 |
 |
 |
|
| The following summary minutes have not been approved by Simpsonville City Council. An official copy of the minutes will be available after adopted by City Council at City Hall 118 NE Main St. Simpsonville. Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, notice of this meeting date, time, place and Agenda was posted on the bulletin board at City Hall and faxed to the newspapers, radio stations, television stations and any concerned citizens. |
|
 |
SIMPSONVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 7, 2007, 6:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Donnie McDowell, Kirk Leitke, Caroline Richardson-Mahaffey, Dick Witkowski, Mike Newman, Roy Shelton
MEMBERS ABSENT: James Boyd
CITY STAFF/LEADERS PRESENT: David Dyrhaug
GREENVILLE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING STAFF PRESENT: Kevin Robinson
CALL TO ORDER/OPENING REMARKS:
Commission Chair Dick Witkowski called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
Mr. Dyrhaug held roll call.
Mr. Witkowski presented the items on the agenda and the hearing rules of procedure.
Mr. Newman motioned to accept the June 2007 Planning Commission minutes.
Mr. McDowell seconded the motion.
Mr. Witkowski noted a typographical error on the second page of the minutes. The last word of the paragraph that starts: “Mr. Kevin Ross, Land Design LLC, engineer of Capewood Place …” should end in the word “opposed” rather than “proposed.”
The motion passed unanimously.
The June 2007 Planning Commission Hearing minutes were approved.
Simpsonville Pay Day Loan Ordinance
Mr. Robinson presented proposed ordinance TX-2007-02, an ordinance that lists check-cashing establishments, deferred presentment lenders, and title loan lenders as permitted uses in the S-1 zoning district, special exception uses in the C-2 zoning district, and prohibited uses in all other zoning districts.
Mr. Witkowski added that check-cashing establishments, deferred presentment lenders, and title loan lenders could be located in a PD zoning district subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission.
Mr. Leitke asked how institutions such as banks that commonly cash checks would be affected by this ordinance.
Mr. Dyrhaug noted that banks would be excluded from the regulations of this ordinance because they are specifically excluded in the proposed definition of a “check-cashing establishment.”
Mr. Robinson read the proposed definition of a “check-cashing establishment” as follows: “A person or business that for compensation engages, in whole or in part, in the business of cashing checks, warrants, drafts, money orders, or other commercial paper serving the same purpose. ‘Check-cashing establishment’ does not include a state or federally chartered bank, savings association, credit union, farm credit system, or industrial loan company. ‘Check-cashing establishment’ also does not include a retail seller engaged primarily in the business of selling consumer goods, including consumables, to retail buyers that cash checks or issue money orders for a flat fee not exceeding three dollars as a service that is incidental to its main purpose or business.”
Mr. Newman motioned to recommend approval of ordinance TX-2007-02.
Ms. Richardson-Mahaffey seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously.
Mr. Witkowski thanked the planning commission and staff for their work and efforts in regards to this proposed ordinance.
Eckerd’s Sign Near I-385 and Fairview Road Interchange
Mr. Dyrhaug presented an issue pertaining to the Eckerd’s sign located at 3875 Grandview Drive . The Eckerd’s pharmacy will be converting to a Rite-Aid pharmacy. Presently, nonconforming pole signs exist on the property. Rite-Aid is proposing to change out the faces of these signs from Eckerd’s to Rite Aid. Staff has determined that the nonconforming Eckerd’s pole sign adjacent to the I-385 exit ramp shall be removed. Staff has provided the sign permit applicant with both verbal and written correspondence to this effect. Mr. Dyrhaug indicated that the applicant has expressed willingness to comply with staff’s determination.
Mr. Witkowski identified other signs throughout the City with which the City has had enforcement problems. He specified the billboard at the Georgia Commons property. The City’s ordinance does not permit billboards. However, that billboard has been allowed to persist. He also commented on sandwich board signs along Main Street . These signs are permitted to exist during the day, however, they must be brought inside overnight. Mr. Witkowski commented that some of these signs are being left outside over night. Mr. Witkowski asked Mr. Dyrhaug to investigate both of these matters.
Mr. Newman stated that he had sent both the City Code Enforcement Officer and the City Administrator a list regarding 17 nonconforming signs along Fairview Road . Mr. Newman asked Mr. Dyrhaug to follow up on the status of that list.
Mr. Dyrhaug agreed to investigate the issues addressed by Mr. Witkowski and Mr. Newman.
ATM Location in Bloom’s Parking Lot
Mr. Dyrhaug presented the item. The proposed ATM is located at the parking lot of the Bloom grocery store at West Georgia Road . This property is zoned PD. The ATM is owned by Capital Bank. Mr. Dyrhaug stated that the ATM has already been placed on-site. He identified that miscommunication contributed to misunderstandings that led to the premature installation of the ATM.
Mr. Newman asked about what “miscommunication” took place. He stated that the comments expressed by Planning Commission in the June meeting were clear.
Mr. Dyrhaug noted that this item was previously discussed at the June Planning Commission meeting. Leading up to the meeting, the applicant was led to believe that his attendance at that meeting would not be necessary, and, therefore, he did not attend that meeting and was not able to hear directly from the Commission their review of the proposed ATM. Following the June Planning Commission meeting, a City staff member telephoned the applicant to share with him the proceedings of the meeting. After this telephone conversation, communication between the applicant and staff ceased, until at a later date after staff had learned that the ATM had been installed without the necessary permits and approval from Planning Commission.
Mr. Dyrhaug noted that staff has taken action to rectify the situation and has imposed penalties and fees on the applicant for not obtaining the required permits. Staff has also turned off power to the ATM until such time when the ATM has received the approval of the Planning Commission. He stated that the purpose in discussing the item tonight is to listen to proposals from the applicant regarding how they plan to achieve the comments made by the Planning Commission at their June meeting.
Mr. Sean Faulkner, attorney with Roe Cassidy Coates & Price, and representing the applicant, addressed the Commission. He stated that Mr. Dyrhaug’s assessment was correct. Mr. Faulkner said that the applicant was led to believe that he did not need to appear before the Planning Commission. He expressed that at no point has it been their intention to usurp the authority of the Planning Commission.
Mr. Faulkner addressed the Commission’s comments about using brick veneer. He identified two service doors on the structure, one to provide access to the ATM and the other to provide access to the mechanical equipment. In addition, the wall on which the ATM user panel is located must be able to slide outward. Installing brick veneer on the structure would compromise the ability for these doors and features to function properly. As an alternative, Mr. Faulkner proposed that the applicant install a brick landscape feature approximately 18 to 24 inches in height that would surround the perimeter of the landscape island on which the ATM is located. Additionally, the applicant would plant some low-lying shrubs to enhance the landscape island surrounding the ATM.
Mr. Shelton expressed his displeasure with the appearance of the ATM, comparing it to a “duded-up port-a-john.”
Ms. Richardson-Mahaffey noted that instances exist where ATM were constructed of brick or had the appearance of brick. She specifically used the Bank of America located in Simpsonville as an example.
Mr. John Fouke, Facilities Manager of Capital Bank, and the applicant, addressed the Commission. He apologized for the circumstances that contributed to the premature installation of the ATM. He stated that the ATM was pre-fabricated and designed for the marketing and branding of the bank. He indicated that the pre-fabrication of the machine ensures the security of the machine. Any physical modifications to the structure would compromise the security of the structure and the branding of the bank. He also indicated that two other ATMs were ordered and installed simultaneously with this ATM. The other two ATMs are located in Greenville and Greer. All three ATMs appear identical.
Mr. Witkowski also expressed his displeasure with the appearance of the ATM. He stated that its appearance is not consistent with the appearance of the entire planned development in which this ATM has been located.
Mr. Shelton asked the applicant if the colors of the ATM would remain unchanged.
Mr. Fouke explained that the colors were strategically chosen by the president of the bank. Previous to this new marketing strategy, the bank primarily used the color “blue” in its marketing schemes and the design of structures.
Ms. Richardson-Mahaffey expressed concern that the colors of the ATM are not consistent with the theme of the planned development in which the ATM is located. She noted that there are several other places within the City of Simpsonville where this ATM could be appropriately located. However, the appearance of the ATM is out of place in its current location at this planned development.
Mr. Fouke noted that the ATM is designed by a company known as Concept Unlimited.
Mr. Dyrhaug noted that the Commission should give the applicant direction in regards to what they may do to make the appearance of the ATM acceptable at this location. He asked the Commission to specify if there are certain colors that the Commission deems appropriate. He also asked the Commission to indicate if they feel the landscape feature described by the applicant would be appropriate. He also asked the Commission if there are any other considerations that the applicant should make in terms of the design of the structure.
Mr. Witkowski noted that the landscape feature is a positive feature.
Mr. Newman asked the applicant about the height of this feature.
Mr. Faulkner stated that the recommended height of the feature is 18 inches and absolutely not greater than 24 inches. The height needs to be limited for security purposes.
Mr. Shelton asked the applicant about the landscaping surrounding the ATM.
Mr. Faulkner indicated that low-lying shrubs would be the only appropriate option, again citing security reasons for not having any taller plants.
Mr. Shelton expressed his displeasure with the overall color choice, citing both the blue and the green as unattractive.
Ms. Richardson-Mahaffey expressed her dissatisfaction with the choice of using the particular hue of green that is incorporated in the design of the ATM. This color has not been incorporated with anything else that currently exists in this planned development.
Mr. Shelton expressed his overall disappointment with the ATM thus far. He indicated that after the June Planning Commission meeting, he anticipated that the applicant would return with an impressive design for the ATM. He stated that his frustrations stem from the applicant’s failure to accomplish this.
The Commision moved to table the vote of approval or disapproval of the ATM until its next meeting in September when they hope to see more detailed proposals and plans for how this ATM can be incorporated into the overall design of the planned development in which it is located.
Mr. Witkowski encouraged the applicant to meet with his marketing personnel in order to re-design the ATM so that it will be consistent with the planned development in which it is located. Mr. Witkowski also noted to the applicant that he should attempt to E-mail plans and renderings to Mr. Dyrhaug. In so doing, Mr. Dyrhaug will be able to disseminate these plans and renderings to the Commission and generate a preliminary response from the Commission in response to whatever proposals the applicant is able to generate. This will help the applicant to be able to present a competent alternative when they return to the September Planning Commission meeting.
Closing Remarks
Mr. Witkowski stated that “POD” trailers are becoming an issue within the City. He expressed concern that the City currently has no means of regulating their placement and location within the City. He asked staff to examine this situation and ascertain what could be done in regards to PODs within the City of Simpsonville .
Mr. Dyrhaug replied that other communities sometimes enact ordinances that regulate outdoor storage in general and that such regulations could be applied to PODs. He agreed to examine this situation in greater depth.
Ms. Richardson-Mahaffey motioned to adjourn the meeting.
Mr. Newman seconded the motion.
The motion was approved unanimously.
Commission adjourned at 7:53 p.m. |
|
|
| 118 N E Main Street, Simpsonville, SC 29681 |
|