MINUTES
CITY OF GOOSE CREEK
PLANNING COMMISSION
MARGUERITE BROWN MUNICIPAL CENTER
519 N. GOOSE CREEK BOULEVARD
TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 2011, 6:30 P.M.

 

I. Call to Order -Chairman Allen Wall

Chairman Wall called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m.
Present: Joel Arenson, Paul Connerty, Doug Quinn, and Allen Wall
Absent: Gayla McSwain, Jeffrey Smith, and Barry Washington
Staff Present: Daniel Ben-Yisrael and Sarah Hanson

Mr. Wall welcomed Mayor Heitzler to the meeting. Mr. Franklin Moore was introduced as a new member to the Commission.

II. Review of Minutes - February 1, 2011

Motion: Mr. Arenson made a motion to accept the minutes with a comment that a reference be added that Ms. McSwain and Mr. Arenson had recused themselves from the hearing due to their living adjacent to the golf course. Mr. Wall asked that the statement referring to the 168 acres be changed to indicate for the record that the property is actually 160 acres. Mr. Arenson amended the motion, and Mr. Quinn seconded.
Discussion: There was none.
Vote: All voted in favor.

Mr. Ben-Yisrael passed out a copy of the decision letter recommending that City Council change the zoning of the 160 acres of the Crowfield golf course property. He explained the letter had been approved by the Chairperson but he wished for the full Commission to review the letter. There was discussion about the letter, and a change was made to the wording of the motion. Mr. Ben-Yisrael explained to the Commission that following the last City Council meeting there was some discussion concerning the Commission's public hearing, and he is unsure how Council will handle the recommendation. He stated there was a possibility Council may send the matter back to the Commission to reconsider rezoning the entire property. He stated the question is whether, if they wish to rezone the entire property, it must come back before the Commission, and they are researching the process that would be used. There was discussion concerning the process if the scope of the rezoning is changed. There was discussion about the Commission recommending that any future zoning proposals not initiated by the Planning Commission be referred to the Commission via the City Council.

III. Discussion - Land Use Buffer

Mr. Ben-Yisrael summarized his past discussion with EDAC regarding street buffers and existing nonconforming businesses and the Commission's request for information about Mt. Pleasant's sliding scale ordinance that allows for flexibility in standards. There was discussion about how to balance visibility with aesthetics.

He shared comments received from other planners around the state regarding legal nonconforming uses and what triggers are used to require compliance to the new ordinance. Some require compliance after a use is abandoned for 90 to 120 days; some require compliance when renovations or improvements are made that equal 50% of the structure's reasonable replacement cost; others require compliance when rebuilding a structure after a disaster causing damage of more than 50% of the fair market value; and some provide a grace period for the nonconforming uses of up to three years, then any nonconforming uses are considered in violation of the ordinance. He suggested using the renovations or improvements equaling more than 50% of the replacement cost as the trigger and basing the determination on the building inspector's recommendation.

There was discussion about providing a grace period and whether it is fair to require legal nonconforming businesses to make improvements to meet the ordinance to improve the aesthetics of the City. Mr. Ben-Yisrael stated there is the process through the ZBA to ask for a variance in the event there is a reason they could not conform to the ordinance within the grace period. The Commission requested that the ordinance state a grace period for compliance. There was discussion about whether to use the 50% substantial improvement as well, whichever occurred first. There was discussion about the differences in using fair market value as determined by the tax assessment or reasonable replacement cost, with the agreement that reasonable replacement cost was simpler to implement and is assessed by the building inspectors. It was decided that a five year grace period would be more business-friendly.

Motion: Mr. Connerty made a motion to include in the ordinance the requirement that legal nonconforming properties be required to conform to the new ordinance when there are renovations or construction totaling more than 50% of the reasonable replacement cost of a structure or within a five year grace period, whichever occurs first. Mr. Quinn seconded the motion.
Discussion: There was none.
Vote: All voted in favor; none opposed.

The Commission requested Staff add language regarding implementing a sliding landscape requirement and bring the draft back for review. Per Mr. Quinn's request, Mr. Ben-Yisrael agreed to take into consideration current property conditions and the need for consistent appearances. Mr. Ben-Yisrael suggested limiting the options and keeping a more urban feel. It was decided Staff will bring a revised draft to the Commission and then bring it forward for a public hearing in May.

Mr. Wall reminded the Commission to return feedback on the Comprehensive Plan to Jessica.

Mr. Wall reminded them the next Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee is scheduled for March 22, and the public will be invited. It was confirmed the final proof would be presented to the Committee for their review, and the Committee will then refer it to the Planning Commission for their public hearing. It was agreed the meeting on the 5th would begin at 6:30, and the Steering Committee would be encouraged to attend. There would be maps and copies of the Plan available for public review prior to the meeting, and it was requested these be made available to them at 6:00 that evening. It was also requested that the meeting be advertised and that the draft be made available on the City's website. There was discussion about the procedure to be used in the Commission's consideration and discussion from the public input on the 5th and the subsequent approval of the Plan and recommendation to City Council via a public hearing on the 14th.

IV. Comments from the Commission

There was brief discussion about the dinner the prior month. Mr. Wall asked about the improvements currently ongoing along Highway 52, and Mr. Ben-Yisrael explained this was a part of the improvements provided by the TIFF funding.

Mr. Wall asked about off premise signs on Snake Road.

V. Comments from Staff

Mr. Ben-Yisrael stated the training would begin the following meeting.

VI. Adjournment

Mr. Quinn made a motion to adjourn, and Mr. Connerty seconded. All voted in favor. The meeting adjourned at 8:22 p.m.