A - Town Council Meetings

MOUNT PLEASANT TOWN COUNCIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. Municipal Complex, Council Chambers 100 Ann Edwards Lane Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 MINUTES Mayor Haynie called the Town Council Meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. Council Members Bob Brimmer, Joe Bustos, Kathy Landing, Jim Owens, Tom O’Rourke, Gary Santos and Guang Ming Whitley were present. I. PRAYER Chaplain Rich Robinson led Council in prayer. II. PLEDGE Mayor Pro Tempore, Gary Santos, led Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. III. COMPLIANCE WITH FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT Mr. Pagliarini certified compliance of the Freedom of Information Act. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Santos moved for approval of the agenda; seconded by Mr. Owens. All present voted in favor. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS, AWARDS & PRESENTATIONS A. Public Hearing: A Public Hearing to receive input regarding a proposal to amend the Comprehensive Plan 2009 – 2019 (2014 Update) Future Land Use Map by changing the land use designation from Recreation Open Space to Low Density Neighborhood for an approximately 1.83 acre tract of land located at 1500 Clubhouse Lane in Raven’s Run Phase I Subdivision, identified by TMS No. 561-  01-00-095 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book BM, Page 022. Julie O’Connor, stated that she has been hired by the new owners of this property to design their new home. She said that this property is currently in the County and does have residential zoning. She added that while this property was designed as open space, it has always been privately held and privately owned. She mentioned that the airplane hangar is also privately owned. She said there is a runway that is also private for the residents of Raven’s Run that abuts this property; however, it is not owned by the property owner. She said on the other side of the runway, there are aircraft parked that are used within the neighborhood and this hanger has not been used for that purpose. She said there is currently a driveway, which is what will be utilized to access the residence. B. Public Hearing: A Public Hearing to receive input regarding a proposal to widen Park West Boulevard from 2 to 4 lanes and enhance bicycle and pedestrian facilities between approximately the Park West Boulevard/Bessemer Road roundabout and the Town’s recreation complex. Mr. Brad Morrison, Transportation Director, stated that this public hearing is to receive input regarding the widening of Park West Boulevard from two to four lanes, which will include enhanced bicycle and multi-use path and pedestrian facilities along the way. He said that this would be from the Park West Bessemer roundabout to the Town’s Recreation Facility entrance. He said that this is related to the Public Information meeting that was held on October 26, 2017. Kevin Cunnane, River Vista Way, said that he is in support of the widening of Park West Boulevard. He said that it is long overdue. Mayor Haynie declared the public hearings closed. Page 2 of 30  C. Presentation of Cresco Award Chris Luly, Senior Planner for the Town of Mount Pleasant, together with Mayor Haynie, Town Council members, Historical Commission Chair, Rick Gutowski and Commission members, Robert Macdonald and Heidi Schless, recognized Walter G. Brown, Jr., as the 2017 recipient of the CRESCO award, which honors and recognizes those who make a significant contribution to the community on a historical basis, and proclaimed December 12, 2017 “The Annual Cresco Historical Stewardship Award” to Walter G. Brown, Jr. D. Announcement of Coleman Boulevard Holiday Window Decorating Contest Winner Amy Livingston, Business & Tourism Manager, together with Mayor Haynie and Town Council members, recognized Barre South as the winner of the Coleman Boulevard Holiday Window Decorating Contest Winner. E. Employee of the Month Police Chief Carl Ritchie, together with Mayor Haynie and Town Council members, recognized Private First Class Fermin Cardenas, Mount Pleasant Police Department, as Employee of the Month. VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER 14, 2017 TOWN COUNCIL MEETING AND THE NOVEMBER 2017 FINANCIAL STATEMENT. Mr. Santos moved for approval; seconded by Mr. Owens. All present voted in favor. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PUBLIC STATEMENTS George Freeman, 1450 Bowman Road, said that he would like to speak about Billy Swails Boulevard and the Sweetgrass Basket Overlay District. He said currently, Billy Swails Boulevard goes from Hamlin Road to Porchers Bluff and soon will go from Six Mile Road to Porchers Bluff. He said in the past four or five years when development occurred in this area, the community and the CAGE organization worked to ensure these subdivisions have at least two connections Page 3 of 30 and one would be to Billy Swails Boulevard. He said that a subdivision will be built right behind the new Home Depot and will be connected to Six Mile Road and to Billy Swails Boulevard when complete. He said further down off of Old Georgetown Road, there is a development that was just approved and will be connected to Georgetown Road and the new realignment of Long Point Road when it is developed. He said at the other end of Billy Swails Boulevard at Porchers Bluff, there is another subdivision that is also connected to Porchers Bluff and Billy Swails Boulevard. He added that in this area, when they had the Highway 17 Task Force, this was one of the requirements in this area, to provide inter-connectivity. He said that he would like to pass this on to the new Town Council members and refresh the already sitting members. Barry Wolff, 1468 Pocahontas Street, said that on the agenda is the reevaluation of the CRAB. He said the issues of raised medians on Coleman Boulevard and on-street parking on Coleman Boulevard need to be revisited. He said that over time, if Council has seen the effects that the raised medians and the on street parking has had on the Boulevard, which has created a tremendous amount of U-turns and a tremendous amount of traffic congestion when people are attempting to parallel park in a society where we do not parallel park much anymore. He thinks that we need to understand that businesses will suffer from the medians and the neighborhoods abutting Coleman Boulevard will suffer from the medians, because drivers will have to go into neighborhoods to make property turns to get to businesses. He said that he does not believe the Town had the strength of Council to revisit this in the past, and hopes that we have the strength now and understand what we are creating. He said that visions are good; however, sometimes they are wrong. Pat Sullivan, 1002 Plantation Court, said that on the subject of Coleman Boulevard, she would think that Council’s number one concern would be the safety of its citizens. She said if you look at what was said the last time Coleman Boulevard was brought up, the three members of staff stated that collision rates decrease between 25% Page 4 of 30 and 50% with the medians. She said in addition, pedestrian collisions decrease by 50% and research shows that up to 30% capacity increases. She said those that are unhappy with Coleman Boulevard, it is understandable, because it is under construction. She hopes that Council takes the citizens’ safety into consideration over some people who are not happy with how fast they can get down Coleman Boulevard. Kevin Cunnane, 3032 River Vista Way, said on the safety aspect, there is an aspect of safety that is very important. He said that raised medians, when you have emergency response, you send units from both directions, because you are not going to be able to get through. He said you cannot work over the median with a ladder when you are coming from the wrong direction. He said that the Town does not have a double response in the Town available to do this, so we are asking for urban solution when we do not have the urban infrastructure to make this happen. He said that this is something that really needs to be considered. He said if the Town does not have the ability to send a double response, then it is irresponsible to exacerbate that problem by extending the median. Katie Zimmeran, 45 Sycamore Avenue, said that she is the executive director of Charleston Moves, which is Charleston County’s non-profit advocacy group focused on safer streets and connecting communities. She said she would love to help the Town study this issue and come up with the right solution based on what we know now. She said the population has exploded in Mount Pleasant and many people drive and many want to have other options of getting around. She said she would love to assist with plans to come up with a way to solve this issue of revitalizing Coleman Boulevard, protecting citizens’ safety and help address the things that are missing, so this is a solid plan going forward. She remembers in the late 1990’s when they were discussing how to address Coleman Boulevard and the prevailing sentiment in Mount Pleasant was that people were using Mount Pleasant as a conduit to get to other places. She said that it was a very significant point of discussion where the Town wanted to come up with a way to Page 5 of 30  make Mount Pleasant a place to be and a community. She would like to keep whatever happens with Coleman as a place where people want to be. She said when you have wider medians that are planted, that is a place for a pedestrian refuge and provides a way to slow traffic down in a good way. She said you want traffic congestion which means the Town is a thriving community and people are safe on the roads. She said the Town also has the opportunity with on-street parking to slow down traffic in a good way, so she urges Council not to throw these ideas out and come up with solid solutions. She said when people are safe, everyone is happier. VIII. PLANNING – Mr. Ulma Planning Committee Minutes Planning Commission Minutes A. NEW BUSINESS 1. First Reading: An Ordinance to rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to CC, Community Conservation District, an approximately 1.50 acre tract of land located at 301 7th Avenue, identified by TMS No. 514-00-00-032 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book D, Page 180. (Ord. No. 17061.) Mr. Ulma stated that this property is designated low density residential and this request is not consistent with the land use plan designation. He said the property currently has two mobile homes on it and such use is not allowed in the R1 district. He said the request is to apply for CC Community Conservation zoning which would allow the mobile homes and would also permit a small grouping of up to three mobile homes on one parcel provided there is sufficient space for each and are able to meet the dimensional standards of the Town’s zoning ordinance. Mr. Bustos moved to deny; seconded by Mr. Owens. Mr. Bustos stated that the Planning Commission recommended denial and the Planning Committee also recommended denial. Page 6 of 30  He said the neighbors who came in to speak also requested denial. All present voted in favor. 2. First Reading: An Ordinance providing for an amendment to the Oakland Plantation PD, Planned Development District Ordinance (No. 04104), and subsequent amendments, pertaining to an approximately 0.60 acre tract of land located adjacent to Highway 17 North across from George Browder Boulevard, identified by portions of TMS Nos. 600-00-00-074 and 600-00- 00-067, providing for the installation of a multi-use path in the natural roadside bufferyard. (Ord. No. 17062) Mr. Ulma said this is to provide for the installation of a multi-use path along Highway 17 in a natural roadside buffer area and would permit a ten-foot trail, which is part of a larger regional trail system for this part of the community. The path is proposed to be located within the waterworks utility easement where it exists. He said that the Town’s zoning ordinance buffer provisions require that trees that are three inches in diameter be protected and the applicant initially proposed protecting trees of six inches diameter and greater along with installation of supplemental plantings rather than replacement plantings and mitigating for the tree removal. Staff expressed concerns if approved and the Planning Commission recommended approval, but agreed that this issue should be addressed. He said at the Planning Committee meeting the applicant stated that they would instead mitigate one to one for the removal of any trees between three inches and eight inches in diameter and the Planning Committee recommended approval with that amended zoning stipulation. Mr. Bustos moved for approval; seconded by Mr. O’Rourke. Michael Cain, 501 Wando Park Boulevard, said that he is with Seamon Whiteside and is working with the East Cooper Land Trust. He added that he is excited about this trail amenity. Page 7 of 30  Kevin Cunnane, 3032 River Vista Way, said that this is a great idea to have this trail, because when it goes past Lowe’s, having no buffer there, it becomes known as the Lowe’s Penitentiary. He said they have a thirty foot fence and it looks like a prison. He said if there is any way to work in a better buffer for that area to make it look less like a prison, it would be very helpful. Mr. Brimmer asked if the motion includes approval with the Planning Committee’s recommendation. Mr. Bustos responded in the affirmative. All present voted in favor. Mr. DeMoura read FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY. 3. First Reading: An Ordinance providing for the annexation of an approximately 1.00 acre tract of land located on Jack Leland Drive/Stratton Place identified by TMS no. 614-00-00-006 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book J, Page 100. (Ord. No. 17063) Mr. Owens moved for approval; seconded by Ms. Whitley. All present voted in favor. Mr. DeMoura read FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY. 4. Consideration of a request from the Patriots Point Development Authority to waive the 12-month waiting period to submit a modified rezoning application for the National Medal of Honor Museum property pursuant to Town of Mount Pleasant Code of Ordinances 156.031(E)(4). Mr. Santos moved for approval; seconded by Mr. Owens. Mayor Haynie stated that when this was first applied for, the lease between Patriots Point and the Medal of Honor Museum had not been executed, so they did not have the right to apply. All present voted in favor. B. OLD BUSINESS Page 8 of 30 1. Final Reading: An Ordinance providing for the annexation of an approximately 11.99 tract of land located on Dingle Road identified by TMS Nos. 578-00-00-162, 578-00-00-538 through -599, 578-00-00-595 through -596, 578-00-00-606 through -608, 578-00-00-610 through -620, 578-00-00-667 through -703, 578- 00-00-711 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Book L12, Page 0114-0115 and Book L13, Page 0405 – 0406. (Ord. No. 17058) Mr. Ulma said that this first item is the annexation with the following item being the zoning of the same property. He said this is for the Royal Palms Townhome development, which was developed under Charleston County zoning and consists of 72 lots and is served by a private street, which comes off the end of Dingle Road. He said the property owners have met and the statutory requirements as indicated in State law, and the Planning Committee recommended approval of the annexation request. Mr. Bustos moved for final reading; seconded by Ms. Whitley. Mr. Santos stated that last month, he made his intentions clear about the 75% method. He thinks in the future it should be stated that this is not a 100% annexation, but a 75% annexation. He asked Mr. Ulma to explain the 75% annexation method. Mr. Ulma said that the requirement spells out that at least that percentage (75%) of property owners to request the annexation petition, but does not require the full 100%. He said that he believes that close to 80% was achieved. Mr. Santos said that 75% of the townhome owners can take the other 25% into the Town even without their permission. Mr. Ulma responded in the affirmative. Mr. Santos said that he has an issue with this and asked at the last meeting to see if the other 25% could be found. He asked if they have been found. He said he was very clear at the last Page 9 of 30 Council meeting and has not been contacted regarding this issue. Mr. O’Rourke said that Mr. Freeman and Mr. Jefferson came in last month, and Mr. Freeman again this evening, to discuss the opportunity to have different exits and entrances from there. He said logistically, it will not work with the ponds and land that is not owned by the Town. He said that there is a parcel close to Highway 17, when Hungryneck is finished, that would allow access to get through this property. He asked if there was additional information. Mr. Bustos said that this came to the Planning Committee. He said there were residents who wanted some items addressed. He said first, they are built out and cannot build anymore. He said there is one small area stubbed out to a neighborhood on the southwest portion of the property. He said that people wanted to hear, on the record, that there will be no additional building, and the intention was that they would connect to that neighborhood. He said that this is why it was sent back to the Planning Committee. He said that the other neighborhood is also built out and they would connect. Mr. Owens said it is Crystal Road. Mr. Ulma said that when this was approved under the County, there were provisions made for potential street connectivity, although they were not affected through the plats. He said when the subdivision plats were recorded and there may be intervening property there making the actual physical connection, will have to cross other properties that are not necessarily part of this particular development. He said you would also connect to what is a private street within the neighborhood itself. He said some of this could be difficult to achieve, but it is understood that residents are concerned and interested in making connections between neighborhoods. Page 10 of 30 Mr. Brimmer said when Mr. Freeman was before Council previously, he asked that a condition be put in for interconnectivity on this approval. He said it is his understanding that the Town is unable to condition annexation requests. Mr. Ulma said that is correct. Ms. Landing said that she recalls that the HOA had contacted everyone, but not everyone responded to the request for annexation. She said it is not that they did not want this to happen, they just did not respond. She said it appears there were no negatives. Kevin Hedges, 1279 Dingle Road, said that what Ms. Landing said is correct as the homeowners received multiple notices regarding the annexation by email and standard mail. He said at the very bottom of the map his unit is in the corner by the lake and there is a footpath or easement. He said there is an easement where you are able to walk from the end of the neighborhood down to Billy Swails Boulevard. Susan Day, 1190 Dingle Road, said that she is the only original board member left and there are two new board members. She added that she knocked on every single door in the neighborhood three and four times for those that she could not get a hold of, because some are renting their property out. She email-blasted and Facebook blasted and said that if the homeowners do not know that the property is annexing, then they are not paying attention. She said that everyone knows they are annexing and if they did not sign the petition, it is because they were not available. She said they are excited to be a part of Mount Pleasant. George Freeman, 1450 Bowman Road, said that it sounds like Council is going to disappoint him tonight. He said this is an annexation and rezoning and in one of those, you are able to put conditions in. He said with this project, there was an area reserved for future connections and even at that time, it was a Page 11 of 30 private road. He said that the thinking was that if it did become a public road, that the access would be available so there could be interconnectivity. He said it would be disappointing not to have that connection, knowing the traffic that currently exists. He said when the road is turned over to the Town, the opportunity will no longer exist if the condition is not put in now. He said that this is not something he is asking for, but the community, who asked for this over ten years ago. He said the Town recently approved a project next to this one off of Billy Swails Boulevard and Council approved two connections in this subdivision, which is next to the Dingle Road project. Mr. Brimmer said for clarification from staff, he is aware that you cannot condition zoning requests and asked if annexation requests can be conditioned. Mr. Ulma said that he does not believe you can do either. Ms. Landing said that currently the same number of people are living on this street, as will be living on it if the Town votes for annexation. She said whether we condition this and say in the future when Billy Swails Boulevard is complete, that we find another egress/ingress is not going to change whether we annex it or not. She said currently it is a private road and the Town is not responsible. However, the residents have no other way to exit the neighborhood. She said that they are not going to have another way out either way, so why would this cause Council to deny annexation. Mayor Haynie asked Mr. Bustos if this was addressed in the Planning Committee that if by annexing now, would this close the door to the possible connectivity or is it that the Town is not legally able to acquire this property. Mr. Bustos said that the Town is not going to build the connectivity, which is possible. He said that at some point, someone can built it for traffic. Page 12 of 30  Mr. Santos and Mr. Owens were opposed. All others voted in favor. Motion carries. Mr. DeMoura read FINAL READING BY TITLE ONLY. This Ordinance SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED this date. 2. Final Reading: An Ordinance to zone TH, Townhouse District, an approximately 11.99 acre tract of land located on Dingle Road identified by TMS Nos. 578-00-00-162, 578-00-00-538 through -599, 578-00-00-595 through -596, 578-00-00-606 through -608, 578-00-00-610 through -620, 578-00-00-667 through -703, 578- 00-00-711 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Book L12, Page 0114-0115 and Book L13, Page 0405 – 0406. (Ord. No. 17059) Mr. Bustos made a motion for final reading; seconded by Ms. Landing. Mr. Ulma said that staff wanted to ensure it was explicit that one of the recommendations is that the zoning goes to straight TH zoning. It is presently located within the Sweetgrass Basket Overlay District and having the overlay applicable to this property causes significant non-conformities and issues for the future of this these property owners. He said that the present ordinance before Council does not explicitly state this and the tradition has been to add this language in. Staff would request for Council to amend the ordinance with language that would state “property not to be included within the Sweetgrass Basket Overlay District requirements”. Mr. Bustos amended his motion to add the statement regarding the Sweetgrass Overlay District for the Townhouse District; Ms. Landing amended her second. George Freeman, 1450 Bowman Road, said that he is confused, because Council just made an amendment with the zoning; however, Council just stated that they cannot make the changes for the requirement of the connection with zoning. Page 13 of 30  Mayor Haynie said that this is what Council is told. He said that this development is built out and no developable land is being removed from the Sweetgrass Basket Overlay District, but only making sure that if anything were to happen to one of these units, that they are conforming, because they were already built in the County and not approved by the Town at that time. All present voted in favor. Mr. DeMoura read FINAL READING BY TITLE ONLY. This Ordinance SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED this date. 3. Final Reading: An Ordinance to rezone from NC, Neighborhood Commercial District, to AB, Areawide Business District, an approximately 0.39 acre tract of land located at 1375 Old Georgetown Road, identified by TMS No. 559-13-00-027, and depicted as a portion of Lot 8 on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Book G, Page 049. Property to remain in the UC-OD, Urban Corridor Overlay District. (Ord. No. 17055) Mr. Ulma said that this request was deferred that involves a change from Neighborhood Commercial to Areawide Business. He said the same owners have adjoining properties that are already zoned AB and have not provided any specific development proposals to the Town at this time. He said the property is also covered by the Urban Corridor Overlay. He said that this request conforms to that designation in the land use plan. He added that the Planning Commission and Planning Committee both recommended approval. Mr. Bustos stated that the Planning Committee had a great deal of discussion about a potential hotel, which led to the idea of potentially having hotel districts which will keep the hotels confined to certain areas, where they and their support businesses would be located close by so there will not be a proliferation of hotels across the Town. He said whether this property stays Neighborhood Commercial or rezones to Page 14 of 30  Areawide Business, because it is in the Overlay District, it is subject to having a hotel built there. He said because of several nearby hotels, this is proposed to be one of the districts. Mr. Bustos made a motion for final reading; seconded by Ms. Whitley. Mr. Santos was opposed. All others voted in favor. Motion carries. Mr. DeMoura read FINAL READING BY TITLE ONLY. This Ordinance SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED this date. IX. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Accommodations Tax Advisory Committee (No Meeting) Report B. Bids & Purchases Committee The Committee unanimously approved the following recommendations:  Approval to contract with Sanders Brothers Construction Company, Inc., in the amount of $1,480,355.15 to perform the Town’s Resurfacing Plan and associated Rivertowne pipe replacement.  Approval to contract with Amick Equipment Co., Inc., in the amount of $361,897.44 to provide the rolling trash carts. Recognition The Committee recognized: Jill Russ, Procurement Agent, for 10 years of service. C. Economic Development Committee Page 15 of 30  Staff provided an overview of Economic Development and an update to the Town’s Economic Development Strategy. Committee discussed the need to continue this conversation. D. Education Committee (No Meeting) Report E. Finance Committee Recommendation to accept the FY 2017 Audit Ms. Emily Sobczak of Greene, Finney & Horton, LLP, presented an overview of the Town’s Fiscal Year 2017 external financial audit. The Finance Committee discussed the presentation with Ms. Sobczak and staff and recommended acceptance of the report. Mr. O’Rourke moved that Council accept the audit for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2017; seconded by Ms. Landing. All present voted in favor. F. Fire Committee (No Meeting) G. Human Resources (No Meeting) Report H. Patriots Point Development Authority Page 16 of 30  Report I. Planning Committee Review and possible action related to hotel development in Mount Pleasant. Staff presented information related to existing and planned hotels, including land use and zoning aspects as well as business and economic considerations. Following discussion about some concerns with the number and location of hotels, the committee agreed with staff’s proposal to address this topic as part of the Comprehensive Plan update, with potential new zoning regulations to follow plan adoption. Review of Planning Commission recommendations regarding proposed amendments to the Tree and Buffer ordinances. Staff reviewed the proposed changes which have been recommended by the Planning Commission. Staff noted that these concepts needed to be transformed into ordinance language, and that staff would like to explore possible ways to address some of the issues instead of the exact approaches considered thus far. The committee agreed, with a goal of presenting the draft ordinance to Council in January or February and with staff giving a progress report at the January committee meeting. The committee also requested that there be some discussions with business and development representatives as this proceeds. Staff update on the Comprehensive Plan process. Planning staff provided a status report, sharing information about the amount of public input received since the first Open House, and the nature of the work to be performed by the Plan Forum at their second meeting to occur on December 5. Page 17 of 30 J. Police, Legal & Judicial Committee Mayor Haynie said that one of the items is listed under Council New Business A.4. The Committee has recommended to increase the size of Council Committees up to four members; however, it does not have to be four. He said that given the size of the Town and the amount of business that is being done, Committee members agreed that this would be a good idea. Mayor Haynie said that he had offered up a check on the Mayor’s actions and activities in the form of an Executive Committee of Council to provide oversight; however, the Committee did not feel it was necessary. K. Public Services Committee There was one presentation given at the Public Services Committee meeting entitled “Watershed Planning and Management”. It provided an overview of Phase I of the Shem Creek Watershed Assessment and outlined the way forward for Phase II of the assessment. This will be presented to Council as a CIP Project at the January Council Retreat. L. Recreation Committee The Committee approved a request to direct staff to develop a cost analysis for pickle ball courts and spillover parking over the retention ponds at the Senior Center. The Committee discussed the status of the dog park at the Park West Recreation Complex. Staff will brief the Committee in January on the conceptual plan for the development of the grass parking lot in Phase II of Waterfront Park. The Committee was given an update on participation and activities. M. Transportation Page 18 of 30  The Committee received a presentation of results from the October 26 public information meeting regarding the widening of Park West Boulevard. Proposed improvements included a widening of the roadway from two to four lanes as well as enhancement of bicycle and multi-use path facilities. The three alternatives presented were a designated, marked bike lane, a shared-use lane for bicyclists and a paved shoulder. All three alternatives include a widening of the existing multi-use path from about 6’ to 8-12’. The majority of respondents preferred the marked bike lane option and the Committee directed staff to advance that option to final design. The Committee heard resident requests to implement additional cut-through traffic calming strategies for Cottingham Drive and the Committee indicated it would continue to review the matter with staff. The Committee received legal advice in executive session regarding the Coleman Boulevard revitalization contract. N. Waterworks Commission Report O. Water Supply Committee (No Meeting) Report X. ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT Three Old Village Historic District Commission vacancies One Historical Commission vacancy Two Board of Zoning Appeals vacancies Page 19 of 30 XI. COUNCIL BUSINESS A. New Business 1. Adoption: A Resolution adopting the revised Charleston Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan. (R. 17121) Mr. Owens moved to approve; seconded by Mr. Santos. All present voted in favor. Mr. DeMoura read the RESOLUTION BY TITLE ONLY. This Resolution SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED this date. 2. Adoption: A Resolution authorizing a Law Enforcement Mutual Aid and Jurisdictional Agreement with the Mount Pleasant Police Department between the Berkeley County Sheriff’s Office, the Charleston County Sheriff’s Office, the College of Charleston Department of Public Safety, the Dorchester County Sheriff’s Office, the Folly Beach Department of Public Safety, the Goose Creek Police Department, the Hanahan Police Department, the Isle of Palms Police Department and the Sullivan’s Island Police Department. (R.17122) Mr. Owens moved for approval; seconded by Mr. Santos. All present voted in favor. Mr. DeMoura read the RESOLUTION BY TITLE ONLY. This Resolution SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED this date. 3. Adoption: A Resolution authorizing a Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Agreement with the Medical University of South Carolina Department of Public Safety. (R. 17123) Mr. Bustos moved for adoption of the resolution; seconded by Mr. Brimmer. All present voted in favor. Mr. DeMoura read the RESOLUTION BY TITLE ONLY. This Resolution SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED this date. 4. First Reading: An Ordinance to amend Chapter 32 of the Code of Ordinances to increase the makeup of certain standing committees to up to four members of Council. (Ord. No. 17064) Page 20 of 30 Mr. Santos moved for approval; seconded by Mr. Bustos. Mr. O’Rourke said that he is agreeable with this; however, would like to know why. He said if you have four members, the vote could be 2-2. He said he would not want to be Mayor selecting what appears to be more important committees with four members and others with only three. He said that with eight members of Council, including the Mayor, this also means that on Committee Day, your entire day will likely be spent in Committee meetings. Mayor Haynie said that he suggested this because Committees do the ground work for Council. He said that even if the vote ends up 2-2, the Committee has still completed its work. Kevin Cunnane, 3032 River Vista Way, said that he likes the idea of expanding the Committees and brought this up at the actual Committee that had the discussions. He said that he has seen situations after attending many of these meetings for several years, where Committee members may not have the expertise, which loses the oversight ability, because they rely heavily on staff. He said he brings up the Water Commission, for example, because there is an expert from the Waterworks Commission that sits on a Committee. He said that he has seen it with Fire, too. He said it is similar to having a Legal Committee with no attorney sitting on the Committee, then you rely on one attorney with one opinion. He said there are situations where all you are getting is an echo from the staff and the ability to have oversight is lost. He asked the Mayor to consider expanding it to include a member of the Community, who is an expert on the topic when the need arises. He said that the Town is full of talented people. John Wright, 145 Rose Lane, said that if there is no Committee that is going to require an expert from the Committee, then he does not believe there should be any committee that gets an expert from the community. He said that the residents elected Page 21 of 30  Town Council members to do the work of the people and trusts that Council members will do so. Mr. Brimmer stated that the Ordinance, as it is clearly written, does specify that some committees must have four, some have three and one has nine members. He asked if this proposed ordinance takes away the requirement for those Committees to have four members or does it simply expand that ability to the other committees. He said that he is seeking clarification. Mayor Haynie stated that it is not intended to do so. Mr. Pagliarini stated that the way it is written is that the Committees that currently have four or more will remain that way and this only addresses those Committees with three members, with the option to bring it to four. He said if Council would like to change this, it could be amended at final reading, but it does not decrease any of the current Committees of Council. All present voted in favor. Mr. DeMoura read FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY. B. Old Business 1. Final Reading: An Ordinance authorizing a lease of property known as the Trident Academy Gymnasium to the Town of Mount Pleasant. (Ord. No. 17060) Mr. Santos motioned to approve; seconded by Mr. Owens. All present voted in favor. Mr. DeMoura read FINAL READING BY TITLE ONLY. This Ordinance SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED this date. 2. Review and evaluation of the Coleman Boulevard Revitalization project Mayor Haynie said this was reviewed and feedback was received from many citizens. He added that he also hears about it Page 22 of 30 throughout the Town. He said that the Transportation Committee requested a history of this project and the other items discussed were the design and what the design was intended to do. He said they spent the majority of the time in executive session receiving legal advice because this is a contractual matter. He said this is an ongoing project and the approximate start date was September, early October, 2017. He said that the bid process received approval through Council; however, since that time, new Council members were elected, as well as his new role as Mayor. He said there was a vote on this project with the previous Council of 5-4 to continue with the project. He said that this new Council would like to review the project and see what options are available; what are things that can be accomplished to improve this project; what is the feeling of this Council based on all the information regarding funding, contracts, State and Federal requirements and the Town’s own legalities while in the midst of a contract to work on this project. He said that this is a very complex issue, as well as a complex decision. Ms. Landing said that she is aware that this is a highly debated and controversial issue and as a new member of Council, she has listened to and spoke with others, as well as researched this project. She said the first discussion was regarding on-street parking and mentioned that the question was asked earlier, why the Town wants, on a major four-lane thoroughfare, on-street parking where people were going to attempt to parallel park. She asked if it was similar to the parking in the front of Town Hall and was told that it was. She said that she has previously parked between two vehicles and it has never required her to parallel park, because by design, the spaces are long and wide enough for almost any type of vehicle to pull in. She said that there should be more public information regarding the on street parking spaces that do not require parallel parking. She attends Hibben United Methodist Church, which has a considerable amount of the frontage under construction due to the Coleman Page 23 of 30 Boulevard construction, and parishioners asked her not to take away the on street parking. She said that there are people in favor of the on-street parking. Mr. O’Rourke said that he is in favor of reviewing the plans again. He said that he is in hopes that Council is not re-looking at the plans, because of the medians. He said that medians are one aspect, but if Council is able to go back to the original reason why this plan was developed and some of the guiding principles they were looking at to attain, not everyone in the Town is going to agree on all aspects of the Coleman Boulevard revitalization. He said that there have already been discussions on what is safe and what it not and asked if there is any intent to bring back the individual who developed the original plan or is this going to be the work of the Committee. Mr. Haynie said that he has not heard that discussion; however, it does not mean that Council cannot look at the decision process by reading past minutes or have discussions with some of the original members of the CRAB (Coleman Revitalization Advisory Board). He said some are present this evening and he has had discussions with them. He said that the institutional knowledge is available. Mr. O’Rourke said that he is hopeful that the discussion is regarding what the big guiding principles will be, because there will never be 100% approval on everything; however, if Council is able to agree on the large items and make the decisions based on the big items, he believes they will end up with a better plan. He said whenever Council has completed this process and whatever they decide upon, there will still be a high percentage of people in the Town that do not like what this Council has changed. He said that this is the process and he is fine with this. He is in hopes that this Council is able to come to some type of agreement. Mr. Bustos said that it is no secret that he voted against it back in January of 2016, but have asked and were told that the plan Page 24 of 30 could be modified and even vote to change it. He said that all the points that are being made are good; however; he would like to see the Finance Committee review looking at the financial aspects. He said that his feeling before was that for the cost of doing Coleman Boulevard, a lot of good could be done across the Town, which was his motivation for voting against it. He said there is also the contractual aspect of this project and from discussion, Council does have the ability to modify or do away with the contract. He said there are penalties associated with these actions and believes these would be good topics to address in both Finance and Bids and Purchases Committees to find out what the ramifications are and bring back to full Council. He added that he lives close to Coleman Boulevard and he and his wife walk the side streets and Coleman Boulevard frequently. He said that he has brought up the subject of U-turns and while there is signage in the northern portion of Mount Pleasant that indicates that right turning traffic has the right-of- way; however, we do not have this signage on Coleman Boulevard and it is a weekly occurrence where a vehicle will turn right on red that comes in conflict with a vehicle making a U- turn. He said there are still some issues that need to be addressed; however, the financial and contractual portions are key. He said as we discuss this, his intention is to make a motion to ask the Committees to review this and bring back reports that Council is able to understand. Mr. Owens said that he is not sure that sending this to Bids & Purchases Committee is the answer. He said that if this goes back to Committees, he feels it should go to the Transportation Committee, as well as Police, Legal and Judicial. He said the function of Bids & Purchases are granted based on Council’s vote and when a project comes in, Council either accepts or rejects it based on the vote of Council. He said that Bids & Purchases has already provided this function, so would like to look at the overall structure going forward. Page 25 of 30 Mr. Santos said that he is likely the only one remaining on Council that voted during the first recommendation from CRAB, which was an 8-1 vote, where he was opposed. He was opposed primarily because of the heights of the buildings and the density. He agrees with Mr. O’Rourke to review the plans. He said at that time, the proposal was presented as being a walking community and vibrant with stores. He said if you look at it now, many of the stores have gone out of business multiple times and there is no walking and shopping and he does not see much biking either. He said that a beautiful picture was painted in the beginning and has not turned out the way it was presented. He said if we are going to get this right, he would like to look at this again and reevaluate this one more time before proceeding. Dr. Sarah “Sally” Jacob, 1152 Village Creek Lane, Apt. 1, said that in terms of parking on Coleman Boulevard, Council must consider that many seniors will come of age and she has been hit twice by elderly drivers. She suggested no parking or parallel parking on Coleman Boulevard, mainly because some people do not drive well. She said that she is also concerned about the public’s money. She said there is a contract and there are orange barrels all along Coleman Boulevard. She said that the Town is committed to spending the funding to finish this piece of the project. She said if Council decides to try and change the contract, it will cost. She said that Council cannot take this funding and spend on other roads when they have to pay for the damage of breaking the contract. George Brewer, 241 Bennett Street, said that he is a partner at Moultrie Plaza, which is a war zone for the sewer project that he supports totally. He said that he does not support the raised median project. He thanked Ms. Landing for her comments and invite Hibben to park at Moultrie Plaza for the overage at the church. He said the parallel parking was not part of the original CRAB plan, as he was on the original board. He said it was adopted at a later date in conjunction with the Boulevard Page 26 of 30 project. He said on-street parking is for those who do not have sufficient parking to handle their clients for their business. He said most of the parking, as he originally recalled, was in front of Moultrie Middle School and the Moultrie Middle School playground, which is of no benefit. He said to take away the turn lane does require a U-turn and causes issues for elderly drivers. He said when you include trucks who must do a U-turn at those intersections, it will eliminate businesses. He said the business community is opposed to this and is not consistent with a business. Kevin Cunnane, 3032 River Vista Way, said that when you have a raised median and there is a ladder firetruck involved, they will not be able to do a U-turn quickly. He said it takes time away, which is why a ladder truck is sent from both directions. He said when the CRAB was active, there were four ladder companies in the Town, then three and now there are only two. He said there is one on Mathis Ferry and another in Dunes West. He asked if sending a ladder company from Dunes West to respond to Coleman Boulevard is a good idea. Dennis Blyth, 610 Pelzer Drive, said that his concerns are often related to the U-turns and the raised medians as well. He said that it was mentioned earlier this evening why medians help with giving pedestrians a safe place. He said that he does not believe that wider medians are proposed and in most cases they are narrow. He said, secondly, there are no medians where the pedestrian crossing are located in this design. He said regarding parallel parking and comparing it to what is outside of Town Hall, he would point out that there is no median outside. He said there is also a proposed bicycle lane alongside the parallel parking and where there are other bicycle lanes in the community, you can see people cutting into the bicycle lanes to get around traffic that is trying to turn, etc. He said in this case, people will be stopping in the bicycle lanes to try and wait for or back into a parking space. He said doors will be opened from Page 27 of 30  vehicles into the bicycle lanes without looking to see if a bicycle is coming. He said that there have been discussions that no safety issues have arisen to date, but said that parking is only on two very short blocks, not the entire portion of Coleman. He said that in reference to the U-turns, he said full size pickups and large utility vehicles need up to a 26 foot turning radius which the Town does not have in most of the places along the route. He said that delivery vehicles, which will be plentiful on Coleman Boulevard, do not have the ability to make a U-turn. Mayor Haynie stated that the next item is the ability to go into Executive Session. He said that the Transportation Committee spent a great deal of time receiving legal input regarding the status of this project. He said that there are two choices and would like to know what the will of Council is. He said one is Mr. Bustos’ proposed motion and said that this would not require an executive session. He said that this would be directing Committees of Council to gather information which may involve an executive session at a later date, but does not believe the motion, as stated, would require an executive session. He said that it an executive session is on the agenda this evening and Council is legally able to go into executive session, and the members of the Transportation Committee did receive a briefing on where all the legalities stand. He asked what the will of Council is at this time. Mr. Santos stated that since some Council members are not on the Transportation Committee and were not privileged to the executive session information, he believes it is important to adjourn into executive session in order for all of Council to be provided with an update. 3. Executive Session to receive legal advice on any contractual issue related to the review and evaluation of the Coleman Boulevard Revitalization project, if needed. Mr. Santos made a motion to adjourn into executive session to receive legal advice on any contractual issue related to the Page 28 of 30  review and evaluation of the Coleman Boulevard Revitalization project; seconded by Ms. Whitley. Mr. O’Rourke said that if Council is going into executive session for item D, suggested moving it up on the agenda and addressing the remaining items. Mayor Haynie stated that it was decided to keep it in this order so there is no misunderstanding about what is being discussed. All present voted in favor. Council adjourned into executive session at 7:42 p.m. [Town Hall lost power at approximately 7:49 p.m. and did not regain power until the meeting adjourned; therefore, there is no additional recording of the Town Council meeting. All notes to follow were taken by both Legal Counsel, Mr. Pagliarini and Clerk of Council, Christine Barrett.] Mayor Haynie reconvened the meeting at 8:28 p.m. stating no action was taken in executive session. 4. Post Executive Session Council may take action on any item listed on an executive session during a properly noticed meeting Mr. O’Rourke moved to, at the discretion of Mayor Haynie, send the topic of Coleman Boulevard to the applicable Committee of Council for discussion in January, seconded by Mr. Santos. All present voted in favor. C. Executive Session Mr. Santos moved to go into executive session to discuss the applications submitted for consideration of appointment to the Planning Commission and the Culture, Arts and Pride Committee, seconded by Mr. Owens. All present voted in favor. Page 29 of 30  Council adjourned to executive session at 8:30 p.m. Mayor Haynie reconvened the meeting at 8:45 p.m. stating no action had been taken. Personnel 1. Appointment to the Planning Commission 2. Appointment to the Culture, Arts and Pride Committee D. Post Executive Session Council may take action on any item listed on an executive session agenda or discussed in an executive session during a properly noticed meeting. Ms. Whitley moved to appoint Bren Monteiro to the Culture, Arts and Pride Committee, seconded by Mr. Bustos. All present voted in favor. Mr. Brimmer moved to reappoint DeAudre Brown Gregg to the Planning Commission, seconded by Ms. Landing. All present voted in favor. XII. ADJOURN There being no further business, Council adjourned at 8:46 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Ashe December 12, 2017 Page 30 of 30