Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

meeting uh for August 25th, 2025. The time is six o'clock. And we're going to do a roll call. Here. Here. Here, here. Here. Here. All right. If everyone will stand, we'll do the pledge of

allegiance. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. All right. I want to welcome everybody here tonight. Um do we have uh any discussion or a motion for the previous meetings minutes? Go ahead, commissioner. We have a motion to approve the previous minutes. Do we have a second?

Second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Roll call, please.

Hi. Okay. I

All right. Yes. Jesse.

All right. Now, there is no old business. So, we will move on to new business. It's for case number 2025-115. A request from Smith Walker Engineering and Surveying to approve a preliminary plat for a subdivision of one parcel. partial number 108932000000 0000003603. And I will turn this over to our director for staff presentation. Thank you. So, this case we have tonight is a request from applicant Ben Smith of Smith Walker Engineering and Surveying to approve a preliminary plat for a subdivision of one parcel resulting in 20 parcels which will consist of 19 residential lots and one common open space. So on the next page we have an aerial imagery. Um the parcel wishing to be subdivided is listed as 4560 Nail Road West. There's currently a single family residential structure on this lot and uh it's right under where that number is up there. Um, access to that house from Nail Road West is made by using the privately owned road to the west of this parcel. Two drainage areas run through this parcel. On the northern portion, there's a drainage area for the overflow of the pond in the Ravenwood G subdivision. On the southern portion, there's a stream that originates south of Nailroad West, enters the property, and exits on the western border of this parcel. So on the next page we have the zoning here. This parcel is currently zoned AR. The applicant has applied for a reszoning request to change the zoning to R10 in order to build according to the plat being presented and the R10

zoning is just for the lots that need to be R10. Um and so after approval of the preliminary plat, a final plat showing any necessary corrections will be presented to the city as well as a separate resoning request to ensure that the final plat and the zoning do not conflict in any way. And then so the next page we have the uh preliminary plat. So below is a screenshot of the submitted preliminary plat for review. And um just for good recordkeeping, we screenshotted that whole plat onto this page here. But on the next pages, uh we do have the more zoomed in views of that. So you can go to that next page. And this is a zoomed in view of lots one and two. And uh we can always go back to any of these images that anybody wants to. Um, if you go to the next page here, we have a screenshot of lots three through 20. And, um, if you go to the next page, we've included the general notes section and then also the typical street section um, imagery there. So, if anybody wants to go to any part of these for review, we can always scroll back. So jumping ahead, um we always like to put the actual text in the ordinance. That way we can have it in front of us for review during the meetings. So if you scroll down, um we have our department review of that starting on page nine. So um regarding letter A, the proposed plat follows the requirement of connecting to nearby streets by acting as a continuation of Jordan Drive. So the

street connectivity um is technically um it complies with with that requirement. Um regarding letter B, the proposed plat follows the requirement of keeping the the same street name for the continuation of Jordan Drive. Uh however, the coet lots 12,13, 14, and 15 um technically may need its own street name. And uh we we figured we would just talk to the developer or engineer to um let them choose that street name um and then let us know about it and then we'll just verify if it is a duplicate of any other in the county. And then so regarding letter C, planning staff cannot disprove that the proposed plat gives due regard to the topography and other physical features of the property. Based on complaints given to city staff by the neighboring property owners, there appears to be an issue with flooding in the area. However, as plats typically do not show specifics on drainage, planning staff cannot make any determination on the matter of water collection and drainage. And so if there's any concern about that, um, the applicant can address that tonight. Um, but we cannot in our report say that it conflicts with it. Um, regarding letter D, the proposed plat follows the regulations on right-of-way widths and locations of those types within the city. The developer will build a 50-foot rideway, which is the smallest allowable rideway and which is the most appropriate for a local road. So, it's all good on that one. Um, regarding letter E, the proposed plat does not conflict with anything in the street type and rightaway chart in the code of ordinances under letter under letter E. It should be noted that though this chart does not really address what

letter E is regulating um which is street width, um it does conform to the new street width regulation adopted by the board of alderman on August 19th, 2025. So there's no issues at all found with the that typical street section that they proposed. Regarding letter F, both of the proposed intersections appear to be right angles. Um, regarding letter G, uh, planning staff may need may need clarification. And that one just referred to the, um, the corner radii, um, at the street intersections. And, um, we just figured we would just the planning department would administratively get clarification from the engineer. Um, regarding letter H, no street jogs are proposed, so everything's good there. And a street jog is when streets somewhat meet but are slightly off center from each other. Um the proposed streets are perfectly aligned with each other. So there's no issue there. Regarding letter I, the proposed plat appears to follow all regulations on culdeac design. So um everything's good there. And then regarding letter J, uh we have that planning staff may need clarification and that one is um that the street grades of 0.5% will be required for adequate drainage. Um I think I saw in there that it was 0.2, to, but um we can have the um engineer address that um when he comes up to speak tonight. Um regarding letter K, there's no alleys proposed, so there's no issue there. And regarding letter L, there does not appear to be a feasible way to allow for

a future street connection from this proposed subdivision to any other lot. There's technically a possibility for a future connection to the private roadway to the west, but this was determined to not be financially feasible for the developer as well as for the city. Um, having a singular entrance across from Jordan Drive seems to be the only option when weighing all of the possibilities for connectivity. So the planning department um technically did not have um anything in conflict with the ordinance on that overall design as far as the the street connective connectivity going uh one way in and out. So the next section is about easements. Um going down uh after the text from the ordinance we have regarding letter A, the proposed plat shows three lots with easements. One is a drainage easement on lot 17 and the other two are sewer easements on lots five and 18. Planning staff would like clarification on the easements as well as information on any potentially required easements for all other lots. And all we mean by that is um on a lot of lots we see that um there's an easement drawn around every lot. It doesn't technically have to be drawn on every lot. You could just put in a note section that says what the easements are. Um we'll let the engineer uh draw it however he wants on that um for that item. Um and then for letter B, we have that there are major concerns about two drainage courses running through this proposed subdivision. Um planning staff would like clarification on what will be done regarding surface drainage.

Um and then the next sections on blocks. We found nothing in conflict with the block design requirements. And then the next section is regarding lots and we have that the proposed plat appears to conform to all regulations on lot design. And then the next is about public sites and for our comments we have this proposed plat provides adequate common open space in the center of the neighborhood. The mailbox cluster will be in this common open space. There will be a major water detention area in this common open space, but this will be far in the back and this will leave plenty of recreational space available for the community in the center of the community. So that covers all the sections that we had to review and that the planning commission has to review. Um, in conclusion, based on the criteria the planning department and the planning commission must review, planning staff does not see any substantial reason to deny this preliminary plat. And then we have the proposed um possible motion there. And that concludes our presentation.

All right. Thank you. All right. Does any of the commissioners have a question for our director?

Go ahead, Commissioner Freeman. Um, so You talking about where the end of the the culdesac will like are you talking about where

I don't think they're cut they're not cut. So where that number is is where that where that number is is where the house is and then that um you can kind of match it up with. So try to take a quick screenshot of this in your memory and then go to page um guess you could go to page four. No, go to page

five. All right. So, that that's where that house is. And then that driveway comes that Yeah. And then so if you put the cursor to the left a little bit, you can kind of see the edge of the the very end of that that road. Um, keep going down. Yeah. Right there. That that's that's where it'll that's where the end of the road will be. Yeah, it's going to end pretty close to where that house is. And that house is right under that number in that screenshot.

Yes. I have a question. All right. Go ahead. The fee, the $300 per lot, do we um put it in now with a motion?

One second. I mean, ultimately it'll be you could put that into the motion. Um, but ultimately the board of alderman gives the final decision on that. But let me let me go back and um locate that one real quick. B. Okay. Um, yes, the planning commission can have that in their motion. We need it.

Yeah, it specifically says that the planning commission may recommend that a proposed subdivision be assessed a fee in lie of public land dedication at the rate of $300 per lot for development of 50 lots or less. and $250 per lot for development over 50 lots. And the um applicant can address whether or not the developer intends to dedicate that to the city for it being a public park or if they are planning to have it as a um um privatelyowned park in that neighborhood.

All right. Any other questions? Andrew, I know that you made statement here that residents are concerned about the flooding. Is the curb going to be adequate to give those people piece of mind to make sure they get the waste water runoff okay without flooding?

So, I I'm going to leave that up to the engineers. Um, I know th this is not a perfect process that we have. Um, right now we're just looking at the overall street layout, the overall lot layout, the overall um, places where the homes are going, the streets are going, and the water's going. Um, this is kind of like a very high up sky view of the overall design. And, um, as far as actual measurements of, you know, predicting where waters going to travel and how much is going to flood. Um, I cannot give any guidance on that.

Go ahead. That's in my ward and I've been over there and I've spoken with the constituents that that live in that area with the concerns of the flooding. I've seen pictures. I've seen videos of the flooding that occurs there after storms and it's a real thing. I know that Andrew said he hasn't seen it, but it is a real thing. It's not made. Thank you. All right. Any other questions?

Andrew, I drove down there myself on Friday afternoon. And that there's a a drainage creek and stuff and you can kind of see it on that that first map Mr. Freeman was referencing. So, based off of these lines, are is the developer going to be responsible for cleaning up this because that down there is clogged and terrible and already standing water and everything. So, is he going to be responsible for taking care of that or is that going to be left to whomever owns the land on the other side? Sorry. What which spot are you talking about?

If you go back to the map Mr. Freeman referenced, it's like right under the word lake where it's in blue right there. You can kind of see, you can kind of see how that that drainage, there's like a ditch there that flows. It's all grown up and you can barely get any water right there. I believe the engineer may speak on this tonight. Um I I know that last time uh he referenced the issue being the size of the pipe. And so I I would imagine that since this is a part of this touches the property being developed, um I would imagine that as a part of the development, they may address that um the issue of water passing through there.

The pipe that goes under the road there from west to east, it's a large size pipe, so it's gotten clogged and all of everything, greenery and everything else is growing there along with trash and everything. And it it it looked terrible. I actually took pictures so I could reference it later if needed because it's it it's a mess. And that whole road back there, you can tell, floods and holds water because it's so washed out. People have actually made paths off the road to go around it because it's so bad. The poor little Domino's man that was coming down the road when I was coming back out, God love him. It looked like a his car was going to tear up like he had no shocks or something because the road was so bad back there. And I talked to a couple of the people who lived back there and they said the flooding is terrible. So, um I'm just curious about making sure somebody takes care of that because if the developer's not, somebody really needs to pay attention to that back there.

Yeah. Um and this is kind of what I was referencing earlier. Um it is it is it is very important and it's very good to bring this up. Um this is all very relevant. Um what we have is the literal words on the paper that we have to go by. And so um you know it's very difficult for us in the planning department when we're aware of these events. We get told these events all the time. We do get people showing us pictures and video and telling us about it. Um, but when we have to match this up to the ordinances, um, the only thing that relates to what we're talking about is, um, that letter C in that first section that we reviewed where it says, "The arrangements of streets and lots shall give due regard to topography and other physical features of the property." So, um, you know, this this will be up to the planning commission and the board of alderman as to whether or not the plat presented gives due regard to the topography and other physical features of the property. And that's specifically for the streets and lots. So, this part of the ordinance doesn't actually mention anything about drainage. And so the idea that when everyone was putting together these ordinances a long time ago, I imagine that the idea that they had for this process was to design the streets and the lots with due regard to topography and physical features of the property and then have the engineers figure out how to make the drainage fall

into this layout. And so that's all I'm going to say on that. Are any other questions for Andrew? If the

I have one more. I have a question. So when you're at when you're at Jordan Road there or Jordan right across from where they're wanting to propose this and you're facing it and you look, that's a that's a a dangerous area right there because it's the the drive is is a hidden drive and you're going to add another one to it. But that's that's not what I meant to say. But across there, if you look, what do you say to someone that wants to propose and build something like this when you can clearly see here it comes like this, here it comes like this. Oh, we're going to build in a valley, so to speak. I mean, how how do you what do you ask? Because you can clearly look at it from a just a view that this is going to be a problem. So, how are you? You've got all the things like you said, but it's going to be down. So, what are we going to do about all of the excess? So, I know it goes back to what you said, but what do you say to someone when essentially that's what they're doing? They're building in a valley between two mountains. I know that's a bit extreme, but that's exactly what it looks like.

Yeah. So, that that's actually a really good point. Um, yeah, we do notice that it it dips down in that area. Um, I mean, obviously you could definitely have a stoplight there. Um, you know, they're obviously going to be higher up in the air. You could see stoplight um coming from above up on that hill. So, um, that's one possibility. I I believe a stoplight would be very appropriate for that spot, but um I don't know if maybe we need to do um maybe consult with our engineer on how that might impact the um that other existing driveway. I still think it would be appropriate. Um I'm I'm always a fan of reducing um deadly collisions anywhere in the city. I I know people may not initially like more traffic lights, but I think a traffic light would be really appropriate there.

I I have something to say. So the issue of flooding and danger, shouldn't that be addressed with the um the builders as well? I'm sorry. What what exactly do you mean? I said the issue of flooding and what um commissioner just explained, shouldn't that be addressed with the building so you guys can come together and come up with a plan as how to make

Yes. Usually res usually all the the issues relating to water drainage and water collection and water runoff and flooding that is typically addressed after this this platting process is passed. Um, you know, the platting is just for the shape of the lots and where the streets go. And typically the developer meets with the planning department and um the engineers and they all figure out where the water is going to go, how much water gets collected there, how the water is going to run off, and then all the details on um the pipes and the the tension ponds. So it it that is typically the process and that is

that's the process in most places. That's how we do it here as well. Okay. I just want to I just want to ensure that this is done so people don't end up with flooding. Would the applicant like to come up? Go ahead and state your name and address. All right. Do you have anything you'd like to add to that? I know you've been listening to the conversation before we start asking you questions. Yeah, sure.

I'll start with the actual overall process of what the city requires from me. Um, and that starts with what you're seeing today. Um, with all the detail and all the questions, I completely understand. But at this point in the process, the city doesn't let me submit a set of construction plans with what you're asking about flooding, drainage, everything that you're seeing. Going over there and and seeing all that, I completely understand. Um but that we are hired to provide a design set stamped legal set to build based on all the FEMA flood regulations MDQ state draining regulations and the city engineering Neil Schaefer with the city of one lake. That is what we are required to do at this point in the process. They don't tell me to submit that. So I don't have that to give you. So if I understand and just make sure that's why it does say preliminary plat after this it goes to a final plat once y'all have all that discussion and it comes back before us.

Yep. After this it'll go to the reszoning then it'll be reszoned and then we will have I I will be providing a full set of construction plans that address every concern that you're you're you're questioning here. and then Neil Schaefer, they review it for a month and then we come back and then we go back for a final that you will see. But at this point in the process, I'm not able to submit that. So I I can't provide that. However, I can address those concerns now verbally. I know what it's like out there. As for that drive, like you said, the the the Pizza Hut man, that's a private drive. The city doesn't own it. We don't own it. The only thing that I can control is what's on our property legally. I I've seen it. It's bad.

If I understand these these plans though, y'all y'all not even tying into that road anymore. We don't And and that I think that goes back to your question. We don't have any cut through on that road. The only the only connection we physically have is on nail. That's the only connection we have. We have zero connection other than what is already existing. That house, that entrance that's there right now. That's current. Um, but we physically and legally can't do anything to that rope. It is owned by one one individual, not by the city. And and the only thing that we have access to is that one home that has an easement that allows him to get on his property.

And I wasn't talking about the drive. I was talking about how bad the flooding is. It's obvious by driving down through that road. But I was asking about the drain that goes along there, though, because the picture just didn't show a good clear cut. I if that was going to be on your side of the responsibility or if it was still going to be over. Can we go to the the plat and maybe I can that one's fine. So you see that where I have a detention area right there. Do you see that dark line? Go to the the right top right hand corner. Billy you right there. Oh, see the drive and I go over that dark line. That's a that's the 36 inch pipe that you're seeing. Okay. That's clogged. It's terrible. Okay. my detention will that'll be a a full facility that we will put a outlet structure on with trash gates that will maintained by the HOA. The question that you had about the $300 per lot thing, it will not be public. It will be private and will be maintained by an HOA through the CCRs that will submit via the final plat months down the road. So it will all be maintained from a legal standpoint and from the corrective action standpoint of flooding. Now it's not represented on here because this picture is not meant to represent drainage on here.

Okay. There is curb gutter and sidewalk. Yes. But we have designed a full underground drainage system that connects to the 48 you see off of nail road. So when you pull when you drive down Nail and you see the big steep that that you're talking about that's the 48 inch pipe that you see and we will be tying onto that via manhole and then designing a full underground system that goes into that detention pond and fixes that problem. Now when you drive down there you will see that it is in a valley. We propose fill. We're proposing a massive amount of fill. We will be approximately a foot and a half, two foot below nail road. Right now, it is not representative of that when you drive down there because we have not been able to construct, but after this thing is built, we are proposing a foot and a half lower than Nail Road and it'll be a massive amount of fill on this site.

So, when you're going to clear that property, so you're going to cut the road in there first. You're going to have to clear the trees and everything out of the way to build that subdivision there. Correct. Typically the first step is grubbing, underbrushing, grubbing. Yep. Right. So you got to build a road to get logging trucks in there to move stuff out of there.

We're required by MD MDQ to put down a construction entrance. Um that will have to be filled to their requirements, the state requirement. Um I'm not sure what that is at the moment, but typically it's at grade, our proposed grade. It'll be have to be at that grade. So Phil will have to be brought in before anything and that's that's what we're governed by through the state and through the city's regulations. It's basically we're we're given a roadmap by the city and that's kind of where what we're bounded by. Um and and we we we comply with every single bit of comprehensive compliance that the city provides us. Now, when it comes to the engineering portion, like I said, I I I'm not I'm not able to submit that at this time. So, I can't I can't get past that point without an approval.

Do you not see that field as being a problem knowing that the area is flooded and it's in a valley? The more water that washes in slowly over time, it's going to wash out.

So, the water coming onto this site, the only amount of water that comes onto this site that you see right here is via the pond from the north. Okay? that we do not plan on touching that is will remain existing. The only one that we plan to disturb the the second access onto this piece of property via runoff is that 48 inch pipe. That's the only other access water has on this property. Now 48 inches of water is a lot of water. That's what you're seeing. That that that that does cause flooding. But when this is built, you won't even see that pipe. It'll go completely underground into that detention facility. That will that will choke it. If you talk to the people who live in the home that's going to be right behind your proposed little culde-sac right there, he said it's nothing but flooding and constantly in his backyard and it runs backwards back that way back toward where you're going to be building. So that's what I'm talking about. Like when you get the rain, you get the flood, it's going to come down. It's going to follow it's going to follow how it goes.

Which which house? I'm sorry. Which if you go down the private drive, it's the first house on the right. So, it should be right there. Right behind your Cole's attack you're talking about. Yeah. Where the man's pond is? Um, nope. You're gonna go further up um this way. It's the very first one on the right. They have sheep and stuff out in the field. You see the sheep on the field to the right first and then there's a house. It's the very first house on the right. When you go down that road, I don't know where the curs Yeah, the cursor is way back there. No, that's way back. You got to come back down toward nail road right in. Yeah. Go right there. Nope. Down. Nope. Not that guy. That's too far. But

right in there. There's a house that's right in there. The very first one. It's right here before you even cross the pond. I mean, it's it's all it's right before you get to that pond on the other side. There's a home there. And he says that all the flooding goes and it it reverts back down that hill. I asked him if they ever have any problem because of the road. And he said, "Yes, all the time." Um, he said, "Not on my house cuz I'm on a hill." But it goes all in on the back of me. I'm I'm still Which house? 4580. So that I'm I'm I'm just getting I just want to get clarification on who who it may be.

I have one more question. Actually, we're talking about filling that up, but there's still the current residents that live there, not part of that subdivision that are in the agricultural residential area, they're still going to be in the valley. So, you're raising it up worse.

Look, I the only thing I can only thing I can tell you is that we I mean, we we can't legally flood somebody. I I can't I mean, we we will we have every bit of liability on this, myself and the developer as well as the city. The city reviews it. The city has to stamp it. I I all I can say is it will be fully functionally engineered subdivision. That's the only thing I can tell you. I I every every bit of flooding that you see on this site, I have to legally slow down. I have to take it what is existing and my proposed runoff cannot be any quicker or the quantity can't be any more than what I what what is already on on the ground. That's that's all I can say. That's that's what I'm governed by.

Any other questions? I just like I said, I I just want to reiterate what uh what's what everything is saying is that and and I'm I love the discussion that we're having and everything, but this is just for a preliminary plat. So, it's just looking at the map and just saying, does this fit does this fit with what the city uh what the what what's in city code and and and and the other stuff that we've been bringing up tonight. I mean, he has addressed and it will be addressed officially when we get further down because he can't even technically present it in on paper right at this time. So, I just want to remind everybody that we're looking at just what they have laid out. So, do we have any other questions for the applicant?

All right. Do we have a motion? I'll make the motion. Go ahead. After review After review of case number 2025115, the planning commission approved the request for the preliminary plot of Golden Eagle Estate on parcel 1089320000003603 by Ben Smith of Smith Walker Engineer and Surveying LLC with the following condition. that the proposed subdivision be assessed a fee of $300 per lot in low of public land dedication. All right, we have a motion. Do we have a second? Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. A motion and a second. Do we have any other discussion?

Second. Roll call, please. Kirby, nay. Mar Crawford, nay. Lita Fox, nay. Calvin Freeman, yes. Maurice Taylor, yes. Vidal, yes. Yes. Jesse wear. Yes. Yes. Okay. Motion passes 43. Thank you, guys.

Thank you. All right. On to other business. The straight C is streets for all survey. I'll turn this back over to the staff for for comment presentation.

Thank you. Yes. So, um we are still in the middle of our safe streets first survey um public outreach and uh we just got our we just got some new business cards in with a QR code, but it takes you um to the same place that we've had posted for a while. Um if you know anybody that has um any concerns about sidewalks, walkability, um pedestrian vehicle, bicycle safety in the city. Um please have them fill this fill this out. Um I think Billy's taking you to the website right now. Um it consists of a survey in three parts. Um one is a questionnaire that talks about um basically ranking different issues um regarding walkability and safety in the city. And then there's an a section about the um there's a section where you can click on an interactive map. And so here we go. So here's our website and you can access this through hornl.org um on the new section where he just clicked. So, you can click on the survey there. You can answer some questions. They're very, very easy questions. Next is the interactive map. This is the fun part. Um, you could see what other people in the city have commented. Um, you could zoom into the map. Um, turn on the u aerial imagery on it. You can click on all the bubbles and see what people have commented. The majority of these are going to be about sidewalks and bike lanes. Um dangerous intersections, um ADA curb ramps needed. Um intersections that are dangerous for car drivers as well as pedestrians and

bicyclists. Um as long as it relates to anything safety on walking, bike riding, and driving vehicles, um please put put it all on this map. So this is open until I know the um we extended the time period. Um is it you remember the extension period? We extended it about another week. So it was going to close on the 29th originally. So I think now it's going to close on the the 7th or the 8th. I think the eth. Yeah.

Yeah. So, I I I think it was the seventh. So, basically, you have another week to get this filled out if you haven't already. Hey, Andrew, can I add that if they've already done it, they can go back and add another marker if they think of something at a later date? Yes, I believe so. Um I I believe you're talking about for the interactive map. Yeah, I'll think of something and I'll go back in the middle of the night and put it in there. Well, I'm I'm glad you've proven that true. So, yes, you can you can put multiple markers on the map. All right. Do we have anything else? Otherwise, do we have a motion to adjurnn? Second. We got a second. I want to say