Historic Review Board
Regular MeetingFort Mill, SC · August 13, 2019
Minutes
MINUTES
TOWN OF FORT MILL
HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD
August 13th, 2019
Council Chambers – 112 Confederate Street
4:30 PM
Present: Chairman Louis Roman, David Booth, Megan Brinton, Scott Couchenour, Samantha Nifong, Sarah
Shaw, Planning Director Penelope Karagounis, Senior Planner Alex Moore
Guests: Davy Broom, Fort Mill Town Manager
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Louis Roman called the meeting to order at 4:37 PM.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairman Roman entertained a motion to approve the minutes from the June 11th, 2019, meeting as presented.
Scott Couchenour made a motion to approve the minutes. David Booth seconded the motion. The minutes were
then approved with by a vote of 6-0.
NEW BUSINESS
Chairman Roman opened the new business portion of the meeting by noting the contents of the agenda and the
associated packet of information. This included an application submitted by the Town of Fort Mill for a Certficate
of Appropriateness (COA) at 345 N. White Street within Walter Y. Elisha Park.
Senior Planner Moore then introduced the request by noting that the purpose of the application for the COA was so
that the Town of Fort Mill could implement enhancements within Walter Y. Elisha Park. Moore noted that only a
portion of Elisha Park lay within the Town of Fort Mill Historic District. Thus, some of the proposed improvements
would not be required to be reviewed by the Historic Review Board (HRB). The components of the project which
HRB would be responsible for reviewing include the 2nd Restroom, the Amphitheater, Parking Area B, along with
associated hardscaping and landscaping associated with each of these areas.
Senior Planner Moore first presented that portion of the project to include the 2nd Restroom. In discussing the
architectural elevations for this building, he stated that the brick to be used, along with that of the other proposed
structures, would be like the brick used within Millstone Park.
Mr. Booth inquired about that portion of the 2nd Restroom site plan which indicated a sidewalk of twelve feet in
width would traverse that area in front of the bathroom entrance. He had some concern about the necessity of the
sidewalk being this wide.
Senior Planner Moore noted that this is what had been proposed at this location and asked Town Manager Davy
Broom to provide some background on this sidewalk width.
Mr. Broom stated that the reason for the sidewalk being 12 feet wide at this location was that in the future it was
the Town’s intention to widen the entirety of sidewalks within Elisha Park. Thus, that portion of the park within the
current scope of enhancement would be designed with a wider sidewalk than the typical width of five feet.
Chairman Roman noted that wider sidewalk was common in public use areas to facilitate heavier emergency
vehicles.
Ms. Shaw asked if the wider sidewalk would assist with emergency preparedness.
Mr. Booth indicated his experience as a landscape architect revealed that wide sidewalks were not an essential part
of preparing for emergency vehicle access. Moreover, he stated that a taper from a width of 12 feet to five or six
feet, such as proposed in this instance, would cause pedestrian conflicts. He advised that the Town should be
cautious in the design of the sidewalk at this location for this reason.
Mr. Broom noted that the Town would certainly be cognizant of this.
Mr. Cochenour asked if there was a timeline on additional improvements within the park such as the sidewalks that
Mr. Broom had touched on.
Mr. Broom said there was not currently a timeline for such additional improvements, but that he expected that the
present scope of park construction would likely elicit positive feedback on moving forward with future
enhancements.
Ms. Shaw asked Mr. Broom if the plan was to taper the 12’ sidewalk down to the existing black asphalt sidewalk.
Mr. Broom affirmed this.
Senior Planner Moore interjected that the new sidewalk at this location would be typical white concrete with no
brick soldiers. He also noted that the concrete sidewalk with brick enhancements would be located closer to the
actual amphitheater area.
Mr. Cochenour then stated that he believed the HRB was in favor of speeding up the entirety of the enhancements
within Elisha Park, such as wider sidewalks throughout the park.
Mr. Broom said he would certainly pass this sentiment along.
Ms. Brinton asked Mr. Broom if the wider sidewalks throughout the park in the future would be asphalt or concrete.
Mr. Broom noted that it would be the intention to extend the wider, concrete sidewalks throughout the park.
Planning Director Penelope Karagounis then noted to the HRB that there were discussions about including a
downtown master plan into the next budget which could include planning for such future sidewalk enhancements.
Mr. Booth then asked if there was now and overall master plan for the park and downtown.
Ms. Karagounis responded that there was not currently a master plan for downtown. She noted that this was
something that the Town would like to see done.
Mr. Booth then asked why the location as proposed was chosen for the 2nd restroom building.
Mr. Broom responded that there were a couple of reasons for this location. First, there are already utilities in this
vicinity. Second, the Town wanted the restrooms in general proximity to the amphitheater stage.
Mr. Booth then asked if the Fort Mill Police Department had reviewed this plan.
Senior Planner Moore stated that the various town departments had not yet reviewed the site plan but that this would
happen as a matter of course subsequent to the HRB review. He stated that Planning Staff could then pass along
any suggestions or recommendations from the HRB to the various reviewers.
Chairman Roman asked at what time would the restrooms be closed each day.
Mr. Broom responded that the restrooms would be closed as dusk.
Ms. Shaw asked about clean-up and maintenance of the park facilities after concerts.
Mr. Broom stated that this would be handled by a public works crew.
Ms. Brinton asked about the location of the existing playground in relation to the proposed park improvements.
Senior Planner Moore noted the location of the existing playground on the site plan.
Ms. Brinton asked if the new sidewalk would be extended to the playground.
Senior Planner Moore responded that there would not be a sidewalk extension to the playground within the current
scope of the project.
Ms. Shaw asked where restroom one was located on the plan.
Senior Planner Moore stated that restroom one was proposed to be located adjacent to the existing town soccer field
off Calhoun Street, and that this was not within the historic district. Thus, it would not be reviewed by the HRB.
Ms. Shaw noted that both restrooms as planned would be a good distance from the recreational/playground area of
the park and reiterated what Ms. Brinton had inquired about regarding sidewalk extension.
Ms. Brinton concurred and stated that lack of existing sidewalk connectivity was one of the complaints she often
heard regarding Elisha Park.
Mr. Broom noted that existing asphalt sidewalk circumvented the park which allowed for pedestrian connectivity
to the proposed restrooms via sidewalk. He added that another consideration in the location of the restrooms was
that of the wishes of Leroy Springs Company for the sight lines from White Street down to the proposed
amphitheater area to remain open.
Chairman Roman then noted that the new, permanent amphitheater structure would be in the same portion of the
park where temporary stages had always been set up for events.
Mr. Broom confirmed this.
Ms. Brinton then responded that she believed the location of restroom building two was fine, but that her issue was
with the walking distance from the playground to the restrooms.
Mr. Booth stated that the second restroom building could be an iconic element of the park if located closer to White
Street, while additionally better serving the playground section.
Mr. Cochenour then noted that many years ago when the Springs Mill was located where Elisha Park is, there was
a one-story office building owned by Springs adjacent to White Street and in front of the Mill.
Chairman Roman stated that a common architectural method for improving the look of what might otherwise be
considered a negative aspect of the landscape, is to make such buildings, perhaps restrooms, an iconic element of
the site.
Mr. Broom then noted that this was indeed what the Town of Fort Mill had done with the design of the second
restroom building. This building did harken back to the building which Mr. Cochenour had referenced adjacent to
White Street.
Mr. Booth then estimated that the cost per square-foot of the second restroom building would be $150 to $200 per
square-foot. He stated that if the town was going to spend this much on the building that they should not want it
tucked down into the corner of the site as planned. Rather, the goal should be to have this be a very recognizable
element of the park’s design and thus be located closer to White Street.
Mr. Broom noted that this building would be on a knoll and thus would be an identifiable and important piece of
the enhanced park design.
Senior Planner Moore then stated that the amphitheater itself only had one, unisex restroom within its design. The
point being that many performers, such as with an orchestra, would be better served by having restrooms generally
close by as was reflected with the current site plan, rather than locating them adjacent to White Street.
Mr. Cochenhour asked if the proposed second restroom building would be large enough for events such as the
Strawberry Festival.
Mr. Broom noted that the Town of Fort Mill in fact typically rents approximately 106 temporary restroom units for
the Strawberry Festival. Thus, event with the addition of the restroom building, a number of these temporary units
would continue to be needed.
Chairman Roman then stated that he believed the proposed location of the second restroom was a great spot in that
it would efficiently serve the amphitheater area. He then suggested that another, third restroom building for the park
might someday be useful closer to the playground and White Street. Such a future structure might be located where
the former Springs Mill office building was sited.
Mr. Cochenhour then stated that if such a building were constructed in the future that it should more closely match
the original Springs Mill office building.
Ms. Shaw inquired about the lighting within the enhanced portion of the park.
Senior Planner Moore noted pedestrian lighting would be included.
Mr. Booth inquired about the removal of existing trees within the park as part of new construction.
Senior Planner Moore then went over the project site plans and indicated that approximately seven trees would be
removed. He stated that the removal of these trees was somewhat mitigated by the new landscaping which would
be implemented along with the new construction.
Chairman Roman then asked that the overview of the entire park be shown on the power point so that the locations
of these trees could be discerned.
Senior Planner Moore placed the aerial photograph of the overall park on the presentation screens and then
illustrated where these trees were located as they corresponded with the submitted project site plan.
The HRB wished to have the willow oak trees targeted for removal mitigated.
Senior Planner Moore then moved the discussion toward the amphitheater portion of the site plan. He noted the
proposed architectural elevations along with the landscaping and hardscaping elements.
Mr. Booth asked if there was any existing architecture in town which resembled that of the proposed amphitheater
structure.
Mr. Cochenour noted that the buildings along Main Street have numerous, similar arched windows.
Mr. Broom indicated that elements of the former Springs Mill building were looked at in designing the amphitheater
structure.
Discussion then shifted toward meshing the design of the second bathroom building with that of the amphitheater.
Regarding the amphitheater building, the consensus of the HRB was a request to recreate the rear façade design
elements of the amphitheater building on the front and side façades on this amphitheater building. This would entail
adding the arched, bricked/faux window element and perhaps a faux door on the front façade and one arched,
bricked/faux window on the side facades.
The recommendation on bathroom building two involves a synthesis of façade design between it and the
amphitheater building. This would be accomplished by removing the four rectangular windows at the center of the
side elevations and replacing them with two bricked/faux windows. The two arched windows would remain at each
end of the side elevation as currently designed. The current dormer windows would be replaced with arched
windows to match the arched windows remaining on the side facades.
Senior Planner Moore then presented that portion of the project which would include on-street parking along Ardrey
Street, immediately adjacent to the park.
Mr. Booth suggested that the Town of Fort Mill look at doing reverse angle parking at this location rather than
traditional angled parking. Ms. Nifong noted that there needed to be some handicapped parking spaces included.
Senior Planner Moore noted that these recommendations could be examined during the site plan review stage.
Senior Planner Moore then presented the proposed bench swing concept which would be implemented at various
locations in Elisha Park.
The HRB recommended that the bench swings be redesigned to remove the masonry portion at the bottom of the
respective supporting posts. Additionally, the HRB recommended that the chain portion of the swings be modified.
These recommendations were based on safety concerns.
The HRB also recommended that understory trees, such as crepe myrtles, be planted adjacent to the swings for
shade purposes.
Senior Planner Moore indicated that these recommendations would be passed along.
Senior Planner Moore then went over the basic zoning parameters of the project which included the underlying
zoning considerations and subsequent site plan review by the various town departments.
There was general agreement by the HRB to approve the Elisha Park enhancements with the following strong
recommendations:
1. During the site-plan review process, which will include evaluation by the utilities and stormwater
departments, an attempt should be made to save the willow oak trees scheduled for removal. If these trees
cannot be saved, then HRB would like for these trees to be mitigated by planting like species at appropriate
locations.
2. There should be a more cohesive design binding the second restroom building and the amphitheater building.
Regarding the amphitheater building, the consensus of the HRB was a request to recreate the rear façade
design elements of the amphitheater building on the front and side façades on this amphitheater building.
This would entail adding the arched, bricked/faux window element and perhaps a faux door on the front
façade and one arched, bricked/faux window on the side facades. The recommendation on bathroom building
two involves a synthesis of façade design between it and the amphitheater building. This would be
accomplished by removing the four rectangular windows at the center of the side elevations and replacing
them with two bricked/faux windows. The two arched windows would remain at each end of the side
elevation as currently designed. The current dormer windows would be replaced with arched windows to
match the arched windows remaining on the side facades.
3. Reverse angle parking should be considered for the on-street parking proposed along Ardrey Street.
Additionally, handicapped parking spaces should be added at this location.
4. The design of the bench swings should be modified to remove the masonry elements at the bottom of the
support posts. The proposed chain element of the swing support should be removed or modified as well.
Both recommendations are for safety. Additionally, crepe myrtle trees should be planted adjacent to the
swing benches to provide shade.
Chairman Roman then asked for a motion on the proposed approval with the above strong recommendations. Mr.
Cochenhour made a motion to approve. Ms. Nifong seconded the motion. The HRB then voted 5-0 (Ms. Shaw had
to leave the meeting early) to approve the proposed Elisha Park enhancements, with the aforementioned strong
recommendations, within the Town of Fort Mill Historic District.
There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 6:15 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Alex J. Moore, AICP
Senior Planner
September 3rd, 2019
Agenda
HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD
August 13th, 2019
112 Confederate Street
4:30 PM
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. HRB Meeting: June 11th, 2019 [Pages 2-5]
NEW BUSINESS
1. Request for Certificate of Appropriateness
Applicant Name: Town of Fort Mill [Pages 6-24]
Owner Name: Town of Fort Mill
Property Address: 345 N. White Street
Purpose: Request to implement a variety of improvements within
Walter Y. Elisha Park
Zoning: GI / Historic District
ADJOURN
The following press was notified of the meeting by email or fax in accordance of the Freedom of
Information Act: The Herald; CN2; WRHI; Fort Mill Times and WBTV. The agenda was also
posted at the entrance to Town Hall the required length of time and on the Town website.
The Town of Fort Mill is committed to assuring accessibility with reasonable accommodation, of
Town services and facilities for all individuals, in compliance with federal law. Please contact the
Town Manager’s Office at 803-547-2116 if you need assistance.
1
MINUTES
TOWN OF FORT MILL
HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD
June 11th, 2019
Council Chambers – 112 Confederate Street
4:30 PM
Present: David Booth, Scott Couchenour, LeAnne Burnett Morse, Samantha Nifong, Planning Director
Penelope Karagounis, Senior Planner Alex Moore, Assistant Town Manager Chris Pettit
Guests: Members of BSA Troop 250-G and Kelly Clark (Kuester Commercial)
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson LeAnne Burnett Morse called the meeting to order at 4:36 PM. Ms. LeAnne Burnett Morse, normally
the vice-chairperson, presided in place of Mr. Louis Roman. Mr. Roman was absent due to a back-injury suffered
in a recent car accident.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairwoman Burnett Morse entertained a motion to approve the minutes from the April 16th, 2019, meeting as
presented. Senior Planner Moore interjected that two corrections needed to be made. Moore noted that in preparing
the minutes he had inadvertently transposed Megan Brinton into the record rather than Carmen Banks. Moore stated
that the minutes should reflect that Carmen Banks was in attendance and participated in the April 16th HRB
meeting. Senior Planner Moore also stated that the submittal date of the previous meeting’s minutes needed
correcting. Moore stated that the minutes should reflect a submittal date of 6/11/19. Moore apologized to the HRB
for these errors and noted that he would correct these items.
Scott Couchenour made a motion to approve the minutes with the adjustments as noted above. David Booth
seconded the motion.
The minutes were then approved with by a vote of 4-0.
NEW BUSINESS
Chairperson Burnette-Morse opened the new business portion of the meeting by noting the contents of the agenda
and the associated packet of information which included the application for final Bailey Bill certification for 100
Main Street in downtown Fort Mill.
Senior Planner Moore noted that the reason for including the HRB agenda from 6/14/16 was to provide background
information on the Bailey Bill project at 100 Main Street. The 6/14/16 HRB meeting agenda included the application
for preliminary Bailey Bill certification for this respective property.
2
Chairperson Burnette-Morse asked if the HRB members were all familiar with the Bailey Bill concept. She
suggested that Staff give some additional background on the Bailey Bill.
Senior Planner Moore stated that he had information on the Bailey Bill concept as related to the subject property.
Chairperson Burnette-Morse asked Senior Planner Moore to proceed with this discussion.
Senior Planner Moore then stated that the current meeting was for the required final certification review of
completed work at 100 Main Street pursuant to the property owners request to be granted local tax credits for that
property. He noted the State of South Carolina enabling statute which permits local governments to grant special
tax assessments, or abatements, to rehabilitated historic properties. For municipalities in South Carolina this is
Section 5-21-140 of the code of laws and is simply referred to as the “Bailey Bill.”
Ms. Nifong asked Senior Planner Moore what he meant by abatement. Moore responded that this simply means
there would be a reduction in the tax amount due for a property when final Bailey Bill certification. He also noted
that the reduction in taxes would only involve that portion of taxes due to the Town of Fort Mill. For York County,
subsequent to Bailey Bill final certification, the property would continue to be assessed at the standard millage rate
with no reduction.
Chairperson Burnette-Morse stated that it was her understanding that the Bailey Bill would lock in the assessed
value of the property at the pre-improvement amount for a specified period.
Chris Pettit, Assistant Town Manager, then explained the role of the HRB in finalizing the application. The Bailey
Bill locks in the value for a period of twenty-years. This is only for the Town of Fort Mill’s portion of the taxes.
The pre-rehabilitation value of the project was $586,000.00. To be eligible for the tax reduction, the applicant must
put 20% of this amount back into the property in the form of structural rehabilitation. Pettit noted that the applicant
put at least $1,701,190.51 into the project, thus greatly exceeding the minimum investment.
Mr. Pettit then reiterated that the applicant had previously received preliminary certification from the HRB for this
Bailey Bill project in 2016. He then noted that the final certification now required from HRB would close out the
procedural portion of the overall project and allow the property owner to be assessed, for the Town’s portion of the
tax bill, at $586,000.00 for twenty-years. That portion of the tax bill for York County and the York County School
District would not be reduced.
Senior Planner Moore then summarized the requirements for final Bailey Bill certification and made note of the
status of each obligation as pertaining to 100 Main Street.
1. The property has received preliminary certification:
As noted within the general information section, this property received preliminary certification on June
24th, 2016. Please see Exhibit ‘B’ which includes the preliminary certification application along with the
agenda from the June 24th, 2016 HRB meeting which includes the rehabilitation plan.
2. The minimum expenditures for rehabilitation as set forth by the Fort Mill Code of Ordinances have been
incurred and paid:
3
The required expenditures for this project are 20% of $586,500.00 (FMV). The applicant has provided
information indicating that this minimum expenditure threshold has been met.
3. The reviewing authority has reviewed the completed rehabilitation work and has determined that all such
work is consistent with the plans approved by the reviewing authority during preliminary certification. The
Fort Mill Historic Review Board (HRB) shall serve as the reviewing authority for all completed
rehabilitation work submitted as part of the final certification process:
The review by the HRB must be based on the standards of rehabilitation which are listed in the attached
Exhibit ‘A.’
4. All application fees have been paid in full by the applicant:
All application fees have been paid in full.
5. The property has met all other requirements of the Fort Mill Code of Ordinances:
The property has met all other requirements of the Fort Mill Code of Ordinances.
Senior Planner Moore then presented the pre-rehabilitation photos of 100 Main Street as well as the post-
rehabilitation photos to indicate the work that had been completed.
Mr. Booth then asked if the Bailey Bill included interior and exterior.
Senior Planner Moore noted that it included both.
Assistant Town Manager Pettit stated that it did include both, but that it was principally exterior.
Senior Planner Moore noted that based on the 20% minimum expenditure requirement (of pre-rehab value), the
property needed to have a minimum of $117,300.00 invested to qualify for final certification of the Bailey Bill.
With a minimum of $1,701,190.51 invested into the property, this project easily qualified for final certification.
Chairperson Burnette-Morse then asked if there were any other questions of staff. There being none, she asked if
there were any other items that the HRB wished to discuss.
Senior Planner Moore then noted that Ms. Clark was in attendance representing the applicant.
Chairperson Burnette-Morse informed Ms. Clark that she could come to the podium and address the HRB if she
wished.
Ms. Clark stated that she did not have anything additional to share unless the HRB had questions for her.
Mr. Booth asked if the expenditures were broken out by exterior and interior.
Senior Planner Moore stated that the expenditures were indeed noted as to whether they were interior or exterior.
Assistant Town Manager Pettit then clarified that both interior and exterior work qualified for Bailey Bill
expenditures.
4
Mr. Couchenour asked Staff if a change of ownership in the business could affect the property’s Bailey Bill status.
He used the example of new signage.
Senior Planner Moore noted that it could change the status if new signage were not properly designed, but that such
a change would be required to be reviewed by the HRB so such a proposal could be turned down by the Board.
There being no other discussion, Chairperson Burnette-Morse entertained a motion for approval of the application
for final Bailey Bill certification.
Mr. Couchenour made a motion to approve. Ms. Nifong seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0.
Chairperson Burnette-Morse then held that the final certification was approved.
Senior Planner Moore then noted that Staff had no other business to present.
There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 5:10 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Alex J. Moore, AICP
Senior Planner
August 5th, 2019
5
H I S T OR I C R E V I E W B OA R D
APPLICANT
Town of Fort Mill
Subject Property: 345 N. White Street
Tax Map # 020-01-28-002
Zoning District: GI, General Industrial District
Zoning Case: 2019-0268
REQUEST
The Planning Department has received an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) from the Town
of Fort Mill for proposed improvements within Walter Y. Elisha Park.
SITE DESCRIPTION AND GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN
The overall project includes an assortment of enhancements within Walter Y. Elisha Park to include a new
amphitheater; a reconfiguration of existing parking; adding parking spaces; the addition of a restroom building;
and site improvements to walking trails, lighting, landscaping, etc. The amphitheater and restroom will be
constructed of brick, which will match the brick within Millstone Park. Illustrative drawings of these buildings
have been included in this packet.
Importantly, only a portion of the proposed Walter Y. Elisha Park improvements will occur within the Town of
Fort Mill Historic District. Thus, the Historic Review Board (HRB) is tasked with reviewing only the
improvements in that area of the park which is located within the Historic District. This respective area includes
Tax Map number 020-01-28-002 and consists of 11.91 acres. Note the overall historic district map in this packet
with the relevant portion of Walter Y. Elisha Park highlighted within the Historic District. Additionally, please
note the overall project site plan which also highlights the relevant section of the Walter Y. Elisha Park to be
reviewed by the HRB.
The specific enhancements that will be reviewed by the HRB include those listed below. Site plans and
illustrative/typical drawings have been included in this packet with the site plan placed immediately before the
associated drawing. Bench swings are located throughout the project. With respect to the bench swing illustration,
as these are located throughout the project, the chosen site plan for this design element is that of Parking Lot B.
1. Restroom two site plan (includes areas of hardscaping/landscaping) and illustrative drawings.
2. Amphitheater site plan (includes areas of hardscaping/landscaping) and illustrative drawings.
3. Parking Lot B site plan (includes areas of hardscaping/landscaping) along with typical bench swing.
6
The design standards that will be considered by the HRB for this project may be found in the TOWN OF FORT
MILL HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES. The specific sections of the TOWN OF FORT MILL HISTORIC
DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES that are relevant to this project include the following, with respective page
numbers as noted in Part I. Additionally, the property must adhere to the various standards of the Town of Fort
Mill Zoning Ordinance as noted in Part II.
I. HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES REVIEW
A. Below are the general DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION (CHAPTER 4, PAGE 97 AS
NOTED) for this review. Planning Staff concludes that these parameters have been met for this
project.
1. Section 4.40, page 97 of Town of Fort Mill Historic District Design Guidelines--Civic building
projects should reflect basic urban design principles in their designs:
Civic facilities should be designed to reinforce the downtown fabric of streets, public spaces,
and sidewalks.
Outdoor spaces designed for public use should be provided.
The visual impacts of automobiles should be minimized.
Primary entrances should face the street or a public space, not to parking lots.
A sense of human scale should be conveyed.
Civic facilities should provide a pedestrian-friendly street level.
2. Section 4.41, page 97 of Town of Fort Mill Historic District Design Guidelines—Civic spaces
should reflect basic urban design principles in their designs:
The edges of a civic property should be inviting to pedestrians.
Convenient pedestrian connections should be provided.
Adjacent historic resources should be integrated.
A balance of landscape and hardscape elements should be provided.
Civic spaces should include streetscape furnishings, such as lighting, benches, and public
art.
A sense of human scale should be conveyed.
Civic space should be appropriately scaled to the Fort Mill Historic District.
Significant view corridors should be maintained.
II. ZONING DISTRICT GUIDELINES REVIEW
• The subject property being reviewed by the HRB is zoned GI, General Industrial
• Public Buildings, Facilities, and Land, and expansion thereof, are permitted in the GI Zoning District.
• Subsequent to HRB review/approval, the site plan and building plans must be reviewed by the
appropriate Town of Fort Mill Departments to include Planning & Zoning, Building, Utilities &
Stormwater, and Public Works.
• Site Plan approval must be obtained before land disturbance begins.
• Building plan approval must be obtained before structural work begins.
7
Staff Recommendation
Planning Staff recommends that the HRB grant Approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness for proposed
improvements within that portion of Walter Y. Elisha Park located within the Town of Fort Mill Historic District
(Tax Map 020-01-28-002).
8
9
10
Historic District Boundary Map
M
on
ro
e
W
hi
te
St
.
.
St
e
r at
de .
fe St
.
St n
rn
e Ma Co em
y
d
ca
ou in
eb St . A
Cl
.
St
h ite
W
Walter Y. Elisha Park
Improvement Area
within Historic District
11
I I •• -- z
.... 1
C) � �
N WHITE STREE1{US 2 ) PARKING SUMMARY iii �
�
••
1. lHSSITEISCOMPRISEDOFPOR1IONSOFTAXPARCELS02o.o11-3038,mo.o11-3039, w
•
{SCOOT) D»012-8001.020-012-8002,AN0020-01Z.0001. Q
► >-M
Z. Tt£ZONNGOFTIESEPARCEUIISGIANDfMtl. LOCATION NO.SPACES "'0
3. 1lE PROPOSEDUSEOFTHIS SITE IS A TOWNPARK.
z ��
4. TIE LAMl USEOFSURROUJGNG PARCELSIS RESl:>ENTIALNECOMMERCIAL PARKING LOTA 20
5. NO PORTIOl'\IOFTHS PROPERTY IS LOCATEDIN 1l£ 101)..YEAR FlOOD PLAIN PER FEMA MAP
:s....... ��
NO. 45091C0214F $0
PARKINGLOTB 21 0 C(I)
J�
PARl<INGLOTC 11 �
"" j-t;;,._,:
AMPHITHEATER (EXISTING SPACES TO REMAIN) 2B O 0
0 �rr
AMPHITHEATER (PROPOSED ADA SPACES) 3
AMPHITHEATER (PROPOSED STANDARD SPACES) 24
TOTAL SPACES 107
u
I
'
- Walter Y. Elisha Park
\
\
Improvement Area within the
..
'
Historic District
I
\
'O
..•
ZONED: G>
\
TEMPORARY
MULCHED TRAIL /
�
r·
• \
1;
11
I
/
'I
' I
C,f:.i r-101
ZD',•>D: •• ..
.�
-j RESTROOM 2 j
0
� 2r' r 1L C,!)01
n nN c. ut?·, Af11._1
D,' 163 <o PG. 2.Jf!
..
a E 167 PC 3
..
zc�J�l
LOOMS WAY
{LOCAL, 40' ROW) �:-
•• •• ,.
I
,.""
·I
1 I ., ,. ..... u r 7.... e:;1�
,=r
CHA'Vr..t. C["I .;f lL <
j •
TJB. :72�.: G. 44:J
PB 15 PG ;,,_4 ., I.
I
+ Nf" .I?- ( / --¾, '--, \
PARKING LOT C
'"2
1 g: c3 Ir
'IC
,. •:.- Kt,)', d; T°A"
,-_,1.1., •
l'B. 161 '9 PG ��
>'t:! l'.7 PG .5.�... #,""2C ,1 \
zo,._!"I .,.
w_ 1r,l1f\' OF f.[-( �-fi
w Jc: 01 7 >G 4
r? ·c
"
_J
1-
j,�IJ I· "'&J (/)Q ' "
W-J
I
--
..-o_r:: JOS. ._,4,- AA-0
{: ff: 4R � '51'•
.
w
7
ttO.cO-,..10 •
r-c •! "G �-4 F F'1JSt L
..-7
(i11-3.J39
r'IIE F? ,,. _J !Jd !5, PC, -
S
"c. r ,.
,.,
F
' 'I
\ 'G,
er PERMIT SET
NOT FOR CONSl'RUCTION
-�-- , '""'"'"
111..1..:., l. 801c
LJ Project Manager:
� L�I:/ iJ:MP. Iv!- ,c,� ' JC.18 Tripp Barrineau, Pl.A
lLC C�- •�)/(., DG ""9 C.Ki.,, d '(H � :{• 11,V.1 r A-C,< ;n VL .. '
•-li
,,_
I"' 1<; F&, 4 I DE 9 (. ' ,-.I";;,. •• �, f'f?, ,'!,it Drawn By Checked By
1 "0N{C P ;, 8!", ·r: ei� 13 '(J�� �,; 11;1
CEB MDC
I! , ,. . . ,..
'\ Date: 07-18-2019
Scale: As Shown
�
Project No.:
50' 50'
,C:::,,
100'
I
...,E >Al, &: ;.;YI ZHFW-
r:i, 15119 >-v 2[!5
PB 15 .,,. 24
�
SCALE:1•= 50'
186572.00
� ·u •ff" I. ') Drawing No.:
I , I C.0.3
f .______________________________________________________________
, _________________________________________________________.
12
13
FORT MILL, SC
WALTER ELISHA PARK - AMPHITHEATER RESTROOMS
06 AUG 2019
14
PEOPLE PLACES PURPOSE
JAN / STO
WH
FRONT ELEVATION
3/16" = 1'-0"
WOMEN FAMILY MEN
SIDE ELEVATION MULTI-STALL RESTROOMS - PLAN
3/16" = 1'-0" 3/16" = 1'-0"
FORT MILL, SC
WALTER ELISHA PARK - AMPHITHEATER RESTROOMS
06 AUG 2019
15
PEOPLE PLACES PURPOSE
16
STAGE - ENTRY VIEW
FORT MILL, SC
WALTER ELISHA PARK - AMPHITHEATER
06 AUG 2019
17
PEOPLE PLACES PURPOSE
STAGE - ENTRY ELEVATION
1/8" = 1'-0"
FORT MILL, SC
WALTER ELISHA PARK - AMPHITHEATER
06 AUG 2019
18
PEOPLE PLACES PURPOSE
STAGE - AUDIENCE VIEW
FORT MILL, SC
WALTER ELISHA PARK - AMPHITHEATER
06 AUG 2019
19
PEOPLE PLACES PURPOSE
4"
2' - 0"
4"
4"
STAGE - AUDIENCE ELEVATION
1/8" = 1'-0"
FORT MILL, SC
WALTER ELISHA PARK - AMPHITHEATER
06 AUG 2019
20
PEOPLE PLACES PURPOSE
STAGE - SIDE ELEVATION
1/8" = 1'-0"
FORT MILL, SC
WALTER ELISHA PARK - AMPHITHEATER
06 AUG 2019
21
PEOPLE PLACES PURPOSE
DN
DN
DN DN
ELEC RR
STORAGE CHANGING
STAGE - PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"
FORT MILL, SC
WALTER ELISHA PARK - AMPHITHEATER
06 AUG 2019
22
PEOPLE PLACES PURPOSE
23
24
Get email alerts for Fort Mill
A daily email when new agendas and minutes are posted.