Recreation sheds on SI--Next step is unclear

It is hard to know exactly where Town Council is with the controversial recreation shed amendment, even after the September 21st Town Council meeting. 

While Mayor Pat O'Neil did acknowledge at the beginning of the meeting that Town Council was aware most of the attendees were there because of the zoning amendment, he then stated that Town Council would not be voting on the amendment that night.  

And that was absolutely all that Town Council said about the recreation shed amendment at the meeting. A number of islanders did make comments--both pro and con-- about the amendment during the public comment period, however.

In view of the number of islanders who attended the Town Council meeting because of the amendment, it was truly surprising that the recreation shed issue was not on the  agenda at all--even for discussion. 

So where we are with the approval process? In response to an email, Andy Benke said that the amendment should fall under the responsibility of  the Land Use and Natural Resources Committee (LUNR), chaired by Councilwoman Rita Langley. Other members of LUNR are Mayor Pat O'Neil and Councilman Chauncey Clark. But if LUNR is indeed the next step, it is not clear why Town Council did not vote to send the amendment to LUNR at the Town Council meeting on September 21st. 

It is possible that Town Council will discuss the amendment at the next Town Council workshop, scheduled for Monday, October 12th at 6:00, and decide then what the next step would be. But again, it is not entirely clear what is going on with the amendment at the moment because Town Council did not discuss the issue at the Town Council meeting.

What has become abundantly clear over the past several months is that the recreation shed amendment has generated much controversy and much correspondence from islanders to Town Council and to the Planning Commission. The many letters and comments in opposition to the amendment generally cite concerns about the precedent-setting nature of an island-wide zoning change, the accommodating of one small group of islanders to the detriment of the rest of the community, and the unexplored consequences to the entire community of allowing stand-alone recreation sheds on what is now a single-family residential island--as affirmed and re-affirmed in the Comprehensive Plan that was updated just last year.

In contrast, the letters from islanders in support of the amendment are primarily from residents living in the neighborhood around the property in question, and generally focus on the benefits to the immediate neighborhood of removing the one house from the one piece of property on Marshall Boulevard.

So for the moment, it appears the discussion of the recreation shed amendment is ongoing. It is essential that islanders continue to send letters to members of Town Council and let them know what you think about the recreation shed issue.

And in the meantime....Read the letter below from islander Mike Walsh to each Town Council member. Mike's letter also ran in the September 11 edition of Island Eye. In his very clever imagined conversation between William Moultrie and Florence O'Sullivan, Mike manages to capture the essence of many of the letters written by islanders who oppose the recreation shed amendment:

A Sullivan’s Island Conversation

Here’s an imagined conversation between two residents of Sullivan’s Island in regard to the proposed zoning change to allow a recreational structure in place of a house at 3117 Marshall Boulevard. Whether it fits more into the fiction or non-fiction category each reader will have to decide for him or herself.

Florence O’Sullivan:  So I hear that a group of people want to do away with a house on front beach where the erosion is getting bad and make it into something else. What’s that all about?

William Moultrie:  Yep, that’s right. Some nearby homeowners have formed some sort of corporation to own the property, remove the house and turn it into a recreational facility instead. But, they’re not calling it a recreational facility, they’re calling it a “conservation easement”.

O’Sullivan:  What’s a conservation easement?

Moultrie:  That’s a legal agreement between a property owner, in this case the “corporation” that was formed, and a non-profit conservation organization, namely, the East Cooper Land Trust.

O’Sullivan:  So it’s like a donation then.

Moultrie:  Not exactly. There is a value to the property and the arrangement is permanent, so there may be a tax deduction available to this group of…hmm…not quite sure what to call them. Let me call them investors. But they do retain certain rights to the use of the property.

O’Sullivan:  Like what?

Moultrie:  Well, like building a recreational shed, complete with storage room and shower, and using it to entertain friends and family.

O’Sullivan:  But any resident of the Island could use this, right?

Moultrie:  No way. It would be available only to the owners of the property.

O’Sullivan:  So they could hold like another Woodstock or something on the beach?

Moultrie:  Well, they say it would be limited to 24 people at a time with only two cars parked on the property, though for the life of me I’m not sure who’s going to enforce that. I’m really not clear on what happens when guest number 25 and 26 shows up.

O’Sullivan:  Maybe you could send some of that famous militia of yours to help. But what’s the next step?

Moultrie:  The Town has to go along with the whole deal through the Planning Commission and the Town Council.

O’Sullivan:  Why wouldn’t they go along with it?

Moultrie:  Because this is a residential lot in a residential neighborhood on a residential island. Plus it really goes against the Comprehensive Plan the Town has approved and re-approved over the years that was designed to maintain the current residential character of the island. In addition, essentially the entire current Town Council campaigned on a platform that included maintaining the current make-up of the island.

O’Sullivan:  But there would be only one of these easements, sheds, recreational facilities, whatever you want to call it on the island, right?

Moultrie:  Au contraire, my friend. If the zoning ordinance is changed it would then apply to whoever else might want to do the same thing. You can’t just do it for one group. Even an official from the East Cooper Land Trust came over and not only urged the Planning Commission to approve this deal, but also encouraged the Town to loosen up and allow more of this type projects to go on.

O’Sullivan:  I don’t know. It does seem like something that is done in the name of conservation along with the Land Trust is kinda like motherhood and apple pie.

Moultrie:  C’mon, Flo. Get your head out of the 17^th century. This is not exactly like someone donating a hundred-acre nature preserve. This is a very small group of people trying to change a very small piece of property into something they can use and enjoy to the exclusion of anyone not on the guest list of 24. It does absolutely nothing for you, me or the vast majority of island residents.

O’Sullivan:  Yeah. I see what you mean. Just one last question. You don’t suppose that anyone involved with making a decision on this would be close enough friends with the investors to be on that guest list of 24 do you?

Moultrie:  Ahhhh…I really couldn’t say.

O’Sullivan:  Hmmm.

(To be continued.)

The Planning Commission met on September 9th to discuss the recreation shed amendment and hear comments from islanders. 

In spite of all of the controversy surrounding the amendment, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the amendment and send it on to Town Council for a vote. 

So now it is up to Town Council to decide what to do with the Planning Commission's recommendation. 

Town Council will meet this Monday evening at 6:00 and may--or may not--include the recreation shed issue on the agenda. But it is now up to Town Council to decide what the next step will be. The Planning Commission's vote  last Wednesday only represents a recommendation to Town Council. Council has the final say about the amendment.  

Council could do one of several things, including: 1) accept the Planning Commission's recommendation and vote to approve the amendment; 2) vote against approving the amendment; or 3) decide the issue needs more work and study and remand it to another committee, such as LUNR.

This issue is very controversial and has generated much opposition from across the island. A number of islanders have attended Planning Commission meetings over the summer and spoken out strongly against the recreation shed amendment.  Many more  have contacted Town Council in opposition. Islanders have also contacted East Cooper Land Trust and Coastal Conservation League in opposition to the amendment.

At the meeting on September 9th, Planning Commission Chair Gary Visser declined a request from an islander to read into the record the letters received since the last Planning Commission meeting in August, and also refused to characterize the letters as either for or against the amendment. Turns out all of the letters in the packet given to the Planning Commission were clearly opposed. So why not just say so? 

Turns out also that there was a letter in the packet from East Cooper Land Trust, dated August 27th, stating that ECLT no longer wanted to be involved in the process of the zoning ordinance amendment, as it had become controversial.

Seems that is a significant development--to say the least!--and certainly something that the Planning Commission should have made public before taking a vote to recommend the amendment. Why would the Planning Commission continue to act as if there is little opposition or controversy about the recreation shed amendment?

So what should islanders who are opposed to the amendment do now? Plan to attend the Town Council meeting at 6:00 on Monday and speak out during the comment period. If you cannot attend the meeting, contact Town Council and let members know how you feel about the amendment. And stay tuned....

Planning Commission Public Hearing tonight at 6:30

The Sullivan's Island Planning Commission is holding a meeting tonight to hear what residents have to say about changing SI zoning regulations to allow stand-alone recreation structures on residential lots.The purpose of the the meeting is for islanders to offer feedback to the Planning Commission on the proposed zoning change, so plan to attend, hear what other islanders have to say, and offer comments and concerns.

Click here to read the notice and the agenda for the meeting. Scroll through to see a concise handout put together by Town staff summarizing the key provisions of the proposed language of the zoning amendment.

Also on the agenda is request from an islander to subdivide 2 parcels on Middle St--2214 Middle St.and 2216 Middle St. 

Please attend the meeting tonight if at all possible and let the Planning Commission know what you think about this precedent-setting zoning change on Sullivan's Island. Contact information for the Planning Commission can be found at: sicommunityimpact.com.

The meeting will be at 6:30 in the Town Hall, 2050-B Middle St.  Parking is in the neighborhoods due to construction of the new Town Hall. 

Hope to see you there!