How Aiken City Council, a Developer, and Public Safety sparred over less than an acre of land. The Developer won round one.
by Don Moniak
July 2, 2024
(Updated* July 5, 2024)
On Monday, June 26, 2024, , Aiken City Council voted 5-2 to give initial approval to a 38-acre residential subdivision that is a part of a larger, 49-acre development called Rutland Place. The approval included a Zoning Ordinance waiver for building separation on 16 acres of the property where single-family detached homes are proposed. The waiver will allow the developer to locate two-story homes within fifteen feet of each other instead of the minimum of twenty feet required by ordinance.
Aiken Public Safety and the City Fire Marshall had expressed objections to the waiver months ago, and continued to express objections and concerns—which were also documented in the Planning Commission’s recommendation Memorandum to Council. Following a 37-minute discussion between Public Safety, the Developer VIP Riverside, and Council, the waiver was approved. In doing so, firefighter safety and fire protection took a back seat to the economic demands of a housing developer.
The subtraction of the five feet of separation that would provide a safer space in any necessary firefighting efforts amounts to less than an acre of land for the developer, or about 2-3 homes. For firefighters, it is a loss of five feet of safe space in an already tight firefighting environment.
by Don Moniak
July 2, 2024
by Don Moniak
In December 2022 Aiken City Council approved a 330-unit residential subdivision named “Aiken Village.” The proposal involved 68 build-to-rent, single-story, multi-family story, townhomes with a total of 330 housing units on a 49.3-acre tract bounded by Rutland Drive and Hwy 19 North (Edgefield Highway).
That project was pursued by the owner of the property, North Augusta based VP Riverside, LLC. The company’s plan was to obtain approval for the plan and then sell the property to a developer, but the project never moved forward.
Instead, VP Riverside came back with a new plan this year, one that provides both a new residential subdivision and commercial development across from Aiken High School that is more appropriately named “Rutland Place” (Figure 1). Once again, VP Riverside is seeking the less typical process of seeking approval from City Council and then selling the property with its plans to a developer.
Like Aiken Village, the Rutland Place development requires rezoning and Concept Plan approval for two separate but connected plans. The property is not being subdivided. There will be two zoning designations within the same 49.3 acres. Therefore, two approvals by City Council are necessary for the same property (see pages 261 to 340 of the 6/24/24 City Council agenda packet for information on the First Reading of the Public Hearing to provide initial approvement of the project).
First, a rezoning to Planned Commercial (PC), and an associated PC Concept Plan, for an 11.4-acre portion of the tract; where a Tractor Supply store and up to five other yet-to-be-named businesses are planned.
Secondly, a rezoning to Planned Residential (PR), and an associated PR Concept Plan, for the remaining 38-acre portion of the property. There, the proposal is for 210 single-family, detached, two-story homes (two-family townhomes) on 22.4 acres, and 59 single-family, detached homes (Figure 2) on 15.6 acres—an overall housing density of 7.1 units per acre.
In its development application, VP Riverside requested a waiver for the 59 detached single-family homes, asking for 15 feet between homes instead of the minimal 20 feet set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. The difference involved with the five-foot waiver, area wise, is at most three-quarters of an acre.
As a justification for the waiver, VP Riverside cited a correlation between increased home density and home affordability, and claimed the plan was more in line with Aiken’s Comprehensive Plan’s guidance for improved walkability—itself an interesting argument since a waiver was also being granted to remove a section of sidewalk.
Although the Planning Commission had voted 5-0 to recommend the developments, it did not recommend the buildings separation waiver. In its memorandum to City Council (pages 305 to 313), the Commission cited concerns raised by the City Fire Marshall and Aiken Public Safety during the earliest stages of the approval process; concluding that VIP Riverside should comply with the building separations provision of the ordinance. Specifically, the memo read, in part,that:
“Zoning Ordinance Sec 4.2.6.E states that no single story building shall be erected within 15 feet of any other single story building and no multi-story building shall be erected within 20 feet of any other building. The (applicant’s) project narrative requests a waiver to establish an alternative standard 7.5’ side setback. The Fire Marshal has commented that Public Safety is opposed to the setback request waiver which would allow detached side setbacks at 7.5’, which allows for 15’ between homes, due to concerns with exposure fires and firefighter safety.
Public Safety requests adherence to the minimum building separation depicted in the Zoning Ordinance. Approval should include a condition that the required building separations be met per the Zoning Ordinance.” Approval should include a condition that the required building separations be met per the Zoning Ordinance.” (Original underlined emphasis).
The process leading to City Council’s June 24th decision to waive the building spacing requirement was confusing, complex and legislatively untidy, as this 6/28/24 letter to Mayor Teddy Milner and City Council illustrates.
The lengthy waiver debate began just as Council was about to approve the project, which itself had involved a 20-minute discussion. At that point, VP Riverside co-partner and former North Augusta City Manager Todd Glover returned to the podium and stated “I need to have the waiver more definitive.”
A 37-minute discussion (beginning at the 2:07:00 mark) ensued that culminated in a 5-2 vote to approve the project and the waiver, with Mayor Teddy Milner and Councilman Ed Woltz dissenting.
Five feet may not seem like much, but Public Safety and the City’s head Building Inspector explained the justification for the minimal spacing requirement—firefighter safety and defense of adjacent structures in the event of a fire.
Building Inspector Mike Jordan, who has extensive firefighting experience himself, and Aiken Public Safety Captain Brian Brazier, who also serves as the City’s Fire Marshall, took turns explaining why five feet is important.
Jordan explained that the 20 feet of spacing was necessary to keep any fire from more easily spreading from the area of origin to more structures; keeping the fire within a single structure. He stated, in part, that:
“I can tell you personally, on the ground, (five feet) is a lot, especially with multi-story structures. If we need a ladder, that distance is critical. The police department years ago worked with that (ordinance process) to establish those separations for protection from fire, to try to isolate to individual structure and keep the fire from burning up multiple homes.”
That latter effort resulted in a higher standard in Aiken than in other municipalities like North Augusta—whose Development Ordinance only requires ten feet between homes for “small lot” and “medium lot” housing developments.
In defense of the waiver, Mr. Glover (Figure 3) made two interesting arguments. First, he somewhat denigrated his firm’s now defunct Aiken Village Concept Plan by stating that “I think the 330 town homes that we crammed in there the first time was maximizing the density.” (The plan actually called for 330 multifamily units across 68 single-story townhomes).
Then he cited his own experience as a resident of North Augusta’s Hammonds Ferry neighborhood, where homes are often separated by only ten feet within a grid with very narrow streets that makes firefighting even more challenging—essentially suggesting that Aiken should set a precedent of lowering its standards to that of North Augusta’s.
(The Second Reading of the Public Hearing that would provide final approval for the process is scheduled for Council’s July 8, 2024 public meeting.)
APS Captain and Fire Marshall Brian Brazier then provided another justification for the 20-foot rule, that home interior materials, as well as some home construction materials, can and do burn hotter and faster than in the past:
“I said when we first started this we are charged with protecting life and property with the understanding that a fire in a residence in today’s world flashes in three to five minutes, which means the whole room is consumed that rapidly due to the type of materials we’re putting in our homes.
As we keep building these houses closer together it’s going to get worse. I mean it’s proven science that fires flash quicker they burn hotter than they ever have before, because of the materials that we’re putting in them, and that’s why some of of this separation is in place to keep our people safe but to protect property.”
One summary of the science from 2016 describes and illustrates research by UL Laboratories that concludes that commonly used modern building materials and most modern home furnishing are generally more conducive to fire spread, adding that, “Research shows that 30 years ago, you had about 17 minutes to escape a house fire. Today it’s only 3 or 4 minutes.”
Aiken Public Safety Chief Charles Barranco was the final speaker, and expressed support for his Captain and the Building Inspector Jordan, while issuing a warning to City Council that it would be setting a precedent for future developers. He stated, in part, that:
“The Captain is right, as fires burn faster hotter and time is always an issue to um to try to put that fire out….we have about 40 to 45 fires true fires a year and getting them when they are very small is happening less and less. So we wanted to bring you the information because I’m not that aware that planning or the building official or anybody from Public Safety has ever waived these (requirements) before…whatever you decide you are setting a precedent.”
Council then discussed the situation before approving the waiver with the 5-2 vote, with the usual perspective that “we need the housing” being the higher priority.
But in this case, the amount of additional housing is negligible, about three homes in a 259-unit subdivision. Council spent nearly forty minutes haggling with its own Public Safety leadership over less than an acre. It then chose to grant an exemption to the City’s higher minimal standards for fire protection, putting the demands of the property owner and future developer before the safety of its own firefighters and over the objections of Aiken Public Safety and its Planning Commission.
Figure 4: Aiken Public Safety Chief Charles Barranco and APS Captain and Fire Marshall Brian Brazier speaking to Aiken City Council on 6/24 in support of maintaining a safer distance between homes. From archived City of Aiken You Tube livestream video.
Footnote
* Following is additional information from the draft meeting minutes. It is rare to anomalous for minutes to not be approved as final.
a. Regarding the final vote:
“Councilwoman Price moved, seconded by Councilwoman Diggs, that Council approve on first reading an ordinance to rezone 38 acres located at Rutland Drive and Laurens Street to PR (Planned Residential) and approve the concept plan with the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission and grant a waiver of 5’ from 20’ to 15’ for the distance between two story structures. The motion was approved by a vote of 5 in favor and 2 opposed. Mayor Milner and Councilman Woltz opposed the motion.”
Council members in favor were Lessie Price, Gail Diggs, Kay Brohl, Andrea Gregory, and Ed Girardeau.
b. There is an anonymous assertion on the comments section that the developer will be “Using ALL non-combustible products.”
This is an inaccurate statement. As the meeting minutes (pages 37-38 of the file) accurately reflect, the developer’s representative stated an intent to use non combustible materials, he did not commit to that approach, and left the door open to future changes. The representative also declined to disclose the name of the developer, which would enable Council and staff to investigate its track record.
The draft minutes state:
Bryan DeBruin, 16 Wellington Avenue, Greenville, SC, stated he represents the development group. They will purchase the property and intend to develop it. Regarding the specific question regarding the fire rating, we do infill development in four different counties now.
On the multi- family side, we do that. We have not had to do that on a residential home. We consider both single-family attached, townhomes as well as the attached product to be residential so they would not have sprinklers. They would meet the residential building code standards.
While it seems like a really easy fix just to create a higher standard on the rating, from a building perspective and affordability component every time you make a change to this product and every time you make a change to the home, there are a lot of other what ifs that happen such as the supply chain, etc.
He said he would be concerned and would not be able to give that assurance because we don’t know if we could do that and where that would go. It might be a harder hardship for the construction of the home to do it that way than it would be for the reduction of lots.
He said they were real excited. This will be our first project in Aiken. The advantage of this is that you get to balance density with the townhomes, with the single-family, and the attached product and that is not all one thing. When it comes all of one thing, either you are over dense or you are under dense and you are priced out a considerable amount of your residences. Having this waiver and variance on just the single-family detached aspect allows them to meet the density obligations that they will have to make for it to make sense financially while also delivering something that they will be proud of and the City will be proud of as well.”
Developer did state that materials will be hardie board (cement board), brick and stone….no vinyl siding.
All NON-combustible products.
https://www.jameshardie.com/blog/siding-durability/fire-resistant-siding/
https://www.gobrick.com/media/file/16-fire-resistance-of-brick-masonry.pdf
https://www.realstonesystems.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Fire-Rating-of-Stone-1.pdf
Obviously the best protection to not having home fires is to not build homes, leaving the property bare dirt. However, with a national building standard of 5 feet separation (that would allow for any siding including wood and vinyl) and considering there are 210 townhomes 22′ wide each in 2, 3 and 4 clusters that are only separate by a sheetrock wall…being approved by the fire marshal.
Having 59 detached units 30′ wide with 15′ separation AND using NON-Combustible exterior products – this waiver does not seem like a far reach.
Anonymous.
1. The statement that “the best protection to not having home fires is to not build homes, leaving the property bare dirt” seems like a kneejerk statement that reflects a bias against existing conditions; a seemingly complete aversion to recognizing what is present and what will be lost.
Almost no development is proposed to be constructed on what is now “bare dirt.” The bare dirt is exposed during site preparation—in some cases so irresponsibly that neighbors have to eat dust for weeks on end; as in this case:
https://aikenchronicles.com/2023/05/03/dust-storm-in-an-incentive-zone/
A similar situation is ongoing at a development along Vaucluse Road above the junction with the bypass. Fortunately there is nobody directly across the road, like the one in the cited case who had to keep their windows closed in spring while their HVAC home was being sandblasted and their HVAC system was being clogged with dirt.
This Rutland Place development is on land that is now ~40 acres of open field and ~10 acres of maturing pine forest. That is what will be lost. For many long-time residents, that property will long be remembered for being productive agricultural land, most noted by a long-time seasonal roadside fruit and vegetable stand along Edgefield Highway that was there year after year. During peach season there were always cars stopping. The forestland will be clearcut and occupied by a suburban landscape, adding to the ongoing decline of forest cover that is most evident in the western portion of Aiken County. Overall, it is a loss of rural character that adds to the ongoing widespread discontent with the City’s and County’s direction.
So please do not present inane, false choices like “bare dirt or homes” in the future.
2. Still, thank you for the information. It is important that the comments of the potential developer, who sounded like they have an option to buy the property, be heard. Those comments are now in an update, verbatim from the very accurate meeting minutes.
But three notes on those comments:
a. The representative declined to disclose the name of the developer; therefore its track record cannot be investigated.
b. The developer could change. They have an option to buy, but they have not bought yet. That PSA could probably be assigned to another developer.
c. The rep did not speak until the end, only after one Council member asked when they will hear from the developer, not just the existing property owner. The rep did not say they “will” use noncombustible or even less combustible materials than inferred to by the Fire Marshall. He said they intend to use them, and then left a loophole that added to that noncomittment. Here is the portion of the minutes where he spoke:
“ Bryan DeBruin, 16 Wellington Avenue, Greenville, SC, stated he represents the development group. They will purchase the property and intend to develop it. Regarding the specific question regarding the fire rating, we do infill development in four different counties now.
On the multi- family side, we do that. We have not had to do that on a residential home. We consider both single-family attached, townhomes as well as the attached product to be residential so they would not have sprinklers. They would meet the residential building code standards.
While it seems like a really easy fix just to create a higher standard on the rating, from a building perspective and affordability component every time you make a change to this product and every time you make a change to the home, there are a lot of other what ifs that happen such as the supply chain, etc.
He said he would be concerned and would not be able to give that assurance because we don’t know if we could do that and where that would go. It might be a harder hardship for the construction of the home to do it that way than it would be for the reduction of lots.”
Echoing the comments from others, the Aiken City Council’s abrogation of the most rudimentary standards of public safety and ethical development is shocking but not surprising. With the standards for development drawn from the ideology of the cancer cell, we can expect to see more sick growth and more accommodations to the mercenary school of modern development that prizes intense housing density and the shoehorning of buildings onto lots so as to maximize the profit, (safety, quality of life, and societal benefits be damned).
This compromise of public safety is shocking, but not surprising, given the predilection of City Council to bow the knee to any developer who happens along with an outrageous demand. Shame on the five CC members who decided to place pleasing the developer above common sense and the pleas of Aiken’s Public Safety Director and Fire Marshall (The Fumbling Five being Gail Diggs, Lessie Price, Kay Brohl, Ed Girardeau, and Andrea Gregory). Speaking of common sense, it’s highly improbable that denial of the request would have resulted in the developer withdrawing the project, since the impact in terms of dwelling units to be built is roughly 1%.
I’m guessing if this were a south side, Woodside-type development, there would be no conversation about 15-20 feet between houses. I am a social conservative, but wonder if there is some prejudice showing when considering and approving developer ideas for the north and east side. Are council members thinking as long as it is not in my back yard, you can pack those houses as close together as you want.
That was my thought as well. And when houses are packed in like this you end up with a tenement look that will be just another eyesore after the paint fades.
We establish codes for public safety for a reason.
Our City Council displayed casual disregard for public safety by granting yet another developer a waiver of code in the interest of the developer’s business plan. 20 feet of separation is essential in protecting life and property in a fire. That seemingly insignificant 5 feet can be the difference between a controlled fire outcome and a multi building inferno. Our police and fire public safety experts were steadfast in their support of the 20 foot code. Our City Council seems to feel that their expertise in fire safety is greater than the Police and Fire Chiefs.
If a fire does occur at this location in the future, any injury, death or multi-building conflagration will be on the City Council.
Is this leadership or outright ignorance that prevailed in the code alteration? Those people who voted to pass the variance will likely be gone when the Council is called to account for this absurd variance.
I’ll eat my hat if anything in Rutland Place resembles the rendering at Figure 1. Just another example of bait and switch. And our Council and Commissions keep falling for it.
There is effectively no zoning and no land use policy and no comprehensive planning in Aiken — city or county. The fix is in and the palace guards are corrupt.
Why should anyone be surprised that this concept plan passed. No one there seems to be AT ALL concerned with public safety. How sad is that! It’s always all about the money. So when there is a fire down the road, and someone dies, maybe then they will realize their stupidity in justifying said plan and will think twice before they approve another.