Planning and Zoning - Regular Meeting

Let's pray. Amen. Thank you. Amen. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Amen. Thank you. Thank you. Amen. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

I've asked for Mr. Howerton to lead us in the prayer, and I will provide us with the pledge allegiance to the flag.

Let us pray. Our Heavenly Father, we thank you for this day, and we thank you for this place that we could assemble. Dear Lord, please give us the wisdom, and please give us the spirit of a like kind tonight, Lord, to help us through these different issues. We'd ask you to also guarantee us it's very safe to travel home tonight, Lord. These things we ask in Jesus' name. Amen.

Amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the code for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

This is just a reminder to please turn your phones off or place them on silent. The meeting will proceed as follows. I will read the items into record, staff will present an overview of each item, the commission will ask staff any questions it may have, and the applicant will then be called upon to speak to his or her request for up to a period of four minutes. And any citizen present who would like to speak will have the same opportunity. Following the discussion, the Planning Commission will make a recommendation for rezoning items and a final decision for requests for waivers. County Council has the final decision-making authority on rezoning items, so please make sure you follow the items of interest through to County Council. The planning department can provide you with the dates for upcoming land use committee and county council meetings. Unruly and disrespectful conduct will not be tolerated. Attendees demonstrating unruly and disrespectful conduct will be escorted out of the meeting. Are there any agenda items or updates?

Yes, ma'am. One item, item 5A, the applicant is requesting deferral. And of course, you will have the opportunity to consider that after the item is read into record.

Yes, ma'am. Thank you. So, first on the agenda tonight is the approval of the minutes from the regular meeting of July 28th, 2026. Move to approve. We have a motion from Ms. Hoover and a, do we have a second? Second. We have a second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. Motion carries. Next on the agenda is a deferral, another deferral that will not be entertained, but it will be read into the record. An ordinance to modify the official zoning and development standards map of Berkeley County, South Carolina in regards to Ranchulada. Holdings LLC on behalf of David Riley of Riley Family Revocable Trust for TMS number 271-00-02-008 plus or minus 4.30 acres. located on Clements Ferry Road and Perrineau Lane in the vicinity of Wando from the multi-sectional manufactured residential R1MM District to the General Council GC District and Council District 2. The next on the agenda is a request for rezoning that staff just informed us was deferred, but we will read it into the record as well. An ordinance to modify the official zoning and development standards map of the Berkeley County, South Carolina in regards to Chad Leader of Eastwood Homes on behalf of 734SRL LLC for TMS numbers 144-00-01-015 and 144-00-01-063 plus or minus 252.61 total acres located on Highway 402 Sportsman's Retreat Lane and Umbria Road in the vicinity of Cordsville from the Agricultural Flex 1 District to the Transitional Agricultural Zoning, TAZ District in Council District 8.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The applicant informed us prior to the start of the meeting that they request deferral and because the item was published and posted, the deferral request must be approved by you all. Should you opt to defer the item, we will need a motion. The applicant is here.

Thank you. Is anyone from the community here to speak for or against this application? Yes, ma'am, go ahead. Just state your name and your, no, ma'am, come to the podium and state your name and address for the record.

Okay, my name is Melanie Lott. I'm from Quartzville Community, and... In reference to the proposed district, it does not change the number of homes. I'm actually in support of it because I like the buffer between the highway and the community, but I am, we still have some concerns, and if you were at the County Council last night, you heard most of this, but the concerns are Highway 402, the traffic is unsafe, and we're concerned about the number of homes because this is not the only development that's happening in our area. It's just the only one published because of the rezoning request. So it's that, it's the sewer. A lot of us still have septic tanks and we also have wells. So there's a difference between adding one or two homes and adding, and I don't even know what the home number is at this point, but 138 homes was the last number I heard. you know that many septic systems what is that going to do to our drinking water because they're going to have town water they're going to have water that's purified what is that going to do to our drinking water should our drinking water be tainted then we'll be forced to buy in or tap into the county water to have fresh water so that's a concern so it's the safety it's the fact that we have no shelters in our area for our people and um let me see i'm sorry um And just make sure I don't miss anything else. The property tax is the other thing. The last I'd heard, these homes start off at $400,000. That does not meet our price ranges, you know, for our income levels in our place. And so we're concerned about the taxes being increased as well. We already have A lot of our folks in our neighborhood are seniors, and we're concerned about property taxes going up because they're barely making ends meet now. We gave out food three weeks ago, and we served 153 families at the end of the day. And these people are like eating chicken wings as their meat. for their dinner. Y'all, my kids eat that before supper. And so those are concerns that we have in the community. I also do wanna recognize Eastwood though, because I do appreciate, I don't know where you are, but I do appreciate you being willing to meet with our community on Thursday, because at least we feel like we have some kind of conversation, which we have not been able to have up to this point. So that's all I have. Thank you so much.

Anyone else here to speak for or against? Yes, ma'am. You can come up to the podium. Please state your name and address for the record.

Nicole Burbage, 911 Lacey C. Lane, Moncks Corner. I believe in property rights, but property rights do not mean a developer is entitled to have the county continually change the rules until the investment produces the return they want. This developer knew what they were buying. They knew the zoning, the roads, the infrastructure. They knew the corridor that this was in and the expectation of no development in the future. It's not in a growing corridor. We're not the next Cane Bay. in 2024 the same property came before the county under the proposed conservation subdivision zoning district and because of the size of the development it was required to go through the moratorium process that proposal fizzled now the exact same property is back under the very similar conservation subdivision concept except this time we're calling it transitional agriculture and we're being told that the moratorium doesn't apply but my question is why i do not understand the argument her i'm sorry i do understand the argument for tax and uh... if the alternative conventional flex one development with no required buffers and no required green space is the is the only alternative then requiring buffers in fifty percent protected open spaces absolutely an improvement but Better than worst case scenario alternative does not automatically make it the right development for this property. We're talking about very small lots and potentially hundreds of individual septic systems in an area where many residents are depending on wells and we are concerned about high water tables already. DHEC can determine whether an individual septic system can be permitted, but who is evaluating the cumulative impact of hundreds of septic systems, because this is only the first development, hundreds of septic systems on groundwater and surrounding properties. that is the county planning question and then there's infrastructure miss hoover you asked about this in june you said at what point will we say no to new development so infrastructure can catch up we have been asking this for years we need a turning lane on highway 402 yet we're being asked to add potentially hundreds of residents to this area where infrastructure has already been a concern there is only one point of access to this proposed development Our one Berkeley comprehensive plan is supposed to protect us for growth before it happens. It should not be approving development first and figuring out whether infrastructure, wastewater systems and zoning policy can support it afterward. There is no development agreement with this development. In 2024, we were told flex one by right yields approximately 139 homes. Now we're hearing 172 homes. And on the current material you have, page 15, they even mentioned they could put 361 homes on it. Have the flex one standards really changed that dramatically in two years? Are we comparing different calculations to make 147 homes seem more reasonable? If the buffers and conservation requirements and agricultural protections in TAS are a good policy, then let's get that TAS policy figured out first. Let's answer the septic, the groundwater, the infrastructure, the density, the moratorium questions before we approve a new development based on the ordinance that is still being created. I know they have the right to request this, but I'm asking you to use your best judgment because when these houses are built, that developer is going to leave and we are still here.

Thank you. Anyone else here to speak for or against? Yes, sir. Please come up. You can state your name and address for the record.

My name is Steven Wright. I live at 972 McKnight Forest Road in Cordsville. The numbers that I've heard on the amount of houses for the possible four different housing is well over 1,000 houses. Sportsman's Retreat, up to 600 is what I was told. If it's 350, that's still 350. There is, in my estimation, less than 300 houses from one end of 402 to the under end of 402. So just putting in 350 houses doubles the amount of houses. double or triples the size of the amount of vehicles that are gonna be traveling on that road. Traffic right now, if you go over on 402 and you're trying to come into town, traffic is backed all the way up to Old Cherry Hill. That's about three quarters of a mile because right now the intersection at 402 and 52 cannot handle the traffic. Typically a house today has three to five vehicles. Mine has three. The other individuals who were talking about water, I'm on a well, I'm on septic. When we don't have rain, we struggle to get water. But adding all of those houses is going to add more water, tainted water, into our water system. So I do not, in my opinion, believe that just with the infrastructure, The road systems, it can't handle it. You'd have to widen that road out to four lanes and a turn lane. To do that, you're taking people's property. There are many houses on 402 that are 50, 60 feet off the road. To put in two lanes at 24 feet a piece, that's 48 feet. There has to be, between the road and the house, there's a buffer So a lot of those houses are going to go away. So they would have to take it by eminent domain. And this is not an eminent domain issue. This is a private subdivision that's going in. Therefore, in my opinion, eminent domain doesn't happen, which means that the state can't widen the road. It's not for the good of the community to add this many houses. If you want to put in a 300 foot buffer, That makes it a little bit better. It cuts down on how many houses. But it doesn't cut down enough to warrant the road that we have now. So before anything is done, the state needs to come up with what direction the road is going to be, how we're going to widen it to handle all the traffic. If you build the houses first, then you build the road, you're going to end up, just like State Road, over toward Cane Bay. They built all of those houses, over 30,000 houses in a 10-year period. They just now finished the widening. Cane Bay was started about 2010, 2012. 14 years later, the state finally widened the road. I used to drive on my work route to Holly Hill. There were days and times that I didn't want to go that way Traffic was horrible coming down that road. You're gonna run the same situation here if you allow the houses to go in before you widen the road. That's all I have.

Anyone else here to speak for or against? Hearing none, do we have any questions for staff?

Madam Chairman, I'd like to ask staff for clarification about the number of houses that we are entertaining. In my packet, it looks like it's 147 that they're requesting. If it were flex one, it would allow 172 is what I'm reading here. And I just was curious about the other numbers. Exactly what are we looking at?

Sure, I appreciate the question. The conservation subdivision sketch contemplates 147 and then the flex one by right sketch contemplates the 172. I think the metrics that were mentioned earlier speak to just zoning density if you multiply the developed acreage times the typical density or minimum lot size allowances.

Thank you.

All right, no other questions. Do I have a motion? Or deferral?

Motion.

Second. I have a motion from Mr. Blackwell and a second from Mrs. Hoover. All in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? The motion carries. The next thing on the agenda, we have agenda item B and agenda item 5B and 5C, which will be read together. an ordinance to modify the official zoning and development standards map of Berkeley County, South Carolina in regards to David D. and Kelly B. Fitzpatrick survivorship for TMS numbers 181-00-02-057 and 181-00-02-059 plus or minus 16.96 total acres located on Oakley Road and Old Highway 52 in the vicinity of Moncks Corner from the manufactured residential R2 district to the agricultural Flex 1 district in Council District 8. Item C, an ordinance to modify the official zoning and development standards map of Berkeley County, South Carolina in regards to Rachel Faith Lasher Sturvant for TMS number... one eight one zero zero dash zero two dash zero eight zero plus or minus two point nine eight acres located on oakley road in the vicinity of monk's corner from the manufactured residential r2 district to the agricultural flex one district in council district eight thank you madam chair

So this is a combined staff report for two neighboring lots. There's three total. The Fitzpatricks own the portion in red, and they're wanting to utilize their lot for agricultural use, which I think it might already be... being utilized as that. There is a single family dwelling on it. Ms. Sturdivant owns the smaller lot in purple, and she would like to use her lot also as agricultural and to repair her existing barn from termite damage. All lots are contained Frontage along Oakley Road, a secondary state-maintained roadway. The larger lot also contains frontage on Old Highway 52. They're contained within a triangular strip of area located between Highway 52 and Old Highway 52. The northern point extending upward to Galliard Road and the southern part extending all the way down to Cypress Gardens Road. The lots are joined by R2 to the north and south and a heavy industrial and smaller 0.41 acre general commercial lot to the west. The adjacent lot sizes vary with the smallest being approximately one acre, increasing to about 16 acres. Again, these are the adjacent lots, mostly flex one and R2. It is contained within the future land use map zoning designation of suburban communities. And the main zoning distinction between the R2 and Flex 1 is that Flex 1 does allow for up to four parcels maximum. The subject parcels are surrounded by primarily R2 and Flex 1 that maintain a rural residential character. The area also reflects a transitional development pattern with properties east of old Highway 52 generally zoned Flex 1 and development transitioning to a greater suburban intensity as you move west towards Highway 52. The Flex 1 zoning classification provides a versatile rural residential housing type framework that can accommodate multiple dwellings. Should this request be denied, they would be held to the R2 standards. Should it be approved, they would be held to the Flex 1 standards.

And that concludes. Any questions for staff? Is the applicant here? Would you like to come please to the podium and state your name and address for the record?

Rachel Faith Lasher Sturdivant, 931 Oakley Road.

Apologies. No, no, his fault. Randall Sturdivant.

Yeah, so I don't know if there's anything you want me to speak on or? Any questions for the applicants?

Yeah, just if you could just very quickly summarize kind of what is driving this.

Yeah, so when we initially purchased the property, we didn't realize that it was not applicable for livestock. I do have horses on the property, and I don't want to move.

And I don't, the barn has got termite damage and it needs to be redone. So I want to keep my property. I don't want to have to leave the house I've been in for almost seven years. And my neighbors are following suit so that we can also be in the same situation because it was a dairy farm, it was a horse farm, and we don't know at what point in time it changed. It's now not applicable for nothing more than eight hens is what we were told. So I would really just like to stay where I'm at and build the property that I'm on and keep it the way it is, but make it nicer. So that's what's driving it. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone here in the audience who would like to speak for or against this application? All right, hearing none, do I have a motion? Move to approve. I have a motion from Ms. Hoover and a second from?

Second.

A second from Mr. Blackwell. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? You've got your variance. All right, item 5D is an ordinance to modify the official zoning and development standards map of Berkeley County, South Carolina in regard to Patrick Sullivan on behalf of Fred Holzberg for TMS number 222. plus or minus 4.40 acres located on North Main Street in the vicinity of Somerville from the single family residential R1 district and the general commercial GC district respectively to the general commercial GC district in council district four.

Good evening, commissioners. Good evening. Just to clarify, Currently, the intent is to combine this lot with its neighboring property after it has been re-sown to GC and then combine it with its neighboring lot into a parcel that has 8.9 acres in total. So the subject property, which is pictured here, is non-conformingly split zoned into R1 and GC. It measures 4.4 acres in total, 4.3 of which are zoned R1, whereas just 0.1 acres are currently zoned GC. The request is to rezone the 4.3 acres into GC so that the property as a whole is commercial. A draft traffic impact analysis has already been prepared for the proposed landscaping business. It concludes that this business will not have a significant impact on North Main Street's traffic. This next slide is a close up look at the split zoning of the subject property. If you take a look at the image on the right, you can clearly see the 0.1 acres of GC at the front of the lot. as opposed to the rest of it, which is R1 in yellow. Both properties share frontage along North Main Street. The split zone portion occupies approximately 32 feet of frontage. And because of that, the only way to access the vehicle repair shop that is at the back of the property is through the property that is currently being rezoned. This can be seen in the image. You can see that the smaller strip DOESN'T QUITE ALIGN WITH THE ROAD ACCESS, BUT IF THESE TWO LOTS ARE ULTIMATELY COMBINED, THEY WOULD HAVE GREATER ACCESSIBILITY TO VENT APART. THIS NEXT SLIDE SHOWS THE SURROUNDING USES. TO THE NORTH, THERE ARE R2 RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL STORAGE USES. TO THE SOUTH, THERE ARE STORAGE AND COMMERCIAL USES. THERE IS MORE COMMERCIAL STORAGE TO THE EAST, AND TO THE WEST, THERE IS AN APARTMENT COMPLEX. And this is the future land use map. The property is currently in the growth corridor with underlying neighborhood mixed use. And this is what the applicant has submitted as their concept plan. So if the applicant wishes to speak to it, he can refer to this slide to do so later. This slide shows the differences between the different zoning districts. The key here is that commercial uses are only allowed in the GC portion and the landscaping business is intending to use the entire lot. The first image is of the portion that is split zoned. This is where the GC portion begins and then transitions into R1 in the first image. And the second one is just a view towards Somerville. And here is what the access situation looks like. And also you can see the entrance to the vehicle repair shop that is on the adjacent site to be combined. Staff believe that this rezoning request aligns with the comprehensive plan. The feature land use map showed that this area is intended to be neighborhood mixed use. And these areas are intended to have a mix of neighborhoods and standalone businesses that can serve these residents. This landscaping supply business would be near other businesses that are already sown GC and also near both single family residential and apartment complexes. And because of that, we recommend approval as it would continue to expand the mixed use character of this location. And additionally, it would also fix the nonconforming split zoning while also improving both Lattice access to the road. But if this request is denied, they will continue to have a nonconforming split zoning, which could impede the redevelopment of this parcel. But if it is approved, They will be held to GC zoning standards as they redevelop into a landscaping supply business.

All right, does anyone have any questions for staff? Hearing none, is the applicant here? So please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record.

Preston Busby, 501 Wando Park Boulevard. I'm here on behalf of the applicant, Patrick Sullivan, who is also here if you have any additional questions that I might not be able to answer. As staff discussed, there are two existing buildings on site that were a former auto repair shop. The user of the property actually used both properties as their own. On an arrow, you can see it a little better, but the access, all the roads, everything on site was acting as one. The applicant is looking to purchase both properties that are owned by the SAM landowner and renovate and upfit the existing buildings on site for the new landscape business. In order to do so, it would need to be one parcel and because of the split zoning and the legal non-conforming at the access, that's why we're here requesting rezoning and really to kind of clean up mess that some of these parcels have right now. So if you have any questions for me or if I can't answer them with the applicant, I'm happy to help.

Any questions for the applicant?

Are any of the existing buildings there being used currently or are they vacant?

Currently they're vacant. It goes with the all zoning thing and that's about all I got to say. I just think it would be a good deal.

Does anyone have any questions for this? Any questions? All right, no. No, sir, thank you. Anyone else here to speak for or against? All right, seeing none, do I have a motion?

Motion to approve.

I have a motion by Mr. Blackwell, a second by? Gore. Okay, oh yeah, I know that. I just didn't hear you, Ms. Gore. All in favor, please say aye. Aye.

Opposed?

All right, that agenda item passes. All right, next on the agenda is item E, an ordinance to modify the official zoning and development standards map of Berkeley County, South Carolina in regards to Amber Kammer on behalf of Jack J. Green Jr. AT ALL FOR TMS NUMBER 242-00-02-030 PLUS OR MINUS 3 ACRES LOCATED ON HIGHWAY 78 AND JUSTIN COURT IN THE VICINITY OF LADSON FROM THE AGRICULTURAL FLEX 1 DISTRICT TO THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL GC DISTRICT IN COUNCIL DISTRICT 4.

Good evening, members of the Planning Commission. The applicant is proposing to develop the site with five flex commercial buildings containing 10 tenant spaces. As way of background, the property is located approximately 500 feet south of the intersection of Highway 78 and Limehouse Drive. Through coordination with the engineering department, a traffic impact analysis is not required based on the intended use. This slide just shows the adjacent property information. As you can see, the adjacent zones primarily are identified as general commercial, and there is a mix of different land uses within the vicinity. This slide just provides the future land use map. As you can see, the parcel is located within the neighborhood mixed use future land use designation. This slide just provides the distinctions between the existing zone and the proposed zone. And this slide provides a concept plan for the proposed development. Here we have images of the site and as well as Highway 78 looking westbound and this slide we have the image of the highway looking eastbound. As it relates to conformance with the comprehensive plan, the site is or staff does find that the request is consistent with the future land use designation of the neighborhood mixed use designation. As it relates to the recommendations, staff recommends approval. The site is located along Highway 78, which is an established transportation network that serves the region. There are also GC zone parcels located approximate to the subject parcel along the Highway 78 frontage. If approved, the rezoning will align with the historic commercial usage of the property and support development and redevelopment as intended. As it relates to potential impacts, if the request was to be denied, the applicant would be held to the current Flex 1 standards and permitted to develop that property according to those requirements or standards. Conversely, if the request was to be approved, the applicant would then be held to the general commercial district zoning standards and permitted to use the site as such. And that completes my presentation.

Any questions for staff?

One.

What is the current property being used for? It looks like it is developed.

According to my knowledge, the property is currently being used as a boat and recreational vehicle storage business, but I will defer to the applicant to speak more to the current use.

Assuming that is correct, then that would be conforming with Flex 1?

Actually, no. The current use is not permitted. It's a non-conforming use. Thank you.

Any other questions for staff? All right, hearing none, is the applicant here? I don't see an, okay, there you go. You wanna come up to the podium and state your name and address for the record?

Hey, David Bordick from 10088 Highway 78.

Any questions for the applicant?

Yeah, could you just kind of give us an overview of what you're planning to do here? I mean, I've seen the drawings, but.

I mean, technically, I mean, this was the property that Jamie grew up on and it was all overgrown and everything. There had always been a shop up in front where some car work had been done there. One time or another, there was a home also there. That was a business that was torn down and condemned. We went and cleaned the lot and just used it to go ahead and allow people to go ahead and store things on it. I run my pest control business out of the original home for the greens in the back there. And he has his construction business back there. And we'd like to go ahead and try and make it a little prettier than what it is now. Questions?

That's it. Thank you.

I have one question. What kind of tenants are you planning to have? What kind of businesses? What kind of tenants?

Anybody that'll rent it from us. I have a friend of mine that has a tire business. He'd like to go ahead and come on in there. He thinks it'd be a great location for him. His gentleman has a smaller electrical business. He's looking to go ahead and possibly take some space back over there. I know I'm planning on taking one of the, half of one of the buildings. I know Jamie's taking half, maybe more than that, and possibly a woodworking shop. Just something to go ahead and generate a little income in the community.

Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? Go ahead, Mr. Hallerton.

I see the approach road that comes into the development. What does it look like past the picture here? Does it go many degrees?

I'm not sure what you're asking. It's just in court. is actually the road that... You've got a road coming in there now. Yeah, it's called Justin Court.

Okay, and it does touch 78?

Yeah, it comes out from 78 and goes towards the back of the property where the house is.

What does that look like, where it touches 78?

It's like a beautiful road in there. Can you go back to that slide?

I can answer that.

Oh, okay.

Oh, here's the clicker right there. Yeah, whatever. So originally, years ago, there was a Boba Home part there, and when the 911 system was incorporated... The road that went down there was just a rock road. And because of 9-1-1, they had to give individual addresses to each one of the trailers. So they had to name the street. So that's how it ended up with the street name. But it's not a county maintained. It's a private road. It's never been a county maintained road. And there hasn't been a trailer park there in 20 years, at least.

So currently, it's a gravel road that connects to 78?

Mm-hmm.

OK. Yeah.

And apologies.

40 feet is paid.

Could you just state your name and address for the record?

Amy Green, 103 Garden Hill Road.

Thank you. Just that we have it on the record. Any other questions? All right. Hearing none, do I have a motion? Move to approve. I have a motion to approve.

A second.

And a second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? And that motion carries. Thank you. Is there, we don't have anything else on the agenda unless you have something, Ms. Simmons? No updates. No updates. All right, so do I have, I will entertain a motion to adjourn.

I'll make that motion.

I have a motion to second. All in favor? Aye. All right, we are adjourned.