 Welcome, everyone, to the January 2023 meeting of the City of Columbia Board of Zoning Appeals. I'm Gene Dinkins Jr., Chair of the Board. At this time, I'd like to introduce other members of the board. To my left, we've got Catherine Finner, Siri McIntosh. We're expecting John Gregory to walk in any minute. He'll be right here. Sherrard DeVall, Don Guignard. I would also like to introduce the staff to assist the board. We've got Hope Hasty. She's our Zoning Administrator. Erica Hyen, Deputy Zoning Administrator. And Sky Robinson Barnes. Here's John Gregory. Okay, the board is charged with hearing applications for special exceptions, variances, and administrative appeals. All testimony is recorded for the record. Anyone wishing to speak will need to be sworn in and come to the podium to speak. No testimony can be taken from the floor. When you come to the podium, state your name, and please speak clearly into the microphone because the meeting is being recorded. Applicants with cases before the board are a lot of the presentation time of 10 minutes. This time does not include any questions asked by the board or staff regarding the case. Any member of the public may address the board in intervals of three minutes or five minutes if you're a spokesperson for an established body or group of three or more, like a homeowner's association. The applicant then has five minutes for a bottle. The board reserves the right to amend these procedures on a case-by-case basis. Okay, those of you who plan to speak today must be sworn. If you are here as an applicant or here to speak in any case, please stand at this time and raise your right hand. Okay, do you affirm or test that the testimony you will give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Okay, thank you. All right, at this time we'll turn the meeting over to staff. Thank you, good afternoon. We'll start out with the consent agenda and the first item on consent agenda is the approval of the December 1st, 2022 minutes. The next item on consent agenda is 20220041SE1125 Park Street, the special exception request to permit a type 2 eating and drinking establishment. And the second case on the consent agenda this afternoon is 20220041. Hang on a second, you'll get a chance, hang on, keep going, hope. It's case 20220043V 1307 Calhoun Street. It's a variance request to the rear yard setback standard. And at this time, are there any members of the board that would like to remove an item from the consent agenda? Are there any members of the public that would like to remove an item from the consent agenda? Okay, is there a motion for the board to remove that item from the consent agenda? Which one? This is the case on Calhoun Street. Calhoun Street. Somebody give us a motion real quick. Okay, motion to second. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, thank you. All right, so we'll take a motion on the consent agenda without the Calhoun Street case. It'll be on the regular agenda. We'll place it last, Hope. Yes, I'm not sure the applicant's here yet, so we can go ahead and put it. Last. Okay. All right. Any motion? Yeah, let's get a motion for the consent agenda. Move that we approve the consent agenda subject to the removal of the Calhoun Street property and staff comments. Okay. A motion to second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, motion passes. Thank you. All right, moving on to the regular agenda. The first item is case 2022-00-40SE-7609 and 7611 Garner's Ferry Road and 150 Fountain Lake Road. And it's a special exception request to permit a convenience store. And I'd just like to announce about this one. This one is currently going through the annexation process. So the two parcels you see on the screen that are red, they're currently in the city. The other parcels are not, and they're going through the annexation process. Okay, thank you. And I believe the applicant is here to speak about the request. Okay. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is Tommy Pease. I'm here with Racetrack to discuss this project at Garner's Ferry. And so first of all, I wanted to tell you a little bit about our company as we're new to the area. So Racetrack is a family owned business. We're based out of Atlanta, Georgia, have been around since about the 1950s when it started as Bolshe Gas. So as a company, we pride ourselves on partnering with our communities, providing great opportunities for our employees, and then providing a great experience for our customers. So in order to partner with our communities, for us that starts in the development process. So what we like to do upfront is reach out to any government agency or department that's needed when we begin the development process. In this case, we've been in contact with the Prime Prevention Department, the Police Department. We've got an open dialogue with SCDOT. We're looking to do what we can to not only make our access as safe to this site as possible, but hopefully improve the traffic at this intersection as a whole. So a little bit more specific about the site. So this is a convenience store with two fuel stations. So the convenience store itself is what we're here for the special exceptions for. So we like to really go above and beyond when it comes to our convenience stores. That comes to putting a lot more time and effort into the development process. So we'll keep our stores exceptionally clean. When it comes to parking, site flow will go above and beyond in order to make sure that's as safe as possible. And when it comes to the hiring process, that's another step where we like to partner with the community. Many of my co-workers at Racetrack actually started out in the store. So the idea of going from the store to the corporate office is alive at Racetrack. So with that being said, I wanted to turn it over to the board and see if I could answer any specific questions. Thank you. I thought your application was thorough. I thought you did a good job filling it out. I didn't realize there were not any new racetracks in the Columbia metropolitan area. It seems like I've seen them around. But so this would be your first one. How many do you operate in South Carolina? Of the Racetrack brand zero. Really? So we've got multiple raceways, which is a sister company. They're our franchisee brand. So the Racetrack initiative in South Carolina is a new and exciting opportunity for us. Certainly know your professional organization. So I guess the only question that I have, and we'll get some other questions from some other board members, I'm sure, is how many gas stations convenient stores are located in this proximity, whether it's you pick the distance, half mile, mile. A half mile, I believe there's, this may be incorrect, but there's two that I'm aware of. At this intersection itself, there's not any others. That's why we see this as a great opportunity. I know there's one, just a couple of lots to the east and southeast. I think it's a shell or something like that. Is that what it is? Okay, all right. Well, we won't get into too much discussion about that right now. I'm sure we'll have our chance. But at that time, this time, I'd like to ask, do any board members have any specific questions for the applicant? I got one question. Do y'all have a, I didn't see, do you have a proposed site plan or anything like that? We do have a proposed site plan for now. So as I mentioned, we're still in open dialogue with SCDOT. Okay. Our conversations with them really drive our site plan as the location of those driveways are very important. So we do have a current site plan. I'm not sure if it's included in that application. But if not, we're more than happy to share it. But as of right now, I guess it is still subject to change until we get a little further along in the process. Can you just spend maybe 30 seconds just telling us how it might lay out on the site? Yes. So along Garner's Ferry, currently there's two drives. The drive closest to the intersection is by current DOT standards considered non-conforming. So we'll be closing that drive. And then along the, I guess, I got my directions confused. I guess that'd be the eastern property line. We'll be having a driveway there, planning on doing a sidewalk along there to the intersection. Above that, we'll have our main fuel canopy. That'll probably have six to eight fuel pumps. Behind that, you'll have a row of parking, our 8,000-square-foot convenience store. And then behind that, we'll have a second fuel canopy. That'll most likely have three fueling stations. And that'll be a diesel fueling canopy for trucks of sorts. And then along that side road there, we're currently proposing two full-access cuts, one for the front court, as we call it, our regular auto, and one for the back. Typically, we like to keep those separate as the different-size vehicles. The flow traffic works better if you're able to separate them. So you'll have two, go ahead, sorry. And I was going to mention, there's also an existing enterprise on site located in the top corner. So as our deal currently stands, we'll take over that lease. It'll remain for an X amount of years. And then at that point, we'll decide whether we want to renew that lease agreement or not. OK. So you're looking at two on Fountain Lake and getting rid of one on Garner's Ferry and, I guess, creating a new one on Garner's Ferry? I guess you could say redoing one of the two. OK. Thank you. Yeah, that's a good, it's a large site. So I'm glad you brought up that about the enterprise, because it is large for a gas station. OK. And if I could just say that staff will work in conjunction with the applicant during site plan review, as well as DOT. And if Fountain Lake may be city, I can't remember, but we would work with the applicable traffic engineers on that. I think you're right about Fountain Lake. That's correct. OK. Any other questions? What about all those trees in the corner? Are they going to go? There's some nice big trees, it looks like, down in the whatever that is. So yes, we're in the process of doing a tree study right now, or tree survey, excuse me. So, you know, any protected tree specimens, we like to keep in place as much as possible. With some of the site plans still just being proposed, I'm not able to answer that for sure. But we will make as much of an effort as we can to keep those, and if not, go through all the correct mitigation requirements. All right, thank you. Thank you. OK, do we have any members of the public or anyone else here today who'd like to speak on this matter? OK. All right, good. Well, at this point then, we'll move into board discussion. Who'd like to start? Go ahead. What's that, Sherrod? Remind us, please. Talking to the microphone. Concentration of proliferation. So that'd be number eight. The concentration of proliferation of the same or similar types of special exception use. I mean, there's so many convenience stores and gas stations already along that strip. You've got the sick go to the right. It's a block away. You've got a shell that's two intersections up. Two intersections up. You've got two more gas stations by the RVs there, which is across from the Walmart. Going back the other way, where that new development took place down by the Bojangles and Zakswees. There's another convenience store gas station there. Then a block up from that, where the Burger King is. There's a shell. It's just an X on over there. It just seems if our goal here is special exception only and we need to meet all of the criteria, I just don't see how this meets number eight. That's kind of why I asked the question of the applicant, how many there were. I looked earlier today and I saw three within like 1,000 feet. A little much further than that, but maybe it's 1,200 feet, but there are a lot. But the deal with the criteria, it needs to meet them all, but a lot of these areas are sort of vague and gray areas. What constitutes too many or what is a proliferation? So that's for us to decide if do we think it's three, do we think it's five? So I point that there is some wiggle room with some of these criteria, okay? I assume all those gas stations you're talking about have convenience stores with them because of course gas stations are outside our purview. They all have convenience stores with them, as far as you can remember. They all have convenience stores, yeah. They may not have the truck diesel component though. That's some little different. They might have. Yeah, I think almost all of them do, except for maybe the closest one. Yeah, except for that closest one, which the closest one is that sicko that's right there. Well, it's a similar type of use, so it really doesn't matter either way. It's a similar type. That's my only question, I mean, that's what we're doing. Yeah. That seems like, I don't know how it's meeting that. It does. It does seem like a preparation, yeah. There's no question they meet the rest of them. I mean, it's a great location for it, I mean. Yeah, when I looked at them up, I didn't feel like it was so overly compact because in that stretch, there's so much sort of large scale commercial. There is. That I don't think it's gonna super stand out. No, I mean. From what's kind of. Actually, that particular area on Gonnisfaire is not so much industrial. It's mostly like shopping center type stuff. Yeah, that's what she was saying. She was saying large scale commercial. Yeah, it's mostly like shops. Big boxes, applebees. So huge olleys, I think it is in the center. There's a big sign there. Yeah, southeast, right up by the Walmart. Yeah, and this is a very heavily traveled roadway. I don't know what the traffic count is, but it's tremendous for our area. So the more cars justifies the more gas stations. Well, there's six between there and I 77. Did you count John? Thank you. Six. Well, that's a lot. Here's my thinking is we're not supposed to be talking about gas stations because that's not in our purview. But as far as convenience stores, I'm thinking that the philosophy on convenience store proliferation has more to do with neighborhoods where you get these convenience stores and folks are hanging out at all hours and screaming and shouting and acting up and drinking and stuff like that. That's probably, I'm thinking, why this is subject to special exception rather than just being as a right. And I just don't see that that's a problem in this case that we're not talking about a neighborhood where convenience stores can really be a nuisance in a neighborhood, but I don't see this being a nuisance where it is. That's a clarifying question from the staff, sure. If the gas station is sort of a thing and the convenience store is a thing, I mean, can you have a gas station without a convenience store? Sure. Yeah, you could. And yeah, just to clarify, the gas station is a permitted use. So it's really the question of the convenience store use. Catherine, you're the lawyer, so we need to get you to read this again. I think what you said has some truth to it. Read, if everyone's got your criteria, read the special exception number eight and what it says. It's more than just creating a proliferation of a similar type of use. Give us your interpretation of that, Catherine. It says that which concentration may be detrimental to the development or redevelopment of the area in which the special exception use is proposed to be developed. I think that my understanding, I've sat through a number of meetings, Boza and City Council meetings where neighborhoods were just up at arms, up in North Main, Monticello, that kind of thing, where they've just, oh, Claire, they were just like one convenience store after another. They can't get a grocery store, but they got all kinds of convenience stores and they attract a certain element that is detrimental to the community. That's just not what we got here. So I don't see that it's detrimental to the development or redevelopment of the area. As I say, it would be in a neighborhood setting or a more fragile community. This is commercial. I'm actually a little bit confused about that assessment. I mean, I understand what you're saying, but I don't know if it's a nuisance issue. I mean, as far as what we're dealing with here when it comes to our rules on the board, it's my understanding that we have to look at our special exception rules and whether or not the developer is meeting those criteria. When I was, right, right. If the criteria here is that there's a concentration proliferation of the same or similar types of special exception use, which concentration may be detrimental to the development or redevelopment of the area. That means that what we're saying here is if we've already got a bunch of some things where it could prevent the development of something else, which is this part detrimental to the development or redevelopment of the area? I think that's the question. That's meaning other development, right? I think that's the question we have to ask ourselves is would this gas station be detrimental to the development or redevelopment of the area? And I think as Catherine said, I don't see how anyone could think that it would be. Well, and for the record, I mean, I wasn't using the term nuisance in the legal sense of nuisance, which is a very particular thing. I was using it in the sense of an annoyance or something that bothers the community. And I just don't see this as something that's gonna bother the community. I don't know, maybe it will, but nobody's here complaining. I don't see it as something that will bother the community either, I just see it as already a lot of the same thing. Why not leave that development for something else as opposed to what, I mean, I just don't see how it clears number eight. My argument of that is that if it could be something else, they should have done something with it. I mean, that's true, but. I mean, it's a commercial strip. Yeah. Yeah. So you're gonna have a commercial strip, you're gonna have what there? I mean, I think. I hear what you're saying. I guess this goes back to what he was saying, like how many is too many? Is eight too many? Is 12 too many? It's not all commercial either. Fountain Lake Road leads all to residential. That's true. Yeah. After reading it again and listening to Catherine's explanation of what she thinks it means, I think you have to have a concentration or proliferation of the same or similar type uses that's detrimental to the area. I think it has to meet both of those points. And so if there's 12 of them, yeah, that may be too many, but if it's not detrimental to the area, then it doesn't X off that specific number. That'd be my interpretation. It's definitely a concentration. It's definitely a concentration. Is it detrimental? Yeah, that's the question. But it's got to be more than that to not meet the criteria. It's the way I listen to Catherine's interpretation. Well, I mean, it's detrimental. Which may be detrimental. And I just don't know how much debt. I mean, the area is, I don't know how many new things are going in there. I'm not sure. It's a tricky area there because. It's actually a heavily developed area. That whole bonus area right there is. Well, I'm saying, but if you think about that shopping center is all like C grade C retail. I mean, it's, it's Ollie's and it's, you know, Southeastern salvage, it's former big box stores. All right. Well, I think, I think we've hit on this enough. We've got to move this along. Any other, any other or discussion or any other matters related to this? I think we've hit this one enough. Anybody? All right. Let me ask for a motion. I make a motion that we approve the special exception request to establish a convenience store here subject to staff comments. Second. We have a motion to second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Opposed. Okay. Motion passes. We're luck with it. Very good. So I've recused myself from the next case for personal matters. We'll turn the meeting over to John Gregory. Yes. All right. Do we, do we have the. Jane, you might need to help. What did you ask that? Look at that. Yeah. The applicant here. Can we just present it really quick? Yeah. You want to present it real quick? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yes. The applicant is here. But it's a another convenience store application special exception on Shop Road and Pine View Drive. And the applicant would like to come up and present the request. Afternoon. Tommy P. is with racetrack. Yeah. As I'm sure at this point, we're all a little more familiar with our company, racetrack. I figured for the interest of time, I'll go ahead and dive into the specifics of this one. So this site is located at the intersection of Shop Road and Pine View Drive. So this is a little less condensed of an area as the previous site we just discussed. So we've been under contract for this pieces of property for a couple of months now. As part of that process, we began our open dialogue with SCDOT very early on. And that's what's really been driving a lot of the site plan for this one, which I'm not sure if it's included. This one has less drives. We're doing one full access on Pine View and one on Shop Road. As a part of this development, we plan on making improvements to the offsite right away. That's going to mean a right turn lane and a left turn lane at both entrances as well as on Pine View slight widening with the road. That's all in an effort to, I guess, make this intersection as safe as possible and get customers in and out of the site as safely as possible. So while this area is very vacant, vacant now there is some plans to include a industrial center to the east part of our site. So as a part of our development, we'll also be providing a access road for that. As far as the convenience store aspect, similar to our piece of property on Garner's Ferry, we've reached out to both the city, crime prevention department and the police and are looking to do what we can in order to create partnerships with all those entities. Another just part of our business. So we look to obviously make our stores as safe as possible. So some of the things that we may do are things such as providing free food and beverages to law enforcement, trying to create visibility from the inside of the store to the right away and all the fuel pumps as visible as possible so that our store staff can keep an eye out and address any issues as needed. So with that being said, I'd like to turn it over to the board with any specific concerns. I know you mentioned it a little bit, but I'd like you to walk through the site plan a little bit. Typically we have site plans of these things, so it's easier for us to understand how it lays out, but yeah, I know you mentioned access road on the east or industrial development as far in one access on each road. Can you just talk through that how it kind of lays out? So if you're looking at this map here, along shop road, along the eastern property line, there'll be a shared access road there that will be perpendicular. And I guess sort of uniform with the access on the other side of shop road so that'll in turn act as a four-way intersection. We'll be installing a left-hand turn lane into the site as well as a right-hand turn lane for eastbound traffic. Coming in off of that, there'll be two different side roads, one towards the beginning of the property line and one further towards the back. That will take you further along to where our diesel fuel canopy is gonna be. So this one has a little bit different of a layout. It's the fuel canopy is side-by-side versus stacked. And then when you get closer to the shop road, pine view intersection itself, that's where you're gonna have our regular fuel canopy with the convenience store behind that. The access along that portion is gonna be just north of where that culvert is to the smaller triangular piece of property. So that'll be a single full access entrance there. And y'all won't be crossing that culvert? We do plan on crossing the culvert. So we're in the process of engineering that process now. So it will be a culvert crossing. We're working with all agencies required to make sure that is up to code. Appreciate that. This helps me visualize it. You got it? Yeah, for me, the site plan was definitely the biggest concern here. And so that's where it's getting into that weird cross-out between a gas station and a convenience store. And we're sort of only looking at the convenience store because my mind is seeing a giant sea of pavement. The culvert is a legit creek that goes into a wetland just to the south of that. So my brain is going off. It is, so this site plan in particular is gonna have a lot of green space. So that crossing itself is gonna be just a single, I guess a two lane, I guess you could say road, going across that that will feed back in to the bigger piece of property. Most of the site plan itself is gonna be closer to that shop road intersection. And then from there, you'll have two access roads that go back towards the property line. In between, the two of those is gonna be a big green area with landscaping and most likely some sort of stormwater pond. That's out of our purview. That makes me feel better, yeah. Any questions? I don't have any. It's no good. Thank you. We asked for comments from the public first. Ask for comments from the public first. Yes. Does anybody in the public wish to make a comment and question? Seeing none, turn it over to board discussion. Start us off. Seems like a good thing, I mean. I don't think we'll have the proliferation here. Yeah, it's like a great location for it. Sorry to say, it's a huge development. Great location for a gas station, I think. Well, does someone wanna make a motion? Move that we approve subject to staff comments. Second. Have a motion and a second. Those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Thank y'all and good luck. What's next? All right, ready? Yep. All right, next item on the agenda is 1458 and 1482 Caroline Road and Trinity Drive. And this is a request for a special exception to permit townhomes in the O.I. zoning district. The applicant is here to present the request. Okay. Thank you, board, for your time. My name is Luke Boatwright. I'm with Stanley Martin Homes. We've been in the area under Stanley Martin for the past three years. You may have formally understood us as Essex Homes in the area since the early 1980s. Stanley Martin purchased Essex three years ago and I was a part of the group as well. Just in the past year, we have finished closing over 700 homes in Columbia and the surrounding counties. We're very entrenched in this area and excited about this upcoming project in the Garner's Ferry, Trinity Road area. This would be our closest location into the downtown city area as we try to find more items inside of your municipality. In 2021, we're very proud to have been named the National Builder of the Year by the National, by Builder Magazine. Very excited to offer a townhome product in this area that is close to Fort Jackson and downtown to be able to offer a more affordable way to the path to home ownership. As renters are looking for their own piece of the American dream, townhomes have become the most affordable way to do that. And once we find that we're able to get a homeowner into a Stanley Martin townhome, then they can continue to progress into our different product down the road. We have Burnside Farms as a neighborhood that we have been very successful in, which is just down 378 from this project and very excited about this area and the growth opportunity. I brought David Brandes as well, our engineer, to answer any engineering specific questions that you would have on the project. Thank you. Thank you. My name is David Brandes. I'm an engineer with Yale Robinson here in Columbia. I'm gonna take just a couple minutes to talk about the site plan and if you're scared to go down the 13 criteria for approval. As you can see, everything is inward facing. We have one access point on Trinity and a second emergency access point for fire trucks and ambulances. That'll be gated, so it'll be one single access. We have a significant amount of open space. Part of that will be a dog park on your lower right hand corner. The upper triangle to the northeast will be a left open space. And then we have some wetlands on the property that we're gonna utilize for walking trails and some other low connections. So we have a pretty significant amount of open space. The total density we could have will be 16.4 per acre. We're at 8.8 with this particular site plan. And one of the things I wanna point out and I know you know this, we're here just for the special use, although the site plan really gives you context. Working with the planning commission and staff, there may be some tweaks to the site plan. With that, I'd like to quickly go through the 13 criteria. The first one, special exception complies with all applicable zoning standards. We're an OI here, which is a reason why we have the special exception for townhomes. We'll be able to meet all of the parking requirements, setbacks, open spaces. So there are no parts of OI that we can't meet. So we'll be able to fully meet the code with this special exception. OI does mention in their uses as a broad range of civic and commercial development, as well as a limited residential, typically in locations where visibility and good access are important. Second, the proposed special exceptions complies with all applicable use specific standards in Article Four. Townhomes are listed as a special exception, so we do meet that criteria. Third criteria proposed exception will not have substantial adverse impact on vehicle traffic or vehicle pedestrian safety. We have not completed a traffic impact statement. Part of this is, you know, cart before the horse. We have to determine what the use is to do a traffic impact, but we will be completing a traffic impact statement both for DOT and for the Planning Commission. But just didn't want to talk a little bit about that. To the west of the property is Greenlawn. That'll be the major access. It goes Greenlawn down to Garner's Ferry. DOT has recently improved the Traffic Lights Act, Garner's Ferry, and Greenlawn then goes and connects to Leesburg Road to the north. Currently, Greenlawn Road operates at about 4,900 cars per day. Looking at the capacity of a two-lane urban collector, that's about 8,600 vehicles a day for a level of service B. Let me just mention that again. 8,600 cars per day would allow the roadway to operate at a level of service B. We're half that right now. So we feel very confident we're not gonna cause issues with traffic. There may be some necessary requirements for some turn lanes. We won't know that till we finish the traffic report, but that'll be something we'll work with DOT about. One thing we don't directly connect to Greenlawn, which some people would say, oh, we'd rather you connect directly. Instead, what we allow is that traffic to mitigate before it gets to that, doesn't back up, people aren't on Greenlawn waiting to turn left. And so Trinity gives us a good opportunity to do that. Four adequate provisions are made for parking and unloading. We'll be able to meet the two units per space, plus spaces for the mail kiosk. We are actively looking at adding some visitor parking to this as well, because two is sometimes not enough when grandma comes to visit the young ones. We're gonna pay attention to that carefully. Five proposed special exceptions will not have substantial impact on adjoining properties in terms of environmental factors, such as noise, light, glare, vibration, fumes, odor, obstruction of air, light, and litter. As of residential use, this is one of the lowest uses you find for those items versus an OI commercial or an OI industrial. Six, the proposed special exception will not have a substantial adverse impact on the aesthetic character of the area, including a review of the orientation spacings of buildings. If you would go back to the site plan, please. All of our buildings are inward facing with vegetation on the outside. All of the parking is on the inside in either a garage or a space in front of the house. So we feel like that's a positive for the community. The town homes will be built to residential look and standard. There'll be new construction and we feel like it'll be a good mix into the community. I'm jumping ahead just a bit, but we have an apartments to the south and then there's single family housing on the north and then the rest of it is commercial. There are two churches on either side and a school across one of the roads. We feel like this is a good blend of residential uses. Be sure to have it. On to seven, proposed special exception will not have substantial adverse impact on public safety or create a nuisance condition detrimental for public interests or conditions like to increase law enforcement responses. Typically that is something we look at in terms of night clubs, restaurants, commercials. We typically don't see that adverse impact for residential apartments. Sometimes you hear people talk about why I don't really like apartments. These are all single family home ownership. It's not designed to be rental. All of these will be sold so the impact will be no different than a single family development. Eight, the establishment of the proposed special exception does not create a concentration or proliferation of the same or similar types of special exception uses which concentration may be detrimental to the development or redevelopment of the area. The only other town home project in this area is going back towards behind the Shoneys and what used to be Jim Hudson automobile down the frontage road. You can see it off I-77. There are some along Leeper Road that are town home-like but they're not this type of development. The proposed special exception is his system of the character and intent of the underlying zoning district is indicating the zoning district purpose statement which I read for you earlier and it does talk, and that statement does say to provide lands that accommodate a broad range of civic and commercial development as well as limited residential and typically in locations where visibility and good access are important. You might go back to the aerial. I appreciate you doing that. It doesn't show you completely but you can see below here. You can see just the tip of Lowe's. You can also see heavy commercial along Garner's Ferry. Russia's is right on the corner and then as you go up along Leesburg, there's a little bit lighter but still commercial along there. So right now there is not particularly a buffer between what you see as the apartment complex in the Southwest and the single family homes. We feel like the town home use is a good transition between that very heavy commercial and the single family housing. Tim, the proposed special exception is appropriate for use in its location compatible with permitted uses adjacent to the vicinity of the property. Same for similar reason, this will be home ownership. It will not be rental. And we feel like that's a good transition for the single family tour north. One of the problems Columbia has and I think you've heard this brought up before is that we have some housing deficiencies. We have a lot of $400,000 houses and we have a lot of $60,000 houses but it's become very difficult for young people to move into housing products. Not many of them can come out of college or come out of high school or a trade and take on a $400,000 mortgage. Is that a rent? So this gives an opportunity for people who need that transition into home ownership and it's sort of a donut hole in the residential in Columbia. Lastly, two more, sorry. The proposed exception will not have an adverse impact on the land values of the surrounding property. If you look at the properties that are listed on Zillow, they run roughly about $100 to $130 a square foot for the residential tour north. And the houses are typically in the 1800, you do see some that top to the 2200 and some that dropped to 1500. So we're a similar size and as new construction will be in the upper end of that $130. So we'll fall right in the same land value or higher land value and we think that'll not have an adverse impact on the properties. And finally, the proposed special exception will not adversely affect the public interest. And again, I think we believe and our client believes that town homes are a needed residential use and we feel like it's a good transition for that heavy commercial and that single family. And with that, I'll entertain any questions or Luke would certainly answer any. Thank you, David. This was certainly a very thorough, good presentation. Myself have any questions. Thank you pretty much answered it. It was very good. Thanks for the presentation. I think one thing you brought up was the fact that it is owner occupied and I think that's a great idea. The Gibbs Green Town Homes in University Hill have covenants that do not permit rental. So tenants can't sub let it out. Are you planning on having something on that? I don't know that's something that we can commit to at this point. We have not contemplated that at this moment. Typically we are a for sale to individual ownership company. It's not something at this point that we've gotten even into an HOA document discussion to prevent that. It's something that we could disclose and look at but we haven't had those discussions at this moment. I mean, I guess because your point was a very good one that oftentimes apartment communities can be a little more transient and nobody washes a rental car and all that kind of stuff. But I do think that we now have that pressure from both Airbnb and just in general, people decide that it would be great to have a thing. And what I found in University Hill is that mom and pop landlords, like somebody just decides they wanna rent their place out. Those are the problems. We don't have nearly the problem with professional landlords that we do with one off landlords. And that's the only thing I'm thinking about but I don't think we have the ability to really require that, I suppose. Yeah, I mean, I would say if you've been in the news in the past six to 12 months, large group ownership of single family homes for rent is a rising market. We are in the beginning stages of us from the development so we would be years from not having that discussion but that is something, when you get more of a commercially owned ownership you have definitely some more restrictions than just your mom and pop. I wouldn't anticipate this being a mom and pop rental type of location. Sure. I mean, I think that you are hitting a reasonable, you're not putting the maximum number of units you could by a matter of factor of 50% fewer than you could. But I do think that density is important and it does help reduce sprawl and it seems like you're gonna be coming in. What sort of price point were you thinking of from the ballpark? That's a changing figure every day with the rising cost. We would really like to be somewhere in the low 200s for this product. But I tell you that now and a year and a half from now and we're building, we just don't know what that looks like. Sure. I have a question. You mentioned earlier about the traffic study that you all were working with SEDLT. And I'm assuming how is that, you have any idea when the timeline for that is and what exceptions you guys might have to make in going to what DIT? No, it'll be prior to us going to the planning commission, which I don't know if you know the schedule of that, but it'll be sometime in the February timeframe we'll have that complete. I got a question. I like the trail. That's kind of cool on the site plan. The, a notice there's only one or maybe gated emergency fire lane acts. Okay, I see that now. On the north side where it just kind of dead ends there, is that like a dumpster there? No, at this, no, it's really dead ends just for turn around and that type of thing. It's not really made for dumpster particularly. Yeah, and one of the things we'll have to work with with the city is trash pickup and how that happens. Is it a common trash pickup and is it roll off carts? We just don't know that question yet. I mean, I'm sure y'all thought about it, but I guess that the through access to Caroline, was that? The reason we didn't show it is Caroline is much more a single family home ownership versus Trinity, which is a lot more open space and apartments. So we felt it was better to keep that access on that lower one and not in effect build a cut through to Caroline and that's part of the reason why we did that. The city has an ordinance that requires the roll carts be stored in out of sight, not on the front plane of house. So that could be an issue with your trash decisions. Yeah, it's something we'll have to deal with and you know, like just now, y'all probably know this, you can't get a post office, you can't get a mailbox in front of your house anymore. If you've got one now, you've got the last few ever built. And so everything has to be a joint mail kiosk. And so does that also then perhaps extend a trash drop off? That's just something way, way down in the future for us. And we're not really here to do site plan review. I'm just thinking of our traffic flow. That's right. We're kind of into the weeds of matters that are really not in our purpose. It's hard not to look, I know. Well, I think the traffic thing kind of, it does bleed in sort of public interest and all of that, you know, because I would almost, yeah. It does, it does. All right, any other specific questions for the applicant? All right, very good presentation. Can I ask one, sorry. No, no, no, no, go ahead. So in general, like the open space is nice and I see that you've sort of retained the minimum amount of tree canopy, which you know, the tree canopy there is some good and some not so good. I guess, are there any plans for any plantings within the development? We've not shown a landscaping plan. We've only shown sort of the boundaries to keep, but yeah, there will definitely be landscaping. There's a strip between the sidewalk and the roads, so there'll be opportunities for us to have plants planting with that, so. Trees, I mean. Trees, yeah. Good point, David. Are you gonna underground your power lines? Ooh. Oh, that was your idea. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, there would be, you'd have a transformer every 20 feet if you did. I guess the other question then is working with along that trinity with the site plan and connecting to the sidewalk that's there and that sort of thought process is. Yeah, we will definitely do that, yeah. Thank you. Very good, thank you very much. Anyone from the public wish to speak on this matter? Okay, good. Let's start board discussion. Kenny. I think my only question is still kind of about the traffic, I really like to see the traffic plan. That area already has a ton of traffic coming off that green lawn area. I really would like to see what DOT comes back with for the provision. Yeah, they'll have to do that in order to get planning commission approval, which is already stated that he will do that, so. That's really my only concern is the traffic in that area and what they come back with, I don't know if. They'll work that out. We need to see that, but that's really my concern. Well, we did have a letter from Ms. Edgar and I read that and it seemed like most of her comments were outside our purview as far as I could tell. I mean, in terms of how many units they have, they're already doing half as many as they could and I do think density is a value. It's a, you know, and it's gonna be owner occupied. These are gonna be probably people with more responsibility than, you know, in the apartments nearby. Not always, I mean, but yeah. Which I think was my question of, is it within our sphere of influence to have the access stay on Trinity, you know? I think that's the planning commission. That's gonna be more of a site plan review. We're sort of allowing them to get to the next stage. Because I think that, I think that changes the dynamic in my head because I think it would be more detrimental, you know, if you've got exits coming out in every corner. I feel like it's gonna have a different impact on that. They'll work for the city and the entity and everyone to work those matters out. John? I mean, I think it meets all the criteria. Okay. I mean, I don't have any problems with it. Gregory? No, I'm good. Yeah, I like to see, multiple, I like to see flow through a site. Yeah. But, you know, it's not really our purview. It's not. So I'm just gonna let them handle that. Well, I personally like it. The only question I had was gonna be for the applicants regarding DITSA, did any answer that in his very thorough presentation. So I don't have any questions. I think it's a good use, I think it's a good project. I like it. Let's get a motion. Make a motion that we approve the special exception subject to staff comments. Second. We have a motion to second. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Opposed? Okay. All right, very good. Motion passes. Good luck with the project. Looks like you're guilty. All right, so we need to go on to, or go back to Calhoun Street, 1307 Calhoun. So let me get back to that really quick. Point it just right. All right, so 1307 Calhoun Street is a variance request to the rear yard setback requirement. The applicant is here and, yeah, if you'd like to present your request. Good afternoon. Excuse my attire. Yeah, please state your name for the record. I'm Allen, Allen Powell, owner of Detail Scout. I was requesting a variance on the property at 1307 Calhoun Street. Initially, I was requesting it due to the fact of the back property, which is not being utilized. Initially, they said if I was going to have a, if I was gonna store vehicles inside of the build out from the initial property, because we're adding to the initial property, that I could utilize the clearance, but then they said the individuals being inside of the property will have to get a variance. So that's what I'm requesting. This will be a second location for me as well. My first location is on northeast side of Columbia on two nights directly in front of Spring Valley residents. Allen, before you go any further, this is an unusual case. This was on the consent agenda and it was removed by the public. So I'll be honest with you, I haven't spent as much time on this case as I usually do on these. How about for the board's benefit, give us a little bit more of a 30,000 foot view, what you do, what it is. These details are helpful, but I don't know what you're doing to be honest with you. Okay. I do high-end detailing, so we detailed vehicles. Everything's hand-serviced. We're not like Frank Sparkle, the snappies. Like I said, my facility is on two nights where you're able to come in. We have a complimentary Wi-Fi, coffee, water, tea. It's more personable. It's on the personable side of it. So I've been in business 10 years in the current location. I sit beside. It was in BSC Bank at the time. Now it's Security Federal. And like I said, we're directly across the street from Spring Valley, which is, I'm not originally from here, I'm from Palm Beach, Florida. So everyone says that it's a prestigious neighborhood. So for us to be across the street from the neighborhood beside the bank for 10 years, I mean. That is very good. Yeah, so. So is this location, is this an existing location? On Calhoun? Yeah. It's an existing location, but it was a print shop initially. That you're trying to move into. Yeah, prior to purchase, it was a print shop. CGI builders, developers, Mr. Gray, who's my contractor, he was gonna build out and outfit the building for my use and my employees' use as well. But again, like I was saying, the back petition part that was actually gonna be incorporated with the current property, we was asking for a variance. Initially they were saying 15 feet, but then we said three to five would be ideal. And then I thought everything was okay until it was kind of a challenge. Okay, so. I think there was some confusion, maybe with staff originally, about whether the building was an accessory structure or a principal structure, which would have to follow the 15 foot. So it's 15 feet for a principal structure. 15 feet is a requirement, yeah. What are you requesting? How close are you requesting today with your variance? Five, okay, so we're taking from 15 to five, okay. I'm a little confused. So you're, what's there now is this sort of, is a former print shop. Yes, ma'am. And then you've got a driveway. Yes. And then a little garage at the back. Where is the work gonna happen in the little garage at the back? What's gonna happen? It's gonna be all inside quarters. So the vehicles will be pulled inside of the property. You mean the print shop? Well, the little garage. The little garage. Yes, a garage. Where they're showing it, where that vehicle is parked, I purchased the property all the way back towards, I guess, where you see Sumter Street is, right there. So I purchased the property all the way back towards where the blue lining is on the back end. Okay, so they're gonna build out my property all the way to that. And we're gonna be able to pull the vehicles inside of the property. They'll have a wash area as well and a drain. So you're gonna have like a covered area for the vehicle? Yes, ma'am. Okay, now I understand. So that's what the five feet is for? I'm sorry, say it again. That's what the five feet is for, the coverage area? Is the garage. Yeah, if you go to the, yes. Mm-hmm. The new construction, of course. I think it's fine. I think it's fine. All right, well, let's hang on one second, y'all. It's my fault, I started this. But we're really not, we're really not into the, do you have any more, I wanna give you a fair chance to present without us forging it again. I started this, it's my fault. Sorry, I was just totally confused, so yeah. Let him finish and then we'll ask questions. So, keep going or tell us you're done, tell us you're done or whatever you want to do, but I'm sorry about that. This is not exactly the procedure the way we're supposed to do it. That's the first time. Okay, but yeah, so we're gonna, initially how the vehicles are placed with the garage bay doors, the vehicles will be pulled inside of the property. So we'll be utilizing the entire back end of the property. Just like my structure on two nights, the front part of it will be a lobby for patrons to kind of wait if they choose, but then we'll have a concierge service as well, like we provide on the northeast side and my current location to drop off clients and they can drop their vehicles off. And also, I didn't want, since I purchased the back lot, I didn't want just squatters, just being there without utilization of the property in the back. So with the, again, with the builders, we were asking for the five feet of, is that a 15? So we'll be able to utilize the entire structure and it'll be ideal for the structure to be completed with the variance. Yeah, so that front building there is existing on the site plan. And then where the three cars are is the proposed garage and that's where the rear. To be built. Yes, and that's where the rear property line is right behind that, and that's where the 15 foot requirement is. And right now it butts up against a paved area, I think, a parking lot, trying to get back to it. And you can't just move your garage that's not built right now closer because you wouldn't have enough room to turn the cars. I'm sorry, say that again. Yeah, I think that. 10 feet closer would make it a challenge. If you just move, there's no garage there now. No, ma'am, no, ma'am. If you just move the garage closer to Calhoun, you would not be able to turn the cars around properly or you just don't want to have dead space behind it. I don't want to have dead space and also for utilization to actually maneuver the vehicles. We were gonna actually have. Yeah, so you need a turn rate. You need some place to turn there. Yes, ma'am. I understand. Yes, ma'am. So why, I understand the confusion. Why is this not an accessory structure? I mean, because it's a commercial use. And so if you're using, I mean, if you had like a shed or something like that, like a really small shed, that might be an accessory structure, but this is really just part of the business. So if it's a business with multiple buildings, they're all gonna have the primary building setbacks. Okay. What is the use directly behind the property? Nothing. There isn't anything being utilized with the property. We looked at the, who owned the property that sits directly behind it. And it's kind of hard to get the information whoever owns that property. We were looking for the deeds and things of that nature and we couldn't find the deeds over like, I think it was eight years. So. Is there a business there now or it's vacant? It's empty. The property is empty, but it comes up under a different name. I forget the name. So I don't know if they're paying taxes or whatever on the property, but it just doesn't seem like it's being utilized at all. Should be able to find that out by looking at the tax map and pulling up the tax map. Some of the owners opt out. That's a county. Yeah, some buildings opt out. Yeah. This one's opted out. Is it opted out? That makes it difficult. Yeah, nifty. All right. Well, which I'll go for the after. I understand it now. Everybody can understand it. All right, well, thank you for presenting again. I'm sorry I wasn't prepared for this. I wasn't, but thank you very much. All right, thank you. Okay, you can have a seat now. Okay, does anyone from the public like to speak on this matter? Please approach. Hi, my name is Charlotte Thompson and I appreciate the board members for the opportunity to speak on this matter. I work at 214 and 2016 Sumpter Street, also an owner of those buildings, one of the owners. We're there seven days a week providing healthcare services to the public. Which one is that? Would you show us? It is, no, it's getting confused. So where, our parking lot for behind on Sumpter Street, 2016 is that first larger building, 2014 is the smaller building next to 2016. And then that area behind 2014 and to the right side with, which is adjacent to his property is our parking lot for patients. Thank you. And so that's why I'm here speaking about it. So the issue is the required rear yard setback in the RIC District is 15 feet. They want to construct a commercial garage on the property for personal gain. The proposed construction of the garage does not fit on the property to allow the required setback. The fact that the land maybe utilized more profitably, should a variance be granted, is not constitute grounds for granting of a variance. The property does not have a unique hardship but rather the issue is self-imposed by the new owners. They want to construct a new building on the property. The request in my opinion does not meet any of the requirements of the 17-2.5S4 zoning ordinance. There are not extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to this particular piece of property. The property has been used by others for other businesses in the past with the 15-foot required setback in place. Other properties in the area such as our own two buildings have the required 15-foot setback. These conditions do generally apply to other properties in the vicinity. In particular, our two buildings have the required 15-foot setbacks. Marion Street property, the large school that's on Marion Street has a 15-feet setback in place. These conditions are actually the result of the applicant's own actions. There's not enough space within the required setback. They're building something where there's not enough space, basically, to meet the requirements that the city's put in place. So it's their own actions that are causing the issue. It's not the result of someone else's action to the property. It's existed that way with the 15-foot requirement for years. And because of these conditions, the application to this particular piece of property would not effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. The property could still have possible uses that's been used for years. It's just that the new owners want to change the use of the property. So I don't think it's fair to put restrictions on us in the neighborhood for their profitability. Other owners could use this property as it stands. The authorization of the variance will be of substantial detriment to the adjacent property and to the public good. And the character of the zoning district will change if this is granted. The detriments to the adjacent property would be decreasing airflow, increasing noise, decreasing the natural sunlight, increasing artificial bright lights by the lighting that they'll most likely install on their building, fumes, increased water flow on the adjacent property, the roof they're proposing is sloped. It'll be running off onto our parking lot. It'll restrict the movement of cars on trucks that are parking in our patient parking lot and their maneuverability. So the public good will be harmed because we serve patients and we're there seven days a week. The character of the zoning district will be harmed since the intent of the ordinance is to have a 15 foot setback on properties for aesthetic and a healthy environment to work. The property value of the adjacent properties will decrease due to the crowding. Is that about it? I don't think they meet any of the things and it's not in harmony with the ordinance of the ordinance in place and it's gonna cause problems to us and public welfare. And for these reasons, I oppose the approval of the variance and I recommend that it should not be approved. I believe the approval only serves the profitability of the new owner to the detriment of the neighborhood and it's not keeping in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the ordinance. And I feel like we need to respect the ordinance and have respect for the neighbors and property owners in the area. All right, thank you. Thank you for your testimony, I appreciate that. Hope, is there any, I know in residential there's a maximum percentage allowable lot coverage. Is it different for commercial? Thank you. Okay, thank you for your testimony. Okay, would you like to re-approach and we will give you about five minutes or so for what you think she said or? For me, I don't see it being a problem due to the fact that, again, I've done this. I'm in the neighborhood. I mean, I know it's two nights, but again, I'm directly across the street from Spring Valley residents. And with the property being built, we have a drain that will be inside of the actual facility. We're not doing anything on the outside of the facility where it's a runoff due to the fact in danger in the habitat that's actually around. So everything will have an actual drainage to where it goes out and the flow actually goes out into our oil and water separator. So there will be any type of just, you know, and I mean, it's just runoff anyway. The thing about it is with the noise factor, it's all inside quarters. It's not gonna, we're not like drilling or anything like that. The most noise you will hear is a vacuum and you probably won't hear that. All of my gadgets are state-of-the-art, so it's not like one of those things where it's just like we're jackhammering and moving concrete and things of that nature, so. But I mean, I think it would be ideal since constant closed down. And so with us coming downtown, I think it will be, you know, and supply jobs as well, so I think it'll be a good fit. But we run a type ship, so, you know, we don't, you know, it's one of those things. We're about business. It's not all about the extra stuff going on, so. Okay. All right. Well, thank you. Thank you very much for just the money. So we will move into board discussion. I'll start on this one. The adjacent owner's or property owner's testimony, she brings up some valid points. I do not agree with everything she said. I think she does have some valid points. Some of the stuff I don't think is correct, but I'm not sure, y'all. I personally would like to see a way for us to get this done for the applicant. I think it's a good spot, and I do think there's a void, like he said, of the constant and he's been in business for 10 years somewhere else. He seems pretty professional. I'd like to see a way to get it done. I'm not sure if we can, running down the criteria. I don't know if he does meet them, but sure. I want to make a comment about the business and, you know, say what you, so for my wife's birthday about two years ago, I took my car to his shop, and it's the best detail. I mean, it was like a $200 detail, but it was, I mean, they spent six hours on it, and it was a really good detail. So I know he runs a good business. It was not loud when I dropped off or picked up, and it was clean, and they had good people. So I'll just say that about the business. You'll figure out a way to get this done. Here's the thing, I think it, the only thing that really is at issue here is that is a 10 foot strip. You know, many of the other concerns that the neighbor pointed out are things that he could do of right. If he's willing to, if he were willing to, or able to move his garage just a little bit closer. Right, he can't. But if he could, he can do everything else that he wants to do there. So the only thing we're talking about here is that 10 foot strip, and I'm looking at the site, and I'm seeing that the adjacent property is a parking lot on the, what is that, south, north? North, yeah, turn around, turn around, north. Sumter, north, yeah, Sumter, on the Sumter Street side, and then an unoccupied property parking lot next to it. So I don't see that a 10 feet closer is really an issue from the same point of noise, fumes, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Public testimony is closed. Public testimony is, you cannot, public testimony is closed. Well, there's 28 feet according to this between the structure in the back and the new buildings. If you move it 10 feet closer, it's 18, it's roughly what, 40% less? What do you need, 24 John Gregory? In between, oh, from here. Turn around, of course, 24 feet in there. There is 28 right now. Yeah, 28 feet. There is, I don't know. Almost 29 feet, so if you take 10 out, you're turned out. I mean, the general turn around is 24 feet. But Catherine, those are really good points. So what you're saying is most of our testimony, if it was 10 feet closer, those issues would be there anyway. So we're talking about a 10 foot strip. What he's asking for. Right, we're talking about it. Only a 10 foot strip. And that if another business, I mean, I think when print shops are not, they're not, it's a Dunder Mifflin kind of a thing. You know what I mean? It's not a growing industry. The whole site's impervious anyway, so there's not going to be any additional runoff for that. In fact, arguably it's multiple structures. So you're not, you know, it's not one giant structure that's trying to take it. Right. And arguably parking cars. Well, and arguably, because he's going to have a drain system and mitigation systems, he's going to be causing less runoff than you would have otherwise. Right. Well, I think it's the rain runoff. I don't know about that. Nothing's going to get away from inside. It's going to be the same, essentially. But if he runs, here's the deal with that. If he, water runs off onto his neighbors, he's got a whole different problem. You know, he will damage them and then they can have a whole different problem. So he'll have to figure that out whether he would have to install some trench drain back there in the back and underground type it to an existing, those are sort of getting out of their shoes. But basically what I'm saying is you're correct. That's not something right. Can I? But if he built the garage, which he could do as of right, 10 feet closer in. All the same problems that we ever had before is just a 10 foot strip. Which is what we're questioning. That was otherwise going to be pavement is going to be inside his property instead of on the edge of his property. John Gregory. Yeah, I actually got a question for Hope. Add in a building like this, do they have to do any sort of screening behind the building? Maybe that will help alleviate some. Doesn't that get changed? You mean screening like a fence? Like a fence or anything. Usually with an addition or something like this, it's based on the value. And I don't think it wouldn't trigger anything here. Can we ask a question to the applicant? Absolutely. Please approach. Yeah, hey, have you, so a couple of things, just trying to, you know, see how we can solve this 10 foot issue. What right now it being 28 feet, what would be them if we were to scoot it up, even like two or three or four feet? I mean, every foot in this kind of scenario helps. Yeah. What, I mean, what could you get away with? I guess like, could you move it up five feet? I mean, is that a, I don't know. I mean, five feet would be ideal. You know, that will actually be ideal. That's what we were and asking for. No, he means five. No, could you move it from like a five foot setback to like seven foot, eight foot? I mean, nine foot, I mean, just trying to, so that's the first question. Second question is, have you considered any screening with this kind of layout that might help solve any, you know, neighbor issues? Some kind of fence, some kind of fence. Well, initially, I mean, we didn't have anything to like initially speak about. So we didn't know that this was going to take place. Yeah. But hope, hope, doesn't some of this change because of the whole thing with the, I think that was changing. Part of the councilman's changing that you don't have to, you don't have to have a, but a fence. You don't have to put any kind of landscaping buffer or anything like that, right? If it's, if it's, because it's not even a changing use. It's not residential to, to, right? I mean, it's all, it's use, it's the same, same use. Used to use. You don't even, you never would have had to do anything. Right, right. Well, and it's, are we still on discussion? That's, also the problem here is it's all impervious now and he's going to have to have land disturbance. And he's going to, well, he might not trigger the land service threshold, but still the fact of getting a machine in there to dig it all up and dispose of it, it'd be one thing if it was vacant space and he could just do that. It's a really good idea, but it might kill the project to make him do that. Well, and I will just say that it's, It's a thing for me. All right. If it's required or you want him to, you know, move it up possibly, there might be some issues then with maneuverability and reviewing the site plan. Yeah. When staff reviews the site plan. No, this wouldn't go to planning commission or anything, but of course everything does have a site plan review. So. Well, then maybe, I think it's 24 feet between, at least it's 24 feet, between stacked parking. So maybe John, you could craft it in such a way that he'd moved it up to work with staff and move it up to the minimum required staff to be on campus, to point it. But so my sort of issue though, is like the biggest concern of the neighbor is sort of the encroachment and the squeezing of her property. And so if he can put up a fence on the property line, then screening and whatever, and if he can change the pavement or even installing a curb or whatever, if he can do that rather than the property line, then how does the placement of the building make any difference to the change in the relationship of those properties? If I understand what you're saying, so you're saying because he could simply put a fence there right now as of right, what's the difference between that and a garage? That has nothing around it in five feet versus. I wouldn't, I mean, I didn't mean screening with a fence. I was thinking something like, yeah, so yeah, I was thinking more like something green maybe. But I don't think it's a matter of visibility as it is just like the squeezing of access to the parking spots. But what Celia's saying is that, yes, you could put a fence up there without having to come to us and it would squeeze them as much as they wanted. So why not? More than. Yeah, more than five feet. You can put a fence right up on the property line. Right. And here they're getting five feet more because he's gonna be five feet back. Yeah. So he's actually harmed less. So the adjacent property owner would be harmed less than if he were to put a fence up. Right. Very good point. So. I was throwing thoughts out there. So I just, I feel the general consensus of the board is that we think this is a good use and gonna be okay. And we're trying to figure out how to get this done. Yeah. Good. Yeah. I like the business. I like, I mean, it's good, but I like this area needs some help. Something like Sumpter Street needs. And I feel like it'd be a good addition to the area. He seems like a good fit for me. I mean, he's been in business 10 years somewhere else. I mean, I think we're looking for. I think we don't have any purview there, but his ability to work with the neighbors around him is kind of really gonna be up to him. I don't, I think it's kind of out of our budget. I mean, he can't damage them in any way. So he'll, that'll, we can't, that'll all work itself out, run off and stuff. I mean, that'll work itself out. But it seems like a very low impact business. Very low impact. I think inside like that, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. It's just a parking. It's more shielded now than it will probably would have been with a, with a open parking lot. Good size building for a lobby and an office. But if you look at what's there now, you had an open parking lot in the back. Now it's going to be enclosed. So you're not having the visibility in the car slamming their doors. If I'm the, if I'm in a jointed property, I just don't see a problem. No, I think it's, I think I'm better off. It looks kind of similar to the property behind him. If you look at this picture, it's up now with a building in front and then a structure in the back. I mean, that's kind of what it looks like. Well, I think we've added this thing enough. Unless anyone has anything else to say, I'd like to ask for a motion. Yeah, I'll make a motion that we approve this variance request subject to staff comments. Second. We have a motion to second all those in favor. Please say aye. Aye. Aye. All right, motion passes. Good luck with your business. Thank you, I appreciate you. You're welcome. Okay. Hope, do we have any other business today? No other business today. I would like to say that we'll need to do the election of officers soon, maybe possibly at the next meeting. So just be on the lookout for that. I'll probably be in correspondence with you. Well, next meeting is my last meeting. Yes. So you might as well just, you might as well do it in March then. You're going to have an election next month, and then again the next month. Right. Do we have new board members in the pipeline? Yes, so we are trying to get in touch with him now. There's been one appointed, so we're trying to get in touch with him to make sure there's still some interest there. Very good. I'm ready to retire. It was a couple of months ago that he was appointed. Very good. Very good. Make another round. Why don't we hang it up. All right, so motion adjourned. Second. All those in favor, please say aye. Any opposed? All right. Good meeting, everybody. Good meeting. Good job.