Glynn mainland site coverage may change
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
By Pamela Permar-Shierling
Last night (Tuesday, August 18) the Islands Planning Commission (IPC) considered four changes to the new zoning ordinance which went into effect July 1.
• remove the 60% site coverage maximum in all residential districts on the Mainland; remove the 85% site coverage maximum in all commercial zoning districts on the Mainland.
• remove the County’s 15 ft. marsh buffer requirement regarding uses within the buffer and retain the state marsh buffer requirements.
• exempt additions or improvements for all existing commercial developments from Development Plan approval by a Planning Commission;
• remove Level 1 traffic study references and replace with traffic impact study where applicable.
These changes were sponsored by Glynn County Board of Commissioners Chairman Wayne Neal.
During their August 11 meeting the Mainland Planning Commission (MPC) voted to remove all the site coverage maximums for residential and commercial on both the Mainland and the Islands.
Several IPC members did not agree with removing the site coverage requirement completely.
Courtlyn Cook commented that the mainland has flooding issues. “I don’t see the justification to remove all site coverage limits.”
Stefanie Leif, Glynn County Planning and Zoning Director, agreed there were challenges meeting the 60% site coverage on the Islands. “It is hard to do pools and additions to homes without going over the site coverage limits.”
She also said no site coverage variances had been requested yet.
IPC member Michael Torras pointed out with the 25% tree ordinance open space requirement and the set back requirements there would be green space without limiting site coverage.
Bryce Brock said, “I think site coverage limits are there for a reason, but there could be a healthy balance for the Island such as not including air conditioning or generators in the site coverage calculation.”
The IPC approved the site coverage change as presented with the following modifications to the language:
• exempt generators, handicapped lifts or ramps from the site coverage calculation
• count artificial turf and gravel at 50% toward site coverage
The IPC approved the marsh buffer, Development Plan changes for existing commercial, and traffic study changes as presented.
The MPC’s traffic study language took the county out of the equation stating that a traffic study was only required when a traffic engineer makes a recommendation for a next level traffic study. That would be the applicant’s traffic engineer.
During the IPC discussion Torras asked if there was an appeal process for the traffic study requirement.
Leif said there is not a formal appeal process for the traffic study requirement.
Danny Smith, Assistant County Manager, said, “If the code says it is a requirement, then a traffic study is required.”
He continued to say that most of the traffic comments come at rezoning where, he said, it is a little early for a traffic study at that point.
“You are just rezoning the property,” he said. You don’t have a definitive plan as to what you are going to do with the property. I don’t agree that we should require a traffic study at a rezone. But there should be a traffic study at the construction, development process.”
Both the MPC and IPC recommendations will go to the Glynn County Board of Commissioners for final approval.
