Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

This conference will now be recorded. All right, we'll call this meeting to order tonight. Um, first thing we'll do is invocation uh led by Mary Ellen. Heavenly Father, please guide us and give us wisdom as we strive to do the best we can for this. Amen. Pledge allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Business tonight is uh we're conducting a public hearing. The purpose of the hearing is to receive the public input on amendments to chapter 17 section 17394 and 17395. Uh section 17450 through 17459 and that uh consists of adding allowed use for vape tobacco shops and cannabis dispensaries in C1 highway commercial district and also modifying language expressing uses not specified as prohibited and planning commission's new ordinance proposal of a vape tobacco shop and cannabis dispensary. uh supplemental district regulation and then that newspaper public notice was uh posted on 610 2025 in the Mar Beach Journal. All right, we'll open this public hearing uh for any discussion. Any public comments uh around uh any of that business? Um, we will close the public hearing and move on to the next item. Uh, number five is agenda approval for tonight. If I can get a motion for agenda approval

to approve the agenda. All right. Thank you, Carolyn, for uh approving the agenda for tonight. Can I get a second? Second. Mary Ellen seconds. Um, any discussion around the agenda, Mr. Chairman? Yes, sir. Uh I move to strike the uh director's report as uh town administrator I guess who is the acting um director is uh not not the president. Okay. Is there a second to that? Second. I got I got a motion to strike the director's board and a second. Any uh discussion around that? Um I would mention that uh when uh the director uh position comes vacant uh uh the administrator passed along to me an email relating that uh Miss Angie would be uh the sole designate for staffing and everything and the communication to the plan commission. Uh so I would assume that would probably be a part of her role as well. Um I have been interchanging that communication. uh I've passed along uh what will should be in that and also periodically by ordinance and by law um we're supposed to be reported out on certain items but absolutely being that we do have a vacancy I just wanted to mention those items all right yes ma'am a recent town council meeting the mayor made it crystal clear that town administrator was to act in the role of acting director I second that motion motion. All right. Any other discussion? All right. Uh the motion is to strike the director support for the night. Everyone agreeing say I. I. Anyone opposed? Say no. All right. Let's strike for the day.

Uh, next item will be minutes approval from 632025. Motion to approve those minutes. Move to approve the minutes of January, 2027. Allen. Uh, motion to approve the minutes and uh, uh, second. Any discussion around the minutes? Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um, uh, this is the, unless I missed something in the last meeting, this is the most detailed minutes I have seen to date. Um, which is neither here nor there, I'm I'm curious to know if this is what's going to happen from here on out. I understand that minutes are typically be brief and u, you know, highlight motions, etc. Um, you know, if if we needed to, you know, go over the video, you could actually either transcribe the video or watch the video. Um, I'm not saying that I'm against this detailed, you know, minutes. And I'm not sure who put this together, but I mean, it's pretty impressive, but it's a lot. and you know to go through minutes if you needed to go back and look at the minutes. This is not a simple um straightforward um short and to the point set of minutes. That's just a comment. Okay. What would you like to see out of it? Uh more brief and more just the highlights. I know you're um whoever put this together went into great detail and I guess the question is do you just transcribe the whole thing or you know how much do you trim it down? Minutes are typically you know I did a little bit of research and minutes are supposed to be brief and to the point and just

you know get the highlights. We're going into quite a bit of detail which you know is helpful. I'm not saying I'm against it. I'm I am saying that it it's a lot. Um, so I just wanted I didn't know if I was the only person who noticed that. Um, it is impressive and God bless whoever. Did you put this together? Okay. Um, a lot of work and that and that your dedication and you know um your ability to put this to have the time and the energy and the ability to put this together. Um, I commend. Uh I'm just saying for the public and for the um a little bit more brief might be helpful. Okay, Mr. Chair. Yes, ma'am. My two cents is that I love it. We have been having lengthy detailed discussions on numerous subjects don't work. We don't have any other way of going back to see what it was we decided the previous meetings. I'm not saying we have to be this long all the time, but right now our work is complex and I like it. And I'll just respond, Scott. I bought a plot note, so all this was uh artificial intelligence. It transcribed everything uh to it. I I got on there and any gaps or anything I modified, which is very limited. U so there may be issues in here, but uh we was I was hoping that you guys would be able to review it. Um so it didn't take you long at all. I could probably do it for 10 minutes. Fantastic. Uh, I agree with Mary Allen. Uh, I'm pleased to look at this. I think it creates a record that is much easier to search. Um, rather than going back to an audio and trying to search, you have to know where to look. Just think if you want looking about what was discussed on one particular

subject, it might take you 20 minutes to find it in the audio here. take you if you have this in digital form, it take you a quick uh you know search bar and you'll find what you need. So, I'm all for this kind of uh document in the future for for minutes. Other comments or other minutes? All right, I got a motion and a second to approve tonight's uh minutes. Um everyone in Grant say I I. Anyone oppose say no. Minister approved. We'll move on to the next item uh which is public comments on agenda items for tonight. Any public comments on agenda item. With no comments, we'll move on to nine business items. that is vape shop, tobacco shop and canis cannabis dispensing businesses ordinance language and ordinance proposal of the town of Surfside Beach to amend certain sections of chapter 17 language and zone on the code of ordinance of the town of Surfside Beach, South Carolina, creation of a supplemental district regulations and chapter 17450 through 17459. Can I get a motion to approve? Mr. Chairman, I move to approve the um Do I need to spell out the name of the ordinance again? No, I got the other to approve the ordinance uh and the related uh use chart uh at 17395 and 17394. We'll have to do those two in a different Oh, excuse me. Okay. So, just the vape shop on this one. Just the vape shop. All right. I've got Carolyn uh with a motion to approve tonight's vape shop tobacco shop cannabis with sensible business ordinance language and

amendment. Do I have a second? Second. Yes, sir. All right. I have a second from Nelly. Um any discussion on that, Mr. Chair? Yes, sir. Couple of points. So, make sure we're operating off of the version that was emailed out, not the version that's posted online. There are some material differences. Additionally, section 17452D offer that we edit the language slightly. So, in layman's terms, this this saying if uh you're an existing bake shop and you're not complying to the distance requirements, then you're considered non-conforming. And none of this section none of this applies to I think we should just say you're non-conforming. Everything still applies to you except for the distance requirement. So things such as the specific uh call outs an ordinance around the signs the uh underage or minor uh provisions in here tech just don't think that because something is non-conforming we say well you don't have to follow any of this it should be you're non-conforming in your location but everything other than the location is still applicable and in section E of 17452 next section down Uh Alex uh just for D what is the specific what are you looking at specifically? So as it reads today, it says any cannabis dispensing business smoke shop or tobacco tobacco score in operation at the time of this division's adoption of being non-conforming use and is not required to comply with requirements of this division.

reading it properly, we should say in your deed, my suggestion is should say it's non-conforming and you're still required to follow all of chapter 17 except for the distance requirements might be a better way to word that. So it's just just a minor there. Any questions on that one? So basically you would like to just strike out not and and is required to comply with the requirements until signific cannabis dispensing business smoke shop or tobacco store in operation at the time of this division's adoption shall be deemed a non-conforming use and is required to comply with the requirements of this division until such time as there is a change in ownership of the business or material change in the business type with the exemption of location restrictions. Second point is the next paragraph down says any business in operation at the time of this division's adoption that exceeds either 10% exemption exception. I think it should given some of our challenges with interpretation. That should specifically say any business in operation at the time of this division's adoption or thereafter technically as it's written right now was adopted tomorrow by Friday somebody could be out of compliance and be okay because the day of adoption a moment of

adoption they were in compliance. So it's just make it a forward looking statement rather than a moment of adoption. So I think it could be as simple as at the time of this division's adoption or thereafter. Those two words or thereafter. Okay. Is there any uh opposition to that or any other way they may work? Mr. Chair. Yes ma'am. If you go back to D We want to have we want to have the just the I feel like it might read a little bit weird if we do it. I like the way you said it first, Alex. You do you remember what you said first? Yeah. So D is for today's bake shops. E is for uh Circle K selling, right? So I think I think E is pretty straightforward just for a minute. words shall be deemed non-conforming use and is not and is just say it's non-conforming use but is required is required to comply with all other component areas of with the exception of this division with the exception of make sure that the exception part is in So you're saying shall be deemed a non-forming use and is required to comply with the requirements of this division and other except except for location

and such time as 30% of ownership for business material the business type what was the part. So the sentence is getting long after non-conforming use of period. All right. Businesses are required to comply with all aspects of this division except for the location requirement until such time there is a change in ownership material change in business. All right. Um so non-conforming businesses are required with the requirements of this division until such time as there is a change in ownership of the business or material change in the business type and step four location. So, and that should come right after business day. No, it's prior prior to change in material change, change in way before the war magnet after requirements of this division, right? Non-conforming businesses are required to comply with this division except for the actually it's spell out so long except for sections A B C and D above sections that are except for what you say except for AB C A B and C of Are you finished, Alex? Yeah, I'm sorry. Uh, yes. Yes, ma'am. Um, I would suggest a slight change to um

the language he's proposing. Um and um so I would have the second sentence read, "Nonconforming businesses are required to comply with requirements of this division with the exception of the location restrictions in section 17-453. Until such time is there a change in ownership of the business or any material change in the business type?" Do you have that captured over there? Um, I believe I do. Okay. Is anyone opposed to that change? I like it. All right. Well, Carolyn, could you read it one more time just so we're all clear? Okay. So it would uh uh D would read any cannabis dispensing business, smoke shop or tobacco store in operation, excuse me, at the time of this division's adoption shall be deemed a non-conforming use. Period. Non-conforming businesses are required to comply with the requirements of this division with the exception of the location restrictions in section 17-453 until such time is there is a change in ownership of the business or a material change in the business type. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. Sounds great. All right. Uh back to E. Um Alex, what is uh what is the suggestion for you there? Um after the word adoption, add a comma or thereafter. Only suggestion for that one.

Okay. Any uh comments or opposition or other suggestions? Mr. Chairman, could I get a repeat on that? pounds trying to save the other one. He is saying on E that he it says any business in operation at the time of this division's adoption or thereafter common that exceeds either of the 10% exemption and everything else is the same. So he's added or thereafter after the division's adoption of the first sentence. All right. Any other comments, suggestions, opposition on that or um I would like to stay with us and just finalize this one and then we'll move on if you have another in that area. Yes. All right. Uh everyone is with that. Do you have one for E or you can or do you have any more out? Yes, Scott, if you'd like. Yeah, I'm I'm for I'm 17456. Okay. have to unless there's something really. Nope. Well, we're finished with those two amendments. So, if you have one um this has to do with inspections and my concern was fourth amendment uh issues. Which section are we're at section 17456 inspections. So, that would be page seven of eight or section 17456 inspection. Yes. Okay. And um my concern is uh you know constitutional protections. Um you know currently according to what this says my interpretation is they can go in and inspect anytime anywhere any place um under any circumstances and that's certainly not constitutional. Um and I would

Okay. Um I would suggest or propose adding um right after entry. of the town of Suride Beach shall have the right of entry during reasonable or regular business hours uh to carry out inspections, surveillance, monitoring procedures in a non-destruct disruptive manner uh necessary to determine compliance and non-compliance subject to constitutional and statutory protections for the fourth amendment. Now you know the fourth amendment you know talks about um you know having a warrant and you know in this case the town will not uh enter and this is according to South Carolina law they cannot enter without a warrant or permission um back rooms offices employees only areas without prob probable costs. So, I don't know if we want to add all that, but as a um believer in the Constitution and our freedoms, um you know, these inspections, you know, early on that they can just go in at any time and not not according to our constitution. Chair, are you going to go? Uh Mariela, this body is not Supreme Court. I don't think we're in a position to be debating constitutionality, especially when the police chief and the town attorney have no problem with this ordinance as it is. I think we need to leave it up to the police to decide whether they have any business going into that or not. I don't I don't think that's that's I don't

think we need to address constitutionality in a very small town ordinance. I think the police know what they what they can do, what they can't. All right. Any other comments? Yes, Mr. Chairman. Yes, sir. I strongly disagree. Uh, we're putting in an ordinance in this town and we need to um abide by constitutional and personal freedom laws and at least adding some verbiage to explain to anybody who's reading this. because somebody like me who's a business owner and and a resident and an individual, um I want to know that, you know, this town will not just do whatever they want whenever they want to. Um you know, and we should be in compliance with the law and constitution and just putting people's minds at ease. If it bothered me, I'm sure it bothers a lot of other people seeing that they could just go in at any time and so at least adding um during regular business hours and subject to constitutional statutory protections. That would be enough because then it puts people's minds at ease knowing that well, okay, you know, it's only, you know, there there is a clause in and out and they can't just come in at any time cuz if if people if businesses think that they, you know, anybody can come in at any time and go search anywhere, it's just not it's not a Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. All right. A to you first. Yeah. So, appreciate the sentiment in the statement. Good things. You know, if I look through our media code

inspections are riddled throughout it and words like expect premises anytime it's open for business. So, that's a good clause. Your first uh comment around nondisruptive, I think that's very subjective. So, I'm not aligned with that. I will add, you know, if you're in the food business or at a restaurant, there inspections that are intentionally unannounced during business hours without notice and there really isn't much regard for you whether it's disruptive or not. It's, you know, trying to get people doing the right thing or the wrong thing. So, I'm I'm okay with during regular business hours. I think uh to put in there subject to constitutionality it seems a little unnecessary right that's that's in my own court of law for some of them challenging or if they're correct so be it I think if we just say for supplying spices during regular business hours we can kind of make sure you're meeting what you put on your application Mr. Uh yes sir respond um doing a little bit of research there is a clause to that in cases where a violation presents an immediate threat to public health safety and that is lawful but unless that's the case they can't just walk in at any time in any place according according to the law. Thank you Carolyn. I believe you had some uh I don't uh remember how we got to the language that's currently in 17456, but I would suggest that um maybe Scott's concerns are addressed or everybody's concerns are addressed if we

just um took the language from the um sexually oriented businesses ordinance. and uh modified the beginning a bit uh to have it applied to um the uh vape shops. So that um section which is 17437 [Music] um is labeled inspections and it reads the management of any sexually oriented business shall permit representatives of the police department, building and zoning department or other town, county, or state agency to inspect the premises at any time it is open for business. And just just for clarity, you're saying it says permit those departments, correct? It's it's uh uh saying that by virtue of us letting you operate, uh you are letting us come in during normal operating hours to check to make sure you're abiding by the requirements. How do you feel about that? Or anybody got comments around that? I like what I'll start off with that this is just one small section of a great big tote of ordinances. I don't think it's the proper place to address constitutionality. It's only that big shops when Mr. Cherry one of the Scott's raising points around have carved out for health and safety purposes. I think you said during your

research which would allow health officials to go in unannounced the whole premise in 17450 our purpose and intent literally saying purpose and intent and the section is to promote health and safety right so like we're wrapping this around you know health safety morals and general welfare so there is a parallel there to inspections the health safety purpose Sure. Yes, sir. Um, I understand and I appreciate the comments. Um, I'm sure there's more than just me that thinks in this way. I don't think it would hurt to add subject to constitutional statuto protections. Six words. And that would just put a person like me or a business owner or a resident or, you know, the general public at ease that you're not a police state. Okay. It seems like we're all divided here. So, what I would suggest is uh we'll offer amendment to that and we'll vote on that amendment and then we'll move on from the session. So, uh Scott, if you'd like to offer your amendment. Yes. Um, I move to add the wording uh to the end of section 17456 inspections adding subject constitutional statutory protections. And would you like to also do the during regular business hours? Um, I I think um Alex mentioned that earlier. It it states that. Okay. Not not not in this section for sexually explicit sexually oriented business that Caroline.

Okay. Okay. So the motion on the table is section 17456. The town of Sersside Beach shall have the right to entry to carry out inspections, surveillance and monitoring procedures necessary to determine compliance and non-compliance subject to the constitutional or statutory protections. All right. Do I have a second for that? Right. Got a motion in second. Any comments relative to that? All righty. No comments. We'll vote individually just so we stay on track. Uh, Alex, no. Uh, Marilyn, no. Uh, Melody, no. Um, Caroline, no. Larry, no. Scott. Yes. And I'm going to be on the motion failed. Uh 1 to six. Mr. Chair. Yes, sir. Um, can I ask members why I think it's important Marielle Ellen stated her opinion, but why not add subject to constitutionally statuto protections? Because it's a bake shot or because it's similar in that I'm just asking. I'll be glad to share my opinion on it. Um I I think uh we have inspectors and police officers that already carry out laws. So uh I don't think the extra language is particularly needed. Uh I I would hope they follow the law and know the procedures for those inspections. And I would think they would particularly uh if they needed the right of entry or anything, they would work with the land or the property owners or tenants in that. That's not I don't think the extra language is needed. I think the intent is all there regardless of the additional

the know almost every sentence in here we could follow so long as it's constitutional and so like it's like it's like be obvious like anyone could challenge any component like this is a restrictive ordinance so whether it's 10% of sales when you can inspect it how old one could be before they smoke tobacco or walk in or be around tobacco. Uh what kind of sign they can put up? Like everything put subject to constitutionality. Any others want to comment? Well, I voted no primarily because I preferred uh Carolyn's approach of uh following 17437 from the sexually explicit uh uh similar section. All right. Thank you, Larry. Uh Carolyn, would you like to raise the motion to change it to match the other or are we good with how it stands? I I would like to um make a motion, but I I don't remember how we got to the current language. Can somebody remember how that happened? Because I thought we were for the most part following the sexually oriented businesses language and somehow we deviated with regard to to this. I I think in previous conversation with uh director Davis at the time when she was modifying drafting some of this language, she had also mentioned that she had pulled uh some other language from other ordinances with other jurisdictions. So maybe it's possibly pulled from another section or or it could be our own creation. I'm not for sure. Well, I'm I'm going to move to um amend

17 uh 456 to uh insert uh language similar to um 17437 where the only substitution would be the um variety of business uh what we're currently um considering. Okay. Um, is there any chance that you could draft that up real quick and specify because if we're going to approve this, I want to make sure it's approved properly. Sure. The management of any uh medic. Oh, okay. I just want to get the the um how we refer to the group of businesses. Um do you want to think about it for a moment? We'll come back to that. I can do it. Okay. Okay. Uh, the management of any cannabis dispensing business, smoke shop, or tobacco store shall permit representatives of the police department, building and zoning department, or other town, county, or state agency to inspect the premises at any time it is open for business. Right. I need a second for that. I'll second that. All right. I got Carolyn with a motion to amend and Larry with a second. All right, we'll open it up for any further comments, Mr. Chair Scott. So, that was my first suggestion that it it'd be during regular business hours, which is what that's stated, right? Correct. Okay. And you know, that's that's according to our

freedoms and liberties. Um, so I'm good with that. Any other comments before we take a vote? All right. So, uh, I will allow you to read that one more time if you can, Carolyn, and, uh, we'll move on to the um, management of any cannabis dispensing business, smoke shop, or tobacco. Wait a minute. where Alex any cannabis dispensing business, smoke shop or tobacco store uh shall permit representatives of the police department, building, zoning department or other town, county or state agency to inspect the premise premises at any It's open for business. Thank you. Um, so I believe we're pretty much confirmed. So everyone in agreement say I. I. Anyone oppose say no. All right. Motion pass. All right. Any other amendments or comments around B shop? Yes, Mr. Go ahead. All right. Mariela, we're not chart yet, are we? Uh, we are not. Mr. Sure, Scott. Section 17 459. Um, and

and I wasn't here at the last meeting, so I apologize for anybody who was 459 is page eight. Um, page eight of eight, and it starts out a business authorized to do business in the town of Surfside. This sounds awkward. Um, I I would an entity authorized to do business in the town of Surfside or something to that effect. Just when we repeat business of business, it just sounds awkward. But I'm not dogmatic about it. Any opposition or comments around that? Chair. Yes, ma'am. Might work if we said a business authorized to operate in certain conditions. All right. Uh any opposition other comments around that? But it looks like 1749459 the suggestion is a business authorized to operate in the town of Surfside Beach for 10% or less as an annual birth receipt. All right. Any further uh amendments? So, we'll go back to the original amendment, uh, which is basically approving this. Um, I guess who was the original? You, Alex. Who approved the original? I think it was next. Okay, Caroline, do you want to amend it uh to approve with all amendments or I guess we I don't think we voted each amendment, but if you want to approve with all amendments tonight, um that would move to that we adopt the vape shop

ordinance uh as originally proposed with the amendments that we have agreed upon during the course of this uh meeting. Thank you. I need a second. I'll second. All right. Got Caroline motion to amend with approval of uh everything we discussed and agreed upon tonight and Larry seconded. Any other comments around it? All right. Uh I'll do this individually as well. Uh Alex, yes. Uh Mary Ellen, yes. Melody, yes. Um we'll skip to Carolyn. Yes. Larry, yes. And Scott, yes. And myself will be yes as well. A lot of work went into that. So, thank you for all you guys work. So, we will get that moved over to town council. All right. Next item. Uh we will be discussing use chart 17395 and also 17394. Uh an ordinance proposal of the town of Surfside Beach to amend C section chapter 17 language of zoning with code is ordinance of the town of Surfside Beach, South Carolina that will include the use charge 17395 and 17394 which is addition of allowed uses of a vape tobacco and cannabis shops and addition of language in 17394 that stipulates non-listed uses as prohibited. And if I get a motion to approve that, Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to approve that, but I don't think it states what 17394 is doing. Yep. 17394 uh states that it stipulates addition of the language uh on the top of that how to use chart that stipulates non-listed uses as prohibited, which was addition to that.

Yes, ma'am. At the bottom of the same page, the last statement, if a use is not explicitly listed, it shall not be permitted within the zone district. That is the statement we want to emphasize and fully read right up at the beginning of 394. Is that correct? Well, 394 was removing the old language that was codified that was specified to be removed uh during codification stating the highlights and all that portion. Um and then the 17395 was the addition of um addition of the language around prohibited items if it wasn't stated how to use the use table. Right. Correct. That's well the how to use the use CH table was the removal of the language that stated um states at the top or the bottom were the previous codification didn't remove language that was in the draft. Mr. Chair. Yes ma'am. I don't really care where we put it, but I think this the statement that governs the entire use table and all the thought processes that go with it permit it is if a use is not explicitly listed, it shall not be permitted within its own district. And I think that needs not to be in a fine print footnote. It needs to be right up front somewhere. Yes, ma'am. So, that is that is what we're voting on tonight. We're adding additional language to the top of the 17395 use table that specifies any uses not stated or not written. And then the 17394 is in relation of moving uh the language specifying that there was highlighted portion of stuff that was already supposed to be not part of tech.

Mr. Chairman, should I restate my motion? You can. You can. Okay. I'm going to move separately on the T table. Okay. That uh we uh adopt uh the use chart 17395 as amended to include at the beginning uh a statement that only the uses that are specified in the use chart. um are permitted. Uh and if the user wants to do something else, they've got to seek uh a change to the use chart. And the use chart specifies that um uh cannabis dispensing businesses, smoke shops, and tobacco stores are a uh use that is uh allowed if there is compliance with our new uh article article four. Great. Um, so just to follow up from that, uh, if you have your packet, uh, under section 395 use table, it's not highlighted in red as it has previously been because this is a final version. Uh, but, uh, the addition of the language was only uses listed on this table are permitted within the specified zoning district. If a use is not explicitly listed in this table, it should now not be permitted within the specified zoning district or elsewhere else elsewhere within the town of Side Beach. Any person wanting to operate or establish a use not listed in this table shall first pursue an amendment to this ordinance through and by the procedures in section 17202 of this job. So that is the addition to 17395 use table along with uh adding um the bake shop and stuff as allowed use and it's conditional based on the supplemental

location restrictions. Mr. Chair. Yes ma'am. I just want to apologize. Item three, page one of one and the pro that where the problem is in page two of 19 seems to fix it. So, Mr. Chair, I'll second Carolyn's motion. All right. Thank you, Alex. All right. Any other comments or anything related to that? All right. Uh we will move on to a vote. Uh everyone agree say I. I. Anyone opposed say no. All right. Motion is passed. Next. All right. Do you want to do the 17394, Carolyn? Sure. I move that we um amend 17394 to remove the language that appears in the code as stating that certain sections that are being added are highlighted. I think it was just a inadvertent upload of language that shouldn't be there and the intent is to uh Caroline made a motion to remove uh language that was previously left in there from the last codification resulting just specifying that highlighted portion of stuff and it also specified in that language that that section be removed when it was codified. um when she was looking and doing all this stuff, she specified. So, I will second your motion. Uh Carolyn, any uh comments or anything around that? All right, no comments. Uh we'll take a vote. Everyone agree say I. I. Anyone opposed? Say no. All right. Motion passes. So, all those amendments from public hearing today uh passed and we'll get

those translated over. Uh next item, we'll move on down to uh planning commission capital investment program and uh that'll be led. Um what I will do, Alex, it looks like this is only the business items for some reason. So, I don't think they take action, but if you want to make a motion to approve it and we'll just table it. Whatever. Just make a motion to I make a motion to approve the W mission capital investment program for tonight. Second. We can only discuss it if it's in business. Second. So, I've got a motion in a second uh to and then we'll open it up for discussion. So it looks like the planning commission capital investment program was located under business items tonight. So proper procedure would say we'd have to make a motion and approval of that item for us to have discussion. So I don't want to just table and not have discussion tonight. So we're going to approve it. We're going to have discussion and then we'll amend the table later. Yes ma'am. All right. Uh for is yours Alex? Yeah. So I just distributed uh those of you in the audience. We took the 33 elements uh items from our comp plan. Some of them are things like uh actively pursue uh public safety uh grants. Uh continue road maintenance activities. We're repaving to two and a half miles per year. Uh address increased demand fire and police services. Maintain staff efficient gear. So, there's 33 items that were individually uh called out in the comprehensive plan in the Surfside Beach website under the

planning commission section. One of the bullets under our duties is to submit a financial plan to town council so that they can incorporate it, choose to incorporate it into the budgeting process based upon our priorities. Different town do this differently if you've Googled around. Some of them build a 20page PowerPoint with detailed down to the dollars and cents literally cost of every item in their comprehensive plan and when they'd like it to be gated into uh the next 1, three, five or 10 years. Uh other towns just call out uh priority ranking that the planning commission uh the town should address first. To my knowledge, the planning commission uh inception to date has not supplied town council with a capital investment program or priority funding list. So the first stab at this was for us internally as uh commission to look through 33 items in the comp plan, ranked them from most important to least important one through 33 and then we put all seven of our rankings together and come out with a weighted average score and that lists based upon our first go of this subject to anyone's veto of where we feel that the town should focus its budgeting priorities moving forward. So that first round of prioritization has occurred. So we need to do a couple of things that's in some order. Uh one, solidify what I just distributed, which is our our ranking order. Two, figure out what level of depth we want a capital investment program to be for the town to submit to town council. Three, it probably makes sense to have a discussion with the council and the administration as to,

you know, is this real and impactful? Are we will we go through the motions of putting together a detailed plan with costs for it to be acted upon or is it not in how the town chooses to do its current budgeting process, which it's not. It's it's not a part of their care and activities. So, it's my uh preamble and intro into this this session. I'll stop and see if there's any questions or comments. Um, Alex, uh, I know you had looked and I've looked at other jurisdictions as well and like you said it does go in depth to dollar amount and things but um, I believe what I had seen it looks like basically over a 10ear span they do it but uh, they typically review uh, every 5 years and probably at least review it annually but it looks like they really make modifications and stuff probably every five years without most a ton of them. So I' probably seen a dozen example examples probably seven or eight of them were five year plans and the difference being one 30 or 10 year capital. It's a little murky because some of the items to fund are currently in motion part of ongoing budget. Others are individual line items in a budget uh for you know paving a certain road. Others are never in the budget or not in the budget frequently whenever the call. So like there's this mix of if we highlight hey here the top 10 things are these here's how much we think they cost. four of them are likely at some level funded currently. We've got to figure out does that fit

within the road map of a comprehensive plan where the others aren't funded. The way the way we you typically build a budget bottom up or top down and our town does like a middle out with like directors like it's just a different way of budgeting and it doesn't leave room for things that are not part of that middle out approach. So, it's a square peg round hole scenario that we're faced with of, hey, here's these things we want to fund it, but we've already built the first draft of the budget that doesn't acknowledge most of these. So, it's uh got to just figure out how to step through budget with our Thank you, Alex. Um, just more context, I believe I've been in discussion for three or four months uh around getting this kickstart after we reviewed uh our bylaws and our responsibilities and ordinance and state law. Um, I had requested uh Heather and Jerry um to provide if if they were experiencing it to help uh support the commission or if we could seek additional help to someone else because they're experiencing that. Um, really I haven't got much response for that. So, um, at this point, I I think it is a duty for us to do it. Uh, if I understand it may have never been done before, but us not trying to do it or work on it or trying to move forward with it, that's the right thing to do. So, may Yes, ma'am. In light of what I don't believe, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't believe that the law requires that we do that. It's It's on the website. Is that where it says we're supposed to do this? It's actually in the responsibilities and the ordinance of the state law. Yeah.

It's in the regulation. All right. What I don't see us doing is going through months and months of hard work only to find out that this administration and this council is not hearing us on this subject. If that's the case, let's clarify that first. Okay. Mr. Chair. Yes, sir. To piggy back on. Um, I apologize. Lately, I've been impatient and frustrated. Um, you know, just with life in general, but you know, I I've made a comment maybe being a little too cynical about this. Um, but in reality, council does pull the purse strings. Um, you know, this is a nice exercise. I mean, it's it's I think it's interesting. Um, you know, but you can lead a horse to water if you can't make a drink. you know, we can make a recommendation that, you know, the council will do what they want to do. Um, you know, maybe maybe they'll look at this and find a few things that um might be helpful or at least to see, okay, these seven members of the commission, you know, these are their top priorities in their opinion, so hey, maybe we should add a little weight. So, um, I apologize for my cynicism. Um, but I do know that this is kind of an exercise that may be uh, you know, we're not I'm not sure. Thank you. Thank you, Scott. Yes, sir. Probably appropriate. I'll read the actual duty as spelled out. Prepare and recommend a capital program for its jurisdictions based upon a comprehensive plan and the capital improvements necessary to implement plan. Such capital program shall include an annual capital budget based on estimates of the cost of the proposed projects and the means of financing them. The commission shall submit the capital program including the capital budget to the governing authorities governing authority or authorities as directed. Strange

sentence because as directed can mean where do we submit them or are we directed or not to do this. So I You know, similar to Marielen's point, you know, more reason, you know, to get a little bit of clarity, right? So, like where this gets real is in the draft form number 15 on the list. So, in the middle of all the stuff to do is address ongoing space needs, town hall, etc., etc. That means there are 14 other things that right now in draft we feel is a bigger priority than that item. Yet the town has already spent money on plans and drafts for that item and it's in regular, you know, conversations around that item. So without any other context, this body is saying timeout does more important things do with money. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but that's how our scoring has surfaced. So whether or not we want to put together a detailed analysis down to an anti lash of dollars and cents of cost of all this or put together a higher level proposal of hey here's where we think the priority should be based upon funding or what we did last year that never made its way to town council is to put a dollar figure on it at that time it was to get a foot in the door of 1% of the budget be applied towards the 10-year comprehensive plan at somewhere in between all of that it's saying we should do something to make sure the comprehensive plan is looked at viewed acted upon. Yeah. So I I would propose one approach would be a letter to town council or the administrator pick with uh this bullet point saying how would you like to proceed for the next budgeting cycle

with us integrating the comprehensive plan into how you you budget and and highlighting that the current budget process does not work in that fashion. Aside from someone coming in and saying, "Hey, I need 100,000 for this." Like, it's not it's an annual one and done, not an ongoing living type. That's a recommendation. Uh for me, I just want to clear a few things because for me listening to this conversation, it seems like yes, we did average out our rankings of what priorities we thought, but I want to make sure it's clear that the 33 priorities that was created in the tenure comp plan, which also created was surveyed and public input. So, it's not just our rankings, it's the public's input of saying these are the priorities uh that we should be focusing on for the next year. So yes, uh 1 through 10 or uh definitely we're thinking as residents and exition members uh those may higher than the rest all 33 items were creating the 10ear comp plan related to public feedback our work uh the staff members work and a lot of other things. So um definitely not just our records and other item I will specify when you're reading the ordinance to me um directed was at the end absolutely uh we've already concluded that uh from the mayor nobody directs the planning commission we do our own work second of all I hear shall in that many times and so we already verified that is a requirement by law so and I hear preparing there it doesn't say I'm not sure you said prepare prepare at the beginning of it. So, it doesn't say optional or anything. So, what I hear is prepare and share and directed. So, uh I guess if the commission directs that we should work on it or even if we're reading the ordinance, it says shall.

So, I mean I would interpret that as we probably should at least provide 10 compliment going in the future. Mr. Chair. Yes, ma'am. I'm going to cling to that as director phrase. I I think the whole issue is graying up. We have found that if we ask council a formal question, we get a formal answer. I I like Alex's idea of asking council officially, do you want us to pursue this or not? That would be as directed by council rather than if you know we could go on for months with this and we could find that nobody's interested. Let's ask up front. Y worked last time. I'll support it. Are any um other comments, Mr. Chair? Yes, ma'am. I just I mean just one brief comment. I mean I liked the exercise of doing this. I think if we we are going to follow through and do this. I'm sure that there would be much discussion. you know, we we to Alex's point, the work on the buildings was, you know, kind of in the middle of the pack and many things were on this list more important. But I think if we sat down and really talked about it and hash things out, some of these this this order might change some if we were really this was just us doing a real cursory put a number on it, be done. And I would also say that when council is budgeting for things, they have a lot of knowledge that we don't have. You know, the the needs of the town, the things that they are faced with that they know we've got to have right now. So, you know, just because it's just because we put a we we put a number on list doesn't necessarily mean that that that's where it would be even

on our list if we if we move forward. And I do think that this should have been part of our work in the year that we were working on the comp plan. I mean, is it should we be doing it now? I don't know. Maybe maybe we should, maybe we shouldn't. But I think moving forward, this should be part of the work on the comp plan. You know, we're we're tasked with at a fiveyear mark looking at the comp plan again. maybe we, you know, work on some of it then as well. I I'm just the timing of it is a little bit weird. I think it should have been along with the comp plan. And I don't think that there's anything bad about the planning commission having like a just an overview of and and coming at the budget from a different angle like Alex says, you know, saying these are all the things that would be that we that the that the people of the town and that we feel like are have some validity, have some importance and and uh From our perspective, which is very different from a council's perspective, of course, we could, you know, say this this amount amount of money should be able to allocate it to this and this and this. I don't think there's anything wrong with us doing that and giving the town a different perspective. Give the council a different perspective and let them do with it what they feel comfortable doing with it. You know, that's I don't think there's anything wrong with that. But I to Mary Ellen's point, should we spend months and months and months and months on it when we have so many other important things to do at this point? I'm not sure. Any other comments, Mr. Chairman? I like Mel Mary Ellen's

suggestion. Um, I also, um, might add into that request to town council as to what it thinks, um, a capital investment program should entail. I came at this exercise uh, very differently. I can see from how others came at it. Um I looked at it as capital investment meaning um like businesses that are in making capital investments uh uh building buildings doing this doing you know whatever I also came out came at it as if town council was already addressing it it wasn't something to be put into a forwardlooking program. Uh that it should be something that uh the the citizens of the town have told the planning commission through the process of doing the comprehensive plan. We are interested in this and it should be focusing on that um approach uh rather than the various departments in town who approach the whole uh budgeting process different. They they are asking for what they eat for their department. Both are right. But this exercise I viewed as being the the public coming to the town council and saying, "Look, this is important to us. We think this should be funded." Um, which is different than the police department or public works saying, "We need a new vehicle or we need this or we

need that." Um, kind of thing. So, I I think maybe if we got um uh some more direction uh as to what would be a useful tool uh if the town council wants us to do this that would help. Thank you, Carol. So, uh what I would suggest this is a business item. So, we can't vote on that. So, uh, if you want to amend your motion to, uh, seek out, uh, um, direction from or however you want to say it. I believe did you or did I think I'm not sure anybody? Oh, to approve this list. Yeah. You want to make a motion to uh ask for council's direction on asylum or Yeah. Make a motion that the planning commission request that town council chair guidance. No, I don't have items. I don't want to leave it open like I don't there should not be a do we Yes, we'd like to have like need a little bit more granularity because there's a lot of variety of ways it's done. And this this could you know this could be a you a big exercise or it could be you know a short item for us to put together a couple pages like some some uh clear direction on the capital investment program they'd like to see

coupled with a commitment that it'll be given to you know wait during the budgeting process. motion uh and Marielle and second to that. Any comments or anything around the amendment to the motion? Yes, sir. Um, I think maybe the wording could be I mean, you know, doing it on the fly is good, but I think it could be um, you know, changed a little bit. I think something to the effect of um, we would like a directive from something to that effect. So, and I agree, we need not just guidance, we need to know what we should do before what you know they the career gets to. Any other comments? All right. The motion is to um I don't know went all over the place, Alex. So, the motion is to request clear direction. directions the first time that I said. Okay. Okay. I'd like to make a motion for the planning commission to request clear uh instruction uh as to the capital investment program in uh format and depth of detail coupled with a commitment that during the budgeting process the capital investment program will get consideration due consideration not asking for anybody to commit money, dollar tree, nothing. But I think

last go around that we made a request just just didn't happen. Is that correct included your motion? Thank you. Going to add words to blah blah blah. All right. Uh I got a motion and second. Uh he restated it. Um everyone in agreement say I. Anyone opposed to it say no. All right. Motion passes. Um we'll get something drafted up for council and we'll get that sent over to those guys. Thank you. Next item moving on to uh chapter 7 our discussion items. Chapter 17 ordinance language uh design overlay review of certain section to chapter 17 zoning uh design overlay of the code ordinance of town of South Beach South Carolina review recommendations from the business committee uh which there is also included in that draft and then chapter 17 section 17400 17440 um I just continue to include this and we've been working on it for a long time um so uh basically uh we've got a lot of comments and everything in those sections um if there's there's any comments or suggestions or modifications or uh I think uh uh we had some questions around uh the building vacant registration. I think Caroline uh inquired with a few uh staff members to get some clarity around that. Um if we're going with that or not going with it. Uh but I what I would propose is we have been working on this a long time. Uh we've got a lot of comments already. Uh I'm hopeful that uh when we get a new director um possibly if we have all our notes and intent and uh public comments captured on these items and workshops, we will be able to present that to the director to be able to draft this up something with that and we'll probably start working from a pretty good draft that introduces all those elements in it and we'll work through it a little better. But um really I think it's just important for all of you guys to review this or just make sure you have all your

comments, suggestions, ideas or or if you remember public comments, make sure those are notated and then uh once we get that submit that to the director I think it' be a lot better and be able to write us a good draft. Any comments on uh Mr. Chair? Yes sir. I think last time we discussed this we I raised the option of a few of the low hanging fruit quick wins from the business committee quick suggestions from the business committee such as you changing the threshold from 20% to 50% that as I understand that they're getting it from business owners. My sentiment last time that continues today is can we just vote on a few of these items to make an adjustment. If it doesn't work, change it again. So change the threshold for renovations to 50% to see if they'll spark some interest in someone improving the truck, right? It opens up a can of worms of, you know, what's a improvement versus maintenance versus ongoing, you know, care of the building. But what I feel like it's been 6 months or so since the business committee came here and raised for those this is what our constituents are doing. Yeah, I have no issue with that if we want to do it. Uh but again, uh we have to have public hearing know we got to go through all the sections and get it introduced to council. I'm absolutely fine with that. Uh but just to modify a few elements in it to be honest with you. I think when the business committee come to us and uh suggested the 50% they were thinking that that included everybody but to be honest even if a business comes in and changes ownership or use and all the other elements that require them to comply with this. So yeah, up in the 50%.

I mean, if that's all we want to vote on, we get that next agenda. The commission wants that or if the commission member wants to place it on agenda, more than welcome to do it. Good. All right. Any other comments, Mr. Chairman? Yes. If we were to do what Alex suggested, would we come back around to the overlay um and really dive into all of the things that um at least I think need to be fixed in terms of the language to make make it clear. I think that's intent of the commission. We definitely did a lot of work so far. So, um I think that's the intent. I mean, I can't speak for everyone, but I would definitely like to dissect it and look into it and at it and make it useful and make sure that we're able to enforce it and it makes sense uh for the businesses and the development in the next multiple years. Absolutely. Any other comments, Mr. Chair? I understand what Alex is saying. I kind of agree that it seems like we can't move forward on these tiny little lowhanging fruit things that the business committee requested a long time ago. It looks like we're we're stuck right there and that's been mostly because of the administrative difficulties. like to see us go ahead and at least look like we're making some progress and satisfied the the business committee with the intention once our new director of PB&Z gets his or her feet on the ground that we go back and almost start from square one with going over the ordinances

but I would like to see some of this ending fruit taken care of. Thank you Mr. here. I think the changing from 20% to 50% is not really low hanging fruit. I think that's a pretty big change. Not saying we should or shouldn't do it, but I think that's a that's a pretty substantial change. 30% good. Absolutely. Um, so I know in the past we we talked about trying to get some uh previous or recent properties that would be required to comply with that documentation that's not been provided to us. Um, typically what I do is uh if I know a business is opening, I will uh basically get the address. scientifically for you uh those uh permits and stuff and that give me a good idea of what they put in the business compared against what they invested and what they didn't. But as we've stated multiple times, I mean the last eight recent businesses haven't applied to the overlay anyway. So who say they're even applying to the 20% owner ordinances currently? So, um I think 50 to 20%'s in relevant at time. I definitely think we should enforce our ordinances and if it says 20%, we should make sure they're compliant. Um but I also note the business committee not only wanted 50%. They wanted I know there was comments around the power uh which I think we've scratched out because there were loopholes in that. They were also worried about enforcement for the fact that the the business committee in general was worried about enforcement because we're not making any progress to uh exterior upgrades or aesthetics or anything else. So just rec just identifying the 50%

it could definitely help them in the interior. Uh but are they are they going to actually do the purpose or use that 30% additional aotment or any of those funds to upgrade their exterior which is the whole purpose of design by the way? Mr. chair. Yes, I can't speak to every business owner's intent. But I think what you said around the last eight businesses, there's non-compliance with the overlay. It seems that if the business committee is saying there's honest business owners who want to do some improvements but can't because if they do a little too much, then all of a sudden they got to redo everything. If that's the case, seems like we're catering to those who we're we're handicapping those that want to try to abide by the rules and the rest are or the overlay doesn't even apply to them because we're not enforcing it. So, it just seems a little backwards. And I'm not saying we have to take up every one of their issues, but if there's an older building out here and it's valued at $700,000 on 17 and the building itself is valued at $100,000 and many of them do have that invert. The dirt's worth more than the building just make sure the beast in the beach town. that $100,000 building. If someone wants to do a few upkeep items and they spend 21,000, all of a sudden we throw this, you know, 11 page overlay at them and say, "You got to do everything now because you just did, you know, you spent over 20,000 bucks." Or the business committee saying they want to spend 30,000 on their business. Why in the world are we stopping them and making it hard for them if they want to do something as long as it fits within the overlay guidelines? Why wouldn't we, you know, stop them from improving? So I that's why I raise I don't know low hanging fruit may not be the right word but it just seems like you know we're we're penalizing the people we shouldn't and letting

things slide and we're like we're just in the opposite ends of both. I just think it's a quick thing and it tests the water too, right? We could change this very quickly to act if something goes wildly wrong but right now we've got businesses that aren't investigating themselves. Business committees saying let's try this. I just think this easy enough change. We're at the low end. We did you know we called around months ago and you know the county is a few points higher than 20%. Those things 25 or 30%. There's another local town that's 35%. So we've got a lower threshold. Yep. We don't look any nicer than some of these other areas. So is it working? Look, Alex, uh you're kind of stuck on the 50% and that's perfectly fine. I believe most of everybody is possibly in sport. Not only we had a lot of conversation I think most of the commission agreed to that but um also raises the question we have a lot of conversation around uh complexes and stuff too. So, um I mean 50% I guess listen we we're not boil the ocean here like we can I don't want to get if you're asking me my opinion on it. I don't want to spend three meetings discussing square footage of a four building complex and the ones on the ends are worth a little bit more because they're end units versus the middle unit. So, we've got to figure out the valuation of those five units and they're going to be at 22 20% 22% and the middle split the difference or is the middle one less than splitting the like it it gets beyond absurd where right now we can cover the single buildings or even the complexes at 50% just taking value of the building. Yes, someone's going to get it's not going to hurt anybody, but it may open a window up a little bit more for an individual building owner or a complex owner. We're not going to solve the whole complexity of, you know, some of the strip malls

with it, though. Oh, so you're stating that uh you're looking at single buildings being 50% or you like just right now it's it's blank 20. I'm just saying just change it to 50. Um, Angie, just a question for me. Uh, when we're permitting, uh, units inside of the plaza, uh, and currently in a 20% world, how are you managing that? Do we have separate falls for each unit in the building or is it all grouped together for the plaza or are we currently calculating all the plazas to get the 20% or each single unit? I think it's the whole building. So basically if uh a unit A come in and was opening a business and they applied for business license and we they possibly would have to meet the or not have to meet the overlay but say it's existing business and a and they want to do some improvements. Would you pull all the plazas to determine that 20%. I pull the van route and it usually has the whole building. Understand? But what I'm saying, if I'm going to put $50,000 in unit A as existing business and you have five other units with all the other units occupied and say three of those units have recently been modified or approved. At the present time, it's one one unit. Okay. So, you don't pull the rest of the units. Nothing. I don't think that's property tax record. It's not going to give you the unit tax record. It's going to give you the building, right? But if it's you divide it by six if it's six units or you just look at the value of that building. I haven't had one

recently. I mean, just like the one down here, the the five units, we did it by the whole build the whole lot because it was not by unit. So is that cost of renovation of one unit against the value of the entire building? So we don't calculate if the other three units put $50,000 in pivot too. So if I was an existing business want to put $50,000 in my business. It's a plaza. You're calculating the value of the building from 40 county taxes. They all spent $25,000 a piece which is $75,000. I'm going to spend $50,000. Do you add the $50,000 and $75,000 to compare to the building value or do we just do the single $50,000 compared to the value? I just tell them they have to go by the overlay which is per unit. Thank you. Mr. Sure. Yes. I I have just two comments. Um, first of all, uh, I think if if we can help a business owner improve their property and stay within boundaries of the law and we can encourage, well, the second thing is really to encourage improvement of our town and it's simple and straightforward and we can do it pretty quickly. I would encourage that we we do that. I think uh it seems to me that many of us are in agreement to something like 50%. And um you know as a business owner I think they would appreciate being able to do that and I think the town would appreciate it for the aesthetics. So thank you Mr. Chairman. Yes ma'am. I I think again we are um not separating out the property owners from the business owners. I have

talked to uh a couple of business owners in town and they tell me they can't do anything to the exterior of the building. And so if the whole goal of the overlay is to improve the exterior of the buildings, we can say all the things we want, but those business owners don't have the right to change the exterior of the building. even just to change the paint color, they can't do it because the the landlord or the property owner is the one in control. And so um even if we change things to 50% if they make enough changes I don't know in various different systems uh for uh their unit they can't do anything with regard to the exterior of the building to um improve its appearance and the appearance of the town. I I think we have to go about it in a completely different way which um is why I would hope that we resume this discussion even if we adopt the 50% and that we really dig uh into this. I liked the um suggestion that we had during our um meeting on the 19th that we look at how hounds go about getting um a revitalization or a facelift and um uh I did a little bit of digging and um towns

like our size, they do this, but they have to form an organization that focuses on it. Getting some renderings of the town so that you put people um on board where everybody wants to um uplift the appearance of the town. And I I think that's the way we need to uh approach it rather than to say to business owners, you have to do these things which they can't do. Uh uh I I just think we need to shift gears uh overall on this. And uh I like the part that you proposed about vacant properties and what have you, but we've got all these absentee land owners, uh property owners, and we need to tell them this is what we would like to have happen. These are the requirements in our town, and uh uh if you have a vacant property, register it. We need a database that it sounds like from uh the email exchange with um Nicole that we have a lot of this information already at our disposal. We just need to collect it in in a single place and maybe uh keep the records. Okay, this property they've already satisfied the overlay. It looks nice. This property needs some help. and maybe we nudge the property owner to uh do so. Mr. Chief, thank you. Carol, you finished? Yes. Awesome. Uh Melody. Yes, ma'am. I 100% agree. We talked about this the first time we started talking about the overlay that we we've got to decide who

are we talking to because we're talking to the property owner or the business owner. Sometimes they're the same, but often they are not. So we we got to decide who we're talking to to know what we want to say. Thank you, Chair Mariela. Not to sound like I'm whining and repeat beating myself, but this ordinance is dated 2013 and I recall very well in 2013 it was the will of planning commission to get up on the property owners and that was not the will of council and that all went nowhere. I guess we can hope for better this time. Thank you, Mr. Chair Scott. Okay, so we're we're talking about a few different things. We're talking about uh property owners, landlords, and then we're talking about business owners who are basically renters. Is that right? Um, and you know, in commercial or residential, um, you could be a landlord and a tenant requests um to make improvements and the landlord says, "Hey, I'll buy the paint, you do the improvements." Now, I don't I'm not familiar with businesses in this area and you know, six sixunit businesses, but um are there cases um maybe Angie would notice that a business owner um improves the facade of the property even though the uh tenant that is the business owner, not the landlord, um have they improved just their own facade? There's been a couple I know Wild West did. Okay. So, you know, it it could be I mean, we're we we I think we need to research this a little bit more, but I I

I do think if we can, you know, facilitate the ability to make improvements and if it is the tenants that can improve their facade and work it out with the land owners or the property owners, um then so be it. I think it's more of a question of you know how how does this work? Thank you sir. Um a few uh few other items. I know that we talked about the vacant ordinance uh registration. I sent a bunch of links on that. Um don't have to do it. Just wanted to share the information other jurisdictions have. I think one of the questions last time if that was possible or allowed could still not be in tap run. I'm not sure but uh I would say continue if we want to look into something like that and modified or I'll continue to research that. Um another item that come up uh was uh uh thinking about national brands. I know that I work with food line and other elements. uh they have their own color schemes and everything and it's that's kind of important to those individuals cuz that's how they're recognized especially with food line. I've remodeled and opened many many food lines and I can tell you some jurisdictions are specific in color and all kinds of stuff that you can have. Uh I know we rebranded a few years ago and we changed all our road signs and some of them required to stay blue and a different color than our regular branding and that's important through national change as well. not attract natural chains or um have them, but I think that should be an exemption inside of there, the discretion of the town or something instead of not allowing to be coastal my my opinion and others. So, uh there's other elements definitely in here. I know that I dissected it a lot. Um I think I left notes at the back

of page that we had comments around. One thing uh one thing in my opinion also uh I believe the signage and sizing and type of signage in our town is all over the high it kind of and once you get to plazas and stuff you could have 12 signs within a small area you can't really see the front of the buildings and know what it is but we have a lot of smaller portion buildings and stuff that occupy a small portion of the plaza and it's very hard to recognize that so I wouldn't personally be opposed to uh in the future uh with some type of lowlying signage or uh plazas specifically having one uh pylon road sign instead of multiple maybe with all their buildings in one uh facility. Another issue I have is if you go down 17 currently uh we have a lot of vacant properties currently and you could see that there's no panels or anything on these signs. You can see turtle guts of the signs and I just don't think that's very attractive to business 17. I would possibly propose that when tenants leave the property owners are required to install a blank white panel or something on there uh instead of just leaving it open and stuff like that. So that's personally my opinion. Uh but I think there's a lot of things that could be in this along with uh uh definitely I agree. I mean, we should be focusing on property owners because again, landlords dictate sometime what those improvements can be. So, definitely a lot of work uh uh but really we've had a lot of workshops, a lot of discussions. So, I'd say continue these discussions. Make sure you're capturing your ideas and everything uh so that we can make a master list of all that stuff and uh we can really move forward creating a draft. And I'm not opposed to moving forward with the 50%. We can put it on the next agenda if that's uh everybody's wishes. Um, no problem with that at all,

but we will have to have a public hearing. Um, and plus that will have to go to council uh with three readings for an ordinance agenda as well. Any comments left? Mr. Chairman, I I uh really appreciate what Mary Ellen said about what happened last goround when the overlay was adopted. Um but it's it's been a number of years since then. We have a comprehensive plan where um uh generally I think public opinion was we needed to improve the appearance of uh our 17 corridor um for lots of reasons. It it just boosts everything about the town, its economic benefit, development, it's the benefit to the businesses. Um uh so I'm I'm wondering whether or not uh maybe we should use the same um strategy uh uh as we're going to um do with the capital investment uh and ask town council whether or not it's interested in uh a a more rigorous uh program with regard ard to um highway 17 and its uh appearance. I don't want us to spend a lot more time looking at this if it if it goes nowhere. If uh it has the potential to go somewhere, uh we should invest the time. Maybe we should be suggesting to town council that town council

uh uh I don't know create some sort of uh uh committee that has um uh folks from different aspects of town. folks from from this commission, folks from the business committee, uh uh regular old citizens who uh who are interested in the uh appearance and uh they get together and come up with a plan that they propose to everybody uh to uh to see where we uh might go. But that requires a lot of buy in uh by everybody. Thank you, Carol. Any comments or anything else outside of that? Um, listen, I'll make it brief because most of it is subjective. If we can ascertain for sure what Alex said that the 50% thing is not going to harm anyone, I would be all for getting something done on this front instead of just spinning our wheels. But uh mainly what I wanted to say was I've lived here quite a long time. The other day I was driving from Earl's inlet back up 17 and I was really paying attention to what I was seeing. It was ugly when I crossed the town line. I asked myself, why is this ugly? It was not the part the public's works take care of. That part was loveish. I can live with a vacant building here and there. What was ugly and absolute chaos was the signage. It really slapped me right in the face as if it it must have gotten worse in the last 25 years. It was it was horrible. That's all I have to say on that. Yeah. And uh I've lived here for quite a

long time as well, Carolyn, just for a response to you. And uh I could tell you that the 17 business corridor is definitely uh something very important to multiple people. Uh uh council has has many many discussions inside of that. I think also recently they proposed trying to beautify it with uh parking funds um to utilize uh landscaping stuff just to beautify and possibly make that more aesthetic. Um, we currently have the facade grants that allow and I know the business business committee and the one thing I really like about the business committee is they're creating uh they're reviewing and going back and creating uh uh new business packets. So, um I've talked a little bit of Tom and I think they're including uh some of the elements of uh the design of them, the design overlay of what should be met with that. And I think in the past a lot of the issue is we don't communicate these things. We don't uh a business comes and gets a business license. Yay, sign my name, I can open a business, but they don't know the backdoor stuff or that a lot of people don't know much about ordinances. They just want to do stuff and get with it and go with it. And then here you got code enforcement saying, "Hey, you need this, this, and this, and this." And that's it's doesn't make a good relationship with them. But at the end of the day, I think it's important for the town uh to be able to educate and promote our ordinances and speak to those. Uh, I've had several conversations with Nicole and how PBZ goes to business and stuff. There's several sign offs on things. There's nothing in the business licensing form that says any of the rules, any of the signage, any of that information. It's basically a signoff sheet by each one of the individuals that's turned back into them. They get a business license and they go to business. And then usually probably what happens is they do something wrong and here's somebody ticking them or warning them or uh or giving them verbal. So, um I do know

that the design overlay has been talked about for many years. Um and I do think it's very important that we continue our work on that. Um one thing I will say, I don't agree with sending on specific matters. Absolutely. Sending it to council to get direction. Uh but as a commission, we know our responsibilities. This lies within chapter 17 and the planning commission owns 17 um with the recommendation part of it. Um, so I think with we if we're looking at be changes or anything, uh, we should be communicating with experienced approach and I'm very excited about, uh, someone with many years of experience and, uh, we're fixing to have a new director. So, uh, hopefully, uh, hopefully he can impress us. All right. Say, Mr. Yes, sir. When you say we're fixing to I don't know a date or anything, but they've hired somebody or negoti approved a negotiations a few meeting ago. Okay. Thank you. That's something. Yes, sir. And I think he comes with experience and has held a director role and stuff as well. So, look forward to it. Mr. Chair. Yes, ma'am. I I do think that if you listen to many council meetings, they have talked about the overlay a bunch and they I think they've think they've said many times planning commission is working on it, planning commission is working on it, planning commission. So, I think they're they're uh counting on the fact that we're working on I don't think that we need to ask them if they want us to. I think we know they want us to. And as far as I like the thought process, Carolyn, about getting input from different people, but I think we are we are that body. You know, the planning commission is that body. people the like the business committee can come here and talk to us, members of the public can come here and talk to us and we should ask for input from other people but we

are that body of people in my opinion that that need to be worked on. Absolutely. Thank you. Any other comments around the design overlay? All right. With no other comments, uh just continue to work on this as we've mentioned. Uh it looks like we may propose in the next uh meeting uh 50%. We do have a workshop schedule this uh month but uh um it will probably be in our regular session meeting uh in uh throughout August. All right, we'll move on to uh tree preservation ordinance review existing chapter 17 uh section 17700 and 17750 proposed chapter 18 tree ordinance proposed by storm water committee. Does anybody need a break or we'd like to move on? All right, moving on. Right, a little open discussion. Uh, basically the tree ordinance uh um I think Mary Ellen dissected a little bit of it. I also think Larry uh did a little work with it. Uh I think Caroline and Larry uh added a lot of comments and then uh last meeting we discussed a lot around uh the tree ordinance proposal had a lot of educational elements that possibly may not uh be fit for an ordinance. We also talked a lot about how many pages and how much information was included inside of that uh proposal and felt like it was a lot of information. And so I think you know visually we wanted to uh try to separate uh the educational pieces and then also what was actually law or regulation pieces inside that. So we have did that two times I believe. Um so I think we have reviewed it uh talked about it last meeting a little bit and then uh we'll review it today. So I'll open up for conversation. Any

comments? Do we want to discuss the comments that was proposed or Mr. Chairman? Uh Carolyn. Yes, ma'am. I like the division that Mary Ellen did. Um, and I focused mainly on the version that or the uh segment that would be the ordinance. And I find lots of um things that need to be addressed in uh I put comments into our shared version. I don't know how we deal with that. Um but uh my first my first comment is I think it's organization is not uh user friendly and so that it needs to be um have some reorganization where requirements if we're having requirements are up front and then uh uh exceptions or exemptions follow the requirements. I think that the um so many things in tables um has pluses and minuses. Um I find the tables uh hard to read. Uh and I suspect other folks would find them hard to read. I also think that they need to be geared towards our

um zoning uh and not creating uh a whole set of different categories uh uh with regard to the land. That said, I think you could use the uh zoning and then if uh a lot within the uh particular zoning area was particularly large, you could then um uh say that perhaps in that larger lot, you had to uh have more trees. Um, but uh I think I think it's a a start. Uh, but I think it needs um some retooling before it could be anything that um uh should become uh part of our ordinances. I also think um that because there's so many cross references to chapter 17 that perhaps it belongs in 17 um not as a new chapter 18 and I'll stop there. Thank you Carolyn comments. Uh yeah Larry. Yes sir. Oh, I'm the one who put the uh Mary Allen's document into a shared drive. I spent quite a bit of time editing that. And if you all eventually examine it, you'll see I gave up after a while cuz there was a lot I really wanted to edit there. Uh, I think it would be easier to um take a look at the existing ordinance and start cutting sections

that I think are better in the in the proposed ordinance from the storm water committee, putting them into the existing 17. like well there there there are definitely sections that I think are are better done and particularly the first thing on uh definitions and things like that. Um I said a lot of issues with uh a lot of the numbers that are required trees diameters circumferences all very complicated. uh whether you count uh palm trees as trees or not, whether you count crepe myrtles as bushes or trees, uh I don't think that stuff's really appropriate in this place because basically what we want to do is have people have yards with with leaves, you know, with shade basically. Yeah, we don't want to have to make the town into an urban forest, per se. Um, I think I saw some place that somebody calculated that our canopy covers 39% of the town. Is that good or not? Uh, I didn't have a chance to look into that. I I have some friends up in Briercliffe and if you've been to Briercliffe, they have a lot of big trees there. I'd love to see what their canopy cover is uh in terms of percent. I'm not convinced we need to add a whole lot more trees. I'd like to keep most of what we have here, but uh you know, a lot of these proposed requirements, if you do something to your property that requires like if you're going to put in a pool,

you're going to have to now have your yard uh fit into the requirements that they've proposed. And I think they're excessive. Uh we don't want to financially punish our citizens and existing land owners and homeowners uh just because in 30 years they've lived there on that lot. They have to do something remarkable to make it in order to get a permit to do the work they want to do. But I don't know. I there's just so much to go over. And I'd like to just go back to 17 and start taking or initially taking sections of the new ordinance and putting them in and see how it works out. Thank you. Any other comments? Yeah, I mean I agree. Uh there's a lot of information to dissect in here. I appreciate Mary Ellen and your work. uh uh uh separating those items. Um looks like this is going to be a little bit of a project for us uh in comparing the old chapter 17 and 18 deciding if and it's my experience too. Uh uh zoning laws play a lot more uh ump and getting uh enforcement stuff as well. So um I personally don't think it needs to be out of chapter 18. I think the intent of the stormwater committee uh possibly was just to put more sight to uh a standalone ordinance. Uh but we have 17 chapters already. So uh there's a lot of information inside there that we miss as well. So standalone absolutely but um a lot of information in here and I agree um it definitely needs to be uh flowed a

little better where you could see the basic requirements and move on. Uh there were a lot of educational pieces in there. That's not just my opinion. A lot of pictures on there and for me was a lot. So I would have to read and read and read and read and read until I finally get it. But uh there's a lot of information in it. I think it's important to keep the regulation piece uh and the regulation piece and the educational like we mentioned before and possibly a brochure or if we want to focus on trees create a committee or somebody direct them to make sure we're sharing information about trees and how we can be better and how we can plan and how we can save trees and all that good information. Uh but I totally agree it doesn't need to be an ordinance here. Yes, ma'am. Now that uh we've edited a lot of the educational material out of the new proposal, I agree with Larry that it might be best when we're just comparing requirements to requirements to sit in front of the existing requirements and see where anything new is an improvement rather than do it more or less backwards. Let's look at the existing organs and and see see what's better or we don't like. For instance, the new requirements would remove the idea of anticipating tree root damage to foundations. And what that boils down to if we were to accept their version without comparing it to the existing version means I have to wait until a tree root damages my foundation and the damage has been completed before I can do anything to that tree. So there's some serious stuff. I don't want to wait till my foundation is damaged. The tree root can be anticipated that should be taken care of. And there's other stuff like that.

or something about uh three three homeowner insurance quotes or something. It it we need to I think we need to look at sit in front of the existing one and see where there are improvements to make. That's all there. Thank you, Mariel. Mr. Chair. Yes, ma'am. I think that this is this is this subject is worth a standalone meeting whether it's a workshop or whatever where we're not talking about overlay. We're not talking about everything else. were really just focused on tree on the tree ordinance. It It is a lot and it is important. You know, I storm water's done a lot of great work. There's a an ordinance already in place. I I think we just need to focus on that for a whole meeting instead of trying to do it in a few minutes in a piece of a meeting. Absolutely. Thank you. All right. Any other comments? Um, yes, Mr. Chair Scott. Um, I agree with every bit everything that's that's been said. Um, and I know that storm water committee worked really hard on this and it is detailed and I mean it's it's normative. I've learned quite a bit about trees. Um I you know just to add to what other folks are saying and I do also agree with uh starting with 17 and what we've already put together and then seeing what we can reap from these and add it to it. But as we're doing that, just you know keep in the back of our minds uh you know uh property owners put ourselves in their shoes and you know what kind of burden are we putting on them? Uh trees are beautiful. Trees are wonderful especially when it's 97°

and really humid. So, um, you know, we're Tree Tree City USA, which is too, but you know, just to do our best to, you know, view the ordinance from the perspective of of our residents and that's that's my addition. Thank you. Thank you, Scott. Any other comments? Um, no further comments and uh I guess we'll move on. I think the next step uh bas basically continue to review it. Um, I agree uh to Melody uh we probably need it and it probably will be our uh sole uh topic for uh this this month's uh um workshop. So that thank y'all. Um yeah, so basically uh I think it' be our sole topic for this uh month's workshop and uh we could dig into it a little more but I would say if we're going to go the route of comparing it from others I would say a good portion of I don't know how we'd do that. If commissioner wanted to start from the back side and one commissioner wanted to start from the front, we kind of gather up or if we all wanted to just review it and bring our own ideas. I think it's going to create a lot more conversation and modifications. But um not for sure, but uh we'll we'll discuss that in the workshop. I would say just continue to review it. Uh notate the differences and we can discuss them and uh we may start from the beginning and move on down to uh the flow. So, thank y'all for the conversation today. We'll move on to C, which is official town email counts for Plan Commission members.

Um, this question uh was raised a few meet a meeting or so ago, I believe, uh by Larry. Um I think uh Carolyn and Larry uh participated in their onboarding uh for statutory planning commission uh of South Carolina and I think in some sort of that uh on boarding uh I think communication got shared that uh it definitely was suggested that uh commissioners in any jurisdiction uh would have a official uh capacity email account uh just so you're able to comply with FOYA as well as you're acting as official with the town as well. So, um I believe I have been in interchange conversation with uh the administration um and I believe uh Jerry is has already requested uh individuals emails to be set up. Yes, ma'am. I don't know if anybody cares, but once upon a time commissioners also had official ID documents. Okay. Is that something you're requesting or No, I don't care, but somebody else might. Why are you staring at my property kind of an answer? Probably a good idea. I know that uh I think in our ordinances alone, it allows commissioners to request a visit to uh a site that's being built or something in advance. So, I think we have that option in a ordinance. I don't know. This day and age, people are a little more suspicious about who's knocking on their door, too. Some lady comes to my door and asks if she can look around my property. I'm going to want a little bit more information before I say yes. Times have changed. So, any other comments or anything around uh official ID?

Any other comments around the email accounts? It's possible with the news or the email accounts if we can somehow um implement like a 10% discount at the restaurants. Maybe 15% but I'm hoping to get I appreciate your good luck. All right. I think you might get free parking. All right. Uh well uh we will look forward to that. Uh I will get another update probably for our next workshop and I may communicate that out to you guys. Uh I'm not for sure when that's happening. I didn't get a timeline. I just know that he mentioned that he was working. So um so we will move on. Uh 11 is public comments. [Music] I just want to say on the minutes that were in the packet today, I really like the detail because it's so much easier to look through those minutes to see what you're looking for than to actually go to the video and have to watch the whole thing. So, I for one really appreciate them. I wish town council minutes were like that. Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comments? No. Oh, I thought you were. I ain't got nothing to say anything. Bill Kenan 1312 North Dogwood. Um, I want to talk about your planning commission capital investment program. Your priorities are important to us. We have ours. We would love to have yours. And if you got feedback from more residents than just you all, we'd love

to have it. I would love to have it. We do have a problem. We're limited in property tax. Don't even pay for our salaries. So, anything you propose has to come from a tax and hospitality, which has certain limitations. So, I mean, it doesn't mean you can't propose it, but just realize that if if we can't use a tax or hospitality money on it, we it's not going to happen anytime soon unless we want to raise uh property tax. Uh there's a lot of things in that document. Uh I even propose that we spend some money on sidewalks. the uh repurposing Martin Field is that we can use hospitality a tax for that. So that we're looking at things that we can do. It's not that we've ignored it. It's just money is an issue and re replacing this building whether we tear this building down, but having a courtroom council chamber is eating up a lot of funds. So anyway, thank you for all you all do. When you get down to where a comma has to go, I'm impressed. I really am. You're really into the detail more so than I am. Right. Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comments? All right. Uh we'll move on to commission comments. Alex. All right. Mariela. You know, I've said quite a lot of things. Uh Carolyn, I think I have said more than enough tonight. So, I have nothing to add. And Mr. Scott, I do have something to say, but I'll try to make it brief. Um

uh I'd mentioned to others that I have my hands full right now. Um responsibilities and things are changing by a day. um of you know my care um I've had to bring uh them here because it's dangerous to leave that. Um so I uh I'd appreciate your patience. Um I appreciate if you could do the best you can to not call me out on something that I might not have been able to get to. Um, this has been a really, really busy couple of months with in addition to this extra responsibility. I'm trying to hang on as best as I can. Um, and I'm going to stick with it if I can. If I can't, something's got to give. So, um, I just appreciate your patience. I I appreciate being part of this commission and I'll do the best I can to uh step up as and be here. Um, but you you can only do so much. So, thank you for your patience, Scott. And I'll finish it off pretty quickly, but um just wanted to address uh the comments around minutes. Uh I I absolutely agree. I can tell you there's many things that I've researched. I went back in minutes trying to look at stuff clarity. I I think there's even questions around storm water committee being directed to do something. If it was in the minutes or not in the minutes or in the video, I I think the minutes and the video should match. And that's not just that's just a particular I'm not really referencing that point in general. Um I think as more information as possible is in there. It's easy to dissect language if you move on down. Um not saying this is the format that's perfect. Uh um but I do know there were several comments uh related to us not capturing enough information. And I think there's never going to be a happy medium. Some people don't like a lot of information. Some people like the medium

size and some people like everything. uh but I think archiving governance and uh keeping records and information is the whole point of for you. So I think it's important to capture as much as possible. Um and then it's a lot easier to look at this for me than it is to go through a video. I've had to sit through some videos and I'm skipping trying to get to but um I think this particularly gives an overview. Uh but one thing I did want to say uh Ruby uh Sherry has bought a plot note. So I think they are going to start capturing uh through artificial intelligence with addition of uh uh the town clerk as well. So um hopefully the minutes may be approved. So um next item for uh the comments around the investment. Absolutely. I totally agree. We are limited on budget. Uh but I in my opinion I feel like we spend a lot of a tax and a tax on elements that may not even be needed or shifted. But I will tell you in the rankings a lot of these elements could be paid for a tax. So therefore if we move some stuff around um there definitely could be some funds involved in doing that. Um something we'll definitely have to look at uh while we're doing it. But also I would say uh when I gave my commission report out previously we talked a lot about elements and what projects uh compared I think Mary Ellen uh produced some document or something that compared and to be honest there's a lot of things the town is doing currently uh for capital improvement. It just is not in a plan. So uh maybe just capturing that information out in our capital investment program will be beneficial. I know a lot of I've heard councilmans in the past ask what are we doing? What projects are we doing this month or whatever maybe this could be a document that's clear and says what we're working on and stuff. So, uh definitely look

forward to the capital investment program however it goes. Um but uh think we should continue to work on but hope everyone has a good night and thank y'all for listening and coming out tonight. All right. Motion to adjourn and uh happy 4th of July. Yeah, absolutely. Um, get a motion to adjurnn. I'll make a motion to adjurnn. Scott is motion to adjurnn. Do I got a second? Second. Who was that? Alex. Alex has second motion to adjurnn. Um, any comments or anything? Everyone in favor say I. I. Anyone post say no. No meetings adjourn.