Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone. It's 6 o'clock. Thank you for joining us in the Kittyhawk Town Council meeting room. We're in the Smith room and if you're able to stand, if you would, please join us for that in a moment of silence, please. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Council, I need a motion to approve tonight's agenda.

So moved, Madame Mayor. All All in favor? I need a second for that. Second. Okay. And all in favor? I. Okay. Madame Clerk, has anyone signed up to speak at public comment tonight? Yes, ma'am. Our first public comment is

please speak into the microphone, introduce yourself and uh you have three minutes. Okay.

I'm Jan Collins and I'm president of the Dementia Friendly Coalition. Thank you, Madame Mayor and members of the town council. Thank you to all our DFC supporters that are here tonight and a special thank you to Commissioner Bob Ross for joining us. Dementia Friendly was founded in 2013 following a health needs assessment. Over the past 13 years, it has been built trusted community-based support for individuals living with dementia and for the people who care for them. What began with a handful of volunteers has grown into an organization of more than 20 volunteers serving families across Dair County. But today, despite that growth, Dementia Friendly operates without a permanent home. Program locations are scattered, schedules are limited, and families are left keeping together support wherever space is available, while a former police station sits vacant, unused, and deteriorating. Let's be candid for a moment. Dementia and Alzheimer's are not abstract issues. They are personal. Almost everyone in this room has either experienced this disease firsthand or watched one go through it. You know how isolating it can be. You know how overwhelming it can be for families trying to manage it dayto day. This proposal is about those families. We're asking to repurpose the vacant building into a dementia friendly community center, a dedicated, welcoming space for individuals living with dementia, their caregivers, and the broader community. And I want to be very clear, this is not a risky ask. This is not a permanent commitment. And there is no downside for the town. We are asking for conditional use only. The town retains full ownership and full control. The building

can be reclaimed at any time if a m municipal need arises. In the meantime, instead of sitting idally and continuing to deteriorate, the building would be maintaining maintained, lightly improved, and actively serving residents. This is a lowcost, lowrisisk way to turn a liability into an asset. And the benefits are real. For family, it means consistent, reliable support, a place to go on difficult days. Flexible rest options, connection instead of isolation for the community. It means reduced strain on emergency services, more trained caregivers and first responders, a centralized resource for education and outreach, and a visible commitment to supporting our aging population. This is just not a building, it's a multiplier. Now, I also want to address something directly. We have presented this concept. We have met with members of the council individually. We have had conversations across the community and to date there has been no express opposition to this proposal. No one has raised a reason not to do this. So the question becomes if there's no downside, no opposition, and a clear and growing need in this community, why would we not move forward? This is a practical solution to a very real problem using a building that already exists to serve people who need it today. So, I'll close with this. There is a need. There is a building. There is a solution. And there is still no opposition to taking the next step. We're asking for a simple next step. Schedule a public hearing. Let this

Miss Collins, you're out of time. I have two sentences. Let the community weigh in and let's give this building the opportunity to serve this town again. Not through enforcement, but through care, dignity, and support. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you,

Madam Clerk. Anybody else? Yes.

Okay. Thank you for taking the time to listen to me this evening. I'm No Preston. I'm on the board of the Dementia Friendly Coalition. I flew helicopters in the Navy. Uh retired in 2008 after 37 years of active in reserve service and retired as a river admiral. Uh shortly after we retired or I retired, my wife contracted uh was diagnosed with frontal temporal dementia. And I'm offering these remarks to sort of put in context a little bit of what Jan's talking about with the need the we were blessed with the people from the venture friendly coalition and also at that time Jim uh in providing information and help as I was her full-time caregiver for six and a half years. Uh and as you probably know that's a 24 hour 7 day a week job. There is no rest. There's if you're doing it right. Uh it is fulltime. Three things came out of help uh from the dementia friendly coalition. First is education. There's no textbook that tells you for your specific kind of dementia that you're addressing and how it presents uh what the right way is to take care of of the patient of your loved one. Uh the coalition helps provide education. Second is respit. Uh when do you go grocery shopping? When do you go to the dentist? When do you do this? When do you do that? Uh you don't have the time. It's full-time. The respit uh care that the coalition provides is invaluable

there. The third is educating the community. what the coalition has done with the hospital with restaurants making things dementia friendly uh is invaluable also so you can take your patient out you can go out into the public not be ridiculed not laughed at but be respected uh so uh I would view it as you have a great opportunity here in Kitty Hall to help the coalition help our people in the community. Uh there are a lot of people that weren't as blessed as my wife and I were with the resources and the available time as a retiree to do what we had to do. And the coalition helps fill those gaps. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Anybody else? Yes, ma'am. Saunders. Okay. Hi.

Hello. I'm Karine Saunders. I live in unincorporated Dare County, but I'm here tonight because um along with my husband, I run Outerbanks Insider, a local news outlet, and we just wanted to extend um a personal invitation to all of you and Kittyhawk residents in general to come celebrate local news Day with us this Friday. Um it's from 9 to 11:00 a.m. at Wave Riders in Nexad. Um open to the public. Come join us, get some coffee, and just have casual conversations, meet the people behind the headlines. Um, thank you all for considering the local news proclamation tonight and we submitted those to all of the local governments. Um, this is the first time the local news day has ever been celebrated. It started with the Montana free press actually as an initiative and then North Carolina really took it up and NC local has started to organize NC news cafes across the state. So, in the locations where they don't have staff, they asked local newsrooms to step up and host these. And so, um, I'm the host for the local news cafe that's this Friday for us. And so, I just wanted to thank you for your consideration of the proclamation and invite you all to attend. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Good evening council members there. I hadn't planned on speaking but listening to my friends J whom I had a chance to meet a number of years ago before his late wife passed and observed the care that he gave her cafe. Gem being the acronym for general expert memory care. Uh these folks I just am here to share and provide my support and those I know my fellow commissioners. These folks are selfless. The sacrifice of their time, energy to help those not only suffering from the dementia related illness, but their caregivers and I want to assure you their motives are truly sincere and it is a noble cause. So for whatever that's worth, they have my 100% support and I hope can find a resolution here that could be beneficial for their cause, the community, and uh appreciate your time at this. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, is that it? That's all I have signed up. Okay, council. I need a motion to approve tonight's consent agenda. Make a motion to approve. Send it in. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you. All in favor?

I council, we need to schedule two public hearings. The first is a zoning amendment, text amendment for emergency and government services district. Do I have a Do I have a motion to do that? Madame Mayor, I move to set a public hearing at the town council meeting on April the 6, 2026 to consider the proposed tax amendment to section 42-528. Okay, thank you. Um, may I correct that to May 4th?

Oh, I'm sorry. We are in April. We all had. So anyway, let's just let's just correct it. There you go. We got it now. We got it. Okay. Second. Thank you, Dylan. All in favor? I.

Thank you. Now, we have a second public hearing and it's a zoning text amendment. Division 5 Emergency and Governmental Services District. Um um do I have a motion to schedule that public hearing? Madame Mayor, I move to set the public hearing at the town council meeting on May 4th, 2026 to consider the proposed text amendment to sections 422-250 and 42-251. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you, David. Okay. All in favor?

We have all in favor? I I Okay. We have two public hearings tonight. The first is for the accessory dwelling unit. And I have a And do I have a motion to go into public hearing? So move. Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. All in favor? I. Okay. Public hearing.

Um to begin. Um this amendment clarifies how uh how large an ADU can be accessory building and applies a simple consistent setback standard so the rules are easier to understand and administer. Um this proposed text amendment is to section 42-528. Um it focuses on two areas where the current ordinance is not currently defined and could lead to inconsistent interpretation um based on how the ADU size is calculated and how side during setbacks applied to them. Um starting with the ADU size, the ordinance currently limits these uh these units to 800 square ft or 50% of the primary dwelling uh whichever is less. However, it does not clearly define what counts towards that square footage. Um, in practice, staff has only counted the conditioned living space and excluded unheated areas such as uh garages or storage or attic space. Um, and what we're seeing as a result is that some ADUs include the full allowable living area uh along with large enclosed unheated spaces uh can make the structure appear larger than intended and creates potential for those spaces to be converted into a living area later on without permits. Um the second issue relates to sideyard setbacks. Under the current ordinance, um setbacks or sideyard setbacks increase as the size of as the size of the dwelling increases based on the total condition square footage. Um dwellings up to 3,000 ft have a 10 foot side setback. Uh 31 square foot to 3500 it goes to 12 1/2 ft and so on. Um, so the ordinance does not currently address whether an ADU should be included in that calculation. Uh, that lack of clarity creates uncertainty for applicants and staff and in some cases could require increased setbacks that the primary structure of the lot cannot meet. Uh, the proposed amendment is intended to resolve both these issues in a straightforward way. Um, it should be noted that the planning board was

presented with multiple options on how to best address these issues and uh, the uh, rec or the proposal that you had in your packet were the recommendations that the planning board uh decided on based on those options that they were given. Uh so first it clarifies that only the condition living space counts towards the ADU size limit. Uh at the same time it introduces a requirement for a reported non-conversion agreement to ensure that unheated spaces are not later converted into a living area without proper review and approval. Um, a non-con conversion agreement is a tool that the town currently uses as part of its flood plane administration. Um, if a structure has enclosed space that's below regulatory flood protection elevation prior to receiving their CO, the owner has to uh is required to record this non-con conversion agreement acknowledging that the enclosed space will not later be converted into living space and that runs with the property if the owner sells it. Um so if approved a similar document would be developed to apply to the ADUs in this case. Um second the planning board uh recommended to simplify the size standard by removing the 50% limitation tied to the primary one and retaining uh just the 800 square foot cat as the sole maximum. Um this was not part of the original proposal to the planning board but it came up during discussions and was recommended as part of their motion. Um, so basically what right now if you have a uh like a 1600 square foot primary dwelling you're limited to 800 square feet. Um, if you have a 2500 square foot uh you're limited or sorry if you have a say 1,200 foot primary dwelling 50% you'd be limited to 600 foot for the ADU. Then if you have a 2500 foot primary dwelling you're still capped at 800. Um the planning board recommended just a straight 800 square foot cap on the ADU size. Um and third, it

establishes a fixed 15 foot sideyard setback for detached ADUs rather than tying that requirement to the size of the primary dwelling. Um that's larger than our current minimum sideyard setback. Um it does coincide with one of the um recommendations in the land use plan to look at um how ABUs can impact in residential um neighborhoods. One of them specifically mentioned uh the possibility of increased set side setbacks for them. Um so overall the intent of these changes is to provide a clearer more predictable standards uh ensure that ADUs remain subordinate to the primary structure and reduce opportunities for unintended expansion or circumvention of the ordinance while still maintaining uh compatibility with existing neighbor. Um that all I've got is there any questions for me from council or any public comment during the hearing? Do we have anybody that would like to speak to this amendment? Okay.

Come forward. Come on. You have five minutes. I always forget.

Good evening. Good evening. Um, I spent two years on the county's affordable housing task force, um, which has now grown to a, uh, nonprofit organization. Been working on affordable housing for over 30 years. It's a problem. Um, as a town manager and and a former mayor, I learned there's all kinds of problems and the solutions are hard. There's no such thing as a perfect ordinance. But 800 square f feet is a little bit small. That could be like a somebody would rent that to live in until uh something better comes along. It won't be a home. We have to have more tools in the box. A use the one tool in the box and that and it's not going to solve a whole lot. But we need a little bit bigger than 800 square f feet. A single parent or or any parent who have a child will need two bedrooms. be tough to put two bedrooms into into an affordable housing uh to a to the accessory dwelling unit. I don't know if they're going to be able to fit it on the lot without an addition to the lot coverage. Dair County has put a 1200 foot cap on theirs and they increase the lot coverage to 38%. Kill Devil Hills, I don't know they but I do know they did increase the lot coverage there too. So, if we're serious about trying to solve the housing problem right now, we've got to we've got to lessen the rules a little bit. You got to keep making them stronger. I always thought it was real hard with Kittyhawk was one of the first towns to pass the ADU ordinance and and but I mean, as you can tell, you've been back to it at least three times, maybe four. I don't remember my van, but I was here a lot talking about them. And I appreciate all the work you put into it. But you got to make it a home. You've

got to make it so they're comfortable. If you're only going to have a one-bedroom little apartment, um we're not going to solve a problem with any family. You put something a little bit more comfortable. They'll stay there. They'll make it home. Maybe it won't be just renting something until uh something better comes along. We're hoping with this housing task force that we have the the nonprofit right now um they've got some solutions. There's going to be some building going on. I'm kind of out of the loop. I don't know what goes on exactly. You would know may more than I would know. But we've got to do something and problems are getting worse. I tried I just told uh Commissioner Ross I went out to dinner last week on a Sunday had some some people from Raleigh came down from the homebuilders association and an hour and a half wait on a table in March on a Sunday. I mean it's it's it's just getting more crowded. We have got to find a way to put our workforce into into some kind of housing and not flop houses, not little bungalows. Um I'm hoping that the nonprofit association comes up with a solution. Um, I know ADUs are not the answer completely, but it's another tool in the box. So, I hope you'll consider increasing that 800 foot a little bit more so they could put a two-bedroom unit upstairs or wherever they're putting it and and make it a little bit nicer.

Thank you. Thank you. you. We have we have some promising ideas coming out of the foundation. So, I hope they'll come to fruition. Okay. Anyone else?

Hi everybody. Good evening. I'm Grace Ann. I know I've spoke to you before on accessory dwelling units. Um I went to the planning board when they spoke about this text amendment and it did talk they started with setbacks and they transitioned into just making the 800 square foot heated living space across the board um versus the 50% rule and then up to 800 square f feet and I thought it was a great idea personally owning a house in Kittyhawk that is in the VR1 zone district and last year we discussed the occupancy restrictions making it more longterm versus short shortterm and all that different regulation. And a good point was brought up during the planning board meeting that they discussed was that if the goal for accessory dwelling unit is to be long-term occupancy or especially in the uh village residential one allowing that to be 800 square ft versus like on a th00and square foot house personally I50T house grew up in a 1200 foot house that only means that we can do you know 525 or 600 ft which is a lot more challenging to have a long term. occupant or make it worth building a structure to put a long-term occupant in there if it's only a onebedroom accessory structure. So, I just wanted to make that point and thank you guys for listening.

Thank you. You council, do you have any questions for Rob? I've got one. Um, so Rob, what what was the purpose for the 800 square foot for an ADU? The the size initially to capping it at that.

Think back. I think it was 2018 when this text amendment first came forward. Um, and it was a a citizens application that brought it in and that was just the number that they had on it. But I think the intent on the size limit is to ensure that the ADU stays from an appearance standpoint as a subordinate reduction to the primary dwelling.

Okay. And it's a 50% reduction in that sort of thing. So, and and I do like the idea of um you know, taking some of the guesswork out of it, 50% and all that, but um and I believe state statute indicates 8. It's got to be a maximum cap of 800 square feet. It can't be less than that. It can't be more restrictive. It's got to be 800 or more if I'm not mistaken. Is that right? Uh, I'm not familiar with that state statute.

Okay. Um, so I I think there's a um a Senate Bill 495 that goes into effect on January 1st of 2027 that says it's got to be it can't be any smaller than 800 ft. Um, but what I what I'm interested in is the 800 ft. And you and I talked earlier today about this, but um it seems interesting the way and I I like the way this is structured because it takes the guesswork out of it. I like the way the planning board worked this, but I'm I'm interested in the in the notion of 800 square ft but of condition space but non-conditioned space you can have whatever. So if the purpose is to keep the unit small, how can we allow the only restriction at that point would be lot coverage size. Um so you could have a massive you could have 800 square foot condition space but a massive bottom or you know and how that fits into the whole side which I think defeats the purpose of 800. I think somehow those got connected and so I like the simplicity of it but I'm still not sure about that.

Right. And that did come up during the planning board meeting. Um, I think some specific examples came up having, you know, your 800 foot of living space on top of a threecar garage and then having additional storage and all. And um, that was kind of where the plan board landed. Some of the other options that were presented to them were um, you know, a maximum gross floor area that would uh, cover both the heated and unheated space. Um, having the the heated space match the the amount of unheated space like 800 and 800. Um ultimately this just where they landed in their recommendation.

Yeah. But I mean obviously you can see where I'm coming from because just as the last two um folks said you know 800 square feet is pretty small but you can say I'm going to build a structure. I'm going to limit 800 ft, but yet I'll have this massive structure that has unconditioned space, which defeats the whole purpose of keeping a Now, you know, we're talking earlier and you can have any size garage you want if it's on your property and doesn't exceed lot of coverage, but somehow I think we connected that conditioned space with the unconditioned space and I think that might have made it a little bit more complicated than

right or maybe even kind of defeated the purpose, so to speak. So, I' I'd rather see larger than 800 ft². If I'm going to have a big structure there that's 1,200 ft², I'd rather be more living space than garage space. Um, me personally, you know, um, for that reason for the, you know, the affordable housing issue and and things like that. But that's just that's just me personally. Okay, that it questions for Rob. the 15 foot sideyard setback that that's proposed that is regardless of the size of the new uh accessory building.

Correct. That would just be just a straight 15 foot setback that would only apply to the accessory accessory dwelling unit. So whatever setback applied to the primary when it was built would remain in place whether it's 10 or 12 and a half or what have you. Okay. Even if it's a So if it's like what Councilman Pete's talking about the if it's a large building just has a small ADU on top that large building still has the 15 foot setback. It's that building everything tied to it. Okay.

I mean I I understand what Councilman Pete's talking about. Um, and I think the intent of this was a little small out parcel to take care of maybe immediate family members who needed places to stay or or uh adult children or a mother-in-law suite, if you will. Um, it is interesting that what's what we're seeing. Do you I guess that brings a question to you. What the majority of these are they garage apartments or are they standalone dwelling units? Um say it's fairly even mix.

Okay. I'm sure the intent or the the idea is if I'm going to build a dwelling unit, might as well lift it up and put some storage space underneath. And sometimes we do see that um even if it's not garage space, but just unheated storage space underneath. um you know with the different reg the RF regulatory flood protection elevation um they have to elevate it anyways like you said because they have to elevate it they might as well put some storage or parking underneath it

but that wouldn't affect the lot coverage or the footprint if you build underneath it you know you'd have 800 square feet up and then 800 below so you have half half um so and and I like the idea you know, the non-con conversion agreement. You know, you're hold them to their honor and say, "Hey, I won't go into that heated space. You know, the house gets sold 10 years from now. There's no telling what they could do with it." But you just got to kind of press the I believe button and nobody's going to go into that extra thousand square feet or whatever they had as a garage and now it's it becomes a whole new apartment complex. But um yeah,

I think the cap on 800 the intent in the very beginning was it was called a mother-in-law suite. It was four Airbnbs or whatever we want to call them. Um and then it's changed from the had to be behind use the same driveway. It was really the intent was for like maybe a stepping stool for your children or a loved one that you could take care of. Everything snowballed with the Airbnbs or whatever you want to call them. I know we have a a a housing problem, but if I live in a VR1 and I understand it's 800 square foot, it's probably just going to be a couple people. if if that Airbnb turns into 1,600 square f feet, I'm going to have five families. I might as well live in a a BR3. Um, that's my reasoning. I I I've always wanted to do these by zoning and have sizes by zoning and and do it different. And as most of y'all know, I voted pretty much against these from day one uh because I I just think they're mismatched. and one that would fit over on the beach I don't think would fit back in Kittyhawk Village down certain roads. And so that's why um right now I'm good with the cap unless we want to go different zones and start working this a different way. Um that's where I've stood on these from the beginning. But but you see what I'm saying, Jeff, with the even if you cap it at 800 feet, you can go as large as you want with the unconditioned space. So the footprint I've built a bunch, you know, you build I built 500 ft of living area and 700 ft of decks, porches, and

so I guess the question is is why the 800 square f feet? You know, was that the intent as you were just saying? I think it was just so you don't have three um families staying in one house. Well, I would suspect to keep the footprint size down because the 50% of the original house, you don't want a second structure on a property that dwarfs the original structure, right? I think that's kind of the intent. I think at first we were like 900, weren't we, Rob? I think it was half up to 900 or something. The original 800 or 50% of the project. The size hasn't changed since the 2018 when it first got adopted,

but the cap was nine. 800. Okay. And Rob, would the is it still stated unheated storage or parking shall not be

um considered against the 50% rule? I mean, I'm sorry, the 50% or 800 feet. 800 feet cap. which says that the conditioned living space of accessory dwelling dwelling unit should shall not be larger than 800 square ft. Uh unheated storage or parking space shall not be included in the calculation of maximum ADU square footage uh prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy and non- conversion agreement must be filed with the reg must be filed with the reported deed for the would that help with decks and stuff because that that was something I actually hadn't thought about. um council improve it building out decks. How does that apply here? It does not. Okay.

We've never counted that even with you know our our scaled side setbacks for the primary dwellings. We don't count decks or uneven space into it. But that's not as a result of this ordinance nor any change to this ordinance. Correct. That's just the way it is. Okay. I just want Yeah, that's just something I hadn't considered. That was good. But so it would be that way no matter what we do I guess with the ordinance though. Right. Right. Whether we cap it, whether we don't. The DEX thing is still

and the the language that's being proposed is really just codifying the way it's been applied in practice. Um just going with that extra step of requiring the non conversion agreement because right now we haven't been counting attic space or garage space. U this is just trying to the intent was to get in the town code to clearly state one way or the other so it's not wrapped up for interpretation. So which is good. I mean that's a a good move. If there are no more questions for Rob I'd like to leave public hearing.

I will make one quick comment. Uh Council Mance the uh so I last I checked and I'm looking it up right now. Senate Bill 495 as it's proposed would if upon adoption would have applied to permits. I think it was submitted after October of 25 something of that nature and then would have went into effect

in 27. That's still on the floor. That's actually not it's not been passed yet. It's still that was the Senate bill. It's still with the Senate. There's a mirror there's a um companion bill 627 I believe that was a house bill that's still on the house floor with the rules and operations committee as well. So I as of right now I know exactly which one you're talking about but I don't think they've made it to the point where they passed and become law okay. So if we wanted to right now not saying that we want to but if we did want to go that direction we could actually maximize the square footage to less than 800 right now. Right. because that bill has been passed

far far as I don't know of any other competing statute. So yes, now obviously though you get bills like this, it could be one provision in that bill that is causing people heartburn that ends up legislators heartburn that ends up changing. It seems clear that the intent though w with all of the certainly with just talks that you hear is that ADUs are something that I believe the state ultimately they're certainly taking seriously and I don't think this would be the last bill even if it these bills if they don't pass. So I would guess they're going to go towards less restrictive than more. Right. So,

and and I do believe the language in that proposed bill, I I wouldn't sure if it was proposed or not, um indicates that that's something that they're pushing across North Carolina for for the issue of affordable housing. It it certainly has it's caught somebody's ear as a uh way to to address that particular topic for sure at the state level. Absolutely. I will just add to that point too that currently the way the the size limit is written in certain circumstances we do have a limit that's less than 800 ft because it's 800 ft or 50% of the dwelling whichever is less. So if you've got a right exact foot primary building it could be small. That's right. The planning board recommended doing away with that.

But again it goes back to my initial question. What's the purpose in capping the size of an ADU? Is that for beautifification standards for you? What are we trying what were we trying to accomplish with that? And um

my recollection of it was just to keep it so that it's subordinate of the primary have two well it's the same size you know which is fine. Um and again I go back to that second question is if that's the case then the unconditioned space can be as large as we want it to be. So you end up with this massive building that doesn't, you know, dwarfs the original building. It's that kind of seems counterintuitive is all I'm saying. Just doesn't seem congruent with and so I like where it's trying to go, but that's like kind of just a hanging chad, so to speak, that's in there. So Okay. Okay. Are we ready to go out of public hearing? Do we have a motion?

I'll make a motion to go out of public hearing. Second. Second. Second. All in favor? I I Okay. Any discussion among the council? Where where we need to go with this? What What would you like to do with this?

Um, we need to work on it. I I I think um if I could maybe there's a question for Casey is if if we were to go back and just look at that one piece of the unconditioned space and and just take a round turn on it, would we table that or would we have to kick it back down to the planning board for a relook or how's that? Rob, help me out on that. I suppose it would be substantial enough where we would need to I mean if we're going to we can't peace meal it is what I because I are you are you headed towards the idea of maybe doing away right now with any cap don't discuss that particular language but put in the non-con conversion agreement language.

What I'm interested in seeing is if we could take a round turn on the uncondition space if if we need to cap that. Um if we do how much? Um because again it just doesn't seem fitting that you would limit the living space but then say you can build as much unconditioned space as you want. It just doesn't you know because now you're back to a massive structure. Can we add a condition? Can we add a condition? I'd stay away and because everybody around this table might have a different idea. 400 square feet, 200 square feet, whatever you know

and could we take another round? That's all I'm asking if that's possible. Um, I think personally that this would be kind of a one-off situation. I don't think many folks would build a 800 foot and then some massive boat barn or whatever next to it. I mean, maybe they could if it's, you know, it's their land, but but my thought is why would you couple it with unconditioned space? If you can build as many garages you want on your property, go ahead. You feel free. But with this ADU, there was a reason behind 800 square feet. And that's what I'm kind of stuck on. You know, we say 800 living, but make it as big as you want, right? Just kind of doesn't

I think well certainly one of I mean the part of if not all I know additional things came out of it by recommendation but the intent was to address that precise issue. Correct Rob? Which let me say it's not really to address in your mind when you wrote it. it was to just to deal and make it more clear and and have it comply and be and be parallel to the way you apply it in in real time. Right. Correct. Well, I was giving them options to see which way the town wanted to move forward. Okay. So, I I don't know. I mean, I think with that

if I guess my thought is if we're talking about putting a cap on the unheated space and it's more restricted than what was that's what I mean. So probably I was thinking about I I would I would agree uh mainly just again considering what the there were several options or not several but there were options as he said thrown out there to see which what was everyone's flavor. that wasn't one. However, so um I think if that's something specific that you want to do, I do I think we probably would need to revisit and have it go go back. Uh however, I think it's a good idea if that is the RA council chooses to certainly give Rob some kind of direction on where you'd like to go so we don't have this thing circling. Not specific, just some kind of direction on proposing caps or not prop. He doesn't have to come up with the number, but just if that's what it's being done for, then make sure that's part of of your direction, Rob.

Okay. Do I have a motion? So, if I could ask if would I if I was to make a motion to say let's review that piece, would I table it? No. No, you wouldn't want to table it. Uh, I suppose deny and then I mean or by So, we'd have to do we need to take some kind of action. It's it's here. So, we need to close the item out,

but that's maybe worth doing. So, I would say if that's the route you want to go, if that's the motion you're going to make, yeah, I mean, we're not subject to any rules about how the same thing can't be brought back if that's what ends up happening, such as would apply to a citizen application. However, certainly deny, but state, you know, the purpose because I I think it's great the way it's written. I mean, it's it's good. just that one piece is is just you know it's a it's a um again it's just not congruent with with the initial policy. On one hand you're saying I want to limit it but on the other side saying make it as big as you want you know

it just doesn't you know I think we're missing a piece here. So that's all that's all I'm hung on and I hate to deny something outright like that. Sure. But um but yeah so but it's important to get it right. Um so so madame mayor um I move to deny the proposed text amendment to section 42-528. Town council finds the proposal is inconsistent with the town's adopted land use plan which I'm not so certain that that's the case. Um, I mean it could be if you build a large structure and you know I guess that could be inconsistent

and let I I would say perhaps let's just tailor that a little bit more to say that you know this motion is being made for the purpose of considering whether or not there be X. So for example, a cap put on the non-heated living space. Okay. So, so that way everything else jives, everything else perhaps is still in play and it doesn't look funny when it comes back with some of this same language.

Okay. So, the madame may I move to deny proposal text amendment to section 42-528. Town council finds the proposal is inconsistent with the town's adopted land use plan and uh for the purpose of consideration of um uh maximizing square footage of the unconditioned space. I'm gonna second that. Second. Okay. All in favor? I Okay. Okay. We have Is that clear enough for you, Rob? Okay.

Rob, don't go anywhere. We have a second um public hearing. Um do I have a motion to go into public hearing on the setbacks with the pool decking? So move there. Okay. Second. Thank you. All right. All in favor? I All right. Rob.

All right. Uh this proposal as for section 42-504 related to swimming pools, pool decking, and associated equipment and their setbacks. Um again, this was one with the intent to uh kind of clarify some um existing language that's out there. Um So, the purpose of this amendment is to address an inconsistency in the ordinance and provide clear direction on how these features are regulated within required yards. Um, as a starting point, the town zoning ordinance defines setbacks or yards as areas that must remain open and unobstructed by structures above 30 in in height. That means by definition the ground level improvements like the patio or deck that's under 30 in uh are not considered encroachments into the setback and can extend all the way up to the property line by definition. Um however the current pole regulations are not fully consistent with that definition. Um right now pool decking under 30 inches in height is still required to maintain a 5-ft setback from the side and rear property lines. Uh even though identical ground level deck decking elsewhere on the property are not subject to that same restriction when there's no pool present. Um decking over 30 inches in height on the other hand is treated as a structure must be the full zoning uh district setbacks. Uh the proposed amendment is intended to resolve that inconsistency and better align the regulation. So there's one standard applied to to both. Um, under the proposed changes, all pools would continue to meet the front front yard setback requirements, and the pool itself would still be required to maintain a minimum 5 foot setback from the side and rear property lines. However, that pool decking and aprons that are under 30 inches in height would be treated the same as other ground level improvements. Uh, meaning they would no longer be subject to that minimum setback and could extend closer to the property. um decking or other or decking or structures over 30 inches in height would still be required to meet

the standard setbacks for the district. Um and in addition during the planning board discussion uh the discussion of pool equipment came up and they recommended allowing pool equipment to be located as close as 5T to the side and rear property lines. Uh consistent with setback applied to the pool itself and also consistent with how the town treats HVAC stands. Um is they're permitted to be as close ft to the side property lines. Um, a lot of times during construction, it's not uncommon for the pool equipment to be located on that same stand as the HVAC units. Um, if however, under our current regulations, if the pool equipment gets put on that stand and it's in the setback, we have to tell them to pull the equipment off and put it somewhere else. Um so again overall the intent of the amendment is to improve clarity uh eliminate internal inconsistencies in the ordinance and ensure that the pool related improvements are regulated in a way that's consisted uh consistent with the town's adopted definitions.

All right. Um if anyone in the public would like to comment on this, would you please come forward? Okay. Um, council, do you have questions for Rob? I have a question, Rob. If your pool equipment was enclosed in a enclosure with a roof, is it still held to the 5yard setback or would that be your building setback? Um, it's not specified. Well, currently, um, it's it would have to be the 10 ft 10 building over 30 inches in height from the ground level. It would have to be 25 ft in the rear and 10 feet on the sides. Um,

what if it's not 30 inches above ground level? If it's less than 30 inches in height, then the setbacks don't necessarily because it's less than the 144 and the 12ft walls. It's not the building. Okay, that's North Carolina. Okay. Right. in our you're not going to see HVAC yards and setbacks specifically say that it applies to anything over 30 in height. Okay. So like ground level decks or you got pool equipment that's less than 30 in and by definition it

and currently those types of structures are already going up to the property line if it's under 30 in. Okay. or they can. It's not don't typically see them up to the property line, but right if it's under 30 in it would be kind of give the repair men some room. Any more questions for Rob? Okay. Do we I need a motion come out of public hearing? So moved, madame mayor. Second. Thank you. Okay. Any other discussion among council?

Favor. Oh, one minute. Okay. All in favor? I. Okay. Is there any discussion among the council about this that you'd like to make? If so, if not, we need a motion. Madame Mayor, I move to approve the text amendment to section 42-504. Town council has found this proposal to be consistent with the town's adopted land.

Second. All right. All in favor? I. Thank you, Rob.

There is no new business. There is no old business. And next, town manager comments, please. Good. Good evening, everyone. Um, I have a couple things to talk about. First of all, thank you to all of the 30 volunteers that came out for a community trash collection event. We had beautiful weather. Um, it might be hard to imagine that a trash collection event is fun, but people love it and it's so everyone's so positive and happy to help and it's just a great experience. And thank you to Lauren Garrett and all the staff volunteers who made this event successful. Um, tipping has begun. uh we are doing it a little bit different this year. Our public works team has decided to do that themselves. So now uh we are doing it throughout the month. The guidelines for what type of vegetative debris that you can put out are on the town's website and um the piles of brush should still be placed within the 10 feet of the roadside in front of the property. Um, it's do not stag near utilities, fire hydrants, and under low hanging tree branches. And again, you can visit the town hall with any questions. And also, just a reminder, debris that's created from contractors and landscapers is a responsibility of themselves to remove. The town will not be collecting that type of debris. Um, we are having a party on April, Monday, April 13th between 4 and 7. It is the town's 45th anniversary of our incorporation. Um, please help spread the word. Bring your neighbors and your friends, your kids, your grandkids, your cousins,

whoever. Um, the event will feature the premiere of a historic video recognizing both town's history and America's 250th. This is our like our movie premiere night. I will have popcorn. And um during this kid-friendly event, attendees can also enjoy light refreshments, take a guided tour of the new town hall trail uh and engage with representatives from all of the departments, police, fire, rescue, public works, and and the Der County Library. Um I also want to announce we are going to have a second budget workshop meeting with council on Tuesday, April 14th at 10:00. Um the meeting will be held here at town hall and it is open to the public. Um on April 18th, this is a busy month. Um between 11 and 4 there will be an open air celebration that is free and open to the public. It's the deer county's America's 250th fair. This familyfriendly event is held in downtown Mano. It's going to include vendors, live music, art displays, educational program, and storytelling that captures the rich heritage and defines Dare County and the broader American experience. Those aren't my words. Um, this event is organized by the DARE 250th committee, which is collaborative partnership of all the local governments, schools, nonprofits, cultural organizations, and the state and federal partners across Dair County and the Outer Banks. Um, again, thanks to Lauren Garrett. She is our member representing Kittyhawk and be has been working hard with her team on all of these events. Um, there is a second event that day, but I looked on the website and that all the tickets are sold. They're having an Earth, Wind, and Fire tribute band and so forth. Um, so for more information, visit dare250.org.

And last but not least, another wellloved event is the police department skate event. And that will be held on April 26th at 12:00 p.m. to 2 o'clock. And that is always held at Kittyhawk skate Kittyhawk Park at the skate park. Okay. And that's all I have. Thank you all. Thank you. Town attorney. I have nothing. Thank you very much. Okay, gentlemen. I have nothing to add tonight, Madam Mayor. Okay. All right. Let's move along. David, you got anything?

I don't have much. Um, apologize for being late. Um, I would like to I think Jimmy Helms, aren't you been around for a while? 15 14 15 years coming up for you. Past past. Well, I want 15. I want to say thank you for that. It's been a long time and I want to acknowledge that. And now that you mentioned that, Liliana just finished 10. So, we're happy to have her here, too. Congratulate her as well. Jasper Jasper did Jasper as well. Talk about longevity that she Yeah. Very cool. So, I didn't mean to leave them out, but congratulations to them, too. Thank you. Have you got anything?

Um, yes, a couple things. Um, one is I want to thank all the guest speakers tonight. Um, dementia friendly, thank you for all you do. You guys do a tremendous amount and really appreciate it. So, and thank you for being persistent and and asking. So noted and under consideration, but I appreciate your time and all your energy. You do you do great work. Really good work. Um uh great job to the police department. Uh I appreciate you guys don't see this, but we got their annual report. Um just for the record, um I feel that the community is in great hands with the police department and of course the fire department, too. But just talking about the police department because looking over their annual report, it's fantastic. So, I don't know if that's able the public's able to see that, but um some great things happening and and all our first responders and and in this police report. There's some really really good stuff. So, um really nice job. Nicely done. Um and um the other thing I'm really looking forward to is I think u town manager, we're kicking off the pedestrian and bike multimodal uh coming up. Um there's a lot of folks that are going to be um enjoining in on that to study our safety here in the town, our trails, our bikes, how how we're how we're functioning. And and I think that's hugely important to a lot of things we're trying to accomplish here as a recreational community and also to um enhance business and and our um our our local businesses, their their advancement and investing in them uh to making sure they're doing well. So really appreciate that. and um uh there's going to be a lot of opportunities ahead that people can partake in that that study. So that's all I have.

Okay. Well, I'd like to recognize Rob and all the hard work he's put into trying to get these ordinances straight. Thank you so much for all that and being so informed when we come to you with a question. So, thank you. Second that.

And we are going to go have a um close session. So, we're gonna have to ask you to go tonight and thank y'all for coming. It's been nice to have you here. I don't know what you talking about. No, I know it was. I know.