Developer Frustrated with Panel
Mount Pleasant commissioner says rules must be followed.
by Prentiss Findlay
“I want the people of this town to understand what’s going on behind closed doors,” an angry developer Anthony McAlister told the Planning Commission at its Dec. 20 meeting. McAlister Development Co. and Greystar Real Estate Partners are partners in the project.
McAlister was prepared to present a scaled-down version of the 110-acre project at the meeting, but the commission voted 5-4 against considering it and then rejected the original proposal for Central Mount Pleasant in an 8-1 vote.
McAlister could not be reached for comment Wednesday, but a spokesman said the developer’s effort to present a smaller version of the project that the Planning Commission might approve has been frustrating. McAlister Development’s Mills Buxton said the company is baffled by the response of the Planning Commission to the project, which he noted has generated no public opposition.
“The last meeting was just really puzzling. We feel like we’ve done everything that we’ve been asked to do at every step of the way,” said Buxton, who is chief operating officer for the company.
As originally proposed, Central Mount Pleasant would have 450,000 square feet of commercial space and 907 residential units. The smaller version of the project would have had 22 percent less commercial property, 20 percent less housing and 15 percent less traffic, which was a primary concern of the Planning Commission.
“I think we were not treating the applicant fairly,” Commissioner James Dooley said Wednesday. Dooley cast the dissenting vote in the commission’s 8-1 vote to deny the project. “I felt compelled to make a statement. I didn’t think that was an acceptable way to treat a corporate citizen,” Dooley said.
Commissioner Steve Brock was an outspoken opponent of allowing a vote on the scaled-down development. Brock said his position was based on procedural rules that prevent changing the scope of the project in mid-stream after a public hearing has been held.
“My belief has always been and continues to be that the rules are important. The developer has all the advantages, and it levels the playing field,” Brock said.
At the Nov. 21 Planning Commission meeting, McAlister asked for more time to address board members’ concerns about increased traffic. The commission deferred a vote on Central Mount Pleasant until Dec. 20 but then refused to consider the new version of the project.
Details new version of the development were not discussed at the meeting because a majority of the commission agreed that procedural rules required it to consider the larger version of the project as presented at a public hearing in November.
The Planning Commission sends its recommendation to the Town Council Planning Committee, which is scheduled to meet on either Tuesday or Wednesday.
At issue for the Planning Committee is whether the town should approve annexation and rezoning of about 100 acres of land between Rifle Range Road and Hungryneck Boulevard south of the Isle of Palms Connector. As part of the project, the town also will consider whether to recommend rezoning about 10 acres of undeveloped land on Rifle Range Road already in the town limits. Annexing the 100 acres into Mount Pleasant would make the development eligible for the town’s water and sewer service and its police and fire protection, officials said.
A joint meeting of the Planning Commission and the Planning Committee was held Dec. 6 to discuss the project. There, with the developer in attendance, Brock proposed limiting comments to members of the commission, the committee and town staff. The joint panel voted in favor of his recommendation.
Reach Prentiss Findlay at 937-5711 or pfindlay@postandcourier.com.
Go to Dustin Ryan’s Charleston Real Estate website to view homes for sale in Charleston South Carolina
