►
Description
City of Charleston Committee on Public Works and Utilities 10/26/2020
B
D
D
C
E
E
F
E
C
E
I'd
love
to
let
us
pray
lord.
We
thank
you
for
this
day
for
all
the
many
blessings
that
you
bestowed
upon
us
and
we
ask
that
you
keep
us
ever
mindful
of
the
needs
of
others
and,
dear
lord,
we
ask
that
you,
you
help
be
with
us.
You
help
us
make
good
thoughtful
decisions
that
are
that
are
good,
not
only
for
our
residents,
but
also
for
all
of
the
great
people
that
come
to
this
city.
E
C
F
Yes,
sir,
I'm
actually
asked
mr
mcqueen
with
mr
chairman
members
of
this
committee.
What
we're
doing
here
is
we're
going
to
ask
you,
for
a
date,
probably
the
second
meeting
in
november,
to
set
public
hearings
for
the
closing
abandonment
of
a
portion
of
st
phillips
street
and
also
for
a
curb
cut
portion
of
forestry
on
daniel
island
and
chip.
Do
you
have
anything
you
want
to
add
on
those.
G
No
sir,
well,
I
can
just
sort
of
explain
the
process
real,
quick,
because
there's
a
lot
going
on
in
various
committee
meetings
and
I
talked
about
it
real
estate,
but
it's
with
st
phillips
street
the
portion
of
st
phillips
street
we're
talking
about
that's
maintained
by
d.o.t
right
now.
What
we'll
do
is
today
adopt
a
resolution
requesting
them
to
convey
it
to
us
to
the
city,
and
then
we
begin
the
process
of
closing
and
abandoning
it
as
a
right-of-way.
G
And
then
we
have
to
adopt
an
ordinance
separately,
conveying
one
half
of
each
side
of
that
parcel
to
the
budding
owners
and
then
city
council
will
consider
a
zoning
ordinance
to
zone
the
property,
because
our
right-of-way
is
downtown
or
not
zoned.
So
that's
saint
phillips
street
on
far
street.
It's
a
little
bit
less
complicated.
G
It's
already
zoned
because
that's
all
subject
to
a
pud
so
we're
just
today,
setting
the
public
hearing
and
giving
first
reading
to
an
ordinance
to
quick
claim
it
to
the
the
people
who
deeded
it
to
us,
which
is
daniel
island
associates
and
then
we'll
have
second
reading
of
an
ordinance
to
claim
it.
At
the
same
time,
we
have
the
public
hearing
and
adopt
a
resolution
closing
and
abandoning
it.
Assuming
you
all
agree
to
those
terms.
C
A
C
G
At
some
point
in
the
past.
I
think
they
obtained
that
in
2006
at
some
point
since
2006
we
a
lot,
we
issued
a
building
permit
and
my
understanding
is
at
the
time
we
we
would
issue
the
permit.
It
wasn't
locational.
It
was
you
know,
subject
to
our
ordinances
and
you
know:
you'd
have
to
get
an
encroachment
permit.
If
you
encroached
on
a
drainage
easement,
either
way
we
granted
the
property
owner
a
building
permit
to
build
a
a
back
building
behind
their
their
house,
which
encroaches,
I
don't
know
six
feet
or
so
into
the
easement.
G
G
Typically,
we
would
just
grant
an
encroachment
agreement,
but
an
encroachment
agreement
would
require
them
to
move
the
encroachment.
If
we
have
to
do
work
on
the
property,
so
they'd
have
to
move
a
building.
You
know
it's
a
garage,
I
think,
with
a
something
over
the
top
of
the
garage
and
it
also
their
carport
on
the
front,
which
is
it's
a
structure.
It's
it's
connected
to
the
rest
of
the
house
also
encroaches
into
the
easement.
G
So
what's
being
asked,
is
that
you
adopt
a
or
authorized
the
mayor
to
execute
a
amended
easement
that
would
give
us
a
20-foot
drainage,
easement
in
most
of
the
area,
but
allow
the
encrypt
basically
carve
out
of
the
easement.
The
encroachment
areas
which
will
basically
take
care
of
the
title
claim
against
the
property.
G
Matt
is
comfortable
that
we
can't
maintain
under
those
circumstances
in
in
this
area,
matt
fountain.
You
know
I
wouldn't
typically
recommend
this
unless
it's
clear
that
we
can
maintain
this.
I
don't
like
recommending
it
anyway,
because
it
it
can
happen
often,
but
I
think
this
is
a
common
sense
solution
to
this
particular
issue.
C
A
C
F
A
A
A
F
A
F
C
It
all
right.
Thank
you.
Now
we
go
to
item
g1
discussion
on
captiva
row
and
ashton.
Hall
plantations
changes
to
the
right
of
way
to
narendell,
to
councilman,
sheeley
myself
and
the
mayor's
matter
of
fact.
Mr
may
I
appreciate
your
email
over
the
over
the
weekend,
so
I'm
gonna,
if
it's
okay
with
you,
I'm
gonna,
give
you
I'm
gonna,
recognize
you
and
then
hopefully
I
guess
staff
will
come
and
explain
afterwards.
Mr
mayor.
I
I
Time
flies
when
you're
having
fun
about
two
and
a
half
going
on
three
years
now,
so
I
I
just
want
to
state
that
for
the
record-
and
I
don't
intend
to
participate
in
the
discussion
or
any
vote
today,
so
I'll
just
do
something
that
is
not
in
my
everyday
practice,
which
is
to
be
quiet
and
just
listen.
Well,.
J
J
C
J
K
J
J
M
F
What
julia
and
michael
have
both
said
has
happened,
the
the
original
stop
work
order
and
the
plans
that
the
city
received
for
this
project
were
for
utility
work
only
in
the
right-of-way
of
the
city
portion
of
the
right-of-way.
It
was
not
for
the
improvements
that
were
made
in
the
intersection.
It
was
just
for
utility
work.
C
C
M
E
F
This
is
not
related
directly
to
this,
but
as
an
aside,
I'm
actually
working
with
charleston
county
and
james
island
pst
in
the
town
on
some
issues
in
james
island,
where
we
have
to
come
up
with
an
mou.
But
things
like
this
won't
exist
where
somebody
will
clearly
have
responsibility
for
those
type
items.
E
F
E
I
guess
my
point.
My
question
is:
what
sort
of
penalty
could
there
be
for
somebody
to
work
after
a
stop
work
order
was
was
given
or
for
creating
such
a.
You
know
a
dangerous
situation
here.
What
sort
of
punishment
is
there
to?
Even
you
know,
make
sure
that
it
doesn't
happen
again
I
mean.
Can
we
can
we
find
somebody
for
something
like
this,
or
are
you
saying
that
it's
really
ultimately
up
to
the
county
if
they
wanted
to
issue
some
sort
of
punishment?
For
this.
F
Well,
in
this
particular
instance,
since
the
work
took
place
in
in
the
county,
I
don't
know
if
we
we
could
have
any
punch,
but
if
it
was
actually
in
the
city
right
away
through
livability
court
or
livability
court,
we
could
issue
a
citation,
our
inspectors
or
or
deputize
in
essence,
to
issue
citations.
Prepare
you
to
work
under
permits
and
what
would
happen
is
we
would
issue
a
citation
they
were
there
for
for
appear
before
under
the
livability
judges,
it
could
be
fined
up
to
a
thousand
dollars
a
day.
For
that.
E
E
It
is
absolutely
dangerous
and
I
cannot
believe
that
anybody
would
think
that
that
was
an
acceptable
way.
I
mean
you're
talking
about
I'm
reading
through
all
these
emails,
a
school
bus
carrying
our
children,
can't
even
you
know,
adequately
turn.
This
could
have
been
an
absolutely
dangerous
situation
and
we
would
have
some
responsibility.
C
Oh,
oh
councilman,
councilman
griffin,
I
don't
think
that's
going
to
happen.
One
of
the
things
I
appreciate
your
points.
One
of
the
things
I
want
to
hopefully
get
clairvoyance
on
is
if
the
permits
were
not
issued
on
authority
to
work
on
the
right,
it
didn't
happen
in
the
city
and
I'm
going
to
recognize
soon.
Councilman
moody
who
county
councilman
moody
is
on
the
call
and
I'm
gonna
find
out.
Hopefully,
if
the
county
issued
any
permits,
maybe
the
county
issued
permits
for
that
work.
C
D
Councilman
waring,
thank
you
for,
for
recognizing
me.
Our
variable
joe
dawson
is
researching
that
right
now,
my
understanding
at
least
my
initial
understanding
was
it
was
in
the
in
the
city,
but
mayor
teckenberg
was
kind
enough
to
send
over
some
documents,
so
joe
dawson
is
digging
into
it.
I
I
agree
with
councilman
griffin.
C
N
Thank
you,
councilman
warren
appreciate
it.
You
know,
like
councilman
warren,
was
saying,
there's
three
neighborhoods
involved
here:
marsh
cove,
ashley,
harbor
and
ashley
hall
plantation,
where
people
drive
through
there
all
the
time
now.
It's
also
this
intersection
is
also
a
cut
through
road
when
traffic's
real
bad
on
on
ashley
river
road.
A
lot
of
people
down
in
in
councilman
griffin's
district
in
my
district
actually
use
that
road
as
a
way
to
get
around
bad
traffic
areas.
So
it
there's
there's
a
lot
of
traffic
on
that
road.
N
Those
three
neighborhoods
ashley
hall,
plantation
ashley,
harbor
and
marsh
cove,
have
all
chimed
in
you
know.
I've
actually
even
heard
in
the
last
couple
of
days
about
a
school
principal,
a
school
bus
driver
chiming
in
on
this
on
how
tight
a
turn
that
is,
and
our
fire
marshal
was
calling
me
last
week
on
some
ish
on
some
unsafe
roads,
and
I
asked
him
if
he
was
aware
he
was
not
aware
of
this.
N
When
I
showed
him
some
pictures,
he
said,
that's
awfully
that's
an
awfully
tight
intersection
with
what
they've
done
here
as
well.
So
it's
a
it's
a
very
dangerous
intersection
and
I
don't
know
if
the
council
members
on
this
committee
or
these
committee
members
have
seen
pictures.
I
can
share
my
screen
if
you
want
to
see
exactly
how
much
road
was
taken.
If,
if
you
would
like
to
see
that
and
I'm
able
to
share
my
screen,
I
could
I
could.
N
C
N
Okay,
so
and
I'll
see,
if
I
can
blow
it
up
a
little
bit.
If
you
look
at
this
picture,
you
can
see
where
the
stop
sign
was.
The
stop
sign
was
just
a
little
bit
off
of
the
road,
but
the
road
came
fairly
close
to
that
stop
sign,
but
that
you
can
see
the
white
stripe
here
where
that
white
stripe
used
to
come
all
the
way
across.
N
So
that's
how
much
right
away
this
developer
took
from
us
and
you
can
see
that
it
actually
curves
in
even
further
as
you
go
up
the
road
and
into
the
entrance
of
the
of
the
new
neighborhood,
but
the
let
me
see
if
I
can
give
you
one
more
thing:
there's
a
video
that
came
out
of
some
trucks,
let's
see
if
this
works,
so
these
trucks
are
turning
now.
These
trucks
have
no
trailers,
no
boats
behind
them
or
anything,
but
this
is
why
that
construction
was
right.
N
N
So,
let's
see
if
I
can
get
back
to
where
I
can
take
my
screen
away,
if
I
can
stop
share
okay,
so
so
just
that
hopefully
gives
you
a
little
bit
of
perspective
on
what
was
taken
from
us,
how
much
of
our
right-of-way
was
taken
and
what
it
did
to
make
that
intersection
so
dangerous
there.
So
you
know,
a
lot
of
people
are
very.
N
Very
a
lot
of
people
are
very,
very
upset
and
those
are
the
people
that
have
to
go
through
this
dangerous
intersection
every
day,
if
somebody's
making
that
left
turn
where
those
trucks
were
turning
and
they've
got
a
trailer
or
they're
pulling
a
boat
and
a
lot
of
people
own
boats
in
that
area.
There's
no
way
someone
can
take
a
right
turn
and
also
have
a
a
trailer
or
boat
taking
the
left
turn
on
the
ashley
hall
plantation.
So
anyway,.
C
A
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
if
we
can
just
sort
of
back
up
a
couple
of
steps-
and
I
see
we
got
mr
benjamin
and
mr
summerville
on
the
screen
with
so-
is
this
just
refresh
our
memory
on
this?
I'm
I'm
very
familiar
with
this
area.
I
used
to
take
horseback
riding
lessons
back
up
there
way
many
many
years
ago.
A
O
A
So
going
going
back
to
the
initial
part
of
this
discussion
and
with
mr
o'brien,
I
think
was-
was
alluding
to
with
the
utility
part
of
this.
I
mean
because
the
pictures
that
councilman
bashily
was
sharing
with
us
not
only
that
they
were
doing
work
on
utility
part
of
this,
but
it
looks
like
they
were
also
taking
a
good
chunk
of
the
road
away.
A
Is
that?
Is
there
any
time
authorization
for
that
ever
to
have
taken
place
for
a
a
private
developer
to
take
over
possession?
I
mean
that's
what
it
looked
like.
They
were
doing
that,
and
maybe
I'm
just
confused
on
that,
but
it
certainly
seemed
like
they
were
not
just
reconfiguring
the
the
turn
lane,
but
it
looked
like
they
were
overtaking
part
of
the
road
itself
and
that's
seems
to
be
very
troubling
from
what
I've
seen
so
far.
O
So
the
only
big
drawing
piece
that
I
put
in
here
and
I
might
have
to
turn
my
screen
off
just
so
I
don't
I
come
through
and-
and
you
all
hear
me
so,
the
right-of-way
is
is
owned
by
of
of
ashley
hill
plantation
up
until
that
split
of
captiva
owned
by
the
city.
As
you
all
remember,
a
couple
years
ago,
went
through
the
process
of
annexation,
yep
trying
to
figure
out
what
would
be
in
the
city.
O
O
Change
significantly
once
we
understood
if
it's
in
the
county,
so
that
that's
where
the
dichotomy
pieces
are
that's
why
there
is
a
record
of
us
responding
to
potential
developments
and
changes
within
the
right-of-way
that
you
see
within
the
trc
review,
which
I
think
I'm
chairman
waring
you
have
access
to,
but
but
the
the
the
separation
piece
here
in
terms
of
the
specific
changes
at
the
intersection
is
where
you
have
the
split
between
city
owned
right
of
ownership
and
county-owned
ownership.
Anything
that's
done
within
the
right-of-way.
O
Obviously
this
is
in
public
service.
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
tom,
but
anything
that's
done
within
the
public
right-of-way
of
changes.
One
has
to
go
to
drc
and
also
has
to
get
an
encroachment
permit
and
outside
of
the
utility
permits
that
were
submitted
via
tom,
that
that
was
not.
That
was
not
the
case
there,
so
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
public
service,
but
in
terms
of
getting
proper
permitting
to
be
able
to
execute
and
do
something
in
the
right
of
way.
O
C
H
H
They
put
in
place
a
stop
work
order
and
mr
mathis
and
our
transportation
department
met
with
folks
to
try,
assuming
that
the
work
that
occurred
was
properly
approved,
to
make
it
safer
and
as
safe
as
possible.
That
was
our
goal
now
since,
and
I
thank
councilmember
sheily
for
continuing
to
drill
down
on
this.
H
That,
though,
we
believe
those
changes
were
approved
by
the
county
and,
as
you
heard
from
council
member
moody
just
a
minute
ago,
mr
dawson
and
the
county
are
looking
into
that,
and
so
when
they
confirm
whether
they
got
proper
approval
or
not,
then
they
they
can
make
a
decision
about
whether
they
want
to
pursue
any
additional
changes.
I
do
want
to
make
the
point,
although
I
I
understand
the
expression
council
member
sheeley,
about
the
something
being
taken
away.
H
As
far
as
I
know,
there's
no
legal
change
of
ownership
in
any
of
the
right-of-way.
It's
just
a
change
of
use.
So
what
was
formerly
a
grassy
area
or
or
roadway
is
now
going
to
be
sidewalk
or
something
else
I
mean
per
the
approval,
that's
not
to
say
it
can't
be
undone,
but
but,
as
far
as
I
know,
there's
been
no
change
of
ownership
of
the
right-of-way.
It's
just
a
matter
of
use
and
additional
plans
and
changes
can
be
made
to
the
right-of-way.
H
There's
certainly
been
no
changes
on
the
city
right
away
that
have
been
approved
in
terms
of
a
change
of
use,
and
so
in
that
sense
I
just
respectfully
would
like
to
use
the
language
of
what
got
approved
as
a
change
in
the
right-of-way.
Nothing,
nothing
has
legally
been
taken
away.
No
property
is
transferred
to
the
developer.
As
far
as
I
know,.
C
C
E
E
This
is
a
serious
situation
and
if
you
look
at
what
council
member
sheila
showed
us,
not
only
is
it
difficult
for
two
vehicles
to
go
around
that
bend
at
the
same
time.
But
if
a
car
is
speeding
at
all
and
tries
to
go
around
that
curve
that
curve
they
could
easily
flip,
they
could
easily
go
into
the
other
lane
and
hit
somebody
head-on.
This
is
a
serious
situation
and
our
residents
over
there
don't
want
to
hear
legalese
about
whose
fault
it
is
or
whether
or
not
some
grassy
area
was
taken
out.
E
They
want
us
to
be
very
diligent
about
correcting
this.
So
not
only
do
we
need
to
find
a
path
forward,
like
county
council
member
moody
said
to
get
this
corrected
immediately,
but
we've
got
to
make
sure
that
we're
going
to
hold
this
developer
responsible,
because
if
we
have
any
say
so
in
this,
they
need
to
understand
that
this
is
not
right
to
be
corrected,
but
I
mean
we
gotta.
C
C
The
reason
we
need
to
drill
down
and
find
out
how
it
happened
is
so
it
won't
happen
again
or
what
action
steps
we
need
to
need
to
make
to
make
it
better
just
what
you're
pointing
to
councilman
griffith.
In
other
words,
if
we're
on
our
side
in
our
trc
process,
our
public
works
process-
and
I
don't
know
it
was
a
staff
level
decision
to
do
that.
C
Then,
obviously,
before
you
can
change
the
turning
surface
on
on
asphalt
portion
of
any
street
in
the
city
of
charleston,
that's
something
that
needs
to
be
approved
by
the
maine
council,
not
something
because
when
the
lawsuits
come,
it's
not
going
to
be
the
staff
person
that
gets
sued.
It's
going
to
be
the
city
of
charleston
and
all
the
taxpayers.
C
That's
going
to
share
responsibility
in
that.
So
that's
why?
If
this
process
didn't
it's
a
good
example
to
make
sure
on
the
other
side
of
this,
I
think
the
city
and
the
county
gonna
be
a
little
bit
better
going
forward.
So
now
I
think
we
have
some.
Let's
cook,
do
we
have
some?
I
see
some
other
numbers
down
here.
Do
we
have
some
call-ins
from
citizens.
C
P
P
So
we
we
as
a
community
I
reached
out
not
only
within
my
neighborhood
but
outside
of
our
neighborhood
and
we
you
know
we
have
submitted
a
petition
against
the
allowance
of
these
modifications
because
you
know
put
a
bigger,
stop
sign
on
it.
Move
the
stop
sign
back,
put
some
reflective
tape
on
it.
It
does
not
improve
the
main
concerns
of
this
intersection,
so
in
addition
to
that,
we
did
submit
via
email
a
couple
of
written
in
responses
and
experiences
related
to
the
modifications
to
this
intersection.
P
C
Well,
thank
you,
mr
mcvicker,
and
thank
you
for
your
engagement
and
I'll.
Tell
you
between
the
county
and
the
city.
We
gonna
find
the
answer.
We
already
got
fifty
percent
of
the
answer
that
one
wasn't
approved
in
the
city.
I
want
to
thank
mr
mayor
getting
that
information
to
us.
I
want
to
thank
mr
o'brien,
ms
copeland,
mr
somerville,
mr
benjamin
mcqueeney,
mr
mathis.
H
C
Okay,
all
right.
Thank
you,
mr
means.
With
that
we'll
go
to
next
item
on
the
agenda,
which
is,
I
will
be
just
as
easy
as
the
one
we
just
left,
it's
going
to
be
update
on
bail
tear,
which
is
a.
I
came
on
council
almost
nine
years
ago,
certainly,
eight
years
and
ten
months
ago,
my
first
year
on
council,
it
was
a
new
subdivision
over
on
james
allen.
C
C
H
Oh
well,
I
I
thought
the
first
start
was
just
to
find
out
how
many
certificates
of
occupancy
have
been
issued,
because
that
that
was
where
the
the
clicker
was
counting.
For
you
know
a
change
change
back
council,
but
I
I
will
add
that
councilmember
jackson
and
I
met
with
members
of
the
neighborhood
association.
H
H
You
know,
vandalized
and
or
materials
that
are
stored
on
the
site
stolen,
so
they
were
concerned
about
that,
and
the
city
obviously
agreed
to
allow
them
to.
You
know,
have
the
gates
I'll
I'll
share
with
you
that,
beyond
whether
the
certificate
of
occupancy
number
has
been
met
or
not,
I
think
it
will
be
soon
if
it's
not
already
that
the
unofficially
the
neighborhood
association
did
express
their
desire
to
keep
the
gates
and
to
for
their
safety.
H
They
still
perceive
that
their
safety
is
is
heightened
by
having
the
gates
in
place
and
they
were
willing-
and
I
wanted
to
just
bounce
this
off
of
the
committee
to
see
your
response.
They
were
willing
to
take
responsibility
back
for
the
the
roadways.
I
did
investigate
that
the
city
has
never
done
that
before,
where
we
we
once
we
had
accepted
a
right-of-way
in
a
development,
have
we
given
it
back
to
the
neighborhood,
but
it
is
their
request
and
and-
and
I
at
some
point
I
do
need
to
reply
to
them.
F
Department,
currently
there
are
16
cos,
have
been
issued.
We
have
three
other
houses
that
are
actually
under
construction.
There
was
a
fourth
house
that
was
under
construction,
but
after
the
foundation
permit,
they
canceled
the
permit.
So
we
out
when
these
three
that
are
under
construction,
we'll
have
19
completed,
cos.
Q
Q
I
think
I
think
I
need
to
just
unless
the
mayor
has
had
a
subsequent
conversation,
but
the
way
we
left
that
meeting
the
president
of
their
of
their
board
expressed
the
interest
in
in
retaining
a
private
community.
That
would
would
retain
the
roads
and
they
realized
that
it
would
be
at
their
expense,
but
they
were
going
to
do
their
own
due
diligence
is
the
way
that
I
think
we
left
the
meeting
and
come
back
to
us
if
they
were
still
wanting
to
submit
a
you
know
viable
proposal
for
our
consideration.
Q
Q
H
C
Well,
thank
you
yeah.
Thank
you,
miss
jackson.
Let
me
say
this.
I
I
think
at
the
very
best,
this
development
and
the
leadership
has
been
disingenuous
with
the
city
of
charleston.
I
was
supposed
to
be
21
approximately,
I
think,
three
years
or
so,
and
as
I
told
you,
I
know
it's
been
at
least
eight
years,
you
can't
take
the
public
right
away
like
that.
C
C
C
I
was
from
another
planet
and
I
suspect
the
people
in
bell
tale
would
look
at
me
the
same
way,
but
the
public
right
for
access
is
powerful
and
cannot
be
negotiated
away
because
the
21st
house
has
not
arrived
yet
the
things
that
you
said,
mr
mayor,
about
unsafe
things
happened.
My
father
and
I
built
the
subdivision
a
number
of
years
back,
probably
actually
about.
Two
decades
ago
we
had
the
exact
same
problem.
C
People
would
come
in
and
actually
stole
lumber
from
had
heavy
equipment
stole
lumber,
a
building
package
to
build
a
house
that
was
being
built.
We
got
in
contact
with
the
city
of
charleston
police
and
they
did
a
wonderful
job.
They
would
circulate
through
there
even
to
the
tune
of
parking
to
the
back
of
the
subdivision.
C
In
the
event
that
somebody
came
in
the
moment,
we
did
that
that
problem
ended.
We
didn't
have
to
put
up
a
gate
and,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
I
will
I'll
make
sure
I
send
this
out
to
you
I'll,
take
a
picture
of
the
elaborate
gate.
It's
a
beautiful
gate
that
they've
built
there's
nothing
temporary
about
that
game.
They
have
also,
and
their
and
some
of
the
realtors
sales
literature
actually
put
out
that
they
live
in
a
gated
community.
C
That's
just
not
true!
You
can't
take
the
public
right
away
like
that,
so
I'll
be
coming
forth
with
a
motion
that
we
move
forward
legally
to
have
those
gates
open,
they
don't
have
to
they
don't
have
to.
Actually,
I
think
I
need
to
stay
within
robert
rules
or
I
need
to
have
somebody
else
make
that
motion.
I'm.
A
That
motion,
I
just
want
to
comment
on
what
you've
been
saying:
councilman
we're
wearing
and
well.
I
haven't
started
on
council
as
long
as
you
have.
This
has
been
an
issue
we've
been
dealing
with.
I
know
for
the
past
four
plus
years
and
it's
always
been
this
temporary
gate,
I'm
waiting
for
temporary
to
be
removed
from
this,
and
so
we
we
just
need
to
remove
it.
I
mean
I,
I
think,
that's
just
sort
of
the
bottom
line,
I'm
enough
with
this
nonsense.
A
We
want
to
protect
developers
and
protect
property
owners.
Of
course
we
do,
but
this
is
a
public
right-of-way,
as
you
just
said,
and
it's
really
no
different
than
the
example
you
were
giving
at
the
corner
of
broad
in
in
meeting
street.
I
mean
come
on.
We
just
need
to
go
ahead
and
get
this
thing
taken,
care
of
and
move
on
and
enough
with
this
I'm
very
familiar
with
this
area.
A
A
I
think
we
were
trying
to
help
the
developer
understanding
the
economic
circumstances
back
at
the
time,
but
this
is
enough
already,
let's
if
we
need
to
move
to
do
it
now
and
get
it
done
today.
Let's
we
can
pass
that
motion
or
if
we
need
to
do
it
at
the
next
meeting,
so
be
it.
But
let's,
let's
get
the
ball
rolling
on
this
thing
and
get.
G
C
A
C
G
I
don't
think
I'm
aware
of
any,
but
I
haven't
looked
but
I
mean
I
you
know
I've.
I
reviewed
it
council
member
shade
and
I
mean
I
would
probably
follow
declaratory
judgment
action
that
it's
you
know
invalid
and
request
a
temporary
injunction
that
the
gates
remain
open
during
the
dependency
of
the
appeal
or
the
the
the
action
I
you
know
just
just
so
you
all
understand
what
you
know.
C
I
I've
never
been
this
quiet
in
a
meeting
for
so
long,
but
you
know
I,
I
think
the
things
that
you
know,
council,
member,
wearing
and
council
member
shade
and
everybody
else
has
said-
is
obviously
true.
It
is
a
default
starting
position.
Obviously
the
public
rights
away
cannot
be
privatized.
I
think
chip
is
raised.
A
very
important
point.
You
know,
there's
an
agreement,
there's
a
document
on
record
that
will
need
to
be
consulted
and
go
through
that
process.
I
I
wanted
to
add
this
into
the
discussion
as
we're
looking
into
this,
because
we
may
be
able
to
drive
some
efficiencies
here,
there's
only
one
other
gated
neighborhood
in
city
of
charleston,
I
know
of,
and
it's
ashley
harbor.
We
heard
from
several
of
those
folks
on
the
last
agenda
item
and
I
was
curious.
I
just
went
on
to
scdot
street
finder
and
I
typed
in
cygnus
drive
and
port
sideway.
I
I
Some
I'd
just
love
to
know
what
gives
ashley
harbor
the
right
to
put
up
a
gate
and
have
security
officers
and
things
of
that
nature.
So
we're
going
to
look
into
this
issue.
Let's
make
sure
we
look
at
all
the
different
implications
from
all
sides,
so
we
can
treat
everybody
fairly
and
do
the
right
thing,
because
let
me
tell
you:
they've
been
blocking
that
thing
for
way
longer
than
beltair
decades.
G
G
This
all
here
is
outside
beltaire,
so
you
really
have
pinkish
city
of
charleston.
Yellow
is
james
island.
So
you
really
have
three
properties
that
border
this
property.
Arguably
because
I
think
that's
a
hoa
property
that
are
within
the
city
of
charleston,
so
that's
that's
kind
of
the
other.
When
you
think
of
the
benefits
and
burdens,
I
just
want
you
to
be
aware
of
it,
but
I
did
want
to
point
that
out.
C
G
Well,
what
I
I
guess,
what
I'm
trying
to
point
out
is:
there's
very
few
city
of
charleston
residents
around
this
area
that
are
going
to
care
that
those
gates
are
closed.
It's
really
town
of
james
island
residents
that
would
be
using
those
streets
and
roads,
it's
almost
completely
surrounded
by
town
of
james
island.
So
the
beneficiary
of
bringing
a
lawsuit
is
mostly
the
town
of
james
island.
C
K
C
C
C
C
C
S
Yeah.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
The
the
first
one
is
a
approval
to
enter
into
a
memorandum
of
agreement
with
charleston
county
in
the
town
of
james
island,
and
this
is
basically
towards
sharing
costs
for
our
required
monitoring
work
under
the
scd-hectare
maximum
daily
load,
which
we
normally
refer
to
as
a
tmdl.
S
Basically,
the
the
county
will
manage
the
contract.
The
city,
town
and
county
will
all
contribute
funding
to
the
contract
proportional
to
our
representative
geographical
areas.
Within
that
watershed,
so
it's
a
way
for
all
three
of
us
basically
spend
money
one
time,
instead
of
all
three
of
us
spending
duplicate
amounts
of
money
and
we'll
basically
be
a
much
more
efficient
way
to
kind
of
all
work
together
to
help
with
the
required
regulatory
monitoring
to
help
clean
up
this
watershed.
C
S
C
F
Excuse
me,
susan,
I
was
muted.
I
can
basically
just
kind
of
give
an
overview.
We've
had
some
concerns,
which
I
I
think
susan's,
probably
more
aware
of.
With
concerns
from
a
safety
standpoint
in
the
location,
some
of
the
nodes
for
the
5g
wireless
is
going
in.
We
we've
had
a
problem
from
the
public
service
standpoint
with
this
construction
and
installation
of
a
lot
of
their
fiber
optic,
which
we're
working
diligently
on.
F
We
placed
some
pretty
substantial,
stop
work,
orders
on
both
crown
castle
and
sega
the
two
major
companies
doing
this
work
downtown,
and
we
still
have
several
locations
which
we
have
a
place
for
new
locations.
We
have
not
allowed
them
to
get
permits
for
until
they
actually
do
their
repairs
to
the
blue,
stone
and
the
sidewalks
that
they
damage
downtown.
We
we
meet
my
inspectors
and
I
mean
every
day
they're
slowly,
making
these
repairs,
but
still
not
to
our
standards
that
we
have
downtown
so
we're
working
very
hard.
F
K
L
C
K
We
haven't
talked
about
5g
wireless
for
a
number
of
months,
so
not
much
has
changed,
but
I
thought
I
would
just
update
you
on
some
of
the
recent
happenings
that
have
gone
on
around
the
country
on
a
national
level.
Many
local
governments
are
concerned
about
the
5g
installations
that
are
going
up
in
their
towns,
but
we
have
largely
been
unable
to
stop
the
development
based
upon
fcc
rules
and
state
law.
K
We
are
essentially
limited
to
reviewing
these
location
locations
for
the
equipment
really
on
a
reasonable
time,
place
and
manner
restriction
for
these
small
cell
facilities
and
I'll
talk
about
that
a
little
bit
more
in
a
second.
But
one
thing
that
is
clear-
and
it
was
it's
been
the
case
since
we
first
got
into
this
issue-
is
that
local
governments
cannot
consider
health
concerns
when
citing,
when
approving
or
reviewing
applications
for
the
locations
of
small
cell
facilities.
K
There
are
also
on
the
state
level.
There
have
been
changes
in
state
laws
that
are
also
playing
a
significant
role
in
limiting
the
powers
of
municipalities
to
regulate
5gs
over
20
states,
including
south
carolina,
have
passed
legislation
that
prevents
local
control
of
small
cell
facilities
generally
based
on
a
model
ordinance
that
was
proposed
by
the
american
legislative
exchange
council
and
that's
a
non-profit
organization
of
state
legislators
with
significant,
with
ties
frankly
to
the
small
cell
industry.
K
K
Now
I
will
mention-
and
we
are
watching
this-
that
as
a
result
of
that
fcc
finding
there's
a
group
called
the
environmental
health
trust
in
children's
health
defense,
who
has
filed
an
action
in
the
dc
circuit
court
of
appeals,
challenging
the
fcc's
refusal
to
revise
or
reconsider
these
24
year-old
standards.
This
case
has
been
briefed.
It's
it's
pending
in
the
court
and
it's
something
that
that
certainly
we
will
watch
to
see
if
the
fcc
is
going
to
change
change
their
position
on
this.
K
The
other
thing
that
has
happened
recently
is
that
there
we
were
reviewing
and
watching
closely
a
case
out
in
the
ninth
circuit
court
of
appeals.
I
think
I
talked
to
you
all
about
that.
A
couple
months
ago
it
was
the
city
of
portland
versus
the
united
states,
and
there
the
city
of
portland
was
challenging
a
number
of
the
fcc
rulings,
including
those
on
health
and
safety,
and
unfortunately,
the
ninth
circuit
opinion
was
not
helpful
to
local
municipalities,
with
one
exception
it.
K
It
basically
gave
room
for
cities
to
regulate
the
location
or
the
the
look
of
of
the
small
cell
facilities
basically
said
that
it
was
reasonable
to
look
at
aesthetics.
Although,
when
looking
at
aesthetics,
we
could
not
discriminate
against
small
cell
providers
and
favor
other
infrastructure
improvements.
So
on
its
face,
the
holding
that
holding
in
the
ninth
circuit,
you
know,
allows
the
city
of
charleston
its
flexibility
and
its
design
guidelines,
most
of
which
we
we
have
in
place
already.
So
that's
sort
of
the
national,
the
national
scene
on
a
local
front.
K
We
subsequently
adopted
an
ordinance
in
november
of
2018..
I'm
sure
many
of
you
remember
that,
and
that
ordinance
did
include
guidelines
for
the
installation
of
small
cell
equipment.
It
designates
certain
areas
of
the
city
as
requiring
different
types
of
equipment
that
are
more
in
character
with
the
neighborhood.
It
requires,
for
example,
that
location
of
equipment
cannot
be
closer
than
300
feet
apart,
so
the
guidelines,
the
guidelines
are
good.
K
They
probably
could
be
reviewed
and
maybe
made
a
little
bit
more
on
point
with
the
character
of
neighborhoods
in
light
of
the
ninth
circuit
decision.
So
that's
something
that
we're
going
to
take
a
look
at,
but
the
other
thing
I
wanted
to
mention
that
is
after
we
passed
the
ordinance
and
crown
castle
was
working
with
us
in
court
to
get
their
permits
approved.
K
K
The
third
thing
I
wanted
to
mention
was-
and
you
all
probably
know
this
very
recently,
the
end
of
september,
the
south
carolina
small
wireless
facility
deployment
act
was
passed
by
the
senate
and
the
house
and
the
bill
was
signed
and
it
provides
some
rules
across
the
state
for
regulating
how
municipalities
can
regulate
small
cells
on
the
public
rights
of
way
and
basically,
what
it
allows
the
cities
and
towns
to
regulate
the
appearance
of
small
cell
facilities
and
provides
municipalities.
The
authority
to
to
designate
design
districts
with
more
stringent
appearance
standards
may
be
required.
K
So
so
we
do
that
in
our
guidelines.
Again,
however,
you
know
we
we
are
looking
at
them
to
see
if
we
can
tighten
them
up.
So
I
know
this
is
a
lot,
but
the
question
is:
where
does
this
leave
us,
particularly
in
light
of
the
petitions
that
we've
received
from
the
citizens
and
other
concerns
that
we
have
as
a
local
municipality
for
the
sighting
of
these
facilities
on
our
property?
K
We
are
not
allowed
to
restrict
the
placement
of
these
sequ
equipment
based
upon
health,
that's
clear,
and
that
is
certainly
the
case
based
upon
the
fcc
rulings,
certainly
the
case
based
on
the
ninth
circuit
law.
This
may
change
with
the
district
court
opinion,
but
that's
where
we
are
right
now.
Under
the
ninth
circuit
opinion
in
south
carolina
state
legislation,
we
can
review
and
are
reviewing
our
design
standards
and
possibly
may
may
be
able
to
tweak
those
too
to
preserve
more
of
a
neighborhood.
K
K
K
So
we
will
continue
to
monitor
the
court
in
the
case
of
the
d.c
circuit
and
hope
that
there's
a
you
know
positive
finding.
There
hope
that
the
fcc
may
change
the
regulations
on
health.
I
don't
see
that
happening
in
the
immediate
future
and
for
right
now,
really
there's
a
pretty
limited
avenue
for
us
to
work
within.
C
K
K
You
know
that
we
that
I
have
heard,
not
necessarily
with
respect
to
a
specific
school,
but
in
some
cases
the
schools
want
to
have
access
to
wi-fi
and
want
to
have
the
ability
to
provide
that
access
to
their
their
students.
So
you
know
there's
somewhat
of
a
balance
here
that
you
know
needs
to
be
taken
into
consideration,
but
I'd
have
to
defer
to
jordan
or
to
tom
whether
there's
at
this
point
any
proposed
applications
that
are
within
close
proximity
due
to
school.
L
So
I'd
have
to
go
back
and
review
all
of
them
and
probably
just
overlay
it
with
a
map
of
schools
on
the
peninsula.
I
know
there
is
a
proposal.
That's
relatively
near
abused.
That's
that's
here
kind
of
out
in
front
of
the
gill
yard,
but
you
know
also
I'd
kind
of
have
to
figure
out
what
we
would
consider
close
proximity,
and
then
I
can
run
that
through
and
update
everybody
on
schools.
L
Churches
may
be
a
little
more
difficult,
they're
just
a
little
more
numerous,
and
then
I
don't
know
if
this
has
comprehensive
a
database
on
the
ability
to
really
map
that
as
as
easily
as
there
would
be
with
a
the
school
but
yeah
there
I
mean
there's
likely.
At
least
one
of
these
dots
is
probably
close
to
a
church,
school
or
playground
depending
on
the
definition
of
clothes.
K
You
know
there
are
other
areas
of
the
peninsula
that
need
coverage,
and
you
know
it
would
be.
It
would
be
nice
if
they
would
voluntarily
go
ahead
and
you
know
deploy
some
small
cell
facilities
on
other
areas
of
the
city
on
the
east
side
and
other
places,
but
at
this
point
that
would
have
to
be
voluntary.
C
A
Yeah,
I
did
thank
you
madame
for
so
susan.
This
is
not
a
very
simple.
I
mean
I
heard
what
you
were
talking
about
in
that
beautiful
legal
analysis.
Thank
you
for
that.
So
this
is
just
not
something
that
we
can
zone
around.
I
mean
that's
that's
held
to
the
bottom
line
with
all
of
this.
It's
just
it's.
A
K
Right-
and
you
know,
the
other
thing
is,
is
you
know
they're
allowed
to
put
their
equipment
on?
You
know
on
sc,
eng
or
dominion
polls
and
other
places,
and
what's
a
little
bit
unique
about
our
area,
is
that
there
doesn't
seem
to
be
any
great
interest
in
co-locating,
which
is
when
several
carriers,
you
know,
put
their
equipment
on
one
pole,
which
would
be
nice
because
it
would
eliminate
some
of
these
facilities
and
under
federal
law
and
state
law.
K
Co-Location
as
it's
called
is
encouraged,
but
it's
not
necessarily
required,
so
it
isn't
required,
and
so
you
know
the
companies
have
reasons
why
they
don't
want
to
share
the
various
reasons
why
they
don't
want
to
share
the
poll,
and
that,
of
course,
then
results
in
us
having
to
grant
you
know
more
permit
applications.
Yeah.
I
Yeah,
I
was
just
going
to
comment
real
briefly
that
really
the
legal
issue
here
is
preemption.
This
is
one
of
the
few
areas
where
the
federal
government
I
mean
the
big
boys
congress
has
said
local
governments
stay
out
of
this
and
it's
for
a
national.
It's
for
a
national
policy
of
establishing
robust
dependable.
I
You
know
advanced
wireless
communications
technology
I
mean,
and
when
you
start
talking
about
5g
and
what
china's
doing
and
what
some
of
some
of
these
other
countries
are
doing,
I
mean
this
is
all
like.
You
can
almost
argue.
This
is
like
a
national
security
issue.
I
mean
so
we're
dealing
with
some
big
topics
here
and
it's
it's
rare
that
congress
steps
in
and
actually
preempts
local
government.
I
When
it
comes
to
land
use
decisions,
we
normally
have
a
pretty
free
hand
in
most
things,
but
this
is
one
of
those
examples
and
it's
just
a
very
straightforward
issue,
and
I
think
that
the
the
way
I
conceptualize
it
in
my
mind-
and
it
sounds
like
this-
is
maybe
a
cliff
notes.
Version
of
what
mr
deena
said
is
that
you
know
when
it
comes
to
regulation
over
health
issues,
which
which
I
perceive
to
be
99
of
the
emails
and
public
comments.
We
get
it's
just
absolutely
clear.
I
We
can't
touch
it
with
a
10-foot
poll.
We
just
don't.
We
just
don't
have
that
authority.
Congress
has
taken
that
out
of
our
hands
now.
Can
we
regulate
around
the
edges
for
aesthetic
and
historic
preservation,
type
issues?
I
think
that's
perhaps
where
we
have
a
little
bit
more
leeway
and
that
and
the
and
the
exact
contours
of
that
authority
are
in
the
process
of
being
confirmed
and
worked
out.
But
you
know
this
is
this
is
a
rare
issue,
but
it's
one
where
there's
some
bigger,
bigger
players
involved.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
so
yeah
this
has
been
a
confounding
issue
to
be
honest
with
y'all,
since
since
I've
become
mayor
and
the
competing
interests
here,
and
even
when
you,
when
I've
tried
upon
review
of
the
applications,
you
know
to
to
consider
the
historic
character
of
our
city
and
the
aesthetics
and
denied
a
few
of
the
applications.
I
thought
most
appropriately,
we
got
sued
again
by
crown,
council
and
and
and
ross
is
right,
councilmember
appel.
H
It's
a
heck
of
a
lot
of
effort
and
trouble
for
us
to
manage
all
of
this,
not
to
mention
the
lawsuits
we've
we've
been
exposed
to.
So
it's
been
a
really
difficult
issue.
I
I
wish
we
had
more
authority
over
the
matter
and
we
just
simply
don't,
but
it
seems
to
me
that
we've
taken
the
steps
in
terms
of
the
aesthetics
even
approaching
the
historic
approach
to
try
to
gain
as
much
authority
and
control
as
we
possibly
could.
But
it
admitted
I'll
admit
it's
been
very
limited.
R
On
go
ahead.
Okay,
thank
you.
I'd
like
to
tell
mr
dina
thank
you.
So
much
for
all
the
work
that
you
have
done
on
this
you've
done
a
you've.
Given
you
gave
a
very
good
report.
I
would
like
to
say
too
that
the
the
schools
mr
dina,
can
get
wi-fi
very
easily.
They
can
get
5g.
They
can
get
whatever
they
need
just
by
running
fiber
optics
to
the
school,
and
then
the
people
inside
the
building
choose
whether
or
not
they
want
to
put
it
on
wi-fi
or
whether
they
want
to
put
it
wired.
R
So
that
argument
that
they're
giving
you
does
not
hold
water,
but
I
realize
this
is
a
very
hard
thing.
Also.
The
1996
telecommunication
act
says
that
courts
and
the
courts
have
upheld
this,
that
there
is
no
risk
of
cities
losing
and
having
to
pay
damages,
no
matter
how
times
how
many
times
they
are
sued,
the
worst
that
can
happen
to
you
is
you
get.
They
get
an
injunction
from
the
court
to
adhere
to
the
requests
that
the
telecom
companies
have
been
asking
for.
R
We
have
found
in
that
bill
that
was
passed
by
the
governor
last
week.
Nine
areas
in
section
58-11
that
the
city
can
require
of
applicants,
and
those
things
will
give
us
some
time
to
buy
some
time
and
buying.
Some
time
is
important
in
this
issue,
because
new
evidence,
like
ms
hardiness
said,
is
coming
out
all
the
time
that
knew
that
the
use
of
non-ionizing
radiation
in
close
proximity
to
the
public
can
cause
physical
harm.
R
K
Yes,
sir,
with
all
due
respect
in
south
carolina,
we
we
could
certainly
be
liable
for
attorney's
fees
and
costs,
potentially
in
any
case
that
would
be
brought
in
possibly
other
other
expenses.
So
I
know
in
some
jurisdictions
that
isn't
the
case
and
so
they've
decided
to
plow
ahead,
but
I
think
again
we're
we
would
be
putting
the
city's
monies
at
risk.
If
we
would
take
that
approach.
C
C
Her
property
backs
right
up
to
what
used
to
be
old,
plantation
apartments
peter.
I
don't
know
the
name
of
those
apartments
now,
but
there's
a
ditch
that
runs
along
the
rear
of
her
house
along
her
house
is
one
house
off
of
the
corner
of
ashland
drive
and
foosler
drive
and
there's
a
ditch
in
between
her
or
that
subdivision
and
those
group
of
apartments.
It
runs
from
fusela
to
old
town
road
that
needs
cleaning
it's
kind
of
overflowing
back
in
her
backyard.
C
So
if
you
can
put
that
on
the
list
and
then
if
you
can
give
me
an
update
on
457,
not
now
but
457,
south
sherwood
drive,
which
is
the
property
that
was
behind
rick
hendrick,
we
spoke
about-
maybe
I
don't
know
a
month
and
a
half
or
more
ago,
maybe
a
couple
of
months
ago
now
where
when
they
made
their
improvements
to
their
parking,
it's
a
small
ditch
that
that
water
goes
in
and
overflows
in
their
backyard
before
it
gets
to
a
big
old
canal.
That's
designed
to
handle
it
now.
C
I
think
we
needed
some
small
equipment
to
get
in
there
to
open
up
that
drainage
ditch.
But
if
you
give
me
an
update
on
that,
I'd
be
appreciative
and
peter.
I
guess.
Maybe
you
put
this
on
your
list
as
well,
but
11
ashland
drive
mr
she's,
a
fine
lady,
it's
I
think
she's
cresting
95
years
old,
but
I
promise
you
she's
just
as
sharp
as
anybody
on
this
call.