[00:00:01]
CLOSED CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY BUFORT COUNTY
[1. CALL TO ORDER]
NATURAL RESOURCE COMMITTEE MEETING FOR, UH, AUGUST THE THIRD, 2026.UM, I'M GONNA RISE WITH ME AND JOIN ME WITH A PLEDGE, ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
AND BEFORE WE DO THE PLEDGE, I WILL ASK FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE, REMEMBERING A, UM, I CONSIDER A NATURAL RESOURCE GENTLEMAN, UM, AND MR. LUAN ABNET, WHO PASSED AWAY.
AND, UM, HE WAS A TRUE, UM, CHAMPION OF, UM, NOT ONLY CONSERVATION, BUT MR. ATE PROBABLY BUILT EVERY LAST, UM, BOAT LANDING, BOAT LANDING IN BEAUFORT COUNTY.
UM, SO HE WAS TRULY A, A RESOURCE FOR THIS COMMUNITY.
SO IF YOU WOULD ALLOW A MOMENT OF SILENCE, I APPRECIATE THAT.
JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALL ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AMERICA, AND, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
UM, A STATEMENT OF, UH, COMPLIANCE, UM, UM, STAFF, UM, FOR THE FOYER ALL STATEMENTS THAT'S GOING OUT TO THE MEDIA AND TO THE PUBLIC.
ANNOUNCING THIS MEETING HERE FOR TODAY, RIGHT? YES, SIR.
AND THEN, UM, THERE'S AN APPROVAL
[4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]
OF THE MINUTES FOR, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA.I'M MOVING TOO FAST, MR. PASSMAN.
AND SECOND IT THAT WE APPROVE THE AGENDA.
UM, THOSE IN FAVOR OF THAT, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
UH, DO I NEED TO ANNOUNCE THAT, UM, WHAT YOU, I THINK IS MR. MATHEW HERE, IS HE OR IS HE JUST WALKING AWAY? YEAH, HE'S HERE.
UM, AND WE HAVE THE FOUR OF US HERE.
AND ON, UM, ZOOM IS, UH, THE VICE CHAIR, MR. MCALLEN, AND ALSO MR. UM, DAWSON ON ZOOM.
[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
NOW, MR. FASMAN, IF YOU WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION, IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM, UH, INCLUDING THE, THE MINUTES OF MAY, THE SECOND, 2026, AND THE SPECIAL CALL MEETING OF JUNE 15TH IS ONE MOTION.IS THERE A SECOND? I NEED A SEC.
UH, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MINUTES? THOSE IN FAVOR OF, PLEASE INDICATE BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
[6. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD – 15 MINUTES TOTAL]
WE ARE DOWN TO THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.UM, WE HAVE, UM, ALLOTTED 15 MINUTES.
I THINK WE HAVE FIVE PEOPLE HERE.
AND WITH THAT, UM, THAT SHOULD COVER THE 15 MINUTES BECAUSE EACH INDIVIDUAL IS GIVEN ROUGHLY, UH, THREE MINUTES, UM, TO SPEAK.
UM, AND, UH, WE JUST ASK THAT, UM, YOU STAY WITHIN THE THREE MINUTES.
UM, THERE IS A CLOCK THAT WOULD BE ASSESSING THE TIME, UM, THAT YOU DIRECT ALL COMMENTS, UH, TO THE CHAIR, UM, THAT YOU, UM, DO NOT ATTACK ANYBODY INDIVIDUALLY, PERSONALLY.
UM, WE ASK THAT, UM, UH, YOU KEEP ALL, WELL, THIS BE CORDIAL.
I DON'T NEED TO TALK ABOUT PROFANITY, ET CETERA.
UH, JUST BE CORDIAL IN YOUR COMMENTS.
SO WITH THAT IN MIND, UM, THE FIRST PUBLIC SPEAKER IS MR. OR DARRYL, OR, AND HE'S, UM, GONNA SPEAK ON, UH, ACCESSORY BUILDINGS.
UH, MR. GLOVER, THANK YOU FOR THAT WARNING.
I NEEDED THAT WARNING ABOUT KEEPING MY LANGUAGE CIVIL
I'M ALSO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA BLACK FARMERS COALITION.
SO I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A, A, UM, AGENDA, ITEM B, WHICH, WHICH TALKS ABOUT ACCESSORY BUILDINGS IN PARTICULAR.
[00:05:01]
SHIPPING CONTAINERS.SO THERE ARE SEVERAL FARMERS HERE IN THE ROOM WITH ME TODAY.
I DIDN'T BRING THEM, BUT THEY ALL, THEY ARE HERE AS WELL.
AND IF YOU TALK TO ANY FARMER, THEY NOT ONLY HAVE THE CAPACITY TO GROW, TO GROW THEIR CROPS, BUT THEY'RE VERY RESOURCEFUL IN MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO NOT ONLY GROW, BUT HARVEST THEIR CAR, THEIR CROPS, FARMERS BECOME RESOURCEFUL IN ELECTRICAL, UH, ISSUES, PLUMBING, CARPENTRY, UM, YOU KNOW, MECHANICAL.
ANYTHING THAT A FARMER NEEDS TO DO, HE OR SHE WILL FIND A WAY TO DO IT.
AND I SAY THAT TO SAY, IN, IN ORDER FOR A FARMER WHO IS ACTUALLY ABLE TO SHOW A PROFIT EVERY YEAR, THEY HAVE TO BE RESOURCEFUL.
AND ONE OF THE WAYS IN WHICH FARMERS HAVE BEEN ABLE TO BE RESOURCEFUL AND PROFITABLE IS TO FIND WHATEVER RESOURCES AVAILABLE IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND I'M TALKING SPECIFICALLY ABOUT WHATEVER BUILDINGS, WHATEVER MATERIALS, WHATEVER SUPPLIES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM, THEY USE AND MAKE AVAILABLE TO THEM AT THEIR FARMS TO SHOW A PROFIT.
SO MY REQUEST AND COMMENT TO YOU IS, DO NOT RESTRICT THE FARMER'S ABILITY TO USE WHATEVER BUILDINGS NECESSARY TO SHOW A PROFIT TO KEEP GROWING CROPS ON THEIR FARMS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MS. OR, UM, OUR SECOND SPEAKER IS, UH, MR. UH, ANTHONY JONES.
AND, UM, UM, HE'S WANNA SPEAK ON CONTAINERS FOR FARMERS.
HOW YOU DOING? I'M HERE ON ANOTHER, UM, ISSUE, BUT THE, UH, YES, I AM SPEAKING ABOUT CONTAINERS.
UH, COUNSEL, I NEED TO BRING YOU TO ATTENTION BECAUSE AGAIN, MY NAME IS ANTHONY JONES.
I'M A MEMBER OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA AGRITOURISM COM, UH, COUNCIL AS WELL, UH, ON THE ADVOCACY COMMITTEE.
I'M ALSO THE BEAUFORT, UH, AND, UH, REPRESENTATIVES TO THE FARMER SERVICES AGENCY.
AND I WANT TO BRING THE COUNCIL ATTENTION TO STATE LAW.
UM, 46 DASH 45 TO, UH, UH, DASH 10 TO 46 45 80.
THE, UH, GENERAL ASSEMBLY FINDS THAT THE POLICY OF THE STATE IS TO CONSERVE, PROTECT, AND ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF ITS AGRICULTURE AND FACILITIES FOR THE PRODUCTION OF FOOD AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS.
THE ONLY EXCEPTION THAT THEY GIVE IS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF NEW SWINE OPERATIONS.
IT GOES ON DOWN TO SPEAK TOWARDS, UH, LOCAL GOV GOVERNMENTS.
IT SAYS, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LOCAL LAW OR ORDINANCE AND AGRICULTURAL, UH, OPERATION OR FACILITY IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE LOCAL LAW ORDINANCES IF THE OPERATIONAL FACILITY WOULD OTHERWISE COMPLY WITH STATE LAW OR REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE FACILITY OR OPERATION, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF NEW SWINE OPERATIONS AND NEW SLAUGHTERHOUSE.
AND IT GOES ON TO SAY THAT IF A COUNTY CHOOSES TO OVERSTEP ITS BOUNDARY, THE STATE WILL MAKE YOU NULL AND VOID.
SO, BOTTOM LINE OF IT IS THE RIGHT TO FARM.
UM, LAW GIVES ANY FARMER THE RIGHT TO HAVE CONTAINER, UH, CONTAINER ITEMS, UH, THE FACILITIES ON THEIR PROPERTY WITHOUT HAVING ANY LOCAL INTERVENTIONS.
AND I HAVE A MR. OH, I'M SAYING, IS THIS RE BENNETT? OH, YOU'RE NOT.
UM, NEXT SPEAKER'S, UM, FEI, UM, FELICIA.
AND SHE WANNA SPEAK ON THE HISTORICAL ORDINANCE? YES, MA'AM.
UM, I ONLY HAVE A FEW MINUTES, SO I CAN'T GO INTO THE DISCUSSION THAT WE NEED TO IN MY RESPONSE TO STAFF'S RESPONSE TO MY QUESTIONS AND THEIR FAQ.
BUT I WILL SAY, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND, UM, MS. MADAM CHAIR THAT AT THE END OF THE VOTE ON JUNE 22ND, YOU MADE THE COMMENT, MS. MADAM CHAIR, THAT THERE WOULD BE CHANGES.
WHY HAVE THIS MEETING? AND YOU SAID THERE WOULD BE CHANGES.
[00:10:01]
THERE WERE NO CHANGES IN THE ORDINANCE I WENT THROUGH.IT TOOK THE TIME, ONCE AGAIN, TO GO THROUGH ALL THE LINE ITEM YELLOW BY YELLOW.
WHAT WAS PROVIDED WAS THE FAQ AND ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS I ASKED, MANY OF WHICH I CONSIDER TO NOT HAVE ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
SO I WILL GIVE YOU ONE QUICK EXAMPLE BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, TIME IS LIMITED.
DOES A PROPOSED REVISION CONSTITUTE A TAKING OR DUE PROCESS? AND STAFF'S ANSWER WAS, IN THEIR OPINION, NO.
AND THEY CITED PENN CENTRAL VERSUS, UM, UM, THE OWNER.
DO YOU THINK A SOUTHERN LANDOWNER IS GOING TO ACCEPT SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED THAT THE SUPREME COURT DID IN NEW YORK THAT LONG AGO? DO YOU THINK WE COULD FIND SOUTH CAROLINA LAW? PERHAPS STAFF CAN LOOK UP, UH, LUCAS V.
SOUTH CAROLINA COASTAL COUNCIL, 5 0 5 US 1 0 0 3 19 92.
ALL THAT BEING SAID, LIKE I SAID, I NEED PROBABLY 30 MINUTES AND WE DON'T HAVE IT.
WHAT HAS NOT BEEN ADEQUATELY DISCUSSED IS THE PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES OF CREATING A LOCAL HISTORIC DESIGNATION PROCESS AND THE SUBSTANTIAL BURDEN THAT PROCESS PLACES WILL PLACE ON COUNTY COUNCIL, COUNTY STAFF AND PROPERTY OWNERS THROUGHOUT THIS COUNTY.
NEITHER THE FAQS NOR THE LAMARCA RESPONSES MAKE ANY REFERENCE TO THE 2025 SURVEY THAT THE COUNTY ITSELF COMMISSIONED.
THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT OMISSION.
JANUARY, 2025, YOU COMPLETED THE BUFORT COUNTY SOUTH OF BROAD RIVER IN ST.
THAT'S ONE OF THE MOST RELEVANT DOCUMENTS TO THE DISCUSSION BEFORE YOU, IT DEFINES THE UNIVERSE OF PROPERTY THAT COULD BECOME SUBJECT TO THE NEW LOCAL DESIGNATION REGIME.
ONCE AGAIN, YOU ARE NOT BEING GIVEN ALL OF THE INFORMATION.
I WILL SEE YOU AT PUBLIC HEARING.
AND THEN THE LAST IS MR. LARRY MC CHUDA.
I JUST WANNA SAY I AGREE WITH HER.
BUT ANYTHING, THE, A COUPLE OF POINTS, AND I THINK POLICE MADE THEM AS WELL.
WHAT'S IT, WHAT HAS CHANGED? NOTHING.
AND WE'VE SPENT TIME TO READ IT.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD TIME TO READ IT, BUT I'VE READ IT NOW FOR THREE OR FOUR TIMES SINCE IT'S COME BACK SINCE NOVEMBER.
WE KEEP TRYING TO BEAT THE DEAD HORSE, RIGHT? UM, THE OTHER THING IS THE WHOLE REQUIREMENT, OR THE WHOLE REASON, OR ONE OF THE BIG REASONS WAS WELL, FOR FUNDING TO GET GRANTS, YOU CAN GET GRANTS AND THEY SAY, OH NO, WE NEED THE CLG REQUIREMENT.
THAT JUST SAYS THAT CLG PEOPLE GET FIRST PRIORITY.
YOU CAN STILL GET A GRANT, AND IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING REASONABLE AND WORTHWHILE, WHY WOULDN'T YOU GET IT? WHY WOULDN'T THEY DO IT IF IT'S FOR HISTORIC REASONS? ANOTHER THING, NOTHING HAS BEEN SAID OR EVEN TALKED ABOUT, THE REQUIREMENT FOR STAFFING.
WHAT IS THE STAFFING GONNA BE REQUIRED? THEY, OH, WE ALREADY HAVE A STAFF.
WE'VE ALREADY SPENT A YEAR'S WORTH OF STAFFING, AND I DON'T, AND I HEARD EVEN, UM, CONSULTANTS REWRITING THIS THING, AND WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANYWHERE FOR IT, BUT YOU HAVE STAFFING THAT ARE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF THIS.
ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF CLG IS TO PROVIDE REPORTS AS TO HOW THINGS ARE COMING.
NONE OF THAT HAS EVER BEEN MENTIONED.
AND IF MORE HISTORIC, WHAT WAS SAID BEFORE IS, OH, THERE'S ONLY 49 PROPERTIES, WE'RE GONNA BLOW 'EM RIGHT THROUGH.
WELL, WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT? I MEAN, IT'S EVEN SAID THAT A LOT OF THE PEOPLE HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN, HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN, UM, NOTIFIED.
BUT YOU NEED THIS CLG TO NOTIFY 'EM.
YOU KNOW, YOU CAN STILL NOTIFY 'EM WITHOUT BEING A, A PARTY OF THIS.
AND THE OTHER THING THAT'S EVEN KIND OF FOOLISH, WE SAY WE HAVE TO NOTIFY THEM BY MAIL.
WELL, THERE THINGS HAVE COME A LONG WAY AND A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T READ MAIL ANYMORE.
[00:15:01]
THEM OR SOMETHING THAN TO SAY THEY'RE GOING TO PUT IT THROUGH MAIL.WHEN YOU DO IT THROUGH MAIL, THAT, THAT'S A BLOW OFF.
YOU'RE JUST SAYING, OH, I DID IT, BUT NOBODY EVER READS IT.
UM, AND ANOTHER THING IS, THE BOARD REQUIREMENTS.
ALL THESE PEOPLE THAT ARE GONNA BE ON BOARDS HISTORIC, YOU CAN'T JUST GET ANYBODY, ANY JOE BLOW TO GET ON THIS THING.
I'M SURE YOU'RE GONNA GO THROUGH SOME, BUT THERE SHOULD BE ARCHITECTS.
THERE SHOULD BE HISTORICAL PEOPLE.
THERE SHOULD BE REASONS WHY PEOPLE ARE ON THIS BOARD.
AND BE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THIS IF YOU'RE GONNA DO IT.
NONE OF THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED HERE.
UM, ANYWAY, I I JUST THINK, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
AND THE LAST, EXCEPT FOR RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS, AND THOSE QUESTIONS ARE LAWYER GENERATED, AND WE JUST ASKED FOR PLAIN COMMON SENSE RESPONSES.
WE DIDN'T NEED SOMETHING TO GO INTO COURT WITH.
[7. ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT]
GONNA MOVE THE AGENDA.UM, WE DOWN TO NUMBER ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, THE ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT.
IS THERE A ASSISTANT ADMIN YOU DON'T HAVE TO REPORT? IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT?
UH, COMMITTEE, UH, WE JUST HAD A QUICK UPDATE TO PROVIDE, UH, SOME RECENT NEWS.
THERE WAS A NEWSPAPER ARTICLE ON IT OVER THE PAST WEEK OR SO, BUT THERE WAS SOME DAMAGE RECENTLY TO, UH, THE FAMOUS TREE DOWNTOWN AT THE WITNESS, UM, TREE POCKET PARK.
AND JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE TO COMMITTEE, UH, ON THE STATUS OF THAT.
SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY.
BUT WE HAVE A LEASE AGREEMENT THAT COUNCIL ENTERED INTO IN 2023 WITH THE PAT, UH, PAT CONROY LITERARY CENTER.
AND THEY, UM, AS PART OF THAT LEASE ARE, IT'S A 10 YEAR LEASE, AND THEY HAVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS.
AND I BELIEVE THEY HAD FOLKS OUT THERE LAST WEEK.
I HAVEN'T BEEN THERE SINCE THE WEEKEND TO SEE IF THEY'VE HAD IT REMOVED.
BUT, UM, I KNOW THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT CAME UP IN THE NEWS ARTICLES AND IT'S A FAMOUS AND IMPORTANT TREE AND JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE COMMITTEE A UPDATE ON THAT.
UM, ANY COMMENTS? I, WE APPRECIATE THAT UPDATE.
UM, JAR, MR. FRAS, I, SOME OF MY CONSTITUENTS HAD ASKED ABOUT IT TOO.
AND, UM, IT'S GOOD TO KNOW THE STATUS OF IT.
[8.a. Update on Green Space Program (FISCAL IMPACT: ) - Michael McShane, Green Space Committee Chair]
UM, ITEM NUMBER EIGHT, UM, WE ARE GETTING AN UPDATE ON THE GREEN SPACE PROGRAM FROM, UH, MR. MICHAEL HAN YOU UP.AND HE'S THE CONGRATULATING HIM FOR GETTING THE ORDER OF THE PALM PALMETTO.
DID I GET THAT RIGHT? IT'S LIKE, IT'S LIKE THE PRESIDENTIAL ORDER FOR SOUTH CAROLINA.
MADAM VICE CHAIRMAN, MADAM CHAIR.
IF ANYTHING, I JUST, I'LL SUBMIT THAT, THAT IT REFLECTS ALL THOSE WHO I WORK WITH IN THE WORK THAT WE'VE COLLABORATIVELY DONE.
AND SO I'M JUST A REFLECTION OF THE CONSERVATION WORK THAT'S BEEN DONE ACROSS THE STATE.
AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE SUPPORT.
UH, THIS, THIS AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN.
IT, I OFFERED, UH, TO, TO MADAM CHAIR THAT I WOULD JUST GIVE THE COURTESY OF A QUICK UPDATE TO NATIONAL RESOURCES.
AS OF COURSE, AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE MADE CHANGES HERE RECENTLY WHERE WE'RE NOT NECESSARILY COMING IN FRONT OF NATIONAL RESOURCES AS FREQUENTLY.
AND OF COURSE, YOU'RE NOT MEETING AS FREQUENTLY IN THE SUMMER.
AND SO WITH THE NUMBER OF THINGS, UM, THERE, WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE, UH, THE OFFER WOULD BE ACCEPTED AND WAS TO GIVE A QUICK UPDATE WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU.
AND, AND, UH, I APPRECIATE THE INDULGENCE OF THE COMMITTEE AND THE ADMINISTRATOR ON THE INFORMATION HERE.
WE'LL, WE, UH, I HAVE CLARITY NOW THAT GOING FORWARD, ALL OF THIS WILL BE IN ADVANCE.
YOU'LL HAVE THIS INFORMATION IN ADVANCE TO ADHERE TO YOUR PROTOCOL.
UH, FORGIVE ME, WHEN WE MADE THIS DECISION ON THURSDAY, I WAS OUT OF TOWN AND DID NOT RETURN UNTIL LATE LAST NIGHT.
AND SO THIS WAS SUBMITTED THIS MORNING.
BUT, BUT WHAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU IS AN UPDATED SPREADSHEET.
AND, UH, JUST TO QUICKLY GO THROUGH SOME THAT I KNOW HAVE INTEREST BY THE COMMITTEE HERE IN THE NORTHERN PART OF THE COUNTY, UH, WE CONTINUE TO WORK ON THOSE THAT YOU'VE GIVEN, UH, APPROPRIATE APPROVALS IN THE EASTERN REGION THAT IS ON THE LADIES ISLAND.
UH, MR. BAROLO, I JUST POINT OUT TO YOU A NUMBER ON ST.
[00:20:01]
THAT YOU RECENTLY GAVE DUE DILIGENCE, APPRE, UM, APPROVAL.YOU'VE GIVEN, UH, UH, RESOLUTION APPROVAL ON THE SEA ISLAND PARKWAY TRACKS.
AND THAT IS BEING NEGOTIATED IN PROCESS THERE.
AND WE WILL HAVE A GREEN SPACE MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 10TH, WHICH I HOPE TO HAVE SOME FINAL TO THEN COME BACK TO FULL COUNCIL IN THE SOUTHERN REGION.
YOU WILL AWARE OF THE PROJECTS THAT WE DID WITH THE TOWN OF HILTON HEAD.
AND OF COURSE, THE ONGOING WORK WITH THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ON THE NEW RIVER FOREST TRACK.
THERE, UH, OUTSIDE BLUFFTON THERE, I'M CONFIDENT THAT, UH, MADAM VICE CHAIRMAN THAT THROUGH THE RESOLUTION WILL BE ADHERED TO IN TERMS OF THE ROAD, UH, UH, ROAD, UH, EXCESS THERE.
UM, MORE AS IMPORTANT IN THE WESTERN REGION.
I'LL HIGHLIGHT THE VICTORIA BLUFF TRACK, UH, BECAUSE NEXT TUESDAY, A WEEK FROM TOMORROW, I'LL BE IN COLUMBIA FOR JOINT BOND REVIEW COMMITTEE APPROVAL FOR THE STATE MATCH ON THAT.
AND THAT WILL BE ONE OF THE LARGEST, UH, CONSERVATION EASEMENTS THAT YOU'LL SEE IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE COUNTY.
UH, AS WELL AS, UH, AT THE SAME TIME YOU'LL SEE, UH, NEXT WEEK, UH, OUTTA COUNTY, UH, THE CHELSEA TRACK.
THERE'S A GOOD CHANCE THAT I THINK IT'S THE WEEK OF, UH, AUGUST 10TH, I'M GONNA TURN.
SO IT'S STILL SEEING IN AUGUST 10TH DATE NEXT WEEK, A CLOSING ON THE CHELSEA TRACK IN JASPER COUNTY FOR THE STATE FOREST.
AND THAT TRANSACTION WILL BE GOING THROUGH HERE RELATIVELY SOON, WHICH THEN TRIGGERS, UM, THE REIMBURSEMENT THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.
AND I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT IN JUST A MOMENT, SIR.
AND THEN THE BELOW LIST IS THE CLOSED PROJECTS THAT IS, THAT HAD BEEN TOTALLY FUNDED AND CLOSED.
UH, I SEE A NEW APPLICATIONS COME IN.
THAT WAS ONE THAT WAS PRESENTED AT THE JULY 17TH MEETING EARLIER LAST MONTH.
AND THERE WAS, THE COMMITTEE MADE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE, TO THE APPLICANT, UH, TO COME BACK.
AND SO WE'LL TAKE THAT UP AT OUR SEPTEMBER 10TH MEETING ON THAT.
IT WAS A, IT WAS, IT WAS A, A, A PD BUYDOWN.
WE ACTUALLY MADE A SUGGESTION THAT MAYBE COME BACK IN A DIFFERENT TYPE OF APPLICATION ON THAT.
IF I COULD, THE NEXT SCREEN PLEASE.
WHAT YOU HAVE HISTORICALLY SEEN, I'M HOLDING IN MY HAND.
THIS IS, THIS IS ONE THAT, FRANKLY, MY VIEW WAS A LITTLE, WAS COULD CREATE SOME CONFUSION.
AND SO WHAT I PROPOSED IN FRONT, AND, AND I NEED TO BRING THIS THROUGH TO THE FULL COMMITTEE, BUT I'M GOING, UM, I WONDER IF YOU COULD JUST ENLARGE THAT JUST A LITTLE BIT, IS TO, TO FOLLOW THIS VERY, WHAT I THINK IS A VERY SIMPLE, UH, PROCESS.
TOTAL COLLECTED OVER THE TWO YEAR PERIOD WAS $126 MILLION ON THE CLOSED PROJECTS.
WE JUST SAW THOSE ON THE SPREADSHEET TOTALS 28, LITTLE OVER $28 MILLION PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED BY COUNTY RESOLUTION.
MEANING THESE WERE, HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FULL PROCESS, BUT PENDING CLOSURE.
THIS INCLUDES THE NEW RIVER TRACK AND THE CHELSEA TRACK.
YOU'VE APPROVED, WHAT WE ESTIMATE COULD BE A LITTLE OVER $10 MILLION IN NEW PROJECTS.
THAT IS, YOU'VE GIVEN US DUE DILIGENCE APPROVAL, NOT HAVE COME BACK TO YOU WITH FOR FULL COUNSEL RESOLUTION APPROVAL.
BUT WE ESTIMATE THOSE TO BE IN THE $10 MILLION RANGE THAT LEAVES TODAY AN UNCOMMITTED FUND BALANCE A LITTLE OVER $20 MILLION.
BUT THEN KEEP IN MIND, 26 MILLION OF THAT 67 MILLION IS GONNA COME BACK AS REIMBURSEMENT.
DOES THIS BRING A LITTLE BIT MORE, I'M ASKING A QUESTION, MR. CHAIRMAN.
DOES THIS BRING A LITTLE MORE OF A CLARITY, AND PERHAPS I KNOW MR. MCALLEN, OUR VICE CHAIRMAN IS ON ZOOM.
IS, IS THIS BRINGING A LITTLE MORE CLARITY TO WHERE WE ARE IN TERMS OF A DASHBOARD, LOOK AT WHERE THE FUNDING IS? I SEE THAT I'M, I'M SEEING GENERAL APPROVAL.
SO WE WILL, WE WILL, UM, BRING THIS FORWARD AND FORMALLY ADOPT IT AND BRING THIS IN OUR, AT OUR SEPTEMBER FUTURE MEETING.
BUT THIS GIVES YOU A SNAPSHOT OF WHERE WE ARE TODAY.
ANY YOU FINISH, YOU HAVE QUESTION.
AND BEFORE WE OPEN IT UP, MR. MCALLEN, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR, YEAH, I'M, UH, I'M NOT ABLE TO SEE THAT NEW, UM, ITEM THAT YOU'VE BROUGHT WITH YOU MR. MCSHANE ON THE, UH, IT'S THE ONE, MR. MCKELLAN THAT I SENT TO YOU THIS AFTERNOON.
I SEE THE AREAS IN GREEN, BUT, UH,
[00:25:01]
I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE OTHER, THE OTHER, UH, PROJECTION THAT YOU HAD THERE.IS THE ONE SHEET OF PAPER THAT YOU BROUGHT WITH YOU, IS THAT AVAILABLE TO BE, TO BE SHOWN ON THE SCREEN FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE? WAS IT UP THERE ON THE SCREEN? YES, SIR.
THIS IS THE, THE ONE THAT'S NOW ON THE SCREEN.
CAN YOU SEE THAT, MR. OKAY, NOW I SEE IT.
WAS THAT OUT THERE BEFORE TOO? YES.
I DIDN'T SEE IT ON MY SCREEN HERE.
YEAH, I, I THINK THIS, UH, THIS ONE, UH, BREAKDOWN MAKES, UH, A LOT MORE SENSE THAN WHAT WE WERE USING IN THE PAST.
IT'S MUCH MORE E IT'S MUCH EASIER TO UNDERSTAND AND IT'S A VERY CLEAR, UH, REPRESENTATION OF WHAT WE HAD, UM, WHAT WE'VE DONE WITH IT AND WHAT WE HAVE LEFT AND WHAT WE EXPECT TO HAVE LEFT AND WHEN WE ARE REIMBURSED.
SO IT PUTS US BACK IN BUSINESS AT ABOUT, UH, $46 MILLION, WHICH IS A, UM, DROP OF COURSE FROM THE 126 MILLION.
BUT THAT WAS MONEY WELL SPENT.
AND THIS WILL KEEP US IN BUSINESS FOR, UH, SOME TIME IN THE FUTURE.
AND IT'S VERY EASY TO UNDERSTAND ONCE YOU LOOK AT IT LIKE THIS.
SO I THINK WE, UH, WE DID A GOOD JOB ON THAT.
ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE I, I'M GONNA GET YOU, UM, MR. DAWSON, YOU, I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE SCREEN AND YOU ARE ON THE OUTSIDE.
SO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, MR. DAWSON? MR. DAWSON? NO, SIR.
SO ARE YOU PROPOSING, YOU WOULD SHOW THIS, THIS IN SEPTEMBER, BUT YOU'LL ALSO SHOW US THE OTHER ONE AS WELL? 'CAUSE I LIKE TO SEE THE PROPERTIES IN BY REGION OR HERE STOP.
WE'LL MAKE SURE I HAVE CLARITY.
THIS IS WHAT I KEEP SORT OF AS OUR WORKING DOCUMENT.
AND THEN THIS WILL BE JUST THE FINANCIALS THAT'LL GET UPDATED AS THIS ONE UPDATES.
SO WE'LL AUTOMATICALLY UPDATE THIS.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I HAVE CLARITY THAT THAT'S MEETING YOUR EXPECTATION.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THE STATE BUDGET, JUST A QUICK UPDATE.
UH, BECAUSE THIS, THIS TIES INTO THE CONVERSATIONS WE HAD ABOUT REIMBURSEMENTS.
UH, THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY IS CALLED BACK INTO SESSION NEXT TUESDAY, AUGUST THE 11TH.
THEY SHOULD TAKE THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT THAT WAS AGREED TO BY BOTH THE CONFERENCES OF SENATE AND HOUSE.
THEY SEND THAT OBVIOUSLY THEN TO THE GOVERNOR.
THE GOVERNOR HAS A FEW DAYS TO REVIEW AND IF HE WERE TO ELECT TO DO ANY VETOES ON THAT.
BUT THERE WAS NO, I DON'T SUS I DON'T HAVE ANY SENSE NOR ANY, UH, CONCERN ABOUT THE CONSERVATION ITEMS IN THE BUDGET TO DO THAT.
UH, AND IT LIKELY WILL BE A REPEAT GOING THROUGH.
SENATOR DAVIS HAS BEEN EXTRAORDINARILY ALONG WITH SENATORS PEELER, UH, UH, SENATE CHAIRMAN FINANCE, HAVE BEEN VERY STRONGLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE CONSERVATION WORK WE'VE DONE, PARTICULARLY HERE IN BEAUFORT COUNTY.
AND I LOOK FORWARD THAT COINCIDENTALLY BE IN FRONT OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS AT JOINT BOND REVIEW.
IT'S ON THE SAME DAY LOOKING FOR THEIR CONTINUED APPROVAL IN THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING.
IN, IN, ON SOME OF THESE PROJECTS THAT YOU'RE FUNDING REPRESENTATIVE, UH, HERB KIRKMAN SERVES ON JOINT BOND REVIEW AS WELL, JUST AS MEMBER OF YOUR DELEGATION.
ANY QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIRMAN? NO.
YOU, UM, YOU, YOU ANSWERED AND YOU HAVE PRESENTED A, A PRESENTATION AND TO UPDATE US ON THE GREEN SPACE.
AND I DON'T SEE ANY PRO, YOU KNOW, PROLONGING THIS PRESENTATION.
[8.b. Discussion regarding Data Centers (FISCAL IMPACT: ) -]
WE ARE DOWN TO A DISCUSSION, UM, ON DATA CENTERS AND, UH, IN THIS DISCUSSION.WE'RE AT THE COUNTY, UM, COUNTY ASSOCIATION, ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES, UH, CONFERENCE.
AND THIS HAS BEEN A HOT TOPIC, UM, AT THE ASSOCIATION.
AND SO I ASKED THE CHAIRMAN, I MEAN, I ASKED THE ADMINISTRATION TO, UM, UM, AT LEAST, UM, MAKE A PRESENTATION TO GIVE US SOME GUIDELINES AND BRING THIS AS A DISCUSSION, UM, WANTING TO BE MORE PROACTIVE THAN ANYTHING ELSE AT THIS TIME.
NOT TO SAY NO OR YES TO ANY DATA CENTER, BUT BASICALLY LOOKING AT THIS COUNTY HERE TO SAY, IF THIS IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO DO, OR IF THIS COUNTY EMBRACES SOMETHING LIKE THAT, UM, MAYBE HAVING A DESIGNATED ZONE, MAYBE HAVING A DESIGNATED AREA, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
SO IT'S MAINLY, MAINLY A CONVERSATION.
SO I WOULD, UM, UH, YIELD TO THE ADMINISTRATION IF HE HAS ANY COMMENTS HE'D LIKE TO MAKE, UH, AT THIS TIME, AND THEN OPEN IT UP TO OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS TO MOVE IT FORWARD AND STUFF.
[00:30:01]
COME UP.BUT JUST AS A POINT, THERE'S, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AT THE SCAC CONFERENCE LAST WEEK, AND YES, I HAD ATTENDED, UH, THE NACO CONFERENCE EVEN BEFORE THAT.
AND SO IT'S NATIONAL INTEREST IN THIS.
UM, AND WE HAD HEARD FROM, YOU KNOW, LOUDOUN COUNTY, VIRGINIA, WHICH IS ONE OF THE COUNTIES THAT HAS THE MOST POPULOUS, IS, YOU KNOW, PROBABLY THE MOST DATA CENTERS AND MOST EXPERIENCE.
AND SO WE CAN, YOU KNOW, LEVERAGE THAT EX EX EXPERTISE AND EXPERIENCE, YOU KNOW, SHOULD WE WANT TO GO DOWN THAT PATH.
BUT I THINK THE KEY QUESTIONS WE CAN TALK ABOUT IS WHAT'S WITHIN OUR, OUR, UH, CDC NOW, WHAT AND WHAT SHOULD WE CONSIDER GOING FORWARD? SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO MR. KIDDEN.
THANK YOU COMMITTEE, MR. CHAIR.
UM, I HAVE WITH ME, YOU, YOU CAN STEP UP TO THE MIC.
I HAVE MR. MERCHANT WITH ME TO, UH, GO THROUGH ANYTHING THAT WE, ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CDC AND WHERE IT WOULD FIT IN IN OUR CURRENT SCHEME AND ANY OTHER QUESTIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE TO, TO ANSWER AS WELL.
YEAH, I, I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO OFFER AT THIS MOMENT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE IDEA OF A, UH, DATA CENTER ORDINANCE AND IN THE, THE FORM THAT THAT TAKES WILL HAVE A LOT TO DO WITH HOW THIS MOVES FORWARD.
AND IT ALMOST SEEMS LIKE THE FIRST STEP SHOULD BE, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE WORK OF THIS COMMITTEE TO TAKE ON, YOU KNOW, TO KIND OF TALK ABOUT THE PARAMETERS OF THAT.
ONE OF THE THINGS IN OUR ORDINANCE COUNTY COUNCIL, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT INITIATING ZONING AMENDMENTS, COUNTY COUNCIL IS A PARTY THAT CAN DO THAT.
AND SO IF, YOU KNOW, IF IT IS COUNCIL'S WILL TO, UM, INITIATE A, A DATA CENTER, THEN YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DIRECT STAFF TO DO THAT.
BUT I THINK THE QUESTION IS, WE DON'T QUITE KNOW THE BREADTH OF IT.
HOW MANY SECTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE AMENDED.
AND IT SEEMS LIKE THAT TYPE OF WORK PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE, UM, STUDIED AND DISCUSSED, YOU KNOW, BEFORE STAFF STARTS, YOU KNOW, DRAFTING SOMETHING.
BUT, SO I THINK JUST, JUST FOR THE TIME BEING, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAD A DATA CENTER PROJECT THAT HAD APPROACHED THE COUNTY, COULD WE TELL A BIT MORE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT TYPE, WHAT TYPE OF ZONING DESIGNATIONS THAT MIGHT FIT INTO CURRENTLY AND COULD INFORM US AS TO WHICH ONES WE'D LIKE TO MAYBE ALTER OR, UM, AMEND GOING FORWARD? YEAH, I MEAN, IN THE, OF COURSE, DATA CENTERS, THAT'S NOT A USE THAT'S LISTED IN OUR CODE.
AND SO WE WOULD LOOK AT WHAT ARE SIMILAR.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A CODE THAT WE, OR, UM, A RESOURCE THAT WE USE CALLED THE N-A-I-C-S, NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL.
IT BASICALLY IS A DEFINITION OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES WE USE THAT TO FIGURE OUT.
BUT I IMAGINE SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD FALL INTO THE REALM OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR, OR HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.
AND, UH, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT WHAT THE SIZE OF THE PROPOSAL IS.
IT WOULD MOST LIKELY BE WITH THE, THE ORDINANCES WRITTEN NOW, SOMETHING THAT IS PRIMARILY PERMITTED IN ONE OF OUR INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS.
SO, BUT IF IT WERE SOMETHING WITH A SMALL FOOTPRINT, YOU KNOW, THERE PROBABLY WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, GREATER AMOUNT OF PLACES IT COULD LOCATE.
UM, ONE, ONE OTHER THING I WANTED TO BRING UP IS THAT THE NORTHERN IMPLEMENTATION COMMITTEE, WHICH, UM, IS MEETING, I THINK THE FOURTH FRIDAY, I DON'T REMEMBER THE DATE OF AUGUST.
THIS IS A TOPIC THAT THEY'RE GONNA BE BRINGING UP.
I BELIEVE THAT, UM, GRANT MCCLURE WITH THE COASTAL CONSERVATION LEAGUE IS GONNA BE PRESENTING ON IN GENERAL THE TOPIC OF, UH, DATA CENTER ORDINANCES.
UM, MR. PASSMAN, THEN, MR. MC? UH, YES.
FOR EVERYONE WHO'S LISTENING TO US OR WATCHING US, THIS WAS A HOT BUTTON TOPIC AT OUR MEETING.
UH, THERE ARE COUNTIES IN SOUTH CAROLINA THAT HAVE ALREADY CREATED ORDINANCES.
SO I THINK WE NEED TO FIND THOSE ORDINANCES SO WE DON'T HAVE TO START FROM SCRATCH.
YES, ZONING IS GOING TO BE INVOLVED.
WE HAVE TO BE PROACTIVE BECAUSE DATA CENTERS ARE HERE.
WE ALREADY HAVE THEM THROUGHOUT THE STATE.
WE ALREADY HAVE THEM THROUGHOUT THE COUNTIES.
WE ALREADY HAVE THEM THROUGHOUT OUR NATION.
IT'S HOW WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEM.
WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAUTIOUS ABOUT THIS.
AND SO, YES, I BELIEVE WE SHOULD DIRECT OUR ADMINISTRATION TO BEGIN THAT PROCESS, WHETHER IT'S BY ORDINANCE, BY ZONING, COMBINATIONS THEREOF.
WE NEED ALL OF THE DATA NECESSARY TO BUILD THE PROPER ORDINANCE MOVING FORWARD.
MR. SMITH
[00:35:01]
TWO CHAPMAN COUNCILS AGO, WE, WE HEARD ABOUT THE MORATORIUMS, AND I ACTUALLY TOOK IT UPON MYSELF.I DRAFTED DRAFT AN INITIAL VERSION, NOT OF A MORATORY.
OH, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? ANYWAY, I ACTUALLY DRAFTED A, A DRAFT ORDINANCE INCORPORATING OUR, UH, MODIFYING OUR CDC.
I'M JUST NOW STARTING TO GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY ON IT.
I NOT GONNA LIE, I NEED SOME WORK.
IT'S MAINLY THE PROHIBITION WOULD BE AGAINST A LARGE SCALE.
UH, I THINK WHERE WE COULD ALL GET SOME INPUT IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
UM, 'CAUSE I LEFT A BLANK IN THERE FOR THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
SO, BUT IT DOES MODIFY, IT GOES THROUGH AND ACTUALLY MODIFIES OUR CDCI THINK I HIT ON THE, THE COVERED AREAS IN THE CHARTS IN INSIDE THE CDC.
BUT IT MAY BE A GOOD BASIS, AND I'M NOT EMOTIONALLY TIED TO ANY OF IT, BUT I MIGHT BE A GOOD START TO LOOK AT, AND I'D LOVE YOUR INPUT AND YOUR, YOUR EXPERTISE ON IT.
I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE REASON WHY THIS CONVERSATION IS COMING UP, SO THAT WHAT YOU ARE DOING CAN BE FORWARDED, UM, HOPEFULLY TO STAFF TO COME BACK WITH SOME RECOMMENDATION.
ANYBODY ELSE? OH, I, I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT, UM, A DRAFT AND I HOPE THAT STAFF CAN USE THAT AS A STARTING PORT POINT.
LOOK AT SOME OF THE OTHER COUNTIES TOO, WHAT THEY'VE DONE.
YOU KNOW, SOME OF 'EM WANT IT.
I DON'T, I, I MEAN, THEY'RE PROBE PROB DATA CENTERS.
I TALKED TO SOME PEOPLE FROM ALLENDALE COUNTY THAT LIKED THE IDEA, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT'S THE RIGHT FIT FOR BEAUFORT COUNTY.
SO, AND THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE WANT TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION BEFORE.
UM, WE, WE ARE APPROACHED BY THAT, UM, INDUSTRY, UM, SO THAT AT LEAST WE HAVE A BASIS FOR MOVING FORWARD AND ANYBODY ELSE.
UM, AND IF NOTHING ELSE, UM, I THINK STAFF HAS HEARD.
UM, AND IF YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT, I THINK WE'LL APPRECIATE THAT.
I THINK WE ALL WANT TO BE ON THE, UM, UH, FOREFRONT OF THIS.
AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT I'M FOR DATA CENTER.
I'M NOT SAYING I'M AGAINST DATA CENTER, BUT I THINK THE, UM, UM, THE FACTS NEED TO BE THERE, UM, SO THAT WE CAN BASICALLY PLACE SOME PARAMETERS ON THAT.
I, I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT YOU'D LIKE US TO BRING BACK SOME OPTIONS WITH VARYING LEVELS OF REGULATION FOR CONSIDERATION AND EXAMINATION.
[9.a. 2026/33: An Ordinance Amending the Community Development Code (CDC): Division 5.10 (Historic Preservation), Section 7.2.120 (Certificate Of Appropriateness), Section 7.3.80 (Historic Designation), Section 7.4.50 (Public Hearing Scheduling and Notice), and Section 7.5.40 (Historic Preservation Review Board (Hprb)). The vote at Natural Resources Committee on May 4, 2026 - 6:0 The vote at First Reading on May 26, 2026 - 9:1 The vote to defer Second Reading until the June 22, 2026 County Council meeting on June 8, 2026 - 11:0 The vote to remand back to Natural Resources committee on June 22, 2026 - 6:5 (FISCAL IMPACT: ) - Robert Merchant, AICP, Beaufort County Planning and Zoning Department]
RIGHT ALONG.I THINK, UM, MR. KID, UH, THANK YOU UP ON ITEM NUMBER, UH, NINE A, WHICH IS THE, UM, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMMUNITY, UH, DEVELOPMENT CODE, UH, FOR HISTORICAL PRESERVATION.
UM, I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO PUT IT ON THE FLOOR.
DO I GET A SECOND? I'LL SECOND.
SO, UM, I, I BELIEVE WE'RE ALL AWARE OF THE HISTORY OF, UH, OF THIS ORDINANCE AS IT WAS SENT BACK FROM THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING.
YOU WILL SEE IN THE BACKUP MATERIALS, UM, THE, THAT WE ARE NO LONGER RECOMMENDING MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS ORDINANCE AT THIS TIME.
UM, IT BECAME CLEAR TO US BOTH AT THE MEETING AND IN CONVERSATIONS AFTERWARD, THAT ANY ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS THAT PASS WOULD HAVE TO CONTAIN AN OPT-OUT PROVISION.
AND IN OUR VIEW, UM, THAT DEFEATS THE PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENTS OF BEING ACL G.
BUT IT ALSO TURNS WHAT THESE AMENDMENTS INTO WHAT I THINK COUNSELING COMMITTEE WOULD CALL A FEEL GOOD, BECAUSE IT'S COMPLETELY VOLUNTARY.
AND WE'VE BEEN TOLD REPEATEDLY BY COUNSELING COMMITTEE THAT THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN THOSE TYPES OF ORDINANCES.
SO, FOR THAT REASON, AND WE'RE NOT HERE TO REHASH, UM, YOU KNOW, THE THE PRIOR MEETING.
BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR, OR WANT TO KNOW ANYTHING MORE ABOUT IT, IT IS, ALL THAT MATERIAL IS CONTAINED IN THE BACKUPS.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.
BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS ORDINANCE AT THIS TIME.
HEY, UH, ANY QUESTION, IF NOT, UM, UH, STAFF IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO, UM, UM, NOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS RECOMMENDATION.
UM, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN THAT MOTION, IF NOT MM-HMM
I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON SOMETHING ELSE.
WELL, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
UM, SO I MOVE THAT WE DENIED THE REQUEST FOR THE TEXT AMENDMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
NUMBER ONE, IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
NUMBER TWO, IT IS IN CONFLICT WITH PROVISIONS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT CODE OR THE CODE OF ORDINANCE.
NUMBER THREE, IT IS NOT REQUIRED BY CHANGED CONDITIONS.
[00:40:01]
FOUR, IT DOES NOT ADDRESS A DEMONSTRATED, DEMONSTRATED COMMUNITY NEED.IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE ZONES IN THIS DEVELOPMENT CODE, OR WOULD IMPROVE COMPATIBILITY AMONG USES AND ENSURE EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE COUNTY.
NUMBER SIX, IT WOULD NOT RESULT IN A LOGICAL AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
AND NUMBER SEVEN, IT WOULD RESULT IN ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE NATURAL EN ENVIRONMENT, ENVIRONMENT, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO WATER, AIR, NOISE, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, WILDLIFE, VEGETATION, WETLANDS, AND THE NATURAL FUNCTIONING OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
UM, THERE'S BEEN PROPERTY MOTION AND SECONDED.
UM, IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MOTION? NOPE.
UM, THE, THE ONLY COMMENT I'LL MAKE IS THAT I WILL BE VOTING AGAINST THE MOTION, BUT THAT'S ME.
UM, CAN WE HAVE A ROLL CALL THOUGH? OH, A ROLL CALL HAS BEEN ASKED FOR.
SO, UM, IF STAFF WERE TO GO AHEAD AND, UM, GIVE US A ROLL CALL, I APPRECIATE THAT.
SO, WOULD MR. PASSMAN RESTATE THE MOTION? 'CAUSE WE HAVE TWO MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW.
THIS ONE AND THE ONE HE READ, THE ONE HE HAD EARLIER WAS JUST FOR DISCUSSION, WASN'T IT? YES.
IT BROUGHT ABOUT THE ORDINANCE.
RIGHT? AND NOW I HAVE SAID AS PART OF THE ORDINANCE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO MOVE FORWARD AS, SO THIS WOULD BE ALMOST LIKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION, WOULDN'T IT BE? YEAH, I DON'T THINK IT'S A SUB.
IS IT, IT WOULD TAKE PRIORITY OVER IT, RIGHT? AND IT WOULD DEFEAT THE OTHER ONE WITHOUT HAVING A VOTE? YES.
SO DOES EVERYBODY UNDERSTAND THE MOTION? YEAH.
COUNCIL MEMBER BAROLO, YOU? YES.
[9.b. An Ordinance amending the Community Development Code (CDC): section 5.3.20 (applicability), 4.2.20 (standards for free-standing accessory buildings/structures), 5.8.100 (screening), and 10.1.190 (definitions) (FISCAL IMPACT: n/a) - Robert Merchant]
THE AGENDA, UM, WE'LL BE DOWN TO, OOH, GOTTA FLIP MY PAGE HERE.UM, ITEM B, UM, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODES SECTION 5.32.
UM, AND THIS IS IN REGARD TO FREESTANDING ACCESSORY BUILDING.
THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THE MOTION.
THERE HAS BEEN PROPERLY SECONDED.
SO I GUESS I WANTED TO, UM, EMPHASIZE STARTING OUT THAT THIS ORDINANCE PROVIDES A, IT, IT ALLOWS FOR SHIPPING CONTAINERS FOR AGRICULTURE.
CURRENTLY IN OUR ORDINANCE, WE HAVE TWO RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF SHIPPING CONTAINERS AS STRUCTURES.
ONE OF THEM IS THAT THEY CAN'T BE USED AS ACCESSORY BUILDINGS.
THAT'S AN ARTICLE FOUR OF OUR ORDINANCE.
AND THEN THE OTHER IS SOMETHING THE COUNCIL ADOPTED IN 2022 THAT PROHIBITS THEIR USE AS A DWELLING.
AND SO, UM, THIS ISSUE IS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THIS COMMITTEE.
MS. UH, MR. GLOVER, THAT MANY PEOPLE IN AGRICULTURE AND MANY FARMERS IN OUR COMMUNITY ARE USING SHIPPING CONTAINERS BECAUSE OF THE FLEXIBILITY THEY PROVIDE.
THEY'RE USING THEM FOR A LOT OF DIFFERENT REASONS.
YOU KNOW, WE DID SPEAK WITH THE FARM BUREAU BUREAU AND, AND, AND SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE IN THE, IN THE AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY.
AND THE REQUEST WAS TO COME UP WITH AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD PROVIDE FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR ACTIVE AGRICULTURE, THE ABILITY TO USE SHIPPING CONTAINERS.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, STAFF, WE LOOKED AT THIS ISSUE, WE BROUGHT IT FORWARD TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
WE HAD A VERY, I WOULD SAY, HEALTHY DEBATE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THREE DIFFERENT MEETINGS, THREE DIFFERENT REWRITES.
THERE WAS A KIND OF THE, THAT THREADING THE NEEDLE BETWEEN OVERREGULATION, WHICH WE HAD A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE COMMITTEE WITH A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT HOW SHIPPING CONTAINERS COULD BE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE MISUSED OR, UM, HOW THIS MIGHT LEAD TO ISSUES OF THEM PROLIFERATING.
AND THEN, YOU KNOW, AND THEN THE OTHER SIDE IS THAT ANY TOO MANY REGULATIONS WOULD MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR, YOU KNOW, IT, IT WOULD BASICALLY
[00:45:01]
DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF THE FLEXIBILITY AND EASE THAT THEY PROVIDE IN AGRICULTURE.AND SO, WHAT YOU HAVE NOW IS, I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT WORK OF THE THREE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AND STAFF WORKING ON THIS, THIS ORDINANCE, WE ARE AWARE AT THE STAFF LEVEL THAT YES, THE, THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA HAS AN ORDINANCE THAT RE IT HAS A PROVISION THAT AGRICULTURAL BUILDINGS THAT ARE NOT USED TO HOUSE, UM, ANIMALS OR, OR OFFICES, YOU KNOW, HABIT HABITATION BY HUMAN BEINGS, THERE IS A PATH FOR THEM TO, UM, BYPASS THE RESTRICTIONS OF OUR, OUR BUILDING CODES.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE DID WORK CLOSELY WITH OUR BUILDING CODES DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, WE KIND OF SAW THAT AS WELL, MAYBE THAT IN AND OF ITSELF DEFEATED THE PURPOSE OF EVEN GOING THROUGH THIS EXERCISE.
BUT IN LOOKING AT THAT MORE CAREFULLY, WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE NEED TO HAVE LANGUAGE IN THE CODE THAT TALKS ABOUT HOW, YOU KNOW, ALLOWS FOR SHIPPING CONTAINERS IN AGRICULTURE, SET SOME, UH, YOU KNOW, GROUND RULES OF HOW THEY'RE USED.
SO WE PUT MORE EMPHASIS ON THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS FOR ACTIVE AGRICULTURE.
I THINK THAT ONE OF THE NUMBER ONE THINGS THAT WAS CONCERNS BROUGHT UP BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IF WE MAKE THE DEFINITION TOO BROAD, THEN PEOPLE WILL JUST SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, I HAVE A LITTLE GUARD IN MY BACKYARD.
I'M, YOU KNOW, I WANNA PUT A BUNCH OF SHIPPING CONTAINERS BACK THERE.
AND THOSE ARE THE TYPE OF THINGS WORKING WITH OUR CODE ENFORCEMENT THAT THEY'RE HAVING TO DEAL WITH, YOU KNOW, WITH NEIGHBORS COMPLAINING.
SO WE, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE RESTRICTING THAT TYPE OF MISUSE OF THIS, BUT MAKING IT AS EASY TO USE FOR FARMERS AS POSSIBLE.
AND SO WE PUT SOME LANGUAGE IN HERE TO, UM, BOLSTER THIS IDEA OF ACTIVE AGRICULTURE.
UM, THERE ARE, AND THIS IS OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, AS THIS MOVES FORWARD THROUGH COUNCIL, IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS MADE BY THE AGRICULTURE COMMUNITY IN BEAUFORT COUNTY, WE'RE CERTAINLY WILLING TO ENTERTAIN, YOU KNOW, BUT RIGHT NOW WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT ARE DIFFERENT TYPES OF WAYS OF SHOWING THAT, THAT SOMEBODY HAS AN ACTIVE AGRICULTURAL OPERATION AND THAT'S LISTED AS IT COULD BE ANY ONE OF THESE, A COPY OF SCHEDULE F OF A RECENT INCOME TAX RETURN, UM, AN APPROVED NON TIMBERLAND AG TAX EXEMPTION BY BEAUFORT COUNTY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, USDA FARM NUMBER OR SOUTH CAROLINA TAX EXEMPTION CARD, THEY CALL THE SKATE CARD.
THESE ARE MEASURABLE THINGS AND IT KIND OF SHOWS THAT SOMEBODY, IF THEY HAVE ONE OF THESE THAT THEY HAVE, YOU KNOW, IT, AND IT'S NOT A HUGE BARRIER TO GET THESE, BUT IT'S ENOUGH TO KIND OF SHOW SOMEBODY WHO IS, YOU KNOW, SERIOUSLY CON YOU KNOW, INTO AGRICULTURE VERSUS SOMEBODY WHO MIGHT BE, YOU KNOW, THE CONCERN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS SOMEBODY'S TRYING TO BYPASS THE REQUIREMENT, SAY, OH YEAH, I HAVE A FARM.
AND SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE PUT EMPHASIS THERE.
THE OTHER RESTRICTIONS, UM, ARE ARE FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
UM, NOT STACKING SHIPPING CONTAINERS.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE SAW COMMON IN A LOT OF ORDINANCES AROUND THE COUNTRY.
UM, SHIPPING CONTAINERS SHALL NOT BE USED AS LIVING QUARTERS.
NO LIVESTOCK NOR PETS MAY BE STORED IN CONTAINERS THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE STATE.
UH, YOU KNOW, BASICALLY THE, THE PROVISIONS THE STATE HAS FOR AGRICULTURAL STRUCTURES, THIS IS THE PLANNING COMMISSION REALLY EMPHASIZED STORAGE OF HAZARDOUS WASTE, EXPLOSIVES, FLAMMABLES TOXIC MATERIALS WITHOUT PROPER VENTILATION.
SHIPPING CONTAINERS THAT HAVE, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A 50 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, 200 FOOT FROM RESIDENTIAL, AND ALSO FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY AND BE SCREENED FROM VIEW.
AND SO THAT IS WHAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD.
AND I GUESS JUST A REMINDER, THE WAY OUR LAW READS CURRENTLY, SHIPPING CONTAINERS ARE NOT PERMITTED AS STRUCTURES.
WHAT THIS WILL ALLOW IS FOR THEM TO BE PERMITTED FOR AGRICULTURE.
AND ONE OF THE BIG THINGS THAT WE TOOK INTO ACCOUNT IS, UM, AGRICULTURE IS ONE OF THE IMPORTANT GOALS IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BOTH AS AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND A CULTURAL, YOU KNOW, OUR CULTURAL, UM, RESOURCES CHAPTER.
AND SO REMOVAL OF, UH, REGULATORY BARRIERS TO SUPPORT AGRICULTURE IS ONE OF THE GOALS IN THE COMP PLAN.
AND SO WE BELIEVE IT STAFF THAT, THAT THIS PROVISION AND THESE AMENDMENTS, UM, MEET THOSE GOALS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO WITH THAT, I'LL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, ANY QUESTION HERE, MR. I HAVE TO GIVE THE REASONS WHY WE'RE GOING TO SUPPORT THIS.
I MOVE THAT WE GRANT THE REQUEST FOR THE TEXT AMENDMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
[00:50:01]
CONSISTENT WITH GOLD'S OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.TWO, IT IS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH ANY PROVISION OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE OR THE CODE OF ORATE.
IT IS NOT REQUIRED BY CHANGED CONDITIONS.
IT DOES ADDRESS A DEMONSTRATED COMMUNITY NEED.
IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE ZONES IN THIS DEVELOPMENT CODE.
NUMBER SIX, IT WOULD RESULT IN A LOGICAL AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT PATTERN.
AND SEVEN, IT WOULD NOT RESULT IN AN IN END RESULT IN ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT.
UM, MRS. UM, HOWARD, ARE YOU SECONDING THAT? YES, I'LL SECOND THAT.
SO IT'S BEEN PROPERTY MOTION AND SECOND IS NOW THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR DISCUSSION.
UM, ANY DISCUSSION ON THE MATTER? I, GO AHEAD.
YOU MENTIONED CODE ENFORCEMENT AND I'M, I'M ASSUMING IF LIKE A NEIGHBOR COMPLAINED ABOUT THEY WOULD CODE ENFORCEMENT IF THEY DIDN'T FIT THESE CRITERIA, THAT'S WHERE THEY COULD SHUT SOMETHING DOWN IF IT, YEAH.
IF THEY WERE, HAD TO PUT CHICKENS IN THEIR CONTAINER, YOU KNOW, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
YEAH, THEY WOULD GO OUT AND INVESTIGATE AND THEN, OKAY.
SO THERE'S A WAY TO A WAY TO, UM, GOVERN IT, SO TO SPEAK.
AND THIS IS IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA? OFFORD, CORRECT? YES.
SO IT'S NOT GONNA BE IN THE CITY.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, UM, I I WOULD SAY THAT, UM, THERE WERE SOME MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
IT VOTED SIX ZERO TO, TO, TO MOVE THIS FORWARD, UM, WANTED TO DO, UM, UM, HOME GARDENING.
AND BASICALLY THIS, THEY, THEY, THE COMMITTEE SAID NO, UM, AND IT SHOULD BE A BONAFIDE FARMER, UM, AT THIS TIME.
UM, SO THAT'S WHAT WE BRINGING FORWARD.
UM, AND I WOULD TELL YOU THAT, UM, THIS ORDINANCE WOULD MAKE, IF WE PASSED THIS, THIS ORDINANCE WOULD ACTUALLY MAKE FARMERS ON US.
SO, UM, SOME OF THE BEST LETTUCE I'VE HAD, UH, IS BEING PRODUCED IN A CONTAINER.
UM, SO LET'S MAKE OUR FARMERS HONEST AND SUPPORT THEM IN THIS EFFORT AND STUFF.
UM, ANY MORE QUESTIONS ON THIS AT THIS TIME? CAN WE, UM, PASS THIS ON WITHOUT ANY OBJECTION? OKAY.
[9.c. An Ordinance amending the zoning map for 1.4 acres (r300 012 000 0129 0000, r300 012 000 047a 0000) from T2R to T2RC (FISCAL IMPACT: n/a) - Robert Merchant]
I'M UP AGAIN.WELL, UM, LET ME FIND MY AGENDA AND YOU MOVE FORWARD, SIR.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FOR 1.4 ACRES AND THE PARCEL NUMBERS ARE HERE, UM, FROM T TWO R TO TRT TWO RC.
THIS PROPERTY IS, UM, AT THE JUNCTION OF, UH, SEASIDE ROAD AND HIGHWAY, UM, 21 OF SEA ISLAND PARKWAY.
SO MR. MERICK, YOU ON? OH NO, I NEED A MOTION.
WELL, I THINK AS, AS YOU MENTIONED, MR. CHAIRMAN, THERE IS CURRENTLY A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT LOCATED AT SEA ISLAND PARKWAY AT THE INTERSECTION OF SEA ISLAND PARKWAY, SEASIDE AND COFFIN POINT ROAD.
AND THERE IS, UM, SEVERAL COMMERCIAL USES IN THIS AREA.
THERE'S A RESTAURANT, AND THIS IS, UH, SO WE WERE APPROACH, SO THAT'S AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL AREA, BASICALLY SURROUNDED BY T TWO RURAL.
WE WERE APPROACHED BY AN OWNER OF THREE SMALL PARCELS, UH, LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF WARDEN WARD'S LANDING ROAD IN SEATTLE PARKWAY ABOUT ADDING THOSE PARCELS TO THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.
UM, SEVERAL THINGS, UM, TO, TO KEEP IN MIND IS IN ONE OF THOSE PARCELS, THERE'S AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL OR NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDING THAT'S BEEN THERE SINCE THE EIGHTIES.
SO, YOU KNOW, THERE IS AN EXISTING USE THAT IS MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMERCIAL ZONING THAN THE CURRENT T TWO RURAL.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION AS STAFF.
THEY ORIGINALLY PROPOSED, UM, BRINGING THIS FORWARD TO MATCH THAT C FOUR COMMUNITY CENTER MIXED USE.
THIS CREATED A LITTLE BIT OF A, A STRUGGLE AT THE STAFF LEVEL BECAUSE
[00:55:01]
WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOESN'T SUPPORT THAT ZONING DISTRICT AT THAT LOCATION.AND IT ALSO IS A BIT OUTTA PROPORTION FOR WHERE IT'S LOCATED IN THE COUNTY, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ALREADY ZONED THAT WAY.
C FOUR, UM, COMMUNITY CENTER MIXED USE IS MORE ATTUNED TO LIKE A, UM, UH, COMMUNITY BASED COMMERCIAL CENTER, MAYBE ANCHORED BY A GROCERY STORE.
AND IT ALLOWS FOR MULTIFAMILY UP TO 12 UNITS PER ACRE.
AND THIS IS AN AREA THAT IS VERY FAR FROM ANY, UM, SEWER SERVICE THAT WOULD SUPPORT THOSE KIND OF USES.
SO IT'S REALLY, IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
SO WHAT WE RECOMMENDED THAT THE APPLICANT DO, AND WE ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPORT THIS AS WELL, WAS THAT TO ZONE THOSE THREE PARCELS, T TWO RURAL CENTER, WHICH IS A MIXED USE DISTRICT THAT HAS A LOT OF COMMERCIAL AND SERVICE USES PERMITTED IN IT, BUT IT IS AT A SCALE THAT IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH OUR RURAL AREAS.
YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT MULTIFAMILY OR DIFFERENT TYPES OF USES THAT ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY THE, THE RURAL NATURE OF THIS SITE.
AND SO THAT IS WHAT THEY'RE RECOMMENDING TO DO IS TO ADD THESE THREE PARCELS, UM, KIND OF AS A STEP DOWN FROM WHAT'S THERE CURRENTLY.
UM, IT'S ALSO STAFF'S POSITION, ALTHOUGH WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING IT BE DONE AT THIS TIME, THAT EVENTUALLY THESE PARCELS SHOULD, THE, THE, THEIR ORANGE ON THE MAP THAT ARE ZONED, UM, C FOUR CCMU SHOULD PROBABLY BE ZONED T TWO RURAL CENTER AS WELL.
I MEAN, THAT WOULD STILL ALLOW THE USES THAT ARE IN THOSE AREAS, BUT WOULDN'T INVITE USES OR INTENSITY THAT CAN'T BE SUPPORTED BY THE, UM, INFRASTRUCTURE IN THAT AREA.
SO THAT IS, UM, BASICALLY WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED.
UM, THE APPLICANT IS HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THEM, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS, UM, YOU KNOW, I GUESS THIS IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'LL GO THROUGH OR, OR, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON, ON, ON YOUR MOTION.
BUT WE BELIEVE THAT THIS IS, UM, MEETS THE GOALS.
IT'S, IT'S MORE, UM, CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
I THINK THE, UM, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO MATCH WHAT IS ON THE GROUND.
UH, THAT'S FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE, THE T FOUR T TWO RURAL CENTER, BUT ALSO THE FACT THAT THERE IS A EXISTING NON-CONFORMING BUILDING THERE, WHICH WILL, YOU KNOW, HAS MUCH MORE LIFE IN IT AND WILL CONTINUE TO PRESENT ISSUES AS THE OWNER TRIES TO SELL THAT OR DEVELOP THAT BUILDING.
AND THE LIMITATIONS THAT RURAL PLACES ON IT.
AND I, IT IS FOR THOSE REASONS PRIMARILY.
AND THEN ALSO THAT THIS IS A STEP DOWN FROM THE C FOUR.
WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING USES.
SO FOR THOSE REASONS, UM, STAFF AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONING AMENDMENT.
UM, BEFORE I GET A MOTION, UM, DOES THE APPLICANT WANNA MAKE A STATEMENT? UM, ALL YOU'RE GONNA DO IS PROLONG THIS MEETING, BUT GO AHEAD,
I JUST WANTED TO JUST GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION.
I KNOW MR. CHAIRMAN, KEVIN DUKES ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
YOU WERE AT OUR, AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
I JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHO MY CLIENT IS.
UM, JUST SO YOU KNOW, PRIMARILY WE HAVE A PRESENTATION.
UH, I WANNA BE COGNIZANT OF, UH, YOUR REQUEST FOR A QUICK MEETING.
SO, UM, BUT MY CLIENT'S CE BORNE, UH, COMPANY HAS BEEN IN BUSINESS, IT'S FAMILY BUSINESS, BEEN IN BUSINESS IN SOUTH CAROLINA FOR ABOUT 120 YEARS.
THEY'VE BEEN DOING BUSINESS IN BEAUFORT COUNTY AND HAD A LOCATION HERE SINCE 1999.
UH, THEY ARE A ROOFING CONTRACTOR, UH, AND THEY DO ALL SORTS OF ROOFINGS.
BUT IMPORTANTLY, I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THEY'VE DONE A LOT OF BUSINESS WITH BEAUFORT COUNTY, WITH BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOLS, AND THEY ACTUALLY HAVE MAINTAINED A MAINTENANCE AND SERVICE CONTRACT WITH BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOLS SINCE 2008.
AND SO I THINK THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR A COUPLE REASONS.
ONE IS THEY'RE A TRUSTED ENTITY.
UH, TWO, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ACTUALLY STATES THAT WE WANT TO, UH, BENEFIT THOSE BUSINESSES, WHICH ARE IN EXISTENCE HERE, WHICH PROVIDE, UH, SUPPORT TO OUR COMMUNITY.
AND, AND FRANKLY, CE BORN HAS, AND THEY WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO, AND THIS WILL BE A MORE PERMANENT LOCATION THAN THEY'VE HAD BEFORE.
THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THAT THIS IS REALLY ONLY ONE OF TWO LOCATIONS FOR ANY SORT OF COMMERCIAL GROWTH DESIGNATED, UH, UNDER THE, UH, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
ONE BEING THE CORNERS COMMUNITY AND THE OTHER ONE BEING THESE
[01:00:01]
CROSSROADS HERE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.AND SO THIS IS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY, I THINK, TO HAVE THE MEASURED GROWTH THAT BEAUFORT COUNTY IS ALWAYS LOOKING FOR.
THIS IS AN OFFICE BUILDING WITH SOME SPACE IN THE BACK, MAYBE SOME ROLL UP DOORS WHERE MATERIALS COULD BE STORED INSIDE.
THERE MAY BE A LAY DOWN YARD, BUT IT'S, IT'S VERY SMALL.
AND, AND I DID WANT TO, UH, ALSO POINT OUT THAT THERE'S A SLIDE IN THERE IN THE RESPONSIBLE GROWTH SECTION WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THE TAX REVENUE.
THE CURRENT TAX REVENUE IS $572 A YEAR FROM THE, THESE PARCELS.
THIS PARCEL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DEVELOPING WITH $272 GOING TO SCHOOLS FUTURE REVENUE BASED ON COMPLETED CONSTRUCTION.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WILL BE, BUT THAT WOULD GIVE YOU 11,000 $113 WITH 5,300 GOING TO SCHOOLS BECAUSE THIS IS A 10.5% RATE AS A BUSINESS.
AND SO, UH, THAT'S THE, THE BENEFIT FORECAST IS OVER $10,500 WITH OVER 5,000 GOING TO SCHOOLS.
AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT VERY MEASURED MINIMAL IMPACT AND DEVELOPMENT, THIS IS A USE THAT IS THE SAME THAT IS OCCURRED BETWEEN WHAT IS EXISTING AND WHAT IS JUST ACROSS THE ROAD.
THIS MINIMAL, UH, USE AND SAME TYPE OF USE.
AND SO THAT, THAT SHOWS THE KIND OF THE MEASURED GROWTH THAT QUITE FRANKLY WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING FOR TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE ADDITIONAL REVENUES WITH VERY, UH, MINIMAL AND CONSISTENT GROWTH.
I PUT, LIKE I SAID, PUT TOGETHER A PRESENTATION.
I'M HAPPY TO TALK MORE ABOUT THE LOCATION, WHAT IT CURRENTLY LOOKS LIKE.
THERE'S SOME PICTURES OF WHAT THE CURRENT LOCATION LOOKS LIKE, BUT WE CAN ALSO, UH, SAVE THAT MORE FOR FULL COUNSEL IF YOU WISH.
UM, ANY QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT TO, UH, GIVE THE REASONS WHY WE WANT TO APPROVE THIS? UM, I MOVE THAT WE GRANT THE REQUEST FOR REZONING FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
THE REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE CODE.
IT IS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH PROVISIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT CODE OR OUR CODE OF ORDINANCE.
IT IS NOT REQUIRED BY CHANGE CONDITIONS.
IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING AND PROPOSED USE OF LAND SURROUNDING THIS LAND.
IT WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NEARBY LAND.
IT WOULD RESULT IN LOGICAL AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS.
IT WOULD NOT RESULT IN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND IT WOULD RESULT IN DEVELOPMENT THAT IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY PUBLIC FACILITIES.
IS THERE A SECOND? I SECOND MM-HMM
UH, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION CAN BE PASSED ON, UM, WITHOUT ANY OBJECTION, SO BE IT THIS PAST.
[9.d. A Resolution authorizing the county administrator to execute a memorandum of agreement to engage in discussions about improvements and usage of the Battle of Port Royal Island site, subject to appropriate approval and securing of funding (FISCAL IMPACT: Unknown) - Monica Main, Deputy County Attorney; Stefanie Nagid, Director of Land Preservation; and Beaufort County 250th Commission]
MOVING AGENDA TO NUMBER B, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT TO ENGAGE IN DISCUSSION ABOUT IMPROVEMENTS AND USAGE OF THE BATTLE OF PORT ROY ISLANDS.APPROPRIATE, UH, APPROVAL AND, UH, SECURING THE FUNDS.
AND, UH, MONICA MAINS UP THERE.
IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOTION AND SECONDED.
GO STAFF IS SEEKING COMMITTEES ADVICE GO FORWARD WITH AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENGAGE IN, CONTINUED TO IMPROVE, UM, AND USE THE BATTLE OF PORT, WHICH IS THE FORMER HARRIS PILLOW TRACK, PARKLET, UH, BILL PARK.
AND THAT'S PENDING, UH, APPROVAL.
AND, UM, JUST A BIT ABOUT THE LOCATION.
I SET THE PROMPT FROM STATION.
UM, AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT THIS IS THE, THE BATTLE OF
UM, IT ALSO IS BEING ACROSS THE AIR STATION IS SUBJECT TO ELEVATED NOISE AND INCREASED AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT POTENTIAL.
SO IT'S SUBJECT TO CONSERVATION, A CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND RESTRICTIVE EASEMENT, WHICH IS WHY I'M HERE FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT.
SO, UM, THE RESTRICTIVE EASEMENT IS PERMITS THE, UM, DEVELOPMENT THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE MISSION OF THE INSTALLATION AND PART OF THE RESTRICTIVE EASEMENT REQUIRES A DATE ON THE PROPERTY.
AND IT ALSO LIMITS THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO CAN BE ON THE PROPERTY TO 20 PEOPLE PER DAY, NOT PER HOUR, PER DAY.
UM, AND IT ALSO LIMITS ANY EVENTS THAT WOULD EXCEED 20 PEOPLE, WHICH IS ALLOWED AT TIMES IF THEY GIVE APPROVAL WITH 60 DAYS NOTICE.
[01:05:01]
TO ANY OPERATIONAL HAZARDS OR NEEDS, THEY CAN CANCEL IT IF NEED BE.SO WE HAVE DRAFTED, THANK YOU.
WE HAVE DRAFTED A, UM, A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT THAT WOULD ALLOW THE COUNTY TO, UM, MOVE FORWARD WITH DISCUSSIONS ABOUT CREATING A PASSIVE PARK IN THAT LOCATION.
UM, THE 250TH COMMISSION COULD THINK THAT THIS IS A, A USEFUL ASSET TO THE COMMUNITY AND SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE FOR THE COUNTY TO, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.
UM, AND THEY HAVE, UM, SOME DISAGREEMENTS ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF THE, UH, MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT.
THEY, AND THAT IS YOUR PACKET.
SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT THEY SAID THAT THEY WANTED DIFFERENT SPEND AS IT'S WRITTEN.
UM, BUT WE WANT TO KNOW IF THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE COMMITTEE AND ULTIMATELY COUNSEL COUNCIL IS INTERESTED IN US SPENDING TIME, RESOURCES, AND POTENTIALLY FUNDING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.
AND I KNOW THAT THEY PROBABLY WANNA EXPLAIN TO YOU WHY THEY THINK THAT YOU SHOULD DO THAT.
SO I WAS GONNA GIVE THEM A MOMENT TO, TO COME UP HERE AND EXPLAIN IT.
PUT THE ADDEND CHAIRMAN, MAD VICE CHAIRMAN.
I WAS, I WAS ABOUT TO DO THAT, BUT MY NAME IS RICH THOMAS.
UH, I HAVE THE PLEASURE CURRENTLY OF SERVING AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BEAUFORT COUNTY TWO 50 COMMITTEE.
AND BEFORE I START OFF, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO THANK Y'ALL FOR YOUR PRIOR SUPPORT GOING BACK TO 2022 BY ENACTING US INTO BEING, BY A RESOLUTION AT THAT TIME.
ALSO BY, UH, SUPPORTING US IN 2026 EARLIER BY PROCLAMATION AND RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PORT ROYAL ISLAND BATTLEFIELD SITE AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF BUFORT COUNTY'S PARTICIPATING IN THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION DURING THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY CYCLE, WHICH IN OUR CASE IN BUFORT COUNTY, GOES FROM 1772 TO 1783, OR IN OUR MODERN TIMES 2022 TO 2033.
UM, I HAVE PASSED OUT, OR ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES HAS PASSED OUT A PACKET OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE BATTLEFIELD SITE.
AND I APOLOGIZE TO THOSE WHO ARE ATTENDING VIRTUALLY THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN FRONT OF YOU AT THE PRESENT TIME TO, UH, EXAMINE.
UH, WE WERE TOLD THAT WE WERE SUBMITTED OUR REQUEST TO APPEAR BEFORE YOU TODAY, UH, TOO LATE FOR THAT, UH, INFORMATION TO MAKE THE PACKET.
BUT WE WILL LEAVE A NUMBER OF THOSE PACKETS BEHIND SO THAT THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE NOT PRESENT CAN EXAMINE THEM LATER ON.
THE PACKET CONSISTS OF AN ENLARGED, UH, DIAGRAM OF THE PROPOSED CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN FOR WHAT WOULD BE A COUNTY BATTLEFIELD PARK AT THE GRAYS HILL LOCATION NEAR THE MARINE CORPS AIR STATION BEAUFORT.
UH, IT IS A REVOLUTIONARY WAR BATTLE THAT OCCURRED IN FEBRUARY 3RD, 1779.
UH, THE PROJECT HAS HAD A LONG GENESIS EVOLUTION SINCE THE SOUTH CAROLINA BATTLEGROUND TRUST, UH, ENTERED INTO A HISTORIC CONSERVATION EASEMENT WITH BUFORT COUNTY AND WITH THE MARINE CORPS AIR STATION.
UH, FOLLOWING THAT AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD TRUST, A COMMISSIONED A STUDY AND A REPORT THAT WAS PRODUCED FROM 2017 TO 2020.
SHORTLY FOLLOWING THAT, THE, THE BATTLEFIELD SITE WAS NAMED TO BE ON THE LIBERTY TRAIL, WHICH IS A PROJECT THAT'S A PARTNERSHIP OF THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, THE AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD TRUST, THE SOUTH CAROLINA BATTLEGROUND PRESERVATION TRUST, UH, THE SOUTH CAROLINA TWO 50, UH, MISSION AND AREAS OF FOCUS EMPHASIZE HISTORIC PRESERVATION AS ONE OF THE KEY FOUR PILLARS OF THE COMMITTEE'S MISSION.
UM, WE FORMED A BATTLEFIELD PRESENTATION PRESERVATION COMMITTEE, EXCUSE ME, UH, IN 2025.
AND THAT BEGAN LOOKING INTO THE PLANNING FOR THE POTENTIAL FOR A BATTLEFIELD PARK TO BE LOCATED ON THE HALLOWED GROUND AT GRACE HILL.
SINCE THEN, WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF MEETINGS VISITATIONS TO THE SITE.
WE COMMISSIONED KEN SIMMONS AND ASSOCIATES OF COLUMBIA TO PRODUCE A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN.
WE'VE HAD SOME RECOVERY OF ARTIFACTS THAT WERE EXCAVATED FROM THE SITE BACK AT THE TIME.
THAT STUDY AND REPORT WAS DONE BY THE AMERICAN BATTLEFIELD TRUST, AND THEN WE ENTERED INTO PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COUNTY AND COUNTY STAFF ABOUT, UH, ENTERING INTO AN AGREEMENT TO UNDERTAKE THE PROJECT, WHICH MEANT WE NEEDED TO HAVE THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT DRAFTED.
AND THAT IS WHAT'S BROUGHT TO YOU TODAY FOR, UM, YOUR APPROVAL TO GO FORWARD, ALLOWING US TO ENTER INTO FORMAL DISCUSSIONS ON THAT.
[01:10:01]
DOCUMENT THAT YOU HAVE ON THAT DECK IS A PLAN THAT ACTUALLY SHOWS WHY THIS, UH, LOCATION AND WHY THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION OF THE LOCATION IS NOT NECESSARILY IDEAL FOR THE BATTLEFIELD BAR.UM, YOU CAN SEE ON THAT PLAN THE OUTLINE OF THE, UH, PROPERTY IN WHITE.
YOU CAN SEE THE CURRENT OLD HARRIS PILLOW FACTORY STRUCTURE, AND YOU CAN NOTICE FAIRLY EASILY THAT IT LIES RIGHT BETWEEN THE RED DOTTED LINES AT THE NORTH, UH, THE UPPER PORTION OF THIS DIAGRAM AND THE BLUE DOTTED LINES TO THE BOTTOM.
THE BLUE DOTTED LINES REPRESENT THE PATRIOT BATTLE LINE THAT HAD BEEN FORMED WHEN GENERAL WILLIAM MOULTRIE BROUGHT ABOUT 300 MILITIAMEN AND A HANDFUL OF CONTINENTALS, AS YOU PUT IT, MOSTLY ISTS TO THAT SITE.
THEY ARRIVED SHORTLY BEFORE THE BRITISH WHO WERE APPROACHING FROM THE OBVI OPPOSITE DIRECTION ARRIVED.
CANNONS WERE PLACED BY THE BRITISH, THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE BATTLEFIELD, AND BY THE PATRIOTS AT THE SOUTHERN LINE.
THOSE CANNONS OPENED THE BATTLE.
THE THIRD SHOT FROM THE PATRIOT CANNONS KNOCKED OUT THE SINGLE BRITISH CANNON THAT WAS IN THE BATTLE, AND THE REST OF THE FIGHTING TOOK PLACE WITH SMALL ARMS, FIRE, AND BAYONETS ON THE PART OF THE BRITISH.
AFTER ABOUT 45 MINUTES OF FIGHTING, UM, THOSE SIDES WERE RUNNING OUT OF AMMUNITION.
UH, GENERAL REE HAD GIVEN THE PRELIMINARY ORDER TO PREPARE FOR WITHDRAWAL TO THE PATRIOT TROOPS.
THE BRITISH, AT THE SAME TIME WERE NOTED TO BE LEAVING THEIR POSITIONS AND STARTING TO MOVE BACK ACROSS THE CAUSEWAY TO RETREAT TO THEIR SHIPS IN LAUREL BAY AND RETURN BACK TO SAVANNAH.
THIS BATTLE WAS A VERY SIGNIFICANT BATTLE FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.
THE NEXT SHEET IN THE DECK TALKS ABOUT THE HIGHLIGHTS.
IT WAS A BRITISH ATTEMPT TO DIVERT THE CONTINENTAL ARMY FROM BENJAMIN LINCOLN, SENDING HIS MEN TO COUNTER THE BRITISH OFFENSIVE.
AT THE SAME TIME WAS GOING ON TO CAPTURE AUGUSTA.
IT MARKED THE FIRST RETURN OF THE BRITISH ARMY TO SOUTH CAROLINA SINCE THE 1776 BATTLE OF SULLIVAN'S ISLAND, WHICH WAS A NOTABLE PATRIOT VICTORY, AND IS THE SUBJECT OF THE CELEBRATION TODAY OF CAROLINA DAY.
IT MARKED THE FIRST VICTORY OF PATRIOT MILITIA VERSUS BRITISH REGULARS IN THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR IN SOUTH CAROLINA.
AND WHEN WORD OF THAT VICTORY REACHED GENERAL WASHINGTON IN NEW JERSEY, LATER THAT MONTH, IT GAVE HIM RENEWED, UH, CONFIDENCE TO REBUILD THE NORTHERN ARMIES TO CONTINUE THE FIGHT.
IT MARKED THE FIRST TIME THAT MILITIA MEN HAD BEATEN THE BEST SOLDIERS THE BRITISH ARMY COULD OFFER.
IT'S THE ONLY REVOLUTIONARY WAR BATTLE IN THE ENTIRE WAR WHERE TWO SIGNERS OF DECLARATION FOUGHT.
THEY WERE BOTH ARTILLERY COMMANDERS FOR THE CONTINENTAL MEN WHO WERE PART OF THE PATRIOT FORCES THAT MOULTRIE HAD IT.
WITH THOSE TWO CANNONS ON THE OLD SHELL ROAD AT GRACE HILL, IT REPRESENTED THE TREMENDOUS DIVERSITY OF THE CHARACTERIZED BEAUFORT DISTRICT MILITIA THROUGHOUT THE WAR, SOCIAL, RACIAL AND ETHIC DIVERSITY ABOUNDED.
AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE BATTLE WAS THAT IT DELAYED THE OCCUPATION OF BUFORT FOR A FULL EIGHT MONTHS, DEPRIVING THE ENGLISH OF A MUCH NEEDED FORWARD OPERATING BASE FROM WHICH THEY COULD CONTINUE THEIR CAMPAIGNS TO CAPTURE CHARLESTON.
THE NEXT, UH, SHEET IN THE DECK TALKS ABOUT THE ELEMENTS OF DIVERSITY THAT WERE REPRESENTED IN THAT BATTLE.
WE HAVE, UH, TWO CONFIRMED DOCUMENTED AFRICAN-AMERICAN SOLDIERS WHO FOUGHT SEVEN ADDITIONAL AFRICAN-AMERICAN SOLDIERS WITH A HIGH DEGREE OF CONFIDENCE, AND THEIR NAMES ARE ON THAT DOCUMENT.
THERE ARE FIVE ADDITIONAL AFRICAN-AMERICAN SOLDIERS WHO WERE THOUGHT TO HAVE BEEN THE PRESENT AT THE BATTLE WITH A VERY HIGH DEGREE OF PROBABILITY.
THAT MEANS WE HAD A TOTAL OF 14.
THERE WERE 22 DOCUMENTED JEWISH AMERICAN SOLDIERS PRESENT AT THE BATTLE.
THEIR NAMES ARE, MOST OF THE NAMES THAT ARE CONFIRMED WITH COMPLETE CONFIDENCE ARE ON THE SHEET THAT YOU HAVE.
THERE WERE SOME ENTERS OF THE DECLARATION.
EDWARD RUTLEDGE AND THOMAS HAYWARD JR.
BOTH ARTILLERY COMMANDERS OF THOSE TWO CONTINENTAL PIECES.
HAYWARD WAS WOUNDED IN THE BATTLE AND HIS COMMANDER, WHO WAS A COLONEL, HAD TO TAKE OVER.
THERE WERE MEMBERS OF PROMINENT BEAUFORT FAMILIES AS WELL, THE BARNWELLS, THE BULLS, SSUR, PETRO BILL JOINERS,
AND THEN THERE WERE HUNDREDS OF FARMERS, MERCHANTS, TRADESMEN, WATERMEN, AND OTHERS.
IT IS A VERY STRONG INTENT OF OURS TO COMMEMORATE THAT DIVERSITY BECAUSE IT'S VERY NOTABLE FOR THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR UNITS IN SOUTH CAROLINA TO HAVE THAT DEGREE OF DIVERSITY PRESENT IN A BATTLE SITE AND ON THE BATTLEFIELD, WE, UH, INTEND TO COMMEMORATE THAT THROUGH MONUMENTS AND INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE.
ON THE SHEETS ON YOUR DECK, YOU HAVE THE MONUMENTS THAT ARE, WE ARE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW, OR AT LEAST THE CONTENT POINTS FOR THOSE MONUMENTS.
AND ALSO ON THE INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE, YOU HAVE THE SAME INTENT REPRESENTED.
I'M NOT GONNA TAKE THE TIME IN, IN, UH, THE OBSERVATION
[01:15:01]
OF YOUR REQUEST FOR BREVITY ON THE PRESENTATION.UM, BUT WHAT THE PROJECT IS GONNA ENTAIL IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT WOULD NORMALLY BE PART OF ANY HISTORIC PRESERVATION, LAND PLANNING AND, UH, IMPROVEMENT, UH, PROJECT.
AND THOSE PIECES OF THE PROJECT, I'VE TRIED TO BREAK DOWN ON THE FOLLOWING SHEET TO COLOR CODE THEM, UH, TRYING TO ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS THAT MONICA HAD ASKED US ABOUT WHAT FUNDING MIGHT BE EXPECTED FROM THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE PART, ANY FUNDING THAT WE PROVIDE IS GOING TO BE GRANT BASED, AND THE GRANT WILL COVER CERTAIN KINDS OF EXPENSES AND NOT OTHERS.
SO THE ONES THAT YOU SEE ON THIS CHART, I APOLOGIZE IF ANYBODY'S COLORBLIND, THAT'S NOT GONNA MAKE THIS EASY.
BUT THE UH, CHART IS BROKEN DOWN ON THE RED.
THOSE ARE SHARED FUNDING POSSIBLE, UH, PARTS OF THIS PROJECT.
IN OTHER WORDS, ON THE SITE INVENTORY ONE, THE ARCHEOLOGY AND CADAVER STUDIES COULD BE TOTALLY FUNDED BY THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR ORGANIZATIONS AND THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR ORGANIZATIONS COULD PARTICIPATE IN THE FUNDING OF THE ENGINEERING STUDIES TREE AND TOPO STUDIES.
UH, WHAT IS IN BLUE, OUR SOLE FUNDING BY REVOLUTIONARY WAR ORGANIZATIONS.
AND WHAT YOU SEE IN GREEN, IT WOULD BE THE COUNTY FUNDING, UH, NEEDS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO COMPLETE THIS PROJECT.
THE NEXT SHEET JUST IS A WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THOSE CALL CODES MEAN, AND YOU CAN GO THROUGH THAT AT YOUR LEISURE LATER IF YOU CHOOSE.
AND REALLY, THE FINAL COMMENT ON THE DECK IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR FROM, UH, THIS COMMITTEE AND COUNCIL.
AND BASICALLY IT'S THE APPROVAL FROM NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE TO TAKE COUNCIL AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION TO PROCEED WITH CONVERSATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS ABOUT UNDERTAKING THIS PROJECT.
AND YOU CAN READ THE OTHER THINGS DOWN THERE.
IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW OR ANY QUESTIONS THAT APPLY NOT ON THIS, I'D BE HAPPY.
UM, HE'S OPENING UP, MR. THOMAS IS OPENING UP A QUESTION.
THE BIGGEST QUESTION IS ONE THAT MONICA, YOU STATED, AND THAT IS YOU CAN HAVE NO MORE THAN 20 PEOPLE PER DAY.
HOW WOULD WE ENSURE THAT THAT IS BEING DONE? I'LL, I'LL LET THE EXPERT ANSWER QUESTION.
UM, THE IDEA THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE IS THAT WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE, SORRY, THIS IS NOT WORKING.
WE'LL HAVE TO HAVE A, UM, ONLINE RESERVATION SYSTEM, AND THEN THE GATES WILL BE TIED INTO THAT.
SO, UM, THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE HAS A SIMILAR THING FOR CAMPGROUNDS AND TIME DEN ENTRY AND THINGS LIKE THAT, WHERE YOU GO ONLINE, YOU RESERVE YOUR SLOT, YOU GET A CODE, YOU ENTER THE CODE, UM, AT THE GATE IN ORDER TO COME IN.
SO PART OF THAT ONLINE RESERVATION SYSTEM, WE HAVE HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN YOUR CAR, AND THEN ONCE IT HITS THE 20 PEOPLE PER DAY, THEN THERE ARE NO MORE RESERVATIONS.
UM, IN, IN INITIAL CONVERSATIONS WITH ADMINISTRATION, UM, IT, AND WITH, UM, MR. BEAL, UH, IT WAS THOUGHT THAT MAYBE THIS COULD BE SOMETHING WE COULD, UM, IMPLEMENT COUNTYWIDE AS FAR AS INCORPORATING IT INTO OUR COUNTY PARKS RECREATION DEPARTMENT, TALKING WITH THEM, WHAT THEIR NEEDS MIGHT BE FOR SOME KIND OF RESERVATION SYSTEM.
UM, SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE COULD UTILIZE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTY, NOT JUST THIS PROPERTY, BUT IT IS DEFINITELY, UM, UH, A NEW IT AND TECHNOLOGY THAT WE HAVE.
UH, IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, IF WE PASS THIS TO JUST, I, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE AT ALL OF APPROVING ANYTHING.
UM, IT'S AN UNFUNDED REQUIREMENT.
WE HAVE OTHER PATHS OF PARKS THAT DO NOT HAVE ADEQUATE FUNDING AT THIS TIME.
AND AGAIN, ONLY 20 PEOPLE COULD USE IT PER DAY.
UM, I, YOU KNOW, WE POINT, I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW MANY PEOPLE GO THERE PER DAY, BUT WE HAVE QUITE A BIT ACTUALLY AT, AT SOME OF THEM.
I HAVE FIVE OR THREE PARKS THAT I CURRENTLY HAVE VISITOR ACCOUNT DATA AT IN, UM, A PLACE LIKE WID POINT, I'M GETTING ROUGHLY A HUNDRED TO 200 PEOPLE A DAY.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD'VE GUESSED.
JUST BY SEEING THE CARS AND DRIVE BY.
SO, UM, I GUESS, UH, MY QUESTION IS, WHAT ARE WE DOING IF WE HAVE, IF WE VOTE FOR THIS, ARE WE JUST SAYING THAT WE'LL START DISCUSSIONS ABOUT, UH, MIRANDA? SO THE, THE MOA ITSELF, UH, AS PART OF THIS IS SIMPLY OUTLINING THE EXPECTATIONS OF THE PARTIES.
IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT IT IS NOT A, A CONTRACTOR AN OBLIGATION ON EITHER PARTY TO, UM, UNDERTAKE ANY TERMS. UM, IT, THIS IS REALLY A CLEARING A HURDLE TO GET US TO EXPENDING RESOURCES ON THE DESIGN, UM, NEGOTIATIONS.
AND JUST THE NEXT PAGE OF THINGS THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO BRING THIS FORWARD TO,
[01:20:01]
UH, COMMITTEE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL AS A CONCRETE PROJECT.I'M LOOKING AT THE GREEN, BLUE, RED PAGE.
SO AT THE END IN THE PACKET, IT HAS THE COST AT 3 35, 8 26, AND 45 CENTS.
IS THAT CORRECT? I'M LOOKING AT A, A SPREADSHEET HERE.
UM, THAT WAS THE FIGURE THAT WAS, UM, SENT BY THE TWO 50 COMMISSION.
I THINK EVERYTHING IS PRETTY CONCEPTUAL AT THIS TIME.
I DID ASK STEPHANIE TO WORK UP AN ESTIMATED COST OF THIS PROJECT BASED ON HER PRIOR PROJECTS AND WHAT SHE'S SEEN.
SO SHE DOES HAVE THAT INFORMATION HERE THAT WE
'CAUSE I WAS LOOKING AT 335,000.
UM, SO THE, THE ELEMENTS THAT THEY PROVIDED, UM, WERE, UM, A BIT UNDERESTIMATED, BUT ALSO DID NOT INCLUDE A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS THAT COME WHEN WE GET OUT A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.
UM, SO WE DO HAVE ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEYS.
IT'S A PHASE ONE, PHASE TWO SURVEY REPORT, WRITING SUBMITTAL TO SHIPPO SHIPPO COORDINATION AND APPROVAL.
UM, OUR CURRENT CONTRACT THAT WE'VE DONE AT CAMP ST.
SO I WOULD ASSUME IT'S A PROPERTY OF SIMILAR SIZE, SAME PROCESS.
IT WOULD PROBABLY BE THAT SINCE SIMILAR AMOUNT.
UM, THEY ARE REQUESTING THAT THE WAREHOUSE BE, UM, DEMOED.
AND SO BASED ON WHAT WE DID AT CAMP ST.
MARY'S, THAT'S ABOUT A $200,000 COST FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS PLAN TESTING, MEDIATION PLANNING AND DEMO AND DISPOSAL, UH, PLANNING, PLANNING AND PERMITTING COSTS.
UM, AS WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN RECENT PROJECTS, UM, WITH SEVERAL OTHER CONTRACTORS.
WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR FULL SCHEMATIC DESIGN, ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING, GEOTECH SURVEYING SERVICES FOR A NUMBER OF THINGS.
UM, THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT, PERMITTING SERVICES AND FEES, UH, BIDDING SERVICES, CONSTRUCTION OVERSIGHT AND REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES IS $300,000.
THE ONLINE RESERVATION SYSTEM IS SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T DONE, SO I JUST HAD TO KIND OF DO SOME GOOGLE SEARCHING ON THAT.
YOU'RE LOOKING AT ROUGHLY 50 TO $75,000 FOR A BESPOKE ONLINE SERVICE.
AND THEN THE CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS THAT INCLUDE GENERAL CONDITIONS, BONDS, INSURANCE, CONTRACTOR FEES, PERMITS, LICENSING, MOBILIZATIONS SITE WORK, UM, WHICH INCLUDES THE HORIZONTAL DEMO SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL, GRADING, SEATING, ASPHALT DRIVING, STRIP STRIPING BUMPER, SIGNAGE, GRASS PAVE THE GATES, MONUMENTS, MONUMENT SIGNS, UPLIGHTS, DIAMOND RAIL FENCING, CONCRETE WALKWAYS, EARTH AND TRAIL INTERPRETIVE SIGNS, BENCHES, WATER FOUNTAIN, TRASH, SKEPTICAL DOG WASTE STATIONS, FLAG POLES WITH LIGHTING, BOLLARDS, LANDSCAPING, OFFSITE DISPOSAL, AND SITE UTILITIES IS ROUGHLY 1.1 MILLION.
SO THE TOTAL COST IS AROUND SLIGHTLY UNDER 1.8 MILLION FOR EVERYTHING.
AND THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE EVERYTHING.
LIKE THERE'S, THERE ARE SOME LITTLE THINGS THAT I'VE NOT LEFT OUT.
I TRY TO CAPTURE THE BIGGEST COST, SO I'M GONNA ECHO WHAT MS. HOWARD SAID, AND I'VE SAID IT BEFORE.
WE HAVE PASSIVE PARKS THAT ARE NOT FULLY FUNDED OR DEVELOPED, AND WE'RE NOT GONNA ITEMIZE 'EM, BUT WE ALL KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.
I MEAN, IT'S A NICE IDEA, BUT I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF PUTTING FORTH ANOTHER PASSIVE PARK THAT WE RIGHT NOW DON'T HAVE 1.8 MILLION AND LORD KNOWS WHAT THE CONTINUING COSTS ARE.
SO I'M NOT SURE THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME TO BRING THIS UP.
I UNDERSTAND THE VALUE OF IT, BUT PASSIVE PARKS HAVE BEEN ONE OF MY ISSUES WHEN WE NEED RECREATIONAL PARKS AS WELL.
AND I'M NOT SURE THIS ONE'S GONNA HAVE A RETURN ON INVESTMENT.
UM, I ALSO JUST WANNA POINT OUT, DO WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE NCAS HERE AS WELL? IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE STATION? OH, LET HIM TALK.
I DO WANNA MAKE ONE CLARIFICATION FOR THE ENTIRE COMMITTEE.
WE CURRENTLY HAVE SIX PASSIVE PARK PASSIVE PARK PROJECTS THAT ARE UNDER, UM, VARIOUS STAGES OF PLANNING, PERMITTING, AND CONSTRUCTION.
ALL SIX OF THOSE ARE FULLY FUNDED.
THE PRO THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE NOT FUNDED ARE 16 UNDEVELOPED PROPERTIES THAT THE COUNTY HAS OWNED SINCE APPROXIMATELY 2000 IN VARIOUS PORTIONS OF THE COUNTY THAT HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO BE A PASSIVE PARK, IF THERE WAS EVER ANY FUNDING OR INTEREST FROM COUNCIL IN ORDER TO PUT THOSE UP FOR SOME KIND OF, UH, PUBLIC ACCESS OR USE.
BUT THE SIX PROJECTS WE ARE CURRENTLY WORKING ON ARE FULLY FUNDED.
I HAD ONE MORE QUESTION FOLLOW UP TO THAT.
NO, I'M, I DIDN'T KNOW DAVID RUNS THE CASE.
THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STEPHANIE, UM, OF THE 16 THAT INCLUDES BOTH, UM, THE PROPERTY ON THE SPANISH MOST TRAIL AT MCLE, THE HUNDRED ACRE PARK AND ISLEY FARM, WHICH IS ON DEEP WATER, UM, OUT IN GRACE HILL.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? BEFORE, UM, BRINGING THE MARINES, IS OKEE RIVER FULLY FUNDED? EXCUSE ME? IS
[01:25:01]
OKEE RIVER PARK FULLY FUNDED? OKEE RIVER PARK IS FULLY FUNDED AND COMPLETED.UM, THE PART, THE PORTION THAT IS UNCOMPLETED IS A STORMWATER PROJECT.
OH, UH, NOT A QUESTION REALLY, BUT JUST MORE OF A COMMENT.
UM, THIS PARK OR POTENTIAL PARK, IT IS NOT WITHOUT ITS ISSUES.
I, I THINK THE EASEMENT OUT THERE WITH LIMITED LIMITATION OF 20 PEOPLE PER DAY IS, IS DIFFICULT TO, TO OVERCOME.
HOWEVER, THIS, THIS RESOLUTION RIGHT HERE JUST ALLOWS CONTINUED NEGOTIATIONS AND, AND DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT CAN TAKE PLACE OUT THERE.
AND I THINK THAT SITE IS TOO IMPORTANT TO OVERLOOK AND JUST SAY NO TO.
WE, I THINK WE NEED TO HONOR THOSE FOLKS AS WHAT, IN 20, IN 2029? IS THAT 250 YEARS IN 2029.
SO, I MEAN, I, I DON'T WANNA STOP IT NOW.
WE, WE CAN, I THINK THE CONVERSATION CAN CONTINUE TO SHAPE AND, AND FIGURE OUT WHERE WE GO, WHETHER THAT'S SCALED BACK, WHETHER THAT'S THE PROJECT THAT'S BEEN SUBMITTED BEFORE US, OR A SCALE BACK VERSION.
I, I JUST DON'T NECESSARILY WANNA FORECLOSE THE OPTION RIGHT NOW BY SAYING NO TO IT.
I LIKE MAKE ANOTHER COMMENT IF I SURE.
I DON'T WANT TO, I DON'T WANT TAKE DAVID'S
OH, I, I'VE GOT NO SPECIFIC COMMENTS.
I'M JUST HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT, COUNCIL, WOULD YOU COME, COME UP A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE MIC? YES.
DAVE TRAIL FROM MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, BUFORT, I DON'T HAVE ANY SPECIFIC COMMENTS.
UM, I'M JUST HERE TO ANSWER ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS, UH, IF YOU HAVE ANY FOR THE MARINE CORPS ON THIS PROJECT.
ANY QUESTION? UM, I THINK YOU, UM, I THINK YOU, THE MOU IS VERY CLEAR.
SO, UM, MR. DAWSON, I'M SORRY.
ME? YEAH, I, I JUST WANT TO CHIME IN AND I TAKE THE POSITION THAT, UH, COUNCILMAN, UH,
IT'S GOT SOME COMPLICATIONS, BUT I, I WANNA COMMEND STEPHANIE AND THE TWO 50 COMMISSION IN THEIR EFFORTS TO BRING THIS FORWARD, WORKING WITH THE MILITARY TO ACTUALLY GIVE CONSENT AND HELP TO, UM, MAKE THE PARK FEASIBLE TO THE PUBLIC.
AND I KNOW, UM, WE DON'T HAVE THE FUNDING TO, TO ACTUALLY START THE PROJECT OR DO IMPLEMENT THE, THE ITEMS THAT HAS BEEN, UH, SHARED WITH US.
BUT LIKE, LIKE DAVE, I, I TAKE THE POSITION THAT WE SHOULDN'T JUST KILL IT OR DROP IT.
LET'S, LET'S JUST HANG ON TO IT AND SEE IF BY CHANCE WE CAN WORK THROUGH SOME, SOME EFFORTS OF ACTUALLY, UH, FUNDING THIS, IF NOT TO THE FULL EXTENT, THEN TO SOME EXTENT TO ACTUALLY MAKE THE PARK ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC.
I'M GONNA SAY SIMILAR THINGS, THAT THIS IS THE BEGINNING.
ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THIS COUNCIL WILL HAVE TO TAKE UP AS PART OF THE BUDGETARY PROCESS WHEN STEPHANIE IS PUTTING HER PLANS TOGETHER FOR THE NEXT PASSIVE PARK.
THIS MAY BE THE MOST DESIRED TO COME FORWARD NOW.
SO I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE DISCUSSION, KNOWING THE LIMITATIONS WE HAVE, KNOWING THE FUNDING THAT MAY BE NEEDED.
WE JUST HAVE TO PUT A PLAN TOGETHER.
GEE, YOU WANNA MAKE A COMMENT ON ANYTHING? UH, YOU, YOU GOOD, SIR? IF THERE'S NO QUESTIONS FOR ME, I'M, I'LL BE HERE.
ANYBODY'S GOT ANY QUESTIONS FOR HERE? STATION.
UM, MR. THOMAS, YOU WANT TO WRAP US UP? YES, SIR.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN.
I JUST DO WANNA SAY THAT THIS PROPERTY, UH, IS HALLOWED GROUND.
UH, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HONOR THE PEOPLE WHO FOUGHT THERE IN PERPETUITY SO THAT GENERATIONS FROM NOW PEOPLE CAN BE REMINDED OF THE COST OF FREEDOM, I BELIEVE.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OTHER PROJECTS ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNTY, BUT I'M NOT SURE THERE'S ANY OTHER HALLOWED GROUND THAT IS BEING LOOKED AT FOR THIS.
AND THIS IS A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY BEING THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY OF THIS BATTLE.
THE ONLY OTHER THING I'D LIKE TO SAY IS THAT THE, UH, ESTIMATE THAT WAS ATTACHED TO THE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY SIMMONS AND ASSOCIATES, WHICH IS AT $330,000, UM, ACKNOWLEDGED WE DID NOT CONTAIN ANY, UH, FUNDING FOR THE DEMOLITION BECAUSE THAT PLAN WAS PREPARED TO GO AHEAD WITH THE BATTLEFIELD PARK LEAVING THAT BUILDING IN PLACE, WHICH CLEARLY WOULDN'T BE OPTIMAL FOR PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO VISUALIZE AND UNDERSTAND HOW THAT BATTLE EVOLVED.
[01:30:01]
THOSE ARE THE ONLY COMMENTS I HAVE, AND I WANT TO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ALLOWING US TO APPEAR BEFORE YOU THIS AFTERNOON.UM, IS, IS THERE A NEED TO, UM, IS THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZED IN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION TO EXECUTE A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT TO ENGAGE IN THIS AT THIS TIME? UM, IS THAT A MOTION THAT, UM, I MEAN, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM MOVING THIS MOTION FORWARD AT ALL.
ALL IT DOES IS TO ENGAGE THE COUNTY TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION.
I THINK HIS, UH, LIKE BOTH MR. UH, EW AND MR. DAWSON SAID, AND MR. PASSMAN, THIS, THIS, THIS SITE IS A, A HISTORICAL SITE.
WHETHER WE DO IT TOMORROW OR WE DO IT YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, I THINK, I THINK THE CONVERSATION NEEDS TO CONTINUE.
AND WHEREVER THERE'S FUNDING AVAILABLE TO HELP SUPPORT THIS, THEN THOSE FUNDINGS CAN BE BROUGHT FORWARD AND WE MOVE FORWARD.
SO, UH, DO WE NEED TO, UM, YEAH, I WILL NOT SUPPORT THIS.
I JUST CAN'T KEEP PUTTING THINGS DOWN THE ROAD.
WE HAVE A NEW COUNCIL COMING ON.
I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF MISLEADING THE TWO 50 GROUP SAYING WE'RE, WE ALL LOVE IT AND WE'RE GONNA FIGURE IT OUT.
I DON'T LIKE KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD, SO I WILL VOTE NO AT THIS TIME.
HEY, UM, THERE'S A, THERE'S A MOTION, THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION.
UM, IS THERE ANY OTHER OBJECTION TO THE MOTION? I'M, I'M IN A MEETING.
CAN I CALL YOU BACK? OH, OKAY.
SEEING NONE, UH, CAN I ASSUME THAT ALL THE REMAINING COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE SUPPORTING THE MOVING FORWARD? OKAY.
[9.e. Approval and authorization for the county administrator to enter into an agreement for a publicprivate partnership with Brickyard Commons, LLC for a Royal Pines drainage project. (FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the project is $3,475,000 that would be paid from Stormwater Utility 5025-90-9020-54420 with a balance of $6,275,000.00) - Jared Fralix, Assistant County Administrator, 10 minutes]
THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, UH, IS E UH, APPROVAL AND AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT FOR A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WITH THREE YARD COMMONS LLC FOR A ROYAL PINES DRAINAGE PROJECT.THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO BRING THIS ON THE FLOOR.
UM, IS JARED STEWART? YES, SIR.
SO THIS WAS A PROJECT THAT WAS BROUGHT TO US, UH, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT SEVERAL TIMES IN THE PAST, BUT THIS'S PROCESS BY A PRIVATE, UH, DEVELOPER, BRICKYARD COMMONS, LLC, ADDRESSED SOME STORM DRAINAGE CONCERNS IN THE ROYAL PINE DRAINAGE AREA.
UM, THIS PROJECT CAME TO US LAST FALL AND LATE 2025, UM, COUNCIL DIRECTED ADMINISTRATION TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT CLOSER IN THE FIRST PART OF THE YEAR.
AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING BACK AND FORTH AS PART OF WHEN THE PROJECT GOT BROUGHT TO US.
IT WAS STARTED OUT AS JUST ONE SINGLE, UM, DEVELOPMENT AND ONE SINGLE PARCEL AS FAR AS, UH, CONSTRUCTING A DETENTION PLAN TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE STORMWATER ISSUES.
STAFF'S MAIN CONCERN WAS NOT JUST A DETENTION, BUT ALSO AN OUTFALL SO WE COULD, UH, BRING SOME, UM, SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO THE DRAINAGE CONCERNS THAT PEOPLE ARE EXPERIENCING IN THE AREA.
AND SO WE CONTINUED DISCUSSIONS, AND THEN THROUGHOUT THE SPRING, THE DEVELOPER TOOK ON THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO ACQUIRE SOME ADDITIONAL PROPERTY, UM, WEST OF MIDDLE ROAD SO THAT WE COULD ESTABLISH AN OUTFALL.
AT THAT TIME, THE PROJECT KIND OF GREW AND BECAME A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED AND EXPENSIVE.
AND SO THAT PROJECT IN ITSELF AT THE TIME WAS BROUGHT FORWARD TO COUNCIL, I BELIEVE IN, UH, JUNE, EITHER LATE MAY OR EARLY JUNE.
AND AT THAT TIME, THE PROJECT COUNCIL VOTED TO NOT TAKE ANY FURTHER ACTION ON THE COUNT ON THE PROJECT.
SINCE THEN, THE DEVELOPERS, UH, REENGAGED AND BROUGHT BACK A REVISED VERSION OF THE SAME PROJECT, UM, TO STAFF TO REVIEW.
AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THAT, UM, OVER THE LAST MONTH OR SO.
AND WHAT THIS PROJECT IS, IS A, IT'S A SMALLER SCALE VERSION OF THE ORIGINAL 25 ACRES THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER OWNED AS WELL AS AN OUTFALL.
UM, BUT THIS TIME, INSTEAD OF TO THE WEST OF MIDDLE ROAD, IT GOES TO THE EAST AND CROSSES SAM'S POINT.
SO ALSO IN THE AGREEMENT IS, IS THE AGREEMENT ITSELF, THERE WAS SOME CONCERNS THAT WE HAD JUST IN THE LANGUAGE AND HOW WE'RE GONNA ACHIEVE THE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS OF THE DRAINAGE PLAN.
AND SO THIS AGREEMENT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD.
[01:35:01]
IT'S A SET PRICE.IT HAS SOME CRITERIA ON WINDOWS.
IT WOULDN'T ALL BE AT ONE TIME, ONE LUMP SUM.
IT WOULD BE THE EXECUTION AND CONVEYANCE OF THE TITLE INITIALLY, AND THEN FROM THERE, THE DESIGN, AND THEN PERMITTING, AND THEN CONSTRUCTION AND SOME PAYMENTS ALONG THE WAY.
UM, IF YOU, IF WE COULD SCROLL DOWN TO THE EXHIBIT, THE ATTACHED EXHIBIT IN THE BACKUP, IT'LL GIVE A LITTLE BIT MORE DEFINITION TO WHAT I WAS DESCRIBING.
AND THEN, UM, I GUESS I'LL, WHAT COUNCILS, WHAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD IS, IS THE AGREEMENT.
AND IF SO, UM, WE HAVE IT IDENTIFIED AS STORMWATER FUNDS, BUT INSIDE THE STORMWATER GENERAL FUND, THERE IS FUNDING FOR IT, BUT IT WASN'T IDENTIFIED IN THE PROJECT IN THE FY 27 BUDGET.
SO IN ORDER TO FUND THE PROJECT, WE WOULD HAVE TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS, WHICH WOULD TAKE A SUBSEQUENT ACTION BEYOND JUST THE APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US.
SO AS THAT EXHIBIT PULLS UP, UM, WE COULD TAKE A LOOK AT THAT FURTHER.
IF YOU COULD SCROLL DOWN AND ZOOM IN, PLEASE.
SO TO ORIENT, UM, EVERYONE, THE MIDDLE ROAD IS RIGHT THERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PAGE.
THE ORIGINAL 25 ACRES ARE THE TWO PONDS IN THE CENTER.
SO THIS IS THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE ROYAL PINES GOLF COURSE POND, A AND D, THAT'S THE ORIGINAL 25 ACRES.
THE ENLARGED PROJECT IS CROSSING MIDDLE ROADS TO THE LEFT, UH, PONDS, D THROUGH G OR THOSE PONDS TO THE LEFT.
THAT WAS THE ENLARGED PROJECT AND THE OUTFALL TO THE LEFT THAT IS NO LONGER PART OF THIS.
AND NOW WHAT'S ENCOMPASSED IN, IN ADDITION TO THOSE TWO PONDS, A AND B, IS, UM, AN OUTFALL TO THE EAST.
UH, ONE THING TO TAKE NOTE OF IS YOU CAN SEE THE RED LINE, WHICH IS, IS THE OUTFALL, UM, THAT THAT OUTFALL IS TRAVERSING OVER, UH, COUNTY OWNED RURAL AND CRITICAL LAND PROPERTY TIME VIEW.
UM, SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT NEEDED TO BE COORDINATED A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.
UH, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE IN THAT LOCATION, THAT'S JUST THE TOPOGRAPHY AS IT'S SHOWN.
IT CAN BE REDIRECTED, UM, AROUND THE PROPERTY CORNER OR HOWEVER IT NEEDS TO.
BUT THAT IS THE, THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE AGREEMENT THAT'S BEEN PUT FORTH BY THE DEVELOPER.
AND I GUESS I'LL TAKE IT FROM THERE AND TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL, OUR COMMITTEE MAY HAVE.
UM, WE OPEN IT UP AT THIS TIME, MR. PASSMAN AND THEN MR.
JARED, YOU SAID THERE ARE STORM WATER MONIES AVAILABLE, BUT WE HAVE TO BRING THEM IN TO THE 27 BUDGET, WHICH MEANS AT SOME POINT IN TIME WE WOULD'VE TO AMEND THE 27TH BUDGET.
SO IN ORDER TO DO THAT, WE NEED TO DO A BUDGET AMENDMENT AND IF DESIRED, THE SOONEST WE COULD DO THAT IS WE COULD TAKE THAT FORWARD TO FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING INITIALLY THIS MONTH, SO IN TWO WEEKS, AND THEN ROLL THAT FORWARD TO THREE READINGS AT COUNCIL.
JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THAT, THAT'S A APPROPRIATION OF FUND BALANCE THAT WAS NOT BUDGETED OR APPROPRIATED THIS FISCAL YEAR.
UM, AND WE HAVE, OH, I'M SORRY.
THERE IS SUFFICIENT FUND BALANCE FOR THAT.
IS, IS THE, UH, FIGURE THERE, UM, 6.2 MILLION, IS THAT A GOOD FIGURE THAT THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE BUDGET BUDGET AMOUNT, BUT THERE'S FUND BALANCE INSIDE THE STORMWATER UTILITY.
THAT YOU FEW, MR. THANK YOU JARED.
I, I THINK I SAW IN THE A IS THAT THE THIRD PARTY ENGINEER CAME BACK.
IS, IS IT CORRECT THAT THIS WOULD, IS SIGNIFICANTLY CHEAPER THAN WHAT THE COUNTY COULD DO ON ITS OWN? YEAH.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE CONCERNS WHEN WE ADDRESSED IT WITH COUNSEL, UM, UH, A MONTH OR SO AGO, WAS HOW DOES HAVE A, CAN WE COMPARE THIS? AND WE HAVE SINCE DONE A THIRD PARTY COST ESTIMATE WITH ANOTHER ENGINEER THAT WE HAVE.
IT WAS SUBSTANTIALLY CHEAPER, UH, OR THIS VALUE IS CHEAPER THAN WHAT THE ESTIMATE CAME BACK IN.
UM, INCLUDED IN THE ESTIMATE WAS THE VALUE OF THE EXCAVATION.
UM, AND THAT'S, THAT'S THE MOST EXPENSIVE PART, BUT SUBTRACTING THE COST OF MOVING THE DIRT, THAT WOULD BE THE DEVELOPER'S COST.
UM, IT STILL COMES BACK SIGNIFICANTLY CHEAPER IN THE $6 MILLION RANGE TO CONSTRUCT THIS PROJECT.
[01:40:01]
EVEN WITHOUT MOVING THE DIRT, THE, THE LARGE, THE LARGE PONDS RELATIVE TO THE 3.5, 3.475 IN THE AGREEMENT.ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I'M LOOKING ONLINE.
UM, LET ME ASK YOU THIS QUESTION HERE, MR. TO FAIRLY, UM, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE THIRD PARTY COST JUST TO DO THE EAST SIDE OF THIS PROJECT IS A LITTLE OVER 6 MILLION? YEAH.
IN TOTAL, INCLUDING THE VALUE OF THE LAND, UH, OR THE DIRT? IT WAS APPROXIMATELY 2 22 AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS IS THE VALUE OF THE PROJECT.
UM, WHAT YOU GOT A SMALLER YOUNG MAN BEHIND YOU
SO THAT'S IS IF WE DID IT OURSELVES AS A DIRECT PROJECT, NOT THIS P THREE ARRANGEMENT.
AND SO THE EXTRA COST, BASICALLY THE PIPING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE OUTFALLS, UM, THAT IN ITSELF IS AROUND $6.6 MILLION.
AND THE OTHER COMMENT, NOBODY'S SAID ANYTHING ABOUT, UM, THE OUTFALL RIGHT NOW WOULD GO YOU CONSIDERATION CROSSING, UH, SANDS POINT ROAD WOULD ACTUALLY GO INTO COUNTY OWNED PROPERTY, RIGHT? THAT'S CORRECT.
UM, AND HAS, HAS, UM, HAS THE COUNTY OR THE STAFF, UH, IN PARTICULAR HERE, UH, STEPHANIE, HAS SHE MADE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT? 'CAUSE I KNOW SHE'S VERY PROTECTIVE OF HER PROPERTY.
Y YEAH, SO THERE, THERE ARE SOME, UM, RESTRICTIONS.
STEPHANIE WOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT.
I THINK SHE'S IN THE AUDIENCE A LITTLE BIT MORE DIRECTLY.
UM, SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD NEED TO LOOK AT FURTHER BEFORE WE FINALIZE, UH, THIS AGREEMENT.
UM, STEPHANIE, UH, ARE YOU IN A POSITION TO MAKE A COMMENT? IF NOT, UM, UH, SO, SO JUST BRIEFLY BEFORE, LET
BUT STEPPING OFF THE BOARD, UH, I, UM, DID HAVE SOME CONCERNS REGARDING THE RESTRICTIVE CO COVENANTS THAT ARE ON THIS PROPERTY AND MAKING SURE THAT THE PROJECT IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THOSE.
AND SO I DEFINITELY WANNA HAVE SOME FURTHER CON DISCUSSIONS WITH LEGAL AND JARED AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT, UM, VIOLATING ANY, ANY OF THE REGULATIONS THAT WE'VE PUT ON THE PROPERTY OURSELF.
AND I THINK, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, THIS IS ONE OF THE PROPERTY THAT YOU ARE WORKING ON NOW? YES.
WE'RE ABOUT TO GO OUT TO BID FOR, UM, THE PARK AND SO THE EXISTING LINE DOES CUT ACROSS THE TRAIL SYSTEM, SO I DO NEED TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS WITH JARED ABOUT THE LOCATION.
THAT WAS ALSO A POTENTIAL BENEFIT OF PERHAPS THE TIMING SINKING UP A BIT, WAS THAT IF WE WENT OUT TO BID ON THIS PROJECT AT THE SAME TIME WE WERE CONTEMPLATING THE STORMWATER PROJECT THAT PERHAPS WE COULD TIE IN THE CONSTRUCTION ELEMENTS TOGETHER, UM, POTENTIALLY SOME SAVINGS AND COORDINATION IN, IN THOSE EFFORTS.
I, I JUST KNOW THAT, UM, STEPHANIE IS VERY, UM, PROTECTIVE OF HER, HER DOMAIN, SO, UM, I DON'T WANNA ARGUE WITH HER KNOW MY WIFE
SO I HAD A CONVERSATION EARLIER TODAY ABOUT THE, THE ROLE AND CRITICAL LAND NATURE ON THAT.
UM, WHICH I, I THINK WE'RE ALL SCRAMBLING JUST TO TRY TO ADDRESS THE STORM WATER ISSUES, BUT PERHAPS AS THIS THING, IF IT DOES GET APPROVED, PERHAPS WE CAN CREATE, UM, MAYBE A CREATIVE SOLUTION OUT THERE AND SEE IF MAYBE WE COULD CREATE ADDITIONAL WETLANDS OR, SO I DON'T KNOW, THERE, THERE MIGHT BE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY OUT THERE FOR US TO YES, ABSOLUTELY.
UM, THE, THE INITIAL THOUGHTS OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE, UM, IS DEFINITELY MORE, UM, CONVENTIONAL REGARDING STORM WATER, YOU KNOW, CONVEYANCE.
UM, BUT I AM DEFINITELY OPEN TO MAYBE SOME OTHER TYPE OF SYSTEM WHERE WE ACTUALLY CREATE A FORESTED WETLAND, CREATE MEANDERING CREEKS, LIKE MAKE IT LOOK A LITTLE MORE NATURAL THAT'S GONNA ALSO HAVE BENEFIT OF THE FLOOR AND FAUNA THAT INHABIT THE PROPERTY.
[01:45:01]
OUT THERE FOR SURE.YEAH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE SUPER.
UM, BECAUSE ONE OF THE KEY FACTORS, AN OPEN DITCH GOING TO, UH, IN THIS CASE HERE, LUCY CREEK, YOU KNOW, YOU MAY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN, UM, AT LEAST HAVE THE POLLUTANT, UM, STAY ON, ON THE LAND SIDE BEFORE IT GOES INTO THE WATER AND STUFF.
UM, LUCY CREEK, UM, FALLS RIGHT INTO SEEING HOW THE SOUND, SO I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AS WELL.
SO ANY, ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, UM, THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON, DO WE HAVE ONE ON THE FLOOR YET? UH, MR. CHAIR BEFORE YOU DO THAT? YES, SIR.
JARED, DO YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THE, UH, FACT THAT THE LANGUAGE IN THIS CONTRACT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO THE COUNTY? THERE HAS TO BE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES SPECIFICALLY ON PAGE SEVEN.
WE CAN'T INDEMNIFY ANYONE, WE'RE NOT GONNA DEFEND THEM.
WE'RE NOT GONNA PAY THEIR LEGAL EXPENSES, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
SO VIRTUALLY ALL OF PAGE SEVEN HAS TO BE REMOVED.
THERE, YEAH, AS BRIAN MENTIONED, UM, THERE'S SOME CLAUSES IN THERE THAT WE'VE GOT TO REVIEW A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, THE INDEMNIFICATION SPECIFICALLY.
AND SO, UM, THIS GIVES THE ADMINISTRATOR TO CONTINUE TO AUTHORIZE, TO NEGOTIATE, AND THEN WE WOULDN'T BRING THIS TO COUNCIL UNTIL IT WOULD LINE UP WITH THE ORDINANCE, THE, UH, BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE TO MOVE THE APPROPRIATE FUNDS.
UM, I THINK, IS THAT, UM, WOULD THAT BE PART OF THE MOTION? IT HAS TO, WELL, I THINK, I THINK IF YOU GIVE THE AUTHORITY TO THE ADMINISTRATOR AS THE MOTION, THEN UM, THAT CAN CONTINUE TO BE NEGOTIATED AND FINALIZED THE AGREEMENT.
UM, MR. MOORE, DO YOU NEED ANY MORE DIRECTION OR YOU GOOD? I, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IT REALLY SHOULD GO TO COUNCIL TO GIVE US THE AUTHORITY TO NEGOTIATE.
WELL, I MEAN, IT IS GONNA GO TO COUNCIL, BUT YEAH, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
YEAH, AS LONG AS THAT WAS CLEAR.
UM, ANY, ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? CAN WE DO THIS WITHOUT ANY OBJECTION OR, OKAY.
UM, THERE IS NO OBJECTION LINE AS WELL.
SO THIS MOTION PASSES AND THAT EXHAUSTED OUR AGENDA.
UH, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
WE GOLF GAVE AT, THANKS FOR WATCHING BEAUFORT COUNTY TV.
THIS IS LARRY ROWLAND AND THIS IS A BEAUFORT COUNTY MOMENT.
ONE OF THE EXCITING ASPECTS OF CO COLON, THE COLONIAL SEA ISLANDS WAS THE ARRIVAL OF NUMEROUS FREEBOOTERS AND PIRATES IN THIS AREA.
THE PIRACY IN THE CARIBBEAN WAS ESSENTIALLY ENDED IN 1713 WITH THE TREATY BETWEEN SPAIN AND ENGLAND.
BUT THE PIRATES WHO, UH, HAD INFESTED THE SPANISH MAINE FOR A HUNDRED YEARS MOVED NORTH.
MANY MOVED INTO THE BAHAMAS, MANY MOVED INTO THE SEA ISLANDS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA COAST AND INTO THE OUTER BANKS OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THIS AREA.
COMMON PIRATE HANGOUT WAS THE COAST OF NORTH CAROLINA, WHICH WAS LESS POPULATED AND LESS DEFENDED THAN EITHER THE SEA ISLANDS OR THE NORTH COAST OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
SO IN 1719, SOUTH CAROLINA SENT A FLEET TO NORTH CAROLINA, WHICH CAPTURED STEED BONNET AND SANK HIS VESSEL, DROVE BLACKBEARD NORTH INTO BEAUFORT, NORTH CAROLINA, WHERE VIRGINIANS CAPTURED HIS VESSEL AND KILLED BLACKBEARD.
AND HIS VESSEL, QUEEN ANNE'S REVENGE IS BEING ARCHEOLOGICALLY RECOVERED OFF OF BEAUFORT, NORTH CAROLINA AS WE SPEAK, UH, SOUTH OF CHARLESTON.
THIS PLACE BECAME A VERY ACTIVE CENTER FOR A PRIVATEER WAR IN THE 1730S AND 1740S.
IT WAS ESSENTIALLY A CONTEST BETWEEN THE SPANISH AND ST.
AUGUSTINE AND THE ENGLISH IN CHARLESTON.
DURING THE 1740S, SPANISH PRIVATEERS INFESTED THIS COAST AND VIRTUALLY STOPPED THE MARITIME TRADE FROM PORT ROYAL NEAR BEAUFORT AND FROM CHARLESTON HARBOR.
THE MOST NOTABLE OF THOSE SPANISH PRIVATEERS WAS FRANCISCO LORENZO.
HE CAPTURED MANY SOUTH CAROLINIANS IN HIS VOYAGES, CAPTURED 56 ENGLISH
[01:50:01]
VESSELS OFF THE COAST OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE SINGLE YEAR OF 1741.BUT ALL OF HIS PRISONERS, HE TREATED WELL WHEN HE WAS FINALLY CAPTURED BY SOUTH CAROLINA NAVAL FORCES IN LATE 1741.
HE WAS TAKEN TO CHARLESTON AND THE POPULATION ASSEMBLED AND CHEERED WHEN HE CAME ASHORE BECAUSE HE HAD BEEN SUCH AN HONORABLE PIRATE.
IF THERE IS SUCH A THING, OTHER PIRATES, FRENCH AND SPANISH CONTINUED TO INFEST THE COAST.
1742 TO 1744, AND THEN AGAIN FROM 1748 TO 1751, THE LAST SPANISH PIRATE, DON JULIAN VEGA, UH, WAS HERE AS LATE AS 1760, AND HE WAS CAPTURED BY SPANISH GAR COSTAS, NOT ENGLISH COAST GUARDS.
DURING THAT TIME, THE IANS AND THE CHARLESTONIANS BUILT TWO INLAND GALLEYS ROAD GALLEYS WITH HEAVY GUNS THAT COULD PROTECT THE INLAND WATERS FROM THESE SPANISH AND FRENCH FREE BOOTERS.
BUT BETWEEN 1739, WHICH IS THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR OF JENKINS EAR AND 1763, WHICH WAS THE TREATY OF PARIS THAT ENDED FRENCH AND INDIAN WAR, THIS WAS AN ACTIVE AREA FOR PRIVATEERS AND PIRATES AND THEIR COUNTERFORCE GALLEYS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA.
THIS HAS BEEN A BEAUFORT COUNTY MOMENT.
TO SEE MORE BEAUFORT COUNTY MOMENTS GO TO THE BEAUFORT COUNTY LIBRARY HOMEPAGE AND CLICK ON THE LOCAL HISTORY TAB.