[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6359993,"mediaKeyId","2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00","parentId",2175449,"title","Planning commission approves minutes, elects chair and vice chair","audioSeconds",4205,"startMs",105000,"endMs",4310000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00&start=105&end=4310","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00/thumbnail_105000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6359993/Summerville/Dorchester-County/South-Carolina/Planning-commission-approves-minutes-elects-chair-and-vice-chair","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6359993-44e143c175e69b5adb51e708a31fea57/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448496&Signature=FZGMsUbKbZRoVkD8jgEHVaGn9rmdokVgKMneyKV-x5jXg0w6A-nXySbHows6LGM0azX7rlQRWp46uAYYEm~Yolw3y4ole9TkknDUGMOzB5I-3HTe1czK6oc3r7TXDC021RGtwk9951MOcc15ntELjfo92V3pOEqPEp2WSmcoHSuU2p3ZhWquPHZm~JHYWDcUrEimPLJEAAphbq42LWWWG5s~G930Hb872Xvpw-DLwpPvY6E2mqheN91TEfH-myR0btZoXL1C~LWynjE~g8QyD4nHbvA614F7n4wckmMfnu6sLmOaohxYkoP7s4DkRMd9C4w~dXR2gPTllS-7jlrj3w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","TownSummSC","date","2025-01-27T00:00:00Z","article","The commission accepted the minutes of its Dec. 16, 2024 meeting as distributed with no corrections.

During miscellaneous business the commission elected Jim Reeves as chair. Nominations were taken; a motion and second were recorded and the commission voted in favor.

For vice chair the commission received nominations (including Kevin and Pat Weatherford). The roll call resulted in a vice‑chair appointment announced in the meeting as “Hart.” The commission chair then reminded members to complete required training hours and the meeting adjourned on a motion that carried by voice vote.

These organizational actions are internal commission business; minutes and officer nominations will be reflected in the official minutes and forwarded to town staff for administrative processing.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission Monday January 27, 2025 @4PM","oneSentenceSummary","At the Jan. 27 meeting the commission accepted minutes from Dec. 16, 2024, elected Jim Reeves as chair and selected a vice chair (announced as Hart) and closed the session by adjourning.","taxTitle","Summerville, Dorchester County, South Carolina","taxId",4554,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6359997,"Commission approves temporary dining‑tent rule allowing tents up to 180 days with inspections",1269,2861000,4130000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00&start=2861&end=4130","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00/thumbnail_2861000.jpg","/articles/6359997/Summerville/Dorchester-County/South-Carolina/Commission-approves-temporary-diningtent-rule-allowing-tents-up-to-180-days-with-inspections","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6359997-c26c227732900e9a306b163bc5324925/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448496&Signature=oF4~8Qn7vQxKm~dL6T~DyGleoJk81LGZp5vTZ6pnF5MTFzE~Zo8FbSdvQRL6xBFXhZ6IVBPTxXltwz-Gn2o9jhVN22lfokw65AwxpBZeUBzgMA3KgEhVUlnPQOx-fs2cvsRvHbMikma6ZakXiHRYKlOxv9RWgoCFZVQFcqAYMYoJqHsko4w-glhsjZnkM2T9jZ1c7VgLSGfVcAhuhDIcwY83BApDnVjlqO5G~mcHr-iYSmVS6CWz6nPaNRCXxIN~Z49J0wj3X1IXeWSsO4JSyr6M6t61HSoHnAZ0EaayUdIUzcxsTaBbm0WeZtpkgms~6fCsUzplWt5PoGcC3OQWug__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Summerville Planning Commission on Jan. 27 approved a change to the Unified Development Ordinance to permit temporary dining tents for up to 180 days a year, subject to applicable inspections.

Planning staff explained the amendment was prompted by requests from local restaurants seeking temporary cover during colder months. The amendment creates a permit path for temporary uses such as dining tents and brings those uses under fire and safety inspections, staff said.

Commissioners asked whether specific businesses (staff cited Lowcountry Fish Camp as an example in discussion) would be covered; staff said restaurants would still need to meet fire inspection and other safety requirements and that bringing tents under a temporary use permit is intended to reduce ad hoc, potentially unsafe setups.

The commission voted unanimously in favor of the amendment and will forward the language to the town council for final action. Staff was directed to include inspection requirements and the 180‑day limit in the council packet.","Planning commissioners voted unanimously to recommend a UDO change allowing temporary dining tents for up to 180 days per year, bringing such temporary uses under inspection and permitting requirements.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6360001,"Commission narrows design review board review for small public‑land projects, sets 1,000‑sq‑ft threshold",2711,1201000,3912000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00&start=1201&end=3912","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00/thumbnail_1201000.jpg","/articles/6360001/Summerville/Dorchester-County/South-Carolina/Commission-narrows-design-review-board-review-for-small-publicland-projects-sets-1000sqft-threshold","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360001-9359094461f3dc00b3e0a87e54a946d0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448496&Signature=VD-m6POLwLYNVqVMLoh-jvM-5HRKjTbBO08AdOpCiN0GHMIfOjemdfn-7HDOhTAkD9VV~vfhYrQv839Bln9M6NQxQr-Z54a1jyflIdRFg6fzpKy23lhTfWeaLDKfzg55ucXasPm3ru7gP1KGKlr3nw8q5zjRLdKumV9d4Rwo-O5tvP0OTLqjsx5EummA0MqrmMyuq38HGXdJ9tWFBRK1FtvGeh~7fm9eRC7l127hHzl7H-Bqw3NyH4gQAVUPnPc7~-vWi-r7Gt1JklFT0e4w2i-8K4QMLhbfp~uume8VRKHd6hG~RrGwpYqxFWp744BLBDEmEHzH0CladO0AOsbOig__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Summerville Planning Commission on Jan. 27 approved a proposed amendment to chapter 13 of the Summerville Unified Development Ordinance to exempt certain small projects on property zoned Public Lands (PL) from full Design Review Board (DRB) review.

Planning staff said the change was prompted by repeated small projects — staff cited a roughly 400‑square‑foot concession stand at a Somerville softball field — that require full DRB review though they are minor and not readily visible from the right of way. The amendment, as approved by the commission, exempts buildings of 1,000 square feet or less (as amended during the meeting) from DRB review; commissioners discussed alternatives including land‑disturbance thresholds but adopted the 1,000‑square‑foot threshold.

A commissioner asked whether state or federal buildings are affected; staff clarified federal buildings are not under local zoning authority, but municipal and school district buildings zoned as public lands generally are. The commission voted on an amendment to replace a quarter‑acre disturbance threshold with a 1,000‑square‑foot building size, and the amendment passed unanimously. The main motion as amended also passed unanimously.

The change is intended to reduce administrative burden and reserve DRB review for larger or more visible projects on public lands. Commissioners may still request specific language edits prior to forwarding the amendment to town council.

The commission instructed staff to include the amended language and exhibit in the package forwarded to council for final ordinance action.","The Summerville Planning Commission approved an amendment to UDO chapter 13 to exempt small, low‑visibility public‑land buildings from full design review, adopting an amendment that limits the exemption to buildings 1,000 square feet or smaller.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6360006,"Commission considers three annexation petitions; approves two and declines action on a third",3380,127000,3507000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00&start=127&end=3507","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00/thumbnail_127000.jpg","/articles/6360006/Summerville/Dorchester-County/South-Carolina/Commission-considers-three-annexation-petitions-approves-two-and-declines-action-on-a-third","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360006-b9c2a789a1c70c776120004dcc07df6c/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448496&Signature=RV-oKb~EiTnjvzB9eh~2jo8~OgvexsUhkLkxqydb6spKgM07676Relw1WA8OgBmDa64eWm7rKo61l9JC7Hcpvyigzbv3~q-obSLzEHi87MjRJXiRFFQ0xTLM-4HEvyQKxQH-WQy6CgYfkk2VviO21Dd7ppp6xUs5vx5pl7MSHJUAZzDUCRCdBJKqq4tbSfQvODvC-6L4ZBdgcSSbrf5-VgzY4EsyKvJAjhSksGXKLl2TxCC2exqm8UjK45v-PcjwsAAmVcMlhuurMCsdOjD384FEAM3~APbATU5VWsR1loXnSBerKDPOdiiqgzeIfM07FTZGw-yYrIMsin0yjLF4NA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Summerville Planning Commission on Jan. 27 heard three public hearings on proposed annexations in council district 4 and took mixed action.

The commission voted to recommend annexation of a 0.95‑acre portion of TMS 136000249 (Hershey Park LLC) on Orangeburg Road and Hershey Circle to be combined with adjacent town parcels and rezoned from Dorchester County R‑2M (single‑family/manufactured) to town GB (general business). Planning staff presented the map and commissioners moved to approve; when the chair called the vote, commissioners answered “aye.”

Separately, the commission considered a petition by the trust agreement of Jane K. Upsher seeking annexation of TMS 136090049, a 2.77‑acre parcel along Central Avenue and Old Parsonage Road, with a request to zone the property GB (general business) after annexation. Edward Shepherd, speaking for the applicants, said the Upsher property was “under contract” and that no specific development plan had been finalized. After public comment, including multiple residents who said the parcel sits in the middle of an established residential neighborhood, commissioners voted and the record shows the motion to recommend annexation carried; several commissioners explained on the record they opposed the change but the motion passed and the commission forwarded the recommendation to town council.

A separate petition by Edward H. Tupper to annex TMS 136090006 (approximately 0.48 acre at 1526 Central Avenue) was discussed together with the Upsher petition because applicants sought concurrent annexation. Staff explained the smaller parcel was not itself contiguous to the town limits and could not be annexed independently; commissioners temporarily tabled that petition pending action on the Upsher parcel. After the Upsher motion, commissioners returned to the Tupper petition and concluded that because it was not contiguous it could not stand alone; the motion to approve the Tupper annexation therefore died and no recommendation was forwarded to council on that parcel.

Residents from Old Parsonage Road voiced opposition to commercial zoning in the middle of a residential area. Wayne Gibbons said the neighborhood contains “approximately 30 families” and warned that placing commercial property “in the middle of a residential neighborhood is not to our benefit.” Don Patrick and several other long‑time residents described family roots in the neighborhood stretching back generations and cited traffic and drainage concerns.

The commission’s actions represent a recommendation to town council; council must act to complete any annexation or zoning change. The record shows the commission approved the Hershey Park LLC petition and the Upsher petition (to be forwarded to council) and took no action to forward the Edward H. Tupper parcel due to noncontiguity.","At its Jan. 27 meeting the Summerville Planning Commission reviewed three annexation petitions for parcels in council district 4. The commission voted to recommend annexation for a 0.95‑acre Hershey Park LLC parcel and for a 2.77‑acre Upsher parcel; a smaller 0.48‑acre petition by Edward H. Tupper failed to advance because it was not contiguous.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6360011,"Planning commission recommends denying UDO change that would drop owner-occupancy requirement for bed-and-breakfasts",2786,1321000,4107000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00&start=1321&end=4107","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2175449-5cb0e0627d390b6075df16093de65f00/thumbnail_1321000.jpg","/articles/6360011/Summerville/Dorchester-County/South-Carolina/Planning-commission-recommends-denying-UDO-change-that-would-drop-owner-occupancy-requirement-for-bed-and-breakfasts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6360011-dad7a3e1f9b9c995e734b8519bfac357/orig.mp4?Expires=1770448496&Signature=F0SdtF2Rf4fjmSvPdJngoNXMhZM69CjvDUgZi~uAa7MSDDvRbGzoTIsWMn2Hm5X0FZG--tQF0jnkyhe~jAWxzxvvrCO1stM388bKqNVCQoPz23Fd4cWbz-i1VLnuR1P9jMR15upuRpMmOK1ut8Yyj5Is9nYoHM5lJ~SphLZBgCSx7uKjlT5qIgjxFxleTqN4Gp-vS~EiRW74P3THu0d907dsRL9g8~mgzlP-Vq3SvosNvcDRAl5pOnibKn-ZaIua8AUNJ05V5NFK3BH7BKEWDLjmRtMZPmL7YFIhR8CwET1z0T6ylg0bsHkjivb3BF--i2JTKQKD2VYZYLqIDbnp0w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Summerville Planning Commission on Jan. 27 recommended denial of a proposed amendment to the town Unified Development Ordinance that would remove the owner‑occupancy requirement for bed‑and‑breakfasts.

Residents and neighborhood groups told the commission the change would allow commercial operators and absentee ownership that could alter the character of historic residential areas, complicate enforcement and conflict with South Carolina statutes governing residential‑type lodging.

“Removal of the owner occupancy requirement takes out our neighbors and replaces them with paid staff,” said Debbie Tomchick, a resident who spoke during public comment. Multiple speakers cited state law while urging denial. Peter Gorman told the commission the amendment appeared to be “special interest legislation” advanced to accommodate one property owner and warned it would “lower the bar for business operating in a residential district.”

Speakers referenced provisions in state law that define a homestay bed and breakfast as a “residential type lodging facility” in which the innkeeper is also a resident proprietor. Bertie Crosby and others cited South Carolina Code provisions they said require the proprietor to be the owner and to reside at the property; several speakers pointed to South Carolina Title 33, Chapter 44 language about LLCs and to a separate bed‑and‑breakfast statute from 1998.

Planning staff also flagged enforcement challenges. The staff report noted concerns about verifying residency of an innkeeper or manager and said the language as drafted raised practical compliance questions. During discussion, commissioners suggested a broader study, including legal review of state statute interplay and community input, rather than a single‑item amendment.

Commissioners voted to recommend denial. The recommendation will be forwarded to town council for final action.

The record of public comment to the commission included residents who said they had used freedom‑of‑information requests to review internal emails and expressed concern that council members had discussed the proposed changes before formal study. Several speakers asked for a slower, more transparent process and for a citizen advisory review panel to draft any future changes to the lodging rules.

The commission’s recommendation to deny the UDO amendment does not itself change town code; the town council must consider the planning commission’s recommendation and take any final legislative action.","On Jan. 27 the Summerville Planning Commission recommended denial of a proposed amendment to remove the owner-occupancy requirement for bed-and-breakfasts, after extensive public comment citing state law, neighborhood impacts and enforcement concerns.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission approves minutes, elects chair and vice chair

Commission approves temporary dining‑tent rule allowing tents up to 180 days with inspections

Commission narrows design review board review for small public‑land projects, sets 1,000‑sq‑ft threshold

Commission considers three annexation petitions; approves two and declines action on a third

Planning commission recommends denying UDO change that would drop owner-occupancy requirement for bed-and-breakfasts