* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:03] TO CALL THIS WEDNESDAY, MAY THE 25TH PLAINTIFF COMMISSION TO ORDER, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL PLEASE? COMMISSIONER AMANDA JACKSON DENMARK HERE. MR. CHARLIE WHITMORE, MR. KATHLEEN DUNKIN HERE. MS. JENNER, RICH DELCOR COMMISSIONER, JASON STEWART. SHINAR JIM FLYNN COMMISSIONER. LYDIA DEPAUL HERE. UM, NOTICE REGARDING ADJOURNMENT, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL NOT HEAR NEW ITEMS AFTER 9:30 PM UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS FOR NINE 30 MAY BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OR AN ADDITIONAL MEETING DATE AS DETERMINED BY THE COMMISSION MEMBERS NOTICE REGARDING PUBLIC COMMENTS. EVERY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO IS RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK SHALL ADDRESS THE CHAIRMAN. AND IN SPEAKING AVOID DISRESPECT TO THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS COUNT STAFF AND OTHER MEMBERS THAT ARE SPEAKING STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. WHEN SPEAKING FOR THE RECORD COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. MAY I HAVE AN ADOPTION [III. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA] OF THE AGENDA? ANY FURTHER DISCUSSIONS? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. HOW ABOUT, UM, THE ADOPTION [IV. ADOPTION OF MINUTES] OF THE MINUTES FROM LAST MEETING? I HAVE A MOTION. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, AYE. PUBLIC COMMENTS. [V. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA] FOR THOSE OF YOU HAVE COMMENTS PERTAINING TO AN AGENDA ITEM BEFORE THE COMMISSION THIS EVENING, YOU WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT BEFORE THE COMMISSION VOTES ON THE ITEM. YOU'RE WELCOME TO HOLD YOUR COMMENTS UNTIL THEN, OR VOICE YOUR COMMENT AT THIS TIME. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME? ARE THEY REGARDING THIS TOPIC? ONE IS WHOEVER THAT IS. DO THEY WANT TO SPEAK NOW OR WAIT UNTIL GOOD EVENING? MY NAME IS . I LIVE IN ISLAND WEST. UH, I JUST WANT ADDRESS A COUPLE OF QUICK. MOST OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD WERE ASKED ANSWERED BY, UH, I WAS WAITING FOR AN ANSWER FROM KIM JONES. I'M NOT SURE, UH, THE WIT WHICH WAY THE WATER RUNOFF FOR THEIR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS GOING. I SEE THE LITTLE GLOOM, BUT I DON'T SEE WHICH WAY THE WATER RUNOFF IS. THE WHOLE REASON WHY WE ASKED YOU A QUESTION IS THAT AREA, MOST OF THE RUNOFF COMES THROUGH ISLAND WEST. IF YOU LOOK AT THE GOLDMAN ON BOTTLED WATER, THAT'S STILL COMES THROUGH IN WEST AND EXITS THAT WHAT THEY CALL A EAST. UH, SO WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE GOING TO BE SEEING MORE WATER, UH, THE OTHER ONE IS ON THE COMMERCIAL SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. IN MY UNDERSTANDING, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE DEVELOPED FOR ABOUT, UH, UH, UNTIL THEY'RE BOUGHT PHASE TWO AND THREE, THEY'RE GOING TO DO ONE FIRST, BUT THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY DROPS UP, BACKS UP TO A COUPLE OF HOMEOWNERS. I KNOW IT WAS GOING TO BE A 50 FOOT BUSTLE QUEST THAT THEY PUT IN A PRIVACY FENCE AND CENTRAL THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE NORMALLY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, THEY HAVE DUMPSTERS AND EVERYTHING, YOU KNOW, BEHIND THE BUILDINGS AND MAKE SURE A LOT OF NOISE. SO WE'D LIKE TO REQUEST EVENTUALLY GOT EVERYTHING PITCH, BLOCKING OUT THE HOMES. IS THERE SOMEONE ELSE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK NOW OR WAIT, CAN I DO MY THING? IT'S MORE GENERIC. IT'S NOT REALLY TO, AND IF WE CAN JUST MAKE SURE THAT ANYBODY HAS PUBLIC COMMENT STATES THEIR NAME AND ADDRESS JUST FOR OUR RECORDS AND ADDRESS. MY NAME IS CAROL CRUTCHFIELD AND I AM THE DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES, PLANNING CONSTRUCTION WITH THE BEAVER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT. SO MY ADDRESS IS 2,900 MAIN POINT BOULEVARD B FOR SOUTH CAROLINA. ANYWAY, AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF TO SPEAK ABOUT ANY NEW PROJECTS THAT CREATE RESIDENTIAL HOUSING. TODAY. THERE ARE SIX SCHOOLS OUT OF THE 11 IN BLUFFTON THAT ARE CURRENTLY OVER CAPACITY. THE REMAINING FIVE SCHOOLS ARE HEADING TOWARDS BEING AT OR OVER THEIR PROGRAMMATIC CAPACITY. AT THIS TIME, THE BUFORD COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT DOES NOT HAVE THE FUNDING TO ADDRESS THE CAPACITY PROBLEMS IN BLUFFTON. IF YOU FOR COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO SPORT ANY NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SCHOOL, AGE CHILDREN IN THIS AREA. THANK YOU. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY OLD BUSINESS? OH, OKAY. WELL THEN WE'LL HAVE ONE MORE PUBLIC COMMENT. [00:05:02] YES. MY NAME'S SCOTT CROSBY. I LIVE AT 12 PEPPER HALL PLANTATION DRIVE, WHICH MY PROPERTY IS INVOLVED WITH THE INTERSECTION THAT'S BEING REDONE RIGHT NOW. I'M DIRECTLY ACROSS THE ROAD FROM THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE AWARE OF THE 850 HOMES THAT ARE ALREADY PROPOSED FOR THE INTERSECTION, WHICH IS THE REASON WHY IT'S BEING REDONE RIGHT NOW, BUT Y'ALL ARE TALKING ABOUT HAVING A THOUSAND HOMES PLUS COMMERCIAL SPACE BEING TIED INTO ONE INTERSECTION AND UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A BACK ENTRANCE TO IT AS WELL. BUT I COULDN'T EVEN GET HERE IN TIME JUST BECAUSE OF ALL THE TRAFFIC AT ONE 70 AND 2 78, WHICH IS LESS THAN A QUARTER OF A MILE FROM THIS INTERSECTION. I THINK Y'ALL REALLY NEED TO PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT IN HOW Y'ALL ARE GOING TO PLAN HOW PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GET IN AND OUT OF HERE. THE DANGERS INVOLVED IN IT, NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT IT'S LESS THAN A QUARTER OF A MILE FROM THE HEADWATERS OF THE OCONEE RIVER BEAVER COUNTY HAS DONE A HORRIBLE JOB OF MANAGING THE WATER RUNOFF ON THE GRAY'S PROJECT. THAT'S NEXT DOOR TO ME, I HOPEFULLY Y'ALL WILL DO A BETTER JOB OF THAT WITH THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY OLD NEW BUSINESS, [VII.1. Headwaters at Bluffton (Master Plan Amendment):] THE HEADWATERS AT BLUFFTON, I REQUEST BY NATHAN LONG OF THOMAS AND HUTTON ON BEHALF OF SOUTHEASTERN DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES FOR APPROVAL OF THE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT, THE AMENDMENT WILL REPLACE THE CURRENT MASTER PLAN LAYOUT WHEN THEY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO INCLUDE UP TO 270 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS, THE PHASE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RELOCATED HAMPTON PARKWAY AS APPROXIMATELY 16.1 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL OUT PARCELS LOCATED ALONG THE RAIL LINE, HAMPTON PARKWAY. DAN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CONNECT THIS IS A MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT FOR A HEADWATERS AT BLUFFTON. VERY GOOD. GOT IT. FIGURED IT OUT OVER YOU. THIS IS AN AERIAL SHOWING, SHOWING THE, UH, LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY AND, UH, W WE'RE BOUNDED TO THE PROPERTIES BOUNDED TO THE WEST BY BUFORD COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY. THAT'S WITHIN THE BUCK, WALTER PUD TO THE SOUTH AND TO THE EAST BY THE ISLAND WEST DEVELOPMENT AND GOLF CLUB TO THE NORTH. IT'S FOUNDED BY A US 2 78, WHICH IS FORD ISLAND ROADS. AND ABOVE THAT, THE PROPERTY THAT'S ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF YOU, OF US 2 78 IS, UH, WITHIN UNINCORPORATED BUFORD COUNTY. UH, THE REQUESTED CHANGE. THIS, THIS APPLICATION IS PREPARED BY THOMPSON HUTTON FOR THE APPLICANT, SOUTHEASTERN DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES WITH AUTHORIZATION OF THE PROPERTY OWNER HTTP BLUFFTON, AND THEY'RE REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER PLAN FOR BUCK WALTER COMMONS HALF-TON PARKWAY AT HIGHWAY 2 78, LOCATED IN THE BUCK. WALTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IS THERE'LL BE A RENAME WITH THIS MASTER PLAN IT'LL BE REFERRED TO AS HEADWATERS AT BLUFFTON. UH, MORE SPECIFICALLY THE AMENDMENT INCLUDES AMENDING THE CURRENTLY APPROVED MASTER PLAN THAT CONSISTS OF A MAJOR GROCERY ANCHOR SUPPORTING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND ADDITIONAL GENERAL COMMERCIAL OUT PARCELS WITH A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT TO INCLUDE UP TO 270 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS, THE PHASE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RELOCATED HAMPTON PARKWAY, AS WELL AS SEVERAL COMMERCIAL OUT PARCELS LOCATED ALONG THE RAIL LINE HAMPTON PARKWAY, UH, TO THE LEFT IS A GRAPHIC SHOWING THE CURRENTLY APPROVED MASTER PLAN AND TO THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN. THIS IS THE CURRENT EXISTING MASTER PLAN. HERE IS THE A HARRIS TEETER, UH, LABELED HARRIS TEETER, BUT IT'S A MAJOR GROCERY STORE WITH A JOINING OUT PART WITH THE JOINING COMMERCIAL AND OUT PARCELS ALONG THE FRONTAGE AND OUT PARCELS HERE. THIS CONSTITUTES PHASE ONE OF THE CURRENTLY APPROVED MASTER PLAN. THIS IS THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN. I'VE ROTATED IT. SO TO THE RIGHT IS YOUR NORTH. SO IT MATCHES UP WITH THE CURRENT MASTER PLAN AND I WAS ABLE TO BRING IT UP BIGGER ON THE SCREEN. UM, IT'S A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING UP TO 270 MULTI-FAMILY UNITS. AS I REFERENCED, THERE'S A 15 FOOT BUFFER ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE AND A 50 FOOT BUFFER SHOWING ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE. AND THE EAST PROPERTY LINE TO THE NORTH IS ALSO A 50 FOOT BUFFER. THIS IS ALSO WITHIN 500 FEET, ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 500 FEET OF HIGHWAY 2 78 IS SUBJECT TO THE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY AND REQUIRES A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THAT. UM, THE MULTIFAMILY [00:10:01] DEVELOPMENT IS PROPOSED TO HAVE TWO ACCESS POINTS. WE'LL SHOW THEM HERE, ONE TO THE NORTH THAT WOULD GET OUT ONTO 2 78. THIS IS EXISTING ACCESS TO 2 78 RIGHT HERE. SO THIS WOULD BE ONE ACCESS POINT THE SECOND. AND THIS IS A GATED ACCESS POINT WITH A GATE HERE AND A GATE HERE. THE SECOND ACCESS POINT WOULD BE TO THE SOUTH, AND THIS IS AN EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY IT'S BEING PROPOSED TO BE A GRAVEL DRIVE THAT GETS OUT TO HAVE BEEN PARKWAY. THIS, THIS WOULD NOT ALLOW RESIDENTS OUT. IT'S ACTUALLY FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES ONLY. UH, THE, THE, UH, IN WE MOVE ON TO THE PHASING PLAN. THEY, THE PHASING PLAN, A PHASE ONE WOULD BE THE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND TWO COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT SUPPORTS BOTH OF THEM. SO THAT'S MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT HERE, COMMERCIAL AT THIS CORNER AND COMMERCIAL HERE. THE SECOND PHASES WOULD INCLUDE AN EXPANSION OF HAMPTON PARKWAY ACCESS DRIVE BY 500 FEET AND BRING IN ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. SO THAT WOULD BE PHASE TWO HERE, EXPANDING THE HAMPTON PARKWAY DRIVE ACROSS THE FRONT OF IT AND BRINGING IN THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S HERE. PHASE THREE WOULD BE THE REMAINING COMMERCIAL OUT PARCELS AND COMPLETION OF THE HAMPTON PARKWAY. SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE ALL OF THOSE COMMERCIAL THAT RUNS ALONG WITH THE SOUTH SIDE OF PROPOSED HAMPTON PARKWAY EXTENSION, AND ALSO BRINGS IN THIS COMMERCIAL PIECE RIGHT HERE. UH, THIS IS THE PROPOSED PRE PLAN. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE APPLICANT REVISE THE ORIGINAL TREE PLAN. UM, AND, AND THIS ONE DOES A LITTLE BIT BETTER JOB OF SAVING SIGNIFICANT TREES. THEY SUBMITTED A TREE ANALYSIS WITH THIS APPLICATION THAT IDENTIFIED, ANALYZE ALL OF THE TREES WITHIN THE PHASE ONE DEVELOPMENT. UH, I BELIEVE THE SCOPE OF THE, OF IT WAS JUST THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT HERE, UH, AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED THE, BY THE APPLICANT PHASE. ONE OF THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT IDENTIFIES THE SOUTHERN POINT OF ACCESS TO THE POLLS MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AS EMERGENCY GATED ACCESS ONLY. AND IT WILL CONNECT WITH THE EXISTING HAMPTON PARKWAY VIA GRAVEL, SECONDARY EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY. SO, AS I STATED EARLIER, IT, IT WOULDN'T HAVE RESIDENTS WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO COME IN AND OUT OF THIS. THIS WOULD BE EMERGENCY GATED ONLY. SO THE SECOND ACCESS POINT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES ONLY, UM, STAFF HAS A RECOMMENDATION TO UPDATE THE PLAN AND THE NARRATIVE TO UPGRADE THE SOUTHERN ACCESS FROM GRAVEL EMERGENCY ACCESS TO PAVED FULL ACCESS DESIGNED TO THE STANDARDS OF THE BUFORD COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ORDINANCE 90 SLASH THREE. SO IN OTHER WORDS, UH, OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO, TO FULLY BUILD THIS SECTION UP, UP TO UP TO THE X, THE SOUTHERN MOST ACCESS POINT, UM, AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED THE PHASE ONE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT PROVIDES ONLY ONE SIDEWALK CONNECTION FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE FUTURE HAMPTON PARKWAY. THAT SIDEWALK CONNECTION IS AT THE SOUTHERN SECTION. WELL, A STAFF IS RECOMMENDING IS UPDATE THE PLAN AND NARRATIVE TO SHOW NORTHERN CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN SIDEWALK CONNECTION GOT ARROWS SHOWN ON THE SCREEN, APPROXIMATELY WE'RE WORRIED THE BEST LOCATIONS WOULD BE TO TIE INTO THE, TO THE SIDEWALK THAT WILL BE RUNNING ALONG HAMPTON PARKWAY, UH, REVIEW CRITERIA. THIS IS, UH, COMES OUT OF THE SECTION 3.9 0.3 B THE TWO HIGHLIGHTED SECTIONS 3 9, 3 C AND 3 93 G ARE TWO THAT STAFF HAS SAID ARE NOT BEING MET 3 9, 3 C. THE FINDING IS THE REQUEST IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON ZONING DEVELOPMENT ORDERS ORDINANCE THAT APPLIES TO THE BUCK, WALTER P D THE PLAN AND NARRATIVE NEED TO BE UPDATED TO UPGRADE THE SOUTHERN ACCESS FROM GRAVEL EMERGENCY ACCESS TO FULL PAVEMENT, TO FULL, TO PAVED FULL ACCESS DESIGNED TO THE STANDARDS OF BUFORD COUNTY ZONING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, ORDINANCE 90 SLASH THREE, AND SECTION 3 9, 3 G DEMONSTRATION OF INNOVATIVE SITE PLANNING TECHNIQUES THAT IMPROVE UPON THE STANDARDS AND OTHER ALLOWABLE TOWN OF BLUFFTON ZONING DISTRICTS. WITH THE PURPOSE OF ENHANCING THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON HELP SAFETY AND WELFARE. THE FINDING OF THE PLANT DOES NOT INCLUDE INNOVATIVE SITE PLANNING TECHNIQUES THAT ENHANCE THE TOWNS, HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE, UM, UH, SAME, SAME FIRST COMMENT, WHICH IS THE PLAN AND NARRATIVE NEED TO BE UPDATED REGARDING THE SOUTHERN ACCESS IN UPDATE THE PLAN AND NARRATIVE TO SHOW A NORTHERN CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN SIDEWALK CONNECTION FROM MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO THE FUTURE HABITAT PARKWAY. [00:15:01] UH, THIS IS A TABLE OF THE REVIEW PROCESS. UH, STEP ONE WAS THE APPLICATION CHECK-IN THAT OCCURRED ON MARCH 11TH, 2021. STEP TWO IS REVIEWED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE THAT OCCURRED ON DECEMBER 8TH, 2021. STEP THREE IS A PLANNING COMMISSION REC UH, PUBLIC HEARING RECOMMENDATION THAT'S TONIGHT, MAY 25TH, AND THEN STEP FOUR WOULD BE YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL AND TOWN COUNCIL IS THE APPROVING AUTHORITY. AND THAT DATE IS TO BE DETERMINED ON IN COMMISSION ACTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION IS RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF APPLICATION WITH CONDITIONS OR RECOMMEND RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT TOWN STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS, UM, APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. TOWN STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 3, 9, 3 OF THE UDL CAN BE MET WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL TO TOWN COUNCIL FOR THE HEADWATERS AT BLUFFTON MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT, AND THERE'S FOUR CONDITIONS AS FOLLOWS, UH, UPDATE THE PLAN AND NARRATIVE TO UPGRADE THE SOUTHERN ACCESS FROM GRAVEL EMERGENCY ACCESS TO PAVE FULL ACCESS DESIGNED TO THE STANDARDS OF BUFORD COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. ORDINANCE 90 SLASH THREE, TWO IS UPDATE THE PLAN AND NARRATIVE TO SHOW A NORTHERN CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN SIDEWALK CONNECTION FROM THE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT TO THE FUTURE. HAMPTON PARKWAY THREE IS PROVIDE A SECOND DUMPSTER LOCATION TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF RESIDENTS LOCATED IN THE SOUTHERN HALF OF THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT, UH, SHOULD HAVE POINTED IT OUT. THEN I CAN BRING IT UP ON THE SCREEN, BUT, UH, THEY'RE ONLY PROVIDING ONE DUMPSTER LOCATION AT THE VERY NORTHERN SIDE OF THE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT. OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO SITE A SECOND ONE THAT WOULD SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE SOUTHERN HALF. AND NUMBER FOUR, THEY SUBMITTED A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WITH, WITH THIS APPLICATION, WE'RE ASKING THAT IT GETS UPDATED, UM, THAT A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SHALL BE PROVIDED PRIOR TO SUBMITTING DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR PHASES TWO AND THREE. SO UPDATE THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS WHEN PHASE TWO COMES IN AND WHEN PHASE THREE COMES IN. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO TRY AND ANSWER THEM. CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE FIRST PAGE THAT WAS HIGHLIGHTED FOR A SECOND? I DIDN'T READ THAT SECOND ONE. I APOLOGIZE TO GO BACK TO HERE. GO NOW, KEEP GOING BACK TO WHERE YOU HAD THE HIGHLIGHTED LINES. THERE WERE THREE PAGES HIGHLIGHTED. SO THAT VERY FIRST ONE. SO KEEP GOING ONE MORE. OH, I'M SORRY. I JUST WANTED TO READ THEM BOTH REAL QUICK. IN THE MEANTIME, DOES THE APPLICANT WANT TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE PROJECT? YES. UM, IF YOU COULD JUST GO BACK TO THE MASTER PLAN, I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD AFTERNOON. MADAM CHAIRMAN MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. MY NAME IS NATHAN LONG. I'M WITH THOMAS AND HUTTON. UM, WE'VE ALSO GOT MARK'S IN AND JOHN LEE HERE WHO WERE WITH SOUTHEASTERN DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES. I THINK Y'ALL ARE FAMILIAR WITH THIS DEVELOPER. THEY'VE DONE A FEW PROJECTS IN THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON. THEY ACTUALLY WORKED ON THE KROGER SUPERCENTER THERE IN BUCK WALTER PLACE, AND THEY ALSO DID ONE HAMPTON LAKE APARTMENTS. UM, SO I THINK THAT BOTH OF THOSE PROJECTS SPEAK TO THE, TO THE QUALITY OF THIS DEVELOPER. UM, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH TOWN STAFF NOW PROBABLY ABOUT EIGHT MONTHS ON THE PLAN. AS DAN MENTIONED, WE'VE MADE SOME REVISIONS, UH, LOOKING AT TREES, UH, REVISING SOME OF OUR PARKING. UH, WE'RE FINE WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS THAT THE TOWN PROPOSED, UM, OR STAFF PROPOSED. WE DID, DID WANT TO ADDRESS A COUPLE OF THOSE. UM, SO I'LL JUST KINDA GO THROUGH THOSE ONE BY ONE. UM, ON THE FIRST ONE, UM, UPDATING THE GRAVEL ACCESS FROM BEING AN EMS ACCESS TO A PAVED ROAD, WE ARE FINE WITH THAT AND, UH, WE'VE PAVED THAT ROAD AND THAT GATE WOULD, INSTEAD OF BEING AN EMS GATE, IT WILL ACTUALLY BECOME ACT A FUNCTIONING KEYCARD GATE FOR THE RESIDENTS. UM, UPON SPEAKING WITH THEM ON, ON THAT, WE FEEL LIKE IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE RESIDENTS TO BE ABLE TO GO SOUTH AS WELL AS EAST WEST ON LEAVING THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, UPDATING THE NARRATIVE FOR THE SIDEWALK, CONNECTIONS, THREE CONNECTIONS. UH, ALSO THINK THAT'S A GREAT THING FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE COMMUNITY AND PROVIDING ACCESS TO THE TRAIL. I DID WANT TO POINT OUT THERE'S ALSO A TRAIL PROPOSED THROUGH THE WETLAND BUFFER THERE. UM, THAT IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE MORE [00:20:01] OF A, JUST A MULCH PATH KIND OF WALKING TRAIL. UM, BUT I DID CHECK THE COVENANTS TODAY AND THAT IS ACTUALLY ALLOWED IN THAT BUFFER. UM, FOR THE SECOND DUMPSTER, I DID WANT TO ADDRESS THAT A LITTLE BIT. UM, WHAT THEY DO IS THEY, AND I KNOW WE LABELED IT AS DUMPSTER ON THE MASTER PLAN, BUT IT'S NOT A DUMPSTER. IT'S A TRASH COMPACTOR THAT THEY SIZE BASED ON THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS. AND THEN LIKE THEY DID IN ONE HAMPTON, LIKE THEY ACTUALLY HAVE A SERVICE THAT'S AVAILABLE TO THE RESIDENTS WHERE THEY WILL ACTUALLY COME GET YOUR TRASH AND TAKE IT TO THE COMPACTOR. UH, THE RESIDENTS ALSO HAVE THE OPTION TO DRIVE THEIR OWN TRASH OVER. HOWEVER, THEY WANT TO TAKE THE TRASH OVER, BUT THE COMPACTOR IS SIZE SUFFICIENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. SO WE WOULD LIKE THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER REMOVING THAT RECOMMENDATION AND JUST HAVING THE ONE TRASH COMPACTOR. UH, THE FOURTH ONE WAS THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS UPDATE WITH PHASES TWO AND THREE THREE. THAT IS HOW THIS WAS PLANNED ORIGINALLY. ANYWAY, UM, WE BROKE THE TRAFFIC STUDY UP INTO ALL THREE PHASES AND KIND OF PROJECTED OUT WHAT SECTIONS OF THE ROAD HAVE TO BE BUILT WITH EACH PHASE. UM, AS YOU MAY BE AWARE, THERE'S A, WHEN THIS WAS REZONED AND ANNEXED INTO THE TOWN, THERE WAS A FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THE PUD, WHICH REQUIRES, UH, THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THE ROAD TO BE BUILT AS TO W TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENTS AS IT'S PROPOSED. SO IN PHASE TWO, FOR INSTANCE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BUILD ADDITIONAL SECTIONS OF THE ROADS, UH, FOR THE FUTURE HAMPTON PARKWAY. AND THEN THE LAST THING I DID WANT TO DO IS REVISIT THE BUFFER ALONG THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PROJECT, UM, WHEN THIS WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED AND THE CURRENT INITIAL MASTER PLAN THAT'S APPROVED WITH THE TOWN, THE BUFFER WAS REDUCED FROM 50 FEET TO 25 FEET ALONG THAT CORRIDOR. AS WE WENT THROUGH WITH THE TOWN TO THE DRT MEETINGS OR THE SRT MEETINGS, UM, THEY MADE THE RECOMMENDATION TO CHANGE THAT TO 50, WHICH WE DID. AND, YOU KNOW, AS I STARTED ANALYZING THIS A LITTLE MORE, I WENT BACK IN AND WAS CHECKING THOSE DISTANCES AND WE ACTUALLY HAVE ABOUT 200 FEET BETWEEN THE EASTERN EDGE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. AND, YOU KNOW, BY THE TIME YOU ADD IN LIKE A 15 FOOT STACKING AND LANDSCAPE BUFFER ADJACENT TO THE RIGHT OF WAY, YOU'RE, YOU'RE PARKING 20 FEET, YOUR 24 FOOT DRIVE OUT ANOTHER 20 FEET OF PARKING FACING THE BUILDING. THEN I USE JUST TO TURN DOWN SIDEWALK WITHOUT EVEN DOING CURB, BUT JUST WHERE THE SIDEWALK ITSELF HAS ONE CONCRETE POUR. SO THE FIVE FEET FOR THAT, THEN YOU'VE GOT YOUR EIGHT FOOT FOUNDATION PLANTINGS REQUIRED ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING. THEN YOU'VE GOT YOUR BUILDING. AND THEN IN THE REAR, YOU'D HAVE YOUR FOUNDATION PLANTINGS AS WELL, AND PROBABLY A 20 FOOT EMS ACCESS STRIVE FOR FIRE PROTECTION. AND THEN I LEFT ABOUT 10 FEET JUST TO TAPER THE GRADES BACK DOWN. AND THAT LEAVES YOU ABOUT 15 FEET FOR BUILDING DEPTH. UM, SO I, I DO SEE WHY THAT WAS REDUCED. UM, THE INITIAL TIME THERE, BASED ON THE DEPTH, WHEN WE TYPICALLY PLAN DEPTH OF COMMERCIAL PARCELS IN VACANT LAND, WE USUALLY DO ABOUT 300 FEET. UM, AND THEN YOUR TYPICAL DEPTH OF THIS RETAIL STRIP CENTER, WHICH IS WHAT I ASSUME THIS WILL BE DUE TO THE, HOW LINEAR THAT PROPERTY IS. WE TYPICALLY USE A 45 TO 60 FOOT DEPTH. LIKE IF YOU LOOK AT BUCK WALTER PLACE, THOSE BUILDINGS ARE PROBABLY 65 FEET DEEP THAT ARE, THAT KIND OF FLANK THE KROGER THERE, JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA. SO EVEN IF, EVEN IF IT WAS WITH THE CURRENT 25 FOOT BUFFER, UM, I BELIEVE WE WOULD HAVE 40 FEET OF BUILDING DEPTH, WHICH ISN'T IDEAL, BUT IT'S, IT'S DOABLE. UM, SO I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT, I GUESS YOUR BUILDINGS COULD BE TURNED, UH, PERPENDICULAR TO THE ROAD AND HAVE PARKING FIELDS IN BETWEEN. UM, BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHY THAT WAS DONE. AND THEN THE SECOND PART WAS JUST THE ADJACENT PROPERTY IS COMMERCIAL. AND I KNOW THERE'S A 50 FOOT PUD BUFFER AROUND ALL THE BUCK, WALTER, UM, WHICH IS IN THAT TEXT, BUT TYPICALLY, BUT, UH, COMMERCIAL, THE COMMERCIAL HAS NO BUFFER. UM, YOU'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, THE PARKING LOT AND THEN THEY'RE PARKING JASON CARS THERE. AND THERE IS A SECTION OF ISLAND WEST ADJACENT TO THIS, BUT IT'S THE DRIVING RANGE. WE ARE PLANNING TO KEEP THE 50 FOOT BUFFER ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE, WHICH IS WHAT'S ADJACENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL HOMES THAT THE GENTLEMAN MENTIONED. SO I WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF BRING THAT BACK UP FOR DISCUSSION AS WELL, WITH THE COMMISSION AND THEN MARK SIN, I THINK WANTED TO JUST SAY A FEW WORDS BEFORE WE ADDRESS ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. WELL, MY NAME IS MARK SIN. I'M OUT OF A GUSTA GEORGIA. I WORK WELL. [00:25:01] I WORK IN OWN PART OWNER OF SOUTH EASTERN DEVELOPMENT. AND JOHN LEE'S HERE WITH ME. THANKS FOR HEARING THIS, UH, TONIGHT. I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS TAKING YOUR TIME TO DO THIS. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE INVESTED IN BLUFFTON. THIS ISN'T OUR FIRST TIME HERE. WE'VE, YOU KNOW, BUCK WALKER. WE, WE BUILT THE HOSPITAL, THE CANCER FACILITY THERE, UM, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE HOSPITAL. AND, UH, AND THEN WE DID, WE BUILT THE KROGER CENTER RETAIL. WE ALSO DID HAMPTON LAKES HERE. AS A MATTER OF FACT, BUFORD COUNTY, I THINK WE SPENT, I MEAN, WE'VE INVESTED OVER 300 AND SOMETHING MILLION DOLLARS IN THE LAST 10 YEARS IN BUFORD COUNTY. CAUSE WE DID SHELTER COVE. WE REDEVELOPED THE SHELTER COVE MALL. WE DID WATERWALK THERE. AND WE ALSO DID THE COURTYARD ON HILTON HEAD. SO THE ONLY REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE THAT'S A LOT OF TAX REVENUE FOR THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND WE'VE ADDED VERY LITTLE KIDS TO THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AS WELL. SO I MEAN, I MEAN, IT'S A LOT OF INVESTMENT HERE. A LOT OF IT, YOU KNOW, EVEN HAMPTON LAKES, THERE'S NOT THAT MANY SCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN LIVE THERE. THEY'RE MOSTLY ONE AND TWO BEDROOMS. SO SIMILAR TO THIS. SO I THINK IN TERMS OF AN INVESTMENT IN THE COMMUNITY, OBVIOUSLY WE, WE FEEL VERY GOOD ABOUT BUFORD COUNTY. AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE TIGHT PROJECTS WE'VE DONE, I THINK WE'VE DONE VERY QUALITY PROJECTS, UM, THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, UM, HAD A VERY GOOD RECEPTION IN TERMS OF, UH, WHAT THEY'VE WARDS THEY'VE WON AND RECOGNITION THEY RECEIVE. SO WE APPRECIATE BEING A PART OF YOUR COMMUNITY. UM, WE EXPECT TO DO A QUALITY JOB HERE. YOU KNOW, WE WILL, WE, WE CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE PROBLEM AT ALL WITH NA I KNOW THE NEIGHBOR MENTIONED A FENCE AND BUFFER, WE, WE WE'LL, WE'LL BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. WE'LL DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO THERE. THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. THAT'S PRETTY STANDARD. UM, AND UH, HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS WILL SEE FIT TO APPROVE THIS PLAN. AS FAR AS THE COMPACTOR GOES, IT IS A TRASH COMPACTOR, WHICH IS THE WAY YOU DO THAT. YOU JUST DON'T SIT THEM OUT THERE LIKE YOU DO DUMPSTERS AND THEY LOOK TERRIBLE, RIGHT? TRASH COMPACTOR, YOU ACTUALLY WALK UP AND PUT YOUR, AND YOU BUILD AROUND IT A BRICK FACILITY WALL. SO IT'S SHELTERED AND HIDDEN. AND, UH, OR IT LOOKS NICE. AT LEAST IT DOESN'T LOOK AT IT BECAUSE YOU PUT IT IN THE FRONT OF YOUR ENTRANCE, YOU PUT IN FRONT OF YOUR GATE, SO YOU WANT IT TO BE ATTRACTIVE. AND THEN YOU GO WALK UP AND YOU PUT YOUR TRASH INTO IT AND IT GETS COMPACTED THERE. AND THEN IT TAKES IS TAKEN OUT PERIODICALLY, BUT NOT EVERY NIGHT, YOU DON'T HEAR THE BANG IN AND ALL THAT. THAT GOES WITH DUMPSTERS A LOT OF TIMES. SO I WOULD SAY THAT, UH, THE ONE COMPACTOR WILL BE SUITABLE. WE DO HAVE, UM, A SERVICE 6:00 PM. YOU, WE COME BY A FEW DAYS A WEEK AND PICK YOUR TRASH UP AND ACTUALLY TAKE IT TO THE DUMPSTER SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE PEOPLE DRIVING AROUND WITH TRASH ON THEIR CARS OR WHATEVER YOU NORMALLY WOULD HAVE AN IMAGE OF. SO, UM, IT DOES HELP US CAUSE WE LIKE TO KEEP UP, YOU KNOW, THE FIZZ OF THE FACILITIES WE HAVE OR A-PLUS AND UM, WE WANT TO KEEP THEM ATTRACTIVE. AND SO I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. I WON'T WASTE ANY MORE OF YOUR TIME TONIGHT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, EITHER JOHN LEE OR MYSELF CAN ANSWER IT. AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO THE COMMISSIONERS. ONE WANTS TO START, KATHLEEN, DO YOU WANT TO START YOUR END? UM, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS AT LEAST TO START. UM, FIRST QUESTION. WHEN WAS THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS DONE FOR THIS PROJECT? UH, I BELIEVE IT WAS, I BELIEVE IT WAS A 2021, RIGHT? WHEN WE WERE SUBMITTING THIS, WE PREPARED IT. YES, IT, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS LOOK AT HOW THIS RELATES TO WHAT'S GOING AT THE A HUNDRED UNITS THAT'S GOING IN ACROSS THE STREET AND THE INFLUENCE THAT MAY ALSO HAVE NO, I DON'T BELIEVE IT. IT, WHAT IT DOES IS COUNTS EXISTING TRAFFIC, PRETTY STANDARD FORMAT FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. I DON'T THINK IT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT FEATURE DEVELOPMENT. I MEAN, UM, THIS QUESTION IS PROBABLY MORE, UM, THIS MIGHT BE A KEVIN ANCHORED QUESTION IN TERMS OF THE CONVERSION RATE OF THIS GOING FROM COMMERCIAL TO MULTIFAMILY. HOW DOES THAT WORK IN THE PUD BANK? SO I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO MARK PROBABLY CAN ANSWER THIS A LITTLE BIT BETTER. UM, IT'S, YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY CON THEY'RE NOT CONVERTING COMMERCIAL AND IF YOU, IF YOU COULD HELP ASSIST, BUT I BELIEVE YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND THAT YOU'RE JUST MOVING THEM FROM ONE LOCATION TO ANOTHER, CORRECT. WE HAVE IN THE BUCK WALKER TRACK, WE HAVE THESE 280 UNITS, OR WE'RE ENTITLED TO THEM AS A RESULT OF HAMPTON LAKES. AND THEN WE MOVE THEM ANYWHERE WITHIN THE BUCK WALKER FOR YOU USING SOME OF THE 1200, THERE WERE INITIALLY FOR THE TIME. SURE. THERE, YES. WELL, 600. YOU HAVE, THERE WERE 600 TIMES. WELL IT'S 600 LOCKOUTS COUNTING 1200. YEAH. THIS WOULD BE THE LAST OF THOSE. UM, DOES, HAS THE TOWN APPROVED THAT KEVIN, UH, [00:30:01] UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THOSE, UH, DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ARE FLEXIBLE OVER THE DEVELOPMENT AREA DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AREA. SO TOWN DOWN HAS PROVED IT BECAUSE IT'S A BYLINE TRANSFER WITHIN THE BUCK, WALTER, PLEASE. YES, SIR. SORRY TO, YEAH. SO, SO I MEAN, ACTUALLY THESE UNITS WOULD GO SOMEWHERE WITHIN THE BUCK HALTER TRACK, AND THIS IS WHERE WE'RE TRANSFERRING THEM. AND JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR, THEY DO HAVE RESTRICTED UNITS AT BUCHWALD'S REPLACED OR NOT THOSE RESTRICTED UNITS. WE HAVE ABOUT 600 UNITS THERE THAT WE'RE NOT USING. ARE YOU WILLING TO GIVE THOSE UP AS A PART OF THIS TRANSACTION? WELL, WE HAVE NO WHERE TO USE THEM IN BUCK WALKER, WHETHER WE USE WHERE WE GIVE THEM UP OR NOT, IT'S GOING TO BE KINDA MINGLING. UM, WE'LL PROBABLY, I HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT IT, BUT FRANKLY WE DON'T HAVE, WE DON'T HAVE, LET ME JUST PUT IT THIS WAY. I HAVE NO MORE LAND IN BUCK WALKER. YEAH. BUT IT DOESN'T KEEP SOMEBODY FROM COMING TO YOU IF YOU'RE IN THE FUTURE AND TRYING TO BUY THEM FROM YOU. SO THE MORE WE CAN GET OFF THE BOOKS, THE BETTER IT IS FOR KEEPING DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION. YEAH. I GUESS I GUESS THE BIGGEST THING ON THAT IS IS THAT THERE ACTUALLY IS NO MORE LAND. I DON'T THINK IN BUCHWALD IN THAT BUCK WALKER PLACE, THEY ACTUALLY ARE NOT THAT'S, THAT'S NOT BUCK WALKER, TRACK DEDICATED THAT'S BUCK, WALTER PLACE DEDICATED. OKAY. AND THERE'S NO MORE LAND IN THAT AREA. SO ONE QUESTION I HAVE IS, UH, THE NATURE OF THOSE DEVELOPMENT UNITS BEING TIMESHARES BEFORE, THAT'S CLEARLY NOT STUDENTS GOING TO ELECT STUDENTS WHERE THIS, WHILE IT MAY NOT BE YOUR TARGET AUDIENCE STILL COULD, IS THERE ANY WAY TO HAVE, WELL, EXCUSE ME, IT WASN'T JUST FOR TIMESHARE. THERE'S 1200 UNITS COULD HAVE BEEN, BUT WAS ALSO 600 JUST FOR MULTI-FAMILY. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THESE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN MULTIFAMILY FOR UP TO 600 UNITS. WE USE 300 LOW OVER 300 OF THEM AT HAMPTON LAKES, BUT KATHLEEN JUST, YOU KNOW, IN 2006 IT WAS APPROVED FOR 1200 TIMESHARE UNITS IS LOCKOUT. SO 600 UNITS. THEY DIDN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE TIMESHARES. THAT'S WHAT THE ORIGINAL PROJECT WAS GOING TO BE. AND THEN THEY ENDED UP BUILDING JUST UNDER 300 THERE. IF I REMEMBER, WELL, RIGHT AT THREE LOW, ACTUALLY RIGHT AT 300, 320, ACTUALLY. SO THIS IS THE TWO 80 THERE. YEAH. JUST UNDER 300, STILL FLOATING AROUND THAT CAN GO ANYWHERE ELSE WITHIN BUCK WALTER LICK BY, RIGHT? YES. AND BY THE WAY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I DON'T REALLY HAVE A PROBLEM GIVING THOSE UP. WE CAN FIGURE A WAY TO DO THAT. ACTUALLY, THERE ARE NO USE TO ME AND THOSE UNITS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH BUCHWALD OR PLACE CAMP. I KNOW YOU'RE SAYING THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH BUCHWALD PLACE, BUT I KNOW THAT THERE'S TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS BETWEEN PROPERTIES, BUT THIS IS NOT, THESE ARE UNITS ARE NOT TRANSFERABLE. WELL, THEY'RE NOT, UNLESS YOU ALLOW THEM TO BE, AS I UNDERSTAND, IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. AND THE LAST VIEW AND THE COUNCIL DECIDED FOR SOME REASON THAT YOU WANTED TO ALLOW THEM TO BE, AND THEN ALSO I THINK THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER BUCK WALKER PLACE WOULD HAVE TO AGREE AS WELL. HISTORICALLY, WE MOVE ACTUALLY BEEN OVER THAT JUST, I DON'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOU, BUT WE ACTUALLY BEEN OVER THAT WITH TERRY AND TRYING TO LOOK AT THAT EARLIER ON. AND I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE, THERE WAS SOME ARGUMENT THERE AS TO WHERE THAT'S THE CASE, BUT AS PART OF SO GOOD WITH THAT, KATHLEEN, UM, I'M GOING TO KEEP GOING, OR DO YOU WANT TO GO TO, I THINK MY OTHER COMMENT AND, UM, I APPRECIATED THE EXPLANATION ABOUT THE BUFFER THAT 25 FOOT BUFFER. I AM ONE OF THE, I AGREE WITH STA WELL FIRST I THINK THAT'S OUTSIDE OF OUR PURVIEW, UM, BECAUSE THAT FALLS INTO MORE OF A VARIANCE REQUESTS. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S REALLY SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO BE RICHARD MCCANN IN THIS DISCUSSION TODAY. CAN I ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THAT ABOUT, UM, I THINK IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT THE CURRENTLY APPROVED MASTER PLAN DOES NOT ACTUALLY HAVE A 25 FOOT BUFFER THAT'S APPROVED. IT WAS WRITTEN AS A PROPOSED, WHICH MEANS THAT IT WASN'T ACTUALLY PART OF THE APPROVED MASTER PLAN, IS THAT CORRECT? AND THEY APPROVED INITIAL MASTER PLAN HAS A 25 FOOT BUFFER ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY. FRENCH IT'S DRAWN AS A 50 FOOT. WELL THAT THIS IS THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN. NO, NO I'M TALKING THE OLD, THE ONE THAT WE APPROVED BACK IN OH SEVEN IS DRAWN AS A 50 50. I I'M PRETTY CERTAIN, THE TEXT SAYS IT'S A 25 FOOT BUFFER THERE. I DON'T KNOW. AND WHEN IS THERE A WAY TO FIGURE THAT OUT? THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS THAT'S AN EXTERIOR BOUNDARY OF THE PUD. ISN'T THAT 50 BY RULE. SO UNDER THE, UH, UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THE DOCUMENTS, YES, IT'S A 50 FOOT EXTERIOR BUFFER FOR THE BUD THAT'S THAT IS A TOWN ORDINANCE. AND YOU DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE A VARIANCE THAT NEEDS TO GO THROUGH THE VCA OR THREE-WAY SETTLEMENT [00:35:01] AGREEMENT AMENDMENT, OR PUT AMENDMENT THROUGH TOWN COUNCIL. SO IT MAY BE IN EXISTENCE IN THE ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED. BUT ULTIMATELY THIS IS OPEN THAT BACK UP AND IT'S, IT'S STAFF'S OPINION THAT I OPENING IT BACK UP. IT HAS TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE, AS YOU, MS. DUNCAN SAID, I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED TONIGHT. WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IS GOING TO OCCUR ON THAT PROPERTY YET. SO, YOU KNOW, IT CAN BE SOMETHING LATER ON. WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT WELL. AND HONESTLY, I THINK THAT THAT PROPERTY HAS THERE'S FLEXIBILITY IN HOW IT'S DEVELOPED. I MEAN, THAT'S, THIS ISN'T BEING DEFINED IN AS IT'S CURRENTLY PROPOSED. SO YES, ONE OPTION IS TO TAKE IT AND MAKE IT PARALLEL TO THAT ROAD. BUT ANOTHER IS TO MAKE IT PARALLEL TO 2 78, WHICH CHANGES THE CONFIGURATION ENTIRELY. BUT THAT'S, AGAIN, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DISCUSSED TODAY. I WILL SAY I APPRECIATE THE, UM, STATEMENT OF BEING FLEXIBLE ABOUT ADDING A PRIVACY FENCE, UM, ALONG THAT, THAT, SO THAT'S THE BUFFER. UM, AND I APPRECIATE THE, UH, PROPERTY OWNER THAT CAME BY THAT LIVES ADJACENT TO REQUESTING THAT. SO I THINK THAT THAT WAS A REALLY GREAT, UM, CONVERSATION PIECE TO HAVE. UM, THE OTHER THING I WAS GOING TO SAY, AND I APPRECIATE THAT THE COMPACTOR IS CAPABLE OF THAT HAVE THAT CAPACITY OF TAKING IN, UM, FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE UNITS. UM, AND I APPRECIATE THAT THERE IS A SERVICE FOR THAT. HOWEVER, IF THERE'S NO WAY THAT WE CAN GUARANTEE PROGRAMMING AS A PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. UM, AND SO I'M VERY, I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT PEOPLE TAKING TRASH ON TOP OF THEIR CAR AND DRIVING IT ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, AN ADDITIONAL CONCERN THAT I HAVE ABOUT THIS PROJECT. UM, AND AGAIN, I THINK IT RELATES TO SAFETY IS, UM, REGARDING THE TRAFFIC FLOW. UM, SO IT'S NOT JUST THAT EMERGENCY ACCESS, BUT IT'S, IF YOU'RE UP AT THE NORTH SIDE OF THIS PROPERTY AND YOU WANT TO EXIT THROUGH THE SOUTH, YOU'RE NOW DRIVING THROUGH A PARKING LOT WHERE THERE COULD BE KIDS RUNNING AROUND. AND I MEAN, I LIVE IN BLUFFTON PARK WHERE IT'S A DRAG STRIP AND THIS IS NOT CURVY IN ANY WAY, KATHLEEN, THEY ARE GOING TO GATE IT. SO A COUPLE OF POINTS AT THE FAR END, THAT'S WHERE YOU STOP. BUT THE REST OF IT, WHERE YOU GO ALL THE WAY THROUGH, UM, YOUR, I THINK I CAN JUST SEE SOME KID IN HIS LITTLE HOT ROD OR SOME YOUNG 20-SOMETHING DRAG RACING THROUGH WITH PEOPLE OUT THERE TRYING TO GET IN CARS. AND IT'S, I JUST WORRY THAT THERE'S NOT AN ACTUAL ROAD. THERE'S NO SIDEWALKS WAS, THERE IS, THERE ARE SOME SIDEWALKS AROUND HERE. I TAKE THAT BACK, BUT YOU'RE NOT FOLLOWING A TRADITIONAL STREET PATTERN. I WOULD MUCH, RATHER THAN, RATHER THAN GOING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, GO OUT TO THIS PROPOSED ROAD, THAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT ANYWAY, THE CONFIGURATION OF THIS TURNING THE WAY IT IS, IS WHAT TO ME STARTS KICKING IN THIS IDEA THAT IT NEEDS TO BE A ROAD ALL THE WAY THROUGH. I THINK YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IS WHAT'S SAYING IT CAN BE PHASED IN AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE. SO I'M HOPING THAT YOU CAN SPEAK TO HOW THAT'S JUSTIFIED, BECAUSE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THE CONFIGURATION OF THIS TURNING, WHERE THERE'S THIS NORTH SOUTH MAJOR PASS THROUGH, UM, FOR THESE RESIDENTS, THAT'S, TO ME WHAT'S MORE DRIVING THAT NEED FOR THE ACTUAL ROAD THAT YOU COULD ACTUALLY TAKE. SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE INTERNAL TRAFFIC VERSUS THE PUBLIC. WELL, YEAH, BUT EVEN, I MEAN, THESE PEOPLE WILL BE USING THAT ROAD, THE PUBLIC ROAD ALSO, BUT YES, I'M SAYING THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT THERE'S A NORTH SOUTH ACCESS FOR THOSE RESIDENTS. I WOULD RATHER SEE THEM IF THEY'RE COMING FROM THE NORTH END TO GO TO THE SOUTH END SO THAT THEY CAN DO THE EAST. UM, SO THEY CAN GO OUT TO HAMPTON PARKWAY. I WOULD MUCH, RATHER THAN NOT GO THROUGH THE COMMUNITY. CORRECT. BUT GO AROUND USING THIS PUBLIC ROAD. SO YOU'RE PROPOSING OR SUGGESTING THAT THEY GO AHEAD AND DEVELOP THAT FULL ACCESS ROAD. CORRECT. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. YEAH. THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE. CAUSE I WAS A LITTLE CONFUSED WHEN YOU WERE IN AND OUT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I APPRECIATE THAT. YEAH. SO YOU WOULD, YOU'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THEY SHOULD PROBABLY CONNECT THE WHOLE THING AT THIS TIME, JUST BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC AND THE IMPACT IT'S GOING TO HAVE ON OTHER PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AS WELL AS THE CONFIGURATION OF THIS PROPOSED PLAN. BECAUSE BASED OFF OF THIS, DOES ANYBODY ELSE, WHILE WE'RE ON THAT SUBJECT, HAVE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR AREA YOU HAVE TO ASK, HEY, YOU KNOW WHAT, I'M LETTING IT GO LOGICALLY. IT MADE SENSE WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN TO ONLY REQUIRE THE TOP PART OF THAT ROAD BECAUSE THE TOP HALF OF THE DEVELOPMENT WAS GETTING DONE. NOW, WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING HERE IS BASICALLY THE LEFT HALF OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS GETTING DONE. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE FROM SOMEBODY SITTING ON PLANNING [00:40:01] COMMISSION, TALKING ABOUT MYSELF. IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO APPROVE THIS WITHOUT THAT CONNECTOR ROAD, FOLLOWING THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S GETTING DEVELOPED. UM, AND IT'S NOT JUST FOR WHAT KATHLEEN WAS TALKING ABOUT WITH PEOPLE FROM THE NORTH END TO THE SOUTH END AND NOT RUNNING OVER KIDS, BUT IT'S ALSO FROM A GREATER GOOD OF THE PLANS. THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON IS MASTER PLAN, AND THAT IS FOR INTERCONNECTIVITY. AND WE TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC FLOW. AND IF WE DON'T PUT THAT, IF YOU DON'T PUT THAT MIDDLE SECTION OF THAT, UM, ROAD IN HAMPTON PARKWAY IN, THEN ALL THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON THE NORTH END OF THIS PROPERTY OF THE APARTMENTS ARE LOGICALLY GONNA COME OUT AND DUMP TO 2 78. WHEREAS IF THAT CONNECTOR ROAD IS DONE, THEY WILL THINK ABOUT GOING DOWN TO BLUFFTON PARKWAY OVER TO YOUR OTHER PROPERTY, OVER TO THE KROGER. UM, SAME THING FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE SOUTHERN END, THERE'S THAT INTERCONNECTIVITY. BUT WHAT IT ALSO DOES IS AGAIN, THIS IS APPEALING TO THE GREATER GOOD HERE. THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN BANNER PARK AND PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN PARKSIDE THAT RIGHT NOW HAVE A CHALLENGE, GETTING DIFFERENT WAYS THAT WHEN THIS ROAD IS COMPLETED AS HAS BEEN PLANNED ALL ALONG, IT MAKES TRAFFIC FLOW EASIER FOR EVERYBODY IN THE AREA. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN IT GETS TIME FOR US DOING THE RECOMMENDATION FOR COUNCIL, I, I WOULD BE A BIG PROPONENT OF MAKING ONE OF THE CONDITIONS, UH, COMPLETING THAT ROAD AS A CONDITION OF, OF THE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT. UM, AS OPPOSED TO WAITING TO PHASE TWO OR THREE, THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON IT. YEAH. I AGREE WITH YOU. UM, AND TO JUST THINKING ABOUT THE NEIGHBORING PERF PROPERTY WITH BAYNARD PARK AND PARKSIDE, UM, THEY ALREADY HAVE A REALLY BAD TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE PROBLEM WHEN THEY HAVE TO GET ON 2 78. AND I FEEL LIKE ADDING ALL THESE OTHER RESIDENTS TO THAT TRAFFIC TO THAT ONE LITTLE LIGHT IS GOING TO BE DETRIMENTAL WITH HIGH SPEED TRAFFIC COMING DOWN TO 78. SO ALL THOSE PEOPLE FROM VAYNER PARK AND PARKSIDE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO TRY AND GET TO THAT LIGHT, BUT THEN HAVE TO MAKE A U-TURN WHERE YELLS ENTRANCES BASICALLY. SO THEY ALREADY STRUGGLE. I JUST THINK IT'S GOING TO CAUSE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A TRAFFIC PROBLEM AT THAT INTERSECTION. SO THAT'S MY 2 CENTS. I AGREE STRONGLY ON THAT BECAUSE YOUR PROPOSED PLAN ORIGINALLY DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT PHASING MADE SENSE. IT REALLY DID WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT AND NOW YOU LOOK AT IT AND NOW YOU'RE MOVING RESIDENTIAL DOWN TO THAT AREA. AND I KNOW THAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THIS WAY, BUT NOW YOU'RE ASKING US TO MAKE THIS CHANGE. AND WHEN YOU REALLY LOOK AT IT, IT DOES MAKE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE ROADS IN THAT AREA. AND IT NEEDS TO HAVE AT LEAST THE ACCESSIBILITY BECAUSE ONCE THE PEOPLE ARE LIVING THERE, THEY HAVE TO ONLY GO ONE WAY. I ALSO AGREE, I'M CONCERNED, UM, THAT THE UNITS THAT ARE UNDER DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE STREET HAVEN'T BEEN CONSIDERED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THAT MOST OF THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL NEED TO GO OUT ONTO 2 78. UM, I KNOW YOU HAD MENTIONED FROM THE DRC COMMENTS ABOUT THE INTERNAL PARKING AND CREATING MORE DEDICATED PARKING SPACES AND ROADS AND HOW THAT WASN'T NECESSARILY POSSIBLE BECAUSE OF THE TREES THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAVE. UM, BUT WITH THAT SAID, ESPECIALLY WITHOUT THE GATED ENTRANCE AT THE SOUTHERN END, YOU'RE ASKING EVERYONE TO CIRCULATE ESSENTIALLY THROUGH A PARKING LOT, UM, WHICH SEEMS DANGEROUS FOR THE PEOPLE INSIDE OF THE COMMUNITY. BUT THEN ALSO ANYONE THAT'S KIND OF TRYING TO GET TO THIS PART OF 2 78. I STRONGLY AGREE WITH EVERYONE ELSE. THE INNER CONNECTIVITY IS KEY FOR ME TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THIS W THE, THE THROUGH FAIR ROAD FOR THE GREATER GOOD AS YOU SAY, IT DOESN'T MATTER. AND THAT'S A DIFFERENT MATTER. AS FAR AS THE SAFETY WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE DO THESE EVERYWHERE. I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'VE GOT A THOUSAND UNITS UNDER CONSTRUCTION, BUT I CAN TELL YOU IF WE WERE HAVING ACCIDENTS IN OUR PARKING LOT OR PEOPLE BEING HIT, IT WOULD BE A BIG CONCERN OF OURS. BUT THE ACTUAL FACT IS WHEN PEOPLE DRIVE THROUGH THESE PROJECTS OR THIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES LIKE THIS, A LOT OF TIMES THEY DO SLOW DOWN BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE MOVING IN AND OUT, AND THERE ARE THEIR NEIGHBORS. I MEAN, THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN YOU AND YOUR COMMUNITY. THIS IS YOUR NEIGHBORS. YOU'RE IN THERE. WE, I MEAN, YOU TRY TO BE, YOU KNOW, YOU RIDE THROUGH AND IT DOES CURVE. AND WE DID LOOK AT HAVING A THOROUGHFARE THROUGH THERE, BUT FRANKLY, THE MOUNT OF PROM OAKS THAT YOU'D HAVE TO TAKE OUT TO DO THAT IN THE MORE ASPHALT YOU WOULD HAVE, DIDN'T SEEM TO BE BENEFICIAL TO THE OVERALL PROJECT. YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF ASPHALT AND WE'RE TRYING TO MINIMIZE ALSO THE IMPACT OF, TO THE NATURAL ASPECTS [00:45:01] OF THIS. WE START WITH OUR DESIGN TAKING THAT INTO CONSIDERATION FIRST. SO THE FIRST THING WE DID WAS SPOT ALL THE TREES. THE SECOND THING IS TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN POWER YOUR NEW STORMWATER REX. AND WE ACCOMPLISHED BOTH OF THOSE FIRST. AND THEN WE STARTED PLACING THE BUILDINGS AND HOW WE SET IT UP. SO I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY IS THERE'S A LOT OF THOUGHT THAT GOES IN WITH THESE GUYS AND US AND HOW TO COME UP WITH A GOOD PLAN. THIS IS GOOD AS IT CAN BE ON THIS SITE. WE DON'T HAVE PROBLEMS. YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE MAJOR PROBLEMS IN TERMS OF, I MEAN, I, I DON'T KNOW. I HA I CAN'T TELL YOU I'VE EVER HAD SOMEONE THAT HAD AN ACCIDENT WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY THEN, AND I'LL TALK TO JOHN ABOUT IT. AND WE'VE GOT SEVERAL THOUSAND OF THESE UNITS. IT'S NOT LIKE THAT. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK ACTUALLY HAVING THE PARKING OWN STREETS SOMETIMES SLOWS IT DOWN AS YOU'LL KNOW, IN GOOD DESIGN ON URBAN DESIGN. TYPICALLY IN MY BACKGROUND IS PLANNING IS HAVING HAD, LIKE YOU HAVEN'T DOWNTOWN BLUFFTON, YOU HAVE PARKING ON THE STREET. Y SLOWED IT DOWN. SO IT'S VERY SIMILAR. SO I WOULD TELL YOU, IN THIS CASE, THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE. I THINK WE KNOW HOW TO OPERATE A COMMUNITY. UH, WE COULD PUT DUMPSTERS OUT. WE JUST DON'T LIKE, YOU PUT A DUMPSTER AT ALL DIFFERENT PLACES HERE. WE DON'T LIKE THEM, BUT THE COMPACTOR IS A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE, BUT IT LOOKS NICER AND IT WORKS BETTER. SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT OUR DESIRE TO DO A DUMPSTER TYPE DEVELOPMENT WHERE YOU HAVE ONE AT THE BACK ONE, THE FRONT AND EVERYBODY WALK UP THERE AND THROW IT UP, THROW IT IN THE TOP. HOPEFULLY THEY GET IT IN. WE PREFER TO REFER TO HAVE THE RATIO OR THE PERCENTAGE OF HOMES TO DUMP A COMPACTOR. HOW DO YOU, HOW DO YOU DETERMINE THAT COMPACTOR IS GOING TO PROVIDE EXCELLENT? LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, IS THERE A FORMULA OR A PERCENTAGE? JUST SO WE KNOW HOW THAT, I MEAN, THERE IS, YOU GOT TO S YOU SIZE IT. YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU BUILD YOUR SIZE ACCORDING TO THE COMMUNITY, THE ACTUAL PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE YARDS WAS, I DON'T KNOW, RIGHT OFF. I MEAN, I CAN TELL YOU WE'VE DONE THEM IN, IT'S PROBABLY LIKE 30 BUCKS ONLY ATTRACTIVE YEAH. UNLOAD AND LOAD THEM. AND OF COURSE YOU'RE COMPACTING IT. SO IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT TAKING TOO MANY TRIPS TO THE LANDFILL PER SE. YOU GET A LOT MORE IN THERE BECAUSE, BECAUSE YOU ARE COMPACTING IT IN WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THAT COMPACTOR IS DOWN FOR A COUPLE OF WEEKS, THEN WHAT DO PEOPLE WE, FORTUNATELY, I GUESS WE DON'T LET THEM STAY DOWN FOR A FEW WEEKS NOW THAT WILL BE DOWN FOR DAY. I MEAN, SOMETIMES, I MEAN, YOU HAVE TO GO IN THERE AND FIX THEM. WASN'T THERE AN ISSUE ON HAMPTON LAKE WITH THAT? UM, I'M SORRY IF YOU'RE CONVERSING OVER HERE, THEY ACTUALLY STRING UP REAL QUICK. IF I, IT SEEMS THAT THERE'S, THERE'S, THERE'S, UH, YOU DO HAVE CONCERNS, UM, IF YOU, IF YOU WERE TO MAKE A CONDITION, UM, BUT ACTUALLY LET STAFF AND THE APPLICANT WORK, UM, ON, UM, PROVIDING ALMOST LIKE, UH, DETERMINING WHAT IS THAT MINIMUM SIZE FOR THAT COMPACTOR, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS SUFFICIENTLY SIZED. UM, YOU KNOW, BASED OFF THE 270 UNITS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IN BETWEEN THIS MEETING AND BEFORE IT GOING TO TELL COUNCIL AND THE ABILITY TO WORK ON GETTING THAT INFORMATION TOGETHER AND THEN PRESENTING THAT TO COUNCIL. SO JUST TO, JUST TO KIND OF HELP FACILITATE THE CONVERSATION MOVING ON. OKAY. AND YOU'D PREFER SUFFICIENTLY SIZED WORK WITH STAFF, AS OPPOSED TO PUT A SECOND ONE IN, I HAVE A SEEMS LIKE YOU HAVE MORE. GO AHEAD. MY QUESTION IS JUST TO ASK YOU, CAN YOU, YOU GOT ONE TOTAL BIG ONE, WHATEVER THE SIZE IS, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY OF PUTTING A SMALL COMPACT OR IN ONE END OF IT? AND THEN ANOTHER ONE ON THE OTHER END OF IT? I MEAN, YOU SURE YOU COULD. I THINK THAT THE, THE DIFFERENT SARAH IS, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO MOVE YOUR GATE AROUND IT BECAUSE YOU WANT TO PUT IT OUTSIDE THE GATE SO THEY CAN FREELY GET TO IT. AND THEN YOU GET INTO A LITTLE BIT OF REDESIGN ON THAT END OF IT, YOU KNOW, OR MAYBE YOU HAVE TO SHRINK THE THROAT OR THAT DRIVE ON THAT SIDE. I DON'T KNOW. I JUST HAVE TO ASK, RIGHT. I MEAN, I'M NOT, I CAN JUST SAY IT SEEMS IS, SEEMS TO HAVE ALWAYS WORKED FOR US WITHOUT ISSUES ABOUT IF WERE ISSUES. MY PROPERTY MANAGEMENT GROUP WOULD CALL ME EVERY DAY AND, AND THAT'S NOT ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE TYPICALLY HAVE. OKAY. WHAT ARE THE, NO, THEY NOT INTO THE GATES, ANY OTHER, UM, DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS ON ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO AIR RIGHT NOW? OR DO YOU WANT TO SUMMARIZE? YEAH. TO TWO THINGS YOU SAID THE COMPACTOR SHOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THE GATE TO SHOWN INSIDE THE GATE. SHOULDN'T BE THAT IT'S INSIDE THE GATE. IT'S INSIDE THE GATE. YEAH, IT IS HERE WHEN YOU'RE COMING IN THE FRONT AND THEN YOU GOT TO GO THROUGH THE GATE TO GET TO THE COMPACTOR. YEAH, [00:50:01] YEAH. THE EARS, RIGHT. OFFICER, AND THEN THERE'S THE GATE IS BEFORE IT ISN'T AROUND. IT SHOULD. I MEAN, IT SHOULDN'T BE, IT'S JUST HARD. THEY CAN'T GET IN THERE. SO YOU MIGHT NEED TO, I JUST POINT THAT OUT. SO SOMETHING TO WORK ON, I'M NOT, WE NEEDED TO CORRECT THAT. THANKS. UM, THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I HAD WAS, UM, IT'S, IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S 10 BUILDINGS, 270 UNITS. IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT WHAT I, YEAH. AND THEN IT HAD TO MEET, UM, THERE'S A CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE WITH A NUMBER OF BUILDINGS AND HEIGHTS THROUGHOUT. AND WE HAD TO MEET ALL THAT WITHIN THESE, WITHIN YOUR GUIDELINES. SO EACH BUILDING IS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, DIFFERENT, EXCUSE ME. AND THE NUMBER OF UNITS, THERE'S A 10% OF YOUR BUILDERS. IT CAN BE THREE STORIES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. OKAY. SO THAT'S THAT, BUT THAT'S THE PRODUCT WE'RE ESSENTIALLY LOOKING AT IS A THREE-STORY BUILDING ALL OF A SUDDEN, BUT WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT THAT AT THE MOMENT, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT DEALING WITH BUILDING TYPES. WE ACTUALLY HAVE REQUIREMENTS ON HOW MANY YOU CAN HAVE IN EACH BUILDING. YOU HAVE TO VARY IT SOME, SO IT'S NOT ALL THE SAME. UM, WAIT, KEVIN, DID YOU WANT TO CLARIFY ANYTHING AND REMEMBER THAT THIS WILL COME BACK TO YOU, UH, BOTH AS A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND A CERTIFICATE IN THIS. UM, IS THERE A NUMBER OF BEDS PER THESE UNITS THAT'S ALLOWED OR, WELL, THEY'RE MOSTLY, PROBABLY TWO IN ONE BED AND MAYBE SOME STUDIOS, BUT THAT'S TYPICALLY WHAT WE HAVE. WE MAY HAVE A FEW, THREE BEDROOMS, BUT NOT MANY. OKAY. AND THAT'S NOT REALLY PRESCRIBED, IS THAT IT? WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN? OKAY. JUST THE UNIT OVERALL UNIT. I MEAN, THEY COULD DO ALL THREE BEDROOMS. THEY COULD DO ALL ONE BEDROOM, BUT IT'S JUST A UNIT, A UNIT. OKAY. BUT EVEN IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW, THERE WOULD BE NOTHING THAT WOULD, THEY COULD COME IN WITH FOUR BEDROOM UNITS, FIVE BEDROOM UNITS. NONE OF THAT. I MEAN, NONE OF THAT'S REGULATED BY THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCESS EITHER. I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY UNITS AND PARKING SPACE REQUIREMENTS. SO, BUT NO, WE DON'T REGULATE THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. SO ESSENTIALLY IT WAS BE PARKING AS WHAT'S WOULD BE HOLDING THEM UP. CORRECT. ESSENTIALLY. OKAY. WELL, I'M GOING TO SUMMARIZE REAL QUICK. CAN I ASK ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION? I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO AND THREE STORIES PER YOUR RESPONSE TO THE COMMENTS FROM DRC INDICATE THAT THE BUILDING TWO AND FOUR ALONG 2 78 WILL BE TWO STORY. IS THAT STILL THE PLAN? WHATEVER, BECAUSE DRC HAD MADE THE COMMENT THAT THEY WANTED TO RELOCATE. THE ONE STORY, UM, GARAGE BUILDINGS CLOSER TO 2 78 AND THE RESPONSE WAS THE GARAGES ARE TWO STORIES AS WELL AS THE TWO BUILDINGS PROPOSED ON 2 78. OKAY. AND I THINK WE CAN CATCH THAT AT ANOTHER SUBMITTAL LEVEL. CAUSE I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THOSE BUILDINGS AS WELL, BUT I DON'T THINK WE CAN DISCUSS THOSE NOW. SO, UM, HAVE YOU GIVEN ANY CONSIDERATION FOR ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING? UM, YOU KNOW, UH, WE HAVE NOT OWNED THIS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE, WE'VE DONE, WE'VE LOOKED AT IT AND OTHER PLACES HAVE DONE IT WHERE THERE'S INCENTIVES, FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO NEGOTIATE INCENTIVES WITH THE CITY OR THE COUNTY THAT WANTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THEY'VE ACTUALLY COME FORWARD AND PUT INCENTIVES IN WITH IT. UM, CAUSE OTHER THAN THAT IT DOESN'T WORK. I MEAN, IF IT WORKED, IT'D BE EVERYWHERE. RIGHT. BUT I THINK ONCE WE DID LOOK AT WITHOUT SOME TYPE OF GIVE AND TAKE AND A LOT OF TIMES THAT'S THE CASE, BUT WITHOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, AT HAMPTON LAKES, WHEN WE WENT BACK AND READ OUR REPORTS BASED ON LIKE WORKFORCE HOUSING OR THE 80% OF ABOVE A LOT OF THOSE RENTS AT THE TIME, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TODAY, BUT I'M SAYING AT THE TIME WE RAN IT, WHICH WAS ABOUT A YEAR AGO, WE'RE VERY MUCH IN LINE WHERE PEOPLE WITH THE QUALIFIED AMR QUALIFICATIONS FOR THOSE TWO CATEGORIES, ANYBODY OTHER FINAL THOUGHTS BEFORE I KIND OF GIVE A SUMMARY. OKAY. SO I'M SORRY THAT YOU'RE, YOU CAN'T SPEAK, YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE PRESENTATION. UM, SO AS FAR AS THE TOWN'S RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE FOR US, WE ALL KIND OF SEEM LIKE WE'RE IN AGREEANCE WITH THE CONNECTIVITY OF THAT ROAD GOING THROUGH. UM, AND Y'ALL CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. AND THEN, UM, AS FAR AS THE TOWN'S RECOMMENDATION FOR THE SIDEWALK CONNECTION, WE AGREE WITH THAT. THE DUMPSTER, UM, I GUESS, WOULD BE MORE OF A LOOK INTO THE CAPACITY AND WHAT THAT MEANS FOR THE POSITION SIZES. YEAH. AND THEN, UM, FOR THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, BECAUSE WE'RE [00:55:01] CONCERNED, OR I KNOW THAT I AM ABOUT THE LIGHT AND THE TRAFFIC WITH THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ACROSS THE STREET. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE CAN RECOMMEND REQUIRE THEM TO DO SOME OTHER ANALYSIS TO, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS HISTORICALLY. IT HAS TO BE ON WHAT'S THERE AND NOT WHAT'S PROPOSED. CORRECT. AND I'M SORRY, I'M NOT A MINISTER. I HAD, I'M JUST, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC NOW WITH THOSE 800 UNITS ON THE NORTHERN SIDE OF 2 78, PLUS THESE 270 UNITS HERE AND HOW THAT IS IMPACTED. SO IS THERE A WAY OR ANYTHING WE CAN RECOMMEND THAT THEY HAVE ANOTHER ANALYSIS, BUT LIKE HE WAS SAYING, YOU CAN'T REALLY DO THAT UNTIL THERE'S DEVELOPMENT. SO IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE WE CAN REQUIRE THAT THEY, I THINK IF WE WERE TO RODEO THROUGH THAT, UH, THE ISSUE IS YOU'RE GOING TO BE CONDITIONING, ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT ON POTENTIALLY CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT, UH, WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY CONCEIVABLY PUT, PUT THE APPLICANT IN A POSITION THAT OTHER APPLICANTS THAT COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AREN'T AREN'T SUBJECT TO. SO, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHY WE DO, UH, I GUESS A RELATIVE DEGREE OF CERTAINTY ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT GOING IN ACROSS THE STREET, BUT ULTIMATELY THE, THE CONDITIONS AND THE CRITERIA THAT YOU'LL HAVE TO CONSIDER THE CRITERIA THAT'S IMPOSED BY THE UDI AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. SO, UM, I GUESS THE FOURTH CONDITION THAT TOWN STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED THE UPDATE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR PHASES TWO AND THREE MAY TO SOME DEGREE, UM, IMPACT THAT. BUT, BUT KNOWING THAT THERE'S ALL THESE UNITS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN APPROVED ON THE NORTHERN PART OF 2 78, THERE'S NOTHING THAT I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION THAT MAYBE IT GOES HAND IN HAND WITH THAT YOU CAN GO FOR IT. I WAS JUST GONNA SAY THE WEED. BASICALLY WE FOLLOW THE DOD STANDARDS WHEN WE CREATE THESE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. WE'VE HAD PROJECTS WITH THE DEITY WHERE WE MAY BE DESIGNING FOR DIFFERENT PROJECTS ALL IN THE SAME AREA AND THEY WON'T LET US, WOULD THEY LET US LOOK AT TRAFFIC STAYS FOR DIFFERENT ONES, BUT IT, NONE OF IT MATTERS UNTIL YOU SUBMIT THAT ONE PLAN. LIKE THEY CAN'T CONSIDER IT UNTIL IT'S A REAL PROJECT, I GUESS YOU WOULD SAY. SO MY QUESTION THEN IS, DID I BELIEVE THAT DRC HAD REQUESTED THAT YOU INCLUDE PHASES TWO AND THREE AS PART OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR PHASE ONE? SO SINCE WE'RE LOOKING AT APPROVING A REVISED MASTER PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES PHASES TWO AND THREE, COULD WE NOT ASK FOR THAT TO BE INCLUDED NOW, SINCE WE DO KNOW THAT THAT'S YOUR PLAN DEVELOPMENT, THAT'S PART OF THE MASTER PLAN. THAT'S UP FOR CONSIDERATION. YES, BECAUSE THIS IS TWO AND THREE ARE ADDRESSED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY. IT DISCUSSES WHICH PORTIONS OF THE ROAD WOULD BE BUILT IN EACH GIVEN PHASE. AND JUST TO BACK UP REAL QUICK TO, TO WHAT Y'ALL HAD MENTIONED, I GUESS, WITH THE, UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING WITH THE, HAVING THE ROAD BUILD AT ONE TIME. BUT IF YOU, THE GROCERY STORE USE WHERE IT WAS APPROVED BEFORE GO INTO 2 78 IS A LOT MORE TRAFFIC THAN WHAT THIS RESIDENTIAL USE WOULD BE. BASICALLY PHASE ONE FUNCTIONS WITH JUST THE 2 78 ACCESS, WHICH IS WHY WE HAD THE EMERGENCY ACCESS PROPOSED. THAT WAS MORE FOR FIRE PROTECTION, EMS AND POLICE. UM, BUT AGAIN, WE'RE WILLING TO BUILD BOTH NOW, BUT I MEAN, IT FUNCTIONS WITH JUST THE 2 78, BUT IT'S LIKE YOU SAID, A FOUR PHASE ONE WAS MORE TO THE NORTHERN PARCEL VERSUS THE, NOW IT'S THE WHOLE LENGTH OF IT. AND IT'S LIKE, THOSE RESIDENTS AT THE BOTTOM KIND OF WOULD BE TRAVELING. LIKE HE SAID, THEY CAN, THEY CAN TRAVEL THROUGH THE COMMUNITY AND GO NORTH IF THEY WANT, OR THE PEOPLE IN THE NORTH CAN JUST TRAVEL THROUGH. AND IF THEY WANT TO GO SOUTH, LIKE, I THINK IT MAKES FOR, YOU KNOW, INGRESS AND EGRESS IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. UM, I WAS JUST POINTING OUT THAT THE GROCERY ANCHOR COMPONENT IS DEFINITELY A LOT MORE TRAFFIC THAN, THAN THE 280 RESIDENTIAL RICHARDSON. I HAVE A QUESTION. THERE'S A GENTLEMAN IN THE AUDIENCE THAT IS A RESIDENT OF THE PARCELS TO THE NORTH AND PEPPER HALL, THAT AREA. IS IT OKAY THAT HE CAN COME UP AND SPEAK REAL QUICK? OR CAN I NOT ULTIMATELY IT'S UP TO YOU, UH, AS THE CHAIR, AS THE CHAIR WITH THE CHAIR OF THE COMMISSION, BUT YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY WE TYPICALLY, WE DON'T ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK A SECOND TIME. THERE'S, THERE'S A COUPLE OF COMMON LIMIT. THERE'S A PA UH, PROCEDURE THAT WE FOLLOW TO MAKE SURE THAT DUE PROCESS IS GIVEN THAT EVERY APPLICANT AND WHEN YOU OPEN IT BACK UP FOR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT, UM, AND IT CAN CREATE COMPLICATIONS AND CREATE ISSUES DOWN THE LINE. IF THE APPLICANT HAS NO OBJECTION THOUGH, AND PLANNING COMMISSION DOESN'T MIND, I DON'T SEE WHY, WHY NOT? I JUST DIDN'T WANT TO BREAK ANY RULES. NO, IT'S, IT'S YOUR DISCRETION, BUT THE APPLICANT HAD A PROBLEM WITH THE RESIDENT SPOKE. UH, NO, I JUST, THE ONLY THING I'D SAY [01:00:01] BEFORE THAT IS, AS IT RELATES TO YOU, I THINK YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS GOING TO BE THE ROAD OR THE ROAD FOR PHASE ONE. IF YOU PUT IN, WHICH WOULD BE TWO LANES. AND I THINK EVERYONE HERE WOULD SEE THAT ROAD BEING PUT IN AS BEING DESIRABLE. WE'RE, WE'RE ONLY PUTTING 280 UNITS IN THERE COMING SARAH TO WHAT WAS PLANNED ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. IT'S A LOT LOWER DENSITY, A LOT LESS TRAFFIC IMPACT. YOU KNOW, IF WE DO A PHASE TWO OR THREE, IF, CAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO GO THERE OR IF THERE'S GOING TO BE A DEMAND FOR IT, FRANKLY, I MEAN, IT MAY BE, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT USES. AND WHEN WE USE SOME KIND OF GUESS ON WHAT IT SHOULD BE, MAYBE MEDICAL OFFICE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO GO, THAT'S NOT ON 2 78 AND NOT ON THE PARKWAY, BUT WHATEVER IT'S GOING TO BE, THEN WE'D HAVE TO ADD ANOTHER LANE OR ANOTHER TURN LANES OR WHATEVER'S RECOMMENDED AT THAT TIME. AND THAT'S PROBABLY THE WAY IT SHOULD GO. AND IN THE MEANTIME, YOU GET IT THROUGH FAIR TO THAT TRAFFIC LIGHT, WHAT YOU DON'T HAVE NOW. SO, YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S WHAT YOUR REC, I ASSUME YOUR RECOMMENDATION IS. CAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE ALL GREEN ON. SO THAT'S WHERE IT'S GOING. YEAH. SO, SO I GUESS ALL I'M SAYING TO YOU IS, IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE OVERALL PLAN AND AS YOU SAID, THE BENEFIT TO ALL IN THE COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS TO BE, UH, NOT A HUGE IMPACT ON, BUT A GREATER IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY IN A POSITIVE WAY TO GET THAT THROUGH. SO WELL, BLUFFTON IS, UH, JUST, JUST TO, I MEAN, FIRST OF ALL, FUCK WALTER PLACE Y'ALL DEVELOPED IN THERE. WE PUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE, THE ROADS. AND BEFORE YOU EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT BUILDING IN THERE, UM, LOFTON'S A TOWN OF CONNECTIVITY. WE'VE TRIED TO BE THAT WAY. AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT THIS ISSUE BOILS DOWN TO IS CONNECTIVITY. THANK YOU. BUT NO, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. YOU DON'T HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION ABOUT THE TRAFFIC STUDY. I THINK YOU JUST INDICATED THAT IT DID INCLUDE PHASES TWO AND THREE, BUT IT ACTUALLY SAYS THAT STD OT AGREED THAT YOU ONLY NEEDED TO DO PHASE ONE NOW, SO THE CURRENT TRAFFIC STUDY DOES NOT INCLUDE PHASES TWO AND THREE. IS THAT CORRECT? THESE ARE THE COMMENTS FROM THE DRC MEETING IN YOUR COVER LETTER DATED APRIL 20TH. WELL, I HAVE THE TRAFFIC STUDY PRINTED HERE AND IT'S, IT DEFINITELY PUTS PLACE TWO AND THREE. CAN, CAN WE HAVE HER LOOK AT IT? I HAVE TO JUMP IN AND SPEAK AT LEAST EVERY FEW MINUTES. UM, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT GETS PAINTED UP TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION NEEDS TO BE STATED IN OFFICIAL PART OF THE RECORD. SO WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE THAT TO, UM, UM, UH, EITHER JORDAN OR KEVIN OR WHOMEVER AND SORRY. I KNOW I HAD TO UNFORTUNATELY, WEAK BLADDER ISSUE. UM, I KNOW YOU TALKED ABOUT AFFORDABLE WHILE I WAS OUT OF THE ROOM FOR A MINUTE. UM, DO REALIZE THAT THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO TOWN COUNCIL AND I'M SURE IT'S GOING TO COME UP WHEN Y'ALL WERE THERE. SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO THINK THROUGH THAT PROCESS. AND I JUST REMIND THE COMMISSIONERS. I KNOW Y'ALL WANT ARE TALKING RIGHT NOW, BUT PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS ANYTHING THAT'S ON THERE OUTSIDE, OUTSIDE, OR THE MICROPHONE JUST FOR THE PEOPLE WATCHING THAT. YEAH. WELL I THINK THE CONFUSION IS JUST THAT IT'S Y'ALL'S COVER LETTER THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THIS APPLICATION SPECIFICALLY SAID THAT IT'S NOT INCLUDED WELL, WHILE YOU'RE STILL LOOKING OVER THAT, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS OF THE RESIDENT TO SPEAK? THE APPLICANT IS OKAY WITH IT. DOES THE COMMISSION, ARE THEY OKAY WITH IT OR NO? I'M OKAY WITH IT. YOU'RE OKAY. WE NEED A VOTE OR ANYTHING? NO. OKAY. EVERYBODY ELSE. OKAY. ON THE LEFT. OKAY, SIR, IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES PLEASE. AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AGAIN AND YOUR ADDRESS. MY NAME'S SCOTT CROSBY AT 12 PEPPER HALL PLANTATION DRIVE. IT'S DIRECTLY ACROSS 2 78 TO THE NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY. UM, I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THE SAFETY CONCERNS. WE CURRENTLY HAVE A CONCRETE WALL MEDIAN, WHICH DEMANDS THAT WE HAVE TO PULL INTO THIS, UH, THE STOPLIGHT THERE SO THAT WE CAN DO A U-TURN AND THEN HEAD BACK WEST TO GET TO OUR PROPERTY OR OUR DRIVEWAY. AND FOR WHATEVER REASON, THERE IS AN ABSURD AMOUNT OF CARS THAT ARE MAKING YOU TURNS THERE, WHICH WOULD BE THE ENTRANCE TO THIS PROPERTY. THERE'S WHETHER THEY COME FROM BAYNARD PARK OR DOWN HAMPTON PARKWAY, BECAUSE THEY'RE TRYING TO GET TO ONE 70, THEY HAVE TO COME DOWN AND MAKE A U-TURN THERE. OR THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT COME FROM THE BACK OF THE TOYOTA DEALERSHIP AND ALSO ALL IN THE WEST THAT USED THAT STOPLIGHT. SO EVEN THOUGH THERE'S [01:05:01] NOTHING THERE RIGHT NOW IS A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT USE THAT STOPLIGHT MAKING YOU TURNS, TRYING TO, I DON'T UNDERSTAND MYSELF WHY THERE'S SO MANY PEOPLE, BECAUSE WE'RE THE ONLY DRIVEWAY BETWEEN THAT LIGHT AND ONE 70, BUT IT GETS USED A LOT AND IT IS A HUGE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YEAH. UM, JUST FROM A STANDPOINT OF MAKING SURE THAT OUR CONDITIONS ARE RELATED TO OUR CRITERIA, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE JUSTIFICATION FOR, OR THE REASONING FOR THIS, THE ROAD INTERCONNECTIVITY THROUGH THERE IS BASED OFF OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH THE CONFERENCE OF PLAN, WHICH PROMOTES THE VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECT. WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION? SO I CAN MAYBE, WHY DON'T YOU, WHY DON'T YOU TRY IT? IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEEDED TO DISCUSS BEFORE? THE ONLY THING, I MEAN, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE FOUR ITEMS WE TALKED ABOUT COMPLETE ROAD AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MAKING A JUSTIFICATION. AND ALSO, UH, THE ONLY OTHER THING I WOULD PUT IS WE RECOMMEND THAT THE DEVELOPER AS SUGGESTED DONATES BACK TO THE TOWN, THE, HOW MANY WAS IT CALLED? PLACE? 600 UNITS. I CAN'T DO THAT AT THIS MEETING. I'M ONLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE NEXUS THERE. WHAT IS THE NEXUS BETWEEN THIS DEVELOPMENT? THERE'S NO, AND THEY HAVE A BUY RIGHT ABILITY TO PUT THESE IN DEVELOPMENT UNITS HERE. OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE GIVEN GREAT LATITUDE AND THESE RECOMMENDATIONS TO GO TO TOWN COUNCIL. UH, BUT WHEN THERE'S SOMETHING THAT IS ESSENTIALLY, EVEN IF THEY'RE LARGELY VALUELESS, UH, YOU'RE STILL ASKING THEM TO MAKE A, UH, CONCESSION, UH, AN ABANDONMENT OF THE PROPERTY RIGHT ON, AND THEN ANOTHER FIXTURE OFFING THAT IS NOT BEING CONSIDERED HERE TODAY. SO YOU'VE GOT, YEAH, I'M GOING TO, I'M GOING TO DISAGREE WITH YOU ON THAT. CAUSE WE HAD, WE HAD UNITS THAT CAME OUT OF BLUFFTON PARK AND WENT OVER TO BUCK WALTER. WE'VE HAD UNITS THAT HAVE GONE BETWEEN DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS WITH NO TIE INTO ANYTHING ELSE. I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO HARM US TO SUGGEST TO COUNCIL THAT THEY LOOK INTO THAT, UM, WITH THE DEVELOPER. AND I DON'T SEE WHERE THAT WOULD MAKE ANYTHING AN ISSUE. I, I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S, IT'S DULY NOTED AND I'M HAPPY TO, UM, WORK WITH THE TOWN MANAGER TO CONTACT MR. SANS AND START THAT DISCUSSION. BUT I, I KIND OF AGREE WITH RICHARDSON THAT WE SHOULD NOT MAKE THAT A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL OF THIS MASTER PLAN SINCE THOSE UNITS ARE NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PLAN IN ANY WAY, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER. BUT IT'S JUST, I JUST CONCERNS WITH THAT. AND COMMISSIONER 11 WORDS, YOU KNOW, I'M ONLY HERE TO PROVIDE ADVICE AND OPINION AND LEGAL OPINIONS. ULTIMATELY THE DECISIONS ARE YOURS. YOU ALL MAKE THOSE DECISIONS, BUT, UH, THAT'S THAT CURRENT ADVISOR AND IT JUST, IT AS, AS A KIND OF EXPLAINED, WE DON'T HAVE ANYWHERE TO GO WITH THEM. I HAVE NO REASON NOT TO ACCEPT. IT IS CERTAINLY A LOT BETTER ON MY BEHALF IF I CAN FREELY DONATE THEM. OKAY. AND IT IS JUST A RECOMMENDATION. WE, WE HAVE TRUST AND FAITH IN STAFF THAT WHEN KEVIN SAID THAT I HAVE FULL FAITH AND TRUST THAT THAT'LL THAT'LL HAPPEN. OKAY. SO CAN I ADD ONE MORE COMMENT ABOUT, SORRY. YEAH. SO I THINK THE ISSUE IS THAT DURING DRC, IT WAS REQUESTED THAT ADDITIONAL INTERSECTIONS LIKE THAT THE STUDY SCOPE WAS INSUFFICIENT FOR THE SIZE OF DEVELOPMENT WHEN YOU INCLUDE PHASES TWO AND THREE. SO YOU DO HAVE IT. THE IMPACT IS DONE FOR PHASES ONE, TWO, AND THREE, BUT IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE SCOPE THAT WAS DEEMED WHAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT. UM, PER SE. SO I GUESS ONE QUESTION WOULD JUST BE, IF WE AREN'T ABLE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION FUTURE DEVELOPMENT BY OTHER DEVELOPERS, CAN WE NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION FUTURE DEVELOPMENT? THAT'S PART OF THIS MASTER PLAN APPROVAL, WHICH WOULD NECESSITATE A MORE EXTENSIVE TRAFFIC STUDY? I DON'T THINK WE KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO GO THERE. I MEAN, IT COULD BE A RESTAURANT, IT COULD BE AN OFFICE. WHAT'S THE ASSUMPTION FOR THAT? I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S THE ATTENDANCE THAT AS THOSE SPACES ARE COMING ONLINE, WE CAN THEN ASSESS BECAUSE AS MR. SIN STATED, I DON'T THINK THAT THEY REALLY KNOW, UH, IT COULD BE A DAYCARE, IT COULD BE AN OFFICE, IT COULD BE, UM, A RESTAURANT AND THEY ALL HAVE DIFFERENT, UM, DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF USES IN THE SENSE OF TRIPS GENERATED FOR EACH ONE OF THEM. SO, UM, AND THEN HAVING JUST DIFFERENT, UM, YOU KNOW, NECESSARY REQUIREMENTS. UM, I THINK THE, YOU KNOW, THE BIGGEST, THE BIGGEST ISSUE IS ONE THE CONNECTIVITY. SO YOU'RE CONNECTING FROM 2 78 TO THE HAMPTON PARKWAY THAT GIVES YOU ACCESS TO A FULL INTERSECTION AS OPPOSED TO THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION OF A RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT ONLY, UM, WHERE THE HAMPTON PARKWAY COMES OUT ON 2 70, 2 78. UM, SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE MAKING THAT IMPROVEMENT, WHICH FROM AN ACCESSIBILITY STANDPOINT, NOW, PEOPLE NO LONGER WILL HAVE TO MAKE THAT RIGHT. THAT A, A U-TURN [01:10:01] TO GET BACK AROUND. I GUESS MY ONLY COMMENT WAS IF WE WEREN'T DOING THE ENTIRETY OF THAT CONNECTION, THAT I WOULD PREFER THAT WE INCLUDED A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE DEVELOPMENT. BUT IF WE WERE GOING ALL THE WAY THROUGH, I DON'T HAVE CONCERNS, BUT BASED ON YOUR DISCUSSION, THAT'S WHAT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD BE. UM, I, THIS BRINGS UP ANOTHER QUESTION, UM, THAT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS WAS DONE BY THOMAS AND HUTTON. CORRECT. RIGHT. SO, WHICH IS ALSO DOING THE MASTER PLAN. I'M WONDERING, AND THIS IS MAYBE A STAFF AND OR RICHARDSON QUESTION, UM, THIRD PARTY, CORRECT. CAN WE MAKE A CONDITION THAT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS IS DONE BY THIRD PARTY? THE QUESTION IS NEVER, THAT QUESTION HAS NEVER BEEN ASKED TO ME AND AT LEAST THE BEST. AND SO LET ME, LET ME THINK ON THAT FOR A MOMENT TYPICALLY HERE, MY INITIAL INITIAL THOUGHTS. YEAH. THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, THE ENGINEERING, THE LAND PLANNING ARE ALL CONTRACTED OUT BY THE DEVELOPER, THE PERSON AT THE APPLICANT. AND WE GIVE A LOT OF LATITUDE TO THE APPLICANT TO CHOOSE WHOMEVER THEY WANT TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. AND IT HAS TO ULTIMATELY COMES DOWN TO A CREDIBILITY ANALYSIS ON YOUR END AS TO WHETHER YOU THINK THAT THE ANALYSIS DONE AND IS CREDIBLE IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THE ENGINEERS ARE DOING IT. UM, AGAIN, I, I DON'T KNOW FOR A FACT THAT YOU CAN'T DO THAT, BUT I WOULD BE HESITANT TO GET INTO THAT PROCESS OF ACQUIRING DIFFERENT GROUPS TO PROVIDE DIFFERENT ANALYSIS OR EVEN, EVEN FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. BUT I'M, LET ME SEE IF KEVIN HAS OTHER IDEAS OR OTHER COLUMNS PRIOR TO THE TOWN COUNCIL MEETING. WHAT WE CAN DO IS WE CAN HAVE A, UH, AN INDEPENDENT, UH, TRAFFIC ENGINEER REVIEW AND JUST DO AN ASSESSMENT OF THEIR, THEIR DOCUMENTS. AND THEN WE CAN PRESENT, WE CAN HAVE THAT PRESENTED THAT TOWN COUNCIL DOES THAT. THEY'RE NOT DOING A TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS. THEY'RE JUST REVIEWING THE INTEGRITY OF THAT DOCUMENTED ON A STAFF LEVEL. WE CAN CONTRACT THAT. DOES THAT NEED TO BE, WOULD THAT NEED TO BE A PART OF THE MOTION? WE SHOULD PROBABLY RECOMMEND THAT STAFF DO THAT. YEAH, I, THAT RECOMMENDATION AND WHEN SOME, CERTAINLY THE STAFF IS GOING TO WORK ON PRIOR TO THE MEETING, I THINK THAT Y'ALL, Y'ALL DIRECTED STAFF. I THINK THAT THEY KNOW NOW WHAT Y'ALL WANT. IT'S NOT HAVE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE MOTION AND YOU CAN TRUST STAFF THAT THEY'LL FOLLOW THROUGH THE ROADMAP. OKAY. YEAH. IF I COULD JUST SHARE A REAL QUICK TWO THOUGHTS ON THIS. UM, HAVING BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE TOWN IN VARIOUS CAPACITIES SINCE 2005, UM, I'VE RUN ACROSS THOMAS AND HUTTON AND OTHER TRAFFIC IMPACT, AND I HAVE THE UTMOST TRUST IN WHAT WAS DONE AND THAT YOU WILL KEEP IT. AND I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION TELLING, TELLING COMMISSIONERS THAT'S, THAT'S MY PERSONAL INTERACTION AND FEELING ON IT. AND NUMBER TWO, EVEN, EVEN IF THERE WAS AN ISSUE HERE, IF THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO, AND COUNSEL MAKES IT A REQUIREMENT THAT THAT ROAD POPS ALL THE WAY THROUGH THAT, COMBINED WITH THE CHANGE IN USE FROM COMMERCIAL TO RESIDENTIAL EASES ANYTHING IN MY MIND. UM, AS FAR AS THE NEED FOR THAT, JUST A COUPLE OF YES. AND I UNDERSTAND KIND OF WHY YOU MADE THE COMMENT. I WAS JUST GONNA SAY THAT I, I'M NOT A TRAFFIC ENGINEER. WE HAVE A SEPARATE DEPARTMENT THAT DOES THAT, BUT WE HAVE BUSINESS SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS AND OUR REPUTATION IS EVERYTHING. SO SALSIFY AND INTENDED TO CALL THOMAS AND HUTTON INTO A QUESTION OF INTEGRITY. IT'S A, I THINK FOR ME, IT'S MORE OF A PERCEPTION, UM, BECAUSE I THINK WHILE MANY OF US IN THIS ROOM HAVE A RELATIONSHIP WITH THOMAS AND HUTTON AND DO YOU KNOW THE QUALITY OF WORK THAT IS PERFORMED? I THINK THAT THERE'S A GENERAL THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY INVOLVE THAT. I WOULDN'T WANT THEM LOOKING AT THIS GOING HA HA ASKING, RAISING ANY QUESTIONS THAT ARE JUST NOT NECESSARY. AND I THINK LIKE KEVIN SAID, HAVING AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT JUST OVERLOOK THAT, I THINK THAT WOULD HELP IF I WAS A PRIVATE CITIZEN WHO DIDN'T HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF YOU, IT WOULD PUT MY MIND MORE AT EASE ABOUT THAT. OKAY. IS EVERYBODY READY? CAN SOMEONE MAKE A MOTION? KATHLEEN, I MAKE A MOTION THAT PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH. IT'S A RECOMMENDATION TO, YES, THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID. OKAY. NO, SORRY. I WAS THINKING YOU WERE OKAY. SORRY. UH, RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. UM, I'M JUST ME, [01:15:03] UM, OF THE, I'LL MAKE SURE I CALL IT BY THE RIGHT NAME, UM, FOR THE HEADWATERS OF BLUFFTON MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT, THE CONDITIONS BEING THAT, UM, PER STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, WITH A NOTE THAT, UH, IT WAS SPECIFIC TO THAT SECOND DUMPSTER LOCATION, UM, THAT THERE IS A FURTHER STUDY, UH, IN DISCUSSION, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH THE CAPACITY OF THE COMPACTOR THAT'S BEING PROPOSED AND THE POTENTIAL NEED FOR THAT SECOND DUMPSTER. UM, AND ADDITIONALLY, UH, THAT A, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M USING MY WORDS, RIGHT. UM, THAT BASED OFF OF SECTION 3.9 0.3 POINT B, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT A, THE THROUGH ROAD THAT IS SHOWN, UM, NORTH, SOUTH CONNECTING THROUGH THE PROPERTY IS ALSO, UH, PROVIDED AS A PART OF THE PHASE ONE INSTALLATION. AND THAT OFFENSE IS ADDED ON THE SOUTHERN BUFFER BETWEEN, UH, YEAH. ALONG THAT SOUTHERN BUFFER, ADJACENT TO THE, UM, ADJACENT HOMES SPECIFICALLY SECOND, UM, ANY DISCUSSION I HAVE SOMETHING, UM, YOU DIDN'T MENTION THE SIDEWALKS, THE SIDEWALK. WAS IT ONE OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE TOWN, CORRECT? YEAH. BUT DID YOU STATE IT? I STATED THAT THE CONDITIONS WERE AS PROPOSED BY THE STAFF. THAT'S JUST AN ALL ENCOMPASSING FIRST COMMENT. I JUST CLARIFIED THE THIRD COMMENT ABOUT THIS OR YES. ABOUT THE, SO EVERYTHING THAT THE STAFF HAS PLUS OKAY. MAKING THE ROAD ALL THE WAY THROUGH CHANGING THE DUMPSTER, DINGY, LOOKING, LOOKING AT THE DUMPSTER, ADDING THE ROAD AND ADDING THE FENCE. YEAH. OKAY. SO CAUSE NUMBER ONE WOULD BE THE ONE THAT'S MODIFIED. I'M SORRY. NUMBER ONE WOULD HAVE BEEN THE ONE THAT'S NOT MODIFIED . UM, THE MOTION THE MOTION MADE WAS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. THOSE CONDITIONS BEING THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND STAFF REPORT FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH IN THE STAFF REPORT, UH, PLUS A MODIFICATION OF CONDITION. NUMBER THREE THAT HAD TO DEAL WITH FURTHER DISCUSSION BETWEEN STAFF AND THE APPLICANT OF THE CAPACITY AND NECESSITY OF A SECOND DUMPSTER VERSUS THE PROPOSED COMPACTOR SYSTEM RECOMMENDED BY THE APPLICANT AND THEN A ADDITIONAL, UM, ADDITIONAL CONDITION. UH, THE THREE ROAD BEING CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTERCONNECTIVITY REQUIRE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UH, WHICH IS CONSISTENT, WHICH IS, I GUESS, A MODIFICATION OF CONDITION. NUMBER ONE, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY JUST A MODIFICATION OF NUMBER ONE. IT'S AN EXCITING TO IT IS IT'S A FURTHER INSIDE OF NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT GRAVEL NOT BE COMMITTED. AND THEN THE FLIGHT, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS CLEAR BECAUSE SHE SAID THAT THAT'S ALL IN FAVOR. NO, I'M SORRY. WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT. ALL IN FAVOR. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NO POSTS. THANK YOU EVERYONE [VIII.DISCUSSION] THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, KEVIN, ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR. AYE. THANK YOU EVERYONE. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.