GIAC Visions for Horry County

The GIAC overall vision for Horry County is to maintain its natural beauty where possible, to develop it aesthetically, and to protect the property values and quality of life of its residents, especially those neighboring commercial properties.

Click your choice below to view a particular page section.

Visions for Horry County Council

We hope that the Horry County Council will enact or initiate action on certain measures forwarding the interests of Horry County homeowners and their communities.  Actions that would promote the interests of homeowners, communities and the general population include --

• Imposing impact fees to redirect some of the costs of population growth to those benefiting rather than to current locals  (statistical results across the U. S. show that population growth is costly, not an economic boon to the area as a whole);
• Reconstituting the planning commission so each district has a representative to protect the interests of the mass of citizens in that district.  Then hopefully,  proposals inimical to the interests of a particular district won't even get to the county council;
• Tightening zoning regulations -- Click here for detail (Footnote 1);
• Providing more adequate buffering between residential and commercial areas -- Click here for detail (Footnote 2);
• Ensuring that new buildings do not loom over residences -- Click here for detail (Footnote 3);
• Establishing new overlays, including an overlay to bound the newly constructed Carolina Bays Parkway and prevent it from becoming another 501, or 17 impasse  -- hopefully evolving the overlay concept to add improvements including community appearance boards to pass on designs including colors, and, at least, with no parking incursions allowed in the perimeter buffer -- Click here for background detail (Footnote 4); and
• Banning airborne fireworks, except those controlled by professionals, east of the waterway (alternatively, east of the 17 bypass) to protect against setting homes in this suburban area afire. Click here if you wish to skip ahead to Visions for South Carolina State Government.

Detailing Footnote 1. Tightening Zoning Regulations.  It is highly desirable to tighten zoning regulations as evidenced, among other things, by the possibility of locating an asphalt plant next to a residential neighborhood (actually endorsed by a previous county council -- on the then planning commission's recommendation). 

The zoning regulations are way too broad; click here to see the very high number of uses allowed in the Forest Agriculture zoning ordinance.  A more restrictive Limited Forest Agriculture zone was developed to make that zoning somewhat more representative of what one would expect from such a designation, click here if you wish  to see the statute..  But a newer Commercial Forest Agriculture zoning was added -- apparently a creature of the then planning commission -- with even more uses than Forest Agriculture, click here to see that statute.  Reportedly much Forest Agriculture zoned land was then rezoned Commercial Forest Agriculture without notification of the property owners -- or more importantly, their neighbors.  

Duplexes should be separately zoned from single family homes -- currently both are included in R1 , . . R7 designations (one home allowed per acre to 7 homes allowed per acre).  These single family home/duplex designations are one example of, in general,  too narrow set back requirements -- R7, for instance requires only a 20 feet front setback (R1 requires a more aesthetic 50 foot front setback). 

As a third example, the Planned Development District statute includes few restrictions other than planning commission approval -- as opposed to detailed zoning district requirements spawned by  judgments developed over years; Planned Development Districts have been approved with only five feet between individual homes.  Click here to return to the bulleted item.

Detailing Footnote 2. Providing more adequate buffering between residential and commercial areas.  As to more adequate buffering of single family residential communities from other new, especially commercial, uses, the minimum requirement is to ensure that headlamps from other usage areas not shine into people's living quarters.  This requires at least a four foot high opaque barrier to shield homes from headlamps such as SUVs.  It is desirable that the view of new commercial development be shielded, at least to eye level.  Two solutions suggest themselves -- an attractive landscaped berm or a wall surrounded by landscaping with provisions for adequate landscape maintenance

 The berm or wall would need to be at least four feet tall (providing the opaque barrier), and the landscaping planned so as to be spaced closely enough and to grow high enough to effectively block the view to at least a six foot height.  Fencing, surrounded by landscaping although economical, is too subject to deterioration or damage.  These requirements could be addressed with simple amendments to the landscaping, buffer and tree ordinance.  Click here to see specific potential amendments. Click here to return to the bulleted item.

Detailing Footnote 3. Ensuring that new buildings do not loom over residences.  As to ensuring that newly built structures not loom over nearby single family residential communities, a reasonable approach is to require the distance between newly built structures and land used, or at least zoned, for single family residential be at least twice the structure's height. This requirement could be added to the Zoning Ordinance that is due for review in 2003 or in the Land Development Regulations.

Specifying uses as well as zoning is desirable in both instances because a particular zoning may allow mixed uses or may be owned by a common owner -- even though specifying uses is more difficult to enforce.  Click here to return to the bulleted item.

Detailing Footnote 4. Establishing Additional Overlays. The 501 Overlay, following the Socastee Boulevard Overlay, was the  first to allow parking incursions, the 544 Overlay does not.  The most recent 707 Overlay (with the concurrently passed Holmestown Road Overlay) inexplicably allows incursions into the perimeter buffer landscaping to within 10 feet of highway right-of-way (property) lines.  York County requires their buffer to be increased to forty feet if there is parking in front.  The Horry County Overlays that allow parking incursions into the perimeter buffer actually offer incentives for parking in front!  Click here to return to the bulleted item.

If you want to return to the menu for this page click here.

Visions for Horry County Legislative Delegation

We hope some official at  the South Carolina state level will initiate action on an annual cap on real estate tax increases in 2003. Click here for additional discussions on the property tax cap concept and here for impact fees.

Other desirable South Carolina State government actions in 2003  that would promote the interests of Horry County homeowners, communities and its general population include --

• Allowing County Councils to impose impact fees on new school construction needed to accommodate population growth and for newly required capital improvements less than $100,000, say up to $35,000  for such as newly required police cars and ambulances,
• Passing SC Bill 3698 that would put a 15% valuation cap on owner occupied properties when reassessed every five years until the property is sold, or, even better yet, a bill for a 2% per year cap on property tax increases  -- in either case valuing properties when sold at their sale price for tax purposes.
• Removing sales taxes on groceries.
• Equalizing property tax credits among Horry County  jurisdictions if the county were to ever choose to increase its sales tax.

If you want to return to the menu for this page click here.

Visions 2003 Progress -- Horry County Council

• Impact Fees -- 1. County Council Chairperson Gilland appointed Councilman Smith to chair a committee to again look into imposing impact fees, an effort he had led, but the then County Council rejected early in his term.  2. Councilman Worley initiated a resolution whereby the county would set up an impact fee task force made up of representatives of Burroughs and Chapin, the Homebuilders Association, a Board of Realtors, a chamber of commerce, educational institutions, the South Carolina house of representative and named ex officio members of the Horry County Council (click Initial Impact Fee Task Force Mtg for further information).  The hope is that this task force can agree to changes of the the current impact fee statute followed by an Horry County referendum ask the state legislature to remove some of the excessive constraints of the current statute -- such as not allowing impact fees for new or expanded school facilities, not allowing impact fees for capital items, such as ambulances and police cars, required by growth that do not exceed $100,000, and requiring excessive administrative accounting.
• Reconstituting the Planning Commission -- A 2003 ordinance to do this passed.
• Tightening Zoning Regulations -- In a recent County Council meeting, County Council Chairperson Gilland directed Planning, with no objections from the rest of the council, to recast the zoning regulations within 2004 so that, in general, no more than a dozen uses (as opposed to more than eighty in some cases) be allowed in a zoning district.
• Providing more buffering between residential and commercial uses -- no known action.
• Ensuring that new buildings do not loom over residences -- no known action
• Establishing new overlays and overlay requirements including community appearance boards -- no known action.

If you want to return to the menu for this page click here.

Visions 2003 Progress -- Horry County Legislative Delegation to the South Carolina State Legislature

• Changing the impact fee statute to allow, among other things, the imposition of impact fees on new schools or expanded facilities required to accommodate population growth -- SC Bill H3736 submitted in March 2003 to allow the imposition of impact fees on new schools: languishing, no other known action..
• SC Bill 3698 that would put a 15% valuation cap on owner occupied properties when reassessed every five years -- pending (no Horry County sponsors)
• Removing sales taxes on groceries -- no known action
• Equalizing property tax credits among Horry County  jurisdictions for sales tax rate increases giving such -- no known action

Click here to return to the top of this page.