Isle of Palms City Council – February 23, 2010
Dog license fee increased to $5 for residents
In response to an outpouring from island residents, the Isle of Palms Ways and Means committee voted to change the City’s required dog license fee from the proposed $25 per license for residents to $5 per license; a number much closer to the current license fee of $2. As for the visitor’s dog license fee, which was proposed at $35 per license, Ways and Means asked that the Public Safety Committee go back and re-consider the changes. During the Ways and Means meeting, Council member Marty Bettelli pointed out that the decision to increase dog licenses was made in response to Sullivan’s Island increasing their dog license fee to $35; a ruling which might cause visitors with dogs to descend on the Isle of Palms in order to avoid the fees. The Ways and Means decision to increase the dog license fee to $5 was later approved unanimously during the Council meeting. As for visitors’ dog license fees, the issue will be discussed by the Public Safety Committee on March 10. “We heard you loud and clear,” said Council member Mike Loftus in response to the citizens who attended the Ways and Means meeting to express their opinion. “The Council messed up and we’re in the process of fixing it.”
Island vegetation restrictions wilt on floor
First reading was given to an ordinance which would apply to SR-1 and SR-2 districts, requiring “At least fifty percent (50%) of the area of a lot” to be “naturally vegetated or landscaped with grass or other vegetation”, provided that it doesn’t limit lot coverage to less than 3200 square feet. The ordinance would also require a landscaping plan approval and installation prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
Douglas Kerr, Director of Building, Planning and Zoning for the island, stated that the current ordinance has a limit of 40% on impervious surfaces such as concrete on lots, but there is no limit on pervious surfaces, which could be anything from gravel to bare dirt to slotted decks. “This was proposed before about 5 or 6 years ago, but was removed by the Council,” said Kerr. “Right now, you could theoretically leave a lot as dirt.” However, there was no motion to approve first reading and the ordinance died on the floor.
Roof deck restrictions pass first reading
As with the vegetation ordinance, ordinance 2010-04 was brought up as a result of a workshop held between the Planning Commission and the City Council a few months ago. Before the Council gave first reading, Director Kerr stated that the goal of the ordinance is not to eliminate rooftop decks, but to eliminate the trend of recent structures where the entire top floor is a rooftop deck. “With this [ordinance],” said Kerr, “any deck within 10 feet of the roof is limited to 10% of heated footprint of the structure.” For example, Kerr stated that a 4000 square foot, 2 story house with 2000 square feet on each floor could only have a rooftop deck measuring 200 square feet. “People could still have rooftop decks, they would just be smaller,” said Kerr.
When Council member Barbara Bergwerf asked where the 10% figure came from, Kerr replied that small decks are not objectionable and would still afford a good view, and that the 10% restriction “seemed to be a generally good fit.”
“And the reason this is being done is to prevent …?” asked Council member Marty Bettelli. “It’s aesthetics, for the large part,” said Kerr, pointing out that flat roofs with railings were not only unattractive, they also allowed large parties to congregate 40 feet in the air, which is unattractive from a noise standpoint.
“I can understand noise pollution, but unattractiveness in eye of beholder,” argued Council member Buckhannon. “Some houses might be a hideous color, but when will that legislation come through?”
Bergwerf stated that felt the ordinance should have a first reading so that there could be a public hearing to discuss the pros and cons of the issue, and after a couple more minutes of discussion, the Council voted, passing first reading with Council members Marty Bettelli, Ryan Buckhannon and Sandy Stone voting against.
10 people per rental to be written into an ordinance
Council member Bergwerf read aloud a possible amendment to zoning, asking that the Council consider voting to have it crafted into an ordinance. The amendment amends section 5-4-202: Maximum Occupancy, to read that the maximum overnight occupancy of a residence obtaining and continuously holding a business license since prior to March 23, 2010, shall remain as they are currently, but the maximum occupancy of a residence obtaining a business license after March 23, 2010, cannot have an occupancy of more than ten people.
“This is an emotion issue and I’ve heard from a number of impassioned people,” said Council member Stone. “And there are some unintended consequences that we need to explore.” He went on to list that the amendment, if put into place, would erode the island’s hospitality tax base since less people would be able to stay on the island, and the difference would “come from the backs of citizens, from businesses and from business license fees.” Accomodations taxes are already down, he stated, and would be further degraded by putting the ordinance in place. “Where is the win-win for the citizens?” He asked.
Council member Bettelli asked where the maximum number of 10 came from as it seemed arbitrary to him. Bergwerf replied that it came from “statistics across America. Families of 10 seems like a reasonable number.”
“What if 2 or 3 families want to share a rental?” asked Bettelli. “I don’t understand what we’re trying to do short of scaring people from the Isle of Palms. Our industry is tourism. Some houses, I agree, are way too big, but 10? Come on, it doesn’t make sense.”
Council member Brian Duffy stepped in, pointing out that the ordinance wouldn’t affect people who currently have rental licenses, and as long as their license remains current, their maximum occupancy wouldn’t change. “I think 10 is a number for the future,” said Duffy. “Nothing in this approach takes money out of city coffers now or in the near future.”
“We started on this odyssey years ago when it looked like rentals would burn down the island,” said Council member Ralph Piening. “No one is totally happy with this. The investor class is not happy, but the residents that supported me want to end rentals right now and immediately decrease the number to 10. That’s not going to happen. Instead, we won’t build any more to rent out to 20, 24 or 28 people. It’s not radical, it’s what residents want.”
Council member Mike Loftus concurred, averring that there has been a lot of misinformation going around, such as that certain members of the Council were trying to eliminate rentals altogether. “I take offense to this. I will never take that stand. Rentals are a part of the island.” He went on to point out that rentals have been down, and his new neighbors’ rental has dropped from 15 weeks a year to 5 because the inventory on the island is so high. “This protects your property because it makes it more valuable,” said Loftus. “If you go down 42nd avenue, you’re surrounded by rentals. We’re trying to preserve the residential quality of the island.”
“We’re talking about capping, not reducing the current number,” said Council member Doug Thomas. “Current licenses will stand for as long as the owner or future owners have that license. It’s supply and demand, basic economics.” He also noted that the infrastructure of the island didn’t seem like it could hold many more large homes. “If we continue way we have grown, we will have to burn a lot of dollars on infrastructure.”
In the end, the Council voted to prepare the amendment as an ordinance for first reading, with Council members Marty Bettellli, Ryan Buckhannon and Sandy Stone voting against.
All ordinances which had first reading during this Council meeting will have a public hearing starting at 6:30pm before the March 23 Council meeting at City Hall. The regular Council meeting will begin at 7pm. City Hall is located at 1207 Palm Boulevard. For more info, visit www.iop.net or call 886-6428.
Meeting highlights
• Budget: Charleston County is behind in sending property tax collections to the City, which has only received $1,450,000 to date (91% of budget). However, Treasurer Suggs believes that once the rest is received, the City will meet its budgeted revenue. Business licenses are $200,000 short and even with delinquent payments, the numbers might not make this year’s budgeted revenue. Local options sales taxes and residential rental licenses are both on track.
• Council video online: Council approved an expenditure of $35 per posting to post the city’s Council meetings on the city website, with an annual subscription fee of $60.
• Priority of projects costing $250,000 or more: The following projects costing $250,000 or more to complete were placed in order of priority for the city. Topping the list is the drainage project at 54th – 5th Avenue, followed by the dredging of the Marina, then the disaster recovery fund increase and finally, the scaled-back version of the Recreation ball field reconfiguration.
• Bike rack at the Public Safety building: Discussions are underway to place a bike rack at the new Public Safety building. Chief Buckhannon will look into pricing and report during the March meeting.
• Disaster Preparedness Expo: The joint Isle of Palms and Sullivan’s Island Disaster Preparedness Expo will be held at the Isle of Palms new Public Safety Building on Friday, June 11, 2010, from 5 – 7 p.m.
• ALS Race date set: The next ALS Race on the Isle of Palms beach will be held on Saturday, June 12. 2010. For more information, visit www.alshoperace.com.
• RFP for City drainage maintenance: Eadie’s Drain and Vaccuum Services have been handling the maintenance of the island’s drainage ditches for almost five years and is close to concluding their five year contact with the city. The Public Works Committee voted to draft an RFP (request for proposal) so that other companies can bid on the drainage maintenance contract.
• Approval to issue letter of intent to purchase Mack Loadmaster: The Council approved the issuance of a letter of intent to purchase a Loadmaster Model Excel 31S packer body mounted on a Mack Model GU713 from Amick Equipment for Public Works in the amount of $165,667. However, the city is not under obligation to purchase the equipment if the purchase does not pass budget.
• Fix our drainage! Several residents from Sparrow Drive spoke at the beginning of the Council meeting, pointing out that their neighborhood has become a lake in excess of more than a foot deep and nothing was being done about it. It has become dangerous to walk through the area and one resident expressed concern about liability if someone slipped in the permanent mud in his front yard. Mayor Cronin said he would see what they could do about it.
• Thanks from SIES: Sullivan’s Island Elementary principal Susan King addressed the Council, thanking them for their support of the school. “We’re trying to rebuild our school and I feel very positive about it,” said King. “It’s looking good. Everyone was so giving.” She noted that they have received more than 1000 letters of support from both islands.
• Home business ordinance deferred: An ordinance amending home occupation for a business on the island to allow for more than one home occupation per dwelling unit, and to rename “home occupation” as “home business occupation” was deferred pending a public hearing.
• Penalties for untimely payment of taxes: Ordinance 2010-02, which requires establishments which “tender payment for the patron’s meal, food or beverage” to be subject to a penalty of 25% or portion thereof of the unpaid tax if the monthly tax is not paid by the 20th of the month, with an increase of 5% monthly (or portion thereof) up to 50% until the tax is paid passed second reading.
• Maximum occupancy at any time in rentals: The Council passed first reading of an ordinance to reduce the maximum occupancy of a rental at any time so that the total number of persons at a residence shall not exceed 2.5 times the maximum overnight occupancy or a total of 40 persons, including children. Council members Bettelli and Buckhannon voted against.
