[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:00] 26, first up is the invocation to pledge allegiance to Vice-Cham and Chris Wallace.
[0:08] And
[0:12] what would come before you tonight, grateful and thank you to us that still live in this county and the city.
[0:19] I asked you they here and I would have this move over this meeting, help us to have clear minds, give us wisdom and discernment.
[0:26] Help us to do all things pleasing.
[0:27] I have a system G, isn't it?
[0:33] Okay.
[0:33] Well, congratulations.
[0:35] Okay.
[0:41] One patient.
[0:46] Okay.
[0:48] First up, this is going to be.
[0:51] I get you a.
[0:52] It's going to be a discussion possible with
[0:55] the reasons for the threat, so the home board,
[0:58] that was the goal of council in the middle,
[1:01] so that's a little bit of a introduces to this.
[1:04] Okay, I had a great meeting with staff about this last week,
[1:07] and then Mr. Chassee, I'm trying to finish this off with the president, sir.
[1:13] And what we were discovered, which I always appreciate,
[1:18] is that we don't have to admit that we have a lot.
[1:20] In fact, we have very good research that a report we found,
[1:23] that was prepared by South Carolina DNR and Cleansing University that had best practices for
[1:29] citing solar farms and reducing environmental and temporary impacts.
[1:35] So we took the changes we made were basically to refer more to that document, so we didn't
[1:43] have to rewrite things new, as well as just put some of the language that back there.
[1:48] So the main changes that happened from the last version is the concept of a wildlife permeable
[1:53] things. And we learned that there's a few different ways. You can be a wildlife permeable fence
[1:58] either by the whole fence starts one foot off the ground or you have wider areas with them.
[2:05] This prevents my backup. My goal in this was to make sure we can still encourage
[2:10] the development of solar farms if people are interested in sighting them, but that they are not
[2:15] disruptive to the world nature of the majority of our county. And so this is a way that helps
[2:19] make a compromise there, where wildlife can still move through the area, and the other issue
[2:26] has, is we don't want a situation where someone clears land, puts in solar cells, and then
[2:31] walks away, leaving it's faster. Most of them wouldn't do that, but if we want to make sure
[2:35] that the follow-up plan practices, and that language was in the document from DNR at Plumson
[2:40] as well with replanting of native grasses or pollinators on the type of plants that would
[2:48] help encourage or discourage erosion and encourage it to remain a national area. So we added that
[2:54] language in here and then ended up with this document and it looks like there's two options left at
[3:00] the end of it. Once you all have questions, I'd like to ask a question for a scholar about on how best to
[3:05] talk about safety and tests. Can any questions on that for you to catch the wind, gravel,
[3:18] or
[3:19] And he was real happy with this version, I like it too.
[3:24] I don't know, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
[3:25] Yeah, and one change we made is they start to 13 meters instead of 10, and that's because that's what the state electrical board starts considering them in 13 meters.
[3:34] So that's why that never changed.
[3:36] We have just come up with 10 and said we started to match to stay in mall, which is always, I think, best practice.
[3:41] My question in this dollar is on option one versus option two here on the fifth.
[3:46] Does staff have a recommendation on those two options?
[3:52] I think staff have a recommendation on one, but we found an information on it.
[3:57] That has the safety concept together.
[4:03] But we do not necessarily prefer one.
[4:06] Okay, my main question there is,
[4:11] the National Electronic Code and the National Electronic Safety Code.
[4:15] Anybody's going to have to follow this, right?
[4:18] Like, even if we don't spell out in the ordinance, you have to follow those, that's going to be with it.
[4:22] And stay law and their own law, that's standard, right?
[4:26] Yeah. So if to me, if that's the standard, they already have to follow.
[4:29] I don't think we need to take that effort to rewrite it.
[4:33] So if that's my
[4:36] motion, then, is to
[4:37] to approve the solar ordinance document as written using the option one text amendment for
[4:47] Article 60.
[4:51] Okay, so so basically we're really not voting.
[4:53] I'm sorry we're not going to.
[4:54] Yeah we have a second.
[4:55] Right.
[4:56] Is this different than the second draft we got?
[4:59] We've made a couple of revisions just that we need to speak and had it that word.
[5:04] So I wonder correctly and say that you want to change the draft for the next reading.
[5:10] Right, sorry. Yeah, it's probably the before it has become stirred reading.
[5:13] I would like that to me for her with oxygen wine at that texture.
[5:17] That's okay. Okay, it's been all the rest of the text that's in the past.
[5:19] And except for rest of the text. Okay, so I'll accept all the seconds. Any discussion on that?
[5:24] And they have one question. Was the rice bottom clear? Is there a concern that each album
[5:31] possibly get through that. Yeah, it's a one foot. So yes, they could. I guess that's a concern.
[5:40] Our thought was more to ever building this, it's going to be their best interest to work with
[5:45] there and so it's happening in how safe it needs to be. If they felt like there was a real risk of
[5:51] break-ins, then they could choose the different fencing version that doesn't happen. But I'm thinking safety
[5:57] and or then. Right. It's right. Six inches. Yeah, that would be. It doesn't have to be raised,
[6:08] but it's just one of the options. It can happen. Well, the option one is, is the one you
[6:14] want to do. Option one, you then get to pick up the option. You can do raised on a large mess or
[6:21] have passageways. So basically you're just going to leave option one in there. Yes. Okay. So
[6:28] option two goes away. I'm sorry. The whole option one then has three options within it. Okay.
[6:37] So if you're on page five. So I'm sorry.
[6:44] So this option two's going away. Yes.
[6:48] There are two different denominations, but each definition has options within them.
[6:55] Okay, so you're saying the second definition often, just going away.
[6:59] That is for mentioned.
[6:59] Okay, sorry if I just need to know what you're doing.
[7:02] And your reasoning was the code already in option two, so it's redundant.
[7:08] They're already going to have to follow all this.
[7:10] So at that point in option one, we would have to do one or three.
[7:14] Yes.
[7:16] And we're not doing that tonight.
[7:19] No, no, no, you can lead that.
[7:20] This can't happen.
[7:22] Yeah, this doesn't.
[7:23] So they don't.
[7:24] Yeah, they don't.
[7:30] So, if they have, if the developer has more concerns about safety or sighting wherever they can, use which one of these best matches, what their insurance requirements or what they are, but we're saying you need to have seven kind of where I'm like best.
[7:47] Well, I guess my concern with this is probably going to be here.
[7:51] Oh, nobody's going to be around it, so if the less likelihood of somebody get in it, it's better to see.
[7:58] Uh, pinging.
[8:04] Okay.
[8:04] Any other questions for that?
[8:06] Okay.
[8:06] So we're going to screw that.
[8:08] We're going to screw that provision.
[8:10] And it's off to third reason.
[8:12] In whichever region right here.
[8:15] It's the same sign.
[8:16] Passage units.
[8:17] Okay. Next up is going to be.
[8:21] Let's take a look at the item 2B, it's a light keyweak, and you'll pass me over the way
[8:26] district.
[8:27] This is a goal of council lawless and myself.
[8:30] Let me start on this, and I'll explain to you a lot of key for you.
[8:34] This process began with three public meetings at the March April and May.
[8:40] There was state hold of me between administration and staff as they were both there.
[8:45] There was some initial counts of discussion and from that the staff created a draft overlay.
[8:51] We don't start with like a page, it starts with usually something the staff will write.
[8:57] Big of picture, you have to realize, underneath, every overlay is a 350 page developmental standard portrait DSR.
[9:08] There's a 41 page stormwater ordinance which governs planning use across the entire county.
[9:14] that includes the lights. Now, the protections in those documents you will not see
[9:21] restated in the overlay because that would be was done to put it in two places. So the
[9:27] draft is only additional protections that you would see on the light goal. Now, this tool
[9:33] alternatives in the packet today for the overlay, the first tool alternatives from the
[9:40] Second reading in June 29, July we didn't address station or talk about it or meet about it.
[9:47] I don't understand we had a public hearing, but we had some speakers step up, and at that
[9:53] meeting, we asked the administration to keep the set back and the structure is equal to 50 feet,
[9:59] as it is in the DSO and the stormwater ordinance, and the majority supported that.
[10:05] At that meeting, I tried to formally put that into the over-trapped, but that was not
[10:09] Wow, this is the appropriate time to do that.
[10:13] So the second one will turn to the living's packet,
[10:16] keeps the set back at 50 feet per second,
[10:20] underlying DSO as well as the strong one will work.
[10:23] So tonight, what we'll do is we'll do
[10:25] we just stick with that other one.
[10:26] We'll discuss the overlay changes to the draft.
[10:30] And we'll go one at a time and we have any changes today.
[10:33] So when I want to address first,
[10:35] is the 50-foot set back, which is the second
[10:37] I'm going to turn it as a carrier of metal.
[10:40] I'm going to make a motion.
[10:42] But I continue in that discussion.
[10:43] My motion is going to be accepted to accept the second-level term,
[10:47] which in page is 22 to 33 in the packet.
[10:51] Do I hear a second on that?
[10:55] No, that's what I could do.
[10:56] Okay. Any discussion on that?
[10:59] So if you're talking about 7.4,
[11:02] now I'm talking about the old term, the school term is the old term,
[11:06] which is the second reading,
[11:07] which was the original graph of the change we made up into that point.
[11:13] And then there's the second, second, all part that was just basically the same thing,
[11:18] but section 7 looks like it's different.
[11:21] That's quite a different.
[11:22] So what happens is, section 7, because the way it was drafted initially,
[11:27] was a hundred foot separate.
[11:30] So the idea is only, only, has that wording in the first fifth seat.
[11:33] And to the overlay, you got to rewrite it all for the next 50 feet.
[11:38] Now, if you don't do it for the next 50 feet,
[11:42] all that language drops out because it's in the underlying DSO and still more importance.
[11:47] You understand that?
[11:48] Yes, but when I read it, the underlying DSO, which is such an important,
[11:52] is a 50-foot setback, but a 25-foot buffer.
[11:56] So we have been talking about a 100-foot setback and buffer.
[12:00] So if you go back to 4-10, then you're not.
[12:02] You're taking setback that case of heat and you're taking the buffer that's not happy.
[12:06] Was that, was that your intention?
[12:08] Yeah.
[12:08] To keep it the same way it is now.
[12:10] So the same way it is now.
[12:11] Fifty foot setback 25 foot.
[12:13] Yeah.
[12:14] And then what's the way that version is too is the way she sets up this sewer on the 75.
[12:22] I believe these had to 75 feet.
[12:24] That's somewhere in de-half regulation.
[12:26] So you wouldn't put that in this order that's because we're going to keep that the same.
[12:32] Okay, my other question about that is on your red line version where you get rid of a muscle of 7.4.
[12:39] It actually had a lot more language than Section 14, like specific language about buffer stabilization and origin, full of restriction messages.
[12:49] I'm sorry.
[12:50] That's in store.
[12:50] Mayors.
[12:53] That's in 15.
[12:55] And such 15 of the stormwater awareness?
[12:58] Okay.
[12:58] So, thank you. I didn't see that in the fourth time.
[13:02] So, you're saying that all of the things listed under exceptions are spelled out in stormwater already.
[13:11] Yeah, that's great.
[13:12] Removal of damage trees, removal of noxious vegetation.
[13:17] It's almost word for word.
[13:19] It's great.
[13:20] But I confirmed that it didn't numbers well.
[13:23] Okay.
[13:24] So to be clear, if we pass this new version, that means this conversation started out with a hundred
[13:30] proof buffer and a hundred-foot setback. And now you all want to move it to a 50-foot buffer and 25-foot
[13:36] setback, putting it back. Sorry, 50-foot setback, 25-foot buffer, putting it back where it was before we had a
[13:45] conversation. Well, not really. I mean, I don't remember it's really talk about it. So, but it got in there was probably
[13:51] mentioned in the meeting about his version, and I don't remember talking about it in detail,
[13:56] but the whole reason we put this in.
[13:59] But I wonder if you voted no one would.
[14:01] No, I'm not saying I support my community.
[14:03] I'm saying I'm just going to clarify this after all of this public input and after three
[14:08] months of this being the number one thing we talked about.
[14:11] We're going back to the exact same language that was already in the UDSL.
[14:15] And it already does have some additional prohibits
[14:18] prohibiting prohibits, you know, some clear cutting.
[14:22] It limits impervious services.
[14:24] No, no, before I put that, I'm going to just about the buffer in the set.
[14:28] Yeah, the buffer in the set, background effect, exactly what we were
[14:30] before we did. Yes.
[14:33] So anything we were saying about needing this in order to protect water
[14:36] is no longer of like no, because that's fertilizers in their pesticides
[14:40] and full construction means more sedimentation
[14:43] all that stuff and protect the water, but you gotta remember that. I was the one that was
[14:48] been talking about years, things beyond the earth. I've been talking about habitat, I've been
[14:53] talking about the viewsheds, the beauty of the area, you know, all those things are important,
[14:58] and this will do a lot for that.
[15:00] The order is just one part of it. And honestly, the order is never done. I could really never make a drum on it. I did on Highway 11. I remember because I worried about over the development and trying up the order table, because I said I want 600 feet on my well, although a few thousand houses up there, people aren't going to have water. So that's my answer.
[15:18] Okay, so if we're just changing everything back to where it was, we're saying everything. I don't think there are three examples.
[15:28] So we probably need to go through a lot of the way Rads tape and delete anything and talk to a lot of coffee and drink.
[15:34] Because I think some of this actually does help good work.
[15:37] If you have less construction and less land, we really need to have less water off.
[15:41] If you have commercial, you need to have a huge parking lot, which is going to give you one off this old.
[15:47] There's a lot of other things.
[15:49] It's just the point. The reason why I want to, I don't know how much of that, but when people
[15:53] call this, it's a watch 90, 90 feet steep, and if we go to 100 foot, set the act, they can't
[15:59] build anything. And generally, I don't want to pass legislation that prohibits people from developing
[16:06] their property at all. And I believe that would be illegal, so we can't do that. And then,
[16:12] you know, if it's three lots, maybe you give them the variance, but if it's 30% of lots,
[16:15] do some change to rule, so that was the logic on that.
[16:18] To be clear, I'm not.
[16:20] I do think a hundred feet was too big.
[16:22] I'm just surprised that we're, after all this,
[16:25] we're back at where it was before.
[16:29] Just some kind of, it's a working progress.
[16:31] And I have a lot of questions, you must have,
[16:33] I'm like, you know, it's valid.
[16:37] Now I hope you go down the long list tonight.
[16:40] I think things will more likely change in the beginning.
[16:43] I would love, I think we should do that.
[16:45] and how people are wanting to have any language and directors use.
[16:49] So I'd love to hear your feedback.
[16:52] I have questions about the intent of it.
[16:56] And it's important that I tell the gentleman on the phone
[16:59] to desk that the discussion has gotten hijacked by several camps
[17:06] of people.
[17:08] And we've got a way, we didn't, but the discussion and the public view
[17:14] of this, is that we're targeting one potential project, and that's because now I wasn't
[17:21] my intent, still in my intent, but that's what the public thinks.
[17:27] That my commitment into this was about the sort of, you know, looking for a lot of bucks.
[17:33] Now, we've been working on that, I mean, it's up and down and all over the place, I've got
[17:39] a lot of questions about, it crosses 180 to 3 a couple of times.
[17:45] What does that work like?
[17:47] And like I said, Michael, I think you're going to be probably going to leave me.
[17:51] And I'm hoping that we'll have another meeting, or we can come back and I can say,
[17:56] this is what we've got now, this is where I'm at, and we can move forward.
[18:04] That's just a fraction of what I've got to question why.
[18:07] But any other questions?
[18:10] And I've already said, with you to go this route,
[18:17] I
[18:21] mean, I've got, like, I've got a whole bunch of questions about this, but what you're trying to get us to that on its push version to do?
[18:27] Yeah, basically, the version, the version is on the, yeah, the two are basically the same.
[18:35] Once you go from 100 to 50 feet, you get the second version, and a lot of learning drops out of it because it's in the underlying DS7.
[18:44] So I explained all that.
[18:46] Let's go.
[18:46] So you wouldn't repeat it.
[18:48] Now, if it went to 51, see all that new little, all that language would have to go
[18:53] right back.
[18:54] Because you're getting that extra foot, which is being covered in the DSR's normal.
[18:59] You can see it up to put all that extra foot.
[19:02] Now, go on back to 50.
[19:03] You take all that out.
[19:06] Okay.
[19:06] Just, I have a cup.
[19:07] That's my only problem.
[19:08] I have other changes I want to make too.
[19:09] We can go on one at a time.
[19:11] But I rather than just do like we always done with trash.
[19:15] Okay, in terms of which one of these jigsaw, there are a couple other things where we moved
[19:20] the view lines, is that in the stormwater?
[19:23] The view lines.
[19:27] The jump points, except existence, is that in the stormwater as well?
[19:31] It's the view, it's the view, it's the view, it's regulated.
[19:35] So we're just not going to read this now.
[19:38] Okay.
[19:38] Okay,
[19:44] so all we're deciding right now, in this vote, it's the 100 feet and then all the things ever sacrificed by that change.
[19:52] Yeah, I have two of the things that I want to change soon, but was it wanted to pop?
[19:57] Okay, any other discussion on it?
[19:59] Those are February's right hand.
[20:02] We're proposing something to that.
[20:04] Next item.
[20:06] That's the one where you want to go.
[20:07] I'd like to go later.
[20:09] I don't know what's up another one.
[20:12] It's just a bit in the warehouses on page 2 to 6 warehouses.
[20:17] I would end with the public here on the floor of this third 2020.
[20:25] That's about 20 different meetings.
[20:27] Public meetings.
[20:28] That would say that was the one.
[20:31] We got public inputs for specific work here for that.
[20:34] Where do you have to pay two?
[20:37] Pay two.
[20:38] So it's pay comes on.
[20:39] That's exactly the other thing.
[20:40] that we have.
[20:41] Do you have a number 12?
[20:43] No.
[20:46] And that's going to be the where, on the specific occasion.
[20:54] Yeah.
[20:54] Would that the one on a tree?
[20:56] Yeah.
[20:57] That's what I'd like to do is add that.
[20:58] Just to make that more complete.
[21:03] That's fair.
[21:04] I'll take it three.
[21:05] So I'm going to make a motion to add that.
[21:08] It's the six where as on that page.
[21:11] That was a public hearing.
[21:12] I'm all the 3226, which is clean that up a little bit.
[21:17] So I hear a second on that.
[21:18] I hear that.
[21:19] I need to start showing it.
[21:22] It was a favorite right hand.
[21:25] It was a course hand side.
[21:26] Anybody else have anything?
[21:29] No, I just want it.
[21:32] I got that.
[21:33] I'm happy to go last.
[21:35] No, go.
[21:36] I don't have to go.
[21:37] I don't have to go.
[21:40] Okay, I believe we should remove the words recreational opportunities and tourism from all of the warehouses.
[21:48] That's number four, number eight, number ten, number 13, because when y'all voted to get rid of it,
[22:00] this in a version of commercial or multi-family, then you basically said you don't want anybody
[22:05] human tourism on the lake or visiting it, so I think it is disingenuous to have it in the
[22:11] wearout statements. Somebody travels about and puts it in a water that's not somebody.
[22:16] We have one public arena on Lake Keyway, which is my own Creek Park, a community count.
[22:23] Sunset, something. Sunset, but Sunset is interesting. It's spending when I'll be made
[22:27] possible by this, the County County.
[22:30] As seven, ways that you can access the lake. So we are making it harder to access the lake to public. We're making it harder to access the lake. We're making it harder to have a meal on the lake. We're making it harder to visit the lake. So it seems really wrong that all the warehouse statements should say that we are trying to add recreational opportunities or the tourism contract.
[22:59] You're moving any possibility that a paddleboard rental company, a small restaurant, a public marina,
[23:10] in none of those places can go in when y'all voted to remove any opportunity for commercial.
[23:16] You said single family only, let me answer this. If we change this, you've got to vote for this.
[23:21] Yeah. Okay, so we're going to make a bunch of changes.
[23:26] And at the end, you're going to vote now.
[23:28] I'm going to try to protect y'all from having wearouts.
[23:30] I don't need protection.
[23:31] The county needs protection because we're going to get so we know.
[23:34] If we are saying this is for the promotion of the tourism economy,
[23:39] and then we also say that all commercial is against the roles, then we are.
[23:43] Do you see legal liability on that?
[23:47] Any other question?
[23:48] Do I get liability on the moving towards
[23:50] and the vaccination from the rice solving?
[23:52] No, she can get in there while also providing all.
[23:55] I'm going back to the registration.
[23:58] Those benefits are being included in the registration.
[24:04] I think my creation is important.
[24:08] It can be used for a family, because that's not a kind of networking that values.
[24:13] Well, it is.
[24:15] Okay, let's take a look at that.
[24:25] Where Ed, let's see.
[24:29] At the number age says the county council finds the unique character
[24:32] at the Lake area of this derived from the combination of our military sources.
[24:36] Seeing the commission's recreational opportunities towards
[24:39] connectivity, residential communities, wildlife and public access to the lakes.
[24:45] Again, that seems.
[24:46] What do we have public access to like, so also?
[24:49] Because we've got a public access.
[24:53] You have a croaker, which is not our part, it's a state.
[24:57] Say that it's public access.
[24:58] Say that data coming into account.
[24:59] Yeah, that's a big answer.
[25:01] That was a big answer.
[25:02] Then we have my own croaker, which is our part that we operate by five to two garrisons.
[25:07] And then you have a warpath like in which we are in the process of taking that for operation.
[25:12] So those would be the three that would be public on our side.
[25:15] like there's a couple other access points that are not public,
[25:19] they're more private, you know what I'm gonna control with that.
[25:21] Yeah, you're like, I like that I like that I like that I like that I like that it's not really trying.
[25:26] That's what I'm saying, that's what they're taking with all of the people I should want to say that.
[25:30] Right now, yes.
[25:36] Okay.
[25:38] The whereas number 19, which is on page three,
[25:42] It's right in the middle, whereas County Council further finds developments, standards should be practical and
[25:47] forceful consistently administered and based upon an identifiable impact to public resources rather than subjective or arbitrary criteria.
[25:55] I personally have not been given an impact statement of what a commercial development would do to the lakes,
[26:01] and was wondering if anybody else had identified what impacts to public resources to back this statement.
[26:13] Okay,
[26:17] so we should probably delete that whole sense and ended after consistently administered.
[26:25] Better find out what did I did if I will impact that would even be better.
[26:29] I would love to see if we can have a general impacts of how a commercial or a set of maybe condos or townhouses are going to impact other resources and their heat.
[26:40] So we all have those impact statements that would be great.
[26:45] We'll be moving forward next time.
[26:46] We'll see it in order to make number 19 relevant.
[26:53] Similarly, number 21 to down where it's kind of council finds the adoption of this.
[26:59] It says, well, by providing development standards to the unique characteristics of the characters,
[27:04] while preserving opportunities for reasonable growth, investment,
[27:07] recreation tourism and development. I think no preserved opportunities for reasonable growth
[27:13] investment, recreation tourism or development when you completely ban all commercial with
[27:20] no ways of doing that. So that's again, if y'all are going to do that, I think the period should
[27:24] be after a lake areas, because we're not preserving any of those things.
[27:29] Reasonable growth, you'll be able to continue to have residential growth and then outside the
[27:33] to lay the hot growth as well.
[27:35] Where this is not about outside the earth or where I want to see inside the
[27:38] other land, do you only have single-family homes?
[27:41] And that's no growth because it's the land that's already bought.
[27:43] There'll be no investment.
[27:44] The people that own the land will be built as hell.
[27:48] That growth?
[27:49] Yeah.
[27:51] It's tax revenue, bro.
[27:52] And in the house.
[27:53] Is there a problem?
[27:54] Is there a problem?
[27:55] Yes.
[27:55] I would consider that growth.
[27:57] Okay.
[27:57] What about investment?
[27:59] There you guys build these things across the planet.
[28:01] they're buying the land from people to build their hotel.
[28:07] Okay, so maybe the word did I would say it could sit to sit commercial investment.
[28:11] I think you would.
[28:12] That would be.
[28:13] But that's not it.
[28:15] I just mean development.
[28:19] That's the dog.
[28:20] Listen, I'm getting a lot of questions about the warehouse statements.
[28:23] And they need their setting.
[28:24] That's not for why we're doing this.
[28:26] I consider it.
[28:26] We just voted to take this back where it was before we had an overlay.
[28:30] I'm just trying to really clarify why.
[28:32] It's not that.
[28:33] It's back and where it was in terms of wire protection and buffers is that.
[28:40] There's anything else here.
[28:43] Yes, I have some questions to answer to.
[28:45] So this came up.
[28:48] I want to understand, we're talking about 30% of your locked in for these sorts.
[28:52] If your house are that 30%.
[28:55] Yes.
[28:57] Okay.
[28:59] So to me, this spirit of this,
[29:01] I mean, the house itself is not creating a bunch of runoff problems.
[29:06] The runoff problems are if you have scrolling, driveways, if you decided to build a giant
[29:12] basketball court, if you decided to have a telepad, whatever it is you're doing on your
[29:18] fancy-like property.
[29:20] We're trying to limit that.
[29:23] If you're health itself, health is at 30%, then basically we are encouraging people to have
[29:31] It's not being able to build their drive license.
[29:33] It's never my attention, and I came to y'all about it.
[29:36] Now I do know, so I guess my question is,
[29:39] what is still be environmentally helpful
[29:41] to restrict the amount of impervious services
[29:44] that exclude buildings from being hard?
[29:47] You're arguing right now is you get runnels from roofs,
[29:52] you get runnels from driveway, that's the reason.
[29:54] I just listen to you for 10 minutes saying
[29:56] that we're taking everything that's reserved to water,
[29:59] and you propose.
[30:00] It was something that's actually going to harm the world. I'm clarifying. You know, if we take out the houses, the houses are roofs. I mean, a half an ankle off, 30% is 6600 square feet foot print. That's pretty big. Yeah.
[30:16] And I can go up another 15%. So, I mean, I would say most houses now probably aren't even close to that. And then probably pretty big, but they probably go up a flash. It's a point. They don't scroll out.
[30:32] That's my thing, but I think what you'd be arguing there is, basically, a loud, more
[30:37] impervious services and more run off and more of the problem that we're trying to solve.
[30:42] Well, that's a great one. I haven't. When I've got this, we haven't seen anything
[30:47] that describes exactly the perfect 30% came from. That's the best practice.
[30:55] That's the best
[30:57] question. Anything that creates runoff, it doesn't naturally go into the ground impacts.
[31:03] Okay. What I'm done. So that's why we included those structures to plan this one
[31:08] on our project. This is to get that as close to zero as possible to zero impact even
[31:13] when you build. Okay. That means that's important. What is for any particular
[31:18] lot? What is the percentage? Is it 30 now?
[31:22] I doubt I don't have a chance to do this on this page from that.
[31:25] Let me ask you a question about that.
[31:28] Now, this is the way I understand it is.
[31:31] Duke energy has to do nothing up until 800 feet or anything else.
[31:36] It's above sea level.
[31:37] Now, my understanding is if you, if you're on the property before they came, it's 800 feet.
[31:43] If you own it after, I'm going to say it over four.
[31:46] Think that's correct.
[31:47] There's three levels.
[31:48] This three levels in our 801 as well.
[31:50] I think it's the eight-word.
[31:53] Eight-word.
[31:54] Then, it's 50 feet from the county and usually eight-yo-a gets it.
[31:58] Correct?
[32:01] But I don't think the HLA is either two of the county.
[32:04] No, no, no, no.
[32:04] It's a C-P-D-E-D-A-R.
[32:08] You can look at the eight, eight hundred and eight, outs, yes.
[32:13] And then after that, you got the county 50, and somebody's age, you're wasted 50.
[32:18] On top of the teacher.
[32:20] And then some of them are not, I know they would have our 50.
[32:24] So, I'd always never get 50%.
[32:25] Now when I get everything, everything.
[32:28] So, the 50, so it's 51.
[32:32] So within the 50, you can't have an impervious structure or
[32:38] correct. So a lot of times like I look at an area and you'll see a concrete road
[32:43] it stops probably 51 feet and then after that it's ground without the correct.
[32:48] Yes. Okay. So when you read the 73 it's written incorrectly. The extra 15% doesn't
[32:57] come from within the 50. After the 50 when you've had 30 surfaces, then you can add 15%.
[33:08] You see the way that's written, it actually says within the 50, but then the 50 you can't have in perfect services.
[33:15] So you're really talking about above 50.
[33:18] Right, that, are you talking about 60?
[33:20] Yes, yes.
[33:21] That's, if they're going to expand on what there's already to 60.
[33:25] Yeah, but we think that already exists now.
[33:27] They're going to expand.
[33:28] But you're talking about them expanding above the 50 feet, right?
[33:33] Because then they can't do anything within the 50 feet.
[33:36] are you addressing a non-conformant or obvious surface, I read it as being a non-conformant.
[33:45] But it doesn't understand that there's a man that exists in a non-conformant act, but
[33:49] let's say somebody's a 25, and you're saying he's got a corner of his house there, and
[33:56] he wants to put a padded in there, he's within the 50 feet, he's saying he's got 15% with
[34:03] But what does he have above the 50 feet?
[34:06] He's also got, he's got the 30% limit, part of it too, doesn't he?
[34:12] You see, you know, maybe I'm wrong.
[34:14] No, I didn't understand what kind of 50 I did.
[34:17] Well, within the 50, I guess if it's not in the form,
[34:19] he's got a part of the house in there,
[34:21] and he wants to put patio there.
[34:22] You're going to allow him to do that.
[34:24] Existing legally established impervious surface areas.
[34:28] Is that what it says?
[34:29] It says, let me say.
[34:31] So they were legally established at the time.
[34:33] and they would say, okay, affected day of the ordinance.
[34:38] Okay, so that's basically, I got it.
[34:39] What about a five to five to six feet?
[34:44] They not get a 15% or two or no.
[34:47] That's why I was just asking her to crisis it.
[34:49] I think it's above the eightles four, actually.
[34:53] It's probably above the Duke level.
[34:55] So the name you're seeing in Clare Factor,
[34:58] there's what, here's what's in it's what?
[35:00] It's in the floor part, so it'll trigger.
[35:01] Or what?
[35:02] It's in the upper side of the 50s.
[35:04] I think C is intended to be for,
[35:06] You've got to change for the court just because of something.
[35:09] You know, some of the socials and natural things were existing on a long-an'tch and correctly stay.
[35:14] But the, I guess my point is that it says within the 50.
[35:17] Right.
[35:18] Now, let's say, let's say, your house, let's say your house is in half the.
[35:23] And you built it at 51 to 75.
[35:27] And it's got to be 30% of the law.
[35:29] How to throw out.
[35:30] Now, if you want to expand that 15%, but you allow them where does it say that?
[35:34] I don't believe that means you're allowed to expand in 15% but that's y'all decision.
[35:39] No, no, no, no, okay, okay. Is that what you're saying?
[35:42] Okay, but you only have that expansion within the 50 feet?
[35:46] Yes, there's already impervious circumstances.
[35:49] In the 50 feet. Why are you allowing it within the 50 feet only but anything about the neutrality?
[35:55] You are. You're allowing it above, but it's got to be limited to the restrictions here.
[35:59] Okay, but the after 15% that's just in the case where you may have a...
[36:04] I get it, but because you use that extra 15% above the 15%?
[36:09] No, then plan that situation.
[36:12] This is talking about existing legally established appropriate service series.
[36:17] Not news.
[36:19] Okay.
[36:19] It's the intent.
[36:20] Now, I agree with Ms. Fowl, it might not mean.
[36:22] That's not going to be clear.
[36:23] It's money, then.
[36:24] It's clear.
[36:24] Yeah.
[36:26] Big down.
[36:27] Four, it should say what you wanted to say.
[36:28] That's what I don't know.
[36:29] But just like I said, my understanding is that if you're at 30,
[36:33] People are saying both the health time and 30 percent, you're 51 feet.
[36:36] I read that as you can go another 15 percent, that's not the end of it.
[36:41] That's fine.
[36:42] I just want to make sure.
[36:44] But you're only going to allow them that expansion within the feet of the authorities.
[36:47] It's all in there.
[36:49] All right.
[36:50] And I end this.
[36:50] That's fine.
[36:51] Thank you.
[36:51] I had a question on that.
[36:56] We had a question regarding is there a way to make this impervious purpose apply
[37:01] or a whole, like, a plan development, or instead of doing my individual thought, can't
[37:08] do 30% of the entire PD, 30% or does that kill the effectiveness of it?
[37:15] Well, the way it's currently written is pride myself.
[37:18] So, if that's one vessel, the entire PD, then we could look at that way.
[37:26] But if they, if their intention is to, it's what it's called, it's what it's called.
[37:30] So we have lots, then it would be July. For a lot would stay 30 percent.
[37:36] Okay. Well, the thing is change, well, more or the, is that what you're doing?
[37:41] Well, I mean, PD is that, that's commercial aspects on that. So I think that's a bigger question.
[37:52] When you say PD, you're making a plan.
[37:54] Right. So we don't know.
[37:56] Because I know that government has the big open space and that's all natural to rest a bit.
[38:00] If the houses are close together and they're working to more concrete there.
[38:03] If they hit a percentage, all that's protected with this other part of us more concrete,
[38:10] or more impervious.
[38:12] Like, is it better to do this as a percentage of a whole lot?
[38:15] Or, which is going to get us the better?
[38:17] Which is going to get us the better?
[38:18] Yeah.
[38:23] Yeah.
[38:23] I think we've still looked at her personal.
[38:29] It's just going to be broken down into a hundred and last, we'll look at a lot of them.
[38:34] It's very important.
[38:36] Okay.
[38:37] Five of them are excellent.
[38:38] One more question before the PD portion.
[38:40] If I learned a lot about there are courbies, pavements, and chorus pavement options, those
[38:46] would all be approved for it.
[38:47] They don't count this.
[38:48] So you can fill the courbiest driveway and not have a calculator.
[38:52] Yes.
[38:53] Sure.
[38:53] I'm not going to have to.
[38:55] Super.
[38:56] A four-planned development.
[38:58] What if you have a plan development?
[38:59] Where are you going to build?
[39:00] I don't know what our minimum is.
[39:02] And that plan development that community wants to have a dog.
[39:07] We do not have a net.
[39:08] That's what we do.
[39:10] I know, but dogs are here on that language we just cut out because of stormwater.
[39:17] Does dogs have to minimize size.
[39:20] It's the last bullet under the 7.4 that we cut out.
[39:29] Like, if you have a doc or if you had a clubhouse or if you had some kind of structure that served your community of the PD, are those commercial?
[39:41] Doc itself.
[39:43] I think if there was a structure on the doc, yes.
[39:48] So that means we split it in that?
[39:51] would there be a stroke or a roundabout?
[39:55] When you say stroke or you need to look up, what's up the law?
[40:03] It's going to be on the other side.
[40:04] Are you saying that?
[40:05] I think it's just about two.
[40:06] You've got restrictions on that too.
[40:08] Well, yeah.
[40:09] Thank you.
[40:09] Sorry.
[40:10] You can all in place.
[40:13] But I mean,
[40:15] okay.
[40:16] So we're saying future communities,
[40:18] we'll have to be able to put any resources here.
[40:21] Yeah.
[40:22] Because that's a commercial.
[40:28] And then I just had a general question
[40:30] back to you on this path.
[40:33] Are we allowed to pass an ordinance that doesn't have a review
[40:37] or an appeals process?
[40:39] Like the first version of the first two versions of this,
[40:41] we saw had a board of zoning appeals process,
[40:45] where you, we said, we don't want you to ever do these things.
[40:50] We will consider a couple commercial options
[40:52] if they touch the lake.
[40:53] We have to go through the museum,
[40:54] which is what a county county does.
[40:56] Where a group of people work as whether or not it matches
[40:59] this is what's our language, natural character and environmental interest.
[41:02] We got rid of all of that, which means we also got rid of the entire concept of the BCA.
[41:06] There is, right, that appeal thing is in there, but it's not written in any of the, like, review criteria and stuff,
[41:12] so we didn't say what they were doing.
[41:14] So is, can this exist that way?
[41:17] Can you own it yourself?
[41:19] No, I just want to say that you have a borders on appeals for anything that the D.S.
[41:23] that might have a specific negative impact on specific life that you need, that student remains
[41:27] a, you know, like, for example, I'm going to use a bad example, Mr. Chairman. My life's 99 feet deep
[41:34] and you've got a hundred foot separate. It's 49 feet deep and you've got people come to the borders
[41:38] on it, but so there is still be able to do that. What the economy County orders have to
[41:42] that balance. And I ask it, but that's not necessarily, you know, the things on how you all want
[41:48] structure, all of the policy measures, is you have a specific type of board of
[41:54] zoning field review process that is specific to that overwork. That won't do
[41:59] a way when you're administrative rights through the regular board of
[42:03] zoning fields. That's still going to be there, but the B.O. is only counting method.
[42:08] They simply gave that board of zoning appeals and enhanced power within them.
[42:15] So to say, you wanted to do a commercial development, you wanted to build a small
[42:17] restaurant. We have prohibited that. Can you go to the VZA and ask for one?
[42:23] The interesting question because is there a situation where the unique character of your
[42:27] lot doesn't allow you to have a commercial development or is it just a complete prohibition?
[42:34] We've got a complete prohibition. That's the interesting question.
[42:39] It says that it says you
[42:40] are right here in section nine that the whole appeals go to the board. There is a field process.
[42:46] But we didn't write in any language for how they're going to review that before we had language
[42:49] what is supposed to consider or not consider? We deleted all of that. So we set up an appeals
[42:54] process with no language of what they should consider or not consider. That's face to what we have
[42:58] of the DSO. For the DSO, it's spelled out exactly what we want where and where and where. This says
[43:05] you can't ever have. Do we need to refer back to the DSO? And that solved that problem because that
[43:13] I'm just going to put this one up like this.
[43:15] I'm going to put it like this.
[43:16] I'm going to add that into the house.
[43:19] What would you add?
[43:21] Just where the reference where it is.
[43:22] Is it brought back into the idea for the field's process?
[43:26] Okay.
[43:27] I'm making motion to do that.
[43:29] So still they know when to look.
[43:32] You have a second on there.
[43:34] Just a second.
[43:34] Can you discuss it on there?
[43:36] Well, my discussion that is unconcerned.
[43:39] Several people didn't want the busier involved in us because they were concerned
[43:42] that a small group of people would be making victims.
[43:45] They were concerned as people could be subject to influence
[43:49] or they would give them too much power.
[43:51] People did not want a small group,
[43:53] even though we have these all over the county.
[43:55] They did not want a small group making decisions on this.
[43:57] The way you get around that in my opinion
[43:59] is to get them the exact language,
[44:00] that's the kind of thing we do want, or don't want.
[44:03] We would consider it under these circumstances,
[44:05] but not under these laws, we don't do that when anything else.
[44:08] But this is an overlay, this is different.
[44:10] I really love them, does it have that, does it?
[44:13] Be the general, the general.
[44:15] What is that about?
[44:16] But I just, I just, so it's general feel of what I'm saying,
[44:20] general feels with no language that we think anything that ever be okay.
[44:25] I'm just not sure it's really not.
[44:26] I guess what I guess will happen is that the first one may just claim,
[44:29] but look at this world, and I don't like the decision.
[44:32] The real sense, no commercial episodes, just being out there.
[44:34] Well, they'll look at the circumstances hardship and other aspects
[44:38] that they have to deal with always.
[44:39] make a decision. I mean I like I said we didn't do this for highway a lot of them.
[44:43] You first you started with saying it was no it was process. It's in here.
[44:47] Then to make it easier so people know we've got a point to where they look.
[44:51] Yeah, I don't want to go any further than that because we don't do that to anything else.
[44:55] Yeah, I think the board is not going to be feels convenient for us.
[44:58] Good job.
[45:00] Okay, we'll go ahead. Yeah, we'll go ahead. No, yeah, I'm fine with that. And I would just hand in to your early question about just whether our order is to see the order you just always have at court to give to your efforts to county ordinances. And so long as we are continuously having a rational basis, then I think that I think we have recovered and things are successful.
[45:23] So we're going to add that language in there. Any questions on that, or any approach discussion?
[45:28] Actually, do you clear?
[45:30] I would just say that.
[45:31] I wanted to make sure we all voted.
[45:32] Now, we're ready to vote.
[45:33] We're ready to vote.
[45:33] We're ready to vote.
[45:33] We're ready to vote.
[45:34] We're ready to vote.
[45:34] All right.
[45:38] So, so far, there's been one.
[45:40] Three.
[45:40] Three changes.
[45:42] All right.
[45:45] Anybody have any of the discussion on this?
[45:48] All right.
[45:50] Next item up is going to be two C, which is going to be hotels.
[45:55] This is going to count the lowest.
[45:57] So, you're going to figure out you claim that.
[45:58] What's the most important thing is that everyone else that we need, so I think playing
[46:08] staff that have more than to go on business, I'm
[46:16] okay with it the way it's ready to work
[46:18] on
[46:26] it.
[46:26] Okay, I'm fine with it too, but I thought you did a good job of it.
[46:32] You know the place that we just, we didn't have any language at all, I think we even had
[46:36] a definition.
[46:37] No, because you never did that to me, I won't lost.
[46:40] Now, I guess my only curve.
[46:42] Well, I guess that question might sound good.
[46:48] I have questions.
[46:49] They went out for under first.
[46:55] I write that the standard appearance of the commercial development.
[46:57] This is accounting is 50 feet.
[47:00] The models have been paid for mine.
[47:02] Thank you.
[47:03] Okay.
[47:03] So why are we proposing that a hotel has to be an under seat
[47:06] to all other commercials at 50 feet?
[47:12] First, yeah.
[47:13] That's the question for that.
[47:15] I think we would like to see that there was a little bit more of the risk for hand condition.
[47:20] Her proposal has 13, 20, 20, 20, 30, 30, 20, 30, but I'm still using it.
[47:27] But I'm still using it a little bit more than we are, certainly.
[47:32] Based on the other, based on the research that happens on strong order.
[47:38] Yes.
[47:38] And you have some of that.
[47:39] We gave you some additional information.
[47:41] So that's actually what you want that they're making in the package.
[47:46] It's a summer meeting.
[47:48] We call them powers.
[47:49] We're referencing that.
[47:50] It's three of these works that you wanted to provide.
[47:54] Yeah.
[47:54] That's a whole standard.
[47:56] Yeah.
[47:59] Yeah.
[47:59] So according to this,
[48:01] 50 foot gives you meaningful fall water quality benefits.
[48:05] That 100 foot for a lot of those significant areas for preservation.
[48:12] Well, that would be a bumble for the folks who see that.
[48:17] Can we do that?
[48:20] Does it want an impact?
[48:21] Yeah, that's exactly what we're talking about.
[48:25] Okay.
[48:26] My other question is, I was, you know,
[48:30] I'm not an engineer, but from my understanding,
[48:33] you can run a hotel on septic.
[48:37] You just have to fall to different policies.
[48:39] It was wondering why we were proposing not allowing us to tell what's up there.
[48:45] Again, that was a recommendation that was in a planning commission one that we probably have a, you know, right there.
[48:55] Because Alex is my question for you.
[48:57] Like the majority of your district is on septicry.
[49:00] Is that for city?
[49:01] Yeah, most of both wanted to through that.
[49:04] So this is a way to make sure there's another tell us about 23.
[49:08] I didn't write it.
[49:09] I'm just saying that.
[49:09] What do you mean?
[49:10] I don't know.
[49:12] I don't know.
[49:12] I don't know.
[49:12] I don't know.
[49:13] I said, exist of 40, I don't see.
[49:19] Sigma depth sides are large, you're ain't doing.
[49:23] Is that an operating?
[49:25] That was there.
[49:26] They're just a set of depth.
[49:28] And typically that would be typically you've
[49:31] all know if you did not answer a area that does how.
[49:35] So the capacity.
[49:39] So the problem process.
[49:40] Yeah, but it doesn't mean they can't, like, they're on hotels in the country.
[49:48] Honestly, I'm just telling you what I think their adult process was that you're
[49:52] wanting to be minimally impacted.
[49:56] You're going to have to continue to double the size of the footprint of it for the second.
[50:00] Right, what's on with the whole county that we are no longer talking about?
[50:03] The whole county.
[50:06] Yeah, this is counting why, this is not one area.
[50:10] But it doesn't eliminate big parts of the car, it's in so many parts of the county of
[50:13] San Francisco.
[50:16] Good.
[50:17] You're done.
[50:19] Okay.
[50:20] I find that.
[50:21] I find that.
[50:22] I find that.
[50:22] I find that.
[50:23] I think that.
[50:23] I don't always.
[50:24] They just look up there.
[50:26] I'm sure they can never have a cell.
[50:29] I find this kind of, again, is what we wouldn't talk about outdoors in the economy.
[50:33] We talked about the benefit of people visiting here.
[50:35] we're talking about, I mean, communications has done so much
[50:37] and quite a little work on bringing people to pick
[50:40] and county to face it.
[50:41] We wanted to spend money.
[50:43] I mean, this came up when we were talking about when Mr. Trump
[50:47] had a rally here and we're trying to figure out the economic impact.
[50:50] One problem is it weren't a lot of hotels.
[50:51] And you were in that part of the county for people to stay in.
[50:53] So they came and left.
[50:55] And we missed an opportunity to work on it in touch.
[50:58] So like to me, if there's a few more hotels in the area
[51:02] that tends to have a very positive impact.
[51:04] They eat in our restaurants.
[51:05] They buy our gas.
[51:07] They enjoy the beauty that we're working so hard to protect.
[51:11] And y'all were making it, I mean, not y'all, I'm sorry.
[51:14] We haven't voted.
[51:15] Ban excepted me geographically saying
[51:17] that they're not allowed in the sports of the county.
[51:19] And I think that feels like a little bit.
[51:21] I hear more on the blue, but just not on the perspective.
[51:24] Right, that just feels like a little bit.
[51:25] Definitely.
[51:26] It's not a little bit.
[51:27] I think there's an intent.
[51:29] So we wanted to create some of their recommendations in touch, right?
[51:33] But in terms of that, the staff have a strong set on
[51:36] type papers, I'll go through.
[51:39] Okay, I mean, I don't think, I don't think
[51:45] Avenue Hotel, where the enclosure to the municipality
[51:52] where there's just a set of system, a sewer system,
[51:56] I don't think that the henders anybody
[51:58] they can join the beauty of pick-and-spel.
[52:02] I mean, I'm on
[52:05] anybody around pick-and-spel,
[52:09] stay in pick-and-spel,
[52:10] out of the town that you'll all over the county
[52:12] to enjoy the beauty of this county.
[52:14] I don't think that's a relevant argument.
[52:18] Where the hotel is located,
[52:21] if we had just five more hotels sitting
[52:25] ground in easily limestone pecans.
[52:30] Even liberty, nobody's going to put a hotel out of the middle of dates, right? I mean, it's just not going to be,
[52:40] so they're going to, they're going to feel closer to where there's, there's a lot more activity. So I would say, you know, pickings is, in my opinion, is a prime opportunity, because you have, it's a pass through to the lakes, right, for people to come and enjoy.
[53:01] see any beauty and what we have here in Piccans County.
[53:10] They're going to build one up in the hills of close to North Carolina.
[53:15] Personally, I don't think that it's either going to be easy or do that.
[53:18] Just because of the training loan and the rock involved,
[53:22] if you're going to have to move to even built something.
[53:27] I mean, just where we are in the state, any of us, it's just going to come and sense to me if you apply it says they're going to be closer to a sewer system and not be even an area where it's going to require to have a safety tank because that footprint is for their project is going to be way bigger and I would say a lot more expensive.
[53:56] I agree with you that it's going to make it less like little bits, like is it our drug?
[54:00] Do we have to regulate that?
[54:01] It's the natural market, it's good to determine if they want investment in that amount.
[54:08] So, we haven't had, we haven't had a second reading machine,
[54:15] so that would be to tend it.
[54:19] We won't have a second reading on it, but we might need to make a recommendation to do the draft
[54:26] It's like, are you?
[54:28] Tim tonight?
[54:29] Yeah.
[54:29] Oh, yes.
[54:30] OK.
[54:30] I'm making a work of it.
[54:32] I'm making a work of it.
[54:33] OK.
[54:34] I'll make a work of it.
[54:34] I'll make that move.
[54:36] I'll text this.
[54:38] I'd like to make an amendment that we
[54:39] remove language requiring public water and public
[54:43] server.
[54:50] You need to explain that already.
[54:55] For once, twice to your motion stand.
[55:00] You've done it in your second.
[55:02] Anybody have a further discussion on this?
[55:07] Does the same rate right hand?
[55:10] Does it close the same side, and passes on to S?
[55:13] Was that, did you, did you, did you, did you pass?
[55:14] You opposed that was part of the quarter one.
[55:17] Okay, next item up is going to be a list on this.
[55:20] That's just on that.
[55:21] Right. Here we are in a second.
[55:22] That's just maybe a quarter.
[55:23] That's a question.
[55:24] I have some questions.
[55:27] Next is three A.
[55:29] This is going to be developmental area map with county district
[55:32] Ors, council, letting you struggle throughout.
[55:38] One of the big concerns when I was not the doors was controlling the growth of Dickens'
[55:44] camp.
[55:45] And so in my district, we have a couple areas you can see on the map, on the left, those
[55:51] green areas where you can put eight houses per acre, which I believe is a place of very extreme
[56:05] to manage and pawn power infrastructure in the account.
[56:11] So what I have proposed in order to slow the growth that everybody is concerned about
[56:17] is to change the designation for that area to an agricultural where it's one acre lots,
[56:25] which if you look north and south, it just blends right in on the right.
[56:30] We'll dictate, and then there'll be one acre, one acre, lots there, and then you'll still have in the light blue area running north to south, between Liberty and Pickins, half acre, lots.
[56:48] So you still have, you'll still have those half acre lots there, but we won't have the density of eight houses per acre, we'll have one house per acre.
[57:00] which was in the pilot control density of our area in specifically in my district.
[57:12] Okay, there's going to be a second reading, so do I hear a motion on that?
[57:17] Make a motion that we accept, and then we map it.
[57:21] Okay, I'm going to, I'm going to second it, and I need to go.
[57:25] Yeah.
[57:28] Okay, so I have a lot of problem that we're considering a singular map
[57:33] when this map was the result of a two year discussion
[57:35] as part of an entire review, yes.
[57:38] Now, staff started with proposal for that map
[57:42] that we are far away from, and we ended up with something
[57:45] that was done with a lot of politics,
[57:47] and a lot of change in my neighborhood changes in Syria.
[57:50] So to come in two years later and change it
[57:53] is to do something that didn't take into account
[57:56] the entire conversation.
[57:59] If you continue to remove any density in account,
[58:01] You are saying that we only want one home's on one acre, which are around here are not going to cost less to $500, and they're only going to be.
[58:11] We are making decisions to no longer have affordable, forget affordable, attainable houses in thick and county.
[58:18] If you continue to expand to one house for acre, you're saying we would like sprawl because it's a lot harder for EMS and please and all this to do one acre separated, and you're saying that we would like all of our houses to be worth.
[58:32] So that, I mean, it even landed to seven conditions, not individual lives, so many people.
[58:38] Yeah, if you own your one life, yeah, these are subdivisions, which is how you more
[58:42] affordably billed homes.
[58:44] It's a way, like, like, like, like, like, like, we just changed a lot, like, and that's not true.
[58:50] That's not true.
[58:50] That's not true.
[58:50] Right.
[58:52] And open three subdivisions already have 50% of the land that you cannot know.
[58:57] We already made where we said, we don't want strong.
[59:01] We want houses to be near each other in one area so they can be open in the up.
[59:06] If we require one acre lots and 50% sprawl, those homes are going to be way above.
[59:12] Saying, you only the richest people who want to live on an acre, and who are allowed to move here.
[59:19] And when you send your remains, just take one district and change it without changing the others.
[59:24] You made it even less dense overall and made all of the homes any future homes we've got more expensive.
[59:29] We're not having a conversation here about going into any other areas and adding back the little more density there to encourage your space development that works or could possibly be affordable for anyone
[59:39] You're just doing it in one area. So you're you're you're not saying smart growth. That is not the word and it is no growth
[59:45] It is saying things do not live here and we hope your children don't want to appear
[59:49] And we hope your teachers and your nurses don't want to live there because they're not going to be able to buy a house
[59:54] And my little bit that I could control is basically drawing some more and all that.
[59:59] Now!
[1:00:00] We didn't show anything else. We just made it harder to make a subdivision here, which I know everyone thinks that's a bad word, but those are the houses that I help my children come back and live in and they're not going to be able to do it here.
[1:00:10] My second point is that, do you see how this previous green and over here touches the city of easily? You just made it harder for someone to build a subdivision? What are they going to do? If they all not land or sell that land? They're going to annex into the city of easily. The majority of complaints we get are people who don't want any message.
[1:00:28] That is the biggest thing that is happening.
[1:00:30] And when you make it harder to develop in the county,
[1:00:33] you incentivize developers and landowners
[1:00:36] who have the right to make as much money
[1:00:38] from selling their land as they want to get
[1:00:40] and extend to the city to then be able to build
[1:00:43] denser housing that's actually more affordable
[1:00:44] for the developer and the buyer
[1:00:47] takes changes to property tax on it
[1:00:50] and increases the size of our cities,
[1:00:53] you just made it extraordinarily attractive
[1:00:55] for city of easily to grow.
[1:00:57] And for all of that land around there to be annexed because everyone of those homeowners is going to want to get the most landowners going to get the most money they can and they sell it.
[1:01:05] So we have not only made it impossible for some divisions to come in affordably.
[1:01:10] We have not added density anywhere and we just incentivize the city of Italy to annex anyone who owns landowners.
[1:01:15] But cannot understand why we would do something in a vacuum.
[1:01:19] Because I just don't understand.
[1:01:21] I think a lot of your exaggerating in a lot of case.
[1:01:24] For example, when you said,
[1:01:26] all these changes look the administration match.
[1:01:29] I didn't make one change in my district.
[1:01:31] That is what the administration proposed for me.
[1:01:33] Yeah, you're in the rural, it's district.
[1:01:35] But what you just said, all these changes,
[1:01:37] that there was no changes at all.
[1:01:39] Right.
[1:01:40] Another second is, it was a one-acre minimum of 50% open space.
[1:01:45] It's up to digits.
[1:01:46] That light blue areas is hand-hater and it's 40%.
[1:01:50] So again, that's incorrect.
[1:01:53] No growth.
[1:01:54] I mean, there's 308 premise issue for houses last year
[1:01:57] in the county area.
[1:01:58] So there's growth going on.
[1:02:00] It's just not wide open growth.
[1:02:01] It's just destroying the world.
[1:02:03] Unless they can't calibrate on Facebook,
[1:02:04] but you can manage my point, I'm listening to you.
[1:02:08] You want to just run over the rural list of this county.
[1:02:11] You want to destroy the tree canopy.
[1:02:13] You can construct it and you want to get the roads.
[1:02:16] What does need to be light?
[1:02:17] It gets what the nothing might.
[1:02:19] they're not going to be done. They can barely take them forward to stick. They're lucky if they catch
[1:02:24] them up on the highway, except for their roads to tell. So they're not going to be whining.
[1:02:28] It's just not enough. The infrastructure is being stripped. We've got to build another
[1:02:34] resource. We have enough dump trucks. We're trying to catch up now in the future if it
[1:02:39] becomes a problem. Then we can ease these restrictions. But right now we're still behind
[1:02:43] for so many different ways because this road is just taken off and we went from a period
[1:02:49] six years ago without almost no restrictions. We're just trying to catch out.
[1:02:55] So I don't, I don't, I think a lot of what you said was exaggerated and true, frankly.
[1:03:03] I respectfully would the value, I have five acres with my house and I wasn't anywhere close
[1:03:10] a million dollars. So somebody's going to pay a half a million dollars. I'm going to cut my
[1:03:18] proper stuff and let him pay me a half a million dollars for four acres on my property and
[1:03:25] keep the one for myself. And I'll sell that and I'll leave your app a million here. I mean, that's
[1:03:33] just ridiculous. So that's
[1:03:39] why I think that was an extremely good thing.
[1:03:42] When you have denser houses, that improves tax revenue to the county that allows you to invest in residential recycling centers.
[1:03:52] A house on one acre does not pay for itself.
[1:03:57] That's what we were told by staff when we started the UDSF.
[1:04:01] A house on one acre does not pay for itself in terms of services required.
[1:04:06] Now, the county is not in the bay bay houses on either wheel.
[1:04:09] Yes.
[1:04:09] both the plot by how many acres of the so-called, how much strain is that going to put on
[1:04:14] infrastructure, how much strain is that going to put on all the far part of the property in
[1:04:18] the house. That may not, that may not, that may not, that may not, that may not, that may not, that may not.
[1:04:22] They cannot be one of the main property taxes. But they also put a load on the existing infrastructure.
[1:04:29] So you've got, I mean, that you cannot develop yourself in your prosperity. Right, but you have
[1:04:39] things to keep the county.
[1:04:43] You can't.
[1:04:44] You can't.
[1:04:44] You can't.
[1:04:44] Explain where you're wearing.
[1:04:45] I mean, that's what I'm saying.
[1:04:46] You're putting the additional strain on it.
[1:04:49] But let me stop.
[1:04:50] Don't pay for the strain.
[1:04:52] You can't.
[1:04:53] It's not.
[1:04:53] You're not a little proud that you can not attack your way into prosperity.
[1:04:58] I'm not.
[1:04:58] It is not how it works.
[1:05:00] I want to talk.
[1:05:01] I'm trying to attack.
[1:05:02] I'm trying to attack the way into paying our bills.
[1:05:04] I'm trying to think she said we needed to do it.
[1:05:05] Like it's banned drugs.
[1:05:07] You have to have a bigger tax phase to do that.
[1:05:08] or you have to increase access.
[1:05:10] The other day, the position of job will be left
[1:05:11] with our county council.
[1:05:13] Do you want to expand your tax base or raise taxes
[1:05:15] after your treat for this?
[1:05:17] At the time, we've got so many people moving
[1:05:19] to this area of the country, that that is not a problem.
[1:05:23] And they brought us to people with coming here,
[1:05:26] then that baby of problems.
[1:05:28] But right now, that is not the case.
[1:05:32] Yeah, if you look at Anderson, Greenville,
[1:05:34] what they did in the visual lots on septic.
[1:05:39] Think Anderson went to an acre minimum,
[1:05:41] and I think wrinkles of acre hand.
[1:05:44] Man, nature, they're worried about
[1:05:47] dumping all that sewage into the environment.
[1:05:50] Now, we're still at a half acre,
[1:05:51] so it's very generous relative to the surrounding county.
[1:05:55] So I agree with, you know,
[1:05:57] I think you're making a good point there.
[1:05:58] I mean, right now there's still building house
[1:06:00] in a pretty good clip.
[1:06:02] No, we manage our money.
[1:06:03] I think we'll be okay.
[1:06:05] I just, this idea doesn't want to just accelerate growth, it's just not a good idea.
[1:06:10] All right.
[1:06:10] I never said this needed to become denser.
[1:06:12] It's like, oh, I can never want that.
[1:06:13] I need to, you know, to see that you can't just keep jumping from eight houses and
[1:06:19] acres of one house and a completely changes the ability of people to have homes to live
[1:06:23] in.
[1:06:24] And Alex, you put on Facebook just the other day.
[1:06:27] Thanks to the UDSO, we have slowed down applications for development only one that's
[1:06:31] made through the process at the time.
[1:06:32] that's sure about that. Right. So, so the map is working. Right. So why do we need to reduce it even more?
[1:06:38] So what about that? What about that? That's working. So you have succeeded in slowing down current.
[1:06:42] And the goal was really behind-unit infrastructure. People were unhappy with how we're just running
[1:06:49] over the world, this world, this is kind of changing. It's changing. It's going to happen. It's clear
[1:06:54] cutting. So we took a decision made as you can three years ago. I came to some divisions too.
[1:07:02] make to lower the density and it's having the fact that.
[1:07:06] And I'm pleased with a lot of the work we did on removing clear accounting on having
[1:07:10] local space.
[1:07:12] I think that repairing and said that there's a lot that I very fond that it's now and
[1:07:15] with the work that we did.
[1:07:17] But at that point there's been a complete shift from that's put density in some places
[1:07:22] so that the place is going to be a more rural.
[1:07:24] That's the trick.
[1:07:25] If you keep saying we want to protect a rural part of this county, the way you protect a rural
[1:07:29] part is a
[1:07:30] Nowing for it to be denser in other parts. And the best place to do that is around cities, including easily
[1:07:35] our largest South Booker meeting with the Department. Very important. Okay.
[1:07:40] It's his district. He knows its best in his district. Come on above for it. The problem you have in
[1:07:45] CUNSEN is the University wants to grow and grow and grow and grow. And they've run out of space. Where they're going to put these students. They've already
[1:07:55] annexed to central and they got to grow up, they got to go up and there's this desire within the
[1:08:04] cleansing apparatus, whether it's the school, the city council, the most of them anyway to reach out into the
[1:08:09] county and make it dance so we can put more students in our school. People in my district don't support
[1:08:14] it. Okay, the university's big enough. Okay, if they don't have enough room there, that's their problem.
[1:08:20] thing to manage it. And I understand what you're at. You're right here. I believe you're part of
[1:08:28] that belief that I'm in clubs, but that's classical cities that continue to grow and everybody else
[1:08:33] is expensive. And I don't feel that, buddy. Just in the right area we have a lot more people than students
[1:08:39] who live in clubs and one of the big problems is that faculty and families are being priced out
[1:08:44] because student housing is more expensive. So if you want your faculty and your families to live
[1:08:48] anywhere if you're. We need houses. Well, the school used to have about 20,000 people in
[1:08:54] the school. There were 29,000. Yeah, that's all. There's only 30,000. Yeah, and it's awful.
[1:08:58] And I wish the state would talk for fire and come to the space. You're exactly right. I'm not
[1:09:02] saying I need y'all to build houses. Like, I mean, yes, the density is at the southern part. But if
[1:09:08] you look at the comprehensive plans, we'll pick a county, which I ran when I was running for this
[1:09:13] office. It says, the density should be in the southern part of the county and it should be
[1:09:17] to our two big assistants. That is what the comprehensive plan says. And you're going in, there's
[1:09:22] nothing left, down by the county, partly because central annex some, and then because Mr. Wallace's
[1:09:28] district, we voted that. I couldn't do anything about that, and then now you're going to the
[1:09:32] next to the city and reducing part of that. So we're not even following our conference plan anymore.
[1:09:37] Yeah, I'll get to what you did that next year. When you made the conference a plan, did you talk to
[1:09:41] to see what they wanted, because I did, when I ran for office, I knocked on a lot of doors,
[1:09:53] and one of the biggest responses I got was, thank you for wanting to slow the growth.
[1:10:00] I told them why I moved here, why I chose Pickin's County. I came down here for three years
[1:10:06] from North Carolina. Looking, because I heard about Marine boat, I saw it on my
[1:10:12] What a great small city you know, so I started checking it out. I went a bunch of different areas around and I kept coming back to pick his county. Why because of what we have here
[1:10:24] three years I looked
[1:10:26] and looked and looked and kept coming back to pick his county.
[1:10:32] And ended up obviously choosing to live in county because of the rural.
[1:10:40] That's the right way to say it.
[1:10:43] This is the lifestyle that I wanted to live, and now that I'm here, I want to protect it.
[1:10:48] I had a lot of people tell me the exact same thing, they want to protect their way of life
[1:10:55] here.
[1:10:57] The problem is not loosening that density, you talk about the cities, they're going to
[1:11:07] that's going to be relevant. If we left that, it helps us per acre, they don't answer
[1:11:15] anything. Because they see the tax revenue, just like you said, and I'm telling you,
[1:11:20] you cannot tax your way into prosperity. That's common to me.
[1:11:26] Now, anybody else have any questions? So this is going to be a second reading on this
[1:11:33] The change, this delay is just for any other comments you put.
[1:11:38] Okay, those are favorite right hand, those are both same sign of passes, the order
[1:11:43] one.
[1:11:44] There are jammed and meeting, I'm going to make the motion to adjourn, set it, set it,
[1:11:50] I think the discussion with the neighbors right now.