Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

Call to order the planning commission meeting for Tuesday, December 2, 2025. Madame Secretary, may we have roll call? Thank you. Chairman Coutuli here. Commissioner Bellamy here. Commissioner Goseski, present. Commissioner Horton, Commissioner Oler, here. Commissioner Prince here. Commissioner Weise present. Chairman, you have a quorum. Thank you. Suzanne, do we have any communications?

No, I just I've provided everyone with the non-draft copy of the calendar tonight and then um tomorrow we have our last brown bag lunch and that has been moved to our conference room from the training room if you're planning on attending and then also next week the lunchon. Thank you. Okay, approval of the meeting minutes. Has everyone had a chance to review them? Any comments, questions? Mr. Chairman, I move we approve the October 2nd, November 11th minutes as is

October 21st and 21st, excuse me. October 21st. Thank you. Second. Okay, we have first and second. Any further com uh comments or questions before we vote? All those in favor? I closed eyes have it. We have two consent agreement.

Yeah, we have two final plats on the consent agenda that we discussed this morning. Um 5A is final subdivision plat SUV 2560 a major final bonded plat of subdivision creating 26 residential lots common area and private rights of way in phase 10 C of Grand Nose North and 5B is final subdivision plat SUV 25-61 a major final bonded plat of subdivision creating 28 residential lots common area and private rights of way in phase 7B of Grand Dunes Okay. To site a small discrepancy in area on the uh common area. I saw on the plan sheets there's two uh two common area parcels. a larger one at 2 67 acres and a smaller triangular one at 0.47 acres. I can't come up with what they're coming up with for the total area of the common areas

on which which plat. Um there's three there's three pieces. There's Yeah, that's what I can't find on there. Oh jeez. Say to

Okay. Yep. All right, that should answer that question. Yep. Thanks, Ed. Any other questions, comments? Okay. There any uh comments or questions by commissioners? Are you satisfied?

Okay. I entertain a motion. I make a motion that we approve the consent agenda item consent agenda items as submitted. Second. Any further comments? This chance. Okay. All those in favor? I I I opposed. I have it. You're right.

Okay. Moving on to item 6A. Um this is a sketch plan SUV 25-9. a sketch plan of subdivision creating 41 residential lots, open space, and public rights of way at Harper Valley off Tommy Chestnut Road. Uh you've seen this a couple times on your agenda. It started in August 15th and it has been postponed to allow them uh to provide justification regarding the tree removals. Um it's a 13.2 acre property, undeveloped and vacant. It is zoned R1A and it's adjacent to the Kingsport subdivision and um uh Palmetto Harbor. We discussed it a lot this morning. Um again, this sketch plan step is relatively new. Uh the next step will be the preliminary plat from which they would be able to go forward and get a grading plan. Um this just kind of gives them a preliminary conceptual level um entitlement for their lots and infrastructure. There are a few comments that we included at the last meeting as well as um this morning and um and the applicants here if anyone has any questions. Okay. Any uh comments or questions by commissioners? I

think we went through it pretty in pretty a lot of detail this morning and uh for our first uh attempt at a sketch plan, I think it worked out pretty well. have any comments from the public. All right. Any other questions, comments? Commissioners, entertain a motion. I move that the planning commission approve the sketch plan SUV-25-9 prepared for Harper Valley with the provision that buffers, screenings, and plantings be identified in the preliminary plat.

Second that motion. Last chance for comments. I'll entertain a motion or I'm sorry, we already did that. Um, all those in favor I I

opposed eyes have it. All right. So, we have item 6B, reszoning request Z2515. Uh, we received an application requesting the resoning of one parcel containing 33 acres located on the corner of Point Set and 37th Avenue South. Uh, they're currently zoned R2 and requesting Highway Commercial. This item was previously scheduled for the October 7th agenda, but was postponed uh at the applicant's request. Uh the parcel contains a single family home and the surrounding parcels are zoned R2, highway commercial and R1. Uh so to compare existing and proposed zoning, the purpose of the R2 district is to provide for limited alternatives to single family housing, smaller lot development, and correspondingly higher densities, but not permit the crowding of development on individual lots or parcels. The purpose of the highway commercial commercial district is to provide commercial opportunities to the traveling public and areas in the commu community where large-scale commercial projects may take place with minimal impact on contiguous residential development. This district is designed to support local as well as regional shopping centers and business complexes. Uh this district will accommodate a wide range of business and commercial uses clustered where feasible for cumulative attraction and located for optimum accessibility. Um now to look at the permitted uses um to look in the R2 district. Those uses

include the following. A zero lot line, single family detached developments, townhouse developments, family daycare homes, multipplexes, so triplex and quadruplex dwellings, uh, and single family and common projects. Permitted uses within highway commercial district include personal service establishments, convenience, primary and secondary retail establishments, general business services, funeral homes and access accessory crematoriums, uh professional offices, commercial recreation, establishments, churches, places of worship, um religious institutions um including accredited educational facilities, motel, hotels, lodges and ins hospitals, clinics, nursing and convolescent homes, um educational institutions, armories, lodges, civic clubs, um commercial and training schools, animal hospitals, veterary clinics, automobile service and repair, public and private transportation service and facilities, commercial parking lots, and structures, adult entertainment establishments and signs are permitted by article 3. Um, accessory uses, incidental to multif family dwellings, hotels, motel, ins, lodges, and resort residential. Um, other accessory uses are cemeteries and video gaming machines or stations. Um so just to look at questions we consider by ordinance the relationship of the request to the comprehensive plan. The proposed zoning designation highway commercial is not a primary recommended zoning district within the compliance index. Uh whether the request violates or supports the plan. The

proposed highway commercial zoning is inconsistent with the residential suburban land use classification found in the 2018 comprehensive plan. uh whether the uses permitted in the by the proposed change would be appropriate in the area. Um so the uses permitted in the highway commercial district would be appropriate in the area. The subject property is located along 37th Avenue South, a designated focus area in the 2018 comprehensive plan. Uh this corridor uh was historically the main street of Windy Hill and is a walkable 44 mile connection between US 7 highway 17 and Ocean Boulevard. Uh the plan describes the area as predominantly residential with neighborhood commercial businesses located at each end transitioning to dense be beachfront hospitality development along Ocean Boulevard. Um access is subject to city encroachment permit approval. Public water and sewer are available. Uh and there were no issues at the staff level. So, if you do choose to forward to city council of recommendations of approval, I do recommend option C to recognize substantial change or changing conditions or circumstances in a particular locality.

And if we do not recommend, it would go with a correct. Um, it would be the alternate motion to recommend denial. There any discussion um on this request this morning at the workshop? Well, a lot of discussion this morning in regards to this discussion. You

want to rehash some of that? Oh, Rocky, this Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, this morning we were discussing the point of the housing and what potentially could go there down the road. All right. Where you have just our residential there and then down on the bottom, I guess that's the neighborhood commercial that's there.

And the pink is neighborhood commercial. you know, do I personally feel that it I feel it should be neighborhood, but then that would be spot zoning and we can't go that far. you know, somewhere down the line with the focal areas in the four towns that are North Myrtle Beach, 37th Avenue, the old Main Street eventually, you know, maybe in the next comprehensive plan that could uh be changed where, hey, we can make that neighborhood commercial and give the opportunity to do something there. All right. Unfortunately, the one piece across the street that was grandfathered in, you know, look at the uh the intersection of 37 and uh points at um that would make it all four quadrants highway commercial.

No, no, no. just show up the um the other map see across the other the other two corners are not highway commercial they are residential residential what was the other flip back to the other map because it's

so this is the zoning map which these properties on the corner um that are in mentioned right now are zoned highway commercial. Um, and then on the existing land use, they are considered residential. Uh, based on the Ory County land codes and currently what's out there, that went away. It would Yeah. brought back.

It wasn't chosen. It was grandfathered. So, like went through process of being that was what was right for that. This is what and so this going to that uh but this is starting to head down that street by piece zoning and I just think you know maybe in the land use it could look at how that street might be addressed with a lot more discussion from the residents than as well as that's not a request on the table.

Yeah. Okay. Um like to ask uh for any uh public input. We have any

I live at 38th Avenue 710 38th Avenue South. been there for 44 years. We right back to the back of that property. Um it was owned by a North Carolina man for quite a while and just sold not too long ago and um we heard about this. We saw the sign of the thing and we're worried about what was going to go there. And once we open it up to commercial, the possibilities are endless. They could come and I mean we could have built store behind us in a community with a lot of residential um up to a smoke shop to a bike or bar or whatever they want to put there. And I think that you know um it's not going to just hurt just that little area. It's going to extend down the street because what's going to happen is I think people are going to start getting more opportunities to to address let's make the whole street commercial piece by piece over 20 30 years and you're still spot zoning everything and eventually you know building that area up. Um so I I totally contest it. I'm totally against it and uh I hope you guys will you know shut it down. But thank you for hearing me. Good evening. My name's Mary Sheran. I live on 38th Avenue South, kind of across the street from this property. I'm a new resident here. I love Windy Hill. I love North Myrtle

Beach. My husband recently died unexpectedly and he was very much against this. And that's why I'm here tonight because I want to ask you all if you'd like to have a highway commercial lot across the street or next to your property, next to your home. This is my home now. And I don't I don't think it's a good idea. Thank you. Sorry for your loss, ma'am. You

have any more public comment? You want to step up here, please? I have right now have no plans.

Scott Allen. I live on Turner Street. I have no uh plans to physically change the property. Uh and nor would I ever put anything in like that on my neighbors. Right now it's an Airbnb. Uh we wanted to get it reszone because I think the corners around it are all commercial. Whether they were grandfathered in or not, I don't know what, you know, it's still commercial and that's all we were asking to do. Not like we're planning on putting any in it that's derogatory to the neighborhood. I might ask um what are your plans for it if you reszone it?

Uh right now the plan is just to put uh an office in it, a real estate office, a oneperson real estate office. That's it. Hey, any more questions? Thank you. I don't think the issue was about it being an office. The issue is the zoning.

Something could happen to whatever that was next week and then the next person up. It could be whatever. I mean, and and you know, uh the little auto repair shops been there since I was a kid, and that's a long time ago. And uh so it's it is and it and it wasn't, you know, the folks that had property around there, it wasn't exactly desirable even then. And to even have an opportunity to invite something like that to continue deeper down into the neighborhood, it has to there has to be a demarcation line. and except for the fact that that historic that property is grandfathered in um it wouldn't it wouldn't be there today and to to to change that now I just don't really think it's appropriate

no any other comments by commissioners Okay, I'd like to call for a motion. I move that the planning commission recommend denial of the reszoning request Z-25-15 as submitted. Second.

Last chance for comments. All those in favor of denial. I I

opposed. I have it. Item 7A is zoning ordinance text amendment ZTX 2513. This is a text amendment that allows uh provisions for the reconstruction, repair, or reestablishment of non-conforming beach cabanas. Um you saw that um a couple of meetings ago at the November 3rd meeting, city council postponed that ordinance on second reading to allow this ordinance to catch up with it. And what this ordinance does is it allows um once we delete beach cabanas from our ordinance that will be a non-conforming use. And I I know of two, the Tidewater and the Barefoot Beach Cabana. So what this ordinance um amendment does is it allows those to be reconstructed, repaired or reestablished. um specifically a structure utilizing single family design and development standards that serves as a oceanfront related amenity for a larger residential development. That was the former definition of beach cabana formally regulated as a beach cabana house that the provisions of section 23133 2 and 3 shall not apply. And those provisions are if it's damaged beyond 75% it can't be rebuilt. So, this would allow those beach cabanas that exist now, even after the use is abandoned, um, for them to be replaced.

It's very wordy way of me to say that. I'm sorry, but yeah, replaced as a beach cabana. Replaced as a beach cabana. That would be the only two. That's the only two that I'm aware of. Yes.

The Barefoot Beach Cabana and the Tidewater Community Beach Cabana. Is there is a third one? The Oh, there's five. My apologies. I didn't know that. Do we need to take another look at this? It will protect all five. Okay. So, it's not just for the two then. Yeah, it's all five will be protected. Specifically reference. I know, but we specifically are saying all that in this.

We all know Chris, of those five, all right. Are there any more that may be floating out there that this is gonna We're just extending the window from the 50% to 75%.

No, 100%. It could be it could be okay completely washed away and they could rebuild it leveled to the ground.

Okay. Say, say Tidewater was to decide to uh sell theirs. I'm sorry. U say Tidewater was to decide to sell their Cabana home. How would that There's no So the next one owning it would have the same rights as the this one. So it's not just for tide. It's for that property. It's for that property. Correct. But it could be sold for a use that's conforming other than a cabana house.

That happened. neighborhood.

So if u if the cabana house is is uh the the use as a cabana house, if the property's use as a cabana house ceases, it's changed to something else. And if they do change the use, then it's no longer considered a cabana house for purposes of this text amendment. Correct.

On our part against them. But if they changed it back to a single family, could they do that? Single family. But other uses, no. Yeah. Right. Okay. Ocean front. So they could be changed back to R4 rental. They are within that zoning district. Yeah. All the ocean front cherry grows R4. Yeah, exactly. So they could use it for whatever

they could use it. go back to R1 and go back to whatever the previous zoning that would be spot R1 in R4. They converted it back to R4. It would be conformance R4. Okay. Yes. They said R1 do single family detach.

Exactly. Yeah. But it's an alternate use. up. Yeah. So you could have a private equity group go to a neighborhood in financial need and buy their cabana house and then have select members of their private equity group have access to the beach club cabana

so someone else could do what she's saying. Cabana houses

satisfied. on that. Any further questions? Anyone from the public? We'll entertain a motion. I move the planning commission recommend approval of the zoning ordinance text amendment ZTX-25-13 as submitted. Second. All right.

Best chance for comments. All those in favor? I I opposed. I have it. Merry Christmas.

Item 7B, zoning ordinance text amendment DTX-205-14. This is a text amendment revising sub subdivision and non-commercial signs. That's what it was initially um conceived as. We had a workshop November 13th. We've taken out the non-commercial sign portion of this for now. We need to figure out where we need to go legally with that. So, this is just affecting the subdivision signs. Um section 2336 sign regulations. We're adding a couple of uh residential districts that have not yet um that were never added into this. So, R1, R1A, R1B, we've also added R1E and CR. Um R2B was somehow missed. So in subdivisions with more than 10 lots, two subdivision entrance signs per principal entrance are allowed. Such sign shall designate the subdivision by name or symbol only and shall be placed on the face of a masonry entrance wall to said subdivision or residential district. One such sign shall not exceed 20 square feet per sign face and an aggregate area of 40 square feet per entrance, nor shall they exceed a height of 7 feet. If a double face sign is used without the entrance walls, only one such sign is allowed per entrance. And we're adding part two. Subdivision entrance signs that exceed any of the above specifications, including but not limited to sign area height, placement, or supporting structure, may be permitted only by special exception pursuant to section 2364 when site conditions or design circumstances justify departure from the standard limits. We talked about the special exception requirements this morning. It's uh not injurious to neighboring properties. It's harmonious with the neighborhood. Um all of those elements. This puts it as a special exception under BCA. They can approve larger

signs. Does, and this is just for my knowledge. Did we include um when we're talking about adding different areas, um conservation community, any of the future names? And I did put them in there. CR and R1E are in there. Okay, perfect. We'll see where that gets with council based on the timing of y'all's workshops for that and everything, but they are in there for now. Thank you.

Any further questions or comments? Entertain a motion. I move the planning commission recommend approval of the zoning ordinance text amendment ZTX-25-14 as submitted. Second.

Last chance for comments. All those in favor I I opposed. I have it. Mr. Chairman, I need to recuse myself on the next item.

Item 7 C is minor PDD amendment Z25-18. This is a minor amendment to the Prince Resort PDD for a temporary sign for the pier and restaurant. Um, this directs visitors to the protected pedestrian walkway used to access the pier and restaurants while circulation is disrupted due to construction and the sign will be removed when construction is complete. It's a 4x8 sign. Um, it'll be painted white with those lo those graphics on it. It adheres to the city standards of signs based off of the large building, I guess. So, yeah,

it's way below the Yeah. Mint limit for the signage.

Any comments or questions from the public? I entertain a motion. I move that the planning commission approve the minor planned development district amendment to the Prince Resort PDD Z-25-18 as submitted. Second.

Last chance for comments. All those in favor? I I have it. about it. Any further comments by the public inviting comments now? No, no one's here. Okay. I entertain a motion to adjourn. I All those in favor? I opposed. None. That hurts. That one, doesn't it?