►
Description
City of Charleston Special Planning Commission Meeting: City Plan 6/23/2021
B
B
F
H
G
Coming
through
clear,
charlie,
look:
okay,
if
y'all
are
ready,
we'll
go
ahead
and
get
started.
I'd
like
to
welcome
everyone
to
this
special
meeting
of
the
city
of
charleston
planning.
Commission.
My
name
is
charlie
carrich,
I'm
the
chairman
of
the
commission,
and
so
everyone
knows.
The
members
of
the
commission
are
appointed
by
charleston
city
council,
the
volunteers
and
I
know
you
join
me
in
thanking
them
for
their
work
for
the
record
I'll
read
the
members
chloe.
Let
me
ask
you
well
I'll,
read
the
members
who
are
in
the
commission
and
then
you'll.
G
G
This
is
a
special
meeting,
so
we'll
hear
we'll
be
talking
about
the
city
plan
and
again
I
want
to
go
on
record
as
we've
done
before,
and
thanking
the
city
planning
staff
for
their
many
many
hours
and
weeks,
probably
months
of
work
on
this.
This
only
happens
once
every
10
years,
so
I
know
they
really
work
very
hard
on
this
and
we
appreciate
it.
G
I'd
also
like
to
thank
commission
members,
because
we've
had
one
other
meeting
on
this
and
we
asked
commission
members,
we
we
tabled
any
motions
or
we
wanted
to
bring
forward
recommendations,
so
we
get
it
100
right
before
we
send
city
council.
I
want
to
thank
commission
members
for
their
input
and
feedback
on
this
so
that
we
can
discuss
today.
G
So
what
I'll
do
is
I'll
turn
it
over
to
mr
chris
morgan.
If
that
help
he'll,
let
anyone
know
the
people,
members
of
his
staff
that
will
be
participating
in
the
meeting
tonight
and
introduce
them.
Then
we
will
have
the
presentation
then
we'll
have
public
comment.
Then
we'll
close
the
public
aspect
of
the
meeting
and
we'll
have
questions
comments
of
commission
members
and
emotions.
A
Well,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
so
happy
to
be
here
and,
and
I
think
at
the
culmination
of
what's
been
a
really
long,
but
very
productive
process
with
you
all
on
this
comprehensive
plan.
I
I
don't
know
that
in
my
I
know,
in
my
time
with
the
planning
commission,
we've
never
had
as
intensive
a
project
as
this
one
working
with
you
all
on
a
document
and
all
like
that.
A
So
I'm
really
proud
of
what
we've
put
together
over
the
last
18
months
or
so,
and
I
think
it
was
good
to
have
another
couple
weeks
to
kind
of
digest
some
stuff
and
let
you
all
throw
in
some
other
ideas
that
you
had
and
we'll
be
going
over.
Those
tonight
and
staff
with
us
tonight
is,
of
course
they
are
the
rock
stars,
they're
the
ones
who
have
written
this
plan
and
done
such
a
great
job
with
it
the
we
have
chloe
stuber
eric
pullman,
jim
hemphill
and
philip
overcash.
A
I
know
that
we
also
have
some
comments
from
the
public,
and
I
think
typically,
you
all
like
to
hear
from
speakers
and
things
and
we've
got
some
speakers
signed
up.
So
of
course
we
would
have
that
aspect
today
as
well,
but
I
without
further
ado,
I'm
gonna
go
to
screen
share
here
and
get
to
the
items.
A
A
Okay,
let
me
get
to
my
view
and
I'll
get
full
screen
and
just
make
it
a
little
bit
neater.
Where
is
full
screen,
though
there
we
go
all
right.
Look
at
that,
okay,
so
in
the
first
section
of
the
plan,
of
course,
that
was
the
engagement
section
and
we
had
some
comments.
Looking
down,
everything
that
is
new
comments
or
changes
is
in
blue
hope,
that's
showing
up
as
blue
for
all
of
you.
A
But
what
we
see
that
in
the
planning
department,
as
is
giving
regular
reports
to
you
and
the
public
on
how
we
are
working
on
getting
the
recommendations
of
the
plan
done
and
having
regular
update
sessions
for
prioritization
from
you
all,
and
you
know
just
kind
of
updates
on
how
we're
doing
on
the
whole
thing
and
then
number
six
was
a
new
one
to
continue
to
research
and
diversify
data
sources
to
be
data.
Smart,
thus
supporting
staff
when
formulating
policy
processes
and
ordinance
development.
A
C
A
Give
our
thoughts
on
all
of
them
absolutely
all
right,
yeah,
okay!
So
I'm
going
to
move
on
now
into
natural
resources
and
in
number
five
we
have
create
incentives
for
the
use
of
conservation
easements,
including
developing
a
tool
kit
for
green
space
preservation
and
then
in
number
seven.
We
added
some
more
to
this
I'll.
Just
read
the
whole
recommendation.
It
says
continue
to
promote
planning
and
zoning
policies
that
align
with
the
living
with
water
approach
outlined
in
the
dutch
dialogues.
A
Charleston
study,
including
encouraging
the
use
of
green
infrastructure
and
we've
added
in
landscaping,
practices
and
storm
water
management.
Green
infrastructure
includes
features
such
as
bios
whales,
forest
pavements,
rain
gardens
and
wetland
buffers
and
other
practices
that
leave
existing
natural
features
and
ecosystems
undisturbed.
So
it
seems,
like
makes
a
lot
of
sense
on
our
end,
so
comments.
Okay,
all
right!
A
I'm
gonna,
move
on
cultural
resources
and
had
a
couple
in
here
under
number
seven,
so
the
old
recommendation
increased
the
amount
of
markers
and
monuments
documenting
sites
and
key
figures,
culturally
and
historically
significant
to
charleston's,
african-american
and
other
underrepresented
communities.
So
a
slight
change
to
that,
then,
on
number
10
conduct
a
new
historic
resources
survey
for
all
appropriate
parts
of
the
city,
especially
the
upper
peninsula.
A
We've
had
another
number
of
organizations
commenting
on
the
need
for
a
historic
resources
survey
for
the
upper
peninsula,
and
we
know
that
there's
some
other
parts
of
our
historic
surveys
that
we
have
at
the
city.
Sorry
about
that
that
we
have
the
city
that
needs
some
updating
as
well,
but
we
had
specifically
called
out
several
organizations,
the
upper
peninsula
and
then
number
12
reevaluate,
the
feasibility
of
an
archaeological
ordinance
for
the
city
and
there
you
know
that
was
suggested
by
one
of
you
all.
A
I
think
it
was
miss
jacobs
and
I
know
it's
been
suggested
by
a
number
of
organizations,
and
you
know
it's
something
that
could
be
done.
It's
just
going
to
have
some
costs
and
some
pretty
substantial
costs,
because
the
only
way
we
have
found
through
our
research
around
the
country
to
have
an
archaeological
ordinance
is
to
have
a
on-site
on
on
payroll
archaeologists,
and
it
has.
The
potential
to
you
know,
create
an
extra
hurdle
on
some
redevelopment
projects
or
taking.
A
You
know
some
some
buildings
that
you
know
and
sites
that
may
be
in
need
of
of
redevelopment,
and
it
does
just
add
an
extra
step.
You
know
and
that's
the
thing
we
just
have
to
look
at
the
balance.
Are
we
gaining
a
lot
through
the
extra
history
we
learn
about
the
site
and
other
significant
things
we
find
underneath
the
ground
that
we
might
not
have
known
were
there
versus?
You
know
what
it
takes
in
time
and
cost
of
the
city
for
the
archaeological
component
to
be
part
of
our
ordinances?
A
So
all
right
not
seeing
anybody
stopping
me,
so
I'm
going
to
move
forward.
Okay
in
economic
development,
this
one
has
kind
of
been
tweaked
a
couple
of
different
times,
but
the
way
number
two
now
reads
is
dedicate
staff
and
resources,
I.e
an
office
of
economic
development
to
create
targeted
goals
for
each
area
of
the
city
and
work
with
corresponding
economic
development
offices
in
charleston
berkeley
counties
to
unify
approaches
to
regional
economic
development.
Clearly,
we've
been
hearing
this
from
a
lot
of
folks
that
they
would
like
the
city
to
do
more
from
an
economic
development
standpoint.
A
We
do
have
our
existing
office
of
business
services
and
they
also
do
neighborhood
services
as
well.
We
were
trying
to
you
know,
keep
from
this
plan
specifically
calling
for
other
positions
within
the
city
government.
You
know
we
can
study
it
and
all
like
that,
but
not
trying
to
be
a
kind
of
30
000
foot
level
thing
and
not
say
specifically:
oh,
we
need
another
position
here
and
so
it's
kind
of
been
soft
pedal
a
little
bit,
but
we
have
heard
this
from
a
number
of
different
sources.
A
The
number
five
pursue
policies
and
programs
to
support
independent,
locally
owned
businesses
and
allow
for
competition
with
larger
national
chains,
including
creating
programs
or
incentives
for
preserving
legacy,
businesses
and
affordable
commercial
properties,
and
this
addition
and
providing
targeted
to
support
to
navigate
the
city's
licensing
and
permitting
processes.
Again,
this
could
be
a
cost.
It
could
involve
some
extra
staff,
but
we
aren't
specifically
seeing
staff.
It
may
be
that
something's
going
to
be
moved
around,
but
this
was
something
we
heard
on
several
different
levels
as
well:
okay,
not
seen
anybody
raising
a
hand
or
anything
okay.
G
C
Well,
I
mean,
as
an
example,
number
12.
I
I
I
sensed
a
little
hesitancy
just
based
on
the
possibility
of
cost,
but
the
way
that's
written,
I
don't
that's
not
a.
We
shall
do
this
kind
of
statement.
That's
a
look
into
it.
Kind
of
statement
are
any
of
these
a
definitive.
We
shall
because,
if
it's
just
to
look
at
the
feasibility
of
these
things,
I
don't
see
what's
wrong
with
that.
G
You
know,
I
agree
with
you,
mr
bailey
personally,
because
I
think
to
reevaluate
doesn't
mean
you're
spending
money
if
the
money's
there
or
certainly
the
city
can
can
do
it.
But,
as
you
said,
that's
going
to
pertain
to
if
there's
dollars
to
do
that.
So
I
agree
with
anybody
else.
Have
any
input
on
that.
J
Go
ahead,
charlie,
I
think,
if
we're
consistent
with
the
wording
so
far,
we've
it's
a
little
bit
inconsistent.
So
I
think
if
perhaps
we
could
just
use
the
same
wording
when
we're
just
evaluating
or
when
we're
just
looking
at
it,
because
then
it
leaves
the
kind
of
open
to
interpretation
if
it's
worded
differently
and
people
could
interpret
it
differently.
So
I
would
just
say
not
a
big
change,
but
just
to
use
the
same
wording
when
we're
just
evaluating
or
recommending
an
evaluation.
G
Makes
sense
anyone
else
so
again,
I
think
harry
has
a
good
point.
Mr
bailey
has
good
points.
Maybe
we
should
as
we
go
through
if
anyone
if
any
commission
member
has
a
question
or
concern
as
we
go
through
them,
that
probably
would
be
the
best
way
so
and
we
can
go
backwards,
but
let's
go
ahead
and
go
forward
and
go
back
to
anything.
We
covered
anything
else
on
this
one
I
to
me
this
sounds
reasonable
because
it
doesn't
say
we
shall
or
they
will
implement
just
as
we'll
evaluate
it.
A
G
A
Just
to
morgan,
okay,
number
16
and
we've
heard
about
number
16
from
both
planning
commissioners
and
some
organizations
in
town,
but
establish
a
task
force
to
update
the
city's
tourism
management
plan
in
a
manner
that
will
improve
livability
for
charleston
citizens.
While
recognizing
the
importance
and
economic
impact
of
tourism.
A
G
G
E
My
only
question
to
staff
is
because
I
know
that
you
know
the
wording
of
these
things
are
very
is
very
important.
I
know
charleston
moves
at
the
previous
meeting
put
forth
two
recommended
additions.
They
said
to
the
transportation
element
of
the
plan
and
I
was
just
wondering
how
that
was
used
in
the
crafting
of
number
16,
because
these
things
were
very
wordy.
You
know-
and
I
just
didn't
know
how
the
two
reflect
with
each
other.
A
I
So
what
I
understood
what
charleston
moves
shared
was
was
the
statements
made
and
the
public
comment
was
basically
a
sort
of
copy
and
paste
of
statements
that
were
made.
The
last
planning
commission
meeting
and
weren't
necessarily
wording
for
recommendations
in
this
wording
was
suggested
by
commissioner
bailey.
C
E
J
I,
like
the
wording
as
well.
One
of
the
things
I
think
I
had
sent-
and
this
might
have
been
a
while
ago-
is
with
the
pedestrian
pathways
and
the
bike
pathways.
I
know
gosh.
It
was
many
years
ago,
and
I
think
this
is
actually
in
in
the
plan
somewhere,
but
when
we're,
when
we're
specifically
calling
it
out
here,
is
making
sure
that
there
is
that
adequate.
I
don't
know,
I
don't
know
the
wording
for
it.
J
I
don't
know
if
it's
a
barrier
or
spacing
between
the
vehicle
traffic
and
the
walkways,
and
I
know
that's
something
that
encourages
people
to
walk
and
ride
bikes
when
there
is
some
sort
of
a
whether
it's
trees
or
grass,
as
opposed
to
the
pedestrian
pathways
being
right
up
on
the
road
near
the
cars.
So
I
don't
know
if
that's
something
that
needs
to
be
addressed
here,
but
I
just
want
to
bring
it
up.
A
We
we
know
about
that,
need
for
separation
from
the
vehicle
areas
and
the
wording
here
I
think,
allows
for
that,
because
it's
saying
that
you
know
if
you've
got
the
room,
you
know
you
can
make
the
path
wider,
but
we
don't
want
to
get
the
paths
like
just
to
be
flush
with
the
curve
that
kind
of
thing
in
all
instances,
because
that
isn't
as
safe
as
getting
them
further
away.
Absolutely
that's.
B
B
G
A
Yeah,
the
national
model
by
you
know
that's
advocated
by
different
advocacy
organizations,
as
you
know,
typically
up
to
12
feet.
Sometimes
they
can
be
as
narrow
as
eight
feet,
but
you
know,
12
feet
provides
the
best
ability
to
separate
from
you
know,
bicyclists
from
pedestrians,
and
I
think
that's
the
type
thing
we'd
like
to
have.
If
there's
enough
room,
you
know,
for
instance,
the
folly
road
overlay
that
we
have
now
calls
for
12
feet
on
both
sides
of
folly
road.
A
However,
we've
got
some
constraints
in
certain
areas
of
folly
road
we're
trying
to
get
to
12
feet
in
almost
all
instances,
but
you
know
there
are
sometimes
some
constraints
and
trying.
Sometimes
the
width
of
the
path
is
less
important
than
like
angie
was
saying
getting
it
away
from
the
moving
traffic
and
that's
a
really
high
priority
is
getting
away
from
the
moving
traffic,
and
sometimes
we
sacrifice
a
little
bit
of
that
to
get
it
away.
But
anyway,.
K
I
have
I
have
one
question
and
actually
a
a
point
to
maybe
adding
that
number
16.
can
we.
You
know
we're
adding
on
more
and
more
to
an
already
cumbersome
and
stringent
application
process
for
anybody
coming
to
the
city
and
could
we
maybe
add
a
word
in
there
that
says:
promote
and
incentivize
on
policies
for
wider
multi-use
paths
instead
of
just
adding
an
entirely.
K
You
know
and
I'm
a
hundred
percent
for
the
water
pass,
but
I
think
that
there
needs
to
be
some
sort
of
incentive
in
there
to
promote
and
encourage
that
and
really
you
have
to
follow
it.
But
but
you
know,
and-
and
I
don't
know
where
you're
gonna
wide
and
that
we're
feasible,
because
I
don't
know
that
anybody-
that's
gonna-
come
off
the
money
in
order
to
widen
existing
already
unless
the
city
plans
on
doing
that
or
the
state.
K
K
A
Being
pursued
right
now,
there
were
a
lot
of
variety
of
strategies
that
were
studied
to
help
with
the
congestion
of
I-26
and
light
rail
was
studied,
commuter
rail
has
been
studied,
neither
of
those
were
as
effective
given
our
densities
and
the
traffic
issues
we
have
in
our
region
as
the
concept
of
bus,
rapid
transit
and
that
was
viewed
as
the
most
economically
feasible
and
the
ability
having
the
ability
to
move
the
greatest
number
of
folks
in
our
environment,
and
so
that's
why
that
was
moved
forward.
It's
funded
through
the
hampstead
sales
tax.
A
Hopefully
it
will
get
the
federal
funding
that
they're
working
to
get
and
with
all
that
it
would
be.
You
know,
implemented
as
a
kind
of
parallel
route
to
I-26,
from
almost
all
the
way
to
somerville,
essentially
into
downtown
charleston.
So
that's
been
a
thing,
that's
been
studied,
I
mean
we
haven't
looked
you
know
at
like
high-speed
rail,
for
example
like
high-speed
rail
to
columbia
or
atlanta
or
whatever
it
might
be.
K
Christopher
I
was
talking
about
to
columbia.
I
was
really
just
talking
about
to
somerville
to
monk's
corner
for
the
medical.
You
know
I
drive
back
and
forth
a
lot
on
the
interstate
and
I-26
traffic
with
one
car
wreck
is
just
crazy.
So
if
you,
if
you're
telling
me
that
your
proposal
with
the
rapid
transit
works
and
that
has
been
decided
more
than
a
high
speed
between
the
two,
you
know
the
surrounding
neighborhoods
and
the
surrounding
communities,
and
that
suits
me.
Thank
you.
It's.
A
G
A
It
might
be
that,
let's
say
you've
got
a
neighborhood,
that's
being
built
for
sake
of
argument.
It's
on
b's
ferry.
Well,
it's
on
a
a
road
that
doesn't
have
a
bike
pad
facility
on
it
right
now.
So
if
the
the
developer
is
willing
to
put
in
a
very
nice
bike
bed
facility
across
the
front
of
it
on
the
main
kind
of
collector
road,
maybe
there's
some
things
within
the
neighborhood
itself,
where
not
as
many
people
walk,
that
could
be
reduced.
A
G
Okay,
so
I
think
so,
I
think
what
I'm
hearing
is
on
mr
le
saint's
comments
that
the
separation
of
that
we
talked
about
of
the
of
the
past,
the
bicycle
pedestrian.
If
we
can
include
that
as
well
as
the
incentivized,
possibly
incentivized
people,
if
possible,
to
promote
these
ideas,
are
we
hearing
anything
else.
E
E
I'm
just
going
to
I'm
going
to
support
mr
lissane
in
his
concept,
and
sometimes
it's
just
as
simple
as
two
different
brick
styles,
because
that's
routinely
used
all
over
europe,
and
you
know
that
if
you're
on
the
gray,
brick
you're
a
biker
in
the
red,
brick
you're
a
pedestrian,
it
is
it's
not
it's
just
a
slight
design
on
the
sidewalk.
It's
not
any
big
physical
development.
E
I
A
All
right,
so
this
is
in
the
community
facilities
and
priority
investment
area,
a
new
recommendation
that
says
research
and
evaluate
the
efficiency
of
capital
projects,
development
and
the
maintenance
of
existing
facilities.
It's
a
little
bit
of
a
open-ended
one.
I
think
I
think
the
commissioner
who
recommended
it.
Maybe
she
might
want
to
explain
a
little
bit
on
that.
You
know
and-
and
let
you
all
have
the
discussion
on
that.
One.
E
So
I
think
it
might
be
time
for
us
to
look
at
that
department
that
it
may
have.
You
know,
because
the
city
has
grown
and
there's
a
lot
of
requirements
for
capital
projects,
the
maintenance
of
our
capital
projects,
the
development
of
our
parks.
We
just
might
want
to
look
at
how
that
department
is
structured
and
evaluated
so
that
we
don't
get
bogged
down
in.
E
You
know
providing
these
sorts
of
facilities
and
parks
that
the
public
is
anxiously
asking
for
during
the
city
plan,
and
that
was
advised
that
I
made
that
as
sort
of
vague
as
possible.
So
it
didn't
sound
very
specific
because
it
is
once
again
just
an
evaluation
because
we've
grown
and
we
need
these
services
to
for
the
public.
G
Thank
you
miss.
Thank
you,
mr
jacobs.
I
tell
you
and
I
have
no
issue
with
those
being
in
there,
but
the
way
I
read
it
without
that
in
there
would
still
pertain
to
those
areas.
You
said
an
area
has
designated
the
city,
centers
neighborhood
edge
and
certainly
but
areas
if
that
wasn't
in
there.
Those
are
those
things
could
still
be
relaxed
development
requirements
because
they
wouldn't
include
it
at
all.
As
all
am
I
reading
that
correctly,
chris,
they
would
still
be
included
anyway,
but
they
weren't
specifically
designated
that
way.
B
G
G
A
I
got
miss
jacob
to
give
her
background
on
that
one,
so
yeah,
okay,
so
all
right,
so
we'll
go
on
to
the
housing
area
and
on
number
two.
We
have
a
slight
change
strongly
and
encourage
strongly
encourage
and
create
incentives
for
diversity
of
housing,
types
within
neighborhoods,
citywide,
et
cetera,
et
cetera.
A
A
The
number
eight
expand:
the
partnership
with
the
charleston
redevelopment
corporation,
the
palmetto
community
land
trust
and
establish
a
land
bank
for
future,
affordable
housing
development
and
then
in
number
10
editions
of
allocate
dedicated
resources
and
staff
to
assist
lower
income,
homeowners
and
african-american
owners
of
historic
homes
to
retain
reinvest
and
redevelop
their
properties
to
increase
the
amount
of
naturally
occurring,
affordable
housing
stock,
and
we
removed
a
few
words
from
this
to
to
reword
it.
This
way.
G
K
I
If,
if
I
could
speak
to
that
quickly,
we
we've
defined
affordable
housing
in
the
city
plan
as
including
low
income
through
workforce
housing,
so
that
is
part
of
this
recommendation
and
any
any
any
reference
to
the
word.
Affordable
housing
in
the
plan
anywhere,
it's
stated
is
including
both
workforce,
housing
and
low-income
housing.
A
I
A
F
Hey
this
is
john's
zlogar,
with
the
johns
island
task
force.
First
of
all,
I'd
like
to
really
thank
staff
for
all
the
effort
they
put
into
this,
especially
relative
to
the
elevation-based
efforts,
they're
doing
and
also
reaffirming
the
urban
growth
boundary.
But
there
is
one
area
we
think
that
could
be
improved
in
the
city
plan
and
that's
the
recommended
densities
for
the
rural
and
low
impact,
slash
conserved
areas
as
a
way
of
background.
The
rural
areas
are
currently
zoned
as
conservation.
F
This
limits
the
density
to
one
dwelling
unit
for
one
and
a
half
acres,
but
in
the
draft
city
plan
before
you,
the
density
has
been
increased
to
one
dwelling
unit
per
one
acre
now
this
is
a
significant
up
zoning
and
is
not
in
line
with
the
the
city
plan.
Support
of
the
ugb
and
the
city
plan
definitely
does
a
great
job
of
supporting
ugb.
F
G
I
D
D
You
know
we
we've
had
a
lot
of
interaction
with
the
city
staff
and
and
with
our
constituents
on
this
issue,
and
we
appreciate
the
response.
Responsiveness,
we've
gotten
from
from
the
planning
staff,
we're
very
excited
about
this
document.
We
think
it.
It
presents
a
bold
vision
for
the
next
10
years.
We
in
particular,
are
very
excited
about
the
commitment
to
the
dutch
dialogues,
charleston
report,
the
commitment
to
affordable,
attainable
housing,
as
well
as
a
focused
continued
focus
on
charleston's,
historic
and
cultural
resources.
D
We
also
want
to
just
say
that
a
lot
of
our
recommendations
that
we
put
forth
have
been
incorporated,
and
we
very
much
appreciate
that
we
we
want
to
thank
the
city
staff
and
the
planning
commission
for
that.
We
do
have
one
concern
that
we
want
to
bring
forth.
That
is
sort
of
we
just
noticed
fairly
recently
when
we
were
looking
at
the
land
use
map
for
the
peninsula.
D
D
I
think
urban
core,
but
it's
now
termed
city
center
in
this
new
document
has
the
the
the
boundaries
of
that
have
changed
pretty
significantly,
and
so
it
is
taken
being
taken
away
from
all
the
areas
downtown
south
of
market
street,
so
king
meeting
streets
and
broad
street
have
all
been
removed
from
what
used
to
be
called
urban
core
now
city
center
category
and
now
designates.
I
think,
those
areas
as
neighborhood,
and
we
have
very
significant
concerns
about.
D
We
think
is
a
huge
philosophical
shift
from
the
way
the
city
has
thought
about
downtown
charleston,
and
we
just
are
very
concerned
about
that
designation,
changing
so
dramatically
and
really
think
that
merits
restudy
and
hopefully
will
re-extend
city
center
down
to
those
traditional,
the
sort
of
civic
heart
of
downtown
charleston.
Thank
you
very
much.
G
M
Of
course,
the
k
nor
property
has
in
place
existing
pud
zoning
and
development
agreements
that
are
going
to
guide
growth
there
for
the
next
25
years
and,
as
we've
come
to
get
our
arms
around
the
plan
better.
We
we
do
believe
that
the
plan
is
largely
consistent
with
that
with
those
documents
and
again
appreciate
staff
kind
of
helping
us
better
understand
this.
M
The
there's
been
some
discussion
about
the
about
the
longleaf
pines
on
part
of
this
property,
and-
and
we
just
want
to
make
sure
that
everyone
understands
that
you
know
the
harvesting
of
these
pine
trees
has
been
going
on
for
many
many
years
and
continues
and
were
planted
there
for
timber.
There's.
Also
large
sections
of
this
property.
M
There's
that
have
been
set
aside,
including
various
buffers
and
a
650,
acre
sanctuary
area
for
conservation,
and
we
do
think
that
that
those
plant,
the
existing
puds
and
development
plans
really
strike
a
reasonable
balance,
and
so
we
just
wanted
to
make
make
that
point.
Let
everyone
know
that,
frankly,
we
think
the
comprehensive
plan.
It
does
track
generally
right
correctly
with
the
existing
zoning
and
appreciate
everybody's
time
on
these
issues.
So
thank
you.
G
L
L
Further,
we're
equally
encouraged
to
see
the
incorporation
of
strong
recommendations
from
our
partner
organizations
like
charleston
moves
the
coastal
conservation
league
and
historic
charleston
foundation,
and
we
really
appreciate
the
level
of
collaboration
that
we've
seen
throughout
this
process.
That's
been
going
on
for
more
than
a
year.
L
Overall,
we
see
this
visioning
document
as
foundational
for
establishing
meaningful
and
unprecedented
goals
for
equity
inclusion
in
the
city
of
charleston,
and
we
look
forward
to
partnering
with
the
community
and
city
leadership
to
help
make
this
vision
a
reality.
So
we
thank
you
for
your
continued
and
thoughtful
review
of
this
critically
important
plan
and
the
opportunity
to
comment.
G
N
N
N
G
O
O
This
is
an
excellent
plan
with
a
lot
of
progressive
content
that
we're
really
excited
about,
but
there
is
one
area
in
particular.
We
believe
still
needs
your
attention.
The
proposed
future
land
use
maps
for
canehoy,
suburban
zoning
is
slated
for
the
majority
of
upper
canehoy
north
of
clemens
ferry
road.
An
area
we
believe
should
remain.
O
Rural
cane
hoy
can
be
developed
in
a
way
that
utilizes
its
high
ground
to
meet
the
developers
purpose
and
need,
while
also
preserving
the
important
natural
and
cultural
resources
on
the
site
that
go
far
beyond
the
old
growth
longleaf
pine
that
serves
as
habitat
for
federally
protected
red-cockaded
woodpeckers
that
mr
wilson
referenced.
The
environmental
impacts
of
harvesting
timber
versus
clear
cutting
for
suburban
sprawl
are
very
different.
O
G
I
I
I
I
believe
that
the
area
of
the
city
from
market
to
broad
between
king
and
meeting
should
remain
a
part
of
the
city
center.
The
designation
should
not
be
changed
to
neighborhood.
That
area
should
not
become
primarily
residential
and
then
I've
copied
and
pasted
the
preservation
society
concerns
about
emissions
of
key
concepts
in
the
plan.
I
agree
with
their
concerns
in
quotation
marks.
I
A
vision
for
a
culture
of
citizen
awareness,
responsibility
and
action
towards
water
management
is
needed,
and
the
plan
in
its
current
form
misses
this
opportunity
and
more
in-depth
discussion
of
tourism
management,
including
the
implications
for
affordable
housing,
neighborhood
serving
businesses,
quality
of
life
for
charleston
residents.
It's
unclear
why
an
initial
recommendation
to
create
an
office
of
economic
development
has
been
removed.
We
urge
the
city
to
reincorporate
this
provision.
I
I
would
like
to
express
my
opposition
to
allow
development
on
the
9
000
acres
north
of
clements
ferry
road.
I
also
want
to
express
opposition
and
concerns
with
allowing
the
long
savannah
project
to
move
forward.
Charleston
is
quickly
becoming
over
developed,
leading
to
destruction
of
critical
habitats
and
wetlands
and
increased
flooding.
This
is
not
sustainable
growth.
Even
the
higher
forests
help
protect
us
from
flooding
and
provide
ecosystems,
habitats,
and
once
they
are
gone,
they
are
gone.
We
cannot
undo
the
harm
caused
by
this
continued
growth.
I
I
After
reading
the
recent
article
in
the
post
and
courier
about
revitalizing
king
street
have
the
following
recommendations
to
be
discussed
during
your
planning
meeting
close
king
street
from
calhoun
to
broad
for
motorized
vehicles
from
10
am
until
10
pm
daily.
During
a
visit
to
the
city
of
port
ireland,
I
witnessed
a
dramatic
increase
in
commerce
in
the
inner
city
main
street,
which
was
close
to
auto
and
truck
traffic
from
10
am
to
11
pm.
I
First,
any
recommendations
related
to
advancing
or
supporting
the
extension
of
interstate
526
across
johnson
james
island
should
be
removed
instead
less
expensive
projects
that
enhance
equitable
mobility
and
don't
harm
cultural,
natural
resources
should
be
supported.
Examples
include
the
maybank
pitchforks
on
john's
island
and
additional
low
country,
rapid
transit
lines
for
west
ashland,
james
island
that
expand
upon
the
initial
spine
along
rivers,
avenue
that
is
currently
in
development.
I
Second,
please
encourage
planning
commissioners
to
designate
the
area
of
the
canhoy
peninsula
north
of
clements
ferry
road
as
a
rural
area.
That
change
will
help
protect
the
approximately
4
500
acres
of
freshwater,
wetlands
and
longleaf
pine
forests
that
are
home
to
threatened
and
endangered
species,
as
well
as
irreplaceable
cultural
resources,
including
those
of
the
jack
famous
community.
G
Thank
you,
chloe
that
will
close
the
public
aspect
of
this
part
of
the
meeting
and
before
we
move
on
to
commission
members
for
questions
comments,
I'd
ask
mr
morgan
or
anyone
from
the
staff
that
they'd
like
if
they
have
any
comments
on
any
of
the
speakers
or
the
written
comments.
If
not
that's
okay,
too,
I
just
wanted
to
ask.
A
We
actually,
you
know,
don't
recommend,
of
course,
anything
but
denser
than
one
unit
an
acre
if
it
is
outside
the
ugb
and
of
course
we
don't
annex
anything,
that's
outside
the
ugb,
so
I
think
that
we're
still
honoring
the
whole
character
of
the
ugb.
Nothing
has
really
changed.
There's
what
I'm
saying
this
is
not
a
zoning
ordinance
conservation.
A
Zoning
is
an
option
for
areas
that
are
outside
the
ugb
and
that's
one
unit,
every
acre
and
a
half
and
again
we
aren't
annexing
other
areas
out
there,
any
zonings
that
are
greater
than
one
unit,
an
acre
or
pre-existing
to
the
before
the
ugb
even
existed,
and
I
know
even
though
it's
been
around
for
20
years,
we've
got
some
zoning
on
the
ground
outside
the
ugb.
That's
that's
denser
than
that,
but
that
is
something
that's
been
in
place
for
for
several
decades.
A
In
reference
to
I've
got
a
couple
of
slides.
I
can
kind
of
go
into
if
you
all
wanted
more
detail
on
the
the
the
king
hoy
issue.
Is
there
any
interest
in
the
commissioners
and
discussion
on
the
king
hawaii
comments?
We
heard
commission
members,
I'm
seeing
you
okay,
so
I'm
going
to
go
to
a
screen
share
on
this
and
I'll
also
have
a
couple
of
slides
in
reference
to
the
city
center
comments
that
we
got
too.
Let
me
go
to
sheer
screen.
A
J
A
A
A
We
don't
have
rural
areas
anywhere
in
this
plan
that
are
inside
the
ugb.
So
because
this
whole
area
is
inside
the
ugb,
it
would
not
have
a
rural
designation.
That's
just
one
of
the
principles
that's
been
in
this
plan,
as
well
as
our
previous
two
plans
that
have
involved
the
ugb,
so
rural
is
typically
outside
the
ugb
and
there
hasn't
been
a
proposal
to
change
the
ugb
here.
A
It's
also
important
to
note
that
we
are
dealing
with,
of
course,
a
pud
and
a
development
agreement
that
allows
the
densities
and
types
of
development
that
is
coming
in
the
the
the
king,
hawaii
development.
But
it's
also
important
to
note-
and
let's
see
if
we
can
start
moving
the
slides
here,
so
the
area
that
is
city
center
is
within
about
a
half
mile
to
quarter
mile
of
clements
ferry
road
here
and
then
there's
an
area
of
the
suburban
category.
That's
about
a
mile
and
a
quarter
deep.
A
There
are
lots
of
wetland
areas
in
here.
You
know
this
is
an
area
that
would
not
necessarily
be
all
developed
anyway
because
of
the
wetland
areas
because
of
commitments.
The
owners
have
made
to
preserve
areas
of
old
growth
pine.
You
know
it's,
it's
really
kind
of
about
balance.
You
know
there
is
going
to
be
some
development
here
and
I'm
going
to
kind
of
show
you
another
slide.
That
is
part
of
our
justification
for
the
development
here,
but
then
there's
also
going
to
be
preservation
of
areas
too.
A
So
we
think
it's
it's
balancing
development,
and
these
preservation
needs
out
here
is
is
kind
of
what
this
plan
is
doing.
But
this
is
the
image
from
wagner
and
ball's
study
same
scale
here,
and
you
see
how
much
of
this
area
is
the
high
ground,
and
so
this
was
a
big
part
of
the
reason
that,
in
the
plan,
we
designated
greater
densities
out
here,
because
there
is
so
much
high
ground,
and
you
might
remember
when
we
were
talking
about
elevation
based
land
use
recommendations.
A
We
were
trying
to
get
away
from
the
lower
areas
and
in
fact
out
here
in
king
hoy.
Our
recommendations
are
getting
away
from
some
of
these
lower
areas,
but
concentrating
the
development
more
in
the
high
ground.
Now
the
wagner,
mall
folks,
don't
say,
build
on
every
square
inch
of
high
ground.
Of
course
you
need
areas
for
filtration
and
you
want
to
keep
some
of
that
canopy
and
those
good
soils
and
all
that.
A
But
we
think
what
we've
got
in
the
plan
is
is
a
pretty
good
area
of
balance,
so
that
was
kind
of
our
explanation
as
to
how
we
came
up
with
those
and
and
it's
balancing
the
the
pud
and
the
development
interests
that
are
already
in
place
with
the
cities
need
to
grow
in
an
area
like
this,
because
it
is
such
high
elevations
and
we
do
have
another
image
here.
That
shows
the
elevations.
A
C
E
Is
that
you
know
the
recommendations
of
this
area
is
a
based
on
a
global
look
of
the
city,
but
also
in
consideration
with
land
use
and
putt
agreements
and
development
agreements
that
already
exist.
On
from
what
I
understand
a
large
portion
of
this
land,
is
there
a
way
for
do?
You
have
readily
available
something
that
could
show
us
that
or
you
could
just
trace
it
for
the
for
these.
A
E
A
It
goes
all
through
here.
In
other
words,
if
you
can,
you
all
see
my
cursor?
Yes,
okay,
it
includes
all
this
area
in
here
and
then
it
comes
back
around
here.
Some
of
this
is
in
other
development
agreements,
but
then
it
includes
this
site
and
then
all
the
way
down
here
and
all
the
way
up
here
and
up
along
this
creek
and
then
all
the
way
over
to
jack
primus.
E
So,
basically,
basically-
and
this
is
for
you
know
my
understanding
as
a
new
commissioner
as
well
as
these
several
of
the
citizens
that
have
you
know
commented
written
in
called
in
this
land
is
already
committed
by
a
put
or
a
development
agreement
at
some
level.
Yes,
okay,
I
think
that's
most
important
for
everyone
to
understand.
So
thank
you
for
that.
A
Right,
morgan,
you
go
ahead
response
to
the
comments
about
the
downtown
designations,
so
this
is
the
downtown
charleston
area
and,
of
course
the
dark
red
is
what
we
call
our
city
centers
in
the
past.
It
was
comparable
to
urban
core
is
what
we
called
it
and-
and
you
know
some
of
that
is
planner
marketing.
Let's
call
it
that,
because
really
some
plans
do
things
like
they
do.
A
You
know
land
use
area,
one
land
use
area
two
and
they
don't
kind
of
try
to
personify
it
in
ways
that
we
were
trying
to
do
here,
but
I
hope
that
people
are
not
confusing
the
phrase
city
center
with
central
business
district.
They
are
completely
different
city.
Central
business
district
is
a
is
a
kind
of
business
term
and
kind
of
a
center
of
the
city
term
that
every
community
has-
and
you
know
none
of
this
would
change.
What
is
the
central
business
district.
This
is
about.
A
If
you
look
at
this,
all
of
this
area
of
downtown
is
fairly
low
height
districts,
with
the
one
exception,
the
one
exception
of
about
50
feet
in
from
king
street
and
about
50
feet
in
from
meeting
street.
There
is
a
small
area
of
six
story
which
has
a
couple
of
six-story
buildings,
and
I
think
it's
called
liberty
center
here
and
then
the
hotel,
the
oh.
I
can't
believe
I'm
forgetting
the
name
of
the
hotel
at
the
corner
of
queen
and
not
queen
yeah,
queen
and
king.
N
C
E
A
Mills
house,
thank
you,
ding
ding
ding,
that's
the
winner.
The
mills
house
hotel,
so
those
are
two
buildings
that
are
a
little
bit
taller
and,
of
course,
when
you're
on
broad
street,
the
people's
building,
which
is
a
historic
structure,
but
when
we
think
about
what
development
might
occur
in
this
area
in
the
coming
years,
we
think
about
like
where
there
are
vacant
lots,
because
all
these
buildings
are
historic
buildings
and
things
they
aren't
going
to
be
torn
down.
But
there
are
vacant.
A
Again,
it's
not
about
changing
what
is
the
central
business
district
of
our
city,
it's
about
where
the
greatest
intensity
is,
and
we
felt
that
on
king
and
meeting
from
you
know,
charleston
place
up,
which
is
a
fairly
intense
development
and
then
all
the
things
you
get
around
college
of
charleston
and
then
going
all
the
way
up.
King
street,
you
know
those
were
the
right
areas
to
be
in
that
kind
of
city
center
area
and
they
were
also
had
proximity.
A
This
is
a
very,
very
important
part
about
this
to
the
low
country,
rapid,
transit
they're
within
about
a
half
mile,
a
five
or
ten
minute
walk
of
low
country,
rapid
transit,
and
we
were
trying
to
make
sure
that
everything,
particularly
on
the
peninsula,
that
was
within
a
five-minute
walk
of
that
and
that
was
not
already
part
of
a
context
of
a
neighborhood,
was
in
city
center
and
where
we
had
neighborhoods
things
like
that
that
we
were
staying
away
from
that.
So
that
was
what
it
was
about.
It
was
about
level
of
intensity.
A
It
was
not
trying
to
change
the
central
business
district
or
anything
like
that.
You
might
notice.
Also
that
you
know
like
west
edge
is
included.
I
don't
know
if
you
know
most
people
who
define
a
central
business
district
would
say:
west
edge
is
part
of
it,
but
it
is
an
area
of
intense
development
because
of
the
low
country,
rapid
transit
and
its
proximity
to
musc
and
and
things
like
that,
and
that
is
a
completely
different
environment
from
what
broad
street
is
from.
G
You're
good,
thank
you.
So
the
way
I
think
I'd
like
to
handle
this
is,
you
know
chime
in
is
we
have
recommendations
that
are
printed
out
that
were
sent
to
us.
We
discussed
a
couple
of
them.
I
think
we
discussed
number
16
under
excuse
me
when
the
hat
under
transportation
pretty
well,
and
I
think
we
agreed
on
employee,
made
some
nates
on
it
notes
on
it.
Can
we
just
go
through
starting
with
page
one
and
engagement
either?
Five
or
six
is
any
concerns
on
those
changes.
C
A
C
A
G
G
G
Mission,
okay,
miss
jacob's,
a
second
that
and
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
these
would
be
yeah.
We
can
do
a
roll
call
votes
on
each
of
these,
but
anyway,
any
discussion
on
these
two
any
concerns
with
them.
If
not,
can
we
have
just
a
mutual
agreement?
These
are
good
without
doing
a
roll
call
vote,
I'd
hate
to
do
a
real
couple
on
all
of
them.
If
we're
taken
at
the
end,
we'll
do
a
roll
call
vote.
If
there's
any
controversy,
is
all
commission
members
good
with
those
five
and
six
hundred
years.
G
J
G
J
G
Great
miss
johnson
under
natural
resources.
The
changes,
if
there's
no
discussion
again,
we'll
just
do
a
roll
call
with
a
voice
everyone
in
favor
of
that
all
right.
Thank
you
appreciate
it.
So
now
we'll
go
to
cultural
resources
and
we
have
I'm
sorry.
We
have
cultural
resources.
We
have
number
seven
number
10
and
number
12.
G
B
G
B
G
Great
and
the
natural
resources
and
this
jacob's
second
any
comments,
if
not
we'll
ask
all
in
favor,
aye
aye,
anyone
opposed
all
right.
The
record
stands:
there's
no
one
opposed
on
economic
development.
We
have
a
couple
of
changes.
Number
two
on
the
item.
Two
item.
Five
item.
Eight,
an
item
me
14
and
16.
B
I
I
don't
have
any
issue
with
this.
I
think
this
is
a
good
suggestion,
but
my
only
issue
with
is
that
we're
we're
saying,
establish
a
task
force.
I
think
we
should
allow
the
city
to
proceed
with
updating
the
city's
tourism
management
plan
and
the
way
they
see
best
fit.
I
don't
I
don't
I'm
not
comfortable
with
the
planning
commission,
so
I
would
just
strike.
Can.
B
G
E
J
B
I
mean
I,
I
agree
with
everything
that's
been
said
and
I
think
perhaps
number
two
and
number
four.
We
should
just
add
the
words
that
we
see
above
in
number
12
on
the
same
page,
reevaluate,
the
feasibility
of
and
just
say,
evaluate
the
feasibility
of
dedicating
resources,
evaluate
the
feasibility
of
partnering,
with
technical
with
trident
tech
and
so
forth.
G
I
I
I
I'm
making
note
of
that,
but
there
are
multiple
other
instances,
not
under
review
tonight,
previous
recommendations
that
have
not
been
discussed
that
use
the
language,
dedicate
staff
and
resources,
or
some
very
similar
language.
To
that
do
you
are
you
also
motioning
to
make
that
change
to
all
instances
where
that
language
is
used.
P
I
wasn't
and
I'm
I'm
not
bringing
that
one
up,
I'm
not
bringing
that
one
up
for
the
purposes
of
saying.
Well,
here's
you
know.
Maybe
we
need
to
reevaluate
that
I'm
saying
that
a
lot
of
the
verbs
that
are
being
used
in
here
seem
prescriptive
as
opposed
to
you
know.
This
is
a
as
rather
than
suggestive,
and
so
I
think
maybe
what
we
look
at
is
you
know
just
an
overall
catch-all
sentence.
You
know
that
describes
all
the
recommendations
saying
while
some
of
these
may
seem
prescriptive.
P
These
are
just
our
suggestions
for
how
the
city
and
city,
council
and
city
planning
department
should
proceed
in
the
next
10
years.
I
mean
that's,
I
mean
essentially
that's
what
we're
doing
we're
making
recommendations,
and
these
are
things
that
we
would
like
to
see,
but
we
know
that
we
can't
prescribe
them.
B
G
G
Think
there's
a
16
where
we
talked
about
this
a
good
bit,
and
I
think
I
think
we
discussed
this
a
little
bit
and
is
there
a
motion
on
that?
I
think
we
talked
about
crystal
hussein,
talked
about
adding
the
the
separation
and
also
and
well
as
possibly
incentivizing
when
this
length
is
just
incentivizing
for
developers
and
do
that
work.
G
G
B
Mr
chairman,
I
I
will
have
to
say
that
this
one
does
give
me
a
concern
for
the
same
reason.
You
know,
I
believe
that
the
capital
projects
division
does
great
work
with
the
resources
that
they
have
and-
and
I
and
I
believe
that
you
know
this
is
the
job
of
the
mayor,
and
I-
and
you
know
this-
is
a
division
of
a
department
of
the
city
of
charleston
that
were
sort
of
directing
the
the
mayor
to
research
and
evaluate,
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
this
was
done
in
2016.
G
B
N
B
G
Yeah,
with
the
exception,
nine
I'm
with
you
and
that
miss
johnson
you're
fine
with
wade
claire
great.
Thank
you
all
in
favor
of
that
please
say:
aye
aye,
aye,
all
right.
Anyone
opposed
to
that.
Okay!
Thank
you.
Under
housing,
we've
got
under
number,
seven.
We've
got
to
change
and
number
10
and
number
two
as
well.
I'm
sorry
I
apologize
yep
number
two
yeah,
there's
three
words.
There.
G
C
G
P
I
did
have
one
question
about
the
downtown
plant
christopher.
I
was
looking
on
our
city
plan
website
is
the
downtown
plan.
I
didn't
see
it,
but
maybe
I
might
it
just
might
have
been
an
oversight.
I
know
it's
been
referenced
in
the
past
and
I
think
that
plans
went
from
almost
early,
not
1997,
but
I
won't
tell
you
how
young
I
was
if
I
graduated
high
school
in
97.
That
tells
you
how
how
long
ago
that
plan
was
made.
P
A
I
think
in
our
minds,
update
means,
you
know
completely
redo
it.
I
mean
there's
still
some
relevant
items
in
there,
but,
for
instance,
it
looked
at
downtown
as
just
being
up
to
the
septum
of
clark.
Parkway,
and
you
know
these
days.
Downtown
includes
things
all
the
way
up
in
nomo
and
all
that
it
didn't
really
look
at
the
perimeter
protection
issues
that
we're
now
working
with
for
downtown.
A
G
P
G
A
E
G
G
K
P
G
G
I
don't
think
mr
fluge-
I
don't
think
he's
with
us
today
is:
is
that
correct,
chloe,
yeah,
okay
and
I'm
in
favor
as
well,
so
that
would
be
eight
in
favor
and
unopposed
folks.
I
appreciate
your
patience
tonight
and
then
and
appreciate
everyone's
work
and
the
staff's
work
on
all
of
this,
and
I
think,
we've
and
I
look
forward
to
us
meeting
with
city
council
to
talk
about
it
and
give
our
thoughts
as
well,
so
that'll
be
a
fun
meeting
as
well.
So.