SOUTH!  TOWN OF SOUTHERN SHORES  PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING 5375 N. Virginia Dare Trail, Southern Shores, NC 27949 Phone 252-261-2394/F Fax 252-255-0876 www.southernshores-nc.gov PITTS CENTER Monday, April 15, 2024 at 5:00PM MINUTES  CAROLINA  1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Pledge of Allegiance 3 4 Present  5 Chairperson Ward (arrived at 5:26 pm) 6 Vice Chairperson Tony DiBernardo 7 Planning Board Member Lawler 8 Planning Board Member McClendon 9 Planning Board Member Collins 11 Approval of Agenda  10  12 Motion made by Planning Board Member Lawler to approve the agenda as presented, Seconded by 13 Planning Board Member Collins. The motion passed unanimously. The motion passed unanimously (4-0). 16 Motion made by Planning Board Member Lawler to approve the minutes as presented, Seconded by  14  15 Approval of Minutes - February 21, 2024  17 Planning Board Member Collins. The motion passed unanimously (4-0).  18 19 Public Comment 20 None 21 22 Old Business  23 ZTA-23-05, Zoning Text Amendment application submitted by the Town of Southern Shores to amend 24 Town Code Sections 36-57, 36-202(d)(2), 36-203(d)(2), 36-204(d)(2), 36-205(d)(2), and 36-206(d)(2) to 25 amend the Town's current lot width requirements by amending the definitions of building setback line 28 Planning Director Haskett reviewed the changes to ZTA-23-05 after the Board recommended denial of 29 the version considered at the previous meeting. Staff is proposing to delete building set back line from 30 the zoning ordinance, as well as the subdivision ordinance. The definition ofl Lot Width Line meaning a 31 line established. 25 feet from thej front lot line or the point where the lot is 100 feet wide whichever 32 distance is closer to thej front lot line, will be added to both ordinances. The staff is also proposing to add 33 the definition of yard in the subdivision ordinance, exactly howi it is defined int the zoning ordinance. 34 Amending the preliminary plat requirements in the subdivision ordinance where currently it requires 35 showing the proposed minimum building setback line or lines on preliminary plats. Mr. Haskett also 36 proposed, in the subdivision ordinance and ini the definition for the zoning ordinance definitions staff 37 has again deleted building set back line, amended lot width definition sO that it now means the width of 38 a lot at the required lot width line and staff has revised the lot width definition sO that it means a line  26 and lot width and by establishing new measuring points for lot width  27  Southern Shores Planning Board-April 15, 2024lpg. 1    39 established. 25 feet from the front lot line or the point where the lot is 100 feet wide, whichever distance 40 is closer to the front lot line. In sections 36- 202, 204,203, 205, and 206 which is all the 41 Residential District regulations, and the Government and Institutional District regulations are all 42 identical with what's being proposed. The minimum lot width for lots created after. June 6, 2023, for RS- 45 Planning Director Haskett reviewed examples with the Board. There was some confusion as to building 46 setback line and howi it's used for determining lot width, as well as the actual setbacks for a structure, 47 staff has proposed to do away with building setback line because we've always had yard and that's what 48 we use for the actual setbacks. He reiterated that the 100 feet wide measured at the lot width line is 49 only applying to lots created after. June 2023, this would be when there is a recombination ora 50 subdivision. Staffi is trying to make sure that it is simple, and it is not ambiguous.  43 1is 100) feet wide measured at the lot width line.  44  51  52 Planning Board Member McClendon questioned that in multi-family the minimum lot width could be 75 53 feet measured at the lot width line, but our lot width line definition references a 1001 ft. requirement. 54 The lot width line definition should be redefined basically depending on the district. 56 Planning Director Haskett proposed rewording the definition to include, where the lot width. is 50f feet, 57 75j feet, or 100j feet wide whichever. is applicable in the district it is located. 59 Vice Chairperson DiBernardo asked if there were many 751 feet wide lots. Planning Director Haskett 60 stated the RS8 district, Mallard Cove which is RS10, Pelican Watch and the Government and Institutional 61 district. He added that we would still need to add Mr. McClendon suggestion in reference to the other 64 Hearing no further discussion, Motion made to approve ZTA-23-05 with the correction discussed adding 65 where the lot width is 50j feet, 75 feet, or 100 feet wide whichever. is applicable in the district it is located, 66 Seconded by Planning Board Member Collins. The motion passed unanimously (4-0).  55 58  62 lot sizes in the definition, which is easy to do.  63  67 68 69 New Business 70  71 The Town Planning Board began discussing potential commercial design standards to add to the 72 Town Zoning Ordinance at the November 21, 2022 Planning Board meeting. The discussion began with 73 reviewing the commercial design standards that have been adopted by the Towns of Duck, Kill Devil 74 Hills, and Nags Head. At the February 22, 2023 Planning Board meeting, the Board continued their 75 discussion and provided feedback to Town Staff on potential commercial design standards to include 76 inaz Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) application. Based on that feedback, Town Staff is proposing to 77 amend Town Code Section 36-163(1)a. by amending the minimum parking space width requirement for 78 all uses other than single-family residential homes, adding section 36-163(4)f. by addingareduction 79 ofr required parking spaces for planting trees in excess of a required buffer, amending Section 80 36-57 by restating the definition of substantial improvement, adding Section 36-179 to establish 81 commercial design standards and adding Section 36-299b)12).20. to establish that commercial 84 The proposed commercial design standards would apply to all new construction and substantial 85 improvements in the general commercial district for all uses other than one and two-family.  82 design elements must be shown on a site plan, if applicable.  83  86 dwellings. The proposed standards, and their sources, are as follows:  87 88  (1) Paint colors shall be ofl low reflectance, subtle, neutral and earth tone colors (Town of Duck);  Southern Shores Planning Board-April 15, 20241pg.2    89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115  (2) Mechanical equipment shall be screened and shall not be visible from any right-of-way (Town (3) Fences shall be constructed of wood, or match the materials used for the building (Planning (4) No commercial building front shall remain unbroken (unpierced) by a window, architectural element, entrance or functional general access doorway for more than 50 feet (Town of Duck); (5) Windows shall comprise no less than 10% and not more than 40% of each building's (6) No awning on any building which encroaches on a sidewalk or pedestrian walkway shall extend out from the building more than 2/3 the width oft the sidewalk nor shall it at any point be (7) Wall articulations (or breaks in thet façade or roofline) shall be designed not less than every (8) Architectural embellishments that add visual interest to a façade or roof such as dormers, chimneys, cupolas, watch and clock towers, shutters and other similar elements are encouraged (9) Roofs shall be constructed with one or more of the following roofs: hip, gable or mansard  of Kill Devil Hills); Board);  vertical wall area (Towns of Duck and Kill Devil Hills);  less than 81 feet above the sidewalk (Town of Duck); 501 feet along the building façade (Town of Duck);  (Town of Duck); (Town of Kill Devil Hills).  116 The proposed amendments include reducing the minimum parking width requirement for all uses other 117 than single-family residential homes from 9.51 feet wide by 18 feet long to 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. 118 The proposed amendments also include a voluntary sketch plan review by the Planning Board prior to 119 submittal ofa an application for site plan approval. Lastly, the proposed amendments establish that the 120 total parking requirement for every 20 parking spaces for a proposed use or existing use may be reduced 121 by one parking space for each tree that is provided ine excess of a required buffer for up to five parking 124 Planning Director Haskett added the amendment on page four of five, line 35 and 36 of the ZTA (Part IV.  122 spaces. 123 125 2(c): 126 127 128  Site improvements that meet the requirements of Section36-179, show all proposed site improvements including, but not limited to:  129 Staffi is withdrawing that part, there would be no proposed amendment to that section. There would just 130 be the proposed amendment on line 40 where it says commercial design elements pursuant to section 131 36-1791 if applicable. He stated because line 35 site improvements that meet the requirements, there 132 could actually be some cases where they don't have to meet the commercial design standards. 133 Planning Board Member Collins stated the word "may" is used for submittal of a sketch plan, which 134 would leave it as an option. Planning Director Haskett stated that is correct and staff's recommendation 135 as the applicant has al lot of other requirements, they must submit for a site plan review. Ift this is 136 adopted the applicant would already have to adhere to the commercial design standards. 138 Chairperson Ward questioned the number of days the Planning Board would be given to review.  137  Southern Shores Planning Board-April 15, 2024lpg. 3    139  140 Planning Board Member McClendon asked ift the town currently reviews sketch plans and site plans. 141 Planning Director Haskett stated the subdivision ordinance does have ap provision for reviewing a sketch 142 plan of a subdivision but there aren't any other sketch plan reviews in the zoning ordinance. The 143 proposed sketch plan review will not be at full sight plan, it will just be what's required; it shall consist of 144 an narrative and conceptual renderings that show the proposed buildings, building elevations,  145 landscaping, and parking areas. 148 then the Planning Board shall review.  146 149 151 time. 152 154 157  147 Planning Board Member McClendon clarified that the applicant may submit a sketch plan and if they do 150 Chairperson Ward suggested replacing the "may" with "shall" and stretching out the Boards review 153 Vice Chairperson DiBernardo agreed with Chairperson Ward and recommended 14 days. 155 Planning Board Member Collins felt it would be beneficial to the person drawing up the plans to have 158 Planning Board Member McClendon inquired ift the sketch plan would only come to the Planning Board 159 orv would it go to council with Planning Board comments. Planning Director Haskett stated it would only 160 be reviewed by the Planning Board and the Planning Board would provide comments to the applicant. 162 Chairperson Ward reviewed the ZTA by each: section and the Board made the following suggestions:  156 this direction and know what is more likely to be approved by the town.  161 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185  Section 36-163 Off-street parking equrements-reduction of required parking for providing trees. The size oft the tree needs to be provided. Consensus to replicate the commercial buffer requirements of 6-8 feet of maturity (native species mature: shade tree), aesthetically placed in a The developer is receiving 162 square feet they don't have to pave in lieu of putting a  non-bufferarea.  tree, this should be incentivized. o Remove reference to the buffer. Section 36-179 Commercial design standards.  Item #1 Paint colors- Consensus to remove low reflective wording, use low gloss. Item #8 Architectural embellishments (8)- replace wording with architectural embellishments that add visual interest are encourageda and leave out all of the  examples.  Architectural embellishments are considered signage and will contribute to the  footage of signage. Item #7-agree as written. Item #6-agree as written. Item #5-agree as written. Item #4-agree as written. Item #3-agree as written. Item #2-agree as written.  item (9) roofs remove as iti is not necessary, all roof types are allowed.  186 Vice Chairperson DiBernardo reviewed a document Planning Board Member Zehner previously shared 187 with the Board, explaining Floor Area Ratio. He stated that iti is a good way to compare the density and  Southern Shores Planning Board-April 15, 2024/pg.4    188 volume of buildings between multiple sites, if not also set a standard through policy and regulation 189 given the limited amount of commercial development. It would be fairly simple to calculate this fora all 190 commercial properties in town and perhaps that is a data point to evaluate when considering 191 commercial design standards. What looks too dense with respect to our vision for the Town versus what  192 seems to be the correct range or limit.  193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232  What Is Floor Area Ratio?  The floor area ratio is the proportion of a building's entire useable, floor area to the total area of the site on which it is situated.. A larger ratio would most likely suggest dense or urban development. The floor area ratio is used by localg governments to create local zoning codes. You can calculate the ratio by dividing the building's overall or gross floor area by the site's gross  area.  Floor Area Ratio = Total Building Floor Area/Gross Lot Area  Ins summary, the floor area ratio is a measurement that assesses development intensity by determining the ratio of as structure's totalj floor area (or gross floor area) to the size of the patch of land on which iti is constructed. In most cases, thej floor area ratio is stated as a decimal  number.  Understanding the Calculation components.  Since floor area ratio is ai ratio, comprehending the term necessitates knowledge of the ratio's The first component of floor area ratio is a measure of the buildable land areaj for the complete site, unit, or lot, in square feet. Furthermore, the section of a development site where construction can reasonably and legally take place is known as the buildable land ared. Many encroachment, factors, such as public streets and other public rights-of-way, streams or wetlands, and regulatory restrictions, might limit the buildable. land ared. Particular, local zoning ordinances and land use regulations define which regulatory consequences and other Moving on, the second calculation is made by calculating the floor area of each. story of the building, once again ins square feet, and then summing the areas ofe everyf floor to get the gross, Thej floor area ratiol is calculated by dividing the total floor area by the buildable land ared. The floor area ratio would provide a large degree of latitude in the ultimate. shape of a building if there were no other development limits. Other laws, such as height limits, limit how) floor area ratio can be allocated in many regions around the US and the rest oft the world.  encroachments define the buildable land area.  or total, floor area oft the structure.  233 Chairperson Ward felt the Floor Area Ratio had some value but was unsure how to put it in the 234 ordinance. He suggested Mr. Zehner, Planning Director Haslett and himself get together at at future time  235 and research it further.  236  Southern Shores Planning Board-April 15, 2024/pg.5    237 Chairperson Ward stated a concern with the Ginguite project was the volume and knew the Board 238 would like to mitigate some of that but was unsure how to do that. Planning Board Member McClendon 241 Chairperson Ward asked Planning Director Haskett if he had anye experience with FAR, Floor Area Ratio. 242 Planning Director Haskett stated he did not but agreed with the suggestion ofr researching it more. He 243 felt it was a good idea to include something that addresses the volume of development on a parcel. 245 All Planning Board members agreed by consensus to have Chairperson Ward and Planning Board 246 Member Zehner meet with the Planning Director to research this topic further. 248 Chairperson Ward stated he would like to move forward with the commercial design standards and 249 requested to have further discussions at the next meeting in hopes of having a reasonable ZTA that they 252 Planning Board Member McClendon stated the FAR publication. states that the premiums are overly 253 complicated for a small community and should not be duplicated blindly, furthermore the benefits of 254 floor area ratio appear to occur only in high bulk zones where building height is not a major 255 consideration. Hes stated he was unsure on how it would apply unless it was used as an incentive. He 256 stated when referencing density, sometimes people lose sight of the fact that it might be better to have 257 25 or 30 apartments in one building that goes up five stories as long as the rest of the space is open 260 Planning Director Haskett stated he will take the Board's feedback and revise the ordinance and bring it  239 did not knowi ifintroducing FAR would do that.  240  244 247  250 can recommend to the council.  251  258 space, as opposed to spreading them all out all over the ground.  259 261 back for consideration. 262 263 Public Comment 265 him. 266  264 Michael Florez-a local architect and the topic of commercial design standards is of particular interest to 267 Matt Florez- local resident and electrical contractor, visions about what an architectural facade can 268 comprise of and how it can compel our community to look vibrant and holistic to what its origins are. 269 Recommend item #8 should include coastal design, fear that noti including language on roof tops could 272 Planning Board Member McClendon addressed the two speakers and stated the proposed project on 273 Ginguite was, just a massing of the buildings and you couldn't see through it at all, especially at the 274 location. He would like to hear any ideas to address the issue from an architect and engineer and what  270 give too much flexibility.  271  275 they thought were appropriate commercial design standards.  276 278  277 The speakers did not have an immediate recommendation but would think about it.  279 Planning Board Member Comments 281 this Saturday from 11 to3. 284 applies to lot disturbance permits. 286 Announcements  280 Planning Board Member McClendon stated the Coastal Social Studies Institute is having their open house 283 Chairperson Ward would like the Board to still consider residential language on the tree ordinance asi it  282 285  Southern Shores Planning Board-April 15, 2024/pg. 6    287 Planning Director Haskett announced the next meeting will bel May 20th with commercial design 288 standards on the agenda, as well as an agenda item requested from Mr. Zehner on affordable housing 289 and howi it relates to the Planning Board. The modernization oft town codes (some amendments) as  290 directed by the Council might be on the agenda as well.  291 292 Adjourn  293 Motion to adjourn by Vice Chairperson DiBernardo, Seconded by Planning Board Member Collins. The  294 time was 6:45 p.m. The motion passed unanimously (5-0).  295 296 ATTEST: 297 298 299  uH!  Resperttulysubmittes,   Clerk  -  AL  O  Southern Shores Planning Board-April 15, 2024lpg.7