1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,159
Turtle Beach. Um, we'll go ahead and

2
00:00:02,159 --> 00:00:04,960
call this uh meeting to or uh uh to

3
00:00:04,960 --> 00:00:06,480
order.

4
00:00:06,480 --> 00:00:08,960
>> Miss Amber.

5
00:00:08,960 --> 00:00:10,480
>> Uh, Chairman McGonagal

6
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:11,040
>> here.

7
00:00:11,040 --> 00:00:12,080
>> Andy Thomas

8
00:00:12,080 --> 00:00:12,639
>> here.

9
00:00:12,639 --> 00:00:13,519
>> Mendle Bell

10
00:00:13,519 --> 00:00:14,080
>> here.

11
00:00:14,080 --> 00:00:15,280
>> Joe Reeves.

12
00:00:15,280 --> 00:00:16,240
>> Cynthia Lover

13
00:00:16,240 --> 00:00:16,640
>> here.

14
00:00:16,640 --> 00:00:17,680
>> Wyman Wise

15
00:00:17,680 --> 00:00:18,080
>> here.

16
00:00:18,080 --> 00:00:19,279
>> Norfleet Jones

17
00:00:19,279 --> 00:00:19,760
>> here.

18
00:00:19,760 --> 00:00:21,119
>> We have a quorum.

19
00:00:21,119 --> 00:00:24,160
>> Great. Thank you. Um, take a minute and

20
00:00:24,160 --> 00:00:25,760
review the minutes and if we can get a

21
00:00:25,760 --> 00:00:29,359
um approval to on the

22
00:00:29,359 --> 00:00:34,870
back to original meetings.

23
00:00:34,880 --> 00:00:36,000
» We got the

24
00:00:36,000 --> 00:00:37,840
>> Yeah. If we could take take a a moment

25
00:00:37,840 --> 00:00:40,879
to review the um May 14th meeting

26
00:00:40,879 --> 00:00:44,320
minutes and we get a motion to approve.

27
00:00:44,320 --> 00:00:45,360
>> Motion to approve.

28
00:00:45,360 --> 00:00:46,719
>> Thank you, Mr. Reeves. Do we have a

29
00:00:46,719 --> 00:00:48,160
second?

30
00:00:48,160 --> 00:00:50,160
>> Got a second. Mr. from Mr. Jones.

31
00:00:50,160 --> 00:00:52,000
>> So, just a quick correction in the

32
00:00:52,000 --> 00:00:53,840
minutes. My name is spelled wrong just

33
00:00:53,840 --> 00:00:55,760
so it's recorded correctly.

34
00:00:55,760 --> 00:00:56,640
>> What page?

35
00:00:56,640 --> 00:01:00,559
>> It's on the front page. Just mendle me n

36
00:01:00,559 --> 00:01:07,190
>> one L Mendle.

37
00:01:07,200 --> 00:01:08,960
» All right.

38
00:01:08,960 --> 00:01:12,640
>> Yeah, exactly. Two L's bell.

39
00:01:12,640 --> 00:01:14,960
>> All right. Um we've got a a motion, a

40
00:01:14,960 --> 00:01:16,799
second. All in favor with the

41
00:01:16,799 --> 00:01:18,000
modification.

42
00:01:18,000 --> 00:01:19,040
>> I

43
00:01:19,040 --> 00:01:22,080
>> Any opposed? Nice have it. All right.

44
00:01:22,080 --> 00:01:25,280
Let's review the um uh Thursday, June

45
00:01:25,280 --> 00:01:29,360
11th uh BZA meeting. If we can get a uh

46
00:01:29,360 --> 00:01:31,759
motion to approve those minutes.

47
00:01:31,759 --> 00:01:33,520
>> So moved.

48
00:01:33,520 --> 00:01:35,040
>> Second.

49
00:01:35,040 --> 00:01:39,360
>> And if we Thank you. Uh um Mr. Thomas

50
00:01:39,360 --> 00:01:40,400
for the motion.

51
00:01:40,400 --> 00:01:42,799
>> Same same not

52
00:01:42,799 --> 00:01:45,280
>> and Mr. Reeves on the second. Um and we

53
00:01:45,280 --> 00:01:48,079
got a Mendle Bell with one L and two L's

54
00:01:48,079 --> 00:01:50,799
on the bell.

55
00:01:50,799 --> 00:01:53,680
All right. Any other discussion?

56
00:01:53,680 --> 00:01:55,040
All in favor?

57
00:01:55,040 --> 00:01:55,439
>> I.

58
00:01:55,439 --> 00:01:57,920
>> Any opposed? The eyes have it.

59
00:01:57,920 --> 00:01:59,920
>> All right. And um we're going to move on

60
00:01:59,920 --> 00:02:05,920
to um the city item number three on the list. M uh Mr. Cwell. Any

61
00:02:05,920 --> 00:02:07,119
communication?

62
00:02:07,119 --> 00:02:11,680
>> Great. Thank you. Um

63
00:02:11,680 --> 00:02:13,920
if we can go ahead and get uh the person

64
00:02:13,920 --> 00:02:19,750
that's the only person here sworn in.

65
00:02:19,760 --> 00:02:21,920
Do you solemnly state under penalty of

66
00:02:21,920 --> 00:02:23,599
perjury that the evidence you shall give

67
00:02:23,599 --> 00:02:25,280
in this matter shall be the truth, the

68
00:02:25,280 --> 00:02:27,599
whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

69
00:02:27,599 --> 00:02:28,480
>> I do.

70
00:02:28,480 --> 00:02:30,720
>> Great. Thank you, Mr. Uh, we'll move on

71
00:02:30,720 --> 00:02:33,519
to the first item on the agenda.

72
00:02:33,519 --> 00:02:35,040
>> We want the first item on the agenda of

73
00:02:35,040 --> 00:02:38,480
new business. We've got BZA 26-20, an

74
00:02:38,480 --> 00:02:41,519
application by Donald David Okonnell uh

75
00:02:41,519 --> 00:02:43,599
for a variance of the front yard setback

76
00:02:43,599 --> 00:02:47,920
at 247 Pomemetto Harper Drive, zone R1B,

77
00:02:47,920 --> 00:02:50,080
single family lowmedium density

78
00:02:50,080 --> 00:02:53,040
district.

79
00:02:53,040 --> 00:02:54,560
If you can introduce yourself for the

80
00:02:54,560 --> 00:02:55,760
record.

81
00:02:55,760 --> 00:02:57,280
>> David Okonnell.

82
00:02:57,280 --> 00:02:58,480
>> Speak at the microphone if you would,

83
00:02:58,480 --> 00:03:00,800
Mr. Connell. David Okonnell work with

84
00:03:00,800 --> 00:03:04,480
Chris Manning Communities.

85
00:03:04,480 --> 00:03:06,800
>> 9405 Cove Drive, Myrtle Beach.

86
00:03:06,800 --> 00:03:10,869
>> Great. Thank you.

87
00:03:10,879 --> 00:03:13,440
» Tell us your story.

88
00:03:13,440 --> 00:03:15,280
>> We're building a house in Pelmetto

89
00:03:15,280 --> 00:03:17,440
Harbor. And just like all the other ones

90
00:03:17,440 --> 00:03:22,080
that we've done, um we've requested uh a

91
00:03:22,080 --> 00:03:25,519
variance with a setback. So because of

92
00:03:25,519 --> 00:03:29,120
the topo of the project uh of the of the

93
00:03:29,120 --> 00:03:30,640
lot

94
00:03:30,640 --> 00:03:33,440
and uh to keep the house from being

95
00:03:33,440 --> 00:03:36,159
blocking the neighbors views, we're

96
00:03:36,159 --> 00:03:39,200
asking for a 5-ft variance on the front

97
00:03:39,200 --> 00:03:41,920
setback.

98
00:03:41,920 --> 00:03:44,480
>> Great. Thank you, Mr. Okonnell. Any

99
00:03:44,480 --> 00:03:49,509
questions for the applicant?

100
00:03:49,519 --> 00:03:52,710
» Yes,

101
00:03:52,720 --> 00:03:55,360
I'm reading your

102
00:03:55,360 --> 00:03:58,239
Number five, you say describe how the

103
00:03:58,239 --> 00:03:59,760
variance solves the minimum variance

104
00:03:59,760 --> 00:04:03,040
necessary. It said a variance is not

105
00:04:03,040 --> 00:04:04,799
necessary for the reasonable development

106
00:04:04,799 --> 00:04:07,360
of a lot which would say that you don't

107
00:04:07,360 --> 00:04:12,309
need the variance.

108
00:04:12,319 --> 00:04:14,480
» I'm sorry, Miss Lover, where are you? Uh

109
00:04:14,480 --> 00:04:20,469
yeah, where we

110
00:04:20,479 --> 00:04:22,079
» Oh, that's yours. You started doing it.

111
00:04:22,079 --> 00:04:27,430
You started doing these different

112
00:04:27,440 --> 00:04:29,520
Okay. So,

113
00:04:29,520 --> 00:04:32,240
this So, these pages are yours.

114
00:04:32,240 --> 00:04:36,550
>> Okay. Where's his

115
00:04:36,560 --> 00:04:39,600
» Okay. Thank you.

116
00:04:39,600 --> 00:04:43,590
Sorry, I'm confused.

117
00:04:43,600 --> 00:04:45,680
» And just to be clear again, this is the

118
00:04:45,680 --> 00:04:47,520
neighborhood that that goes back down

119
00:04:47,520 --> 00:04:49,680
that slopes down into the waterway.

120
00:04:49,680 --> 00:04:52,720
>> Yeah. Yeah. Palmetto Harbor.

121
00:04:52,720 --> 00:04:55,919
um almost every single house built in

122
00:04:55,919 --> 00:04:58,639
there, especially over the last 10

123
00:04:58,639 --> 00:05:02,000
years, um has they tried to keep it

124
00:05:02,000 --> 00:05:04,080
uniform so it wouldn't block any of the

125
00:05:04,080 --> 00:05:06,720
neighbors views by being, you know, 5

126
00:05:06,720 --> 00:05:09,520
foot in front. So,

127
00:05:09,520 --> 00:05:11,360
we've done this a bunch of times and

128
00:05:11,360 --> 00:05:13,600
this is just I think it's the last lot.

129
00:05:13,600 --> 00:05:14,960
I don't think there's any lots left

130
00:05:14,960 --> 00:05:19,510
after this one

131
00:05:19,520 --> 00:05:23,360
» property. Um these lots usually laid out

132
00:05:23,360 --> 00:05:26,720
when the property was in the county.

133
00:05:26,720 --> 00:05:28,960
>> I believe so. It was before my time, but

134
00:05:28,960 --> 00:05:32,000
I believe so.

135
00:05:32,000 --> 00:05:33,680
>> Would these would these lot would the

136
00:05:33,680 --> 00:05:36,240
county zoning have uh given you would

137
00:05:36,240 --> 00:05:38,000
you have needed a variance under the

138
00:05:38,000 --> 00:05:40,000
original zoning when they were plotted

139
00:05:40,000 --> 00:05:41,840
in the county?

140
00:05:41,840 --> 00:05:45,199
>> I don't remember. I'm sorry.

141
00:05:45,199 --> 00:05:49,990
>> Ben, you might know the answer to that.

142
00:05:50,000 --> 00:05:53,830
set

143
00:05:53,840 --> 00:05:56,400
to

144
00:05:56,400 --> 00:06:02,230
>> I think so.

145
00:06:02,240 --> 00:06:04,080
» I thought my recollection was when we

146
00:06:04,080 --> 00:06:06,479
had these before that

147
00:06:06,479 --> 00:06:07,759
when they were in the county they were

148
00:06:07,759 --> 00:06:09,280
laid out with different setbacks. That's

149
00:06:09,280 --> 00:06:10,800
why the lots were platted the way they

150
00:06:10,800 --> 00:06:11,680
were.

151
00:06:11,680 --> 00:06:13,759
>> I think that's come somebody said that

152
00:06:13,759 --> 00:06:15,759
in a prior hearing on these lots. I'm

153
00:06:15,759 --> 00:06:18,800
just trying to determine

154
00:06:18,800 --> 00:06:21,280
Okay,

155
00:06:21,280 --> 00:06:22,800
>> that seems like something we took into

156
00:06:22,800 --> 00:06:24,720
consideration what the original

157
00:06:24,720 --> 00:06:26,639
>> zoning was when the subdivision was laid

158
00:06:26,639 --> 00:06:28,400
out versus when it came into the city

159
00:06:28,400 --> 00:06:32,080
that gave it a more restrictive

160
00:06:32,080 --> 00:06:35,830
>> question

161
00:06:35,840 --> 00:06:39,120
a minimum 20.

162
00:06:39,120 --> 00:06:39,520
Okay,

163
00:06:39,520 --> 00:06:41,120
>> that's and I do believe I think that's

164
00:06:41,120 --> 00:06:43,199
what we all kind of recollect on the

165
00:06:43,199 --> 00:06:44,800
>> when we initially started dealing with

166
00:06:44,800 --> 00:06:46,479
these it had to do with the zoning that

167
00:06:46,479 --> 00:06:50,560
the county had was more and it was 5 ft

168
00:06:50,560 --> 00:06:51,680
less. So

169
00:06:51,680 --> 00:06:53,360
>> So under the original zoning when this

170
00:06:53,360 --> 00:06:55,919
was plotted out

171
00:06:55,919 --> 00:07:00,070
>> correct?

172
00:07:00,080 --> 00:07:01,919
» Yep. Good deal. Great. Give us a second.

173
00:07:01,919 --> 00:07:02,880
We're going to hear from the city and

174
00:07:02,880 --> 00:07:33,270
we'll be back to you. Let's go

175
00:07:33,280 --> 00:07:36,710
» on the

176
00:07:36,720 --> 00:07:38,880
Majority of the box

177
00:07:38,880 --> 00:07:58,070
area.

178
00:07:58,080 --> 00:08:09,830
Straight

179
00:08:09,840 --> 00:08:17,189
down

180
00:08:17,199 --> 00:08:48,389
the street.

181
00:08:48,399 --> 00:08:55,829
pull off

182
00:08:55,839 --> 00:10:03,350
regulations.

183
00:10:03,360 --> 00:10:05,519
issuance of the varants because other

184
00:10:05,519 --> 00:10:07,600
homes

185
00:10:07,600 --> 00:10:11,750
are not loud enough.

186
00:10:11,760 --> 00:10:14,160
Well, I'm reading it verbatim.

187
00:10:14,160 --> 00:10:19,910
>> Yeah, it's

188
00:10:19,920 --> 00:10:21,200
» I'm going to start that sentence over.

189
00:10:21,200 --> 00:10:22,640
The inter coastal waterway side of the

190
00:10:22,640 --> 00:10:24,240
Palmetto Harbor Drive would be

191
00:10:24,240 --> 00:10:26,240
harmonious, congruous, and balanced with

192
00:10:26,240 --> 00:10:27,680
the issuance of the variance because

193
00:10:27,680 --> 00:10:29,519
other homes on the street were granted

194
00:10:29,519 --> 00:10:32,000
setback relief from the BCA. Describe

195
00:10:32,000 --> 00:10:33,440
how the variance saw as the minimum

196
00:10:33,440 --> 00:10:34,959
variance necessary for reasonable

197
00:10:34,959 --> 00:10:37,360
development of the site. A footprint of

198
00:10:37,360 --> 00:10:39,279
more than 2,000 square foot can be built

199
00:10:39,279 --> 00:10:41,279
without any reduction of setback. A

200
00:10:41,279 --> 00:10:43,200
three-story home exceeding 6,000 square

201
00:10:43,200 --> 00:10:45,279
foot can be built without any reduction

202
00:10:45,279 --> 00:10:48,320
of setback. A 6,000t single family home

203
00:10:48,320 --> 00:10:51,600
is a reasonable development on a 7,860

204
00:10:51,600 --> 00:10:53,760
foot lot. A variance is not necessary

205
00:10:53,760 --> 00:10:55,040
for the reasonable development of the

206
00:10:55,040 --> 00:10:57,760
lot. Six, describe why the granting of

207
00:10:57,760 --> 00:10:59,440
the requested variance will not confer

208
00:10:59,440 --> 00:11:01,200
on the applicant any special privilege

209
00:11:01,200 --> 00:11:03,279
that is denied by the zoning regulations

210
00:11:03,279 --> 00:11:05,200
to other land owners in the same zoning

211
00:11:05,200 --> 00:11:07,279
district. Other land owners and

212
00:11:07,279 --> 00:11:08,959
developers with properties on the same

213
00:11:08,959 --> 00:11:10,959
side of Palmetto Harbor Drive have been

214
00:11:10,959 --> 00:11:12,800
granted variances for reduction of front

215
00:11:12,800 --> 00:11:14,720
setback.

216
00:11:14,720 --> 00:11:15,440
>> That's all.

217
00:11:15,440 --> 00:11:16,640
>> Great. Thank you, Mola.

218
00:11:16,640 --> 00:11:17,120
>> You're welcome.

219
00:11:17,120 --> 00:11:21,110
>> Any questions for the city?

220
00:11:21,120 --> 00:11:23,040
» Um,

221
00:11:23,040 --> 00:11:25,519
is there a staff recommendation on this

222
00:11:25,519 --> 00:11:26,720
property?

223
00:11:26,720 --> 00:11:28,480
>> I am not making a recommendation. No,

224
00:11:28,480 --> 00:11:30,720
ma'am.

225
00:11:30,720 --> 00:11:32,880
Do you feel that you feel there's a

226
00:11:32,880 --> 00:11:34,959
hardship

227
00:11:34,959 --> 00:11:38,079
this lot that would um

228
00:11:38,079 --> 00:11:40,160
>> I feel that there's a hardship with the

229
00:11:40,160 --> 00:11:42,079
um with the slope of the lot going back

230
00:11:42,079 --> 00:11:44,880
towards the the waterway. It's um about

231
00:11:44,880 --> 00:11:48,000
47 feet into the lot. It starts to slope

232
00:11:48,000 --> 00:11:50,160
down about 47 feet from the back of the

233
00:11:50,160 --> 00:11:55,990
lot.

234
00:11:56,000 --> 00:11:58,399
» I know that. So my reading of all this

235
00:11:58,399 --> 00:12:02,550
is

236
00:12:02,560 --> 00:12:04,320
variance is not necessary for the

237
00:12:04,320 --> 00:12:05,920
reasonable development of the lot. But

238
00:12:05,920 --> 00:12:09,990
however,

239
00:12:10,000 --> 00:12:12,079
this board has issued variances for the

240
00:12:12,079 --> 00:12:13,600
other homes on the street that are on

241
00:12:13,600 --> 00:12:14,959
the same side of the waterway and are

242
00:12:14,959 --> 00:12:18,160
similarly situated. Um, you feel that's

243
00:12:18,160 --> 00:12:19,680
a mitigating factor?

244
00:12:19,680 --> 00:12:20,480
>> I do.

245
00:12:20,480 --> 00:12:23,829
>> Okay.

246
00:12:23,839 --> 00:12:26,320
» Does that not account for the topography

247
00:12:26,320 --> 00:12:27,760
though? Even though that lot's that

248
00:12:27,760 --> 00:12:28,959
size, you still have to account for the

249
00:12:28,959 --> 00:12:30,320
topography, right? Because you got that

250
00:12:30,320 --> 00:12:33,279
47 foot slope. If they push the house

251
00:12:33,279 --> 00:12:34,720
back, they go back into further in the

252
00:12:34,720 --> 00:12:37,440
slope back towards the waterway, right?

253
00:12:37,440 --> 00:12:38,800
>> And so they have a topography issue on

254
00:12:38,800 --> 00:12:40,160
the back side of that lot.

255
00:12:40,160 --> 00:12:42,160
>> So moving the house up five feet would

256
00:12:42,160 --> 00:12:43,680
actually give them relief on that

257
00:12:43,680 --> 00:12:45,040
topography on the back part of the

258
00:12:45,040 --> 00:12:45,760
property. Correct.

259
00:12:45,760 --> 00:12:47,760
>> It would. Okay.

260
00:12:47,760 --> 00:12:49,680
And in the in the past, I'd like to just

261
00:12:49,680 --> 00:12:51,440
ask David, excuse me. Um, in the past

262
00:12:51,440 --> 00:12:52,959
when we've granted these, we we always

263
00:12:52,959 --> 00:12:54,480
ask the question of me making sure

264
00:12:54,480 --> 00:12:55,519
there's going you're not going to have

265
00:12:55,519 --> 00:12:57,120
any parking like under the sidewalk.

266
00:12:57,120 --> 00:12:59,120
You'll have plenty underneath the house

267
00:12:59,120 --> 00:13:01,040
and in the driveway.

268
00:13:01,040 --> 00:13:02,800
>> Sorry,

269
00:13:02,800 --> 00:13:04,399
>> that's okay. Um, there there's going to

270
00:13:04,399 --> 00:13:06,480
be with by letting you come closer to

271
00:13:06,480 --> 00:13:07,760
the front, there's not you going to have

272
00:13:07,760 --> 00:13:08,639
they're not going to have to park the

273
00:13:08,639 --> 00:13:10,399
cars on the sidewalk. No, in that

274
00:13:10,399 --> 00:13:11,200
neighborhood or anything.

275
00:13:11,200 --> 00:13:13,920
>> No, there's still room to just like the

276
00:13:13,920 --> 00:13:15,279
other ones. There's still room to pull

277
00:13:15,279 --> 00:13:17,440
the cars all the way in.

278
00:13:17,440 --> 00:13:21,030
Yep.

279
00:13:21,040 --> 00:13:22,639
» Any other questions for the applicant or

280
00:13:22,639 --> 00:13:25,120
the city? Anyone prepare to make a

281
00:13:25,120 --> 00:13:26,000
motion?

282
00:13:26,000 --> 00:13:27,839
>> I'll make a motion, Mr. Chairman. I move

283
00:13:27,839 --> 00:13:30,720
that the board grant variance BZA26-20

284
00:13:30,720 --> 00:13:32,160
because applicant has demonstrated an

285
00:13:32,160 --> 00:13:34,480
essay hardship. Specifically, there are

286
00:13:34,480 --> 00:13:35,519
extraordinary exception conditions

287
00:13:35,519 --> 00:13:36,720
pertaining to this piece of property

288
00:13:36,720 --> 00:13:38,399
with the topography and a steep slope

289
00:13:38,399 --> 00:13:40,399
back to the waterway on that property

290
00:13:40,399 --> 00:13:42,160
itself. These conditions they generally

291
00:13:42,160 --> 00:13:43,600
apply to the other properties in the

292
00:13:43,600 --> 00:13:45,440
vicinity. Because of these conditions,

293
00:13:45,440 --> 00:13:46,399
application of the ordinance

294
00:13:46,399 --> 00:13:48,720
particularly property would effectively

295
00:13:48,720 --> 00:13:50,639
would be not fully restricted but it

296
00:13:50,639 --> 00:13:52,079
still would put limitations on the

297
00:13:52,079 --> 00:13:54,000
property itself. The authorization of

298
00:13:54,000 --> 00:13:55,200
the variance would not be a substantial

299
00:13:55,200 --> 00:13:56,560
detriment to adjacent properties that

300
00:13:56,560 --> 00:13:59,199
actually would bring harmonous to uh the

301
00:13:59,199 --> 00:14:00,880
actual neighborhood itself because every

302
00:14:00,880 --> 00:14:02,320
lot would be align every house would be

303
00:14:02,320 --> 00:14:04,000
lined with the proper setbacks that

304
00:14:04,000 --> 00:14:06,079
match the character in the district of

305
00:14:06,079 --> 00:14:08,560
the of the variance.

306
00:14:08,560 --> 00:14:12,000
>> Thank you Mr. bell with two L's.

307
00:14:12,000 --> 00:14:14,000
Um, do we have a Do we have a second?

308
00:14:14,000 --> 00:14:15,920
>> Second.

309
00:14:15,920 --> 00:14:18,560
Any discussion?

310
00:14:18,560 --> 00:14:19,839
>> All in favor?

311
00:14:19,839 --> 00:14:21,360
>> I

312
00:14:21,360 --> 00:14:23,199
>> Let's have it.

313
00:14:23,199 --> 00:14:26,079
>> Um, can we get a motion to close our

314
00:14:26,079 --> 00:14:26,560
meeting?

315
00:14:26,560 --> 00:14:27,760
>> I'll make a motion. Second.

316
00:14:27,760 --> 00:14:28,880
>> Second.

317
00:14:28,880 --> 00:14:30,560
>> A motion from Mr. Bell, a second from

318
00:14:30,560 --> 00:14:34,480
Mr. Reeves. All in favor?