Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, good evening. It is September the 21st, 2026. It is 6.31 in the p.m. We're here at Town Hall Complex at 120B West Church Street. This is going to be a Planning Commission regular session meeting. Go ahead and call to order and do a roll call, please.

Laura Gillespie. I'm here. Sean Bryant.

I'm here.

Jerodine Bowers. Here. LaJawna Williams. Justin Howard.

Here.

Kevin Duggins. Riley Adams.

Here.

Bart Cotscroft. And Jenna Mae Lemon. Here.

All right. So we got the approval of the minutes from the August 17th, 2026 meeting. Do I have a motion to approve?

Motion to approve.

Second. Second.

All right.

Go ahead and vote. District 1.

Votes yes. Votes to approve.

District 3.

Votes to approve.

we'll go with that large justin approve riley you're what uh yes six approved six thank you and miss lemon you're eight yes and two yes approved Motion passes. New business. A request for rezoning of 238 West Church Street, TMS number 005918-04-005 from C1 General Commercial to C2 Office and Institutional Commercial District. I know we have representatives. If y'all want to step up to the podium, just in case anybody has any questions for y'all, it shouldn't be too difficult. I promise. We can make a motion to discuss.

You might want to make a motion to discuss it.

Motion to discuss.

I have a second.

We need a second to discuss. All right.

All right.

So open for discussion. Do you have any questions, Laurel?

If you just want to tell us about it to start. Above what we already know from reading.

All right. So I'm Andy Bittenboe from Sheila Realty, and we have the property up for sale down the street here at 238 West Church Street, which has been used for the past number of years as the Pure Air building. I'm assuming everybody knows the location. And it had been used as a sales office. on the front side for the owner lynn smith and she had actually done some in-house training with some of her sales associates and i think the goal was to sell vacuum cleaners so um she's changed her business strategy and ready to sell the building and now we have scott melissa jalbert who look to open their business in the town of bakesboro leesville and occupy that building and their goal is to have professional massage therapy education in a clinic and massage and wellness services and provide educational and professional development on the rear side of the building So I'm sure y'all read your packets and you got your info. That would, based on that use, not necessarily the retail side of things, but that training usage would require the zoning amendment or zoning change. But I'll let Ms. Melissa tell you more about her business and their intentions. And if you've got any questions, just hit us with them and we'll try our best to answer them.

Hi, so I'm Melissa Jalbert. I currently have a space, a rental space out of B&L Spine with Dana Librand. It's called Cloud Nine Massage and Bodywork. Sorry. Cloud Nine Massage and Bodywork Therapy. And I've been there for about eight years now. Wow. developed a pretty good clientele there and I'd like to expand that. So part of the business would be expanding that into this new space. But I want to be able to have a massage school at the same location. My goal is to have the massage school and be able to employ some of my graduates at the business as well. So I feel like this would be a great a great thing for the town to be able to have future employment opportunities for these people. There's not a whole lot of massage in this town and people are having to go to Lexington and Aiken for massages. So I would really like to be able to keep it here in your town.

Can you tell me a little bit about how many parking spaces that you need to operate?

Oh, sure. So there's a few spaces right in front. There's actually one that's handicap accessible. This lot actually comes with the spare lot that's in the back. That's the lot that we'll be using for parking. So there should be roughly about 20 spaces. If we plan it right, we can put about 20 spaces. So parking shouldn't be too much of an issue. Thank you. You're welcome.

Does anybody else have any questions?

Will the parking enter Hallman Street or will it come off of West Church Street?

The plan is to come off of West Church Street. I realize that traffic is going to be kind of pretty bad sometimes. So it's nice to have that back street that they can come off of. My goal is to what I have in my head is for them to kind of come in off of the main street and then maybe leave out Hallman Street. People will be coming at staggered times, so it's not like anybody's going to be coming all at the same time. The students may be leaving at the same time, so if they leave out that Hallman Street, it'll be easier to kind of disperse the traffic a little bit.

For your students, would you be offering some type of payment plan or, you know, anything like to get them started? You know, a lot of these kids around here, if they're coming right out of high school, they don't really have, you know, their parents were like, hey, you know.

Right. So there will be payment plans. Yes. It's a nine month program. So they actually have a long period of time to actually pay that off.

That's good. Thank you. So what kind of – do they get a certificate or some kind of diploma?

It's a certificate of completion. So South Carolina recognizes licensure. They require 650 hours. The program has to be – approved by the commission for higher education so i'm working on the paperwork to get approved for that obviously i have to have a location to do that first and a business license so i've got to do these steps first my program i'm looking at having 720 hours which is actually going to give them more hands-on so that they're more prepared to for graduation

So is state credentials?

Yes, it would be once they graduate from my school, they'll be able to take the licensing exam and apply for the state license. So they cannot receive money or work until they receive the state licensure. They'll be fully prepared once they graduate.

And is that two separate partials or is that one partial right here? It is, too. So is the second piece need to be joined into the first one? So it needs to be zoned together, basically. Both pieces actually need to be changed.

Yes.

Okay.

Question. Can you have a business and a school in the same dwelling? Yes.

Many schools actually do that.

Most of the hair places.

There will also be a student clinic. Now the students can't receive money for that. The money goes to the school. But there will be students are allowed to practice. They actually have to. They're required to practice so many hours on the public. So there will be a student clinic as well as the professional side.

Jay, do we know what lot number? Well, you know what? It's not listed as a lot number.

I'm getting that other TMS number for you.

Okay, thank you. What is 245?

Lot 245. I believe that is a residential property.

Let me see on my – sometimes it's hard to see on our map. Yeah.

Anybody else, Riley, do you have any questions?

Let me just try to find that map. This is probably outdated.

Do you want the new map? Do you have a new one? Yeah.

We're just trying to look over the new map just to let you all know what we're doing.

Do you have the zoning map?

So, Mr. Chairman, the second parcel will be 005918. dash zero four dash zero one five. So when y'all make a motion, make sure you include both of those. Confirming both parcels are being sold and you wish to, okay.

Thank you, Jay. Does anybody else have any more questions?

I'll make a motion that we add that.

We'll just make, we don't have a motion. We'll just make a motion. Does anybody want to make a motion to approve TMS number 005918-04-005 and TMS number 005918-04-015 from C1 to C2? May I ask for clarification? Absolutely.

Do we? We can add this in right now. We don't have to wait the 30 days or whatever. How many days?

No, that will be on the town council side. That will be when the public notice is required. So if you can add that at this time and then it will be taken care of on the town council side. It's still just a recommendation to town council to approve it.

All right. Recommendation to approve.

So we have a motion.

So your recommendation is to approve as presented by a chair. Correct. With those two parcels.

Okay. Do I have a second?

A second.

Approve. Any further discussion? Hearing none. District 1?

I vote yes.

District 3?

I vote yes. At large?

Yes.

District six. Yes. District eight. Yes. And district two votes. Yes. All right. Thank you all very much. Appreciate you. Thank you. The next step is obviously this goes before council and then they have to approve it as well. And then they'll have two readings. Yeah. So, all right. Thank you all for coming out. Appreciate it. We have a motion to adjourn and move into a work session. I so move. Do I have a second?

Second.

All right. We're going to take a quick break so we can set up.

Sean, all in favor of adjournment, please.

All those in favor of adjourning?

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

I like that.

All right. We are now going to call this Planning Commission work session to order on, again, September 21st, 2026. It is now 6.54 in the p.m. Still at Town Hall Complex 120B West Church Street. And get a roll call for...

Laura Gillespie. Here. Sean Bryant. Here. Jaredine Bowers. Here. LaJawna Williams. Justin Howard.

Here.

Kevin Duggins. Riley Adams.

Here.

Bart Kartscroft. And Jeremy Lemon.

Here.

All right. So we're going to jump right on into old business. And I bet, Jay, you don't have any of that stuff that I emailed Becky last time, did you? Wait, did I email you the – I did. Didn't I just email you the definitions that I had worked so diligently on writing for commercial and industrial projects? So basically, Justin, we realized that there's a reference to 72 hours prohibited parking of commercial or industrial vehicles in residential areas. And we are trying to figure out because there is no definition of a commercial or industrial vehicle and so on and so forth. And so we were trying to work through all of that and

So one of the examples was you may work for a corporeal and you may have a company car, but that's your car. Basically, that's all you drive. You know, this doesn't come under HOA rules. This comes under the town rules, but some areas won't allow them to park in their own parking. So we're trying to get that. We're trying to jump ahead and get that clarified.

Okay.

Yeah. And then on the screens, you can see the, there's the definitions that for commercial vehicle and state of South Carolina does not have an actual, that I could find. Do you have any definition for an industrial vehicle?

I mean, there would be definitions depending upon what it's regulating, but I don't know that it's just defined as one thing. I mean, it's...

But you can have, well, but there are commercial vehicles that have P tags as well, but they're not.

Are they okay? That's a good point.

i don't think we should spend a ton of time on this one i think it's you know we get a little bit in the weeds with this but i think last time we talked we wanted to balance the ability to regulate parking of commercial vehicles inside the town on people's residences but not be overly overly burdensome on people trying to make a living you know if they have a take home whatever car for the electric co-op or they're a truck driver or something like that so i think we need to define it based on weight

Can we make the attorney just come up with a definition?

I mean, I can think of so many examples, like electricians and their trucks. You know, they like to have it parked where they can put their cameras on it. You know, I think about all the different smaller vehicles that people can use for business.

I'm great on this, so fill me in. Is this part of them parking in a parking spot or out on like a street corner?

Parking in a, where is it?

It's off. It was off. Like on the street in front of them. Was it on the street? I thought it was off the street.

I think it was off street. Thanks.

I think it was just in general.

It's section...

It's all of them.

Yeah, but it's like 6... Whatever dash 6 is. I got too many notes.

I'm sorry.

If I may.

You absolutely may.

Okay. Just for some clarity, talking with Amanda, the only recent incident where there was any kind of enforcement of this was a tractor trailer being parked in Leapheart Acres at a home. And they ended up moving it, working an arrangement to be in a parking lot, the old Pickley Wiggly parking lot with Wiz. And so... to my knowledge, that's the only one that has come up. This really hasn't been an issue from an enforcement standpoint. So I know I don't want to overstep, but I don't know that there is a great need to address this.

We started already.

It's one thing to discuss it, and then another thing to actually take action. Again, I don't think that there is a a great need for a big change. And my concern is while respecting property rights and somebody that owns the house being able to park their vehicles, again, I think anything that's a van, a pickup truck, a car is allowed regardless. So we're talking about larger vehicles, a box truck or tractor trailer. Certainly, you know, heavy equipment would be that industrial like you've defined. We're not seeing that as a big issue. We've worked through that one with the resident in Leapheart Acres.

And...

Personally, I don't see this as a major need that requires action, but that's just my opinion.

I'm fine with that. I just think we need to have a definition of some sort in one of the sections. We can certainly reference back to all three of them.

I think that given the definition is absolutely prudent and we can get the town attorney to work on that. And then that can be added into the definitions. But I don't know that it really warrants a ordinance change to our one, two, three. So that's my opinion.

I'm perfectly fine with that. So everybody else go with that. We'll just do the definition. And as long as something's defined, then I think. that's kind of what really hung us up last time was the, the definition was the fact we didn't really have a definition and whatnot.

So that was our concern.

All right. So if we can do that for next meeting, I don't, I don't think we wait.

I think we just define it right now based on either the tonnage or the number of axles. And if it's a neighborhood, they're going to have their own restrictions, and it's going to limit whether or not you can park that in the neighborhood. So we aren't really worried.

Well, to my knowledge, we only have two HOAs. You've got Woodridge Court and then Summerland. So not all neighborhoods have extra, more restrictive policies.

Typically, you live in a neighborhood, but it's not a neighborhood.

And there is no HOA. I mean, I drive my trailer truck home, but I parked in my driveway. It's not out in the street corner if I bring it home. Which is a break.

So...

I mean, I'm just saying, if you can park it in your driveway and they down street corner. I don't see, but that's just me, but if it's out on that street corner. Somebody might have an issue turning and see coming out of the neighborhood and cause of accidents. And we got no problem and now it was.

And we talked about that, even just doing it where it's like, where's the owner. Owned or like on the street.

Yeah, it was, we had talked, we went into a whole long spiel about owner operated or, for instance, if I worked for you and I drove my work truck home, but I was going on vacation and you didn't need my work truck, then I parked at my house for more than 72 hours. I'm good with that.

Okay.

Okay.

Everybody okay with that? Yeah. Define it as being a vehicle more than one ton parked off, like on the street for more than 72 hours.

I like that. On the street or off the street?

Like in the street. If it's in the driveway, we don't care.

Okay.

No, wait a minute. That would kick out. We have two 50s.

Three 50s.

One ton.

No, those are half ton.

350 is well, that three is three.

I used to have 350.

Yeah, there's there's 8,000 pounds. That'd be more than a building.

We can look it up.

A ton is 3,200 pounds, right? I thought it was 2,000. 3,200.

That works.

You got it?

We don't need to look that way. According to see, that's where you start getting into the weeds because of the DMV classification and everything else. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah. I think the time that Riley's referring to is towing capacity at the time, as opposed to the weight of the actual vehicle. Correct. Is that, is that right? Riley that you're 3,200 references to a towing capacity.

Well, the, uh, 350, F-350 can potentially tow with a dually 32,000 pounds. How many?

47. Okay.

I thought that was a 450. I thought the 350 was maxed at 32.

Modern F-150 or ancient front.

That's 3,200 pounds. That's what Riley just said. Hey, Google. No, I'm just kidding. I don't have Google. How many pounds? I'll leave it at 2,000. Oh, it does say 2,000 pounds is one US ton. We're going to go.

Yeah, but they consider a 250.3 quarter ton.

So, they consider up to 5350 truck.

Well, then, why don't we go anything that requires a CDL, which would go 26,000 pounds or above. With a gross vehicle weight of 26,000 pounds or greater. Okay, we're done with this section. Yeah, we're moving on.

Go ahead. All right. So we're just looking for clarity. So are we still looking for a definition of commercial or an industrial vehicle, or did y'all just define it?

I think he just defined it that they have to have a CDL license.

That's right. So that is commercial. Mm-hmm. Okay.

Um, we're just going to take out those little fluff terms and just say. A vehicle swaying more than 26,000 requires CDO is not in there.

I don't think.

Let's keep pushing. All right. Yeah. You good? Not everything. Okay. So 1 down.

All right.

sharing the research found at Dominion regarding, which is nothing, it's the same thing we had before, but I do think that we should, in essence, instead of it saying LED, because LEDs will potentially go out because something else new will come in. I think we keep the verbiage of whatever lumens or whatnot, but change it to the current, most current updated fixtures, light fixture emitting, whatever it may be.

Or savings, kind of whatever is the most power saving.

Well, let's get a reading section.

So the section is 613. Nope, that it's not it either. When I looked at the Dominion site, they had a lot of different. jay you probably looked at it and it was what this is is the required buffer between commercial and residential section 613 of the subdivision here it is i got it it's 613 but not in the 613 that i was looking at So here's the street light 6-13. It's street lights.

Oh no, that didn't help me. I didn't bring my glasses. I'm sorry.

So residential standard 15,000 lumen HPS street lights shall be installed at a rate of not less than one street light per six lots. developers shall be responsible for the operating costs of said lights at the standard rate subject to the rate and class of service approved by the south carolina public service commission until the town accepts title to the affected subdivisions road infrastructure at which time the town will assume responsibility for said operating costs if the developer elects to install more than one one street light per six lots then the operating costs for All such additional streetlights shall be borne by the developer or the residents of the affected subdivision.

So we're talking about both subdivision.

Well, this is part of the subdivision ordinance.

This this portion specifically not because there's been questions about the town lighting too.

Well, the town lighting was already converted to the LED. My recommendation would be to remove the HPS reference and just leave it at 15,000 lumens. And then if it's LED or if it's the next great thing, it's already addressed and it meets that minimum lighting requirement.

I'm okay. I mean, I'm good with that. Is everybody? Yeah. I mean, I think because I mean, I know, you know, 20 years from now. They'll have something completely different.

They'll probably find out if LEDs have been killing us.

We might have miniature sunlight. Or suns.

Ruining our eyes. All right.

It's already happening. That's what I thought.

Minimum of 15,000 units as opposed to just setting it at 15. It's the wrong way. Limiting if they want to reduce brightness in the residential.

Yep.

Well, so that was going to be my question. Well, so the question or my question is, is one street light for six lots. Well, if I buy 41, Laura, if I buy your property and I decide I want to make 17 lots in your property, but the street runs along and it's three, you know, 3000 feet on each side or on the length of the street, then you don't have one, but Like there's no actual lineage footage, linear footage there.

So if you buy six lots, basically you can have one.

That's it. You have one in the entire subdivision.

You wouldn't go by lot, would you? Because you think about the townhomes and you think about the size. This goes by lot.

That's what I'm saying. This is actually going by the lot size. It's going by lots. It's not going by length or size.

So, basically, you're raising the concern of the density of the lighting. If you have smaller lighting versus small lots versus larger lots.

Now, I get it because if a developer comes in and says, I want 1, every 600, 600 feet or every, let's say, 1000 feet. There's not 6. Well, I mean.

If they were telling would obviously maybe the 6, but this size, well, and then after that would be.

I guess that's that's my attorney question for Jay right now.

Yes.

Because I don't know what their mindset was when they came up with the six lots. Was that six quarter acre lots? Was that six half acre lots? Was that six one acre lots?

I mean, did you do it by battery or did you do it per mile?

I would do it by 12 units. Okay. What's the radius on a 15,000 lumen light? Let's go by that.

That's a very good question. That would be a great question for a Dominion representative who could not be here tonight.

They said they couldn't. I think the council had that same question. Go by that. It's my fault.

Yes, Jay.

Okay.

is the expectation to have a fully illuminated roadway. I mean, that is not the expectation in the town. The focus on normal streetlights or normal streets that are not subdivisioned is to mainly focus on intersections for safety with traffic. There are some that are longer stretches that are perhaps there are sidewalks where we do have additional streetlights. Beyond intersections, but the main focus is on intersection safety subdivisions. I acknowledge that. Yes. I mean, that one's it just depends on what your expectation is.

I mean, this in an R1 district, it would be larger lots if it's an R3 and you have cluster homes. There'll be a greater density of lighting in that area. And then on top of that, it's going to cost the town more because it's in our regulations for subdivisions saying you have to have it every six lots. So we have cluster homes and every six lots now has a light as opposed to what we previously had. have going toward my neighborhood or whatever.

Land plains there. So that's overkill. And the reason I'm thinking about it is because I had a neighbor and I've had a cluster home and I had a neighbor complain about my floodlights. So I ended up having to buy floodlights. Adjusting it was a problem. So I had to buy the ones that were hooded. So pointed downwards.

Is the cluster homes, I mean, you know, are they defining those as lots?

Yeah.

They're under the cluster home. There's a definition of it.

You would assume 1 out for a lot, right? You would assume out for a lot. Who do you assume?

And each house will be sold individually.

But that would be my 1 house is a lot.

That comes under special, right?

Okay, what do we want to know? I'm trying to see if I still have the email from when. Yeah, they're considered lots. I own a little teeny tiny lot. That's right. A little teeny tiny house on it. I share a lot line. My driveway shares the lot line.

Another idea would be to not have a set definition or one size fits all approach, but we require that any developer or subdivider of property have to submit a street lighting plan as a part of their

subdivision so we can review if we think it's enough lights for that particular setup and riley i think that that makes like the question about cluster homes and everything i think they come under a special and that may be something that has to be written separately anyway because it wouldn't come under your regular subdivision it comes under an exception

They have to consider that when they're building the homes anyway for the lighting, don't they?

Yeah, it's enough for the intersection. That's right.

It's enough for the intersection and whatnot. So I think we just say that before they get final approval on a subdivision flat, they've got to submit their lighting plan as part of it. We just add that in as another requirement.

I know council is also working on this as well. Is it going to be on their next work session?

It got withdrawn. We could have that as a work session item, but I think we're waiting on that from planning commission.

I think if we're going to say...

Again, I don't know that this is a big concern. If you go to Summerlin, there is, I believe, adequate street lighting in the Summerlin neighborhood, which meets the six-lot requirement.

And I think my biggest thing is that I don't want the town to have to pick up the extra lights.

They bill it to the residents of those neighborhoods.

Well, no.

No, this is this is this is for subdivisions. If someone wants to build a subdivision, they buy 10 acres. They want to subdivide it into lots. This section is relevant only to that. We're not talking about street lights on Main Street, right? And then please build Batesburg district. We're talking about in neighborhood.

No, right. But this says that the town. until the town accepts the title to the affected subdivision's road infrastructure, at which time the town will assume responsibility for the operating costs of the lighting. Yeah, and then they bill it to the HOA.

It would still go to the individual homeowner, wouldn't it?

It's saying that the town's going to assume the responsibility of the operating costs for these.

That's what it says, but I know it

Where?

In Summerlin, they were.

They were, and then they stopped about a year ago. And based off the language here, we have not pushed forward with it because the interpretation is that we are responsible because it meets the six. It doesn't exceed. If it was to be more dense, then they would have that responsibility. I would love for them to pay, but... So...

Yes. And that's why I would like to... That's why I don't like the six lots. Well, and to go to Riley's...

I was looking at the other part. If the developer is to install more than one street light per six lots, then operating costs for all such additional street lights should be borne by the developer or the residents of the estate. That's what I always thought.

It was the residents. That's what it says.

Mr. Chair, if I may, to Riley's point of them submitting a street lighting plan, I think the intent is to give guidance so that they're all right. We know we've got to have it every six because my concern would be who's reviewing that and what is the standard that it's got to meet?

are we drawing 80 foot diameter around each street light and that's the light and we just kind of guessing um but i know on the two previous this one over here and woodland back here yes that we made sure that they had those every six lots and that's what we went off of and that was which is the standard right right so Like, that was a requirement, like, then they had to go back and redo the drawings because that and add the sidewalks in.

That's right.

Because they didn't have any of that in and then we're like, no, that's going to happen. But.

Yeah, well, and I agree that that is the standard right now and. Again, I think in Summerland, it seems to be adequate. And I know Riley, you live in Summerland, so you're out and about more in the evening than I am. I don't exactly peruse the evening hours at Summerland, but it does appear to be adequate. Probably it is much more a higher density of lighting in that neighborhood than throughout town. I think we need to give guidance to the developer instead of leaving it open ended that they submit a plan that we review it in some way and send it back. I think I think right now it's good guidance. I think that is a fairly standard. policy with other municipalities and subdivisions. We can do some research if that is the desire, but I do think we need to give some guidance.

That comes under the South Carolina Public Service Commission for the guidance of that.

I'm okay with that. Take that out on the mic.

How does everybody feel about leaving it to where we just kind of clarify that it's a minimum of six per, or where is it? I don't have it pulled up anymore. It's a minimum of one per six lots, but we also require a street lighting plan. Planning Commission can ask for more if we think that that area or that neighborhood needs more lighting for whatever reason.

That's basically what it says anyway, isn't it? That's basically what it says anyway. When you read the search?

I think, yeah. Let's just look at, because it's out of town, let's talk about Little Creek. That way we're not talking about something in town. Think of the size of those lots. Of course, that's not a real subdivision, is it?

No, it is. That is a real subdivision.

It is, okay.

I'm a part of that. That's a real subdivision.

There you go. So, you know, you think about the size of those lots. every six may not be enough. So that's why I think it almost has to be by the distance of the street.

The lot size is not clarified.

Right. Do you go by foot? Do you go by yards?

Right. If the lot size had a clarification of how big the lots are, then yes, but they don't have no clarification of how big the lot size is.

Well, and Justin, lots vary depending upon the residential zoning. So it does create that.

So if six lots is 10 acres and you only got one per 10 acres.

And the lot size is only a minimum. You can always have a larger lot size.

Yeah, to to Laurel's point, it would be up to the residential. They want to add another light with it. Yeah, then it is their calls, right?

Yeah, my neighbors have added your power bill.

So I got 1 that. Glare is right into my back porch, but. It's okay, I can pull the blinds.

Alright, so we'll just keep it at basically like Riley said, one per six.

I still worry about that.

I mean, it's done us fine for right now, so instead of us being hung up on this and not getting to the other stuff, but we definitely want to take out the HPS for sure on that because we won't it to be, I don't want to say LED because new technology comes out, so I say I.

That's my ballpark. Is this based off this new subdivision that's pretty much coming up right now?

A couple of them. That one and also the...

The problem is the HBS ones are super expensive and so on and so forth. Obviously the LEDs are out there right now, but but you know, in 20 years when they have, you know, miniature sons on a pole and whatever. So, so yeah, I think it just needs, I don't know how attorney wants to word all that, but I think everybody agree with that. Just to take the HPS out.

So do we want to leave it at wording of 15,000 lumen or greater or greater?

Yes. Okay. And we'll just keep the six lots. And then, but add in, submit lighting.

That covers us. So if we think that that neighborhood needs more than one for every six lots, we can say you need more.

Okay, so if we do have a neighborhood that's a...

It's just sets a minimum to give guidance to the developer or... So if somebody comes in and builds an estate style subdivision. All right, so good on that. And a lot of them. Okay.

Great.

Oh, the data centers. Next item is work session discussion and proposed creation of a new zoning district for possible data centers or data centers, however you would like to say it.

All right, Riley, I know you said that.

Jane, do you have that? I was never given that one. Okay. You didn't have that one. Becky was Riley sent it to her. No. Okay. Hold on. Now, do you have, I've got to find it.

Becky's email on the phone. Nope.

Then I can pull it up here.

Yeah, so Christina's going to go forward that email to me, and then I can pull it up. So I was going to forward it to you. Or if you've got it, you can forward it to me. And that says, Christina, walk.

Yeah, this is a tough one.

These are coming. They're coming up. J Hendricks.

Some will be small. Some will.

I know, I feel like you have my name up there. Yeah, they're almost done.

So Riley, I'm going to let you talk about this. This is your baby right here. You did all the hard work. You did the brain work on this.

I was thinking somebody did their research.

He did a lot of brain work on it.

So we've talked a little bit about this already, being that as our current ordinances are written. We have nothing that adequately encompasses a potential data center. Our industrial zoning classification does not even come close to assessing that concern. So this is a proposed ordinance drafted in part by myself and with some sections taken from the York County Planning Commission proposed ordinance that they circulated in a recent meeting but I want to implement a special zoning category we can call it you know whatever we want it hasn't been named yet but it's gonna be specific to data centers right we don't have a ton of land available in town limits, but we have to think of the possibilities of annexation and if our town could be situated for a large scale data center, if that's something that we want. If so, the requirements in here are as stringent as possible to allow for something like this, if it meets all the requirements, but to not just allow free reign, do whatever you want, power it with 1,000 generators from United Rentals and just pollute the town to death. So we can jump into it, go through it section by section, or if y'all want time to review it, we can add it to the... Yeah, I've printed copies of it for everybody before.

That's the same thing we did.

Yeah, you should all have it. That's it.

Dang, I missed it. How does it... Protect. Being we're a border town, how does it protect with other counties bumping up against us?

It wouldn't do anything to county-owned property. That's something outside of our purview. It would only be applicable to town, you know, annexed land into the town. But, yeah. So definition sections obviously are, you know, some of that is going to be but those are just kind of classifying what these different centers are how you define their accessory uses what an actual data center is you know any facility used primarily for storage management processing transmission of digital data housing computers equipment etc um we've got our noise equivalency levels decibel ratings and like what time those are measured through which is kind of like your your nighttime, your wind down hours when people are trying to rest and not want to be disturbed by noise.

That scares the day for me sometimes.

Yeah. You might not have this. So the printed version that you So this would be like the approval process for if we got an application to rezone a parcel of land for this special use data center classification. So it would be a new zoning category. It wouldn't be changing industrial. It would just be a brand new one. I've got some proposals in here.

Can you explain the idea of a supermajority? What is a supermajority for this?

So we would have to change that in our other zoning categories, but typically like majority would be anything over 51. Supermajority would be like a two-thirds vote.

And why do you feel that's necessary for this one specific industry?

I'm not a proponent of data centers. I think that they have a lot of drawbacks. I think the only reason they're appealing to towns and counties is they're painted as a cash cow. It's going to bring all this money and revenue into your community, but in reality, it's got a lot of adverse effects as well.

So the way I would view this is creating guardrails to protect the town from water requiring surface water, which would require the use of the town's water system as opposed to wells, which would impact the local agriculture. The loop system, which is the newer technology, so they're not producing a lot of wastewater, which would overload our wastewater system. I believe that's a guardrail that we want to

But they still have to fill up once a year or top off approximately once a year.

Well, yeah. And the analogy that's been used before with me is it's like a swimming pool. The initial fill up is significant. And just like a swimming pool, you have evaporation. You're going to have evaporation from that water system. So depending upon how frequently they top the system off water, you know, it is not nearly as significant as the older systems. The loop system is much more conservative, and you don't produce the wastewater issues. That would be a concern for the wastewater plant. Obviously, you address the sound concerns, the noise issues, and I would assume, you know, having a buffer, you know, would be setbacks that would meet certain requirements i think we would have a greater setback than you would for some of the other industries um again i think this would be an i2 i think it would be an industrial two we have i1 you could have i2 um you know i i get the concern with the super majority but that's not the case with any other planning commission function or town function for that matter

Yeah, I just think with how prevalent this issue is, especially in South Carolina, and you see a lot of recent newsworthy situations in McCormick County, York County.

know i don't think the decision to put a data center in someone's backyard should be something that five people vote on so well it wouldn't you would have the planning commission and town council would vote on it and and i think ultimately the planning commission would make a recommendation to town council and town council would be the ones that would ultimately decide the the vote um

So I actually propose a public referendum on the issue of data center. I don't think that it's something that five people should vote on.

I don't think that that's adequate safeguards for my thing is town council is elected as representatives for their people. And and I think that. Educating the nine members of council is a much more doable thing than to educate 5,500 people on the nuances of a data center. I think you have to trust your elected officials to do that. I mean, that's their job.

I don't think people trust the elected officials on this sort of issue.

And that's fair. That's a fair statement. But my concern is if it becomes a public referendum... The misinformation that's put out, perhaps from both sides, I'm not going to say that both sides wouldn't put misinformation, but I think there's a lot of misinformation out there about the negativity towards the data centers. You hear a lot about the water issues and the wastewater, but that has been addressed really through the loop system.

Recycling.

We have concern about the electrical draw, but that is typically addressed by the co-op or Dominion that they would require that company to do those improvements to not put the burden on the rate payer, but they would pay for that improvement. I mean, every one of us has got a smartphone. We're on Wi-Fi. We're using data right now. It is an issue that is important, and we need to have data centers in order to maintain the things that we do. I'm not saying that the data centers come into Batesburg-Leesville. I think we set up guardrails and we have good guidance, but I don't think we need to go to an extreme because there's a fear of it. I think you have guidelines, these are going to be the minimum standards, and ultimately the council is the elected representatives of their people. If the public has concerns, they need to come to those public hearings. Public hearings are absolutely applicable and would be a part of any rezoning, any annexation. Those are required by law. I don't think we need to create a more stringent standard for just one industry.

See, I'm getting the feeling that this is already something that's being approached by the town because there's propaganda out there everywhere trying to get towns to buy into this. I don't think the research is there. It's not beneficial. So, I mean, I'm not voting for it.

haven't been approached by any industry that's looking to locate here. But yes, it is out there. Lexington County, it's been talked about with Lexington County. It's been talked about in Newberry County. We know that they put the moratorium on for the one year. I've had conversations with other managers. We've had managerial meetings where data centers have been discussed. And there are valid concerns, and I think that's where we have guardrails in place, But I don't think we just put the scarlet letter on them and just go outright and make it where it's almost impossible to do it. I think we set up guardrails to protect the town, to protect the environment, and then ultimately the people through their elected representatives make that decision.

Well, I think like, you know, you said have negative opinions about what it is. I mean, I think people are allowed to have negative opinions about what they don't want. I mean, and I understand that it may give, you know, something a bad name when it shouldn't be. But I think, yeah. it's up to the individual. I mean, if it's a bad name, it may not be a bad name because of misinformation. It may be just something that they, in their opinion, they don't want. So, you know, negative opinion, negative opinions about something doesn't necessarily to me mean that, um, It will deter a vote one way or the other. That's just my opinion. I just feel like people should, I mean, negative opinion does not always mean misinformation. That's what I'm trying to say.

And I agree. I mean, I just want us to make sure that we set the guidelines correctly. and are consistent with our ordinances. The supermajority votes, I mean, again, this is just one item that is being identified for that higher threshold. It still goes to council regardless. If the planning commission votes 5-4 and it fails on the supermajority, it still goes forward with just a negative, you know, it doesn't have a pass. Even if planning commission votes down something, it still goes to town council.

It doesn't have a recommendation. It has a recommendation that we don't recommend this.

I just think about Vulcan and how frightened we were of Vulcan. We just need all the information up front. We really do. Do we have all the information even today of what's coming?

And I don't have all the information. Again, I've been to different trainings and meetings and have had multiple conversations with other managers through the Economic Development Institute when I attended. These were topics of conversation. Yeah, I don't want us to overregulate something out of fear. I mean, again, guardrails to make sure that we protect our town, to protect the environment through the water, wastewater. I think those are valid things, but I just want us to be cautious.

Do we have a proponent that's for or whatever? Do we have somebody that's for and against it? Like somebody that could come and speak to all of us as a collective, potentially to include...

town council as well so that way they're not having to make two different trips here and whatnot so so my my thing is that these educators you know these municipal societies these representatives from data centers whatever you want to call them they're only going to tell you that they've got new systems in place it's not going to drain your resources and it's going to be so much money for your town that's why i want both i won't

I want those four data centers and I want those against them, whether it's an environmental agency or whoever. However, I would like to have one from each side. That way we can hear both opinions and the town council can also hear the same opinions. I mean, I think that would be the best route to go because then we could have information from both sides. That way it would be.

I mean, this might be really silly, but I could almost see a debate.

I mean, we could do a ring in here and do like a boxing match or whatever. I mean, we could absolutely do that. I'm okay with that. I don't know how the town and the insurance company would feel about that.

But yeah, I'm pretty sure that could be interesting.

It's not what they sell you.

I mean, because if we had I mean, if we had that. For and again from both sides, not just one sided. I want both sides because I want. Because then I can take that information that they gave me for both for and verify myth or factor, you know, whatever do my own research as well. And same with town council and everybody else on here. We could all make that opinion as an educated opinion because we've been educated on.

Yeah, I like that data centers. Right now, I do not feel educated enough on it at all. I mean, I watched the video. I mean, I learned a lot. I watched the video. And I've watched several YouTubes, pros and cons.

Well, Becky sent out the videos as well to all of us, and they're long, but they're not bad. But I still, I mean, I agree. I still don't think there's enough... I don't think I have enough information from a reputable source for or a reputable source against. Does that make sense? Yeah, I'm fine to do that. I just think that... But I want a reputable source. I don't want... It's a corrupting... I don't want Bobby Joe down here who lives in the bottom...

I just don't want to understate the gravity of a situation like this to approve a data center. And more often than not, in recent news articles, videos, and you can watch any of it locally, South Carolina, within 80 miles of where we sit currently, county councils have voted or town councils and county councils have voted in opposition to what the voters wanted. And it purely probably came down to numbers, right? Oh, it's going to be so much money to come in for the town.

Did Newberry, though, go opposite?

They haven't decided, but they're probably going to end up voting on one, too. But I just don't think that... I don't think it's a decision that should be solely in the hands of a council person because it's just they don't understand the gravity of it. It's not like a street light. It can't be undone once you start it. So... I have strong feelings about it. We can hug it out later. I'm fine.

I just don't think people understand how dangerous it is.

Do you know anybody who can do both sides?

We had a – I can reach out to the MASC. They had speakers come. The Municipal Association. They had speakers at one of the managers' forums back in the spring.

Was that a ProData Center speaker?

No, they were actually – I thought that they were fairly balanced. I mean, they were not a – Yeah, they were trying to present the information. They were not from a data center. They weren't with Google or – Was that the one that Ripple was? Now, Brits with central Midlands.

Okay. That was okay.

Yeah. So this was through the association at 1 of the, maybe the spring managers forum.

So, should that be some something that everybody both boards and our counts?

I mean, I have a, I have someone, a colleague from the environmental law project that could come and speak on the other end of this situation. Uh.

Have your people get his people and I'll put my people in contact, but that way, if we can try to plan it along with counsel. So that way we can all have. We can all make informed decisions. Okay, I think that would be, I think that would be more appropriate. Because I don't, I mean. I don't disagree with Riley, but I don't necessarily agree with Riley right now because I don't feel like I have enough information for everything. If that makes sense. I don't know how everybody else feels.

It does make sense. And just for clarity, there's nobody that has approached the town about a data center being built. Meta's not knocking on the door.

Technically, don't we have a data center in town, AT&T buildings? The old AT&T building, technically speaking.

Micro.

I mean, I'm just saying, like, technically. The facilities that I'm talking about are ones that would ruin, I think, would ruin the town.

The mega ones.

Yeah. It would kill the draw to live here for a long time.

Well, then, let's see if we technically already have a data center in town.

That's like just because it has some servers and it doesn't mean it's a – there's servers back here.

There are servers back here. Well, just remember it did say principal use was servers. Was that not what the AT&T building is? I'm just asking questions. I've never been in there before. Okay. I had no idea it was in there.

Maybe we should make a –

you need to define that language yeah principal uses yeah the principal use yeah so this is yeah all right so yeah so we need to get with council and and his people will get in touch with you and your peoples and we can work all that out Uh, see, that probably won't happen this year. Yeah, yeah, so it's probably gonna be next year. Because there's no way to get it done with the comp plan and yeah, I'd rather. All right. So does everybody have a copy of the comprehensive plan? Because we have new business. Comprehensive plan. Begin revisions on housing, economic land use, and economic elements. At 830, wherever we're at, 830, I'm drawing the line. We're out. Okay. Love y'all mean it, but I also love my family as well.

We need to change at large on here.

And I could definitely 100% talk to y'all all night about anything, but I just can't. Can't do it. All right.

Let's see... Up ahead... Where's the packet? Haha, nailed it.

All right.

Yeah, I'm trying to find it in my. See what happened was I don't have a page 47. I have a four dash two. That works even way better. Five dash one. All right. So the housing element here.

Do you have any more of those copies?

The comprehensive plan? Mm-hmm. How many more do you have? We have one copy, one full copy. Can you all share?

No, I'm fine. I've got something. You want to look over mine?

Okay.

Plus they're going to put it up on the board.

All right. So the housing element.

Wait. So we're going to go ahead and go to the next section.

Going to the housing section.

Population element.

5-1. No, the housing. Yes.

No, no, that would be that. That's fine. Did you not?

All right, so the housing elements, it is a lot and I can't figure out how to zoom in. I'm not going to read through all of this because that just ain't going to happen because that'll take me forever to read through it. Sorry. Are you going to read it? It's fine, batch one.

I don't know. I mean, I can tell you it's.

It doesn't say it doesn't say anything. It says 5 dash 1 is page. Oh, my computer's being really stupid right now. Somebody has a very good sound system in there. 47. Nobody said that what I said was 47. I'll share my cookie dough. It only has two grams of sugar in the whole thing. Well, I'll eat the sugar and you can have the non-sugar part, okay? How about that? The housing element is the first one.

We haven't done it since 2008. And so this is just updating the plan that's on file. So it's giving you some historical data, percent change and ultimately it's to be a guide for the planning commission and council for the growth of the community.

But I think it gets misunderstood that some people think it's written in stone. That's why we have this board. So if something needs to be changed, it can be reviewed.

We'll hit the highlights then. So on 5-1, the housing unit growth, It says, uh, shows base release. Well, it's got 2010 was 2063, 2020. We dropped in the housing unit growth, uh, night 1983. Yeah.

We lost about 4% of the housing stock is what it said. So, uh, demolition, uh, we've, you know, if you ride through certain parts of town, you'll see where vacant lots are, where the homes were demolished. Some were vacant condemned, but, um, there have been some removal of properties and that's reflected in those numbers. If you look at 5.2 on the next page, you'll see the new construction and you'll see that the growth over the last several years with the anomaly of 2023, I have no idea why that was so small, but averaging roughly 20 new homes per year over the last five years. So you're seeing that trend, and then you're about to see a significant growth with the subdivisions.

What's the voting year? 23? Was that a voting year, pre-voting? Doesn't that always mess with?

That was post-COVID in the crisis. Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah. I had a couple of two-by-fours. I was trying to sell them on Facebook Market today. Just, yeah, what? I know what I got.

But look how it jumped to 2018.

Going on, let's see.

People were afraid to make purchases.

We'll go to the land area by residential land use, the single family, obviously the acreage, the duplex, the multifamily, manufactured or mobile home. And then the total residential, all of the. Land uses acreage is. Going on a 55 with the housing types where explains. All of the types that we have, which are. Single attached single attached. A duplex multifamily. three to nine, whatever. Mobile homes. We have 138 mobile homes in town.

Manufactured and mobile.

No, it says mobile homes. It does not say manufactured. It says mobile homes.

Doesn't it say manufactured and mobile home?

Not on figure 5.6 on page 5-5.

All right, you win.

I know. Yeah, it does seem high to me too. Yes.

Um, figure 5.4 on page 49. you have a good point. It doesn't say does not out does not add up to 100. 1% over 100.

So they need to redo their math on that. Plus where it says unit type, it probably should have said mobile, home, and manufactured. Because it did on 5.4. It says mobile, manufactured, and mobile home on 5.4. So it should include that.

But how do we know that that's what they did, manufactured home?

Do you see manufactured home anywhere in that unit type?

No, and I don't see modular home either.

but if it was once there, it means it has to be a percentage.

Do they consider the mobile homes, manufactured homes, mobile homes, and then modular homes? Are those all because they are all mobile and they can come in on a trailer?

Well, then they need to put manufacturer and then say what percentage that is because if it's a percentage, Or if it's both of them.

Yeah, I thought if a house came, I thought to be manufactured, it had to be a certain percentage of the house.

Figure 5.2. I'm not sure they put the manufactured home on there.

Because we wouldn't know that. But Riley does make a valid point. I'm sorry, I'm talking with a mouthful. I'm sorry.

We approved Two.

Two over in at least three, four.

What is the question again?

Off of Lyon Street.

The manufactured homes.

Between Lyon and Saluda. Okay. Avenue.

So, yeah, we have one on Duncan Street that was approved last year.

What's the street by? Yeoman Street. It's one there.

Maiden.

It's one there.

There are several out in Northeast Street. I mean, they're around. I mean, I would have thought 138 was high, but.

I mean, I guess it depends on what their definition of mobile home is, too. That includes the manufactured home.

Manufactured home, by definition, is a stick-built home. By definition, it's a stick-built home. It's built in the factory and then pieced together. Modular home is the same, but they do it where it's two pieces put together. Modular homes can still be moved, so anything that is going to be put on property has to have all of their moving equipment removed from it and put on the brick.

Manufactured home. A modular home can't be.

Manufactured home. Yeah, that's what I...

Manufactured home is movable, but that's why you have to remove it, and then you can detitle it. Yeah, because modular home is... Modular home is stick-built. Yeah.

Manufactured is put together.

They're stick-built, but put together.

They're built to a different standard.

There's a little bit of difference on manufactured homes and a lot of modular homes. Yeah, there you go.

That's right. And to the point of it's just rounding is why the number doesn't add up. I mean, it's just it's a rounding thing. The 100.1 would just be rounding.

I mean, if you want, it can only go to 100 if it's our percentage of our density.

Well, that's why it shows 100% on the total residential. But it's 95.16535667, but it rounds to 95.2. And then 4.58253003, so it rounds to 4.6. And then it's .2521133. So it was just rounding is why that percentage looks a little off, but it's 100%. It's 100.1%.

All right, so moving on to the next one, the median number of rooms per occupied housing unit, South Carolina, Lexington County, and then Batesburg, Leesville, rent or occupied, along with owner occupied and total units. All right, moving on to 5.6, you got the median year residential structure built by tenure. So all the year, I guess, 1993.

Oh, we got a lot of old houses. Where is that house by?

That's not even right. What's not right? Jane, I already know. House ages were not started until the 1920s, 1930s on the tax records. So many of the homes are older than what is indicated.

They can only go by what is reported. Unfortunately. Unfortunately.

Jay's home is probably much older than what Zillow says it is.

Yeah. But, yeah, I mean, we do have an older town, 150 years old.

I mean, obviously that's going to change here very shortly.

The median will definitely change. You're right. It will slide.

All right. So then the year housing units were built.

There was a bunch added in the 40s. Okay. And some communities, every time a garage or something, just try to change it.

It's us. It's a perfect room. Which, I mean, all of that.

Right.

Don't try to get everything to equal.

Because mine was down.

Hey, man, government math is different. Don't do it. Private sector math. Justin, I know you're reading through all of this at very fast pace. We get it.

Okay, let's go.

I mean, the housing is the housing and there's, I mean, there's really not much we can, we cannot. That's not true because I got a time machine in my backyard. I'm not doing anything good.

This one's already fixed. I've got to find the plus capacitor. Let's see. Housing values.

That is all so very wrong now. I mean, I know it's 2023, but yeah, that's on 510. What page? There it is. I got it. 5-10 page number on the bottom right-hand corner. Yeah, that one. Yeah, because that is nowhere near what it is. I mean, again, it says 2023, but... Because we just had to have our house appraised at... According to this, it says there's 10 houses that are over 500,000. What?

I think they tore it down.

That would probably be a lot of some of these larger lots.

I mean, that, I mean, the source is the Census Bureau and I mean, it.

Oh, that actually says 2025 on that on the bottom.

The figures are 23, but the, the study was released in 25.

I mean, I didn't have it reassessed. I had it turned into a tax home. Mine's been reassessed.

I didn't ask for mine to be reassessed.

They just did it. They did everybody's. Was it last year?

Yes.

Last year. There we go.

I mean, pretty much none of this. We can't change any. I mean, none of this can be changed anyways because this is basically just numbers.

So we can move along.

Yeah. Although 514 does have the vacant property zone for residential uses. 5-14. And I can't see on mine. If I try to zoom in on it, it's going to... See? I forgot mine.

I just watched it on YouTube this afternoon.

Mine are at home.

Good.

I do too, but neither one of them are here.

Red bean. Light wood, which would make sense because of the new scalp. Elgin. They're not using our. I'm not sure.

Well, because it has our 1, our 1, a, our 2 and our 3. Yeah. Okay.

Why would it be zoned? It's zoned. It's got color on it. Which one?

That whole section right there.

Yeah.

That is... So it's just showing you the density of

Oh, that's the school.

That's the high school and the primary school. Oh, on the left-hand side right there? On the left-hand side?

Is that what you're talking about?

Oh, yeah. It's a lot of woods over there.

Is that wetlands over there?

I mean, I know it goes down into the bottom, but... Can't go.

Sorry.

All right, next page has a partnerships goals and objectives. I guess we should go over the goals and objectives here. All right, so goal 1 is preserve and improve the existing housing stock, which we're obviously already doing. Definitely improving, and we are still preserving because we're working on the ordinances. Strengthen the code enforcement staffing and procedures to ensure timely correction of property violations. Yes, we do.

Yeah, so we have a civilian code enforcement officer that enforces property maintenance code.

But we don't have a building.

Building officials are contracted through SafeBuild. But what they're referring to is code enforcement for property maintenance code. So that's enforcing codes upon the existing properties. You know, the building officials coming out and doing inspections on new construction. But property maintenance code is focused on… Cutting your grass. That is one of them. But, you know, if the… If the building is uninhabitable or if there are structural defects, you know, oftentimes he gets pulled into issues, you know, in rental properties and stuff. Yeah. So what they're saying is making it a stronger, I don't know if they're implying a second staff member, but to help maintain the. So if our code enforcement needs to write a ticket, a police officer comes in and writes that ticket. It does require a second person. Well, the initial desire from... So just for historical sake, whenever the code enforcement position was added, council did not want to see that be a law enforcement position at that time. And so they wanted it to be a civilian position. It's a civilian based out of town hall at the old town hall. Now, every person that has been has either been a certified law enforcement officer or retired law enforcement.

I did it for a little over a month with.

There are some that do and there are some that do not. We try to... Well, I would say that our code enforcement officer tries to be diplomatic. We try not to be strong-armed. It is very, very rare for a ticket to be issued. They try to work with people to try to get more education, education and bring them into compliance.

Turn your mic down.

There you go.

do we ever have situations like where the town has to go cut people's grass and like, do they build them for that service?

Like if it's just a true safe, there is a mechanism to place a lien on the property. If we go and if we have to tear a building down, uh, if we were, but that is very rare. We haven't done that to my knowledge. We've never done the grass cutting, uh, But I know that there were a couple instances 20-plus years ago where a building had collapsed, the town had to go clean it up, place the lien on the property, and eventually it came to the town because the property owner just vacated and just said, you can have it. There was a second one that the town had to pay for the demolition. The person ultimately sold the property, paid the town back. So those are the only two instances that I know that that's been done. And the town doesn't typically like to do that because that puts the cost on the town to fix a problem. And then maybe you get it back, maybe you don't.

So it's not like the HOAs where they put a lien on the house.

You can still put a lien on the property, but, you know, if they continue to pay taxes, you know, that lien just can linger. Yeah. Until they sell the property. Okay. and just for for your benefit yeah we have had conversations i had one last week with savannah cogg about the cdbg grant so we're going to be pursuing cwg grants on what's called blight the part of community development so we're going to try to get grant money to tear down abandoned condemned houses there are several that have been burned out that have just sitting there So we would rather go that route of getting grant money to try to pay for it as opposed to us incurring the cost using taxpayer money to pay for that. So that is something we're going to actively pursue in the next year is to get that list, get all the data. There's going to have to be some condemnations that are done, but that is part of this process.

The property review, property review board. What is that idea?

Some towns have like a historic property review.

This is not that. This is a property review board to provide structure and oversight and collaboration on blight and property maintenance concerns.

Yeah, I think there's some communities that do this. Some of them like they won't let you put like a box on a lot. You have to have at least a porch or a... And they actually review...

So at the top of the screen, you know, it does talk about, you know, did I go too far? I clicked too far. But it is something that is allowed in the property maintenance code. I believe they typically want you to try to have an architect and have different people with skill sets that are specifically related to construction or to have experience in that field and not just a random board. We do not have that at this time.

We're already working on the goal two for carefully planned duplex townhome in Swanskill. Trying to change some of the ordinances. Sure. The council had issues with the council meeting. They did not approve. What did they not approve? I can't remember.

It was some wording.

It was something that... You're talking about one of the...

The last council meeting.

They did not approve the change to C1 for the...

The medical and hospital. The hospital and medical treatment. But they're sending it to the work session so they can have more discussion on that.

We're going to have more discussion at the work session next week.

Yeah, so... The second one was the shall...

That one did get first reading approval. So the discussion centered around not so much the dispute of medical treatment facility and an urgent care being in C1. It was more of a concern. Traffic. Well, I think that may have been part of it, but it was really the inclusion of hospitals into that category was the concern of a couple of council members. I felt that y'all's recommendation was accurate. I think a C1 zoning for a hospital is accurate. Every hospital that I go to is surrounded by commercial, you know, lots of fast food restaurants specifically.

I mean, you're not going to put it in a neighborhood.

Yeah, it's not going to be residential.

I mean, I was confused because I watched the whole thing and I was like, do they want it on a side road? What do they mean?

That will be part of that discussion next week. I didn't get a good clarity. It was more of just concern or didn't want it to be included in the C-1. Again, it wasn't so much an argument about an urgent care and the medical treatment facility in C-1.

Because that's not a medical treatment facility. That is technically a professional international business facility. One of the IVs, it was a professional services. Yeah. I was a professional officer of some sort. So it was, it was still okay to be in a C1 anyways. So, but I still, it's an urgent care and you're going to provide. Yeah.

Anyways, I think that the, in my personal opinion or professional opinion, perhaps, um, I think providing that clarity that a medical treatment facility is allowed in C1 when we are specifically saying it's allowed in other zoning I think was important and not simply have to dig into building codes to find a definition that makes it, all right, that could be a professional service. So I felt the recommendation from the PC was appropriate.

We did too. We did too.

And we'll have continued discussion Monday.

I won't be there. All right. So pretty much that's every, I mean, I went to the last page for the rest of the objectives. And then goal seven, plan for the future residential growth and market stability. And all of that. all right i don't want to start another section because it's already 8 24 and that'll give us all time to lock it up so do i have a motion to adjourn this work session and we will pick this up at the next month's meeting if we don't have anything and we'll just have a straight work session everybody's good with that everybody good laurel so are we good with that yes okay so motion to adjourn so move second