. So, first I'm not I'm not at all happy with the the zoning and the and the densities here. I don't think it's appropriate the appropriate for the area. And I do if if it it is approved, I I feel strongly about having a full secondary access.

Understood. Respectfully in in response, I I would say you heard the developer say in the work session that this is going forward regardless of whether or not uh it's part of the city. Uh the county has a horrible track record of allowing uh junk throughout our county. Uh I think the city has done a much better job. Uh yes, there's criticism certainly, but I would rather given that this is a very important quarter entering into our city. I would rather uh maintain that control that we otherwise lose if it's developed in the county without any of our say.

Okay. Any other comments from the commission? There's a motion on the table to approve the annexation request and the concept plan uh to approve to recommend the city council. Um but to remove item three from the possible conditions um and it's been seconded. No further discussion. Um we'll call for a vote. So all those in favor raise your hand. like sign oppose and the motion fails. The application fails. Three to two. Um I wanted that. I'm sorry. Can you repeat that?

Motion fail. Yes. 3 to two. Um okay. Without seeing any other business, we'll call for adjournment. Um motion for adjournment. Some move. Second. All those in favor.