The Southern Shores Town Council met on July 2 for its regular monthly business meeting. The following are highlights from the meeting:
COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS: In a rare display of disagreement, Town Council members split on some of the new commercial design standards recommended by the Planning Board and included in a Zoning Text Amendment that the Council first took up at its June meeting and then tabled for further consideration at the July meeting.
Expediency won out, as if often does, with three of the five members voting July 2 to approve the language before them in ZTA 24-03, and only change one word. The ZTA, which was subject to public hearing in June, sets forth 11 design standards with which “new construction and substantial improvements” must comply. It also defines what a substantial improvement is.
To see the latest version of ZTA 24-03, see pages 2-8 of the July 2 meeting packet, which you will find at https://mccmeetings.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/soshoresnc-pubu/MEET-Packet-b9c1afc388cb479a858efdfa994cef50.pdf
After the 3-2 vote, the Town Council coalesced around an idea promoted by Mayor Pro Tem Matt Neal, who was in the minority, of involving the “larger community” in a task force- or committee-led effort to create a “real vision” of Southern Shores’ small commercial district at the southern end of town.
Mr. Neal spoke of formulating a “small-area plan” for the “enhancement of our commercial district”—which would apply for 10 years, 20 years, even 50 years “down the line”—and referred to the vision statement and land-use recommendations in the newly updated Southern Shores Comprehensive CAMA Land Use Plan (LUP) for guidance and support.
The Council left the “framework” for such a task force up to the Town staff, which is expected to make a proposal at an upcoming meeting.
(For further information, see our recap of the Council’s discussion below.)
NEW LAND USE PLAN: After a public hearing, during which no one spoke, the Town Council unanimously approved the updated Comprehensive CAMA Land Use Plan (LUP), which was drafted with Town support by consultant Stewart, Inc.—provided the plan receives a final edit.
Councilwoman Paula Sherlock drew attention to some typographical and syntactic errors in the text, after which Councilman Mark Batenic insisted that the plan be thoroughly reviewed.
(Having been in touch with the consultant about the many errors present in an earlier draft, we would recommend hiring a professional proofreader to bring “fresh eyes” to the document.)
You will find the final draft of the new LUP here: https://www.southernshores-nc.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/2509/2-13-24_draft_comprehensive_land_use_plan.pdf
After the final edit is done, Mr. Haskett will submit the plan to the N.C. Division of Coastal Management (DCM) for review. The DCM acts as staff for the N.C. Coastal Resources Commission, which must certify the LUP for it to take effect. The DCM will notify Mr. Haskett of any questions it may have about the LUP.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING INITIATIVE: Michael Zehner, a professional planner and alternate member on the Town Planning Board, spoke to the Town Council, on behalf of the Board, asking the Council to “take some initiative” on addressing affordable housing, aka workforce housing, in Southern Shores.
Mr. Zehner used the official definition promulgated by the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development to define “affordable” housing as housing that costs 30 percent or less of a household’s gross income, including utilities. The term is often used in a different sense to refer to specific housing assistance programs, such as those that reserve a number of units in a residential complex for low-income renters or owners.
Mr. Zehner, who led a discussion about affordable housing in the Planning Board at its May meeting, said he was conveying the Board’s recommendation that the Town engage the public to find out, first of all, if residents believe affordable housing is/is not a “problem” in Southern Shores, and, secondly, if it is, how residents would like to address/resolve it.
He suggested that a public study could be done. The survey done just two years ago for the update of the LUP did not include affordable housing as a topic, per se.
In advocating for a community task force to develop a plan for the commercial district, Mr. Neal suggested incorporating affordable housing options.
He also expressed, during his closing comments, an interest in talking about accessory dwelling units in Southern Shores, which, under current Town Code ordinance, are not permitted. The Code allows for separate living space that is accessory to a principal residence, but the space cannot constitute a dwelling unit.
The Mayor Pro Tem again turned to the newly approved LUP for support, quoting a land-use recommendation on p. 100 that suggests evaluating “the Town’s current policy on separate living spaces and [considering] revisions to allowances and standards for accessory dwelling units by zoning district.”
(The Chicahauk Property Owners Assn. has a covenant that prohibits accessory dwelling units in Chicahauk and supersedes the Town Code.)
Mr. Neal said he would like to “elevate” the issue of accessory dwelling units, which have been suggested as a means to provide affordable housing, and move toward taking action.
MILFOIL SURVEY: Town Manager Cliff Ogburn reported that the N.C. Dept. of Environmental Quality will be conducting a survey of the presence of Eurasian milfoil in the Southern Shores canals during the “second half of July.” Mr. Ogburn anticipates having DEQ’s results to present to the Town Council at its September meeting.
JUNIPER TRAIL/CHICAHAUK TRAIL BRIDGE/CULVERT: Mr. Ogburn also reported that the construction contract for the renovation of the Juniper Trail/Chicahauk Trail bridge and culvert will be out for bid on Sept. 9 and remain open until Oct. 4. The Town Manager hopes to receive at least three bids and to be able to present them to the Town Council at its November meeting.
SOUTHERN SHORES CEMETERY: Councilwoman Sherlock is heading up an effort to beautify and enhance the Southern Shores Cemetery, which is located at 64 S. Dogwood Trail and has substantial funding for maintenance. Ms. Sherlock reported that she met at the cemetery with 15 people who have family members buried in, and/or own plots in, the cemetery, and with arborist Andy McConaghy, who lives in Southern Shores, to discuss improvements.
Apparently, some people have suggested removing some of the trees that make the cemetery such a desirable resting ground. According to Ms. Sherlock, Mr. McConaghy advised her that there are dogwoods in the cemetery that are more than 100 years old and live oaks that are older than 200 years old.
Ms. Sherlock also reported that she, the Town Manager, Public Works Director David Bradley, and a community volunteer spent a couple of hours the morning of July 2, picking up litter, including beer bottles, “dead plants and faded flowers,” at the cemetery. A volunteer-led litter patrol would seem to be in order.
BONUS COVERAGE: ELABORATING ON COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
Mayor Pro Tem Neal, who is an experienced builder, initiated the Town Council’s discussion of ZTA 24-03, which adds a new section (36-179), titled “Commercial design standards,” to the Town Code of Ordinances. He also led the Council’s discussion on the measure at the June meeting. (See The Beacon, 6/14/24.)
Mr. Neal made the case for deleting three of the 11 proposed design standards in ZTA 24-03 and received support from Councilman Batenic.
The standard that primarily divided Mr. Neal and Mr. Batenic from the other three Council members was one requiring “exterior building paint colors” to be “subtle, neutral and earth tone colors.”
“That level of detail needs to be more of a community-led decision, rather than a Council [decision],” Mr. Neal said, noting that many of the town’s flat tops wouldn’t meet this requirement.
Councilwoman Sherlock, who was the most vocal in opposing the Mayor Pro Tem’s suggestions, responded: “I think that’s what our community wants in the commercial area. They don’t want some glaring . . . [trickle off inaudibly] I don’t think they want the big, bright-colored buildings. They don’t want the yellow building.”
Mr. Neal replied that he knows “some who wouldn’t care,” and that Ms. Sherlock would be surprised by opinions in town outside of the Council’s “limited circles.”
[We represent such an opinion and prefer a colorful and beachy look in the Town’s commercial buildings to the “neutral,” cookie-cutter façades we currently see at The Marketplace. Not every colorful building is garish.]
Mr. Neal also commented upon the lack of specificity in the adjectives, “neutral” and “subtle,” which may be evaluated differently depending on the eye of the beholder. We note that even the description, “earth tone,” is subject to interpretation, and every effort should be made in legislation to enact unambiguous, precise terms that make clear the intent of the Council.
Mr. Neal quoted from the newly updated Land Use Plan—which the Town Council unanimously approved later in the meeting—to support his position.
“When creating building design standards,” he read from p. 102 of the LUP, “the community should be involved in the process.”
Saying that they “don’t do anything” or “add anything” to the new ordinance, Mr. Neal also argued in favor of deleting the following two design standards:
“Architectural embellishments with a coastal design that add visual interest are encouraged.” (No. 8)
“Low impact development techniques utilized to mitigate potential stormwater impacts are encouraged.” (No. 9)
Clearly, to “encourage” commercial property owners to do something is not the same as to hold them to an enforceable standard, which all Council members recognized. We would have deleted this language for that reason. Mr. Neal noted that the concept of a “coastal architectural style” is very broad, and, again, Mr. Batenic supported him.
Mayor Elizabeth Morey, Councilman Rob Neilson, and Councilwoman Sherlock all said they “like” these two “standards,” and Ms. Sherlock observed that, despite the lack of enforceability, they are a “message about what we want businesses to aspire to.”
Mr. Batenic took issue with another standard that reads: “Building elements that resemble animals, lighthouses, castles or pirate ships are prohibited.” (No. 11)
The Councilman noted that “you could have lollipops” or other elements not singled out in the standards, and said he thought “the whole idea was not to have anything on the outside.”
“You could make a prohibited emblems list a mile long,” Mr. Neal said.
Ms. Sherlock recalled that she asked Mr. Haskett at the June meeting about this standard and posed the hypothetical of having a slice of pizza on the outside: Would that be permissible?
Mr. Haskett distinguished “building elements” from signs and said he thought the pizza slice would be interpreted as a sign, which would be regulated by the Town’s sign ordinance.
The word “element” was not defined in ZTA 24-03.
No one suggested deleting this standard or rewriting it so that the intent behind the prohibition would be effectuated without listing specific “elements.”
Finished vs. Floor Area Ratio
Mr. Neal again brought up the ZTA’s use of the term, “finished area,” which it defines by referring to the definition in the Town Code for “living space.”
At the June meeting, Mr. Neal said that he was not familiar with the ZTA’s terms of “finished area” and “finished area ratio” and explained that professional builders use the standards of “floor area” and “floor area ratio.”
Mr. Neal said that “floor area,” which he defined as “all square footage within the exterior walls” of a building, is typically used to control density on a commercial property. The floor area ratio is derived by dividing the floor area by the building lot area.
Under the new ordinance, the square footage of the “finished area,” which as “living space” is essentially the area usable for human habitation, is divided by the land area to arrive at a required “finished area ratio” for buildings in the commercial district. This ratio is limited to 0.35 in one of the new design standards. (No. 10)
Mr. Neal noted at the July meeting that “finished area” is “subject to change” because some of the square footage considered uninhabitable could be converted to “living space” and vice versa.
“I’d like it to be more immutable, personally,” he said, but he eventually withdrew his objection to the new term, provided Deputy Town Manager/Planning Director Wes Haskett redefines it so that it has a separate definition, apart from “living space.”
The new definition was not made part of the motion that resulted in the ZTA being adopted nor did the Council provide a definition.
We believe the issue of density and what building area to consider is of more relevance in a mixed-use development, than in a traditional commercial development where there is no residential space.
If SAGA Realty & Construction had been limited to a finished area ratio of 0.35 in the buildings it proposed for its Ginguite Creek property, one Planning Board member informed us, the living space in its buildings would have been reduced.
According to the new LUP, Southern Shores’ commercial district is 38 acres, or 2 percent of the town’s land area.
According to the current Land Use Plan, which was certified by the N.C. Coastal Resources Commission in 2012, the commercial district is 56 acres, or 2.6 percent of the town’s total land area of 2,175 acres.
We wonder why there is this discrepancy.
As noted above, ZTA 24-03 eventually passed, by a 3-2 vote, with just a one-word change. Although the one word is a significant one—changing “shall” to “may”—in a section pertaining to the submission of a site plan review of a proposed development for new construction or substantial improvements in the general commercial district, we exercise our prerogative not to probe this esoterica further. The new ordinance does not change the fact that the Planning Board will scrutinize all sketch plan reviews.
ZTA 24-03 also changes the off-street parking requirements in the Town Code (Sec. 36-163) by allowing a business to reduce its required parking by one space for every 20 parking spaces, if it plants a shade tree instead. The Town Council unanimously supported this amendment.
The Council’s discussion about the design standards ended with Mr. Neal saying, “This document doesn’t get us there,” and Councilwoman Sherlock responding, “But it’s a step in the right direction.”
By Ann G. Sjoerdsma, 7/16/24
The Southern Shores Beacon 