Blog

Mayor Pushes for Relaxed Restrictions

BLYTHEWOOD – Mayor J. Michael Ross called for a revamping of the town’s Master Plan and specifically of the Town Center District (TCD) at the Town Council work session at the Golf Club in Cobblestone Park Tuesday morning. He had expressed at the Nov. 29 meeting that his goal is to relax not only the town’s sign laws, but what he considered too restrictive zoning in the TCD.

“I don’t want to give you the wrong impression when I say (the town) is not going to look like the suave picture of the Town Center District that sits there in the conference room,” Ross told the Council members, “but it probably will not. It was probably wonderfully planned out 10 years ago. But I don’t know if the town can ever be developed like that. I think it’s time for this Council to revisit this and have a more practical vision for a new Master Plan that incorporates more economic development as much as anything.”

Ross said he had asked Town Administrator Gary Parker to provide Council members with background about how the Master Plan came about. In that report that was handed out at the meeting, Parker described the TCD as the heart of Blythewood and included any future residential parts of town that would be developed in the district along with the commercial area of Blythewood Road and McNulty Road. The TCD regulations and design standards, Parker wrote, were to create a pedestrian-oriented area where people could walk to shopping and dining – places like Reston, Va.; Columbia, Md.; Cary, N.C. and Baxter Village/Town Center, S.C. He concluded that while these towns are regularly in the top 10 of CNN Money’s top-rated cities to live in, the only subject of Council’s work session discussion in this regard would be whether or not this model is right for Blythewood. While the mayor had made it clear that this was not his vision for the town, he asked the other members their views.

Councilman Bob Massa pointed out that the town had spent nearly $300,000 on the Plan in 2009 and that it was made law by a previous Council in 2010. Massa, who campaigned for a tweaking of the Master Plan, also pointed out some of its benefits. He said earlier in the meeting that anyone walking or biking in Blythewood was risking their life. The Plan calls for more accessible walking and biking trails in the TCD.

Councilman Tom Utroska said that while there were numerous committees involved with the creation of the Master Plan, many of the committees’ suggestions were ignored. He would like to have more solid citizen input.

Councilman Bob Mangone suggested a visit to Little Mountain, a town he thinks is more in line with the kind of town Blythewood could become. Ross suggested a subcommittee made up of members of the Planning Commission and Chamber of Commerce study the issue and report to Council.

Parker suggested asking Wayne Schuler of the Central Midlands Council of Governments, and who assists the town government in reviewing and revising its Comprehensive Land Use Plan every five years as required by state law, to also assist in reassessing the Master Plan.

BLYTHEWOOD – Continuing to rehash Mayor J. Michael Ross’s concern that the Town’s sign ordinance and the Town Center District zoning is too restrictive, some Council members disagreed saying the sign ordinance should not be scrapped or even tweaked very much. The ordinance was passed in 2009 to require all signs in the town to conform by the year 2016 (high-rise interstate signs don’t have to conform until 2020).

Councilman Bob Massa said he felt the Council should stick with the 2016 ordinance. While some signs are slightly out of conformity because of size, he suggested allowing a 5 percent overage.

“That would bring a lot of these signs into compliance. Having previously served on the BZA,” Massa said, “when anything pertaining to signs came before us, we held them to the 2016 date. There was a lot of public involvement. The weakness in the system has probably been allowing the Town Administrator to override the BZA and planning commission. I don’t know how that can happen since under the state statute, the BZA is the only law making body outside the Town Council.”

Massa also said he felt the sign ordinance is fairly liberal from the standpoint that the Town doesn’t say what materials or style a business has to use.

“Our limitations are restricted only to size,” Massa said. “So I would recommend sticking with the 2016 ordinance.”

Councilman Tom Utroska agreed that the 2016 ordinance should be kept.

“I think it is inappropriate for the Town Administrator to overrule the BZA on sign ordinances,” he said. “That has caused problems. The BZA should be the final authority.”

Councilman Eddie Baughman said the churches are having the biggest heartburn over the sign issue.

“If we would allow a 10 percent overage, that would probably bring the churches in line with the ordinance,” Baughman said. “But a church’s sign is its landmark, its identity. (The ordinance) makes them rebrand. The trustees of those churches are the ones having an issue with it. They don’t budget that kind of money.”

Councilman Bob Mangone said both Sandy Level and Trinity UMC had big building programs – a community center and a teen center – built in the time during which the sign ordinance was enacted.

“For another $300 – $400, they could have brought their signs into compliance,” Mangone said. “I understand the branding and all that, but they had the opportunity when they had money to make a little change to be in compliance. But like a lot of others, they didn’t.”

Mangone said he felt the Town should also have been sending out notices every year to remind businesses they are going to have to conform. Mangone also suggested a new scenario concerning zoning, one in which the area around the interstate is not considered the same as the town. He suggested less restrictive zoning in the TCD from McNulty and Boney roads to Community Road, which encompasses most of the downtown area, and to create a more lenient sign ordinance for that area to accommodate travelers coming on and off the interstate.

“Let’s say to the Planning Commission, take that Town Center District and make some kind of commercial zoning around the interstate and have separate sign ordinances for that and grandfather them in,” Mangone said, “then hold everybody else accountable with this other ordinance.”

Parker pointed out that there are laws on the whole subject.

“Those big (high-rise) signs may be treated differently, because they are subject to different laws,” Parker said. “Once you’ve adopted a sign ordinance, if you make changes to it, like a 10 percent allowance, have you put yourself at risk with every other business who didn’t come in within the 10 percent who could might claim that you, because you made your original adopted rules to some extent, then why not to ‘my’ extent. If you make the change you open yourself up to a claim by someone who wasn’t covered by that 10 percent. There are a lot of things to consider. You want to be fair and appreciate the churches, but when you adopt a sign ordinance, that means all signs. There’s no distinction.”

Massa reminded Council that “the sign committee (that adopted the current sign ordnance) was made up pretty much of all the commercial businesses down Blythewood Road. Let’s just say the ordinance is there and we’re going to enforce it and move on.”

Parker said he wanted to point out that while it may be a harsh law, it is not the Town’s duty on an annual basis to notify businesses that they are out of compliance. Once a law is passed, it is a person’s responsibility to know the law.

“We are taking a courteous step to remind them that the deadline is approaching,” Parker said, adding that just because a sign is 3 inches above the limit, “you don’t have to go out and enforce that 3 inches.”

There was general agreement that the Town needed an accurate inventory of all the signs and how many are out of conformity and in what way.

In other business, Council discussed giving Town employees the Friday after Christmas off this year so they could enjoy a 5-day holiday. But Ross said that would be for this year only because of when the holiday falls on the calendar.

Hospitality Tax Leads To-Do Lists

RIDGEWAY – Following up on their Sept. 18 community meeting where a broad outline of goals was developed, Ridgeway Town Council sat down with Jeff Shacker of the Municipal Association of S.C. on Nov. 13 to narrow the spectrum of ideas into the Town’s strategic plan for 2015.

Shacker and Mayor Charlene Herring, along with Council members Russ Brown, Heath Cookendorfer and Doug Porter, gleaned from a list of more than 30 goals developed at the Sept. 18 meeting, trimming that lists down to three top priorities, four second-tier priorities and four third-tier priorities.

Leading the priority list on Ridgeway’s 2015 strategic plan is a hospitality tax. Although the concept, pushed in the past by Councilman Brown, perished on the floor at Council meetings last year, the notion cropped up on the “must-do” list of Herring and each of the three Council members present last week.

Maintaining existing infrastructure and adding an additional police officer rounded out the top three priorities.

An advertising/marketing campaign for the Town topped the list of second-tier priorities, followed by providing for residential development within the downtown business district, providing additional street lights and extending water lines down Hood Road.

Working with the Central Midlands Council of Governments to explore form-based codes in order to explore the idea of mixed business and residential property use downtown topped the third-tier list. Developing customers for the water line near the gold mine, a citizen-led town beautification program and providing a system of ambient music downtown rounded out the list.

Recreation projects, such as expanding the local ball field for use for events and implementing a health and fitness program, did not make the cut as the Town is looking to the County’s new comprehensive recreation plan to fill those gaps. Providing Wi-Fi service downtown also did not make any of the lists, although Herring indicated Council would explore the possibility.

A security camera system for downtown also failed to make any of the lists.

$1.4 Million Offer Sparks ‘Discussions’

WINNSBORO – Three weeks ago, Mayor Roger Gaddy made it perfectly clear that the portion of the Town of Winnsboro’s water infrastructure servicing Blythewood was absolutely not for sale. Although Gaddy indicated after Tuesday night’s Town Council meeting that there still existed no great impetus to sell off the Blythewood infrastructure, he had just been given the green light by Council to discuss with Columbia Mayor Steve Benjamin a recent $1.4 million offer placed on the table last month by the Capital City.

While Gaddy said the offer was not so rich that it had to be jumped upon with both feet, it at least merits the courtesy of further discussion. Some of that discussion will include Blythewood Town Council, which Gaddy said he plans to address on the issue at Blythewood’s Dec. 9 work session. Winnsboro is in the planning stages of running a supply line from the Broad River to the reservoir, and still needs the Blythewood system, its customers and its potential future revenue to help secure financing for the project. Gaddy said he hopes to make that clear to Blythewood next week.

Gaddy also said the Blythewood system had been appraised within the last two years at roughly $1.2 million. Since then, he said, significant upgrades have been put in at the expense of the Town and Fairfield County. Plus, Gaddy said, there are future revenues to consider when weighing the $1.4 million offer.

Asked by The Voice Tuesday night if the Town would have the system reappraised in light of the new offer, Gaddy said he did not believe the process would get far enough to require it.

The $1.4 million offer came in the form of a Nov. 19 letter from Benjamin to Gaddy, which stated, in part, “. . . Blythewood has requested the City of Columbia consider purchasing the Blythewood portion of the Winnsboro system.” And Blythewood’s request only brings back to the surface a matter that has lingered unresolved since April, when Blythewood Town Council passed a surprise resolution to terminate the water franchise agreement between Blythewood and Winnsboro. Blythewood contends that the agreement expires in 2016, while Winnsboro maintains it is valid until 2020.

Following the guidelines of the agreement itself, Winnsboro last summer voted to hire an arbitrator to make their case. Blythewood, however, did not, and the deadline to do so passed in September.

It was apparent, Gaddy said, that neither side was entirely happy with the franchise agreement as written and Winnsboro would be amenable to negotiating a fresh deal.

“(Blythewood) doesn’t like this franchise agreement, we’re not happy with it either, let’s work together to work something out that would be mutually beneficial,” Gaddy said Tuesday. “But no one has gone to them and sat down and said that.”

BLYTHEWOOD – Taking full advantage of last summer’s State Supreme Court ruling that crippled the Freedom of Information Act and opened the door for boards and councils to alter agendas without giving 24-hour notice, Town Council at their Nov. 24 meeting tacked on three items to their agenda after the meeting had begun.

One of those was an action item on a matter that could cost the town $50,000, and another was discussion of the hot-button sign ordinance.

Added to Agenda:

1. Consideration of a vote on a waiver letter concerning the town’s designation for the SMS4 storm drainage program. Council voted unanimously to apply for a waiver to be excluded from the state’s Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (SMS4) program, a designation that, if not waived, will require the Town to initiate and maintain a storm water management program for Blythewood as specified by the S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC). The vote included the provision that the Town would, at the same time, pursue a second option of continuing discussions with Richland County to become a co-permittee with the County should the waiver be denied. Under the second option, the Town would pay Richland County approximately $50,000 for the County to manage the town’s storm sewer system.

2. A report by Malcolm Gordge on the recent special called meeting concerning non-conforming signs. Gordge told The Voice that he was asked by the Mayor on Friday to make the report; however, the item was not placed on the agenda last Friday, which would have notified the community that the item would be discussed at the meeting should anyone in the community have wanted to speak to it. Council took no action on the item, but Ross, who supports extending the date by as much as four years to make all non-conforming signs in the town conform, asked that the matter be put on the agenda for the next Council workshop for discussion. It has not been announced when that workshop would be held.

When Sabra Mazyck, chairwoman of the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA), which hears variance requests for non-conforming signs, asked to address Council on the subject, there was some hesitancy on the part of the Mayor to allow her to speak since she had not signed up (prior to the meeting). Mazyck reminded Council that she had not signed up to speak because the item had not been put on the agenda until after the meeting had started. Mazyck told Council that those who have appeared before the BZA asking for variances knew that Jan. 26, 2016 was coming and they knew they would have to replace their signs at that time. She told Council that “We work hard when we come to our meetings to make decisions,” and suggested that the Council should be more considerate of what they ask their volunteers (board and commission members) to do.

3. A report on the landscaping of the I-77 interchange. Town Administrator Gary Parker reported that the landscape contractor for the I-77 beautification project will replace the 30-40 additional trees that have died this year because they died in the warranty period. Parker said the replacements will be smaller versions of the trees currently planted since the smaller sizes will have a better chance of survival.

Searching for New Auditor

Council voted unanimously to issue a Request for Proposal for audit services. The request seeks sealed proposals from qualified certified public accountants to audit its financial statements for fiscal year ending June 30, 2015 with options for annual renewals in 2016, 2017 and 2018.

FY 2014 Budget Amended

Council voted unanimously to amend the FY2014 budget primarily, according to Parker, because the amended items were under-budgeted. In the general fund, under Operations, $1,000 was added to Advertising; $10,000 to Audit and Accounting; $1,000 to Legal; $90,000 for the Inspection Services under Legal and Professional; $10,000 to Community Promotions and $14,000 to Utilities.

“We also put back the Encumbrances total to $89,275,” Parker said, “in case we want to make use of any of those carry-over amounts. We also increased the base payment to the Blythewood Facilities Corporation Trustee to $99,376 in order to cover the entire payment for 2015.”

Added expenditures totaled $221,651.

Changes to the revenue included increasing the Insurance Tax Collection amount by $56,000 from $250,000 to $306,000, showing the actual fees received in permit fees and re-inspections ($136,000), estimated interest earnings of $600 and appropriating $99,051 from the fund balance. The $90,000 payment to RCI for inspections is a wash because the expenditures are covered by the fees received. This raised the general fund revenue by $251,651.

As for the Accommodations and Hospitality Tax budget, “We added $300 in interest income to the A-Tax budget, $500 in interest income to the H-Tax budget and appropriated $44,300 from the fund balance, bringing the new total $316,800,” Parker explained.

The Visitor Center allocation was reduced to $18,000 because the Chamber was receiving funding of $10,000 and the Chamber is not allowed to be funded by tourism dollars, Parker said.

“We put a line in for general event expenditures,” he said, “since the particular events are subject to change and we made that total $90,000.”

There was no change in the budget of the Manor.

Appeal of Dist. 3 Councilman Denied

NEW ELECTION PENDING

COLUMBIA – In a 4-1 decision Monday afternoon, the State Election Commission denied an appeal by District 3 County Councilman Mikel Trapp, upholding the Nov. 17 ruling by the Fairfield County Election Commission that ordered a new election in District 3 between Trapp and challenger Walter Larry Stewart.

“It’s almost a new day in Fairfield County,” Stewart said after Monday’s ruling. “It’s time for the people to speak. We went through the process of law and that was step two. Step three is to have another election, and we’ll go from there.”

Trapp and his attorney, John C. Moylan III, have 10 days from the time a written order is produced by the State Commission in which to file an appeal, which would go directly to the S.C. Supreme Court. Debra Matthews, the Winnsboro attorney who represented Stewart in his protest and at Monday’s appeal hearings, said she was prepared for the possibility of an appeal to the High Court.

“We’re pretty confident,” Matthews said. “We’re prepared, because we’ve already done all the research and have all the Supreme Court cases to support the evidence, so we’re good to go.”

Trapp’s appeal hinged on his attorney’s ability to introduce as evidence sworn affidavits from a pair of voters in the Monticello precinct. Those voters were two of the five voters, Matthews successfully argued in Stewart’s Nov. 17 protest hearing, who had been given incorrect ballot styles in the Nov. 4 election, which Trapp won by only four votes. The affidavits, however, testified that both voters would have voted for Trapp, had they been given the correct ballot style on Nov. 4.

Kadena Woodard, who sat in for Trapp at the Nov. 17 hearing, tried to introduce similar documentation. Matthews objected, however, as the documents were not notarized. The County Commission agreed, accepting them only as “offers of proof,” to be judged by the State Commission.

Monday, Moylan urged the State Commission to hear the appeal “de novo,” or anew, considering the now sworn and notarized affidavits.

“It is beyond ironic that someone could use supporters of Mr. Trapp to overturn Mr. Trapp’s election,” Moylan argued. “That cannot stand. To turn a blind eye to direct evidence, we would submit, is not the appropriate thing to do.”

But Liz Crumb, an attorney from the McNair Law Firm representing the County Commission, argued otherwise.

“The rules of evidence of the Circuit Court must be followed as nearly as practicable (in election protest hearings),” Crumb told the State Commission. “You have a very thorough record before you, and the only reason the Board can determine to have a de novo hearing is when there is not a full and complete record and you determine that more evidence is needed.

“To allow affidavits after the fact,” Crumb said, “is not a proper proceeding.”

The best evidence of how a voter intended to vote, Crumb said, is, according to numerous court cases, the ballot.

“The problem is, in this case, they weren’t given the proper ballot styles,” Crumb said, “so you do not have a ballot. In this case, we believe it is improper to allow evidence after the fact when Mr. Trapp could have attended the (Nov. 17) hearing, did not ask that the hearing be delayed and provided documents that weren’t even notarized.”

Moylan reminded the State Commission that it only took two members of the Commission to move to a de novo hearing. Billy Way Jr., Chairman of the State Commission, opened the floor for such a motion to his fellow commissioners, but the Board was silent.

After returning from executive session and prior to calling for a vote on the matter, Way said that the Commission had not considered the new affidavits in their deliberation.

Trapp declined to comment after Monday’s ruling.

Vote Rattles Mining Company

WINNSBORO – After more than an hour in executive session Monday night, a Fairfield County Council that was three-sevenths shy of a full load voted to lawyer-up and assist Rockton Thruway residents who have for nearly a year been fighting a mining company that is eyeballing more than 900 acres for a granite quarry in their back yards.

The late addition of the item to Monday night’s agenda captured the attention of Winnsboro Crushed Stone, LLC, which sent Charlotte attorney Jay McKeown to speak on its behalf during the meeting’s first public comment session.

“They were surprised to see that on the agenda tonight,” McKeown told Council. “The bottom line, and most simply, is there is a process in place. S.C. DHEC (the Department of Health and Environmental Control) has a process in place for mine applications. That process is in progress. There have been a number of public hearings and comment with regard to that process and I ask the Council to let that process go forward.”

McKeown told Council that the property in question, 405 acres of which will be left as undisturbed buffer, was zoned as Conditional Use in 2012.

“As I understand it, nothing has changed in the zoning laws or the ordinances that would affect this certificate that was issued by a County employee,” McKeown said. “The question I have to keep asking myself, and hopefully, Chairman, this Council may be asking this question, is why are you voting on it tonight?”

A similar venture, Fairview Mine in Blair, was issued a permit in 2009, McKeown pointed out, without the County becoming involved at all. A vote against Winnsboro Crushed Stone, McKeown added, was bad for business.

“If a business can’t rely on the County in upholding ordinances and zoning certificates, what type of affect will that have on businesses in the future?” McKeown asked. “A ‘No’ vote will have a negative impact on future investment and future industry in this county.

“This is a S.C. DHEC decision,” McKeown added. “And I think many of the members of Council understand that the County at this point, after giving permission, has nothing further to do with regards to this permit.”

While Council did not vote Monday night to ban the operation of the mine, they did vote to retain an attorney to help ensure that residents of Rockton Thruway had their concerns addressed. Many of those concerns were aired out at a Nov. 20 DHEC public hearing, held in the Fairfield Central High School auditorium. Those concerns included the impact of blasting at the mine on nearby homes, air quality, truck traffic and, predominantly, water usage.

“Because the Council has so many questions regarding the impact of the wells, the impact of truck safety, the hours of operation and meeting all of the standards and federal requirements,” Councilwoman Mary Lynn Kinley (District 6) said in her motion Monday night, “the Council does hereby direct the County Administrator to retain legal representation to defend the interests of Fairfield County in regards to the pending mining application of Winnsboro Crushed Stone.”

All four remaining Council members – Kinley, Carolyn Robinson (District 2), Chairman David Ferguson (District 5) and Vice Chairman Dwayne Perry (District 1), who also offered the second – voted in favor. Councilman Mikel Trapp (District 3) was present at the outset of the meeting, but did not return with Council after the executive session. Councilmen David Brown (District 7) and Kamau Marcharia (District 4) were not present Monday night.

After the meeting, Milton Pope, County Administrator, said the legal counsel will “look at all of these outstanding concerns that a lot of these citizens have raised, to look into those items along with the information at DHEC to provide public comment before the close of the public comment period on Dec. 4.”

Lisa Brandenburg, a Rockton Thruway resident that has helped lead the charge in opposition to the quarry, said after the meeting that her camp was “elated” at Council’s decision.

“But we are prepared to move forward with all initiatives,” she added.