Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

first planning commission meeting for the city of Myrtle Beach. I'm going to call the meeting to order and move on to roll call. Uh Sharon here, Joe here, Austin here, Danielle here, Betty here, Phil here, Zeb here, Paul. Thank you everybody for being in attendance and refreshing. We're going to start with the approval of the minutes next up for October 7th. Please make a motion we approve as written. Second. I have a motion by Paul and a second by Sharon. Thank you. All in favor say I.

I. Okay. Moving on to the presentation of new applications of pin 25-06 forest dunes.

Yes ma'am. This a request from Chris Chley Bolton and mink to subdivide approximately 1.66 66 acres off the corner of 63rd Avenue North and North Ocean Boulevard, zoned R10, into three lots ranging in size from 24,297 ft to 23,671 ft. This is the property in question, the end of 63rd Avenue North on the Ocean side of North Ocean Boulevard. And currently the requested subdivision would see that split into three lots. As this is just workshop, that is all I have for you all. Happy to take any questions. And I believe Mr. Chocolley is not here today, but Mr. Wooten is pinch hitting instead.

Okay. Second spring. Okay. Questions for Cameron.

Okay. Questions for Mr. Wood. If they don't ask me anything, you're it's a good day. Any questions? Oh, okay. Explain the work around with the trees, the lots.

Um, we we we went ahead and did a tree survey. Um the client will likely sell these lots to people to build on build homes on and they're going to have to be responsible for working around the trees. There'll be there's nothing planned for construction at this time by our claim. We're simply subdividing the property for its eventual sale. I did show you all the trees. Um, do the uh the reserveyed lot lines generally follow the original lot lines? Yes. Well, the outside perimeter does. Sure.

But if you'll recall, this track was a large lot and a smaller lot, a 75 ft lot and a much larger lot. So, we've done away with all those property lines and we've evened it out. So, all three lots are roughly 90 ft. So, are we are we dee restriction? I I noticed that that was enclosed, but where are we? Is that with deed restrictions? And was this two was it always two lots or was it originally three?

Let's see. To my knowledge, it's been two lots. I think I think Mike is probably if you look at the original subdivision survey, it was probably three lots at one time because it may have been, but I I didn't do the title search, so I don't know. Yeah. Um well, I mean, that is one of the obligations for the applicant is to do a title search and produce any deed restrictions that occur on the propert. There are no de I know Chris done that. There are no deed restrictions. That's likely. Yeah. No, that would prohibit this. That's also likely. Yeah.

Who who actually did the Do we know who did the title search? The full title search. Got to go back a 100 years. Don't know, but I'll find out for the next meeting. Okay. I mean, I, you know, we've done other subdivisions of lots in this particular um township area and um and they've always had deed restrictions. Zeb, for the for the new people, newer people, could you expand or Cameron expand on deed restrictions because it's something that comes up regularly and everybody doesn't know what that is. So, somebody Cameron, do you want to do it?

Simply just a restriction on a piece of property. what the penant can't do with that piece of property. Uh it's important to know that this board does not enforce those. We just have to ask by state law for them if they exist on the piece of property. They're generally rectified in the court system uh to remove them if needed. So, but we do not enforce these restrictions of planning board. Yeah. the state law when considering um uh subdivisions, state law requires us to ask if the restrictions uh cover the property and if they do, do they um prohibit the requested action that's being that's being considered by I'll have that answer for you.

Okay. Yeah, I mean, you know, it's it may not have showed up in a 60-year search, but it's going to show up in a 100 year search. Um almost every lot in Myrtle Beach is de restricted to from subdivision of any further than what the original lot lines were. I think you're going to be fine because I think the original lot lives for this subdivision are probably along the lines of what you have here. Um but but that's but we don't know if it was two lots or three lots of the original and you do have to do that long search. their laws.

And our concern here is obviously what's happened in Surfside and other places where you take a traditional neighborhoods with larger lots and then somebody comes in and subdivides the lots and sells off smaller lots as a detriment of the remainder of the neighborhood. Understood. Okay. Uh any further questions for not our next meeting. Thank you. Thank you for being here. We'll see Chris. We'll see. Are you sure about that now? Well, I'm I'm reasonably sure. We'll see. We'll see. Madam Chair, to recuse myself from the remainder of the

Okay. All right. Because you're related to somebody. Okay. Uh Austin has submitted a recusal form. Thank you. Thank you. Goodbye. Goodbye. Nothing personal. Um, all right. On to the next item. Ax25-03 29th Avenue Spiritual Center HUD first.

So, uh, Kelly's going to be giving this presentation as her first annexations and PUDs, I actually believe. But wanted to start with this statement. Uh, this is multiple pieces that are all directly linked to one another. So, um, she's going to run through this thing pretty systematically and try to get to the end before a lot a lot of the questions come in, but just really want to make it known that the annexations are generally contingent on the pud being approved as well. So, as they go through, just keep in mind that those pieces all kind of have to fit together to get to that final pud point. So, just want to start with that. So,

thanks Cam. Okay. Request from Robert S. Giten agent to annex approximately 64 acres off 29th Avenue North and to reszone from Ory County Highway commercial to the 29th Avenue North spiritual center pub. Here is a aerial view of the proposed annexations and the current zoning as well as the proposed annexations. This is the second one. It's a request from Robert S. Giten, agent, to annex approximately 3,394.77 square ft of off 29th Avenue North and to reszone from Ory County Highway commercial to the 29th Avenue North Spiritual Center put. again the proposed annexation, the current zoning and the proposed annexation. In relation to that, here is the 29th Avenue Spiritual PUD. It's a request from Robert S. Dton agent to create a planned unit development between North Oak Street, 29th Avenue North and 27th Avenue North, known as the 29th Avenue North Spiritual Center, PUB. Here's the aerial view of the proposed boundaries of the PUD. the aerial view of that, the zoning that would correlate with the proposed the previous proposed annexations and how it would all fit into place within the PUD.

The 29th Avenue Spiritual Center, PUD, is the continued mission of the Habad of of Myrtle Beach, and it will consist of a traditional school and worship center, a mikvah, and permanent independent and short-term rental on-site residences. The total area will be 64 or I'm sorry, 6.4 acres, and it consists of eight parcels. Three of those are currently undeveloped and the remaining five include already an existing school, a spiritual center, a former florist and residential structures. The 8,000 square foot spiritual center with four apartment floors will act as the PUD's anchor. Some dimensional requirements of the PUD will consist of a minimum lot area of 2500 square ft with a maximum height of 60 ft for the spiritual center facility with 42 feet for the remaining structures. A minimum front setback of 20 ft along the perimeter of the PUD with no minimum front yard setback within the interior of the PUD. and a minimum building separation of 10 ft. Here's a zoning comparison summary between the proposed PUD and the underlining zoning HC1, the HC1 minimum side and rear yard setbacks and the proposed PUDS parking standards table. Again, all three of these agenda items are contingent upon each other. I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. The applicant is also in the room with us.

Okay, let's let's just start out with the U annexations. Does anybody have any questions about that? Um, I'm a little unclear as to what of which of these parcels are currently in the city versus the ones that are not. Okay, so let's run back here.

So, uh, one of couple things to get to here. So, this right now is our current zoning map. So, we have that small donut hole right in the middle. It's currently six pieces of property that are outside city limits. The first annexation, and why we had to run two separate annexations for this, they're owned by separate individuals. So, the first annexation was owned by one person. The second is owned by the Habad school right now. Um, when it originally came in, we thought it was just notice how there's some weird cracking in the vectoring of the coloring. We thought that was uh that small sliver in the second one was already part of the city, but we found that after the fact that that's actually outside of the city, but owned by Labot. Really? Yeah. It's

that to our to the Ory County records, it looks like an ement property left over from Burrows and Chapen. So, it was just a weird one that we had to kind of rectify. So the first annexation would be these two blue properties here that are being brought into the city with the second annexation filling in that small little sliver here. So you would still have a remaining three parcels that are outside the city limits and it would be you can show them the these three here would be remaining outside the city limits. Okay. Um and then what about the the property they recently purchased? Is that not part of this annex section? I believe that'd be a good question for the applicant. It's already in the city. It's already in the city, but it doesn't show it here, does it?

Because I thought it backs up the um Top Golf. Yeah, that would be this large piece here. Yeah, that large piece here. That's already in city limit. That's the city. So, what's the zoning of that piece? Uh that one, I believe, is amusement. Yes. Okay. So that that one piece you just pointed out is in the city. Yes. The only things that are not are the uncolored pieces. Okay. Uncolored. Oh boy. So just to unc

again at the end of it all again if this all fits together these are the only three remaining pieces that would be outside of city limits not accounted for in the putt here on the corner. Everything inside that red boundary would become part of the pud. Can you show them this? I think that's a good representation. You can see the donut hole that will exist from if it's not on the uncolored part. I'm not going to leave that alone.

What's the do we know what the county zing is of those highway commercials? Okay. Any more questions on the annexation portion of this? Because I'm excited to get to the FUD part. The first time you've ever said that. This is the first time I'm really excited. I've been waiting for this for months. Um, any other questions for Kelly about the annexation portion? That's the easy question. I have a question. Um, yes sir. The current florest property help is it

not conforming to our current highway commercial setback? Which property? The florest. The florest on the corner. Flowers by Richard I believe. So they're not in business anymore that currently is zoned mum. I believe they are conforming to the mum. And that requires what? I don't know. off the top of my head. Charlie said he would be here shortly here. That's a good question. Even if it doesn't comply, it' be non I mean it be grandfather.

Yeah. I'm asking a question because they're asking for 20 foot all the way around that perimeter of 29 oak and I'm trying to get a feel for the oak street. That is the question that you have answered by the time rolls around.

Okay. Anything else for Kelly? Because I'm going to ask Mr. Guin to Can you answer that. Thank you, Kelly. We'll come back to you. Thank you. Which one? About Phil's question. Yeah. No, but did you want I thought you wanted to hear that answer. Well, let's deal with ask. Okay. All right. Thank you. No problem. Um, are we ready or Well, we we are. I thought Phil had a question about the annexation part,

but he does not mind. So, let's move on to the PU. Kelly, we're back to you. Any questions? Any questions for Kelly about the pud? So, I haven't Okay, so you've got these different colors here for for what I think is going to be the pud. Does that mean that some of the B property is going to be part of the pud and some of it's not. No, this is just an overlay red. Okay. So, so the the the two lots that are be the two lots in the eman that'll be annex are going to be part of the pod and then the existing property that the the spiral center already has will become part of the pod.

Will there be any property the spirit center has that's not going to become part of the pud? Yeah. No, all of the red is the pud and the These three, two, three are the annexations.

Oh, you're talking about just if they're annexed in, don't they'll be part of that? Um, what's the minimum lop size under MUA? Don't believe there is one. There's not. Is there one under highway commercial? 10,000.

Hold on a second. It's easier when the encyclopedia is sitting over there, isn't it?

Uh, there's no minimum watt area within the mum highway commercial one. Caitlin is correct. It's 10,000 square feet. All right, let's let's move on. Anything else that you want to tell us about the public? You ready for more questions? Does any other questions say anything? Go ahead with We have to We have to test Kelly every minute here. This is quite a package for to cover. Thank you for doing

uh so what else do you have for Kelly? Okay, Kelly, you did a good job. If nobody has any questions for you, so I'm gonna move to Mr. and do you have a tale to tell us? Uh, yeah. This has been an education process for me. I am obviously not Jewish and I was not familiar with a lot of the traditions, but I've spent several months now learning this. So, are you converting? No. No.

I didn't know where we're going. I think I have some children and a wife that would probably not be in favor of that. So, but I will say it is fascinating that um when you look at at their religious requirements, I understand why they want to create an immersive spiritual center. I've always seen them walking up and down on the sidewalk not realizing that on the Sabbath they're not allowed to drive. So, as their congregation, for lack of a better word, ages, like all the rest of our congregations are aging, the ability to walk to a service is less and less viable. So, what their thought was is if we can create one center where they can not only worship, but share their meals and lodging if they so choose. And they're aiming that for both people that live within the city and then some residents that may not be able to get here otherwise. So, that's the is that they create one center that feeds them from both a school perspective to a worship perspective to an actual nutrition perspective. So they want to do it all as one center. It's an it's an optimistic project. I would say if you look at the scope and scale of that it's it's massive really.

It really is. And it and I thought you know that this is a one of a kind thing but I've had calls from all over the country that people who are looking at the same sort of project are looking at this for their community. Even it started with Charleston. I got some calls from Charleston saying it may not feel like it, but these guys are actually the forefront of what we're trying to do as a Jewish community. So, um I've been over and looked at the Torah. I knew what the Torah was. I did not realize that it was actually 12 gigantic handwritten scrolls. They're huge.

It's unbelievable. Um, but yeah, you couldn't ask for nicer people than than they understand their mission. They get a little caught up in thinking that everybody else is going to be as passionate about their mission as they are, which is probably not the case, but I think they're trying to do the right thing for the right reasons. We spent a lot of time with staff making sure that we were covering all our bases and how to get there. the use thing. You know, we did a lot of time trying to sort out what were excluded uses as much as what were allowed uses because a lot of those excluded uses just cloud the picture. They're never going to be a viable option in this PUD. So, we chose to separate those and leave them separate from the ones that are allowed. The uses you see here, I don't see those ever changing again. They're they're obviously considering the fact that they could continue to expand. They had conversations with the Elks Lodge about the piece behind them. That didn't go anywhere. Ultimately, I think they'd love to figure out a way to incorporate some of that. If the other three parcels ever came available, I think it would make sense that they would try to do something with that. The two lots that Kelly was talking about early on, they already leased the home. If y'all remember that next door is where the best bull peanuts in town have been for a long time. So I hate to see that go away, but I don't think that'll be part of their menu going forward. So have to find somewhere else to get more peanuts from. Um it's it's really simple from their use and what they're doing with it, but it's a complicated project with a lot of moving parts. It's there's some engineering and architectural challenges to this. Tom Miller's the architect of record. DRG is the engineer of record. Worked with both of those guys for a long time. I have a lot of respect for them and a lot of confidence in their ability to do

well. I wish the other three parcels because I believe that this could be absolutely a magnificent looking pud and it really it's a sad looking corner right now as it stands. What happens to a bod school?

It'll stay it stays operating. The florist actually becomes what we're calling the commissary in there. So the idea was that would be where they'd feed the children, but they also have it available so they have people that are housed on site. They're not having to wait for the formal meal time that could come over and grab a snack or sandwiches or drink or those kind of things on site. So that's what's going on with Florest. I don't think they intend to expand any further the the range of um opportunities. They're not going to build college here or anything like that, but school is something they're very proud of. They think it's what's helped perpetuate their presence here in the community and I tend to agree with that. So that's something they don't ever want to give up. Um if you go over there now, it's pretty interesting. The old dance school is functioning as both a worship center and a meal center. So they literally have a meal, roll the tables out of the way, then worship. And it's not an ideal situation. Um the kitchen is fairly limited. So the number of people that they can serve is fairly limited because of that. So they spend a lot of time.

Mr. What is the congregation numbers? I I don't really know. I can have that for you next time. No, it's just a curiosity because this is an enormous undertaking. It is financially. That's not our purview, but that's always a concern. I agree. I agree. This is I I have a multitude of questions, but let's go around the table if you don't mind. Sure. Absolutely. Paul, one question right now. Okay, Zeb, what do you have, please? Um, can you just kind of give us a rundown of why you need the PUD and why existing MU zoning doesn't work?

It doesn't work because what they're trying to do with their singular uses and you've got both permanent residents and transient residents. So that's that's their real challenge and that's why HC1 didn't work alone, HC2 didn't work alone, but the two uses together do work. Um what is the for for residential lots? My recollection is is you can't have residential lot less than 7500 square feet. Is that correct? Uh depending on the zoning, we have R5 that goes out 5,000 ft. 5,000 ft.

So, I mean, would you need lots that are less than 5,000 square feet? I don't think they will subdivide any lots out of this. The existing lots will stay there because they don't own all of those, particularly the two on the outside. But the plan is that if you're within the project, you would never know that there's a boundary line there. It all works together. Even if they choose to sell something along the lines of a condominium unit, it would still maintained in common because they don't want to have to deal with which one they don't own. They don't own the two here. That one they lease and that one is the one. So they going to continue to lease and walk.

They will improve those properties. They've got a long-term lease on both of those. So they'll still continue to use those within the worship that they're using. Now, one of those homes functions similar what we would call a parsonage. So they have their their their rabbis are able to maintain there. So, so the the easement area, the leftover easement area and the um and the two lease parcels are not going to become part of the p. No, they are becoming part of the but they won't be recombined into one parcel. Okay. So, those owners are considering to the p.

Yeah. Um the habad actually owns a small parcel. Selby trust owns the other two. I think you'll remember when they bought They took it in a different entity that is supposed to be a subsidiary of the Habad. Some of the paperwork wasn't done incorrect is being corrected now to make sure that that's reflecting what that actually part of the 2500 foot things is to account for that small easement parcel from leftover BNC that's about 3,300 square ft. So just trying to give wiggle room on that one to make sure that that parcel can stay as is without having to be forced into combination with anything else. What's the reason for even not providing that with one of the other parcels?

When they're done with their design, they may very well do that. But today, what they're telling us is that they don't intend to combine anything. I think some of that will have to do with financing, too. This is going to get financed in tranches, for lack of a better word. That largest building is probably the most difficult to finance out of all of them. The others I've seen the financing commitments from traditional banks. I think those are all manageable. That large building is going to maybe not a miracle, but it's going to take a a lot of prayer to get to get that up. Well, I think they can do that. I agree. I agree.

Anything else? I got to move on. We'll come back. We'll come back to you. Okay. Joe, do are you ready to ask some questions? Yeah. So, you mentioned earlier something about how like other places in the country or looking at the spiritual center. So nothing like this already exists in the country. They don't have one that's what they call immersive. So you're there for everything. You come to worship, you come to stay, you come to share your meals, you come to study, all those things.

There are there are other spiritual centers but not Jewish spirit. I mean we have one part of us. That's a good question. Anything else, Joe? Not at the moment. Okay, Jared. And nothing yet. Okay, Daniel. I have nothing yet, but I have some. Okay, well, I was just curious about the larger building you're talking about. It looks like there are about 250 units to be built.

How in the world you going to fit that in? Three stories. Well, and that that building has a 60 foot height limit and the massing exhibit that's in here is not very good. Tom is revising that. So before we come back to what I wanted to see was both the streetscape and an overhead so you could get some context. That massing exhibit they gave us doesn't really give you any context, but I've been assured that that will be available before next week. So you can see that. Well, I would assume being a spiritual center, they would be small rooms and simple rooms because that's what they should be. But Um, you know, I was just curious about that. Thank you.

Yeah, my assumption is that they're going to function more like dormitories of single family permanent residents. So, they will share common areas. They won't need meal preparation, all those things. And do we allow dormitories anywhere else in the city? J1. Yeah, there's that HUD. And then I believe we do in the um oh the old the old hospital site um was that zone the old hospital site that's now Pepon whatever that designation was at the time when I was at the hospital I believe we allowed that

we did I believe so I don't remember that I'm surprised that's a doing my best thing is though um if everything is approved what would be like the starting point when they'll be able to like start using well when I say start some of the uses already exist the bod's there the school's there

they're already converting the old flower shop as their compulsary so the next probably the next piece would be the um the individual residences that you see in there that are kind of more like town homes. That would probably be the next piece that comes. I expect the larger building to be the last.

Hey, Phil. Phil, I know you have a question. I just want to before you start there, Phil, because I have a lot of questions. I I I wanted to commend you on the section one, the summary of this. I thought that was really well done and uh I I just like what how you presented it. It felt totally different than all other puds that you Well, I'll have to give them credit. I got a lot of editing help from them. It was not solely my interpretation because Well, maybe you need to have another partner there. I mean in real. No.

Well, here's what I would say is anytime I do work for churches, regardless of what denomination they are, it's free. So, I like to think of these as divine intervention. It's better because I'm here for the right reasons. And evidently, you're getting schooled. So, you're getting getting some dues paid there. Okay. Phil, I know you you have a whole page, but I have I'm not doing all these right now. I've just got four. Okay. Okay. You you go so that I want it all. You go. Yeah, you go. So because then what you don't ask, I have a list of

Okay. Um the public improvements 200,000 on your experience um with the 5ft sidewalks and the type landscaping that's being deceptually presented. Apparently you feel that 200,000 will cover all I think it's a little low only because that mid block signal line crossing probably going to run around 135 to 150 by itself. So that I expect by the time we're done with council that number will increase.

Okay. So by the time we get to the final we'll have the more accurate number. Okay. And I do want to commend you by the way too. This is wonderful opportunity here and they're trying their best to improve the area. They are and that's good and they and Joyce was right they have some challenges. That corner in particular looks like an old bandaid compared to anything else.

Now where are you planning to put in those residential housing that kind of I guess almost a Lshaped block. I can understand the request for 20 ft. Particular way it's being designed is that it's not like a flat running along Oak Street. It's more just the corner is going to hit that point and the rest really is going to be graduating away from that. Um is the is the way the putt design um would it require if you change that type of concept that it would require to come back the perimeter um boundary change with the buffer on it? Yes, it would have to come back as camera can answer this but I would ass change that exterior decided to put something straight parallel to the street 20 ft away that require is that a change that required to come back

I believe so that we find out for sure next time and that was one of the challenges with the massing exhibition because when Tom drew it he drew it with a 10 foot set back and because it is internal and immersive we felt like it was important to keep it 20 perimeter so you can control that both until the surrounds improve so they can control what's on the interior and from a visual standpoint because that gives them enough room. I use the boundary with top golf as a good example. Staff had some early input that was valuable is that you got those lights and you got that intrusion there. you really need to do a layer as much as you can opaque buffer on that boundary to protect the integrity of what you're trying to do within the so I see that is probably the biggest challenge of all is figuring out how to buffer that effectively um and that's one of the other

layers by by next week DRG will have a both a plan and a street perspective of a section of that buffer that's I suppose you get that. So why do you need it on the pinky lots which has got the um housing and the zone by someone else and the forest? Why does those need and along with baud center now street why does those need to be 20?

Well just the perimeter buffer for the whole is 20 ft. So wherever that boundary was, as an example, if they did acquire those three parcels later and amended the PUD to include those, then the 20 ft would then move out to 29th Avenue instead of being and then internally there'd be 10 foot separation between structures will have to have a 10ft separation. But you are wanting the putt to currently change from 30 to 20 on Oak Street. still trying to figure out what what's the need for that. There's more buffer with 30 ft. There is 20 ft. I don't think you have 30 ft there today. You have barely enough for a parking space,

right? And that's what I'm thinking. So, kind of if you could figure that out without that to help us explain it, somebody have to ask a question why. It's it helps with understanding that. What I expect to happen is those parking spaces in front of the old floors may ultimately go away and the parking will be in terminal. I don't think you'll maint when when I look at their summary overview of what this puts supposed to be. I see nothing commercial oriented. So why is the we retaining permitted commercial uses HC1 and HC2? Because we have to look at this. They can fail at this or it never gets completed like it is. This anyone else can come in go to all the way around change back will go back and I'm I'm not comprehending why they need all these type brokers. confectionist, dress maker, eyeglass sales, floorest. Why are we retaining those commercial?

Only for what you said is as the project evolves over time, whether that's 5 years or 10 years or whatever it is, these outside parcels, if they acquire them, may maintain a commercial use, but we thought it was more important to exclude uses that weren't ever realistic for this property and only include the uses that were viable within the property. I will out that as you've seen in most of the PUBs in the last four or five years, it has a sunset clause with a reversion in there. So if it does not gain traction, it will not remain the PUB. It will revert back to straight zoning. And of course, any future development will have to meet the requirements for that under a question. I guess be staffing a restaurant across the street. elementary school and this is the school too. Someone decided to build a restaurant there and had a bar. Would that be legal?

Bars excluded use already. I know I know bar I want to make sure said bar and you know unpermitted us bars and what do you call taverns? So restaurant that had a bar inside of it would not be allowed. It'd have to be more of a that would be a state issue. Yeah. I mean zoning wise I know I'm not sure that because they got restaurants included but it's state issue. Yeah and some restaurants have bars in them most of them do. I mean even hotels.

So the big thing is there's regulations that state you cannot sell alcohol within certain understand as a permanent uses. That's a long That's a long step that front door to that property, front door of the school to the travel path. Is there a way that we could see they're converting the old flower shop and you know that's not real pretty on street. Is there a way that we could include incorporate in there some way they going to improve that process?

We are working with them on that. They are approving. It's more of an inside out option right now. Yes. Well, I'm talking about outside option.

What's Yeah. And and I think you know this the reason I don't include those in the PBS because it still has to go to CA and I don't want to have to because CA has a difference of opinion on what the aesthetics are. So when you see a PED from me, you will only see a boxing massing exhibit. You won't see architectural I didn't say architectural but you do have in phases what's going to be done and you got in phase one to maintain what we have what I'm saying can we say and improve the exterior look of the property c in terms of what that is applicable but not to allow to stay as is

because it's a mess is what you're saying. Yeah. I mean I understand the principle but I I don't know how we get there from here because they're working on the drawings for the renovations to the flower shop as we speak which will be approved by CAB. So I think it's safe to say that other than the existing structures the entire P gets improved but I don't know how you quantify that in PUB to make it binding today that you want to know what the improvements to the flower shop are going to be.

I don't need to know to know that that will enhance the exterior. Yeah. Yeah. I I don't think there's any question about that. They don't want a flower shop facade next to the school that they're using for a commissary. The last thing I have right now is um what a need for 10 years and a fiveyear extension. It sounds like this. There's a need. I agree with the need. Why?

Mainly because that largest building that we've been talking about. That is the challenge in that if you started today, you'd be three years into design and permitting that building. So five years the spiritual center, the largest building.

That's why otherwise if it were a typical multifamily or even a commercial PUB, those are are done on the front end. They're either improve them or they're not. This is a little bit different as everything's evolving as they progress with each step of it. Kind of like they've done up until now. School was built uh 40 years ago. So, it's taken them this long to get this much traction to where they're going. I'm not willing to say that in five years they can complete this. I don't think that's a real That's why I was curious about the congregation size because this is a financial

wallet. It is.

It is. I mean, what what prevents the PUD being passed and then the organization deciding to sell off um a portion of it for these that would include these permitted uses that don't really I mean I think one of the reasons for considering all this because this is very outside of the normal um uses permitted by by the current zoning scheme inside the city. um you know small lot sizes, dormitories um um you know u various other things which I think um are fine as part of a accessory to a religious campus but my concern would be if it's not used as a religious campus at some point in the future does this undermine the whole zoning scheme um inside you know the area that we're looking at. I mean, I'm I worry about tiny houses. You know, that's one of the things we've been trying to avoid is tiny houses, subdivisions of tiny houses, you know, those kind of things that it's it all makes sense when it's part of a greater spiritual center. But if this was going to be cut up at some point in the future, maybe not even voluntarily, um I don't know if this zoning is what we would want to stay in place.

I think let me jump to here real quick. I think doing force off text. One of the simplest answers is the summary of the pud specifically spells out what this is. So if someone does come in and tries to buy up this property and do you know tiny homes well uh I have here in writing and enforceful that they're also going to be building a mikvah and a religious traditional school and worship center. So there's the teeth to the pud that says what this will be. Okay. So including Yeah. So, we're we're we're fairly confident that that the text in the PUD looks at this as all one one general permitted use. That's how I with with all the separate it it it cannot be separated,

right? Is there a way to tie these permitted uses to those lots that need the permitted uses, which is those two? The only ones I see as commercial is the two that's in the pinky section. No, because as an example of the large spiritual center, probably going to have some sort of concession operation in there. Probably going to have some sort of store that'll be within there. So, you can't do access you're not supposed to access.

That's why we eliminated both the special exceptions and the conditional uses in there. If you look at just the straight uses including Um after the total build out you have up to 40 53 buildings I think in the um I mean what kind of buildings are you envisioning there that would be 53 buildings on on this particular piece of property. Some of them are detached but the majority of the density comes from that one large building. If you take that building away the density drops dramatically as do the different types of construction. So it wouldn't really be 53 buildings really.

Yeah. Yeah. That that was really one of my very pointed questions that 56 separate buildings. I mean what are they identified as? That's an enormous amount of Yeah, that would include all the existing buildings plus the residences that are ground level for lack of a better word, not including the larger build. But but they're 56 separate buildings. To me, that means each one has four walls. Not necessarily. It might be a shared wall. These could be Maybe maybe we need to couch this sentence differently then because that reads to me 56 separate build.

Okay. If they're units, you you want them treated as one aggregate building like a I mean, that's what gets gets me worried about tiny houses again and tiny buildings for that matter. Could be seven buildings, but it would be one building. Yeah. I mean, condos. I'm not concerned about condos. You know, we have,

you know, but I mean that's what makes the 2500 square ft lot size, you know, of concern, particularly if it's not needed. If if we don't need I mean we've got a grandfather lot that was kind of leftover lot anyway but if we don't need 2500 square ft I'd like to at least maintain 5,000. Well I think we'll have to include that existing lot. So the most you can go is 3200 square ft and provide for the existing lot unless the existing lot's nonforming. If it's not non-conforming when you put it in PG,

it becomes what it is. Okay, Phil, are you finished with all of your questions? Okay, the I'm going to just go down a little few questions for myself. The $200,000 is based on the value of the PUD projection. Correct. So,

it's yet to be seen what council will agree to on that. And I will tell you that the midblock um signal line crossing was something that we didn't think was going to be a possibility. Thanks to a workshop in this room, senior um staff said we can support that. So that that was not in the earlier drafts. that did come into the submittal draft for that very reason because they think it's important both for kids leaving the existing Ory County schools and here going across the street or worshippers coming across the street as well and that like Phil asked earlier I think that one item is going to run somewhere between 135 and 150,000 we just put one in a del

the overall value of the putt is based on the value of the public improvement. So if that if that item, you know, that's we're a long way from sidewalks and everything else that you mentioned. That's why I think that number will go up by the time. Okay. um the the public benefits be limited uh to the improvements to be made uh to public assets include storm water roadways and public safety assets. So because this is this is a different pod uh not open to the public. Is that correct? That's right.

It's not open to the public. So it has a little different question. Um, another question is what about um the visitor store? Is that visitor? Does that mean somebody within the property within? Okay. Yeah.

I I you you have addressed all the parking standards. Um I'm not sure about all of them, but one that I think is omitted is this is an enormous property. It's going to have a lot of staff. Where is staff parking? that I don't know that they've addressed the number of staff that won't be living on site. So that was the other part of that. Their worshippers, as an example, won't be driving to worship. They'll be walking or staying on site. So that's why traditional parking standards really don't work for this. It's a completely different,

but there is going to be staff nonetheless, right? I mean, there are going to be housekeepers and Well, what's yet to be seen is are those staff of the same religious orientation as the people running? So, they're going to walk they're not going to have housekeeping one day a week. So, yeah, they're not going to have housekeepers drive in during Sabbath to service the units while the worshippers walk in.

Okay. It's just a concern for me. But um we we there's a lot of redundancy in this as I flip through, but u my my biggest concern was the uh 56 separate buildings. If you can address that and couch that in a different format, I would appreciate that because that it it's kind of elusive uh to what the uh the phase five and I mean the this is many years away. But um you know I I'm I'm cheerleading for this because I think this would be a great benefit to the community, a great benefit to the Jewish community, a wonderful change to that that really sad corner that we have there. And uh I I know that u the CAP will do a great job on making this look fabulous because it doesn't not only need to be functional for you. It needs to look beautiful and welcoming to everybody too.

And it needs to be somewhat timeless for what they're doing. It doesn't need to be something that five years from now is going to look outdated. I I do I really do hope it's done in 10 10 years. I really would hope I'd like to see it. I'm not sure I got many more than that. So, actu actuarily speaking, as they say. So, I mean, I I am rooting for this. I I just see good things. It's a good It's good. You've done a good job on this. Um, I would like to see and I've already talked to Cameron about the Some of our exhibits are pretty minute.

Can anybody read them? I mean, they're not They're not. We'll provide 11 by seven. Yeah. Get back to because that that's a normal PUD presentation is 117.

Uh I sure would like to see see that a little better and you'll have probably more information when you come back. Anyway, um I don't I I even think that the tree that you're going to have trees. There's probably really no trees on property. Are there any trees? There's some, but they're not great trees. And again, going back to the conversation with staff about that buffer between top golf, there's really nothing that would be sufficient to do that because if they're canopy trees, they don't provide any coverage for below. So, that layered buffer is very important on that.

Yeah, you're you're going to have to do a lot of layering for the top backing up to top. I mean, I I'm not sure how you do it, but you know, we have a lot of brilliant landscape people and they can get it done because it needs to be an enclave. So, it needs to be private and spiritual and quiet and, you know, not have a golf ball flying over, you know, I don't know how far those golf balls go, but you you probably know that or the people yelling go as far. Oh, well, there is that.

Chef, um, I know you've got a 20 foot setback along the perimeter of the pud. Um would would the applicant be willing to if they decide at some point in the future ever to build walls or fences along the perimeter that they at least uh set those walls and fences back 5T so you've got some landscaping between the sidewalk and the perimeter fence? Yes, that's not an issue. Okay. I I don't think they plan to put a fence now, but I understand why that could be a possibility. And it might in the future, particularly if they acquire those three lots, it might more sense to close. Yeah. And I I understand that that could happen, but I just don't you know, we've got those situations where we got a wall right up and it's you know

Yeah, that's not a problem. If I can get the calculation right, the worship conference and back is about 8,000 square feet. So that's 16 spaces for that total three facility and half of that is support. So it's not assembly. So about 4,000 is the assembly portion of that, right? 4,000 assembly 4,000. Yeah. Right. Split you worship 4,000 assembly. I know on Sunday that don't walk, but I'm going back to the same thing. They going to do things other than their Sabbath. Not their Sabbath

or I'm still trying. I know it's an issue with what you're thinking. You know what I'm trying to say? 16 spaces for that larger facility. they going to have. It's not going to be just for residents, right? I'm having a hard time wrapping around how that's going to be even the right thing for them.

You know, the original proposal and I think staff will tell you was was a lot less than that. So that what you have is is based on a change from staff. How how does how does staff wrap around with all our other regulations with all our other requirements? We do see an overkill in um especially big box stores with some of the parking requirements and everything else, but we need parking and other situations. But how how do we wrap around allowing that such a large facility? I mean usage is I mean, I think you raised a good point, Phil, in that I'm not as concerned about, you know, it's it's kind of their choice given the nature here. This is not necessarily going to be open to the I mean, the public. I don't I mean, you know, um so so it's kind of their own. They'll make their own arrangements for their own cars. What does worry me is we've got, you know, city rights away in the neighborhoods all around there and if they don't have sufficient parking, are they going to be parking in these city rights away um in front of people's houses and all that kind of stuff? But, you know, on a semi, you know, you know, constant nature,

um how how do we how do we address that in a way that that works? I I'll go back to at least from best practices and planning. We're seeing more cities moving towards models decreasing the amount of parking. Um about 25% of American surface areas or parking lots at this point. So um best planning practices it's kind of letting the market decide what they need. I don't think they're going to put themselves in a position where they underpark themselves for this very nature. I think the in discussions with the applicant as well um their intention that the people who are staying there on site are the ones primarily using the site. So you already have parking that's built in additionally with all the housing that's going on the site as well. So um I as a staff member I feel comfortable with the parking that's been provided

what said you look the units that they're portraying all those units actually have parking associated with those units. Is there I mean is there a way to as part of this flood have no on street parking um you know in the area or or at least along the those people's houses that that on the other side of Oak Street there. I mean I I just you know it's it's it's a problem that the city has addressed before in the form of you know beach access and all that kind of stuff. You get a city permit because you live in the city you know you can park in these rights away. Um, and these people who live there will be residents of the city. Um, so I I just don't want there to be underparked only to burden the neighbors with on street parking or

Well, I think the resident parking is sufficient within. It really just comes down to guests and I think we had this conversation early on. This is not intended to be a mini Broadway at the beach with a manora. It really is just a worship center. That's what it's for. It's not you're not trying to attract the general public with just I think between Phil and Z and my thoughts about parking. We don't need to have overflow parking on the street or in adjoining neighborhood. That's that's a cons that's it's a it's a reality thing. I mean it's that simple. So I mean we don't want to overpark any we don't because

that's awful. Uh but I tell you what might help. Before next week, we'll put together a total parking because I think what's misleading is when you look at the parking chart, it's breaking it out by unit. So, you're not seeing what will see. That would be wonderful. That would be that would be very helpful. Sure. Okay. Commissioners, what other questions do you have for Mr. G? So, I think you know what we need, what we're looking for. Uh, and uh if anybody has any last One quick question I have for staff. Yes, Phil.

And the phase five is where you're going to build the amenities and accessory uses. What what are they envisioning that? Well, and keep in mind that any of the phases can be built in any order. So, that's just for an organizational standpoint, but as an example, if they put in residences where they have people permanently there, they think they'll have plunge. they'll have some sort of outside activity because part of what they don't want is people that are they don't want this to feel like a restaurant. They want these people to still have an active lifestyle.

Thank y'all. Thank you. Appreciate see you next time. Will you be will you be ready with everything with our next meeting? Yeah. give me a good excuse to tell you where they got better. I have some minor revisions to my narrative, but I think I'm in good shape compared to them. Thank you for your being a volunteer to help this.

Oh, absolutely. I told these guys I did one for a church that started out that I was going to negotiate a contract for construction and the next thing I knew I was closing a $12 million construction. I love what I bargain for. As them knows, that's part of you. You take it where you get, you'll take a bottle. They're not finished with you yet. Well, another friend of mine who is also Jewish had a saying about that. He said, "Be careful now. When you give us one thing, we're gonna ask for two."

Thank you. Thank y'all. I appreciate it. I have a question for the staff to help educate me. Um, for a spiritual center such as this and we're going to build a dormatory and single residence, what guidelines do we use for being such a thing? I mean I mean we've never done one before. I've never I don't know what the Yeah, this this has been an odd one. It's taken quite a few months to get to the table because this is as chef noted one of the first of its kind in the country. Um

what we looked at with this one is the the folks who were involved in this were very very clear from the outset that this is something for the participants of their faith. Um so that's where we my large concern coming into this initially was that this was just going to be a short-term rental facility.

But when it came in with that large narrative speaking specifically to what they wanted for their community. That kind of alleviated my concerns that this isn't going to be just a short-term rental with a cloak over it. So, um, when it comes down to the housing, it's kind of like the statement I made with parking. We're trying to move to more of a model where the market decides what it needs and and when they presented us with this where they wanted to do more of a town home style um, with some detached single family, we felt comfortable with that. So I guess my my other question is educating me. What is it our responsibility to question the developer or the builder on number of parking spaces? Is this something that the cab I'm just the cab is involved with or is this something that we say you've got to have so much? So I would I would start by saying the words on the paper are the purview of planning commission to uh come to the table with and work through with the applicant before it goes to city council. I mean city council is ultimately the backs stop and decider of all of this. But parking is very much on the table for you as a board to discuss with the applicant. Um because at this at the end of the day it is an opinion of the board to present to them that they don't have enough parking if that's how you all feel. But it is well within your purview essentially of any words in that document there. So CAB largely won't get involved with parking. Um that is baked into the code itself too. I mean it's up to their opinion.

Yeah, it's it's rare. I mean parking really is kind of more our our our purview here. Um and and you know where we've eliminated parking requirements in like the downtown areas and all that kind of stuff. that has not concerned me because um to the extent we do have on street parking uh it it goes with a commercial application anyway. here. If there is on street parking, you know, because of insufficient parking at at the facility, it's going to be spilling over into people's front yards.

And that's, you know, that's a problem. That's not what we see, you know, you know, where we're underpart in other areas. It it's not so much of a problem. I mean, you're right. I mean, they them to find their parking spaces, you know, and and pay for them, you know, if they're if they're on a city lot or another person's private lot. But here, because it backs up to a neighborhood, a residential neighborhood, it's going to spill over into free parking area in front of people's houses. And that's that's the biggest concern I have over this whole project.

And I think the the the concentration of walking that has to do with Shabbat. So, and and that is only one thing. So, six days a week, anybody can drive anywhere basically. I mean, I don't know, but So let's not are also Shabbat, but holidays are also Shabbat for Jewish culture. So that I'm just saying that's that's when they can't drive. So So there is everybody has car.

So uh one of the earlier discussions we had had was seeing if they could work with the Elks Lodge that's behind them to do kind of a hybrid leasing situation or to provide some overflow parking. I don't know if that conversation has shaken out in any direction. didn't seem to head. Um, it is something that we can discuss with the applicant before they bring this back in before y'all the next meeting. Is there a way to prohibit on street parking as part of the plan? Not to my knowledge because that becomes a police in the rightway. So, it would just be, you know, neighborhood residents calling the the police officers there's a car illegally parked in the rightway in front of their house.

Is it illegally parked though? If it's not a parking space, depends on what street you're on. There's some streets now where you can park. It's a lot of the rightway width, isn't it? Well, I mean to me my my perception is is you can park in any city right away unless there's a no parking sign there. You can't park on Ocean Boulevard anymore. You can't park on my street unless you have a sticker. Well, you got

Well, I know you have a sticker. But but but I mean uh anybody that's going to be uh visiting this facility that is a city resident will have a sticker. So, I I think the simplest answer for this one would be um we'll put this to the applicant before they come in next time. This is not under a time crunch. Kind of like a subdivision would be where the state law has mandated you have to either approve or deny a certain amount of time. So, if the applicant brings in that total parking count and you are still uncomfortable with it, it's perview of the board to continue it at least one time so that way they can work towards a more amicable parking solution for you.

You know, I have the same concern I think is about parking. I understand. I just want to make sure I understand our purview the same as we all talk about landscaping z the facility uh lighting uh street lighting on property lighting it's all in here uh if that's in with our p per p per p per p per p per p per p per p per p per p per purview I would rather see a a more inclusive plan of all of that just I think I think he's going to bring that back yeah now to us right because we we do have concerns. You're on the right track.

I'm with Exactly. I might take a peek at existing conditions of the properties. I know appearance-wise, we've had questions, but look at parking wise, what's currently going on there. When I drive by, it's really not the existing sites are not parked that high. They're pretty low. I agree. The only time you see like traffic is school pickup traffic. Yes. Yeah. That's pick up the traffic. But and then and then the when the floor is backing out into Well, that's closed though.

No, I I know that. But I I I recognize that. But they I'm glad he said that they were going to take out that parking back. I mean, because talk about pickup traffic and pulling out into that street. It wasn't a good it wasn't a good scenario at all. So, I'm glad he said he was going to take that away. And I just want to reiterate the document in and of itself is the purview of this board. Okay. And I'm gonna talk about both sides of my mouth here real quick though. It's the purview of this board, but city council is the final decision around it. So it's up to y'all to decide what extent of something you want to ask from an applicant knowing that at the end of the day they can just request that you deny it, move it on to city council. So I think it's fair.

And pretty pictures don't count. It's it's the text that's that's what counts to us. So don't unlike CAB you were looking at right I mean when I was on the CAB I mean they brought inclusive plans that showed signage and landscaping I mean it was really ind depth and if it's with our purview I'd rather see it here so it makes the job for the CA maybe a little bit easier

actually doesn't because you know a building could change building codes could change layouts and then they got to come back to this whole process again so that's why typically you are just in a box and then we let the design elements occur with any time that it gets put into the tol's point brought up the financing of that large building if they show you the elevation. in for the next meeting. Could we get that delivered to us rather than get it at the moment that we come in so that we have time to stud?

Okay. Is everybody finished with that? Now I'd like to move on to the um what's coming down the road? Anything? Nothing right now for midcycle. So the excuse me, next deadline is November 7th, I believe it is. There's a couple things have text floating out and about. I haven't heard of any other puds really at this point coming in the door. So

um I do have to say though, Taisha did get the beach management plan back into the state. So we're waiting for for final stamp of approval and a note from the state that we're good to pursue with that one. Um, and we're working pretty hard on the U. Oh, this is a big one. So, the comprehensive plan update that we've been working on with the population element. Um, working up a white paper to start with, which is just a lot of the text that will be encompassed in the document. Wanted to get that to y'all for your analysis review. Make sure y'all are comfortable with that before we go ahead and do all like the graphic design work and making it pretty. So, I just wanted to start with just the simple raw data and information that we can have pushed to you. So hoping to have that to you for the next meeting. Okay, good. Anything else from staff? Nice job, Kelly. Thank you.

That That's a lot, too. You did a good job. Taisha. Taisha did a good job. She kept everything under control. She did. Well, she tried and she and she's very quiet when she does almost everything. And Kaitlyn, the backbone for all of us. She keeps everything glued together. Thank you. Um, communications from the planning commission. Anybody have anything? Boy, everything is perfect in Myrtle Beach. I love to hear that. Okay, then to Yes. Second.

Motion to adjourn from Zeb and second from Paul. All in favor? So, you're in charge of putting this together the presentation. Just presenting it. Okay. Who puts together this? Oh, this time I did. Okay. I was just curious. Are you also the deliverer? Yes, I delivered as well. I had a busy