[0:06] There we are.

[0:33] I'm no cause anything I can help with.

[1:12] I can feel it.

[1:14] Like you're on one go.

[1:20] Yeah.

[1:26] You're on one go.

[1:29] Yeah.

[1:29] You're on one go.

[1:29] We're on one go.

[1:32] We don't know if we should push through this.

[1:34] I think that's good.

[1:35] I think that's good.

[1:36] I think that's good.

[1:38] It's a pain.

[1:39] I think that's kind of a shame.

[1:43] What's your last name?

[1:47] Gil.

[1:51] He's out of jail.

[1:53] Yeah.

[1:54] He's out of jail.

[1:56] Okay.

[1:58] Okay.

[1:59] Thanks.

[2:00] Thank you.

[2:01] Thank you.

[2:04] Thank you.

[2:06] Thank you.

[3:07] I'm going to put a record on the side.

[3:12] I'm going to put a record on the side.

[3:15] I'm going to put a record on the side.

[3:16] I can't see you.

[3:22] Oh, that's not a great memory.

[3:27] I have 17.

[3:31] Oh, I must be out there all gone.

[3:36] I can run up here really quickly and make some more but people can also kind of write on their phone and there's that

[4:14] I'm gonna grab you a plug-in.

[4:19] Actually I'm going to use your phone.

[4:22] Oh, it's no use here.

[4:24] I don't know what this is.

[4:26] I don't know what this is.

[4:28] I don't know.

[4:28] Oh, I don't know.

[4:31] Oh, so we can feel it.

[4:33] Do you hear the parer?

[4:35] I can't hear the parer.

[4:36] I can't hear the parer.

[4:38] Yeah, I can hear the parer.

[4:44] We can put it in the movie.

[4:46] Oh, great.

[4:48] Oh, oh, no.

[4:48] Yeah, that's better, I think that's better.

[4:51] Yeah, that's better.

[4:52] Point broader.

[4:53] Can you paint?

[4:54] Can you take that piece of gun?

[4:55] Sure, men are there.

[4:57] All right.

[4:57] You got that piece? Yes.

[5:22] Good evening. Good evening. I'd like to welcome you to our September, 2020-6,

[5:31] If you're a key county planning commission public hearing we're all seem to be here in attendance, and so just a few things before we get started.

[5:42] If you wish to speak in favor of opposition to us tonight and you're not the owner of the applicant,

[5:49] those who speak in opposition must file a campaign disclosure and file it.

[5:55] If you haven't, can you Morgan, could you weigh that to us? Do you have it?

[5:59] I don't have a copy of the form.

[6:03] Chris, did you have that in the back?

[6:05] OK, so it'll be in the back and if you bring it forward,

[6:08] the campaign disclosure.

[6:11] The applicant and its supporters will have 10 minutes to speak,

[6:18] followed by the opposition, which will also have 10 minutes to speak.

[6:21] And so if you wish to speak, please try to not repeat what other people

[6:27] said in front of you because we are going to try to keep this 10 minutes. We are starting late again.

[6:34] So we want to try to move this efficiently as possible. We want everything to be heard of course,

[6:40] but we do want to try to keep our protocol of 10 minutes for the applicant and 10 minutes in

[6:47] opposition. So when you come to the podium, please state your name and address for the record,

[6:52] and we'll go from there and we can start with our first case.

[6:58] Do you want to do the approval of minutes?

[7:00] Oh, excuse me.

[7:01] Absolutely.

[7:02] We have the, I'd skip this.

[7:06] I'm sorry about that.

[7:09] Let's talk, let's look at the public hearing, hearing minutes of August 4th,

[7:17] I think there's been a number of corrections provided to staff at the email and those have been accepted by the staff.

[7:28] So is there any other additions that haven't been made to the staff?

[7:33] You got the ones I sent you.

[7:35] Yes, I believe so.

[7:39] Okay.

[7:55] So we have them all.

[7:57] Okay.

[7:57] Thank you.

[7:58] So with that, I'll entertain a motion to accept the meeting minutes as amended.

[8:06] I'll make a motion to approve the meeting minutes as amended.

[8:10] I'll make a motion for approval by commissioner below.

[8:13] Second by commissioner dolls.

[8:18] Any discussion?

[8:19] All in favor?

[8:20] It's please indicate by saying aye.

[8:23] Your pose.

[8:24] Passive unanimously.

[8:26] Moving on to the work session minutes of August 17.

[8:32] I believe we are in the same situation as some minor edits that were submitted to staff,

[8:38] and those have been corrected for the record.

[8:41] Anybody else have anything that has not been submitted?

[8:45] Here, now I want to entertain a motion to accept those minutes as amended.

[8:51] I'll make a motion to approve.

[8:52] I'm going to put my button and second my commissioner below.

[8:57] I'll in favor of that motion.

[8:59] Please indicate by saying aye.

[9:00] Aye.

[9:01] Aye.

[9:02] No.

[9:03] Upscan.

[9:04] Upscan.

[9:05] And as commissioner being his aunt.

[9:10] Sips thing.

[9:13] OK.

[9:14] Now, I'll get back to where I was.

[9:16] I jumped the gun.

[9:18] We'll have our first case.

[9:20] All right.

[9:22] I will close.

[9:26] So the first case that we have on the agenda is will

[9:32] I'm sorry if I've messed that up, but yeah, it's probably, it's a

[9:39] rezoning case on Knoxburg, triway for two, I'm sorry, it's a special

[9:43] use permit case on Knoxburg, triway for 2.2 acres.

[9:47] It's in District 3, it's for gas station with additional retail and they

[9:53] had two concurrent variances requested.

[9:56] I do want to let you know.

[10:00] That the applicant between the, between the work session and now, the applicant is requested post-pone the public hearing on this case to November.

[10:11] We found a significant conflict on their site plan that's a problem for two of the zoning conditions from that 2008 case.

[10:23] I can go into more detail if it'd like, but they would really like to postpone the public hearing altogether.

[10:30] It would be re-advertised and depending on the scope of the changes to the site plan,

[10:36] we may need to notify everybody who received an invitation for the community input meeting as well.

[10:43] Because that's a change to the site plan.

[10:45] So it will be re-advertising.

[10:46] Yes, and we'll have a work session, I guess, in October, by the way.

[10:53] Okay.

[10:55] Any questions of this noise?

[10:59] Okay.

[11:00] So the applicant has requested a postponement to November 3rd,

[11:04] 2026.

[11:05] There will be re-advertising.

[11:08] There will be community involvement information exchange meeting.

[11:13] Well, I have another work session on this case looking for potentially a new site plan and so forth.

[11:20] It represents the conditions potentially of the 2008 or that, I guess, I could end up in other variants of the class.

[11:30] Could either, could either wind up with some variances, or maybe have to tack on some modification to zoning conditions?

[11:36] Okay.

[11:39] So, is there a motion to accept the postponement?

[11:41] Make a motion do it at the postponement.

[11:45] All right.

[11:46] I'll second it.

[11:49] Commissioner Gill.

[11:51] Motion may pass.

[11:52] May about commissioner below.

[11:54] Seconded by committee Gill.

[11:57] All those in favor and at motion.

[11:59] Please indicate.

[12:00] It's by saying aye.

[12:02] Aye.

[12:02] Be opposed.

[12:03] Motion passes unanimously.

[12:06] All right.

[12:09] Let's go to our second case.

[12:50] I

[12:54] think there was an attempt to notify these folks ahead of time, and it was an unfortunate

[13:00] thing that they waited to almost add a clock, but I think just for everyone's information

[13:06] There wasn't a doubt to notify the public.

[13:10] Yes.

[13:13] And unfortunately, I left on the mistake on this slide.

[13:17] This is the next case is John Lloyd for LDS arms,

[13:23] Baldwin Highway, property that we've seen many times.

[13:29] They are requesting to rezone 40 acres for light industrial.

[13:36] they are going from our 80 li within the city limits of ball ground. They specifically said

[13:45] the use was going to be a flex for warehouse. So ignore the details of the request. I failed

[13:52] to get that updated from the work session slides.

[13:59] This is the general vicinity of that property.

[14:02] The parcels in question are highlighted in a light blue color. It is this property is located

[14:09] between the Sage Hill development and the Marble Tree,

[14:14] residential subdivision off of Baldwin Highway to the North and West is also the

[14:21] 575 right away.

[14:27] This is what the property looks like today.

[14:31] There are two kind of wooded stream corridors. We'll see that on the site plan a little bit more detail.

[14:40] There's also kind of see a pond in the middle, but there's property that's been used for pasture as well.

[14:51] Here's what the zoning looks like in this area.

[14:56] There would remain some R80 pieces in the cat.

[15:00] County here, as well as, you know, you'll see the L.I. on the other side of Baldwin Highway, the two city properties on either end, as well as the city as annexed the 575 right away.

[15:18] This is what the future development map looks like. Remember, we have a kind of a shared map with the city, a ballground, so they have this area categorized as neighborhood living.

[15:33] And here's the site plan that the applicant provided with their application.

[15:39] You can see more detail of those stream corridors that I was talking about.

[15:43] Those have really been over time.

[15:46] Those have been really difficult thing to work.

[15:49] Work around when they've had residential applications for this property.

[15:58] The building is kind of in two pieces and then there's some loading ducks in this corner.

[16:04] on the north end.

[16:10] The items that the staff identified in our staff report,

[16:15] you know, the city is working with Georgia power

[16:18] to annex, we go back to the map.

[16:21] There's a piece up here directly north of this site

[16:26] that would become an island if it's not annexed into the city,

[16:31] but the city is already working with Georgia power

[16:33] to resolve that issue.

[16:34] And we also noted that the property is going to be served by city, water, and sewer.

[16:42] In support of this application, you know, this is on a busy area.

[16:49] You have 575 on the north side as well as ballground highway to the south.

[16:55] That definitely is a high traffic area that might support that light industrial.

[16:59] There's a existing light industrial within the county across, across ballgun highway, and then the streams are really providing a significant amount of buffering, far exceeding that required 50 foot buffer between L.I. and our residential zoning district.

[17:21] In opposition or things that don't support this proposal is that the light and industrial use and zoning is not really consistent with that character area from the future development map.

[17:38] And then as well, you know, there's going to be adjacent residential development to this property. Those are existing neighborhoods.

[17:49] So, that might be a source of conflict.

[17:54] So, those are kind of the highlights of this case.

[17:57] I think it's kind of the end of my presentation.

[18:03] I think we're ready for the public hearing.

[18:05] Any questions from Australians?

[18:07] Just done?

[18:08] Thank you.

[18:10] The applicant will come forward, please.

[18:18] Good evening for the record.

[18:19] My name is Park South with Sam's Locker and Huff.

[18:21] And I'm going to make a short presentation and then reserve some additional time to respond to

[18:27] any comments or concerns from the community.

[18:30] I wanted to go through some of the elements that you're staffed at a good job of going through.

[18:35] The first is just recognition of this property being between background highway in 575.

[18:43] There's a mixture of different uses in this corridor area where you have some industrial light and industrial general commercial type.

[18:51] use is and then you have some residential uses. The county's land use plan is actually gone back

[18:56] and forth. At one time this was workplace center and then there were some concerns about

[19:02] some areas that maybe should be residential rather than a workplace center. So then the county

[19:08] actually amended their plan, full-out workplace center, which would have been conducive with

[19:13] light industrial, but in a neighborhood living, which is density of update in its breaker.

[19:17] So, that my client has had this property for many years and proposed many different versions of developing the property.

[19:25] One of which is density consistent with residential density consistent with that neighborhood living in the county.

[19:33] And then there were concerns about too many houses in the traffic at residential producers.

[19:39] and so there was the general consensus that light industrial creates an opportunity for jobs

[19:45] on this site and that the quite frankly, the layout with the way we're able to do the layout.

[19:53] With the stream buffers, we can have a natural barrier between us and the adjacent residential properties.

[20:00] And that's the reason why this proposals, before either day, it's a light industrial use. As you can see, as you enter off of a ballground highway, you have your parking for customers and employees, and then that would be your front of house if you will, your office area. And then behind that is your more flex space for industrial uses. As you probably know, you actually have some higher tech industrial uses that are coming in this area.

[20:30] proximity to the airport, proximity to good power source, proximity to access to all the infrastructure

[20:38] that you need for quality, higher tech, industrial is in this area and attracting good businesses.

[20:46] And that's what this proposal would do is be a great location to attract good business businesses.

[20:53] They can take advantage of the access to the inter-states access to all-ground highway

[20:58] And that's the site plan we've got before you today, so I'm going to now

[21:03] reserve whatever time I have left and if there's community concerns I will address those two

[21:09] Before you step on any questions

[21:14] Point question I had any specific use at this point in time

[21:20] No, it is,

[21:24] I've learned different businesses have different kind of how things work.

[21:29] Light industrial spaces are almost all speculative when they're built, and then you have

[21:35] right now.

[21:36] There's light industrial uses that are wanting 100,000 square feet that's available right

[21:41] now.

[21:42] This is not available right now, but that's how that business works.

[21:45] So it's not as much when they want it, they want it right then.

[21:50] So it'll be built and then be built.

[21:53] So the eventual builder or user will respect these buffers.

[22:00] Okay, so he's going to basically sandwich himself in between the two strings.

[22:05] All right, thank you.

[22:08] All right, anyone here to speak in favor of the application?

[22:12] Please step forward.

[22:17] Seeing none, is there anyone wishing to speak in opposition?

[22:21] I

[22:25] see a nine, I guess we'll close.

[22:29] I could respond.

[22:30] No, thank you.

[22:31] You can respond.

[22:34] And quite frankly, I, as a lawyer, of course, I could respond.

[22:38] And my response is that sometimes the lack of people saying something speaks more than saying something.

[22:46] In the fact that you don't have, and you know, you've done several cases up and down the section of a

[22:52] around highway and usually people are concerned when things don't seem to fit in the fact

[22:56] that you don't have people here are opposed.

[22:59] Let's you know that there's been some dialogue on Mr. Barnes went to a community input meeting

[23:05] that we had and we've talked to all the neighbors and so I hope that they're not being

[23:09] here as an indication to you as it is to me that this makes sense that fits in the area

[23:15] and as a good use and we ask that you recommend approval is to city of

[23:21] ballground as light dust, drill, screw, deposit.

[23:25] Thank you.

[23:27] Yes, that will close the public comment and open it up for discussion.

[23:33] Questions?

[23:34] I'll start the discussion on this since it's my area up there, but I do want to hear

[23:39] feedback from Russa, Planning Commission members, if needed.

[23:45] So this has been an area as he said it's had different zoning that's been recommended for

[23:54] from heavy industrial to density housing, so to work down to where we are now on light

[24:00] industrial.

[24:01] Baltimore City ballgrounds trying to get a little bit more space and not lose that opportunity

[24:05] to have light industrial on our area, so this is a good fit on that highway there and as you

[24:14] that expanded and came into the city a while back so they're right across the street

[24:21] in some other light industrial and how this worked out even.

[24:26] I think better for the city in the area also is that the stream buffers

[24:31] keep a nose intact and not crossing over into each other if it had been homes

[24:37] that would not have occurred or be a lot more.

[24:41] You know homes pushing up on the north end and the south end.

[24:46] So with that, I think right now that this is a better fit for what's been recommended

[24:52] over the time have been in there, but again I'd like to, before emotion comes up.

[25:00] If there's any other comments or feedback.

[25:08] That's not going to be anything you just said. For the record, if we don't know what industrial

[25:15] I like to know that we keep the buildings between the streambuffers, so there's no chance

[25:19] that something is changed all the sudden that whole parcel gets built to be very edges.

[25:26] I want to protect the boundaries that they are trying to offer us now. I want to kind of

[25:30] written into knowing that will be sustained to whatever happens in the future, knowing that

[25:34] it's speculated, build, I want to have connect the control over that.

[25:38] Now, I understand, and if anything changed on that anyhow, it would have to come back through

[25:45] the process again for whatever's on there, but that's what we've got now is what we feel

[25:50] as a good commitment to it.

[25:53] And neighbors spoke to some of the surrounding neighbors, and that was a better fit for them

[25:59] as well, that they enjoy.

[26:02] I think it should be noted, if you had a,

[26:06] looking at the entire site and it's entirely the 40 plus acres.

[26:10] If you had a residential development,

[26:14] even of moderate density,

[26:16] most likely you're having roads crossing

[26:18] from one side to the other to fully access the site.

[26:22] Now those roads would be exempt from my buffer requirements,

[26:26] but they would still depending on how you built

[26:28] the roads that we acquire, Corps of Indian Air permits, federal permits.

[26:35] So with this approach, it's, it's, you're going to forego that, I'll, that problem.

[26:44] So I would agree with the comments made to this point.

[26:50] You know, this is, this is a, it's a difficult piece of property.

[26:54] I mean, that's, that's been the problem in the past, as I understand it, you have two

[27:00] streams, there's expanse, there's permitting time frames that are involved in developing

[27:08] this.

[27:10] So, you know, the county has a vision for light and some industrial along this corridor.

[27:17] Here we have an opportunity.

[27:18] The city is essentially sharing that vision and we have a proposal that seems to fit the

[27:29] and respects the fact that we've got two streams crossing it.

[27:34] It seems like it seemed like it's a good fit to me.

[27:40] I've moved forward and I make a motion to approve this to L.I.

[27:49] Commissioner Barn makes a motion to approve.

[27:50] Is there a set?

[27:52] I'll go with a commissioner and the light on the first.

[27:57] All right.

[27:57] Those, and is there any discussion on that motion?

[28:04] Any further discussion?

[28:06] All in favor, please indicate by saying aye.

[28:09] Aye.

[28:09] Any opposed?

[28:11] Motion carries unanimously.

[28:31] Our next case is case number 260900.

[28:37] This is Karen Lance for Tony Bittle.

[28:40] It's a 5.91 acre piece of property on herd road.

[28:46] They're requesting to reason on the property from R80 to AG so that it can be added with the rest of the farm property that Mr. Little owns.

[28:56] This is in the Commission District 1.

[29:03] Here's kind of an overall vicinity map.

[29:08] This is, you know, heard road, heads almost directly towards the airport from the roundabout

[29:15] at the end of technology, which Parkway, this property is about halfway between that roundabout

[29:22] and lower Bethany Road.

[29:25] So, you know, the pink that you kind of see, this dark pink, those are all areas, neighborhoods

[29:31] that are in the city, but this is kind of on the edge of that.

[29:35] It's still within the growth boundary, but it's on the way to the airport.

[29:45] There's a closer view, currently the property is fairly wooded.

[29:51] Mr. Little has a lot of pasture on his property.

[29:57] The zoning map in this area.

[30:00] It has a mixture of AG and RAD. There's AG across the street, Mr. Little's properties AG already, but then there's

[30:12] some RAD to the south and west of this property.

[30:19] The future development map puts this property in

[30:22] suburban growth. But it is direct, you know, right on the line with the workplace center that we have

[30:29] located around the airport.

[30:35] Here is the survey that the applicant provided.

[30:38] If the property, there's a stream in this southeast

[30:45] corp, like edge of the property.

[30:48] I believe that stream or that ditch kind of becomes the property

[30:51] line for a little bit, and then there's some drainage

[30:54] easements that kind of cross the property as well.

[31:02] So, from the staff report, you know, as I mentioned, stormwater had comments about the original site plan,

[31:10] but those changes have been incorporated into that revised plan that I just showed you.

[31:15] Things that are kind of in support of this application, you know, suburban growth.

[31:21] While it's primarily focused on residential, it does encourage preserving green spaces as transitions between residential areas and active agriculture.

[31:32] In addition, there's existing AG properties along herd road in opposition, you know, the agricultural

[31:41] uses are not particularly supported by its firm growth character area or the workplace

[31:46] center in this, you know, it's kind of the awkward situation where this gets combined, the overall

[31:54] property will kind of straddle, straddle the line between those two character areas.

[32:00] So that's the end of my presentation.

[32:02] I think we're ready for a public hearing.

[32:04] The question.

[32:05] I've got a question.

[32:06] Did the heart have a chance to look at this?

[32:10] Um, I don't believe so.

[32:13] Because it looks to me like the properties got a lot of trees on it.

[32:16] Are there any specimen trees on there that have to be protected?

[32:19] They weren't required to create an existing site resources map because they're not proposing the construction of any

[32:26] building or anything like that.

[32:28] That's why you know, so they can just clear up all the trees and.

[32:32] Well, I mean, there are agricultural exemptions in the tree ordinance for the creation

[32:37] of pasture and agricultural land juices.

[32:42] That's why I was going to mention the exemption.

[32:45] Oh, don't go ahead.

[32:46] Okay.

[32:48] Okay.

[32:49] Any other questions?

[32:52] All right.

[32:52] If the applicant will step forward.

[33:01] Good evening.

[33:01] my name is Karen Lance. Thank you for having me tonight. My office address is 2288

[33:07] Mary at a highway here in Canton. Thank you for allowing me to speak and present the

[33:11] rezoning case of 5.9 one acres adjacent to 250 herd road on behalf of Mr. Little. He is on

[33:18] the property adjacent to this, this hundred acre farm that is currently zoned AG since late

[33:24] 70s. He recently purchased the subject property, which I can go back. How do I know that one

[33:35] there?

[33:37] Just recently purchased this 5.9-1 acres to add to the existing form, the property that we are requesting to

[33:44] zone is currently zone are 80 and we would like to add it to the farm enlarging the hay

[33:50] production area that he currently has. So if you see here on the survey this strip right

[33:56] here for some reason was taken off years ago and put with this. So we're adding that extra

[34:02] road frontage to the existing farm and adding this to the the hundred acres that we already have.

[34:09] And as Margaret mentioned, it would not be conducive to have this is AG and this is R80.

[34:19] Currently, it is suburban growth and we are workplace center, but there's no intention

[34:25] for this to be a hundred-lot subdivision or a industrial park or anything, it's going to

[34:30] be a farm as it has been.

[34:32] I've got a couple of questions.

[34:38] So Mr. Little is on this property roughly 50 years.

[34:42] More than 50 years.

[34:44] So what agricultural activities does he have?

[34:47] Occurrently on his house.

[34:48] Mr. Wilkie.

[34:50] I think some of the people around here know cuts hay off of there.

[34:53] And then before that, Mr. Heard had cut it for years and years.

[34:58] That's been a hay field.

[34:59] So if you go up there next...

[35:00] On any other non-agricultural activities going on in the adjacent parcel?

[35:05] No.

[35:08] Non-agricultural?

[35:10] Yes.

[35:11] No.

[35:12] Okay.

[35:14] Why were the buffers established on this property?

[35:20] What was the what?

[35:21] The stream buffers. Why were they established on this property?

[35:25] The reason I'm asking that question by state law,

[35:27] their agricultural activities are exempt from having established buffers, and they can also

[35:35] county ordinance does the same.

[35:41] We've been from Stormwater requested that they be shown on the site plan.

[35:46] He's just trying to make sure that they're identified.

[35:49] Okay.

[35:51] So, but from our cultural standpoint, there are, you don't buffer, don't have any recognized.

[35:56] You can disturb the buffer for agricultural purposes.

[35:58] similar to the question about the tree ordinance, you're exempt.

[36:03] I understand that, but that stream goes down on into the farm, and we've not touched

[36:06] that number 50 years, so we have no intention of touching this one other.

[36:10] Okay, I'm just asking the question, I was there.

[36:13] Okay, I'll have some other questions later.

[36:18] Thank you.

[36:18] All right.

[36:21] Anyone here is speaking in favor of this application,

[36:29] please step forward,

[36:33] and if you would

[36:34] Please make sure you stay at your name for me to write this down so I can't go away.

[36:39] Will you look at Jason to that and I agree with Tony's proposal and I know he's trying

[36:48] to get that triangle of land and I trust that he's not going to clear cut it or anything like that.

[37:01] Hi, anyone else here speaking favor?

[37:02] I'm

[37:14] a rural Derby and we on the property at 300 herd road, my son lives at 350 herd roads.

[37:21] We're right across the street from there.

[37:23] We are in support of Tony changing this to agriculture.

[37:30] That's the best use of that land, the best use of what's going on in that neighborhood.

[37:35] And if you've looked at the property, you couldn't build a house on it if you wanted to.

[37:40] So I mean it's up and down and it's just,

[37:43] it should be agricultural land to be in what the neighborhood is

[37:49] and it is just not, you just can't be able to have stuff.

[37:54] So thank you for your time.

[37:56] Yes, sir.

[37:56] Could you state your name one more time for me, sir?

[37:59] It's like a rural, dirty, rural, dirty.

[38:02] Thank you, sir.

[38:12] Anyone else here to speak in favor?

[38:20] So you know, here's speaking opposition.

[38:22] You

[38:26] know, we'll close the public comment, you know,

[38:33] I have a couple of questions.

[38:36] Okay. I've walked the site. It is, um,

[38:44] I'm not being really suitable for hey, which is the production,

[38:48] which is the stated reason for this. And more importantly, there's no reason to reason it if

[38:55] wants to put hey on a property of our 80. You can do that without

[39:00] free zoning. The property roughly has based off the USGS

[39:07] block sheets and my walking is about a two to one slope. The horizontal

[39:12] slope versus the vertical, every two feet, horizontal and you go down on

[39:16] about a foot, which is a 50% grade.

[39:22] Maximum safe tractor for a

[39:25] production is around 25-35 percent. Based on manufacturers that I've looked up, that's a maximum

[39:32] slow.

[39:36] What really troubles me about this site is not being used for agriculture. The joining site.

[39:44] Let me, let me provide a little detail. I reviewed aerial photographs from 1945 to 2026.

[39:54] Up to 2000-05 this site in question is an agricultural force.

[40:00] Prop. 2006, there's a major slight disturbance. Earth movement, grading, start filing, soil, etc.

[40:09] 2007, it continues and there's still fences added and it continues to be disturbed up through 2009.

[40:19] Around 2009, the site becomes stable, it begins to stabilize and remains stable to 2015.

[40:27] 2019, excuse me, nine, after that, there's a significant sight disturbance coming on in 2017.

[40:36] There's a presence of two excavators, numerous dump trucks, land is being disturbed, excavated,

[40:43] stock, soil is being stockpiled. That's not an agricultural for use.

[40:50] This property that

[40:51] asking to be zoned is not suitable for the stated use.

[41:00] In 2018-19 2021-22-25 and is

[41:05] recently as 2020-6. This is still presence of excavators, dump trucks, stockpiles,

[41:11] or soil, land disturbance. If you look at the U.S. G.S. quite cheap from 1928-2024, you can

[41:19] the changes in elevation that occurred.

[41:26] I am not supporting this for rezoning classification.

[41:32] On the surface it looks pretty benign.

[41:35] I was the first one to say, why are we here?

[41:37] Why are we even doing this?

[41:39] Because this activity could occur if it stated

[41:41] that it could occur without the rezoning.

[41:45] But when you start digging down into the details,

[41:48] this life's not suitable based on the elevations

[41:51] in defography and the joining property is not necessarily being used for agriculture, and

[41:57] hasn't been for the last 20 years.

[42:01] So what are we proposing to do here? I don't know.

[42:09] I'll offer that to the board, but I'm clearly not going to support this application going

[42:16] forward.

[42:17] Okay.

[42:25] Well, my comment on here is that I do see agriculture use is happening because it's

[42:32] hey, they're producing hay, I don't know, I don't know if it's two times of the year.

[42:40] But that part is in there.

[42:44] I would assume if we're doing this parcel for further hay production that the trees are coming

[42:51] out.

[42:52] I would imagine.

[42:52] Is do we know that for a factor? Is that with the

[42:58] But some are coming out to expand it

[43:10] because I think that's what a concern was one of the other neighbors was that

[43:13] That wasn't getting totally clear cut to their property or anything is it?

[43:20] What do you imagine then the plan is for a tree buffer of how much like 30 feet 40 feet

[43:49] the property that's being requested to be resolved.

[43:53] Next door.

[43:55] So this will be an addition to that.

[43:57] Can we have her come to the microphone?

[44:03] You're talking about the hayford action in a good year.

[44:06] It's been anywhere from four to five thousand bills.

[44:09] Per acre.

[44:11] So her one.

[44:12] No, that's in total and that's at least one time.

[44:15] And we're getting at least three cuttings.

[44:18] Well, if you look at the photograph right there,

[44:20] you can see that this photograph is roughly somewhere around

[44:28] 2009 thereabouts.

[44:30] This photograph you're here.

[44:31] If you go out there and look at it today in the current,

[44:35] you would see a lot more disturbance in the central part of the

[44:38] joining property.

[44:40] So what I, my concern is this for your client.

[44:44] is using the product. He says he wants to put his hay on this property that he's asking for a

[44:50] rezoning. I'm saying it's not suitable because it has a 50% grade.

[44:57] The tractors aren't even

[44:59] That's not a sweet

[45:00] They've already even operate a hay bailer, that's not saying that.

[45:05] Secondly, I'm looking at the e-drainagee statements that come in there, have a similar slope.

[45:13] There's like what that likewise. And I'm also saying the existing use may be hay in and around there,

[45:22] but there's other activities that are not agricultural related whatsoever.

[45:26] Do not appear to me. I was offering you to tell me what they were and so but I don't I don't know what they are

[45:36] Okay

[45:37] What are they you have a agricultural use you can move dirty on your side. You can

[45:43] We've been expanding the area for hey, so that's what's been new. I don't think I don't think that

[45:51] You've been doing moving dirt around for over 20 years

[45:55] You can do that on a farm.

[45:57] You can do that, but it's a large scale if you're doing it.

[46:00] You're removing most of the site from a paper.

[46:03] No, you're not.

[46:05] I'm not here to argue with you.

[46:07] I've looked at the record and I know what I see.

[46:10] We're not going to be removing all the trees off the side that we're asking to have it done.

[46:15] We're not going to.

[46:16] But if you again, you don't need a zoning to do what you did want to do.

[46:21] If you want to grow hay there, you don't need a reason.

[46:22] But we want the rezoning to add it to the farm you're going to allow us to add this six acres to an AG zone and why not let us add it in there

[46:31] You don't have to do it. I have a question. There's no hardship to do this

[46:36] So you're going to add this to your date to combine it all

[46:40] Yes, so we're going to where we have this the hundred eight almost hundred acres under one tax parcel

[46:45] This will be added to it because that was a whole reason we bought it was for that road frontage there

[46:51] because for some reason everything is

[46:52] actually in conservation?

[46:54] Yes, conservation?

[46:55] No.

[46:56] Because it was about the same amount of money

[46:58] because he gets school tax exemption.

[47:01] No.

[47:01] And it's his personal.

[47:02] All of it.

[47:03] Is it the 90 acres in tax conservation?

[47:06] No.

[47:06] It's not in conservation.

[47:10] No, we did not put it in conservation.

[47:13] But whenever you do this school tax exemption

[47:15] because that's his primary residence.

[47:17] So you get one or the other.

[47:19] You can't do about

[47:28] it. Thank

[47:34] you.

[47:35] Anybody else have a thought question?

[47:38] I have a follow up question from the science.

[47:42] So I just want to double check that we're speaking the same language here.

[47:45] The conservation use program.

[47:49] So for years, we had it in, I'm sorry I cut you off.

[47:51] You're fine. You're fine.

[47:52] Go ahead.

[47:53] For years, we had it in conservation for years and years.

[47:57] When he turned 62,

[48:01] So it was about the same amount of money.

[48:04] I think it money even been a little cheaper,

[48:06] because it's his homestead,

[48:08] and he resided there as a primary residence.

[48:10] It was cheaper to put it as his primary residence.

[48:13] And not have an incarceration.

[48:15] Because he got the school's access.

[48:17] I'm sure he can do both.

[48:18] You cannot do both.

[48:19] There she can.

[48:20] She can't.

[48:21] I'm not.

[48:22] I'm not.

[48:24] Well, okay.

[48:25] The tax.

[48:26] I'm just making sure.

[48:27] accessor told us that we couldn't get a conservation, and the school tax exemption on a piece of property.

[48:35] Okay. Well, I'm here to tell you that's on my property, both.

[48:39] Okay. Well, I guess we need to get a visit to talk to you.

[48:42] Maybe it'll be a little cheaper now.

[48:46] Thank you. I just wanted to make sure we were all talking the same thing because that was confusing me.

[48:58] Any other discussion?

[49:02] Is there a water resource on that piece of property that maybe they need?

[49:06] Well, there it is a stream on the downstream, the downgradient portion of it, as you move away from the road.

[49:17] We haven't had a lot of rain this year, so.

[49:19] No.

[49:19] Water resource would be nice.

[49:21] Great.

[49:23] Well, it's an intermittent stream.

[49:26] You can, I don't want to get into the details here.

[49:29] It's an intermittent stream.

[49:30] It's seasonally.

[49:31] It does not for very rock.

[49:34] Yeah, it's not flowing at the moment.

[49:36] I

[49:40] can understand why they want to have it deleted and all together and read them, so I'm going to make a motion to approve.

[49:55] I'll second.

[49:55] All right, motion by dolls and trustworthy.

[50:00] Second,

[50:03] any further discussion?

[50:06] All in favour of that, please indicate by saying aye.

[50:09] Aye. All of those? No motion passes, eight to one.

[50:19] Okay, I missed your 72 and that was white side in Whitaker.

[50:35] Okay,

[50:37] let's get to our last case.

[50:54] Another ballground case.

[50:57] Case number two, 2026, the zero one Doug Strahl for KM homes.

[51:04] Location is 1065 Carter's Wall Street.

[51:07] It's in District 1.

[51:10] The acreage is 9.12 acres, but this is not a rezoning.

[51:16] There are some things about the ball ground code that requires changes to density

[51:22] to go back through the rezoning process, but this is actually what we would consider a modification

[51:28] to zoning conditions.

[51:30] They want to increase the number of homes on the site from 38 to 42, as well as modify

[51:41] four conditions and remove one, and I have a slide that provides more detail on that.

[51:50] So here are the conditions.

[51:53] The first condition, they're modifying it to refer to their site plan as opposed to the

[52:00] that was used in the original rezoning.

[52:04] The second condition, they are just requesting that increase from 38 homes to 42.

[52:12] They're requesting to delete condition number four,

[52:19] and they are requesting to modify condition number eight,

[52:25] as well as condition number nine.

[52:28] There's site plan is slightly different than the original rezoning case and so there's some good reasons to make those modifications, but they are preserving these conditions that refer to buffering and fencing again adjacent to the existing neighborhood to the east.

[52:54] Here's the site, it is almost directly on top of the interchange at Halbridge and 575.

[53:05] There's an adjacent neighborhood called Lantern Walk.

[53:09] It's been there for quite some time, and the buffering that's referred to in the conditions

[53:14] has to do with that property line at the eastern property line.

[53:20] Here's a close review of the property.

[53:24] There's an existing house on the Carter'sville Street front edge, but the rest of it remains

[53:30] wooded and undeveloped.

[53:35] Here's a clip of the city of Ballground zoning map.

[53:41] This piece has already been rezoned to RZL.

[53:44] The surrounding property is traditional neighborhood development.

[53:49] And the Lantern Walk neighborhood is part of that, as well as the medical office building that exists at the roundabout.

[54:02] So here's the annexation plan that we received in 2024 that their original plan, when this was resowned, was to preserve that existing house on the road advantage on Cargarsville Street.

[54:19] The new site plan from a different developer is, you know, really where they're picking up the extra lots as right here where that existing home was located.

[54:37] So here are the notes that we produced on this.

[54:40] You know, it's what they're asking for is consistent with that RZL zoning district.

[54:44] The density is within that range for neighborhood living or urban core character areas.

[54:56] If you want more detail, you know, this modification allows them.

[55:00] To go up to 4.73, dwelling units per acre, which is well within the six units per acre that's allowed in RZL.

[55:11] I mentioned the fencing and landscaping against Leonard Walk.

[55:17] In opposition, you know, those four additional homes will increase traffic on Carter'sville Street and we have heard a little bit about this in the past on this application.

[55:31] So that's kind of the summary of our staff comments.

[55:35] Can you go back to the various conditions?

[55:39] Sure.

[55:39] Because these are the ones we have.

[55:41] It's one of make sure we can.

[55:42] These are the ones we'll be considering.

[55:45] Correct.

[55:48] So there's one, two, four, eight and nine.

[55:55] If we can lay that up, that'll be...

[55:58] Sure.

[55:58] So we'll know what we're all right.

[56:02] Thank you.

[56:03] Is anyone here to represent the case?

[56:14] Good evening Mr. Chairman.

[56:15] There was a planning commission.

[56:16] Ethan Underwood.

[56:17] I'm here with Doug Strahl.

[56:19] Regarding this application if I'm a.

[56:22] Yeah.

[56:24] Presentation here.

[56:25] Thank you all.

[56:26] I figured out this is my crutch.

[56:31] I think that Margaret's given a good summary.

[56:34] The properties are already zoned RZL.

[56:37] we are asking for a four to a lot increase.

[56:39] So we'll explain to you why.

[56:41] As shown here, we do have the RZO zoning adjacent

[56:45] to this traditional neighborhood zoning.

[56:49] Important that we want you to know here,

[56:52] if there's a food line that's been installed at this area,

[56:54] and there is a very steep topographical change.

[56:57] It's about 20 feet in topo change.

[57:00] That's important because one of the conditions

[57:02] that you're considering condition number four references

[57:05] is an interparsal connection and we just do not, do not believe that is practical from

[57:10] the progress standpoint. So putting this subdivision in here, you can see how the lay

[57:16] end to Carter's Phil Street.

[57:19] Zooming in, what we have done is we are showing you additional

[57:24] or four extra lots up here at the front. And the condition modifications are almost entirely

[57:30] to match the new site plan. So we still want to accomplish the goals of the original zoning,

[57:35] but we do have to tailor it to the new site plan.

[57:38] So, this is the original site plan,

[57:41] and the intention was to keep that front area

[57:44] with an existing home, and in hopes that it would be maintained,

[57:47] and that would keep the,

[57:49] I guess, the past character of that, of a cardinal street.

[57:53] Unfortunately, this is what has become of the house.

[57:56] It's just not been maintained,

[57:57] and we don't think it's salvageable at this point.

[58:00] So we think it would be better to develop it this,

[58:03] with houses that match what's been approved behind there and create a uniform

[58:08] insurance and a peer. So, again, this is the change. This is really the only

[58:14] area that we're asking to modify significantly and there's some site plan

[58:18] modification, just particularly with numbering. So, if you can read this, I know

[58:23] that it's a small print. The biggest change you can see is in condition number one,

[58:28] is we are asking to reference a completely different site plan, where we'll

[58:32] site plan, the old conditions number two, number eight, and number nine, reference lots on the old site plan.

[58:42] So we've just changed these to match and make sure that we're still preserving the intention.

[58:47] And then again, we are asking to eliminate condition number four because that topographical change.

[58:53] Obviously, that's something we've got to still work with the City Council in Margaret and about,

[58:56] as to whether they are agreeable to that, but we would submit to you that as in practical.

[59:01] So putting this into visual connotations, condition number eight, the original zoning required

[59:10] of buffer along these lots, new condition number eight, we just said it has to be between

[59:15] the right of way and all the homes.

[59:17] So that way we're not referencing specific lot numbers, but again, accomplishing the intention

[59:21] of condition number eight.

[59:22] Condition number nine only required a fence along a portion of the lots

[59:29] KM homes is proposing to put a fence along all the lots on that eastern boundary

[59:34] So that actually extends that condition number four again. This is there was a kind of the

[59:40] Background city council wanted a connectivity there and in two dimensions it makes sense

[59:45] We're proposing that that is not viable

[59:48] So we will leave that to your discretion as to whether you want to recommend that.

[59:51] Well, obviously, we still have to deal with the City Council and what they're going to do.

[59:55] But we would suggest to you that based upon the topography that that is a...

[1:00:00] Extraordinary hardship that cannot be accomplished.

[1:00:03] So, homes that are proposed on the site, they are planted very, very well with traditional

[1:00:08] neighborhood's next door and the traditional architecture in the city.

[1:00:17] So, with that, we hope may be back to the Chairman's point.

[1:00:23] That may be the most important slide for you all to consider.

[1:00:26] We do request that you would recommend approval to the city.

[1:00:30] We are happy to answer any questions.

[1:00:31] and we will reserve any time that we have remaining.

[1:00:34] Thank you.

[1:00:35] Thank you.

[1:00:38] All right.

[1:00:39] Anyone here to speak in favor of the application?

[1:00:44] So you know, anyone here speaking,

[1:00:47] wish to oppose this application?

[1:00:50] I will close the public comment and open it for discussion.

[1:01:01] I'll take the lead on this one again,

[1:01:03] because again, my area have been ball ground.

[1:01:10] We're in agreement on making these adjustments to the various conditions.

[1:01:17] It had changed, like Mr. Armstrong would said, once the home was removed, it wouldn't

[1:01:22] be removed out of there.

[1:01:23] It was not viable to the neighborhood, so the property changed hands, so that's why

[1:01:29] these things, they fit to what the adjustments that need to be made and remove those conditions

[1:01:35] off and these will be heard by the city of ballground starting on this Thursday as well if this

[1:01:42] case moves forward.

[1:01:50] I know if I may.

[1:01:51] I noticed they actually add six parking spaces in this new site plan with they did not have

[1:01:56] in the previous site plan.

[1:01:57] I noticed I had a male Kiosk area.

[1:01:59] You're right.

[1:01:59] That is a better.

[1:02:01] As a good bonus then that's a bonus.

[1:02:02] It needs it.

[1:02:04] It's right now it says 24 driveways which as we debate that whole, well that's long enough

[1:02:09] for not, at least we have work parking.

[1:02:12] I encourage them to actually add more,

[1:02:13] cause it looks like you could add more a lot

[1:02:15] along that southern, or I guess I should be western

[1:02:18] boundary wouldn't it?

[1:02:20] Yeah, there's more down.

[1:02:22] There's more chance to add a

[1:02:23] three or four more down there.

[1:02:25] I'd encourage them to let that happen,

[1:02:27] but for me this makes sense.

[1:02:32] Any other discussion?

[1:02:36] All right.

[1:02:38] So I assume we would just need to get through the first.

[1:02:40] I think we need to go through each condition

[1:02:42] and this, again, these are recommendations

[1:02:44] is that we'll go to the City of Bollground for their final approval.

[1:02:49] So the condition number one is the new site plan by grading engineering, dated August 10,

[1:02:57] 206.

[1:02:58] And make a motion to approve condition number one?

[1:03:01] Second, the motion.

[1:03:02] Okay.

[1:03:05] Motion made by Barnes, seconded by Vance, all in favour please indicate by saying aye.

[1:03:12] Aye.

[1:03:12] any opposed motion carries unanimously.

[1:03:19] Second condition two is to change the maximum

[1:03:24] lots from 38 to 42 homes and that's based on the

[1:03:29] great plan which is just recommended for approval.

[1:03:34] So is there a motion for that?

[1:03:36] Make a motion to approve condition number two.

[1:03:39] I think I can do motion, motion

[1:03:45] made by Commissioner Bores, I can do by Commissioner Vanceant, any discussion,

[1:03:53] all is in favour of that motion, please indicate by saying aye,

[1:04:05] aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye.

[1:04:10] Internal road lots of the lots that are on the west side of the new internal road on the west side

[1:04:18] there would be a ten foot undisturbed buffer that's condition number eight.

[1:04:24] I'll make a motion to approve condition number eight.

[1:04:28] Okay.

[1:04:30] So, then we'll we're to the past two motion made by Commissioner Bars, I can go to Commissioner

[1:04:38] is that all in favor indicate by saying aye, aye, aye, aye, any opposed motion carries?

[1:04:43] In addition, number nine, private fencing slash landscaping behind units, one through 27.

[1:04:53] This is on the east side of

[1:04:56] it.

[1:04:58] So if there's any discussion.

[1:05:02] I'll make a motion, approve, condition number 9.

[1:05:09] Motion, may the commissioner bar, second, the commissioner, may as that, all in favour?

[1:05:17] Condition 4 is to be deleted. That is the road step out. Is there a motion for that?

[1:05:26] I'll make a motion move for you.

[1:05:28] All right.

[1:05:28] I'll second it.

[1:05:30] Devin emission or below in literature.

[1:05:36] Measure in.

[1:05:37] целcond.

[1:05:38] Hollien-Favor, i, one.

[1:05:41] Hollien-Pos, motion carries.

[1:05:45] Colleagues.

[1:05:46] Any other business?

[1:05:49] I have just two minutes.

[1:05:52] I did want to introduce our new zoning division.

[1:05:56] manager. I didn't warn him that's going to happen. His name is Sarah Brennan. Hello.

[1:06:05] And he's had some experience in the private sector. He's worked for Pond for a little bit.

[1:06:12] And he also has public sector experience.

[1:06:15] I like you.

[1:06:17] You know.

[1:06:18] Welcome aboard.

[1:06:19] You know what I mean?

[1:06:19] The opening comments come on.

[1:06:23] Thank you.

[1:06:25] Thank you.

[1:06:27] Right.

[1:06:29] Thanks for catching this.

[1:06:31] I know you're really huge.

[1:06:33] I am.

[1:06:34] It's starting to be more of a game.

[1:06:36] It's not with me.

[1:06:39] All right.

[1:06:40] We have no other business.

[1:06:41] Motion through adjourn.

[1:06:43] Motion through adjourn.

[1:06:44] I'm a glacier below.

[1:06:46] I'll second.

[1:06:47] Second, my commissioner, trustler, all in favor.

[1:06:53] Aye.

[1:06:53] Aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, aye.

[1:06:53] Pose, motion carries.

[1:06:55] We adjourn at eight, forty-four.

[1:06:56] How many cases next month?

[1:06:58] Three.

[1:07:02] Thank you.

[1:07:06] Thank you.

[1:07:06] Excuse me.

[1:07:06] He's been a class student.

[1:07:09] He's been a class student.

[1:07:09] How do you know about the student?

[1:07:13] He's been a class student.

[1:07:15] He's been a class student.

[1:07:17] He's been a class student.

[1:07:18] He's been a class student.

[1:07:20] That man had a thing going.

Planning Commission Public Hearing

Agenda

Transcript