Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

and I am Bob Bigger, uh, vice chair, filling in tonight for our absent chair. Um, thank you all. Um, uh, start with the, um, approval of the minutes from our December 17th regular meeting. Has everybody reviewed that? Any questions or comments or changes to the minutes? Hearing none. A motion to approve. Motion to approve in a second. Second. Minutes have been approved. Item four on the agenda. Confirmation of the agenda. Um uh Tommy, any changes to the agenda as presented tonight? Uh no sir, the agenda is as advertised.

Thank you very much. Uh we will then move into our first um item tonight uh for u public hearing uh item number RZM25-00004. This is a resoning request um presented by Fletcher Dickert with True North Church to reszone approximately 25.89 acres and approximately 4.48 acres located at 1060 West Martintown Road and 1068 West Martintown Road. TPN's are 002 08 03 028 [music] and 002 08 03- Z006 uh with the request to change from R7 which is small lot single family residential and OC um OC office commercial to um GC general commercial anything else we need to know um about this uh request tonight.

Yes, sir. If I if I may. It's this gives you the topography and shows the two parcels there with true true north on one parcel which is owned R seven and the parcel next to it which is zoned office commercial. This is a little bit better showing the zoning map and where that line is. This is what it would look like as if it is approved to reszone to general commercial. And here is where we got into this issue at is True North wants to expand their facilities. Those facilities will cross the property line and be partially on the parcel that's zoned office commercial. Well, you can't do that. You you know, it needs to all be on one lot. When you cross a lot line, there's a lot of things come in into play that are cost prohibitive. So, we needed they need to combine the lot. Well, to combine the lot, they both need to be the same zoning district except that there are large there are a large assembly because they have more than 600 people. because they're a large assembly in the new code. Um, a large assembly is not allowed in a residential district. So, nor is it allowed in an office district. So, True North right now is existing non-conforming is a non-conforming use. So, there's a couple of different options there. And the simplest option is to reszone it to general commercial.

Um it's on a four-lane road. Um it's serving what a lot of people would look at as a commercial operation. Um it would as a commercial in the general commercial the large assembly would be allowed and would it would meet all those conditions. Um, one of those is direct access to a highway. Um, so that that is the request before you is to reszone both of these parcels so then those parcels can be combined and they can make an addition to the church facilities.

Any questions for me? I assume they do own all of the property. Yes, sir. they own on both of those pares. Any other questions? [clears throat]

Um again for the audience uh here in attendance tonight uh um for both of our public hearing items just uh to establish the uh kind of protocol and ground rules. Um we will uh hear from the applicant uh who will present the uh um their request uh and and then open up for uh public comment um after discussion of the uh the commissioners and then the uh um the applicant will be invited back to address any any comments that are raised from the uh um from the audience tonight. So uh we will start tonight with bringing the applicant down for for this. Uh Mr. Dickert if you want to approach the deis please if you'll give us your uh for all speakers uh including the the applicants if you will give us your name and address uh um prior to starting

yes my name is Fletcher Dickert I'm with Allan Bachelor Construction but representing True North Church tonight addresses 1120 Jones Street Augusta Georgia um members of U planning commission appreciate your time tonight um And thank you, Tommy and staff. I want to commend Tommy and staff. Uh what was supposed to be just a quick pop into his office just to verify what the church was planning to do turned [music] into a couple hour meeting, impromptu meeting that kind of stirred all of this. And most of this comes about as a result of the new development code that you guys adopted uh in February of last year. Uh, as you well know, the use matrix prior to the current development code actually had a church's use in the use matrix. The new uh development code eliminated the church uh in the youth ma uh use matrix and it's now only assembly. Um, I did a little bit of research. I think all but maybe three churches in North Augusta are in residential zonings because the previous uh preference was that churches were in residential zoning. Um, when this property was reszone or brought into the city limits, when the church purchased it and and wanted to build the original uh campus there, the 25 acres, it was brought in under the residential zoning because that was the kind of the the standard at that time. the five acres that's just to the north of of the church uh was brought into the city limits by someone else under office commercial because at that time they were planning to do a senior living development when that didn't materialize the church was did acquire it. They never did anything with it. So that's why it sat as office commercial uh up until now with the church looking to as Tommy pointed out

with the church looking to to expand we need to do a combination. I thought it was going to be a simple combination uh submission uh has kind of turned into this. So based on your current development code uh and a lot of research and going through all the requirements, we feel that the only option that True North has uh to be in compliance with the current development code is the general commercial uh resoning. So that's why we requested that it is a conditional use as Tommy's pointed out. Um and the church does meet those conditions. Um but that is an additional there are some additional requirements that that planning staff has to ensure the church is in compliance with. Um guess that that's that's the request. Uh the commission have any questions? Just to be clear, the only modification you guys are planning to make at this time is to add on the existing behind this existing building.

That is correct. A proposed roughly 5,000 square foot addition onto the back of the kids building. We are adding four uh children's classrooms. Um um I I would think uh you know there's lately there's been a lot of questions about growth and development in the community and and you guys fortunately not for me. you have to deal with that. Um, but I think something hopefully we can all support is is growth of our churches and so the the church's youth program is growing and there's a big need for additional classroom space in the in the kids area. Any other questions from the commissioners? Mr. Dicker, if you'll have a seat for a minute, uh, we'll open up for public comment and then invite you back up to uh, um, address any comments. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, sir. uh for public comments. Again, I'll ask you to if you're interested, raise your hand. I'll um invite you up to the uh the podium um ask you to uh um as you come up uh um give us your name. And uh if you could uh um if we have multiple speakers, please try to limit your um uh comments to uh to five minutes. And and if you've got multiple speakers addressing an issue, um let's try to try not to rehash the same uh items that the prior speakers have uh have shared. So, um I won't put anybody on the clock yet, but uh um depending on uh the number of speakers, we may have to consider that at some point. Uh anyway, tonight. Yes, sir. Welcome. Um please uh your name and address, please.

Hey. Yeah. Good evening. My name is Tim Monaco. I'm at 557 Plantation Drive. My property is behind True North. My property touches both 25 acre and also my concern is um guess Mr. a parking lot there by chance. I'm just concerned about water runoff that um that the parking lot where the water from the parking lot goes because at the end of my property there is um there can be some flooding. city's looked into that, but um it's it's a wooded area behind, you know, my property, but just concerned about, you know, water runoff and that may go.

Yes, sir. And I had another question.

Sure. Yeah, go ahead, please. Yeah, go ahead and bring all the questions. So the other question is um so the entrance True North is currently using that as overflow parking right now and um you know for their Sunday services but that area you just put in a light there at Knob Cone Town and there's going to be a business probably most likely across the street on Knob Martin town hive opens All those businesses will be up and running very very very congested. Uh what's the plan as far as additional entrance be made the uh additional construction? I don't know if that's the right question to ask but just concerned about that. I mean, I'm one of several hundred people that live back in that area. Um, you know, Savannah Barren and you have all the way, you know, houses going all the way to the very end. So, it's difficult to, you know, get out of the the neighborhood taking a left or taking a right, especially in the morning. And fast forward, you know, a year from now, two years from now, it's only going to get worse. So, just concerned citizen. This is the first time I've ever spoken. So, I've lived here that I've lived in that area for about 12 years. And it's definitely uh grown two street lights, one at I20, one at Mount Con. So, [clears throat] It's good that businesses are thriving

and North Augusta is you know there's development going on. However, you know what point you look at it and got to consider people living you know in residents and also traffic. You guys are the smart people and have the brains and what you're doing. So just wanted to throw that out there. Thank you very much. Could you repeat your last name for me sir? uh Monaco M O N acco. Uh thank you very much, Mr. Monaco. Um we will have uh Mr. Dickard address uh the um both the uh the water runoff and the uh the parking situation here in just a second. Is there anybody else that would like to speak uh um on this agenda item this time?

Yes, ma'am. Do do we have this handheld microphone? Um if we can we've got a handheld microphone to make sure because right that that that microphone is not set up for tall people. Um so we'll try to do a better job. Thank you. Thank you ma'am. [clears throat] Is there anybody else that has any questions or uh comments that they want to share? Yes, ma'am. My name is Sarah Hobbs and I give my address to please

207 Springwood Court. And mine's kind of buffering off that gentleman. I figured since I'm here, I'll say something and I live right around there and near the hive. But parking is definitely a big concern because as we all see it, they're all parking in the grass and everywhere and when it rains or anything, it's storm goes off on runoff and traffic. has traffic been studied because as he mentioned as well the hive is coming all this new growth we're concerned citizens like how is that looking at being looked at appropriately that's it super thank you very much

anybody else have any uh comments on true north question um any other response from the board uh Mr. Dicker, will you uh step back up and uh um address if you can again any studies uh um do we have topographical maps uh in in our package timing?

Um yes. So regarding the question of is a additional parking lot uh being planned at this time? Uh the answer to that is none. No uh imperous parking is envisioned at this time. We obviously through the uh planning review process will have to meet all the development code requirements and and a parking calculation is is part of that. Uh as we as you probably know the development code does allow m uh does allow pvious pavement which is what the church uses for intermittent use. So, we're in the church is currently in compliance with the development code from uh a pvious and impervious uh parking requirements. We'll obviously have to work with Tommy and and staff to ensure we're in in compliance there. I I will say with the addition of this addition, we are not envisioning additional uh trip counts. This is simply to meet a a classrooms are overburdened right now. Um this does not allow this does not create any more seats for people to attend a service. This is just dealing with the number sheer number of kids that we have um because apparently our congregation has a lot of kids. So um we are just trying to meet that need. So we do not envision there honestly being any more um parking requirements, but to to answer the gentleman's question, we will have to be in compliance with the uh city development code. uh as it relates to that as as it relates to runoff. Uh yes, as part of the site plan process, we do have to ensure that uh the storm drainage system is sized appropriately, that the retention pond is sized appropriately and uh Cranston Engineering has been uh hired and is running all of those high hydraulic

calculations as we speak. And so we will have to be in compliance with with all the storm water runoff requirements. So, um, but again, the the only change that's envisioned at this point is adding about 5,000 square ft of of more imperous surface, uh, which will be taken into account and into and to the storm water system. Um, to answer the question about another entrance, um, no changes are planned to the current parking situation um, at at this time. at answers. I think the Miss Hobbs had a very similar question, but note we're not envisioning any more um parking than um and traffic than what is current. Any questions for follow-up questions for Mr. Dick? Any other conversation comments?

I guess Mr. Mr. Paradise, just as a point of clarity, um if they were to later need additional parking or any of those things, they would have to come to you for approval for any of those changes. Correct. Correct. You can have a seat. Thank you. Thank you. [clears throat] Again, any uh final conversations, comments uh from the commission. I'll make a motion to to recommend approval of RZM25- Z004, the resiling request.

Second a motion and a second. Uh all in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Hearing none. Passes unanimously.

Thank you. All right. Uh, next item on the agenda tonight is PD25- Z001, the plan development major major modification. Um this is a request by Riverside Village um parcel D own Owner LLC for a major modification to the Hammonds Ferry plan development. The project area encompasses approximately 100 95 acres um located west of Georgia Avenue between the North Augusta Greenway and the Savannah River. Purpose of the modification is to adopt an updated Hammonds ferry plan development general development plan to recognize changing conditions in phase B, specifically parcel D in the River Riverside Village area and [clears throat] reinforce the standards and regulations that apply to the final phases of construction in Hammond's Ferry. Uh Mr. Paradise, do you have any other updates to this request?

Uh yes, sir. And that is why y'all have about a 300page plus um agenda packet is because when you change one, it's part of that bigger picture. So, let me kind of siphon out from that big picture what the actual ask is and and what is going on a little bit. This is the Hammond's Ferry development. 190 something acres is that's the whole thing. That is what the PD um it regulates. This is another the zoning map for it. And this one shows you the the different phases. And specifically, we're talking about phase B. And that's that's important because phase B um according to the general development plan and the ordinance is the primary center of mixeduse activities serving the surrounding neighborhoods and will be the center of and I emphasize higher intensity civic retail commercial and residential uses. So there's supposed to be a high density in this area. And it goes on to say the Riverside Village is the heart and soul of the neighborhood, the one common area of activity to which all residents and visi visitors have a sense of connection. Um, it goes on to say, "The program will combine certain basic conveniences with a variety of social gathering places and entertainment venues, a limited mix of specialized

retail and food shops, and I emphasize this next, a contingent of professional office uses and service components, a variety of recreational and athletic components, and an array of civic components that lend an authentic town quality to the commercial core of Riverside Village. So, the general development plan calls for this to be a highly dense area, a central core, so to speak, and it also calls for there to be professional office uses in that district. As it stands now, that is lacking. Um so then we drill down a little bit further. This is phase B as it stands now as it's proposed and this is parcel D. This is the only thing that is before you tonight is parcel D. Uh the applicant is requesting a modification to the plan development to partial D. It's 83 acres in size and it's currently um is approved for 22 single family attached homes and 2600 square ft of retail. So there could be 23 different property owners on that.83 83 acres of property backing up to the brick pond. Um, if approved, it's the intent of the city to purchase both parcel D and the stadium deck with the city developing parcel D and parking for the office building in the stadium deck. Currently, the stadium deck is under private ownership. The modification would allow for the

site to be developed for an office use of a maximum of 80,000 square feet. Where did that 80,000 square feet come from? Well, when you do the math, you can get about a 20,000 square foot floor space on there. You can go four floors. That'll give you 80,000 square feet. uh that would be the maximum square footage available and the development could be far less. Modification would then allow the city to move forward with the development of the parcel as a proposed cyber center, not a data center, but a cyber center, an office use. Um the parking for for this would be in the stadium deck and it would also put all of the parking in Riverside Village under city management. The city is currently having an updated wetland delineation done to ensure that the wetlands are not affected by any development on the parcel. Once we get that line hadn't been done in in several years, Mr. Clifford may have some better data there, but it may have shifted one way or the other. It may hurt the city. It may help the city. Wherever that line is, then the city by the development code has to drop back 25 ft from that line. So there will be no development in the wetlands. There will be no development within 25 ft of the wetlands. That is the development code. That is the requirement. And I can tell you I think our city council is protective of the brick pond. What then the investment that they have down there. I don't see that happening as as to the size and scale of the building. Um back looking at this back in 2017 uh the planning commission approved a

site plan for the parcel that was not constructed. The approved plan called for fourstory building with 17,390 ft of commercial space on the first floor and 17,85 square ft of residential on each of the second through fourth floors. The total floor area approved was 70,85 square feet. So, a large building has already been approved on that site for one time in the past and it worked. It is not unreasonable to think that that could happen again. Um it may be that 80,000 has to be scaled down. The city hadn't got into development phase of it yet, but in the end um all of the city standards will be required to be met. Approvals of the modification only allows for the city to move forward with purchasing an engineering design. And and of course, as always, with a site plan such as this, that site plan will be back before the planning commission for your review to make sure that all the boxes are checked and and for y'all's approval. Do you have any questions for me? Commissioners,

when we were when we look at the density intensity, when we look at the math for the parking spaces and we have TBD and parcel D. Yes, ma'am. Is that when like we were approving parcel K, the other parcels that we've just approved, where was the parking count in for parcel D? Was that included in our parking deck number?

It was. It was. based on the 22 um single and this is another picture of that particular parcel too. Um it was based on the 22 um single family attached homes and the u 2600 square ft of retail space. Now, here is and and you may remember across the street was supposed to be a five-story office building and then there was apartments that was three stories of retail was approved on this site. So, it's kind of flipped. It was always the parking plan down there is to have flex parking I think is the name of it. But basically the parcel D parking will be during the day. They will be gone at night and then the residential will be parking there. So there'll be shared parking between the two with the come and going. So based on that there there there's adequate we believe there's adequate parking there. The other thing is is as it stands now, um the stadium deck parking lot the city has no control over. This allows the city to have control over all of the parking, but that's getting away from the partial D. The parking will be in the stadium deck. And Tommy, just for my own simplification of this uh to make sure I understand, uh um again, this is this is zoned for for some development. Um

whether we approve this request um and that it whether this request fits in the in the the original plan in the original PD plan. um uh whether whether we approve this or not um uh some some you know if we don't approve this it's still zoned for development at some point um and whoever developed it develops it whether it's developed as the approved mixeduse retail commercial or mixeduse retail um residential um uh the important part in in relation to the wetlands is that plan will have to come back to us for approval. Um and and that plan has to fit in the the wetland setbacks whether it's the request or the what it's it's zone for currently.

Yes, sir. Okay. I think you said that. I think I think I followed that. If y'all received an application today, if if there was an application before you today and it checked all the boxes for what was supposed to go there, um, as y'all have learned through your training, um, you're pretty bound to to approve it, uh, so that you're not being arbitrary and capriccious. Any other questions for uh, Mr. Paradise? All right, if we could have the applicant come forward, please.

Good evening, commission members. I'm Jim Clifford, the city administrator representing the city of North Augusta here at 100 Georgia Avenue. So, I'd like to do is put some baseline information out for the planning commission this evening along with for our citizens here before the public input session. So in 2020, the US Department of Energy in the state of South Carolina reached a $60 million correction $600 million settlement regarding the downsizing of the Savannah River site in previous years. In January of 2022, the South Carolina legislature allocated those funds to various cities and counties. And the city of North Augusta received dedicated funding for three projects. The first of which was the transfer station for $2 million. The second of which was cyber infrastructure for $15 million. The third of which was the new Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam for $20 million. Transfer Station project was completed last year and is now operational. The lock and dam project is on hold pending federal litigation and mediation. So that leaves us here with the cyber infrastructure project. So to determine what kind of potential uses we were going to have for this cyber infrastructure, the city has been in dialogue with leadership from the Georgia Cyber Innovation and Training Center, Fort Gordon, Savannah Riverite, USC Aken, Aken Tech, and other potential stakeholders uh in the project. Proximity to the Georgia Cyber Center, correction, the Georgia Cyber Innovation and Training Center has been key to that discussion. Uh location matters uh and especially for the cyber infrastructure. So, the cyber infrastructure project could look like several things, but the city envisions a multi-story class A office space uh which would be used by academia, government, and corporate interests. A much more scaled down, smaller version of what you see across the river uh at the Georgia Cyber and Innovation Center. But I also like to stress this is not a data center. So, there's some confusion out there about what a data center and a cyber center is. A data center is simply a building filled with servers and

computer equipment which is accessed and used by people that are not in that building. It's a there's a computer that's a remote. Uh in this particular building we're talking about it would obviously have server rooms but that would be to facilitate the workings of the customers and the clients inside that building. So it is not a a data center in that way and is very much like the public safety headquarters or the building that we're standing or sitting in right now which has a server room. So, it was presented to the city council late last year. The staff requested an analysis of the site uh known as parcel D within Riverside Village and contracted Cranston Engineering to show what the maximum footprint of the building could be. Uh and as Tommy laid out, that's a four-story building that it's just shy of 80,000 square feet. I don't believe the budget that we have uh in talking to some engineers is going to allow for a building of that size. uh but I wanted to at least show what was the maximum possible uh outlay there on the site itself and 80,000 is the maximum uh that would fit. So if the planning commission recommends the action and the city council approves purchase the properties, this would allow the city to purchase partial D which is unoccupied and partial B also known as a stadium deck uh for the primary parking or parcel D. There would likely be some ADA parking uh on that site to accommodate ADA users, but the vast majority of the parking is envisioned to be uh in parcel B, the stadium and parking deck. From an environmental perspective, parcel D is not in a protected wetland. Hence, the parcel does not require EPA, core of engineers, state or federal environmental considerations. But understanding the sensitivity of brick pond parks and ensure that the city does not encroach uh onto the wetlands. The city is contracted for an engineer to do a new delineation study for really just figuring out what the edge of the wetlands is. And Tommy talked about, hey, the wetlands could have shrunk, the the wetlands could have increased. We want to make sure we have a clear understanding of the edge of the wetlands and then the buffer that's

going to move into the building site. Uh and so we have a good shot there. The last study that was done was in 2013, so it's 13 years ago. So, we really want to see what the changes are to that site. I believe this is a good deal for the city, for Riverside Village, and for the taxpayers. Uh, this project is going to allow us to consolidate uh Riverside Village parking ownership and uh will also allow an owner on parcel D that's going to take greater care in the construction on that site. Uh, and also, you know, the city's great subject to greater scrutiny than commercial builders. So, I know this is going to have a lot of eyes on it. So, we're going to have to make sure we're doing all the right kinds of things to make sure we're not having any environmental impacts through construction. And it also does this without any impact to the taxpayers because this is Department of Energy settlement money. This has no uh effect on the tax base. It's not funded through property tax dollars. So, something I believe is going to end up on that site. So whether it's commercial development uh or it's going to be a city project, if it's a commercial development, it's going to be a commercially owned multif family, multi-story complex that's going to have, you know, parking requirements. Uh and I think this is a better use and that we're going to have daytime use only there are parcel D and allows us to host academic space uh and also commercial space through Riverside Village. So I thank you for your time this evening and I'll be prepared to answer any of your questions along with any of our citizens questions this evening. Any commissioners have any questions for Mr. Clifford?

I assume that the the parking deck in this property is for sale. Technically, it is. We've been in dialogue with the the ownership group of the parking deck at parcel B which is owned by Greenstone. Uh and so the sale would be through the same ownership group. So they would sell both parcel D and parcel B, Bravo and Delta simultaneously as part of that deal. And should this go through timeline? Are we are you thinking this needs to be done? Is there a deadline on the funds?

There's not a set deadline for the funds. Um but I also don't like to leave uh money out there. Uh as you know, every year goes by and inflation ticks off. Uh there is, you know, less buying power with your dollar for both land and for uh general infrastructure. For clarity, those funds would allow you to also purchase the parking deck. It would because the parking is required. I cannot put enough parking spaces on parcel D to self- sustain that lot. It has to have off-site parking. What about uh so the city would own the building and then rent it out, the space out for computer work?

The the answer is it depends. Uh there we've had a number of dialogue. Uh I think the Georgia Cyber and Training Center has some great models. Uh you can make an argument that you would want to find a rent paying tenant uh that would occupy at least one of those floors and you could also make an argument that you want to have either lowcost or no cost uh office space available for academia. USC Aken and Aken Tech uh have both expressed interest in being able to have space here which would benefit our citizens and specifically our students in North Augusta to be able to do cyber patriot classes to do uh cyber teams to do any number of different things. Uh, and I think that'd be a good benefit for our folks.

Any other questions for Mr. Clifford?

Thank you. If you'll have a seat for a minute, we will open up for public comment. Uh, again, before we get started, uh, no commitment, but if a quick show of hands if you plan to speak, just so I have an idea of how many people will be speaking tonight as I just Okay, sounds good. Um, uh, again, we'll uh go ahead and start with a fivem minute time limit. um uh uh on our speakers just to make sure that we can get everybody uh covered. So hopefully that'll be enough time. But uh again, a reminder to um try not to repeat anything that your uh that the prior speaker has uh has has made. So um again, who would like to be first? Um welcome you to come up. Ma'am, if you'll come down to the uh the podium and give us your your name and address, please. And while she's coming down, I just want to um make note we do have we did receive several emails um prior to uh uh the meeting. Um one of them from a uh Sandy Zenko and the other um an email from David Harmon. Just want to confirm that we we did receive those. So yes, ma'am.

Diane Laroo. I live at 608 Railroad Avenue. So I'm on the same street as the property you're speaking of. In fact, I moved here in 2009 and spoke on behalf of development of Riverside Village at every single public hearing. So, I'm coming from that perspective. Um, but I do have some questions about this property. I'm wondering first off, uh, how long have we had the DOE funds available to us for that purpose that was described? We'll ask him to come back and address that. So, if you'll just Yeah, we're making a note of your questions. Yes, ma'am.

Parcel B houses the clubhouse. Am I correct? No. Okay. Well, it looked on the picture like it might Okay. Um, so the city, so my other question is, because I'm just trying to get as much information as possible, the city wants to purchase parcel D and then sell it or rent it to a company. Correct. Yes.

And part of the parking debt. Is the city has the city considered purchasing that property and developing it into a natural space, a green space? Is that possible? Okay,

we will defer to Mr. Clifford to to answer that question. So, thank you. He's making those notes, but yes, ma'am. Thank you for that. Uh um Yes, ma'am. Next. Yes, sir. Good evening, vice chair, members of the planning commission. My name is Nick Hobbs. [snorts] Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. I'm here tonight because the city council recently voted to ban fishing at West Pond, citing eco system protection and wildlife safety as the reason that for that decision. [snorts] That action matters for planning purposes. It represents a formal acknowledgement that the city by the city that the brick pond ecosystem is under stress and requires protection. When the city makes that determination, it should guide all related land use decisions, not just park regulations. [snorts] While the fishing ban itself was a city council action, the reasoning behind it falls squarely within the commission's responsibilities. Council did not site convenience or recreation management. They cited wild water quality, eco system health, and wildlife protection. If those [snorts] concerns justify restricting public use of an existing park, then they must also guide development decisions that directly affect the same ecosystem. These issues cannot be separated. Before coming here tonight, I reviewed what the city has publicly released regarding Brick Pond Park and surrounding development. [snorts] The city does have general storm water information and historical data related to the brick ponds as a constructed wetland. However, there does not appear to be a current publicly a available cumulative impact study that evaluates the combined effects of existing riverfront development. The growing number of paved surfaces which cause storm water to move faster

and in in greater volume. sediment and erosion under present conditions, wildlife displacement as habitat continues to shrink and the environmental impact of displace of developing parcel D, the last [snorts] remaining undeveloped buffer adjacent to brick bomb brick pond park. [snorts] There has been some discussion about buffer delineation, but the delineation only shows boundaries. It does not analyze outcomes after development occurs. If comprehens if comprehensive studies exist, the public has not seen them. If they do not exist, then advancing development options with them would be premature. When I say study, I want to be very clear. I'm not referring to a general storm water plan or a lawn draw a line drawn on a map. I'm referring to a current cumulative impact study. The type of study look looks at today's conditions. How much of the riverfront has already developed? How storm [snorts] water actually moves during rain events now and how sediment reaches the ponds? How much wildlife habitat has have we already lost due to development? What happens when the next parcel is developed on top of everything that already exists? Does the ne does the next development push an already stressed ecosystem past a point where damage becomes unavoidable? Why parcel D is different? Parcel D is not simply another vacant lot lot. Functionally, it is part of the brick pond park ecosystem. It absorbs storm water before it reaches the ponds. It filters sediment and runoff. It provides habitat continuity for wildlife already displaced by surrounding development. Once parcel D is developed, those functions are permanently lost. No, no mitigation measure can fully replace natural buffer land once it is gone.

[snorts]

If the city has already determined that the ecosystem requires protection, advancing development on the last remaining buffer is inconsistent with that decision. Have we fully considered elsewhere? I want to pose a a a planning question for the commission. Have we fully considered whether this development would be better suited elsewhere if data if the data center or the cyber center project is in a $10 million range is in is being contemplated because you're going to spend $5 million on the property plus the parking deck. You got $10 million left over. that that that use it or lose it mentality is kind of that's kind of irresponsible in my opinion when we have when we're talking about the full impact that developing all of that land on the river has caused. The city owns and controls previously disturbed. The city owns or controls previously disturbed land including the former public safety headquarters site [snorts] that could be demolished and redeveloped without sacrificing wetlands buffers or habitat connectivity. That is what planning is meant to do. Put development where it fits best and protect land that performs irreplaceable environmental functions. [snorts] In closing, the city has already said that the ecosystem needs protection. That principle should guide planning decisions, not stop at park rules. Part parcel D, the last opportunity to preserve, I'm sorry, partial D represents the last opportunity to preserve natural protection for a stressed public asset. Once it's gone, there is no way to undo that decision. I respectfully ask that the commission I I respectfully ask that this commission consider whether advancing development here is responsible without a current current comm cumulative impact study and without fully eval evaluating alternative sites

that align with sound planning and long-term stewardship of the environment. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hobs. [applause] Who's next? We have anybody else? Yes, sir. I forgot to set my timer for Mr. Hobs. I'll just Okay, got time. I promise I won't talk longer than five minutes. Okay, thank you.

I only have a few questions. Uh I I think the obvious question I'm sorry, name address, 346 Shoreline Drive. Yes, sir. Go ahead.

The obviously qu question, the first question I have is why is North Augusta getting into the real estate business? Why are we going to start leasing property? I'm aware of two properties that have been available for quite well one at least that's been available probably for five or six years now and that's part of the clubhouse. There's a whole floor there. The clubhouse has parking and yet Mr. Clifford mentions that the people that will come will use a floor. Why hasn't the city considered that? The original plan for Riverside Village included a senior center, which I am, um, small shops and now all of a sudden this opportunity comes about and we talk about a cyber center. For a little background, I worked for Panasonic for 30 years. I was their IT director. Uh, part of my responsibility was to manage people. It is a 24-hour a day job. You may not have computers and servers in this building, but people are not leaving at 5:00. That's part of the job. They know that's one of the requirements. They work long hours. All of a sudden, I think what we're doing with garage, we're saying we're playing musical chairs with with garage space. We say things are available yet never nothing is ever put into anything concrete. We move people around. We we just put up all these apartments right on um Railroad Avenue. I don't know where those people are going to park. Those people are going to come and work uh come home from work at five between 5 and 7:00. There's going to be 70 days of year there's going to be a ball game there.

how they're going to get home is God's guess. Last, uh, Mr. Clifford talks about clients and if we're going to get into the real estate business, I think before we spend anybody's money, whether it be the government's money or our own money, and I can't imagine building an 80,000 square foot building for $15 million, which which I think is what's left. So, there will be some city funds, and I'd like Mr. Clifford to address that. Uh, in talking to a professional, he said a good uh rule of thumb is probably $400 per square foot. Uh, if you do the calculation, that gets you to about, if I if I'm correct, about uh $30 million and we're going to get 15. Where's the other 15 million coming from? So, those are the kinds of questions I think I would like to have addressed tonight. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Lardy. [clears throat]

Ma'am. Okay, we can take a a microphone up to her, please. Thank you. Thank you. Linda Hutchinson. I live at 169 Red Globe Street. My concern is about access. I am president of the southeastern chapter of Paralyzed Veterans of America. I live here. I enjoy the ponds. I enjoy the ball games. But when there are games going, there is not enough accessible parking in the decks or on the street as it is now. We add a cyber center to this. Where are we going to park? The other issue is access to parking for visiting the ponds. We used to have two areas not part of this parking decks where we could park to access the ponds. One by the bridge and the other near behind partial D basically. It's behind the parking deck a little bit behind it. Parking on that side for anybody that has a lift or a ramp vehicle is dicey at best. There is no designated accessible parking. The parking that we had on the bridge side is now gone to us.

It was done away with for the convenience of construction. So that's gone. What are we going to do about the accessibility? I know that I am far from alone as a person with significant mobility disabilities that visits the pond. Tonight, I'm not even going to get into the West Pond fishing issue because I know that's going to be coming up later. can't believe me. I will be talking about it because that was the only safe accessible fishing area that we've got in North Augusta. But right now, I just want to talk about the overall accessibility, the accessible parking, and the safe access to the ponds. when all this space is built up, it's just not going to be left to us. So, somebody please address these issues. And if the city wants information on the ADIE, Paralyzed Veterans of America will always stand ready to help them. And I can speak for our national organization on that. As president of the largest chapter in the country, I know who to call at our Washington office to get help with ADA issues. So, we stand ready to help the city of North Augusta where that's concerned. Thank you very much. I appreciate everybody's time.

Thank you very much. Um, who else would like to speak?

Sarah Hobbs, 207 Springwood Court. Okay. The reality is that the city has multiple viable options that do not involve DOE money and cities use these tools routinely. First, partial D and the parking deck are already being discussed as a package. That matters because the parking debt is a revenue generating asset, not a liability. Revenue backed acquisition. The parking deck procedure revenue tied to Riverside Village activity and events. The city constructor constructure a revenuebacked obligation where the assets help service the cost of its own acquisition. This avoids burdening taxpayers and avoids DOE's funds entirely. Park and storm water capital use. Partial D functions as park and storm water infrastructure. It absorbs runoff, filters pollutants, and prevents future mitigation costs. Using park, storm water or capital improvement funds to acquire land that performs these functions, is fiscally responsible and prevents larger future expenses. Phased acquisition. The city does not need to do everything all at once. Parcel D can be secured first to protect the ecosystem while the parking deck is addressed on a longer timeline. Acquiring parcel D does not mean stopping development. If a $10 million data center or cyber center is being contemplated, the former public safety headquarters site or previously disturbed land is far better location than the last remaining buffer to brick ponds parks that preserves economic development while protecting irreplaceable land. The city is not chooing between choosing between environmental protection and financial responsibility. Acquiring

parcel D in the parking deck without DOE funds is achievable using standard tools, especially when one assets generates revenue and the other prevents long-term environmental cost. What cannot be replaced is the last remaining buffer to Brick Pond Park once it's developed. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Hobs. [applause]

Yes, ma'am. Diane Laroo again. I just have a comment for you to ponder as you make go through the process of making this decision. Um, when I built my house in Hammond's Ferry in 2009, I was disturbed by the fact that I didn't hear birds. There were no birds in the neighborhood. We did not have mature growth. Since that time, it's come where I have to buy a full bag of bird seed every week to keep my birds happy until the construction of the apartments in Riverside Village. Up until that time, I heard birds daily. Now, it's a rare sighting for me. Let's uh let's let everybody else uh um Yes, ma'am.

Yeah, we need to come back.

207 Springwood Court. Um, so the gentleman before was saying that there was with his math there was going to be a $15 million bill that maybe the city of North Augusta has to foot that bill. I don't I if and if that's the case and we approve them to build on that parcel D, I mean that that's that's going to cost the taxpayers a lot of money. $15 million is a lot more than $5 million. we can acquire partial D and parcel B, protect parcel D and and and offset some of the note with maybe the whole entire note. I'm not sure with that parking deck. But if you're going to build something, you're going to have to buy that lot for 5 million and DOE's only you only have 10 million left of DOE money. That's not going to build what what we discussed what he discussed during his I mean I just don't understand how how we can acquire that land ourselves develop it and dedicate it to the brick pl. It sounds like it's going to like we're already going to cost the taxpayer $15 million to build the data center cyber center.

Thank you. We'll have Mr. Clifford clarify those numbers. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. I'm Tabitha Wardrop. Nice to meet you, Erin. I think we talked on Facebook the other day. Tabitha Wardrop, 193 Village Parkway. Um, you know, when we start out with original plans, they sound great at the time. They make a lot of sense, but then when we get in the middle of things and we start living through those things, I think we learn. And then once we learn more um and learn better, we can do better. And um I think I'm hearing a lot of uh my neighbors and friends talk about how you know Mayor Williams ran on tourism right and drawing people to the community and Brick Ponds is a draw from across the river Aken Edgefield you name it. Folks come to this area just to go to Brick Ponds just to walk. Sure. Hammonds Ferry. I love walking down there too along the river. But brick ponds. So when I hear, you know, we're not going to build within 25 ft of the wetlands, I'm kind of thinking 25 ft might be from here to that wall. And you know, I mean, no disrespect, Mr. Paradise, but I mean, that concerns me. You know, that's pretty close. Um, and uh, you know, I would just ask that we reconsider what we do with this property. I'm all for the city purchasing it. I'm all for the city purchasing the garage and using

that for income for the city. Um, but I know that this year that um, our state legislature has earmarks available for funding for cities and counties. And I would ask the planning commission to reconsider the purpose of this property and reconsider where the funding could come from to purchase both of these properties. The sellers wouldn't lose any money. Uh the city would win to help support the mayor's tourism initiative. Of course, growth, of course, bringing office space. of course, you know, developing where it makes sense to develop, but we have a lid building. We have an old food line building. We have several places that we could reconsider using that just might make a little more sense to the citizens, the taxpayers. You know, not that we're on the hook for this funding. I get that. But again, others have raised issues with what about down the road when we know more and we have to do something different about that funding. So this would kind of cut our losses with that if there were any losses down the road. And I'm just asking that we kind of think outside the box a little bit. And I realize that you might be on the hook for this vote because of whatever your commitment was during training. But I ask each one of you to be an independent thinker. Okay? And please consider the people in the audience and those online that can't be here because it's dinner time. People have church. They have kids and not everybody can show up, okay, that have a vested interest. And so just on their behalf, I just ask you to reconsider and I appreciate every one of you. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Walter.

Mr. Chairman. Yes, [applause] sir. Just for clarification, the old Lidle building is being redeveloped. building standards. It has a permit. They're progressing on that. And the food line building, if it's one I'm thinking of, um on um out there close to the forks, is in use. It's it's just uh not open for commercial purposes. Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Mr. Paradise. Yes, sir. [clears throat] Hello. Uh, my name's William Jackson, 444 Crossroads Drive. I just had a couple questions, couple concerns. Parcel D is right next to the Crown Plaza parking garage, which is also owned by the city. Um, and it has not been mentioned in any way, shape, or form about providing parking for whatever goes on parcel D. Um, is there a restriction uh with the uh parking agreement, the existing parking agreement, is there a restriction on who can park in that garage or if there's any space available? Um, that was my first concern. My second concern is, uh, the brick ponds have an outlet from the ponds to the Savannah River. Uh it's

critical in maintaining the environmental balance of the ponds. That outflow goes directly under parcel D. any construction that happens on partial D, we'll have to take that into consideration and hopefully not impede that flow through because it is needed to keep the balance in those ponds. And like I said, it runs directly under parcel D. Thank you. Great. Thank you very much, Mr. Jackson. Ma'am,

Karen Wells, 902 Fairlane Avenue. Um, and I just have a couple of questions for clarification. When you talked about that the um, and I think I'm saying this right, that they had to think about what we approved to begin with, like when when we way back. Ma'am, you need to address the cheer.

Okay. When we've when we talked way back, um, and we just moved here five and a half years ago, so I may be missing something, but I believe that I've understood that what was originally planned for all of um this area is very different than what is there now. And so, are we still obligated to do something that was on that beginning approval, but we've changed other things? I don't I I'd like some clarification on that. Um, the other thing I would like to say is I and I may be wrong. I feel like when I was at a county commission meeting and they were talking about the apartments that parking was an issue then and they said that those apartments would use the parking garages. Well, now if those parking garages are going to be used by something else, then how does that help those people who have rented those apartments? And then that comes into my fear that we love this area. Um, we moved here from out of state, but I I am concerned that what we've created that was so wonderful with the ballpark and everything else is going to turn out to be empty buildings. I know we had tickets. We had tickets with a lot of other people to the games. We've all given them up because there's no when you get down there, the garages are full. There's nowhere to park. Um, and so if that stuff all becomes where people aren't renting the apartments because they can't park, they're not going to the games because they can't park and that stuff becomes a liability and it becomes run down, then we're looking at a bigger issue. So

I guess I would like to see that addressed. Thank you very much. [applause] Anybody else that hasn't spoken already twice? All right, we'll ask Mr. Clifford uh to come back up and address uh the the questions and concerns that were raised. Um

well, I appreciate everyone's attendance and I think I've got most of the questions down. If I happen to gloss over one, uh, please remind me if I didn't cover the the topic. So, starting with Diane Laroo, how long are the funds good for? Uh, the answer is I don't know. Uh, the state legislature has not uh designated an end state or an end timeline for the usage of those funds. I know those funds were delegated by the state in 2022 specific to those projects. And I would also say probably an answer to some other questions that those funds can only be used for those specific purposes. So for example, I cannot use uh Department of Energy settlement money to buy parcel D and use that as protected wetlands, you know, or you know, buffer zone, if you will, for the brick pond parks. That can only be used for cyber infrastructure. That's the dedicated use as set aside by the state legislature. Um and then about selling or renting parcel D. I don't believe it is the city's intent. And I hate to say never say never, but you at least in under, you know, the concepts that we're developing now, the city would be the owner of the building on parcel D. We may rent space inside that building to a tenant. Uh, and if you look at what city of Aken's done with their department of energy money, they've got a standalone building in their downtown. Uh, and I believe they're renting space to I think it's SRNL, the S River National Lab, on a year-to-year basis. Uh and we would envision a very similar kind of arrangement with a different tenant. Uh but not leasing the whole building or turning the whole building over to a different uh you know client organization or selling the building uh to an organization that wanted to buy it. I don't want to say it would never happen, but that's not the current plan at least of the city. Uh and then as far as purchasing for green space, you know, I have a lot of f and even council members that will say, "Hey, I'm interested in doing this." And the the first question I always ask is with which money do you want to do it? Uh which resourcing tale would you like to do? Uh my understanding in talking to

the property owner uh is that they would not be interested in moving that parcel for less than a million dollars. Uh and so when you look at that impact on the stormwater fund on capital projects fund uh that that would be that would be very impactful and especially when you look at the number of stormwater projects the city has across the board even with the passage of capital project sales tax 5 that doesn't even fully address all of the storm water requirements across the city's boundaries. Uh, so those are those are just numbers I can't necessarily get my hand wrapped around as far as within the city's budget without having an impact on either enterprise funds or on the general fund. Uh, for Mr. Hobbs asked about an environmental study, you know, there are lots of different types of studies, but I think what you're describing, which is almost like a comprehensive kind of plan, uh, is not number one is not required. Uh, and number two, I'm not entirely sure exactly what what kind of study that would look like. That could be, you know, an impact study. We'd have to do some more research with an environmental firm, and I'm not sure exactly what that would cost, but and I'm not the most conversant person on environmental studies, but I do know what, you know, the core of engineers requires, what federal agencies require when you're going to do something in around a wetlands. And the study that was described is, you know, far greater than what those requirements are, you know, across an ecosystem. Uh, and so I I don't we haven't investigated any of those potentials across the brick pond. uh at least not to my understanding. Uh for Mr. Olardi, uh you know, why are we in the real estate business? Well, you know, ideally, you know, when we look at the cyber infrastructure money, um that's what the the purpose of the the funding is for is for investment in your community for uh high-tech cyber type of businesses. The city of Aken has already uh moved forward in that arena. Uh we think that's a a wise expenditure of funds. Uh you made mention of the

clubhouse and the 14,000 square feet uh that are there. Uh and I'm not in charge of that building and that it's privately owned. Uh we've had discussions with uh the ownership groups there and it's actually been through multiple owners. Uh and at this point in time, I don't have a tender offer, if you will, for you buying that space and that building. If we're wildly successful in parcel D, uh if that's approved, then could that certainly be an adjunct to, you know, a cyber infrastructure in Riverside Village? Absolutely. I'd like to see the 14,000 square feet in the uh clubhouse building, you know, be uh used. I'd actually uh taken two different uh high-tech clients to that space uh and just lost out to other cities as they were doing other other kinds of things outside the region. Uh for Miss Hutchson as a fellow veteran, appreciate your service and I'm glad to have you here today. You know, again, I'm not uh the most convergent, but I would say that I know that the parking areas on the east pond and the west pond have been temporarily impacted by construction over there uh by Fancler. And my understanding is uh as Fancler starts wrapping up construction here in the spring. Uh some of those spaces that are kind of put aside uh will be more accessible once those those jobs are done. Hopefully by Mast's week, at least for parcel K, I think partial C will be done. Although I do want to be truthful in advertising and say I'm not entirely sure what the impact over by parcel uh C is going to be long term because when the Georgia DOT project for the 13th Street Bridge goes, I suspect they're going to need some construction lay down areas and part of that land there is owned by, you know, SC DOT as far as the easement that they have there. So there could be a future impact in 2028 and beyond when that occurs. Uh, but I certainly want to make sure we're respectful of, you know, ADA and accessible parking for all of our citizens here to the wetlands and to the to the ponds themselves. For Miss Hobbs, uh, you know, I would say that parcel D is not listed as a storm water asset. We

have a lot of assets that are listed specifically as storm water, uh, but that's not how parcel D is listed. Parcel D is listed as you have there in front of you in your packet as part of Riverside Village. has always been intended for development at that site as a uh multi-use building and is not intended for additional wetlands or buffers uh inside the Riverside Village uh construct as far as and I think uh two two different folks talked about the opportunities with the old public safety headquarters and the courts and C building. So I would tell you first that the old public safety headquarters and they're two separate buildings there. So you've got the public safety headquarters building which has the bays. Uh we still are holding that building. The office space we think is uh unfit for for use, but we use the bays for a number of different things and for storage for the public safety department. Uh so that really leaves us with what is known as the courts and C building, the twotory 10,000 foot building that's adjacent to it. And I did take a client to that site because, you know, it's unencumbered property right now. We'd like to see something done with it. And I brought a client uh potential cyber client to that site specifically. Uh and so there were two things that they decided about with that building was one they didn't like the building uh which is fair. Uh and then the second thing they didn't like was the location. Uh they wanted to be closer to downtown Riverside Village and closer like line of sight to uh the Georgia Cyber Innovation Training Center. So that that location has been viewed by at least one client uh and is found to be lacking as far as the viability of those kinds of sites there. see if Tabitha Walder talked about purchasing with earmark money. Um maybe but that at the end of the day we have to trust the earmark process and I'm not sure if uh we're going to compete well for that use. Uh there's a lot of cities as they open up earmarks uh and you'll see this at the federal level as well. Uh it's it's it's not a guarantee. I'm not sure if they would get it and I'm not

entirely sure how the city council would rank uh you know the purchase of parcel D as a stormwater conveyance item in rel relation to some other projects that are out there that are of greater impact to citizens as far as you know purchasing power. Um, but I don't think we have the but aside from the earmark piece, I just don't see a funding line available right now within the city to purchase that for that purpose, nor uh do I think that the owner of the parcel is interested in selling uh parcel D without parcel B attached to it. I think that's a that's a twofur. Uh at least in our discussions that we've had to date, uh they're looking to have both parcels go at the same time. Uh and the city would certainly be able to enact that. For Mr. Jackson uh did not mention the Crown Plaza parking deck, the city owned deck. And that's because, you know, we're trying to cross level the number of parking spaces available in each deck for day use people. So, somebody wants to go down to uh one of the restaurants there in Riverside Village. They have to have a place to park. You want them to have opportunities in both parking decks. Uh, and so if we start taking all of the parcel D residents and move them into the Crown Plaza deck, that really is going to squeeze that deck as far as total number of available spaces for visitors. Want to make sure visitors have an open shot at at both decks. Uh, so we don't want to shove everybody into one. Uh, and Mr. Jackson, I do appreciate your comment about the outflow uh, underneath parcel D. And I agree that's something that from an engineering perspective, we want to make sure that whether it's the city doing the work or whether a commercial developer comes in and does something, we don't want to see u you know a crushing of the pipes or anything that would affect kind of the outflows of the the property to to go on out. Um and I've heard you throughout kind of the threat of a lot of different folks a philosophical objection to the in you know what Riverside Village is and what it was designed to be. Uh and so ultimately, you know, I'll fall back on my original argument, which is the city

doesn't have to purchase this uh item. I think it would be good that we do, but if a developer says, "Hey, we'll do something with this u something is going to go there." I don't believe uh that this is in especially the way Riverside Village is growing uh and the density that's down there now and the success that it has that it's just going to sit there as an unencumbered piece of property. Believe somebody will put something on at that point. And that was what Riverside Village was originally envisioned to be. every diagram, every picture, every schematic of Riverside Village showed uh every every one of those parcels having something on there to meet the intent of the village. Uh and so parcel I, which is offscreen down by the the backside of Ironwood Apartments, has a a project that's u there now for town homes for consideration. Uh and this is the last unencumbered piece of property. Uh, and so again, my argument is I think the city would be a good landlord and a better landlord than uh a commercial developer. Uh, and so I think I've gone through at least most of the questions and if I didn't answer any, I'm certainly open to hear from the commission about any last questions you have for me. Just um for clarification, you know, if we don't use the funds that are allotted to us for the cyber center, does the city have any interest in purchasing this if we didn't have those funds available

for parcel D? Ma'am,

if I did not have or correction, if the city did not have a $15 million set aside for Department of Energy funding, then the answer is probably no. Uh, you know, I do not have the ability to to go into, and that probably answers a question I had from one of the other constituents about, you know, bonding. Um, you know, when I first got into this job in 2020, you know, no city administrator wants to sit there and eat a credit hit. Uh, in the first 90 days in the job, the, you know, Moody's credit rating of the city slipped one. Uh, and it took three years for that to come back. And the reason for that was because of debt load. Uh and so ultimately, you know, as a fiscally conservative kind of person, I'm not interested in putting the city in a position where, you know, our credit is going to be a problem. Uh and so even as we went through capital project sales tax 5 planning through you, the voter referendum, you have an option to put bonds uh as commentary on there to say, hey, the city intends to get bonds to accelerate a project. uh in the city of North Augusta opted not to pursue bonds uh because we did not want to have more open lines of credit uh because we have the credit obviously for Riverside Village. We have credits open now for uh the public safety headquarters which will pay off a CPSD4 and we did not want to have an open line of credit on CPSD5. So that that's why I would not at least I would not recommend to the city council uh that we would go forward on a on a bond initiative uh from a financing perspective for anything down there in the village. Any other questions for uh Mr. Clifford? Thank you, Mr. Clifford. And and thank you everybody who spoke tonight uh for uh your civility and uh and and sharing your uh your thoughts and and u and interests in this property. So, thank you all very much for your for your time. Any other discussions? uh from the

commissioners.

I'd just like to say I I understand where a lot of you are coming from. I am an outdoorsman myself actually last week about this time. I was on my way up to Virginia to hike on the Appalachin Trail. Uh I worked with the Cub Scouts and the Boy Scouts. I am an Eagle Scout. Uh I love nature. I love what Brick Pond Park is. I take my kids down there. We love seeing the turtles and the alligator and Stumpy missing an arm and it's just it's a great place. I love that it's just honestly about a mile from my house. All the things that I do in North Augusta is within a mile or so of the park. I'm here all the time. I love the city and I love what we are doing and I'm glad that we have the park. Um that being said, I do understand that we are not voting tonight on whether something is built there or not. This is about what can be built there. Um it's it's a very tough one. Um you know, we get this big old pack in the mail early about when you guys can see it as well. And when you feel it and it's nice and thick, you know there's something serious coming up. So I knew I had a lot of studying uh you know, I met with Tommy just to make sure I had as many of the as much information as I can uh to make a a wise decision. Um, and so that being said, I I do think I lean towards um approving this or or recommending this to be approved. Um, not for uh to say that something there. I do like it empty. Like I said, I love actually Sandy was my neighbor. I talked to her this week as well. She has pictures uh hanging up in my restaurant that she sells that she has taken down at Brick Pine Park. I really do have a love for the place. Um, I I obviously this will affect that. I'm not going to try and say this won't affect uh and have some negative effects on the park. Um, but I don't think it will be

completely detrimental. Um, I think it's something just like with the park indic. Uh, you know, I think it'll have an effect and it might scare the birds away for a while, but I hope that once things calm down, I think they can come back and I think as the city takes care of it and a lot of the citizens are down there doing their parts, uh, that we can, uh, bring some of that wildlife back and continue to maintain it to be a wonderful, great place. Um, so that's that's kind of where I'm coming from. like say I will uh recommend to do this just because I think the city and the plan here is uh possibly better than somebody else what what they could do to it. So I just want some clarification if you ever want to talk to me come find me and talk to me. I'd love to for you guys to get to know me. I'm not just a a talking head up here. I am very invested in the community and uh like I'd love to to chat further on these things and to get to know you guys and you guys get to know me.

Mr. Paradise, I'm not sure if this question should be to you or Mr. Clifford. Um so as it stands now with how it's I guess zoned and delineated, where is the parking for what would be developed on parcel D at right now? the master the master parking agreement in effect right now remember there I believe it's a split and I'm talking off flat footed I think there's a split between the um parcel D and the um stadium deck I was just going to say, you know, we we definitely hear you guys. Trust me, I'm I'm a self-proclaimed tree hugger. That's why we're talking about trees after this. Um, you know, it's a dilemma of it's already approved. This can be used for homes and commercial. So, what's what do we do? What's the highest and best use to have the least amount of impact? Parking is a concern of mine. I do come down here a lot. Um I try to, you know, use our local businesses, locally owned small business. So I want to be a part of Riverside Village also. So is 22 residences, maybe 44 cars at night, you know, is the trade-off that we have people during the day versus at night. And you know, if it's already approved, someone's going to build on it. If the city doesn't have the funds to buy it for a park, you know, what's our highest and best use to have the least amount of impact? Um, you know, the city did the brick ponds. They were 20 years ago. It looked much different. And I think they're absolutely fabulous. I talking today when I walk my dog down there, dogs that I dogs often because I enjoy it and enjoy the city gators as DNR called them. They're used to living in the city. So, um, you know, our our job gets tough sometimes, but we want to make

sure you know, what's the highest and best use that we can offer with what's what's already approved.

And I'll just echo what Jesse said. We're obviously all citizens of North Augusta. We also bring our kids to brick ponds very often and we're super involved with the community and we do also we hear the the battle cries of the public and it is a very hard decision because this is a prime piece of real estate and ultimately something is going to go there and I personally would rather see the city do it and do it well and and see the vision in the future than a big developer from out of town that doesn't care about our community, doesn't care about the future, doesn't care if the building sits empty 20 years from now. Um, I feel confident that the city, if they purchase this, would want it to be used and used well and responsibly and taken care of. Um, I hate to see anything go there, but Riverside Village was built to be a high density development with multiple different things with housing, with retail, with restaurants, with it's built to be busy. Um, and so it is a tough decision, but I do agree that I'm leaning more towards recommending it because I would rather see the city do it and do it well and do it responsibly than an out of town developer because this prime piece of real estate, someone will put something on it. And yes, the plan has to come through us, but ultimately, like Tommy said, if they check all the boxes, we can't really turn them down. So, but thank you all for coming. We love seeing um the community involved. the the public hearing is is closed. Yes, ma'am. Sorry. Um um any other comments, questions from commissioners? And as a reminder, um we are we are a recommending body only. We um you know uh all we do tonight uh with our vote, we'll recommend to city council. So um the decision hasn't been made and and city council will make the ultimate decision. So there'll be other opportunities for you to speak. Yeah.

Um, thank you for your time. Um, any other, if no other questions, do I have a recommendation? I'll make a motion to recommend approval of PD25-001. Plan development major modification. I have a motion. Do I have a second? I'll second. Second from Miss Commissioner SE. Uh, all in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Nay. One. One. Nay. um Commissioner Wadell with the with the name. Thank you very much and thank you all again for uh coming um this evening. [clears throat]

Mr. Chairman, can we maybe take a um five minute break? That'd be fun. Yep.

I didn't put your license. I'm going to call the uh commission meeting back to order after our break. Uh again, thanks everybody for their patience. Um our our next agenda item is a presentation by our city arborist Roy Kibler um on tree preservation. So, anything else, Tommy, we need to know in advance of this uh discussion presentation. Uh this is the next step in the development of a tree preservation plan or ordinance um that the that y'all have asked us to look into and um and and have some arburous tree people come in and speak to you. But that is what we're trying to do here. And Roy was kind enough to come tonight and uh sit through a rather long longer than normal meeting.

Thank you for your patience. Thank you uh commissioners for having me this evening. Um and just just to briefly go through this these slides. Um why protect and enhance your community forest? Uh tree ordinance can help protect and enhance the benefits of your community forest by establishing a permanent and official tree protection policy. Ordinances establish municipal authority over public trees. Set standards for tree planting, maintenance, and management. Outline enforcement, fees, fines, and define nuisance conditions on private trees. Uh environmental, social, and economic benefits flow from a healthy, well-managed community forest. Healthy community forests that reduce air and noise pollution, save energy by shading and cooling, furnish habitat for wildlife, enhance aesthetics of a property, and contribute to community image uh pride and quality of life.

And I will say that's that's my bad. Uh, I apologize for that. The um last sentence there. That wasn't him emphasizing. That was my cut and pasting.

Oh, no worries. No worries. Um, options for uh tree preservation. Have a pre-application conference with the approving uh department. Uh, this meeting should be held prior to submitting any application for site development. uh for example building permit or any grading permit or land clearing. Um a current tree survey should be submitted for all commercial, multifamily, large, single family subdivisions. Uh put in place a development plan review checklist for conserving trees on sites proposed for development. A percentage of mature trees shall remain of a minimum 35% of the 4 in to 8 in caliber trees. Uh 8 in uh diameter DBH within the required perimeter and perimeter landscape zones. 25% of trees over 8 in in DBH within the required street frontage perimeter or perimeter landscape zones shall be retained when commercial properties above residential properties and planned for during the land development process. A minimum of 20 trees per acre must be maintained. Uh heritage trees and grand trees uh need to be identified on the survey. Um this would include any oak, pine, magnolia or any large canopy tree over 24 in in DBH. And that is diameter breast height. Um which is about 48 in where you would measure the tree. Um trees such as dogwoods, crepe myrtles, Chinese fringe trees, and other small trees over 8 in uh in DBH would want to

be uh preserved. Next slide. Um, six, make it a violation to remove any trees with a DBH of 4 in or greater within the street tree frontage perimeter or perimeter landscape uh, yards prior to development. In an exceptional case where the approving authority determines that an individual tree or group of trees is very high value uh, and virtually irreplaceable, approval is required for removal. uh only uh an example of live oaks, exceptional native species or trees of historical importance. Recognizing that some existing trees are not suitable or desirable as street frontage trees, developers are encouraged to identify those trees along road corridors that may be preserved during the clearing and development process and those would be identified in a tree survey. Um the approving authority uh may approve preservation of trees in lie of or in combination with specific replanting uh efforts. Violators are charged with a misdemeanor. Uh each day's continuence is considered a separate offense. advantages uh by imposing the daily condition even small fines associated with misdemeanors can be significant. This helps ensure compliance and prompt mitigation work. Uh control the quality of tree that is being planted for subdivision trees and street trees. Select the areas of groupings of trees to save on a site. Saving large areas of green space is better than saving one tree alone.

Ensure that trees or groups of trees selected to be saved on a site development shall have the correct tree protection zone and measures in place and inspected throughout the construction process. That's all well and fine if you say you're going to protect trees, but then don't ensure the proper tree protection throughout the construction process. Um, you can put tree protection up, but if you don't go buy and inspect or make sure that that's up throughout the construction process, you're not you're not you're putting it up for u for no reason. protect uh protected trees shall count uh as credit towards the total net canopy coverage that is required on a developed site. Um develop a tree preservation checklist for sites proposed for development. Um view the tree protection ordinance bulletin 31 from the Arbor Day Foundation. And I think Tommy said he had put it in your packet. This is a really goodformational um guide for tree uh preservation ordinances and creating one. So, it's a good read, a lot of information. Um but I think it's it's beneficial, you know, uh for everybody to understand what goes into that and um and the importance of it.

I went through that really fast. I do want to ask a couple questions. question [clears throat] um as you see it or maybe this is maybe the answer is you don't know but um the approving authority is typically okay the planning department and so um I would probably be correct in assuming then that the person policing the violations of the tree survey or tree preservation would also be the planning department.

Yes. Okay. This is sort of an opinion question because in the information you gave us, you gave some examples of sort of the different municipalities that have different forms of protection and it's it's pretty varied. Um, in your opinion in North Augusta, what would what would your opinion of what this maybe would look like that would be manageable? Because some of this gets pretty drilled down. I don't know if we're sitting there policing 4 in trees. Um, yeah. Just your opinion.

I think um probably 4-in caliper trees on sites in North Augusta are are going to be probably mostly water oaks, um, sweet gums. um trees that uh may not be of high value, but if they're saved, they can still be, you know, valuable trees uh in the ecosystem and and help with the city's tree camp. Um as far as heritage trees, I think I don't think we have as many heritage trees in North Augusta as we would like. Um I think uh a lot of you know uh development has already been done. We did try and our best to save as many as we could at the public safety headquarters. We've got some really big uh those would be heritage considered heritage trees on that site. Um as far as sites that were are being planned for residential um you might have 12 to 18 inch. I'm going to gather probably oaks and and hardwoods uh in some pines that in my mind I would save. Uh and I think they would be worthy of saving. Um uh and I think that's that's the whole point of you know trying to get a tree preservation or in in place is to try and help because those trees have a large tree canopy and very hard to replace that amount of tree canopy. Um, so I mean it's it's kind of where my mind mindset would be. Mr. Paradise, for you, given if we did

every single one of those provisions that we just saw on that list, do you foresee that as being an overload to your department as it relates to managing those? Probably. like you would need more staff. I would have to drill into it a little bit, but the two code enforcement officers that we have, this is will be additional duties for them.

Any other questions for is this the slideshow is not in our packet, right? I'm sorry. No, sir. Is that something that could be emailed to us? We can email that. I'd love to look at it, but we're a little rain's a little bit fried and and that's just a drag. I mean, that's just there's no it's that's nothing concrete to clarify. I love it. [laughter] You will you will probably have a different arborist here or a landscape or somebody here next month. Presentation would be awesome to have. I will I should have printed that off and I wasn't thinking to be honest with you. An email is fine. Save the trees. Excuse me.

I said an email is fine. Save the trees. We we killed enough trees were our agenda this month. This has been very helpful, Mr. Killer. Thank you for your your knowledge and information. Thank you. What you're what you're doing for our city. So, yes. Thank you very much. Very helpful in our discussion. I have a question. Yes. Um, as our city arborist, would you recommend that we look at this more closely? I'm assuming your answer is going to be yes, but absolutely. Absolutely. [clears throat]

when I feel like there's probably got to be like a happy medium between like every day is another misdemeanor and there's there's got to be a line somewhere and because I I think that that sounds a little ridiculous to me. Um but there does have to be meat to it. Sure. There's got to be

rules that aren't enforced aren't rules. Yeah. And I think you know the grand trees, the queen trees, what whatever we're giving that term to like in front of the public safety office, it in my mind that's number one priority and enforcement for those. You know, if we're talking about stands of trees, that would be nice, but if that's outside of what we can really manage um and and to Jason's comment at our last meeting, too, because I thought about this later, um I worked new construction for almost nine years. I think I closed close to 900 houses in one time. We cut down a big tree that was outside of the footprint of the house. You know, we didn't save anything that was super close that would fall down and they were just I I like I cried inside. They wanted to cut it down, but it was their choice. So, um because I think the comment was, you know, for builders and developers, if they leave them, is it costing them money if they have to come back and cut those trees down? Because we understand the value of clear cutting. But just in personal experience, one out of probably 900 because I really thought gave it a lot of thought like it was just one. So just put that out there.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Paradise. Uh you have a report for your department this evening? Not really. Um [laughter] we we we have been busy as always and um right now the focus is getting ready for this weekend. All right. Yeah, absolutely. Well, um on on behalf of the council over the commission, please thank your department for all the hard work that uh that you guys continue to do for for all of us. Thank you, sir.

Yes, sir. And please, please, um, we got flatfooted and complacent and Elaine changed her mind and and and got us flatfooted. Please keep an eye on this weekend so we're not flatfooted. I put gas in my car and charge my batteries. So, all right. We will um uh then adjourn the uh the meeting for tonight. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.