6. Mr. & Mrs. Goel are requesting a variance from Division 5.11.60.G.1. – Approval from OCRM, to construct a Bulk Head landward of the OCRM Critical Line within the River Buffer. The property is located at 12 Hampton Lane, Colleton River and is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD).

[6. Mr. & Mrs. Goel are requesting a variance from Division 5.11.60.G.1. – Approval from OCRM, to construct a Bulk Head landward of the OCRM Critical Line within the River Buffer. The property is located at 12 Hampton Lane, Colleton River and is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD). ]

MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT. >> YOU HAVE TO HAVE UP TO THREE MINUTES TO MAKE THOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

FIRST ON THE AGENDA, MR. AND MRS. LET'S GO. I REQUEST ADVANCE FROM DIVISION

5 THAT SHE LEVIN THAT 60 G1 ARE HERE EXCUSE ME. >> YOU REPRESENT ME.

OK, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND COME UP TO THE PHONE. SHE CAME IN YOU RIGHT IS OK.

GOT UPSET AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO TO PROTECT THE TREES COUPLE OF TREES THAT WERE MARKED AND THEY'RE MARKED IN THE CRITICAL AREA. THEY'RE OUTSIDE OF THE BUFFER ZONE. WE'RE KIND OF BY FOR A BULKHEAD TO PUT ACROSS THERE TO PROTECT THE EXISTING TREES AND LEFT ON THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY IS GETTING SOME EROSION. WE APPLIED FOR DNA TO MAKE NINE SAID THEY AGREE THERE WAS EROSION. THERE'S TWO GREAT BIG LIGHTBULBS THAT ARE OUTSIDE THE CRITICAL AREA. 32 INCH AND 19 INCH LIVE OAK THAT ARE NOW IN THE MARSH.

AND THEIR HOMEOWNERS ARE BUILDING A HOUSE ON SITE NOW WHICH IS GOING TO MAKE LESS AND LESS IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, MORE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. AND THEY HAVE WHERE THERE'S ANY MORE RUNOFF OR EROSION DOWN TO THE DIFFERENT OR OUTSIDE POSING TO THE VOLCANO IN YOUR EXISTING TREES. THE LEFT HAND SIDE THAT PROTECTS THE BUFFERS BETWEEN THESE IS THERE REALLY IS THEIR HOUSE TO WHAT DO WE DO? AND OF COURSE IS THERE A LOT OF LOSS THAT THIRTY FIVE TO THE LEFT AND TO THE RIGHT THIS PROPERTY IS THEIR HOUSE.

>> THEY'RE JUST IN THE HOUSE. ANY OF THE PROPERTIES HAVE A BUCKET.

THE TWO MEANINGS DON'T. THERE'S A COUPLE DOWN THE STREET THE WAY FROM.

THIS IS MAINLY MARSH AREA. YES, IT'S RIGHT AT THE EDGE OF THE MARSH.

SO THERE'S A THEY HAVE MY MARKER ON THE ON THE PLAN AND IT HAS MARKED A CRITICAL LIKE THE ONE THAT USUALLY ENTER THE MARKET CALLED THE EDGE OF THE MARSH.

AND THEY'VE MARKED IT. SO WE'RE NOW TWO TREES THAT OBVIOUSLY THE ROLLING MARSH AND NOW THEY'RE IN THE IS WHERE THEY PUT THE LINE. SO SO IS THIS ENTIRE AREA.

MAINLY I MEAN FOOTAGE OF MARSH SHE WOULD SAY IS THERE UP TO IT LEADING PROPERTY? THERE'S PROBABLY MORE BEFORE YOU GET THE CREEK. THERE'S A GOOD DOCTOR TO THE.

SO IS THIS JUST RISING TIDE? JUST TIDE THAT'S COME INTO THE WAVE OR ANYTHING THAT'S CAUSING

[00:05:03]

ALL SOME TIME SOME IT'S PROBABLY HELPFUL. YOU KNOW, I WROTE IT A LOT DURING HURRICANES BUT IT'S YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING LAW. IT'S HAD EROSION BEFORE THEY STARTED BUILDING THE HOUSE. IT WAS MEANT A LOT. THEY HAD EROSION THEN.

>> SO THAT'S TREES COMING UP IN THE MORNING AND THEN THEY'RE STARTING THE TREES START TO LEAN THAT THEY GET UNDERMINED. AND IT WAS KIND OF PROTECTING THE REST OF THE TREES THAT ARE THERE. THOSE TWO WERE OUTSIDE THE BUFFER ZONE.

I WAS REQUESTED TO CHECK TO WATCH THOSE TWO TREES. THE PROBLEM IS WITH SUCH BIG TREES YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE SUCH A BIG BOX AT SOME THE BOXES WOULD KIND OF OVERLAP.

AND WE HAD AN ARBORIST TO REPORT AND HE RECOMMENDED THAT WE DO A BULKHEAD TO BE LESS DAMAGE TO THE TREE ROOTS TO JUST DO ONE CONTINUOUS BULK AT CROSS FROM WHICH OVER EROSION STADIUM HAPPENED WITHIN. WELL HOW LONG HAS THIS OWNER HAD? HOW LONG HAVE THIS PROPERTY IN THERE? I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THEY'VE BOUGHT IT PROBABLY TWO OR THREE THREE YEARS, MR. JERRY. THEY BOUGHT IT IN 2017.

>> ABOUT ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS? WELL, SIR, I SIR I KNOW IS DUE HERE IN 2020. THEY BUILT THE DOCK IN THE BOATLIFT.

YES. SO THEY OBVIOUSLY OWE CRM AND AND EVERYBODY GOT INVOLVED TO PROVE THAT, CORRECT? YES. AND MAY I ASK WHY THEY DIDN'T ASK FOR PERMISSION TO BUILD THE BULKHEAD THEN THEY THEY WEREN'T ACTIVELY THEY DIDN'T KNOW THEY NEEDED THE BULKHEAD. THEY DIDN'T SEE THE PROPERTY. THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE A DOCK BEFORE THEY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY. IT'S ACTUALLY APPLIED TO THE DOCK AND GOT THE DOCK PERMIT AND THEY JUST BUILT IT LAST YEAR AND THEY STARTED BUILDING THE HOUSE. THEY NOTICED THEY HAD MORE AND MORE EROSION WHEN THEY GO AFTER THEY BUILT THE DOCK THEY CAN GET OUT AND LOOK BACK AT THE PROPERTY, SEE HOW MUCH EROSION THAT YOU HAVE THOSE THAT YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF TREES EXTANT HERE.

IT WAS PURPOSE OF REMOVING WITHIN IT LOOKED LIKE MAYBE SIX FEET BACK.

SO SOME OF THOSE ARE DEAD SOMETIMES GET DAMAGED. >> A MAN HAD BEEN OUTSIDE A COUPLE TIMES AND MET WITH THE GARBAGE MAN ON SITE. WE HAVE SOME TREES THAT HAVE DONE THEIR DAMAGE. I THINK THE MOSTLY PALM TREES THEY'VE LOST OUT.

THEY'RE JUST REQUESTING REMOVAL FOR THOSE THE LOCAL HOW HIGH IS THERE?

>> THE BULKHEAD ITSELF PROBABLY A FOOT AND A HALF HIGH AND IT WOULD JUST ELIMINATE LIKE THE STORM SURGES AND KING TIDES AND THINGS LIKE THAT FROM COMING IN AND TAKING MORE DIRT FROM THE PROPERTY. NO, BUT I MEAN HOW HIGH IS THAT ABOVE THE WATER BLUFF? YEAH, IT'S KIND OF SLOWED DOWN. I SAID IT'S PROBABLY TWO TO THREE FEET IN ELEVATION.

>> THEY HAVE IT ON THE SITE PLAN AND THE CONTOUR LINES THE NUMBER EIGHT BIG NUMBER SEVEN WITH THE DOTTED LINES THOSE ARE ONE FOOT CONTOUR LINES OF ELEVATION.

>> SO IT LOOKS LIKE UP AT THE TOP IT'S NINE. >> YES.

OK, SO IT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT TO THE MARSH AND WE'RE JUST GETTING EVIDENCE OF MORE AND MORE. BUT ISN'T THAT SORT OF TYPICAL? IT IS VERY YOU KNOW AND I'M USING HANS USUALLY WHEN THERE'S A DROP IT'S ALWAYS A LOT OF THINGS HANGING OVER IT.

THE ONLY PROBLEM IS WHEN YOU HAVE THAT SLIGHT DROP LIKE THAT, IT'S VERY DEMOCRATIC LINE YOU HAVE WITH I COMES UP AND IT CREATES A BLUFF AND ONLY GETS WORSE AND WORSE AND WORSE AND IT COMES BACK INTO THE PROBLEM WITH THIS. YOU JUST STAY THE SAME CHEWED UP THE SAME AMOUNT BUT AS IT COMES BACK IT CREEPS UP INTO THOSE HIGHER ELEVATIONS.

>> I GUESS MY QUESTION IS IF YOU PUT THE BALL CAN AND YOUR NEIGHBORS DON'T HANDLE IT, ISN'T IT GOING TO FORCE THE WATER AROUND IT? SOME OF IT.

I MEAN IT'S IT'S GOING TO FORCE WATER AROUND THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE YOU'RE GONNA HAVE LESS RUNOFF AND RAINSTORMS. BUT YEAH, WHEN THESE KING TIDES IS GOING TO IT'S IT'S FORCE

WATER AROUND IT. >> REALLY ANYWAY AND I'M SURE I ONE MORE QUESTION.

ACCORDING TO COMPREHEND PLAN A FIVE POINT ELEVEN POINT SIX SO G 1 IT SAYS THAT YOU HAVE TO GET PERMISSION FROM OCR M TO CONSTRUCT THE BULKHEAD IN THE CRITICAL AREA.

GEORGE SAYS YOU HAVE TO GET THE PERMISSION IN THE RIVER BUFFER BECAUSE THAT IS A RIVER BUFFER.

[00:10:06]

IT'S IN THE RIVER BUFFER BUT ALSO YOUR HOME REQUIRES AT THOSE CRITICAL IN THE RIVER.

BUT I DON'T LIKE IT. THAT'S WHAT IT READS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

>> MORE QUESTIONS LIKE HEY HERE FROM THE COUNTY HE IS REQUESTING A WAIVER FROM NOT

GETTING OCR PERMIT FOR A BULKHEAD. >> OCR DID NOT THINK THAT THERE

WAS ENOUGH EROSION TO ISSUE A BULKHEAD FOR THIS PROJECT. >> HE'S BUILDING THIS.

WE CALL IT A GARDEN WALL INSIDE THE RIBAUT BUFFER WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED.

HE HAS NOT PROVEN IN THE HARDSHIP GOING OVER THE REQUIREMENTS.

>> IT APPEARS THAT THE PROPERTY IS FLOODING AT HIGH TIDE WHICH I'M ASSUME ALL THE OTHER PROPERTIES ARE ALSO FLOODING AT HIGH TIDE. THERE ARE SOME TREES THAT ARE BEING ERODED. HE COULD FIX THAT AND THE ARBORIST THEY KNOW HOW TO PACK

IT IN AND DO IT PROPERLY SO THAT THE TREE SURVIVES. >> OTHER IF THERE IS NOTHING SIGNIFICANT ABOUT THIS PROPERTY ALL THE PROPERTIES I AM GOING TO ASSUME HAS THE SAME ISSUE.

AND BY BUILDING THIS GARDEN WALL INSIDE THE RIVER BUFFER IT'S GOING TO CAUSE A LOT OF OTHER EROSION ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. AND WE DON'T KNOW HOW HE'S GOING TO BUILD THIS WALL TO NOT AFFECT THE NEIGHBORS. SO WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH THIS BECAUSE WE CAN'T DO SOMETHING ON ONE PROPERTY THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE

ADJACENT PROPERTIES. >> THE VARIANCE I STAFF FEEL THAT IT WOULD CONFER SPECIAL PRIVILEGES ON THIS LAND OWNER AND BUILD IN THE GARDEN WALL WITHIN THE BUFFER WHICH IS NOT

REQUIRED. >> WE DON'T EVEN REQUIRE. WE DON'T EVEN APPROVE FENCES AND BUFFER IN THE RIVER BUFFER. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE NATURAL. I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHER WAYS THAT HE COULD MAYBE PUT SOME DIRT IN AND IN PACK THE TREES. LIKE I SAID BEFORE SO THAT THE TOP THE WATER IS GOING TO TAKE ITS NATURAL COURSE. SO I DON'T SEE WHERE THIS IS A SPECIAL PROTEIN SPECIAL INCIDENT PERTAINING TO THIS ONE PROPERTY.

IF WE START WITH THIS WE HAVE TO CONTINUE IT ALL THE WAY DOWN.

SO STAFF IS ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED DISAPPROVAL AND WANTED TO MEET WITH THEM TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER WAY WE COULD ASSIST THEM IN MAYBE DOING THE TREE WELLS JUST AROUND THE TREES SO THAT THEY DON'T DIE. HOPEFULLY AND WE SAVE THEM.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT TO BUILD THIS WALL IN THE BUFFER WE ARE RECOMMENDING THEM.

THIS IS AWESOME. ALL RIGHT. HERE'S OUR READ SECTION 5 DOG.

ELEVEN SIXTEEN G. NOT ONE. THIS IS A PARAPHRASE AND BULKHEADS IN THE RIVER BUFFER SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING .

>> SO WE'RE DEALING WITH A BULKHEAD THAT'S IN THE RIVER BUFFER AREA.

AND NORMALLY WHAT HAPPENS? >> THEY HAVE TO BACKFILL INTO THE RIBAUT BUFFER.

SO WHEN THEY DO THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS A PLAQUE BACK PLAN REVEGETATION PLAN SO THAT ALL THAT ANYTHING THAT'S DISTURBED WITHIN THAT BACKFILL OR IF IT'S THERE GAINING NEW

LAND THAT IS REVEGETATE IT AND THERE'S NO RUNOFF. >> YOU KNOW, THAT SHOULD ONLY

BE THE CASE FOR A BULKIER. >> THAT WAS ON THE WATER SIDE OF THE IN LAW.

YES. YEAH. HAVE YOU EVER HAD A SITUATION WHERE IT'S ONE WHERE THE BULKHEAD THAT WAS ON THE LAND SIDE OF THE OCR IN LINE BECAUSE THEY DON'T GIVE POCKET PERMITS THE PROPERTY THAT'S LAND WORD OF THE CREDIT.

>> WELL, YEAH. YOUR HOME'S JURISDICTION STOPS OR DECLINE WELL STARTS AT THE CRITICAL LINES WHERE YOU GO AGAINST IT. IF LANGUAGE IS WHERE IT STARTS.

YES. SO IT'S THAT I JUST THINK IT'S INTERESTING THAT GEMMA SITUATION WHERE IF SOMEONE WANTED DID WANT TO BUILD A BULKHEAD IN THE RIVER BUFFER AND IT WAS LAND WERE THE OCR M 1 THERE SEEMS TO BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THEY GET APPROVAL FROM OCR M IN A SITUATION WHERE THEY HAVE NO JURISDICTION.

>> WELL I GUESS MOST TIMES THE OCR WOULD GIVE THEM THE PERMIT AND A LOT OF THE DAMAGE IS

[00:15:02]

ACTUALLY IN THE RIBAUT BUFFER AND SO FAIL BACKFIELD THEY'LL PUT THE WALL ALONG THE CRITICAL

LINE AND BACKFILL ALL THAT STUFF AND THAT'S OUR BUFFER. >> SO IF THEY DO THAT THEN WE REQUIRE THE BUFFER TO BEAT. THAT'S WHY WE LOOK AT THE RE THE FLAT BACK PLAN TO MAKE SURE THAT WHATEVER IS REMOVED OUT OF THAT BUFFER BECAUSE THEY'RE ACTUALLY GAIN IN LAND WHEN THEY GET A BULKHEAD AND THEN THE CRITICAL LINE NOW STARTS AT THAT BULKHEAD.

>> SO WE REQUIRED OCR AND TO SAY OK, THERE IS ENOUGH EROSION GOING ON, GIVE THEM THE

BULKHEAD AND THEN WE'D TAKE CARE OF THE BUFFER SECTION. >> ONCE THEY PUT THAT BULKHEAD IN WE WOULD POSITION WOULD THESE FOLKS BE IN IF THEY WENT TO OCR CRM AND SAID LOOK, THE CODE SAYS I HAVE TO GET APPROVAL FOR YOU BUT CAN YOU GIVE ME A LETTER THAT SAYS YOU

HAVE NO JURISDICTION? >> I THINK THEY DID. SO THERE IS NO EROSION THAT

THAT'S ONE OF THE BIGGEST THING . >> DOES THEIR APPLICATION

COMPLY WITH ALL THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF SUB G THERE? >> I HAVE TO READ FELT THE HEIGHT THE TREE PROTECTION REVEGETATION PERHAPS THIS WALL IS ONE FOOT HALF FOOT SO THEY

DON'T NEED IT ENGINEERED ONLY. >> ANYTHING OVER FORTY EIGHT INCHES COULD REQUIRE THE ENGINEER TO SET THE CLAIMS TREE PROTECTION THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT'S REQUIRED

TAKING DOWN SOME TREES. >> I DON'T SEE ANY TREE PROTECTION REVEGETATION.

I HAVEN'T GIVEN UP. >> OKAY SO BUT WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE OCR APPROVAL BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ACTUALLY DECIDE IF THERE IS ANY EROSION GOING ON IN THE COUNTY FEEL

THAT THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS TO MOST PEOPLE. >> WELL, MY QUESTION IS I MEAN IS IT REASONABLE TO REQUIRE THAT THEY GET OCR OF APPROVAL IN A SITUATION WHERE OCR ERM SAYS WE DON'T HAVE ANY JURISDICTION OVER THAT SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT

IT. >> WELL MAYBE NOT. BUT WE DON'T ALLOW THIS.

BUT THIS IS IN A SECTION OF THE ROOM ABOVE AND IT SEEMS THAT IT DOES ALLOW IT AS LONG AS YOU

MEET ALL THESE REQUIREMENTS. >> WELL ONE OF THE REQUIREMENT IS APPROVAL FROM OCR AND THEY'RE NOT MEETING THAT WELL. MY POINT IS IT ISN'T. IS IT REASONABLE TO REQUIRE THAT THEY GET SOMETHING THAT THEY CANNOT GET WHILE THEY CAN WAIT UNTIL THEY REALLY HAVE EROSION AND THEN GO AND GET THE PERMANENT I MEAN IN OTHER WORDS, THEY WON'T GIVE THE PERMANENT BECAUSE THEY FEEL THERE'S NO NEED THERE'S NO EROSION UP TO THE CRITICAL

LINE. >> I MEAN THE CRYSTALLINE WATER HITS REALLY COMBINED WITH FOR EXAMPLE TO GIVE NO WAY AROUND IT. IS THERE SOMETHING WRITING FROM OCR AND THAT'S IT THAT EXPLAINS YOUR POSITION ON BECAUSE I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE RECORDS OF THE STAFF REPORT OH IT MENTIONS THIS OCR HAS DENIED THE APPLICANT A PERMIT.

YOU SAID YOU NOW BELIEVE THERE'S AN EROSION OF THE CRITICAL LINE THAT WARRANTS A BULKHEAD OR A PRO THAT WAS JUST IN THEIR ANALYSIS PORTION. ARCHIE, I THOUGHT SOMETHING WAS

WRONG. >> NO, I HAVE NOTHING FROM ME I'D REALLY LIKE TO SEE WHAT OCR

RAM'S WRITTEN POSITION IS ON THIS BEFORE. >> IF THEY SAY NO WE'RE NOT GOING TO GIVE THE FIRM IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT WARRANTED. IS ONE THING IF THEY SAY NO WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET FIRM BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY JURISDICTION OVER THIS SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET INVOLVED IN IT. I MEAN THAT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT THING. THE APPLICANT TO SEE IF ANYTHING MOVES HERE I MEAN I WAS YOUR AGE BUT YOU CAN YOU CAN YOU CAN STUDY WE'LL GET YOU ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE SAY THEY'VE MADE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THERE'S NO EROSION AT THE CRITICAL LINE AND THAT'S WHY

[00:20:01]

WE'VE PROPOSED HAVING THE BULKHEAD IN THE BUFFER ZONE ONE FOOT BACK FROM THE CRITICAL

LINE. >> BUT THEN THEY HAVE THEY THEY BASICALLY SAID THAT THEY DIDN'T

BELIEVE THERE WAS EROSION THERE . >> THEY LOOK FOR ACTIVE EROSION. THEY LOOK FOR YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR STATISTICS ARE.

THEY'VE HAD A LOT OF NEW PEOPLE IN THERE THAT AREN'T PROPERLY TRAINED LOOKING BUT THAT'S WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION THEY WILL IF THERE'S NO ACTIVE EROSION YOU NEED TO BULK IT.

WELL, I WOULDN'T DISAGREE THAT THERE'S TREES THAT ARE NOW IN THE MARSH THAT WOULD KIND OF PROVE IT. THERE'S ACTIVE EROSION GROWING .

>> HOW LONG WOULD YOU SEE THOSE TREES WAS IN THE MARKS? >> I MEAN THAT YOU WOULD SAY THAT CAME BECAUSE OF THE HURRICANE MAYBE WHY? I DON'T THINK THAT FROM THE

HURRICANE. >> I DON'T KNOW. I MEAN THEY COULD HAVE AND PROBABLY DIDN'T HELP AT ALL. BUT I MEAN THE HURRICANE PROBABLY CAME IN AND BROUGHT A STORM SURGE IN TO LOOSE DIRT AROUND THE TREES. NOW THE TREES ARE IN THE MARSH . AT SOME POINT THEY'RE GONNA TOPPLE AND YOU KNOW BUT THAT LINE THAT THE THING WE'RE TRYING TO FIX THE PROBLEM OF TRYING TO FIX IS THE BUFFER ZONE IS SUPPOSED TO BE 50 FEET AS THE CRITICAL LINE CREEPS BACK AND GETS WASHED OUT THE BUFFER TO GET SMALLER, SMALLER OH WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS KEEP THE EXISTING 50 FOOT BUFFER,

YOU KNOW, THROUGHOUT IT. >> I DIDN'T GET YOUR NAME ORIGINALLY EASTMAN STEVE.

>> WE'RE JUST TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, SLOW UP A PROBLEM. IT'S YOU LOOK I MEAN A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AT NOW HERE AND NOW. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT A 10 YEAR PLAN OR A 15 YEAR PLAN AT SOME POINT THOSE TREES WERE ON LAND. THEY WERE UPLAND VEGETATION.

WELL, LET ME SEE IS THERE A WAY JUST TO DO SOMETHING TO PROTECT THE TREES WITHOUT PUTTING IT OFF A MARKET ALL ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED TO DO THE TREE BOXES AROUND THE TREES AND THAT ARBORIST MADE A REPORT SAYING THAT 132 INCH LIVE OAK YOUR BOX WOULD HAVE TO BE, YOU KNOW, 35 FEET WIDE AND HAVE TWO LEGS COME BACK INTO THE PROPERTY TO MAKE THE BOX AND

THEN BREAK DOWN. >> YOU'D HAVE TO HAVE A TREE. WELL FOR A 19 INCH LIVE OAK JUST A FEW FEET AWAY. SO IT MADE THE BOX SO BIG AND THE OBVERSE WAS MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS AND IF YOU MADE ON ONE SIDE OF THE TREE JUST MADE A BULKHEAD INSTEAD OF HAVING THE LEGS TO CHOP ALL THE ROOT SYSTEM YOU SAID A LOT OF THE ROOTS WERE UP AND UP THE TREE ITSELF WITHIN THE ELITE THE BULK AND ALONG THE ENTIRE PROPERTY LINE ARE JUST WHERE

THE TREES ARE. >> WE WE COULD PUT IT WHERE THE TREES ARE BUT IT'S YOU KNOW IF IF YOU PUT IT JUST WHERE THE TREES ARE THEN YOU'LL HAVE EROSION BETWEEN THE TWO.

>> BUT THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GONNA GET. >> BUT IF YOU PUT IT IN ALSO LIKE LIKE WAS ALSO SAID THAT THAT'S JUST GOING TO DEFLECT THE WATER TO THE NEIGHBORS AND EXACERBATE ANY SORT OF PROBLEMS THAT THEY HAVE. RIGHT.

RIGHT. SO WHAT'S THE REALLY WHAT'S THE HARDSHIP HERE? A HARDSHIP WOULD MEAN THEY'RE LOSING PROPERTY, OK? AND IS THAT IS THAT A CONDITION

THAT APPLIES TO THE OTHER LOTS IN THE AREA? >> A LOT OF THEM, YEAH.

IF YOU LOOK OVER A PERIOD YOU CAN SEE AND THAT'S ONE OF THE CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES THAT THE HARDSHIP IS SOMETHING THAT'S UNIQUE TO YOUR LOT AND IT DOESN'T APPLY TO THE OTHER

ONES. >> SO YOU THINK YOU'VE GOT A PROBLEM GETTING ACROSS THAT HURDLE FOR THAT REQUIREMENT HERE BECAUSE IT IS APPLICABLE TO BE IN THE LOTS OF THE ERM CEO IS TRYING TO PROTECT THE BUFFER AND THEY KEEP THAT SAME 50 FOOT IN AFTER YOU LOOK 10 OR 15 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD THEY MIGHT HAVE MORE HARDSHIP BUT THEY MIGHT ONLY HAVE A 30 FOOT

BUFFER AT THAT POINT. >> WELL THE BUFFER LINES WOULD KEEP MOVING BACK AS IT'S TIED TO WHERE OCR USE YOUR ONLINE BROWSING AND THE BOTTOM LINE RIGHT BUT THE HOUSE DOESN'T MOVE. GREG SO THE BUFFER ZONE WOULD BE A LOT SMALLER BECAUSE THE HOUSE IS BUILT RIGHT AT THE END OF THE BUFFER AT 30 FEET FROM A CRITIC CLIENT.

>> HYPOTHETICALLY DEPENDING ON SITUATIONS WHERE YOU'RE TRYING TO KEEP THEY REQUIRE A 50 FOOT BUFFER WOULD BE TO KEEP A 50 FOOT BUFFER WE CAN REVISIT WE WE CAN APPLY THOSE YOUR INVENTORY BOXES BECAUSE THOSE TWO TREES BIG LIGHTBULBS ARE IN THE BUFFER AREA IN THE CRITICAL

AREA. >> SO THEY'RE NOT IN THE COUNTY'S JURISDICTION.

SO WE'D HAVE TO APPLY WE APPLIED TO DEAC FOR REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO BUILD BOXES AROUND THOSE TWO TREES AND WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING FROM YOU.

>> YOU YOU STILL MAY GET THAT APPROVAL FROM THEM. WE MAY.

YES. THINK THAT'S ALL FOR ME FOR RIGHT TEMPERATURE.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU. >> BOARD MEMBERS.

JUST A MINUTE. WE'VE HEARD THE EVIDENCE THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED BEFORE US.

WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THIS BOARD OR THIS APPLICANT? MR CHAIR, I'LL MAKE A MOTION.

I MEAN WHO DID WE DENY THE PERMIT BECAUSE IT DOES NOT IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FIVE POINT ELEVEN POINT SIX ZERO G ONE WHICH STATES THAT YOU HAVE TO GET APPROVAL BY OCR CRM IN THE RIVER I'D SECOND THAT WAS GERMAN.

[00:25:10]

>> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO DENY THE APPLICANT SO IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MADE AND SECOND ALL IN FAVOR OF THE NINE THE VARIANCE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.

>> SO IT'S BEEN DENIED THAT THIS VARIANCE BEING GRANTED ANY PUBLIC COMMENT I GUESS I SHOULD ASK ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS WITH PRIDE TO US WHAT WE IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING AFTER ALL. YES AND YES THERE ARE LOTS E-MAILS, SOME IN FAVOR AND MOST OF THEM IS NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT I GO WITHIN THE RANGE ARE INCLUDED IN THE RECORD. MR GRIFFIN YES.

BUT SEE I DON'T NO NO I DON'T HAVE ANY FORMS HERE FOR ANY PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> SO WE STILL BE GOOD ON THAT. ITEM NUMBER SIX ANYHOW HARMLESS ERROR I ITEM NUMBER EIGHT

[8. Mrs. Michael Murr is requesting a variance from Division 4.2.20.B.4 – Accessory Use General Standards and Division 4.2.20.C. Approval of Accessory Use. Applicant is requesting a variance to keep a Storage Building on the property that does not have a principal use of structure. The Property is located at 259 Perryclear Drive and is zoned T2 Rural Neighborhood (T2RN). ]

MICHAEL MOORE, PRESIDENT VARIANCE FROM DIVISION 4 DASH 2 DASH 2 0.

>> BE FOR STATE YOUR NAME. >> MY CASE SLICE AND DICE. I'M MICHAEL.

HAVING GROWN UP IN HAMPTON COUNTY AND NOW RESIDING IN RURAL BEAUFORT COUNTY SMACK DAB BEHIND MCI S ENJOYING THE SMELL OF THE FLYBOYS FOR THE LAST 34 YEARS AT FORTY TWO NORTH YOU DROP THE LAST THING I EXPECTED WAS TO BE IN FRONT OF THE ZONING BOARD AT 70 YEARS OF AGE

IN 2013 THREE YEARS PRIOR TO MY HUSBAND'S DEATH. >> WE PURCHASED LOCK 27 WHICH IS ALL THIS FITS IN QUESTION DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF OUR MAIN DWELLING.

NUMBER ONE FOR THE PURPOSE OF KEEPING OUR PRIVACY BY NOT HAVING ANOTHER DWELLING IN FRONT OF US TO TO MAINTAIN SOME DISTANCE BETWEEN OURSELVES AND VERY CLEAR TRAFFIC.

YOU CAN SEE THERE IS A SATELLITE PHOTO OF THE AREA AS WELL AS MAP BY GAS.

MY HOME AS WELL. SO TO MAINTAIN THE DISTANCE. AND NUMBER THREE TRULY HAVE A STORM PROTECTED AREA FOR POSSESSIONS ESPECIALLY DURING HURRICANES AND OTHER INCLEMENT WEATHER CONDITIONS. MY HOME AT 42 IS NOT WITHIN THE NOW DEFUNCT VERY CLEAR ASSOCIATION SUBDIVISION BUT AND YOU CAN SEE THEY TAKE LONG FOR URBAN MATTERS AND INFORMATION FROM A VERY CLEAR ASSOCIATION REGARDING THE QUESTION OF QUESTIONABLE ACTIONS AND IN

THAT THEY'RE NOT TOTALLY IN OWNERSHIP. >> WARRANT FILED DIRECTLY AND

SO FORTH. >> BUT WITH DONE ON THE UN MAINTAINED PORTION OF NORTH DRY RUNS BETWEEN MY DWELLING AT FORTY TWO NORTH YOU AND LOT TWENTY SEVEN IT'S MAINTAINED FROM THE OTHER 38 NORTH B WHICH IS AT THE NORTHWEST END OF IT PAST MY HOUSE TO THE END OF NORTH YOU DRIVE IN APRIL THIS YEAR I CONTRACTED A COMPANY ONLINE TO CONSTRUCT A STURDY METAL BUILDING FOR PERSONAL USE SPECIFICALLY FOR HURRICANE SAFETY FOR OUR 20 FOOT SAILBOAT AND ATV AND OTHER TWO ITEMS AND SO TO PREVENT MY HAVING TO TRY TO GET THEM LONG DISTANCES OUT OF HARM'S WAY THE COMPANY SAID EVERYTHING WOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF .

>> I ACCEPTED THAT ON GOOD FAITH AS I DID WITH MY SEAWALL AND DOCK REBUILT AFTER MATTHEW AND IRMA YOU CAN SEE IN THE CAR PHOTOS A BUILDING IS SET BACK OVER ABOUT 200 FEET FROM PARENT CLARE LANDSCAPE WITH BOTTLE BRUSH BUSHES ON PERRY CLARE SIDE COLOR COORDINATED WITH MY HOME AND IT'S JUST ACROSS ON MAINTAINING NORTH YOU DRIVE IN FRONT OF MY HOME AREA ON JULY

6. >> I DID RECEIVE CODES ON VIOLATION CITATION FROM OFFICER GAUTIER. I CALLED THE COUNTY AT THE VERY NEXT DAY AND FOR SEVERAL DAYS

AFTERWARD I HAVE MY CALL LOG HERE. >> IF IF THAT'S NEEDED WE HAVE

A COPY OF IT. >> DO YOU HAVE THAT SO-CALLED LOG IN THERE?

>> OK. YOUR MOTHER WASN'T POSITIVE AT THE END OF TODAY.

[00:30:01]

SO I'VE INTIALLY DID GET IN TOUCH WITH DAN AND TO TRY TO FIND OUT WHAT TO DO IN KENYA AND MY EXCEPTIONAL CONDITIONS ARE I MAINTAIN THAT A HARDSHIP EXISTS ON THE GROUNDS THAT A

LOT 27 IS SUPER LOW. >> THERE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN BY NEIGHBOR MY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR OF THE TREES ON THE LOT BEING TWO FEET UNDERWATER AFTER MATTHEW EXCEPTIONAL MOUNTS FILLED DIRT WOULD HAVE TO BE BROUGHT IN TO MAKE FOR A SAFE DWELLING THAT WAS GOING TO LAST ANY TIME WHICH IS ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS THAT A BUILDING WAS SUPPOSED TO HOME

SHOULD BE THEIR FIRST. >> BUT LIKE I SAY RECEPTION OR MOUNT TO FILTER WOULD HAVE TO BE BROUGHT IN TO MAKE THAT SAFE PLACE FOR A BUILDING OF THAT MAGNITUDE NOT A CONDITION CAUSED BY MYSELF. LAND NO ADDITIONAL HARDSHIP. IT'S WELL KNOWN THAT ADDITIONAL DWELLINGS ARE UNDESIRED BY DMCA AS ITS PROXIMITY TO THE BASE IS NOT SHOWING THE PLANTS

LITERALLY ACROSS PRECLUDE RICK PERRY CLEAR DRIVE FROM WHAT 28? >> NEXT TO MINE IS THE BEGINNING OF THE BASE. THE TREES AND THEY NORTHWEST THE NORTHWESTERN MOST RUNWAY IS RIGHT THROUGH THOSE TREES. THE GOVERNMENT HAS ALREADY PURCHASED LOT 26 NEXT DOOR TO MINE WHICH IS MAINTAINED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION BY CERTAIN PTO MEMBERS.

NEXT TO MY LOT 27 AND BLOCK 29 WHICH IS NOT SHOWING SEE THE SURVEY FLAT AND GOVERNMENT LADDER LIKE 20 KNOTS NEXT. 28 THE GOVERNMENT LETTER PROVING THAT THEY'VE BEEN BUYING PROPERTIES AND PAYING THE ASSOCIATION BACK DUES FOR YOU KNOW BLAH BLAH BLAH.

WHICH THAT AREA INCLUDES A RUNOFF POND FOR TIDAL OVERFLOW AND RUNS UNDERNEATH NORTH YOU DRIVE AS WELL AS THE PERIOD CLEAR PLANTATION SIGN IS THERE WHICH I UNDERSTAND MAINTENANCE AROUND THAT SIGN IS AUTHORIZED AND IT IS CUT RIGHT AROUND THE SIGN.

>> SHOWING PERRY CLEAR SUBDIVISION I DID NOT MEET WITH STAFF PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION

BECAUSE I WAS UNAWARE THAT I COULD OR SHOULD. >> AFTER CITATION I STAYED IN

CLOSE CONTACT WITH THEM AS REQUIRED IN THE TIME PERIODS. >> I DID CALL REGARDING THE

OPTIONS OPEN TO ME. >> AND THE CALL LOG REFLECTS THAT AND MONDAY THE 20 MONDAY JULY WELL I CALLED I SPOKE TO LATER SHE HAD RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM AUDRA

VIOLATION. >> AS FOR NO PERMIT I ASKED ABOUT OPTIONS OPEN TO ME SHE

SAID TO GET A SURVEY TO CONSOLIDATE THE PLANT. >> I SAID I WOULD SOON ORDER AN

EMAIL REGARDING MY DESIRE TO JOIN PROPERTIES. >> MY HOME AT NORTH YOU LOT 27 . I EXPLAINED THAT THE STRUCTURE WAS BUILT TO CODE CODE AND IT WILL WITHSTAND WINDS UP TO 140 MILES AN HOUR. AND I BEGAN CONTACTING SURVEY

COMPANIES AT THAT POINT. >> ON THE 12TH IN THE AFTERNOON LISA CALLED FROM THE COUNTY SHE STATED WANTS THE PROPERTIES WERE CONJOINED THAT I MUST HAVE A BUILT IN BUILT AT SURVEY DONE

AT WHICH POINT A PERMIT CAN BE ISSUED. >> SHE STATED THAT THE SIZE

OF THE BUILDING WAS OKAY ON TUESDAY THE 13TH. >> LISA CALLED FROM ZONING.

SHE STATED SHE MUST CORRECT HERSELF THERE COULD BE NO CONJECTURE PROPERTIES DUE TO

THE PRESENCE OF NORTH. YOU. >> I EXPLAINED THAT NORTH YOU DRIVE FADES ON THE MAP AND YOU CAN SEE ON THE SATELLITE IMAGES THAT I HAVE IS OVERGROWN WITH GRASS FROM TWO PROPERTIES NORTH WEST OF ME NOT MAINTAINED SOME MORE.

>> THE FED PROPERTY LOST 20 7 PERRY DRIVE WAS PURCHASED IN 2013.

MY NOW DECEASED HUSBAND FARMER WAS KILLED HE HAD IN STORE HIS OWN CULVERTS IN THE NORTH END OF OUR DRIVEWAY BECAUSE THE COUNTY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT SECTION AND DID NOT MAINTAIN NOR VIEW DRIVE WHICH I THOUGHT WAS A VERY INTERESTING I WAS TOLD THAT THIS BUILDING COULD BE PERMITTED WITHIN THE FORTY TWO NORTH YOU BOUNDARIES AND YOU COULD SEE I DID ASK ABOUT OTHER OPTIONS LEAVING THE BUILDING UP WITH THE END OF IT OTHER THINGS I WAS TOLD I COULD MOVE THE BUILDING ONTO THE NORTH, THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE CONFINES OF MY HOME NORTH VIEW BUT THAT'S INCORRECT DUE TO THE SPACE IS LIMITED A LOT BECAUSE THE SEPTIC TANK AND DRYING FEEL IT WOULD BE RIGHT IN THE AREA WHERE THE NEW BUILDING WOULD HAVE TO BE MOVED TO.

>> WITH A SETBACK REQUIREMENTS AN UNSIGHTLY OVERCROWDING ALSO OF THE PROPERTY YET AGAIN YOU CAN SEE THE AREA ON THE LARGE SATELLITE PHOTO AND I'VE MARKED WHERE THE SEPTIC TANK IS ON

[00:35:05]

THOSE PICTURES AND THE DRYING FIELD. >> I DO NOT FEEL THAT BEING ALLOWED REASONABLE USE OF ONE'S TAX NEVER DELINQUENT OR IN DEFAULT ALWAYS MAINTAIN PROPERTY IS CONFERRING OR SPECIAL PRIVILEGE. I DO FEEL IT'S UNFAIR TO

ENFORCE CODES IN SOME INSTANCES BUT NOT OTHERS. >> EXTENSIVE AREAS OF GOVERNMENT AND COUNTY PROPERTIES ARE BEING MOWED AND MAINTAINED IN AND BEYOND.

>> VERY CLEAR WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION IN MY KNOWLEDGE BY CERTAIN VERY CLEAR CIRCLE

RESIDENTS WHO ARE OBSESSED AND TURN IN OTHERS FOR VIOLATIONS. >> SANDRA THEREBY SETTING THE GOVERNMENT AND THE COUNTY UP FOR LIABILITY SHOULD THERE BE AN ENTRY ON THEIR PART?

>> MY BUILDING AS STATED IS IS DIRTY AND IT IS BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT'S CONSIDERED TO BE A PERMANENT BUILDING WHEN IT ACTUALLY CAN BE DISASSEMBLE BY A COUPLE OF TEAMS WITH ELECTRIC DRILLS AND REVERSE IT MORE IN HARMONY TO ME WITH A ZONE BY NOT BUILDING ANOTHER SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING TO ATTRACT MORE PEOPLE AND TRAFFIC LESSENING FURTHER ENCROACHMENT

ON GOVERNMENT PROPERTY AND AIRSPACE. >> SEE THE SMALL SATELLITE PHOTO? THE NORTHERNMOST RUNWAY AND LITERALLY RIGHT THROUGH THE TREES CATTY CORNER TO MY HOUSE ACROSS VERY CLEAR DROP AND THE AIRCRAFT RUN THEIR REGULAR TOUCH AND GO ROUTINE SEVERAL TIMES A DAY MOST DAYS RIGHT OVER MY YARD.

I CAN SMELL THE AFTERSHAVE. LIKE I SAID EARLIER. >> SO TO ME MORE DWELLINGS IN

THE ACTIVE ZONE IS VERY ILL ADVISED. >> PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THIS BUILDING IS BEING LABELED AS ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF GENERAL PUBLIC

AND A DETRIMENT TO PUBLIC WELFARE. >> IT'S ATTRACTING NO TRAFFIC TO THE AREA. IT IS THERE IS NO USE PLAN OF ANY KIND FOR ANY BUSINESS

FINANCIAL GAIN OR REASON FOR ANYONE TO BE NEAR IT. >> WHO IS NOT NEAR ME? IT ATTRACTS THE OCCASIONAL CURIOUS DEER EMITS NO HAZARDOUS ODORS OR CHEMICALS.

>> I REALIZE THERE ARE THOSE OBSESSED BY A PRISTINE PARK LIKE APPEARANCES AND UNBENDING RULES BUT NEIGHBORHOOD DO EVOLVE AND CHANGE AS ARE THE NEEDS AND WANTS OF EXCUSE AND THE AIR STATION SURELY ALLOWING OTHERS TO LIVE WITHIN REASONABLE BOUNDARIES AND

REGULATIONS NOT JUST ENFRANCHISING THEM. >> THEY USE OF THEIR OWN HARD EARNED DESERVED LAND AND PROPERTY SHOULD BE AN UNDISPUTED INALIENABLE RIGHT TO

MY STATE. >> GO AHEAD. NO THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN SUM UP YOUR I MEAN YOU MAY HAVE SAID IN YOUR PRESENTATION YOUR VARIOUS ACTUALLY QUESTIONING CAN YOU SUM THAT IN TO SENTENCE ? OH, WHAT IS YOUR VARIANCE THAT YOU WERE VARIANCE IS THAT I HAVE ACCESSORY BUILDING WITHOUT ON THAT LINE BECAUSE THEY'RE TAX SEPARATELY WHICH I TRIED TO CONJOINED BUT THEY IMPACT ARE SEPARATE PROPERTIES BECAUSE OF NORTH YOU DIE RUNNING THROUGH THERE.

SO I HAVE AN ACCESSORY DWELLING WITHOUT A PRIOR MAIN HOUSE OR DWELLING THERE.

MY DWELLING IN THAT 42 FEET IF I MAY BE FROM MISTREATMENT. >> I THINK WHAT IT IS IS IF YOU LOOK AT FOUR POINT TWO POINT TWENTY B FOR THIS AS AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

THEY'LL BE LOCATED ON THE SAME LOT AS THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE AND THAT'S WHEN I THINK THAT'S THE ISSUE HERE. HOUSE IS ON A DIFFERENT LOT OF WITH IT.

>> IF I MISSOURI WHAT ABOUT THE PROVISION OF THE COVENANTS THAT SAY ALL LOTS OF USE ONLY FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE? THAT'S WHAT I'M CLIMBING OUT OF THE HARDSHIP BECAUSE THAT LOT REALLY IS WOULDN'T BE SUITABLE TO A HOUSE WITHOUT TONS AND TONS OF DIRT.

BRIAN AND HARDSHIP BECAUSE I CAN'T USE THE MA MY HOUSE TO PUT IT ON BECAUSE OF THE CONFIGURATION MISSION AND THE FACT THAT THE SEPTIC TANK AND DRAIN FAIL ARE WHERE IT WOULD NEED TO GO AND YOU CAN'T BE ON IT AND YOU CAN'T BE BUT WITHIN SO MANY FEET OF ALL THAT.

>> BUT WHEN YOU WHEN YOU BOUGHT THAT LOCK YOU AGREED THAT SHOULDN'T BE SUBJECT TO THOSE

COVENANTS. WHY WERE THOSE COVENANTS? >> I JUST FOUND ALL THOSE ON.

I UNDERSTAND IT. YOU KNOW IT AND OFTEN YOU WHEN I LOOK AT THESE SORTS OF AFTER THE FACT VARIANCE APPLICATIONS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I ASKED MYSELF IS IF IF YOU WOULD COME

[00:40:04]

TO US FOR A VARIANCE BEFORE YOU BUILT IT WOULD WE HAVE GRANTED .

AND I THINK I'D HAVE A BIG PROBLEM GRANTING THAT VARIANCE BECAUSE IT APPEARS TO ME TO VIOLATE THE COVENANTS AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE GRANTING VARIANCES TO ALLOW ACTIVITIES THAT VIOLATE APPLICABLE COVENANTS THAT I THINK STATE LAW PROHIBITS US

FROM DOING. >> ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. I HAVE ONE

GOOD. >> MY CONCERN IS YOU HAD A CONTRACT TO PUT THAT BUILDING RELATIONS CONTRACTOR AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW TO PULL PERMITS OR DO ANY OF THAT STUFF.

THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO IT. THEY WERE OUT OF NORTH CAROLINA . I FOUND THEM ONLINE AND THEY SAID EVERYTHING WOULD BE LEGAL AND TAKEN CARE OF . SO THEY WEREN'T LICENSED IN SOUTH CAROLINA OR BEAUFORT

COUNTY BAD? >> I DON'T KNOW. THEY DO WORK HERE.

LIKE YOU CAN'T COMBINE THE TWO LOTS. THEY WON'T LET ME.

THEY WON'T LET THEY SAY THAT BECAUSE I'M NOT JOB RUNNING THEIR IT'S YOU KNOW, IT'S

REALLY GROWN UP. >> IT'S NOT MAINTAINED ON THAT END FROM 38 ON TO WHERE IT JUST ENDS AND BUT PEOPLE STILL USE IT. JUST EVERYBODY FROM DOWN.

BUT I THINK ONE COUPLE HAS THEIR OWN PRIVATE DRIVEWAY OUT TO BE CLEAR THEY'VE ALL THEIR BACK A LOT IN FRONT OF THEM OR THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE NEIGHBOR THAT THEY WILL USE THE DRIVEWAYS AND NOBODY FROM THAT AND REALLY USE THIS NORTH VIEW FROM.

>> BUT IT'S BASICALLY NEITHER IS ABANDONED. IT DOESN'T SHOW ON THAT SUBDIVISION PLAN. YES, IT DOES. YEAH.

AND THE ONLY REASON PEOPLE HAVE MY NAME IS BECAUSE OF THE CABLES AND I GUESS THERE'S CABLES AND THINGS THAT RUN THROUGH BUT I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY I CAN'T UNDO HIM BECAUSE I MEAN I'VE I LIVED ON PROPERTY, I GREW UP ON PROPERTY AND HAVE BEEN COUNTY WHERE THE UTILITIES YOU OWNED THE LAND THEY HAD AN EASEMENT PATHWAY THROUGH IT.

>> SO YOU KNOW, I WANT TO EVENTUALLY FIND OUT HOW I CAN KEEP DOIN THEM BUT KEEP THE

HEAT LET THEM KEEP THEIR EASEMENT THAT THEY NEED. >> DOES THE OWNER'S ASSOCIATION

OWN THAT RIGHT AWAY? >> NO, THAT'S NOT JUST SOMEBODY WHO OWNS IT.

>> THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE THE WAY COMPANIES OR UTILITY COMPANIES OR.

YEAH. NOT NOT PARROT CLEAR. THE COUNTY MAY CHANGE IT BUT

WHAT THEY DO THEY DON'T MAINTAIN A VERY WELL NOT. >> NOT ANYMORE.

THEY STOPPED AT LIKE 38 NORTHE A COUPLE OF HOUSES DOWN FROM SOME YEARS BACK.

>> WHO WOULD HAVE GOD? >> SOMEBODY WHO'S GOT A SPINE BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE DRIVEWAY.

SOMEBODY OWNS THAT STRIP OF DIRT AND IF YOU CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY'RE SAYING TO

COUNTY THE COUNTY DOES THAT A COUNTY MAINTAIN ROAD? >> I DON'T KNOW THIS COUNTY OKATIE BUT I'M SURE THE RIGHT AWAY BELONGS TO THE COUNTY AND MAYBE SHE COULD PETITION COUNCIL TO ABANDON THAT SECTION OF JESUS. YOU OWN ONE MOD ACROSS THE ROAD. I MEAN LET'S SEE HERE AND JOHN CAN I IT'S GOT A HIGH BAR.

IT HAS TO BE SEPARATED BECAUSE THE RIGHT OF WAY SEPARATES FROM SO THEY'D HAVE TO ABANDON THAT STREET. THAT WOULD HAVE TO GET RID OF THE RIGHT WAY.

YEAH. AND THEN THAT HAPPENED. SO TALKED TO COUNTY COUNCILMAN IF IT'S A ROAD. PUBLIC WORKS. WOULD HAVE NOT BEEN USED EFFECTIVELY. WHY NOT USE FIGHTING ONE AT ALL? IF THE NEIGHBORS WERE OUTSIDE I'D SAY MR. SUMMERFIELD HERE YOU MIGHT WANT TO START WITH

INTERNET. >> MA'AM, I SEE. >> LOOKING AT THIS SATELLITE PHOTO THERE IS A STRUCTURE TO THE RIGHT OF YOUR HOME WITH A DRIVEWAY IN FRONT OF IT.

WHAT IS THAT BUILDING? THAT'S A GARAGE. >> AND SO THAT WOULDN'T BE

ADEQUATE TO STORE YOUR THINGS IN CASE OF EVACUATION. >> THERE'S MY SHOP.

>> IT'S THERE. THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LEFT SIDE OF IT.

IS ACTUALLY PULLED THROUGH. >> I CAN PULL BOATS THROUGH THERE WITH A TRAILER AND EVERYTHING SO I'M PRETTY MUCH TO KEEP THAT OPEN INSIDE AS I'M PULLED THROUGH I HAVE A GRANDFATHERED IN BOAT RAMP THAT WAS THERE FROM TIME IMMEMORIAL AND I'M ABLE TO PULL STRAIGHT

[00:45:04]

THROUGH AND OUT. >> SO THAT'S A COVERED AREA THOUGH.

YES. SO IT WOULD OFFER PROTECTION. >> IT DOES SOMEWHAT BUT NOT WHEN MATTHEW AND ARMOR CAME THROUGH MY BED WERE AGAINST THE SEA WALLS AND IT WAS A MESS AND I NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET HIM OUT OF THERE AND THEN HOME AWAY.

>> QUESTION THE MOVIE YOU HEARD FROM THE KID. THANK YOU, MR. WE HAVE HEARD SO FROM THE COUNTY. I GUESS WE CAME HERE FOR YOU AGAIN.

IF YOU DON'T MIND MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR YOU. YOU KNOW I COULD MAKE JUST BECAUSE THIS BUILDING WAS BUILT WITHOUT A SIGNING PERMIT. WITHOUT A BUILDING PERMIT.

IT IS AN ACCESSORY BUILDING AND THERE'S NO PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY.

>> IF SHE HAD COME TO US MAYBE SHE WOULDN'T HAVE CHECKED THIS BECAUSE SHE WOULD SIGN THAT

THERE'S NO COVENANTS OR SOMETHING. >> AND BUT AFTER CHECK IN THERE'S NO WAY WE WOULD HAVE GIVEN HER A PERMIT TO BUILD A STRUCTURE.

>> EVEN IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT THE COVENANTS WAS ALTERED, WOULD YOU HAVE.

CONSIDERING THAT IT'S AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS THE PRINCIPAL WOULD YOU HAVE GIVEN

HER A ZONING TO START OFF WITH? NO. >> NO.

WHY NOT? WHY NOT? BECAUSE HE HAS SUCCESS RESTRUCTURE AND NEEDS THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A HOUSE HOME TO HAVE

THE NECESSARY IT WILL QUICKLY MISS FIT AGAIN. >> THINK WAS OF MAKE A SUGGESTION. YES. MADE THE TOP FLOOR A STUDIO AND

TURNED IT INTO A RESIDENCE. >> AND THEN IT WOULD BE A HOME. >> I THINK THAT'S A CREATIVE IDEA. YEAH. MISS MURRAY, DID YOU HEAR HER

IF SHE'S MEETING ANY OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS, JEREMY WILL ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 9 WHICH IS PUBLIC COMMENT. FOR SUMMER I HAVE BETTY VAN

ESCALATE. >> BUT IS IT THEY THINK YOU CAN GO FOR SO WE CAN CHILL RECORDS.

>> THANK YOU. HERE YOU HAVE TO SUPPORT MICHAEL AND HIS FRIENDS AND EVERYTHING AND I JUST FEEL LIKE SHE NEEDS SUPPORT IN THIS BUILDING.

>> BEAUTIFUL AND BLENDS AND WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE TRASH AND STUFF OUTSIDE AND IT'S APPEALING AND IT'S JUST MORE TO SUPPORT HER ON THAT.

>> THANK YOU. MAYBE MAYBE VAN AND MS. BRENDA T OR BRENDA J.

LUCAS, THANK I AM HERE REPRESENTING PIRI CLAIRE OWNERS ASSOCIATION.

>> I'M A TREASURER OF THE OTHER OFFICERS WITH ME AS WELL AS SEVERAL THE NEIGHBORS.

>> OUR MAIN CONCERN IS IS THAT AND WE UNDERSTAND MAYBE THIS ISN'T A DIRECT CONCERN FOR THE

BOARD BUT SHE WAS IN VIOLATION OF OUR COMPETENCE. >> YOUR SUGGESTION PROBABLY WILL NOT WORK BASED ON THE ELEVATION OF THE LOTS AS WELL AS THE OTHER COVENANTS.

>> WE SINCERELY REGRET THAT THIS HAPPENED TO HER. WE WOULD HAVE WORKED WITH HER IF SHE HAD COME FORTH AND TALKED TO US ABOUT THIS. BUT OUR MAIN CONCERN IS WHAT KIND OF PRESIDENT ARE WE SETTING BECAUSE THERE'S NEIGHBORS OF HERS THAT ARE IN THE EXACT SITUATION THEIR HOMES ARE ON THE WATER, AN INDIVIDUAL LOTS THEY BOUGHT PROPERTY ON THE LAND SIDE THAT IS PROPERTY AND PERRY CLEAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION THERE IS A GOVERNMENT ROAD THAT SEPARATES SAYS TO THAT'S USED M S SHE TALKS ABOUT IT BEING POORLY

MAINTAINED. >> IT'S JUST ONE OF THOSE GRAVEL ROADS THAT GRASS HAS GROWN OVER A PERIOD OF TIME AND THE PEOPLE STILL MOWED AND TREATED AS A YARD AWAY.

[00:50:06]

BUT IT IS A GOVERNMENT ROADWAY AND AND WE HAVE SEVERAL NEIGHBORS IT'S ALREADY COME TO

THE BOARD AND SAID IF SHE DID THAT WHAT CAN I DO THAT? >> WELL, THOSE PERIOD CLEAR OF HER HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION ,THOSE LOTS WERE SET ASIDE TO BE PRIMARY RESIDENCE WITH

MINIMAL REQUIREMENTS. >> WE HAVE A FUNCTIONING ARCHITECTURAL BOARD THAT'S

REVIEWED EVERY PLAN THAT'S BEEN BUILT THERE. >> IT ALLOWS FOR ONE ADDITIONAL BUILDING TO BE BUILT ON THAT PROPERTY THAT ALSO HAS TO BE APPROVED AND CURRENTLY AS THE LORD IS WITH HER ROADWAY AND THE BUILDING IT WOULD BE AND I USED TO DO DESIGN WORK IN A COMMERCIAL SETTING IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR AN ARCHITECT TO COME IN AND REDESIGN AND

REBUILD AND TO BE ABLE TO USE THAT STRUCTURE SURE. >> AS IT IS TO MAKE IT A HOME OR TO MEET ALL THE BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS. AND SO WE WE HATE THIS FOR HER

BUT WE REALLY REQUEST THAT THE BOARD DENY THIS TO GO TO. >> HE SAID EARLIER WHEN YOU FIRST STARTED YOUR PRESENTATION YOU SAID THIS YEAR TO CAME TO YOU GUYS FOR PRIOR TO PUTTING THIS BUILDING UP THAT WOULD PROBABLY I DON'T KNOW VIEW IT DIFFERENTLY.

>> WELL, WE WOULD HAVE WE WOULD WIN OVER AND REVIEWED HER PLANS WITH HER.

>> AND IF WHAT SHE WANTED TO HAVE BUILT THERE WAS NOT ACCEPTABLE BAR PLANS WE WOULD HAVE KNOW WORKED WITH HER IN ACHIEVING WHAT SHE NEEDED TO DO.

>> BUT OUR COVENANTS PLAINLY CALLS FOR THE PRIMARY RESULT RESIDENT TO BE BUILT FIRST.

>> YOU KNOW, IF SHE'D COME TO US AND SAID I HAVE THIS FIVE YEAR PLAN, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD HAVE TALKED TO HER ABOUT IT AND TALK THROUGH THIS WITH HER AND WE WOULD MAYBE EVEN YOU KNOW, WE ALSO THEY GET HOMEOWNERS CAN PROVE THE SIDING AND POSITIONING OF THOSE BUILDINGS AND HAVE A RESIDENCE AND NONE OF THAT WAS DISCUSSED WITH ANY OF US.

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MAYOR.

>> YOU CAN COME ON BACK IF WE CAN MAKE A BRIEF I CAN PLAY I DON'T KNOW PERRY CLEAR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ACTUALLY EXIST AS AN ENTITY BECAUSE THEY WERE SUMMONED BY DAY'S RECEIVED A LETTER A WHILE BACK PROBABLY THINKING LAW FIRM FROM ANOTHER RESIDENT ON THE CIRCLE QUESTIONING THE OPERATION OF THE ASSOCIATION AND THERE I NEVER RECEIVED ANYTHING FROM THEM THAT THERE ARE MEETINGS I DON'T GET THERE'S NO THERE SUPPOSEDLY I KNEW WHEN WE

BOUGHT THE LOT YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO PAY DUES THERE. >> THERE'S OR NO ORGANIZATION WHERE THEY COLLECT THE DUES OR SAY PAY YOUR DUES EVERY JANUARY THE 1ST.

>> I'M NEVER I'VE BEEN I DON'T I'M NOT NOTIFIED OF ANY MEETINGS I'VE GOTTEN ALL ALL THOSE ARE MY PEOPLE GATHERED AT A HOME SOME DAY OR TWO AGO AND I THEY MUST BE HAVING A MEETING BUT I WAS NOT INVITED TO THE MEETING SO I I DECLARE THAT THERE IS NO PERIOD FOR THEIR HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION AS SUCH IS I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR YOU YOUR SO IS IS THE BUILDING

ALREADY BUILT IN GOD'S NAME IS COMPLETE? >> YES.

THANK YOU BOARD MEMBERS WE'VE HEARD THE TESTIMONY APPLICANT AND THE COMMENTS BASED ON WHAT WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT KNOW BASED ON WHAT THE COUNTIES CITIES SEE SAYS WHAT WOULD BE THE PLEASURE

OF THE BOARD. >> I KNOW I WOULD WANT HER TO UNDERSTAND IF WE DO DENY IT KNOW SHE CANNOT COME BACK AND BE ABLE TO WORK THROUGH WITH THE COUNTY IF SHE WANTED TO CONTINUE SHE MIGHT BE ABLE TO COME BUT THE COUNTY TO FIND SOME SOLUTION WITH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION THAT WOULD SATISFY BOTH TO BE ABLE TO GET A PERMIT FOR THAT STRUCTURE. I JUST WANT TO THROW THAT OUT THERE FOR HER.

YES, I'D BE INCLINED TO ALSO AGREE THAT IT WOULD BE NICE IF HE COULD GET IT RECONSIDERED BEFORE WE GIVE A FINAL YOU KNOW IF IT'S NOT SET IN STONE IT'S ALREADY BUILT AND I DON'T KNOW

[00:55:03]

WHERE SHE GOES FROM THERE BUT IF SHE HAD SOME TIME SHE COULD WORK WITH THE COUNTY AND WITH HER NEIGHBORS AND SEE IF THERE IS A SOLUTION BEFORE WHAT DOES HAPPEN IF WE DENIED THIS

KEVIN LOVE IT KIND OF CASE THAT HAS TO BE REMOVED. >> I'LL MISS YOU.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT UNDERSTANDS ME SO MAYBE SHE CAN JUST WITHDRAW APPLICATION MAYBE MAYBE SHE COULD WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION.

TRY TO ASK US TO CONTINUE WITH HIS YEAH. YEAH YOU'RE RIGHT YOU WOULD CONTINUE IT BECAUSE IT'S STILL A LOT OF VARIANCE. IT WOULD GIVE HER A CHANCE TO LOOK AT CREATIVE SOLUTIONS LIKE WHAT HILLARY IS TALKING WITH AND MAYBE TALKING.

BUT LIKE I SAID EARLIER THESE SORTS OF SITUATIONS YOU KNOW I LOOK AT IT AS YOU KNOW WHAT? HOW WOULD WE HOW WOULD WE THINK IF SHE CAME TO US BEFORE SHE STRUCK THE BUILDING TO ASK FOR A VARIANCE AND IF WE KNEW AT THAT POINT IT WAS A VIOLATION OF THE COVENANTS AND AT THAT POINT SHE COULDN'T GET A ZONING PERMIT. I MEAN I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'D BE GRANTING THAT VARIOUS HAD IF WE WOULDN'T. GRANTED IF IT WAS A NEW APPLICATION I'M NOT PREDISPOSED TO GRANT IT IN END UP IN A SITUATION WHERE WE'VE APPROVED A VIOLATION COVENANTS AND WE'VE APPROVED A ZONING VIOLATION. BUT IF A IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO ASK US TO CONTINUE I CERTAINLY HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THAT MR. YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME HERE WHICH COULD COME UP WITH THE GET A MUCH FATHER'S TIME IF THERE IS A CHANCE THAT I COULD CONTINUE AND WORK WITH THE COUNTY AND COME TO A CONCLUSION OR SOME WAY TO MAKE THIS FEASIBLE AND WORK, I WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT AND IF THERE IS AN ASSOCIATION I NEED TO BE INCLUDED AND NOW WHEN MEETINGS ARE AND KNOW WHO AND WHEN TO DISCUSS THIS WITH AND WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR AND DON'T WANT AND AREN'T GOING TO CONSIDER AN SO DO YOU THINK IN.

>> WELL IT WOULDN'T BE 30 DAYS THANK YOU TO BE PREPARED BY OUR NEXT SCHEDULE PROBABLY BE THE THIRD. IT'S BEEN ABOUT THREE WEEKS SINCE 17 TWO WEEKS.

SO SO MAYBE MAYBE TWO. MONTHS DECEMBER DECEMBER MEETING.

YEAH. YEAH. SO WE'LL NOT A DECEMBER MEETING. YEAH. MR. MARCH'S COUNTY HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO US CONTINUING THIS TO GIVE THE APPLICANT TO WORK THINGS OUT?

>> I HAVE TO BE HONEST I DON'T KNOW WHAT REMEDIES THERE ARE. YOU KNOW I DON'T KNOW WHAT OPTIONS WE HAVE. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT CONVERSION CONVERTING THIS TO SOME FORM OF RESIDENCE IS A POSSIBLE CRIME. I WOULD SAY THAT'S A REMOTE POSSIBILITY BECAUSE WE JUST HAVE TO SHARE INFORMATION. IT'S NOT THE KIND OF BUILDING THAT WAS REALLY BUILT TO BE CONVERTED A RESIDENCE AND THERE'S JUST A LOT OF UNKNOWNS THERE DISPERSING AND THERE WAS NO BUILDING PERMIT. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SURE.

WELL, I MEAN DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO HER TRYING TO TRYING TO SATISFY ANY CONCERNS YOU HAVE AND THAT'S JUST HOLDING OFF ON DOING ANYTHING TILL SAY THE DECEMBER MEETING.

HI. I GUESS MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT IT IS DELAYING ACTION WHICH I

DON'TRE ARE. >> I'M NOT AWARE OF WHAT WORKABLE STEPS WE HAVE TAKEN TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. SO I MEAN I'M NOT OPPOSED TO DELAYING ACTION BUT WHAT YOU SAID YOU SEEM TO THINK THAT THE END RESULT IS INEVITABLE BASED ON THE AT THE END OF THE SENTENCE. MR. CHAIR. WELL, I MAY I'VE GOT AN IDEA.

SORRY. CAN YOU FILL OUT FORM IF YOU HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN WE CAN. YEAH, I MEAN YOU CAN STILL FILL IT OUT HERE.

IN THE MEANTIME, MISS MARY, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE CODE ENFORCEMENT? DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SAY? IF YOU COULD COME UP TO THE PODIUM, MISS MARTY. THANK YOU. HAVE YOU.

ARE YOU FINISHED, MR.. SO I GUESS UH, PROTEST WHAT HILLARY ARE SAYING.

I WENT OUT THERE THIS MORNING SO TAKE IT MORE. THAT'S TRUE FOR GEORGIA.

>> I APOLOGIZE. >> MY NAME IS OFFICER TRACY GAUTIER AND I WORK FOR B FOR COUNTY CODE ENFORCEMENT AND I'M ACTUALLY THE ONE THAT WHEN OUR OFFICE RECEIVED A COMPLAINT FROM A RESIDENT OUT PERRY CLEAR PLANTATION AND CONDUCT THE SITE INSPECTION AND ISSUE.

>> MISS MOORE, THE NOTICE VIOLATION I WENT OUT THERE THIS MORNING TO TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS

[01:00:02]

WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO HAND TO THE BOARDS. YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE WHAT THE

STRUCTURE LOOKS LIKE OUT THERE. >> YOU WANT TO GET THIS FEELING AND THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT ANGLES TO YOU GUYS. I THINK THE BIGGEST CONCERN IS NUMBER ONE.

>> IT IS ON A CONCRETE SLAB. HOWEVER, IT'S NOT THERE'S NO FOOTER ATTACHED TO IT.

WHAT BUILDING CODES FIRDOS SQUARE WOULDN'T REQUIRE TO MAKE A RESIDENCE.

AND IF YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE STRUCTURE, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM TO MAKE IT A LOFT TYPE LIVING AREA. BUT TO HAVE STORAGE UNDERNEATH SO THE STRUCTURAL PROBABLY HAVE TO BE REMOVED THE CONCRETE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A FOOT OR MORE.

IF THE BUILDING WOULD EVEN ALLOW WHICH I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE THEY WOULD ALLOW THAT MAY BE DIFFERENT. THERE'S NO UTILITIES THERE. THERE ARE UTILITIES.

SO A SEPTIC TANK BROUGHT INTO THE ISSUE FROM HAD NO WATER UTILITY PRACTICES.

BEING MADE AVAILABLE ON THAT PROPERTY IS NO SEWER IN THAT AREA NOW.

SO IF IT'S THAT LOW THEN IT PROPERTY MIGHT NOT EVEN PARK RIGHT.

>> AND THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE FIRST THING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO FIND OUT IF THE PROPERTY WOULD CURVE AND THEN GO TO BUILDING CODES AND I'M ASSUMING THAT BUILDING CODES WOULD MAKE THAT STRUCTURE HAVE AN ENGINEER'S REPORT TO AN I DEFINITELY KNOW THAT THEY WOULD MAKE TAKE OUT THAT CONCRETE OR FOOTER IF THEY'RE GOING TO CONVERT IT INTO A RESIDENCE OR PART OF IT A RESIDENTS IN HIS PHOTO.

IS THAT A SHED ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY THAT THERE WAS SHARED BACK HERE BEHIND THE BOAT TRAILER? YES, SIR. IS THERE A HOUSE THERE? NO, SIR. SO THIS IS ANOTHER PROPERTY I'M DEALING.

SO YOU'RE AWARE THAT IT'S JAY WE HAVE TWO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT.

I'M NOT SURE THIS FOR THIS CASE OR NOT. BUT GRAHAM TRASK.

YES. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO STRESS NEXT.

IS THERE ANY WAY THAT SHE COULD PUT A SMALL PRIMARY RESIDENCE ON THAT LIFE AND THEN THIS

BUILDING BECOMES THE ACCESSORY BUILDING? >> I DON'T KNOW.

THAT WOULD BE FEASIBLE. IT WAS JUST AN IDEA I HAD AN IS BUILDING IS 900 SQUARE.

THAT WAS BECAUSE YOU ONLY GET 30 PERCENT OF THE HOUSE SIZE. SO BE THERE NOW YOU KNOW.

BONNIE BONNIE CRYSTAL NANCY. >> OK, ALL RIGHT. WELL, ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ALONG. WE'RE COMPLETE. WE CALLED THE PUBLIC COMMENT

FOR THIS VARIANCE FOR MISS MERV . >> WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO PUT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR? MISS ADMITS MISS SMITH. WE JUST TRIED TO SEE IF YOU COULD MAKE USE OF THIS BUILDING AND YOU KNOW, JUST TO TRY TO COME UP WITH A WAY THAT YOU COULD PROPERLY HAVE YOUR BUILDING THERE AND MAKE USE OF IT.

THAT'S ALL WE WAS UP HERE TRYING TO DO TO TRY TO ACCOMMODATE YOU IN WHATEVER WAY HOWEVER WAY WE COULD. BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, IS IT STILL THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD TO ALLOW HER TIME TO? BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING NOW RIBAUT THAT SHE HAVE TIME AND NOT TO END THERE'S GOING TO STILL BE THE SAME. SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S STILL

THE BOARD TO EXTEND HER THAT OPPORTUNITY OR NOT. >> BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID AND I GUESS I WONDER AT LEAST PUT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR RATHER WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THIS TO THE I TO ASK FOR A CONTINUING. I MEAN NO SHE SHE HAD SHE HAD SO AND I GUESS WE'LL CONTINUE THIS TO OUR DECEMBER MEETING AND THAT WAY YOU CAN GIVE IT THE COUNTY AND SEE IF ANY WAY

[10. Mr. Graham Trask is requesting a variance from Division 3.3.110.C.A – Front Setback. Applicant is requesting to construct a Drive-thru Restaurant outside of the build-to-setback line. Property is located at 131 Sea Island Parkway and is zoned T4 Neighborhood Center (T4NC). ]

YOU COULD WORK ANYTHING OUT SINCE YOU'RE REQUESTED FOR A CONTINUANCE.

>> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MOVING TO ITEM NUMBER 10, MR. GRAHAM TRASK OR HIS QUESTION THERE? WELL, THE NEXT COUPLE OF ITEMS

[01:05:03]

OF PRESS IS A QUESTION AT VARIANCE FROM A DIVISION THREE DASH THREE DASH ONE 10 ROT SET BY THE TRACKS. OH YES. CAPTAIN.

HOWEVER THE FIRST BALL OR ALLOWING AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON ON THIS PROJECT BRIEFLY AND MOST RECENTLY I'VE BEEN THE ONE TRYING TO HOLD THE CITY IN THE COUNTY ACCOUNTABLE

FOR THEIR RULES. >> SO IT'S AN INTERESTING VIEW ,DON'T IT? DON'T BLAME US FOR ANYTHING THE CITY DOES THAT'S NOT SO GOOD. ANYWAY, I GREW UP IN NEWPORT.

MY FAMILY'S BEEN HERE A LONG TIME. MOST RECENTLY I'VE BECOME INVOLVED WITH REAL DEVELOPMENT INVESTING A LOT IN DOWNTOWN BEAUFORT AND THE CITY.

THIS IS THE ONE OF THE FEW PROJECT PROPERTIES THAT I OWN IN THE COUNTY AND I'VE WORKED REALLY HARD OVER THE LAST NINE MONTHS WITH MY PROFESSIONALS WHERE EDWARD FERRY TO GET THIS RIGHT. SO IT'S A LONG WINDED WAY OF SAYING I'M IN HERE TO MAKE A QUICK BUCK. I'M HERE TO DO THIS DEVELOPMENT RIGHT.

WHAT I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT TONIGHT IS WHAT EXISTS ALONG THE SEA ISLAND CORRIDOR AS WELL AS THE LADY'S ISLAND THE SAME POINT ROAD I PUT TOGETHER A VERY NICE FLASHY COLOR PACKAGE FOR YOU AND IT GIVES YOU A NICE FLAVOR OF THE BUILDINGS THAT SURROUND MY PROPERTY.

>> SO I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THAT. I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE

PATCHWORK OF ZONING THAT EXISTS IN THIS AREA. >> SOME IS CITY, SOME AS COUNTY, SOME IS ONE ZONING ZONE IS ANOTHER ZONING. WE'RE GOING TO TALK I'M THEN GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, ITS UNIQUENESS AND THE HARDSHIPS THAT WE FACE WITH DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE VARIANCES.

>> SO JUST QUICKLY ON THE VARIANCES I'M HERE TONIGHT ASKING FOR A VARIANCE FOR THE

BILL TO MINE TO BE AT THE DOMINION POWER LINE EASEMENT. >> I'M ASKING FOR A SPECIAL USE FOR A DRIVE THROUGH AND I GUESS I APPARENTLY AM ASKING FOR A VARIANCE WHICH I STILL DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND WHICH IS THAT APPARENTLY THE US OUR KEY THINGS THAT I DON'T HAVE STORE FRONT. WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT STARTING OFF AS YOU GUYS MAY KNOW I KNOW SOMEBODY FROM SOUTH OF THE BROAD SEA ISLAND PARKWAY THERE IS A FOUR LANE ROAD.

>> IT HAS TURN LANES. THE MINIMUM SPEED LIMIT IS 45 MILES AN HOUR IN SOME PARTS OF IT. IT'S 55 MILES AN HOUR. THE PATCH THE COUNTY AND CITY HAVE ENGAGED OVER THE YEARS IN A BATTLE TO ANNEX AND TO PROHIBIT ANNEXATION.

>> I'M HAPPY TO SAY THAT WE GOT MOST OF OUR PROPERTY INTO THE CITY BUT AS I HEAR THE LAND

WHICH IS IN YOUR PACKAGE IS THE ROAD. >> SORRY.

YES. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS CLEAR.

THIS IS CNN PARKWAY. THIS IS SAM'S POINT ROAD. LADIES ON THE DRIVE THE WHITE HERE IS IN THE PURPLE SHADED IS COUNT. OK.

SO YOU CAN SEE IT'S A PATCHWORK OF ZONES AND SO YOU'VE GOT COMPLETE JURISDICTIONS MANAGING THIS GENERAL AREA IN THIS AREA. THERE ARE TEN DRIVE 30 MINIMUM FIVE OF THEM ARE FOR FOOD.

FIVE OF THEM ARE FROM BANKS ONES FOR A PHARMACY. AND THERE IS VIRTUALLY NO

[01:10:06]

RESIDENTIAL IN THIS GENERAL AREA ALONG THESE CORRIDORS. OK.

>> IS EVERYONE FAMILIAR WITH THIS CORRIDOR? I MEAN IF YOU DRIVEN ALONG IT SAY YOU KNOW IT THERE IS NO PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO SPEAK OF ACROSS THIS ROAD BETWEEN THE

LADY'S ISLAND DRIVE AND THE BEAUFORT HIGH SCHOOL LIGHT. >> IF YOU TRY TO CROSS THAT

ROAD YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GET KICKED. >> SO THE SOUTH SIDE IS

COMPLETELY SHUT OFF FROM THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROAD. >> AND THERE'S VERY LITTLE CONNECTION ON THE NORTH INTO THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL AREAS WHICH ARE FURTHER NORTH AND MY PROJECT ADDRESSES THAT THE PROPERTY ORIGINALLY WAS TWO POINT FOUR ACRES.

>> IT STRADDLES TOLD A ZONING ITEMS AND AGAIN KEVIN , IF I MAKE THIS IS MY PROPERTY HERE

AND THE PURPLE IS T FOR NC NEIGHBORHOODS. >> AND AS YOU CAN SEE MY PROPERTY. ORIGINALLY IT WENT ALL THE WAY BACK SO HALF OF IT WAS IN T FOR

H.S.. >> OK. SO APPROXIMATE THE REAR ONE ACRE WAS IN T FOR H. AND THE FRONT ONE AND A HALF ACRES IS EMPTY FOR NC BETWEEN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY THE PROPERTY GOES FROM BEING 17 FEET HIGH.

>> AND DROPS DOWN TO A THAT'S THIS MUCH ELEVATION CHANGE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HARDSHIP. I HAVE A FRONT CASTLE WHICH IS 17 FEET AND I HAVE A REAR PARCEL WHICH IS SO IT'S IN THE UNFEASIBLE TO GET BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN THOSE TWO ELEVATIONS AND YOU SEE THAT ON THE PLAIN. SO IN EFFECT WHAT YOU HAVE IS A OF WINDS IN THE REAR AND A HIGHLAND IN THE THE FRONT PORTION OF THE LAND ALONG SEA ISLAND PARKWAY ON THE RIGHT AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE CASTLE HAS A CHUNK TAKEN OUT OF IT BY

THE DOOR LOFT. >> THE LAND IS LIKE A PIECE OF PIZZA THEY GO.

IT NARROWS AS IT GOES BACK WHICH MAKES IT CHALLENGING TO CONFIGURE IN THE REAR.

AND FINALLY THE DEO TEAM, THE SOUTH CAROLINA JYOTI WANTS ANY EGRESS INGRESS TO LINE UP WITH THE GREAT CO INGRESS AND EGRESS WHICH IS RIGHT ACROSS SO HERE YOU YOU HAVE CEILING WHAT EXISTS ALONG THAT CORRIDOR IN THAT 34 NC THAT FOR INSTANCE DOWNTOWN.

>> SO WHAT HAS HAPPENED OCCURRED IS DUE TO A VOCAL MINORITY I BELIEVE THE COUNTY

HAS ZONED THAT FOR PEOPLE TO BUILD THAT. >> SO I HAVE THIS HARDSHIP I HAVE TO BUILD THIS AND FINALLY THERE IS A POWER LINE EASEMENT ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY IN WHICH I CAN'T BUILD VERTICAL DOMINION POWER DOESN'T ALLOW THAT.

>> SO WE'RE STUCK. CAN WE GO BACK PROMOTE YOU TO YOU? YOU HAVE A HARDSHIP BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO BUILD TO THE ZONING CODE .

YEAH, I'LL SHOW YOU WHY. I THINK IT I GUESS IT'S BECAUSE I THINK IT'S THE WHAT THEY HAVE

[01:15:14]

SAID I NEED A VARIANCE FOR FOR THE FRONTAGE AND I'LL I'LL GET TO THAT I'LL GET SO MUCH YOU

DRIVE THROUGH IS ALL ALONG THAT THAT CORRIDOR. >> AND SO I WANT TO BUILD A COFFEE RESTAURANT AND THE COFFEE RESTAURANT CONNECTS TO PROFESSIONAL VILLAGES WHICH IS AN OFFICE COMPLEX BY A PEDESTRIAN PATH SO AND PROFESSIONAL VILLAGES WHICH IS THE LARGEST OFFICE COMPLEX ON LADY'S ISLAND CONNECTS TO THE NORTHERN RESIDENTIAL

NEIGHBORHOODS. >> AND YOU ALL GUYS KNOW COFFEE BRINGS PEOPLE TOGETHER SO THE RESIDENTS IN THE NORTH CAN WALK THROUGH PROFESSIONAL VILLAGES TO THE COFFEE SHOP TO

HAVE COFFEE MEET AND WALK BACK. >> THEY DON'T HAVE TO CROSS THE STREET TO WALK ON THE SIDEWALK.

THEY WALK RIGHT TO THIS COFFEE SHOP. >> SO THIS ACTUALLY FITS RIGHT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH IS A NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER ,A WALKABLE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER EVEN THOUGH CARS ARE WHIZZING BY AT 45 OR 50 MILES AN HOUR.

>> IT FITS SO MY VARIANCES. I HAVE A POWER LINE IN THE EASEMENT WHICH IN WHICH I CAN RELATE TO AND THIS REQUIRES THAT I BUILD WITHIN ZERO TO 15 FEET OF THE SIDEWALK.

>> WELL, THE POWER LINE EASEMENT DOESN'T MATTER. IT'S NOT GOOD SHORT BUT THE COUNTY I THINK THE COUNTY RECOGNIZES THAT THAT YOU OUGHT TO GET A VARIANCE FOR THAT.

HAVE SEEN THAT. HAVE YOU SEEN THEIR STAFF REPORT? I DID. BUT YOU HAVEN'T PROVED IT YET. SO I'M JUST MAKING MY CASE.

DO I NOT NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT? I THINK OK.

I THINK YOUR APPLICATION AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION PROVIDE A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR

DETERMINING THE POWER ABOUT THE DRIVE THROUGH. >> WE BELIEVE WE MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DRIVE THROUGH. AND LET ME GO THROUGH THAT

DRIVE THROUGH. >> ARE YOU GOING TO USE. NO, NO.

LET'S. YOU WOULD WANT A SEPARATE EACH ITEM SEPARATELY.

SO WE WE WE WE DEAL WITH THE FIRST VARIANCE FIRST. RIGHT.

OK. YOU WANT TO GET BACK? YEAH.

LET'S LET'S DEAL WITH IT. NO I MEAN THEY'RE ALL SEPARATE APPLICATIONS SO I DON'T SET.

OK. YOU MEAN I GET TO SIT DOWN AND THEN WE COME BACK I COME BACK OR ALL IS LOST AND I'LL LET YOU DO WE WANT TO HEAR FROM THE COUNTY ON THIS LIKE AND THAT OR

NO OBJECTION TO THE FIRST PARISH REQUEST. >> WITH REGARD TO SETBACK BECAUSE OF THE WAY THINK ANY PUBLIC COME FOR ITEM NUMBER TWO IN PUBLIC COMMENT MR. CHAIRMAN,

YOUR INDULGENCE. >> I'M CHUCK NEWTON. I'M CHAIRMAN OF DCI ALLEN COALITION BECAUSE THESE ISSUES ARE SO INTERCONNECTED HOPE POPPY, GIVE ME A LITTLE BIT OF LATITUDE IN TERMS OF CONNECTING THEM BECAUSE I THINK THE WAY YOU UNDERSTAND IT

THIS THIS IS NOT A ZONING ISSUE. >> THIS IS NOT A ZONING ISSUE.

TONIGHT'S AGENDA. I FIND QUITE INTERESTING BECAUSE YOU'RE DEALING WITH TWO VARIANCES AND THEN THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IF YOU DEALT WITH A SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

FIRST I HAVE A SENSE THAT THE OTHER TWO AND DENIED IT I HAVE A SENSE THE OTHER TWO ISSUES WOULD BE MOOT. BUT AS THAT THIRD ISSUE THAT'S REALLY MOST IMPORTANT HERE.

>> IF GRANTED THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD PERMIT A DRIVE THROUGH WHAT ONE THIRD OF THE ISLAND PARKWAY PARTIALLY AS MR. TRASK MENTIONED IS ALMOST DIRECTLY ACROSS A GO SHOPPING CENTER WHICH IS A RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT AND ON SIGNALED INTERSECTION.

>> IT'S ALSO ADJACENT TO THE PARKWAY WHERE TWO LANES MERGE INTO ONE.

WHAT ABOUT THAT POINT FORWARD? IT'S TWO LANES AND A TURN LANE ALL THE WAY TO THE WOODS MEMORIAL RIDGE FIELD IS TRAFFIC COUNTS SUGGESTS WE'VE GOT ABOUT 18 THOUSAND OF ANNUAL AVERAGE

[01:20:07]

TRAFFIC MOVEMENTS IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA WHICH MEANS WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THOSE

MOVEMENTS. >> YOU KNOW, IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PLANS FOR 131 SEA ISLAND

PARKWAY, THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM THAT'S GONE UNRECOGNIZED. >> 2017 27 STANTON ISLAND QUARTER TRAFFIC STUDY IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF SERIOUS AND GROWING TRAFFIC PROBLEMS.

>> NINE PROJECTS WERE RECOMMENDED FOR IMPROVEMENTS IN NOVEMBER OF 2018.

>> BEAUFORT COUNTY VOTERS APPROVED A REFERENDUM WHICH PROVIDED FOR 30 MILLION DOLLARS FOR TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THE SEA ISLAND PARKWAY IN PRECISELY THE AREA THAT WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT. >> HIS APPLICATION FOR THE DRIVE THROUGH ENTIRELY THREATENS THE WORK BEING DONE AND THE DESIGN WORK IS GOING FORWARD AS WE SPEAK TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ON THE PARKWAY AND WOULD OBVIATE A BIG CHUNK OF THAT 30 MILLION DOLLAR

OF TAXPAYER MONEY THAT IS CAPTURED THROUGH THE SALES TAX. >> BUT IT IS TAXPAYER DOLLARS.

THIS APPLICATION A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN OTHER DRIVE MR. TRASK MENTIONED THERE WERE TEN

DRIVE THROUGH IS ALONG SEA ISLAND PARKWAY. >> I'M HARD PRESSED TO FIND ONE THAT ENTERS DIRECTLY FROM THE STREET. MCDONALD'S IS OFF A SECONDARY ROAD. THE NEW WENDY'S IS A SECONDARY ROAD.

THE BANK PROPERTIES I'M AWARE AND EVEN THE WALGREENS IS OFF A SECONDARY ROAD AND DOES NOT

IMMEDIATELY ENTER OR EXIT OFF THE STREET. >> SO IN THIS PROPOSAL SHOULD AUTO STACKING EXCEED A DOZEN OR SO AUTOMOBILES? TRAFFIC WOULD BACK HER TO THE

PARKWAY. >> YOU'RE YOU'RE ON TO THE SPECIAL USE.

WE'RE NOT THERE YET. SO. WELL, I SAID I GET WITH YOUR INDULGENCE THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ISSUES HERE. I THINK THEY'RE ALL TIED TOGETHER HERE. NOW IF I MAY, I'M PERFECTLY WILLING TO STOP HERE AND REJOIN I'M I FOR ONE AM IF YOU HAD TO SAY ABOUT THE VARIANCE FOR THE FOR THE BILL TOO BECAUSE THAT'S

WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH FIRST. >> WE HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE THE FIRST VARIANCE.

I'LL COME BACK AND SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE LATER AT THE GAME. >> OK, SIR.

THANK YOU. MISS BONNIE MR. BONNIE BONNIE STALWART I'M A RESIDENT OF LADY'S ISLAND SINCE 2000 AND I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS IS THE WHICH ARTICLE WE'RE TALKING

ABOUT. >> SO IF I NEED TO COME BACK FOR ONE OF THE OTHER NUMBERS, LET ME KNOW. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO SOMEBODY WHO OWNS PROPERTY BEING ABLE TO

SELL IT. >> IT TAKES MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS.

I'M NOT SURE I AGREE THAT THERE SHOULD BE THINKING OR VARIANCES OR THINGS THAT SHOULD BE CHANGED. I THINK THAT SETS A PRECEDENT. A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO A LOT OF US ON LADY'S ISLAND MET AT LADY SILENT MIDDLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND TRIED TO PUT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TOGETHER THAT WOULD HELP TO HAVE SMART

DEVELOPMENT DOWN THAT CORRIDOR. >> I CAN SEE OTHER THINGS THERE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER WHETHER FOR DOCTORS OR DENTISTS OR A VET CLINIC OR SOMETHING WHERE THERE'S NOT SO MUCH IN

AND OUT TRAFFIC ESPECIALLY BETWEEN MORNING HOURS AND NOON. >> THERE ARE TWO OTHER REALLY

GOOD COFFEE SHOPS. >> I THINK LESS THAN A MILE AND A HALF FROM WHERE THIS IS PROPOSED AND THERE'S FREE PARKING DOWNTOWN TILL 11 O'CLOCK SO PEOPLE CAN GO.

THERE'S PLENTY PARKING. IT'S NOT GOING TO DISRUPT THIS IS A DANGER INTERSECTION COMING OUT OF GREAT CO . IT'S ONE OF THE PLACES WHERE THEY HAVE THE MOST ACCIDENTS.

SECOND, I THINK PROBABLY GET INTERCEPTION BY WALGREENS AND PUBLIX.

>> I JUST AM I'M TRYING TO SELL THESE VIOLENT PEOPLE AND IT'S REALLY HARD WHEN YOU'RE DOWNTOWN AND YOU'RE TRYING TO GO ACROSS THE BRIDGE AND IT'S NOT AND YOU CAN'T GET ACROSS

THE BRIDGE AND IT'S NOT BECAUSE THE BRIDGE IS OPEN. >> IT'S BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC IS

BACKED UP ALL THE WAY OUT PAST THE SHELL STATION. >> THERE'S GONNA COME A TIME WHEN THE BRIDGE OPENS ON EVERY HALF HOUR IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO CLEAR ALL THE TRAFFIC

BEFORE IT OPENS AGAIN. >> PEOPLE THAT I'VE TALKED TO RECENTLY ABOUT THIS THEY CAN'T WAIT TO THE NEW PUBLIC OPENS OUT BY STAPLES BECAUSE THOSE PEOPLE ON THAT SIDE OF THE

BRIDGE AREN'T GOING TO COME OUT TO LADY'S ISLAND ANYMORE. >> THEY IGNORE IT NOW AND THEY

DO THAT. >> IT'S GOING TO BE EASIER TO GO TO LOWE'S INSTEAD OF GREAT.

AND I'M ALL FOR SUPPORTING SMALL BUSINESSES AND COMPANY BUSINESSES BY PEOPLE WHO LIVE

HERE. >> BUT THERE'S NOT COULD BE ANY REASON FOR THEM TO FIGHT THE TRAP ANY MORE OR BE WORRIED ABOUT AN ACCIDENT IF THEY CAN EASILY GO OUT TO THE PUBLIC'S OUT THERE, BUY STAPLES AND GO TO GREAT CO OUT THERE. I KNOW PEOPLE WHO'VE CHANGED

[01:25:05]

THEIR DOCTORS, THEIR DENTISTS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WANT TO FIGHT THE TRAFFIC ON LADY'S

ISLAND. >> NOW THIS IS ONLY GOING TO MAKE WORSE.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S OK TO SPEAK NOW ON THESE ISSUES BUT PLEASE LISTEN WITH SOMETIMES WONDERING ARE YOU LISTENING? I HAVE SUPPORT ALL THE BOAT THINGS THAT YOU ARE BEAUFORT COUNTY HAS ASKED TO SUPPORT WHATEVER IT WAS. THE 1 PERCENT SALES TAX A COUPLE OF YEARS GO I HAVE SUPPORTED IT BUT NOW IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO SUPPORT US LIVE ON LADY'S ISLAND AND HAVE TO DO THAT. I HAVE TO GO DOWNTOWN AND BACK SOMETIMES THREE OR FOUR TIMES A DAY. I DON'T KNOW MR. TRASK.

I DON'T KNOW WHERE HE LIVES. I DON'T KNOW HOW OFTEN HE HAS TO GO ACROSS THAT BRIDGE AND BACK. BUT FOR US WHO DO IT'S JUST GETTING TO BECOME A NIGHTMARE.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> IT'S THE ONLY TWO PUBLIC COMMENT NOTICES THAT I HAVE TO STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD WE DO HAVE SOME E-MAILS THAT CAME IN THAT IS FEW FOR MAJORITY OR AGAINST THIS APPLICATION. BUT WE'VE GOT TO CLOSE THAT PUBLIC COMMENT NOW. CAN I GET SOMEONE TO MAKE A MOTION ON THIS VARIANCE FOR ITEM NUMBER 10? MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY I MEAN I THINK THIS IS A CLASSIC SITUATION WHERE IF HE'S E CAN'T COMPLY WITH THE CODE AND MEET THAT REQUIREMENT, HE WAS GOING TO DEVELOP THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT I THINK IS CLEARLY A CASE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ONLY ABOUT THE THE BILL TO HEAR REALLY A CASE THAT'S WARRANTED FOR A VARIANCE IN MOVE THAT BASED ON THE APPLICATION BEFORE US AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT THIS FIRST VARIANCE BE APPROVED OF SECOND MOTION HAS BEEN ON FLOOR IN A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR ITEM NUMBER 10. >> THAT HAS BEEN PASSED AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO BE MOVING ON TO

[12. Mr. Graham Trask is requesting a variance from Division 5.2.30.A – Private Frontages General. Applicant is requesting a variance from the Private Frontages to construct a Drive-thru Restaurant. Property is located at 131 Sea Island Parkway and is zoned T4 Neighborhood Center (T4NC). ]

SECOND VARIANCE WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER 12 FROM DIVISION 5. THAT'S TWO THAT'S 3 0 FOR A

PRIVATE FUND EACH GENERAL APPLICATION. >> MR. PRESS.

SO IN THE COUNTY CODE FIVE POINT TWO POINT THREE BUREAUS PRIVATE FRONTAGE WE CONTEND WE HAVE A SHOPFRONT. LET ME READ YOU THE DEFINITION OF THE SHOP ON IN THE COUNTY CODE SHOP. RIGHT. THE MAIN FACADE OF THE BUILDING IS AT OR NEAR THE FRONTAGE LINE WITH AN AD GREAT ENTRANCE ALONG THE PUBLIC WAY.

THIS TYPE IS INTENDED FOR RETAIL USE. IT HAS SUBSTANTIAL GLAZING AT THE SIDEWALK LEVEL AND MAY INCLUDE AN AWNING THAT MAY OVERLAP THE SIDEWALK.

IT MAY BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER FRONTAGE TYPES SO THEREFORE THE SRT IS ASSERTED

WE DON'T HAVE A SHOPFRONT WE ASSERT. >> WE HAVE A SHOPFRONT AS PER THIS DEFINITION. THE SRT HASN'T SAID WHAT WE HAVE BUT THEY SAY IT'S NOT SHOT EVEN THOUGH IT IS THE FRONT FACADE OF THE BUILDING. IT HAS DOOR, IT HAS GLAZING THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE DEFINES A BUILDING AS INCLUDING ALL THAT IS UNDER THE ROOF. THIS HAS A ROOF OVER IT. SO THEREFORE I'M A LITTLE

CONFUSED WITH THE VARIANCE BUT I DON'T SET THE RULES. >> WE HAVE A SO THAT IS I WE TRIED EVERY LAST CONFIGURATION ON THAT PROPERTY TO DESIGN SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY.

>> BECAUSE THIS DOES RELATE TO THE DRIVE THROUGH BECAUSE WE'RE HAPPY TO TAKE THAT SHOPFRONT

OUT. >> BUT I CAN'T MEET THAT. >> SO YOU ASKED ME WHY I THINK MR. WILLIAMS WHY I WAS SHOWING THIS AND THAT'S BECAUSE THAT SHOT FROM LIKE IN ORDER TO MEET

[01:30:03]

FOR AN END. SO WE HAVE MADE EVERY EFFORT TO MAKE THE SHOP THE FAGADE IS I

HAVE A MODEL WHICH I'M HAPPY TO SHOW OF WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING. >> WELL I MEAN YEAH I'M WONDERING WHETHER OR NOT IT'S YOU'RE HERE FOR A VARIANCE OR FOR APPEAL OF THE STAY OF DECISION. BUT I I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STAFF DECISION IS IF YOU DON'T HAVE A SHOPFRONT. WHAT DO YOU HAVE? I DON'T KNOW.

WELL, LET'S FIND THAT OUT. OK. ONE THING TO NOTE I TALKED TO ALL THE ADJACENT PROPERTY UNDER NEXT DOOR AND ACROSS THE STREET ALL ARE EITHER IN SUPPORT FORMAL SUPPORT WHICH I BELIEVE YOU'VE RECEIVED AT LEAST TWO AND I WILL SUBMIT INTO RECORD

THOSE TWO QUALITIES TO THIS SUPPORT. >> WE HAD A WE HAVE TWO H.C.

GRAY AND THE DOORS. CORRECT. OK.

AND THE OTHERS ARE NOT IN OBJECTION AS FAR. >> WELL, LET'S LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE. IF WE DID HEAR FROM THE COUNTY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS THIS PLAN RIGHT IT THE ZOMBIE L.A. SIDE EXHIBIT WHERE I'M SORRY I AGAIN THAT'S THIS STRUCTURE HERE AND THAT'S THE POWER LINE IS YOU COULD POINTED OUT THAT

IF A GOOD SO HERE'S THE BUILDING RIGHT HERE. >> THE FACADE IS THERE, THE FRONT FACADE OF THE BUILDING AS AT THE POWER LINE IS AT THE POWER LINES AS DEFINED IN THE

SAME SORRY. >> YEAH, YEAH. HAS A FUNCTIONING DOOR THAT CONNECTS TO THE SIDEWALK. IT HAS LOST BUT WE DON'T HAVE AN ELEVATION OF A DO WE GET WE HAVE A MODEL WITH RANDY SHOWING YOU THAT PLACES WE LOOKED AT. NOW WE HAVE A PLACE WHERE WE CAN MEET NEXT YEAR NO. SO THAT WE CAN WALK AROUND THIS HERE.

THAT WAS THAT WAS AN EARLY ON THAT WAS AN EARLIER ONE. HERE'S HERE'S THE MOST RECENT.

SIDEWALK WHERE I GET PLAN AND THAT'S A CANOPY OVER THE DRIVE ,RIGHT?

>> YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT. IT DOES HAVE A STORE FRONT.

>> IT'S JUST TAKEN THAT ORANGE ONE STEP FURTHER. STILL YOU ACTUALLY DIED WITHIN

THE BUILDING. CORRECT. >> MUCH LIKE CARWASH AROUND THE CORNER THAT'S IN A SITTING JURISDICTION NOT THE COUNTY BUT DOESN'T MEET THE INTENT.

THERE IS PRECEDENT FOR THIS. AROUND THE CORNER AGAIN IT'S IN THE CITY.

YOU'VE GOT A WALL THERE. IS IN SESSION. SO SAME THING AS AN ORANGE BOWL

AND THAT'S JUST REFINED A LITTLE BIT BETTER NOT RIGHT. >> SO THOSE WHO ARE COMING OFF THE SIDEWALK. SO YOU BEEN ON HERE IS ACTUALLY CROSS CITY TRAFFIC INTO HIM.

>> I'M WALKING DOWN. I'M STANDING ON THE SIDEWALK IS YELLING STOP.

LOOK AT THE WORLD OPEN UP RIGHT NOW. I CAN MOVE IT AROUND.

>> OK. YOU DON'T MEAN YOU DON'T HAVE YOU DON'T NEED A VARIANCE FOR

THAT. >> YOU'RE JUST SAYING WHILE WE'RE HERE WE'RE A VARIANCE APPLICATION. BUT LIKE I'D LIKE THE COUNTY TO EXPLAIN WHAT THEIR POSITION IS

ON THIS NARROW WE HEAR FROM THE COUNTY I YES. >> AND THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE

[01:35:04]

THE FIRST THING I ADDRESS THAT MR. WILLIAMS GO ON TO AND THE STAFF REVIEW ITS ACTION FORM.

>> THE STAFF RECOMMENDED THAT MR TRUSS SUBMIT A AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE TO THE CBA FOR A VARIANCE TO THE BUILDING FRONTAGE TYPE FOR THE T 4 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER

DISTRICT. >> BECAUSE WHEN YOU DO LOOK AT THE SHOP REQUIREMENTS AND DIVISION FIVE POINT TWO RIBAUT IS PRETTY ABOUT WHAT YOU SEE OR YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE MAIN

FACADE BEING IN LINE WITH THOSE REQUIREMENTS FOR A SHOP FRONT. >> AND THIS IS AS YOU'VE SEEN A THIS WALL AND THERE'S A THEN THERE'S THE DRIVE THROUGH LANE AND THEN YOU GET TO THE MAIN

FACADE OF THE BUILDING. >> THIS GIVES IT WHAT IS THAT PART OF THE BUILDING AND SOME

OF IT COULD HINGE ON THE DEFINITION OF THE BUILDING. >> MR. ARMY IS THE CODE DOESN'T

HAVE A DEFINITION OF A BUILDER. >> IT DOES NOT BUT IT DOES HAVE A DEFINITION OF A FACADE.

IT'S NOT A DEFINITION SON WHICH INCLUDES THE WORD BUILDING IN IT.

I KNOW THAT IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT THAT'S PART OF THE BUILDING IF IT'S ONE STRUCTURE, ONE CONTINUOUS ROOF OVER IT AND SO INVESTOR TRUSS DID REFERENCE THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE . WHAT HE'S REFERENCING IN HIS APPLICATION FOR THAT DEFINITION OF BUILDING IS ACTUALLY THE DEFINITION FOR BUILDING AREA FOR DETERMINING THE AREA OF THE BUILDING. THERE IS ACTUALLY HOWEVER A DEFINITION FOR BUILDING AND THAT DEFINITION IS ANY STRUCTURE USED OR INTENDED FOR SUPPORTING OR SHELTERING ANY

USE FOR OCCUPANCY. >> THIS BROUGHT THIS FRONT WALL IS A FALSE FRONT FACADE DOESN'T REALLY DO THAT. IT'S NOT SHELTERING ANYONE WHO'S COMING INTO TO DRINK COFFEE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S JUST GOT A ROOF OVER THOSE FOREVER.

>> BUT CAN MOVE THROUGH AND BACK TO WE'RE GETTING TOO DEEP INTO THE DEFINITIONS.

I DO AGREE WITH WHAT YOU WERE SAYING. THIS IS MUCH MORE AKIN TO A

APPEAL OF AN INTERPRETATION. >> SO BUT WHAT IS IT BECAUSE THE COUNTY TOLD ME TO GO DO THIS WHAT THE COUNTY TOLD THEM THE EXCUSE ME THE COUNTY TOLD MR. TRACKS TO SEEK A VARIANCE SO THAT HE COULD HAVE WHATEVER THIS SHOT FRAUD IS, WHATEVER THIS FRONTAGE IS OBVIOUSLY BELIEVED THAT THIS WAS NOT A SHOPFRONT AS AS DEFINED THEN WENT TO WHAT IS IT?

>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION AND I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE STAFF WAS ASKING HIM TO GO GET A VARIANCE OR TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD AND SAY I DON'T HAVE ANY OF THE PRIMES TYPES DEFINED IN THE CODE THE VARIANCE SO THAT I CAN BUILD WHATEVER YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU INSTEAD

OF DOING THAT. >> MR. TRASK HAS ASSERTED THAT HE INSTEAD HAD A SHOT AND LIKE I SAID THAT IS MORE LIKE AN APPEAL FROM THE INTERPRETATION WHICH IS A DIFFERENT PROCEDURE AND I BELIEVE THE BOARD CAN'T RULE ON THAT TODAY. I THINK HE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND APPEAL THAT INTERPRETATION OR ELSE WE WOULD CONSIDER THE VARIANCE APPLICATION JUST EXCUSE ME SIR OR ELSE WE CAN CONSIDER THE VARIANCE APPLICATION.

>> THE COUNTY TOLD MR. STRAIGHT TRASH TO GO FILE IF HE WOULD HAVE ACTUALLY FILED THE APPLICATION THAT THEY ASKED HIM TO FILE IF THEY IF HE WOULD HAVE SAID DON'T HAVE A JOB APPLICATION I HAVE SOMETHING DIFFERENT AND I DON'T THINK THAT FRONTAGE TYPE IS DEFINED

IN THE CODE AT ALL. >> HE WOULD'VE SAID I NEED A VARIANCE FROM THE FRONTAGE TIMES THAT PROVIDED IN THE CODE THEN YES YOU COULD CERTAINLY RULE ON A VARIANCE DAY BUT WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS NO SUBSTANTIVELY THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE IS THE WORDING MAY NOT BE THE SAME BUT SUBSTANTIVELY THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US IS THE SUBSTANCE AND WE WE HAVE

JUST READ IT'S REQUEST. >> WHAT'S IT SAY? THAT'S WHAT THEY SAID.

[01:40:09]

>> WHAT DO YOU WHAT ARE YOU READING FROM THERE? >> WHAT'S OUR DEAL? AND THIS IS WHAT'S A VARIANCE? I'M JUST. HE SAYS I'M NOT ASKING FOR A

VARIANCE BUT LOOK AT THAT. >> IS THAT IN YOUR PACKET? OUR THAT'S OUR.

THIS IS OUR. >> THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION VARIANCE HERE.

PRETTY CLEAR SAYS THERE'S A BIT OF VARIANCE FOR THE BUILDING FRONTAGE.

OF COURSE THAT IS JUST WHAT THE STAFF PUT TOGETHER. >> THAT IS NOT ACTUALLY WHAT THE ALLOCATION SAYS. IF YOU LOOK AND I THINK THAT'S MY POINT ON THAT THAT HE'S SEEKING AN INTERPRETATION OR AN APPEAL FROM AN INTERPRETER RATHER THAN SEEKING A VARIANCE

. >> IF THE ALSO SINCE THE BOARD MOVED THROUGH IT IF THE BOARD IS TREATING THIS AS A VARIANCE HEARING IS REQUIRED TO SAY WHY HE NEEDS THE VARIOUS REASONS HE GIVES THE PROPERTY BUT DOES NOT ALLOW AN UP ENOUGH DEPTH TO PUT A DRIVE THROUGH IN THE REAR

ONLY. >> AND THE TOPOGRAPHY IN REAR OF THE PROPERTY DOES NOT ALLOW DRIVE THROUGH AND WE'RE ONLY SO THOSE REASONS FOR NEEDING THE VARIANCE DON'T LINE UP WITH A

VARIANCE FROM A SHOT FRONT TO WHATEVER THIS IS. >> THOSE ARE RATHER A VARIANCE WOULD BE A VARIANCE FROM SECTION FOUR POINT ONE POINT SEVENTY WHICH CONCERNS DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANTS. THAT PROVISION ONLY ALLOWS FOR DRIVERS ONLY SIDE OF AND BACK BUILDINGS WHERE IT WAS THIS ONE THOSE PLAN COMES AROUND THE FRONT.

>> SO HIS REASONING FOR THE VARIANCE IS IS NOT REASONING WHICH SUPPORTS A DEPARTURE FROM

THE SHOP FRONT. >> AND AGAIN IT GETS CONFUSING BECAUSE HE'S SAYING HE ALREADY HAS A SHOP FRONT SO I SUPPOSE HE'S SEEKING SOME OTHER DIFFERENT KIND OF FRANCHISE

MODEL. >> IS THIS QUESTION THEN IS THIS A SHOP FRONT OR IS IT NOT A SHOP FLOOR? IS THAT KIND OF CONFUSION? THE STAFF BELIEVES THAT IT IS

NOT A SHOP. >> RIGHT. THAT'S WHY I MEAN SOMEHOW THEY RAN ASKING HIM TO MAKE A VARIATION REQUEST TO THE ZONING BOARD SO THAT HE COULD GET

APPROVAL FOR WHATEVER THE FRONT OF THE SHOP IS. >> OK.

>> SO YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING HE'S SHELVING THIS PICTURE OF WHAT HE HAS TO DO BUT WHAT HE'S ACTUALLY DOING IS NOT REALLY COMPLYING TO THIS THAT KIND OF SOME RACIAL PART HERE.

OH, I'M SORRY. I SAID IS HE ASKING THAT WE LOOK AT THIS AS THE QUESTION IS

IS THIS A SHOPFRONT OR IS IT NOT A SHOPFRONT? >> SO THAT DECISION NEEDS TO BE MADE BEFORE WE WOULD LOOK TO A VARIATION THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE ASKED TO DECIDE AMONG OURSELVES IF IT'S A SHOP OR NOT, WE SHOULDN'T BE DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A SHOPFRONT DAY

BECAUSE THAT IS NOT A QUESTION FOR A VARIATION. >> IT'S THE STAFF'S OPINION THAT IS NOT A SHOP RUN. IT'S MR. TRAFFIC BEING THAT IT IS A SHOP RUN.

SO TO MAKE A DETERMINATION ON THAT THE PROPER PROCEDURE WOULD BE TO APPEAL THAT INTERPRETATION TO THIS BY. SO I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO MAKE ANY DECISION ON THIS TODAY WERE PERSONALLY BEFORE THIS BOARD WITH THE QUESTION OF WHETHER HE HAS A SHOT OR

[01:45:05]

WHETHER HE HAS SOMETHING ELSE. NOW IF WOULD LIKE TO FOREGO THAT PROCEDURE AND JUST APPEAL FOR A OR USUALLY COME FOR THE BOARD FOR VARIATION SAYING I DON'T HAVE A SHOT BUT I WOULD LIKE APPROVAL FOR WHATEVER I WANT TO CALL THE FRONT OF THIS BUILDING THEN THAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE TIME TO DO CONSIDER A VARIANCE OR HE CAN COME IN AND ASK FOR A VARIATION NOT TO

HAVE A SHOPFRONT AND JUST DRIVE BACK INTO THE COFFEE SHOP. >> IS THAT ANOTHER QUESTION?

>> HE COULD AMEND HIS PLAN TO HAVE A NEW DRIVE THAT DOES NOT COME AROUND THE FRONT OF THE SHOP. CERTAINLY WHICH IS WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DO AT OK.

SO I HAVE A QUESTION. >> YOU REVEREND FOR POINT ONE POINT SEVEN ZERO DRAGGED THROUGH FACILITIES. YES, SIR. IN HONOR THEIR LETTER C IT COVERED THE ROOF OVER THE DRIVE TO SHELBY COMPLIMENTS ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AS THE DESIGN COVERING THE PRIMARY PORTION STRUCTURE. WOULD YOU AGREE? HE'S SATISFIED THAT I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH IT IS ARCHITECT.

>> THAT MEANS HE'S PART OF THE STRUCTURE IS PART OF THE BUILDING RIGHT?

WE HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THE GRITTY OF THE COVERING. >> I DON'T SEE WHAT THE PROBLEM

IS HERE. >> THE CONGOLESE COP WOULD SAY AND PICK UP ON A SIGN HERE BUILDING SO THAT COMPLIES WITH THAT SAME SECTION OF THE CODE FROM THE CHIMPS I GATHER.

>> I THINK MR. HOPPER JUST SAY THAT MR. DRAFT DIDN'T WORD HIS APPLICATION CORRECT.

OK, WASN'T IT? YEAH. INVERSION OF THE.

YEAH. THIS IS VERY THIS ISSUE AND ESPECIALLY THIS APPLICATION THERE'S SOME COMMON CONCERN HAS TO DO WITH THE CONFIGURATION OF THIS LOCKED THIS DISTRICT AS IS MR. TRASK MENTIONED IT CALLS FOR A WALKABLE MAIN STREET REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THAT SEEMS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS AREA OR NOT. THAT CAME OUT OF MANY COMMUNITY PLANS. AND IF IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE, THAT'S AN ISSUE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNTY COUNCIL TO CHANGE THE ZONING. BUT THIS THIS DISTRICT CALLS FOR WALKABLE COMMUNITY AND IT IS VERY SPECIFIC. OUR CODE IS VERY SPECIFIC OF HOW BUILDINGS ADDRESS THE STREET TO THE DETAIL THAT IN THIS DISTRICT T4 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER. THEY CALL FOR A FRONTAGE DIFFERENT TYPES OF FRONTAGE TYPES. YOU KNOW, THEY LIST THOSE OUT AND IF YOU GO TO ARTICLE 5 THERE ARE DIAGRAMS THAT SHOW WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE AND THE WHOLE IDEA IS THAT YOU HAVE THE BUILDINGS FRONTING THE SIDEWALK AND YOU DON'T HAVE AUTOMOBILE TRAFFIC OCCURRING BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE SIDEWALK. SO THAT IS THE REASON THAT AS STAFF WE WERE DIRECTING THEM TO CONFIGURED THE DRIVE THE DRIVE TO A DIFFERENT MANNER. SO THAT IS AT THE REAR OF THE BUILDING AND WE HAVE MANY INSTANCES OF THIS INTERVIEW FOR IT.

WE HAVE TO STARBUCKS ACROSS THE STREET. WE HAVE MCDONALD'S OVER ON THE CORNER OF 170 AND BOUNDARY STREET, THE NEW WENDY'S THAT WENT UP KNOW THE CITY THAT THE BUILDING FRONTS THE SIDEWALK. IT DOESN'T HAVE THE DRIVE THRU LANE IN BETWEEN.

>> SO IT FACILITATES PEDESTRIAN. SO THAT'S THE CONFIGURATION WE CALLED FOR THIS PARTICULAR DESIGN THIS THIS COVERING OVER THE DRIVE THRU LANE IS A WAY TO

MEET. >> I WOULD TAKE THE LETTER OF THE LAW FOR THIS STORE FRONT OR THE FRONTAGE SITE WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE IT DOES. IT'S STILL IT DOESN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF HAVING THE BUILDING ENGAGE THE STREET AND NOT HAVING THIS CAR TRAFFIC GOING

ON BETWEEN THE ACTUAL BUILDING AND THE SIDEWALK. >> THE PERSON WHO WOULD ENTER THIS BUILDING BUT I WALK INTO A DOOR AND AND IMMEDIATELY BE FACED WITH TRAFFIC GOING

THROUGH THE DRIVE THROUGH IT. >> THAT'S NOT THE INTENT OF THIS DISTRICT AND HAVE ALL THESE PRIVATE FRONTAGE TYPES AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE DIAGRAM NONE OF THEM SHOW ANY SORT OF PECULIAR TRAFFIC OR PARKING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT OCCURRING BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE. YOU KNOW, THERE'S DIAGRAMS SPECIFIC IN THAT.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO DO WITH A CANOPY OVER THE.

I THINK THAT WITH THAT PARTICULAR YOU KNOW, THERE ARE DRIVE THROUGH CANOPIES THAT STOP THE CONCERN IS THAT IT'S LOCATED ON THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING AND THAT'S WHAT THIS

[01:50:02]

DISTRICT IS CALLING FOR. AND THIS IS AN ARGUMENT WHEN WE YOU'LL EVEN FIND A SPECIAL USE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT AND CONSISTENCY WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT MUST BEAT. AND SO THAT'S WHY THIS SITE PLANNING ISSUE IS SO IMPORTANT AND IT'S RELATED TO THIS PRIVATE FRONTAGE TYPE WHICH IS

THAT SECOND VARIANCE. >> SO I JUST I WAS CONCERNED THAT WE WERE MAYBE YOU KNOW, THE ISSUE IS BECOMING SEPARATE FROM I GUESS THE LARGER ISSUE WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE

DISTRICT IS. AND SO I WANT TO OFFER THAT. >> DO YOU FEEL AS THOUGH I DON'T KNOW IF WE LET YOU IN THE APPLICANT COULD HAVE MORE EXTENDED EXTENSIVE CONVERSATION

ON THIS BEFORE COMING BEFORE THIS BOARD. >> BECAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE IT.

>> YEAH. AND I'D SAY THAT WE WERE VERY CLEAR FROM THE VERY FIRST TIME THIS PROJECT CAME FORWARD AS A PRE APPLICATION CONFERENCE. SO WE ENCOURAGE APPLICANTS APPLICANTS TO COME IN IN A VERY INFORMAL SETTING WITH OUR FOLKS, YOU KNOW, BUILDING CODES ,STORM WATER TO TALK ABOUT BROAD SITE PLANNING ISSUES AND WE AT THAT VERY FIRST MEETING MENTIONED THAT THE PURPOSE DISTRICT HOW THE DRIVE THROUGH WOULD NEED TO BE CONFIGURED.

AND I WILL ADD AT THAT TIME THAT REAR PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WAS NOT SOLD YET.

SO IT WAS STILL PART OF THIS PROPERTY. SO THERE WAS MORE FLEXIBILITY BEFORE SUBDIVIDED TO PROVIDE FOR, YOU KNOW, ACCESS ISSUES. YOU KNOW, ANY OF THE KIND OF THINGS THAT ARE MAKING IT VERY DIFFICULT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE OF THIS ZONING DISTRICT. BUT YEAH, WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH I BELIEVE TWO OR THREE PRE APPLICATION APPLICATION CONFERENCES AND THEN CONCEPTUAL REVIEW PESTER TV AND WE WHAT WOULD YOU WERE BRINGING BEFORE YOU YOU FELT WAS NECESSARY AT THIS POINT TO BRING BEFORE YOU LAY YOUR RECOMMENDATION WAS DEFERRED UNTIL BUT CONDITIONS THAT YOU'RE LISTED ON THE ON

THE SEVEN HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY THE SRT. >> HAVE THEY NOT SPECIAL.

THAT'S FOR THE SPECIAL I MEAN AS I KNOW I'M JUMPING AHEAD BECAUSE I KEEP ON ABOUT I

RESPONSE. >> YES. I MEAN VERY BRIEFLY I SORT OF FEEL LIKE WE'RE GOING AROUND IN CIRCLES HERE AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO THE LAWYER

GENTLEMAN HERE. >> I THINK HE'S TRYING TO DO THAT AND TRYING TO SOMEHOW SEND

THIS STORE FRONT WHICH ISN'T A STORE FRONT. >> BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS TO GET AN INTERPRETATION JUST TO DELAY. I WAS ADVISED TO COME IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD TO GET A VARIANCE FOR SOMETHING THAT IS A DOOR OR SHOPFRONT.

>> I DIDN'T EXPECT TO HAVE TO COME IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD WHEN I HAVE A STORE FRONT.

>> IT'S ALLOWED IT'S A STOREFRONT AS DEFINED. SO I FEEL LIKE THE SRT HAS TRUMPED UP AN ISSUE AND THEN ADVISED ME TO COME IN FRONT OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TO JUSTIFY WHY THAT'S A SHOPFRONT SO I WOULD PREFER SINCE APPARENTLY I'D COME BACK

BEFORE YOU ANYWAY FOR AN INTERPRETATION. >> IF WE CAN GET THIS SORTED OUT I HOPE FAVORABLY BECAUSE IT'S IT'S SHOPFRONT AS FAR AS THE ASSERTION THAT THIS IS

OF MY OWN MAKING THAT'S COMPLETELY FALSE. >> WE WENT THROUGH TENS OF DIFFERENT CONFIGURATIONS TO TRY TO GET THIS PRODUCT TO FIT ON THE FULL TWO POINT FOUR

ACRES. >> BUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT NARROWS AND BECAUSE THE DOOR CHUNK IN THE FRONT END BECAUSE OF THE POWER LINE EASEMENT WHICH PUSHES BACK AND BECAUSE OF THE DFT WANTING TO ALIGN WITH THE GREAT COVID HAS TO GO OVER TO THE LEFT.

>> AND SO THEREFORE IT HAS TO COME AROUND AND WE THEN PUT A SHOP FROM FRONT OF IT WHICH

MEANS ALL THE LINES THAT THE COUNTY HAS. >> SO I'M A LITTLE PUZZLED

[01:55:06]

FRANKLY. >> I THINK THAT YEAH I THINK THAT WAS IT.

>> OH, SORRY. >> ALL THESE I'M SORRY WILLIAM. ALL THE THINGS THAT WE THEY SAY

WE HAVEN'T MET. >> WE ACTUALLY HAVE MET THEY HAVE COME UP WITH THEM SAYING THAT WE HAVE WHETHER IT'S PEDESTRIAN ACCESS, WHETHER IT'S PARKING, WHETHER IT'S THE FRONTAGE. I SORT FEEL LIKE THEY'RE TRYING TO GIVE ME THE RUNAROUND TO

KIND OF DELAY AND DELAY AND DELAY FRANKLY. >> NO.

OH, RIGHT. BUT SO I REALLY THINK ARE KIND OF THREE ISSUES BEFORE THE

BOARD ON THIS VERY ISSUE. >> TWO THAT WOULD HAVE KIND OF BEEN OVER THAT HAVE BEEN OVER FIRST WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS PROPERLY A VARIANCE BEFORE THE BOARD.

>> AS I'VE STATED EARLIER, THIS IS AN INTERPRETATION ISSUE WHICH WOULD BE APPEALED TO THE BOARD AND HEARD THAT MANNER. OH, ON THAT POINT MR. COLBY BEEN UM IT RUBS ME THE WRONG WAY TO HAVE THE COUNTY TELL TO GO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE AND THEN FOR THE COUNTIES REPRESENTATIVE TO STAND UP HERE AND SAY OH NO, HE SHOULD'VE FILED AN APPEAL INSTEAD.

>> WELL, CERTAINLY. >> AND AND I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU 100 PERCENT IF HE WOULD HAVE FILED FOR THE VARIANCE THAT THEY ASKED HIM TO FILE FOR IF HE WOULD HAVE ASKED FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE FRINGE TYPES THAT ARE SET OUT IN THE CODE . AND I WOULD CERTAINLY AGREE.

>> AND I I READ HIS VARIOUS APPLICATION AND I THINK I HAVE A STORE FRONT.

BUT IF I DON'T I WANT A VARIANCE FOR WHAT I DO HAVE. I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. YOU KNOW, I'M I'M LOOKING AT IT A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.

>> HEARING HIM SAY THAT A STORE FRONT IN THIS DISTRICT IS A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE COME IN THE FRONT DOOR, THEY'RE WALKING DOWN THE SIDEWALK LIKE IT WAS AN OLD FASHIONED NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND WHAT HE'S GOT IS HE COMES IN THE DOOR TO A PORT OF CALL WHICH HAS CARS DRIVING BY.

AND IF HE WANTS TO GO IN THE BUILDING, HE HAS TO GO THROUGH THE CARS TO ACTUALLY GET INTO THE BUILDING THAT IT'S NOT BEING USED AS A STORE FRONT EVEN THOUGH LOOKS LIKE A STORE.

AND LIKE MR. BURKE SAID, IT MAY MEET THE LETTER OF THE LAW AND IF IT MEETS THE LETTER OF THE LAW THAN IT MEETS THE LETTER OF THE LAW, OK. I'D LIKE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT THE SAME THING THAT HERE WITH DERRICK. SO I MEAN OUTSIDE ABILITY YOU HAVE TO GO ACROSS THE WHERE DO PEOPLE DRIVE IN AND OUT? YOU GOT THE EXACT SAME THING.

>> SURE. >> AND OF COURSE YOU WOULD GET SEVEN POINT TWO POINT ONE FORTY D TO D WHICH DISALLOWS THE BOARD FROM CONSIDERING OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE NEARBY WHICH ARE NOT INFORMING OR ARE CONFORMING AND DECIDING ON A VARIANCE.

>> SO YES, THERE ARE CERTAINLY SEVERAL SEVERAL OTHER DRIVERS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD BUT THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN CONSIDER WHEN ONE CAN DECIDING ON THIS VARIANCE.

>> YOU SEE WE CAN NOT CONSIDERED IT WHEN DECIDING WHEN IS A VARIANCE.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> SEVEN TWO D AND I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO REALIZE THAT

THAT IS PERMITTED UNDER THE ORDER AT WORK. >> SO IT'S NOT USUALLY SEEN IN THE DISTRICT. I UNDERSTAND THAT BUT I KNOW WE HAVE GRANTED VARIANCE BASED OFF OTHER PROPERTIES. I KNOW WE'VE DONE THAT BEFORE AND YOU WOULD CERTAINLY KNOW

BETTER WHAT I CAN ONLY QUOTE THE LAW TOO. >> OK.

ALL RIGHT. >> SO WE HAVE THAT QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS PROPERLY BEFORE THE BOARD AND IF THE BOARD BELIEVES IT IS PROPERLY BEFORE THE BOARD, THEN WE HAVE THE REASONING THAT IS GIVEN BY MR. TRASK FOR HIS VARIANCE FOR THE DEPARTURE FROM

THE FRONTAGE TYPE WHICH IS THE PROPERTY DEPTH. >> IT DOES NOT ALLOW FOR THE DRIVE PARTY WHICH DOESN'T ALLOW FOR THE DRIVE THROUGH AND AGAIN THIS IS THESE AREN'T REASONS THAT WOULD LEND THEMSELVES TO WHY THE VARIANCE FROM THE SITE IS IT IS NOT.

>> ISN'T THAT A ISSUE HAVING TO DO WITH THE SIZE OR THE TOPOGRAPHY OR THE SHAPE OF THE PROPERTY OF THAT'S AN ISSUE HAVING TO DO WITH WHAT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY LOOKS

[02:00:07]

LIKE AND HOW IT GOT WOULD LIKE MR. MURCHISON MAYBE HE'S MEANT TO LIVE LONG, COME UP WITH A CREATIVE WAY TO MEET THAT BUT IT'S INTERPRETING WHAT I SAID EARLIER I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT

THIS MEETS THE LETTER OF THE LAW. >> I'M SAYING THAT IT'S AN ATTEMPT TO MEET THE LETTER FOR SO I DON'T WANT TO BE QUOTED AS SAYING THAT I COULD.

>> I BELIEVE THAT. I MEAN DOESN'T IT? YEAH.

OK. WELL THE RECORD SHOWS WHAT IT SHOWS.

OK. AND AGAIN TO COME BACK THERE THERE'S CREATES CONFUSION WHEN WE'RE TREATING SOMETHING THAT IS A REQUEST FOR AN INTERPRETATION AS A VARIANCE

BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO TELL WHAT HE'S SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM. >> IS HE SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM A SHOPFRONT TO WHAT WE HAVE HERE OR IS HE SEEKING A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS FOR POINT ONE POINT SEVENTY WHICH REQUIRE THE DRIVE THRU TO BE ON BACK OR ON THE SIDE TO A VERY TWO TO VERY BAD TO BE APPLE ROUND THE APPLICATION CLEAR ON THAT THERE'S A VARIANCE FROM FIVE POINT TWO POINT THIRTY WHICH THAT IS JUST TABLE OVERVIEW OF THE TIMES.

BUT THE FACT IS PEOPLE MAY HE'S HERE HE'S HERE TRYING TO SUBSTANTIVELY DO WHAT THE STAFF TOLD HIM TO DO. AND NOW GUESS IT RUBS ME THE WRONG WAY WHEN THE COUNTY'S REPRESENTATIVE SAYS OH HE GOT IT WRONG, THE STAFF GOT IT WRONG WHEN THEY TOLD HIM WHAT

TO DO. >> SOMEBODY GOT IT WRONG. >> I BELIEVE THE STAFF WAS FAIRLY CLEAR AND IT'S IN THAT ACTION FORM IS IN THE PACKAGE THAT'S CONTRACTS PROVIDED YOU

HAVE OTHER DOS. >> OCTOBER 7 TWENTY ONE THE LAST READ BULLET POINT FOR THE END OF THE DOCUMENT THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT THE CBO AWAY FOR ONGOING VARIANCE TO THE BUILDING CODE FOR THE T NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER DISTRICT AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE

BEFORE US ME MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS MAY NOT AGREE WITH ME. >> WELL THAT IS CERTAINLY

SOMETHING FOR YOU TO DECIDE. >> AND THEN IF AS WE SAID THESE EXPLANATIONS FOR THE DEPARTURE WHATEVER VARIANCE IS YOU SEEK THESE REASONS THE PROPERTY DEPTH AND THE TOPOGRAPHY ACTUALLY GO TO AND SUPPORT THE NEED FOR A DEPARTURE FROM THE SHOPFRONT TO WHATEVER IT IS HE HAS THEN IF THE BOARD WERE TO DECIDE THAT THOSE REASONS WERE SUFFICIENT.

>> THE BOARD STILL HAS TO CONSIDER THE STANDARDS SET OUT IN SECTION SEVEN POINT TWO POINT ONE FORTY POINT D POINT ONE POINT R D 1 COURSE FIRST THERE'S AN EXTRAORDINARY AND EXCEPTIONAL CONDITION HERE AND HE DOESN'T ADDRESS THE EXTRAORDINARY EXCEPTIONAL

CONDITION THAT WOULD REQUIRE A DEPARTURE FROM THE SHOP. >> AGAIN THAT THERE IS A DICHOTOMY THERE ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A DEPARTURE FROM THE SHOPFRONT?

>> ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A DEPARTURE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A DRIVE THROUGH?

>> WE TALK ABOUT SHALL WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THE COUNTY TOLD HIM TO DO AND THAT'S DEAL WITH THE

STOP FRAUD ISSUE. >> AND I MEAN I READ THIS ESSAY IF HE IF IT'S NOT A SHOPFRONT THEN I WANT A VARIANCE FOR WHATEVER IT IS BUT THE COUNTY CAN'T TELL ME WHAT IT IS.

>> SO BASICALLY WE'RE TRYING TO HAVE A VARIANCE ON THE SHOP FRONT AND THEN GO TO THE SPECIAL USE WHICH HAS TO BE SATISFY THOSE CONDITIONS WHICH IS CONGRUENT WITH THE PLAN.

>> BUT THE ZONING BUT IT'S IF WE APPROVE THE SHOPFRONT DOES THAT WHAT OTHER ISSUES ARE

THERE WITH CAN WITH IT? >> WELL THEN THERE'S THIS SUCH AS YOU I MEAN SEPARATE APPLICATION. YEAH I'M I GUESS AGAIN WE GO TO THIS ORIGINAL QUESTION BECAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE IT'S SOME THERE'S SOME HOMEWORK THAT OBVIOUSLY AWESOME CONVERSATION THAT THE COUNTY BECAUSE THEY KIND OF REFERRED HIM INSTRUCTED HIM TO COME BEFORE US FOR WHAT

[02:05:07]

HE CAME FOR. >> SO DO WE NEED TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION THE APPLICANT NEED TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION BACK WITH A COUNTY PRIOR TO COMING BEFORE US.

>> SO THAT AT LEAST HE CAN COME TO FORCE WITH THE CORRECT APPLICATION, NOT FEEL AS THOUGH HE'S HERE, PUT HIM WITH THE CORRECT APPLICATION. BUT THAT'S REALLY MY POINT.

AND I THINK IT'S THE COUNTY'S POINT THAT IT WOULD JUST BE A LOT MORE CLEAR CUT IF WE WERE EITHER HAVING AN APPEAL FROM OKATIE OR WE CLEARLY HAD A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM ONE OF THE FRONTAGE TYPES IN THE CODE AS WE HAVE IT HERE IT'S JUST UNCLEAR AND IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR YOU TO MAKE A DECISION BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO FIRST INTERPRET WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE AND AND THEN ANALYZE IT IN A FEW DIFFERENT WAYS AND THAT MAKES A VERY DIFFICULT JOB

FOR YOU. >> I THINK THE MOST CLEAR CUT WAY WOULD JUST BE TO ALLOW HIM TO COME BACK AND EITHER SUBMIT THE VARIANCE REQUEST THAT THE COUNTY ASK HIM TO SUBMIT OR IF HE FEELS VERY STRONGLY THAT HE HAS A CONFORMING SHOPFRONT FRONTAGE TYPE.

>> BUT ISN'T THAT WHAT HE'S DOING HIS REPUTATION HE IS PRESENTING A SHOP FRONT FRONTAGE WITH THE DRIVE THROUGH INSIDE AND ASKING IF WE WOULD APPROVE THAT VARIANCE AS A A SHOP FRONT FRONTAGE AS DRAWN IN THE APPLICATION. I MEAN THIS SO HE'S SAYING THAT HE HAS A SHOP RUN. SO HE'S SAYING IF HE HAVE SHOP THAT'S AN ALLOW PRODUCT TYPE.

SO IF HE HAS A SHOP FRONT HE DOESN'T NEED THE VARIANCE. >> THIS BUT THE STAFF SAYS HE DOES NEED A VERY. YEAH. I MEAN DID THEY READ THAT BACK SAYING THIS IS THEY'RE LEERY ABOUT I THE STAFF AND NOW HE DOES NEED A VARIANCE.

OK. FROM WHAT THEY HAVE RENDERED AND INTERPRETATION WHAT WHAT ARE THEY? WHAT YOU NEED A VARIANCE FROM THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE A

SHOPFRONT. >> NO THAT'S THAT'S A THAT'S A THAT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE

DETERMINATION. >> THAT'S NOT A VARIANCE. >> THEY HAVE RENDERED THE INTERPRETATION THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE A SHOPFRONT AND THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE ANY OTHER INFORMING FRONTAGE TYPE SINCE HE DOESN'T HAVE A CONFORMING FRONTAGE TYPE.

>> HE NEEDS A VARIANCE SO THAT HE CAN BUILD SOMETHING DIFFERENT.

AND I SEE THIS AS AN APPLICATION. >> THEY NEED IT.

I WANT A VARIANCE BECAUSE WHAT I HAVE SAID IS A CONFORMING SHOWS A LEGITIMATE SHOPFRONT OR A LEGITIMATE FACADE IN THIS DISTRICT. SO WHAT'S HE ASKING FOR THE

VARIANCE FOR? >> BECAUSE THE COUNTY TOLD HIM TO THE COUNTY TOLD HIM TO FOLLOW THAT PROCEDURE TO GET HIS APPROVAL AND NOW MR. KOPPEL JUST SAY.

>> GOTCHA. HE SHOULD'VE FOLLOWED A DIFFERENT PROCEDURE EVEN THOUGH THE COUNTY TOLD YOU TO DO ONE THING THE COUNTY TOLD HIM THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE A CONFORMING FRANKENSTEIN AND THAT IF HE WANTED SOMETHING DIFFERENT WHICH IS WHY HE WAS PRESENTING HIS PLAN, HE NEEDED TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD TO ASK FOR A VARIANCE SO THAT HE COULD FEEL THAT SOMETHING DIFFERENT. AND IN THAT SUBSTANTIVE WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US I BELIEVE IS THE

OPPOSITE OF THAT. >> I BELIEVE THIS IS HIM SAYING NO, YOU'RE WRONG ACCOUNTING.

I DO HAVE A SHOPFRONT AND THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO DO THAT WOULD HAVE JUST BEEN TO ASK FOR AN APPEAL OF THAT INTERPRETATION RATHER THAN ASKING FOR A VARIANCE WHICH THE

COUNTY TOLD HIM TO DO THE YEAH . >> EXACTLY.

AND IF HE WOULD HAVE DONE THAT THEN THIS IS VERY MUCH WHAT I WOULD NOT BE OVER YET.

>> YOU YOU'RE TRYING TO SPLIT HAIRS HERE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT MR. CARTHAGE, HE'S HERE DOING

SUBSTANTIVELY WHAT THE COUNTY TOLD HIM HE NEEDED. >> I'M TRYING TO MAKE THIS PROCESS MUCH CLEARER AND EASIER FOR EVERYONE. AND ON THE BACK I WOULD REALLY HATE FOR MR. TRASK THIS BOARD AND THE STAFF TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH APPEALS IF WE HAD TO DO

THAT JUST BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET THIS RIGHT PROCEDURALLY. >> SO BECAUSE YOU REALLY DO GET INTO SPLITTING HAIRS WHEN THERE'S THIS MUCH AND YOU IDIOT ABOUT WHAT THIS APPLICATION IS

AT SEVERAL DIFFERENT LEVELS. >> SO EVEN IF IT'S ANOTHER OUT, I THINK IT'S GOING TO SAVE A

LOT OF TIME, ENERGY AND MONEY ON EVERYBODY'S PART. >> IF HE EITHER ASKED FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE APPROVAL OR THE ALLOWED FRENCH TIMES OR JUST ASK FOR AN APPEAL FROM THE

[02:10:01]

INTERNET AND I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HIS LANGUAGE DOES .

>> APPLEGATE BELIEVES THAT FOR A PRIVATE FRONTAGE IS SHOPFRONT SRT TO SEARCH THAT BUILDING FRONTAGE DOES NOT COMPLY WITH FIVE POINT TWO POINT THIRTY EIGHT AND THEREFORE REQUIRING A VARIANCE WHICH IS HERE FOR THAT'S THAT'S EXACTLY FOR RIGHT .

>> AND THE STORY BUT I THINK WE'RE WE'RE SAYING THE SAME THING BUT ENDING UP A DIFFERENT

RESULTS. >> YES, HE'S SAYING THE BELIEVE PRIVATE FRONTAGE IS SHOT DOWN.

>> HE HAS GOT HE NEEDS A VARIANCE IF HE'S GOING TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM SHOP FRAUD IF HE WANTS TO SAY A SHOPFRONT HE NEEDS TO SAY NO STAFF.

>> YOU'RE WRONG IN YOUR ENTIRE INTERPRETATION OF WHAT HE GOT FROM IT.

WHAT IS IN MY PLAN IS A SHOP LIKE YOU'VE GOT YOUR INTERPRETATION WRONG.

I'M GOING TO KILL THAT UP. THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS CAN TELL ME YES, MR. TRASK, WHAT YOU HAVE IS INDEED SHOPFRONT AND THEN THERE WILL BE NO NEED FOR A VERY POROUS MAYBE SKIRTING AN ISSUE IS THE REAL ISSUE THAT CARS ARE GOING TO COME IN FROM THE STREET, TURN LEFT INTO THE AREA THEN IF TO THIS STREET ONCE STRAIGHT SHOPFRONTS THERE'S A DRIVEWAY COMING IN THERE IN THE MIDDLE OF IT IS THAT WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE?

>> THAT WOULD ALL BE IN THESE SPECIAL USE PART, RIGHT. SO IF WE SAY OK, MR. TRASK, YOU'RE CORRECT. WE ACCEPT THAT THIS IS A STORE FRONT.

DOES THAT IN ANY WAY AFFECT THE DECISION? I MEAN ARE WE GETTING SENT IN AS FAR AS DECIDING WHETHER THIS FEDERAL USE IS OK? THAT WOULD BE ONE ELEMENT IN THE DECISION OF WHETHER THE SPECIAL USE WOULD BE OK BECAUSE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS GOING TO REQUIRE THAT ALL THE CODE GUIDELINES ARE MET FOR THE PARTICULAR SPECIAL USE THAT'S

BEING REQUESTED. >> SO IF THE BOARD WERE TO DETERMINE THAT THIS STORE FRONT IS ALLOWED FRONT FRONTAGE USE THAT WOULD JUST BE ONE CHECK MARK TOWARDS THE SPECIAL USE

PERMIT. >> IT WOULDN'T BE DECISIVE ON THE ISSUE BUT IT WOULD BE ONE

PART OF THE CONSIDERATION THE BOARD WOULD HAVE TO MAKE. >> SO IN OTHER WORDS WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT THE WHOLE PACKAGE IF WE JUST KNOW THAT. AND MY QUESTION FOR THE ATTORNEY YEAH I HAVE ONE AND I WANT LABOR TO POINT BUT I HAVE AGREE WITH MR. WILLIAMS. MR. TRASK FOLLOW THE COUNTY'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO PARALYZE THE CITIZENS IF THE COUNTY MADE A MISTAKE AND MAKE HIM COME BACK IN ANOTHER MONTH WITH MORE DELAYS. I JUST DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CORRECT THING.

I'LL SAY GOOD FOR MR. TRASK TO BENEFIT THAT I AGREE WITH CHIMPS.

BUT I CAN ALMOST CERTAINLY TELL YOU THAT IF WE GO FORWARD THIS VARIANCE AND IF IT'S GRANTED THAT MR. COLLEGE IS GOING TO APPEAL THAT TO THE CIRCUIT COURT.

SO YOU MAY BE YOU MAY BE BETTER OFF. THAT'S WHAT HE'S THREATENING.

I DON'T. YOU MAY BE BETTER OFF FROM A TIME WISE STANDPOINT.

PULLING BACK I WAS SAYING THAT'S WHAT WE'D LIKE TO AVOID. I THINK THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY I MY WILL GIVE. BUT THE COUNTY HAS SET UP A SITUATION PUT MR. TRASK IN THAT POSITION WHERE IF WE GO FORWARD AND DO WHAT THE COUNTY TOLD TO DO, THEN THE COUNTY IS GOING TO APPEAL THAT DECISION TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF DECLARATORY JUDGMENT, ISN'T IT? NO, NO. IT'S A IT'S A THAT'S AN APPEAL. THAT'S A BEYOND WHAT YOU MIGHT

WANT HERE. >> WHATEVER YOU SAY, WHATEVER YOU'RE GETTING IF YOU COME BEFORE THE COURTS THAT THEY CAN BE SURE TO WORK. WHY AMERICANS TRUST AND I THINK

IT WORKS BOTH WAYS. >> MR. WILLIAMS, HE'S GOING TO UNDERSTAND OR THE COUNTY IS GOING TO APPEAL BUT THE COUNTY IS GOING TO LOOK IN MY OPINION VERY RIDICULOUS APPEALING SOMETHING BASED ON IT ON A FACT THAT HE DID WHAT DID WHAT THEY TOLD HIM TO DO IN CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES. YOU KNOW, YOU TOLD ME JUST LIKE YOU SAID YOU TOLD HIM TO DO THIS IS HOW YOU TOLD ME TO DO IT. YOU DIDN'T TELL ME YOUR APPEAL.

I TOLD BUT I THINK THE PROBLEM FOR THE TIME SPAN IS AND THEN IT GOES TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

[02:15:01]

AND BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S A YEARS LONG PROCESS. AND I CLEARLY SERVED HEARTEDLY.

THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME MIDDLE GROUND HERE. BUT HE'S HERE TONIGHT DOING WHAT HE WAS ASKED TO DO. YOUR INTERPRETATION IS QUITE FRANKLY CORRECT.

I THINK IT'S A FACADE BUT IF IT'S NOT THAT I NEED TO. BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY TOLD HIM TO DO. SO YEAH, IT SET IT UP FOR IT WOULDN'T BE GOOD FOR THE COUNTY AND OR FOR THE APPLICANT. TO AND I'VE DONE A COUPLE OF THOSE THEY TAKE SOME AS A LIE I WOULD ASK WHY WOULD THE COUNTY WANT BECAUSE THEY CAN'T GET IT DOESN'T WE'D JUST LIKE TO BE CLEAR ON WHAT WAS AWESOME ABOUT THE AND THAT'S IN THIS OUTPATIENT IT'S GOING TO BE IMPOSSIBLE THINGS LIKE THIS TYPE 1 WORKS AND I DON'T DRIVE INTO COMBAT COMPOUNDED THE

PROBLEM. >> THE COUNTY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY WHEN HE SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION TO SAY OH NO, THIS ISN'T WHAT WE MET. PLEASE REDO YOUR APPLICATION.

AND THEY DIDN'T DO THAT. I ACTUALLY SUGGESTED GETTING THE PATIENT AND THEY SAID MR. TRACKS IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK I QUICKLY SUGGESTED GETTING INTERPRETATION ON THE SHOPFRONT

FROM THEIR DEPARTMENT DURING OUR TEAM MEETING. >> FROM FROM THIS GENTLEMAN'S DEPARTMENT. AND THEY SAID NO, GO TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR A

VARIANCE. >> AND SO CLEARLY I DON'T WANT GO DOWN THE ROAD OF SPENDING A

BUNCH OF MONEY AND DELAY THROUGH CIRCUIT COURT. >> I DON'T KNOW WHY THE COUNTY

WOULD DO THAT. I'VE MET THE LETTER OF THE LAW. >> I'VE LET I I'M ACTUALLY I BELIEVE MET THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW WHERE WE'RE MAKING IT MORE PEDESTRIAN BECAUSE OF THIS COFFEE SHOP. THEY DON'T SEEM TO AGREE WITH THAT ANYWAY.

I GUESS I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD AND NOT SPEND ANOTHER MONTH OR 60 DAYS WITH

THIS SORT OF CIRCULARITY. >> AND SO I YOU KNOW, THE THE HARDSHIP THAT I AM BECAUSE OF THIS WHATEVER I HAVE IN THE FRONT, THE HARDSHIP IS I CAN'T MOVE THE BUILDING ANY OTHER WAY TO NOT HAVE TO PUT THAT WHATEVER IS IN THE FRONT TO MEET THE CODE OF THE ELEVATION CHANGE BECAUSE OF THE DOOR PROPERTY WHICH IS IN THE FRONT BECAUSE OF THE INSURANCE THAT

THE D.A. WANTS. >> I I CAN'T PUT THE BUILDING ANY OTHER WAY TO NOT PUT THAT WHATEVER IT IS IN FRONT. SO I'M ASKING FOR A VARIANCE FOR THAT WHATEVER IT IS.

>> ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR ANY OF THE DOS? WE CLOSED THAT PART OF PUBLIC

COMMENT FOR THE ITEM NUMBER. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY. BEFORE YOU GO TO THE PUBLIC

COMMENT, I CLOSED IT BUT A WELL I CLOSED IT. >> YEAH.

I WOULD JUST REMIND THE BOARD TO CONSIDER THE EIGHT STANDARDS SET OUT IN SEVEN POINT TO 140 THE ONE I BELIEVE THE APPLICATION IS NOT MEET THOSE STANDARDS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A VARIANCE FROM SHOPFRONT TO SOMETHING DIFFERENT OR FROM OR OR FROM

THE BRIBERY REQUIREMENTS. >> THE BOARD WAS AT SEVEN POINT SEVEN POINT ONE OR EXCUSE ME

SEVEN SEVEN POINT TWO POINT ONE FORTY B IS THE STANDARD. >> MAY I ACTUALLY KNOW HOW IT DOES IF I DIDN'T KNOW THAT? SO WHAT THAT MEANS IS THERE ARE EXTRAORDINARY EXCEPTIONAL CONDITIONS ARE AND ARE NOT A RESULT OF THE ACTIONS OF THE LANDOWNER.

WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS AD NAUSEUM. DOMINION POWER LINE HAS BEEN IN THE FRONT DOOR LAW FIRM TAKING THE CHUNK OUT OF THE FRONT. RIGHT.

THE SC DOJ T WANTING TO LINE UP EGRESS INGRESS ACROSS FROM GRECO.

THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT. AGAIN THERE'S THIS MUCH ELEVATION DIFFERENCE TOWARDS

[02:20:05]

THE REAR OF THIS PROPERTY UP HERE. >> THE NARROWING OF THE PROPERTY FROM FRONT TO BACK. AND WE HAVE MADE SPECIAL EFFORTS TO RETAIN ALL THE AS MANY SPECIMEN LIVE OAKS ON THAT PROPERTY. ONE IS FIFTY NINE INCHES IN

DIAMETER AND WE HAVE WORKED AROUND THE SPECIMEN LIVE OAKS. >> THE VARIANCE WOULD NOT

CONFER SPECIAL PRIVILEGE ON THE ANT LANDOWNER. >> YOU SKIPPED OVER ONE.

WHICH ONE IS THAT? IF YOU DON'T GET THIS VARIANCE HOW ARE YOU EFFECTIVELY PROHIBITED OR ARE UNDULY RESTRICTED THE UTILIZATION OF LAND?

>> I WON'T BE ABLE TO DEVELOP THAT LIKE I WANT BUT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO DEVELOP IT.

>> YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO DEVELOP THE WAY YOU WANT, CORRECT? CORRECT BREATH OF DRY BUT YOU'RE A BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU ARE PROHIBITED FROM USING YOUR LAND. I MEAN NOT PROHIBITING ME FROM USING THE LAND I USE IT FOR SOME QUITE YOU CAN USE IT FOR SOMETHING ELSE WHERE YOU DON'T NEED THAT VARIANCE WHERE I

DON'T NEED THAT FIT THAT VARIANCE CORRECT. >> I WOULD SAY AND TO BE FRANK WITH YOU I MEAN I THINK YOU HERE BECAUSE THE COUNTY TELLS YOU TO BE HERE BUT I HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME JUSTIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH THAT PARTICULARLY CRITERION.

OKAY. >> THE THE VARIANCE PERMIT WOULD NOT CONFIRM OUR SPECIAL PRIVILEGE ON THE LAND OWNER OF THIS GLASS BUILDING FRONT WHATEVER IT IS IS SIMILAR TO

OTHER BUILDINGS IN THAT AREA. >> I KNOW YOU APPARENTLY CAN'T CONSIDER THAT BUT EVERYBODY

ELSE HAS DONE IT. >> THE VARIANCE BUT THAT IS I WOULD SAY THEY DID IT UNDER A DIFFERENT CODE . THAT'S WELL THE CITY HAS DONE IT.

>> THE CITY'S DONE IT. THE AND THE COUNT WELL THE CITY HAS APPROVED A A GLASS WALL

LIKE THIS. >> BUT WE'RE NOT IN THE DAY ANYWAY.

GOOD. IS IT THE MINIMUM NECESSARY? >> YES.

IS IT IN VARIOUS PERMIT IS IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE PRESERVES SPIRIT AND IS CONSISTENT WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. I BELIEVE IT IS. I'VE MET THE DEVELOPMENT CODE IN MY OPINION. I AGAIN BELIEVE IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IT CONNECTS THE NORTHERN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS TO AN AFFINITY FOR COFFEE . I DO RESPECT THE NICE LADY WHO IS UP HERE BEFORE ABOUT TRAFFIC BUT I ACTUALLY TEND TO DISAGREE WITH HER ANALYSIS. SO RIGHT NOW PEOPLE HAVE WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT SPECIAL USE STUFF RIGHT NOW. >> LET'S GO AHEAD.

OKAY. SO GET IT. YEAH.

SO IT'S CONNECTED WITH THE PEDESTRIAN AND THEN THE THE THE VARIANCE PERMIT WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF PERSONS RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> ALL MY NEIGHBORS HAVE EITHER APPROVED IT OR NOT OBJECTED TO IT BE INJURIOUS TO THE LAND OR

IMPROVEMENT IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. >> I'M PROTECTING THE TREES.

>> OTHERWISE BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE. TO THE CONTRARY, I THINK IT WOULD BE AN ASSET TO THE PUBLIC TO HAVE THIS HERE BECAUSE OF THE THE REASONS THAT I'VE

OUTLINED. >> THAT'S IT. >> LET'S STILL HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT ONE CRITERION ABOUT PROHIBITED UNREASONABLY RESTRICTED FROM UTILIZATION OF THE PROPERTY. THERE ARE PROBABLY A SLEW OF OTHER USES TO WHICH YOU CAN PUT THIS PROBABLY THAT YOU DON'T NEED A VARIANCE BUT THEY WOULD ALL HAVE THAT THAT GLASS.

>> RIGHT RIGHT THERE AND I'LL NEED THAT THOSE QUESTIONS. >> BUT BUT IF THE IF THE COUNTY SAID NO THERE AND I CAN GIVE YOU INTERPRETATION I THINK YOU NEED YOU NEED TO CONSIDER MAYBE TALK TO MR. WAGNER ABOUT THIS. GO BACK TO HIM AND SAY YOU DON'T HAVE ANY RIGHT TO REFUSE

TO GIVE ME AN INTERPRETATION BECAUSE I DO. >> EVEN THOUGH YOU WERE HERE DOING WHAT THE COUNTY TOLD YOU ,I DO THINK IT'S FOR PROPERTY HERE IN THE CONTEXT OF AN

APPEAL. >> I SAID EVEN THOUGH HE'S HERE DOING WHAT THE COUNTY TOLD HIM TO DO, I THINK HE PROBABLY IS MORE PROPER. THE APPEAL OF AN INTERPRETATION IS PROBABLY THE MORE PROPER CONTEXT TO BE HERE WHICH THEN KIND OF BACK UP IN FRONT OF YOU AT. BUT THEN YOU OUGHT TO WORRY ABOUT THESE CRITERIA.

I DON'T NEED IT WHERE I NEEDED TO BE. ALL RIGHT.

>> SO THIS. >> WE WERE THERE APPROVED THIS VARIANCE.

WOULD IT RUN THROUGH EVEN IF THEY DIDN'T DO A DRIVE THROUGH? BECAUSE IT'S BASED ON THE CONFIGURATION WITH THE DRIVE THROUGH IS WHY THEY'RE ONE OF THEIR HARDSHIPS AND WHAT WE HAD. BUT THE SPECIAL USE HASN'T EVEN BEEN APPROVED YET.

RIGHT. SO IF THE SPECIAL USE WASN'T APPROVED, COULD YOU BUILD A

[02:25:02]

BUILDING WITHOUT THE STORE FRONT OR THAT THEY'RE ALL THE ON THAT AREA? THERE ARE ALL SORTS. I MEAN I'M JUST NOT SEEING WHAT WE'RE DOING.

THE ANSWER MAKES SENSE TO GO TO THE SPECIAL USE THAT'S INTO OUR ON THIS AND THEN COME BACK AND DECIDE ON THE FRONT. I FEEL LIKE WE'RE BACKWARDS. YEAH, I MEAN I'M HAPPY TO DO

THAT. >> I'M NOT SURE IF WE CAN GO TO THE SPECIAL USE WITHOUT SATISFYING WHY THIS APPLICATION ? IT WAS A SEPARATE APPLICATION.

THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT CONNECTED. >> I MEAN I WOULDN'T HAVE A PROBLEM PUT THIS ON THE TABLE FOR A WHILE AND TAKING THE SEPARATE APPLICATION AT ANY

RATE WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AND VARY A VARIANCE. >> IF I MAY.

>> HERE WE KEEP SAYING DRIVE THROUGH AND IT'S CLEAR IN THIS THING THAT THE DRIVE THROUGH IS IN THE BACK IN THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. THIS IS JUST A DRIVEWAY.

IS IT NOT ARRESTED? SO WHY DO WE KEEP CALLING IT THE DRIVE THROUGH?

IT'S NOT A DRIVE THROUGH. >> IT'S A DRIVEWAY. >> EXACTLY.

THAT'S WHY I DON'T WHERE BECAUSE I WAS JOE. >> I MEAN BACK.

MOVING ON TO THE SPECIAL USE THIS DRIVE THROUGH IS IN THE REAR AND OUTSIDE OF THE

BUILDING. >> WELL, DRIVE THROUGH WHICH IS WHAT WE ALL DRIVE THROUGH IS DIFFERENT THAN IN DRIVEWAY BECAUSE DRIVE THROUGH YOU'RE GOING TO STOP MAKE AN ORDER,

PICK IT UP AS IT HAPPENS TO USE THE DRIVEWAY. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

THAT'S GOT TO BE STOPPED IN INVOLVED. >> SO IS IT IS A PLEDGE OF THE TO PEOPLE LIST UNTIL WE HAVE IT GO TO ITEM TO GO TO ESPECIALLY USE.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I COULD RESPOND TO THE CRISIS OF THOSE OR GET TOO FAR REMOVED FROM IT

. >> JUSTICE TO THOSE STANDARDS FOR THE VARIANCE I'LL ADDRESS THE ONES THAT THERE ARE ISSUES WITH THAT SUBSECTION B THE EXTRAORDINARY AND EXCEPTIONAL CONDITIONS REFERRED TO IN SUBSECTION A ABOVE ARE NOT THE RESULT OF THE ACTIONS OF THE LANDOWNER ARE THE CONDITIONS HERE ARE THE RESULT OF THE APPLICANT'S ACTIONS THE APPLICANT ACQUIRED THIS PROPERTY OR TWO POINT TWO THREE FIVE ACRES WHICH INCLUDED THIS PROPERTY DECEMBER 20 20 SUBDIVISION PLAN WAS PREPARED PROPERTY ON MARCH 6 THIS YEAR AND THEN POINT NINE SIX THREE ACRES OF THE ORIGINAL TWO POINT TWO THREE FIVE ACRES WAS SOLD IN JUNE 3RD OF 2021 AND SO THE APPLICANTS CLAIMING THAT PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE DEP LOT DOESN'T ALLOW FOR THE APPROPRIATE TYPE OF DRIVE THROUGH BUT THE APPLICANT ALSO SOLD OFF THE BACK PART WHICH WOULD HAVE GIVEN HIM MORE DEPTH TO DO APPROPRIATELY INCLUDE THAT DRIVE THROUGH DO WHAT MR. WILLIAMS WAS SAYING AS TO SUBSECTION C THERE THIS AMOUNTS AND THE VARIANCE EFFECT OF EFFECTIVELY PROHIBITING OR UNREASONABLY RESTRICTING THE

UTILIZATION OF THE LAND. >> IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THERE ARE MANY MANY USES THAT BE MADE IN THIS LAND OTHER THAN A DRIVE THROUGH THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF DRIVE THROUGH.

>> IT'S JUST THAT MR. TRASK WANTS TO BE CHOSEN FOR THIS PARTICULAR USE CODE DOESN'T ALLOW FOR WHATEVER PARTICULAR USE A LANDOWNER WANTS TO USE IT FOR JUST KEEPS KEEPS THE COUNTY FROM DISALLOWING ANY USE LEAVES D THE VARIOUS PERMANENT NOT CONFERRING SPECIAL PRIVILEGE I

BELIEVE SPECIAL PRIVILEGE WOULD BE CONFERRED HERE. >> OTHER APPLICANTS I DON'T SEE WHY THEY WOULD RECEIVE TREATMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW SOMETHING THAT IS NOT

CONFORMING LIKE THIS AND AS SUCH I AM VERY CALM. >> IT IS HARMONY WITH GENERAL PURPOSE AND INTENT DEVELOPMENT CODE AND PREFER PRESERVES ITS SPIRIT.

>> IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION THREE POINT TO POINT ONE TEN A WHICH GOES THE PURPOSE OF THE T FOR N C ZONE IT'S INTENDED TO INTEGRATE VIBRANT MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL ENVIRONMENTS INTO NEIGHBORHOODS PROVIDING ACCESS DAY TO DAY WALKING DISTANCE SERVING AS A

[02:30:04]

FOCAL POINT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> THIS IS NOT THAT KIND OF MAIN STREET COMMERCIAL THAT IS INTENDED I BELIEVE APPLICATION FAILS ON THAT POINT AS WELL THAT TO A CERTAIN SECTION H WELL IT'S CONSISTENT WITH C WITH A COMPREHENSIVE

PLAN LIKE THANK YOU. >> IF I MAY READ VERY BRIEFLY I PROMISE YOU KNOW A COUPLE

OF POINTS. >> SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE BACK PIECE POSSIBLE I CAN GET INTO UNION DESIGN BUILD UP HERE AND TELL YOU WOULDN'T MATTER THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH THE BACK. THESE IT RELATES THIS BECAUSE OF THE ELEVATION BECAUSE OF THE FIVE FOOT AND EVERYTHING ELSE WE CAN TALK ABOUT. SO WHAT GIVES YOU WITH IT IS NEVER THE STORAGE PEOPLE CAME HOME AND SAID WELL WE WON'T NEED ACCESS, WE WON'T NEED CONNECTIVITY, WE WON'T NEED ANYTHING. COULD WE BUY IT FROM YOU SO WE CAN EXPAND OUR BUSINESS? PERFECT. IT WORKED OUT IT WAS A MARRIED LADY. SO TO SIT HERE AND ARGUE THAT SOMEHOW HE COULD HAVE GONE BACK THERE WHEN THE ENGINEERING OF THE DESIGN PEOPLE HAVE TOLD YOU CANNOT BECAUSE OF ALL OF THESE FACTORS RELATING TO LANDS. RIDICULOUS.

YES. THERE ARE OTHER THINGS OUT THERE.

I KNOW THEY MAY SEEM WILLIAMS BUT THE NEW TYPE OF BELL IS BUILT THE SAME NAME WHEN YOU COME IN HERE YOU GO AROUND TO THE BACK AND YOU COME THROUGH THE FRONT AND YOU GO OUT FOR THE MAIN SEA ISLAND PARKWAY THAT'S NEW CONSTRUCTION. IT ILLUSTRATES THE POINT OF YOU HAVE YOUR BODY AND I'M NOT SAYING WHAT IS RIGHT AND WHAT IS WRONG AND YOU HAVE ANOTHER BODY OVER IN THE CITY DOING DIFFERENT THINGS AND SO YOU'RE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE A

PATCHWORK ON LADY'S ISLAND. >> THERE ISN'T A SINGLE THING THAT RIGHT NOW IS BUILT OUT THERE THAT PROMOTES PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC ON SEA ISLAND PARKWAY. NOTHING.

THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT ARE BUILT MAYBE T4 OR C THAT LOOKED LIKE IT WOULD BUT IT'S NOT PROMOTED OUT THERE. THIS WILL AT LEAST PROMOTE SOME PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC COMING IN FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD BACK BEHIND. THEY CAN GET BACK IN THERE.

THERE'S NOT ANOTHER PLACE YOU CAN DO THAT AND YOU CAN'T CROSS THE STREET.

MY OFFICE IN ISLAND SIX PROFESSIONAL VILLAGE FOR THE HECK OF IT.

>> MY STAFF'S EXCITED. THEY CAN ACTUALLY WALK OVER TO GET A CUP OF COFFEE OR TO DO SOMETHING ELSE OR GET LUNCH. BUT IT'S JUST RIDICULOUS TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THIS GRAND PLAN. THAT SHIP SAILED AND I UNDERSTAND THE POINT.

THE POINT IS WARMING IN ITS THAT SHIPS TO. AND IT'S NEVER GOING TO BE A WALKING COMMUNITY AS LONG AS THE SPEED LIMIT IS WHAT IT IS. AS LONG AS IT'S FOUR LANES AND I PROJECT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SOME MORE LIGHTS IN THERE. IT'S MORE TROUBLE IN THERE.

BUT HE'S TRYING TO DO IT. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ASKED HIM TO DO AND KEEP THOSE DRIVEWAYS IN THERE AND I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE VARIANCE.

I'M GOING BEYOND THAT. BUT I JUST WANTED TO RESPOND TO A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT MR. IT IS AT THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD TO CONTINUE WITH ITEM. YES.

HOLD ON A MINUTE WITH THE VARIOUS MOVED TO THE TABLE THE VAGARIES OF GO TO ESPECIALLY USE THE SPECIAL. I AGREE THAT OKATIE GOING ON A VARIANCE.

MAJORITY RULE IS OK. ALL THE PEOPLE OF TABLE AN ITEM TWELVE AND MOVING ON TO ITEM 14 SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND. ALL RIGHT. SO THE MAJORITY RULES ON THAT ONE. CHAIRMAN ASK FOR A FIVE MINUTE RECESS.

OK. >> THANK YOU. CURRENTLY WE'RE

[14. Mr. Graham Trask is requesting a Special Use Permit to construct a Drive-thru Restaurant in the T4 Neighborhood Center Zoning District. Drive-thru Restaurants are allowed in the zoning district as a Special Use. Property is located at 131 Sea Island Parkway and is zoned T4 Neighborhood Center (T4NC). ]

AND AGAIN LIKE I SAID, WE GO TO MOVE TO ITEM 14 AND WE'LL RETURN TO ITEM TWELVE THIRTEEN

WHICH IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT. >> ONCE WE ARE DONE WITH ITEM 14 15 SO GRAB TRASK IS REQUESTING A SPECIAL PERMIT GOOD CONSTRUCTIVE DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANT IN A T4 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER. YOU CAN COME FOR GRAHAM WITH A SPECIAL USE.

I'M REQUESTING A SPECIAL USE FOR DRIVE THRU AND THE T FOR IN C PER.

>> THREE POINT ONE POINT SIX ZERO CONSOLIDATED USE TABLE COFFEE SHOP WITH DRIVE THROUGH FACILITIES ARE A SPECIAL USE WITH THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC USE CONDITIONS WHICH APPLY TO THE CODE OF CONVENTIONAL THE TEETH FOR NC TRANS SEX ZONE AND NOT A CONVENTIONAL ZONE WHICH IS

[02:35:08]

IMPORTANT TO NOTE. >> NEVERTHELESS OUR PROPOSED SITE PLAN MEETS THESE REQUIRED MONTHS FOR THE CONVENTIONAL ZONE EVEN THOUGH WE'RE IN TRANSACT.

THE DRIVE THRU CONFIGURATION DRIVE THRU SHALL BE LOCATED TO THE SIDE OR AT THE REAR OF THE BUILDING IN SHELBY DESIGNED SO THAT PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IS ENSURED.

OUR DRIVE THRU IS AT THE REAR. THE SITE THERE IS A LOCATION ON A CORNER LOT.

>> WE'RE NOT ON A CORNER LOT IT'S IN THE ROOF IF COVERED THE ROOF OVER THE DRIVE THRU SHALL BE OF A COMPLEMENTARY ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN AS THE DESIGN COVERING THE PRIMARY PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE. THERE IS NO ROOF OVER THE DRIVE THROUGH TALK BOXES TALK BOXES AT DRIVE THROUGH FACILITY SHELBY SCREENED BY A SOUND BARRIER SUCH AS LANDSCAPING A

FENCE OR A MASONRY WALL. >> WE HAVE STACKING LANE REQUIREMENTS THE STACKING LANE SHE'LL BE A MINIMUM OF 12 FEET IN WIDTH AND PROVIDE FOR THE STACKING OF AT LEAST FIVE VEHICLES ONE BYPASS LANE A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET IN WIDTH SHE'LL BE PROVIDED WE HAVE THAT IN FACT OUR STACKING LANE COULD PROBABLY ACCOMMODATE NORTH OF 20 VEHICLES.

>> THAT'S WHAT WE'RE REFERRING TO THE CBO A SLIGHTLY EXHIBIT BY WARD EDWARD DATED OCTOBER 7, 2021. UPDATE THE QUESTIONS FOR ME NOW .

NO, I HAVEN'T YET FROM THE COUNTY. THANK YOU SIR.