MINUTES
CITY OF GOOSE CREEK
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
TUESDAY, APRIL 6, 2010, 6:30 P.M.
MARGUERITE BROWN MUNICIPAL CENTER
GOOSE CREEK

I. Call to Order - Chairman Allen Wall

Chairman Allen Wall called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m.
Present: Joel Arenson, Paul Connerty, Doug Quinn, Jeffrey Smith, Allen Wall
Absent: Gayla McSwain and Barry Washington
Staff Present: Daniel Ben-Yisrael, Sarah Hanson

II. Review of Minutes - January 5, 2010
Mr. Arenson asked that the minutes reflect that his request was that Staff research how other cities handle their street name changes rather than just a general overview of the issue.
Mr. Quinn asked about the wording referring to Mr. Wall's request for Staff to research the previous renaming of South Live Oak to North Main Street.

Motion: Mr. Quinn made a motion to accept the minutes with the above revisions. Mr. Smith seconded.
Discussion: There was none.
Vote: All in favor; none opposed.

Mr. Wall commended the Commissioners for their diligence in informing Staff about their inability to attend the March meeting prior to the time of the meeting so that other Commissioners could be notified.

Mr. Wall thanked Mr. Quinn and Ms. McSwain for their hospitality for the February dinner. There was brief discussion about having a second dinner once the weather was warmer.

III. Discussion - Street Name Change for a Portion of State Road

Mr. Wall stated that at the January meeting it was decided that there would be a public hearing regarding the name change of State Road to St. James Avenue and asked Mr. Ben-Yisrael about the postponement of the hearing. Mr. Ben-Yisrael stated that Staff would like to be able to gather more information from the Daniel Island Company as to where their access roads are going to be located on that side in order to try to coordinate the location of the name change with a potential intersection. That information is forthcoming; the plans are changing, and Staff expects to have more information in the coming weeks or months.

Mr. Wall stated he was in error concerning the name change to the City Limits in that it does extend to the City limits boundary. Mr. Ben-Yisrael showed an illustration of the City boundaries being also the Carnes boundaries and the street names as they've been changed to date.

Mr. Wall asked if Staff had had the opportunity to see how other municipalities handled the location of the street name changes, and Mr. Ben-Yisrael responded that it was handled differently depending on the municipality.

IV. Discussion - Land Use Buffer Map

Mr. Ben-Yisrael explained that Staff wished to work with the Commission to look at current undeveloped or in some instances underdeveloped properties, or properties that could be redeveloped in the near future to identify them and to discuss appropriate buffering requirements. There are instances where commercial/industrial land is adjacent to residential land uses and other less intense zoning uses. The Zoning Ordinance requires that, when adjacent properties have different land uses or are different zoning districts, a buffer be established; currently the requirement is a 15 foot buffer of vegetation and/or fencing. The buffer of vegetation would have to grow or be established at 6' within three years. That is the baseline of the buffer requirements, and there have been situations where the buffers have been found to be inadequate, and it may have been appropriate to have enforced a more substantial buffer. At one time there was a land use buffer map established and references to buffers that should be required for certain properties. That map isn't now available, but Staff wishes to have the Commission discuss what they feel would be suitable land uses for these properties and contemplate the impact of potential development and then discuss what would be appropriate buffers, thus establishing a future long range buffer map to coordinate with the land use buffer map that will be established for the Comprehensive Plan. He provided two buffer map profiles for two vacant properties and told the Commission they will review others in the upcoming months.

A profile of a commercial site at the corner of Plantation Blvd. and St. James Avenue was presented. Currently zoned General Commercial, it abuts a Restricted Commercial area, and is across from the WalMart property. Behind the property is a residential single family detached development - Westminster Heights. The greatest potential impact would be to this residential area immediately behind it. There was discussion about what the City can require a commercial developer to do concerning a buffer. Mr. Ben-Yisrael responded that the 15 foot buffer is all that can be required by the ordinance. However, the tree ordinance can also contribute toward the buffer requirement as well, and Staff can also negotiate a more substantial buffer. There was discussion about the types of buffers which can be used, including berms, densely planted areas, different types of fencing, most determined by a case by case basis. By having direction by the Commission, Staff is more comfortable negotiating with the developers for what is necessary, as the request for additional buffering doesn't appear as arbitrary; it provides Staff with a bit more leverage when having these conversations with the developers. Mr. Arenson suggested that the City should have a standard buffer profile. He suggested having a living buffer with vegetation and landscaping vs. fencing which can deteriorate over time. Mr. Ben-Yisrael suggested that following these discussions the Commission will develop specific recommendations about buffering and then use if for redrafting the Zoning Ordinance.

Mr. Wall suggested that the use of the property could determine the type of buffer required. Mr. Arenson suggested developing standards where buffer requirements could be based on the type of project, a sliding requirement. Mr. Ben-Yisrael suggested including land use recommendations in their discussions as well, as that could also be included in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Arenson suggested standards be designed for aesthetics as well. There was brief discussion about specific standards relieving some of the subjective aspect of the review/recommendation phase of the project.

Mr. Wall asked about the possible uses for this property. Mr. Ben-Yisrael presented photographs of the property as well as a table of land uses for a property zoned general commercial. Mr. Wall questioned if the restricted commercial zoning adjacent to the general commercial zoning was created to provide a buffer between the residential zoning and the general commercial zoning. Mr. Ben-Yisrael stated that in this particular situation, because single family residential is directly adjacent to the general commercial zoning, the restricted commercial zoning doesn't succeed in acting as a buffer.

Mr. Arenson suggested that if properties contain mature trees, it is critical to have standards in place prior to construction to preserve the mature trees. Mr. Ben-Yisrael stated the tree ordinance requires that a tree survey be submitted prior to any clearing, but with buffer recommendations the area to be preserved can be identified and then additional requirements for preservation be put in place.

Mr. Ben-Yisrael suggested the Commission discuss the best use for the property and what type of buffer would be recommended. Is the general commercial zoning the best use for the property, with the single family residential adjacent, and what type of buffer is needed? Because of light, noise, use, etc., the residential area could be impacted by a general commercial development. There was some discussion about the amount of space between the commercial property and the current residences. There was discussion about integrating retention ponds into buffer zones, requiring aesthetic standards.

Mr. Wall asked if Staff wants guidelines for future developments, and Mr. Ben-Yisrael stated he felt the requirements needed to be more robust. There was discussion about considerations for buffering which are specific to general commercial zoning such as building height, lighting, and noise and the possibility of having a buffer based on a sliding scale and one which requires existing vegetation remain. Mr. Arenson suggested researching what other communities require for their buffer areas, particularly places such as Hilton Head. Mr. Quinn also asked that signage be taken into consideration as well. Mr. Ben-Yisrael suggested crafting an ordinance which allows clear guidelines for different cases, creating a minimum, then allowing flexibility and the authority to devise a buffer specific to the property, particularly being able to increase the required buffer.

There was discussion about getting public input concerning the issue and the requirements for notifying the public and holding public hearings for developing properties. The Commission expressed their feeling that the public should be a part of the process.

Mr. Ben-Yisrael suggested that perhaps it would be more effective for the Commission to look at the properties, the conditions surrounding them, and their land uses and then take a broader approach by making suggestions as to how buffers should work and then Staff take that feedback and craft a draft ordinance for the Commission's review and discussion.

Mr. Ben-Yisrael provided a profile for the property at the corner of St. James Ave. and Fairfax Blvd., immediately across from the Chick-Fil-A property, which is currently zoned Restricted Commercial. Mr. Wall asked if existing buffers would then become nonconforming, and Mr. Ben-Yisrael answered that they would, but he said only a change in use or a substantial improvement would be the only time the nonconformity could be addressed.

It was agreed that at the next meeting other site profiles will be presented so that the Commission can be informed of what properties are vacant, particularly for the land use discussion. From there Staff will research and work on language to craft a proposed ordinance.

Mr. Arenson asked if the Daniel Island Company has planned for adequate buffering at Carnes Crossroads, and Mr. Ben-Yisrael stated that the plans he has seen go over and beyond what is required. They do a good job of master planning their properties. Mr. Arenson suggested using their standards for other properties.

V. Comments From the Commission

Mr. Quinn asked if USC still owns the shopping center property at Crowfield and St. James Ave. and if it still was located outside the City limits, and Mr. Ben-Yisrael confirmed that both were still true. Mr. Wall reminded the Commissioners to respond to the COG's information for the Comprehensive Plan Committee. Mr. Wall asked about Staff providing the Commission with new development information on a regular basis.

VI. Comments From Staff

Mr. Ben-Yisrael congratulated Mr. Wall on his selection as the City's Volunteer of the Year.

VII. Adjournment

Mr. Quinn made the motion to adjourn. Mr. Washington seconded the motion, and the meeting adjourned at or about 8:00 pm.