by SC Reporter Emilie Alfino
Following Tuesday’s Planning Commission meeting, the Land Development Code Review Subcommittee – consisting of all seven members of the Planning Commission – met to review four matters: vegetation buffers, home elevations, limitations on principal structures, and front yards.
Vegetation Buffers
This discussion considered revisions to the vegetation buffer standards for commercial and institutional uses. Recommended revisions include decreases in tree quantities and changes to plant types/quantities dependent on the adjacent use, as well as the addition of language for existing mature trees within buffer areas, compliance following a natural disaster, phased installation, and the presence of powerlines, public utility easements, and stormwater areas that fall within required buffer areas.
Home Elevations
As reconstruction deadlines for nonconforming structures approach, staff have encountered permit applications to elevate structures that were not substantially damaged by a natural disaster but whose owners wish to elevate for resiliency purposes.
City staff recommends that a similar provision – allowing up to 10 feet of elevation for all lawfully established nonconforming structures – is appropriate in the context of the City’s strategic goals (i.e., resilience).
Staff recommends allowing lawfully established nonconforming structures that do not comply with setback requirements or height limitations to be elevated up to 10 feet above predevelopment grade.
Front Yards
This involved consideration of an amendment to strike a provision prohibiting accessory buildings in front yards. “Front yard” means an area, unoccupied, except by structures specifically permitted, extending across the full width of a lot and lying between the abutting street line and the nearest part of the principal structure on the lot. The section raises some questions regarding consistent application.
Some accessory structures, including ground signs, fences, and walls, are allowed in front yard areas by other sections of code but are not included among the exceptions of this section.
There are numerous examples of accessory structures permitted in front yards that comply with minimum setbacks, such as swimming pools, detached garages, storage sheds, generator stands, pergolas, planters taller than 3 feet, and recreation courts (at multi-family developments). This pattern is especially noticeable in multiple-frontage lots (but not limited to them).
Limitations on Principal Structures
Discussion was regarding limitations on principal buildings, which apply to multi-family development outside the Resort Housing District, due to City staff finding that the section is effectively obsolete in the context of other, more recently adopted, sections of the Land Development Code. Staff researched the origins of this section, of which there are three references, with amendments largely unrelated to the actual standard:
• An ordinance replacing the former Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
• An ordinance establishing the Resort Housing District
• An ordinance listing revised and reformatted standards for Unified Residential (Cluster) Development and Multi-family Housing. Staff finds this section inconsistent with more recently adopted ordinances and therefore recommends its removal.
• Limiting building design and construction to no more than two dwelling units, vertically, at any point in the building.
• An ordinance increasing maximum height allowed by the Land Development Code in all residential districts, and specifically added, “the height of all new buildings shall not exceed three stories above base flood elevation.”
• Based on this standard, presently, multi-family development has a more restrictive height standard than a single-family residence
The Code prohibits flat roofs, defined as any roof with a slope less than one to four, at any point in the building. However, architectural standards allowed flat roof areas up to 25% of the building’s total roof perimeter. A further ordinance removed the prohibition of flat roofs at multi-family structures.
All these matters will now be formally presented to the full Planning Commission for consideration and vote.
Leave a Comment