All right, good evening everybody. It is approximately 530 on the second day of April in 2025. We are here for BA 24-032C, which is a request by Cedar Village Center, trading as Norpevilleium for age restricted adult housing to be located at 10879 Clarksville Pike in Clarksville, Maryland. Mr. O, it's your case. Good evening. For the record, saying O on behalf of the petitioner. Not an examiner. We have a pretty comprehensive staff report, and I'm happy to put witnesses on to go through each and every criteria. I thought it might be more efficient to kind of identify the issues that remain in the case and speak to those. I think we can probably fill your time doing that. You'd speak up just slightly. Yes. I was saying that the staff report is pretty comprehensive, goes through each and every criteria. I have a witness here, John Carney, who is a civil engineer who can speak to those criteria and be able to concur with much of what's in the staff report. I think that would get somewhat monotonous. I think it probably time that are spent on discussing the issues that remain in the case. I know that you just brought one up with the landscaping and that what you feel is a necessity for a final landscape plan that's updated from the one that was included with the response to the design advisory panel. And we intend to do that if the hearing examors willing to continue the case and have us provide that exhibit. But in the meantime, I think one of the main issues we'd like to perhaps we can get an orientation of the property, but we'd like to launch into some of the comments made by DPC as to the density issue. I know that the hearing examiner requested a copy of PLAT 685 and as a supplement to that we provided a correspondence that occurred during the year 2016 where a similar but not identical cases before the zoning board and also provided two precedents Shipley Meadow and I think it's called Riverside Overlook and those exhibits that are accompanied with that. So with that, I'd call John Carney. If you would take the witness stand and be sworn. Or actually, you could stay here. That's fine. Thank you. It would be better if he goes. It would be, OK. Yes. Go ahead. You don't have a lot of room there. He's going to go over there, Kel. Over there? Yeah. Take everything. So while he's getting situated, Mr. O, since we're going to be receiving a final landscape plan, the letter that you provided me this evening from Brescia, would you make the changes we talked about? And could we have a signature line? Some idea who it's from? Sure. Okay, thank you. Just for the record, and I know Mr. Brasier and another Victoria, they're both on. There was a concern brought about the landscape plan which was produced post the July 16th date, I think I had the right date, for the July 24th, sorry, meeting of the DAP, that landscape plan that's in the record is currently dated June 2024. So it would have preceded that DAP hearing. The response to the DAP notes a revised landscape plan which would certainly occur after July 24, 2024. The hearing examiner would like to accurate date as to that landscape plan. And specifically would be asking that that not be illustrative but rather the revised landscape plan as per the letter to the DAP. So we would be looking for those changes and as the hearing examiner just stated would appreciate the identification of the signatory to that memo and also the date of the memo. And the corrected DAP meeting date. And the corrected DAP meeting date. I think it specified July 10th, which was an error. And of course, when the final landscape plan is produced, the correct date on it. Yes. A revision to the date that's on the landscape plan. The current. All right, thank you. Those were instructions you were giving to your clients. Yes. I just wanted to make sure they were party to our discussion. Yeah, okay. So, sir, I need to swear you in. Thank you. Do you solemnize to wear a firm under the penalties of perjury that the response is given in statements made to be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. I do. Thank you. Please state your name and business address for the record. John Carney, benchmark engineering, 330-0 North Rig Road, suite 140. I like it so you may not know, 21042. So I should know this, but it's J-O-H-N. Correct. K-A-R-N-E-Y. C-A-R-N-E-Y. Okay. Crossed it out twice. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Carney. How are you employed? I'm a civil engineer for benchmark. Okay, and how long have you been a civil engineer for benchmark engineering? I've been a licensed engineer for 10 years. and you have worked on development proposals in Howard County, is that correct? Correct. And how long have you done that? About 28 years. And you've had the opportunity to testify before the Howard County hearing examiner in prior cases, is that correct? Correct. Okay. I want to take you to this proposal for a conditional use BA-24032. Just in general terms, and I would ask our first exhibit be the conditional use plan, would ask that it be shown to the public electronically. No, this is just a general. This was a regular exhibit, the conditional use plan. And while Cal brings that up, I would ask you to just generally describe the site's property, what's being proposed, the surrounding environments and so forth. The site is a little over five acres. It is located on Clark's field pipe. So could we pin that one down? Is it 5.11 or 5.24 or a different number? We have on our boundary survey 5.11. Thank you. Then that's what I'm going to take if that's what you say this. That's fine. Okay. Because the staff said differently. Correct. I don't know the reason for that discrepancy. That's okay. If you're swearing it's 5-11. It's 5-11. Thank you. This exhibit does not look familiar. I have hard copies of the plan if you'd like. In fact, would you like a hard copy of the plan, the large scale plan, conditionally used plan? That would be super if you have one. Particularly if you have the larger one that's in front of you right now. That's legible, but you can see. I do however have a magnifying glass, but it's more helpful. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Rowland. I'll get you a copy of it then. Australia, would you have a smaller copy for me to refer to? For the CU? Yes. I had it. Is it on the back of it? I had it in the packet that I gave you? No. You mean, would you just give us tonight? Yes. I thought there was a page, small page, and see you on there. Okay, it doesn't look good. There was, but I have this. Yeah, it's good. Thank you. So, it's what you just passed by there, Count. It's that, you know. It's that. That's good. Can you make it small? Yeah, perfect. So Mr. Cronie you're saying it was 5.11 acres. 5.11 acres, yes. Okay. It's bounded by Route 108 to the north and Cedar Lane to the west and then Beach Creek subdivision around the other two sides. We are proposing access from Cedar Lane, not from Route 108. The subdivision itself consists of 16 duplex units and then two sets of four townhouse units. They're the same size footprint, but they're just, you know, the four units are four connected and the other ones are just two connected together. The units along Route 108 are going to have their sides towards Route 108 and they're going to share driveways that come out to the internal road. There's going to be a community center that is going to be as you enter the subdivision on the left of the road coming in with a patio area around it. The road's going to come in and, you know, front on all the lots and then have a call to sack ball. That's going to be big enough for safety, for fire safety vehicles to turn around. We will have landscaping around the exterior of the property, including shade trees, evergreen trees and offence. We're also going to utilize a berm along Route 108. There is forest conservation areas proposed as you enter the subdivision on the subdivision road on the right and the left. And then there's an area further back towards the Beach Creek subdivision where there's also farce conservation area. The farce conservation area on the right as you come in is going to overlap the wetland and the wetland buffer areas down there. We're proposing storm water management, microbiota retention facilities and dry well facilities. There are several specimen trees on site. We'll be retaining some of those and some of those are in the way of the development. Unfortunately. Are you retaining a lot of the existing vegetation? Yes. As far as the trees. The wooded vegetation. Going back to the pre-submission meeting which The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that you're using. The way that this was a proposal for townhomes? Yes. And the residents who were expressing concern do they themselves live in townhomes? Do not remember where they lived, but I believe that it was a- Well, Beach Creek is a townhome neighborhood, is there right? Well, Beach Creek does have single-family houses and it also. Okay. Your proposal is for how many units? Okay. Step back. Sorry. The specimen trees before you leave that. I see they're appear to be six specimen trees. I believe one of them is in the root 108 right of way. So I see on the plan. One, two, three, four. One, two, three. Two, three. So are you looking at sheet two? I'm looking at sheet two of three. Okay, as the road comes in, there's one tree that kind of hidden on the north side of the subdivision road. So that's number one, right? That's the rest of the tree one. Two and three are off to the right from there. Right. Down towards the wetlands. Then four and five. I'm sorry, five and six are back in the first conservation easement to the south and east and the number four is in those duplexes right there in that same area the second set of duplexes from the call-to-circle. Thank you very much there's four and then seven and three one out in the route one-eight right away just north of the new Artists Act, Bob. Looks like it's kind of in the road. Ah, thank you so much. Okay. All right. So you indicated probably in your discussion with DAB, if not with the technical staff, that there would be probably a follow-up request to remove some of the specimen trees. So it looks to me like two, three, five, and six are fully sustainable where they are. So you would be coming in ask for One four and seven Sakura So if you look on page three The remarks column. Yeah, I'll have a page three Would you like a page three? I Add on the page three. I only have a page two. So one was to be removed for the access. Two and three were to be retained. Four was removed. Five and six were to be retained. And seven was to be removed. And then she three does that. And she can get a copy of one and three. He pages one and three. She's one and three. The county only copy of that. I understand that is not anything I can do tonight that would have to be thank you very much and ask a later application should this get approved. I'm just going Mr. O. No, that's fine. Mr. Carney and how many units, senior units, are you proposing on this property? 26. 26. Now that is based on the age that you have included in this conditional use plan. What is that acreage that you selected? So, what we have done is we have subtracted out parcel lot 163. Okay. And so, it is based on... So what's the acreage of 163? It's slightly over one acre. One second. Per the record plat dated November 9 of 85, it was 1.0720 acres. Thank you. It's really good to be able to see things. Okay, so. So we have based the density on the 4.04 acres. It does not include that. That's a lot. Okay right. So, okay. Stop there for one second. That's wrong. All right. Lot 163 is 1.072 acres. And you included that in your density calculation. Did you? No. No. Did not include that. You backed that out. Correct. So the 5.11 acres, I back out from that, the 1.0720 to get the net. That's what we did, yes. Okay. Please. Okay. So that results in 4.04. I can't quite hear you if you would just keep your voice up a little bit. That results in 4.04 acres. 4.04. Gross. Gross. Yes. Gross. Okay. Yes. Okay. And using that figure, you were extrapolating the density. Correct. Okay. And somewhere here in this technical staff, it did the math for me. So. Page three. Here's a question. Mr. O, you can answer it. Yes. So on the technical staff report on page three yes item number two under 4 a evaluation and consideration Tissioner asserts that lot 163 which is designated as non-buildable open space for the Beach Creek subdivision could also be used for density calculations for this petition, but you are not doing that. We did not. open space for the Beach Creek subdivision could also be used for density calculations for this petition, but you are not doing that. We did not. We specifically met with them and told that we would not. Okay, but that takes a big confusion out of it. All right, so going on, the rest of that paragraph, I'm going to paraphrase it into the positive light. So the proposed development will consist of 26 ARH dwelling units on 4.4, 4.04 net. So it's net acre to grow, say, it is net. So if it's net, you've taken out the flood plain and the Steve slopes. You know, I'm not a mathematician, but 5.11 minus 1.07 is going to be close to 4.04. So that would be gross. There were no other subtractions. The wetlands, et. It's not wetlands. It's floodplain in steep slopes. That's the definition of net. You deduct those two. Okay. All right. Okay. Then going on with that sentence, which equates to 6.44 dwelling units per acre. This is less and the maximum density of seven dwelling units per acre allowed for an AR-A-H in the RSC zone, which would allow 28 dwelling units. Is that a correct statement? Other than the first part, whether you assert that that's what we are asserting that we want to count that? I've crossed that part out. If that's done, the rest of that is accurate and you can see they do the analysis 4.04, which is the deletion of law 163. Okay, so the development provides two acres or 49 percent of the property is open space. Yes. Correct. Correct. Correct. Yes. Correct. Okay. Which exceeds 35% requirement. Okay. All right. Thank you for letting me ask that question. And if I may, if you would take a proffer, I just wanted to kind of make sense of the additional documents we sent a little bit of history. In 2009 or thereabouts, there was a development known as Shipley Meadows. It was subdivided. And often in the RSC zone, four units to the acre is what the density is. But if you elect to do single family attached units, most of the time you don't wind up using the entire parcel. Roughly half of it just winds up as an space area. They did that in Shipley, Meadow. But the intent after the residential subdivision was to place a conditional use on the remainder of the parcel. Some of the community objected to that, said saying that you can't put a conditional use on land where you've already used all the density. And essentially the legislative compromise on that is the provision that you see in 130, I believe it's C, saying that in order to do a conditional use on the residual portion of which you use the residential density, if you retain one residential unit, that is the cost of being able to keep yourself eligible for a conditional use. So you can keep, you can build a conditional use on that area that you set aside but you have to save one residential unit for a lot to be combined with that area in order to be eligible for a conditional use. That was the rule and that's what it was enacted. Okay, but as I understand what you're saying tonight, we've taken 163 on the table. We have. So chapel gate and Chippley Meadow are no longer at issue here tonight. That's very astute of you to observe. That's correct. We were asserting the point of law that we can, if we want to include a lot, 161, but we haven't, we didn't. And so it's really not an issue there. That's why I was so surprised that they inserted that issue again into the staff report. So I just wanted to explain that. I appreciate that. And that's what caused me to ask for that plat today. Thank you. Yeah, I appreciate it. And I just want to note for the record, the plat 6th-th-a-55 is different from the sketch plan. DPC keeps calling it an open space parcel. If you look at plat 6th-th-a-55, it is not open space. It was never identified as open space. In fact, I Mr. Rudder will talk about how open space and the requirements of open space were regarded in the mid 80s. But at the time of the recreation of this plat, the final recreation does not have this designated as an open space parcel. So I wanna make that abundantly clear that is an error in the DPC technical staff report, a report that is otherwise very comprehensive and accurate. I believe they made that error several times. So I just wanted to point that out. The node also explains very clearly that this lot is non-buildable until it is merged with another lot at which point in time it could be re-subdivided. We intend to do that as part of the site plan if this application were to be approved. It didn't make sense to do it now in anticipation that the conditional use will be approved. So we talked to planning and zoning and planning and zoning would be okay with that. And certainly there will be a consolidation of parcels if this conditional use were to be approved. So like I said, Mr. Rutters, here to answer any question. Mr. Carney can answer any questions or verify my proffer. But in fact, I think you got the point that this issue of density is really not before you in this case. Right, okay. So, but you're proffering that you're going to take 163 and re-subdivide it so that whole area will no longer be as designated on your plan for us conservation. No, not quite right. I believe 163 is the only lot that was referenced as something other than a lot for the purpose of Beach Creek subdivision. And I think initially DBZ said that's an open space lot. You can't remove that from Beach Creek. What we showed was we have plenty of open space above and beyond the requirement of requiring lot 163. And therefore. Right now your site plan shows berms on 163. Correct. Yes. berms, pretty much berms. So what's going to happen to the berms? What the berms are a proposed feature? Well, they're on the site plan if I approve it. Yes, I don't know if this is your question. There's never been a question about whether the conditional use can go on land that was computer for residential density purposes. The question is, do you count that again if it's a proposal for senior housing? No, I think we're good. You and I understand that issue. We understand that issue. My question is, right now, if I approved this site plan, lot 63 has on it on this plan, berms. And a road, the access road. And the access road. And you're saying in the future, under the section of the code you cited that I can't remember, you're going to come in and re-subdivide that? We're doing is joining it with the other. There's a total of eight lots here right now. And so it makes no sense to have those lot lines on one comprehensive development. So to the extent that it makes sense, I'm sure DPC will ask us to do a consolidation plan and probably create one lot for everything. Right. So. But I'm left with the question that I misunderstand you when you said You were going to add more development to 163 in the future. No, absolutely not No residential units are gonna go on 163 the only thing there is their access roads Stonewater Management and the berms that you pointed out. Okay. All right First conservation and parking lots and first concern and and the reason why why we were comfortable with taking that density out was because we elected to do single-fime attached units. We didn't need the density from a lot 163. All right. All right. All right. So I think we made some headway on that, Mr. Carney. I don't know if you were able to speak to any of the DAP comments and their recommendations and what the team elected to do based on that. They went back to the DAP and I believe secured DAP's approval of the revised materials, is that right? Okay. Can you describe what they were seeking, how you would arrest it and the ultimate conclusion? There was, I remember all of the debt points, but they were concerned about the units that are having their sides to root 108. And we looked at rotating those units so that they would be facing our subdivision road. There's a requirement that you have to have 20 feet from the sidewalk to the garage of those units. And those units are a certain depth. And when we added all that together, we ended up pushing into the building restriction line, the setback line. So we were not able to do what DAP had requested on that. did relocate one of those duplexes down towards the cul-de-sac bulb to kind of open it up a little bit and to have that access come in directly off the cul-de-sac. Give a little more spacing in there. We actually, I believe, grabbed three parking spaces there in that area. All right. Bear with me just one minute. All right, Mr. O presented tonight a letter that someone wrote on behalf of brush year, a brush, and it's the a data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data data That's what you just addressed. The setback requirements do not allow us to rotate the housing units. We have maintained the same orientation. Correct. That's what you just said. Okay. And point three also kind of is wrapped into that same conversation. Okay. Right. I got that. Okay. Point one of the response letter was for improved landscaping with additional evergreens at the buffer and more grasses and plants within buyer retention area as street tree planting along internal streets. And we revised the landscape plan the illustrative landscape plan to share that. Okay you haven't given it to me because the landscape predates this and but you're going to. Yes you you're saying you are going to do that you are going to revise in accordance with DAPS recommendations with number one. I believe the illustrative plan that we have in the record does show the revisions. It predates DAPS. I understand the date is wrong but the changes to the substance plan remet. It's of no consequence because you're not going to accept that. Okay, okay. I just wanted you to know that the only emission was the date. Verify and that it's not a luster to the physical plan. That's right. Okay, okay, if we take care of that, that would be super. All right, number four, the letter is simplify the front elevations of the housing units, reorient the community building entrance to face the parking. Did you do that? Should we just let Brasier address that? Yeah, we can let the architect address that. Okay. All right. Okay. So let me look at that for one second. All right. The first depth comment also included with with the landscaping a central planting area in the cul-de-sac and the fourth would be to supplement and better define the street scape using the American lindens or another medium-sized tree. So you said that you accept the American lindens, but nothing is being said about the Central Planning Area in the cul-de-sac. I don't think we reached a conclusion on that point. Okay. So between now and the landscape plan, a conclusion will be drawn? Yes. Maybe perhaps Mr. Bray should address that. Alright, it's good. Alright. All right. So the second app point was the applicant should consider the advantage of reorient and the units on the northern side. Is that the same issue of moving the duplexes front to back as opposed to side to side? Okay. Okay. Okay. All right. And then you're going to have the architect testify as to the facades and they're All right, and last comment by DAP was, oh, the orientation of the community building and your architect's gonna talk to that too. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Now I can, I could, with Mr. Carnie, go through each and every criteria and try to guess it, which one might have the concerns about. The report is, I think indicate satisfaction of all the criteria. And I think Mr. Carney would concur with that, but unless there's any specific. Why don't you ask Mr. Carney whether he would adapt the technical staff report? Is this testimony know if the staff report is accurate and would in substance be the same as the testimony you provide tonight. Does the staff report adopt the staff report? Other than the discrepancies that we have discussed, would you in general believe that the staff report is accurate and would in substance be the same as the testimony you provide tonight. With one small exception to that being the zoning history. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. BA 12 008C was granted on 524, 2012 and that was for Beach Creek Lot facility. You referenced that. That was approved, right,, Mr. Carnegie? That was granted, yes. And let's talk about that, because that's an interesting subject matter. Currently, do you agree with me? There were four single family detached homes kind of in the 1940s character on these properties. Correct. And there are rentals, or I think the hair salon might be in one of them. Yes, that's all right. And they all have direct access to one away via private driveways. Is that correct? Correct. There was a proposal as you indicated for a conditional use on one of those last for a child daycare center that proposal was approved, correct? Correct. And ultimately, When? When? At 2012? 524, 2012. 524, 12, thank you. I think you and I were both there, right, Mr. Croni? Yes. OK. But a long time. OK. Subsequent to that approval, however, that Child Day Care Center was never constructed, is that right? Correct. OK. And would you agree that part of that was that the frontage improvements required for that development made that project infeasible? The frontage improvements along Route 108. Route 108. And the telephone poles and the axle of diesel lanes and all of that was expensive. Okay. So would you agree, and if we could pull up exhibit number one of the conditional use plan for the public to view, I would appreciate that. I wanted to bring your attention to the property lines along Route 108. And I don't know how great you can see it here, but I noticed that looking at the property lines, some kind of jog in, some of them go out further to 108 and so forth. Is this a product of some lots, either not having been part of a previous subdivision plan or right away not being dedicated? I mean, in general, it's a mess out there right now. Would you agree with that? All the frontage, yes. Okay, and so part of this proposal is really to eliminate those individual entrances and exits on route one-away, have a consolidated development that comes off the lesser road, and to provide a better streetscape from route one-away. And the views of these what are kind of older residential lots, that correct? Would you agree with that? I agree. Okay. I think those are the questions that I have from Mr. Carney if we could. All right. I've got some. So working our way through the Technical Staff Report, we agree that the first page is an error because the acreage is 5.1105.24. We work our way through the fact on page two, the site description references, plat 6855, and the fact that 163 will be used as density. And that is an error. We go on to page three, the zoning history. You've indicated there is zoning history on one of the four existing homes, VA 12008C, a conditional use for a child care facility. It was approved on 52412 and it was never constructed due to the frontage requirements making it financially not feasible. Going on down on page 3, 4A2 is the discussion about lot 163 that we agree is in error. All right, going to page four references the illustrative landscape plan. So we're gonna take care of that comment, right, Mr. O? Yes, ma'am. 3B to make sure that the buffers and everything and any requirements of depth that you're fulfilling and a look at the planting in the circle. All right. Then we come to page five and the parking is the parking comments don't necessarily line up in the technical staff report. So on page five, there's a reference to the fact that there's a five parking space deficiency in the plan and the petitioner asserts the 26 foot wide internal roadway can accommodate this deficiency. Is there a deficiency? And if so, there's parking spaces if they're going to be provided on the roadway need to be on the site plan as marked. I believe I'm reading this now. 15 spaces adjacent to community center and three spaces between the two groups of somebody detached and they're indebted parking spaces. And then yes, we will be utilizing the parking on the street to make up the deficiency. All right, so we need the five spaces and Mr. O. Let's see. You are not providing a revised conditional use plan that if I approve it, I can require that. Would you like the locations identified specifically? Because I think it will vary along the screen. Yes, they should be marked on the plant where they are. OK. Yeah. And if it's just as easy for you to do it up front, because you're already doing the landscape plant, that would be super too. OK. So we're going to landscape letter and three revised plan showing, showing the five spaces. Okay. Continuing down on page five, it indicates that the point of access for the, and I'm in D, I'm on five paragraph D. It says that the point of access for the development may not meet intersection separation requirements and DED and DPW will need to evaluate this during the STP review phase. Tell me about that. There's a corner clearance requirement. DED recommended us to look at section in their specific comments. It was section 2.5 of the design manual volume 3. This was in the comments that attended to the technical staff report. Okay. Correct. All right. Data in November 25th, 24. Okay. And I look to that section and that requires 75 foot corner clearance and we are providing 85 on this plan. You can't feed. So you don't feel that there's a problem there? No, I do not. Okay. Precites, precise site distance measurements can only be determined by a detailed site plan, site distance analysis, which is typically conducted during the site plan development review. I understand that. Going down to E, the proposed design includes protecting the required 25 foot wetland buffers and that is shown on the bottom left corner the right side of the entrance feature and indicates three forest conservation areas. So tell me, helping identify the forest conservation easement is located where specimen tree 5 is. For us conservation easement is located where specimen tree 1 is. Where is the third for us conservation area? There's, as you come into the subdivision road A A there's one to the left and one to the right God and then further back By the cul-de-sac there's another area back there. Okay. Thank you. I got that The one with the wetlands is that one on the right Thank you. All right going down to historic structures. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. Okay. All right. So in the DAP report on page three of five, the middle of that references the daycare facility, conditional use, and you've already indicated yes indeed this is an error and you've corrected that you've told me about the child facility. All right. There's our... Uh oh, no. We're not done. All right. the last possibly question that I have is with regards to page 7 of the petition. And you can tell me where else it's located, Mr. O, because I just happen to see it on page 7 of the petition. And it's item number 15. So an ARH-A-R-A-H is required to incorporate all of the required universal design guidelines and the universal design guidelines go on to list items that are desirable and items that are custom options. So I'm just going to deal with the required ones. So on your petition, you provide four of the required items, but all of the rest of the required items have to be provided. And I don't see a reference to or testimony as to whether or not they are going to be provided. So Mr. Cardiff, is there an intent to provide universal design features for all the age restricted units? Yes, there is. Okay. All of the required. All of the required. Yes. So that's like there are 11 requires and all 11 will be provided. Yes. Okay. All right, I think that's me for the moment. So I seized that there are some citizens present here tonight and I don't know if any of you have any questions of Mr. Carney. This, this, I'm giving you an opportunity to ask Mr. Carney questions. It's not an opportunity for you to speak at this time. Does anybody have any questions they want to ask of me? OK, ma'am. I'll come up here. Cal, can you set her up on one of the speakers now? All right, good evening, ma'am. Good evening. Can you please state your name and address to the record? My name is Trina Bork and my address is 10810 Beach Creek Drive. B-O-R-K. B-O-R-K. Thank you. Okay. What questions would you have of Mr. Carney? I apologize for traffic. I missed a first couple of minutes in the meeting. So this may be addressed, but on the far east side of the development, where it butts up against Beach Creek, they're taking away a lot of the trees. They're gonna be putting an offense in a new tree line. My question was how are you handling water runoff and erosion because there's historically been a water issue because it's then a hill down to the townhouses. They are along there. There's eight townhouses. And so many, many years ago, the H.O.A. had to come in and re-grade to help provide some remediation for flood issues. But a lot of our concerns is just removing a lot of the trees. Is that going to, where's the water going to go? This was actually brought up in the pressubmission meeting. Mr. Carney, you want to speak to this? Yes. We're at the maximum along that property line. We're moving about 20 feet of trees. We are putting in the fence and some other landscaping as you stated. Right. We are also going to treat the rooftops of those buildings in dry wells which are a practice, some water practice that goes in the ground. It's a rocks, you know excavation data about six feet, fill it with stones and then put the down spouts into that. Oh, okay. So that will infiltrate into the ground. Okay. So that's what we're going to do for the rooftop. The dryways and the cul-de-sac ball we're We're going to go to a bioretention facility. That's going to be up closer to one away. OK, I saw that on the site plan. And that's going to be up closer to 1-8. Okay, I saw that on the site plan. And that's going to drain to that defined swell at this charge point goes down kind of a long 1-8 to the very intersection of Beach Creek and 1-8. Okay. So that's what that's going to go. Okay, so with the pardon me because I'm not. with the dry wells wells like how quickly does the water come out of those I guess because the problem we've had is Water it can actually see but like from behind the hill. Is that makes sense? We've had that issue in the past so So these practices you know they the excavations usually down six feet. Okay, there's a little bit of layer of sand and then some stone. Okay. And then about a foot of soil on top of that. Okay. So, and they're sized according to the volumetric runoff, Okay. So generally these are probably eight by eight kind of sized facilities. Five feet deep, eight by eight, you know know Okay, so that should hold the decent amount. Yeah, hold the decent amount. Okay You know over like a 10-year storm or a hundred-year storm they don't normally get put into these facilities Right, you know they the facility will have like a pop-up emitter or at the downspout location when that pipe backs up It'll flow out there like kind of like a normal downspout right Okay, so all their downsides at the downspout location when that pipe backs up, it'll flow out there like a normal downspout. Right. OK, so all their downspouts. And that will be overly inflow. At the moment are draining into these dry wells then from the roofs. From, yes, not right now, but the development. Not right now when you build it. Yeah, it'll be. So instead of just draining out the side of the house, it's gonna drain into the dry well. Correct. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. And we have one for each facility. Okay. Yep. Thank you. And we have one for each facility. Okay. For the back of the houses and then for the ones on the end we showed ones for the front of the house also. Okay. And then you said the like the cold the sack and driveways are draining towards that retention pond right along 108. Okay, thank you. That was my question. I was just concerned about flooding because it's been an issue in the past. No, it's a good question. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Does anybody, Sarah, come on up and take a seat. I guess I want to address one more thing for that last question. Okay. Good real fast. During the construction, we will have super silk fence or silk fence, you know, along the perimeter of the property for the during the construction phase. Okay. All right, sir. Would you state your name and address? Cian is he on, Kel. Yes. My name is Robert Austin. I can't hear you. My is Robert Austin and I live at one zero eight two zero old woods way and That is all for Beach Creek My question is more to the last meeting That I attended that discussed the aesthetics and the plans and the layouts that that directly related to my home. My home is on the side that will connect to the new homes that are being built. So we're more connected to what may be the backyard of those homes and what exists now in the back of our homes. on my side is a tree line that was there, that's there now that in the plans that were submitted and that we saw last year it looked like all of that was going to be removed and it was just going to be some grassland or it was just a couple of what looked like a few bushes that seemed to represent the removal of all of those trees that it's just now behind our homes. And that coming to this meeting today, I heard that there may have been a change to that to now have a little bit more privacy between the new homes and the back of our homes. Am I addressing this correctly or? I don't think there's been any substantial changes to the location of the back of those units. So the back of the unit? So the back of the unit? Relic into the boundary line? So what we saw last year in the plans which meant to clear out all of those trees remaining or? There's some area in there that we have defined as wetlands, that a natural resource consultant defined as wetlands and we located that, markings in the field and then we built a forest retention area kind of around that, retaining some of those trees as you first come in. Do you know which lot you are? Well, Well my plat is like one I believe 163, 165 somewhere around that. I live directly next door to the first one three five six maybe you could approach him with your with your naked point out the I only have area three of the beach creek. I can. You want to use the illustrative landscape. And that would show. in the forest conservation area where it's best once a five to six below 10. That's my view. I'm going to do this. I'm going to have to do it. Thank you. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give you a hand. I'm going to give Each crepe is a thing that comes up. We then would be roughly here. This is my home here and this is where the tree line is currently where all the trees would be. So this is actually my house here, and this is my neighbor's house here. So what does this have to do with me? So I'm planning improvements in that area. So there's no trees there. What is the plan? Let me get back to my microphone. Mr. Carney, what is Mr. Austin's lot? He is in the first or second group of townhouses on old time. Old woods. Second group of townhouses on old woods. So I don't have streets so. You could see it on the plat. He's in the group of life. 91 to 94. 93 is this house. A lot of 90 three section on area. Right here. Thank you. Yep. So what we have the honeycomb hatch that is on the plans now. Okay. It is forest retention area. So that would be retaining those trees in perpetuity. Okay so there be trees there. The trees that are there now will remain. In this honeycomb hatch area would remain. There's a little bit more on the far side from you. Okay. That we will be needing to remove for those duplex units. Okay and that pretty much answers it until I see a a little bit more. I'm saying definition and stuff later on, I guess. But the other question went to the clarity on 55 and over as far as the individuals that can purchase homes there. Is this to mean that there are no children going to be in the development? How is that going to be controlled? When it comes to our homes there and anyone coming in there, we're worried about traffic and everything that can happen from, we've already had that that rented in that area that will come through the backyard and stuff like that so how is that going to be controlled on anyone that may have other children over how you're going to prevent someone living there from having their niece nephew or grandchild living with them and then that affects affects us. And you ask that out? Mr. Oak and property. Yeah. So this is an age restricted community, which means binder Howard County law and also enforced by covenants that are placed on the property that are enforced by the Home Utters Association of this development. Children are only allowed to stay with an age restricted unit no more than 90 days out of the year. So they can visit and so forth, but you cannot have school-aged children. In fact, one resident has to be over 55. a spouse that is under 55, I believe, can stay there, but ultimately, the federal law also requires that the individuals living there be over 55. Section 62, as far as federal law goes. So we can expect periods of 90 days that children will be running through, say, for the summertime and all of that. Well, first of all, I, I'd like to say to you that that is in fact the case. My experience has been probably the biggest enforcers of not having children in the neighborhood or the residents of the senior dales themselves. You get a, the get off my lawn. Mentality very strongly in those. And the very last question is development time and noise factor through development. What's the development period? Just estimation, once groundbreaking has started, should this be a problem I would imagine that you would probably see disruption through the entire construction period of maybe close to a little over a year maybe up to about a year and a half maybe okay will there be any changes to the noise restrictions such as all we've had special they would there be special conditions for someone's, for a group starting early or maybe ending late, because of a certain part of the, you know, I'm saying project needs to be completed by a certain time, so we're gonna expect, you know, construction to be heard at 6 AM and ending at 10 or at 10 or 9 p.m. something like that. No there is no exemption to the noise ordinance for Harrow County for construction. Certainly I can't guarantee that they'll never be a violation but in fact they are supposed to comply with noise ordinances and I fully expect them to do that. But thank youamakwa. Yes, absolutely. All right, thank you, Mr. Ostam. Sir, step up. Oh, yeah. Hi. All right, let's see. My name is Kirk Waiiger. This is Karen Jetson. We both live at 10822 Oldwoodsway, Roberts neighbors. First question I got. This drawing is up here is that more current I have a November 5th 2024 drawing and just based on the location and the specimen trees or five and six it's different than the one was up on the border. Okay so the one up there was older I guess. Showed different to your eye and especially the details and different locations. Okay. So the one up there was older, I guess. Showed a different line, especially in the details and different locations. Okay. This is the current one. That's a different line. Yeah. The specimen trees are almost on the property line. Yeah. Or here or there farther off. So can you see what the date on that plan is? cannot read from you Down by my lower right by the seal Just needs to be blown up I'll take your work that this is later. We have feel located on and we will be using the field location for Everything from now on. Okay, and I guess in definition, I'll explain. I don't exactly, you have .15 areas of retention. It does not have retention bond in there. That's actual retention. What's the definition of that? Retention is saving the trees. Oh, okay. And a reforestation would be planting, or a fire station would also be. Okay. So that's the case. But in this case, we're retaining the trees in this area. The area a little bit further to the right over towards the north. One that towards the east actually, there will be some planting in that area. So that forest conservation easement near your house directly behind you will be retention as you look out your back door to the right will be planting. Okay. We'll be planted planted. And said there'll be more plants trees there to the right. But behind us you are going to maintain the not the full width, but but a good portion of it. Okay, so I think we have. I mean, you showed the two big ones there being retained, but there's much of another dozen smaller ones. Yeah. They'll also stay. Yes, they'll stay for where the lines move down. Yeah. Yeah. When we build those four units that are kind of close to our call to Sackball, we have to clear some of those trees. And that's, there's one specimen tree in that area that we'll be taking out. Right. You'll see that. Yeah, we can see the yellow ribbons around the trees from our deck. But anyway, when the new planting goes, do we have any input on that? Because we'd like to see some, like, evergreens along the new development side. They try to block that visually and sound wise. I believe you can plant evergreens in the reforestation area. We have not gotten to that point to do a planting planting yet. That will be part of the site development plan. Okay. I think this question is right ahead. I just had one. So traffic, you know, it's hard for us to traffic. It's hard for us to come out of our division onto 108 as it is. So, you know, now this is going to be a lot more people trying to get onto 108 to go go wherever. You know, are there plans for, I don't know, a street light or, you know, anything like that to help? So we're going to be removing all the driveways between Beach Creek and Cedar, Cedar Lane. So all those driveways that come out from the houses that are there now on the small businesses. Right. They're all going to be removed. They're only three or four houses. Four. Four houses. Yeah, and that's not... Yeah, that's not... That's not really the problem. It's just the traffic on 108, being... Our vehicles are going to come out the cedar and then come up to that signalized intersection. Right. go whichever way they go from there. We will have to do a traffic impact study. Yeah, I was good to say. OK. intersection and then go whichever way they go from there. We will have to do a traffic impact study. Yeah, I was good to say. Okay. Yeah. Because we're coming out of Beach Creek onto 108. And right now, I mean, it's just hard even now to try and make a left turn. You know what I mean? So you would have to do then a street study or whatever you say. We do a impact study. Impact study? Yeah. You understand what I'm saying, right? Yes. Okay, that's good. I just, I wanted to, I'm not a traffic engineer, but I've worked with that in a long enough, but I've worked with them long enough to no understand their methodology. Let's say we have 26 units, roughly, let's say 33% of them leave during the rush hour in the morning, because rush hour is the toughest time, right? So 7 to 9. So if you're talking about one of those hours and a third of them going during the one hour, so let's call it 10 just to overestimate. You're talking about 10 vehicles coming out of this development within an hour. So 10 divided by 60 minutes. It's like one car every, what is that? 6's this development itself is not adding a lot of cars to one-way. I know there's a lot of cars on one-way. They're coming from Clarksville and other areas and so forth. I just wanted to say out of this development, you're going to see close to 10 cars additional on Route 108 during the rush hour. That's when the heaviest. And you're saying that because it's 60 or 50, what does it say? No, no, actually it should be lower because it's senior, but in general, in rush hour, you know, not every 26 houses all leave at the same time. They spread out over between 7 to 9 and 4 to 7 in the afternoon. So what you try to do is during the rush hour, how many cars is adding to the network? And so if you look at the 26 units, not all 26 go out. So I'm going to overestimate and say 10 seniors still work and go. That's a pretty fair estimate of what you can expect. I'm not sure I agree with you because I think 26 occupants, you know, times two cars. Yeah, but they don't they don't all work and they don't all go out of the same time. So I'm just telling you and you could be skeptical what I say. But there's traffic engineers who are engineers certified. And this is their methodology on what they predict. And generally, although a lot of people say, I don't know if I agree with that, they every year they use the same and tweak them based on all the uses throughout the United States. So it's been my experience. It's a pretty reliable predictor of what. There's a school, home would school there. Under department of education is there. I mean, so there's, you know, I'm sure you know. Anyway, but yeah, so that was my other. Yeah, just one final question. The forest conservation area because it's being retained, there won't be any regrading in that area. We can't regrade in the retention areas. The reforestation areas or far station areas we could grade through those and then plant in that graded area Most of regrating with kilone trees. Yeah, and that includes you know field dirt and an excavation But I don't we don't do it's hard to pick your contour lines off a herb and it doesn't seem to be any new and so that area no All right, thank you and just one more question. How far into the process are we your contour lines off the air but it doesn't seem to be any nuance in that area. No. Okay. All right. Thank you. And just one more question. How far into the process are we? I mean, this is the beginning. Yes. Oh, it's the beginning. To it may not even go through. Right. That's right. If it does, what's the estimated time of construction? He said a year, but a year and a half. Starting today, you're probably not going to see construction for over a year. There's several. If the conditional use is approved which is being asked for tonight, there's several layers of site plan reviews that need to occur before you ever get a shovel in the ground. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. And the site plan stage is the one you were most interested in, the specific design plan, because you want to make sure that there are evergreens. Right, because it's beautiful. We have something like that. And that's what you need to participate in when it's time for that one. OK. I appreciate that. Thank you. All right. Thank you. So there's one more gentleman here. Would you like to have some questions? So if you could just state your name and address for the records. My name is John Jennings. I do not live in the subdivision there. I live up to the lane at Heritage Green across from the athletic fields. My concern has to do with traffic. So questions? You can't make a statement right now, but you can ask questions. Oh, well, I need to give some background in order to ask the question. Okay, let's see how far you go. Okay. Rush out traffic 108 and C-L-E. You got five or six cars going north on You got five or six cars going north on Cedar blocking your entrance to your development. Cars are going 108 north and they're turning into Cedar Lane and they want to turn into your unit of element. What's your solution for that? You got gridlock. Generally, once the driveway, once our access road is built, people will see it as they come up and will stop and have a space between their car and the car ahead of them. If they backed up that far, and then the car coming south from Cedar will be able to turn into a road A. That's an ideal situation. I don't see that. That's all I have. Okay, all right. That's gonna be a problem. Thank you, sir. All right, let's see. Mr. O, do you have any further questions? Mr. Carney? No, I don't. All right, Mr. Carney. Thank you very much. Thank you for participating. Thank you. I think we'd like to call either Victoria or Mr. Brasier, not sure which one. By there, them could be elevated. Mr. Brasier, you're able to unmute yourself and turn your camera on at this time. Can you hear me now? We can hear you. We cannot see you. Well, I have my camera on. At the bottom of the screen where it says camera or start video. Yeah, let me see. Can you see me now? You can see your screen, but we can't see you. Well, I've got my cameras on, my little red lights on. I just click start video and it's not here. Can you see me now? No, why don't you sign off and sign back in? There you go. Can you see me now? No. Why don't you sign off and sign back in? There you go. Can you see me now? You okay? Okay. All right. So, sorry, I need to just where you in. You could raise your right hand. Thank you. Do you sell me swear or firm under the penalties of purr truly that the response and statements made tonight shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you very much. State your name and address for the record, sir. My name is you want my business address or my home address? My name is Ron Brasier. My business address is 5, 5,att Place, suite 300 Columbia, Maryland. Thank you. Mr. Brasier, good evening. I mean, you were on the line as I was discussing with the hearing examiner that number one, the illustrative exhibit that we prepared needs to be modified to be the landscape plan that the letter that you submitted as a dapleter response needs to be dated. And the date of the landscape plan also has to be reflected to be the correct date after the July 24th da proceeding. You heard all of that. Those are revisions that you can make. Is that correct? Yeah. Okay. Signature. And the signature of for the date response letter. Okay. We can do that. We are not the landscape architect. so we'll have to get the landscape architect to address that and then we can submit it. Yes. Okay. There were a number of questions that there are a couple of questions that the hearing examiner brought up about your response to the DAAP. I believe we're going to be talking about the mass and we'll move to that. But I think the first question was about the cul-de-sac and putting plantings within the cul-de-sac. You opted not to do that. Can you explain to the hearing examiner what the team's thinking was on that? Then again, the landscape architect should be here. We were not the landscape architects. So we really, our response was from the landscape architect that we address. Well, we made the application, so we responded to them. You were at the DAB meeting, is that correct, Mr. Brayden? Yes, I was. OK, and did the issue about the plantings and the coldness that come up? It did okay and After the discussion and your response as to the suggestion Was the DAP satisfied with your response that the plantings would not happen? We did not get a response we submitted our response to their their comments, and we did not, we have not received anything back. OK. Let's go over for that. And I would say on any of the comments that we responded to, we did not get a response back. Who kept this point? Well, this letter has nothing to do with the cul-de-sac issue. Only came up for that. During that, right? Correct. Is the architect coming? Is that Victoria? No, Victoria is also an architect. I mean, the landscape. The landscape? It's OK. The landscape architect, I believe the name was Mark Strunch. Mark Stewart. Yes, I can. Stewart. Do you know of, and we'll get him to finalize that landscape plan. Yes. Yes. But Mr. we are not prepared to have Mr. Stewart here tonight. We can for a future hearing if you if you would like. Yeah I think we were waiting for the responses from to our responses to them. Right. So I would suggest that Mr. Stewart think about that call to suck? Okay. That's fine. I do have Mr. Rudder here. He was here for a different reason. But he has an opinion on that, on the planting and the call to suck. If you're interested. No, I appreciate Mr. Rudder, but I'm not sure on this subject he's the right person. Okay. All right. Mr. Brasher, can you speak to the issues of massing and the architecture on the units as you discuss with a DAB. They were okay with our massing. There was some comments on some facade articulation which we addressed and we actually did change. I don't know if you can pull up our. Sure, let's do that. First of all, and our initial seminal and then our we did these and sent them back to them. And I have the ones you sent back. We'll display those and then you can. Yeah, those those address address their comments. Okay. If we can pull them up, we'll let you explain to the hearing exam or what changes you made. And we have two deal of vacations and we had renderings, three deal renderings. It's part of this and all the... Oh, I thought we did. Maybe we just have hard copies of these. It was part of the application I thought. At least one was color. I'm going to go down a little bit. There they are. That's the clubhouse. Yeah, I think you go down a little bit further. They're there. Keep going. That's our clubhouse. There we go. Tell us when it's stopped. Okay, go back up. Yep. Right there. That's a typical quad elevation. And we simplified our, uh, gabled roofs. We actually had more. Um, we had had some in the middle but we put them on the end at the request to simplify the elevations So this is what we submitted back to them and it's a Passade of stone and s. Next slide. If you want to go down. That's that's the rear. We have rear decks on each one. And again, a more simplified roof. At the request of that as well. Which would be not as busy for people living behind this. Then again glass and siding. And go down and we have renderings. These are like 3D vignettes of what the building would look like. And the rear and the front and the side. And we keep going down. We have 3D renderings. That's a 3D rendering of what the project would look like when built. This is a facade when we have four units. Just to give the massing, that's the rear of four units. Another vignette, a 3D vignette of what the four units would look like. And the rear. We should have more renderings below. Yeah, I think that's what we have right now. Oh, that's it. Okay. There are some other three-day renderings of the four quad that we had as well. Those are the questions. But what we're presenting, what you're saying right here are our revisions to our original submittal that we sent back to DAP. Thank you Mr. Bush. Mm-hmm. So Mr. O. Mr. Bush here cannot testify to number one on this daffrey sponsor letter. Can the architect, excuse me, the landscape architect provide that? Everybody's danced around and said they can't answer any of the landscape questions. I think Mr. Cardi's pretty versed in this. Yeah. I couldn't answer some of these questions. Why don't you take the stand again? Mr. Cardi, you said specifically that you couldn't testify as to this plan. I do see street trees, the lighter green circles. Do you see more and and and and and that you can clarify, Mr. I do see that he has a circle in the middle of his cul-de-sac bulb. On this illustrator plant has a circle in the middle of the cul-de-sac and that could be a landscaped island. Generally, I try not to a civil engineer put a landscape island in there because emergency vehicles have to go around that and school buses if it was a residential neighborhood. Situation like this still a little hesitant for the fire rescue service vehicles. There is a detail in the Howard County Manual for a call to sack with the center island. We are very tight on our area that we have there because of the existing Route 108 right of way and the need for that stormwater management facility to be there. I'd be hesitant to show a circular island there in the middle if it was going to expand the paved area. You're not a landscape architect. But I'm answering from a civil engineering storm water management road design. Right, Mr. O's asking you to testify from a landstake architect. I'm just asking the landstake perspective on it. I believe the hearing examiner ultimately wants to hear from our landscape architect. And that more than fine. Well, I'm okay. If we can do that, that's not a big deal. If they put it in writing, you know, and say whether they're going to a seed to dab with the circle, indeed, whether additional trees, including upper greens, have been added to the 108 buffer, whether indeed six birch trees were added along the northern edge of the bioretension area, grasses and other small plants will be added to the bioretension areas we develop the landscape plan. So at this point in time, you're going to be given me a landscape plan. So let the our landscape architect do their thing and indicate that they've taken care of the data issues. Or why not? Yes. Like the circle, they don't. OK. Definitely. All right. So if you just break that out and let that under somebody else's signature. We will do that. That'll be great. OK. Mr. Carna, you did a bang up job. Not even here, you say I'm an remiss. Cross your plan thought has her hand raised. I don't know if you want to address her. I'm sorry, what? Victoria, I believe she's the link's to the architecture architecture. She's his client. I'm just letting you know she has her hand raised on the line. Yes, thank you. Could we hear from her? Do you want a collar? Yes. I agree with you. Wait a second. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. She has her hand raised on that box. Yeah. Could we hear from her? Do you want a collar? Yes. I'll be right back. Wait a second. So wait, don't let Mr. Pershier go because does anybody here have any questions of Mr. Pershier? No, no, no, no. And no. Okay, now you can let him go. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Let's pull up. and no. Okay now you can let him go. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right let's pull up. I can't still can't see her last name. I can't. Absolutely not see it. Let me see. All right. You're what I'll say. It's where you in me. Yes. There we go. Do you sell me swear affirm under the penalties of perjury? The response is given and statements made tonight will be the truth. The whole truth and nothing but the truth. I do. Thank you. Please state your name and business address for the record. Victoria, cross our plant hold 5560 Stereo Place, Suite 300 300 and Columbia, Maryland. Thank you. Your witness. Thank you. Miss Crosher, Plantork, what was your responsibilities in this plan? I was the project manager for a British design. I submitted the DAP, both the initial presentation and the DAP response. Okay. You had your hand up as we were communicating with the hearing examiner. Is there something that you wanted to provide in addition to what's said? Yes. With in terms of question number one, the comment was addressed by us for DAP or by the landscape architect. We originally did not have a landscape circle in that cul-de-sac, and more additional plantings were planted both along that internal street and around the bioretension pond. It wasn't fully developed yet at this stage, but it is the intention to be adding those plantings as requested by DAP. Those are the questions that I have. All right, and you work for Brisha here? Brisha, design, yes. Okay. And I'm sorry, your qualification, you're not a landscape architect? No, I'm an architect. That's fine. And that's fine. I just want to get my notes right. Okay, all right. Thank you. Does anybody have any questions? Thank you. Nope, nope, and no. All right. Okay, thank you so much. That's our case. This is your case. All right. So now those who have remained, does anybody wish to give testimony tonight? If you do, this is now the time for it. No, no, and you don't have to give, you don't have to ask questions now you could just say whatever you want to say. Oh, you do want to talk okay come take a seat here in the middle. Do I need to state name and address again? I'm gonna swear you in first. Okay. Do you sell me we swear or firm under the penalties of purgey, that their response is given and statements made tonight will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please state your name and how am I dressed for the record? Trina Bork, B-O-R-K, 10810, Beach Creek Drive, Columbia, Maryland. All right. Ireland. What would you like to say about this? I just wanted to reiterate those of us in beach creek. All my neighbors that I've talked to. The main thing we like about the properties is most of us look on trees. So wanted to reiterate having some sort of strong blockage. So we're not looking in the backs of our neighbors, the new developments houses. And I'm sure they don't really want to look in the backs of ours either. They would probably prefer, you know, some sort of greenery, some sort of ever greens tall bushes, something that will block the view to sort of keep the ambiance of both developments more pleasant. And so we're not, you know, staring into each other's living rooms. I appreciate everybody who has come here today to give information and answering my questions and such. And is there a way to find out we were notified by this by our HOA and so is there a way to find out when future meetings are happening to attend? We could discuss that with your HOA. Okay, that would be fantastic. But I guess that's all I wanted to say is, you know, I appreciate all the effort you've put forth and the main thing I think most of us are concerned about right now is just keeping some visual separation between the two developments. You understand. That was it. All right. Thank you for participating. Thank you very much. Do either one of you wish to speak? This is the time for you to talk about anything you want with reference to this project. A question is do you want to bail yourself of that or are you satisfied with what you heard tonight? Your satisfied would you heard? Okay. All right. Then the evidentiary hearing this matter will deem to have been held. The record is going to be kept open for four items. One is the final landscape plan with all of the notations on the block that is the final plan, the revised the new date, et cetera, et cetera. Secondly is the brochure letter that will let's take at item number one, the DAP response letter, make sure the DAP data, the DAP hearing is corrected, put a date on this letter, put a signature line on this letter. The third item is that you will provide a revised site plan showing the location of the five parking spaces on the road. And when you do that, make sure you also revised the date block on the plan to add the new date on there. And the fourth is a letter from your landscape architect so they can respond with regards to what is currently number one on the rest year letter. So there's four items. And then upon receipt of those four items, a decision and order will be forthcoming. And if you all signed in, you all will get a copy of it. Thank you. I got through a little late. There's a sign she did the back of the room. Okay, thank you. Just make sure you know it's on there and then I can read it. And I could thank you. That's important reading. All right, then, that being said, the matter will deem to have been concluded at this time. and I thank everybody for participating and coming tonight. Thank you all. Thank you very much. matter will deemed to have been concluded at this time. And I thank everybody for participating and coming tonight. Thank you all. Thank you very much.