Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

as soon as we get I think AV up and running then we'll start the meeting because I know it's at currently 601. So, I want to welcome you all to our planning commission meeting, but again, give us a few minutes, please, to get the AV up and working. Good. We're good. We're good. We're good to go.

Oh, we are. Okay. I didn't either. Thank you, Mr. Tommy. We're good. We're good. His isn't that. Yeah, his isn't. That's why he was

Oh, good. All right. Cooking with gas. Oh, well, that's coming. Okay. All right. All right. Good evening everyone. I will officially call to order the March 18th regular meeting of the North Augusta Planning Commission. If we could please have the roll call by commissioners, Aaron Slade, Red Harbison, Bob Bigger, Jesse Elliot,

Chelsea Wad. And I am your chair, Christine Crawford. All right. Um, are there any changes or edits to the February 18th minutes? If not, and uh entertain a motion for approval, please. So moved. Second. All those in favor, please say I. I. All opposed. Thank you. Mr. Paradise, are there any changes or additions to the agenda? No, ma'am.

All right. So I want to welcome everyone to our meeting again and thank you for your patience as we were a little late getting started. Want to explain um the process for our meeting this evening. So we have one plan development modification um on the agenda as well as a discussion around tree preservation. If there are comments or questions from the public, after the applicant comes up, we have a chance for um commissioners to ask the the applicant any questions. We will then open it up to the public. We ask that you keep um your comments to about two minutes because we want to make sure that we have time for everyone. We ask that if there are any new things or new perspectives that you'd like to share that you please um do so to add on. And so we want to make sure that we hear perspectives, but also want to make sure that we um hear things that are different. And so if someone has said something that you agree with, but you want to add another piece or there's something else, then please be sure to share the other thing u so that we again get everyone's um get a breath of opinions or concerns about something if there are any or support in that matter. Um we ask that when you come to the dis that you to the microphone rather that you give your name and address and uh if there is anyone who for mobility reasons needs Mr. Paradise to bring us a microphone then please let us know that as well. After you make comments, we then have the applicant reply to all comments and questions at one time. And after that, then we as commissioners go into discussion, a vote. Okay. All right. So, if we could please begin with plan development 26-001, a request by Stanley Martin Holmes to modify the hive plan development. Mr.

Paradise, what would you like for us to know about this application? Yes, Mr. Chairman. This is um part of the annex hive annexation from November 3rd of 1986 zone plan development. Stanley Martin is the applicant. They are requesting about 65.65 acres of it is residential and they're looking for a modification of section C and D in the hive specifically to revise 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 and 3.3 of the general development plan. What does all of that garblely goo mean? Um this is from the section C and in the current development or general development plan it calls for quarter to a half acre in size lots. When we got the plan review in the lots were not of that size. They met 45 to 70 in width. It met the density. everything else except for that quarter to have a grand size. So, we reached back out to the engineers and there's been some discussion there and I'll explain why they a little bit of why. My understanding is they want to lower the lot size. Um they are reducing the lot count in this section from three units per acre to 2.9 units per acre. I believe this is let's see I had that written down here

but there's a reduction there. I think it's four units. And then C and D is similar that they would have smaller taking out the half acre and a quarter acre size requirements. This gives you an idea of the different phases in there and their acreage. So when it's all said and done, the minimum lot size requested is in track A would be 24,2,420 ft. Track B would be 7,800 ft and C and D what we're really talking about would be 5,400 square ft. Now that looks like this is the overall plan. This is what you don't see in the numbers there is what's not included in that lot area is that buffer area there in the back that's common area. So it's making the lot sizes smaller. Um the planning department um in discussing this because a buffer was required there as a condition city council uh that that not be put on the parcel. We required it to be separated out so that it would be better maintained into perpetuity. If it's on somebody's individual lot, it's going to get clear. is a lot harder to enforce.

And this shows the same type thing, but where it backs up to the interstate. Um there again, that buffer there. Uh that instead of putting that on the lot, they're using it to screen from the traffic, the noise, and the side of the interstate. And here is u another look u you see in the again you see the distance there the open areas um where there could be lots or they could make the lots bigger but they're choosing not to. One of those is, you know, keeping again off the interstate there on the northern side, keeping the buffer to the residential on the southern side, and in the middle um you've got common area between the um subdivision lots. They're not backing up to each other. The other thing there too is, and the engineer can go into this a lot more better detail than I can, but in that center portion, they've also got some drainage swells. And if those are on individual lots, they tend not to be maintained. Homeowners tend to go, "Now, I don't like that swell in my yard." And they fix it and then it messes up the drainage. So from the engineering standpoint, um they feel like it would be better to have the smaller lots in the common open area and where the swells could be maintained better questions for me. So just so I'm understanding right this

is they're wanting to make it smaller not necessarily coming from their reasoning other than what we have what guidelines we have given them with the buffers and all. So that's sort of forcing that smaller.

In some cases it is in some cases it's not. Yes they could go they could do the lot all the way to interstate rightway. But I think, and I don't want to speak for the developer, but by having that buffer there, you know, you're cutting down on that road noise in this common area, so it's not getting cleared out. So, I think that's I think they're looking at they would have a nicer subdivision if they had that undisturbed common space around. And again, the applicants here, he can address that more in depth than me. This is what what this is not is an attempt to get more lots. All right. Any other questions for Mr. Paradise at this time? All right. Thank you. If the applicant will please come forward and please uh give your name and address.

Fine, Gransson Engineering Group, 815 Stanton Drive, North Augusta. McCarthy, Stanley Martin Homes, 2743, Augusta, Georgia.

We appreciate the introduction from Mr. Paradise. Um to add to what he said, this is not an attempt to get more lots and increase density. We've actually proposed reductions in the densities um so that by allowing for a smaller lot size, we would not come in and increase the lots. What you see here works for the applicant. It's what we would like to proceed with. We've already completed the design. Um and the only major comment we received from staff was um that we were not in compliance with the minimum lot size. And the reason for that um is the language was in the GDP narrative. It was not in the PD ordinance. So we really only needed to revise the GDP narrative and that language was left over from the original revision that was done in 2006 under the old north Augusta zoning and development code. Um what you see here is more of a cluster style development. We don't want to subdivide more property than what's actually needed for the construction of homes. We want to preserve the open space. If we were to extend those rear lot lines back toward the interstate, we would then The applicant would then be selling real estate to homeowners that is wooded and would give them the ability to clear it. It add maintenance to the homeowners. Um on those backtoback lots where you see an open space strip, that's a transition slope. Um in our experience, when you extend those lot lines over the slopes, it creates a storm water issue.

People block build fences in the swailes. Um Those slopes rarely get maintained by the homeowners. It would be preferred for the HOA to have a maintenance plan in place to mow the slopes, clear undesired vegetation, not allow trees to mature or grow on a slope that could potentially fall. Um, so that's the reasoning there. Um, another reason is we want this to be more in line with North Augusta's current idea of a planned development. We want to provide a mix of product types. Um, and the applicant will speak a little bit more to their marketing strategy and the product types that they are going to be building on these lots. Um, but we're providing lots to accommodate homes from 40 to 42 foot in width. They'll speak a little bit more about the square footages. Um, three to five bedroomedroom homes, various price points, and many different floor plans and the sides. So, I'll let them speak a little bit more to their marketing strategy.

So, just to add on um to what Bert was explaining, um we have tried to stay in designing this um section really and in the whole thing with within the characteristic of the land. there's quite a bit of topography in the rear and um that does present some opportunities for homeowners and and some drainage challenges. So, we're really trying to work within that um as B explained and it's a whole lot easier when it's not on the homeowner and we're not chasing homeowners to try to, you know, to to take care of something. We're trying to preserve as many trees as we can. We certainly feel that the community itself will be more desirable with the the more of a buffer we have uh between the highway. It keeps the noise down for us and you know and and the the residents in the surrounding and the surrounding area. Um one one note is in the first section that Mr. Paradise pulled up on those home sites we exceeded the minimum square footage of those home sites. So, um I I believe that the average required was somewhere in the neighborhood of 7200 square feet and we're at 9,300 square feet. So, um our intent with this new design is to provide square footages. Um the average may look different, but we're going to be from 5200 square feet to 16,000. So, we're not just going in doing small cookie cutter lot. What we're trying to do is provide space around the home sites as well as offer a variety of homes that we are seeing in that are popular in the market today. So the average square footage nationwide really has continued to drop and it was less than 2300 square feet 2279 something like that about right right around there last last year and what we are looking to do is not take away what we were

going to offer originally which was between 38 and 42 foot wide product um but we're going to add in some 30 foot product which we recently opened at Martintown Ridge and it has been really well received um just located down the road in North Augusta. But those homes range from 1,800 to well over 3,000 square feet. They're three to five bedroomedroom. They're two and a half to four and a half bath. So they're not small homes. And the original intent of this community was to be able to market to we have town homes that will probably be desirable for potentially first time buyer who don't want any but then we have a variety of that will fit the first time move up buyer, the middle move up buyer, and even those folks that want to downsize. We've got primary bedrooms on the main level as well as four bedrooms up. So, we're offering a variety of products that we have seen throughout this area um that we know is successful in this building. Um you know, I think our our overall um request trying to do the right thing here within the characteristics of the land. Um we don't want to extend home properties back up to you know so um we appreciate your time. Our density I think at this point has Mr. mentioned we're not asking.

Thank you, Commissioners. Do you all have any questions for Mr. Fine or Miss McCarthy? I'm not sure if this is a better question for Mr. Paradise or Bert, but um without the the changes to create the buffers, would we have met would they have met the lot size requirements? The the problem is the lots are not a quarter to a half acre in size even with even if you extend it out. Now if if if they took they could make them um with the current layout they could make them that size. Okay. But they would do away with those buffers.

Okay. And then is there a required frontage for these for this PD for the lots? So they they meet those. Okay. And we're not proposing a reduction in the in the front. Okay.

And I would say remember this is not a preliminary plat. This is a major PD modification. So this is changing the rules basically the zoning ordinance development code of development. So if we make these changes for this, this doesn't change anything in the future necessarily. Would it hold us to accepting these changes for anybody else that came to ask for it? No, these are specific to this particular plan. That's what I thought. I just wanted to have it said out loud.

Um, and one more question with the buffers and all those trees and all that are left behind. I know the homeowners wouldn't own it and you mentioned the homeowners association. taking care of who would actually own that property. Okay. I'm not super familiar with how HOAs work exactly. Thankfully, I've never had to deal with that. It's I say thankfully, maybe it's a great thing. I just usually hear bad about it. It's typically deed to the HOA and then they paid the property taxes and the maintenance on it when it's so like they're saying it's removing it from the borrower or the homeowner altogether.

Thank you all. Any other questions applicants? Okay. So, applicants, if you all could please have a seat and um take notes as because we'll ask you to respond to all questions and comments at one time. All right. If there are any um questions or comments, we ask that you please come to the microphone, give your name and address. Um again, ask that it keep it to to two minutes so that your neighbors have time to share as well. Are there any questions or comments from the community at this time for public hearing? I am I don't know because the gentleman in the back we've had a request.

We've had a request that the sound be turned up if that's at all possible. Sir, I'm not sure that that is I'm sorry. Um we'll see what he can do. Yeah. And we'll try to make sure if if all of the commissioners could make sure that we speak into the microphones as well. Um, that would be helpful. Okay. There any comments or questions? Please come forward and give your name and address. Thank you. Um, my name is Justin. I am a homeowner at 1013 Pinion Road, which is in the county, not in the city. Um this particular uh presentation that you guys put together um in the back in section six has made a couple of uh comments in here that previously were debunked or said that you guys were going to future in the future evaluate and see what the impact was in this. you have just whitewashed over those comments that you made about before the U traffic that is going to impact Pinion Road proper itself. In this document, what your engineer has presented has said in the back of this that it will undoubtedly affect the road and the traffic opinion said in this particular prop. So at that personally this is not acceptable to the homeowners opinion road. Last time you guys also said you guys didn't care what the homeowners in this county cared about because this is the city. So, I'm

not going to continue anymore. If you don't want to hear from the people of the county that you are affecting, I will walk away. If you want to continue to hear my comments, I will stay. Okay. Well, I'm asking. So we've g So sir sir I'm going to answer your question. Thank you. Okay. So we ask that everyone share their comments. We ask them to keep it to two minutes so that there are others are is there any more information that you would like for us to know about your concerns about the traffic? We will have the applicant respond. And is there anything else that you would like to share with us?

Um do you have a picture of I know you say in section C you reduce by four and then D you reduce by 19. Sorry if you could if you could get in the microphone so we make sure your neighbors can hear you.

Yeah. So in section C you guys say that you reduced by four units and in section D which is the section that ties in over two opinion you reduced by 19 lots. Do you guys have a picture or a slide that can show that difference to this group here tonight on what that particular view right there looks like from previous to new? Can that be provided and looked at tonight so it can be evaluated because this looks like there's only four four houses that are going to go from where you guys tail off in section C over to over to pinion. I'm just curious on what that looked like before if we can take a look at that to see how that has affected it. Um the other the other comment that I will make is um Pinion Road is governed by Pine View Estates um covenants. In our covenants for Pine View Estates, it is not allowed to build anything besides new homes on Pinion Road. You can find that at the Aken County government um office and go get a copy of it, look at it yourself and see that this road that comes into opinion is a direct violation of our covenants that was approved prior to your 2000 your initial 2006 approval of this plan. So there is a potential for legal action that could be taken from the people that are and could be owned property on Pinion Road against the city, against the owner, against the

developer of this property. There is a potential for that. That can't happen because you guys are violating our covenants and you guys have been here have said you are going to enact new covenants for this neighborhood. So by that you're whitewashing over what is already established for us and saying what you want is better than what we want. So with that, I don't think that the tie-in to our road, our subdivision is um first of all, I don't think it's moral or right when you sit down and you look at what the paper has been proven and said of and such up before you guys ever started or ever approved this the first time in 2006. Just want to put that out there. That was approved as a perpetual, which means everlasting. It never has to be approved again. It always exists. It cannot be taken out of the county courthouse. It will always be there forever for any person that we sell our property to or anybody that new that comes in. They are protected by those covenants. So, just wanted you to hear that and from from me to know that we have our covenants. You guys are enacting new covenants by what you're doing. You're saying, "I don't care about your covenants. I'm going to do this anyway because I think it's important as the city to have this thorough fair through your road that was established back in the early 70s. It's just not fair to us. Point blank. It's not fair. You guys are doing what you want. It's just not fair." So, um, I know that's not a question, but

Okay, that's a point. All right. Thank you. Um, I don't think I have anything else, but um, thank you very much. All right. Thank you. All right. Next, please. And again, um, please be sure to give your name and your address and keep the and if there's anything new that you would like to share from what Mr. Justice shared, please do so. Thank you.

Okay. Uh I am uh Donald Bridges. My wife and I live at 102 Longleaf Court and u I would like to make comments uh relative to the plan tie-in of uh the hive to Pinion Road. And uh since this hearing is focused on changes to the hive development, uh I'd like for you to consider one further change and that would uh maintain a situation where that tie-in is limited to emergency vehicle use or unusual vehicle use or or a foot path. Uh we've made known many times that uh the pinion road's not capable and it's not uh conditioned to handle what you see is literally I hadn't counted the numbers there but it's a large number of automobiles that'll result from that that housing and you compare it to running it through a subdivision that we're talking about where you have two three acre lots it it's a mismatch I I just wish you'd reconsider limiting the tie in such that it does not allow general traffic patterns. Uh we we are we bought housing in that area to be isolated and we hoped that we could stay that way. Please consider isolating us somewhat from the heavy traffic that will reserve. That's my comment. Thank you, Mr. Burgess. Ma'am, if did you need a microphone or you going to come down?

No, ma'am. No, we need you to um we need you to come down to the microphone or either bring in one. But yeah,

no, no, no, please don't. Yeah, but we want to make sure that it can be both recorded and that everyone can hear you. My name is Lauri Hamilton. I live at 10004 Spruce Court, which attaches to Pinion Road, less than 200 yards from where the tie-in opinion will be. I have several comments to make on those. Um, previously when we hear here to speak, um, city planner, Mr. Tom Paradise, um, had several things to say to make us accept the driveway. And I find those conditions are no longer intact because of the changes that have been allowed to the developer. The first one was to have faster access to the rear of the hive for the sub from the substation on five notch road. Well, now that they are building a new substation at the corner of Martintown and Nwood, EMS will have faster access to this area on the new driveway into the residential portion of the hive. It will only be 7 several hundred yards away and it won't diminish anyone's neighborhood. Secondly, Mr. Paradise stated that they needed to have that route through to Pinion to lessen the volume of traffic on Nwood by giving them access through our neighborhood of 36 homes. They did a they took a private traffic study un and

did not allow us to have a state traffic study done. That traffic study did not it was done in the summertime. Did not mention when what school access when you're trying to get on to Five Notch and off of Five Notch. It's a nightmare every day already. It's a nightmare. And during the seasons there are three spots on pinion that you are completely blinded by the sun. Somebody's going to get hurt. um especially if they raise the volume. Um if we were so concerned about lessening the volume of traffic on Nwood, why was the new driveway approved to let all of the East people have access to Nwood coming in and out? So since the plan was changed and the new driveway was approved, I I personally and most of my neighbors cannot see why pinion needs to be affected by the new subdivision of the hive at all. We understand that there's a topography problem in the back and that's why there's only those few lots in line. And um I have heard from several surveyors that um they will need a larger area of land to put in the proper driveway. Um lastly, what I have to say is from the very first meeting, we were told that the lots were going to be of a certain size and a certain standard of home was going to be built that they would be all brick homes, 300 to $400,000 homes. And that was to make us feel better about being then being able to have comparables to

our homes so that we would be have having higher values. With the school um with the homes being smaller sized, I don't see that we're going to get that. And with all the changes made to the building materials, we're not getting all brick homes there. So it seems to me kind of a and switch just to get us to be excited about having a subdivision cut through into our area. And the noise, I can't tell you the noise. It's horrendous. So, I hope these buffers and new homes will work because we used to have a quiet neighborhood and it's already disrupted and these homes haven't even started to be built yet. Thank you. I hope y'all will consider

taking the opinion off the table. Thank you, Miss H. Is there anyone else who would like to come forward or needs a microphone while Mr. Paradise is up?

All right. And I'm going to ask you to please give Mr. Paradise enough time to sit down. So, because he may have to respond to some of these as well. So, we'll give him a moment um to get back in place as well. Uh, my name is Jeff Williams. This is my wife, Miranda Williams. We live at 1019 Pinion Road, which is right next to the proposed entrance. Um, couple questions. I guess we have comments, whatever. That road, um, according to their drawing, according to other maps that are out there are They don't match. Um that proposed road that goes all the way in in that straight line and turns to the left up there. GIS maps um even documentation that's was given um provided by y'all for this meeting shows a different layout than this picture right here that was given by Cranston. Um so really that roadway is in dispute um at this point um that needs to be discussed or whatever needs to happen with it. But as of right now to proceed and move forward with that road is that would be impeding onto our land that we purchased. Um, another issue is when they go to build that entrance way, there's nowhere for them to work without encroaching onto our property to take out trees and things like that, which there's been a discussion and it was already discussed that they would have to take out trees on our property in order to work on that

road. Um, I don't agree with that. I don't that's not possible for them to do. Um we are not okay with them taking out or damaging our land in any way. Um same thing there's a stream that kind of crosses over that they have to cross over that roadway with is a stream that they have to build a covert which again would affect our land and things like that. We are not okay. I'm Miranda Williams. Um, we did have a discussion with Stanley Martin um and their engineering about this road. They did bring out a platform from 2010, but after digging, I found the original easement agreement from 2008 with um Tetra where they were given.59 acres. When the land was sold to Tetra, they were sold 52 acres. So, the plat that you're looking 2010 is actually not what they were sold. So you cannot put a 60 foot wide road on something that is not that wide. Twothirds of the back of that road is my property. And I'm not allowing a road to be on my property. I bought that home for the purpose of being out in a water space for my children. When I toured that home, I could not hear the interstate. Two weeks after I moved into my home, I hear nothing. I moved out of the center of the city of North Augusta and quiet. And I don't have that. I hear my trucks all day and night. And when I went out there, that's not what I

Yeah. Two weeks after we moved in, the woods 100 yards behind our house. That brush fire was my backyard and it went up to their line with them. So there's not a buffer as big as you think there is. I now can see people at the end of I see their pool. I see their house where it's already been cleared up. So we don't have privacy. It's already gone. Unless you're going to replant that entire corner, those people no longer have anything back there. I can see them swim in their pool this summer. Another solution, those four houses that are on the tail end of that road could easily move towards the center of that community, put a culde-sac in and send them out the other way towards the other two entrances that they were given and solve the problem for that road completely. That's all I have. You have anything else?

That's just my thing is noise is already there. And if you take more of those trees down, it's just going to get louder. You can come stand in my backyard right now. It was quiet. It was birds when I So, how much louder is it going to get? And I'm the one at the end of this road. I hear it loud. Thank you. Thank y'all.

Thank you. If there are uh no other questions or comments, we'll ask the applicant. Okay. Thank you. Hello, I'm Jean Norris and I live at 1013 Pinion.

Okay. Um, first off, I just want to echo what every one of my neighbors have already stated. We either originally built our homes or we have moved in like my family for the sole purpose of the quiet and safe neighborhood that we are in. our opinion what you're going to be doing and what you had decided based on points that are now mute point are you're going to just take that away from us. Um, and it's like my husband said and I echo it's you're putting as we feel um this neighborhood already higher up than pinion that is established that these are people who have been here for decades and you're saying because you're not in the city limits we're just going to kind of ignore and yes we're able to speak But we're not being heard. Okay. Um we are on the greenway. We had brought up points before about how on the greenway it is already there. There there's nothing there. Um we don't even have a stop sign for us. Okay. Um there's safety for the people that use the greenway which is constant and we use the greenway. that's safety for them. Ty, using that tie-in from the road, it's just going to amplify that. Um, even just putting a stop sign there, that's not going to help. We all know that how those are. Okay. Um, also mute point for that the EMS new station where that's going to be at that was said before that that's why the tie-in was going there because for emergency access for that was the reason. There's not that reason anymore.

So why is it that this is still being pursued? Um also the the lot size you said before that this would raise our you know prices for the homes there. It's not going to do that it seems like right now for us and so you're also taking that away for from us. Um, so we also again mentioned that we have the the covenant that was here. I mean for decades that we've had the covenant and that it has withtood this time for now and and now what it's just you know what are we saying about things are illegal that we we use them when they're for our good or that we can just kind of brush them away when we want to use it for something else. we this this legal document that we have what are we saying that is not important even though that is for all these communities in these um neighbors within pinion also if if you do this tie-in and there's all this um the new traffic and everything and and again what Lori Hamilton said about the traffic that was true we're one house down from where the tie-in would be and we saw we I I stood out there and watched how it it is done where in the summertime and of course because they're doing it in a time of day where there's not anybody going back and forth. But if you were to do it and then add all those homes in, it's going to be chaos. Our road, which is a small road for a very small community, was not built for that. You're going to be making better roads for this, but our road is not meant for that. Also, when it was first proposed, myself and other members of the community talked with the developers. We met and we talked with the developers and they told us that they don't need it, that it was pushed on them by the city and they don't need

it. So, if they don't need it and now these points are are muted, why is it still being pursued is is my point. Um, and lastly, again, we're not in the city, so you may say, "Well, you're you're, you know, not paying city taxes, so why does this matter?" It matters because we live in North Augusta. We're your neighbor, okay? We're going to be their backdoor neighbors. That's why it matters. And your word matters and integrity matters and this is not matching up to that. Um, so again, you know, I understand that Mr. paradise. You don't live in North Augusta, but you're able to also make deci decisions with people who live in North Augusta. So, I just want you to think about that as well. Um, you know, I just we we have our kids that grew up in our house and we hope that this will be our forever house. My son wants our house when he grows up, but I told him, "No, son, I don't know if you're going to want it now with what's going on." that that's a sad thing to have to tell my son to say the house that you've grown up in, you may not want it now. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Okay. So, we'll um let Mr. Paradise start responding first and then we'll ask the the um applicant to come back um and respond to questions and comments as well, please. Go ahead, Miss Paradise. Thank you.

And yes, this is driven by the city. the developer would probably prefer a culde-sac and and not the expense for public safety. The um but this is something that the city is requiring the connection to pinion. Um as far as the Knob Cone entrance, that drive has always been in the plans. There's nothing new on that driveway in from Knob as to the pinion connection not being needed now because of public safety facilities on Knob Cone or Martintown Road. Those are conceptual. They the city has not acquired the land. The city is not even in negotiations about the land. That might be 5 10 you know we don't know when some somewhere there will be a fire station or public safety station in the future out somewhere there but where that is and when that is we don't know and until that time we need that pinion road connection. Now, as far as covenants goes, and we've had this discussion before, there's two parallel roads, as I as the attorneys have explained it to me. We have the development code. That is what we deal with is what is in the development code. That is the city's enforcement. covenants over here. The city is a civil issue that the city has no authority to enforce and the city is outside their area of responsibility. the if I would

section 2.9 of the development code application of deed restrictions, covenants and contracts says unless deed restrictions, covenants or contracts directly involve the city as a party and interest, the city shall have neither the authority nor responsibility to enforce them. So that is a separate issue between the property owners and the developers. Any questions for me? Any questions for Paradise?

None at this time. if the uh applicant could please come forward and offer any answers or insights into um I think there were some questions um in general and then I think about the I guess outside of the tiein does the um on the issue that we're talking about today the maps that were maybe have changed there was some suggestion that those were different I think if you could review again um if it is in fact a as you have stated a reduction in homes and then I think there was um pricing as well right so if you all could cover pricing and materials and any changes around that c can I before we go question for Tommy on existing neighborhoods that we have that maybe have just a two entrance do we have something with this this density that's in the city with just two entrances

comparable and and you have to look at is I always look at it similar to a building. Where's your remote exit if you need to get out? And if you look in this particular instance, you've got while while you have this phase here, you only have one road coming into that phase. So this section down here, those other entrances up there aren't helping it. If if something were to happen, if there were to be a tree go across the road up there at the top, um public safety, EMS, nobody would have access to get to the back if you did that not have the connection with Pinion Road.

So by one road, we're not talking about Knob Cone and Martintown. You're talking about the entrance road into this community here, right? If if you if you look so if you all could please go ahead. If I'm just we could keep it down so that we could get an answer from Mr. Paradise. Yeah. When you look at what what's on the screen there at the top right where this phase starts that road's coming in. That's the only road coming in back here. There's not another road that goes back out that would hit Knob Cone and tie in there. So, if you called us acted everything up, you've got basically a dead end in there.

Okay. All right. Thank you. This I'm sorry. Go ahead. We're asking for the applicant to respond to

Yes. Um I just like to start by saying I mean in my responses I mean no disrespect to anybody in the crowd, Mr. Paradise. Um just some items may come out blunt. Um, but first of all, I just want to reiterate that our application tonight has nothing to do with the connection to Pinion Road. That is an old item that has been discussed numerous times at numerous meetings. It is a requirement by the city as a public safety concern. um regarding public safety. Um the develop the applicant would I will speak for them and say I don't they don't want that they don't neither want nor object of that entrance whether it's emergency only or full access as it's currently shown. Um, regarding traffic on Pinion Road, we have completed a traffic study and it was mentioned that it was not a state approved study. That study was approved and accepted by the SC DOT. Pinion Road is not a county-owned road. It's a stateowned road. It would be up to the state to make any improvements to that road if it were to fail from traffic generated from this development which is not expected based on the results of the traffic study. Traffic study shows no impacts to pinion or the intersection of pinion at five notch from the current condition. There was also some items mentioned on the road that there's not enough

property there to construct the road. That is not true. Um, this plan is generated from a recorded plat from 2010. Um, they mentioned some that there may have been a adjustment in the acreage of the parcel that was sold to Tetra Group, a couple hundredths of an acre. It it is possible for property lines like this to change. Property line here is the creek. Creeks often change when events like Hurricane Helen come and erode the banks and adjust the adjust the actual stream. So when the property lines the center line of a stream, it can change. Um when we met with the homeowners to discuss the out of goodwill met with the homeowner discussed the road installation the road can be installed on the property as shown. We did mention to them that an easement would be desired to take down and replant trees for them, which is not a requirement of code, but we would have wanted to get an easement to clear the trees so that the installation of the road does not impact the root root base and eventually kill the trees with time that are on the property line. So that was out of good faith trying to give a buffer so that they don't have to see the road from their house. Um as far as the densities go, um the original master plan allowed for higher densities than what we're proposing here. that it was equivalent to 23 units between pod C and D.

It's not to say that's actually what they could get, but if you were to give them this reduction in lot size, they could easily pack in some more units if the densities allowed them to, which is why we proposed the reduction. So, what you see here is what you get. Um were there what were the other points that you would like us to address? I think um some maybe from Miss McCarthy I think there were some questions around selling price um housing price materials.

Um so in our preliminary state more houses. As far as the homes go, um we will have products to product. And I Does anyone else had a notes or I think that covered the Are there any other questions with regards to this application from the commissioners? I would just like to say in closing that we have tried to do, but

we do want to Thank you. All right, commissioners. Just to review, this is for the plan development modification um as presented with regards to CN D. I'm All right. Sir, we we were getting into the um discussion section, but since you've gotten up and come, I'll go ahead and let you um make your comment, but this is kind of out of place, so I'm going to have to kind of pause where we were and let you make your comment and then we'll go back. But this is going to be the the last because we've closed out the public comment section. Go ahead, sir.

Is the meeting over? Not yet, sir. That's the reason I got up. Okay. Yes, sir. Sir, if you give me map up here. Sir sir, can you give us your name and your address? My name is Leon Walden. Okay. Thank you, Mr. West Avenue right back there. The last house on West Avenue. I've been in it since 1950. Yes, sir. That's who I am. Okay. Thank you.

I'm here for my sister, Dr. Celeste Spence and Wayne Spence who are 84 and 83 years old who at Santi and didn't have the slightest idea what's going on. They own Flash Court where it comes in to the service station next to Mr. Tinsley's at Five Knots Road and whatever y'all named the one with I think it's Knob Con or something now. Well, is that the road up there that comes out? It's a beautiful subdivision. I love it

for a trailer park, but I mean it's beautiful and everything about it. The gentleman's got down the man, it's wonderful. I've been waiting and waiting and waiting. But we have a planning commission down here just talking here. They ain't a soul up there know what's going on between here and there because you can't hear it. I've got $3,000 hearing aids in now and I can't even hear the gentleman that's trying to explain why the little lots are not big enough to put a dagum $300,000 house on. I believe that's what I was hearing because they won't be able to ride the bicycle beside it. Am I wrong?

So now where is the road? Is are we looking at the road up there that's coming down? Are we talking about the electrical power line that runs from up there? That's the only straight thing that I can see, but it's going to take some grading to make a road in there. Okay. So, sir, this this application has come in before the planning commission. That's right. That's why I'm here. Okay. It is not for the road issue. This is about the lot sizes for a buffer. Why did this thing here have all of this that just came out? So, so that is

about Yeah. the road that's coming down and the only road that I have known and I have been here for 85 years is the power line that runs down that you might be taking and run a road through. is in a different place. So, so sir, this is and maybe we can um have at the end of the meeting have you spend some time with Mr. Paradise and maybe with the applicant to make sure that you can hear us and understand what we're what we're talking about. I'm trying I'm trying to accommodate you, sir. I understand, but I can't hardly understand you. I I know. I I hate this and I'm not sure if we have uh how to to to solve for that.

Back down. Okay. So sir, let Mr. Paradise is going to talk. See if you can hear him better.

Is is there somebody from the newspaper here? The only reason I asked you this is I own the trashy trashy junk lot and mobile homes place this where the new exit three on my 20's going to be. And I almost get killed every time I'm coming out of the road that isn't as wide as from there to there. And before it was as wide as the entrance to the cemetery and the new sub. I will be happy to see. Okay. Thank you. All right. Let me know when there's something to be said.

All right. Thank you. All right. And we'll make sure that uh Mr. Paradise talks and so try to figure out a remedy for this, but Okay. All right. All right. So, um, commissioners, if we could get back to the application for plan development, modification, um, for the portions as referred to in the agenda for section C and D. All right. Any comments or discussion? And this is and again, the motion would be for recommendation to city council,

I guess. Could we would there be A because obviously their plan is not to have more homes in there, but I guess could we have it in writing saying, you know, we can where we will approve smaller lot sizes with the condition of keeping the the homes because I don't I just don't as we have seen, you know, you can come back later and want to change this and this. I just wouldn't lack verbiage in there to say we are going to hold you to this density

and this is the general development plan. um that verbiage could be put in there. You would need to say where you want that in there and what it is to say. And let me ask this because we the we have the reduced density that is proposed. Correct. Right. So would that does that not prevent it references like four and then 19 loss reduced density? So it's reduced density and it gives a new density figure. It's page six of 17. I think it's covered in here.

So there covered in there. Yeah. So the new Okay. If you could Yes. Just to clarify, we have proposed reduced densities. Okay. In the ordinance and narrative so that we can't build more homes than what you see, right? And that's the reduce from 3.0 to 2.9 2.6 It's on page six. Perfect. Okay. Thank you for that. All right. Any other questions? No, I like the idea of the tree buffer because that aligns with our next topic with the with the tree ordinance. So, um and it will hopefully help with road noise once the houses get up because we know remove those trees. It makes a difference.

Um All right. So, are there any other questions? If not,

I I just want to take a second to uh again address the crowd. I you know, we we hear you. We appreciate your passion, your concern, your protection of your property. I know you say we don't. Um but you have to know that your concern is outside of our purview for tonight. We can't do anything about this road. There's nothing that we can do to control this road. It's been approved. All we can do tonight is talk about the lot size that doesn't have any impact on your neighborhood. And we we're sorry that we can't. All I can say is as a council, as a commissioner, what you can do is go to your council representatives. You can ask for speed bumps and speed bumps and anything you can do to to minimize the traffic that's going because the road is coming and and we hate it for you. We honestly do. Um but uh um there's it's just out of our hands tonight.

So I'm sorry. I'm I'm I'm sorry. We we're I'm sorry. I I'm I'm sorry. We're in the middle of discussion and hacking a motion. I can't open it back up. So if we're going to call So

So again, these are again outside of our purview. This is we are not responsible. This is something that the city that you all will have to talk about. Um we again you have to talk to the city. Uh so Mr. We have a planning commission office, we have councils, we have a mayor. Um, and so again, this what we are getting ready to vote on is the plan modification. We hear you. We hear your concerns, but it is again outside of what we are allowed to do anything about. Okay.

All right. Just to add to that, um, and why you this was on the road. This was part of a 1986 plan development and then again discussed in 2002 and then again in 2023. So, this road was discussed in those previous meetings. Unfortunately, it's it's already been approved. And so,

so, all right. So, we're going to keep going with the um motion, please. If there's a motion to approve or either way, I need a motion on the floor. No, ma'am. I can't open back up. We're in the middle of a motion. I've got to finish our motion. If you feel free to talk to the developer afterwards, but we are in the middle of a motion. I can't open it back up for public hearing. Okay. So, I'm I'm

sorry. I'm sorry. We're going to have to continue. You can talk to developer or Mr. Paradise. If in the middle of the motion, if we could please have a motion with regards to this application, which is a modification on the lot sizes with the density that is reflected in the agenda. Do I have a motion to accept or and then we can vote however you all feel? I'll go ahead and make the motion for PDM26-001 plan development modification. Uh again, is to modify the plan development uh affecting 65.65 acres. Um and recommend as proposed. Second. Second. Okay. Any other conversation or discussion?

All those in favor, please say I.

I. All opposed. All right. Thank you. All right. Mr. Paradise, we have next up is the so the tree preservation discussion. So, if you could please go over that with us. That's a memorandum 26-008. And in that memorandum there, we we've talked about tree preservation for the last three months. And trying to put some stuff together that y'all may or may not want. Um, I came up with two recommendations. Um, you can do one, you can do the other, you can do none. You can send me back to the drawing board or you can do both. They don't, you know, um, this is just trying to capture what we thought y'all may have wanted. This one, the first one actually, um, Miss Baker found it from Tacoma, Washington. And what they do is they in incentivize the saving of larger trees. And and in this one and and in keeping with um what we had heard from Mr. Sheileely trying to keep it simple too. Um so in incentivize saving the large existing trees. I wouldn't recommend pines. Um and so the minimum require to be planted. The minimum allowed large tree is a 3-in caliber and that gives you equals 400 square ft of canopy cover.

Well, what we thought is if it's an existing large tree, this would be similar to a grand tree with the size. And we're looking at anything except a pine. If it was equal to or greater than 15 in diameter breast height, less than 24 in, instead of 400 square feet of canopy, you've already got the canopy there. So if they got four, you would bump that up to 500 square feet. Um, if it was greater than 24 in, it would be 600. square feet. Now, it may be y'all may want more, less, you know, but that's something that we put out there for discussion. And the other thing that um is if it's a large tree and it's over 24 in, you know, what if it exceeds you it the actual tree canopy is more than 600 square feet. So if it is then they give us that calculation and they would get that um as well. And then the other thing part of that is is it's required to be shown on the landscape plan. Tree protections required before they start grading and all the way through the construction process. And if they don't maintain that, they may very well lose that credit. So that's the first thought um that we had. The second one is do you want me to move on to the second or you want to discuss?

Let's pause for a second to see if there's discussion or questions around thoughts around the recommendation one which personally I like. Yeah. My discussion is I like it. Yeah. I like it as well. It doesn't give um developers teeth as far as saving trees within a existing buffer and calling those trees and count.

Yeah. Now, what what you would do is this is where I would fit this in at or where I suggested fitting this in is in a place where it could be used Say if it was um on a planning strip and it's in there, it could be used there. If it's in a parking lot, well, it could be used for the parking lot calculation. So that wherever that tree is, if it could be used to meet the criteria for that area, it could be fit in. That's what I wanted to make sure that was for that that specific area. We're going to count a buffer tree for overall canopy,

right? That Yeah, it would go toward the overall canopy, too. Um, remember in our code you don't use you've got canopy requirements here, canopy requirements here, and you don't mix them. So, but so wherever it was at, it would get credit for.

So, we may just need some language around with respect to the area located as we flesh that out. And then would we add because obviously we know if we damage root systems we need to be further out you know would we add a if we say we have a 500 square foot canopy you have to have a curb or you know diameter of 30 feet you know I don't know what that is do we need to put that in writing so we don't like know we're talking about the buffer and if they run over you know they're trying to accommodate for that because you can damage the trees. So actually reading in your in this recommendation. So yeah, it is um

It says protective barriers approved, but do we need to be specific? It it is one foot radius for every inch of DBH tree shall be divided within which paving grading or the storage of dirt, building materials, debris or other materials or other equipment shall not be allowed. So if it's a 24 inch diameter breast height, it goes 24 in or 24 feet out and circles around

and and nothing would be allowed in there. Any other comments or consideration for that? All right. So, um, one foot radius out per inch um to protect the tree. Any other any other on recommendation one? Okay, that's fair. If you could get with recommendation two, please. Go ahead, Miss Paradise. We we can't do that right now. We can talk if you want to wait and get people after the meeting, but we're we are this is not the public portion. We're discussing a recommendation for a tree ordinance at this point. So, I'm sorry. I'm not going to um open it back up right now, but go ahead, Mr. Paradise, if we could talk about recommendation.

Recommendation two. One of the things that we have is there's no buffer requirements between um residential and residential. And one of the things that we hear is residential, you know, the a subdivision comes in and clearcuts, right?

And they all come all the way up to the property line of the adjacent subdivision. Now, now, um what this does is one it is for subdivisions. I don't know how much of recommendation one you would really see home builders do. They just because of the nature of that type of development, but what this would do would it be would be a 25- foot undisturbed and that's an important word and undisturbed buffer around the whole thing. Uh this would be the adjacent subdivisions and the um along the street frontages. It's similar in scope as to what Columbia County has except Colombia County does not include the 25- foot buffer against other subdivisions as I went through it and as as I understood it. So that was an option that that I wanted to put out there for y'all. Um, it is something that we hear complaints about by the neighboring subdivisions. I think y'all heard it tonight. Um, and that would be a way that we may be able to address it in the future.

Just so I have, but then again, you know, it's just an idea just for clarification. So, if if we put this in and then they came to you because they weren't able to build a subdivision because this was going to get in the way, would they come to us and ask for a modification to It depends on the zoning. If it's a it's a planned development, yes. If it's R14, say, no, it would go to the BZA. Okay. And there they would be um the signs, the letters to anybody within 200 feet and a newspaper ad so that the public would be notified.

And I'll I'll throw this out as a former real estate agent and who worked for a builder when we would back those neighborhoods up to each other. I don't know if a 25 foot buffer for backtoback is that might be too much but from a you know like even talking about pinion people didn't know where their property lines were. They didn't know where their fence line was. They thought they own trees and you know you have to move fences or there was there was bad blood when that would happen. So, at a minimum, you know, you're you're taken away from your lot size and developers may not love that, but from a a neighbor standpoint, I like the idea of because it happened multiple times or they knew the property behind my neighborhood right now, property behind them was for sale, was going to be built one day and you don't own the trees. You don't own the trees. And but again, I I want to keep the trees, but I don't know if 25 feet I like the road frontage part. Um, I do like that for sound reasons, too. But neighborhood to neighborhood or back property line to back property line, maybe not 25 feet, but it would resolve layers of issues with that. And, you know, if there's another number, you know, that you want to plug in. Um, and just remember that this is common area. This is not on the lot. So, the lot size would not decrease. The lot size would still be 7,000 square feet in an R seven. It would not include any any of the portion of this buffer. But if if y'all have a want to keep it 25 along street frontage and just tell me the number that you want to go to on the other if you want to do with it at all

and it's on the exterior boundary. Um, so is that all exterior boundaries subdivision? Okay. Just I was making as it stands now it's all of them including roads, adjacent subdivisions. Is there any context for why it's 25 ft? I got it from Columbia County.

Okay. Yeah. And if you look at those buffers in Columbia County, you know, because that's deeper than a a standard garage if you think look visually. So, and those buffers at the front of the neighborhood, I think the 25 ft is sufficient, but again, we're backing up boundary stuff. I I don't know. Personally, I don't know if that's as much density as needed. As much or too much? I got I because I thought you were saying the 25 ft was too too much

too much to back up but it would solve you know neighborhood issues of why did you take them on trees and you didn't own them so we can take them but then that way it still gives the appearance that you know and then the property line issue could still come into play but less likely because if you're not taking down a tree you're not having to move fences and it's probably more prevalent people than people know um when you back into this area.

So, let me ask this. So, then ideally, what would you think would be sufficient if it wasn't 25? Not just you, anyone else who has thoughts and if it's and I think some of the 25 is ease of being on all sides, but um what do you all think visually in my mind? You know, is it 15 feet 25 feet? I just think it's too much all the way around. But I don't know if 10 ft's too small, 15 feet. And I'm just thinking from a builder developer, you know, if we're keeping the lot size the same, maybe 15 ft.

Yeah. I mean, I like the I like that in theory if we had this in already going on where we'd have 15 budding up to 15. Given that we haven't had this before and we're trying to put it in. I kind of like the 25.

It's just 25. In reality, when you look at these neighborhood, if you drive by Columbia County neighborhood, 25 ft buffer is significant. And again, we're we're talking about this because we want to maintain the trees. The buffer is above and beyond that I think too, you know, because we were talking more about saving the big mature trees. And I like the buffer to keep the green space look, which is what we've talked about is we we hear everyone saying stop cutting all the trees down. So that's why we're having this discussion. So how do we maintain and I from I think visually personally I like it better from a noise standpoint because if you're on a busier road, you know, like what we're talking about now, when you clear cut, you're going to hear that noise. So trees help they just help with that. So

um this is not extensive research but just from preliminary looking it looks like 14 to 15 ft of buffer will provide privacy both visually and by sound. So I don't know if that's worth looking into behind the houses and then around the exterior having 25 ft if that's I guess if 15t is enough to create a visual in an auditory buffer. So, so then there's two different So, let's let's go the first piece around. Um, so that would be talk. You would be suggesting having one set for um say the front maybe sides and then the portion. And again, it may be irregularly shaped. So, it's not But if there is a a border with another subdivision or other homes, then See, that could also be on the side. That could be on the front. I mean, so

what if you just made it that if any sides that border something in the R zoning can be between 15 and whatever and anything not zoned R would have to be 25 ft. Is that crazy? Paradise.

I think that would be doable. So does that sound like something? 15 for R, 25 for not not adjacent to our sounds. So if you could write that out and and maybe look at what that because that sounds good. Now make sure Well, and and I've got a question on that. Yeah.

All right. So, if it's a street frontage, is it still 25 ft or Okay. Because I think if we leave 25 ft, we're, you know, builders, developers are already having to shrink lots. We're talking about it tonight, you know, so we don't want to shrink too much because we want to make it reasonable and as affordable as possible, too. But um and then I'm just thinking if it's a plan development against another plan development, right? Well, so yeah. So you have both on both sides.

Yeah. But I just want to make sure that we also don't just say our so that it is some language around how we do it for plan developments as well. And that may be where it gets We'll see.

You don't know what's coming in the next plan development, right? So, um, and you may not as long as it's so that means it would be a minimum of 15 regardless. But absolute worst case, it may be somewhere that you wish you'd had 25, but would be 15. So, let me recap. Um, y'all, recommendation number one, y'all are pretty good with.

Yes. Recommendation number two would be 15 feet twin and R 25 ft on a road frontage and 25 ft if it's a non R if it's adjacent to something not not a residentially zone. Now remember when you say the R U um that puts it in a residential zoning district. Yeah, I'm going down but it may not be a residential use. Just so you have that. Okay? Because what we want to say is if it's going to be up against another home,

right? Or a lot that will be sold to a homeowner. But in terms of the code, how do we say that? Are are you wanting to say adjacent to a residential use? Yes. Yes. Or property zone or or vacant lot that's zone residential. I think that might and then if it's a non-residential use, you go to the to 25.

Okay. That way, and I'm and I'm thinking it could be a church or a school or something else in an R zone next door. Does this create a situation where somebody develops a neighborhood, half of it is not currently Rzzon, they have to put up a 25 foot buffer. Those folks come back later, get it reszoned to make it residential, and then they're adding a 15oot buffer on top of the 25 foot buffer that's already there. It could, if I'm if I'm tracking right, of course. Then again, um I always say they can they could certainly Ask for

ask for variance. I mean that's kind of above and beyond common sense. Yeah. the goal of being the buffer. But yeah, since over I like the idea of the credit too, like you were talking about with the, you know, over planting if we're going to save the queen trees and Yeah. I think

All right. So, all hearts and clear all hearts and minds clear on recommendation number two. Mr. Paradise, go take a stab at it. Let's say that. And then we will um revisit it. so that um we can proceed to to getting grand protection and mix one to you know that wasn't commercial corridor I didn't feel like that was the guidance that I had gotten so I didn't do anything on that we talked more about how to reward people that were yeah going forward and we didn't um

so we also talked about then you know the measurement and enforcement and so I think is there a particular so is there something that you would that you have in mind with that question I guess is what I'm trying to as I ride around North Augustine I look at the trees that I would consider grand trees and majority of them are in our downtown commercial areas um big diodor cedar massive oak trees Those are the ones that I would protect more than those. Are these on developed lots or undeveloped acreage? Both.

Um, but even if somebody were to come to buy a current develop lot, redevelop, tear down a home and put in a parking lot in our middle of our downtown, I might All right. Um because well some of the examples that we had prior specific to like grand trees and I think there were some wording in some of the proposals that address you know certain caliber canopy. Yeah. Well, but what hap some of what um I guess was a part of discussion last time with the landscape architect was also some of the language that and some of the language that we currently have around canopy and kind of merging it. So it wasn't so we hadn't just been identifying by tree type. Um and then also just the enforcement piece of it and who was defining the trees and who was going out and measuring and all of that. And I don't know if there is a way to define grand trees um because you all have very specific examples in mind, right? But how do we translate that into something that is operational

and enforceable oak? But you're and you're proposing that we that we would say that specifically for certain zones like downtown mixuse and downtown. Okay. I I think that is more tenable than it sounds because those are such small zones. We're not talking like residential like you've got a middle of a res and so I think having a developer be required to do a tree survey in downtown mixed use one and two is not out of the question.

Go ahead. in I think we the reason I brought this up we when I lived in Aken we did make a change and there was something it was along those lines there was a commercial development that they had to shift some things around to save the the sole grand tree that was on the lot and it was a massive oak tree so um and it it worked it worked out fine they just had to make a slight adjustment but it saved that tree so I I think it's going to be few and far between but if we can be more specific about it in whatever we write I I would say we we add it in there. So would you mind repeating that Commissioner Harrison what you so Miss Paradise can maybe add

18 or 24 inches I don't know a grand tree to be determined but any oaks cedars anything other than a pine greater than 18 to 24 in downtown mixed use one and mixeduse 2 shall be protected as determined by Tree survey is what you're doing. Tree survey. Well, tree survey, I mean, just says, "Hey, it's there."

Um, all right. So, are you wanting to say is it's a grand tree and it's there. um if it is on a developed property and the owner takes it down that that would be prohibited or are you going to say that if it is being redeveloped that it comes into play and are you saying like you can't touch it or are you saying there's just bit better or different incentives like with the other I'm open for

because I personally don't think that we should tell a homeowner they can't cut down a tree on their property that they own. Well, and and that was another thing is do you want to make it so that it's just nonresidential? Well, I was in downtown. Well, there is residential in downtown, I guess. Yes. But yeah, I don't know. I know. Good discussion. I I I think maybe you could just throw it in like with recommendation number one of you maybe the incentive is different or or just continues on with the bigger tree or something like that. I don't know I know what you're talking about

medical bank or something. Yeah. the driveway had to be split around it rather than going through and they had to do

and and here here's my only fear with with the downtown mixed use and I'm private property rights like I get that. So do we say you know we have an ordinance that we want to protect trees of this width whatever that looks like. Um obviously if they're diseased or there something like that the homeowner can say hey we we got to take it down. The flip side to that and and that's that's common sense. I get that. The flip side to that is my little fear is if we just make it commercial is we obviously all went through a hurricane. Um there are people that will have no trees in their yard for the rest of their lives. And so if somebody moves into a residential and there's a beautiful 100 foot canopy tree, they're like it's got to go. And that's part of our community that we're we're really trying to discuss to save. So, um, and I'm hearing that from people, too, is like, you know, all the trees got to go and and that we've gone through something and that's human nature. So, do we do we need to do a little bit to say if it's of a certain size, just our ordinance is we got to have a compelling reason to let you take it down. But, and I I get when it's your property, I get it. But

when I think giving the incentives like that gives people like if it's worth the extra money it might cost if we cut it down, it's worth that for my safety or peace of mind, then that's up to them. But make it enticing enough to want to keep it that kind of does our part in protecting it without necessarily taking somebody's rights. Yeah. So again, so you're you're on the side of the um incentivization, but I like it. But but that being a core as opposed to it being an ordinance that

but that also then goes to newer things, right? And I I think they're just talking about so if somebody buys a mixed use a residential home decides that they want to put a small bank building right there. There's a big oak tree. There's no I mean you can incentivize it but they're not going to say yes, right? Because it's small lot. It's that one commercial shot. You all are saying that um they shouldn't be able to take that tree down, but you could just as easily have it not be a bank, but another homeowner who buys that same home, that same lot and decides that

and also you got to look at like if there's a piece of property and there's this wonderful beautiful tree right in the middle of it, if we say you can't cut it down, that that property is useless for anything ever. Well, and I obviously for and I'll just speak to builder developers and just my experience. If it's within a footprint of making it an unusable lot, then then the trees got to go. I mean, but if there's, you know, within a certain obviously if it's a foot from the edge of a house or a building, it I mean, that's just plus your root system's going to get destroyed when you go in there and do it anyway. So if if it makes the lot unusable then I think we have to be reasonable and say no we we it if you can shift a building and you're set maybe we do a little variance on a setback or something if we can move it back five feet and we have plenty of that circumference you know radius we were calculating

with a bigger tree some of these trees are 60 in wide right and though we also to me if you're writing code you don't want you know half the lives has it come before like it to have to go for a variance. Right. I Right. Right. So, how do we think about

I and I just I'll just go back again to working for a builder developer that we would go and have raw land and have all the trees and we could get a plat a proposed plat and you can walk out there and go not in the footprint not in footprint in the footprint. you you can pretty clearly see what and it's probably less trees than what you think that would be impacted. I I think when you're talking about raw land now existing stuff like what you're talking about that's you see the tree probably um but I I don't from a code or whatever you know if it makes the lot not buildable then then I think the treere's got to go but I I just think there's a like what we're talking about I think there's a compromise they just have to shift a building a little bit and and it was fine and they saved the tree So, I just I think it's usually clear once you set your plat, you can kind of I'll speak for myself. Um I'm a tree hugger. The developer I used to work for, I went and marked the trees against his um he did not want me to do it, but when the guy comes out there with the big truck to cut the trees down, they were marked. He doesn't know. He doesn't know who put the tape on there. And I would get a like, who marked those trees? And be like, I don't know. And so the tree stayed because they're not sending the equipment back out. And it was never impeding of the footprint of a house because I knew where the property was. And it wasn't tons of trees. It might have been five trees. But people are like, "Oh, we love these big beautiful trees." And no one ever asked to cut them down.

We just need to send the air out to all the new I would love to do. I would love to do it. Go ahead. On the other end of that, and I'm just going back to what Mr. Sheily had talked about about the grading and the necessary grading because the hills and stuff we have here in North Augusta and you know the good soil being gone. Um you know

and again with a when you know what you're looking at when you see a topo map or a plat map you you you know if we've got to do a swell or something like that like you know that trees got to go. And um one of the comments a couple months ago was like, "Oh, we save these trees and we got to cut them down." And I I literally I don't know, I think I sold 900 homes. I think there was one tree we had to cut down in a and that was a huge tree. And everyone else complimented those trees. But again, from great again, if it makes it an unusable, unbuildable lot, then then the trees got to go. But I I I think that's more an exception probably.

So we still need to give paradise of guidance for mixed use one and two for what we would like to take a stab at. Not that we have to agree because again um if it is what mentioned around 184 um is that property is that current res if we agree that that's a grand tree in mix downtown the next piece of that is then what right

right and and right so is that is that home owner only is that commercial use I'm a fan of if you're in that zone, it it has to be approved if it's over a certain amount because is it is it just I don't like it. That's one thing. But is it diseased or is it is it something impeding something? But I Yeah. So that's my

So everyone currently in downtown want to remove backyard to 24 we say 24 in I mean is 18 too small you know and we're small yeah that's what I'm saying you know and we're kind of talking grand entry we're talking you know so I think 18

and I think most people that move downtown do it because they like that, but you're going to have the folks I think that it's on a resale property that would come in on a residential and be like, "Don't trees." So, that would be the one. Um, for what it's worth, Roy in his presentation to us define the grain trees as DBH 24 in. So, pine magnolia, but maybe so not pine but magnolia. So, for our woods.

Yeah. And I know that's hard to because who who does is code enforcement just they do your grass is too tall. What? Okay. They would um we I would probably write that with approval by the planning director and then and y'all push back if you think but then that would give me I could reach out to Roy. I could reach out the code enforcement. I could go look at it. Sometimes dead disease and dying and you ride out there and you look at it and you go, "Yeah, I don't need nobody else tell me."

Sure. Or um the other thing is is you know what you're going to get into is um you know it's impacting foundation or it's impacting the sewer line. Sure. That those kind of things and the that's where um it's been my experience the horiculturist quite as firm a ground because the treerees healthy and everything's good. Um, anyway, unless y'all have an issue with that and that would put it back on me to make the be the bad guy one way or the other. I like that.

And on the subject, off the subject, obviously with the growth that we're going to have with rooftops, is another code enforcement officer in the queue anywhere like budget-wise? Okay. And and I let me say this about that since you brought it up. Code enforcement tends to be on the older parts of town. That's where we do most of our work. So the newer subdivisions, you know, other than doing the landscape inspections for the cos, it's not an issue.

Oh, just because we require so much landscaping, which I know the builders and developers don't like compared to our neighboring counties. But then on the flip side is if it's not maintained, that's just my Yeah. And I I see a lot of that on the commercial side. So, and I know that's probably just staff issue. So for all hearts and minds clear on we like recommendation one recommendation um two we talked about some changes and then we have added and asked for an additional around grand trees and hardwoods greater than 24 and mixed downtown one and two correct yes okay making sure I'm clear

but all right just to throw another wrinkle in the in the thing all right so if you're looking at I'm going to Well, all right. The Hobby Lobby shopping center, Kasa the pizza. There's this massive diodor in the front right on the road is beautiful. What could we do to save I mean to prevent the like what if a new owner comes in commercial and wants to develop that property and cut that tree down? Is that even outside of chaining myself to the tree, you know, type of is there anything that this planning commission could do? I don't I don't know. I We say downtown mixed juice one and two, but then that tree comes to mind. I'm sure there are plenty others within town.

Then do we add commercial zoning? Because I think that is the original North Augusta Christmas tree. There's lights in that tree if you look at it really close. Next time you drive by there, I think they've grown into the tree. So let's do this. Let's Mr. Paradise come back with a version of the three that we have requested. Okay. If Commissioner Harson, you could chew on I can certainly do that. What that could look like,

right? And is that a zone issue? Is that a commercial? So, if you had to write that out and not So, let me let me ask you and challenge you to think outside of just that one beautiful scene. I know. I know. Right. like but what but what would that in a so if you could ordinance look like if you could chew on that um for us and Mr. Harson please feel free to reach out to I'll send you want to discuss it talk through it all right staff report Mr. Fair enough.

Um, actually we've um the plans for North Augusta Elementary has been approved and the auditorium for North Augusta High School have been approved. Both of their site plans and I've got some other stuff there, but that's something. Well, as always, we thank you and your team for um all of the work that you all do for um North Augusta and our citizens. And we uh appreciate everyone. And again, thank you commissioners for your time and your work. And um