Planning Committee

TOWN OF MOUNT PLEASANT, SOUTH CAROLINA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE JANUARY 8, 2018 MINUTES Municipal Complex, Committee Meeting Room Present: Joe Bustos, Chair, Bob Brimmer, Guang Ming Whitley, Tom O'Rourke. Staff: Eric DeMoura, Christiane Farrell, Jeff Ulma, David Pagliarini, Kent Prause, Lee Cave, John Wood Mr. Bustos called the meeting to order at 10:30 am. 1. Approval of Minutes from the December 4, 2017 meeting Mr. Brimmer moved for approval of the minutes. Ms. Whitley seconded the motion. All in favor. 2. Public Comments There being no comments, Mr. Bustos continued with the agenda. 3. Employee years of service recognition Mr. Ulma recognized Mr. John Wood for five years of service. He stated that as an inspector, he handles both commercial and residential inspections. Mr. Bustos and the Committee commended Mr. Wood for his years of service. 4. Deferred Items a. Annexation: 1500 Clubhouse Lane. Request to annex an approximately 1.83 acre tract of land located at 1500 Clubhouse Lane in Raven’s Run Phase I Subdivision, identified by TMS No. 561-01-00-095, depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book BM, Page 022. b. Plan Amendment: Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan 2009-2019 (2014 Update) Future Land Use Map by changing the land use designation from Recreation Open Space to Low Density Neighborhood for an approximately 1.83 acre tract of land located at 1500 Clubhouse Lane in Raven’s Run Phase I Subdivision, identified by TMS No. 561-01-00-095 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book BM, Page 022.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 2 of 11 c. Rezoning: Request to zone R-1, Low Density Residential District, an approximately 1.83 acre tract of land located at 1500 Clubhouse Lane in Raven’s Run Phase I Subdivision, identified by TMS No. 561-01-00-095, depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book BM, Page 022. Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee (attachment 1). He stated that access was an issue discussed at last month’s meeting and showed where access would be located on the map for the Committee. Mr. Bustos thanked staff for the information. Mr. O’Rourke expressed concern with access. He stated that one of the concerns was whether access would conflict with the runway and asked if this has been resolved. Mr. Ulma answered in the affirmative. Ms. Whitley asked if more than one dwelling could be located on the property if zoned R-1. Mr. Ulma answered that based on the acreage, the parcel could be subdivided. He stated that this would require subdivision approval, but the intention is to only have one residence on the property. Ms. Whitley asked if the property was subdivided would it require Town Council approval. Mr. Ulma answered in the negative. Mr. O’Rourke moved to recommend to Town Council approval of the annexation. Mr. Brimmer seconded the motion. Motion passed on a 3 to 1 vote with Mr. Brimmer, Mr. Bustos, and Mr. O’Rourke in favor; Ms. Whitley opposed. Mr. Brimmer moved to recommend to Town Council approval of the amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. O’Rourke seconded the motion. Motion passed on a 3 to 1 vote with Mr. Brimmer, Mr. Bustos, and Mr. O’Rourke in favor; Ms. Whitley opposed. Mr. Bustos asked if the property owner if there would only be one home of the property. Ms. Doreen Ronchi, property owner, answered in the affirmative.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 3 of 11 Mr. Brimmer noted that the decision on the zoning request cannot be conditioned. Ms. Whitley asked if there are concerns over future subdivisions, it would be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Ulma answered in the affirmative. Mr. O’Rourke moved to recommend to Town Council approval of the zoning request. Mr. Brimmer seconded the motion. Motion passed on a 3 to 1 vote with Mr. Brimmer, Mr. Bustos, and Mr. O’Rourke in favor; Ms. Whitley opposed. 5. Review of Planning Commission recommendations from the December 20, 2017 meeting a. Request to Rezone approximately 6.97 acres of land from CC, Community Conservation District, to R-2, Low Density Residential District at 1843 Rifle Range, identified by TMS No. 561-00-00-012, and depicted on a plat recorded in the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book DA, Page 508. Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee (attachment 1). He stated that the Planning Commission considered the request and did not have a recommendation. Mr. Bustos asked the number of dwelling units allowed under CC. Mr. Ulma answered that approximately 21 homes would be allowed. Mr. Bustos asked how many dwelling units would be allowed under R-2. Mr. Ulma answered approximately 30 units would be allowed. He stated that the number of units that would be built would be based on other requirements such as roadways, buffers, open space, etc. Mr. Bustos asked about access. Mr. Ulma answered that they would have an access from Rifle Range Road that would most likely line up with Maple Hill Road. Mr. Bustos asked about buffers. Mr. Ulma answered that he was not sure what the buffer requirements would be for CC zoning. Ms. Whitley expressed concern with increasing the density. Mr. Ulma clarified that the density would not change with either CC zoning or R-2 zoning; only the lot size would change. He stated that the density would remain three units per acre.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 4 of 11 Mr. Brimmer stated that at the Planning Commission meeting, it was indicated that the smaller lot sizes would allow for better preservation of trees. Mr. O’Rourke moved to recommend to Town Council approval of the zoning request. Ms. Whitley seconded the motion. Mr. Charlie Salmonson, owner, clarified that the zoning request would be to have smaller lots for better preservation of trees, more open space. Mr. David Roland, 1420 Page Tree Lane, expressed concern with maintaining the access for Page Tree Lane. He stated that currently the property pin is located in the middle of the roadway. He also expressed concern with drainage and that the roadway is not impacted. He asked that the owners of the surrounding homes be included in the discussions regarding development of the property. He asked if cluster development would allow for more homes to be built on the property. Mr. Ulma answered in the negative. Mr. Bustos asked if Page Tree Lane would be impacted. Ms. Erin Stevens, engineer for developer, answered that Page Tree Lane is not a dedicated roadway. She stated that the property would have to be surveyed and it was her understanding that Page Tree Lane was not located on the requested property. Mr. Bustos expressed concern with access of Page Tree Lane being impacted. Ms. Stevens reiterated that her understanding was that Page Tree Lane was not located on the requested property and that a survey would need to be conducted to determine the exact location of the existing roadway. Mr. Brimmer asked if the tree survey has been completed. Mr. Wilson answered in the negative. Ms. Whitley suggested that a deferral might be appropriate to determine the location of the roadway. Mr. O’Rourke stated that this is a rezoning request and suggested that the Page Tree Lane access would not impact the rezoning.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 5 of 11 Mr. Brimmer agreed and suggested that the sketch plan would provide additional information on access, open space, trees, etc. Mr. Bustos asked if the roadway issue could be resolved by Town Council. Mr. Salmonson answered that they could attempt to address the issue. Mr. Bustos called for a vote on the motion. Motion failed on a 2 to 2 vote with Ms. Whitley and Mr. O’Rourke in favor; Mr. Brimmer and Mr. Bustos opposed. b. Request to amend approximately 12.3 acres of the Dunes West PD, Planned Development District Ordinance, by rezoning from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to DW-C-R-1, Dunes West Covington R-1 on Bessemer Road, identified by TMS No,: 583-00-00-003 and 583-03-00-254 thru -261, -263, and -265 thru -281, and depicted on a plat recorded in the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book L17, Page 0033. Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee (attachment 1). Mr. Brimmer asked the reason for the request. Mr. Ulma answered that it would allow for the reduced setbacks and restrict construction of ADUs. Mr. Brimmer asked if the setbacks would be different from Dunes West. Mr. Ulma answered in the affirmative. Mr. Chris Donato stated that the proposed C-R-1 lots with the reduced setbacks would provide more development flexibility with different house types. He stated that these units would count toward the maximum units allowed within Dunes West. Mr. Bustos asked if access would be from Brightwood. Mr. Donato answered in the affirmative. Mr. Brimmer asked if the side setbacks would change. Mr. Donato answered in the affirmative. Ms. Kathy Landing, 2114 Sewee Indian Court, stated that she toured the property and the model home. She suggested that having the additional flexibility would allow for customization of the homes, which is desired.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 6 of 11 Mr. Kevin Cunnane, 3032 River Vista Way, stated that this would add land to the Dunes West PD and expressed concern with this since there was recently a large effort to bring consistency in zoning with the Dunes West/Park West PD. Ms. Whitley asked if only the setbacks would change. Mr. Donato answered in the affirmative. He stated that the lot coverage would remain the same as well. Ms. Whitley asked if the request would restrict the construction of ADUs. Mr. Donato answered in the affirmative. Ms. Whitley moved to recommend to Town Council approval of the request. Mr. O’Rourke seconded the motion. Motion failed on a 2 to 2 vote with Ms. Whitley and Mr. O’Rourke in favor; Mr. Brimmer and Mr. Bustos opposed. c. Request to amend the I’On PD, Planned Development District Ordinance (Ord. No. 97010) by amending the text pertaining to the section “Neighborhood Standards,” which includes Yard, Porches, Outbuildings and Building Types. This request affects various properties located throughout the approximately 243-acre area comprising the I’On development. Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee (attachment 1). He stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval. Ms. Julie O’Connor, 50 Eastlake Rd, and member of the I’On Architectural Committee, stated that this would bring the PD into compliance with the 1999 written determination. Mr. Bustos asked if this would reduce the setbacks. Ms. O’Connor answered in the affirmative and stated that it would be the same setbacks that have been used based on the 1999 determination. Mr. Brimmer asked the reason for the change. Mr. Prause answered that this is to formalize and adopt the determination by ordinance. Mr. Brimmer asked if there have been recent instances that have precipitated the change. Mr. Prause answered that building plans are being received that meet the standards outlined in the 1999 determination, but do not meet the ordinance requirements. Mr. Brimmer asked the number of homes built in 1999. Ms.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 7 of 11 O’Connor answered that approximately 50 homes were built in 1999; now there are approximately 600 homes built. Ms. Whitley asked how the homes were built if they were non-conforming. Mr. Prause answered that the homes built under the 1999 determination would be considered non-compliant, not non-conforming. Ms. Whitley asked what the practical impact would be. Mr. Prause answered that if the standards are not formalized, then a variance would be needed for any changes to the existing homes. He stated that since the Board of Zoning Appeals hears requests based on hardship, a variance would not be an appropriate remedy; it should be corrected through an amendment to the ordinance. Ms. O’Connor clarified that the 1999 determination was recognized as the building standard and homes were built based on this determination. She stated that good practice is to change the ordinance and the reason for the request. Mr. Bustos asked if not approved, what is the legal ramification. Mr. Pagliarini answered that the homes are non-compliant and if there is any damage to the home, the home would have to be repaired or rebuilt to the standards outlined in the ordinance. This could mean that a homeowner could not rebuild the same home they had prior to the damage. Ms. Whitley asked how many lots remain vacant. Mr. Prause answered that he is not sure, but stated that this would affect any additions as well. Ms. Whitley asked if the request would formalize the standards that have been used since 1999. Mr. Prause answered in the affirmative. Mr. Bustos stated that the lot coverage requirements would change and expressed concern with this. Mr. Brimmer asked the reason for using the 1999 determination as opposed to adhering to the ordinance requirements. Mr. Prause answered that he is not sure. Mr. Brimmer suggested that staff determine if there are any other determinations that would require an ordinance change and have these corrected as well.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 8 of 11 Mr. Bustos stated that he is not in favor of zero setbacks. He asked the number of remaining vacant lots. Ms. O’Connor answered that there are approximately three vacant lots remaining in the phases that are currently under construction. She stated that there is one phase remaining where construction has not yet started. She stated that if an existing non-compliant home is damaged through a storm event, fire, etc., it will not be allowed to be rebuilt unless it meets the ordinance requirements. Mr. Brimmer expressed concern with homes being built based on a determination letter and not on what was approved by ordinance. Mr. Gary Santos, 1690 Greystone Blvd, stated that there was some dissention on Town Council at the time the I’On ordinance was approved. Mr. O’Rourke suggested that because the homes were developed based on the 1999 determination, there could be legal issues and suggested that it would be legally easier to amend the ordinance than to not and experience significant legal ramifications. Ms. Whitley suggested that the change should only apply to the phases currently built out, but not to future phases. Mr. Prause answered that there are ten phases within I’On. Ms. Whitley expressed concern with the 60% lot coverage and that this could have an impact with Town drainage. Mr. Bustos suggested that the ordinance should be upheld. Ms. Whitley moved to recommend to Town Council denial of the request. Mr. Bustos seconded the motion. Motion passed on a 3 to 1 with Mr. Brimmer, Ms. Whitley, and Mr. Bustos in favor; Mr. O’Rourke opposed. 6. Annexation: 448 Gurley Street. Request to annex an approximately 0.69 acre tract of land located at 448 Gurley Street, identified by TMS No. 556-00- 00-004 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book T96, Page 0168. 7. Annexation: 449 Gurley Street. Request to annex an approximately 0.64 acre tract of land located at 449 Gurley Street, identified by TMS No. 556-00- 00-314 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book BB, Page 067.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 9 of 11 Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee (attachment 1). Ms. Whitley moved to recommend to Town Council approval of the annexation for 448 Gurley Street. Mr. O’Rourke seconded the motion. All in favor. Ms. Whitley moved to recommend to Town Council approval of the annexation of 449 Gurley Street. Mr. O’Rourke seconded the motion. All in favor. 8. Progress Report & Schedule for Amendments to Tree Protection & Bufferyard Regulations Mr. Ulma provided an update for the Committee. He stated that staff estimates that a draft could be considered at the March meeting. He stated that the Chamber of Commerce and the development community have provided input as well that would be included for consideration as staff moves forward. 9. Workforce Housing Committee Progress Report Mr. Ulma updated the Committee on the progress of the Workforce Housing Committee. He stated that based on legal advice, a full 1023 should be completed for formulation of the 501c3. He stated that this additional legal work would cost approximately $7,500. Mr. Bustos asked the reason for the length of time needed for progress. He suggested that there are funds being provided with little result. Mr. O’Rourke expressed concern with implementation of workforce housing. He suggested that the Town needs to have a lengthy discussion on how this would move forward. He suggested that this could be included for discussion at the retreat, especially since some funding from the Town would be needed for the program to be successful. Ms. Whitley expressed concern with moving forward and how funding would be determined.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 10 of 11 Mr. Brimmer stated that this was a way to provide a foundation for workforce housing in the Town. He stated that at the time this was initiated, it was known that it would take some time to accomplish. Ms. Landing agreed that this should be discussed at the retreat. She stated that the non-profit is one aspect, but suggested that there needs to be a clear approach on how to move forward. She suggested that a private partnership should be considered as well as the possibility of forming a real estate investment trust. She agreed that it should be setup correctly so that it can be self-sufficient. Ms. Whitley agreed that this should be discussed at the retreat. Mr. Bustos asked that this topic be included for the retreat. Mr. DeMoura answered that this would be done. 10. Progress Report on Comprehensive Plan Update Mr. Ulma updated the Committee on the progress of the Comprehensive Plan update. Mr. O’Rourke asked the completion date. Mr. Ulma answered that the update should be completed by October 2018. 11. Consideration of Potential Growth Management Plan Mr. Bustos stated that he asked for this to be included on the agenda. Mr. Ulma provided information on building permits issued for the last 20 years through a PowerPoint presentation (attachment 1). Mr. Bustos suggested that there should be a way to manage the amount of growth, particularly because the infrastructure is not in place. He suggested that the number of permits issued should be managed by some means. Mr. O’Rourke suggested that there should be a plan, but suggested that there should be discussion in conjunction with the amount of infrastructure that needs to be accomplished and how the infrastructure would be funded.  Planning Committee January 8, 2018 Page 11 of 11 Mr. Bustos agreed. Mr. Brimmer asked if the number of units approved but not built includes units that might never be accomplished. Mr. DeMoura answered that the approved units is a true number of what can be built. Mr. O’Rourke suggested that this should be discussed at the retreat so that staff has a better idea of what direction Town Council would like to go. The Committee agreed that this should be included for the retreat. Mr. Brimmer asked for clarification on the request from I’On and if it would go to Town Council. Mr. Bustos answered that it would be sent to Town council. Mr. DeMoura stated that an executive session would be added to the Town Council agenda for that item in the event it is needed. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 12:03 pm. Submitted by, L. Lynes PlanComm01082018  Attachment 1: January 8, 2018 Planning Committee Meeting Minutes PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 08 January 2018 COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL  Deferred Items: 3.a,b&c. 1500 CLUBHOUSE LANE Request to annex and zone R-1, Low Density Residential District. Also request to Request: amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map by changing the land use designation from Recreation Open Space to Low Density Neighborhood. Location: 1500 Clubhouse Lane / Raven’s Run Subdivision Parcel ID (TMS No.): 561-01-00-095 Type of Request: Annexation, Comprehensive Plan amendment, zoning Annexation – Not required; Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Required; held by Town Council on December Public Hearing: 12, 2017; Zoning – Required; held by Planning Commission Total Acreage: Approximately 1.83 acres Plat Recording Info: Book BM, Page 022 Application Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24048 Staff Report Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24250 Planning Commission recommends approval or denial of the zoning and Action to be Taken: Comprehensive Plan amendment request. This recommendation is forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee of Council and Town Council.  4.A. REZONING: 1843 RIFLE RANGE ROAD Request to rezone from CC, Community Conservation District, to R-2, Low Density Request: Residential District Location: 1843 Rifle Range Road Parcel ID (TMS No.): 561-00-00-012 Type of Request: Rezoning Public Hearing: Required; To be held by Planning Commission Total Acreage: Approximately 6.97 acres Plat Recording Info: Book DA, Page 508 Application Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24502 Staff Report Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24615 Planning Commission recommends approval or denial of the request. This Action to be Taken: recommendation is forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee and Town Council.  4.B. REZONING: COVINGTON AT DUNES WEST Amend the Dunes West PD, Planned Development District Ordinance, by rezoning from Request: R-1, Low Density Residential District, to DW-C-R-1, Dunes West Covington R-1. Location: Bessemer Road Parcel ID (TMS No.): 583-00-00-003 and 583-03-00-254 thru -261, -263, -265 thru -281 Type of Request: Rezoning/PD Amendment Public Hearing: Required; To be held by Planning Commission Total Acreage: Approximately 12.30 acres Plat Recording Info: Book L17, Page 0033 Application Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24503 Staff Report Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24616 Planning Commission recommends approval, approval with conditions or denial of the Action to be Taken: request. This recommendation is forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee and Town Council.  4.C. REZONING: I’ON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT Amend the text in the I’On PD, Planned Development District Ordinance (Ord. No. Request: 97010) pertaining to “Neighborhood Standards,” which includes Yard, Porches, Outbuildings and Building Types. Location: I’On Development Parcel ID (TMS No.): Approximately 243 acre area comprising the I’On development. Type of Request: PD Amendment Public Hearing: Required; To be held by Planning Commission Total Acreage: Approximately 243 acres Plat Recording Info: I’On Technical Plan Application Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24504 Staff Report Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24617 Planning Commission recommends approval, approval with conditions or denial of the Action to be Taken: request. This recommendation is forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee and Town Council.  5.C. I’ON DEVELOPMENT – LOT STANDARDS Existing • Front Setback – 0 feet • Side Setbacks – 3 feet Proposed • Rear Setbacks – 0 feet • Corner Setback – 0 feet • Building Coverage – 60% • Lot Width – 27 feet min. OTHER Yard 1. Buildings shall be set on the lot relative to the build to zones and PROPOSED setbacks specified for each building type. 2. Stoops, chimneys, balconies and bay windows may encroach within AMENDMENTS the setback or build-to zone. 3. Street walls shall be built on frontage lines as shown. Porches 1. Shopfront buildings shall have an arcade that extends along 100% of the street façade. 2. Side-yard and All-yard buildings shall have a covered porch a minimum of 8 feet in depth. 3. The porch shall extend a minimum of 50% of the length of the home in the case of Side-yard buildings and a minimum of 40% of the street façade in the case of All-yard buildings. 4. The street façade of All-yard buildings shall extend along the front yard a minimum of 40% of the lot width. Outbuildings 1. Outbuildings shall have a maximum footprint of 625 square feet and building height of 18 feet. 2. The walls of the outbuildings at interior property lines shall be left windowless and shall be two-hour fire rated. 3. Outbuildings may have less than 3’ setbacks from adjoining property line. 5. ANNEXATION: 448 GURLEY STREET Request to annex an approximately 0.69 acre tract of land located at 448 Gurley Street, identified by TMS No. 556-00-00- 004 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book T96, Page 0168. x x x 6. ANNEXATION: 449 GURLEY STREET Request to annex an approximately 0.64 acre tract of land located at 449 Gurley Street, identified by TMS No. 556-00-00- 314 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book BB, Page 067. x x x  7. PROGRESS REPORT & SCHEDULE FOR AMENDMENTS TO TREE PROTECTION & BUFFERYARD REGULATIONS • Staff has begun to draft text amendments and proposes the following schedule: Tree and Buffer Text Amendments- 2018 Schedule Task Jan Feb March April Planning Commission Special Workshop(s) Planning Commission - Public Hearing Text Amendments to Planning Committee Text Amendments to Council for First Reading Text Amendments to Council for Final Reading 8. WORKFORCE HOUSING COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT •Since the November Planning Committee update, the committee has met two more times •Efforts continue to focus on creation of the 501(c)3 nonprofit corporation • Mission Statement • Articles of Incorporation • Bylaws • 1023EZ form prepared for online submittal to the IRS •Public education program still being developed •Preliminary discussions with MPWW about possible development site also under way 8. WORKFORCE HOUSING COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT •Legal review of this effort has identified the need to submit a full 1023 form to the IRS  higher level of review for nonprofit housing corporations •Preliminary Scope of Services/LRA (Legal Representation Agreement) drafted by Wagenmaker & Oberly, LLC, a law firm which provides extensive legal guidance to nonprofits •Senior Associate with the firm met with the committee at the December meeting & explained the issues in more depth; approximately 6 months will be needed to finalize this process 8. WORKFORCE HOUSING COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT •Committee recommended to Council that this professional legal advice be secured, with an appropriation from the Town budget (<= $7500); Planning staff reviewing & discussing with Town Administrator •In the meantime, Articles of Incorporation can be filed with the Secretary of State and the group could begin to work on other efforts; approval of 501(c)3 status can occur later & be applied retroactively 9. PROGRESS REPORT ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE • Plan Forum meeting held December 5. • Reviewed Open House and survey responses • Received briefing from Town CFO and MPW General Manager • Established 4 Subcommittees to define goals & objectives relative to 4 identified themes • Quality of the Built Environment/Place • Quality of Life/Community Character • Safe & Efficient Mobility • Taking the Long View • 7 New Plan Forum Members appointed – participating in subcommittees • Open House scheduled for January 30, 2018 10. CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN 10. CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN MONTHLY REPORT DATA November 30, 2017 BUILDING PERMIT REPORT, NOVEMBER 2017 BUILDING PERMIT REPORT, NOVEMBER 2017 ANNUAL BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED, 2000 -2017 ANNUAL GROWTH RATE, 1997-2017 (CO’S) PERMIT TRENDS November 30, 2017 5-YEAR ANNUAL GROWTH RATE, 2012-2017 (CO’S) 10-YEAR ANNUAL GROWTH RATE, 2007-2017 (CO’S) 20-YEAR ANNUAL GROWTH RATE, 1997-2017 (CO’S)  STATUS REPORT: November 30, 2017 POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL FUTURE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 30, 2017 5,444 residential units, approved but not built:  3,668 Single family homes  698 Townhomes  488 Multi-family condos  590 Multi-family apartments  REMAINING UNITS COMPARED TO TOTAL UNITS Approved, Total Built or Under Type of Unit Total Approved Percent Unbuilt Unbuilt Units Construction Single Family Residential 3,668 28,004 24,336 13.1% (SFR) Townhomes (TH) 698 3,519 2,821 19.8% Multifamily – Condos 488 4,822 4,334 10.1% (MF-C) Multifamily – 590 6,732 6,142 8.8% Apartments (MF-A) Totals 5,444 43,077 37,633 12.6%  REMAINING UNITS SUBJECT TO ANY RATE LIMITS Approved, Type of Unit Carolina Park Liberty Hill Farm Other Unbuilt Units Single Family Residential 3,668 689 264 2,715 (SFR) Townhomes (TH) 698 104 66 528 Multifamily – Condos 488 0 0 488 (MF-C) Multifamily – 590 200 0 390 Apartments (MF-A) Totals 5,444 993 330 4,121  POTENTIAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT NOVEMBER 30, 2017 5,444 residential units, approved but not built:  3,668 Single family homes  698 Townhomes  488 Multi-family condos  590 Multi-family apartments  HISTORICAL PERMIT ABSORPTION RATE 2012 TO 2017 Year Total Number of Building Permits 2012 1071 2013 1141 ESTIMATED FUTURE 2014 1311 SUPPLY = 4.5 YEARS 2015 1144 2016 1580 2017 (est.) 1062 Average 1218 10. CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN COMMITTEE DISCUSSION