May 26, 2021 Town of Bluffton Planning Commission

[00:00:07]

WHOA. >> THAT'S WHY I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS PLANNING COMMISSION

[Items I & II]

CAN I GET A ROLL CALL? >> PRESENT PRESIDENT MATTHEW PRESENT HERE.

[III. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA]

>> THANK YOU. RIGHT. AND I HAVE AN ADOPTION OF THE

AGENDA. >> I MOVE WE ADOPT THE AGENDA AGAIN.

I'LL SECOND HERE. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES OF APRIL THE TWENTY EIGHTH

[IV. ADOPTION OF MINUTES]

OH BOY. I HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT THAT WILL COME DISCUSSION.

I'M SORRY. DISCUSSION ON THE MINUTES AND I WISH I COULD SEE THEM.

>> BUT I WROTE IT DOWN. IT WAS SEVEN POINT ONE PARAGRAPH ONE REMOVE TWO AND I WOULD PLACE WITH THEM BECAUSE IT SOUNDED LIKE WHEN WE EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT WE WERE IT SAID FOR THE EXECUTIVE SESSION TO MEET TO DISCUSS AND CAN'T SEE IT.

AND CAN YOU SHOW ON THE SCREEN A CARD WITH NO PAPER? >> YEAH.

SEVEN POINT ONE. >> THANK YOU. OUR RECEIPT OF LEGAL ADVICE RELATED TO THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TO APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE REPLACE THAT WITH THE 324 21 APPROVAL OF BECAUSE IT SOUNDS WE'RE SAYING TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAN AND WE HAD ALREADY WE'LL JUST KEEP PASSING IT AROUND.

>> JUST GIVE ME DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF I WOULD I WOULD SAY AND TO BASICALLY AND IT DOESN'T

MAKE SENSE. >> SHE'S ADDING THE DATE AND REFERENCE FOR IN THE SECOND.

>> I'M SORRY. CAN YOU CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT ONE MORE TIME? I HAD I WAS HAVING TROUBLE PULLING IT OUT JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE LOOKING AT WHAT

YOU'RE LOOKING AT HERE. >> YEAH. SO THIS IS ITEM 7 1.

THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH SAYS RECEIPT OF LEGAL ADVICE RELATED TO THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION INTO AND TO APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN PURSUANT TO WHAT I WAS GOING TO RECOMMEND IT TO BE CHANGED TO LEGAL ICE RELATED TO THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE APPROVAL THERE 324 21 APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN PURSUANT TO SINCE MADAM CHAIRMAN CHAIRWOMAN IF I MAY THE I OBVIOUSLY DON'T HAVE AN OBJECTION WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO WITH THE MINUTES TO REFLECT THE LANGUAGE I BELIEVE THAT WAS USED IN THE MINUTES LIKES THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE ORDER THE REASON THAT THE MOTION WAS LIMITED IN SCOPE WAS BECAUSE IT WAS GETTING INTO WHAT THE LEGAL

REALLY WAS. >> IT WAS KIND OF A UNIVERSAL DISCUSSION ELEMENT PLANS BUT ALSO OBVIOUSLY A DISCUSSION OF AN INDIVIDUAL. I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN.

I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU WANT TO DIFFERENTIATE TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.

SO IT'S REALLY THAT'S JUST AN EXPLANATION FROM THE STAFF STANDPOINT.

BUT ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS TO HOW YOU WANT YOUR MINUTES TO READ IT. THAT'S ONE ITEM FOR DISCUSSION. BUT THEN I ALSO WANTED TO POINT OUT IN EIGHT POINT ONE TO PARAGRAPH THREE SECOND SENTENCE COULD HAVE.

>> I'M SORRY. FOURTH PARAGRAPH. >> CHAIRMAN JACKSON DENMARK ASKED TOWN ATTORNEY RICHARDSON BRUCE TO EXPLAIN WHY HIS PROJECT BACK TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR THE RECORD LA BRUCE! EXCLAIMED EXPELLING A.

[00:05:05]

>> THOSE ARE THE TWO. >> THAT WAS A TYPO. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY COMMENT AS FAR AS KATHLEEN'S EXPLANATION? THE FIRST PIECE WE HAVE TO AMEND OR CAN WE JUST MAKE THE

PHONE CALL FOR A MINUTE? >> BUT TYPICALLY WHEN YOU CAN MAKE AMENDMENTS TO THE MINUTES AND WITH NOW WITHOUT DEBATE UNLESS ANYONE CHALLENGES THEM. SO WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS THAT YOU CHOSE VOTE TO ADOPT THE MINUTES AS RECOMMENDED BE AMENDED BY MR. DUNCAN REMOVED.

>> NOW ALL YOU NEED TO VOTE EFFORT WE'RE TRYING TO BE AN IN-PERSON PERSON FAVOR HIGH END

OPPOSED. >> THANK YOU. >> PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THOSE

[V. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA*]

MINUTES. >> ONE PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THOMSON WOULD YOU LIKE TO TALK? SPEAK NOW OR YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO LET US KNOW AND THAT STARTS.

>> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD MADAM MADAM CHAIRWOMAN.

>> IF I MAY JUST INTERJECT QUICKLY FOR FOR MR. ZAHN AND FOR ALL PUBLIC COMMENT BECAUSE WE'RE BACK IN PERSON IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE SO THAT WE HAVE AN ADEQUATE RECORD OF IT BECAUSE IF WE'RE NOT RIGHT IN FRONT OF IT YOU CAN'T HEAR IT.

IT'S THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND THERE'S NO THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT IT.

>> IF YOU SAW IT RICHARD DAVI, IF SHE CAN DISTRIBUTE IT AFTER THE MEETING AND I CAN TAKE THIS

OFF. >> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS TOM ZEN.

I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN BACKWATER SINCE PROBABLY 99. I CIRCULATED A PACKAGE TO EVERYBODY EARLIER TODAY. THAT KIND OF EXPLAINS THE ISSUE THAT'S OUTSTANDING WITH REGARD TO A NO GRADING POLICY AND A GOOD NEIGHBOR POLICY THAT CONFLICT.

SO THE PURPOSE TODAY IS INTRODUCE MYSELF AND TALK REAL QUICK AND TO SUPPLEMENT WHAT I SENT OUT EARLIER TODAY. FIRST THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE HERE OBVIOUSLY.

THIS IS A ABOVE AND BEYOND TO VOLUNTEER THE ONE POINT FIVE ACRES AT THE TOWN'S CENTRAL OR

MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE WE GET HOLD THAT UP. >> WE CAN WE CAN SEE SPEAKING

TO MIKE OPERATING ON SITE. >> IT HAS ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE WATER, SEWER, GAS, WATER, SEWER, ELECTRIC CURB CUTS, ROADWAYS, LANDSCAPING THE SIGNAGE

ACTUALLY ACTUALLY WERE DESIGNED. >> SO I WAS I WAS THE ONLY WAY FOR THE AFTERNOON I DID NOT SEE YOUR PACKET AT THE INTERSECTION LOVELAND PARKWAY IN THE BACKWATER PARKWAY WHERE THE LIGHT IS HOUSE BOULEVARD AT THE PARCEL YOU GO ALL THE WAY TO THE TOWN'S RESIDENTIAL PATH RESIDENTIAL TRACT WITH THE TOWNS ABOVE IS AND IT WOULD BACK RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE THE VIEW FROM JASPER WATER SAW STATION IS ON STATION.

>> IT'S GOT ALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE EVERYTHING IN PLACE.

>> WE APPLIED FOR A RENEWAL OF A GRADING PERMIT WHICH EXPIRED A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO AND ALTHOUGH THERE'S LOTS OF GRADING PERMITS PERMITS IN BLUFFTON THEY'VE TAKEN PLACE GRADING ONLY THIS ONE HAS THERE IS NOT A GRADING PERMIT APPARENTLY INSIDE THE BUCKBOARD

[00:10:06]

MAINTAINED AS MUCH VEGETABLE AS POSSIBLE AS A BOY. >> OK, THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE IT. IN WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO OLD BUSINESS UNLESS THERE'S AN

OH YOU HAVE ONE MORE HARRY. >> I'M I AM OKAY. >> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. HI, MY NAME IS KERRY AMES. I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE HLA FOR THE FARMER BUCK WALTER. I'M HERE TODAY FOR. WE JUST HAD A QUESTION THE REC CENTER WE'RE GLAD IT'S EXPANDING. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF CHILDREN IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. OUR MAIN CONCERN IS I GAVE A MAP TO DARBY.

OUR MAIN CONCERN IS THE FLOODING ISSUE. >> THEY ARE TENNIS COURTS COMING IN AN ADDITIONAL ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY PARKING SPACES AS WELL AS A RESTROOM AREA AND THIS IS ALL COMING INTO AREAS OF OUR RIGHT PACKING UP TO OUR PROPERTY THAT HAS FLOODED ALREADY. IT'S A CONCERN FOR US BECAUSE THE CURRENT PLANS ONLY SHOW ONE EXISTING RETENTION POND AND ONE SMALL ONE ON THE VERY END OF THE TENNIS COURTS THAT ARE PROPOSED. SO WE'VE BEEN WORKING EXCLUSIVE WITH THE TOWN A LOT IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS NOW WITH BNP REPORTS REQUIRED WE WERE AHEAD OF THE CURVE BECAUSE OF MATTHEW. WE MADE THE NEWS WE DON'T WANT TO EVER DO THAT AGAIN.

WE WORK VERY HARD NOT TO. >> WE'VE DEVELOPED WE WORK WITH THOMAS AND HUTTON, OUR ENGINEER . WE HAVE A LAGOON COMMITTEE THAT WE HAVE CREATED .

WE HAVE OUR MEASURING STICKS IN EVERY ONE OF OUR LAGOONS SO THAT EVERY RAINFALL WE MAKE WE MEASURE WE SEE OUR LAGOONS, YOU KNOW, WORKING AS THEY WERE PREPARED TO DO WETLANDS AND THERE IS A LARGE CONCERN THAT THERE'S A LOT OF CONCRETE GOING IN AND NOWHERE FOR IT TO GO EXCEPT FOR INTO OUR PROPERTY. SO THAT IS MY PURPOSE AND IF EVERYBODY CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF IT IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE THE

NEWS AGAIN AND I HAVE OVER 500 HOMES THAT ARE VERY CONCERNED. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND

YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT THAT SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO OLD BUSINESS THE WELFARE TOWN VILLAGE REQUESTS BY WALLACE

[VI.1. Belfair Towne Village (Certificate of Appropriateness – Highway Corridor Overlay District): A request by Wallace Milling of Witmer Jones Keefer, Ltd, on behalf of David Carpio of Brixmor for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness – HCOD. The project consists of the removal of trees located along the frontage buffer with US HWY 278. The Property is zoned Belfair Planned Unit Development a located northeast of the intersection of US HWY 278 and Simmonsville Road. (COFA–01-21-14930) (Staff- Will Howard)]

>> THE PROPERTY IS ZONED BELFER PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND LOCATED NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION

OF U.S. AID AND SIMMONS MILL ROAD. >> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU. AS YOU ALL HOPEFULLY REMEMBER I PULLED UP A PRESENTATION WHEN

THIS WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED TO YOU IN JANUARY. >> AT THAT TIME YOU ASKED THAT THE APPLICATION BE TABLED, ASKED FOR SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SPECIFICALLY TO INCLUDE AN ARBORIST ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS A TREE MITIGATION PLAN THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED THAT THERE WAS DIDN'T. AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE.

SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> SO I'M JUST GOING TO MOVE TO THE ADDITIONAL MATERIALS JUST

TO MILITARIZE YOURSELF. >> AGAIN, WE'RE DEALING WITH A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE HIGHWAY CODE OR ALONG AND IN FRONT OF THE WELFARE TOWN VILLAGE COMMONLY KNOWN AS ONE AND KROGER SHOPPING CENTER. SO THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL TREE REMOVAL PLAN THAT WAS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT PROPOSED THE REMOVAL OF 56 TREES EACH AND A FIVE BY A RED X.

AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE DASH BOX THERE AFTER YOUR REQUEST THE APPLICANT PROVIDED AN ARBORIST ASSESSMENT THAT WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET AND PROVIDED AN UPDATED TREE REMOVAL PLAN BASED

ON THE OBVERSE ASSESSMENT. >> THE ORIGINAL PLAN IS ON TOP OF THE SCREEN.

[00:15:01]

REMOVAL OF 35 TREES AS OPPOSED TO 50 6. >> ALL OF THOSE TREES WERE DEEMED TO BE EITHER HAZARDOUS OR UNHEALTHY IN THE ARBORIST ASSESSMENT THAT WAS PROVIDED TEAM. IN ADDITION TO THAT THEY ALSO PROVIDED A TREE MITIGATION

PLAN. >> YOU CAN SEE HERE A LOT OF THE EXISTING CANOPY YOU CAN

SEE AND REMEMBER HOW THIS WORKS . >> YOU CAN SEE IN HERE.

>> THESE ARE SOME EXISTING FIREWORKS FOR THE SECOND SEASON FOR SO EXISTING LIVE OAKS.

SOME EXISTING CANOPY AND THROUGH HERE AND YOU CAN NOW SEE WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING.

TO SUPPLEMENT WITH ADDITIONAL LIVE OAKS SOME ADDITIONAL SABLE PAUL MEADOWS FRINGE TREES AND I

BELIEVE SOME YEAR UPON HOLLY. >> SO AS YOU REMEMBER WE HAD DISCUSSED WHETHER OR NOT THE PRIOR REMOVAL WAS WAS WITHIN COMPLIANCE OF THE END OF THE BUFFER FOR EVEN THOUGH IT WAS

OUTSIDE OF THE STRICT BUFFER OF THE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR. >> THERE IS STILL SOME LANGUAGE IN THE PD DOCUMENT THAT SAYS YOU STILL NEED TO PROVIDE SOME SUFFICIENT SCREENING OF THE PARKING AREAS. BASED ON THE APPLICANT'S RECENT MEDAL WE'VE PROVIDED AN UPDATED FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED MITIGATION PLAN WILL PROVIDE SUFFICIENT SCREENING AND BUFFERING OF THE PARKING AREAS TO SATISFACTORILY SCREEN THE PARKING AREA FOLLOWING TREE

REMOVAL. >> THAT'S THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT I HAVE FOR YOU TONIGHT. SO NOW YOUR ACTIONS THAT YOU CAN TAKE ON THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATENESS AND TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION ARE TO APPROVE IT AS SUBMITTED APPROVE IT WITH CONDITIONS YOU COULD TABLE IT AGAIN OR DENY THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY

THE OUTCOME. >> WELL COULD YOU PUT BACK UP THE SCHEMATIC HERE? HERE YOU GO. YES. THANK WALLACE.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU I MEAN YOU HAVE A STAFF RECOMMENDATION IN THE FINDINGS WE IDENTIFIED THINGS WE WE FOUND THAT THEY HAD SATISFIED THE INTENT OF THE BUFFER AND WE DIDN'T WE DIDN'T INCLUDE A FORMAL RECOMMENDATION IN THIS REQUEST BECAUSE BECAUSE YOU HAD

ASKED FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. >> WE PROVIDED THE INFORMATION AND NOW YEAH, AS USUAL MY FIRST QUESTION IS STAFF LOOK INTO THE COUNTY WHEN THIS WAS DEVELOPED

ORIGINALLY. >> IF THESE TREES THAT WELL MAINTAINED THROUGH THAT DEVELOPMENT WERE USED TOWARDS IRRIGATION TO OFFSET THEIR MITIGATE MITIGATION CALCULATIONS IN THEIR ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT SO THESE THAT ARE BEING REMOVED.

>> WELL ANY OF THE TREES. YES. SO THE TREES THAT ARE HERE THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THE BUFFER COULD HAVE COUNTED TOWARDS MITIGATION TOWARDS WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED AS PART OF THE REST OF THE TREE REMOVAL WHEN THIS WAS DEVELOPED ORIGINALLY WITH

THE CARBON THEY COULD HAVE. >> BUT NO, WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE ORIGINAL PLANS WHEN THIS WAS DEVELOPED COUNTY. SO NOW SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FOR

THIS SINCE WE ARE THERE IS OUR TREES THAT ARE BEING REMOVED. >> I WANT TO SAY WE'D LIKE TO SEE THE I CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE PLANT TREES GOING IN BUT WITH THAT BEING 35 TREES COMING OUT AND I DO SEE THERE'S 40 PLANTS GOING IN TO ME IT'S STILL NOT MEETING THE TREE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A PART OF THAT PBT IN THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AT THE TIME BASED ON MY UNDERSTANDING OF IT AND I DON'T HAVE CALCULATIONS THAT WOULD BACK THAT UP THAT IT IS DOING THAT. SO THAT'S MY FIRST CONCERN GOING OUT THE GATE. I MEAN I'M FINE WITH THE PLANT SELECTION.

THAT DOESN'T BODE ME. WHAT IS IT THAT YOU THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDED? SO I WANT TO SEE THE TREE MITIGATE. I WANT TO SEE THAT.

WHAT FOR? OKAY, SO THERE'S SIX OVER STORY EVERGREEN BROAD LEAF TREES PER 100 LINEAR FOOT PLUS SEVEN UNDERSTORY TREES PLUS 30 SHRUBS AT TWO AND A HALF FEET.

[00:20:08]

WELL, THIS IS ANYTHING YOU CAN HELP CLEAR UP FOR HER. YES, MA'AM.

>> WE DID IN THE INITIAL PLAN WE SHOWED THAT MITIGATION. >> I SAW THAT THAT AND THOSE AND I KNOW THAT THAT PLAN CHANGED. THOSE TREES AREN'T EXACTLY THE SAME AS IT IS ON HERE. BUT EVEN WHEN I LOOK AT THAT WE COVERED THAT MITIGATION ON SITE

WITHOUT ANY TREES. >> HOW WOULD THE ORIGINAL PLAN DIDN'T SHOW ANY MITIGATION THERE WAS SHOWING THAT THE BUFFER HAD BEEN COMPLETELY MET AND THAT THERE THAT.

SO THE ORIGINAL COUNTY MITIGATION WOULDN'T HAVE REQUIRED ANY OF THESE TREES TO BE MITIGATED. IT'S ALL UNDER MITIGATION SIZE .

>> THEY'RE NOT SIGNIFICANT TREES UNDER THE COUNTY ORDINANCE.

>> MY UNDERSTANDING OH THERE WAS A TWENTY NINE INCH PINE RIDGE AND ADDITIONALLY IF THESE TREES WERE USED AS MITIGATION FOR THAT INITIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S WHY THAT THAT'S WHY THAT MATTERS IS THAT IF THESE TREES HAD BEEN USED FOR MITIGATION IN THE COUNTY PREVIOUSLY, THEY WOULDN'T YOU COULDN'T TAKE THEM OUT WITHOUT HAVING TO MITIGATE FOR THEM.

>> I SEE YOUR POINT. THERE IS AND I GUESS IF WE HAVE TO WE COULD GO BACK AND REHASH THAT. HOWEVER, WE WOULD ALSO WANT THE ABILITY TO REHASH THE FACT THAT A LOT OF NEW LAVA OAKS AND PALMETTO TREES HAVE BEEN PLANTED ON THE SITE SINCE TWO HURRICANE EVENTS AND THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE COUNTED TOWARDS THAT MITIGATION AS WELL. I MEAN THERE'S THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF REFRESH OUT THERE OVER THE YEARS THAT WE WOULD WANT TO COUNT AS WELL ON IT. I MEAN JUST ALL DUE RESPECT, THAT SEEMS LIKE A PRETTY LENGTHY ENDEAVOR WHERE I THINK OUR CLIENT WOULD JUST REALLY LIKE TO USE AS MUCH COMMON SENSE AS POSSIBLE HERE AND TRY TO PUT BACK SOMETHING THAT

SATISFIES THE BUFFER. >> YOU KNOW, WE'LL GO BACK TO OUR ORIGINAL POSITION AND SAY THAT WE DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ANY LEGAL LANGUAGE IN HERE REQUIRING ANY OF THESE TREES OUTSIDE OF THE BUFFER TO BE TO BE KEPT. I MEAN THAT WE COULD FIND BUT IF WE NEED TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE COUNTIES DEVELOPMENT PLAN, I THINK THAT WILL BE A CHALLENGE JUST BECAUSE THESE TREES HAVE GROWN THESE TREES WEREN'T EVEN PROBABLY PICKED UP ON A SURVEY THEN. SO YOU KNOW ANYTHING UNDER EIGHT INCHES NOT EVEN SHOWN.

SO A LOT OF THESE ARE STILL AROUND THAT SIZE ADDITIONALLY. >> THE OTHER THING THAT I NOTICED ON THAT TREE REMOVAL PLAN THAT YOU HAD YOU HAD TALLIED UP THE TOTAL NUMBER OF TREES THAT WERE STAYING IN EACH SECTION. I SAW THAT.

BUT WHAT I SAW IN THE TREES THAT WERE STAYING IT'S ALL OVER STORY TREES SOME MANY OF WHICH ARE PINES, THEIR GUM TREES SO THEY DON'T MEET THE EVER STORE EVERGREEN BROAD LEAF OVERSTREET CATEGORY. NOR DID THEY MEET THE EVER THE UNDERSTORY REQUIREMENT EITHER

THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN PLACE. >> CORRECT. SO SURVEYORS TYPICALLY DON'T PICK UP UNDERSTORY TREES FOR THAT'S A PRETTY HEFTY ENDEAVOR GOING OUT AND SURVEYING EVERY POINT FOR EVERY YO POT OR WAX MYRTLE OR SAW PALMETTO THAT'S OUT THERE WHICH WOULD ALL COUNT IN THAT CATEGORY. BUT THEY'RE OUT THERE AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SHOWING KIND OF THAT SHADED GREEN AREA. I THINK IT WOULD BE PRETTY CLEAR JUST BOB, YOU KNOW, DRIVING BAR WALKING THROUGH THAT PARKING LOT THAT THERE IS THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF BAY TREES AND WAX MYRTLE AND I MEAN I THINK WE'LL POINTED THAT OUT IN HIS FIRST STAFF REPORT THAT THERE WAS SOME OF THAT STUFF ALREADY THERE. SO I MEAN WE COULD GO OUT THERE AND PINPOINT EVERY ONE OF THOSE IF WE NEED TO TO MEET THE UNDERSTORY REQUIREMENTS.

>> IF COULD INTERJECT AS WELL THE FACT THAT THERE IS A 25 FOOT BUFFER OUT THERE.

SO AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PLANS HERE THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE TREES EXCEPT FOR I BELIEVE ONE

[00:25:06]

SO NOT NECESSARILY BUFFER REQUIREMENTS BUT SCREENING A PARKING LOT REQUIREMENTS AND THAT'S WHERE HAVING THESE LIVE OAKS THE WHOLE MEADOWS IN THERE AND THEN THE HOLLY PALMS YOUNG

ON FRENCH JURY. >> SO YOU DEFINITELY HAVE A LAYERING THAT'S PROVIDING

SCREENING. >> YEAH. WHICH WHICH IS BEYOND WHAT WHAT

THE ACTUAL BUFFER. YES, PART OF THE BUFFER. >> SO ARE THERE ANY SHRUBS IN THAT KIND OF FIRST HALF OF THIS CLOSEST TO THE INTERSECTION COMING IN IN THE BUFFER? IS THERE ANY SHRUBS GROUND? YES. OK.

YES, THERE'S A LOT YOU'RE JUST NOT SHOWING IT RIGHT? WELL, THERE'S THERE'S A PLAN TO THE HEDGE ON THE EDGE OF WENDY'S PARKING LOT. AND SO WE THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS WAS COVERING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE BUFFER SO WE ILLUSTRATED THERE'S THERE IS A APPROXIMATELY FOUR FOOT IN OVERALL HEIGHT MAINTAINED WAX MYRTLE HEDGE THAT FRONTS THE

ENTIRE WENDY'S PARKING LOT. >> BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE BUFFER ITSELF OUTSIDE THOSE SHRUBS OUTSIDE OF THAT. RIGHT. THERE'S NOTHING THERE ARE A LOT

OF PULL MEADOWS OUT THERE. >> OK, IF YOU COULD BRING IT UP ON STREET VIEW AND LOOK AT IT ALSO IN YOUR PREVIOUS RETREAT REMOVAL PLAN YOU HAD NOTED THERE WAS NOTED IN THERE IN THE BUFFER TO TRIM DOWN ANYTHING THAT WAS ANY SHRUBS DOWN TO FOUR FOOT HEIGHT, ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THE BUFFER TO SHRUBS TRIMMED DOWN TO ONE AND A HALF FEET AND THEN TREES TO BE CLIMBED UP TO SIX FEET MINIMUM IN THE BUFFER AND THEN 15 FOOT OUTSIDE OF THE BUFFER.

>> IS THAT STILL THE INTENT MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS PLAN? IF IF THAT'S WHERE I WANT TO DO THAT, I DON'T REMEMBER IT SAYING THAT IT NEEDED TO GO DOWN AND HAVE FIAT.

>> YES. YEAH. THEIR INTENT IS TO MAKE IT LOOK JUST LIKE IN FRONT OF JUST LIKE THE OTHER SIDE. JUST LIKE IN FRONT OF CHILD X.

>> I'M I'M I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT JUST BECAUSE IF THERE'S ONE I CAN'T SEE ANY INDICATION OF THE BUFFER. THAT'S THE PLANT THE SHRUBS THAT'S IN THE BUFFER FOR A PORTION OF THIS. AND THEN IF IN FACT THAT STUFF THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE BUFFER WAS GOING DOWN TO A FOOT AND A HALF WHICH YOU WILL PRUNE OF COURSE TO THAT LEVEL WITH THOSE TYPES OF SHRUBS. BUT THAT'S GONNA CLEAR OUT TO ME A LOT OF VISIBILITY TO THE WENDY'S PARKING LOT AS WELL. OK. LET ME.

I'M SORRY. I'D LIKE TO CHANGE MY ANSWER SO THAT IT'S NOTHING THAT WILL IN

THAT WILL GET IN THE WAY OF THE SATS. >> SATISFACTION OF THE REQUIREMENT TO SCREEN THE PARKING LOT. SO FOR INSTANCE, THE HEADS THAT WILL JUST MENTIONED RIGHT THERE THAT WE'RE ILLUSTRATING THAT'S GOING TO STAY BECAUSE IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT WE NEED TO SCREEN THE PARKING LOT AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ATTEMPTING TO

DO HERE. >> SO THAT'S THAT WILL STAY THAT LANGUAGE ABOUT EVERYTHING OUTSIDE OF THE BUFFER BEING TRIMMED DOWN TO ONE AND A HALF FEET IS HOW THINGS HAVE.

I DON'T REMEMBER I DON'T REMEMBER THAT BUT WE'LL WE'LL NIX THAT FOR SURE.

>> IT ALSO SAYS ANYTHING UNDER FOUR INCH DIAMETER IS GOING TO BE REMOVED AS WELL AND I DON'T HAVE THAT AGAIN. I DON'T HAVE THAT PLANNED PULLED UP SO I CAN'T CITE IT FOR BATUM TO HOW IT'S WRITTEN IN THERE BECAUSE MR. AND WHEN I LOOKED AT THE PDB DEVELOPMENT THAT ONE OF THE TWO APS IN BOTH OF THOSE TODAY I SAW WHERE IT SAID YOU COULD CLEAR UP TO TWO

INCHES. >> NOW I UNDERSTAND IF THERE IS A FOUR THERE'S A STATEMENT SOMEWHERE ELSE ABOUT FOUR INCHES BUT I DID SEE THAT IF YOU WANT TO GO BACK THROUGH AND CLEAN YOU CAN DO UP TO TWO INCH CALIPER BUT IT DIDN'T SAY UP TO FOUR INCH WHICH SPECIFICALLY I'M MOSTLY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT IN THE BUFFER ITSELF RATHER THAN OUTSIDE OF THE BUFFER.

BUT I ALSO THINK THAT THIS IS BEING TREATED AS A 50 FOOT BUFFER RATHER THAN AS A 25 FOOT BUFFER. GIVEN THE NATURE OF HOW THIS IS BEING PRESENTED AND HOW IT

SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED. OK. >> IF IT PLEASES THE PLANNING COMMISSION THEN THE LANGUAGE WE WOULDN'T PROPOSE TO CLEAN ANYTHING IN THE BUFFER RIGHT.

>> THAT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING FROM YOU GUYS COMMENTS FROM YOU'RE NOT.

>> ARE YOU JUST. ARE YOU PRUNING THE SHRUBS IN THE BUFFER AS WELL AS IT HAD

BEEN WRITTEN ON THAT PREVIOUS TREE REMOVAL OR NO? >> I MEAN I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH

[00:30:03]

>> WE'RE GONNA GET RID OF VINES THAT ARE HANGING IN THE TREES THAT ARE UNSIGHTLY AND WE'RE

GONNA CLEAN UP DEADWOOD AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> AND WE ARE GOING TO MAINTAIN AT A FOR. WELL, WE WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN IT THAT UNDERSTORY THOSE PALMS DOWN AT A FOUR FOOT LEVEL. SO IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE BUFFER PROVIDES A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT LAYERS AND WE WANT TO MANAGE THAT THAT LAYERING. SO WE WANT TO GET THOSE

INVASIVE THINGS OUT AND THEN MAINTAIN THAT FOUR FOOT HIGH. >> IF WE COULD BUT IF IT'S IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WANTS US TO LEAVE THAT BUFFER ALONE, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT AS WELL.

>> WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS AND HOW HE JUST DESCRIBED THAT HOMES AREN'T EXACTLY LIKE YOU

CAN JUST COME IN. >> AND I'M DAN MURPHY'S. I JUST I JUST DON'T WANT

LANGUAGE. >> I DON'T WANT I WANT I WANT IT TO BE PER THE GUIDELINES.

I DON'T WANT TREES LOOMED UP MORE THAN SIX FEET. IT CAN BE PRUNED UP NO MORE THAN SIX FEET. THAT BUFFER SHOULD BE REMAIN UNDISTURBED UNLESS IT'S AN INVASIVE OR SOMETHING THAT'S TWO INCH CALIBER TREE. THAT WAS OUR PURPOSE TO TAKE THAT LANGUAGE. WE THOUGHT THAT WE TOOK THAT LANGUAGE STRAIGHT FROM THE FEED

. >> THERE WAS THERE IS NOT THERE IS A PIECE IN THERE THAT DOES SAY THAT THERE IS ANOTHER PIECE THAT SAYS WHAT YOU CAN DO BUT GOING BACK AND TO CLEAR THINGS

OUT, THAT'S WHERE IT BRINGS UP. >> AND I IF I COULD I MIGHT HAVE EVEN WRITTEN WRITTEN IT DOWN BUT I'M NOT SURE JUST WE WOULD LIKE TO DO WHAT THE PD ALLOWS US TO DO.

>> THIS IS WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO WHATEVER THAT LANGUAGE WAS ALLOWED TO DO IS WHAT?

>> SO YEAH I JUST MADE A NOTE TO MYSELF SECTION FIVE POINT TWO POINT NINE POINT I THINK THAT'S D THAT'S THE BEAUTY WHICH OBVIOUSLY I DON'T HAVE PULLED UP AT THE MOMENT BUFFER TO REMAIN I'M DISTURBED AND THEN MAY REMOVE IT AND THEY DON'T SAY WHETHER IT'S HEIGHT OR WHETHER IT'S PUT IT OUT THERE FOR YOU GUYS TO TO WHERE TO MOVE THAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO MAINTAIN THAT BUFFER THE WAY THAT THE PD D WRITTEN IS THAT THEM IN THE CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT ALLOWS YOU TO MAINTAIN THAT THAT YOU WILL FOLLOW THOSE GOD'S GUIDELINES.

>> RICHARDSON AND THAT SOMETHING WE CAN OFFER YEAH. >> FOR THE BUFFER AND THEN AGAIN THE THE OTHER TREES THAT WERE IN QUESTION WERE THE TREES THAT MEETING THE INTENT OF SCREENING THE PARKING LOT AND THAT'S WHERE THEY'VE BEEN. COME BACK TO SUPPLEMENT THEM ONCE THEY REMOVE THOSE OTHER TREES PLANT BACK WITH THE LIVE X PLANT BACK WITH THE HOLLIES, ALL OF THE OTHER ITEMS TO MEET THE INTENT OF THE SCREENING PORTION NOT NECESSARILY THE

BUFFER PORTION. >> OH YES. >> AGREES THAT THAT HAS BEEN DONE ONE MORE TIME AND AGREES THAT THAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED WELL WILL PER THE PLANS.

>> YES. AND THEN OBVIOUSLY THE ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION AND IS THAT IN

ACCORDANCE ALSO WITH THE PD? >> YES. YES YEAH WE WE WE HAVE FOUND THAT THE PLAN THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PD AGREEMENT RIGHT THERE TO SUFFICIENTLY SCREEN THE PARKING AREA AND THEY ARE ALL LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE 25 FOOT UNDISTURBED BUFFER IN THE QUARTER.

>> WHAT'S THE HERE THE WORDS THAT ARE COMING OUT HEY, DISEASE TREES I GET IT.

>> BUT WHY CUT THE SHRUBS? WHY TRIM BACK THE SHRUBS? WHY DO ALL THAT WHEN THE WHOLE PURPOSE WAS TO HAVE A VISUAL BUFFER FROM THAT PARKING AREA, THE ONLY THING THAT I CAN CONCEIVE AND THAT I'M ASKING YOU TO TALK ME OUT OF BELIEVING BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE MY MIND'S

GOING IS THAT YOU JUST WANT TO HAVE BETTER VISIBILITY. >> THE STORES WHICH IS NOT NECESSARILY THE INTENT OF DRIVING DOWN TO 78 SO ROUNDABOUT WAY.

>> THAT'S MY QUESTION WHY WHY DO THIS? I THINK WE MENTIONED IN THE

[00:35:03]

>> THE PEOPLE THERE EXPECT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF QUALITY JUST LIKE MANY OF THE BUFFERS ALL AROUND BLUFFTON THEY ARE KEPT AND THEY'RE STILL FULFILLING THE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS.

THAT'S WHAT THIS PROPERTY OWNER WANTS TO DO IN ACTUALLY HIS. I MEAN WHEN THEY CAME TO US IT WAS WE JUST WANT TO BE LIKE THE FRONTAGE OF CHILD DADDY'S. IT JUST LOOKS CLEANER AND IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEBODY IS MAINTAINING IT AND SAFETY FOR THE TREES AND THE TAKE TAKING OUT THE DISEASE TREES AND ALL THAT LIKE YOU SAID SO IS IS THE FRONT EDGE OF CHILD.

>> THERE IS A DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT FROM THIS. >> IT IS A DIFFERENT OVER MAKE

A MOTION THAT WE PROVE THE BACK HYPER. >> HI.

HI. FIRST SORRY. >> WHAT WAS YOUR.

>> YES, YES. YES. YES.

OK. >> 3 2 UM PERSONAL. >> NOTHING PERSONAL.

WE'RE HERE FOR A SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ON TO NEW BUSINESS NEW RIVER

[VII.1. New Riverside Park (Street Naming Application): A request by Constance S. Clarkson on behalf of the Town of Bluffton for approval of a street naming application to name the newly constructed private drive that will serve Fire Station #31 and the Town of Bluffton New Riverside Park. The property is zoned New Riverside Planned Unit Development and identified by tax map number R610 036 000 1319 0000 located southwest of the intersection of Okatie Highway and New Riverside Road. STR 05-21-00000) (Staff – Will Howard)]

WELL YOU PRETTY MUCH JUST DID THAT PRESENTATION. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STREET NAME IS. JUST KIDDING. I KNOW SO.

AGAIN THIS. THIS IS ESSENTIALLY AS MANY HERE WHERE THERE'S A NEW FIRE STRAIGHT FIRE STATION THAT IS CONSTRUCTED SEEM TO OPEN THAT WILL SHARE A ACCESS DRIVEWAY OFF RIVERSIDE ROAD WITH THE TOWN OWNED NEW RIVERSIDE PARK. SO THIS APPLICATION IS TO IS REQUESTING THAT YOU APPROVE THE STREET NAME OF RED BARN DRIVE FOR THE ACCESS DRIVE.

THAT NAME HAS BEEN VETTED WITH ALL THE APPROPRIATE MUNICIPALITIES AND AGENCIES BEAUFORT COUNTY IMMENSE HILTON HEAD, FORT ROYAL EVERYWHERE WITHIN COUNTY.

SO THAT NAME HAS BEEN APPROVED AND IT ALSO RECEIVED APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW

COMMITTEE. >> WITH THAT BEING SAID AS GRANTED BY THE POWERS SET FORTH IN SECTION 2 2 6 5 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE YOU CAN TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS ON WITH RESPECT TO THIS APPLICATION. YOU CAN APPROVE IT AS SUBMITTED, APPROVE IT WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE APPLICATION.

THERE ARE FIVE CRITERIA I BELIEVE FOR THAT APPLY TO A STREET NAME.

STAFF HAS FOUND THAT ACTUALLY THERE ARE MORE THAN FIVE CRITERIA.

ALL BUT ALL THOSE CRITERIA ARE ACCEPTABLE. THERE HAVE BEEN MET AND SATISFIES THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 315. THREE OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOP AN ORDINANCE THAT RECOMMENDS THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE FOLLOWING STREET NAME IS SUBMITTED THAT NAME BEING RED BARN DRIVE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.

I'M SURE CONSTANCE WOULD LOVE TO SPEAK TONIGHT. >> I THINK WE SHOULD NAME IT AFTER THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR. THAT DISCUSSION ANY OTHER

NATION OR ANY QUESTION WILL MOVE. >> WE ACCEPT THE RED BARN DRIVE

. >> ANY DISCUSSION IN FAVOR BY RIGHT.

[VII.2. Parkers Kitchen – 5 Oliver Court (Preliminary Development Plan): A request by Drayton-Park Companies, LLC on behalf of the owner, Wyatt Pringle, for the approval of a Preliminary Development Plan. The project consists of the construction of a +/- 5,200 square foot convenience store and fuel station. The property is zoned Schultz Planned Unit Development and consists of approximately 1.88 acres identified by tax map number R610 031 000 0961 0000 located at 5 Oliver Court. (DP-02-21-015049) (Staff – Will Howard)]

[00:40:05]

>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT NEW BUSINESS IS PARKER'S KITCHEN.

ON YOUR NEXT BY OLIVER COURT A REQUEST BY DRAYTON PARK COMPANIES LLC ON BEHALF OF THE

OWNER WYATT PRINGLE FOR THE APPROVAL. >> HER PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 5200 SQUARE FOOT CONVENIENCE STORE

AND FUEL STATION. >> THE PROPERTY IS IN SHORTS PLAYING UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY ONE POINT EIGHTY ACRES IDENTIFIED BY THE TAX MEMBER AND NUMBER IN YOUR PACKET LOCATED AT FIVE. OLIVER COURT WILL AGAIN WONDERING WHY THIS AND WHAT'S

ON THE SCREEN SAYS THERE WE GO . >> OKAY.

>> RIGHT. SO AGAIN THIS IS. OR THE PARKERS KITCHEN STORE NUMBER NINETY ONE REQUESTED BY DRAKE AND PARKER COMPANIES FOR THE APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT WILL CONSTRUCT A APPROXIMATELY 50 200 SQUARE FOOT CONVENIENCE STORE WITH SIX FUELING STATIONS AND ALL ASSOCIATED PARKING AND INFRASTRUCTURE.

>> THE PROPERTY IS ZONED SCHULTZ TRACT PLAN NEW DEVELOPMENTS LIES WITHIN THE BLUFFTON PARK BUSINESS PARK DESIGNATED AREA ALSO KNOWN AS BLUFFTON PARKS B C AND D MASTER

PLAN IDENTIFIED BY THE TAX MAP . >> NO YOU SEE THERE CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY ONE POINT EIGHTY EIGHT ACRES. HERE'S AN AERIAL LOCATION JUST FOR REFERENCE YOU'LL SEE GET THIS TO WORK AGAIN. THERE'S A SELF-STORAGE THE NAPA MINI IF YOU ARE FROM ARK FORMERLY KNOWN AS NEIGHBORS STATION ACROSS THE STREET THAT

LOCATION. >> SO A LITTLE BACKGROUND. >> THIS APPLICATION WAS

ORIGINALLY REVIEWED AT THE APRIL 7TH MEETING OF THE DRC. >> WE PROVIDED COMMENTS TO THE APPLICANT ON SOME SITE PLANNING ISSUES. THEY PROVIDED A RECENT MEDAL AND A REVISED CYCLING AND LANDSCAPE PLAN AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE HERE TO PRESENT TO YOU.

I THIS WAS THE INITIAL PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED. >> OUR PRIMARY CONCERNS WITH THIS PLAN WERE THAT IT WAS NOT A COMPANY. THIS PLAN WAS A TRAFFIC IMPACT

ANALYSIS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. >> THIS PLAN UNFORTUNATELY DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE THE THE CIA THAT WAS PRESENTED THAT THEY HAD THIS RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT INTERSECTION ON THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY WHICH GUY SPECIFICALLY SAID WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED AND THE ALL THE ACCESS POINTS TO THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY WERE ALREADY ESTABLISHED IN THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN. THAT'S NOT ONE OF THEM. SO THAT WAS OUR PRIMARY CONCERN. THEY ALSO WERE HAVING FULL ACCESS INTO THEIR SITE AT THIS INTERSECTION OFF ALL OLIVER COURT AND AGAIN CIA SAID DUE TO POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WITH STACKING. THEY RECOMMENDED THAT THAT INTERSECTION NEAR BE A WRITE OUT ONLY LEAVING THE PARKER SITE. SO WE ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS WITH THE APPLICANT AND THEY SUBSEQUENTLY PROVIDED THIS PLAN WHICH THAT ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS. YOU CAN SEE THEY ELIMINATED THE ACCESS OFFER BLUFFTON PARKWAY OR THE SECONDARY ACCESS RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT OF THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY.

THEY PROVIDED A WRITE OUT ONLY COMING OUT OF THEIR SITE EXITING TO OLIVER COURT.

ALSO PREVENT LEFT TURNS INTO THE SITE FROM OLIVER COURT THAT ELIMINATED THE CONCERNS WITH

STACKING BACK ONTO THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY. >> SO NOW AT FULL ACCESS WOULD BE PROVIDED AT THIS REAR ENTRANCE. BACK HERE THEY THEY ALSO PROVIDED PLAN. AND AGAIN, THIS IS CONCEPTUAL. THEY'RE JUST AS YOU KNOW, SHOWING THAT THEY PLAN TO MEET THE END OF THE OF THE BOSTON PARK COMMERCIAL MASTERPLAN AREA

[00:45:01]

PLANT SCHEDULE. >> THIS WAS AIRED BY KEEFER LOCAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS FAMILIAR WITH OUR REGIONAL PLANT MATERIAL AND REQUIREMENTS.

SO I THINK THAT ALL LOOKS PRETTY GOOD. THEY ALSO PROVIDED A CONCEPTUAL LIGHTING PLAN I DID NOT INCLUDE. UNFORTUNATELY THAT SLIDE THAT WOULD INDICATE THEY ARE SHOWING INTENT THAT THEY WILL COMPLY WITH THE LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS OF THE BOSTON PART B C AND D MASTERPLAN AND THEY WILL ALSO THEY HAVE RECEIVED A PRELIMINARY OR CONDITIONAL APPROVAL BY THE BLUFFTON PARK PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION.

THEIR ARCHITECTURE ALTHOUGH WE HAVE NOT REVIEWED IT, WE WON'T REVIEW IT BUT IT WILL BE REVIEWED AND WILL REQUIRE APPROVAL OF THE BLUFFTON PARK PMA AND THAT WAS NOT COME TO

US. >> NO, NO. ALL OF THAT ARCHITECTURE IS YOU FAMILIAR WITH OTHER PROJECTS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH ON THE PARKWAY? WE DON'T REVIEW IT PLANNING COMMISSION DOES IT REVIEW BECAUSE THAT'S NOT ACTUALLY PART OF A HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY. BUT IT DOES GET REVIEWED BY THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATE SECTION AND IT HAS TO MEET THEIR STANDARDS.

THAT'S A REQUIREMENT OF US TO PROVIDE A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

APPROVAL AND IT'S ALSO REQUIRED BEFORE THEY CAN GET ANY BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED.

>> SO AS WE GO THROUGH THERE ARE SIX CRITERIA THAT YOU YOU CAN CONSIDER IN YOUR REVIEW OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN A BROKEN OUT EACH ONE HERE.

STAFF FINDS THAT THIS PROJECT LIES WITHIN THE SHORT TRACT PDB AND THEREFORE IT'S NOT US THAT'S NOT SUBJECT TO THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOUND IN THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE THAT ALSO FINDS THAT THE BUSINESS PARK AREA OF THE BLUFFTON PART B C AND D MASTER PLAN WAS DESIGNATED FOR APPROXIMATELY TWO HUNDRED ACRES AND THIS PLAN IS IN CONFORMANCE

FOR THE MOST PART WITH BUXTON PART B, C AND D. >> MASTER PLAN AREA ONE OF OUR LARGEST CONCERNS IN THAT WE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT AND WE WORKED WITH B FOR COUNTY WAS A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WAS INCLUDED WITH THE SHULTZ DRAGGED PD.

>> THE APPLICANT WAS ASKED TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WITH THEIR PROJECT KNOWING THAT TRAFFIC ISSUES WOULD BE OF CONCERN AT AN INTERSECTION THAT WAS ALREADY HAD ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A FAILING INTERSTATE THOUGH THE APPLICANTS PROVIDED THAT APPLICATION THAT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.

>> THEY ALSO SUBMITTED IT TO BE FOR COUNTY FOR REVIEW SINCE THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY IS NAMED BY

BEAUFORT COUNTY. >> WE NEED THEIR INPUT AND WE WOULD LIKE THEIR APPROVAL OF THE THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. UNFORTUNATELY EVEN OF THE THE APPLICATION THE DTI WAS SUBMITTED TO STAFF AND B FOR COUNTY 90 DAYS AGO WE LITERALLY

JUST RECEIVED THEIR COMMENTS YESTERDAY. >> WE HAVE NOT HAD SUFFICIENT TIME TO REVIEW THEIR COMMENTS BUT WE WE DO KNOW THAT THEY ARE RECOMMENDING SOME ADDITIONAL

INFORMATION BE PROVIDED. >> POINT OF PERHAPS AN ENTIRELY NEW TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO SATISFY THEIR MOVING ON TO THE REMAINING CRITERIA.

3 AND HAVE NOTED THAT ALL THE REQUIRED UTILITIES OF ELECTRICAL TELEPHONE, WATER

AND SEWER ARE ALL AVAILABLE TO THE SITE. >> THE APPLICATION HAS NOTED THAT THE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE COMPLETED IN A SINGLE PHASE HAVE REVIEWED AND DEEMED THE

APPLICATION TO BE COMPLETE. >> YOUR ACTIONS TONIGHT ARE THAT YOU CAN APPROVE THIS AS SUBMITTED. YOU CAN APPROVE IT WITH CONDITIONS OR YOU CAN DENY THE

[00:50:04]

>> WE ALSO HAVE. DANIEL I'M NOT GOING TO TRY TO PRONOUNCE YOUR LAST NAME.

I'M SORRY. WE ALSO HAVE DANIEL REPRESENTING PARKER'S AND WE HAVE JOSH COX WHO IS THE ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR THE PROJECT AND THERE THEY'RE

AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS AS WELL OR ANYTHING FURTHER. >> YOU GUYS LIKE TO COMMENT

BEFORE WE START DISCUSSING. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. MY NAME IS DANIEL VENESS TRIAL OK.

I'M SURE YOU WOULD HAVE DONE A FINE JOB. I'M PLAYING A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER FOR THE PARKER COMPANIES AND I'M HERE WITH JOSH COX OF BUBBLE DESIGN GROUP, THE CIVIL ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT AND DANIEL KIEFFER, THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT. WE DID A GREAT JOB COVERING THE SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT.

UNFORTUNATELY WE DID GET THE COMMENTS BACK RATHER LATE FROM BEAUFORT COUNTY ON THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. LIKEWISE, WE HAVEN'T HAD SUFFICIENT TIME TO DIGEST THOSE FINDINGS OR RECOMMENDATIONS BUT IN TAKING A QUICK LOOK AT THEM WE DON'T ANTICIPATE HAVING TO MAKE ANY MY MAJOR CHANGES TO THE SITE PLAN AS WILL NOTED IN HIS PRESENTATION.

ONE OF THE MORE SALIENT POINTS THAT CAME OUT IN THE ANALYSIS AND THE REVIEW BY THE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT FOR BEAUFORT COUNTY WAS THAT THE ACCESS THAT FIRST ACCESS OFF OF OLIVER COURT NEEDED TO MATCH WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IN THE TSA WAS AND THAT IS FOR IT TO BE A RIGHT OUT ONLY. OUR INTENT WAS TO KIND OF DISCUSS THAT WITH BEAUFORT COUNTY TO SEE IF THERE WERE ANY CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH WE COULD BUILD THAT AS A FULL ACCESS AND LATER REVISIT IT ONCE THE STORE BUILT AND IF PROBLEMS AROSE WITH STACKING AND ADVERSE IMPACTS TO BLUFFTON PARKWAY, WE WOULD THEN COME BACK TO REVISIT THAT AND RECONFIGURE IT TO BE A WRITE OUT ONLY. SO THAT WAS OUR INTENT. HOWEVER, IN AN EFFORT NOT TO DELAY OUR PROJECT AND HAVE TO WAIT 30 DAYS FOR A PRELIMINARY APPROVAL, WE'D LIKE TO ADVANCE THE APPLICATION MOVE TO THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STAGE, GET OUR M.S. FOR REVIEW STARTED AND FINISH UP OUR ENGINEERING AND STORMWATER PLANS. COMPLETE OUR REVIEW WITH THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE AND THEN COME BACK FOR FINAL PLANNING REVIEW WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT WHICH TIME WE WILL ENSURE THAT WE HAVE ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED ALL OF THE OUTSTANDING COMMENTS FROM THE BEAUFORT COUNTY TVA REVIEW AND BEFORE COMING BACK FOR YOUR FINAL APPROVAL. SO IF YOU'RE A MEDAL TO THAT WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU APPROVE OUR PLANS TONIGHT WITH THE CONDITION THAT WE WORK WITH STAFF TO SATISFY THE PROVIDED IN THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REVIEW BY BY BEAUFORT COUNTY.

>> WHERE DOES THAT COME BACK BEFORE US? >> WHEN I WENT RICHARDSON TO GO TO AND I WAS ABOUT TO JUMP IN THERE IT WILL NOT COME BACK BEFORE YOU GET TO DRC.

>> YOU CAN REQUEST THE STUDIO ADMINISTRATOR BRING BACK FOR YOU BUT ULTIMATELY THE DECISION WHAT WE DISCUSSED LAST SUMMER BUT ALSO REMIND YOU THAT THERE ARE THREE OF USE THAT THREE OF YOU THAT ARE MEMBERS OF THE DRC AND AT THAT TIME WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND

MAKE COMMENTS AT THAT POINT. >> DOES ANYONE WANT TO GET STARTED?

>> YEAH, I WOULD. I'VE GOT SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS AND I GET ALL MY FUEL FROM BARKER SO IT'S NOT A PARKERS THING. THAT'S A THAT'S A HORRENDOUS INTERSECTION RIGHT NOW. ANYBODY COMING OUT OF DENMARK BARELY MOVE OUT BEFORE THEY SEE THE CARS COMING ON THE LEFT SIDE. SHOOT NOW TOWARDS YOUR PROPERTY TO MAKE A LEFT. ANY CASES WITH YOU WITH CARS COMING OUT OF YOUR PROPERTY MAKING THAT RIGHT HAND TURN AND AS I UNDERSTAND WITH THE NEW PLANES THEY CAN'T COME STRAIGHT

ACROSS TOWARDS DENMARK. IS THAT CORRECT? >> A NO, THAT'S THEY CAN LET ME

[00:55:05]

>> THERE IS A RIGHT TURN RIGHT OR LEFT TURN AVAILABLE FROM COMING OUT OF PARKER'S TO FIND

AND PROVIDE. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY YOU'RE LOOKING TO SERIOUSLY

SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE. >> YOU HAVE GOTTEN TO THE POINT NOW WHERE IF I'M GOING OUT AND HAVE AN MA COMING FROM THE CARWASH WOULD NOT HAVE TO MAKE A RIGHT GO DOWN WITH THE RED LIGHT ACT WHICH IRONICALLY THAT WAS THE WAY BLUFFTON PARKWAY WAS DESIGNED.

>> IF YOU READ THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT YOU SEE THE PEOPLE GOING ACROSS.

YEAH, IF YOU SEE THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE BOSTON PARKWAY IT ACTUALLY STATES THAT YOU KNOW THERE'S REQUIRED SEPARATION BETWEEN TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND THEN A LOT OF THE SIDE STREETS THAT FEED THE PARKWAY WERE PLACED SO THAT INSTEAD OF MAKING LEFT HAND TURNS THEY WERE PLACED SO THAT PEOPLE COULD MAKE A RIGHT HAND TURN GO TO A CLOSE TRAFFIC SINGLE AND THEN MAKE A U-TURN IF YOU WOULD THREE TERMS WITH THAT MALL, WHATEVER IT IS OR

FILL LANE WAS SOLID. >> AND THERE WAS NO WAY TO CROSS EITHER WAY THERE WOULD BE MUCH MORE FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT. THAT'S COUNTY.

I JUST I JUST THINK IT'S TERRIBLY UNSAFE. >> I MEAN I'D SAY IT'S RIGHT

WITH ONE GAS STATION IT'S UNSAFE NOW. >> SERIOUSLY UNSAFE THOUGH THAT ROAD THAT THE PARKING LOT IT CONNECTS TO THE ISLAND PLASTERS THAT PEOPLE CAN.

>> YES, THERE IS THERE IS CONNECTIVITY AND THEN THAT'S A REQUIREMENT OF THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE FOR THE BOTTOM PART B SANDY. SO THERE IS CONNECTIVITY TO THE ADJACENT PARCEL. AND THEN THERE IS STILL CONNECTIVITY TO THE MAP.

YOU JUST HAVE TO COME FROM HERE AND THEN GO THAT YOU KNOW IN THAT WAY ACTIVITY QUESTION DOWN

ON THE CIRCLE. >> OR UP ON THE CIRCLE ON THIS MAP TO THE RIGHT IS EVENTUALLY GOING TO CONNECT TO OTHER FRONTAGE ROADS. RIGHT.

TO THAT'S JUST A YEAH. YOUR THAT'S JUST A REAR ENTRANCE TO THAT DOESN'T

PROVIDE THE IS DOESN'T PROVIDE FULL CONNECTIVITY. >> OKAY.

IT'S IT'S LIKE THE BACK OF HOUSE AREA ON UNDEVELOPED PARK THAT LED INTO THIS

DISCUSSION. >> YES. THIS INTERSECTION HASN'T BEEN

CONSIDERED BEFORE. >> IT'S NOT EVEN GOING TO BE CONSIDERED FOR A SIGNAL.

>> IT IS NOT CALLING FOR A SIGNAL BECAUSE OF ITS PROXIMITY TO THE EXISTING SIGNAL AT SIMMONS VILLE ROAD. YOU WILL SEE ANY SIGNAL ANALYSIS WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED IN A SIGNAL WARRANT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY BEAUFORT COUNTY BECAUSE IT'S THEIR ROAD. BUT AT THIS POINT JUST BASED ON THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN, IT DOESN'T MEET THE SEPARATION REQUIREMENT

FOR SIGNAL NOW ANOTHER. >> I AGREE THAT THIS INTERSECTION HIGHLY PROBLEMATIC. I THINK YOU EVEN BROUGHT UP THE IDEA THAT PEOPLE ARE COMING OUT HERE AND DOING U TURNS. SO YOU COMBINE THAT WITH PEOPLE GOING AND SHOOTING STRAIGHT ACROSS AND I JUST KNOW ABOUT A PROBLEM INTERSECTION. I'M JUST I WANT TO RESPECTFULLY

DISAGREE WITH ALLERGIES. >> I HAVE WHEN I GO HOME I NEED TO FILL UP WHICH SEEMS TO BE FREQUENT. I HAVE TO TURN LEFT AND GO OVER TO MY I FEEL LIKE I'M TAKING MY LIFE INTO MY OWN HANDS DOING AS PARKERS IS CREATED FOR ME AND I BELIEVE PEOPLE LIKE ME THAT COMMUTE ON THE ROAD ALL THE TIME AND I GO RIGHT INTO THE PARKERS OR RIGHT INTO THE END

MARK. >> I THINK I COULD BE WRONG BUT I THINK WE'RE GOING TO END UP WITH LESS ISSUES AND THAT INTERSECTION OF THE TWO JUST MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE AND

THOUGHTS ON IT. >> I JUST THINK THE TREND THE TRAFFIC GOING IN THE PARK IS AS POPULAR. IT'S GOING TO HAVE HEAVY I MEAN RELATIVELY HEAVY TRAFFIC THERE AND I'M LESS CONCERNED WITH THE TRAFFIC GOING IN. I'M REAL CONCERNED WITH THE

TRAFFIC COMING OUT AND I MEAN I CAN'T DISAGREE WITH YOU. >> I MEAN I'VE SPENT SOME TIME AT THIS INTERSECTION AND IT'S IT'S NOT THE BEST SITUATION. I MEAN WE WE WOULD IDEALLY WANT

[01:00:07]

WE DO THINK, HOWEVER, IN AGREEMENT WITH THE COMMISSIONER THAT DRIVERS MOTORISTS WILL TAKE THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE AND ONCE OUR STORE IS THERE IT PROVIDES ANOTHER OPTION AND ELIMINATES THE NEED TO CROSS THOSE ADDITIONAL LANES OF TRAFFIC TO GET INTO THE END

MARKET. >> AND FOR TRAVELERS TRAVELING WEST IN THE EVENING COMMUTE AND WE THINK THAT WILL CAPTURE A LOT OF THAT TRAFFIC AND HELP AGAIN ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE

DANGEROUS CONDITIONS THAT EXIST THERE TODAY. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

AS FAR AS I'M GOING TO KIND OF PULL UP THE TRAFFIC FOR A SECOND, THE STREET FRONTAGE, IS

THERE A REQUIREMENT OF HOW THE BUILDING WHAT IS YOUR. >> I KNOW WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT ARCHITECTURE BUT WHAT IS YOUR INTENTION RIGHT NOW? IT'S A SIDE FACING BUILDING.

YES. SO WE HAVE AND JOSH, HELP ME WITH THIS.

WE DO HAVE A REQUIREMENT TO ADDRESS THE FRONT EDGE AND I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT UNDER YOUR PURVIEW BUT WE DO HAVE OUR ELEVATIONS WITH US. IF YOU'D LIKE TO TAKE A LOOK AT THEM. BUT WE'RE WORKING WITH THE COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND THERE IS A REQUIREMENT IN THE ORIENTATION OF THE BUILDING AND WE'VE ADDRESSED THAT ADEQUATELY. JOSH. IF YOU DON'T MIND, WE'VE BEEN

WORKING CLOSELY WITH OBJECTS CLIFFORD ON THAT. >> I'M SORRY I JUST MADE THE

MISTAKE OF DOING IT. >> CAN WE MAKE SURE THAT WE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE? SURE PICKS UP. THANKS. YEAH, I'M SORRY.

AGAIN, MY NAME'S JOSHUA COX OF DESIGN GROUP AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE INITIAL CONCERNS WHEN WHEN WE REVIEWED THE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND WE STARTED WORKING WITH ROGERS

CLIFFORD CLIFFORD RIGHT. >> ROGERS CLIFFORD YOU HAVE THE ELEVATION I.

>> BUT YEAH ARCHITECT AND I CAN I CAN PASS THIS AROUND I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT THEY'VE COME UP

WITH. >> AND JUST TO CLARIFY THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS I PULLED OUT FROM THE DESIGN GUIDELINES BECAUSE WHAT IT STATES AND WHAT ROGERS WHAT THEY'RE WORKING WITH WAS IT SOUNDS LIKE WITH ROGERS IS THAT IN THIS BUSINESS PARK PARKWAY LOTS DESIGN GUIDELINES STATE THAT MAIN BUILDING ENTRANCES MUST BE ORIENTED TO FACE THE PARKWAY.

>> THIS FACADE IS REQUIRED TO HAVE THE PRIMARY ARCHITECTURAL EXPRESSION ON CORNER BLOCKS.

BOTH FRONT EDGES ARE CONSIDERED PRIMARY FACADES FOR ANYTHING THAT'S FACING A STAFF FIELD AND THIS SATISFIES OR IS THAT NOT SOMETHING YOU CAN THEY'RE SATISFIED.

>> WE'RE SATISFIED THAT THEY'RE THEY ARE MEETING THE BILL TWO LINES AS WE'RE NOT REVIEWING OUR ARCHITECTURE, WE HAVE TO RELY ON THE THAT THE A RB OF BOSTON PARK WHICH HAS

HAPPENED IN THE PAST I DON'T KNOW BABY ON THAT. >> I MEAN WE AGAIN WE JUST WE WORK CLOSELY WITH THE RB. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THERE'S NO ANSWER TO THAT.

WHAT WE ARE GONNA DO IS REQUIRE THEIR APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT BEFORE WE CAN PROVIDE A FINAL PLAN APPROVAL. WORKING WITH THEM TO MAKE SURE AND THIS MEANS THAT THE CORNER WHAT REQUIREMENTS? YES, VERY CLOSE. YES.

ROGERS I BELIEVE SENT OVER AN EMAIL OR A LETTER STATING THAT HE HAD REVIEWED THE PROJECT AND THAT IT WAS MORE OR LESS CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES .

HE HASN'T ISSUED A FINAL APPROVAL YET WHICH WE WILL OBTAIN AS WILL INDICATED AFTER WE GET YOUR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL LEADING UP TO THE ONLY OTHER THING I WAS JUST

[01:05:05]

>> SO I DON'T KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT ME PERSONALLY APPROVING SOMETHING RIGHT NOW WITHOUT

HAVING ALL THE INFORMATION. >> WELL, I CAN ASSURE YOU OF THIS AGAIN WE HAVEN'T HAD A

CHANCE TO DIGEST EVERYTHING. >> I DID SPEAK WITH JENNIFER BEALL OF BEALE ENGINEERING THE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT WHO PROVIDED THE COMMENTS. I REACHED OUT TO ERIC GREENWAY, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND TANNER THE HOW UNFORTUNATE I WAS ABLE TO GET THEM TODAY.

>> HOWEVER, IN LOOKING AT THE COMMENTS BRIEFLY I TALKED TO OUR TRAFFIC CONSULTANT AND WE DO HAVE TO GO BACK AND PROVIDE SOME CALCULATIONS. WE DO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IN PLACES THE NARRATIVE MATCHES THE PROJECTIONS AND BUILD TO CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE ESTIMATING IN THE STUDY. WE'RE GOING TO CLEAN THAT UP. WE'VE WE'VE ADDRESSED ONE OF THE MAJOR CONCERNS AND THAT IS THE WRITE OUT ONLY COMING OFF OF OLIVER COURT AND AT ALL IN ALL HONESTY, I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE IN THERE OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, SOME COSMETIC THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED THAT WILL RESULT IN A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO THE SITE PLAN BEYOND WHAT YOU'RE SEEING TONIGHT. AGAIN, AT LEAST THREE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE PLAN IN ITS FINAL FORM.

WHEN WE GO BACK TO DRC FOR A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL.

SO SOMETHING WOULD BE WRONG TO TABLE JUST UNTIL WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION.

>> WE WOULD PREFER A VOTE TO APPROVE. THAT WAY WE CAN MOVE TO THE

NEXT STEP. AND NOT LOSE 30 DAYS OR MORE. >> AGAIN, WE'D BE WILLING TO WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH STAFF SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMISSION DRC WHOMEVER IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ALL ARE HAPPY WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING BEFORE WE GET YOUR FINAL DEVELOPMENT

APPROVAL. >> I MEAN AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU GUYS WILL HAVE FINAL SAY AND IF WE HAVEN'T ADDRESSED THE COUNTY'S CONCERNS TO YOUR SATISFACTION WE DON'T GET AN APPROVAL. SO WHAT YOUR APPROVAL TONIGHT WHAT YOUR CONDITIONAL APPROVAL TONIGHT WOULD WILL DO FOR US IS GIVE US THE GREEN LIGHT TO GET OUR IN.

THAT'S FOR SOME MIDDLES DONE SORT OF STORMWATER DESIGN AND YOU GET FURTHER ALONG IN THE PROCESS SO THAT ONCE WE'VE SATISFIED THOSE CIA COMMENTS WE CAN THEN LOOK FORWARD TO CLOSING OUT THE PERMITTING PROCESS AND GETTING STARTED ON CONSTRUCTION AND MAKING THIS

OUR I THINK SEVENTH LOCATION IN BLUFFTON. >> SO RICHARDSON IF WE DID APPROVE IT WITH CERTAIN CONDITIONS I KNOW THERE'S THREE OF US THAT WILL BE ON THE FINAL DRC BUT DOES THAT I'M JUST AFRAID OF RUNNING INTO THINGS THAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST

LIKE LAST MONTH WHAT WE DISCUSSED? >> WELL, I'M SURE WOMAN I THINK IT ULTIMATELY DEPENDS ON THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE ON THE APPROVAL .

>> IN LOOKING AT THE APPLICATION, LOOKING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE CRITERIA WHICH CRITERIA ARE OF CONCERN? IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S THREE POINT TEN POINT THREE A THREE AND A FOUR AND THOSE DEALING WITH THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND THE DEVELOPMENT MUST BE SERVED BY ADEQUATE PUBLIC SERVICES INCLUDING ROADS.

SO UNFORTUNATELY BECAUSE THE INFORMATION ME FOR COUNTY DIDN'T COME TILL YESTERDAY IT'S NOT INCLUDED WITHIN YOUR PACKET AND HOW IS IT THAT YOU CAN'T REALLY CONSIDER IT BECAUSE NEITHER STAFF NOR THE APPLICANT AND ABOUT AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW.

>> SO THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED COMPLIES WITH THE OR MEETS THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA. THE CONDITIONS THAT YOU CAN IMPOSE CAN'T NECESSARILY DELEGATE YOUR AUTHORITY TO A THIRD PARTY TO MAKE THAT DECISION FOR YOU.

IT'S ULTIMATELY IT'S THE DECISION THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT AT THE HALF IN DRC HAVE SOME APPROVALS APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE CRITERIA OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM PRELIMINARY

DEVELOPMENT. >> SO IT'S NOT THAT'S NOT A GREAT CONCRETE ANSWER FOR YOU BUT IT REALLY AGAIN JUST DEPENDS UPON THE CONDITIONS THAT YOU WANT TO IMPOSE.

[01:10:01]

OF THEIR DOCUMENTS THEY NEEDED TO HAVE. >> I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS.

>> SO THE CANOPY FOR THE PALMS IS OVER THE BUILDING SET BACK LINE.

DO WE NOT CONSIDER THE CANOPY BUILDING? THE STAFF NOT CONSIDER THAT CANCELING THE BUILDING SET BACK MEASURE TO THE TO A VERTICAL FACADE A VERTICAL THAT IS ALLOWED AS A APARTMENTS OVER THAT I DON'T THANK YOU SO YES IT'S FOR THE PRINCIPLE BUILDING WITH THE CANOPY IS THOSE ARE ALLOWED TO PROTRUDE BEYOND THAT SET BACK LINE.

>> IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO MARK ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE STREET SO AND MARK THEIR BUILDING IS SET AT THAT HUNDRED FIFTY FOOT MARK WHEREAS THEY HAVE THE CANOPIES AT THE FRONT THERE ARE A SET BACK SPECIFICALLY FOR CANOPY THAT ARE NOT PART OF THE I THINK THERE I FEEL AS THOUGH THERE IS A LOT STANDARDS I CAN PULL UP WITHIN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES BUT THE THE LOT STANDARDS FOR BLUFFTON PARK HAVE HAVE LINES FOR PARKING AND THEY HAVE LINES FOR BUILDING AND BUILDING REPRESENTS LIKE KEVIN SAID THE PRIMARY BUILDING VERTICAL WALL AND OTHER A

PERTINENCE IS LIKE CANOPIES GARDEN STRUCTURES. >> THEY'RE ALL ALLOWED OUTSIDE

THAT SET BACK OR BUILD TO LINE BUILDINGS. >> THEY EXPLICITLY STATE PORCHES. THEY DIDN'T I MEAN OBVIOUSLY GAS STATIONS VERY PARTICULAR USE WELL, I THINK IF YOU LOOK ACROSS THE STREET IT'S OBVIOUSLY ERIN THERE'S THAT EXAMPLE WHERE IT WAS ALREADY ALLOWED AND IT'S THE SIGN ALLOWED TO BE IN THE BUFFER.

>> YES. >> IT JUST HAS TO BE TEN FEET OFF THE ROAD OR THE RIGHT AWAY

. >> AND THEN I THINK THAT A LOT OF THAT I'M SURE IF I MAY WE AGREE AGAIN RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR CONDITIONAL APPROVAL AS STATED PREVIOUSLY.

>> BUT IN THE EVENT THAT THE COMMISSION IS INCLINED TO ON BASIS OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY COUNSEL IN THE EVENT THAT YOU ARE INCLINED TO DENY THE APPLICATION, WE WOULD PREFER A CONTINUANCE TO THE NEXT AVAILABLE AGENDA. BUT AGAIN PREFERENCES FOR

CONDITIONAL APPROVAL. >> SO ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I READ LOOKING BACK THROUGH THE PDB WAS THE IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING THE TREES THAT ARE ON PROPERTY AND THERE'S SOME LIVE OAKS AND WATER OAKS AND OTHER PROPERTY NONE OF WHICH APPEAR TO BE STAYING.

>> AND I DON'T SEE ANY NOTES IN REGARDS TO MITIGATION EITHER. SO THAT WAS THAT.

AND I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION THAT TO THE LOT WAS ESSENTIALLY CLEARED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF I THINK THE WATER ROAD IN ONE OR TWO OTHER TREES THAT WAS VIRTUALLY CLEARED YEARS AGO.

>> THE FACT THAT THEY'RE PLANNING BACK, YOU KNOW, A SELECTION OF LIVE OAKS AND OTHER MATERIAL THAT WOULD MORE THAN EXCEED ANY MITIGATION REQUIREMENT OF OF THE PD.

AND YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER IN A MASTER PLANNED AREA WITHIN THE PD MITIGATION IS NOT TREE FOR

TREE PER OBJECT. >> MITIGATION IS FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE PD.

SO THERE THEY WOULD MORE THAN SATISFY THE MITIGATION THEIR PORTION OF THAT WITH THE LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT THEY'VE PROVIDED. AND THEN HOW IS THAT MEASURED OR HOW IS THAT ACCOUNTED FOR THEN WHEN I MEAN WHO WHO'S LOOKING AT THAT NUMBER IS A JUSTICE STAFF LEVEL THING AND YES, HE DOESN'T SEE THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOESN'T SEE THAT NOBODY THE DRC SEES IT BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

>> YEAH. ALL RIGHT. AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS I SAW THAT THERE WAS I THINK 39 PARKING SPACES THAT WERE ON THE PLAN AND THEN IT NOTED AND I ALSO NOTED IN THE GUIDELINES THEY'RE PERMITTED TO HAVE 31 AND I THINK THERE WAS A 20 PERCENT THAT THEY HAVE OVER THAT WHICH MAKE IT THIRTY SEVEN .

>> SO IS THERE IS THERE SOME KIND OF A PARKING ASSESSMENT THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED THAT BASED ON BASED ON HISTORY IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT WHAT YOU WOULD PROVIDED WITH YOUR KITCHENS VERSUS I MEAN I ALSO I BELIEVE THAT THE 20 PERCENT OVERAGE OF THE REQUIRED PARKING SPACES

[01:15:08]

IS A TOWN YOU'D BE REQUIRED. >> WHICH I THINK WE MISTAKENLY REFERENCED OUR NEW VIDEO

DEVELOPMENT STANDARD ON THE SITE PLAN PRESENTED. >> BUT THE THE PD HELLMAN'S STANDARDS THEY DON'T HAVE THAT . MATT I DIDN'T.

>> YEAH. SO I'LL PUT IT AT 31 WHICH PUTS THIS 18 NOW.

>> SO THE THE P BELMONT STANDARD WHICH IS BASED OFF OF BEAUFORT COUNTY'S ORDINANCE

IS FIVE SPACES PER THOUSAND SQUARE FEET I BELIEVE. >> SO WE MEET THAT MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKS BUT THAT STANDARD HAS NO MAXIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES PERMITTED.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE WE'RE ON THE OTHER THING I READ IN THE MEDIA THAT YOU COULDN'T GRADE IN THE

BUFFER IS THAT DID I READ THAT CORRECTLY? >> THE BUFFERS UNDISTURBED?

>> YES. SO I'D ALSO NOTE IT LOOKED LIKE TO ME THAT PORTION THAT I THINK IT MUST BE A STORMWATER COLLECTION KIND OF ON THE ALL OVER COURT SIDE LOOKS LIKE IT'S IN THE BUFFER. AND I WON'T BUILD THE PLANE THAT MIGHT BE A BUFFER THAT FROM THE PARKWAY FROM OLIVER COURT PRIDE MORE VISIBLE ON THE LAND IN THE LANDSCAPE.

>> IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE THAT THAT MIDDLE CENTER ISLAND FRONTING LIKE ALONG ALL OF ALL OF OUR CORE IT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS GRADING LINES THAT MADE IT LOOK LIKE IT WAS SOME KIND OF STORMWATER COLLECTION AND PERHAPS I'M MISUNDERSTANDING BUT IT DEFINITELY LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS GRADING LINES AND IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S IN THE BUFFER YOU'RE ALLOWED TO PUT STORMWATER BMD IN THAT PORTION OF THE BUFFER THAT THE PORTION OF THE BUFFER WITHIN THE PD THAT'S DESCRIBED AS UNDISTURBED IS THAT PORTION OFF OF THE 25 OR 50 FOOT BUFFER OFF OF THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY RIGHT AWAY ON OUR CORE.

>> THAT DOESN'T APPLY AT ALL. >> OLIVER COURTS A PRIVATE ROAD WITHIN THE PD SO THOSE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS DON'T APPLY. YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

>> IS WE TABLED SO WE CAN DO THAT? M.J. WANTED TO ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION. THE AGAIN YOU CAN REQUEST THAT THE VIDEO ADMINISTRATOR BRING

HIM BACK. THERE'S NO IRONY. >> QUIET.

AND AGAIN, IT'S FOR Y'ALL TO PROVIDE THE INPUT TO THE EPA ADMINISTRATOR AND FOR HER TO

MAKE THE ULTIMATE DECISION. >> WHAT ARE YOUR MONEY? IF I MIGHT MY MY POINT ABOUT TABLING IT IS IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO REVIEW THE WHOLE PROJECT.

ALL RIGHT. AND WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE FACTS .

THAT'S IT. THAT'S THE ONLY ONLY REASON AND WE WE MAY HAVE A FULL COMMISSION NEXT TIME TO GO BACK TO THE STAFF COMMENTS ABOUT YOUR FINDINGS ABOUT THE TRAFFIC

. >> WE. THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WAS PROVIDED THE SCHULTZ PD AND THEY PROVIDED ADDITIONAL CIA SUMMARY.

>> IT IDENTIFIED THAT INTERSECTION AS A FAILING INTERSECTION CURRENTLY THERE IT'S TO TALKS ABOUT THE CUING AND THE STACKING OF THAT INTERSECTION AND THAT'S WHY THEY RECOMMENDED THE WRITE OUT ONLY OF OLIVER COURT OR TO OLIVER COURT FROM THE SITE WHICH THEY PROVIDED TALKS ABOUT SIGNAL IZATION IS NOT PROBABLE DUE TO THE PROXIMITY TO THE SIMMONS BUILDING THE DO THE ADDRESS CAN BE OUT STRAIGHT IN IT CHOOSE TO WRITE OUT OUT

OF WHAT I READ. >> I SPOKE EARLIER I ASKED THE INTERSECTION AS IT'S CONSTRUCTED NOW ALLOWS LEFT TURN STRAIGHT RIGHT TURN THE RIGHT THING ON THEIR PLANS

[01:20:07]

CONCRETE BARRIERS TO DO SO. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY'D ALLOW FOR THAT.

WE'VE GOT TWO SEPARATE LANE HAD LEFT COMING OUT OF OLIVER RECORD MEDIAN TO MAKE THAT YES.

>> SO THAT WE WOULD STILL INCREASE THAT WOULD STILL INCREASE IN OK I THOUGHT YOUR CONCERN WAS THAT THROUGH MOVEMENT UP THE WELL EITHER WAY YOU'RE GOING FROM ONE SIDE THE

OTHER IS MY CONCERN RIGHT NOW IT'S HERE. >> YES AND THAT WOULD BE THE CASE FOR ANY BUSINESS THAT DEVELOPS ON THAT THAT YEAH BUT NOT NECESSARILY HIGH TRAFFIC

BUSINESS. >> UNDERSTOOD. BUT BUT AGAIN WE FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT FOLKS WILL BE TAKING THAT RIGHT HERE AND USING THE U-TURN AS MEETING.

>> I WOULD WELL I'M MAKING THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE TSA IS GOING TO ADDRESS SAFETY

CONCERNS AT THAT INTERSECTION AS WELL. >> WELL, ESSENTIALLY IT'S

ADDRESSING TRAFFIC. >> SO YES, IT'S GOING TO IT IT MEASURES LEVELS OF SERVICE AND WAIT TIMES IT MEASURES SITE DISTANCING THE MEASURES YOU NUMBER OF TRIPS.

I THINK IT'S SAFE TO ASSUME THAT YES, IT'S GOING TO BE A MEASURE OF SAFETY.

DO THEY? IS THERE A SPECIFIC SAFETY CRITERIA THAT THAT'S KIND OF HARD TO QUANTIFY BUT ALL OF THAT WILL BE CONSIDERED AND THAT WOULD ALL RELATE TO SAFETY

IF THAT MAKES SENSE. >> DOES I GUESS I THINK AT LEAST FOR ME THE SAFETY AT THE

INTERSECTION IS A CONCERN. >> I AGREE WITH YOU I AGREE WITH TERRY TRYING TO COME OUT OF DENMARK AND MAKE A LEFT HAND TURN TO GO BACK WEST IS CAN BE A BIT A CHALLENGE AND THE BEST

OF DAYS. >> BUT TO ME AS LONG AS THE TSA COVERS SAFETY CONCERNS THAT INTERSECTION IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE AND THEN COMING BACK TO THE DRC THE DRC AGREEING THAT THE SAFETY CONCERNS HAVE BEEN MET THEN I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH APPROVING THE PLAN TODAY

WITH THE CONDITION THAT IT COME BACK TO WHAT WE KNOW. >> WE KNOW A FILE PLAN MAY GO TO THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. SO WE KNOW THAT THE THREE

OF YOU ARE ON THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. >> SO YOU YOU AT LEAST THREE

OF YOU WILL SEE IT THAT FINAL PLAN. >> WELL, CAN I ASK A QUESTION A COUPLE OF TIMES NOW YOU REFER TO THE COUNTY DEEMING THAT INTERSECTION AS A FAILED INTERSECTION WHEN YOU WHEN YOU READ IT I KNOW TRAFFIC ENGINEER BUT WHEN YOU READ TRAFFIC

THERE'S THE CRITERIA AND ANALYSIS. >> THE LEVEL OF SERVICE IS ESSENTIALLY MEASURED AT THE TIME THAT SOMEONE HAS TO WAIT TO EXIT THE INTERSECTION TO EXIT AND IT'S TYPICALLY RESTRICTED BY A LEFT THE TIME IT WOULD TAKE TO EXIT MAKING A LEFT HAND TURN. SO BECAUSE OF JUST THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT'S ON THE PARKWAY AND THE FACT YOU'RE PROBABLY FAR ENOUGH AWAY FROM THAT TRAFFIC SINGLE SIGNAL THAT YOU DON'T GET A LOT OF RELIEF BECAUSE THERE'S NOT CARS COMING THROUGH THE INTERSECTION.

>> THERE COULD BE CARS TURNING YOU KNOW FROM YEAH. FROM THE PARKWAY OR FROM SIMMONS. SO ANYWAY IT'S BASED ON AND GRADED ON THE THE TIME IT TAKES YOU FROM THE TIME YOU GET THERE TO THE TIME YOU MAKE A TURN MOVEMENT AND THAT'S THAT AND THAT'S IT'S A LEVEL OF SERVICE F CURRENTLY REALLY UNDERSTAND. THINK OF THE GRADING SYSTEM A B C D AND AN F SO AN F MEANS THAT IT'S IT'S IT'S IT'S A FAILING INTERSECTION MEANS THAT YOU

[01:25:05]

IS THAT SO SO YOU COULD WAIT UP TO THREE MINUTES DURING PEAK HOUR IF YOU WANTED TO MAKE A LEFT HAND TURN. SO WE ALREADY KNOW IT'S A TERRIBLE INTERSECTION.

WE ALREADY KNOW THAT NOW WE'RE GOING TO AND I DON'T WANT I DON'T WANT TO SAY THIS LIKE I'M

SUPPORTING SUPPORTING THE PROJECT. >> BUT IN TALKING WITH I SPOKE WITH THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER YESTERDAY AND SHE INDICATED ALTHOUGH THERE WAS A LOT OF THIS SHE NEEDED ADDITIONAL CRITERIA. BUT THERE IS THE THEORY AS COMMISSIONER WETMORE SAID THAT THE SERVICE STATION ON THE WEST ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PARKWAY WOULD SERVICE WESTBOUND TRAFFIC. NO ONE WOULD TURN LEFT TO GO INTO THE END. MARK ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PARKWAY AND THE SERVICE AND THE END MARK WOULD SERVICE EASTBOUND TRAFFIC. NO ONE WOULD GO OVER AND MAKE A LEFT HAND TURN TO GET INTO PARKER'S. SO THERE YOU COULD MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT IT MIGHT ACTUALLY IMPROVE THE INTERSECTION IF THERE'S SOMETHING THERE IF YOU DON'T HAVE EVERYONE MAKING LEFT AND RIGHT TURNS INTO THE SERVICE STATION ON THE SOUTH

SIDE THAT DISCUSSION WHAT EXACTLY DID THE COUNTY SAY? >> SHE JUST OFFERED THAT THEORY AND SAID SHE NEEDED MORE TRAFFIC COUNTS, MORE INFORMATION THAT SHE HAD PROVIDED IN HER REPORT TO US THAT WAS FORWARDED TO THE APPLICANT FROM PARKER'S TO

ADDRESS. >> SO IF INTERSECTIONS FAILING AND THEY KNOW IT MIGHT ADD EXTRA MEDIAN OR WHATEVER LIKE AT WHAT POINT IS BEAUFORT COUNTY THEN DO SOMETHING LIKE I KNOW THAT'S NOT YOU BUT JUST LIKE THEY KNOW ITS FAILINGS, ARE THEY GOING TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT THAT WOULD I MEAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS THEY WOULD HAVE TO JUST LOOK IF THEIR ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THEY EVER BLUFFTON PARKWAY THEY DO AND I HEATHER IS RUNNING UP

RIGHT NOW BECAUSE SHE HAS THE ANSWER. >> SHE'S THE SMARTEST, RIGHT? YEAH. JUST TO ANSWER QUICKLY THE THE IN THAT IS A LOT OF THOSE PROJECTS ARE BEING ADDRESSED OR BEING CONSIDERED TO BE INCLUDED ON IS YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE THERE LIST THAT'S ALL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED IMPACT FEES.

>> SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF IS WORKING ON AS FAR AS WHAT ARE THOSE PROJECTS ACCESS MANAGEMENT, SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THEY'RE PUTTING ALL THAT TOGETHER AND TO BE FURTHER THEY'VE SHUT DOWN MEDIANS ON TO 78 DONE SOME OTHER THINGS

THROUGHOUT THE YEARS BASED ON AREA SANCTIONS. >> SO I MEAN TO ME THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE WOULD JUST MAKE SENSE AND THEN THE THEORY OF PEOPLE ON THE RIGHT WOULD GO INTO PARKER'S REPORT AND THE LEFT WOULD GO IN AND MARK, I UNDERSTAND THAT OR GO DOWN TO THE NEXT LINE, MAYBE MAKE A U-TURN. I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT MAKES SENSE WITH THAT MEDIAN IN THERE MAKES NO SENSE TO ME. BUT WE'RE IN TODAY'S WORLD AND WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW EXACT FIGURE EXACTLY WHAT THAT'S WORTH.

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >> I JUST I JUST I'M

UNCOMFORTABLE JUST BECAUSE OF NOT HAVING MORE INFORMATION. >> I GUESS.

BUT I UNDERSTAND THE FINANCIAL AND THE TIME THAT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT I GET IT.

I WORK EVERY DAY SO I GET IT. BUT I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M DOING THE RIGHT ON.

>> I WOULD SAY THERE'S ALSO A CERTAIN AND I'M NOT TRYING TO ADDRESS THE COMMENT YOU MADE.

I'M JUST CERTAIN LEVEL OF RUST COMFORT PROCESS WHETHER IT DOES COME BACK TO 0 THEN AND I DON'T

KNOW I MAKE IT IT SOUND MORE BLUNT THAN I WANT TO BE. >> I GET IT.

I JUST THINK OF PAST THINGS WE'VE DONE IN IT'S COME BACK AT US AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE I KNOW THIS IS DIFFERENT BUT IT'S STILL NOT AS YOU SAY, THIS IS THE SEVENTH ONE THEY'VE BUILT

OUR TOWN SO WE KNOW HOW THEY DO IT TO JUST THINKING OUT LOUD. >> WELL CAN YOU GO TO THE SLIDE

[01:30:06]

IT'S HARD WHEN WE DON'T HAVE THINGS PRINTED OUT. >> I WOULD PAY FOR APOLOGIZED FOR THAT. IT'S BEEN 17 MONTHS SINCE WE'VE GOTTEN SO WE WE KIND OF SAY I WAS WRONG. YES. BIRD WHERE THE PRINTER ROOM WAS I HAD SAID ON A PRINTER SOMEWHERE I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT IN THE GUIDELINES I SAW IT SAID PROPERTIES THAT SPECIFICALLY THIS PROPERTY THAT IN THE GUIDELINES I THINK IT WAS THE DOES IT BE RIGHT FOR A OR WHATEVER PROPERTY WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE PUC IDENTIFIED AS A TYPE FOR A I THINK IS WHAT IT IS A

HOME. >> OKAY. YES.

OKAY. SO AS I SAW I BELIEVE I SAW IT LOOKED LIKE IT HAD A TWO STORY REQUIREMENT FOR THOSE CORNER LOTS AND IT HAD UP AN ASTERISK NEXT TO IT ON THE PLAN THAT I SAW AND THAT WAS REFERENCING YOU NEED TO HAVE A TWO STORY ELEMENT.

I'M ASSUMING THAT YOU'VE HAD A DISCUSSION WITH MR. ROGERS CLIFFORD YOU THE APPLICANT HAVE HAD A CONVERSATION. THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THAT RAISED ELEMENT AND THAT WAS SATISFYING HIM. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.

OK. >> WE ARE ARCHITECT IT'S A I'M SO SORRY.

JUST. YOU CONTINUE IF YOU COULD JUST AS WE WORK THE DURING THIS I'M

TELEVISIONS EVERYONE CAN HEAR IT. >> JUST NOT TRYING NOT TO LEAN BACK IN YOUR CHAIRS BECAUSE THEN THE MICROPHONES DO CUT OFF AND IF YOU COULD JUST LET ME

I'M SO SORRY I. >> YEAH. WE'RE ALL LEARNED AND GOT A BIT TOO COMFORTABLE. THIS PERSON THING IS HARD. I KNOW I KNOW I'M USED TO BEING

A WELL YES WE DID ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS. >> WE HAVE SOME MINOR DETAILS TO WORK OUT YET. OF COURSE WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO IN FRONT OF MR. CLIFFORD AS WELL. BUT I THINK WE'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK AND HE INDICATED THAT IN HIS LETTER TO YOU TWO WILL MEET PREVIOUSLY YOU ALSO DISCUSS WITH THEM A FOUNDATION PLANTING

AS WELL AROUND THE BUILDING. >> YES. YES.

AND THE PERGOLA THAT YOU SEE ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, ALL OF THAT CAME OUT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH MR. CLIFFORD AS WELL. NOW MR. CLIFFORD'S OF THE IT WOULD BE AS HIS OPINION OR HE HAS WEIGHED IN ON THAT TRELLIS FACING THE PARKWAY AND HE HAS DEEMED THAT A PROPER ENOUGH OF A FRONTAGE ALONG THE PARKWAY.

>> IS THAT AS I GUESS. >> YES. >> YES.

AND I'M CAREFUL TO SAY THAT HE HAS NOT ISSUED FINAL APPROVAL YET BUT IN IT SO YES, WE PRESENTED THAT TO HIM AND HE DIDN'T HE DIDN'T MAKE AN ISSUE OF THAT.

>> HE DID NOT THINK THAT HE DID NOT IN FACT THAT CAME OUT OF OUR CONVERSATIONS WITH HIM AND I THINK EARLY CONVERSATIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE HAD WITH STAFF AS WELL.

>> AND I'LL JUST SAY AGAIN, I MEAN YOU ALL HOLD THE KEYS OF THIS PROJECT THAT WE CAN'T GET A BUILDING PERMIT UNTIL WE GO THROUGH THE D.R. SEE PROCESS FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW. SO WE HAVE TO COME BACK WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THE CONDITIONS AND ALL OF THE ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED TO YOUR SATISFACTION.

SO THERE IS IN OUR OPINION THERE ARE ADEQUATE PROTECTIONS IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT THINGS ARE DONE PROPERLY AND MOUNTING A WOMAN IF I CAN JUST JUMP IN QUICKLY NOW JUST A FEW ITEMS FIRST I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE DOCUMENT BEING COMMISSIONER HARNICK HAS IS INCORPORATED WITHIN THE FINAL DOCUMENTS WITH WE MAKE SURE THAT NOBODY GETS A COPY OF THAT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IT'S BEING CONSIDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS PART OF THIS PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN OR IS YOUR DUTY TONIGHT AND THE PROCESS OF THIS PLAN OBVIOUSLY YOUR DUTY TONIGHT IS TO REVIEW THE THREE CRITERIA THE FUTURE HOW THIS PLAN PROGRESSES IN THE

FUTURE. >> I DO WANT TO MAKE I CHECK WITH STAFF JUST MAKE SURE BUT OBVIOUSLY THE DRC MEETINGS ARE OPEN SO ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO ATTEND HAS THE ABILITY TO ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS AND A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT'S BEING PRESENTED TO THE THAT AND

[01:35:02]

HERE. >> SHE HAS HEARD YOUR CONCERNS. >> I CANNOT I CANNOT SPEAK FOR HER AND I DON'T KNOW IF SHE SHE NECESSARILY WANTS TO SAY SO RIGHT NOW BUT I FULLY FULLY BELIEVE THAT IT WILL LIKELY BE BEFORE YOUR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AGAIN YOUR YOUR

RESPONSIBILITIES TONIGHT IS CRITERIA. >> THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN PRETTY CLEAR THAT IF YOU ALL ARE LEANING TOWARD DENIAL THEY WOULD PREFER TO TABLE AT THE NEXT MEETING SO THAT YOU KNOW WHEN THERE IS A DONE DENIAL IT STARTS BACK OVER ALL THE WAY AT THE BEGINNING AND OBVIOUSLY THAT'S NOT SOMETHING ANYBODY WANTS AT THIS STAGE OF THE PROCESS. SO IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT MOTIONS I'M HERE TO HELP YOU HOWEVER YOU WANT TO WORD IT THAT AGAIN IT'S A REVIEW BY CRITERIA AND IT'S YES COMFORT LEVEL WITH THOSE AND AGAIN BUT IN A DIFFICULT POSITION AS HAS THE APPLICANT BECAUSE OF YOU THIRD PARTIES NOT GETTING DOCUMENTS IN A TIMELY MANNER. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ON HAPPY TO YOU KNOW WHICH WAY IT'S GOING TO GO AHEAD SAID I MOVE THAT WE PROVE THE APPLICATION AS PRESENTED AND THAT WE FORMALLY REQUEST THAT THE IDEA OF ANY STRAIGHTER BRINGS IT BACK BEFORE US FINAL REVIEW FOR OUR COMMENTS CAN ITEM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE

[VIII.1. Comprehensive Plan Update]

THANK YOU KEVIN . >> YES. >> JUST VERY BRIEFLY SPEAK VERY BRIEFLY. I KNOW THAT A LOT OF YOU HAVE PARTAKES IN QUITE A FEW OF THE MEETINGS THAT WE'VE HAD VERY RECENTLY EITHER BEING PART OF A STAKEHOLDER OR STEERING COMMITTEE OR EVEN THE COMMUNITY ROUNDTABLES THAT WE HAD LAST NIGHT AS WELL AS THIS MORNING.

SO WE'VE HAD A LOT OF A LOT OF INPUT OF OUR CONSULTANTS ARE WORKING TO PUT ALL THAT INFORMATION TOGETHER AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO BRING SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BACK TO YOU GUYS RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST IN THE FACT FINDING BEFORE THEY START WORKING ON ASSESSING ALL OF THOSE WITH THE ELEMENTS OF THE COMPLAINT.

SO JUST LET ME KNOW WE'RE WORKING THROUGH THIS AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL HAVE A A PRODUCT THAT WE CAN BRING TO YOU IN A DRAFT FORM VARIOUS SECTIONS OF IT TO GET YOUR

INPUT ON IT. >> SO JUST LETTING YOU KNOW THAT WE ARE MOVING FORWARD GETTING IN A LOT OF INPUT THROUGH SURVEYS. SO I BELIEVE THAT WE'VE PROVIDED SOME CARDS HERE FOR A WHILE AND IF YOU HAVEN'T TAKEN A SURVEY THERE'S SOME INFORMATION ON THE BACK. IT'S AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE AS WELL AND THAT'S IT.

>> KEVIN ? KEVIN , DID YOU GET A GOOD TURNOUT FOR THE MEETINGS TODAY? YESTERDAY, YES. SO WE THE WE HAD A APPROXIMATELY 20 PEOPLE WHICH FLOOR FOR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT VIRTUALLY THAT'S RIBAUT. WE'RE GIVING THUMBS UP ON THAT.

YES. SO BOTH BIRTHDAYS. >> YEAH.

>> YEAH. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN ON A STEERING COMMITTEE?

>> I WANT IT. I WANTED TO PARTICIPATE. YES.

WOULD YOU CHOOSE ME PARTICIPATE ? AND OBVIOUSLY TONIGHT I COULDN'T DO IT. YEAH. AND YESTERDAY I WAS UNABLE TO.

SO YEAH, I'M GLAD TO HEAR YOU FEEL YOU HAD A GOOD TURNOUT AND WE'RE GETTING A LOT.

>> I SAY WE'RE GETTING A LOT WITH APPROXIMATELY ONE HUNDRED AND NINETY TWO INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE COMPLETED THE SURVEY ONLINE. SO YEAH.

>> QUESTION LET'S JUST DISCUSSION ORIENTED. WHERE ARE THOSE MEETINGS TODAY ARE AND HOW MOVING FORWARD HOW MUCH OF THAT KIND OF DISCUSSION ARE WE GOING TO BE PRIVY TO IN

TERMS OF WHAT THE. >> SO THE THE MEETINGS WE WILL THEY WERE RECORDED.

SO WE WILL HAVE THEM UPLOADED TO THE WEBSITE I BELIEVE DARBY SHAKING HER HEAD.

YES. SO IT WAS MORE OF JUST KIND OF FACT FINDING AND A SENSE

[01:40:04]

SO IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO GET INVOLVED MOVING FORWARD ON THIS AND WANTED THEIR VOICE TO BE HEARD I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A SURVEY THEY GOT FILL OUT WHICH IS LIKE 10 QUESTIONS LONG AND IT'S PRETTY LIMITED IN TERMS OF BRINGING UP THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

>> HOW COULD ONE GO ABOUT GETTING INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS TO KIND OF HELP THEIR

VOICE AND CONCERNS BE HEARD MOVING FORWARD? >> SO WE WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS AND WE'LL HAVE ADDITIONAL ROUNDTABLE MEETINGS.

HOPEFULLY IN PERSON SO WE'LL BE COMMUNICATING THAT OUT TO INDIVIDUALS THAT THEY CAN THEN PARTICIPATE. BUT THIS WAS JUST A UNFORTUNATE I DON'T HAVE THE THE THE TIMEFRAME IN FRONT OF ME TO LET YOU KNOW. BUT HE REALLY IN THIS FIRST THREE MONTHS THAT WE'RE IN. IT'S JUST THAT MORE OF THE FACT FINDING THAT AS OPPOSED TO LIKE ACTUAL CREATING ANY TYPE OF POLICY RELATED DOCUMENTS. SO SO IF IF YOU HAVE SOMEONE THAT WANTS TO BE INVOLVED, THEY CAN REACH OUT TO MYSELF OR CHARLOTTE MORE AND THEN WE CAN

GET THEM IN CONTACT WITH OUR CONSULTANTS. >> YOU KNOW, IF THEY HAD SPECIFIC INFORMATION THAT THEY WANTED TO PROVIDE, THEY CAN DO THAT AND WE CAN EASILY DO LIKE A SIMPLE ONE ON ONE DISCUSSION WITH THEM BUT THEN GET THEM ON KIND OF ON THE LIST SO THAT WAY AS FUTURE ITEMS COMING COMING UP THEN THEY CAN PARTICIPATE AND THEY'RE STAKEHOLDERS AND RAPID STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS AND THOSE ROUNDTABLES THOSE ARE KIND OF BY INVITATION RATHER

THAN OPEN FORUM. >> AND THE ONE YOU JUST HAVE IS KIND OF OPEN FORUM THAT MOVING

FORWARD THERE BIRTH BY INVITATION. >> THE STAKEHOLDERS WERE THEY WERE BY INVITATION JUST BECAUSE OF THE YOU KNOW THAT THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WE'VE KIND OF REACHED OUT TO. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT'S EXCLUSIVE.

SO IF SOMEONE SAID HEY, CAN I BE HONEST STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE .

ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S GREAT. SO WE TRIED TO REACH OUT TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE TO BE ON THOSE YOU KNOW, SOME PEOPLE DIDN'T EVEN RESPOND TO IT.

SO I MEAN THAT IT HAPPENS. BUT YOU KNOW, WE TRY OUR BEST TO GET AS YOU KNOW, CAST THE NET AS WIDE AS WE CAN AS THERE LESS SOMEWHERE WHO THE STAKEHOLDERS ARE IS THAT BEING

HELD PRIVATELY? >> I THINK THAT I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S NECESSARILY PRIVATE.

>> I MEAN, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE WANT MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT SENDING OUT A LOT PEOPLE'S INFORMATION. BUT I MEAN IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE INTERESTED IN, I'M HAPPY TO YOU KNOW, OFFLINE LOOK INTO IT. I JUST THOUGHT MAYBE YOU'D BE

LIKE I COULD LOOK AT THAT LIST ALSO I WAS ON THERE. >> I CAN CONVEY MY THOUGHTS TO THEM SO I DON'T HAVE TO GET FULLY INVOLVED. BUT I KNOW THAT THEY ARE IN TOUCH WITH SOMETHING SO THAT THEY CAN SHARE MY THOUGHTS. AND THAT'S A MECHANISM FOR

PEOPLE TO WRITE DISCUSS. >> YEAH. OUTSIDE KEVIN , IF I MIGHT JUST

INTERRUPT FOR A SECOND. >> CHARLOTTE LOOKING FOR ANY MORE VOLUNTEERS FOR THOSE

COMMITTEES? >> WE WILL BE RIGHT AWAY FOR YOU TO GET INVOLVED.

WE JUST HAD YOU KNOW, WE JUST HAD A BIG PUSH WITH THOSE ROUNDTABLE MEETINGS SO THE CONSULTANTS ARE WORKING ON, YOU KNOW, KIND OF FORMULATED ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN INTERNAL MEETING. WE HAVE BIWEEKLY INTERNAL MEETINGS JUST TO GO OVER THE INFORMATION. SO ONCE WE GET THAT KIND OF PUT TOGETHER AND WE CAN GET TO THE NEXT STEPS AND WE'LL DETERMINE WHAT THE NEXT MEETING NEXT ROUND OF MEETINGS ARE AND THEN WE'LL COMMUNICATE THAT WITH EVERYONE.

MOTION TO ADJOURN REMOVED AND I'M READY. >> GIVEN THAT I THANK YOU

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.