giving us the invitation i will remain standing for the pledge of allegiance let's pray devin father we just thank you for this day father god we just thank you for all you do and all you're going to do always continue to bless us and go about your business taking care of business for the city of greenwood father god please continue to protect the citizens of south carolina and all of the world father god in your name we do pray amen amen and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all i'm not used to this i thought this is the worst session well it is but we've got i need some business to attend to also um in accordance with the freedom of information night chapter 4 title 30 go to laws of south carolina 1976. an agenda has been posted on the front door city of hall meeting has been given to the news media it appears we do have a quorum is that correct all right okay you think we have a proposed executive session up first that's correct [Music] i'll make a motion to um go into executive session discuss a contractual matter with greenwood county and possible action afterwards secondary we have a motion by mr bass second by miss bones any further discussion about going into executive session all in favor of going into executive session to consider just a contractual matter with greenwood county with potential action to be taken upon our turn that motion carries unanimously with six votes all right can i hear any other motions mr man i'd like to make a motion to authorize the city manager to enter into an agreement with the for automatic fire aid with greenwood county second i have a motion by mr bass second by ms hutto brings us to the discussion portion of it um you want to run us through that sure so well it's clear this is just a brief powerpoint that's going to kind of cover the high point can i ask real quick these pictures look like they're with this florida state flag there i have to ask you about that i didn't make those pictures take that up with the chief back there or chris pierce all right pierce does that with every truck that they they manufacture they take that picture and bring it to purchase i thought it was a carolina flag you would think they would transpose your state flag you may should suggest yeah i was talking fierce so as you all know we've been discussing uh automatic aid with the county for i believe about two and a half years what is presented tonight is an agreement that has already passed county council last month we're just going to cover the hot points for the benefit of those in attendance tonight essentially what's going to happen is there will be four adjacent districts the one the the four county fire districts that are adjacent to the city the city will provide automatic response to structure fires uh the responsible and then and in turn the county will respond to all structure fires within the city limits everyone will respond from the closest station um will and with the most appropriate apparatus here's kind of the high points uh again the most appropriate unit will respond the four adjacent fire districts are northwest highway 34 corniche and promised land those are the ones that the city will respond out into into the county and and by nature of the title of the agreement this will be automatic so 9-1-1 will tone the city in the same way they told the county both both fire departments will roll to that fire and depending on the severity of the scene they may turn the city around we may turn the county around if we're there first and we know we can handle or vice versa there may be times when the county might arrive on a city fire scene before us and they take command of that fire scene it may happen vice versa in the county but essentially we'll be working together to provide the highest quality fire service in the city and in these four adjacent districts it's a requirement that that each responding apparatus must have at least on-duty staff two-personnel minimum firefighter one certified this is only for structure fires and or contents of residential commercial and industrial structures first responder incidents are not included in this automatic aid agreement any call outside of the response boundary which we'll have a map up here in just a moment it's considered mutual aid we already have a mutual aid agreement in place with the county that operates very well we'll keep that in place so if outside of these boundaries if mutual aid is needed uh we'll operate under that and that the county will notify us that they need assistance and if we are available and we have equipment to help them and respond we will and same part in the city they'll respond and assist us as well with entrapment if we know there's entrapment and it's in the county we will respond and nothing changes in that regard also greenwood county will include the city and discussions for the location design the new fire training center which is included in the capital project sales tax similar to uh i say this more so for for maybe the benefit of the index journal there's a state law regarding reimbursement of police officers so if you hire a police officer and then abbyville hires that police officer within two years they have to reimburse you the jurisdiction that you left for training and other things so we have a similar clause in this agreement with the county that basically says if you after we have somebody gone through the academy they're trained firefighter two if they're hired within two years you have to reimburse the other agency for um the training associated with that individual and their equipment you know bunker gears helmets which are things that are very specific to that individual because obviously i couldn't wear austin's bunker gear and he couldn't wear mine so i mean you never know but it would be a little big on me we have a hazmat agreement already with the county we've had it for several years it will remain in place just as it is now this doesn't change that um and then there is an option to withdraw from this agreement if you know things don't go as written which i do not foresee with a three month notice up until september 2024 and afterwards a six month notice here are the four districts that are adjacent to the city they're included in the automatic aid agreement for the city and then obviously the county will respond to any fire any structure fire within the city limits um we have obviously there's some things to do before this rolls out so we attended the date of november the first the fire departments their administrative staffs are already working together to put in some appropriate policies and procedures and make sure everybody's running the same way and making sure that 9-1-1 is is going to tone things the way that they should be toned and so once we have all those little kinks worked out and we we're certain that everyone is on the same page then this will roll out tentatively november the 1st i'll entertain any questions the chiefs are here as well if you have any questions with them i think one bullet point that you um was on previous time every two back is that um that chief strange feels very confident this will not change our iso truck high rating um i think that was just one other point that i would want to know as a city resident about this sure to that point you're right i did kind of skim over that bullet kind of quickly uh it will actually enhance our iso with additional personnel responding into the city and additional apparatus responding into the city um again you know when you enter agreements like this the goal is to make sure they're mutually beneficial so it's going to have as much benefit to the county as it is to the city and there's going to be some some things to work through but you know if you if you really think about it a lot of the county staff works for the city a lot of their volunteers already are city fire employees so um when we get a response from the county the likelihood that this is somebody that already works for us is very high and they're off duty so we're getting our own personnel really while they're working for the county or while they're on a volunteer basis yes thank you all right any further discussion regarding the proposal to authorize the city manager to enter into an agreement for automatic fire aid with greenwood county all right all in favor of authorizing the city manager to enter into an agreement for automatic fire aid with greenwood county mr miller yeah all right that motion carries unanimously to seven votes thank you we have a couple items under new business in this special called meeting uh the first one is to consider acceptance of the 2021 audit as presented by manly garvin and so i'm going to turn the floor over to you luke vickery he's going to present the audit you do have a copy of the audit at your desk and also a handout from a handout from manly garments we do apologize for the delay and typically we present the audit to you all in april or may uh you can see that luke had a surgery here and then there were just a lot of delays with um just throw a plethora of things but we are confident now in the presentation that manly garment is going to give so mr vickery mr callister good ceo absolutely uh again my name is luke vicker i'm a cpa at manly garden i've been working the city and sarah in one capacity another since 2019 we took over the audit and so again as julie mentioned a few bumps in the road along the way none of which you know really could be helped um you know sarah's team did a great job getting things wrapped up you know uh and we're pleased to present you the audit today um again so obviously the finance the finance tips of the city are december 31 2021 um so it's a little bit dated but obviously this is something you know required to be presented to you guys and so i'll try to be brief but i want to be as in depth as needed so through any questions just stop me along the way uh we'll we'll go in as in depth as needed but otherwise i'll try to uh to keep it brief and hit you with the highlights the first thing i'll start off with is the audit the financing it's a little handout it's a it's a summary essentially of what i'm presenting for you tonight in summary sky high view you were presented unmodified which is the highest level opinion we can give the city it's a clean opinion on the city's financial statements as of december 31 2021 um again highest opinion that we can issue uh the report is dated as of today again apologies for the delays uh there uh overview of the financial statements and again we'll dive into these a little bit the general fund decreased by approximately three hundred ninety five thousand dollars um you're we have a trend analysis behind this we'll take a look at hospitality increased by about 1.26 million in fund balance and the non-major funds increased by about 156 000 uh we had unmodified opinions which is again the highest opinion we give over internal patrol and finance reporting and compliance talk about a little bit what that means as we get thrown but again clean single out opinion which is related to federal expenditures no findings there uh happy to present that to you tonight so if you flip over uh we have the uh general fund analysis and this is something really i like to put all my my boards with their non-profit or as a governmental entity to look at so the gfoa recommends that you have two months minimum fund balance uh at year end me and brandon had a question about this i'm sorry what is the recommended maximum two to six months let's get in there okay thank you man two to six months so you guys are right there at five months uh you know you saw a little decrease from 20 to 21 uh by you know approximately a month you know a lot of that was related to the federal uh funding that came through through 2020 the pandemic but if you look at five-year announcements you guys are trembling up from about four months on average and now about five months so good news from that standpoint again five months fund balance in the general fund there uh anybody any questions on that any additional questions all right well let's move on uh the next thing we'll talk about is the financial statements this is the big package about 53 pages and again i'll try to hit you with the highlights one thing i'd like to i like to stop at is the actual audit opinion um this year if you've ever read one of these in depth um you know it can be very uh tedious to get through but this year the opinion changed pretty significantly and i i think for the better again we're presenting a clean opinion with the highest opinion you that we as authors can give your financial statements and that that means essentially that uh we believe they're materially correct uh if you read this and again i would encourage you to because i think it's become a lot more plain english it talks about the uh responsibilities of management which previously was not in there and that's essentially to uh design implement internal controls and then he talks about preparing the financial statements uh you know they're required as management required to uh talk to to look at and make sure they can continue for 12 months uh go and concern and uh and so on and so then if you look at the auditor's responsibilities talks about us and so there's a few really bullet point that i like to hit on and talks about we come in as auditors and we exercise professional judgment you know if i talk to sarah's team and they give me an answer and i'll just take that uh you know for granted i go in and check uh you know makes make sure kick the tires um we go in we assess grip so you know obviously you know we think some odd areas are higher risk than others talk about we get understanding of internal controls and we evaluate estimates that uh that sarah's team gives us in the financial statements so again highest level opinion we can give just high level there i would really encourage you to read it because i do think it's gotten a lot better a little bit more plain english that said if you flip over to page 10 of the financial statements this is the statement net position uh this is i just like to hit this is that the biggest change from past year is you guys paid off all your debt uh during the year which is uh excellent um thing to to point out so you'll see uh no lineup for debt there that's the government-wide and so if we'll flip over to where i like to spend most of the time for purposes of analysis is page 12. and it's essentially the the funds and we have the general fund the new fund which is the american rescue plan act again that was part of a joe biden's bill related to covid19 you'll see that the big number right there is uh this due to the city as of 12 31 21 is about 3.3 million 756 thousand dollars the hospitality tax you'll see there your big item is restricted cash about 3.5 million dollars and your non-major funds right there about 500 and 573 thousand dollars restricted cash um again big item here he's got about eight million dollars a fund mouse in the general fund uh hospitality is about four million so that's again your balance sheet for the funds and where i would encourage you spend time if you're going to do any analysis uh as a council next thing i'd like to point out in just a high level is on page 14 that is essentially the income statement of the funds it's a statement of revenue and expenditures and changes to fund balance uh big items here is obviously no surprise tax revenue is the biggest for the general fund about six million dollars last year lexus comes right behind that about four million dollars uh you see again as we mentioned the change in uh fund balance of the general phone is about a loss three hundred ninety five thousand dollars hospitality an increase of one million two hundred seventy five thousand and non-major funds 156 000 again you'll see uh the american rescue playing out you guys spend about 2 million 69 000 as of 12 31 21 obviously we know that's changed since then you've spent more than that but as of 12 31 21 you spent 2 million any questions there all right well moving right along i won't spend much more time on the notes you know those are uh important to the purpose of the financial statements but uh for for this presentation i will just leave you with they are important to read although they also are good sleeping the next thing i'd like to talk about is the actual single this is next small report says the uniform guidance report so this is required anytime a government or non-profit uh expends more than 750 thousand dollars of federal funds the page attempt uh it's it's it's a separate report small report it's on the back it's towards the back towards the back [Applause] [Applause] kept going i just want to make sure that you get separated so talk about a little bit of what this is anytime a government nonprofit spends over 750 000 of federal funding we're required to come in and have what is essentially called a single audit so it's a separate type of audit from your financial statement audit and essentially what it boils down to is internal controls over your federal funds and compliance did you spend them in compliance with the federal government so we come in and do a bunch more testing over these funds spend a lot of time with sarah on these and if you'll flip over what is it page one of mine i'm not sure page number wise which you guys have but it's the number it's the page with numbers on it's only page on in the report you'll see again you spent two million sixty nine thousand one hundred twenty dollars of the co-vid19 american recipe plan act um you know that that primarily came from the american rescue plan act um and that is the reason you had a single audit this year again we spent a lot of time in internal controls compliance and the uh primary thing in this report is there's no findings over those you spit those uh you know in compliance we didn't find any internal control uh issues in related to those funds uh which is which is uh hats off to sarah and her team i know this came fast and heavy and there was a lot of guidance to get through in order to figure out what you're supposed to do with that so uh uh you know hats off to her team uh and the last thing i'll i'll present to you is what we call our board report sas 114 reports report city council if you're gonna if you want to understand you know more of a plain english version of the audit this is where i would encourage you to start this report primarily came as a template from the aicpa in response to um you know a lot of the accounting fiascoes of the early 2000's the world comes in runs and what they found was that your auditors were not talking to council they weren't talking to the board members and so this is required it's a it's a boilerplate template of information that we are required to give the board it is a more plain english version of the audit uh the audit process it really talks about how we came in we plan the audit which uh talks about the materiality level of it again we don't order every single penny there's some materiality that's involved here how we assess risk in each area then we you know identify hey where we think the high risks are we kick the tires real hard there and you know uh uh kick off tires equally you know in other areas but maybe not to the level that we think the highest risk is uh you'll you'll see that if there was any audit adjustments we proposed they would be in here and we would require to tell them to they would there were not and then the last at the back of it you'll see the written representations we're required uh to get from management those come from sarah and julie and essentially that just says you know they've given us everything we've asked for they haven't hidden anything uh again a boilerplate template but uh we're worth reading for management representations uh well that says is there any questions on the 1231 21r what do you mean by materiality okay um so in a plain english uh version uh you know for walmart if they misplaced a million dollars it may not be a big deal it's a billion billion dollar company uh for the city if they misplace a million dollars it would have a major issue yes yes so so materiality is a calculation that we get is we calculate as orders and you know i'm not allowed to disclose what that number is but materiality to a threshold we say okay this would materially misstate the financial statement so it's probably it's not a dollar so it's almost like a percentage yes it is so if we have if this is our revenue it would be a percentage of revenue that would be so materiality is based on it it's a percentage yes it's a percentage it can be based off your revenue your assets your expenses you calculate a number of different ways and we do and we take an average sometimes uh and so we arrive at this number and that's what we've defined as materiality okay and the other question is which areas are the areas of highest risk in the accounting world so i'm not sure i'm illegally allowed to disclose what we uh that may be uh but okay i can go on here uh i would have to get permission from the boss um i can tell you he said typically revenue cash so so whenever there's cash assets that come in that basically that would be your highest risk of where money could filter out yeah your risk of cash is that there are there are cash accounts that are not on the city's books we have ways to determine that we do use some outside third party confirmation services um they don't give us a lot of detail other than what the balance was that particular thing you know that we asked for uh revenues again you know that's that's just management of a variety of controls that would be someone asking sarah hey can you make this journal entry to move this and you know from here to there but nothing you know when we say high risk um a lot of that is determined based off of our testing as well and so we we do some pretty in-depth internal control testing over certain areas to try and mitigate the risk for being high now some of them are just inherently high risk and like you said cash is a good example revenue is another good example which they kind of go hand in hands right um but for the most part those are your major risky areas now there are some other abilities so when you do the audit you also look at our internal controls and when you give us an unmodified um report if there was a problem with our internal controls that's what you're basically here for am i pretty much some i mean well the financial statement is not specifically designed to identify internal control issues now if they come up as a result of our testing we would put those in writing to them that said there was none but uh you know we could we can't say for 100 sure there's not there's not issues because again like management override controls those that would be very difficult to identify okay all right do you have any recommendations that you would offer for finance to improve on uh no ma'am uh you know i think some of the things that you know we work through um initially uh as uh you know um the kind of the the turnover in cfo you know that was filled very quickly and pro and promptly i think sarah did an excellent job so i think some of those may have been identified and they were rectified along the way any other questions from manly carving we're going to let you sit down i've been sitting down for six weeks i'm thank you luke appreciate it i hear a motion with regard to acceptance of the 2022 2021 audit make sure to accept the 2021 audit second i have a motion by ms hutto second by miss bowles any further discussion regarding acceptance of the 2021 audit is presented by manly garden all right all in favor of acceptance of the 2021 audit mr miller yes all right that motion carries unanimously with seven votes i'd like to just um commend sarah and her staff for the hard work i know that like luke said we had a lot of turnover at the cfo you know level it was a lot overcome we had a lot of software challenges appreciate council's patience while we worked through all those pieces i know several councilmembers kept saying when are we going to get the auto when are we going to get the audit and i finally said guys really need to audit and luke's like just kidding i'm having surgery so we just had a lot um a lot of obstacles like he said that really could not have been avoided and so we appreciate patience and we appreciate you know sarah's hard work and manly garmin work with us through those challenges um absolutely sarah thank you thrust into a difficult situation and not just you but your team as well so thank you um we did just get the copy today so i have it electronically but we printed it out for purposes of the meeting i can send it to you i'll send it to you electronically as well we'll put it in your um dropbox so that you have an electronic copy in there as well appreciate it all right and i know mr miller didn't get a copy so mr miller we'll put in dropbox okay okay okay thanks yep no problem all right under our next new business item this is to consider ordinance number 22-020 which amends ordinance number 0310 which is the master plan residential zoning district council had a previously approved this npr i believe in 2019 since that time we've had a few developers that have requested this zoning the reason that it's on the agenda tonight is because in the last three meetings count several council members have requested that we pro that we as a staff propose uh what i would classify as maybe more of a slimmed down version of our existing npr after discussing it internally with carol and draper and i don't know draper are you on the call we're supposed to text him i'm here okay great i forgot to text you um draper worked with carol um and myself and ryan we all kind of you know batted around a bunch of ideas and came up with um the version that's presented to you tonight in the packet tiffany do you have that packet do you have a packet yes okay so we're gonna click through here i'm gonna uh draper made these slides but he's out of town so i'm gonna cover them and if i missed something he can he can chime in and carol is here as well so we'll kind of um we'll double down on this and answer any questions that you guys have but if you look in the packet that we provided to you you have a redline version which is actually a blue line version of the proposed npr the the major changes are this um you have to have a site plan which was which was required before but now the only thing that's required there's a number of lots of setbacks the density the streets and the open space that's that's proposed for the development then you have to have a narrative that hits on these items here so the name the types of housing as in like single family multi-family town houses whatever it might be how the parcels are going to be laid out again the open space if there are amenities where are they what are they um and then your infrastructure as in like where are your utilities located you know making sure that you have all that infrastructure accounted for uh the density in units per acre housing type and number of dwellings so you may have a you may have a development that has um single-family homes and townhomes so that's what that is designed for there again lot sizes and then uh intended design saying this is what our landscaping is going to look like this is generally what the architecture is going to look like but not locking that developer into a specific elevation of what the houses may or may not look like you said not locking them in correct uh into a specific elevation you know they're not going to show a picture of your house and say this is what all the houses are going to look like they don't have to provide that they just have to provide the density the layout of the you know if they say we're going to build 179 houses their site plan shows 179 houses there's only 179 houses here's the lot size we're building single family homes not necessarily the specific this is what the house is doing because sometimes the developer's not the builder i i would say that more often than not and i don't know mr mayor if this is um maybe carol knows but um we've just seen so much residential growth lately i think we're just learning a lot as a staff as we go and i i don't know if that's historically the way it's been but what i've seen is a trend towards these folks who were coming in and doing the land development and building the houses they're not doing that anymore they're just going in developing the property putting in the infrastructure and then they're selling it to another building so based on that we're going to see this twice every single time a development comes down is that right see what twice somebody's going to have to come to us twice the developer's going to come in and develop the proper i mean the um they're going to come in but i think this is going to eliminate it right so whoever gets the zoning will if they want this npr they will present to you i'm an r3 and i want to go to npr then let's just use four star as an example because that's the most recent one we've talked about so they they have provided you with a proposed site plan for east cambridge right okay and that's sufficient for the whole side plan ma'am yeah yeah so i'm just using them as an example they've already stated that look we're just putting in the infrastructure and we're selling it to a builder we don't know who our builder is going to be so if you were to approve npr for that one just as an example that site plan follows well the mpr which includes the site plan follows that parcel so when they sell it to a builder the builder is locked into the npr zoning that was presented to council at that time so and you'll see right here how do you make changes so unless there is a major change it doesn't come back to council the thing is we the problem had been that we would get this developer and say hey this is what we're going to do but the zoning itself in that r3 or r4 let's say let's say it's r7 zoning wouldn't hold you to that site plan now we have a zoning that will hold you to that site plan so you can say to the general public they're only going to build 120 houses and in our four they could have built 225 houses but because of this site plan they can only build these many houses and it in that site plan also tells them what kind of housing whether it's single family whatever so if they're saying we're going to build 25 single families and we're going to build a 150 you know duplexes it's got to be 25 single family and so this is a way that we can honestly tell our constituents this is the number of housing this is the way it's going to look this is the open space without having to worry about the elevation and the elevation basically says you know is it going to be two-story is it going to be single-family is it me single level what is it going to the house going to look like no other most zoning doesn't tell you what a house is going to look like but this will basically specify what the development as far as the ground is going to look like the use of the land use of land but not necessarily the house itself correct well it could tell you what type of house yeah single family duplex patio home zero lot light it'll give you an idea and it but you'll also see the size of the lot the size of the lot will stay specific the size of the green space will stay specific where the retention pond is will stay i mean where the roads are all that will be basically tied so it will be deeded to that property within that npr district zoning similar to if you if i bought a piece of property from nikki and it was owned institutional professional when i buy it it's institutional professional so if i buy it from nikki and smpr i'm buying it as npr just like a pdd if i buy a piece of property and it's owned pdd i'm buying that pdd right and i'm locked into whatever that pdd says because when nikki owned it council approved it as a pdd and here's the plan if i want to change it then i have to come back through the process and so that's it's basically the same thing it's just is the npr i think the general consensus of at least the council members who asked staff to bring a proposal forward was that it was so cumbersome that developers were not choosing it right and it was a little bit tying their hands specifically because of the way the model seems to be trending i don't know if it's always been that way that you have a land developer and then a builder but i've seen this transition in the last three years where it's like you have both and then suddenly now you just have land developers and builders but what i what i found historically in greenwood is that when we had our local builders they bought the land they built the house okay and they even sometimes let other builders come in and build on their lots however when you have a national builders and this is the first time greenwood has seen in the last three years is the first time greenwood has seen national builders national builders don't do the development first they have their scouts that go out develop the land and then swap over because that's just the way they operate local builders don't operate that way because they they buy a smaller piece of land so before until after 2020 before 2020 we didn't have any national builders we had all local builders they just operate in a different different mechanism how many had since we since we passed the npr in 2019 has anybody take it has anybody used it just one just seven oaks yeah this is the one was the one on florida high school was the one on florida avenue npr oh it's not i can't remember but i know at least so i know at least the one across from greenwood florida okay so there are two okay you said it is draper yes it is okay i thought so that was the same developer and they did they did npr for both of theirs essentially what we did here was amended the existing ordinance to make it a little bit more streamlined um and then if you see here these are some optional items that council can require if they want to if you want a traffic study you can require it a phasing plan if you want a landscape plan you can say we want that before we make a decision but it's not required up front i tell you this is i think all of us that have had to deal with with the expansion of the city of rezoning for these developments this is what this is what constituents want okay they want reassurance what is planning you were planning right yes what is your opinion my only concern and i think it came up in the previous meeting is that we're getting awfully close to contract zoning i mean plan development districts are a legal form of contract zoning in the state they are enabled by the state uh playing enabling legislation and i think you can have another district that's very similar to what we call a pud but i think you want to make sure that there's some maybe incentive or some reason you know i understand the density and the things you're trying to get something for giving the developer something and you want to make sure you're tied to it but i wouldn't want to see anything that just said you have to do this this this this and this in order to get this zoning um i think i think there should be kind of an exchange in there and it should be built into the language as well because i think it the like the discussion did come up a very short discussion though that it could be construed as contract zoning and i don't want to i don't want to go there so is there anything with this proposed blue line agreement that you have any issues with that we need to be aware of only only to make sure that we have something either in the intense statement and and trevor talked about it like at the bot at the bottom of the page in the blue line conditions for approval there are some things in there that you might not see in straight zoning that might offer some options for a developer like i said a density bonus or something along those lines like this you're talking about 3.2.12 3.2.12.5 right yes this is the one that you called me about this morning and i think miss bowles asked about it as well and we talked about the potential of leaving it in if you felt like that was something that i think that i think that would go somewhere towards doing it might not even have to use the same language but just have something in there sure to give to let them read it and say oh this this has given us flexibility yeah they're asking for more but we're getting some flexibility also and then also draper and i have long discussions about making sure that we had language in there on what to do if they did come back and say we need to make some changes which is here minor changes at the administrative level they wouldn't have to come back to you but they would be clearly explained in language here what those minor changes can be um major changes would have to go back to planning commission and come back to you the minor changes are not defined i don't think are they basically it's just if it's not this then it's minor yeah it's not these things here so any of these things listed here changing like so intensity of use going from single family to multi-family 10 increase in traffic 10 percent increase in youtube going from multi-family to single family could probably happen at the administrative level but that's not what it says right now i never know but that's what see those are those are major changes well i know that's what i'm saying is he's he's giving you a threshold from what is a major change if they're asking for changes that don't meet that threshold then they may be considered a minor change we can split spell it out but that's it i don't mean to get too much in the weeds here but is it a is it a major change if you increase traffic when a traffic study is optional that's going to be that's a tough call i mean because you can't really tell i mean without putting numbers to it i can't really tell you what an increase of traffic really means but i mean if you're talking about going that's a good example of going from single family to multi-family if you're going from this is a low number of 10 single-family units to 30 multi-family units even though multi-family units generate lesser traffic typically than single-family you know you're going to increase traffic because you have more units i think these opportunities for staff level approval provide flexibility for the planning director to make a call about yes i feel this is something that can be approved at the staff level or it needs to come back through and it counts if it's me i'm going to err on the side of caution unless i'm very clear about it i've done that before for some people thought ridiculous reasons one concern on putting so much um definition to the plan coming out of the zoning phase is that quite often you're not going to have that much research done at that level but that just means that they can they may walk away from it somebody else may come in and pick it up yeah and just getting back to 3.2.12.5 [Laughter] what was struck through i don't necessarily have any issues with striking through it as a mandatory condition for approval right i just wanted i thought it was beneficial to leave those in as as you know things that we encouraged yes encourage the sex suggestion because i mean i think the intent when they wrote it was that they were trying to encourage more creative development and correct to be innovative that's what types were for and what we saw for years what i've seen in south carolina for 20 years is that everybody was coming in to get five foot side yard setbacks there was nothing creative about it whatsoever they were trying to make it easier to slap a bunch of houses on a piece of property i mean like it in particular the tree the savings the tree can be like to me that's the thing that i talk to developers about every time i meet with them is they just come in and just clear the car it's so frustrating and well i always tell them that's going to help your stormwater numbers significantly make it more crazy because these conditions should change as you cluster houses let's put them right and we just put them back in we'll put them in and when you cluster housing and that's the incentive if you cluster yes you can get smaller locks if you cluster that way you can leave untouched areas which it's better for storm water which is better for your tree canopy which is better for the environment so clustering absolutely but getting it is it's less expensive for the developer in that they have less linear feet to put in infrastructure you know the that's where their cost is if you've got an option between a 50 foot wide lot or required 70 foot wide lot the 50 foot wide lot's gonna be a lot cheaper to lay down um the one thing that some people kind of bristle at when you talk about cluster housing is that they're scared that someone's going to come in later and develop the area that was left open they can be right with that i think that's been our biggest concern this is how you make it happen that's okay yeah so like for instance the property that julia sorry right no the the property that julie was talking about referring to earlier that development they're they're they're using the cluster right but there's a lot of property this but but from from topography standpoint they cannot use that property right but what if yeah what if there is something that comes through and i'm telling you the folks that call us and are are saying no this is what they're going to do and they have this idea that this is exactly what this developer's going to do and you say that's not the plan they've given us they're not going to do that i've been told they're not going to do it and then two years down the road they sell it off and they do it um not that it we we've lied to the people that it's going to be affecting the most i mean you know in their mind right so but based on information that's that's the reassurance that this does give us that people are going to do what they say they're going to do is exactly what we've been looking for so and you're giving them the benefit of developing at a number where the gross density on the overall property does not exceed what they came in with in the first place and does not see what's allowed but they're just able to do it in a smaller amount of space and then councilman huddle said absolutely that's a that's smart development carol can i ask you a question bob um i don't think this is too far away from this but can you if you're gonna if you're gonna introduce impact fees on your on on developments um can you do it for specific zoning or does it have to be across the board i would think it would have to be across the board i know that you can do it for different types of development like the first one could be a sewer fee for example you could have one a separate one for recreation purposes so you couldn't just do impact fee for high density haven't seen it done that way but i mean i'm not i'm not an expert so okay maybe something to explore i think if we from my conversations with other like city managers if we if council wanted to explore impact fees we would really need to bring somebody in to to do an assessment for us um you know we get we get these folks that come in and they say they wanted a r15 and they're not using the r15 they're only trying to make it fit for this very specific purpose if you want an r15 then you have to pay major impact fees based on the density it could be in my opinion and then so um so you better make the the zoning that we have based on the density that you're actually going to use work i don't think you can apply the the impact fees until you come in at the development stage yeah so this this council's never assessed impact fees and and i would contend at least from my standpoint i'm not sure i have a complete and full understanding of them because we've never implemented it complete opposite would that be a lawrence flynn question i always like to ask tripp first if he wants to do it one of tripp's strengths is that he acknowledges when he's not in his in his wheelhouse i i will say that you know the threat that i've heard for two decades is that um if you if you institute impact fees development's going to stop because they're just going to pass it on to the to the buyer i think it really depends on the locale and and the strength of the market and the present location whether the impact fee is going to hinder or not i mean and again the reason why we had the encouragement we had where we actually had incentivized development was because until the last few years it was only the local builders that were building in greenwood we we couldn't get a national builder even to even come and take a look at greenwood yeah but i'm just thinking if there was any way to incentivize low-density housing which is what our community really wants um then i i would just i think it would be great i think the market would drive a little bit yeah i know that's that's what our community's been pretty clear about that i mean development and developers know their metrics i mean they wouldn't be coming if they didn't think they could make money we appreciate the interest but obviously we want to do it responsibly so i think that's a good i'd like to uh just before we get too far off of the topic about the conditions for approval i think maybe what um i'm hearing y'all say even from phone calls from council members i got earlier in the day was potentially make these conditions for approval these encouraging things you do this you get this like protect the tree canopy and you get this or whatever i think we can work those into the narrative section of this new ordinance to have them included there or somewhere else within this ordinance you can but you've got to have it explained in here that's what i'm saying yeah so there's a abc so a is site plan b is written development narrative and c is other so i think we can work it in because it sounds like generally and still vote on it this evening not without the changes is there any urgency that we need to vote on this tonight at all yeah well can't we make a motion i guess to approve it with those additions i guess you could make a motion to approve it by leaving that section in the right point in some form or fashion i mean again i think the the condition of the 3.2.12.5 that was blue line through says shadow and that's the legal buzzword that we probably want to avoid but we also want to encourage so if we could leave it in as as in terms of you know something to be encouraged but not a something that's mandatory i think we could probably do that by saying you know owing to the fact that you're trying to create innovative and smart development because you've got something in the in the intense statement that i think we can borrow and put down there these things these are options for getting to that you know that point i i'm i'm not a i'm not a planning director so uh and draper i know he may have something he wants to say but i don't particularly see any reason why i couldn't be a show do you yeah no i i struck this section because it's just made it cleaner it was you know trying to streamline the ordinance um i think it'd be really easy to to just amend it to make it optional and curt and have that encouragement that both julie and carol are talking about okay this still gonna have to go to planning anyway right yes yes they have a special card meeting on next monday yeah we what time it's 11. okay so so to comment on the question that somebody asked over here do we have to vote on it who said that best okay um i found the line was npr's owning districts which is only but npr districts are intended to promote creative and innovative design by highlighting uh neighborhood character and complimenting these land uses pulls similar language down to that 3.2 point 12.5 yeah okay all right um when y'all get ready to make your motion she can repeat that if you need to but if you don't want to make a motion you don't have to i want to explain why it's on the agenda tonight so the last three meetings this has come up by three council members who brought this up and said we really wish you would staff would present an option to us for xyz and so in in the the conversation keeps coming up in relation to the two rezonings that we have on the table right now which are public hearing on the 19th which is the marshall road and the east cambridge which is our awards two and three and we wanted to as a staff be able to present something to council that if you want to vote on this tonight you can take second reading on the 19th and then if you wanted to make a motion to apply this new npr to those developments you could do that if you don't want to do that you don't have to take a vote on this tonight you can table this we can bring it back on the 19th and you can take first reading but on the 19th you will be presented with a public hearing and a second reading on those two developments one going from ip to r7 and one going from r3 to r4 if you don't have this in place you don't have the option for this you can you can make a motion for npr as it exists now that won't happen but you won't be able to utilize the new language which is fine it's up to this council but if we didn't have this prepared for you you wouldn't have the option so now all options are available to you you can table this we can bring it back later but we've advertised the public hearing for the two items the two planning items for east cambridge and marshall so they will be on the agenda for the 19th now you can table those too if you don't want to take a vote on them but i think the council's indicated pretty clearly that when you advertise for a public hearing you really like to go ahead and have the public yeah no i i don't know there's any reason necessarily to table this well i know we didn't get an opportunity to talk about it work session um and typically we do but this was the only timeline available to us and so we're presenting it as an option had we not presented it you wouldn't have had the option so it's just an additional option available to council from a staff level it's up to you how you want to proceed if you want to table it if you want to vote on it if you want to vote it up if you want to vote it down it's up to y'all so you're saying that we make we wait till the 19th they have all the changes made we can't vote on it before we do the public hearing if you were to table this tonight then you would only be able to take first reading on the 19th and you won't be able to you won't be able to use it and it wouldn't be an option and i think this is an option that the public would prefer more so than the others so i think in my opinion this is just me speaking i would go ahead make the motion with the with those changes with additional changes with the additional changes we've discussed and move right on move right along well what happened is planning come back and decide they have some changes that they want additional change that they want to make we over right i mean we don't know the right amount so the recommendations if some changes came forward from planning commission at that meeting at 11 o'clock on monday the 19th you could always incorporate those into your second reading mode okay so i mean there's no reason why you couldn't approve you you honestly could have proved that first reading just says it's written and still make changes before second reading you don't but i mean now if you know you want to make a change i would make the motion with it but i'm saying you know you you don't you don't have to adopt that second reading the exact same thing you adopted that first reading the planning nobody from planning commission has seen it yet i don't believe so no they've seen it they've gotten there a couple of them i sent it out okay and we were trying to schedule a meeting so i want to make sure they knew what we're going to be looking at but i'll send it out whatever whatever you if you if you take a vote today this evening i'll make sure that they get that version also and it's the only thing on the agenda so they can they have some time to work on it all right if they choose to all right any further questions for miss coleman i will point out that i know the timeline seems hurried however at the staff level draper in particular spent a lot of time on this um and he and carol batted this around a good bit and so even though the timeline seems hurried there was a lot of investment on the staff level i think guys made it very clear not to anticipate anything until november so i really appreciate it yeah and we all we all open our our emails on thursday and friday as soon as you get it and spend the entire weekend planning the weekend his brain is tired so carol you went through this already okay and like i said i mean basically the language that i suggested make sure what what i wanted to be is attract still want to make it attractive to the developers so that they like and i know one of the i want you're looking at the one on marshall road i think they could take a couple of those boxes with your plan and i will tell you to do that i think cambridge probably could cambridge is one i was thinking about more i did send this proposed language just so y'all know to the four stars folks um in anticipation because we met with mr jones the last week of the week before while they were there i explained to them hey i mean they've sat through all three meetings they know what you guys have asked for so i sent them this and said this is proposed council's gonna consider this they may approve it they may not but here it is just in case and so she mis miss chasing was like i think this is great you know um and she said that she was going to go ahead and start working on her narrative so that if you all recommended that she would be ready so i mean um just stay on them and i think and i think it gives assurances to the public that they can't they don't have elsewhere and i do think developers are not opting for this because it was so intense in my opinion i mean i'm not saying that this is not also more intensive than just a straight up r7 but i do think this is more doable maybe it's the best thing i don't know i mean the thing is if they if the developer buys it gets the r7 it doesn't do an npr of any form or shape or form r7 you could put a she she tongue more of houses than than you can with what this is this makes me feel a lot better yeah and it puts it into the one of the things that's always annoyed me is speculative zoning changes you know like if someone comes in and says i want to do this in a commercial district what if they don't do that well then i could do this or this or this and you can't control that very very well but if you can come up with some other way to give them some flexibility but you kind of know what you're going to get for it yeah without breaking the law throughout the state i mean you know i think our biggest thing is that we if we don't need to reinvent the wheel i mean is in coming up with this did you look at any other model yes and what happened was a few years ago state supreme court heard a case and they kind of slapped everybody's wrist about plant development districts which replaced pigs back in the day because plant unit developments were initially that flexible zoning district and they had underlying zoning still attached to them so they you get a plan but you knew that the commercial might be highway commercial uses or you know the residential portion of it could be this size lot or whatever and i think it might have been a mistake i don't know defer to you but um the position that was handed down basically said that you had to have all of the classifications of uses in order to qualify as a planned development district and that includes commercial residential institutional and industrial and no one's ever going to do that i mean that's just not going to happen so towns and counties started coming up with a new zoning district that was like the planned development district but they called it something else and it gave them that flexibility it was perfectly legal but they could kind of incentivize zoning and get a plan that they knew they could count on but not have to meet that level of review and almost every place i know has has something similar to that and that's what this basically looks like okay again my car my biggest concern is every single one of these somebody comes and says we need this zoning because we want to do this but it's not really this zoning oh yeah and so this this just makes it consistency yeah i mean and it just you're going to do what you say you're going to do so that that uh or that that the land is going to be used for this purpose of why we made our decision yeah and you know if someone can tell me the topography of a property prevents development but i mean they drain part of the everglades in florida so i mean i i think you can't ever guarantee that just based on the topography either no you can't guarantee okay all right thank you any further questions thank you comments thank you appreciate it i feel a little better here from planning all right now that i don't trust you doing here emotionally it doesn't feel like that at all very motion with regard to uh proposed orders number 22.020 motion to consider ordinance number 22-020 amending the ordinance number zero 03-011 zoning ordinance chapter three zero one zero zero one zero with the changes i'll get there zoning district regulations article two residential district do i have to read all that district regulation section 3.2.12 mpr master plan residential zoning district with additional changes does that cover everything i think so got a motion by ms hutto ii by mr jones uh any further discussion regarding proposed ordinance number 22.020. all in favor of proposed ordinance number 22.020 amending ordinance number 03-010 zoning ordinance chapter 3 zoning district regulations article 2 residential district regulations section 3.2 point 12 npr master plan residential zoning district with changes mr miller yes all right that motion carries unanimously with seven votes all any further discussion about adjournment all in favor of a journey to work session mr miller yes all right that motion rattling i wanted to uh