FENWICK ISLAND – A Fenwick Island committee this week began the process of formulating voluntary design guidelines for the town’s commercial district, which led to a larger discussion on the group’s purpose.
Since the Fenwick Island Ad Hoc Commercial District Planning Committee was formed earlier this year, members have worked with consultant Jeff Schoellkopf of The Design Group to better define Fenwick’s vision for the commercial district. This week, those discussions were revisited as the committee began to draft voluntary design guidelines.
“We’re going to try and sort through all of the information he has given us over the last several months and pare it down to some guidelines that we want to recommend to the council …,” said Councilman Richard Mais, chair of the committee. “The idea this afternoon is to go through each of these items and, first of all, decide if we want to address them at all, and then make the suggestion to town council whether they are possible design guidelines or something that requires an ordinance change.”
The committee this week focused their efforts on five issues in the town’s commercial district – mechanical units, parking, building aesthetics, commercial uses and the permit process – and reviewed possible design guidelines and ordinance changes that would suit the needs of commercial development while protecting residential properties owners.
Members, for example, agreed to consider allowing rooftop mechanical units to exceed the height limit and require such units to be 25 feet away from the rear property line.
“This is an attempt to move some of the noise that’s generated from these units away from the residential areas,” Councilman Bill Weistling said.
Members this week also agreed they wanted to encourage mixed use development in its design guidelines, but did not support the development of condominiums. There was also a discussion if residential houses should be allowed in the commercial district.
“So far, we’ve allowed that,” Mais said.
Committee member Reid Tingle noted that residential properties are not held to the same setback requirements as commercial properties. He said they should be in the commercial district.
“That’s what I think the discussion needs to be,” he said. “Who says they can’t build a house and then convert it to a real estate office? It’s in a commercial zone and then they’ve found a way to get around the commercial zoning.”
Resident Richard Benn advised the committee to consider design guidelines and ordinance changes that encourage redevelopment in the commercial district.
“And the only way to encourage redevelopment is to make it profitable for somebody,” he said.
Resident Nadia Butler, however, questioned if that was the intent of the committee.
“I think there is a fundamental issue here in what is the purpose,” she said. “Is the purpose of what you are doing is to say, ‘If something is developed, this is what we want it to look like,’ or is the purpose to encourage development? Those are two very different things.”
Weisting replied that the intent of the committee was to encourage redevelopment and develop design guidelines should redevelopment happen.
“I think it’s both,” he said. “We are setting guidelines on what we as a town would like commercial buildings to look like. In doing that we are also providing maybe an incentive for a commercial business or property owner to come in here.”
After further comments from the public, the committee agreed to continue its discussion at the next meeting.
