Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript


[I. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:02]

I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, JUNE 26TH.

IT IS 6:00 PM UH, MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? CHAIRWOMAN.

AMANDA DENMARK.

VICE CHAIRMAN CHARLIE WETMORE.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER MICHAEL BROCK.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER RICH DELCO.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER LYDIA DEPAW.

HERE.

COMMISSIONER JIM FLYNN HERE.

YEAH.

I HAVEN'T VICTOR GIVEN IN A WHILE.

[III. NOTICE REGARDING ADJOURNMENT]

OKAY.

NOTICE REGARDING ADJOURNMENT.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL NOT HEAR NEW ITEMS AFTER 9:30 PM UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT ITEMS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN HEARD BEFORE 9:30 PM MAY BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OR A SPECIAL MEETING DATE AS DETERMINED BY THE COMMISSION MEMBERS.

UM, BEFORE WE HAVE ADOPTION OF AGENDA OR ADOPTION OF MINUTES, WE DON'T HAVE ADOPTION OF AGENDA ON HERE.

WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO THAT TOO.

UM, I'D LIKE TO TAKE A MINUTE.

UM, OBVIOUSLY COMMISSIONERS, YOU KNOW, AND STAFF, YOU KNOW, UM, WE UNFORTUNATELY LOST A MEMBER OF OUR PLANNING COMMISSION SUDDENLY LAST MONTH.

UM, IT WAS HEARTBREAKING TO LEARN ABOUT THE SUDDEN PASSING OF JASON STEWART, WHO'S SERVED AS ASSISTANT TOWN MANAGER IN PORT WENTWORTH WAS A BLUFFTON RESIDENCE AND SHARED HIS EXPERTISE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH US.

HIS COMMITMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND INVALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS WILL BE REMEMBERED FONDLY.

OUR DEEPEST CONDOLENCES GO OUT TO HIS FAMILY, FRIENDS, AND COLLEAGUES DURING THIS DIFFICULT TIME.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK US TO OBSERVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE IN HIS MEMORY.

THANK YOU.

JASON WILL TRULY BE MISSED.

HE WAS, HE WAS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THIS COMMISSION.

UM,

[Additional Item]

CAN I HAVE A MOTION FOR ADOPTION OF AGENDA? SECOND.

SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

[IV. ADOPTION OF MINUTES]

UM, THE MINUTES FOR MAY 22ND TWO, 2024.

CAN I HAVE A MOTION ON THAT? MOTION TO APPROVE? SECOND.

OKAY.

MOTION AND SECONDED.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

THAT IS APPROVED.

UM, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? NOTHING.

NO.

NOBODY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING.

OKAY.

UM, OKAY.

NO OLD BUSINESS.

UM, WE'LL

[VII.1. Compass Self Storage - 315 Gibbet Road (Certificate of Appropriateness - Highway Corridor Overlay): A request by Amsdell Construction, LLC, on behalf of the owners, Amsdell Storage Ventures 81, LLC, for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness-Highway Corridor Overlay application. The project consists of two, two-story buildings totaling approximately 109,398 SF of climate-controlled self-storage space, the associated landscaping, lighting and other infrastructure. The properties are zoned Jones Estate PUD, consist of 3.21 acres identified by tax map numbers R610 036 000 0459 0000 and R610 036 000 0458 0000, and are located at the northeast corner of the Caine Drive and Estate Drive intersection, west of Gibbet Road, and fronts on SC Hwy 170. (COFA-03-24-019062)(Staff - Katie Peterson)]

GO TO THE FIRST ITEM OF NEW BUSINESS.

ITEM ONE IS COMPASS SELF STORAGE.

THREE 15 GIBB ROAD.

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY A REQUEST BY AMT, STILL CONSTRUCTION LLC ON BEHALF OF THE OWNERS AMT, STILL STORAGE VENTURES 81 LLC FOR APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, HIGHWAY COURT OR OVERLAY APPLICATION.

THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF TWO, TWO STORY BUILDINGS TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 109,398 SQUARE FOOT OF CLIMATE CONTROLLED SELF-STORAGE SPACE.

THE ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING AND OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE.

THE PROPERTIES ARE ZONED JONES ESTATE.

PUD CONSIST OF 3.21 ACRES IDENTIFIED BY THE TAX MAP NUMBER IN THE AGENDA, NUMBERS IN THE AGENDA, AND ARE LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE CANE DRIVE AND A STATE DRIVE INTERSECTION WEST OF GIBB ROAD AND FRONTS HIGHWAY ONE 70, WHICH IS THE REASON WE HAVE THE HCOD, MR. CHAIRMAN.

I'LL HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF FOR THIS PROJECT.

THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS.

UM, TONIGHT BEFORE YOU, AS WAS ADDRESSED BY, UM, TARA WETMORE IS THE COMPASS SELF-STORAGE FACILITY.

I DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE, UM, AGENDA ITEM LANGUAGE AGAIN.

SO I'LL START OFF HERE WITH THE SITE PLAN.

UM, AS YOU CAN SEE, THE HIGHWAY IS ON THE TOP LEFT SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN HERE.

UM, SO IT'S LABELED OAKLEY HIGHWAY HERE.

I'VE GOT A LITTLE X THAT KEEPS POPPING UP, BUT, UM, SO THE TWO FACILITY BUILDINGS THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING ARE THESE RIGHT HERE.

THIS IS THE RETENTION POND THAT IS OUT THERE CURRENTLY.

SO THAT'S HOW YOU KIND OF CAN SEE IT AS YOU'RE DRIVING PAST TODAY.

UM, I HAVE INCLUDED THE ROOF PLANS FOR BOTH BUILDINGS AS WELL AS THE ELEVATION.

SO THIS IS BUILDING A AND BACK TO THE SITE PLAN.

BUILDING A IS THE ONE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE HIGHWAY.

BOTH ARE UNDER THE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR.

UM, BUT THIS IS THE ONE THAT IS FURTHER FROM THE CORRIDOR OR THE HIGHWAY WITHIN THE CORRIDOR, AS WELL AS A BUILDING SECTION.

AND THE TOWER ELEVATION, SINCE IT DOES IT IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THERE, AS WELL AS THE ELEVATIONS FOR BUILDING B UM, HERE, WHICH THIS IS THE ONE THAT IS CLOSER TO HIGHWAY ONE 70, AS WELL AS THEIR SECTION FOR THE TOWER AND THE BUILDING SECTION.

UM, THEY HAVE PROVIDED PERSPECTIVES FOR YOU FOR BOTH BUILDINGS.

[00:05:03]

AND YOU CAN SEE HERE WHERE IT'S THE OAK HIGHWAY VIEW DOWN HERE IS WHAT YOU'RE GETTING.

UM, THIS IS NOT TO INCLUDE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.

SO THE LANDSCAPING ON THIS IS NOT PERFECTLY REFLECTIVE OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, BUT IT IS OF THE ELEVATIONS.

AND THEN THE, UM, MATERIALS, COLORS, CONFIGURATIONS FOR THE BUILDING AS WELL AS THE LIGHTING PLAN.

DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE DETAIL.

I'M FLYING THROUGH THIS AND I AS ALWAYS AM HAPPY TO GO BACKWARDS.

UM, BUT IT TYPICALLY HELPS IF WE JUST GO THROUGH IT QUICKLY ON THE FRONT END AND THEN ANSWER QUESTIONS AS WE HAVE THEM.

AND THE LANDSCAPE PLAN HERE.

UM, SO YOU CAN SEE AGAIN THIS IS THE ONE 70 SIDE HERE ALONG WITH THE PLANT SCHEDULE.

THE REVIEW CRITERIA ARE FOUND IN SECTION 3 17 3 OF OUR UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE.

BECAUSE THIS IS LOCATED WITHIN THE JONES ESTATE, PUD, UM, MORE OF THE DESIGN CRITERIA ARE FOUND IN THAT THAN THEY ARE THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AND THE APPLICATIONS MANUAL.

SO I'VE GONE THROUGH ALL OF THOSE.

UM, AS THIS IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY, THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN APPROVE THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH CONDITIONS OR DENY THE APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT.

IF THEY FIND IT DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOUND IN SECTION 3 8 17 3 OF OUR ORDINANCE.

UM, AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, A TABLE IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED.

STAFF WENT THROUGH AND LOOKED AT THE CRITERIA FOUND IN SECTION 3 17 3 AND FOUND THE FOLLOWING ITEMS. UM, WERE NOT YET MEETING THOSE REVIEW CRITERIA.

UM, AND MR. CHAIRMAN, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, I WILL GO THROUGH THESE, GO BACK TO THE PLANS TO SHOW YOU WHERE THEY ARE THAT I'M SEEING THESE ITEMS. UM, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE AND THEN THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE PROJECT, ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CANNOT OR, UM, DO NOT HAVE ANSWERS FOR.

OKAY.

SO THE FIRST ONE IS TO REVISE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO ADDRESS THE STORMWATER COMMENTS FOR DRC.

THE DRC STORMWATER COMMENTS WERE, UM, IN REGARDS TO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.

THEY HAD PLANT MATERIAL IN THE BIO RETENTION CELLS THAT, UM, WAS BEING PROPOSED THAT DID NOT MEET THE REVIEW CRITERIA FOR THE STORMWATER MANUAL.

UM, AND SO THEY WERE ADDING UP PLANT MATERIAL THAT WOULDN'T MAKE THAT BIO CELL WORK WELL.

UM, THERE ALSO WAS A DIFFERENCE ON THE DETAIL VERSUS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THE BIO RETENTION CELL.

SO THE CIVIL PLANS VERSUS THE LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR WHAT MATERIALS WERE IN THERE.

UM, AND THEN THERE ARE TREES BLOCKING THE PEDESTRIAN EGRESS FOR BOTH BUILDINGS, UM, ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.

SO THAT IS THE BIO CELL, WHICH IS LOCATED HERE AND HERE.

THIS ONE WAS THE ONE THAT HAD THE MORE, UH, UM, MORE TREE PLANTINGS BEING INSTALLED.

THERE'S THIS ONE HERE, THE PEDESTRIAN PATH FOR THE EXIT DOORS ARE LOCATED HERE AND HERE.

CAN YOU SEE? YEAH, YOU CAN'T SEE MY MOUSE ON THE SCREEN.

UM, AND THEN THE DETAIL FROM THE CIVIL PLANS IS NOT SHOWN, BUT IT INCLUDES THE PLANT MATERIAL THAT IS IN THE BIORETENTION CELLS.

THE LIGHTING PLAN AS IS TYPICAL.

THESE ARE LED LIGHTS THAT THEY PROPOSED.

THE, UM, ILLUMINATION LEVELS AND THE CUTOFF FIXTURES DO MEET OUR REQUIREMENTS.

SO IT IS JUST A, A, UM, LED VERSUS THE, UH, HALOGEN OR OTHER BULBS THAT ARE PERMITTED SPECIFICALLY BY THE ORDINANCE.

SO A DETERMINATION ON THAT IS NECESSARY.

AND THEN THE FIFTH ONE IS ABOUT THE ROOFTOP UNITS.

UM, THE ROOFTOP UNITS THAT ARE BEING SHOWN, AND CHARLIE CAN SPEAK TO THIS MORE, UM, KNOWLEDGEABLY THAN I CAN, ARE DIFFERENT THAN THOSE WHICH ARE BEING SHOWN ON THE ROOF PLANS FOR THE DRAWINGS.

UM, AND THE UNITS THAT THEY'RE BEING SHOWN ARE THE, ARE RESIDENTIAL CARRIERS.

UM, WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE HEIGHT OF THE PARAPET VERSUS THE HEIGHT OF THESE PROPOSED UNITS, THEY ARE VERY, VERY CLOSE.

AND BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE BUILDINGS, UM, THERE ARE SOME CHALLENGES WITH THAT THAT WE ARE SEEING.

SO, UM, BECAUSE THEY CANNOT BE SEEN OVER THE TOP OF THAT, THERE IS A CONCERN THERE.

I'VE PHRASED A LITTLE BIT IN THIS CONDITION.

UM, SO CONFIRMATION THAT THE ROOFTOP UNITS WILL NOT BE VISIBLE BEYOND, BEYOND THE PARAPET AND AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT THEY SHOULD, SHOULD THEY BE INSTALLED DURING CONSTRUCTION, BE VISIBLE THAT THE BEYOND THE PARAPET HEIGHT, IT WILL RESULT IN A FAILURE OF THE HC INSPECTIONS AND POTENTIALLY HALT CONSTRUCTION AS IT COR IS CORRECTED.

THEIR DRAWINGS CURRENTLY SHOW THAT THEY WILL NOT EXCEED THAT PARAPET HEIGHT, HOWEVER, THEIR DRAWINGS AND THEIR ROOF PLANS ARE NOT REFLECTIVE OF EACH OTHER.

AND SO SHOULD THEY BE INSTALLED IN THE FIELD AS THEY'RE SHOWN ON THE ELEVATIONS, THEY WILL CAUSE AN ISSUE POTENTIALLY.

UM, OR IF IT'S A DIFFERENT UNIT THAN IS SHOWN ON EITHER OF THOSE.

IT ALSO WOULD CAUSE A, A CHALLENGE THE H SO HCOD INSPECTION SHOULD BE FAILING THESE INSPECTIONS

[00:10:01]

AS THEY DO NOT MEET THE PLANS ANYWAYS.

BUT BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING WE ARE SEEING AT THIS LEVEL, I'VE PUT IT IN THERE AS A COMMENT JUST TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT BECAUSE THIS COULD BECOME A VERY, VERY, VERY EXPENSIVE AND POTENTIALLY STOPPING PROBLEM IF, UM, THEY CANNOT FIND A UNIT THAT MEETS THAT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT SINCE THE PARAPET IS ABOUT FOUR FEET TALL.

SO, UM, I'VE PUT THAT IN THERE AS THE POTENTIAL CONDITION THAT COULD BE ADDED TO AN APPROVAL SHOULD YOU FEEL APPROPRIATE.

AND THEN THE OTHER THREE ITEMS ARE THAT A SIGNED PERMIT IS REQUIRED.

THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS ON EVERY SINGLE COMMERCIAL PLAN THAT I REVIEW, THAT ALL OF THE COMMENTS PROVIDED BY DRC AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN MUST BE ADDRESSED TO BE COMPLIANT WITH THIS.

WE ARE WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT ON, THEY'VE RESUBMITTED A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

UM, IT'S BEEN TO DRC, BUT IT, THE RESUBMITTAL IS, UM, BEEN RESUBMITTED.

WE HAVE NOT PROVIDED THAT FEEDBACK SO THAT ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL COMMENTS THAT ARE HERE, THEY WON'T MAKE CHANGES TO THOSE PLANS AND THEN FIND THAT THEY HAVE TO CHANGE THEM AGAIN TO BE REFLECTIVE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS COMMENTS ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND POTENTIALLY LIGHTING PLAN FOR THE SITE.

AND THEN THE FINAL ONE IS A LETTER OF APPROVAL FROM ATLANTIC STATE MANAGEMENT, WHO IS THE DOCTORATE FOR THE PALMETTO POINT BUSINESS PARK.

A RB UH, MUST BE PROVIDED.

AGAIN, THAT IS AN ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM AND, UM, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT OUT OF STUFF LEVEL.

SO DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME ON THESE ITEMS? NO.

WELL, THE PARAPET WALL ONE THAT I, I KNOW THAT IS GONNA BE, IF YOU HAVE TWO PLANS, NOT MATCHING, THAT'S DEFINITELY AN ISSUE AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.

SO, UM, AND I KNOW THERE'VE BEEN BACK AND FORTH TO DRC.

IS ANY CHANGES RECENTLY THAT THEY SAY TO YOU? NOT REGARDING HVAC? NO, BUT THE, THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THAT TONIGHT.

YEAH, I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP THE FLOOR.

CAN WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT ABOUT WHY THEY HAVEN'T ADDRESSED THAT? OH, SORRY.

NO, I'M KIDDING.

AND, AND FEEL FREE TO TALK TO THE PROJECT IN GENERAL, BUT THEN ADDRESS.

UM, MY NAME IS PETER RYER, UH, DESIGN HOUSE ARCHITECTURE, 3,300 AUBURN ROAD, AUBURN HILLS, MICHIGAN.

UH, LET ME SAY, I'M SORRY FOR YOUR LOSS.

AND, UH, AND I'D LIKE TO THANK ADMINISTRATION OVER THE LAST YEAR OR SO FOR KIND OF STEWARDING US THROUGH THIS PROJECT.

IT'S A LOT OF STEPS AND, UH, QUITE COMPLICATED, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO DO IT.

AND WE'RE DOING OUR VERY BEST TO COMPLY AND BRING THE PLANS UP TO SPEED AS FAST AS WE CAN AS WE RECEIVE COMMENTS.

UM, THE, THE, THE PROJECT THAT WE, WE CONSIDER THIS PROJECT AN A PLUS SITE, AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE BEST THROUGH THE OWNERSHIP AND US AND YOU TO, TO BRING YOU A PROJECT THAT YOU'LL BE PROUD OF AND SOMEBODY CAN LOOK AT AND SAY, BOY, THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT WHAT I EXPECTED OUTTA SELF STORAGE.

AND, UM, THAT'S PART OF WHAT I DO, UH, AS A, AS THE CHIEF ARCHITECT OF, OF MY COMPANY, UM, ALL, ALL AROUND THE COUNTRY IS, IS THESE REALLY GOOD CLASS A SITES.

AND SO I'M NOT HERE TO CONTRADICT OR BE CONTRARY ABOUT ANYTHING.

UM, THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO METHOD THAT WE HAVE TO SAVE MONEY ON THE HEIGHT OF A PARAPET OR THE HEIGHT OF A MECHANICAL UNIT.

BUT TO SPEAK TO THAT, UM, THE ORIGINAL PLANS, UM, WHEN WE HAD POSITIVE FEEDBACK, UH, SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, WENT OUT INTO A PRELIMINARY BID PROCESS, AND THEY DID HAVE SPLIT SYSTEM UNITS WITH RESIDENTIAL STYLE AIR CONDITIONERS ON THE ROOF.

THESE WERE SPECIFIED AS 36 INCHES TALL.

UH, THEY SIT ON ABOUT A FOUR INCH RACK.

THEY DON'T HAVE A CURB BECAUSE THEY DON'T PENETRATE.

SO, UM, AT THAT TIME, I BELIEVE WE MIGHT HAVE SHOWN A FOUR FOOT PARAPET.

UM, THE COMMENT CAME UP AND WE STARTED TO, WE STARTED TO LOOK AT OUR BIDS AND OUR PRELIMINARY BIDS AND FIND THAT ROOFTOP UNITS, WHICH WERE ALWAYS MORE EFFICIENT, HAD BECOME, UH, DIFFICULT TO, TO, UH, ACQUIRE DURING COVID.

AND, AND THE PRICES WENT UP.

NOW THEY'VE COME DOWN, UM, SO OUR MECHANICAL ENGINEER OUT OF ARIZONA, WHO ALSO IS ALMOST ENTIRELY A SELF STORAGE COMPANY OF, YOU KNOW, HUNDREDS OF THESE A YEAR AROUND THE COUNTRY.

SO WE DEPEND ON THEM TO PUT THESE TOGETHER FOR US.

UH, THEY RES SPECIFIED, I BELIEVE A CARRIER ROOFTOP UNIT THAT'S A, A FIVE ZERO FCQ, WHATEVER THAT MIGHT MEAN.

UM, AND PER THAT SPECIFICATION, THAT IS A 33 INCH TALL UNIT, THE WHOLE ROOFTOP UNIT.

SO THAT'S ON A 12 INCH OR MAYBE EVEN A 10 INCH CURB.

UH, THOSE DETAILS COME AS THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS GET COMPLETED, BUT CALL IT A 12 INCH CURB THAT PUTS THE, THAT PUTS THE UNIT TOP AT 45 INCHES.

SO AFTER RECEIVING A COMMENT ABOUT NOT, UH, A, A POTENTIAL, A POTENTIAL OF

[00:15:01]

SEEING A, A ROOFTOP UNIT BEYOND THE PARAPET, IT WAS RAISED TO 72 INCHES.

SO THE, THE NEW PLANS THAT ARE CIRCULATING AND BEEN UPLOADED TO THE PORTAL HAVE A 72 INCH PARAPET, WHICH IS PROBABLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ON THE SCREEN.

SO, UM, IT'S AT 30 FEET.

THE, THE, THE FLOOR, THE ROOF LINE IS 24 FEET.

THE PARAPET IS AT 30.

UM, THAT'S A SIX FOOT PARAPET REGARDLESS OF, LET'S PAUSE YOU FOR ONE SECOND.

DO WE HAVE UPDATED ELEVATION SHOWING A SIX FOOT PARAPET, BECAUSE THAT MAY THAT'S RIGHT.

SIX FEET, FOUR AND 15 16TH INCHES.

I'M SORRY, MY MATH IS TERRIBLE.

IT TURNS OUT, BUT I APOLOGIZE.

I JUST, BECAUSE THE OTHER CONSIDERATION IS IF WE HAVE THE WRONG ELEVATIONS AND NOW IT'S TWO FEET HIGHER, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THAT.

UNDERSTOOD.

GO AHEAD.

UNDERSTOOD.

SO, LONG STORY SHORT, THE THE ORIGINAL DESIGN OF THE SPLIT SYSTEMS AND THE DESIGN OF THE ROOFTOP UNITS WERE CLOSE BEFORE.

NOW THEY'RE NOWHERE NEAR, UH, VISIBLE FROM THE GROUND AT ANY PERSPECTIVE OR DISTANCE.

UM, AND, AND THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE TO, TO THAT DISCUSSION.

I'M NOT SURE, EVEN NO MATTER THE LOCATION ON THE ROOF, AS CLOSE AS YOU CAN GET TO THE PARAPET OR AS FAR BACK AS YOU CAN GET FROM THE PARAPET, YOU STILL CAN'T EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE PARAPET WITH THESE UNITS.

UM, AND I HAVE DOCUMENTATION, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S, WE HAVE SPECIFICATIONS FOR THOSE AND, UH, AND THE LIKE.

SO THAT'S KIND OF THE, THE, THE ANSWER TO THAT, UH, TO THAT KIND OF LOOMING QUESTION.

AND I'D LOVE TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PROJECT IF THERE, OH, I DON'T THINK WE'RE DONE WITH THIS QUESTION.

DID YOU WANNA FOLLOW UP ON THAT OR ARE YOU GOOD? OKAY.

UM, BY MYSELF PERSONALLY, Y'ALL WERE ASKED NO LESS THAN THREE TIMES TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON THE UNITS.

WE STILL DON'T HAVE THAT.

TONIGHT IS THE FIRST TIME WE'RE HEARING ABOUT A 50 FCQ.

WE DON'T KNOW THE TONNAGE, THEREFORE WE DON'T KNOW THE SIZE.

A 50 FCQ I'M IN THE BUSINESS CAN GO ANYWHERE FROM 33 INCHES HIGH TO 57 INCHES HIGH, AND MOST LIKELY YOU'RE GONNA HAVE 15 AND 20 AND 25 TON UNITS ON THAT ROOF, WHICH MEANS THEY'RE GONNA BE IN THE 57 INCH HIGH RANGE.

THERE ARE SIX POLES.

YOU HAVE 24 TONS TO DO.

59,000 SQUARE FOOT OF BUILDING AT 80 DEGREES .

THE MATH DOESN'T WORK.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT FOR A FACT.

I DO LOAD CALCULATIONS FOR A LIVING.

I, I HAVE THE WORKING DRAWINGS, I HAVE THE ENGINEERING, IT'S ALL OUT THERE FROM THE ENGINEERS.

THEY DO THIS.

OKAY.

AND WE DON'T HAVE THEM, WE DON'T KNOW THE UNITS, THE SIZES, AND I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO AN ARGUMENT HERE.

WE DON'T HAVE DATA WE'VE ASKED FOR.

WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE WHAT THESE UNITS ARE.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE SUPPLYING THE BUILDING.

I HAVE CONCERNS OVER THAT.

OKAY.

UM, WE'RE COMMITTING THAT THE UNITS ARE NOT VISIBLE OR ABOVE THE PARAPET AND WE KNOW THE SIZES AND THE HEIGHT OF THE PARAPET.

AND FROM A PLANNING STANDPOINT, NORMALLY WE WOULDN'T HAVE THE, THE FINAL, FINAL FINALIZED MECHANICALS TO SHARE.

WE WOULD JUST HAVE ESTIMATES OF FIGHTS AND PARAPET HEIGHTS.

BUT NOW WE'VE HAVE, BECAUSE THE PROJECT IS IMMINENT, WE HAVE RELEASED THE ENGINEERS TO GIVE US THE SIGN OF SPECS.

AND THAT'S WHAT I'M REPRESENTING TO YOU THAT I LITERALLY BROUGHT WITH ME FROM A CONVERSATION TODAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY WERE CORRECT.

THAT INFORMATION IN THE PACKET OR THAT'S JUST INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE? WELL, THE INFORMATION THAT'S CORRECT IN THE PACKET IS THAT ALL SIX OF THE UNITS ON BOTH BUILDINGS ARE LABELED RTU UNITS.

SO THERE WAS THERE THAT WAS UPDATED THEN.

ARE THE SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED IN THE PACKET TO MATCH IN THE CROSS SECTIONS? IT SHOWS THAT THE UNIT DOES NOT EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.

WELL, IT SHOWS THAT IT EXACTLY MATCHES THE HEIGHT.

I JUST WANT YOU SAID IT WAS MUCH SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN IT, SO IT'S NOT, IT'S EQUAL TO, IT'S, IT, IT SHOWS WHAT WE NEED TO SHOW TO MAKE THE COMMITMENT TO THIS BOARD, THAT THOSE THINGS DON'T EXCEED THE HEIGHT.

OKAY.

BUT THE SPEC SHEET THAT YOU GAVE US IS WHAT YOU ARE PLANNING TO USE, OR IT IS NOT THE HELP SHEET, THE SUPPLEMENTAL CUT SHEET WE GAVE YOU WAS BASED ON ENGINEERING.

THAT IS, THAT IS MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS OLD.

SO IT'S NOT REFLECTIVE OF THE CURRENT PLAN, BUT THE SECTIONS THAT SHOW THE HEIGHT OF, OF THE EQUIPMENT ARE A COMMITMENT TO THE HEIGHT OF THE EQUIPMENT BASED ON THEM BEING RTUS AT THE TIME THAT SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET WAS ASKED FOR.

THAT WAS THE SYSTEM.

AND THEN WHEN THERE WAS QUESTIONS, WE, WE ASSURED OURSELVES THAT WITH THE RTU CHANGE, WE STILL HAD THE HEIGHTS THAT WOULD SATISFY YOUR REQUIREMENTS.

I'M, I'M, I'M NOT GONNA GET DEEP INTO THIS, BUT I AM GONNA TAKE, EXCEPT FROM THAT, BECAUSE WHEN WE WENT TO DRC FOR THIS

[00:20:01]

HCOD PLAN, WE HAD A CONVERSATION THAT THERE IS NO WAY THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE IT.

AND IT SAID RTU AND IT SHOWED THAT CUT SHEET AT THAT TIME.

AND AT THAT TIME, HOW LONG AGO WAS DRC TWO, THREE WEEKS APPROXIMATELY FOR HCOD FOUR WEEKS.

BECAUSE THAT WAS WHEN THE, AT THAT TIME IT WAS REQUESTED THAT YOU GET THE INFORMATION FOR THE RTUS TO US.

AND HERE WE ARE FOUR WEEKS LATER AND WE HAVE NO INFORMATION.

I HAVE A CHALLENGE WITH THAT.

UM, LET'S NOT HARP ON THIS POINT.

ARE THERE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS? I KNOW THERE WAS, UH, SOMETHING ABOUT LANDSCAPING POSSIBLY.

YEP.

AND IT WAS THROUGH THAT.

WELL, I GUESS THE QUESTION STILL REMAINS IS DID IT GET CHANGED AND DO WE HAVE A COPY OF THAT PLAN THAT IT'S BEEN CHANGED? LANDSCAPE.

LANDSCAPE, YEAH.

OKAY.

I COMMENT ON THAT LANDSCAPE.

OH, HE CAN'T SPEAK TO HIS OWN COMMISSION, I APOLOGIZE.

NOPE, HE CANNOT SPEAK TO HIS OWN COMMISSION.

I'M SORRY.

SORRY MIKE.

NO, YOU'RE RIGHT.

JONATHAN STEWART, I HAD A HARD TIME HEARING THE QUESTION JUST REGARDING, THERE WAS MENTION TO YOU, I GUESS AT THE IC AS FAR AS THE, AS KATIE INDICATED EARLIER.

UH, IN OTHER WORDS, IS THERE ANYTHING CHANGED FROM WHAT WE ACTUALLY HAVE NOW COMPARED TO WHAT WAS BROUGHT TO YOU WHEN YOU HEARD ABOUT THE QUESTION ON LANDSCAPING? YEAH, SO THERE WERE SOME, THERE WERE SOME CLARIFICATIONS ON THE, UH, TREES IN FRONT OF THE, UH, STAIRWELL, UH, EXIT DOOR STOOPS.

THOSE HAVE BEEN SHIFTED.

AND, AND THE NEW PLAN, UH, WE JUST UPLOADED TO THE PORTAL, UM, AND I UNDERSTAND IT WAS BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION A FEW WEEKS AGO.

WE JUST UPLOADED IT.

UM, THAT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE TREES ARE NO LONGER VISIBLE.

AND THEN ALSO THE PLANT MATERIAL, UH, WAS, WAS QUALIFIED WITH MORE DETAIL AS TO SPECIES AND QUANTITIES, UH, ON THERE.

SO THE ORIGINAL ONE SAID NATURAL GROUND COVER.

AND SO THAT'S BEEN UPDATED AS WELL.

THERE WAS ALSO A, A QUESTION I REMEMBER HEARING REGARDING THE DOORS, THE EXIT DOORS, THERE WAS TREES THAT WERE CLOSE TO THAT.

THAT'S YES.

SO THAT, YEAH, THE STAIRWELLS, THOSE EXIT DOORS ARE, ARE WHERE THE STAIRS ARE.

AND THAT HAS BEEN CLEAR, UH, CLEARED UP AND THERE'S A CLEAR PATH AND THERE'S A, UH, ON THE, ON THE UPDATED VERSION ON, ON THIS VERSION, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE WHERE THOSE EXIT DOORS ARE.

SO ON THE, ON THE UPDATED VERSION, WE'VE ACTUALLY INLAID THE STAIRWELL.

SO YOU SEE WHERE THE STAIR IS AND YOU SEE WHERE THE DOOR IS AND IT WILL LITTLE MORE CLEARLY IDENTIFIES THAT WE HAVE A COPY OF THOSE.

YES, WE DO NOT, BECAUSE THE APPLICATION DEADLINE IS FOUR WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.

THIS IS UPLOADED TO THE PORTAL.

I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT YET.

SO WHAT WE ARE REVIEWING TONIGHT AT THIS MEETING IS THE ONE THAT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET.

UM, A RESUBMITTAL, IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEELS APPROPRIATE TO BE REVIEWED AT A STAFF LEVEL FOR THOSE LANDSCAPE PLAN CHANGES.

IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH STAFF BEING ABLE TO IDENTIFY THOSE THREE ITEMS COULD BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED.

UM, AND THEY WOULD NEED TO RESUBMIT AFTER THIS MEETING WITH THOSE CHANGES BEING ADDRESSED IF THAT'S THE CASE.

BUT, UM, WHAT'S BEING REVIEWED AT PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT IS THE INFORMATION THAT IS IN YOUR PACKET.

ALL I HAVE.

ANYTHING ELSE? JUST WANNA WETMORE, I'D BE COMFORTABLE WITH STAFF REVIEWING THE LANDSCAPING.

I THINK IT COMES BACK TO OUR COMFORT LEVEL WITH THE IS, IS, IS I THINK IN MY MIND THE BIGGEST ISSUE.

WELL, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, MAJORITY RULES, THAT'S THE THING IN THESE COMMISSIONS, UM, I AM PERSONALLY NOT COMFORTABLE.

AND IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF STAFF'S ABILITY OR INABILITY.

IT IS BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD DIFFERENT STORIES AND WE HAVE REQUESTED DIFFERENT INFORMATION.

UH, THIS WOULDN'T EVEN BE A CONVERSATION IF IT WASN'T PICKED UP.

THAT CUT SHEETS.

THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS WERE PROVIDED, BUT RT USED ARE DRAWN ON THE BUILDING.

I THINK PERSONALLY IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE IT COME BACK BEFORE US.

AT LEAST FOR THAT ELEMENT.

I WILL NOT BE THE ONE MAKING THE MOTION CHAIR.

I AGREE WITH THAT.

JUST BECAUSE EVEN THE, LIKE THE CURB HEIGHT LISTED AS 18 INCHES, WE WERE TALKING MAYBE SIX TO 12.

I JUST THINK IT'S NOT CLEAR.

AND WE'VE HAD APPLICANTS ASSURE US IN THE PAST THAT UNITS WILL

[00:25:01]

NOT BE VISIBLE UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, AND THAT'S NOT ALWAYS THE CASE.

AND SO I THINK IT JUST NEEDS TO BE ACCURATELY SUBMITTED WITH ALL THE REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR US TO ENSURE THAT THIS WILL NOT BE VISIBLE AND THAT WE KNOW WHAT THE FINAL ELEVATIONS WILL LOOK LIKE.

EXACTLY.

AND TO BE, TO BE FAIR, THIS IS ALSO TRYING TO PROTECT THE APPLICANT FROM THE GOD FORBID SCENARIO THAT THE UNITS ARE TOO TALL.

UM, THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES ON THAT, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I MAY, UM, AS YOU KNOW, UH, WE, YOU HAVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, ? YES, SIR.

SO ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE, UH, RICHARDSON.

BRUCE, FINGER MILLING BROOKS AND BRUCE ATTORNEYS FOR THE ALLEN HERE FOR Y'ALL AND PROVIDE LEGAL GUIDANCE.

SO, UH, YOUR OPTIONS TONIGHT, YOU HAVE THREE AT YOUR DISPOSAL.

AS USUAL, YOU CAN APPROVE, IMPROVE THE CONDITIONS.

YOU CAN DENY I HAVE APPLICANT'S REQUEST AND IF Y'ALL ARE AGREEABLE TO IT, IT CAN ALSO BE TABLED.

AND THAT WAY IF THERE IS A POTENTIALLY ADVERSE DECISION BASED OFF OF LACK OF INFORMATION, THEY CAN PROVIDE THE NEEDED INFORMATION AND NOT HAVE TO START OVER FROM THE VERY BEGINNING AS IT THEY WOULD HAVE TO IF IT WAS DENIED.

ACTUALLY, I JUST REMEMBERED YOU NEED TO BE BY THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE WE'RE RECORDING THIS.

WELL, I, I'M YOU UP.

I'M HOPEFULLY GONNA PUSH YOU UP HERE.

OKAY.

UM, I'LL BE, I'LL BE GLAD TO DO IT IF YOU WOULD LIKE, SIR.

YEAH.

IF YOU, IF IF THEY ARE DENIED ON HCOD, DOES THAT MEAN THEY START HCOD ALL OVER AGAIN, HAVE TO GO TO, UH, DRC AND ALL THAT? OR DOES IT MEAN YES, JUST, JUST SO WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT RESULTS AND WHAT WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO PUNISH, WE'RE TRYING TO RESPECT THE PROCESS.

YES, SIR.

MR. CHAIR.

THAT, THAT IS, UM, THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY WILL HAVE TO START OVER FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCESS AGAIN, THROUGH THE HCOD, COFA, HD OR F-H-D-H-C-O-D-H-C-O-D PROCESS.

TOO MANY LETTERS.

TOO MANY, TOO MANY A ACRONYMS, HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT, NOT HISTORIC DISTRICT.

THE, THE TABLING HAS TO BE AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.

THAT IS CORRECT.

OKAY.

AND, UM, GENERAL FEEL, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED, NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED.

I'M NOT COMFORTABLE.

I'M NOT COMFORTABLE IF, IF THE, UH, IF THE COMMISSION FEELS LIKE IT'S, IT'S NOT GONNA GO FAVORABLY, WE WOULD REQUEST A TABLING IN A, IN A RETURN FOR THE, UH, CLARIFICATION OF THE SIDE.

WE, WE DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE TO START ALL OVER AGAIN.

THAT WOULD BE AMENABLE TO US.

UM, WE DO.

WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS, UM, KATIE, YOU USUALLY WANT CLEAR DIRECTION ON WHAT IT IS WE'RE LOOKING FOR, CORRECT? CORRECT.

OKAY, SO WE'RE LOOKING FOR ON THE LANDSCAPING END , JUST REAL QUICK.

YEAH.

AND I DON'T ITEM THE STAFF PHONE.

IF YOU HAVE OTHER ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED, I'D LOVE CLARIFICATION ON 'EM TO ENSURE THAT WHEN THEY DO GET A RESUBMITTAL TO US, WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT BRINGING SOMETHING BEFORE YOU ALL THAT DOES NOT MEET THESE REQUIREMENTS.

IS THERE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL DIFFERENT? NO, I, I THINK THIS ADDRESSING THESE WOULD MEET MY NEEDS, BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE WE NEED IN FAIRNESS TO THE APPLICANT, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS.

DO I HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST? SO MOVED.

SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.

OKAY.

OKAY.

[VII.2. New Riverside Medical Office (Development Plan): A request by Ryan Lyle of Davis & Floyd, Inc., on behalf of Russell Baxley of Beaufort Memorial Hospital for approval of a preliminary development plan. The project consists of the construction of a 5,000 SF medical office building with associated parking and pedestrian access. The property is zoned Jones Estate PUD and consists of approximately 1.37 acres identified by tax map number R610 036 000 3212 0000 and located within the May River Crossing Master Plan. (DP-03-24-019067) (Staff – Dan Frazier)]

UNDER NEW BUSINESS, UH, ITEM NUMBER TWO, NEW RIVERSIDE MEDICAL OFFICE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

A REQUEST BY RYAN LYLE AND DAVIS OF DAVIS AND FLOYD, INC.

ON BEHALF OF RUSSELL BAXLEY OF BUFORD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOR APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF CONSTRUCTION OF A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS.

THE PROPERTY IS ZONED JONES ESTATE, PUD, AND CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 1.37 ACRES IDENTIFIED BY THE TAX MEMBER ON THE AGENDA AND LOCATED WITHIN THE MAY RIVER CROSSING MASTER PLAN.

MR. FRAZIER.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

THIS IS A PRELIMINARY

[00:30:01]

DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR NEW RIVERSIDE MEDICAL OFFICE.

A REQUEST BY RYAN LYLE OF DAVIS AND FLOYD, INC.

ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER RUSSELL BAXLEY OF BEFORD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL.

FOR APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A SINGLE STORY, 5,000 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING INFRASTRUCTURE.

AS YOU ALREADY STATED, IT'S ON 1.37 ACRE PARCEL IN THE JONES ESTATE, PUD.

IT'S LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLUFFTON ROAD.

UH, THAT'S INCORRECT.

IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE MAY RIVER CROSSING MASTER PLAN.

UH, HERE WE GO.

WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL LOCATE IT VISUALLY.

THIS IS, THIS IS, UH, INTERSECTION OF MAY RIVER ROAD AND, AND, UH, OAK T HIGHWAY.

IT'S MAY RIVER CROSSING.

IT'S THE SHOPPING CENTER WITH THE PUBLIX IN IT.

IT'S THE FIRST PARCEL ON YOUR LEFT IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL C IN THE MASTER PLAN.

I BELIEVE I'LL BRING THAT UP IN ONE SECOND.

THIS IS AN AERIAL OF THE SAME LOCATION.

IT IS, UH, SUBJECT PARCEL IS AN OUT PARCEL WITHIN THE MAY RIVER CROSSING, AND THE UTILITIES HAVE BEEN STUBBED TO SERVE THE SITE ALREADY WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPED FOR THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT.

IT IS ALSO WITHIN THE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY.

SO IT'LL REQUIRE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, REVIEWING LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING AND ARCHITECTURE AT THE TIME OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL.

UH, THIS WENT BEFORE THE DRC ON MAY 1ST, 2024, AND THE APPLICANT PROVIDED A RESUBMITTAL ON MAY 14TH.

THIS IS THE MASTER PLAN, UH, AND THE PARCEL WE'RE LOOKING AT IS PARCEL C DOWN HERE.

I GOT A CLOSER VIEW OF THE SITE PLAN.

UH, THIS LAYOUT, IT'LL BE ACCESSED INTERNALLY.

THIS TO, TO THE RIGHT OR TO THE EAST.

IS IS THE ENTRANCE DRIVE.

I BELIEVE IT'S CALLED MAY CROSSING ROAD, MAY RIVER CROSSING.

UM, THE PARCEL SITS AT, UH, 75 FOOT SETBACK, UH, THE COMMERCIAL SETBACK OFF, OFF OF MAY RIVER ROAD.

PARKING IS PROVIDED.

I HAVE ONE.

WE HAVE ONE CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT I'LL GET TO IN ONE SECOND ASSOCIATED WITH THE PARKING AND YOU'LL PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERS THE FOLLOWING, THE CRITERIA FOUND IN UDO SECTION THREE TEN THREE A.

THESE ARE THE CRITERIA.

THE RESPONSE TO THE CRITERIA ARE WITHIN YOUR PACKET.

ANY COMMISSION CAN APPROVE THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH CONDITIONS.

IT CAN TABLE THE APPLICATION OR YOU CAN DENY THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANTS TOWN STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT MEET CRITERIA TWO, AND THEREFORE TOWN STAFF DOES NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

UH, CRITERIA TWO HAD TO DO WITH, UH, MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT THAT REQUIRED THAT 18, THAT ALL SPACES BE ABOVE THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF SPACES WILL, WILL BE PERVIOUS.

SO, UH, THE CONDITION ONE IS, IS, UH, RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF IS THAT THE CONDITION YOU LEVY ON THIS IS ALL PROPOSED ONSITE PARKING MORE THAN THE REQUIRED 18 SPACES WILL BE DESIGNED AS PARKING AT TIME OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL.

AND I HAVE A SUGGESTED MOTION THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND CAN, ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, IT'S MOVED.

SO IT'S CLOSER AND I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE FOR ME OR THE APPLICANT.

HOW MANY SPACES ARE THERE, DAN? THERE'S 40 TOTAL 18 ARE REQUIRED.

SO IT WOULD BE 22 SPACES THAT WOULD NEED TO BE, UH, OUS.

ANY QUESTION? DAN HAS IT, UH, APPLICANT INDICATED WHY THEY WANT THAT MANY PARKING SPACES.

I I THINK IT HAS TO DO WITH THE FUNCTION OF THE BUILDING.

UM, UH, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY WE, WE, WE WILL GET, WE'LL GET SUBMITTALS THAT THE GO ABOVE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED.

AND IT'S USUALLY BASED UPON JUST INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE AND THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THEY NEED.

THE APPLICANT WAS NOT AWARE, NOR WAS I OF THE PERVIOUS PARKING CONDITION.

THIS WASN'T IGNORED BY THE APPLICANT.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY'VE, THAT THEY'VE FOUND OUT SINCE THEIR SUBMITTAL.

AND THERE'S LOT, THERE'S MANY EXAMPLES OF THAT PERVIOUS PARKING IN THAT AREA ALREADY.

THERE IS PERVIOUS PARKING WITHIN NEW RIVER, WITHIN MAY RIVER CROSSING.

UM, I DON'T REMEMBER ANY BY PUBLIX.

SO IT, I I THINK ON THE OTHER SIDE, STARBUCKS HAS SOME NEXT TO IT, I BELIEVE.

AND THE, THE WHOLE REASON FOR THE PERVIOUS PARKING IS JUST THE, THE WATER DRAINAGE KEEPING AWAY FROM THE RIVER.

ABSOLUTELY.

YEP.

DONE WITH DAN.

I JUST WANT TO ASK THE QUESTION, THE GUIDING, IS THE APPLICANT AWARE OF THIS AND ARE THEY GONNA DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT?

[00:35:03]

AWARE OF THE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA SPEAK ON THAT.

YEAH.

THE PARKING SITUATION.

ARE YOU AWARE OF THIS AND CAN YOU MAKE CHANGES? HAVE YOU MADE CHANGES? NO CHANGES.

DAN, IS THIS ONE THAT WOULD COME BEFORE DRC FOR YES.

THE HCRD OF THE BUILDING? YES.

OKAY.

UM, WELL, DID THE APPLICANT WANT TO SPEAK RYAN DAVIS EMPLOYED? UM, I CAN ANSWER ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, BUT I THINK DAN SET IT UP WELL.

WE CAN ADDRESS THE PREVIOUS PARKING AT FINAL DRC.

WE DO HAVE TO GO TO HIGHWAY QUARTER DOOR OVERLAY TO GET, UH, CERTIFICATE, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE BUILDING ARCHITECTURE.

AND WE'RE WORKING ON THAT.

SO AS WE COME BACK TO THE BOARD DRC FOR FINAL, WE'LL SHOW, UM, THE, UH, SERVICE PART QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OTHER THAN THAT ONE COMMENT, AND I KNOW YOU GUYS KNOW, BUT PLEASE REMEMBER, YOU HAVE TO HAVE TWO FRONTS.

SO NO, LIKE SERVICE ENTRY LOOKING THINGS, FRONTING MAY RIVER ROAD, PLEASE.

WHEN YOU GET TO THE ARCHITECTURE.

AND TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT, YOU HAVE A HUNDRED FOOT LONG BUILDING.

WE DON'T LIKE A HUNDRED FOOT LONG FLAT BUILDINGS ON THE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR.

SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO HAVE, WHETHER IT'S REAL OR NOT, UM, SOME VARIATION IN THE STRUCTURE, SOME FALSE WINDOWS IF THEY'RE NOT REAL ONES, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT TELLING YOU HOW TO DESIGN IT ARCHITECTURALLY, BUT IF YOU COME WITH A HUNDRED FOOT SLAB OF CONCRETE, IT'S, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A HARD TIME .

YEAH, WE'RE, YEAH, WE'RE USED TO THAT.

IT'S GONNA BE A GREAT LOOKING BUILDING.

UH, WE LOOKED AT THE ADJACENT ARCHITECTURE AND UM, WE DO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL BUFFER ALONG HIGHWAY 46, SO YOU'RE NOT REALLY GONNA BE ABLE TO SEE THAT ON THE HIGHWAY, BUT WE UNDERSTAND THAT WE CAN'T HAVE A LONG BLANK FACADE UNTIL 15 YEARS FROM NOW.

SOMEBODY CLEAR CUTS IT BY MISTAKE.

UM, OKAY.

DAN, DO WE HAVE THE PROPOSED? I DO.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, SIR.

I'D LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I MOVE TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVE THE NEW RIVERSIDE MEDICAL OFFICE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.

ALL PROPOSED ONSITE PARKING MORE THAN THE REQUIRED 18 PARKING SPACES WILL BE DESIGNED AS PERVIOUS PARKING AT THE TIME OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL.

SECOND MOVED AND SECOND INTO ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

OPPOSED? OKAY.

MOTION CARRIES.

ASK FOR DISCUSSION AFTER THE SECOND.

[3. Joiner Property – 9 Bruin Road (Development Plan): A request by Jonathan Marsh of Witmer Jones Keefer, Ltd, on behalf of the property owner, Eugene Marks of JOHA LLC, for approval of a preliminary development plan. The project proposes the installation of site infrastructure including internal drive, access, parking, walks, utilities, drainage, and stormwater infrastructure to support one existing residential unit and the future development of three mixed-use commercial lots and two mixed-use carriage houses for a combined total square footage of +/- 19,100 SF. The property is zoned Neighborhood Core – Historic District (NC-HD) and consists of approximately 0.79 acres identified by tax map number R610 039 00A 0021 0000 located at the northeast corner of Bluffton Road and Bruin Road. (DP-03-24-019066) (Staff – Dan Frazier)]

OKAY.

THIRD ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

JOINER PROPERTY.

NINE BRUIN ROAD DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

A REP, A REQUEST BY JONATHAN MARSH OF WHITMER JONES KEEFER ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER EUGENE MARKS OF JOE HA L LC FOR APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

THE PROJECT PROPOSES THE INSTALLATION OF SITE INFRASTRUCTURE, INCLUDING THE INTERNAL DRIVE ACCESS, PARKING WALKS, UTILITIES, DRAINAGE AND STORM WATER INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT ONE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNIT AND THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THREE MIXED USE COMMERCIAL LOTS AND TWO MIXED USE CARRIAGE HOUSES FOR A COMBINED TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PLUS OR MINUS 19,100 SQUARE FEET.

THE PROPERTY IS ZONED NEIGHBORHOOD CORE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 0.79 ACRES AS IDENTIFIED BY THE TAX MAP NUMBER IN THE AGENDA LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLUFFTON ROAD IN BRUIN ROAD.

MR. JUDGE, MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE JOINER PROPERTIES LOCATED AT NINE BRUIN ROAD.

IT'S REQUEST BY JONATHAN MARSHALL WHITMER JONES KEEFER.

THE APPLICANT PROPOSES THE INSTALLATION OF SITE INFRASTRUCTURE, INCLUDING INTERNAL DRIVE ACCESS, PARKING WALKS, UTILITIES, DRAINAGE AND STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT ONE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNIT AND THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THREE MIXED USED COMMERCIAL LOTS AND TWO CARRIAGE HOUSES.

IT'S ON A 0.79 ACRE PARCEL ZONE NEIGHBORHOOD CORE HISTORIC DISTRICT, AND IT'S LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLUFFTON ROAD AND BRUIN ROAD.

HERE'S THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY SUPERIMPOSED OVER AN AERIAL, UH, SUBJECT PARCEL IS WITHIN THE NCHD DISTRICT REQUIRING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, HISTORIC DISTRICT REVIEW AND APPROVAL.

UH, THE APPLICANT PROPOSED IT TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY INTO FOUR TOTAL BUILDING LOTS.

THE SITE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT I'VE JUST LISTED WILL BE COMPLETED AS THE FIRST PHASE FINAL BUILDING USES AND TENANTS ARE YET TO BE DETERMINED.

THE

[00:40:01]

EXISTING ACCESS POINTS WILL BE IMPROVED TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE INTERNAL PARKING AREA ALONG WITH UTILITY AND SERVICE ACCESS.

THE ACCESS FROM BLUFFTON ROAD IS PROPOSED TO BE RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT THE ACCESS OFF BRUIN ROAD IS PROPOSED TO BE FULL ACCESS.

THEY HAD A TIA PREPARED THEY, THEY WORKED CLOSELY WITH S-C-D-O-T, WHO MAINTAINS BOTH BRUIN ROAD AND BLUFFTON ROAD, WORKED WITH THEM ON THE ACCESS, HAD TO MAKE A COUPLE CHANGES WITH THEIR SITE PLAN TWICE I THINK.

AND, UH, THE RESULT IS, UH, A-C-D-O-T UM, WOULD, UH, WOULD, WOULD PROVIDE AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AND ARE OKAY WITH A RIDE IN RIDE OUT OFF OF BLUFFTON ROAD AND A FULL ACCESS OF BRUIN ROAD.

UH, THIS WAS HEARD AT THE DRC ON MAY 1ST, 2024.

THE APPLICANT PROVIDED A RESUBMITTAL INCLUDING A RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON MAY 29, AND THEN THEY PROVIDED A SECOND RESUBMITTAL AND THAT WAS BASED UPON THE CHANGES THEY HAD TO MADE DUE TO THE TIA AND THAT WAS ON JUNE 17TH, 2024.

HERE IS THE LAYOUT.

HERE'S A CLOSER VIEW OF IT.

THIS IS THE RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT THAT I'M REFERRING TO OFF OF BLUFFTON ROAD.

THIS IS A FULL ACCESS POINT OFF OF BRUIN PROPOSING.

UH, THE HEAVIER LINE IDENTIFIES THE INDIVIDUAL FOUR LOTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED FOR A, AS A CARRIAGE HOUSE TO THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ONE A IS CARRIAGE TO LOT ONE, LOT TWO, AND LOT THREE IS ON THE CORNER.

THEY PROVIDED A SITE DATA TABLE THAT THAT BRINGS TOGETHER WHAT, WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED ON THE PROJECT.

UH, HOPEFULLY HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.

THEY, THEY, THEY ACTUALLY INCLUDE THE PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINTS AND MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE AND THE ASSUMED BUILDING USES SO THAT THEY COULD, THEY COULD PROVIDE US WITH THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED.

THEY HAD, THEY'RE SHOWING 47 SPACES AND 47 SPACES ARE WHAT IS REQUIRED.

UM, THEY JUST GOT UNDER THE GUN ON THE, ON GOLF PARKING SPACES.

UH, ONE OF THE LAST DEVELOPMENTS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH BEFORE WE CHANGE THE UDO AND CHANGE HOW, UH, GOLF CART PARKING SPACES CAN BE, UH, COUNTED TOWARDS, UH, REQUIRED PARKING.

I CAN RETURN TO THIS OR ZOOM, ZOOM INTO ANY OF THESE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

UH, SAME CRITERIA.

UDO SECTION THREE TEN THREE A.

THESE ARE THE CRITERIA FINDING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED, APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH CONDITIONS TABLE THE APPLICATION OR DENY THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT AND TOWN STAFF.

FINDS THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION THREE TEN THREE A OF THE UDO HAVE BEEN MET AND RECOMMENDS THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE APPLICATION THAT'S SUBMITTED.

AND, UH, THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND, UH, AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR APPLICANT CAN SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF.

WHY DON'T, IF, IF WE'RE OKAY WITH IT COMMISSION, WHY DON'T WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? AND LET'S, THEN LET'S GO WITH QUESTIONS.

MM-HMM, .

OKAY.

GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY.

UH, MY NAME'S DAN KEEFER WITH WHITMER JONES KEEFER.

WE'RE THE LAND PLANNERS AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS.

THANK YOU FOR, UM, HEARING US TONIGHT.

WE, EUGENE MARKS IS THE, THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND HE'D LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS ABOUT THE PROJECT AND THE PLACE, A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE HISTORY.

AND THEN WE'VE GOT THE PROJECT TEAM, UM, HERE.

MYSELF, DYLAN TURNER, WHO'S A, A ENGINEER, NATE STORY.

UM, SO ENGINEER.

AND THEN JOHN MARSH FROM OUR OFFICE AS WELL.

SO WE GOT FOUR.

THE CROWDS.

MM-HMM.

.

MM-HMM.

GUYS OUT.

MR. MARKS.

THANKS DAVE.

HI FOLKS.

EUGENE MARKS, UH, I OWN THE PROPERTY BY THE WAY.

JOHA ARE THE INITIALS OF MY GRANDKIDS.

UM, AND, BUT I HAVE TO ADD ANOTHER INITIAL BECAUSE WE GOT ANOTHER ONE, UM, WHICH IS LOVELY, BUT I'M NOT DOING THE PAPERWORK JUST FOR THAT.

I WAS GONNA SAY, THAT'S GONNA TAKE A LITTLE BIT TO CHANGE.

YES, YES.

UM, I'M GONNA LET THE EXPERTS DO THEIR THING BECAUSE THIS IS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF TECHNICAL INVOLVED WITH THESE THINGS AND SO FORTH.

BUT, BUT I THINK IT'S ALSO VERY IMPORTANT, UM, FOR US.

THIS ISN'T JUST DIRT AND STICKS AND ROOFING AND SO FORTH.

UM, AND I THINK SOME DEGREE THAT CAME ACROSS WHEN WE REDID THE HOUSE.

UM, UH, AND THIS IS A CONTINUATION OF THAT.

WE'RE VERY PROUD OF THE HOUSE.

WE'RE PROUD OF WHERE IT'S LOCATED.

WE'RE PROUD OF THE WAY IT LOOKS.

WHENEVER I COME DOWNTOWN AND I LOOK ACROSS THAT VIEW, I JUST SAY THAT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST A GORGEOUS CORNER.

AND SO WHEN WE'VE GONE AT THIS AS A TEAM, WE HAVEN'T

[00:45:01]

GONE AT THIS SAYING, WHAT'S THE BEST ECONOMIC MODEL? WHAT'S THE HIGHEST AND BEST ECONOMIC USE? HOW DO WE SQUEEZE THIS IN? HOW DO WE DO THIS AND DO THAT? THERE WERE OTHER WAYS WE COULD HAVE GONE ABOUT THIS.

FOR EXAMPLE, THERE WAS A CONCEPT THAT THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A LOT ON JOINER LANE THERE, BUT THAT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN RIGHT FOR THE HOUSE BECAUSE THAT BUILDING WOULD'VE BEEN ENCUMBERING COVERING A LITTLE BIT OF SPACE FOR THAT HOUSE.

SO WE DIDN'T PROCEED WITH THAT.

YOU COULD RECONFIGURE THIS LOT.

WE COULD HAVE SAT BACK AND SAID, WELL, LET'S WAIT FOR, THEY ASK US TO DO THE TRAFFIC STUDIES AND SO FORTH.

WE TRAFFIC IS IMPORTANT HERE.

SO WE WENT OUT, INVESTED IN THAT, AND THAT WAS DONE IN THE FALL.

DAN KEEPER AND I WERE WALKING THE LOT AND I SAID, YOU KNOW, THESE TREES, THEY NEED TO BE PRUNED AND THEY NEED TO BE FERTILIZED.

AND I SPENT 12 GRAND TO P PRUNE AND FERTILIZE BEFORE I GOT HERE.

BEFORE YOU WERE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, THE TREES, BECAUSE THE TREES ARE IMPORTANT.

AND SO, AND THERE'S A WHOLE SERIES OF OTHER THINGS.

I'VE SPOKEN TO THE SEARCH GROUP, OUR NEIGHBORS, ABOUT THE IN AND OUT, ABOUT POSSIBLY CONNECTING, NOT CONNECTING.

I'VE SPOKEN TO THE JOINERS AGAIN, WALTER LIVES NEXT DOOR.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW THAT, BUT IN THE HOUSE RIGHT NEXT DOOR, WALTER AND I HAVE BECOME FRIENDS.

WONDERFUL PART EXPERIENCE IN MY LIFE.

BUT, SO WE'VE, AND, AND ONCE THE PLAN WAS SUBMITTED, I SENT IT OUT TO FIVE OR SIX PEOPLE.

WELL-KNOWN PEOPLE IN TOWN WHO HAVE OPINIONS AROUND WHAT'S GOING ON IN OLD TOWN.

SO HERE IT IS, WE'RE PROUD OF IT.

WE'RE GONNA EXECUTE IT THOUGHTFULLY AND PROPERLY.

IF YOU HAVE COMMENTS, PLEASE PROVIDE THEM.

NOTHING CAME BACK NOW, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S BECAUSE NO ONE LOOKED AT IT.

AT LEAST HALF OF THEM LOOKED AT IT.

LET'S, LET'S SEE.

AND SO THERE'S NO COMMENT.

SO, SO, SO AS WE GET INTO THIS, WE'RE HERE TO DO THE RIGHT THING IN THE CONTEXT OF PRACTICAL, REASONABLE, AND, UM, RESPONSIBLE.

AND I'M GONNA LET THE PROS TALK ABOUT THEIR THINGS BECAUSE FOR ME IT'S NOTIONS FOR THEM, IT'S THEIR WAY OF LIFE.

UM, UH, JAMES, THE ARBORIST IS NOT HERE, BUT HE HAS A REPORT ON THE TREES, UH, AND, AND THE TEAM IS HERE.

SO YEAH, THIS IS TECHNICAL AND THIS IS ABOUT NUMBERS AND DETAILS AND SETBACKS AND SO FORTH, BUT IT'S ALSO ABOUT INTENT AND RESPONSIBILITY AND TRUST THAT WHEN WE SAY WE'RE GONNA DO SOMETHING, WE'RE GONNA DO IT RIGHT.

SO THANK YOU.

I'LL TURN IT OVER TO, UH, MR. KERA.

YEP.

THANK YOU.

ONE COMMENT.

I MAY JUST ONE.

UM, IN REGARDS TO THE 1, 2, 3, THE FOOTPRINTS AND THE PORCHES, THOSE ARE, UM, ESSENTIALLY CONCEPTUAL FOOTPRINTS, BUT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR APPROVAL ON THAT.

THERE'S REALLY NOT A PROCESS FOR US TO GET APPROVAL ON THE FOOTPRINTS, BUT IN ORDER TO GET THE PLAN COMPLETE, WE HAD TO BACK INTO A SHAPE AND THE FORM.

AND OBVIOUSLY WITHIN THAT, THAT FOOTPRINT THERE WOULD BE SERVICE YARDS, THERE'D BE A DA ACCESS, ALL THOSE THINGS.

WHAT HAPPENED WITHIN THAT FOOTPRINT? SO WE'VE GOT, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY CREATING, CREATING THE LOTS RIGHT NOW.

AND THAT THOSE WILL COME BACK.

THE BUILDINGS WILL COME BACK THROUGH THE HPC PROCESS INDIVIDUALLY, UM, OR AS ONE, IT'S PRETTY BIG PRO IT WOULD BE PRETTY BIG FOR SOMEBODY TO DO THIS AS ONE PROJECT.

UM, AND WE FEEL EVEN FROM A QUALITY STANDPOINT, THIS WILL BE AN EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURE WITH WORKING WITH THE TOWN AND HPC AND, AND SOME OF THE DETAILING.

SO RIGHT NOW WE'RE SETTING UP THE FRAME FRAMEWORK FOR THAT.

THIS IS REALLY THE FIRST STEP OF, OF MANY.

I DON'T THINK WE COME BACK TO YOU GUYS, BUT WE WILL COME BACK TO HPC SEVERAL TIMES WITH ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION.

I STARTED ON THAT END LAST TIME.

MR. FLYNN, DO YOU HAVE ANY, I PROBABLY HAVE CONCERN REGARDING JUST THE RIGHT, RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT AND HAVE FULL ACCESS OFF OF JOINER, OFF OF BRUIN.

UM, YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT.

DO YOU FEEL YOU HAVE I THINK IT'LL BE A TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE BY MYSELF, BUT THAT'S JUST MY OWN PERSONAL 'CAUSE I'VE BEEN STUCK IN THAT TRAFFIC BEFORE.

SURE.

YEAH.

WE'VE LOOKED AT ALL ACCESS POINTS.

OBVIOUSLY WE'VE GOTTA HAVE ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY.

UM, THE, THE THING IS THAT THAT CARS IN THAT AREA ARE ALREADY SLOWING DOWN TO VERY SLOW SPEED.

AND WE DEFINITELY HAD EXPERTS LOOK AT, DAN COULD ATTEST THAT WE'VE GOT, WE'VE HAD SEVERAL OPTIONS OF RIGHT AND RIGHT OUT FULL ACCESS, BUT WE RELY ON, WE RELIED ON DOPS, UH, APPROVAL EXPERIENCE WITH THAT GUIDING US TO WHERE WE'RE AT NOW.

YEAH, YEAH.

THAT, YEAH.

UH, SO DYLAN TURNER, KELLY HOR ASSOCIATES, UH, ONE 15 FAIRCHILD STREET, CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA.

UM, SO YEAH, WE'VE, UH, TALKED TO DOT ABOUT

[00:50:01]

THIS.

SO OPERATIONALLY AT THE DRIVEWAYS, THE BOAT DRIVEWAYS WE HAVE, UM, VERY, I GOTTA SLIDE A COUPLE OF TWO I SHEETS.

YEAH, YOU CAN PULL THEM UP AND JUST, JUST DISCUSSION.

YEAH.

OKAY.

SO, UM, SO YEAH, THIS IS OUR KIND OF OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT WE SENT OVER TO DOT AND WE ACTUALLY GOT SOME INPUT FEEDBACK FROM THIS.

SO, UM, ONE OF THE, THE CONCERNS THAT STAFF HAD BROUGHT UP WAS THE QUEUE.

SO THE TURNS GOING INTO THE SITE OFF OF BRUIN, WOULD THEY EXTEND BACK INTO THE FOUR-WAY? STOP.

SO IN THE, UM, LEMME PULL IT UP HERE.

IT'S NOT ACTUALLY ON THAT, BUT DURING THE MORNING WE DO THESE SIM TRAFFIC RUNS, WHICH IS BASICALLY THE, YOU PUT IN THE EXISTING CONDITIONS, YOU RUN THESE SIM TRAFFIC RUNS.

WE DID 10, YOU ONLY HAVE, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO FIVE.

WE REALLY WANNA MAKE SURE WE GET A GOOD, UH, IDEA OF WHAT, UH, THIS LOOKS LIKE.

SO MORNING WE HAD ABOUT A 40 FOOT QUEUE STILL BACK, UM, WHICH DOES NOT GET TO THE FOUR-WAY STOP IN THE AFTERNOON.

WE HAD 93 FEET, WE HAVE ABOUT 115, SO AFTERNOON WE'RE GETTING CLOSE.

SO THEN WE PREPARED, OKAY, UM, WHAT CAN WE DO IN THIS SITUATION? SO IF YOU HAVE THAT SITUATION, THERE'S GONNA BE A RELIANCE ON COURTESY GAPS.

SO WHAT THOSE ARE, ARE PEOPLE SAYING, HEY, YOU KNOW, COME ON ACROSS.

SO THERE WILL BE A LITTLE BIT OF THAT.

BUT, UM, WE ALSO RECOMMENDED SOME DO NOT BLOCK INTERSECTION SIGNS AND SOME POTENTIAL STRIPING THAT YOU COULD DO.

AND DOT SAID NO TO THAT, UM, THAT THEY DID NOT WANT THAT TYPE OF STRIPING.

UM, THAT JUST IS ANOTHER THING TO KIND OF REINFORCE WHAT IS CALLED THE COURTESY GAPS, UM, REQUIRED THERE.

BUT AS FAR AS LIKE A, A, UH, A TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE, WHATEVER, WE'RE NOT PROJECTING THESE HORRIBLE LEVELS OF SERVICE OR ANYTHING AT THE FOUR-WAY STOPS.

THE NO BUILD OVERALL INTERSECTION DELAYS ARE VERY, VERY SIMILAR TO THE BUILD.

UM, SO WE HAVE THAT.

AND, AND SO WHAT WE HAVE, WE INITIALLY HAD THE FULL MOVEMENT ON BLUFFTON ROAD.

DOT SAID NO, UH, BUT WE'LL ALLOW THE FULL MOVEMENT ON BRUIN.

SO THAT IS ACTUALLY THE LAST SUBMITTAL THAT Y'ALL SAW WHERE WE HAD THAT, UM, CHANGED THIS MONTH.

UM, SO THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE FROM TRAFFIC.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? YEAH, I MEAN IT'S, IT'S STILL A CONCERN.

I MEAN, I, I KNOW THEY GAVE YOU THE BLESSING, BUT DOESN'T ACTUALLY MEAN WHEN, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU SAID, YOU WOULD GET VERY CLOSE TO THE END.

THE A EPISODE IS GONNA YEAH.

IN THE AFTERNOON WE'RE, OH, UH, THAT'S JUST, I READ ON HERE, UM, IN THE AFTERNOON WE DO PROJECT TO GET PRETTY CLOSE TO THE INTERSECTION, TO THE POINT THAT, I MEAN, I THINK YOU COULD SAY IT'LL GET TO THAT POINT 93 FEET VERSUS 115.

THAT'S AN ADDITIONAL CAR OUTSIDE OF OUR PROJECTION.

SO, UH, WE WOULD GET CLOSE.

UM, I, I WILL SPEAK FROM EXPERIENCE WHERE I LIVE IN AN AREA WHERE I DEPEND ON COURTESY GAPS TO GET INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND SO SOMETIMES YOU GET 'EM, SOMETIMES YOU DON'T.

BUT ONCE AGAIN, WE'VE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S KIND OF THE MAXIMUM QUEUE.

SO THAT'S WHAT THAT PROJECTED MAX IS.

THE AVERAGE IS GONNA BE LESS THAN THAT 93 FEET.

UM, I WAS OUT THERE TODAY IN THE AFTERNOON 'CAUSE I KNEW WE HAD THIS SO DROVE AROUND TIME AND TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

I KNOW IT'S NOT SCHOOLS DURING SESSION.

WE KNOW WE HAVE SOME VACATIONERS IT, THE, THE QUEUE FROM THE FOUR-WAY STOP WAS APPROACHING THIS DRIVEWAY A FEW TIMES FILLED BACK.

SO THIS MAX QUEUE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ISN'T GONNA BE LIKE THE FULL PEAK HOUR OF THIS SITE.

IT'S GONNA HAPPEN EVERY TIME.

IT COULD BE AN OCCASIONAL OCCURRENCE.

WELL, LET, LET ME, LET ME JUMP IN BECAUSE I DID IT AT FOUR O'CLOCK YESTERDAY.

MM-HMM.

AND THE QUEUE WAS WAY PAST THE THING REALLY.

AND, UM, AND THAT WAS JUST TUESDAY, RIGHT? UM, IT'S, IT'S NOT A BIG DAY.

AND, AND I APPRECIATE THE IDEA OF THE COURTESY GAP, UNFORTUNATELY, AND I'M A NORTHERNER THAT'S BEEN TRANSPLANTED DOWN HERE.

NOT ALL OF OUR NORTHERNER FRIENDS THAT ARE MOVING DOWN HERE UNDERSTAND THE COURTESY GAP.

SO I, I HAVE SIMILAR CONCERNS THAT THAT FULL ACCESS IS GONNA SPILL RIGHT INTO THE MAIN INTERSECTION OF, OF DOWNTOWN BLUFFTON, UM, WITH THE FULL ACCESS ON BRUIN.

UH, SO YEAH, I I WOULD ALSO WONDER WHY WE COULDN'T CONSIDER A RIDE IN RIGHT OUT FROM, FROM BRUIN.

SO ONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE'VE GOT AS, AS THE TEAM AND SOME OF THE STUFF THAT IT COULD IMPACT OTHER AREAS THROUGH BLUFFTON IS WE WENT RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT THERE.

WE CANNOT CAPTURE THE SOUTHBOUND TRAFFIC FROM THE CIRCLE INTO THE SITE.

'CAUSE WE'RE LIMITED TO RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT, OFF BLUFFTON ROAD LIMITED TO RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT OFF OF BRUIN ROAD.

SO THEN WHAT INEVITABLY HAPPEN IS THEN YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING TO THE SITE THAT MAY BE, UM, CUTTING THROUGH SOME OF THE MORE RESIDENTIAL ROADS.

SO, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE ROUTES FOR FOLKS TO GET TO THE SITE IF THIS IS A RIDE IN, RIDE OUT, BUT THEN YOU'RE CUTTING THROUGH OTHER RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, AND ROADS AND THAT THAT COULD HAPPEN IF IT'S BOTH, IF BOTH ARE LIMITED TO RIGHT AND RIGHT OUT AGREE, BUT IT IS DISTRIBUTING

[00:55:01]

THE TRAFFIC OVER MORE ROADS.

IT'S NOT ENDING UP RIGHT INTO THE MAIN INTERSECTION.

SO I, I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT, AND I UNDERSTAND THE COMPLEXITY OF THIS, AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT YOU GUYS HAVE DONE ON THIS TRAFFIC STUDY.

I JUST, TRAFFIC IS GETTING WORSE AROUND HERE BECAUSE WE'RE GROWING SO QUICKLY.

UM, AND I WOULD WORRY THAT IT'S JUST GONNA BE BAD AT THAT INTERSECTION.

BUT I, I DON'T KNOW, JIM, IF YOU HAD ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONER? NO, I, I THINK THAT'S IT.

I MEAN, AGAIN, JUST BEING HERE, LIKE I SAID, YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY FROM BLUFFTON, THAT'S FINE.

BUT WHEN YOU ARE IN THAT AREA, THAT WHOLE AREA, THAT IS THE MAIN AREA FOR OLD TOWN.

YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS EVERYTH KNOW, I, I'M EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY FAMILIAR WITH, UH, THE PLUS.

AND JUST THAT, I THINK THAT JUST, IT'S THAT BRU ROAD ONE THAT'S, IT'S UH, WHAT PART, WHAT PART OF CHARLESTON ARE YOU FROM? I LIVE IN AVONDALE.

I WENT TO MIDDLE SCHOOL AT HILTON HEAD.

UH, AND A LOT OF MY PROJECTS, I WORK VERY, VERY CLOSELY WITH DAN ON A LOT OF THINGS, A LOT OF THINGS , THE, UM, WELL, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'VE, IF YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH MOUNT PLEASANT, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID MM-HMM.

, UM, I, I DO SHARE THE CONCERN OF THE TWO CHAIRMAN THAT HAVE SPOKEN ALREADY.

AND I, I, I LIVE TWO BLOCKS FROM THERE AND I SEE THAT TRAFFIC OFTEN AND THE CONCERN, AND, AND I'M TALKING TO YOU SIR, AS MUCH AS, UH, YOUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER, THE CONCERN I HAVE IS IF YOU'RE COMING DOWN MAY RIVER ROAD AND YOU WANT TO GO STRAIGHT ONTO BRUIN ROAD AND YOU DECIDE YOU WANT TO TURN LEFT INTO THIS PROJECT, WHILE SOMEBODY WHO'S COMING FROM BRUIN ROAD WANTS TO TURN LEFT ONTO BOUNDARY, YOU ARE GOING TO CREATE GRIDLOCK BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT GONNA TURN LEFT AND THEY'RE BACKED UP INTO THE, UH, FOUR-WAY STOP, AND THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO TURN LEFT.

THERE'S A REAL POTENTIAL FOR GRIDLOCK.

I WISH WE COULD REENGAGE DOT IN THIS CONVERSATION.

I UNDERSTAND THEIR CONCERN, AT LEAST WHAT'S BEEN EXPLAINED TO ME IS THEIR CONCERN IS IT'S TOO CLOSE TO NECTAR'S ENTRANCE TO HAVE TWO FULL SERVICE ACCESSES NEXT TO EACH OTHER.

THAT MAKES NO SENSE TO ME WHATSOEVER.

UM, THAT IS FURTHER UP AND THAT'S IN AN AREA WHERE IT'S EASIER TO GET IN FULL ACCESS AND OUT.

I'M SUPER CONCERNED ABOUT A HUNDRED TO 115 FEET AWAY FROM THAT FOUR-WAY STOP ON THAT NARROW, NO PARALLEL PARKING, NO OTHER WAYS, UH, AROUND IT.

UM, BUT THAT, THAT'S A MAJOR CONCERN.

AND I'LL SAY TOO, FROM THE, THE TECHNICAL SIDE, YOU KNOW, WE RAN THE SIMULATIONS AND WE DIDN'T SHOW A GRIDLOCK IN THOSE, IN THOSE SITUATIONS.

SO WE'RE RUNNING THIS IN TRAFFIC TO RUN THIS, WHICH USUALLY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF OF THIS SIZE, WE DON'T ALWAYS HAVE TO RUN, UM, SOME TRAFFIC.

WE LOOK AT A SYNCHRO QUEUE.

SO WE DOUBLED OPEN QUEUES UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS WOULD BE A CONCERN BECAUSE OF WHERE THIS IS.

AND SO, UM, WE DIDN'T SHOW A, A GRIDLOCK IN THE SIMULATIONS.

UM, AND IT'S LIKE I SAID, WE GOT CLOSE TO THE FOUR-WAY STOP, BUT DID NOT, UM, SPILL BACK INTO IT BASED OFF OF THOSE COUNTS THAT WERE ALL DONE BEFORE SCHOOL'S OUT.

SO THE COUNTS THAT WE DO, SEVEN TO 9:00 AM AND FOUR TO 6:00 PM AND, AND THE QUESTION BECOMES WHAT , I KNOW THIS ISN'T NECESSARILY A MAJOR CONSIDERATION FOR YOU, BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU'RE WRONG? AND WE'RE RIGHT A YEAR FROM NOW WHEN OUR NEIGHBORS ARE UPSET BECAUSE THERE'S GRIDLOCK AND THE PEOPLE WHO BUILT BUILDINGS IN HERE ARE UPSET BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN'T GET IN AND OUT.

YEAH.

SO THIS IS WHY WE'RE HAVING THE CONVERSATION, RIGHT.

OF THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO, CAN I UNDERSTAND, UM, UH, I CAN I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ISSUE IS ON BREWING.

UH, I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ISSUE IS ON BREWING CARS BACKED UP ON BRUIN GOING TOWARDS WOULD BE RIGHT IN RIGHT OUT, NO LEFT END MM-HMM.

THAT WOULD FIX THE PROBLEM ON BRUIN.

AND, AND WE, THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO.

I'M TRYING TO SEPARATE THE TWO SO I UNDERSTAND.

YES.

I DON'T, I DON'T SHARE DOT'S CONCERN ON BLUFFTON ROAD.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THE REST OF COMMISSION FEELS.

I, I MEAN I'M ONLY ONE OF, I'M TRYING TO, BECAUSE I CAN'T THINK OF ONE UNLESS THEY KNOW WHAT, IF YOU'RE SAYING , THEY COULD REVISIT TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, BUT CAN'T OVERRULE IT.

YEAH.

YEAH.

I, I, AGAIN, ONE PERSON I WOULD FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE.

AND I KNOW IT PUTS LIMITATIONS ON YOU HAVING A WRITE IN, WRITE OUT ON BRUIN.

EVEN IF THAT MEANS YOU END UP WITH TWO WRITE IN WRITE OUTS, AND I KNOW THAT BECOMES A LOGISTICAL ISSUE.

I, I ALMOST, I DON'T KNOW, DAN, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, UM, HOW FEASIBLE IT IS TO REVISIT DOT AND HAVE THEM RECONSIDER THIS IN ON BLUFFTON ROAD.

I CAN DEFINITELY, UH, DYLAN HAS WORKED WITH

[01:00:01]

D OT FOR DECADES.

LITERALLY.

YEAH, I CAN, I MEAN, I'D LOVE TO, I'D LOVE TO HAVE A FACE TO FACE WITH THEM, RIGHT.

I'D LOVE TO BRING THEM DOWN THERE IN MY GOLF CART OR MY CAR AND SHOW THEM WHAT THE CONCERN.

I'M AFRAID IF SOMEBODY IN COLUMBIA THAT, OR CHARLESTON THAT DIDN'T GO TO HILTON HEAD MILL , NO.

UH, SO WE CAN ALWAYS ASK THAT QUESTION.

I MEAN, WE CAN, WE CAN ASK, SAY, HEY, WE MET WITH THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON AND BASED OFF OF WHAT THEY EXPERIENCED LOCALLY IN THE AREA, THEY'VE, THEY'VE ASKED THIS, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THAT DO T'S GONNA CHANGE THEIR THEIR MIND ON THIS.

'CAUSE THE EMAIL WE GOT, I THINK VERBATIM WAS NO FULL MOVEMENT ON BLUFFTON ROAD.

YOU CAN HAVE A FULL MOVEMENT ON BRUIN.

UM, AND EVEN WITH THAT SENTIMENT WAS TYPICALLY IF YOU HAVE A WRITE IN, WRITE OUT, YOU WOULD HAVE A MEDIAN ON THE MAIN LINE.

SO IN THIS CASE IF YOU BLUFFTON ROAD AND HE'S LIKE, DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE MEDIAN.

'CAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S NO SPACE TO DO IT.

AND THE SAME WOULD APPLY TO, TO BRUIN.

UM, IN THIS CASE, I MEAN, WE CAN, WE CAN ASK, WE'VE, WE'VE GOT A STUDY ALREADY.

HAS IT, YOU KNOW, OUR PREVIOUS DRAFT HAD WHAT WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

UM, AND IF WE'RE, IF WE'RE LIMITED BOTH TO RIDE IN, RIDE OUT, THERE WILL BE A REDISTRIBUTION OF, OF TRAFFIC THROUGH CURRENT RESIDENTIAL ROADS THAT WOULD THEN CIRCULATE BACK TO THIS RIDE IN RIGHT OUT TO CAPTURE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING, UH, FROM THE CIRCLE.

AND THEN WHAT WE WOULD DO AT THE FOUR, THAT PARK AND NECTAR, UH, WHAT WE'LL DO AT, UH, THE LEFT.

YEAH, YEAH.

NECTAR KNOWS THAT.

SO THEN , CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE REASONING WHY DOT REQUIRED THE RIGHT AND RIGHT OUT ON BLUFFTON ROAD AS OPPOSED TO BRUIN ROAD AND WHY BURN ROAD? THEY'RE SAYING THAT'S WHERE YOU CAN HAVE FULL ACCESS.

IT WAS THE SPACING FROM THE NECTAR DRIVEWAY THAT REALLY DROVE THE FULL MOVEMENT DISCUSSION ON BLUFFTON, WHERE WE ARE CURRENTLY 25 FEET FROM NECTAR'S DRIVEWAY, WHICH NECTAR WOULD BE FULL OF MOVEMENT.

WE'D BE FULL OF MOVEMENT.

SO THEN YOU HAVE, UH, THE SITUATION, IF SOMEBODY WAS TURNING LEFT INTO EITHER OUR SITE OR INTO NECTAR, THE PERSON EXITING THE DRIVEWAY WOULDN'T KNOW WHICH ONE, AND THEN YOU CAN LEAVE TO A, A COLLISION SO THAT THAT'S THE SPACE THAT, THAT'S THE SPACING DEAL.

AND SO THAT'S WHY THEY WANTED TO MOVE.

AND THEN IT ALIGNS WITH THE FULL MOVEMENT OF THE GAS STATION, WHICH IS A HUGE DRIVEWAY ACROSS THE STREET, BUT UH, IT ALSO IS WITH ANOTHER, UH, FULL MOVEMENT ACROSS THE STREET.

SO THAT'S MORE OF THAT REASONING.

THANK YOU.

JUST TO ADD SOME, UH, I UNDERSTAND, I UNDERSTAND THE TRAFFIC.

I, I I, I'VE MADE A LEFT TURN IN THERE 200 TIMES FROM BRUIN INTO JOINER, AND I HAVE NEVER HAD A PROBLEM BECAUSE CARS ARE GOING VERY SLOW AND THAT'S WHY I'M LIKE A LEFT IN.

YEAH, I'VE NEVER, I'VE NEVER HAD A PROBLEM.

UM, MAYBE THEY CAN SEE THAT I'M, UH, ORIGINALLY FROM NEW YORK AND THEY DON'T WANNA GET MY WAY .

BUT, BUT ON A SERIOUS NOTE, I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE THERE.

I RESPECT, I RESPECT THAT.

YOU KNOW WHAT, MY BIG CONCERN ON THIS CORNER IS, I GOTTA HAVE A LEFT END SOMEWHERE, BECAUSE IF WE DON'T HAVE A LEFT END OFF OF, OFF OF BLUFFTON ROAD, YOU KNOW WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN? THEY'RE GONNA GO THROUGH THE PROMENADE, THEY'RE GONNA CUT SHORT AND PARK A NECTAR.

AND I DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN.

THEY'RE GONNA GO EITHER LOOP AROUND PROMENADE, OR WORSE, THEY'RE GONNA GO THROUGH THE STOP AROUND MAIDEN LANE AND COME IN THE OTHER SIDE.

SO NOW YOU IN YOUR CAPACITY MAY SAY THAT'S FINE AS LONG AS WE PUSH IT OFF THE INTERSECTION, BUT, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S 35 PARKING SPACES OR SOMETHING HERE, YOU KNOW, 40 SOMETHING, AND THIS IS GONNA BE MOSTLY OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT FOR A RESTAURANT.

SO I JUST WANNA THANK, IN PROPORTIONALITY BEING CANDID AS I OPEN THIS, I REALLY WOULD LOVE TO FIND A LEFT END.

I MEAN, YOU, YOU, OTHERWISE, IT'S COMING AS A WORK, AS A DEVELOPMENT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A LEFT END.

UM, AND I, AND I FEEL LIKE THAT'S A, THAT'S A, THAT COULD BE A FATAL FLAW FOR DEVELOPER.

AND YOU ALREADY LOOKED AT POSSIBLY SHARING AN ACCESS WITH NECTAR.

THAT DOESN'T WORK.

UH, I SPOKE TO NECTAR LAST YEAR.

I SPOKE TO, I SPOKE TO THEM AGAIN.

THEY ARE OPEN-MINDED ABOUT IT, PARTICULARLY IF THERE'S ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT ON THE OTHER SIDE THAT AT SOME POINT COMES THROUGH THE CHALLENGE THAT I HAVE.

AND I, I, I HOPE JUST IN ALL, I WOULD LIKE TO DEVELOP THIS, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON HOW THINGS GO AND IF THIS IS GONNA BE FUN AND EASY AND VERSUS, SO I'M TALKING ABOUT ME.

HERE'S GONNA, I I I WOULD LIKE TO PUT SOME NICE RESIDENTIAL HERE, RESIDENTIAL IN A RESTAURANT WITH AN OPEN BAR.

I JUST DON'T LIKE THAT KIND OF TRAFFIC COMING THROUGH.

AND, UM,

[01:05:01]

AND THAT WOULD TAKE A REWORK OF NECTAR TO CARRY MORE OR TRAFFIC THERE THAT'S NOT PAVED.

SO IT INTRODUCES A CLIENTELE, A TYPE OF PARKING, BUT THIS DESIGN COULD ALLOW FOR IT IN TIME, THIS, THIS CORNER.

IT ALSO COULD ALLOW FURTHER CONNECTION THAT WAY.

I PREFER NOT TO DO IT BECAUSE I JUST DON'T THINK THE RESIDENTIAL PEOPLE HERE ARE GONNA BE THAT HAPPY WITH PEOPLE.

CUT.

AND THEN YOU'RE GONNA HAVE PEOPLE CUTTING THE CORNER THROUGH JOINER ROAD INTO NECTAR INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE STOP ZONE.

AND I'LL BE HAVING TO PUT SPEED BUMPS AND ALL THAT STUFF.

I'M SORRY, I'M, I'M, I'M VIOLATING, I'M VIOLATING MY PRICE.

NO, IT'S, IT, LOOK THIS PAUSE HERE FOR A SECOND.

THIS IS A MAJOR PARCEL IN THE HEART OF OLD TOWN.

THERE'S, AND I'M SURE NOBODY'S MENTIONED IT YET, BUT I'M SURE THE NEXT DISCUSSION IS ABOUT THE TREES UP FRONT.

WE'VE GOTTA HAVE THIS DONE, RIGHT? IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WANT TO DO IT RIGHT.

WE WANT TO HAVE IT DONE RIGHT.

WE'VE GOTTA HAVE THIS, THIS ONE, IN MY OPINION, IS MORE OF A DISCUSSION THAN A, A DICTATION, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

SO, UM, ANYBODY ELSE ON THE PARKING SLASH ACCESS? OKAY, NEXT SUBJECT.

OKAY.

UM, I WAS WONDERING, I THINK MAYBE FOR RICHARDSON, IF THE ARBORIST REPORT FOR LOT THREE STATES THAT THE FOUNDATION SHOULD BE PILINGS VERSUS SOLID, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD INCORPORATE INTO THIS APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT SOMEHOW ENSURES THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PARCEL WILL COMPLY WITH THAT? BECAUSE IF THEY DON'T, THOSE LIVE OAKS WILL NOT SURVIVE.

AND TO ME THEN THAT WE GET INTO THE SECTION OF THE UDO WHERE WE NEED TO PRESERVE THE TREE CANOPY.

AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO.

THANK YOU.

THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION.

LATE, UH, LATER IN THE EVENING.

LAST BULLET IN THE FERENCE.

SO AS Y'ALL KNOW, THESE, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCESS THAT Y'ALL THAT WE'RE HERE TONIGHT IS, DOESN'T REALLY GET INTO THE VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION STRUCTURES THAT ARE GONNA BE BUILT OVER THERE, BECAUSE THOSE ARE GOING TO BE GOVERNED BY THE HBC AND THE UDO AND THE, THE, THE STANDARDS THAT WE HAVE.

THE, I I THINK IT IS A REASONABLE CONDITION BASED OFF OF, I GIVE GIVE, I, I THINK YOU'RE GONNA NEED TO GIMME A MINUTE.

OKAY.

ABOUT ONE.

I, I WOULD TRY.

I I WAS TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING ON THE FLY THERE AND I'M SITTING HAVE, IF YOU DON'T MIND, GIMME ABOUT OR WOULD THE APPLICANT BE AMENABLE TO SOMETHING LIKE THAT BEING INCORPORATED? OBJECTION.

YOU EXPLAIN EXACTLY THE LAST BULLET POINT OF THE ARBORIST REPORT MENTIONS THAT FOR SITE THREE WITH THE LARGE LIVE OAKS, THAT THE TREES WOULD SURVIVE IF THE BUILDING IS BUILT WITH A PILING FOUNDATION INSTEAD OF A SOLID FOUNDATION.

SO THAT WOULD MEAN YOU COULDN'T JUST DO A SLAB LIKE THE MAIN STREET BUILDING TYPE WHERE YOU'RE JUST DOING A SLAB ON GRADE.

THE ARBOR REPORT DOES NOT SAY THAT THAT'S APPROPRIATE FOR THAT LOT THAT YOU NEED TO DO A PILING FOUNDATION.

SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IF WE'RE APPROVING THIS DEVELOPMENT, THAT THAT IS MAINTAINED IN THE DESIGN OF THE ACTUAL STRUCTURE.

I WOULD, I WOULD ABSOLUTELY SAY THAT SHOULD BE INCLUDED.

OKAY.

ABSOLUTELY.

BECAUSE IF I CAN HELP MY TRUCK WHEN SOMEONE ELSE TAKES THIS PROJECT OVER, YEAH, I ABSOLUTELY THINK THAT SHOULD BE THE CASE.

THANK YOU.

THE FIRST DEVELOPER TO TRY AND KILL HIMSELF OFF DURING , JUST A SIDE NOTE ON THAT, THE EXISTING CORNER HOUSE IS RAISED UP, SO THAT WILL BE SORT OF THE, COULD BE THE MODEL FOR THAT, THAT BUILDING AND THE PORCH.

UM, AND ALSO NOTE THAT IN THEIR DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY, WE HAD THAT AS ONE AND ONE AND A HALF STORY 'CAUSE OF THE CANID BE, I THOUGHT IT SAID TWO AND A HALF STORE, OR ONE AND A HALF TO TWO AND A HALF.

IT IS ONE AND A HALF.

IT SAYS ONE AND A HALF TO TWO AND A HALF, I BELIEVE IN YOUR PARKING DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY.

OKAY.

LET IT CLOSING THREE, RIGHT? YEAH, YEAH.

THE INTENT WAS THE, THE WHERE YOU SEE THE NUMBER THREE, THAT, THAT FRONT HAD TO BE LOWER, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S GONNA BE MORE OF AN HPC ITEM WORKING WITHIN THE CANOPY OF THE TREATMENT.

SO, UM, DISCUSS WITH TOWN STAFF AS WELL AS, AS THE APPLICANT.

AND I, I BELIEVE IT DOES FALL WITHIN YOUR JURISDICTION, UH, FOR A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT REASONS.

BUT PRIMARILY IT IS THE PROTECTION OF THAT TREE CANOPY, BUT IT'LL ALSO FALL UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE HPC, WHO KATIE HAS CONFIRMED, EXCUSE ME, MS. PETERSON HAS CONFIRMED WILL BE,

[01:10:01]

UM, YOU KNOW, THAT ARBORIST REPORT IS AN ESSENTIAL COMPONENT OF THEIR CONSIDERATION AS WELL.

SO IT SHOULD BE CAUGHT AT THAT LEVEL AS WELL.

SO WILL THE ARBORIST REPORT, JUST SO I KNOW FROM LIKE A PROCESS STANDPOINT, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WHEN THEY COME INTO HBC WITH BUILDINGS THAT WILL BE PART OF THE APPLICATION, IS THAT REQUIRED TO BE PART OF THE APPLICATION? SO THE DESIGN CRITERIA FOR SECTION 3 18 3, WHICH IS THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HD INCLUDES ALL DESIGN CRITERIA IN ARTICLE FIVE BE MET ARTICLE FIVE, SECTION 5.3 OR 5.5 0.3 ISH, I'M GONNA SAY IS THAT THE CONSIDERATION OF THE EXISTING CANOPY MUST BE CONSIDERED FOR THE SITE PLAN DURING THE SITE PLANNING FOR ALL SITES.

UM, AND BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THESE TREES, WE WOULD REQUEST AN ARBORIST REPORT AT THAT TIME.

IF THE ARBORIST REPORT IS THE ONE THAT THEY'VE PROVIDED THAT HAS THOSE DIRECTIVES IN IT, THEN WE WOULD ASK THAT THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT OR THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ARBORIST REPORT TO PROTECT THAT.

SO I THINK THAT, UM, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAVING A CONDITION THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ARBOR'S REPORT ARE FOLLOWED WOULD INCLUDE THE PEER FOUNDATION, EVEN THOUGH A FOUNDATION ISN'T SOMETHING THAT TECHNICALLY THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWS IN ITSELF.

SO BECAUSE BOTH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BOTH HAVE THE DESIGN CRITERIA FOUND IN ARTICLE FIVE AND THE ARBORIST REPORT IS PART OF REVIEWING THAT TREE CANOPY, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE.

THANK YOU.

THAT KIND OF, UH, NO, NOT RIGHT, RIGHT NOW.

OKAY.

UM, I DO, I DO HAVE A CONCERN THAT MIRRORS THE CONCERN WE HAD OVER AT PRICHARD AND BRUIN.

ARE WE IN CONSIDERING THIS, CREATING AN UNDEVELOPABLE LOT? THE CONVERSATION WE HAD OVER AT THE OTHER PROPERTY WAS THE, THERE WERE TOO MANY TREES THAT CREATED UNBUILDABLE LOTS.

THE OTHER PROPERTY THOUGH ALSO DID NOT HAVE AN ARBORIST REPORT WITH A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION THAT IT APPEARS, IF I'M READING IT CORRECTLY, HAS THE ARBORIST ACTUALLY SEEN THIS LAYOUT OR THEY JUST SAW LOT THREE IN GENERAL? UH, THEY SAW THIS LAYOUT.

OKAY.

SO IT WAS FOR THE WHOLE LOT.

RIGHT.

BUT THEY SAW THE LAYOUT WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING, NOT THAT THIS WE'RE APPROVING THIS PLAN IN TERMS OF WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKS LIKE, BUT THE REPORT WAS BASED OFF OF THE LOCATION THAT'S SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN SAYING THAT IT COULD BE DONE WITH A, I DON'T THINK THE ARBORIST WOULD'VE SEEN WHERE THE BUILDING'S GONNA BE PLACED, BUT THE ARBORIST IS GONNA CONSIDER THE, THE ROOTS ANYWAYS.

SO IN THEIR REPORT, IT, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE LAYOUT IS ON THREE, THEY'RE GONNA CONSIDER ANY EFFECT THAT A BUILDING IN WHAT THE FOUNDATION WOULD BE AROUND THOSE TWO TREES.

SO THAT'S THE REASON WHY THEY SUGGESTED THE PEER FOUNDATION, BECAUSE THEY COULD PUT IT FIVE FEET OR 10 FEET.

THEY'RE SAYING ACROSS THE BOARD ON LOT THREE, EVERYTHING HAS TO BE PURE FOUNDATION.

SO I MEAN, IT COULD, I'VE SEEN ARBORIST REPORTS ALSO INCLUDE SPANNING FOUNDATIONS BE BASED ON WHEN THEY DIG THE PIERS AND THERE'S A ROUTE THERE, THEN THEY HAVE TO DO SOMETHING IN THE FIELD TO CHANGE THAT.

SO, WELL, I THINK THIS REPORT SAID SOMETHING ABOUT, UM, IF A ROOT WAS CUT, FILLING IT OR SOMETHING.

I, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AGAIN.

WELL, IN THE ARBOR REPORT IT DOES SAY CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING NUMBER THREE.

SO I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT THEY'VE SEEN A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT THIS IS PROPOSED.

YEAH, JUST, JUST TO CLARIFY, CLARIFY THE LOT WAS WALKED WITH JAMES WITH THIS PLAN.

YEAH.

OKAY.

EXACTLY.

UM, AND, UM, I'M SORRY, I SHOULD DO THAT.

YOU'RE GOOD.

I DON'T THINK, I DON'T THINK WE'RE APPROVING AN UNBUILDABLE LOT.

I THINK BASED ON THE ARBOR REPORT AND THE INTENT OF THE OWNER, I THINK THEY'RE GONNA DO EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO SAVE THOSE MAGNIFICENT TREES.

WELL, AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I NEED A COMFORT LEVEL ON, BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT A BUILDING THAT'S BEING PROPOSED UNDERNEATH THE DRIP LINE.

I HAVE IN THE BACK OF MY MIND THE TOWN'S RECENT PROJECT AT OYSTER REFRACTORY PARK WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO DO WOODEN PILINGS AROUND THAT TREE AND FOUND OUT THERE WAS SO MANY ROUTES THEY ENDED UP GOING WITH STEEL PILINGS SO THEY COULD USE LESS.

AND, UM, I JUST, I, YEAH, I'VE, I'VE ONLY BEEN HERE 33 YEARS, BUT I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE THERE WERE 700 OF US HERE.

AND THOSE TREES ARE AN

[01:15:01]

INTEGRAL PART OF WHAT I VIEW AS BLUFF AND WHAT MANY DO.

AND I'M, I'M NOT EVEN SAYING THAT YOUR INTENT IS TO HAVE THOSE TREES DIE OFF, BUT WE CAN'T EVEN LET IT ACCIDENTALLY HAPPEN.

AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I'M, I'M LOOKING FOR A LITTLE BIT OF COMFORT FROM OUR EXPERTS ON THE ON COMMISSION.

WELL, I MEAN, AS AN EXAMPLE, JUST AS FOR ME AS A, AS A LAYMAN, THE HOUSE, THAT HOUSE, THAT FOUNDATION IS A PURE FOUNDATION AND THAT OAK TREE THIS BIG, YOU CAN TOUCH IT OUT THE WINDOW.

AND WE DID THAT.

WE DID THAT IN A THOUGHTFUL WAY.

IT WAS OVER FERTILIZED BEFORE A FEW MONTHS BEFORE WE PUT THE, WE PUT THE, THE PIERS IN, WE FERTILIZED AGAIN.

AND THAT TREE BLOOMED EVEN BETTER.

NOW, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG, BUT, SO YOU CAN DO IT.

YOU CAN DO IT.

AND IT WOULD BE CRAZY FOR ME TO BUILD A BUILDING AND IT AND KILL A TREE AND THEN FOREVER NOT BE ABLE TO GO PUT UP A LITTLE.

IT JUST, SO, SO WE ARE ALIGNED 100%.

I DO WORRY THAT AT TIMES WE, YOU KNOW, TO THE POINT WE CAN'T LOSE A TREE.

THERE'S GOTTA BE A PRACTICAL BALANCE HERE.

AND MAYBE ONE OF THE PRACTICAL BALANCES TOO IS, HEY, BY THE WAY, WHEN YOU DO THIS THING, YOU GOTTA THROW IN TWO MATURE OAK TREES.

COULD BE TWO 20 FOOT OAK TREES BECAUSE THESE ARE GONNA DIE SOMEDAY.

ONE OF THEM'S ALREADY, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S BEEN, IT WAS DISCUSSED, BUT ONE OF THESE JAMES CAME BACK AND SAID, THIS TREE IS DEAD NUMBER THREE MM-HMM, , IT'S ACTUALLY SHOULD COME DOWN.

IT'S HANGING OVER BLUFFTON ROAD.

IT'S THE ONE UNLOCKED TWO, IT'S, IT'S THE OTHER 22 INCHES.

IT'S DEAD.

I DIDN'T WANT TO, THE LAST THING I WANNA DO WOULD COME IN HERE AND SAY, OH, I CUT DOWN THE TREE JUST BEFORE IT WAS, BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN THAT'S GONNA HAVE TO COME DOWN THE OTHER, THE OTHERS WERE PLANTED AT THE SAME TIME.

WE DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THOSE ARE GONNA HAVE ANYWAY.

SO, YOU KNOW, MR. WHITMORE, I, I WOULD HATE TO HAVE A BUILDING IN AND HAVE THIS TREE DYING ANYWAY, AND THEN SAY YOU DIDN'T KILL THE TREE.

SO I, IT'S JUST, IT'S A JUST A SUPPOSED SITUATION, YOU KNOW, BUT WE'LL DO EVERYTHING AND WE'LL PUT IT IN THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE THIS FOUNDATION, YOU HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO FERTILIZE IT SIX MONTHS BEFORE AND YOU HAVE TO PROMISE TO FERTILIZE IT EVERY SIX MONTHS AFTER I'M WILLING TO DO WHATEVER SO THAT WE CAN LOOK BACK AND SAY WE WERE AS PRUDENT AS WE COULD BE AND STILL ALLOW THIS OWNER TO DEVELOP THIS CORNER IN A WAY THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED.

SO IF I HEARD YOUR QUESTION RIGHT, UM, WE CAN MAKE A CONDITION OF THE MOTION THAT ANYTHING BUILT ON LOT THREE, UM, SHOULD BE A PEER CONSTRUCTION, NOT A SLAB CONSTRUCTION.

I I, PER THE ARBORIST? I BELIEVE SO BECAUSE OF THE ARBORIST REPORT.

AGAIN, IT IS, IT'S A LITTLE COMPLICATED SIMPLY BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE, THE APPLICANT PROVIDES THE, THE BUILDING LAYOUT FOR THE, THE WHAT, THE POTENTIAL, UM, HOW, HOW THE LOT WILL BE FILLED AND HOW THE BUILDING WILL BE, UH, LOCATED ON THAT LOT, BUT ULTIMATELY A DIFFERENT, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN'T WHAT THE COMMERCIAL COTTAGES COULD BE BUILT, UH, MAIN STREET.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT, DIFFERENT FORMS THAT WOULD REQUIRE THOSE TO BE RELOCATED.

BUT YEAH, I THINK IT IS WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW.

I THINK IT IS, IT FALLS WITHIN YOUR AUTHORITY TO MAKE SURE THAT HOWEVER, THIS, WHATEVER CONDITIONS NEED TO BE PLACED ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE FORM OF THE BUILDING OR THE SHAPE OR THE LOCATION OF IT ON THAT LOT, AND BE PLACED ON PILINGS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THOSE TWO SPECIMEN TREES ON LOT THREE.

I THINK THAT DOES FALL WITHIN YOUR AUTHORITY.

I ALSO JUST WANNA CLARIFY TOO, FOR ME IT'S BIZIBLE IN THAT, LIKE FOR AN EXAMPLE, A COMMERCIAL COTTAGE, I BELIEVE WOULD BE BUILDABLE ON THE LOT WITH THE, THAT PARTICULAR BUILDING TYPE, KNOWING THAT IT'S SMALL.

SO IT IS A BUILDABLE LOT.

I'M NOT POSITIVE THAT A 4,400 SQUARE FOOT TWO AND A HALF STORY BUILDING IS APPROPRIATE THERE OR THAT THAT PARTICULAR TYPE THAT THEY'VE PROPOSED IS WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO WHEN THEY GO THROUGH THE HPC PROCESS.

BUT NOT BEING ABLE TO GET 4,400 SQUARE FEET, TWO AND A HALF STORIES DOESN'T MEAN IT'S NOT BUILDABLE.

IT'S JUST THAT IT MAY OR MAY NOT GET THEM THAT MAIN STREET BUILDING TYPE THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT.

WELL, AND THAT'S WHY WE RELY ON HPC.

THAT IS THEIR FUNCTION, NOT OURS.

THE NEXT ONE.

YEAH.

I, I, I JUST TO CLARIFY, THE, THE PLAN FOR MY VISION OF THAT CORNER IS A ONE AND A HALF, ONE AND THREE QUARTER STORY BUILDING WITH RECLAIMED WOOD IN A RAISED FOUNDATION.

KINDA LIKE WHAT I DID OVER THERE ON IN STOCK FARM, ICONIC BUILDING OF SCALE.

SO IF, IF THERE'S SOMEWHERE IN HERE THAT SAYS THERE'S

[01:20:01]

A VISION OF A 4,400 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING THERE, THAT I WOULD BE WILLING TO AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION HAS TO BE, BE THIS, AND THE MAXIMUM SIZE CAN ONLY BE THIS AND IT CAN ONLY BE UP TO ONE OR THREE QUARTER STORE, I'D BE WILLING TO GO THAT FAR TO ACCOMPLISH THE PROTECTION OF THAT CORNER BECAUSE THAT, I BELIEVE IS THE RIGHT THING FOR THE TOWN.

IT MAY REDUCE ECONOMIC VALUE FROM WHAT COULD BE, BUT THAT'S THE RIGHT THING FOR THIS TART IS A SMALLER SCALE BUILDING THERE.

WE COULD PUT A A NOT TO EXCEED ONE AND A HALF STORY, UM, MM-HMM.

ARE WE ABLE TO SAY THAT THEY CAN'T CUT THE LEADERS THAT THE BUILDING DESIGN MUST BE DESIGNED AROUND THE LEADERS? WE'RE GIVING YOU A WORKOUT TODAY.

YOU ARE .

THANK YOU.

UM, I, I THINK, I THINK POSSIBLY, BUT, UM, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO, UM, RATHER THAN GET INTO SPECIFICS AT THIS POINT, TO MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION AND, AND SOMETHING THAT MS. PETERSON HAS POINTED OUT, UH, BECAUSE THE ARBORIST REPORTS COULD CHANGE BASED OFF OF CHANGES IN CIRCUMSTANCES AT THE TIME OF HPC SUBMITTAL.

UM, ANOTHER THING IS YOU, I I, I BELIEVE MR. MARKS WHEN HE TELLS YOU, UH, WHAT HIS PLANS ARE FOR THIS PROPERTY, BUT MR. MARKS MAY NOT BE THE PERSON TO DEVELOP LOT THREE.

IT COULD BE SOLD FOR ANY NUMBER OF REASONS, UH, AND SOMEBODY ELSE WITH DIFFERENT PLANS COULD BE IN, CAN BE INVOLVED, AND A DIFFERENT ARBORIST COULD COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT OPINION ON THAT, ON WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE THERE.

SO BASED OFF OF WHAT I'M HEARING FROM Y'ALL WOULD BE A, A CONDITION ALONG THE LINES OF THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF LOT THREE WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ANY SORT, WITH THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN AN ARBORIST REPORT SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE, OR SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF KOFA HD.

I, I'LL COME UP WITH SOMETHING IN A MINUTE, BUT THAT, UH, ROUGHLY ALONG THOSE LINES AND, AND YOU DON'T THINK WE COULD TAKE UP HIS SUGGESTION TO ALTER WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN OUR THING AS FAR AS MAKE IT ONE IN THREE QUARTERS AND SOMETHING LESS THAN 4,400 SQUARE FEET? 'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE SEE IN OUR REPORT.

RIGHT.

BUT I, AND WHAT THEY'RE, I, I THINK, I, I THINK WHAT MR. KEEFER, AS I SAID EARLIER, WAS THEY'RE PUTTING BASICALLY MAXIMUM, DO THEY THINK THAT THEY COULD PUT ON THE LOT HERE TO GIVE YOU THE VISUALIZATION OF WHAT COULD BE DONE AND THAT AS, AS A REQUEST FROM STAFF, AND IT MAY EVEN BE A, YOU KNOW, MANDATORY PART OF THEIR APPLICATION TO SHOW WHERE THAT THOSE BUILDINGS WOULD BE CITED OR ANY POTENTIAL BUILDINGS SHOULD BE CITED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

BUT ULTIMATELY THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE BUILT THERE CAN RANGE IN SIZE AND, AND SCOPE.

AND I THINK THAT THE WAY OUR CODE WORKS IS THAT THE UDO WILL DICTATE WHAT BUILDING SHAPE AND SIZE GOES THERE BASED ON THE SETBACKS, YOU KNOW, PRESERVING THE TREES.

UM, THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT COULD COME UP FROM A VARIANCE REQUEST TO, YOU KNOW, MODIFY SIDE SETBACK OR A REAR SETBACK FOR PRESERVATION OF THAT TREE.

I MEAN, YOU CAN HAVE ALL SORTS OF ISSUES THAT COULD COME UP THAT WE DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO HANDCUFF OURSELVES AT THIS POINT.

DOES THE HPC HAVE THE AUTHORITY IF THEY CHOSE AT THEIR DISCRETION TO REQUIRE THAT THE LEADERS BE MAINTAINED AND DESIGNED AROUND? OR IS THAT NOT SOMETHING THAT THE HPC COULD ENFORCE IF THEY CHOSE? THE HPC HAS THE SAME AUTHORITY AS YOU DO WHEN IT COMES TO PROTECTING THE TREES.

THEY ARE LOOKING AT THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE BUILDING AT THE TIME WHEN THEY'RE LOOKING AT THE TREES.

BUT PROTECTION OF CONSERVATION OF THE EXISTING CANOPIES TO PROTECT THOSE LARGE CANOPY AND HARDWOOD TREES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 5.3 OR SECTION 5.3 OF OUR UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE WOULD COVER THAT FOR Y'ALL'S BASIS RATHER THAN PUTTING A RESTRICTION ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE BECAUSE ONE BY TWO YEAH, I'M NOT TRYING TO DO THAT.

I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IF WE STAY, WE ALSO HAVE COURSE THAT IT'S, EVEN THOUGH WE WILL NOT BE REVIEWING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T INTERFERE WITH THE EXISTING CANOPY, IT IS WITHIN THE H HPCS POWER TO REQUIRE THAT THE DESIGN OF THAT BUILDING NOT INTERFERE WITH THE EXISTING CANOPY.

I THINK THE WAY THAT Y PROPOSING THE WAY OUT TO WORKING BELT SUSPENDERS, YOU PUT THE CONDITION ON THERE TO FOLLOW THE ARBORIST REPORT, MAKE SURE THAT THE, THE TREES ARE PROTECTED AND THEN HBC WILL DO THEIR OWN, MAKE A REPORT.

BECAUSE AGAIN, WE DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ONE OR TWO OF THOSE.

BOTH OF THOSE TREES CAN BE GONE BY THE TIME ANYTHING'S DEVELOPED ON THERE OR EVERY THINGS COULD CHANGE.

SO,

[01:25:06]

AND I THINK THE, THE, IF I MAY, THE, AND Y'ALL CAN CONTINUE, BUT THE CONDITION WOULD BE THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF AN ARBORIST REPORT BE FOLLOWED TO PROTECT THE EXISTING TREES PER UDO SECTION 5.3 0.3 D, UM, UH, RELYING HEAVILY ON MS. PETERSON THERE WITH THE UDO CITATION AND INCORRECT.

AND JUST TO CLARIFY, WE SHOULD REFERENCE THE ARBORS REPORT AS SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON JUNE 26TH, MARCH 22ND.

THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT.

I THINK IT'S AT THE TIME AND THE ARBOR REPORT.

OKAY.

SO RATHER THAN GETTING SPECIFIC THINGS COULD CHANGE AND WHAT MAY BE NEEDED TO BE THERE, ONE OF THOSE LIVE OAKS IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT MAY BE FOR BOTH.

BUT RICHARDSON, IF I CALL SIX DIFFERENT ARBORISTS, I CAN GET ONE TO SHARE MY VIEW THING WITH LAWYERS REPORT.

I THINK HE CARES.

BUT TO MISS MARK, MISS MR. MARK'S COMMENT EARLIER, IF HE'S NOT THE ONE DEVELOPING THIS LOT, IT COULD BE SOMEBODY THAT GOES OUT AND GETS A SORRY BOGUS AR ARBORIST REPORT.

YOU'RE, YOU'RE, WE HANDCUFF OURSELVES TO A ARBORIST REPORT.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THAT, THAT, THAT COULD HAPPEN.

BUT WHAT YOU HAVE TO HOPE IS THAT STAFF IN THE HPC WILL, WILL BE ABLE TO SEE AND DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN WHAT IS, UH, AN ARBORIST REPORT THAT FOLLOWS THE PROPER METHODOLOGY AND COMES UP WITH A CORRECT CONCLUSION BASED OFF OF WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED VERSUS AN ARBORIST REPORT THAT IS NOT WORTH THE PAPERS WRITTEN ON.

AND THERE ARE ALWAYS THOSE RISKS.

THERE'S A RISK WITH ANY PROFESSION THAT COMES BEFORE Y'ALL, ANYTHING THAT'S SUBMITTED, I, I HEAR YOU.

I'M MORE COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING LANGUAGE THAT ADDRESSES THE, UM, PEER CONSTRUCTION ON LOT THREE AND POSSIBLY EVEN ADDRESSING ANY LEADERS OF TREES THAT ARE, THAT'S, THAT'S ME.

AND THE, THE APPLICANT HAS SAID THAT THEY WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT TOO.

SO IT DOESN'T, IT IS NOT AN ISSUE UNLESS IT BECOMES AN ISSUE RIGHT.

LATER.

IT'S REALLY UP TO Y'ALL'S DISCRETION.

AND I THINK THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OR THAT PARTICULAR LOT CAN BE READDRESSED IF THE TREES FOR SOME BIZARRE REASON ARE NO LONGER THERE AND CAN BE MODIFIED.

ABSOLUTELY.

UM, OLD TOWN MASTER PLAN IS THE GUIDING DOCUMENT OF THIS LOT AND OLD TOWN MASTER PLAN HAD A NEW TOWN HALL GOING THERE, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, BUT SAVING THE TREES.

SO YES.

I, I I, I, UM, I HOPE YOU SEE WHERE WE'RE ALIGNED HERE.

YOU KNOW, WE ARE ALIGNED HERE.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I HAVE ONE MORE FOR STAFF, JUST SO I UNDERSTAND.

SO WHEN IT COMES BACK THROUGH HPC FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL BUILDING, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THE FINAL BUILDING PARKING WORKS, YOU JUST LIKE THE FIRST ONE CAN DO BASICALLY WHATEVER THE MAX IS, AND THEN BY THE TIME YOU GET TO THE LAST ONE, THEY HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S STILL ENOUGH PARKING? OR HOW DOES THAT GO? SORT OF, SORT OF.

SO, UM, ONE OF THE REVIEW CRITERIA FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IS THAT IT'S IN LINE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

SO WHEN THEY GIVE US THE NUMBERS FOR ALL OF THEIR BUILDINGS, THAT'S THE MAXIMUM THAT COULD BE PROPOSED ON THAT LOT BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN HAS, HAS ACCEPTED, AND THAT'S WHAT THE STORMWATER PLAN HAS ACCEPTED.

UM, AND SO THEY CAN GET SMALLER THAN THAT AND POTENTIALLY THEY COULD PROPOSE SOMETHING.

SO IF BUILDING THREE SHRINKS TO 400 SQUARE FEET, IT, WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M PROPOSING.

BUT IF IT GOES DOWN TO 400 SQUARE FEET FROM 4,000 SQUARE FEET, THAT OBVIOUSLY LEAVES THE SURPLUS.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO MODIFY THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO REFLECT THAT BECAUSE THE STORMWATER PLAN, THAT WILL MESS WITH THE LIMITED OF DISTURBANCE FOR THE WHOLE SITE.

SO IF THEY'RE TRYING TO ADD THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE ELSEWHERE, IT WOULD BECOME A CHALLENGE.

SO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS REFERRED TO AS WE GO THROUGH.

SO IF IT IS EXCEEDING THAT BILL, THEY'LL HAVE TO WORK WITH THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

BUT IF THEY'RE UNDER IT BY JUST A LITTLE BIT, SO IF IT SAYS IT WAS GOING TO BE 900 SQUARE FEET AND IT'S 800 SQUARE FEET, THERE'S A POTENTIAL THAT THEY WON'T HAVE TO MODIFY THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BECAUSE IT WON'T AFFECT THE PARKING IN A NEGATIVE.

LIKE IT WON'T CHANGE ANYTHING ENOUGH TO WARRANT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT.

AND IT'S UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

SO, SO IT'S BUILDING, IS IT SET BY LIKE WHERE THEY HAVE THAT TABLE LIKE LOT ONE THROUGH FOUR? YES.

LOT ONE DOES GET THAT IS THE MAXIMUM.

THAT'S THE MAX FOR THAT LOT.

SO THE SQUARE FOOTAGES THAT THEY'VE PROVIDED, ARE THE MAX ON A LOT PER LOT BASIS BASED ON THE LOT? YES.

BASED ON, BECAUSE BASED ON THE PARKING, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT, SO IT'S NOT, THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT CAN BE THAT TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE.

IT IS PARCELED OFF BY EACH BUILDING.

SO YOU CAN REVIEW THAT WHEN THEY SUBMIT IT.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

UM, IN, IN, CAN I ASK

[01:30:01]

A QUESTION JUST ONE MORE IN, IN TERMS OF PROCESS, UM, WHERE MIGHT YOU GO NOW, BECAUSE I HAVE A FEW OTHER THINGS WHERE MIGHT YOU GO NOW? AND I HAD A FEW OTHER COMMENTS.

ARE YOU JUST TOLD ME KIND OF WHERE YOU'RE THINKING, BECAUSE I HAD A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT I MIGHT INTERJECT.

THAT'S KIND OF A WEIRD THING TO SAY.

YOU'RE GONNA SAY, WELL, WHAT'S ON YOUR MIND? RIGHT, , WELL, WHAT MORE, DO YOU WANNA DO A TEMPERATURE CHECK? WE CAN, WE CAN DO THAT.

UM, THE ONE, THE ONE THING THAT I WOULD ASK, WHEN, WHEN, AND IF WE DO A, UM, MOTION.

MOTION, YEAH, THAT'S WHAT THE WORD'S IS TO, UM, ASK THE APPLICANT TO WE APPROACH DOT ABOUT CHANGING THE OTHER INTERSECTION.

UM, THAT WOULD, THAT WOULD BE MY RESERVATION AT THIS POINT TOO.

BUT WITH THAT SAID, UM, HOW ARE WE FEELING ABOUT THIS? I, I PERSONALLY FEEL THAT IF WE FOLLOW THE ARBORIST REPORT AND, AND THE APPLICANT DOES WHAT THEY'RE SAYING THEY'RE GONNA DO, PROTECTING THOSE TREES WITH THE PURE FOUNDATION, I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

IF THEY DID SOMETHING WITH THE BRUIN ROAD ENTRANCE, UM, I AGREE WITH THE TREES, I STRUGGLE A LITTLE BIT.

'CAUSE IT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THEY KIND OF DID THEIR DUE DILIGENCE WITH LIKE THEY DID THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THE REQUEST TO DOT.

NOT TO SAY THAT THERE CAN'T BE MORE CONVERSATION, I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S GONNA BE A FRUITFUL EFFORT.

BUT, UM, I ALSO STRUGGLE A LITTLE BIT WITH THE, I I APPRECIATE THE WRITE IN, WRITE OUT AT BRUIN SO THAT WE DON'T END UP WITH TRAFFIC SITTING IN THE INTERSECTION.

BUT I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS.

LIKE ARE PEOPLE GONNA TRY TO BE DOING U-TURNS? ARE PEOPLE GONNA BE PULLING OFF? JUST WHAT THAT MEANS FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO COME FROM THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE.

MY CONCERNS TO THOSE TREES UP FRONT, THOSE ALWAYS HAVE AND ALWAYS WILL BE MY CONCERNS.

UM, A COUPLE OF Y'ALL ON COMMISSION HAVE HELPED ME HAVE MORE COMFORT LEVEL WITH IT, BUT I'LL FEEL A LOT BETTER THREE YEARS AFTER SOMETHING'S BUILT THERE AND THEY'RE STILL THERE.

.

UH, WHAT ABOUT YOU MS. BROWN? I FEEL PRETTY COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD.

I I AGREE.

THE DOT ISSUE IS NOT GONNA GO ANYWHERE.

I THINK WHAT YOU HAVE HERE IS, IS WHAT'S GOING TO BE, IT'S NOT GOING TO, IT'S NOT GONNA CHANGE FROM THERE.

I THINK THE FACT THAT HE SPENT 12 GRAND ON THOSE TREES ALREADY TELLS US THAT HE'S, HE'S WILLING TO PUT SOME MORE INTO IT BASED ON US SITTING, UH, HA HAVING CRITERIA ON RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE ARBOR'S REPORT.

SO, UM, I'M, I'M FEELING GOOD ABOUT MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS.

YEAH, I AM TOO.

I MEAN, I WANTED TO ASK THE QUESTION REGARDING, AND I WAS THE FIRST ONE TO BRING UP IS THE IN AND OUT.

RIGHT? RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT.

AND AGAIN, I, I AGREE, UH, THAT THERE WILL NOT BE, UH, AN ISSUE THAT IF YOU GO BACK TO THE OT, THEY'RE SAYING THEY'VE ALREADY APPROVED IT.

WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM US? UM, I'M HAPPY WITH AS FAR AS THE IRIS REPORT BEING ATTACHED TO THE MOTION AS WELL.

UM, AND I THINK I'M ALL SET ON THAT.

OKAY.

UM, I DUNNO THAT WE NEED TO, I HAVE FURTHER CONVERSATION.

SOMETIMES LESS IS MORE MR. MARKS AT THIS POINT .

SO I, I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT BEFORE , UM, IT TOOK ME 53 OF MY 58 YEARS TO LEARN THAT.

UM, I WILL ASK BEFORE, BEFORE I ENTERTAIN A MOTION, I WILL ASK THE APPLICANT.

I KNOW A COUPLE OF COMMISSIONERS UP HERE, DON'T THINK IT'S GONNA GO ANYWHERE, BUT I WOULD ASK YOU AS A PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL FAVOR TO APPROACH DOT ONE MORE TIME AND SAY THAT THERE WERE CONCERNS FROM THE COMMISSION AND FOR THEM TO RECONSIDER IT.

AND IF THEY DO, THEY DO.

IF THEY DON'T, THEY DON'T.

I JUST, I THINK A FULL ACCESS OFF OF BRO ROAD IS A MISTAKE PERSONALLY, MR. WHITMORE.

THAT'S TOTALLY AGREE WITH THAT.

AND THAT'S, I HAVE A, I HAVE A BIG ISSUE WITH THAT.

I THINK THE COMMUNITY IS GONNA LOOK AT WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE AND WHEN THEY'RE STUCK IN THAT TRAFFIC, THEY'RE GONNA SAY, WHY DID YOU APPROVE THAT? WELL, I ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

I'LL SPEAK UP.

WHY? DO Y'ALL NEED ANY RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE ON ANYTHING? YES.

YES.

YES.

CHICKENS.

YES.

AND BASED OFF OF WHAT I'VE, WHAT I'VE HEARD, IT'S THE PREFERENCE

[01:35:01]

WOULD BE TO NOT CITE THE SPECIFICS OF THE EXISTING ARBORIST REPORT THAT WAS SUBMITTED AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION AND THAT IT NOT BE MADE IN EXPLICIT CONDITION.

ANYTHING WITH THE RIGHT END, RIGHT OUT, OR THE ACCESS.

IT'S THE ONLY CONDITION HAS TO DO WITH THE ARBORIST REPORT.

SO, UH, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION, UH, THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF AN ARBORIST REPORT BE FOLLOWED TO PROTECT THE EXISTING TREES PER UDO FIVE 3D AT THE TIME OF THE, UM, TIME OF DEVELOPMENT.

OR LOT THREE, EXCUSE ME, YOU HAVE A MOTION USING THAT LANGUAGE.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE, UM, PROJECT AS SUBMITTED, UM, WITH THE AMENDMENT OF THE, THE LANGUAGE.

MR. RICHARDSON.

SECOND? SECOND.

IS THERE A DISCUSSION SEAT NOW OR FOREVER? OKAY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

OPPOSED? UH, OPPOSED.

MOTION CARRIES FOUR TO ONE.

UM, THAT'S IT ON THAT.

DO WE HAVE ANY

[VIII. DISCUSSION]

FURTHER DISCUSSION? ANYBODY WANNA MAKE ANOTHER MOTION? I HAVE ONE.

SORRY.

I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE ANGIE.

SHE'S OUR NEWEST PLANNER ON THE STAFF.

UM, SO THIS IS ANGIE.

SHE'LL BE WORKING.

SHE'S REPLACED JORDAN.

UM, SORT OF, UM, SHE'LL BE STARTING AS A PLANNER WHERE JORDAN WAS A SENIOR PLANNER.

SHE, UM, WAS OUR INTERN LAST SUMMER.

AND SO WE ARE REALLY EXCITED TO HAVE HER BACK.

AND SHE IS STARTING FROM, UM, STARTING TO GET HER FEET WET WITH THINGS LIKE SIGNS AND TREES.

BUT SHE WILL EVENTUALLY BE HANDLING A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT COME BEFORE YOU ALL AT SOME POINT, WHETHER IT'S, UM, IN AID OR ON HER OWN.

BUT, UM, WE'RE EXCITED TO HAVE HER.

SO JUST WELCOME TO ANDY, ANGIE.

SORRY.

WELCOME.

OKAY.

ANY OTHER MOTIONS? LIKE TO ADJOURN? MOVE TO, UH, MOVE TO ADJOURN TO ADJOURN.

SECOND.

YEAH.

THIRD.

OKAY.

MOVE IN SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

MEETINGS ADJOURNED.