Town Council - Special Meeting

Let me call to order the special council meeting of Mount Pleasant Town Council for this Tuesday, February 10th, 2026. Um, as I will do in the next meeting, let me remind everybody it is Black History Month in the town of Mount Pleasant. We have a robust schedule of events. Um, please uh consult those. I believe this Saturday is the uh Plantation Singers if I remember correctly. So, um that's one you don't want to miss. Item number two on our agenda for today is public comment. If you're here to make a public comment, please come forward, give name and address. Two and a half minutes. Anyone for public comment? None. All right. Public comment is closed. Item three, executive session. Uh item A, legal and contractual legal advice related to John is at all uh versus the town of Mount Pleasant and B personnel update on personnel matters related to the Mount Pleasant Police Department. Do we have a motion? So move

in a second. All right. Any discussion before the vote? Let me announce that we may take as council action on any item including any subsection of any section listed on an executive session agenda or discussed in executive session during a properly noticed meeting. All in favor of the motion to go into executive session, please say I. I. Any opposed? All right, we are entering executive session upstairs, please.

Yeah, okay.

Thank you. No, I just want to get it right. Pressure on. For those of you that are just here, we are concluding our 5:00 pm special town council meeting. Thank you. So bear with us as we wrap this up and then move on to the six o'clock um monthly town council meeting. So we have u reconvened after executive session. No votes were cast. No action was taken. I do believe we have a couple of motions.

Yes, sir. On item 3A, uh, I would like the motion to grant town staff the authority to proceed as discussed in executive session. Second. Have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? All in favor, please say I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Um the second item um was an update on personnel matters related to the Mount Pleasant Police Department and the council members have asked me um I had a statement but I'll make that statement in a form of a motion. Um first of all uh it is that we commend the handling of the investigation uh into the current issue uh in our police department by our chief and by our head of human resources. We received the info uh up to date up to this point and commend the chief for the information that was made available to the public yesterday, which was a fantastic update. Um that we agree with the path forward as was laid out to us in executive session tonight. We think it is on the right track, not only for um this matter, but uh ways to improve moving forward. And and perhaps most importantly, we want to thank and commend all the officers dutifully serving and protecting the town of Mount Pleasant day in and day out, good times and bad, good publicity and other. And we want to thank them for that. And I make that in a form of a motion. Do I have a second? Thank you.

Any discussion? All in favor, please say I. I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Item five is uh approval of the 2026 blessing of the fleet beneficiaries. Yes, sir. Well, we've done this so many times. Uh Nicole Harvey's here and she will lead us through this portion of of the agenda. Mr. Mayor, thank you.

Thank you all. Council members, um so you have uh in your packets, I believe recommendations um for many many years, you know, we're almost at 40 years. This will be our 39th year of the blessing. And East Cooper Meals on Wheels had all the um got all of the net proceeds from the festival. It's not on. I don't need a mic. We all know that people can hear me down the hall. Sorry. Um so I can't tell if it's on or not. Anyway, um so anyway, we have formalized the process for many, many years. The Magwood family gets together with staff and we review applications from area nonprofits that serve Mount Pleasant residents. And so um this year we would like to recommend the Lonen Foundation, which works with um children who have a parent who has been diagnosed with cancer and they give them really specific care to help them through and give them resources through that kind of traumatic event. And then the other is East Kipper Mount Pleasant Kuanas Club and they do a lot of great local um um projects with the schools and the Ronald McDonald House and in Lucy Beckham and Wando. So um two great local organizations full of wonderful Mount Pleasant people helping our community and so that's who we would like to recommend. Mr.

Chair approval of the um blessing of the fleet beneficiaries as described. All right. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you. We let the rec chair do that. Thank you. Any discussion? All in favor, please say I. I. Any oppose? Motion carries. And thank you. Thank both organizations for what you do for our community. Item six, rec uh recognition of state champions bands of Wando, Wando Girls tennis, Oceanside football, Oceanside boys volleyball, and Oceanside girls tennis. So turn that over. Yes. So uh uh Councilwoman Hayatt is a proud alumni of Bands of Wando. So, she really wanted to do this recognition. So, we are not. So, awesome. Go for it, Miss Hyatt.

Thank you. As former Wando band drum major, I'm here and proud um to recognize our bands of Wando. The Wando High School band, currently led by band directors Bobby Lambert, Laney Redki, and Matthew Kilby, also a proud Bands of Wando alumnist, is a legacy program that has rebuilt with strength and resilience following COVID and school changes. This past season marked a historic achievement. The Bands of America Carolina Regional Championship, the South Carolina State Championship, and a top 11 finish at Bands of America Grand Nationals. An unprecedented sweep in a single year.

Yes.

Beyond awards, the Bands of Wando provides students with belonging, discipline, leadership, and lifelong impact. The program proudly represents Mount Pleasant on local, regional, and national stages while remaining committed to ensuring that no student is excluded due to financial barriers. The band directors were unable to attend this evening as there's concert band rehearsal tonight. However, they send their sincere thanks and appreciation for this recognition. We're happy to celebrate these students for their accomplishments. Congratulations, Awesome. Congratulations.

Great job, guys. Oh, thanks. So fun. Awesome. That's for us. Oh my god. Thank you, guys. Thank you. Awesome. Congratulations. Thank you so much. Is your mom Bissa? Michelle. Okay, great. Hey, Michelle. How you doing? I know your mom. All right. This is wonderful. Awesome.

Thank you guys. That was awesome. 250 kids come in. All right, I think up next we have our Wando girls tennis team. Are they out there?

Oh, we're welcome. All right, so the Wano High School girls tennis team won the 5A Division One State Championship this past fall, beating Spartanberg 4 to3 in the final to cap an amazing season in which the Warriors finished with a 22 and4 record. It was the team's second consecutive state title and 10th overall in program history. Wanda was led by senior co- captains Mia L. Kudiwi and Callie Kuzaza who clenched the championship in dramatic fashion when they won their doubles match. The last time a Wando girls tennis team won backto back state titles was 2008 and 2009. Uh Wo is coached by Mr. Bob Lang and assisted by Heather Chadwick and David Kelly. So let's give a round of applause for our Wo Harlson. Are you an assistant?

All right, up next we have Oceanside Football. We might need too long.

Not Jackson. All right.

Um All right. Oceanside football. So, the football team captured its not one, not two, but third straight South Carolina State title, rolling to a 28-7 victory over BHB to secure a three repeat and the 3A championship game. After a slow 0 and2 start playing large schools by the way, the Land Sharks rebounded by winning 13 straight games highlighted by a statement 2420 victory over 5A powerhouse and eventual state champion Dutch Fork who also had what like an 18game winning streak or something going into that. Is that right? Just adding I'm ad living. Um uh so let's see. uh proving the program, proving that Oceanside uh was among the best not only in the Low Country, but in the entire state. Oceanside capped the season with dominant performances on both sides of the ball throughout the playoffs, outscoring opponents 181-36. And the Land Sharks are led by Kos Brad. All right. Yes. Okay. Just very quickly. Oh,

it's okay. My name is Chris Swisser, the board chair at Oceanside. And on behalf of our board, along with Coach Brent Mccra, we want to give uh Mayor Haney a championship ball. Wow. Just to show

just to say thank you for all the support. There's um it's funny, every time that Oceanside takes the field, we've get accused of recruiting from all over the state, all over the Southeast. And a lot of these boys I've coached in the in the leagues that have played back here at Town Hall, at Park West, and at Moltry. And these guys are homegrown. And uh we've got one of the one of the biggest legends of high school football in the making with coach Brent Lrret. So boys, it's on to number four and five and six. Let's keep making Mount Pleasant proud. Awesome. Thank you. Yes, sir.

Oh, my bad. Okay. We're a big family.

Great. Awesome. Great job everybody. I look forward to being at your send off again next year. That's all right. Not at all. All right. Uh, Oceanside boys volleyball. Sorry. All right. Now, our wonderful volleyball players, please come up. All right,

perfect. The Oceanside boys volleyball team earned its second straight 4A state championship, defeating Travelers Rest 3 to1 to defend its crown and cap another strong season where the Land Sharks finished 23 and3. After dropping the opening set in the state championship game, the Land Sharks responded with poise and intensity, dominating the final three sets to secure the state title. Congratulations, fellas. We'll give them a big round of applause. We'll have you turn around.

Awesome. One more.

All right, one more. We have our Oceanside girls tennis team. Are they out there? All right. Uh, the tennis program continued its dynasty by winning its fifth consecutive state championship with a victory over Christ Church, extending one of the top championship streaks in the South Carolina High School League. Much like last season, the title came down to one crucial match and a decisive tie break. The Land Sharks delivered when it mattered most, winning the tie break to secure their fifth straight title. Congratulations.

I want the tallest girl needs to stand in front of John. I'm just taller than me.

All right.

Congratulations. Get you a permanent chair right there. Yeah. Really? Sometimes we wonder why members of the state legislature from the upstate don't like the low country very much. If you listen to who we are beating

that might have something to do with it. All right. Congratulations to all our youth and uh we we really appreciate everybody sort of tying it back to their experience in the town of Mount Pleasant. That's why we do it. Um item seven, if there is nothing further for this special town council meeting, we will adjourn. We'll give the clerk a few minutes to get the software switched over and then we will start our 6 pm regular town council meeting. This special meeting is adjourned. Mrs.

Sorry about the chicken scratching. That's okay.

got it. Good evening everyone and welcome to the Tuesday, February 10th monthly town council meeting of the town of Mount Pleasant. It's good to be every see everybody here and let me remind you that uh we are in the midst of our Black History Month observance and this Saturday night at Christ Church um the uh official program is the Plantation Singers and if you've never experienced that is something you don't want to miss. So um there's something every Saturday through the end of the month. So please take those in as you can. Um item number one would be our prayer which tonight will be led by Chaplain Rob Dwey followed by the pledge of allegiance by Mayor Pro Tim Chapman. Please stand. Let us pray. Heavenly Father, we just thank you for the gift of being able to live in Mount Pleasant that you've blessed us with and just this uh beautiful part of the world. We thank you for the leadership here. ask your special blessing upon this meeting and especially your blessing upon all first responders that you would hold them in the palm of your hand. So as we move forward in this time, let it be your time as we move to attempt to do your will. In your holy and blessed name we pray. Amen.

Amen. Please face the flag. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. Thank you all very much. Item three, approval of the agenda. May I have a motion, please? Motion to approve. Second. Motion to approve and a second. Any discussion? All in favor, please say I. I.

Motion carries. Item four, public hearings, awards, and presentations. A we will begin with a presentation of the Alhhamra Garden Club proclamation. Mr. Demora, please.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Members of council, hello. Um, I'm very excited about doing this. I understand at the end of this proclamation, we will have a ceremonial handoff. Uh, I believe there are three keys, not just one. uh to the post office but I'll go ahead sir read the proclamation on your behalf. Whereas the historic pageants post office was built by the pageants family in 1899 and served as the first freestanding post office in Mount Pleasant from 1899 to 1917. And whereas the Alhambor Garden Club requested the town's permission at its June 7th, 1971 council meeting to move the post office, which was offered to the club by Mrs. Tracy Proctor, to the town's property, now known as the James B. Edwards Park, stating that the building would be restored as nearly as possible to its original state. And whereas town council found the club's request to be acceptable, allowing the club to relocate the post office to the town's property. And whereas Harry Hoptopolis subsequently relocated the empty post office to its current location at the western corner of Pit and Bank Streets in the old village and gave the club the keys to the post office. And whereas the club restored the post office and was successful in acquiring and furnishing the post office with its original postal boxes and other furnishings in use when it was last operative in 1917. And whereas the club has maintained and preserved the post office since 1971 and received the town's Kresco historical stewardship award in February of 2019. And whereas the club has decided to cease its use of the post office and turn the keys to the post office over to the town. And whereas the town is grateful for the club's

contributions to the history of the town through its preservation and maintenance of the post office. Now therefore, I will haney mayor of the town of Mount Pleasant gratefully accept the keys to the pageant's post office this 10th day of February 2026. And Mr. Mayor, would you please come forward? Thank you very much.

Members of the club, if you'd like, please come up. Everybody of thank you for keeping the since 1972. That's longer than some of our council. You want to get a picture that way though? Like at least come around front and get all of them. Yeah. Right. Three, two,

There it is. Our next item uh we have a that we want to have the reading of a resolution from the South Carolina legislature uh in honor of Rear Admiral James H. Flat Lee III, United States Navy retired. If you remember last summer, we recognized the admiral here and his widow Nancy is here. I'm so sorry I was a thousand miles away when the admiral passed and for his visitation I'm sorry I could not be there but um he is one of the most um impactful citizens to our country that has ever called Mount Pleasant home and we appreciate Representative Busto spearheading this resolution and we just thought it would be fitting to have that read tonight. So Mr. Deora if you will again do the honors.

I'd be happy to sir. It's an honor for me to read to you a resolution from the South Carolina House of Representatives. It says, "This is a House resolution to express the profound sorrow of the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives upon the passing of James H. Flattly III, retired Rear Admiral of the United States Navy, and to extend their deepest sympathy to his large and loving family and his many friends. Whereas the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives were saddened to learn of the death of retired Rear Admiral James H. Flattly III at the age of 91 on December 12th, 2025. And whereas born in San Diego, California on January 9th, 1934, he was the oldest of four boys born to James H. Flattley Jr. and Dorothy May McMurray. and he followed in his father's distinguished footsteps as a World War II ace by becoming a distinguished naval aviator himself. And whereas during his 31 years of active military service, he logged 4,460 flight hours in over 30 different aircraft and was the first aviator to complete 1,68 carrier landings. In 1963, he successfully executed multiple carrier landings aboard the USS Forest while pilot while piloting the C130 Hercules, the largest aircraft ever to land on a carrier. Whereas Admiral Flattley's decorations included the Distinguished Service Medal, silver star, Legion of Merit with four gold stars, Distinguished Flying Cross with two gold stars, bronze star medal with combat V for valid, air medal with silver star with the numeral 24 to indicate over 350

combat missions. the Navy Commenation Medal with Combat V and Presidential Unit Citation with Bronze Star. During his third tour in the Vietnam War, he was commander of Fighter Squadron VF-31. More than all the medals he received, he felt the greatest accomplishment of his career was that he brought home every member of that squadron to their anxious and loving families. Whereas together with his beloved wife Nancy Monica Christy, he reared six fine children. James IVth, Joseph, Mary Kitley, Michael, Kathleen, and Cara Brophy. His children blessed him with the affection of 22 beloved grandchildren and 10 great grandchildren with more on the way currently. Adding to his pride and all of his offspring, three of his six children followed his path into military service along with seven of his grandchildren. And whereas upon retiring from the Navy, Mr. Flattley served as director of government programs at Cambridge Research Corporation and then as general manager and chairman of the board of Intermarine USA. In 1994, he and his wife moved to Charleston where he served the state as CEO of Patriots Point Naval and Maritime Museum, transforming Patriots Point into the state's largest tourist attraction. Whereas he served as chairman of the board for Roper St. Francis Healthcare in Mount Pleasant and of the board of the South Carolina Maritime Security Commission charged with reestablishing and overseeing the South Carolina Naval Militia. He served on the board of directors for the USS Yorktown Foundation and the National Medal of Honors Center for Leadership and was a member of the Golden Eagle Association, the USO World Board of Governors, the United States Naval Institute, the Red River Valley River Rats, the Association

of Naval Aviation, the Surface Naval Aviation, the Naval Submarine League, and the United States Naval Academy Alumni Association and Foundation. for his significant contributions. He was honored with the coveted order of the Palmetto. And whereas during a life devoted to his country, his community, and his family, Jim Flattley was a man of strong faith and was deeply committed to his church, St. Benedict Catholic Church. His impact on naval aviation, the Charleston community, and the lives of those who whom he loved and with whom he served will be remembered for generations. The members of the South Carolina House of Representatives are grateful for the life and legacy of Jim Flattley and for the example of courage, sacrifice, and commitment to service he set for all who knew him. Now therefore, be it resolved by the House of Representatives that the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives by this resolution express their profound sorrow upon the passing of James H. Flattly III, retired rear admiral of the United States Navy, and extend their deepest sympathy to his large and loving family and his many friends. Signed, G. Merl Smith, Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Thank you very much. Item C is um administration of the oath to our new municipal Judge, Judge Sinclair, who is actually returning after having done this um in the past. I will be administering the judge. I doly swear that I am duly qualified according to the state of exercise and that I will to the best of my ability. I will discharge those duties and will preserve and defend the Constitution of this state and of the United States. State of the United States. I pledge to

uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary. I pledge in the discharge of my duties of my duties to treat all persons who enter the court with civility fairness and respect. I pledge to listen to courtously sit actly and rule after careful consider deliberation. I pledge to seekice

judge. Thanks for coming back. Thank you. Appreciate you. Thank you. Yes.

All right. If Miss Harnesses, come forward. Item D is a public hearing on the proposed amended municipal budget for the 2026 fiscal year. Uh, this being a public hearing, comment is allowed. That does not take up your time for your com public comment later. So if you have a comment after this um please come forward. Miss Harnesses if you will go over the particulars.

Good evening. So this is a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the fiscal year 2026 Mount Pleasant budget pursuant to section 6180 of the South Carolina Code of Laws. The original proposed mid-year budget adjustment is in the amount of 9,958,491. There are also some proposed amendments which were discussed during the council retreat which will be discussed later in the agenda. That's all we have.

All right. Is there anyone here to make a public comment on the a budget as presented? If not, I am required by law to sound the gavvel and declare this public hearing closed. Mayor, I'd like to make a motion. Yes. that we include the recommendation for healthc care fund balance true up amount of 2,300,000 that we include IT watchard migration Mr. Chapman. We'll be getting to that later in the agenda. There there agenda. Okay. This is just the public hearing. Okay. The public hearing is over. That's why I was going forward with it.

That's right. We'll get to that one. Thank you, though. All right. Item five, approval of the minutes of the January 13th special and regular town council meetings and the December 25 financial statement. Motion. Second. Have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All in favor, please say I.

Motion carries. Item six is public comment. When your name is called, please come forward to the lectctor name and address in two and a half minutes, please. Mr. Demora. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. First speaker, Parker Smith. Good afternoon. Uh, my name is Parker Smith. I'm located at 1234 Melvin Bennett Road in Mount Pleasant. I was raised um I was raised in Mount Pleasant, graduated from Wando High School, and today I run our family's funeral home business. This community has always been home to us. Our family is currently at a crossroads where we plan for the future of our business and evaluate relocating our funeral home within Mount Pleasant. As part of that process, we took a thoughtful look at how this property could best serve our family and the surrounding community. While the town's comprehensive plan identifies this parcel for commercial use, we believe that residential zoning is more consistent with the existing character of the area and better aligned with neighbor neighboring properties. Reszoning to R2 would allow us for a carefully designed residential community that respects our neighbors and natural features of the land. This zoning provides flexibility to design lots around the majority of existing mature trees. Although much of the site has been cleared historically, our plan intentionally adds mature trees, landscape buffers, and a natural-looking pond feature along the road frontage to enhance the tree canopy and to improve curb appeal overall. Importantly, all three of us, my brothers and I, plan to live in this community. Because of that, we're personally invested in the long-term quality, appearance, and livability of this neighborhood. The request is compatible with surrounding zoning, including the R2 zoning of Shell Landing and the adjacent Midtown Plan development. It also reduces traffic impact by consolidating two existing access points into one safer, more consolidated, efficient entrance. Our goal is to create a neighborhood that feels natural and intentional uh with walking paths, benches, green space that provides a walkable park-like entrance experience. This approach is inspired by

the nearby Shell Landing with our intent to complete uh complement and enhance the overall character of this area. We believe that the resoning request allows for the development for our family, our neighbors, and the town at Pleasant that we could all be proud of for years to come. Thank you all for your time and consideration today. Stuart Whiteside.

Thank you. You have Steuart Whitide, 618 Hop Gall Bluff Drive. I'm with Seaman Whiteside, the engineer that's representing the Smith family, who is requesting R2 zoning for their approximately 5 acre tract on Rifle Range Road for the development of a 14 lot single family subdivision. The R2 zoning is consistent with the neighboring uh properties. The Shell Point on one side is R2. Central Mount Pleasant on the other side is actually a zone PD with a much smaller lots. Under the current R1 zoning that the property is currently zoned, you could develop 12 single family lots. However, the shape and width of the property is such that the and along with the drainage east on one side severely restricts the building footprints that could be placed on the lots. By using R2 zoning with front and rear setbacks of 25 ft instead of 30t that you have in R1, it allows you the flexibility in building footprints and helps us plan around the existing trees. R2 would end up providing a better streetscape visually from the type of homes that could be placed, the placement of the homes, and from a vegetation standpoint. So, we'd like to ask your consideration part two zoning. If you have any technical questions later, I'd be glad to answer them. Thank you,

Marcus McDonald. Hello, my name is Mark McDonald, 123 Lion Street, uh, town of Mount Pleasant Council. Um, happy Black History Month. I'm lead organizer Charleston BLM, also a substitute teacher with family roots in Mount Pleasant that go back generations back to when Boone Hall was operational in a different aspect. Um, and another factor to Black History Month before I get to my main point, but what followed after the slavery was sharecropper and my grandmother um, whose family was from the uh, Bonha plantation. Um, she was grow she was raised up in a sharecropper family and that was the grandma who raised me. Um, but back to my my point of uh, my my topic at hand specifically with Mount Pleasant Town Council. I'm asking you all to consider voting on an independent racial bias audit um of the town of Mount Pleasant Police Department. It's well known by a lot of folks um at least who look like me that everybody in Mount Pleasant is not policed the same. Um and I encourage Mount Pleasant Town Council to make action to change that. Um there's se proof that these independent racial bias audits have worked in places like city of Charleston and North Charleston. Um, and I encourage y'all to reach out the folks like Charles Justice Ministry who do boots on the ground work like that. I see some of y'all nodding your head. So, y'all some of y'all familiar with them, but I encourage y'all to um work with them. Some of them have congregations and churches that they work with in the town of Mount Pleasant. Um, so I know they have the vested interest and I know a lot of the communities um although they may not be incorporated, um, a lot of us drive through um, Mount Pleasant to get to work, etc. Um, and we deserve to be

policed the same way as everybody else when we driving through. Um, and that's pretty much my main point. Again, in closing, um, please look into and, you know, I encourage you to actually do an independent racial bias audit of my pleasure. Please. Thank you.

Blake Hill. Hello, my name is Blake Hill, 3759 North Highway 19 or Highway 17, Mount Pleasant. I have been missed the past two meetings as my wife and I have spent the last year uh living in an RV, traveling the country, visiting over 40 plus campgrounds across the country. Um, and we are proposing to annex into the town of Mount Pleasant to hopefully bring the best of what we have experienced across the country to the town of Mount Pleasant. We have no campgrounds here other than the KOA which um is a beautiful campground has been around for a long time and we're hoping to bring a new updated kind of boutique uh higherend feel to it to bring people that um value the what we love about Mount Pleasant and Charleston to the area and thank you for your time. We just haven't been able to make the past two meetings. So just wanted to show face and say thank you and that we hope to get annexed into the town.

Mike Van Horn Good evening, council. Mike Van Horn, Ironbridge Drive. Um, I'd like to request that uh the council as a whole will sit there and take a look to go back to the fact that when we were looking to have three readings on town council versus the two readings. Um recently we had the meeting over there at Alahhamra Hall and there seems to be too many things periodically they're getting put on agendas that the residents don't know about. So I think you know three readings would be a little bit more helpful as far as information for us to understand what's going on, what may be voted on or what may not be voted on just to keep the public aware in that sense. The uh next thing that I want to talk about is uh you know directly to you Mayor Haney. I'm concerned about your response uh that was posted recently as far as the uh Mount Pleasant police cheating scandal. You're quoted as saying this is not like we're talking about officers who are not worthy of being police officer somewhere. Those are pretty alarming words, you know, and it's quoted, you know, News4 has it on their site as well. I mean, the the word bad optics continue to plague Mount Pleasant. You know, we had Patriots Point was one situation. bad optics. But when you can sit there and basically look at the officers and just give them a a pat on the back and say, "You know what? You were caught cheating. No big deal." You know, it's a little sensitive to the town to sit there and expect you as our leader to sit there and just turn a blind eye. My question is, what other things go on throughout the town that we just sit there and turn a black eye to? So, we deserve better. I would just hope you would take a look at the situation. Maybe it was addressed wrong to the public, but maybe uh you know, consider

what you're saying before you say it because again, you represent all of us when you're talking to the media. Thank you, David Speden.

Good evening. Dave Speden, 3429 Tum Circle, small town charm. Every year before the Super Bowl, my neighborhood does a chili cookoff. And this year, we want to give a thank you to Councilwoman Whitaker. She was one of our guest judges this year, as well to the Mount Pleasant Fire Department that comes to promote fire safety and prevention. And I think the adults like that even more than the kids do, just by the pictures and everything that happened that day. So, it was a great event and we sincerely thank you. Highway 41. Glad to see the communications are a lot more active and the county came to um the retreat the other week. I did not know they were going to be there in the afternoon. I left at lunchtime. I'm sorry I did, but I was able to get a copy of the presentation. Thank you, John. And I do have a lot of questions and comments for it that I will share with the county. Um I'm curious, I know you can't answer now. Do you have questions and comments that you gave them that are actionable and they're going to have to get back to you because I want to make sure these things that I bring to them will be tied back. And will there be a follow-up meeting for you? Uh on the milestone slide, I didn't see any plan for communication. So, I'm just hoping that's a little oversight, but they had other dates that were there, but communication on this has to happen all along. Um I'll wait till after I meet with the county and let you know how that turns out. Lastly, the 2026 transportation sales tax referendum. I was at the county meeting the other day where all the mayors presented their priorities. I thought it was a really good meeting, some really good feedback. But what I'm seeing and reading the paper talking to neighbors and the group there is that what is your plan to communicate our priorities to the community. So when they go to vote, it's more about what we will get or won't get. So I think informed voters make better voters. And this can't be an emotional one because there's a lot at stake because there's some things that we seriously need now and depending on

how we vote we may not see them for a very long long time. So thank you Jamie McKe

James McKe 1247 Palmetto Peninsula Drive. Um I'm here to follow up a letter that I sent. I think you got a little bit of mail about artificial turf and uh I have to confess a year ago I was probably neutral on grass and artificial turf but I've done a lot of research at the encouragement of some of my friends who are in the conservation area and turns out there are some significant health risks associated with artificial turf. one for the kids get more hurt. Um the second is the fields are hot. They absorb a lot of the heat and I don't think we need more of that here in South Carolina. And the third and the most worrying to me is that uh the chemicals from the artificial turf and the surface that's put below them goes into your groundwater. And you know a lot of the research about this is emerging, right? And so a $2.7 billion dollar industry is going to ask you to ignore these warning signs that there are some serious risks with choosing it. It's not that artificial turf doesn't have a lot of benefits. But I don't think the risks are worth, you know, what could possibly happen to our kids and to our community. And we may not know for sure what the full long-term effects are of that until later. And that's been true for a lot of other things. most recently forever chemicals, right? If you read the article about that, we all thought staint master and teflon and things like that were great with huge benefits to them and we didn't really realize the risks of those until later and you're spending a lot of time now having to clean up and get rid of all those things. So, I just ask you to take a careful look as you're considering the types of fields that you're going to put in the rifle range park. Thank you.

That's all I have. Is there anyone that did not get the opportunity to sign up who would like to speak? Please come forward. Name and address. Two and a half minutes, please.

Good evening. My name is Robert Adams. I live at 35 East Lake Road in Mount Pleasant and I oppose the proposed amendments in ordinance number 255021 pertaining to the building area ratio standards and uh other development standards. At the outset, I am very sympathetic to the desire to pro prohibit overdevelopment so that the building covers essentially the whole lot or the heights are out of character with the community. On the other hand, these proposals go too far. Uh they're both existing and other options that can be taken that are much less draconian. I'd like to make five quick points. First of all, I don't live in either the old village historic district or the overlay districts that are shown on page eight of the presentation relating to the amendment. However, page two says that all of these amendments would apply to the rest of the town. So, I would respectfully request that the town council clarify that the amendments do not have any effect upon any neighborhoods not shown on page 8. Second, I understand from comments of several of the town council members on Next Door that the amendments are the result of some members or some old Mount Pleasant members uh residents about the size and scale of new homes. Significantly though, those some members have not taken and do not want to take the approach of an HOA or a historic

district. I suspect that they failed believe their neighbors wouldn't support it. And what I am asking is the town council to decline to adopt an ordinance without broad support within that specific area. Third, the adoption of the proposed building area ratio restriction is unreasonable and arbitrary as demonstrated by the fact in the present in the presentation that it applies regardless of the lot size. Mr. This is a radical change from the lot coverage percentage calculation to a cumulative square foot calculation based upon the number of stories in a home or ADU.

Sir, your time's up. Time is up. Thank you. Thank you.

No, it doesn't work that way. U Denise Fugo, executive director of housing for Mount Pleasant. Happy New Year to everybody. Um, a couple things going on. Um, with the expansion of 41, um, we're getting some feedback from Gregory Ferry, our only affordable housing project here in in Mount Pleasant. Um, I guess 12 parking spots are going to be removed. And um if I I do the inspections of those town homes and uh the reality is most people although there is an addict on the third floor for storage and our our residents are young average age 35 most people use their garage for storage. So um and uh so there is an issue with those 12 spots and who's ever working with the county please include me so we can at least figure out what we're going to do for those residents. And then finally, um, congratulations to all of you that live in Mount Pleasant because Zillow and Redfin said that the average home value is now $950,000, which puts more pressure on me because I have 851 people that work for the town can't afford to buy here. The hospitals are upset because they can't keep staff. So, we really need to focus on affordable housing. And to um, Katherine and Alex, I would like to have lunch with you or a cup of coffee. Um, we do actually have a lot of people. And the good news is in 2026 we have three banks that are working with our residents that earn less than $65,000. It's taken 10 years, but we're very excited about it. Thank you.

Jeremy Manchester, 3133 Pignatelli Crescent, Mount Pleasant. Uh good evening, council. Uh one of your voters here on the north side of town. Hope you guys are doing well. Um, tonight I'm trying to annex a 1.24 acre parcel on 41 that my f my family acquired nine years ago into Mount Pleasant. It backs up to Sunchaser, which is in Mount Pleasant on Highway 41. Uh, we're not trying to change the zoning. My family just wants the property to be in Mount Pleasant. Um, I want my taxes to go to the town, you know, not some random spot in John's Island. We, the town, need the money. I also have a son on the spectrum. When he moves into this home in several years, I'd like him to be able to work with the town, not the county. The county can be very tough at times. Even pulling a basic permit can turn into a nightmare. I'm trying to plan for his future. He and I have planted many trees here, and we are planning to plant many more. Hoping you can help in any way possible. Um, really appreciate your guys' time. Take care. Good evening, Perry R 2004 Brick Kilm Parkway. Uh, congratulations again to Wanda Van and all the athletes we hear tonight, which kind of rolls into my comment about uh playing surfaces and fields for our kids in town pleasant. Artificial turf has been in use in the United States for nearly 60 years and has been extensively studied. Numerous studies, including research and reviews involving agencies such as the CDC, EPA, and US consumer protection and safety, have examined artificial turf services. To date, none of these agencies have concluded that there are proven adverse health effects from playing on modern artificial turf fields. It is important to compare this to the realities of maintaining natural grass fields. Our grass fields require regular applications of fertilizers, herbicides,

pesticides, and fungicides to remain playable. Many of those products have known environmental and health impacts and over time they can run off into our local waterways. There's also a very real cost consideration for taxpayers in the south. Maintaining a single natural glass, excuse me, natural grass athletic field can cost upwards of $50,000 per year. On top of that, maintaining just one rectangular grass field generates over 225 plastic 50-lb bags that end up annually in our landfills that are used for the fertilizers, seeds, and soil amendments. The town of Mount Pleasant has attempted organic treatment programs in the past on our fields. Those efforts saw very limited success largely because our fields are simply used too heavily. High utilization makes organic only programs extremely difficult to sustain. Adding artificial turf fields would help redistribute field usage, reduce wear on existing grass fields, and could actually create opportunities to revisit organic treatment programs in future lower use facilities. Sorry, I hate reading. You all know that. Uh, the town went roughly 10 years without building new active recreation facilities and is now working to catch up with rapid population growth. Our existing fields are under constant pressure. Artificial turf fields can help handle up to four times more use than natural grass, allowing the town to address demand without continually repairing, resolding, and closing fields. Modern artificial turf is not what many people remember from decades ago. New hydrocooling technologies like hydrochill and tacool significantly reduce surface temperatures. Turpp blades are now commonly made from polyethylene which has been brought up before same materials used in a toothbrush and is non-toxic material used in food and medical settings. New porous backing and subbased design improve drainage, reduce runoff and allow turf systems to be recycled at the end of their life. Um I just ask that you please use today's science

technology and not outdated assumptions when you're making your decision on that. Thank you. All right, there's no one else for public comment. Public comment is closed. Item seven is consent agenda items. Do we have a motion, please? Second. Motion to approve and a second. Any discussion? All in favor, please say I. I. Motion carries. Items are approved. Item eight is planning new business. Uh Mrs. Reid, if you'll take us through.

Thank you, Mayor. Um trying to catch up to y'all. All right, I'm going to take items one and two together, but they will need separate votes. Um so this is an ordinance to annex and zone Community Conservation District, a property on Highway 41. It is 1.24 acres. You can see it here. It does back up to Sunaser Lane and is adjacent to Isaiah Smalls Road. Um it is currently S3 in the county and it will come in as CC community conservation district. Those are uh comparable the same zoning districts essentially the town and the county. Um this property is in the Philips Historic District in the county and um so it comes to you with a recommendation of denial for the zoning um from the planning commission and then from the planning committee. It's has a recommendation of denial for the annexation and I'm happy to answer any questions.

I move to approve. Second. Is this for um A and B or just A? I mean one and two or just one. Just one. Yeah, just one. Okay. Thank you. To approve. Yes, sir.

All right. We have a motion to approve and a second discussion. I think I heard Yes, sir. I think this is a perfect example of what we've been talking about for a long time. This is the Phillips community. Uh it's on the National Historic Register that's been recognized by Charleston County. It's also recognized by National Park Service. It has a historic overlay. So, it has an extra layer of protection that goes beyond just the zoning. If there's anyone that would we would consider uh denying it would be this one because it is in the Philips community and it would not be um subject to the historic overlay and the protections that it has. Again, this is a national historic trust property. We're looking at other properties throughout uh with 10M Hamlin, etc. and waiting for the historic overlay to uh be uh approved so that we can do the same thing and seek to mirror that and have those levels of protection in other settlement communities. So, for that reason, I'll be voting to deny.

Yes, ma'am. Um is this the property that already has sewer? I know one of these on Highway 41 already has sewer even though it's in the county. I believe it does already have sewer. Okay. So, I believe that's what we were told to. Excuse me, sir. We can't we can't have talking from the chambers. I'm sorry. That's a standard rule. It's not just you. I I I promise. Yes, ma'am. Okay. So, did you get the answer to your question? I believe we were told at committee that it already has sewer. So, that's why I was asking sewer availability. Availability. Yeah. Availability mean they have service.

Okay. I thought he said they had service already. Okay. Okay. So this is in the Phillips Historic District? Yes, sir. Okay. And if we annex it, it comes out? Yes, sir. So the district only applies if it's the county even though it's a national designation. Yes, sir. Okay. That's significant for my vote. Yes.

I I just still think I mean, personally, I would love to fill in all of the donor hole properties and have the whole our town actually as one. Um, I think the zoning is the same. Again, they can develop it regardless. Uh, because the zoning is the same. They'll get the sewer. Um, I'm in favor of annexing um folks who want to annex when the zoning matches and the zoning does. So,

yes, sir. Thank you. I I'd actually challenge council at this point to actually create our own historic overlay. If if if we care so much about these um these districts in this historic district, which I do as well, why don't we bring them in the town? And why don't we create our own historic overlay? I mean, who everybody cares? Everybody up here cares about this historic overlay. What better way to protect this historic overlay than by doing it ourselves? And you've got to bring they only come up for annexation once. Once you deny it, they're not coming up again. They get sewer. So annex it in and let's get to work and create our own historic overlay so that we can be accountable and responsible for protecting these neighborhoods.

Miss, we are in the process of developing our own historic overlay. We've been waiting on the county so that we could have um similar rules and we're going to have a special counsel a committee meeting. Once he's denied sorry once he's denied it does not have to come back. So, annex inn it is already in a historic

it's already in historic and John I would um I would say that thank you so much for saying that because that's exactly what we're intending to do and that's exactly what we we're waiting to do so that when we approve the 10 mile u a 10mi district that we can enact a pending ordinance doctrine of the historic uh overlay that the county will adopt and that will allow us to adopt and mirror that if we choose to based on council discussion. In this particular case, we already have a historic overlay. So, the historic overlay is already in place and so we don't need to put one in place at this point for uh that particular area. All right. The motion is to approve. If there's no further discussion, all in favor of the motion to approve the annexation, please indicate by saying I. I. All oppose.

No. Everybody know raise your hand. Okay. The nos have it by six to three. Uh move to defer. I'm sorry, ma'am. Just need to get those notes again. The notes.

Yes. Uh move to defer. Um, you're talking about item two. I'm talking about item because we're so the the motion was the motion as I understand was so the motion was to approve which failed which to me doesn't actually deny it yet. Correct. Um, so my motion is to defer. Second. And the reason behind that is because as I hear chairman uh chairwoman Hyatt uh of the planning committee uh we can we can defer this several times and give time for our own historic overlay matching however that kind of plays out. So I'd like to see that play out before we straight deny.

Well, let me let me ask a point of order here. This Phillips community already has a national historic designation, right? Yes. So, I don't want to confuse a zoning overlay with a historic overlay, right?

So, 10 mile already has a historic overlay and a and a zoning overlay in the county. The town is working on a similar zoning overlay. There is no zoning overlay that exists for the Phillips community or Hamlet Beach. Those are next. So the 10 mile was sort of the pilot program. Let's get this one going. So while the Phillips community does have a historic designation in the county, it does not have a zoning overlay and we are not the county is not, to my knowledge, working on one yet. So So we aren't either. We're waiting to see. We're following the county suit in all of these. But if we were to annex it now, it would come into the town and then it would not even have that historic overlay,

that historic designation. Excuse me. Zoning is an overlay. Historic is a designation. Yes, it is a county historic designation designated through the county.

So, so we have we have a motion to defer. Did we get a second? We got a second. Okay. Yes, sir. We're in discussion. And the way that is going with the zoning, how that's done with the settlement communities is the settlement communities such as the um 10M have been working on that for 10 years, especially the last three years and that's now been approved by the county by 68% of their voters and they've determined what are the elements of their zoning um uniquely uh what they've done and and based on how that goes then they'll do the same for Hamlin and perhaps they'll for Phillips community. Is that correct? Yes, sir.

So, it's important that the the people in that area specifically get to determine what those elements are of zoning. It would it would be analogous to coming to the old village and and saying, well, you really can't determine what are the parameters you're looking for in the old village or brickyard or uh seaside or anything else. We'll determine for you. I think it's important that each of these areas, these settlement communities uniquely with their historic history, get to choose what they would like to see their zoning to be in the county. Would it be appropriate to have an amendment to the motion to defer one and two since two is the zoning anyway or just no no action on the zoning if we don't annex it? Right.

Right, sir. I mean, I think you could defer both of them. I think you could just take that up next or I I can amend my motion to make it one and two. Okay. Defer. second. All right. Um, so the motion is and as amended is to defer one and two. I do have one question. Yes, sir. Mr. Mayor, um, so Mr. Tiki brought up a good point when he's talking about um the zoning overlay and the people in those communities should decide. But my understanding of the county historic the whole historic overlay is that it's not made up of just people from this community. Like there's people from some of the John's Island communities and like it's not like it's not a board made up of only Phillips community. Am I correct in that?

You're correct. It's the the county's historic preservation commission is made up it's countywide. Yeah. And so there's only a couple of I mean I don't know the bo but but the board makeup um I mean I've heard those meetings are wild in that I mean you've got these people from all over the county. They don't know right what I mean. So, I don't trust that board. I mean, I

I would agree I would agree with um uh Mr. Rambo's assertion, and that's exactly why they're looking to have a specific overlay for the 10mi that would be made up of the 10mi residents, much like the Old Village historic district is made up all but one of residents in the Old Village. And so that's really what they're looking to do because I agree. I wouldn't want somebody from all over town being on our old village historic commission trying to tell us what to do in the old village. So your point is well taken, but that's not what they they're moving to do. Okay. Just real quick.

Yes, sir. Respectfully for I I think Mr. Tinky and and many else on this council, I think I'm on the same page with you with protecting this community. Where I where I differ is we don't control the county and unless a majority of us, which we couldn't anyway, are going to run for county council, we have no guarantee that this is protected. It's not going to be they could change their vote in five years if they want. So, we've seen that they don't listen to us on 41. So, what why are they going to listen to to us on this? And they can change it. If we want to protect the neighborhoods within the borders of Mount Pleasant, then we should protect them. And that is why it'll be a yes for the deferral so that that can get caught up and then we can bring this entire community in if they would like to and we can protect this historic district. Thank you.

All right. All in favor of the motion to defer items one and two, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion one. No. Okay. Motion carries.

Item three, please. Yes sir. Uh I will take three and four together. They will be separate votes. This is an ordinance to annex and zone conservation recreation open space. A 2 acre parcel. This is located out in northern Mount Pleasant. Um you can see it there with the red star. It's the long narrow parcel and it is directly adjacent to the town's um public services facility off of Leven Road and Highway 17. Um, this is a parcel that is within the uh 10mi um historic overlay and it is also within that newly adopted 10mi zoning overlay and within that 10mi um zoning overlay in the county it is recommended for commercial uses and um in the town it is recommended for settlement community uses. Um, so I did want to point out it's that long red parcel there, commercial properties in the urban suburban area. Again, that's in the county's new zoning overlay, and that's what supersedes the county's base zoning of S3, which is RCC. So, here's a comparison of what you could do in that commercial 10mi overlay versus the town's conservation recreation open space. Again, it's pretty um you know, there's much more intense uses that are allowed for that commercial property there if it stays in the county. Uh food sales, convenience stores, repair services. Um it does allow single family residential as a conditional use. Um I believe it's up to two units an acre. Um the conservation recreation open space is what the applicant is requesting for this property if they are annexed into the town. Um they you heard the speaker at the beginning of uh for public comment. They would like to make it into a a RV park or a a campground. It would um it would have to if if it were approved, it would have to go through our design review board. Um we would look at, you know, buffers and and all

those sorts of things, any pads that were put there to protect the the trees and and and that such. But um really if you look at the potential uses conservation, recreation, open space, there's not a lot of other uses that it would be allowed to have. Um all of it is, you know, compatible with that um recreation and conservation designation. So that is the proposal before you to annex this property and zone it CRO in the town of Mount Pleasant. Move to approve second annexation. All right. Is that for uh item three and four? Just three. I I'm glad to combine them. Combine them. Okay. Move to approve three and four. Second.

All right. We have a motion and a second. Um and this was recommended for approval by the planning committee. Okay. Yes, sir. M Rambo. Um so I I've been on council now for six years. This is the first RV park discussion or the first um conservation recreation open space. Feel like I'm finally learning and then y'all throw something new. Um I I know you put that list at like so how many I don't even know how an RV park works. I've never been to one. Like how many RVs would be allowed at one time? Like is is there a limit just however many they can fit. What in in traffic studies like what's the traffic impact of an RV park? I I just don't know the answers to those.

That's a great question and that's why it would have to go through our internal uh development review team. We would look at it for any sort of concrete pads they may want to put there, how many could fit. They'd have to have a buffer along Highway 17. They'd have to preserve their trees. U so those are the things that we would look at. The the application mentioned 10 to 20. It would depend on the site meeting all the development standards because even though you're not putting a permanent structure there, you're going to have to meet all your all your setbacks, all of those things that apply to a typical commercial or you know residential lot. So, those are the things that we would look at. I think I think the applicant would like to get at least 10 spots in there. Um, but that'll be determined through the review process.

Okay. All right. Thank you. Any other comments? All in favor of the motion to approve items three and four, please say I. Any opposed? Motion carries. First reading, ordinances number 26011 and 26012. All right. Item five.

Yes, sir. Moving along. So this is a request to um reszone a parcel from area wide business to R2 low density residential district. Um this is on May Lane. You can see it here um in the context of the surrounding zoning. Um here is the future land use. It is recommended for community scale commercial. Um I would like to point out the existing land use and I think that was an important point to make in the past meetings is even though it's recommended for commercial uh much of this area is uh used as residential and has been used historically as residential. Um also you can see that May Lane is a dead end. There was concern at the planning commission meeting about that being a commercial property due to no outlet. Um also, uh because it is such a small I think it's 4,800 square feet. Once you applied any sort of buffers, uh you whatever commercial property um you would improve it with, you would have to meet the parking. So it really would it's not large enough to to accommodate a commercial property. So they have requested to reszone it to residential.

Um move to approve. Sorry. And it was recommended. All right. We have a motion and a second to approve item five uh reszone from AB1 to um business one to R2. Any discussion? All in favor, please say I. Any opposed? Motion carrots. First, ordinance number 26013. Item six. Um a lot of parcels in there. Please walk us through this.

Yes, this is actually seven parcels. Uh together they add up to a little over five acres in size. You can see it here. Um it's adjacent to the Fulton subdivision um which is to the north old Georgetown Road and Children's Road. Um these seven parcels are in the county. They are S3 which is the same as RCC. That's what the future land use recommends. Um and I am taking these together but to point out the annexation. You do have to be contiguous to annex. um this property is contiguous through here and so you have to annex this one to make that one contiguous and so on. And then the same here, the contiguity is right there. You'd have to uh annex parcel five to make six and seven contiguous. And so the owner would like to bring all those parcels in uh and go from S3 in the county to CC in the town. This is not in a historic designation. So this is not in uh any protected. It is in the sweet grass basket overlay district. I apologize. And there is no request to remove it from the sweetgrass basket overlay. So it would come inc.

Okay. Are we approving just item six or six and seven? I'll do six and seven. Six and seven. All right. Any discussion? I do have one procedure question. Um yes. Does if it I thought S3 in the county like automatically came in CC. It does. So why is it an agenda item with the new zoning code? It used to be that when uh somebody came in and wanted to annex their property and they didn't request a zoning, it we would go with the default default zoning. We now make them request a zoning even though uh it's consistent with what the default zoning would be so that there's that public process and people are aware. But if you denied the zoning, it would come in would still be the same thing.

Correct. I'm okay. Okay. All right. If there's no further discussion, all in favor of the motion to approve items six and seven, please say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. First reading ordinance numbers 26014 and 26015. Okay. This next applicant has requested a deferral. All right. Move to defer. Second. All right. Thank you. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All in favor, please say I. All right. Motion carries. All right. All right. Item nine, please.

All right. This is a request uh to reszone a 4.88 parcel uh off Rifle Range Road from R1 to R2. Um the parcel is here. Um you can see it is adjacent to Shell Landing and on the other side it sits next to uh Midtown. Uh as I said, it is owned R1. It's currently used as a funeral home, which would require a special exception um if it was coming in as a new use. The request is to reszone to R2. These are both lowdensity residential district uh designations. The comp plan, either R1 or R2 would be appropriate for for this area. It does not increase the density. Uh under R1 or R2, you have three units an acre. Um, so the request to go from R1 to R2 really comes down to your lot size. Um, 8,000 square feet versus 10,000 square feet. And so you can imagine that even though the density does not change, uh, the maximum density can't necessarily be accomplished under the R1 10,000 square foot lots. And so, uh, that is the request before you. And, um,

move to approve for discussion. Second. All right. Motion to approve and a second. We are in discussion. Did you have a question? Yes sir. Well, so how many units is is R1? I I'll give you all the questions at once. How many units is R1 compared to R2? And what other uses? So what it's currently residential or commercial? Uh neighborhood commercial.

No, the comprehensive plan recommends neighborhood scale commercial. Okay. Um, and actually the neighborhood scale commercial um was I think it was updated with that with our most recent comp plan, but current zoning R1, proposed zoning R2, both have a maximum density of three units per acre. Um, so it really comes down to the lot size and once you get your infrastructure, your buffers, your streets, all those things is what you can accomplish under the R1 versus R2. Uh town staff has not reviewed a subdivision plan. Um if the approval is granted of the resoning, they would have to submit a sketch plan. Um it would go through our internal development review team. We would we would look at it and then once it was met all the zoning requirements, we would send it to the planning commission for approval.

Can you go back to the picture of the of the Google map? Yeah. Yeah. So it there's a funeral home on there now. Correct. Which is commercial. So what other commercial because that's residential all around there. What other commercial can be put on here? There can't the zoning is not for commercial. The zoning is for residential. The future land use recommends commercial and I suspect that was placed there because of the the use and it's been used in that manner for such a long time. But the zoning dictates the permitted uses and so single family detached residential is the only use allowed there. Okay.

Yes, sir. It So, is the use just grandfathered? Is it misszoned? Currently, I I'm sure it existed. I think it was held think 1999. 1979. So, in 1979 is when we adopted our first ordinance. This use would require a special exception through the board of zoning appeals. Um, I suspect it's been there long before our our zoning ordinance was in place. If they were to come in today with a funeral home, they'd have to go to the board of zoning appeals for a special exception. So, and this is the soccer field back there. It is.

This originally was a single family residence that was converted to funeral homes. I guess they didn't request a resoning at the time. Um, now where's the there's a easement on this property. Where is that on the right side or on the back? Yeah, it's this right along there. It's a 35 ft drainage easement. Okay. Is there a power line on that as well? I think there's a power line that runs along that side. Yes.

So, my my question and I I I was here but I missed this part of the planning committee meeting. If if the comprehensive plan has that as neighborhood scale commercial I thought we just went through a several years long process to have zoning changed to match what the comprehensive plan said. Um and so I'm I'm confused as to why if the comp plan has it neighborhood scale commercial um the zoning is still R1. Um because part of the reason we went through all of that and this this is opinion. Um was that the comp plan needed to recommend land uses that help us ease traffic, put things where people need them. And yet it seems like we're always peacemealing and putting more residential where the comp plan and when we took a 10,000 square foot look said, "Hey, if we put commercial there, people could go do something there instead of having to get on 17 or or go somewhere else." And so I I just feel like every time we start making progress after the comp plan review and and changing that and getting the zoning, we're right back to going for the maximum density residential. And that's why I'm I'm just not comfortable with this.

What when you put in place, as you mentioned, you don't have a survey or you don't have an actual um u layout of the lots. Um if you were to do that, what would you imagine the number of homes that could be at R1 versus R2? Do you have a uh pure speculation? The maximum density is 14, so you're not going to get over that, right? Um if you had 10,000 square foot lots, my guess is anywhere from 10 11 lots um by the time you had all your infrastructure in place versus what's an R R2? How many lots? 13 14.

So it's it's kind of a quandry, right? Mr. May, like you bring up, it's the comp plan saying neighborhood commercial. I don't right. I don't know that they got that one right. Yeah. Around all the around all the residential. So I think that maybe that was overlooked. Um you know my interest was I think seaman whitesiz was up here for speaking of that talking about more trees. It's pretty barren land right now. Um I'd like to see some more trees and and some more legacy trees and and a pond and things. I like the soccer field up there. We don't have the soccer fields the problem. But um get your wallet out.

Yeah, you get your wallet out. Um but uh I I'd like to be I'd like to see it a little bit more consistent with the neighborhoods around it. And so they already have the So it's weird. They complance those neighborhood commercial and and they have the right to build homes there. That those are two true statements. Yeah. Okay. Yes, ma'am.

Yeah. Your your question, mayor, was exactly my question and the reason I I um voted denial on the committee meeting because I assumed that the kind of future use plan was was the neighborhood scale commercial. I think my understanding now though to your point too, John, is that you know what it is right now is R1. So no matter if we do nothing, they can still build whatever it is 10 houses. Um, and if we give them R2, which is what they prefer, you know, it's been represented to me that they can do more with the lot and be a little, you know, have the buffer potentially on rifle range and, you know, all of that. Um, so I, for that reason, because it is R1 and they can already build houses on it. Um, you know, to me, there's not enough difference between R1 and R2 in this case and with the representations the owner has made to me to to make me u say no to it. That makes sense. And that that's why I was leaning for R1 as well because of uh it's still a considerable amount of homes uh but it's less density on that street and a lot of people for example on across the street there's larger lot sizes and people are getting good renumeration for those.

Yes sir.

Yes. So um similar to to Mr. Rambo I have a a sentimental attachment to those soccer fields. Uh, I remember, you know, my kids being four years old and and coaching out there and and I I hate to see those go, but I I understand um that we don't own those fields and and um this is already zoned as residential. I guess my thought is shifting it to R2 may enable them to put more of a buffer along rifle range and kind of have a more park-like um setting to it. Whereas R1, that very well could be a house right there on the on the corner. Um I I think R2 maybe gives them a little more flexibility to design around some of the the few existing trees there. Um and and so kind of mixed feelings about this as well. Um but I think uh residential is is what they're zoned now. It's clearly not a commercial lot. I would hate to see that be developed as commercial, in fact. Um, and so it's to me I think the R2 gives them a little flexibility to make the the entrance to this um nicer and more parklike and and for that reason uh I support it.

Is there is any buffer required at Rock Ranch? I mean I see all these other houses are right. There would be a required buffer. How much? My guess is be 50 feet, but I'd have to look. It could be I don't have the answer off the top of my head. It's going to be at least a type 10 B buffer, street side buffer. It may be larger than that. I'd have to look. Oh, okay. Because when I look at the ne the houses next door, they're right up on the road. So, I didn't know if there was a buffer even required in that area. Yeah, there should at least be a type a a type B buffer, which is a street buffer, and it's typically 10 feet. Um, so I'd have to double check that, but it would at least be that at least. That would be the minimum, just 10 feet. Yes. Yeah. Which one gives the Which one gives the bigger buffer up front? Is there a difference?

The the zoning wouldn't dictate the buffer along. Yeah, we can't. And we this is straight zoning, so we can't exact anything out of that. Right. Correct.

Okay. Um also want to mention um I I was mentioning to a supporter of this earlier today um one of the hard lessons I've learned in my time on here is remember as much as we like um the applicants and and and all of that, the zoning just stays with the land. um you know they can sell it tomorrow, the market can drop before things get going. We have to ask would we come along and zone this R to um whoever it was and so um there have been some cases and I'm not saying that they're not in you know doing that that they don't intend to do it they say but from our standpoint once we zone it that whoever ends up with the property or what at whatever time they then have that zoning and um I've learned that the hard way on a couple of notes in the past. So that's kind of shading my my view of things as much as I believe them.

And one of the things I hear from people is give us consistency. Don't give you know if you give one something to one you're that sets a precedent. We we want to have it here. And so I think it's important to be consistent as we go through this and whether you're a builder or individual home owner etc. They just want to know there's some consistency out there and this would give consistency. Mr. Brown do do have one more question. And I see Shell Point is what zoned R2 and then on the other side that's a PD. Um what zoning would that be that PD be consistent with? Oh goodness. Is that like more of an R2 or an R3?

Well, the lots look a lot smaller. I would say it's R3 R4 type size lots. Thank you. Okay. Yes, sir. Mr. Ch, mayor, council members, I would invite you to look at what is across the street, which is a school, an elementary school.

Anything we can do to reduce the number of vehicles on Rifle Range Road, I think we need to do. And if we're getting less houses in R1, that's reducing traffic on Rifle Range Road. And I would invite any of my friends on council at 5:00 on a weekday, go look at the traffic on Rifle Range Road. So in that case, I am going to vote for R1.

All right. If there's no further discussion, I think we're going to have to do a roll call on this. The motion is to approve, so a yes vote is to change to R2. Mr. Rambo, no. Mr. Rambo votes no. Mr. Tinky, no. Mr. Tinky votes no. Miss Whitaker, yes. Miss Whitaker votes yes. Mr. Brownstein, yes. Mr. Brownstein votes yes. Mr. Chapman, no. Mr. Chapman votes no. Miss Crosby, no. Miss Crosby votes no. Miss Hayyatt, no. Miss Hayyatt votes no. Mr. Ikapano, yes. Mr. Iapono votes yes. Mayor Haney, no. Mayor Haney votes no.

Okay. By 63, the motion uh to approve fails. All right. Item 10, please. This was uh up in Park West. Yes sir.

So this is an ordinance to amend the Dunes West Park West plan development. The proposal is to incorporate a 7 acre parcel into the PD. Uh the site is there. It is adjacent to the Life Park Church and is under the ownership of the church. It was originally thought that they would expand and use this parcel and they've been looking at some different options and um they would now like to incorporate it into the PD and develop it as residential. It is recommended it is zoned for public institutional and um like I said because it was anticipated to be used um for the church use. So as I said this is a 7 acre parcel. What they would like to do is bring it into the church and you can see it right down there. It is adjacent to the Dunes West PD. Um it would come in uh with a multifamily type zoning. Um

and may may I interrupt you just for all of our edification? The Dunes West PD is what Park West is under. Correct. Okay. Just want to make sure we everybody knew that's what we're talking about. It's a joint Dunes West Park West PD. Um, this is contiguous and adjacent to the Park West neighborhood. It would come in, they would designate it uh for multifamily and it would allow um they've planned for 43 uh townhouse style multifamily units. Move to deny. We have a motion to deny. Do we have a second? Second.

And we have a second. All right. We are in discussion. Um I h I have a comment that I want to make. Um, again, y'all can call me the old man if you want. I I I've earned it. Um, years ago, we did a settlement on Park West, a legal settlement, and um, we paid millions of dollars, and part of that was a buy down of development um, rights as you call it. And I understand that there are like what 50 left of of multif family,

right? And I I get it that if we put this parcel into the PD or I'm going to ask it will it will use 46 of those remaining 50 43

43 of those remaining 50. I if that is I I want to make sure that we are not adding um we never anticipated adding land to the Park West or Dunes West PD when we did that as a council. um we thought, you know, we were buying down Park West as we knew it um for that amount of money to settle that lawsuit, which we did. And now we're adding land so that it can be developed in Park West. Um so, first of all, that that's just that that that's kind of outside the box on that. The other thing is again um I just have a problem with us reszoning things that we just went through years and years of comp plan comp plan review and zoning and there's a reason this is public institution and people have bought and moved there relying on certain things. I don't think they check the zoning of every parcel of land. But now what are we going to do? We're going to do not just residential but multif family in a place that every other thing that we have looked at to this point I believe Miss Rita unless I'm misunderstanding the the comprehensive plan um everything else saw that as being PI. Is that right?

Yes sir. That's correct. That's correct. And I would like to say that a lot of times when we go through that comprehensive plan exercise, we we look at what the zoning is. It was zoned for public institutional and we knew that it was going to be planned for that and so you know it was based on that as well. But you're correct. Okay. Correct. Are they proposing to do any affordable or attainable units in this on on their own? No, sir. Not that I'm aware of. Okay, Mr. Ram.

Yeah. Um, so I mean the original idea of that property, it I think you mentioned it was if they were going to build a school right there, uh, I think was their original idea. Um, even if they're not going to build a school, I mean, uh, being a parent of young children, um, I mean, the biggest complaint is that there's not enough daycarees. I mean, that would be an amazing place to have a church sponsored daycare that could generate revenue for the church if that's what they're needing. Um, and and that would be my encouragement of of the use is what they had originally intended. Um, I don't think that putting 43 more units there serves that community in any way except further increasing traffic. Um, I certainly was not elected or said when I ran for office that I was going to add more units. Um, I So, I don't know. I think there's some good options there for use of that property that could serve that community and serve the church. Um I think reszoning it to uh residential is the easy way out for quick money, but I that's not I'm not supporting that.

Mr. tinking them as height.

The reason the reason why I voted that way is I had a call with Park West today at some length and they were scrambling because they're not for this and and they were they were scrambling to get a letter together or to get people here. Now, that's conjecture because it but it is a conversation I had. So I would want them to be able to give their full um wholesome have a full discussion uh with the seller and the developer as to what happens because there's unintended consequences whether we can unilaterally put them in or not. The discussion has to come what do these unit owners pay as far as amenity fees. Uh what what are you know what are their rights and what are not their rights. So I think a discussion with Park West would be important uh mirroring u Mr. Rambo. I think you can also have the use of the school. You can also have the use of a hospital or medical clinics etc. All of which give more live, work and play opportunities for the people in that area. But let's just say it was we went forward with towno homes which do give density in that area and may be a good area for density. Then we need to really look at a couple things and those those items are connectivity. The walkways would connect to the school, but we'd have no guarantee that they would do those. They would also connect potentially to the um retail that's at public. So, when I walked that that lot, it was obvious to me that people are going to walk in the street if they don't have the sidewalks and whatnot. So, that's not safe for that many people that are there. Uh likewise, attainable housing is something we've committed to do. and um the church uh C Coast uh could have taken a lot of more different ways of getting their money back. They have a similar situation. They were going to develop a church at Park West, I mean, but they decided not to. So, they did attainable housing instead of industrial use. And they and so that was 100 units

as I recall of attainable housing. So, if it were to go the route of um uh town homes, I certainly would want to put in a parameter percentage for attainable housing because we very much need it there. Also, I think the uh other items that would least be considered were uh buffers there and to make sure that in the PD they couldn't do more than 43 uh units. And we did talk about one other area which you you showed if you see the map there where the pond is on the other side of that is a just an open parking lot and there could be instead of a culde-sac there, there could potentially be another entrance and exit. Obviously that have to be engineered. But um those are my reasons. I don't think we're there yet as far as the discussions as as what the use of it is.

And just to be clear, Mr. Pleini, on first reading, um it's a yes or no on on this. Correct. Yes, sir. Okay. Right.

Yes. I guess we this is something that normally I wouldn't be in favor of, but I think council needs to understand whether these units would actually um take up 43 units that are allowed in the PD out of the 50. So basically, this is approving units that are already approved that could be built that don't come to us because it's a PD and we could attach um things like attainable housing. So, one thing I was considering was if we would send it back to committee and um address the fact that it's a PD and and some things that we could attach to the plan rather than just approving it up or down today if we deferred it and send it back to committee.

Is there could we have a clarif I'm sorry. Who's raising? Mr. Brown. Well, I think I think Howard had us first.

Oh, yeah. That's right. Mr. Chapman is first and M. Thank you. I want to add to uh Council Member Hyatt's comments about where else do we want 50 multifamily units to come in the Park West area. We don't know where they're going and I don't think anybody wants even 50 more in the Park West area. But if we're going to have that possibility, which we do, and I was on planning commission when that vote came up in in court, mayor, and I was very glad to see it. Um, but this area, we just built a new road right in that area that can handle the traffic. We also have a commercial shopping area right there. And I'm sure the church is going to want to do the right thing. And if any any entity feels the need for um the housing that's that's necessary for our workers in Mount Pleasant. It's certainly a church. So, I'm going to vote yes on this. Number one, to be a good place if we're going to have multifamily to have it. And second, if we are going to have additional attainable housing, I think if anybody is going to do attainable housing, a church is going to

do it. And then finally, um it is next to a commercial area. which is walkable from these units. So for those three reasons, that's why I'm going to vote yes. Well, let me clarify. The motion is to deny. See, I'm going to vote yes to do this. Whatever it takes. Mr. Brown, see you next week.

Thank you, sir. And Mr. Chaplain stole some of my my thunder. Um, I do think, um, this would be probably the most appropriate place if you're looking at at Park West from a a bird's eye view. It's right on a new road. It's attached to commercial. Um, it is kind of a live, work, play scenario in my mind. It also has an added benefit of um, furthering the interests of First Baptist Church, which is an important congregation in our community. Um, I I would like to see some um attainable housing there. I think that um assuming we we get past through past this vote tonight, um I would like to see it go back to the planning committee and see if we can maybe negotiate a little bit more to um uh to make sure that we're we're um creating space for young professionals, senior citizens. Um, and also I do think multifamily by its very nature will make it um, uh, more affordable than a single family home. Um, it's just it's it's something that that I care deeply about. Um, there's a lot of people that we need in our community to that make it work, whether it's a first responder, a town employee, a nurse, a teacher. Um, and those people are currently shut out of of Mount Pleasant. So, I I I see a lot of benefit to this. It kind of closes out for all intents and purposes the park, the Dunes West PD. Uh it's on a new road. It's connected to commercial and the schools and the church. Um and so I I do see a lot of positives uh with what they're proposing.

Yes, sir. Mr.

Okay. So, just couple of things. Um, number one, I can see why we might need districts for stuff like this because we just turned down three homes on Rifle Range Road and now we're talking about 43 homes in in what is upper Mount Pleasant, North Mount Pleasant, Park West area. Um, it's kind of inconsistent, but I understand. Um, I I I personally think that this needs to go back to planning committee for further discussion. And I think that's and and I would agree with a little bit of the attainable housing portion of it. Um I understand I never knew just cuz you were touching a PD that you could come in and claim that PD's um uh vested rights I guess you could say. Um um that might be too big of a word, but um but you can take up their housing. So I I like the idea of it going back to um back to planning committee. I do have to state I think uh a little inconsistent here on council with 43 homes compared to three on rifle range.

Yes, Miss C. Mr. Mr. Go ahead. Um I would like to also put this back to the committee. I think there could be some restrictions that we could put in place because as I understand it, whatever we put in the PD has they have to follow. Correct. If we say you're capped at 43, they're capped at 43. That's right. And I believe it's 14. It went from like 10 homes to 14 homes on rifle range,

not three. Um, just to make that clarification. Um, but yes, I think going back to the planning, deferring it back to the planning committee to attach some restrictions that we would like to see on it would be my vote.

M. Mr. Paglerini h help us on this. If if you were again living in Brickyard and somebody from an adjoining piece of land wanted to go into the Brickyard PD, could they do that if there was extra housing? What's I'm confused because it's obviously something you can do. Uh but how how does that work if you have a PD in and uh Patriot I mean in Park West and then somebody adjacent can just go into your PD? I I think normal thought process would would want to compare it to an HOA but but this is right but this is a PD it's not governed by initially it was governed by a declarant and and there was I say somebody some entity at the helm which there is not right now but the governing entity which is us has the authority to amend PDS. Um uh someone used the term vested right. The number of units though is not something that the town could unilaterally change in this case. There's no guarantee that those additional 50 units will ever be built.

But this while unusual this is an appropriate way to move forward in this situation. Mr. Rambo,

I have kind of a followup. Mr. the same thing and um um can the park west de like I don't know if the park west developer they're still around I mean they've pretty much built out where could they realistically put 50 more units I mean it's like it's an arbitrary number on a page but that doesn't mean they can actually make it fit within what they have currently I'm very confused and why would the Park West developer just give away their units they wouldn't have a right to say no what are they what's the financial gain for them to give away their units. I'm very confused at the motivations here. I think there's like this this selling point that oh, there's going to be 50 more units built anyway, and I just don't believe that. So, I don't know. I I threw a lot out there, but

I No, it's a great point. I you know, as David said, there are 50 units available. We went and looked the the already approved mo even though you have units allotted you still have to go through an approval process with the town

and so we went and looked at all of their approved multifamily developments and they are all built out the the ones that have been approved and planned. So where could this 50 fit? We didn't go back and look at all their vacant land that would is not in a buffer. you know, I I can't answer that question without looking at the entire development and I but they could come up with a new location conceivably if they could find one and they would have 50 units. Um but so what would they financially what would the developer financially gain from giving away their

units? When you say the developer, you know, again, there is no the developer, right? it would be on an individual parcel within the bounds of the plan development. So those 50 units are getting developed. Well, again, if as Michelle says, if there is a parcel that could be developed, someone purchased it or an entity purchases it, those those units are available. We're just But but again, I should probably smoking mirrors to just add density. Anyway,

that does I just have to ask a question because I it's new to me. So, if I if I have a PD, I've worked hard to get a PD and it takes years to get one and um I've got 100 units left and a town came and said to me, I'm just going to take a hundred of your units that I'm going to add to your PD and then I I've done all my performance based on those 100 units. How could Wouldn't they have a recourse if they lost the units, but I'm I'm not understanding it. Well, that the units belong to the PD, right? Not to any individual developer in this point. it belongs to everybody who's under that. Okay. So, let's let's take that. Let's take their then right before

but with the PD there. If they have a homeowners association, they're planning on developing 50 more and that's going to lower their uh their dues because they can develop more units, then you've taken away the homeowner association ability to do that. I don't know. I just don't understand it either. Yeah. I I don't want to confuse HOAs with a PD which is a legal entity and document

which provides parameters, provides a zoning map, it provides caps on on density, on units and the like. It's not managed by an HOA. It's originally managed by a declarant who creates it. That declarant in this case no longer exists. Um so the units may never be developed at all. It is possible that someone could find an area within the PD, the current PD, and could develop to somewhere between one and 50. Um, as Michelle said, it's very difficult to look at it now and determine where that will be. Um, well, that's why I'm glad I'll be I'll be voting to have it go back to the committee, too, because I think uh because I think it's important that there's at least a discussion between the developer and the seller and the and the um There is no developer as far as input.

All right. Um, we have a motion to deny. Um, if there's no more discussion, I I don't know if we need a roll call. I think we might. All right. The motion to deny. So, a yes vote is to deny. Just real quick. So, we could vote no and then make a motion to defer and if we wanted to. Is that correct? Yeah, you could do that. Right. Okay. Thank you. Right. Mr. Tinky, vote. Mr. Tinky votes no. Miss Whitaker, no. Miss Whitaker votes no. Mr. Brownstein, no. Mr. Brownstein votes no. Mr. Chapman, no. Mr. Chapman votes no. Miss Crosby, no. Miss Crosby votes no. Miss Hayyatt,

no. Miss Hyatt votes no. Mr. Iapono, no. Mr. Iapono votes no. Mr. Rambo, absolutely yes. Mr. Rambo votes yes. Mayor Haney. Yes. Mayor Haney votes. All right. By 7 to two, the motion fails. Move to defer to planning committee. Second. All right. To defer to the planning committee. Yes, sir. All right. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion, please signify by saying I. I. No. And one opposed. All right. Motion carries. 8 to one.

Give me just a second to make my notes. Okay, this moves us to uh section B, old business uh still under planning. Uh final reading of an ordinance um to amend sections 156 of Mount Pleasant code of ordinances pertaining to building area ratio standards within the neighborhood character preservation overlay district. Mrs. Hy, do you have a as chair of planning, do you have a motion to make? Um, I would like to move that we approve with amendments. Um, okay, hold on. Make a motion. Motion. Motion to approve.

Can we do two? I I I'm wondering if these should be two separate votes. So, we have the B issue and then we have the ADU issue. Okay. I think it would be um it would be important if we separated those for the purposes of of how if that's possible. Well, what what we would require is on item number one for a final reading an overall motion to approve and then and then amendments can be made one by one. Okay. So, if you'll do the overall motion. Okay. So, move to approve. Second. All right. And this is just to get the overall topic into discussion and then we can make amendments. All in favor of the motion, please say yes, sir.

If we vote now, then we're approving the whole thing. Um we I think we wanted the opportunity to make some amendments. Amendments, right? Any amendments can be made at this point. Got it. All right. Yes. The amendments were Miss Hayatt, go ahead. That I wanted to make were um for accessory uses and structures to have a consistent um 10-ft side and rear set back for all accessory uses and structures. Okay. Um a 10 10 foot No matter the height, right? Just to for consistency. 10 foot side side. Are there more or is that okay more? Um

I want uh the next amendment would be to eliminate that the max it would have to be part of the same amendment. Is it part of the we have to take amendments or you want each one each amendment? I think each each separately separately. So the first amendment is the 10 ft and then that would require a second and a vote and then you could move. All right. Is there a second? Can I have her repeat it? We're we're not in discussion if we don't have a second to her the motion. You're correct, sir. She can repeat the motion. Please repeat the motion. Okay.

To uh to allow 10 foot side and rear setbacks for all accessory uses and structures. Okay. Is there a second? Um, the chair can second. So, I will second for discussion.

For me, I think it's important to look at it holistically because you could as we go through these, these are all interrelated as far as how the setbacks are, the building area ratio, and all the rest. And so if we go peace mill by there, I don't mind. I'd like to have a discussion on on the whole thing really before we go one by one and and vote on them because at the end of the day, we might realize we had an unintended consequence of what happened with the vote. But that's just that's just for me. Mr. there.

Well, as chair and the one seconded that if we try to do this Rubik's cube, we're going to have nine different opinions. Um, and that's okay if y'all want to be here all night, but I I think we need to find a way to address these issues or everybody's going to have, you know, you move this to you move the ADU from 25 to 20 feet, then then the setback gets moved. So, if somebody's got an answer to that other than one at a time, I I don't know what it is. Yes, sir.

Yes, sir. Uh, thank you. I'll I'll give it an attempt. Um, I I went to the the meeting. I've I've read through um the public comments. kind of what I've heard, you know, obviously there's a a variance of opinion, but but what I've heard is um as sort of a common thread is to approve the building area ratio and to change the setback on ADU the any portion above what was it 18 feet move it to 10 feet uh instead of the the six that it currently is. I think those are the two popular components of this. I think that the rest the the um uh no taller than the principal structure uh and the maximum of 40%. Uh I think those two seem to have more potential unintended consequences. So, I I would sort of recommend that the path forward um is perhaps to do the bar uh do the increased setback for the tall accessory structures and then maybe we can hold off on the rest and and sort of study how that would impact the neighborhoods. Um my my take away from it and and I agree is that um a lot of the homes being built in Old Mount Pleasant uh appear to be oversized, taking up a lot of of the lot and creating scale issues in the in the neighborhoods. Um our stated purpose when we started this process was trying to come up with ways to encourage people not to demolish the ranch homes. I think that those uh if you're limiting an accessory structure to 40% or no taller than the primary structure, I think both of those things actually work against that goal and could potentially encourage people to take down those those ranch homes. So that's kind of the the path forward um that I envisioned, but I'll you know

obviously listen to the rest of the group. Miss, so you made you you got a motion. Um, do you want to amend or withdraw that motion? Uh, no. I'm fine with that. It, you know, it had to do with consistency. Um, because I was also going to make a motion about heights, but um, well, I think you know, if we just stay at 10 feet, then it's easy for for staff to just I think we have a I think we have a path forward because it's it in discussion on the motion that I seconded. Um, along Mr. Brownstein saying I I think we ought to agree tonight on the big things that we can agree on

and get and get the basics of this done. Um we have done this before. Um you know the perfect is the enemy of the good and a good plan executed today beats a perfect plan tomorrow. So let's um let's agree on the big things and I think you did a good job of summizing those summarizing those and I think the setback is one of those the 10 the 10 feet. Mr. Brownstein, would you agree that that the further we set back, the better? Yes, sir. Um I I do. Um I I think as it as it stated in the um the ordinance with the setback is is appropriate. Okay. So, are you withdrawing then your motion so it goes quicker? Oh, no. Is is are you withdrawing your second, I guess?

No, I'm not I'm not withdrawing my second. Um, but the the 10 feet right now the amendment is to just have it a 10 foot rear and uh side and rear setback on all accessory usage. We haven't addressed the height and all of that yet. Right. Okay. I mean, I I was in agreement with with uh Mr. Brownstein as far as eliminating the 40% rule and Okay. and then um addressing the heights. Okay. Those were just the three things and and just to help move the discussion along, I am too. So, I'll be voting that way as well and I think this is part of that. Yes, sir.

On the building to area ratio, I would just add everything that relates in this building to area ratio would be in the that's listed in the um draft uh would be utilized because I think those were good the good definitions and good exceptions. For example, that uh one of them was for item um uh let's see on the last page for lots tidly influence saltwater wetlands marsh or open water beyond the delineated dehack OCRM critical line barsh will be calculated only using the high ground of the lots and specifically excluding wetlands u marsh or open view that's just one of the listings that describes building area ratio I'm just saying include do the building to area ratio and just include the the statements around building area ratio.

Okay. As part of that. All right. I think we got a path forward. So if we're ready to vote on this uh this is the amendment. Do you have a question? Uh Miss Hyatt's um setback was regardless of height. Um does that affect you know somebody just building a um a shed or detached garage? Um

so our code is broken up into major accessory structures and uses and minor and um a major is a shed whether it's 10 feet tall or or 15 feet tall or 18 feet. U minor would be uh maybe like children's play equipment things like that. So, so our zoning code does differentiate, but a shed, regardless of the height, would be considered a major accessory structure.

So, I think in light of that, I think we need to put some kind of height. Um, I don't know, just restricting somebody from putting a a tool shed um six feet from the property line. I I just feel like maybe the way it's written in this ordinance is better. Um, anything over 18 feet would have a 10-ft side and rear setback. That seems good to me. That's right. You I'll You want me to withdraw my motion? I'm not I'm not saying that. I'm asking you what you want to do. No pressure tactics here. No, sir. No m.

Okay. I mean, it this was hard doing these three because I had something that had to do with heights that I was going to amend, but and that's why the 10 foot, but okay. If it's going to mean sheds, I'll I will withdraw my amendment. Okay. And I will withdraw my second. That's okay. You propose? Yeah. I'll go ahead and propose an amendment that we approve the bar and um the side setback for an accessory structure as um described in the ordinance. re remove the um maximum 40% of the building footprint for the accessory structure and remove the part that's no taller than the primary structure. Second. No.

Okay. Remove one at a time. Okay. I got the motion in a second. I just want to make sure I got second. Remove what? I'm sorry. It's uh to approve the bar, remove the um 40%, remove the no taller than the primary structure, and to um Yeah. and to approve the um uh the 10 foot side setback as described in the ordinance. Okay. Uh she had already seconded. Yeah, she already had a second. Okay. Is every is everybody

Let me let me ask this question. Um just so we can kind of vote with confidence. Does with those uh amendments, does anybody anticipate any further amendments to this ordinance after this? Yeah, I thought we were doing these one at a time, but you said remove eliminate 40%. Eliminate the no taller than the primary structure. Approve the bar. Approve the setback as described.

And just for clarity for people watching, that's not the 40% lot coverage. That's 40% for an ADU, right? for a major structure could not be more than 40% of the size of your house when ADUs normally are 850 ft. Right? And if you have a 1300 square foot house, you get to build a closet. Yeah. And also not to be confused with 40% impervious surface coverage, 35% lot coverage, right? We're not talking about impervious or lot coverage, right? We're talking about the relationship of your accessory to your home. Correct.

That's that's real important. Yes. I just have one clarifying question. So on the setback, so if you're going to build over 18 feet, the amendment is to have a 10-ft setback. Does that set back apply at the ground level like foot number one of the building or is that like a wedding cake? Like you could potentially like have a tiered roof and as long as you're 10 feet from the property line once you're 18 feet high. See what I'm saying? Yeah. No, I see. Could it be a step back? Um, it's really any portion over 18 feet has to be 10 feet off the property line. Um,

okay. Doesn't affect the entire So, if somebody had like a detached garage currently that was six feet or seven feet from the property line, they could still add on to it. They just couldn't uh they would just Yeah, I got it. I got it. And I just I don't know if it matters, but I just want to clarify that the ordinance is already written to say um the six feet and the 10 ft. So the setbacks would stay the same. I don't know that that's an amendment, but yes, not an amendment. Um, so it would remain. Yeah. So I guess if we're if it's just an amendment to to remove the 40% and to remove the no taller than the primary structure.

And do you want that removed for the old village historic district, too? Because it's already it's already in there for the old village. It's already written in the code. No. Okay. only just for the old Mount Pleasant outside of the um outside of the historic district for the neighborhood character preservation overlay district. Would that be correct? Okay. That's what we're voting on because we we don't need to go changing what we don't need to break fix what ain't broken. Yeah. Exactly. Right. Any other Yes, sir. So, this does not include any other part of Mount Pleasant. No, the accessory structures applies to the rest of town. So you can see on the left is the location.

Um how how it has evolved is that you have the old village, you have old Mount Pleasant and then you have the rest of town. But the way it has come to this point at final reading is that old Mount Pleasant and the rest of town are all the same. And when we talk about old Mount Pleasant, it's this area and the rest of town. So it would affect it this height and setback for detached accessory structures would apply throughout town except for the old village historic district over unless of course overruling HOAs

if HOAs wouldn't matter. What could matter is if there's a plan development in place that has their own setback. So if it's already uh if setbacks are established in an approved plan development, this would not apply. But if you're outside of a planned development and you're outside of, you know, you're North Mount Pleasant and you want to do a detached accessory structure that's going to be over 18 ft in height, you have to have a 10 foot setback.

Any just to be clear then in the old village it would be uh 25 or 20? No, the the proposal was to go back down to 20 feet in the old village with a definite 10 foot. Yeah. Okay. This is on the amendment. Um I don't think I could restate it. I've got the the bullet points written down. Um to amend um if there's no further discussion, all in favor of the amendment, please say I. I. Any opposed?

All right. So, um the amendment passes. So now we um already have a motion to approve the um overall um ordinance which would be as amended. I I just have so this is every neighborhood in town. I don't

I this started in one neighborhood in the old in in Indian village and then this is sweeping across every other neighborhood in town. I don't know that every other neighborhood in town. I think we concentrated on only telling uh old Mount Pleasant, old historic district this that's where the um that's where the open house was was done. And this is all of Mount Pleasant for that reason. Can make a an amendment. Then I would then I would then I would I'd make a motion to take the rest of town off of off of this until we were to have time to let the rest of town know because we 100% concentrated on old village historic district. Was that a motion?

Yes, sir. Okay. And I second taking off rest of town. Well, yeah. Yes, ma'am. That's right. Um, the only thing I think that's really affected all the rest of the town is the setbacks. The six foot is the only thing that's really changing is that you're going to have to do a 10-ft setback if you have a over 18 foot building townwide. Isn't that the only thing that's going to affect the rest of town? That That's correct.

That's that's the only thing, Mr. Afano that's going to affect everybody else is the consistency with setbacks with accessory buildings. Instead of six feet, if it's tall, it'll go to to 10 ft. I I just want to add, I think Mr. Iano has a good point. Um we we only mentioned it u for for this part. It doesn't mean we we can't come back and do it for all of town, but I think for appearance and propriety sake, we need to do it this way as advertised. Thank you. Okay.

And because it also affects that height of the ADU compared to the the primary structure too. So I agree, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. All right. Uh yes, this is an amendment. This that uh what was again Mr. want to just remove rest of town. Right. Yeah, I've taken that. Got it. Right. All right. All in favor of the amendment, please say I. I. Any opposed?

All right. So, it is amended. So, this applies to certain parts to Old Village historic and the others to Old Mount Pleasant as um the um neighborhood character preservation overlay district which was shown on the map. So now um as amended um is there any further discussion on the ordinance as it stands. All right. All in favor of the motion to approve the ordinance as amended, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? All right. Motion carries. Thank you all very much. Final reading ordinance number 255. We made it.

That we made it exactly. And if we if we're going to keep moving, um I won't need to have a break, but um so let's see if we can keep going. We're almost through planning. All right. This is um items two and three. Yes, sir. Final reading to annex and zone this parcel. Move to approve items two and three. Second. We have a motion in a second. I'll just say before we vote, I've been a no on these from the start and I'll still be a no. And I'll lose vote. That's okay. I just want to explain. Well, I'll be a no as well. All right. All right. All in favor of the motion to approve items two and three, please signify by saying I. I. All oppose. No. All right.

Final reading ordinance number 2602. Crosby. No. Crosby Tinky Haneies. Yeah. Wasn't that a 1970s B? No. Crosby still. All right. Item four. providing for the uh annexation of an approximately.35 acre parcel load located at 1602. Yeah, just a reminder, this came to you last month for first reading. Um y'all, they were requesting R3 zoning. Um council denied that R3. It's still up for annexation. If this is approved, it would come in as R1. Yep. Second. Okay. And again, this is only for the annexation.

Okay. All right. Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve um at.35 acres. This is this intended for residential use? Yes. Okay. All right. All in favor of the motion to approve, please say I. Any oppose? Motion carries. Final reading ordinance number 26004. Section nine, committee action items. There are none. Section 10, item eight, uh first reading, ordinance to amend. Uh this has to do with public rightway planning and replacement in our code of ordinances. Um it's it's a I mean it's a legal change, but it allows for some uh new ways to uh plant and cover things that frankly were outdated that has to do with B. Move to approve.

Thank you. Second. We have a motion and a second to approve. Any discussion? Yes. Quick question. And is this the one that that we had kind of kicked around about a year ago? And there's some question about um would Mount Pleasant Waterworks replace the grass when they're um doing work.

I don't know if it's the same one, Mr. Brownstein, but I know that this one is so they can do like a more uh pollinator friendly and all rather than the hydro seeding and stuff like that. Whether that's the same issue, I'm not exactly sure. Yeah, that as long as it doesn't change if I want grass, they come and and you know dig up the line that they replace the grass. Um it just I understand if it gives more flexibility for pollinator gardens, but just want to confirm that that's not going to, you know, change how they treat um my yard or your yard when they um

I certainly don't think so. And that wasn't the intention, but I will defer to legal. They still have to replace your grass. Yeah. What? What did I don't think we're going to have involuntary pollinator gardens. I'll say that much. Yes. Any any of I just didn't I didn't hear what Mr. Pag doesn't affect what Mr. All right. All in favor of the motion to approve, please say I. I. All right. Motion carries. First reading ordinance number 26019.

Uh old business. Item one, an ordinance to amend the budget town of Mount Pleasant for fiscal year. Um this would be your motion. Yes sir. Um as y'all heard the re the uh presentation by our finance director. This is a amendment to recap. Motion to approve. Yes. Second. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chapman. You want the gavl? I was going to say it. Please vote. Go ahead and vote. Give us your motion. Oh, now we need the amendment.

Okay. to recommend to approve the fiscal year 2026 mid-year budget adjustment with staff recommended amendments which include healthcare fund balance true 2,300,000 IT watch garden migration of police camera data 300,000 storm water emergency repair cost 500,000 and then a new position within the business license office and inspector uh $0 using money that's already there. Total amount to amend 3,100,000. Do we have a second?

Second. All right. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion, please say I. I. All right. Motion carries. Reading 260. That was the amendment. We need to vote. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. That was the amendment. Amen. Thank you. Got ahead of myself. All right. Any further discussion now on the uh on the motion to approve the or the the budget true up. All right. All in favor of the underlying motion, please say I. I. Any opposed? Thank you all very much. Thank you. Reading ordinance number 26008. Number two, an ordinance authorizing and approving a grant of surplus rightway to the South Carolina Department of Transportation. Mr. Chairman, second.

We have a motion to approve and a second. We went over the details of this last time. Is there any discussion? All in favor of the motion to approve, please signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Final reading 26007. Item 11. If there is no further business, this meeting is adjourned. That was better.