Council asks staff to draft moratorium on standalone apartment projects while plan is revised

City planning staff briefed council members on a possible temporary moratorium on new standalone multifamily apartment projects and the council gave staff direction to draft an ordinance reflecting guidance heard at the study session.

Tommy Paradise, Director of Planning and Development, reviewed case law and examples from other municipalities (Clemson, Port Royal, Mount Pleasant) in which local governments adopted time‑limited moratoria to allow code and plan revisions. Paradise said the moratorium tool is intended to “pause” approvals so staff and the council can study impacts and implement changes to the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance.

Parcels and existing pipeline: Paradise said the city currently has 63 projects in the pipeline — including 11 apartment projects totaling roughly 2,883 units, 18 single‑family attached projects (about 1,100 units), and 16 single‑family detached projects (about 12,773 units) — and that roughly one‑third of housing in the city is renter‑occupied while two‑thirds is owner‑occupied.

Council guidance and scope: Councilmembers expressed concern about “standalone” apartment complexes (the large, single‑parcel developments that have been proposed at several sites). Several members said they were comfortable using a moratorium to pause approvals for such standalone apartment projects while the city revises relevant plan and zoning language. Councilmember Kevin and others recommended excluding duplexes, townhomes and small “missing-middle” multifamily types from a ban; other members urged that staff draft a moratorium that specifically targets large, stand‑alone apartment proposals so typical attached single‑family and planned mixed‑use projects are not unintentionally blocked.

Possible duration: Council members discussed several timing approaches. Suggestions included (a) a one‑year moratorium with an extension provision; (b) a two‑year or two‑and‑a‑half‑year moratorium that aligns with the comprehensive‑plan rewrite scheduled for August 22, 2027; and (c) a moratorium limited to a date tied to the plan rewrite rather than a fixed number of months. Paradise said staff could draft the ordinance using council guidance and that staff preferred a date‑based endpoint tied to the plan process.

Why it matters: Council members who supported the draft direction cited concerns about the cumulative public‑service demands and infrastructure impacts of large apartment complexes, and the lack of controls in the current zoning framework for standalone multifamily. Members who opposed a broad ban emphasized housing supply and affordability concerns and asked that small‑scale multifamily (duplexes, triplexes, townhomes) be preserved as options.

Quotes and clarifying points: Tommy Paradise said, “To do a moratorium, it’s got to be for the purpose of researching and implementing changes to the Zoning Ordinance, comprehensive plan or both.” Councilmember Pat said she favored a longer pause to align with the comprehensive‑plan rewrite. Councilmember Kevin recommended allowing duplexes and smaller “missing‑middle” units, saying they can provide relatively affordable options with lower density impacts than large apartment complexes.

Next steps: By the close of the discussion staff said it would prepare a draft ordinance for council review that would (a) apply to standalone apartment projects, (b) exempt existing vested projects and approved planned developments, and (c) include a defined endpoint (either a date tied to the comprehensive‑plan rewrite or a specified extension mechanism). The draft will come back to council for consideration and possible adoption on a future agenda.

Ending: Staff will circulate a draft ordinance reflecting the council’s preference to pause approvals for large, standalone apartment complexes while protecting small‑scale multifamily options and vested projects.