|
Folly Beach residents to vote on building height limit ordinance
By Shannon Cavanaugh
Contributing Writer
It took three city council meetings, pleas from angry citizens and more than 600 signatures before Folly Beach City Council decided to reverse its previous decision at a special meeting Jan. 26 and give voters the power of setting height limits under a fire and protection safety ordinance.
“I don’t like this ordinance. It’s full of holes,” said Folly Beach Mayor Vernon Knox. “The only reason I’m supporting it, and (I) can’t really say support it, rather crammed down my throat, is because it is the desire of 600 voters to vote on it.”
The council voted 5 to 1 to let Folly Beach voters have the opportunity to vote on a “Building Height Limit Ordinance” April 4. If passed, the ordinance would require a 50-foot height limit from the nearest road centerline.
Getting approval to vote on this ordinance was not easy. It took 50 volunteers knocking on doors to collect more than 630 signatures from Folly Beach voters who said they wanted the right to vote on whether the island should set height limits on buildings for fire and protection safety.
“The message is pretty loud to the mayor and the council. We, as members of the community, want buildings in appropriate scale to the community,” said Dave Stormer, the volunteers’ leader. “The old saying is ‘When the people lead, the leaders will follow.’”
Arguments on both sides went back and forth from allowing Folly Beach residents to vote on it, to the legality of the ordinance, to voters calling it “a delay tactic for developers,” to the mayor calling it “pure politics.”
However, at the Jan. 24 city council meeting, at the mayor’s request and upon the previous advice of the city attorney, the Folly Beach City Council unanimously voted to remand the resolution to the planning commission for public hearings, refusing to put it on the April 4 ballot or consider the fire and protection safety ordinance as a council.
“This is a flat out land use zoning ordinance, not a fire and safety issue,” said the mayor. “It’s 10 weeks away from the election, and it’s designed to affect the C-4 ordinance (with no height limits) we just passed. I’m referring it back to the planning commission for a public hearing. That probably won’t take place until March, meaning it won’t make the April 4 ballot. The city then has one year to hold a vote.”
Not quite what voters expected, especially Councilman Wallace Benson, who attended a petition drive rally and told volunteers they would “get a referendum, and the public should have a final say.”
Benson was the only councilman at the Jan. 26 meeting to vote against sending it to the public for a vote because it was a binding referendum. Height restrictions and zoning are topics the planning commission has discussed and already held public hearings for during the past year and made recommendations that the city council rejected.
Last December, the council created and voted on C-4 no height restriction zoning for the newly annexed Tollbooth House property in an effort to annex the Piggly Wiggly and its tax base and keep the mayor’s promise to the Barber family, who owned the land.
Councilman Eddie Ellis, who voted against the C-4 no height restriction, has introduced a zoning amendment that would limit the height of a building to
35 feet above base flood elevation. The mayor amended that to 40 feet and sent it to the planning commission for a public hearing before coming back to council again.
Currently, Folly Beach relies on a fire/police combination of 12 officers and a handful of volunteers. According to Fire Chief George Tittle, his crew can protect 20% of the properties on Folly Beach. He says no city official has discussed how his crew will handle annexations with no height restrictions. Voters recently turned down a property tax that would have helped pay for a full-time fire department and updated equipment.
Two Folly Beach residents did speak out against sending the height limit ordinance to the public for a decision.
“I do not like this ordinance. It’s a product of frustration to get height limitations on C-4,” said Rex Whitcomb. “I fear it is dangerous if we start monkeying around with these ordinances.”
“This ordinance would hurt me,” said Bob Hatcher. “If my house burned down, I could not rebuild it to the same height. I like the idea of building my house as high as I want to.”
|
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version