APPROVED  TOWN OF DUCK PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING September 13,2023  The Planning Board for the Town of Duck convened at the Paul F. Keller Meeting Hall on Present: Chair Marc Murray, Vice-Chair Bob Wetzel, Joe Blakaitas, Brenda Chasen, James Also present: Director of Community Development Joe Heard, Senior Planner Sandy Cross and Chair Murray called to order the Regular Meeting of the Planning Board for September 13, 2023  Wednesday, September 13, 2023.  Cofield and Council Liaison Sandy Whitman. Community Planner Jim Gould.  at 6:31 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS  Bruce Lindsey, 114 Tuckahoe Drive West, was recognized to speak. Mr. Lindsey stated he is the Vice President of the Tuckahoe Homeowners Association located next to Bias Shores. He requested the Planning Board to fully consider the public trust doctrine and state law when considering the request before them in order to preserve the rights ofNorth Carolina citizens with respect to the enjoyment and access ofsound fronts and beaches. Mr. Lindsey described the Sound as an estuary, a partially enclosed coastal water body where freshwater from rivers and streams mixes with salt water from the ocean. He noted that the Albemarle Sound is an estuarine body of water with estuarine beaches. Mr. Lindsey explained that North Carolina state courts have defined the public beaches to extend from water's edge to the mean high-water mark, al line that fluctuates with the tide amplitude and erosion that is known as wet sand beach. He: noted that although the state of North Carolina does not own the dry sand beach, defined as the area between the mean high-water mark and the base of the first line sand dunes, state courts have consistently held that itc does not give the property owners and absolute right to privacy ort toi restrict access to that portion  oftheir property. DISCUSSION  Building Height Defmitlon-slandards in Coastal High Hazard. Areas  Director of Community Development Joe Heard pointed out an error in the building height definition as it relates to standards in Coastal High Hazard Areas (CHHA). He stated that, as a result of Planning Board discussion, a change to building height measurement had been made in May 2020 to the section dealing with properties in the AE, AO and X: flood zones but should also have been made in the CHHA section. He noted the need for discussion on how best to address the issue of dealing with building height in different flood zones. Heard suggested the Board consider supporting a similar change in the CHHA zone that limits the top of the lowest floor to not exceed two feet above the regulatory flood protection elevation. He explained that right now    there is technically no height limit in that oceanfront district and expressed the need to close that Member Cofield questioned ifa specific situation had triggered this change. Heard explained that the Town has not been challenged on the height issue. He added that it was something staff had noticed and wanted to close the loophole to prevent future issues. Senior Planner Sandy Cross noted two instances where staff was working on height in an oceanfront situation. In each case, staff understood the intent and limited the height measurement to two feet above RFPE, but such Murray stated that int the Coastal High Hazard Area, therei isa a1 regulatory flood protection elevation as well as the requirement for the free and clear of obstruction. He questioned if two feet above the highest pre-disturbance grade would be the RFPE for that lot. Cross replied that is not necessarily the case. She described an example whereby a property is at an elevation 14 feet, the RFPE would have already been met. However, in an oceanfront Coastal High Hazard Area, you also need to have two-foot free and clear distance above the highest adjacent grade, which would Murray noted the need to discuss wording to ensure that the Town's requirement of two-foot free and clear is not penalizing. He also questioned if when the grade is higher than the regulatory flood protection elevation, but the two: feeti is still required, is-stafflooking to go1 two feet minimum or two feet maximum exactly. Murray asserted the Town'sstance in the past had been ai minimum of two feet and if higher was desired, it was allowable. Cross instructed that going higher than two feet was permitted, however one would be penalized by the height. Murray stated that had Heard explained that the specific details oft the amendment are not part oft the agenda at this time. He requested guidance from the Board as to whether the Board recommends this potential amendment tol be taken to Council for authorization to review the matter further. Murray noted the difficulty in comprenending the confusing language, even as someone who deals with it daily. He expressed his desire to ensure that the terms flood elevation and free and clear of obstruction, which are two separate yet related terms, are covered in the draft text amendment. Vice-Chair Bob Wetzel pointed out that pictures, drawings and/or photos would be helpful in future discussions. Cross noted Wetzel's suggestion and stated staff would provide an illustration It was the consensus of the Board members that the proposed change be taken to Council and the Murray described the Town of Southern Shores remedy to alleviate confusion surrounding the building height regulation for all zones is to require a separate lot disturbance permit. He noted that Duck does not have a separate permit for this, but same could be added as aj permit condition. He described Southern Shores' procedure as gathering pre-disturbance information to calculate height, a height above sea level is given and that is the maximum allowable ridge height for that  loophole.  wording is not actually in the ordinance.  trump the 14 feet.  not been the case in the past. Cross disagreed with Murray's statement.  ini the future to further aid in understanding the proposed ordinance wording.  Board could have future discussions regarding the language.    project. He pointed out that this process would be something that would be helpful because it would be pre-litigated and would be a condition the contractor would initial up front rather than once it is already built. Heard agreed with Murray'ss suggestion and stated that staffwould inform  Council the Board is interested inj pursuing this text amendment.  PLANNING TOPIC PAS. Report - Activity Centers  Heard gave an overview of the article Identifying Activity Centers: A How-To Guide" from the American Planning Association. He noted that Duck Village was likely the only activity center in the Town ofDuck and described thei importance ofthis area to the town and how it could be further Murray stated the article was interesting to read and noted the importance of thinking about Chasen agreed the article was informative and added that it changed her perspective about Duck's little community and made her realize the importance oft thinking now, sO the town is] prepared in  enhanced in the future.  development thirty to forty years out is useful.  the future.  APPROVAL OF MINUTES  Minutes from the August 9, 2023, Meeting  Cofield motioned to approve the minutes from August 9, 2023 as presented. Chasen seconded  Motion carried 5-0. OTHER BUSINESS  Heard and Cross shared that they had conflicts with the next scheduled Planning Board meeting. Due tot these scheduling conflicts, the Board: members agreed that the regularly scheduled! Planning Board meeting on October 11,2023 would be rescheduled to October 18, 2023.  STAFF COMMENTS  Summary of September 6, 2023 Regular Town Council Meeting Heard gave a summary oft the recent Town Council meeting.  Project Updates  Cross introduced the Town's new intern, Ashlynn Basnight. Cross provided a short overview of  various projects going on in the Town.    BOARD COMMENTS  Chasen applauded the BRIC grant approval.  ADJOURNMENT  Cofield moved to adjourn ther meeting. Chasen seconded. The meeting was adjourned by consensus  ofthe Board Members at 7:10p.m.  Approved:  Marc Murhay, Chairman  3E