Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Okay. Good afternoon. Welcome to the November 18th planning commission meeting. And uh I'm going to call the meeting to order. And we start with roll call. Sharon here. Joe here. Austin here. Danielle here. Bettanne is excused. Phil here. And Deb is I went as slowly as I could, but he's not here yet. So, he I think he's coming, but And Paul here. Thank you. Uh I'm going to start with the approval of the minutes for November 4th, please.

I need uh one correction, please. At least from what I can see on item two, um, Commissioner Mills made a motion to approve and I second it by myself, but maybe change it. Commissioner Williamson change. Did you hear that? Say it one more time. Change it from Paul to Commissioner William. I don't mind using my first at all, but whatever. Will. Okay. Anything else? Anyone? Okay. How about a motion? I'll make a motion to approve. I'll second. With that.

Thank you. I have a motion from Paul with that uh correction and a second by Sharon. All in favor say I. Okay. Thank you everyone. Moving on to prein 25-06R is dunes and um do you have Anything you want to say about this? Yes, the applicant has requested a continuence. In front of you is an email that they have sent that they will be ready by the next planning commission meeting. Okay. Thank you. Yes.

Um they in their request they stated they need resolve regarding a combination plan for for student section project. Is this these lots involved with another plan or is it separate? It's they're waiting for the deed information. Okay, good. Motion to continue. I have a motion from Austin to continue as requested by the applicant and a second by Danielle.

Phil said it first. Okay. Anybody Phil? Okay. uh request from the uh applicant to continue and uh any further discussion? If not, all in favor say I.

Okay. Thank you very much. Anybody opposed? All right. Moving on to the next item, presentation of new applications and Caitlyn text 25-06 arcades in MU. All right. This is a brief overview. Um, this is a request from Candace Bass to amend article 14 section 1407C of the zoning code to add gaming arcades as a permitted use in the MU mixeduse zoning district. And the request is as follows. Allow use of gaming arcades within the mixeduse district. And then here's a map showing all of our MU districts. We have MUM and MU. And then the little one in the middle that is blue is our mumm Booker T. Washington overlay. Here is an aerial map of that. And then our applicant is here to go into further detail for this application.

Okay. Just just one second. Okay. Commissioners, uh any I think you got all receive a phone call from Cameron this morning? Yes, I did. Yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. uh that we're have a little more uh input from all of you hopefully. So that's where we're going to ask if anybody has any questions first from Caitlyn, but speak up for any concerns and then we'll hear from the applicant. Okay. Question. Yes.

Um in the current MU, do we have any gaming arcades already established in any of the MU areas? No, we do have them in our amusement and entertainment districts. Yes. Has there been numerous requests for this or is this the first time this time that you're um this is the first one I'm aware of? Yes, sir. Yes, sir.

First request. And anybody else have any comments for Kaitlin? Questions for Caitlyn staff? Okay, Miss Bats, thank you for being here today. Yes, ma'am. Do you have anything that you would like to tell us that you think we should know?

Um, just that I currently own and operate an amusement company out of Morgan City, North Carolina. Um, we have 179 games in operation total. My husband is my business partner. Um he does all of our repairs and restorations and everything like that. Um so we would plan to operate this if allowed underneath um the same business model as what I currently have. Um and everything that we have runs off of quarters or tokens. So everything would be coin operated. I have looked into like tax stamps and all the legalization that I would need for the area. Um, it is the building that was previously a candy shop. Um, and so my what I would plan to do if allowed is have probably 30 to 40 arcade games in there. We don't run any type of gambling equipment. Um, and then we would also offer like a concession style food, hot dogs, um, popcorn, drinks, coffee, ice cream, things like that. Um, and that that's pretty much about it. We have games from the late 70s to the early 2000s. Um, and some more modern equipment. Um, but we keep everything up and running nice. We have constant good reviews. I have 4.7 stars on Google. Um, and we just plan to keep it simple and safe for the community.

So, can you do you already own this property? Is that why you do not because I mean there are other places for you to There are some other places. We were looking specifically down that main road um and we've been looking for multiple years now. That building has been available for quite some time. So I have been back and forth with the property management company um to see what the options would be. We have not signed a lease yet just because I didn't want to put myself into that much money if this was going to be allowed. Um, so this is just my very first step for taking precautions to see if it would be able for us to do there.

Did Did the staff review with you where you could do this if All right. What's the name of your your business? It's Flashbacks Arcade. Flashbacks. What I'm sorry. What candy store you referring to? There's like if you can tell us. Um, it's 1400 South Ocean Boulevard. So, it's going to be um unit A and B. Um it's right there on the end. It's that newer building down there. The buildings that known it with the miniart and the liquor store and it's a three empty space in the same building. So, it's a little strip building.

Yeah. Hold on. Tisha is gonna right here. Get it right there. She's going to nap it. Thank you. But that's that building that was built about three years ago. Yeah. Nice building. Brand new basically. How many square feet is it? It is about 3,800 ft. We The arcade that I have in Morehead City is 6,000. Oh, okay. Okay. commissioners. Uh what questions uh would you like to ask Miss Bass?

So you um Joyce asked that the the staff showed you other um alternatives. Uh does any of that not work for you or not specifically? Um do you have bu like other places specifically that you're talking about that are open and available? We really do like the location of the the building that I'm talking about. Um there's not, like you guys said, there's not any other arcades close by around. Um and it would be prime location for something fun considering all the hotels that are nearby.

I guess being back on to kind of add on to what you said, my concern with MUM as a whole, some of these are neighborhoods and if we get this Even though that location may work, it's the whole it's just it I mean it goes into neighborhoods and so then somebody else can just open up a correct me if I'm wrong. They can open up an arcade in the middle of a neighborhood unless it's deed restrict but we don't enforce deed restrictions. Right. So that's my would be my concern

and I have the same concern about housing locating something like this in around housing if we approved be all up and down the well it's a massive it's a massive amount of mu amounts of really huge that's that's was my first concern if you have talked to staff about where you could locate if this uh you know as we review this so Phil you have

waving understands because the size of the MU because the diversity of the senate um your what you're planning to do is a is a thing that would be good. The complications you're hearing is the size of our M is one of the largest districts we have and it's not new. It's it's going to open up everything and that's difficult. And then you and technically it's not but it is you'd almost be spot zoning saying oh we just do it for you because where you at might work. We wouldn't do that. Anyhow

I was also trying to think about maybe like special use permits or anything like that that may be able to pertain to this. I we're we'd like to be cheerleaders for business. So it's, you know, if there's an option for you to locate somewhere else that but as as we go along with this and uh I I don't know how everybody uh everybody's an individual vote, right?

So everybody has to look at it in their own view. Um but there's challenges for me. I'm not going to speak for everyone, but you might have heard them say that too. Well, this is workshop for for staff just as much as as well as it is for y'all as the planning commission. Um, one of the things we're talking about as far as the mumm and all that, I mean, that's the easy if it's something that wanted to be done, an easy request is to just take the mumm off the table and just let it be mu. That puts some limitation on where you could do it. Um, my only thing about even going with that, if you look at mu, mu is mainly concentrated along our boulevard, uh, with a few random areas, um, that were in association with golf courses to allow the short-term rentals. Um, you also look on our boulevard, you've got two areas that are zoned amusement solely for the purpose of the arcades and everything else. Um, other big thing for me is we're in the midst of a zoning rewrite right now. um to be considering the allowance of uses in a zoning classification where they previously have not been allowed in the midst of a zoning rewrite may not be the best idea. You may end up with something to where you as a board make could pass something that once we go through the zoning rewrite really hatch into it even deeper may say that's not the best place for that use. It was good the way it was. we've allowed a use and is now going to be grandfathered in for where they're at. Um, now that needs to be brought into consideration as well on this that we are in the midst of a zoning rewrite. Um, and that this is something that could be addressed or could be talked about in regard to the zoning rewrite.

And I think additionally the our comprehensive plan, the idea is to have amusement type activities in a central location primarily. that you can have more diversity of people that can actually attend it where you're you're isolated out there. And we the vision of the current plan is that we get them to where there's all kind of amusement so people can build off each other and can bounce off each other and it's in a location where people are expecting that type of activity etc. So, Even our comprehensive planning um is is more like a dark this board that's sitting there on the it creates issues with how do we justify for a comprehensive plan. So some feedback to you about that.

I think you hear some concerns. Uh this this moves to uh from I don't know the date our next meeting. second second December 2nd we will we will vote on this so that's uh that's when we'll be back here and I guess we'll see you at that point thank you for coming in so much time thank you okay commissioners um we're going to move on to um the communications from the staff and I have

welcome

uh communications from staff and I want uh TA to tell everyone what our three women are about to embark upon. Yes, pretty exciting. Um Kelly, Caitlyn, and I will be taking the AICP exam this week. So, keep buzzing your thoughts, please. It's a 3.5 hour exam. How many questions? 170 questions. 170 questions. And uh we need to keep the thoughts and prayers because you know because Cameron took it last year, remember?

And uh so and you have to have there's qualifications. You have to be a planner for so many years. And so anyway, it's pretty exciting time. And so think about them because they're they're going to be under the gun. Two two of them tomorrow and Caitlyn on Thursday. We'll put the pressure on. If Cameron can pass it, you all got this. I already know that. No, they do. And and they've been studying together. Yes. And separately. And and my goal today was to get done as soon as possible so they all can go back and study. So, um, you're making great time. Yes,

we actually have a little side bit, Taisha and I, on the time. Thank you very much. Can't discuss that. Um, all right. Uh, anything else from staff, please? Uh, anything to report Kelly over there with a little top knot, which I love. And thank you. You did a nice job. Anything else that you want to say today? No. Okay. Thank you. If you guys have any um feedback for the population element um update, please let us know. Um you can email it to us. You can say it now. We did our due diligence for that. And it's

Did everybody read this? Because this is a phenomenal piece of work here and so much information. Every page you go, "Oh my gosh, really? Holy cow. Did that Oh wow. It it's just chalk full of information. So please make sure if you didn't read it to do that." And Um, okay. Back to commissioners. Uh, what would you like to um say? Anything happened in town that you have observed that we should I'm slow down because you're going to win the bet. Uh, anything that you have observed that we need to take care of uh out on the street? Anything from potholes? Did y'all know there was a pothole hotline? Do y'all know that?

No. Did you know that there's a pothole hotline? No. Is it advertised on Friday fast? I haven't seen any pothole. Are you about to get that speed dial? Is there not? Cameron told me the last time we had a meeting. You believe him? No. Yeah. Is there really?

Okay. So, anything that you've observed, con construction or things that are falling down that we haven't taken care of, things that you've observed that you're alarmed about, you know, we need to bring it to the staff's attention to something that happened. Presbyterian Church, uh, please. I know I've said it before. We've all said it a hundred time. I've said it behind the scenes. Even I beg some city council people, "Holy cow, that's not good." I Googled the Myrtle Beach pothole hotline. What we get is call the main customer service number, ask for public work streetm department and go from there or you can use the online reporting tool

online reporting. So has anyone seen the new street lights that they're putting up in market? Good or bad? I don't think that when did this happen? I noticed one on Sunday and somebody else told me there was another one, but just started. It's It's made by Verizon and it's I think it's like maybe some kind of like Wi-Fi emitter. I didn't have time to really inspect it myself, but they're not as attractive as the existing ones. No, that's not good. Tell us where it is so we can help. The one that I saw is behind Gordon Beers on Deville Street. On Deville Street.

Yeah. Okay. Okay. So, if there's just one so far, um I personally have seen one. Uh somebody else mentioned that they had seen another one, but where where is the other one? I'm not sure. I'll have to do a walk around and and try to find it. But it's um But do you find it besides not as attractive, is it doing its job? Um, I'm assuming it has some kind of new like maybe Wi-Fi emitter feature, but it's just got like a really thick base. Yeah.

Um, it doesn't look very uniform with the other ones that I think are pretty elegant. So, I don't Is that something that the planning and zoning commission Well, we like to hear we like to hear feedback. I think in that being approved those are being approved by staff. We we voted on a ordinance I mean we recommended an ordinance for staff to approve those going forward. Is that right? In regard to those cell phone tower those little 5G cell towers bitty cell towers isn't there a standard lot configuration for market commons? Do you know I mean does the cab get involved with any of that? Don't know.

I mean the the street light I mean you're talking about the street lights. Yeah. There's certain ways that they have to do things. But he's talking about street lights. Yeah. I thought he was talking about cell towers. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, the street lights out street lights out of market common. That's where your mids and tiffs and everything come into play. So, who do you think has changed them out? Um, somebody told me Verizon. See, Verizon that throws me off. Verizon. Yeah. See, Verizon would be a cell tower or a mini cell tower. They just put They just put a new one out there. Yeah. Could it be a combination of white and cell tower? Yes. Oh, we have those.

That's option. That's option for a cell tower for an acceptable. It's not totally bothering me, but I just noticed that it's a lot thicker than the other street lights. It's carrying more than a street light. It's It's possibly doing being a tower, too. And that's what you're going to start the

the monopose. Wish Charlie was here, but Charlie had to be at another meeting today because he's our cell phone, our cell tower. These are like the not the cell towers, but the these are the ones to give you coverage and not capacity, so to speak. Um to where we try to make them simulate as much as possible to a light pole or anything along those lines. There's no way that you're going to get an exact match to the light pole because there's too much guts to a sail tower than there is as opposed to just a regular light. Um, and so yeah, we've uh we've worked very hard and shot down many models to arrive at what is the in our opinion was the least intrusive and many of them are out there.

When you said Verizon, I think that changed everything. It's uh that tower over there on 62nd. That big tower that that was recently put up maybe a year or so ago. That one is a that that must be that's not a 5G tower. That's a that's a big but that's a straight mon that's a straight slip pole. Yes. It's bronze and the base comes up about that high and then you get a that's the Yeah. They're putting them out everywhere. That's the new They're in front of on Ocean Boulevard. They're in front of somebody's house on What street is that? Like 30th 32nd Avenue. There's a giant There's one of those right smack in front of their house. Just the first time I've seen Well, it sounds like it's going to be that first.

It's going to It's going to be It's going to be It's going to be common. And sadly, I mean, good for us, but sad for Visual. But the last that we heard from them, it's not going to be as many as they initially expected that it would be. that they're getting ways now where they can get more capacity and coverage out of just the bigger the bigger towers and don't have to have small sale towers as bucks. So, thank you that that's the beginning.

I just have one more question. Is it possible to do like a oneoff? Like for an example, this this person came in and wants to do that in mu, but technically it's not allowed. Are they are we allowed to give them like a oneoff like, okay, you're allowed to do it, but Okay. That would be spot zone. Okay. That's that's where you get into contract zoning and things along those lines.

Yeah. So I mean the only thing that you could possibly do on her of what she did was what she initially requested. You could drop the MU in and just just apply the muh and there was a specific area along the boulevard which is what which is what she's looking for is the area along the boulevard that she wanted to do a overlay zone or something along those lines is something that you could give consideration to along that. it with our zoning rewrite coming up right now. Um I'm more apt just to see what the zoning rewrite and and that's one reason I ask staff if they're aware of is this a demand or is this an

individual situation and it sounds like it's more of an individual situation because we like Ken said it really was getting to be that demand then what he said was like an overlay might be something would come but if we wanted it but there's no command for and and We often have these oneoff things and you really have to make a judgment. Is that going to be better for our community? Uh but when you see the possibility of the infiltration of that virtually everywhere in the city, I you have to decide whether that you think that's a good thing or not. Okay. I try to look in the reg. Is there a definition for gaming

arcade? Yeah. You think that that's it? Oh, you wrote it. Yep. Homework. It's definitely code. It is. I do have a a question for staff kind of along those lines. Coral Beach on I think it's on 17th Avenue South. Mhm. Yeah. They have an arcade in their hotel. Oh, accessory use which is allowed. Yeah. So, so like this lady for example, if she cut a deal with the hotel to run her only thing that she really couldn't have then she couldn't have that like

or no, she could have that too as part of but she couldn't have that signage out on the boulevard because it has now become an accessory used to the hotel. Gotcha. And she wants a massive space. Oh, that one at Coral Beach is pretty big. Oh, it it's 3,800 ft at least. Yeah. Bowling alley, arcade games, the whole Yes. So, you're allowed those as an accessory use. There are certain zoning zoning classifications that allow arcades outright and then there are those like in the like hotels and and accommodation with at least 100 rooms. Yeah.

You are allowed to provide as an accessory use of the ar the gaming arcade, the convenience stores and all that type stuff. Yes, sir. So, just as a a straw, Paul is would anybody think that that would be a good idea to have that done because I I I I like to hear the other side of the argument. Well, it I think it kind of depends on um whether or not we want to kind of limit that boardwalk amusement area to the boardwalk amusement area or if we want to open the door for expansion further along Ocean Boulevard. I mean, I think I mean Kim was right. the overlay zone would be a way to perhaps get around

to get around the, you know, reclassify everything as amusement or or opening the door huge on MUM. Um but but I'm not quite sure even the overlay is appropriate because I'm not quite sure we want to expand the amusement area past the amusement area. Yeah, I think because then that gets big more unwieldly. If you open up the door, you're going to have could have a bunch of people coming in asking for the same thing. Yeah. Oh yeah. Or an expansion of axe throwing, you know, whatever. The axe throwing. Man, do I miss that. And here's publicity wise, we're having a little bit of problem controlling the amusement area where it's at currently at. So yeah,

is is all axe throwing is gone, isn't it? I think all of the I thought we prevented it in highway commercial. Yeah, but she means actual act. It was a very short live. There's one down there by Presswood. That one's closed down. Jackax. Oh, is it? Yeah, they're all They're all I don't think there's any past the state park. Yeah, Jack. Yeah, you're right. After after I saw that video of the person throwing it and it came back at them and almost cut their head off.

Well, there's they're still prevalent, but just not here. I mean, I was up in uh Spartanberg area a couple of weeks ago and that was rode by two of them. So, make sure you take all your, you know, your party animal friends and go extra. Um, okay. If you add a little alcohol, it makes it real fun. That's really important. In fact, that's probably required. Okay, folks. Um, can I just question that we we brought up um uh on our call earlier today? Um, can I mean instead of we got these deed restrictions and all that kind of stuff is, you know, is is a pretty big hassle. Um, and

it was brought up. Um, well, we we it was continued the item. Yeah. Yeah. So, I'm wondering if as part of the of the zoning rewrite, we could look at um in order to try to kind of maintain some of these traditional neighborhoods that aren't in, you know, Grand Dues is not a problem because they've got uh they've got covenants and everything that that you know would prevent subdivision of lots. Um, but these older neighborhoods that don't have those covenants that they're you're relying purely on deed restrictions. I'm wondering if as part of the zoning rewrite that we could um uh amend the zoning for these areas to to um to have a a minimum subdivision requirement higher than what we currently have, I think, which is what

I'll go ahead and tell you as I mean y'all can ask whatever you want to. As a staff, I wouldn't support that. I mean, that's just I think the one that's been continued right here before y'all today. Um, he's asking to have lots that are the same size as the lots on both sides of it. Okay. So, it's pretty hard for me to say you can't have something that everybody else on the street already has. I don't disagree with that. I mean, um, but and that's kind of my point is is that, you know, because somebody back when the subdivision was originally, uh, created bought a double lot doesn't necessarily mean that that has to be a double lot for the rest of, you know, creation,

you know, but but what I think we could look at is is establishing an average lot size for these neighborhoods and saying you can't subdivide less than this average lot size. And again, not I mean this this is just general conversation discussion right here, right? You know, it goes back to one of the one of my least favorite words, but it's one that I have to live and die by. We all do. Market driven. You know, market driven comes into play with a whole lot of that with a whole lot of that type of stuff. I don't think that's a fair comparison because I mean um

because I wasn't finished with the comparison. What you're looking at there was at that time there wasn't a whole lot of influx to come in here to Myrtle Beach whenever all these lots were combined and made into multi multiple lots. We were not the tourist destination that we've become. We were not the fastest growing area in the United States of America for 10 or 15 straight years. Um, and so that's what I'm saying to market is it's similar to market driven and that um, we might not agree with it, but it's what the world now is expecting. Um, if I had it my way, we would all have 20,000 square foot lots and you wouldn't be able to holler in your house and your neighbor hear you in in in in their house because they're only 5t apart. But that's the world that we've come to now. And so you've got to factor all those types of things in as far as all the different ways of thinking from the different folks coming up. And that's hard for me to do sometimes.

But that is part of it. I understand that point. But how's that any different? You know, allowing somebody to put, you know, four homes on on a lot that, you know, that only traditionally had one home in that neighborhood. How's that any different from somebody putting a a a fourperson uh four multif family unit town home next to your lot? I mean, we have zoning to kind of, you know, to compartmentalize these areas and protect the the the the residential, you know, component of of those neighborhoods of of what they were and what they are now. Um, I mean, it's I mean, it's the same kind of thing. Help me understand that this is R10 zone, right,

that they were doing, which what they were saying is is kind of what you're saying. You said that, you know, what size can it be? That's why You understand? That's why R10's there. They can't do less than 10,000. Yeah. But 10,000 is a lot smaller than the average size lotage right now, right? In that area. Yeah. And that's the thing. I mean, I I just don't see how that's something that you might could that you might could look at is do you want to increase the minimum lot size in the RTN zoning classification? But then the thing that you're going to factor in there is how many lots are you making non-conforming by doing so? I mean, so there's a lot that goes into it. I mean, I I agree with that.

And and there's more than one approach to it. Um, and it's what becomes a a thing for zoning and planning more particularly in the future is 25 years from now, somebody might be saying, "Why were these lots allowed to be this side?" Though, it stuff just changes so much in regard to it. Um, but that request that's up there before us now, it's like 20,000 foot lot, 20,000 foot lot, 20,000 foot lot, 67,000 square foot, 20,000 foot lot, 20,000 foot lot. All he's looking to do is come back in with lots that are the exact same size that the lot's currently on both sides of it.

Right. And and and I'm not, like I said, I'm not what I'm trying to say is is maybe establish a minimum lot size for these different neighborhoods and and maybe it requires a new zoning classification for each neighborhood. But yeah, I mean a minimum lot size, yes, that creates that, you know, the for those lots that might be smaller than the average, then that does make them non-conforming. But that, you know, we could clarify that there's, I mean, as long as they can stay that size and and that doesn't, you know, as long as they meet the other requirements for re

that request that you just said said there about, you know, different zoning classifications for different neighborhoods is going against the direction of planning and zoning right now. planning and zoning direct directions directions right now are to have less zoning classifications is where is where the is where the push is with zoning codes right now is to have less zoning classifications that that's the city council pushing that or no no I'm talking about in general for all across the United States where the the people who are uh talking the outside vendor who is helping with the

No ma'am no let let me make that I am talking about in general across the United States of America, planning in general across all towns is going to having fewer zoning classifications than they currently have right now. This is not a V. This is not our Kimley Horn pushing us this way. This is Kimley Horn providing this information that supports what we were already seeing. that that's the push for planning and zoning right now is to go with fewer zoning classifications. Um that they show us some of the ones that they've done or show us some of the ones that they've looked at that went from 27 zoning classifications to 15 or that went from 20 zoning classifications to 12. Um, now it is the market average for like they said like the last eight to 10 years, every zoning rewrite that they've done, people have been driven toward lesser zoning classifications,

you know, but also I mean today's world, every new residential development has got a set of of covenants and restrictions and they're managed by an HOA to enforce them. Here we're talking about older neighborhoods that don't have that HOA established. I mean, any any new development now is going to have that almost almost everyone um all over the country. So, here here we're what what we're trying to address here, at least what I'm talking about, is these older neighborhoods that don't that weren't developed that way and and and and and trying to find a way to protect them just like all the new neighborhoods are already protected. What are we protecting them from? Um a change in the scheme of the the original development,

which could be a good or a bad thing. Well, I mean, it could be. I mean, but but um but it but if that was the scheme that was established, then I mean I I think I mean that's that's what they they bought into they bought into under that scheme. You knew what was happening. That's the whole concept of zoning was the SK you know is the scheme of development.

You would know all developments in market common. You know what the lot size are. You know all the ones in Grand from the scheme of our zoning. I mean, just because the fact that they supersede our requirements. I mean, I you're getting into a you're getting into a slippery slope. You're getting into uh more than triple staff responsibility in regard to certain situations like that. One of the reasons that they are are pushing for less zoning classifications is the simplicity of the approach to make it more simpler to understand, not as complicated. Um, yet they were offering an alternative that's going to be a bit more complicated than just a regular zoning classification. But again, it's not my decision to make. It's just my opinion to give.

Yeah. I mean, I I you know, I I think I I think most city res most permanent residents would, you know, would like to be able to know that that somebody's not going to build a, you know, a fourhouse development next to their single family home. Well, I can assure you there will not be a fourhouse development in anything that's zoned to Rena. That is just single family zoning classification. Well, I mean, when I say I mean four little mini houses or whatever like that, you know. Um um I mean some of those lots up around Birch could easily fit four houses on under the current. I don't consider 20,000 square feet a small lot, especially in today's market.

Well, it depends on what you have next door to it. You know, if you've got if if if you're in a a subdivision with 200 lots and they're all halfacre lots, then then it's really kind of I mean, it's it's It's kind of unfair for somebody to come in there and and subdivide that halfacre lot, put two or three houses on when everybody else is is is living in a community with one house on on those lots. You know, I I mean, we we could have this discussion that 10 years ago whenever, you know, whenever all these new subsidies were coming in out there at market comments and I said there's no way that we should approve a lot that's 40 foot wide,

but that's everything that got approved. Why? Because that's what the market was dictating. Well, again, that those are those are new communities that had not been established yet and people bought into them like with 40 foot wide lots. This is what I'm trying to talk about is is existing communities um that uh that already have an established scheme that the city is, you know, the zoning should should should you should correlate with that established scheme. That's decisions for council to make. Okay. Very interesting. Well, deed restrictions will be up on Next agenda would be well I have a question property on the boulevard. So

go ahead. They postponed this twice and I know we made a decision. That's okay for that. I'm trying to understand. They're still trying to find out why the Cameron told me that the BNC is uh waving the DE's restrictions. I know it's they're trying to get that corrected. But my I guess my question is to ask is you brought up the last time you hear about to do a proper title research go back 110 years probably over 100 years. Most of these I mean a lot of these tees were given out in the in the 30s

30s and I mean I mean some of them not to the 50s but the because the the problem I have with all of this is we have a state mandate and yet we have de restrictions and most people here if you have a draw life wouldn't even know anything about it. So it it's a conflict and either we have to say and you don't want to do this for everybody. Either you do a 110 year title search on everything or you don't do it on anything and if it you're aware of it comes up it does. If it's not aware of you don't worry about it. But that's a problem too because we know that there are issues. How do we resolve that?

I mean you keep how how do you resolve it? It's already been going on y'all. Okay. All these things are not I'm taking these two lots and combining them. Some of them are I'm taking half of this lot and putting here and half of this lot and putting there. That's a subdivision. A subdivision does not always have to be making smaller lots to be considered a subdivision. Um you know the you talking down here on the boulevard, the same things are up in Pine Lakes. You know, we had the one that came through here that we said couldn't allow a subdivision because he was you weren't allowed to subdivide the property. It was a property that was made up of one original lot and parts of other of two other. It was like lot 11, part of lot 10 and part of lot 12. That's a subdivision. If that was taken to court, they probably went in court and says that your deed restrictions are null and void because you have already subdivided original lots that that these deed restrictions apply to. Y'all going into a wormhole is where is seriously where you're going into.

Well, the statute created a wormhole. You know that. I mean, it's it's a poorly written statute and it doesn't really add a whole lot of clarity is what the hell it means. But, um, but again, that's the whole reason for maybe fixing this in the form of zoning and then and change the minimum lot sizes. I mean, maybe we just have I mean, if we want to do one type of zoning for um you know, a lot of different residential areas, then we just establish a larger lot size and just make a lot of lots non-conforming.

The fact that the deed restrictions go back so far, they do go back so far. I alert everybody in my neighborhood perpetually, all the people that move in, that there are deed restrictions and if you want to contest it, you need to go to Conway and get the deed restriction and bring it to wherever, you know, to to show that that this is what it is. So, we still, in my understanding, I talked to Cameron uh this morning about this, we can still say no. Yeah, we can still say no. Uh that's that's an auction. Um,

right now we got like at at um Pine Lakes R10. We have this one we're looking at R10. I get over to Bur Chap and everything. It's another zoning because it's in the yellow and the other. Um, you're really telling people what's current what you're saying is either it's R10 or it's R20. If you say R20 is 20,000 square feet, R10, but they already see it's R10 going into it. The question is, do we have to revisit those types of Is that what? But what I was saying is is rather than I mean um we're we've been um focused on these deed restrictions as a way to um to try to I think you know follow again what was intended by the original subdivision developer but also to protect the scheme of development of these of these residential subdivisions. Um otherwise I mean what's going to happen is if if we didn't have these e restrictions in place now then you're going to see what happened in Surfside and and you're going to have speculars buy up all these lots and put two or three houses on each lot and that's going to I mean that will happen uh if and that and that would have happened by now if it hadn't been for the deed restrictions. Um but you know I'm saying is is why not if we're going to revisit the zoning code anyway why not fix this in the zoning code? See, like these three lots on the I just just talk about the example that we've got the the three widths on those lots are 90 ft. Okay, you can't split it again. You can't make another lot because you got a minimum lot width requirement. Okay, I think the minimum lot width is either 60 or 75 on that. There's no way you can split that 90 ft and get another minimum lot width out of it. You go back to what the original intent of it was whenever they did the subdivision. They're asking to go back to the original lots that were combined.

So that is the original intent of the sub of the original subdivision. So are you saying they were originally three lots? Yes, because we did we haven't seen that though. That's we nobody presented that to us that it was originally three three lots. I mean I think it's only come to you during as workshop. He hadn't had a public hearing matter on it yet cuz he's continued it. Well, I understand that. But

but there was another one uh I don't know right by behind Jimmy I mean uh Mo It was the Habachi place. He brought the original two lots in and we told him no because they had deed restrictions. It was in the same neighborhood on um Highland North Highland Way. I don't somebody I can't remember the developer, but they brought in the original Yes. and he withdrew. Yeah, because No, we told him no. Right. Yeah, we told him no.

But those original lots, it was one of I think those original lots were so small that maybe that they wouldn't have met today's thing. I have to go back and look at that. But know it's one I'm not saying that you should be automatically allowed to go back to your original lot. But if your original lot of record meets all the dimensional requirements that we currently have in our zoning code and you want to go back to the original lot of record that makes the minimum lot width, minimum lot depth and minimum lot area. I find that to be a hard refusal. Agreed.

Well, that's one we did that's one we did for that person on um is about six months ago. person come in and put the lots back to the root these subdivided like who was it? It was I that's what I think neighborhood well there was no it was Nation's homes did the three directly behind it and then somebody else it might have been Nations came back again for a double lot across the street from those three the thing I think what I don't know

with the deed restriction you buy into a neighborhood just like market comment. You know that what you're buying into. When you buy into what I call old Merrl Beach, you should also know what you're buying. Know what you buy into. I agree.

And if that's a deed restricted area, then it's a deed restricted area and you because you don't want you don't want in Grand Dunes the carpet pulled out from under you because they changed their mind or market common. You don't want the carpet pulled out from under you because now even though that's where you bought, well, guess what? We don't we don't think that's right anymore. I mean, I think that's where uh Zeb's going with this. You need to be buying what you bought. You need to own what you bought. But here's the question I have. As a lawyer,

you go back to what you what Mr. Staly said. He bought property in a R10 zoning classification. He looked at R10. He saw an R10 had a 10,000 square foot minimum lot size. He saw the minimum width and he saw the minimum depth. He saw this big piece of property and he said, "I can get three lots that meet the R10 zoning classification," which is the point that Mr. Staly made earlier. So, he is buying into what's dictated to him. He's buying into a R10 zone piece of property that has a 10,000 foot lot minimum minimum lot width and a minimum lot depth. And that's what he bought into was based off of our zoning map, not off of a deed restriction.

Right. Now, what I have to ask you is from a legal standpoint, if I'm buying that property, what is the obligation of an attorney that's representing you to go back and tell you what you are I I I don't I don't need Mr. Thomas to answer that question to be honest with you. I think he's starting to give legal opinions into I think he's starting to give legal opinions to the planning commission meet and I think we're on some thin ice and I may be 100% wrong but I do not feel comfortable with that with what we we can we can we can ask for adjournment second meeting to adjourn second

I have a a Danielle meeting to adjourn motion and a second from Austin okay you can shut everything down