City to move forward with some new ordinances

LANDRUM — Landrum City Council decided to scrap its proposed “Downtown Overlay Pedestrian District” this week, and instead research how to give incentives to new downtown retail businesses.

The council met jointly with the Landrum Planning Commission Tuesday to discuss in detail new proposed ordinances.

The proposals included zoning changes and the creation of the downtown overlay district, which would have required any new businesses that open on the ground floor of properties in the affected district to be retail only.

“I’ll be honest with you, I just think at this time we don’t need any of it,” said Councilman Billy Inman. “I’d be hard pressed to tell somebody what they can rent their building for. I think we should encourage retail.”

Landrum officials have heard many negative comments about the proposed district, including at a public hearing in September and again at the city’s regular meeting in October.

Council and planning board members discussed how to instead encourage retail businesses to open downtown.

City Administrator Rich Caplan said incentives would not have to be an ordinance, but rather a policy. Caplan said one idea would be for the city to take, for instance, $5,000 out of its hospitality tax to support new retail stores downtown.

“Other cities help with marketing,” Caplan said. “We could say we’ll give you $1,000 worth of free radio ads if you’ll do retail business in downtown Landrum.”

Councilman Johnny Carruth asked for Caplan to check around with other towns and see what they do as far as incentives and the planning commission will come up with proposals.

Another discussion Tuesday was to reduce the minimum lot size in the R-3 zoning district from 8 units per acre to 16 units to promote growth and more affordable housing.

Landrum Mayor Bob Briggs said the idea is some cities can grow their revenue base by annexation, but in South Carolina, that is very difficult. He said those who ride around Landrum will see a lot of vacant lots. If someone wants to put a house on some lots, the city’s current law does not allow that.

“That’s really our big reason is to allow people to build houses on smaller lots,” Briggs said.

Briggs also said officials have asked builders what they are looking for and they say smaller footprints so they could build more affordable housing.

Planning commission member Carol Browning said the objective is to make it easier for people to build and to not have to jump through as many hoops.

Councilman Daniel Prince said he wished it could be on a case-by-case basis.

“At some point, somebody is going to do it where you don’t want them to,” Prince said. “Somebody is going to bend those rules and put something where you don’t want it.”

But Inman said then there is the risk that one resident gets a variance and another does not, which causes a problem.

Carruth said the city may need a minimum lot size so someone does not build a 700-square-foot house. He suggested a minimum lot house of 1,000 square feet, but would like to see what other areas are doing regarding house size.

Council decided that minimum house size would need to be a separate ordinance so will send it back to the planning commission for a recommendation.

Council came to a consensus to go forward with increasing the density of lot sizes from eight to 16, but for new construction only. There are currently three vacant lots where multiple housing units could occur, such as apartments or townhouses.

The council also came to a consensus to delete a proposal to require new developments to have walking and biking paths, but to encourage developers to have them and to maintain them. A proposal for the city to place bicycle parking throughout the city was also discussed, with the council coming to a consensus to place bicycle parking in public areas, but not on private property.

The council will likely consider adopting its first reading of the new ordinances at its next meeting, scheduled for 6 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. 13.