City Council - Regular Meeting

Action was taken. This is our tradition here at the city prior to gabbling a meeting in order to have a short prayer tonight. Council member Lindsey is going to lead us. You're welcome to join us if you'd like.

That is great. Lord God, we thank you for this opportunity that we have in this New Year. And Lord God, we ask you to continue your your guidance, your grace, and your mercy. Not to not just to us, but our staff as well as our loved ones as well. Lord God, we know that hate can't exist where there is love. We know that darkness can't exist where there is light. So we ask that you show us the way to be more loving in your image so that we might exercise that that's plea exercise that in a way that's pleasing to you. These and all blessings, ask in Jesus' name. Amen.

Amen. We call this meeting of Monday, 01/26/2026 to order. Please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay.

If you'll bear with us, there's a few things that'll fall off the agenda. We'll just get to them as we'll handle that when we get to them, but we'll move on first to item three a. Consider approving the consent agenda, which is items three a, minutes of the regular session of 01/12/2026. Three b, second reading and adoption of an ordinance for partial abandonment of utility rights of way and easements on property located on Overview Drive in the city of Rock Hill. And three c, second reading and adoption of an for the partial abandonment of utility rights of way and easements on property located on Celanese Road in the city of Rock Hill. So move for approval. Second. I have a motion and second. Any discussion? Questions?

Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. Item four a, consider planning commission recommendation on petition MDash2025Dash17 by Riverchase Realty LLC to rezone approximately 13.2 acres including right of way at fifteen o five and fifteen fifteen Riverchase Boulevard from General Commercial GC and planned unit development PUD to master plan commercial MP dash c. Tax parcel 6620501248 and 244. Shauna?

Meeting council. So this site is located at the Northwest Corner of Ligon Drive and Rivertouch Boulevard, North of Soumani's Road and West Of I 77. It consists of two undeveloped parcels. Surrounding uses include undeveloped property to the north and east, multi family apartments to the West, and commercial uses to the South.

Look at the map. The

property is zone planning development. Well, half of the property is on playing development, the western half, while the eastern half is on general commercial, surrounding zoning districts include additional PUD zone parcels, general commercial, multi family 15, community commercial, and limited commercial. So the PUD portion was originally approved back in 1986 as a River Chase playing unit development, where the subject area was approved for just over 500,000 square feet of commercial area. The PUD was subsequently amended in 2003 to additionally allow for industrial flex space uses. And this is just the PUD overlaid over the aerial site.

So when I go over the site constraints for the parcels on which kind of sets the tone for some of the things that we'll discuss later on the presentation. So the site can consist of a number of physical constraints. Those include a 150 foot wide easement for Duke's overhead transmission lines, a 54 inch wall water line, a sewer line, three intermittent streams, one perennial stream, three wetlands, FEMA floodplain, and two storm water detention ponds. And I've kinda highlighted those here, so I've shown the 150 foot wide Duke easement, the 54 inch wall water line, the sewer line. So just a number of physical constraints on the property.

So the proposal for tonight will be to rezone the parcels to multi master plan commercial to allow for two upscale four story extended stay hotels. Extended stay hotels are customary of apartment like amenities such as the kitchenette as they are intended for exterior periods of occupancy. The hotels would be constructed in two phases. The first phase would include an approximately 85,700 square foot and 121 room hotel which will be a residence in the hotel would have a flat roof surrounded by parapet walls and corner treatments. We have a series of vertical and horizontal offsets and the exterior materials would include brick masonry, horizontal and vertical fiber sand, fiber cement board and batten siding.

The second phase would include an approximately 59,300 square foot, 116 room hotel, which would be a studio res or similar. We'll kinda go over that later on also. It would also have a flat roof surrounded by parapet walls and corners treatments. The exterior materials will consist of fiber cement or EFIS panels and metal panels of architectural gray. So during the PC meeting or during the planning commission meeting public hearing, one of the planning commission members kind of pose a question of why not just build, you know, one hotel instead of two hotels.

Since that time, the developer has brought forward a third option, so this was not shown to the planning commission. The developer has brought forth a third option that should they not should he not build hotels one and two, he would just build one hotel. That hotel would be a dual branded hotel with which would consist of both traditional and extended stay style rooms. So this is just an example. This is actually, I believe, in Indianapolis, but this is just an example of a residence in in a spring Springwood Suites, Spring Hill Suites, both under the Marriott brands.

So this is just an example. This is a local example. This is a courtyard by Marriott and Residence Inn at the Northlake Mall. Just to give you an idea of what that could look like. So hotel number one would address Ligon Drive and Hotel Number 2 would be situated to the rear.

Parking would be provided during each development phase. No new streets or right away would be created with this development. The development has fringe on three streets, Lincoln Drive, Riverchase Boulevard, and Lexington Commons Drive. Access for the hotel would only come from Lincoln Drive via two access points. Existing sidewalk along Riverchase Boulevard south of the subject site subject property currently terminates at the corner of Ligand Drive in River Chase Boulevard.

A TIA was required and performed because the development would generate more than 100 peak hour trips but did not yield any required traffic improvements. So although no traffic improvements were warranted, there have been past, present, and future projects in this area that have been aimed at easing the traffic congestions in this area of Celanese and along Celanese Road as a whole. So there are plan improvements to the interchange overall that is expected to get started within the next few years. And there's been some changes to the off ramps for Celanese Road at I 77 and there's been other changes in the area over the recent years. So you're probably asking why is this a master plan?

Why are we doing this as a master plan? So we use master plans when there is a request to not meet several zoning requirements which will here and after referred to as deviations as well as lock in concessions agreed to by the developer in an attempt to help offset those deviations. So in the next few slides, we'll go over what those deviations and concessions are. The the standards for hotel uses were listed in the staff reports. I won't go over all of them, but I was hit on the main ones.

Before I get started, I would just like to say that regardless of the deviations, the hotel our hotels are still meant to be transient uses. They will are not meant to be places of residence. So the first one, hotels

should

not be a place of residence. So right now, these only ordinance states that hotel stays may not exceed thirty consecutive days in any hotel or combination of hotels. The applicant would propose to increase this from thirty days to six months. So again, the the extended stay style hotels just naturally, most folks would be staying there over thirty days anyway. So, you know, if you're in town, you know, building the Costco or the Target or or what have you, you would expect to be there more than thirty days.

And it's less of a it's less of a thing on on staff and both hotel staff to have to call staff each time that a hotel stay or needs to stay over that time. Multiple thirty day periods within within any consecutive twelve month period are not allowed and then maximums length of hostel stay. So right now the maximum length for hotel stay is six months. That would propose to be increased from one or to one year. There are still circumstances that must exist for staff to increase the or out approve the hotel extended stay.

So, again, it could be things like, you know, an employ a contract, house fire, or something of that nature to where staff could approve that. Continue with the deviations or non residential design standards, facade massing. So, basically, this standard not included direct graphics from our zoning ordinance. The the intent is to not have long stretches of a building wall without any horizontal vertical relief. Hotel number one meets this requirement.

However, hotel number two doesn't. However, hope because hotel number two has not been decided as far as the exact hotel brand and maybe a studio res or something equivalent to a studio res. The developer has agreed to work with staff to the extent practical so that that hotel meets that requirement. The second one is height. So the zoning ordinance requires that when the building is within 30 feet or excuse me, within a 100 feet of a property that's used or zoned for multifamily, it cannot exceed 30 feet in height.

The hotels will be up to 50 feet and the hotels are 71 feet and 56 feet away from the villas at Riverview apartments. And that photo on the left is a just a photo of the apartments. Landscaping, specifically buffers and grading, the applicant proposes to a 45 foot deviation, however, it would increase the fence height from six feet to eight foot for additional screening. Additionally, the zoning ordinance does not allow for you to grade within the buffer. The applicant will propose to grade within the buffer and replant that so that's a deviation and hotels require one space per guest room parking space per guest room.

So total of 237 guest rooms with 226 parking spaces so a deficit of 11 spaces. This is just a buffer exhibit so. I've tried to show here in the red outline with the sort of yellow background is the required buffer area so of course you can see parking spaces will be when that and within that buffer portions of small portions of the building would be within that buffer and again those physical strengths that we went over a little bit early in the presentation kinda force the all of the development to this corner of the parcel. So it's really it would be really difficult to expand beyond this kind of envelope. Additional terms.

So master plans automatically revert to the SF 2 zone industry if the two year vesting period is lost. The applicant has proposed that this would revert to office institutional instead, so should that best in period be lost, it would go back to o I instead of s f two. Hotel and flag limitation. Hotel number two would excuse me. Hotel number one would be a residence in.

Hotel number two would be a studio res or equivalent within the Marriott Hilton IHG or Hyatt brand. And then lastly, the dual brand hotel alternative with traditional and extended stay style rooms would be within the Marriott brand or equivalent within Hilton IHG or Hyatt. Landscape district participation. So there's a future city initiative to deter crime, increase quality of life, create place making, and beautify the River Road corridor. Developer does own and operate the Red Roof Inn at 1037 Riverview Boulevard in addition to other hotels along Riverview Road and has agreed to advocate for and participate in the creation of that district.

And with that, staff recommends approval of massive plan commercials on industry.

Any questions for Shauna?

So Shauna, I guess I got I have a question because I'm not sure. Go back to the parking slide.

Sure.

So if you have one parking space per guest room and they have they're 11 short, what where do we park that hotel when it's a 100% occupied and you have staff working there?

We so a few years ago, we kinda moved from we used to park hotels based on the number of employees and the number of guest rooms. Since then, we kinda moved away from parking uses based on employment because it's kinda hard to do that. And so now we solely based it on the number of of guest rooms. So it would be a deficit of 11 spaces.

Okay. So back to my question, I guess, are we gonna have cars parked down on the street?

I I think it it I mean, there's that possibility, I guess, not on the street, course, but at at times, there's another hotel next door to it once built out. We could get some temporary till then, but like my family, when we travel, we may be in one car, but we got two rooms because my kids are older. I mean, I I think that does happen more often than you think.

But what if it's just one hotel?

So is that

I think we need temporary.

Is that one hotel parking or is that both hotels

That's for both. So that's the total of both. So the 237 guest rooms, that's for all both hotels.

Gotcha.

So across the two, there will be a shortage of 11 spaces.

And and go to the the the site plan with the partner.

The bigger one.

Yeah.

So, really, once they get in the parking lot of those hotels, some could park either hotel, so to speak. Yes. So you're just looking Yes.

There wouldn't be a parking amongst both hotels once they're both built. So there wouldn't be parking areas that would be restricted to one hotel or vice versa. They would once they're both built, they would both share parking.

I guess I'm just thinking like the Adidas event. Mhmm. Both of those hotels are gonna be full. And I hear you saying y'all might but there's also gonna be some people that come in two cars and have one room.

Yeah. Right. So where do you park? Where do those people park? Unmarked spaces on the side, I guess.

They should only they should only be parking in the parking.

Oh, I know they should. Does it does the site plan,

I mean, going to the west of that, I guess, is where I'm it does it prevent from any more development? Any getting 11 spaces in there as a overflow or something? I mean, there's it it just prevents that completely?

They're they're using every usable inch of the site.

I mean, do you take hotel two up a floor and and short shorten the footprint to get additional parking spaces.

Maybe get a parking agreement with a neighbor.

I can meet you all.

I'm not just that that concerns me a little bit that you don't have enough parking there.

I get it. Certainly.

Alright. So so I'm assuming the planning commission recommendation approved it short of those parking spaces. Is that correct?

They did. During the planning commission discussion, they did bring about setting a precedence for the number of deviations so they did at least bring that up as far as like the buffers and the parking or just the overall number of things that were being asked for but I think that they kinda went back to how much the site is constrained.

Alright. So, then the planning commission approve this reverting back to OI versus SF two?

Yes.

Alright. So help me understand why we would change that. I mean, we have a rule with planned development that it reverts back to SF two. So why does this development was it any different than any other plan development change that?

Well, so when the planning commission made the recommendation is just, you know, for the overall number of deviations, I will say that the SF 2 zoning district it doesn't allow for kind of some of the uses that could possibly go here should this, you know, not happen. I also have the useless I can pull up as well, but generally SF 2 is gonna allow for half acre lots and allow for some lower intensive non residential uses such as like maybe like a church or school, but it's not gonna allow for any commercial uses. So you would have this parcel off of, you know, Selwyny's Road that would essentially be limited to, you know, residential uses or have

I get it. But but this came before council and and this isn't this really the on this applicant. But we did a plan development with the developer for this site and this is what it was supposed to look like. Right. And if it didn't, then it reverts back to SF 2. So if this doesn't get built, it should come back to this council for us to have that say in what goes there just like we did when this was however many years ago we did the original PD. If you go to OI, we might not have a say in what goes there. That's that's kind of the whole point of the PD. So I don't know why we would not revert back to a more restrictive zoning district So this would come back to us if these hotels were never built. We would have a say in what went there.

Sure.

So I guess I'm there's a disconnect for me and neither my staff would propose that or why the planning commission would approve that because that just kinda goes against in my mind, why you do a PD. Mhmm.

Right. So it would normally go back to the s f two if the developer is asking that it goes to o n I. But that's something that we can consider it going back to SF two like it normally would instead of 0 I.

Okay. So if we If we motion. Yeah. In our motion, we would need to take that out. Okay. And then I'm sorry to take up so much time, but on the Hotel Number 2 on your slide where you talked about the brand. Okay. So the last point there, it says dual brand alternative with traditional and extended stay rooms within a Marriott or equivalent with Hilton Holiday Inn Hyatt. I thought that I read in the packet that that is with city manager approval.

Yes. So that would have that would require actually coming I think the the way that it's written is that if that option is chosen, it will come back to the city council.

Okay. Alright.

So if the applicant decide to do the one hotel

Mhmm.

Instead of two, can it be reconfigured to the point where you get those 11 spaces?

Because it would come back to the city council. I think that if if the if the parking is if if I think that if the parking is hang up, that's something that you all can certainly require that it must meet the the parking count. Or the required parking.

Just looking at the diagram, I mean, there's space there.

Mhmm.

If it was reconfigured, it would give you the level of parking spaces, maybe even more if it was one hotel.

It seems like it would. Yeah.

So is there and I'm not trying to put you on the hot seat, but you're just is there a reason staff do y'all not think part that parking would be a big deal that y'all kinda giving on that? I mean, did you make a recommendation to the planning commission that that was okay?

Yes. So, with the the parking was a part of along with the other deviations was a part of the staff's recommendation to the Planning Commission.

Okay. So, my question is from our planning staff, you are willing to deviate from the parking. So are you don't you don't think that's a big deal that we don't have the spaces required if both of those hotels were full?

It could be an issue. I wouldn't say that we don't I wouldn't say that we don't think that it would be a big deal because it could very well be an issue in the event like you said, if both of the hotels are occupied. Our parking standards sometimes, you know, we have parking to where it's not completely utilized. So it's it's kind of hard to it's kind of hard to tell if all the parking would actually be needed.

In the second reading, I'd like to just pose a question to the developer and hotel staff. What percentage of the time is it a 100% occupied? And yeah. That's just my question. How how how many what's the percentage?

We can give you that information. Mhmm.

And I also thought about how many times have all other hotels been 100% occupied that parking was an issue. Okay. Have we considered that or have we looked into that?

We can look at that possibly find a way to look at occupancy for hotels to see, you know, maybe even aerial images for different hotels in and around the city. I was going back and looking at aerial images to see, you know, how if they're all part, over part, or under part, or what have you.

To both of your points, I think it's gonna be very small.

Mhmm. Mhmm.

But I think we spend so much money on sports tourism and bringing visitors to town that that's when, like, some of these Adidas events and others, it's gonna be packed and I just wouldn't wanna see that parking overflowing on the street that's not meant for parking. So that's really the reason for my question, but I don't

think you're

gonna the applicant probably in the hotels are gonna say they're a 100% occupied even 20 or 30% of the time.

I also think given the nature of the hotel with it being an extended stay, it's it's something to consider because this may not be your Adidas hotel. This may be somebody who's coming to build something or work in Charlotte Metro Area, Rock Hill. I I think the nature of the hotel itself is something to be considered.

But you also at Residence Inn has two bedroom units.

Mhmm. Mhmm.

And you're only counting one parking space for that room.

Mhmm.

So.

Shawn, another traffic stay was done but Liggett Drive was a just a little cut through for a while and then it's been redone. So nothing came back that it would handle that traffic emptying out on just Liggett?

No. Everything was fine

to handle that? It could go either way, either light, guess it could go either direction once it get onto Ligon?

Correct. So there were no no warrant improvements based on the traffic impact analysis. And I think it's just based on again the future plans for the I 77 Celanese Interchange as well as the past things that have been done. So, Ligon Drive formally stopped at the gas station and then it continued over to Riverview and there have been another number of other changes in the area.

So another question is is, you know, they keep referring to the hotel one as Residence Inn, but then there's all these ifs. So is residence in on the the hook? Have they signed a contract with them or not? Because there seems to be a lot of like, oh, this is Residence Inn, but then there's a lot of well, maybe not, maybe this, or if it's this, then maybe it will be this.

So so based on the information that we receive from the applicant, the the hotel number one will be the residence and I think the applicant has indicated that, you know, they've already paid like an application fee for the residence and they've gotten that approved. It's just that with the studio res that that could that could possibly change if there's another hotel or another brand that is, you know, performing or outperforming the studio res that is offered within the other brands. So there's I can't remember off the top of my head, but there's another similar brand offered by Hilton that could, you know, develop as a site, and the the applicant just wants the sort of the ability to go with one or the other.

So, it it does mention in there a couple of different places that it it would be a equal or higher end brand model of those brands.

Yes.

Right? But if you look at Studio Rez, Marriott, LiveSmart, Hilton, I don't know that those are higher level brands hotels within their tiers.

Yes.

You you got Homewood Suites which I don't know how that compares like the LiveSmart hotel from Hilton and the Homewood Suites from Hilton. I'm just I just wanna make sure that there's no contradiction that they're saying one thing and then we're get something else. Right. Because I don't believe the LiveSmart or the Studio Res is be referred to as higher end. And I ask that because it goes back to another question I have. Remind us the changes we did to the hotel stuff about three or four year couple several years ago when we had all the problem with the homeless staying more than basically camping out. Can you remind us the new regulations that we changed on that? Do you know the by chance?

So with the with the text amendments that went that went to you all last January, so actually January '25. '25. Those went to first readings and those actually haven't been approved yet.

Okay. So we had spent a lot of time with the hotel and I think the owner of this franchise actually has one in this area where we had a lot of crime. We had the hotels being used as more or less apartment complexes. Yeah. Right? Do we know the status of that? Mean because now he wants to increase it from six months to a year. Are we gonna go down that road with the Red Roof Inn and all these other ones that were that we had issues with And and if he builds a lower tier hotel beside the residence in are we going. Is is. Are we going to have that problem there. That we were trying to solve for. You know a year or two ago.

Right.

So you know, he's asking for a year longer, where I don't know that we've we've solved issue on Riverview Road. Maybe we have. Do we know any statistics from We Riverview Road about meeting those guidelines and meeting Mhmm.

We pulled some we do have some recent numbers.

Dennis Fields, just give everybody your name.

Yep. Dennis Fields, development and zoning manager. We didn't have the police department do the calls for service for several hotels. They did indicate that overall, they're actually down about 1,100 calls for the year in comparison to years like 2223. And I know that there have been some changes from talking to some of the hoteliers. They do ID checking. They actually share that information amongst the hotels and that kind of thing. Some of the hotels were down as much as 90% for calls. Some of them that were in upwards of a 100 calls are down below 20 calls for a quarter. So there's been significant improvements in the overall area just generally, but we can get into other numbers.

We didn't have a whole lot of time to dig through this spreadsheet that we're given by the police department, but those could also be calls from the hoteliers themselves. Yeah. So we did get a breakdown of that. Just the volume of calls in general has decreased by a good amount.

And and there there was a process. How how do we know how do how do we, as staff, keep up with them reporting somebody that needs to stay over thirty days? I mean, do we get they have to access they have to give us access to their roster, what do you call their

Yes.

Go ahead.

In 2020

or the 2023, we had asked all of the hotels for that information. We have not done that since just to kinda get a snapshot in time of where we were when we were suggesting some of the changes and text amendments. And and Shauna was correct. We went through first reading of that. I have not seen second reading of that. But, you know, some of those changes were in response to this, and and the hoteliers heard loud and clear during that first reading that they needed to make some changes internally, and I believe that's why some of these numbers are going down.

Coming down. Right. So we hadn't had the complaints and the calls out there is is like we had.

Correct. Mhmm. That has decreased.

We pulled numbers back in July to look Steven Gibson was kind enough to do that and looked at them, and there'd been a significant drop, but we're still getting calls which we want to get calls Yeah. When when we have things out there that need police presence. What we didn't want is what it appeared to be was just turn a blind eye and and drive that into the ground. I think with the road construction being completed now and Jimmy, think the lines will be buried hopefully in the polls taken down the next month or so, I'm guessing. It's changed. Yeah. So we're the hoteliers really have stepped up.

Well, I'm happy to hear that and I just wanna make sure that we don't extend it to a year. We're putting ourselves into more of a harder spot to to regulate that. And, you know, obviously Residence Inn is a good brand. I've stayed in them a bunch with my family because I I had a bunch of kids and we do just stay for a weekend. So it's not just used for thirty days or forty, you know, forty five days.

I mean, we we stay in those and weekends back in. But you know, we're going to, you know, and I get the idea of having a residence in on one property and having a maybe a little bit smaller price point beside it, which is a good thing. But I just caution to, just wanna make sure that we're not going down that road where we're creating what we have on Riverview Road and it turns into a problem and we've yet now we gave them a year and now we have no teeth or no claw to go back and say hey wait a minute you're you're perpetually you know letting people stay here that is that you shouldn't and and then staff gotta figure out to track it. Certainly. How we how did we get the report back from them?

How do we make the approval if it's over six months? You know, that's a lot of work on staff too. So I'm bringing those comments up. Anything else for Shauna?

I was gonna ask, how how likely is staff willing to to build one hotel and reconfigure it till we get the parking spaces. They still get what they want, traditional and extended stays. I'm asking because I I go to Greenville and cook for the Shrine Bowl that's in Greenville. Uh-huh. And we're losing that revenue to Greenville. The economic impact, I've been doing it for the last three years. And the reason is that we don't have a 250 bed hotel here that would house the whole entire shrine bowl teams.

Right. So the applicant has, you know, say to me that this will most likely be the two hotel model, especially since he's essentially has the residence in approved, that he just simply wanted to introduce this dual brand alternative because it is a new model and just wants to, you know, essentially keep his options open should he not build those other two. But from from what I understand, he's pretty much banking on building the two hotels, but just wanna keep just wants to keep this as an option.

It's $30,000,000 investment on Riverview Road. Yeah. I must not lose sight of that. This is a big deal.

Mhmm.

Big deal or big problem?

No. They're all problems. Things Everything's

a I think it's a big deal.

Yeah. I'm just saying. Just wanna be careful. Anything else? Plus wish for counsel.

I would make a motion. So Paul, do I do I reject the planning commission recommendation if I wanna make any changes to what they approved or Just a minute. In my old age, I've become more malleable. You can accept it with with Change. With changes.

Alright. So I would make a motion to accept the Planning Commission recommendation with the following changes that the property would revert back to SF 2. If this project was not built per our normal Standards with buds and that we would meet the parking space requirement as outlined in the zoning code.

That's the motion. Is there a second? Second. Alright. Discussion. I'm I'm not sure this is a question for parking space. Meaning, can can the applicant strike in a a contract with the neighboring property owner and get credit for the use of 11 parking spots if need be. I don't know who I'm looking at. It's showing

like behind Lincoln, the back of those stores, there's All those restaurants. Yeah.

Possibly. So in order for them to share parking with, like, the Kanichiwa and the Empire development, they would have to have enough of their own parking to share. So if they happen to be over 11 spaces, now we can run the numbers. If they happen to be over, that's a possibility, but, of course, that would mean, you know, they have to get their approval to do it.

So it's it's a possibility. Right. Okay. Mhmm. Just a question. Any other discussion? I'm sorry.

Well, just I think maybe this would help too for second reading. The breakdown of one bedroom and two bedroom units in the residence. And for sake for sake of parking, we're kind of counting it as one room I believe but just confirm that

okay

and then Paul maybe before second reading I would like your maybe to weigh in on extending those stay times and how that may affect us with to John's point of what we've been trying to do with some of the issues we've had with other hotels. You know, I guess it again kind of back to some other comments I made it looks great for the residents in. We know that brand and that's great for ten years. Thirty years from now does a future council have a problem on their hands because we've written something in that says they can stay a full year or whatever. So

Yes, sir. I think I understand what you're getting at. I'll work on it.

Any other discussion? We have a motion and a second to accept the Planning Commission recommendation with with some amendments to that. Any further discussion? Questions? Hearing or seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. We'll move on to item four b, ordinance to amend the zoning orders of the city of Rock Hill code by making certain changes in the official zoning map affecting approximately 13.2 acres located on Riverchase Boulevard from general commercial GC and planned unit development, PUD to master plan commercial, MPC.

So move for first reading. Second.

We have a motion and second. Any discussion? Questions? Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. We'll move on to item four c. Consider playing commission recommendation on petition MDash2025Dash19 by Bill Elliott to annex and rezone approximately 4.4 acres at 540 Mount Gallant Road from Urban Development UD in York County to Industry General IG, tax Parcel 664 Dash 008. Shauna? So

this site is located in the Eastern part of the city, West Of I 77 and East and North East of North Anderson Road. The property has an existing industrial building. Surrounding uses are also mainly industrial. The parcel zone urban development in York County, surrounding zoning districts include industry general, limited commercial, and also parcels dark zone urban development, industrial development, and residential mixed use 20 in York County. This is just a photo of the property.

The request does not have a site plan because no new development is being proposed. The site is already served with city water and sewer services and recently requested a fire line to serve a new sprinkler service for the building for the utility per the city's utility service policy, properties contiguous to the city limits are subject to immediate annexation at discretion of city council from requesting a utility service for an existing use with no new development or redevelopment. This one's. And with that, staff and planning commission recommends approval of the Industry General Zoning District.

Thank you. Any questions for Shana?

Make a motion to accept the planning commission recommendation.

Second. Promotion, second. Any discussion? Questions? Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. Item four d, consider a petition for annexation to the city of Rock Hill Industrial city Of Rock Hill of Rock Hill Industrial Park Area 13 lying adjacent to the city limits of the city of Rock Hill, South Carolina, shown on map dated 12/29/2025.

So moved to accept the petition.

Second. The motion is second. Any discussion, questions, hearing, and seeing none. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved in four e, ordinance to amend chapter seven annexations of the code of the city of Rock Hill so as to provide for the annexation zoning award designation of Rock Hill Industrial Park Area 13, flying adjacent to the city limits of the city of Rock Hill, South Carolina.

So moved for first reading.

Second. The motion is second. Any discussion, questions, hearing, and seeing none. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. And then four f, ordinance to amend the zoning ordinance to the city of Rock Hill code by making certain changes in the official zoning map affecting approximately 4.4 acres located on Magdalet Road from urban developed UD to industry general IG. So move for first reading. Second. We have a motion, second. Any discussion, questions, hearing, and seeing none all in favor favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved.

We'll move on to item four g. Consider planning commission recommendation on petition 2025Dash20 by Vincent Hicklin to rezone approximately 3.88 acres including right of way at 648 And 652 South Jones Avenue from single family residential 5 S F 5 to office and institutional o I. Tax parcel 625 Dash 04 Dash 0 1014 and 033. Shada.

Alright. So this site is located in the Southeastern portion of the city, south of the the East Black Street corridor in the Stonewall neighborhood. It consists of two lots that are owned by the hands of Mercy mercy. The site contains a church building as well as accessory buildings used to support the church's operations. Surrounded by single family detached uses.

Property zone single family fives also surrounded by other single family five properties predominantly. So this is just some photos of the property so Vincent Hicklin of Camp Flight Academy is requesting to rezone the property to use the main building at 648 South Jones Avenue as a child daycare that would house up to 30 children. The day care would not be considered an accessory used to the church since camp fight academy would operate outside of the church's normal operating hours. The child day care facilities are prohibited in the current SF 5 zoning district. Therefore, the applicant is requesting to be rezoned to office and institutional which allows both the church and the day care as conditional uses.

With that, staff and planning commission recommends approval of the office and institutional zone industry.

That was the building to the left, right?

Yes. So, yes, the the the building with the blue roof is where the daycare would be housed. Not the entire building, just a portion of the building.

So the church is not in the front part of it? You said the building with the blue the blue top. That's the church. Right?

Yes. That's the church building. So that's where the day care would be. The there are no immediate plans for the the smaller building with the handicap ramp on the front of it. It's just customary for churches to uniformly have the same zoning district.

So whenever it's not the church, it will be a daycare? Yes.

So if it were if the daycare were operating, like, you know, during the time of Sunday school or something like that, we could just consider it an accessory to the church. But once the daycare operates outside of the church's hours, so once they operate Monday through Friday outside of when the church is in session, then it we just have to consider it is on use of the daycare, and that's why the the rezoning is necessary.

But what the what the day care be operating during church hours or church service time?

Right.

There may be some, you know, ancillary, you know, church times during the week, maybe like on a Wednesday or something like that for revival. But Monday through Friday, day care afterwards. Yes. So not on not on Sundays when you have your main church service. Not

to get off topic too far, but I mean, is there is there something in our code that if they have a daycare and operate in a daycare that they actually have to have kids there?

They should have kids there.

I'm just I mean seriously we we we it could it could happen. I'm just curious that is there something that specifically says, okay, if you're operating over a day care that there has to be so many kids per square footage or so many I mean, is it is it kinda embedded in there somewhere that we have?

Not in our zoning ordinance made there may be something DSS because the daycare would have to, you know, go by any DSS regulations. But there's nothing specific in our ordinance that would say that kids have to be there. We just assume that it'll be used as a day care and kids will be there.

And we know what happened we assumed.

Well, this is an established organization. They've been in existence for several years. So Mhmm.

Yeah. That's why I wouldn't try to get off top at it. But regarding

this specific Right. I understand.

In general. Did did it was that something in there?

I know.

New

council. Any other questions, Rishana?

I can keep it up over here.

What's the wish of council? Seven for approval.

Second. Second.

We have a motion to second. Any discussion, questions, hearing, and seeing none. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved in item four h. Important is to amend the zoning ordinance of Rock Hill City code by making certain changes in the zoning map affecting approximately 3.88 acres located on South Jones Avenue from single family residential five, s f five, to office institutional OI. So move approval. Second. Second. We have a motion, second. Any discussion, questions, hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. Okay. Without objection, we're gonna defer on items four I and four j due to the weather and trying to get everybody out a little bit earlier and see you'll come back with that at the next meeting.

Yes,

sir. Okay. We'll move on to item five a, consider resolution of city council, the city of Rock Hill to ratify and confirm acceptance of city streets. Mister Bagley.

Your council good evening. As has been our tradition we bring before you streets to be accepted into the city for maintenance purposes and ownership. You have a list. This is a six month list since the last time I was here with these. And these are streets that have either been adopted into the city because of annexation or acceptance of a neighborhood or the change for some of the reasons. So you've got a couple maps and that's the difference in there. You have a list as well that identify which streets have been changed or new streets that have been added. So staff would recommend that we accept these into the city system at this time.

Any questions for Jimmy? So move to approve the resolution. Second. The motion is second. Any discussion?

Yeah, Jimmy. Of course, probably know what's coming, but I I I will say it again for the record, but you know, here we are being asked to accept streets into the city that are what county or state roads?

If they were Right. In the county before annexation, they would be county roads. Right. I don't believe any of these are state that Okay.

So previous county roads that now that we wanna take control of, yet the county continues to try to negotiate and pinch us on how they fund and take care of roads. So I I don't I still think we need to look at why we still do that and a greater plan of when we continue to get shortchanged by the county and now we're gonna accept their streets and then this just less off their plate that they get more money for something else and I just don't think it's handled equitably. So it's just a concern of mine. I will keep restating. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other discussion? Well said. Is there a motion? We have a motion, don't we? So any any further discussion, questions, hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. Sorry. I'm sorry. That's okay. You did get that. Yes. Okay. Thank you. We'll move on to item six a, consider approval of the Rock Hill Economic Development Corporation goals for fiscal year twenty six twenty seven. That is also being deferred to the next meeting without objection. Okay. Move on to item six b, consider reallocation of the 2024, 2025 South Carolina accommodations, tax marketing, and promotions fund, 65 percent to the advertising and promotion special fund, which 30%, we've got mister Brian Jones with us in this evening.

Good evening. Four recipients of twenty twenty four twenty five accommodations tax funding were unable to meet the matching requirements. As a result, August in funds are available for for reallocation. On behalf of the Tourism Commission, we're asking to move these funds into PRT's 30% fund. Opportunities currently exist to support tourism initiatives in Rock Hill through enhancing marketing and operational efforts. The reallocation funds could be utilized for additional tourism related events, trade shows, bid fees that align with the city's tourism and economic development goals.

Thank you. Any questions for Brian?

So move to approve this reallocation. Second.

We have a motion to second. Any discussion? Questions? Hearing and seeing none, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Approved. We'll move on to item seven. Congratulations to our switch winner, which is Heather Pitt. You get and our customer connect winner, Jeremy Muma. Each of you will receive a $50 credit on your next utility bill. Any city council committee reports, miscellaneous business. One item on miscellaneous business. I wanna congratulate Dean McKeever, who's now our assistant city manager, is now here on the side, and she gets to sit in all these meetings with us as well from here at this point forward. Congratulations on the promotion. We're thankful to have you as part of the management team. Any other miscellaneous business? With that, we're in executive session. We'll see you all in a few weeks.