Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

>> I LIKE TO WELCOME EVERYONE AND I'LL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.

[Item I]

[00:00:03]

I'LL READ THE REQUIREMENTS THAT I DECLARE THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW, NOTICE OF THIS MEETING WAS POSTED 72 HOURS IN ADVANCE.

IN ADDITION, THIS MEETING WAS POSTED ONLINE AND BEING HELD VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DECLARATION MADE BY TEXAS GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT, WHICH TEMPORARY SUSPENDS CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE TEXAS OPEN MEETING ACT TO HELP REDUCE THE POTENTIAL TRANSMISSION OF COVID-19.

THE TERMINATION OF A LEAST FOUR OF OUR COMMITTEE MEMBERS MUST BE IN ATTENDANCE.

I'LL ASK EACH COMMITTEE MEMBER TO INDICATE YOUR PRESENCE BY RESPONDING WITH SOME AUDIBLE SOUND OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT.

WALTER LISIEWSKI, HERE.

ROBERT HEINEMAN, JOHN ANTHONY BROWN?

>> HERE.

>> JOHN ANDERSON?

>> HERE.

>> ARTHUR BREDEHOFT?

>> HERE.

>> BOB ADAMS?

>> HERE.

>> MARY FUNDERBURG.

>> HERE.

>> MEMBERS PRESENT TO DECLARE THAT WE HAVE A CORE.

I'LL GO DOWN TO NUMBER 2, CONSIDER AN ACTION

[Item II]

REGARDING THE REVISED MINUTES OF THE MEETING FOR MAY 6TH AND MINUTES OF THE MEETING FOR JUNE 3RD.

HAS COMMITTEE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MINUTES?

>> YES, SIR. WE MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE REVISED MINUTES OF MAY 6TH AND THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JUNE 3RD AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

>> ALL RIGHT, DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

>> AYE, ARTHUR BREDEHOFT.

>> MARY, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM NUMBER 3, PUBLIC COMMENTS.

[Item III]

I'LL READ THE GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

ON MARCH 16TH, 2020, TEXAS GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT TEMPORARY SUSPENDED CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE TEXAS OPEN MEETING ACT TO HELP REDUCE POTENTIAL TRANSMISSION OF COVID-19.

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE BEGAN TO BE USED IN VIDEO CONFERENCE ON APRIL 3RD.

THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES WILL BE USED TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETING ACT AND HAVE BEEN MODIFIED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE COMMITTEE'S MEETING HELD BY VIDEO CONFERENCE.

KIM, WILL YOU KINDLY READ WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, PLEASE.

>> CERTAINLY. PARTICIPATION BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND OPEN MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE IS WELCOMED AND ENCOURAGED.

A PUBLIC COMMENT AGENDA ITEM IS INCLUDED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING TO PRODUCE THE MOST EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE PROCESS FOR ALLOWING CONSTITUENTS TO ADDRESS THE COMMITTEE.

AND THE FOLLOWING GUIDELINES FOR PARTICIPATING IN PUBLIC MEETINGS, WHICH HAS BEEN ADJUSTED DUE TO THE USE OF VIDEO CONFERENCING DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC EMERGENCY.

INDIVIDUALS WHO WISH TO MAKE GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS, ADDRESS A TOPIC THAT IS NOT INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA, OR WHO WISH TO ADDRESS SPECIFIC AGENDA ITEMS MUST DO SO UNDER THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AGENDA AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.

INDIVIDUALS WILL BE LIMITED TO A TOTAL OF THREE MINUTES REGARDLESS OF THE NUMBER OF TOPICS, AND INDIVIDUALS WHO PROVIDE AN UTILIZE A TRANSLATOR WILL BE LIMITED TO A TOTAL OF SIX MINUTES.

SPEAKERS WILL BE TAKEN IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY CALL IN.

STATE LAW PROHIBITS THE COMMITTEE FROM FORMERLY ACTING ON A SPECIFIC ITEM OR PUBLIC COMMENT UNLESS IT APPEARS ON THE POSTED AGENDA.

THEREFORE, ANY COMMITTEE DISCUSSION OF ITEMS NOT INCLUDED ON THE POSTED AGENDA IS LIMITED TO QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFICATION AND WHETHER OR NOT THE ITEM SHOULD BE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA.

SPEAKERS MAY EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS OR VIEWPOINTS ON AN ISSUE, BUT ARE NOT PERMITTED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE DEBATE ON AN ISSUE.

SPEAKERS WILL NOT USE PROFANITY.

COMMENTS FROM SPEAKERS CAN BE MADE TO THE COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE OR DIRECTED TO AN INDIVIDUAL MEMBER.

CONSISTENT WITH IN-PERSON MEETINGS, PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE TAKEN DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION OF THE AGENDA ITEM.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA THAT YOU MAY BE CALLING FOR.

WE WILL CALL UPON YOU IN PUBLIC COMMENTS SO THAT WE CAN IDENTIFY WHICH ITEMS YOU'RE PRESENT FOR.

IF YOU'RE PRESENT FOR AN ITEM THAT'S GOING TO BE LATER DISCUSSED IN THE MEETING, WE WILL PUT YOU ON HOLD IN THE QUEUE AND ASK YOU TO HIT STAR NINE ON YOUR PHONE, WHICH WILL ALLOW US TO SHOW THAT YOU'VE RAISED YOUR HAND AND THAT'S THE ITEM YOU'RE PRESENT FOR WHEN WE GO THROUGH THOSE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.

THE ADDITIONAL NOTES FOR THOSE WISHING TO CALL IN; WHEN CALLING IN, YOU'LL BE PLACED IN THAT QUEUE.

YOU'LL BE CALLED UPON IN THE ORDER WHICH YOUR CALL WAS RECEIVED.

IF YOU RECEIVE A BUSY SIGNAL WHEN CALLING IN AND THE PUBLIC COMMENTS PERIOD IS NOT CONCLUDED, PLEASE HANG UP AND CALL BACK.

THE COMMITTEE WILL MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO ENSURE THAT ALL CALLERS HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.

WE HAVE BEEN MADE AWARE WHEN WHEN YOU CALL BACK, YOU MAY NEED TO USE ONE OF THE ADDITIONAL PHONE NUMBERS THAT'S IN THE LIST.

SO KEEP IN MIND MORE THAN ONE PHONE NUMBER IN CASE YOU DO GET DISCONNECTED.

IF YOU'RE WATCHING THE VIDEO OF THE MEETING WHEN YOU ARE CALLED UPON TO SPEAK, PLEASE MUTE THE VOLUME OF YOUR COMPUTER BEFORE SPEAKING TO AVOID THE AUDIO FEEDBACK FOR THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS, THERE IS A BRIEF LAG BETWEEN THE AUDIO AND THE VIDEO FEEDS.

AFTER YOU HAVE BEEN CALLED UPON,

[00:05:01]

YOU CAN DISCONNECT THE PHONE CALL AND CONTINUE TO WATCH THROUGH THE LIVE STREAM BROADCAST.

>> ALL RIGHT, VERY GOOD.

DO WE HAVE ANYBODY IN QUEUE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS?

>> WE DO. I SHOW WE HAVE 10 CALLERS.

>> FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS OR FOR ITEMS?

>> LET'S TRY SOMETHING NEW.

I SHOW 10 PHONE CALL NUMBERS IN THE QUEUE.

IF ONE OF THESE CALLERS IS PRESENT AND WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ONLY IN PUBLIC COMMENTS AS OPPOSED TO DURING AN AGENDA ITEM, COULD YOU PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND BY SELECTING STAR NINE ON YOUR PHONE IF YOU ARE LOOKING TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC COMMENTS.

I HAVE ONE THAT HAS RAISED THEIR HAND FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> CALLER ENDING IN 8059, YOU ARE PRESENT WITH THE COMMITTEE TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC COMMENTS.

>> WELCOME, CAN WE HAVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

>> THIS IS FOR THE CALLER ENDING IN 8059.

I'LL TRY GOING TO THE NEXT ONE.

IS THIS CALLER ENDING IN 8059?

>> YES, I'M THERE.

>> EXCELLENT. YOU'RE PRESENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS PORTION OF THEIR AGENDA.

>> ALL RIGHT, LET ME MUTE MY VIDEO FEED.

YES, MY NAME IS DAVID PRATT.

I LIVE AT 15 BLUFF CREEK PLACE IN ALDEN BRIDGE AND I'M A MEMBER OF THE RDRC FOR ALDEN BRIDGE.

THE PUBLIC COMMENT I WANTED TO MAKE IS THAT WE HAVE BEEN WITHOUT MEETINGS GOING ON NOW, ALMOST SIX MONTHS.

WE'VE SEEN INFORMATION ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE MAY GET VIDEO CONFERENCING STARTED SOON FOR US SO THAT THAT WE MAY RESUME OUR MEETINGS, AND I WAS WONDERING IF THERE WAS ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THAT TO GET THESE BACK GOING. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AS YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T OPEN UP A DIALOGUE DURING PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT YOUR ITEM WAS NOTED.

THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE?

>> YEAH. THE NEXT CALLER I HAVE ENGAGED IS CALL ENDING IN 2227.

>> I THINK I MADE A MISTAKE, I WANT TO COMMENT WHEN IT GET DOWN TO OUR ITEM.

>> UNDERSTOOD, I'LL GO AHEAD AND PUT YOU BACK IN THE QUEUE AND WHEN YOUR ITEM COMES UP, YOU CAN HIT STAR NINE AT THAT TIME.

>> OKAY, LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING REAL QUICK.

THE VIDEO ZOOM IS LAGGING BEHIND WHAT YOU ALL ARE SAYING FOR SOME REASON.

>> AT THE TIME OF YOUR ITEM, I WILL GIVE A PRESENTATION.

THERE WILL BE ENOUGH TIME IN THE PRESENTATION THAT YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW THAT YOUR ITEM IS BEING PRESENTED

>> OKAY. THANK YOU, MA'AM.

>> ANYBODY ELSE?

>> I DO NOT SHOW ANY OTHER CALLERS WITH HANDS RAISED FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4, CONSIDERATION AND ACTION REGARDING THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR INTERIM ACTION DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

AS YOU REMEMBER GUYS, THIS IS WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME.

SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT WE PUT IN PLACE, THE SIGNS, REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF NOTICES THAT WE SEND OUT, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED? ANY COMMENTS PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE?

>> NOT AT THIS TIME. NO, SIR.

>> OKAY, WE'LL MOVE ON THEN TO ITEM NUMBER 5,

[Item V]

CONSIDERATION AND ACTION REGARDING THE DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COVENANTS, RESTRICTION, EASEMENTS, CHARGES AND LIENS IN THE WOODLANDS DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC.

AS YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHERE WE'VE RELINQUISHED THE RDRCS

[00:10:02]

AND OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE COVENANT'S GROUP.

ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS, OR ANY CONCERNS, OR CHANGES THEY WANT TO MAKE?

>> WALT, IT'S ARTHUR. I HAVE A CONCERN, IT'S THAT WE DON'T HAVE A CLEAR PLAN TO RESTART THE RDRCS.

WE HEARD ONE PUBLIC COMMENT ABOUT THAT.

THERE'S OTHER COMMENTS THAT ARE COMING FROM RDRCS THAT WANT TO GET STARTED AND WE'RE HEARING SOME RDRCS DON'T WANT TO GET STARTED TO FACE-TO-FACE.

BUT WHEN WE STARTED THIS TEMPORARY AUTHORITY, WE EXTENDED IT TO MAY, WE REVIEWED IT IN MAY, AND AT THE TIME WE AGREED TO GO TO JUNE.

WE'RE HERE ON JULY 1, I WOULD ASK THE COMMITTEE IS THAT WE TERMINATE THE TEMPORARY AUTHORITY AT THE END OF JULY AND ASK THAT STAFF COME BACK NO LATER THAN OUR NEXT MEETING WITH A CLEAR PLAN TO START THE RDRCS ON AUGUST THE 1ST.

IT'S CLEAR IN THE COVENANTS THAT THE RDRCS HAVE TO MEET AT LEAST ONCE A MONTH.

IT IS AN ELECTED GROUP THAT REPRESENTS THE RESIDENTS.

IT REALLY IS TIME TO START AND RESTART THE RDRCS AND LET THEM PERFORM THEIR FUNCTION OF TAKING CARE OF THE RESIDENTS' BUSINESS.

STAFF HAS DONE A GREAT JOB UP TO THIS POINT, BUT I THINK IT'S TIME TO GET THAT ELECTED GROUP BACK IN ACTION TO REPRESENT THE RESIDENTS.

LET US THEN ONLY TAKE ON THE APPEALS APPLICATIONS WHICH FIT VERY WELL INTO THE ROLE OF THE DSC.

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT?

>> SIR, I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION REGARDING THE STRUCTURE OF WHAT THE RDRC NEEDS.

BASICALLY, EVEN IF THEY DON'T MEET IN PERSON, OBVIOUSLY, THEY NEED TO MEET ONLINE, TYPICALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW, AND I'M SURE THAT ALL THE VILLAGE ASSOCIATIONS ARE DOING AS WE SPEAK LATELY.

SO THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING, RIGHT? THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING ONLINE SYSTEM LIKE ZOOM OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, CORRECT?

>> I WOULD ASSUME, YEAH.

>> MY QUESTION WOULD BE, SO THEY JUST NEED STAFF TO WORK WITH THEM BASICALLY TO GET THE APPLICATIONS AND STUFF LIKE THAT READY FOR THEM, JUST LIKE OUR STAFF GETS THE STUFF READY FOR US. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> I WOULD THINK THAT'S CORRECT SINCE EACH RDRC HAS A STAFF THAT DOES, WHEN THEY HAVE IN-PERSON MEETINGS, PREPARES ALL THE APPLICATION, GETS THE POWERPOINT READY, HAS THE MEETING PREPPED UP, AND ACTUALLY RUNS THROUGH ALL THE APPLICATIONS AT THE MEETING THE RDRC MEMBERS AND ANY OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD JOIN THAT FACE-TO-FACE MEETING.

>> SURE. THE ONLY SUPPORT THEY NEED IS BASICALLY GETTING ACCESS TO SOME KIND OF ONLINE MEETING, RIGHT? THAT'S THE ONLY THING STOPPING THEM AT THIS TIME? IF WE WERE TO SAY, "LET'S START MEETING," WHAT WOULD HOLD THEM BACK TO NOT BE ABLE TO MEET?

>> I CAN SPEAK TO THAT, IF I MAY?

>> OKAY.

>> STAFF HAS PREPARED A WORKSHEET FOR THE BOARD TO REVIEW AND CONSIDER THE FUNDING, FOR LICENSING, FOR THE STAFF IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THOSE MEETINGS.

THAT WILL BE GOING TO AN UPCOMING BOARD MEETING FOR THE BOARD TO APPROVE THE FUNDING FOR THE

>> OKAY. SO WE HAVE FUNDING TO CONSIDER THEN AS WELL?

>> YES, SIR.

>> OKAY.

>> STAFF WILL BE PREPARED AND WILL CONTINUE PROVIDING THOSE SERVICES WITH AN AGENDA, WITH THE POWERPOINTS, ETC, AS WE HAVE IN THE PAST.

IT WILL BE WITH THE BOARD TO APPROVE THE FUNDING FOR THAT TOO.

>> RIGHT. THANK YOU HENNIE.

>> IF I COULD ASK, WHEN IS THAT SCHEDULE TO GO BEFORE THE TOWNSHIP BOARD?

>> I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHICH TOWNSHIP BOARD MEETING IT'S GOING TO GO TO, THE FIRST OR THE SECOND, BUT STAFF WILL BE PREPARED FOR THE FIRST MEETING FOR THE MEMO TO BE COMPLETED.

IT IS 99 PERCENT COMPLETE RIGHT NOW AND IT WILL BE SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION AT AN UPCOMING MEETING.

I'M JUST NOT EXACTLY SURE WHICH BOARD MEETING, SIR.

>> WILL STAFF BE READY TO START AUGUST THE 1ST FOR THE RDRCS TO START TO MEET?

>> ONCE WE RECEIVE THE APPROVAL, THE IT DEPARTMENT WILL NEED TO THEN PURCHASE THE LICENSES.

STAFF WILL HAVE GONE THROUGH SOME TRAINING BY THEN.

WE EXPECT TO BE READY IN AUGUST FOR THE MEETINGS.

>> OKAY.

>> WALT, I WOULD SAY THAT WE WOULD STILL WANT TO CONSIDER THAT THE TEMPORARY AUTHORITY OF THE DSC WOULD END AT THE END OF JULY SO WE CAN REALLY GET READY FOR THE RDRCS.

IT STILL GIVES US ONE ADDITIONAL MEETING IN JULY SHOULD WE HAVE TO TAKE TEMPORARY AUTHORITY INTO AUGUST FOR TECHNICAL REASONS

[00:15:01]

THAT THE EQUIPMENT WOULDN'T BE READY OR THE LICENSES DIDN'T SHOW UP IN TIME.

BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO DEMONSTRATE TO RDRCS WE'RE READY AND WE WANT THEM TO GET GOING.

>> THAT'S CORRECT SIR.

>> DO WE GET A MOTION ON THAT?

>> I GUESS WE NEED TO ADD A MOTION.

>> WE HAD A MOTION WHEN WE EXTENDED IT BEYOND MAY TO TAKE IT BEYOND OUR LAST MEETING IN MAY.

SO WE DID USE THE MOTION SYSTEM TO GO THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.

>> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> IF I WOULD MAKE A MOTION, IS THAT THE TEMPORARY AUTHORITY THAT THE DSC IS UTILIZING TO HEAR THE RDRC APPLICATIONS BE TERMINATED AT THE END OF JULY IN ANTICIPATION THAT THE RDRCS WOULD BE READY FOR AUGUST MEETINGS, AND ITS STAFF WOULD COME BACK ON OUR NEXT MEETING WITH AN UPDATE ON A PLAN AND UPDATE ON WHAT ACTION THE TOWNSHIP BOARD TOOK ON THE FUNDING REQUEST TO PROVIDE THE TOOLS TO MAKE THE ONLINE MEETINGS OPERATIONAL FOR OUR RESIDENTS AND FOR STAFF.

>> SO FOR YOUR MOTION, IS THERE A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I.

>> I.

>> MARY, I.

>> ANY OPPOSE? ALL RIGHT, MOTION CARRIES.

>> BOARD THANKS, AND WE APPRECIATE WHAT STAFF HAS TO GO THROUGH, HENNIE.

WE KNOW IT'S NOT EASY TRYING TO PUT THAT PACKAGE TOGETHER TO GET ALL THE TECHNICAL ITEMS AND TOOLS READY TO CONDUCT SEVEN PLUS RDRC MEETING.

SO WE APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU AND THE STAFF IS DOING TO MOVE THIS PROCESS ALONG.

>> GOOD. THANK YOU SIR.

>> ITEM NUMBER 6, CONSIDERATION AND ACTION OF

[Item VI]

THE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS AND COVENANT VIOLATIONS IN SECTIONS VII AND VIII RECOMMEND FOR SUMMARY ACTION.

WE'LL GO THROUGH COMMERCIAL FIRST.

DOES ANY COMMITTEE MEMBER HAVE A SUMMARY ITEM YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE REMOVED?

>> NO, SIR.

>> NO, SIR.

>> NO, SIR.

>> CAN WE GO THROUGH THE SUMMARY ITEMS FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES?

>> IS TIM STILL HERE?

>> HE'S ON MUTE.

>> YEAH. HE'S NO LONGER ON MUTE. MY APOLOGIES.

IN REGARDS TO THE COMMERCIAL ITEMS THAT ARE RECOMMENDED FOR SOME REACTION, I HAVE 3 WATERWAY COURT 8701 NEW TRAILS DRIVE, SPECIFICALLY FOR THE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS.

I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE OTHER ITEMS ON THE AGENDA THAT 9391 GROGANS MILL ROAD, SUITE B5, 4455 PANTHER CREEK PINES, 1560 LAKE WOODLANDS DRIVE, 9595 SIX PINES DRIVE, SUITE 1140, AND THAT IS THE CONCLUSION OF THE COMMERCIAL ITEMS. FOR THE ITEMS THAT I CALLED OUT, IF ANYONE WAS PRESENT FOR THOSE SUMMARY COMMERCIAL ITEMS, YOU'LL RAISE YOUR HAND BY HITTING STAR 9, I CAN CALL UPON YOU TO SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS IN REGARDS TO THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS.

I SHOWED ONE INDIVIDUAL WHO RAISED THEIR HAND AT THE BEGINNING OF THE COMMERCIAL ITEMS. I'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL UPON THEM.

CALLER ENDING IN 9034, ARE YOU CALLING IN REGARDS TO A COMMERCIAL MATTER?

>> YES, I AM. MY NAME IS MERRIS BLAIR AND I'M CALLING IN REFERENCE TO B, THE WATERWAY LOFTS AT 1 WATERWAY COURT.

>> THANK YOU, MERRIS, FOR CALLING IN.

I DO NOT SHOW THAT THAT ITEM IS ON THE COMMERCIAL SUMMARY.

SO THAT WILL BE HEARD DURING THE FULL COMMITTEE REVIEW WHICH WILL BE FOLLOWED SO AT THIS TIME, I'LL GO AHEAD AND NOT DISCONNECT THE CALL, BUT CLOSE THE CALL AND LOWER YOUR HAND, AND THEN YOU CAN RAISE YOUR HAND WHEN YOUR ITEM IS UP FOR DISCUSSION.

>> OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> KIM, I HAVE A QUESTION. THE 3 WATERWAY COURT, WAS THAT TABLED?

>> CORRECT.

>> OKAY. SO THAT'S TABLED, AND THEN 1 WATERWAY COURT, WE'LL HEAR IN COMMITTEE, RIGHT?

>> CORRECT.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT IS THE ONE THAT THE LADY WAS JUST CALLING IN.

MERRIS IS CALLING FOR THAT ITEM AND THE OTHER ONE IS TABLED.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> THEY'RE VERY SIMILAR. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF SIMILAR TREE ISSUES AND LIGHTNING ISSUES THIS EVENING.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> OKAY. I DO NOT SHOW THAT THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS THAT

[00:20:03]

ARE PRESENT FOR THE REST OF THE COMMERCIAL ITEMS, IF YOU WANT TO ACT ON THOSE.

>> ALL RIGHT. CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT SUMMARY PROMOTIONAL ITEMS?

>> I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

CAN WE GO THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL SUMMARY ITEMS PLEASE?

>> COMPLETELY. THE RESIDENTIAL SUMMARY ITEMS FOR WHICH I SHOW SOMEONE IS PRESENT OR NO, SORRY.

THE RESIDENTIAL ITEMS FOR THE SUMMARY AGENDA ARE ITEM NUMBER 210, JENNY REN, ITEM NUMBER 311 BITTERWOOD, JUST TO CLARIFY, THAT ITEM IS WITHDRAWN AND THAT'S WHY IT IS ON THE SUMMARY.

ITEM 767 NORTHWIND SALE PLACE, ITEM 20 ADAM, 1028 SOUTH TALLOWBERRY DRIVE.

11 HALF-MOON COURT, 31 ROLLING STONE PLACE, 2 FLAT CREEK PLACE, 39 STONY BRIDGE CIRCLE, 6 SOUTH HIGHLAND PORT, 27 RUSSET WOODS, BOTH FOR THE WALKWAY AND THE DRIVEWAY WIDE LINK, 3 WINDRIDGE PLACE, 2712 ECHO STREET, 86 LAZY LANE, AND 42 WEST TALLOWBERRY DRIVE.

IF YOU ARE PRESENT FOR ONE OF THOSE ITEMS THAT I JUST CALLED OUT, IF YOU'D LIKE TO RAISE YOUR HAND BY HITTING STAR 9, I CAN CALL UPON YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> SOMEBODY JUST PUT THEIR HAND UP, KIM.

>> TWO JUST RAISED THEIR HANDS AND I'LL CALL ON THOSE.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> CALLER ENDING IN

>> HELLO, THIS ASHLEY RAMSEY.

I'M ITEM NUMBER 10 ABOUT THE NEW FRONT DOOR.

IS THIS THE TIME THAT I CALL IN OR LATER?

>> YOU ARE CORRECT. THIS IS THE TIME THAT YOU CALL IN AND THAT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, MS. RAMSEY, IS CURRENTLY BEING REVIEWED AND ACTED UPON BY THE COMMITTEE TO APPROVE AS PRESENTED.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

>> NO, MA'AM. I DO NOT HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

DO WE KNOW WHEN THERE MIGHT BE AN ANSWER? NO RUSH.

>> WITHIN A MATTER OF MINUTES, THE COMMITTEE SHOULD ACT ON ALL THESE ITEMS.

>> OKAY. WONDERFUL. WERE YOU-ALL ABLE TO SPEAK TO ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS THAT IS ALSO A REALTOR WITH THAT NOTE IN THERE THAT SHE THINKS IT WOULD INCREASE THE PROPERTY VALUE?

>>THE INFORMATION THAT YOU PROVIDED WAS SUBMITTED TO THE COMMITTEE, THAT THEY WOULD LIKE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE TO REVIEW.

THEY HAVE A PACKET OF INFORMATION THAT IS INCORPORATED IN THAT.

>> OKAY, GOOD.

>> YES.

>> OKAY. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GO TO THE NEXT COLOR.

CALLER ENDING IN 9695.

>> I'M SO SORRY. I HAD MY MYSELF MUTED HI, I'M REBECCA LAMBERT.

I'M THE HOMEOWNER AT 9 KNOLL PINE COURT, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR MY ADDRESS LISTED.

IT SAYS I'M ITEM NUMBER 19 ON MY LIST.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. THAT ITEM IS NOT ON THE RESIDENTIAL SUMMARY SO THAT WILL BE HEARD LATER ON DURING THE REGULAR FULL COMMITTEE REVIEW.

>> SURE, OKAY.

>> GREAT.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I THINK I HAVE ONE MORE.

>> HI, THIS IS LAURA WILSON CALLING IN AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DIDN'T MISS OUR OPPORTUNITY.

WE ARE ON FURTHER COMMERCIAL FOR GHINJ.

>> YOU ARE ON THE REGULAR AGENDA AND AFTER WE GO THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL SUMMARY ITEMS, WE'LL MOVE TO THE COMMERCIAL AGENDA FROM THAT.

>> FANTASTIC. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> IS THAT IT?

>> YES, SIR.

>> CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RESIDENTIAL SUMMARY ITEMS?

>> SO MOVED TO ACCEPT THE RESIDENTIAL SUMMARY ITEMS AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.

>> ALL RIGHT. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, KIM.

[00:25:01]

WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

[Item VII A]

CONSIDER IT AN ACTION OF THE COMMERCIAL APPLICATION AND COVENANT VIOLATIONS.

>> ABSOLUTELY. IF YOU'LL JUST GIVE ME ONE SECOND, I'LL GO BACK TO SHARING THAT SCREEN.

>> IS

>> YES, HE IS.

>> YEAH.

>> OKAY. CAN EVERYONE SEE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE PRESENTATION?

>> YES.

>> YES.

>> YES, KIM.

>> GREAT. SO THE FIRST ITEM FOR WHICH I SHOW I HAVE INDIVIDUALS PRESENT IS IN REGARDS TO ITEM NUMBER A.

FOR ALL OF THE CALLERS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN THE QUEUE, IF YOU ARE CALLING IN REGARDS TO ITEM A, WHICH WOULD BE THE INNOSPEC OILFIELD RECEIVE, CONSIDER, AND REVIEW THE STATUS REPORT BY INNOSPEC, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND HIT STAR 9 TO RAISE YOUR HAND NOW AND AT THE COMPLETION OF THE PRESENTATIONS, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL UPON YOU TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE CONSIDER, AND REVIEW THE STATUS REPORT BY INNOSPEC.

THIS IS THE LAUKIEN/INNOSPEC OILFIELD SERVICES PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2600 TECHNOLOGY FOREST BOULEVARD.

I KNOW EVERYONE IS FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROPERTY AND HAS SEEN ROUTINE CORRESPONDENCE IN REGARDS TO THE STATUS REPORT.

TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY, IT IS THE PROPERTY LOCATED HERE OUTLINED WITH THE RED SQUARE.

THIS IS BEING DISCUSSED IN REGARDS TO THE EQUIPMENT THAT IS ON THE ROOF AS IT RELATES TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEES PREVIOUS ACTIONS FOR THE HVAC AND CHILLER YARD.

THESE WERE THE MOST CURRENT PHOTOS THAT WE HAVE, WHICH WERE PROVIDED ON JUNE 2ND.

I WILL GO AHEAD AND DEFER TO BRETT STRONG FOR A STATUS REPORT UPDATE THROUGH THEIR LEGAL COUNSEL.

I ALSO DO HAVE TWO CALLERS THAT HAVE CALLED IN.

BRETT, DO YOU KNOW IF ONE OF THE CALLERS WAS MAYBE THE ATTORNEY WHO IS CALLING IN?

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT.

I DID REQUEST THAT HE LET US KNOW IF HE WAS GOING TO IT MIGHT BE THE STATUS REPORT WHICH I RECEIVED TODAY THROUGH THEIR COUNSEL AND THEN WE CAN GO TO THE CALLERS.

THAT'S PROBABLY THE BEST.

>> OKAY. WHY DON'T YOU GO THROUGH WHAT YOU RECEIVED, BRETT?

>> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMITTEE.

WELL LET ME BACK UP.

AS THE ACTION THAT WAS TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE IN MIDDLE OF MARCH ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

KIM HAS OUTLINED THAT THERE WERE THREE ITEMS THAT NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED.

ONE WAS ENCLOSING THE EQUIPMENT ON THE ROOF, THE SECOND WAS TO PROVIDE SOUND DAMPENING MATERIALS IN THOSE ENCLOSURES, AND THIRD TO PUT SOUND DAMPENING MUFFLERS OR SOME SORT OF SOUND DAMPENING ON THE EXHAUST STACKS WHICH YOU SEE THERE IN THE PICTURE THAT IS BEFORE YOU.

THE REPORT I RECEIVED TODAY IS THAT THE WORK TO REINFORCE THE STRUCTURE THROUGH THE BUILDING AND INTO THE FOUNDATION IS COMPLETE.

THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT THE STRUCTURE, BASICALLY WHAT THEY HAD TO DO IS PUT SOME REINFORCEMENTS IN TO ALLOW TO HOLD UP THIS AND THE OTHER IMPROVEMENTS.

THE WORK TO RE-INSTALL THE INTERIOR BUILD-OUT IS NEARING COMPLETION.

ON THE ROOF THE STUD FRAMING TO AFFIX THE SCREENING PANEL IS COMPLETE.

HOWEVER INNOSPEC ENCOUNTERED AN ISSUE WITH THE SHEET METAL SCREENS, THEY WERE MANUFACTURED AND DELIVERED BUT IN THE WRONG COLOR.

IT IS NOT ADVISABLE TO INSTALL THE SOUND ABSORBING PANELS WITHOUT THE METAL SCREEN PANELS ALSO INSTALLED.

BASICALLY AS OF FRIDAY, JUNE 26TH THEY EXPECTED THREE WEEKS TO GET THE CORRECTED PANELS.

SHIPPING DATE FOR THE ATTENUATORS WHICH WOULD BE THE MUFFLING EQUIPMENT FOR THE STACKS REMAINS TO BE THE WEEK OF JULY 20.

INSTALLATION OF THE ATTENUATORS WILL TAKE ONE TO TWO DAYS, THE METAL PANELS AND THE SOUND PANELS WILL TAKE THREE TO FOUR DAYS FOR BOTH.

GENERALLY IT APPEARS THE WORK WILL BE COMPLETE OR NEARLY COMPLETE BY THE END OF JULY. THAT IS THE REPORT.

I WOULD REMIND THE COMMITTEE THAT WHAT THE ACTION IN MARCH DID PROVIDE IS THAT THERE WOULD BE A FINAL PRESENTATION JUNE 1ST WITH THE HOPE THAT THE COMMITTEE COULD TAKE FINAL ACTION ON THE IMPROVEMENTS, OR BASICALLY THAT THE WORK IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE COVENANTS, AND STANDARDS, AND CONDITIONS.

THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD HOPE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE TODAY, SO THE COMMITTEE JUST NEEDS TO CONSIDER AT THIS POINT IS THERE ANY ACTION TO BE TAKEN WITH REGARD TO WHERE WE FIND OURSELVES TAKING INTO ACCOUNT COVID-19 AND OTHER ACTIONS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS.

>> WELL I THINK THE ORIGINAL FINISH BASICALLY DROP DEAD DATE WAS JUNE 30, CORRECT?

[00:30:05]

I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE HAD AGREED UPON.

>> THAT IS CORRECT MR. CHAIRMAN, IS THAT JUNE 30 WOULD BE THE FINISH DAY, THAT ON JULY 1 THE COMMITTEE WOULD TAKE ACTION WITH REGARD TO THIS MATTER.

>> BASED UPON EVERYTHING THAT'S TRANSPIRED WITH COVID-19 AND THIS DISRUPTION OF BUSINESS.

THINK IT'S SLACK ON THEIR PART OR ANYTHING.

I THINK PROBABLY EVERYBODY'S BEEN WORKING PRETTY HARD ON THIS, AND IF THEY CAN HAVE IT DONE BY THE ENDS OF JULY, THAT'S 30 DAYS LATE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S REALLY THAT BAD CONSIDERING EVERYTHING THAT HAS TRANSPIRED.

UNLESS SOMEBODY ELSE FEELS DIFFERENTLY ABOUT IT.

>> SURE, I AGREE WITH YOU.

>> THE RESIDENTS WOULD LIKE FLIGHT TO GET IT FINISHED, AND SO WOULD WE.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY JUST ADD SOME SUPPORT TO THE ADD.

I'M CURRENTLY GOING THROUGH MAJOR CONSTRUCTION AT OUR HEADQUARTERS AND I DEAL WITH THIS ON A DAILY BASIS.

THERE'S PLENTY OF MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES THAT HAVE BEEN POSTPONED OR DELAYED BECAUSE OF COVID-19, SO IT'S NOT JUST THEM THAT'S GOING THROUGH THIS, THERE'S MANY COMPANIES THAT ARE GOING THROUGH A CONSTRUCTION THAT THIS IS AFFECTING.

>> WALT, I'M VERY SURPRISED THAT THE DELAY IS ONLY 30 DAYS, SO I THINK THEY'VE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB TO REALLY TIGHTEN IT UP.

DO WE NEED A MOTION TO REVISE THE FINISHED DATE TO JULY 31ST, WHAT ACTION TO BE TAKEN IN OUR FIRST MEETING IN AUGUST?

>> MR. CHAIRMAN AND ARTHUR, I THINK IT'D PROBABLY BE GOOD TO AT LEAST HEAR FROM THOSE THAT ARE CALLING IN BEFORE THE COMMITTEE.

YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION AND HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, BUT BEFORE ACTION WE PROBABLY OUGHT TO AT LEAST HEAR FROM THOSE WHO ARE CALLING IN.

>> THE CALLERS TO COMMUNICATE THEIR MESSAGE. THANK YOU BRET.

>> THANK YOU BRET. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE PREPPED RIGHT NOW?

>> THAT'S ALL I HAVE SIR.

>> OKAY.

>> KIM, CAN YOU CHIME IN WITH THE CALLERS PLEASE?

>> ABSOLUTELY. CALLER ENDING IN 7177, ARE YOU PRESENT TO SPEAK ON INNOSPEC?

>> HI, YES, THIS IS NICOLE WINGER, ONE OF THE RESIDENTS IN HAROLD OAK.

I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO THE UPDATE AND I WOULD AGREE WITH WHAT WAS DISCUSSED AS LONG AS WE CAN DO WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW AT THE END OF JULY, JUST TO BUTTON UP TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WORK IS COMPLETED, THEN I THINK THAT'S FAIR.

>> GOOD, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, APPRECIATE THAT.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I'M SEEING IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE QUEUE THAT'S ONE OF THE OTHER ATTORNEYS FOR THE INNOSPEC, OR ARE THEY ALL THE RESIDENTS?

>> I JUST HAVE PHONE NUMBERS, SO I DON'T KNOW THEIR CALLER ENDING IN 8610, ARE YOU PRESENT ON BEHALF OF INNOSPEC OR ARE YOU PRESENT IN REGARD TO

>> I WAS PRESENT IN REGARD TO THE 86 I WAS HAVING SOME ISSUES GETTING THROUGH A WHILE AGO WHEN THE RESIDENTIAL WAS UP.

JUST WANTED TO SEE WHAT I NEEDED TO DO FOR THE UPPER LEVEL DECK.

>> YES, WE SPOKE ON THE PHONE EARLIER TODAY.

>> YES MA'AM.

>> THAT ITEM WAS HEARD UNDER THE SUMMARY CONSENT AGENDA AND IT WAS APPROVED ON THE CONDITION THAT THE IMPROVEMENT MEETS CODE AND PASSES FINAL INSPECTION.

I KNOW YOU HAD MENTIONED TO ME THAT YOU HAVE THAT, SO WE'LL MAKE SURE WE HAVE THAT IN OUR RECORDS, AND THE COMMITTEE HAS ACTED UPON ITEM WITH THAT APPROVAL.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> I DO NOT. I CAN PROVIDE THAT TO YOU, I'LL SHOOT YOU AN EMAIL WITH A COPY OF THAT PASSED INSPECTION FORM.

>> PERFECT. THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MY PLEASURE. THANK YOU.

>>

>> YES. I JUST WANTED TO DISCONNECT THE OTHER CALL.

CALLER ENDING IN 5324.

>> YES. THIS IS CHRIS CUNNINGHAM, AND JUST A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

THE FIRST ONE IS DIRECTED TOWARDS BRET.

LAST TIME WE TALKED YOUR SOUND CONSULTANT COULDN'T DO AN ONSITE BECAUSE OF COVID-19, AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT.

HAS THERE BEEN ANY PROGRESS ON THAT WITH HIM AT LEAST LOOKING AT THE MATERIAL AND THE PROCEDURE INNOSPEC'S GOING TO USE FOR THE SOUND OR MEDIATION?

[00:35:06]

>> MR. CUNNINGHAM ONCE AGAIN THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST AND FOR CALLING IN.

AT THIS POINT JUST TO CLARIFY AGAIN, THAT OUR FIRM HAS HIRED CONSULTING EXPERT.

WE HAVE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THAT CONSULTING EXPERT, AT THIS POINT THEY ARE BASICALLY ON HOLD AWAITING CERTAIN ACTIVITIES TO BE TAKEN WHEN THEY CAN GO OUT AND DO THE ANALYSIS.

THEY WILL BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE TAKES ACTION ON THIS AND THERE IS A CONSTRUCTION TO TAKE PLACE, THEY WILL BE ENGAGED AND THEY WILL GO OUT THERE.

BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING SO FAR AND THE DEADLINES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED, MY GUESS IS THAT WE WILL HAVE SOMEBODY OUT THERE IN JULY LOOKING AT WHAT IS BEING CONSTRUCTED AND HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED, AND WILL REPORT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.

>> THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.

THEN THIS IS MY SECOND QUESTION JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND IS, WHAT'S BEING TABLED RIGHT NOW IS TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE FROM BASICALLY THE END OF JUNE TO THE END OF JULY OR AUGUST 1 FOR INNOSPEC TO COMPLETE THE WORK?

>> I'LL RESPOND TO THAT.

THE DISCUSSION SO FAR HAS BEEN AROUND THAT, BUT THERE IS NOT A MOTION ON THE TABLE YET.

>> OKAY.

>> BUT IN THIS NEXT ACTION WILL BE.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ANYBODY ELSE IN THE QUEUE?

>> NO SIR.

>> ARTHUR, YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO YOUR MOTION?

>> HEY ARTHUR, YOU'RE MUTED.

>> THANK YOU. I WOULD ASK THE COMMITTEE TO EXTEND THE JUNE 30 DEADLINE FOR COMPLETION TO THE END OF JULY ON THE 31ST JULY, AND THEN FOR THE COMMITTEE TO REVIEW AND GET BRET'S UPDATED REPORT AT OUR FIRST AUGUST MEETING.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> BOB, SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>>

>> ANDERSON, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

IS THAT IT ON INNOSPEC THEN?

>> YES.

>>

>> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY.

I'M NOT SURE WHICH CALLERS WE HAVE PRESENT BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THE CALLS TO KNOW WHICH ITEMS WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS PRESENT.

I CAN JUST GO WITH THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

I KNOW ONE OF THE CALLERS.

ITEM B IS PRESENT.

IF YOU WANT, I CAN JUST GO CHRONOLOGICALLY AND ASK THEM TO RAISE THEIR HAND WHEN WE GET TO THEIR ITEM.

>> LET'S JUST DO IT THAT WAY.

WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING WHO'S HERE FOR WHAT.

>> CERTAINLY. SO THE FIRST ITEM FOR WHICH I HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT IS ITEM B,

[Item VII B]

WHICH IS GOING TO BE THE CONSIDERATION AND ACTION TO AMEND THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR A TREE-TRIMMING PERMIT AT THE WATERWAY LOFTS, WHICH IS LOCATED AT ONE WATERWAY IN THE VILLAGE OF TOWN CENTER.

LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY HERE, IT IS THE WATERWAY LOFTS.

THERE WAS A REQUEST THAT CAME BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE IN REGARDS TO SOME TRIMMING THAT WAS NEEDED TO TRIM UP THE AREA OF THE TREES, AS IT IS ADJACENT TO WATERWAY AVENUE AS WELL AS ONE PLACE OFF OF THE WATERWAY COURT NEAREST THE PARKING AREA.

THROUGH THE DELEGATION AGREEMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC, THIS ITEM WAS REVIEWED AND ACTED UPON BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE, WHICH IS YOUR COMMUNITY STANDARDS COMMITTEE, AND THEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STAFF PROCESSED THE APPLICATION OUT TO THEM IN REGARDS TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF TREE TRIMMING.

AFTER THAT OCCURRED, HERE IS THE INFORMATION THAT WAS ORIGINALLY SUBMITTED, WHICH WAS SEVEN TREES IN RED THAT THEY HAD ORIGINALLY REQUESTED FOR REMOVAL AND THIS WAS THE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR THAT PROPOSAL.

THIS WAS THEIR PRELIMINARY REVIEW.

AFTER REVIEW AND ACTION, AND THIS WAS WHAT WAS PROVIDED DURING THAT REVIEW AND ACTION PREVIOUSLY, THERE WERE AREAS WHERE THEY WANTED TO TRIM UP SOME OF THE TREES CLOSEST TO THE BUILDING AS THEY OVERHANG TOWARD THE BUILDING.

THERE WAS A REQUEST TO REMOVE SOME TREES, WHICH WERE THE ONES THAT WERE REPRESENTED HERE, AND THAT GOES THROUGHOUT THAT PORTION ALONG WATERWAY AVENUE AND THIS WAS OF THEIR ORIGINAL REVIEW AND ACTION FOR THAT REQUEST.

AFTER THAT PERMIT WAS PROCESSED OUT, HERE ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE RELATED TO THAT PERMIT.

[00:40:01]

THOSE CONDITIONS FOR THE TREE TRIMMING WAS ONLY TREE TRIMMING TO BE APPROVED.

IT RECOMMENDED THAT ALL TREE LIMBS WITHIN PROXIMITY TO, OR PHYSICALLY TOUCHING THE BUILDING OR OVERHANGING ANY OUTDOOR AMENITIES, SUCH AS THE BALCONIES, PATIOS, WALKWAYS ETC., WOULD BE PRUNED BACK APPROXIMATELY 4-5 FEET AT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF PRUNING.

THE COMMITTEE BELIEVED THAT NO TREE CONDITIONS WARRANTED REMOVAL FOR THE WATERWAY LOFTS.

SO THERE WAS, DURING THAT APPLICATION, NO ALLOWANCE OF TREES TO BE REMOVED AND THERE WAS AN IDENTIFICATION THAT IF THERE WERE ANY TREES THAT THEY FELT NEEDED TO BE REMOVED, THEY COULD RESUBMIT AND PROVIDE DOCUMENTS FROM A PROFESSIONAL ARBORIST NOTING ANY CONCERNS TO THE DAMAGE OF THE STRUCTURE OR ANY CONCERNS WITH THE TREE THEMSELVES.

THE TREES WERE TO BE PRUNED MINIMALLY AND IN A BALANCED MANNER SO AS NOT TO STRESS OR WEAKEN THE HEALTH OF THE TREE.

IDENTIFYING NOT TO TOP THEM.

NOTING THAT IF THERE WAS ANY WEAKENING OR DYING AS A RESULT OF PRUNING, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO REMOVE ANY TREES PROPERLY AND WOULD NEED TO DO REPLACEMENTS, CALIPER INCH PER CALIPER INCH WITH SPECIMEN TREES AND IDENTIFIED NO OTHER PERMITTING.

FOLLOWING THAT PERMIT GOING OUT, WATERWAY LOFTS THEN WENT FORWARD TO START THE TREE TRIMMING IN THE AREA AND THE CAD ADMINISTRATION STAFF RECEIVED A COMPLAINT THAT EXCESSIVE TRIMMING HAD TAKEN PLACE.

OUR CAD STAFF DID GO OUT TO VERIFY THE CONCERN AND A VIOLATION NOTICE WAS SENT REGARDING EXCESSIVE TRIMMING AND NOTING TREE REMOVALS.

THE STAFF ALSO OBSERVED A COUPLE OF TREES THAT WERE REMOVED OR VEGETATION THAT WAS REMOVED AND SO THEN THE OWNER RESPONDED IDENTIFYING THE REMOVAL OF ONE TREE AND INITIALLY CONTESTING THE CONCERN OF EXCESSIVE TREE TRIMMING AND TREE REMOVALS.

HOWEVER, DURING SOME OF THE COLLABORATION WITH THE APPLICANT, THEY DID NOTE THAT UPON FURTHER REVIEW, THEY IDENTIFIED THAT THERE WERE SOME AREAS WHERE THE TRIMMING OCCURRED THAT WAS ABOVE AND BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT THEY ORIGINALLY HIRED THEIR CONTRACTORS FOR.

SO THE FOLLOWING ARE SOME BEFORE AND AFTER PHOTOS OF THE AREA, BOTH WHEN THIS WAS REVIEWED BY YOUR COMMUNITY STANDARDS COMMITTEE AND PRIOR TO THE PERMIT BEING SENT OUT, WHICH WOULD BE WHAT YOU'D SEE HERE ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE AS YOU'RE WALKING ALONG THE AREA BETWEEN WATERWAY AVENUE, NEAREST THE BRIDGE, AND WATERWAY COURT.

THEN HERE IS THE AFTER PHOTO OF THAT SAME AREA, SO YOU CAN SEE THE CANOPY AREA AND HOW THAT HAS BEEN THINNED OUT.

THESE PHOTOS WERE TAKEN IN JUNE.

THESE WERE THE PHOTOS IN APRIL PRIOR TO THE PERMIT.

HERE ARE SOME OF THOSE AREAS.

THERE WAS ONE TREE THAT WAS IN THAT ORIGINAL PROPOSAL THAT WAS REQUESTED FOR REMOVAL.

THOSE TREES WERE IDENTIFIED AS NOT IN NEED OF REMOVAL.

THERE WAS TRIMMING THAT WAS ALLOWED AND THEN WE IDENTIFIED THAT THOSE TREES HAVE BEEN REMOVED SINCE THAT TIME.

HERE'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THAT VERY SAME TREE SO THAT YOU CAN SEE FROM ANOTHER VIEW, AND THEN THE AREA AFTERWARDS WHERE IT APPEARS THAT THAT TREE IS NO LONGER THERE, WHICH THEY DID IDENTIFY WAS A TREE THAT WAS REMOVED.

HERE'S A SMALLER VEGETATION SECTION THAT WE SEE, VARIES BETWEEN WHAT'S IN FRONT OF THE PINE TREE AND WHAT IS NO LONGER THERE, WHICH WAS ONE SMALL YAUPON, AND THE AREAS THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT ARE ALL PRIMARILY THE AREA HERE WHICH IS CLOSEST TO THAT WATERWAY BRIDGE AND NEAREST WATERWAY AVENUE.

HERE ARE SOME MORE EXAMPLES OF THAT AREA SOUTH OF THE LIMBS REMOVED.

IN THAT CONDITION OF APPROVAL, THERE WAS A NOTIFICATION FOR OVERHANGS TO BALCONIES, ETC., LIMITED PRUNING NO MORE THAN 4-5 FEET AND THIS WAS SOME OF THE EXCESSIVE TRIMMING THAT WAS IDENTIFIED WHEN THE COMPLAINT CAME IN THAT WAS IN ADDITION TO WHAT THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SPECIFIED, AND THOSE SHOW YOU IN VARIOUS AREAS.

HOWEVER, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS PHOTO IN THE MIDDLE, WHEN THEY DID HIRE THE CONTRACTOR TO COME THROUGH FOR THE TRIMMING AND SOME OF THE REMOVAL THAT OCCURRED, THEY DID ALSO INSTALL PLANTING AROUND THE UTILITY BOX, AND YOU'LL SEE THIS IN THIS PHOTO HERE AS WELL AS IN LATER PHOTOS, SO THERE WAS SOME ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING THAT WAS ADDED NOT PART OF THE PERMIT JUST DONE BY THE APPLICANT FOR BEAUTIFICATION AND SCREENING OF UTILITY BOX.

HERE IS ANOTHER VIEW, THAT EAST SIDE ALONG WATERWAY AVENUE, BOTH ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE WOULD BE YOUR BEFORE PHOTO SHOWING YOU THAT CANOPY OF TREES, AND THEN YOU'RE AFTER PHOTO SHOWING YOU THAT SIMILAR AREA AS WELL AS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF THAT SECTION HERE AND THE AREA WHERE THOSE TREES HAVE BEEN TRIMMED.

THESE GIVE YOU THE BEFORE PHOTOS OF THAT VEGETATION BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE WALL AS YOU'RE APPROACHING THE BRIDGE, AND THEN THIS WOULD BE THAT SAME AREA AFTER.

THIS ALL OCCURRED AROUND THE SAME TIME AS THE OPERATIONS CHANGING DUE TO COVID-19.

I APOLOGIZE IF ANY OF THE PHOTOS ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE DIFFICULT OR NOT THE EXACT ANGLES.

[00:45:05]

THEN THIS IS JUST TO GIVE YOU THE OVERALL VIEW OF WATERWAY AVENUE ALONG THE WATERWAY AND ALSO TO AFFIRM THAT THERE WERE NO CHANGES MADE TO THE AREA ALONG THE WATERWAY ITSELF.

IT'S THE WATERWAY AVENUE CLOSEST TO THE BRIDGE WHERE THE TRIMMING MOSTLY OCCURRED.

THE FOLLOWING IS THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED BY WATERWAY COURT.

THIS IS THE RESPONSE AND DOCUMENTATION FROM WATERWAY COURT.

I KNOW THIS INFORMATION WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR WORKSHEET AGENDA, BUT I'LL ALSO GO THROUGH THIS QUICKLY IN REGARDS TO WATERWAY LOFTS RESPONSE.

AT FIRST, FOR COVENANT ADMINISTRATION, THEY IDENTIFIED THAT THEY HAD RECEIVED THE LETTER.

THEY WANTED TO NOTE THAT THE BRANCHES THAT WERE DEAD OR BROKEN TOUCHING ANY PART OF THE BUILDING WAS THE AREA THAT WAS REMOVED, ANYTHING THAT MADE THE PARKING GARAGE THAT WAS NOT ACCESSIBLE, OR THE TRIMMING OF THE BRANCHES TOO LOW OR THICK, FOR A PERSON TO WALK FROM THE STAIRCASE TO THE SIDEWALK.

THEY ALSO IDENTIFIED THAT THEY DID HAVE ONE TREE THAT WAS REMOVED ON THE EAST SIDE AS THIS WAS THE DEAD TREE WITH NO LIVING BRANCHES, BLOOMS OR LEAVES, AND THEY WANTED TO NOTE THAT THEY DID PROPERLY REMOVE IT.

THEN THEY ALSO DID A FOLLOW-UP LETTER IN JUNE IDENTIFYING THAT WHEN THEY DISCUSS THE INFORMATION, THEY WANTED TO PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING WHICH ARE DOCUMENTS THAT I'LL GO THROUGH ABOUT DELIBERATING ON THE CLAIM OF EXCESSIVE TRIMMING, PICTURES ILLUSTRATING SOME OF THE BEFORE AND AFTER COMPARISONS IN THE AREAS OF THE LOFT, THE CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE BOARD AND THE POSITION THAT THERE WAS A GOOD FAITH IN FOLLOWING THE COMMITTEE'S ORDER FOR TRIMMING.

AS ADMITTED, ONE AREA DID RECEIVE EXCESSIVE TRIMMING BY THE CONTRACTORS, BUT THIS WAS NOT AT THE INSTRUCTION OF THE BOARD OR ANY REPRESENTATIVE.

IN REGARDS TO THE TREE REMOVAL CLAIM, ONE DEAD TREE WAS REMOVED PER THE REGULATIONS AND THE STUMP WAS REMOVED.

THE REGULATIONS THAT THEY'RE REFERENCING ARE IN REGARDS TO THE COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE PROPER REMOVAL.

HERE ARE THE EXHIBITS THAT WERE PROVIDED IN THE JUNE 1ST RESPONSE LETTER SHOWING THE BEFORE AND AFTER TRIMMING AS WELL AS SOME OF THE LIMBS AND BEFORE AND AFTER DEMONSTRATION.

HERE WAS THE EXHIBIT PROVIDED TO SHOW THE AFTER TRIMMING SO THAT THERE WAS CLEAR ACCESS TO THE STAIRWELL, AREAS WHERE LIMBS WERE TRIMMED SO THAT IT WOULDN'T CAUSE OBSTRUCTION TO THE LIGHTING.

ALSO, INCLUDED IN THAT WAS THE TRIMMING THAT SHOWED THE INFORMATION OF THE RECENTLY PLANTED SHRUBS AND GREENERY AROUND THE UTILITY BOX AND JUST A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF THAT FOR YOU IS REPRESENTED HERE SO THAT IT'S MORE CLEARLY VISIBLE OF THE CONCEALING OF THE UTILITY BOX.

THEN THE FOLLOWING WERE ALSO INCLUDED TO REPRESENT THE TREES ON WATERWAY COURT WHERE THOSE WERE ACROSS FROM LOFT NUMBER 1 AND BOTH THE BEFORE AND AFTER PICTURES OF THOSE TRIMMINGS AND EXAMPLES TO SEE THE TREES ON THE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY TO THE WATERWAY; SOME OF THE REVIEWS AFTER THE TRIMMING, AND THEY DID NOTE THAT UNFORTUNATELY, THE TREE CREW EXCESSIVELY TRIMMED THIS AREA, THE EXCESSIVE TRIMMING WAS NOT AT THE ORDER OR COMMAND OF THE BOARD OR ANY REPRESENTATIVE.

SOME MORE PHOTOS THAT WERE PROVIDED NOTING THE RECENT PLANTING OF THE SHRUBS AND GREENERY TO THE THIS ITEM DID GO TO THE COMMUNITY STANDARDS COMMITTEE WHO RESUBMITTED THEIR RECOMMENDATION.

AFTER REVIEW AND DISCUSSION, THE APPEAL OF THE CSC'S ACTION OF THE TREE MODIFICATIONS WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING.

THE COMMITTEE HAS AFFIRMED ITS DECISION THAT THE WATERWAY LOFTS HAS OVER CLEARED THE TREE VEGETATION AND DID NOT FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES AS PREVIOUS ACTION DEMONSTRATED.

THE TREES WERE TRIMMED WELL ABOVE REQUIRED PEDESTRIAN HEIGHT UP TO THE SECOND STORY BALCONIES.

TREES WERE TRIMMED WELL BEYOND THE CSC COMMITTEE ACTIONS TO PRUNE TREES, A MAXIMUM OF FIVE FEET AWAY FROM THE BUILDING STRUCTURE AND ELEMENTS.

NO ADDITIONAL TREE OR VEGETATION TRIMMING SHALL OCCUR WITHIN THE WATERWAY LOFTS PROPERTY WITHOUT WRITTEN APPROVAL AND A MEMBER OF THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP STAFF BEING PRESENT.

THE WATERWAY LOFTS IS TO REPLANT REPLACEMENT TREES AS SUBMITTED WHERE ANY TREES WERE REMOVED OR OVER TRIMMED, AND THE COMMUNITY STANDARDS COMMITTEE BELIEVES MID-GROWTH SUPPLEMENTAL PLANTING FOR ADDITIONAL SCREENING ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IS NECESSARY.

A THIRD-PARTY PROFESSIONAL ARBORIST IS TO DETERMINE AN APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF SUPPLEMENTAL MID-GROWTH PLANTING TO BE ADDED WHERE MID-GROWTH WAS CLEARED.

I DO HAVE ONE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE WATERWAY AVENUE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM.

>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION, ACTUALLY, I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF KIM CAN ANSWER, MAYBE THE CALLER CAN ANSWER THIS.

DOES THE WATERWAY LOFT HAVE A PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY, ARE THEY THE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY?

>> OUR COMMUNICATION HAS BEEN WITH A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BUT I WILL COORDINATE IN REGARDS TO THEIR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT.

WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO ENGAGE THE CALL?

[00:50:01]

>> YEAH. I'M JUST CURIOUS IF IT'S JUST LIKE, IF THE BOARD APPROVES SOME WORK TO BE DONE ON PROPERTY, WHO OVERSEES THAT?

>> CERTAINLY, LET ME GET A CALLER ON.

HI

>> YES, MA'AM, I'M HERE.

>> I KNOW THERE'S A BIT OF A LAG, THE QUESTION FROM ONE OF OUR COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN REGARDS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS SOME PROPERTY MANAGER, AND IN THE EVENT THAT A BOARD MAKES A DETERMINATION ON ANY MAINTENANCE OR WORK SUCH AS THIS THAT WOULD NEED TO OCCUR, WHO IS THE INDIVIDUAL WHO SEES OUT THAT ACTION?

>> WE DO HAVE A MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND ITS FIRST SERVICE RESIDENTIAL.

THEY'RE ACTUALLY THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY FOR BOTH OF THE LOFT BUILDINGS ON THE WATERWAY.

>> OKAY. CAN YOU TELL US HOW THIS ALL HAPPENED?

>> YES. WHAT OCCURRED, WE APPLIED BECAUSE UNFORTUNATELY, WE DO ADMIT THAT THE TREE MAINTENANCE HAS NOT OCCURRED, AND THE LAST TRIMMING THAT WE CAN MAYBE PINPOINT WAS 10 YEARS AGO.

THEREFORE, WE HAD SOME VERY LARGE BRANCHES HITTING WINDOWS DURING WINDS AND STORMS, AND WITH THE TREES BEING THAT TALL, YOU CAN ONLY IMAGINE HOW MUCH THEY SWAY.

THEY WERE HITTING THE WINDOWS PRETTY HARD AND COMING UPON STORMS, WE WERE GETTING COMPLAINTS FROM RESIDENTS THAT THIS WAS OCCURRING, SO, WE ASKED OUR MANAGEMENT COMPANY TO SEE IF WE COULD GET SOME BIT, WELL, THIS WAS AT THE BEGINNING OF COVID, THEY'RE WORKING FROM HOME, THEY'RE NOT WORKING FROM THEIR OFFICE.

AFTER WE GOT THE APPLICATION AND THE ORDER THAT WE COULD TRIM, WE COULD NOT GET OUR NORMAL SERVICE, OUR LOAN SERVICE, WHICH IS AT BERKELEY, THAT THERE'S I THINK THE TOWNSHIPS BUSINESS IN ADDITION TO OUR LANDSCAPING.

WE COULD NOT GET THEM IN AN ADEQUATE AMOUNT OF TIME, IT WAS GOING TO BE OVER A WEEK OR SO, AND, THE WEATHER FORECAST WAS PREDICTING ANOTHER TWO VERY STRONG STORMS FORTHCOMING IN THE NEXT WEEK, AND BERKELEY SAID IT MIGHT BE A WEEK, MAYBE TWO WEEKS BEFORE WE CAN MAYBE GET TO YOU.

OUR FIRST SERVICE RESIDENTIAL DID HIRE A TREE COMPANY, AND I BELIEVE THEY CAME OUT ON A SATURDAY, BUT NOBODY FROM FIRST SERVICE WAS THERE BECAUSE OF COVID, AND WE HAVE GIVEN THEM DIRECTIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS ABOUT WHAT TO DO, AND UNFORTUNATELY, IN ONE AREA THEY DID.

WE DID CLEAR ALL THE TREES THAT WERE TOUCHING THE BUILDING, AND WE HAD TO DO A PRETTY GOOD AMOUNT BECAUSE THOSE TREES MOVE AND SWAY, AND WE REALLY DID NOT WANT A WINDOW BROKEN IN ADDITION WITH THE HURRICANE SEASON FORTHCOMING.

IT LOOKS EXCESSIVE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN OVER 10 YEARS SINCE IT WAS ANY MAINTENANCE DONE ON THOSE TREES.

NOW, FOR THE HEIGHT OF THE TREES THAT THE CSC IS COMPLAINING ABOUT AND SAYING THAT WE VIOLATED, WE TRIMMED THEM UP EVEN SHORTER THAN THE AMOUNT OF THE OTHER TREES THAT ARE IN THE SAME AREA ACROSS THE STREET AND IN THE SAME VIEW THAT THE TOWNSHIP TRIM.

THERE ARE ABOUT 7-8 FEET, AND YOU COULD SEE IN SOME OF THOSE PICTURES, USING THE LADY IN THE PICTURES AS A RULER.

WE DIDN'T TRIM ANY HIGHER THAN THAT, WE ACTUALLY HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A LOWER OF A CANOPY.

BUT ONE THING IS, THE LOFT BOARD ACTED IN GOOD FAITH, THEY'RE JUST TRYING TO DO MAINTENANCE, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE BUILDING, THEY WERE TRYING TO PREVENT ANY DAMAGE OF WINDOWS, AND ALSO ALLOWING PEOPLE TO USE THEIR PATIOS BECAUSE IN SOME OF THE PICTURES, YOU CAN SEE HALF OF THEIR PATIOS, YOU COULD NOT USE THEM OR EVEN SIT ANY FURNITURE OUT BECAUSE THE TREES OVER GREW ONTO THEIR PRIVATE PATIOS.

ONCE THAT WAS DONE, WE TOTALLY AGREED THAT THE TRANSFORMER WAS HIDEOUS, SO WE IMMEDIATELY TRIED TO BEAUTIFY IT, ADD SOME MORE GREENERY TO DO WHAT IT DOES, TO MAKE IT LOOK PLEASANT, BECAUSE WE WANT OUR BUILDING TO LOOK GOOD AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE LOVE OUR TREES.

BUT IT WAS NECESSARY MAINTENANCE THAT WAS LACKING, THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE, AND WE DO NOW HAVE A PLAN IN PLACE TO TRY TO DO MAINTENANCE EVERY THREE YEARS TO WHERE IT WON'T BE SO OVERGROWN.

IT WAS OVERGROWN THE TOWNSHIP HAD TO FIX THE LIGHT, ONE OF THE BEAUTIFUL LIGHTS THAT GO OVER THE WALKWAY.

IT HIT LIGHT A FIXTURE, IT WAS THAT MANY TWIGS AND THAT BIG, DAMAGING. THAT'S ABOUT IT.

>> YOU REPRESENT THE WATER LOFT BOARD?

[00:55:02]

>> YEAH, I AM A MEMBER OF THE WATERWAY LOFT BOARD, THERE ARE FOUR OF US ON THE BOARD, AND I WAS ELECTED ON THE BOARD TO REPRESENT THE BOARD IN THIS MATTER.

>> OKAY. I GUESS WHEN I READ YOUR LETTER HERE, IT SAYS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, THE WATERWAY LOFT.

MANY ASSOCIATES ARE PERPLEXED AND DISMAYED AT THE DELIVERY OF THE TOWNSHIP LETTER FOR THE ACTION THAT TOOK PLACE I GUESS WE FEEL THE SAME WAY.

I THINK YOU WERE GIVEN GUIDANCE ON WHAT WAS ALLOWED TO BE TRIMMED, AND YET LOOKING AT THE PHOTOS, IT'S OBVIOUSLY THAT IT WENT WAY OVERBOARD FROM THAT JUST SEND THEM OUT THERE WITHOUT ANY OVERSIGHT OF WHAT REALLY NEEDED TO BE DONE.

>> THAT'S AN ERROR THAT THE BOARD FEELS THAT WOULD BE DONE DIFFERENTLY NEXT TIME, THE BOARD FELT THAT BECAUSE OF THE FORTHCOMING STORMS AND WHAT HAD JUST OCCURRED THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS WITH THE STORMS AND THE HEAVY POUNDING ON THE WINDOWS BY TREE LIMBS, THAT SOMETHING NEEDED TO BE DONE IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE WE WERE GOING TO INCUR DAMAGE IN THOSE HUGE WINDOWS.

LIKE I SAID, ONE AREA, IT DID GET OVERZEALOUS AND WE'RE WANTING TO PLANT A TREE BACK THERE, WHATEVER NECESSARY IN THAT CORNER, TO BRING BACK THE GREENERY AND THE SHIELD BECAUSE OUR RESIDENTS DO LIKE TO BE SHIELDED FROM THAT VERY BUSY WATERWAY BRIDGE.

WE'RE VERY WILLING TO PUT A TREE THERE TO HELP THAT GROW.

A LOT OF THE LIMBS, THEY DID SAY, ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, I WAS OUT OF TOWN AT THIS TIME, ONE THE BOARD MEMBERS DID SAY SOME OF THE LIMBS, BECAUSE HE DID A WALK THROUGH PRIOR, WERE GROWING DOWNWARD, AND SOME OF THEM WERE DYING BECAUSE THEY WERE SO THICK AND THE INSTRUCTIONS WERE TO CUT ANY LIMBS THAT WE'RE GROWING ON A DOWNWARD PATH VERSUS OUT AND UPWARDS OF A TREE.

THAT IS SOME REASON WHY SOME OF THAT UNDER CLEARING DID GET CLEARED OUT, AND HONESTLY, IT WAS WAS PRETTY THICK THROUGH THEIR TO WHERE STUFF WAS NOT GETTING ADEQUATE LIGHT, IS WHAT WHEN THE BOARD MEMBERS DID THE INSPECTION PRIOR AND GIVE THE DIRECTIONS, AND TRUST ME, WE LIKE OUR PRIVACY FROM THE WATERWAY JUST AS MUCH ON THAT ONE SIDE BECAUSE IT IS VERY BUSY AND WE'RE DOING OUR BEST WE CAN TO ALSO PROTECT OUR BUILDING AND PROTECT OUR RESIDENTS FROM HAVING BROKEN WINDOWS OR TREE LIMBS COMING THROUGH THERE.

IT DID CAUSE SOME DAMAGE TO SOME RAILING, THESE LIMBS GROWING UP AND AROUND, SO THOSE WERE REMOVED AND WE'LL BE RE-FIXING THE RAILING BECAUSE THAT WAS PUSHING ON THE RAILING AND BENDING IT.

BUT, HONESTLY, WE ACTED IN THE BEST GOOD FAITH THAT WE KNEW, TO PROTECT THE BUILDING AND DO WHAT NEEDED TO BE DONE BEFORE THESE STORMS WERE GOING TO COME IN.

>> I GUESS THE ONLY THING I HAVE IS THE CSC GAVE YOU APPROVAL AND THEY TOLD YOU WHAT THEY WANTED DONE, AND IF YOU HAD ANY QUESTIONS, YOU SHOULD HAVE ADDRESSED IT THEN BEFORE THIS TOOK PLACE.

ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> MAYBE A QUESTION FOR THE CSC, DOES ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS IN THE MID GROWTH, IS IT REQUIRED SINCE THERE WERE SOME EXCESSIVE REMOVAL TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CURRENT PLANTINGS MEET THE FULL INTENT OF THE CSC?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. THE INTENT IS TO SUPPLEMENT THE EAST FOREST RESERVE MID GROWTH SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT WAS EXCESSIVELY CUT.

>> THIS AREA.

>> YES MA'AM. THAT IS THE SIZE OF THE SITE THAT THE CSC BELIEVES WAS THE MOST EGREGIOUSLY CUT AND IT SHOULD BE REMEDIED.

>> SO THE NEXT ACTION IS THAT THE BOARD OF THIS LOCATION OF THE WATERWAY LOFTS HAS TO GO BACK IN AND DO SOME ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS TO MEET THE INTENT AND WHAT WAS APPROVED BY THE CSC. BOB IS THAT CORRECT?

>> WELL, THAT'S THE ONLY WAY TO REMEDY THIS SITUATION NOW, BECAUSE THE MID GROWTH HAS BEEN EXCESSIVELY CLEARED.

IT IS THE CSC'S OPINION THAT A THIRD PARTY ALWAYS NEEDS TO GET INVOLVED BECAUSE WE DO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE AMOUNT OF ROOTS DOWN AT THE BASE LEVEL IS PRETTY THICK DOWN THERE,

[01:00:05]

SO WE NEED AN EXPERT TO DETERMINE WHAT IS THE BEST TYPE OF VEGETATION THAT CAN BE PLANTED DOWN THERE SAFELY WITHOUT IT DYING OFF AS WELL.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> I GUESS MY OWN RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CSC, BUT MAYBE HIRING A THIRD-PARTY ARBORIST TO GO IN THERE AND ACTUALLY ASSESS WHAT TOOK PLACE AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE'RE REQUIRING TO GO BACK IN THERE WOULD MEET THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE CFC IS LOOKING FOR.

>> IT SOUNDS REASONABLE, IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE IT'S PROPERLY VEGGED AND MEETS THE ORIGINAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE CSC THAT WAS APPROVED.

>> IS BRET STILL ON THE LINE?

>> HE IS.

>> I AM.

>> HEY BRET, WOULD IT BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO GET YOU TO HIRE A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT TO GO OUT AND ASCERTAIN WHAT WAS DONE, AND LOOK AT THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT THE CSC HAS, AND GIVE US A PLAN OF WHAT HE THINKS TO GET IT BACK TO WHERE THE ORIGINAL REQUIREMENTS WERE?

>> I BELIEVE THAT'S IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CSC.

I GUESS I'D ASK BOB, WAS THE THOUGHT, BOB, THAT THE BOARD OF THE WATERWAY LOFTS HIRE THAT PERSON AND THEY REPORT TO THE COMMITTEE OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE THAT PERSON HIRED BY EITHER THE TOWNSHIP AND/OR THEIR COUNCIL? WHAT IS YOUR THOUGHT ON THAT?

>> WELL, GIVEN THE OPTION, I WOULD TAKE THE LATTER.

I BELIEVE A THIRD-PARTY ARBORIST THROUGH THE FUNCTION OF THE TOWNSHIP IS PROBABLY THE MOST NEUTRAL TO TAKE.

>> I TEND TO AGREE WITH THAT.

IF THERE'S CONCERN WITH REGARD TO A NEUTRAL, UNBIASED RECOMMENDATION.

THAT THIRD PARTY CAN OBVIOUSLY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE INPUT OF THE WARD FROM THE LOFTS AS TO WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE FOR SAFETY AND VISIBILITY AND IN FUTURE GROWTH.

SO I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE.

>> QUESTION, BOB?

>> YES, SIR. SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE GO WITH THE CSC'S RECOMMENDATION, INCLUDING ALL OF THE SIX NOTED BULLET POINTS, AS WELL AS THE THIRD PARTY PROFESSIONAL ARBORIST THROUGH THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP TO DETERMINE THE BEST SUPPLEMENTAL MID-GROWTH PLANNINGS AND WHERE THOSE CAN BE ADDED.

>> ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A SECOND?

>> I SECOND.

>>

>> ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> MARY, AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSERS? ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND YOU ALL HAVE A VERY PLEASANT EVENING.

>> THANK YOU.

>> TAKE CARE.

>> BYE BYE.

>> OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM FOR WHICH I KNOW WE

[Item VII D]

HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT IS THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS GOING TO BE ITEM D, WHICH IS THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO AMEND THE COMMITTEE'S ACTION TO ALLOW THE DOOR VINYL GRAPHICS THAT CONTAINED COLOR AND ARE LOCATED ON TWO OF THE ENTRY DOORS.

THIS IS AT IMPACT CHURCH OF THE WOODLANDS, WHICH IS LOCATED AT 5401 SHADOWBEND.

YOU MAY RECALL THAT THE DSC TOOK ACTION ON THIS ITEM BACK IN MAY IN REGARDS TO THE GRAPHICS.

THERE WAS A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE EXISTING DOOR VINYL GRAPHICS THAT WERE INSTALLED ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE GLASS CONTAINED COLOR AND ARE LOCATED ON FOUR OF THE ENTRANCE DOORS.

THE COMMITTEE DENIED THE REQUEST AS PRESENTED AND REQUIRED THE OWNER TO REVISE AND RESUBMIT TO ALLOW A SINGLE GRAPHIC IN ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS.

THEY DID HOWEVER NOTE THAT THERE WOULD BE A VARIANCE TO PLACE THE GRAPHIC ON THE EXTERIOR SURFACE DUE TO THE TINTED NATURE OF THE GLASS.

FOLLOWING THAT, THERE WAS A REHEARING REQUEST THAT WAS SUBMITTED AS A RESULT OF THE VINYL GRAPHICS AND A REQUEST FOR VARIANCE, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT HAD TO BE REVIEWED AND PLACED ON THE AGENDA AT THE DISCRETION OF THE COMMITTEE.

WHY AM I HERE? WE GO.

TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY,

[01:05:02]

5401 SHADOWBEND PLACE IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION CLOSEST TO LAKE WOODLANDS DRIVE AND SHADOWBEND PLACE.

THE LOCATION OF THE DOOR VINYL GRAPHICS IS IN THE CURVE HERE, UNDER THEIR CARPORT AREA.

IT CANNOT BE SEEN FROM THE STREET, AND EVEN SOME OF THE PARKING LOT.

YOU HAVE TO TURN IN TOWARD THE BUILDING TO SEE THE VINYL GRAPHICS.

HOWEVER, VISIBILITY TO THE STREET IS NOT PART OF THE COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCE.

THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS IN REGARDS TO THE NUMBER ON THE EXTERIOR AND THE APPLICATION OF COLOR TO THE VINYL GRAPHIC.

HERE IS THE OVERALL VIEW OF THE SITE AND THE AREA WHERE THE VINYL GRAPHICS ARE LOCATED.

HERE WAS THE SUBMITTAL THAT WENT FOR THE DSC IN MAY, AND YOUR ACTION FOR THAT ITEM.

HERE ARE THOSE DOORS FOR IMPACT CHURCH OF THE WOODLANDS, WHICH ALSO INCLUDES COLOR, AND IS LOCATED ON FOUR OF THE DOORS AS YOU ENTER THE CHURCH.

THIS WAS THE PHOTO THAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE BEFORE.

THEY DID IDENTIFY THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE BUT MAINTAIN ONE VINYL GRAPHIC IN COLOR ON TWO OF THE DOORS SINCE THEY DO HAVE TWO SEPARATE ENTRIES AND THOUGHT IT WOULD LOOK BEST TO HAVE THE IMPACT CHURCH VINYL GRAPHIC AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS IN COLOR, BUT PLACED ON TWO OF THE DOORS.

THAT IS THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED.

IN REGARDS TO IMPACT CHURCH OF THE WOODLANDS, THERE WAS A VARIANCE REQUEST FROM THE CHURCH IDENTIFYING THAT THE SIGNAGE HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE SINCE THE NEW BUILDING COMPLETION, WHICH HAS BEEN VISITED AND OBSERVED BY TOWNSHIP WITH NO OBJECTION.

THE DOOR SIGNS DO NOT FACE THE STREET.

CURRENT SIGNS MATCH MANY OTHER COMMERCIAL SIGNS IN THE WOODLANDS, AND THEY ASKED TO PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHMENTS WITH EXAMPLES OF OTHER BUSINESSES IN THE WOODLANDS.

WELLS FARGO, CRU, CROSSING CHURCH, AND I WILL HAVE THOSE IN THE PRESENTATION FOR YOUR REVIEW.

THEY WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THE TWO COLORS, THE GRAPHICS WITH THE LOGO COLORS, AND THE CURRENT MEASUREMENTS ARE PROVIDED WHICH DO MEET THE STANDARD.

THEY'RE SEEKING TO ADHERE TO THE COVENANTS OF THE WOODLANDS AND MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL.

PLEASE UNDERSTAND THE POTENTIAL ECONOMIC IMPACT AND THE CONTINUED CHALLENGES THEY ADDRESSED DAILY AS A RESULT OF THE CONTINUOUS VANDALISM, THREATS, VIOLENCE AGAINST THE CHURCH.

THANKS FOR THE CONSIDERATION, AND IF MORE DETAILS ARE NECESSARY, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTACT US.

I KNOW THAT WE HAD DEACON NORRIS CALL IN EARLIER, AND I BELIEVE HE IS STILL IN THE QUEUE.

SO DEACON NORRIS, IF YOU WILL GO AHEAD AND HIT STAR NINE ON YOUR PHONE, WE WILL BE ABLE TO CALL UPON YOU WHEN THE CONCLUSION OF THE PRESENTATION OCCURS.

PERFECT HERE IS IMPACT CHURCH AS SEEN COMING OFF OF COCHRAN'S CROSSING, FROM THE PARKING LOT ITSELF AND THE EXISTING VEGETATION IN THE AREA, AS YOU'RE LOOKING A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO THE ENTRY WAY UNDER THE COVERED AREA.

THEN HERE'S A MORE CLOSER VIEW FROM THAT ENTRY AS YOU ARE WRAPPING AROUND THE PARKING LOT, LOOKING CLOSEST FROM THE CARPORT.

HERE IS THE PRESENTATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY IMPACT CHURCH.

IMPACT CHURCH CAMPUS ENTRANCE, AFTER EXITING OFF OF SHADOWBEND PLACE, THE FIRST TURN.

AS YOU ARE COMING INTO THE CAMPUS, THE SECOND TURN.

FROM PARKING LOT NUMBER 2, APPROACHING THE FRONT OF THE SANCTUARY, WHICH IS YOUR THIRD TURN, AND THEN THE FRONT ENTRANCE TO THE SANCTUARY.

THIS WAS PROVIDED, SO THEY WANTED TO DEMONSTRATE TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE, THE VISIBILITY OF THOSE VINYL GRAPHICS AND WHERE YOU NEED TO BE BEFORE YOU CAN SEE THOSE GRAPHICS AT THEIR SITE.

THIS IS VIA THE PARKING LOT AND THE ENTRY TO THE SANCTUARY.

A MORE CLOSER VIEW OF THE FULL DOORS, WITH THE REVISION NOW OF IT JUST ON THE TWO DOORS.

AND THEN WE'VE ALSO INCLUDED THE STAFF DESCRIPTION FOR EACH OF THOSE EXAMPLES SO THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF THE FOLLOWUP ON THOSE ITEMS. THEY IDENTIFIED SCHLOTZSKY'S WOODLANDS CHURCH AND JULIO'S MEXICAN GRILL, WHICH ARE THE PHOTOS THAT WERE PROVIDED TO THE STAFF HERE OF WOODLANDS CHURCH, SCHLOTZSKY'S AND JULIO'S.

THE STAFF DID RESEARCH AND EACH OF THESE ARE OUTSIDE OF THAT WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP JURISDICTION, AND DO NOT FALL WITHIN THE COVENANT'S EASEMENT, RESTRICTIONS, CHARGES, AND LIENS, OR THE COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THOSE THREE PARCELS.

THEY DID ALSO IDENTIFY WHOLE FOODS, WHICH IS AT HUGHES LANDING.

THIS IS STILL IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND HAS NOT BEEN TURNED OVER TO THE TOWNSHIP FROM THE DEVELOPER FOR ENFORCEMENT.

SO THIS IS A MATTER THAT WE CAN ENGAGE WITH THE DEVELOPER IN REGARDS TO THE ENFORCEMENT ITEMS FOR THAT, WHICH IS FOR THE FREESTANDING SIGN.

THESE WERE OTHER EXAMPLES THAT WERE PROVIDED.

THERE WERE TWO PROVIDED IN THE COCHRAN'S CROSSING SHOPPING CENTER.

WE ARE AWARE OF THOSE AND WE DO HAVE THOSE TWO ITEMS ON NOTICE.

THEN THERE WAS ALSO THE QUESTION REGARDING CHRIST CHURCH UNITED METHODIST, WHICH DID HAVE A DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, NOT VINYL GRAPHICS ON THE BUILDING, AND THOSE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS WERE APPROVED AT YOUR MAY 2018 MEETING.

[01:10:04]

HERE ARE SOME OTHER APPROVALS THAT HAD BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD, MANY OF WHICH ARE IN REGARDS TO DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, SOME OF WHICH DO INCLUDE SOME VINYL GRAPHICS.

WE DO NOT HAVE RECORD OF APPROVAL FOR THESE ITEMS AT THIS TIME.

HERE ARE MORE EXAMPLES THAT WERE PROVIDED IN MARKET STREET.

AS YOU MAY BE AWARE, MARKET STREET DOES HAVE SOME VARYING JURISDICTION IN REGARDS TO ENFORCEMENT, AND SO SOME OF THESE MATTERS WOULD BE MATTERS THAT WOULD NOT BE WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE JURISDICTION, BUT CAN CERTAINLY BE DEFERRED TO THE DEVELOPER FOR THEIR JURISDICTION AS IT RELATES TO SIGNAGE.

THEN THE FOLLOWING WAS AN ARTICLE AND DOCUMENTATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY IMPACT CHURCH WHEN THEY SUBMITTED THEIR REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE, AND THEY WANTED TO REQUEST THAT THIS INFORMATION BE PROVIDED TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE.

IT'S IN REGARDS TO THE ARTICLE THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THEIR APPLICATION.

THIS IS THE ARTICLE THAT WAS ON APRIL 1ST, 2017.

I'LL GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW.

I KNOW SOME OF YOU ARE AWARE OF THIS FROM THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED IN YOUR WORKSHEET.

IT GOES ON TO IDENTIFY IN THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE WITH THE NOTE OF DISCRIMINATION IN THE WOODLANDS CONCERNED RESIDENTS AND BOARD.

THIS IS THE ENTIRETY OF THAT IN REGARDS TO THE CONCERNS OF THAT.

I WILL ALLOW DEACON NORRIS TO SPEAK IN REGARDS TO THIS ITEM, AND WE'LL GO AHEAD AND DEFER TO HIM.

BUT WE WANTED TO INCLUDE THIS AS THEY REQUESTED THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE RECEIVE THAT ARTICLE IN REVIEWING THAT ACTION.

I WILL JUST JUMP BACK QUICKLY TO THE DOORS THEMSELVES, MAYBE NOT SO QUICKLY, WHICH IS REPRESENTED HERE.

IF NO ONE HAS ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I CAN ENGAGE WITH THE CALLER.

>> PLEASE ENGAGE WITH THE CALLER.

>> GREAT.

>> HI. IS THIS DEACON NORRIS?

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> ALL RIGHT. MR. NORRIS, YOU HAVE THE FLOOR.

>> OKAY. THE VIDEO IS A LITTLE BIT BEHIND THAN WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, BUT ANYWAY WE'LL GO INTO IT.

FIRST OF ALL I'D LIKE TO SAY, GOOD EVENING TO THE BOD AND THE COMMITTEE AND STAFF FOR AFFORDING ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAL TO YOU CONCERNING THE VARIANCE OF THE POSTED SIGNAGE THERE ON THE ENTRANCE DOOR AT THE IMPACT CHURCH OF THE WOODLANDS.

NOW I WANT TO UNDERSTAND, MY APPEAL TONIGHT, TO YOU IS NOT HERE TO SET A PRECEDENCE FOR OTHER BUSINESSES, OR CHURCHES, OR POSTERS GRABBING MY APPEAL, IS FOR THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE VARIANCE FOR THE IMPACT CHURCH OF THE WOODLANDS, DUE TO THE FACT THAT WE'RE UNIQUELY LOCATED FOR THE PROPERTIES AWAY FROM THE MAIN STREET SHADOWBEND.

I UNDERSTAND IN YOUR PRESENTATION THERE, THAT IT WASN'T IN THE VARIANCE ABOUT BEING ABLE TO SEE IT FROM THE MAIN STREET.

THE EXPLANATION THAT WAS GIVEN THAT WE'VE BEEN THERE FOR SUCH A LONG TIME, AND I UNDERSTAND FROM THE LAST TIME WHEN THIS WAS BROUGHT, THE ADJUSTMENTS WERE MADE ON IT, BUT WE'RE APPEALING FOR THE COMMITTEE TO COMMEND THEIR ACTIONS ON THE GRAPHICS THERE ON THE DOOR.

THE REASON BEING, GOING BACK, WE ALSO REALIZED TYPICALLY THE SPECIAL ACCEPTED VARIANCE ARE GRANTED WHEN THE PROPERTY OWNER DEMONSTRATE OR EXISTING GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS, DOES NOT PRESENT A PARTICULAR DIFFICULT TO THE PRESENT PROPERTY OR NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

FOR NON-CONFORMING, LIKE WE ARE CONSIDERED NOW ON THE VIOLATION ON THE VARIANCE AND CONSIDERATION TO GIVE FOR GRANDFATHER.

I THINK WE HAD TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE BEING GRANDFATHER, THEN.

NOW THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, AND I KNOW GRANDFATHER IN THE END, IT WILL BE IN EFFECT UNTIL THE LAPSE OF TIME OR TO THE BILL BANISHED OR GOES AWAY.

BUT MY QUESTION TOO WAS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S OF A SPECIFIC KIND, WHEN THIS WAS IT RETROACTIVELY CHANGED DUE TO SOME CONSEQUENCE OR THE ACTION? WHAT WAS THE RELATIONSHIP? WAS THERE ENACTMENT, OR WHATEVER? BECAUSE WE SEE A LOT OF BUSINESSES AND NOT BRING IN COMPARISON, THAT HAVE THESE AND TO GO BACK AND DO THAT, WE JUST DIDN'T UNDERSTAND.

I UNDERSTAND WE HEADING ON THE FOUR DOORS, WE TOOK IT OFF WITH TWO DOORS BECAUSE OF

[01:15:03]

THE TWO INCHES THAT WE HAVE THAT THEY'RE ON THE DOORS THERE.

FOR AS THE COLOR, WE SAW A LOT OF DIFFERENT COLORS AND YOU HAVE SOME ESTABLISHED BUILDINGS THAT JUST LIKE WELLS FARGO, SOME OF THE OTHER BUILDINGS THAT HAVE DIFFERENT COLORS ON THEIR DOORS.

I DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND THAT.

WHEN I SAY I UNDERSTAND, I'M ASKING FOR AMENDMENTS, BECAUSE THEY'RE OTHER COLOR ITEMS THAT WE SEE ON GRAPHICS AROUND IN THE COMMUNITY.

SOME OF OTHERS THAT I KNOW THAT YOU MENTIONED THERE, WAS NOT IN THE JURISDICTION, BUT SEVERAL OF THEM ARE IN THE JURISDICTION OF THE WOODLANDS TOWN. DID YOU HEAR ME?

>> YES, BOB OR JOHN DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS?

>> WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES THAT MAY BE IN VIOLATION REGARDING WINDOW GRAPHICS AND COLOR.

HOWEVER, I WOULD NOTE THAT THOSE ARE IN VIOLATION.

THE EXAMPLES THAT YOU'VE POINTED OUT EITHER ARE NOT RESIDING WITHIN THE WOODLANDS OR ARE ON A VIOLATION NOTICE LIST.

NOT ALLOWING COLOR AT ALL ON THE WINDOW GRAPHICS.

I DON'T SEE HOW WE CAN MAKE A VARIANCE HERE BECAUSE IT DOES SET A DANGEROUS PRECEDENCE FOR EVERY OTHER BUSINESS, REGARDLESS OF IF IT IS VISIBLE FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY OR NOT.

I'M SORRY, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO DISAPPROVE THIS AND THEY BOTH NEED TO BE REMOVED.

THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED FOR ONE ON ONE OF THE ENTRANCES, AND IT NEEDS TO BE IN WHITE.

THE VARIANCE WOULD STAND THAT IT COULD BE PLACED ON THE EXTERIOR DUE TO THE HEAVY TENT.

>> CAN I ASK ONE QUESTION? WOULD IT BE PERMISSIBLE FOR US TO HAVE THEM ON THE TWO ENTRANCES THERE SINCE WE HAVE TWO ENTRANCES COMING IN? ONE ENTRANCE IS BLOCKED WHEN YOU'RE COMING IN.

>> YOU HAVE AN ENTRANCE BLOCKED FROM THE INSTITUTE?

>> IT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING. BUT FOR ITS VISIBILITY.

I'M SORRY, NOT BEING BLOCKED.

>> NO, SIR. IT'S UNDERSTOOD FOR EVERYONE, ONCE THEY'VE PARK THEIR VEHICLE AND ARE APPROACHING THE BUILDING, THEY KNOW WHERE THEY ARE.

HAVING THE NAME OF THE ENTITY ON EACH OF THOSE DOORS IS NOT NECESSARY.

SPECIFICALLY WITHIN THE CRITERIA, IT SAYS ONE ENTRANCE DOOR.

WE'RE SIMPLY TRYING TO FOLLOW THE RULES THAT HAVE BEEN LAID OUT FOR US HERE.

>> YES, SIR. I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND.

THE ONLY REASON I WAS SAYING IS BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO ENTRANCES BECAUSE IT'S A CHURCH.

WHEN YOU'RE ENTERING AND EXITING THE BUILDING, IT'S MORE ECONOMICAL FOR PEOPLE TO IN GRACE THROUGH THE TWO DOORS.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING, HAVING IT ON ONE DOOR WOULD MAKE IT LOOK OFF. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? I'M SEARCHING FOR A BETTER WORD.

IF IT WAS ONE DOOR I CAN UNDERSTAND.

BUT SINCE WE HAVE FOUR DOORS THERE, THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION.

>> YEAH. BOB, THIS IS ROBERT.

I JOINED THE CONVERSATION LATE BECAUSE OF ANOTHER MEETING THAT RAN WAY OVER, BUT I THINK HAVING THE WHITE ON THE TWO DOORS, I'M ALL RIGHT WITH THAT.

THE FATHERS THERE ARE.

>> THAT'S FINE. THAT WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL VARIANCE BEYOND WHAT WE'VE TYPICALLY ALLOWED ENTRANCES QUITE DISTANCE APART FROM EACH OTHER, TYPICALLY IN 100 FEET OR MORE.

IT WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE TO BE AN IDENTIFIED VARIANCE HERE.

>> I GUESS WHAT HE'S SAYING IS IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE SIGN ON BOTH DOORS, THEN EVERYBODY'S GOING TO GO TOWARD ONE DOOR AND THEY REALLY

[01:20:01]

NEED TWO DOORS IN ORDER TO GET EVERYBODY IN.

THEY WANT BOTH DOORS USED.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MAKES OPERATIONAL SENSE OR NOT.

OTHERS COMMENT.

WALT WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> I WON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.

>> WITH THE TWO OR?

>> YEAH, WITH A TWO WHITE.

>> BECAUSE THAT WILL READ AS ONE WORD.

>> I DON'T KNOW, WHAT DO YOU GUYS WANT TO DO?

>> I'D SAY IT'S GOING TO BE IN WHITE TO JOHN'S COMMENTS.

WILL IT BLEND SO WELL THAT IT WON'T BE IDENTIFIABLE?

>> IS THAT A QUESTION TO ME?

>> NO, TO JOHN ANDERSON

>> THEM A LITTLE BIT SO THAT IT APPEARS LIKE TWO WORDS.

>> GOT IT. THANK YOU, JOHN.

>> OR ADJUST THE VERTICAL HEIGHT OF ONE VERSUS THE OTHER.

IT'S VERY LOW VISIBILITY.

I CAN SEE THE POINT OF BOB AND ROBERT.

BECAUSE IT'S SUCH LOW VISIBILITY, I THINK THIS ONE IS A DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCE THAN WE GENERALLY SEE WITH THESE.

ONLY THE PEOPLE ON THIS PROPERTY CAN SEE IT.

>> JOHN, YOU'RE SUGGESTING THAT YOU'D ALLOW THE BLUE ON ONE DOOR OR TWO DOORS?

>> WELL, I'M NOT SAYING TO ALLOW THE BLUE, BUT I'M SAYING THEY WOULD NEED TO SLIGHTLY ADJUST THE DESIGN IN ORDER TO MAKE IT WORK IF IT NEEDED TO BE ALL IN WHITE.

I THINK IT CAN BE ON BOTH DOORS.

JUST BECAUSE, LIKE HE WAS SAYING, IF IT'S ON ONE EVERYBODY'S GOING TO GO TO ONE.

I THINK THERE'S JUST A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES THAN WE GENERALLY SEE.

>> YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THE WHITE.

IF IT'S ALL WHITE YOU'VE GOT A GAP BETWEEN IMPACT AND CHURCH THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO ADD.

OTHERWISE THE TWO WORDS WILL READ AS ONE, THAT'S GOING TO BE CONFUSING.

YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THAT.

>> I THINK THEY COULD ADJUST IT THOUGH, TO ADD THAT SPACE IN THERE AND MAKE IT WHITE SO THAT IT MATCHES WITH.

>> TO ALLOW TWO DOORS WE MAKE WIDE AND WE PROBABLY HAVE TO REVISE THE LETTERING A LITTLE BIT.

>> I THINK SO. BUT THE MINOR ADJUSTMENT IN THE DESIGN, I THINK IT WOULD WORK.

>>

>> REVISE AND RESUBMIT? I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT.

>> CAN YOU JUST START?

>> YES, SIR.

>> OKAY. SO I FIND MOTION ALLOW THOSE HAVE A REVISE AND RESUBMIT WITH THOSE DOORS ALLOWED IN ALL WIDE TO MATCH THE STANDARDS.

>> I DRIVE A SECOND.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> HI.

>> HI.

>> ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> LET'S JUST MOVE FORWARD. I'M NOT GOING TO ADDRESS THIS LETTER.

SO LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT TALK.

>> CERTAINLY. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS GOING TO BE ITEM E WHICH IS

[Item VII E]

THE CONSIDERATION ACTION FOR TEMPORARY YARD SIGNS FOR INSTALLATION ON ANY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP.

THIS IS PRESENTED BY THE WOODLANDS UNITED METHODIST CHURCH AT 2200 LAKE WOODLANDS DRIVE.

THEY WANTED TO PROVIDE THE APPLICATION AS THEY INTEND TO ORDER 750 SIGNS THAT ARE YARD SIGNS THAT WILL BE 18 INCHES BY 24 INCHES.

[01:25:04]

BUT WERE TO COME IN THE NEAR END JULY, THEY COULD GO AHEAD AND PUT THEM A LITTLE EARLIER.

BUT THEY WANTED TO TRY AND REMAIN IN COMPLIANCE WITH YOUR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO IDENTIFY TO PEOPLE THAT THESE ARE TEMPORARY SIGNS AND THAT THEY SHOULD ONLY BE UP FOR 120 DAYS.

THE CHURCH REPRESENTATIVE DID IDENTIFY IN THE SUBMISSION OF THE SIGN WHICH HAS AN ARTIST RENDERING HERE FOR YOUR REVIEW.

BUT OUT OF THE CHALLENGES THAT OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR WORLD HAS BEEN FACING WITH NEGATIVITY, AND CONFLICT, AND RACISM.

WE WANT TO HELP BRING A MESSAGE OF HOPE, AND ENCOURAGE OUR NEIGHBORS TO SHARE THAT HOPE.

OUT OF THAT DESIRE, WE WONDERED IF WE COULD SHARE AND ENCOURAGE A LIMITED NUMBER OF YARD SIGNS WITH OUR CONGREGATION.

IF APPROVED, WE COULD BOTH GO AND DELIVER SOME, FOLLOWING HEALTH PROTOCOLS, AND HAND THEM OUT WITH A NOTICE STATING THAT THE TOWNSHIP HAS APPROVED THEM FOR A LIMITED TIME.

SO THEY WILL NEED TO BE REMOVED BY, AND THEN YOU GUYS COULD ESTABLISH A DATE IF YOU WERE TO CONSIDER ALLOWING THEM.

OUR HOPE IS THAT WE COULD GET THEM OUT AT THE END OF THIS MONTH AND HAVE THEM UP UNTIL SCHOOL STARTS IN MID-AUGUST.

THE RENDERING PROVIDED YEAR IS THE HOPE LIVES HERE, AND IT HAS THE REPRESENTATION OF THE WOODLANDS UNITED METHODIST CHURCH WEBSITE AND THE LOGOS THAT ARE TIED TO WOODLANDS UNITED METHODIST.

IF I HAVE SOMEONE ON THE CALL FROM WOODLANDS UNITED METHODIST CHURCH THAT WAS CALLING TO REPRESENT THIS ITEM AND KICK IT HIT STAR NINE OR RAISE YOUR HAND.

I CAN CALL UPON YOU TO ENGAGE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE.

OTHERWISE, IN REVIEWING YOUR RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS, THIS WOULD BE CONSIDERED A TEMPORARY SIGN.

THE SPECIFICATION IS PROVIDED WOULD MATCH IN REGARDS TO MAXIMUM HEIGHT, OVERALL GROSS SURFACE AREA.

IT WOULD NEED TO BE ADVISED THAT NO TREES WOULD BE REMOVED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE SIGNS, AND THE DURATION WOULD BE TO REMAIN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STANDARDS WHICH WOULD BE NOT TO EXCEED 120 DAYS FROM THE INSTALLATION OF THE SIGN, AND I DO NOT SHOW THAT I HAVE ANYONE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM.

>> KIM. QUESTION. WITHOUT REVIEWING THE MESSAGE DOES IT MEET ALL THE STANDARDS AS A TEMPORARY SIGN?

>> CORRECT. IN REGARDS TO YOUR STANDARDS, THE HEIGHT AND GROSS SURFACE AREA ARE PART OF YOUR RESIDENTIAL STANDARD AS LONG AS NO TREES ARE REMOVED, AND THE DURATION REMAINS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE 120 DAYS.

THE ONLY OUTSTANDING MATTER FOR CONSIDERATION IS STATICS.

ALL SIGNS MUST BE GENERALLY COMPATIBLE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE COLORS AND MATERIALS USED MUST BE HARMONIOUS AND IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE RESIDENTIAL LOT ON WHICH THE SIGN IS TO BE LOCATED.

SO I WILL LEAVE THAT STATICS ISSUE UP FOR THE COMMITTEE FOR DISCUSSION.

BUT THAT IS THE COMPLETION OF THE RESIDENTIAL STANDARD RELATED TO TEMPORARY SIGNS.

>> REMOVAL BY THE 15TH AUGUST WOULD STILL BE WITHIN 120 DAYS NOT TO EXCEED THAT. CORRECT?

>> CORRECT.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ANYBODY HAVE

>> NO.

>> YEAH. THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD ON THE RECOMMENDED MOTION THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT HOW MANY OF THESE, 750 OF THEM?

>> I WOULD LIKE TO ORDER 750.

>> I'M WORRIED THEY GET PERHAPS.

THEY GET WHEN THEY HAVE THEIR SIGNS TO PEOPLE THAT CAN GIVE THEM A COPY OF WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE.

>> WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THAT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL SO THAT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE A COPY OF THE STANDARDS TO THE INDIVIDUALS

>> I THINK IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE IF SOMEONE CAME FOR A SIGN OF THE INDIVIDUALS I THINK IT GOOD IF AT LEAST, AS A CHURCH TO GIVE A COPY OF WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE.

>> I THINK THAT'S PRUDENT THIS WAY; SOMEONE CAN'T SAY, "WELL, I HAD IT UP PAST TO 15TH OF AUGUST, I DIDN'T KNOW."

>> I LIKE THE IDEA.

MY CONCERN IS WE ARE IN AN ELECTION YEAR.

THOUGH, I DON'T LEARN SIGNS JUST TO POP UP RANDOMLY EVERY TIME SOMEBODY SEES A SIGN.

I THINK WE OUGHT TO BE STRICT ON THAT.

>> NOTED. OF COURSE.

>> HAS ANYONE THOUGHT ABOUT THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE WEBSITE BEING CONSTRUED AS AN ADVERTISEMENT OR BUSINESS NAME? THAT'S REALLY MY ONLY CONCERN.

I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THE INTENT OF WHAT THE SIGNS WOULD BE PROVIDING.

BUT BY PUTTING THE BUSINESS NAME INTO OUR WEBSITE ON THERE,

[01:30:02]

IT'S BASICALLY FREE ADVERTISEMENT.

IT'S ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE OF 750.

>> I THINK IT'S THE INTENT FOR FOLKS TO GO TO THE WEBSITE BECAUSE THERE'S INFORMATION REGARDING ACTIVITIES, AND SOME INFORMATION REGARDING WHAT'S BEING DONE IN THE COMMUNITY TO HELP ADDRESS THIS ISSUE.

>> I COMPLETELY APPRECIATE THAT, AND I AGREE.

THIS COULD BE WARPED INTO A DIFFERENT DIRECTION.

BANKS COULD SAY, "WE HAVE MONEY FOR PEOPLE NOW.

WE HAVE LENDING." IT COULD EXPLODE IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS THAT WE MAYBE OR NOT ANTICIPATING CURRENTLY.

>> I THINK BOB MAKES A FAIR POINT ON THAT.

IF YOU THE SIGN WITH EVERYTHING THERE EXCEPT A WEBSITE, THEN IT'S MORE EVEN MORE NEUTRAL.

>> WHAT IF THERE WAS THE ALLOWANCE FOR THE WOODLANDS UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OR THE WOODLANDS UMC, BUT NOT IN THE FORM OF A WEBSITE?

>> WELL, STILL ADVERTISING.

>> ARE YOU PROPOSING THEIR NAME AND LOGO?

>> I'M NOT PROPOSING ANYTHING OTHER THAN TO CLARIFY WHETHER OR NOT IT IS THE WEBSITE THAT IS AN ISSUE, THE NAME, OR THE LOGOS.

SO IT'S JUST TO CALL OUT ALL THREE.

>> WELL, TO ME IT'S SIMPLY THE IDENTIFICATION OF A BUSINESS NAME.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT'S WHAT HAS TO BE THE MOST CONCERNED.

>> THE LOGO.

>> YES SIR, AND THE LOGO.

>> NOW, IS THE LOGO THOSE FOUR SYMBOLS BELOW HERE?

>> CORRECT.

>> SO IF YOU JUST LEFT HOPE LIVES HERE, YOU DROP THE LOGO SYMBOLS, YOU DROP THE WEBSITE, AND LEAVE UP THE FENCES.

IT'S REALLY NEUTRAL AND YOU'RE NOT ADVERTISE IN A BUSINESS, OR YOU'RE NOT ADVERTISING AN INSTITUTION WITH THE FULL WEBSITE INDICATOR.

EVERYBODY RECEIVES A SIGN, GETS A COPY WHAT STANDARDS ARE.

SO NO LATER THAN THE 15TH AUGUST.

THOSE SIGNS ARE REMOVED AND PROVIDE THEY REMOVE NO TREES OR OTHER VEGETATION.

>> I AGREE WITH WHAT ARTHUR HAS SAID THERE.

I'M TRYING TO PLAY THIS FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE HERE.

DOES THE ILLUMINATION OF THE NAME AND LOGO NULLIFY THE INTENT OF THE SIGN NOW?

>> WELL, I WONDER IF THEY COULD USE A DIFFERENT RATHER THAN THE LOGOS BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THOSE ARE NECESSARY FOR THESE.

I COULD SEE THE VALIDITY IN HAVING SOMEWHERE TO GO TO GET MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW YOU CAN GET INVOLVED AND DO MORE IN THE COMMUNITY.

I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT THE BUSINESSES OR THE CHURCH'S ACTUAL WEBSITE IS THE PLACE FOR THAT.

IF THEY HAD SOMEWHERE THAT WAS NEUTRAL THAT WASN'T NECESSARILY A BUSINESS, THAT WAS JUST AN INFORMATION WEBSITE.

I DON'T THINK THEY'LL BE AS BIG A DEAL WITH THAT.

>> I'M ASSUMING THAT THEIR PROGRAM WOULD BE IF I STUCK THIS IN MY FRONT YARD AND THERE'S SOMEBODY WALKING THEIR DOGS OR WALKING WITH THEIR KIDS, AND THEY LOOK AND THEY SEE THIS SIGN, HOPE LIVES HERE AND THEY WOULD SAY, "WOW, I WONDER WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS." BUT THEN WHEN THEY SEE THEWOODLANDSUMC.ORG, I'M ASSUMING THEY WOULD PROBABLY GO ONLINE AND THEY WILL SAY, "WOW, I WONDER WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS.

MAYBE I CAN GET INVOLVED AND HELP MY COMMUNITY." I'M SURE THAT'S WHAT THE PROGRAM IS ALL ABOUT.

I GUESS THAT IF I GOT ON THIS WEBSITE, IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT SAID HOPE LIVES HERE AND HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT.

IT'S ONLY SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE UP THERE FOR JUST A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.

I DON'T REALLY KNOW IF IT'S THAT BIG OF AN ISSUE AND IF IT HELPS WHAT THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT, THE CHALLENGES OF OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR WORLD ARE FACING.

YOU'RE GOING TO COME DOWN WHAT, IN AUGUST?

>> BY MID-AUGUST,

>> IT COULD BE A GOOD THING FOR THE COMMUNITY.

IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE UP THERE PERMANENTLY.

[01:35:02]

>> I AGREE.

>>

>> LOOK, IF LOOK IT UP, IT COMES, YOUR POPS UP IS THE WOODLAND UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, SHOWS THE FOUR LOGOS, AND THEN I'M ON THE WEBSITE.

THEN I CAN SEARCH FROM THERE.

>> DO THEY HAVE SOMEWHERE THAT'S LINKED TO HOPE LIVES HERE?

>> I DON'T SEE IT YET. THEY MAY NOT HAVE DONE THE LINK, JOHN, BECAUSE THE SIGNS AREN'T UP YET.

BUT WHEN I DO THAT WEBSITE, I GET THE FRONT PAGE OF THE WEBSITE AND I GET WHAT THE LOGOS MEAN.

SO IT EXPLAINS EACH LOGO.

THE FOUR LOGOS SYMBOLS.

>> I THINK WE CAN TAKE THEM-

>> I THINK BOB BRINGS UP AN INTERESTING POINT, SO DOES WALT.

I THINK SINCE THIS IS A TEMPORARY SIGN, I THINK WITHOUT THE WEBSITE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THIS SIGN MEANS, IF I'M JUST A RESIDENT WALKING BY.

>> WELL, I THINK THE LOGOS ARE UNNECESSARY IN ORDER TO GET THAT ACROSS.

>> I DON'T THINK THE LOGOS REALLY WILL HELP YOU, I THINK THE WEBSITE IT'LL TIE YOU INTO FIND OUT WHAT THIS IS.

JUST THE LOGOS ALONE, I DIDN'T PICK UP ANYTHING WHEN I LOOKED AT THESE FOUR LOGOS AND THEN I WENT ON A WEBSITE.

SO I'D BE OKAY WE THE SIGN WITHOUT THE LOGOS, KEEP THEM.

I'M NOT HERE TO REVIEW TO MESSAGE, BUT THE WEBSITE BRINGS IT ALL TOGETHER AND I'M GOOD WITH IT SINCE IT'S ONLY TEMPORARY, AND BY THE 15TH AUGUST IT WOULD BE REMOVED.

>> ARTHUR, IN THEIR REQUEST, THEY IDENTIFIED THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEM UP FOR AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER.

BUT IF THEY WERE TO COME IN NEAR THE END OF JULY, WE COULD GO AHEAD AND GET THEM OUT.

THEY DID ALSO IDENTIFY THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO GET IT THROUGH UNTIL SCHOOL STARTS.

SCHOOL, I BELIEVE IS SUPPOSED TO COMMENCE AUGUST 12TH.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO EXTEND THAT PASSED AUGUST 15TH BECAUSE THEIR REQUEST IS FOR SEPTEMBER.

YOUR TEMPORARY SIGN STANDARD ALLOWS FOR 120 DAYS.

SO EXTENDING IT INTO A SEPTEMBER DOES STILL ACCOMMODATE THE 120-DAY RESTRICTION.

>> KIM, I APPRECIATE THAT CLARIFICATION.

I'LL REMOVE THE 15TH AUGUST, I'LL STAY WITHIN THE STANDARDS OF MAXIMUM OF 120 DAYS.

SO I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

>> I THINK IT WAS IN BOTH PLACES, SO I DID AS WELL.

>> THANKS FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

>>

>> IS IT OKAY IF THEY JUST REMOVE THE LOGOS?

>> WHAT I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION FOR THE COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER TO APPROVE THE TEMPORARY SIGN PROVIDED THE LOGOS ARE REMOVED, LEAVE THE WEBSITE INDICATOR, AND STAY WITHIN THE STANDARDS FOR TEMPORARY SIGNS TO NOT EXCEED A 120 DAYS.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO YOU REMOVE THE LOGO BUT YOU'RE LEAVING THE WEBSITE?

>> YES, SIR.

>> OKAY. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> OKAY. ANY OPPOSE? MOTION CARRIES.

>> THE NEXT ITEM THAT I BELIEVE WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS PRESENT IS IMF,

[Item VII F ]

WHICH IS THE NEXT ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE EXISTING EXTERIOR LIGHTING THAT EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM FOOT CANDLE LEVELS ALLOWED AT THE PROPERTY LINE.

THIS IS THE WOODLANDS CHRISTIAN CHURCH AT 1202 NORTH MILLBEND DRIVE.

JUST TO MAKE YOU AWARE OF THE NEXT FEW ITEMS ON YOUR AGENDA.

F, V, H, AND I ARE ALL GOING TO BE LIGHTING ISSUES ALL RELATED TO EXISTING LIGHTING IN PARKING LOTS, AND THEN PRIMARILY PROPOSED WALL PACK LIGHTING THAT HAS NOT BEEN INSTALLED AS OF YET.

THIS ITEM WAS BROUGHT FORWARD WITH THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE AND BY THE STAFF AS IT RELATES TO THE MODIFICATION TO THE COLOR TEMPERATURE, WHICH IS AT 5,000 VERSUS A REQUIREMENT THAT IS GENERALLY FOR 4,000 FROM THE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THERE WAS AN IDENTIFICATION IN THERE, A CONDITION NOTING TO RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REQUIRE MODIFICATIONS OR CHANGES IN THE EVENT THAT A NEGATIVE IMPACT IS RECEIVED.

AT THE TIME THAT THESE ITEMS WERE PLACED ON THE AGENDA, WHICH WAS YOUR JUNE 3RD MEETING, IT WAS TABLED TO ALLOW THE COMMITTEE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO OUT AND REVIEW THESE ITEMS. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ITEMS AT 1202 NORTH MILLBEND DRIVE FOR THE WOODLANDS CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED HERE NEAREST MANY PINES AND NORTH MILLBEND DRIVE.

[01:40:04]

LOOKING AT THE AERIAL VIEW, IT IS THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PARCEL NEAREST TAMARACK PARK.

THE LETTER THAT WAS PROVIDED IS TO ADDRESS THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE IN REGARDS TO THE AREAS WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL PERFORMED THEIR OWN LIGHTING STUDY FOR THE EXISTING LIGHTS THAT WERE REPAIRED, AND THE WORK OF THE LIGHT SOURCE THAT WAS CHANGED TO LED, AND WHAT THAT DID TO THE COLOR TEMPERATURE AND FOOT CANDLE READINGS.

THIS LETTER REPRESENTS FIVE DIFFERENT LOCATIONS, WHICH I'LL SHOW YOU ON A MAP, AND NOTES WHERE THOSE MEASUREMENTS WERE TAKEN, WHERE THE VEGETATION IS FOR EACH OF THOSE, AND THEN WHAT THOSE FOOT CANDLE READINGS ARE.

TO DO A QUICK SUMMARY, THE COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS FOOT CANDLE READING WOULD BE 0.1 AND THIS WOULD BE THE VARIATIONS OF 0.25, AT ITS HIGHEST, 0.28 FOOT CANDLE READINGS FROM THE CHURCH BUILDING AND ABOUT A FOUR-FOOT WIDE SECTION THAT LIES DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM A STREET LIGHT, WHICH THEY DID MEASURE AT A 1.7 FOOT CANDLE IN THE DIRECTION OF THE STREET LIGHTS.

SO THAT IS SOME OF THE AREAS WHERE THERE'S SOME DISCREPANCIES.

IN REGARDS TO THE MAP THAT WAS PROVIDED, THEY SHOW AREA 1, WHICH IS YOUR 0.8 FOOT CANDLE READING AT THE PROPERTY LINE; 2 AT 1.5; 3, WHICH IS DEMONSTRATED BETWEEN 0.01 FROM THE CHURCH AND 0.25, WHICH IS CLOSER TO THE NEARBY STREET LINE.

SIMILARLY, ON 4, YOU HAVE A READING OF 0.07 FROM THE CHURCH UP TO 0.28 TO THE NEARBY STREET LIGHT.

AND THEN 5 AS YOU WRAP AROUND, WHICH IS.28 FROM THE CHURCH, AND THEN 1.7 NEAREST THE STREET LIGHT AT THE PROPERTY LINE.

THE TRIANGULAR SECTIONS THAT YOU SEE AGAINST THE BUILDING ARE THE WALL PACKS, WHICH ARE REPRESENTED HERE.

I BELIEVE THERE ARE SIX WALL PACKS.

THEN THE CIRCLES THAT YOU SEE IN THE PARKING LOT AREA IS THE LED PARKING LIGHT HEADS, WHICH ARE A 150-WATT EACH LED LIGHTS.

THOSE ARE REPRESENTED AS YOU SURROUND THE PARKING LOT IN THESE SIX AREAS.

HERE ARE YOUR PARKING LOT LIGHTS AND THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE STYLE OF LED PARKING LOT LIGHT THAT WAS INSTALLED.

HERE ARE THE WALL PACKS.

THESE WALL PACKS AND THE INSTALLATION WOULD NOT HAVE A SHIELD ON THE LIGHT ITSELF TO DIRECT DOWNWARD.

SOME MORE EXAMPLES OF THE WALL PACK LIGHTING.

HERE'S THE VIEW OF THE PROPERTY.

IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, YOU'LL SEE AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY SO THAT IT CAN DEMONSTRATE WHERE YOU'RE LOCATED FOR THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, THIS IS AS YOU COME THROUGH THE ENTRYWAY.

HERE IS THE EXISTING SURROUNDING PROPERTY AND THE VEGETATION.

THIS IS TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF SOME OF THE VEGETATION AROUND THE BUILDING ITSELF BEFORE THE FOREST RESERVES.

THEN THIS IS LOOKING OUT TO THE STREET.

THERE'S THAT ENTRYWAY SIGN YOU SAW, THE FOREST STATION THAT SURROUNDS THE AREA LOOKING OUT TO MILLBEND DRIVE AS YOU'RE COMING INTO THE PARKING LOT, WHICH IS REPRESENTED HERE.

A MORE CLOSE UP VIEW OF THAT SECTION, HERE ARE THOSE PARKING LOT LIGHTS.

THESE LIGHTS ARE ALREADY INSTALLED AND THEN THE APPLICATION WAS PROVIDED.

MORE INFORMATION IN REGARDS TO THE WALL PACK LIGHTS THAT ARE ALSO INSTALLED: AS YOU'RE GOING AROUND, THESE WOULD BE THE NEAREST NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WHICH IS THE VEGETATION THAT YOU HAVE, LOOKING AT THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY IN THE FOREST AROUND THE REAR.

THERE ARE SOME AREAS WHERE THE LIGHTS THEMSELVES DO NEED TO BE FACING DOWNWARDS, SO THEY'RE SET A BIT OF AN ANGLE AND THEY SHOULD BE TURNED SLIGHTLY DOWN IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH YOUR COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS.

OVERALL VIEW TO YOUR NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

IF THE OWNER FOR 1202 NORTH MILLBEND DRIVE IS PRESIDENT, PLEASE HIT STAR NINE ON YOUR PHONE SO THAT WE CAN IDENTIFY YOU FOR THE COMMITTEE.

THIS ITEM WAS TABLED.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO OUT AND LOOK AT IT.

AT THE TIME, THERE WAS INFORMATION AS IT RELATES TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE FOR OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE.

THE MOST PREDOMINANT VARIATION FOR REVIEW IS IN REGARDS TO REQUIRING THE LED FIXTURES TO BE MODIFIED TO A 4,000K COLOR TEMPERATURE WITH A 500K VARIANCE BETWEEN EACH THAT'S ALLOWED.

THE OWNERS WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD BY THE COMMITTEE IN ORDER TO IDENTIFY THAT THEY WOULD STRUGGLE TO MODIFY THE LIGHT FIXTURES FROM THE CURRENT 5,000K DOWN TO THE REQUESTED 4,000K.

THEY ARE PRESENT TONIGHT SO THAT THEY CAN SPEAK TO YOU IN REGARDS TO

[01:45:04]

THOSE DIFFICULTIES IN MAKING ANY MODIFICATIONS ON THE EXISTING LINES.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME OR SHALL WE GO AHEAD AND ENGAGE THE CALL?

>> ONE CLARIFICATION.

THIS SITE IS SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL, CORRECT?

>> YES, THIS IS ON MILLBEND.

LET ME GO BACK TO THE AERIAL VIEW FOR YOU. SORRY.

>> NO, YOU'RE FINE.

>> VILLAGE OF GROGAN'S MILL TO THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE, IF YOU'RE FACING THE PROPERTY FROM MILLBEND IS THE WOODLANDS MONTESSORI.

FROM BEHIND THE WOODLANDS MONTESSORI, THIS HERE IS LAMAR ELEMENTARY.

TO THE LEFT-HAND SIDE IS TAMARACK PARK, AND THEN MOST IMMEDIATELY ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROAD IS FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST SCIENTISTS.

ON THE OTHER SIDE OF NORTH MILLBEND DRIVE CEDARWING LANE WOULD BACK UP TO NORTH MILLBEND DRIVE.

THIS IS THE MOST ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES OFF OF NORTH MILLBEND.

>> VERY GOOD.

>> TO DATE, THE ANY COMPLAINTS IN REGARDS TO THE EXISTING LIGHTING.

>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU.

>> ABSOLUTELY. SHALL I GO AHEAD AND PUT THE CALLER ON THE LINE? OR DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> GO AHEAD, PLEASE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. HI CALLER ENDING AND 1013.

ARE YOU CALLING IN REGARDS TO THE LIGHTING FOR THE WOODLANDS

>> I AM.

>> GO AHEAD, THE COMMITTEE CAN HEAR YOU.

>> HI. MY NAME IS STEVE RANDALL AND I AM THE PROPERTY COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN FOR THE CHURCH.

I DID NOTE THAT WE DID INDICATE THAT WE WOULD STRUGGLE TO BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE LIGHTING COLOR.

THE LIGHTS THAT ARE UP THERE CAN'T REALLY BE MODIFIED, THEY'D HAVE TO BE TAKEN DOWN AND REPLACED WITH DIFFERENT LIGHTING WHICH IS REALLY OUTSIDE OF OUR FISCAL MEANS AT THIS TIME.

>> SO I GUESS, WE CAN REQUEST JUST TO LEAVE IT AS IS.

>> YES. I REQUESTED ALLOW US TO LEAVE THEM AS IS, WE CAN WE CAN CERTAINLY PUT DOWN THAT THE REQUEST WOULD BE TO MODIFY TO A 4,000K LIGHT SYSTEM SHOULD ANY OF THE LIGHTS FAIL.

BUT THAT WOULD ACTUALLY END UP WITH A MULTI-COLOR IN THE PARKING LOT, THE LIGHTS SHOULD HAVE MORE THAN A 10-YEAR LIFE ON THEM.

>> I'VE DONE A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH ON SUNLIGHT FIXTURES, I CAN'T REALLY SAY THAT I'VE RESEARCHED THE ONES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED AT THIS SITE, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN COMPONENTS WITHIN THOSE LED LIGHTS THAT CAN BE REMOVED AND EXCHANGED, AND THEN THE LIGHT COLOR IS BASICALLY CONVERTED TO THE 4,000.

IT'S NOT A REPLACEMENT OF THE FIXTURE BASED ON THE PEOPLE I HAVE TALKED WITH.

WE WANT CONSISTENCY.

FIVE-THOUSAND IS A VERY BLUISH LIGHT, 4,000 IS MUCH MORE WARM YELLOWISH TINT TO IT.

IT PROVIDES JUST A CONSISTENT LOOK ACROSS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEES IN THE BOARDS ARE LOOKING FOR.

I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY AND HAVE THIS REVISED AND RESUBMITTED BASICALLY PROBATUM GRACE PERIOD OF TWO YEARS GRANT FOR FULL CONVERSION OF LIGHTING.

TWO YEARS IS ADEQUATE TIME.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT MAY BE TOUGH, BUT THE COMPONENT HERE IS YOU SHOULD HAVE SUBMITTED THIS.

IF WE LET THIS GO, THEN WE HAVE TO ALLOW THE NEXT PROPERTY TO GO, AND THE NEXT ONE, AND THE NEXT ONE.

THIS HAS TO BE FIXED, AND IT'S GETTING TO THE POINT WHERE PEOPLE ARE UNINSTALLING, NOT ASKING, AND THEN ASK FOR FORGIVENESS, AND I

>> YOU HAVE NO STANDARDS WRITTEN FOR EXTERIOR LIGHTING ON PROPERTY THAN ANY OF YOUR STANDARD WRITTEN MATERIALS.

>> NO, SIR. I AGREE WITH YOU.

>>

>> I AGREE WITH YOU. WE DO HAVE STANDARDS IF THEY MUST BE SUBMITTED, AND HAD THEY BEEN SUBMITTED PRIOR TO

[01:50:04]

>> WHERE DOES IT STATE THAT IN ANY OF YOUR WRITTEN MATERIALS?

>> IT'S A PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT TO THE EXTERIOR.

>> SO THE LIGHTS ALREADY EXISTED THAT YOU CLAIM THAT A CHANGE OF LIGHTING COLOR WOULD BE A CHANGE TO THE PERMANENT EXTERIOR.

>> WELL, YOU'RE CHANGING THE LIGHT FIXTURES, YOU CHANGE THEM ALL OUT TO LED SYSTEMS, WHICH IS GREAT, A LOT OF PROPERTIES ARE DOING THAT.

WE COMPLETELY AGREE THAT IT'S A COST-EFFECTIVE THING TO DO.

IF YOU GET IN BEFORE YOU HAVE THEM INSTALLED, AND WE CAN DIRECT YOU TO THE CORRECT COLOR TEMPERATURE, TO BEGIN WITH, NONE OF THIS WOULD BE TAKING PLACE.

>> I'M SORRY. THE SUBCOMMITTEES UNDERSTAND EVERYONE'S PLINT IN THE ADDITIONAL COSTS THAT WILL BE INCURRED WITH THIS, WHICH IS WHY WE WANT TO GIVE EVERYONE A REASONABLE GRACE PERIOD TO GET THIS CHANGED OUT.

BUT ASKING FOR COMPLETE FORGIVENESS, IN MY OPINION, IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD ALLOW FOR.

WELL, THE RECOMMENDED MOTION HERE TO DENY, REVISE, AND RESUBMIT WITHIN THE TWO-YEAR TIME PERIOD, AND HAVE EVERYTHING FIXED.

>> WHAT ABOUT THE DOWNWARD POINT TO THE 90? THE FIXTURES THAT HAS TO BE DONE BEFORE THE TWO-YEAR GRACE PERIOD?

>> IT SHOULD BE.

>> IF I MAY IN THE RECOMMENDED MOTION, THERE IS A COMMITTEE REVIEW, AND THEN THERE ARE JUST SOME CONDITIONS IF YOU WERE TO NOT ALLOW IT, AND ALSO CONDITIONS IF YOU WERE TO ALLOW IT IF IT CURRENTLY EXISTED.

THE RECOMMENDED MOTION, I'M ASSUMING YOU WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT IT'S AFTER THE COMMITTEE REVIEW, IT'S THE PROPOSED DENY, REVISE AND RESUBMIT, NOT THE APPROVED AS CURRENTLY EXISTING WITH CONDITIONS

>> YES, MA'AM. THAT IS CORRECT. THANK YOU.

>> I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, THERE WAS MORE THAN ONE RECOMMENDATION IN THERE.

>> YES. MY RECOMMENDATION IS FOR THE DENY, REVISE AND RESUBMIT.

>> OKAY.

>> IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT?

>> SECOND. I DON'T THINK THE TWO-YEAR GRACE PERIOD IS A GOOD

>> COUNCILS IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> WALT, AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED?

>> AYE.

>> MOTION CARRIES.

>> IF I HAVE A COLOR IN THE QUEUE THAT IS HERE FOR ITEM G,

[Item VII G ]

WHICH IS 3200 RESEARCH FOREST DRIVE, ALSO FOR THE LIGHTING THAT IS PROPOSED.

IF YOU COULD PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND AT THIS TIME, THAT WAY I AM AWARE IF YOU'RE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM.

THIS IS FOR ITEM G. PERFECT.

ITEM G IS THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE EXISTING PARKING LOT LIGHTING AND PROPOSED WALLPACK LIGHTING THAT EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM FOOT CANDLE LEVELS ALLOWED AT THE PROPERTY LINE.

THIS IS AT THE VENTURE TECH II BUILDING REPRESENTED HERE OFF OF RESEARCH FOREST DRIVE, WHICH IS THE BUILDING THAT YOU SEE HERE IN SOMEWHAT OF A U-SHAPE.

ALSO ON THE AGENDA, I BELIEVE ON ITEM I, YOU'LL SEE ALSO FROM DEER PARK VENTURES, THE BUILDING TO THE REAR.

THE REASON WHY I CALL THAT OUT RIGHT NOW IS BECAUSE YOU WILL SEE IN SOME OF THE PHOTO METRICS THAT IT WAS SUBMITTED FOR BOTH OF THESE LOTS.

THE ONE THAT YOU'RE FOCUSING ON FOR THIS AGENDA IS THE U-SHAPED ITEM HERE.

HERE ARE THOSE TWO, THIS IS THAT U-SHAPED ONE AND THE PHOTOMETRIC STUDY, WHICH DOES HAVE AN IDENTIFICATION OF COLOR, TEMPERATURE, AND FOOT CANDLE READINGS THAT EXTEND BEYOND YOUR COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS.

AS REPRESENTED HERE, YOU'LL SEE YOUR ILLUMINANCE OF FOOT CANDLES.

YOU HAVE SOME AREAS NEAREST THE PROPERTY LINE WHERE YOU HAVE MEASUREMENT OF UP TO TWO-FOOT CANDLES, AND THEY WILL BE REPRESENTED HERE AS WELL.

HERE IS THE PHOTOMETRIC STUDY AND SOME OF THE SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED FOR THE 12 LIGHT POLE FIXTURES, AND THE 10 WALLPACKS.

THE 12 LIGHT POLE FIXTURES ARE CURRENTLY INSTALLED, THE 10 WALLPACKS HAVE BEEN PURCHASED BUT NOT YET INSTALLED.

[01:55:06]

SO THE PHOTOS THAT YOU'LL SEE FOR THE WALLPACKS ARE THE EXISTING ONES THAT THEY INTEND TO CHANGE.

HERE ARE THE SPECS FOR THE EXISTING LIGHT POLE FIXTURES, ALSO LED LIGHTS.

HERE IS THE SURROUNDING BUILDING, AND THE MAP AERIAL VIEW WILL SHOW YOU WHERE YOU ARE ON THE PROPERTY, LOOKING AROUND TO THE FORESTED AREA.

I APOLOGIZE IF I'M GOING TO QUICKLY ON THIS ONE, IT'S A VERY SIMILAR SCENARIO WITH LIGHTING AND THE LUMEN OUTPUTS, COLOR TEMPERATURE AND READINGS.

THESE GIVE YOU SOME MORE EXAMPLES OF THAT AREA.

THIS IS A SIMILAR WALLPACK THAT ALSO DOES NOT INCLUDE THAT SHIELD THAT'S PROPOSED.

AS YOU COME AROUND THE BUILDING, YOU'LL SEE THERE ARE VARIATIONS OF THE WALLPACK CURRENTLY, TWO DIFFERENT TYPES.

YOU DO HAVE YOUR REPRESENTATIVE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND GO BACK TO 12 LIGHT POLE FIXTURES, AND THE 10 WALLPACKS.

I HAVE TWO INDIVIDUALS WITH THEIR HANDS RAISED FOR THIS ITEM.

IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME ON THIS ITEM?

>> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> CALLER ENDING IN 1895, ARE YOU CALLING IN REGARD TO A 3200 RESEARCH FOREST DRIVE?

>> YES.

>> IF YOU COULD MUTE YOUR SCREEN WHILE YOU'RE ON THE CALL, I

>> I'M SORRY. WHEN YOU SAY MUTE THE SCREEN, I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

>> ON THE PHONE.

>> JUST PUT MUTE?

>> NO. YOU'RE FINE.

I WAS GETTING FEEDBACK.

>> NO. I'M JUST ON A REGULAR PHONE.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> WELL, I JUST WANT TO SAY GOOD EVENING TO THE COMMITTEE.

I'M LAURA WILSON, AND I'M THE PROPERTY MANAGER FOR THIS LOCATION.

I WAS JUST LISTENING TO YOUR PREVIOUS THING, SO I UNDERSTAND IT'S FAIRLY SIMILAR SITUATION.

I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I HAVE ORDERED WALLPACK FOR THAT LOCATION, THEY'VE NOT BEEN INSTALLED, AND I HAVE ALSO THE ELECTRICIAN WHO'S ALSO THE OTHER PERSON ON THE CALL WHO COULD ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

WE ARE ABLE TO RETURN THOSE WALLPACKS AND GET THE CORRECT WALLPACKS THAT YOU ALL ARE REQUESTING, AND WE CAN GET THAT TAKEN CARE OF.

THEY WERE NOT INSTALLED ONCE WE REALIZED THIS WAS A PROBLEM.

REGARDING THE POLE LIGHTS, THE POLE LIGHTS WERE INSTALLED.

I WILL CLAIM MY OWN IGNORANCE, I GUESS.

I HAVE NO IDEA AT ALL THAT WE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT, AND I TOOK OVER THIS PROPERTY TWO YEARS AGO.

AS A PROPERTY MANAGER, I HAVE NEVER HAD PROPERTY IN THE WOODLANDS AREA BEFORE AND HAD ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE.

I COULD NOT PUT LED IN.

LED LIGHTS WENT IN TO HELP CAUSE WE WERE CONSTANTLY SENDING MONEY TO HAVE TO REPLACE THE LIGHTS THERE, THEY WERE GOING OUT ALL THE TIME.

SO FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY, AND FOR LOOK ON THE PROPERTY, AND SAFETY, AND EVERYTHING, WE WENT AHEAD AND PUT LED IN.

IN MY SITUATION, THE ELECTRICIAN COULD ANSWER AGAIN A LITTLE BIT BETTER ON THAT, BUT I DO KNOW THAT TO PLACE THOSE OUT, THERE ARE, OF COURSE, IS A GREAT EXPENSE IN THAT, AND ALSO, LABOR INVOLVED TO DO THAT.

THAT IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT I WANTED TO TELL YOU GUYS ON THAT, AND JOSE BLANCO IS ON THE LINE ALSO.

>> I DO SHOW ANOTHER CALLER ON THE LINE, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO OPEN UP THAT CALL?

>> PLEASE.

>> YES? HI, I'M JOSE BLANCO.

I'M THE ELECTRICIAN COMPANY THAT DID THE INSTALL FOR SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE LIGHTING, I'M HERE TO HELP.

>> OKAY. BOB, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO, SIR.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE WALLPACKS HAVE NOT BEEN INSTALLED, BUT THE LIGHT POLE FIXTURES HAVE BEEN INSTALLED?

>> CORRECT.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE LIGHT POLE FIXTURES AT 5,000 AND WE HAVE WALLPACKS

[02:00:02]

THAT CAN BE EXCHANGED FOR THE CORRECT DOWN LIGHTING SYSTEM. IS THAT ACCURATE?

>> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> OKAY. THEN I WOULD HOLD THE COURSE WITH THE PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD THAT THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE GIVEN A ALLOWANCE OF A TWO-YEAR GRACE PERIOD IN ORDER TO GET THE LIGHT POLE FIXTURES CONVERTED FROM THE 5,000 DOWN TO THE 4,000.

AT THIS TIME, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU HAVE THE WALLPACKS RETURNED AND REVISED AND RESUBMITTED IN ACCORDANCE TO HAVE DOWN LIGHTING.

AT THAT POINT, I WOULD SAY YOU WOULD BE IN PRETTY GOOD SHAPE.

I WOULD AGREE THAT A VARIANCE WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR THE 8.1 ON THE PHOTO METRICS.

BUT IT'S BETWEEN TWO COMMERCIAL SITES AND IT'S THE SAME OWNER, I THINK THAT'S A COMPLETELY LOGICAL IDEA FOR THEM TO HAVE.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT LED FIXTURES ARE A GOOD THING.

WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT.

WE JUST HAVE CONCERNS WHEN PROPERTIES INSTALL SYSTEMS THAT ARE OUTSIDE AND VISIBLE TO ANYONE AND HAVE NEVER SUBMITTED FOR THEM.

I UNDERSTAND YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT.

SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO COURSE CORRECTION SO THAT THE PROPERTY WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITHIN AT LEAST TWO YEARS FROM NOW.

SO THAT IS MY RECOMMENDATION.

>> OKAY. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE WHO'S IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>>

>> AYE.

>> ANDERSON, AYE.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> IF I COULD, WHILE I STILL HAVE THESE TWO CALLERS AVAILABLE, I KNOW IT'S GOING TO JUMP, BUT THIS IS VERY SIMILAR.

FOR ITEM I WHICH IS 8701 NEW TRAILS DRIVE, YOU HAVE THE SAME SCENARIO OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE EXISTING PARKING LOT LIGHTING AND THE PROPOSED WALLPACK LIGHTING THAT EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM FOOT CANDLE LEVELS.

THIS IS THE SAME IN THE ADJACENT PARCEL.

DO YOU WANT GO AHEAD AND ACT ON THAT WHILE THEY ARE PRESENT? I CAN GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION FOR THAT ITEM.

BUT IN TRUTH, OTHER THAN WHERE THE LIGHT POLE IS IN THE PARKING LOT AND WHERE THE WALLPACK IS ON THE BUILDING, THE SAME SCENARIO AND THE NEED FOR THE VARIANCE IS APPLYING IN THIS SITUATION, IN REGARDS TO THE REPLACEMENT OF THE LED FIXTURES AND THE NEED TO MODIFY THE WALLPACKS.

WOULD YOU SAY THAT THAT'S ACCURATE, BOB?

>> YES, MA'AM, I DO.

I BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THIS PROPERTY WOULD SUFFICE FOR THE ADJACENT AS WELL.

>> GREAT. WALT, IS THAT OKAY IF WE DO A

>> GOT IT. A MOTION. IS THAT YOUR MOTION, BOB?

>> YES, SIR. MY RECOMMENDED MOTION IS TO APPLY THE PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED RECOMMENDATIONS TO 7901 AS WELL AS 3200 RESEARCH FOREST DRIVE.

>> ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> WHOEVER ELSE IS IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> MARY, AN AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>> ANDERSON, AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

>> GREAT. THAT ALLOWS US TO HAVE HEARD ITEM I AND FOR THOSE TWO INDIVIDUALS ON THE PHONE.

JUST GIVE ME A MINUTE TO GO THROUGH THE CALLERS AND THEN I CAN GO TO THE NEXT ITEM FOR WHICH I HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT, WHICH I BELIEVE THAT SOMEONE IS PRESENT FOR ITEM H,

[Item VII H]

WHICH IS THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE EXISTING PARKING LOT LIGHTING AND PROPOSED WALLPACK LIGHTING THAT EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM FOOT CANDLE LEVELS ALLOWED AT THE PROPERTY LINE.

WHOEVER IS AT ALDEN BRIDGE, IF YOU CAN HIT START THAT WE CAN IDENTIFY THAT YOU ARE PRESENT FOR THE COMMITTEE.

DO I HAVE ANYONE PRESENT FOR ITEM H, THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE EXISTING PARKING LOT LIGHTING?

[02:05:03]

MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY, ON THIS ITEM, IT IS A DIFFERENT PARCEL, HOWEVER, IN CONSIDERATION OF TIME, THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE YOU ALSO HAVE LIGHT FIXTURES IN THE PARKING LOT THAT WERE REPLACED WITH LED LIGHTS THAT ARE A 5,000 K, WALLPACKS THAT ARE AT A 4,000 K. THIS ITEM WAS REVIEWED BY YOUR SUBCOMMITTEE WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU HAVE ACTED ON FOR ALL OF THE OTHER LIGHTING COMMERCIAL ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA.

I CAN GO THROUGH THIS ENTIRE PRESENTATION, BUT I DON'T SHOW THAT I HAVE ANYONE ON THE CALL.

I CAN EITHER SKIP THIS ONE AND WE CAN GO BACK TO IT.

OH, I DO HAVE SOMEONE ON THE CALL.

NEVER MIND, I'LL GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION.

SO IN REGARDS TO 7901 RESEARCH FOREST DRIVE, YOU DO HAVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE EXISTING PARKING LOT LIGHTING AND THE PROPOSED WALLPACK LIGHTING THAT EXCEEDS YOUR MAXIMUM FOOT CANDLES.

THIS IS FOR THE PLAZAS AT ALDEN BRIDGE.

REPRESENTED HERE, IT'S AT THE INTERSECTION CLOSEST TO RESEARCH FOREST DRIVE AND ALDEN BRIDGE DRIVE.

THE AERIAL MAP HERE WILL SHOW YOU THE PARCEL AND REFERENCE.

HERE IS THE PHOTOMETRIC STUDY THAT WAS PROVIDED.

YOU'LL SEE THE AREAS WHERE THE FOOT CANDLE READINGS ARE.

I KNOW THIS IS DIFFICULT TO READ, BUT IF I COULD DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE PROPERTY LINE CLOSEST TO THE BOTTOM HERE, YOU HAVE FOOT CANDLE READINGS THAT COME IN AT 0.1, SOME AT 0.2, PRIMARILY AROUND THIS AREA HERE.

OVER HERE, YOU HAVE 0.24579, 1.3 AND 1.1 IN THIS AREA, THIS WOULD BE ADJACENT TO A COMMERCIAL TRACK.

THEN THE MAJORITY OF IT ON THE PROPERTY LINE HERE IS 0.1.

THAT WOULD BE CLOSEST TO RESEARCH FOREST DRIVE.

HERE'S YOUR PHOTOMETRIC STUDY SHOWING YOUR FOOT CANDLE READINGS RANGING BETWEEN ZERO AND TWO-FOOT CANDLE READING.

YOU'LL SEE THAT AREA HERE THAT WE'RE REFERENCING PREVIOUSLY WHERE THE FOOT CANDLE READINGS MEASURE HIGH CLOSEST TO WELLS FARGO.

HERE ARE YOUR SPECIFICATION FOR THE LED LIGHTS THAT WERE INSTALLED.

THESE WALL PACKS ARE UNIQUE TO THE PREVIOUS WALL PACKS THAT WERE REVIEWED IN THE SENSE THAT THE DESIGN DOES ALLOW FOR MORE SHIELDING THAN THE ONES THAT YOU SAW ON THE PREVIOUS ACTION.

HERE ARE THE PHOTOS OF THE POLES AND THE LED FIXTURES THEMSELVES, IT DOES HAVE FOUR LIGHTS ON THE POLES AS YOU GO AROUND THE BUILDING.

HERE ARE THE WALL PACKS THAT ARE IN NEED OF REPLACEMENT.

THIS WAS REVIEWED BY YOUR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE AND A RECOMMENDATION WAS PROVIDED IN REGARDS TO THE IMPROVEMENT REQUEST AND THE EXTERIOR LED LIGHTING UPGRADE, WHICH WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: I WILL SAVE REVIEWING ALL OF THESE AS THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE LAST THREE ACTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN.

THOSE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ALSO REPRESENT THE ALLOWANCE FOR A GRACE PERIOD OF TWO YEARS FOR A FULL CONVERSION OF THE LIGHTING TO CORRECT THE COLOR TEMPERATURE TO A 4,000K.

I DO HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT ON THIS ITEM.

>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S LET THEM GO AHEAD AND

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> CALLER ENDING IN 1895.

>> YES, THIS IS THAT IS ALSO MY PROPERTY.

AFTER THE LAST TWO, IT HUNG UP ON ME, THE PHONE LINE, SO I HAD TO CALL BACK IN.

SO SAME THING ON THIS PROPERTY, ALL THREE OF THOSE PROPERTIES ARE MINE.

MY ONLY THING I DID WANT TO SAY, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT SOMEHOW YOU GUYS, GOING FORWARD TO THE FUTURE, SO SOMEONE WON'T GET STUCK IN THE SAME TYPE OF THING, CAN THERE BE, I GUESS, A MORE CLEARLY WRITTEN SOMETHING OR RATHER FOR PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN YOUR AREA SO PEOPLE WILL KNOW WHAT THEY NEED TO DO WITH LIGHTING FOR COMMERCIAL LIGHTS REGARDING LED LIGHTING? SOMETHING THAT'S VERY CLEAR EITHER ON A WEBSITE OR SOMETHING LIKE THIS SO WE DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS LIKE THIS OF PUTTING IN LIGHTING AND HAVING TO GO THROUGH THE EXPENSE TO CHANGE THEM OUT.

LIKE I SAID THIS TO ME, OBVIOUSLY, IS MY FIRST TIME.

NEVER HAD A PROPERTY IN THE WOODLANDS, DIDN'T EVEN BARELY KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP UNTIL I GOT THERE AND STARTED GETTING LETTERS.

SO I WAS JUST WONDERING, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S POSSIBLE FOR YOU-ALL TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF REALLY CLEAR, SOMETHING YOU CAN WORK ON FOR PROPERTIES LIKE THIS FOR LED LIGHTING, SO WE CAN HAVE CLEAR INTRODUCTION OF WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE SO WE CAN PUT IN AN APPLICATION AND NOT HAVE TO ASK FOR FORGIVENESS AFTERWARDS?

>> IF I COULD GO AHEAD, AND BOB, I IMAGINE WE PROBABLY WANT TO ALSO ADD TO THIS.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND LIGHTING STANDARDS, THE WAY THOSE ARE WRITTEN AS WELL AS THE COVENANCE, DOES NOT HAVE

[02:10:04]

BEHIND WHEN WE DIDN'T HAVE LED LIGHT AS WE WERE TOLD, MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THOSE SUBCOMMITTEES FROM THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE THAT THE WAY THEY DRAFT DESIGN STANDARDS IS TO IDENTIFY TO ME AN APPROVAL PRIOR TO ANY OF HAS TO BE SUBMITTED BEFORE ANY INSTALLATION CAN OCCUR.

THEN WHATEVER CONDITIONS THEY APPLY WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHATEVER IS THE CURRENT TREND CURRENTLY OCCURRING THAT IS I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING EVEN THOUGH THAT'S NOT ACCURATE.

>> YES, MA'AM. I'M JUST ASKING.

IT'S COMING IN AS NOT NOT NEW TO PROPERTY MANAGEMENT BY ANY MEANS, BUT CERTAINLY NEW TO YOUR AREA.

SOMEONE LEFT OUR COMPANY, I GOT NO DIRECTION, JUST TOOK OVER THE PROPERTY, AND DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.

OF COURSE, ON A LOT OF MY OTHER PROPERTIES, WE CAN DO LED LIGHTING.

YOU JUST PUT THEM IN, IT'S KIND OF THE TREND RIGHT NOW.

SO WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS I REALIZED WHERE ALL THESE ANSWERS ARE GOING OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO, BUT WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS JUST, HEY, CAN YOU GUYS JUST MAKE IT CLEAR SO WE'LL HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING? WE HAVE A PLACE TO GO-TO TO KNOW WHAT WE NEED TO DO WITH LED LIGHTING, BECAUSE I WON'T BE THE FIRST AND WE WON'T BE THE LAST, AND I'M SURE THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE.

AS MORE AND MORE PEOPLE ARE CHANGING TO LED LIGHTING, NOT ONLY IN RESIDENTIAL BUT ALSO ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE VERY CLEAR DIRECTION ON THIS.

I DON'T FEEL THAT'S OUT THERE.

I THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT THING FOR ESPECIALLY SOMEONE LIKE ME WHO CAME A NEW TO A PROPERTY, SO I WOULD KNOW TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

BECAUSE CERTAINLY, WE'D LIKE TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

I JUST WASN'T GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO IT.

I JUST WENT AHEAD AND CHANGED THE LIGHTING, I HAD NO IDEA WHAT YOUR RULES WERE OUT THERE.

>> I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR FOR YOU TO SAY

>> IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU GUYS COULD ALSO HELP WITH PROPERTY MANAGERS LIKE MYSELF TO HELP US HAVE A REAL CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT'S EXPECTED?

>> I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY.

AS SOMEBODY THAT'S IN YOUR LINE OF WORK, DON'T YOU OFTEN HAVE TO CONTACT GOVERNMENTS IN DIFFERENT CITIES TO FIND OUT WHAT IS ALLOWED, WHAT'S NOT ALLOWED?

>> I'M NOT

>> IF YOU HAD BEEN HERE, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO SOMEBODY AND LET ME TELL YOU, YOU NEED TO HAVE AN APPLICATION.

THAT WOULD HAVE COME BEFORE US AND YOU WOULD HAVE THE INFORMATION YOU NEEDED BEFORE YOU INSTALL IT.

>> YEAH. I UNDERSTAND SIR, BUT I'M JUST SAYING WHEN YOU COME INTO THE WOODLANDS AND YOU'VE NEVER HAD A PROPERTY THERE, I HAVE OTHER PROPERTIES WHERE I DO NOT HAVE TO DO THAT.

I'VE JUST BEEN ABLE TO CHANGE MY LIGHTING.

I MANAGE PROPERTIES IN OFTEN SAN ANTONIO, I HAVE NOT HAD TO DO THAT.

SO THIS IS A FIRST TIME FOR ME HAVING TO GO THROUGH THIS ON LIGHTING.

I'M JUST SAYING, IT'S NOT A CHALLENGE THAT I'M COMING TO YOU WITH.

I'M COMING WITH A REQUEST THAT I WOULD JUST THINK IT WOULD BE A GREAT THING FOR YOU GUYS TO GIVE JUST A REAL CLEAR DIRECTION ON: "HEY, IF YOU'RE A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNER MANAGER AND YOU'RE WANT TO CHANGE TO LED LIGHTING, THIS IS WHAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE." SO PEOPLE WILL KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THEY NEED TO DO AND DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE EXPENSE OF THIS.

>> ANYTIME YOU HAVE A QUESTION LIKE THAT, YOU CAN CALL THE THEY'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND HELP YOU FOLLOW THROUGH ON THE PROCESS.

THERE'S ALSO AN APP THAT THE WOODLANDS HAS, SO THE ONE THAT YOU CAN GET SOME OF THE FOR THE WAYS THAT YOU CAN CONTACT THE TOWNSHIP, AND THEY'LL WORK WITH YOU ON THINGS LIKE THESE.

SO JUST RECOGNIZE THE FACT BEFORE YOU DO SOMETHING, YOU HAVE TO APPLY FOR IT.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE APPRECIATE IT.

>> NOTED AND UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

THIS MOTION ACCEPTED FOR THIS ONE? I MEAN, THIS GOES WITH THE OTHER THREE, RIGHT?

>> I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION THAT IT CARRIES TO THIS PROPERTY AS WELL.

>> OKAY.

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> IS THAT A SECOND?

>> I SECOND.

>> ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSE? ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES.

>> EXCELLENT. GIVE ME JUST A SECOND TO GATHER MY NOTES.

>> IS THAT ALL THE LIGHTING ONES NOW?

>> YES, SIR.

>> NO MORE COMMERCIAL?

>> I JUST NEED TO CHECK REAL QUICK.

I BELIEVE THAT WAS THE LAST OF ALL OF OUR COMMERCIAL ITEMS. YES, THAT'S THE CONCLUSION OF THE COMMERCIAL ITEMS.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE CAN GO TO RESIDENTIAL ITEMS.

[02:15:01]

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> ALL RIGHT. I'LL START SHARING THE SCREEN.

THERE WE GO. SO THIS IS ITEM NUMBER ONE,

[Item VIII 1]

RESIDENTIAL FOR 27 VILLA CANYON PLACE, THEN THE VILLAGE OF INDIAN SPRINGS.

THIS IS A REHEARING REQUEST, SO I BELIEVE WE HAVE TWO PEOPLE ON THE PHONE.

SO GO AHEAD AND RAISE YOUR HANDS AND IN A MINUTE AFTER THE PRESENTATIONS, WE'LL GET TO YOU.

THIS IS YOUR SECTION MAP.

ACTUALLY, THIS WAS REVIEWED AT YOUR LAST MEETING AND IT WAS A

>> WE NEED TO GO. I'M NOT SURE WE NEED TO GO THROUGH ALL THE

>> I ONLY HAVE A COUPLE OF SLIDES AND THEN I HAVE THEIR SLIDES THAT THEY PRESENT THAT THEY'RE PRESENTING FOR THEIR REHEARING REQUEST.

>> OKAY.

>> OKAY. SO A REAL PHOTO, THIS IS A REMINDER.

IN YOUR SURVEY, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE GENERATOR WAS THAT YOU-ALL REVIEWED AND THE PUZZLE.

THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR SUBMITTED A REHEARING REQUEST.

THE FOLLOWING FOUR SLIDES OR THEIR SLIDES THAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED, I CAN GO OVER THEM OR I CAN GO TO THE HOMEOWNER OR THE AFFECTED NEIGHBOR AND LET THEM DISCUSS THE SLIDES. WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE, WALT?

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? WE LOOKED AT THIS LAST TIME, RAN IN.

I THINK WE UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ISSUE IS.

IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'D LIKE TO JUST LET THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ONLINE TO GIVE US THEIR CONCERNS.

>> OKAY.

>> WALT, I THINK THAT'S PRUDENT. I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

>> LET ME SEE. CALLER WITH THE LAST FOUR NUMBERS OF 5472, ARE YOU THE AFFECTED NEIGHBOR MS. KAISER?

>>

>> 5472.

NO, I'M THE ONE WHO WANTS TO INSTALL THE GENERATOR.

>> OKAY. IS THIS MR. BERNARDO?

>> YES.

>> OKAY. WELL, LET ME PUT YOU ON HOLD FOR JUST A SECOND.

I'M GOING TO LET THE AFFECTED NEIGHBOR SPEAK FIRST.

IS THIS MR. AND MRS. KAISER?

>> IT IS.

>> YOU ARE LIVE WITH THE COMMITTEE. GO AHEAD.

I HAVE YOUR SLIDE UP, YOUR FIRST SLIDE, SO YOU CAN JUST TELL ME WHEN YOU WANT ME TO CHANGE THE SLIDES.

>> HAVE THE COMMUNITY LOOKED AT THE REST OF THE SLIDES SO DO THEY COULD HAVE IT IN FRONT OF THEM?

>> THEY WILL HAVE THEM IN FRONT OF THEM AS YOU SPEAK.

YOU CAN JUST TELL ME WHEN TO MOVE FORWARD TO THE NEXT SLIDE AND PRESENT YOUR REQUEST TO THEM.

>> OKAY. THIS IS DAVID AND JENNIFER KAISER.

WE LIVE NEXT DOOR TO THE BERNARDOS AND WE'RE ASKING FOR A REHEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.

PARTICULARLY LAST TIME, WE WENT FIRST BECAUSE THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A SNAFU WITH THE CALLING IN, AND THEN WE HAD SOME TROUBLE GETTING IN.

BUT AS A RESULT OF THAT, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO REBUT IT IN THE ARGUMENTS THAT HE HAD.

SO DESPITE THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE WERE HITTING STAR 9, WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GET IN AND REBUT SOME OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT HE MADE.

HE DID MAKE SOME MISLEADING STATEMENTS ABOUT THE NOISE LEVELS, AGAIN, WHICH WE COULD NOT REFUTE.

WE'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THOSE.

I'LL TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS AND THEN I'LL GO INTO SOME DETAIL.

THERE WAS AN ARGUMENT MADE THAT SEEMED TO BE THE BASIS OF THE JUSTIFICATION THAT THE GENERATOR WAS OKAY AT THAT LOCATION, THAT IT WAS NO WORSE THAN THE TEMPORARY GAS TURBINE GENERATOR.

WE DON'T BELIEVE THIS TO BE TRUE AND I'D LIKE TO MAKE SOME ARGUMENTS AGAINST THAT.

WE HAVE SOME QUANTITATIVE INFORMATION ON THE NOISE LEVELS, WHICH WERE NOT DISCUSSED AT ALL.

WE'VE NOTICED IN SOME OF THE OTHER APPLICATIONS FOR GENERATORS, THAT'S A KEY ITEM, BUT SOMEHOW, IT JUST DID NOT GET DISCUSSED AT ALL IN THIS ONE.

WE HAVE INFORMATION REGARDING THE EFFECT ON THE PROPERTY VALUE THAT WE'D LIKE TO PRESENT THAT AS WELL.

THERE ARE OTHER ITEMS SUCH AS THE HOMEOWNER PLACE THAT SAID THAT HE COULD NOT PLACE THE GENERATOR ANYWHERE ELSE ON HIS PROPERLY.

WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT TO BE TRUE, BUT ALSO, IT SHOULDN'T MATTER.

THAT'S NOT A QUESTION OF WHETHER THEY GET ONE OR NOT.

IT'S WHETHER THIS POSITION IS GOOD FOR THE LOCATION OF THE GENERATOR.

[02:20:02]

YOU GUYS NEED TO HAVE THE RIGHT INFORMATION IN ORDER TO MAKE THE DECISIONS LIKE THIS AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR A REHEARING.

IN MORE DETAIL, PROCEDURALLY, WE FEEL THE BURDEN SHOULD BE ON THE HOMEOWNER TO PROVE THAT THIS DOES NOT AFFECT HIS NEIGHBORS ADVERSELY.

AGAIN, I WON'T GO INTO IT.

WE WEREN'T ABLE TO REBUT ANY OF HIS ARGUMENTS.

IT'S REGARDING THE NOISE LEVEL, SO YOU WERE MISLED.

I THINK HE SAID THAT THIS THING ONLY COMES OFF FOR A FEW SECONDS ONCE A WEEK.

WE FOUND THAT IT'S MORE TIME.

IT'S ACTUALLY MORE TIME THAN THAT.

THE GENERATOR MANUFACTURER'S SPEC SHEET SAYS FIVE MINUTES AND WE'VE TALKED TO PEOPLE WHO SAY IT CAN BE UP TO 12 MINUTES.

THE NOISE, WE THINK, IS GOING TO BE EXCESSIVE.

MANUFACTURING NOISE LEVELS, IT SAYS ON THE DATA SHEET, MEASURE FROM 23 FEET AWAY.

IT ACTUALLY SAYS A COUPLE OF THINGS.

ONE IS THAT IT CAN BE NOISIER COMING OUT AT THE END OF IT.

THAT MEASUREMENT IS TAKEN FROM DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF IT.

THE OTHER THING THERE TO NOTICE, WE DON'T HAVE 23 FEET.

IN THE LOCATION THAT IT'S PUT THERE, THAT'S GOING TO BE LESS THAN 10 FEET FROM OUR HOUSE.

SO WE'RE HIGHLIGHTING HOW MUCH GREATER THE NOISE CAN GET.

REMEMBER, NOISE IS A DECIBEL SCALE.

BUT WE HAVE ALSO TALKED ABOUT WITH THE GENERATOR INSTALLERS, AND THEN THEY FLAT OUT SAID THAT THEY WOULD NOT RECOMMEND PUTTING ONE SO CLOSE BETWEEN THE YOU GUYS TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE VIDEOS THAT WE PUT IN OUR LETTER, OR JUST GOOGLE YOURSELF AND SEE HOW MUCH NOISE THESE THINGS MAKE.

THEY ARE QUITE LOUD AND ALL THAT NOISE IS GOING TO BE REVERBERATING BETWEEN THESE TWO WALLS RIGHT THERE.

IT WAS THE SAME AS A TEMPORARY ONE, BUT WE DON'T THINK THAT'S TRUE.

FIRST OF ALL, A TEMPORARY GENERATOR IS NOT SOMETHING A BUYER OF YOUR HOUSE COULD SEE.

A TEMPORARY GENERATOR IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE IN THAT SPOT DIRECTLY.

IT WOULD BE PROBABLY ON THE DRIVEWAY OR IN ANOTHER LOCATION.

GENERALLY, WHAT HAPPENED DURING TEMPORARY GENERATORS RUN DURING THE DAY AND THEN AT NIGHT, PEOPLE WOULD JUST LET THE GAS ROLL OUT AND THEN THEY I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE THAT IT'S OKAY TO RUN THESE THINGS 24/7 AFTER A HURRICANE. NOISE IS NOISE.

I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND WHEN IT IS.

WE UNDERSTAND THERE ARE OTHER GENERATORS IN WOODLANDS AND WE CAN ONLY SPEAK TO THIS LOCATION, BUT THE ONES THAT WE KNOW ABOUT ARE GENERALLY SITUATED AWAY FROM NEIGHBORS' HOUSES.

THEY HAVE WALLS OR VEGETATION PUT UP.

THE POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IS BILLY DOESN'T HAVE A ROOM FOR ANY OF THESE.

WE'VE TALKED TO HIM ABOUT IT. HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY ROOM.

HIS PROPERTY LINE COMES UP FIVE FEET, MAYBE SIX FEET AT THE MOST, AND HE NEEDS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DISTANCE AROUND THIS GENERATOR.

HE CANNOT PUT ANY WALL UP TO POINT THE FAN AT THAT.

HE CANNOT PUT UP ANY VEGETATION TO BREAK OUT THE SOUND.

WE'VE LOOKED AROUND BETWEEN HOUSES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AT LEAST IN WE DIDN'T FIND ANY THAT WERE BETWEEN THERE.

WE DID FIND ONE COMMERCIAL APPLICATION THAT WAS FOR WALMART ON APRIL 3RD OF THIS YEAR AND THERE WERE ALL KIND OF REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF DECIBEL LEVELS.

THEY REQUIRED 65 DECIBELS AT THE PROPERTY LINE AND THAT THE HOUSES WERE REALLY NOT THAT CLOSE TO THE BACK OF THE WALMART.

SO THOSE NOISE LEVELS, I THINK WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT AND GIVE YOU INFORMATION ON SO YOU CAN MAKE A GOOD DECISION.

WE ARGUE THAT THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION OR SOME OTHER ARGUMENTS SAID, THE HOMEOWNER MAY HAVE SAID THIS IS THE ONLY LOCATION THAT'S POSSIBLE.

WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S TRUE.

AGAIN, WE'VE TALKED TO SOME GENERATOR INSTALLERS AND THEY INDICATED THAT THEY CAN RUN CABLE FOR A REASONABLE COST.

BUT AGAIN, ALL THE BOARD NEEDS TO DO IS DECIDE ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR SPOT.

IT SHOULD NOT DETERMINE WHETHER OTHER LOCATIONS ARE POSSIBLE OR NOT.

WITH REGARD TO THE HOUSING VALUES, WE HAVE SOME INFORMATION IN THERE ABOUT HOW MUCH IT AFFECTS WE TALKED TO OUR REALTOR.

I THINK WHAT SHE SAYS IS PEOPLE LOOK FOR THIS STUFF.

REGARDLESS OF HOW OFTEN IT GOES OFF, WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY SEE ONE THAT YOU CAN SEE AS THEY WALK AROUND YOUR HOUSE, IT'S GOING TO AFFECT YOUR HOUSING VALUE.

BASICALLY, JUST FROM THE CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM, IS THAT PEOPLE IGNORE THIS ALL THE TIME AND THEN FOUR, FIVE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, THEY GO TO SELL THEIR HOUSE, THEY HAVE TROUBLE, AND THEY'RE ALL UPSET.

WE'RE TRYING TO NIP THIS IN THE BUD BECAUSE WE DO THINK IT WILL AFFECT OUR PROPERTY VALUE.

THEIR ESTIMATE WAS SOMEWHERE AROUND 2-10 PERCENT.

THAT'S A BIG DEAL.

BUT IF IT AFFECTS IT AT ALL, I THINK IT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE BOARD AND THE STANDARDS TO UPHOLD PROPERTY VALUES AND CONSIDER THE EFFECT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHEN THEY MAKE THE DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO GRANT FINALLY, THE GENERATOR IN THAT LOCATION COULD HINDER SOME PLANS FOR WHAT WE HAVE FOR THAT AREA.

[02:25:01]

AGAIN, THEY DON'T HAVE VERY MUCH ROOM AROUND THAT GENERATOR.

THEY HAVE MAYBE FIVE FOOT FROM THE GARAGE, SO MAYBE SIX FOOT AT THE MOST, AND YOU NEED AT LEAST THREE FEET OF SPACE AROUND THE ENTIRE GENERATOR, AND THAT WOULD HINDER US.

WHEN WE PUT IN OUR PLANS TO PUT IN SOMETHING IN THAT AREA, WE DON'T WANT ANY ISSUES WITH GETTING A PERMIT BECAUSE BILLY COMES BACK AND SAYS, "WELL, YOU CAN'T DO THAT BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT OUR GENERATOR." SO THEY NEED

>> YOU'VE HAD YOUR THREE MINUTES.

>> OKAY. CAN I SUMMARIZE THEN?

>> YES, GO AHEAD.

>> JUST IN SUMMARY, LISTEN, WE HAD TROUBLE BEING HEARD LAST TIME SO WE'D LIKE TO REHEAR.

WE BELIEVE THE VARIANCE WAS GRANTED WITH FALSE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THINGS RUN AND WITH FALSE ARGUMENTS ABOUT WHETHER IT WOULD BE EQUAL TO OTHER ITEMS, OTHER TEMPORARY GENERATORS.

IT WAS GRANTED WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION OF SPECIFIC NOISE LEVELS, WHICH WE'D LIKE TO PRESENT TO YOU BECAUSE IT'S CRITICAL.

IT WAS GRANTED WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION OF HOUSING VALUE, WHICH WE WANT TO PRESENT TO YOU IS CRITICAL.

FOR THESE REASONS, WE WOULD REALLY LIKE TO HAVE YOU REHEAR THIS.

I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO TO BE IN LINE WITH YOUR

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> WHICH WE NEVER GOT TO DO LAST TIME.

>> LET'S HEAR FROM THE HOMEOWNER.

>> OKAY.

>> MR. BERNARDO?

>> YEAH.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> AT THE FIRST MEETING, I WAS ASKED, "HOW OFTEN DOES IT GO OFF?" I REPEATED WHAT THE SALES PERSON TOLD ME; IT WAS 11 SECONDS EVERY WEEK.

AFTER THAT, I VERIFIED THAT WITH THE MANUFACTURER AND WHAT THEY TOLD ME WAS THE UNIT I AM PURCHASING GOES OFF EVERY TWO WEEKS FOR FIVE MINUTES.

THE FIVE MINUTES CANNOT BE ADJUSTED.

THE 12 MINUTES HE MENTIONED IS A DIFFERENT UNIT, SO IT DOESN'T APPLY TO MINE, AND I ADVISED THE KAISERS OF THAT CORRECTION MYSELF, SO THEY GOT THAT INFORMATION FROM ME.

I ALSO PROVIDED THEM WITH THE SPECS TO SHOW THEM WHERE TO GET THEM, SHOWED THEM A COPY, POINTED OUT THE DECIBEL LEVEL.

IT'S 67 DECIBELS THE TEMPORARY GENERATOR, THE SMALLEST ONE I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN GETTING IS 74 DECIBELS AT 25 FEET.

>> THAT'S LOUDER.

>> WHICH IS LOUDER, AND WHERE I'VE MY PORTICO SHADE CLOSEST TO MY POWER BOX, BECAUSE I'M PLANNING TO PUT IN A SWITCH THAT I CAN PLUG IT INTO.

>> WHAT HAPPENED?

>> LOST HIM?

>> I THINK WE LOST HIM.

>> YES. MY PHONE JUST SAID I'M MUTED SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ALL HEARD.

>> WE HEARD YOU.

>> OKAY. SO WHERE I WOULD PUT A TEMPORARY GENERATOR TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS MY FUSE BOX IS WITHIN THE 25 FEET.

SO BASED ON MANUFACTURER'S PUBLISHED DATA, I DON'T HAVE A GENERATOR SO I CAN'T MEASURE THEM, IT WOULD BE LOUDER.

THEY'RE CORRECT, IN THAT, WHERE THIS GENERATOR WOULD BE, POINTING THAT I MEASURED EVERYTHING FROM THEIR GAS METER WITH A DECIBEL READER SO I COULD READ THE SOUND, AND IT'S ABOUT 13 FEET AWAY.

IF THE UNIT IS RUNNING AT 67 UNITS AT 23 FEET, I MOVED AWAY 23 FEET WITH MY POWER BLOWER, MUFFLED IT, SO THAT I GOT A 67 READING AT 23 FEET AND THEN I MEASURED IT AT 13 FEET, WHICH WOULD BE HOW FAR THE GENERATOR IS FROM THEIR GAS METER JUST USING A CONSISTENT DISTANCE, AND IT WAS 70 DECIBELS.

AS A COMPARISON, I TOOK THE BLOWER TO MY BEDROOM SIDE OF THE HOUSE, 10 FEET AWAY, THE BLOWER'S RUNNING UN-MUFFLED AT 93-95 DECIBELS AND ON THE INSIDE OF MY BEDROOM, THE DECIBEL LEVEL IN MY BED,

[02:30:03]

HEADBOARD AND A WALL BETWEEN THEM, IT'S READING 46 AND THAT'S THE EXACT SAME DECIBEL LEVEL THAT YOU CAN HEAR IN MY BEDROOM AT 2:30 IN THE MORNING WITH THE AC BLOWING THROUGH THE VENT.

>> OKAY.

>> WHEN THE VENT GOES OFF, IT READS 44.

SO JUST GIVES YOU AN IDEA.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE READING WOULD BE IN THEIR BEDROOM, BUT I'M TRYING TO GET THE QUIETEST UNIT POSSIBLE.

IT'S AIR COOLED NOT WATER COOLED, SO THAT'S HOW LOUD IT IS.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

TO THE NEXT ONE, NICK.

>> WELL, THEY HAD TOLD ME THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PUT UP A FENCE AND PUT IT ON THEIR LAND, WHICH PUTS IT WITHIN THREE FEET OF WHERE I WANT TO PUT MY GENERATOR, BUT THEY HADN'T PERMITTED THAT FENCE YET.

CERTAINLY A COMPROMISE IS TO PUT IN A FENCE, BUT THE FENCE WOULD HAVE TO BE ABOUT 20 INCHES ON THEIR SIDE TO GIVE, ALLOWS FOR

>> WE'RE NOT HERE TO HEAR THE FENCE.

>> YEAH. I'M JUST SAYING THAT WOULD BE A COMPROMISE.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

DOES COMMITTEE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO.

>> THE KAISERS EXPRESSED A WISH TO SPEAK AFTER MR. BARNARDO SPOKE, JUST TO BE ABLE TO GIVE ANOTHER REQUEST, MAYBE ABOUT ANY OF HIS CLAIMS.

>> DOES ANYONE IN THE COMMITTEE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION THAT WE SHOULD DEAL WITH HERE?

>> I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT NEW INFORMATION HAS REALLY BEEN PRESENTED FOR A REHEARING.

>> WELL.

>> I THINK SOME OF THE THINGS HAVE TO DO WITH THE DECIBEL LEVELS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

>> YEAH, IT'S LOUDER THAN WE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE.

IT'S RUNNING LONGER THAN WE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE.

IT WAS GOING TO BE 11 SECONDS, NOW IT'S FIVE MINUTES.

I THINK THIS IS SOME NEW INFORMATION.

>> I THINK IF WE DO A REHEARING WE SHOULD HAVE THE HOMEOWNER PRESENT AN ALTERNATE LOCATION SO WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THIS, ONE MORE TIME FULLY.

I DO HAVE A QUESTION, DOES OUR STANDARD DEAL WITH PROPERTY VALUE PLUSES OR MINUSES?

>> NO, IT'S NOT.

>> NOT INVOLVED IN THERE.

>> THANK YOU. I'D BE OKAY FOR REHEARING, BUT I WOULD DEFINITELY WANT THE HOMEOWNERS TO PRESENT, IN A REHEARING, AN ALTERNATE LOCATION SO WE CAN REALLY AS A COMMITTEE TAKE A LOOK AT WHERE IT'S BEING PROPOSED AND ANY ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS.

ALSO, THE AFFECTED NEIGHBOR INDICATES THEY HAVE PLANS HERE, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO KNOW WHAT THOSE PLANS ARE SO WHEN WE DO A REHEARING, IF THE COMMITTEE APPROVES, WE CAN LOOK AT ALL THE ASPECTS OF THIS LOCATION AND THE INTENT.

>> CAN WE ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TO THE HOMEOWNER REAL QUICK?

>> YEAH, GO AHEAD.

>> SIR, HOW LONG DURING THE DAY DOES YOUR AIR CONDITIONING RUN? HOW LONG DOES YOUR AIR CONDITIONING RUN ON DURING THE DAY?

>> ALL THE TIME. NOW, I OFTEN HAVE A CONDENSER WHICH IS OUTSIDE, WHEN KICKS ON, I CAN'T SAY.

I CAN TELL YOU HOW LOUD IT IS BECAUSE.

>> RIGHT, I KNOW.

I'M ASKING A QUESTION BECAUSE YOUR.

>> GENERATOR IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE NEXT TO THE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT.

>> I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.

>> YES. THEN SO.

>> THAT RUNS QUITE OFTEN, MUCH MORE THAN FIVE MINUTES EVERY TWO WEEKS.

NOW, IN AN EMERGENCY WHEN YOU GOT YOUR POWER DOWN, I'VE TOLD THEM I'M WILLING TO SET THE DELAY ON IT.

THEY HAD COMPLAINED THAT THEY DIDN'T WANT THE GENERATOR KICKING ON IF IT WAS JUST A NUISANCE SHORT SHUT DOWN AND I CAN ADJUST THAT TO FIVE MINUTES OR 10 MINUTES AND THAT WOULD AVOID THAT.

>> IT WAS FIVE MINUTES EVERY TWO WEEKS. YEAH. GO AHEAD.

>> SIR, DO YOU HAVE YOUR LAWN MAINTENANCE? DO YOU HAVE LANDSCAPERS WHO CUT YOUR GRASS?

>> NO. I DO IT.

>> OKAY, YOU DO IT. DOES YOUR NEIGHBOR HAVE LANDSCAPERS CUT THE GRASS?

>> DO IT.

>> SO HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE FOR YOU TO CUT YOUR GRASS?

[02:35:03]

>> THE REASON WHY I'M ASKING THESE QUESTIONS.

>> POWER BLOWER AND HEDGING, PROBABLY ABOUT 45 MINUTES.

>> RIGHT. SO THE QUESTION THAT I'M ASKING, IS THAT, BETWEEN YOUR LANDSCAPING AND YOUR AIR-CONDITIONING CONDENSER OUTSIDE IS RUNNING LONGER THAN THE TEMPORARY NOISE FOR THE TESTING.

SO IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY, I THINK MY LAST QUESTION WOULD BE, I DON'T HAVE ANY POWER, BUT THERE'S A NOISE OUTSIDE THAT IS ACTUALLY THE SAME DECIBEL, EVEN A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT I'M LISTENING TO AN AIR CONDITIONING UNIT RUN PRETTY MUCH ALL DAY.

IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT?

>> YES.

>> OKAY. THAT'S ALL I NEED.

I'M OKAY WITH A REHEARING, BUT I JUST NEEDED TO HAVE THESE QUESTIONS ANSWERED.

THAT'S ALL.

>> ALL RIGHT. THE MOTION ON THE TABLE TO GRANT THE REHEARING AND REQUEST THAT IF THERE'S ANY ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS WE'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT PRESENTED ALSO.

>> ALSO TO WALTER, IS THAT THE AFFECTED NEIGHBOR BRING FORWARD WHAT THE PLANS ARE THAT THEY INTEND TO ASK THE COMMITTEE TO REVIEW.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> SO WE HAVE ALL THE DATA IN THE NEXT REHEARING.

>> OKAY.

>> WALT, I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT, I DO HAVE ONE MORE PERSON THAT HAS THEIR HAND UP THAT HAS NOT SPOKEN.

>> ALL RIGHT. LET US HEAR IT.

>> HELLO. YOU'RE ON THE LINE WITH THE COMMITTEE.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE?

>> NO. I DON'T NEED TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, BUT I WAS WAITING TO DISCUSS ITEM J ON THE COMMERCIAL AGENDA WHICH YOU'VE SKIPPED OVER AND WE DIDN'T DO K, L, M, OR N UNDER THAT CATEGORY, BUT I NEED.

>> I BELIEVE THAT WAS COMMERCIAL ITEMS. WE'RE ON SUMMARY AND THEY DISCUSSED THOSE AND ACTED ON THOSE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING.

>> I'VE LISTENED TO THE WHOLE MEETING.

NO, YOU DIDN'T. YOU DID ALL THE LIGHTING.

THIS IS ABOUT SIGNAGE.

>> OKAY. WE'LL GET BACK TO THAT.

THANK YOU. LET'S FINISH THIS AND THEN WE CAN GET BACK HER.

>> OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. TAKE THE MOTION. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND.

>> ALL RIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I.

>> I.

>> I.

>> I.

>> ANY OPPOSE? ALL RIGHT, MOTION CARRIES.

>> OKAY, LET ME SEE.

DID YOU HEAR THAT THE REHEARING WAS APPROVED?

>> YES, WE UNDERSTAND AND THEN WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT TO HAVE THE PLANS

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

>> WHAT'S THE DATE OF THAT NEXT MEETING THAT'S TWO WEEKS FROM TODAY?

>> IT IS JULY 15TH.

>> OKAY. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

>> THAT'S ALL ITEMS I HAD.

CAMERA, DID YOU JUST START SHARING? YES, YOU DID.

>> THANK YOU, NES.

>> THANK YOU. KIM YOU'RE STILL MUTED.

[Items VIII 4 - 6]

>> THE NEXT ITEMS THAT I HAVE ON THE AGENDA ARE GOING TO BE ITEMS 4, 5 AND 6 OF THE RESIDENTIAL AGENDA.

THE COMMERCIAL ITEMS THAT WERE REFERENCED IN THE EARLIER CALL WERE THE SUMMARY AGENDA ITEMS. HOW WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO PROCEED? THOSE SUMMARY ITEMS WERE DONE RIGHT AFTER THE CALL TO ORDER.

>> WERE THEY APPROVED?

>> WITH VARIOUS CONDITIONS? YES. SHE SAID SHE CALLED ABOUT J, K, L, M. SO I'M NOT I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE IF YOU WANT ME TO GO BACK AND CLARIFY WHICH ONE SHE IS CALLING IN REGARDS TO.

>> PUT HER BACK ON THE LINE AND THEN WE'LL COVER THOSE.

>> UNDERSTOOD.

>> FROM WHAT YOU SAID, YOU'VE ALREADY APPROVED THESE WITH CONDITIONS.

>> WHAT ITEM WERE YOU CALLING IN REGARDS TO?

>> I'M CALLING IN REGARDS TO ITEM J.

IT'S FOR EXISTING DIRECTIONAL SIGN AT 8701 NEW TRAILS DRIVE.

>> THAT ITEM

>> YOU MIGHT HAVE COVERED THEM IN THE FRONT AND I JUST DIDN'T KNOW WHAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT.

>> OKAY. THE ACTION ON THAT WAS TO PROVE ON THE CONDITION THAT THE TENANT NAMES MUST MATCH THE SUBMITTED PLANS,

[02:40:01]

REMOVE MAERSK LOGO, AND REPLACE WITH JUST THE NAME.

NO OTHER SIGNS ARE APPROVED AT THIS TIME.

FUTURE CHANGES TO THE SIGNS FOR TENANT NAME, UPDATES WILL REQUIRE AN APPLICATION AND THE REVIEW OF THE PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE OR ITS DESIGNEE, SIGNS MUST BE KEPT IN GOOD ORDER AND REPAIR AND MUST COMPLY WITH THE COMMERCIAL PLANNING AND DESIGN STANDARDS.

THAT IS FOR THE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS FOR 8701 NEW TRAILS DRIVE.

>> PERFECT, I DID MISS THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> UNDERSTOOD, NO WORRIES. THANK YOU FOR STAYING ON.

>> OKAY, GOODBYE.

>> OKAY. GIVE ME JUST ONE SECOND TO GET BACK TO THE RESIDENTIAL AGENDA.

STARTING WITH ITEM 4, THE NEXT FEW ITEMS ARE ALL FOR 116 SOUTH TIMBER TOP DRIVE.

THIS WILL BE A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A PROPOSED NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION THAT EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM HARD SURFACE AREA ALLOWED.

IT IS ALSO GOING TO BE THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE PROPOSED POOL AND DECKING THAT WILL EXCEED THE MAXIMUM HARD SURFACE AREA ALLOWED AND PROPOSES A TREE TO BE REMOVED THAT IS MORE THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE POOL AND POOL DECKING.

SO WOULD REQUIRE A VARIANCE AND NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH YOUR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

IT IS ALSO FOR A PROPOSED FENCE THAT INCORPORATES THE REQUEST TO REMOVE A TREE.

THAT IS IMPEDING THE INSTALLATION OF THE FENCE ON THE PROPERTY LINE.

SO AGAIN, THESE ARE FOR 116 SOUTH TIMBER TOP DRIVE.

YOU MAY RECALL THAT YOU REVIEWED THIS ITEM PREVIOUSLY AS THERE HAVE BEEN CONCEPT PROPOSALS AND DEMOLITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED FOR MANY OF THE PROPERTIES THAT RUN ALONG THE INTERIOR LOTS OF SOUTH TIMBER TOP DRIVE.

FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING, 116 SOUTH TIMBER TOP DRIVE IS THE ITEM REPRESENTED HERE.

IT IS AN INTERIOR LOT IN SOUTH TIMBER TOP OFF OF GROGANS MILL ROAD.

LOOKING AT THE AERIAL VIEW, IT'S THE PROPERTY REPRESENTED HERE BACKING UP TO THE GOLF COURSE.

I'M SURE WALT CAN TELL ME SPECIFICALLY ON THE GOLF COURSE WHERE.

THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY HAD COME FORWARD TO YOU PRIOR FOR A CONCEPT REVIEW, WANTING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE COMMITTEE WOULD ALLOW AS IT RELATES TO SETBACKS, AS IT RELATED TO LIVING AREA, AS WELL AS FOR HARD SURFACE AREA.

AT THE TIME OF THAT REVIEW, WHICH WAS ON MARCH 4TH OF 2020, THERE WAS AN IDENTIFICATION BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE CONCEPT THAT THEY WOULD CONSIDER THE ALLOWANCE OF A PLAN WHERE YOU WOULD REDUCE THE HARD SURFACE NOT TO EXCEED 45, THAT WOULD BE A 5 PERCENT ALLOWANCE.

THAT 5 PERCENT ALLOWANCE WAS NOTED WITH THE INCLUSION OF THE CONSIDERATION FOR A FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS A POOL OR A SUMMER KITCHEN.

IN OTHER WORDS, IT SHOULDN'T BE JUST THE HOUSE AT 45 PERCENT.

IT SHOULD ALSO INCORPORATE WITHIN THAT 45 PERCENT OTHER TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS PATIO COVERS OR POOLS.

AT THIS EVENING'S MEETING, THE OWNERS HAVE PROVIDED FOR YOU THEIR PROPOSAL FOR THE HOUSE AND THE POOL, ALL COMING IN UNDER THE 45 PERCENT CONSIDERATION THAT WAS REVIEWED AT YOUR PREVIOUS MEETING UNDER CONCEPT.

HERE IS THE VIEW OF THE PROPOSED HOME, THIS WILL ALSO SHOW YOU THE AREA OF TREES THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL AND HOW THE HOME IS SITUATED ON THE LOT.

THIS HOME DOES RESPECT ALL SETBACKS ON THE PROPERTY.

THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS SPECIFICALLY FOR THE HARD SURFACE.

IT ALSO RESPECTS THE INITIAL LAND USED DESIGNATION, WHICH IS REPRESENTED AT 3,800 SQUARE FEET, AND THE PROPOSED NEW HOME WILL COME IN AT 3,699 SQUARE FEET.

LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY OF 116 TIMBER TOP, YOU HAVE THE PROPERTIES TO THE LEFT AND RIGHT-HAND SIDE.

THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE SURVEY WILL SHOW YOU THE CONCEPT OF THE NEW HOME THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE BUILT ON THE LOT PREVIOUSLY ACTED ON BY THIS COMMITTEE.

THE LEFT-HAND SIDE SHOWS YOU 114 SOUTH TIMBER TOP AND THIS IS THE OLD SURVEY OF THE ORIGINALLY DESIGNED HOME, 114 IS PROPOSED TO BE DEMOLISHED IN ANTICIPATION OF A NEW HOME.

THAT IS JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THESE PROPERTIES.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, THAT ONE THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE A NEW HOME IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONTRACT, WHICH WAS PROVIDED TO THE STAFF, NOTING THAT THERE IS A PENDING SALE THE END OF JULY, WHICH WILL TRANSLATE THIS PROPERTY REPRESENTED IN BLUE TO THE SHOWCASE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY THAT CURRENTLY OWNS 116, 118.

YOU MAY RECALL THESE THREE PROPERTIES CAME FORWARD AS A CONCEPT.

THEY WANTED TO FENCE ALL OF IT IN WITH THEIR EROSION CONTROL FENCING.

SO THE OWNER DID MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNICATION FORMS,

[02:45:01]

MANY OF WHICH WERE TO THEMSELVES.

BUT IN ADDITION TO THOSE, ALSO INCORPORATED THE PROPERTIES THAT YOU SEE REPRESENTED HERE.

CURRENTLY, OUR STAFF HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY NEGATIVE IMPACT IN REGARDS TO THE NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION PROPOSAL, AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM THE BUILDER THAT THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY NEGATIVE RESPONSES AS IT RELATES TO THE CONSTRUCTION.

HERE'S THE VIEW OF THE SURVEY.

YOUR OVERALL LOT COVERAGE, WHICH IDENTIFIES BOTH THE SLAB OF THE HOME, ANY INCORPORATED SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR DRIVEWAY AND SIDEWALK, WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED FOR THE POOL DECKING COPING, AND THEN THE OVERALL TOTAL AND THE LOT SIZE, WHICH BRINGS IT TO A TOTAL OF 44.8 PERCENT TOTAL LOT COVERAGE.

THIS WAS ALSO DIGITIZED BY OUR TECHNICAL REVIEW FOR VERIFICATION OF THE FIGURES FROM THE SITE PLAN, AND WE GET THE SAME AT ABOUT 44.6 BASED ON OUR DIGITIZATION.

HERE IS THE RENDERING OF THE PROPOSAL FOR THE HOME CONCEPT OF SOME OF THOSE BUILDING MATERIALS THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE USED.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THOSE AREAS SHOWING YOU BOTH THE MATERIALS THAT ARE BEING USED FOR THE WOOD SIDING, FOR THE COMPOSITION SHINGLE, AS WELL AS SOME OF THE MATERIALS FOR THE STUCCO, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'LL SEE ON THE FACADE OF THE HOME, IN ADDITION TO SIDING COMPONENTS AND SOME STONE, WHICH IS THE SAME REPRESENTATION YOU SEE HERE.

HERE'S THAT STONE, HERE IS THE COLOR OF THE ROOFING IN WIRE BLACK.

NOW, WE'LL GO INTO YOUR ELEVATIONS.

YOU HAVE YOUR ROOF PLAN AT YOUR TOP LEFT, YOU HAVE YOUR RIGHT AND LEFT ELEVATIONS IN THE LARGEST DESCRIPTIONS HERE, THESE WOULD BE TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES WHICH WILL BOTH BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION, AND A CROSS SECTION OF YOUR HOME.

GETTING INTO THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, YOUR FIRST FLOOR HAS THE PRIMARY FOCUS OF LIVING AREA COMING IN AT 2,577 SQUARE FEET WITH AN ADDITION OF 1,122 SQUARE FEET ON THE SECOND FLOOR.

THAT BRINGS YOU TO THE TOTAL OF 3,699 SQUARE FEET OF LIVABLE SPACE THAT FALLS WITHIN THE CRITERIA AND THE LAND USE DESIGNATION COMING IN AT A MAX OF 3,800.

YOU ALSO INCORPORATE YOUR PORCHES, YOUR DECKS, YOUR GARAGE SPACE.

THOSE ARE ALL UNLIVABLE SPACE THAT DOES ACCOUNT TOWARD YOUR HARD SURFACE, WHICH BRINGS YOU TO THE 45 PERCENT.

THIS GIVES YOU THAT SECOND FLOOR PLAN, FOCUSING MORE ON THE BEDROOMS, GAME ROOM, AND COVERED DECK.

YOU DO HAVE AN OPEN SPACE HERE, CURRENTLY REPRESENTED AS MECHANICAL AND NOT CONFIGURED INTO THE LIVABLE SPACE.

THAT MAY BE AN ITEM OF CONSIDERATION IN YOUR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BUT IT CANNOT BE MODIFIED TO LIVABLE SPACE WITHOUT SEEKING TO OBTAIN AN APPROVAL IN ADVANCE AND NOTING THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT TO A LAND USE DESIGNATION.

HERE'S THAT HARD SURFACE DIGITIZATION SHOWING THAT WE DIGITIZED AT 44.6.

SO IT IDENTIFIES THAT THE ACCURACY ON THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED IS IN ACCORDANCE.

THERE IS SOME VARIATIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CRITERIA FOR THIS AREA, AND IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE HOMEOWNER HAD WANTED US TO CALL OUT TO THE COMMITTEE JUST TO REALLY REPRESENT THAT WHILE THEY ARE COMING IN AT THE 45, WHICH IS A FIVE PERCENT VARIANCE ACCORDING TO THIS CRITERIA, WHICH IS THE CRITERIA FOR 118 SOUTH TIMBER TOP ON TIMBER TOP ITSELF, LOOKING JUST AT 18 NORTH TIMBER TOP, THEY HAVE AN ALLOWANCE OF 45 PERCENT.

I'M SURE THAT SOME OF THE INDIVIDUALS MORE SEASONED ON THE COMMITTEE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD CRITERIA COULD SPEAK TO THOSE VARIATIONS.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING A LOT OF THAT CORRELATES TO THE LOCATION AGAINST THE GOLF COURSE AND THE SIZE OF THE LOT.

SO THAT IS WHERE YOU HAVE THOSE VARIATIONS IN PERCENTAGES AS IT RELATES TO CERTAIN LOTS SUCH AS LOTS ONE THROUGH 16, WHICH IS 118 SOUTH TIMBER TOP, VERSUS THE LOTS IN BLOCK TWO.

NOW, FOR YOUR TREE REMOVAL PLAN.

ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE, THE OWNER HAS SUBMITTED THE TREE REMOVAL AND HAS IDENTIFIED THESE TREES, COLOR-CODED, AND BROKEN DOWN BY WHAT THEY'RE BEING PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.

SO ANYTHING THAT YOU SEE REPRESENTED IN GREEN IS THE NUMBERS OF TREES THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL FOR THE HOUSE.

IN BLUE, CONVENIENTLY, ARE THE NUMBERS FOR ANY TREES PROPOSED FOR THE POOL.

THEN THE RED, WHICH IS JUST THE ONE REPRESENTED HERE, TREE NUMBER 17, WHICH IS A 23-INCH CALIPER PINE, IS THE PROPOSED TREE PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL FOR THE FENCE.

I WILL CARVE THESE OUT BASED ON THE IMPROVEMENT THAT YOU'RE FOCUSING ON.

THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, PROVIDED BY A LANDSCAPING ARCHITECT DOES HAVE THE PROPOSED TREE PLANTINGS REPRESENTED AT THREE 30 GALLON REDBUDS, SIX 30 GALLON WAX MYRTLE, FOUR 45 GALLON WATER OAKS.

THEN AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, WHICH I DID NOT CALL OUT, IS A LOT OF BETWEEN SEVEN GALLON AND ONE GALLON SHRUBS AND GROUND COVER SUCH AS THE BOXWOOD, THE IRIS, THE CAMELLIA.

[02:50:02]

IN TOTAL, I SHOW THAT THERE ARE 13 TOTAL TREES PROPOSED FOR PLANTING IN THE LANDSCAPING PLAN.

I SHOW 19 TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL FOR ALL OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE BEING SUBMITTED.

TO FOCUS ON THE FRONT OF THE HOME AND TO GIVE YOU A BETTER CLOSE-UP VIEW, YOU'LL SEE HERE THAT THERE ARE TWO OAK TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL, A 10-INCH AND 14-INCH OAK.

CONSIDERED TO BE IN THE FRONT, BUT I UNDERSTAND SOMEWHAT TO THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, IS THE 14-INCH PINE.

THEN THE REMAINING TREES THAT WILL BE ON THE PROPERTY ARE THE 13-INCH OAK HERE THAT WILL REMAIN AFTER CONSTRUCTION, AND AN 18-INCH PINE HERE THAT WILL REMAIN AFTER CONSTRUCTION.

THERE IS ALSO A CLUSTER OF TREES ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE THAT ARE NOT PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.

THEN YOU CAN SEE FROM YOUR LANDSCAPING PLAN, AND I'VE WAX MYRTLE, AND WATER OAK, THE WATER OAK BEING HERE, FRONT AND CENTER NEXT TO THE DRIVEWAY, A COUPLE OF WAX MYRTLES TO THE SIDE HERE, HERE, AND HERE, AND THEN ALSO THAT REDBUD, WHICH IS REPRESENTED HERE AND HERE IN THE FRONT YARD.

THE OWNER, IN SPEAKING WITH HIM, DID IDENTIFY TO ME THAT ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THEY MADE THIS PROPOSAL AND HAD THE ELECTRICAL RUNNING WHERE IT WAS, WAS SO THAT THEY COULD MAINTAIN THIS CLUSTER OF TREES, WHICH YOU'LL SEE HERE ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE.

THAT CLUSTER OF TREES DOES INCLUDE TWO OAKS AT SEVEN AND 10 INCHES IN CALIPER, AND IT ALSO INCLUDES A 17 AND A SIX-INCH PINE.

I KNOW THOSE ARE HARD TO SEE IN THE OVERLAY, SO I JUST WANTED TO CALL THOSE OUT TO YOU, AND THIS CORRELATES WITH THE TREES THAT ARE ADDED AS WELL AS THE TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.

FOCUSING IN THE BACKYARD, YOU HAVE 12 TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL IN THE REAR YARD.

NOW, AGAIN, THESE TREES ARE EITHER FOR THE INCLUSION OF THE HOME, THE POOL, OR THE FENCE.

THE ONLY ONE THAT'S PROPOSED FOR THE FENCE IS THIS 23-INCH PINE.

IT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED TO THE OWNER THAT THIS COMMITTEE IS VERY CONSISTENT IN REQUIRING THAT FENCES ARE BUILT AROUND TREES, AND THAT TREES HAVE NOT BEEN PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.

HE DOES UNDERSTAND THAT HE STILL WANTED TO PLACE THE REQUEST FOR THE COMMITTEE FOR CONSIDERATION.

IN REGARDS TO THE POOL, THERE'S APPROXIMATELY SEVEN TREES FOR THE POOL, AND THE REST THAT YOU SEE HERE ARE IN REGARDS TO THE HOME.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND FOCUS ON THOSE TREES AND THE BREAKDOWN OF THOSE TREES AS WE GET THROUGH EACH IMPROVEMENT.

SO LOOKING BACK AT THE FRONT YARD, HERE ARE THOSE TWO TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.

LOOKING KIND OF OFF TO THE LEFT HAND SIDE IS THAT CLUSTER THAT WOULD REMAIN, THE 18-INCH PINE THAT WILL STAY WHERE IT'S AT, AN OAK THAT WOULD REMAIN, WHICH IS THE ONE REPRESENTED HERE TO THE SIDE, I KNOW THESE PHOTOS ARE VERY DIFFICULT AND I THANK THE HOMEOWNER FOR PROVIDING THOSE IN THE ABSENCE OF OUR TECHNICIANS.

THEN THE TREES THAT YOU SEE HERE ALONG THIS SIDE, WHICH ARE THESE PINE AND TWO OAKS, WOULD ALSO BE PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL BECAUSE THEY ARE WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE HOME.

HERE'S THAT OVERVIEW OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.

THIS TREE IN THE FRONT IS TO REMAIN, THESE TWO ARE TO BE REMOVED, THIS CLUSTER OVER HERE FAR OFF IS FOR THE ALLOWANCE TO REMAIN.

LOOKING AT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, THESE ARE THE TREES THAT YOU SEE HERE ALONG THE SIDE, THESE ARE THE TWO TREES THAT YOU SEE IN THE FRONT.

LOOKING AGAIN, YOU'D HAVE THOSE TREES REPRESENTED IN THE FRONT, WHICH ARE FROM TWO DIFFERENT ANGLES, LOOKING IN THE FRONT YARD TOWARD THE HOUSE, AND ALONG THE SIDE OF THE DRIVE.

AS YOU COME ALONG THE SIDES OF THE HOUSE, THESE ARE THE EXISTING TREES.

THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING HOUSE WILL CHANGE WITH THE NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION.

SO THAT WOULD CAUSE THESE TREES TO BE EVEN CLOSER TO THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED HOME, AND WOULD BE WITHIN OUR STANDARD AS IT RELATES TO THE ALLOWANCE OF REMOVAL WITHIN FIVE FEET IF THE FOOTPRINT IS PROPOSED, WHICH HAS NOT CHANGED FROM YOUR REVIEW AT CONCEPT.

SOME OF THE CANOPY OF THE TREES THAT YOU SEE SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY.

NOW, YOU'RE LOOKING FROM THE BACK OF THE HOUSE.

SO THIS IS ACTUALLY AT THE GOLF COURSE LOOKING TOWARD THE HOUSES.

THIS IS 116, LOOKING BOTH TO THE INDIVIDUAL SIDES BEHIND THE HOUSE.

SHOWING YOU 116, WHICH WE HAD PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED TO YOU WHEN YOU REVIEWED THE CONCEPT FOR ALL THREE OF THESE HOMES, THIS IS THE PROPERTY THAT YOU ARE CURRENTLY DISCUSSING TONIGHT.

WE JUST HAD THIS PANORAMIC FROM BEFORE COVID PANDEMIC AND IN YOUR CONCEPT REVIEW SO WE WANTED TO PROVIDE THAT TO YOU.

ANOTHER VIEW OF THAT SECTION, THOSE THREE HOMES LOOKING OUT TO THE GOLF COURSE FROM THE LOT ITSELF.

THE PHOTOS HERE WERE PROVIDED BY THE OWNER, NOTING THAT THERE IS A SUPPORT FOR THE NEED OF IMPROVED DRAINAGE ON THE PROPERTY.

[02:55:03]

THEY HAVE PROVIDED A DRAINAGE PLAN TO YOU, WHICH IS REPRESENTED HERE.

THIS DRAINAGE PLAN HAS BEEN SEALED BY A PROFESSIONAL CIVIL ENGINEER.

IT DOES REPRESENT BOTH THE DRAINS THAT ARE BEING INSTALLED, PRETTY MUCH RUNNING DOWN THE TWO SIDES OF THE HOUSE.

IT ALSO INCORPORATES ALL OF THE DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS AS WELL AS THE DRAINS, THE INLETS, THE SIZES, DIAMETER OF THE PIPES ETC.

I HAVE CARVED SOME OF THAT OUT FOR YOU SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER THAT SIGNED IT, AS WELL AS THE DRAWINGS ITSELF, WHICH REPRESENT EACH OF THE INLETS GOING THROUGHOUT THE LOT ON BOTH SIDES.

THEY BOTH TIE-IN OR CONNECT TO THE EXISTING DITCH AT THE REAR, WHICH IS WHERE THE GOLF COURSE IS.

HERE ARE SOME OF THOSE BLOWN-UP VERSIONS FOR YOUR REVIEW IN REGARDS TO THE DRAINAGE CALCULATION, WHICH INCORPORATES ALL OF THE HARD SURFACE, THE DRAINS WHERE THOSE SIZES ARE, AND WHERE THOSE INLETS ARE FOR THE DIFFERENT SETUPS OF SIX INLETS AROUND THE PROPERTY.

SOME OF THE SPECIFICATIONS FROM YOUR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER REPRESENTING THE PIPES, THE SIZE OF THE CATCH BASINS, THE INLETS, AND SOME OTHER INFORMATION IN REGARDS TO THE CONTRACTOR CONNECTING DOWNSPOUT DRAINS TO THE CLOSEST STORM SEWER LINE INLET STRUCTURE.

CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ALL DOWNSPOUTS, BOOTS, AND FITTINGS TO ACHIEVE THE DESIGN.

GOING INTO THE POOL ITSELF, YOU HAVE YOUR REQUIRED ELEVATIONS OF THE POOL, AS WELL AS THE CROSS-SECTION OF THE POOL THAT'S PROPOSED.

THE POOL IS PROPOSED TO BE 11 6 BY 28.

THE POOL ITSELF COMES OFF OF THE COVERED PATIO WITH SOME DECKING, AND A MINIMAL AMOUNT OF JUST THE POOL COPING.

SO YOU DON'T SEE A GREAT DEAL OF HARD SURFACE, BUT THE OWNER IS AWARE THAT PART OF THIS PROPOSAL WAS TO IDENTIFY OVERALL HARD SURFACE.

WITH A CONCERN THAT THE COMMITTEE MIGHT NOT BE RECEPTIVE TO ANY ADDITIONAL VARIANCES, AS IT RELATES TO HARD SURFACE OVERAGES AS THIS ENTIRE PACKAGE WOULD BE A 5 PERCENT ALLOWANCE.

POOL IS APPROXIMATELY 11 BY 28.

HERE IS THE TREES PROPOSED FOR THE POOL, THE TREES THAT YOU HAVE HERE 3, 4, 5 AND 6, AND 2, ARE WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE POOL, BUT TREES 1 AND 7 ARE FURTHER AWAY.

SPEAKING WITH THE OWNER, THEY DID IDENTIFY THAT IF IT WAS MORE FAVORABLE TO THE COMMITTEE, FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF THE POOL.

THEY WOULD UNDERSTAND SHIFTING THE POOL SLIGHTLY TO THE RIGHT, WHICH MAY ALLOW FOR THE MAINTAINING OF A COUPLE OF TREES TO THE LEFT-HAND SIDE.

THERE IS A TREE HERE FOR THE HOUSE, WHICH WAS NUMBER 19, WHICH IS 19 INCH PINE, WHICH THE OWNER HAS ALSO BEEN ADVISED IS SIGNIFICANTLY FAR AWAY FROM THE HOME, AND MORE THAN LIKELY NOT A VARIANCE ALLOWANCE BY THE COMMITTEE FOR THE NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION.

HERE IS YOUR LANDSCAPING PLAN, I KNOW A LOT OF THIS HAS BEEN ALREADY CARVED OUT FOR YOU IN REGARDS TO THE REFORESTATION, AND WHERE THAT PLANTING IS GOING.

SO THIS IS JUST FOCUSING ON THE BACKYARD, AS OPPOSED TO THE FRONT.

IT STILL INCORPORATES REDBUDS, WAX MYRTLES, AND WATER OAKS.

HERE'S A CLOSE UP VIEW OF BOTH THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, WHERE THOSE TREES ARE LOCATED, LOOKING A LITTLE BIT FURTHER AWAY AND TO THE SIDE, LOOKING FROM THE EXISTING SECOND STORY, TRYING TO GIVE YOU A VIEW DOWN TO THE PROPERTY, GIVING YOU SOME OF THE IDEA OF THOSE TREES.

THEN LASTLY IS THE FENCE, THE FENCE IS PROPOSED TO GO AROUND THE PROPERTY LINE.

IT WOULD HAVE THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE, WITH THREE GATES.

THE FENCE IS PROPOSED TO BE A WROUGHT IRON, FIVE FOOT TALL FENCE.

THE FENCE WOULD BE A POOL BARRIER FENCE, SO IT WOULD NEED TO COMPLY WITH POOL BARRIER REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT WROUGHT IRON FENCE.

THERE IS CURRENTLY A WROUGHT IRON FENCE AT THE PROPERTY, THIS WILL MODIFY THE LOCATION, AND THIS IS THE TREE.

MIND YOU, THIS IS THE HOUSE YOU'RE LOOKING AT.

THIS IS THE TREE THAT IS PROPOSED, THE OWNER WAS ADVISED THAT THERE WOULD PROBABLY BE CONCERN FROM THE COMMITTEE FOR THE REMOVAL OF THIS TREE, AND THAT CONSISTENTLY WE HAVE SEEN THE COMMITTEE NOT ALLOW TREE REMOVALS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF FENCING.

NONETHELESS, THEY WANTED TO INCORPORATE THAT TO SEE IF THE COMMITTEE WOULD CONSIDER AN ALLOWANCE.

AT THIS TIME, IF I COULD HAVE THE OWNER OR ANY INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THIS NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION RAISE THEIR HAND BY HITTING "STAR 9." I CAN GO AHEAD AND ENGAGE YOU WITH THE COMMITTEE.

DOES THE COMMITTEE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME REGARDING THE HOME, POOL OR FENCE?

>> NO.

>> GREAT JOB KIM. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY.

[03:00:04]

I'LL GIVE IT A MINUTE, I KNOW THERE'S SOME LAG TIME IN THE PRESENTATION.

I DID TRY AND BREAK THESE DOWN FOR ACTION, ITEM 4 WOULD BE THE HOME, 5 IS THE POOL, AND 6 IS THE FENCE.

>> GUYS, I GOT A COMMENT.

WHEN WE'VE TALKED ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT, WE ASSURED PEOPLE THAT WE WOULD BE VERY COGNOSCENTE, THE ILUD AND MAKE SURE THAT WE BUILD HOMES ACCORDINGLY, THEY SPIN OUT TO WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE, AND THE SIZE, AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

ONE OF THE THINGS WE WANTED TO DO WAS SAVE AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE ALSO, AND IT'S A BEAUTIFUL DESIGNED HOUSE THAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT.

BUT IT'S AN AWFUL LOT OF MATURE GROWTH TO JUST TO CUT DOWN.

IT'S NICE TO SAY YOU'RE GOING TO PUT 13, 45, THERE ARE SO MANY GALLON TREES IN THERE.

BUT I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE IT'S JUST ME BUT I JUST HATE SEEING, HOW MANY TREES ARE WE LOOKING AT HERE, 19 TREES?

>> NINETEEN TREES WITH A LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT INCORPORATES 13 FOR INSTALLATION, AND I THINK THERE ARE SEVERAL WHICH I HAVE DISCUSSED WITH THE HOMEOWNER, THAT I DON'T SEE WILL NECESSARILY BE REQUIRED.

ESPECIALLY THE PINE FOR THE FENCE, THREE FOR THE HOUSE, AND I WANT TO SAY MAYBE TWO FOR THE POOL.

I THINK THERE IS SOME OPPORTUNITY WHICH I DID INCORPORATE IN MY RECOMMENDED MOTIONS, CALLING THEM OUT BY TREE.

IF YOU'D LIKE, I CAN GO BACK TO THAT TREE PLAN FOR US TO REFERENCE.

I DO NOT SHOW THAT ANY CALLER

>> NOT YET. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT?

>> WALT, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD OBSERVATION.

I THINK IF WE LOOK AT THE REST OF THESE PROPERTIES, I GUESS WE'RE GOING TO GET HOME PLANS FOR THE OTHER PROPERTIES FOR REDESIGN.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PROPERTIES TOGETHER, THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF MATURE GROWTH LEAVING THOSE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES, THAT WILL REALLY OPEN UP THIS ENTIRE AREA, AND CHANGE THE DYNAMICS OF THE AREA.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REALLY FOCUS ON THESE LANDSCAPE PLANS, AND HOW MANY TREES REALLY NEED TO COME OUT, AND HOW MANY TREES SHOULD REMAIN.

TO TRY TO KEEP SOME AT A LEVEL OF CHARACTER OF THE MATURITY OF THESE LOTS.

>> I REALIZED HE SITS DOWN AND THEY DESIGN A BEAUTIFUL HOME, BUT HOW THAT HOME FITS ON THE EXISTING PROPERTY OF THIS AREA, THAT YOU'RE GOING TO END UP CUTTING DOWN 19 TREES, I DON'T KNOW.

TO ME, IT CHANGES THE WHOLE CHARACTER OF A NEIGHBORHOOD.

ROBERT, WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> WHO? ME? WALT, DID YOU SAY ME OR NOT?

>> YEAH.

>> WELL, THE TREES WE HAD TO GO THROUGH KIM'S LIST, BECAUSE THERE'S HALF DOZEN THAT COULD REMAIN.

>> I DO SHOW THAT THE OWNER WAS ACTUALLY ABLE TO GET IN TOUCH WITH ME, SO I COULD GET THEM TO CALL IN.

I DO HAVE THEM NOW ON THE LINE WITH THEIR HAND RAISED, WHENEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO ENGAGE WITH THE CALLER.

>> ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD PUT THEM ON.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. THIS IS DAVID GILES AND GLORY GILES.

>> WELL, YOU HAVE A BEAUTIFUL HOME HERE THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO CONSTRUCT.

BUT I DON'T KNOW, WE JUST HAVE A BIG CONCERN ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF TREES YOU ARE CUTTING DOWN HERE.

I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO REPLANT SOME, BUT THAT ARE GOING TO CHANGE THE WHOLE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

YOU ARE CUTTING DOWN 19 TREES, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE SMALL CRATE MODELS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

DID YOU TAKE THAT IN CONSIDERATION WHEN YOU DESIGNED? THE DESIGN OF THE HOUSE IS NICE, BUT I GUESS WE WISH YOU LOOK AT THE LOT AND SAY, "OKAY, WHAT CAN I REALLY SAVE HERE?"

>> NO, HE'S NOT MUTED, FOR SOME REASON HIS CALL DISCONNECTED.

>> I DON'T KNOW. MAYBE I'M THE ONE THAT FEELS THAT WAY.

>> NO, WALTER, I SUPPORT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

AGAIN, IS THIS HOMEOWNER GOING STAY IN THE PROPERTY OR IS IT GOING TO BE RESOLD? IF YOU'RE GOING TO LIVE IN THIS PROPERTY,

[03:05:01]

I THINK YOU WANT TO SEE MORE OF THE MATURE TREES STAY.

IF THIS IS FOR AN INVESTMENT AND YOU MOVE OFF, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT APPROACH.

>> WHERE WE COME IN, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> RIGHT.

>> SO I DO HAVE THE CALLER BACK ON THE CALL, AND IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS PROPERTY IS BEING DEVELOPED TO BE SOLD, ALONG WITH THE OTHER TWO THAT THE BUILDER OWNS, AND A THIRD ONE OR FOURTH, IF YOU INCLUDE THIS, THAT IS UNDER CONTRACT TO BE SOLD TO HIM.

IT WOULD BE A RUN OF FOUR PROPERTIES THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR TEAR-DOWN, REBUILD, AND TO SELL.

I WILL GO AHEAD AND ENGAGE THE CALL IF THAT'S OKAY WITH EVERYONE.

>> YEAH. GO AHEAD.

>> CALLER, ARE YOU THERE?

>> WE'LL TRY AGAIN. I'M SORRY.

THIS IS DAVID GILES AND GARY GILES.

>> GO AHEAD.

>> IS EVERYBODY LISTENING?

>> YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.

>> SUBSEQUENT TO OUR INITIAL PROPOSAL, WE'VE TALKED TO KIM AND AMANDA AND WE BASICALLY RETHOUGHT OUR APPLICATION.

SO I CAN TELL YOU, RIGHT OFF THE BAT, THAT WE'RE GOING TO MOVE THE POOL TO THE RIGHT.

THREE, SEVEN AND SIX ARE PROBABLY NOT PART OF OUR DEMOLITION OR TREE REMOVAL.

IF YOU CAN MAKE A NOTE OF THAT, EACH OF YOU.

SEVENTEEN ON THE FENCE WE UNDERSTAND.

SO TAKE THAT ONE OFF.

>>

>> UNDERSTOOD. THEN 12 AND 13 IN THE FRONT, WE ALSO HAVE NO PROBLEM LEAVING THOSE TWO.

SO WE'VE NOW REDUCED OUR REQUEST FROM 19-14.

IT WAS A LEARNING CURVE THING FOR US, UNDERSTANDING THE FIVE-FOOT RULE AND ALL OF THAT.

BUT UNDERSTAND ALSO THAT THE NEXT TWO PROPERTIES, JUST SO YOU DON'T FEAR THAT WE'RE COMING AT YOU FOR 10 OR 23 TREES EACH TIME, 118 I THINK HAS, MAYBE, 10, 120 HAS SIX OR SEVEN.

SO IT JUST HAPPENS THAT 116, WHICH YOU'RE HEARING FROM US FIRST, HAS A LOT OF TREES.

I'M HOPING THAT, WITH THIS CONCESSION, WE'RE MORE IN KEEPING WITH YOUR INTENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> WE ARE JUST CONCERNED.

YOU'VE DESIGNED A BEAUTIFUL HOME HERE, THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

I'M SURE IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE MARKET IS LOOKING FORWARD, BUT WE'D LIKE TO HAVE YOU BE COGNIZANT OF THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE LOT AND THE TREES.

MAYBE YOU DESIGN SOMETHING SO THAT YOU CAN ELIMINATE THE REMOVAL OF AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE.

IT CHANGES THE WHOLE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S NICE TO GO BACK AND REPLANT A 45 BUT WHEN YOU TAKE DOWN A 24-INCH TREE, IT'S A BIG DIFFERENCE.

>> GRANTED. MY QUESTION IS, MY UNDERSTANDING OR MY TELLING YOU JUST NOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO SCALE BACK FIVE OR SIX OF THESE TREES, IS THAT NOT IN KEEPING WITH WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR?

>> COMMENTS FROM ANYBODY ELSE?

>> IF I COULD, ON THE RECOMMENDED MOTIONS, IN ADDITION TO THE ONES THAT DAVID HAD MENTIONED.

I ALSO INCORPORATED A RECOMMENDATION THAT TREE NUMBER 19 BE KEPT AS WELL, WHICH IS THE 18-INCH CALIPER PINE.

THAT WOULD REQUIRE REVISIONS TO IDENTIFY THE TREES MARKED 6, 7, 12, 13, 17, AND 19 ALL BE KEPT.

SO THOSE WOULD BE 12 AND 13, THE TWO OAKS IN THE FRONT.

NINETEEN IS THE PINE IN THE REAR, 17 IS THE LARGE PINE FOR THE FENCE.

SEVEN AND SIX ARE THE TWO OAKS TO THE SIDE.

SO THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR SIX MORE TREES TO REMAIN ON THE LOT.

THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO KEEP THE LANDSCAPING PLAN WITH THE CURRENT PROPOSAL AND REQUEST AND REVISE AND RESUBMIT FOR THE KEEPING OF THESE SIX TREES.

[03:10:02]

>> I'VE GOT ONE OTHER QUESTION.

ON THE TREES ON THE AND 16, THE EXISTING HOUSE IS FURTHER OVER THAN THE PROPOSED HOUSE OR NOT?

>> GO AHEAD.

>> IF I COULD ANSWER. I THINK IT PROBABLY IS BY A COUPLE OF MORE FEET, BUT NOT MUCH.

THEY HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT SURROUNDS THEIR AIR CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT AND A GRAVEL PATH, AND ALL OF THAT WINDS AROUND THROUGH THOSE TREES.

>> TO ME, THE SIX THAT AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, OVER AT THE FRONT, YOU'RE ABLE TO SAVE.

FOURTEEN IS CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

IF WE WERE ABLE TO SAVE THAT ONE, THAT WOULD GIVE YOU TREES ON BOTH EDGES.

>> YEAH.

>> THAT WOULD BE SAVING SEVEN, I THINK THAT WOULD BE PRETTY GOOD.

>> OBVIOUSLY, WE'VE INVESTED A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT INTO THIS ROBERT AND PANEL COMMITTEE.

WITHIN REASON, THIS IS A BUSINESS FOR US, BUT WE INTEND TO DO THIS AS MANY TIMES AS WE CAN OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS.

WE'RE HERE TO COOPERATE, AND IF EVERYBODY FEELS LIKE 14 NEEDS TO BE SAVED, THEN WE'LL TRY TO SAVE IT.

WE'RE JUST TRYING TO FOLLOW THE RULES, REALLY, AND PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT OF RURAL IGNORANCE AT THE BEGINNING WHEN WE MADE THIS APPLICATION AND DRAWING.

>> WE CAN APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS THERE.

WE REALIZE IT'S A BUSINESS FOR YOU, THAT'S WHY IT BOTHERS US ALSO BECAUSE I KNOW YOU SPENT TIME DESIGNING THIS AND LAYING IT OUT AND EVERYTHING.

THEN FOR US TO TELL YOU, WELL, YOU NEED TO MOVE THIS HERE AND MOVE THAT THERE, THAT COSTS SOME MONEY TO YOU, AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT.

ALL WE'RE SAYING IS, BEFORE YOU SIT DOWN AND DO THE DESIGN, LOOK AT ALL THE TREES, AND YOU KNOW HOW WE ARE ABOUT TREES AND SO FORTH, MAYBE YOU CAN TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.

SO WHEN YOU DO COME IN FRONT OF US, WE DON'T HAVE TO SAY, WELL, IF YOU MOVE THIS THREE FEET THIS WAY, THEN WE CAN SAVE THESE THREE TREES.

THEN YOU'VE GOT TO GO BACK TO YOUR ARCHITECT AND THAT'S MORE MONEY THAT IT'S COSTING YOU, WE'RE VERY COGNIZANT OF THAT. THAT'S NOT WHAT OUR GOAL IS.

>> WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU DO.

I'M GLAD YOU LIKE WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WE KNOW THAT THERE'S RULES YOU'RE FOLLOWING TOO.

BUT ON THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE, I'M HOPING THAT WE CAN COME TO AN AGREEMENT TODAY WITH CONDITIONS THAT WE ALL AGREE TO AND KEEP MOVING FORWARD.

I WILL TELL YOU THAT THE NEXT TWO HOMES, 118 AND 120, 118 WAS SUBMITTED TUESDAY FOR TWO WEEKS FROM NOW BEFORE YOUR COMMITTEE; 120 ALSO IS GETTING SUBMITTED TOMORROW.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT, ONCE AGAIN, THOSE TWO PROPERTIES DON'T HAVE MANY TREES TO START WITH.

HOPEFULLY, THAT ISN'T THE SAME HARD PILL TO SWALLOW.

>> OKAY. ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> YES, TO RECAP SO WE REALLY KNOW HOW MANY TREES HAVE BEEN REMOVED FROM WHAT'S BEEN AGREED TO REMAIN, I CAN GET ABOUT 12 TREES REMOVED. IS THAT CORRECT, KIM?

>> YES.

>> OKAY.

>> I'M SORRY SO WHEN YOU SAY 12, YOU'RE INCLUDING 14 STAYS?

>> THE COMMITTEE HASN'T ACTED YET, BUT MY COUNT, AND I THINK ARTHUR'S AS WELL, IS THAT IT WOULD REQUIRE 7, 6, 12, 13, 14, 17, AND 19 ALL TO REMAIN.

>> OKAY.

>> THAT'S WHAT I TABULATED COUNTING THAT, ROBERT RECOMMENDED TREE 14 STAY.

>> RIGHT. OKAY, AND IN THE RECOMMENDED VERSION WHERE I NOTED TREES 12, 13, AND 19 FOR THE HOUSE.

I'VE ALSO INCLUDED 14, IF THAT IS SOMEONE'S RECOMMENDATION TO INCORPORATE INTO THE RECOMMENDED MOTION.

[03:15:05]

>> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDED MOTION WITH THE ADDITIONAL TREES AS NOTED TO BE IN THE RECOMMENDED MOTION.

>> PERFECT.

>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WHAT THE COMMITTEE IS DOING TO RECOGNIZE THE VALUE OF THE WOODLANDS AND TO KEEP AS MANY TREES AS POSSIBLE.

>> I THANK YOU.

I KNOW THAT THE MOTION HASN'T PASSED, BUT WE'RE WITH YOU, WE REALLY ARE.

BY THE WAY, WE FINISHED ELWOOD, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER BACK IN AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, WE CAME BEFORE YOU, AND IT'S TURNED OUT VERY NICE AND PEOPLE COMPLEMENT THE TREE, SOME MATURE TREES THAT ARE THERE SO WE KNOW THERE'S A VALUE TO THAT.

IT WAS 11033, ELWOOD.

>> WHICH ONE WAS THAT KIM?

>> ELWOOD, IT WAS ONE THAT WAS ON A CORNER LOT IN GROGAN'S MILL.

THERE WERE SOME INDIVIDUALS WHO CAME TO THE COMMITTEE THAT WERE UPSET ABOUT THE TREES THAT WERE PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL.

BUT ONE OF THE TREES HAD A SEVERE LEAN IN THAT CORNER END OF THE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY, IF THAT HELPS.

THAT'S THE TREE I REMEMBER.

>> WHY DON'T YOU RECITE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND WE CAN MOVE ON.

>> CERTAINLY. JUST TO MAKE SURE I HAVE IT CORRECT, I BELIEVE THAT THIS WAS ARTHUR BREDEHOFT, AND WAS IT ROBERT HEINEMAN ON THIS RECOMMENDATION, AND THEN I'LL GO AHEAD AND RECITE IT. IS THAT RIGHT?

>> I THINK IT'S FINE.

>> THAT'S FINE UNLESS ONE OF YOU WILL WANT TO DO THE SECOND.

>> OKAY. IN REGARDS TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOME, THE ACTION IS TO APPROVE ON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS; THE OWNER MUST COMPLY WITH THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS DEFINED FOR NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO YOUR HOURS OF OPERATION FOR CONSTRUCTION, ACCESS AND SAFETY, FENCING, CONTRACTOR VEHICLES, LOT MAINTENANCE KEPT IN ADHERENCE TO YOUR DRAINAGE PLAN, THE INSTALLATION OF THAT PLAN AND THE INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION AFTER THE INSTALLATION AND INSPECTION.

DUMPSTER OR OTHER WASTE CONTAINERS THAT ARE STORED ON SITE, PORTABLE RESTROOM FACILITIES, COMPLETION OF WORK, AND IT'S ADVISED TO REFERENCE THE CURRENTLY ADOPTED STANDARD FOR COMPLIANCE OF ALL OF THESE COMPONENTS.

THE OWNER MUST REVISE AND RESUBMIT THE PROPOSED TREE REMOVALS, REQUIRING TREES MARKED NUMBERS 12, 13, 14 AND 19 TO REMAIN AND ARE NOT APPROVED FOR REMOVAL.

THESE ARE THOSE OAKS IN THE FRONT YARD AND THEN THE PINES IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD.

THE OWNER MUST SIGN A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT THAT THE AREA ABOVE THE GARAGE ADDITION REPRESENTED AS MECHANICAL ON THE PLANS, WILL NOT BE CONVERTED INTO LIVABLE SPACE.

THE OWNER MUST SEEK TO OBTAIN APPROVAL FOR ANY ADDITIONAL LIVING SPACE.

AS IS ADVISED, THE INCREASE WOULD ALSO REQUIRE AN AMENDMENT TO THE INITIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION.

THE OWNER MUST ADHERE TO THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING PLAN UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION, AND THE PLANTINGS MUST BE KEPT AND MAINTAINED A CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARDS PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT, AND A REQUEST FOR AN ADDITIONAL TIME MUST BE REVIEWED FOR APPROVAL.

THE OWNER MUST ENSURE PLACEMENT OF THE IMPROVEMENT DOES NOT HOLD TO MATERIALLY IMPEDE DRAINAGE AS DEFINED IN YOUR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND ALL OF THE IMPROVEMENTS MUST MEET CODE AND PASS FINAL INSPECTION.

THAT IS THE CONCLUSION OF THE ACTION FOR THE HOME.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> SO I GO AHEAD AND GO TO THE POOL?

>> YES.

>> IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WAS MOVED BY ARTHUR AND SECONDED BY ROBERT TO APPROVE THE INSTALLATION OF THE POOL AND DECKING ON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS; THE OWNER MUST REVISE AND RESUBMIT THE POOL AND DECKING PLANS, AND THE MARKED SURVEY, SHIFTING THE POOL OVER TO THE RIGHT IN ORDER TO SAVE THE TREES MARKED NUMBERS SIX AND SEVEN.

INSTALLATION OF THE DRAINAGE PLAN, INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION OF INSTALLATION MUST OCCUR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS AND THE STANDARD.

THE OWNER MUST ENSURE PLACEMENT OF THE IMPROVEMENT DOES NOT HOLD TO MATERIALLY IMPEDE DRAINAGE AS DEFINED IN THE STANDARDS.

OWNER SHOULD DISCLOSE TO ANY BUYER THAT THE HARD SURFACE FOR THE LOT IS FIVE PERCENT OVER THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED AND WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR FUTURE VARIANCES FROM THE HARD SURFACE CURRENTLY PROPOSED.

POOL EQUIPMENT AND ANY LIGHTING MUST COMPLY WITH THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REGARDING HEIGHT, BEARING OF THE LIGHT AND LOCATION, AND THEN ALL IMPROVEMENTS MUST MEET CODE AND PASS FINAL INSPECTION.

THEN LASTLY IS THE FENCE, ALSO BY ARTHUR AND SECONDED BY ROBERT TO DENY THE REQUEST TO REMOVE THE TREE FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE FENCE AS REQUESTED AND CONDITIONALLY APPROVE A PROPOSED FENCE ON THE CONDITION THE OWNER AROUND THE EXISTING TREE AND REMOVING THE PROPOSED TREE REMOVAL.

[03:20:03]

THE POOL BARRIER FENCE MUST BE BUILT WITHOUT THE REMOVAL OF TREE MARKED NUMBER 17 ON THE PLAN, WHICH IS THE 23 INCH CALIBER PINE.

THE FENCE MUST BE A MINIMUM OF FIVE FEET TALL AS SHOWN ON THE ELEVATION.

POOL BARRIER FENCING MUST MEET CODE AND PASS FINAL INSPECTION.

>> OKAY.

>> SO WE'RE VOTING ON FOUR, FIVE, AND SIX COMBINED.

>> CORRECT.

>> ALL RIGHT, CAN WE HAVE OUR MOTIONS? OKAY, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I.

>> ARTHUR, I.

>> I.

>> ANY OPPOSED?

>> I.

>> MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WE'LL SEE YOU JULY 15TH.

>> I WOULD ADVISE YOU TO LOOK AT THE WEBSITE FOR THE DEADLINES FOR SUBMISSION.

WHEN WE RECEIVE THE SUBMISSION, AND WE CAN VERIFY THAT IT'S COMPLETE, WE'LL BEGIN TO PROCESS IT TO PLACE IT ON THE NEXT AGENDA.

SO I'M NOT SURE IF YOUR SUBMISSION YESTERDAY MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO BE PLACED ON THE JULY 15TH MEETING, BUT WE'LL CERTAINLY TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AND I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH YOU OUTSIDE OF THIS MEETING.

>> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> YES. WE HOPE THAT YOU LIKE THE NUMBER TREE SURVEY, THAT MAKES THE DISCUSSION MUCH EASIER.

>> I PERSONALLY LOVED IT.

IT MADE MY WORK MUCH EASIER.

>> YES, AND THE HARD SURFACE, SO HAPPY 4TH OF JULY WEEKEND, EVERYBODY. APPRECIATE IT.

>> HAPPY FOURTH TO YOU TOO.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> WHAT'S NEXT?

>> I AM ALMOST THERE.

>> IS THAT IT?

>> NO, SIR.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION REAL QUICK ON THE RESURVEY OF THE POOL AND THE FENCE, AND SO ON.

DOES THE COMMITTEE WANT TO SEE THE BACK OF THE COMMITTEE OR IS THAT FOR STAFF?

>> STAFF CAN DO IT.

>> STAFF IS MORE THAN QUALIFIED.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THE NEXT ITEMS THAT I HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT FOR ARE ITEMS 8 AND 9,

[Items VIII 8 & 9]

WHICH IS 43 EAST TRILLIUM CIRCLE.

THIS IS GOING TO BE A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR AN EXISTING PLAY STRUCTURE THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE 10 FOOT REAR EASEMENT, BUT IT IS ALSO FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR AN EXISTING STORAGE BUILDING THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE 10 FOOT REAR AND FIVE FOOT SIDE YARD EASEMENTS.

YOU MAY RECALL THAT YOU HAD REVIEWED THESE ITEMS PREVIOUSLY ON YOUR AGENDA, AND THEY CAME BEFORE YOU AT THE EARLIER MEETING WHICH WAS IN DECEMBER OF 2019.

YOU ACTED ON IT AT THAT TIME NOTING THAT IT NEEDED TO BE DENIED.

IT WAS A VIOLATION THAT WAS A RESULT OF NOTICE AND THE OWNER CAME FORWARD, AND THE COMMITTEE DISAPPROVED THE ITEMS AND REQUIRED THEM TO BE REMOVED.

PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL, THE OWNER SOLD THE HOUSE AND THE CURRENT OWNERS ARE NOW RECEIVING THE INFORMATION THAT THEY WERE REQUIRED TO BE REMOVED.

WHEN THEY PURCHASE THE HOME, THEY WERE PART OF THE SELLING POINT FOR THE HOME AND NOW THE CURRENT OWNERS ARE REQUESTING THAT THE COMMITTEE CONSIDER THE SHED AND THE PLAY STRUCTURE FOR THE NEW HOMEOWNERS.

THIS ITEM WAS CIRCULATED WITH NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNICATION AND BOTH PRESENTLY AND PREVIOUSLY, THERE WAS OPPOSITION TO THE STRUCTURES AS THEY CURRENTLY ARE SITUATED.

TRILLIUM CIRCLE, AN AERIAL VIEW OF THAT SECTION.

THEN HERE IS THE STORAGE SHED AND THE PLAY STRUCTURE BOTH LOCATED IN THE REAR AND ONE LOCATED IN THE SIDE YARD EASEMENTS.

HERE IS THE VIEW OF PROPERTY AND HOW IT SITS WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

IT DOES BACK TO A RESERVE.

THE VARIANCE REQUEST PROVIDED BY THE OWNERS WAS REALLY TO IDENTIFY THAT THEY CLOSED ON THE REFERENCE PROPERTY FROM THE HICKS, AND THEY WERE UNAWARE OF THE ISSUE.

THEY HAD TRAVEL CLOSURE ISSUES COMING BACK INTO THE COUNTRY.

THEY RECEIVED THE LETTER FROM THE TOWNSHIP IN REGARDS TO THOSE TWO IMPROVEMENTS BUILT WITHOUT AN APPLICATION, ENCROACHING INTO THE EASEMENT, AND AFTER DISCUSSION WITH THE STAFF, THEY WERE IDENTIFIED OF THE NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUES.

THEY'RE NOW REQUESTING THE COMMITTEE CONSIDER GRANTING THAT EXCEPTION FOR THESE STRUCTURES.

HERE ARE THE TWO IMPROVEMENTS IS A TWO-STORY, IF YOU WILL, PLAY STRUCTURE AND A STORAGE BUILDING.

THE STORAGE BUILDING IS IN THE SIDE AND REAR YARD EASEMENT.

THE PLAY STRUCTURE IS IN THE REAR EASEMENT.

HERE'S THE VIEW AS YOU SEE IT FROM THE FRONT OF THE HOME, AND THERE WAS A REQUEST BY AN INDIVIDUAL

[03:25:03]

REPRESENTING HOW LONG THEY HAVE LIVED IN THE WOODLANDS THAT THEY UNDERSTAND THAT THE HOUSE WAS PURCHASED, THAT THEY KNOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN DENIED, THEY FIND THE PLAY HOUSE TO BE OF CONCERN, AND THAT THIS IS THE VISIBILITY FROM THEIR BACKYARD AND FROM THE STREET.

THEY WOULD LIKE THE COMMITTEE TO UPHOLD THE STANDARDS AND THEIR PREVIOUS RULING TO DENY THE VARIANCE.

WE ALSO RECEIVE PHOTOS FROM THE HOMEOWNER PROVIDED BY YOUR CURRENT OWNER FOR THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO THE LEFT AND RIGHT HAND SIDE SHOWING YOU THE VIEW OF THAT PLAY STRUCTURE.

THE STRUCTURE AND THE SHED.

THE MEASUREMENTS THAT NOTE THE PROXIMITY ON THE LOT LOOKING AT ALL ANGLES ALSO AS WELL FROM BEHIND THE FENCE WHERE THE RESERVE IS LOCATED.

PHOTOS OF THE PLAY STRUCTURE IN THE SHED FROM YOUR DSC MEETING PREVIOUSLY HAS NOT MODIFIED SINCE THAT TIME.

THERE WERE CONCERNS AT THE TIME THAT THAT WAS REVIEWED.

I WILL GO AHEAD AND JUST GO BACK TO THE TWO STRUCTURES THEMSELVES.

IN ADDITION TO THE APPEAL DESCRIPTION THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS, THEY ALSO IDENTIFIED THAT THERE IS A HARDSHIP AS IT RELATES TO COST AND REMOVAL.

THE HOUSE WAS SOLD WITH THESE COMPONENTS BEING CONSIDERED AS ADDITIONAL FEATURES.

THEY'RE REQUESTING THAT THE COMMITTEE GRANT AND EXCEPTION TO APPROVE THE STRUCTURES.

THEY IDENTIFIED THAT WITH RETIREMENT SAVINGS, THEIR PARENTS CANNOT AFFORD TO SPEND THE FUNDS FOR THE REMOVAL AS THEY'VE ALREADY PAID FOR THE HOME AND THE CLOSING COSTS.

BUT THEY DID IDENTIFY THAT IF BOTH STRUCTURES CANNOT BE APPROVED, THEY ARE REQUESTING TO ALLOW THE STORAGE SHED AS IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEIR PARENTS CAN UTILIZE AND WOULD COME IN HANDY.

YOUR WORKSHEET ALSO INCORPORATES THE OPPOSITION'S FROM 39 AND 33 TRILLIUM.

I DO HAVE CALLERS ON THE LINE IF YOU COULD HIT STAR NINE SO THAT I CAN SHOW THAT YOU ARE PRESENT FOR THAT ITEM, I CAN GO AHEAD AND ENGAGE YOU WITH THE COMMITTEE.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME OR CAN I GO AHEAD AND ENGAGE THE CALL?

>> NO, GO AHEAD.

>> HI, ARE YOU THE HOMEOWNER FOR TRILLIUM?

>> I'M MOVING IN FROM OUT-OF-STATE CALLING FOR LINE ITEM 7.

I HEARD IT TALKED ABOUT IN THE SUMMARY, SO DOES THAT MEAN IF THEY'RE SKIPPING OVER THAT IT'S BEEN APPROVED?

>> YES, SIR. YOU'RE CALLING IN REGARDS TO 67 NORTH WINDSAIL?

>> YES, MA'AM.

>> THAT ITEM WAS HEARD PROBABLY ABOUT 5 O'CLOCK, IT WAS ONE OF THE FIRST ITEMS IN THE CONSENT AGENDA AND IT WAS APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

>> I WAS LISTENING, I WASN'T SURE WHAT THAT MEANT. THANKS FOR YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATED. SORRY TO KEEP YOU ON THE LINE.

>> NO PROBLEM. THANK YOU.

>> DO I HAVE ANY CALLERS PRESENT FOR ITEMS 8 AND 9? APPARENTLY I DO NOT.

>> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE RECOMMENDED MOTION?

>> NO, SIR.

>> NOW I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDED MOTION FOR ITEM NUMBER 8 TO DENY AS PRESENTED.

BASED ON THEIR CONDITION, ALLOW THEM TO HAVE SIX MONTHS TO REMOVE IT. DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> I.

>> ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.

ITEM NUMBER 9 ON THE SHED.

I REALLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH RECOMMENDED MOTION.

I SAW IN AN MOU.

DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION ON NUMBER 9.

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY I.

>> I.

>> MOTION CARRIES.

>> OKAY.

NEXT ITEM FOR WHICH I HAVE, AN ACTION IS NEEDED,

[Item VIII 19]

AND I BELIEVE I HAVE SOMEONE PRESENT, IS ITEM NUMBER 19 FOR 9 KNOLL PINES.

ARE THE CALLERS CURRENTLY ON THE LINE CALLING FOR 9 KNOLL PINES? I KEEP CONFUSING MY ITEM 19 WITH 9.

DO I HAVE ANYONE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM FOR 9 KNOLL PINES?

[03:30:03]

I KNOW THAT THEY HAD SAID THAT THEY WERE CALLING IN.

I BELIEVE THIS IS MY LAST ONE.

>> YES. WE ARE HERE.

>> OKAY.

>> HELLO?

>> HI. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION.

FOR SOME REASON, IT WASN'T SHOWING THAT YOUR HAND WAS RAISED, BUT NOW I KNOW YOU'RE PRESENT FOR THIS ITEM, SO I'LL GO THROUGH THE PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL CALL UPON YOU. ARE YOU THE OWNER?

>> YES.

>> PERFECT. IF YOU'LL HANG TIGHT FOR ME, I WILL GIVE THE PRESENTATION TO THE COMMITTEE.

ITEM NUMBER 19 IS THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR AN EXISTING FENCE THAT WAS BUILT WITH THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE FACING OUTWARD FROM THE LOT.

THIS IS AT THE LAMBERT RESIDENTS, WHICH IS LOCATED AT 9 KNOLL PINES COURT IN THE VILLAGE OF PANTHER CREEK.

THE PROPERTY IS REPRESENTED HERE AT THE CUL DE SAC OF KNOLL PINES COURT, OFF A FALLING STAR IN THE VILLAGE OF PANTHER CREEK.

WE DID RECEIVE RESPONSES.

NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNICATION FORM WAS CIRCULATED.

WE HAD ONE INDIVIDUAL WRITING THAT THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF THE FENCE AS IT STANDS AND WE ALSO HAD AN INDIVIDUAL WHO CALLED IN OPPOSED TO THE FENCING.

THE PORTION OF FENCING THAT IS ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY IS WHAT THEY WERE CALLING IN ABOUT SPECIFICALLY.

HERE'S THE VIEW OF THE PROPERTY SITTING ON KNOLL PINES COURT, LOOKING AT THE SURVEY, THERE IS A GATE THAT HAS A DESIGN THAT'S NOT ONE OF THE STANDARD DESIGNS OF APPROVAL AND REQUIRES REVIEW BY THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS COMMITTEE, AND SAME FOR THE FENCE THAT RUNS ALONG THIS PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY, WHICH ALSO HAS KIND OF AN OUTLINE OR TRIMMED EFFECT TO IT THAT WOULD REQUIRE ACTION BY THIS COMMITTEE, AND THEN THE FENCE THAT RUNS ADJACENT TO PROPERTY 11, IS CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT AND RUNNING ADJACENT TO, SAY IT WAS SEVEN, IS ALSO A CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT.

THIS PORTION OF THAT FENCING HAS CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT MEMBERS VISIBLE TO THE STREET OF KNOLL PINES COURT.

HERE IS THE VIEW OF THAT PROPERTY AND HOW IT SITS WITH PROPERTIES 7 AND 11 KNOLL PINES COURT.

THE VIEW OF THE FRONT OF THE HOME LOOKING TO THE LEFT AND RIGHT HAND SIDE, AND HERE'S WHERE YOU SEE THOSE MEMBERS THAT ARE VISIBLE TO THE STREET TO THAT ADJACENT LOT.

A LITTLE CLOSE UP VIEW OF THAT SECTION AND THE AERIAL VIEW IN THE BOTTOM CORNER REPRESENTS WHERE YOU'RE LOOKING, AND THEN HERE'S THE VIEW OF THAT BREEZE WAY FENCE, WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT, BUT HAS A TRIMMED OUT DESIGN THAT MAKES IT LOOK LIKE THAT OF A CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT FENCE.

HERE'S A MORE CLOSE UP VIEW OF THIS AREA.

YOU DO HAVE SOME AREAS IN COCHRAN'S CROSSING THAT YOU MIGHT BE FAMILIAR WITH THAT HAVE THIS SIMILAR KIND OF OUTLINED TRIM DESIGN.

YOU'VE SEEN THOSE IN THE STONY RUN AREA THAT ARE CAPPED WITH KIND OF A TRIMMED EFFECT TO THE CONSTRUCTION MAKERS.

HERE IS A CLOSE UP VIEW OF THAT GATE AS YOU'RE LOOKING IN THE BACKYARD.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE ENTIRE FENCE WAS SMOOTH SIDE IN, CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT.

THIS WAS DONE BY THE PREVIOUS OWNER AND THE CURRENT OWNER, THE LAMBERTS ARE REQUESTING THAT THE FENCE BE MAINTAINED AS THEY WERE UNAWARE THAT THE PREVIOUS OWNER DID NOT APPLY FOR THE FENCE AND OBTAINLY REQUIRED PURPOSE.

THIS IS THE BACKSIDE OF THAT FENCE THAT FACES THE DRIVEWAY.

SO YOU CAN SEE THIS IS THE SMOOTH SIDE AND THEN THE UNFINISHED WERE TRIMMED OUTSIDE IS FACING THE DRIVEWAY.

AS YOU GO AROUND THE PROPERTY, LOOKING FROM EACH VIEW, THIS IS THE NEIGHBOR THAT WAS IN OPPOSITION TO THAT PORTION OF THE FENCE AND PERHAPS THEY MAY BE THE OTHER CALLER ON THE CALL.

ANOTHER CLOSE UP VIEW THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE HOMEOWNER REQUESTING THAT THEY MAINTAIN THAT FENCE, AND I HAVE THE OWNER ON THE CALL AND I HAVE ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL ON THE CALL.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME?

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> NO SIR.

>> NO QUESTIONS FOR ME.

>> DO YOU WANT ME TO SEE WHO THE OTHER CALLER IS?

>> YES.

>>

>> NO, MA'AM. I'M NOT.

I'M NUMBER 10 ON I WAS JUST WONDERING WHY IT WAS SKIPPED OVER.

>> LET ME LOOK AT THAT REAL QUICK BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT WAS

[03:35:03]

PROBABLY HEARD AT THE BEGINNING OF THE AGENDA IN THE SUMMARY SECTION.

YOU ARE 28 SOUTH TALLOW BARRY FOR THE FRONT DOOR COLORED?

>> YES MA'AM.

>> THAT ITEM WAS APPROVED AS PRESENTED.

IT WAS HEARD AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA.

>> WELL, WONDERFUL. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

>> THANK YOU FOR STAYING ON THE CALL.

I APOLOGIZE.

>> THAT'S OKAY. I HAD TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES GETTING ON, BUT THAT'S OKAY.

I GOT THE GOOD NEWS I WANTED. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. BYE BYE.

>> SO I JUST HAVE THE OWNER AND I'LL GO AHEAD AND UNMUTE THEM SO THAT THEY CAN SPEAK TO THE COMMITTEE OR YOU CAN SPEAK WITH HIM?

>> YES.

I THINK I SENT IN KIND OF A VARIANCE REQUEST FORMAT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE MUCH MORE TO ADD FROM WHAT WAS STATED ON THAT FORM BUT I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR SPEAK ANYTHING THAT WAS ON THERE IF I NEED TO.

>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

>> CAN WE HAVE SOME OPPOSITION CORRECT FROM AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER?

>> CORRECT WE DID.

THEY SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO CALL IN THIS EVENING.

BUT IF YOU ARE, HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

I SCROLLED UP TO GET TO THAT

>> THIS AFTERNOON WE RECEIVED A CALL FROM 11 KNOLL PINES COURT AND THAT'S BEEN INCORPORATED IN YOUR WORKSHEET.

THEY IDENTIFIED THAT THEY WERE IN OPPOSITION TO THE FENCE BEING THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT MEMBERS.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IN YOUR DISCUSSION WITH STAFF, THEIR CONCERNS WAS IN REGARDS TO THE PREVIOUS OWNER'S REMOVAL OF A SHARED FENCE, WHICH WE DID ADVISE THEM THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THIS COMMITTEE WOULD BE ABLE TO DISCUSS, AND IS A CIVIL MATTER BETWEEN THEM AND THE PREVIOUS OWNER.

HOWEVER, IN REGARDS TO SPECIFICATIONS, THEY JUST SAID THEY WERE OPPOSED AND THAT THEY PLAN TO SPEAK WITH THE COMMITTEE.

UNFORTUNATELY, I DON'T SHOW THAT THERE ARE ANY OTHER ATTENDEES FOR THIS ITEM.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. LIKE I SAID, I GUESS, MY REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE WAS AS I'D SUBMITTED IT.

WAS THERE A SPECIFIC REASON OR PROTEST THAT I CAN ADDRESS OR SPEAK TO, OR?

>>

>> YEAH, THAT'S CORRECT.

>> SO IT WAS NEVER APPLIED FOR. CORRECT, KIM?

>> FACT.

>> A NEW HOMEOWNER IS NOW TRYING TO RECTIFY WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY JUST BUILT.

>> IT WAS A RESULT OF MONITORING DOWN THE FENCE WE SUBMITTED A NOTICE TO THE HOMEOWNER.

THE HOMEOWNER AT THE TIME THAT THE FENCE WAS BUILT WAS A DIFFERENT OWNER THAN THE CURRENT OWNER.

THE CURRENT OWNER, UNFORTUNATELY IN PURCHASING THE HOME ALSO PURCHASED THE VIOLATION.

WE SENT THE NOTICE TO THE NEW OWNER IN REGARDS TO THE VIOLATION FOR THE FENCE THEY SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION.

THEY DID NOT INSTALL THE FENCE, THE PREVIOUS OWNER DID.

>> IN YOUR RECOMMENDED OPTION 1, HOW MUCH OF THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE IS CORRECTED BY OPTION 1, IF THE COMMITTEE WOULD CONSIDERED THAT?

>> IN OPTION 1, IT WOULD JUST BE FIVE PANELS.

THE PORTION THAT IS VISIBLE TO THE STREET.

AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THAT WOULD REQUIRE MODIFICATION.

>> OKAY. OPTION 2 WOULD BE A DENIAL AS PRESENTED AND REQUIRE THE OWNER TO REVISE AND RESUBMIT, HOW MUCH OF THE FENCE WOULD HAVE TO BE FIXED ON OPTION 2?

>> ON OPTION 2, YOU WOULD HAVE THESE PANELS HERE ON THIS SIDE, WHICH ARE THE ONES VISIBLE TO THE STREET.

IF YOU'LL GIVE ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO BACK TO MY SURVEY, HOPEFULLY I'M GOING THE RIGHT WAY, IT WOULD ALSO INCLUDE THIS ENTIRE RUN OF FENCING THAT'S CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT.

CONSIDERING THE PROPERTY LINE FROM LET'S CUT IT IN HALF, IT'D PROBABLY BE 60-80 FEET

[03:40:05]

BECAUSE I'M GUESSING IT'S PROBABLY LONGER WITH THE ROAD RIGHT AWAY,.

>> RIGHT.

>> EIGHTY FEET THAT WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED OR MODIFIED.

>> ARE WE GETTING ANY COMPLAINT ON THIS SECTION YOU JUST POINTED OUT?

>> THIS PORTION IS THE PORTION OPPOSITION WAS THE LADY WHO CALLED OUR STAFF THIS AFTERNOON THAT SHE'S OPPOSED TO THE FENCE, SHE HAD A DISCUSSION IN REGARDS TO THE PREVIOUS HOMEOWNER REMOVE OF THE ROD IRON FENCE, AND SAID SHE PLANED TO CALL INTO THE MEETING.

THAT'S ALL THE INFORMATION.

>> JUST TO CLARIFY, THERE'S A PROTEST TO THE PORTION OF THE FENCE.

I THINK THE PORTION OF THAT FENCE THAT YOU GUYS ARE REFERRING TO RIGHT NOW, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A PROTEST TO THAT PORTION OF THE FENCE.

AS I THINK THERE'S A PROTEST TO THE PORTION OF THE FENCE THAT FACES THE HOME AT 11 KNOLL PINES COURT, WHICH IS NOT THE SIDE FACING THE STREET, THAT'S THE FENCE BETWEEN MY HOME IN 11 KNOLL PINES COURT.

BUT MAYBE I'M INCORRECT.

CAN YOU GUYS CLARIFY WHICH PORTION OF THE FENCE YOU'RE REFERRING TO NOW THAT HAS THE PROTEST ASSOCIATED WITH IT?

>> CERTAINLY. SEVEN HAS THE FENCING WITH THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE MEMBERS SEEN FROM THE STREET, 11 HAS THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE MEMBERS AND HAS A NEIGHBOR WHO OPPOSED THE FENCE.

BUT THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION OF THAT FENCE WAS IN REGARDS TO A CONCERN ABOUT A ROD IRON FENCE PREVIOUSLY REMOVED FROM THE OTHER NEIGHBOR.

NONE OF THIS CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT FENCING IS VISIBLE TO THE STREET, IT'S JUST CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT TOWARD 11.

ELEVEN DID SUBMIT THE OPPOSITION, THE EXTENT OF THAT SAYS, PLANS TO SPEAK WITH THE COMMITTEE.

SEVEN OR WHAT'S VISIBLE FROM SEVEN, BETWEEN PLOT 7 AND 9, IS CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT FENCING THAT IS VISIBLE TO THE STREET, WHICH IS COMMONLY A DISCUSSION THAT THE COMMITTEE HAS IN REGARDS TO NOT ALLOWING CONSTRUCTION SIDE VISIBILITY THAT IS SEEN FROM THE STREET.

>> HOW LONG HAS HE LIVED IN THE HOUSE?

>> WHAT?

>> HOW LONG HAS HE LIVED IN THE HOUSE?

>> SIR, HOW LONG HAVE YOU LIVED IN THIS HOME?

>> APPROXIMATELY EIGHT MONTHS.

>> WHEN WAS THE FENCE PUT UP, KIM, IF YOU HAVE AN IDEA?

>> I'M SORRY, I

>> SIR, I THINK IT WAS PUT IN A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. SO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN-

>> PROBABLY FIVE YES OLD

>> YEAH, I THINK IT WAS JUST A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO THE FENCES PUT IN.

I GUESS IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SUMMER OF 2018.

>> KIM, NUMBER 11 NEVER COMPLAINED BEFORE?

>> NO. WE HAD NEVER RECEIVED A COMPLAIN.

WE DID ONE THIS AFTERNOON TO BE A SUPERVISOR FOR THAT VILLAGE.

>> KIM, ROBERT.

GO BACK TO THE FENCE DESIGN, THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT.

SO THAT ONE, DOES THAT MAKE POOL A BARRIER?

>> PROBABLY NOT.

>> IT WOULD BE I THINK THAT IT WOULD DEPEND ON TWO THINGS.

ONE, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE OF INTERPRETATION ON THE POOL BARRIER INSPECTION WITH THE THIRD PARTY INSPECTORS.

IF THE MID RAIL IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SPACING FROM THE BOTTOM OF THIS MID RAIL TO THE TOP OF THIS RAIL, AND I WANT TO SAY THAT THAT'S 48

>> FORTY-FIVE INCHES.

>> THEN-

>> FORTY-FIVE INCHES.

>> ONE THING I WOULD ADD TO THE POOL BARRIER QUESTION IS WE HAVE HAD AN ADDITIONAL FENCING INSTALLED AROUND THE POOL FOR A POOL BARRIER IN ADDITION TO THE OUTSIDE FENCE AROUND OUR PROPERTY.

WE DO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL FENCE AROUND THE POOL.

>> DO YOU KNOW IF THAT FENCING WAS INSPECTED TO MEET CODE?

>> I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS OR NOT.

MY WIFE MAY HAVE SUBMITTED SOMETHING TO MAKE SURE IT MET CODE OR NOT, BUT IT'S ADDITIONAL FENCING AROUND THE POOL.

[03:45:01]

WE CAN CERTAINLY SUBMIT SOMETHING IF WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT MEETS CODE OR NOT.

>> SO ROBERT, GETTING BACK TO THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT, IT IS POSSIBLE THAT IT MIGHT NOT.

WE WOULD HAVE AND IT'S INCLUDED IN BOTH OF THE OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO MEET TO DO THE LAST FINAL INSPECTION.

>> SO IF

>> DO YOU KNOW THAT WE HAVE HAD SOME INSPECTORS THAT WILL ALLOW A BEVELED EDGE, WHERE YOU CAN CUT THAT MID RAIL AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE SO THAT IT CAN MEET CODE?

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> ALSO THAT FOR CONSIDERATION.

>> YEAH, WITHOUT THE BEVELED EDGE, I DON'T BELIEVE IT MEETS THE 40, SOME ISSUES WITH THAT, SO IS SIX FOOT FENCE.

>> YEAH. KIM, IF WE DID OPTION 2, WOULD WE ALSO FIX THE FENCE IN THE DRIVEWAY WITH THE GATE?

>> IT ACTUALLY WAS TO ALLOW THE PORTION OF FENCE AT THE GATE AND ALONG THE DRIVEWAY.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO WITH AN OPTION 1 WOULD FIX MOST OF THE ISSUES, CORRECT?

>> OPTION 1 FIXES THE PORTION OF CONSTRUCTION SIDE OUT FENCING VISIBLE TO THE STREET ONLY.

>> OPTION 2 FIXES THE CONSTRUCTION

>> CORRECT.

>> IF THE FENCE WAS ORIGINALLY THE NEIGHBOR WOULD HAVE THE SMOOTH SIDE AND THE OWNER WOULD HAVE THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE.

>> CORRECT.

>> OKAY. I THINK TO BE CONSISTENT THAT OPTION 2, ALTHOUGH IT'S A DENIAL AND A RESUBMISSION, WOULD MEET THE STANDARDS.

>> I AGREE THERE, BUT MY ONLY THING IS, WE HAVE A SITUATION THAT THIS FENCE HAS BEEN UP THERE.

YOU NEVER HAD A COMPLAINT.

YOU HAD A PERSON THAT BOUGHT THE HOUSE THAT THOUGHT THAT, YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT'S A GOOD LOOKING FENCE.

BUT THEN YOU FIND OUT IT'S NOT BUILT RIGHT.

NOW I GOT TO GO AHEAD AND DO ALL THE REPAIR WORK.

I LIKE OPTION 1 MYSELF, WHERE YOU'VE FIXED WHAT YOU CAN SEE IT TO THE STREET AND THAT GATE THOUGH, WITH THAT CAP ON TOP, THAT THING OVER THE TOP OF THE GATE?

>> YES.

>> I DON'T KNOW IF I CARE ABOUT THAT TOO MUCH, BUT I JUST HATE TO SEE THE GUY HAVE TO SPEND ALL THIS MONEY FOR SOMETHING THAT HE DIDN'T DO.

>> WELL, YOU COULD DO OPTION 1.

YOU COULD REMOVE THE CAP OVER THE GATE AND STILL KEEP OPEN.

IF THERE'S FURTHER COMPLAINTS, THEN IT PROVIDES THE DSC THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THOSE COMPLAINTS.

IT FIXES THE IMMEDIATE TO THE STREET, IT TAKES DOWN THAT CAP OVER THE GATE, AND WE'LL SEE WHAT THE FUTURE BRINGS, IF THERE'S ANY FURTHER COMPLAINTS ON THE FENCE.

THEN IT BALANCES IT OUT FOR THE HOMEOWNER THAT JUST INHERITED THE ISSUE.

>> ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMPLAINTS WITH THAT?

>> NO.

>> NO.

>> NO, SIR.

>> DOES ANYBODY MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT OPTION 1?

>> I'LL SECOND IT. DOES OPTION 1 REMOVE THE CAP OVER THAT GATE, KIM?

>> IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO PUT THAT IN THERE, IT CERTAINLY DOES.

>> MR. CHAIR?

>> YES, I WOULD.

>> OKAY. I HAVE IT INCORPORATED TO REMOVE THE CAP OVER THE GATE.

>> OKAY.

>> WE'LL SECOND.

>> MY RECOMMENDED MOTION.

DO I HAVE A SECOND?

>> WE'LL SECOND, ARTHUR.

>> ALL THOSE

>> CAN I JUST SAY SOMETHING.

YOU'RE ASKING ME TO REMOVE THE CAP OVER MY GATE?

>> WELL, LET'S EXPLAIN THAT TO HIM, KIM, THAT

>> I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED.

>> LET ME GO OVER THE ACTIONS BY THE COMMITTEE.

THE ACTION FOR THIS EVENING IS TO APPROVE THE FENCE ON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS; THE PORTION OF FENCING ADDRESSING TO 7 KNOLL PINES MUST BE MODIFIED TO COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS.

THE OWNER CAN REVERSE THE PICKETS, DOUBLE-SIDE THE FENCE, OR CHOOSE A LINE THAT COMPLIES WITH THE STANDARD AND ELIMINATES THE VISIBILITY OF THE CONSTRUCTION SIDE MEMBERS FACING OUTWARD FROM THE LOT.

THE MAJORITY OF FENCING FACING THE DRIVEWAY AND THE GATE DESIGN ARE BOTH APPROVED, PROVIDED THAT THE ARCHWAY OVER THE GATE IS REMOVED FROM THE TOP OF THE GATE ON THAT FENCING.

THEN ALL FENCING MUST MEET CODE AND PASS FINAL INSPECTION.

IN THAT REGARD FOR THE FENCING, IF THE INTERIOR FENCE IS DEEMED TO BE YOUR SECURE POOL BARRIER,

[03:50:02]

WE WOULD NEED TO GET AN INSPECTION FOR THAT INTERIOR FENCING TO COMPLY WITH CODE AND PASS FINAL INSPECTION.

IF THAT IS NOT DEEMED AS THE SECURE POOL BARRIER, THEN THE PERIMETER FENCING AROUND THE PROPERTY WOULD BE THE FENCE THAT

>> YEAH.

INSPECTION AND APPROVAL OF THE INTERIOR BARRIER FOR OUR POOL FENCING ALREADY.

>> WHAT WE WOULD DO IS REQUEST AN INSPECTION REPORT FROM A THIRD-PARTY QUALIFIED INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE INSPECTOR AND WE WOULD KEEP THAT IN OUR RECORDS TO IDENTIFY THAT AS THE CODE-CERTIFIED POOL BARRIER FENCE.

>> OKAY. WITH RESPECT TO THE LITTLE DEAL ABOVE THE GATE ON THE GATE ENTRYWAY FROM THE DRIVEWAY, I DON'T KNOW, IS ANYBODY PROTESTING THAT OR SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? THAT'S JUST A DO-HICKEY ABOVE THE GATE.

IT'S NOT DOING ANYTHING.

I DON'T KNOW WHY I'D NEED TO REMOVE THAT.

>> IT PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPROVED AT THE RDRC LEVEL AS SUBMITTED THERE.

>> OKAY. WELL, HOLD ON REAL QUICK.

I THINK MY WIFE IS GETTING SOME PAPERWORK, BUT I THINK WE MAY HAVE HAD SOMETHING THAT APPROVES THAT GATE.

>> HI, THIS IS REBECCA.

I CAN'T FIND IT RIGHT NOW.

I DIDN'T THINK THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE WERE ADDRESSING, BUT I BELIEVE WE GOT A LETTER IN THE MAIL SAYING THAT THE PERGOLA, IT WAS CALLED A PERGOLA, I BELIEVE, WHICH I TOOK TO BE THE ARCHWAY OVER THE GATE, THAT IT HAD BEEN APPROVED.

>> DO YOU WANT TO IDENTIFY THAT IF THE STAFF AND THE OWNER CAN VERIFY APPROVAL OF THE ARBOR, PERHAPS BY THE RDRC,

>> YES.

>> PERFECT. OKAY.

>> WE'RE GOOD

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE A SECOND.

ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> ARTHUR, AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> AYE.

>> ANY OPPOSE? ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU.

>> WHAT'S NEXT, MA'AM?

>> I WANT TO SAY THAT'S IT, BUT I JUST WANT TO CHECK REAL QUICK AND MAKE SURE. YEAH.

>> I THOUGHT WE HAD A HOME BUSINESS TONIGHT, DIDN'T WE?

>> IT WAS WITHDRAWN FROM THE AGENDA.

>> OKAY.

>> THE OWNER WITHDREW.

>> ALL RIGHT.

>> THAT IS ALL OF THE ITEMS TO BE REVIEWED.

WE ARE NOW INTO PUBLIC COMMENTS, MEMBER COMMENTS, AND STAFF REPORT.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS, CORRECT? ALL RIGHT. SO ITEM NUMBER 9, NO MORE COMMENTS?

[Items IX & XI]

ROBERT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING?

>> NO, NONE.

>> ARTHUR?

>> YEAH, JUST FORTUNATE TO BE HERE.

WE'VE GOT A GREAT STAFF AND COMMITTEE, HOW WE REALLY DESIGN AND RESOLVE ISSUES ON BEHALF OF THE WOODLANDS, SO THANKS FOR EVERYBODY'S GREAT EFFORTS.

>> THANK YOU. JOHN ANDERSON?

>> YES, SIR.

>> BOB ADAMS.

>> IT JUST STRIKES ME WHEN AN APPLICANT SAYS, IS THERE ANY WAY THAT I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THIS? I UNDERSTAND THEY NEED TO BE ASKING QUESTIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

I STILL STAND THAT THE WOODLANDS PAPER OR SOMETHING TO THAT IT BASICALLY CAN HAVE SOMETHING VERY SIMPLE IN THERE.

EVEN ASKING THE QUESTION; DID YOU KNOW ANY PERMANENT IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXTERIOR THAT NEED TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE WOODLANDS TOWNSHIP? LEAVE IT AT THAT WITH A PHONE NUMBER OR SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

>> WELL, I THINK OUT IN THE WOODLANDS MAGAZINE ALL THE TIME, AND THERE'S ALWAYS COMMENTS THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING, CALL.

>> VERY GOOD. NOTHING BEYOND THAT. THANK YOU.

>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT THOUGH. ANYTHING ELSE, BOB?

>> NO, SIR. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. MARY?

>> I'LL JUST SAY EVERY MEETING IS A REAL EXPERIENCE.

[03:55:02]

THEY ALL VARY SO MUCH.

IT'S A PLEASURE TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS.

I'M LEARNING A WHOLE LOT.

>> EXCELLENT, MARY. THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. LET ME LOOK INTO THAT.

YOU CERTAINLY SHOULD BE ON THERE.

WE'LL GET THAT CORRECTED RIGHT AWAY.

>> OKAY.

>> YEAH. THIS WAS A TRIAL PERIOD OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT MARY.

>> OKAY. I'M STILL ON PROBATION?

>> YEAH. STILL ON PROBATION, MARY.

>> JOHN ANTHONY?

>> GUYS, I CAN'T WAIT TILL WE ALL MEET AGAIN.

I MISS ALL OF YOU, SO HANG IN THERE.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION.

MY HUSBAND AND I WERE TALKING AND HE'S AN ENGINEER.

WHAT IS THE STANCE ON SOLAR IN THE WOODLANDS? I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY, BUT I'VE BEEN GETTING A LOT OF PHONE CALLS.

DO WE HAVE ANY SOLAR?

>> THAT IS A REALLY GOOD QUESTION.

WE DON'T HAVE IT ON THE AGENDA, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT I'D BE HAPPY TO SPEAK WITH YOU OUTSIDE OF THE MEETING.

WE DO HAVE SOME STANDARDS IN REGARDS TO SOLAR PANELS AND SOLAR COLLECTORS.

IT IS SOMETHING REPRESENTED IN OUR DEVELOPMENT PHILOSOPHY THAT'S ENCOURAGED.

BUT I CAN DISCUSS THEM WITH YOU OUTSIDE OF THE MEETING IF YOU'D LIKE.

>> OH, WE WERE JUST QUESTIONING IT BECAUSE WE GET CALLS ON IT.

WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN INSTALLING ANY OR GETTING ANY, BUT WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF PHONE CALLS ABOUT IT.

>> KIM, A SUGGESTION, MAYBE THE CHAIR WILL CONSIDER TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING AS JUST A RECAP ON SOLAR BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO BE COMING UP ALL OVER THE PLACE IN LIGHT OF ENERGY COSTS AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH COVID-19.

>> YEAH, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.

KIM, CAN WE DO THAT?

>> ABSOLUTELY. I HAVE PUT THE REQUEST ON HERE TO REMIND MYSELF TO GET IT READY FOR THE NEXT MEETING.

>> OKAY. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING.

AGAIN, I'M SORRY THESE MEETINGS LAST SO LONG LATELY. I DON'T KNOW.

MAYBE IT'S HARDER BECAUSE WE'RE ON REMOTE LIKE THIS, WE'RE ALL NOT IN THE SAME ROOM TOGETHER.

WE CAN'T I KEEP TRYING TO MAKE THEM MOVE FASTER.

I'LL KEEP WORKING ON THAT. STAFF, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING?

>> NO. NO, SIR. THANKS FOR HAVING US.

>> WE'RE THRILLED TO HAVE YOU GUYS. HENNIE, YOU HAVE ANYTHING?

>> I JUST WANT TO THANK THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR SUPPORT AND FOR EVERYTHING THEY DO FOR US.

I THINK WE HAVE A GREAT WORKING RELATIONSHIP AND I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS FOR WHAT YOU DO. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. I JUST WANT TO KNOW, HOW COME I DON'T GET A KNOCK ON MY DOOR WHEN MY PIZZA IS SUPPOSED TO BE DELIVERED OR SOMETHING, OR UBER EATS?

>> YESTERDAY, THEY SAID THEY COULDN'T MAKE IT TILL FRIDAY, SO I SAID, NO THAT'S ALL RIGHT.

>> OH, OKAY.

>>

>> IF I COULD, THIS COMMENT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD AT ONE OF THE FIRST MEETINGS AND IT WAS WHEN ONE OF OUR STAFF HAD JUST RETURNED BACK AND HE HEARD THAT COMMENT AND HE SAID FOR A SPLIT SECOND, HE REALLY THOUGHT HE HAD MESSED UP AND THOUGHT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO DELIVER SO I GOT A KICK OUT OF THAT.

>> WELL, THE ONLY THING THAT'S GOING TO BOTHER ME WHEN WE ALL GET BACK TOGETHER AGAIN AND MONEY IS GOING TO BE SO TIGHT, WE'RE NEVER GOING TO GET THOSE LOBSTER SANDWICHES THAT HENNIE HAS ALWAYS PROMISED US.

>>

>> OKAY. CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN?

>> SO MOVED.

>>

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY. BE SAFE.

>> TAKE CARE. BE WELL.

>> HAPPY 4TH OF JULY.

>> YEAH, HAPPY 4TH.

>> HAPPY 4TH OF JULY. TAKE CARE. BYE.

>> EVERYONE TAKE CARE.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.