Jun 05, 2023 Planning Commission

[1. CALL TO ORDER ]

[00:00:08]

I CAN HAVE YOUR ATTENTION WOULD YOU PLEASE JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I PLEDGE ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLG AND TO THE REPUBLIC ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR YOU TO THE MEMBS OF THAT'S A GOOD REMINDER IF YOU'RE PROUD YOUR CELL PHONE HERE PLEASE PUT IT ON SILENT IF YOU NEED TO ANSWER THE PHONE FOR SOME REASON PLEASE TAKE WITH YOUR SIDE OF THE ROOM SO YOU CAN KEEP THAT KIND OF ORDERLY AND WE ALL CAN BE ATTENTIVE TO THE ISSUE AT HAND CHARITY IF WE DO THAT AND YOU DO THAT YOU MIGHT LOOK YES, WE'LL DO EVERYBODY HEAR ME OFF REGARDING THE CELL PHONE. OKAY.

[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – May 1, 2023 ]

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

AT THIS POINT IF THERE ARE ANY CITIZEN COMMENTS NOT RELATED TO THE ISSUES ON THE ACTION ITEM AGENDA, ANY CITIZEN COMMENT NOT RELATED THE ACTION ITEMS ON THE AGENDA.

[7. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT/REZONING REQUEST FOR 21 ACRES (R100 025 000 0068 0000, R100 025 000 068A 0000 AND R100 025 000 0068B 0000) LOCATED AT LAUREL BAY ROAD, AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF ROSEIDA EXTENSION, FROM T2 RURAL (T2R) TO INDUSTRIAL (S1) ]

INDUSTRIAL USE IS ONE OF THOSE DEEMED APPROPRIATE FOR THE PARCELS WITHIN THE ACRES A ZONING DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AND SALVAGE OPERATIONS IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THESE PARCELS. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IDENTIFIES THESE AREAS THAT ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE ACRES WHERE INDUSTRIAL WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE AND THESE PARCELS ARE NOT WITHIN IT. SO WHENEVER WE ALSO LOOK YOU CAN SEE HOW MAJORITY OF THIS AREA IS RURAL AND ABUTTING THESE THREE PARCELS ARE SOME LARGER RESIDENTIAL LOTS SO WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL IN MILITARY WEIGH IN ON THIS DID THEY HAVE ANY?

[00:05:04]

YEAH. JUST LIKE A SLIVER AT THE TOP POINT OR THE FRONT ONE.

OKAY. QUESTIONS THE COUNTY GOOD. NOT ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. SURE. WOULD YOU PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF WHERE YOU LIVE? MY NAME'S JOSH. COULD YOU PUT THAT MICROPHONE NEXT TO JOSHUA? MY NAME'S JOSHUA WARD. I WAS THE PURCHASING AGENT THAT HELPED THE OWNER THIS PROPERTY. I'M JUST REPRESENTING THEM ON THEIR BEHALF BECAUSE I WAS ABLE TO ARTICULATE A LITTLE BIT BETTER ON WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO.

I DELIVERED A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION IF WE COULD PULL THAT UP TO THE COUNTY BUT WE'RE WORKING ON IT OVER HERE. OKAY. SO THESE ARE THE THREE PARCELS AS YOU CAN SEE. SO EACH ONE OF THOSE MARKS IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

YEAH. SO EACH ONE OF THOSE MARKED PROPERTIES IS A COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY THAT'S WITHIN A MILE OF OURS OBVIOUSLY.

YOU KNOW WE'RE NOT TRYING TO BUILD ON WETLANDS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT AND STILL MAINTAIN WITHIN LIKE THE ALLOWANCE OF WHAT YOU GUYS WOULD ALLOW. BUT IF YOU SCROLL THROUGH THE PICTURES OF STORAGE UNIT YOU CAN KEEP SCROLLING PLEASE SALVAGE YARD TO OTHER ADDITIONAL SALVAGE TYPE BUSINESSES ANOTHER STORAGE UNIT AND THEN ANOTHER TYPE OF SALVAGE BUSINESS. SO I MEAN THERE'S OTHER PROPERTIES WITHIN THAT ROAD THAT ARE BEING PROXIMITY TO ALLOW THAT TYPE OF USAGE SOME MORE WITHIN THE CITY OF BEAUFORT WHILE ALSO LOOK TO HAVE BEEN I GUESS GRANDFATHERED IN FROM THE COUNTY FROM BEFORE THEY HAD FUTURE LAND AND THEN THIS IS JUST KIND OF A BRIEF STATEMENT OF WHAT WE WOULD BE TRYING TO DO. IDEALLY WE'RE JUST LOOKING TO DO SOME SMALL STORAGE UNIT OPTIONS ALONG WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR LARGER BAYS THAT'S ALLOWED EITHER VEHICLE STORAGE ITEMS STORAGE OR WORKSHOP STORAGE. SO A LOT OF TRAFFIC AREA WITH THE FLYOVERS FROM THE AIR BASE . I MEAN IT IS LIKE SUPER LOUD THERE SO THE FACT THAT IT'S YOU KNOW, BEING PROPOSED TO BE PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL, I'M KIND OF SURPRISED JUST BECAUSE YOU KNOW, JETS ARE FLYING OVER LIKE AT LEAST 100 FEET, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE SO YOU KNOW, I LIVE, YOU KNOW, A LITTLE BIT FURTHER UP THE ROAD FROM THERE AND YOU KNOW, IT SHAKES THE HOUSE ALMOST WHENEVER THE JETS FLY OVER IDEALLY.

YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO KIND OF GET IT TO WHERE WE COULD PROVIDE THAT'S CURRENTLY IN NEED RIGHT NOW AND COUNTY, YOU KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE MOVING HERE THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF STORAGE OPTIONS AVAILABLE THAT HAVE AVAILABILITY AND JUST TRYING TO CREATE, YOU KNOW, A BUSINESS THEY'LL BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE AREA.

THAT'S IT. QUESTION NO, THANK YOU. JOSHUA, YOU HAVE A COMMENT REGARDING THIS ISSUE THIS JUST ONE AND AS FAR AS I'M AWARE OKAY PLEASE COME FORWARD IF YOU ARE MAKING A COMMENT RELATED TO THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU.

WELL, WE'LL LISTEN TO SOME PUBLIC COMMENTS JUST BEFORE WE START THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND I WILL GIVE THIS A INSTRUCTION AS WELL IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF ISSUES.

UM, IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY AND YOU WANTED TO SPEAK ON SPECIFIC ISSUE SUBMIT YOUR REQUEST TO SPEAK OF TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARY TO MY MY IMMEDIATE THERE YOU'LL BE ALLOWED 3 MINUTES TO SPEAK WE'LL BE RESPECTFULLY LISTENING YOUR COMMENTS AT THE AT THE PODIUM PLEASE CLEARLY STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD. UM UM AND PLEASE IN TURN BE RESPECTFUL TO THE PUBLIC FORUM THAT YOU WERE IN THIS PUBLIC MEETING IS RECORDED AND THEREFORE BECOMES A MATTER PUBLIC RECORD AND DOES AS DOES ALL CORRESPONDENCE ON THIS ISSUE DIRECTED TO COUNTY OFFICIALS. PLEASE IF WE HAVE MULTIPLE SPEAKERS I WOULD SAY PLEASE TRY TO AVOID COMMENTS ALREADY OFFERED THAT THAT'S NOT ADDITIVE TO OUR INFORMATION PLEASE PLEA AND I SAID ALREADY PLEASE PLACE YOUR CELL PHONES ON SILENT SO THAT WE CAN LISTEN TO TERRIBLY TO THE SPEAKERS JUSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTST REMINDERE ISSUES THIS ISSUE P C THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BODY TO COUNTY COUNCIL AS SUCH PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION THIS ISSUE GOES FORWARD TO COUNTY COUNCIL THROUGH THE LAND USE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE AND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THE REVIEW AND VOTING DETERMINATION SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION ON THIS ISSUE IS A STEP IN THE REVIEW PROCESS AND VOTING DETERMINATION BY COUNTY. I HAVE THE NAME OF A ALL I HAVE IS MOTION OR IS IT JUST FIRST NAME RICHARD? MR. RICHARD OR RICHARD 151

[00:10:02]

RICHARD OKAY AND WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD IT'S 151 LITTLE BAY ROAD AND I WAS JUST JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY HOW THIS WOULD IMPACT THE RESIDENTS.

OBVIOUSLY THE PROPERTY BUMPS EXACTLY TO THE BACKYARD OF OUR PROPERTY AND I WASN'T SURE OF WHAT THE SETBACKS AND THE REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE IF THIS WERE TO GO THROUGH AND THE ZONING WOULD BE CHANGED. OKAY. UM FOR THE COUNTY ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO THAT SOME JUST EMERGENT SOMEBODY'S OWN STAFF LIKE TO RESPOND TO THAT TO ME GO TO THE PODIUM YES PLEASE. WELL THIS IS THIS IS A ZONING AMENDMENT SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE USE IS. SO IT'S IT'S VERY SPECULATIVE AT THIS POINT, YOU KNOW, BUT THERE ARE BUFFERS, REQUIREMENTS AND WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR INDUSTRIAL TYPE USE TO RESIDENTIAL, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A 50 FOOT BUFFER.

BUT IT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON WHAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT OCCURS ON THE SITE, YOU KNOW, SO ANYTHING PERMITTED UNDER SE ONE INDUSTRIAL COULD HAPPEN IF THIS THIS AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD.

OKAY. OKAY. THAT'S ALL THE INFORMATION WE HAVE FOR YOU ON THAT ONE. SURE. AT THIS POINT, ANY FURTHER COMMENT YOU CARE? OH NO I THINK THAT'LL THAT'LL DO US THINK I THINK 50 WOULD BE OKAY UM I THINK AS LONG AS THERE WAS AT LEAST ENOUGH BUFFER TO PROTECT US UH, HAVE THEY SAID WHAT THEY PROPOSED TO PUT TO THAT IF THEY TO GET AN INDUSTRIAL ZONING.

WELL THE GENTLEMAN JUST SPOKE TO THAT ISSUE REGARDING UM THE STORAGE CAPABILITIES JUDGE STORAGE AT STORAGE SHED. OKAY. AWESOME.

THANK SO MUCH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

THERE ARE OTHER ON SPECIFIC TO THIS ISSUE. YES, MA'AM PLEASE COME UP IDENTIFY YOURSELF. SURE. FOR THE RECORD, UH, MY NAME IS MARIA MIMS AND I LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO THAT PROPERTY AND THE I LIVE AT 16 HOURS OUT OF ROAD EXTENSION AND THE IS DIRECTLY BEHIND US AND HE ACTUALLY STARTED CLEARING THE PROPERTY MID AUGUST AND HE DID COME APPROACH AND TALK TO US ABOUT THAT BUT THE AREA IS FULL OF CRIME DRUGS PROSTITUTION AND WE AFRAID OF THE TRAFFIC THAT IT'S GOING TO PRODUCE IN THE ROAD ON OUR IS A CURB AND PEOPLE ALREADY THROUGH THAT ROAD ALREADY SO WE'RE CONCERNED WITH MORE TRAFFIC THROUGH AND WE DO HAVE CHILDREN IN THE AREA THAT IT WILL CAUSE AN ISSUE BECAUSE THAT CURVE IS A SHARP CURVE AND WE WERE ALSO WORRIED ABOUT THE MILITARY TOO THAT DOES THAT TRAFFIC THE MILITARY TRAVELS THAT ROAD A LOT TOO. SO INCREASE TRAFFIC WOULD AFFECT THEM AND THEIR FAMILIES ALSO UM AND WE ALSO HAVE THE ISSUE OF TRESPASSING ON OUR OWN PERSONAL PROPERTY THAT WE'VE HAD AND WE'VE HAD TO CALL THE POLICE SEVERAL TIMES.

I KNOW THEY'RE TIRED OF US. THEY KNOW US. I'M SO I'M CONCERNED THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE STORAGE UNITS THAT PROPERTY WILL THAT AFFECT THE STORAGE UNITS ON THEIR PROPERTY BECAUSE THOSE THE PEOPLE AROUND THERE DON'T RESPECT BOUNDARIES AT ALL THEY CROSS OVER ONTO YOUR PROPERTY ESPECIALLY DURING NIGHT AND THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC DURING THE NIGHT TIME THAT WE'RE ASSUMING IT'S ASSOCIATED WITH DRUG TRAFFICKING AND WHATNOT AND AND ALSO WE HAD AN ISSUE WITH PUBLIC ACCOUNTING PUBLIC WORKS WAS TRYING TO ACCESS OUR PROPERTY SO THEY'RE TRYING TO DIG WATER ON OUR PROPERTY. THEY WERE SAYING IT WAS SOME TYPE OF DRAINAGE ISSUE BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY DRAINAGE ISSUES AND WE TALK TO THEM ABOUT THAT . SO WE'RE NOT SURE IF THAT WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PERSON TRYING TO GET WATER BECAUSE ACCESS OUR WATER PUBLIC WATER UM BUT AGAIN PUBLIC WORKS NEVER GOT BACK WITH US AND TALKED TO US ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON SO WE JUST JUST LET IT DISSIPATE AND AND A TRAFFIC MILITARY BASE AND A CRIME CRIME IS A BIG BIG PROBLEM.

THE AREA AND THE DRUGS, RIGHT BIG BIG BIG PROBLEM STILL ONGOING.

[00:15:06]

MR. MERCHANT, DO WE HAVE CLOCK WORKING ON THE THREE MINUTE STRETCH? I THINK WE'RE GOING TO NEED THAT. YEAH YES, MA'AM.

WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS? YES MY NAME IS RHONDA DOHERTY AND I LIVE AT 4436 PINEWOOD CIRCLE. BUT COULD YOU PLEASE PULL THAT MAP BACK UP TO SHOWS WHERE THE PROPERTY IS SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PURPLE I ON 17.5 ACRES JUST ADJOINING THAT TO THE LEFT YOU KNOW AND I, I UNDERSTOOD THAT THEY WANTED TO PUT SOME STORAGE UNITS IN THERE SO I DID A QUICK SEARCH OF STORAGE UNITS AND JUST AT THE END OF THE ROAD, YOU KNOW, NOT EVEN A HALF A MILE THERE'S A COMPANY THAT HAS DIFFERENT LOTS OF STORAGE UNITS AND JUST A MATTER OF FACT THE WEEKEND YOU KNOW, WE'VE RIDDEN ONE OF THOSE SO WE KNOW THAT THEY'RE NOT AT CAPACITY AND THEN IN MY SEARCH IS WITHIN FIVE MILES THERE'S FIVE STORAGE UNITS COMPANIES YOU KNOW THAT PEOPLE CHOOSE FROM YOU KNOW IN THIS AREA IS RURAL WHERE WE HAVE YOU KNOW, WE'RE JUST WOODED AND WE JUST HATE TO SEE THAT DESTROYED BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT A LOT THAT IT'D BE A FOR A COUNTY ANYMORE AND YOU WE JUST WANT TO KEEP IT THE WAY IT IS SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANYONE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE? OKAY.

IF NOT TO THE U.S. ANY COMMENTS AND YOU DO HAVE ONE OUT THERE. ALL RIGHT, SIR, PLEASE JUST APOLOGIZE FOR THE INCONVENIENCE OF THE LACK OF CHAIRS BUT I UNDERSTAND WE'VE TRIED TO GET MORE AND THEN YOU JUST DON'T JUST HAVE ENOUGH. HI.

MY NAME IS BLAKE KENNEDY. I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION TO ADDRESS SOME CONCERNS. BUFFER ZONES WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE A MAIN CONCERN.

FENCING IS GOING TO BE AROUND ANY PROJECT THAT I DO SO THAT'S GOING TO HELP ANY KIND OF TRESPASSING, YOU KNOW, THE WANDERINGS THAT GO THROUGH AND THOSE WOULD DEFINITELY LIKE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTING A LOT OF SECURITY. YOU KNOW, IF WE DECIDE TO DO A PROJECT IT'S GOING TO BE MORE COMMERCIAL. I'M ONLY REALLY LOOKING TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE THOSE COMPANIES THAT DISTRIBUTE LARGE GOODS. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M GOING.

IT'S ALL PROPOSED AT THE MOMENT SO SORRY. I'M OUT OF BREATH.

I HAD TO RUN TO GET HERE BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE THAT THIS PROJECT IS DEFINITELY GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE TAKE EVERYONE'S OPINION INTO ACCOUNT AND MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE HAPPY WITH WHAT HAPPENS. WE JUST WANT TO PROVIDE COMMERCIAL STORAGE FOR THE BE FOR REGION I SURE THANK SIR ARE THERE FURTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ISSUE OKAY HEARING NONE COMMENTS QUESTIONS I HAVE A QUESTION IN OUR PACKET IT SHOWS THAT THE PROPOSED DESIGNATION OF IS THE ONLY S1 I CAN SEE UNLESS ARE THERE IS A LARGER AREA THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT IS IT SEEMS TO BE BY T2 ORANGE WHICH IS I THINK A G2 ERS WHAT IT IS NOW SURROUNDED T2 ORANGE SO I'M CONFUSED ABOUT WHY WE SHOULD APPROVE S1 IN THIS AREA AND I LIKE WHAT THE I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THE STAFF IN DENIAL OF THIS THAT'S MY COMMENT OKAY COMMENTS FURTHER COMMENTS YES I JUST NOTE I KNOW IT WAS MENTIONED THERE ARE SOME OTHER NONRESIDENTIAL USES LAUREL BAY BUT THOSE ARE NONCONFORMING USES AND I THINK THE CONCERN AND WHY THIS WAS ADDRESSED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS THAT THE INTENT ISN'T TO SEE NON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OCCURRING IN LINEAR FASHION ALL ALONG LAUREL BAY SO WHILE THERE MAY BE SOME THAT ARE THERE AS A RESULT OF NONCONFORMING USES.

I AGREE WITH THE COMMISSIONER'S COMMENT THAT. I DON'T THINK THIS IS IN KEEPING WITH THE INTENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THERE ARE OTHER LOCATIONS WHERE INDUSTRIAL USES AND ZONING ARE IN PLACE AND MORE APPROPRIATE RIGHT.

THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS I JUST LIKE TO COMMENT I'M IN AGREEMENT REGARDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE AS IT WAS LAID OUT AND TOOK SEVERAL YEARS TO DEVELOP AND WE ARE NOT BUT A YEAR AND A HALF FROM THAT POINT IN TIME THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A 20 YEAR PLAN

[00:20:01]

SO I AM NOT INCLINED TO LOOK FAVORABLY ON CHANGING ZONING TO S ONE.

THAT'S MY COMMENT. IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER COMMENTS MAY I HAVE RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THE ZONING MAP REQUEST FOR ANY OR SURE AS WE GO THROUGH BASED ON THE TESTIMONY THAT WE HEARD THIS EVENING AND THE INFORMATION IN THE STAFF REPORT I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND TO COUNTY COUNCIL THAT THE REZONING FROM T TO R TO S ONE BE DENIED. ALL RIGHT THE SECOND ALL RIGHT .

FURTHER DISCUSSION ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE RECOMMENDATION NOT TO APPROVE RAISE YOUR HAND IT APPEARS UNANIMOUS THAT THE ZONING CHANGE REQUEST IS DENIED AS A RECOMMENDATION GOING

[8. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT/REZONING REQUEST FOR 502 ACRES (R300-012-000-0001-0000, R300-012-000-0254-0000, R300-007-000- 0002-0000, R300-012-000-0255-0000, AND R300-012-000-0256-0000) LOCATED AT 288 DULAMO ROAD TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY (CPO) BOUNDARY ]

OKAY, LET ME LET ME REPEAT THAT BETTER. ALL RIGHT.

IN FRONT US IS A ZONING MAP REZONING REQUEST FOR 502 ACRES LOCATED 288 DELAMAR ROAD TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY BOUNDARY. ALL RIGHT WE'LL HEAR FROM THE COUNTY. GOOD EVENING MR. MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

AS THE CHAIRMAN STATED WHAT WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS A PROPOSAL MAP AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT WOULD REMOVE THE FIVE PARCELS THAT MAKE UP PINE ISLAND FIVE AND OR TWO ACRES FROM THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT.

CURRENTLY THE CURRENT ZONING OF PINE ISLAND IS TOO RURAL PERMITS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AT A DENSITY OF ONE DWELLING UNIT FOR THREE ACRES AND ALSO PERMITS VERY LIMITED NONRESIDENTIAL USES. THE TWO RURAL ZONED IS INTENDED TO PRESERVE THE RURAL CHARACTER . THE FOUR COUNTY LITTLE ISLAND ALSO FALLS WITHIN THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAYS AND THE STATE ENABLING LEGISLATION DEFINES OVERLAYS ZONES AS THAT THEY IMPOSE A SET OF REQUIREMENTS OR RELAX A SET OF REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT WHEN THERE IS A SPECIAL PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE PARTICULAR GEOGRAPHIC AREA THAT DOES NOT COINCIDE WITH THE UNDERLYING ZONE BOUNDARIES.

SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE UNDERLYING ZONING, IF YOU THINK LIKE A A TRANSPARENT SHEET OF PLASTIC WITH A DRAWING IT THAT YOU OVERLAY YOU HAVE YOUR UNDERLYING ZONING AND WHAT YOU'RE IS WITH THIS OVERLAY DISTRICT IN THE CASE OF THE CULTURAL PROTECTION DISTRICT ADDING ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS TO WHAT THE UNDERLYING TWO RURAL ZONING HAS IN SPECIFIC WITH THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY IT RESTRICTS FRANCHISE ARCHITECTURE AND PROHIBITS RESTRICTED ACCESS OR GATED COMMUNITIES, RESORTS AND GOLF COURSES WHICH WERE DEEMED TO BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH CULTURAL PROTECTION. JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ABOUT THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY. IT WAS IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED LAND USE POLICY IN BEAUFORT COUNTY SINCE 1999. IT WAS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED IN APRIL 26, 1999 WHEN THE COUNTY ADOPTED ITS ZONING, ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ORDINANCE OR WHAT THEY USED TO CALL THE CDA. SO IN THAT FOLLOWED THE EXTENSIVE COMMUNITY PROCESS. THE DISTRICT IN ITS ORIGINAL LANGUAGE HAD A STATED PURPOSE TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES TO PROTECT NATURAL OR CULTURE RESOURCES FOUND ON SAINT HELENA ISLAND IN SOME OF THE LANGUAGE FROM THE PURPOSE STATEMENT GOING BACK TO 1999.

HAS THIS STATEMENT RAPID IN-MIGRATION WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER THE

[00:25:01]

IN 2014 THE COUNTY ADOPTED ITS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND AT THAT TIME INCORPORATED THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT IN THAT CODE AS WELL. SO IT YOU SURVIVED A NEW CODE FOR THE COUNTY. AND THEN IN EIGHTH OF 2021 THE COUNTY ADOPTED ITS VISION ENVISION BE FOR COUNTY 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THAT FURTHER UPHELD THE CPO POLICY RECOMMENDING THE FOLLOWING. THIS IS SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION FROM THAT CODE FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REEVALUATE THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT BY ASSESSING WHETHER ADDITIONAL LAND USE RESTRICTIONS ARE NECESSARY TO MEET THE INTENT OF THE DISTRICT. CONSIDER THE ADDITION OF SPECIFIC DESIGN STANDARDS THAT REINFORCE HISTORIC GARLICKY CHILD DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AND CHARACTER.

INCLUDES DIVERSE REPRESENTATION ON THE STEERING COMMITTEE THAT MAY BE FORMED TO.

GUIDE THE PROCESS. ENSURE PUBLIC INPUT FROM ALL SEGMENTS OF COMMUNITY SO THAT NOT ONLY TALKED ABOUT FURTHERING THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT BUT STRENGTHENING IT AND A COMMUNITY GROUP AND COMMUNITY BASED GROUP TO DO JUST THAT.

SO IN NOVEMBER 14TH 2022 COUNTY COUNCIL APPOINTED THE CULTURAL PROTECTION DISTRICT COMMITTEE AND THAT COMMITTEE WAS FORMED AND IT WAS GIVEN FURTHER DIRECTION BY THE COMMUNITY SERVICES AND LAND USE COMMITTEE ON JANUARY 9TH 2023 TO EXACT TO STUDY THE EXISTING CPO ORDINANCE AND REINFORCE THE OVERLAYS PURPOSE AND IMPROVE THE PROTECTION IT PROVIDES TO SAINT HELENA. THAT'S A PARAPHRASE OF THE MOTION MADE BY THAT COMMITTEE AND I THINK YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH WITH THAT AND OF COURSE THIS PLANNING LOOKED AT THAT AT OUR AT OUR MAY MEETING THAT WAS ADOPTED MAY 8TH, 2023 BY COUNTY COUNCIL.

SO YOU KNOW THAT GIVES YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND OF THE ORIGINS OF THE CPO DISTRICT ZONE AND WHERE IT STANDS TODAY. I WILL ADD THAT THE AND I HAVE A MAP HERE AND I THINK JUST HOLD IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT YEAH . THANK YOU.

AND IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO READ ON THIS MAP BUT THE BOUNDARIES ENCOMPASS THE ENTIRE ISLANDS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF DAUGHTER AND WITH THE EXCEPTION OF HARBOR FRIPP AND THE BARRIER ISLANDS WHICH INCLUDE HUNTING ISLAND PRICHARD'S CAPERS ST PHILIP'S AND THE LANGUAGE WHEN THIS WAS ADOPTED IN 1999 IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS IN THE APPLICABLE SECTION THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY APPLY TO ALL OF SAINT HELENA ISLAND WITH THE EXCEPTION OF FRIPP HARBOR HUNTING AND TARTAR ISLANDS AND THE WELL AND ALSO THE UMBRAGE BARRIER ISLANDS INCLUDING PRICHARD'S CAPERS, SAINT PHILLIPS AND BAY POINT.

THE APPLICABLE OF THESE STATEMENTS SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT THE CPO DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS APPLY TO NEW USES. IT IS NOT THE INTENT OF THIS SECTION TO CREATE NON CONFORM USE OF EXISTING USES. SUBDIVISIONS PARTIES IN OTHER DEVELOPMENTS APPROVED PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION 1999 ARE EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION AND SO THAT TO ME AS STAFF IT'S CLEAR THAT A JUSTIFICATION OF WHY THOSE BOUNDARIES WERE DRAWN DID NOT INCLUDE DATA FOR HIP AND HARBOR BECAUSE THOSE HAD ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED SUBDIVIDED THE PATTERNS HAD ALREADY BEEN ESTABLISHED IN 1999 ALSO IN ANALYZING LOOKING A LITTLE FURTHER WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS A WHOLE YOU KNOW PLACE HAS GREAT VALUE IN PROTECTING THE NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES OF SAINT HELENA ISLAND. THERE IS A SECTION YOU KNOW THERE'S ENTIRE SPOTLIGHT'S SAINT HELENA SECTION IN THE CODE AND THE PLAN PROVIDES THAT VIEW FOR COUNTIES CALLING EACH

[00:30:03]

AND THAT'S A QUOTE FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE AS WELL AS BOTH A STRATEGY AND AN ACTION.

THE PLAN CALLS FOR THE COUNTY TO REEVALUATE W8 THE CPO DISTRICT I MENTIONED EARLIER AND I WILL SAY THAT WHEN THE CPO CPO COMMITTEE MET. ONE OF THE CHARGES IS THAT IT IMPROVED UPON THE PURPOSE STATEMENT TO MAKE SURE THE INTENT OF THE CODE DIRECTLY TIED TO WHAT IT WHAT IT DID YOU KNOW THE PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN USES AND SO SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS ADDED TO THE PURPOSE STATEMENT I'LL READ IT SAYS THAT LARGE SCALE RAPID OR SUBURBAN SUCH AS GATED MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES, GOLF COURSES AND, RESORT DESTINATIONS, CONFLICTS WITH THE ISLANDS CHARACTER AND PRESENTS THE GREATEST THREAT TO THE CHARACTER AND STABILITY OF THE ISLAND COMMUNITY. RAPID SUBURBAN GROWTH WOULD NOT ONLY CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA AND THREATEN THE NATURAL CULTURAL HISTORIC QUALITIES OF SAINT HELENA IT WOULD LIKELY BRING WITH IT DISPROPORTIONATE AND UNSUSTAINABLE SHORT AND LONG TERM DEMANDS FOR URBAN SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE.

IT EVENTUALLY LEAD TO URBANIZATION OR SUBURBANIZATION OF THE ISLAND.

THE LOSS OF NATURAL QUALITIES WHICH HAD SUSTAINED GENERATIONS OF ISLANDERS AND WHICH HAVE HAS RESULTED IN THE CULTURE AND HISTORY OF THE. AND SO I THINK ALL OF THESE REALLY KIND OF POINT TO WHAT THE TARGET AND INTENT OF THE DISTRICT IS AND AS FAR AS STAFF RECOMMENDATION JUST TO SUM UP YOU KNOW STAFF RECOMMENDS THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS THE LOCATION AND EXTENT OF THE CPO BOUNDARIES WERE PURPOSEFULLY DELINEATED TO SUPPORT IMPLEMENT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE PURPOSE STATEMENT OF THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT TO MOVE THE BOUNDARIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXCLUDING CERTAIN PARCELS ERODES EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY BY ALLOWING VERY USES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS POSING THE GREATEST THREAT TO CHARACTER AND STABILITY OF THE ISLAND COMMUNITY SO THAT IS OUR STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS IS FOR DENIAL BUT 1959 ALL RIGHT AND IN MAY WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT THAT TOUGH ACT TO FOLLOW GRIEVING EVENING.

THANK YOU CHAIRMAN COMMISSION MY NAME IS ELVIA PIANO. I'M THE OWNER OF SUBJECT PROPERTY PINE ISLAND. I'M EXCITED TO SPEAK TO THE COMMISSION TONIGHT BECAUSE WE HAVE A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY HERE TO ACTUALLY HELP PLAN FOR A VERY IMPORTANT PLACE IN COUNTY WHICH IS HOW AN ISLAND LIKE MANY I ARRIVED HERE OVER TWO YEARS AGO AND WAS IMMEDIATELY TAKEN BY THE INDESCRIBABLE ELEMENTS THAT MAKE COUNTY A SPECIAL PLACE.

SO I DECIDED TO STAY HERE. THIS IS NOW HOME AND I PURCHASED PIECE OF PROPERTY WITH THE INTENTION OF BUILDING SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY, THE COMMUNITY MY TEAM CAN BE PROUD OF . THAT DESIRE STILL STANDS TODAY AND DECISIONS MADE BY THIS COMMITTEE AND COUNTY WILL DETERMINE IF THAT CAN BECOME A REALITY.

ACCORDING TO BE FOR COUNTY, THE ROLE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO TELL YOU GUYS THIS BUT JUST FOR INFORMATION IS TO ADVISE ON MATTERS RELATING TO THE PREPARATION FOR THE FUTURE, TO ADVISE COUNCIL ON WAYS OF OVERCOMING COLLECTIVE PROBLEMS INVOLVING THE COUNTY AND TO ADVISE COUNCIL IN THE ORDERLY PLANNING FOR WISE CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES, PRESERVATION OF THE SCENIC BEAUTY AND ENVIRONMENT OF THE LANDS AND WATERS OF THE COUNTY. THIS ROLE IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

EVERY TIME THIS COMMITTEE MEETS AND TONIGHT EVEN MORE SO BECAUSE WILL HAVE A DIRECT EFFECT ON THE FUTURE OF SAINT HELENA FOR MANY GENERATIONS TO .

THAT'S A RESPONSIBILITY THAT NEEDS TO BE CEMENTED IN FACT NOT JUST A MOTION.

I IMPLORE YOU TO LISTEN TO THE FACTS WHEN THE OUTCOMES AND TO LOOK AT THIS AS AN EXERCISE OF COMMON SENSE. I AM REQUESTING THAT MY PROPERTY ON ISLAND BE REMOVED THE CPO BECAUSE IT WILL ACTUALLY ALLOW ME TO ACHIEVE THE GOALS OF THE ORIGINAL CPA

[00:35:03]

WE'LL START WITH THE HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY BUT IRELAND HAS NOT BEEN A PART OF ST HELENA DAILY ACTIVITIES FOR OVER 160 YEARS. IT'S BEEN A PRIVATELY OWNED DESTINATION AND UTILIZES GATED RECREATION DESTINATION FOR ALL OF THAT TIME UP UNTIL JANUARY 5TH THIS YEAR. WHEN YOU GUYS HEARD IT FIRST MOST PEOPLE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE PROPERTY WAS. IT'S AT THE END OF A TWO MILE ROAD.

YOU'LL DRIVE RIGHT BY IT UNLESS YOU'RE LOOKING FOR AND IT'S IT. IT'S HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT.

GIGANTIC THERE. BUT IF YOU DRIVE BY YOU SEEMINGLY ARE LOOKING AT A SERIES VOICE. BUT IRELAND HAS ALWAYS BEEN A RESORT.

WE HAVE A RESORT LODGING FOR BUILDINGS TO HOUSE GUESTS AS THEY COME OUT TO ENJOY OUTDOOR . WE HAVE HISTORICAL LETTERS AND CORRESPONDENCE WITH PEOPLE INVITING THEM TO COME AND ENJOY SAID RESORT. WE HAVE LETTERS TO PRESIDENTS MULTIPLE PRESIDENTS INVITING THEM AND THEIR CHILDREN TO COME OUT AND HUNT AND DO RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR A FEE. THE PROPERTY IS ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES AS SUCH TWICE IT HAS BEEN A GATED RESORT.

CURRENTLY IS A GATED RESORT AND IS FACTUALLY AS YOU SAID MR. HANEY, A NON-CONFORMING UNDER ANY ITERATION OF THE CPO WHETHER IT BE IN 1999 OR TODAY. WE HAVE SUBDIVISION PLANS ROAD PRICE SECTIONS CORRESPONDENCE WITH WITH ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS, ROAD PLANNERS AND OFFICIALS FROM 1958 DETAILING THE FUTURE BUILD OUT. THESE ITEMS ARE IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND ESPECIALLY WHEN CONSIDERING THE TASK OF PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE BECAUSE WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE PAST WHEN CONSIDERING ZONING CHANGES.

THE SECOND THING IS THE UNIQUENESS OF THE PROPERTY. THERE HAVE BEEN THERE'S BEEN A TON OF MISINFORMATION, SIGNIFICANT MISSING INFORMATION REGARDING PROPERTY.

SO I WANT TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT WITH FACTS. I'M NOT MAKING THIS OUT OF THIN AIR. IT'S ALL BASED ON SCIENCE, MATH, ENGINEERING WORK AND THE PRODUCT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF SURVEY WORK THAT I'VE COMPLETED TO DATE AND HAVEN'T REQUIRED TO BUY AN ISLAND IS THE SINGLE HIGHEST AND DRIEST PARCEL LAND OF ITS SIZE WOULD BE FOR COUNTY PROPERTIES 502 ACRES AND ONLY HAS FIVE ACRES OF WETLANDS.

THE WHOLE THING 96% OF THE PROPERTY IS SAND. 79% OF THAT PROPERTY OF THAT SAND IS CLASSIFIED AS A-1 MEANING THAT IT'S THE MOST WELL DRAINED IN THE ENTIRE COUNTY.

THE PROPERTY IS OVER SEVEN AND A HALF MILES OF SHORELINE DEEP WATER SHORELINE 8762 LINEAR FEET. THE BLUFFS RANGE FROM 20 TO 45 FEET IN THE AIR.

IT'S HIGH AND DRY. THE PROPERTY'S BEEN GATED FOR 60 YEARS.

IT ACTUALLY HAS TWO GATES AND THOSE GATES ARE GRANDFATHERED INTO ANY SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENT . THE ENTIRE PROPERTY HAS POWER. POWER POWERED BY DOMINION AND HAS WATER PROVIDED BY JASPER THAT GOES ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE.

THE ISLAND PORTION OF MY PROPERTY HAS ACTUALLY DEVELOPED.

IT HAS DEVELOPED SINCE THE TURN OF THE CENTURY AND IS THE ONLY DEVELOPED PART OF THE PROPERTY UNLIKE WHAT MOST PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TOLD IT ALSO HAS POWER WATER LIKE I JUST SAID IT HAS ESTABLISHED ACCESS ABORIGINAL CAUSEWAY AND THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE.

THERE ARE ZERO CEMETERIES ON MY PROPERTY. WE'VE GOT PEOPLE RUN AROUND EVERYWHERE SAYING THAT THERE'S 15 OF THEM. THAT'S A LIE.

WE'VE DONE THE IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THIS PLANNING COMMISSION HEARD FROM MY ARCHEOLOGIST, THE VERY HEAD OF THE ARCHEOLOGY TEAM DID THE WORK IN MITCHELL BILL.

WE SELECTED THEM INTENTIONALLY AND DUG 30,000 HOLES THREE TIMES THE STATE STANDARDS AND DID IT TO THE STANDARDS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SO WE COULD HAVE MY KIDS TO COME OUT AND FURTHER OUR WORK. CHILDREN I'VE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR TWO YEARS.

ALL THESE FACTS ADD UP TO A UNIQUE, EXTREMELY UNIQUE SCENARIO ONE AN EXTREMELY UNIQUE PIECE OF PROPERTY. PINE ISLAND IS THE SINGLE MOST DEVELOPABLE PIECE OF LAND ON SAINT HELENA ISLAND. IT HAS THE REQUIRED SOILS, REQUIRED WATER ACCESS, TOPOGRAPHY AND ALL THE ELEMENTS LOOK FOR WHEN ASSESSING A PIECE OF PROPERTY TO.

WHAT YOU'VE BEEN TOLD TO USE TO THE CONTRARY. THOSE ARE THE FACTS.

NOW FACTS ABOUT THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT THE ITEM BEFORE YOU THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FOR MY PROPERTY WAS NOT SUBMITTED TO GET OUT OF THE RULES. IT WAS SUBMITTED IN NOVEMBER LAST. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THIS BECAUSE THE INITIAL SUBMISSION TOOK PLACE TO ANY ORGANIZATION OF ANY COMMITTEE PRIOR TO ANY CHANGES OF ANY RULES AND PRIOR ANY TARGETED CAMPAIGNS AGAINST ME, MY FAMILY, MY TEAM IN THAT PROPERTY, THE COUNTY THE ONES WHO ARE SAYING THAT THIS APPLICATION SEEKS TO DEFEAT THE POLICIES ARE THE THAT ASKED ME TO TABLE THAT APPLICATION IN NOVEMBER. I'M NOT POINTING FINGERS BECAUSE WE RESPECTFULLY AGREED TO DO IT TO STRENGTHEN THE AREA BUT NOW WE'RE RIGHT BACK WHERE WE STARTED. LET ME TELL YOU WHY THE COMMITTEE AND THE BROADER PUBLIC ARE BEING TOLD AND I'M TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE RULES. THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

WE HAVEN'T THE PROBLEM THAT SAINT HELENA FACES NOT ME. OUR PROBLEM.

THE INTENT OF THE CPO, AS ROB STATED WAS TO PREVENT WAS TO PROTECT NATURAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES FOUND ON SAINT HELENA ISLAND. THE WAY THAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO

[00:40:03]

IT'S SUPPOSED TO DO THAT AS WELL AS THE COMMISSION. THIS COMMITTEE UNDERSTANDS WHAT GENTRIFICATION IS. AS SAID, IT'S THE RAPID IN-MIGRATION OF NEW RESIDENTS THAT CREATES A GREATER DEMAND FOR URBAN SERVICES AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THIS COMMITTEE SHOULD ALSO UNDERSTAND IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT VARIABLE WHEN ASSESSING NEW DEVELOPMENT IN TERMS OF PREVENTING GENTRIFICATION IS RESIDENT ADDS PERIOD SPECIFIC SAINT HELENA NEW RESIDENT ADDS ESPECIALLY IN HIGH PRICED WATERFRONT PROPERTY LEAD TO DISPLACEMENT BECAUSE OF THE PROPERTY TAXES INCREASE IN IF WE AGREED THAT THE INTENT OF THE CPO DISTRICT IS TO HELP HER GENTRIFICATION DISPLACEMENT THEN ALL PROPOSED PROJECTS SHOULD GO THROUGH THE FILTER WITH NEW RESIDENT ADDS AT THE TOP.

THAT'S IT. THE OPTIONS I'M DEVELOPING THIS PROPERTY IT'S MY PROPERTY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I HAVE THAT RIGHT THAT CAN'T BE TAKEN AWAY FROM ME.

THE PROPERTY IS NOT FOR SALE. I HAVE COMPLETED EVERY SINGLE TASK NECESSARY TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY AT THE END OF THIS PROCESS. ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS I'VE IMMERSED IN THE AREA TO UNDERSTAND TO THE BEST I CAN HOW ME AND MY TEAM CAN BE A PART OF THE SOLUTION TO BETTER AND TO BE THE BEST POSSIBLE NEIGHBOR AND TO HELP PARTNER WITH WITH SAINT HELENA FOR THE FUTURE NOT PART THE PROBLEM.

AS THE ZONING DIRECTOR ALSO STATED THE PRIMARY THREAT THE LONG TERM VIABILITY OF THE COUNTY'S GOAL GATED COMMUNITIES IS LAND DEVELOPMENT. IN MY OPINION THE PRIMARY IS AN ADDITIONAL PRIMARY THREAT. SECONDARY PRIMARY ONE A1 B TO ANY COMMUNITY IS A LACK OF POSSIBILITY. A LACK OF INVESTMENT, A LACK OF RECOGNITION AND RESOURCES.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF MY PROPERTY IS INEVITABLE. WE HAVE NOW AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHAPE THIS IN A MANNER THAT'S BENEFICIAL TO THE COMMUNITY. THE FIRST OPTION THAT WAY IF WE REMOVE THE PROPERTY THE CPO IT WILL ALLOW ME TO REDUCE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY BY OVER 60% AND HAVE ZERO NEW PERMANENT RESIDENTS. THIS ALIGNS WITH THE INTENT OF THE CPO BECAUSE IT PREVENTS BECAUSE NOBODY WILL LIVE HERE FULL TIME.

THEY DON'T NEED ANYTHING URBAN GOODS AND SERVICES. I'LL REDUCE DOC DENSITY BY OVER 90%. THIS ALIGNS WITH THE LANGUAGE OF THE CPO BECAUSE.

IT PROTECTS THE WATERWAYS WHICH IS A NOTED CULTURAL RESOURCE. I WILL PERMANENTLY OVER 80% OF THE PROPERTY AS OPEN SPACE AND GREEN SPACE. THIS ALIGNS THE INTENT OF THE CPO BECAUSE IT'S TIED TO THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. I'VE CREATED A FOUNDATION THAT WILL BE SEATED AND FUNDED IN PERPETUITY TO SUPPORT ORGANIZATIONS AND BUSINESSES BATTLING AGAINST CULTURAL LOSS . IN ORDER TO DO THESE THINGS I NEED A BUSINESS. I NEED AN ENGINE. THAT BUSINESS? YEAH, IT'S A GOLF COURSE BUT A GOLF COURSE CAN'T RESIDENTS ESPECIALLY ON A PROPERTY THAT I ALREADY BOUGHT WITH NO RESIDENTS ON IT. A GOLF COURSE CANNOT RAISE PROPERTY TAXES OTHER RESIDENTS OF THE AREA. COMMERCIAL USES ARE NOT COUNT AGAINST RESIDENTIAL USES PERIOD. THAT'S HOW PROPERTY TAXES WORK . IN MY OPINION THAT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED.

THIS IS CRITICAL TO UNDERSTAND AND TO CHOOSE. BELIEVE ME IF YOU WANT IN THIS OPTION I MAKE $0. NONE. IT'S INTENTIONALLY BUILT.

PLEASE. PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL. IT'S INTENTIONALLY BUILT TO BE A PART OF THE COMMUNITY AN ENGINE WITH THE LEAST AMOUNT OF NEGATIVE IMPACT.

YOU'LL HEAR FROM OTHER PEOPLE NOTES CORROBORATE BUT THIS IS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT DEVELOPERS DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE. RED HERRING THIS RED HERRING THAT I'VE BEEN SAYING IT FOR TWO YEARS IF I WANTED TO BUILD 166 I WOULDN'T BE HERE THE FIRST PLACE.

THE SECOND OPTION IS A GATED RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY OF 166 HOMES 166 SEPTIC TANKS, HUNDRED AND 66 WELLS AND OVER 100 DOCKS. THIS IS THE ONLY OTHER ECONOMICALLY VIABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY IT'S ZONED FOR THIS TODAY.

I'VE TAKEN ALL THE NECESSARY STEPS TO MAXIMIZE THE RETURN ON MY INVESTMENT USING THE RATIONALE AND INTENT OF THE CPO IS PREVENTING WORLD DISPLACEMENT.

THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THIS ARE SIGNIFICANT. IT ALLOWED 500 NEW RESIDENTS.

THAT'S SYNONYMOUS WITH RAPID IN-MIGRATION. IT'LL GENERATE OVER 500,000 NEW CARS ON THE ROADS. IT ALLOWED OVER 100 KIDS TO THE SCHOOL SYSTEM.

IT WILL CHANGE THE VOTING DYNAMICS FOR THE ENTIRE AREA AND IT MAY LIKELY INCREASE TAXES ACROSS ST HELENA AND IT MAY ACTUALLY INCENTIVIZE OTHER PEOPLE THAT DON'T WATERFRONT PROPERTY TO COME UP AGAINST ME. THESE AREN'T THREATS. THESE ARE OPTIONS.

I'M SEARCHING FOR A WAY TO WORK WITHIN THE SYSTEM BUT I NEED TO RECOGNIZE I NEED EVERYONE TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE TO DO THIS TOGETHER. NOT SCREAMING AND YELLING AT EACH OTHER, OVERCOMING COLLECTIVE PROBLEMS AND OTHER TASK OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHICH YOU GUYS DO A GREAT JOB OF TAKING ALL THE INFORMATION AND MAKING A RECOMMENDATION

[00:45:05]

THE BROADER COUNTY IS OF THE UTMOST CONCERN. WE CAN AGREE THAT NEW RESIDENT ADDS THE SINGLE LARGEST THREAT TO GENTRIFICATION DISPLACEMENT. IT'S AN EASY DECISION.

WE GOT TO OVERCOME THE PROBLEM TOGETHER. THE PROBLEM IS MISINFORMATION.

FOR ONE THAT HUNDRED AND 66 ISN'T REAL. IT'S VERY REAL.

WE'VE DONE TWO AND A HALF YEARS OF WORK TO GO DOWN THAT PATH. IT REQUIRES INPUT FROM ANYBODY EXCEPT FOR THE ZONING DIRECTOR ON THE CRT ROOM WHICH ALREADY DONE.

ACTIVISTS ARE SAYING THEY CAN AFFECT THE OUTCOME OF MY DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S NOT TRUE. THEY'LL HAVE ZERO EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF MY DEVELOPMENT REGARDLESS EVEN IF THEY DID. NEW RESIDENTS WILL STILL BE ADDED SOMEHOW.

YOU KNOW THEY BRING DOWN TO 166 TO 133. THAT'S 495 NEW RESIDENTS.

PROBLEM NUMBER TWO IS THE SPREAD THIS MISINFORMATION. WE'VE HAD CAMPAIGNS CREATED AGAINST AND MY PROPERTY THAT'S ONLY GOING TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY'RE PRETENDING TO PROTECT. PEOPLE ARE BEING TOLD THAT A GOLF COURSE WOULD CREATE LAND LOSS. IT CAN'T.

IT'S A PRODUCT OF NEW RESIDENT ADS. THEY'RE BEING TOLD THE DEVELOPER WOULD DESTROY THEIR WAY OF LIFE. WE ACTUALLY WANT TO BE HELPFUL IN HELPING THAT PERSEVERE AND SUPPORT IT. THEY'RE BEING TOLD THE PROPERTY TAX ARE GOING TO SKYROCKET IF I BUILD A GOLF COURSE. WE'VE BEEN OVER THAT.

THAT'S NOT HOW IT WORKS. THE DOMINO EFFECT IS THE THIRD ITEM AS YOU HEARD.

THAT'S ONE OF THE NUMBER ONE THINGS GOING ON. WE WANT TO BUILD THAT.

I GET IT TO OUR CAPITAL THAT CAN BUILD A RESORT AND DUE TO ARE YOU'RE ALLOWED 24 ROOMS NO DEVELOPER WANTS TO BUILD A RESORT WITH 24 ROOMS. IF WE SET A PRECEDENT THIS IS A POSITIVE ONE NOT A NEGATIVE ONE . THERE ARE A TOTAL OF FIVE OTHER PARCELS ON SAINT HELENA THAT COULD SUPPORT THAT AT THIS SIZE TO SUPPORT A GOLF COURSE.

THEY DON'T HAVE THE REQUISITE SOILS OR THE ACCESS TO DO IT EVEN IF THEY DID IF THEY WANTED BUILD A GOLF COURSE AND I'M WILLING TO COMMIT TO ALL OF THESE THINGS CONTRACTUALLY IN PERPETUITY THEY'D BE REQUIRED TO DO THAT AS WELL. THAT WOULD BE DENSITY.

THEY'LL BE REDUCTION. THAT'S LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY FINANCIAL SENSE AND IF THEY DID THEY'D BE TAKING CARS OFF THE ROAD AND NEW RESIDENT ADDS WHICH IS THE GOLD CPO THAT'S A WIN. THEY WON'T BUT THEY MIGHT AND IF THEY DID IT'D BE A GOOD THING. PLANNING COMMISSION YOU GUYS HAVE TO USE YOUR COLLECTIVE WISDOM. I'M HOPING TO HELP OVERCOME COLLECTIVE PROBLEMS. I HAVE A PROBLEM THIS THE FIRST TIME I THINK I'VE USED ALL MY TIME THAT I'VE HAD ALREADY UP HERE. I'VE TOLD 9 MINUTES OF THE LAST SIX MONTHS PLEASE.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS I'VE ONLY HAD 9 MINUTES IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS.

NOW IF TEN THERE BEING PLEASE SPEAK. PLEASE ADDRESS US DIRECTLY NOT THE AUDIENCE. THE PEOPLE ARE BEING TOLD THEY'RE MAKING AN INFORMED DECISION. THEY MADE AN INFORMED CHOICE. THAT'S NOT THE CASE IF THEY HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN THE FACTS AND THESE ARE THE FACTS IT'S UNCLEAR ME HOW STAFF COULD COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT MOVING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CPO EXCO TO EXCLUDE THIS PARCEL WOULD ERODE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CPO ALLOWING THE VERY USERS THEY'RE IDENTIFIED AS THE LARGEST GREATEST THREAT TO THE AREA. THE GREATEST THREAT IS RESIDENT ADS PERIOD. NOT A GAME, NOT A SPORT TO USE PEOPLE.

THE PLAN I'M PURSUING AT ZERO IT'S A COMMERCIAL USE THAT HAS ZERO IMPACT ON RESIDENTIAL TAXES, DOESN'T CREATE GENTRIFICATION AND CREATES A RECURRING REVENUE BUSINESS THAT PROVIDES COMMITTED ANNUAL RESOURCES BACK INTO COMMUNITY. THE PLAN THAT I MAY BE FORCED TO DO LIKE WE'VE SAID MAY INTRODUCE 500 NEW RESIDENTS SIGNIFICANT STRESSES ON INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND MOST IMPORTANTLY IT WILL INTRODUCE LOTS AT AN EXTREMELY HIGH PRICE POINT TO THE LOCAL MARKET WHICH COULD TO THE RIPPLE EFFECT THAT EVERYONE'S TALKING ABOUT. THE COMPREHENSIVE IS A GUIDE. IT'S NOT ALWAYS RIGHT IN.

2021 AFTER THE PASSING OF THE COMP PLAN WAS ONLY DIRECTOR IN RESPONSE TO CRITICISM THAT THAT VERY PLAN DOES NOTHING FOR THE COMMUNITY OF ST ISLAND STATED LAND USE PLANNING IS A VERY COMPLICATED ISSUE. HALTING DEVELOPMENT MAY LEAD TO LESS INVESTMENT IN RURAL COMMUNITIES. THAT VERY THOUGHT PROCESS IS WHAT ACTUALLY TO THE EROSION OF THE CPO, THE EROSION OF ST HELENA AND THE EROSION OF THE COMMUNITY.

WITHOUT CONTINUED THOUGHTFUL INVESTMENT OF TIME, ENERGY AND RESOURCES THE EVENTUALITY OF THE AREA IS UNDENIABLE. MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

YOUR TASK IS TO PREPARE FOR THE FUTURE OVERCOME COLLECTIVE PROBLEMS AND ALLOW FOR PLANNING THAT PROTECTS THE ENVIRONMENT AND THE BROADER COUNTY FOR TODAY IS A DECISION THAT WILL SHAPE THE VERY FUTURE OF ST HELENA ISLAND FOREVER. YOU HAVE A TEAM WE'VE GOT 17 PEOPLE THAT ALL PUT THEIR HANDS IN TO COMMIT TO THIS THAT WANT TO DEDICATE TO BEING PART OF THE SOLUTION THAT REQUIRES DECISION OF LEADERSHIP ON BEHALF YOU.

[00:50:01]

SO LET'S ACT LIKE IT. THANK THANK YOU. DID ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YOU WERE UP HERE. DID YOU WANT TO ADDRESS YOUR CLARIFICATION, PLEASE? MR. PROPIONATE CAN YOU PLEASE COME UP? JUST POINT OF CLARIFICATION.

YES HAVE AT LEAST SINCE JANUARY YOU'VE AND YOU SAID IT AGAIN TONIGHT THAT THERE WILL BE NO PERMANENT RESIDENTS ON PINE ISLAND AND YOU'VE OFFERED VARIOUS EXPLANATIONS WHICH I BELIEVE SPECULATIVE. ARE YOU GOING TO ASK PEOPLE WHO PURCHASED PROPERTY NOT TO BE A PERMANENT RESIDENT THAT CAN BE PART OF THE ONGOING DISCUSSIONS OF COMPROMISE.

I'M SURE YOU'VE STATED IT AS FACT. I'M ASKING IS THAT PART OF YOUR PLAN. WELL, THE LOTS ARE ALREADY SOLD AND EVERYONE ELSE EVERYONE THAT THAT IS PURCHASED THEM WILL NOT BE MOVING HERE. BUT AS PART OF THE COMPROMISE WE CAN A DISCUSSION I WOULD LOVE TO ENTERTAIN IT AS TO HOW TO MAKE THAT A REALITY FOREVER.

I DON'T THINK WE ARE IN THE BUSINESS HERE TONIGHT OF COMPROMISING WITH YOU, SIR.

I'M TRYING TO ELICIT A FACT. DO YOU HAVE A DOCUMENT TO THOSE TO WHOM YOU HAVE SOLD LOTS WHETHER THEY ARE INVESTORS AND SPECULATORS OR WHETHER THEY INTEND TO MOVE HERE, WHETHER OR NOT THEY CHOOSE TO LIVE HERE AND YOUR DOCUMENT SAYS YOU CAN ONLY LIVE HERE SIX MONTHS OF THE YEAR OR JULY AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER OR JANUARY TO MAY. YOU HAVEN'T ANSWERED IT'S A SIMPLE QUESTION IF THERE ARE NO COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DRAFTED BECAUSE I HAVEN'T GONE THROUGH THE ZONING PROCESS SO ANSWER TO YOUR SIMPLE QUESTION IS NO BUT THE ELABORATION TO THE THE LONGER ANSWER IS WE CAN CONSIDER IT.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. PIANO. OKAY.

MR. CAPUANO, DID OR DID YOU MENTION SOME OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR PARTY THAT WERE GOING TO MAKE COMMENTS OR I THINK DURING PUBLIC COMMENT TIME? ALL RIGHT.

BUT IF THEY CAN BE AFFORDED THE OPPORTUNITY TO WALK UP HERE, I'M SURE THEY WOULD NOT.

BUT I THINK WE'LL WAIT TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. OKAY.

I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION, MR. TROPEANO. YES, SIR YOU SAID YOUR PROPERTY IS ALREADY GATED. THAT'S NEWS TO ME. OKAY.

WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN 59 YEARS AGO? NINE YEARS AGO? CORRECT. TWO GATES NEVER HAD A LOCK UP. PLEASE THIS IS A DISCUSSION WITH YOU, MR. CAPUANO AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION. YOU'LL HAVE A CHANCE TO MAKE YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS. YEAH. SO THERE'S GATE.

THE REASON I'M I FIGURE THAT THE REASON THAT PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THAT IT'S GATED IS BECAUSE THE GATE IS ABOUT 150 YARDS INSIDE THE PROPERTY BUT IT'S THERE AND DATED 59 YEARS AGO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, MR. CAPUANO? OKAY.

UM, WE'RE READY FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS.

AGAIN, I'M GOING TO ASK THAT YOU SPEAK FOR 3 MINUTES. WE HAVE I BELIEVE WE'VE GOT A LIST OF 34 SPEAKERS AND WE GIVE 3 MINUTES EACH. WE'RE HERE TILL 830 JUST A 37.

UM, YES, I DID NOT I KNEW IT. SO I'M GOING TO ASK THIS IF YOU HEAR THINGS SAID BEFORE YOU GET TO YOUR PARTICULAR TURN TO SPEAK PLEASE TRY TO AVOID BEING REDUNDANT REPETITIVE.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE PRODUCTIVE . WE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR AS MANY DIFFERENT INPUTS AS YOU'D CARE TO PROVIDE BUT. AGAIN, I WOULD SAY FIRST OF ALL IF YOU CAN TO YOUR 3 MINUTES WE HAVE A CLOCK UP HERE TO REMIND YOU.

I WOULD SAY BE RESPECTFUL IN YOUR COMMENTS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO DEBATE YOU.

WE'RE JUST HERE TO LISTEN TO YOU AND GATHER THAT INPUT. UM AND I MENTIONED TO YOU, UH, THIS IS A RECORDED MEETING SO OF YOUR COMMENTS WILL BECOME A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD THAT CAN BE VIEWED FOR AS LONG AS THEY HAVE THE VIDEOS AVAILABLE .

UM, AND WE ARE AGAIN AN ADVISORY BODY TO COUNTY COUNCIL AND AS MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THE FINAL DECISION BEING THAT THE COUNTY COUNCIL IN A PUBLIC MEETING THAT WILL ACCOMPANY THAT. SO WITH THAT IN MIND I'M GOING TO START WITH THE FIRST SPEAKER I WILL MENTION YOUR NAME AND HOPEFULLY GET IT CORRECT. AND IF YOU WOULD JUST COME UP IN AGAIN STATE YOUR NAME AND LOCATION FOR THE RECORD YOU'RE BEING YOU'RE TELEVISED.

[00:55:04]

THIS WAS JUST A CONCEPT THAT WAS SUBMITTED THE ARGUMENT THAT WAS STILL GOOD IN 1990 941 YEARS LATER IS LUDICROUS. THIS IS THE ULTIMATE CALLED THE EISENHOWER MARY.

THE DEVELOPER OFTEN CALLS HIS PROPOSED PRIVATE GOLF RESORT A LEGACY DEVELOPMENT.

SADLY, THE LEGACY WOULD BE THE DESTRUCTION OF THE GOA GEECHEE CULTURE ON ST HELENA AN EXAGGERATION? NO. THE FIRST GEORGE ISLAND HILTON AND MANY OTHER PLACES THAT WERE THRIVING SEA ISLAND COMMUNITIES ARE NOW PRIMARILY GOLF RESORTS . NOT THIS TIME, NOT THIS TIME. WHEN I ASK EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM TO STAND. SUPPORTS SAINT HELENA. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

THANK. I HAVE I KNOW I'M GOING TO MISS THIS BECAUSE I'M THIS I CAN'T READ SOME OF THE WRITING ELDER LOOKS LIKE JACK. I'M AT 45 LATSON ROAD.

I GOT THE RIGHT 45 LEFT THE ROADS IN HELENA ISLAND. ALL RIGHT SIR.

I LISTEN AT THE ORDER OF THE PROPERTY ON PINE ISLAND. HE SAID THAT THE PEOPLE ON STATEN ISLAND IT DIDN'T EVEN KNOW IT WAS THERE. WELL, THAT'S THE FIRST THING I HAVE TOLD. I'M PASSED IN THE CHURCH WITH A DEACON THAT WORKED AT THAT PLACE UNTIL HE DIED. SO I KNOW ABOUT IT. I KNOW ALL ABOUT IT.

BORN AND RAISED ON STATEN ISLAND. I MIGHT LOOK 35 BUT I'M SOON TO BE 89. AND THANK YOU SIR FOR THE STATEMENT MADE.

IT HAPPENED ON HILTON HEAD. IT HAPPENED ON THE FIRST. WE DON'T WANT AN AUDIENCE IN HARLEM ALL THIS GOOD TALK THAT THIS BILL DOES BECOME THE PURCHASE OF THE LAND.

IF I PUT FROM THE BIBLE THE BIBLE THAT WERE FIRST TAKE TIMEOUT AND CALL UP THE CALL. WHEN YOU BOUGHT A PIECE OF PROPERTY YOU SHOULD HAVE SUCH CONTACT. SOME OF THE PEOPLE ON SAINT HELENA AND SEE WHETHER IT WAS FEASIBLE OR NOT FOR YOU TO PUT IT OFF. WE DON'T WANT A GOLF COURSE ON SENATOR. PEOPLE AREN'T AS DUMB AS THEY USED TO.

LET ME REPHRASE THAT. BLACK PEOPLE IS NOT AS DUMB AS THEY ONCE WERE RIGHT AWAY.

YOU GOT PEOPLE THAT COME IN HERE. I'VE BEEN HERE ALL MY LIFE.

I LEFT IN 55 AND MOVED BACK IN 81 AND PILE ON. IT IS A NICE PLACE.

YOU PUT A GOLF COURSE THERE. YOU AIN'T GOT TO WORRY ABOUT NO MORE ALL THAT.

YOU JUST SAY YOU GOT TO HAVE A SEPARATE TYPE TO EACH HOUSE THAT YOU BUILD OVER THERE.

WHERE DO YOU WANT TO GO COME FROM. I KNOW YOU DON'T GET BUT YOU SAID THE AUTO PLANT. YOU SAID YES. PLEASE.

PLEASE IT JUST ADDRESS US. SO WHAT I'M SAYING TO THE COUNCILMAN HE HAD THIS UP.

YOU KNOW THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE WE VOTED UNANIMOUS THAT WE WOULD NOT HAVE NOTHING WITH IT.

I DON'T EVEN SEE WHY IS THIS MEETING YOU BOTH RESOLVED AND RESOLVED ME WITH YOU RESOLVED? YOU TAKING IT OUT OF THE HANDS OF ZONE THAT IT WAS IN AND HE WON'T BE FEASIBLE TO BUILD.

[01:00:07]

MR. JAMES SMALLS. ARE YOU ALL RIGHT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HAVING ME. SPENT 7 TO 6 YEARS ON CITY HALL BEEN NAILED AND 85 VOTES FOR BROUGHT THE LUMBER WOOD DO IT ROOM WE IT UP AROUND PINE ISLAND SORT OF A LIE WHEN THEY SAY WE DON'T KNOW WE'RE BUYING ALL OF THAT A LOT OF US KNOW WE HAVE TO USE WHAT'S CALLED BAD OLD YOU KNOW EVERYBODY HAD A BOAT DOWN THAT RIVER THAT WE COULD GO OUT TO THE RIVER FISH CATCH CRAB NOT BECAUSE WE ALL SULLIED BECAUSE DUMPED A WILL. HOW WE LIVE? NO. BOYS AND GIRLS GO OUT, CATCH CRAB AND FISH, TAKE IT BACK HOME AND IT WAS A MEAL FOR YOUR FAMILY. NOW YOU TOLD ME I'VE GOT TO GIVE UP THIS LOOK BECAUSE THE PLAN WASN'T TO COME HERE TO DEVELOP SOMETHING FOR US ALL SAID THE ISLAND. IT SUPPOSED TO BE A RESULT THAT WHEN THE RICH PEOPLE WHO EVER COME IN THEY COULD HANG ON A LITTLE WHILE AND THEN IT COULD GO BACK HOME.

YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT'S WHY HOPE QUESTION COULD GET ANSWERED RIGHT NOW.

TIME'S UP. BUT A YEAR AGO I HAD MY HOUSE BURNT DOWN.

I DIDN'T HAVE NO WATER BECAUSE THE HARDWOOD DIDN'T WORK. I HAD TO STAND THERE LOOK UP MY HOUSE BURNED. BUT THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE. THE QUESTION WAS I WANTED TO KNOW DO WE HAVE ENOUGH WATER PRESSURE COME IN ALL TO THE ISLAND TO SUPPORT ALL THESE OTHER THAT WE WANT TO PUT THERE? I CAN TELL YOU THE ANSWER RIGHT NOW NO WE DON'T. I JUST WENT AND WE BUILT IN THE SAME SPOT WHERE MY HOUSE BURNED DOWN HERE WHEN I GOT DONE. SOMEBODY DECIDED THAT THEY WILL CALL TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND SAID I DON'T HE DIDN'T HAVE A PERMIT TO BUILD A COAL LODGE BUT I DID HAVE A PERMIT.

SO WHEN THE COMMITTEE TOLD HEY LISTEN THIS BIG WORD YOUR ZONE YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOU IN THE ZONING AREA. I SAID OKAY, WHAT YOU NEED WE NEED TO A PLAN SHOWING EVERYTHING I DO. WELL I'VE GOT A PLAN. I HAD IT FOR 52 YEARS IN THE AREA WHERE I LIVE. GUESS WHAT HAPPENED? NO, YOU HAD TO GO AND GET ANOTHER ONE. I SAID WELL THE LAND MOVE IT DIDN'T GO ANYWHERE.

IT'S STILL NOW THE STONES ARE STILL THERE. I HAD TO SPEND $1,000 WITH JOE TO DO $1,000. THAT'S THE THING. MR. SMALLS, YOU PLEASE ADDRESS US PROPERLY. YEAH, WE GOT BUT I'LL JUST TELL HIM.

ZORDON, GO LIVE TO CHANGE THE TRADE. SCOOBY-DOO.

THE DAY BEFORE THEY SAID IN BLUFFTON THAT THEY SAID THE FIRST KEY THAT THEY SAID IN HILTON HEAD THEY IN BLUFFTON ON ASTRO FACTORY ROAD THAT EVERYTHING'S TO CHANGE DON'T BELIEVE THAT IT WON'T BE A CHANGE. I SEE EVERYBODY WHO USED TO LIVE IN HILTON HEAD BLUFFTON ALWAYS A HARD TO VIEW IT WILL BE A CHANGE BUT NO IS THE ANSWER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MIKE HAYES.

MR. MIKE HUGHES. MR. CHAIRMAN, NOT A PRIVILEGE, PLEASE.

YES. JUST AGAIN FOR THE RECORD, LET ME INTRODUCE MYSELF.

MY NAME IS LARUE SOME WITH FINGER MELANIE BROOKS AND BRUCE AND ON HILTON HEAD AND WE HAVE BEEN RETAINED BY THE COUNTY TO REPRESENT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HERE NOT THE APPLICANT, NOT THE COUNTY BUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION. FOR THAT REASON JUST WANT TO REITERATE WHAT THE CHAIRMAN HAS SAID IT IS IMPERATIVE ANYBODY WHO IS SPEAKING SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE AND TRY TO DIRECT COMMUNICATE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THAT WAY THE RECORDERS AND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MAYBE VIEWING THIS ONLINE OR HOME ARE ABLE TO EAR AS WELL. SO IF YOU COULD JUST PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU SPEAK VERY CLEARLY INTO THE MICROPHONE. THANK YOU. THANK MR. BOTH.

YES, MISS YOU. MY NAME IS MIKE HUGHES WITH THOMAS THIS YEAR COMPANY.

HMM. SO THERE WAS A LITTLE BIT CONVERSATION WAY OF LIFE AND

[01:05:03]

AGAIN OUR GOAL IS TO REDUCE DEVELOPMENT. OUR GOAL IS TO REDUCE DENSITY.

SO I WOULD SAY WE ARE CONSISTENT IN THE CURRENT ZONING TO MEET THAT INTENT AND THE MOST IMPORTANT RESOURCE IS THE PEOPLE AND WE ARE NOT DISPLACING PEOPLE.

SO THIS IS A PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTY. NO ONE IS BEING DISPLACED.

IS IT IN CONFLICT WITH OF THE PROVISIONS OF DEVELOPMENT CODE ? YEAH, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CODE TO REALLY REMOVE THE OVERLAY ADDRESSES ANY DEMONSTRATED COMMUNITY NEED. IT CREATE MORE JOBS AND MORE OPPORTUNITY THAN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD. THAT'S THAT IS A FACT IS REQUIRED BY CHANGE IS IS REQUIRED BY CHANGING THE CHANGING CONDITION WE HAVE WE HAD A COMPLETED APPLICATION THAT MET CODE AND THIS WAS SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE AMENDMENT TO THE SO BY CHANGING THE CODE OR BY GIVING US A ZONING AMENDMENT WE ARE ACTUALLY BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN THAT WAS ALREADY SUBMITTED APPROVED AS AN APPLICATION TO THE COUNTY.

SO THAT WOULD ALLOW TO HAVE A CONDITION AS TO WHY WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS AN AMENDMENT.

IS IT LOGICALLY AN ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT? YES.

THERE'S A LOAN PACT'S INTENDED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA WITH A RESULTANT ADVERSE IMPACTS TO NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. AGAIN EITHER WAY WE DEVELOP THIS WE WILL BE WITH PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT WHETHER IT'S 166 LOTS OR WE DO THE GOLF COURSE WITH THE 50 LOTS WITH RESULT IN DEVELOPMENT OF ADEQUATE SERVICES AND PUBLIC FACILITIES.

WE WILL ENSURE IT EASY FOR US TO MEET THE PUBLIC FACILITIES NEEDS.

IF WE DO 50 VERSUS 166 BUT EITHER WAY WE WILL ALSO HAVE SUFFICIENT USES FOR THE AMENITIES AND THE PUBLIC SERVICES THAT ARE OUT THERE. SO THAT'S WHAT I HAVE.

THANK YOU. ALL THANK YOU, MR. HUGHES JENNY MCCAULEY JANET MCCAULEY 66 DELANO BLUFF. I'M A NEIGHBOR DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY ANY DEVELOPMENT TO ST HELENA VILLE AND ISLAND. I'M AN EDUCATOR, A HISTORY GUIDE CONSERVATIONIST, FOUNDER OF ADAPTIVE GOLF. I AM ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO A PROPOSAL THAT WOULD REMOVE MORE THAN 500 ACRES FROM THE CPO IGNORES. THE COMMUNITY CONCERNS PUBLIC RALLIES PETITIONS AND WOULD SET VERY DETRIMENTAL PRECEDENT TO THE FUTURE OF ST HELENA.

AT NO IN TIME OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS HAS THE DEVELOPER REACHED OUT TO THOSE OF US DIRECTLY IMPACTED THE POWER LINES TO PINE ISLAND GO RIGHT THROUGH OUR YARDS IN DELANO AND THIS PROPERTY HAS CLEARLY BEEN IN THE CPO AND CONTRARY A STATEMENT IN THE APPEAL.

IT WAS NOT A MISTAKE THAT THE PROPERTY IS IN THE CPO. THE COMMUNITIES THAT WERE EXCLUDED HAD GUARDS GATES NOT DIRT ROADS WITH PASTURE GATES. I NOTE IN THE HISTORY THE FORMER OWNER HAD MERELY A GOAL TO EXPAND INTO A RECREATIONAL AND HOUSING AREA.

LET'S BE REAL. THIS IS A PROPOSAL TO CREATE A GATED COMMUNITY WITH MULTIMILLION DOLLAR HOUSES WITH AN EXCLUSIVE GOLF COURSE THAT WILL NOT BENEFIT ANY OF US AND WILL CREATE MENIAL DRIVE POTENTIAL TO RAISE OUR TAXES AND DISPLACE MANY WHO LIVE IN THIS AREA. ZERO NEW RESIDENTS DOES THAT IMPLY SHORT TERM RENTALS? WE'RE ALREADY DEALING WITH SOME OF THESE IMPACTS NOW. LOOKING AT AN INTERVIEW IN THE ISLAND PACKET CAN ASSURE YOU WE ARE NOT MISGUIDED AND CLEARLY SEE THE PRESSURE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE WITH HIS INVESTORS. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE IGNORE THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE THE CULTURE, THE INDIGENOUS AND THE GULLAH GEECHEE THAT OCCUPY THESE PRECIOUS LANDS AND THE IMPACT TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND ALSO RESPONDING TO THAT INTERVIEW AND THE ISLAND PACKET. THIS IS NOT A CHOICE BETWEEN COMPASSION AND STUPIDITY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. LESLIE LENHART LESLIE GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN.

[01:10:01]

SHE'S IN WASHINGTON, D.C. ADVOCATING FOR THE GOAL OF U.S. CULTURE BUT SHE DID SUBMIT COMMENTS A WRITTEN COMMENTS TO YOU TODAY AND I WOULD LIKE TO FOR THE RECORD HIGHLIGHT OF THOSE FOR YOU TONIGHT. WE ARE ASKING THAT THE COMMISSION SUPPORT THE STAFF WITH MUCH APPRECIATE THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THESE AND WE FEEL THAT THIS PROPERTY SHOULD NOT BE SINGLED WITH THIS REZONING WE OPPOSE ANY OF THE ZONING CHANGES ALL OF THE PROPERTIES ON SAINT HELENA ISLAND, PINE ISLAND AND SAINT HELENA VILLE SHOULD REMAIN UNDER THE ZONING AS THEY HAVE SINCE 1999. THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT GOLF COURSES, GATED AREAS AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS ARE INCOMPATIBLE USES WITH THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT AS THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN.

EVEN BEFORE THE AMENDMENTS WERE RECENTLY APPROVED BY THE CPO COMMITTEE A GOLF COURSE IS THE GOLF COURSE IS A GOLF COURSE. THE HAS CLEARLY RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THIS REZONING WHICH WE DO APPRECIATE VERY MUCH ON SAINT HELENA THERE ARE MANY HISTORIC THERE ARE WATERWAYS, SACRED GROUNDS AND FARMLAND, OPEN SPACES, HUNTING GROUNDS IN THE LAND ON WHICH ALL OF THE CULTURE'S TRADITIONAL EVENTS HAVE OCCURRED. IT'S THE TRADITION TO FARM.

IT'S THE TRADITION TO HUNT. IT'S THE GOLF GTI TRADITION TO NAVIGATE LOCAL WATERWAYS.

IT'S THE GOLF GTI TRADITION TO BURY NEAR THE WATERWAYS. THE WATERWAYS ARE SACRED TO THEM. SO GIVEN THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IDENTIFIES LAND DEVELOPMENT AS THE PRIMARY THREAT, THE ISLAND CULTURE, THE REZONING IS INCONSISTENT TONIGHT WITH THE CPO BEFORE AND AFTER THE AMENDMENTS. THEREFORE WE ASK THAT YOU DO NOT SINGLE OUT THIS PROPERTY AT 288 ALAMO ROAD AND THAT YOU DENY THE REZONING AS WELL DENIAL THE APPEAL THAT IS BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING AS WELL .

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ANTHONY JONES.

ANTHONY JONES. JUSTIN MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.

MY NAME IS ANTHONY JONES. I MADE 42 ROBERT AND CLARE TRAIL ON SAINT HELENA.

I'M A 64 YEAR RESIDENT OF COUNTY, A 20 YEAR RESIDENT OF SAINT HELENA.

I HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS WHO WERE BORN AND RAISED THEIR SAINT HELENA.

MY STEP GRANDFATHER HAS ONE OF THE MAIN PATRIARARARARARARARD PROPERTY MR. POMPEY COKES AND MANY FOLKS WE KNOW HE'S ONE OF THE MEMBERS THAT PURCHASED LAND SHORTLY AFTER ENSLAVEMENT THIS IS AGAIN AS HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF. THIS IS ANOTHER SITUATION WHERE SOMEONE COMES IN. I'VE ONLY BEEN HERE FOR TWO YEARS.

YEAH. AND NOW I WANT TO SEE A CHANGE AND SAID THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE A SAVIOR OF ALL. I'M GLAD YOU ALL OPENED THE MEETING WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ON THE CALL JANUARY AFTERNOON THERE IN CAPS CAPS SECTION IN THE DIARY OF GENERAL HIGGINS AND HE MENTIONED OF HOW HOW THE SOLDIERS LOOK AND HOW THE CEREMONY WHEN THEY BEGAN TO READ THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION AND SPORADICALLY OUT OF THAT CAME THE THE SONG MY TIS MY COUNTRY TIS OF THEE SWEET LAND OF LIBERTY AND HE SAID THAT THAT TOOK OVER BECAUSE HE REALIZED THAT THAT WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT THE FORMERLY ENSLAVED COULD NOW SAY THIS IS OUR COUNTRY AND THEY WERE PROMISED 40 ACRES AND A MULE BUT IT DIDN'T TAKE LONG FOR ANDREW JOHNSON TO RESCIND THAT.

BUT THEN HAD FOLKS TO GO AHEAD AND PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. YOU KNOW I ASKED YOU TO VOTE

[01:15:02]

THIS IS THE PLACE WHERE WE CALL HOME. THIS IS THE PLACE THAT WE DON'T NEED SOMEBODY TO COME IN. TELL US HOW WE SHOULD HOW THEY CAN HELP US.

WE'VE BEEN HELPING OURSELVES OUR RED. SO MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION I SINCERELY ASK YOU TO DENY. THANK YOU.

ERNESTINE ATKINS. ERNESTINE GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ERNESTINE ATKINS AT 36 ATKINS BLUFF. BEAUFORT CAROLINA THAT ACROSS THE ROAD FROM WARSAW ISLAND.

MY FAMILY WERE RAISED BORN AND RAISED ON SAINT HELENA. I'M ALSO A PROPERTY OWNER AND OWNER OF CINDERELLA MAN. I COME BEFORE YOU THIS AFTERNOON TO TELL YOU THAT SINCE 1993 OR 95 I WAS ON THE PENSION OF A PLANNING BOARD TO HELP PRESENT US HELP SAVE THE CPO TO BE PLACE. WE WENT TO A WE WENT TO CLASSES FOR ALMOST FOUR YEARS FROM 1995 TO 1994. 1999 WHEN WE CAME BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE ASKING TO ADOPT THE CPO. SO TODAY I'M HERE TO ASK YOU TO.

WE WANT NO EXCEPTIONS TO THE CPO AND SENATOR RESPECTFULLY HAVE ASKED AND HELP THE COMMUNITY TO PRESERVE SAINT HELENA ISLAND IN EVERY MEETING THAT WE HAVE HAD WE ALWAYS THAT'S TO HELP PRESERVE SAINT HELENA ISLAND I DON'T WANT TO MAKE SOME THINGS THAT WAS SAID EARLIER. THERE'S SOME TALE THAT HAS BEEN TOLD ABOUT PINE ISLAND.

THIS IS THE CHILD SUPPORT AND THE FIRST TEACHER AT THE PEN SERVICE IN 1984.

SHE LIVED IN THAT HOUSE THAT WAS ON FURLOUGH. BUT YOU KNOW THAT HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF AND SHE SAID THERE ARE NO ARTIFACTS ON THE ISLAND.

I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT. I JUST DON'T BELIEVE THAT. AS I WAS TOLD FROM MY GREAT FRIEND UNCLE HE LIVED OVER THERE AT SOME POINT AND I KNOW HE TOLD ME THERE'S SOME IN THE OF THE SOME THE BURIED OVER THERE. SO WHETHER HE FOUND IT OR NOT THEY WERE I DON'T KNOW BUT I TRULY BELIEVE THAT THERE'S NOT TRUE WHICH HARRISON HELD AND WE REALLY DO. AGAIN WE DON'T WANT ANYONE TO COME IN TO OUR COMMUNITY.

HE SAID HE WAS WORKING ON FOR TWO YEARS. WELL DOGGONE I'M 76 AND I MUST BE WORKING ON 25 YEARS TRYING TO PRESERVE HELENA ISLAND WHO'S GOING TO HAVE SOMEONE TO COME AND SAY WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? YOU AS THE PLANNING BOARD NEEDS TO SHOW RESPECT. YOU REPRESENT US. YOU HAVE TO HELP US DO THIS.

HOW MANY OF YOU LIVE ON AN ISLAND? WHAT IF YOU LIVE THERE? YOU WOULD KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. BUT IF YOU DON'T LIVE THERE, YOU DON'T KNOW WE HAVE RESPECT FOR EACH OTHER. WHETHER YOU SEE US FIGHT OR A FALL, WE'RE GOING TO ALWAYS, ALWAYS STAND TOGETHER. MY THING IS NO EXCEPTION TO THE CVO. THANK YOU MR. IP JESSE WHIHIHIH GOOD EVENING PLANNING COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS JESSE WHITE AND I'M THE SOUTH COAST OFFICE FOR THE COASTAL CONSERVATION LEAGUE HERE IN BEAUFORT. DESPITE THE CLEAR AND CONSISTENT MESSAGE FROM THE SAINT HELENA COMMUNITY OVER THE PAST SIX MONTHS AND TRULY OVER THE PAST 24 PLUS YEARS THAT GOLF COURSES RESORTS AND GATED COMMUNITIES HAVE NO PLACE ON THE ISLAND. WE ARE BACK BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER CONTINUES TO PRESS FOR A SPECIAL EXCEPTION TO THE LOCAL ZONING RULES IN ORDER TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED. WE COMMEND STAFF FOR A THOROUGH

[01:20:04]

DESIRED 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE INTO PARCELS OF SIX HOLES EACH. BOTH THESE REQUESTS FLY IN THE FACE OF DECADES OF THOUGHTFUL AND INTENTIONAL LONG TERM PLANNING IN NORTHERN BEAUFORT AND EVERYTHING THE SAINT HELENA COMMUNITY HAS STOOD FOR AND REMAINED CONSISTENTLY UNITED AROUND FOR DECADES. THAT GOLF COURSE IS GATED COMMUNITIES AND RESORTS DIRECTLY THREATEN THE SUSTAINABILITY OF ST HELENA'S LIVING GULLAH GEECHEE CULTURE, LAND OWNERSHIP AND RURAL WAY OF LIFE. OUR RULES EXIST FOR A REASON AND THE ST HELENA COMMUNITY HAS WORKED DILIGENTLY TO DEFEND THE CPP'S LONG STANDING PROTECTIONS FOR THEIR ISLANDS THAT PROHIBIT GOLF RESORTS AND GATED DEVELOPMENTS.

THE REQUESTS FOR A SPECIAL CARVE OUT TO BUILD PRECISELY IS PROHIBITED IS AN INSULT.

THIS WAS JUST REINFORCED BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL ON MAY EIGHT FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THIS PLANNING COMMISSION WELL BEFORE THE ADOPTION THE 1999 ZONING LAWS AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES LOCATED NEARBY BUT OUTSIDE SAINT HELENA LIKE DR. FRIPP AND HARBOR ISLANDS HAD ALREADY OBTAINED THEIR DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS.

BAY POINTE VISTAS BERMUDA BLUFF LIKEWISE HAD INDIVIDUALLY RECORDED SUBDIVISION ENTITLEMENTS THAT PRE-DATE THE ORIGINAL CPO IN 99. THESE ARE ONLY RELEVANT IN DEMONSTRATE THE INCOMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT WHICH THE CPO WAS CREATED TO PREVENT FROM PROLIFERATING ACROSS SAINT HELENA ISLAND. THE CPO AS ASTUTELY REPORTED BY STAFF EXIST WERE DRAWN PURPOSEFULLY. AND BY MOVING THEM YOU'RE ERODING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE CPO THE PROPOSAL FOR A REZONING AND THE APPEALS DIRECTLY CONTRAVENE THE POLICIES AND GOALS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS WELL AS THE INTENT OF THE CPO AND THE LETTER OF LAW.

AS ORIGINALLY ENVISIONED IN 1999 IT HAS ALWAYS PROHIBITED GOLF COURSE DEVELOPMENTS, GATED COMMUNITIES AND RESORTS, A PRIVATE IS NOT THE SAME THING AS A GATED COMMUNITY AND HISTORIC USE AS A PRIVATE RECREATIONAL RETREAT IS NOT THE SAME THING AS RESORT.

PLEASE UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY OF THE CPO AND REJECT PROPOSALS .

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU TO.

JACK SMITH. JACK SMITH. KIM LEADING MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. I'M JACK SMITH. I'M AN ATTORNEY NELSON MULLENS REPRESENTING THE PEN CENTER. THE PEN CENTER FORCES BEEN A BACKBONE OF THIS COMMUNITY FOR A VERY LONG TIME AND PROUD TO STAND HERE AND ASK YOU TO PLEASE SUPPORT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND DENY THIS REQUEST THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE YOU FOR DETERMINING WHAT THE FACTS ARE AND HOW TO INTERPRET THEM IS VERY IMPORTANT. I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU DO CONSIDER THE FACTS BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU INTERPRET THEM ACCORDING TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, TO THE APPLICABLE REGULATIONS THAT YOU HAVE AND TO COME TO THE DECISION THAT I THINK THE STAFF APPROPRIATELY CAME TO THAT THIS IS SPOT ZONING, THIS IS NOT REALLY APPROPRIATE TO TRY TO TAKE ONE LARGE 500 ACRE TRACT OUT A PROTECTIVE ZONING CODE THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE FOR OVER 24 YEARS NOW AND WHICH HAS THE UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO PROTECT A CULTURE SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN INTERNATIONALLY AND NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED THE FACT THAT A PIECE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY HAS A GATE AND THAT THEIR FAMILY AND FRIENDS OR INVITEES COME AND USE IT IT IS NOT A RESORT. IT'S NOT INDIVIDUALLY PLATTED LOTS IT'S NOT REALLY THE TYPE DEVELOPMENT THAT ONE CONSIDERS AND THE MODERN ZONING CODE BUT WE'VE HEARD TIME AND TIME AGAIN THIS LAND WILL BE DEVELOPED AND AT SOME POINT YOU WILL HAVE TO CONSIDER DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR IT. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE CPO THE BEDROCK UNDER WHICH ANY SUCH PLAN IS CONSIDERED WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A NINE OR 18 OR A THREE OR SIX HOLE GOLF COURSE, A GOLF COURSE REALLY JUST A GOLF COURSE IN 1999 AND SINCE IT WAS FIRST DEFINED IN THE DICTIONARY AND 1890S A GOLF COURSE IS EITHER NINE OR 18 HOLES AND SO THAT'S WHAT DEFINITION SAYS AND THE CODE BUT IN FACT THE INDUSTRY WITHIN THE LAST 10 TO 15 YEARS HAS STARTED BUILDING SUCH AS THAT THE CARLTON RIVER CLUB YOU

[01:25:03]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DR. MARIE GIBBS.

DR. MARIE GIBBS GIBBS GOOD EVENING PLANNING COMMITTEE MY NAME IS MARIE GIBBS.

I STAND HERE THIS EVENING A LONG TERM RESIDENT OF ST HELENS, ALAN FOR MORE THAN FIVE GENERATIONS. I ASKED YOU TO UPHOLD THE CPO PLAN THAT PROTECTS THE WAY OF LIFE FOR US WE KNOW FOR EXAMPLE WHAT WE'VE SEEN OVER THE YEARS HOW AND WHAT DEVELOPMENTS HAVE DUE TO AREAS OF HIGH TAXES, LOSS OF HISTORY AND CULTURE AND, DISPLACEMENT OF THE PEOPLE. IS THERE EASY TO COME TO ERA AND SEE YOUR DREAMS NOT REALIZING THERE'S THE DREAM IS ALREADY HERE THAT LIFE CANNOT BE BROUGHT WE ARE NOT WE ARE NOT IN THE PLACE WE WERE AT WAR 100 YEARS AGO. WE ARE VERY EDUCATED PEOPLE WITH OUR OWN PLAN FOR OUR LEGACY AND GENERATION WEALTH WE HAVE TO BE SAVED OR WE DON'T NEED A SAVIOR. I ASK THAT YOU UPHOLD THE CPO PLAN THAT THAT YOU ASK COMMITTED TO GRANT THEM AS THEY DID FOLLOW THE LAW THAT GUIDED DEVELOPMENT ONCE IN HIMMLER'S IRELAND FOR MANY YEARS THANK YOU THANK YOU NEIL REINERS HILLARY KNOWS GOOD AFTERNOON AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS AFTERNOON SO HEY ROSS STATEMENTS IT'S STARTING STARTING YOU HEAR ME IT'S STARTING THE OPENING OF ANOTHER HILTON HEAD ISLAND AND SURROUNDING ISLANDS ON ST HELENA ISLAND WE DON'T WANT IT THIS IS DISRESPECTFUL FOR US TO COME BACK BEFORE YOU AGAIN AND PLEAD AND BEG FOR YOU TO UPHOLD THE CPO PLEASE CONTINUE TO DO THAT AND I THANK YOU UPHOLDING IT SO FAR WE HAVE 12,000 SIGNATURES AND COUNTING TO THE DEVELOPERS HOW? 12 STAFF MEMBERS. 17 STAFF MEMBERS.

IS THERE ANY PETITIONS THAT WERE PRESENTED TO YOU BY THE DEVELOPER THAT SAYS THAT THEY WANT A GOLF COURSE? I SPEAK FOR THE PEOPLE HERE AND THAT'S MILA 184 SAXON MILL ROAD SAINT HELENA I'M THE COMMUNITY WOODLAND ADVOCATE FOR THE SANTA FE AS PROPERTY.

YOU CANNOT DISRESPECT THE PEOPLE LIKE THIS OR THE RESIDENTS AND THE LAND OWNERS THAT RESIDE SOMEWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THEY HAVE A STATE THEY OWN SAINT HELENA. THEY DO NOT WANT THIS THE TRAFFIC LADIES ISLAND MIDDLE SCHOOL, BEAUFORT HIGH SCHOOL IT'S TOO MUCH. PEOPLE SAID WE HAVE A JEWEL HEY ON SAINT HELENA. LET'S CONTINUE PROTECT IS TO STOP A TOWN MANDATING DEVELOPERS OUT BECAUSE THEY ARE WAITING TO COME IN AND TAKE OUT YOU WE DON'T WANT THIS WE VA&-PY CAN'T BUY US DON'T WANT A PUTT PUTT GOLF COURSE EITHER NO MEANS NO THAT'S WHAT YOUR PARENTS DON'T YOU? SO ARE YOU ALL HEARD IT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. SAMUEL WILLIAMS. I ABSTAINED BUT I DID SAY NO.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.

STAR DUNBAR. GOOD EVENING. SHE STATED MY NAME IS STAR

[01:30:01]

THERE ARE A GENERATION OF PEOPLE FROM THE PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE WHO ARE AND WILL BE DISCONNECTED TO THEIR HISTORY. CAN YOU IMAGINE NOT KNOWING OR HAVING DOCUMENTATION OR ARTIFACTS OR A SACRED LAND OR TRADITIONS OF YOUR FAMILY MEMBERS OR HOW DIFFICULT IT WILL BE TO DISCOVER SAID ITEMS PEOPLE WANT TO LEARN THEIR HISTORY THEIR ROOTS THROUGH VISITING PLACES OF THE ANCESTORS WHO LIVED FOUGHT AND DIED A GOSSE A GOLF COURSE THE SOLE PURPOSE OF THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE AND WILL NOT BENEFIT THIS CAUSE WE CANNOT ALLOW MONETARY GAINS TO OUTWEIGH PRICELESS CULTURE HISTORY HISTORY HAS ROBBED US SORRY HISTORY HAS ROBBED EDUCATING OUR PEOPLE HISTORY HAS ALSO MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT THE LAND AND THE GULLAH OR WHO POSSIBLY WOULD WANT TO LEARN EVERY TO RESPECT THE CULTURE OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN A COMMUNITY . PLEASE DO NOT REPEAT HISTORY THAT HAS FELLED OUR PEOPLE.

WE ARE THE INDIAN TRIBE. WE STAND PRESERVING, PROTECTING AND TO OF THE PRESENT SORRY THE PINE ISLAND FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. JANE PATRICK JANE CAFFREY. GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS JANE CAFFREY AND I LIVE IN THE AMO SECTION OF ST HELENA AND THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK. SO I JUST WANT TO MENTION THE REASON WHY I FEEL SO STRONGLY AGAINST EXCLUDING THE PINE ISLAND FROM THE CULTURAL PROTECTION AND I THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN AS A GRANDMOTHER OF SEVEN AND AS A VOLUNTEER FOR A THE CHILDREN OF SAINT HELENA AND. I KNOW MANY PEOPLE HERE IN THIS ROOM TONIGHT SPEND LOTS OF TIME WITH THE CHILDREN OF SAINT HELENA EDUCATING THEM, TEACHING THEM THE CULTURE, HELPING THEM BE MENTORS. WHAT KIND OF PRECEDENTS WOULD IT SET IF WE TELL OUR CHILDREN TOMORROW THAT SORRY WE'RE GIVING UP THIS ISLAND FOR THE MONEY THAT WE DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR FUTURE SO I JUST WANT EVERYBODY TO REALLY TAKE THE CHILDREN OF SAINT HELENA, THE GULLAH CHILDREN ALL THE CHILDREN INTO ACCOUNT WE THINK ABOUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO PRESERVE THE CULTURE THINK ABOUT THEIR FUTURE, THEIR FUTURE, THEIR CHILDREN'S FUTURE AND THINK ABOUT THE STORIES THAT WE'RE TOLD TONIGHT ABOUT GROWING UP AS A CHILD HERE? I DIDN'T I'VE BEEN HERE EIGHT YEARS AND I FIND IT A PRIVILEGE TO LIVE AMONG SUCH A RICH CULTURE. BUT THINK ABOUT THE GENTLEMAN WHO TALKED ABOUT CRABBING AND FISHING AND BEING ABLE TO SPEND TIME IN THE WATER AND SO I REALLY THINK THAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN TO PRESERVE ENVIRONMENT TO KEEP THE THE WATER, THE LAND PURE THE STREETS NOT CLUTTERED. WE WANT THEM TO BE SAFE, TO BE ABLE TO RIDE BICYCLES, TO BE ABLE TO GO KAYAKING, TO BE ABLE TO FIND JOBS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY BEING TELL FOLDERS OR YOU KNOW BE SERVICE COMMUNITIES. WE WANT THEM TO BE ABLE TO CHOOSE WHAT OPPORTUNITIES THEY HAVE AND THROUGH THIS MENTORING AND SPENDING MORE TIME WITH THEM. THEY'LL BE ABLE TO FIND WHAT THEY REALLY WANT TO DO AND NOT NECESSARILY BE OF SERVICE TO COMMUNITIES THAT THEY CAN'T EVEN GO INTO AS A RESIDENT OF SAINT HELENA, THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SALLY MAYES I'M SALLIE I LIVE

[01:35:07]

FOR SUNDOG LANE SAINT HELENA ISLAND MORE THAN T T T T T T T T CAME TO THE PEOPLE OF SAINT HELENA AND SAID WHAT IS IT YOU ALL WANT? SEE IF YOU CAN COME UP WITH A PLAN. WE DID WE DIDN'T JUST FALL OFF A TURN APPROX WE GOT TO WORK AND WE CAME WITH THE CPO MORE THAN TWO DECADES AGO. THIS CPO IS INCLUDED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE JOB OF GOVERNMENT IS TO PROTECT PEOPLE AND PROPERTY.

WE ARE THE PEOPLE. YOU ARE THE GOVERNMENT PROTECT US.

THANK SALLY STONE STONE. SALLY STONE 390 DISTANT ISLAND DRIVE I HAVE NOTHING TO SAY THAT HASN'T BEEN SAID FAR MORE ELOQUENTLY BY PREVIOUS SPEAKERS.

I'LL ONLY SAY I STAND WITH THEM THANK YOU PAUL GALLEN IS IT REALLY? AND THEY CLAIM OH YEAH OKAY YOU COULD HAVE FOOLED ME. MY NAME IS PAULA DELANEY.

I LIVE 60 CSABA ROAD ON SAINT HELENA. THANK YOU CHAIRMAN AND BOARD MEMBERS FOR HEARING ALL OF OUR THOUGHTS. PLEASE ENFORCE THE CPO WAS PUT IN PLACE FOR A REASON AND ALL OF THOSE REASONS HAVE BEEN STATED.

IT'S BEEN IN PLACE SINCE THE LAST CENTURY LET'S SAY IT'S NEVER BEEN CHALLENGED TO THE EFFECT OF PUTTING IT ASIDE. IT'S ALWAYS BEEN SUPPORTED. THE DEVELOPER HAS STATED ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS THAT THIS IS ALWAYS THAT'S PINE ISLAND HAS ALWAYS BEEN A GATED COMMUNITY KNOW FOR A FACT THAT IS NOT TRUE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN ON THAT PROPERTY MORE THAN ONE TIME THERE THERE'S A GATE NOW AND THERE ARE ARMED GUARDS AND CAMERAS BUT THERE WASN'T A GATE UNTIL HE THE PROPERTY. THANK YOU TOM DONOHUE DONOHUE. GOOD EVENING Y'ALL.

MY NAME IS TOM DONOHUE. I LIVE IN SABO ACTUALLY I LIVE AT 62 SABO FIRST I'D LIKE TO SAY AND I MENTIONED THIS IN ANOTHER MEETING AS WE ALL KNOW, THE LOVE OF MONEY IS THE ROOT ALL EVIL AND IT'S OUT CONTROL IN THIS WORLD TODAY AND WE'RE WE'RE LIVING THROUGH A CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF IT RIGHT NOW I'VE HERE FIVE YEARS THE GULLAH GEECHEE PEOPLE ARE THE MOST WONDERFUL UNIQUE LOVING KIND I R MET. I'M 65 YEARS OLD.

I'VE LIVED UP AND DOWN THE COAST. I'VE LIVED IN LOUISIANA OUT WEST. I'VE KNOWN A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND AND THEIR CULTURE ASTOUNDS ME ON A DAILY BASIS AND I WISH THIS DEVELOPER HAD DONE MORE RESEARCH BEFORE HE MADE THIS DECISION ABOUT THE WISHES AND THE UNIQUENESS OF LOVING PEOPLE AND YOU I STRUGGLE WITH LISTENING. I'VE BEEN THIS HAS BECOME MY PURPOSE IN MY I'M NOW RETIRED SO I GOT TO DO SOMETHING ANYWAY TED TO HEAR THE GENTLEMAN TALK ABOUT FACTS FACTS FACTS? WELL, YOU KNOW I WANT TO SEE SOME PROOF OF THESE FACTS BUT I WISHED HE HAD HIS RESEARCH.

I FEEL LIKE IT'S TIME FOR HIM TO GATHER HIS LOSSES AND GO HOME AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S OTHER THINGS CAN BE DONE WITH HIS PROPERTY. I KNOW HE DON'T WANT TO WALK AWAY FROM HIS $18 MILLION BUT FOR GOODNESS SAKES, YOU KNOW, WE AS A PEOPLE CAN COME TOGETHER WITH AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN THAT WILL BENEFIT THE PEOPLE OF SAINT HELENA AND WILL BENEFIT THE CHILDREN AND EDUCATING THEM TEACHING THEM ABOUT THE THE THE THE ENVIRONMENT THAT WE HAVE AND THE UNIQUENESS OF THE LOWCOUNTRY.

YOU KNOW, I MOVED HERE FIVE YEARS AGO AND YOU COULD GO AND FIND SOME CLAMS PRETTY PRETTY QUICKLY AND A HALF A BUCKET OF CLAMS AND A FEW HOURS NOW I UNDERSTAND THERE AREN'T ENOUGH CLAMS THEY'RE HARD TO FIND AND THE OYSTERS ARE GOING AND WE NEED TO PROTECT WHAT WE HAVE

[01:40:05]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. RHONDA DOHERTY.

RHONDA DOHERTY AND RHONDA DOHERTY SOMEWHERE. OKAY, WE'LL PASS RHONDA EVELYN SCOTT. THAT'S A LAKE. OH, EXCUSE ME.

GOT YOU CONFUSED WITH EVELYN AND PAUL AND THAT'S OKAY. GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE.

MY NAME IS ELLEN SCOTT. I LIVE AT 181 FRONT POINT ROADS IN HELENA ISLAND, SOUTH CAROLINA. I'VE BEEN THERE FOR 40 YEARS. 45 YEARS.

I NEED SOME CLARIFICATION. I I SERVE ON THIS CPO COMMITTEE.

I'VE BEEN ON EVERY COMMITTEE FOR LAST 30 YEARS TO COUNTY LAWYERS TALK TO US ABOUT A NEXUS. I NEED TO CONNECT THE DOTS. THE NEWSPAPER REPORTED THERE WERE 40 MEETINGS BETWEEN COUNTY AND MR. TROPEANO. WHERE WERE THESE MEETINGS HELD ? CAN YOU TELL ME MORE ABOUT HOW THE STAFF REACHED TO THE CITIZENS? WHAT WENT ON IN THE MEETINGS? DID THEY TAKE MINUTES? WAS MR. TROPEANO ENCOURAGED BY OUR COUNTY EMPLOYEES TO PURSUE A DEVELOPMENT THAT VIOLATED OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OUR PROTECTIONS AS LAID OUT BY OUR CPO? WAS MR. TROPEANO DECEIVED. WHAT WOULD MOTIVATE THE COUNTY TO ENCOURAGE THIS VIOLATION OF THE PROTECTIONS THAT REPRESENT THE CITIZENS OF ST HELENA ISLAND SINCE 1863 WHEN THE FIRST LAND SALES OCCURRED ST HELENA ISLAND. OWNING LAND EDUCATION AND ACCESS TO THE WATER HAVE BEEN THE VALUES OF ST HELENA ISLAND. IT'S CLEAR WE STILL EMBRACE THESE VALUES. IT OCCURS TO US THAT THE MONETARY AGENDA OF OTHERS AND POSSIBLY COUNTY EMPLOYEES IS IN CONFLICT WITH OUR VALUES. WE KNOW THE COUNTY WANTS TO ADVANCE THE ECONOMICS OF DEVELOPMENT. WE HEAR YOU WHEN YOU SAY WE'LL BE SORRY AT THIS PROJECT. IF WE REJECT THIS PROJECT THEY COULD BRING US MUSEUMS AND MONEY. WE DISAGREE BECAUSE WE KNOW THE COST TO OUR BEAUTIFUL HOMELAND ,WE KNOW HOW THE DOMINOES WILL FALL. THAT'S WHY WE WROTE OUR PROTECTIONS. I'VE BEEN AS I MENTIONED, I'VE BEEN ON EVERY COMMITTEE FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS ABOUT SAINT HELENA AND I'VE HAD AN ISLAND BECAUSE I'VE BEEN AN ISLAND BUSINESS PERSON FOR 30 YEARS. I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU CALL US BUSINESS.

COME. YES. GALAS, GAGES, ANGLOS, THE COMMUNITY ON DARTMOOR ALL PEOPLE OF SAINT HELENA, OUR FAMILY.

WE THEY HAVE SOUGHT MY VOICE BECAUSE OF MY FAMILIARITY AND MY RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE PEOPLE OF SAINT HELENA. THEY HAVE SOUGHT MY VOICE BECAUSE.

I AM AT ONE WITH OUR ISLAND FAMILY. I HUMBLY SUBMIT THAT I SPEAK FOR MANY MANY PEOPLE AND I AM GOING TO WAGER THAT EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM SPEAKS FOR MANY MANY PEOPLE AND WE DO THIS. THIS IS HOW WE COMMUNICATE. BEFORE EVERY MEETING I AM CONTACTED BY RESIDENTS LOOK OUT FOR ME, GET BACK TO ME, LET ME KNOW WHAT HAPPENS.

YOU FOR ME YOU KNOW THAT SO I CARRY A LITTLE BIT OF RESPONSIBILITY TO MY ISLAND AND THE PEOPLE OF SAINT HELENA . I WANT YOU TO KNOW JUST AS OF THE OTHER FOLKS HAVE SAID THIS IS MY MISSION BUT THIS IS OUR VOICE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ELAINE. EILEEN.

LOOKS LIKE WILLIAMS 12 WATERBORNE ROAD EILEEN. NO.

[01:45:04]

GOOD EVENING AND THANK YOU FOR THIS THIS OPPORTUNITY IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND IN MANY OTHER STATES OF THE YOUR DOCUMENT IS REQUIRED FROM THE SELLER.

AND FROM WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM THE INVESTOR HE'S BEEN HERE TWO YEARS SO HE WAS FULLY AWARE OF WHAT HE WAS PURCHASING AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS IN THE CPO AND THE RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING PINE ISLAND. AS FAR AS THE APPEAL I KNOW HE HAS RIGHT TO APPEAL BUT A SUCCESSFUL APPEAL NEEDS TO SOMETHING THAT SOME MALFEASANCE ,SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE WRONG FALSE STATEMENT, IMPROPER INSTRUCTION INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT A CPO MICHAEL CONDUCT BY SOMEONE AND I'VE HEARD NONE OF THAT.

SO HE WAS NOT MISLED THE WORD REMOVAL FROM THE CPO. OKAY.

THAT IS NOT A REAL ESTATE TERM. THAT IS NOT A PLANNING. IT'S NOT IN REAL ESTATE AND IT'S NOT IN THE PLANNING DICTIONARY. IT'S LIPSTICK.

A PIG. IT'S EITHER ANNEXATION OR SPOT ZONING SPIKE ZONING IS ILLEGAL IN STATES AND I BELIEVE IT'S ILLEGAL IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

LOOK IT UP ON GOOGLE RIGHT NOW SPOT ZONING IF THIS WOULD OPEN PANDORA'S TO LET SOMEONE COME IN AFTER TWO YEARS AND CHANGED ZONING THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

HE HAS OTHER OPTIONS AND HE PRESENTED THOSE OTHER BEFORE HE EVEN PURCHASED A PROPERTY.

ONE WAS 63 HOMES. THE OTHER 100 EXCUSE ME 65 HOMES.

163 HOMES. AND THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY THAT HE COULD IT WITHOUT TAKING A LOSS. SO THAT'S THOSE ARE THREE OPPORTUNITIES THAT THE INVESTOR IS RESPONSIBLE HIS OWN INVESTMENTS. JUST LIKE YOU AND I ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR WHAT WE INVESTED, WHAT WE INVEST IN JUST LIKE WORN BILL GATES, CRAMER EVERYONE ELSE THEY ARE FOR THEIR INVESTMENT. SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT COUNTY IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR BAILING HIM OUT AS FAR AS THE STATEMENT IT ALREADY A GATED COMMUNITY.

THAT IS NOT TRUE. THERE'S THAT. IF YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S GATED ASK A REAL ESTATE BROKER THAT'S BEEN BUSINESS FOR 30 OR 40 YEARS.

THEY WOULD NOT LIST THAT LISTED AS A GATED COMMUNITY. THERE'S NO ASSOCIATION, NO COVENANTS RESTRICTS. THERE'S NO BYLAWS, NO MEMBERS. SEE PINES IS GATED REXFORD IS GATED, SHIPYARD IS GATED. FRIPP IS GATED DR. HARBOR HE'S NOT IT'S THE SAME THING.

IT'S NOT A GATED COMMUNITY. THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT WILL HOLE UP ZONING LAWS SO THEY GET UP AND SAY I WILL DO THIS. WELL, YOU NEED TO GET PAST THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. THE COMMERCIAL I HEARD THE WORD COMMERCIAL USED ALSO.

THAT'S NOT ZONE ZONING LIKE CLUBHOUSE RESTAURANTS. THOSE ARE COMMERCIAL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, KATHLEEN KATHLEEN KAMALI KAMAL KATHLEEN KAY.

NOW I'M NOT SURE KATHLEEN. ALL RIGHT. WILLIE TORAL IS WITH THROUGH ALL RIGHT. WALTER GAY. THANK YOU, MR. GAY DALLAS WOULD . GOOD EVENING. I'M I'M A LOCAL BEAUFORT RESIDENT. FOR OVER 20 YEARS I'VE BEEN A LOWCOUNTRY NATIVE FOR ABOUT 45 YEARS. THIS IS SOMETHING I THINK THAT PEOPLE NEED TO REALLY TRULY UNDERSTAND TONIGHT. THE ZONING IS ONE HOME FOR THREE ACRES, RIGHT? DO THE MATH. THAT'S 166 HOMES. THAT'S WHAT THE GENTLEMAN PURCHASED AND THAT WHETHER ANYONE LIKES IT OR NOT IN THE ROOM WHAT HE CAN DO.

RIGHT. RIGHT. BUT PLEASE ADDRESS US.

PLEASE ADDRESS THIS DIRECTLY AND. THERE WAS A LOT OF STATEMENTS MADE TONIGHT. I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS.

SOME OF THEM WERE FACTUAL BUT MORE. THE GATE.

IT IS A PASTOR. WHOEVER SAID THAT WAS RIGHT BUT IT IS A GATE AND HAS BEEN THERE FOR 60 YEARS. SO IT'S A FASCINATING SO WHAT EVERYONE NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND

[01:50:06]

COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE MET WITH HIM AND BEEN ON THE PROPERTY SO THIS DIDN'T JUST HAPPEN OVERNIGHT. I FIRMLY RESPECT AND BELIEVE THE CULTURE.

WHEN I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL I SPENT MY SUMMERS VOLUNTEER CENTER THROUGH BETHANY UNITED METHODIST CHURCH SO I DEEPLY LOVE THE COMMUNITY AND I WOULD DO NOTHING TO HARM IT BUT THAT'S THE REASON WHY. AND I THINK EVERYONE NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND WHY THERE'S 30 PLUS LOCAL PEOPLE HERE THAT SUPPORT IT. THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT DO SUPPORT IT AND QUITE FRANKLY THEY ARE SCARED TO GET UP HERE ON THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE OF ALL OF THE YELLING BEHIND PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE BE QUIET.

I THINK SOME PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM NEED JESUS. THEY NEED TO BE RESPECTFUL AND SO IS THE TRUTH. SO I IMPLORE YOU ALL TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU A DEVELOPER THAT IS TRYING TO DO SOMETHING RIGHT WHETHER YOU IT OR NOT AT LEAST SOMEBODY HERE IS TRYING SOMEONE IS. SO YOU SHOULD AT LEAST UNDERSTAND THAT TONIGHT WHETHER YOU IT OR NOT AND I KNOW THERE'S NO GUARANTEES IN LIFE BUT I DO KNOW THAT THE GUARANTEE FROM BEING THE DEVELOPER IS THE ZONING AND THAT IS TO OUR.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MR. MARIE GIBBS, PLEASE IF WE NEED TO GET THROUGH THE COMMENTS AND I WOULD ACTUALLY BE RESPECTFUL AND I KNOW I'M RIGHT I'M SORRY I'M SORRY. THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION OR A NEGOTIATION WITH THE AUDIENCE. MARIE GIBBS, I THINK I AM SORRY I DIDN'T HEAR YOU.

SAM COOPER. SAM COOPER. MY NAME'S SAMUEL COOPER AND I LIVE ME AT 909 HAMMOND STREET IN THE CITY OF BEAUFORT AND MR. TROIANO STARTED HIS COMMENTS SAYING HE WANTED TO APPEAL TO COMMON SENSE WHICH I'D SORT OF LIKE TO DO MYSELF AND HE ALSO HAS SAID IN THE NEWSPAPER AND HERE TODAY THAT HE WANTS TO BE PART OF THE SOLUTION AND NOT PART OF THE PROBLEM. WELL, I REALLY DON'T THINK THERE IS A PROBLEM EXCEPT MAYBE THE PROBLEM THAT HE HAS WITH THE FACT THAT HE'S BOUGHT THIS LAND AND NOW IS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF HE CAN GET HIS MONEY OUT OF IT. WHAT I THINK THERE'S A PRINCIPLE CALLED CAVEAT EMPTOR THAT SAYS IF YOU BUY SOMETHING YOU YOU OWN IT AND THEN YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE AND I THINK YOU FOLKS HAVE ENOUGH I'M SURE YOU DO ACTUALLY BECAUSE YOU'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS FOR A LONG TIME NOT TO BUY INTO THE IDEA THAT WE'VE TO BAIL HIM OUT THIS HE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY KNOWING WHAT THE RESTRICTIONS WERE, KNOWING WHAT HE COULD AND COULDN'T DO AND WHAT HE MIGHT HAVE TO DO TO TRY TO MAKE IT WORK.

AND I WE HAVE TO DO WHAT WE THINK IS RIGHT TO PROTECT THE HERITAGE AND THE LAND OF SAINT HELENA. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

PAUL GRAHAM. PAUL GRAHAM MR. GRAHAM, WELCOME BY THAT GREAT GREAT GREAT.

GOOD EVENING, SIR MY NAME IS CRAIG REEVES. I LIVE AT 13 MYSTIC CIRCLE IN BEAUFORT BUT I HAVE A BUSINESS ON SAINT HELENA 34 HALLMARK ROAD I'M NOT HERE TO ADVOCATE FOR OR AGAINST BUT I DOING MY RESEARCH THIS IF YOU ARE AWARE OF WHAT THIS IS.

SCARES ME TO DEATH. I'M A COMMERCIAL FISHERMAN. MY WHOLE LIFE GENERATIONS I'M

[01:55:04]

I DO ALL OF THAT. WE HAVE OUR OWN SHRIMP BOATS WHEN WE DO IT ALL THE CPO ALLOWS FOR 165 HOMES AND AT ABOUT 100 DOCKS I STRUGGLE WITH THIS PICTURE WHICH LOOKS VERY ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY AND A GREAT WAY TO DEVELOP THE ISLAND.

I KNOW IT COMES WITH GOLF FOR SOME REASON GOLF OR EXCLUDE EXCLUSIVITY SEEMS TO BE A DETRIMENT BUT THE TRUTH IS THE CPO ALLOWS FOR THIS AND THIS IS VERY BAD SO YOU GUYS CAN STOP THE GOLF COURSE AND 50 HOMES OR 60 HOMES AND VERY LITTLE IMPACT TO OUR COMMUNITY.

OR YOU CAN JUST SAY NO WE CAN'T DO A GOLF COURSE AND THEN SAY YEAH, YOU CAN GO BUILD 165 HOMES WHICH INCREASES TRAFFIC AND A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER NEGATIVE THINGS.

SO TO ME IT'S A LOSE. YOU SAY NO TO THIS THEN WE LOSE WITH THIS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MARTA. I THINK IT'S MARTA MIMS 16 ROSITA ROAD THAT'S IN BEAUFORT. YEAH. THIS COULD BE THE PREVIOUS ONE.

HAVE A GIVE IT TO ME. ALL RIGHT. TRAVIS STEWART AGAIN.

WOW. HI, ALL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

I HAVE THIS NICE LITTLE THING PREPARED. MY NAME IS TRAVIS STEWART AND I LIVE POINT ROAD ON SAINT HELENA AND I'M YOU KNOW, I'M ALL ABOUT HAVING Y'ALL CONTINUE DOWN THE PATH OF PROTECTING THE MANY THE MANY OF US ON SAINT HELELELELELD AND WORK FOR THE BENEFIT OF US THE FOLKS THAT ELECTED INSTEAD OF THE FEW THAT WANT TO DO WHAT'S BEING SUGGESTED THE MANY NEIGHBORS AND ANCESTORS WHO'VE TOILED, SURVIVED AND THRIVED ON THE LANDS OF SAINT HELENA AND MORE IMPORTANTLY SAINT HELENA. BILL WE KEEP SAYING PINE ISLAND Y'ALL BUT IT'S SAINT NOW AND THERE'S A BIGGER, RICHER WAY BACK HISTORY THERE THAT NOBODY SPEAKING TO THAT GOES WAY BACK BEFORE THE HANNA'S AND THE FOLKS WHO WERE INVITING THE PRESIDENTS TO COME HUNTING WITH THEM. SO YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO BE EXPANSIVE ON OUR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THESE REPRESENT AND THE POTENTIAL FOR ANY CULTURAL IMPACT THAT ARE THERE IN AROUND AND UNDER THE SOIL AND THE WATERWAYS. I KNOW WE KEEP I MEAN I KEEP GOING BACK AND FORTH. I GET IT. ALL OF OUR OPTIONS RIGHT NOW ARE BAD BUT BECAUSE SORRY THE ZONING OF THAT MUCH LAND ALLOWS FOR BUNCH OF STUFF WITHIN THE EPA WITHOUT OF THE EPA. SO I ONLY REGRET THAT WHOEVER ARE THE 30 ARCHITECTS PLANNERS LAWYERS, ACCOUNTANTS THAT THIS GENTLEMAN CHOSE TO MEET WITH. DIDN'T THEY ALL GOT ON BOARD EITHER THEY DON'T LIVE ON SAINT HELENA OR THEY DON'T KNOW ANYBODY TO ASK ON SAINT HELENA.

WHAT DO Y'ALL WANT? MIGHT YOU ACCEPT I AM A GOLFER BUT I TEND NOT TO SHAKE MY INTO THE WATERWAYS? THEY PICKED UP 14,000 GOLF ON THE MARCH BUT DON'T TELL THE OTHER LAST MONTH NOW THERE THAT'S NOT HABITAT THAT'S HABITAT DESTRUCTION AS IS THE RUNOFF FROM A GOLF COURSE IN ADDITION TO ALL THE LOVELY YARDS THAT YOUR NON RESIDENT RESORT OWNERS WANT TO SEE WHEN THEY COME IN. SO I'M HERE TO SAY PLEASE SAY NO I'M NOT SURE WHAT TO SAY YES TO AND YOU KNOW I MEAN I JUST I ,I WANT TO I WANT TO SAY HELP US. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED ANYBODY'S IN PARTICULAR HELP.

WE NEED A BETTER CONVERSATION THAN WHERE WE'RE GOING AND SO FOR NOW I'M SAYING LET'S PLEASE SAY NO TO THE OF THE FEW AND LET'S TAKE CARE OF THE MANY THE MANY WHO NOT ONLY ELECTED YOU ALL AND ARE IN THIS ROOM BUT ALSO AT 1% TAX INCREASE TO PROTECT HABITAT AND WILD SPACES OF WHICH THIS STILL IS THOUGH IT IS STILL A PRIVATE LAND AND I REALIZE HE'S GOT SOME RIGHTS TOO. SO SORRY TO MUDDY THE WATERS BUT LET'S PLEASE SAY NO TO HIS APPEALS AND HIS EXCEPTION TO THIS CPA. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU THANK YOU. BLAKE KENNEDY LIKE KENNEDY THAT PREVIOUS ALSO THAT WAS A NEVER

[02:00:09]

IT'S REALLY UP TO YOU. YEAH. WELL MR. TROPEA ON MUCH TO COME BACK UP. YOU ASKED THAT QUESTION MR. TROPEANO.

YEAH GO AHEAD. MY QUESTION IS WHO WOULD YOU MIND AS A QUESTION PLEASE? SURE. SEVERAL SPEAKERS TONIGHT AND I BELIEVE IN THE ISLAND PACKET GAZETTE ARTICLE IT REFERENCED THAT YOU MET WITH 30 TO 40 PEOPLE ON ST HELENA ISLAND SO I JUST WOULD LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION ABOUT THAT. IS THAT CORRECT IT INCORRECT.

WHERE DID YOU MEET OVER TWO YEARS? WHO WERE THEY? ARE YOU DO YOU WANT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION OR WOULD YOU PREFER NOT TO? I'M TO DO A COUPLE OF THINGS ABOUT A COUPLE THINGS. I'M NOT A HUMAN ROLODEX WHICH I WAS WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS IS THAT AS MR. WOODS SAID, MY BELIEF IS THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO WANT TO STAND UP AND SAY THEY HAVE HEARD FROM ME AND I FEEL LIKE THERE IS A MODICUM OF IN THESE MEETINGS THAT HAS BEEN CREATED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY OBVIOUSLY GIVEN THE CONTENT ON THE RECORD WE HAD A MEETING APRIL 22ND OF 2022 WITH A GROUP OF PASTORS AND MINISTERS THAT WAS FACILITATED BY MY COUNCILPERSON MULTIPLE MEMBERS OF THAT GROUP.

THEY PRAYED OVER US AND PRAYED FOR OUR SUCCESS AND SOME OF THEM HAVE ACTUALLY UP AND SAID THE CONTRARY. THAT'S WHAT THIS TOPIC OF CONVERSATION HAS CREATED IS AN UNCOMFORTABILITY THE COMMUNITY THEMSELVES TO BE ABLE TO STAND UP AND SAY NOW LET'S JUST GO WITH WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE SAID. I THINK AS OF TODAY THE TOTAL WORLD AS OF YESTERDAY THE TOTAL WAS 432 PEOPLE THAT WE'VE TALKED TO INDIVIDUALLY.

I'VE BEEN THERE FOR 528 DAYS AND YOU DO THE MATH THAT'S THAT'S TOUGH TO DO.

I'M GOING TO NAME NAMES OUT OF RESPECT FOR PEOPLE. BUT I TELL YOU, YOU SOME DIGGING AND THERE WILL BE PEOPLE THAT WILL BE WILLING TO SHARE THEIR EXPERIENCE THAT THEY'VE HAD WITH ME TEAM MEMBERS AND THE CONTENT OF THAT AND WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT ONE WORD OF WHAT WE HAVE SHARED NOT ONE SINCE THE DAY I GOT HERE HAS CHANGED AND.

A SPECIFIC PASTOR TOLD ME ONLY YOU CAN MAKE YOURSELF A LIAR SO THAT'S WHAT I TOOK TO HEART AND I HAVEN'T A SINGLE WORD. I'M NOT SURE IF THAT PASTOR BELIEVES IN WHAT, HE TOLD ME.

BUT THAT'S I TOOK TO HEART IS FROM DAY ONE TO TODAY NOTHING'S CHANGED.

ALL RIGHT THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT'S FINANCE AND THE OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION IF NOT MAY HAVE A MOTION REGARDING THE ZONING MAP OR REZONING REQUEST FOR THE 502 ACRES I'M SURE CHAIRMAN PAPPAS, I'D LIKE MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE PROPOSED ZONING THAT WOULD REMOVE PINE ISLAND SAINT HELENA VILLE PROPERTY FROM THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE WE HAVE A MOTION TO HAVE A SECOND LOOK AT THAT WE HAVE A SECOND WITH FURTHER DISCUSSION SO FURTHER DISCUSSION I GUESS I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT IT'S EASY TO START TO BLEND SOME OF THE THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE HAVING TO DEAL WITH TONIGHT INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC IT WILL BE DEALING WITH IN THE NEXT ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. SO REALLY WHAT OUR FOCUS IS WITH THIS PARTICULAR CASE IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS EPA SHOULD BE REMOVED AS PART A REZONING REQUEST. AND I THINK WHAT I IN TERMS OF THE ARGUMENTS BY THE

[02:05:01]

SO AGAIN, WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE CHARGED WITH IN TERMS HAVING TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR A REZONING, I DO NOT THINK THAT THEY'VE DEMONSTRATED THAT IN FACT. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS POLICIES, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THERE WAS A LOT OF PUBLIC INPUT THAT WAS MADE WHEN THE CPO WAS INCLUDED. WE'VE GONE THROUGH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SINCE THEN TO REAFFIRM THAT IN FACT THE CPO IS APPROPRIATE FOR THAT AREA.

SO BASED ON THAT I WOULD AGREE WITH THE MOTION THAT'S BEEN PUT BEFORE US.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF DENYING MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THE ZONING MAPPING CHANGE FROM RAISE YOUR HAND IF UNANIMOUS ALL RIGHT THE LAST ISSUE OF THE

[Items 9, 10, & 11 ]

WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS? MR.. AND I'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO GIVE A VERY BRIEF INTRODUCTION INTO WHAT Y'ALL ARE DOING HERE TONIGHT.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE. I WOULD LIKE THAT YES. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO MAKE DISTINCTION. ABSOLUTELY. IF YOU'LL JUST GIVE ME ONE MOMENT. THANK YOU, MR. BRUCE. SO MR. CHAIRMAN, AGAIN FOR THE RECORD, I AM HERE REPRESENTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IT'S LISTED AS THREE SEPARATE APPEALS BUT ALL INVOLVING THE SAME THAT SAME 500 ACRES THAT WAS DISCUSSED BEFORE THREE APPLICATIONS.

THERE WERE THREE APPEALS ON APPLICATIONS TO DEVELOP A SIX HOLES OF GOLF IS AS THEY WERE IS HOW THEY WERE STYLED IN THE APPLICATION SIX HOLES OF GOLF ON THAT 500 ACRES THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN SUBDIVIDED INTO AT LEAST THREE THREE PARCELS AND THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THOSE THREE DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS. SO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT YOU WILL BE SITTING IN A WHAT IS KNOWN AS A JUDICIAL CAPACITY. YOU ARE ACTING AS A TRIER OF FACT AND A ESSENTIALLY A JUDICIAL PANEL IN DETERMINING WHETHER IN ERROR WAS MADE BY THE BEAUFORT COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHEN IT DENIED THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FOR THAT WERE SUBMITTED BY PINE ISLAND. THOSE THREE APPLICATIONS STAFF PRESENT AND THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT THEIR POSITIONS ON THAT AND I AM HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE YOUR CODE THE COUNTY CODE SETS FORTH WHAT YOU ARE HEARING PROCEDURES ARE AND IT ALSO SETS FORTH WHAT YOUR OBLIGATIONS ON AN APPEAL SO WHEN ARE HEARING THIS TONIGHT YOU ARE TO YOUR DECISION BASED SOLELY ON THE RECORD OF THE APPEAL AS SUPPLEMENTED BY ARGUMENTS PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THE STANDARDS SET IN 737 D OF THE CODE THOSE STANDARDS ARE THE APPEAL REVIEW STANDARDS IN THE APPELLATE BODY WHICH IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS LIMITED TO FOLLOWING DETERMINATIONS THAT THE DECISION MAKER WHICH

[02:10:03]

SO THAT'S A TO SUMMARIZE THAT THAT THERE WAS A ERROR IN THE AN ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR AT THE STAFF. THE SECOND REASON WOULD BE THAT THE DECISION MAKER MADE A DECISION BASED ON A STANDARD NOT CONTAINED IN THE DEVELOPMENT CODE OR OTHER APPROPRIATE COUNTY ORDINANCES REGULATIONS A STATE LAW OR A STANDARD MORE STRICT OR BROAD THAN THE STANDARD ESTABLISHED WAS APPLIED. AND FINALLY THE THIRD ONE WOULD BE THAT THE DECISION MAKER MADE AN IN APPLYING A STANDARD OR MEASURING A STANDARD AS YOU PROGRESSED THROUGH THIS I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY FIVE POINT ANY ONE OF THOSE THREE IF YOU WERE QUESTIONING WHICH ONE MAY APPLY OR WHICH ONE THEY MAY BE ARGUING I'D BE HAPPY ASSIST I WILL TRY MY BEST TO REMAIN AS UNBIASED AS POSSIBLE SO IF YOU ASK ME DIRECTLY ON WHAT MY OPINIONS MAY BE AS TO THE FACTS OR WHAT MY OPINION WOULD BE IF I HAD TO SERVE AS THE REVIEIEIEE FULLY DECLINE AND FACE THE THE WRATH OF YOU SIX THE THE APPELLATE BODY IS NOT HERE TO HEAR ANY EVIDENCE MAKE ANY DECISION BASED ON HARDSHIPS OR SPECIAL CONDITIONS SO THE IDEA OF WHAT NECESSARILY COULD BE DONE IF THIS APPEAL LOCATION IF YOU ALL UPHOLD THE DECISION OF STAFF THE IDEA OF WHAT POTENTIALLY COULD BE DONE WITH THIS PROPERTY IN SORT OF COURSE OF COURSE OF CIRCUMSTANCE IS NOT A RELEVANT CONSIDERATION. SO WHAT COULD BE BUILT ON THERE IF YOU UPHOLD DECISION OF STAFF IS NOT PERTINENT. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT COMPLICATED LEGAL ISSUES THAT ARE ALSO GOING TO BE RAISED TONIGHT BY THE APPLICANT AND BAR STAFF. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU ALL LISTEN CAREFULLY IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE STANDARDS I'LL BE THAN HAPPY TO PROVIDE SOME GUIDANCE AND GIVE YOU ANY SORT OF INFORMATION THAT I FEEL IS HELPFUL AND YOU ALL REACHING YOUR DECISIONS AGAIN AT THIS POINT I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND I'M HERE IF YOU NEED ME. THANK YOU. MICHELLE BRUCE MICHELLE BRUCE, AS YOU MENTIONED HERE TO ASSIST US WITH LEGAL COUNSEL IN THE EVENT WE SHOULD NEED IT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE FAIR AND OPEN AND THEN FOLLOW THE DUE PROCESS ENTITLED THE PROCESS WILL PROCEED AS FOLLOWS THE APPLICANT HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF SO THE APPLICANT WILL PRESENT FIRST THEIR PETITION FOR APPEAL AND THEN WE WILL HEAR FROM THE COUNTY AND LASTLY A REBUTTAL OPPORTUNITY BY THE APPLICANT SO WHO WOULD LIKE TO WHO IS INTENDED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT? SARA CAN YOU PLEASE COME UP IDENTIFY YOURSELF? THANK YOU CHAIRMAN PAPPAS AND LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MY NAME ELLIS LIESMAN. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT PINE ISLAND LLC.

I'M A PRACTICING ATTORNEY IN CHARLESTON. YOU MENTIONED THE PHRASE DUE PROCESS, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND THE PHRASE CAVEAT EMPTOR USED EARLIER BY ONE OF THE SPEAKERS.

I THINK THOSE TWO OF THE PHRASES FOR US TO START WITH MOST AND THANK YOU CHRIS TO START WITH WITH THE BEGINNING BECAUSE DUE PROCESS REQUIRES THAT WHEN YOU PRESENT AN APPLICATION THAT COMPLIES WITH THE EXISTING STANDARD THAT THE ZONING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILL PROCESS THAT APPLICATION THAT'S SIMPLE DUE PROCESS WHAT'S NOT ALLOWED HAPPEN IS FOR YOUR APPLICATION TO BE DELAYED AND NOT ACTED UPON UNTIL THERE IS A MODIFICATION MADE FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF DISALLOWING YOUR APPLICATION AND WE TALK ABOUT THE DEVELOPER AND CAVEAT EMPTOR WELL WHAT MORE DOES THE DEVELOPER OR ANY PROPERTY OWNER HAVE TO RELY UPON THAN THE ZONING CODE AS IT EXISTS AT THE TIME THAT THEY PURCHASE A PROPERTY AND THEY SUBMIT AN APPLICATION SO THE ERROR THAT WE'RE ASKING YOU ALL TO ADDRESS THIS EVENING IS THAT WHEN BEAUFORT COUNTY RECEIVED THE APPLICATIONS AND THE THREE AND MR. CHAIRMAN, IF YOU MIGHT

[02:15:02]

SO JUST FOR PURPOSES OF ALL THE FOLKS THAT ARE HERE AND FOR YOUR COMMISSION, I'M HAPPY TO MAKE THESE COMMENTS ONCE AS THEY APPLY EQUALLY TO ALL THREE APPEALS RATHER THAN DOING IT THREE TIMES. IF THAT WOULD BE YOUR PLEASURE .

YES SIR. THANK YOU. SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT ERROR AGAIN, COUNTY HAS A DUTY AND AN OBLIGATION TO APPLY THE STANDARDS AS THEY EXIST AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION THIS PART, THIS APPLICATION INVOLVED THESE THREE INVOLVED 636 HOLE GOLF COURSES. SO DESPITE THE SUGGESTION THAT GOLF IS AN ANATHEMA AND A CULTURE KILLER UNTIL JUST VERY VERY RECENTLY GOLF COURSES UP TO SIX HOLES ON A PARTICULAR PARCEL WERE SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED UNDER THE SAME CPO OVERLAYS ZONE THAT FOLKS HAVE MENTIONED TO YOU THAT THEY WERE A PART OF DRAFTING AND WAS SO CAREFULLY DRAFTED AND IS SO VITALLY IMPORTANT. THE ONLY REASON THAT IT WAS RECENTLY CHANGED BECAUSE MR. TRUMP PIANO MADE APPLICATION THAT COMPLIED WITH THAT CPO HE WAS ASKED TO NOT PRESENT IT IN NOVEMBER SO HE DIDN'T HE DEFERRED ON THAT HE EVENTUALLY PRESENT IT ON MARCH THE SEVENTH AND THE COUNTY DIDN'T ACT ON IT MARCH 7TH YOU SAID? YES, SIR.

THANK YOU, MR. MILLER. MARCH 2023 SO WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THAT.

IS THAT THE ALLOWANCE OF THE SIX HOLE GOLF COURSE ON A PARCEL WAS CHANGED AN AMENDMENT HOWEVER THAT AMENDMENT DID NOT EXIST AND WAS NOT PART OF THE BEAUFORT COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE OR A PART OF THE SUBSECTION OF THAT WHICH IS THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY AT THE TIME APPLICATION WAS PRESENTED HOWEVER THAT AMENDMENT WHICH WAS FIRST READ FOR THE FIRST READING ONLY LATER WAS USED AS THE BASIS FOR DENYING THOSE APPLICATIONS WHICH WERE COMPLIANT WITH THE ZONING CODE AT THE TIME THEY WERE SUBMITTED.

MISS KRIS, COULD YOU FLIP TO THAT NEXT SLIDE? THANK YOU.

THIS WAS MR. MERCHANT'S LETTER. IT CONCLUDED AN EXCERPT FROM IT.

WE'VE RECEIVED CONCEPTUAL LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION AS THE DIRECT DRIVE DETERMINED PURSUANT TO 7.2. 61 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT YOUR APPLICATION DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE AMENDMENTS GIVEN FIRST READING BY COUNTY COUNCIL ON APRIL TEN, 2023. SO WHY IS THAT A PROBLEM FOR DUE PROCESS AND WHY IS THAT A PROBLEM FOR CAVEAT EMPTOR AND WHY IS THAT A PROBLEM FOR COUNTY IT'S ILLEGAL TO APPLY SOMETHING THAT HASN'T BEEN ENACTED YET TO THESE APPLICATIONS FOR THREE REASONS. KRIS CAN YOU SWITCH TO THE NEXT SLIDE THE PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE THAT'S NOT A PHRASE THAT GOT USED IN MR. MERCHANT'S LETTER BUT THAT'S WHAT HE WAS DOING. HE WAS SAYING SOMETHING THAT FIRST READING ALTHOUGH IT HAS TO RECEIVE THREE I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND USE IT TO DENY YOUR APPLICATION EVEN THOUGH IT ISN'T AN ORDINANCE YET. NOW THERE'S A VERY LIMITED LIMITED RULE THAT ALLOWS FOR THAT TO HAPPEN AND IT'S CALLED THE PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE .

IT WAS RECOGNIZED BY OUR SUPREME COURT IN 1979 AND WHAT IT SAYS AND I'VE COPY THIS IS THE EXACT LANGUAGE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN FROM THIS OPINION WE HOLD THE MUNICIPALITY MAY REFUSE A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A LAND USE IN A NEWLY ANNEXED AREA WHEN SUCH USE IS REPUGNANT TO A PENDING AND LATER ENACTED ZONING ORDINANCE. FIRST PROBLEM PINE ISLAND NOT A NEWLY ANNEXED AREA IT'S BEEN PART OF BEAUFORT COUNTY SINCE 1769.

I SEE BEHIND THE CHAIRMAN AND WHEN BEAUFORT COUNTY WAS FOUNDED IT'S BEEN A PART OF THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY SINCE THAT WAS INITIATED IN 19 APRIL 26TH, 1999 ACCORDING TO MR. MERCHANT'S COMMENTS. SO THE FIRST RULE ABOUT APPLYING A PENDING ORDINANCE THAT HASN'T BEEN PASSED YET IS IT APPLIES TO AREAS THAT ARE NEWLY ANNEXED THAT THAT NOT THE CASE HERE THAT IS A LEGAL AREA AND AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND AS AS AS COUNCIL SAID

[02:20:08]

AND YOU JUST GOT THAT PROPERTY. OKAY. THAT'S WHEN YOU CAN USE THIS LIMITED BUT PRETTY UNFAIR TOOL TO APPLY AN ORDINANCE THAT HASN'T EVEN BEEN PASSED YET TO REFUSE TO ACT ON AN APPLICATION THAT COMPLIES WITH THE EXISTING ORDINANCES THAT WERE THERE WHEN THAT APPLICATION WAS PREPARED THAT WERE THERE WHEN THAT PROPERTY WAS BOUGHT JUST LIKE IN THIS SITUATION. OKAY SO IT WASN'T A ANNEXED AREA AND AT THE TIME THE APPLICATION WAS CERTAINLY NOT REPUGNANT TO A PENDING ORDINANCE OR TO AN EXISTING ORDINANCE BECAUSE AS WE'VE ALREADY DISCUSSED GOLF COURSES OF UP TO SIX HOLES WERE SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED. NO, NO THANK YOU. PLEASE.

I'M NOT GOING TO I'M NOT GOING TO ADDRESS THE PEANUT. PLEASE.

YOU WON'T I'M GOING TO HAVE TO ASK YOU TO PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL .

THANK YOU SO. YOU ALL CAN REVIEW THOSE. YOU CAN MAKE THAT DETERMINATION BUT IT SAYS WHAT IT SAYS SO YOU TO LATER DETERMINE WHETHER IT WAS REPUGNANT TO SOMETHING THAT WAS PENDING AND LATER ENACTED. SO THAT'S THE SECOND PARAGRAPH THAT'S THERE AN ORDINANCE IS LEGALLY PENDING. THE GOVERNING BODY HAS RESOLVED TO CONSIDER A PARTICULAR SCHEME OF REZONING AND HAS ADVERTISED TO THE PUBLIC ITS INTENTION TO HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE REZONING SO AS MARCH SEVEN, 2023 WAS THERE A PARTICULAR STREAM OF REZONING THEY'VE BEEN ADVERTISED TO THE PUBLIC THAT WAS GOING TO OCCUR RELATING TO PINE ISLAND NO THERE WAS NOT A PARTICULAR SCHEME OF REZONING DID NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE THAT LATER BECAME THAT AMENDMENT DIDN'T EVEN EXIST IT DIDN'T EVEN EXIST AS MARCH 21ST WHEN THE CPO COMMITTEE DIRECTED THE COUNTY TO WORK ON THE WORDING OF THOSE MORS OF MARCH 7TH WHEN THOSE APPLICATIONS WERE SUBMITTED THESE WERE BODIES AND THERE WAS AND THERE NO PENDING ORDINANCE BY MEANING A SCHEME OF REZONING THAT HAD BEEN ADVERTISED THE PUBLIC THAT DID NOT EXIST AT THE TIME SO THE COUNTY AND OF COURSE THERE'S PRESSURE THIS ROOM IS FULL.

PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO DO THE WRONG THING BUT SOMETIMES THEY DO SOMETIMES THEY APPLY PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE TO A NEWLY AREA EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT LEGAL TO DO THAT SOMETIMES THEY THIS DOCTRINE WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE A PARTICULAR SCHEME OF REZONING THAT EXISTS AT THE TIME AND IT HASN'T BEEN PUBLICLY. SO WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE IS FROM WHEN AGAIN IN NOVEMBER OF 2022 WHEN THE APPLICATION WAS ASKED WHEN THIS COUNTY'S ADMINISTRATOR ASKED THAT IT BE DELAYED AND NOT BE BROUGHT FORWARD YET THAT REQUEST HONORED BUT THEN AS WE GO FORWARD THE THREE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IN ORDER FOR THE PENDING ORDER DOCTRINE TO BE APPLIED WEREN'T PRESENT. BUT WHAT THE COUNTY DID IS IT WAITED UNTIL IT HAD THIS TEXT AMENDMENT UNTIL IT HAD ADVERTISED AND THEN UNTIL IT HAD GIVEN IT FIRST READING AND THEN THIS WAS RETROACTIVELY APPLIED TO COMPLETE APPLICATIONS THAT WERE ALREADY ON AND SOME PEOPLE MIGHT SALUTE THE COUNTY FOR DOING IT BUT IT'S NOT THE LAW IT VIOLATES THE LAW AND THAT'S WHEN YOU HAVE TO EXERCISE THAT QUASI JUDICIAL FUNCTION TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE'S RIGHTS ARE RESPECTED, INCLUDING SOMEONE WHO SUBMITS AN APPLICATION THAT

[02:25:07]

IT CHRIS, IF YOU CAN SWITCH TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. I KNOW THE TEXT IS A LITTLE SMALL ON THE SCREEN HERE BUT THIS IS TO SHOW THE AGAIN WHAT'S NOT ON HERE ARE THE DISCUSSIONS 2022 WHEN THE APPLICATION COULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD BUT WHAT IS HERE IS IN FEBRUARY 2023 THE PURCHASE OF THAT PROPERTY IS FINALIZED AT THE TIME IT'S THE EXISTING CPO OVERLAY ZONE ALLOWS FOR THE USE THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR A SIX HOLE GOLF COURSE ON EACH OF THESE PARCELS LATER ON AFTER THAT IS WHEN THE COUNTY TAKES QUITE PLAINLY TARGETED AND TRY TO STOTOTOTOTOP PROJECT IN ORDER TO CHANGE THE CPA OVERLAY ZONE AND THEN RETROACTIVELY APPLY IT. THAT'S NOT ALLOWED THAT'S LIKE THERE ARE A SET OF DECISIONS THIS IS NOT A NEW CONCEPT. THERE ARE A SET OF DECISIONS THAT BACK THIS UP NOT ONLY TO THE CASES THAT LIMIT WHAT THE PENDING ARE AND ORDNANCE DOCTRINE IS AND WHEN IT CAN BE APPLIED BUT ALSO THAT WHEN YOU SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION YOU HAVE A RIGHT FOR IT TO BE ACTED UPON, NOT TARGETED AND THEN MADE ILLEGAL BY A SPECIFIC AMENDMENT THAT DIDN'T EXIST AT THE TIME. SO IN THE PURE OIL DIVISION CASE WHAT THEY RECOGNIZED IS WHEN YOU'RE RELYING IN GOOD FAITH UPON THE EXISTING ZONING AT TIME YOU MAKE A PERMIT APPLICATION YOU HAVE A VESTED RIGHT TO PROCEED WITH THAT AND WHAT PURE OIL DIVISION DECIDED IS NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE THAT RIGHT WHEN YOU'VE ALREADY GOT A PERMIT IN HAND BUT YOU'VE GOT THAT RIGHT EVEN WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE A PERMIT IN HAND YET WHEN GOT AN APPLICATION IT'S BEEN SUBMITTED THAT'S A SUPREME COURT DECISION LIKE THE ONE THAT I MENTIONED BEFORE THAT'S EXISTED SINCE 1970. THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CASE FOR YOU TO REMEMBER BECAUSE ALTHOUGH THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO GET VESTED RIGHTS THIS RECOGNIZES THAT WHEN YOU RELY THAT AND YOU IN GOOD FAITH YOU SPEND MONEY ON IT, YOU SPEND MONEY ON SURVEYING YOU START PAYING PROPERTY TAXES. YOU DO THOSE THINGS YOU SOMETHING FORWARD TO THE COUNTY THAT'S AUTHORIZED UNDER THE ZONING CODE YOU'RE ALLOWED AND YOU'RE ENTITLED TO HAVE THAT APPLICATION PROCESSED NOT SHELVED. SO FIRST NATIONAL POLICE ANOTHER CASE THAT ACTUALLY COMES FROM THE FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS.

SO THIS IS FROM OUR FEDERAL COURT. SO WHEN WE REALLY START TALKING ABOUT DUE PROCESS AND CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED, THAT'S THE COURT THAT PROTECTS THOSE. THIS COURT IS RIGHT BELOW SUPREME COURT.

IT SITS IN RICHMOND AND SO WHAT IT SAYS IS OKAY. THE STARTING POINT FOR OUR INQUIRY IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER STATE AND LOCAL LAW AFFORDED SCOTT THE PROPERTY OWNER IN THAT CASE PROTECTABLE PROPERTY INTEREST IN THE PERMIT SUFFICIENT TO TRIGGER FEDERAL DUE PROCESS GUARANTEES. WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT CASE THE DEVELOPER WANTED TO BUILD AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLEX AND THEN A LOT OF FOLKS CAME OUT AND ARGUED WITH COUNTY COUNCIL TO BASICALLY NOT ALLOW THEM TO DO IT EVEN THOUGH HE HAD SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION.

SO THEY STARTED A MORATORIUM AND THEY BLOCKED THAT PROJECT, SHELVED IT UNTIL THEY COULD REZONING THE PROPERTY IN A MANNER THAT WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR HIS PROJECT TO BE FOR HIS PROJECT TO PROCEED DIFFERENT INTENDED DEVELOPMENT BUT SAME MISCONDUCT UNDER SOUTH LAW SETTLED WELL BEFORE HE APPLIED FOR THE BUILDING PERMIT. SCOTT ENJOYED AN ENTITLEMENT DONATIONS OF A PERMIT UPON PRESENTATION OF AN APPLICATION AND PLANS SHOWING A USE EXPRESSLY PERMITTED UNDER CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE AND THIS APPLIES EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE AN OPTION TO PURCHASE PROPERTY AND NOT NECESSARILY ACTUAL LEGAL TITLE.

THOSE WERE THE FACTS IN THE SCOTT CASE HE HAD AN OPTION TO BUY THE PROPERTY AND OUR SITUATION THAT'S BEFORE YOU LADIES AND GENTLEMEN THE ALREADY OWNED THE PROPERTY SO YOU'VE MADE DECISION ON THE REZONING AND NOW IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO SIT AS JUDGES ON AN APPEAL TO DECIDE WHETHER IT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE COUNTY TO APPLY THE PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE TO AN AREA THAT WAS NOT NEWLY ANNEXED RELATING TO A TEXT AMENDMENT THAT WAS NOT AND AND NOT WRITTEN AT THE TIME THERE WAS NO THERE WAS NO PARTICULAR SCHEME OF REZONING THAT EXISTED AT THAT TIME AND THERE WAS NO ADVERTISEMENT NOTICING THE PUBLIC THAT THIS WAS GOING HAPPEN. SO UNLESS THOSE THREE THINGS ARE PRESENT IT'S NOT PROPER FOR

[02:30:06]

YOU SHOULDN'T IN AN IMPROPER ACT YOU SHOULDN'T CONDONE IT. YOU SHOULD REVERSE IT.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, MR. MAY I ANOTHER MATTER OF PRIVILEGE.

YES, PLEASE. YEAH. WHILE I KNOW THAT THERE IS AN INHERENT DESIRE TO COMMUNICATE WHEN SOMEONE ELSE IS SPEAKING OR TO VOCALIZE DISAGREEMENT OR AGREEMENT IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT WE HAVE A CLEAN RECORD IN CASE THIS TO FURTHER APPEALS THAT WE CAN DIFFERENTIATE WHO'S SPEAKING WHEN THEY'RE SPEAKING IT CAN OFTEN BE DIFFICULT TO DO SO THE LINE SO I KNOW I KNOW IT CAN BE TOUGH BUT PLEASE PLEASE TRY TO KEEP OUTSIDE NOISES TO A MINIMUM TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE YES THANK YOU CALLS COMING? YES SIR SIR PLEASE WE DON'T LIKE SIR PLEASE HELP US GET THROUGH THIS I'M SORRY I'M SORRY SIR WOULD YOUOUOUOUOUOUOU YES, SIR. BRIAN HOLBERT DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE COUNTY IN THIS MATTER. YOUR HONOR. YES? CAN YOU MOVE THE MICROPHONE CLOSE TO YOU? I'M NOT HEARING YOU EASILY.

OKAY. BRIAN HOLBERT, DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY I'LL BE HANDLING THE APPEAL BEHALF OF THE COUNTY. NOW THE APPELLANT HAS RAISED THREE MAIN ISSUES IN THEIR APPEAL. THE FIRST IS THAT THE CDC CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT STANDARDS ONLY PROHIBIT NINE HOLES OR MORE GOLF COURSES THAT'S A FALLACY AND ALSO ASSERTS THAT THEY HAVE A VESTED RIGHT TO BUILD THREE SIX HOLE GOLF COURSES.

THAT'S A FALLACY. AND THE APPELLANT ASSERTS THAT THE PENDING ORDINANCE DOESN'T APPLY BECAUSE THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED MARCH 7TH AND OUR PUBLICATION WAS IN MARCH 23RD.

THOSE ARE THREE MAIN ISSUES THAT ARE GOING TO ADDRESS ACTUALLY YOU'VE HEARD A LOT OF DISCUSSION FROM MR. LIESMAN SIR, COULD YOU HOLD ON A SECOND WOULD YOU PLEASE CLOSE THE DOOR BACK THERE? I NEED TO MINIMIZE CONVERSATION SO WE CAN HEAR.

THANK YOU. WHEN I WAS A KID I WAS PRETTY WHITE RELIGIOUSLY WATCHED DRAGNET AND JOE FRIDAY SERGEANT JOE FRY IN L.A. POLICE DEPARTMENT HAD A PHRASE A CATCH PHRASE THAT HE USED AND I PLAY WAY I PRACTICE LAW AND THAT IS JUST THE FACTS MA'AM JUST THE FACTS SO I JUST WANT TO PRESENT THE FACTS AND KEEP IT TO THE FACTS I WANT TO KEEP IT IN REALITY UNLIKE HOW MR. LIESMAN WORKS WITH HIS FACTS HE PUT FORTH THE FIRST ISSUE NEXT SLIDE. SO HE'S DEALT WITH VESTED RIGHTS.

THE FILM ASSERTS THAT THEY HAVE A VESTED RIGHT TO HAVE THEIR APPROVED FOR THREE SIX HOLE GOLF COURSES BECAUSE OF THE ORDINANCES EFFECT ON MARCH 7TH, 2023 THEY CITED THE PURE OIL CASE FROM 19 7053 YEARS AGO DEALING WITH VESTED RIGHTS. IN THAT CASE HE EXPLAINED IT THAT THE VESTED RIGHTS THE APPLICANT TO USE BECAUSE THEY SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER HIS POSITION IN THE CURRENT EXPENSES AND OBLIGATIONS RELIANCE ON THE ORDINANCE IN EFFECT AT THAT TIME THAT WAS GOOD LAW AT THAT TIME BUT WHAT HE DIDN'T MENTION WAS THAT THE COURTS RECOGNIZED THAT THIS EXPRESS USE THAT THEY TALKED ABOUT BUILDING THE STANDARD OIL GAS STATION IN A COMMUNITY WAS ALLOWED BY THEIR ZONING LAWS AND IT WAS NOT INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THAT DISTRICT HE FACT BUT NOW THEY ALSO SAY GOT THE GREENEVILLE FROM 1980 340 YEARS AGO A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER WANTED TO BUILD LOW INCOME APARTMENTS IN

[02:35:01]

ALL RIGHT BUT HE ALSO DIDN'T TELL YOU WAS A SOUTH CAROLINA BECAUSE OF THE LAW THAT WAS DEVELOPED AND THE CASE LAW CONSIDERED COMMON LAW THE LAWS THAT WERE BEING DEVELOPED BACK IN SEVENTIES IN THE EIGHTIES RELATED TO ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT WERE RUN AMOK SO THE LEGISLATURE TOOK ACTION IN 1990 FOR THEY PASSED THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT PLANNING ENABLING ACT OF 1994. THIS ALLOWED FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES TO APPOINT COMMISSIONS TO AID IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF AND KEEP IT IN RALEIGH FASHION AND CONTROLLED THE COUNTY COUNCIL. EACH COUNTY CAN CREATE A PLANNING COMMISSION THE AREAS OF JURISDICTION DEFINED AT 629 330 ACCOUNTING TO EXERCISE THE POWERS GRANTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER IN THE TOTAL UNINCORPORATED AREA OR SPECIFIC PARTS OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREA. WELL BETWEEN 1994 IN 1999 BEAUFORT COUNTY CREATED A PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEY WORKED ON CREATING COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ORDINANCE. ROB TALKED ABOUT THAT THIS IS THE RESULT 1991 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND THE ORDINANCE PART OF THAT PROCESS DEALT WITH APPOINTING A CPO THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY COMMITTEE TO PROTECT CULTURAL AREAS AND IT WAS THE FIRST EXPANDED BEYOND SAINT HELENA. IT WAS GOING TO INCLUDE OTHER AREAS WEST OF BEAUFORT, NORTH OF THE BROAD. THEY LATER EXCLUDED THAT AND KEPT IT ONLY TO SAINT HELENA FOR THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT.

ROB SHOWED THE MAPS THAT THEY CREATED DEFINING THE DISTRICT THERE AND THERE WERE AREAS THAT WERE KEPT OUT OF THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT ON SAINT HELENA ISLAND AND AS HE IDENTIFIED FRIPP ISLAND DR. ALL HARBOR ISLAND GATED COMMUNITIES WERE KEPT OUT OF THE CBO FOR HUNTING ISLAND WAS A STATE PARK THAT WAS KEPT UP HUNTING ISLAND WAS NOT OUR JURISDICTION THAT WAS STATE THAT WAS KEPT OUT THE OTHERS WERE GAY COMMUNITIES AND TWO OF THEM HAD GOLF COURSES.

THE COMMITTEE IN THE COUNCIL DID NOT WANT TO HAVE NONCONFORMITY ALREADY IN EXISTENCE IN THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT. SO THOSE WERE EXCLUDED.

THE REST OF IT WAS THERE IF ANYBODY WANTED TO CHALLENGE BEING PART OF THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT THEY COULD HAVE CHALLENGED IT BACK IN 1999 UP TO 60 DAYS AFTER WE ADOPTED THAT ORDINANCE BUT THE CPO THE TIME HAS COME AND GONE.

THE PROPERTY OWNERS ON SAINT HELENA HAVE LIVED WITH AND PARTICIPATED IN THE PROTECTIONS OF CPO SINCE 1999 THE PREVIOUS PROPERTY OWNERS OF PINE ISLAND FROM 1999 UNTIL TODAY HAVE LIVED WITH CULTURAL PROTECTION OF THE DISTRICT'S PROTECTIONS AND THE ZONE STANDARDS.

MR. TROIANO TWO YEARS AGO STARTED TO MAKE PLANS TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY.

HE DIDN'T PURCHASE IT UNTIL FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR A FEW MONTHS AGO FEBRUARY IS WHEN HE CONSUMMATED THAT HE DIDN'T OWN IT BACK IN 2022 OR 2021 WHEN YOU SPEND YOUR MONEY ON ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEYS AND ENGINEERING EVERYTHING ELSE HE DIDN'T OWN IT.

HE MIGHT HAVE HAD A CONTRACT FOR SOME CONTINGENCIES WITH AN OPTION TO PURCHASE IT BUT HE HADN'T CONSUMMATED THE DEAL TILL FEBRUARY. HE DOESN'T MIND BECAUSE THE GO TO PRODUCTION DISTRICT THAT WAS ADOPTED IN PART OF THE COUNTY CODE IN 1999 THE LANGUAGE IS THE SAME TODAY THE LANGUAGE HAS NOT CHANGED NOW BACK THEN IT WAS AN APPENDIX TO THE CODE AND TODAY IT'S PART OF THE ACTUAL CODE ITSELF 3.4.5 ALL PART OF THE APPENDIX.

BUT IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION 3.4.5 ALL IT GIVES YOU THE PURPOSE OF THE CPO.

THE PURPOSE IS THAT THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE IS ESTABLISHED TO PROVIDE FOR THE LONG TERM PROTECTION OF THE CULTURALLY SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES FOUND ON SAINT HELENA ISLAND. THE CPO ZONE ACKNOWLEDGES ST HELENS HISTORIC CULTURAL AND

[02:40:04]

THAT'S THE PURPOSE AS IT WAS DEFINED UP UNTIL LAST MONTH IN PARAGRAPH D OF THAT SAME CODE SECTION USE LIMITATIONS. AS ROB TOLD YOU EARLIER, THE SPECIFIC USES DEEMED TO BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CPO ZONE AND THEREFORE ARE PROHIBITED RESTRICTED ACCESS GATED COMMUNITIES LIKE FOR HARBOR ISLAND AND DAYTIME THAT'S INCOMPATIBLE SO THEY DIDN'T WANT IT IN THEY WANT NON-CONFORMITY RESORTS, THEY WANT BIG HOTELS OR BIG RESORTS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THEY WANT TO KEEP THEIR CULTURE LIFE AND GOLF COURSES.

GOLF COURSES WERE PROHIBITED USES NOW THERE THE APPLICANT IS TRYING TO MAKE FUN OR MAKE LOOSE WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT FOLLOWS THE PROVISION OF THE GOLF COURSE SAYING THE USE INCLUDES REGULATION PAR THREE GOLF COURSES HAVING NINE OR MORE HOLES THAT'S HE'S PLAYING ON THAT'S WHAT HE'S SAYING HE HAD TIME FOR THE LANGUAGE IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE FROM 1999 UNTIL TODAY DEFINING GOLF COURSE REMAINED THE SAME 1999 LANGUAGE READ REGULATION IN PAR THREE GOLF COURSES AND ASSOCIATED AMENITIES HAVE NINE OR MORE HOLES A DRIVING RANGE MAYBE AND SO WE'RE USED THE OPERATION THAT WAS IN 1999 THE LANGUAGE TODAY DEFINITION OF GOLF COURSE HASN'T CHANGED AS I SAID. AND WHERE DO THEY GET THE DEFINITION FOR A GOLF COURSE? WELL, THEY USED PLAIN AND ORDINARY MEANING OF THE LANGUAGE AND THEY ALSO USE WHAT'S CALLED A PLANTERS DICTIONARY AND THIS IS PART OF MATERIALS PROVIDED TO YOU OR THE PRESENTATION I'M MAKING. OKAY, THAT WAS IN THE EXHIBIT DEFINITION OF A GOLF COURSE ATTRACTIVE LAND LAID OUT WITH AT LEAST NINE HOLES.

WE'RE PLAYING A GAME OF GOLF AND IMPROVED WITH TEES GREENS FAIRWAYS AND HAZARDS A GOLF COURSE INCLUDES A CLUBHOUSE AND SHELTERS AS ACCESSORY USES ANOTHER ONE AN AREA OR COURSE FOR PLAYING GOLF CONSISTING OF AT LEAST NINE HOLES EXCEPT MINIATURE GOLF WITHIN WHICH THE PLAYING AREA IS NOT ARTIFICIALLY ILLUMINATED. IT GOES ON TO SEVERAL OTHER DEFINITIONS THAT YOU CAN READ IN THE ATTACHMENT THAT HE GIVE TO YOU THAT'S THE PLANNER'S DICTIONARY FROM 2004 AND THE SAME DEFINITION PREDATED THAT BUT THAT'S PART OF THE DEFINITION THAT WAS USED IN OUR CODE THAT THE PLANNERS USED TO PUT IN THERE TO THE DICTIONARY . MERRIAM-WEBSTER DEFINES GOLF IN 2023 GOLF IS A GAME WHICH A PLAYER USING SPECIAL CLUBS ATTEMPTS TO SINK A BALL WITH AS FEW STROKES AS POSSIBLE INTO EACH OF THE NINE OR 18 SUCCESSIVE HOLES ON A COURSE THAT'S GOLF GOLF COURSE IN AREA OF LAND LAID OUT FOR WITH A SERIES OF NINE OR 18 HOLES EACH INCLUDING A TEE FAIRWAY AND PUTTING GREEN AND OFTEN ONE OR MORE NATURAL OR ARTIFICIAL HAZARDS ALSO CALLED GOLF AS 2023 FROM MERRIAM WEBSTER'S I'VE GOT A 1970 DICTIONARY WITH THE TEXT EDITIONS IT HASN'T CHANGED A GOLF COURSE IS 18 HOLES PAR THREE CAN BE NINE HOLES OR 18 HOLES BUT SOMETHING LESS THAN NINE HOLES IS NOT A GOLF COURSE. A GOLF COURSE HAS 18 HOLES IN INTERPRETING THE LANGUAGE IN THE KILL ZONE IN ORDNANCE THERE'S SOME KEY SOUTH CAROLINA CASES THAT STAND FOR KEY ELEMENTS IN INTERPRETING THE ORDINANCES AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE CASE MTC OUTDOOR LLC VERSUS ,D.O.T. IT'S A 27 SOUTH CAROLINA CASE.

IT'S UNPUBLISHED OPINION BUT I PUT IT FORTH FOR THREE RECOGNITIONS THAT THEY HAD AND THEY WERE SUPREME COURT CASES AND IN THAT CASE THEY SAID THAT THE SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT HAS RULED THAT THE WORDS OF A STATUTE MUST BE GIVEN THEIR PLAIN AND ORDINARY MEANING WITHOUT RESORT TO SUBTLE OR FORCE CONSTRUCTION TO LIMIT OR EXPAND THE STATUTES OPERATION. AND THEY CITED HITACHI DATA SYSTEM CORPORATION FOR THIS LEATHERMAN FROM 1992. NCC OUTDOOR ALSO CITED THAT THE CARDINAL RULE STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION IS TO ASCERTAIN AND EFFECTUATE THE LEGISLATIVE WHENEVER POSSIBLE CITING STROTHER V LEXINGTON COUNTY RECREATION COMMISSION 1998 ANOTHER CARDINAL CONSTRUCTION IS ALL RULES OF STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION ARE SUBSERVIENT TO THE ONE THAT THE LEGISLATURE INTENT MUST PREVAIL IF IT CAN BE REASONABLY DISCOVERED IN THE LANGUAGE USED AND THAT LANGUAGE MUST BE CONSTRUED IN THE LIGHT OF THE INTENDED PURPOSE OF THE STATUTE CITED CARE GUIDES VERSUS UNITED ARTISTS COMMISSIONS 1994 WHEN U.S. SUPREME COURT CASE LAW INTERPRETED THE STATUTE AND THE ORDINANCE THE PLAIN MEANING IS NO GOLF COURSES ARE ALLOWED IN

[02:45:07]

THERE'S NO MENTION OF THREE SIX GOLF COURSES AT THAT TIME THAT APPLICATION DEALT WITH AN 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE. ANYONE FROM NOVEMBER 2022. IT WASN'T UNTIL MARCH SEVEN OF 2023 THAT THE TOPIC WAS SUBMITTED IN AN APPLICATION TO THE COUNTY FOR THREE SIX HOLE GOLF COURSES. BUT AS WE SAID, THE CODE DID NOT ALLOW FOR GOLF COURSES AND A GOLF COURSE NINE HOLES OR 18 HOLES NOT SIX HOLES OR SEVEN OVER EIGHT HOLES OR HAVING NINE ONE HOLE COURSES. THAT'S NOT IT FOR A GOLF COURSE AS DEFINED BY CODE IT'S NINE IT'S 18 HOLES BUT IT'S NINE HOLES OR MORE FOR A PAR THREE IF IT'S LESS THAN THAT IT'S NOT DEFINED IN OUR CODE AND IT'S NOT A PERMITTED USE A GOLF COURSE IS NINE OR 18 HOLES.

IT IS LESS THAN THAT. IT'S NOT PERMITTED BY OUR CODE .

IF SOMEONE SUBMITTED SOMETHING LIKE THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL RIGHT HOW DO WE ADDRESS IT TO AMEND OUR CODE TO ALLOW FOR THE USE OR PRECLUDED THAT'LL COME UP A LITTLE BIT.

ALL RIGHT. SO BACK TO THE VESTED RIGHTS ARGUMENT THAT THEY'RE MAKING.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER LIKE I SAID THAT THEIR CASES ARE 50 AND 40 YEARS OLD.

OKAY. WELL AFTER THE 1994 ENABLING LEGISLATION, SOUTH CAROLINA ALSO ADDRESSED THE NEXT ISSUE THAT WAS BOTHERING THE STATE AND THEY ADOPTED THE VESTED RIGHTS ACT IN 2004 AND MADE IT APPLICABLE IN 2005 JULY 125 THE VESTED RIGHTS ACT EFFECT AND APPLIED IT TO THE ENTIRE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA IF A LOCAL PLANNING COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE OR COUNSEL DID NOT ADOPT THEIR OWN VESTED RIGHTS ACT THE STATE APPLIES SO THE VESTED RIGHTS ACT APPLIES TO EVERY IN SOUTH CAROLINA EITHER BY THEIR OWN ORDINANCE BY STATE STATUTE IN THE STATE STATUTE DEFINED VESTED RIGHT IT MEANS THE RIGHT TO UNDERTAKE AND COMPLETE THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY UNDER THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOP OR PHASE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS PROVIDED IN THIS ARTICLE AND THEN THE LOCAL LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCES OR REGULATIONS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO THIS CHAPTER.

SO THAT'S WHAT A VESTED RIGHT IS THE NEXT SECTION 629 1530 PROVIDED THAT THERE'S A TWO YEAR VESTED RIGHT ESTABLISHED ON APPROVAL OF SITE SPECIFIC PLANS, CONFORMING ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS AND WE KNOW PARAGRAPH A1 A VESTED RIGHT IS ESTABLISHED FOR TWO YEARS UPON THE APPROVAL OF A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN DON'T HAVE RIGHT TO ANYTHING UNTIL YOU'VE GOT AN APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN. OKAY WELL BETWEEN 24 AND 25 JULY ONE OF 2005 WHEN THE STATE STATUTE TOOK EFFECT, BEAUFORT COUNTY ADOPTED, THEIR OWN VESTED RIGHTS ACT AND THE VESTED RIGHTS ACT WAS ADOPTED ON JUNE 27, 2005 AND CHAIRMAN WEST NEWTON SIGNED THAT INTO LAW AFTER THE COUNTY COUNTY COUNCIL VOTED AND THE VESTED RIGHTS ACTIVIST ADOPTED BACK THEN DOES THE SAME LANGUAGE AS TODAY FOR THE COUNTY AND IT IN THE SECTION 7.4.10 THAT VESTED RIGHTS FOR LAND DEVELOPER PLANS AND PLANS GENERAL A VESTED RIGHT IS ESTABLISHED FOR TWO YEARS ON FINAL APPROVAL OF A LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN OR A FINAL PLAT OR SUBDIVISION. WHY DOES THE APPLICANT TALK ABOUT IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THAT STATUTORY LAW THAT SUPERSEDES THE OLD COMMON LAW THIS IS PUT INTO PLACE TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS CREATED BY THE OLD COMMON LAW FROM PURE OIL PURE OIL IS BAD LAW THIS IS THE LAW THIS IS THE STATUTE THE LEGISLATURE HAS SPOKEN THE COUNTY COUNCIL HAS SPOKEN.

OUR AUDIENCE ALSO SAYS IN SECTION B PLANS MUST BE RECEIVED AND APPROVED A VESTED RIGHT FOR APPROVAL OF THE LAND PLAN OR FINAL PLAT OR SUBDIVISION SO NOT BE VALID IN LET ME SAY THAT AGAIN SHALL NOT BE VALID AND EFFECTIVE UNTIL ALL PLANS ARE RECEIVED AND APPROVED AND ALL FEES PAID IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS DEPARTMENT CODE THAT'S LAW IN THIS COUNTY AND SOUTH CAROLINA. THE EFFECTS OF INVESTOR RIGHTS LEGISLATION AS I SAID WITH THE ADOPTION OF THIS LEGISLATION THE PRIOR CASE OF PURE AUTOMATION CONCERNING VESTED RIGHTS IS NO LONGER APPLICABLE TO LAND DEVELOPMENT PLANS IN SOUTH CAROLINA THAT LAW IS

[02:50:02]

THEN YOU HAVE THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN WHICH SUBMITTED ON MARCH SEVEN A CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND THEN AFTER YOU HAVE THE STAFF REVIEW MEETING AND GET ALL THE STATS YOU GO OUT ONCE THAT'S COMPLETE AND THEN YOU GET YOUR FINAL PLANS AND THEN ONCE YOU SUBMIT THAT FINAL PLANS WE HAVE PERIOD OF TIME I THINK UP TO 60 DAYS TO REVIEW THAT AND EITHER APPROVE IT OR IF YOU HAVEN'T ACTED ON IT IT'S APPROVED OR YOU DISAPPROVE. IT HAS NOT COMPATIBLE A FINAL PLAN WE NEVER GOT TO WE NEVER GET TO A STAFF ROUTINE TO REVIEW THAT CONCEPTUAL PLAN BECAUSE OF THE LAW THAT CAME INTO EFFECT PRIOR TO THAT ALSO HAVE A FOURTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FEDERAL LAW UP IN RICHMOND AS HE SAID UNDER LAW IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A VESTED RIGHT IN EXISTING ZONING USE THAT WOULD BE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED AGAINST SUBSEQUENT CHANGE OF ZONING ORDINANCE PROHIBITING OR THAT USE THE OWNER MUST OBTAIN A PERMIT OR OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE WHERE REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE ORDINANCE AND PROCEED UNDER THAT PERMIT OR CERTIFICATE TO EXERCISE IT ON LAND INVOLVED SO THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MAY BE ADVISED THAT THE LAND IS BEING DEVOTED TO THAT USE. COURT OF APPEALS CASE 2008 AFTER THE VESTED RIGHTS AND IT'S THE UP AND DOWN THE EAST COAST AND THE FOURTH CIRCUIT SO CLEARLY THERE'S NO VESTED RIGHT FOR THE APPLICATION AND CLEARLY THE ORDINANCE PROHIBITS GOLF COURSES IN THE CPO GOLF COURSE NEVER DONE EITHER. I BET THERE'S NOT A PERSON WHO LIVES AND TAKE OVER IN THE COMMUNITY THAT'S PICKED THE GOLF CLUB TO PLAY ANYWHERE.

THEY JUST DON'T DO IT. THAT'S NOT THEIR CULTURE. IF PART OF THE GO AHEAD CULTURE YOU'RE NOT PLAYING GOLF THAT'S NOT THEIR CULTURE OKAY AND THERE'S A LOT MADE ABOUT PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE THAT WAS THE THRUST OF THEIR CASE THE PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE.

WELL LET ME TELL YOU THE PENDING ORDERS DOCTRINE IS A TOOL FOR THE GOVERNMENT.

THE GOVERNMENT INTO EFFECT PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE. IT COMES TO EFFECT IF WE INVOKE IT. BUT IN THIS CASE IT MATTER THE CPO ZONE ORDINANCE IS PROHIBITED. GOLF COURSES SINCE 1999 AND IT WAS APPROVED IN 2004 WAS 14 AND EXISTED TO TODAY THE EFFECT OF THE TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEFORE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE COUNTY COUNCIL IN APRIL AND MAY ONLY DEALT WITH STRENGTHENING THE LANGUAGE OF SOMETHING ALREADY PROHIBITED AND FURTHER DEFINING THE PURPOSE OF THE CULTURAL PROTECTION. MAKE NO MISTAKE THE CPO PROHIBITED GOLF FOR 2324 YEARS.

GOLF WAS NOT ALLOWED UNLESS ONE DATA ARE FOR FILING AND THEY WEREN'T IN THE CPO APPLICANTS NEVER RECEIVED ANY VESTED RIGHTS. AS I SAID THEY RELIED ON SHERMAN VERSUS REEVES WHY HE'S SAYING THAT THAT ONLY PENDING ORDER ONLY APPLIES TO ANNEX I DON'T KNOW THAT'S NOT THE LAW AND HE KNOWS THAT'S NOT THE LAW .

IT APPLIES WHETHER OR NOT AN ORDINANCE COMES INTO EFFECT FOR ZONING LAW.

ANNEXATION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. IT'S JUST IN THE SHERMAN CASE THAT CAME UP THEY HAD ANNEXED SOME LAND IN PREVIOUS BE WHERE IT WAS THEY PROHIBITED AND DURING THE INTERIM THEY WERE PASSING THE ORDINANCE. FAR AS PROHIBITING SIGNS IS WHAT THE PURPOSE WAS WASN'T EVEN ZONING CASE IT WAS FOR SIGNS IN THE INTERIM UPLAND SUBMITTED ALL THOSE APPLICATIONS FOR ASSIGNING PERMITS AND THE GOVERNMENT INVOKED THE PENDING ORDINANCE SO THAT WAS THAT THAT CASE HELD CORRECTLY HE SAID THAT A MUNICIPALITY MAY PROPERLY REFUSE BUILDING PERMIT FOR A LAND USE IN A NEWLY ANNEXED AREA WHEN SUCH USE IS REPUGNANT TO A PENDING AND LATER ENACTED ZONING ORDINANCE.

ALL RIGHT. WHAT WAS THE LOGIC THAT THEY USED?

[02:55:02]

BUT THAT WASN'T THE HOLDING THAT WAS ONLY CITED BECAUSE IT WAS PART OF THE REASONING IN THE PENNSYLVANIA COURT IN THE DECISION THEY WERE RELYING UPON .

BUT LET'S PRESUME THAT THAT IS THE LAW AND SUBSEQUENT CASE IN THE LAST COUPLE OF DECADES HAVE CITED CERTAIN FOR THAT PURPOSE FOR WHATEVER REASON. ALL RIGHT.

SO LET'S PRESUME THAT THAT IS THE THE COMMON LAW IS IT IS THERE ARE KEY DATES IN THE TIME CHRONOLOGY FOR PENDING ORDINANCE THAT YOU SHOULD CONSIDER THE FIRST ONE IS THAT ON NOVEMBER 7TH OF 2022 THE COUNTY COUNCIL ELECTION NOVEMBER 14TH OF 2022, THE CPO COMMITTEE WAS CREATED SO THE ONE THAT WAS IN EXISTENCE BACK IN 1999 WAS DISBANDED BECAUSE THEIR JOB WAS DONE. BUT NOVEMBER OF LAST NOVEMBER 7TH AT THE NATURAL RESOURCE COMMITTEE THEN NOVEMBER 14TH THE COUNTY COUNCIL THEY RE CREATED THE CPO COMMITTEE AND WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR CREATING COMMITTEE AND APPOINTING THE MEMBERS TO THAT COMMITTEE? HERE'S THE BACKGROUND IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR COUNTY COUNCIL ADOPTED AN UPDATED VERSION OF THE COUNTY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THE CURRENT PLAN LAYS THE PATH FOR COUNTY OVER THE NEXT DECADE TO BALANCE MANAGING GROWTH AND MAINTAIN OUR NATURAL RESOURCES AND CULTURAL HERITAGE PROTECTING THE GULLAH COMMUNITY AND RURAL WAY OF LIFE ON SAINT HELENA PAUL ON THE ISLAND AND WARSAW ISLAND IS A HIGH PRIORITY IN THE CURRENT PLAN. AS A RESULT ONE OF THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS OF THE PLAN TO FURTHER PROTECT THE ISLAND IS TO ASSESS AND STRENGTHEN THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY.

THAT'S WHY THAT'S THE BACKGROUND IN THE COUNTY COUNCIL CREATING THE CPO AGAIN THEIR TO FORM A COMMUNITY LED COASTAL PROTECTION OVERLAY COMMITTEE THAT WAS MADE OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS REPRESENTATIVE OF SAINT HELENA ISLAND, THE CPO WILL BE TASKED WITH REVIEWING THE CURRENT CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY STANDARDS AS OUTLINED IN THE COUNTY'S COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH SETS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE COUNTY AS PART OF THE REVIEW REVIEW THE COMMITTEE WILL DETERMINE WHAT NEEDS TO BE ADDED TO THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY TO REINFORCE ITS PURPOSE AND IMPROVE THE PROTECTION IT PROVIDES TO SAINT HELENA AND SURROUNDING ISLANDS. SO ON NOVEMBER 14TH, 2022 COUNTY COUNCIL IS ALREADY HAVING A SCHEME OF THE REZONING AND IMPROVING THAT TEXT LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT WAS THE FIRST DATE THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT FOR NOVEMBER 14TH OF 2022 TO SEE IF YOUR COMMITTEE WAS CREATED AS I SAID TO CONSIDER STRENGTHENING ON NOVEMBER 29TH THAT SAME YEAR THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED FOR PINE ISLAND FOR AN 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE AND A RESORT NO. THREE SIX ALL GOLF COURSES IT WAS 118 HOLE GOLF COURSE ON NOVEMBER 30TH THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR DISCUSSED WITH THEM THE ZIMA THERE'S ONLY MAP AMENDMENT TO ALLOW COUNCIL TO CONSIDER A TEXT AMENDMENT.

ON DECEMBER 18TH OF 2022 WED THO BE A JANUARY 5TH 2023 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO CONSIDER THE TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE CPO ON JANUARY 5TH. YOU FOLKS THAT WERE ON THE COMMISSION OF THAT DATE HEARD THAT TEXT AMENDMENT THAT WAS PROPOSED BY THE COUNTY STAFF AND YOU VOTED IT DOWN AFTER HEARING FROM ALL OF THESE PEOPLE BACK HERE ON JANUARY NINTH THAT WENT TO THE LAND USE COMMITTEE, A COUNTY COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND THEY RECOMMENDED ON A MOTION BY YOUR CLUB OR THE COUNCILMAN THAT THE MATTER BE POSTPONED UNTIL APRIL 10TH AND BE REFERRED TO THE CPO FOR CONSIDERATION BECAUSE THAT WAS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY, THEIR DUTIES AND THEY WANTED THEM TO WEIGH IN ON HOW TO STRENGTHEN LANGUAGE THERE.

SO THAT'S JANUARY NOW IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT ON JANUARY 9TH AT THAT LAND USE

[03:00:07]

WHAT'S THE SIGNIFICANCE THAT YOU MIGHT ASK? WELL, A QUORUM OF COUNCIL IS SIX COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO IN EFFECT THAT'S A DE FACTO COUNTY COUNCIL COMMITTEE A COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING BECAUSE EIGHT MEMBERS ATTENDED AND PARTICIPATED IN THE DISCUSSION.

SO COUNTY COUNCIL SENT THAT TO THE CPO ON JANUARY 9TH THE MEETING WAS TELEVISED ON THE COUNTY CHANNEL THAT'S ADVERTISING THAT'S NOTICE JANUARY 17TH THE CPO COMMITTEE BEGAN MEETING TO DISCUSS THE CPO ZONE STANDARDS AND INCREASE THE STRENGTH OF THE LANGUAGE AT THE DIRECTION OF BEAUFORT COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING ON DURING FEBRUARY THE CURRENT OWNERS CONSUMMATED THE DEAL TO THE PROPERTY. NOW THEY OWNED THE PROPERTY IN FEBRUARY OF 2023 ON EIGHT OR FEBRUARY 28 THE APPLICATION RECEIVED TO DIVIDE THE THREE PARCELS OF PINE ISLAND INTO FIVE PARCELS THE FIVE ACRE EXEMPTION PLANT THAT'S WHERE YOU GOT IT. AND THAT WAS THE FIRST LIGHT AS FAR AS NOTICE THAT ALL RIGHT WHAT'S HE GOING TO DO WITH THREE PARCELS THREE SIX ALL GOLF COURSES OBVIOUSLY MARCH 3RD THE COUNTY RECEIVED A REQUEST FOR A PRE-CONFERENCE FOR PINE ISLAND GOLF COURSES ON MARCH 7TH THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THE APPLICATION BEING APPEALED TODAY FOR THOSE THREE GOLF COURSES. THE NEXT DAY THERE WAS A PRIVATE MEETING ON MARCH 8TH, MARCH 9TH THE ADMINISTRATOR SENT THREE INCOMPLETE APPLICATION LETTERS TO PINE ISLAND AND IN THAT LETTER HILLARY NOTIFIED THEM THAT THEY NEEDED TO HAVE THE DEQ A WAY THE ARCHEOLOGICAL LETTER AND NATURAL RESOURCES WELL THE NEXT DAY THE ATTORNEY ANEMIC REPRESENTS THE PINE ISLAND SENT A LETTER TO HILLARY ARIZONA ADMINISTRATOR DISAGREEING WITH THE INCOMPLETENESS DETERMINATION THAT SHE HAD MADE .

BUT ON MARCH 13TH, THREE DAYS LATER THE WAY IT WAS SUBMITTED SO ONE OF THE THREE MISSING DOCUMENTS WAS SUBMITTED ON MARCH 16TH. ARIZONA ADMINISTRATOR HILLARY SENT THE LETTER TO TURN IN HIM EXPLAINING WHY THE APPLICATION IS STILL AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CONCEPTUAL PLANNING APPLICATION NOT THE FINAL PLAN. THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN.

THE VERY NEXT DAY THERE WAS A MEETING WITH STAFF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, THE PLANNING DIRECTOR ,ATTORNEY AND ATTORNEY NEMEC WAS THERE PINE ISLAND AND OUR ARCHEOLOGICAL STAFF MEMBER WAS PRESENT AT THAT MEETING ON THAT DAY AND THEY MET TO DISCUSS THE MISSING THE ARCHEOLOGICAL LETTER AND THE NATURAL RESOURCES LETTER WAS NEEDED BEFORE YOU COULD HAVE A COMPLETED APPLICATION TO WHERE WE CAN SCHEDULE THE STAFF REVIEW TEAM MEETING AND GO OVER THE APPLICATION WITH THE AFGHANS TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT THEY NEED TO GET THE FINAL APPLICATION ON MARCH 21ST THE COUNTY ADVERTISED FOR COUNTY COUNCIL TO HOLD THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE FOR TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY CODE AND THE CULTURAL PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE AT THE APRIL 10TH COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING AT 5:00.

SO MARCH 21ST WE'RE ADVERTISING FOR THE FIRST YEAR OF THE TEXT AMENDMENT.

PART OF THAT SCHEME OF REZONING . ON MARCH 23RD AN ARCHEOLOGICAL LETTER WAS DRAFTED BY THE STAFF AND SENT TO THOMPSON HUTTON, THE APPLICANT ENGINEERING FIRM AND IN THAT LETTER WE TOLD THEM THAT THEY HAD TO REVISE THE PLANS TO ADD THE RESOURCES IN PHASE ONE OF THE SURVEY SO THE COUNTY COULD KNOW WHERE THE RESOURCES WERE ON THE PROPERTY SO WE COULD DEAL WITH THAT THE STATE HAD TO KNOW AND THE COUNTY HAD TO KNOW BEFORE WE COULD HAVE A COMPLETED CONCEPTUAL PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW ON MARCH 24TH THE NATURAL RESOURCE LETTER WAS COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED TO MISS AUSTIN ON MARCH 24TH THE STAFF DECIDED THAT ALL RIGHT, EVEN THOUGH WE DIDN'T HAVE A COMPLETE ARCHEOLOGICAL LETTER WE WERE STILL MISSING THAT PHASE ONE SITE PLAN TO IDENTIFY WHERE ALL THESE WERE ON THE PROPERTY THAT HAD BEEN IDENTIFIED. THEY SAID ALL RIGHT, FOR OUR PURPOSES IT'S COMPLETE AND WE'LL SCHEDULE THAT STAFF REVIEW TEAM MEETING TO GO OVER THE APPLICATION WITH THE APPLICANT ON APRIL 19TH, 2023. NORMALLY IT'S DONE WITHIN THREE WEEKS BUT THREE WEEKS AFTER THE 24TH WHEN THAT PRE OR THAT CONCEPTUAL PLAN WAS DETERMINED TO BE COMPLETE ENOUGH TO DO THE REVIEW EXCEPT FOR THOSE REVISED PLANS WE SCHEDULED FOR THE NEXT AVAILABLE SRT AND THAT ON THE APRIL 19TH. SO THAT WAS THE NEXT MEETING

[03:05:01]

TWO WEEKS LATER COUNTY COUNTY COUNCIL GAVE THE THIRD AND FINAL READING TO THE MEMBERS OF THE CPO DISTRICT AND IT BECAME LAW. SO WE BEEFED UP THE LANGUAGE DEFINING THE GOLF COURSE IN ITS OWN STANDARDS AND THE PURPOSE OF THE CULTURAL DISTRICT WHILE WE WERE PROTECTING IT. HOW IMPORTANT IT WAS TO THE COMMUNITY ON APRIL 12TH PINE ISLAND REQUESTED THAT THAT MEMBER OR APPLICATION THAT WAS HELD IN ABEYANCE THAT HAD BEEN DEFERRED B REACTIVATED AND YOU HEARD THAT TONIGHT. THAT'S WHAT YOU HEARD EARLIER.

THAT WAS THE ZONING THAT HAD BEEN SUBMITTED IN NOVEMBER OF LAST YEAR AND MR. LIESMAN WAS I THINK CONFUSING WITH THE THREE GOLF COURSES FOR SIX HOLES ON APRIL 12TH PINE ISLAND ALSO SUBMITTED THE THREE APPEALS THAT ARE HERE BEFORE YOU RIGHT NOW THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING. THAT'S THE TIMELINE AND THE CHRONOLOGY THAT ARE THE FACTS THAT ARE BACKED UP BY THE DOCUMENTS PROVIDED AND YOUR DIGITAL DATA IS ALSO EXHIBIT A'S RULES. ANY DATE THAT I MENTIONED THERE COULD INVOKE PENDING ANY OF THE DATES MENTIONED ABOVE CONVOKED IN NOVEMBER OF 2022 WHEN COUNTY COUNCIL RE CREATED THAT CPO TO CONSIDER LANGUAGE TO BEEF UP THE CPO DISTRICT STANDARDS. THAT'S WHEN IT STARTED IN DECEMBER WHEN WE ADVERTISED A PUBLIC HEARING AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE JANUARY 5TH MEETING ON JANUARY 5TH WHEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERED THE TEXT AMENDMENTS ON JANUARY 9TH WHEN THE COMMITTEE REFERRED BACK TO THE CPO TO CONSIDER THE TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT THE COUNTY SUBMITTED OR ON MARCH 21ST WHEN WE ADVERTISED THE PUBLIC MEETING TO CONSIDER THE TEXT AMENDMENTS ON APRIL 9TH WHEN WE ADVERTISED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL 10TH WHEN WE HELD THAT PUBLIC HEARING I'M SORRY WHEN WE HELD THE FIRST READING ON APRIL 24TH WHEN WE HELD THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THE COUNTY COUNCIL IN THE SECOND READING OR ON MAY EIGHT, THE THIRDNDMENT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT THE ZONING DIRECTOR ROB MERCHANT RELIED ON THE APRIL 10TH THE DATE BEFORE THE DATES TO ISSUE THE LETTER WHICH HE HAD CLEAR INTENT THAT THE COUNTY COUNCIL WAS NOT GOING TO PERMIT GOLF COURSES IN THE CBO AND SENT THAT LETTER ON APRIL 14TH TURNING POINT IOWA AT THE APPLICATION WAS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE POLITICAL STANDARDS OF CDC AND THE AMENDMENTS GIVEN IN THE FIRST WEEK APRIL 10TH HE PLAYED A CONSERVATIVE AND WAITED TO SEE GIVEN ALL THE POLITICS WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THAT FIRST READING OF THE TEXT OF IT WE PLAYED IT SAFE SO LET'S USE APRIL 10TH WHEN THEY HELD THAT FIRST READING ROB SENT THAT LETTER ON 14TH DOES IT MATTER THE CPO ALREADY PROHIBITED THAT USE THE CASES THEY CITED FOR THE OLD COMMON LAW PURE OIL AND GREENVILLE THEY SAID THAT THE EXISTENCE WAS SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT IT WAS PERMITTED USE AND IT DIDN'T DISTURB THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES. THAT'S NOT THE CASE THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE. IT WOULDN'T APPLY ANYWAY. PURE OIL AND SCOTT THE GREENVILLE WOULDN'T APPLY REGARDLESS BECAUSE THE CODE DID NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMIT SIX WHOLE GOLF COURSES SIX WHOLE GOLF COURSES WOULD BE REPUGNANT TO THE GOAL CULTURAL COMMITTEE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT SO THOSE LAWS WOULDN'T APPLY REGARDLESS BUT THE STATE THREW THAT AWAY AND WE HAVE THE VESTED RIGHTS ACT. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH.

THAT'S THE LAW. A DEVELOPER HAS THE RIGHT WHEN THEY HAVE THE VESTED GIVEN BY THE LEGISLATURE OR THE COUNTY COUNCIL AND THAT'S WHEN YOU HAVE APPROVED PLANS WITH A PERMIT. OKAY. SO WE WOULD ASK THAT THE APPEAL BE DENIED THE ZONING DIRECTOR ROB MERCHANT CORRECTLY FULFILLED HIS DUTY TO DENY THE

[03:10:06]

HE GAVE THE APPLICANTS A CHANCE TO BE HEARD BEFORE, DENIED IT SO HE'D HAVE TO WAIT A YEAR TO RESUPPLY OR RESUBMIT. THE APPELLANT HAD NO VESTED RIGHTS AS OF APRIL 14TH, 2023.

THEY'RE AT LEAST A YEAR AWAY BEFORE GET THE REVIEW OF THEIR CONCEPTUAL PLAN WHICH IS BEING PRICED A LOT PROCESS ALONG THE WAY THEY WERE WORKING WITH WHEN THEY SENT THE TOTALING WHAT THEY NEEDED TO COMPLETE IT THEY SCHEDULED A MEETING BUT IT ALL OCCURRED AS FAR AS THE READING OF THE ORDINANCE PRIOR TO THE SRT MEETING STAFFORD DUTY ON■ APRIL 14 OR APRIL 19TH THROUGHOUT SO STAFF PROCESS CONTRARY TO WHAT THEY REPRESENTED IT WAS BEING PROCESSED AND MOVED ALONG IN DUE COURSE. IT WAS DENIED TO LET AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. GUYS THAT FIRST READ IN TEXT ON APRIL 10TH ONLY STRENGTHENED THE LANGUAGE DENYING GOLF COURSES IN THE CPO.

IT ONLY STRENGTHENED THE LANGUAGE THAT ALREADY EXISTED WHICH PROHIBITED GOLF COURSES AND GOLF COURSES AGAIN ARE BECAUSE 18 HOLES NINE HOLES OR 18 HOLES.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE MERRIAM WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY THE PLAIN ORDINARY ME OR THE PLANNNNNNNNNE THE DEFINITION IN OUR CURRENT CODE AND THE 1999 CODE AND THE 24 CODE STAYED THE SAME.

I WOULD TELL US CLEARLY WANT AN 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE AND RESORT AS REQUESTED IN A DEVELOPER 2022 APPLICATION FOR THE ZONING MAP THE MONEY SPENT BY THE APPLICANT WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT A GOLF COURSE IN RESORT PROHIBITED IN THE CPO. THIS IS WHY THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE AMENDMENT BACK IN OF 2022 AS THEY KNEW IT WASN'T ALLOWED .

SO ANY MONEY HE INVESTED AND SPENT THERE HE DID WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT IT WASN'T A PERMITTED USE. HE WAS LIKE IN VEGAS PLAYING CRAPS REALLY NICE OH SEVEN CAME UP BECAUSE IT'S NOT ALLOWED THE APPLICANTS TRIED DOING IT IN ROUND AND ROUND FOR AN 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE ASKING FOR THREE SIX HOLE GOLF COURSES WHICH OF COURSE EQUALS 18 HOLES OF THE REQUEST FOR SIX HOLE GOLF COURSES IS NOT A PERMITTED USE IN A BEAUFORT COUNTY OR THE COST IT DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF A GOLF COURSE. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE OUR DEFINITION IN ORDER TO ALLOW THIS USE ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTY ,ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTY IT'S NOT ALLOWED BECAUSE IT'S NOT PART OF THE DEFINITION OF A GOLF COURSE NINE OR EATING HOLES SO UNLESS THE COUNTY AND THE MUNICIPALITIES ARE GOING TO CHANGE THEIR DEFINITIONS OF THE LAND USE DEFINING GOLF COURSE IT'S NOT PERMITTED. THEY HAVE NO VESTED RIGHT AND THEY HAVE NO PERMIT FOR IT. SO AGAIN WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU DENY THEIR APPEAL IN A PULLED ROB MERCHANT'S DECISION DENYING THEIR APPLICATION AS BEING NOT COMPLIANT WITH CODE AND THE TEXT AMENDMENT THAT WAS ADOPTED AND EQUAL. DAN THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I'LL BE BRIEF IN REBUTTAL AGAIN WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT LAW AND THERE'S SOME DISAGREEMENT ABOUT WHAT THE LAW IS. I READ YOU A CASE FROM THE SUPREME COURT THAT SAYS AND RIGHT AFTER MR. HILBERT SAID THAT IT DIDN'T SAY WHAT I SAID YOU ACTUALLY READ IT AND HE READ IT THE SAME WAY I READ IT. WE THE MUNICIPALITY MAY PROPERLY REFUSE A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A LAND USE IN A NEWLY ANNEXED AREA WHEN SUCH USE IS REPUGNANT TO A PENDING AND LATER ENACTED ZONING ORDINANCE.

AND HE SAID OH WELL MAYBE THAT WASN'T THE HOLDING BUT WHAT THE PHRASE WE HOLD MEANS THE BEGINNING OF THAT SENTENCE AND THAT'S A SUPREME COURT DECISION.

THE SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA THAT SAID THAT. SO WHEN YOU APPLY A PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE THAT'S THE ONLY INSTANCE WHEN THAT CAN OCCUR WHEN IT'S A NEWLY ANNEXED AND WHEN YOU HAVE A PARTICULAR SCHEME OF REZONING THAT HAS ALREADY ADVERTISED AND THAT EXISTS WHEN MR. HILBERT'S GOING THROUGH AND TELLING YOU WELL THERE'S ACTUALLY ABOUT TEN DIFFERENT TIMES THAT MAYBE YOU COULD SAY THAT THE COUNTY HAD TERM THAT THERE WAS A PARTICULAR SCHEME OF REZONING THAT UNDERMINES HIS ARGUMENT BECAUSE CLEARLY IN NOVEMBER AND

[03:15:03]

THE GOVERNMENT IS TELLING YOU YOU CAN'T DO SOMETHING OKAY? THE COUNTY HAS RIGHTS TO PASS ZONING ORDINANCES BUT THE WAY THAT THE LAW READS INCLUDING HELICOPTER SOLUTIONS VERSUS FROM OUR SUPREME COURT 2015 WHAT IT SAYS IS OKAY ONCE COUNTY HAS PASSED AN ORDINANCE IT IS CONSTRUED IN FAVOR OF THE PROPERTY OWNER IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE FREE AND FAIR USE OF PROPERTY THE SAME ARGUMENT MR. HILBERT MADE I WAS IN A CASE WHEN THE TOWN OF HILTON HAD SAID YOU CAN'T HAVE OUTDOOR GO CART ANYWHERE ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND BECAUSE OUR ZONING CODE DOESN'T EXPRESSLY ALLOW FOR IT. IF ANY OF YOU HAVE BEEN TO THE BROAD CREEK MARINA YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE IS AN OUTDOOR GOLF CART GOLF THAT'S ALL GO CART GO CART COURSE THEY'RE NOW NOT GOLF CARTS PLENTY GOLF CARTS GO CART TRACK THERE'S A GO CART TRACK ON HILTON HEAD THAT EXISTS UNDER THE SAME IDEA THAT AFTER THESE ORDINANCES ARE PASSED IF YOU IF IT'S NOT THE USE IT'S NOT PROHIBITED IT'S ALLOWED THAT USE WAS ALLOWED UNTIL WAS CHANGED IN THE SPECIFIC TARGETING OF THIS ORDINANCE WHICH WAS OF THIS PROPERTY WHICH WAS NOT A NEWLY ANNEXED AREA AND THERE WAS NOT A PARTICULAR SCHEME OF REZONING IF HE WANTS TO MENTION. WELL, THERE WERE EIGHT COUNTY COUNCILMEN GATHERED AT MEETING WELL THAT SOUNDS TO ME UNLESS IT WAS NOTICED AS A COUNTY COUNCIL MEETING LIKE AN ILLEGAL MEETING THAT VIOLATED FOYA BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO NOTIFY EVERY MEETING THAT Y'ALL HAVE EVER HELD HAS ALWAYS HAD NOTICE SO IF HE'S IF HE'S SAYING THE PARTICULAR SCHEME OF REZONING OCCURRED AT AN ILLEGAL GATHERING OF COUNCIL MEMBERS, WELL THEN THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN RELY UPON. AND WHEN HE SAYS THE COUNTY'S POSITION IS CLEAR, I THINK SOMETHING THAT'S FORGOTTEN IS FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT WERE ON THIS COMMITTEE, ON THIS COMMISSION ON JANUARY 5TH AND WERE PRESENT AT THAT MEETING MY REMEMBER WHEN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MR. GREENWAY SAID WELL YOU KNOW WHAT THIS APPLICANT CAN DO? HE CAN SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY AND HE CAN HAVE SIX HOLES OF GOLF ON EACH ONE.

Y'ALL MAY REMEMBER THAT YOU MAY NOT REMEMBER IT BUT WHEN THE COUNTY IS TALKING ABOUT POSITION NOT WHEN IT'S BEEN SUED FOR AN ILLEGAL APPLICATION OF THE PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE BUT WHEN SOMEONE'S GETTING UP AND SPEAKING THE TRUTH IN A MEETING WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING PARTICULARLY AT STAKE THAT'S WHEN THE TRUTH IS SAID.

AND IN THAT MEETING MANY YOU ALL WERE HERE THAT'S WHAT WAS SAID THE APPLICANT COULD SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY AND GO WITH SIX HOLES ON EACH. THAT WAS WHAT WAS SUBMITTED.

MR. HILBERT'S EXPLANATION ABOUT VESTED RIGHTS AND I KNOW YOU ALL HEARD MORE ABOUT CASE LAW MORE ABOUT ALL THIS THAN YOU EVER WANTED TO IS INACCURATE FOR THIS REASON WHEN A STATUTE IS GOING TO DISPLACE ALL THE CASES THAT CAME IT IT WILL SAY SO IT WILL SAY THAT THIS DISPLACES THE COMMON LAW THAT CAME BEFORE IT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE 24 VESTED RIGHTS ACT, IT DOES NOT SAY THAT AND THAT REASON IS FAIRNESS.

THE VESTED RIGHTS ACT CREATES A CERTAIN RIGHT ONCE A PRELIMINARY PLAT OR A CONCEPTUAL PLAN OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT CREATED BUT IT'S NOT THE SOLE RECOGNITION OF THAT.

THERE ARE OTHER RIGHTS AND THE CONSTITUTION ALSO COMES INTO PLAY TO SAY THAT WHEN YOU RELY AND YOU PURCHASE A PROPERTY AND YOU SPEND MONEY IN GOOD FAITH RELYING EXISTING ZONING, YOU SUBMIT AN APPLICATION, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT FOR IT BE PROCESSED AND ACTED UPON AND PEOPLE THIS COUNTY INCLUDED DON'T DOESN'T NORMALLY MOVE GOALPOSTS ON PEOPLE AND THEN RETROACTIVELY CHANGE SOMETHING THAT WAS VALID WHEN YOU SUBMITTED IT THIS CLEARLY WAS THERE'S REASON WHY

[03:20:01]

SO I THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION FOR STAYING PAST THE NORMAL TIME WHEN YOU WOULD HAVE THESE MEETINGS. I THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE.

THANK ALL THE FOLKS THAT ARE HERE TO PARTICIPATE IN SOMETHING THAT'S IMPORTANT TO EVERYBODY. BUT AGAIN, WHAT'S ALSO IMPORTANT IS THAT THE LAW IS FOLLOWED AND IN THIS CASE THE LAW WAS NOT FOLLOWED. I WOULD ASK THAT YOU CORRECT THAT BY REVERSING THE COUNTY DIRECTOR'S DECISION. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU OKAY. SO A LOT OF INFORMATION IN FRONT OF US. I'LL TELL YOU THE MOTION FOR OR LEGAL COUNSEL QUESTIONS FOR LEGAL COUNSEL DO YOU WANT TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE OR YES. OKAY YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO IN EFFECT MOTION WE GO TO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASKING THE ATTORNEY SOME QUESTIONS THE TESTIMONY THAT WE WERE GIVEN.

ALL RIGHT. AND FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, THAT IS PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT SECTION SUBSECTION A TO RECEIPT THE LEGAL ADVICE TO PENDING OR THREAT CLAIMS OF SECOND SECOND WAVE SECOND WELL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION TO GO INTO AN EXECUTIVE FOR LEGAL COUNSEL IF YOUR HAND IT'S 344421 AND SO WE'RE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. RIGHT. OKAY.

I'M OKAY. I'M GOING TO DO THAT ONE AGAINST RIGHT ON.

ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO ADJOURN FOR SOME OF OUR LEGAL COUNSEL.

WE HOPEFULLY WILL BE BACK AND WHAT 15 MINUTES? I DON'T I DON'T EXPECT IT WILL TAKE VERY LONG. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

BUT IT DEPENDS AND PATIENTS AT THIS LATE HOUR IN THE EVENING JUST FOR THE RECORD WE DO NOT TAKE VOTE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION AS TO HOW TO PROCEED ON THE ISSUE BUT WE DID COME UP WITH QUESTIONS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK TO JUST VERY CLARIFY OUR OF WHAT'S APPROPRIATE TO BASE OUR DECISION SOMEONE LIKE YOU OFF OF THE FIRST QUESTION ESPECIALLY I'M JUST GATHERING MY THOUGHTS HERE LET'S SEE I'M NOT REALLY ALL RIGHT I MEAN HAVE THE LANGUAGE IN MY HEAD YET. WELL I'D LIKE TO START YEAH GO AHEAD. DO YOU WHEN WAS THE APPLICATION CONSIDERED ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLETE? WELL I THINK THAT IN OUR VIEW THAT WAS SET FOR MARCH 24 OR 24. THAT'S OUR RIGHT. YES.

OKAY. SO YOU GET THROWN OUT THE MARCH 7TH DATE BUT OH YES.

MARCH 7TH WAS WHEN IT WAS I THINK IT WAS WHEN IT WAS SUBMITTED AND THEN THE REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL ITEMS WERE WERE MADE AND THOSE WERE PROVIDED. AGAIN THE ISSUE WITH THE ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY IS THAT WHEN ITEMS ARE IDENTIFIED EVEN THE STATE DOES NOT LIKE FOR THOSE TO BE MADE PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD FOR SAY BECAUSE THEN IF SOMEONE WANTS TO GO WITH THEIR METAL DETECTOR AND GO FIND SOME THINGS THAT'S DEEMED AS SOMETHING THAT'S NOT DESIRABLE. SO A LOT OF THOSE RESULTS ARE NOT INCLUDED.

AND MISS LAUREN AN IMAGE IS HERE AS WELL AS OF COURSE MR. TRUMP PIANO THEY MAY HAVE SOME MORE PARTICULAR BUT THANK YOU MR. MILLER SUBMITTED MARCH SEVEN AND CONSIDERED COMPLETE IN TERMS THE ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS ON THE 20. OKAY SO EFFECTIVELY THE APA APPLICANT DATE IS MARCH 24TH NOT LIKE NOT MARCH SEVEN. WELL NO NO NO NO IT WILL IT'S MARCH 24TH 20. IT WAS ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLETE IF YOU'RE MAKING A STATEMENT THEN YOU'RE MAKING A STATEMENT IF YOU'RE ASKING THE QUESTION WELL I'M JUST SAYING THAT I THINK IT IS A LOT OF TIMES THE PROCESS WILL GO ON OVER YEARS IN TERMS ADDITIONAL

[03:25:02]

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WHEREAS HAVE SEEN PAST JUST HIS POSITION WELL OKAY I WAS GOING TO ASK WHAT IS THE COUNTY'S POSITION THAT PARTICULAR QUESTION AS I TRIED TO MAKE ABUNDANTLY CLEAR ON MARCH 24TH WE ARE STILL MISSING THE ARCHEOLOGICAL INFORMATION. OKAY AND THAT WAS THE CONCEPTUAL APPLICATION IT WASN'T THE FINAL APPLICATION WHERE YOU GET A PERMIT NO PERMITS COMING FROM THIS CONCEPTUAL PLANNING APPLICATION THAT THEY SUBMITTED THEY HADN'T EVEN HAD THE SRT MEETING TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THEY NEEDED TO COME BACK WITH FINAL APPLICATION.

THAT MEETING WOULD HAVE OCCURRED ON APRIL 19TH AND APRIL 19TH.

THEY GO BACK, THEY GET THE FINAL PLANS, THE PERMITS DEAC FROM BEAUFORT, JASPER WATER ALL THE PERMITS THEY THEN THEY COME IN AND THEN THE COUNTY REVIEWS IT AND THEY HAVE AFTER 60 DAYS TO REVIEW IT AS I SAID AND WHEN WE STEP THAT APPROVED THAT IT'S COMPLETE AND IT'S FINAL AND APPROVED THAT'S WHEN IT'S A COMPLETE APPLICATION BUT THEY COME BACK WHEN THEY'VE GOT ALL THAT STUFF FOR THE APPLICATION TO WHICH THEY COULD GET THE REVIEW FOR THE PERMIT IS THAT CORRECT FROM? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

A GOOD DEAL FROM THE APPLICANT . ONE FACTUAL DETAIL TO BE COMPLETELY ADDRESSED THIS YEAR TO COMPLETE THIS APPLICATION ANANANANANANANAND IT'S IT'S UP S UP TO THE CHAIR AND THE COMMISSION WHETHER Y'ALL WOULD TO HEAR FIRST THIS IS YOURS I'M SORRY YOU NEED FURTHER INFORMATION ON THE GROUND SORRY WOULDN'T PAYING ATTENTION I WAS RIGHT THE THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS REQUESTED THE OPPORTUNITY TO HELP FOR THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION THAT HE THINKS COMMISSIONER MILLER ASKED AND YES GO AHEAD APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. THE REQUEST ITEMS THAT WERE DEEMED NECESSARY TO DEEM THE APPLICATION COMPLETE IF YOU WILL. THE FIRST ONE THE ARROW HAS NEVER BEEN ON APPLICATION ANYWHERE IN COUNTY THAT ANY OF MY ENGINEERS AND DESIGNERS HAVE EVER SEEN ONE TO THE NATURAL RESOURCES SURVEY I WANT EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WORKS FOR NATURAL RESOURCES DETERMINATION DONE BY THE NATURAL RESOURCES DIRECTOR I'M SORRY IF I MESSED THAT UP IS ABOUT TREES AND NATURAL RESOURCES AND WETLANDS AND ALL THAT. WE COMPLETED A TREE IN TOKYO OF 502 ACRES IN 32 DAYS.

NOW WHY THAT'S IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE THAT REQUIRES YOU MEASURING EVERY TREE OVER EIGHT INCHES ON THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY SHE HAPPENED TO BE ON VACATION I HOPE THE ARCHEOLOGY STUFF IS SENSITIVE TO ME BECAUSE IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.

WHEN I FIRST GOT HERE EVERYONE REFERENCES ALL THE MONEY THAT I SPENT ON STUDIES AHEAD OF TIME AHEAD OF PURCHASING IT IT HAD WHATEVER I DID THREE TIMES THE STATE BE CLEAR AN INTENSIVE LEVEL SURVEY THAT I NEVER DID IT ROB WOULD HAVE ASKED ME TO DO IT SO INSTEAD I DID IT AHEAD OF TIME THE DIRECTOR THEN SAID WE TO SEE THAT BUT THE DIRECTOR SAID T T T T T T T T T TER I ORD A PHONE CALL WITH THE SHIPPER ROB LARSON AND ROB LARSON FROM THE SHIP.

I SAID DO NOT RELEASE THAT MATERIAL BECAUSE IT WILL GET LOOTED PERIOD.

ASK LARRY ROLAND, ASK THE SHIP OUT. ASK ANYBODY IN AUTHORITY OF THAT AND THEY WILL BE VERY CLEAR IT IS THE DISRESPECTFUL THING TO DO TO PUT IT ON A MAP.

I WAS RETICENT NOT FOR TIMING BUT BECAUSE OF THE RESPECT FOR THE CULTURE AND THE THINGS ARE ON THAT PROPERTY. NOW LET ME BE CLEAR AT SOME POINT THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO COME OUT. I GET IT. BUT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WEAPONIZED IN HISTORY ON THE INTERNET PAINTING PICTURES OF CULTURE AND SAYING COULD IT BE ON THIS PROPERTY? COULD IT BE CHANGING THE VERY TITLES OF PHOTOS FROM THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS? SO IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S ON MY PROPERTY AND IT'S NOT SO FOR ME TO RELEASE THAT INFORMATION IS DISRESPECTFUL TO THE VERY ARTIFACTS AND PEOPLE WHOM THEY REPRESENT. ALL RIGHT. AND I'M NOT APOLOGIZING FOR THE DIRECTOR TO HOLD UP MY APPLICATION DEEMING IT INCOMPLETE BECAUSE OF THE ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES BECAUSE I DID THE SURVEY AHEAD OF TIME THAT HE WOULD HAVE REQUESTED ANYWAYS IS RIDICULOUS AND RUDE TO THAT VERY THOSE VERY PEOPLE THE SHIP TOLD HIM NOT TO.

[03:30:08]

SO COUNTY NEEDS TO CLEAN UP THEIR PROCESS AND PROBABLY ADD THOSE THINGS THE CHECKLIST BECAUSE NO ONE IN RELIANCE UPON A PIECE OF PAPER GETS HANDED TO YOU WOULD EVER DEEM SOMETHING INCOMPLETE IF THEY CHECK EVERY BOX. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. I GUESS I HAVE A QUESTION. THERE WERE.

LETTERS BETWEEN HILLARY AUSTIN AND LAWYER NEMEC FORGIVE ME IF I'M MISPRONOUNCING HER NAME ABOUT THE COMPLETENESS OF THIS APPLICATION. CORRECT.

SO I GUESS THE BOXES I SAW WERE I MEAN IT WAS VERY CLEAR. PLEASE GET A LETTER FROM YOU KNOW SECRETARY OF THE COUNTY OF NATURAL RESOURCES. PLEASE GET A LETTER OF DETERMINATION AND IT SEEMS TO ME YOU TOOK IT ON YOUR OWN VOLITION PARTICULARLY THE ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY AS YOU'VE DESCRIBED TO EXCEED THE COUNTY REQUIREMENTS.

SO CLEARLY YOU KNEW WHETHER OR NOT THERE WAS A BOX TO CHECK. YOU KNEW HAD TO BE DONE.

SO I'M CONFUSED WHY YOU DIDN'T SEE THAT LIKE WHY YOU'RE OBJECTING ABOUT THESE LETTERS OF DETERMINATION WHY DIDN'T YOU GET THOSE THOSE TWO LETTERS BECAUSE? NO. WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT YOU NEED THEM PULL UP AN APPLICATION FOR COUNTY CHECKLIST DON'T WE HAVE DONE THERE BUT ALL THE LETTERS AFTER SO THE LETTERS IN THAT THAT I'M LOOKING AT THE TIMELINE IN MARCH YOU YOU SAY NATURAL RESOURCES LETTER WAS COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED ME SO I DON'T DO THE NATURAL RESOURCES LETTER I DON'T DO THE ARCHEOLOGICAL THAT IS DONE BY THE COUNTY. THEY CAN DO IT ON THEIR OWN TIME MEANING THEY CAN TAKE AS MUCH TIME AS THEY NEED TO NOW RUN THROUGH THAT TIMELINE AND TELL ME WHY IT HAPPENED IN THE TIME FRAME THAT IT FROM THE SEVENTH TO THE 24TH AND THEN JUXTAPOSE TO WHEN THINGS GOT PUBLISHED THE MORNING OF THE NIGHT OF WHATEVER YOU WANT WE CAN GO IN CIRCLES ALL DAY BUT I MEAN IT IS WHAT IT IS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. SORRY FOR MY TIME. I GET TIRED.

ALL RIGHT. YOU WORLD OR WHAT? WHAT? HERE'S THE GOLF COURSE. YEAH? YEAH.

WHERE DO YOU TAKE THAT ONE? SO I HAVE A QUESTION AND I'M NOT SURE WHO WOULD BE BEST POSITIONED TO ANSWER THIS. IT HAD TO DO WITH THE THREE DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE A, B AND C COURSES. OKAY. YOU WE GOT MIKE HERE TO OKAY WE DID THIS AND PART OF MY QUESTION ARE THE RESULT OF THE FACT THAT IT WAS KIND OF HARD TO REVIEW THE PLANS A SMALL COMPUTER SCREEN WHEN THERE ARE SEVERAL SHEETS THAT MAKE UP EACH COURSE AND I JUST FORGOT TO ASK THE STACK ABOUT THIS. HI I'M SURE.

YES. AND I'LL ALSO STATE THAT I'M NOT A GOLFER.

SO IF MY QUESTIONS ARE IGNORANT. PLEASE FORGIVE ME.

ALL GOOD. ONLY THING I'LL TELL YOU ABOUT GOLF THIS IS THE ONLY GAME YOU CAN'T WIN YOU JUST PLAY IT. SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD AND IT WAS UNCLEAR WHEN I WAS TRYING TO SKIM THROUGH THE DRAWINGS IS THERE A CLUBHOUSE IN THOSE APPLICATIONS WAS NOT OKAY I NOTICED ON I THINK IT WAS COURSE B IT SHOWED A PRACTICE AREA WHAT DOES THAT CONSIST OF PRACTICE AREA IT'S HOW IT WAS LABELED THE PLANS BUT PROBABLY JUST OPEN SPACE OR SOMETHING SQUARE WE HAD A BALL SO IT'S NOT A DRIVING OR SOMEPLACE WHERE YOU CAN PRACTICE PUTTING OR CHIPPING OR AND THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN LEVEL WE PROBABLY DIDN'T DELINEATE WHAT IT WAS WHICH IS GOOD PRACTICE AREA BIG BLOCK WAS THERE A PRACTICE AREA EACH OF THE COURSES THAT ARE PROPOSED I DO NOT RECALL AND THEN I KNOW I SAW AND I CAN'T

[03:35:05]

IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS MADE UP MAYBE FIVE BUILDINGS ALL LABELED MAINTENANCE FACILITY BUILDING. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'RE REFERENCING THE CORRECT ONE BUT OF THE THERE PROBABLY WAS SOME VERSION OF A MAINTENANCE FACILITY UNCLEAR.

I DON'T REMEMBER I WAS LABELED IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S ONE, TWO, 345 BUILDINGS IN A CLUSTER AND EACH BUILDING A FEW BOLTS A LABEL AS A MAINTENANCE FACILITY I DON'T HAVE IN FRONT OF ME SO I'D HAVE TO AND I GUESS MY QUESTION WAS IS THAT I DIDN'T SEE THAT ON ALL THREE COURSES SO I WAS JUST CURIOUS HOW THAT WORKED. THE MAINTENANCE FACILITY MEANING EACH INDIVIDUAL GOLF COURSE MAY NEED ITS OWN MAINTENANCE.

CAN WE GO THIS OR DOES EACH OF EACH COURSE HAVE ITS OWN MAINTENANCE FACILITY BUILDING THIS ONE HAVE ITS OWN LAWNMOWER AND I'VE BEEN A FAN OF COMMUNITY BUILDING BUT NO I DO NOT KNOW. I'M HAPPY TO CHECK IT OUT FOR YOU IF I GOT THE APPLICATION IN FRONT OF ME AND THEN I GUESS THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD HAD TO DO WITH CIRCULATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE SO CAN YOU DO YOU HAVE TO USE THE SAME ROADWAY IN ORDER TO ACCESS ALL THREE OF YOUR COURSES OR IF IN FACT THERE ARE INDEPENDENT CAN YOU ACCESS ONE INDEPENDENTLY WITHOUT HAVING TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER COURSE HAVE TO DEFER TO THE ENGINEERS THAT DESIGN THE PLANS BUT AS FAR AS BUFFER REQUIREMENTS. WHEN I FORGET THE MATRIX IT'S CUBES BUT RECREATION RECREATION HAS NO ESTABLISHED BUFFER THIS REQUIREMENT BE FOR COUNTY CDC.

WELL I WASN'T REFERRING TO BUFFER JUST WHETHER OR NOT THESE COURSES COULD LITERALLY FUNCTION AS THREE INDEPENDENT COURSES OR IF YOU HAD TO USE THE ONE ROAD TO BE ABLE TO GET TO COURSE B THROUGH COURSE OR ACCORSI ETC. IN ORDER TO SUBDIVIDE THE PARCELS EACH PERSON HAD TO AVOID A MAIN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY SO. EACH PARCEL IS ACCESSIBLE OFF OF DONNA ROAD SO THE ROADS THAT SHOWN ON THE PLAN ARE PUBLIC ROUTES SO EACH PARCEL IS ACCESSIBLE BY THE LAMA ROAD AND THERE IS AN EXISTING EASEMENT THAT RUNS THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROPERTY THAT GOES FROM DELANO OUT TO. AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION ARE THERE CAR RENTALS? WHAT'S THERE ARE THERE GOING TO BE CARTS GOLF CARTS? GOLF CARTS? OH WELL DO YOU GO BACK AND DO NOT BE A GOLFER? MY GOAL IS TO HAVE A WALKING ENVIRONMENT AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY BECAUSE LEARN A LOT MORE DOING THAT WITH HISTORY EMBEDDED THROUGHOUT THE GOLF EXPERIENCE BASED ON OUR ARCHEOLOGY WORK THEN YOU DO DRIVE AROUND ON A GOLF CART FLYING AROUND IGNORING EVERYTHING AND SO NO GOLF CARTS . THERE WILL BE SOME GOLF CARTS FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE DIFFICULTY WALKING BUT THAT'S A FUTURE OPERATIONAL PLAN THAT I HAVE YET TO DETERMINE SO UNCLEAR. EXCUSE ME DO YOU PLAN TO HAVE THREE HEAD PROFESSIONALS ONE FOR EACH GOLF COURSE UNCLEAR. I'M SORRY I SAID I'M NOT SURE BUT PROBABLY NOT.

PROBABLY. WHAT'S THE DISTANCE BETWEEN COURSE A COURSE B COURSE BEING A COURSE C THE DISTANCE BETWEEN YEAH IS IT 3000 YARDS IS A 200 YARDS PROBABLY THAN THAT IT'S THE SEPARATION BETWEEN THE PARCELS IS LEGALLY ALLOWED AND THE ADMINISTRATOR STOOD UP AND SAID IT COULD BE DONE ON JANUARY 5TH SO I DID IT RIGHT. CLEARLY YOU HAVEN'T THOUGHT TOO MUCH ABOUT THIS YET BUT THERE'S LOTS THAT GOES INTO A GOLF COURSE.

WHERE DO YOU PLAN TO PUT YOUR COURSE? CHEMICALS ARE GOING TO BE IN THE MAINTENANCE AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUNTY STANDARDS OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN A MAINTENANCE AREA DESIGNATED HOWEVER FAR AWAY WE CAN PUT IT AWAY FROM THE RIVERS AND WATERS TO RESPECT THE WATER ANY ELSE I HAVE A QUICK GOOD IN THE STAFF REVIEW TEAM ON MARCH THAT'S WHEN YOU KNOW AMONG THE STAFF YOU KNOW CONTACT FOR YOU AND I'M DID YOU GET THIS DIRECTION COMMENTS PRE-APPLICATION OF COMMENTS CONTACT AMANDA FLINT FOR NATURAL RESOURCE DETERMINATION CONTACT ELIZABETH ANDERSON WAS THAT CONVEYED TO YOU IN A TIMELY SRT ACTION ITEM LIST? WE NEVER RECEIVED THAT FROM COUNTY.

[03:40:04]

ARE YOU COMMITTED TO HAVING THESE THREE PARCELS WITH A DEED RESTRICTION SO THAT THEY CANNOT AT A FUTURE DATE BE COMBINED? I BELIEVE YOU REFERENCED REFERENCING QUESTION THAT MS..

AUSTEN ASKED AND THAT AS OUR TEAM MEETING OF IS THERE SOMETHING WE DO TO MAKE THEM SO THEY CAN'T BE COMBINED? THAT'S A DISCUSSION THAT I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE IN TERMS OF A COMPROMISE BUT I'M UNEQUIPPED TO ANSWER THAT BECAUSE.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WORKS BUT WHAT I WILL TELL YOU IS IN THE BROADER VISION OF NEVER ANYTHING OTHER THAN A GOLF COURSE HERE I WOULD CONSIDER A DEED RESTRICTING ANY EASEMENT OVER THE ENTIRETY OF THE AGGREGATION OF GOLF COURSES SO THAT IT COULD NEVER BECOME HOMES. AND LET ME TELL YOU WHY THE NUMBER ONE QUESTION THAT I GET IS WHAT ABOUT NEXT GUY PERSON, WHOMEVER? THERE WON'T BE ONE.

AND WHY I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE THERE'S A AN ARTICLE A REPORT DONE BY THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND WITH THE OPEN LAND TRUST WHO I TORE AROUND MY PROPERTY AND WE HAD LONG DISCUSSIONS.

I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTOOD THIS AND IN THAT TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND DOCUMENT WHICH IS ENTITLED THE ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF OPEN SPACE IN COUNTY THEY DO NOT CONSIDER PRIVATE AMENITIES AS OPEN SPACE BECAUSE THEY CAN BE DEVELOPED IN THE FUTURE. SO IN ORDER TO NEVER THAT HAPPEN I WOULD CONSIDER THOSE THINGS AND EVEN BEYOND THAT IRONICALLY IN HILTON HEAD WE ARE FIGHTING A GOLF COURSE THAT WANTS TO CHANGE THEIR ZONING TO BECOME A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY AND THE COMMUNITY IS FLIPPING OUT IN CARLTON COUNTY WE ARE LITERALLY GET THEY ARE LITERALLY TAX BREAKS TO A GOLF COURSE DEVELOPER SO THAT CAN COME IN AND DEVELOP A PRIVATE GOLF COURSE IN A RURAL AREA SO THEY DO NOT LARGE SCALE SUBDIVISIONS. THESE ARE ALL THE INPUTS INTO THE EQUATION OF HOW DO WE MAKE SURE ONE THAT THIS IS A ONE AND DONE SCENARIO BECAUSE NO KNUCKLEHEAD ON THE PLANET LABELS THEMSELVES A DEVELOPER WHATEVER DEED RESTRICT PUT CONSERVATION EASEMENTS OVER OR MONEY OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS TO THROW IN THE AIR.

THAT'S WHAT WE ARE WILLING TO DO AS A COMMITMENT SO THAT PERMANENT NEW RESIDENTS NEVER SHOW UP WELL AND THE TRUST REPUBLICAN BOARD IS ACTUALLY AWESOME.

IT GOES THROUGH ALL OF THE QUALIFICATIONS OF WHY AND HOW AND IF YOU RUN IT THROUGH THE GREEN THE GREEN BIRD OVERLAY YOU UNDERSTAND HIGH AND DRY RESILIENCY, WATER QUALITY, THE WHOLE THING. I MEAN WE RUN THROUGH IT. I'M THE ONE WHO ASKED THE QUESTION BEFORE BUT YOU KNOW, PERMANENT NEW RESIDENTS COULD YOU JUST CLARIFY THAT IT SEEMED LIKE TACKED ON TO YOUR LIFE? YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY IT'S A REALLY HARD THING TO ANSWER BECAUSE IT DIVES INTO THE BUSINESS MODEL THA AND SO FOR ME IF I TAKE A STEP BACK AND I WANT TO ANSWER THE QUESTION IN TERMS OF IT WOULD WOULD X AMOUNT OF PERMANENT NEW RESIDENTS BE BETTER THAN Y3X THEN THAT SHOULD SUFFICE IN A WORLD OF NEGOTIATE WELL WE'RE NOT IN NEGOTIATION, WE'RE IN A HEY LET ME DROP HIM INTO SAYING WHAT HE DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO ANSWER SO WELL I THINK THAT'S UNFAIR. I DON'T THINK HE WAS TRYING TO TRAP YOU. IT'S JUST YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE AND SO BUT FOR ME TO TELL A HOMEOWNER THAT THEY COULDN'T LIVE THERE FULL TIME WOULD BE TOUGH.

I'D BE WILLING TO CONSIDER IT AS PART OF A LARGER EQUATION. BUT I MEAN I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I HAVEN'T EVEN TO THAT POINT AND THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING IN THE EQUATION OF WHAT WE'RE WILLING TO DO IN ORDER TO COME TO A PRAGMATIC COMPROMISE THAT IS IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE AREA. BUT I CAN'T THE QUESTION I DON'T WANT TO DODGE IT AND CIRCLE TALK AND LOOK NEFARIOUS I JUST DON'T KNOW.

SIMILARLY FOR PLACING A DEED RESTRICTIONS SO THAT THESE THREE COURSES DON'T AT SOME FUTURE POINT BECOME ONE CORRECT AND MY BIGGEST FEAR IS THAT SOMETHING GETS WRITTEN TO THE CONTRARY I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR ALL THESE THINGS ARE ON THE THE ARBITER OF A COMPROMISE IS WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR AND THOSE ELEMENTS THAT YOU'RE HIGHLIGHTING ARE THE PAIN POINTS THAT I LOVE TO TALK ABOUT. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION I'D LIKE TO ASK THE COUNTY TO JUST ADDRESS. SURE. YES.

YOU MAY BE HANGING OUT OR I DO APPRECIATE. ALL RIGHT.

YOU MADE THE STATEMENT THAT HE DIDN'T RECEIVE NOTICE ABOUT THE DEFICIENCIES AND I'VE GOT HERE THE LETTER DATED MARCH 9TH TO MR. MICHAEL HUGHES RELATED TO PINE ISLAND GOLF COURSE AS I TOLD YOU WE CONTACTED THOMSON AND THEIR ENGINEER AND TOLD HIM THE THREE THINGS MISSING.

[03:45:02]

THE VERY NEXT DAY ATTORNEY NIEMI HAD THE MEETING WITH UH THE COUNTY ATTORNEY UH PRETTY WARD THE PLANNING DIRECTOR THE ARCHEOLOGICAL DIRECTOR AND ATTORNEY AIMING TO RESOLVE THOSE TWO MISSING DOCUMENTS NATURAL RESOURCES LETTER AND THE ARCHEOLOGICAL LETTER THE VERY NEXT WEEK ON MARCH 23RD THIS LETTER THEY SUBMITTED THE ARCHEOLOGICAL LETTER MINUS THAT PLAT THAT I TALKED ABOUT MISSING THE IDENTIFICATION WHERE THE ARTIFACTS WERE BUT MR. TREVINO IS CONCERNED ABOUT AND UNDERSTANDABLY SO AND THEN MARCH 24TH THE VERY NEXT DAY WE GOT THE NATURAL RESOURCES LETTER DETERMINATION AND THEN THAT VERY SAME DAY WE RESPONDED TO THOMPSON HUTTON TELLING THEM ABOUT IT'S CONSIDERED AND WE'LL SCHEDULED THE SRT WE STILL NEED THE SITE PLAN IDENTIFYING WHERE THE ARTIFACTS WERE FOR THAT MEETING SO WE DID SEND THE NOTIFICATION TO THE PERSONNEL THAT WERE REPRESENTING HIM. THE COUNTY WAS IN DIVISION THAT READY FOR YOUR QUESTION, SIR? WELL QUESTION REGARDING VESTED RIGHTS IS IT A LAW OF RIGHTS AND YOU'RE CONSIDERING THAT VESTED RIGHTS DON'T OCCUR HERE UNTIL THERE IS A APPROVED APPLICATION? THAT'S CORRECT. SUBMITTED FINAL APPLICATION THAT CONCEPTUAL FINAL APPLICATION WHICH WOULD HAVE GONE BEYOND START DATE WE ARE A LONG WAY AWAY FROM THAT. OKAY AND I GUESS IT'S THE APPLICANT'S POSITION THAT THAT ISN'T DECIDING FACTOR FOR THE WELL WHY THEY THINK THEY HAVE A VESTED RIGHT THE CONCEPT BOGGLES MY MIND BECAUSE THE CONCEPT IS JUST THAT AND THEN WE GIVE THEM DIRECTION ABOUT WHAT THEY'VE GOT TO DO TO FINALIZE IT. A LOT OF TIMES THEY NEVER COME BACK. IT'S JUST A CONCEPT SO DO THEY KEEP A VESTED RIGHT FOREVER? IS IT IN INFINITY? YEAH. NO MOST OF THE TIME THEY COME BACK IN SIX MONTHS TO A YEAR IF THEY'RE COMING BACK AND THEN WE DO THE FINAL REVIEW AND APPLICATION AND UPON REVIEW THEIR FINAL APPLICATION THAT'S WHEN BY LAW YOU CAN GET VESTED RIGHTS APPROVED PERMITTED PLANS . YEAH YEAH.

THIS YEAR IT CAN'T BE ANY MORE CLEAR AS FAR AS THE LEGISLATURE TAKING THAT ACTION TO CLEAR UP ANY MISCONCEPTION ABOUT WHEN VESTED RIGHTS OCCUR AND WHEN THEY CAN START SPENDING THE MONEY ON PLANTS IF THEY WANT TO SPEND IT BEFORE THEN THAT'S AT THEIR RISK.

ONCE THEY HAVE THOSE VESTED RIGHTS THEY GET TO RELY ON THAT THEY CAN'T RELY ON ANYTHING UNTIL WE GET THAT. OKAY. ONE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE ONE QUESTION, SIR. HOW YOU DEFINED IT A STANDARD FOR A GOLF COURSE OF BEING NINE OR 18 HOLES THREE PAR THREE 9 TO 18 HOLES. CORRECT THAT THOSE THAT THE STANDARD DEFINITION IN MERRIAM-WEBSTER IN THE PLANNING GUIDE THAT'S RECOGNIZED ANYWHERE AS FAR AS WHAT A GOLF COURSE IS SO UNDER THAT DEFINITION AND THE PRIOR UNDER THE PRIOR TEXT THE MOMENT BEFORE IT WAS AMENDED WHEN THE THREE SIX HOLE GOLF COURSE COURSES BEEN ALLOWED. NO, ABSOLUTELY NOT. AND ANYBODY THAT STOOD UP HERE AND REPRESENTED THAT DIDN'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ACTUALLY REPRESENT THAT.

OKAY. THE CPO PRECLUDED THAT OKAY. THAT WAS CLEAR IN THE CPO IN THE COUNTY ORDINANCE IT DIDN'T ALLOW FOR ANYTHING ANY GOLF COURSE ALL AND CERTAINLY THAT'S SOMETHING IT'S NOT EVEN CONSIDERED A GOLF COURSE. OKAY.

THANK YOU. THIS IS JUST A CLARIFICATION. SO YOUR POINT THAT YOU MADE EARLIER IS THAT RIGHTS OF THE MR. TEAM BELIEVES IN VESTED RIGHTS BECAUSE OF OF THE THREE SIX HOLE GOLF COURSES THEY BELIEVE THEY HAVE POSTED RIGHTS TO THREE SIX ALL GOLF COURSES BASED UPON THAT ACCESS LANGUAGE UNDER THE CPO OF GOLF COURSES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A REGULATION AND PAR THREE OF NINE NO MORE I DIDN'T SAY NINE HOLES OF WARRANTIES REGULATION AND PAR THREE OF NINE OR MORE HOLES PAR THREE OF NINE OR MORE HOLE REGULATION

[03:50:03]

YOU CAN'T GET A PERMIT ON A CONCEPT IF YOU LOOK AT THE REASON THAT IF YOU LOOK AT OUR CONCEPT PLAN THE PATIENT GOES THROUGH A CHECKLIST AND IT CLEARLY SAYS COMMITTEE LEVEL CONCEPT PLAN APPLICATION THAT'S A SEPARATE APPLICATION FROM A FINAL APPLICATION.

SO WE HAVE A PRE YOU HAVE A CONCEPTUAL AND YOU HAVE A FINAL THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT APPLICATION PROCESSES FOR MAJOR LANDED ON AND FOR A GOLF COURSE THAT'S A MAJOR LAND DEVELOPMENT BY RCC SO HE HAD TO HAVE PRE YOU REQUESTED A MARCHCHCHCHCHCHT OCCURRED ON MARCH EIGHT MARCH 7TH THIS WITH PLANS THAT THERE WANT TO SAY THAT'S A GREAT FOR MARCH 24TH AND MAY THINK IT'S COMPLETE IF YOU'RE STILL TALKING ABOUT A CONCEPTUAL PLAN NOT A FINAL PLAN UNDER THERE CASE LAW AGAIN DON'T FORGET WHAT I SAID AS FAR VESTED RIGHTS THAT'S BEEN OVERRULED THE LEGISLATION LEGISLATION CLEARED THAT UP FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT BUT OUR CODE DID NOT SPECIFY AUTHORIZED GOLF COURSES AS THERE ARE CERTAIN IN GOLF COURSES ARE REPUGNANT TO THE GOAL OF CULTURAL COMMUNITY COMMUNITY. SO THOSE MEAN EITHER ONE OF THOSE TWO THINGS KEY DISTINCTIONS FOR PURE OIL AND SCOTT THE GREENEVILLE CASES THEY'RE INAPPLICABLE HE LOSES UNDER THE OLD LEASES AND UNDER THE STATUTE EITHER WAY IT DOESN'T HAPPEN IT DOESN'T MATTER. I THINK THE COURTS WILL UPHOLD THAT I RIGHT. THANK YOU. JUST WANT TO KEEP IT TO THE FACTS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS WE ALL LIKE TO ASK? DO WE HAVE A NEED TO GO BACK INTO SESSION? DO YOU WANT TO GO? I THINK HER LEGAL COUNSEL HAD SOME QUESTIONS. DO YOU WANT TO? THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. FOR ME HENLEY.

SO IF YOU WOULD INDULGE FOR A MOMENT, I THINK THAT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF KEY QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN POSED AND BECAUSE OF THE SOMEWHAT COMPLEX AND LEGALLY ROLE ISSUES HERE, I HOPE YOU DON'T MIND IF I ASK SOME VERY POINTED QUESTIONS TO YOU ALL SO THAT I CAN ASSIST YOU WITH THE DRAFTING OF YOUR MOTION IN DRAFTING A FINAL ORDER.

AGAIN, THIS IS FOR THE BENEFIT ACCOUNTING FOR THE PUBLIC AND FOR THE APPLICANT SO THAT EVERYONE WILL HAVE A CLEAR AND CONCISE ORDER SHOULD ANYONE DECIDE THEY WANT TO APPEAL THE DECISION MADE HERE TONIGHT AS THE CODE ALLOWS FOR AN APPEAL TO THE MASTER AND EQUITY OR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT. SO THE THE FIRST QUESTION THAT I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A CLEAR DISCUSSION OF SO WHEN DRAFTING THAT MOTION I CAN HAVE THAT ASSISTANCE AND HAVE YOU ALL DISCUSS AND DISCUSS AMONG YOURSELVES AND WITH ANY INPUT FROM THE PARTIES HERE IS WHETHER WHEN THE YOU KNOW WHETHER UNDER THE OLD ITERATION OF THE OLD ITERATION OF THE CPA THAT SAYS AND I'D LIKE TO JUST QUOTE IT'S PRECISELY IF YOU'LL ALLOW ME TO THE FOLLOWING USES ARE DEEMED TO BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE CPO ZONE AND THEREFORE ARE PROHIBITED GOLF COURSE.

THIS USE INCLUDES REGULATION OF PART THREE GOLF COURSES HAVING NINE OR MORE HOLES WHETHER THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT OR PROHIBITED UNDER THAT CPA.

SO THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST QUESTION THAT I WOULD HAVE FOR YOU.

THE SECOND QUESTION THAT I THINK NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED DEPENDING ON THE WAY THAT'S ANSWERED HAS TO DO WITH THE PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE AND IT HAS TO HAS TO DO WITH WHEN THAT APPLICATION WAS DEEMED SUBMITTED AND RECEIVED BY THE COUNTY.

YOU OFFER TESTIMONY FROM BOTH THE COUNTY AND THE APPLICANT BOTH WAYS AND DATES RANGING FROM MARCH 7TH TO MARCH 24TH. THE THIRD QUESTION WOULD BE WHEN WAS THE NOTICE OF THE PARTICULAR SCHEME OF REZONING PROVIDED YOU HAVE HEARD EVIDENCE FROM THE COUNTY AS TO

[03:55:04]

SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT MR. PIANO'S TEAM WAS GIVEN FAIR NOTICE THAT THAT THE CPO WAS UNDER A POTENTIAL TEXT AMENDMENT REVISION. DOES THAT FIT THE FAIR RELIANCE OR WHATEVER YOU CALL IT A GOOD FAITH OR GOOD FAITH? SO WHEN WE STARTED OFF I WARNED YOU ALL THAT YOU MIGHT ASK ME QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE TO SHIRK FROM ANSWERING THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THEM BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A QUESTION FOR Y'ALL TO ANSWER IS WHETHER THAT'S GOOD FAITH RELIANCE OKAY. CERTAINLY IT SOUNDS LIKE GOOD FAITH TO ME.

I MEAN I YOU KNOW, I READ FROM A LETTER FROM THE COUNTY SO YOU KNOW, I THINK IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO ABOUT I'M HAPPY TO BRING IT UP. BUT IT SEEMS FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD. I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT AMONG US WAS THE DEVELOPER WAS THERE ENOUGH NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT AND OUR AND

[04:00:05]

I MEAN I THINK OH I GOT TO START THE CONVERSATION BACK TO COUNSEL'S FIRST QUESTION.

IT HAD TO DO WITH WHETHER OR NOT HE SO OF COURSE IS SOMETHING THAT WAS A RIGHT UNDER THE OLD LANGUAGE AND I THINK IN ORDER TO REALLY ADDRESS THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER NOT ONLY THE TEXT WITHIN THE THE THE CPO BUT ALSO THE LANGUAGE THE DEFINITION LANGUAGE THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE BECAUSE WHILE THE CPO LANGUAGE TALKS ABOUT INCLUDING BOTH WHOLE AND REGULAR REGULATION COURSES, THE DEFINITION IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE IS MUCH MORE SPECIFIC AND IT BASICALLY SAYS THAT A GOLF COURSE IS DEFINED AS REGULATION AND PAR THREE COURSES HAVING NINE OR MORE HOLES AND THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY ACCESSORY FACILITIES AND USES INCLUDING DRIVING RANGES ETC. SO I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK IN THE CONTEXT OF THE LANGUAGE IN THE CPO IN TOTAL AS WELL AS THE DEFINITION THAT EXISTED IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ME THAT DOESN'T INDICATE THE SIX ALL COURSE IS A BY RIGHT USE OF LANGUAGE INTERPRETATION YES I'M SORRY BUT I, I AGREE WITH YOUR INTERPRETATION AS WELL. IT ALSO SAYS RESTRICTED ACCESS GATED COMMUNITIES ARE SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED IS WHAT THIS IS GOING TO BE ACCORDING TO THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN WHETHER THE GOLF COURSE NINE OR 18 HOLES IT ALSO SAYS NO RESTRICTED ACCESS MITIGATED IN WHAT IS DEFINED AS A GATED COMMUNITY BECAUSE APPLICANT HAD SAID THAT THERE'S BEEN GATES ON THAT PROPERTY FOR WELL A LOT OF BUT WE'VE HEARD TESTIMONY SO THAT'S A FENCE, RIGHT? NOT A GATE AND NOW THERE ARE SECURITY PEOPLE THERE THAT SO IS THAT A GATED I DON'T KNOW. I THINK THAT WOULD BE I MEAN I'VE GOT A GATE MY YARD I MEAN IT'S NOT A GATED HOUSE BUT IF I PUT A SECURITY CODE GATED COMMUNITY NORMALLY COME WITH A NATURE AWAY RIGHT AND HERE ANYBODY OKAY HERE SO FOR COVENANTS RESTRICTIONS NOT WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING THAT'S GOING ALL RIGHT ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT THEM ALL OVER? IF NOT, I CAN ENTERTAIN A EMOTION. WHAT'S EVERYBODY TALKING ABOUT WITH AS FAR AS THE APPLICATION FROM THE APPLICANT DATE 373 24 I THINK IT'S 324 HOWEVER OUR OUR COUNTY COUNCIL TOLD ATTORNEY RATHER TOLD US IT'S A CONCEPTUAL PLAN SO IT'S NOT REALLY CONSIDERED TO BE AN APPLICATION UNTIL IT'S STAMPED APPROVED SO OTHER RE YOU KNOW WHICH ONE IS IT. YEAH AND LOOK AND PERHAPS MAY BE A BETTER QUESTION FOR MR. HOLBERT IF THAT'S IF YOU HAD THAT QUESTION ABOUT WHAT WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ACTUAL AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING APPLICATION VERSUS CONCEPTUAL AND WHETHER AN APPLICATION FOR A CONCEPTUAL PLANNING APPLICATION IS OF EXCUSE ME AN APPLICATION OR A CONCEPTUAL PLAN IS SOMEHOW LESSER BUT I, I JUST I THINK IT'S BETTER FOR MR. HOLBERT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT I THINK THAT WE'RE IN DISCUSSION PERIOD NOW AND THERE WAS A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT HELPER GOT UP AND GAVE ABOUT A SIX MINUTE PRESENTATION I BELIEVE THERE'S POINT WHERE THE PRESENTATION DOES NEED TO END OR RIGHT BOTH PARTIES SHOULD SPEAK AND ONCE DISCUSSION PERIOD STARTED I THINK THAT REALLY HAD A PROBLEMATIC PROCEDURE. THIS IS QUESTIONS DIRECTED TO ONE PARTY AND I STATED THAT I THANK YOU I THINK THE PROCESS I WOULD CLOSE AT THAT OKAY THAT'S I WANT TO CLOSE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OF IT WHAT WE NEED NOW IS A MOTION SO THAT SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON ACTUALLY I REMEMBER NINE FEEL I MR. CHAIRMAN I HAVE BEEN AGAIN I'VE BEEN WORKING ON A MOTION HERE IF YOU DON'T MIND I'M OVER REMOVE THE TOP PORTION OF THIS PIECE PAPER BECAUSE IT HAS

[04:05:06]

ULTIMATELY WHATEVER MOTION Y'ALL MAKE NEEDS TO BE SUPPORTED BY THE TESTIMONY THAT YOU'VE HEARD TODAY AND THE APPEAL DOCUMENTS. BUT YOU HAVE THREE OPTIONS YOU HAVE THE MOTION TO AFFIRM THE DECISION THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT YOU HAVE THE MOTION YOU HAVE A MOTION TO REVERSE THE DECISION OF THE COUNTY'S PLANNING DEPARTMENT OR YOU HAVE A MOTION TO AFFIRM WITH SO I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY TO PUT ALL THAT RATIONALE IN OUR MOTION THAT THAT IS JUST THE SUPPORT THAT WILL GO BEHIND. IT MOTIONS YOU TO DENY OR MODIFY, CORRECT. SO TYPICALLY WHAT YOU WILL HAVE IS SOME LIMITED SUPPORT THAT WILL BE MORE THOROUGHLY EXPLAINED IN THE IN THE WRITTEN ORDER BUT MOST OF YOUR SUPPORT AND EVIDENCE IS INCLUDED WITHIN THIS TESTIMONY TODAY IN THE APPEAL SUBMITTALS BUT WE DO HAVE SOME SOME ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE THERE JUST TO ACTUALLY FIND THE SUSTAINING GROUNDS OR THE GROUNDS FOR REVERSAL. OKAY. SO WE'RE IN POSITION TO MAKE A MOTION BASED ON THE THIS DECISION NOT HAVE TO BE READ INTO A NO AND I WOULD AND I WOULD ARGUE NOT I RECOMMEND NOT ALL OF Y'ALL LOOKING AT THAT. THAT WAS JUST A IF THERE IS SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO MAKE IT LOOK AT THE MOTION AFFIRM DENY ,MODIFY WELL I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO AFFIRM THAT YOU WOULD SEEK TO AFFIRM A DECISION OF THE FOUR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF. WOULD YOU SAY CITE WOULD REGARDING THE PINE ISLAND APPEAL. OH OF COURSE. OH, TO MAKE IT COMPLETE.

OKAY, LET'S SEE I'M REGARDING YOU KNOW, THE PINE ISLAND PEOPLE I GUESS THAT'S THE BEST WAY TO SAY YOU WANTED I'VE GOT IT RIGHT. GOT REGARDING THE PINE ISLAND GOLF COURSE A B AND C ALL THREE BECAUSE THE APPLICANT ATTORNEY ASKED ME AND SAYS THIS ONE CORRECT. SO I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT DELINEATES I'M GOING TO SAY ALL THREE OF THEM FOR CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR PINE ISLAND SIX WILL GOLFERS COURSES THREE SIX ALL GOLFERS SO I FIRM THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE DECISION OF THE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT AFFIRMED THEIR DECISION TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL FOR THREE ROOMING THE COUNTY POSITION CORRECT WHICH IS DENYING THE APPLICANT YEAH.

AFFIRMING THE COUNTY'S POSITION. OKAY THE STAFF I GUESS PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF'S POSITION IN BEFORE THERE'S A SECOND I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU ALL STATE THE REASONS FOR POSITION THAT'S ONE OF THE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WROTE OUT FOUR DIFFERENT SUSTAINING GROUNDS FOR YOUR POSITION OKAY SINCE THERE'S NOT A SECOND HEARING YOUR MOTION IS STILL ON BEFORE YOU CAN. OKAY.

FURTHER REASONS WOULD BE THAT DEVELOPMENTS PROPOSED THE APPLICANT ARE GOLF COURSES AND GOLF COURSES ARE PROHIBITED THE CPO DISTRICT UNDER THE EXISTING ORDINANCES AND THE PRIOR ITERATION OF THE ORDINANCE AND I WOULD SAY ALL PRIOR ITERATIONS OF THE ORDINANCE TO THAT THE APPLICATIONS AT ISSUE WERE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT TO THE COUNTY ON MARCH 7TH.

HOWEVER THE APPLICATIONS WERE INCOMPLETE DUE THE APPLICANT'S FAILURE TO INCLUDE MANDATORY SUPPLEMENTAL REPORTS AND EXHIBITS THE APPLICATIONS NOT COMPLETE UNTIL MARCH 24TH WHEN THEY WERE RECEIVED BY AND ACCEPTED BY MISS AUSTIN AND AS OF MARCH 24TH THE COUNTY HAD ALREADY A NOTICE FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THE DEVELOPER OF ITS INTENT TO REVISE THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE CPO DISTRICT. AS I SAID EARLIER, I THINK THE APPLICANT KNEW THAT BACK IN NOVEMBER THROUGH THAT LETTER THE DEVELOPER PRESERVED LITTLE

[04:10:03]

YEAH. SO YOU WANT ME TO READ THROUGH EVERYTHING AGAIN? NO, I DON'T. I WOULD AMEND MY MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT WE FEEL THAT VESTED RIGHTS ARE NOT APPLICABLE IF I'M A MATTER OF PRIVILEGE IF I MAY.

YEAH, THAT'S NOT RIGHT. I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS A MOTION TO AMEND THE THE MOTION THAT'S ON THE FLOOR WITH A ANOTHER FINDING THAT THERE WAS NOT A FINDING OF A VESTED RIGHT UNDER THE BEAUFORT COUNTY CODE OR THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE BECAUSE THE APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED WAS NOT STAMPED AND APPROVED BUT RATHER IT WAS JUST IT WAS JUST RECEIVED. SO I MEANT MY MOTION TO ADD THAT WE DID THERE IS NOT A FINDING OF VESTED RIGHTS UNDER THE GREEN DEVELOPMENT CODE BECAUSE THE APPLICATION WAS NOT STAMPED AND APPROVED BUT IT WAS AS RECEIVED SECOND OKAY.

SO WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT BEFORE WE VOTE ON THE MOTION.

SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENT THE MOTION FOR MOTION .

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND THE MOTION THEN ALL ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS AMENDED AS AMENDED RIGHT HERE AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS COUNTS POSITION IS AFFIRMED IN THE IS DENIED PENDING ON THE APPLICANT THANKS TO THIS CIRCUMSTANCE I FIND IT TO BE ANY OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE I KNOW I HAVE TO BE HERE LOOKING AT WHOLE IT FEELS LIKE WELL MIGHT BOTHER ME THAT WE HAVE TO ADJOURN W

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.