[I. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:12]
IN COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY MAY THE 24TH TO ORDER MAY I PLEASE HAVE A ROLL CALL YOU NEAR THE DOCKS AND THEN HERE COMES CHAIRMAN CHARLIE WHITTEMORE HERE SAID THAT WHEN YOU GOT HERE THE WHOLE RICH DON'T CARE PENSIONER JIM GLEN YEAH COMMISSIONER LYDIA IS UP HERE COMMISSIONER JASON STEWART AND NOTICE REGARDING ADJOURNMENT THE PLANNING COMMISSION NOT HEAR NEW ITEMS AFTER 930 UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY A MAJORITY VOTE THE COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT ITEMS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN HEARD BEFORE 930 MAY BE CONTINUED ONTO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OR A SPECIAL MEETING AS DETERMINED THE COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTROL NOTICE REGARDING PUBLIC COMMENTS MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO IS RECOGNIZED TO SPEAK SHALL ADDRESS THE CHAIRMAN AND AND SPEAKING AVOID DISRESPECT TO COMMISSION STAFF OR OTHER
[V. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA]
MEMBERS OF THE MEETING. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS WHEN SPEAKING FOR THE RECORD COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO 3 MINUTES MAY I HAVE AN ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA SO MOVED SECOND[VI. CIVILITY PLEDGE]
AND FURTHER DISCUSSION ON FABER HI CIVILITY PLEDGE WE PLEDGE TO BUILD STRONGER AND MORE PROSPEROUS COMMUNITY BY ADVOCATING FOR CIVIL ENGAGEMENT RESPECTING OTHERS AND THEIR[VII. ADOPTION OF MINUTES]
VIEWPOINTS AND FINDING SOLUTIONS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON MAY I HAVE AN ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES FOR APRIL 26 OR A MOTION FOR ADOPTION FOR THE MOVED FROM SECOND SECOND ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ALL IN FAVOR HI COMMENTS DO YOU HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT ARE ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA? NO THEY ARE FOR THE AGENDA.[X.1. Buckwalter Crossroads (Master Plan Amendment): A request by Brian Witmer of Witmer Jones Keefer, Ltd, on behalf of Millstone Ventures, LLC, and with the approval of the property owner, Parcel 8A, LLC, for approval of a master plan amendment application. The Applicant proposes to amend the Buckwalter Crossroads Master Plan by adding an additional 21.92 acres that will include 16.02 acres of residential development and 5.9 acres of commercial development. The property is zoned Buckwalter PUD and consists of 21.92 acres located at the northeast corner of the intersection of SC Highway 170 and Gibbet Road. (MPA 01-23- 017595) (Staff – Dan Frazier)]
OKAY. AND WE HAVE NO OLD BUSINESS SO WE WILL GET STRAIGHT TO THE NEW BUSINESS WHICH IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR FIRST OF ALL HEAR FROM DAN, THEN THE APPLICANT AND THEN WE'LL DO THE PUBLIC COMMENT. OKAY, DAN, THIS IS FOR BUCK WALTER CROSSROADS MASTER PLAN A MINUTE A FOR BRIAN WHITMER. KEEFER ON BEHALF OF MILLSTONE VENTURES APPROVAL OF A PROPERTY OWNER PERSONAL EIGHT LLC FOR APPROVAL OF A MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION THANK YOU MADAM CHAIRMAN. MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT FOUR BUCK WALTER CROSSROADS THIS IS A LOCATION MAP SHOWING THE BUSINESS BLOCK BLUFFTON PARKWAY THIS IS HIGHWAY ONE SEVEN NEAR OKATIE HIGHWAY. THIS IS THE EXISTING IN THE CROSSROADS MASTER PLAN RIGHT NOW IT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN GREEN NORTH OF BLUFFTON, SOUTH OF BLUFFTON PARKWAY THE FUNDING FROM OKAY THE REQUEST HER REQUEST THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT IS THE IS THIS SECTION HERE THAT TAKES IT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO GIVE IT ROAD THIS IS PROPOSING TO PUT THIS INTO THE EXISTING BIKE PATH THE CROSSROADS MASTER PLAN THIS IS ANOTHER SHOT OF IT AS AN AERIAL THE APPLICANT BRIAN WHITMER OF WHITMER JONES KEEFER ON BEHALF OF MILLSTONE VENTURES LLC AND WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE PROPERTY OWNER PARCEL EIGHT LLC IS REQUESTING APPROVAL FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENTLY APPROVED MASTER PLAN FOR BUCKWALTER CROSSROADS IN THE PARK TO PLEASE AND MORE SPECIFICALLY THE AMENDMENT IS TO THE REQUEST TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL 21.92 ACRES THAT WILL INCLUDE 6.02 ACRES OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND 5.9 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.THIS IS THE EXISTING MASTER PLAN AND WHAT'S BEEN ASKED TONIGHT IS TO AMEND IT SO THIS WOULD BE THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN AND THE AMENDMENT INCLUDES THIS BOTTOM PORTION DOWN HERE THEY PROVIDED A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN WITH THIS APPLICATION IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THAT THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED ON WHAT'S WHAT'S ON THIS CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN WOULD GO THROUGH DEVELOPMENT PLANNING APPROVAL PROCESS IT'D BE COMING BACK TO YOU FOR PRELIMINARY PLAN AND THEN IT'S ALSO WITHIN THE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR SO YOU WOULD SEE IT TWICE AT THE POST UP IN CASE WE NEED TO DISCUSS ANYTHING IN FURTHER DETAIL. BUT I REMIND YOU THAT THIS IS A SITE PLAN THAT'S NOT UP TONIGHT TONIGHT JUST REQUESTING THE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE WALTER COMMONS LAND USE TRACK OF THE BUCKWALTER PAD AND WITHIN THAT TRACT IT HAS ALLOWED LAND USES THAT INCLUDE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT INCLUDE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMERCIAL AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL USES SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY
[00:05:02]
RESIDENTIAL USES AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN GENERAL COMMERCIAL USES IS ESSENTIALLY ALL COMMERCIAL USES OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL AT TIME OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL THAT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO EARLIER THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY AND IT WILL REQUIRE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REVIEWING, LIGHTING AND ARCHITECTURE AT TIME OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL.SO YOU'LL SEE THAT AS WELL AT TIME OF PLAN SUBMITTAL AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BEAUFORT COUNTY CONNECT'S 2021 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN AT TIME OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL AND THAT'S BECAUSE THAT WAS BROUGHT TO TOWN COUNCIL AND TOWN ADOPTED THAT PLAN AS PART OF THE AS A SUPPLEMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THESE ARE YOUR REVIEW CRITERIA WE HAD A PRE APPLICATION MEETING ON DECEMBER ONE OF 2022 AND AND THEY MADE THEIR SUBMITTAL ON JANUARY 24TH 2023 IT WAS REVIEWED BY DRC ON MARCH 1ST OF 2023. WE ARE HERE TONIGHT MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL AND TOWN COUNCIL CONSIDERATION FOR THE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT THE DATE THAT WILL BE DETERMINED IS YET TO BE DETERMINED.
YOUR ACTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION ARE RECOMMENDED OF THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION WITH CONDITIONS OR RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT TOWN STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. TOWN STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 393 OF THE UDL CAN BE MET WITH FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL TO TOWN COUNCIL FOR BUCKWALTER MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT AND WE HAVE THREE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS.
FIRST ONE IS A STATEMENT SHALL BE PLACED ON THE AMENDED MASTER PLAN DECLARING THAT ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PARK QUARTER CROSSROADS MASTER PLAN SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BEAUFORT COUNTY CONNECT'S 2021 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN. AND ESSENTIALLY THAT PLAN PROVIDES FOR A IT HAS THE RECOMMENDATION OF A OF THE FUND THE NORTHBOUND SIDE OF OF C HIGHWAY 170 THAT THAT A MULTI-USE PATH BE INSTALLED CONDITION NUMBER TWO IS WHETHER LOCATED OR OFF SITE IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF DEVELOPERS TO INSTALL A FOOT WIDE CONCRETE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PATH ALONG C HIGHWAY 170 FRONTAGE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS AND OF THE COUNTY CONNECT'S 2021 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PATH IN CONJUNCTION WITH INDIVIDUAL SITE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE PARK QUARTER CROSSROADS MASTER PLAN AND THE THIRD AND FINAL RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF IS THAT SITE LAYOUTS FOR ALL PARCELS ARE SUBJECT TO FULL TOWN REVIEW AND APPROVAL AT TIME OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL AND I WILL JUST OPEN IT UP IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME KNOW THAT THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THEM DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR DAN AT THIS TIME? I JUST HAVE QUICK ONE. GO BACK TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS IF YOU WOULD DAN.
NUMBER TWO STATES CONCRETE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN PATH MOST THEM ARE ASPHALT THEY ARE AND ON THE OTHER SIDE OF 170 IS ASKED FOR. WE HAD ACTUALLY MET WITH BEAUFORT COUNTY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WAS WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM MAINTENANCE AND WHAT WHAT THEY HAD THEIR ENGINEERING DIRECTOR RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE A THAT THEY WOULD IF DOT DOES ASSUME LONG TERM MAINTENANCE THAT COUNTY WOULD AND BE COUNTY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT AS A CONCRETE PATH RATHER THAN AN ASPHALT PATH BECAUSE THEY VIEW THAT AS EASIER LONG TERM MAINTENANCE AND I THIS IS THIS IS NIT PICKING HERE BUT I THINK IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE WITH THE ASPHALT ALREADY OVER ON THE AREA THINK CONCRETE'S GOING TO LOOK A LITTLE WEIRD JUST THAT'S WHY I ASK THE QUESTION THE COMMISSIONERS BUT IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CHANGE THAT CERTAINLY CAN CREATE A ALL RIGHT WHAT SHOULD APPLICANT WANT TO SEE. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME HELLO I'M BRIAN WHITMER WITH WHITMER JONES KEEFER WE'RE LAND PLANNING OUR WHOLE TEAM HERE AS YOU CAN SEE WE HAVE A CLIENT. WE HAVE LEGAL THEN WE HAVE CIVIL ENGINEERING.
I THINK WE'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY YOU HAVE LINKEDIN DID A GREAT JOB OF INTRODUCING PROJECT OKAY THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND LET THE PUBLIC COMMENT COME UP.
THANKS. I GUESS YOU'RE AFRAID SHE'LL YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
[00:10:06]
FOR THE RECORD. OKAY. SO WELCOME.MY NAME IS CAROL CRUTCHFIELD. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES PLANNING CONSTRUCTION WITH THE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT. IF YOU WANT MY ADDRESS I'LL GIVE IT TO YOU.
I'LL HAVE IT FOR KING GEORGE ROAD IN BLUFFTON, SOUTH CAROLINA ABOUT A MILE DOWN THE ROAD FROM WHERE THIS PROJECT IS . BUT I STAND BEFORE YOU TONIGHT AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TO DISCUSS THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW RESIDENTIAL HOUSING PROJECT ON YOUR AGENDA TONIGHT IN THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON OUR EDUCATIONAL FACES A PRESSING CHALLENGE OUT OF 11 SCHOOLS IN THIS AREA A STAGGERING SIX ARE CURRENTLY OPERATING THEIR INTENDED CAPACITY TO ALLEVIATE THE STRAIN WE INSTALLED AN ADDITIONAL EIGHT CLASSROOM MODULAR STRUCTURE AT PRINCEVILLE THIS PAST SUMMER THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT RIGHT FALLS IN THE PRITCHARD VILLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ZONE.
THE SCHOOL NOW HAS A TOTAL OF 18 CLASSROOMS IN MOBILE UNITS.
THE REMAINING SCHOOLS CONTINUE TO APPROACH OR EXCEED THEIR PROGRAMMATIC CAPACITY RECOGNIZING THE URGENT NEED FOR A SOLUTION, THE BOARD RECENTLY APPROVED FUNDING FOR THE DESIGN OF A NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT THE MAE RIVER CAMPUS. THIS INITIATIVE AIMS TO ALLEVIATE THE OVERCROWDING AT PROJECT BILL. HOWEVER THERE IS NO FUNDING AT PRESENT TO THE SCHOOL SO CURRENTLY OUR APPROACH TO TACKLE THE OF OVERCROWDING INVOLVES THE INSTALLATION OF MOBILE CLASSROOMS AND THE REASSIGNMENT OF STUDENTS FROM NEWLY DEVELOPED NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE THIS WOULD BE TO LESS CONGESTED SCHOOLS EVEN IF IT MEANS TRAVELING PAST A NEARBY SCHOOL. AND WHILE THIS STRATEGY TO SOME EXTENT IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT AS ALL OUR SCHOOLS CONTINUE TO REACH THEIR CAPACITY LIMITS THE AVAILABLE OPTIONS FOR FAMILIES WILL GRADUALLY BECOME LESS APPEALING THAN THEY ARE AT PRESENT. AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU JUST FOR EVERYONE'S TONIGHT THIS APPLICATION IS JUST FOR THE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT NOT THE USES SPECIFICALLY SO THOSE WILL BE ADDRESSED JUST TO HAVE A CLARIFICATION FOR THE PUBLIC. THOSE WILL BE ADDRESSED WHEN THERE ARE FURTHER DEVELOPMENT PLANS. YOU'RE BACK AND YOU CAN ALWAYS COME BACK.
OKAY. SO DO YOU WANT TO START OFF WITH ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? THE SHERIFF YES SIR. I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT BUT I'M MY NAME IS WALTER NESTOR AND I'M THE ATTORNEY I'M AN ATTORNEY WITH BURN FORMAN AND WE REPRESENT THE APPLICANT AND I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS. YOU START YOUR DELIBERATIONS AND THAT'S ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD. ALL RIGHT.
I'M SORRY THAT I DIDN'T STAND UP EARLIER BUT IT'S THE STAFF COMMENTS, THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE SOME CONCERN ABOUT AS MR. FRASER POINTED OUT WHEN HE INTRODUCED THE APPLICATION, ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS HE SAID IS THAT WE HAVE THE PERMISSION THAT MILLSTONE DEVELOPMENT HAS THE PERMISSION OF THE LANDOWNER PARCEL EIGHT LLC TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT ADDING THIS PROPERTY TO BACKWATER CROSSROADS.
WHAT WE DON'T HAVE IS PERMISSION OF ANYBODY ELSE IN THAT BACKWATER CROSSROADS PD AND SO WE CONCERNED THAT THE ADDITION OF THE STATEMENT I'M I'M CONCERNED THAT IT'S GOING TO CREATE LIABILITY FOR OUR CLIENT. WE DON'T KNOW HOW OUR APPLICATION CAN BE USED TO BIND SOMEBODY ELSE'S JUST LIKE MR. FRAZIER SAID WE HAD TO GET PERMISSION PARTIALLY A LLC TO SUBMIT THIS APPLICATION BUT CAN I ASK A QUESTION AND THEN WOULD YOU WOULD IT NOT BE MORE BENEFICIAL THAN TO JUST CREATE YOUR OWN MASTER PLAN INSTEAD OF ANNEX OR NOT ANNEX BUT AMENDING THE EXISTING MASTER PLAN? WELL IT MAY VERY BE BUT WE DIDN'T AND THAT WAS A DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD WITH STAFF ON IS TO SUBMIT OUR OWN MASTER PLAN. I DON'T I DON'T I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE WITH LANDOWNER AND HOW THAT WOULD GO.
OF COURSE WE HAVE INVESTED SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME AND EFFORT IN THIS PROCESS BUT WE BELIEVE I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE STAFF HAS ADVISED MILLSTONE THAT THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO CONSTRUCT THIS PATH AND MILLSTONE IS WILLING TO DO ABSOLUTELY GLAD TO DO THAT EITHER PUT MONEY INTO A FUND FOR PATH TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT A LATER TIME BECAUSE RATHER THAN HAVE A SIDEWALK TO NOWHERE BUT WE'RE WE'RE ABSOLUTELY WILLING TO DO THAT AS A MATTER OF FACT EVERY STAFF REQUEST WE HAVE SAID YES TO AND SO THIS ONE JUST THREW US BECAUSE THIS ONE WE DON'T SEE WE SEE THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T DO AND WE CAN'T WE CAN'T CHANGE SO PERHAPS THERE'S A WAY TO CHANGE THAT LANGUAGE TO MAKE THAT STATEMENT SOMETHING ELSE.
[00:15:08]
BUT AS IT READS TO US IT CAUSES US GREAT CONCERN THAT THOSE OTHER LANDOWNERS ARE GOING TO ARE GOING TO BE UPSET WITH US BECAUSE WE AN APPLICATION AND THE APPLICATION IS GOING TO RESULT IN AN AMENDMENT TO THEM TO THEIR MASTER PLAN. WHAT THE HARD PART IS IS WHEN YOU KNOW THE RISK WHEN OPEN UP A MASTER PLAN THEN YOU'RE FREE FOR ALL I MEAN WE'RE ALLOWED TO CHANGE THINGS FOR MINUTE SO LATE BREAKING THIS KIND OF A LATE BREAKING RISK IT'S BREAKING US TONIGHT TURNED TO US IN QUITE FRANKLY LIGHT TO YOU BUT IT'S CURRENT IT MIGHT OTHER THINGS IF WE'RE OPENING THIS MASTER PLAN THAT WILL WANT TO DISCUSS IN ADDITION TO THESE BIKE PATHS. WELL THERE AGAIN THAT'S WHAT WE DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR THE TOWN CAN LAWFULLY DO THAT AGAIN WE HAVE WE HAVE STANDING BEFORE TO DEAL WITH ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY WE DON'T HAVE STANDING TO DEAL WITH WITH THE REST OF THE PROPERTY AND THAT AND THAT'S OUR CONCERN. RICHARDSON DO YOU HAVE SOME LEGAL GUIDANCE AS FAR AS WHEN YOU OPEN UP THE MASTER PLAN IT'S BEEN MANAGER THANK YOU VERY MUCH AGAIN FOR THE FOR THE RECORD AS WE DID THOSE MEETINGS RICH SILVER THERE MIKE BROOKS AND BRUCE IN HERE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION GUIDANCE TO THE COMMISSION FOR ANY LEGAL ISSUES THAT JOHN MAY HAVE THE WAY THAT THIS HAS BEEN TREATED IN THE PAST WITH MASTER AMENDMENTS IS LARGELY AKIN TO A YOU KNOW, A TEXT AMENDMENT WHERE AN APPLICANT WHO MAY NEED A TEXT AMENDMENT A SINGLE PROPERTY REQUEST, A MEDIA TEXT AMENDMENT BUT THAT TEXT AMENDMENT WOULD IMPACT ANYTHING THAT IS IMPACTED BY THE GET ANY SORT OF ANY SORT OF DEVELOPMENT IT HAVE THAT SORT OF CASCADING EFFECT NOT EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY NEEDS TO HAVE SIGNED OFF ON THAT TEXT AMENDMENT OTHERWISE YOU COULD YOU KNOW EFFECTIVELY YOU YOU'VE EFFECTIVELY ADMINISTRATOR WILL OR ACTIVELY PREVENT FROM BEING ABLE TO AMEND THE OR AMEND ORDINANCES BECAUSE THIS IS A THIS IS NOT BY RIGHT THE ABILITY TO AMEND THE MASTER PLAN TO INCORPORATE NEW LAND OFFICERS IN A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS FAR RIGHT PERMITTED IT IS OPENING ITSELF UP TO THE CONDITIONS BY STAFF AND BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ULTIMATELY TOWN COUNCIL. WE DO THINK THAT WE DO THINK THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE TO REVIEW TO CONSIDER ISSUES BUT WE ALSO UNDERSTAND UNDERSTOOD I UNDERSTAND THE EXTRAORDINARILY DIFFICULT POSITION THAT MILLSTONE AND APPLICANT ARE IN AT THIS POINT BECAUSE IT IS IT IS SOMETHING WHERE I DON'T THINK IT WAS CONSIDERED BY THEM WHEN THIS PROCESS BEGAN OR OR WHERE THEY PROBABLY WOULD HAVE GONE THE OTHER ROUTE AND DONE THEIR OWN MASTER PLAN.SO I CERTAINLY SYMPATHIZE WITH THE OUTCOME BUT ULTIMATELY IT IS WITHIN STAFF'S DISCRETION TO MAKE MAKE THIS RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION WITHIN PLANNING COMMISSION'S DISCRETION TO CONSIDER IT AND ULTIMATELY IT'S WITHIN COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION TO IMPOSE SUCH A CONDITION THE ALTERNATIVE FOR THE APPLICANT TO WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION AND IN THE MASTER PLAN AS IT EXISTS WILL STAY IN PLACE SO I HOPE THAT ADDRESSES YOUR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS A LOT I KNOW I AM AND WE HELP EVERYBODY A WAY SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANYWHERE MANY I KNOW I'M GOING TO LET HIM GET UP AND SPEAK AS WELL. THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT CAME UP AND AND COULD YOU PUT UP THAT DRAWING THAT SHOWS THE PINK LINE OH PLEASE.
BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN PLANNING THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE ABILITY TO CREATE YOU KNOW, EITHER FRONTAGE ROADS, CONNECTOR ROADS, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM TO MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC ON THE MAJOR ROAD WHICH IS 170, WE DON'T SEE A POSSIBILITY OF THAT IN THE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT THAT'S COMING FORWARD WHICH WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT IF WE ARE OPENING UP A MASTER PLAN WE WANT THE APPLICANT TO CONSIDER DOING SOMETHING LIKE CONTINUING THAT PINK LINE RIGHT THROUGH ALL THE WAY TO GIVE BUT I THINK IN THEIR CONCEPTUAL IT DOES THAT ANYWAY I JUST DIDN'T GET COLOR AND I DON'T THINK IT DID THAT I THOUGHT IT WAS CROOKED KIND OF ROAD YOU DON'T WANT THE STRAIGHT RIGHT LIKE IT'S A DRIVEWAY VERSUS WHAT THE PINK LINE WAS INDICATING WHICH WAS THE ROAD AN ACTUAL FRONTAGE KIND CROSSROAD TO THE END I'M SURE IT IS WE DO HAVE FRONTAGE ROAD WITH ANGLED PARKING AND
[00:20:02]
PART OF WE WORKED THROUGH A TOWN STAFF IS THAT THAT WOULD BE BECAUSE THE PARKING THING WAS SECTION AND JUST GOING THROUGH A PARKING LOT SO INTERCONNECTIVITY IS SOMETHING WE WANTED AND WE WANT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO COME THROUGH THIS IT'S NOT A GATED MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AND I WOULD SAY IF IF WE WERE AMENDING THE MASTER PLAN THAT CONNECTION DOESN'T HAPPEN OR DOESN'T HAPPEN. IT'S IF IT'S A STANDALONE YOU KNOW, IT'S PART OF THE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE THOUGHT THAT WE GET THAT IN CONNECTIVITY YOU HAVE ACCESS DOWN GIVE IT IF NEEDED AND AND THAT'S REALLY HOW YOU WANT THEM TO LIVE ANYWAY YOU WANT THE COMMERCIAL TO COME IN TO THE RESIDENTIAL TO BE ABLE TO GET TO THOSE USES WITHOUT HAVING TO USE LIKE I GUESS MY CONCERN IS THIS IS ALL RESIDENTIAL AND IT'S GOT LOTS OF ANGLED PARKING AS YOU SAY I COULD VERY EASILY SEE THE RESIDENTS WANTING SPEED BUMPS TO PREVENT TRAFFIC FROM GOING THROUGH THERE BECAUSE I CAN SEE IT GOING THROUGH THERE AND YOU GOT TO MAKE A LEFT BY CIRCLE TO CONTINUE OUT, IS THAT CORRECT TO CONTINUE? WELL, YOU GIVE IT ROAD, YOU HAVE IT RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT FULL ACCESS AND GET IT AND THAT'S FOR THE DOOR TO THERE IS THREE COMMERCIAL PARCELS THE RIGHT HAND SIDE AND THEN THERE'S A FOR COMMERCIAL PARCEL ON THE CORNER SO IT'S IT DOES HAVE OTHER USES BESIDES JUST WELL AND IF YOU DEVELOP THE MULTIFAMILY PRIOR TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL PARCELS YOU THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO CONNECT TO THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH WHICH THEY WON'T BE IN CONTROL OF BECAUSE THEY WON'T RUN THOSE PARCELS EITHER SO AND I'M WITH THE L.A. COMMISSIONER ADELE GORE THERE NEEDS TO BE I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE PROVIDED SOME ABILITY TO SECURE IT FULLY SERPENTINE THROUGH THESE MULTITUDE OF PROPERTIES THAT WILL BE DEVELOPED AT VARIOUS TIMES TO GET TO GIVE IT . I THINK IT'S NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE REST OF THE MASTER PLAN AS SHOWN WHERE IT'S A MUCH MORE DIRECT EVEN IF IT DOES SERPENTINE A LITTLE BIT. BUT I THINK I'M AT BARE MINIMUM WANTING TO SEE ON HERE IS A PINK THAT ACTUALLY EXTENDS ALL THE WAY THROUGH THIS PROPERTY TO GIVE IT ROAD TO WHERE YOU CAN TURN LEFT AND RIGHT NOT JUST RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT BECAUSE WE MAY NOT ALWAYS BE HERE TO SAY HEY WE KNOW THIS WAS INTENDED TO CONNECT AND SOMEBODY MIGHT DEVELOP LATER WHERE IT IS GATED WHERE YOU GO UP ONE SIDE, YOU GO TO THE OTHER WHERE IT BLOCKS OFF FOR SOME REASON BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GUARANTEED PLAN AS IT STANDS. SO I WANT SOME RECORD STATES THAT FOR CONNECTIONS LET ME LET ME INTERJECT REAL QUICK I CAN JUST SO THAT I CAN CLEAR THINKING GO OVER LET ME JUST CLEAR SOME THINGS UP YES WHAT WE ARE DOING TONIGHT IS NOT THAT RIGHT SO WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT UNDERSTANDABLY THE CONNECTIVITY BUT THEY MAY NOT COME IN WITH THIS PLAN. I UNDERSTAND THOUGH WE ARE NOT WE CAN'T BASE OUR RULING JUST ON THERE'S NOT A PINK LINE BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AMENDING A MASTER PLAN SO YES WANT ALL OF THAT TO HAPPEN BUT WE NEED TO BE ON TOP OF IT GOING FORWARD BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING FOR TONIGHT'S PURPOSE. RIGHT.AND I'M NOT SPEAKING TO SPECIFICALLY DRAWN AS THEY HAVE IN THEIR PLAN.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT FROM A CONCEPTUAL LEVEL FOR THE WHOLE ENTIRETY OF THIS MASTER PLAN THERE IS A FRONTAGE ROAD THAT CONNECTS SHOWN BY A PINK LINE THAT SHOULD CONTINUE THROUGH THIS PROPERTY. HOWEVER THAT'S EXECUTED IN THE END THAT'S SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
THIS GOES AND THEY'RE NOT SAYING NOT TO DO IT AND MAYBE THEIR CONFIGURATION IS NOT GOOD AND THAT'S WHERE WE HELP THEM LATER. RIGHT.
BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE WANT THEM TO DRAW PINK LINE ON THE PLANNING GOING ON THERE.
COULD YOU DRAW A PINK LINE ON THE PLAN I THINK WOULD BE DROPPING A LITTLE YELLOW LINE HERE. WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION DURING? YEAH, BUT ANY MORE OR DOWN HERE AGAIN? NO, NO RIGHT NOW NOT A GOOD ONE.
OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION FOR DAN BUT I CAN WAIT.
YOU WANT TO COME BACK? YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND WHO YOU ARE PLAYED BY ADRIAN DENNIS MILLER AND I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS OF MILLSTONE VENTURES. I'M THE APPLICANT AND I JUST WANTED TO POSE A QUESTION ABOUT CONDITION NUMBER ONE TO THE COMMISSION AND YOU KNOW DAN OBVIOUSLY IS HERE AS WELL. CAN WE PULL IT UP ON THE SCREEN I'M SORRY I DIDN'T GET A PRINT BACK AND I'D LIKE TO START OFF BY SAYING THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY PROPONENTS THE CONNECTIVITY AND
[00:25:07]
OF THE MULTI-USE PATH AND IT'S GREAT COMPLIMENT OUR USE AND WE LIKE IT WE WE DO DEVELOPMENTS YOU KNOW ALL OVER THE COUNTRY AND THIS OF CONNECTIVITY IS SOMETHING THAT WE COMMONLY EMBRACE FOR OUR JOB SO WE DO WANT TO DO IT AND WE'RE HAPPY TO CONSTRUCT IT AS A TIME OF WE'LL BE DOING MULTIFAMILY PIECE ON THE OF THE DEVELOPMENT SO YEAH AND WE WENT THROUGH THE DRC PROCESS AND DISCUSSED THINGS LIKE WHERE WE'RE ABLE TO ACCESS THE STATE ROAD AND WE GOT OUR YOU KNOW TRAFFIC STUDY DONE WHERE YOU KNOW WE'RE WE'RE PRETTY BOUND BY NCDOT REVIEW OF THE TRAFFIC STUDY OF WHERE ALL OF OUR ENTRANCES ARE AND EVERYTHING AND WE'VE RECEIVED MANY GOOD AND HELPFUL COMMENTS DURING THE DRC PROCESS I THINK I CAN SAY ALL OF WHICH WE INCORPORATED INTO THE TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY. SO WE'RE TRYING TO BE REALLY GOOD TO WORK WITH AND YOU KNOW BE SYMPATHETIC INPUT FROM THE INTERESTED PARTIES AND SO ON.COMMENT NUMBER ONE OBVIOUSLY WE WANT THAT AND WE WANT THAT PATHWAY TO CONNECT ALL THE WAY TO GO UP THE BOSTON PARKWAY JUST LIKE IT SHOWS IN THE 2021 CONNECT PLAN THAT WOULD BE OPTIMAL FOR US AND YOU KNOW, I THINK OUR THE THAT WALTER BROUGHT UP REGARDING THAT COMMENT IT KIND OF STEMS FROM YOU KNOW, OUR YOU KNOW I KIND OF STARTED TO TRY AND TRYING TO FIND THE RIGHT WORDS IT WOULD BE IT WOULD AT THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR ALL THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WHERE THAT PATHWAY GOES AND EXTENDS TO BLUFFTON PARKWAY IS SOMETHING THAT THE PLANNING STAFF AND COMMISSION ADDRESS WITH THOSE DEVELOPERS AS THOSE COME UP JUST AS IT BEEN ADDRESSED WITH US UM FOR FOR OUR MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THE THAT MAKES US NERVOUS ABOUT IT IS MAKING COMMITMENTS ON OTHER PEOPLE'S LAND TO THEM THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE LIABILITY TO US. WE'VE BEEN ADVISED BY WALTER THAT THAT COULD BE A LIABILITY TO US THAT WE'RE WE'RE MAKING COMMITMENTS ON OTHER PEOPLE'S LAND UNBEKNOWNST TO THEM AND THAT IS SOMETHING WE'D PREFER TO AVOID.
SO THAT GOES BACK TO MY QUESTION THE FIRST QUESTION OF WHY NOT HAVE AN MASTER PLAN.
YEAH AND WE COULD DO THAT THE ADVANTAGE OF AMENDING IT VERSUS HAVING IT WE HAD CONVERSATIONS EARLY ON THE PLANNING VERSUS WITH ABOUT AND I THINK WE DID GREAT OPTION WELL RIGHT RIGHT YEAH I THINK YEAH AND WE TALKED WE'VE TALKED WITH WILLIE WITH WORD EDWARDS AND BRIAN ABOUT KNOW THE TRADE OFFS AND THE PROS AND CONS OF NEW MASTER PLAN VERSUS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT AND THIS JUST WASN'T BROUGHT TO OUR AT THIS POINT IN TIME AS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD CONSIDERED AND THIS COMMENT WE DIDN'T RECEIVE UNTIL LAST WEEK SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE NOT THAT'S WHY WE'RE IN THE POSITION WE'RE IN NOW. YEAH SO UM, WE WOULD BE WE WOULD LOVE IT AND IT WOULD WE WOULD VERY SUPPORTIVE OF IT IF WHEN THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS, YOU KNOW ARE BROUGHT BEFORE YOU THAT THIS BE ADDRESSED BECAUSE WE WANT THAT CONNECTIVITY UM BUT IT WOULD US MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE AND WE APPRECIATE IT WE'RE WORRIED SOMEBODY WILL SAY WELL POINT BACK TO OUR YOU KNOW MASTER AMENDMENT AND THERE WILL BE A LIABILITY AS WE'VE BEEN ADVISED WE HAVE BY WALTER THAT YOU KNOW WE A COMMITMENT ON THEIR PROPERTY UNBEKNOWNST TO THEM SO THAT'S THAT'S IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER IT THAT WAY WE WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE IT AND IF YOU CAN'T THEN THAT'S SOMETHING HAVE TO DISCUSS ONE QUESTION DENMARK SORRY WE'RE NOT ARE WE CREATING AMENDMENT JUST FOR THIS MILESTONE OR? ARE WE AMENDING THE ENTIRE MASTER PLAN? THE ENTIRE MASTER SO SO IF WE MAKE A REQUIREMENT IT GOES TO THE ENTIRE MASTER PLAN WHICH IS BY THAT KIND OF THING THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO AMEND THE MASTER PLAN SO WE HAVEN'T ANYTHING OUT OF CONTEXT, CORRECT? I DON'T I MEAN IF THERE'S A IN THE ORIGINAL MASTER A CONNECTIVITY PLAN WITH THE PINK LINE THEY STILL HAVE TO HEAR TO SOMETHING AND THIS IS JUST THE SOMETHING THEY HAVE TO ADHERE TO AND IT GOES BACK WELL THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING A MASTER PLAN LIKE THEY'D HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ANYWAY I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS YOU'RE MAKING IT
[00:30:03]
SOUND LIKE YOU WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE WHILE WE THE STAFF ARE SAYING THE ENTIRE PLAN HAS TO HAVE ITEM ONE BUT YOU'RE MAKING IT SOUND IT WOULD FALL BACK ON YOU.IT DOESN'T HAPPEN THAT IT WOULD. RIGHT.
I KNOW THIS AND I UNDERSTAND IT AND THAT'S WHY THEY FEEL MIGHT BE LIABLE TO THE PERSON WHO'S GIVEN THEM THE PERMISSION TO COME THEIR MASTER PLAN EVEN THOUGH WE'RE MAKING THAT WE'RE MAKING THAT CHANGE THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY OF ALL OF A FRANKLY TO FOR PLANNING COMMISSION TO BE CONSIDERING POTENTIAL LIABILITIES BETWEEN THE OWNER THE CURRENT OWNERS AND THIS MESS THIS MASTER PLAN AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPERS I THINK IS A LITTLE OUTSIDE OF YOUR PURVIEW. WHAT YOU ALL SHOULD BE DOING IS ANALYZE CRITERIA THAT'S BEFORE STAFF HAS MADE THIS RECOMMENDATION BASED OFF OF A BELIEVE IT'S A RESOLUTION ORDINANCE ADOPTED BY THE COUNTY AND THAT HAS BEEN INCORPORATED WITHIN THE TOWN PLANNING PROCEDURES ABOUT TOWN COUNCIL. THIS CONNECTS 2021 BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN PLAN OBVIOUSLY THE 2021 BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN PLAN ACCOUNTING WAS NOT IN PLACE AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL ADOPTION OF THIS MASTER PLAN. SO I'M SEEKING TO AMEND THIS COMMISSION BILL WHERE I THINK YOU ARE CORRECT IN SAYING THIS WE CAN EFFECTIVELY SPOT ZONED PORTIONS OF A MASTER PLAN BY SAYING OKAY WELL THIS IS GOING TO BE IMPOSED ON. THIS ONE PARTICULAR PROPERTY AND EVERYBODY ELSE IS GOING TO BE ESSENTIALLY LOCKED INTO WHAT THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY.
WHEN YOU OPEN THE MASTER PLAN AGAIN THIS IS A PLANNING DOCUMENT.
IT'S A ZONING DOCUMENT YOU HAVE WITHIN YOUR POWERS THE ABILITY TO MODIFY THAT PLAN CONSISTENT WITH THE LAW AND THE PROCESS THAT WE GO THROUGH WE BELIEVE IS APPROPRIATE.
YEAH IT WILL ADD AND AGAIN SIMILAR A TEXT AMENDMENT SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT BUT THAT IS THE THAT IS YOU KNOW MY OPINION ON THIS AND I BELIEVE IT HAS BEEN THE POSITION OF THE TOWN THE PAST AS WELL WHEN LOOKING AT MASTER PLAN AMENDMENTS I THINK THAT THE LAST TIME PLANNING COMMISSION PROBABLY CONSIDERED ONE SIMILAR WOULD HAVE BEEN SOMEWHERE IN THE NEW RIVERSIDE AREA. I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER MAYBE IT WAS MID-POINT WHERE THERE WAS THE DISCUSSION OF YOU CAN EITHER MOVE FORWARD WITH THE AMENDMENT OR YOU CAN KEEP YOUR MASTER PLAN THE WAY IT IS WE'RE NOT YOU CAN WITHDRAW YOUR APPLICATION BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO AMEND WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO LOOK AT A REDUCTION IN DENSITY OR A REVIEW HOW THE ENTRANCE TO THE THE DEVELOPMENT IS DONE AND SO AGAIN I'M SINCERELY SYMPATHETIC FOR DEVELOPERS IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THEY'VE OBVIOUSLY PUT IN TOWN MONEY EFFORT INTO THIS AND UNFORTUNATELY THIS DID COME UP TO THEM AT A LATER DATE BUT ULTIMATELY IT IS IS PART OF THE PLANNING DIRECTIVES OUT OF OUR TOWN COUNTY AND IT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN ADOPTED WITHIN THESE CONDITIONS BY STAFF BECAUSE OF THAT AND IT IS WITHIN YOUR DISCRETION AS PLANNING COMMISSION TO INCORPORATE IT AS A RECOMMENDATION OF TOWN COUNCIL OR TO ELIMINATE IT BASED OFF OF WHAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING. SO IT'S UP TO YOU ALL TO YEAH I DO AND THEN I'M SORRY TO YOU WITH THIS I SHOULD ASK YOU THIS BEFORE BUT IT DIDN'T OCCUR TO ME. QUESTION DO WE KNOW WHY THIS PROPERTY WAS NOT ORIGINALLY THE MASTER BUT DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA THAT I DON'T IN THE MOMENTS BEFORE THE RESULT IS OKAY BECAUSE SAME OWNER OF THE REST IN THE MASTER PLAN OWNS IT. I WAS CURIOUS WHY HE KEPT IT.
I DON'T KNOW. OKAY IF SOMEBODY KNOWS ADRIAN AGAIN SO IT WAS AND THIS IS A LITTLE BIT HEARSAY I HAVEN'T SEEN ALL THE DOCUMENTS MYSELF BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT WAS PREVIOUSLY OWNED BY A CHURCH OF SOME KIND. OKAY.
AND THOMSON BOUGHT IT IN ABOUT 2017. OKAY.
SO HE BOUGHT IT AT 88. HE BOUGHT IT IN SO SO YEAH SO THEY BOUGHT IT AFTER THE ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN WAS OKAY THANK YOU THAT THAT HELPS YOU THE QUESTION I KEEP ASKING MYSELF AND I'VE BEEN ASKING MYSELF FOR THE PAST THREE DAYS SINCE REVIEWING THIS PACKET WHAT IN DAN I DON'T KNOW IF HAVE INSIGHT IN THIS I KNOW I'M PUTTING YOU ON THE SPOT BUT WHAT YOUR COMMENTS ARE WHAT IS THE BENEFIT TO THE TOWN WE AS A PLANNING COMMISSION ARE
[00:35:03]
SUPPOSED TO CONSIDER WHAT IS THE BENEFITS OF THE TOWN? WHAT IS THE BENEFIT TO THE TOWN IF ANY OF WRAPPING INTO THE ADJACENT MASTER PLAN AND GO AHEAD? WELL WELL ONE OF THEM IS THE CONNECTED CITY THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.I MEAN THE THE ACCESS TO SC 170 IS ALREADY IS SET IN STONE DOTY WANTS RIGHT AND RIGHT OUT WHERE THEY WILL BE AND THAT'S TIED TO AN ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN IF THEY HAVE THEIR OWN MASTER PLAN. IF YOU'RE SAYING AS AMENDING AMENDED INTO THE EXISTING MASTER PLAN VERSUS OWN I MEAN THEY CAN DO THE EXACT SAME THING AS ITS OWN MASTER PLAN.
I THINK I THINK IT MADE IT EASIER FOR THEM TO REQUEST AMENDING INTO THIS FROM POSITION. WE COULD PROCESS IT EITHER WAY .
OKAY AND THAT'S AND THAT'S THE STRUGGLE I'M HAVING PERSONALLY IS IS I DON'T SEE A BENEFIT I DON'T SEE A DRAWBACK NECESSARILY THAN WHAT I'M ABOUT TO SAY.
I DON'T SEE A BENEFIT THE TOWN OF OF AMENDING THIS INTO A MASTER PLAN I DO SEE BENEFITS TO THE TOWN IF AND DON'T THROW THINGS AT ME ESPECIALLY YOU ALTER THE END OF IT BEING ITS OWN MASTER PLAN WE CAN FOCUS MORE ON THAT THAN WHEN IT'S WRAPPED INTO SOMETHING.
WE CAN DEAL WITH THE SIDEWALKS AND NOT IMPACT PEOPLE WE CAN DEAL WITH.
I MEAN THERE THERE TRAFFIC ISSUES AND I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A TRAFFIC PLAN DONE BUT THERE ARE TRAFFIC ISSUES THAT IF THE USES THAT ARE DRAWN ON THIS MAP WHICH WE'RE NOT CONSIDERING USES TONIGHT COME TO FRUITION THERE'S LOT MORE DISCUSSION THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO HAPPEN THAT I'M HAVING A I HATE TO SAY IT BUT I'M HAVING A CHALLENGE WITH WITH AMENDING THE OTHER MASTER PLAN AND THEN IN THE SIDE OF MY THOUGHT PROCESS THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT OWNS THAT MASTER PLAN ISN'T EVEN HERE TONIGHT SO WE'RE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT SOMETHING MAY AFFECT HIM AND I WILL SAY IT WILL IMPACT OUR, YOU KNOW, RECOMMENDATIONS ONE AND TWO THE RECOMMENDATION TO HAVE A PATH BUILD CAME INTO PLAY WHEN THE TOWN ADOPTED THE NEXT PLAN.
AND THEN THE REAL QUESTION IS WHO BEARS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF BUILDING IT AND WHAT OUR RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF THAT THE DEVELOPER BUILDS IT AS IT COMES IN THAT'S IT.
AND THAT CAME OUT OF A DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD WITH THE COUNTY WHERE WE ALSO THREW IN OKAY IF WE BURDEN THE DEVELOPER WITH BUILDING THE PATH DO WE BURDEN THEM WITH THE LONG TERM MAINTENANCE OF AND THEY SAID NO WE WOULD MAINTAIN THAT LONG TERM.
I THINK THEY WOULD MAINTAIN AND MAINTAIN THAT LONG TERM EVEN IF YOU AMENDED THE CONDITION TO NOT SAY CONCRETE. OKAY. I MEAN BUT THAT'S WHERE WE STAND WITH THAT. THE REASON THAT'S IN THERE IS IF TOWN HAD REJECTED THE THE NEXT PLAN AND SAID DON'T WANT TO ADOPT IT AS A MUNICIPALITY WE WOULDN'T HAVE THAT THOSE FIRST TWO IN THIS AS A RECOMMENDATION STAFF OKAY. OKAY I APPRECIATE THAT AND I'VE JUST FOR FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, I PERSONALLY AM HAVING A CHALLENGE WITH RECOMMENDING THAT THIS MOVES FORWARD IN THIS WAY SHAPE AND FORM AND I'M ONE OF SIX I'M JUST TRYING TO WORK FOR IT. RICHARDSON YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT IF YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING TO SIR MR. NESTOR FOR MAKING SURE THAT I WILL LAY THIS TO THE COMMISSION BECAUSE IT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN CLEAR SO FAR THAT ARE MULTIPLE OWNERS, NOT JUST THE YOU KNOW, WE THE MASTER PLAN AS IF IT'S A SINGLE OWNER KNOWS ALL THE PROPERTY WITHIN THERE BUT THERE ARE MULTIPLE MULTIPLE FOLKS SOME OF WHOM ARE ACUTELY AWARE OF WHAT IS GOING ON HERE.
AND I OTHERS WHO MAY NOT BE SO DESPITE THE OUT TO THE PUBLIC SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS THAT WAS BROUGHT BEFORE YOU. OKAY.
I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS IGNORANCE OF STANDING IS NOT AN EXCUSE IGNORING NOT PAYING TO PUBLIC NOTICE OF WHAT'S GOING ON IN YOUR PROPERTIES IS NOT AN EXCUSE EITHER.
THAT BEING SAID AND I AM A HUGE ADVOCATE FOR SIDEWALKS AND I THINK WITH THE RATE OF GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING AROUND HERE I THINK THE DEVELOPER SHOULD BEAR BURDEN A PORTION OF THE BURDEN OF A LOT OF THESE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. THAT BEING SAID I'M ALSO SENSITIVE TO THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IMPOSED UPON A DEVELOPER IN THE PROCESS AND GOING INTO THAT PROCESS KNOWING WHAT TO EXPECT. SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I'M LOOKING AT IS IN THE NEXT PLAN WHAT WOULD IT'S AN INTERNAL POLICY IT SOUNDS LIKE
[00:40:05]
IT IT'S AN INTERNAL DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE STAFF AND COUNTY IMPOSING THAT BURDEN ON THE DEVELOPER. HOW WOULD A DEVELOPER KNOW THAT THAT WOULD BE IMPOSED UPON THEM BY READING THE CONNECT'S PLAN THEY IS THERE A STATEMENT IN THERE THAT SAYS NO THERE IS AND IT'S CALLED OUT AS AN INTERMEDIATE PROJECT FROM A TO BE BUILT WITHIN 6 TO 10 YEARS.IN FACT THE BACK OF THE LISTS FUNDING SOURCES THAT COULD BE USED TO TO GET ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND YOU KNOW THIS IS COUNTY WIDE PROJECTS THAT THEY'RE SHOWING AND.
IT LISTS FUNDING SOURCES IN THE BACK. IT BREAKS DOWN INDIVIDUAL PATHS AND SEGMENTS OF PATHS BY SHORT ,MEDIUM TERM AND LONG TERM 0 TO 5, 6 TO 10 AND THEN TEN AND BEYOND. I THINK AND WE SEE IT AS AN OPPORTUNITY I MEAN THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO TO SOMEONE IN WANTING TO DO A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON AN UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY AND THEY'VE GOT A SIDEWALK HITTING THEM ON BOTH SIDES OF THEIR PROPERTY.
WE WOULD WE WOULD SAY YOU'RE BUILDING THE SIDEWALK WITH YOUR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TYING IT TO THE EXISTING SIDEWALKS. I DON'T SEE THAT. I'M SURPRISED THAT THIS IS SUCH A BIG BONE OF CONTENTION ACTUALLY. BUT I GUESS THE ARGUMENT IS THEY'RE NOT ARGUING A MILLSTONE IS NOT ARGUING AND PUTTING IT IN THE PATH AT ALL.
THEY SAID THEY WOULD DO IT BUT THE CONCERN IS THAT YOU'RE YOU'RE BURDENING THE THE EXISTING MASTER PLAN FUTURE DEVELOPERS WITH HAVING TO IN A PATH IF THIS IS APPROVED STAFF IS PERFECTLY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT RECOMMENDATION BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU GUYS NEED TO CARRY THAT RECOMMENDATION FORWARD AT TOWN COUNCIL CAN I GET A CLARIFICATION DID SO IF IF WE WHATEVER REASON DECIDE NOT TO WE COULD SAY WE COULD DELETE THIS FROM THE RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU'RE SAYING WE COULD DO THAT YOU CAN YOU CAN YOU REWORD STAFF'S RECOMMENDING THAT IS ANY EASEMENT TO SAY IN THE FUTURE THERE HAS TO BE ROOM FOR A SIDEWALK OR IS IT JUST THIS IS IF WE DON'T PUT IN IT'S GONE WHERE WHERE? WELL IT'D BE A LITTLE MORE OF ANOTHER DISCUSSION. I MEAN THERE'S A POSSIBILITY THAT AN EASEMENT MAY BE REQUIRED ON PROPERTIES IN ORDER TO GET THE PATH BUILT FOR IT COULD POSSIBLY BE BUILT COMPLETELY WITHIN THE DLT RIGHT OF WAY AT A FUTURE DATE FUNDED PUBLICLY SO I DON'T KNOW ANOTHER WOULD BE TO PROVIDE A 15 FOOT 20 FOOT EASEMENT FOR A FUTURE SIDEWALK TO BE BUILT BY OTHERS FUTURE PATH TO BE BUILT BY OTHERS THAT AGAIN IF I MAY SO YOU'VE GOT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED.
THERE'S DISCUSSION OF AN EASEMENT THAT'S PERHAPS A LITTLE BIT AGAIN STICKING THEM TO THE CRITERIA. AND THEN IF YOU GO BACK THE PROJECT I THINK THE VERY FIRST FIRST ONE THAT JOHN WAS ON THE CONFERENCE WHY DOES THIS MASTER PLAN AND THEY CAN COME UP WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND A COMPREHENSIVE WHICH IS JUST ADOPTED WITHIN THE LAST 12 MONTHS TOWN COUNCIL ADOPTED THE JOHN SPEARHEADED THAT PROJECT IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THE COUNTY CONNECT'S 2021 PROGRAM IS REFERENCED AS ONE OF THE KEY COMPONENTS OF THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT AND ANCHOR SO I THINK THAT IS WHERE YOU'RE GETTING THE INTRODUCTION TO THE NEED FOR COUNTING THE NEXT PLAN MAKING SURE THAT IT'S WHAT THIS APPLICATION CONSISTENT WITH THE ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE OF THAT STAFF HAS MADE THAT RECOMMENDATION. THE PLANNING COMMISSION A CONDITIONAL ULTIMATELY PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION THE COUNTY TOWN COUNCIL CAN INCLUDE THE CONDITIONS REFERENCED BY STAFF. IT CAN INCLUDE NO CONDITIONS. IT CAN BE A RECOMMENDATION OF THE NOW IT IS WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW AS WITH ANY JURISDICTION TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT YOU DEEM APPROPRIATE PROVIDED THAT YOU ARE FOLLOWING YOUR CRITERIA NO MATTER WHAT WE RECOMMEND DENIAL OR THESE DIFFERENT CAVEATS IT'S STILL GOING TO GO TO TOWN COUNCIL ABSOLUTELY DOESN'T EXPLAIN THAT. THERE HAS TO BE NO DOUBT AS I AM OF THE OPINION THAT IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO INCLUDE THIS IN A MASTER PLAN WHETHER IT'S A NEW PLAN, AN AMENDED PLAN AND SO TO ME IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO WITHDRAW APPLICATION BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT THIS TO BE PART OF THE AMENDED MASTER PLAN AND THAT'S THEIR DECISION.
BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE AN AMENDED MASTER PLAN, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO INCLUDE THOSE BECAUSE IT'S EXPLICITLY PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH IS OUR MAJOR REVIEW CRITERIA.
SO IF THEIR DECISION IF THEY WANT TO KEEP THE APPLICATION OR PULL IT BUT I THINK EITHER WAY MY STANCE IS THAT WE NEED TO INCLUDE THAT LANGUAGE WHENEVER COMES BACK UP.
YES, MR. NESTOR THANK YOU GENTLEMEN. COME TO THAT MINISTER FOR THE
[00:45:01]
RECORD ON BY WAY OF A SUGGESTION IF WE MAKE CONDITION NUMBER ONE A NOTICE REQUIREMENT RATHER THAN REQUIREMENT SO THE TOWN IS TELLING EVERYONE ELSE LOOKS AT THIS MASTER PLAN THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED SO THAT IT'S A MODEST CHANGE OF THE WORDS I JUST PROVIDED THAT THAT CHANGE TO MR. RICHARDSON MR. LA BRUCE I'M SORRY BUT YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF CHANGE A COUPLE OF WORDS IT'S NOT MILLSTONE THAT'S DOING THIS TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS IS A REQUIREMENT THAT THE TOWN IS GOING TO REQUIRE ALL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS BUCKWALTER CROSSINGS TO CONFORM TO COUNTY CONNECTOR 2021 AND AND THAT PROVIDES US WITH JUST A LITTLE BIT OF COVER THAT OUR APPLICATION DIDN'T TRIGGER IT BUT WHAT TOWN AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TOWN COUNCIL PERHAPS WILL APPROVE IS A NOTICE THAT'S NOW IN THE MASTER PLAN AND THAT NOTICE WARNS FUTURE DEVELOPERS THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO DO SOMETHING IT'S A IT'S A IT'S A IT'S A MODEST DIFFERENCE BUT IN YOU READ THAT HOWEVER YOU WORDED IT SO I CAN HEAR IT WHILE I'M READING IT YES MA'AM IT IS HEADED UP I KNOW WHOEVER WANTS TO READ IT SOMEONE GO AHEAD. WHAT? SO THE CHANGE CHANGED TO NUMBER ONE WOULD BE A STATEMENT SHALL BE PLACED AND I'LL TELL YOU WHEN THE CHANGE IS A STATEMENT BE PLACED ON THE AMENDED MASTER PLAN DECLARING THAT AND THEN INSERT THE TOWN SHALL REQUIRE THEN PICK UP AGAIN ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN BUCKWALTER CROSS CROSSROADS MASTER PLAN CONFORM ELIMINATE THE WORD SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COUNTY CONNECT'S 2021 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN WHAT WE'RE CHANGING IS SIMPLY INSERTING THE TOWN SHALL REQUIRE THAT ALL DEVELOPMENT COULD FALL BACK ON ITS IT'S SOME COVER YES MA'AM IT'S SOME COVER BUT JUST AS THIS JUST KEEPS GETTING MUDDY TO BE FAIR THOUGH IS OPENING THE MASTER PLAN NOT THE INITIATING.I MEAN THE FACT THAT WE'RE OPENING THE MASTER PLAN IS WHY THIS IS COMING UP AND SO THIS IS THE TRIGGERING EVENT. YES, I HAVE ONE AND ONE THING I WANT TO SAY AND I'VE HEARD IT TONIGHT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN IS AS MUCH A SURPRISE TO YOU THAT WE KNEW SARA AND THEN WE SAW IT BUT THIS IS HOW IT IS GOING TO BE MEANING UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU ARE.
I MEAN THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. I UNDERSTAND IT.
I DON'T WANT TO BE IN YOUR PLACE TO HAVE THIS FORCED UPON YOU BUT WE'RE DOING OUR JOB.
YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WE JUST WENT THROUGH MONTHS AND MONTHS OF THIS PLAN AND BECAUSE OF THAT WE WANT HAVE TO I THINK I'M GOING TO SAY I WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SAYING THAT WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO CONFORM TO THAT AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE AT AND UNFORTUNATE THAT YOU ARE AT THIS PREDICAMENT RIGHT NOW AND YOU ARE LEARNING THIS BUT IT MIGHT BE TO YOUR BEST INTEREST TO THINK ABOUT WITHDRAWING AND COME BACK AS YOUR OWN.
I WELL ONE THING I'D LIKE THAT I'D SAY THE STATEMENT WALTER NESTOR JUST READ WOULD BE YOU STILL IT IT'S JUST PUTTING IT ON THE TOWN IT WOULD PROBABLY BE FAR BETTER US WITHDRAWING AND RESUBMITTING INDIVIDUALLY AND THEN YOU HAVE NO LANGUAGE ON THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY WOULD BE THE OTHER OPTION. YOU SEE THIS MASTER PLAN BACK ITSELF AND IT WOULDN'T REALLY HAVE WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANY LANGUAGE TO PUT THE BACKWATER FROM A BEFORE PERHAPS LOCAL PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES A DECISION ON THE PROPOSAL. IT MAY BE WORTHWHILE TO OUR STAFF WHETHER THEY HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THAT THAT STATEMENT ONE WAS WHAT STAFF HAD PROPOSED IN IT STAFF HAS FOUND IN THE APPLICANT'S FINAL AMOUNT BETWEEN IT ULTIMATELY AGAIN IS PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION BUT AS I KEEP I KEEP GOING TO WHAT IS THE BENEFIT TO THE TOWN HAVING THIS LANGUAGE SEE BENEFIT TO THE TOWN DON'T YOU THINK HAVING THEM CONFORM WITH 2021 FOR THE REST OF THE MASTER PLAN? I THINK THAT THE TOWN I THINK WE CAN MAKE THE REST OF THE MASTER PLAN INTO THEIR CAN USE THEM TO DO IT. YEAH I FEEL LIKE WE'RE PUTTING A MODIFIER IN THERE THAT WE DON'T NEED WHICH IS THE TOWN REQUIRES ARE WE GOING TO DO THAT ON ALL OF THESE I MEAN IT'S A MASTER PLAN IT'S BEEN OPENED WE AMENDED IT.
THIS TOWN STAFF OBJECT TO IT. I DON'T THINK WE DO I THINK I THINK THE LANGUAGE MODIFIED BY
[00:50:08]
MR. NESTOR IS FINE. I DON'T I DON'T SEE A PROBLEM WITH IT.YOU CONCUR OR ACTUALLY I MEAN THAT ASK ME WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN DEVELOPMENT ARE GOING TO COME IN AND WE AS THE TOWN AND TOWN STAFF WILL WILL LET THEM KNOW THAT THAT WE THAT INSTALLING THE PATH WILL BE A REQUIREMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL APPROVAL WHICH WE WANT TO GO AHEAD REVISION I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD I AM TO I THINK IN SHARE SENTIMENTS OF CONCERN ABOUT THIS INCLUDED LIKE CHANGING A WHOLE MASTERPLAN FOR THIS AND NOT DOING THIS AS A SEPARATE MASTER PLAN AND I THINK IT REALLY SHOULD BE ONE OF THE IN ADDITION TO THIS BICYCLE PATH THAT I SEE BEING AN ISSUE THE OTHER THING I SEE THAT THERE ARE PORTIONS OF THE OLD MASTER PLAN THAT I DON'T THINK CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS OF THE PARTY. SO YOU'VE GOT THE SANDHILL TRACT ABOVE THE BACK WALL OR THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY THE BETWEEN THE WETLAND AND THE PARKWAY WHICH IS SHOWN AS LIKE A RETAIL THAT'S IDENTIFIED AS RESIDENTIAL ON THE SANDHILL TRACT WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR THAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT. I UNDERSTAND THAT IS NOT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY. YOU'RE NOT EVEN LOOKING AT THAT BUT YOU'RE OPENING UP A MASTER PLAN THAT'S SHOWING LINE WORK THAT ISN'T CONSISTENT WITH WHAT NEEDS TO BE THERE OR WHAT CAN BE ALLOWED TO BE THERE. WE'RE NOT TALKING USE BUT THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT ITSELF AND I ALSO SAW IN THE PAPERWORK THERE WAS A QUESTION OF DOING WAREHOUSING NORTH OF PARKWAY BETWEEN 170 AND THE WETLAND WHICH. AGAIN THERE WAS A STATEMENT FROM TOWN STAFF SAYING IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THAT YOU'D TO UPDATE THE LINE WORK.
I'M ASSUMING THAT GOT DROPPED BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T WANT TO GET INTO THE LINE WORK ON THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. SO AGAIN I ECHO THAT SAME COMMENT OF THIS OPENS A CAN OF WORMS AND REALLY SHOULD BE ITS OWN STANDALONE DOCUMENT IF YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO BACK IN THERE AND TAKE CARE OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE IN THAT MASTER PLAN THAT ARE PROBLEMATIC. I AGREE. I MEAN MAKES SENSE.
WHY OPEN UP SOMETHING THAT YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AND TO ANSWER YOU I FEEL LIKE WE WOULD HAVE MORE CONTROL AS IT WERE A SMALL SEGMENT IF IT CAN HAPPEN AND I THINK WE CAN DEAL WITH THE PATHWAYS ON THE REST OF IT. I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE SAYING I JUST I DON'T SEE IT NECESSARILY A BENEFIT TO THE TOWN THAN POTENTIALLY FORCING THE REST OF THE MASTER PLAN TO HAVE THAT BIKE PATH WHICH I THINK WE CAN DO ANYWAYS AS THE DEVELOPMENTS ARE TO US I DO SEE A BENEFIT AND IF IT HAS ITS OWN MASTER PLAN WE'RE ABLE TO HOLD IT A LITTLE BIT MORE ACCOUNTABLE THAN IF IT'S PART OF ANOTHER ONE.
I COULD BE WRONG BUT THAT'S THAT'S WHERE I'M SITTING. IN WHAT WAY CAN THEY BE HELD MORE ACCOUNTABLE? I GUESS JUST SO I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT PROCESS I FEEL LIKE THE CONNECTOR ROADS TO THE OUTSIDE, THE TRAFFIC STUDY WE CAN TAKE IT A LITTLE BIT BETTER LOOK AT BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THAT TRAFFIC STUDY INCLUDED THE WHOLE MASTER PLAN OR IF IT JUST INCLUDED WHAT THESE PROPOSED AND SO ON HAVE JUST BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT BEFORE US.
I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT GIVEN ROAD INTERSECTION AND HOW IT HOW ALL OF THIS DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS IT AND I FEEL LIKE IF IT'S PART OF AND I, I COULD BE WRONG I FEEL LIKE IF IT'S PART OF A BIGGER MASTER PLAN IT KIND OF GETS LOST IN SOME THAT AND THEY CAN THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY ISN'T NECESSARILY JUST ON THIS BUT IT'S ON MORE THAT MAKES SENSE ADRIAN DANIELLE AGAIN SO SOUNDS KIND OF LIKE THE DIRECTION WE'RE HEADED HERE IS THAT WE MAY NEED TO POSTPONE THIS AND ULTIMATELY CONSIDER WITHDRAWING AND SUBMITTING THIS AS A NEW MASTER PLAN LIKE THAT WOULD BE A MAYBE A CLEANER PREFERABLE YOU KNOW REQUEST YOU KNOW IF WE DO THAT OR PROBABLY GOING TO FIND OURSELF HERE AGAIN FOUR MONTHS FROM NOW YOU KNOW APPROACHING YEAR AGAIN WITH THE SIMILAR PLAN WITH NEW DRC COMMENTS AND ADJUSTMENTS WHICH OF COURSE WE'RE HAPPY TO DO. THAT'S WHAT HAVE TO DO HERE EFFECTIVELY IF WE DO THAT IT KIND OF SEEMS TO ME AND YOU KNOW I COULD BE WRONG ABOUT THIS THAT.
[00:55:06]
WELL IT WILL BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE CONSIDERATION THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE TONIGHT ABOUT OUR PLAN THEN YOU KNOW, IT WILL BE SIMILAR USE AND THERE WILL BE SOME ADJUSTMENTS MADE AND MAYBE WE NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS WILL YOU KNOW WE'LL STILL BE AGREEABLE TO THE NEXT PLAN BUT IT WON'T OPEN UP THE KIND OF WORMS WITH THE REST OF THE MASTER PLAN.UM BUT IT IN WHAT IT DID THAT SEEMS SIMILAR TO REMOVING COMMENT NUMBER ONE AND THEN CONSIDERING THIS IN TERMS OF WHERE WE'LL TO IN THE END YOU KNOW IT JUST HAPPENED FOUR MONTHS EARLIER WHERE OBVIOUSLY THERE IS TIME AND EXPENDITURES THAT WE FEEL THE PRESSURE OUT AND THAT'S BUSINESS AND OUR RESPONSIBILITY. SO I'M JUST MAKING THE COMMENT TO ASK THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THAT AND IF THE COMMISSION DOES NOT CAN YOU KNOW IS NOT OPEN TO REMOVING CONTENT NUMBER ONE AND ALLOWING TO CONTINUE, THEN I THINK THE BEST THING FOR US TO DO WOULD BE TO ASK FOR KIND OF A CONTINUANCE AND YEAH AND I'M SORRY WHAT WE WOULD ASK IS THAT YOU TABLE FOR A MONTH SO THAT MY CLIENTS CAN ACTUALLY CONSIDER ALL THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE AND AND JUST TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION AND COME BACK WITH A FULL WITH A SEPARATE MASTER PLAN OR COME BACK AND IN THIS AND SO I THINK IT'S POSSIBLE WE'D APPRECIATE THAT I THINK THAT'S THE BEST SOLUTION BECAUSE YOU JUST GOT THIS INFORMATION A WEEK AGO AND YOU HAVEN'T HAD REALLY TIME DIGEST IT AND IT TAKES A LONG TIME IT'S ABOUT 2 MINUTES OF SIX SO THAT'S ANOTHER QUESTION THAT CAME IN AND IT'S NOT A LOT BASED IN THAT POSITION. A LOT OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING BETWEEN I GUESS I'M STILL MISSING THE PART WHERE LOOKING AT IT AS AN INDIVIDUAL MASTER PLAN IS REALLY MUCH DIFFERENT BECAUSE THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NETWORK ROAD ACCESS, THE TRAFFIC STUDY THAT'S ALL GOING TO BE PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS. SO I GUESS LIKE IS THE MASTER PLAN NOT REALLY INTENDED TO A GENERAL VARY I KNOW THAT THEY GAVE US A DETAILED BUT A MASTER PLAN CAN BE VERY CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND HAS NOTHING TO DO REALLY WITH THE USE LIKE A LOT OF THAT IS BY SO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS CAN THEY JUST ADD IT TO THIS MASTER OR CAN THEY HAVE THEIR OWN MASTER PLAN BUT FUNCTIONALLY THE OUTCOME FOR MY VIEW IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME OTHER THAN WHETHER THIS LANGUAGE IS IN THAT MASTER PLAN NOT SO I'M STRUGGLING TO SEE WHY WE WOULDN'T WANT THEM TO AMEND THE WHY WE WOULD BE ENCOURAGING THEM TO DO THEIR OWN MASTER PLAN BECAUSE I'M NOT GETTING HOW THAT CHANGES US LOOKING AT IT ON ITS OWN AS A MASTER PLAN WE CAN'T GET INTO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW LEVEL COMMENTS AT THAT POINT EITHER.
SO I'M JUST STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND THE PROS OF DOING THAT.
I GUESS YOU KNOW, I ALMOST WONDER WELL GEE I'M GLAD I AGREE WITH YOU AND I CAN SEE HOW YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT THAT. BUT I THINK YOU HEARD THE COMMENTS FROM DEVELOPERS THEMSELVES AND I THINK THEY DON'T LIKE THAT COMMENT.
YOU KNOW AND I CAN UNDERSTAND I HAVE BEEN THERE BEFORE ACTUALLY AND I DON'T LIKE WHEN SOME SURPRISE COMES IN AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE GOT TO LIKE. WELL WITHIN FEW WEEKS AGO.
SO I THINK IN THIS CASE HEAR WHAT LIBBY IS SAYING. I AGREE.
WHY SHOULD WE GO THAT ROUTE? BUT I DON'T THINK YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE LANGUAGE OF THAT TOWN RECOMMENDATION. I THINK I THINK THE TABLING MIGHT HELP US UNDERSTAND TOO BECAUSE I WANT TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT BETTER YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON THAT BECAUSE IT'S MAKING SENSE BUT I'M NOT THERE AND I AGREE IT MAKES SENSE BUT I WOULD NOT BE IN AGREEMENT TOO TO ELIMINATE THAT FIRST COMMENT OR CORRECT. I DO SO I AGREE WITH YOUR POINT BUT IF THE ONLY WAY WE COULD DO IT IS TO ELIMINATE THAT FIRST POINT THEN I HAVE A PROBLEM.
THEY DID MAKE SUGGESTED LANGUAGE REVISIONS THAT TOWN STAFF WAS OKAY WITH SO IF THEY'RE OPEN TO KEEPING THAT WITH THEIR I GUESS TO NOT DELAY THE PROJECT IF THEY TO JUST WANTED TO THROW OUT THERE THAT I'M NOT SURE WHY WE'RE ENCOURAGING THEM TO DELAY IT IF THE END RESULT IS GOING TO BE THAT THEY CAN AMEND THE MASTER PLAN WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY'VE OFFERED WELL AND WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY'VE OFFERED RICHARDSON WOULD YOU NEED TIME TO REVIEW THAT TO MAKE SURE IT MAKES SENSE. ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THAT NOW? I MEAN IT'S IT'S A MINOR MODIFICATION EFFECTIVELY INCORPORATES THE TOWN AS THE OPPOSING ENTITY RATHER THAN LEAVING IT AS A YOU KNOW A DIRECTIVE THAT ALL SHALL CONFORM BUT RATHER THAT THE TOWN SHALL REQUIRE THAT ALL CONFORM WHICH IS A IT'S A SLIGHT CHANGE TERMINOLOGY BUT I OBJECTIVE AND IT DOESN'T DIMINISH THE ILLEGALITY OF IT. SO I'D WERE I'D BE FINE WITH THE CHANGE FROM BACK TO AND
[01:00:08]
FROM HERE I FORGETTING HERE WE'RE DOING A RECOMMENDATION THAT'S GOING TO COUNCIL SO YOU TIME TO VET AND MAKE SURE YES SIR COMMISSIONER WEBB OR WE WOULD HAVE TIME TO REVIEW THAT TO CONFIRM BUT FROM FROM LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY CHANGE IS BEING REQUESTED NOW SO DON'T THINK YOU'RE WILL DIMINISH THE ABILITY OF THE TOWN TO ENFORCE AND THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID BEFORE TO BUT CERTAINLY WILL CONFIRM THAT BEFORE IT GOES TO COUNCIL I THINK THE OTHER I THINK FOR ME IT'S HARD EVEN APART FROM JUST THIS NEXT PORTION BY STANDING BY THIS A MASTER AMENDMENT AND PROVIDING A RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL APART FROM LOOKING AT THE NITTY GRITTY OF A DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FROM A CONCEPTUAL LEVEL I THINK YOU HAVE TO BECAUSE YOU'RE TAKING IT AS AN ENTITY AS A WHOLE.YOU CAN'T JUST LOOK AT THE ONE PART IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY DOES REALLY LOOK AT THIS AS A SINGLE PART. IT'S NOT REALLY LOOKING AT THE COMPREHENSIVE NATURE OF THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT IT'S NOT REALLY LOOKING AT WETLANDS AND EASEMENTS AND WHAT PROPOSED LIKE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS ARE BEING PROPOSED HERE WHICH LIKE I SAID EVEN IF YOU TAKE OUT THE LINE WORK YOU STILL DEFINITELY GOT A USE HERE THAT'S INCONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER PLANNING DOCUMENTS THAT ARE ON THAT APPROVED AND PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
SO I'M STRUGGLING SAYING YES TO SOMETHING THAT I CAN TELL YOU ISN'T RIGHT EVEN IF IT'S JUST A PORTION OF IT. AND I KNOW THAT WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN IT THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD HICCUP. I DON'T WANT THEM SAYING HEY WELL PLANNING COMMISSION CLEARLY APPROVED YOU KNOW WHAT LOOKS LIKE A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT BY THIS STANDARD.
SO WE WANT TO BE JUDGED BY THAT THEN IT BECOMES IT IT REALLY MUDDIES THE WATER OF WHAT'S ACCEPTABLE NOT ACCEPTABLE. ARE THEY PERMITTED TO DO COMMERCIAL BY RIGHT NOW IN THAT PORTION OF IT? NOT SPECIFICALLY BETWEEN THAT WETLAND AND BLUFFTON PARKWAY.
IT FALLS IN THE SANDHILL TRACK AND IT CAN'T IT CAN'T BE GENERAL COMMERCIAL.
IT HAS TO BE. BUT IS THIS MASTER PLAN DOING ANYTHING WITH USE AS THE USE NOT BY THE PARCEL LIKE WE'RE NOT GRANTING USE TO THE REST OF THE PARCELS IN THE MASTER PLAN IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S COMMERCIAL WHEN IT CAN'T BE COMMERCIAL WHETHER IT DEVELOPS THAT WAY OR NOT OTHER PARCELS NOT ON ANOTHER PARCEL NOT OKAY CAN YOU CLARIFY OR CLARIFY EVERYTHING'S ALLOWED BY THE BACKWATER PD WE'RE IN THE BACKWATER THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE NORTHERN RIGHT I'M TALKING ABOUT THE PORTION THAT'S UNDER THE SANDHILL TRACT OVER THE PARKWAY NORTH OF THE BLUFFTON PARKWAY. OKAY.
IT'S NOT ALLOWED TO BE THE COMMERCIAL. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE RESIDENTIAL THERE. IT'S IDENTIFIED AS RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CAN DO THAT CAN DO COMMERCIAL. IT'S JUST HAS A SIZE LIMITATION .
THE COMMERCIAL PROGRAM WHERE WATSON PARKWAY CURVES AT THE END THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN COMMERCIAL NORTHSTAR ON WHEN IT'S BETWEEN THE WETLAND AND 170 BETWEEN THE WETLAND GOING EAST IT'S THE SANDHILL TRACK AND IT'S NOT JUST RESIDENTIAL SAND COULD YOU PULL UP THE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT I THINK THAT THIS AND I THINK GOING BACK TO THIS POINT OF IF WE THIS THAT WOULD GIVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT TO SEE IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS BE BETTER FLUSHED OUT AND ADDRESSED. YES THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS IT STANDS CURRENTLY WOULDN'T YOU TALKING ABOUT THE SOUTH SIDE OR THE NORTH NORTH OF THE BLUFFTON ON THE EAST OF EAST OF THE CORRECT THAT WERE INITIALLY APPROVED COMMERCIAL BACK AND 0708I DON'T KNOW THE BACKGROUND ON IT THE POINT YOU'RE MAKING THOSE ON COUNCIL WITHIN THE COMMONS LAND USE TRACK AND THE LAND USE TRACK IS CHANGED IS THE SANDHILL LAND USE TRACK AND THEN YOU'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PERMITTED IN THE CENTRAL PLANNING DISTRICT YOU DON'T GO TO THE BOARD FOR SAY IT'S I THINK IT WAS IN WELL WHAT IS IT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR OH OKAY THAT'S GOOD BUT THOSE WORDS ARE IN THINK IF I WANT TO PULL UP THE BOARD WHAT MY PROBLEM THE REAL TEST IS IT FOR ONES THAT ARE GOOD OR SILVER TO THE I MEAN YOU'RE
[01:05:16]
COMMERCIAL AND YOU STAND THAT LITTLE AREA THAT'S NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL THAT'S OUR CHALLENGE THE SANDHILL TRACK YOU'RE ALLOWED TO DO COMMERCIAL THERE. IT JUST HAS A LIMIT THE SIZE I GUESS REALLY COME. I MEAN WE COULD WE COULD END UP COMING BACK WITH A SEPARATE MASTER PLAN. I GUESS YOU JUST IT COST US LITTLE TIME.IT PROBABLY WON'T COST US KNOW QUICKLY RETOOL IT AND RESUBMIT BUT YOU DO THE LANGUAGE BECAUSE ALL WE WERE DOING AS A SITE AND THEN THAT'S THE FIRST THING ALL RIGHT CAN WE GO AHEAD AND I THINK WE'RE ALL OVER THE PLACE. CAN WE KIND OF GET A CONSENSUS OF WHERE EVERYBODY STANDS SO WE CAN KIND OF GIVE SOME DIRECTION IF THEY WANT TO TABLE OR IF WE WANT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION? DO YOU HAVE A I LIKE LILLIAN SAID HAVEN'T I'M TORN I MEAN I AM IT'S BECAUSE I AGREE BUT THEY'RE TOWN STAFF AND TOWN COUNCIL IS FINE WITH THE CHANGE IN THE LANGUAGE THEY ARE GOING TO BE BACK TWICE SO THEY'RE NOT IT'S NOT LIKE THIS IS THE FINAL ONE WHERE WASHING OUR HANDS OF IT SO I'M I'M GOING TO GO WITH WHAT LYDIA'S RECOMMENDATION WELL LET ME BRING GOT SAME THOUGHTS WE WOULD LIKE APPROVE THE TOWN STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE AMENDED LANGUAGE THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDED. I THINK FROM A MASTER PLANNING PERSPECTIVE IT MEETS ALL OF OUR CRITERIA AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
CERTAINLY WE ANY OTHER CLARIFICATION? I'M NOT STANDING ON A HILL I'M ON THE DIANE I'M I'M GOING TO GO WITH THAT YEAH I AM I'M ON THE SIDE.
YES. OKAY I'M LIKE CHARLIE NOT COMFORTABLE BUT I WOULD SUPPORT IT DEFINITELY. I'D LIKE CLARIFICATION ON THAT THAT PIECE OF THAT SAME TRACT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SAY YES TO SOMETHING THAT THAT THAT WE KNOW BLATANTLY DOESN'T WORK.
I DO THINK I DO NOT WANT I DON'T WANT TO MISS AN OPPORTUNITY TO STAND BY A CHANGE TO THIS MASTER PLAN THAT BENEFITS THE TOWN AND NOT BE PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL BECAUSE WE'RE NOT APPROVING ANYTHING WE'RE JUST RECOMMENDING TO COUNCIL SO PART OF YOUR YOUR RECOMMENDATION COULD INCORPORATE LOOKING FURTHER INTO THAT AND HOW THAT IMPACTS I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO MAKE IT PART OF THE AMENDMENT.
WE CAN DIRECT STAFF TO DO IT BUT THERE'S RECOMMENDATION FOR STAFF TO COMMENT ON THAT TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE TOWN COUNCIL. YES.
IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN AND I THINK WHAT MY MY AND LET ME ASK THE QUESTION FIRST IF I MAY AND THEN I'LL GET BACK TO THAT THE THE PEOPLE DISCUSSION AS WELL IS I ASSUME THAT THAT WILL BE INCORPORATED AS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS. YES.
AND THAT THE APPLICANT SAID THAT THERE MORE TAKEN CARE OF . BUT AS FAR AS THE SANDHILL TRACT MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE NOT TO IMPOSE IT AS A CONDITION BECAUSE IT'S IT'S BUT IT'S NOT A IT'S RECOMMEND IT WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION WITH FOR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS AND THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT'S I THINK RATHER IT'S AND IT'S INCUMBENT UPON STAFF STAFF TO DO THAT RESEARCH TO ENSURE THAT WHAT THEY'RE PRESENTING TO TOWN COUNCIL THE ROUTE MAP FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE YOU KNOW WITH ALL THE CRITERIA AND YOU'VE CHALLENGED THEM TO GO FIND THAT YEAH YOU TO GET THAT INFORMATION AND WE WOULD HOPE THAT THEY WOULD PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT THE COUNCIL ON THE RECORD AND I THINK TOWN STAFF'S COMMENTARY WAS THAT YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING OH PARDON THAT ALL THE PARCELS AND THAT WOULD BE ALL THE PARCELS IN ITS MASTER PLAN THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THE TOWN REVIEW TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT AND YEAH I MEAN I MEAN ONE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMES IN ON THE PROPERTY THAT THAT KATHLEEN WAS REFERRING TO ROBINSON BUT I MEAN WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO RESEARCH THAT WAY AND THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE OKAY. WELL WITH THAT THEN LET'S GO AND GET A RECOMMENDATION IN.
LET ME YEAH, YEAH WAIT AND JUST JUST FOR THE RECORD A COPY OF THE DOCUMENT THAT'S BEEN HANDED OUT TO DE PAUL HAS BEEN GIVEN TO CARRY TO INCORPORATE WITHIN THE MINUTES.
SO ANYBODY WHO IS NOT ABLE TO VIEW THAT DOCUMENT ONLINE RIGHT NOW WILL BE ABLE TO SEE THE
[01:10:04]
JUST POSTED. OKAY MORNING. I MOVE TO RECOMMEND TO TOWN COUNCIL TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH THE CONDITIONS BY TOWN STAFF NUMBER TWO AND NUMBER THREE AS WELL AS A REVISED NUMBER ONE THAT SAYS A STATEMENT SHALL BE PLACED ON THE AMENDED MASTER PLAN DECLARING THAT THE TOWN SHALL REQUIRE ALL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE BUCKWALTER CROSSWORD CROSS ROADS MASTER PLAN CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COUNTY CONNECT'S 2021 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN AND WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE EXISTING MASTER PLAN PINK LINE OF ROADWAY INTERCONNECT CONTINUES THROUGH THE NEW PARCEL PLAN A SECOND STEP OR HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THAT PINK LINE CONNECT TO THE FULL ACCESS IT GIVE IT ROAD THAT WHERE YOU CAN TURN LEFT AND RIGHT THE MOTION HAS ALREADY BEEN SECONDED SO THAT'S JUST THIS IS A DISCUSSION POINT. OKAY I DON'T HAVE TO OKAY WELL IN FAVOR.ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU AND THANK YOU FOR LETTING US TALK BACK AND FORTH
[X.2. Amendments to the Town of Bluffton’s Municipal Code of Ordinances, Chapter 23, Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), Article 3 – Application Process, Sec. 3.17, Certificate of Appropriateness – Highway Corridor Overlay District and Article 5 – Sec. 5.8, Lot and Building Standards (Staff – Charlotte Moore)]
. YOU GOT IT A LITTLE COMPLICATED.THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE THE DIALOG ITEM NUMBER TWO AND AMENDMENTS TO THE TOWN OF WEAPONS MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORDINANCES CHAPTER 23 VIDEO ARTICLE THREE APPLICATION PROCESS AND ARTICLE FIVE LOT AND BUILDING STANDARDS SECTION SO IT AND MADAM CHAIR WHILE WE'RE GETTING READY EVERYBODY'S GOING TO WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT COMMISSIONER FLYNN AT SOME POINT IS LIKELY TO BE OUR AND THEREFORE I AND I DON'T WANT TO GIVE HIM A B OVER FOR THAT. IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE LANGUAGE WE NEED? THE THINGS YOU NEED WE'LL JUST MAKE A NOTE OF IT IS THE TIME I TOLD KEVIN .
OKAY? FINGERS CROSSED WE'LL ALL BE LEAVING, RIGHT? CHARLOTTE NO PRESSURE, CHARITY. THANK YOU. WE HAVE TWO SECTIONS OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE AMENDMENT AMENDED.
THE FIRST ONE IS SECTION 317 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS THE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID FOR THE COFA HISTORIC WE ARE RECOMMENDING LANGUAGE BE INSERTED THAT AN APPROVED FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WOULD BE REQUIRED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION COULD REVIEW COFA HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT PLAN.
THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS SO THAT WE THAT WE HAVE A FINAL PLAN AND THAT ANY CHANGES TO PLAN WILL HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE AND CORRECTED BEFORE WE REVIEW THE COFA SO WE DON'T HAVE SOME BACK AND FORTH GOING ON AND I'M TAKING UP A LOT OF STAFF TIME AND TIME FOR THE APPLICANT.
IN ADDITION WE HAVE SECTION 5.8 MAKING SOME CHANGES TO THE LOT AND BUILDING STANDARDS AND I DO HAVE THE TEXT OF AMENDMENTS THAT I CAN PULL UP. BUT LET ME JUST BRIEFLY HIT THE POINT. SOME OF THESE ARE HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO SOME AMENDMENTS THAT WERE MADE PREVIOUSLY THAT THERE WOULD BE OVERSIGHT ON SOME PARTICULAR TABLE FOR INSTANCE, NOT THE LIVE WORK LIGHT TYPE WHICH WE ELIMINATED PREVIOUS THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT WE HAD ABOUT THIS RELATED TO A DEVELOPMENT IN BACK ISLAND THERE WAS CONCERN THAT THE LARGE LIGHT TYPE MAY BE INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE OF SOME SETBACK AND HEIGHT ISSUES. SO STAFF RECOMMENDING THAT THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT BE REMOVED FROM THE VARIOUS LARGE LIGHT TYPES INCLUDING MULTI-FAMILY MIXED USE AND COMMERCIAL AND THAT IT BE PERMITTED WITHIN THE MEDIUM LIGHT MULTI-FAMILY AND EXCUSE.
WE ONLY HAVE 12 LIGHTS WITHIN TOWN THAT ARE ZONED LIGHT INDUSTRIAL FOR THE MOST PART THEY EXIST WITHIN THE SOUTHERN PORTION BUCK ISLAND AND I GO THROUGH JUST NORTH OF BLUFFTON PARKWAY VERY UNLIKELY THAT WE'LL SEE LARGE DEVELOPMENT THERE AND.
SO THIS REALLY SHOULDN'T AFFECT ANYTHING. ADDITIONALLY WE'RE RECOMMENDING FOR THE LARGE MIXED USE LOT TYPE WE INCREASE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM TEN FEET TO 30 FEET AND THE PLANTATION PART SHARED IN PARK WE HAVE SOME UNDEVELOPED LOTS THAT ABUT RESIDENTIAL AND THIS PARTICULAR LOT TYPE ALLOWS UP TO FOUR STORIES.
THAT TEN FOOT SETBACK IS REALLY TOO MINIMAL SO THAT 30 FEET WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE.
AND THEN FINALLY WE'RE RECOMMENDING FOR THE THE NUMBER OF THAT ARE PERMITTED THAT IT BE REDUCED FROM FIVE STORIES TO FOUR STORIES FOR BOTH THE LARGE COMMERCIAL TYPE AND THE CIVIC LIGHT TYPE. AND IF YOU DECIDE TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT ON THIS CAN APPROVE IT AS STAFF IS RECOMMENDED AND MAKE AMENDMENTS OR DENY THE APPLICATION THE CRITERIA MOST OF THEM DO NOT APPLY THROUGH FOUR AND IT DOES COMPLY THE APPLICATION WITH THE
[01:15:04]
APPLICATION IS MANUAL IF A DECISION IS MADE TONIGHT THIS ITEM WILL MOVE FORWARD TO TOWN COUNCIL JULY ALL THE AMENDMENTS THAT WE'VE HEARD THIS YEAR WILL BE PACKAGE IS ONE AND THEY WILL MOVE FORWARD ON JULY 11. THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED ON AUGUST EIGHT AND WITH THAT WE ARE MAKING THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION BE.ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. EVERY QUESTION ELECTRICAL MOTION CONCERNS. OKAY, MOTION WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
YES I MOVE TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENTS OF THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON CODE OF ORDINANCES CHAPTER 23 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AS RECOMMENDED BY TOWN STAFF SECONDED BY HAVE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ALL IN FAVOR OKAY THANK YOU YOU COULD EVEN FURTHER ABOUT ANYTHING ANYBODY.
SO I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN UNLESS YOU HAVE A SECOND SECOND ANYBODY WANT TO DISCUSS THA
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.