* 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. [00:06:05] [00:06:18] EVERYTHING, EVERYONE. UH, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TODAY. UM, WE'RE GONNA CALL THIS TO ORDER. THIS IS CITY HARDY [I. CALL TO ORDER] V CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP, COUNCIL CHAMBERS 2 0 5 MAIN STREET, HARDY V, SOUTH CAROLINA 2 9 9 2 7, MONDAY, MARCH 24TH, 2025 AT 5:00 PM UM, THIS IS A WORKSHOP. WE ARE MORE RELAXED ON A WORKSHOP. THIS IS MORE A DISCUSSION THAN A FORMAL MEETING. THERE ARE NO VOTES TODAY. UM, EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO SPEAK AT WILL. HOWEVER, I MAKE SURE THAT THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER HAS, UH, COMPLETED THEIR THOUGHTS BEFORE YOU CHIME IN. AND I THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. AND I PARTICULARLY WANT TO POINT THIS OUT TO THE PUBLIC AS WELL. UH, BE A GOOD IDEA OF SOMEBODY SPEAKING, UM, BEFORE YOU JUMP IN, ASK THE SPEAKER IF THEY'RE FINISHED, SO THAT WE, EVERYBODY, NOBODY GETS TALKED OVER. 'CAUSE SOMETIMES YOU DO IT BY ACCIDENT AND I KNOW I DO. SO, UM, IF WE MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY'S COMPLETED THEIR THOUGHTS BEFORE THEY CHIME IN FOR THE PUBLIC. IF YOU WANT TO SAY, I'M, I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE A FORMAL PUBLIC SESSION. THIS IS A SMALL GROUP. YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING WHILE WE'RE HAVING DISCUSSION UP HERE? JUST RAISE YOUR HAND AND I'LL REC WHEN I RECOGNIZE YOU. YOU CAN COME FORWARD. OKAY. SO NICE AND EASY, MR. GOOR. TAKE IT AWAY. [II. MANAGER’S REPORT] THANK YOU, MAYOR. THIS MATTER WAS RECENTLY BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON A REQUEST TO REZONE PROPERTY. UM, BASED UPON THE COMMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED AT COUNCIL, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT A WORKSHOP SESSION WOULD BE BENEFICIAL. SO I'VE ASKED STAFF TO PREPARE A PRESENTATION, REALLY THAT KIND OF ACCOMPLISHES TWO THINGS. ONE, IT PROVIDES A REFRESHER ABOUT THE TRANSECT ZONES AND WHAT THE OVERALL VISION IS FOR THE WHITE HARDY BOULEVARD MAIN STREET CORRIDOR THAT CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED BACK IN 2024. AND THEN TAKING THAT INFORMATION AND THEN TRANSLATING IT TO THE CURRENT REQUEST, WHAT THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING, AND THEN WHAT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS ARE GOING TO BE IN ORDER TO HOPEFULLY ACCOMPLISH, UM, TWO THINGS. ONE, PROTECTING THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN TERMS OF ITS CHARACTERISTICS AND DEVELOPABILITY, BUT STILL SUPPORTING THE OVERALL VISION FOR THE DOWNTOWN CORRIDOR. AND SO WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE PLANNING STAFF AND ASK THEM TO KIND OF COVER THEIR PRESENTATION. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR. COUNCIL. GOOD AFTERNOON. UM, YOU'LL BEAR [A. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HARDEEVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA TO AMEND THE ZONING FOR A PARCEL 029-45-11-014 CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY +/- 0.24 ACRES FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (SFR2-T3) DISTRICT TO DOWNTOWN MIXED USE (DMU-T5) DISTRICT AND AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF HARDEEVILLE] WITH ME. UM, TRANSECT ZONES ARE NOT THE MOST SIMPLE THING TO EXPLAIN, BUT YOU GUYS ARE A LOT SMARTER THAN, THAN MOST PEOPLE. SO MAYBE YOU CAN, YOU CAN HELP ME WITH THIS ONE AS WE GO ALONG. NOW THAT YOU BUTTED THE BREAD, UH, . WELL, YOU'RE ASSUMING A LOT. UM, SO WHAT IS A TRANSECT ZONE? UM, IT'S A VISUAL ZONING CONCEPT USED TO DESCRIBE HOW ENVIRONMENTS VARY FROM PLACE TO PLACE BASED ON THE SCALE OF HUMAN INTERACTION. SO IT'S, IF YOU'RE OUT IN THE COUNTRY, YOU'RE NOT NECESSARILY GONNA BE MEETING PEOPLE, FINDING PLACES TOGETHER 'CAUSE YOU HAVE LOTS. SO IT GOES FROM T ONE, WHICH IS A NATURAL ZONE, ALL THE WAY UP TO T SIX URBAN CORE ZONE. IN OUR, IN OUR ORDINANCES. WE ARE LOOKING AT T THREE, T FOUR, AND T FIVE, UM, IN OUR DOWNTOWN AREA. AND I'LL SHOW YOU WHERE THOSE, UM, PLAY OUT. THIS IS SPECIFIC TO THE DOWNTOWN AREA. THIS IS ONLY IN A [00:10:01] SPECIFIC AREA OF OUR ZONING ORDINANCE. UM, IT WAS RECENTLY ADOPTED LAST YEAR, LAST FEBRUARY, UM, DESIGNED TO ENCOURAGE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WHITE HARDY BOULEVARD MASTER PLAN. WE NEEDED SOME, SOME TEETH TO HELP US GET THAT DONE. UM, AND IT, AS I MENTIONED, IT INCLUDES T THREE, T FOUR, AND T FIVE. ON THE MAP HERE, YOU CAN SEE HOW IT PLAYS OUT. T FOUR IS BASICALLY WHITE, WHITE HARDY BOULEVARD. SO THAT ONE IN THIS CASE IS NOT REALLY OF OF INTEREST TO US. WE ARE REALLY LOOKING AT THE T THREE AND THE T FIVE AND THE NEXT SLIDE ZONES INTO THE SPECIFIC AREA. UM, THAT FIRST WE'RE A LITTLE, THE, UM, LOT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS, IF I WOULDN'T SHAKE, IT'D BE THAT LITTLE JUT OUT IN THE YELLOW THERE. THE, IN THE RED, THE YELLOW. SO THE PARCEL WHERE THE JCNU OFFICE IS CURRENTLY IS ON THE RED. AND THIS IS THE, THE VACANT LOT BEHIND THERE. UM, THE, ASIDE FROM THE NORMAL USE TABLE IN THE MZDO, WE HAVE THE TRANSECT ZONES AND IT, IT ADDS AN OVERLAY AN OVER, UM, A ZONE OF WHAT CAN BE ALLOWED IN THOSE AREAS. AND, UM, IT'S IN OUR ORDINANCE IN THE SAME CHAPTER. UM, THE PART THAT'S REALLY OF IMPORTANCE TO US IS THE PARKING. UM, THAT'S WHERE PARKING WAS THE REASON WE RECOMMENDED THAT THEY GO WITH THE T FIVE. BUT IF YOU, IF YOU, IF WE MADE SOME CHANGES IN THE ORDINANCE, IF WE LOOKED AT THE ORDINANCE, 'CAUSE PARKING'S NOT ALLOWED IN T THREE, WHICH IS WHAT THAT LOT IS CURRENTLY ZONED. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA FOCUS THIS WHOLE PRESENTATION ON IS HOW, UM, THIS APPLIES TO TRANSECT ZONES APPLY TO WHAT THEY'RE REQUESTING. UM, WE TALKED A A LOT ABOUT WHAT THE DIFFERENT HEIGHTS WERE IN, UM, OTHER DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE T THREE AND T FIVE ZONE. UM, THIS BASICALLY SHOWS YOU THAT INFORMATION. YOU CAN SEE THE T THREE HAS, UM, FRONTAGE BUILT OUT LESS. YOU WANT MORE GREEN, THE T FIVE TOWN CENTER, YOU WANT IT, YOU WANT YOUR BUILDINGS UP THERE AND LESS, UM, AND MORE COVERAGE. UM, SAME THING WITH THE HEIGHTS AND THE IMPERVIOUS SERVICE AREAS. ALL OF THOSE ARE, ARE VARY THROUGHOUT THOSE THREE ZONES. SITE ACCESS. GO BACK BEFORE PLEASE. YES. , THERE'S A LOT ON THAT ONE. THERE IS A LOT ON THAT SLIDE. YES. UM, SO T THREE OBVIOUSLY IT SAYS RESIDENTIAL AT THE TOP AND THAT'S WHAT IT IT IS TO, TO BUFFER THAT AREA BETWEEN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL THAT'S NOT IN A TRANSECT ZONE AND THE MORE INTENSE USES THAT ARE IN THE TRANSECT ZONE. SO, UM, THAT'S WHY IT DOES ALLOW FOR SOME, SOME DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THE TWO STORY HOMES AND, UM, VERSUS THE THREE STORY AND THOSE TYPE OF THINGS. MM-HMM . SO GO BACK . THE CURRENT PROPERTY WHERE SAL COURT AND JCNU ARE, ARE T THREE NOW? NO, THE, THE WHERE JCNU IS IS T FIVE CURRENTLY IT'S THE LOT BEHIND. THE LOT BEHIND IT THAT WE'RE TALKING. THE BEHIND IT IS T THREE. GOTCHA. OKAY. YES. OKAY. UM, SO WHERE I'M GONNA GO WITH THIS AS YOU, IF YOU, ONCE WE GET THROUGH EVERYTHING IS TO SEE HOW WE CAN POTENTIALLY LEAVE IT T THREE, LEAVE IT LIKE IT IS NOT REASON IT, UM, AND ALLOW FOR THE USES TO STILL OCCUR AS THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING. SO THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS. SO I'M JUST, IT'S GONNA TAKE ME A FEW MINUTES TO GET THERE. UM, ARE WE GOOD WITH THAT ONE? NOW YOU WANNA LOOK AT IT SOME MORE? JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. MM-HMM . THE GROUND FOUR FLOOR CEILING HEIGHT FOR T FIVE IS A 12 FOOT MINIMUM. THE GROUND FLOOR CEILING HEIGHT IS A 12 FOOT MINIMUM. NOW IN THE, IN, IN, IN THE TEXT OF THE DOCUMENT, IT DOES SAY FOR CERTAIN USES IN, IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS WITH THE APPROVAL OF SRC AND AND AND OTHER THINGS AND MEETING OTHER STANDARDS THAT THEY CAN GO UP TO 25 FEET. BUT THAT'S VERY SPECIFIC. YEP. AND MY UNDERSTANDING WITH THAT, BRIANNA, IS THAT ALLOWS FOR A CONCEPT OF HAVING MAYBE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND THEN MAYBE RESIDENTIAL ON A SECOND OR THIRD FLOOR ABOVE THAT. AND SO THAT'S YOUR STOREFRONT. IS THAT 12 FOOT MINIMUM? SO EXPLAIN TO ME IF SAUL'S COURT IS T THREE NOW, RIGHT? THE [00:15:01] LOT BEHIND IT. YES. OKAY. 1 0 3 SAUL'S COURT IS T THREE IS T THREE. MM-HMM . AND THAT ALLOWS FOR TWO STORIES. IT ALLOWS FOR NINE FOOT CEILINGS. IT ALLOWS FOR WHERE'S THE PARKING? THE PARKING'S NOT ON HERE. THAT'S WHAT IT'S NOT PARKING. UM, AND MAYBE YOU'RE GOING TO GET TO THIS. HEY. YEAH. WHY, IF IT HAS ALL THE THINGS FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND WANT TO BE DONE, WHY ARE WE CHANGING IT? PARKING. YEAH. GO BACK. AS YOU SEE HERE ON THIS, THAT, UM, PARKING AND THE D WHEN YOU LOOK AT 3.2 A 25, IT GETS INTO MORE DETAILED ABOUT SHARED PARKING. RIGHT NOW IN T THREE, IT DOES NOT ALLOW SHARED PARKING. AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS ESSENTIAL FOR THIS PROJECT. EXPLAIN THE SHARED PARKING. SHARED PARKING. UM, WELL I'VE GOT A SLIDE ON THAT. SO IF, IF WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE SHARED PARKING AND MAYBE I CAN COVER THAT A LITTLE BIT. SO LET ME, CAN CONTROL OF THE COMPUTER . SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT NO RESIDENTIAL T THREES HAVE ALLOWANCE FOR PARKING? NO, THEY HAVE PARKING, NOT SHARED PARKING WITH ANOTHER PARCEL. LET ME, LET ME GO THROUGH THIS AND MAYBE WE CAN TRY TO GET THERE AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. UM, BUT THE, THE, YOU HAVE TO KINDA LOOK AT THIS AS A WHOLE OF WHAT YOU WANT THE DISTRICT TO LOOK LIKE, I GUESS IS THE BEST WAY TO TALK ABOUT IT. UM, FOR THE TRANSECT ZONES, THE KEY IS TO FOCUS ON SAFE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS. BUT YOU DON'T WANT THE PARKING LOTS TO BE FIRST AND FOREMOST. YOU WANT THE PARKING LOT TO BE INTERIOR TO THE LOT. UM, PARKING SHOULD BE LOCATED BEHIND PRIMARY BUILDINGS. AND IF THEY'RE NOT BEHIND THE PRIMARY BUILDINGS, THE ORDINANCE DOESN'T SAY SCREENED OR BUFFERED. IT SAYS MASKED. SO YOU WANT, YOU WANT TO SEE SOMETHING. LIVING FENCE WAS, WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS MENTIONED IN THERE. AMONG EVERYTHING SHARED PARKING IS PERMITTED AND SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED. SHARED PARKING IS, YOU HAVE A CHURCH THAT REALLY ONLY HAS EVENTS ON A SUNDAY, THEY HAVE EXTRA PARKING AND YOU HAVE A RESTAURANT THAT DOESN'T HAVE, THAT HAS EVENTS MORE WHEN THERE'S NO CHURCH. UM, THEY COULD POSSIBLY SHARE THE SAME PARKING LOT 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT NEEDED ALL AT THE SAME TIME. UM, SAME THING WITH SOME OF THESE RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH AN OFFICE BUILDING. THE OFFICE WOULD NEED IT DURING THE DAYTIME. RESIDENCES TYPICALLY NEED IT MORE AT NIGHT. THE TYPE OF RESIDENCES THAT ARE GONNA BE LOCATED HERE, UM, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS. AND IN THESE ZONES, LIKE A, LIKE A DOWNTOWN HISTORICALLY LIKE WE ALL HAVE GREW UP IN, UM, SHARED PARKING IS, IS ESSENTIAL. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ON SITE. UM, PARKING HAS TO BE WITHIN A QUARTER OF A MILE. SOME TYPE OF SHARED PARKING HAS TO BE AVAILABLE TO THESE USES WITHIN A QUARTER OF A MILE TO MEET THEIR PARKING STANDARDS. SO THAT'S WHAT'S IMPORTANT. UM, SHARE, THERE'S THE, THE MATRIX OVER HERE ON THE RIGHT DOES GET A LITTLE HEADY AND, AND FULL OF NUMBERS. AND I'M NOT GONNA GO INTO ALL OF THAT, BUT IT TELLS YOU, UM, BASED ON THE TYPES OF USES THAT YOU HAVE, WHAT THAT FACTOR, WHAT THAT FACTOR THAT YOU SHOULD MULTIPLY THE SPACES BY TO SEE WHAT KIND OF SHARED PARKING YOU WOULD NEED. SO IF YOU HAVE, UM, AN OFFICE AND A RESIDENCE OR RETAIL AND A RESIDENCE NEARBY, WHAT SHOULD THAT SHARED PARKING LOOK LIKE? SO ALL OF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WILL TAKE PLACE ONCE THAT APPLICATION IS IN, IN PLACE AND CAN ONLY BE APPROVED BY THAT STAFF REVIEW COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE. UM, THE OTHER IMPORTANT THING ABOUT THIS SHARED PARKING, IT'S REALLY BIG ON PARKING SETBACKS AND A LOT OF, A LOT OF OUR, UM, ORDINANCES AND THINGS YOU LOOK AT, THERE'S NOT A SETBACK FOR A PARKING LOT HERE. THERE'S A SETBACK FOR A PARKING LOT. NOT ONLY IS IT SETBACK, BUT THERE'S ALSO SETBACKS WITHIN THE PARKING LOT FOR LIKE WHEEL STOPS. THEY WANNA HAVE THAT, THAT GREEN AREA, AND THEY WANNA HAVE THOSE AS PEDESTRIAN WAYS. THE PEDESTRIAN WAYS HAVE TO BE SO WIDE AND HAVE TO BE CLEAR WHEN, YOU KNOW, YOU PARK PEOPLE, PARK AND THE BUMPERS HANGING BACK OVER THE SIDEWALK. THAT CAN'T HAPPEN IN THESE SHARED PARKING LOTS BECAUSE, UM, THEY'RE TRYING TO BE AS EFFICIENT WITH THE USE WITH THE ROOM AS POSSIBLE. UM, LANDSCAPE SCA LANDSCAPING STANDARDS ARE REQUIRED TO PREVENT IMPACTS TO ADJOINING PROPERTY. IF THERE'S A PARKING LOT, YOU TYPICALLY DON'T ALWAYS SEE LANDSCAPING SURROUNDING IT OR SCREENING AND BUFFERING. IT'S A MUST IN THIS, IN THESE ZONING DISTRICTS. AND THE T TRANSECT ZONES AND CROSS ACCESS EASEMENTS MUST BE APPROVED AND THEN RECORDED WITH THE REGISTER OF DEEDS TO ENSURE FUTURE USE AND AVAILABILITY. UM, THAT MEANS THAT, THAT IF SOMEONE SELLS IT, THAT USE THAT REMAINS WITH THE PROPERTY, THE, THAT SHARED [00:20:01] CROSS EASEMENT ACCESS, CROSS ACCESS EASEMENT. SO, UM, I HOPE THAT KIND OF EXPLAINS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHY WE ARE, WE'RE WANTING THE PARKING AND THE SHARED. UM, AND IT, IT EVEN WILL HELP WITH OUR MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS ACROSS, IT'LL BE ACROSS THE STREET AND THE, AND THE MEMORIAL PARK AND SOME OTHER THINGS TO HAVE THESE PARKING LOT AND PARKING FACILITIES THAT CAN BE SHARED. UM, ALSO IN THE TRANSECT ZONE IS A BIG SECTION ON BUFFERS AND LIGHTING, UM, BUFFERS, NO MATTER WHICH TRANSECT ZONE IT IS, NO MATTER HOW IT IS, BUFFERS ARE REQUIRED, NOT RECOMMENDED, NOT, UM, NEXT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. AND IT'S PRETTY, UM, IN DEPTH ON WHAT IT, WHAT IT REQUIRES. IT ALSO, UM, THEY HAVE TO, WHEN THEY'RE COMING THROUGH STAFF REVIEW, COMMITTEE MEETING, WHEN THEY'RE DOING ALL OF THIS, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT STAFF REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING. AND THE STAFF REVIEW HAS THE ABILITY TO GO TO ANY SEC THAT SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE WITH ALL OF THE LANDSCAPING BUFFERS AND MAKE SURE THAT THOSE, THOSE NEIGHBORS ARE PROTECTED. UM, LIGHTING SHALL, SHALL BE OF A PEDESTRIAN SCALE, MEANING YOU'RE NOT REAL TALL LIGHTS JUST GONNA BE DOWN LOW LEVEL APPROVED BY STAFF REVIEW COMMITTEE. AND WE'LL BE, I DID HAVE A TYPO THERE. WE'LL BE REVIEWED TO ENSURE NO IMPACT ON ADJOINING PROPERTIES. UM, AND THAT IS A MUST. THERE CAN'T BE, UM, LIGHT POLLUTION. THERE CAN'T BE OVERSHADOW. IS ANY OF THAT CANNOT HAPPEN OVER A SPILLAGE IS WHAT WE'RE CALLING IT. YES, SIR. YOU TALKING ABOUT THE STAFF APPROVING IT? MM-HMM . DOES THE PUBLIC HAVE ACCESS TO THE STAFF WHEN THEY'RE MAKING THESE REVIEWS AND RECOMMENDATIONS? OR IS THIS KIND OF, THE STAFF IS GOING BY THE STRICT STANDARDS OF WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS? SO IF ONCE IT'S APPROVED IN THAT ORDINANCE, WHICH WE HAVE SOME PRETTY STRINGENT STANDARDS IN HERE, UM, THAT'S WHAT, IF NOT, THEY GO TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS. OKAY. IF, IF WE CANNOT AGREE, THEN, THEN WE DECIDE IT NEEDS TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AND THEY MAKE THAT DECISION STAFF REVIEW, COMMITTEE COMMITTEE THAT IS JUST BASICALLY REITERATING WHAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE HOLDING THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE OF WHAT'S IN THE ORDINANCE. MM-HMM . BUT TO JOHN'S QUESTION, QUE THE ANSWER IS NO. UM, THE, THE PUBLIC IS NOT UNLESS THEY KNOW IT'S HAPPENING AND THEY REQUEST TO BE THERE. YES, SIR. MAYOR, THAT THE, THE STAFF REVIEW PROCESS IS NOT A PUBLIC PROCESS. THE PUBLIC PROCESS, THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S OVER BY THAT TIME. THAT IS CORRECT. THAT THAT'S WHAT JOHN WAS ASKING. YES, SIR. RIGHT? YES, SIR. SO THAT, THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU KNEW WHAT ALL WAS IN THIS ORDINANCE THEN. UM, SO YOU KNOW, WHAT'S, WHAT'S COMING OUT OF IT. UM, ANOTHER SECTION THAT WE DON'T HAVE IN THE REST OF OUR ORDINANCE IS BUILDING MASSING. AND I THINK WE, WE HEARD ABOUT BIG BUILDINGS ON THE CORNERS AND, AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS. AND I'M GONNA SHOW YOU WHAT'S ALLOWED AND WHAT'S NOT ALLOWED. UM, THE BUILDING MASSES, LARGE BUILDINGS MUST BE DIVIDED TO APPEAR AS SMALL, SMALLER VOLUMES GROUPED TOGETHER. UM, ARTICULATION IS SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR AND, AND I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT, BUT, UM, THE, THE BUILDING ON THE, THE EXAMPLE OF HERE, HERE ON THE RIGHT HAS A A LOT OF ARTICULATION. YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S, IT'S BROKEN UP. IT HAD DIFFERENT ROOF LINES. UM, UM, IT'S GOT VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL VARIATION. WHAT IS PROHIBITED IS JUST A BIG BLOCK BUILDING, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S ON THE CORNER. SO, UM, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT FOLKS KNEW WHAT THAT MEANT. UM, IN THE T THREE ARTICULATE ARTICULATION, SPACING HAS TO BE EVERY 50 FEET, T FIVE, EVERY 50 FEET AS WELL. UM, SO THAT'S A, UM, A GOOD THING TO KNOW THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE THIS ARTICULATION NO MATTER WHICH TRANSECT ZONE IT'S GONNA BE IN. AND THAT YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE THESE MASSIVE BUILDINGS RIGHT BESIDE SMALLER BUILDINGS. UM, HOW ALL THIS APPLIES TO THE APPLICATION FOR 1 0 3 SAS COURT. UM, THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT WAS REQUESTED TO ENABLE SHARED PARKING ACROSS TWO PARCELS AND COMMON UTILITIES. THAT WAS THE BIG MOVE OF WHY WE WERE REQUESTING IS YES, THE, THE IS ALLOWED IN S FFR T THREE RIGHT NOW. UM, THE KEY WAS GETTING THE PARKING SHARED AND, AND BEING ABLE TO MAKE IT FIT IN WITH THE REST OF THE TRANSACT ZONES. SO, UM, WE LOOKED AND SAID, IS THERE A SOLUTION FOR THE PROJECT OTHER THAN RESULTING TO T FIVE? THAT WAS, THAT WAS STAFF'S, UM, MOTIVATION HERE. UM, SO WE LOOKED AT THE SHARED PARKING COMPONENT. UM, WE LOOKED AT THE DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICTS. WE LOOKED AT THE DIFFERENT TRANSECTS. T THREE CURRENTLY DOES NOT ALLOW FOR PARK, UH, SHARED PARKING AND THE, UM, PARKING [00:25:02] AS IT NEEDS TO BE IN PLACED IN THIS PROJECT. UM, CROSS ACCESS EASEMENTS ARE ENCOURAGED. THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S GREAT FOR THE CITY. THAT'S GREAT FOR THE, THE FUTURE OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS KNOW WHAT EVERYBODY OF THOSE, WHAT THEY'RE GETTING. AND T THREE ZONE INTENT IS TO PROTECT EXISTING REG RESIDENTS FROM THE MORE INTENSE THINGS AT T FIVE. SO WHAT THAT TELLS US IS WE NEED TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE. WE NEED TO DO A TEXT AMENDMENT RATHER THAN A REZONING. WE NEED TO DO A TEXT AMENDMENT. PUT THOSE STANDARDS IN THERE EXACTLY LIKE YOU WANT IT FOR THE SHARED PARKING FOR T THREE, FOR T THREE, LEAVE IT T THREE, LEAVE IT SFR. THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY WANNA DO. WE'RE JUST GONNA BE ABLE TO ALLOW THE, UM, SHARED PARKING AND THE SHARED UTILITIES AND THAT CROSS ACCESS EASEMENTS. IS THAT A BIG DEAL TO DO? NOPE. AND I'LL TELL YOU ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT THIS PROPOSED SOLUTION HELPS TO ADDRESS WAS THE CONCERN THAT WITH MR. MO'S PROJECT, AND AGAIN, HE'S OUTLINED KIND OF THE ELEMENTS OF IT, BUT IF FOR SOME REASON HE SHOULD WIN THE LOTTERY AND DECIDE THAT HE WANTS TO MOVE, UH, TO SOMEPLACE THAT'S WARM YEAR ROUND AND HE SELLS THAT PROPERTY TO SOMEBODY ELSE, THEY WOULD STILL BE CONSTRAINED BY THE, WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF T THREE. BUT IF WE AMEND IT TO ALLOW FOR SHARED PARKING, NOT ONLY DOES IT HELP ACCOMPLISH THE GOALS OF THIS PROJECT, I WOULD ARGUE THAT THAT'S REALLY IN KEEPING WITH YOUR OVERALL DESIGN PLANS FOR THE REDEVELOPED WHITE HARDY BOULEVARD AND MAIN STREET AREA. AND KATIE, I JUST EMAILED YOU A GRAPHIC. IF YOU COULD PULL IT UP REAL QUICK SINCE YOU'VE GOT THE LAPTOP THERE. I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO SHOW SHE SENT IT TO ME 'CAUSE I SIGNED NOPE, I SIGNED IT TO CA. I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT I SENT IT TO KATIE. SHE SIGNED IT. OH WELL , I NEED IT. I HAVE ONE QUESTION. I HAVE. CAN WE GO BACK TO THE BUMPERS AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS? MM-HMM . OKAY. JUST ONE. CAN WE ENLARGE THAT AT ALL? MY OLD EYES JUST CAN'T. I UNDERSTAND THE THANK YOU JOHN. I APPRECIATE IT. THE TABLE, MR. MESMAN, THE TABLE. MM-HMM . YES. YES. WELL, I I'M JUST WONDERING ABOUT, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT THERE HAS TO BE THE GREEN SPACE IN BETWEEN THEM AND ALL OF THAT, AND I UNDERSTAND ALL OF THAT. I, MY CONCERN IS, IS ALL THE PROPERTIES HAVE ENOUGH SPACE ROOM FOR PARKING MM-HMM . WELL, THE IMPORTANT PART ABOUT THE SHARED PARKING IS YOU DON'T NEED AS MUCH PARKING. NO. BUT WHEN YOU WE, WHEN WE PUT IN THE SCREENING MM-HMM . WHICH MEANS WE'RE GONNA HAVE WHAT IS THE SIDE SETBACK ON SAUL'S COURT OR, OR ANYTHING FOR PARKING OR ANYTHING. AND AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THESE ARE DIFFERENT SIDE SETBACKS THAN THEY NORMALLY WOULD BE. THE PLACE WHERE THERE WOULD BE A SETBACK FOR IT, BECAUSE YOU SEE ZERO MM-HMM . MINIMUM FIVE FEET. UM, FOR DETACHED, WE'RE GONNA DO THAT WITH THOSE BUILDINGS AND LANDSCAPING BEING ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE LOTS. OKAY. BUT I'M TALKING THE PARKING MM-HMM . WILL THE PARKING BE, WE HAVE THE BUILDING. I CAN'T REALLY TELL YOU ALL THAT UNTIL IT'S ENGINEERED COMPLETELY. BUT WHAT I'M SAYING, THIS ORDINANCE IN THE, IN THE LANGUAGE, AND I'M GONNA LOOK AT KATIE FOR THIS, IT'S GONNA TELL HER HOW SHE CAN APPROVE THAT IT'S GONNA TELL THEM HOW THEY CAN PLACE IT AND YES, IT'S NOT GONNA MAKE IT UNBUILDABLE, BUT THEY MAY HAVE LESS PARKING AND HAVE TO RELY ON OTHER PARKING IN THE AREA. OKAY. THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT I WAS GOING WITH. I MEAN, THE ADDED THINGS THAT, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE REQUIREMENTS FROM THOSE, BUT YOU KNOW, ARE WE GONNA RESTRICT THE PARKING THAT FOR THE USE OF THE PARKING? THAT'S, THAT'S, SEE THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS GOING MM-HMM . UM, TOO THAT WHEN YOU KEEP SAYING SHARED PARKING MM-HMM . I KNOW YOU SAY SHARE FOR LIKE, FOR ACROSS THE STREET AND MM-HMM . WHO ELSE ARE THEY GONNA SHARE IT WITH? OH, WHAT IT'S, IT'S THE WAY IT WORKS OUT. AND, AND, UM, WHEN YOU'RE, ONCE THIS GETS GOING, 'CAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE, THIS IS GONNA BE ONE OF THE FIRST WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR THE SHARED PARKING, BUT IT'S THAT QUARTER MILE FOLKS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE WILLING AND ABLE TO WALK, WALK THAT QUARTER MILE. NOW HANDICAP HAS TO SAY THE SAME. YEAH. THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE IN HANDICAP. THEY HAVE TO HAVE WHAT? THAT'S THOSE, THOSE ARE NO GIVES ON THAT. YEAH. BUT, UM, AND, AND HERE'S ANOTHER IMPORTANT ELEMENT OF THAT. SO THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT A PLAN TO US THAT MEETS THOSE CALCULATIONS, THAT CROSS HATCH THAT BRANDO WAS SHOWING. AND IT'S NOT JUST MEETING THE CALCULATION, BUT THIS CROSS EASEMENT FOR PARKING HAS TO BE RECORDED AND BECOMES PART OF THE TITLE WORK FOR THOSE PROPERTIES. OH, OKAY. AGAIN, BECAUSE IF THEY SELL THAT PARCEL AND A NEW OWNER COMES IN AND SAYS, I WANNA REDEVELOP IT, YOU CAN'T LOSE THAT SHARED PARKING BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FUNCTION WITHOUT IT BEING THERE. SO NOT ONLY DO THEY HAVE TO IDENTIFY IT FROM A CALCULATION STANDPOINT, IT HAS TO BE RECORDED AS PART OF IT. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE T FIVE PARCEL AND THE T THREE, IF THEY'RE GONNA USE THOSE TWO TO MEET THOSE CALCULATIONS, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE [00:30:01] TO BE A CROSS EASEMENT RECORDED BETWEEN THEM. THAT'S IT. SO THAT THE SHARED PARKING IS LOCKED IN. ALRIGHT, BRIAN, UM, I, I KNOW WE HAVE SOME RESIDENTS HERE PROBABLY GOING TO WANT TO ASK OR SOMETHING, BUT WAS THAT ONE OF THE MAIN, THE MAIN CONCERNS? I KNOW THAT WAS ONE OF 'EM WITH THE PARKING AND THE BUILDING AND THE LOT BEHIND. DOES THAT ADDRESS ONE OF THE MAIN CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENCE? UM, I, I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THEM BECAUSE I I DO TOO. I WOULD TO, I THINK WE GOT SOME OTHER ANSWERS THAT WE, THE OTHER FACT I BROUGHT THE ORDINANCE AND I CAN TRY TO LOOK IT UP OR WE CAN GET BACK TO 'EM WITH OR IN YOU WITH OTHER THINGS. BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT BY THE, UM, IN DEPTH REVIEW THAT'S REQUIRED OF THESE PROJECTS WHEN THEY COME IN, THAT WE CAN ADDRESS MOST OF THAT INFORMATION, THOSE BUFFERS, LIGHTING AND UM, AND PARKING AND, AND NOISE. WERE A LOT OF 'EM JUDGE. YEAH. PARKING I KNOW WAS ONE. THE QUESTION IS, IS DO WE HAVE ANY GOVERNING GUIDELINES SAY MM-HMM . THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES REQUIRED? ABSOLUTELY. RESIDENTIAL MM-HMM . AND WE ALSO HAVE THAT FOR A COMMERCIAL. YES. OKAY. WE, YOU TAKE THE WE HAVE THAT IN FOR THE ENTIRE ORDINANCE. AND THEN YOU GO BACK TO THAT, THAT CHART THAT'S OVER HERE. OKAY. THAT'S HOW THE SHEET, THAT ONE IS RESIDENTIAL, THE OTHER IS OFFICE WHERE THESE TWO MEET WILL TELL YOU HOW MANY PARKING SPACES YOU NEED FOR THAT SHARED USE. OKAY. OKAY. I THINK THAT CAN ONLY BE AN ESTIMATE BECAUSE YOU'RE HOPING THAT EVERYBODY IN THE RESIDENTIAL IS GONE WITH THE COMMERCIAL. THAT'S, THAT'S HOW PARKING IS MM-HMM . FOR THE MOST PART. AND, AND THE, A LOT OF IT IS BASED ON SIGNAGE AND OTHER THINGS. MM-HMM . UM, AND WE MAKE SURE THAT ALL THAT'S TAKEN CARE OF. MM-HMM . OKAY. MY, MY CONCERN IS THAT I DON'T WANNA RESTRICT USAGE BECAUSE OF THE PARKING. MM-HMM. I HAVE A, A QUESTION REGARDING THE PARKING, WHICH I THINK WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES WHERE, UH, IS THERE ANYWHERE IN THIS ORDINANCE THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR SHARED PARKING BE A SPECIFIC LOCATION? 'CAUSE IT'S ONE THING IF YOU PUT THE PARKING ADJOINING THE EXISTING PARKING, IT'S ANOTHER THING IF YOU PUT IT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING CLOSEST TO THE HOUSE, IT CANNOT BE CLOSEST TO THE HOUSE. MM-HMM. SO IT HAS TO BE INTERIOR TO THE LOT. IT HAS TO BE TO THE PROJECT INTERIOR. SO, UH, AND DOES IT HAVE TO BE ADJACENT TO THE LOT IT'S SHARING? NO, NOT NECESSARILY. BUT IN THIS CASE, BECAUSE OF, OF THE PLACEMENT OF WHERE THEY'RE REQUIRED TO PLACE THE NEW BUILDING THAT THEY'RE GONNA BUILD ON THAT FRONT LOT AND WHERE THEY WERE GOING TO PUT THE DUPLEX, IT WILL BE ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER. OKAY. SO THAT, AND THAT'S WHERE I'M GETTING, IT'S STRADDLE THAT PROPERTY LINE. I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT OTHER PLACES RIGHT NOW. 'CAUSE THIS IS ONLY A QUARTER OF AN ACRE. MM-HMM . MM-HMM. ALRIGHT. SO THAT'S THE IMPORTANCE OF SHARING THAT ONE. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THE PARKING IS NOT INTRUSIVE TO THE ADJOINING HOUSES. CANNOT BE. AND THAT'S WHAT I TALKED ABOUT, THE MASKING. IF IT'S THERE, THERE'S GOTTA BE MASONARY WALL OR THERE'S GOT TO BE BUFFER. MM-HMM . LIVING FENCE OR SOMETHING SUBSTANTIAL FOR THE PURPOSES OF, AND IT'S VERY SPECIFIC IN THERE. LIGHTING IMPACT, NOISE. MM-HMM . UH, ODORS, ANY OF THAT. OKAY. SO MY NEXT QUESTION IS ABOUT, UH, BUFFERING. MM-HMM . OKAY. THERE'S A, THERE ARE SOME TREES THERE BETWEEN THIS QUARTER AN ACRE AND THE NEXT HOUSE. RIGHT. UM, NOW WE'RE REQUIRING A BUFFER IF SOMETHING GOES THERE, BUT IT JUST SAYS BUFFER. ARE THERE ANY SPECIFICS ABOUT WHAT HAS TO BE THERE? DOES IT HAVE TO COMPLETELY COVER, YOU KNOW, I, YOU, YOU CAN PUT A, A PINE TREE THAT TAKES UP THIS MUCH ROOM AND SAY THAT'S A BUFFER. THIS IS WHERE DO WE HAVE SOMETHING SPECIFIC WE DO, UM, IN, IN IT, THIS TALKS ABOUT BEEFING UP WHAT WE ALREADY HAVE, UM, IN THIS SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE. BUT WHAT WE DO IS WE REQUIRE UNDERSTORY AND OVERSTORY. SO YOU'VE GOT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS GOING ON THERE. YOU'VE GOT THE UNDERSTORY FOR THE LOW LEVEL THINGS, AND THEN THE UP, UH, UM, CANOPIES AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT ARE GONNA, SO THERE'S GOTTA BE A WHOLE PLANTING PLAN. IT HAS TO BE APPROVED. I CAN'T TELL YOU RECENTLY HOW MANY PLANTING PLANS I'VE HEARD KATIE HAVE TO DISAPPROVE AND TELL 'EM TO GO BACK, START OVER. BECAUSE THEY WANT TO MINIMIZE IT. WE DO NOT ALLOW THAT. OKAY. 'CAUSE HERE'S, HERE'S THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE QUESTION. AGAIN, IT'S ONLY A QUARTER OF AN ACRE, OR IF WE REQUIRE BUFFERING, THAT MAKES THAT QUARTER OF AN ACRE, TWO TENTHS INSTEAD OF 2.4. SO BE IT. THAT'S RIGHT. IT, IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE USES AND IT'LL BE APPROPRIATE FOR [00:35:01] TO, TO SEPARATE IT. NOW IT WON'T BE AS WIDE AS SOME OF THE ONES IN OTHER AREAS OF I UNDERSTAND. BUT IT WILL, BUT IT, IF THERE'S A REQUIREMENT, IT'S GOING TO COME FROM THAT QUARTER OF AN ACRE, I GUESS. LET ME PUT IT THAT WAY. ABSOLUTELY. IT HAS TO COME FROM THAT AREA. HAS TO, AND IT HAS TO BE UNDER AND OVER. MM-HMM . BECAUSE AGAIN, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HEARD IT LAST TIME IS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT, YOU KNOW, A A TALL STRUCTURE LOOKING INTO MM-HMM . SOMEBODY'S BEDROOM. OKAY. ABSOLUTELY. THAT'S SO, UH, I THINK, I THINK WE NEED, I ASKED, UM, A SPECIFIC QUESTION I WOULD THE LAST TIME, AND I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE RESIDENTS, UH, WHAT THEY THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY JUST HEARD AND WHAT ADDITIONAL OBJECTIONS WOULD YOU LIKE TO PUT FORWARD BASED ON WHAT YOU JUST HEARD, MR. MAYOR, ONE QUICK QUESTION. SURE. WHAT ARE THE PHYSICAL DIMENSIONS OF THESE LOTS? I KNOW QUARTER ACRE, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE, THE WIDTH AND THE DEPTH OF THESE TWO LOTS. WHAT ARE THE NOT MUCH, DOESN'T, DOESN'T LOOK VISUALLY. IT DOESN'T LOOK TOO MUCH. NO. I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT IS THE WIDTH AND THE DEPTH OF THE TWO LOTS COMBINED? I WOULD HAVE TO, TO, I, I UNDERSTAND IT'S A HALF ACRE, BUT IS IT THE WIDTH, THE DEPTH? THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO ESTABLISH. GET UNTIL WE GET INTO THE, THE, THE, UM, ENGINEERING OF IT ALL. I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION. UM, WE CAN CERTAINLY GET GET THAT FOR YOU BEFORE WE, UM, IT EXISTS. I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT AS WE DISCUSS THIS BECAUSE YEP. WE'LL PUT IT UP ON THERE. OKAY. WE, WE'VE GOT MAPS THAT WE CAN SHOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. LIKE A HALF ACRE COULD BE 30 FEET WIDE AND 300 FEET LONG. RATHER THAN TALK ABOUT IT THEORETICALLY, LET'S JUST LOOK AT IT. AND, AND THE REASON WE HAVEN'T LOOKED INTO THAT IS THE ZONING WASN'T IN OR THE, WE DIDN'T KNOW ITS ZONING WEREN'T PLACE TO DO. OKAY. I UNDERSTAND. I JUST, IT'S HARD TO VISUALIZE FOR ME, I'M, I CAN DRIVE BY IT, BUT I, IT'S, I JUST DON'T SO AND SLOW I'LL, IT, IT MIGHT BE, IT MIGHT BE FOR ME. WHY DON'T JUST, WELL, YOU'RE WILD FOR SOUND TONIGHT. YEAH. THERE'S, DID YOU HAVE ANY CREAM OF WEED THIS MORNING OR THERE'S NO ONE SAFE TONIGHT? DID. YEAH. LET'S PUT THE MAP UP. OKAY. WELL HE'S GOT A WHOLE BUNCH OF THEM DOWN THERE. DON'T THROW THAT. I WAS JUST GONNA THROW THIS IN. NO, HE'S GOT PLENTY. DON'T THROW ONE OF MY CANDIES AT HIM. OKAY. THERE YOU GO. LEMME GET THIS IS, I COULD USED MOUSE. SORRY, WE DIDN'T HAVE A MOUSE FOR THIS TODAY. AREN'T SATELLITE'S AMAZING. THERE WE GO. ALRIGHT, THERE WE ARE. OH, MINE. THIS IS GONNA BE APPROXIMATE. KEEP IN MIND. OKAY, SO THE FRONT ONE ABOUT 96, THAT'S WIDTH OR THAT'S DEPTH. YEAH. OKAY. AND THEN THAT'S THE FRONT ONE. YEAH. THIS IS THE BACK ONE. ABOUT 90. ABOUT 90. MM-HMM . ABOUT 95. THAT'S 180 ISH. MM-HMM . TOTAL. YEAH. AND THE, OH, SORRY. THE, THAT THAT MIDDLE LINE. YEAH. PROBABLY BEST ONE DO ONE, SIX. NO, ONE OF THE DIMENSIONS. DIMENSIONS. OH. 1 1 10 BY ONE 10 WITH THE ACREAGE I CAN GET REAL EASY. IT'S A HALF ACRE, WASN'T IT? YEAH. 1, 2, 4. YEAH. 1.25. LOOKING AT IS NOW ONE'S 0.2. ALL RIGHT. SO THAT'S THE PROPERTY LINE. THE YELLOW. MM-HMM . INSIDE THAT YELLOW. ARE THESE TREES? I SEE. IT'S, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO, THERE'S AN EASEMENT. I KNOW TREES ARE THERE. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS. THERE'S, WELL, AND THIS IS, THIS IS ARIEL, SO IT IS NOT EXACT HERE. AND THERE'S AN EASEMENT BETWEEN HIS PROPERTY AND THIS PROPERTY. THIS IS AN EASEMENT. THERE AREN'T ANY TREES ON THE PROPERTY. IT IS ONLY THE BUFFER THAT'S ALIGNED. HIS PROPERTY. ALL THOSE TREES ARE IN THAT EASEMENT. THAT'S ON JC OUTSIDE OUT. THAT'S THE CURRENT BUFFER UNTIL WE GET PERMISSION FROM THE CITY TO GET THE SETBACK WITH THAT BEFORE WE [00:40:01] DO ANYTHING. BUT THOSE, THOSE TREES ARE IN THAT BUFFER. YEAH, IT IS IN THAT BUFFER RIGHT THERE THAT UNOPENED THAT EASEMENT. I, I GUESS WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS IS IF, IF THERE'S TREES INSIDE THAT YELLOW LINE, DOES THAT ALLOW THEM TO CUT IT DOWN? WE WON'T BE AS DISTURBING THOSE. YEAH. ONE SECOND. OKAY. YEAH. LET'S, LET'S, UM, I'LL TELL YOU, LET'S, BEFORE WE GO FURTHER, I OFFERED THE PUBLIC OKAY, LET'S GIVE THE PUBLIC A CHANCE, YOU KNOW, 'CAUSE WE CAN TALK ALL DAY, BUT UNTIL WE HEAR FROM THE RESIDENCE, WE DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND, UH, WHERE THE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS ARE. DID YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I, IF YOU WOULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD. HOW ARE Y'ALL? HI, I'M JONATHAN BULLARD, 1 0 5 SAULS COURT. UM, A LOT OF THINGS WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT IS THE COVENANTS THAT LOT NUMBER TWO IN SAULS SUBDIVISION FALLS UNDER, UH, THE GUIDELINES ARE A LOT STRICTER THAN THE ZONING ORDINANCE. UM, EVERY PERSON WHO PURCHASE A PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THE SAUL SUBDIVISION DOES SIGN THIS WHEN THEY PURCHASE THE PROPERTY. I DO HAVE A COPY OF THE COVENANTS I CAN PROVIDE TO ANYBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT. UM, THE SETBACKS ARE A LOT MORE THAN THE T THREE T FIVE SETBACKS. UM, I DO HAVE SOME OF THOSE I CAN GO OVER WITH Y'ALL IF YOU'D LIKE TO HEAR. UM, YEAH. WELL, JUST TO CLARIFY, WHEN YOU SAY COVENANTS, IS THIS PART OF AN AN HOA SITUATION FALLS COURT? WE HAVE A, THE, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A LETTER FROM TOM JOHNSON'S OFFICE THAT THIS LOT BEING THAT IT WAS PART OF THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY, WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT, IS WHAT I HAD. AND MAYBE MR. GRUBER CAN WELL CLARIFY THAT. ULTIMATELY WHERE WE WIND UP GOING IS THE ENFORCEMENT OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS ARE A PRIVATE RIGHT. NOW, OBVIOUSLY, WE DON'T WANT TO GRANT ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE IN CONTRAVENTION TO THAT. BUT WE'RE ALSO NOT GONNA INTERJECT OURSELVES BETWEEN A PROPERTY DISPUTE BETWEEN MULTIPLE PROPERTY OWNERS. AND SO FOR OUR PURPOSES, I THINK WE ARE LOOKING AT IF, FROM A DEVELOPMENT PERMITTING STANDPOINT, WHAT IS IT THAT WE FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH, IF ANYTHING. BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT WOULD CONFLICT WITH A COVENANT AND RESTRICTION THE COVENANT AND RESTRICTION'S GONNA CONTROL, BUT IT'S GONNA BE A PRIVATE MATTER FOR THEM AS THE HOA, WHATEVER THE GOVERNING BODY IS TO ENFORCE THOSE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS. BUT WHAT I'M CONFUSED ABOUT IS THIS LOT GOVERNED BY THESE COVENANTS. YES. I HAVE FROM TOM JOHNSON. YOU'VE GOT ONE PERSON SAYING YES, AND YOU'VE GOT ONE PERSON SAYING NO. MM-HMM. SO WHAT DO YOU HAVE, BRIAN FROM TOM JOHNSON? I MEAN, I HAVE THE COPY OF ALL MY PAPERWORK. MM-HMM . I PURCHASED THE HOME. THE ONLY LOT THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE COVENANTS IS LOT NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS THE LIBRARY. TWO THROUGH 12 IS INCLUDED. AND, AND, AND NOT SAYING THAT YOU'RE WRONG, NOT SAYING THAT YOU'RE RIGHT. JUST SAYING THAT YOU'VE GOT AN OPINION ON IT AND WE'VE RECEIVED SOMETHING FROM SOMEBODY ELSE THAT SAYS SOMETHING CONTRADICTORY. WE'RE NOT IN A POSITION WHERE WE CAN PICK WHO'S RIGHT AND WHO'S WRONG. I, I AGREE. RIGHT. SO THIS IS, THAT'S ONE THING WE HAVE TO GET, UH, SETTLED. YES SIR. WHAT, WHAT, WHAT ARE THE GOVERNING COVENANTS TO THIS PROPERTY? AND I CAN ARE ARE THEY GOVERNED BY THIS OR ARE THEY NOT? THAT'S, THAT'S A BASIC QUESTION THAT WE NEED TO GET IN GOVERNED BY THE HOMEOWNERS OF SAUL'S SUBDIVISION. UM, BUT THEY TRUMP, UM, WE NEED IF THEY'RE MORE, IF THEY'RE MORE STRICT, WHICHEVER IS MORE STRICT IS THE ONE THAT HAS TO BE FOLLOWED. RIGHT. WELL, WE HAVE TO FIND OUT. YES, SIR. IS TO OUR LEGAL COUNSEL IS WHAT, NOT, NOT, NOT SOMEBODY ELSE'S LE EXCUSE ME. WE HAVE TO FIND OUT THE, FROM OUR LEGAL COUNSEL AND BE ADVISED AS TO WHAT OUR LEGAL INTERPRETATION IS. 'CAUSE THIS OBVIOUSLY IS A, A KEY POINT. YES, SIR. MR. MAYOR, MAYOR WILLIAMS. WELL, THAT'S MAYOR. UM, YES, JOHN, I WAS JUST TO DOVETAIL ON WHAT YOU SAID. HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO, IF, IF HE'S GOT A, A LEGAL OPINION, WHO IS GOING, WOULD SETTLE THIS? THE CITY ATTORNEY WOULD BE, IF HE'S GOT AN OPINION, YOU KNOW, ATTORNEY AND WHATEVER MM-HMM . WHO, WHO OH, JOSH. WHO, WHO, WHO, WELL, I DOES THIS THAT, UH, I THINK AT SOME POINT THEN WE AS A CITY AND YOU AS A RESIDENT WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT NEXT LEGAL STEP WE NEED TO TAKE TO SETTLE THE DISPUTE. AND I, I'M NOT A LAWYER, SO I'M NOT EVEN GONNA GO THERE. SURE. I MADAM ATTORNEY, I I CAN ANSWER THAT FOR YOU. IF, IF THERE ARE PRIVATE COVENANTS ON THAT LAND, IT, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THEY SAY. THE CITY DOESN'T ENFORCE PRIVATE COVENANTS. THAT IS A PRIVATE MATTER BETWEEN THE PROPERTY OWNERS. WHAT THE CITY DOES ENFORCE ARE YOUR OWN ZONING CODE AND YOUR ZONING REGULATIONS. UM, SO [00:45:01] IF THERE ARE PRIVATE COVENANTS ON THESE PARCELS, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE, THE PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT BETWEEN THEMSELVES. SO LET'S SAY, LET'S SAY IT'S MARGARITAVILLE. OKAY, THEY HAVE CCNRS. RIGHT? SO YOU'RE SAYING THAT, UM, YEAH, THEIR, THEIR CC AND OURS, GOOD EXAMPLE OF THIS. OKAY. I KNOW EXACTLY WHERE YOU'RE GOING. I MEAN YEP. OUR ZONING CODE ALLOWS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF FENCES, RESIDENTIAL FENCES, BUT THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF MARGARITAVILLE DOESN'T. RIGHT. SO FROM AN ENFORCEMENT STANDPOINT, YOU CAN'T BUILD A FENCE BECAUSE THE COVENANTS PROHIBIT IT. BUT OUR ZONING STANDARDS DON'T LOOK AT THE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF PRIVATE COMMUNITIES BECAUSE IT'S A VERY LEGAL ANSWER AS TO WHETHER ONE IT EXISTS. AND TWO, IS IT ENFORCEABLE? AND SO THE ONLY ENTITY THAT CAN MAKE THAT DETERMINATION IS A COURT. SO WHERE I'M GOING IS WE CAN'T MAKE OUR PLANNING DECISIONS BASED UPON WHAT LEGAL INTERPRETATIONS MAY OR MAY NOT COME OUT. ALL I CAN SAY IS ANYTHING THAT YOU DECIDE WILL NOT OVERRIDE THE APPLICABILITY OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS, THEY WOULD STILL BE IN PLACE. BUT IT'S UP TO THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO ARE PART OF THOSE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS TO ENFORCE THEM. SO IF I USE YOUR EXAMPLE MM-HMM . IF THIS WAS MARGARITAVILLE, ALL RIGHT. AND THE CNR IS NO OFFENSE. MM-HMM . AND HE WANTED TO PUT A FENCE IN MM-HMM . THE CC AND S WOULD OVERRULE AS THEY DO NOW. YES. SO ISN'T THE SAME THING APPLICABLE TO WHAT HE'S SAYING? HE'S SAYING THAT THE CC AND R TAKE PRECEDENT OVER THAT ZONE. BUT WHAT WE WERE NOT THE DECIDING BODY FOR THAT. IT WOULD BE A COURT OF LAW THAT WOULD DECIDE THAT COURT HE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE, WOULD A COURT OF LAW? YES. YES. IT'S A PRIVATE MATTER THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO FILE. IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT THIS PROPERTY DOES THAT'S IN VIOLATION OF THE CCRS, HE WOULD HAVE TO FILE A PRIVATE LAWSUIT AND GET A DECISION FROM A COURT NOT FROM THIS BODY. RIGHT. OKAY. SO IF STEVE IN MARGARITAVILLE WANTED TO BUILD A FENCE, WHICH IS AGAINST THE CC NRS, HE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE IT TO COURT. CORRECT. AND OR VICE VERSA. OR MINTO WOULD ESSENTIALLY SUE THEM TO PRE PREVENT THE INSTALLATION OF IT. ALL RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND. YOU STICK IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS. THAT'S WHAT YOU, THAT'S WHAT YOU GET FROM TRYING TO PUT A FENCE IN MARGARITAVILLE. WELL, MY, MY CONCERN WITH ALL THIS IS ARE WE SPINNING OUR WHEELS UNTIL THIS MATTER IS SETTLED? WELL, I WOULD ARGUE NO. AND HERE'S WHY I WOULD ARGUE NO, IT GOES BACK TO THE BROADER CONCEPT OF THIS IS NOT JUST FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. THIS IS HOW WE SHOULD HANDLE ANY SIMILAR REQUEST WHEN WE'RE TRANSITIONING FROM T FIVE TO T THREE. AND THAT'S WHERE I WOULD GO BACK TO, IF YOU CAN PULL THAT GRAPHIC UP, THE CONCEPT FOR THIS AREA, THESE EXAMPLES RIGHT HERE ARE GREAT EXAMPLES OF SHARED PARKING. AND SO BY VIRTUE, AND AGAIN, THIS IS AN ILLUSTRATIVE CONCEPT PLAN. SO THIS IS NOT THE, THE CODE OR SET IN STONE OF WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN, BUT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE EXPRESSING THE IDEA THAT YOU PUT YOUR BUSINESSES UP ALONG THE STREET, YOU HAVE PARKING TO THE INTERIOR AND IT SHARES PARKING WITH POTENTIAL OTHER OPPORTUNITIES THAT COULD BE RESIDENTIAL IN NATURE BECAUSE THAT'S THE VISION THAT YOU HAVE FOR YOUR DOWNTOWN. AND SO, WHAT I THINK THE COUNCIL SHOULD BE LOOKING AT FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE, DOES THIS CONCEPT MAKES SENSE AND SHOULD IT BE REPLICATED? NOT THAT IT NECESSARILY APPLIES TO JUST THIS PROPERTY, BUT IT SHOULD BE FOR THE ENTIRE CORRIDOR. ALRIGHT. SO I I'M SORRY I DIDN'T INTERRUPT, BUT WE NEEDED TO HAVE SOME CLARIFICATION. SO PLEASE CONTINUE. I DON'T REALLY HAVE MUCH MORE, I MEAN, WE, WE DON'T WANT MULTIFAMILY COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ON A, ON A DEAD END ROAD. UH, WE'VE, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 30 YEARS. THESE RULES, THESE COVENANT RULES WERE SET IN PLACE FOR A REASON. YES. THEY MIGHT NOT PERTAIN TO Y'ALL VOTING ON IT, BUT IT MEANS A LOT TO, TO US THAT LIVE THERE. NO, I UNDERSTAND. BUT AN IMMENSE AMOUNT. AMOUNT. BUT HERE'S, HERE'S, HERE'S THE POINT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO, SO WITH THE ZONING THAT'S THERE, NOW, THEY COULD GO AND PUT A, UH, A DUPLEX ON THAT PROPERTY. RIGHT. BUT IF Y'ALL ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT, WHO'S HELD RESPONSIBLE IF IT WERE TO GO TO THE LAW ROUTE? WELL, IF, AGAIN, BACK TO THE BASIC QUESTION NOW, 'CAUSE I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THIS. IF, IF WE DO NOTHING RIGHT, IF WE DO NOTHING, THE LANDOWNER, [00:50:01] WHOEVER IT MIGHT BE, CAN GO AND PUT A DUPLEX TWO STORY DDU, DUPLEX. 'CAUSE THAT'S T THREE AND T THREE ALLOWS FOR TWO STORY, UH, DUPLEX APARTMENTS OR DUPLEX HOUSING, NOT APARTMENTS. MM-HMM . SO HERE'S, HERE'S THE THING. WHAT WE'RE FACED WITH IS, IS THE, IF THE, IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING, THEY CAN STILL BUILD. YOUR OBJECTIVE IS NOT TO BUILD ANYTHING. I WANT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOME BUILT RIGHT THERE. BUT THAT, THAT'S OUR, UNLESS I UNDERSTAND THE ZONING, ONLY THE ZONING CAN DO OTHERWISE WITHOUT US TOUCHING IT. WHICH IS MY NEXT QUESTION OF, YOU KNOW, WHO DECIDED WITH THE REZONING THAT THAT WAS GONNA BE T THREE OVER? IT'S T THREE NOW. YES, NOW, BUT IT WAS NOTT THREE. WHEN WAS IT CHANGED WITH THE ADDITIONAL TRANSIT IN, IN, IN FEBRUARY OF 2024? TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NOBODY ELSE SAS COURT. FEBRUARY, 2024. MM-HMM . IT WAS THE WHOLE DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTING THE WHITE PARTY MASTER PLAN IS WHAT DID THAT MM-HMM . BUT WHY, WHY THAT INTERIOR LOT ON SAUL'S COURT? BECAUSE OF HIS RED ALONG GENTLEMEN, HE HAS THE, UNTIL HE YIELDS THE FLOOR, I I WILL NOT CALL ON YOU, BUT I UNDERSTAND YOU WANNA I UNDERSTAND. SO, YOU KNOW, I I MEAN YOU CAN KEEP YOUR HAND UP. I'M JUST SAYING HE HAS THE, HE HAS THE FLOOR UNTIL HE YIELDS IT. THAT LOT DOES NOT TOUCH MAIN STREET THAT WE THAT ABOUT, WHICH IS WHY IT T THREE AND NOT T FIVE. YES, SIR. BUT SO IT IS MY, MY LOT. GO BACK. YEAH. MAY I ASK, UM, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF. I WOULD LOVE TO PROVIDE IT TO YOU. WELL, YOU KNOW, THE, WHAT ARE, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU SAID IT HAS DIFFERENT SETBACKS AND THOSE THINGS. I CAN'T PLACE ANYTHING IN MY MIND WITHOUT SEEING THOSE IN, IN WHERE WE WELL, I THINK, I THINK THEY HAVE TO, IF YOU COULD PROVIDE THOSE TO, SO RIGHT NOW NO BUILDING SHALL BE ERECTED ON ANY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING LOT NEAR THAN 25 FEET TO THE FRONT. LOT NOR NEAR THAN 10 FEET TO ANY SIDE LOT. ALL LOTS. INSTEAD, RESIDENTIAL AREA SHALL BE USED FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES EXCLUSIVELY. NO STRUCTURE EXCEPT IS HEREAFTER PROVIDED SHALL BE ERECTED, ALTERED, PLACED, OR PERMITTED TO REMAIN ON ANY LOT OTHER THAN ONE DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, NOT TO EXCEED TWO AND ONE HALF STORIES AND HEIGHT AND ONE SMALL STORY ACCESSORY BUILDING, WHICH MAY INCLUDE A DETACHED PRIVATE ONE OR TWO CAR GARAGE. AND THIS GOES FOR LOTS TWO THROUGH 12 IN THE SA SUBDIVISION. UM, MADAM ATTORNEY, UH, DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF WHAT HE'S READING? I DON'T. I WOULD HAVE TO DO A TITLE SEARCH ON THE PROPERTY TO SEE WHAT TYPE OF CONDITIONS. BUT AGAIN, CONDITIONS AND COVENANTS. THE CITY IS NOT A PARTY TO THOSE. AND THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE THEM. AND THE CITY'S NOT BOUND BY THEM BECAUSE WE'RE NOT A PARTY TO IT. BUT ME PERSONALLY, I DON'T SPEAK FOR THE CITY. I DON'T WANNA BE IN A LAWSUIT WITH THIS GENTLEMAN OR ANYBODY ELSE ON SOWELL COURT OR WITH HIM OR ANYBODY. AND, AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO COME UP WITH A, A DECISION HERE, WHICH WON'T BE TODAY. WE'RE TRYING TO HEAR ALL THE FACTS SO THAT WHATEVER WE END UP DECIDING WHEN WE DO COME TO A VOTE, WE CAN BE AS INTELLIGENT AND FAIR AS POSSIBLE. THANK Y'ALL, EVERYBODY. OKAY. SO, UM, THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING QUESTIONS. WE'RE NOT MAKING DECISIONS HERE. THAT'S WHY IT'S A WORKSHOP. THIS IS NOT A DECISION MAKING MEETING. IT'S A FACT FINDING MEETING. THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING QUESTIONS, WHY WE'RE ASKING YOU QUESTIONS WHILE YOU'RE TELLING US STUFF SO WE CAN FIND THE FACTS TO MAKE A FAIR AND JUST DECISION. OKAY? SO, AND IF YOU, WHEN YOU HEAR THE REST, IF YOU HAVE FURTHER, JUST RAISE YOUR HAND NOW, GENTLEMEN, IT'S YOUR TURN. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MAYOR, MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL. UM, I'M GONNA PROVIDE SOME GOOD CLARIFICATION OVER WHAT THE GENTLEMAN JUST SAID. AS A PRACTITIONER WHO HAS TO DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES EVERY DAY, WHEN YOU AGREE TO ANY ZONING AS A DESIGNER AND ANYTHING ELSE, IF THERE ARE COVENANTS ON THAT PROPERTY, I HAVE TO CONFORM TO THOSE COVENANTS. WE STOPPED THIS PROJECT ONE TIME BEFORE WHEN WE WERE TOLD THAT THERE WAS THIS RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. AND SUPPOSEDLY MY CLIENT RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM HIS ATTORNEY THAT, THAT WAS CLARIFIED. IF IT HAS NOT BEEN, WE STILL CAN'T PROCEED WITH OUR PROJECT WITHOUT ADDRESSING WHETHER THOSE COVENANTS ARE ENFORCEABLE FOR THAT LOT OR THEY'RE NOT. THERE'S NO DESIGN. THERE'S WHAT YOU APPROVE HERE WILL NOT ALLOW US TO DO ANYTHING THAT'S BEYOND WHAT THOSE [00:55:01] COVENANTS ALLOW FOR THEM. EVERY ONE OF THOSE LOTS ON THAT STREET RIGHT NOW IS T THREE. CLEARLY NONE OF THEM CAN DO ANYTHING RELATIVE TO T THREE BECAUSE THOSE COVENANTS RESTRICTED. SO THE GENTLEMAN'S RIGHT. IF THOSE COVENANTS ARE ENFORCEABLE, THEN WE ARE HELD BOUND TO THOSE COVENANTS. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO NOT ARGUE AT ALL. IF THE COVENANTS ARE ENFORCEABLE, WE HAVE TO REWORK OUR PROJECT. IT'S NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO BE DONE WITH THE TOWNHOUSES IF THAT'S THE CASE. SO YOU ARE NOT GOING TO BE EXPOSED BY THIS, BY MY CLIENT OR ME AS A DESIGNER TO GO OUTSIDE OF COVENANTS. I I HAVE A DUTY AS A PROFESSIONAL TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT BY LAW. AND IF THOSE COVENANTS ARE ENFORCED, THEY'RE, THEY'RE THE LAW FOR THAT, THAT PROJECT. WE DON'T, WE DON'T STEP OUTSIDE OF THOSE THINGS. OKAY? SO NOW, UM, IF YOU COULD GO BACK FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR AFFILIATION. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS SHEDRICK COLEMAN. I'M AN ARCHITECT FOR SHED ARCHITECTURE. OKAY. SO I DON'T KNOW TO ANYBODY ELSE, BUT DOESN'T IT SEEM A, A CORE ISSUE IS TO FIND OUT WHAT'S, WHAT THE COVENANTS HERE ANY FURTHER? YES, SIR. MAYOR, WE, I APOLOGIZE, BUT I'VE GOT TO CAUTION YOU ALL ABOUT GOING DOWN THIS PATH BECAUSE IF YOU SAY THAT YOU NEED SOME KIND OF COURT JUDGMENT IN ORDER TO MAKE YOUR PLANNING DECISIONS, YOU ARE EFFECTIVELY LETTING ANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNER KNOW THAT IF THEY WANNA CHALLENGE A REZONING, ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS SAY, THIS ISN'T ALLOWED. AND YOU COULD HOLD IT UP FOR YEARS. SO I GO BACK TO WHAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON. WHAT ARE YOUR PLANNING PRINCIPLES? WHAT IS THE CODE THAT YOU ADOPT? AND THAT SHOULD BE IN LINE WITH YOUR EXPECTATIONS. I WOULD CAUTION YOU TO NOT INTERJECT PRIVATE COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS BECAUSE WE HAVE NO ABILITY TO CONTROL THEM OR REGULATE THEM. AND, AND AGAIN, IF YOU ALLOW ME, WE CAN'T. THAT'S GOOD COUNSEL. UM, AND, UM, OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. WE, WE CAN, WE CANNOT DIS DISOBEY THE COVENANTS. I'VE RECENTLY RENOVATED MY HOUSE BASED ON BEING ABLE TO DO IT BY THE CODE. YES, I COULD DO WHATEVER I WANT, BUT I HAD TO SUBMIT THE PLANS FOR MY RESIDENCE TO MY HOA FOR THEM TO APPROVE WHAT I WAS PLANNING TO DO, REGARDLESS OF ME GETTING A PERMIT. IF MY HOA SAID NO, I COULDN'T DO IT, THAT'S WHAT THE RESTRICTIONS OF THE COVENANTS ARE. RIGHT? THAT'S WHAT THIS GENTLEMAN'S TALKING ABOUT. THAT'S WHAT HE'S SAYING. WE, WE ARE WRITING WITH THAT. IT DOESN'T AFFECT THE ZONING, IT DOESN'T AFFECT ANY CODE ISSUE. IT IS RELATED TO THAT SUBDIVISION AND HOA, WHICH WE HAVE TO FOLLOW. IT DOES NOT IMPOSE ANYTHING UPON THIS BOARD. I'M, I'M TELLING YOU, IT JUST DOES NOT, IT, IT, WE ARE ABLE TO MOVE PROJECT ALONG AND THERE ARE NUMEROUS RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT GO WELL OUTSIDE OF ZONING THAT WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH, BE THEY CIVIL, ARCHITECTURAL, WHATEVER. THERE ARE A LOT OF LAWS AND WE HAVE TO NAVIGATE THROUGH ALL OF THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR PROJECT MEETS EVERYTHING, NOT JUST THE ZONING ISSUE. SO WE ARE, I I AM DEFINITELY, UH, SENSITIVE TO YOU. AS I TOLD YOU, I'VE, I'VE BEEN 13 YEARS ON A PLANNING BOARD. I I GET IT. AND YOU DON'T WANT TO MAKE A MISTAKE IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS. AND ESPECIALLY WITH THIS BEING ONE OF THE FIRST PROJECTS IN THIS NEW, UH, UNDER THIS NEW ZONING, IT'S, IT'S IMPORTANT YOU GET IT RIGHT. AND WE ARE PROBABLY, PROBABLY ONE OF THE BEST GROUPS OF PEOPLE BECAUSE OF THIS UNDERSTANDING TO HELP NAVIGATE THROUGH IT. I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH YOUR PLANNING BOARD TREMENDOUSLY THROUGH THIS. I MEAN, THEY'VE BEEN GREAT AND WE'VE BEEN LISTENING AND TRYING TO NAVIGATE THROUGH ALL THIS. WE DON'T WANNA SEE SOMETHING GO WRONG. WE BELIEVE WE HAVE A GREAT PROJECT. I HAVE SOME EXAMPLES OF THAT FOR YOU ACTUALLY, TO SHOW YOU WHAT WE'RE INTENDING BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND WE'RE, WE'RE NOT JUST THROWING SOMETHING OUT HERE. WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE DO THIS FIRST TIME WOULD COMPLY. FIRST OFF, WITH THE ZONING, NOW WE'LL HAVE TO GO BACK AND GET CLARIFICATION ON THE ISSUES OF THE COVENANTS. BUT THAT FIRST THING IS TO LET YOU SEE WHAT OUR INTENT IS RELATIVE TO THE ZONING DECISION. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT WE INTEND TO DO. IF THE REST OF THIS GETS WORKED OUT, I THINK FOUR OF US LIVE IN UNDER HOAS AND WE CAN'T PLANT A BUSH WITHOUT HAVING THE HOA APPROVE IT. TED, UM, I KNOW YOU'RE BACK THERE AND MAKING, MAKING GESTURE THING THE HI MEAN, WHAT HE THINK THIS GENTLEMAN IS TALKING ABOUT WITH THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. I CONTACTED THE REGISTER OF DEED AND WAS TRYING TO GET THE PROPERTY INTO MY NAME, INTO THE BUSINESS NAME. AND THEY TOLD ME, NO, MR. MOY, WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS CONTACT AN ATTORNEY. I SAID, WELL, YOU CAN'T GIVE ME ANY ADVICE. THEY SAID, WE DON'T GIVE ANYONE ADVICE. YOU NEED TO CONTACT AN ATTORNEY. SO THE ATTORNEY WHO I BOUGHT WHO DID THE CLOSING FOR ME, TOM JOHNSON, AND I EVEN [01:00:01] PAID INSURANCE FOR OUR TITLE RESEARCH TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING WAS LEGIT BEFORE I EVEN WENT THIS AVENUE. BECAUSE I KNOW PLANNING, YOU KNOW, I WAS A PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTOR ALSO FOR JASPER COUNTY. I WAS THE FIRST. SO, YOU KNOW, I KNOW PLANNING AND ZONING A LITTLE BIT. NOT AS MUCH AS THESE GUYS, BUT AT LEAST I HAVE SOME CONCEPT OF IT. AND SO THEY TOLD ME, GO AND GET AN ATTORNEY. GET HIM TO SEND YOU A CERTIFIED LETTER. I SENT IT TO THE CITY LIKE THEY REQUESTED. HE SENT IT TO THEM. HE SAID IT WAS NO RESTRICTED COVENANTS BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENED, THAT PROPERTY WAS SOLD TO THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY AND THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY, WHEN THEY SOLD IT TO THE PERSONS WHO I BOUGHT IT FROM, ALL THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WENT AWAY. AND WHEN I BOUGHT IT FROM THAT COUPLE THAT I BOUGHT IT FROM, THERE WEREN'T ANY RESTRICTED COVENANTS ON IT. NOW WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, THAT'S ANCIENT HISTORY. BEFORE HE WAS BORN, EVEN PROBABLY BEFORE HIS DAD WAS BORN, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? HE'S TALKING, HE'S TALKING WHAT HE'S BEEN TOLD. HE MIGHT HAVE THIS PROOF OF WHAT HE'S BEEN TOLD, BUT I KNOW WHAT I PAID FOR AN ATTORNEY TO DO FOR ME. AND SO IF THE ATTORNEY DIDN'T DO WHAT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO DO, GUESS WHO'S THAT GONNA BE ON? AND THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY BECAUSE I WENT, I WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS. THEY TOLD ME, SAID THEY COULDN'T DO ANYTHING UNTIL I MADE SURE THESE LADIES AND THAT GENTLEMAN TOLD ME I COULD NOT EVEN CONTACT THEM UNTIL THEY RECEIVED THAT LETTER AND THEY'RE RECEIVE AN OFFICIAL LETTER FROM THE ATTORNEY. SO THAT'S NOT MY FAULT. I PAID, I PAID FOR WHAT I PAID FOR. SO IT'S NOT ON ME. I DID, I, EVERYTHING YOU GUYS ASKED ME TO DO, I HAVE DONE, THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR TWO, ALMOST THREE YEARS TRYING TO GET THIS PROJECT DONE. AND I FEEL, UH, SOME TYPE OF WAY BECAUSE I DON'T THINK NO ONE ELSE WENT THROUGH AS MUCH AS I'VE WENT THROUGH JUST TO TRY TO HELP THIS CITY. AND I'VE BEEN HELPING THIS CITY FOR 25 YEARS WITH AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS. EVERYTHING I CAN DO, THIS IS HOME. I LOVE THIS PLACE. I'M NOT GOING ANYWHERE. NO ONE'S GONNA RUN ME FROM HERE. THIS IS WHERE I WANT TO BE UNTIL I DIE. AND THIS WILL BE UNTIL I WORK AND DIE. I, I MEAN, IT'S NOT FAIR TO ME. YOU GUYS KNOW ME. YOU GUYS DON'T, I'M NOT A STRANGER. I'VE BEEN HERE FOR 30 SOMETHING YEARS. YOU GUYS KNOW ME. I'M NOT GOING ANYWHERE. I, I, I WENT TO THE BANK. I GOT FINANCING FOR THIS PROJECT ALREADY. HOW DO YOU THINK I FEEL? I GOT PROJECT, I MEAN FINANCING AND NOW I I'M GOING THROUGH THIS AGAIN. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. YES. I, FOR ONE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT PLANS THEY HAVE IN, IN INVOLVED BEFORE WE OKAY, SO LET'S, WE'RE NOT MAKING A DECISION TONIGHT. I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT THEY HAVE. LET'S, LET'S GO TO THAT. LET'S, DO YOU HAVE, UH, WHAT YOU WANT TO DO? YES. WE, I HAVE COFFEE. THANK YOU. THESE DRAWINGS ARE ONLY FOR THE, UM, MIXED USE BUILDING AT THE FRONT BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON. BUT IT HAS CONCEPTS OF THE SHUT GIVES THIS THE CORRECT ONE. IS THAT THE CORRECT ONE? YEAH, THAT'S WHAT THIS IS. OKAY, THANK YOU. THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE PLAN FOR THE PROPERTY FACING MAIN STREET? YES. THAT THAT IS, THAT IS, THAT'S THE MIXED USE OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ELEVATION. UH, THOSE ARE THE, THE, THE FRONT IS THE ONE WITH THE STOREFRONT ALONG AND THE TOP ONE IS WHAT FACES THE, THE PARKING LOT AREA. AND THEN THOSE ARE THE TWO SIDES ON THE NEXT SHEET. AND BEHIND THOSE ARE ON THE NEXT SHEET ARE THREE DIMENSIONAL, UH, THREE DIMENSIONAL DRAWINGS OF WHAT THOSE BUILDINGS LOOK LIKE IN MASS, INCLUDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENCES AROUND WITH THE FOLIAGE THAT EXIST RIGHT NOW. SO JUST TO TRY AND GIVE SOME IDEA TO YOU OF WHAT THE SCALE OF THESE BUILDINGS ARE, THAT THERE'S VEGETATION THAT WOULD EXIST BETWEEN AND GIVE YOU VIEWS OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE FROM THE STREET LEVEL, FROM VARIOUS AREAS. JUST TO, TO LET YOU SEE THAT WE'RE NOT OVERWHELMING ANYTHING. THE BUILDING IS TWO STORIES ON THE FRONT, WHICH COULD BE THREE. WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT A THREE STORY BUILDING. IT'S A TWO STORY BUILDING ALONG MAIN STREET AND THEN TWO STORY TOWNHOUSES COMPLYING WITH THE T THREE CRITERIA WITH PORCHES AND STOOPS ON THE BACK. UH, THE BUILDING AT THAT, AT THE STREET, THE, THE SIDEWALL FACING THE NEIGHBOR IS BLANK, DOESN'T HAVE ANY WINDOWS OVERLOOKING, OVERLOOKING THAT NEIGHBOR. UH, SO, AND THAT'S THE ONES CLOSEST TO THE STREET THERE. [01:05:01] SO WE ARE, WE ARE, WE UNDERSTAND WHERE THE PROJECT IS, WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. AND IT IS BASICALLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT THE TT THREE AND THE T FIVE WOULD LIKE YOU TO SEE WITH THE PARKING IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO BUILDINGS, BETWEEN THOSE THREE BUILDINGS. SIR, LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION BASED ON THIS LAYOUT, AND WE SAW BEFORE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT THAT HAS 110 FEET OF DEPTH. OKAY? PLUS YOU HAVE A SETBACK. WHAT'S THE SETBACK REQUIRED IN THE FRONT? 10 FEET. 10 FEET? WELL I'M, I'M JUST SAYING IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF, A LOT HAVE TWO BUILDINGS IN 110 FEET WITH A REQUIREMENT OF SOME BETWEEN IT, DOESN'T IT? I'M THINKING THE SAME THING RIGHT? LOT. A BUILDING, LITTLE PIECE OF LAND, A SITE PLAN THAT WAS UP THERE EARLIER. THAT IS THE CORRECT SITE PLAN PULL. YES. THERE'S, THERE'S THE SITE PLAN OF WHAT THAT, THAT THOSE BUILDINGS AND HOW THEY WERE BE CITED AND PARKING IN BETWEEN THEM. SO THAT SHOWS HOW ALL THAT DOES FIT ON THE PROPERTY AS WE PROPOSE. OKAY. THESE PARKING, THESE GARAGES THAT ARE, THOSE ARE JUST THOSE, THAT'S A OPEN PARKING LOT'S, NOT GARAGE GARAGES. THOSE ARE STOREFRONT WINDOWS. NO, NO, NO. I WAS LOOKING AT THE, THIS THIRD SHEET. THOSE ARE THE EXISTING HOMES. OH, THOSE ARE THE EXISTING HOMES. OH, OKAY. TO SHOW, JUST TO SHOW THE TWO ACROSS THE STREET. OKAY. THE STREET IS HERE. OKAY. I SEE NOW I UNDERSTAND. NOW I GET IT. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH, THANK YOU. SO THIS IS SO COURT AND WHAT THAT THOSE, THAT CONCEPT IS BASED ON A TOTAL, UH, DEPTH OF 187 FEET FOR THE TWO LOTS. YES. I MEAN THAT WHAT YOU SEE THERE, WHICH CONFORMS TO ALL THE SETBACKS AND EVERYTHING IS EXACTLY WHAT IS REPRESENTED ON THESE DRAWINGS. OKAY. THOSE, THOSE CONFORM TO THE SETBACKS CURRENT ON THE T THREE ZONING. ON THE T THREE ZONING? YES. OKAY. AND THE T FIVE AT THE FRONT. OKAY. BUT WE WE'RE UNFAMILIAR WITH WHAT DHOA WOULD BE OR ALL THAT. THAT'S SOMETHING AGAIN, IF THE HOA TURNS OUT TO BE SOMETHING WE, WE ARE IN, YOU CAN ADJUST TOTALLY DIFFERENT BALLGAME. YOU WOULD, YOU CAN ADJUST TO THAT. OKAY. DID YOU HAVE THAT IN MIND? LIKE IF YOU HAD TO ADJUST? I MEAN, IF SOMETHING WAS TO HAPPEN, IF, IF, AND I THINK MR. MOY HAS ALREADY TALKED ABOUT IT, BUT IF, IF, IF WE END UP HAVING TO DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF THE COVENANTS BEING ENFORCED, THOSE, THOSE TOWNHOUSES GO AWAY. THEY'RE NOT, THEY'RE NOT SINGLE FAMILY BUILDINGS. THERE'S NO WAY AROUND THAT LANGUAGE. I MEAN, WE CAN'T CREATE SOMETHING THAT'S, YOU KNOW, TOTALLY DOESN'T WORK WITH THAT. SO IF, IF IT DOES TURN OUT THAT THAT'S THE CASE, THE ZONING STILL WOULD REMAIN, IT STILL WOULD REMAIN TO BE T THREE. THAT'S SOMETHING YOU ALREADY ZONED. BUT WHAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO BE BUILT ON THAT LOT WOULD NOT BE THOSE TOWNHOUSES THAT ARE ALLOWED BY THE NEIGHBORS. OKAY. OH, WOW. BRIAN, COULD YOU COME BACK UP? I'M GONNA ASK YOU A QUESTION. YEAH. AND THERE'S NO RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER. YES SIR. I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S IN YOUR HEAD. YES, SIR. OKAY. IF I UNDERSTOOD YOU RIGHT, WHAT YOU WANT, ONLY ON THAT QUARTER OF AN ACRE IS ONE, ONE STORY SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THAT'S YOUR, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ONE STORY. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ONE STORY. NO, SIR. IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. IT CAN'T BE OVER TWO. OKAY. TWO AND ONE HALF. SO, UM, SO YOU JUST WANT ONE FAMILY ON THAT QUARTER OF AN ACRE. I DON'T KNOW IF Y'ALL HAVE EVER WALKED OR RAN A QUARTER OF AN ACRE OR 0.47 OF AN ACRE, BUT THAT, I MEAN, I CAN WE, I CAN THROW, I CAN HIT YOU WITH A BASEBALL. NO, I'VE, I'VE LOOKED AT HOLMES IN MY PAST, YOU KNOW, SHOT. WE'RE TALKING THAT WE'RE ON A QUARTER OF AN ACRE. I KNOW IT'S SMALL TALKING SMALL. I, BUT THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION. YES, SIR. IF YOU HAD YOUR FIRST CHOICE, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT PASSING JUDGMENT ON IT, WHAT WOULD YOU WANNA SEE ON THAT QUARTER OF AN ACRE IF, YOU KNOW, FILLED THE ONLY EMPTY LOT IN SAUL'S COURT WITH A, A SINGLE FAMILY HOME LIKE THE REST OF THEM? ONE OR TWO STORIES, SIR. OKAY. AND NOTHING ELSE IS ACCEPTABLE TO YOU? I MEAN, I DON'T, THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE. I'M NOT SAYING NOTHING ELSE IS ACCEPTABLE, BUT THAT'S WHAT I WOULD PREFER TO [01:10:01] SEE. AND THAT'S WHAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON SAUL'S COURT WOULD. I'M NOT, THERE'S NO RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND. I'M NOT AGAINST GROWTH, I'M NOT AGAINST DEVELOPMENT. I THINK IT ALL HAS ITS RIGHT PLACE AND, AND AREAS FOR IT TO HAPPEN. UM, BUT WHEN I BOUGHT THIS HOUSE, I'VE LIVED THERE 30 YEARS, YOU KNOW, I DIDN'T BUY IN AN AREA THAT'S RURAL THAT COULD BE BUILT WHERE I COULD BE BUILT ON TOP OF, YOU KNOW, I BOUGHT IN A, IN A SUBDIVISION THAT WAS BUILT OUT, WASN'T EXPECTING ANYTHING ELSE TO BE BUILT IN THERE OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, IN THE FUTURE OF THAT ONE EMPTY LOT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I PUT MY CARDS AT WHEN, WHEN, YOU KNOW, I WENT TO PURCHASE A HOME. UM, I GET IF YOU, IF YOU LIVE, IF YOU BUY, YOU KNOW, DOWN HERE ON PLANTATION DRIVE AND YOU'VE LIVED HERE FOREVER, YOUR DEVELOPMENT'S GONNA COME EVENTUALLY. AND IT, AND IT COULD COME RIGHT UP AGAINST YOU. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I PICKED WHERE I LIVE. BUT THIS CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS AS T THREE, IT ALLOWS FOR THIS, BUT NOT SHARED PARKING. IS THAT CORRECT? UH, I THINK FOR THE RECORD, LET'S PUT THAT VERBALLY, PLEASE. YES, SIR. OKAY, THANK YOU. DID I SEE A HAND RAISED? YES. YES, YES, YES. BEING A BUSINESSMAN, I DIDN'T GO OUT AND PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY JUST TO BILL A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THAT WAS NOT MY INTENTION. AND JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE ONE ILL FADED RESIDENCE HERE. WHO'S GIVING ME ALL PLEASE? TED? TED, TED, WE ARE NOT GOING TO PASS JUDGMENT ON ANYBODY HERE. SORRY. I'M SORRY. I'M NOT PASSING JUDGMENT ON YOU. ALL RIGHT. I'M NOT PASSING JUDGMENT ON YOU. PLEASE. ALRIGHT, FINE. I HAVE ONE PERSON, DON'T TALK OVER ME. OKAY. I HAVE ONE PERSON. IT'S NOT LIKE YOU HAVE A HOUSE FULL OF RESIDENTS FROM THAT COMMUNITY WHO'S GIVING YOU GRIEF. THIS IS ONE PERSON. HE'S NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT LIVES NEXT DOOR. IT'S ANOTHER LADY WHO OWNS A DOUBLE TRIPLE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR. SHE'S NOT HERE, SHE'S NOT COMPLAINING. I MEAN, THIS IS RIGHT. DON'T GET ME WRONG, BUT WHEN I PURCHASED THAT PROPERTY, I DIDN'T PURCHASE THE PROPERTY TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. AND I DON'T THINK, NO ONE SHOULD TELL ME WHAT I SHOULD BUILD ON THERE IF I MET THE REQUIREMENTS. OKAY. SO YOU DON'T TELL ME AND YOU DON'T ASK SOMEONE WHO LIVES NEXT DOOR WHAT YOU WANT BUILT THERE. I MEAN, YOU DIDN'T ASK ME WHAT I WANT BUILT THERE. OH MY GOSH, MAN. SO I THINK THAT'S A LITTLE, EXCUSE ME, LET ME FINISH. SO I THINK THAT WAS WRONG FOR YOU TO PUT HIM IN THAT SPOT. HE'S BEING DISCIPLINED. JUST LET ME FINISH. I THINK IT WAS WRONG FOR YOU TO PUT HIM 'CAUSE YOU DIDN'T PUT ME IN THAT SPOT. AND I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY AS COMMERCIAL BECAUSE I WANTED TO DEVELOP IT. I WANTED TO HELP THE DOWN TRIAL GROWTH. I HEARD WHAT Y'ALL WERE DOING AS THE CITY. AND SO I WANTED TO COMPLY. I HAD PROPERTY ON MAIN STREET. I SAID, WELL, THIS WOULD BE THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY FOR ME AND MY COMPANY TO EXPAND AND GROW. WE HAVE MET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, SIR, WE HAVE MET EVERYTHING. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM. I TOLD YOU WE WENT TO THE ATTORNEY. THE ATTORNEY SENT THE LETTER. SO YOU GOT PROOF THERE ON FILE THAT THE ATTORNEY SAID THERE WAS NOT A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY I AM UP HERE GOING ON INTO MY THIRD YEAR TRYING TO GET A PROJECT DONE, AND I WANT TO GET IT DONE, BUT SEEM LIKE YOU GUYS DON'T WANT ME TO DO IT. NO, THAT'S FINE. MR. MAYOR, JUST OUTTA FOR THE RECORD, THERE'S ANOTHER NEIGHBOR HERE. MA'AM, DO YOU WANNA COME UP? THAT'S STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. MY NAME IS MAUREEN GARDNER AND I LIVE AT 1 0 6 SAS COURT. UM, MY NEIGHBOR AT 1 0 8 SAS COURT IS WORKING AND SHE COULDN'T BE HERE. UM, SO THERE ARE MORE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT. UM, THE BIGGEST THING IS, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE PARKING AND THE SHARED PARKING. WE WANT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME. WE JUST, LIKE BULLARD SAID, OR JONATHAN BULLARD SAID, WE WANT, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH JUST IN A DIFFERENT AREA. YEAH, I DID AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, I DID SEE THAT OTHER WOMAN HERE. MM-HMM. AND THEN THERE WAS, THERE WAS THREE OTHER PEOPLE HERE. THEY JUST UNDERSTOOD THE SIGN WAS SMALL. UNDERSTOOD. THEY DIDN'T KNOW THE DATE. BUT, YOU KNOW, TED, YOU SAY A LOT OF THINGS, BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY YOU TALK ABOUT ONLY ONE PERSON OBJECTING AND YOU'RE ONLY ONE PERSON. [01:15:02] SO WHAT WE TRY TO, WHAT WE'RE HERE ON A WORKSHOP IS TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR ONE PERSON IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND YOU TO ACCUSE US OF NOT PUTTING UP BARRIERS TO DOING YOUR PROJECT, I DON'T THINK IS ADVANCING YOUR COST. SO WE'RE HERE, AS I SAID, SEVERAL TIMES TO LISTEN, TO LEARN AND WE'RE NOT VOTING. SO WE CAN GO BACK AND TALK ABOUT THIS AND THINK ABOUT IT AND DO THE RIGHT THING. WE'RE NOT PASSING JUDGMENT ON YOU, TED, AND WE'RE NOT PASSING JUDGMENT ON THE RESIDENTS OF SAS COURT. WE'RE LISTENING TO EVERYONE. THANK YOU, SIR. I APPRECIATE IT. DO YOU WANNA, I, I'M SORRY? ARE YOU FINISHED, MA'AM? YES SIR, I AM. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YES. I WOULD LIKE, MAY I ASK A QUESTION? CURRENT T FIVE ZONING ON THE BUILDING ON MAIN STREET ALLOWS FOR ANOTHER FLOOR. CORRECT. OKAY. UM, AND YOUR PROPOSED, UH, DUPLEXES. I SEE WHAT I, WHAT AM I COUNTING? UH, SIX FOUR. WHAT AM I COUNTING? THERE ARE, THERE ARE 4, 4, 2. THOSE A DUPLEX BUILDING. SO IT'S FOUR UNITS. OKAY. IF YOU WENT UP ONE MORE FLOOR ON YOUR MAIN BUILDING, YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO GET TWO, THREE APARTMENTS IN THERE. TWO, WHAT I'M, I'M, I'M JUST, I'M THROWING SOMETHING OUT THERE FOR THAT. IF I MIGHT, UM, ADD TO THAT, UM, WITH THE PARKING CONSTRAINTS IN THE AREA RIGHT NOW, CURRENTLY AS TODAY, AND THEY, THE, WHEN WE LOOKED AT THIS, THAT'S WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT. ARE THERE OPPORTUNITIES FOR SHARED PARKING? AND THERE WEREN'T. THAT'S WHERE WE WENT AT THIS AT THIS TIME. UM, THERE WILL BE IN THE FUTURE WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE BUILT AND DEVELOPED, BUT RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TO KNOW THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE PARKING THAT THEY COULD SHARE. AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WERE LOOKING AT. WE DISCUSSED ON STREET PARKING, WE TALKED ABOUT THE DOT AND, AND OUR STANDARDS ON MAIN STREET. WE LOOKED AT ALL THE OPTIONS AND THAT'S WHERE WE GOT TO ALSO SOME OF THE SHARED UTILITIES THAT, THAT ARE, ARE GONNA NEED BE NEEDED. RIGHT NOW THERE'S SOME UTILITIES THAT ARE ALMOST UNDERNEATH THE, WHERE THE OLD LIBRARY SITS AND, AND THOSE WOULD BE, UM, HAVING TO REWORK THOSE AS WELL. WHERE I WAS GOING WITH THAT IS IF YOU WENT UP ONE MORE FLOOR AND THEN YOU DID BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY ON THAT BACK LOT, WOULD THAT, IS THAT A WORKABLE? WELL, YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE MORE PARKING TO DEAL WITH AND YOU STILL WOULD HAVE THE SAME ISSUE OF THE PARKING SITTING ON THE, ON THE T FIVE PROPERTY. YOU'D END UP RIGHT AT THE SAME POINT ONLY YOU'D HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY LOT. WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GET THE PARKING ALL ON THAT FRONT LOT. WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT. SO, AND YOU WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO PUT THAT PARKING ON THAT SINGLE FAMILY LOT. THIS IS, THIS IS WHERE I'M GOING. I'M TRYING TO FIND A SOLUTION HERE, FOLKS. I'M, I, I SEE BOTH SIDES OF THIS. THE TEXT AMENDMENT WOULD HELP WITH THAT. THE, WHAT THE TEXT AMENDMENT THAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING WOULD HELP WITH THAT. BUT THERE ALWAYS HAVE TO HAVE TO BE SOME RECONFIGURATION THERE. WELL, BECAUSE THIS IS WHERE I'M GOING WITH THIS. I, I KNOW YOU TED, ARE LOOKING AT THE VIABILITY OF THE REVENUE COMING FROM THESE RENTALS. AND I KNOW YOU FOLKS ALSO DON'T WANT, DON'T WANT WANT THIS. IS THERE SOME WAY TO INCREASE THE VOLUME OF YOUR FRONT BUILDING, HAVE A ONE STORY HOME ON THE BACK? IT WOULD TAKE SOME CHANGING ON OURS TO SHARE THAT PARKING IN BETWEEN. COULD WE ACCOMPLISH IT, CAN IT BE ACCOMPLISHED? THAT'S AN ANSWER. THAT WOULD BE AN ECONOMIC ANSWER ON WHETHER WE CAN MAKE THIS WORK. SO I CAN'T ANSWER THAT ON BEHALF OF MY CLIENTS. WELL, THAT'S AN ANSWER. IT'S MAYBE IT'S WORTH RESEARCHING AT LEAST THAT I, I WOULD SAY IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT ARCHITECTURALLY TO CREATE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT AND HAVE THE SCALE OF IT WORK. AND YOU'D STILL HAVE A BIG BUILDING SITTING, YOU'D HAVE A THREE STORY BUILDING NOW SITTING NEXT TO A SINGLE STORY BUILDING. WHAT I MEAN, IT IS BASICALLY THE SAME THING TO ME. WE HAVE A BUILDING THAT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE HARMONIOUS WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE WE HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE TO, TO THE RIGHT OF US. WE HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE ON THE LEFT. NOW WE BUILT THIS BIG THREE STORY BUILDING RIGHT IN THE MIDST OF THEM. I, I REALLY THINK THAT'S NOT WHERE WE WANT TO GO. OKAY. I MEAN, WE, WE REALLY WANT TO DO SOMETHING THAT ENHANCES WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO CREATE HERE. I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IF TED SOLD EVERYTHING AND MOVED ON DOWN THE ROAD TO ANOTHER PLACE, SOMEBODY ELSE COULD COME IN THERE AND BUILD A THREE STORY BUILDING. CORRECT. BUT, BUT ALRIGHT. THAT'S, WE WE'RE FACED WITH WHERE WE ARE NOW. AND I WANT TO, I WANTED TO BRING SOMETHING UP THAT I, I THINK THAT WE HAVE A, A ISSUE HERE THAT GOES BEYOND OUR PROPERTY RIGHT NOW. THIS NEIGHBORHOOD IS ZONE T THREE. EVERY ONE OF THESE LOTS RIGHT NOW IS T THREE. IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR THAT FIRST OFF TO BE T THREE ANYMORE? AND SECONDLY, IF SAY [01:20:01] WE BUILT THIS PROJECT AND THE NEIGHBORS NOW DECIDE THAT, HEY, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING'S GOING WELL HERE, MAYBE WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, GET RID OF THESE COVENANTS AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS T THREE, THEY COULD DO THAT. SO RIGHT NOW, T THREE DOESN'T LOOK GOOD TO THEM, BUT I'VE GONE THROUGH YEARS OF OPPORTUNITIES WHERE A PROJECT IS STOPPED AND THEN THE ZONING STAYS THERE AND THE ECONOMICS THAT YOU'RE PUTTING UPON US THAT SOMEONE COULD BUY OUR LOT. WELL, THE SAME THING COULD HAPPEN TO THESE LOTS. WE'VE HAD PEOPLE BAND TOGETHER AND SELL WHOLE NEIGHBORHOODS AS A GROUP BASED ON A ZONING THAT CAN HAPPEN HERE. SO ALL THE, THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN, IT'S AN OPEN BOOK. YES. I DON'T PLAN TO LIVE, I LIVED HERE 30 YEARS. WELL, NOTHING'S GUARANTEED ON EITHER SIDE BY MY PROPERTY OWNER OR THESE PROPERTY OWNERS ON WHAT THEY WILL DO. AND THAT T THREE IS THERE THAT GIVES 'EM SOME RIGHTS AND SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IN THE FUTURE. SO IS T THREE APPROPRIATE BECAUSE IT'S BEYOND US RIGHT NOW. BUT LET, LET ME, LET ME RECAP AND WE'LL, WE'LL, WE'LL, UM, SO WE CAN MOVE ON. UM, WHAT'S BEING ASKED OF THIS COUNCIL, BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD, IS NOT THE CHANGE FROM T THREE. ALL WE'RE ASKING, YOU'RE ASKING THIS COUNCIL TO DO IS CHANGE TO AN EXCEPTION AND ALLOW SHARED PARKING. DO I HAVE THAT UNDERSTANDING? CORRECT, YES, SIR. UM, THERE'S A FEW MINOR THINGS THAT WOULD GO ALONG WITH THAT IN THE STANDARDS. SO WE MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S TAKEN CARE OF AND TAKEN CARE OF THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. YEAH. AND THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BACK TO YOU FOR APPROVAL. RIGHT. SO, BUT AGAIN, WHAT THIS COUNCIL, I JUST WANT, SO WE'RE CLEAR WHAT, WHEN WE GO TO FIRST READING, WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DO IS NOT CHANGE FROM T THREE TO T FIVE. WE'RE BEING ASKED TO PUT AN EXCEPTION ON THIS PROPERTY. NO, NO SIR. THE SHARED PARKING IT WHAT THEY'RE ASKING YOU FOR AND IT'S WRITTEN, I, YOU KNOW, IT'S A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ACTUAL ZONING CODE. THE TEXT AMENDMENT. OKAY. IT WOULD BE A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE TO ALLOW FOR THAT PARKING IN THE T THREE. SO WE'RE, AND THE ASSOCIATED CHANGES NEEDED TO NECESSITATE THAT FOR THE T THREE. AND IT'S GONNA BE A FULL, IT'LL GO TO YOUR PLANNING COMMISSION, THEY'LL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND THEN THAT ORDINANCE CHANGE WOULD COME TO YOU FOR A VOTE. SO IT WOULD BE ALL ALL T THREE. ALL T THREE. YES. WOULD THIS WOULD ALLOW ANYTHING IN T THREE TO HAVE SHARED, TO HAVE A SHARED PLAN. RIGHT. AND AND WHAT THEY'RE SAYING, THIS IS WHAT'S CONSISTENT WITH YOUR WHITE HEARTED BOULEVARD MASTER PLAN AND YOUR COMP PLAN TO ALLOW THAT SHARED WORKING. AND T THREE ALLOWS ALL THE THINGS IN THERE. SO THIS ARCHITECTURAL THING, ONCE WE ALLOW SHARED, UH, PARKING WOULD ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN. THIS COULD BE ONE OF THE OPTIONS. NOTHING ELSE IS BEING CHANGED IN YOUR T THREE OTHER THAN ALLOWING FOR THAT SHARED PARKING. SHARED PARKING AND WHAT'S NEEDED TO NECESSITATE SHARED PARKING. SO ALL THE THINGS OF T THREE STILL WILL APPLY TO THIS PROPERTY. CORRECT. WHAT, WHAT YOU HAVE IN T THREE THAT WILL CONTINUE THE, THE CHART YOU HAD, ALL OF THAT WILL CONTINUE TO APPLY. IT'LL JUST CHANGE THAT ONE LINE. WHERE IS IT? THE THE PARKING? YEAH, RIGHT HERE. SO IT'S A TEXT AMENDMENT. AND THE OTHER THING THAT WE'VE LEARNED HERE TODAY IS THAT, UM, THERE COULD BE, REGARDLESS WHAT WE DO, THERE COULD BE A DISPUTE FROM THE, THE RESIDENTS AND THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY OVER THE CCNRS. THERE COULD BE, BUT THAT WOULDN'T, THAT WOULDN'T PUT US IN THE MIDDLE. NO, SIR. AND WHAT, WHAT THE CITY DOES REQUIRE IS THAT WHEN AN APPLICATION IS MADE, THE APPLICANT HAS TO CERTIFY THAT THEY'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANY EXISTING COVENANTS. IF THEY EXIST, THEY CERTIFY THAT TO US. UM, BUT THAT, THAT'S ON THE APPLICANT. SO IT'S, IT'S NOT ON THE CITY COUNCIL TO DECIDE ON THAT, TO MAKE A JUDGMENT ON THAT, TO REVIEW THAT. YOU DON'T, YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT. YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED TO DO THAT. AND, UM, YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE STANDING TO DO THAT EITHER. OKAY. I THINK, I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT WE HAVE TO DO. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT HERE TO MAKE ANY DECISIONS ON IT. I'M, I'M HERE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT, WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED, WHAT OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS A COUNCIL ARE. UM, AND, UH, I THINK, SO IF WE, [01:25:01] WHAT'S THE NEXT STEP? WE, WE GO TO FIRST READING ON THIS OR DOES IT HAVE TO GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION FIRST? SO IF WE PURSUED A TEXT AMENDMENT, THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND THE THOUGHT WOULD BE THAT IF WE'RE PURSUING THE TEXT AMENDMENT, THEN THE REZONING WOULD BE WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT. SO WHAT HAD BEEN ON YOUR AGENDA FOR FIRST READING WOULD BE TAKEN OFF, BUT STAFF WOULD DEVELOP THE LANGUAGE TO, UM, FORMALIZE THE TEXT AMENDMENT IN THE CODE AND THEN WOULD INTRODUCE THAT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN IT WOULD COME TO COUNCIL FOR TWO READINGS. SO THIS TEXT AMENDMENT IS THE OFFICIAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION AT THIS POINT? YES. AND, AND THE BASIS FOR THAT IS THIS ONE WE WANTED TO PRE PROTECT AND PRESERVE THE T THREE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND ESSENTIALLY SAYING THOSE WOULD BE THERE AS A BUFFER TO THE MORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT THAT'S IN THE T FIVE. BUT IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE BROADER CONCEPT OF THIS DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT, WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO INCORPORATE SHARED PARKING. AND THAT'S WHY I'M, I'M STRESSING THAT IT'S NOT JUST THIS APPLICATION, IT IS THE BROADER PICTURE FOR THE CORRIDOR BECAUSE THIS WILL BE THE FIRST OF SEVERAL THAT WOULD LIKELY COME FORWARD UNDER THOSE STANDARDS. BUT THAT'S ONLY IF THE COUNCIL SUPPORTS GOING IN THAT DIRECTION. AND SO DO YOU NEED A STRAW POLL? THERE'S NO BINDING VOTES. IT IS NOT BINDING, BUT IT'S JUST DIRECTION TO STAFF OF WHETHER WE SHOULD PREPARE SOMETHING OR WHETHER THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER. GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD, COME UP WITH SOMETHING ELSE. MAY I ASK A QUESTION SOMEWHERE? I GOT A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED WITH ALL OF THAT. SO WHEN YOU SAID THAT THE APPLICANT, THIS MUST BE, WE CAN CHANGE OUR, UH, UH, OUR WORDING TO ALLOW THE SHARED PARKING THAT IS COMPLETELY ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IS BEING REQUESTED. SO THEN BEFORE MR. MOY WOULD BE ABLE TO COME BACK TO US, DOES THIS CCR HAVE TO BE SORTED OUT? SORTED OUT? NO. SO AS PART OF OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WE REQUIRE CERTIFICATION THAT THEY DO NOT APPLY THAT WAS SUBMITTED AND PROVIDED BY MR. JOHNSON. NOW THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY CAN'T BE CHALLENGED, IT'S JUST WE ARE NOT THE ONES THAT ARE ABLE TO CHALLENGE IT. OKAY. THE APPLICANTS HAVE MET THEIR BURDEN BY SUBMITTING PROOF IN THEIR OPINION THAT THEY DO NOT APPLY. OKAY. THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT I ASK. OKAY, THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, SO FOLLOWING UP ON WHAT STEVE JUST ASKED, IF WE, UM, DO A STRAW POLL ON THIS TEXT AMENDMENT MM-HMM . WHAT HAPPENS? AND I THINK HARRY ASKED THE SAME THING. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? IT GOES BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. YEAH. STAFF WOULD HAVE TO DEVELOP THE LANGUAGE AND THEN THAT LANGUAGE WOULD HAVE TO BE INTRODUCED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AND THEN IT WOULD APPEAR BEFORE YOU AS AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND YOUR CODE TO ADOPT THAT LANGUAGE. AND THEN IT WOULD BE UP TO YOU TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. WOULD WE, WOULD WE LEAVE TED'S WOULD WE LEAVE THAT OFF OF OUR AGENDA UNTIL IT COMES BACK FROM THE PLANNING? AGAIN, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE APPLICANT. IF IT WERE ME, I WOULD LET THAT PROCESS PLAY OUT KNOWING THAT IT WOULD ALLOW FOR WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO DO IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT. BUT IN THEORY, THEY'RE ENTITLED TO APPLY, THEY'RE ENTITLED TO ASK YOU TO MAKE A DECISION ON THAT. BUT BASED UPON THE FEEDBACK THAT WE HEARD WHEN THIS FIRST CAME BEFORE YOU, THERE APPEARS TO BE CONCERNS WITH THEIR REQUEST TO REZONE IT TO T FIVE. SO AGAIN, I CAN'T, CAN'T MAKE THAT DECISION FOR THEM. BUT I WOULD SAY YES, THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT PLAY OUT BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE THE, UH, LIKELY WAY THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AS CONTEMPLATED THEY NEED TO WITH, I'M SORRY, WITHDRAW THE T FIVE REQUEST AND THEN RE REQUEST WHAT? SO THE STAFF IS GONNA BE THE ONE THAT'S GONNA BE MAKING THE REQUEST FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT. AND AGAIN, IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, IT'S BECAUSE WE THINK THAT THE AMENDMENT SUPPORTS THE OVERALL CONCEPT FOR REDEVELOPING THE DOWNTOWN AREA. OKAY. SO WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE THIS CONFLICT OVER THE CCRS? THAT WE ARE COMPLETELY OUT OF THIS. THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT AND I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO, STEVE. 'CAUSE I'M THINKING THIS MR. MAYOR, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO MM-HMM . BUT THE PUBLIC HAS, THIS ISN'T THE END FOR THE PUBLIC. I MEAN, THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEY WOULD ALSO BE ABLE TO COME TO COUNCIL FOR BOTH READINGS. OKAY. SO IT'S NOT LIKE WHAT WE HAVE TO DO, WHAT WE HAVE TO DO, WHAT, WHAT'S BEFORE THIS COUNCIL IS IF WE WANNA TAKE THE SHARED PARKING TEXT AMENDMENT, WE HAVE TO GIVE THAT DIRECTION. MM-HMM . IF WE DON'T WANNA DO ANYTHING RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE'RE WE'RE CONFUSED [01:30:01] OR WE WANNA THINK ABOUT IT, THEN WE DO NOTHING AND IT GOES NOWHERE. IF WE SAY LET IT PROCEED, THEN WHAT'S, WHAT WAS TABLED WAS A CHANGE TO T FIVE. MM-HMM . SO WE EITHER GO TO THIS SHARED PARKING ROUTE OR GO TO THE NEXT STEP AND VOTE ON THE T FIVE ROUTE AND UH, YOU KNOW, OR WAIT AND HAVE ANOTHER OR YOU KNOW, YOU WANNA THINK ABOUT IT. MM-HMM . IT'S, THAT'S, THOSE ARE OUR CHOICES AT THIS POINT. YES SIR. BECAUSE I THINK AT THIS POINT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD FROM EVERYBODY AND I, EXCEPT THIS GENTLEMAN WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING ELSE. UM, BUT WE HAVE TO DECIDE AT SOME POINT, OKAY, WHAT DO WE TELL STAFF IS THE NEXT THING WE WANT DONE? OR IF WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING DONE, THEN THE ORDINANCE CHANGING TO T FIVE COMES FORWARD. IS THAT RIGHT? YES. THEY WOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE YOU ACT UPON, 'CAUSE IT'S ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IT'S, THEY, THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO ASK US TO. THAT'S IT. WE COULDN'T POSTPONE IT INDEFINITELY. RIGHT, SIR. MR. MAYOR SHERICK COLEMAN, AGAIN, I WILL TELL YOU THAT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF MY CLIENT, IT WOULD BE IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO PURSUE THE TEXT AMENDMENT BECAUSE WE REALLY DON'T WANT T FIVE THAT WE, WE ONLY HAD THE T FIVE BECAUSE TO COVER THE PARKING. SO IF THAT CAN BE ADDRESSED BY THE TAX AMENDMENT, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO GET AWAY FROM THE T FIVE BECAUSE I DON'T THINK T FIVE IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WE DEFINITELY WOULD RATHER SEE IT REMAIN T THREE. SO WE WOULD PRE PREFER THAT. I THINK THAT'S WHY WE TABLED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. UM, WE'RE IN AGREEMENT. SO I COUNSEL, UM, I'M OF THE OPINION AND I'LL TAKE A TO UPHOLD, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DON'T WANT TO THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO MAKE ANY DECISION. BUT AS A, IF WE GIVE A STRAW POLL TO GO FORWARD WITH THE TEXT AMENDMENT, AT LEAST THAT PUTS T FIVE OFF THE TABLE FOR NOW. PUTS IT BACK IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, GIVES IT AT LEAST THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS. UM, IT GIVES US TIME TO MAKE A FINAL DECISION. AND, AND I THINK, UH, BECAUSE TO DO NOTHING THEN, THEN WE HAVE TO VOTE ON T FIVE AND THAT BECOMES A MESS. UM, SO THAT'S MY THOUGHT. UM, DOES ANYBODY WANT TO ADD TO THAT BEFORE I TAKE A STRAW POLL? I THINK IT'S A GOOD SUMMARY. MM-HMM . A GOOD AND I THINK T FIVE T THIS TEXT AMENDMENT WILL BENEFIT US IN THE FUTURE. SO THIS DOESN'T ARISE AGAIN WITH OUR WHITE HARDY BOULEVARD PLANNING. I THINK SOME, I DON'T WANNA SAY THIS SLIPPED THROUGH THE CRACKS, BUT IT'S SOMETHING YOU NEVER, YOU DON'T DEAL WITH UNTIL IT POPS UP. SO I THINK, I THINK IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO TO AMEND, UH, OUR ZONING TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. I THINK ALSO, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD. THE ONLY, THE ONLY THING THAT WORRIES ME ABOUT ALL OF THIS IS IF WE ARE GOING TO OPEN IT TO ONE, ONE PERSON AND WE ARE GONNA INTRODUCE SHARED PARKING GOING FORWARD, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT SIZE OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE GONNA COME TO REQUEST SHARED PARKING. AND ARE WE OPENING PANDORA'S BOX BY GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS? GREAT QUESTION. LET'S, IF YOU COULD PULL BACK UP THE MAP TO SHOW THE EXISTING ZONING. IT'S NOT EVERYWHERE. IT REALLY IS ONLY WHERE T THREE MEETS UP WITH T FOUR AND T FIVE. SO YOU'RE NOT GONNA HAVE SHARED PARKING BACK HERE. YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO HAVE IT ALONG THIS CORRIDOR. AND AGAIN, TO GO BACK TO THAT, THAT BIGGER PICTURE OF WHAT THE VISION IS, THAT'S, I REALLY THINK WHAT YOU WERE ANTICIPATING, WHICH IS BUILD YOUR COMMERCIAL UP HERE, HAVE SOME SHARED PARKING, AND THEN HAVE SOMETHING LESS INTENSE BEHIND IT AS YOU TRANSITION TO MORE OF A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. BUT, BUT FOR OUR PURPOSES WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, IT WOULD REALLY ONLY APPLY TO THIS BOUNDARY RIGHT HERE. SO IT'S ONLY GOING TO BE APPLICABLE TO THE PORTION THAT'S MARKED T THREE. THAT, AND SO LET ME ADD TO THAT, THAT WOULD ALSO ALLOW IT FOR THIS AREA RIGHT HERE. T FIVE, T FOUR AND T FIVE AGAIN THE, THE SHARED PARKING CONCEPT WITHIN THE TRANSECT ZONES? YES. THEY'RE ALREADY, YEAH, IT'S ALREADY IN THOSE. OKAY. WELL IT'S ALREADY IN T FOUR. IT'S ALREADY IN T FOUR AND T FIVE. WELL, I, I THINK, I THINK THE CHOICE TO, UH, HAVE STAFF PURSUE, UM, THE TEXT AMENDMENT GIVES EVERYBODY MORE TIME TO THINK. UM, I THINK AT SOME POINT, UH, WE [01:35:01] NEED AN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO ADVISE US ON THE LEGAL, UH, PARTS THAT WE DISCUSSED, UH, SOMETIME PRIOR TO FIRST READING, UM, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND OUR LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES AS WELL. UM, SO LET ME TAKE A STRAW POLL, UH, AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT TO, UM, DO STRAW, UH, SHARED PARKING, THE, UH, THE TEXT AMENDMENT. EXCUSE ME. YEAH. UM, AND IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THAT AND YOU WANT TO OFFER SOME OTHER ALTERNATIVE, PLEASE DO SO AT THAT TIME. SO STEVE, UM, I THINK WE SHOULD PURSUE THE, UH, TEXT AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME. VALERIE TEXT AMENDMENT FROM ME. PAUL TEXT AMENDMENT. JOHN TEXT AMENDMENT FOR, UM, FOR PROTECTION, BUT ALSO WITH THE UNDERSTANDING. AND THEY, AND WE HAVE HAD AN UNDERSTANDING TONIGHT THAT THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE SOME MORE INPUT LATER ON BEFORE ANYTHING IS DEFINITELY DECIDED. THEY'LL HAVE INPUT AT, THEY'LL HAVE INPUT AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ALSO, IF WE FEEL THAT AFTER THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WE NEED TO HAVE ANOTHER WORKSHOP, WE HAVE THAT RIGHT TO DO SO, SO THERE'S GONNA BE AT LEAST THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS AND WE CAN ADD A FOURTH IF WE FEEL IT'S NECESSARY. CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE OUR PLANNING MEETINGS AT 10 O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING. IS, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR WHEN THIS COMES TO PLANNING TO SCHEDULE IT LATER SO THE FOLKS, THE RESIDENTS WHO LIVE THERE AND ACTUALLY WORK CAN, CAN ATTEND? I KNOW. YOU KNOW, CAN YOU MAKE THAT HAPPEN? WE CAN MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION. ABSOLUTELY, SIR. OKAY. PLEASE DO. BECAUSE I THINK THEY HAVE A VOICE AND THEY NEED TO BE HEARD AND YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T EXPECT THEM TO, TO, TO LEAVE THEIR JOBS FOR THIS. THEY'LL HAVE THEIR TIME AT COUNCIL ALSO, BUT I THINK AT PLANNING THEY SHOULD BE HEARD ALSO. BUT IF THEY KNOW IT FAR ENOUGH IN ADVANCE TOO THAT YOU RIGHT. MAKE SOME PLANS. YEAH. BUT I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IF THEY CAN MAKE PLANS FOR FIVE, I I THINK IT'S A GOOD SUGGESTION. I WOULD SUPPORT THAT. THANK YOU. UM, SO I, I AGREE WITH THE TEXT AMENDMENT. IT GIVES EVERYBODY TIME TO SIT BACK AND THINK ABOUT THE RAMIFICATIONS AND THE UNDERSTANDING AND HOPEFULLY IN THE END WE'LL MAKE WISE DECISION. UM, AND, UM, SO MR. GRUBER, THE UM, STRAW POLL, NON-BINDING STRAW POLL OF THE COUNCIL IS THAT WE SHOULD PURSUE THE ROUTE OF TEXT AMENDMENT, UM, ON THIS, ON THIS ISSUE? YES. WE'LL, WE'LL LIKELY NEED A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO WORK ON DRAFTING THE LANGUAGE. SO I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT THIS IS PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT WOULD COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THEIR MAY MEETING. OKAY. YOU JUST KEEP US ADVISED. YES, SIR. AND, UH, WE'LL GO ACCORDING TO THAT. IS EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD ON WHAT THE PROCESS PLEASE MISS? I JUST WANTED TO ASK A QUESTION. MAUREEN GARDNER 1 0 6 FALLS COURT. SO DOES THAT MEAN THE, I THINK IT'S APRIL 17TH, THAT MEETING IS NO LONGER OR THAT THERE'S NOTHING RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR APRIL FROM WHAT THEY WERE TOLD BECAUSE THERE'S NO AGENDA OR THERE WASN'T. AND, AND WHAT SHE'S REFERRING TO IS THE MOTION THAT CITY COUNCIL MADE TO TABLE THIS MATTER TO A DATE. OH, THAT ONE WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE SO THAT YEP. WHAT WE'RE GONNA LOOK TO DO IS WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO HAVE THEM SEND US SOMETHING, UH, TEMPORARILY WITH DRAWING THEIR REQUEST IN, IN ORDER TO ALLOW US TO GO THROUGH THIS EFFORT, WHICH MEANS IT'LL COME OFF THAT AGENDA. OKAY. AWESOME. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. SO IF I UNDERSTAND WHAT MR. GRUBER JUST SAID IS IF THE APPLICANT INSISTS WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA AND VOTE ON T FIVE. OKAY. 'CAUSE THEY HAVE THAT RIGHT? MM-HMM . BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THE PLAN, BUT IF THEY DO AS MR. GRUBER SUGGESTS, THEN YES, IT WOULD BE TAKEN OFF THE AGENDA. SO WE BE NOTIFIED THAT IT'S BEEN WITHDRAWN SO WE DON'T HAVE TO ATTEND THE MEETING. COULD WE APRIL 17TH MEETING, COULD WE MAKE SURE MM-HMM . THAT ON ANYTHING, ANY MEETING THAT, UH, SOLS COURT GETS, GET LETTERS BECAUSE THE FIR WE GOT A LETTER FOR THE FIRST MEETING, BUT THEN THERE WAS JUST A LITTLE STAKE IN THE GROUND AND THE DATES WERE SO SMALL THAT HALF THE NEIGHBORS DIDN'T SEE IT. I'M ASKING STAFF OKAY. TO MAKE SURE ANY MEETING REGARDING THIS BE SENT TO ALL THE RESIDENTS OF SAUL, SAUL, SCOTT, CAN WE DO THAT? YEP. THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH. YOU'RE WELCOME. UM, GENTLEMEN, WE'RE IN AGREEMENT. I'M OKAY. SO, [01:40:01] UH, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE, THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HEADING. UH, I WANNA THANK EVERYBODY FOR THEIR PATIENCE, FOR THEIR INPUT AND UM, WE'LL GET THERE. THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW WHERE WE'LL GET, BUT WE'LL GET THERE. GET SOME. WE'LL GET THE RIGHT. THANKS A LOT. WE'LL GET SOMEWHERE. WE'RE GOING IN SOME DIRECTION. HI. [III. ADJOURNMENT] AYE. * 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.