|
George's Information and Comments Growth Impact Action Committee ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ |
|
|
Proceedings: May 17 Envision 2025 Horry County Comprehensive Plan -- George Edwards
Note: These are not official proceedings, but as I observed them. I intend to continue publishing the officially approved Land Use Element minutes (which will likely include more or fewer items and details) with other supplemental material provided by staff when such becomes available.
You can click here when you want to move back to the main menu for the Land Use Element of the Envision 2025 Horry County Comprehensive Plan.
Steering Committee Membership Changes on the Horry County Web Site
There were no steering committee membership changes shown on the Horry County Web site. Johnny Skippers attended the May 17 meeting, for the second time, sitting behind a preprinted placard indicating Holliday Associates, a legitimate group with appointment rights included in the ordinance forming the steering committee. Top Level May 17 Envision 2025 Unofficial "Minutes"
The basic results of the May 17 meeting were voting the "Rural Land
Stewardship Program" tool into the Envision 2025 comprehensive plan and
accepting the Rural Area description assigned to the white area of the
current staff prepared edition of its Future Land Use Map.
Voting members present included: Marty Ekster, Mitchell Flannery, Julie Harbin, Tamera Bergstrom, George Edwards, Shirley Martin, Eric Rabon, Carol Hardwick, Felix Pitts, Susan Libes, Fred Richardson, Lawrence Langdale, Holly Kauffman, Peggy Graham, Pam Creech and Johnny Skipper -- representing Holliday Associates as in the May 3 meeting. Staff handouts included the May 17 meeting agenda, the May 3 meeting minutes, a Statement of Needs and Goals reflecting previous committee amendments, and the latest edition of the candidate Envision 2025 - Future Land Use Map with Future Land Use - Area Designations. The May 3 minutes were approved. Chairman Fred Richardson, the Grand Strand Water & Sewer Authority appointee, asked for steering committee member comments. George Edwards, County Council District 8 appointee, proposed departing from the published agenda, in which a Future Land Use Map presentation with the latest revisions was to immediately follow, in order to first revisit the Community Benefits Agreement strategy and discuss other committee member proposed strategy additions that had been previously announced. He noted that, although he announced his intention to propose revisiting the Community Benefit Agreements strategy in the meeting previous to the last meeting, the last meeting had been totally taken up with a Future Land Use Map discussion. Chairman Richardson ruled toconsider revisiting the Community Benefit Agreements strategy before returning to Future Land Use Map discussions.
Edwards distributed handouts on Community Benefits Agreements as well as two other proposed strategy additions that he and staff had previously e-mailed to all steering committee members with e-mail addresses. The CBA portion of the handout follows:
· Promote community involvement and stakeholder participation through the use of Community Benefits Agreements (CBA’s). (as initially prepared by staff) A Community Benefits Agreement is a written legally enforceable contract between a developer and a coalition that represents stakeholders in a community, for example, Home Owner Associations. In return for community support and being permitted to build in a community, the developer agrees to provide benefits such as park or recreational areas, community services, environmental improvement, facilities or amenities. Edwards noted that when CBAs were initially struck from the plan by the committee, before he was a member, the first argument made was that neighboring communities would never agree to any such agreement and that the first proposed added strategy in his handout was in response to another argument given.
He argued that the agreement between Wicked Stick golf course and the neighboring Southwood community showed that such agreements could be made. He also said that he religiously watched tapes of all Horry County county council meetings, and when oral developer promises were given, council attorneys consistently pointed out that such were not enforceable. He noted that the suggested wording was only to "promote."
Peggy Graham, Horry County Planning Commission, Chair Appointee, said she was the one who made the initial arguments against including CBAs in the plan. General discussion followed including opinions that PDDs accomplished the same purpose as CBAs. Shirley Martin, County Council District 9 appointee, suggested changing the word "promote" in the strategy to "encourage." Others expressed concern about development rights being even more restricted with CBAs.
Edwards said that CBAs were legally enforceable contracts between
communities and developers, not restrictions enforced by the county -- as
opposed to PDDs which were contracts between the county and developers.
He asked Janet Carter, Planning Director (and attorney), whether she would recommend CBAs. She smiled and said that she would always recommend any agreements to be written as legally enforceable contracts; she also clarified that PDDs were actually enacted laws rather than contracts.
Ultimately Lawrence Langdale, Horry-Georgetown Homebuilders Association
appointee, moved to amend striking the words after the word
“participation.” The amendment passed with only Pam Creech, Wildlife Action, Inc.; Susan Libes, Coastal Carolina University;
Julie Harbin, County Council District 4, and Edwards raising
their hands to vote no. The amended proposal passed, I
believe (not stated by the chair) with the words "through the use of
Community Benefits Agreements (CBA's)" struck and the word “Promote” changed to
“Encourage” as Martin had suggested.
Felix Pitts, Burroughs & Chapin Company appointee, pitched a Rural Land Stewardship Program
that he had promoted in an e-mail to the steering committee sent since the
previous meeting including reference material
He stressed the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) aspect of the
Rural Land Stewardship Program. TDRs had previously
been voted down by the committee.
Edwards spoke in support of a Rural Land Stewardship Program as
implemented in Florida. He stressed the rural aspect.
Pitts spoke, emphasizing its TDR aspect.
Harbin expressed concern about TDRs allowing even more increased
density in her S.C. 707 area or other already congested areas that
were already without adequate public facilities
Edwards said that TDRs were intrinsic to Rural Land Stewardship Programs but
the key word
was “Rural” -- in Horry County the white area shown on the Future Land
Use Map. The S.C. 707 area and other such areas were shown as Urban
Communities, definitely not within the white area, and so could not be "receiving areas"
as defined in a Rural Land Stewardship Program. The program also was to
consider public
facility adequacy in allowed receiving areas. Areas for which TDRs would be
granted would be required to be placed in conservation easements that run
with the land. He said that detailing the implementation of this was beyond
the scope of this committee; that would be done by staff and possibly other
citizen committees.
Senior Planner, Christopher Klement, weighed in assuring the committee that it was staff's job to carefully plan what areas were suitable to be receiving areas under such a plan. Receiving areas are the areas to which development rights would be allowed to be transferred. Pitts continued pressing for a general TDR not restricted to rural areas.
Edwards moved to include a Rural Land Stewardship Program in the comp
plan as a tool.
Vote passed overwhelmingly.
The Future Land Use Map with the latest revisions was displayed on the
screen. There was much discussion especially by Pitts who objected to the white portion of the
Future Land Use map being called “Rural” because he felt that it infringed
upon development rights.
Principal Planner, Roy Taylor, assured him that zoning not the map would determine zoning approval. Pitts said that might be true but the rural designation would raise a question. Edwards said that without a designated Horry County rural area, the Rural Land Stewardship Program tool previously approved would be meaningless.
Ultimately, Langdale moved to accept the term rural for the map’s white area
Motion passed
Sometime during the proceedings after much discussion on the rural designation, Klement, referring to a document in front of him, keyboarded a definition on his computer so that it would appear on the screen. The definition was refined and agreed to by committee consensus. Steve Tanner, a planner from the city of Conway, rose in the audience to say that property development rights were not all that the committee should be considering. He reminded the committee that land use element considerations were to include those of the six other comprehensive plan elements -- natural resources, community facilities, cultural resources, housing, population and economic.
Creech expressed concern about cumulative effects on rivers and drainage.
Libes suggested adding periodic reassessments as to whether the
goals of the comprehensive plan were being met. Ray felt that was superfluous.
It was unclear whether that was resolved.
Edwards's handout of suggested strategy additions was not further
acknowledged one way or another. As one was a hedge for the unsuccessful CBA
approval attempt, the important one remaining was "Require a
developer to contribute in kind or financially the proportionate share of
the public facilities his development requires to be as adequate
post-development as pre-development. (This assumes public facilities are not
already adequate or will not be adequate after development. 'In kind'
includes the appraised value of land dedicated for public facility usage.)"
If you wish to return to the top of this page, click here.
The words after "requires" above will be dropped from any future wordings for a proportionate share approach as it is impossible to have a development keep public facilities fully AS adequate post-development as pre-development (except in the most general sense that general taxation would be no higher or for a totally ridiculous scenario in which the developer could build the development's own required fire stations, schools, police stations, jails, furnish fire engines, police cars, etc. and finally build a new road from the development to S. C. 31). Truly meaningful impact fees are infeasible under the S.C. impact fee statute, moratoriums are apparently politically unacceptable. And an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, although highly desirable in allowing development only in areas where there are adequate public facilities, when applied to the entire county would require more taxes on everyone.
This leads to a proportionate share approach to keep things from, at least financially, continually getting worse for the general population of Horry County. Such could be better stated as follows: "Require a developer to contribute in kind (e.g. dedication of property) or financially the development's proportionate share of the public facilities the development requires," or maybe add: "that will be unavailable after development."
It would appear to be a little difficult to convince the world
that "contributing a proportionate share" is a bad thing. New
developments should pay their proportionate share of the public
facilities they require. That is only fair. Big developments
obviously would pay much more than small ones. This is just.
A developer might argue that he has to continue to pay taxes on those public facilities -- join the crowd, that is what everyone else is doing to pay for previous development -- in addition to the maintenance, replacement and, refurbishment costs that are legitimate tax costs for everyone.
The handout which follows shows the latest steering committee statement of comprehensive plan needs and goals. Click Land Use Element Updated Draft 4/17/07 for an overall, if somewhat dated, presentation of the land use element. The committee voted to drop the word "conservation" from "rural conservation areas" in the future land use definitions and wherever else that phrase occurs. Changes are also anticipated to reflect changes in data since the committee started almost 2 1/2 years ago. If you wish to return to the top of this page, click here.
Handout: May 17 Steering Committee Meeting -- Statement of Needs and Goals
STATEMENT OF NEEDS AND GOALSNeed:Identify land suitable for future development in the County in an economically and environmentally sustainable manner that promotes the health, safety and general welfare of present and future residents, businesses and visitors.
Goals:
· Encourage growth in existing and planned areas throughout the County through reinvestment and new development that improves the quality of life by respecting and reinforcing existing community forms and values.
· Promote sustainable development patterns through environmentally friendly design, balanced land uses, a variety of housing choices, and a well-integrated transportation system, public facilities and amenities.
·
Encourage the protection of rural areas that have distinct
resources, characteristics and a traditional way-of-life in Horry County in
a manner that respects private property rights while simultaneously
· Develop a coordinated approach with consistent standards of evaluation in regards to population growth and land development that measures the effects of urbanization on the capacity and accessibility of public services, existing settlement patterns and the natural environment.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
It is recommended that Horry County implements following strategies within either a short term (1-2 years), intermediate term (2-5 years) or long term (5 and more years) time frame in order to fulfill the previously identified Needs and Goals.
Growth through reinvestment and new development
Develop an Adequate Public Facilities Plan that identifies base levels of service as well as funding mechanisms for maintaining current levels of service and infrastructure capacity in the future (short term).
Create a 20-year Capital Improvements Program (CIP) that addresses all the County’s public investment needs (short term).
Adopt design guidelines for commercial and Planned Development District (PDD) developments and an architectural review process that evaluates the appropriateness and encourages a variety of buildings, properties, and land uses to create architecturally and physically attractive areas (short term).
Adopt a Fix It First policy that gives top priority to repair and reinvestment in existing infrastructure (short term).
Produce a Unified Development Code that combines the County’s Land Development Regulations and Zoning Ordinance into one document that removes redundancy, etc. (short term to intermediate).
Address the need for open space retention, parks and schools, landscaping, subdivision connectivity, public safety and multi-modal transportation (short term).
Promotion of sustainable development patterns
Adjust the County’s zoning regulations to provide for greater flexibility for mixed uses, multiple housing types and compact development patterns (short term).
Develop and implement an
Incentive Zoning Ordinance
Develop and implement a Cluster Development Ordinance for commercial, residential and mixed-use developments in which a significant portion of the site is set aside as undivided, permanently protected open space, while the buildings (houses, shops, etc.) are clustered on the remainder of the property (short term to intermediate).
Encourage the preservation of sensitive environmental features and open space within development plans in exchange for incentives to the developer (short term).
Encourage low impact development designs to minimize impervious coverage throughout Horry County (short term).
Develop a Horry County Trails and Open Space Master Plan that identifies current and future needs, potential acquisitions, potential funding mechanisms and an implementation program (short term).
Adopt an Urban Forestry and Greenway Plan to increase the amount of accessible Open Space and to enhance and preserve the quality of naturally unique areas (short term).
Develop an ordinance that severely limits the discharge of untreated stormwater runoff from developed areas into wetlands (short term).
Encourage the use of the South Carolina Forestry Commissions Best Management Practices (short term).
Develop a “Traffic Impact Analysis” report to advise of potential adverse effects due to increased volume to be expected (short term).
Revisit “Parking Regulations” to determine the best site design requirements concerning vehicular ingress and egress, proximity to congested intersections, lateral access between separate but adjacent sites, and forward motion design (short term).
Consider the programmed “Pavement Management System” to insure routine and periodic maintenance can occur as necessary with minimal disruption to the motoring public (short term to intermediate).
Develop an “Access Management Program”, sometimes referred to as a Driveway Access Manual that would require adequate separation between individual curb cuts, installation of service lanes, and turn-lanes with capacity for the intended uses, and possible installation of traffic signals (short term).
Rural Areas
Develop Rural Area Management Plans (RAMP) that detail the land use needs of specific rural communities and areas (short term).
Develop an Agricultural Security Areas Ordinance that provides protection from ordinances that would otherwise limit or restrict agricultural activities (short term).
Encourage the protection of Riparian Corridors (short term).
Encourage cooperation and an open forum between the citizens, County, State, National, and regional agencies and organizations, both public and private, with an interest in conservation and preservation of natural resources (short term).
Promote the use of existing mechanisms or vehicles of property conservation through established means such as the USDA conservation banks for property conservation (short term to intermediate).
Preserve rural character and the lifestyles of property owners in areas well beyond the urban-suburban fringe, while providing opportunities for compatible development patterns (long term).
Evaluation of population growth and land development
Coordinate with various County departments and develop a system and database that enables the Planning Department to monitor and record land use changes, zoning activity and development permitting on a perpetual basis to assist in evaluating future policies and infrastructure needs (intermediate to long term).
Initiate studies with other governmental departments and agencies that will provide practical guidelines for evaluating the fiscal impacts of land development proposals and decisions on a long-range basis to avoid sudden increases in unfunded infrastructure costs (long term).
If you wish to return to the top of this page, click here. |