* 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 EVENING [I. CALL TO ORDER] EVERYBODY. IT IS SIX O'CLOCK. I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, MAY 27TH TO ORDER. UM, CAN I GET A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? CHARLIE WETMORE. HERE, VICE CHAIRMAN JIM FLYNN. HERE. COMMISSIONER MICHAEL BROCK. HERE. COMMISSIONER RICH DECO COMMISSIONER LYDIA DEPAUL. HERE. COMMISSIONER DAN ROW. HERE. COMMISSIONER WILL HOWARD HERE. THANK YOU. UH, 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 AN ADDITIONAL MEETING DATE AS DETERMINED BY THE COMMISSION MEMBERS. OKAY, I'D LIKE TO CALL [IV. ADOPTION OF MINUTES] FOR AN ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MEETING. I'LL MOVE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OKAY. THAT PASSES. DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT? NO PUBLIC COMMENT. THERE IS NO OLD BUSINESS, NEW BUSINESS. ITEM NUMBER ONE IS UNIFIED [VII.1. Unified Development Ordinance Amendments (Public Hearing): Consideration of Amendments to the Town of Bluffton’s Municipal Code of Ordinances, Chapter 23, Unified Development Ordinance, Article 5 – Design Standards, Sec. 5.10 Stormwater; and Article 9 – Definitions and Interpretation, Sec. 9.2 Defined Terms. (Staff – Andrea Moreno)] DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS, PUBLIC HEARING, IT'S CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS OF THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON, MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 23, UDO, ARTICLE FIVE, DESIGN STANDARDS SECTION FIVE POINT 10 STORMWATER AND ARTICLE NINE, DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS. SECTION 9.2 DEFINED TERMS. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. DO WE WANNA DO THE CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT NOW? OKAY. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE TOWN OF BLUFFTON MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORDINANCES. THIS IS THE FIRST CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. MICHAEL HUGHES. OKAY, MR. HUGHES, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. HELLO, MY NAME IS MIKE HUGHES WITH THOMAS HUTTON IN, UH, FORT HARRIS NEST, SAVANNAH, GEORGIA. UH, THANKS FOR HAVING ME. I FEEL THAT I'VE BEEN UP HERE SPEAKING ABOUT THE WETLAND ORDINANCE NOW HERE FOR TWO YEARS, AND ITS DIFFERENT, UH, FORMS. UM, AND I THINK A LOT OF IT DOES STEM FROM THE, UH, US SUPREME COURT S OF DECISION, UM, WHICH, UH, IN MANY PLACES RELEASED AND LIMITED THE OVERALL JURISDICTION OF WETLANDS. UH, HOWEVER, IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND THE COASTAL COUNTIES, THE STATE TAKES JURISDICTION OVER AQUATIC RESOURCES, UH, THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES, DOES NOT, I SHOULD SAY. SO I JUST WANNA BE CLEAR THAT THERE ARE REGULATIONS IN PLACE THAT DO PROTECT WETLANDS AS THEY STAND TODAY FROM, FROM A FEDERAL AND STATE PERSPECTIVE. SO I ALWAYS WORRY WHEN WE ADD ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS THAT, THAT ARE NECESS NOT NECESSARY WHEN WE HAVE PROTECTIONS IN PLACE AS THEY STAND TODAY. I DO SUPPORT THE ABILITY FOR THE TOWN TO REGULATE THE VIOLATION OF THE STATE AND FEDERAL LAW. SO I SUPPORT THE ORDINANCE AND ITS PURPOSE FOR SUPPORTING THE, UH, ENFORCEMENT OF VIOLATION OF FILLING WETLANDS. UM, AS IT RELATES TO SOME OF THE SECTIONS, UM, I DO ASK, AND I DID SPEAK QUICKLY ABOUT ONE SECTION THAT I DO THINK SHOULD BE MODIFIED. UH, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A SCRATCH ON THE DESIGN MANUAL SECTION, UH, WHERE IT SAYS YOU HAVE TO HAVE A HUNDRED YEAR STORM CONVEYANCE FOR PIPES DOWNSTREAM, PIPES DOWNSTREAM. WERE ORIGINALLY DESIGNED FOR 25 YEAR STORMS. UH, OVER BANK PROTECTION SHOULD BE A HIGHER STANDARD, AS SHOULD, UH, THE EXTREME FLOOD PROTECTION. THAT SHOULD BE THE A HUNDRED YEAR STANDARD. SO I AGREE WITH THAT PART, JUST NOT THE OTHER, UH, I WOULD ASK THAT EXCEPTION UNDER SECTION FIVE POINT 10.7 A 10 A BE STRUCK. I THINK IT CAUSES A LOT OF CONFUSION AND PROBLEMS AS IT RELATES TO A 50 FOOT BUFFER AND WHERE IT APPLIES. UM, AND THEN THE ONLY OTHER THING I WOULD ASK IS IF WE GET A CLARIFICATION ON A COUPLE THINGS, UM, I WOULD ASK IF YOU ARE IN A PUD, DOES THIS ORDINANCE APPLY TO YOU? NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, IF YOU ARE IN A PUD, DOES THE 50 FOOT BUFFER APPLY TO YOU? NUMBER THREE, IF YOU ARE IN A PUD WHERE THERE WAS ALREADY A PERMIT AND THE PERMIT HAS EXPIRED AND THERE ARE NO WETLANDS ON YOUR PROPERTY, BUT THERE ARE NEAR YOUR PROPERTY, WHAT A BUFFER ENCROACH INTO YOUR PROPERTY. I WOULD ASK THE SAME THING IF YOU'RE ON, SAY, BUCK ISLANDS IN LOUISVILLE ROAD. IF YOU HAVE A PROPERTY AND THERE ARE NO WETLANDS ON YOUR PROPERTY, BUT THE TOWN DETERMINES THERE ARE WETLANDS ON THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR. DOES THAT IMPEDE OR AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO USE YOUR LOT AS YOU PURCHASED IT OR OWNED IT FOR [00:05:01] ITS INTENDED PURPOSE? SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF POSSIBLE UNDER WHAT SCENARIOS THOSE APPLY. AND THEN I WOULD ALSO ASK ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, UM, IN A PUD, IF WE ARE GOING FOR A FEDERAL PERMIT AND A STATE PERMIT FOLLOWING ALL THE RULES, REGULATIONS, AND REQUIREMENTS, WILL THE FEDERAL PERMIT AND THE STATE PERMIT BE HONORED IF WE MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS? THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. AND SIR, I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT ALREADY, UH, PUT THAT IN EMAIL FORM, SEND IT TO STAFF, BUT ALSO COPY PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL OR ASK IT TO BE COPIED TO. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. FOR RECORD AT SOME POINT, SECOND CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. THIRD AND FINAL CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE PROPOSED UDO AMENDMENTS. THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED. ANDREA, IT'S ALL YOU. ALL RIGHTY. UM, GOOD EVENING. OKAY, SO LAST MONTH WE WORKSHOPPED THESE AMENDMENTS TO SECTION FIVE 10 WITH STORMWATER AND 9.2 ARE DEFINED TERMS AS THEY RELATE TO THE WETLAND ORDINANCE. SO TONIGHT, STAFF ARE REQUESTING THAT PLANNING COMMISSION PROVIDE THEIR RECOMMENDATION OF THESE PROPO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THESE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, UM, AS WE GEAR UP FOR COUNCIL NEXT MONTH. UM, AS A REMINDER, THE CURRENT WETLAND ORDINANCE WAS ADOPTED AS AN INTERIM WETLAND ORDINANCE. IT WAS ALWAYS MEANT TO BE LATER SUPERSEDED BY A COMPREHENSIVE WETLAND ORDINANCE INCORPORATED THE CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDATIONS, FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC AND RELIANCE UPON A NEW TOWN ON WETLAND MAPPING TOOL. CURRENTLY, THE TOWN'S UTILIZING THE NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY, WHICH SPECIFIC TO OUR AREA, HASN'T BEEN UPDATED SINCE LIKE 2011 ISH. UM, AND DOESN'T INDICATE THE PRESENCE OF SMALLER ISOLATED WETLANDS, WHICH IS WHY WE ARE REALLY PUSHING FOR, UM, A TOWN WETLAND MAPPING TOOL. SO WE HAVE MORE ACCURATE INFORMATION SPECIFIC TO SECTION FIVE 10. WE ARE CORRECTING SCRIBNER'S ERRORS AND MAKING GENERAL GOOD HOUSEKEEPING EDITS. WE ARE INCLUDING ENHANCED RESILIENCE RELATED LANGUAGE. WE'RE ADDING CLARIFYING LANGUAGE REGARDING THE AUTHORITY OF THE UDO ADMINISTRATOR AND CLARIFYING EXEMPTIONS AND EXCEPTIONS TO THE WELLAND ORDINANCE ITSELF. SPECIFICALLY, WE ARE INCLUDING A REFERENCE TO THIS TOWN WETLAND MAPPING TOOL TO EIGHT APPLICANTS AND WETLAND AND WETLAND BUFFER IDENTIFICATION. WE ARE ELABORATING ON CORE EXCEPTIONS, UM, INCLUDING A LIST OF ALLOWED ACTIVITIES WITHIN WETLANDS THEMSELVES. AND FOLLOWING Y'ALL'S FEEDBACK LAST MONTH, WE DID ADD IN LANGUAGE THAT SPECIFIES THAT MULTI-USE PATHWAYS, WHICH ARE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE PROPOSING, ARE ALLOWED, ALLOWED WITHIN, UM, WETLANDS ARE TO BE PERVIOUS TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICAL. AND THEN WE'RE ALSO INCLUDING A LIST OF INSURANCES FOR THE PROTECTION OF WETLANDS AND WETLAND BUFFERS, IF YOU REMEMBER, THAT WAS THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS, DEEDS AND, UM, PERMIT RESTRICTIONS. AND WE'RE ALSO INCLUDING A LIST OF, UM, DEFINITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE WETLAND ORDINANCE. WE ARE ADDING DEFINITIONS OF HEAVY MACHINERY AND WETLAND BUFFER AND THEN REVISING THE CURRENT DEFINITION OF WETLAND DELINEATION. UM, AGAIN, WITH Y'ALL'S RECOMMENDATION, WE HAVE ADDED SPECIFIC LANGUAGE TO FURTHER CLARIFY WHO CAN PROVIDE A WETLAND DELINEATION. THE DEFINITION YOU SEE ON YOUR SCREEN IS WHAT IS PROVIDED OR A PROPOSED IN THE ORDINANCE ITSELF. UM, ESSENTIALLY WE ARE LOOKING TO ADD THAT IT CAN BE A PROFESSIONAL WITH KNOWLEDGE OR EXPERIENCE, MEANING ESSENTIALLY SOMEONE WITH A, YOU KNOW, CERTIFICATION, A DEGREE, ET CETERA, OR SOMEONE THAT HAS, YOU KNOW, MANY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN IDENTIFYING THE BOUNDARIES OF WETLANDS. AND THEN WE ALSO DO AT THE END, INCLUDE AN EXAMPLE OF A WETLAND SCIENTIST, MR. ENGINEER. SO, UM, PER UDO SECTION 3 5 3, UM, YOU ALL ARE TO REVIEW ANY, UM, UDO TAX AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS AGAINST THESE CRITERIA. UM, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS ARE CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES FOR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT. THESE AMENDMENTS SUPPORT BEST PLANNING PRACTICES FOR STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE TOWN AND ITS RESIDENTS. UM, THIS, THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE NO RELATIONSHIP ON THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC SERVICES AND THEY COMPLY WITH THE APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE APPLICATIONS MANUAL. SO, UM, AS GRANTED BY THE POWERS AND DUTIES SET FORTH IN SECTION 2 26 C FOUR OF THE UDO, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THIS APPLICATION AND ITS RECOMMENDATION TO COUNSEL, YOU ALL MAY RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. UM, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION WITH AMENDMENTS OR RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. UM, OUR NEXT STEPS WILL BE TO TAKE THIS TO TOWN [00:10:01] COUNCIL NEXT MONTH FOR FIRST READING FOLLOWED BY SECOND READING IN JULY. THAT QUESTIONS FOR ME, FIRST OF ALL, TO CLARIFY TO COMMISSION, THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION. THIS IS NOT AN ACTUAL VOTE FOR APPROVAL. WE'RE JUST RECOMMENDING TO COUNCIL WHO HAS THE FINAL SAY IN THIS ONE? UM, CAN YOU ADDRESS THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE EARLIER ABOUT WHETHER IT APPLIES TO THE PUD FIRST AND FOREMOST? SO THE ORDINANCE ITSELF DOES IN THAT YOU WILL STILL NEED TO HAVE ESSENTIALLY APPROVAL FROM THE TOWN TO IMPACT A WETLAND INSIDE OF A PUD. HOWEVER, THE 50 FOOT BUFFER DOES NOT APPLY. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS ALL HAVE THEIR OWN SPECIFIC, UM, BUFFERS OR THEY'RE CALLED VEGETATIVE SETBACKS, UM, THAT STIPULATE THE DISTANCE AROUND ALL WETLANDS WITHIN A PUD. SO CAN YOU CLARIFY, IF, IF YOU HOLD A STATE PERMIT YES. THEN THE TOWN IS GOING TO TAKE NO, YOUR STATE PERMIT DOES NOT APPLY. WE'RE NOT GONNA HONOR THE STATE PERMIT AND YOU CAN'T, YOU, YOU HAVE TO GET OUR APPROVAL. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? NO. SO IN THE ORDINANCE, THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN IS WE BASICALLY HAVE THE ABILITY TO TAKE WHAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED IN TERMS OF STATE PERMITTING AND YOUR DEMONSTRATED, UM, EFFORTS TO PROTECT WETLANDS, WHETHER THAT BE THROUGH MITIGATION CREDITS OR COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS, ET CETERA, AND HONOR THAT STATE PERMIT AND THEREFORE ESSENTIALLY MAKE AN EXCEPTION TO OUR, OUR PERMITS. UM, WE ALSO, ON TOP OF THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL, UM, IN THE SENSE THAT IF WE, FOR EXAMPLE, FEEL THAT IT WAS JUST PAID INTO THE MITIGATION BANK, BUT THERE AREN'T ANY ADDITIONAL EFFORTS BEING PUT FORTH AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT TO PROTECT THE WETLAND, WE COULD REQUEST AS AN EXAMPLE THAT THERE'S AN ENHANCED BUFFER WIDTH ON THE REMAINING SECTIONS OF THE WETLAND OR A REFORESTATION, THINGS LIKE THAT. THE UDO HAS THE ABILITY FOR THE UDO ADMINISTRATOR TO HAVE DISCRETION THAT REGARD. OKAY. UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, CHARLIE OR I HAVE A FEW MORE IF YOU I DON'T KEEP GOING. OKAY. SO IS JUST TO CLARIFY THERE, IS THERE A WETLAND SCIENTIST ON STAFF? NO. OKAY. WHO'S GONNA MAKE THOSE DETERMINATIONS THEN? ABOUT WHAT, SPECIFICALLY? ABOUT WHO, WHO IS GOING TO REVIEW A STATE PERMIT AND DECIDE WHETHER THAT IT NEEDS ADDITIONAL, UM, REGULATION FROM THE TOWN STAFF WILL BE, BUT WHO WANTS STAFF AS QUALIFI? I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING. WHO WANTS STAFF AS QUALIFIED TO DO THAT? IF YOU DON'T HAVE A WETLAND SCIENTIST, THE STATE PERMIT WAS REVIEWED AND, AND ISSUED BASED ON AND, AND BY SOMEONE QUALIFIED AS A WETLAND SCIENTIST TO DO SO. SO I'M JUST CURIOUS WHO ON THE STAFF WOULD DO THAT? YEAH, SO THE, IT'D BE THE SAME CRITERIA THAT WE WOULD UTILIZE TO, UM, WHO CAN PROVIDE A WETLAND DELINEATION WOULD BE SORT OF THE SAME CRITERIA. OKAY. AND THEN WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO OBVIOUSLY OUTSOURCE IT TOO. OKAY. COULD I MAKE A SUGGESTION JUST ON, I I LIKE THAT YOU, YOU INCLUDED ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE FOR THE QUALIFICATIONS OF WHO COULD MAKE THAT DELINEATION MM-HMM . BUT SHOULD IT, SHOULD IT NOT BE SOMEONE WHO IS CURRENTLY EMPLOYED AS A PROFESSIONAL, EITHER SELF-EMPLOYED OR BY SOMEONE ELSE AS A PROFESSIONAL? BECAUSE AGAIN, WHO'S, WHO'S TO SAY THAT ANY INDIVIDUAL IS GOING TO IS GOING TO TRY TO MAKE A WETLAND DELINEATION? THEY GO, OH YEAH, I'VE BEEN, I WAS, I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS. I'M CURRENTLY EMPLOYED TO DO IT. I DON'T HAVE ANY CREDENTIALS THAT SAY I CAN DO IT, BUT I'VE GOTTA, I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS AND THAT'S MY EXPERIENCE THAT QUALIFIES ME TO DO SO. SO MAYBE YOU COULD YEAH. KIND OF MAKE IT EVEN MORE STRICT THAT, THAT THAT PERSON IS EDUCATED OR PREFERABLY CURRENTLY EMPLOYED AS A PROFESSIONAL, WHATEVER IT WAS. ECOLOGIST, WETLAND, BIOLOGIST. UM, I DON'T KNOW, JUST A SUGGESTION. UM, WHAT ABOUT MIKE HUGHES'S COMMENTS ON OVERBANK PROTECTION VERSUS, UM, REQUIRING A HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD PIPES TO BE INSTALLED THAT ARE, THAT ARE GOING TO CONVEY TO 25-YEAR-OLD FLOW PIPES AND, AND THEN THE SYSTEM'S NOT GONNA WORK ANYWAY BECAUSE DOWNSTREAM THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN COMPROMISED BECAUSE THEY WERE DESIGNED TO A 25 YEAR FLOOD. UM, THAT WAS A RECOMMENDATION, UM, FROM AN ENGINEER DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. UM, BUT I DO BELIEVE THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING. OKAY. UM, WHEN WILL THE MAPPING TOOL BE IN PLACE? SO IT IS CURRENTLY [00:15:01] LIVE INTERNALLY FACING ON BLUFF AND EXPLORER, BUT THE PLAN IS TO HAVE IT EXTERNAL FACING AFTER SECOND READING. OKAY. SO IT'S READY TO GO NOW. OKAY. UM, AND I, I GUESS I DO, I STILL HAVE CONCERNS WHEN SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I ASKED YOU YESTERDAY IN OUR KIND OF PRE-MEETING FOR THIS MEETING, IT SEEMS LIKE WHENEVER THERE WAS AN ISSUE WE'RE LIKE, WELL, THAT'S OKAY BECAUSE WE CAN JUST, SOMEONE CAN JUST APPLY FOR A WAIVER OR THEY CAN GET A VARIANCE. BUT, BUT YOU'RE, YOU'RE USING THAT SOLUTION FOR WHAT, WHAT ARE POTENTIALLY AND SEEMS LIKE RECOGNIZABLE, KNOWN PREDICTABLE CONDITIONS AND, AND VARIANCES IN WAIVERS ARE TYPICALLY FOR UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS. SO AGAIN, I THINK WE'RE RUSHING TO GET THIS DONE AND SAYING, WELL, THAT'S OKAY BECAUSE THE SAFETY NET IS THE WAIVER. BUT I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER INCLUDING ALL OF THOSE THINGS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT WE ARE ALREADY SAYING, WELL, NO, THAT'S OKAY. 'CAUSE YOU'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO GET A WAIVER FOR THAT AND YOU'RE GOING TO GET A WAIVER FOR THAT. AND SO THERE'S THESE KNOWN CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE ALREADY PLANNING ON ISSUING WAIVERS. WE SHOULD CODIFY THAT IN THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE WAIVERS ARE, AGAIN, WAIVERS ARE FOR UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS. THEY'RE NOT FOR, FOR KNOWN PREDICTABLE CONDITIONS THAT WE KNOW ARE GONNA HAPPEN. YEAH. AND I APOLOGIZE IF I MADE IT SEEM THAT WAY, UM, WHEN WE TALKED YESTERDAY. NO, THE WAIVER WOULD MAKE, WOULD BE APPLICABLE IN THE SENSE THAT IT ISN'T UNFORESEEN SITUATION THAT OUR ORDINANCE HAS BROUGHT UPON WHERE NOW A PROPERTY CAN'T BE ACCESSIBLE OR ET CETERA, WHERE THE WAIVER IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE APPLICANT TO DISCUSS WITH STAFF AND HAVE STAFF REVIEW IT VERSUS GOING THROUGH THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DIRECTLY FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST. UM, THE WAIVERS, IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE HANDED OUT WILLY-NILLY. THAT'S A PRETTY STRENUOUS LIKE WAIVER POLICY THAT WE REVIEW AND ANALYZE THESE WAIVERS AGAINST. UM, I WILL JUST FOR EXAMPLE THOUGH, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT YOU, BUT JUST FOR EXAMPLE, WE USED, UM, SOMEONE WHO NEEDS TO MAKE AN IMPACT FOR A ROAD CROSSING. YES. AND YOU, AND, AND I HAD THE QUESTION, WELL, IF I HAVE TO MAKE AN IMPACT FOR A ROAD CROSSING MM-HMM . AND WHAT'S THE JUST NOMINAL FIGURES HERE, I'VE GOT A 50 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY, SO I KNOW I'VE GOT IMPACT 50 FEET JUST TO GET, GET THE, THE, THE ROAD THROUGH THE WETLAND MM-HMM . BUT NOW THAT SINCE I'VE IMPACTED THE WETLAND, I'VE GOTTA PUT A 50 FOOT BUFFER AND I JUST CLOSED UP MY ROAD CROSSING. RIGHT? SO THE ONLY WAY I CAN MAKE THIS WORK IS TO IMPACT SIGNIFICANTLY MORE OF THE WETLAND JUST TO CREATE A BUFFER. AND THEN YOU SAID, WELL, THAT'S OKAY. WELL, WE'LL JUST, YOU'RE GONNA GET WAIVER FOR THAT. WELL, THAT'S A PREDICTABLE KNOWN CONDITION THAT WE KNOW IS GONNA HAPPEN. SO I THINK YOU SHOULD, WE SHOULD TRY TO WRITE CONDITIONS LIKE THAT INTO THE ORDINANCE. THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE. AND I THINK IF, IF WE SIT DOWN AND TALK WITH, WITH ENGINEERS AND OTHER OTHER PROFESSIONALS, I THINK WE'LL FIND A LOT MORE OF 'EM THAT, THAT WE SHOULD PROBABLY QUANTIFY RATHER THAN JUST, HEY, WE'VE GOT A SAFETY NET OF AN ORDINANCE FOR ANYTHING THAT THAT DOESN'T WORK. I DO THINK THAT THERE WAS APPREHENSION TO MAKE A WHAT IF LIST. UM, KNOWING THAT WE WEREN'T ABLE, WHEN WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO BE INCLUSIVE OF EVERY TYPE OF SCENARIO. UM, I WILL NOTE YOUR SUGGESTION. WELL, I I WOULD TEND TO AGREE WITH THEM ON THAT CODIFY AS MUCH AS YOU CAN BECAUSE I MEAN, THE UDO IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE IN A WHOLE, IN THAT WE CAN'T KNOW EVERY SITUATION AND WE DO RUN INTO 'EM. BUT IF THERE ARE, AND THIS IS OUTTA MY LEAGUE, OKAY. BUT IF THERE ARE SITUATIONS THAT WE KNOW WILL ARISE THAT SHOULD BE IN THE CODE, I WOULD SUGGEST IT. AND, AND YOU'VE GOT TIME BETWEEN NOW AND TOWN COUNCIL TO, UM, TO LOOK INTO SOME OF THOSE AND I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE GOT STAFF THAT CAN HELP WITH THAT OR, OR WHAT YOU'RE YEAH, AND ACTUALLY, I, I HAD A ANOTHER QUESTION THAT IT, IT SEEMS TYPICALLY FROM PLANNING COMMISSION TO TOWN COUNCIL, THERE WOULD BE NOT THE TOWN COUNCIL MEETING IN IN TWO WEEKS. IT WOULD BE THE TOWN COUNCIL MEETING. THE THE MONTH FOLLOWING SINCE WE'RE IN THE LAST WEDNESDAY OF THIS MONTH, TYPICALLY THIS WOULD BE AT FIRST READING IN JULY, IS THAT IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS BEING FAST TRACKED FOR SOME REASON THAT IT'S GOING TO FIRST READING IN TWO WEEKS AT THE JUNE 9TH MEETING. IT'S, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS. IT MAY NOT HAVE ALWAYS BEEN THAT WAY, BUT OKAY. YEAH. I DON'T FEEL THAT. BUT IT DOESN'T GIVE STAFF A LOT OF TIME BECAUSE [00:20:01] YOU'VE GOTTA TURN YOUR, YOUR STAFF, YOU'VE GOTTA TURN REPORTS IN FOR, FOR TOWN COUNCIL. AND THEN HERE WE ARE SAYING, HEY, WE THINK YOU SHOULD LOOK AT MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS BEFORE YOU PRESENT THIS TO COUNCIL. AND YOU DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TIME TO DO THAT. THAT'S, THAT'S ALL WE AGREED ON. WELL, I WOULD SUGGEST IF YOU HAVEN'T HAD THE TIME TO DO IT, JUST TELL COUNCIL WE'RE WORKING ON SOME OF, YOU KNOW, AT, AT THE VERY LEAST. BUT I THINK, I THINK THOSE ARE SOME GOOD POINTS. UM, IT WASN'T TOO MEAN, WAS IT? I I'M JUST POINTING OUT WHERE I SEE YOUR POTENTIAL PROBLEMS. SO I DON'T THINK ANYBODY TOOK IT THAT WAY. YEAH. THAT'S ALL I HAVE, SIR. TO ENTERTAIN A RECOMMENDATION. DO WE HAVE A SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATION? WE DO. UM, SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE MAY WANNA PROCEED WITH AMENDMENTS. WE HAVE A SUGGESTED MOTION ON THE SCREEN FOR WITHOUT AMENDMENTS. I DON'T KNOW. UNLESS COMMISSIONERS FEEL DIFFERENT. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO AMEND IT PER SE AS MUCH AS A DIRECTION TO STAFF OF WHAT WE WOULD SUGGEST. I YEAH, THAT'S THROUGH. I I'M NOT, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN 'CAUSE I DON'T, I DON'T AGREE WITH IT. I DON'T AGREE WITH THE, THE PREMISE. UM, MAY I ASK A QUESTION'S UN PROTECTED. WE, SO, AND, AND THEN I DON'T AGREE. SO I, IF, IF I WAS GONNA DO IT, IT WOULD BE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR, FOR CHANGES. OKAY. DO YOU HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS TO SUGGEST IT BE EXPENSIVE? I JUST, I I I HAVE A QUESTION IS WHAT'S GOING BEFORE, JUST SO THAT I'M CLEAR. THIS IS ALREADY EXISTING TEXT THAT WE ARE AMENDING, SO IT'S NOT REALLY, DO YOU AGREE WITH THIS AS A PREMISE THAT ALREADY EXISTS? WE'RE JUST A AMENDING THE TEXT TO PROVIDE CLARITY. CORRECT. BUT IT'S NOT, SHOULD THIS EXIST AS AN ORDINANCE? THE ORDINANCE ALREADY EXISTS. THIS IS SIMPLY A WAY TO AMEND IT, TO CREATE CLARITY FROM THE FIRST VERSION. AND THE UDO IS A LIVING DOCUMENT THAT CONTINUES TO BE AMENDED OVER TIME AS DIFFERENT SCENARIOS PLAY OUT. SO IT ALREADY EXISTS. SO IF WE CHOOSE NOT TO AMEND IT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE NOT REALLY CHANGING. IT'S ALREADY IN PLACE. LIKE IT'S NOT, SHOULD THIS BE IN PLACE OR NOT? IT'S ALREADY IN PLACE. SO IT'S WELL, IT IT IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF, BECAUSE OF THE SEPARATION OF NON-JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS NOW THAT THE TOWN IS TRYING TO TAKE FORWARD. THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE ON, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING. WE'RE DISCUSSING AMEND. YEAH. IT'S, THAT'S A BIG PART OF THIS, OF THIS ORDINANCE. THE LANGUAGE IN THIS IS THAT'S NEW. THE NEW, THE RED LANGUAGE, THE ABILITY TO USE CERTAIN STATE PERMIT WASN'T, WASN'T IN THERE BEFORE. YOU DIDN'T HAVE THAT PERMIT. YEAH, IT WAS THOSE TWO SECTIONS. WE JUST BEEN MOVED UP. OKAY. YEAH, I AGREE. I AGREE. I MEAN IT'S NOT, WE'RE NOT SAYING DO WE AGREE WITH THE ORDINANCE AS IT AS A WHOLE. IT'S JUST WHAT DO WE NEED TO EDIT IN TERMS OF CREATING CLARITY. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE COULDN'T MAKE EDITS THAT CREATE ADDITIONAL CLARITY WITH DIRECTION THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE EXPLORING ADDITIONAL THINGS TO SEE IN FUTURE REVISIONS. BUT IT'S LIKE YOU'RE HERE TODAY, MAKE OTHER CHANGES AND MM-HMM . STILL REALLY LIKE, JUST TAKE A STAB AT A MOTION I MOVE TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENTS TO THE TOWN OF LEFT IN CODE OF ORDINANCES. CHAPTER 23, UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE ARTICLE FIVE DESIGN STANDARD SECTION FIVE 10 STORMWATER AND ARTICLE NINE, DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATION SECTION 9.2 DEFINED TERMS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND IF I MAY, UM, SORRY TO INTERJECT. I THINK THIS MOTION IS ONE THAT WAS PROBABLY TAKEN FROM A TOWN COUNCIL MEETING. 'CAUSE WE, THAT'S RECOMMENDED BY PROCEED NOTE. WE HAVE TO HAVE A SECOND BEFORE WE CAN HAVE A I. I I. AND I'M AWARE, I JUST BEFORE THERE WAS A SECOND, I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE CLARIFIED THAT BECAUSE THIS IS A MOTION TO APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THIS IS A LANGUAGE THAT WAS USED. THIS SHOULD BE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. DO YOU WITHDRAW YOUR MOTION? I WITHDRAW MY MOTION SO I CAN REMAKE IT. COMMISSIONER, WE COULD HAVE SECONDED AND AMENDED IT. YES. I TRY TO KEEP THINGS EASY. I TRY TO KEEP THINGS EASY FOR Y'ALL. THANK YOU. OKAY. I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO TOWN COUNCIL. THE AMENDMENTS TO THE UDO AS DESCRIBED ON THE SCREEN. I SECOND ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? ALL. IF YOU'RE OPPOSED, YOU CAN BE OPPOSED. THAT'S FINE. OKAY. ONE ABSTENTION. OKAY. SECOND [VII.2. Beaufort Memorial Primary Care at May River Crossing (Certificate of Appropriateness - Highway Corridor Overlay District): A request by Josie Abrams of Josie S. Abrams Architecture, on behalf of property owner Beaufort Memorial Hospital for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness - HCOD application. The project consists of the 5,000 SF single story medical office building with associated infrastructure. The property is zoned Jones Estate Planned Unit Development (PUD) and consists of approximately 1.38 acres identified by tax map number R610 036 000 3212 0000 located within the May River Crossing Master Plan. (COFA-02-26-020148) (Staff - Angie Castrillon)] ITEM IN NEW BUSINESS, BEAUFORT MEMORIAL PRIMARY CARE AT [00:25:01] MAY RIVER CROSSING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT, A REQUEST BY JOSIE ABRAMS OF JOSIE S ABRAMS ARCHITECTURE ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, BEAUFORT MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOR APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, HCOD APPLICATION. THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF THE 5,000 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE STORY MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING WITH ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE. PROPERTY IS ZONED JONES ESTATE PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 1.3 ACRES IDENTIFIED BY THE TAX MAP NUMBER IN THE AGENDA LOCATED WITHIN THE MAY RIVER MET CROSSING MASTER PLAN. UM, AND BEFORE WE START, REMINDER TO THE COMMISSIONERS THAT WE HAVE APPROVED THIS PROJECT, THIS IS HCOD. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT LIGHTING, LANDSCAPING, ARCHITECTURE, AND SO, OKAY. UM, SO THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS MEMORIAL. UM, PRIMARY CARE AT MARY CROSSING. IT DID COME TO YOU WITH A DIFFERENT TITLE, BUT IT'S THE SAME PROJECT, UM, IN NEW, UM, IN MARY RIVER CROSSING MASTER PLAN. IT'S A REQUEST BY JOSIE ABRAMS OF JOSIE ABRAMS ARCHITECTURE REPRESENTING BUFORD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL TO BUILD A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING. AND LIKE YOU SAID, YOU'RE REVIEWING ARCHITECTURE, LIGHTING, AND LANDSCAPING. THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OUTLINED IN RED. IT IS FRONTING MAYOR RIVER ROAD ALONG MAYOR RIVER CROSSING INTERIOR TO THE SITE. THIS AERIAL PROVIDES A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT. THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS IN NOVEMBER, 2025. UM, I'M SORRY, 2024. PRIOR TO, UM, FILE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, ALL PROPOSED ONSITE PARKING MORE THAN THE REQUIRED 18 PARKING SPACES WILL BE DESIGNED AS PREVIOUS PARKING 2022 YEARS. THIS APPLICATION IS FOR A COFA HCOD LOCATED IN THE JONES ESTATE, PUD WITHIN MAYOR RIVER CROSSING MASTER PLAN. IT IS SUBJECT TO JONES ESTATE, PUD DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND CONCEPT PLAN. THE MAYOR RIVER CROSSING MASTER PLAN AND UDO SECTIONS FIVE THREE. SO THAT IS THE BEAUFORT COUNTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ORDINANCE 90 DASH THREE ZDSO AS NOTIFIED AND INCORPORATED INTO THE JONES STATE PUD. SO THESE ARE THE NORTH AND SOUTH BUILDING ELEVATIONS. WE DID WORK WITH THE APPLICANT'S INCORPORATE MORE ARTICULATION WITH THE ADDITION OF METAL AWNINGS, A LARGE WINDOW RECESS AND PROJECTING WALL SECTIONS. ADDITIONALLY, STAFF DID HAVE CONCERNS REGARDING THE ROOF LINE, UM, THROUGHOUT THE REVIEW PROCESS. HOWEVER, STAFF'S INTERPRETATION REMAINS THAT THE ORDINANCE INTENDS TO DISCOURAGE UNARTICULATED FLAT ROOF LINES. THE APPLICANT DID PROVIDE A NARRATIVE, AND I'M GONNA QUOTE, UM, THE FOREFOOT DEEP METAL COORDINATES AND PROJECTING BRICK PLASTERS COMPRISED 45% OF THE TOTAL PERIMETER OF THE BUILDING AND SERVE TO ADDRESS THE HCOD CONCERN FOR FLAT ROOFS WITHOUT A PEDIMENT. A CORNICE IS ALSO UNDERSTOOD AS AN ARCHITECTURAL CROWN AND IS PROPOSED IN LIEU OF PEI AS IT CREATES AN ANGLED ELEMENT WITH ITS FIVE 12 PITCH. BASED ON THAT INTERPRETATION AND THE NARRATIVE, THE PROPOSED CORNICE IS VIEWED BY STAFF AS MEETING THE GUIDELINE REQUIRING IMPEDIMENT OUTLINED IN SECTION FIVE 15 OF THE CESO. NEXT SLIDE IS THE EAST AND WEST ELEVATIONS, ALONG WITH THEIR DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE DETAIL, WHICH WE FOUND TO BE CONSISTENT WITH EIGHT COD STANDARDS. THESE PERSPECTIVE RENDERINGS SHOW THE PROPOSED EXTERIOR APPEARANCE. THE COLOR BOARD INCLUDES THE PROPOSED, UM, I BELIEVE IT'S THE NAME OF THE PAINT. IT'S CALLED AGE COPPER ACCENT COLOR FOR THE CORNICE AND THE WINDOW FRAMES. THIS IS GOING TO BE ONE OF TWO ITEMS THAT STAFF IS REQUESTING IS DETER DEFERRING TO THE COMMISSION TO DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATENESS OF. HERE WE HAVE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. IT SHOWS THE PERIMETER AND FOUNDATION BUFFER, PLANTINGS, PARKING LOT ISLANDS AND TREE PLACEMENTS. SETH FINDS THAT THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE. AND THE APPLICANT HAS ADDRESSED PRIOR COMMENTS REGARDING PLANTINGS OVER THE UTILITY EASEMENTS OF CONFIRMATION FROM DOMINION'S ENERGY. AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THERE IS A 75 FOOT COMMERCIAL SETBACK. SO THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GONNA BE PRETTY FAR BACK FROM MAYOR RIVER ROAD AND THAT IS A CLOSE UP OF THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. UM, ALSO THERE IS FIRST, UM, CHATHAM BANK. THERE'S FIFTH THIRD BANK ACROSS FROM MAYOR RIVER CROSSING ROAD, UM, UNDER [00:30:01] CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW. AND THERE WILL BE A SIDEWALK THAT CONNECTS THE TWO PROPERTIES. UH, SETH FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED ILLUMINATION IS ALSO IN COMPLIANCE. HOWEVER, WE ARE REQUESTING DETERMINATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE APPROPRIATENESS OF LED LIGHTING. UM, AND THE PROPOSED PICTURES ARE ALSO INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. ANY COMMISSION SHALL CONSIDER THE CRITERIA SET FOURTH AND SECTION 3 17 3 OF THE UDO IN ASSESSING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT. THE REVIEW CRITERIA ANALYSIS IS INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT IN YOUR PACKET AS WELL. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO TAKE FOLLOWING ACTIONS, APPROVE AS SUBMITTED, APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS TABLE OR DENIED THE APPLICATION. UM, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVE AS SUBMITTED WITH, UM, TWO DETERMINATIONS WE'RE ASKING YOU TO MAKE, WHETHER THE PROPOSED USE OF COLOR, COLOR, AGE, COPPER AS AN ACCENT IS APPROPRIATE UNDER 5 15 9. AND WHETHER THE PROPOSED LED LIGHTING FIXTURES ARE AN, UM, LIGHTING IS AN APPROPRIATE SUBSTITUTE FOR THE LAMP TYPES. SO THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE OR I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I HAVE A SUGGESTED MOTION SLIDE, UM, JUST HERE EVERYONE OKAY. WITH THE APPLICANT SPEAKING NEXT AND THEN WE CAN OKAY. GOOD EVENING. I'M JO ABRAMS AND I, I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT I NEED TO, TO ADD BEYOND THE NARRATIVE AND DRAWINGS, BUT I'M DEFINITELY HAPPY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. DO WE HAVE A PHYSICAL SAMPLE OF THE PAGED COPPER? YES. YEAH. COULD WE SEE TO THAT? BECAUSE IT'S TOTALLY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU SEE HERE. IF YOU WANT TO WALK OUTSIDE, YOU'LL FIND IT'S A VERY NICE COLOR MATCH TO THE CANOPY AT THE FRONT OF THIS BUILDING. OH, BUT YOU'RE ALSO HOLDING IT. OKAY. YES. I HAND HAND IT OFF. YEAH. PERFECT. THANK YOU. THIS IS THE COLOR THAT YOU USE IN OTHER LOCATIONS AS WELL, RIGHT? YES. I MEAN, I FEEL IT'S AN OUT HOSPITAL'S AND IT CHANGED IT'S THE HOSPITAL'S COLOR, CORRECT. OH, TRUE. IT'S, IT'S A LOT DIFFERENT. WE SAW THAT AT, UM, DRC. IT'S A LOT DIFFERENT WHEN YOU SEE IT IN PERSON THAN WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE ON THE PRESENTATION. IT IT DOES, YES. CORRECT. SO IT WON'T BE NATURAL COPPER THAT IS PATINA OVER TIME? NO, JUST THIS, THE COLOR AGED COPPER. RIGHT. THE COLOR. ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE COLOR QUESTION ON THIS END? JUST QAS WORK THERE. IT LOOKS LIKE IT, IT'S CHANGED. IT'S, IT'S COMING OUT. IT'S CORRECT. IT'S, IT'S GOT A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT, IT'LL PROVIDE A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT SHADOW LINE FOR SURE. WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY SEW THIS BUILDING? NEXT TENANT DOESN'T WANT THAT CORNICE. IS THERE A WAY TO HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEY'D HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH? CORRECT. MR. FRAZIER, I MISSED THE QUESTION. WE WOULD NEED TO COME, UM, BACK AS A APPROPRIATE AMEND AND THINK OF THE ONE WE JUST GOT, UM, FOR THE, UH, NEW CHASE BANK. WHO WOULD CHASE BANK. YEAH, YEAH. UM, MATERIAL BOARD MATCHES THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE AND THE DETAILS FOR IT. AS FAR AS THE BRICK, I DON'T SEE A CASTSTONE. I SEE THE CASTSTONE CAP, BUT NOT THE MATERIAL BOARD. OH, THAT'S CORRECT. WE WERE JUST GONNA PAINT IT THE, YOU KNOW, PARGE THE, THE MASONRY AND PAINT IT. UM, ONE OF THE COLORS THAT ARE SUBMITTED THERE ON THE BOARD. OKAY. APOLOGIZE. YEAH, NO QUESTIONS. MY, MY ONLY CONCERN AND I I DEFER TO THE REST OF COMMISSION IS WE HAVE ON THE SOUTH FACING ELEVATION 70 FEET OF THE SAME ROOF LINE. UM, AND NOW WE'VE PUT A FOUR FOOT COVER OVER A DOOR TO COUNT THAT AS A ROOF UNDULATION. I STILL THINK THAT'S TOO BIG OF A MASS THAT'S JUST AT THE SAME HEIGHT, BUT I'M ONE PERSON. SO, UM, I KNOW YOU ATTEMPTED TO CHANGE IT, BUT YOU KNOW, THE PROJECT WE'RE ABOUT TO SEE, THEY CAME BACK AND DID A PITCHED ROOF AND DID SOME OTHER THINGS [00:35:01] THAT PUT US INTO LOW COUNTRY VERNACULAR. AND I JUST DON'T SEE THIS BUILDING AS, AS LOW COUNTRY VERNACULAR. THIS IS TO BE FAIR IN A PLAZA THAT'S BEEN DEVELOPED OVER 20 YEARS AND HAS SEVERAL DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL TYPES IN IT. SO WITH THAT SAID, CAN WE GO MS. ANGIE TO THE PROPOSED MOTION? WELL, DO YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS? LET ME ASK IT. I DON'T, I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT. I DON'T HAVE A SUGGESTION ON HOW TO CHANGE THAT TO MAKE ME HAPPY, BUT I'M ONE PERSON I'M NOT AND GENERAL CONSENSUS SEEMS TO BE GOING THAT THIS IS A GOOD DESIGN. SO I DON'T WANNA HOLD THAT UP. AND I DID WRITE THIS SUGGESTED MOTION ASSUMING THAT YOU, UM, WERE AFFIRMATIVE OF THE DETERMINATIONS THAT LED YING IS APPROPRIATE AND AGE COVERS ALSO APPROPRIATE. AND YEAH. AND WHATEVER MOTION WE HAVE HAS TO ADDRESS THOSE TWO ITEMS. MM-HMM . ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. SO SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A STAB AT A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE BEAUFORT MEMORIAL PRIMARY CARE AT MAY RIVER CROSSING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HIGHWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS THAT THE PROPOSED LED LIGHTING FIXTURES ARE APPROPRIATE. SUBSTITUTE THE LAMP TIES PERMITTED UNDER ZDSO 90 DASH 30 SECTION, UM, AS WRITTEN AND THE PROPOSED H COPPER ACCIDENT COLORS APPROPRIATE AS WRITTEN. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU. OKAY, ITEM FOUR. THANK YOU. ITEM FOUR, NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE. NO IT'S NOT. NO IT'S NOT. IT'S ITEM THREE [VII.3. Chipotle at May River Crossing (Certificate of Appropriateness - Highway Corridor Overlay District): A request by Joshua Bookhout of Wilkus Architects, on behalf of property owner PBC Partners, LLC, for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness - HCOD application. The project consists of the construction of a single-story 2,385 SF restaurant with associated infrastructure. The property is within the Jones Estate Planned Unit Development (PUD) consists of 1.51 acres identified by tax map number R610 036 000 3211 0000 within the May River Crossing Master Plan. (COFA-02-26-020127) (Staff - Angie Castrillon)] CHIPOTLE AND I'VE CROSSED IT OUT TOO EARLY. CHIPOTLE MAY. RIVER CROSSING CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATE S-H-C-O-D-A REQUEST BY JOSHUA BOOKOUT, BOOKOUT OF WILKIS ARCHITECTS ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER PBC PARTNERS, LLC FOR APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, HCOD APPLICATION. THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE STORY, TWENTY THREE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY FIVE SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT WITH ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE. THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE JONES ESTATE, PUD CONSISTING OF 1.51 ACRES IDENTIFIED BY THE TAX MAP NUMBER ON THE AGENDA WITHIN THE MAY RIVER CROSSING MASTER PLAN. THANK YOU. UH, SO THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS ALSO IN THE MAY RIVER CROSSING DEVELOPMENT. UM, SO AS YOU STATED, IT IS FOR A SINGLE STORY, 2,385 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT WITH ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE. UM, HERE WE HAVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. I WILL POINT OUT THAT ALTHOUGH IT IS FRONTING, UM, ONE 70, THE DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE ON THE EAST SIDE, EAST OF THE ROAD THAT IS CUTTING THROUGH THAT PARCEL. WE HAVE AN AERIAL FOR MORE CONTEXT AND THIS ONE CAME TO YOU, UH, BACK IN NOVEMBER AND WAS ALSO APPROVED. UH, WE DID RECEIVE, THE CONDITION WAS FOR THE, UM, UNALLOCATED PARKING TO BE ALLOCATED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT AND WE DID, DID RECEIVE THAT FROM THE DECLARANT. AND THAT PARKING IS, UM, SOUTH ON THIS DRAWING, WHICH WOULD BE EAST. AND, UM, I WON'T GO OVER THIS AGAIN, BUT IT IS THE SAME MAYOR CROSSING AND JONES' STATE PUD STANDARDS, THE ZDSO. SO THE TWO PRIMARY FACADE, UH, FACADE SHOWN HERE, UH, FACE ONE 70 IN THE WEST AND THE PARK IN THE EAST BECAUSE THE PARK SERVES AS A KEY AMENITY WITHIN MARY RIVER CROSSING DEVELOPMENT STAFF DID REQUEST THAT THE EAST FACING FACADE BE DESIGNED AND TREATED AS A FRONT ELEVATION. WE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT THROUGHOUT THE REVIEW PROCESS TO INCORPORATE ADDITIONAL ARCHITECTURAL ARTICULATION THROUGH THE USE OF A PITCH STANDING SEAM, METAL ROOF AWNINGS BOARD, AND BATTEN SIDING, BAHAMAS SHUTTERS, UM, ALONG HERE, UH, SPANDREL GLASS WINDOWS TO SORT OF BREAK UP, UM, THE FACADE AS WELL AS ACCENT SIDING PANELS. AND I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE BUILDING, WE ASKED THEM TO EXTEND THE FACADE AS THEIR DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE. THE PROPOSED MATERIALS ARE SHOWN HERE AND WE FIND THEM TO BE CONSISTENT WITH HCOD STANDARDS. THE [00:40:01] LANDSCAPE PLAN SHOWS, UM, THAT THE SIDE AND REAR BUFFERS DO MEET THE CODE AS WELL AS THE HIGHWAY BUFFERS. HOWEVER, WE HAVE APPROVED A FOUNDATION PLANNING OF LESS THAN EIGHT FEET ALONG THE EAST ELEVATION DUE TO DESIGN CONSTRAINTS. I ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT WE DO HAVE A SPECIMEN LIVE OAK LOCATED ON THE NORTH END OF THE PROPERTY. AND STAFF HAS WORKED WITH APPLICANT THROUGHOUT, UM, THE DESIGN PROCESS TO PROTECT THAT TREE WITH REDUCED PARKING. UM, SIMILAR TO THE LAST APPLICATION, THE LIGHTING PLAN IS IN COMPLIANCE, BUT I AM GOING TO ASK FOR YOUR DETERMINATION ON THE APPROPRIATENESS OF LED. LIGHTING PLANNING COMMISSION SHALL CONSIDER CRITERIA SET FORTH IN SECTION 3 17 3 OF THE UDO. THE REVIEW CRITERIA AND ANALYSIS ARE INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT IN YOUR PACKET. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED, APPROVE A CONDITIONS TABLE OR DENY THE APPLICATION. AND TOWN STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF 3 17 3 ARE MET AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED WITH THE ONE DETERMINATION, THE APPROPRIATENESS OF LED LIGHTING. THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND I DO HAVE A SUGGESTED MOTION IF YOU'D LIKE TO SEE THAT O FROM WILKIS ARCHITECTS, UH, FOR REPRESENTING CHIPOTLE OUTSIDE OF THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER FOR CHIPOTLE. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. UM, SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS THE, UH, HIGHWAY FACING ELEVATION, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE AT YOUR DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW TO GET THE TRANSOM ON THE RIGHT TO ALIGN WITH THE WINDOW BELOW AND HAVE ANOTHER SOLID PANEL RATHER THAN HAVING AN ELONGATED TRANSOM THAT DOESN'T ALIGN WITH THE WINDOW HORIZONTAL? YOU MEAN ABOUT THE, CAN YOU MAKE THE WINDOW TO THE RIGHT OF THE DRIVE-THROUGH LOOK THE SAME AS THE WINDOW TO THE LEFT? UH, WE CAN ADD, UH, AMONG IN THERE THE, THE BLACK MARKER ABOVE THAT IS THE, OUR HEATER, ME OUR HEATER ELEMENT. BUT WE'VE HAD MILLION. PERFECT. THANK YOU. , NOTHING YET. SO YOU, YOU ADDRESSING THE SYMMETRY OF THOSE WINDOWS, LYDIA, IS THAT YOUR INTENT? I WOULD LIKE TO, YES. YEAH. THEN I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE. MM-HMM. SO MA'AM, ARE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ON OUR DRIVE THROUGH WINDOW, HOW YOU HAVE THE THREE BLACK SQUARES? MM-HMM. ONE OF THE BLACK SQUARES, LIKE WE'RE TALKING IS, IS A HEALTH COMPLIANCE CODE FOR OUR, OUR AIR CURTAIN. IT ALSO PROVIDES HEAT DURING THE WINTERTIME, BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT TO KILL SO WHEN THE DOOR OPENS, IT COMES ON BLOWS, KILLS EVERYTHING OUT. WHAT WE CAN DO THOUGH IS WE WANT TO MAKE IT SYMMETRICAL AS BLACK OUT ONE THE OTHER RIGHT THERE WOULD THAT'D BE GREAT. OKAY. UM, CAN WE GO BACK TO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR A SECOND? I THINK WE, THIS OCCURRED TO ME YESTERDAY, UM, LOOKING AT THE PLANS, I THINK WE'VE NEGLECTED SOMETHING HERE. UM, NONE OF THESE DRAWINGS SHOW THE ENTIRE LOT THAT'S BEING DEVELOPED BECAUSE PART OF THE LOT IS ACROSS MAY RIVER CROSSING ROAD. IT IS NOT SUB DIVIDABLE WITHOUT A MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT. IT'S PART OF THIS LOT. AND SO IF WE LOOK AT IT, MATTER OF FACT, ANGIE, IF, UM, I THINK YOU HAD AN OVERHEAD SHOT OF, UH, LIKE GOOGLE MAPS SEVEN. YES. OKAY. IF YOU SEE TO THE LEFT OF THAT, THAT ORANGE RECTANGLE, YOU'VE GOT THE TREE LINE ALONG ONE 70, BUT THEN YOU'VE GOT MORE OR LESS A CLEARED OUT LOT. UM, I THINK WE SHOULD, UM, MAKE IT A REQUIREMENT THAT THE LANDSCAPE CLAN INCLUDES, AND, AND IT CAN BE MINIMAL, BUT IT INCLUDES LANDSCAPING ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT, UH, ROAD. YOU GO BACK TO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FIRST. SO ALONG MAY CROSSING ROADS SO THAT WHEN YOU'RE NOT DRIVING DOWN THAT ROAD, IT JUST DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A, SO PUT SOME KIND OF SHRUBBERY OR, OR BUSHES ALONG, ALONG THE ROAD'S EDGE THERE. YEAH. I THINK JUST, JUST BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING FROM ONE 70, YOU'RE LOOKING AT PARKING STOPS, YOU'RE ALSO LOOKING STRAIGHT AT THE DUMPSTER. 'CAUSE IT LINES UP WITH THE ROAD, WHICH I UNDERSTAND THE SITE LAYOUT BASED ON THE TREE AND EVERYTHING ELSE. BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE A SHAME IF YOU COULD DRIVE DOWN ONE 17 AND SEE A CORRIDOR STRAIGHT THROUGH THERE TO THE DUMPSTER TOO. YEAH. IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE HARD WITH THAT TREE BUFFER TO SEE IT, BUT I MEAN, JUST HOLDING CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE'VE DONE, I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE A CONDITION OF THE, UM, [00:45:01] THE TREES RIGHT THERE. YEAH. ARE YOU, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT JUST MAY RIVER, MAY RIVER CROSSING, NOT, NOT THE ENTIRE REST OF THE LOT. RIGHT. JUST, UH, BECAUSE IT WAS BROUGHT UP, UM, THE LADY BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE THAT'S FACING ONE 70, BUT THERE'S A BIG TREE LINE BUFFER BETWEEN THAT, WHICH COVERS EVERYTHING AT THAT. YEAH. BUT IF YOU, IF YOU COME JUST AFTER THE, THE ARC OF THE TURN ONTO MAY RIVER CROSSING ROAD AND PLANTED ALL THAT, THAT'LL GIVE ADDITIONAL BUFFER TO THE GOTCHA DOWNSTAIRS. SO JUST, UH, IS THERE ANY, JUST SOME KIND OF SHRUBBERY RIGHT THERE? YEAH, I THINK, I THINK WHAT WE DO IF COMMISSIONS, UH, WHOEVER ENDS UP DOING THE MOTION IS COMFORTABLE WITH IT, UH, TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT, UM, LANDSCAPING BE PUT ON THE WEST SIDE OF MAY, RIVER CROSSING ROAD, UM, TO BE, UM, SIGNED OFF AT FINAL. THAT WAY IT DOESN'T HOLD YOU UP TO HAVE TO COME BACK TO US. ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONERS CAN THAT PANEL THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AT YOUR DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOW, CAN THAT JUST MATCH YOUR STOREFRONT SYSTEM? YES. IT JUST HOLD OVER. OKAY. PERFECT. THANK YOU. UH, IF WE CAN GO TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT, AMENDMENT MOTION. MOTION. UM, YES. UH, SO I HEARD WAS YOUR FIRST REQUEST LYDIA HANDLED TO MAKE A AMENDED BECAUSE MY SUGGESTED MOTION IS AS SUBMITTED. SO RIGHT NOW WHAT I'M HEARING IS YOU REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING WEST OF MAY CROSSING ROAD AND MATCHING SOMETHING. SO TALKING ABOUT IS SYMMETRY ON THE DIVE THROUGH WINDOW WOULD PROBABLY BE THE BEST WAY TO PUT IT. SURE. SYMMETRY ON THAT. SO WE'D HAVE TO FILL IN THAT TO MAKE ALL, OOPS. OH, TOUCHSCREEN . WOW. YOU GUYS ARE FANCY HERE. SO WE JUST HAVE TO BLACKEN IN THAT OTHER OKAY. FISHER MOUSE. DON'T WORRY AGAIN. SO, UM, SO WE'D END UP HAVING THREE CONDITIONS. MM-HMM . I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CHIPOTLE AT MAY RIVER, RIVER CROSSING TO CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HIGHWAY CORRIDOR RELATED DISTRICT APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS THAT THE PROPOSED LED LIGHTING FIXTURES ARE AN APPROPRIATE SUBSTITUTE FOR THE LAND TYPES PERMITTED UNDER THE ZDSO SECTION AS REFERENCED THAT THE DRIVE THROUGH WINDOW ARCHITECTURALLY MATCH AS REQUESTED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION FOR A MORE SYMMETRICAL LOOK AND THAT LANDSCAPE BUFFER BE EXPLORED ALONG MAY, RIVER CROSSING ROAD, WEST SIDE ON THE, IS THAT THAT ONE WEST SIDE, WEST SIDE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE IDENTIFIED PROPERTY, UH, TO CREATE A BUFFER. DO WE HAVE TO SECOND ANY DISCUSSION? THAT WAS PRETTY GOOD. THAT WAS VERY GOOD ACTUALLY. VERY GOOD. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. OKAY. THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. OKAY. ITEM FOUR [VII.4. New Riverside Village Parcel 4B-3C (Development Plan): A request by Griffin Savedge of Thomas and Hutton on behalf of property owner S70 Royce Group, LLC for approval of a Preliminary Development Plan application. The project consists of the construction of two (2) two-story commercial buildings totaling 20,000 SF with associated infrastructure. The property is within the New Riverside Planned Unit Development (PUD) consists of 2.35 acres identified by tax map number R610 036 000 3702 0000 within the New Riverside Village Master Plan at the intersection of New Riverside Village Way and Parkside Commons. (DP-03- 26-020155) (Staff - Dan Frazier)] ON THE AGENDA. NEW RIVERSIDE. DID I GET IT RIGHT THIS TIME? YES YOU DID. NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE PARCEL FOUR B DASH THREE C DEVELOPMENT PLAN, A REQUEST BY A REQUEST BY GRIFFIN SAVAGE OF THOMAS AND HUTTON ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNERS SC 70 ROYCE GROUP LLC FOR APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION. THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO, TWO STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS TOTALING 20,000 SQUARE FEET WITH ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE. THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE NEW RIVERSIDE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 2.35 ACRES IDENTIFIED BY THE TAX MAP NUMBER IN THE AGENDA WITHIN THE NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE MASTER PLAN AT THE INTERSECTION OF NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE WAY AND PARKSIDE COMMONS. MR. FRAZIER. THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS IS A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT TIME APPLICATION FOR NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE PARCEL FOUR B THREE C. UH, THE APPLICANT GRIFFIN SAVAGE OF THOMAS AND HUTTON ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER S 70 ROYCE GROUP, LLC REQUESTS APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROJECT CONSISTS OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO, TWO STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS TOTALING 20,000 SQUARE FEET AND THE ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE. IT IS A 2.35 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE NEW RIVERSIDE, PUD. IT'S SUBJECT TO THE STANDARD SET FORTH IN THE NEW RIVERSIDE PUD AGREEMENT AND CONCEPT PLAN. THE NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE MASTER PLAN AND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTIONS FIVE THREE AND FIVE 10. UH, THIS IS THE [00:50:01] LOCATION OF THE, OF THE PARCEL. UM, I DON'T SEE MY MOUSE, UH, ADJACENT TO IT. TO THE, TO THE EAST IS WHAT'S REFERRED TO AS AN ENTRY PARK WITHIN A NEW RIVERSIDE PARCEL. UH, TO THE WEST OF IT IS A LAGOON WITHIN NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE. HERE'S AN AERIAL SHOWING THE SAME LOCATION. UH, IT IS LOCATED WITHIN NEW RIVERSIDE, PUD, UH, AND IT'S SUBJECT TO THE STANDARD SET FORTH IN A NEW RIVERSIDE PUD DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE MASTER PLAN THAT'S SHOWN THERE ON THE RIGHT AND THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTIONS FIVE THREE AND FIVE 10. IT IS IDENTIFIED AS PARCEL F IF YOU COULD SEE IT ON THAT GRAPHIC. UM, AND IT IS RESTRICTED TO A MAXIMUM OF 20,000 SQUARE FEET OF HEATED SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SLASH PLANNED SHOPPING. THE EXISTING CONDITIONS. AND, UH, I'M NOT SURE IF I CAN POINTER OUT HERE, BOOP, MAYBE I BETTER NOT MESS WITH THAT RIGHT NOW. , UH, THE, IT, IT'S GOT SPARSE TREES ON THE PROPERTY, BUT THEY ARE PROPOSING TO HAVE, UH, A TOTAL OF FOUR LIVE OAKS THAT ARE 10, 13, 16 AND 19 INCHES, UH, REMOVED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, AS WELL AS ONE EIGHT INCH WATER OAK, BOTH OF THE, UH, ALL OF THOSE BEING ON THE NORTH SIDE AND IDENTIFIED WITH AN X 'CAUSE THIS IS ACTUALLY EXISTING CONDITIONS IN THE DEMO PLAN. UH, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES TWO, TWO STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. SO THEY WILL BE CONNECTED, UH, AND PARKING, LANDSCAPING, UTILITIES. THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A 12,900 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND A 1000 SQUARE FOOT OUTDOOR PATIO, AND THEN A 7,100 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING. IT'LL BE ACCESSED FROM DRIVES ALONG NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE WAY AND PARKSIDE COMMONS. BOTH OF THOSE ARE INTERNAL ROADS TO THE NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE. UH, AND IT IS, UH, SUBJECT TO FOUR PARKING SPACES PER THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. SO THAT COMES OUT TO 84 PARKING SPACES. THEY'RE PROVIDING 63 OF THOSE ON SITE. AND AN ADDITIONAL 21 SPACES ARE BEING ALLOCATED BY, BY THE DECLARANT THAT IS 17 OF THOSE SPACES ARE, ARE ADJACENT AND ALREADY ON ARE ARE ALREADY ON STREET PARKING THAT EXISTS WITHIN NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE. FOUR ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES WOULD, WOULD BE, UM, CONSTRUCTED ON STREET PARKING AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT TO MEET THE 84 PARKING SPACES REQUIREMENT. THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS REVIEWED AT THE APRIL 8TH, 2026 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING. THE APPLICANT PROVIDED A RESPONSE TO COMMA TO REVISE PLANS ON APRIL 28TH. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, A CLOSER VIEW OF IT. THE ACCESS POINTS WERE ALREADY SET. THERE'S ALREADY CURB CUTS OUT THERE ON THE PROPERTY. SO THEY DESIGNED THE PARKING LOT, UH, LAYOUT BASED UPON EXISTING ENTRY POINTS, UH, TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY. THERE ARE THE, ARE THE TWO BUILDINGS AND, UH, TO THE EAST IS THE ENTRY PARK. UH, ALL OF THE STORMWATER DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE IS CONTAINED ONSITE. THEY ORIGINALLY WERE PROPOSING TO USE A PORTION OF THE ADJACENT ENTRY PARK, BUT THEY HAVE, UH, UH, STAFF DID NOT RECOMMEND THAT THEY GO FORWARD WITH THAT. THEY, THEY'VE FIGURED OUT A DESIGN THAT WORKS WHERE THEY CONTAIN IT ALL ON SITE. UH, THIS, THIS IS A, UH, EXHIBIT THAT WAS INCLUDED WITH THE NEW RIVERSIDE PROPERTY OWNER ASSOCIATION, THEIR ALLOCATION GRAPHIC. UH, THERE'S, THERE ARE GREEN SPACES OFFSITE. THERE'S, THERE'S A GREEN BOUNDARY AROUND 17 SPACES. AND THEN THE FOUR SPACES THAT YOU SEE THAT ARE, THAT ARE SOLID GREEN, THOSE ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT FINDING COMMISSION SHALL CONSIDER THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN SECTION THREE TEN THREE A OF THE UDO IN ASSESSING THE APPLICATION. THESE ARE THE CRITERIA. RESPONSE TO THE CRITERIA ARE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. UH, PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED, APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH CONDITIONS, TABLE THE APPLICATION, OR DENY THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS, UH, STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION THREE TEN THREE A OF THE UDO ARE MET AND RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED. I CAN GO BACK TO THIS SUGGESTED MOTION. UM, AND I WILL, THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND, UH, I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR THE APPLICANT CAN COME UP AND ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR PROVIDE A PRESENTATION IF YOU CHOOSE, [00:55:03] UM, ON THIS ONE. IF YOU DON'T MIND, LET'S GO THROUGH THE QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION FIRST AND THEN WE'LL GO ON TO THE APPLICANT, UM, AS WELL START AT YOUR END. NOW CLOSE THE PARKING WAS THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD YESTERDAY IN MY, WHAT'S, WHAT'S PARKING SIX YEARS NOW, CHARLIE, SIX YEARS INCLUDE THAT FOR POST PARK FOOTAGE BUILDING FOR THE, THE, THE HATCH OUT SERVICE WARRANT. I DON'T THINK THERE'S, I DON'T BELIEVE THEY ARE. THEY GO BE OPEN. THEY'RE OPEN. THEY'RE, THEY'RE CLEAR IN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. THEY ARE, THEY'RE CLEAR IN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. OKAY. THE TWO LOCATIONS ADJACENT TO EACH OF THE BUILDING. YES, I KNOW. UM, COMMISSIONER HOWARD AND I HAVE, UH, THE SAME QUESTION, SO I'LL LET YOU ADDRESS IT. UM, OKAY. AND I'M JUST, SO LET'S GO BACK HOWEVER MANY YEARS AGO, EIGHT YEARS AGO, WHENEVER WE WERE, WHENEVER THIS WAS CONTEMPLATED THIS PLAN, UM, A A LOT OF THESE, THERE WERE NOT A LOT OF SIGNIFICANT TREES OR QUALITY LIVE OAKS ON THE PROPERTY, BUT MOST ALL OF THEM WERE LOCATED IN THIS GENERAL VICINITY. UM, A LOT OF THEM HAVE BEEN SAVED IN, IN THE PARK, BUT THERE ARE THREE THAT IT LOOKS LIKE ARE BEING PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL TO CREATE THE DRIVE ISLAND PARKING. UM, GO BACK ONE SLIDE, MR. FRAZIER. OKAY. PLEASE THAT SLIDE. OKAY. AND, AND ALTHOUGH THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY SIGNIFICANT BY DBH, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE, WE FIND HISTORICALLY WHEN YOU TAKE THESE 13, 16, 19 INCH LIVE OAKS AND YOU RELEASE THEM BY REMOVING ALL THE CANOPY AROUND THEM, THEY CAN BECOME VERY SIGNIFICANT TREES. UM, SO WHAT I WOULD WOULD LOVE TO SEE A SIGN IS THERE'S A COUPLE WAYS AND, AND, AND WITH AN OVERLAY, IS THIS IN THE DRIVE AISLE OR IS THIS IN PARKING? CAN YOU, COULD YOU TELL, TELL ME. DRIVE IN THE DRIVE AISLE IT LOOKED LIKE ONE'S IN PARKING AND THE OTHER TWO WERE IN THE DRIVE AISLE. SO IS, BUT YOU, YOU KNOW, WOULD, I WOULD LOVE TO, TO SEE SOME CREATIVE SUGGESTIONS OR SOLUTIONS TO MAYBE PUT THOSE IN SOME, PUT THEM IN AN ISLAND, PUT THEM RECONFIGURE THE DRIVE AISLE SOMEHOW TO, TO TRY TO SAVE ANY OR ALL OF THOSE, THOSE TREES. UM, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW I JUST, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE ALLOTTED 20,000 FEET AND YOU DID 20,000 FEET PLUS A THOUSAND FEET OF OUTSIDE DINING AND CONSUMING ALL 84 PARKING SPACES. AND THIS PLACE IS UNDER PARK TO BEGIN WITH. I'M SURPRISED THE POA ALLOCATED THAT NUMBER OF, OF, UM, COMMON PARKING SPACES TO YOU. I'M SURPRISED THEY'RE EVEN AVAILABLE QUITE HONESTLY. UM, BUT I, I JUST, I'M NOT SAYING IT'S A NO-GO. ABSOLUTELY. BUT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE AN EFFORT MADE TO, TO TRY TO, TO KEEP THOSE TREES EITHER LIKE I SAY, THE DRIVE AISLE, PUT 'EM IN SOME TYPE TYPE OF ISLAND TO SHOWCASE THEM TO DO SOMETHING, TO, TO TRY TO SAVE THOSE AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE FACT THAT YOU'VE GOT THREE OF THE REMAINING TREES ON YOUR PROPERTY. YOU'VE GOT, AND I'M GONNA ADD TO THAT BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO THE RIGHT OF IT ON THIS MAP. YOU'VE GOT A 10 INCH LIVE OAK IN THERE AS WELL. BUT, BUT CONCEDING THAT, THAT'S JUST TOO CLOSE TO WHERE THE ENTRY'S GONNA BE. UM, YOU'VE GOT FIVE SIGNIFICANT TREES RIGHT NEAR EACH OTHER THERE. AND TO REMOVE THREE OF 'EM, UM, THAT'S GONNA CHANGE THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THAT WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD. I MEAN, ONE OF THE BEAUTIFUL THINGS, I I INTENTIONALLY DRIVE THROUGH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD DOWN THAT ROAD BECAUSE OF THE BEAUTIFUL, IT WAS WONDERFUL WITH THE ORIGINAL DESIGN TO PUT A COUNTY LIBRARY THERE THAT DIDN'T COME THROUGH. UNDERSTOOD. BUT I, I'LL, I'LL GO FURTHER THAN, THAN WILL DID. I, I'M NOT WILLING TO ALLOW A PLAN TO COME THROUGH. THAT'S GONNA BE CLEAR. THOSE TREES, UM, AS FAR AS MY VOTE'S CONCERNED, JUST CAN'T PAY THEM OVER. THEY'RE TOO SIGNIFICANT. RIGHT. AND THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS. MY NAME'S GRIFFIN SAVAGE. I'M WITH THOMAS COTTON. I'M THE ENGINEER ON THIS PROJECT. UM, WHEN WE INITIALLY WENT TO THE SITE TO CONCEPTUALLY LAY OUT WHAT OUR PROJECT WAS GONNA LOOK LIKE, WE FELT OUR EFFORTS WERE BEST FOCUSED ON THE SIGNIFICANT TREES ON [01:00:01] SITE IN THE FORM OF THE 25 INCH LIVE OAK, THE 27 INCH IN THE CORNER, AND THE 25 INCH SORT OF CENTRALLY LOCATED. UM, BY DOING THAT, WE COMPACTED OUR BUILDING TO A TWO STORY 20,000 SQUARE FOOT. UM, AND THEN LAID OUT OUR PARKING LOT KNOWING WE HAD TIGHT PARKING CONSTRAINTS IN ALL OF RIVERSIDE VILLAGE. SO AS TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF IMPACTS NEEDED IN THE POA MAINTAINED RIGHT OF WAY. UM, WE JUST FELT THAT THE TREES THAT WE'RE SEEING AS DEMOED HERE WERE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE QUALITY OF THE OTHER SIGNIFICANT TREES ON SITE. UM, THAT WAS OUR NON ARBORIST OPINION OF ASSESSING THE SITE. BUT ULTIMATELY IT WAS ALWAYS THE INTENTION WITH THIS PLANT TO HAVE A ROBUST PLANTING PLANT TO COME AROUND THIS. AS YOU GUYS KNOW THIS, MOST OF THE SITE IS CLEARED NOW. UM, THERE'S ONLY ABOUT 10 OR 11 EXISTING TREES ON SITE. WE WERE, IT WAS ALWAYS OUR INTENTION TO HAVE A PLANTING PLANT THAT FEATURED DOZENS OF TWO AND A HALF INCH LIVE OAKS SCATTERED AROUND THE SITE THAT WOULD VASTLY OUTWEIGH THE NET INCHES THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE DEMOLISHED HERE. YOU'RE, YOU'RE TALKING TRUNK INCHES VERSUS WHAT A TREE LOOKS LIKE AT 19 INCH LIVE OAK. THAT'S NOT THE SAME. IT'S NOT GONNA BE THE SAME FOR 50 YEARS. IT JUST, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT YOU CAN DECREASE THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING. YOU CAN MOVE THE PARKING. THERE ARE THINGS YOU CAN DO TO SAVE THESE TREES AND SAVE THE LOOK OF THAT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU'RE NOT DOING. SO WE DO HAVE A, WE DO HAVE A REVISED LAYOUT IN THE WORKS. IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN WORK THROUGH WITH TOWN STAFF TO TRY AND SAVE THESE TREES? IS THERE JUST A COORDINATED EFFORT WITH PLANNING COMMISSION TO GO FORWARD? I WOULD SAY THAT THE REVISED LAYOUT THAT WE HAVE IN THE WORKS NOW DOES RESULT IN ADDITIONAL SPACES NEEDED IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. UM, THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE POA FOR ADDITIONAL APPROVALS. UM, ALSO IN THE SAME VEIN WE HAVE IN ORDER TO HIT OUR PARKING REQUIREMENT, WHICH IS 84 SPACES, UM, GIVEN THE 20,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND 1000 SQUARE FOOT PATIO, UM, WE WOULD ASK FOR A, A WAIVER FROM THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS TO ALLOW MORE THAN EIGHT SPACES IN A ROW PRIOR TO A TREE ISLAND. SO THE PARKING THAT WE SHOW ON THE PLAN NOW, DAN, CAN I, THE PARKING THAT WE SHOW ON THE PLAN PLAN NOW DOES MAXIMIZE EIGHT SPACES IN A FEW AREAS. UM, IF WE WERE TO REVISE THE PLAN TO SAVE THE TREES THAT YOU GUYS ARE SPEAKING ABOUT NOW, UM, WE WOULD ASK THAT WE COULD GET MORE THAN EIGHT SPACES IN A ROW, IN A FEW AREAS ON SITE AND POSSIBLY IN THE RIGHT OF WAY COMMISSIONERS. SO YOU'RE, YOU'RE GAINING THE ADDITIONAL SPACES BY YOU, BY REMOVING THE, THE, THE MEDIANS OR THE ISLANDS IS WHAT YOU'RE DOING. IT'S, IT'S STILL THE INTENTION TO HAVE A ROBUST PLANTING PLAN. YEAH. YES. UM, SO LET, AND, AND BEFORE I, LET ME JUST ASK COMMISSIONERS AND DAN AT, AT THE SAME TIME, IF THEY WERE TO MAKE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN, IN, IN THE DRIVE AISLE IN THE LAKE THAT TYPICALLY COME BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT SINCE THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO PLANNING COMMISSIONERS THAT WILL BE REVIEWING PLANS THAT RETURN TO DRC, WOULD YOU ALLOW THERE ANY REVISION TO, TO BE COMING BACK TO DRC JUST TO SAVE THEM A LITTLE BIT OF TIME OF COMING ALL THE WAY BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND I, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS WOULD BE FINE WITH THAT. SO I'M ASKING EVERYONE IF I'M JUST LOOKING FOR SOLUTIONS MM-HMM . I WOULD, I DON'T KNOW HOW THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS FEEL, BUT I WOULD, I WOULD BE OKAY WITH THAT IF THE, IF THE MOTION WAS WORDED IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT COMES BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION IF THE FINAL PLAN INCLUDES REMOVING ANY OF THOSE TREES THAT ARE STAYING NOW, THOSE THREE. YEAH. AND THEN I, ON THE, ON THE MORE THAN EIGHT, I KNOW IT'S A STANDARD THAT WE HAVE, BUT THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO EVERY STANDARD. AND I THINK IF IT SAVES SOME SIGNIFICANT LIVE OAKS, I'M COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. WE HAVE DONE THAT IN THE PAST. I, UH, I WOULD HOPE WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT HERE. AND IT, IT IS CALLED OUT IN THE . PD IS IS EVERY EIGHT SPACES THAT ISLANDS PROVIDED. I'M PRETTY SURE, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW THE UDL READS. AND I THINK THAT IT WAS BORROWED FROM THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. BUT, UH, YOU'LL HAVE, WHEN IT COMES RESUBMITTED AFTER STORMWATER PERMITTING, IT COMES BACK WITH A LANDSCAPE. IT, IT'LL HAVE A FULL LANDSCAPE PLAN INCLUDED, BUT THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMES IN. SO AS, AS GRIFFIN WAS ALLUDING TO, WE WE'LL BE ABLE TO SEE HOW ROBUST THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IS AS WELL. ALL THOSE SPACES [01:05:01] ARE . YES. YEAH. MM-HMM. A FEW OF THEM ARE. UM, WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE IS THE MINIMUM REQUIRED TO MEET THE STORMWATER RETENTION REQUIREMENTS. I'M NOT AGAINST MORE THAN EIGHT SPACES IF IT GETS US TREES, BUT LIKE IF YOU TOOK OUT AN ISLAND RIGHT NOW AND IT BECAME LIKE 14 SPACES OR SIX, LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T LOVE THAT IDEA. LIKE, I'D BE OKAY WITH 10 MAYBE, OR, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? LIKE TAKING IT FURTHER. BUT I THINK IT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CHARACTER TO GO TO, LIKE HAVE A PHYSICAL COPY OF IT, IF THAT WORKS FOR YOU GUYS TO SEE. I'M SORRY I DON'T HAVE A, A DIGITAL FORMAT OF THIS, BUT IT WOULD INDICATE, I SUPPOSE, WHERE WE SHOW SPACES IN ITY HOW FAST, HOW MANY YOU'D LIKE TO SEE IT. THIS ONE, THIS ONE'S FINE TO PLAN. THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT. ANYTHING THAT, ANYTHING THAT PLAINTIFF COMMISSIONER HAS TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE RECORD ONLY BECAUSE IT'S A PUBLIC HEARING, RIGHT? IT HAS TO BE AVAILABLE PUBLIC, IT HAS TO BE PART OF THE RECORD. RECORD. OTHERWISE IT DIDN'T EXIST. RIGHT? THIS WAS CREATED ONLY A FEW HOURS AGO. OKAY. UNLESS YOU HAVE A COPY FOR ME TO KEEP, YOU CAN KEEP THAT ONE. OKAY. BUT THAT'S THE ONE SHOW IT TO THEM AND THEN DOWN. YEAH. WHILE THAT'S COMING DOWN, I MEAN, I, I KNOW WE PULLED THE, PULLED THE STORM WATER DRAINAGE OFF OF THE ADJACENT SITE. I MEAN, EVEN TO, TO THE POINT OF PUTTING THAT PARTIALLY ON THE ADJACENT SITE. I ANYTHING TO SAY THESE, THESE BEAUTIFUL TREES, THIS IS THE ALUMINUM THAT RESULT AND YOU GOING BACK TO THE POA FOR MORE THAN THE 21 SPACES, IT WOULD STILL BE 21 SPACE IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. THE RESULT IS THAT WE WOULD JUST HAVE TO BUILD MORE OF THOSE. SO AS WE'RE SHOWING RIGHT NOW, WE STILL ARE ALLOTTED 21 SPACES FROM THE POA, THAT 21 SPACES OF THOSE FOUR ARE BEING CONSTRUCTED WITH THIS NEW PLAN. WE'RE STILL ASKING FOR 21 SPACES. GRIFFIN, HELP ME OUT WITH THE SITE PLAN THAT'S ON TOP OF PAGE. UM, AND THERE'S A LARGE ISLAND. THERE'S ONE, THERE'S PARKING SPACES, AND THEN THE LARGE ISLAND, BEFORE YOU TURN INTO THE, WHERE IT SAYS CONNECT TO EXISTING CURB INLET. YES. MM-HMM . CAN YOU ADD SPACES IN? WHY IS THAT SPACE THERE? WHY IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE, THE EIGHT SPACES? SO IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. ULTIMATELY THE FIVE, I THINK THAT'S 60 C HERE. NOW, OUR EXISTING, WE ADDED TWO TO THE END OF THOSE. THAT'S JUST TO MEET OUR PARKING REQUIREMENT AS COMING NOW, COMING DOWN NOW DOES INCLUDE THREE EXTRA SPACES IN THE, IN THE PIECE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. OKAY. THAT DRIVE STILL LOOKS PRETTY DARN, DARN CLOSE TO THOSE TREES. SO YOU MAY HAVE TO LOOK AT SOMETHING PERVIOUS OR SOME OTHER, THIS, IT IS STILL HIGHLY CONCEPTUAL. WE COULD SHIFT IT FURTHER AWAY. SORRY, YOU JUST BROUGHT BACK A MEMORY OF ROBERT'S PROBLEM, AND REALISTICALLY, IF YOU REDUCED YOUR BUILDING FOOTPRINT BY 500 FEET, YOU COULD ELIMINATE THOSE TWO SPACES RIGHT? TO HER. YEAH. YOU JUST BROUGHT BACK A MEMORY OF ROBERTS FOX STANDING ON MAY RIVER ROAD WHEN THEY PUT THE PERVIOUS SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF HIS LAW OFFICE WITH, UM, THE MENTAL EQUIVALENT OF A SHOTGUN THREATENING THE BUILDERS. BUT, OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE? COMMISSIONERS COMMENT I MIGHT MIGHT ADD TO THE, THE, UM, PRESERVING THOSE TREES IS A, A, AN ASSESSMENT OF THOSE TREES AND MAYBE A RATING ON THE SURVIVABILITY WITH THE IMPACT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE. UM, UH, I APPRECIATE THE, THE PAVERS IN THE PARKING SPACES, BUT MAYBE AROUND THOSE TREES THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO SAVE IS ADDITIONAL, UM, CAREGIVING TO THE PAVING TREATMENT AROUND THOSE TREES. SO, UM, AS WE SEE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN COME THROUGH AND WE ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS, I KNOW IN THE PAST WE'VE DEFINITELY ACROSS THE COUNTY ADDED THOSE 12, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE PARKING SPACE IS, IF IT'S 12 OR 14, I'VE SEEN, UM, THAT DONE ACROSS THE BOARD. UM, BUT THEN ALSO THE, UM, RATING SYSTEM OF, OF THE SURVIVABILITY FROM AN ARB ON THE SURVIVABILITY AND HOW THE IMPACT IS GONNA PLAY ON TOP OF THAT, A MANAGEMENT SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION TURNING DIRT. UM, AND THEN THROUGH THE PROCESS OF CONSTRUCTION, UM, ESPECIALLY THE TREE [01:10:01] PROTECTION AND, UM, ADDITIONAL SUCH AS, LIKE JUST RECENTLY IN, IN THESE DROUGHTS THAT WE'VE HAD, WE'VE ADDED MULCH, UH, ADDED MULCH RINGS AROUND THOSE TREES THAT WE'RE PRESERVING TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE, THEY'RE SAVING THE MOISTURE AROUND THE ROOT STRUCTURES, UM, DURING THE DRY, DRY SEASONS. BECAUSE DURING CONSTRUCTION YOU'RE NOT IRRIGATING ANYTHING. SO, I MEAN, WE ALWAYS WANT TO IRRIGATE NEW PLANTS, BUT EVEN THE OLDER, THE EXISTING PLANTS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PRESERVE DURING THOSE DROUGHTS AND DURING THAT EXTREME STRESS OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS REALLY, UM, ADDRESS THOSE, THOSE CONCERNS OR THOSE IF, 'CAUSE IF WE'RE TRYING TO SAVE THESE TREES AND WE'RE JUST GONNA KILL 'EM DURING CONSTRUCTION, IT'S USELESS. SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY CONCERN. AND YOU SAID IT'S BEEN CLEAR, HAS IT BEEN UP YET? NO. OKAY. AND, AND JUST TO ADD, I MEAN, WE MAY SOUND, AND I'M TALKING TO THE DEVELOPER HERE, WE MAY SOUND LIKE, UM, WE'RE ALL PAIN THE ASSES, BUT YOUR FINISHED PRODUCT SAVING THESE TREES IS GONNA BE SECOND TO NONE. IT REALLY IS. IT'S, IT IS GONNA BE, IT'S GONNA BE A FEATURE OF WHAT YOU'RE BUILDING THERE. UM, AND IF WE CAN SAVE 'EM, WE REALLY NEED TO. AND I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER HOWARD FOR CATCHING THAT WHEN WE WERE TALKING. UM, ANY OTHER THOUGHTS, CONCERNS, QUESTIONS? DO WE HAVE A PROPOSED MOTION? CAN WE TALK TO RICHARD? ARE WE, CAN WE DO THAT? CAN I JUST GO TO DC I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT RIGHT NOW ABOUT HOW TO WORD THIS BASED ON WHATEVER. UM, SO I WOULD ASSUME IT'D BE SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF I MOVE TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS. THE NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE PAR FOUR B THREE C PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS SUBMITTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. UM, AND, UM, AS COMMISSIONER BROCK HAD MENTIONED, UM, A TREE ASSESSMENT AND RATING TO BE PROVIDED AT THE STAFF LEVEL FOR REVIEW. UM, AS TO THE THREE, THE THREE LIVE OAKS, UM, THAT EXPECTED TO, OR THAT WERE INTENDED TO BE REMOVED ON THIS PLAN, I, I'M GONNA FIND A LITTLE BETTER WHEN I GET MY MOTION. AND THEN THE SECOND ONE WOULD BE TO RECONFIGURE THE PAVING AREA AND DRY AISLES IN AN EFFORT TO SAVE THOSE, THOSE SAME THREE TREES. UH, WHICH RECONFIGURATION CAN BE APPROVED AT THE STAFF LEVEL. HOWEVER, IF THERE ARE ANY, IF THOSE TREES HAVE TO BE REMOVED, THEN IT NEEDS TO COME BACK BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONDITIONS ARE. IT'S A LITTLE UNUSUAL. UM, SO THERE'S NOT LIKE A TEMPLATE IN MY HEAD THAT I CAN I RUN OFF OF. IF YOU GIMME JUST A SECOND, I'M GONNA TRY TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER. IS THAT ALL YOU CHARGED BY THE HOUR? RIGHT. I'M GONNA KEEP Y'ALL HERE. ALL RIGHT. , WHAT IS THE, CONGRATULATIONS. SO CAN WE SAY WHAT RESTAURANTS THEY ARE YET? NOT YET. WHY SAY YOU ALMOST GOT APPROVED . I'LL TELL YOU ALL. AND WE WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE 19, THE 13 AND THE 16. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE 10 OR THE EIGHT. RIGHT, RIGHT, RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT. THOSE THREE IN ADDITION TO THE OTHERS THAT THEY ALREADY PLANNED ON. YEAH. THE THE EIGHT IS A WATER OAK AND THE 10 IS, I, I JUST, THE LOCATION OF IT AND THE FACT THAT IT'S ONLY 10. A QUESTION FOR YOU. HAVE YOU HAD ANY EXPERIENCE OF LIKE, SO THE THE DRIP LINE, UM, IS GOING TO BE OVER THE ASPHALT AREA. HAVE YOU HAD ANY EXPERIENCE AFTER THIS IS MUCKED OUT INSTEAD OF ASPHALT HAVING LIKE A, A TURF STONE OR SOMETHING OVER THE DRIP LINE THAT NEXT ALLOW MORE, UM, MORE WATER AND NUTRIENTS TO THE ROOT, BUT BUT STILL BE A DRIVABLE SURFACE? IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE IMPACT ON THE ROOTS. THAT'S THE BIG THING IS THE IMPACT ON THE ROOTS AND HOW THEY'RE PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION. UM, AND THEN HOW THEY'RE TREATED WHEN DISTURBANCES IS IMPACTED ON THE ROOTS. SO CLEAN BREAKS, CLEAN CUTS, UM, AND THEN, UM, DURING THE PROCESS OF THE CONSTRUCTION, UM, ROOT FERTILIZATION, PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND THEN RIGHT. DEEP ROOT INJECTION DURING THE ONLY THING YOU KNOW, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT, HARD DO CONSTRUCTION TO KILL, TO GIVE THAT TREE THOSE TREES EARLY JUMP. UM, AND THEN DURING THE PROCESS OF CONSTRUCTION IS REALLY MAINTAINING THOSE, LIKE I SAID, IF WE HAVE A DROUGHT, UM, AND THERE'S NO IRRIGATION, THERE'S NO [01:15:01] WATER AND THEY'RE STRESSED ALREADY AND THEN THEY'RE OVERLY STRESSED BECAUSE OF IMPACT PAVING THOUGH IS, IS CRUCIAL. UM, WHEN YOU PUT CURB CUTTER AND YOU'RE GOING IN THERE AND ASPHALT, UM, YOU'RE TAKING, YOU'RE TAKING AWAY LOSING THAT ENVIRONMENT THAT THEY'RE ALREADY IN. SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO ADDRESS THAT. KEN, IS THERE A VEHICLE AS PART OF LIKE THE INSPECTION PROCESS FROM THE TOWN OR LIKE A THIRD PARTY THAT INSPECTS AND PROVIDES A REPORT ON THE TREE PROTECTION AND THE MEASURES BEING TAKEN DURING CONSTRUCTION? YEAH, WE, WE GO OUT AND INSPECT DURING CONSTRUCTION. YEAH. YOU MEAN AS FAR AS TREE PROTECTION BEING, UH, UH, IS IT LIKE STORM WATER, THIRD PARTY ARBS THAT CAN GO OUT AND PROVIDE LIKE MONTHLY? WELL, WE, WE HAVE A THIRD PARTY ARBORISTS. I MEAN, WE'LL HAVE THE LUXURY OF A TREE RISK ASSESSMENT TO, TO GIVE US A HEAD START ON THE, ON THE TREES. YEAH. WE CAN DO ADDITIONAL, WE CAN DO IT. WE HAVE A PRE CLEARING MEETING, A, A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING FOLLOWED BY A PRE CLEARING MEETING. THE PRE-CONSTRUCTION IDENTIFIES WHERE THE, THE TREE PROTECTION'S GOING TO GO AND HOW THE TREES ARE GONNA BE PROTECTED. AND THEN BEFORE, UM, PRE CLEARING THERE WON'T BE MUCH CLEARING, BUT BEFORE PRE CLEARING, WE'LL WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING'S IN PLACE. THE, THE IMPORTANT THING THERE ON SITE WHEN THEY DO THE TRUE THE ROOT PRUNING AND IF THEY DO ANY, ANY, ANY TYPE OF DISTURBANCE, ARBORIST, THEY'RE ON SITE WHEN THAT OCCURS. RIGHT. JUST TO MAKE SURE IT'S DONE PROPERLY. OKAY. AND IF THERE'S A MANAGEMENT PLAN IN, IN CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION FOLLOWS THAT MANAGEMENT PLAN. YEAH, I JUST SAY WHEN BUILDING CODE GOES OUT THERE AND, AND INSPECTS ON THE WEEKLY BASIS, THEY'RE FOLLOWING THAT MANAGEMENT PLAN. YEAH. YOU HAVE THIRD PARTIES THAT DO ALL TYPES OF TESTING INSPECTIONS. AND HOW DO YOU THIRD PARTY ARBORISTS OR TOWN A IS, WE'D HAVE ONE LIKE ON RETAINER THAT WE DON'T USE OFTEN ENOUGH, BUT WE, WE COULD, WE COULD PROBABLY GET A COUPLE OF INSPECTIONS DONE WITH, WITH OUR ON RETAINER ARBORIST DURING CONSTRUCTION TO ENSURE THAT THEY'RE MEETING ALL OF THE TREE PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT NEEDS TO BE IN ADDITIONAL CONDITION. I WOULDN'T THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE MOTION. UH, THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE MOTION. UM, I THINK THAT THAT STAFF HAS NOW BEEN INSTRUCTED ON THAT TO HAVE SURE THAT THEY'RE, HAVE THEY HAVE THAT AVAILABLE. I THINK STAFF UNDERSTANDS HOW IMPORTANT. UM, AND, AND IF WE, IF WE FIND THAT IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN, THAT CAN ALSO BE INCORPORATED AS A, YOU KNOW, A CONDITION LATER IN FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN. 'CAUSE THIS IS, THIS IS JUST PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. YEAH. SO, UM, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY, UH, LET'S, LET'S, IF THIS WORKS FOR Y'ALL, SOMEONE CAN SAY, YOU KNOW, MOVE AS, AS WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST. OKAY. SO I MOVE TO APPROVE THE NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE PARCEL FOUR B THREE C PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. UH, CONDITION NUMBER ONE TO RECONFIGURE THE PARKING AREAS AND DRIVE AISLES TO SAVE, HANG ON, I'M, I'M GONNA PAUSE YOU RICHARDSON. YOU PROBABLY NEED TO DO THIS INTO THE MICROPHONE IN CASE THEY NEED TO PLAY IT BACK LATER TO TYPE UP, SORRY. NO, I GET IT. MAKES PERFECT SENSE. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE NEW RIVERSIDE VILLAGE PARCEL FOUR B THREE C PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION IS SUBMITTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. CONDITION NUMBER ONE TO RECONFIGURE THE PARKING AREAS AND DRIVE AISLES TO SAVE THE THREE LIVE OAKS OF 16, 19 AND 13 INCHES IN DIAMETER. REST SITE LOCATED IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH RECONFIGURATION CAN BE APPROVED BY TOWN STAFF. IF HOWEVER, ONE OR MORE OF SAID TREES MUST BE REMOVED, THEN THE APPLICATION NEEDS TO COME BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR, UM, APPROVAL AND CONDITION. NUMBER TWO, A TREE RISK ASSESSMENT AND RATING OF CRES TO BE PROVIDED FOR TOWN STAFF REVIEW. MOVE. MAKE THAT MOTION. MOTION. SECOND. OKAY. MOTION AND SECOND. DID ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. PASSES IS UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU GENTLEMEN. SORRY IT WAS A LITTLE PAINFUL. AND, UH, TO MAIDEN LANE PEOPLE, YOU'RE NOT THE ONLY ONES WE PICK ON TREES ABOUT. OKAY. ITEM [VII.5. Maiden Lane Development (Development Plan): A request by Nathan Sturre of Sturre Engineering, on behalf of property owner Hinton Vacation Properties for approval of a Preliminary Development Plan application. The project consists of nine (9) single-family residential lots with common open area and associated infrastructure. The properties are zoned Neighborhood General - Historic District (NG-HD) and consist of 3.58 acres identified by tax map numbers R610 039 00A 0042 0000 and R610 039 00A 042A 0000 located south of Bruin Road west of Pritchard Street. (DP-03-26-020162) (Staff - Dan Frazier)] FIVE. LAST ITEM ON THE MAIN AGENDA. MAIDEN LANE. DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT PLAN. A REQUEST BY NATHAN STIR STORY ENGINEERING ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER HINTON VACATION PROPERTIES FOR APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION. THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF NINE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH COMMON OPEN AREA AND ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE. THE PROPERTIES ARE ZONED NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL HISTORIC [01:20:01] DISTRICT AND CONSIST OF 3.58 ACRES IDENTIFIED BY THE AGENDA NUMBERS IN THE AGENDA LOCATED SOUTH OF BRUIN ROAD AND WEST OF PRITCHARD STREET, MR. FRAZIER. OKAY, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS IS A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ENTITLED MAID LANE DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT, NATHAN STORY OF STORY ENGINEERING ON BEHALF OF PROPERTY OWNER HITCHEN VACATION PROPERTIES REQUESTS APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE PROJECT CONSISTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF NINE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH COMMON OPEN SPACE AND ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE. IT'S A 3.58 ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, GENERAL HISTORIC DISTRICT WITHIN THE OLD TOWN, AND IS SUBJECT TO THE APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UDO UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT OWNERS. HERE'S THE LOCATION OF PROPERTY. TO THE NORTH IS BRUIN ROAD. IT HAS AC IT HAS FRONTAGE ON BRUIN ROAD AS WELL AS MAIN LANE. IT ACTUALLY COVERS OVER THE COVE. UH, CAN'T SEE THE COVE THERE AS WELL, BUT, BUT IT HAS FRONTAGE ON PRITCHARD STREET AS WELL. UH, THERE'S A CONTACT MAP AND SITE PHOTOS THAT, UH, IT'S, THERE'S LOTS OF SUBSTANTIAL TREES ON SITE, UH, THAT THIS SHOWS THE LOCATION. YOU, YOU CAN SEE THE, THE COVE, UH, WE'RE ACTUALLY TURNED 90 DEGREES HERE, UH, NORTH IS TO THE RIGHT. UM, THEY'VE HAD, THEY'VE, THEY'VE COME TO PLANNING COMMISSION PREVIOUSLY WITH, WITH, UH, WITH, UH, CONCEPT PLAN THAT WAS ACTUALLY, UH, CROSSING THE CROW, CROSSING THE COVE ONTO PRITCHARD STREET. UH, WE AT, AT THAT TIME, WE, WE ASKED TOWN COUNCIL IF, IF, UH, THEY WOULD BE OPEN TO ALLOWING AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT ON PRITCHARD STREET. I THINK WHAT CAME BACK FROM THAT WAS NO, THAT'S NOT AN OPTION FOR 'EM. SO THEY'VE COME BACK AND THEY'VE REWORKED THE SITE. THEY'RE, THEY'RE NOT ASKING FOR THAT. THEY'RE, IN FACT, THEY'RE PROVIDING, UH, A FAIR BUFFER AND LEAVING THE COVE ALONE WITH WHAT THEY'RE COMING WITH. NOW THIS IS THE FIRST TIME, UH, WITH MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THEY'RE SUBMITTING ONE WHERE IT IS A 100% RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THERE, THERE WAS ALWAYS A COMMERCIAL COMPONENT FRONTING OFF OF BRUIN ROAD. UH, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INCLUDES THE NINE RESIDENTIAL LOTS, AND THEY WOULD BE FRONTING ON A NEWLY CONSTRUCTED RIGHT OF WAY OF 45 FEET IN WIDTH, UH, WITH THE ASSOCIATED DRIVEWAYS, COMMON AMENITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A PHASED APPROACH. AND, UH, FIRST PHASE WOULD BE INFRASTRUCTURE. SO, UH, IN WHICH THE RIGHT OF WAY AND ALL COMMON AMENITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE IS CONSTRUCTED. UH, ONCE THE PROPERTY, WHAT, ONCE THAT'S INSTALLED, THE PROPERTY IS SUBDIVIDED, THEN THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS CAN BE SOLD AND DEVELOPED BY INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS. AND AT THAT TIME, THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HISTORIC DISTRICT, WHICH WOULD BE REVIEWING ARCHITECTURE, LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING. UH, S-C-D-L-T ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR BRUIN ROAD AND A TOWN OF BLUFFTON. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR MAIN LANE, WHICH IS IDENTIFIED AS A GHOST ROAD WITHIN THE TOWN. UH, ADDITIONAL SUBMITTAL ITEMS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET, UH, DEMONSTRATE THE PROPOSED BUILDING FOOTPRINTS, OPEN SPACE TREE CANOPY COVERAGE AND REQUIRED ONSITE PARKING. UH, PARKING WILL BE PROVIDED ON THE LOTS THAT'S VISITOR AND, AND, UH, RESIDENTIAL PARKING AS WELL ON EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS, UH, PER THEIR NARRATIVE. THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS REVIEWED AT THE APRIL 15TH, 2026 DRC MEETING. THE APPLICANT PROVIDED A RESPONSE TO COMMENTS AND REVISED PLANS ON APRIL 29TH, 2026. UH, THE SITE PLAN AND IS, UH, IN ACCORDANCE WITH UDO SECTION 5, 3, 3, FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS WILL BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN 75% TREE CANOPY LOT COVERAGE. THAT'S ONCE THE LOTS ARE SUBDIVIDED. UH, UH, A FUTURE PROPERTY OWNER COMES IN, WANTS TO SUBMIT A BUILDING PERMIT. THEY NEED TO PROVIDE 75% TREE CANOPY ON THAT INDIVIDUAL LOT. THAT'S EX EXCLUSIVE OF, UH, THE FOOTPRINT FOR, FOR THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. AND POSSIBLE A DU STAFF HAS MADE THE APPLICANT AWARE THAT THE MAXIMUM 60% LOT COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MAY IMPACT THE DEVELOP. LEMME TRY THAT AGAIN. DEVELOP ABILITY OF INDIVIDUAL LOTS. SO THIS IS KIND OF A ZOOMED UP VERSION OF IT. YOU CAN SEE THE ACCESS OFF OF BRUIN ROAD. THERE'S, THERE'S ONE RESIDENTIAL LOT, LOT NUMBER NINE IS CLOSEST TO BRUIN ROAD. THE APPLICANT HAS MADE EVERY EFFORT TO ALIGN THE ROAD SO THAT IT MINIMIZES IMPACT ON SIGNIFICANT TREES THAT EXIST [01:25:01] ON THE PROPERTY. THEY'RE PROPOSING STREET TREES AS SHOWN ON THIS GRAPHIC, UH, THAT YOU COULD SEE THAT THERE'S A DECENT BUFFER BETWEEN THE COVID ITSELF, THAT TOP OF BANK AND, AND, UH, VOLUNTEER WAY, AND NONE OF THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS. BACK UP TO THE COVID ITSELF. UH, THEY PROVIDED A TREE SAVE AND REMOVAL PLAN. UH, THE INTENT OF THIS, THIS EXHIBIT D, IS TO IDENTIFY ALL THE TREES THAT WILL REMAIN ON THE PROPERTY. AND THAT INCLUDES AFTER THE, AFTER THE DEVELOPMENT'S BEEN SUBDIVIDED AND INDIVIDUAL LOT OWNERS ARE COMING IN. THE EXPECTATION IS THAT WHAT IS SHOWN HERE IS BEING SAVED REMAINS TO BE SAVED EVEN AFTER, UH, BUILDING PERMITS APPROVED AND HOMES ARE CONSTRUCTED. REVIEW CRITERIA SHALL CONSIDER THE CRITERIA SET FORTH AND SECTION THREE TEN THREE A OF THE UDO IN ASSESSING APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. UH, THESE ARE THE CRITERIA. THE RESPONSE TO CRITERIA IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE AUTHORITY TO TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTION. THAT IS APPROVE THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH CONDITIONS, TABLE THE APPLICATION, OR DENY THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. UH, STAFF RECOMMENDATION CURRENTLY IS TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED. WE'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK BACK AND FORTH WITH THE APPLICANTS. THEY CAME IN WITH ADDITIONAL LOTS. WE, WE SEE THIS AS, AS A MUCH IMPROVED PLAN FROM WHERE WE BEGAN. SO, SO STAFF, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING, UH, APPROVAL AS SUBMITTED. THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE AND I'LL JUST RETURN IT BACK TO THE SITE PLAN. IS THAT ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO THEY STARTED WITH THIS? MM-HMM . BEEN A WHILE. OKAY. COMMISSIONERS, THOUGHTS? COMMENTS? I DUNNO WHY I'M STARTING ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE EVERY TIME TOO. YEAH, SORRY. NO, I JUST, I JUST FOUND OUT AS FAR AS THE, UH, LIKE CARRIAGE HOUSE OR THE ADDITIONAL HOUSE, IT HAS TO BE BEHIND THE STRUCTURE ITSELF. THAT'S CORRECT. THE WAY IT READ IS, UH, UH, BEHIND PRIMARY, I FORGET EXACTLY HOW IT'S WORDED, BUT, BUT IT PRIMARY STRUCTURE. YEAH. BEHIND THE PRIMARY, THE CARRIAGE HOUSE NEEDS TO BE BEHIND THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. SO YOU HAVE LOTS FIVE, NINE, AND EIGHT THAT, THAT HERE ARE IDENTIFIED. UM, WITH THE, WITH THE CARRIAGE HOUSE BEING I THE PURVIEW OF THIS, CAN I CHALLENGE EVEN SIX? YEP. BUT YEP. WELL, THAT'LL BE HANDLED THAT BUILDING PERMIT. BUT, BUT I, I THINK THESE, THIS, THIS WAS SHOWN TO DEMONSTRATE THAT A, THAT A PRIMARY AND A CARRIAGE HOUSE CAN FIT ON THE PROPERTIES. YEAH. IT'S NOT UNDER, IT'S AN OBSERVATION, BUT IT'S NOT UNDER THE PURVIEW OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW. SO JUST TO CLARIFY THOUGH, WE ARE NOT APPROVING ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS, ANY BUILDING FOOTPRINTS WHERE PAVING IS ANY OF THAT, IT'S SIMPLY THE SUBDIVISION. THIS IS NOT APPROVING ANY OF THAT. AND A FOLLOW UP TO THAT. DOES EACH ONE COME TO US OR DOES IT GO TO HPC? IT GOES TO HPC, BUT IT WOULD BE, YOU'RE APPROVING THIS. NONE OF THIS GOES TO HPRC OR HPC, THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, IT CAN BE APPROVED. THE, THE PHASE ONE INFRASTRUCTURE ROAD COULD BE BUILT WHEN THEY COME IN WITH INDIVIDUAL LOTS. IT WOULD GO TO HPRC AND HPC FOR THEIR COFA APPROVAL PRIOR FILTER. UM, SO WITHOUT SEEING THE TREE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE, I WASN'T HERE IN THE VERY BEGINNING, SO I'M SURE THERE, THERE HAVE BEEN TREE ASSESSMENTS BECAUSE SEVERAL OF THEM WERE REMOVED. UM, SO THE REMAINING TREES THAT, THAT WE SEE ON THIS PLAN, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS BECAUSE I WOULD, I WOULD NOT, I WOULDN'T, NOT THAT I DON'T RELY ON HPC TO TAKE CARE OF THIS, BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS ALL OF THESE TREES, IF YOU'RE TYPICALLY DOING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, YOU HAVE TO IDENTIFY ALL THE TREES TO BE SAVED. UM, AND SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS, UH, SAVE ALL OF THESE PRIMARY TREES THAT WE SEE IDENTIFIED HERE JUST WITH THE, THE CANOPY CIRCLES. UM, I WOULD LIKE THEM TO IDENT, BE IDENTIFIED AS TO BE SAVED SO THAT THE HOMEOWNER KNOWS WHEN THEY PURCHASED THE LOT, THAT THAT TREE CANNOT BE REMOVED. UM, BECAUSE I DON'T, I, I'D HATE TO HAVE THE SITUATION WHERE HPC IS FACED WITH A HOMEOWNER WHO JUST PAID, YOU KNOW, HALF A MILLION DOLLARS OR MORE FOR A LOT AND THEY'RE THINKING THEY COULD REMOVE THAT TREE AND HPC SAYS NO, AND THEY GET IN A BATTLE. AND I, TO AVOID THAT, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT THESE TREES BE IDENTIFIED AS TO BE SAVED, [01:30:02] UM, ON EVERY, EVERY LOT THAT THEY EXIST. OKAY. I GUESS WE CAN DO THAT WITH BEING, SHOULD HAVE AN EXHIBIT THAT IDENTIFIES ALL THOSE TREES AND IT GETS RECORDED. YEAH. IF THEY HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEY SHOULD HAVE, THEY SHOULD HAVE, UM, AN EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN AND THEN A DEMOLITION PLAN. AND ON THAT DEMOLITION PLAN, THEY WOULD IDENTIFY WITH TREE SAVE ALL THOSE TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN AND THEN THEY, THEY COULDN'T AT THAT POINT, THEY CAN'T BE REMOVED. YEP. OKAY. THANK YOU. UM, OUTSIDE OF THAT, MY ONLY OTHER CONCERN IS, I KNOW IT'S ONLY NINE LOTS, UM, BUT HAVING, AND I DON'T THINK YOU CAN CALL IT A SECONDARY POINT OF ACCESS WHEN YOU HAVE TWO AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE BOTH EQUALLY. NEITHER IS RESTRICTED VIA EV, YOU KNOW, LIKE AN ED, A LANE OR ANYTHING. SO YOU'VE GOT AN ACCESS THAT'S GOING TO A DIRT GHOST ROAD. SO NO, IT'S PAVED. MIAN LANE IS PAVED UP TO, UM, AND THEN PASSED THIS PROPERTY TO THE CORNER. OKAY. AND NOT WIDE, BUT IT'S PAVED. IT'S NOT WIDE, BUT IT'S PAVED. YEAH. IT, IT'S, IT IS, BUT YEAH. WHAT'S THE WIDTH? IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A TWO LANE ROAD THOUGH. NO, I BELIEVE IT IS. IT'S EITHER 12 OR 14 FEET WIDE. WHAT'S THE FIRE DEPARTMENT REQUIRING? 14. NATHAN, CAN YOU GO UP TO THE MIC? SPEAK. GOOD EVENING. NATHAN STRY? UM, I BELIEVE THEY REQUIRE 14 FEET. I THINK THEY REQUIRE 14 IN A DRIVE AISLE. I THINK THEY REQUIRE 20 FOR A ROAD. IT'S 20 UNOBSTRUCTED. SO AS LONG AS THE CLEARANCE ON THE TREES AND EVERYTHING ALLOW THE FIRE TO OR TRUCK TO MOVE THROUGH THE SITE, WE CAN HIT 14. OKAY. UM, THAT, THAT WOULD JUST BE MY ONLY OTHER CONCERN. JUST THE ACCESS TO THAT, TO THAT GHOST ROAD AND THEN THE MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES THEREAFTER. UM, BUT PRIMARILY I WOULD JUST LOVE TO SEE THOSE TREES SAFE. YES, SIR. AND WE'VE ADDRESSED THAT THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE MM-HMM. IS GOING TO BE ON BROUNE. CORRECT SIR. ANYTHING ELSE? ANYTHING ELSE? MM-HMM. WELL, WHEN Y'ALL CAME HERE WITH, I THINK IT WAS 18 THE FIRST TIME, I THINK WE DID PRETTY GOOD TO NOT LAUGH YOU OUT OF THE ROOM. UM, IT'S TAKEN A WHILE TO GET HERE AND YOU KNOW, WISE MAN ONCE SAID THAT, UH, A GOOD NEGOTIATION AND A GOOD PLAN. NEITHER SIDE IS HAPPY, BUT BOTH ARE SATISFIED. UM, WHILE I'D STILL LOVE TO SEE TWO OR THREE LESS LOTS THAN WHAT'S THERE, I THINK IT'S A GOOD PLAN. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT, THAT Y'ALL COULD BE PROUD OF. SAME AS THE PREVIOUS PROJECT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. YOU'RE GONNA MAINTAIN A GOOD BIT OF THE TREE CANOPY. IT'S GONNA HELP YOU TO SELL LOTS AND IT'S GONNA HELP YOU TO HAVE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. SO, UM, WITH THAT SAID, DO WE HAVE THAT SUGGESTED MOTION? YEAH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION. OKAY. I, I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MAIDEN LANE DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION THAT ALL OF THOSE TREES IDENTIFIED ON THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED, UM, AS SIGNIFICANT TREES, UH, BE SAVED WITH TREES SAVED ON THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS SO THAT THEY CANNOT BE REMOVED IN THE FUTURE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? DO WE NEED TO, I THINK IT'S IMPLIED THAT IF THEIR DISEASE OR DYING THAT THAT'S AN EXCEPTION TO IT. WE DON'T NEED TO, I YEAH, YOU DON'T EVEN NEED A TREE PERMIT TO REMOVE A DEAD TREE. SO IN EMERGENCY ROOM, GOT TWO DAYS AFTER THE THREE WAS OUT. UM, WITH ALL THAT SAID, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MIGHT, UH, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, THE, OR DO WE HAVE ANY SPECIMEN TREES WITHIN THE PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY THAT ARE, UH, I'M TRYING TO SKIMM THROUGH HERE JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT, UH, WHEN I REVIEWED IT, WE DIDN'T. UM, NATHAN? NO BELIEVE SO PART OF THIS WE DO IN TERMS OF, WELL, THE TOWN COUNTS ANYTHING OVER 24 INCHES. RIGHT. THAT WE'RE NOT KEEPING, I MEAN, IT'S OKAY THAT THEY'RE REMOVING IT. ARE YOU ASKING IF WE'RE REMOVING ANY, OR IF THERE ARE ANY, IF Y'ALL ARE, IF THERE, IF THERE ARE ANY, UH, PLANS TO REMOVE ANY SPECIMEN TREES WITHIN VOLUNTEER RIGHT OF WAY, UH, VOLUNTEER WAY? YES. OKAY. DO WE NEED TO BETTER DESIGNATE THE TREES? WE CAN. I, I TRY TO DESIGNATE THEM AS, AS THE TREES SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN, BUT WELL, CAN WE SAY THE ONES SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE DRAWING D YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I GOT ON THE SCREEN IN THE LOWER LEFT DESCRIBES THE TREES THAT ARE WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE STATUS OF THEM. YEAH, I THINK, I [01:35:01] THINK EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM KNOWS WHAT THE INTENT WAS AND WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO HERE. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY AGAIN FOR THE RECORD, IN CASE THINGS HAVE TO CHANGE IN A YEAR OR TWO THAT WE'RE, WE'RE CLEAR ON IT. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE, WE CAN AMEND THAT MOTION. UM, HOW DO WE WANNA DO THIS? WE WANNA AMEND IT TO THE TREES IN THE COMMON AREA AND ON THE LOTS TO THAT EFFECT OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY, OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY COMMON AREAS. LOTS. HOWEVER Y'ALL, Y'ALL CHOOSE TO DO IT. I THINK EITHER FINE. TAKE A STAND. WELL GO AHEAD. YEAH. SO I, UM, MOVE TO AMEND. YEAH, MOVE TO AMEND, UH, THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR SO THAT THE TREES TO BE SAVED ARE THOSE SIGNIFICANT TREES OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY OF VOLUNTEER WAY SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO THE MOTION TO AMEND? SECOND. OKAY. THE AMENDMENT HAS BEEN MOTIONED AND SECONDED. DO WE HAVE ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. OKAY, THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. SO NOW IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE AMENDED MOTION? OKAY, SAYING NONE. UM, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION AS AMENDED. AYE. AYE. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION? STAFF COUNT, NOBODY. OKAY. DO I HAVE A FINAL MOTION FROM SOMEBODY TO ADJOURN? SECOND ADJOURN. SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. THANKS FOR WATCHING BC TV. I'M DENNIS ADAMS AND THIS IS A BEAUFORT COUNTY MOMENT. FOREST GUMP, THE PRINCE OF TIDES, THE GREAT SANTINI. THESE ARE JUST A FEW OF THE BIG HOLLYWOOD MOVIES FILMED IN BEAUFORT COUNTY DURING THE 1980S AND 1990S. BUT THE EARLIEST BIG SCREEN PRODUCTION, A SHOT HERE DATES BACK NEARLY A CENTURY. LATE IN NOVEMBER, 1917, AMERICAN FEATURE FILMS OF GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA SENT A COMPANY OF ACTORS ON LOCATION TO ST. HENA ISLAND AND AMONG THE ANTEBELLUM MANSIONS OF BUFORT. IN THE WORDS OF THE BUFORT GAZETTE, THE RISE AND FALL OF THE CONFEDERACY IS ONE OF THE MOST REMARKABLE AND STUPENDOUS MOTION PICTURE SCENARIOS EVER ATTEMPTED BY ANY DRAMATIST. IT CERTAINLY WAS A COSTUME DRAMA WITH OVER 640 PIECES OF PERIOD CLOTHING SHIPPED IN FOR THE ACTORS. JOINING THE PRODUCTION JUST BEFORE FILMING WAS ONE WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM, A PEERLESS FILM COMPANY OF LOS ANGELES. HE LENT A HOLLYWOOD TOUCH TO THE PRODUCTION. UNFORTUNATELY, THE FILM HAS DISAPPEARED. IT WOULD SEEM THAT THE STUDIO EXAGGERATED ITS CLAIMS OF THE MOST IMPRESSIVE MOVING PICTURE SINCE THE BIRTH OF A NATION. I'M DENNIS ADAMS, AND THIS HAS BEEN YOUR BEAUFORT COUNTY MOMENT. TO SEE MORE BEAUFORT COUNTY MOMENTS GO TO THE BEAUFORT COUNTY LIBRARY HOMEPAGE AND CLICK ON THE LOCAL HISTORY TAB. * 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.