Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thanks for replying, PD. Having been away I'm playing catch-up and I don't have the latest Observer yet.
It is unfortunate that the current representation from PI is so "invisible"...and with the decision being made by "out of towners" essentially, the outlook is pretty dismal. How unfortunate....PI still has a lot of charm, but once they get one monstrosity built that won't last long.
What's doing with that fancy Promenade project?
Wish I could be there for the meeting, but work will be in the way and we can't make it.
PD, I have a question. Please forgive my ignorance about governance of the area but I was just wondering who drafted the ordinances that were supposed to keep out big box developers? Is is a subset of the commission that will be deciding, or another entity? And, do you know if anyone is thinking ahead to after the voting, and drafting a new ordinance that will stop the future attempts by this type of business? Seems like that would be an important thing for someone to be working on...!
We got the Observer yesterday; I was surprised by a couple of the letters' stalwart defense of the project.
I find it interesting that there is now a strong effort to hide the identity of the potential tenant; given the names of some of the other large corporations that SunBelt deals with, I can't see why it matters who actually wants the thing built cuz they're all behemoths and are completely inappropriate for the area.
I hope that there are people out there who are supplementing their e-mails with actual letters of protest. Its easy to delete e-mail or block it, but a real letter has to go through a lot of hands to get from sender to recipient and they can pile into quite an expression of opinion ( think about "Miracle on 34th St and the letters addressed to Santa). Such a tangible exhibit could be difficult to ignore. - And no, I'm not thinking that anyone is going to gather the letters in bags and haul them to the meeting, but I am thinking that an increase in actual mail to these individuals could make more of an impact that a list of messages on the inbox.
Hope someone will video the meeting for those of us who can't be there!
Been a bit out of the loop. I have every intention of attending the meeting this coming Thursday at Waccamaw HS and speaking. Here's a link to what I thought was called Walmart Watch. Lots of interesting info on groups all over getting together to stop the store from expanding in their area. We MUST band together now!!!
Hi chili'! Good to see you back here.
We got last week's Observer today and I have been reading the letters to the editor. I'm glad to see that folks from the immediate area seem to be in agreement about the situation for the most part. There's one guy who seems to not grasp that this is really about a LOT more than just economics and aesthetics, but perhaps he will change his mind, too.
Since I can't be there, I am trying to get off as many letters as I can, but that only goes so far, of course.
I hope that y'all can get across the points of: potential impact on the environment from the number of cars and underground holding of runoff; that the surreptitious manner in which this transaction has occurred should be used to call into question the ethics of the "unnamed tenant" ; and just how ridiculous a variance for a building 3 TIMES larger than the biggest buidling now allowed really is...dang! that will swallow that whole end of town!!
And for those who seem bent on mentioning the potential tax revenues and jobs- will someone PLEASE explain that with the usual incentives and deferrals they will not be paying these expected taxes off the bat- those are deferred for a certain time ( usually 5-7 years is my understanding) and by that time they will be trying to close and relocate the business. And those "new" jobs that they are supposedly going to create will, in actuality, be not new jobs but just placement for folks who have lost their jobs due to closure.
I do hope that this attempt by another "gigantic" corporation will raise the red flag for Pawleys residents that they MUST take control over the future development of the area and put together a Master plan that includes ordinances that would stifle these businesses as well as a growth development plan that will provide opportunities for small businesses that are more appropriate to "bloom and grow". It should now be obvious that the area is "on the radar".
Will be watching from afar and hoping for the best.
Today is just the first public step. The County Planning Staff has reviewed the developer's proposal and recommended approval, contingent upon a number of conditions they added. That was expected, since the proposal met the most recent interpretation of the zoning regulations. Those actions are administrative and not held in public. Tonight, the County Planning Commission reviews the staff's report, and will make a recommendation to County Council. The Commission is less restricted than the Planning Staff. They can recommend based to some degree upon what they feel is in the best interest of the County, as well as their perception of public need and public want. They can also choose to ignore the public's wishes altogether.
Regardless of what they recommend, County Council will still have the final say. At some point, it will come before County Council in a public meeting. They can choose to put it on their agenda any number of times. Tonite's meeting will be interesting and will be important because it will be the first hint of which way the County is leaning, but the real fireworks will probably be the Council meeting(s).
There's also been some talk of lawsuits, in the event it gets approved. IMO, that's just noise at this point. I'm not sure any group has deep enough pockets to be willing to take on WallyWorld's lawyers.
Well, I guess everybody who is interested has heard the results, I'm just not sure where they leave us.
It was an interesting 5 hour meeting. I don't have the energy to do the meeting justice. After a lengthy presentation by the planning staff and a relatively brief sell job by the developer's lawyer, 90 people had signed up to speak, with 3 or 4 supporting the proposal and the remainder opposed. There were 5 Planning Commission members present. The PI representative and the MI representative openly challenged statements by both the staff and the lawyer. The other 3 said little or nothing at all throughout the entire meeting.
The initial motion was to deny the rezoning proposal. It was defeated 3-2 with little discussion. Go figure. The second motion was to approve it, but require them to meet the zoning overlay restrictions, which allows County Council to approve buildings up to 60,000 sq ft. The developer wants to build about 120,000 sq ft and tried to bypass the zoning overlay by buying add'l wooded acreage behind the current shopping center. This motion passed 4-1. I left with the impression that the Commission's minds were probably pretty well made up before the meeting started. The Coastal Observer did an interesting blow-by-blow blog during the meeting.
I suspect the dust will have to settle a little and somebody smarter than me will need to figure out the next steps. Someone at the meeting said County Council must follow the usual regulatory procedure of three readings. If that's true, the first reading is automatic approval with no discussion, with the real debate coming at the second reading. I assume the Council has the freedom to follow the recommendation or ignore it and either approve what the developer requested or deny it altogether. The developer may also decide to retreat and regroup, or he may charge ahead taking his chances. There was also a comment in yesterday's Coastal Observer that Walmart has some "neighborhood market" stores in the 60,000 sq ft range and that might be an alternative. Oh well...
Regardless, the community did itself proud last night. The meeting was well run, orderly, and respectful. I was actually impressed by the developer's lawyer, which has to be a first. He was obviously aware of community feelings and was sensitive to those. For the most part, the public speakers also did nice jobs presenting their points without too much sarcasm or too many personal attacks. The real battle is probably still ahead.
Update - Just found this info in the Georgetown Times. Not sure it clarifies much. "The plan now goes to County Council, which will give it first reading by title only on Oct. 9. A discussion and second vote will take place on Oct. 23, with a final vote on Nov. 13. Council can agree to the recommendation, make changes to it or deny it."
Last edited by PawleysDude; 09-21-2012 at 08:03 AM..
Reason: Quick Update
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
