MINUTES
CITY OF GOOSE CREEK
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARGUERITE BROWN MUNICIPAL CENTER
519 N. GOOSE CREEK BOULEVARD
TUESDAY, JANUARY 4, 2011 6:30 P.M.
I. Call to Order -Chairman Allen Wall
Chairman Wall called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
Present: Joel Arenson, Paul Connerty, Gayla McSwain, Doug Quinn, Jeffrey Smith, Allen Wall, and Barry Washington
Staff Present: Daniel Ben-Yisrael and Sarah Hanson
II. Review of Minutes - December 7, 2010
There was discussion concerning the minutes not referencing the fact that the recusal of Mr. Arenson, Ms. McSwain, and Mr. Connerty during the public hearing held the previous month was per legal counsel. Mr. Connerty suggested because it was not stated during the meeting that the Commission had requested legal guidance, the record for this meeting could not reflect that fact. He suggested instead adding it in the Commission comments for this meeting. Mr. Arenson requested two other text changes.
Motion: Mr. Smith made a motion to accept the minutes as adjusted. Mr. Arenson seconded.
Discussion: There was none.
Vote: All voted in favor.
III. Review and Discussion of Land Use Buffer Ordinance
There was discussion about requiring landscaping to soften fencing used as a buffer element when located at the street side property line. There was brief discussion about adding language requiring specific plantings at specific intervals.
There was discussion concerning how street buffer requirements are measured in terms of what defines the buffer line. Mr. Ben-Yisrael explained the buffer line would begin at the property line and measure inward. He suggested this could be specified in the Ordinance.
It was explained that the new ordinance would apply to all existing and future streets and would be required for all new developments and for any significant redevelopment. Other existing properties would be considered existing nonconforming properties.
There was discussion about including language that states the guidelines are minimum standards but that the City reserves the right to impose more stringent requirements if needed for the public good. There was concern that this could be considered to be arbitrarily imposed and not consistently applied. It was suggested that the requirement would have to be based on performance of the buffer and be clearly measureable to allow for consistency and not be subjective or arbitrary. Mr. Ben-Yisrael stated he would research and consider additional language. He stated there was a method of "marking up" the requirement but allowing methods of reducing the requirement depending upon how the buffer is designed and stated he would bring the language to them.
There was agreement to add language regarding compliance at time of the Certificate of Occupancy.
The Commissioners questioned the references made to the various section numbers of the Ordinances in the draft. Mr. Ben-Yisrael explained that these were all a part of the Zoning Ordinance as a whole.
There was brief discussion about the reference to buffers around wetland areas.
Mr. Ben-Yisrael advised the Commission the City's Economic Development Advisory Committee had shown interest in reviewing the draft, and he would be meeting with them the next week to discuss the draft.
IV. Comments from the Commission
Mr. Wall asked about the process required for the Public Hearing which had been continued to their February meeting. He stated he would be meeting with the City Administrator to find exactly what options are available for their consideration, and he asked that Mr. Ben-Yisrael compile a list of these options that could be given to the Commissioners prior to the February meeting. Mr. Arenson asked about receiving a copy of the deed restriction cited at the public hearing. Mr. Ben-Yisrael answered he was willing to give that to them but felt it could cloud the issue. There was brief discussion about being able to clarify the issue for the public or whether it would confuse the issue further as well as the opinion that the deed restriction was irrelevant to the Commission's decision, as that was a City Council consideration.
The Commission discussed a possible date for a dinner.
V. Comments from Staff
There was brief discussion about the work beginning along Highway 52 at Liberty Hall Road as well as the status of the Food Lion shopping center on St. James Ave. Staff updated the Commission on the Northwood Assembly Church and School.
VI. Adjournment
Mr. Arenson made a motion to adjourn, and Mr. Washington seconded. All voted in favor. The meeting adjourned at 8:07 p.m.
