Planning Committee

TOWN OF MOUNT PLEASANT, SOUTH CAROLINA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE DECEMBER 4, 2017 MINUTES Municipal Complex, Committee Meeting Room Present: Joe Bustos, Chair, Bob Brimmer, Guang Ming Whitley, Tom O'Rourke. Staff: Eric DeMoura, Christiane Farrell, Jeff Ulma, David Pagliarini, Michele Canon, Elizabeth Boyles, Amy Livingston 1. Approval of Minutes from the November 6, 2017 meeting Mr. Brimmer moved for approval of the minutes. Mr. O’Rourke seconded the motion. All in favor. 2. Public Comments Ms. Sally Jacob, 1152 Village Creek Lane, referenced the recent newspaper article announcing the formation of a 501C3 for affordable housing. Mr. John Wright, 145 Rose Lane, referred to agenda item 3A, and president of African-American Historical Commission, expressed concern with the request and asked that it be denied. He stated that the owner is not willing to meet with the community and does not have the community’s best interest in mind with the request. Mr. Ed Lee, president of East Cooper Civic Club, stated that in regard to item 3A, he agrees with Mr. Wright. He stated that the property has had several previous requests that were not approved. He stated that the Civic Club is not opposed to subdividing the property, but does not want the use of a bed and breakfast. He stated a bed and breakfast would be an allowable use under the proposed zoning and asked that the request be denied. Ms. Pat Sullivan, 1002 Plantation Court, expressed concern that the future land use recommends a different zoning than what is proposed. She suggested that the Comprehensive Plan recommendations should be upheld. Ms. Thomasena Stokes-Marshall, 481 Lillie and Rebecca Lane, referred to item 3A and agrees with the comments of both Mr. Wright and Mr. Lee.  Planning Committee December 4, 2017 Page 2 of 8 3. Review of Planning Commission recommendations from the November 15, 2017 meeting a. Request to rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to CC, Community Conservation District, an approximately 1.05 acre tract of land located at 301 7th Avenue, identified by TMS No. 514-00-00-032, and known as Lot 91 in Remleys, as depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book D, Page 180. Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee (attachment 1). He stated that the request is to have the existing mobile home conforming, which is the reason for the request. He stated that the Planning Commission recommended denial. Mr. Brimmer moved to recommend to Town Council denial of the request. Mr. O’Rourke seconded the motion. All in favor. b. Request to annex an approximately 1.83 acre tract of land located at 1500 Clubhouse Lane in Raven’s Run Phase I Subdivision, identified by TMS No. 561-01-00-095, depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book BM, Page 022. c. Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan 2009-2019 (2014 Update) Future Land Use Map by changing the land use designation from Recreation Open Space to Low Density Neighborhood for an approximately 1.83 acre tract of land located at 1500 Clubhouse Lane in Raven’s Run Phase I Subdivision, identified by TMS No. 561-01-00-095 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book BM, Page 022. d. Request to zone R-1, Low Density Residential District, an approximately 1.83 acre tract of land located at 1500 Clubhouse Lane in Raven’s Run Phase I Subdivision, identified by TMS No. 561-01-00-095, depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book BM, Page 022. Mr. Ulma reviewed the requests with the Committee (attachment 1). He stated that the HOA has reviewed the request and made changes to allow residential uses on the property. He stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval.  Planning Committee December 4, 2017 Page 3 of 8 Mr. Bustos asked how the landing strip would be affected. Mr. Ulma answered that he was not sure if the landing strip would continue to be utilized. Mr. Brimmer stated that it was mentioned at the Planning Commission that the planes would be stored on the property across from the subject property. Mr. Ulma confirmed. Mr. Brimmer asked if there would be emergency access issues. Mr. DeMoura answered that he is not aware of any access issues. Mr. O’Rourke suggested that it should be determined how the property would be accessed and if the runway would continue to be utilized. He suggested that access should be determined prior to a decision on the request and confirmation that there would not be a conflict with the runway. Mr. Bustos suggested that deferral of the request might be appropriate. Mr. O’Rourke moved to recommend to Town Council deferral of items 3B, 3C, and 3D to the next meeting. Mr. Brimmer seconded the motion. All in favor. e. Request to amend the Oakland Plantation PD, Planned Development District Ordinance, pertaining to an approximately 0.60 acre tract of land located adjacent to Highway 17 North across from George Browder Boulevard, identified by portions of TMS No’s. 600-00-00-074 and 600-00- 00-067, providing for the installation of a multi-use path in the natural roadside buffer. Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee (attachment 1). He stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval. Mr. Brimmer asked if this trail would be named for Mr. Seamon and if this project would replace the memorial project previously requested near Remley’s Point. Mr. DeMoura answered in the affirmative. Mr. O’Rourke asked if this trail would connect to an existing trail system. Mr. Ulma answered in the affirmative and showed this on the map for the Committee.  Planning Committee December 4, 2017 Page 4 of 8 Mr. Lee Gastley, Seamon, Whiteside, and Associates, confirmed that this would be a memorial project replacing the one near Remley’s Point. He asked that trees three to eight inches be allowed to be removed with a 1:1 replacement required. Mr. Bustos asked if all trees would be replaced at a 1:1 ratio. Mr. Gastley answered in the affirmative and stated that they do not anticipate removal of any trees greater than eight inches. Mr. Bustos suggested that this stipulation should be included in the motion. Mr. O’Rourke moved to recommend to Town Council approval of the request with allowance for trees three to eight inches in diameter to be removed with a 1:1 mitigation required. Ms. Whitley seconded the motion. Mr. Bustos suggested that it should be noted for Town Council that the project would replace the previous memorial project near Remley’s Point. Mr. DeMoura answered that this would be included in the minutes. Mr. Bustos called for a vote on the motion. All in favor. 4. Request to annex an approximately 1.00 acre tract of land located on Jack Leland Drive in Stratton Place, identified by TMS No. 614-00-00-006 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book J, Page 100. Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee (attachment 1). Mr. Bustos asked if the property would be subdivided and what the zoning would be. Mr. Ulma answered that it would be annexed as R-1, with the marshland being designated as Conservation Open Space (CO). Ms. Whitley moved to recommend to Town Council approval of the request. Mr. Brimmer seconded the motion. All in favor. 5. Deferred from Town Council to Planning Committee: Final Reading: An Ordinance to rezone from NC, Neighborhood Commercial District, to AB, Areawide Business District, an approximately 0.39 acre tract of land located at 1375 Old Georgetown Road, identified by TMS No. 559-13-00-027, and  Planning Committee December 4, 2017 Page 5 of 8 depicted as a portion of Lot 8 on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Book G, Page 049. Property to remain in the UC-OD, Urban Corridor Overlay District. (Ord. No. 17055) Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee (attachment 1). He stated that it was deferred back to the Committee by Town Council. He stated that this item relates to item 6 and suggested that deferral of this request until after that discussion might be appropriate. Mr. O’Rourke moved to amend the agenda to move item 6 to item 5. Mr. Brimmer seconded the motion. All in favor. 6. Review and possible action related to hotel development in Mount Pleasant Mr. Ulma and Ms. Amy Livingston reviewed the hotel information with the Committee (attachment 1). Mr. Bustos suggested that location is a vital consideration when approving hotels and that they should be located in a hotel district. Having the hotel districts would provide direction on where it would be appropriate for hotels throughout the Town. Mr. Ulma reviewed policy tools and options with the Committee such as adding hotel districts or making amendments to the existing zoning classifications to determine where hotels would be appropriate. Mr. O’Rourke agreed that there should be hotel districts considered and that it should be discussed during the Comprehensive Plan process. He suggested that the districts should be spread throughout the entire planning area and located so that supporting services such as restaurants can locate there as well. Mr. Brimmer asked if the proposed additions for the Ferry Wharf area were included. Ms. Livingston answered in the negative. Mr. Brimmer suggested that another consideration would be to better clarify what uses are allowed within the different zoning classifications, particularly with Areawide Business (AB) and Areawide Business-2 (AB-2). He agreed that the Comprehensive Plan process would be the appropriate venue for this discussion and recommendations. He also suggested that traffic should be a consideration as well.  Planning Committee December 4, 2017 Page 6 of 8 Mr. Bustos suggested that more hotels are needed in the northern part of Town to help accommodate guests visiting residents. He suggested that there should be consideration of lowering the threshold of trips required for an impact assessment. He suggested that staff review this and bring back to the Committee. Mr. O’Rourke moved to direct staff to continue to deliberate on options for hotel districts and bring back to Committee. Mr. Brimmer seconded the motion. All in favor. 7. Deferred from Town Council to Planning Committee: Final Reading: An Ordinance to rezone from NC, Neighborhood Commercial District, to AB, Areawide Business District, an approximately 0.39 acre tract of land located at 1375 Old Georgetown Road, identified by TMS No. 559-13-00-027, and depicted as a portion of Lot 8 on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Book G, Page 049. Property to remain in the UC-OD, Urban Corridor Overlay District. (Ord. No. 17055) Mr. Bustos asked if the request is located within a zoning district that allows hotels. Mr. Ulma answered in the affirmative. Mr. Brimmer suggested this is an example of how the different zoning districts should be reviewed to determine where hotels would be appropriate. Ms. Whitley asked if the Urban Corridor allows larger hotels. Mr. Bustos answered in the affirmative. Mr. Bustos asked about height. Mr. DeMoura answered that the maximum height is 80 feet. Mr. O’Rourke moved to recommend to Town Council approval of final reading of the request. Mr. Brimmer seconded the motion. All in favor. 8. Review of Planning Commission recommendations regarding proposed amendments to the Tree and Buffer ordinances Mr. Ulma reviewed the request with the Committee. He stated that the Planning Commission has reviewed the existing ordinances and recommended some  Planning Committee December 4, 2017 Page 7 of 8 changes. He stated that based on the recommendations, there might be some other remedies or tools available that would accomplish the intent of the recommendations that staff would like to bring back to the Committee for consideration. Mr. Brimmer stated that at the last meeting the development community requested to meet with staff and asked if this was accomplished. Mr. Ulma answered in the affirmative and stated that staff would like the opportunity to provide some options through the draft ordinance changes. He stated that the development community has been encouraged to continue to participate in this process and provide their interests to the Committee as this moves forward. Mr. O’Rourke asked if the request came from an organization or some sort of collective representation. Mr. Bustos answered that the Chamber of Commerce requested inclusion in the discussion as well as local engineering companies. He suggested that providing input to staff was appropriate. Mr. Bustos suggested that a pending ordinance doctrine as these changes move forward might be important to prevent a “rush of clear cutting of trees”. Ms. Canon reviewed the Planning Commission recommendations with the Committee (attachment 1). Mr. O’Rourke asked if all pine species would be included. Ms. Canon answered in the affirmative. Mr. Brimmer asked the reasoning for not having 8 inches protected for new residential developments. Ms. Canon answered that the recommendation was to keep it at 16 inches as it would also negatively affect the individual homeowner. Mr. Brimmer suggested that 8 inches be considered for new residential developments. Ms. Canon continued with review of the Planning Commission recommendations. Mr. Brimmer asked if Category IV species could be removed with no mitigation. Ms. Canon answered in the affirmative and stated that they are considered not protected or exempt trees. Mr. Brimmer suggested that some mitigation should be required for Category IV species.  Planning Committee December 4, 2017 Page 8 of 8 Mr. Brimmer asked if there is a F buffer located in the Town. Ms. Canon answered in the affirmative and stated that they are typically seen for industrial uses. Mr. Bustos asked how much time would be needed. Mr. Ulma answered that 30- 60 days would be needed to draft the revisions to the ordinance. Mr. Bustos suggested that an update be provided at the next meeting. Mr. DeMoura stated that if desired, first reading could be considered at the December meeting with any recommended changes being accomplished prior to final reading. Mr. Pagliarini agreed. Mr. O’Rourke suggested that the amendments should not be rushed and time should be taken to ensure all aspects have been vetted. Mr. Bustos suggested that first reading should be considered in January. Mr. Pagliarini noted that Town Council would have up to six months to have final reading of the text amendments. Mr. Brimmer thanked staff for all of their hard work on this issue. 9. Staff Update on the Comprehensive Plan process Ms. Boyles updated the Committee on the Comprehensive Plan process (attachment 1). Mr. Brimmer asked if the new forum members can be contacted so that they can attend the meeting tomorrow. Mr. DeMoura suggested that the official invitation would be sent out once all of the names have been finalized. He stated that the new members can be encouraged to attend the meeting tomorrow if desired. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:52 am. Submitted by, L. Lynes PlanComm12042017  Attachment 1: December 4, 2017 Planning Committee Meeting Minutes PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 04 December 2017 COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL  3.A. 301 7TH AVENUE Request to rezone from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to CC, Community Request: Conservation District Location: 301 7th Avenue, Scalonville Parcel ID (TMS No.): 514-00-00-032 Type of Request: Rezoning Public Hearing: Required; held by Planning Commission Total Acreage: Approximately 1.50 acres Plat Recording Info: Book D, Page 180 Application Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/23504 Staff Report Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/23629 Planning Commission recommends approval or denial of the request. This Action to be Taken: recommendation is forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee and Town Council.  3.b,c&d. 1500 CLUBHOUSE LANE Request to annex and zone R-1, Low Density Residential District. Also request to Request: amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map by changing the land use designation from Recreation Open Space to Low Density Neighborhood. Location: 1500 Clubhouse Lane / Raven’s Run Subdivision Parcel ID (TMS No.): 561-01-00-095 Type of Request: Annexation, Comprehensive Plan amendment, zoning Annexation – Not required; Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Required; held by Town Council on December Public Hearing: 12, 2017; Zoning – Required; held by Planning Commission Total Acreage: Approximately 1.83 acres Plat Recording Info: Book BM, Page 022 Application Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24048 Staff Report Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24250 Planning Commission recommends approval or denial of the zoning and Action to be Taken: Comprehensive Plan amendment request. This recommendation is forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee of Council and Town Council.  3.E. OAKLAND PLANTATION Request to amend the Oakland Plantation PD, Planned Development District Request: Ordinance, providing for the installation of a multi-use path in the natural roadside buffer. Location: Highway 17 North (across from George Browder Blvd.) Parcel ID (TMS No.): 600-00-00-074 and 600-00-00-067 (portions thereof) Type of Request: PD Amendment Public Hearing: Required; held by Planning Commission Total Acreage: Approximately 0.60 acres Application Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24050 Staff Report Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/24254 Planning Commission recommends approval, approval with conditions or denial Action to be Taken: of the request. This recommendation is forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee and Town Council. 4. PROPERTY ON JACK LELAND DRIVE Request to annex an approximately 1.00 acre tract of land located on Jack Leland Drive in Stratton Place, identified by TMS No. 614-00-00-006 and depicted on a plat recorded by the Charleston County RMC Office in Plat Book J, Page 100.  5. 1375 OLD GEORGETOWN ROAD – FINAL READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 17055 DEFERRED FROM TOWN COUNCIL TO PLANNING COMMITTEE Request to rezone from NC, Neighborhood Commercial District, to AB, Areawide Request: Business District. Property to remain in the UC-OD, Urban Corridor Overlay District. Location: 1375 Old Georgetown Road Parcel ID (TMS No.): 559-13-00-027 Type of Request: Rezoning Public Hearing: Required; held by Planning Commission Total Acreage: Approximately 0.39 acres Plat Recording Info: Book S15, Page 0309 Application Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/23137 Staff Report Link: https://www.tompsc.com/DocumentCenter/View/23231 Planning Commission recommends approval or denial of the request. This Action to be Taken: recommendation is forwarded to the Planning & Development Committee and Town Council. HOTEL DEVELOPMENT December 4, 2017 EXISTING ZONING PROVISIONS Under existing zoning, hotels are allowed as follows: Hotels are a permitted use in: AB, AB-2, ED, and WG- Cooper “Boutique” Hotels or Inns with 50 or fewer rooms are a permitted use in: NC, AB, AB-2, MD, WG-Cooper, and WG- Wando Hotels also permitted in UC-OD, Urban Corridor Overlay, and various PD districts BACKGROUND: ZONING MAP OF DISTRICTS BACKGROUND: HOTEL LOCATIONS  HOTELS BY THE NUMBERS Hotels Address Guest Rooms Beach Club 28 Patriots Point Road 92 Best Western 259 Mcgrath Darby Blvd 70 Cambria 1472 Highway 17 N 112 Clarion Inn 310 Johnnie Dodds Blvd 116 Comfort Suites 1130 Hungryneck Blvd 81 Cottages on Charleston Harbor 16 Patriots Point Rd 10 Courtyard 1251 Woodland Ave 130 Days Inn 261 Johnnie Dodds Blvd 130 Extended Stay America 304 Wingo Way 101 Room Numbers Ferry Wharf Hotel (Embassy Suites) Harry Hallman Blvd 450 Current: 2,585 Hampton Inn (IOP Connector) Hampton Inn (Sessions Way) 1104 IOP Connector 255 Sessions Way 120 121 Under Construction Now: 562 Harborside at Charleston Harbor 20 Patriots Point Rd 125 Hilton Garden Inn 300 Wingo Way 133 % Increase (Under Construction): 22% Holiday Inn/Hotel Indigo 250 Johnnie Dodds Blvd 158 Holiday Inn Express & Suites 350 Johnnie Dodds Blvd 116 Total in Pipeline & Existing: 3,721 Holiday Inn Express & Suites 1104 Stockade Ln 103 % Increase in Pipeline: 44% Home2 Suites (Indigo Square) Homewood Suites James Nelson Road 1998 Riviera Dr 122 107 Hyatt House Midtown Avenue 128 Hyatt Place at Towne Centre Hungryneck Boulevard 92 Inn at I'on 148 Civitas St 7 Inn at I'on Annex 140 Civitas St. 7 Mainstay Suites 400 Mcgrath Darby Blvd 71 Old Village Post House Inn 101 Pitt St 6 Quality Inn and Suites 196 Patriots Point Rd 103 Red Roof Inn Plus 301 Johnnie Dodds Blvd 124 Residence Inn 1116 IOP Connector 90 Shem Creek Inn 1401 Shrimp Boat Ln 50 Sleep Inn 299 Wingo Way 83 Springhill Suites 245 Magrath Darby Blvd 110 Staybridge Suites Johnnie Dodds Boulevard 108 In the county TownePlace Suites Stuart Engals 101 Tru Hotel 1550 Volunteer Ln 124 Wyndam Garden 1330 Stuart Engels Blvd 120 TOTAL 3,721 HOTEL + ROOMS ADDED (ANNUALLY) REGIONAL HOTEL DEVELOPMENT Downtown: • Total Approved, Proposed, Under Construction: 2,181 Rooms • Late 2017/2018: 787 Rooms • 2019: 200 rooms West Ashley: • Total Approved, Proposed, Under Construction: 500+ Rooms North Charleston: • Total Approved, Proposed, Under Construction: 800 Rooms ONGOING MONITORING OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY FROM HOTELS: OCCUPANCY RATES YTD 2017 Occupancy: 76.8% (Through October) ONGOING MONITORING OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY FROM HOTELS SOME CONSIDERATIONS Potential Economic Issues/Concerns:  Unprecedented acceleration in growth of rooms  Regional impact  Effect of competition from new hotels on existing hotels  Ability for hotel managers to hire local employees  Economic Diversity  Variety of commercial uses  Different hotel types Traffic:  Generally, not considered a high-impact generator  126 rooms needed to generate 75 peak-hour trips, the threshold required to trigger an impact assessment Other Considerations:  Strong interest/need for associated uses like meeting & conference spaces  Support uses like restaurants and entertainment typically located nearby POLICY TOOLS Land Use Policy Decision:  Consider this issue independently? Or include as part of the Comprehensive Plan update now under way? Regulations:  Once a policy decision has been made about any concerns, various regulatory techniques/options are available to handle such uses  Create new zoning district(s) designed specifically for hotels/hospitality/support uses  Adjust existing zoning districts/use table for permitted (by-right) versus special exception uses based on hotel size or type (e.g., full service) TREES AND BUFFERS December 4, 2017 7. REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE TREE AND BUFFER ORDINANCES. 1. A subdivision should be treated differently than an existing single family residential lot – with subdivision being defined as any lot created as a result of a subdivision of property. (see current definition below in our Land Development Regulations). REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS 2. Maintain current ordinance requiring protection of trees 16 inches and greater for Single-family and new Residential developments. 3. Make Pine Species and Sweet Gum protected by moving from Class IV to Class III; accept proposed tree replacement table with regards to species and class (includes pulling Pecan out of Hickory Species and making separate in Category II, and including Mulberry and Leland Cypress in Category IV). [see table] 4. Maintain requirements for Existing SFR in Tree Replacement Table and move New Residential Subdivisions (per definition) to same required mitigation as Commercial. [see table] REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS 5. Retain a minimum of 160 inches per acre protected trees (16 inches and greater) on new Residential Subdivisions where it exists; where it does not exist (where land is cleared/redevelopment), must plant up to 160 inches/acre. This acreage is proposed not to include wetlands, retention ponds nor R/W. 6. Maintain current ordinance requiring Commercial retain or plant 160 inches/acre (8 inches and up protected). 7. Remove language in Ordinance provision below pertaining to commercial sites and make the same apply to new residential subdivisions, so as to remove flexibility allowing developer to remove/mitigate when inches can be retained:  “(3) A minimum of 160 caliper inches per acre shall be retained on the site. Where this number cannot feasibly be retained, or on parcels with less than this amount, caliper inches from planted canopy trees may be used to meet this requirement.” REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS 8. Maintain current language in ordinance regarding Replanting Schedule Standards to avoid a monoculture among plantings. 9. Require tree plantings to be 50% native (shall apply to canopy and understory trees only, not shrubs) for both commercial and new residential subdivisions. 10. Require payments to Tree Bank at a rate of 1 ½ times the Market Value for each tree. 11. Maintain current ordinance requiring mitigation for Illegal Tree Removal be 200-Percent the DBH removed. 12. Revise the Table of Bufferyard Requirements to remove Single Family Detached as a proposed use and combine Duplex/Townhouse and consolidate those required buffers. [see table] REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS  REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS 13. Increase required bufferyard plantings using Option 1 [table below] with the requirement of five (5) trees for Bufferyard B (standard street buffer). Option 1 Per 100 Existing Existing Existing Req’d- Proposed Proposed Proposed LF Req’d- Req’d- Evergreen/Conifer Canopy Understory Evergreen/conifer Canopy Understory A 2 3 0 2 3 0 B 3 3 0 3 5 0 C 3 6 0 3 6 0 D 4 6 10 4 6 10 E 6 9 18 6 9 18 F 10 15 30 10 15 30 BUFFERYARD ILLUSTRATIONS BUFFERYARD ILLUSTRATIONS BUFFERYARD ILLUSTRATIONS BUFFERYARD ILLUSTRATIONS  TREE & BUFFER RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PLANNING COMMISSION 14. Maintain current ordinances pertaining to the following Special Bufferyards: Natural Roadside Buffer, Joint Town/County Highway Corridor Overlay, Sweetgrass Basket Overlay and Mathis Ferry Road Buffer 15. Increase the Critical Line Buffer (currently ranges in width from 15 feet to 35 feet) to 50 feet. 16. Explore adopting a shoreline or waterfront buffer standard that works in tandem with critical line to increase resiliency.  ROADSIDE BUFFERS Natural Roadside Buffer – • Along designated scenic highways, US Hwy 17 North of Long Point Road, SC Hwy 41, Rifle Range Road (portions) • Major arterials – 100 foot buffer or determined during planning process • Minor arterials/collector streets – 50 foot buffer or determined during planning process • Trees less than 3” in caliper can be cleared • Select pruning of limbs • Any additional plantings must be of a native species • Turf/grass is prohibited Joint Town/County Hwy Corridor Overlay • 15 foot • All portions of Chuck Dawley Blvd, US Hwy 17 North from IOP Connector to I-526/Chuck Dawley Blvd, Old Georgetown Road Loop area, and along Long Point Road between the SPA Wando Terminal and I-526 • 50 foot • All remaining portions of US Hwy 17 east of the IOP Connector (except for Old Georgetown Road Loop area) and on Long Point Road between I-526 and Whipple Road  ROADSIDE BUFFERS Sweetgrass Basket Overlay District • Old Georgetown Road Loop Office Area • 20 foot buffer is required along the Old Georgetown Road right-of-way • Fencing may be required during design review • Village Commercial Area (from Old Georgetown Road to Hamlin Road) • Minimum 50 foot vegetated right-of-way buffer along US Hwy 17 • Village Commercial Area (from Hamlin Road to Porchers Bluff Road) • Minimum 35 foot buffer along US Hwy 17 for commercial properties • Requires two 6-inch caliper street trees to be planted within the right-of-way along the property pending SCDOT approval Mathis Ferry Road Buffer – • Boundary – 7th Avenue to Whipple Road • Property owners encouraged to plant canopy trees along roadway • New Developments – • Single-family – 25 feet • Multi-family – 50 feet • Nonresidential – 75 feet Where roadside buffers overlap, the more strict buffer is used  CRITICAL LINE BUFFER • Undeveloped, naturally vegetated buffer along tidally influenced areas designated by SCDHEC-OCRM (only applies to lots platted after September 12, 2000) • Vision corridors allowed, but can not exceed 33% of buffer length • Development of pedestrian trails, vehicle access to docks and piers, utility lines, swales, and erosion control devices are allowed • Width – • Cooper River Bridge to Ben Sawyer Bridge – 15 feet • Cooper River Bridge up Wando River, and Ben Sawyer Bridge northward along Intracoastal Waterway – 35 feet average (minimum 20 feet) • Critical areas subject to change upon a parcel’s subdivision through DHEC- OCRM 8. STAFF UPDATE ON THE 2018 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROCESS • Comprehensive Plan Survey received 933 responses before closing on November 20. • Received new Plan Forum member names • Next Plan Forum meeting is tomorrow, December 5 • Receive information from Marcy Cotov and Clay Duffie • Review information from Open House • Review Themes and Issues that came out of Open House discussions and survey • Will set up subcommittees to discuss identified Themes in meetings over the next couple of months. • Next Open House scheduled for January 30, 2018 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 04 December 2017 COMMITTEE OF COUNCIL