Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 2, 2003 P & Z CommMeridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 5 of 71 and most specifically the special note regarding the applicant's continuing -- continuance of trying to nail down the Intermountain Gas out parcel. End of motion. Mathes: Second. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? Are we assuming that we are in favor of tying the Development Agreement together with the -- Centers: Yes. That was included in staff comment. Borup: Okay. All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 5. Public Hearing: CUP 03-044 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development in a proposed C-G zone for proposed Silverstone Business Campus by Sundance Investments -southeast corner of East Overland Road and South Eagle Road: Borup: Next is item five, Public Hearing CUP 03-044, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development for a proposed C-G zone for proposed Silverstone Business Campus by Sundance Investment. I'd like to open this hearing at this time and start with the staff report. Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, members of the Commission, this item is a Conditional Use Permit fora Planned Development. The property was formally annexed, I believe, just last week. It's located here on the south side of Overland Road about a quarter mile east of Eagle Road. There are three parcels involved and the Preliminary Plat that this body approved and the City Coundil approved last week does propose to create 49 new lots that would have a C-G zone. The red that is in Silverstone Corporate Center currently is also C-G. They have a split zone in Silverstone Corporate Center. They are not proposing a split zone here. They were annexed with the full 80 acres being C-G. Just to remind you that the parcel does have the Eight Mile Lateral that is here on the northern quarter of the parcel. The Preliminary Plat was approved with -- on the south side about a 3,500 foot long, 10-foot wide, multi- use public pathway and they have plans and are moving ahead with that, as well as the plat. My understanding is they have had -- continue to have negotiations with the Corps of Engineers and the Highway District on the parcel that's shown here in red, which the Highway District owns, being shifted to the west to be located more centrally here. What they are proposing tonight with this Planned Developmental, the Development Agreement that was required with the annexation basically put all of the uses in terms of what uses will be permitted in this project, basically deferred any discussion of those uses until this application. The development agreement required that they come in with a Planned Development. There was several discussions between staff and the applicant and, clearly, they did submit that. So, the main reason for this application to be before you, I think, is really to talk about the uses and as you may have seen in the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 6 of 71 staff report, there was some discussion -- one of the conditions dealt with that in particular. They have -- they are proposing two special use areas. I'm just going to skip ahead here to a slide to show you what they are showing in their application. Again, here is Overland Road on the north proposing to extend two public streets to the south in the project and continue Copperpoint Drive here from Silverstone Corporate Center. The Eight Mile Lateral drain is shown here and they are proposing basically standard C- Gzone uses here on the north, some retail along Overland Road, and, then, the special use area A is adjacent to what is shown as future residential on our comp plan to the east and that, really, encompasses all of -- all of special use area A, with the exception of these northerly two lots. Then, special use area B is basically from the Eight Mile Drain all the way south to their south boundary with Sutherland Farms Subdivision. And as they showed in Exhibit C of their application there, they have different uses for these different special use areas and staff did review those, compared them to the Silverstone Corporate Center Development Agreement that already exists, basically just bearing in mind the residential to the east and we recommended four changes to that exhibit and I will just touch on those in just a minute. Two other highlights, though. They are proposing two amenities for the project, since it is a Planned Development, they need to provide two amenities. One of those, of course, is the public pathway. The second one, the ten percent of the project they are proposing in open space and I pointed out that they are just about 8,000 square feet below what would be ten percent. They would need to have a little over eight acres of open space to have ten percent and they have 7.88, so they are just a little shy on that and we have asked for them to submit a revised concept plan that shows where they are going pick up that additional 8,000 square feet of open space. Then on page six of our staff report that was transmitted on September 26, I did mention the open space, that was one of our special considerations and, then, the second one is a plat modification and in their letter basically the applicant, as with many commercial industry developers, is wanting as much flexibility as possible to market the property and they are asking, as I understood it, for some options with lots and just to point out, we don't have in code the ability at staff level to change the number of lots, that would have to be done through another platting process. As they have done with Silverstone, they can do lot line adjustments and maintain the same number of lots, but just to clarify -- to clarify that. There are some photos that they have submitted with their application that show the types. of buildings that would be typical. These are office buildings on the left and retail buildings on the right. The flex and office buildings, which would be primarily in that special use area B, are shown here, a warehouse building there on the right-hand side. Then, some smaller user buildings, some typical elevations are shown there. These smaller buildings -- and I will just go back to the site plan again, would -- what they are proposing is primarily to be along the future residential here on this east side. Then, on page seven, just to highlight, again, on item number two of our conditions, we are recommending that the utility facility major be deleted as a permitted use and that this be only allowed through Conditional Use. The special use area A, we recommended in the staff report a contractor's yard also be deleted. These lots along this eastern boundary are all less than 300 foot as the Preliminary Plat was approved and the ordinance says if you do a contractor's yard it needs to be at least 300 feet away from residential. So, clearly, a standard contractor's yard would not normally be allowed at all on that east boundary, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 7 of 71 because they don't meet the 300 foot separation. I did talk with Mr. Larson today and they have, I think, given some thought to how they would like to maybe amend this. They disagree with the complete deletion. They want the ability to market those eastern lots for contractor's yards. So, I think that's probably one of the main points for the Commission tonight to discuss. I think the other changes that we recommended that all the manufacturing in that special use area A be indoor -- be restricted to indoor and any outdoor manufacturing would need to be pushed on the other side of Topaz, the north- south street there, and, then, D, item 2-D, is limiting the public utility yards to minor public utilities, instead of allowing both major and minor, just restrict that to minor. Then, on the supplemental uses we are recommending that that paragraph be deleted and that basically was requesting some flexibility with their current Silverstone project. There is the Michael's building that some of you may have seen back there that they were looking for some flexibility and this development agreement is a different development agreement than Silverstone Corporate Center, so at least from staffs perspective we didn't see how those two development agreements could really be merged. I think other than that, we have some standard CUP conditions that are in there. The Overland Road -- they are still talking with the Highway District about access points onto Overland Road. Mr. Larson did confirm today that they have not -- that they don't have a date with 'the Highway District on that reconsideration to possibly add another access point to Overland Road. So, I think that's also up for the Commission, whether you're comfortable with just leaving that as it currently stands and they would have to come back to you if there were any significant changes to the plan. On item number four, the last thing I wanted to point out on page seven of the report, the way it words now, the way we worded was the Planning and Zoning Department staff is hereby granted authority to approve modifications to the master site plan that conform to either of the concepts submitted with the application and I will just show you briefly they have submitted three different site plans with the application. This one, as you can see, the main difference is the large lot on the south end and a relocation of the street. This revised plan has the lot on the south broken up and, then, the Copperpoint is more dr less extended in a straight line to the east. Then, this one, which is fairly close, I think as you can see, the main difference is some of this area in the center of special use area B, they have kind of changed the orientation of some of the buildings. They would allow, if the uses as they propose them, it would allow some heavier uses, like light industrial and warehousing in here that normally would not be allowed in the commercial in the C-G zone, but since it's a Planned Development, that's what they are requesting is to be able to increase some of the intensity of the uses in the project. I think those are the main things to point out right now. Borup: Okay. Thank ydu. Questions from any of the Commissioners? Would the applicant like to make their presentation? Larson: Chairman Borup, members of the Commission, my name is Cornell Larson, I'm here tonight representing Sundance on the Silverstone Business Campus. I would be happy to go through and address some of the issues that were brought up by staff. In general, we are in concurrence with all the issues, but two of them, so I wanted to kind of go through and talk about that, as well as when we went through the approval Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 8 of 71 process -- and it's not necessarily reflected on the plan that's on the wall, but there was another street added here to serve the Sutherland Farms development to the south. That was a requirement. So, that street will be added as part of the platting process. This piece of ground that exists right here is, actually, a C-G zone and so these lots wouldn't really be butting up to Sutherland Farms Subdivision directly, so that's why we -- I want to just make sure I was a little bit clear on that. Centers: Let me interrupt. Is that a separate ownership, Mr. Larson, the C-G to your south? Larson: Yes. That is a -- it is not our ownership, it is Sutherland Farms ownership and it was rezoned, I believe, to a C-G or was brought through with that process. Hawkins-Clark: Right. That's correct. Larson: It would be a piece that sits right in here that's part of their -- actually, it's right along the canal that goes through sort of like that. So, it's right in that area. Centers: Everything north of the canal? Larson: Correct. Centers: Right. Larson: In addition to that, we wanted to talk -- there were a couple of comments in the staff report about ACHD's facilities that were going into the project. We were proposing to relocated, as you know from the previous presentation, this area that now is ACHD's property more over into the middle of the project, that kind of brings it away from this residential line. We were planning to take that property and landscape it, put grass in it and use as much of it as -- open space as we could. It's our intent to improve it. The Highway District was looking at potentially not improving it and using as typically one of their retention ponds. We -- the owner has a similar one at Black Eagle in Boise and they have gone in and improved that and they continue to do the maintenance on it, so I kind of wanted to let you know that it's the intent at this point in time and we are pretty close to an agreement with the Highway District that we can improve this grass and make it a fairly nice open facility there and have it look better than just the standard retention facility. As far as the street improvements on Overland Road, we have been working with the Highway District an,d last week we received four drawings from them that show some of the options that can be done on Overland Road. The developer has sent out a letter to the adjacent homeowners on the north and has scheduled a meeting early next week -- I can't remember if it's Monday or Tuesday, but the first part of next week to present those options to the homeowners, so we could get some input on what their feelings might be, so, then, when we go back to the Highway District we will have, hopefully, a little better direction on what the homeowners might like to see. So, that is in process and is moving along, but it's probably going to take a little while, as did Eagle Road when we went to get it improved, so -- I don't know if Bruce Mills is here or not, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 9 of 71 but he might be able to give you a little more information on that if he is here and is available. The idea of the concept plans or the different plans that we were asking for staff to have approval on, it does give us a little flexibility in selling the property. We have had a couple of large users looking at the facility and that was part of our reason for the request was to see if we could have your concurrence that we could work with staff to make those changes if we needed to or if we did get a large user. Then, in looking at the items that staff had requested on the -- I believe it was page seven. Yes, on page seven. We are okay with item 2-A. 2-B we wanted to talk a little bit about and 2-E we wanted to explain why we had asked for those supplemental uses under 2-E. I will go ahead and start with 2-B, the special use area for the contractor -- or the contractor yards. We were looking at these smaller buildings along this side as potentially contractor yard areas and we are pretty sympathetic to what the staff is saying about that being adjacent to residential and what the owner was willing to do was have a restriction of hours of use on those buildings along here, so that we could have some control on when they might be using those facilities. They were looking at like a 7:00 in the morning until 7:00 or 6:00 at night for hours of use to help control that. These are relatively small buildings, so we are not anticipating any large equipment in there or anything, but some of the small businesses that are contractor type businesses do like to have a little bit of space to store stuff in and vehicles and et cetera, so that was our request for that, so we would like to have you guys consider, if you would, the request to maybe limit the hours on those buildings along that side. I'm not sure whether you will remember, but on the supplemental uses, which are on five -- on page five of the listed uses in the proposal we had sent with the application, included apparel manufacturing, metal fabrication, assembling of leather products, some machining, some bottling of flammable liquids -- these were all items that we -- actually, there is one more. Interior and exterior storage. These were all items that we came back to the Commission when we did the Michael's of Oregon project, which sits about right here and they are looking at expanding over onto the sight here with another facility and so rather than go back through the same process again, we ask for those as they related to the Michael's of Oregon project, that was built in the corporate center, and so it was our intent to be able to bring some of these uses that existed with Michael's over here should they need to expand their business. So, in an effort to try to explain that a little better to you than maybe we did in the application, which was the intent for those items that were listed under supplemental uses. With that, I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have. Borup: Questions from any of the Commissioners? Centers: Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Larson, on page six of the staff report they mention the open space and where you're almost 7,500 square feet short. I don't think you really addressed that, unless you want the ACHD detention pond to cover that. Larson: No. We will make up the open space, but the detention pond is also included in our open space. Centers: Yes. Okay. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 10 of 71 Larson: But we will make up the addition seven or eight thousand square feet that we need to add to that in order to make sure we are in compliance with that. Centers: Okay. And was the detention pond passive or active? Larson: Meaning is it a detention or a retention? Centers: That was a question that the staff posed here. Is it passive or active? I can give my definition. I think you have one, too. Larson: The intent there is that the space would be available for use if someone wanted to walk across the space or do something like that, but as far as it being an activity area, like an outdoor soccer field or something like that, it would not be that. Centers: It's not going to be fenced or -- Larson: It will not be fenced. Centers: It would be -- you would require -- or you would have to mow. I think I have seen the one at Black Eagle. It's close to the highway, isn't it, to Overland Road? Larson: It's, actually, back along the residential area on the north side and they currently do mow and manicure that. There are riparian plant materials down in the bottom of it that acts as a -- if you will, a bio-filter. Centers: Right. Larson: But they did mow and maintain it and they would continue to mow and maintain this one as well. Centers: I would call that active, wouldn't you, Mr. Clark? Yes. Thank you. I guess in relationship to the contractor's yard and shop, I guess what I'm visualizing there -- we had one situation off Overland, west of Meridian Road, that didn't fly -- it flew here and it didn't fly at Council. I think I'm right on that. But I think that was a more active yard with a lot of heavy equipment coming and going and that type of thing. So, are you talking like an office warehouse situation where you might have -- and it comes to mind every quickly, an electrical contractor's shop in the back where he has his goods and his vans and he has it office up front, are you talking something like that? Larson: That would be more the intent of a small user. We wouldn't be looking for somebody who would have heavy equipment in there and that's kind of the reason those buildings are smaller, is so we could the size and those lots are smaller, so we could control the size, so we -- Centers: So, warehouse-office situation? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 11 of 71 Larson: Is typically what it would be, yes. Centers: Okay. So, if we tagged a condition there with that verbiage, you wouldn't object to that? Larson: I don't think we would. Centers: What they are objecting to next to the residential is the chain link fence with the backhoes coming in and that type of thing and that's not your intent? Larson: And we actually -- no. We discussed with staff that we might even be willing to do some solid fencing in those areas or -- and I think some of those provisions are available in the code right now, too, in the discussion with Brad about the landscaping setback and screening and those kind of things. So, we were fairly comfortable with that, it was just mare if we did find a small electrical firm or a plumbing firm or somebody like that that we could certainly utilize those lots for that type of use. Borup: I had the same thoughts as Commissioner Centers, you know, an excavation contractor with the trucks and equipment and backhoes coming and going, I -- that would not be appropriate there, but a small contractor's shop -- but -- and some of them may or may not have storage outside, so if there is a provision in there to have proper screening and a solid fence and stuff, are you comfortable with that if there was outside storage? Larson: Yes. I think we are. Centers: And limit the hours I think was a good suggestion. I don't think 7:00 to 7:00 would be enough. I think 6:00 to 7:00 would be more appropriate for -- Borup: And the time of year, too. Larson: One of the things we have seen is like, for example, contracting -- or a concrete contractor might be pouring concrete at 4:00 or 5:00 in the morning in hot weather conditions. So part of the reason for limiting the hours would be to have those guys get their equipment that they need out, loaded in the trucks, and sitting out front and not back by the neighbor's housing. Centers: Very good. Borup: Any questions from any of the Commissioners? I think Commissioner Centers asked the couple I had. I don't know if you had any additional comment on the Overland access or not. It looks like you're talking just a couple of drive entrances, I guess working out with ACHD -- Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 12 of 71 Larson: That's part of the proposals that would be going to the neighbors the first part of next week and, hopefully, back to the Commission for reconsideration. Obviously, I'm sure the neighbors will need some time to, you know, get together and consider those options or what's being made available to us. The Highway District has completed the drawings and different options that they would like to see, so those will be available for the neighbors at that meeting. Centers: One more question, Mr. Chairman. Are you saying that Michael's of Oregon in Silverstone presently performs those six functions? Larson: Yes, they do. Centers: Really? Larson: Yes. Centers: Okay. They are diversified. Larson: Yes. Borup: Yes, I can see all that in just normal outdoor stuff, not on a -- because the definitions are pretty wide encompassing, so it covers all that real easy. Okay. Anything else, Mr. Larson? Larson: No. Borup: Thank you. Larson: Thank you. Borup: Do we have anyone else to come forward and testify on this? Okay. Seeing none. Centers: Mr. Chairman, I have a question for staff. I guess we could leave the hearing open. I guess, you know, how do you feel about the contractor shop and yard as we would define it to be mini warehouse slash office space concept with no heavy equipment coming or going? That would be my definition that would be allowed for him. Hawkins-Clark: Commissioner Centers -- Centers: And fenced. Hawkins-Clark: Yes. I mean that would be a change to the way that the zoning ordinance defined the contractor's yard. Centers: Yes. But could we tag that on tonight? Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 13 of 71 Hawkins-Clark: Certainly. I mean, yes, as a Conditional Use Permit that's possible. Yes. You know, I think the zoning ordinance defines the contractor's yard processing storage, maintenance of -- that are incidental to operations like demolition and -- you know, so I --just to point out when it comes three years down the road and, potentially, this property has -- along the eastern boundary has been replatted or maybe the lots change size, they get bigger, and, then, we are -- we are going to be enforcing the definition of a contractor's yard and there is -- as -- you know, as shown there would be nothing limiting that, you know, as it is. So, that was the reason we recommended the deletion. But I think if I hear you correctly, Commissioner, it's -- you're changing the definition, which is okay, we just need to be sure to get that into the plan. Centers: Or any contractor yard use shall come back for a CUP at that time. Hawkins-Clark: I think that's an option. I think we know enough about contractor's yards today that it may -- it may be a waste of time in the future -- Centers: Yes. I'd rather put the new definition on it and -- Borup: If we have a narrow definition. Centers: Yes. And, then, we don't see it again. Then, my next question is the original graph that you had up there showing A and B, A was adjacent to the Michael's of Oregon -- or, excuse me, B, and the parcel there that he's speaking of, could we limit that expansion and allow that? How do you feel about that? I guess if a company wants to expand and it's in the area of -- in the B area, it's not next to residential, I don't object to it. How do you feel? Hawkins-Clark: Right. No. I agree. Centers: Okay. Good. Thank you. Thank you very much. That's all I had. Thank you. Borup: Okay. Any comments from any of the other Commissioners? Centers: Mr. Chairman, I would move that we close the Public Hearing. Mathes: Second. Borup: Motion and second tc close the Public Hearing. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Centers: Then, I would make a stab at recommending approval on this item five, CUP 03-044, it's a request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development in a proposed C-G zone for proposed Silverstone Business Campus by Sundance Investments at the southeast corner of east Overland and South Eagle Road, including Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Odo6er 2, 2003 Page 14 of 71 all staff comments dated October 2nd. On the front page it states reference Silverstone Business Campus and we should insert request for aCUP -- request of a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Development. That's just a little technical thing that I noted there. That was the agenda item. So, including all staff comments and, then, as amended referring to page six, the applicant has indicated that they will comply with the open space and storm water detention pond will be developed as active open space, subject to ACHD's approval. I can't imagine them denying that. Page seven of the comments, item 2-B, the term contractor's shop and yard definition would change to a contractor's warehouse slash office space with no heavy equipment coming or going. Rohm: And to strike the delete. Centers: Correct. Thank you. Borup: I assume that would also not allow demolition storage and that type of stuff, too. I don't know how exact we need to get in the definition, but -- Centers: Well, all uses shall be enclosed, other than parking of vehicles, with no heavy equipment coming or going. Borup: Okay. Centers: Yes. And, then, fenced per their landscape plan. Brad, jump in if you like. Hawkins-Clark: Chairman Borup, I guess the one -- two clarifications. I mean -- so you are saying that no outdoor uses will be allowed -- Centers: Correct. Hawkins-Clark: -- at all? Centers: Other than parking and, you know, that type of thing. Borup: That's what I was wondering, because that didn't come up earlier. I mean I can see -- Centers: Other than parking of the company's vehicles -- Borup: -- a plumbing contractor might have some pipe lying out on a rack or something, so you're saying that wouldn't be allowed? Centers: Well, I guess, you know, you wouldn't be that technical if it's -- you have a fence that is site obscuring. I think the big thing is heavy equipment or contractor's equipment coming and going would not be allowed. Equipment of the backhoe and -- Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 15 of 71 Borup: Well, the other one thing that would concern me is it talks about demolition -- a demolition as also a definition and, you know, demolition storage could be quite unsightly. Rohm: Possibly just have an exclusion of heavy equipment and that wouldn't preclude them from having a material yard. Borup: Maybe exclude heavy equipment and demolition storage? Centers: Yes. That's fine. You know, I don't think the applicant is -- and excluding demotion, then. Borup: Those are the things that are -- seem to be in the definition that would maybe be a concern. Centers: And -- are we okay there, Brad, do you think, then, with the definition? For you to enforce it later? Hawkins-Clark: I think what we would relay on is definition of heavy equipment that's in the zoning ordinance Title 11, which says establishments primarily engaged in the sale or rental of tools, trucks, tractors, construction equipment, ag implements and similar industrial equipment. Centers: Right. Hawkins-Clark: So, I mean it does cover a lot, but I think it's important to clarify whether the Commission does or does not want the materials storage outdoor to be a part of this Centers: Well, I think as Chairman Borup stated, you know, a plumber's pipe that he might store on racks, I wouldn't object to that, you know, if they are going to have a fence behind it and that type of thing. Borup: Maybe if it's storage of supplies incidental to their business. Centers: Related to their business. Borup: Something that would be inventory, not something that's going to be sitting out there for permanent. Centers: Right. Borup: I don't know how you get all that in a short definition, but -- Hawkins-Clark: It's your motion. Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting October 2, 2003 Page 16 of 71 Borup: Well, maybe just equipment incidental to their business use. Centers: Yes. So included. A contractor's shop and yard to be defined as their warehouse slash office and materials stored related to their business and excluding all heavy equipment or contractor's equipment, for example, backhoes, et cetera. Office hours shall be no less, no greater than 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. I say 6:00 a.m., because people should get up at 6:00, especially if they work for me, so they can get to work on time. I had a problem with that lately. Strike item 2-E and in the applicant's submission they refer to an expansion, that item would only be applicable to Michael's of Oregon expansion, as requested. End of motion. Rohm: I will second that. Borup: Motion and second. Any discussion? Did we make -- did you make note that the applicant said they would comply with the open space? Centers: Yes. Borup: That was -- you mentioned that? Okay. We have a motion and second. All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES. ONE ABSENT. Item 6: Public Hearing: RZ 03-010 Request for a Rezone of 4.47 acres from R-4 to R-8 zones for proposed Woodside Creek by Woodside Properties, LLC - 1115 North Ten Mile Road: Item 7: Public Hearing: PP 03-025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 15 building lots and 5 other lots on 4.47 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for proposed Woodside Creek by Woodside Properties, LLC - 1115 North Ten Mile Road: Borup: The next application is items six and seven, Public Hearing RZ 03-010, request for rezone of 4.47 acres from R-4 to R-8 zones for proposed Woodside Creek by Woodside Creek Properties, 1115 North Ten Mile Road. And PP 03-025, request for Preliminary Plat approval of 15 building lots and five other lots on the same 4.47 acres, both R-8 zone. Like to open both Public Hearings at this time and start with the staff report. Kirkpatrick: Chairman, members of the Commission, this is an application for a rezone from R-4 to R-8 and it's a Preliminary Plat for 15 building lots. This is an in-fill development that will be north of the Berkeley Square Subdivision. It's located on Ten Mile Road approximately a half mile south of Cherry. There is currently one existing home on the property, which will remain on the property. Let's see. I will go to the site plan. That's the aerial. There is one existing home, which will remain on the property. They will be given up their access to Ten Mile Road and there will be no access points