Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

I'll make a motion to accept as is. Second. Okay. All those in favor?

I. Okay. All right. Now, new business. Mark, what are we doing here today? Uh, your first case this morning is ZV2604. The petitioner is Ratcliffe Homes. The owner is Ratcliffe, Inc. The location is lot 57 of Twin Oak subdivision, which is next to 578 North Tulip Lane in the in the Twin Oak subdivision. The type of case is a variance to development standards of 1 acre and setbacks. Uh this morning you'll conduct a public hearing to consider the variance from the development standards of the zoning ordinance. Specifically the request is um from from the 1acre requirement of residential lots in chapter 159 article 2.19. Uh the public hearing was noticed uh on March 27th and all to all adjoining land owners prior to the prior to April 1st. The petitioner is requesting variance to build a single family dwelling on lot 57. I'll go ahead and highlight that on the map and it is a 0.53 of an acre lot. Uh the health department has reviewed for on-site septic soil tests have been completed for the septic system. McGomery County highway would issue a permit for the location in Twin Oak subdivision for the cut into the property. The county has reviewed the site for storm water compliance. Uh this is a subdivision that was platted uh long before McGomery County implemented storm water ordinance. So staff's review was based on that location and and that lot. So I just wanted to let you know that the topography controls the storm water to a natural drainage area release point that carries storm water of the

subdivision. uh the back lot line of the homes on two according to a blaine are you know all in the ditch line that carries the storm water to the south towards Sugar Creek. Uh McGomery County Building Administration would require siltation protection of the south lot line and protect protection of the natural drainage way as well. The total impervious is less than the maximum that's allowed uh by our storm water ordinance. Flood plane was reviewed on the property and it does not have any special flood hazard areas. Uh the access is from Tulip Court. It is zoned residential and the property can meet the requirements of addressing and it's again is served by private well and septic. Uh you have your factors be considered. I did want to show you the topography composite which I did send to you but I'll just put that up again. Kind of gives you an idea. Uh 57 is located here where my cursor is. So we have current homes on the lots that border this natural drainage way here. It's a ravine that leads out from tulip port and there is drainage pipe that comes to this natural drainage way from the subdivision as well. So that's this topography just kind of gives you an idea of how the lot is set up which it kind of also explains u the why the developer is asking for a couple things there. Obviously, we require one acre and he's also asking for a setback reduction because ours is 60 feet. Uh in this case on lot 57, the only location that you can build because of topography is in this location here on the uh southwestern portion of the

lot. And the reduction is because of the topography. He is looking to reduce from 60 feet to 45 ft. Um I I looked at the homes in Oaks. There are different setbacks throughout Twin Oaks and uh just for your purposes, there's some that are 120 ft back and they're more than 50% of them are around 30 feet from the road. So, just just so you know that. Okay.

Then we have then the last thing would be uh staff recommends approval after review with those conditions. Securing rightaway permit, securing building and septic permit approval required by M McGomery County and then owner will be required to install silt fence on the south property line common with lot 56 in this case and protect the natural drainage area with silt fence during construction. Uh you know requirements of silt silt fence um in our ordinance are anything over being disturbed over an acre. These are not over an acre but protection in this case on the south property line and the drainage away would be a proponent. Okay. In this lot we're looking at first is is part of that lot is that highly erodable soils then

there are erodable soils. Yes.

Okay. Okay. Well, I guess we ought to open it up. Let the people speak. We're going to have a uh public hearing. open it up to you folks uh to start. We're going to start at 11:06. This is not a question and answer session. You folks can stand up here and tell us what you want us to know and then we'll we'll listen to what that is and then we'll go from there. So, your microphone is ready. Anyone want to speak? And we're working on this lot 57. Okay. I'm Kathy Barta. I wrote you a letter. I've been living there for 50 years. I asked for you to go out and look at these two lots together. I know we're only discussing the one. I know that Radcliffe has already built out there and filled in a ravine with chunks of concrete and fill that is against the law. And I don't want him to be doing that again for those two lots. He's already taken down all the trees. He's already messed up the uh even if you give him permission for one house, the rest of it just already rigged it. I worry about his conditions, his setbacks for the houses that that are on that lot. He wants a setback, but the other house is already further back. Did you get a video of the neighborhood? Because we had a video taken of the neighborhood and was supposed to be sent in. It would what he wants to do would

impug the integrity of the neighborhood. And I'm just totally against it. I've been there 50 years. I've seen the changes, good and bad, and I just don't agree with this. Anyone else have a comment? Now's the time. And please give us your name and address. Um Cindy Cassenza. I was at 635 North Forest Roads on on the backside by the farm area, the horse farm. Um first he came in and took down all the trees which makes the area look terrible. And if you're talking about erosion, that would be a big reason why there would be additional erosion. So that's a big concern. Um, I also bring up the quality of the houses that he builds. Every house in Twin Oaks is different. There is not one house that's the same. And so, one of the concerns that I have are the houses that he is going to build. Um, are they going to be He already built one in um I'm sorry, but the area we call No Oaks, the part that doesn't have trees because we have every everywhere else has trees. That's what

Okay. Okay. That's um but he he builds pretty similar houses and to me that would also reduce the integrity of our subdivision. We are very different. We don't have builders come in and build homes and that's one of my concerns and also his reputation as a builder is a concern because he does not build quality homes and the homes in our subdivision are also quality homes. So, we are concerned about um reducing the uh value of our homes um in resale value. Um not that any I've lived there over 30 years and were concerned about all of that. Um for him just to come in and take down those trees and not talk to anybody, he just came in there and did it. It's it's to me you come into a neighborhood, you get feedback from your neighbors and he did none of that. So that's that's a big part of of my concern is ask opinions and are these two houses going to be exactly the same. Do they live up to the standards of the rest of the houses in the neighborhood or are they just going to be three, fourbedroom ranches, which is not what you see in our neighborhood. And again, are they going to on the property values of everything else that's there.

Okay. Thank you. Good morning everybody. My name is Dr. Madi. We live in lot number 50 right across 57. We lived there almost 45 years. We got it built. We also own 51 next to us. The beauty of Twinox is trees. That's why we went there and we got it built. Whoever built the house in Twinox, they cut only trees where the house is going to sit. They didn't clear whole lot. And uh we went on winter vacation. When we came back, we saw all these trees gone. It was very heartbreaking and my daughters who grew up in that house so they were practically crying but that is a different story but I think uh if he cut the trees where house is going to sit would have been better for the neighborhood and he cleaned it completely and moreover we don't so I'm not bragging but we built a reasonably good size home there and we also have lot next to it and I I don't know what kind of houses he's going to build there and that might impact my house value and of course everybody's value in the neighborhood. So I request you guys whatever is right we are not dictating here anything but uh so we request your team to make right judgment for us for him for everybody for the Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Anyone else?

Good morning everybody. I'm Dr. Santi. I live in lot 63 608 North Chili Court. We have lived there for more than 35 years and Uh as my previous speaker said, Dr. Mari said, it is heartbreaking to see all the trees taken down in the neighborhood. The whole idea of the whole neighborhood was attractive because of the trees that were there and we can practically see across across the ravine the other side of the street which is which doesn't uh look and it looks like a lumberyard more than a more than a housing place you know. It is it is not residential doesn't look like a residential locality anymore. Uhhuh. There were some other owners who have taken down all the trees and it is all looking bare now. And I uh and one of the speakers recommended you to have a video view, aerial view to see how the neighborhood looks right now because uh the attraction of the whole neighborhood and uh of course the resale value and the aesthetic value everything is compromised with all these trees being taken down. It looks like more like a business place to me, you know, uh rather than a living area. So, please keep that in consideration when you're granting permission to knock down all the trees and make it a flat land. Thank you all very much.

Thank you.

Okay, anyone else? We want to hear your opinions. You've come to the meeting. Does anybody have a good understanding of the history of your own covenants in HOA?

Yeah. The house is going to go down. I ma'am. We can't address that.

All right. If there's no one else wants to uh make a comment, we will close the public hearing. Association. Is there a covenant in this particular area?

No, we can't. Yeah, we don't. Okay, sir. Stand up here and give us your name and address.

Okay. Uh, my name is Tim Halum. I live at 1633 West Forest Road. And uh I just wanted to say I um I'd been gone for a couple weeks and I came back and uh it looked like literally looks like a bomb has been dropped in that area of 57 and 58 I believe it is. 57 58. Yeah. It literally looks like a bomb's been dropped. when he built the other house just around the curve from me. Um, I remember when they tore out all those trees and then they I think they brought in maybe 80 80 uh tandem dump truckloads of fill.

Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead, sir. Go ahead. Yeah. Yeah. So he did that. Uh I think the it's already starting to erode over there beside that new house that they built there. Uh there's nothing going to hold that back. It's just it just drops down. Folks, let him finish and then you can come up and make your Oh, that's okay. I'm used to Betty. She Okay. But no. Uh so anyway, uh that that's the most recent occurrence and that house just uh some people just moved into that house and I've been by it several times and it's already washing away out there on the side. Well, we're dealing with this one here at 57.

Yes, I know that you are. But the but the ravine situation is it's just there's two ravines that come together and that's just the other one. Yeah. And you're right, but it's this is every bit the ravine that that was. he would have to bring in 300 truckloads of field. And I'm not I'm not the junk he brought in. And then he broke down the curbs in the neighborhood out there. There's no curb left because his trucks just backed over them and just broke it all down. That that may be common, but I would think that you would replace all that. Yeah. Uh when that happens, it's not done anything

uh to enhance the neighborhood. It's a It's a I live on Forest Road. There's a reason for that name. It's forest. It's a That whole place was old forest. And a lot of people are out there because of that. And the first thing that the man did was take down I counted a hundred trees, sold off the timber. So, he's probably got his money back on the on the uh the lots. Uh be my guess. I don't know, but I do know that there's going to be a major runoff problem there. And then if you put the houses up close to the street, it's going to change. And I know that you can't make decisions necessary on aesthetics, but it it will change the aesthetics of the neighborhood. So, just wanted to put that out there.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else? Please step up here. This is your chance. Okay. Well, if there's no one else, we'll close the Public hearing 11:21. Okay. Mark, do we have any paperwork? People have sent us ideas, opinions.

You received all the comment letters that were were sent. Um, they were all letters. Uh, one was extracted off of a text, so I transcribed it into a word document. But yes, uh the last one was this morning um around 8 o'clock. So, but you have all of those. Okay. Okay. Well, we've heard public opinion. Anyone want to make a motion discussion and then we'll do we can discuss before or after the motion?

What are your thoughts, gentlemen? I mean, I have I have concern just with the looking at the topography of these lots and the clear disregard for erosion control already with the deforestation of it just in that alone. I mean, we're you're dropping 30 feet from the road to the bottom of that close to it on the side you're on. To me that does when I look at my factors here I mean that there's concern about how this will affect adjacent property values of what is going to happen with this erosion. I feel like we're squeezing a house into like we're giving leeway to squeeze a house on a super small buildable corner. It's one doing that and not affecting the rest of the lotion depends on clearly that he's taken a step to not any other thoughts that's my problem is the drainage and differences in height good that's going to be built there.

Mark, what civil engineering or assessments does have to do to get approval for it? The building permit has to certain things have to be done upstream of that which has to be as downstream of what we're doing here. Obviously, just remember this is a subdivision that was in place before we had a storm water ordinance, before we had a zoning ordinance, before we had a flood ordinance for that matter. Um, actually before our building ordinance as well. So, this is a subdivision that doesn't have drainage tactics other than natural topography. So in that case um we look at the factors of the lot itself. So is water on that lot going to affect adjoining properties? All of the properties as you can see by that topography cut all the properties between those two lanes. The storm water goes to that ravine on every property. Uh 57 goes to that re ravine as well. So when you look at that I mean there is natural drainage that controls this. So there is no specific engineered drainage plan of this subdivision. Um so we take the natural set. So the natural set is the topography. Now as far as filling the drainage way he cannot fill that drainage way in.

Um that is part of the issue uh with what has happened out there. He hasn't brought much dirt in there. He has put a little bit of dirt there, but he did take the trees down. There's, you know, rights are rights. If you own a property, can you take the trees down? I don't see how you can say no to that. Uh, but anyway, as far as the natural drainage of the property, it is there just like the remainder remainder of the subdivision. Mark, can you explain if if there is going to be a building there in order to get his permits, will the will the uh owner have to meet your storm water ordinance in terms of how water flows off of that lot? And what does that mean?

Correct. In these situations, our primary goal is to wherever the water flows now, it can still go that way. But in the situation of putting a new improvement on that lot, we would require control of any downspout and guttering to go to the drainage way that is on the property. So, in other words, he wouldn't be able to push water from one lot to another, but he would be able to push it to a natural drainage way, which is on the property. Uh so in the case of lot 57, there is natural flow to the south. Uh we would control that with a small swell between property lines to the back of the property into the natural drainage way. So that's how we do that. That's how we do it in all the subdivisions. You know, uh dividing swells to carry any any water that transfers from one lot to the other to control that because there's no improvement on 57. There's going to be an improvement on 57 which speeds the water up. and it naturally goes to the drainage way and to the lot south of it. So, we're going to control that uh with our work up as far as the storm water goes on the building permit. So, those are those are what's undertaken on the storm water for the property at the time of the building permit. Just making sure that if the BCA says he has to do this that he does that and making sure that it protects any common enemy.

I have a question. Where does the water uh four or 57, where does that water go? Does it go to 58? Does it go to 56? How does it drain out? Well, let me explain what you're looking at. The lighter color is the higher elevation. The darker color is the lower elevation. Right. So, that darkest area in the middle is a ravine. That is what Seth said, around 25 to 30 foot deep at the deepest point between the houses.

Yeah. Uh so as you can see 57 goes to that ravine but because of the way it lays it also goes to the lot south of it. So it goes both ways. Now in the shaded area just above the 57 lot number you can see where the water kind of accumulates there. That's a little lower elevation and it goes into the drainage with the natural drainage way. You can see a little lead out to the north there. That is natural drainage way from lot 58. Okay. So you you you know in this in this particular situation there is natural drainage on the lot.

Yes. But this house will change the speed of the water because there's going to be more impermeable soils with the house on that property. Changes the speed. Impervious Yes. surfaces change the speed of water. Yes. No question. You're not getting more water. You're not getting more rain on that lot. No. You're getting more hard surface where the water will run off of. Yeah. Okay. Yes.

Focus. A lot of system. system. Check anytime you put in Well, I I don't we can't get into all that right now. Uh that's not part of our what we're trying to determine. Okay. Well, guys, okay.

Yeah, Dick, let me explain it to you. So the issue if the if the board were to approve the variance that does not that the owner still has to then go to our health department and has to get a permit for them showing that that septic system is going to work correctly which relates to the issues you're talking about proper percolation proper area and all that. That's just it's just not this board who deals with that issue but that doesn't mean it's not dealt with. It's dealt with by our health department. Don or is in the back of the room. He's the guy you would have to go and they'll have the owner would have to satisfy our health department that that their septic system can work properly. Even if the board approves this, that's just a future step just like the building permit. That's another future step. This meeting isn't the final word. It's kind of the beginning actually um to the process. But I don't I just say that because I don't want you to think that that issue won't be dealt with. It will, just not by these guys.

Okay, Mark, I got a question. Sorry to put that. You do have the site plan kind of showing you where it is located on the property. Yes. Yes. So, one of our main things to look at is, you know, with the septic and the size and things like that, do you know what the average lot size is in this addition roughly? I didn't run an average. Um, but there are a lot of lots that are of this size and then there's bigger bigger lots in the subdivision. Um, so it no, I didn't run an average size, but let me turn this elevation data off and you can look a little better.

I guess just looking at, you know, this is going to be a lot smaller compared to all the other ones out there or we kind of in flow with what's out there. You can see um a lot of the lots are

same. That's five. There's a lot of different sizes. Five. There are some bigger lots over on this side. So, yes, there's lots ranging from 42 to up to over an acre in the subdivision. And they'll have to deal with that when it goes to the county if we approve it.

Yeah. We're not dealing with that exactly today. Okay. Anybody ready to make a motion? I I've stated my my thoughts on it and I I understand we've seen a lot of these cases. We're we're seeing a lot at Lake Holiday. We're seeing you know this is our first year and you know it's it's tough when you get into some of these old neighborhoods. But to me this differs in a little bit from what we've seen to date. I feel like the adjacent properties are substantially impacted. I feel like total disregard for the erosion that's already going to occur from the deforestation that does that alone and my motion would be to not approve this for those reasons.

Okay, we have a motion to not approve this. I need a vote. Sorry. Okay, I'll second that. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? Yeah, we're not approving. Yes. Yes. Yeah, we did.

And we'll do it again. We're all in favor of of not approving it. Yes. Or deny. Okay. So, our next we're going to lot 58 next. 57.

Yes. Your next case is ZB2605. It is again petitioners Rcliffe Homes and it is lot 58 adjacent 257 next to 623 North Tulip Court. Again, the variance is for development standard of one acre and setbacks. Today you'll conduct a public hearing to consider a variance from development standards of chapter 159 of the zoning ordinance. Specifically, petitioner is requesting variance from the 1 acre requirement and setbacks. Notice published on March 27th and sent out prior to the land owners prior to April 1st. Petitioner is requesting a variance to build a single family dwelling on a 47 acre lot. Health Department reviews. A review is required for the on-site septic. I know that soil tests have been completed for the site. Again, McGomery County Highway rightway permit would be required and would be issued by McGomery County Highway for the entrance into the property. County also reviewed the site for stormwater compliance. Um, again, same as 57. and it had plotted a long time ago as natural topography. Um, McGomery County would require siltation protection on south lot and protection of the natural drainage way. Access is to tulip court and it is zoned residential and the property can meet the addressing requirements. Um you have your three factors and then staff recommendation. Again it was approval of variance with conditions. Again conditions are the rightway permit building and septic approval and silt fence installed on south lot line and drainage area.

Okay. I'm sorry. It is a request for 45 ft as well. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So, we need a public hearing on this one. We're opening up the floor 11:37. Anyone have a comment they want to make about this lot?

Well, we have one new one. Yeah, my name is Phil Ramos. I live at 646 North Tula Court, which is directly across from Law 58. And I concur with much was said uh about law 57 and that uh the essential character of Twin Oaks has been Oaks with his clear cutting of that of that property. It looks like he's going for no oaks. And uh I I think he was he he with a truckload of lumber that he's taken out of there. I'm sure he's fully compensated for anything that he's financially put out. And he's should have been fully fully aware of the limitations that he had and the the county zoning ordinance. And I don't see a reason to to to grant the variance because it it it impacts the quality of life and privacy that we've enjoyed there. My lot in fact is like an acre and a half and and to to deal with with a variance of of the county uh ordinances on lot I I don't think it's is is something that should be granted. Uh I I am concerned about drainage. If you look at it with the with the floor and fauna that he's destroyed in that area across there, it has to be

eroding right now. So, and I think it there's an erosion off of that lot 58 as well as 57. So we we we certainly are seeking a denial of this variance. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Anyone else want to ma'am? Ma'am. Yeah. Please come to the microphone if you have more comments.

I told you my name Kathy Barta. I live in the original section, but the drainage right now, I mean, when when it was forested, it had it was protected. It had ground cover. It had trees. It that absorbed all the moisture. Now, it's stripped. It's only going to erode even more for the I look at it rain on a bare piece of land. It's going to drain. If it's got vegetation on it that he has already taken out, it's worse. much worse. Okay. Thank you, ma'am. Come up, sir.

Yeah. Just want to be sure that the things that were said about lot 57 will also be recorded for this lot 58 when you make your decision. Okay. That's why we have the public hearings so we get your opinions. Yeah. Is that true? Will those same comments that were made previously be on the record for this lot?

These are two separate cases and this is a public comment only. It's not question and answer. So just just remember that the information for both lots comes from the staff report and they have both lots and a staff report for each one of them. As far as the public comments, the public comments for 57 are with 57. So, if you have comments on 58, you should probably stand up and make those comments. Yeah.

Well, they've taken out all the trees. We've talked about that. They've clearcut it essentially clearcut it. Um I I walk That's all downhill there. If you look at the where the where the height where the road is, that's that all goes downhill. So, it's a good walk. You can walk about three miles through our neighborhood and you get a pretty good workout in it. And what I'm saying is it's I'm already seeing it because I go down through there every day and I've already seen the runoff and uh that's not with any houses on it. The trees aren't holding there's no trees to hold anything. And they just they also dozed up the the stumps. So you don't even have that uh root system really there to hold hold it back anymore either. It's a big difference than it was.

Okay. Thank you.

Have to do this twice. Cindy Cassenza said 635 North Forest Road. We're lot 73. Um, so again, property values, aesthetics, all of those things. The runoff, erosion, everything that compromises the integrity of our subdivision. Those are all the things that are just really important to all of us. And that goes for all of these lots that he's trying to to build on. And he doesn't have a lot of integrity. That's one of the things that is a big concern that he comes in, he does his thing, he leaves, he doesn't also take care of the property, the area being concerned about the erosion. Um, you had commented on him having to follow these other rules and he has to do that, but how well does he do it? Um, I've heard stories about his houses falling apart, different things happening. He has to do the run off to certain areas, but how well does he do that? And so, all of those things are a big concern because I've heard things about him being a reputable builder or an irreputable builder. Beyond that, it's just what's going to happen to all of that and is it going to um impact the houses below. It's it's not impacting my house, but if that impacts them, then it would impact my house because that would impact property values. So, that's a big concern of all of us. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.

Hello. Whatever I say now would be echoing what I said before of this lot also. But I would like to say again most of the people moved into that neighborhood because of the beauty of the trees and uh when someone built a down close to the ravine that was a big issue at that time. You all may know at that time and in a residential area cutting trees I heard to my knowledge and you may know may know you may know more should not cut for the sake of business. Trees falling down on the house a risk purpose. People have been cutting trees in twin but nobody cut trees so far for the business purpose for logging. Cleaning completely cutting some trees in the middle of the lot where he's going to build would have been better. Now it really damaged the aesthetics of the neighborhood and I think it is too late to grow the trees in that area. But it is very very saddening and Just not only that erosion and the size of the lot and all these things you know more and you you have been doing right you have been delivering good justice for us and this is what I want to say again about this lot too. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Anyone else want to express their opinion? again I'm sure living the lot 63. So what the previous speaker the pre told about the runoff you know from that because there's a big slope from 58 towards my lot and of course it's on the other side of the road. uh that uh Twin Oaks Court was really a private area and nice but now it will become like a already there's of course there's a new house that has been built below there and uh I think all the things that we have talked about for the previous lot 57 are applicable to this lot not only the beauty but the property values will go down like anything And there are no trees left actually it is not at all attractive anymore for anybody to you know want to buy property and come in there. So so if this is being done only for business purposes. So I would uh request you to all keep that in um consideration and take appropriate decision. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Anyone else while we're doing this? Okay, we're going to close the public hearing 11:47. Okay, gentlemen, after we've heard this, do we Oh, we we've got all the information on this lot, too, from you. So, we're good to go from people commenting. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Okay. What do we think on this one, guys?

Mark, are you able to put up our drawing of where he plans to put Before you do that, Mark, can we just I just want to point out after looking at this map, it doesn't really look like these lots are that much different from what they've already built on with all the ravines and everything going through. Now, there's nothing we can do about all the other previous buildings, but it just looks to me like it's not that much different when you look at that map.

Oh, you're fine. Yeah, I'm just making sure I have it oriented right. So that that north peak is where we were looking. So the ravine would be right off of it.

Yeah. Awesome. Yeah. Okay. You guys can see

Any other questions you want to asking? Ready to make a looked like it was higher up. Not as much ravine in that one from that map.

Yeah. Sorry. We have just general information. So looking just looking at his plan, it would put that septic field right down in the middle of that ravine. It's easier. Okay. Anyone want to make a motion?

Okay, we're done with public comment. Um, I mean being that we have discretion on this and I I feel the same way about this lot as I did the other as far as this topography I mean being stripped down already into the ravines. I feel like it's we're already causing adverse value to the property values on these two lots. So that's just my opinion. Well, yeah. I mean, in my opinion, this site is different

and and I I'm going to make a motion that we approve this one just because it's it's that much different than the first one. The first one had that great big ravine, and I did not want it at all. This one, I think it's a workable situation. I think they can make a satisfactory site and put their house on it. So, I vote for it. That's my motion. Anyone want to second? I'll second it. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed.

I oppose. 3 to one. Okay. Now the next lot. That's lot 59. Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah. Okay, Mark.

Okay. Okay, your next case is ZB2606. Again, the petitioner is Ratcliffe Homes. Uh the location is lot 78 of Twin Oaks subdivision, which is next to 1881 West Blue Beach Lane. The type of case is a varian variance to the development standard of 1 acre. Again, this meeting was uh I'm sorry, introduction. Uh today, you'll conduct a public hearing consider the variance of the development standard from chapter 159 and it is a variance. The petitioner is requesting variance from the 1acre requirement. No setback variance, just variance of the 1acre requirement. Public hearing was published on 27 March 27 2026 and land owners prior to April 1st 2026. Petitioners requesting variance to build single family dwelling on a 77 of an acre lot. Again, the county health department reviews and is required for on-site septic system. Soil tests have been completed for the septic system. McGomery County Highway would issue rightway permit in the Twin Oak subdivision and the county is reviewing the site for storm water compliance. Um, in the review, uh, there it's a it's pretty flat lot. Uh, it lacks a lot of grade. Uh but the absorption area it there is enough absorption area grass

area to to handle the proposed 4700 square feet for the single family dwelling and driveway. Roadside ditch will be required to cut to match properties east and west of the build and downspouts would be required. That's part of the storm water review. flood plane was reviewed with no special flood hazard area and access to the property is from Blue Beach Lane. It is zoned residential and it can meet the requirements for addressing. You have your three factors and staff does recommend approval of the variance with two conditions which is one is the rightway permit requirement and two is the building and septic permit approval from McGomery County. Okay. And once again, we've got the concerns people sent in. Each of us has a

Okay. Yes. All the all the comments, which this was an interesting one because they're all in the same subdivision, but all you got all the comments for all three branches. Okay. Okay. We're going to open up for public hearing 11:59. Anyone want to come and make comments on this lot? We know the drill.

Good morning. Morning. Uh I'm Buddy Brady. I live at lot 880 or 1857 with West Blue Beach Lane. Um the I know this is I'm assuming something here. It says on lot 78. It just says lot. There's no description of what it is. I'm assuming it's the size of the lot would be the only thing he's asking for the septic and so on.

Okay. I want to make sure I was assuming right. You know how assuming goes. Um the uh I know you guys are are looking for um comment commentary and stuff like that. the the lot itself is 77, which is out in the neighborhood there. I believe there were averaging right about 0.9 acres. Uh those were all laid out. Some of those are much larger. Um I'm not sure what all they are, but I know they're pretty close to 0.9, which is a lot different than 77. In other words, what I I feel like is if you give me a dollar, I have a choice of giving you 90 cents back or I give you 77 cents back. That's the that's the way I'm looking at this from a a a one acre buildable lot with a septic system. The standard, as you know, in the tables R2 uh and R1 talk about a 43,500 square foot lot, which is one acre. Um, this is to the best of my knowledge and what I've heard, this lot has been attempted to be built on at le or uh variances at least twice. Once by this board, maybe not you, but this board and one by the state. Um, and both of those were denied from from what my historian tells me. Okay. U so those are the things that that we uh we were looking at is if I have a four bedroomedroom house and it requires a uh I think this is a threebedroom I believe um threebedroom house on a oneacre lot it's x amount of water if I reduce the land I'm still going to have the same water but I'm going to have a bigger

issue with the land okay because you you understand what I'm Um the other thing that um I'm going to I've got my notes here. Sorry about that old teacher habit. Um and the other thing too is the property value. It has to be it really can't diminish the property value. You've heard that across the board here. You've heard it. Uh and let's face it, you know, the reputation of the the contractors wanting to be to build on this is not the best in the world. And so it's it's very disturbing because I live right next to one of his houses, the only Redcliff house in the in the addition. Um, so those are the things that concern me is the property value, the look of the house, and if I may present these to the board, they're just pictures of every house on that street, Blue Beach Lane. Okay. And as you notice, if you look through those, there's one house that sticks out. Uh, it's not a custom house. And that's why people build out there. That's why we we look at it. We look at the house. We look at the location, location, location. If you go down through there, you'll see one house that sticks out tremendously. It's not a customuilt house. I was told that a customuilt house is built. All houses are stick built one way or the other. Whether it's a modular or still stick built customer and I'm not trying to be a snob. I'm just trying to say our property values are important to all of us. Go back to my 90 cents and my 77 cents. Okay. Um so if in closing I I I think it should be

denied simply because of the land size of of the lot size 77 is a lot different. I know over in the old older portion of it it's different. This here has its own set of covenences that are in place today. Um and there's a requirement on the south end which is the new part that those trees cannot be cut down. That's a bird sanctuary that's in the covenants. 10% of the house or 10% of the sideyard has to be uh it has to be 10% of the lot size. What whatever that means I don't know how you determine that it's 77 be 007 t of u of of the lot. So I don't think meeting the covenences and the building code, not the building code but the lot size determined by um this ordinance the 159. I think there's plenty of opposition just the legal opposition meeting the code that it should be done. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Anyone else want to make a comment? Please come up here. Ma'am, please come up here. We can't hear you and the people watching can't.

I just want to say that I live right next door. Excuse me. What is your name, ma'am? Well, Penny Sterling. Penny Sterling. Thank you. and I live right next door to the lot in question. Okay. And I'm very concerned about not only the size of the lot and the size of the house that's going to be built there affecting our property values and I'm worried about the septic system, too. Uh where's that field going to go? Is it going to go and erupt over on my property? So, I have a lot of concerns and I really hope that you will deny the request that uh is before you. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. Anyone else want to make a statement? Okay. Well, we're going to close our hearing at 12:06. Mark, I have a question. On this map you have shown of the house and how it's going to sit. It looks like it comes up to within seven feet of the property line. Is that correct? Is that Our setbacks for residential properties are five foot side and five foot rear. Okay.

Okay. What do we think? Any other sizes, acre sizes around that would you say? Yeah, to me this differs from the first two that we've heard just with the action that's taken and and believe me like I'm aware of the integity of the

builder and the homes he builds and everything else like that. But that's as we've discussed, it's not not for this board to to decide on those factors. We have certain things that that we're bound to to decide on on whether we approve or deny and then it goes downstream for other people to be able to and other ordinances and boards and things to be able to address some of that. The good thing is it sounds like you do have some existing covenants that could, you know, help on your own with with what he's trying to do here. But based on the factors that we have to consider here, I can explain those to you real quick. So, you know, the approval, you know, being injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community and use. The second one is will this approval the use and value of the adjacent properties included in the variance will not be affected in a substantially adverse manner and that's the use of the lot itself and then the strict applications of the terms of the zoning ordinance will result in practical difficulties in use of the property it would because it's less than an acre and that's why we're looking at a variance so I can't I can't look at what we have in front of us and what is plotted there you know, any factors for denial. So, I I make a motion to approve.

Okay, we have a second. Second. We've got a motion to approve and a second. All those in favor? Nothing. Okay. Okay. What else do we have on our agenda? Okay. Okay.

Oh, that's all right. We're flexible. We're flexible. Okay. All right. Need a motion. Need a Wait till the meeting's over, ma'am. Let's close it. I have no idea. I never got that. I don't get the paper. I'd say the paper made a mistake because we've been we've been scheduled. Huh? Well, it was posted.

No. Must have been. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. Got a motion to adjourn. We're out of here. We have a journey. Thank you.

I'm just throwing stuff everywhere. Let's see. Did you