Correspondence - Town of Mount Pleasant

Transcription

PATRICIA P. SULLIVAN
___________________________________________________________________________
1002 Plantation Court, Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
843-216-9875
March 18, 2015
Mt. Pleasant Planning Commission
Mt. Pleasant Council
Re: The Atlantic – 3/18/15 agenda item 5i.
“JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN, DOESN’T MEAN THAT YOU SHOULD”
These words were spoken by Planning Commissioner Bob Brimmer at a recent Planning
Commission meeting. They perfectly apply to the proposed new development called The
Atlantic on the March 18, 2015 Planning Commission agenda. This property sits on the edge of
saltwater marsh which expands to the Intercoastal Waterway, the Sullivan’s Island Bridge and
eventually to Sullivan’s Island. It is currently zoned UCOD, Urban Corridor Overlay District
which allows the developer to build 30.6 units per upland acre resulting in 246 apartment units
and 452 parking spaces.
This dense development DOES NOT BELONG in this part of our Town which is described in
the Coleman Boulevard-Ben Sawyer Master Plan as “becoming less intensive as it nears the
causeway providing a sense of decompression”.
Traffic, particularly AM and PM beach traffic during the summer months, is already extremely
challenging. Adding traffic from the 246 apartments (122 units are 2-3 bedrooms) and
commercial traffic from the 14K square feet of commercial space will make traffic even worse.
Surrounding neighborhoods do not want to see this happen. The Town of Sullivan’s Island
Mayor and Council have written a letter to Mt. Pleasant Mayor and Council requesting that this
development be denied, primarily because of the potential traffic impact – particularly the
passage of emergency vehicles.
From an environmental standpoint, the SC Environmental Law Project has requested that this
project be denied because of the effect it would have on fresh and saltwater marsh. See
attached letter.
Please deny moving forward with this development for the sake of safety, quality of life and
protecting our natural habitats.
Sincerely,
Pat Sullivan
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Christine Barrett
Wednesday, March 18, 2015 12:44 PM
roy@rdnmanagement.com
Kelly Cousino
FW: Tonights Planning Meeting
Chairman Neal: Mr. Wolff confirmed that this e‐mail was intended for you. Thanks, Christine From: Barry Wolff [mailto:charbarr@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 11:08 AM To: Christine Barrett Subject: Tonights Planning Meeting Chairman O’Neal, First and foremost allow me to state that I am opposed to the current plans for The Atlantic and Central Mt. Pleasant. I would appreciate if you could address the logic behind not allowing extra time for a presentation by a representative from SSCC as opposed to having a large line of likeminded people expressing the same thing over and over again. The reason the Town is having overflow crowds show up is not to hold hands and yell “build, build, build” I assure you. The group believes in reasonable controlled growth that fits the landscape and character of the Town we love. Give the time for a presentation and have those who are in the crowd either stand or raise their hand in solidarity with the message delivered. Others may still want to speak, but I assure you this would satisfy many. Sincerely, Barry Wolff 1468 Pocahontas St. Indian Village 1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Shea Gibson <atom14real@gmail.com>
Wednesday, March 18, 2015 11:03 AM
Kelly Cousino
Fwd: SAC-2007-00194-2M
Hello Kelly,
I was directed to send the below material to you directly for your review. This was also sent to the Army Corps of
Engineers and DHEC back on February 5th, 2015 for their records of public input. Please consider this information
on the agenda for tonight's meeting regarding The Atlantic development.
Thank you,
Shea Gibson
Meteorologist/Coastal Forecaster for the SE Region
---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Shea Gibson <atom14real@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 11:38 AM
Subject: SAC-2007-00194-2M
To: debra.king@usace.army.mil, williabn@dhec.sc.gov
I hereby oppose the project set forth...
Pursuant to Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344), and the South Carolina Coastal Zone
Management Act (48-39-1 0 et.seq.) an application has been submitted to the Department of the Army and the S.C.
Department of Health and Environmental Control by Pritchard Real Estate Investors and The Morrison Family
Trust c/o Newkirk Environmental, Inc. PO Box 746 Mount Pleasant, South Carolina 29465-0746 for a permit to
place fill material in freshwater wetlands located at Ben Sawyer Boulevard, Mount Pleasant, Charleston County,
South Carolina (Latitude: 32.7875°N, Longitude: 79.917222°W).
This area is a nesting and brooding habitat for numerous coastal birds..and further serves as a ripe
coastal estuary. My opposition to the development proposed here includes the following issues:
(1) habitat loss and degradation
(2) nutrient load depletion (such as nitrogen and phosphorus)
(3) stormwater
(4) pathogens
(5) toxics
(6) Resilience to sea level rise and/or coastal storm events
Specifically...
In general, these problems cause declines in water quality, living resources, and overall estuarine
ecosystem health.More specifically, they all have significant economic, ecosystem, and socio-economic
impacts; for example, local governments close shellfish beds when water-borne pathogens in shellfish
tissue threaten human health; over-enrichment of nutrients in the water column causes dissolved
1
oxygen levels to decline; the waters become "dead zones" where fish cannot survive. The introduction of
aquatic nuisance species can adversely impact native species populations and their habitats.
The health of marine and estuarine systems, and the human economies that depend on them, rely on high-quality habitats that
provide essential food, cover, migratory corridors, and breeding/nursery areas for coastal and marine wildlife.For us locally, healthy
coastal habitats attract the tourism revenues and seafood industries that are vital to many local economies.These habitats also
function to make coastal areas more resilient to storms and sea level rise.
Stormwater runoff is generated when precipitation from rain and/or wintry precip events moves across
the landscape without percolating into the ground. As the runoff flows over the land or impervious
surfaces (paved streets, parking lots, and building rooftops), it accumulates debris, chemicals, sediment
or other pollutants that could adversely affect water quality if the runoff is discharged untreated.
Estuaries will face unique impacts from climate change.Many coastal wetlands and other estuarine habitats are threatened by
inundation and erosion as the rate of sea-level rise accelerates. Climate change will also increase stresses to habitat and fish and
wildlife populations as temperatures and sea levels rise.Water quality problems are likely to worsen in estuarine waters if more
extreme precipitation events create increased polluted runoff.
Sincerely,
Shea Gibson
Meteorologist/Coastal Forecaster for the SE Region
2
1382 Woodlock Road
Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
March 17, 2015
Dear Commission Members:
My wife and I have lived in Mt. Pleasant for over 25 years. We discovered Laurel Lakes when the
neighborhood was just getting off the ground with only a few homes were being built prior to ours.
Over the next few years the neighborhood developed into a wonderful place to reside. Then we learned
the owner of the property had passed on and a developer had bought the property.
Next we were hearing about a road to be built on the earthen dike that separates Creature Beach and
Laurel Lakes. In order to build this road, part of Laurel Lakes would be filled in. I was responsible for
showing how to save money by putting the road in the place where it is now. This also would allow the
developer to have commercial property on both sides of this new road.
The next thing we hear was that a developer was proposing to put a Home Depot in our back yard.
Thanks to many concerned citizens that idea went away.
Next we were invited to a charrette where the developers presented plans and renderings showing homes
as in Ion with ponds and Greek style buildings. This lavish plan was of course approved by all who
looked at it. Next the town annexed the developers’ property to the Town of Mt. Pleasant, also pushed
by the developer due to the footprint size of property to house that the county would allow.
The developer came to our home for several visits, each time showing us more elegant plans. Finally,
the developer came out and finally told us what he wanted. He wanted to tie into the sewer easement on
our property with the promise that this disruptive work would be mitigated with fruit trees and other
plants, and that the lawn would be restored to its original state. We received about a third of what was
required to put our lawn back the way it was, and the fruit trees and other plants turned out to be
transplanted wax myrtles that died, and the gates that were promised in order to keep people from
driving into our back yard, of course, never materialized
I ask that you please not be swayed by this developer. To the developer I say shame on you for twisting
things around for your greed. Shame on you for not following our Town’s Comprehensive Plan that is in
place to protect our citizens against overbuilding, building not consistent with existing residential
neighborhoods, and trying to force residents to accept more and more commercial build-out to envelope
our neighborhoods. If your plan fails then follow-up with a few tweaks to make it fit within the Town’s
planning. Or even better yet, build the residential development that we were shown and was approved.
Make the developer be reasonable and responsible.
Thank you for helping to keep Mt. Pleasant a Town … not letting it become a City.
Yours truly,
Jack D. Lambert
Concerned Citizen – Laurel Lakes
If you ask local Mount Pleasant residents where downtown is, you would most likely get a number of different
answers – the Old Village, Mount Pleasant Towne Centre, Coleman Boulevard, even downtown Charleston.
Now there is another contender for “the heart of the village” and that is Central Mount Pleasant.
In a special meeting this past Thursday, the Town Council approved plans for the 110-acre development
between Rifle Range Road and Hungryneck Boulevard.
The property is owned by McAlister Development Company - a Mount Pleasant based company led by
Anthony McAlister. Mills Buxton is the project manager for McAlister Development. Anthony and Mills are
Mount Pleasant residents.
Keane and Co. leads the design team. Keane and Co. is an urban design and planning company located in
“downtown” Charleston and led by Tim Keane. Jacob Lindsey is the Director of Design. Jacki Martin will be
the Charrette Manager. I had the pleasure of meeting Tim Keane at a recent Town Council meeting, and he
described the development as an “archetypical Main Street.” Hats off to entire team for an extremely thorough
planning process. They obviously did their homework and learned from other recent projects that were shot
down.
The development calls for 719 residential units, 405 of which will be concentrated in a 35-acre mixed-use tract
with 350,000 square feet of office, retail space and a signature hotel. The plan also includes the location of the
much-needed new Mamie P. Whitesides Elementary School, which will become the first LEED (The
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) school in Mount Pleasant.
As a Mount Pleasant resident I look forward to having a place with a real Main Street and public places to
gather, workplaces for knowledge based companies, shops, restaurants and a state of the art school that is
healthy for students, comfortable for teachers, and cost-effective.
Please check back for future updates
LIKE
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christine Barrett
Planning
FW: The Atlantic Project
Please forward to the Planning Commission. Thanks, Christine ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Julia Sachs [mailto:juliasachs@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 7:26 AM To: Christine Barrett Subject: The Atlantic Project Please send this message to members of the Planning Commission and Town Council. I have recently been made aware of some of the details of the proposed Atlantic Project on Ben Sawyer and what I have heard seem to place it in direct opposition to the Town of Mt. Pleasant's Comprehensive Plan as well as common sense. Placing a high density development on the edge of the marsh, with only one outlet onto a two lane road that is already a problem makes no sense. High density building can be a good resolution to growth but only when built in conjunction with easy access to alternative transportation and near to where the residents will work. This location is certainly not in that category, and will most likely convert to rental units/investment properties. I am strongly opposed to this, and ask that my elected officials comply with the established plan for the Coleman/Ben Sawyer Corridor. Sincerely, Julia Sachs 1448 Indian St. Mt. Pleasant 1
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christine Barrett
Planning
FW: "The Atlantic"
Please forward to the Planning Commission. Thanks, Christine From: Colin James [mailto:disc.commander21@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 8:03 PM To: Christine Barrett Subject: "The Atlantic" Please forward this email to all members of the planning commission and town council.
I am a Wando Freshman and a resident of Old Mount Pleasant.
I want to express my concern about the impact on the environment and marsh Eco-system that the building and
development of the proposed “The Atlantic” would bring about. Our marshes are an important part of the economy
in the low-country and they should be protected. The run off from such a development could devastate the marsh
food chain.
Please take into consideration our marshes and the economy based on our marshes when you debate the
development of land near our marshes.
Sincerely,
Colin James
1
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christine Barrett
Planning
FW: The Atlantic Development
Please forward to the Planning Commission. Thanks, Christine From: Cynthia McNaughton [mailto:c_mcnaughton@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 6:14 PM To: Christine Barrett Subject: The Atlantic Development TO: Mayor Page
Council Members
Mount Pleasant Planning Commission
FROM: Cynthia McNaughton / Owner
1481 Center Street Ext., #201
Bay Club Sea Lofts
Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
RE: Proposed Atlantic Development Project
There are significant problems with the proposed mixed-use 246 unit project to be built between Center Street
Extension and the marsh. I believe this project should not be allowed to go forward for the following reasons:
The Coleman and Ben Sawyer Boulevards Revitalization Master Plan describes the section of the corridor in
which the subject parcel is located as the “Gateway to the Beach.” It states:
“Ben Sawyer Boulevard should feel more open and expansive than the more urban sections of Coleman
Boulevard. There should be a transition from the more urban sections near the [planned] Roundabout with the
least intensive areas near the marsh edge. This sense of transition has been described as a “decompression
zone” but in fact it works in both directions: providing a transition from more urban to less urban for those
approaching the beach but also providing transition back into the urban fabric, with the need for traffic
calming and walkability as one enters the Town of Mount Pleasant. This transition can be accommodated by
changes in setbacks, street sections, median treatments, and land uses. The character should become more
expansive and open, with land uses that are generally less commercial and less dense and more residential
(although a mix of uses is still desirable and encouraged) as one draws nearer to the causeway”.
The proposed development is nothing more than a replica of The Boulevard recently built on the more urban
stretch of Coleman Blvd. A development this size clearly does not meet the criteria stated in the Coleman and Ben
Sawyer Boulevards Revitalization Master Plan for a greener transition to and from the beaches. The Boulevard
development was built to the lot lines to maximize the return on the investment with no green space.
The Town of Mount Pleasant Comprehensive Plan 2009-2019 states:
1
Recognize the character of Mount Pleasant’s existing residential neighborhoods and communities. Recognizing
the character of existing historic, traditional, rural, and planned communities, involves maintaining their
desirable characteristics such as prevailing densities, building types, and quiet streets. The Town should ensure
that new development in residential districts is compatible in scale and character and conserves important
neighborhood characteristics.
Again, a development similar to The Boulevard would in no way be compatible with existing, seasoned
neighborhoods. Additionally, building The Atlantic would destroy “prevailing densities” in an entire section of
Mount Pleasant that is predominantly older neighborhoods. Clearly, no one on the Planning Commission has tried
to drive on Ben Sawyer Blvd. from May to September. I routinely have to drive down the left turn lane to be able
to turn left into Bay Club Sea Lofts during the warm months, even on a week day. On weekends the traffic is
bumper-to-bumper from Sullivans Island to Houston Northcutt Blvd.down Ben Sawyer Blvd.
The Town of Mount Pleasant Comprehensive Plan 2009-2019 also states:
Goals Relevant to the Natural Resources Element
1.Protect environmentally sensitive lands and increase access to open space and rural landscapes.
1.1. Limit the development of environmentally sensitive lands, such as floodplains and
wetlands. Encourage developers to preserve vacant floodplain lands as open
space and leave them in their natural state wherever possible
The Atlantic development would require that “the freshwater wetlands are planned to be filled and remediated”
to accommodate the size of this proposed development. How is “filling and remediating wetlands” limiting the
development of environmentally sensitive lands? Why hasn’t the Town of Mount Pleasant encouraged the
developer responsible for The Atlantic to preserve this piece of property? This type of development is not
appropriate for the proposed site.
The proposed Atlantic Development does not meet specific criteria in the Comprehensive Plan. Town of Mount
Pleasant Planning Commission should NOT APPROVE the proposed Atlantic development project.
2
PATRICIA P. SULLIVAN
_______________________________________________________________________________
1002 Plantation Court, Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
843-216-9875
March 17, 2015
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Re: 3-18-15 agenda item 4a – Central Mt. Pleasant
On June 20, 2012 the Mt. Pleasant Planning Commission in a 9:2 vote denied the developer’s
request to rezone 39 acres from low density neighborhood to commercial. Instead, they approved
rezoning 9 acres from low density neighborhood to commercial. One of the primary reasons is that at
the time there was a very high public desire to keep big box stores out of our Town. Allowing 39
acres of commercial land would’ve been enough land to house a big box store. Also at that time, a
total of 719 units was agreed to for the entire 109 acre development. Mt.Pleasant Council upheld the
Planning Commission’s vote.
Now three years later, the same developer is back requesting a change of 30.25 acres from low
density neighborhood to commercial for a retirement community. Our Town has already said no to
this much commercial zoning and should again. Within this proposed retirement community are 275
“independent living” units which basically are apartments which are “dwelling units”. The developer
does not want to count these 275 units as part of their 719 agreed to total dwelling units. This is
absolutely WRONG and I implore the Planning Commission to insist that the 275 units be counted as
part of the 719 total.
Lastly, this developer has returned to our Town multiple times to change their PUD. Allowing this I
believe to be quite unfair primarily because surrounding neighborhoods believe that when initial
submitted plans are voted upon, that that’s that. They generally do not know that a developer has
returned for changes which they may or may not want. Because they don’t know about the new
request for changes, they lose their voice in expressing their opinions about a development which
affects their neighborhood. There MUST be some way to prevent this from happening.
Sincerely,
Pat Sullivan
PRESENTATION ON PROPOSED
AMENDMENT TO
CENTRAL MOUNT PLEASANT
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
Concerned Citizens of Laurel Lakes
Presentation to Planning Commission
March 18, 2015
VESTED (719) VS. PROPOSED UNITS
PROPOSED MIX OF USES
UNITS IN THE CCRC ARE
DWELLING UNITS
• The existing Development Agreement defines a
“Dwelling Unit” as:
• One or more rooms, designed, occupied, or
intended for occupancy as a separate living
quarter, with cooking, sleeping and sanitary
facilities provided within the Dwelling Unit. A
Dwelling Unit includes Detached Single Family
Dwellings, Attached Single Family Dwellings,
Accessory Dwelling Units, Condominium
Dwellings, and Multifamily Dwellings.
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christiane Farrell
Tuesday, March 17, 2015 4:26 PM
Kelly Cousino
FW: "The Atlantic"
From: Christine Barrett
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 4:17 PM
To: Chris Nickels; Chris ONeal; Elton Carrier; Gary Santos; Ken Glasson; Mark Smith; Mayor Linda Page; Paul Gawrych;
Thomasena Stokes-Marshall
Cc: Eric DeMoura; Christiane Farrell; Brad Morrison
Subject: FW: "The Atlantic"
From: CANDY BUCHANAN [mailto:ccbuch@prodigy.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 4:13 PM To: Christine Barrett Subject: "The Atlantic" Please forward this email to our Mayor, members of Town Council, and planning commission.
Dear All,
I am writing to as you to NOT approve the proposed" The Atlantic". The following is a short explanation
of my objections and concerns.
-First and foremost, is the rapid approved developments in the works within a 3 mile radius. Most of the
these are dense developments of which the full impact on traffic, infrastructure, environment is unknown
and impossibly to accurately predict. Staggering the approval of new developments would give you a
clearer view of the impact, but also give council and planners a more reasoned and thoughtful course for
our future.
-Second. Clearly the number of automobiles added to this corridor by this 28 units to an acre ratio is
problematic. Proposed amendments to the entrance of the development do not address the problem.
-The development is out of scale and character with the surrounding area. Very little green space,
height of buildings, impact on the marsh and wetland environment are concerns that diminish the value
and quality of residential community.
-The ratio of rental units to single family dwellings must be balanced. Recent approvals by Council have
rental units multiplying at an alarming rate pitting developers and residents against one another.
To deny the current plan for "The Atlantic" would benefit the current and future residents of Mount
Pleasant.
Regards,
1
Candy Buchanan
1520 Village Square
ccbuch@prodigy.net
843-729-1583
2
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christiane Farrell
Tuesday, March 17, 2015 10:41 AM
Kelly Cousino
FW: Atlantic Dev Proposal
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 8:45 AM
Subject: FW: Atlantic Dev Proposal
-----Original Message----From: Donna farmer [mailto:donnawaterwings@bellsouth.net]
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 8:04 AM
To: Christine Barrett
Subject: Atlantic Dev Proposal
Please stop! Please stop the greed at the expense of our limited remaining Eco-system & the already
overly stressed Ben Sawyer Blvd as the only route from Mt P direct to Sul Isl. with normal increase of
traffic due the increased density in Mt P. & no way in the near future to widen bridge due costs & further
destruction to more of our Eco-system. Please be responsible & at least not cause continued twisting of
surveys to justify 'greed'. I live in Raven's Run which backs up IOP connector-even with a buffer zone
can sound like 'a cheap man's ocean' at all times of the day & night. Might sound 'ole fashion ' & I like to
leave windows open to catch the breeze at opportune times -this ocean is not soothing!! Please
distribute to other decision makers before meeting not after the fact in the my work schedule currently
will interfere with scheduled meeting on Wed. Thank you. Donna Farmer 1794 Omni Blvd Mt. P. 29466
843-345-8941
Sent from my iPhone
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Connie Fowler <cmfowler33@gmail.com>
Kelly Cousino
Planning Commission Meeting 3/18/2015
Town Council appears to be allowing the DEVELOPERS carte blanche in Mt. Pleasant. Developers with the help
of Town Council are destroying our unique town. Growth is necessary but should be reasonably controlled to
allow for smooth traffic flow (especially during emergency/evacuation situations), cost of maintenance for road
repair, maintaining unique character of the area and many other problems that are the result of unreasonable
growth. Where will the developers be when the town needs to address these problems?
Please earn you NEW salary by controlling the growth before more damage is done to our currently and hopefully
future, BEAUTIFUL town of Mt. Pleasant.
PLEASE listen to the voters.
Thank you.
Connie Fowler
1
March 17th, 2015
Dear Mayor and Members of Mount Pleasant Town Council,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the Atlantic Development. I grew
up in Charleston and have lived off and on in Mount Pleasant since the 1980’s. I
purchased a condo at Bayclub off Center Street Extension most recently after
living in Summerlin in Park West for many years while my daughter was at
Wando High School. I decided to move to the area off Coleman to try and get
away from much of the congestion in Mount Pleasant north of the connector.
This is now being jeopardized.
I am sure you have heard all the reasons against the Atlantic. There is no way the
roads can handle that kind of development and the environmental impact would
be horrendous. We have opposed the development as a group at Bayclub. I think
I can sum it up though through the words of my 16 year old son. When he heard
of what was proposed….he stated , “ Oh no, that would ruin Mount Pleasant on
the way to Sullivan’s Island.” I also want to add. I walk, run and bike the pathway
from Mount Pleasant to Sullivan’s Island. If any of you haven’t , I encourage you
to. The walkway and marsh is full of trash and I regularly pick it up when I am on
the path. I am in the process of trying to get the Charleston Running Club to get
involved in helping keep this roadway path clean. Can you imagine how much
litter will be there should the Atlantic Development be there? In addition, cars
sitting idle in traffic polluting the air will prevent people from being able to use
that pathway for exercise to the benefit their health. I can attest to that during
the spans that the Sullivan’s Island bridge is open. Please let’s not continue to
ruin our town. We all love this place and are so blessed to live here. Let’s work
together to try and make Mount Pleasant a better place to live.
Sincerely,
Jana Davis
1481 Center Street Ext. Unit 1207, Mount Pleasant 29464
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ben <bass999@bellsouth.net>
Monday, March 16, 2015 12:12 PM
Kelly Cousino
The Atlantic & Central M.P. Projects
Dear Planning Commission Members As a long time resident of the Old Village and Coleman Blvd. area, I am greatly concerned about the rapid changes and high density growth projects planned for the area and other projects that are ignoring our already bad traffic congestion (God forbid we have another hurricane evacuation), and encroaching on some of our most precious assets (Shem Creek & the marsh off Ben Sawyer Blvd to name a few), with our infrastructure already stressed and falling behind. We had what seemed to be responsible, controlled growth during the late 80’s , the 90’s, and first half of the previous decade and then for some reason things seemed to spiral almost out of control with lack of sensitivity to the residents and little regard for many of the reasons everyone loves M. P.. Old Village now has houses built right up against the public sidewalks, and many not so lovely sheds/mother‐in‐law apartments springing up all over that certainly don’t enhance our oldest most historic neighborhood. We like many neighborhoods are seeing more and more cut‐through traffic as our major roadways become more congested. We need to start providing more reasons for responsible growth such as meaningful employment opportunities, fair housing for all of our residents and continuing to provide and develop more areas of our beautiful, scenic and historic town for all to enjoy such as the recent boardwalks at Shem Creek, Waterfront Park, the old Pitt St. bridge, Marsh View Trail, recreation and sports facilities and more green spaces. We are all very lucky to live in such a wonderful, friendly and beautiful place and if we respect and properly manage it, we will continue to prosper and be a place everyone wants to live or visit. If we lose our charm and livability, we will all lose. Please protect our wonderful town from those who are only interested in growth and profit. Thanks for your time and hard work and I am looking forward to the meeting on the this Wednesday. Sincerely, Ben Daniel Indian Village 1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
jrowe@carolinaoneplus.com on behalf of Jim Rowe <jrowe@carolinaone.com>
Monday, March 16, 2015 11:55 AM
Kelly Cousino
planning commission meeting
It seems to me that before any further considerations or decisions are made, certain legal and other issues should be
sorted out and cleared up.
Did staff follow all the rules?
Were decisions and commitments made by Planning Commissions and Council Members made legally - either
known or unknown.
Have all Planning Commission and Council Members been vetted regarding actual or potential personal or
business conflicts.
If certain rules are made and followed/enforced there will be less contention in the future.
More PR from the Town to alert citizens about severe changes like Shem Creek office, Boulevard and Royal Circle
etc would be very helpful.
More accountability by the staff. For example, the staff supported New Urban design for Coleman and Mid Town.
The purpose of this design is to prevent sprawl elsewhere and allow for more open space. There is no place there is
not sprawl in MP which is not government property. - e.g. town parks, Laurel Hill etc.
"I didn't know the gun was loaded - so so sorry my friend".
Six years ago, an architect from ULI said Coleman would never work for the New Urban Design because it is too
wide and therefore too dangerous for heavy pedestrian traffic.
In essence we concerned citizens should start at the beginning and pay as much attention as developers.
Developers who receive approvals and act cannot be blamed by those who react.
Jim Rowe
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
mja@artigueslg.com
Kelly Cousino
The Atlantic
If it fits into the revitalization/overlay district for Coleman that Town approved a few years ago than it should be approved.
Sincerely, Reece Artigues 1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Laura Barfield <barfieldlaura@gmail.com>
Kelly Cousino
The Atlantic and Central Mt. Pleasant
This is to voice my concerns about proposed Atlantic and Central Mt. Pleasant projects.
1. Atlantic
.i. Destroys natural vistas and ambience.
ii. Further destroys "small town" and "village" atmosphere of Mt. Pleasant proper.
iii. Puts monumenal traffic burden on already congested thoroughfare, coming on/off Sullivan's Island bridge.
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lynnette Lynes
Kelly Cousino
FW: The Atlantic Project
Lynnette Lynes
Executive Office Manager Department of Planning and Development Town of Mount Pleasant 843‐884‐1229 *WE’VE MOVED! The Planning & Development Department has temporarily relocated to 1355 Sweetgrass Basket Parkway while the new Town Hall is under construction. From: tracyblanchard@comcast.net [mailto:tracyblanchard@comcast.net]
To: Christine Barrett; Planning
Subject: The Atlantic Project
Dear Town Council and Planning Commission Members,
I am writing in regards to the proposed Atlantic development on Ben Sawyer
Blvd. I am a long time resident of Mt. Pleasant and have lived in one of the
neighborhoods off Center Street for 14 years. My children attend Mt.
Pleasant Academy and Wando High School. We are active members of this
community, own a small Mt. Pleasant business and spend the majority of our
time and resources in this town.
In writing this letter, I believe I speak for, not only my neighbors and
residents around the proposed Atlantic project area, but the greater Mt.
Pleasant and Charleston area residents. Clearly, you all have heard and seen
the anger and frustration exhibited by residents towards council's
perceived affinity for developers and their large scale plans for treasured
parts of our town.
Please reconsider this path on which you are leading
us.
As for the Atlantic project, there are many compelling reasons that should
prevent this project from taking place. One, the project calls for wetlands
to be filled. It may be less than an acre, but it doesn't matter. We care
about our wetlands in this town.
Two, traffic would be disastrous. 2,230 trips daily? I can't imagine what
that would do to the neighbors and businesses around the area as well as the
Sullivan's Island residents that use the causeway everyday.
Three, your plans state for less density in the Gateway area, not
maximization. This plan appears to be an absolute maximization of
development in this area.
Four, the plan calls for the removal of 10 historic live oak trees.
1
Five, the plans call for a mixed use of apartments and retail. I can only
imagine that this apartment community would be transient vacation dwellers
because of the proximity of the beach.
Please reconsider this project and it's impact on residents of the
surrounding neighborhoods, Sullivan's Island and the city at large.
Thank you for your time and efforts.
Tracy Blanchard
928 McIver Street
2
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Glyn Cowden <lovinglife737@yahoo.com>
Kelly Cousino
The Atlantic
Dear mr. Cousino, As I physically toured the old TV stations property where a developer has the de$ire to develop thi$ property into a mixed u$e di$a$ter of High Den$ity re$idence$ and alleged mixed retail property I left there $cratching my head. A naturally wetland with a mix of fresh and brackish water supporting a healthy population of fiddler crabs and glorious mature oaks I invisioned a wonderful green space as an open park if you will. There is so much emphasis lately on building more and more condos, apts hotels etc. Etc. That property would be a perfect respite from the looming Avalanche of concrete and asphalt. Protect our town from this incursion of over development. Save our children's and their children's children a little Lowcountry for the future. Thank you Glyn Cowden Photography Lovinglife737@yahoo.com Cell 843‐991‐8084 1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christiane Farrell
Kelly Cousino
FW: Atlantic development
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Christine Barrett Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 4:31 PM To: Chris Nickels; Chris ONeal; Elton Carrier; Gary Santos; Ken Glasson; Mark Smith; Mayor Linda Page; Paul Gawrych; Thomasena Stokes‐Marshall Cc: Eric DeMoura; Christiane Farrell; Brad Morrison Subject: FW: Atlantic development ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: John Ebersole [mailto:johnebersole@bellsouth.net] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 4:29 PM To: Christine Barrett Subject: Atlantic development Pleasant forward this email to mayor and council. I can not find one person in favor of the Atlantic dev. This project will ruin family life on Ben sawyer blvd. the inflow of cars and people will make life unbearable. Why would you people want to do this to your town. Several of you own businesses so I could see why you would be in favor! But if you truly are representing the people that elected you this project would be canned! John ebersole Sent from my iPad 1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Glenn <glennhammerbacher@gmail.com>
Kelly Cousino
Atlantic
No more apartment or hotels. Let infrastructure catch up. Schools especially. Sent from my iPhone 1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christiane Farrell
Kelly Cousino
FW: Planning
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 4:19 PM
Subject: FW: Planning
From: Kendall James [mailto:kjames762@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 3:06 PM To: Christine Barrett Subject: Planning Please forward this email to all members of the Planning Commission and Town Council.
I am writing to express my concern over the proposed development near the intersection of Ben Sawyer and Center
Street- The Atlantic.
The neighborhoods in Old Mount Pleasant are suffering from the poor foresight of The Boulevard, we certainly do
not need another high density development in our backyards! The parking and traffic alone from such a
development would cripple our neighborhood! (The Boulevard has shown this!) And then there is the wildlife to
consider. Our marshes are one of the world's most valuable ecosystems. How could the marsh be anything but
harmed by such a development?
Please think clearly when considering the proposed Atlantic development. Such a development is neither in
keeping with TOMP Comprehensive Plan nor is it in our town's best interest. Please do not support the proposed
development.
Thank you for your careful attention to this important issue,
Kendall James
762 Powhatan Ave
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christiane Farrell
Kelly Cousino
FW: "The Atlantic"
Subject: FW: "The Atlantic"
From: Lin Lewis [mailto:typewriterlin@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 3:07 PM To: Christine Barrett Cc: gentieu55@att.net Subject: "The Atlantic" Dear Planning Commission, Town Council and Mayor Linda Page:
Please do not consider approving "The Atlantic," a high density development at Center Street and Ben
Sawyer. The traffic in this area is already difficult, to say the least, and in the summer, when cars are lined up all
the way to Sea Island Shopping Center to go to the beach, it will be impossible to deal with hundreds more
residents trying to get in and out of that area.
As a former merchant on Coleman (manager of Tidewater Executive Center for 28 years), I'm all too aware of
traffic on Coleman and how it impacts everything -- for residents, emergency workers, merchants, and tourists.
The Atlantic project will also impact valuable marsh land, nesting grounds, and ecologically sensitive areas along
the creeks and marshes.
Please don't open the door for more of this. At some point, Mount Pleasant needs to be willing to say "ENOUGH."
Thank you for your consideration.
Lin Lewis
1408 Mataoka Street
843-209-8606
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
saramarcino@yahoo.com
Kelly Cousino
My two cents
Dear Planning Commission: I am writing concerning the development of Mt. Pleasant, specifically the Shem creek parking garage and the housing units heading out to Sullivan's. Bottom line: strongly, vehemently opposed. I moved to Mt. Pleasant with my family in 1980, when I was only 6 years old. There wasn't much around, and I welcomed the development of shopping centers, a second movie theater, and great restaurants. We needed more neighborhoods, and we have them! However, enough is enough. Continued development is starting to destroy the whole reason people love mt. Pleasant. I am a business owner in Mt. Pleasant, so I understand that aspect. However, this doesn't justify the ugliness that has come to this city. What has happened to Coleman blvd is embarrassing. Every time I drive by those tall buildings, that shadow is cast over me, and it feels dark and unappealing. I haven't met anyone who disagrees. And that's the main point. Everybody agrees on this issue. Doesn't matter if one is conservative or liberal, everyone thinks that these proposed structures are a horrible idea. Why is this decision being considered if everyone is against it?? My suggestion? A referendum. Just have all Mt. P residents come out and vote. We all know the outcome, though, so why even bother? Just scrap the whole plan and try to stay true to the people of this city! Sara Marcino Sent from my iPad 1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christiane Farrell
Kelly Cousino
Fwd: Atlantic Opposition
Christiane
Begin forwarded message:
From: Christine Barrett <CBarrett@tompsc.com>
Date: March 16, 2015 at 1:53:18 PM EDT
To: Chris Nickels <CNickels@tompsc.com>, Chris ONeal <CONeal@tompsc.com>, Elton Carrier
<ECarrier@tompsc.com>, Gary Santos <GSantos@tompsc.com>, Ken Glasson
<KGlasson@tompsc.com>, Mark Smith <mark.mcalistersmith@gmail.com>, Mayor Linda Page
<LPage@tompsc.com>, Paul Gawrych <PGawrych@tompsc.com>, Thomasena Stokes-Marshall
<TStokes-Marshall@tompsc.com>
Cc: Eric DeMoura <EDeMoura@tompsc.com>, Christiane Farrell <CFarrell@tompsc.com>, Brad
Morrison <BMorrison@tompsc.com>
Subject: FW: Atlantic Opposition
-----Original Message----From: Kelly Scheerer [mailto:kelly.macko@comcast.net]
To: Christine Barrett
Subject: Atlantic Opposition
Town Council
As a owner in both bay club and shemwood I would like to address my opposition to the
Atlantic. The towns infrastructure can not support all of this new development and this apartment
complex. The traffic on Ben sawyer will increase dramatically. Please listen to the neighboring
communities--who oppose this development! Thank you.
Sent from my iPhone.
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Christiane Farrell
Kelly Cousino
FW: RE:
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Christine Barrett Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 9:08 AM To: Chris Nickels; Chris ONeal; Elton Carrier; Gary Santos; Ken Glasson; Mark Smith; Mayor Linda Page; Paul Gawrych; Thomasena Stokes‐Marshall Cc: Eric DeMoura; Brad Morrison; Christiane Farrell Subject: FW: RE: > > My pleasant does not need more high density complexes. It is over run with apartments. > Save the character of the area by denying this plan. > The causeway cannot be widened into 4 lanes due to the need to preserve Wetlands. The traffic problem is horrendous in the spring and summer months. > Emergency vehicles have one way off sullivans island. > There are so many serious issues involved in this decision the board faces. > Please do the right thing for my pleasant and its residents. > I grew up in charleston and isle of palms. Enough is enough. > Save your town. Take charge. Don,t be run over by developers. > Nancy shannon > Gastonia nc. > Bay club resident. I own my unit and do not rent it out. > > Sent from my iPad 1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lynnette Lynes
Kelly Cousino
FW: The Atlantic Development Request to Deny
Lynnette Lynes
Executive Office Manager Department of Planning and Development Town of Mount Pleasant 843‐884‐1229 *WE’VE MOVED! The Planning & Development Department has temporarily relocated to 1355 Sweetgrass Basket Parkway while the new Town Hall is under construction. From: Christine Barrett
To: Planning
Subject: FW: The Atlantic Development Request to Deny
Please forward to the Planning Commission. Thanks, Christine From: Wesley Carter [mailto:wcarter21401@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 2:10 PM To: Christine Barrett Subject: The Atlantic Development Request to Deny TO: Mayor Page, Town Council Members, Town Planning Commission Members
RE: The Atlantic Development
FROM: Wesley Carter, 1481 Center Street Extension, Unit 1005, Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
410-703-0964
To whom it may concern:
I am requesting that the Atlantic Development be denied due to the following problems:
1) the negative impact of traffic and general lifestyle on the neighborhoods near the development
2) the departure from the comprehensive goals and long-term plan for Mount Pleasant.
The Town Council has the authority and the fiduciary responsibility to uphold the agreed upon comprehensive
plan, vision and goals to make any development "THE LEAST INTENSIVE" near the marsh edge. Clearly
allowing a high density development smack next to the marsh and gateway to the beach should be denied.
1
The additional burden of traffic on Ben Sawyer has also not been confirmed with all of the additional
developments that have recently occurred. A real-time "summer traffic impact" study in this specific beach
gateway location needs to first be completed this summer that will accurately reflect recent growth; not only
including Mount Pleasant but the greater Charleston areas which is also experiencing explosive growth before any
additional impact from the proposed high density housing The Atlantic development proposes to be accurately be
assessed.
To sum it up this proposed development does not even come close to meeting the goals and vision of the
Comprehensive Plan and negatively impacts the surrounding areas in many ways. I am requesting that you carry
out your fiduciary responsibility to uphold and enforce the Comprehensive Plan and deny approval for this
development.
Best regards,
Wesley Carter
2
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lynnette Lynes
Kelly Cousino
FW: Forget The Atlantic...Make it a park!
Lynnette Lynes
To: Planning
Subject: FW: Forget The Atlantic...Make it a park!
Please forward to the Planning Commission. Thanks, Christine From: Chris Young [mailto:cyoung10@aol.com] Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 10:18 AM To: Christine Barrett Subject: Forget The Atlantic...Make it a park! Please do not approve the development proposal for The Atlantic. The added traffic alone would bring Ben Sawyer Blvd to a
grinding halt where it goes from four lanes to two lanes in front of Simmons Pointe, especially in the summer months with the
beach traffic and some 500 bridge openings. Adding the extra traffic from residents and commercial interests at the
proposed Atlantic complex would be like dropping a cork in a funnel!
This delicate marsh property should be a waterfront park. I bet the residents of Mt Pleasant would support a bond issue to
pay for a new park long before they would support this outsized commercial development.
Please share this email with the Planning Commission and Town Council members.
Thank you for all that you do for Mt Pleasant,
Chris & Linda Young
Allison Young
1551 Ben Sawyer Blvd., #24
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Lynnette Lynes
Kelly Cousino
FW: Proposed Atlantic project
ATLANTIC313NU.pdf
Lynnette Lynes
To: Planning
Subject: FW: Proposed Atlantic project
Please forward to the Planning Commission as requested. A copy has already been sent to Town Council. Thanks, Christine From: Kay Addis [mailto:kayaddis@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 5:58 PM To: Christine Barrett Subject: Proposed Atlantic project Madam Clerk: Will you kindly distribute this to all Town Council and Planning Commission members prior to the
upcoming commission meeting on Wednesday?
Thank you.
Kay and Dave Addis
Simmons Pointe
1
March 13, 2015
Dear Leaders of our community:
As residents of Simmons Pointe, we once again urge you to NOT approve the proposed
Atlantic development, as currently proposed.
Our primary concerns:
Traffic: Ben Sawyer Boulevard is a uniquely located roadway, narrowing to one lane as
you approach the causeway and a bridge that opens regularly to nautical traffic. For
those of us who live beyond Rifle Range Road, it is our only route to and, most
important, from our homes. It is an important emergency route to and from Sullivan’s
Island. The causeway and bridge cannot reasonably be widened.
We believe previous traffic studies associated with the proposed Atlantic development
underestimated the increase in traffic along Ben Sawyer during the summer months.
We have been told by other sources that traffic increases 50 percent on a summer
Monday (non-holiday), compared to a winter Monday, and 250 percent on a summer
Saturday. We residents see the back-ups on summer weekends, when the bridge is
open for boats. When the bridge closes, the traffic is non-stop, making left-turn entry
onto Ben Sawyer almost impossible.
We believe high-density development, such as Atlantic, will make traffic worse at that
narrow section of roadway and that residents of Atlantic, turning onto Ben Sawyer,
would make our efforts to do the same more difficult and eminently more dangerous.
Incompatibility with the TOMP Comprehensive Plan: One of the stated goals of the
plan is that “Ben Sawyer should feel more open and expansive...a transition from the
more urban section...with the least intensive areas near the marsh edge...with land uses
that are generally less commercial, less dense and more residential.”
Densities of the surrounding areas range from 3 to 9 units per acre. The Atlantic
proposes 28 units per acre. This density exceeds current densities by up to 9 times.
This cannot be acceptable.
This piece of Mount Pleasant property is unusual, if not unique, in its size and location
on a marsh so near the ocean. It is an extremely valuable and desirable location. We
know that it will be developed, but we believe that it’s too valuable for rental units. Those
of us in nearby neighborhoods have bought homes and take pride in creating and
maintaining serene surroundings. We cherish our fragile marshes, our live oaks, our
birds and sea life. We have invested in Mount Pleasant, and we have a vested interest
in preserving the natural surroundings.
We do not think it’s wise to place a large development of rental units on the fragile
marsh environment, with the concern and care that comes from long-term home
ownership. We worry that rental units could be sub-leased on a short-term basis, in
essence becoming weekly vacation units. That could change the entire character of the
Sulllivan’s Island and Ben Sawyer neighborhoods.
If this development is intended to be part of a “work-live” concept, this is not the right
area of Mount Pleasant. There are no large employers nearby, and, frankly, wages at
restaurants, yogurt shops, grocery stores and drugstores would doubtfully be enough to
allow one to rent an apartment overlooking the marsh. Such a “work-live” concept
would be more appropriate near a medical complex or large high-tech business.
We understand that the developers stand to make the greatest profit from a large
number of retail and residential units. The more per acre, the more their profit. But we
hope the Town of Mount Pleasant will work with both the developers and residents to
approve a plan that adds to, not detracts from, the highly desirable area which we call
home.
Thank you.
Kay and Dave Addis
1551 Ben Sawyer Blvd, #17
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Christine Barrett
Friday, March 13, 2015 8:22 AM
Planning
FW: Overview of problems/objections re: the proposed Atlantic development and
combined request for denial by the seven main Ben Sawyer communities
Overview of Problems with Atlantic, signed.pdf
Please share attached with the Planning Commission. Thanks, Christine From: Lucy Gordon [mailto:lcglisw@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 7:01 PM To: Christine Barrett Cc: JOHN COLLINS; Jay Waddell MH; Katherine Doe; Krista Mysock; Carolyn Adams Sl; Zachary Hatch; Danny McKayHF Subject: Overview of problems/objections re: the proposed Atlantic development and combined request for denial by the seven main Ben Sawyer communities Attached please find a joint document, submitted and signed by the combined communities of Simmons
Pointe, Sawyers Landing, Marsh Harbor, Saltgrass Pointe, Bay Club, Home Farm and North Point,
describing an overview of problems and objections related to the proposal for the Atlantic development.
We trust that you will give these serious thought and consideration. The residents of these seven
communities feel strongly that this proposed development is not appropriate for this location and request
that this proposal be denied in favor of something more appropriate.
Thank you in advance for your consideration. We request that this be distributed to Mayor Page, all
Town Council Members, and all Members of the Planning Commission.
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Robert Thompson <thompsrp@comcast.net>
Thursday, March 12, 2015 3:37 PM
Kelly Cousino
Linda Page; Christine Barrett; Patrick O'Neil
Please Downsize The Atlantic project
LetterToPlanningCommission.docx; ATT00001.txt
Dear Kelly Cousino, Senior Planner Lovely Town of Mount Pleasant ‐ Please forward attached request to reduce the size and scale of "The Atlantic" complex, now planned as a massive mixed‐
use project along Ben Sawyer Boulevard. I would like this to reach your diligent Planning Commissioners before their meeting Wednesday as well as Councilmen Chris O'Neal and Paul Gawrych. I am sending email copies to Mayors Linda Page and Pat O'Neil. Thank you for your every expert effort. Sincerely, Bobby Thompson 2917 I'On Avenue Sullivan's Island 883‐3130 1
12 March, 2015
Members of Planning Commission
Town of Mt. Pleasant, SC
Dear Commissioners,
Thank you all for your dedication and hard work, but please do what you can to reduce the size
and scale of the proposed "Atlantic" project. I am mindful that the Mixed-Use zoning category
applied here was intended to encourage nestling of small shops and housing, but this is another
example of how wrong such ideas can go. In my opinion and experience, the much-vaunted "new
urban" design principles, to build "pedestrian-friendly" streetscapes with stacked housing and
hidden parking does not work, except in maximizing profit dollars-per-square-foot.
I have downloaded and studied the 71 page PDF available through Town of Mount Pleasant
website, including the 9-page staff report, and the more recent communications from developers
trying to assuage citizen concerns. Specifically, my main objections are as follows:
- The project remains simply too large, too close to the road and too close to the marsh.
- This plan is certainly not in keeping with the Commercial Overlay District guidelines calling for
reduced density as Ben Sawyer Boulevard approaches the causeway.
- The proposed bike/pedestrian overpass deserves no place in this "Gateway to Mt. Pleasant."
- The Tree Removal Plan calls for sacrifice of many fine oaks and pines; the large oaks
numbered 31-41 in a cluster of 0.64 acres labeled "public park space" would be sorely subject
to auto and pet pollution.
- The proposed perimeter nature paths, though nice, would encourage human and pet intrusion
and run-off pollution of nearby marsh, a favorite resting and feeding spot for ibis and wood
storks, a threatened species.
Finally, I want to caution against possible further creep of this development. For sad example,
the developers of Toler's Cove once also promised a restaurant and nature walk - even a public
boat-ramp - amenities never delivered.
My own background relevant to this request includes renovation of four family businesses within
the Coleman-Ben Sawyer Commercial Overlay District over the past 35 years, including two
veterinary clinics and two hair salons, one of which we now own, Salon Carmelo at 1230 Schirmer.
Interest and involvement in community development include service on the BCD-COG Citizen's
Advisory Committee on the Environment in the 1980's, with Bill Dreyfuss, and eighteen years on
Planning Commission on Sullivan's Island, where we have worked hard to plan ahead and
preserve what breeze and view we can. This is not so much to toot my own horn as to impress
upon you how much I appreciate your own dedication and hard work.
Sincerely,
Bobby Thompson
2917 I'On Avenue
Sullivan's Island
883-3130
eCopies to Mayors Linda Page and Pat O'Neil, and to Clerk of Council.
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Don Wicks <wicksdl@yahoo.com>
Thursday, March 12, 2015 9:40 AM
Planning
Letter to Planning Commission, REVISED
This is a resubmit of an email sent earlier today that contained alignment errors.
For the 3/18/2015 Planning Committee meeting.
From: Donald Wicks, 993 Cove Bay Lane, Mount Pleasant.
I want to be very clear. I recognize, I understand that the property at 1558 Ben
Sawyer Blvd is VALUABLE PROPERTY that is ready for redevelopment.
In fact, if I didn’t have to look at the nasty old satellite dish with the face painted
on it every time I leave home I would be delighted!
However, the INCONSISTENCY of the Coleman and Ben Sawyer Blvds
Revitalization Plan, and the Atlantic development plan, is troubling.
The Revitalization Plan states “Ben Sawyer Blvd should feel more open and
expansive than the more urban sections of Coleman Blvd” It further states
“There
should be transition from the more urban sections near the roundabout with the
least intensive areas near the marsh edge”. It is very OBVIOUS, the
Revitalization
Plan recognizes a DIFFERENCE between Coleman Blvd and Ben Sawyer Blvd.
Clearly, the SETBACK and the HEIGHT of the buildings fronting Ben Sawyer
Blvd;
the DENSITY, 246 rental units; all of these features of the Atlantic proposal, are
INCONSISTENT with the Revitalization Plan.
1
I have learned recently of the DISCREPANCY between the Revitalization Plans
stated goals of OPEN, EXPANSIVE and TRANSITION, with the zoning
regulations
for this property. This discrepancy should NOT BE EXPLOITED, it should be
CORRECTED by the appropriate town governing body!
Also, the IMPACT TO TRAFFIC on Ben Sawyer Blvd, and the absolutely
TERRIBLE
IDEA of a ROUNDABOUT at the entrance to Simmons Pointe, are
UNACCEPTABLE.
The Atlantic proposal is NOT THE BEST WAY to utilize this valuable property.
Nearby neighbors don’t like it, a neighboring town is GRACIOUSLY signaling it’s
concerns about this proposal, and the INCONSISTENCY with the town’s own
Revitalization Plan make your decision obvious, REJECT THE ATLANTIC
PROPOSAL!
2
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
seymour rosenthal <rosie1niko@gmail.com>
Friday, March 06, 2015 3:34 PM
Planning
Fwd: Central Mount Pleasant and McAlister
I will be on vacation during the next Planning Commission meeting and would like this email sent to the Moultrie
News placed into the record re my comments on Central Mt. Pleasant and the developer.
---------- Forwarded message ---------From: seymour rosenthal <rosie1niko@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 11:28 AM
Subject: Central Mount Pleasant and McAlister
To: news moultrie <editor@moultrienews.com>
I just read the 3/4 Town Crier article in the Moultrie News and the words "Central Mount Pleasant (CMP)" and
"hundreds of citizens" (probably concerned citizens) and "last minute changes" appeared. Controversy has
followed CMP from day 1. They received initial permission much easier than they should have by selling a bill of
goods to the neighboring community by rerouting Hungryneck Blvd, which they then delayed doing anything
about for what must have been over a year and maybe two years. It took a complaint from a fellow developer-another "friend of the town"---that his section of Hungryneck was complete and he was waiting for CMP to
complete their section so the overall roadway could be completed. The original project, as shown to everyone
before any approvals were made, envisioned this grand little town with a hotel and shops and sugar and spice and
everything imaginable and yet every meeting seems to have CMP on the agenda that has changed this development
into something that does not even seem recognizable anymore. Are they done? No siree. More revisions, more
changes, more trips to planning and Council. What is it all about? You know as well as I do--bottom line--more
trips to the bank.
Seymour Rosenthal
Waterfront Dr
Mt.Pleasant
881-8861
1
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Connie Burton <connie.b.burton@gmail.com>
Christine Barrett; Planning
Midtown Lake
Dear Town Council,
I have recently learned that there are plans to fill in a lake or "retention pond" on Midtown Avenue that has
evolved into "wetland" for various types of birds.
I bring this to your attention because I am asking the town to re-evaluate this area and consider leaving it for the
overall beauty for what is to become Midtown Mount Pleasant. This "lake" has become a habitat for ducks,
lowcountry birds and even swans.
As a resident of Mount Pleasant, I remember when Watermark was created and talk was to relocate town
administration to this area, creating "Midtown". I support this idea and feel plans for this would create a nice
upscale area in the center of Mount Pleasant for residents and guests to enjoy.
However, there are many areas in the country that are thriving with residents and businesses but still maintain
some sort of "green space". This green space attracts people to come to the area just as much as the homes and
businesses. Our very own Hampton Park in Charleston comes to mind.
I know there is much involved in city planning. I am just asking that the town reconsider this "lake", since it has
evolved into such a beautiful wetland, for protection as building begins again in the Midtown area.
Thanks for your time,
Connie Burton
1
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Eve Gentieu <gentieu55@att.net>
Christine Barrett; Planning
Mt Pleasant development
MtPleasantDev3.docx
Dear Mayor Page and Town of Mount Pleasant Council Members:
Below and attached is a copy of a letter I am sending to our area newspapers. I ask you to
please consider its message and act in the best interests of our town. Thank you! Eve Gentieu
“Something fishy is happening on the boulevard” was given as a possible theme for the “pearls of wisdom” quotes
to be displayed in pocket parks along Coleman Boulevard by participants in the Mt. Pleasant charrettes back in
2006 (see http://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/4012).
Although most assuredly alluding to Mt Pleasant’s shrimping and fishing past, some would say it hits the nail on
the head in regards to the way development is proceeding at present.
Coming up on March 18 is a Town Council meeting to address the plans for the “Atlantic,” a high density mixedused development proposed for the edge of the salt marsh on the old Channel 4 property right across from
Simmons Pointe. The developers have managed to downgrade their FEMA flood zone rating from most sensitive
to one grade below. This will enable them to build commercial/retail space on ground level, while all other
buildings in that area of the marsh are up on stilts. This sign, “Hurricane Storm Surge May Cover Roadway by 7
Feet” is a stone’s throw away from the entrance to this land on the causeway out to Sullivans Island, and the
roadway is several feet above the marsh. The advantage of having commercial/retail on ground level is that it
earns the developer permission to increase the housing density. The developer also plans a pocket park, a feature
that will increase even further the allowed housing density. If this development is allowed to move forward as
currently planned, that park could proudly boast the above “pearl of wisdom.”
There are many concerns about this development, including impact on the saltmarsh, traffic, and emergency
response ability. The 2014 Mt Pleasant Comprehensive Plan update states that development adjacent to waterways
and marshes should be low-impact to maintain undisturbed buffers to promote excellent water quality. Town
council should uphold that plan and act accordingly to preserve our quality of life and natural areas. Do
“gateways” into our town have to be buildings, or can they be what Mother Nature has so bounteously endowed us
with?
The CRAB report points out the importance of maintaining the aesthetic appeal of the Shem Creek area, yet a large
parking garage has been approved for a lot adjacent to Shem Creek right on Coleman Boulevard, with the
developer set to break ground in April. Are we driving the developers, or are the developers driving us?
A little further down the road, both in distance and time, is the proposed roundabout at Chuck Dawley and
Coleman. The CRAB report for that area recommends a roundabout that will provide better ingress and egress to
surrounding businesses, yet there is concern that the updated plan for that circle may sound the death knell for
those businesses.
Let us hope that the pearls in the “pearls of wisdom” concept (using quotes that highlight key moments in the
history of the town) will not refer in the future to the profits in some developers’ pockets, but in wise and
thoughtful planning decisions that will maintain the character of the town of Mt. Pleasant.
1
Eve Gentieu
1496 Seminole Street
Mt Pleasant, SC 29464
2
Planning
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
diana antonovich <ddantonovich@yahoo.com>
Sunday, March 01, 2015 9:41 PM
Planning
Midtown Lake
Dear Town Planning Members,
I recently learned that there are plans to fill in a lake that is located on Midtown Avenue in central Mount
Pleasant and replace it with housing and commercial real estate. The lake was originally a “borrow pit” in
the 1980’s but it has evolved into an important part of the ecosystem as well as a unique green and
natural space for people to enjoy in Mount Pleasant. While there are some other ponds in the area this
lake attracts far more wildlife and also has an enormous variety of waterfowl. From the common to the
exotic, large flocks are frequently seen inhabiting the lake. Wildlife is particularly attracted to this lake
because of its large size, shallow depth and abundant food sources. A lake of such unique quality is
worthy of protection, so that it may continue to be enjoyed by both wildlife and the general public for
generations to come. It is a priority for us to preserve some of the few remaining green spaces and open
areas in Mount Pleasant. Many of the greatest cities in the world had leaders who fortunately were able
to look forward and see the value in such preservation, knowing that green areas and open spaces
within an urban setting give it greater value than the addition of more brick and mortar structures. What
if Fredrick Olmstead never fought to protect and create green space in New York City or Boston?
Central Park and The Emerald Necklace would not exist. These spaces have been enjoyed by countless
inhabitants and visitors and will be for generations to come. It is obviously important for every
community, big or small, to have such foresight. We have a responsibility to take the sometimes hard
steps to ensure that green/open space will be protected and preserved. If not now then the opportunity
will be lost forever.
Sincerely,
Diana Antonovich
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Erin Timberlake <elynnem@gmail.com>
Thursday, February 19, 2015 12:47 PM
Kelly Cousino; Planning
Re: Urgent: Planning Meeting item e
Hi, I was told that this item was postponed until the March 18 meeting to discuss. Please confirm that my letter below will be included in the meeting as I will not be able to attend the meeting. Also, I’m not sure if you need my address but it’s 1381 Woodlock Road in Laurel Lakes. Thanks, Erin On Feb 18, 2015, at 1:22 PM, Erin Timberlake <elynnem@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I am writing to be included in the Planning Meeting tonight for item e on the agenda‐ central Mount Pleasant comprehensive plan future land use map amendment request. I had planned to attend, but am 9 months pregnant with my first child and am unable to attend due to uncomfort and contractions. > > My husband and I moved to Mount Pleasant almost 3 years ago from Los Angeles, CA. We have loved calling MP our new home and feel we found a secret gem of a neighborhood in Laurel Lakes. We are both in business and are excited about the growth opportunities we see in Mount Pleasant both for quality of life and property value. Being in our early 30’s and accustomed to a larger city, we love seeing new boutique restaurants and stores pop up. > > However, the new proposed amendments to the land use is concerning to us for a few reasons. First, it seems the proposed density level is extremely high for the amount of land involved. This has obvious impacts on traffic flow, land use, safety and quality of life. We left a severely high density city purposefully as we have seen the negative effects on the population that end up in frustration and dysfunction of a community. > > Secondly, with our first child on the way, we are thinking of schooling options. Whitesides is a perfect school option for us at this time and we are grateful to have it located so close to home. However, can the district handle the inevitable large increase in the number of students that will be sent to Whitesides? Will it require a rezoning forcing us and others into a different district? > > Finally, I was surprised to hear about the plan for the eagle’s nest. What a rare opportunity we have to preserve this species, and it seems we are not taking advantage of it. With construction all around it, the eagle who has built his home here will likely leave. Since we’ve moved here, we have seen the pride that everyone in this area has for the lowlands and the animals that inhibit it. It is so rare that people have such pride. I hope that the new amendment will be adjusted to accommodate more space around the nest and throughout the land as was originally proposed. > > So many of us moved to the Mount Pleasant area to enjoy the quality of life offered here at the comfortable and convenient pace that exists. We are also hopeful for the growth that can happen and, if done strategically well, could have a significant positive impact on the community. We ask that the planners are wise in their decisions to grow in a strategic 1
manner with the sufficient infrastructure in place to support the growth as they make these land decisions. May we not look back in regret at what Mount Pleasant could have been, but became overcrowded and dysfunctional instead. > > Thank you for your attention, > > Erin Timberlake 2
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Krista Mysock <klsparky@hotmail.com>
Wednesday, February 18, 2015 3:41 PM
Kelly Cousino
re: Planning Commission Meeting 2-18-15
Miss Cousino,
Thank you for your time. I have reviewed the Planning Commission Agenda for today, 2-18-15, and the Staff
Comments regarding item 4E on the agenda - regarding the proposed project located near MUSC office off of
Hungryneck. I am unable to attend the meeting today but would like to ask the Planning Commission to deny
these requests/amendments. The proposed changes are significantly different than what was approved in 2007. I
am personally very concerned with the increased traffic generation of this proposed project and that the amount of
parks and open space is decreasing. I do not know how this area can support a project of this magnitude and
density in light of all of the new apartments that are adjacent to this area.
Again thank you and the commission for your time and work.
Best,
Krista Mysock
1536 Village Square
1
Kelly Cousino
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Lynnette Lynes
Thursday, February 12, 2015 11:31 AM
Christine Barrett; Kelly Cousino
correspondence from Jerry Scurry
SPlanningBi15021211020.pdf
Mr. Scurry asked that this be forwarded to the Mayor, Town Council, and Planning Commission. Lynnette Lynes
Executive Office Manager Department of Planning and Development Town of Mount Pleasant 843‐884‐1229 From: scannerc360@tompsc.com [mailto:scannerc360@tompsc.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 6:03 AM
To: Lynnette Lynes
Subject: Message from PlanningBizHubC360
1

Correspondence - Town of Mount Pleasant

Transcription

Similar documents

Open living room

Join us for a in the garden

MPCDC News: February 2011

Mount Pleasant Community Brochure

Farmers Market

info link

JohnReddish - Reddish Auctions

NextEra Energy Solutions launches $7.5M MPISD renovation project

Apple Harvest Festival - Fremont Fire Department

caribbean invitation-4