[0:18] If you'll stand for the pledge of
allegiance, please.
[0:21] [clears throat]
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[0:25] United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation
[0:30] under God, indivisible, liberty and
justice for all.
[0:39] » All right. So, everybody's got a copy of
the uh of the minutes. Um I'll ask if
[0:44] anybody has any questions about the
prior hour minutes.
[0:48] » I have a motion. Have a second.
>> Second.
[0:51] » Second. All right. Any discussion on
that? If not, minutes are approved.
[0:56] Okay. So, we're looking at uh
PC-2026-22.
[1:02] » Good evening. Thank you all for being
here. Uh this is a request to reszone
[1:06] from commercial reuse to central
business district five parcels located
[1:10] 206, 208, 210, 211, and 212 Cougar
Street identified as Florence County tax
[1:15] map numbers 974086
78 9 and 35.
[1:22] These parcels are all located on um at
the end the south southern end of Cougar
[1:28] Street which is between Chv Street and
West Palmetto Street. They are all
[1:33] vacant right now um largely being used
as parking lots for adjacent [snorts]
[1:39] properties and the um most of the
properties around them as you can see
[1:44] are zoned either commercial reuse which
is the purple or central business
[1:49] district which is the brown. So they're
right in between both and the request is
[1:53] to zone them from the commercial reuse
which is a lower impact lower intensity
[1:59] commercial use to central business
district which is a mixeduse much more
[2:04] um not much more but more intense more
dense um zoning district. It's the
[2:09] downtown district and there's nothing
specifically planned for that but that
[2:14] would make the open these up to be um a
little more flexible for redevelopment
[2:18] going forward. and um seems kind of
appropriate for uh what is going on in
[2:24] there. The uh future land use map has
them as corridor mixed use um which
[2:30] [clears throat] is what they would be
used for as well.
[2:34] These are some site photos of them. As
you can see, they're just vacant
[2:37] parcels. Um any redevelopment would be
an improvement. So, um and everything
[2:44] around it is former residential. It's
been converted to commercial uses and
[2:49] the as you can see the um school for uh
France
[2:54] » [clears throat]
>> um yeah Francis Mary and the medical uh
[2:56] school where circle park or circle
school was will be just down the block
[3:02] from this. So that concludes staff's
report.
[3:06] » Thank you.
All right. That's a this is a public
[3:10] hearing. So um usually for public
hearing we give 2 to 5 minutes um for
[3:14] response for and against. So I'll open
the public hearing if anybody has
[3:20] anything to say for they can come up to
the podium give their name.
[3:31] » Good afternoon. I'm John Deberry. I've
made the application. I think um Elaine
[3:36] did a great job of presenting our case
for us and um but I want to give you an
[3:41] opportunity to ask any questions that
you might have.
[3:44] » Commissioners, any questions for this
gentleman?
[3:47] » Can you point Can you point to where um
Circle Park?
[3:51] » So you you see where the King Avenue and
Greg Avenue round make the
[3:58] » semicircle there.
>> Oh, right here.
[4:00] » Yes, sir. Okay. [clears throat]
>> So, that's where the new um medical
[4:04] facility is being built.
>> Okay. And then you these are right here.
[4:09] So, uh you don't have any there was no
uh
[4:14] uh use.
You don't have any uh plans for what you
[4:18] plan on.
>> So, the plans that we have um don't have
[4:21] any current plans for these parcels at
this time. Um they all right. So the the
[4:28] dark red right around it, those are
already zoned CBD and these are parking
[4:34] lots that serve
those parcels.
[4:39] And [clears throat]
we're in the process of trying to fix up
[4:44] some of those buildings there. The
tenants have vacated and want to put new
[4:49] facades on them and invite, you know,
more activity down there. Um, and I
[4:55] think it's important it's this area is
kind of in a donut hole because even the
[5:00] light shaded pink between Graham Street
and Cucer and Palmetto, those buildings
[5:07] and uses are already operating like
they're in the CBD. There's a bar in
[5:13] there. There's a paint store. There's a
boutique. Um, so we were just hoping to
[5:19] make it more consistent with everything
that's going on right in that area.
[5:24] There's a nightclub on one side of it,
um, Osborne's
[5:28] and
this would just be an opportunity to
[5:32] make all of that consistent kind of a
consistent area and they'd have
[5:38] consistent setbacks with the other
parcels and the way that all the other
[5:42] buildings have been built over the
years.
[5:45] You say it serves as parking. Is this
parking hooked to other parcels or just
[5:48] » Yes, sir. Um, so
it is there's an originally what was the
[5:56] social security office building that
faces Warley Street. This is parking for
[6:02] that. And um, two of the parcels have
historically been parking for medical
[6:10] facility on Palmeta Street where Dr.
McKay used to be. Mhm.
[6:15] » And um so it served kind of in both
directions as parking for them.
[6:22] » The parking is going away. You're going
to do development that
[6:24] » No, sir. Um for the time being that will
continue to be parking. We hope to be
[6:29] able to landscape that nicely and really
kind of like the downtown did, make the
[6:36] facades of the back of the buildings on
Warley Street look attractive and and
[6:42] perform more as the entrance of the
buildings to take advantage of some of
[6:47] that parking in there. Um, and landscape
it nicely. And then then the idea is
[6:53] we've got a concept of a future possible
another office building there if things
[7:01] go well with the the renovation or
maybe some um some town houses down in
[7:10] there.
>> Okay.
[7:14] » Any other questions?
>> You say the word town. I fig that's what
[7:18] you going to do in the future.
>> Well, That's one purpose of each one of
[7:23] the parts. You going to divide it up and
try to do that, right?
[7:27] » No sir. Um so if we
[7:33] we would not divide that up for um well
first of all I think the lane can
[7:38] correct me but right now I think it's it
would be appropriate for town houses in
[7:43] the commercial reuse.
>> Yes, I think town houses are permitted.
[7:48] So I don't think that you know makes a
difference in this request but um that
[7:55] is really not you know originally my
that's this is a later phase of what we
[8:02] have in mind if things go well and I was
thinking another office building but the
[8:08] city did suggest to look at when I
talked to Hannah um Davis in the
[8:13] downtown development department she
suggested that we look at the
[8:17] possibility of putting putting some
housing down there.
[8:25] » Any other questions?
>> Thank you.
[8:27] » All right. Thanks, sir.
Anybody else speak for this?
[8:32] Anybody here to speak opposed?
If not, I'll close the public hearing
[8:39] and ask for discussion.
[8:43] » Any questions?
Call for the motion. Make a motion to
[8:48] approve.
>> Second.
[8:49] » Second. We have a motion to second. All
in favor?
[8:52] » I.
>> That passes.
[8:56] » All right. [sighs and gasps] Another
public hearing. PC-2026-23.
[9:02] Elaine.
>> All right. This is a U request to zone
[9:05] um NC15 pending annexation. A Whoops. A
parcel um located at 2711 Ascot Drive.
[9:13] and um
uh identified as Florence County tax
[9:18] number 00980181.
This is another donut hole in Windsor
[9:22] Forest. Um these addresses probably look
kind of familiar. We've got several this
[9:27] month and several next month as well. Um
single family house surrounded by um
[9:33] houses that are already in the city and
they just want to um probably got tired
[9:37] of watching their neighbors get their
trash picked up and want to join in
[9:41] that. Um it would be zoned NC15 which is
what everything around it is zoned and
[9:46] um the uh future land use map also has
it as neighborhood conservation. So
[9:51] everything is in keeping. There'll be no
changes to it. Um and as you can see
[9:56] it's a single family house. So um that
concludes staff's report.
[10:00] » Okay. All right. I'll open the public
meeting. Anybody here to
[10:05] speak on behalf of this proposal?
Hearing none. Anybody against it? I'll
[10:12] close the public hearing. Call for a
motion.
[10:14] » I'll [snorts] make a motion we approve.
>> Second.
[10:17] » Have a motion to second. All in favor?
>> I.
[10:21] » Motion carries.
>> Okay. Uh PC-2026-26.
[10:28] I'm sorry, excuse me. PC-2026-25.
[10:32] » Right. Because 24 has been deferred for
next month. Um this is a request to
[10:36] reszone from NC 6.2 2 to NC6.3 18
parcels located on North Aken Drive. I'm
[10:42] not going to read all 18 tax map
numbers. Um
[10:47] here's the addresses and the tax map
numbers. They're all um sequential on
[10:52] the um located along North Aken Drive,
which is a small uh residential area on
[10:58] the north side of West Evans Street. And
um as you can see here, here they are.
[11:04] And they were developed in the 1950s.
these houses were built and there's
[11:09] there because there is a single family
house on each of them and it is a
[11:13] residential donut hole surrounded by
commercial general commercial all around
[11:17] it and the request is to zone it from
reszone it from the NC6.2 2, which only
[11:23] allows single family and uh duplexes to
NC 6.3 in order to give the developer
[11:31] the option of developing single family,
duplexes, town houses, multif family,
[11:37] whatever works out uh whatever the
market would work out. They just would
[11:41] like to have that flexibility.
And um we did have [clears throat] a um
[11:47] one of the other property owners, one of
the few that are left um was interested
[11:52] in that and just wanted to make sure um
you know that this was a quality
[11:57] development. And as I told him that's
not what this is for at this stage that
[12:01] um that would come under any
redevelopment late at a later date
[12:06] because these lots would obviously have
to be recombined and re subdivided to
[12:11] accommodate whatever the development
was. But at this point for tonight,
[12:15] we're just looking at reszoning it from
the NC6.2 to the NC6.3.
[12:21] Um and here's some pictures. As I said,
there older houses built in the 1950s
[12:26] and they're all rentals at the moment. I
don't believe there's any um uh owner
[12:32] occupied houses there. So, that
concludes staff's report. Okay. Uh I'll
[12:38] open the public hearing. Anybody for or
against this proposal? Come up to the
[12:43] podium. Sir, say your name. [snorts]
[clears throat]
[12:52] Good afternoon. My name is Harvey
Frierson and I'm
[12:58] are on the end there which is not listed
on the map there regards to uh changes
[13:05] and I are listening to so far what's
going on with the uh town houses and I'm
[13:12] like Mr. Akens years back in 1950 he
developed that area
[13:19] [cough and clears throat]
and my concern in 2026
[13:23] is concern about 20 46
you coming in are changing up modifying
[13:32] the neighborhood if so should be able to
afford it and my concern was that if
[13:38] they're going to plan I'm going to bring
it to your attention now that street
[13:42] likes should be your part of that
planning. Sidewalks from Evans Creek to
[13:49] Evans Creek
are back of the property is railroads
[13:55] and right now we're experiencing foxes
and coyotes coming into the area and
[14:01] that should be concerned also.
And Florence itself is growing yet
[14:08] nobody mentioned the senior citizens.
So if they're going to buy that
[14:13] property, I would like to see some
senior citizen living in that area.
[14:20] Now when you grow old, you're going to
be young. What about the playground for
[14:23] the children? So those my concern if
that's intact with the planning, I have
[14:29] no problem.
But right now, I want it to be known
[14:34] that this is what uh
some of the residents who's not on that
[14:41] map is concerned about.
[14:45] » Again, thank you for your opportunity to
express my concern.
[14:50] » Okay. Any questions, Mr. Chairman?
>> Uh what house do you live in, sir? I
[14:55] live in the first house next to the uh I
think it's ENT building. I've been there
[15:01] perhaps about 20 years, 25 years.
[clears throat]
[15:06] » So is is your house
>> the first one the blue house?
[15:10] » Yes, sir.
>> It's it's in this proposed change.
[15:13] » No.
>> No. In fact,
[15:15] » you're outside of that.
>> Yes, sir.
[15:16] » Oh, okay.
>> And I'll be affected also. If you look
[15:20] at this zoning map, his is the first
yellow parcel um next to the orange on
[15:26] the right where they the the pieshaped
parcels. Um it's tax map number 006.
[15:34] » Okay. That's near the AT&T.
>> Yes, sir. Next door to you.
[15:38] » Yeah, I know what you're talking about.
>> And and your concern is basically about
[15:43] future use.
>> Yes, sir.
[15:45] » That's what you're voicing an opinion
on.
[15:47] » Yes, sir.
sidewalks, senior living,
[15:53] playground for the children
or a shield against the railroad track
[15:59] or ownership
for driers as well as wild animals.
[16:08] » All right. Thank you, sir. Any other
questions?
[16:12] You good?
I would need to recuse myself from this
[16:16] because I do have interest in this
project.
[16:21] » Okay.
>> So, we just can't have your vote. All
[16:25] right.
>> Right.
[16:26] » Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Anyone
else here to speak on [snorts] this
[16:30] proposal?
>> Oh, would I be able to speak on the
[16:32] proposal?
>> Uh, or what does the
[16:35] » You would um
>> Okay.
[16:37] » You'd have to go out there and Yeah. as
a
[16:42] » point of order the audience for this for
this [clears throat] particular case.
[16:46] Yes,
>> point of order. Uh because she's
[16:49] reclused herself, that only gives us
four people.
[16:52] » That's okay.
>> So, we can still vote. As long as as
[16:55] long as you start the meeting with a
quorum,
[16:57] » correct? [snorts]
>> Everything's good.
[16:58] » Yes, ma'am. State your name.
>> My name is Xavier Sams and I have an
[17:02] interest in this project. Um this
current project the owner has other
[17:07] rentals and as part of the echo program
which also helps those who with domestic
[17:13] violence. Um they also assist veterans
and seniors in those rentals because
[17:18] this property has been is very dated.
The solution would not be to renovate.
[17:24] It would be to have an effective
[clears throat]
[17:27] living. Um, they currently
have different things going on with them
[17:31] where tearing down would be more
effective as far as windows cost
[17:36] effective and different things like
that. So, as far as building back,
[17:41] reszoning to NC 6.3 would give it more
flexibility to build different things
[17:46] back there. Um in talking with housing
authority and also city some of the city
[17:51] council who is also um excited about
this project as well. They mentioned
[17:57] that um there is not a lot of affordable
housing for senior citizens and for
[18:03] those who want to have some type of um
when you have affordable housing they're
[18:10] looked at in a negative type of way. Um,
[snorts] so rebuilding these homes to
[18:16] have
I'm not gonna say upscale, but to have
[18:20] different amenities that they would
actually enjoy when these are going to
[18:24] be rebuil rebuild back.
>> What What else is in this area around
[18:29] these? Can you comment on that? Maybe
you can.
[18:31] » Uh, Terminex was on the corner. Um, you
have a CPA building. Um, it's like a
[18:39] it's right
>> I can't reach it cuz I'm short,
[18:43] » but at the very beginning right here you
have a lot of different offices there as
[18:48] well. Uh, and in front of it is the old
health department. You can't even see
[18:53] these homes from Evans Street. You have
to literally drive in there in order to
[18:58] see it.
>> There's commercial running already.
[19:00] » Yeah.
>> Mhm.
[19:03] » And you call that the Echo? What did you
call it? Echo is a program for different
[19:07] individuals who need housing. Okay.
>> Affordable housing.
[19:12] » And you also mentioned veterans too.
Work with veterans. But put place
[19:14] » it would be veterans placements. They
already working with the veterans. They
[19:18] work with uh senior citizens and they
work with lowinccome also considering um
[19:22] housing authority as well.
>> Okay.
[19:25] » So that was sort of address some of the
things he previous gentleman was
[19:29] speaking about
>> as the senior citizen population. That
[19:32] is something that is noted. Um and
looking at some of the different floor
[19:35] plans that is being visited, that's why
they have decided to do two primary
[19:40] bedrooms. If they were to rebuild, being
that if there was a senior citizen who
[19:45] wanted to rent these, they would be
accommodated on the first floor. Um a
[19:49] lot of homes are now as a realtor here
in Florence are going to
[19:52] multi-generational homes just to offset
the cost of housing. So, we lack a lot
[19:58] of affordable 4bedroom homes in Florence
versus going back with the current one
[20:06] which has three bedrooms and one
bathroom.
[20:11] » Okay.
Any other questions?
[20:14] » Now, he addressed the issue about
sidewalks.
[20:18] Are y'all planning on putting sidewalks
there for them so they can walk around
[20:23] that circle? That has not been discussed
as part of development when it go comes
[20:28] to zoning. So right now it's just in the
reszoning phase.
[20:32] » That will be addressed Elaine. What that
would be addressed for in future.
[20:36] » Yeah, I think it depends on the scale
>> layout scale. Gotcha. Right.
[20:39] » It may require sidewalks. It may not. Um
but it depends on the scale of the
[20:43] development.
>> But there's rules and regulations. Yeah,
[20:45] there's rules and regulations you have
to follow.
[20:47] » And that is a DOT road. It's not a city
road.
[20:56] So, you're planning on putting back
single family living homes
[21:02] because that's what's affected now,
right?
[21:04] » It has been discussed to add town homes.
[21:10] » And you going to do single family homes
also or this town?
[21:13] » It would be town homes.
>> Towns.
[21:15] » All town homes.
[21:19] Any [snorts]
[21:28] other comments,
questions for this young lady?
[21:34] » So, where will you put the each lot? We
have a townhouse. That's what you have.
[21:38] » So, after zoning, um what was also
discussed because of the setbacks, it
[21:44] would have to come back and have each
parcel would have to be reserveyed. So,
[21:48] some of the parcels may have to be
combined because it the setbacks and
[21:52] they're also the the lots are shaped
funny.
[21:56] » I see.
>> Yep.
[22:00] [snorts]
[22:05] » And it's on two sides of the street. So,
on the inside is a pie shaped. on the
[22:10] outside is actually you could do more
with it, but the pies shaped is the one
[22:15] that's going to limit that's going to
limit everything.
[22:24] » Yes, sir.
>> No single family.
[22:29] And the reason being is that you can put
more affordable housing as town homes to
[22:37] accommodate the growth of Florence.
[22:44] You put elevators in it because you got
townhouse. You might have to have
[22:48] stairs, right?
>> You would have to have stairs in there.
[22:51] » That's going to be good for
>> Well, that's why there are two primary
[22:56] bedrooms. One on the first floor or two
bedrooms on the first floor, two
[23:00] bedrooms on the top floor. We're
focusing on multi-generational as well.
[23:05] So, it's a mixture of everybody.
[23:12] All right.
[23:16] » Any other questions for her?
>> All right. Okay. Thank you.
[23:20] » All right. Thank you.
>> Um I'm going to close the public meeting
[23:22] now. Um
any discussion
[23:28] before any discussion in options? Guys,
>> can we reopen the public hearing or it's
[23:33] closed?
>> That's up to the chairman. That's that's
[23:35] chairman. And we've heard both sides. to
give both side equal equal amount of of
[23:39] of time. So if there's no discussion
amongst us, I'll call for a motion.
[23:45] » Move for adoption.
>> Have a second.
[23:47] » Second.
>> Any discussion?
[23:50] » All in favor say I.
>> I.
[23:52] » I. Motion passes.
Okay. PC-2026-26.
[24:02] » All right. And what one point of order
before we move on. The um the deferral
[24:07] of the Stratton Drive case, if you
wouldn't mind bringing that to vote just
[24:10] to defer it so it carries forward to the
next agenda. Sorry.
[24:14] » All right.
>> I'll make a motion to defer.
[24:17] » Second.
>> All right. [laughter]
[24:19] » There it goes.
>> It's deferred.
[24:20] » Yeah. And everybody votes. Okay. Very
good. It's
[24:24] » all in favor.
>> We're official. Good.
[24:29] » Just to make sure everything's official.
So, um, this is an amendment to a
[24:35] proposed amendment to the unified
development ordinance regarding, uh,
[24:39] noise and vibration regulations. And,
and this one's a a little different in
[24:43] that, um, this proposal would remove the
noise ordinance section from the unified
[24:51] development ordinance, which is the
zoning code that planning commission
[24:54] recommends on. But we would we have
existing code also in the code of
[24:59] ordinances which city council takes
action on. And um we we want to one put
[25:04] it all in one place um so that it's easy
for the public and for for our police
[25:10] department who's enforcing this um to to
comprehend and to use so it's all in one
[25:16] place. So we are um proposing that it be
removed from the unified development
[25:23] ordinance and the the key um pieces of
that be combined into the existing code
[25:31] in the code of ordinances. So, um,
planning commission if they choose to
[25:36] would be taking action to remove it from
the unified development ordinance, but
[25:41] that would be contingent, I think, I
think, on it being placed into the code
[25:45] of ordinances by city council. And, um,
this was brought to us by a member of
[25:50] city council. And it kind of started
with um, a recommendation to extend
[25:56] right now. Um there's there's different
decibel levels which I'll go over here
[25:59] in a second for um you know commercial
districts and um residential districts
[26:05] but um based on decibel levels that they
have to be reduced to a certain time or
[26:11] or a certain level um currently at 1000
p.m. um in our commercial districts and
[26:18] it was proposed that that be extended to
11 p.m. and that so that change is in
[26:24] here as a proposal. Um but also staff
took it a step further and wanted while
[26:29] we're while we're touching the noise
ordinance, we wanted to combine it all
[26:34] into one easy to use document. So I'll
um all of that was in your packet. Um
[26:40] but um essentially I we put in the
packet what the um current uh unified
[26:47] development ordinance has in it. Um and
that's showing as as struck through um
[26:52] in this because it would be removed. Um
the key parts of of this code are the
[26:57] decibel levels that is not in currently
in the code of ordinances. But we
[27:01] thought it was important to tie that,
you know, the sound to a measure um that
[27:06] that a meter that we could actually, you
know, that'll hold up in court or or if
[27:11] even if the police just go out there and
you know and you know they have that
[27:15] decibel meter and they can say, "Hey,
it's exceeding that. would you quieten
[27:19] down? Because, you know, everything
doesn't end up in court, but um they can
[27:22] just get um instant, you know, folks to
instantly quieten down. Um but the I did
[27:30] want to show um you know, the code of
ordinances are also in here. Um you
[27:35] know, this is what city council would
have control over. um these first 12
[27:42] items, the the 10-9 and 10-10 and the
first 12 items would remain unchanged.
[27:48] Um that's as it currently reads in the
code of ordinances. Um but then starting
[27:53] with 14 is where we start the
incorporation of the unified development
[27:57] ordinance. We took um language specific
to schools where they that out of the
[28:01] UDO and incorporated it um so that that
you know between seven and four people
[28:07] can't be making noise outside of
schools. Um, and then we added number
[28:11] 17, which has to do with recreation, um,
recreational motorized vehicles, you
[28:16] know, four-wheelers and go-karts and
things like that, um, that that they
[28:20] can't be making certain noise levels,
um, in in neighborhoods and such. And
[28:26] then um under the exceptions, we
incorporated some of the exceptions that
[28:31] were in the unified development
ordinance or all of the exceptions
[28:35] actually um such as construction
activities and that's outlined um up in
[28:39] 1010. It has certain um time
requirements on that. So you can you
[28:44] know perform um construction in the city
and and the noise is accepted to that
[28:49] basically during the daytime hours um as
is acceptable. Um also um the noise
[28:55] emanating from a um that's temporary in
nature like landscaping blowers,
[28:59] lawnmowers and things. We all expect
temporary noises from that within our
[29:04] residential and commercial areas as well
as agricultural equipment in the um in
[29:08] the appropriate agriculture zoning
district. Uh also emergency warning
[29:12] devices, that's you know your police
cars, ambulances, fire trucks. Um and
[29:17] also um the um events that was already
in there, but things like the pecan
[29:23] festival or special events that we held
downtown, but we did add some times to
[29:27] that um because even though the city
says it's okay, we should still follow
[29:32] some rules. So we put from uh 7 a.m. to
1000 p.m. That doesn't give the city
[29:37] free will to go out there and run the
pecan festival till 2 in the morning or
[29:40] anything. So we did put some times in
there. And um and then we made reference
[29:46] um to the appropriate section in the
unified development ordinance there.
[29:50] [snorts] And um then everything in the
uh the black font there is um already
[29:56] existing in the code. And then um these
are all the sections regarding the uh
[30:01] decibel levels and the times um that was
taken from the uh unified development
[30:07] ordinance and placed in there. Um the
changes from the unified development
[30:12] ordinance to this document um are are
that that first section there the one
[30:17] through four um the primaaci violation
and um it that establishes um for the um
[30:25] codes enforcement or or the police
department who who's on the scene uh you
[30:29] know a way to actually show that there's
a violation. Um it it says that they
[30:34] have to have a a meter a decibel meter.
Um it tells the scale by which it's
[30:39] measured. It's got the American National
Standards Institute or ANIE. Um that the
[30:44] you know the meter itself has to be
certified by and it tells where it need
[30:49] you know it needs to be taken at a
reasonable location on the property
[30:52] where the sound is occurring. So you
know if I call that my you know that I'm
[30:56] in my living room and I can hear my
neighbor's kid playing the drums then
[31:01] they basically need to come onto my
property at a reasonable location and
[31:04] and show that decel level. they don't
need to go onto the neighbor's property
[31:08] to do that. So, it establishes things
like that. Um and um the the one change
[31:15] is that um you know from uh 7 to 10 in
residential districts it has the
[31:20] different decibel levels and then um in
the commercial districts it's from 7:00
[31:25] a.m. to 11:00 p.m. And just to um give
you a um if I can might have lost my
[31:31] sheet of paper here, but um the decel
There it is.
[31:37] So to give you a gauge for decibel
levels and this is decibel this is a
[31:43] logarithmic scale. So um you know from
55 to 60 it is a huge increase u but you
[31:51] know a normal conversation
um kind of with some or some background
[31:57] music um if you're in a um in a doctor's
office or something like that would be
[32:02] around 60 dB. So that's just kind of
normal conversation, uh, normal kind of
[32:07] chatter. Um, if you're, um, and that's,
you know, more in the range of what's
[32:13] acceptable in residential areas. Um, but
then if you go up to commercial areas in
[32:19] that 75 range during the daytime, um, it
it's talking about a vacuum cleaner, you
[32:25] know, um, you remember when you were a
kid watching cartoons and your mom was
[32:28] trying to vacuum and you couldn't hear
the TV? That's the kind of noise that
[32:32] that is is is that level of of noise. Um
and then uh at night it would be
[32:38] expected to be 70 dB which is more like
office noise or inside of a car at about
[32:43] 60 m hour or so. So it's that kind of
noise. And then industrial areas have a
[32:48] a different decibel level but it's even
quieter at night because most industries
[32:53] tend to shut down at at night and we
don't have a ton of industrial areas
[32:57] within the city. Um but we did we did
incorporate that chart um with the with
[33:02] the change times into the proposal um
within the um code of ordinances and we
[33:09] also incorporated
um some of the um other language about
[33:14] proposed barriers or structures that
could be um incorporated and also
[33:19] section um 10-xx. There I put an XX
because we haven't assigned that a
[33:24] number in the code of ordinances. Yes,
but yet but um the code of ordinances
[33:28] didn't have anything referring to
vibrations, but the unified development
[33:32] ordinance did. So we took that section
and put it in there as well. So, um that
[33:38] outlines some of the proposed um changes
and planning commission I I think if
[33:43] they choose to um uh move forward with
this would propose to remove it from the
[33:48] UDO um and then give council uh the
ability to add it to the code of
[33:54] ordinances here. So, and that concludes
staff's report and I'm happy to answer
[33:58] any questions.
>> I have a question on [clears throat] the
[34:01] decibb. I have a problem with decibb.
So, I'll tell you right now, [laughter]
[34:05] if me and Mr. Moses are outside having a
barbecue at his house and we have our
[34:09] wives there or kids, grandkids,
whatever, you will exceed every decibel
[34:14] you have there.
>> Without question.
[34:17] » All right. So, I have a very sensitive
uh when it comes to decibel readings uh
[34:22] in Georgetown County. Um and I've
actually proved my point. All right. Um
[34:27] so, uh I you this is too restrictive in
my mind. I'm gonna tell you right now,
[34:32] it's too restrictive. And I'll tell you,
I know at least one um uh city council
[34:36] members, I don't know what's going on
with them, but um I don't I don't think
[34:40] that uh when you start limiting, you
know, um common sense, and a police
[34:46] officer comes out, does this stuff, and
you start putting decibels behind it, uh
[34:50] decibb, you'd be surprised um in a in a
normal conversation how you will exceed
[34:55] some of those that you guys come up
with. So, um that was what I had say.
[34:59] Any other any other comments or
questions for Jerry? I'm with the same
[35:02] thing also because see, you know, if uh
if the police can come in my yard, tell
[35:10] what's going on in the next yard, then
we're going to have a lot of fines with
[35:15] coming to uh to the to the person or
stuff and then it's going I see where
[35:21] I see where you talking about that take
like downtown you have you after five
[35:28] and it's after 7 o'lock. Am I right? I
think it's over to 8.
[35:33] » Yeah.
>> And you you exceed that. That's because
[35:35] you got a ban plan.
>> Yeah. Well, for city events, it would be
[35:39] till 10 p.m. So
>> 10 p.m.
[35:41] » which would align with Yeah. It would
actually be ahead of what's proposed.
[35:45] » Where's that 12:00 at? Um, we're
proposing 11 p.m. for um the uh downtown
[35:53] area in general for for businesses and
but for city events it would be
[35:59] » this unified district is so strict with
the city of Florence. We we got this
[36:05] unified district. They got they're
strict with a lot of thing here in
[36:09] Florence. We let them have their way to
run Florence and this is part of it
[36:15] right here. But see that unified
district, we got to do something about
[36:19] unifi. I think that unified district is
getting way out of hand.
[36:24] » Well, are there any decimals current are
any decibb currently in in ordinances?
[36:29] » It it's currently in the unified
development ordinance. We currently have
[36:33] » But what levels? What
>> these levels? I didn't change I did not
[36:36] change the levels. That's what's
currently on the books. I didn't I
[36:40] didn't touch that at all. I wouldn't I
wouldn't feel comfortable voting on any
[36:43] of this until I actually see the decel
monitor and I know what 70 dB is, what
[36:50] 80 is. I I get your point of saying us
having a conversation is 60.
[36:56] If that's 60 I how is 80? I I don't
know. And I I know
[37:02] » demonstration.
>> Yeah. I feel like I I mean just to cuz I
[37:06] feel like Yeah. I mean, I I get college
football, they're like 120 dB. So, if 80
[37:13] if us having a conversation is 60 and
that's 120, I I don't feel comfortable
[37:19] knowing that I would understand exactly
what 70 and 80 is. I think that you do
[37:24] need to have some type of regulations
and parameters on what is too loud and
[37:30] what's not loud enough. But me
personally, I couldn't sign off on
[37:34] anything until I actually saw the
decibel meter
[37:38] » and saw how it works.
>> Well, right. Right. Now, so who has
[37:41] control?
So, who you mentioned they're two
[37:46] separate. So, who enforces each one?
That's why it's co code the police
[37:52] police have authority to enforce any of
it and codes enfor codes codes
[37:56] enforcement division assist us with that
typically and and this is very complaint
[38:00] driven. This is not something we go out
and find. I mean that that's just
[38:06] » full full honesty on that. We we don't
the police department does not go out
[38:10] searching for loud noises to to throw
fines and and and you know throw tickets
[38:16] at people. But when it's complaint
driven, we do we do have to respond.
[38:20] » I got you. But I But very specifically,
the question I have combining these,
[38:26] » what what more restrictiveness are you
adding or if if any All you're doing is
[38:31] extending the time. Right.
>> That's right. When I read through,
[38:34] » there's really no change. It's just
making [clears throat] it easier for the
[38:38] public and for our our officers and and
us in in planning and zoning to to have
[38:45] all in one place. it it always used to
reside in the the um code of ordinances.
[38:51] When we adopted the new the new unified
development ordinance, it had the noise
[38:55] um section in it. Um we adopted that as
part of it, but as we've applied it, it
[39:00] gets a little confusing. There's a
little bit of contradiction in it.
[39:04] » That's right. So, the four-wheers and
the go-karts and all that, what what
[39:07] explain that to me a little bit more.
What are you What are you referring to?
[39:10] It's um so no person shall operate or
cause to operate any recreational
[39:16] motorized vehicle on a public rideway or
a private property in a manner that it
[39:21] that emitted sound levels exceeding 40
dB at or across the boundary of a
[39:26] property receiving the noise. And um so
it's essentially saying you can't run
[39:33] » and that's in it currently or is that
>> that's in the unified development
[39:36] ordinance currently?
>> Studio currently, right?
[39:39] » Yeah. And we're we are open to any
recommendations coming from planning
[39:43] commission to to move forward or if we
need to have a demonstration.
[39:46] » I have a question. Where are the most
complaints coming from
[39:52] regarding this in this district
>> in in our central business district in
[39:56] our downtown area?
>> Sure. You have a few people outline that
[40:01] call with you know
>> Yeah.
[40:03] a loud burp or something, you know, just
occasionally we get um construction
[40:07] complaints from from projects going on
um you know or or pumps that might run
[40:13] at night in certain areas um you know
throughout the city at various places.
[40:18] But um but for mostly it's within our
downtown district or or potentially
[40:25] within some of our commercial districts
where you know a a bar or a nightclub
[40:29] backs up to a neighborhood
>> and you're adding vibration on this one,
[40:32] right?
>> Um vibration is currently in the unified
[40:34] development ordinance. It would just get
moved over.
[40:37] » Yeah.
>> So basically it's giving city council
[40:39] control.
>> Well, they have control over the uni. I
[40:43] mean ultimately they vote on the unified
development ordinance too but it would
[40:47] be without planning commission's
recommendation.
[40:49] » Yeah.
>> So Ventura Court is also in the city and
[40:53] over there when the band is practicing
at Wilson High School that's a lot of
[40:59] decibb
>> but it's recreational of course it's
[41:03] extracurricular activities. Let's say a
resident on Ventur Court
[41:09] to complain on the ban. What would that
look like?
[41:12] » They take that decimal meter out.
>> Technically [laughter] the band
[41:16] technically the band is in Wilson is in
the county. It's not in the city, right?
[41:19] » But you can but you can but you can
Yeah, you can hear it in the
[41:22] neighborhood through the trees.
>> I hear that at my house.
[41:25] » I I love I loved hearing it. Yeah.
>> But you may have someone who I think
[41:31] we'd be forced to deal with it based on
the current the codes we have on the
[41:34] book
>> on the current stuff that I think all
[41:36] this is doing is just taking it out of
our hands. We have no say in it. with
[41:39] the city council ultimately has a you
know they are elected leaders. All
[41:42] right. So um but it it it combines
everything and we we don't that's not in
[41:49] our purview anymore. Is that correct?
That's how that's what we're doing here.
[41:51] Right.
>> Mhm.
[41:53] » Now they would have to take away or
amend or add whatever they wanted. Um
[41:59] but you couldn't crank up a four-wheeler
anywhere else currently in the city. I
[42:03] mean, if somebody pressed it, you know,
I mean, you there's and I I I understand
[42:06] if I'm trying to sleep and I work third
shift,
[42:09] » you know, bike, I get it. I get it. You
know, if I'm downtown and, you know,
[42:14] wherever and the band's kicking up, I,
you know,
[42:17] » I get it. So, I I think there's uh I
think if you're an elected official,
[42:22] there's consequences uh to what you do
and what you don't, and that's what
[42:27] elections are for. Um, but I I I think
uh I think that uh personally I think I
[42:33] don't like any restrictions at all, but
they're already there. So I think elect
[42:37] officials should be able to
>> make the ultimate decision on that
[42:41] because their constituents are voting
for them.
[42:43] » Um we're just a recommended body to
begin with, you know. So
[42:47] » I get your point too, my man. I I
completely, you know, it's listen from
[42:51] 60 to 80 it it's graduated. What what he
means is when you talking like this and
[42:55] it keeps going up it it's like a 3 to
one 401 5 to1 ones it goes up higher for
[43:00] hearing you know
>> but it it ain't much I'm telling you
[43:02] it's not it's not much so anyway any any
other discussion
[43:07] » or any other comments what what do y'all
with we have to agree on this to send it
[43:14] back to city council or we'll defer to
tell the city council come back with
[43:18] some more information about desk
>> well I mean I think
[43:22] » that I mean, I think you need to take
action on it, either for or against it.
[43:26] Um, or you could defer it or you could
defer it and ask staff, you know, to do
[43:32] more research in a certain area if we
need that.
[43:36] » And I think there's there's multiple
options.
[43:40] » I mean, I read through all of it and
when I read through some of I'm going
[43:43] this this stuff's already in effect. I'm
going Jesus.
[43:46] » Yeah.
>> It's already this is already in the
[43:47] books of law. You know, I start reading
this stuff. I had no idea.
[43:50] » See, that's where they're changing it.
Well, no, they're not changing. Well,
[43:53] they're extending some of the hours, but
this this stuff is going to be in effect
[43:56] one way or the other. It's already in
effect. They're just trying to combine
[43:58] it under one.
>> We are,
[44:01] » you know, instead of us being involved
recommending luckily, we don't have to
[44:05] enforce this very much. I mean, it
doesn't come to light, but if it did, we
[44:09] we we would have to because it's on the
record.
[44:11] » That was my next point is how we don't
have to enforce it. It's just a rule.
[44:15] » That's right. We It's It's very
complaint driven.
[44:18] » And I think that you're cleaning it up a
good bit, right? for when you combine
[44:22] the other things that's being cleaned
up.
[44:23] » We're trying to clean it up. That's
right. Yeah.
[44:26] » Mhm. So, [clears throat] all the rules
are basically there. You only extend it
[44:28] one hour. So, so these rules are already
in place. Nothing we can do about that,
[44:32] right?
>> That's right.
[44:33] » Defining them a little bit more.
>> As a planning commission, you can you
[44:37] can recommend
>> you take the bull by the horns and
[44:39] » Yeah, we could go at it. What you do?
Because
[44:44] » let them come make me some more decimals
going be higher stuff. It's we just
[44:48] don't go ahead and put it in there
because real they open the door for us
[44:52] » and let's keep that door open while we
can
[44:54] » until they come up with something else.
You know, they open the door.
[44:58] » Do we have a motion to have a motion to
defer?
[45:01] » Motion to defer. We have a second.
>> Second.
[45:04] » Any discussion? All in favor?
>> I.
[45:08] » Any opposed?
>> It's deferred. Okay. I think we just get
[45:12] a little more little more
>> little more, you know, background and
[45:16] being comfortable with it and and
>> Okay. And that'll give planning
[45:19] commission some extra time to review
what's what's in place and um
[45:23] » so let me ask you this. If we come back
uh like Mr. Moses, I think what I get
[45:28] what he's saying,
>> how could some of this be changed by us
[45:32] if we make a recommendation that things
are changed? Is that is that way it
[45:35] works? I mean,
>> I think um I think because it's tied
[45:39] currently to the UDO, I think that does
give you guys some say so in it. Um and
[45:45] what I would do is I would um I would
take any recommendations that are made
[45:50] in your motion um for this and put it in
the staff report and present it to city
[45:55] council at that time.
>> And I think that would be good. I mean,
[45:59] I think if I mean, I think it's a good
opportunity. We, as Mr. Moses said,
[46:03] "We've opened the door and we kind of
thought this might happen that that
[46:07] planning commission might have some say
so in it and um for for you guys to have
[46:11] some input in it and have some
recommendations."
[46:14] » Mr. Mo, so the motion you made, we all
approved. Can we just add to that motion
[46:18] of what we're talking about?
>> That's up to you to make it take care of
[46:21] you.
>> I'd like to add I'd like to to add to
[46:23] the motion Mr. Moses and everybody voted
for. What's some of the things if Jerry
[46:28] can just list them out that we that we
want to look at? Now I for one 60 80 dB
[46:33] I mean that's that's me and him you know
having a conversation about football and
[46:38] that that's you know that can get a
little I mean you're you're in violation
[46:43] you know what I mean and and so what
would you anybody want to suggest but
[46:49] what we need to do we need to verify
what what's the decimate we got to come
[46:53] up on that we got to be educated on that
that's number one and then we as a group
[46:58] I think we as a group need to get
together.
[47:00] » Sure. Well, h how about a staff comes
back to us with examples of Jay, I don't
[47:05] know how to do it. Just just sound and
decibb. Um
[47:08] » yeah, we we can see we can do two
things. We can one, we can we can look
[47:12] and see what other municipalities have
in place as far as decibel levels. So,
[47:16] we can put that in a chart so you guys
can see what other places have that that
[47:19] that do it by decibb. And we could
possibly also do a demonstration where
[47:23] we might could get bring in a decibel
meter and have some sounds and show show
[47:27] y'all what that looks like. We'd like to
add that. I would like to add that.
[47:31] » Got it.
>> Yeah. That way everybody hears it
[47:32] firsthand.
>> Yeah.
[47:34] » Anybody else having comments or we good
on that? You look you want to say
[47:37] something?
>> Sure. I understand.
[47:40] » So So let me get this straight. Um
ultimately the um unified development
[47:47] ordinance. Uh the ultimate goal is to
move it into the code of ordinances
[47:52] which would take it away from this.
>> It would take it out of the zoning code
[47:56] and put it in the in the code of
ordinance. ordinances. That's right.
[47:59] » Which would be well everything's
governed by the city council. Yeah.
[48:03] » But it just go straight to city council.
>> That's right. That's right. And and and
[48:08] to be honest, it is most municipalities
and counties it noise ordinances are
[48:13] housed in the code of ordinances. It's
just, you know, these bits and pieces of
[48:17] it got put in the the new code when we
adopted it. Yeah. So in in most places
[48:21] that is where it resides. Um so we we
thought it best to just combine it in
[48:26] that category there. Okay. So, if we
could if we could kind of
[48:31] » chisel at it while we got a chance, this
is probably a good opportunity to do it.
[48:34] » I also would like to add um other
municipalities their
[48:40] uh decibel ordinances. Well, not decel
ordinance, the same thing.
[48:44] » The amounts the amounts of,
>> you know.
[48:48] » Yeah. Sure thing. Yeah.
>> Their version of this [laughter]
[48:51] » the upper limits of the decimals and
stuff like that.
[48:53] » Yeah. Sure thing. We've um we we've
looked at a good many and we we can
[48:57] organize that into a little chart.
>> Thank you.
[49:00] » Anything else, guys? Nothing.
>> That's [laughter] right.
[49:05] » I know I can't hear as well as I used
to. Probably because of some of these
[49:08] loud noises. [laughter]
>> It's the low. It's the low vibrations
[49:12] here. All right. Thank you guys.
Okay. Um so, uh let's do PC-2026-27.
[49:23] Do we have to vote on that to defer?
>> Oh, we added it.
[49:26] » We already voted further. We added
>> Yeah. And I just got some direct from
[49:28] planning commission.
>> Yeah.
[49:32] » All right. All right. How is everybody?
>> Good.
[49:36] » Live it. Now, let's go.
>> Over the next [laughter] 45 minutes, I'd
[49:38] like to explain the Palm Subdivision.
Now, this is uh the Palm Subdivision
[49:44] sketch plan. If this looks familiar,
>> this was approved by planning commission
[49:51] back in 2023. Uh back then we were
looking at 179 total lots, higher
[49:58] density. The developer is coming back
with uh a different product uh than what
[50:04] we've typically seen on the on the
market right now. So it will be uh 39
[50:09] lots as opposed to the 179. Uh, so
here's a location map. Everything's
[50:15] zoned RG2. It is historically the
Oakdale Golf Course. So this is an
[50:21] infill development around existing
single family detached homes and that is
[50:26] what is proposed.
[50:29] So here's the sketch plan. I printed out
the latest and greatest.
[50:35] So they are looking for a conventional
single family type development. Uh in
[50:41] the staff report we said 42 were shown.
Uh it got reconfigured a little bit just
[50:45] to make sure we were meeting all the
minimum lot widths and uh lot areas for
[50:51] the RG2 subdivision and those are uh 80
foot lot widths and 10,000 square ft um
[50:58] which is what is shown in the sketch
plan now. So the setbacks that will be
[51:03] observed
will be 25 ft in the front, 8t on the
[51:08] side, uh 12 feet for street side and 25
ft in the rear. Uh water is available to
[51:14] the property. Sewer is not uh the
individuals when they build the homes
[51:20] will request from uh sedes which used to
be dehack to have uh septic tanks
[51:28] installed.
Uh so no new infrastructure will be
[51:31] installed by the developer. City water
and storm water infrastructure is
[51:35] already in place. Uh compliance will
still do inspections
[51:40] uh along the way. Uh the proposed
subdivision does not require a traffic
[51:45] study. It is under the 50 lot threshold.
Um and um
[51:53] [snorts]
we just asked the engineer to kind of
[51:56] clean up some of the parcel shown to
show what was proposed versus what was
[52:01] existing. And we feel he's done a good
job of that. Uh staff erroneously
[52:06] thought that with the first sketch plan
they were using Lake Oakdale to get
[52:11] density bonuses from preserving the open
space. Lake Oakdale is still going to be
[52:16] preserved. is still in the hands of the
homeowners association. The developer
[52:21] just feels that
it's the right time in the market for
[52:25] maybe some larger parcels and to give a
little more choice uh to the citizens of
[52:31] Florence for uh different housing
products. So the engineer did turn in a
[52:38] revised set of plans which is what's in
front of you now and it does meet all
[52:44] the guidelines of the unified
development ordinance. So that concludes
[52:47] staff's report. Okay.
[clears throat]
[52:53] » All right. This is a
not a public hearing.
[52:57] Any questions for staff?
>> So you said it went from 42 to 39. Yep.
[53:05] » Right. [snorts]
Right. We just um I think it was just a
[53:08] choice of the engineer and the
developer. It was not anything mandated
[53:12] by the city. They were meeting the
minimum standards that are required in
[53:17] RG2.
[53:25] » So bigger lots, single family homes. Mr.
Moses,
[53:29] » these are generousized lots. These are
very generous size lots.
[53:36] » All right. Any other questions?
>> Essentially, it would get rid of the
[53:40] golf course itself. Right.
>> Right. The infill development. Yes, sir.
[53:45] » Golf courses no more.
>> Yes. Not being
[53:48] » any other questions, comments?
[53:53] [laughter]
>> All right. I'll call for a motion.
[53:55] » I'll make a motion approved.
>> Second.
[53:58] » I second.
>> Any discussion?
[54:01] All in favor say I. I.
>> I.
[54:03] » Any oppose? Eyes have it.
>> Second.
[54:07] » All right, that's done. That's done.
Motion to journ is good to go.