* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] CLOSED CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY BUFORT COUNTY. GOOD MORNING AND [1. Call to Order] WELCOME TO THE PUBLIC PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING OF OCTOBER 13TH. UM, I'D LIKE TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER, UH, MOTION TO ADOPT THE AGENDA [2. Adoption of the Agenda] AS SUBMITTED. I MOVE ALL, RAISE YOUR FIRE RIGHT HAND. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. UM, [3. Approval of the Minutes ] APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 14TH. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE MOVE DOCTOR'S WRITTEN? SECOND. I VOTE IN FAVOR. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. MOVED AS, UH, THANK YOU APPEARANCE [4. Appearance by Citizens] BY CITIZENS KIM. I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE SOME CITIZENS WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNSEL. NOW THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK ON THE TOPIC. THAT'S FINE. THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S A ONE AGENDA ITEM, RIGHT. KELLY LEBLANC BLANC, KELLY LEBLANC, ROBERT RENEY, JACK DALEY. HI, UM, JACK DALEY WITH FOREST BEACH OWNERS ASSOCIATION. UM, OUR BOARD HAS HAD A TALK AMONGST OURSELVES AND, UM, WE UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS'S GOING ON AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE MORE THAN A FEW NEIGHBORHOODS LUMPED IN THE SAME CATEGORY FOR CONSIDERATION. AND, UM, SINCE WHAT WILL THIS WILL BE AFFECTING IS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER OVERLAY DISTRICT. WE THINK IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES, WE AS STAKEHOLDERS SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS AND OUR CHARACTER MAY BE DIFFERENT THAN THESE OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS. SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR, AND WE'VE ASKED FOR THIS BEFORE, IS INSTEAD OF LUMPING ALL THE NON PLANTATION PUDS INTO ONE PILE FOR ONE CONSIDERATION, ONE STANDARD ALLOW US TO HAVE A VERY QUICK BUT SEPARATE CONVERSATION WITH THE TOWN ABOUT WHAT UNIQUELY FITS FOR A SPEECH. AND, UH, TO THIS END, WE'VE ALREADY HAD, UH, MISSY WAS NICE ENOUGH TO SET UP A MEETING FOR THURSDAY TO TALK WITH OUR BOARD ABOUT THESE ISSUES, GO OVER SOME OF THE MATH WITH US ABOUT WHAT THESE THINGS WILL ACTUALLY MEAN, UH, BECAUSE NOT ALL NEIGHBORHOODS ARE THE SAME. AND IF THEY WERE, WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER OVERLAY DISTRICT. SO, UM, YES, WE DID NOT INITIATE THIS PROCESS AND AS OF YET, WE'VE NOT REALLY PARTICIPATED. SO WE'RE JUST ASKING. IT'S NOT A DELAY, IT'S GONNA BE QUICK. LET US HAVE A QUICK SIDEBAR WITH THE TOWN, UH, GIVE SOME FEEDBACK AS STAKEHOLDERS AND, UM, LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PROCESS FOR OUR BOARD MEMBERS, AND THEN LET US AS A BOARD MAKE A SUGGESTION AND A PROPOSAL TO THE TOWN THAT EITHER WILL OR WON'T BE TAKEN UP. BUT, UM, THANK YOU AND I LOOK FORWARD TO TALKING TO YOU AGAIN, MR. TAYLOR. ROBERT RAINEY. GOOD MORNING. UH, MY NAME IS ROBERT RAINEY. I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 1981. UM, I LIVE ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND AND, UH, I'M THE BROKER IN CHARGE OF RE MAX ISLAND REALTY. I WAS TOLD THAT, UH, YOU'RE WORKING ON THESE RESTRICTIONS AS FAR AS REDUCING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ON THESE LOTS. AND, UM, I'M AWARE THAT MS. BECKER FEELS THAT STRONGLY THAT IT WILL NOT AFFECT THE VALUES. AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU, AS A LICENSED PROFESSION PROFESSIONAL FOR OVER 30 YEARS, THAT'S NOT TRUE. AND, UM, I THINK THESE RESTRICTIONS WILL REALLY, UH, AFFECT THE PEOPLE WHO OWN THESE LAND, UH, THE LOTS AND ALSO THE HOUSES, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT IN THE EVENT OF A FIRE AFTER THE FIRE, THEY WOULD BE COVERED BY INSURANCE FOR THE DAMAGE, BUT THEN THEY COULDN'T REBUILD WHAT THEY HAD AND PICTURE IF THEY HAD A MORTGAGE AND THEY COULDN'T COVER IT BECAUSE THE RENTALS KIND OF OFFSET THE FEES AND ALLOWS THEM TO OWN A, A BEAUTIFUL PLACE HERE. AND A QUICK REMINDER, WE DO LIVE IN HILTON HEAD ISLAND. THAT IS AN AMAZING PLACE AND I KNOW YOU'RE ALL DOING GOOD WORK TO, TO MAINTAIN THAT. WE CONSTANTLY GET AWARDED. I'M SO PROUD TO SAY WHERE I LIVE WHEN I GO AWAY, UH, AND PEOPLE COMING HERE ARE ENVIOUS OF ALL OF US LIVING IN SUCH A BEAUTIFUL PLACE. OR, UM, I THINK THE HORSE IS ALREADY OUTTA THE BARN. AND FOR THESE LOTS THAT ARE IN THESE AREAS THAT YOU KNOW, OFF THE GATED, OUTSIDE THE GATED COMMUNITIES THAT, I MEAN, IF WE DID THIS MAYBE 30 YEARS AGO OR 20 YEARS AGO, OR 15 YEARS AGO, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE, IF YOU DO WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING, IS YOU'RE GONNA HAVE INCONSISTENT. SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A BIG HOME HERE AND THEN A SMALL HOME. SO THAT SMALL HOME'S GONNA BRING THE BIG HOME DOWN IN VALUE. AND HAVING A RESTRICTION [00:05:01] LIKE THAT, I JUST THINK WOULD BE VERY DETRIMENTAL. SO, UM, WE LIVE IN A RESORT AREA, VOTED CONSTANTLY AS THE NUMBER ONE PLACE AND, UM, WE SHOULD JUST ALL REMIND OURSELVES OF THAT. WE SIGNED UP FOR THAT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU JERRY PETTIGREW. GOOD MORNING. I'M JUST GONNA SAY THIS HAS BEEN A NIGHTMARE FOR ME, A REAL NIGHTMARE. I'VE LO OWNED A LOT IN BRADLEY'S CIRCLE FOR NINE YEARS, AND NOW YOU'RE GONNA LOOK ME IN THE EYE AND TELL ME I CANNOT BUILD ON MY LOT. THAT'S WHAT THIS GROSS FAR DOES TO MY PLANS. DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. DO THE MATH YOURSELF, OR ASK YOUR TOWN ARCHITECT TO DO THE MATH FOR YOU. A GOOD IMPACT STUDY WOULD'VE DONE THIS FOR YOU ALREADY. I DID NOT OPPOSE THE REZONING FROM RESORT DEVELOPMENT TO RM EIGHT IN 2018 BECAUSE IT DID NOT PREVENT ME FROM BUILDING A HOME LIKE MY NEIGHBOR. I HAD NO IDEA THAT THIS WAS JUST PHASE ONE OF A BIGGER PLAN TO RESTRICT FURTHER DEVELOPMENT IN THIS AREA BY THOSE WHO'VE ALREADY BUILT THEIR NICE, BEAUTIFUL HOMES. HOWEVER, I'M GROWING TIRED OF THIS BAIT AND SWITCH. THIS IS DESTROYING MY INVESTMENT AND MY PLANS FOR MY FOREVER HOME. IF YOU WANT TO EXPEDITE THE LMO AMENDMENTS PLAN AND MOVE ON, THEN JUST REMOVE THE PROPOSED FAR, I'LL GO AWAY AND OTHER PEOPLE WILL AS WELL. OUR SETBACK AND HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS ADEQUATELY RESTRICT THE SIZE OF OUR SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS. THIS IS THE ONE SIZE FITS ALL APPROACH, BUT EVIDENTLY THAT'S NOT ENOUGH CONTROL FOR SOME PEOPLE. LET'S TALK ABOUT THE WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION. WE TALK A LOT ABOUT SOMEONE STARTED AT THE CONCLUSION THEY WANTED AND WORKED BACKWARDS. IT'S INCONSISTENT, OISS VAGUE AND BIASED. IT REPRESENTS THE SELF-INTEREST OF A FEW. WELL-POSITIONED, WELL-CONNECTED PEOPLE WHEN IT SHOULD BE LOOKING AT WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE ISLAND AND WHAT'S GOOD FOR PROPERTY OWNERS LIKE MYSELF. THE AVERAGE FAR IN THE BRADLEY CIRCLE AREA IS MUCH HIGHER THAN THE 0.5 LISTED FOR THE RM EIGHTS. AND YOU CAN'T SHOVE ALL DISTRICTS INTO A ONE SIZE FITS ALL FAR. IT SHOULD BE BY NEIGHBORHOOD IF WE'RE GONNA HAVE ONE. AND THIS PART OF THE ANALYSIS IS DOWNRIGHT MALPRACTICE US. WE JUST WANNA BUILD A HOME LIKE OUR NEIGHBORS WERE ABLE TO DO. THAT'S IT. THE, UH, NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE EXISTING FARS, THOSE HOMES WERE BUILT IN THE FIFTIES, SIXTIES AND SEVENTIES, BY THE WAY, ON SLABS. AND THE FARS WERE ADDED IN 2016, 50 TO 60 YEARS AFTER THOSE HOUSES WERE BUILT. ALL THREE OF THOSE FARS, BY THE WAY, CONTAINED EXCLUSIONS TO GARAGES, ATTICS, PORCHES, EVERYTHING BUT HEATED SPACE. AND THAT WAS THE RIGHT THING, IF YOU'RE GONNA PUT IN A FAR, IT TOOK A CITIZEN TO BRING THAT UP AT THE LAST TOWN COUNCIL MEETING. IT'S NOT IN THE IMPACT STUDY, IT'S NOT ANYWHERE IN THERE. UM, A WELL THOUGHT OUT AND NON-BIASED JUSTIFICATION WOULD'VE INCLUDED BOTH THE PROS AND CONS OF AFAR, AND SOMEONE WOULD'VE CHECKED THE MATH TO MAKE SURE EXISTING PARCELS COULD ACTUALLY BE BUILT ON JUST LIKE EXISTING HOMES. AFAR IS AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP FOR US. AND PROTECTING THE CHARACTER OF OUR BEAUTIFUL ISLAND DOES NOT HAVE TO COME AT THE EXPENSE OF ALL SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY OWNERS IN THESE DISTRICTS. THE CURRENT RESTRICTIONS ARE ENOUGH AND THE FAR SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE PROPOSED LMO AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I WAS HOPING I WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT, PLEASE. NO CLAPPING OR APPLAUSE AFTER COMMENTS. WILLIAM MCNEIL. HI, MY NAME IS, UH, WILLIAM MCNEIL. I'M A HILTON HEAD RESIDENT. UH, AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL, I DON'T THINK THE RE THIS REQUIRES A ONE SIZE FIT ALL SOLUTION. WHAT'S RIPE FOR FOLLY FIELD AND HOLIDAY HOMES MAY NOT BE THE RIGHT ANSWER FOR BERKS BEACH. SINGLETON BEACH OR JONESVILLE. FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, IS IT, IT'S CRITICAL THAT NEW HOMES CAN CONFORM TO THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY. THIS IS PARTICULARLY TRUE IN NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE A FEW LOTS REMAIN TO BE DEVELOPED, WHERE THERE'S LITTLE VALUE ENFORCING THE CONSTRUCTION OF SMALLER HOMES THAT DO NOT FIT THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY. LET'S BE CLEAR. THE PROPOSED FAR OF 0.45 IS NOT TRUE. IT'S ACTUALLY A 0.3 BECAUSE YOU CANNOT BUILD UP AND ELIMINATE THE LOWER LEVEL. THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN GET TO A 0.45 RATIO IS TO PUT IT ON A SLAB. MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENTS AROUND HERE, YOU CAN'T PUT IT ON A SLAB. I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACT ON HOMES AND LAND VALUES THAT WOULD RESULT FROM THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION. REDUCING WHAT CAN BE BUILT ON A GIVEN LOT REDUCES THE MARKET OF [00:10:01] QUALIFIED BUYERS, WHICH IN TURN REDUCES DEMAND. I'M NOT SURE HOW MANY OF THE BUYERS WOULD BE INTERESTED IN BUYING THE LOT ON BERKS BEACH IF THEY CAN ONLY BUILD A 1700 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE ONE LEVEL UP. AND I'M EQUALLY CERTAIN THAT THIS WOULD IMPACT THE VALUE OF PROPERTY SIGNIFICANTLY. IS THAT REALLY FAIR? FOR EXAMPLE, ALICE WALTON THE FIRST RESIDENT OF BURKES BEACH, AND WHO STILL LIVES THERE AND WHO OWNS FOUR OF THE REMAINING 10 LOTS. PLEASE EXPLAIN TO HER HOW THIS WILL NOT DRAMATICALLY AFFECT THE VALUATIONS OF HER PROPERTY. LASTLY, THE TOWN COUNCIL IS NOT REGULATING WHAT GETS BUILT INSIDE THE GATE. 'CAUSE THESE COMMUNITIES HAVE THEIR OWN, UH, HOAS. IF THIS IS A FACT, THE RATIONALE IS HOW HOA, LIKE BERKS BEACH AND SINGLETON THAT HAVE AT HOA WITH THEIR OWN CON CONSERVANCIES ARE ANY DIFFERENT THAN THE COMMUNITIES INSIDE THE GATES. THANK YOU. ELIZABETH ANDERSON. HELLO, MY NAME'S ELIZABETH ANDREEN AND WE MOVED HERE THREE MONTHS AGO IN HOPES OF BUILDING IN BERKS BEACH. AND NOW UNDER THIS NEW PROPOSAL, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO, UM, OUR HOUSE IS PROPOSED TO BE UNDER 3000 SQUARE FEET, BUT WITH THIS NEW PROPOSAL, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BILL. I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IN THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE REMOVING SOME OF THESE, UM, EXEMPTIONS AS FAR AS LIKE UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE WHEN BY CODE IT YOU CAN'T HAVE HEATING, YOU CAN'T HAVE PLUMBING. SO WHY ARE YOU NOW WANTING TO TAKE OUT THAT EXEMPTION WHEN YOU TECHNICALLY CANNOT LIVE UNDER THAT SPACE? I DON'T THINK THAT ANYBODY HAS DONE THE MATH IN THIS. AND I DON'T ALSO THINK THAT ALL COMMUNITIES THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING ARE THE SAME. AND WE ALREADY IN BERKS BEACH HAVE OUR OWN RESTRICTIONS. WE HAVE OUR OWN SETBACKS, AND WE ALSO CHOSE TO LIVE IN BERKS BEACH BECAUSE IT WASN'T IN A PLANNED COMMUNITY THAT WE THOUGHT THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOME FREEDOM. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WANT TO ELIMINATE THESE LARGE, UH, RENTAL HOMES. I I GET THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT ATTRACTIVE. AND, UM, BUT THIS RESTRICTION NOW IS TOO SEVERE. IT'S, WE JUST WANT TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. AND WITH THESE NEW RESTRICTIONS, WE WON'T BE ABLE TO. SO I THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU, KEITH LEDGE. MY NAME'S KEITH LEDGE AND I RESIDE AT FOR TERABELLA TRACE. UM, I'M SPEAKING TODAY WITH A CONSENT AND FIRM CONVICTION OF 35 INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE BRADLEY CIRCLE COMMUNITY REGARDING THE ISSUE BEFORE YOU TODAY IN RECONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING THE PROPOSED FOUR A AMENDMENTS TO THE LMOI SUBMIT TO YOU THE TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE IN MY REQUEST. THERE ARE THREE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS, EACH FOR EIGHT BEDROOM STRUCTURES AT 15, 17, AND 19 BRADLEY CIRCLE. THOSE WERE SUBMITTED. THOSE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS WERE SUBMITTED TO THE TOWN ON AUGUST 24TH. WELL, AFTER THE DATE, THE PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE COULD BE APPLIED. IF YOU DECIDE TO, DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE OCTOBER 3RD MEETING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, THE TOWN ATTORNEY DELIVERED WHAT WAS DESCRIBED AS A CONSERVATIVE OPINION REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF PENDING ORDINANCE DOCTRINE TO THE PROPOSED FOUR A AMENDMENTS TO THE LMO. THIS CONSERVATIVE OPTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL WITH THE STATED GOAL OF AVOIDING POT POLITIC, UH, POTENTIAL LITIGATION. THIS IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE REASON FOR MAKING A DECISION BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECTS SO MANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA. DIRECTION WAS THEN GIVEN TO THE TOWN MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH, APPROVE THE APPROVAL PROCESS CONCERNING ALL PENDING BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS. UNDER THE CURRENT PROVISIONS OF THE LMO, THE COUNCIL THEN WENT BACK PUBLIC ONLY TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AND MAKE NO MENTION OF THE DECISION THEY [00:15:01] HAD MADE. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE. I WAS ONLY ABLE TO OBTAIN THIS INFORMATION BY SPEAKING DIRECTLY WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS. I FEEL THAT THE TRANSPARENCY AND THE CONSIDERATION OF THE PUBLIC GOOD OVER DEVELOPER INTEREST FOR WHICH THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL WERE ELECTED WAS CERTAINLY IGNORED IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE. APPARENTLY, THERE WAS LITTLE TO NO DISCUSSION CENTERED AROUND HOW TO EXERCISE THE FULL RANGE OF AUTHORITY AVAILABLE TO THE TOWN, WHICH IS A CHARGE OF YOURS IN THE, IN THE LMO. CONSIDERING THIS, AT A MINIMUM, THE EGREGIOUS STRUCTURES AT 15, 17 AND 19, BRADLEY CIRCLE MUST BE OMITTED FROM CONTINUED CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL AS THEY REPRESENT A FLOOR AREA RATIO THAT IS SO REPUGNANT TO THE HIGHEST CONSIDERED VALUE OF 0.45, THAT IT COULD NOT BE REASONABLY QUESTIONED IF ONLY THE HEATED SQUARE FACE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS CONCERNED. THESE THINGS ARE ABOVE 0.9. IF YOU CONSIDER THE GROSS FLOOR AREA THE WAY IT'S MORE LOOSELY DEFINED, THESE THINGS ARE LIKE 1.7 FAR. IN ADDITION, THESE PLANS FALL FAR SHORT OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THE CHANGES THAT ARE IN QUESTION. THERE IS NO PROVI PROVISION ANNOTATED FOR THE TOWN TO MAKE ITS DECISIONS BASED ON POTENTIAL FOR ADVERSE LITIGATION. YOUR CHARGE IS TO PROTECT US. PLEASE DO SO. KELLY LEBLANC. HI, I AM KELLY LEBLANC. I'M A RESIDENT OF JONESVILLE ROAD. UM, UH, I SENT AN EMAIL, EVERYBODY I THINK IS AWARE OF THE EMAIL THAT I SENT YESTERDAY OF THE BUFORD COUNTY STANDARDS FOR, UH, OR THE, THE DEFINITIONS FOR FAR AND GROSS FLOOR AREA AND, UM, AND BASE SITE AREA. SO I THINK THAT, UH, IT'S GONNA TAKE SOME TIME TO KINDA LIKE LOOK AT WHAT THOSE STANDARDS ARE IF WE DO ADOPT THOSE OR OTHER STANDARD DEFINITIONS OF THESE THINGS. AND, UM, THE OTHER THING THAT I WANTED TO GO BACK AND KIND OF ASK ABOUT IS THE STAFF HAD PUBLISHED A, A CHART IN A PREVIOUS, UH, MEETING, UH, THAT, THAT HAD THE EXISTING FAR RATIOS. AND IT WAS BASED ON AVERAGE BUILDING SQUARE FOOT, AN AVERAGE LOT SQUARE FOOT. SO I WANNA GO BACK AND ASK THE STAFF, IT'S LIKE, OKAY, HOW WERE THOSE CALCULATED SPECIFICALLY? BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT THE, THE, THE MAXIMUM FAR SHOULD BE BASED ON THE EXISTING FAR. AND IF WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY HOW THOSE WERE CALCULATED, THEN WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY. YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO MARRY THOSE DEFINITIONS. BASICALLY THE STANDARD DEFINITIONS. SO THAT TAKES TIME, YOU KNOW, DOING ALL THIS TAKES TIME. AND, UM, WE ASKED FOR A MORATORIUM ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO, AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ALLOWS FOR A SIX MONTH MORATORIUM ON BUILDING WHILE THE LMO IS UPDATED TO COME IN LINE WITH PUBLIC WISHES. THAT'S THE, THE, THE MORATORIUM IS ALLOWED BY LAW. BUT THE, UH, TOWN COUNCIL HAS BEEN ADVISED BY COUNCIL NOT TO PROVIDE A, A MORATORIUM AND INSTEAD ACCELERATE THE LMO CHANGES, WHICH WAS FINE, BUT WE'VE GIVEN IT SIX MONTHS AND THIS FAR CALCULATION OR, YOU KNOW, DETERMINATION REALLY HIGHLIGHTS LIKE THIS TAKES TIME AND IT SHOULDN'T BE RUSHED. SO, UH, I, THIS IS JUST, I'M READING THIS AND I WANT TO SAY, FIRST OF ALL, I APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR WORK HIGHLY. I KNOW THAT YOUR MOTIVATION IS TO, LIKE MOST OF THE RESIDENTS, YOU ALL ARE RESIDENTS. ALL OF THE RESIDENTS ARE AGREED THAT WE WANT TO PROTECT THE ISLAND AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR BALANCE. SO, BUT THIS IS WHAT I HAVE TO SAY, THAT THIS IS A BREACH OF YOUR DUTY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST. SO THE HILTON HEAD ISLAND RESIDENT LEADERS WILL RELUCTANTLY BRING A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD FOR NEGLECTING YOUR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN NOT BRINGING ABOUT A SIX MONTH MORATORIUM. THANK YOU. DANIEL ANTHONY. DANIEL ANTHONY. I LIVE ON JONESVILLE, UH, PRESIDENT OF JONESVILLE PRESERVATION SOCIETY. I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF THE ISLAND FOR NEARLY 40 YEARS. UM, HAD A SPEECH PREPARED FOR YOU, BUT I DON'T, I'M NOT GOING TO READ IT. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK A BUNCH OF WORDS JUST DON'T DO THE TRICK. I AGREE WITH EVERYBODY HERE. EVERYBODY HAS CONCERNS ABOUT THEIR INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES AND THEIR INDIVIDUAL COMMUNITIES. AND I HAVE ASKED RELIGIOUSLY FOR Y'ALL TO MAKE A PUBLIC STATEMENT TO LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT IN THE COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE DISTRICTS, THE FAR CAN BE ADJUSTED TO, TO DICTATE THE CHARACTER OF THAT COMMUNITY. ALRIGHT, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF THE PEOPLE DOWN IN BRADLEY CIRCLE. YOU KNOW, THEY WANT TO BUILD LIKE OTHER PEOPLE BUILT AND THEY KEEP BRINGING UP [00:20:01] PROPERTY RIGHTS AND, AND, AND WHAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO. WELL, THEIR PROPERTY RIGHTS, AND I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, COME FROM WHAT ARE THE RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT THE TOWN PROCEEDS TO, TO USE? IT'S NOT A DIVINE RIGHT BY GOD. SO KEEP THAT IN MIND WHEN YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT THESE DISTRICT PLANS AND MOVING THIS FAR ALONG. I ASKED FOR A MORATORIUM SIX MONTHS AGO. JUST THINK WHERE WE'D BE AT RIGHT NOW. IF WE'D HAVE DONE THAT, WE COULD HAVE TAKEN TIME AND, AND AND NEGOTIATED ALL THIS. YOU COULD HAVE HAD ALL THESE PEOPLE SPEAKING, YOU COULD HAVE GOT EVERYBODY'S CONCERNS. BUT NOW THAT YOU'VE GOT THIS IN FRONT OF YOU AND EVERYBODY'S IN AN UPROAR FROM BOTH SIDES, I JUST DON'T SEE HOW YOU'RE GONNA PROCEED. I THINK YOU NEED TO DO THE MORATORIUM, NEED TO PUT A STOP TO EVERYTHING. LET THE TOWN STAFF DO THEIR WORK ON THIS. 'CAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY BOGGED DOWN WITH SO MUCH JUST NORMAL BUSINESS. REWRITING THE LMO IS IS HUGE AND IT NEEDS TO BE DONE RIGHT. SO I ASK YOU TO RECONSIDER THE MORATORIUM SO THAT WE CAN GET THIS STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL. THANK YOU CARL BRADEN. GOOD MORNING. MORNING. THANK YOU. SO, UH, I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT SINCE 97 AND, UH, I'M A LICENSED PROPERTY AGENT. I JUST WANTED TO SAY, BOY, THAT'S LOUD. THE FARM MATERIALS FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SAID THIS BAR WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE, UH, MAJORITY OF EXISTING BAR REQUIREMENTS IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS. HOWEVER, IT'S NOT CONSISTENT, UH, AS WE ALL KNOW, BECAUSE IT EXCLUDES, UH, BECAUSE THE OTHER, THE DEFINITIONS THAT THEY USE EXCLUDES PARKING AND STORAGE AND THE FIRST 600 SQUARE FEET OF, OF COVERED PORCHES AND ATTIC SPACE. BUT THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT ALONG WITH AN INCREASED, UH, UH, DEMAND FOR PARKING, UM, INCLUDES GARAGE SPACE. AND THE REASON WHY THIS IS SO IMPORTANT IS THAT IT GREATLY REDUCES THE EFFECTIVE FAR NUMBER, AS WE ALL KNOW. IT WILL PUSH IT DOWN PROBABLY BELOW 0.3 TO, UH, YOU KNOW, 0.2 OR SOMETHING. I HAVEN'T FIGURED IT OUT, BUT IT'S, IT'S, UH, UN IT WILL UNFAIRLY LIMIT THE HOME SIZES ON SMALLER LOTS. FOR EXAMPLE, THE, THE HOMES, UH, IN BRADLEY CIRCLE, WHICH ARE, ARE, UH, EVERYBODY'S SO, UH, IN AN UPROAR ABOUT, BUT THOSE ARE, UH, ARE MA AND 0.125 LOTS. AND, UH, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NEXT TO IT THEY'RE BUILDING, UH, ON THESE LONG NARROW LOTS, WHICH ARE ONLY 43 FOOT WIDE. THEY'RE BUILDING, UH, 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HEATED SQUARE FOOT HOMES. SO 5,500 SQUARE FOOT HOMES. AND THIS WOULD PUSH THE HOME RIGHT NEXT TO IT DOWN TO BELOW 2000. UM, SO, UH, AND, AND THOSE LOTS BY THE WAY ARE 58 FOOT WIDE FRONTAGE, NOT 43 58. SO, UM, IT WOULD, IT WOULD, UH, THE 1,750 SQUARE FEET OF LIVING AREA IF YOU INCLUDE THE GARAGE. SO I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT THE GARAGE SHOULDN'T BE INCLUDED BECAUSE, UH, ALL THE AREAS THAT USE FAR DON'T, DON'T INCLUDE THE GARAGE. AND WE SHOULD JUST HAVE A CONSISTENT DEFINITION AND JUST ADOPT THE ONE. I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WASN'T PART OF THIS FAR, UH, PROPOSAL, BUT IT WASN'T, UH, SO IT JUST NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED. UM, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY I I'M AGAINST FAR, BUT IF YOU'RE GONNA DO IT, YOU CERTAINLY SHOULD HAVE A CONSISTENT DEFINITION. UM, AND ONE THAT IS FAIR FOR THE SMALLER LOTS AND NOT PUSHING THEM INTO BEING VERY SMALL HOMES. WHEN YOU GOT REALLY LARGE HOMES RIGHT NEXT TO IT, THEY'RE ALL VACATION HOMES. UM, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE BEACH HOMES AND, UH, FAMILIES VACATION TOGETHER. THEY NEED MULTIPLE BEDS AND BATHS. THAT'S WHAT IT'S ABOUT. AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO REASON TO UNFAIRLY BURDEN FOLKS IN THIS WAY AND DEVALUE THEIR PROPERTY IN THE PROCESS. SO, UH, FURTHERMORE TO IMPOSE IT ONTO NATIVE ISLAND COMMUNITIES WITHOUT NOTIFICATION AND, UH, WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THIS FAR PROCESS, IS HY THINK A LITTLE UNFAIR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. LISA KOTTER, DAWN HOFFMAN. HI, MY NAME IS DON HUFF HAM. THIS IS MY THIRD TIME SPEAKING. I HATE SPEAKING IN FRONT OF ALL OF YOU. UM, I'VE OWNED A TREETOP CONDO SINCE 2012, AND I'VE OWNED MY LOT OFF OF BRADLEY BEACH CIRCLE SINCE 2014. WHEN I KNEW, WHEN I BOUGHT, I KNEW I WAS BUYING INTO A, ON AN ISLAND IN A RESORT COMMUNITY. [00:25:02] UM, I KNEW MY NEIGHBORS WOULD POTENTIALLY BE PART-TIMERS, UM, VACATION HOMES. I ALSO KNEW THERE WOULD BE TRANSIENT RENTERS POTENTIALLY. THIS DID NOT DETER ME FROM BUYING SINCE BUYING MY LOT. UM, IF IT'S GONE FROM BEING ZONED RD WHEN I BOUGHT IT TO RM EIGHT, AND BASICALLY I THINK THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION WAS THE BIGGEST CHANGE THAT DIDN'T IMPACT ME BECAUSE IT WASN'T MY DREAM. HOME WILL STILL FIT ON THAT LOT WITH THIS NEW RESTRICTIVE FAR. MAYBE NOT, IT WON'T . IF THIS FAR RESTRICTION WAS IN PLACE 10 YEARS AGO, I WOULD NOT BE IN FRONT OF YOU RIGHT NOW BECAUSE I WOULD NOT HAVE BOUGHT MY LOT BASED ON SIMPLE ECONOMICS OF THE LAWS, SUPPLY AND DEMAND, THIS RULE MAKES THE SUPPLY OF MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE IS CAPPED AT WHAT IT IS NOW AND THEREFORE WILL INCREASE THEIR PROPERTY VALUE WHILE DECREASING MY PROPERTY VALUE. AT THE SAME TIME, THIS IS NOT FAIR AND NOT WHAT I BOUGHT INTO. I DO NOT THINK ONE FAR IS FAIR FOR ALL NEIGHBORHOODS, AND I RECOMMEND THAT THE ENTIRE FAREYE BE THROWN OUT. UM, AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMITTEE, MS. BECKER AND MR. STANFORD TOLD ME THEY WERE GONNA CHANGE THE DEFINITION FAR TO ONLY INCLUDE HEATED SPACE. UM, OUR DREAM HOUSE, LET ME DESCRIBE IT TO YOU, WAS A GARAGE ON THE GROUND FLOOR IN THE FLOOD ZONE AND OPEN FIRST FLOOR WITH A KITCHEN, LIVING ROOM AND MASTER BEDROOM, AND THEN A SECOND FLOOR WITH THREE BEDROOMS. MY WIFE AND I HAVE FIVE CHILDREN, NO GRANDCHILDREN YET, BUT ONE DAY WE ENVISION OUR CHILDREN, MAYBE NOT AT THE SAME TIME, HOPEFULLY NOT AT THE SAME TIME, UM, BEING ABLE TO VISIT WITH THEIR FAMILIES AND NOT HAVING TO RENT A HOUSE OR STAY IN A HOTEL. BUT WITH US NOW, I WANNA PUT EACH OF YOU NOW, I WANT EACH OF YOU TO PUT YOURSELF IN MY SHOES. AND I'M POSITIVE THERE ARE MANY FAMILIES AND NEIGHBORS IN THE SAME SITUATION. YOU MAY ALREADY HAVE YOUR DREAM HOME, SO THIS SHOULDN'T BE SO HARD. IF THIS HAS BEEN YOUR RETIREMENT DREAM FOR THE PAST 10 YEARS AND YOU OWN MY LOT, WOULD YOU STILL BE VOTING FOR THIS FAR? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, SIR. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THAT'S ALL. OKAY. UM, RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU HAD INTENDED TO SPEAK, BUT DIDN'T SIGN UP. LET'S DO THIS, UH, IF WE CAN, UM, I'M GOING TO PROCEED WITH THE AGENDA AND THEN AT THE CONCLUSION, IF YOU FEEL AS THOUGH YOU STILL HAVE TO SPEAK, THEN I'LL LET YOU COME UP TO, TO ADDRESS THE DAIS AT THAT TIME. OKAY. UNFINISHED BUSINESS DISCUSSION [5. a. Discussion of Single Family Dwelling Parking Requirements and Single Family Dwelling Floor Area Ratio Requirements - Missy Luick, Director of Planning] OF SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING FLOOR AREA RATIOS. MS. E LUECK, DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS A PUBLIC PLANNING COMMITTEE? YES, I'M, I'M GOING TO INVITE THE MAYOR TO COME UP AND YOU WOULD, UH, REQUEST, UH, AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE. GOOD MORNING. YOU KNOW THAT I NORMALLY DON'T LIKE TO READ OFF OF PREPARED STATEMENTS, BUT THIS IS SO IMPORTANT. LAST WEEK WE ADDRESSED FAR IN PARKING ORDINANCE, WHICH WAS VOTED TO ADVANCE RIGHT BEFORE AND AFTER THE MEETING. SEVERAL QUESTIONS, ISSUES CAME TO LIGHT AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THEM. STAFF WAS ASKED TO ACCELERATE THESE ITEMS RATHER THAN BRINGING THESE FORWARD IN A COMPREHENSIVE MANNER WITHIN THE OVERALL CODE REWRITE, THIS WOULD'VE PROVIDED MORE TIME TO ADDRESS THE SCOPE AND OVERALL EFFECT OF THE POLICY. THE EXERCISE STAFF AND COUNCIL WENT THROUGH, IN MY OPINION, SHOULD HAVE ADDRESSED A LARGER SCOPE OF OUTCOMES IN VARIOUS AREAS, GOING BACK AND ADDRESSING THE POLICY AFTER IMPLEMENTATION. WHILE AN OPTION DOES NOT PROVIDE THE COMMUNITY WITH CLEAR DIRECTION, WE WERE MA MADE AWARE THERE ARE, THERE ARE THREE OVERLAY DISTRICTS WITH VARYING DEGREES OF COVERAGE. THE QUESTION WAS ALSO RAISED AS TO THE CORRECT DEFINITION THAT THE TOWN SHOULD USE FOR FAR. HOW CAN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH GOOD POLICY IF WE DO NOT HAVE A CLEAR AND DEFINED PURPOSE? IN ADDITION, THE PROPOSED FAR PERCENTAGE COULD PREVENT SOME FROM BUILDING HOME IN CERTAIN AREAS. SOME COMMUNITIES HAVE A MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 2,500 SQUARE FEET, AND THE PROPOSED FAR WOULD'VE BEEN LESS THAN REQUIRED. THE PROPOSED FAR WOULD CREATE A BLANKET POLICY, WHICH WOULD CAUSE A FEEL OF CONFORMITY THAT UNIQUENESS AND INDIVIDUAL COMMUNITIES COULD BE LOST IN AREAS THAT ARE CLOSE TO BUILD OUT. THE EFFECT ON VALUES WOULD GREATLY HURT LOT OWNERS WHILE POSSIBLY IMPROVE EXISTING HOMES. ADDITIONAL ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS NEED TO BE ASKED [00:30:01] FOR BOTH FAR AND PARKING. WHAT ARE SPECIFIC ISSUES AS TO WHERE THEY ARE LOCATED? ARE WE LOOKING TO ADDRESS SHORT-TERM RENTALS? BY IMPLEMENTING NEW POLICY, A HOLISTIC LOOK MAY PROVIDE DEEPER ANSWERS AND BETTER POLICY THAT IT DOES NOT NEGATIVELY AFFECT PROPERTY OWNERS. WE MUST BE AWARE OF THE CHANGES THAT TOOK PLACE IN 2014 AND WHAT THE UNINTENDED OUTCOMES ARE TODAY, JUST AS 2014, WE MUST LOOK AT OUR CURRENT DIRECTION AND EXPLORE ALL UNINTENDED OUTCOMES. WITH ANY NEW POLICY ORDINANCE PUT INTO PLACE, WE MIGHT BE AT THE RIGHT TIME TO BRING A RENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE FOREFRONT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THESE ISSUES WITH SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND PARKING. IN CLOSING, I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT EXCELLENCE IS ONE OF THE OUTCOMES FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AT THIS POINT, I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS POLICY ORDINANCE IS IN THE VIEW OF EXCELLENCE. GOOD POLICY COMES FROM GOOD WORK, DEEP QUESTIONS WITH CLEAR ANSWERS. I SUGGEST THIS GO BACK TO TOWN STAFF TO ALLOW THEM THE AMPLE TIME NEEDED TO PROPERLY ADDRESS ALL ISSUES AND CONCERNS WITH COMPLETE INFORMATION. I HOPE TODAY'S COMMUNITY INPUT HELPS US MOVE FORWARD TO A POLICY ORDINANCE THAT DIRECTLY AFFECTS POSITIVELY OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO FOLLOW THE MAYOR'S COMMENTS WITH SOME OF MY OWN. IN MY OPINION, THERE ARE TWO SIGNIFICANT DISRUPTING TRENDS THAT CREATED THE PRESSURE TO AMEND THE SINGLE FAMILY PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND INTRODUCE NEW FLOOR AREA RATIO. THE FIRST WAS THE NUMBERS AND SIZE OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL HOUSES AND THEIR SPILLOVER PARKING THAT HAVE TRANSFORMED THE PHYSICAL APPEARANCE AND ATMOSPHERE OF NEIGHBORHOODS, PRIMARILY IN THE NORTH AND SOUTH FOREST BEACH, BIR, BURT'S BEACH, BRADLEY CIRCLE, AND PORTIONS OF FOLLY FIELD. THE SECOND WAS THE INTRODUCTION OF SMALL LOT TRACK HOUSING WITHOUT REGARD TO TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD VALUES. IN RESPONSE TO THESE TRENDS, COUNCIL DIRECTED PPC TO PROPOSE AN AMENDED ISLAND WIDE PARKING STANDARD AND FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS. THESE AMENDMENTS WERE PRIORITIZED WITHIN THE ESTABLISHED LMO SCHEDULE WITH AN EXPECTATION OF ADOPTION IN SEPTEMBER. HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF THE COMPLEXITY AND THE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, WE ARE WHERE WE ARE TODAY. MISSY, PLEASE COME FORWARD. GOOD MORNING. UM, I I SHOULD, I SHOULD ALSO SAY THAT, UM, THE PURPOSE OF TODAY'S MEETING AS IT WAS PROPOSED, WAS TO GUIDE STAFF ON THE DEFINITION OF FLOOR AREA RATIO AND MATTERS RELATED TO THE FAR AND PARKING AMENDMENTS. THANK YOU, MISSY. CORRECT. UM, MS. E LU, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING. UH, GOOD MORNING. UH, I'M GONNA GO OVER JUST THE DISCUSSION ITEMS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP AT THE OCTOBER 3RD TOWN COUNCIL MEETING. UM, AGAIN, UH, THE ORDINANCE THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING AS FLOOR AREA RATIO AND PARKING AND, UM, THE CURRENT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, UH, SET, UH, IMPOSES A FLOOR AREA RATIO OF 0.45 TO SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS, UM, INCLUDING THE FOREST BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER OVERLAY. UM, AND EXCLUDES THE FAMILY COMPOUNDS IN FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS. AND, UM, THE CURRENT AMENDMENT, UH, FOR PARKING INCLUDES, UM, A PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR SINGLE FAMILY OF TWO SPACES PER DWELLING UNIT, PLUS AN ADDITIONAL SPACE PER 750 SQUARE FEET OR PORTION THEREOF OVER 2000 SQUARE FEET. SO THE ITEMS THAT WERE, UM, ASKED TO BE DISCUSSED FURTHER, UM, AT TODAY'S MEETING INCLUDE, UM, MORE REVIEW OF POSSIBLE FLOOR AREA RATIO DEFINITIONS, INCLUDING REVIEW OF THE EXISTING FLOOR AREA RATIO DEFINITIONS IN OUR THREE CHARACTER OVERLAY DISTRICTS, AS WELL AS FROM OTHER COMMUNITIES. WE ALSO, UM, WERE TO DISCUSS CLARIFICATION OF DRIVEWAY AND PARKING SURFACE TYPE REQUIREMENTS, AS WELL AS FURTHER ANALYSIS, UH, ON IMPACTS TO FAMILY COMPOUNDS AND FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS. SO THE PURPOSE OF OF THESE AMENDMENTS WAS TO REGULATE, UM, SINGLE FAMILY FLOOR AREA RATIO REQUIREMENTS TO REGULATE THE VOLUME AND PLACEMENT OF HOMES BASED ON THE STRUCTURE SIZE IN RELATION RELATIONSHIP [00:35:01] TO THE LOT SIZE. AND THE PURPOSE OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS WAS TO BETTER ALIGN THE PARKING FOR SINGLE FAMILY USE TYPE TO THE SIZE OF THE DWELLING UNIT STRUCTURE. SO WHAT IS FLOOR AREA RATIO? AGAIN? THE PURPOSE WAS TO REGULATE THAT VOLUME AND BULK AND PLACEMENT BASED ON THE LOT SIZE. UM, IT'S A SIZE, DENSITY AND SCALE FACTOR THAT ESTABLISHES THE INTENSITY TO WHICH THE LOT OR PLOT OF LAND CAN BE DEVELOPED. SO TYPICALLY FLOOR AREA RATIOS ARE PRESCRIBED AS A DECIMAL NUMBER. SO AGAIN, THE PROPOSED DEFINITION THAT'S IN, IN THE CURRENT AMENDMENT SET IS UP ON THE SCREEN. IT IS RELATED TO OUR EXISTING DEFINITION OF GROSS FLOOR AREA. SO THE PROPOSED DEFINITION, UM, IS A MEASUREMENT OF THE BUILDING'S GROSS FLOOR AREA IN RELATION TO THE SIZE OF THE LAW ON WHICH THE BUILDING IS LOCATED ON. AND THE FAR IS EXPRESSED AS A DECIMAL NUMBER AND IS DERIVED BY DIVIDING THE TOTAL GROSS FLOOR AREA OF THE BUILDING BY THE NET ACREAGE ON THE LOT. SO OF COURSE, OUR DEFINITION OF GROSS FLOOR AREA INCLUDES ALL STRUCTURES, UM, AND AREAS, UH, THERE ARE AREAS THAT CAN BE EXCLUDED IF THEY ARE OPEN AND UNOBSTRUCTED, UN UNOBSTRUCTED TO THE SKY. EXCUSE ME. SO, UM, THE DEFINITION OF GROSS FLOOR AREA INCLUDES BOTH THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE HEATED AND UNHEATED ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THAT DEFINITION. WE DO HAVE, AGAIN, UM, THREE EXISTING FLOOR AREA RATIOS WITHIN OUR CODE. CURRENTLY THEY EXIST WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER OVERLAY DISTRICTS. UM, EACH OF THEM HAVE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS. UM, AND I WILL GO THROUGH THOSE. UM, OF COURSE FOUR, A FOUR SPEECH HAS A FLOOR AREA RATIO CURRENTLY OF 0.55 AND A MAXIMUM HOME SIZE OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET. THE GFA THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE FLOOR AREA RATIO HAS SOME EXCLUSIONS. UM, IT INCLUDES, UM, COVERED PORCHES IN ALL ENCLOSED SPACE WITH A CEILING HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET OR GREATER, EXCEPT AS FOLLOWS, THE AREAS BENEATH THE STRUCTURE USED SOLELY FOR PARKING AND STORAGE AND THOSE AREAS HAVE TO BE VENTED. IT ALSO EXCLUDES THE FIRST 600 SQUARE FEET OF COVERED PORCHES AND ATTIC SPACE AS DEFINED BY THE LATEST ADOPTED VERSION OF THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE. FOLLY FIELD HAS A SIMILAR DEFINITION, HOWEVER, IT HAS A 0.45, UH, FLOOR AREA RATIO AND A MAXIMUM HOME SIZE OF 4,500 SQUARE FEET. AND IT INCLUDES COVERED PORCHES AND ENCLOSED SPACE, UM, WITH A CEILING HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET OR GREATER WITH SIMILAR EXCEPTIONS, EXCEPT THAT THE STRUCTURE AREA DOES NOT REQUIRE IT TO BE HYDROSTATIC VENTED. UM, THE EXISTING DEFINITION WE HAVE FOR THE HOLIDAY HOMES NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER OVERLAY DISTRICT IS ALSO SIMILAR, BUT IT HAS SOME EXCEPTIONS THAT ARE DIFFERENT. SO IT HAS A 0.45 FLOOR AREA RATIO AND A MAXIMUM HOME SIZE OF 4,000 SQUARE FEET. AND THE GROSS FLOOR AREA IS CALCULATED WITH ALL ENCLOSED SPACE WITH A CEILING HEIGHT OF SEVEN FEET OR GREATER. AND IT EXCLUDES IT, IT EXCLUDES THE AREAS, UH, BELOW REQUIRED BASE FLOOD ELEVATION THAT ARE USED SOLELY FOR PARKING AND STORAGE. IT DOES NOT EXCLUDE, UH, PORCHES LIKE THE OTHER TWO OVERLAYS. IT DOES EXCLUDE THE ATTIC SPACE. UH, THAT'S SIMILAR TO THE OTHER DEFINITIONS UP ON THE SCREEN ALSO IS THE, THE CURRENT, UM, DEFINITION WITHIN THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE AS IT RELATES TO GROSS FLOOR AREA AND JUST HAVE THAT UP THERE FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES. UM, AS WE ARE CURRENTLY NOT DISCUSSING, UM, AMENDING OUR GROSS FLOOR AREA DEFINITION, UM, THE BUILDING CODE'S DEFINITION FOR GROSS FLOOR AREA IS VERY SIMILAR TO HOW IT IS DESCRIBED WITHIN THE LMO. SO WE ALSO, UM, PROVIDED SOME RESEARCH ON OTHER FLOOR AREA RATIOS, UM, BOTH IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND ELSEWHERE. UM, AND WE STARTED WITH BUFORT COUNTY AND WORKED OUR WAY OUT. UM, THE DEFINITION FOR, UH, FLOOR AREA RATIO WITHIN BUFORT COUNTY IS A MEASURE OF THE ALLOWABLE SIZE OF LIVING AREA ON A LOT COMPARED TO THE SIZE OF THE LOT. AND IT IS CALCULATED BY DIVIDING THE GROSS FLOOR AREA BY THE BASE SITE AREA. AND THEN THEIR DEFINITION OF GROSS FLOOR AREA IS ON THE SCREEN AS WELL. UM, SO THERE ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS FOR PORCHES AND, UH, OTHER STORAGE AREAS WITHIN THIS DEFINITION. UM, THE DEFINITION OF FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR AISLE OF PALMS, SOUTH CAROLINA IS, IS ON THE SCREEN HERE AS WELL. THAT DEFINITION IS A FLOOR AREA RATIO MEANS A PERCENTAGE CALCULATED BY DIVIDING THE TOTAL LIVABLE FLOOR AREA OF A STRUCTURE ON A LOT BY THE TOTAL AREA OF CONTIGUOUS HIGHLAND OF SUCH LOT. UM, WE DID NOT FIND THAT THEY DEFINE [00:40:01] LIVABLE FLOOR AREA IN THEIR CODE. UM, AND SO WE CAN ONLY CONCLUDE THAT THAT WOULD EXCLUDE NON LIVABLE AREAS THAT MAY BE PORCHES AND, AND STORAGE AND GARAGES. UM, THE DEFINITION, UH, FOR FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR KIAA ISLAND IS ON THE SCREEN NOW. THEY HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF MIXED USE, UH, WITHIN THEIR COMMUNITIES, SO THEIR DEFINITION IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. UM, IT MEANS, UH, FLOOR AREA MEANS THE SUM OF THE GROSS HORIZONTAL AREAS OF SEVERAL FLOORS OF THE BUILDING MEASURED FROM THE EXTERIOR FACES OF EXTERIOR WALLS FROM THE CENTER LINES OF WALLS SEPARATING TWO BUILDINGS COMPUTED AS FOLLOWS. AND IT INCLUDES, UM, FLOOR SPACE DEVOTED TO THE PRINCIPAL USE, INCLUDING ACCESSORY AND STORAGE AREAS WITHIN SELLING OR WORKING SPACE. AND THEN, UM, ALSO INCLUDES ANY BASEMENT FLOOR AREA DEVOTED TO THE PRODUCTION OF PROCESSING OF GOODS OR TO BUSINESS OR PROFESSIONAL OFFICES. SO WORK AREAS ARE INCLUDED, BUT THE TERM FLOOR AREA DOES NOT INCLUDE SPACE DEVOTED PRIMARILY TO STORAGE, UH, OFF STREET PARKING OR LOADING RAMPS, MANEUVERING SPACE, BASEMENT FLOOR AREA, OTHER THAN AREA DEVOTED TO RETAILING ACTIVITIES, THE PRODUCTION OF PROCESSING OF GOODS OR BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES. WE ALSO HAVE THE DEFINITION FROM SURFSIDE BEACH, SOUTH CAROLINA. UM, AND, AND THIS DEFINITION, UM, DOES HAVE SOME EXCLUSIONS. UM, IT DOES NOT INCLUDE PORCHES, UNHEATED GARAGES OR SPACE IN THE BASEMENT OR CELLAR WHEN THE BASEMENT OR CELLAR IS USED FOR STORAGE FOR INCIDENTAL USES. AND SO FLOOR AREA RATIO MEANS THE TOTAL HEATED LIVING SPACE, HEATED FLOOR AREA OF BUILDINGS ON A LOT, DIVIDED BY THE TOTAL AREA OF CONTIGUOUS LAND OF SUCH LOT TAMPA, FLORIDA'S DEFINITION. UM, ALSO EXCLUDES, UM, AREAS THAT ARE OPEN TERRACES, PATIOS, ATRIUMS, BALCONIES, BREEZEWAYS AND PARKING. UM, SO, SO THIS DEFINITION DOES INCLUDE SOME EXCLUSIONS WITHIN HOW THEY DEFINE FLOOR AREA RATIO. UM, MARTHA'S VINEYARD, UM, IN OAK BLUFF, MASSACHUSETTS ALSO DEFINES FLOOR AREA RATIO AS THE TOTAL SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR SPACE WITHIN THE OUTSIDE DIMENSIONS OF A BUILDING, INCLUDING EACH FLOOR LEVEL WITHOUT DEDUCTION OF HALLWAY, STAIRS, CLOSETS, THICKNESS OF WALLS, COLUMNS, OR OTHER FEATURES, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THE CURRENT PROPOSED DEFINITION WITHIN OUR CODE. AND THEN WE ALSO, UM, USED ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO FIND, UH, A CHAT GT GPT UH, DEFINITION. UM, THIS DEFINITION DOES NOT INCLUDE EXCLUSIONS FOR STORAGE OR GARAGES OR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, UM, BUT INCLUDED THAT FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES. CERTAINLY THERE ARE A LOT MORE FLOOR AREA RATIO DEFINITIONS FROM OTHER COMMUNITIES AND OTHER CODES THAT WE COULD EXPLORE, UM, IF REQUESTED. I THINK YOU CAN FIND FROM THESE DEFINITIONS THAT SOME CODES DO HAVE EXCLUSIONS TO WHAT IS COUNTED WITHIN THE FLOOR AREA RATIO CALCULATION AND OTHERS RELY ON THEIR DEFINITION OF GROSS FLOOR AREA. I'LL GO ON AND, UH, PROVIDE THE ANALYSIS THAT WE WERE ABLE MR. CHAIR BEFORE SHE GOES TO THE NEXT ANALYSIS. JUST LOOKING AT THE DEFINITIONS, UM, WE HAVE, AS YOU POINTED OUT, EXISTING, UH, DEFINITIONS IN THREE OVERLAY DISTRICTS. UM, DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT WE'VE EVER HAD ANY ISSUE, UH, WITH FOR INSTANCE, THE, UM, EXISTING DEFINITION IN FOR A SPEECH OVERLAY? AND HAVE THERE EVER BEEN ANY CHALLENGES TO AN OFFICIAL INTERPRETATION OF THAT DEFINITION? I'M, I'M NOT AWARE OF A CHALLENGE. NO, NEITHER AM I . I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF THERE WAS SOMETHING BEYOND MY KNOWLEDGE. OKAY. UM, DO WE KNOW IF THERE'S EVER BEEN ANY ISSUES WITH THE DEFINITIONS FROM THE OTHER TWO OVERLAY DISTRICT'S EXISTING FAR DEFINITIONS, GROSS FLOOR AREA DEFINITIONS? I, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY. NO. THANK YOU. UM, OKAY. THANK YOU MISSY. UM, DO YOU WANT US TO COMMENT ON SE SEGMENTS OF YOUR, UH, PRESENTATION AS WE GO? OR DO YOU WANNA WAIT TILL THE END, HOWEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED? WELL, IT'S, OUR PURPOSE TODAY IS NOT TO TAKE A VOTE, UH, ON A ALTERNATE GROSS FLOOR AREA RATIO. UM, BUT WE ARE, TO GIVE YOU OUR REACTIONS TO IT, MY REACTION IS THAT YOU'VE OVERCOMPLICATED MY BRAIN WITH SO MANY DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVES, , UM, I, I DO THINK THOSE STAFF SHOULD, UH, STUDY AND PROPOSE WHAT YOU THINK BEST FITS THE ISLAND CIRCUMSTANCES COME BACK EITHER TO [00:45:01] THE PUBLIC PLANNING COMMITTEE OR AS THE, THE MAYOR DECIDES WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION, UH, AS SOON AS THAT'S FEASIBLE. ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS ON THE PART OF GLENN? YES. THANK YOU. UM, OUTSTANDING PRESENTATION AGAIN, MISS E THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOUR HARD WORK, YOU AND YOUR TEAM. IT'S CLEAR TO ME THAT WE ARE, WE HAVEN'T, UH, UH, MIXED DEFINITION. WE HAVE MIXED IMPACTS. WE'RE TRYING TO DO A GROSS APPLICATION TO THESE MIXED IMPACTS. I BELIEVE THAT THIS DESERVES MORE RESEARCH AS HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED BY THE MAYOR. UM, AND, UH, I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE REFER THIS BACK TO STAFF FOR FURTHER STUDY. UM, I DON'T KNOW IF A MOTION IN THAT REGARD IS, IS APPROPRIATE. MR. CHAIRMAN, LET'S GET OTHER COMMENTS. MS. BECKER? THANK YOU. UM, CHAIR JAMES. MS. C OF THE DEFINING FAR PRESENTATION THAT YOU JUST MADE. HOW MUCH IS DIFFERENT IN THIS PRESENTATION THAN WAS IN THE PRESENTATIONS THAT YOU'VE MADE PREVIOUSLY? UM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARINGS WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE PPC AND THE PPC AND THE TOWN COUNCIL, AND NOW PPC, UH, THIS PRESENTATION DECK DOES NOT COVER PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED MATERIALS AND STATISTICS. IT IS JUST ADDRESSING THOSE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS. SO WE DID NOT INCLUDE ALL OF THESE DEFINITIONS FROM OTHER COMMUNITIES WITHIN THOSE PAST PRESENTATIONS. WHAT I TAKE AWAY FROM THESE DEFINITIONS IS THEY'RE QUITE VARIED THAT EACH COMMUNITY IS, UM, MAKING THE DECISIONS THAT BEST FIT WHAT THEIR RESIDENTS HAVE ASKED FOR. AND, UM, TO THAT POINT, WHAT I'D LIKE TO FOCUS ON ARE THE RESIDENTS. WE'VE HEARD A LOT FROM REALTORS. WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE RENTAL COMMUNITY. IN FACT, WE HAVE MANY OF THOSE REPRESENTATIVES HERE IN THE ROOM. OH, THE, OF THE RESIDENTS THAT WE'VE HEARD FROM. UM, IT APPEARS TO BE FOUR, BUT IN REALITY IT'S TWO BECAUSE THEY'RE BOTH COUPLES, UM, AND THEN, UM, DEVELOPERS IN AND OF THEMSELVES. SO WHAT'S MISSING FROM THIS DIALOGUE, WHICH HAD BEEN PRESENT FROM THE BEGINNING OF WHEN WE STARTED TO TALK ABOUT FLOOR AREA RATIO, WAS THE IMPACT OF THE OVERDEVELOPMENT ON THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS ACROSS THE ISLAND. AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE WHERE WE ARE TODAY. NOT BECAUSE SOMEONE WANTED TO TAKE AWAY OPPORTUNITIES TO RENT THEIR HOME, OTHERS TO RENT THEIR HOMES. IN FACT, NOT AT ALL. HOWEVER, I WAS TOLD RECENTLY THAT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS OUTSIDE THE GATES OR ACTUALLY COMMERCIAL ZONES, AND PROVE TO THEM THAT THEIR RESIDENTIAL, THEIR INTEREST ISN'T FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO LIVE ON THIS ISLAND. THEIR INTEREST IS FOR THEMSELVES. AND SO THAT STATEMENT HAS TO BE MADE, ESPECIALLY WHEN MY NAME KEEPS GETTING THROWN ABOUT WHEN IT'S ALL SAID AND DONE. EACH DAY THAT I'VE BEEN A COUNCIL MEMBER, MY WORDS AND MY ACTIONS HAVE BEEN TO REPRESENT THE CUMULATIVE BODY OF RESIDENTS FROM THE SOUTH END TO THE NORTH END. AND THAT'S A FACT. IN FACT, ALSO, FULL DISCLOSURE, I OWN TWO VACANT LOTS OUTSIDE THE GATES THAT WILL BE SUBJECT TO THIS. AND SO MY THREE BUILDABLE LOTS WHILE I HAVE A HOME ON ONE, WOULD BE ALSO SUBJECT TO ANY DECISION THAT'S MADE HERE. SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT MY THREE LOTS BECOME TWO IF I WANT A BIGGER HOME. BUT THE, THE, UH, THE BASIC FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH IS IF YOUR LOT IS X SIZE AND YOU WANT A COMPARABLE HOME TO SOMEBODY ELSE'S LOT THAT'S Y SIZE, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY FIT RIGHT? YOU HAVE TO OWN A PROPERTY WHERE THE APPROPRIATE SIZE HOME FITS ON IT AND NOT JUST WHAT THE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE. SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I WAS CLEAR ON WHO I REPRESENT AND WHY I REPRESENT THEM. AND THE REALTORS AND THE LOBBYISTS AND THE DEVELOPERS IN THE ROOM, UM, ARE NOT MY PRIORITY. THANK YOU. UM, I'M LIMITING MY COMMENTS TO THE DEFINITION OF, UM, BOTH FLOOR AREA BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US AT THIS POINT. UM, SO THE REASON I ASKED THAT QUESTION ABOUT HAVE WE HAD ANY ISSUES WITH THE, UH, DEFINITION USED IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS IS BECAUSE IF THAT HAS WORKED AND THERE HAVE BEEN NO ISSUES, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO, AND I SAY THIS, IF WE'RE GOING TO APPLY [00:50:01] FAR IN OTHER AREAS WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY, WHY NOT USE SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN WORKING? UM, AND THEN IF WE LATER DISCOVER, UM, THAT BECAUSE OF APPLICATION, UM, IN OTHER AREAS, PERHAPS WE NEED SOME TWEAKING, THAT'S THE TIME TO DO IT. BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO APPLY A FOUR HOUR RATIO TO OTHER AREAS NOW, THEN I DON'T SEE ANY NEED FOR MORE RESEARCH BEYOND WHAT HAS BEEN WORKING. AND SO I MUST RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE WITH THE MAYOR ON THAT ISSUE. AND I'M NOT READY FOR A MOTION AT THIS POINT. WELL, I'M, I'M NOT, I'M NOT GONNA REQUIRE A MOTION, BUT I THINK IT'S THE INTENT OF TODAY'S MEETING TO GIVE GUIDANCE TO STAFF ON WHAT HAS BEEN SAID BY FOUR MEMBERS OF PUBLIC PLANNING COMMITTEE. SO WITHOUT OBJECTION, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU PURSUE, UM, STUDY AND PROPOSE WHAT STAFF BELIEVES FITS BEST FOR THE ISLAND CHARACTER AND VALUES. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD WITH YOUR PRESENTATION. OKAY. WELL, THANK YOU. UH, SO WE WERE ALSO ASKED TO LOOK AT SOME IMPACTS TO FAMILY COMPOUND AND FAMILY SUBDIVISION DEVELOPMENT TYPES. UM, AGAIN, I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT AS PROPOSED IN THE CURRENT AMENDMENT, FAMILY COMPOUND AND FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS, UM, WERE EXEMPTED. UM, SO THIS SLIDE SHOWS, UM, SOME ANALYSIS OF, UM, SOME VARIOUS, UH, DENSITIES, UM, FROM FOUR DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE TO 12, AND THEN THE RESULTING GROSS FLOOR AREA THAT COULD BE, UM, ACCOMMODATED ON THOSE, UM, UH, PARTICULAR PARCELS, WHETHER IT WAS A FAMILY COMPOUND OR FAMILY SUBDIVISION. UM, SO FAMILY COMPOUNDS AND FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN ALL OF THE DISTRICTS WHERE SINGLE FAMILY IS ALLOWED. SO THEY'RE EXCLUDED AS A USE IN THE RSF THREE FIVE AND SIX DISTRICTS. BUT THEY ARE ALLOWED IN THE DISTRICTS ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, RM FOUR R EIGHT 12 LIGHT COMMERCIAL MAIN STREET, MARSH FRONT MITCHELLVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL RESORT DEVELOPMENT, STONY AND WMU WATERFRONT MIXED USE. UM, AS FAR AS THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS CURRENTLY, FAMILY COMPOUND AND FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS HAVE SEPARATE PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THEY END SINGLE FAMILY USE TYPE, AND THEY REQUIRE TWO SPACES PER DWELLING UNIT. UM, AND SO THEY WOULD NOT BE IMPACTED, UM, BY THE PROPOSED, UH, PARKING AMENDMENTS. WE DO HAVE, UM, FAMILY COMPOUNDS AND FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED SINCE THESE, UH, CODE AMENDMENTS WERE PUT IN PLACE. WE'VE HAD FOUR FAMILY COMPOUND APPROVALS AND THERE ARE TWO CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS. WE'VE HAD TWO FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS APPROVED AND THREE IN PROGRESS. AND WE DID, UH, LOOK AT ALL OF THOSE APPROVED FAMILY COMPOUNDS AND SUBDIVISIONS AND ALL OF THEM ARE UNDER A 0.45 FLOOR AREA RATIO. AND THEN I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER, UM, SMALL DEVELOPMENT, UM, UH, ADPR DEVELOPMENTS ACROSS THE ISLAND THAT ARE DIFFERENT. IT'S A DIFFERENT APPLICATION TYPE THAN A FAMILY COMPOUND AND FAMILY SUBDIVISION. IF THERE'S MORE THAN ONE HOME ON A SMALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, UH, PROPERTY OR AN ADPR IS WHAT WE CALL THEM IN THE COMPUTER SYSTEM, THEY ARE CONSIDERED MULTIFAMILY. AND SO THIS AMENDMENT SET WOULD NOT APPLY BOTH FOR THE PARKING OR, UM, FLOOR AREA RATIO. UM, SO, BUT AGAIN, I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT, UH, AS DRAFTED CURRENTLY AGAIN, UM, FAMILY COMPOUND AND SUBDIVISION WERE EXEMPTED. BEFORE YOU GO ON, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING FAMILY COMPOUNDS, FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS BY PUBLIC PLANNING COMMITTEE? YEAH, MY ONLY QUESTION IS THE REASON YOU'RE, UH, TALKING TO US ABOUT THIS IS BECAUSE THAT WAS A, AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROPOSAL. UH, YES, IT WAS AN AMENDMENT. AND ALSO, UH, THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION OR ANALYSIS ON POTENTIAL IMPACTS. OKAY, THANK YOU. BUT AGAIN, I THINK, UNLESS IS THERE, UNLESS THERE'S COMMENT, I THINK PUBLIC PLANNING COMMITTEE SAYS THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS FURTHER STUDY AND THERE ARE PEOPLE, UH, IN THE COMMUNITY THAT HAVE, UH, INTEREST IN THAT CONVERSATION. I'VE HEARD TWO PEOPLE FROM PUBLIC PLANNING COMMISSION SAY THAT. UM, AND I'M NOT SURE IF, IF HOW THE OTHERS FEEL, AND I'M RESERVING JUDGMENT. UM, AND, AND, AND IT'S HARD TO TALK ABOUT, UM, WHAT HAPPENED AT THE TOWN COUNCIL MEETING WITH REGARD TO FAMILY COMPOUND AND FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS BECAUSE WE APPROVED GIVING THEM A WAIVER, GIVING THOSE PROPERTIES A WAIVER, RIGHT? NONE OF THIS NECESSARILY APPLIES. THAT'S WHAT WE APPROVED WITH OUR VOTE AFTER MANY PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THIS TOPIC. AND SO, UM, I I JUST WANNA POINT THAT, THAT WE HAVE PROTECTED THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS WITH, UH, WITH OUR VOTE AT FIRST READING. THANK YOU. GO ON MISSY. SO, UM, THE REMAINDER, UH, LAST THREE SLIDES [00:55:01] ARE OVER PARKING. UM, AND JUST WANTED TO KIND OF REMIND YOU WHAT OUR CURRENT PARKING REGULATIONS ARE AND WHAT WAS PROPOSED WITH THE AMENDMENT. UM, THE TABLE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN, THE TWO RED ARROWS POINT TO THE CURRENT PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY. THE TOP, UM, ROW IS THE CURRENT SINGLE FAMILY PARKING REQUIREMENT, AND THEN THE SECOND TO LAST ROW IS THE PARKING REQUIREMENT THAT EXISTS IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS. THEY'RE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. UM, SO CURRENTLY THE SINGLE FAMILY PARKING REQUIREMENT IS TWO PER DWELLING UNIT, PLUS ONE PER 1,250 GROSS FLOOR AREA, OVER 4,000 GROSS FLOOR AREA. UM, IN THE OVERLAYS, IT'S TWO PER DWELLING UNIT, PLUS ONE PER A THOUSAND, UH, GROSS FLOOR AREA OVER 2000, UH, FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA OF THE HOME. AGAIN, WHAT'S PROPOSED IS THAT BOTH THE SINGLE FAMILY PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND THE OVERLAYS HAVE THE SAME PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY USE. AND WHAT'S PROPOSED IS TWO PER DWELLING UNIT, PLUS ONE PER SEVEN 50 GROSS FLOOR AREA OVER 2000 SQUARE FEET OF GROSS FLOOR AREA. SO YOU CAN SEE ON THE CHART THAT THERE ARE, UH, VARIOUS, UM, IF YOU PICKED THE, THE 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME AS THAT IS, UM, BETWEEN 4,505,000 SQUARE FEET ARE THE AVERAGE WITHIN THE LAST FIVE YEARS OF BUILDING DATA OF HOME SIZES THAT ARE BEING BUILT ON THE ISLAND. SO, UM, WHAT'S CURRENTLY REQUIRED FOR A SINGLE FAMILY WOULD BE THREE SPACES AS PROPOSED THERE WOULD BE SIX FOR A 4,500 SQUARE FOOT HOME. CURRENTLY WITHIN THE OVERLAYS, IT WOULD REQUIRE FIVE TODAY AND AS PROPOSED, ONE MORE SPACE AT SIX. SO DEPENDING ON YOUR HOME SIZE, UM, THE CHA THE, THE CHANGE IS POSSIBLY, UM, EITHER THE SAME PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS FOR 2,500 TO 3,500 SQUARE FEET OR ONE MORE, OR POSSIBLY TWO MORE FOR A HOME AT 6,000 SQUARE FEET. AND THEN THE CHANGES, UM, BETWEEN WHAT'S PROPOSED CURRENTLY, UM, BASED ON HOME SIZE, YOU CAN LOOK AT THE TOP LINE HERE AND THE BOTTOM LINE TO SEE THAT DIFFERENCE, BUT IT CAN DOUBLE IN SOME CASES. UM, THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THAT ARE REQUIRED. UM, SO THE WAY WE CALCULATE PARKING, UM, IS NOT PROPOSED TO CHANGE. SO IT'S A DIMENSIONAL STANDARD THAT'S A NINE BY 18 AREA. THAT AREA CAN BE IN A GARAGE, UM, IT CAN BE ON A SURFACE AREA. UM, AND, UH, SO THERE COULD BE SOME POTENTIAL IMPACTS IF THAT SURFACE AREA IS MORE HARD SURFACE ON A LOT TO ACCOMMODATE THE ADDITIONAL PARKING THAT'S REQUIRED. WE WERE ASKED A QUESTION ON, UM, WHAT ARE OUR EXISTING REQUIREMENTS FOR DRIVEWAY SURFACING? AND THIS IS RIGHT FROM THE CODE DRIVEWAY SHALL BE SURFACED WITH ASPHALT CONCRETE POROUS PAVING BLOCKS, COMPACTED SHELL GRAVEL OR OTHER MATERIAL. THE OFFICIAL DETERMINES IS UNLIKELY TO CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL MAINTENANCE PROBLEMS, SO IT COULD BE PERVIOUS OR IMPERVIOUS, UM, AND, UH, MEETING THAT PARTICULAR, UH, STANDARD IN THE CODE. UM, IN ADDITION, WE INCLUDED THE PARKING, UM, GUIDANCE FROM OUR DESIGN GUIDE. NOW THE DESIGN GUIDE TYPICALLY COVERS COMMERCIAL PARKING LOTS, AND YOU CAN READ, UM, THIS PARTICULAR GUIDANCE HERE AND IT DOES RELATE TO, UH, A COMMERCIAL PARKING, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS, UM, AN INTERESTING PARKING, UH, RELATIONSHIP TO INCLUDE. UM, SO WITHIN THE GUIDE, GUIDE DESIGN GUIDE, IT SAYS THAT PARKING LAYOUT REQUIREMENTS ARE LOCATED IN OUR CODE. AND PROJECTS, WHICH REQUIRE A LARGE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES SHOULD BREAK THE LOT INTO SEVERAL SMALLER AREAS SEPARATED BY LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE, OTHER SITE FEATURES OR STRUCTURES, AND WHERE APPROPRIATE LARGE AREAS WITH RIGID LAYOUTS SHOULD BE AVOIDED AND STAGGERED OR MEANDERING DESIGNS USED. AND THIS WILL HELP SAVE TREES SLOW DOWN VEHICLES AND CREATE SITE INTEREST WHEN PARKING UNDER BUILDINGS PROVIDE ADEQUATE ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE SCREENING TO PREVENT VIEWS INTO THE GARAGE. UM, AGAIN, THE DESIGN GUIDE IS TYPICALLY APPLIED TO COMMERCIAL, UH, PROPERTIES, BUT INCLUDED IT BECAUSE IT WAS A STANDARD, UH, THAT WE HAVE IN OUR CODE. UM, THE PARKING, UH, IS RELATED TO WHETHER OR NOT WE DO HAVE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY OR NOT. UM, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DISTRICTS WHERE, UM, SINGLE FAMILY IMPER IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS ARE EXEMPT. UM, SO FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THERE IS AN IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE REQUIREMENT. UM, AND IN, IN A LOT OF CASES, SINGLE FAMILY IS EXEMPT EXCEPT FOR IN THE DISTRICTS THAT ARE NOTED HERE. SO, UM, WE DO HAVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING COMMERCIAL AND, UM, SINGLE FAMILY AND MARSH FRONT MITCHELLVILLE RESORT DEVELOPMENT, STONY WATERFRONT MIXED USE, AND THEN ALSO WITHIN OUR THREE OVERLAYS, FOLLY FIELD AND HOLIDAY HOMES BOTH HAVE A PERCENTAGE. UM, BUT FOREST SPEECH, UM, HAS A STATEMENT HERE FOR THEIR IMPERVIOUS, UM, WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN A PERCENTAGE. [01:00:01] UM, THEY REQUIRE ALL SITE PAVING TO BE PERVIOUS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SWIMMING POOL AND DECK, NOT TO EXCEED 500 SQUARE FEET UNLESS THE SITE COMPLIES WITH MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS COVER REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THEIR ZONING DISTRICT. SO, UM, THIS IS A LOT MORE INFORMATION JUST ABOUT PARKING SURFACE REQUIREMENTS WHERE WE REQUIRE SINGLE FAMILY IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS CURRENTLY, UM, WHICH I THINK WERE THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED OF US TO PROVIDE TO YOU. UM, SO THAT REALLY CONCLUDES THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WE PULLED TOGETHER FOR YOUR DISCUSSION TODAY. OKAY. LET'S TALK ABOUT PARKING. UH, FIRST, FIRST A QUESTION AND THEN, UH, MAYBE COMMENTS AFTER THAT. SO MISS MS. LU, IF, IF, UM, YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, NOT THAT FAR BACK. , UH, THE NEXT ONE. YEAH, SO DESIGN GUIDE. SO, AND, AND YOU MENTIONED, UH, IN THE COMMERCIAL AREA. DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH, UM, THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD GUIDELINES OR IS THAT ACTUALLY A, A CODE PROVISION THAT APPLIES, UM, ISLAND WIDE? IT'S IN THE DESIGN GUIDE. IT IS NOT IN THE CODE. SO THIS IS WHAT THEY WOULD LOOK AT. AND IT'S REALLY FOR A COMMERCIAL PARKING LOT. OKAY. GUIDANCE. SORRY, BUT THE BOTTOM PART, THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, THAT DOES APPLY IN THE CODE, THAT'S NOT, OR IS THAT A PART OF THE DESIGN GUIDE? THAT'S CORRECT, YES, THAT IS IN THE, THAT IS IN THE LMO. ALRIGHT. AND SO, UM, THE THREE OVERLAY DISTRICTS THAT WE'VE SPOKEN ABOUT BEFORE ALL HAVE SOME IMPERVIOUS SURFACE REQUIREMENTS WITH, UH, FOREST SPEECH HAVING A, A DEFINITION INSTEAD OF A PERCENTAGE. OKAY. THAT'S JUST WANNA CLARIFY AND MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU WERE SAYING. SO, MM-HMM, , MAYBE AN UNFAIR QUESTION FOR YOU, MISS HAVEN'T BEEN HERE FOR YEARS. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHETHER THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS HAVE, UM, ENFORCEMENT ISSUES OR, UM, VIOLATIONS OF THEIR, UH, SITE OR, UH, PREVIOUS SERVICE REGULATIONS? WELL, THOSE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS ARE WITHIN OUR CODE. SO THEY WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE TOWN WOULD BE ENFORCING 'CAUSE OF THE OVERLAY. YOU GOT IT. RIGHT. OKAY. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY EXAMPLES WHERE THOSE HAVE BEEN VIOLATED? UM, I DO KNOW THAT THERE COULD BE SOME OLDER STRUCTURES THAT DON'T HAVE THE PERVIOUS SURFACE IN PLACE CURRENTLY. IF THEY WERE TO REDEVELOP, THEY WOULD HAVE TO, UM, INCLUDE A PERVIOUS SURFACE TO MEET THE REQUIRED DEFINITION, IF I MAY. UM, SO WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE, AND WE'RE SPECIFICALLY REFERRING TO THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEW SUBDIVISIONS AND COMMERCIAL PLACES, THAT'S WHERE THERE IS A PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS RELATIONSHIP THAT EXISTS, WHETHER IT'S FROM THE START OF A, A SINGLE FAMILY OR A COMMERCIAL BUILD, UH, DEVELOPMENT, WHICH HAS TO PROVIDE FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT, UM, POINTS, PERVIOUS, IMPERVIOUS AS YOU HAVE WRITTEN HERE, UM, AND THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS WHERE SUCH EXISTS. ALSO, HOWEVER, THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE ALL PROPERTIES ACROSS THE ISLAND. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES OUTSIDE THE GATES THAT DON'T FALL INTO ANY CATEGORY AND THEREFORE DON'T HAVE ANY PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS RELATIONSHIP, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. CORRECT. AND THAT'S THE, AND THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT THE PROTECTIONS ARE FOR. SO TO PATSY'S POINT, UM, THAT'S WHERE THE DIFFICULTIES COME FROM. UM, AND, UH, I SEE SHAWAN COMING UP, SO I'LL LET HIM FILL IN WHAT HE NEEDS. WELL, I DIDN'T MEAN, I'M SORRY, SEAN, ASSISTANT, I DIDN'T MEAN TO INTERRUPT YOUR, YOUR COMMENT. UM, BUT BECAUSE THE TOWN INCORPORATED IN 1983, THE OVERLAYS WERE ADOPTED IN THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS, THERE ARE SOME HOMES THAT PREDATED THE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU. SO, UH, THERE MAY BE, UH, UM, EXAMPLES OR, OR PROPERTIES THAT DON'T MEET THIS IMPERVIOUS REQUIREMENT. SO I JUST WANNA CLARIFY THAT. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFICATION. AND THERE ARE PARTICULAR AREAS ALSO, SEAN, JUST TO REITERATE WHAT, UH, MISSY, UM, UH, CONFIRMED FOR ME. THERE ARE AREAS, REGARDLESS IF THERE WERE OLDER PROPERTIES PRIOR TO INCORPORATION OR NOT, THAT STILL TODAY ARE NOT REGULATED BY ANY PERVIOUS OR IMPERVIOUS, UH, PARKING, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. JUST WANNA MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR. THANK YOU. I HAVE TWO ISSUES WITH PARKING. ONE, IT SEEMS TO ME SOMEWHAT ARBITRARY TO SET THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES BY THIS ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT WOULD BE MORE LOGICAL TO APPLY THAT TO THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS THAT ARE TO BE BUILT WITHIN A HOME. [01:05:01] THE FACT THAT SOMEONE HAS A HUGE OPEN SPACE IN THEIR HOME DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THEY'RE GONNA NEED TO BE PARKING MORE CARS THERE. SO I WOULD LIKE SOME FURTHER THOUGHT ON THAT. IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S A MECHANICAL THING THAT IMPOSES SOME VERY SIGNIFICANT, UH, PARKING REQUIREMENTS ON LARGER HOMES. IF THERE ARE A NUMBER OF BEDROOMS IN THERE, I AGREE WITH IT. IF THERE ARE FEWER NUMBER OF BEDROOMS, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE SHOULD BE A WAY TO DEAL WITH THAT, AND THAT DEFINITION COULD BE BASED UPON THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. SECOND ISSUE I HAVE HAS TO DO WITH IMPERVIOUS, IMPERVIOUS SURFACES. WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT STORMWATER. WE HAVE A RESILIENCE ISSUE THAT'S, UH, IMMINENT AFFECTING US HERE. WE NEED TO RECONSIDER HOW WE'RE DOING OUS SURFACES AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACES ON RESIDENTIAL PARKING. UM, WE'VE SEEN EXAMPLES IN YOUR PRESENTATIONS OF SOME PROPERTIES THAT SEEM TO BE VIRTUALLY ENTIRELY COVERED WITH CONCRETE. UM, THAT'S NOT IN MY VIEW IN ACCORDANCE WITH ISLAND CHARACTER. UM, AND SO ONE OF THE WAYS TO DEAL WITH THAT, IF INDEED WE'RE IMPOSING A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES, IS TO HAVE THOSE PARKING SPACES BE, UH, MADE OF, UH, PERVIOUS SURFACES, UH, WHICH CAN BE MUCH MORE ATTRACTIVE AND WILL DEAL WITH SOMEWHAT WITH THE STORMWATER ISSUES. SO IN YOUR FURTHER REVIEW OF THIS, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE LOOK AT THOSE TWO POINTS. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. UH, YEAH, I'D LIKE TO FOLLOW UP WITH SOME COMMENTS, BUT FIRST A QUESTION, UM, WHEN, AND I WAS ONE OF THE ONES WHO SAID, LET'S ACCELERATE SOME ISSUES NOW BECAUSE I, I, I, I STILL AM CONVINCED THAT WE HAVE SOME ISSUES. UM, I RESPECT DISTRICT PLANNING, UM, AND, UH, MAKING, UM, CHANGES TO THE LMO BE COMPREHENSIVE, UH, ALL AT ONE TIME SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE CONFLICTS AND WE DON'T PUT BANDAIDS WHERE WE DON'T NEED BANDAIDS. UM, BUT I'M ALSO SENSITIVE TO CURRENT ISSUES AND, AND NOT KICKING THEM DOWN THE ROAD. UM, SO, UH, CAN YOU TELL ME WHY DID STAFF CHOOSE PARKING AS ONE OF THE ISSUES TO ACCELERATE AT THIS POINT? UH, WE WERE ASKED TO ACCELERATE A SINGLE FAMILY, UM, FLOOR, UH, MASS SCALE AND INTENSITY OF USE, AND WE, UM, ANTICIPATED THAT PARKING WAS PART OF THE INTENSITY ISSUE THAT WE WERE ADDRESSING. AND WAS THAT SOMEWHAT RELATED TO CONCERNS ABOUT SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THE PARKING THERE? UH, CERTAINLY THAT USE TYPE CREATES A LEVEL OF INTENSITY THAT YES, WE ARE TRYING TO SOLVE THAT ISSUE AMONG OTHER, UM, INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE NUMBER OF PARKING AND SIZE AND SCALE OF DEVELOPMENT ON SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. AND, AND DID WE KNOW OF, UM, SPECIFIC AREAS WITH ISSUES WITH PARKING, BECAUSE AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE PROPOSAL WOULD APPLY ISLAND WIDE, UM, UNLIKE THE PROPOSED FAR, WHICH EXCLUDES CERTAIN AREAS. UM, SO FIRST OF ALL, IS THAT CORRECT THAT PARKING WOULD APPLY ISLAND WIDE? THAT'S CORRECT. AS PREPARED AS PROPOSED, IT WAS FOR ANY DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS SINGLE FAMILY USE. FAMILY USES. OKAY. YES. ALL RIGHT. UM, AND THEN AS FAR AS PERMEABLE AND IMPERMEABLE, THOSE AREAS THAT YOU POINTED OUT, UM, ARE THE AREAS WHERE THERE ARE SOME OTHER REGULATIONS WITH REGARD TO THAT. SOME HAVE IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS THAT APPLY TO SINGLE FAMILY AND SOME DO NOT. YEAH, AND SOME DON'T. AND, AND, AND I SHARE WHAT MR. STANDARD SAID ABOUT CONCERN ABOUT IMPERIAL PERMEABLE AREAS ON OUR ISLAND AND STORM WATER. UM, BUT TO ME, IT, IT SEEMS AS THOUGH, YOU KNOW, I, I LIKE TO BE ABLE TO TRY TO, TO ADDRESS SOMETHING INSTEAD OF KICKING IT DOWN THE ROAD. UM, AND SO IT SEEMS AS THOUGH, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND SO FAR, THAT A LOT OF THE PARKING ISSUES HAVE TO DO WITH SHORT TERM RENTALS. UM, I'VE CERTAINLY SEEN IT, UM, IN FORMERLY LIVING IN THE SOUTH MORRIS BEACH AREA AND WALKING THROUGH THAT AREA AND SEEING FOLKS PARKED EVERYWHERE. UM, SO IT SEEMS AS THOUGH, UH, TODAY WE HAVE TWO CLEAR CHOICES. ONE IS, UM, WE CAN, UM, MOVE FORWARD WITH A, A, A REVISION TO THE LMO, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE REFERENCE, UM, IT INCLUDES THE, THE TABLE, UM, IN 16 DASH FIVE DASH 1 0 7, UH, FOR THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES. UM, AND, AND THAT IS DETERMINED BY USES AS OPPOSED TO APPLYING ISLAND WIDE. SO IT SEEMS AS THOUGH IF WE WANT TO LIMIT THE APPLICATION OF THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, THEN IT WOULD EITHER BE TO, UM, LIMIT [01:10:01] IT TO, UM, A CERTAIN USES WITHIN THAT EXISTING TABLE, 16 DASH FIVE DASH 1 0 7 D ONE, UM, SUCH AS, UH, SAYING THAT A SHORT TERM RENTAL USE WOULD BE INCLUDED THERE. THE OTHER CHOICE, UM, AND, AND I THINK IN THIS CASE I MIGHT AGREE WITH THE MAYOR , UM, IS TO LOOK AT THE SHORT TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS WHICH APPEAR IN SECTION 10 DASH TWO DASH 50, WHICH IS NOT WITHIN THE LMO, UM, AND REQUIRES A DIFFERENT PROCESS. AND IN SECTION 10 DASH TWO DASH 50, SUBSECTION D INCLUDES THE PARKING REGULATIONS. UM, AND IT DOESN'T REQUIRE A SPECIFIC NUMBER OF SPACES, BUT IT REQUIRES THE OWNER TO DESIGNATE THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES ALLOWED TO BE PARKED ON THE PREMISES AND DESIGNATE THE ONSITE AREAS AVAILABLE FOR PARKING. AND THE AREAS FOR PARKING MUST BE IMPROVED WITH EITHER PERVIOUS OR IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. AND THEN IT INCLUDES THE NINE BY 18 REQUIREMENT, UM, PARKED ON THE PREMISES, AND, UM, ALSO SAYS NO VEHICLES, UH, WILL PARK OFFSITE. UM, AND IT GOES ON TO SOME MORE LANGUAGE THERE. SO, UM, I, I THINK I HEARD THE MAYOR SUGGEST SOMETHING THAT I'VE BEEN SUGGESTING SINCE I'VE BEEN SWORN IN AS A COUNCIL MEMBER. AND THAT IS, UM, TO ESTABLISH A CROSS-FUNCTIONAL CROSS-DISCIPLINARY, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL, UH, ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO TAKE A LOOK AT, UM, UH, THE PREVIOUS, UM, UH, UH, REGULATIONS WITH REGARD TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS. AND ALSO NOW THAT WE HAVE DATA FROM JANUARY ONE OF THIS YEAR, AND I KNOW I'M SPEAKING OUTSIDE YOUR AREA, WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT THIS, AT LEAST AS WITH REGARD TO SECTION 10 DASH TWO DASH 50, UH, BUT WHAT I WOULD, UH, BE URGING US TO DO TO TODAY IS TO GO AHEAD AND, UM, UH, SEND FORTH, UM, AN AMENDMENT TO 10 DASH TWO DASH 50, AND NOT TO INCLUDE AN ISLAND-WIDE LMO AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME, BUT TO INCLUDE, UM, THE PARKING REGULATIONS PROPOSED WITHIN SHORT-TERM RENTALS ONLY IN THIS OTHER CODE PROVISION. UM, AND TO, UM, ASK THE MAYOR TO BRING FORTH TO TOWN COUNCIL THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CROSS-FUNCTIONAL, UH, CROSS DISCIPLINARY, UH, CROSS REPRESENTATIVE, UH, COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT, UM, WHAT'S OUR EXPERIENCE BASED ON ONE YEAR OF REGULATION AND DO WE NEED TO TWEAK ANYTHING ELSE? AND THAT WAY WE HAVE REPRESENTATION FROM VARIOUS ASPECTS OF OUR COMMUNITY TO DETERMINE WHAT, IF ANYTHING, ELSE TO DO ABOUT PARKING. UH, CHAIR, MAY I JUMP IN ON THAT? SO, UM, THE PROBLEM WITH THAT, PATSY, IS, UM, WHO'S GONNA BE LEADING, UM, THAT COMMITTEE AND DRIVING IT ARE THOSE WHO ARE BEST SERVED BY ITS OUTCOME AND NOT THOSE WHO NEED TO BE SERVED, WHICH ARE THE RESIDENTS IN THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE INUNDATED AND BURDENED WITH SHORT-TERM RENTALS. MOREOVER, YOU CAN'T TELL ME TODAY. SO ALL OF WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS FOR PLANNING PURPOSES MOVING FORWARD, RIGHT? THIS ISN'T RETROSPECTIVE, THIS IS MOVING FORWARD. SO YOU CAN'T TELL ME TODAY WHICH HOMES THAT COME IN FOR PERMITTING ARE GOING TO BE SHORT TERM RENTALS. AND I CAN PROMISE YOU THAT I MIGHT BE A SKEPTIC THAT EACH AND EVERY PERSON THAT COMES IN FOR A PERMIT BUILDING EIGHT AND NINE 10 BEDROOM HOMES ARE GONNA SAY THEY'RE DEFINITELY NOT GONNA RENT THEIR HOMES. THEY HAVE BIG FAMILIES. WE'VE HEARD IT BEFORE. AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WHILE I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE DIRECTION, I THINK PUTTING THE, UH, HOW DOES THAT SAYING GO CHICKEN IN CHARGE OF THE HEN HOUSE IS PROBABLY A BAD, OR FOX IN CHARGE OF THE HEN HOUSE IS A BAD IDEA. UM, AND WELL, BUT THE POINT HAS TO BE MADE THAT THIS IS FORWARD THINKING. AND THE REASON WE NEED PARKING, AND I'M GONNA GIVE YOU A REAL LIFE EXAMPLE TOO, FROM JUST WITHIN THE LAST SEVEN DAYS, A HOME HAS FIVE BEDROOMS THAT HAD THREW A RENTAL AGENCY ON THE ISLAND AGREED TO LEASE LET TO, UM, 40 PLUS PEOPLE AND 15 CARS THAT HAD TO BE DEALT WITH. ONE. WHAT WE'RE TRYING SECOND. WHAT WE'RE TRYING SECOND. NO, BUT THIS IS WHY IF YOU DON'T PREPARE AHEAD OF TIME, THIS TWO POINTS, THIS IS WHY IF YOU DON'T PREPARE AHEAD OF TIME, YOU WON'T HAVE THE ADEQUATE PARKING PERIOD. AND B, YOU DON'T HAVE, UM, FOLKS WHO WE ARE SAYING ARE GONNA BE IN CHARGE OF ALL OF THIS ACTUALLY BEING IN CHARGE BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES WHO AGREED TO TAKE THE DOLLARS. WE DON'T KNOW WHO'S GOING TO BE POPULATING THAT COMMITTEE AT THIS TIME. WELL, I CERTAINLY, UM, THINK THAT, I'M SORRY. I WOULD LIKE, I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO, UM, ADDRESS, UH, I, I THINK YOU SHOULD ADDRESS WHOEVER JUST CALLED [01:15:01] OFF OUT IN INTERRUPTED ME BECAUSE I'M A COUNCIL MEMBER AND I'M AFRAID THAT THAT IS THE APPROPRIATE JOB OF THE CHAIR IS TO MAKE SURE I DON'T GET CALLED OUT. UM, SIR, PLEASE DO YOUR JOB. BRYSON SUGGESTED THAT, UH, THERE BE AN ADJUSTMENT TO A CERTAIN PORTION THAT SHE CITED. UH, I I THINK THAT'S A LAUDABLE DIRECTION. IT HAS POTENTIAL. I WOULD ALSO ASK THAT IN THE STAFF'S DELIBERATION THAT THEY CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT THAT SAME CONVERSATION OUGHT TO INCLUDE OCCUPANCY. THE OCCUPANCY AND PARKING ARE RELATED, AND YOU SORT OF NEED TO PIN THE BOTH OF THOSE DOWN IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD. SO I THINK YOU HAVE RENTAL AGENTS WHO ARE WILLING TO RENT TO 40 PEOPLE AND BRING 15, BUT YOU MADE A STATEMENT, AND I THIS IS A DEBATE OR YOU JUST DICTATING TO US, IS THIS A DEBATE? BECAUSE I DEBATE THAT POINT. IF YOU ARE HAVING RENTAL AGENTS, I HAVE, I HAVE SOME OTHER WHO ARE WILLING TO MAKE REGARDING, I KNOW, BUT YOU'RE NOT UP HERE ALONE. YOU'VE GOT THREE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS, CHAIRMAN THE FLOOR, LET HIM HAVE THE FLOOR. MY UNDERSTANDING THAT PARKING REGULATIONS WILL GO BEHIND GATES AS WELL. IS THAT CORRECT? UH, AS PROPOSED, YES. AND THEN SECONDLY, IT'S BEHIND THE GATES ARE PD ONES. ARE THERE OTHER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS ON THE ISLAND THAT ARE NOT PD ONES, BUT WILL BE IMPACTED BY THIS PROPOSAL? UM, IT, UH, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IS NOT A ZONING TYPE. SO IF THERE ARE OTHER SINGLE FAMILY USES, UM, OUTSIDE, UM, THERE COULD BE OTHER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED. YES. THANK YOU. IF THEY'RE SINGLE FAMILY TIME, MY EXPERIENCE, MOST PD ONES HAVE ARCHITECTURAL RE REVIEW BOARDS. UM, DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA BASED ON RESEARCH THAT YOU'VE DONE, WHAT THOSE ARBS SAY ABOUT THE PROPOSED PARKING STANDARDS? UM, AS FAR AS, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT, HAVE WE REACHED OUT TO ALL OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS AND INQUIRED ABOUT PARKING STANDARD? DON'T NEED TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT BECAUSE I HAVE, WITHIN MY WARD, I REPRESENT A LONG COVE YACHT COVE, WEXFORD SHIPYARD, SPANISH WELLS, UM, AND NONE OF THEM HAVE EXPRESSED A CONCERN ABOUT PARKING. AND WHAT I'M RAISING HERE IS THE SAME THING THAT, UH, CONCERNS ME ABOUT THE FAR, AND THAT IS ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL. AND THAT'S WHY I THINK THAT MS. BRYSON'S SUGGESTION OF TYING PARKING AND OCCUPANCY TO THE PERMIT OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS MAKES SENSE ON THE, ON THE FAR. UM, I'LL JUST ADD THAT, UM, IN MY OPINION, FROM A PLANNING STANDPOINT, THE FAR IS A SINGLE ELEMENT THAT CONTRIBUTES TO A SOLUTION OF REGULATING MASS AND SCALE, BUT IT ALONE CAN'T DO THE JOB. SO IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, SITE COVERAGE, RUNOFF CALCULATIONS, SETBACKS, BUFFERS, I THINK HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED IN TOTAL TO COME UP WITH THE RIGHT KIND OF PACKAGE TO REGULATE THIS. SO AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE THE FAR THAT WE ARE PRESCRIBING GOES ACROSS THE BOARD AFFECTING NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE VERY DISSIMILAR, I'M UNCOMFORTABLE AT THIS POINT THAT WE'VE ACHIEVED THE BEST SOLUTION FOR THE COMMUNITY. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AS CHAIRMAN OF THIS BOARD, I'VE BEEN PUSHING THIS ALONG SINCE THE DAY IT WAS MADE A PRIORITY, AND I TAKE RESPONSIBILITY THAT I DIDN'T ASK THE KIND OF QUESTIONS AND GET INTO THE DETAILS THAT WE NEEDED TO GET TO. SO WE ARE WHERE WE ARE TODAY, AND I THINK WE NEED TO ASK STAFF DO A DEEPER DIVE TO COME UP WITH BETTER SOLUTIONS THAN WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED. MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I CAN, UM, I DON'T WANNA PIGGYBACK ON THAT, BUT, UM, I THINK WE'VE SEEN WITH THE PRESENT WITH THE INFORMATION FROM THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS THAT TAKE IDENTIFYING FAR AND PARKING, UM, WITHOUT THE OTHER CONTEXT. IF YOU LOOK AT THE OVERLAYS, THERE IS A PERVIOUS, IMPERVIOUS REQUIREMENT, SOME OTHER DESIGN STANDARDS. AND SO I THINK THE OVERLAY APPROACH FOR THE AREAS THAT NEED PROTECTION MAKES [01:20:01] AN AWFUL LOT OF SENSE. AND, AND MR. CHAIRMAN, I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT YOU TO TAKE THE, UH, UM, THIS ON YOUR SHOULDER IS A HUNDRED PERCENT. UM, MISSY'S BIRTHDAY WAS YESTERDAY, AND I THINK I'VE AGED HER FIVE YEARS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS. YOUR BIRTHDAY, MISSY . UM, WE, WE, WE PUSHED TO GET THIS, UH, FORWARD AND ADVERTISED, AND I HAVE FAILED TO LEAD MY TEAM TO GIVE YOU THE INFORMATION, UM, TO MAKE A CLEAR AND CONCISE POLICY CHANGE. WHILE I BELIEVE I HEAR CONCERNS FROM SEVERAL RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME ADDITIONAL PROTECTION, UH, TO RESIDENTS AND SINGLE FAMILY, UM, IT'S CLEAR TO ME THAT WE HAVE NOT COME TO THE RIGHT DEFINITION AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED. UM, I, IT, IT TOOK MISSY AND I ABOUT 30 MINUTES WHEN WE SLOWED DOWN TO SAY, WOW, WE, WHAT WE ADVERTISED WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT PROUD OF, AND WE WANT IT BAD, WE GOT IT BAD. AND, UM, AND SO I WANT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I, I HAVE FAILED BECAUSE WE HAVE GOT NOTHING, BUT, UM, THE BEST SUPPORT FROM OUR TOWN MANAGER TO, TO GET CODE WRITERS AND ADDITIONAL STAFF AND RESOURCES TO EXECUTE THIS WORK. BUT I FEEL LIKE WE'RE ALWAYS A LITTLE OUT OF SEQUENCE. UM, I SPOKE BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE BACK IN, I THINK IT WAS IN JUNE OR JULY TO SAY I WAS SO EXCITED TO FINALLY PUT TOGETHER AN ISLAND WIDE MASTER PLAN, UM, TO REALLY FOCUS ON THOSE AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE GATES THROUGH DISTRICT PLANNING AND TO REALLY INFORM A NEW LMO THAT WE COULD ALL BE PROUD OF, THAT IT WOULD, THAT IT WOULD ADDRESS THE EXPECTATIONS THAT THE COMMUNITY HAD AND REALLY DRIVE THE NEXT PHASE FOR HILTON ISLAND. AND, AND THE VISION FOR WHAT I THINK WE COLLECTIVELY, YOU KNOW, WOULD LIKE TO SEE GOING FORWARD. WE, UM, HAVE STRUGGLED WITH SOME CODE WRITERS. WE HAVE AN RFQ THAT'S ON THE STREET. UM, WE, WE, WE'VE REACHED OUT DIRECTLY TO SOME REALLY CREATIVE FIRMS THAT RFQ WILL CLOSE NEXT WEEK. I, I THINK WE'RE GONNA HAVE SOME REALLY GOOD HELP TO HELP US UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT OF, OF THIS INFORMATION. IN 2023, WE HAVE PROCESSED 14 LMO AMENDMENTS, 21 DIFFERENT PUBLIC MEETINGS, LEGAL REVIEW, SORRY, CURTIS AND, AND OTHERS. BUT, SO 21 MEETINGS, 14 LMO AMENDMENTS, AND THAT DOES NOT COUNT THE TEXT AMENDMENT FOR THE ISLANDERS MIXED USE, WHICH, UM, ON APRIL 10TH, 2021 IS WHEN I FIRST I GOT THE FIRST PHONE CALL. UM, AND MISSY PROBABLY THE LAST 15 MONTHS HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THAT TEXT AMENDMENT FOR A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF TIME. SO WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO ADVANCE WHAT I THINK ARE THE REALLY IMPORTANT, UM, INITIATIVES THAT ARE WITHIN THE STRATEGIC PLAN TO, TO PAINT THE WHOLE PICTURE. UM, WHEN I TALKED WITH YOU EARLIER THIS YEAR, UM, I SAID, WHEN I STARTED HERE IN 2006, I LOOKED AT THE CODE AND I WAS LIKE, WOW, THAT WAS BECAUSE OF A CERTAIN SITUATION THAT CHANGE. I, I COULD TELL THERE WAS A CHANGE MADE. IT WAS NOT A CONTEXT. UM, A DENSITY CAP IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAID, NO, NOT ONE MORE UNIT COULD BE CREATED. UM, THERE WERE, THERE WERE SOME INTERESTING, UM, THINGS AS I READ THROUGH THE, THE, UH, COMP PLAN AND THE, AND THE LMO THAT WERE OUTTA CONTEXT FOR ME AS A PROFESSIONAL PLANNER, AND I DON'T WANT TO, UM, TO MOVE SOMETHING FORWARD, I'D BE HYPOCRITICAL, RIGHT? THOSE THINGS BOTHERED ME. AND, UM, I FEEL LIKE I'M, I'M IN THE SAME PLACE, UM, ASKING FOR THE COMMUNITY TO ACCEPT AND COUNSEL TO ACCEPT CHANGES, UM, OUT OF CONTEXT THAT SOMEONE ELSE SMARTER THAN ME CAN POINT TO AND SAY, WOW, I KNOW EXACTLY WHY THAT WAS DONE, RATHER THAN THROUGH THE, UM, THE OVERALL CONTEXT OF THE CODE. SO I WANTED TO ADD THAT INFORMATION AT THE END. I APPRECIATE YOUR TAKING THE TIME TO DO THAT. I, I DO WANNA SAY SOMETHING THOUGH, UM, ABOUT WHERE WE ARE. UH, CLEARLY THERE IS, THERE ARE THOSE DISRUPTING TRENDS IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THIS COMMUNITY THAT HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED. I WOULD ENCOURAGE STAFF, LOOK AT THE FOREST BEACH AREA, BERKS BEACH, BRADLEY, UM, JONESVILLE AND MITCHELLVILLE, THE AREAS THAT HAVE TENSION OF ONE KIND OR ANOTHER FOLEY FIELD AND FOLLY FIELD. YES. UM, SO THAT WE CAN, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, RECOGNIZE WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT GOOD POLICY CAN BE PUT IN PLACE. I ADD A COMMENT READING FROM OUR LAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE, [01:25:01] PURPOSE, INTENT. THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE LMO IS TO GUIDE THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TOWN'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND EXISTING AND FUTURE NEEDS OF THE TOWN IN ORDER, MOST IMPORTANT PART, IN ORDER TO PROTECT, PROMOTE AND IMPROVE THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS, CONVENIENCE, ORDER, APPEARANCE, PROSPERITY, AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE LANDOWNERS AND RESIDENTS OF THE TOWN. IS IT STILL A PRIORITY? IS THAT WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW BY JUST SAYING EVERYBODY BEATING THEIR CHEST AND SAYING, I WAS SO SORRY I DIDN'T DO THIS. I DIDN'T DO THAT. EVERY BOARD WORKED REALLY HARD. AND I'VE SAID THIS TO, TO THE MAYOR, I'VE SAID THIS TO YOU DAVID, AND I'VE SAID THIS TO HER TOWN MANAGER AND SEAN AND MISSY, Y'ALL HAVE WORKED REALLY HARD AND YOU BROUGHT FORTH INFORMATION THAT WAS WELL RESEARCHED AND PUT TOGETHER. AND ALONG THE LINES, I'VE MADE MY OWN COMMENTS, AND IF ANYONE WANTS TO GO BACK TO THE VIDEOTAPE AND SEE THEM, THEN I ARGUED FOR PERHAPS THE AREA UNDERNEATH THE FLOOD ZONE, NOT TO BE OCCLUDED, ET CETERA, BUT IT WAS THE WILL OF THE BODY THAT THAT WAS NOT GOING TO MOVE FORWARD. AND A VOTE WAS TAKEN AND A VOTE WAS TAKEN AND A FIRST READING WAS TAKEN. AND NOW WE HAVE A DIFFERENT AUDIENCE HERE WHO AREN'T THE FOLKS WHO ARE BEING IMPACTED UNLESS YOU LOOK AT THEIR WALLETS. NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO. I'M SORRY, BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT SOMEONE WHO ESSENTIALLY TOLD ME THAT, AND IT'S ON TAPE FOR ANYONE WHO'S INTERESTED. THANK YOU. UM, MR. CHAIR, IF I COULD COME BACK TO THE TOPICS AT HAND, UM, CAN, CAN WE SEPARATE OUT, UM, A COMMITTEE ATTEMPTED CONSENSUS ON THE TWO, THREE SEPARATE ISSUES, IF YOU WILL? THERE'S THE PARKING, WHICH I'VE SUGGESTED, UM, THREE OPTIONS OF FIXING SEPARATELY. THERE'S THE DEFINITION OF, UM, GROSS FLOOR AREA AS IT RELATES TO FAR. AND THEN THIRDLY IS THE APPLICATION OF FAR HOW MUCH AND IF ANY, AND WHERE. UM, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEPARATE THOSE THREE OUT, UM, AND MAKE THE FOLLOWING SUGGESTIONS, UM, BECAUSE I THINK PERHAPS WE NEED A LITTLE MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT FAR BEFORE WE REACH A CONSENSUS. FIRST OF ALL, WITH REGARD TO PARKING, UM, I THINK WE HAVE THREE OPTIONS. ONE IS THE OPTION ON THE TABLE, WHICH APPLIES ISLAND WIDE BASED ON THE PROPOSALS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MOVED FORWARD. THE SECOND IS, INSTEAD OF MAKING IT ISLAND WIDE TO CREATE A SEPARATE USE WITHIN THE TABLE THAT APPEARS IN SECTION 16 DASH FIVE DASH 1 0 7, I THINK IT'S AD, SUBSECTION D, UM, BY USE, UM, AND WHAT THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE. THE THIRD OPTION IS TO NOT INCLUDE, UM, THE CURRENT LMO PROVISION REGARDING PARKING UNDER EITHER THOSE TWO OPTIONS TO INSTEAD, UH, GO AHEAD, UM, AND AMEND SECTION 10 DASH TWO DASH 50 WITH REGARD TO PARKING REGULATIONS USING THE MODEL PROPOSED. UM, AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, UM, ASKING THE MAYOR TO, UH, HAVE THE TOWN COUNCIL LOOK AT, UH, CROSS-DISCIPLINARY, CROSS-FUNCTIONAL CROSS REPRESENTATIVE, UH, COMMITTEE TO LOOK, UM, AT THE YEARS, ALMOST A YEAR'S DATA TO SEE WHAT, IF ANY OTHER SHORT TERM RENTAL REGULATIONS NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. SO THAT'S MY SUGGESTION FOR THE COMMITTEE CONSENSUS ON PARKING. AND THEN, UH, WE WOULD LIKE AFTER THAT TO MOVE TO GROSS FLOOR AREA. AND THEN THIRDLY, TO FAR, GO AHEAD. OKAY, . UM, SECOND, WITH REGARD TO THE DEFINITION OF GROSS FLOOR AREA, UM, I THINK WE ALREADY HAVE A WORKING DEFINITION, UM, AND THAT IF WE ARE GOING TO ADOPT A FAR, WE USE THE EXISTING WORKING DEFINITION. AND, UM, UM, I, I LIKED PARTICULARLY THE, THE ONE FOR FOREST LAKE AND, AND SORRY, I USED TO LIVE IN A SUBDIVISION CALLED FOREST LAKE. I USED TO ALSO LIVE IN FOREST BEACH, SO FORGIVE ME. UM, SO THE FOREST BEACH OVERLAY, UM, BECAUSE I THINK THAT INCLUDES THE, THE BEST LANGUAGE, LOOKING AT ALL EXAMPLES THAT EXCLUDES 600 FEET OF COVERED SQUARE, UH, 600 SQUARE FEET OF COVERED PORCH. UM, AND THE, UM, THE LANGUAGE ABOUT HYDROSTATIC VENTED I THINK WOULD APPLY BASED ON WHATEVER THE BUILDING CODE REQUIRES. SO I THINK WE HAVE AN EXISTING ONE, AND IF WE ARE GOING TO ADOPT A FAR IN OTHER PLACES ON THE ISLAND AT THIS POINT, THEN TO USE THAT EXISTING DEFINITION, UM, ON THAT PARTICULAR, UH, POINT, I WOULD SAY THAT I WOULD BE OPEN TO THAT BEING ONE OF THE ALTERNATIVES. BUT I WOULD LIKE STAFF TO CONFIRM THAT THAT DOESN'T HAVE DOWNSIDES. I, I, I, [01:30:01] UH, TRY TO RESIST AS BEST AS I BEST I CAN TO MAKE A DECISION ON THE SPOT WHEN THERE ARE OTHER ALTERNATIVES. SO I WOULD SAY I UNDERSTAND YOUR PERSONAL POINT OF VIEW AND I THINK THAT STAFF CAN LOOK AT OTHER POSSIBILITIES. MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK THESE SUGGESTIONS ARE CREATIVE, UH, AND WORTHY OF FURTHER DISCUSSION, BUT THERE'S NOTHING ON THE AGENDA FOR US TO APPROVE HERE TODAY. WE'RE HERE TO HAVE A DEBATE. WE'RE HAVING A DISCUSSION OF THIS. UM, AND SO I APPRECIATE THE CONSTRUCTIVE SUGGESTIONS. AND, AND THE THIRD THING WITH REGARD TO THE FLOOR AREA ANALYSIS, UM, UH, A COUPLE THINGS. UM, ONE IS, UM, WHEN I RAN FOR OFFICE, ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES FOR ME WAS, UM, UH, STORM DRAINAGE FLOODING ON THE ISLAND. UM, AND HAVING SERVED ON THE BOARD ZONING APPEALS, I, I SAW CLEAR CUTTING, UM, WHICH REMOVED ALL THE TREES, ALL THE BUSHES, UM, AND THEN VERY SMALL LOTS CREATED WITH LARGE HOUSES. UM, AND, AND I COULD JUST SEE DISASTERS HAPPENING WITH REGARD TO, UH, STORM DRAINAGE AND FLOODING. UM, AND, UH, HEARING FROM THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND THEIR CONCERN ABOUT MASS, SORRY, MASS SIZE, UM, DENSITY AND SCOPE OF AND HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS, UM, AND THE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT. AND HAVING SEEN THAT, UM, SEEN, UH, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TORN DOWN AND, AND FOLKS CALL 'EM MANY HOTELS, UM, UH, PARTICULARLY IN THE FOREST BEACH AREA WHERE I USED TO DO A LOT OF WALKING. UM, AND ALSO OTHER SINGLE FAMILY HOME AREAS TO SEE THAT KIND OF DESTRUCTION ON THE ISLAND. AND THAT HAS CONCERNED ME FOR A LONG TIME. UM, I'M ALSO MINDFUL OF, UH, FOLKS WANTING TO BUILD ON THEIR OWN LOTS AND WHAT THEY WANT TO BUILD. UM, AND, AND SO IN LOOKING AT THAT, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND SUFFER CONSEQUENCES FOR SOME TIME TO COME. BECAUSE AS I LOOK AT IT, I APPRECIATE AND I VALUE DISTRICT PLANNING AND I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH, UM, DEALING WITH THE WHOLE LAND MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE AT ONE TIME SO THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT ONE THING DOESN'T CONFLICT TO ANOTHER AND WE'RE NOT FIXING ONE THING HERE AND CAUSING ANOTHER PROBLEM THERE. BUT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT TIMING. UM, SO I THINK WE OUGHT TO LOOK AT SPECIFIC AREAS RIGHT NOW TO ADD TO THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS. UM, AND I WANNA BE MINDFUL OF THE FOREST SPEECH OWNERS ASSOCIATION, WHICH HAS ASKED TO MEET WITH MS. LUECK, AND THANK YOU FOR AGREEING TO DO THAT. UM, THERE IS SOME TIME TO SEE IF, IF THERE'S ANY, UM, OTHER TWEAKS, BUT I WANNA MOVE FORWARD WITH THE FOREST BEACH OVERLAY DISTRICT, UM, SOONER RATHER THAN LATER AND NOT WAIT ON DISTRICT PLANNING AND NOT WAIT ON A WHOLE LMO. I THINK THERE ARE OTHER SENSITIVE AREAS, UM, AS THE CHAIR HAS POINTED OUT JONESVILLE ROAD, UM, WE ALREADY HAVE A PROPOSED MARIST DISTRICT AND MAYBE LOOKING AT THAT AREA OR A PORTION OF THAT AREA, UM, WE HAVE OTHER AREAS HAVE BEEN MENTIONED, UH, BRADLEY BEACH, BRICKS BEACH AREA. I, I, UM, I DON'T KNOW, UH, HOW TO SOLVE THAT AREA, BUT, UM, I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER AREA TO LOOK AT. UM, AND THEN ALSO, UM, AND FORGIVE ME IF I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT AREA, BUT, UM, BEHIND PALMETTO HALL, THERE WAS A CLEAR CUTTING AREA. UM, AND SO, UM, LET'S LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE SENSITIVE AREAS. UM, AND, AND I STILL MAINTAIN, UM, THAT WE NEED TO BE SENSITIVE TO, UH, GULLAH GEECHEE LAND. UM, HENCE MY SUPPORT OF EXCLUSION OF FAMILY COMPOUNDS AND FAMILY SUBDIVISIONS. UM, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO, TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. UM, INSTEAD OF, UH, HAVING AN ISLAND WIDE APPLICATION EXCEPT FOR P UH, PD, ONE FOR THE 0.45 , UH, HAVE WE NOT COVERED ANYTHING OR HAVE WE LEFT OMITTED SOMETHING THAT YOU WANTED COVERED? NO, I, I THINK I HAVE, UH, CLEAR DIRECTION ON, UH, THE ADDITIONAL WORK WE NEED TO DO IN THE INTEREST OF TIME. UH, I'M NOT GOING TO ENTERTAIN, UH, FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THIS POINT. UM, AND WITH THAT, I STAND ADJOURNED. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.