[00:00:01]
BUT I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS APRIL 25TH,[CALL TO ORDER]
2022 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEETING TO ORDER.IF EVERYONE WOULD RISE, WE WILL HAVE AN IMPLICATION AND THEN WE WILL GRADUALLY DO FLAGS.
MOST GRACIOUS AND LOVING HEAVENLY FATHER.
WE ARE CERTAINLY THANKFUL FOR THE BLESSING SUSTAINED IS HELD.
WE'RE THANKFUL FOR THE SUNSHINE AND THE BRIGHT SMILES ON PEOPLE'S FACES.
WE'RE HERE TONIGHT LORD TO DO THE WORK OF THE COUNTY, TO MAKE FAIR JUDGMENTS AND WE JUST PRAY DOWN YOUR PIECE ON ALL OF US TONIGHT, LORD.
WE'RE PEOPLE OF OPINIONS, AND WE JUST PRAY THAT YOU KEEP US PEACEFUL.
GIVE US THE WISDOM TO MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICES AND GUIDE US AND DIRECT US.
THESE THINGS WE PRAY IN THE NAME OF JESUS AMEN.
>> I'M A CALL ROLL, MS. MICHAEL.
>> MRS. WOODWARD CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR ADDRESS OF WHERE YOU ARE TONIGHT, PLEASE?
>> 9611 HIDDEN HILLS DRIVE PRINCE GEORGE, VIRGINIA.
>> EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT ON OUR AGENDA, WE HAVE A NEW BCA MEMBER AND I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE HIM.
HIS NAME IS JOSH NORRIS, AND I REALLY HAVE JUST MET HIM.
DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO SHARE ABOUT YOURSELF? HOW LONG HAVE YOU LIVED IN THE COUNTY?
>> LIVED IN DISPUTANTA FOR I GUESS GOING ON THREE YEARS NOW FROM WAVERLEY.
>> YOU DIDN'T YOU DIDN'T DRIFT FAR. [LAUGHTER].
>> [LAUGHTER] HAVE YOU BEEN ACTIVE IN ANY OTHER PRINCE GEORGE COMMITTEE'S ORGANIZATIONS?
>> NOT REALLY, I'M JUST GETTING STARTED.
>> MY PERSONAL OPINION IS WE NEED SOME YOUNG BLOOD OCCASIONALLY.
SO WELCOME, WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU.
NOW, WE NEED TO ADOPT THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT AND WE'RE GOING TO STRIKE A1,
[ADOPTION OF AGENDA]
WHICH IS THE ELECTION OF VICE CHAIR.DO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE AGENDA.
>> WITH A MOTION MADE AND SECONDED, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION?
>> YES. DEAR CALL WE WANT SOME COFFEE TOO.
[ORDER OF BUSINESS]
>> THEN NEXT [LAUGHTER] WE NEED TO DO, IS ADOPT THE MEETING MINUTES FROM OUR JANUARY 24TH MEETING.
DID EVERYONE HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW THEM.
>> MADAM CHAIR, I RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES ON THE JANUARY 24TH, 2022 MEETING AS PRESENTED.
>> DO I HEAR A SECOND TO THAT MOTION?
>> MOVING RIGHT ALONG QUICKLY, THE 2021 ANNUAL REPORT IS INCLUDED.
ALWAYS AM AMAZED AT HOW WELL OUR STAFF CAN PUT TOGETHER SOME OF THESE DOCUMENTS.
IN REVIEWING THAT, I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT DIDN'T APPEAR CORRECT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS TO THE ANNUAL REPORT? IT'S STILL IN DRAFT FORM.
DO I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE 2021 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ANNUAL REPORT.
>> SECOND. WE'RE NOT GOING TO ADOPT IT.
[00:05:07]
I NEED A SECOND [LAUGHTER] ON THE 2021 ANNUAL REPORT.>> MR. NORRIS. MS. MCALLISTER.
>> CAN YOU JUST HAVE TO BEAR WITH ME, I'M A LITTLE RUSTY AT ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER.
I THINK AT THIS POINT, JULIE WALTON IS GOING TO DO A RESOLUTION FOR OUR RESIGNING MEMBER.
>> GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
THIS EVENING, IN YOUR PACKET BEHIND TAB 4 IS A RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR MRS. IRMA BROWN, LONG TIME MEMBER OF THIS BOARD.
SHE UNFORTUNATELY HAS DECIDED THAT DUE TO SOME PERSONAL HEALTH ISSUES, THAT IT IS BEST THAT SHE RESIGNED FROM THIS BOARD.
BUT WE DO WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RECOGNIZE HER FOR HER SERVICE.
THEN PASSING THIS RESOLUTION, STAFF WILL THEN MOUNT THIS ON A PLAQUE AND PRESENT IT TO HER AT A LATER DATE.
BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE OR MAKE ANY EDITS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE NOTICED.
BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS RECOGNITION OF MRS. BROWN.
>> DO YOU WANT TO READ THROUGH IT OR DO YOU WANT TO JUST GO AHEAD AND HAVE IT APPROVED WITHOUT READING?
>> TYPICALLY, WE HAVE IT APPROVED AND THEN THAT PRESENTATION, IF I CAN GET MS. BROWN AND HER FAMILY HERE, WE WOULD READ IT AT A LATER MEETING.
>> OKAY. I'VE HAD A CHANCE TO READ IT.
DOES ANYONE SEE ANY CORRECTIONS OR ANYTHING THAT THEY DON'T SEE IT AS APPROPRIATE, AND IF NOT, COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE?
WE APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE RUNNING A RACE, WE'RE GOING QUICKLY.
THE NEXT THING WOULD BE CITIZENS COMMENT PERIOD.
THE CITIZENS COMMENT PERIOD IS OPEN TO ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSIONERS ON ANY TOPIC THAT ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING.
IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK, PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND THERE WILL BE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
IT SEEMS THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS TONIGHT, SO WE'LL CLOSE THAT.
NOW WE'RE TO NEW BUSINESS AND I THINK TIM IS GOING TO GUIDE US THROUGH THIS A LITTLE BIT,
[NEW BUSINESS - PUBIC HEARING]
BUT WE DO NEED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SO I CAN OPEN THAT NOW.>> THAT'S RIGHT AFTER THE INTRODUCTION.
>> GOOD EVENING MADAM CHAIR MCALLISTER AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
MY NAME IS TIM GRAVES, I'M PLANNER IN THE PLANNING OFFICE AND AS MRS. MCALLISTER MENTIONED, I'LL BE INTRODUCING THIS CASE, THIS REQUEST OF CALVIN CARABIN, PURSUANT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION THERE TO PERMIT A PRIVATE ANIMAL BOARDING PLACE AND THEN R-A, RESIDENTIAL-AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT.
PRIVATE ANIMAL BOARDING PLACE MEANS A PLACE WHERE FOUR OR MORE DOGS MORE THAN FOUR MONTHS OLD ARE KEPT FOR PRIVATE USE.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO KEEP 13 DOGS ON THE PROPERTY.
A SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS REQUIRED FOR THE USE, IF THE DOGS ARE KEPT ON A RESIDENTIAL USE PARCEL THAT HAS LESS THAN ONE ACRE IN SIZE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS TAX MAP
[00:10:03]
460,0A00-009-0 AND LOCATED AT 11619 EAST QUAKER ROAD, IS APPROXIMATELY 0.94 ACRES IN SIZE AND IS ZONED R-A.THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INDICATES THE PROPERTY IS SUITABLE FOR AGRICULTURAL USES.
ON THIS SLIDE, YOU CAN SEE AN AREA VIEW OR A LOCATION MAP OF THE PROPERTY.
IT'S RECTANGULAR SHAPED PARCEL AND THERE ARE BUILDING LOCATIONS VISIBLE ON THIS MAP.
YOU CAN SEE IT IN RELATION TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
IT'S LOCATED ON THE EAST QUAKER ROAD.
ON THIS SLIDE YOU CAN SEE AN AERIAL VIEW OF THAT PROPERTY OUTLINED IN BLUE.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE LOCATION OF THE KENNELS, WHICH I'LL GET INTO IN A MINUTE, BUT THEY'RE IDENTIFIED IN RED OUTLINE THERE.
THEN THERE'S A MEASUREMENT TO ONE OF THE ADJACENT HOUSES, AND THIS ONE IS APPROXIMATELY 270 FEET AWAY FROM THE KENNELS.
JUST FOR A REFERENCE ON DISTANCES HERE.
YOU CAN SEE THE TWO ADJACENT PROPERTIES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ARE A LITTLE CLOSER THAN THAT.
SOME BACKGROUND ON THIS REQUEST, MR. CARABIN OBTAINED DOG LICENSES FOR NINE DOGS FROM THE TREASURER'S OFFICE IN 2020.
ACTUALLY, THAT SHOULD READ 2019.
IN 2019, HE OBTAINED A DOG LICENSES FOR NINE DOGS, AND THEN IN 2020 OBTAINED DOG LICENSES FOR 14 DOGS FROM THE TREASURER'S OFFICE.
DOG LICENSES ARE OF COURSE, OBTAINED THROUGH THE TREASURER'S OFFICE SO PLANNING STAFF WAS NOT AWARE OF THIS AT THE TIME.
ALSO IN 2020, STAFF IN THE PLANNING OFFICE RECEIVED A COMPLAINT FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER GARY BROKMEIER, LOCATED AT 11525 EAST QUAKER ROAD, ABOUT THE NUMBER OF DOGS ON HIS PROPERTY AND THE RESULTING NOISE AND ODOR THAT HE EXPERIENCED THERE.
ZONING STAFF DISCOVERED THE NUMBER OF DOGS ON THE PROPERTY WAS IN VIOLATION OF THE SECTION 6-17 OF THE COUNTY CODE, WHICH YOU CAN READ THERE, WHICH I ALSO READ PARTIALLY DURING THE INTRODUCTION HERE.
THE OTHER KEY PART OF THIS WORDING IS THAT NO MORE THAN THREE DOGS ARE PERMITTED ON LESS THAN ONE ACRE UNLESS THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS APPROVES A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, AND SO THAT'S WHAT GIVES RISE TO THIS REQUEST.
THE ZONING STAFF FINDING OUT ABOUT THIS COMPLAINT REPORTED THE VIOLATION OF THAT CODE SECTION TO ANIMAL SERVICES, WHICH IS THE RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT FOR THAT SECTION OF THE CODE AND THE ANIMAL SERVICES INVESTIGATED IT AND THEN FOUND THAT THE PROPERTY WAS LESS THAN ONE ACRE AND TOOK MR. CARABIN TO COURT OVER THE VIOLATION.
SOME TIME PASSED, MR. CARABIN WINS IN COURT.
I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO DETAILS OF THAT.
IT BRINGS US TO FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR WHEN MR. CARABIN APPLIED FOR THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO SEE IF HE CAN GET THIS USE PERMITTED ON THE PROPERTY AS IS ALLOWED FOR IN THE CODE.
[NOISE] THEY'RE GETTING THEIR GOALS ARE TO KEEP 13 DOGS ON THE 0.94 ACRE PROPERTY FOR PERSONAL USE.
IT'S NOT A BUSINESS. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST IS THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR PRIVATE ANIMAL BOARDING PLACE, WHICH IS AN ORDINANCE TERM FOR A PLACE WHERE FOUR OR MORE DOGS MORE THAN FOUR MONTHS OLD ARE KEPT FOR PRIVATE USE.
SOME EXTRA DETAILS ABOUT THIS, MR. CARABIN HAS RENTED THE PROPERTY SINCE DECEMBER 2018.
HE HAS PERMISSION FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER.
THIRTEEN DOGS IS INCLUSIVE OF ALL THE DOGS IN THE PROPERTY, WHICH INCLUDES THREE IN THE HOUSE AND 10 OUTSIDE IN THE KENNELS.
THE KENNELS ARE LOCATED TO THE REAR OF THE HOUSE ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE.
THE KENNELS CONSIST OF FENCED PENS WITH BARRELS OR SMALL DOG HOUSES FOR SHELTER AND WE'LL LOOK AT A COUPLE OF PHOTOS HERE IN A MOMENT.
THE DOGS ARE FED AND WATERED DAILY, ACCORDING TO MR. CARABIN, WASTE IS CLEANED MULTIPLE TIMES PER WEEK AND DISPOSED OF IN ROADSIDE AND TRASH BIN.
THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A LIST OF DOGS WITH THE NAME, AGE, AND BREED FOR EACH ONE.
THE COUNTY ITSELF HAS THAT ON RECORD IF NEEDED FOR REFERENCE.
ON THIS PHOTO, YOU CAN SEE JUST A VIEW WITH ALL OF THE KENNELS IN THE PHOTO.
THEY'RE STACKED ONE BEHIND THE NEXT.
[00:15:03]
YOU CAN SEE THERE'S SOME BARRELS AND ARE DOG HOUSES IN THE DIFFERENT PENS FOR SHELTER FOR THE DOGS.THEY'RE BEHIND A CHAIN LINK FENCE.
THIS IS JUST A CLOSE-UP VIEW OF ONE OF A COUPLE OF THEM.
AGAIN, THERE'S A SPLIT BY A DIVIDER THERE, TWO DOGS IN EACH OF THOSE.
THAT'S FROM MY VISIT TO THE PROPERTY ABOUT A MONTH AGO.
JUST COMMENTS FROM PLANNING AND ZONING, I'M CONDENSING THESE DOWN.
THERE'S OF COURSE, A FULL STAFF REPORT THAT HAS BEEN SENT TO ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS AND THE APPLICANT.
BUT PLANNING AND ZONING STAFFS MAIN COMMENTS ARE THAT THEY ADJACENT USES AROUND THIS PROPERTY.
THEY'RE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS TO THE WEST, NORTH AND EAST, AND THEN VACANT LAND ACROSS THE STREET.
THE EXPECTED IMPACTS ARE THOSE THAT THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT WERE ABOUT, WHICH IS POTENTIAL FOR ODOR AND NOISE FROM DOGS.
OPPORTUNITIES TO MITIGATE THOSE IMPACTS COULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH CONDITIONS ON STAFF AS RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS WHICH WE'LL GET TO IN A MINUTE.
JUST A QUICK NOTES, WE DID OBSERVE 10 DOGS OUTSIDE AND DOGS DID NOT BARK DURING THE VISIT AND ODOR WAS ONLY NOTICEABLE WITHIN ABOUT 10 FEET OF THE KENNELS DURING THE VISIT.
STAFF HAS OF COURSE, RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS TO CONSIDER FOR THIS.
JUST SOME NOTES FROM ANIMAL SERVICES.
THEY GAVE THEM MORE DETAILED ACCOUNT IN THE STAFF REPORT, BUT THEY SUMMARIZED THE PROGRESS THROUGH THE COURT.
IT'S STILL AN ACTIVE CASE, BUT IT'S WAITING ON THE OUTCOME OF THIS REQUEST THAT IS MAKING AT THIS TIME.
THE ANIMAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT SAID THAT THEIR DOGS WERE IN GOOD HEALTH AND THE KENNELS WERE CLEANED DURING THEIR VISITS TO THE PROPERTY.
THEY SAID THAT THEY DID NOT DETECT ODOR FROM THE COMPLAINANTS HOUSE, BUT DID FROM THEIR PROPERTY LINE NEAREST TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THEY SAID THEY DID NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF DENIAL.
THEY'RE GOING TO REMAIN NEUTRAL IN THIS REQUEST.
THAT THEY RECOMMENDED CONSIDERING CONDITIONS RELATED TO MAINTAINING CLEANLINESS, THE KENNELS, AND THE HEALTH OF THE ANIMALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL CODES.
OF COURSE, FOR THIS REQUEST, STAFF IS REQUIRED TO SEND NOTICE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND WE DID THAT BY MAIL AND POSTED LEGAL AD IN THE NEWSPAPER ON TWO SUCCESSIVE WEEKS AND POSTED A SIGN ON THE PROPERTY AS WELL.
WE DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER IN OPPOSITION FROM MR. BROKMEIER, WHO AGAIN LIVES TO THE NORTH, APPROXIMATELY 300 FEET, APPROXIMATELY FROM THE KENNELS.
IT WAS 270 FEET AND THE IMAGE SO JUST APPROXIMATELY, AND THERE WERE TWO LETTERS THAT WE RECEIVED IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST AND THOSE ARE PRINTED IN OUR IN FRONT OF YOU.
EVERYBODY'S RECEIVED THOSE PRIOR TO STARTING TO TALK ABOUT THIS.
THOSE ARE FROM A NEIGHBOR, I THINK AS A TENANT JOEL RYDEL AND KIDS, AT HOUSE NEXT DOOR, THE HOUSES APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET FROM KENNELS AND ANOTHER LETTER FROM STEVE AND JANE HORNER AND THAT HOUSES APPROXIMATELY 510 FEET FROM THE KENNELS.
THIS IS MEASURED USING JUST AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY.
FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION WHILE EVALUATING THIS REQUEST, WHETHER TO APPROVE IT AND WHAT CONDITIONS ARE APPROPRIATE, STAFF RECOMMENDS CONSIDERING THE DEFINITION OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION, WHICH IN THE ORDINANCE IS IF CONTROLLED AS TO THE NUMBER, AREA, LOCATION, OR RELATION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE USE WOULD PERMIT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE, MORALS, ORDER, COMFORT, CONVENIENCE, APPEARANCE, PROSPERITY, OR GENERAL WELFARE.
THAT'S THE DEFINITION OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION WHICH IS THE GENERAL WAY THAT PEOPLE CAN REQUEST TO DO THINGS THAT ARE NOT ALREADY ALLOWED BY RIGHT ON THEIR PROPERTY.
YOU COULD ALSO EVALUATE THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PROPOSED LAND USE IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY.
THAT'S THE IDEA BEHIND A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.
IS IT NOT NECESSARILY APPROPRIATE UNLESS CONTROLLED EVERYWHERE.
[00:20:03]
SOMETHING TO CONSIDER AND YOU COULD EVALUATE IF IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO CHANGE ANY OF THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OR ADD CONDITIONS IF YOU WISH TO FURTHER REDUCE THE IMPACTS ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR THE POTENTIAL FOR IMPACT.STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS HERE ARE IF THE BZA FINDS IT APPROPRIATE TO APPROVE THE REQUEST, STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS THAT SEEK TO REDUCE THE IMPACTS ON ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS AND REDUCE THE NUMBER OF DOGS ON THE PROPERTY OVER TIME TOWARD THE REQUIRED MAXIMUM, WHICH IS THREE DOGS ON THIS SIZE OF A PROPERTY.
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OR CHANGES TO THE CONDITIONS COULD BE CONSIDERED BY THE BZA BECAUSE THAT'LL ADJUST THE LAND USE.
AS YOU CHANGE THOSE CONDITIONS ADJUST THE INTENSITY OR THE OUTWARD APPEARANCE OR EFFECTIVE THE LAND USE.
STAFF IS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND OF COURSE, THIS WHOLE STAFF REPORT IS ON OUR TAB 5 AND THERE'S A DRAFT RESOLUTION ON PAGE 2 OF THE STAFF REPORT AND SAMPLE MOTIONS ON PAGE 4.
THOSE ARE SAMPLE FOR APPROVING THE REQUEST, AS IS WITH THOSE CONDITIONS THAT STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED, OR IF YOU WISH TO CHANGE THE CONDITIONS, YOU COULD APPROVE WITH MODIFICATIONS AND SPECIFY THOSE CHANGES.
IF YOU'RE DENIED, OF COURSE, THERE'S A PROMOTION THERE AND ALSO IF YOU NEEDED MORE TIME OR THE APP CAN NEED MORE TIME TO DO SOMETHING, YOU CAN POSTPONE TO THE NEXT BOARD MEETING DATE TO ALLOW TIME FOR SOMETHING SPECIFIC.
THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS AS STAFF IS PROVIDED HERE.
THE FIRST ONE IS CLARIFYING THAT IT'S FOR MR. CARABIN AND FOR THE PRIVATE ANIMAL BOARDING PLACE USE, AND FOR AND NO MORE THAN 13 DOGS.
ALL INCLUSIVE AND JUST SPECIFIES THE PROPERTY AND IT'S NOT TRANSFERABLE TO FUTURE OWNERS OR TENANTS, DOES NOT RUN AT THE LAND IF THE OWNERSHIP CHANGES, ETC.
THE SECOND RECOMMENDED CONDITION IS PERTAINED TO THE NUMBER OF DOGS ON THE PROPERTY OVER TIME.
WE'VE RECOMMENDED JUST AGAIN FOR CONSIDERATION THAT THEY BE REDUCED WITH THE PASSING OF EACH DOG UNTIL THERE'S NO MORE THAN THREE DOGS ON THE PROPERTY, UNLESS THEY ARE OTHERWISE PERMITTED ON THAT PROPERTY.
NUMBER 3, IN EFFORT TO REDUCE INCIDENCES OF DOGS BARKING AT PASSING WILDLIFE AND REDUCE IMPACTS FROM OVERREACHING ADJACENT PROPERTIES THAT KENNELS SHALL BE RELOCATED SO THAT THEY'RE AS CLOSE TO AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE TO THE REAR OF THE APPLICANTS HOUSE AND BEHIND A PRIVACY FENCE THAT AFFECTIVELY SCREENS THE DOGS FROM EYESIGHT ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
THAT'S THE SAMPLE CONDITION TO ATTEMPT TO MOVE THE DOGS AS CLOSE AS YOU REALISTICALLY CAN, AWAY FROM NEIGHBORS AND TO THE OWNER, BY PUTTING THEM BEHIND THE PRIVACY FENCE THAT INTENT IS THAT THE DOGS WOULD BE LESS LIKELY TO SEE PASSING WILDLIFE.
THAT'S NOT NECESSARY GOING TO COVER THE HEARING OR SMELLING THEM.
ANOTHER CONDITION IS ALL DOGS SHALL BE KEPT UNDER APPROPRIATE SUPERVISION WITHIN THE KENNELS OR DWELLING OR A FENCED AREA OR LEASHED, SO THEY'RE UNDER SUPERVISION.
ARE NOT ROAMING FREE, WHICH WE'VE RECEIVED NO REPORT IN THE ROAMING FREE, BUT THAT'S JUST A PRECAUTIONARY CONDITION.
ALL AREAS ASSOCIATED WITH THE KEEPING OF DOGS SHOULD BE CLEANED AND MADE FREE OF WASTE ON A DAILY BASIS AND THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL DISPOSE OF THE WASTE IN A PROPER MANNER WHICH MINIMIZES THE ODOR TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.
THIS IS THE FINAL CONDITION ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION IS THAT THIS MAY BE REVOKED BY THE COUNTY FOR FAILURE OF THE APPLICANT TO COMPLY WITH ANY OF THE ABOVE CONDITIONS OR ANY OTHER PROVISION THAT APPLIES TO THE KEEPING OF ANIMALS THAT MIGHT BE CONTAINED WITHIN THE PROVISION OF FEDERAL STATE, OR LOCAL REGULATIONS.
WHICH IN THE PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY, THAT ANYTHING PERTAINING TO CONTROL OF ANIMALS AND HEALTH AND THINGS LIKE THAT WOULD BE COVERED BY THE ANIMAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, FOR EXAMPLE.
THOSE ARE THE CONDITIONS THE STAFF CAME UP WITH AND THAT CONCLUDES THE INFORMATION I HAD FOR YOU TONIGHT. THE APPLICANT.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AFTER ME, YOU COULD CALL THEM FORWARD AND OF COURSE, YOU'LL HAVE THE TIME DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING AS WELL.
[00:25:03]
>> JAY GATSBY, BEFORE YOU GO DOWN PULL UP A MAP THAT SHOWED IN MARK, WHAT [NOISE] ARE THE AREAS OF THE, IN ONE MINUTE COMPLAINING AND THE OTHER TWO. WHICH ONE IS WHICH?
>>THE COMPLAINANT IS THE ONE THAT SAYS TOTAL 270 FEET ON THAT HOUSE RIGHT THERE.
>> BUT HE'S BEHIND HIM. THE REQUEST PROPERTY IS THE 11619.
I UNDERSTAND CANDLES IN THE BACKYARD.
>> BUT NEAR THE OTHER TWO I RECOMMENDED THAT YOU CAN FOLLOW IT [INAUDIBLE] THEIR ADDRESSES.
>> YOU'VE GOT 11609, WHICH YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE APPLICANT'S HOUSE, AND 11511, WHICH I BELIEVE YOU CAN SEE THAT IN THE VERY TIP TOP.
YOU CAN SEE A PIECE OF IT OR ONE OF THEIR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN THE TOP MIDDLE OF THE IMAGE, THERE ON THE LARGER PROPERTY THERE.
THAT'S THE OTHER PERSON THAT SENT THE LETTER.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY LETTER FROM THE PERSON ON THE RIGHT, FOR EXAMPLE.
>> I HAVE A PROTOCOL QUESTION.
DO WE NEED TO DISCUSS ANY AMENDMENTS OR CHANGES THAT WE MIGHT RECOMMEND BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING OR AFTER?
>> YOU CAN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ANYTHING THAT YOU HEAR THAT WAY.
>> IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE OPEN PUBLIC HEARING?
>> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE RIGHT NOW.
>> WELL, WHEN WE OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, YES [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER].
WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST ANYONE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO SPEAK OR I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THERE'S ANY NEIGHBORS HERE OR NOT, BUT NOW IT'S A CHANCE.
>> MY NAME IS GARY BROUGHT MEYER AND I'M THE ONE AT 11525 WHICH IS NORTH OF THE PROPERTY.
IN THE SUMMERTIME WHEN IT'S HOT AND IT'S HUMID THE ODORS FROM THE KENNELS, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHICH DIRECTION FROM THE SOUTH THE BREEZE BLOWS IT COMES TO ME.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP THAT IS BEING SHOWN, MY PROPERTY WRAPS AROUND THAT RECTANGLE.
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHICH WAY THE WIND BLOWS AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THE KENNELS ARE LOCATED DIRECTLY ON THE EAST PROPERTY LINE.
THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN CONTAIN THE ODOR TO THE PROPERTY IF THE KENNELS ARE ON THE PROPERTY LINE, IT'S JUST NOT DOABLE.
YOU HAVE TEN DOGS THAT CREATE ODOR ALL DAY LONG, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ODOR IN A NEIGHBORHOOD.
THAT'S WITH TEN DOGS OUTSIDE, THE THREE DOGS INSIDE AND IT IS NOT MENTIONED, YOU HAVE MY STATEMENT WITH THE THREE VIOLATIONS.
THE THREE DOGS THAT LIVE IN THE HOUSE ARE ALLOWED TO RUN FREE WHEN THEY COME OUT TO EXERCISE AND USE THE BATHROOM.
NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN, THEY'RE NOT USING THE BATHROOM ON THEIR PROPERTY.
THEY USE 11621 AND THEY COME TO MY PROPERTY QUITE FREQUENTLY AND DO THE BUSINESS ON MY PROPERTY, ON MY LAWN.
I HAVE NEVER SEEN CLEAN UP AFTER THE DOGS AT 621, NOR HAS HE COME OVER TO MY HOUSE TO CLEAN UP ONCE THE DOGS AFTER THEY USE MY PROPERTY.
YOU MAY THINK THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN FREQUENTLY, BUT IT'S HAPPENED FOUR TIMES IN THE LAST FOUR WEEKS.
I HAVE PHOTO EVIDENCE IF NECESSARY BECAUSE I HAVE SURVEILLANCE.
I HAVE AT MY HOUSE, SO I HAVE PICTURES OF ALL FOUR ANIMALS ON MY PROPERTY AND IT'S A NUISANCE AND THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL VIOLATION.
THAT WOULD BE FIVE DIFFERENT VIOLATIONS WITH TOO MANY DOGS WITH THE ODOR, THE NOISE THAT THEY CREATE.
ANIMAL CONTROL TOLD ME TO MAKE A LOG AND THIS WAS THE FIRST CHARGE WAS BACK IN JUNE OF 2020.
THEY TOLD ME TO MAKE A LOG OF THE TIMES THAT THERE WERE DISTURBANCES OR ODORS.
[00:30:02]
I DID THAT FOR A SIX-MONTH PERIOD.I DON'T MAKE UP DATES, I HAVE THEM HERE ALL LISTED.
SOMETIMES THEY WAKE ME UP TWO OR THREE TIMES A NIGHT.
THIS MORNING IT WAS 3:55, THEY WOKE ME UP.
I ALSO HAVE IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN AUDIO FROM MY BACK PORCH, WHICH IS ALMOST A 100 YARDS AWAY, WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE AT FOUR O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, WHEN TEN DOGS START WAILING.
PUTTING UP A FENCE WOULD BE A GOOD THING, MOVING THE KENNELS UP AGAINST THE BACK OF THEIR HOUSE WOULD BE A GOOD THING, I DON'T THINK IT'LL ELIMINATE THE NOISE.
PUTTING A PRIVACY FENCE, PRIVACY FENCE IS NOT GOOD SOUND REBATEMENT.
IT WOULD PROBABLY CAUSE AN ECHO AND A REVERBERATION.
I'M NOT SURE IT WOULD CURTAIL THE ODOR. THAT'S WHAT I GOT.
>> DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
>> NONE. I HAD ONE, I DON'T HAVE ONE NOW.
[LAUGHTER] BUT SHE NEVER LEFT THE PROPERTY, SHE NEVER BARKED.
>> HOW LONG HAVE YOU LIVED AT THIS RESIDENCE?
>> 26 YEARS, AND ACCORDING TO THE CODE, I WOULD LIKE TO QUOTE IT, 614 SAYS, UNREASONABLY INTERFERED WITH THE PEACEFUL ENJOYMENT OF PROPERTY, THE NOISE AND THE STINK, DEFINITELY INTERFERES WITH PEACE AND SERENITY IN THE COUNTY.
>> THANK YOU, SIR. DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS?
>> IN YOUR STATEMENT YOU SPECIFICALLY REFERENCED THE NOISE VIOLATION CODE, IS THERE ANY RECORD OF THE POLICE ACTUALLY MONITORING THAT?
>> YOU CAN VERIFY WITH THE POLICE.
IF YOU WANT TO BOUNCE MY DATES AGAINST THE POLICE REPORTS.
BECAUSE I DIDN'T CALL EVERY TIME.
ANIMAL CONTROL TOLD ME, ESPECIALLY ON THE ODOR.
WHEN THEY CAME, THEY SAID THAT I HAVE TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE ODORS TO CLEAR BEFORE REPORTING IT AGAIN.
I HAVE A LOG OF HOW MANY TIMES I REPORTED, YOU CAN BUMP IT UP AGAINST THE POLICE LOG AND YOU'LL FIND OUT THAT THEY MATCH.
I DON'T MAKE UP THE DATES, I DON'T MAKE UP THE TIMES THAT THEY WOKE ME UP AT NIGHT.
I SLEEP WITH MY HEAD NEXT TO A CLOCK, SO ALL I GOT TO DO IS LOOK AND SEE WHAT TIME IT WAS THAT THEY WOKE ME UP.
POLICE REPORTS ON BOTH, NORMALLY THE POLICE WILL COME AND THEY'LL DRIVE BY SOMETIMES THEY MIGHT EVEN OPEN A WINDOW OF THE PATROL CAR.
BUT IF THEY DON'T HEAR THEM BARKING FOR TEN MINUTES AND I'VE NEVER SEEN THEM STOP FOR TEN MINUTES, THEN THEY'RE NOT GOING TO HEAR DOGS BARKING.
BUT JUST TO GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, I TOLD YOU THEY WOKE ME UP THIS MORNING, THIS MONTH, THE LONGEST RECORDED TIME I HAVE FOR CONSECUTIVE BARKING WAS SEVEN HOURS, ACTUALLY JUST SHY OF SEVEN HOURS.
THEY STARTED AT 4:55 AND THEY STOP AT 10:51, ALMOST SEVEN HOURS.
IT DIDN'T STOP FOR 48 SECONDS, SEVEN HOURS THEY BARKED CONTINUOUS AND THAT WAS IN THE DAYTIME TOO.
THAT WASN'T JUST ANIMALS RUNNING AROUND AT NIGHT.
>> THE APPLICANT, DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK?
>> I'M HIS WIFE AND I'D LIKE TO SPEAK.
>> COME ON UP AND JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
>> MY NAME IS HANNAH CALVIN, WE LIVE AT 11619 EAST QUAKER ROAD, I LIKE THERE WITH MY HUSBAND CALVIN.
FIRST AND FOREMOST, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TONIGHT.
WE'VE LIVED THERE AT THIS RESIDENCE SINCE DECEMBER OF 2018, LIKE WE'VE ALREADY SAID, WE HAVE 13 DOGS ON THE PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY DOES FALL JUST UNDER AN ACRE AT 0.94 ACRES.
I DO WANT TO PREFACE THAT THESE DOGS, LIKE MR. BROCK MEYER PUT IN HIS LETTER TO YOU ALL ABOUT HIS OPPOSITION OF THIS, THAT THEY ARE NOT PETS.
I WILL SAY YES, THEY'RE HUNTING DOGS.
THEY HUNT. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY,
[00:35:03]
THESE ANIMALS ARE OUR PETS.THEY ARE LOVED, THEY ARE WELL TAKEN CARE OF, WELL-MAINTAINED AND THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY MR. BROCK, HE HAS HARASSED AND INTIMIDATED US FOR ALMOST FOUR YEARS NOW.
HE STANDS ON OUR PROPERTY LINE AND STARES OVER ONTO OUR PROPERTY.
HE HAS PLAYED LOUD WARNS FROM HIS GARAGE OUTSIDE ENCLOSURE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS TO MAKE THE DOGS BARK.
THE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE IS THAT WE LIVE HERE, WE DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO ELIMINATE THE SMELL.
IN THE SUMMERTIME, WE TAKE EXTRA PRECAUTIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SMELL DOES NOT LEAVE THE PROPERTY.
SUCH AS WE PUT FRESH ROCK DUST DOWN MULTIPLE TIMES, WE'VE DONE THINGS WITH LIME, THEY GET FLEA AND TICK PREVENTION, ETC.
BUT TO HAVE SOMEBODY COME AND COMPLAIN ABOUT THE BARKING, THE INCESSANT BARKING THAT SUPPOSEDLY LAST SEVEN HOURS, THERE'S NEVER A TIME WHERE SOMEBODY IS NOT HOME FOR MORE THAN A FEW HOURS.
I WORK DAY SHIFT AT A CANCER INSTITUTE, MY HUSBAND IS AN ELECTRICIAN THAT WORKS NIGHTS, SO THERE'S ALWAYS SOMEBODY THERE.
IF THERE IS BARFING THAT COMES FROM THE PROPERTY, IT IS IMMEDIATELY SILENCED, IF IT'S NOT BY ME, IT'S BY CALVIN.
WE HAVE BEEN BULLIED BY OUR NEIGHBOR FOR FOUR YEARS NOW.
MIND YOU, WE'VE TRIED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HIM, WE'VE TRIED TO SPEAK WITH HIM.
YOU CAN'T GET DOWN TO HIS PROPERTY TO SPEAK TO HIM, IT'S GATED.
HE HAS IT LOCKED, HE DOESN'T ALLOW ANYBODY ONTO HIS PROPERTY.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM LISTENING TO HIS CONCERNS AND HIS ISSUES AND ELIMINATING THOSE AND SEEING WHAT WE CAN DO AS NEIGHBORS TO WORK TOGETHER AND MAKE IT BETTER FOR EVERYBODY.
BUT THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE BECAUSE HE WON'T ALLOW THAT.
I JUST URGE THAT YOU PLEASE TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THEY ARE DOGS, THEY ARE HUNTING DOGS, BUT WE LOVE THEM.
THEY'RE CARED FOR, WE HAVE THE VET RECORDS TO SHOW IT, WE HAVE EVERYTHING.
I ALSO HAVE RECORDING, AN AUDIO JUST AS MR. BROCK MEYER DOES OF THE NOISES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE AND THE CALLS AND THE HORNS AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT HAVE CAUSED THESE DOGS TO BARK, I HAVE DOCUMENTATION OF IT AS WELL.
I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TONIGHT.
>> THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE HERE TONIGHT THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS APPLICATION?
>> MY NAME IS JAMES HERBERT, I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY OF THESE YOUNG PEOPLE, THEY LEASE FROM ME.
I GAVE THEM PERMISSION TO PUT THE DOGS ON, I HAD NO IDEA THAT THE COUNTY HAD THE ORDINANCE.
THEY FOUND THAT DUG UP SOMETHING ONLY IF IT'S BEEN GOING ON FOR A LONG TIME.
BORN AND RAISED 69 YEARS, I'VE LIVED HERE.
I GOT 35 HUNTING DOGS MYSELF, THEY NEVER BARK THAT MUCH STRAIGHT, I CAN TELL YOU THAT.
AIN'T NO DOG IN THIS COUNTRY GOING TO BARK THAT MUCH, I'M TELLING YOU.
BEEN RAISING DOGS SINCE I WAS 18, HUNTING DOGS JUST LIKE THIS YOUNG MAN.
WE NEED MORE PEOPLE LIKE HIM IN PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT HE'S CLEAN CUT, FINE YOUNG MAN, WORKS EVERY DAY AND IT'S TIME FOR THIS PROBLEM TO BE CURED.
THAT MAN THERE CALLED ME 11 O'CLOCK ONE NIGHT, CHEWING MOUTH-PARTS.
HE DON'T KNOW HOW I KNOW IT WAS HIM, BUT I KNOW IT WAS HIM.
THREE YEARS AGO, AND I LET IT GO, NEVER ADDRESSED THE ISSUE.
WELL, WE'RE HERE FOR YOU TO TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEM AND I HOPE YOU DO.
THAT YOUNG MAN LOVES HIS DOGS, PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY IS A HUNTING COMMUNITY.
I CAN'T HELP WITH THAT [INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE IF I COULD STRETCH IT A LITTLE BIT, I'D STRETCH IT AND BELIEVE ME I WOULD, APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.
>> IS NOT MANY PEOPLE LEFT, BUT IF THERE'S ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
>> KELVIN GARY, I LIVE IN 11619 EAST QUAKER ROAD, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? LET ME KNOW. [INAUDIBLE]
>> HOW LONG HAVE YOU HAD THESE DOGS?
>> A COUPLE OF THEM WERE SEVEN YEARS OLD.
ALL WERE SEVEN OR THE YOUNGEST ONES WERE TWO YEARS OLD.
WERE THEY HOUSED IN PRINCE GEORGE BEFORE THIS? NO, SIR. I HAD GOTTEN MORE AS THE YEARS PROGRESSED AND THEN I HAD GOTTEN RID OF SOME BUT I KEPT THE ONES THAT I LOVE AND TEND TO AND THEY WORKED WELL FOR ME.
THEY GIVE ME WHAT I PUT INTO THEM.
I WAS HEARING YOU SAY THAT YOU'RE WILLING TO KEEP
[00:40:04]
THE SAME AMOUNT AS YOU HAVE NOW UNTIL THEY PASS ON AND THE NUMBERS WOULD DROP DOWN ACCORDINGLY THAT YOU COULD REPLACE THEM.WHAT KIND OF BIRTH CONTROL PILLS ARE YOU GIVING YOUR DOGS? THEY'RE SEPARATED. THERE ARE FEMALES AND MALES SO THEY'RE SEPARATED, THEY DON'T INTERACT.
IF THEY COME INTO HEAT, I DON'T RUN THEM AND I RUN THE ONES THAT AREN'T ON HEAT, I KEEP THEM IN THE PEN.
I RUN FOX FOR THEM, I RUN DEAR WITH THEM AND THEY WORK FOR ME. VERY LOW.
NOW, DO WE DISCUSS IT NOW OR AFTER WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? I CAN CONFIRM THERE'S NO ONE ON ZOOM SO THERE'S NO ONE ELSE UNLESS THERE'S ANYONE ELSE HERE.
IF AFTER YOU'VE CLOSED THAT YOU CAN DISCUSS IT.
THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING SECTION AND WE WILL OPEN UP QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE EVERYONE HERE PROBABLY HAS SOMETHING.
THIS IS REALLY A HARD SITUATION BECAUSE I GREW UP IN THE COUNTRY AND I MAY TO HUNTER AND YET I WAS ASKED TO BE ON THE BOARD AND TO SUPPORT THE ORDINANCES AND RULES OF PRINCE GEORGE COUNTY.
I THINK IT'S VERY UNFORTUNATE THAT THE TREASURER'S OFFICE ISSUED LICENSES I GUESS WITHOUT CHECKING TO SEE WHETHER THEY COULD OR NOT.
THAT LEADS YOU TO BELIEVE THAT THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM WITH IT.
I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S JUST A LOT TO THINK ABOUT.
WHAT DO YOU HAVE ON YOUR MIND? GO AHEAD.
FOR OUR FIRST THING. I HAD A QUESTION I GUESS, ABOUT THE TIMELINE, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY.
IT SAYS THAT IN 2019 THERE WAS NINE DOGS AND THEN THAT WENT UP TO 14 IN 2020, WAS THAT BEFORE OR AFTER THE INITIAL COMPLAINT? BY THE STRUCTURE IN THERE, I THINK THAT IT WAS STRUCTURED TO SAY THAT IT WAS BEFORE THE INITIAL COMPLAINT, BUT I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT.
SORRY. IT WASN'T THE SAME FOR THE BOURBON.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I TAKE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND THEN DIRECTLY THAT I WON'T BE ABLE TO ANSWER TO THE APPLICANT.
COULD YOU REPEAT ONE MORE TIME, SORRY ABOUT THAT.
ON THE RECORD FROM THE TREASURER'S OFFICE IN THE PAGE 7, IT'S SPECIFIED THAT HE HAD NINE DOGS IN 2019 AND 14 DOGS IN 2020 BUT I BELIEVE THE INITIAL COMPLAINT THAT STARTED THIS WHOLE PROCESS WAS IN 2020 SO I'M JUST ASKING, DID THE ADDITIONAL FIVE DOGS, WERE THEY ACQUIRED AFTER THE INITIAL COMPLAINT OR BEFORE THE INITIAL COMPLAINT? I'LL LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER.
IT WAS AFTER BECAUSE ONE OF MY DOGS HAD PUPPIES AND I SOLD A BUNCH OF THEM SO THAT'S WHY THEY GOT ADDED AND THEN TAKEN AWAY.
YOU DIDN'T GO OUT AND BUY MORE DOGS? NO, I NEVER DID. I DIDN'T GET ANYMORE.
SO YOU KEPT FIVE THEN IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND THEN YOU GOT RID OF THE REST? YES.
I HAD MY ORIGINAL DOGS AND THEN I HAD 12 PUPPIES OFF OF ONE FEMALE DOG AND THEY ALL LIVED AND I RAISED THEM ALL, AND THEN I SOLD THE REMAINDER OF THEM AND THEN KEPT SOME.
BUT THAT WAS AFTER MR. BROCK MEYER INITIAL COMPLAINT THAT STARTED THIS PROCESS? YES.
WHAT ARE YOUR HEIST DOGS, WHAT KIND OF DOGS ARE THEY? BIRD DOGS.
THEY ARE LARGE ANIMALS ALSO? YES. I HUNT WITH THEM TOO.
CAROL, I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE YOU OUT OF THE DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONING, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO ADD OR? I DO. AS YOU CAN HEAR ME, I'VE GOT CONCERNS FIRST BECAUSE I AGREE WITH WHAT MR. MCALLISTER SAID ABOUT OUR FIRST DUTY IS TO UPHOLD THE ORDINANCES OF THE COUNTY UNLESS THERE'S A GOOD REASON WHICH WE'LL NOT UNDULY HARM OR INCONVENIENCE THE REMAINDER OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND A FEW OTHER LITTLE NUANCES IN THERE.
[00:45:03]
BUT THIS IS NOW BEFORE THE COURT, AND I CAN ONLY SURMISE THAT IF THIS WENT TO COURT, THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD LOSE BECAUSE I THINK THE COURT WOULD APPLY THE STATUTE STRICTLY AFTER LOOKING AT SOME OF THE POSSIBLE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.I'M TORN, I'M NOT A HUNTER, BUT I LOVE DOGS AND I HOPE YOU CAN'T HEAR MY AUSTRALIAN SHEPHERD WHO'S OUTSIDE AND HE'S THERE BARKING.
I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC ACTUALLY TO BOTH SIDES OF THIS.
THE OTHER CONCERN I HAVE IS THAT THE YOUNGER DOGS ARE, I THINK HE SAID [OVERLAPPING] THE DOGS ARE 2-4 YEARS OLD.
THE YOUNGEST ONE IS TWO, AND THEN THERE ARE OTHER DOGS WHO ARE FOUR SO THERE MIGHT BE SIX- [OVERLAPPING] OLDER THAN FOUR. WHAT'S YOUR OLDEST DOG? THIS IS TIM, I'LL CHIME IN BECAUSE HE SENT US A LIST AND THEY WERE A RANGE OF AGES FROM 2-7.
MY POINT IS IT COULD BE A NUMBER OF YEARS BEFORE THIS NATURAL SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM MIGHT OCCUR AS THESE DOGS PASSED AWAY.
THAT'S JUST REALLY CONCERNING ME TOO, BUT I DON'T KNOW AND PERHAPS MR. CLYDE OR MAYBE MR. MCALLISTER OR MAYBE MR. NORRIS [NOISE] COULD ADVISE IF WE DENIED THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, WHAT ARE THE PROSPECTS THAT THE OWNERS WOULD BE ABLE TO RELOCATE THE DOGS TO A DIFFERENT OWNER, SELL, IS THERE A HOT COMMODITY FOR HUNTING DOGS? SORRY TO BE SO NAÏVE ABOUT THIS.
[OVERLAPPING] AFTER THEY SELL THOSE OTHER DOGS.
THIS TIME A YEAR THERE IS NO MARKET, COME FALL THERE WILL BE.
[INAUDIBLE] TO GET RID OF HIS OWN DOGS ANYWAY BECAUSE THAT'S THE [INAUDIBLE].
IF WE DENY THEIR REQUEST AND I'M JUST TRYING TO NAVIGATE AS MUCH OF A HUMANE RESPONSE AS I CAN FIND, WHAT TIMEFRAME WOULD THE APPLICANTS HAVE TO FIND A DIFFERENT PLAN FOR THE DOGS OR HOW LONG WOULD THEY HAVE LEGALLY IF THEIR APPLICATION IS DENIED TO RELOCATE.
WELL, CAROL I GUESS TO ADDRESS THAT A LITTLE BIT, I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT THIS A LOT TODAY BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE A REAL CLEAR ANSWER UNLESS I GO BY THE COUNTY ORDINANCE.
BUT WE'VE GOT AN OPEN-ENDED RIGHT NOW, WE'VE GOT OKAY FOR NOW UNTIL WHENEVER.
I WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD CONFINE THAT A LITTLE BIT AND SAY WITHIN FIVE YEARS OR THREE YEARS THAT THE SITUATION COULD RESOLVE ITSELF.
BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD MEET THE APPLICANT'S NEEDS.
>> YOU CAN COME UP TO THIS MIC, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU.
>> I DO WANT TO ADD, WE HAVE ALREADY GONE TO COURT FOR THIS ONE OTHER TIME AND IT WAS DISMISSED BY THE COURT.
I KNOW THAT WAS A CONCERN THAT MS. WOODWARD HAD, BUT IT WAS DISMISSED BY THE JUDGE IN COURT SAYING YOU'RE AT 0.678 DROP OFF, I'M NOT GOING TO FIGHT YOU OVER THAT.
THEN [NOISE] MR. BROCK MEYER COMPLAIN, HE'S NOW PRESSED CHARGES AGAIN.
I JUST WANTED TO PREP US THAT WE HAVE ALREADY GONE AND HAD THIS DISMISSED, BUT HERE WE ARE AGAIN.
>> DO YOU FORESEE ANY WAY YOU AND WHATEVER THE COMPLAINANT COULD HAVE A MUTUAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU?
>> IF HE COULD SIT DOWN AND HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH US AND WE COULD SIT DOWN AND SAY, OKAY WHAT WORKS FOR YOU, WHAT WORKS FOR US, WHERE CAN WE MEET IN THE MIDDLE? WE HAVE NO PROBLEM DOING THAT, DO WE? WE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO ISSUE DOING THAT.
IF IT MEANS ADJUSTING THE PINS A LITTLE BIT, OKAY.
I MEAN, I'M NOT GOING TO CONNECT THEM TO MY HOME, BUT IF THERE IS A WAY FOR US TO SIT DOWN AND FIND A RESOLUTION TOGETHER.
[00:50:03]
I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WITH THAT AND I KNOW CALVIN DOESN'T EITHER.>> WHICH IS THE WAY GOOD COMMUNITY NEIGHBORS RESOLVE PROBLEMS.
>> I WOULD LOVE TO JUST SQUASH THIS TENSION AND MOVE FORWARD AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IF MY NEIGHBOR IS UPSET ABOUT SOMETHING OR IF WE HAVE SOMETHING TO WORRY ABOUT AND TO HAVE TO KEEP GOING THROUGH THE HEARINGS AND EVERYTHING TO GET A RESOLUTION.
>> TIM, JUST TO CLARIFY, ANYTHING OVER ONE ACRE IS ABOUT RIGHT USE TO HAVE THE KENNELS, CORRECT?
>> IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY OF ACQUIRING ANOTHER LITTLE PIECE?
>> I'LL TRY MY BEST. I'LL PAY THREE TIMES IF THERE IS ISSUES.
>> I DON'T KNOW WHO OWNS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.
>> I WILL TOUCH ON THAT. I DO WANT TO JUST QUESTION THAT A LITTLE BIT.
IN THE RECORDS IT DOES ADDRESS THAT THAT WAS ALREADY ATTEMPTED AND FAILED.
>> NO. I WAS GOING TO DO THAT.
>> CAN YOU STEP UP TO THE MIC. [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'VE AGREED TO GET IT RESURVEYED.
I TALKED TO THE SURVEY AND HE SAID, WELL, YOU MIGHT HAVE LESS THAN YOU THINK YOU DO, YOU MIGHT HAVE MORE.
I TALKED TO, [INAUDIBLE] BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
HE SAID, THE BEST THING FOR YOU DO IS GO THROUGH THE ZONING APPEALS AND LET'S TRY IT THAT WAY. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.
IF IT DOESN'T WORK, I'M GOING TO GET IT RESURVEYED, AND IF THAT DOESN'T WORK, I'M GOING TO BUY SOMETHING SOMEWHERE.
THERE'S GOING TO BE OVER AN ACRE, IF YOU ALL CAN'T RESOLVE THE ISSUE TONIGHT.
WE ARE TALKING[OVERLAPPING] ABOUT HUNTING. YES, SIR.
>> IF WE WERE TO TABLE THIS FOR 90 DAYS AND GIVE YOU THE AUTHORITY TO BE THE NEGOTIATOR, COULD YOU HAVE EVERYBODY ON SPEAKING TERMS IN 90 DAYS?
>> I'LL TRY MY BEST. I'M A GOOD TALKER.
>> MR. GARY IS THAT A POSSIBILITY?
>> I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM.
NO OTHER NEIGHBORS AROUND THEIR HAVE A PROBLEM.
I'M JUST SAYING, I WOULD DO ANYTHING IN THE WORLD, I WONT LOSE A THING, THAT'S A TENANT.
THAT'S MONEY OUT OF MY POCKET AND THEN HE'S GOT HAVE TO GO TRY TO FIND THE HOUSE, YOU KNOW HOW HOUSES ARE NOW, COST A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY.
THEY WORK HARD. IT'S CLEAN[OVERLAPPING].
IF YOU POSTPONE THEIR REQUESTS FOR 90 DAYS, FOR EXAMPLE, UNTIL THEY HAD TIME TO COMPLETE SOME SPECIFIC ACTION.
YES, THAT'S AN OPTION AVAILABLE TO YOU.
THAT OPTION COULD BE SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION TO ADJUST THE BOUNDARY LINES SO THAT THERE'S ONE ACRE, FOR EXAMPLE.
>> BUT JUST TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE IT WAS IN OUR BOARD PACKET THAT THE CASE WAS DELAYED PREVIOUSLY WHILE YOU WERE WORKING ON ACQUIRING PROPERTY, BUT THAT ACTION, THAT'S A MISTAKE.
>> NO. THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE COURT, BECAUSE I WENT TO COURT, WE'VE BEEN TO COURT QUITE A FEW TIMES, AND THAT WAS BROUGHT UP.
THEN I TALKED TO THE SURVEY AND HE SAID, JUST WHAT I TOLD YOU.
HE SAID, YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE ENOUGH, YOU MIGHT HAVE TOO MUCH, YOU MIGHT HAVE MORE THAN ACRE.
>> BUT NO ACTUAL CONCRETE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS HAS ACTUALLY OCCURRED TO DATE?
>> WHAT'S THE OTHER ONE OVER THERE THE SEVENTH ELEVEN?
>> I MEAN I KNOW HIM BUT I'VE NEVER TALKED TO HIM ABOUT THE DOGS.
THEY'VE NEVER COMPLAINED ABOUT THE DOGS. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.
THE ONLY COMPLAIN I GET IS THROUGH CALVIN AND THEN A ONE PHONE CALL I GOT.
I LIVE THROUGH THE WOODS FOR LAND.
YOU CAN HEAR MY DOGS MORE THAN YOU HEAR HIS DOGS MOST OF THE TIME.
HIS DOG ARE BARKING I HEAR THEM BUT WE'RE IN THE COUNTRY, AND WE LOVE TO HUNT.
IF I COULD STRETCH IT TO BE FIVE ACRE, I DO ANYTHING I COULD, AND I'LL DO WHATEVER YOU ASK ME TO DO.
>> YOU COULD POSTPONE TO ALLOW THEM TIME TO TALK AMONGST THEMSELVES AND COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. THAT'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE.
>> JUST TO INVOLVE JULIA A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I KNOW SHE KNOWS HER WAY AROUND THESE SITUATIONS.
WE'RE GOING IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE RESOLVED TONIGHT.
>> CHAIR, THANK YOU. CERTAINLY, YOU CAN POSTPONE YOUR VOTE.
YOU WOULD DATE SPECIFIC TO THE FOURTH MONDAY, THREE MONTHS FROM NOW, NOT NECESSARILY 90 DAYS.
WE WANT IT TO BE ON YOUR REGULAR MEETINGS SCHEDULE.
FOR THE APPLICANTS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, FOR THEM TO DISCUSS THE CONDITIONS AND MAYBE COME
[00:55:01]
UP WITH OTHER CONDITIONS OR OTHER SOLUTIONS OR OTHER IDEAS, AND ALSO TO INVESTIGATE ANY OTHER POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS SUCH AS THE SURVEY OR ADDITIONAL PROPERTY.I DO WANT TO REMIND THE BOARD THOUGH, THIS TYPE OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS NOT YOUR NORMAL BOARD OF ZONING HEARING AWARE, WHERE YOU ARE MAKING A VERY BLACK AND WHITE CODE DECISION.
WHEN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PUT THIS ORDINANCE INTO EFFECT, THEY SPECIFICALLY WANTED A METHOD OF RECOURSE FOR CITIZENS TO HAVE, AND THAT'S WHERE THE PRESENTATION OF A SPECIAL EXCEPTION ISSUE THROUGH THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS WAS PUT INTO THE CODE.
YOUR GOAL HERE IS A METHOD OF RECOURSE FOR ANY CITIZEN.
IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN YOUR NORMAL TYPE OF CASE THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU AND I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT WHEN THE BOARD PUT THIS PROCESS IN, IT WAS TO LOOK AT IT BY A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS AND MAKE YOUR BEST DECISION ON IT.
I THINK YOUR IDEA OF A POSTPONEMENT TO LOOK AT ADDITIONAL SOLUTIONS IS A VERY VALID CONSIDERATION.
>> BUT WE HAVE TWO COUNTY CITIZENS IN OPPOSITION.
I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE THE ORDERS WOULD BE ADDRESSING.
I THINK WE PROBABLY NEED TO GIVE THIS A LITTLE MORE THOUGHT, ALLOW SOME COLLECTION OF INFORMATION, POSSIBLY.
YOU MIGHT EVEN BE ABLE TO TALK TO SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS THAT YOU HAVEN'T TALKED TO AND THEY MIGHT HAVE SOME CONCERNS THAT THEY ARE NICE NEIGHBORS AND THEY JUST HAVEN'T BROUGHT UP.
I WOULD THINK JUST EXPLORE EVERYTHING AND WE'LL GIVE YOU THE TIME TO DO THAT.
>> YOU CAN REQUEST THAT MYSELF OR STAFF, WE HELP FACILITATE THAT.
WE HAVE THE MAILING LIST AND I CAN HELP FACILITATE THAT.
>> IT'S UPON YOU. COULD I ASK MR. BROCK MEYER, TO COME BACK UP A MINUTE.
DO YOU THINK IF WE GIVE YOU 90 DAYS YOU AND THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORS CAN COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT EVERYBODY WOULD BE IN AGREEMENT WITH?
>> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I COULD, BUT I'VE HEARD TOO MUCH FALSE TESTIMONY TONIGHT.
I HAVE NEVER HARASSED MR. CARABIN AND HIS WIFE.
MR. CARABIN CAME TO MY HOUSE, THE FIRST TIME ONE OF HIS DOGS WAS ON MY PROPERTY.
HE CAME TO SEE IF I WAS SHOOTING AT HIS DOG AND I TOLD HIM NO.
THE SECOND TIME HE CAME, HE CAME TO TELL ME THAT I HAD TO STOP CALLING THE POLICE ON HIS DOG.
THAT'S THE ONLY TWO TIMES [OVERLAPPING].
>> WE'RE NOT HERE TO SETTLE A COMMUNITY DISPUTE.
WE'RE HERE TO SETTLE A ZONING ORDINANCE.
>> SO IF WE CAN PUT THE PERSONAL FEELINGS ASIDE AND OFF, NEIGHBORS CAN REACH AGREEMENT.
I THINK IF WE HAD THE VOTE DENIED, NOBODY WOULD BE HAPPY.
SO I'M JUST TRYING MY BEST TO FIGURE OUT ANY WAY I CAN GET EVERYBODY IN CONJUNCTION AND EVERYBODY SPEAKING ON THE SAME PAGE.
>> WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT BUT MRS. CARABIN SAID SHE WON'T MOVE THE DOGS UP BEHIND HER HOUSE.
WHY NOT? IF THE DOGS ARE NOT AN ISSUE?
>> I'M NOT GOING TO CONNECT THE DOGS TO MY HOME.
>> I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO DEVOLVE INTO A BACK-AND-FORTH HERE.
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO RESOLVE.
WHAT I MEAN, AND IF SOMEBODY FROM THE COUNTY COULD MEDIATE IT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE APPRECIATED.
WE'RE GETTING INTO A SITUATION WHERE WE ARE GOING TO BE ARGUING INSTEAD OF REACHING ANY COMPROMISES.
I DON'T QUITE KNOW WHAT THE MOTION SHOULD BE.
MY PERSONAL THOUGHT IS I WOULD LIKE IT TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE TIME TO SMOLDER, [LAUGHTER] I GUESS.
BUT I JUST THINK IT'S TIME THAT WE WRAP THIS UP IN SOME MANNER TONIGHT.
[01:00:03]
DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS, CAROL? YOU'RE EASY BECAUSE I'M SITTING HERE LOOKING AT YOU. [LAUGHTER]WHEN I WAS MADE BIGGER ON THE SCREEN IT SCARED ME.
[LAUGHTER] I AGREE WITH YOU, BUT FOR A DIFFERENT REASON, I THINK WE'RE CALLED UPON TO MAKE A DECISION.
THOUGH IT'S LAUDABLE [LAUGHTER] TO JUDGE JUDY IT A LITTLE BIT AND SEE IF WE CAN GET THE PARTIES TO WORK THINGS OUT.
BUT JUST LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY ITSELF, AND HOW IT IS CONFIGURED, I THINK ANYWHERE THE DOGS MIGHT BE MOVED.
I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY GOING TO CHANGE ANY SITUATION EVEN IF PRIVACY FENCING WERE PUT UP ALL AROUND THAT PROPERTY.
I DON'T THINK IT WOULD TOTALLY RESOLVE THE ISSUE.
I DO AGREE. I THINK OUR JOB IS TO MAKE A DECISION.
THAT DECISION MAY BE TO DELAY IT.
DECISION MAY BE TO DENY IT, DECISION MAY BE TO APPROVE IT, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO COME TO SOME THE RESOLUTIONS TONIGHT.
IF WE DO DELAY IT THOUGH, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME SPECIFIC OTHER THAN JUST MAKE NICE WITH EACH OTHER.
I DON'T THINK THAT WILL WORK AT THIS POINT.
>> WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS OUT OF THIS WHOLE THING, I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT THE CONDITIONS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.
RIGHT NOW I CAN'T REALLY TELL YOU WHAT [LAUGHTER] I THINK, BUT I JUST THINK THAT LEAVING THE CONDITIONS OPEN-ENDED AS TO WHEN A DOG PASSES AWAY IS PROBABLY THE WRONG WAY TO LEAVE THIS.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I REALLY DIDN'T DIG INTO IT TODAY.
I'VE READ ALL OF THIS, BUT I THINK I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE IF THERE AREN'T SOME RESOLUTIONS THEY AREN'T QUITE SO OPEN-ENDED.
[NOISE] AND IF WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT, SOMEBODY MAKE A MOTION.
THE FLOOR IS OPEN FOR MOTIONS.
>> ARE YOU READY FOR A MOTION?
>> I AM [LAUGHTER] YES, I'M READY FOR A MOTION.
>> I PROMISED MYSELF I WOULDN'T DO THIS.
I MOVE THAT WE TABLE IT FOR A PERIOD OF APPROXIMATELY 90 DAYS.
AND WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APRICON AND NEIGHBORS, IF THEY CAN GET TOGETHER AND COME BACK AND MEET WITH US IN 90 DAYS.
>> MR. KREIDER CAN YOU USE THE JULY DATE FOR THE BZA INSTEAD OF THE 90 DAYS.
>> WHATEVER. JULY 25TH, WOULD BE THAT DAY.
I WANT TO SEE SOMETHING COMING BACK THAT THE CO-COMMUNITY OR THE LOCAL COMMUNITY IS IN AGREEMENT WITH.
IF THEY DON'T LIKE THAT, JUST LET THEM MAKE AN AMENDMENT TO IT.
IF I'VE GOT IT CLEAR ENOUGH, COULD YOU READ IT BACK TO US MISSY? I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY MYSELF. [LAUGHTER]
>> IT'S OKAY. YOU WOULD AMEND YOUR EMOTION TO HAVE THE CASE BE POSTPONED UNTIL THE JULY 25TH BZA MEETING ON THAT MONDAY.
AND YOU WOULD LIKE FOR THE COUNTY TO BE INVOLVED IN THE MEDIATION BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE COMPLAINANTS?
>> I'D LIKE TO HAVE ALL NEIGHBORS INVOLVED.
>> ALL THE NEIGHBORS INVOLVED.
AND THEN WHEN YOU GET YOUR STAFF REPORT, WHEN YOUR PACKETS ARE DONE, IS THERE ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR THAT YOU NEED IN THAT STAFF REPORT THAT WOULD HELP MAKE YOUR DECISION?
>> MISSY, BEFORE WE WRAP THIS UP, I THINK MR. NORRIS HAS SOME COMMENTS HE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE.
>> IS THERE A WAY FOR YOU TO WRITE IN THERE TO GIVE MR. WILLIAMS AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT RENDERING THIS WHOLE PROCESS UNNECESSARY BY SOME CONTRACT FOR ADDITIONAL PROPERTY OR SOMETHING TO THAT?
>> IF HE CHOOSES TO GO TO A SURVEYOR AND HAVE HIS PROPERTY RESURVEYED, AND HE FINDS THAT HIS PROPERTY IS NOT AN ACRE OR MORE.
THEN HE WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK INTO DOING A BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT WHICH WOULD MAKE THAT SUBJECT PROPERTY BE THAT OVER AN ACRE SO THAT THIS WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.
SO THAT WOULD BE ONE WAY TO SOLVE IT WITHOUT HAVING A FIGHT.
AND THAT MEDIATION THAT STAFF HAS WITH THE APPLICANT AND THE COMPLAINANT AND THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS,
[01:05:01]
WE WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE MR. WILLIAMS. AND THEN GIVE HIM THAT OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH A SURVEYOR AND GIVE HIM SOME DIFFERENT OPTIONS OF WHAT HE CAN ADD TO IT ALSO.>> THAT'S ANOTHER DIFFERENCE TO THE CASES THAT WE'RE NORMALLY HEARING IS WE'RE HEARING A CASE ON RENTAL PROPERTY, LIVING IN A RENTED FACILITY, AND NORMALLY WE'RE LOOKING AT PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT NEED TO BE LOOKED AT AND UNDERSTOOD A LITTLE BETTER.
>> I THINK WE'RE BEING ASKED TO MEDIATE PRIVATE PROPERTY DISPUTE IN A WAY.
AND ULTIMATELY, I FEEL LIKE IF WE HAVE TO VOTE ON A DECISION TONIGHT, WE'D HAVE TO DEFER TO THE ORDINANCE.
SINCE THERE ARE ISSUES, I THINK THE BEST THING HERE IS JUST TO DELAY IT AND IF WE GIVE EVERYBODY AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK IT OUT.
>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SECOND HIS MOTION? > CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION ON THE MOTION THERE BASED ON EVERYTHING EVERYBODY SAID? IF YOU WERE TO POSTPONE THE REQUEST UNTIL JULY 25TH TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO SEEK A RESOLUTION, WHICH MAY INCLUDE COUNTY STAFF MODERATING A DISCUSSION WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS OR THE PROPERTY OWNER TO APPLY FOR A BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT?
>> CAROL, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO ADD?
NUMBER 1, WE CAN'T FORCE THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS OR RESIDENTS TO BE INVOLVED IF THEY CHOOSE NOT TO.
NUMBER 2, I DON'T THINK THE JOB OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS IS TO MEDIATE OR FORCE MEDIATION.
I JUST HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT PASSING THE BOOK.
I'M NOT HAPPY WITH EITHER YES OR EITHER NO.
>> [LAUGHTER] WELL, IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT MY VOTE WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST SIMPLY BASED ON THE STRENGTH OF THE ORDINATES, THE CONFIGURATION OF THE PROPERTY WOULD BE MORE ABOUT, I KNOW THAT WON'T MAKE ME POPULAR, BUT BEING A LAWYER, I'M ACCUSTOMED TO THAT. [LAUGHTER]
>> BUT ARE YOU SAYING THEN WE CAN'T LEGALLY ASKED HIM TO NEGOTIATE WITH AMONGST THEMSELVES.
>> YOU CAN'T MIX, THEM YOU CAN'T FORCE THEM, YOU CAN'T ASK THEM.
>> BUT NOW IF I UNDERSTOOD [OVERLAPPING].
>> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING. YEAH, IT SOUNDS LAUDABLE, BILL.
YOU CAN'T REQUIRE PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN A NEGOTIATION IF THEY DON'T HAVE A PARDON UPON A DOG IN THE HUT.
IF THE WORDING IS TO DELAY THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS PETITION, THIS APPLICATION UNTIL JULY 25TH, UNTIL THE PARTIES HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REACH A RESOLUTION THAT'S ACCEPTABLE TO THEM.
I GET THAT, BUT IT TAKES TWO TO TANGO AND MR. BROCK [INAUDIBLE]?
AT LEAST THAT'S HOW I HEARD IT.
HE EXPRESSED NO INTEREST IN NEGOTIATING.
IF BOTH PARTIES ARE SAYING TO US YES, WE COULD USE A LITTLE MORE TIME TO WORK IT OUT BETWEEN US.
THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT THING, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT IT IS, IS IT?
>> I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE A HAPPY COMMUNITY.
>> I KNOW THAT BILL AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR THAT, I REALLY DO [OVERLAPPING] I JUST AGREE WITH OUR ROLE.
>> MR. BROADWAY, I DID AGREE TO NEGOTIATE, YOU KNOW, RATHER HE WILL DO IT IN ALL HONESTY, I DON'T KNOW.
BUT I MEAN, IT'S ONLY GOING TO COST US 90 DAYS.
>> I GUESS WHAT I SEE AND LISTENING, I AGREE WITH CAROL IF WE GO BY THE LETTER OF THE LAW.
BUT I ALSO THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF EMOTIONS EXPRESSED TONIGHT, AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF VERBIAGE THAT'S FLOATING THROUGH THE AIR.
I THINK I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO SEE THAT 90 DAYS ACCEPTED AND RESOLVE IT IN JULY.
AT THAT POINT, IF NOTHING CHANGED,
[01:10:02]
WE DON'T HAVE MANY CHOICES.>> I AGREE WITH THAT GIVEN 90 DAYS AND WE MAKE A DECISION WHEN WE'RE DONE.
>> [NOISE] I'M JUST THINKING LIKE, IF YOU DO THAT, YOU JUST HAVE TO VOTE ON IT TONIGHT, BECAUSE IF MR. [INAUDIBLE] LEAVES HERE THINKING IF I HOLD THAT FOR 90 DAYS, I'VE WON. YOU UNDERSTAND ME?
>> I GUESS WHAT I'M THINKING IS THERE'S [OVERLAPPING] PROBABLY A WAY TO MAKE THE PROPERTY IN ACRE.
>> I GUESS IF WE DENY IT AND THEY TURN IT INTO AN ACRE THEN, [OVERLAPPING]
>> HE CAN COME BACK AND GET A PERMIT LATER, KANYE [INAUDIBLE].
>> WELL, HE WOULDN'T NEED US INVOLVED ONCE ITS AN ACRE.
>> CAROL, OTHER THAN VOTE TONIGHT, WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION? [LAUGHTER]
>> MY SOLUTION IS TO VOTE TONIGHT.
>> YES. IF I'VE HEARD FROM MR. BROUGHT MEYER WILLINGNESS POSITIVE ENERGY TOWARDS FINDING A NEGOTIATED SOLUTION.
I WOULD FEEL DIFFERENTLY, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT I HEARD.
>> YOU'RE NOT WRONG. I'M IN TOTAL AGREEMENT THERE, BUT I WOULD JUST HOPING IT WAS A NEEDLE IN THE HAYSTACK.
>> [LAUGHTER] WELL, I'M ONLY ONE VOTE.
I THINK THERE'S BASICALLY A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
>> I DIDN'T HEAR IF THERE WAS A SECOND OR NOT BUT,
>> I THINK WE WILL DO, RESTATE THE EMOTION AT THIS POINT.
>> RESTATE THE MOTION, PLEASE.
>> YOU WERE ON BILL TO RESTATE IT OR WHAT YOU HAD [OVERLAPPING].
>> IN CASE YOU WANTED TO ADJUST WHAT YOU WANTED TO DO BASED ON THAT DISCUSSION.
>> RESTATE THE MOTION IS WHAT IT STANDS RIGHT NOW.
>> WE TALKED ABOUT WAS THAT YOU WOULD POSTPONE THE REQUEST UNTIL JULY 25TH TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE APPLICANT TO SEEK RESOLUTION, WHICH COULD INCLUDE STAFF MODERATED DISCUSSION WITH ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, OR FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER TO APPLY FOR A BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT TO ACHIEVE ONE ACRE OR TO ACHIEVE GREATER THAN ONE ACRE ON THE PROPERTY.
>> THAT'S EXTRAORDINARY, GREAT?
>> I THINK YOU MAY HAVE PROPERTY OWNERS OR RESIDENCE.
>> [INAUDIBLE] DON'T CHANGE IT THEN.
>> YES. I THINK SPECIFICALLY TO INCLUDE MR. WILLIAMS TO BE A PARTY TO THAT AS WELL, EVEN THOUGH HE'S NOT AN ADJACENT.
>> WE'RE GOING TO SEE HOW GOOD OR NEGOTIATE TO YOU MR. WILLIAMS.
>> THANK YOU. I'LL MAKE THE ANNUAL FORMAL MOTION.
>> DO I HEAR A SECOND FOR THAT MOTION?
>> WE SEEM TO BE AT A STANDSTILL.
IS THERE [LAUGHTER] ANYTHING ELSE [LAUGHTER] THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS? I'M SO USED TO PEOPLE TALKING THAT I ALMOST FORGOT I WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ADVANCING THE MEETING.
>> THAT WAS THE BUSINESS ITEM AND NOW WE'LL GO INTO COMMUNICATIONS.
[COMMUNICATIONS]
>> WE'LL KEEP IT BRIEF. THERE IS CURRENTLY NO MEETINGS SCHEDULED FOR NEXT MONTH.
WE DON'T HAVE ANY CASES APPLIED FOR IT THIS TIME.
AT THIS TIME UNTIL ANOTHER CASE IS APPLIED FOR THAT JULY 25TH WILL BE THE NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING.
>> OKAY. NO CORRESPONDENCE THAT NEEDS TO BE GOING OVER.
VERY GOOD. DO I HEAR A MOTION TO ADJOURN?
>>ITS ALREADY MOVED, MADAM CHAIR? [LAUGHTER]
[01:15:02]
>> THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PATIENCE WITH THE PROCESS.
>> WE LOOK FOR YOU TO WALK IN WITHOUT COFFEE NOW.
>> THANK YOU AND MS. MCALLISTER, I THINK YOU'RE DOING A WONDERFUL JOB.
>> [LAUGHTER] I THINK YOU'RE BEING GENEROUS, BUT THANK YOU [LAUGHTER].
>> GOODNIGHT.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.