 See much to you later. Morning. Hey. Hey, what's up man? How you doing? Good to see you. I think Andrea, I see Andrea did a great thing. She knows what it is. What it is. What it is. What are you doing? What are you doing? Hey. What's up? Is she going to be in a minute? No. Not in a minute. Hey man, come on. Thanks. I think it's just you. OK. Okay good morning. I'd like to welcome everyone to the November 2018 City of Columbia Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. I'm Gene Dinkins Jr vice chairman of the board and I'll be serving as chairman for today's meeting. At this point I'd like to introduce the other members of the board. Josh Speed to my far left follow by Reggie McKnight, Jenna Stevens and George Schaefer. I'd also like to introduce the staff that assists the board. We've got Rachel Bailey, zoning administrator, Hope Hasty, deputy zoning administrator and Andrea Wolf, land use board coordinator. The board is charged with hearing applications for special exceptions, variances and administrative appeals. All testimony is recorded for the record and 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 please state your name and please speak clearly into the microphone because this meeting is being recorded. Applicants with cases before the board are allotted a presentation time of 10 minutes. This time also includes all persons presenting information on behalf of the applicant. This time limit 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 by a spokesman for an established body or group of three or more. The applicant then has five minutes for a buttle. The board reserves the right to amend these limits on a case-by-case basis. Those of you who plan to speak 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. Do you affirm or attest that the testimony you will give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Okay at this time I'd like to turn the meeting over to Ms. Bailey. Good morning. I do want to make one announcement before we get going. Item number nine on the agenda case 2018 0101 for 3624 Rosewood Drive a special exception to construct a wireless communication facility a cell tower that has been deferred it will not be discussed on the agenda today. The consent agenda is used by the board to approve non-controversial or routine matters by a single motion and vote. If a member of the board or the general public wants to discuss an item on the consent agenda that item is removed and considered during the regular agenda. The board then approves the remaining consent agenda items. The first item on the consent agenda today is the approval of the October 9th 2018 minutes and we have item number two case 2018 0097 for 1950 Jervais Street. This is a variance to the amount of signage. Item number three case 2018 0098 for 1735 and 1745 Busby Street variance to the buffer transition yard requirement. Item number four case 2018 0100 for 1601 Hayward Street this is a variance to the fence height requirement. Item number five case 2018 0102 for 1425 Richland Street. This is a special exception to establishing in an item number six case 2018 0103 for 2300 Elmwood Avenue. This is a variance to the off-street parking requirement for multifamily development. If anyone wants one of those cases removed and heard on the regular agenda please let us know now. Thank you very much. I'd like to ask for a motion to approve the consent agenda. There's a motion and a second. All those in favor please signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Alright the first item on the regular agenda is under old business. This is item number seven case 2018 0093 621 Whaley Street. This is a special exception to establish a convenience store. The applicant is welcome to come forward. Good morning everyone. It's a pleasure to be back before you. My name is Josh Bolton House. I'm the architect with Bob at Design Build. We're the Design Build contractor who's been hired to construct the store for our client. And so we're back before today to address some concerns the board had from the previous meeting. If you guys could fast forward to put together a short presentation and kind of run through this. I'm sure you guys have reviewed it but the items I'm concerned from the previous meeting were number three from the special exception application proposed exception will not have a substantial adverse impact on the aesthetic character of the area to include review of orientation and spacing of the building as well as number six proposed special substance consistent with the character intent of the underlying district as intended indicated zoning district descriptions and applicable zoning overlays. And so what we did after our last news we went and met with the neighborhood group and heard their concerns and it was a good meeting to hear kind of what they had to say and you know we took some of their things into advice like kind of orientation of the store. Previously it was oriented kind of sideways to the Waley Street and but I felt leaving those means that their primary concern was the demolition of the existing house at 621 Waley Street. So the conversations kind of stall there where it's like you know from our point of view that we can't really move forward the project without demolishing it. They weren't really going to be very supportive of us demolishing it so it kind of landed in a stalemate. It was a good conversation as productive kind of to hear some of their other concerns but unfortunately weren't really able to hash that out. But what we did do was take a look at the orientation of the building and see if we can address it up and then also one of their concerns was we just want to kind of see a plan for what could be done with those parcels because our owner owns obviously the house at 621 and the adjacent parcel the other house there before you get to the other stores beside there as well as the gas station property so he owns a fairly wide range of parcels on Waley Street. So next slide please. We took a look at is you know pushing to the back corner of the property line and facing the street as well and put parking in the front. So you know one of the objections and one of the letters was you know structing the view shed of the corridor. I think this helps do that granted you don't have two houses you're looking at but it doesn't really impact the streetscape like the previous design would have done. We're also proposing dressing up the existing building. You know one of the things they would probably prefer is that we tore down the existing store. Our client does not want to do that. I mean you know a single owner it's not some large developer that has infinite funds to tear down existing structures he's paid a significant amount of money for. So he is open to improving the look of and granted it's not to the level that we're posing for the new store but I think it is at least a middle ground and what we could be doing and then one advantage of orient the plan this way you flip to the next slide would be that it also has the ability to eventually expand it and have it more as like a piece of development versus just random store single house another store gas station and so ever in the overarching kind of mills district plan that was adopted last year you know one of the letters also say that this plan does not address that or doesn't really go with it you know one of the options like it's removing residential in place of a commercial but you know if you look at the zoning overlays in the mill district plan this is kind of their kind of brand master plan to be a kind of like a commercial area not a residential district so you know you have the randy overlay you have the waley street overlay the preservation districts you know these houses neither one falls in that as well as you know even in the most recent master plan completed to talk about the architecture of the houses the gable fronts the two-story structures and you know in all three of these different you know comprehensive guides the architecture and description of the two houses that are my client owns it's not really described and so you know one of the letters of opposition that represents kind of a donut hole I guess we could probably flip to the next couple slides show and I flipped to the end so this is kind of a putting the two grand B district and the waley district overlays together you can see that both the parcels of my client owners are both left out of that and I think you can argue over why that is but the fact is there's if we weren't planning to put a convenience store here if we were put any other use here we wouldn't even be before the bonus board of zoning appeals the house that we could propose the clothing shop and done exactly what I showed in this master plan we wouldn't be here it's only because my client wants to relocate his existing operation from his current store into an upgraded facility and then lease out his existing store for whatever potential use could come his way it's the reason we're here before the board of zoning appeals obviously I understand where people who are opposed is you know these are two older homes you know along waley street they are kind of sandwiched between two commercial uses I mean they're kind of out of place I understand wanting to keep the historic character intact for this area I mean they do have you know a brand new mill plan that was put together and you know I think the overarching plan for the waley street would be kind of an activated urban or urban but retail district you know in the plan they have less the potential of uses for like stores they would like to see and granted a convenience store it's not one of them I don't think my client should be denied just relocating his present business into a new building but of the different uses that could be possibly relocated into a system store the list of coffee shop bakery boutique clothing store curate the vintage clothing shop thrift store costume shop casual sandwich shop so many there's a litany of things I could go in existing store I don't require a ton of space I could add to the plan and kind of I feel jive with the the comprehensive mill district area plan that was put forth last year I think most of the opposition is really just coming for them posing tearing down those two houses which is again as I stated earlier if it was anything but a convenience store we wouldn't even be here we'd be under construction by now so with that you know includes my presentation if you had asked have any questions I'd be happy to answer them please restate so originally this the new convenience store located on this property it was oriented 90 degrees from the place yes so the sort of facing the existing gas station and you've hoped to ease the neighborhood somewhat by rotating it from architectural standpoint I think this is a better solution obviously at the front of the building spacing well at least for you that's what everybody would want the only reason we had a original request of the owner kind of over my objection to it so I think now you know if you choose to do something with that existing other house he has a logical way he can expand it and provide areas that you know some of these other uses that the mill village would want can't have an opportunity to move into he has the potential to build about another 4,000 square feet so I could house two or three other uses that would I think would add to the character of the neighborhood and accomplish the goal set forth in that district plan the proposed expansion area on one of the slides for future is that meant to extend into the other adjacent parcel that the owner would that would be demolishing that other house but then one further correct to the last 16 Waley Street and that's not in the scope of what we're proposing just kind of shows an idea that could very easily be done because then again it's one of the things is like you know if you lose one of the comments from our meeting was you know if you lose one house you're basically gonna lose the other one because now you really have a single house kind of on the island by itself and so what we tried to do was like should he decide he doesn't want to rent that house anymore can we provide him with a logical way to expand what he's doing here that supports the character of the area does not just willy-nilly kind of half-cocked idea that's you don't really want random thing random thing random thing random thing going down you won't a comprehensive streetscape this was our best way of coming up with that question about the existing store that you planned to lease out are there any plans for that do you have any idea what kind of building would want to not at this time our owners gonna occupy until the new store is operational so that time he can vacate and then kind of explore what his options are for that store but from operational standpoint there's no need for him to have two convenience stores within 20 feet of each other so I mean the whole idea of this project was to kind of upgrade his existing facility and represent himself for his existing building okay thank you very much okay at this time like to ask if anyone else like to come forward either in support or against this application morning my name is Jill Weider and with a Mill District Alliance and the Granby Mill Alliance I think one of the most during this whole process for us the most interesting thing that was said was said by your chair Chuck Sally talking about the neighborhood in itself and how they most in his years in the industry and on the board he's never been more impressed with the cooperation and collaboration of a developer and the community as right across the street from the Shivmore and and when you drive by it you see that you see it's a new campus just there's a lot going there's a lot of potential for the community for the development whereas Josh the architect did meet with us there was a bit of a stalemate with the the issue of the houses you know obviously you're always trying to keep what you got when you know in a city that sometimes doesn't take those things into consideration when things aren't protected but it's stalemated at that point you know with houses they did change their plan but we do have some real issues we have the existing building you know these guys I mean God knows what they're going to do but you look at the existing building now and for the past year the fences behind it have been down in a ramshack old-fashioned you know with no attempt at all it even picking up the fallen fences I mean it just looks like who did it in the ram and so we really have real issues about the existing building what their plans are for the existing building you know Cathy's coffee I mean it's interesting it's easy to do a quick tweak and you know in 3d and and dress it up a little bit you know by the mere fact that they haven't done anything with their existing property to dress it up while the rest of the community has come up we think that should be taken into consideration that they need definite plans for what they're going to do with that building and how they're going to do it secondly it's these aren't really architectural drawings I guess they really don't have to present them since this isn't the ddrc but it'd be it these are kind of maybe drawings this is what we'd like to do so we really don't know what they're going to do so it's kind of a mystery but for those reasons and for the fact that we're trying to do so much to bring the community the mill district along it would be nice to have a better idea as to what the real plans are for that for that corner of the neighborhood for that our our commercial area for our retail area since 1976 I came here from New York City to teach film at the University of South Carolina and thought that this was a gem historically you know social history wasn't very hip in those days you know people said oh you don't want to live there but yes so yes I've been in I've been a property owner since the mid 80s think back what was that the structure in question that the house what was it a couple of years ago or a few years ago is it was a single family or was it some sort of they're they're right up until the owners of the Shivmark bought the properties they were rental properties a single family rental properties mostly students that kind of thing thank you by Henry I've lived in the Olympia community since 1983 I am representing the mill district alliance we stand in opposition to the proposed special exception unfortunately our letter did not get to you because of a technical glitch I have sent it on that's okay no worries so I'll try to highlight that letter as best I can we are opposed to the buildings being demolished and if this were to move forward we would ask that the owners be responsible for moving them to properties that are available for them to move to relatively close it wouldn't cost a great deal of money in the greater scheme of things you know the drawings that indicate the old building and covered comps remaining as a great concern to us just a few months ago these owners were before you to add a liquor store their current business model is your typical convenience store with a high propensity to sell alcohol in general we as a community are in real need of a grocery store oriented convenience option within a 1.2 mile radius of our neighborhood we have 12 convenience stores so it's not as if we need a larger convenience store that sells snacks beer wine and gasoline we have plenty of those matter of fact one is only four blocks from the shift mark Kathy's coffee you know this use of the reuse of the building I dare say there are very few boutique stores that would want to have their building right in front of gas pumps I mean it's a mere just couple steps to the gas pumps so what is what is Kathy's coffee that would be the use of the old building I was it was just pictorially represented but the old building is in such location to the gas station gas pumps it would be difficult to convince a boutique store to move in yeah right in front of gas pumps and such and so we're concerned about the future use given their previous applications in terms of pedestrian safety you know it's right across from the Granby Olympia and mill apartments and the propensity for young people to walk J walk would be greatly heightened with that positioning and so we have concerns that you know somehow the traffic would have to be addressed pedestrian as well as the good neighbor plan as Joe was stating earlier they they don't really maintain their green spaces or the or the boundary fences which are down and look quite bad to be honest with you so we questioned the good neighbor landscaping we love the idea that's landscaped would ask that any if this goes forward that the mature trees be preserved and also it was concerning that we didn't have conversation with the owner he sent his architects so we really haven't been able to establish a conversation with the owner per se he also owns more than just one store I believe I was able to find two convenience stores that he owns in the greater Columbia area and if you look at the Shiv Mart model it looks nothing like this and so because there are no design requirements we do have concern that this would not be a plan that would work well with the current movement in the capital city mill district so with that we appreciate your consideration to deny the special section thanks so very much have a question have you identified any areas or any parcels where the houses could be moved yes matter of fact and Joseph could speak to that I spoke to the owner and she the reason why I went to talk to her is I knew they owned two parcels one next to they have a home on church Street and the ideal situation is these houses wouldn't even have to be moved out onto whaley Street they could be moved to the back of the lot across the perimeter road of the Pacific Mills Pacific Park baseball field and then enter Denmark Street right there and the first lot would be right there between two homes on Denmark and then right around the corner on Church Street and the interesting thing is they moved a house into the neighborhood before we had architectural conservation status and that was no it was non contributing so they have a non contributing house already so they they would be interested in filling their two vacant lots with those homes if they were if these houses were moved for them I think the actual cost of the moving of the houses according to the owner she moved a house a single story house from 378 about six or seven years ago and paid about twelve thousand dollars to move that one house a great distance I don't know what the actual cost would be but I am sure judging from what I've gleaned and what it cost to demolish and haul a house away it would be less expensive for them to move these homes into the neighborhood and available lots than it would for them to demolish them and tear them away and I would ask you to consider on approving their exception that they move these homes into these two laws of the consider that's a good idea but certainly not sure that we could require the applicant to do anything like that but it seems like a good deal of the concern certainly is these existing dwellings so let me just ask you then you know if if the applicant was agreeable to doing something like that what would the mills position be on the request well we'd still like to talk to him again about the existing building and what their plans are for maintaining the rest of their property but other than that we'd be more willing to consider to be more we'd invite them into the neighborhood if they were willing to move those homes did you all discuss that in your meeting with them now now it was never discussed I think the plan was to you know hold firm on on keeping the two homes where they were and then see what they came up with thank you if the board will allow it I'd like to just clarify please um to touch on first I know the applicant had discussed potential uses to come into the existing building once the convenience store moves over the properties are within the plan development district it's not really a design overlay it doesn't pull in DDRC but it does certain uses that might be permitted outright in the base zoning district that M1 even though it's permitted in the M1 it's a special exception within the PD so retail restaurants most uses that could come in or a great deal of uses would require further board review so it would be discussed at a future meeting so I did want to throw that out there I also wanted to touch on the mill district plan it is not a regulatory device so it kind of touches base with our future land use and I had provided to you all in your binder I'm just it's in the UC AC one which is the neighborhood activity center so that's what it's explained in there is kind of a donut hole in that district plan which these parcels do fall in it is surrounded by different conservation and protection areas but these parcels that we're discussing today are outside of any overlay or anything that would require a demolition review prior to receiving a demolition permit I just wanted to clear that up I know it's been discussed at last meeting and this meeting as well thank you okay is there anyone else here who would like to speak either in favor or against okay morning my name is Melissa Ligon I live at 412 Florida Street in the Olympia neighborhood I am here in opposition to this proposal and I would like to well I'd like to just point out that the new proposed convenience store is almost triple the size of the existing one the existing one you know is what it is and it's been there but it's you know it it's proportionally sized for the lot that it's on and to expand this by almost three times is just to me seems like it just not a good fit I would like to read to you a letter from Ryan Nevious I think it's probably in your packet but I'd like to read it as a matter of record and this is her speaking Ryan Nevious I'm a property owner in Granby historic district and I was the executive director of sustainable Midlands that proposed the joint City County planning done for the capital city mill district this plan entitled the capital mill district area and corridor plan found online at imagine mill district calm was voted on and accepted by both city and county councils I'm opposed to the request for a zoning exception to expand the Shiv Mart located next to 701 Whaley and across from the Granby and Olympia mill site for the following reasons number one the design and use does not conform to the aforementioned plan the block where the proposed development is located as one of the most traffic congested areas in the city adding new retail will complicate an already difficult traffic problem the proposed development will change the character of the Pacific Park a city of Columbia Park located directly behind the property the proposed development will reduce the number of private residences directly opposite of one of the plan goals to increase residential the existing gas station does not fit into the character of the mill district and the maybe plans show that they do not grasp the concepts of what we're looking for in the mill district it is not an approved use in the zoning two months ago I'm sorry I'm not naming the numbers we're up to number seven seven two months ago the neighborhoods appeared before Boza to protest the current owner trying to obtain a special exception to establish a liquor store the neighborhood does not need or want a liquor store continuing on the historic neighborhoods of Granby Olympia and Whaley along with the district businesses housed in historic structures such as 701 Whaley in the mill's apartments have worked diligently to keep the quality and character of the neighborhood the proposed parcels are in a donut hole of the district so unlike so much of the rest of the neighborhood have no design reviews this gives us concerns about the final quality and appearance of the new buildings while the mills and 701 Whaley must have design reviews the proposed property across the street from both of these does not this donut hole in design review should not exist but it does this is a historic neighborhoods view shed I have one more second please up hold our work to preserve and develop a cohesive mill district and support the efforts of place making and good urban design thank you for your consideration I believe we all want good long-term quality development that enhances the mill district for future generations sincerely Ryan Nevious and thank you so much for your time any questions thank you hey Richard Burks first want to start off by saying that none of us enjoy having to come up and protest a neighbor's expansion want to thank both Josh and John for sitting down with us once together and then Josh and I had a coffee on another occasion to try to try to find some cohesiveness in the plan one of my biggest concerns are the demolition of the houses they were not there in 1919 they were occupied by 1930 one of the occupants was actually Robert Ebert who went on to buy all the housing for the mills in 1940 also the property was occupied by the director of what was the community center at 701 so it does have some property that fabric is important if you do see that this expansion should go through then obviously we do want to make sure that the houses get moved if it all possible to another site in the neighborhood I'm probably most concerned about the along with the demolition if that happens but the the use of the existing convenience store and whether or not that ends up just being a storage shed and or unoccupied and you know we don't we really just don't know and I think that that would be a shame to have a corner a prominent corner in the in the neighborhood that ends up just being storage for overflow or excess for the new convenience store built next door so those are some of my concerns as you know across the street not 150 yards from here I'm putting a roof back on and reanimating properties that have not been in service for 50 years 60 years however long it's been since the roof collapsed so I and all of you know me very well I I just believe that this is a very special neighborhood and we should do everything that we can to protect it going forward thank you when when you had your meeting with the architect did y'all discuss the existing store and you know what would happen we did and they have no planned use for it Josh will correct me if I'm wrong but no other chance we don't have there is no certainty of we the neighborhood group felt like that if that store was torn down and landscaped and more parking was provided for the next door unit that that would that would give us a create a little bit more certainty we wish that there was you know I had to go through DDRC review Josh from PMC and the Mills across the street had to do PMC review I mean a DDRC review we wish that there was a staff level review for this project since it's RV shed you know but it is concerning what what could go back into the and how its position it's a it's a corner you know most convenient stores that you see you're located on a corner there could be a reason for that but okay all right thank you thanks I'm Josh Harding I'm with PMC property group with the Mills across the street I don't have a whole lot to say just here in support of the neighborhood and I'll say the process that we had ultimately with all of our developments and the neighborhood was truly a pleasure and I believe that overall our success is a huge factor you know with our with our relationship so I certainly appreciate our neighborhood and I think you'd agree that we've been here for a long time we're in certainly a part part of the of the area and certainly I hear their concerns and we tend to agree with with all they have to say so that's all thanks I'm Adam Naikler and I'm from the Grammy in the district I don't want to waste a lot of your time since I'm just going to echo what they've been saying we have concerns with the aesthetics of the building and we have concerns with the loss of the historic homes and we do have concerns with safety too with the students running across the street this is basically their place to get their beer from so they're just running across the street in the middle of the intersection it's not so bad at the end with the corners and they have crosswalks but if you slide it on down to the middle they're not going to walk extra so anyway thank you for your time thank you in our meeting with them with the group we we actually did discuss moving the houses and we're not opposed to that I mean it cost money to tear something down it cost money to move it so that's one of the early compromises we did put forth and Bob yield kind of told us you know essentially moving something to somewhere else's like a better term like corrupting history but what we were not opposed to is like we even asked them so you can find a spot for us to move it to we certainly consider that so we are not going to sit on this demolishing the houses there's a easy way to move on we are not opposed to that at all and as far as the drawings put forth I mean I am an architect and I did draw these drawings and this is basically what we sent in for permitting to the city just turned 90 degrees so I mean what you see is what we are proposing building we're not going to throw up a mental building and call it a day I mean I know there's some certain what I mean there is no GDRC review but I've submitted plenty of projects that have been under GDRC review I don't see where GDRC would object to what we're proposing I mean it's a brick facade detailed out I think ideally proportioned I mean it's some thought given to the character and aesthetic of the design so I mean short of just really nitpicking for the sake of nitpicking I think this is probably the better looking proposals for a building that could be done where there is no I guess actual design requirements from the city well I mean regarding the plans I did hear that discussed and personally I'm okay with that I mean you're still trying to figure out whether or not you'll be allowed to do this so right I don't I don't fault you there I think that that's fine I do have one question I heard this from a few of the people opposed and basically where where was the owner of the property during all those discussions I understand you were there and his lawyers yeah he could have been I mean it was actually our suggestion is to let us talk to the community group I mean this is sort of dealing with design and community relations as our wheel house if you would have been he probably was that listen we were just made it back to him we were just kind of get a sense of kind of what they wanted and just from like an expediency and efficiency I said just kind of let me handle it it wasn't he's opposed to meeting with him at all and he'd be here today his mother's ill and so he's dealing with those concerns currently but I think I mean the rest the fence did fall down you know we are planning on rebuilding all that you know in fact we can't tell him it's kind of hold tight on doing anything because you know with construction equipment like you go and rebuild a new fence spend $8,000 there's a good chance that gets torn up during the construction process you got to put it back so this whole time not can you clean it up yeah he probably should have but again he did tell us like the fence had fallen down so we are this whole time thinking that we would have been already kind of underway with construction so he is fully committed to dressing up the property I think he's using this opportunity as a chance to kind of address everything only with landscaping fencing that kind of alleviate the concerns of the neighborhood it has it's just you know you can bring up multiple you know it's multiple source sure I mean you know markets on convenience stores I don't know what he makes but I mean this is not some giant developer that has can just willy-nilly do what he wants but he has access to all kinds of capital he's being very diligent thorough and has bank financing and he needs this to be approved for the financing goes but I mean it's kind of the plight of being a single business owner or individual business owner in this case and so I mean he's trying to do what he can when I you know we keep hearing about the development across the street which which is great in the collaboration but that was essentially a Greenfield site I mean you could have turned that building any different way it still accomplish the same goal so yeah I mean it's super easy to collaborate with a fresh from the ground it's like oh yeah yes we turn it 90 degrees and you still get all your requirements I mean yeah I mean it's right to have that cooperation get that input but that's real easy versus trying to work with a very limited parcel keep existing building open and then trying to I mean it's a little more complicated a little more complicating factors than just picking a fresh site having a clean sleep to work with so I mean we're doing the best we can we're trying to listen and address the concerns we're willing to you know move the houses if what we can't just go by property move when we needed somewhere to move them to so I'm glad to hear that they have found parcels for those to be relocated to because we are certainly open to that anyone else on the board have any questions for the applicant have just one question so there was a discussion about and not for you but I don't think there was some discussion about the existing building being converted into the storage would if the owner wanted to decommission the existing use which is a convenient store and turn that building into a storage use would they have to come before the board to get approval to do so it depends what kind of storage use there is there's different categories if it was used as their personal accessory use storage we would look at it as an accessory use but if it was used as general commercial storage I would have to check on that to see if the PD it would be permitted in the light industrial the M one but I would need to look to see if the actual plan development district on top of that would allow that outright I'm thinking it wouldn't most use is end up coming in a special exception in that PD district thank you right is there anyone else in the audience who would like to come forward and speak either in favor or against this particular okay at this point like to open it up for board discussion input from some of our other members I'll start I have some concern that we're placing undue pressure on this applicant that seems a little bit unreasonable first I want to say I'm an architect I live in a historic neighborhood in the city and so both personally and professionally I have a bias toward we're using existing properties and adaptive reuse having said that it concerns me that that one of the primary concerns that we're hearing against this proposal is related to the existing house structures it's my understanding that the property owner could demolish those homes without coming before the board is that correct okay and it just bought it concerns me that we are considering something that they do not need our approval for nor and that we're discussing things like moving the homes on this board which we cannot require related to this particular application so I think that's putting an undue burden on this particular applicant I also empathize with the community as I said I live in a historic neighborhood I live in cotton town and and we deal with these types of things happening all the time as well and so I I I I I empathize and I and I understand what where the neighborhoods coming from but if I'm reading this the exact properties sort of are in a a black hole or a donut hole basically relative to all of the Mill District area and corridor plans is that like so a lot of the concerns that are being expressed should don't really apply to this particular property and property owners that correct the properties are within the Mill District plan that was adopted but that instrument alone is not regulatory it doesn't create an overlay or any kind of protections that looks at that future land use which is that neighborhood activity corridor and okay so and it's just you know we left this meeting last time with the concerns being specifically related to items number three and six and I feel like that the applicant made a good faith effort to address both of those criteria and personally I believe that they've met the threshold for approval for this that's just how I feel about the application okay well good discussion today Georgia think I agree with you although it everything we're trying to consider this from a bunch of different angles but at the end of the day it does does boil down to the eight specific right criteria that we have to decide whether or not they've met in order to be granted the special exception heard some discussion from the applicant that if they were here today asking us for some sort of a retail store or something like that that well they wouldn't even have to be here and that is true but this this particular use because of the potential for increased traffic and all the other things that go along with the convenience store does require meeting with us and and they would have to meet the eight specific criteria I think they meet most of them but I'm in it's my opinion I'm not sure that they meet all of them I think they did a good job meeting with the community again to try to address the concerns but sometimes it just if it's not the appropriate location for it no matter how hard you try it may not fit I'm personally concerned that the owner wasn't a part of the discussions I appreciate the applicant's response trying to describe why he was not but I think that it would make the neighborhood more comfortable with a request like this knowing that the owner you know the person who's going to be there for forever and not just the architect was you know agreeable to meet with them so that that's a concern to me I'm also concerned anytime we have one of these cases where everyone from the community that came out to speak today before you was against the proposed development so that's a concern to me so as I run through the specific criteria I do not believe it meets number three describe in what ways the proposed special exception will not have a substantial adverse impact on the aesthetic character character of the area I think this is an old mill village these are existing or at one time single family dwellings and I think adding an additional convenience store beside an existing gas station does not meet the the character of the neighborhood and I think for the same reasons it doesn't meet number six so I'm not sure in my personal opinion that we could ask this any thoughts from any other board members all right well this time I'd like to call for a motion ask for a motion okay well hearing none I'll be happy to make a motion I'd like to make a motion that we deny the special exception to establish a convenience store on this particular property a second a motion and a second all those in favor please signify by saying aye aye opposed no okay motion passes thank you very much the hands I didn't hear everyone say yes you know who who voted aye to the motion who voted against thank you all item on the agenda is item number eight case two thousand eighteen zero zero nine six this is fifty eleven Monticello road a special exception to establish a laundry mat if the applicant is here they're welcome to come forward good morning my name is Umesh Patel and I think the laundromat and one of the barbershop next to it it was closed for almost 12 years and we try to reopen it and that's what we're applying for exception okay are you familiar with the specific criteria that you would have to meet in order to be granted this special exception uh no um yeah yeah basically in your application do you have a copy of your application or yes okay if you could would you please run through the criteria it should be eight specific items um I'll be happy to ask the questions and just get your answers um if you want to say number eight well let me know when you get to the particular section so so starting starting at the beginning please describe in what way is the proposed special exception will not have a substantial adverse impact on vehicular traffic or vehicular and pedestrian safety and how adequate provisions are made in the proposed exception for parking and for loading and unloading um the traffic is not uh heavy on that and also there is an intersection the lights are there and there is two uh there's two uh one is on the Monticello road there's a one um I think there's two places you can go to the property one is on Monticello road yeah sorry yeah there's two drivers you can go in and out yep and there's almost like 12 parking spots understood okay all right describe in what ways are proposed special exception will not have a substantial adverse impact on adjoining properties in terms of environmental factors such as noise lights glare vibration fumes odors obstruction of air or light and litter I mean it's a laundromat you know so um what we do is uh we're gonna have some parking lights and I mean it's just uh we're gonna close around 7 30 or 8 o'clock every day so it's not gonna be it's not gonna affect the noise or any kind of lights or anything like that okay understood describe in what ways are proposed special exception will not not have a substantial adverse impact on the aesthetic character of the area to include a review of the orientation and spacing of buildings it's already existing building and also all the equipment's inside too so we're just gonna you know keep as it is and then restart everything okay describe the ways in which to propose special exception will not have an adverse impact on public safety or create nuisance conditions detrimental to the public interest or conditions likely to result in increased law enforcement response we're gonna have a serverless camera outside and inside and we're gonna have one person all the time open to close explain how the establishment of the proposed special exception does not create a concentration or proliferation of the same or similar types of special exception use which concentration may be detrimental to the development or redevelopment of the area in which the special exception use is proposed to be developed there's there's one you know the surrounding neighborhood has to do any kind of laundry they have to drive like three miles away from there so we'll be opening that place it will be more convenient for them certainly not in proliferation explain how the proposed special exception is consistent with the character and intent of the underlying district as indicated in the zoning district description with any applicable zoning overlay district goals and requirements number six um it's a c2 zoning and it's also you know neighborhood commercial and it's already existing laundromat makes sense okay the last couple describe how the proposed special exception is appropriate for its location and compatible with the permitted uses adjacent to and in the vicinity of the property again it was a already existing laundromat and it's vacant you know okay okay and the last one explain in what ways to propose special exception will not adversely affect the public interest opening a laundromat will create a like convenience for the surrounding community and we'll create a you know a couple jobs okay all right well thank you all right thank you sir i have two points on the record yeah please go ahead mr patel um two quick questions um where what did you say where did you say the nearest laundromat was in relation to where where you were yours is where you were with yours where's the nearest laundromat uh it's on the uh i think main street okay okay uh next one i think you said about 12 years ago it shut down what was the reason for it shutting down i think the owner health condition got worsened and he cannot you know maintain it okay and uh a thing uh uh his daughter uh she wasn't here in town so you know nobody can take care of that thing and then it just closed down yeah okay uh one last thing where's the nearest um because i mean i'm laundry i mean i have a i have a wash and dry in my house but i can understand you know when i was in college you know i can i could definitely understand how uh it's very to be to have access to uh laundry laundry man in a lot of facilities or is real that's real good um what's the nearest like neighborhood or next to to your location is your neighborhood around it yeah yeah there's there's a lot of surrounding community yeah mm-hmm um the nearest neighborhood i believe was uh it's right behind it okay we email them and then okay i can understand understandable all right i think it was a hawak neighborhood or something like that hi sorry yeah hide park yeah oh okay all right all right all right thank you thank you okay well is there anyone else here to speak either in favor or against this proposed special exception i'm debra stratton i'm the realtor involved and i have to say obviously i'm in favor of it this building has been closed for 12 years is still fully equipped the owner thought that they would be able to their health would improve and they'd be able to reopen it so they never really gave up on it and so unfortunately now it's gone to the owner's estate as they passed and so they're trying to sell it this would be a great thing i think the neighborhood waited for it to reopen it's probably over three and a half miles away from the next laundromat and this will be it's kind of a slow part of the road you know where there's not a lot of traffic and just housing i think it'll be a great thing for the community they already have one that they do do over off of lisburg road and it's clean and it's nice and it's a place where you could safely go into your laundry which is i think important for every neighborhood to have okay thank you okay anybody else all right well this point led to open up for board discussions any thoughts okay well seems fairly straightforward of course the property was posted and we didn't get anyone complaining about this and i guess really the only reason why they're here is you have to um in the zoning district seek a special exception to open a laundry mat so um we heard the applicant run through the specific criteria i think you made each one so if there's no other discussion at this point i would like to ask for a motion regarding this item i second all right have a motion and a second all those in favor please signify by saying aye aye any opposed opposed okay okay all right well motion passes all right there's no other business on the agenda i hope you all have a lovely Thanksgiving thank you let's get a motion to um adjourn please i move that we adjourned uh to the november 13th board was on the appeals okay i second motion and a second all those in favor please say aye aye okay thank you very much