February 19, 2026, Regular Meeting

Mr. Cokeley referenced the January 28, 2025, Planning Report from Nishuane Group and wanted it stated on the record that they have reviewed the negative criteria with no change to the Master Plan. He testified to the existing conditions, the house that was on site, its deteriorated condition, removal, and the proposed Site Plan. The lot is over three (3) acres and oversized for the zone. He testified to the layout of the site, including the building, outdoor arena, fences, driveway, and paths. He testified to the Stormwater Plan. The site did not have any Stormwater System in place before, and now they are providing an underground chamber system for infiltration. He testified that soil testing was done on August 25, 2025, and positive infiltration is available. Mr. Cohn and Mr. Cokeley testified that the house was removed as part of this project, because it was determined to be in such bad shape that it could not be reused, it needed to be removed to make way for the new home, and there was never an intent to not rebuild a home on the site. Mr. Cokeley testified to the trees on site, those that will be saved/protected, and those that need to be removed, with most located nearest to the paddock. e The new landscape plan includes 54 shade trees, 367 shrubs, and 127 perennial plantings. e Mr. Cokeley addressed the June 19, 2025, September 2, 2025, December 16, 2025, and February 12, 2025, Engineering review letters from Matrix New World. He testified that his office sent responses dated July 2, 2025, and February 5, 2026, with revised plan sheets and additional details. Mr. Cokeley testified that the Applicant will provide as-built plans, a stability analysis for retaining walls, will update all details requested in the Engineering reports, and agreed to provide site improvement cost estimates as conditions of approval. He requested that they not be required to provide an off-site Topographic Plan. He testified that no wetlands or wetland buffers extend into the Property. He testified that the Stormwater system proposed complies with the November 5, 2024, Stormwater Ordinance and that the Applicant agreed to provide a manufactured treatment device and add that detail to the plan. Mr. Cokeley reviewed the Steep Slope Plan provided and marked a copy, Exhibit A-7 (Dated February 19, 2026), with measurements to identify where the offsite slopes of interest

hat detail to the plan. Mr. Cokeley reviewed the Steep Slope Plan provided and marked a copy, Exhibit A-7 (Dated February 19, 2026), with measurements to identify where the offsite slopes of interest are located. e He testified to the slopes on site, the updated calculations and exhibit provided, and concluded that the plan complies with the ordinance. e He also testified that there are no sheer rock faces on the Property, even the steepest slope, which is isolated on one side, is walkable. e He also testified that the Property was graded and disturbed for the original house, and driveway to reduce stormwater runoff, the slopes on site are not natural. The Board was satisfied and did not require the Applicant to provide an additional off-site topographic plan