Category Archives: Traffic & Safety

Aiken County, City Government, Development Issues, November 2023, Stormwater and Flooding, Traffic & Safety, Trees and Deforestation

New Shopping Opportunity and Tiny Lots.

6 Comments

Plans for another dollar store and suburban-style, high-density housing development along the Highway One gateway corridor.

by Don Moniak
November 14, 2023
Updated November 15, 2023.

Tonight’s City of Aiken Planning Commission meeting agenda includes two proposed new developments along U.S. Hwy 1 North: a request for city water and sewer service for a new dollar store across from Aiken Regional Airport, and a ninety-acre, 333-home subdivision with a typical lot size of 0.14 acres.

The two projects are likely to further stir ongoing debate and discussion over both the proliferation of dollar chain stores, suburban-style development, and how Whiskey Road-style sprawl occurs incrementally.

New Shopping Opportunity

Visitors flying into Aiken Regional Airport for the Master’s Tournament and other local pleasure and business activities will likely soon have a new shopping opportunity only one-third of a mile from the airport exit; and local residents will likely have an alternative to the nearby Dollar General.

Agenda item D on the Planning Commission’s agenda is a “City Services Request for Family Dollar Tree, 2530 Columbia Highway North, by Runway FDT.” Since Dollar Trees and Family Dollars have the same corporate owner, whether a Family Dollar or a Dollar Tree store is en route remains unknown.

(Update: The dollar store proposal passed without comment, and the future store was identified as a combined Family Dollar and Dollar Tree).

The proliferation of chain dollar stores across Aiken County is a source of both local amusement and disgruntlement. Contrary to popular perception, many of these newer stores are in the unincorporated lands in Aiken County, not within Aiken City limits.

For example, the new Dollar General stores on Hampton Avenue, at the corner of Chukker Creek Road and Whiskey Road, and on East Pine Log Road all enjoy city services but are situated just outside of city limits. One benefit to DG of these locations is the avoidance of paying city business license taxes—at least until the properties are annexed.

This latest dollar store, located on the northern edge of an established commercial stretch zoned as Urban Development by Aiken County, will be just under four miles north of the City of Aiken’s Generations Park. The property is directly across from Aiken Regional Airport, and within the airport’s restrictive noise and height zones. (Figure 1) While the most recent Aiken County market value appraisal of the 1.8 acre property was for only $35,110, it was sold this past March for $250,000.

The City of Aiken envisions the Highway One corridor as an attractive gateway into Aiken. While the airport provides a broad, pleasant vista, the presence of another dollar store 0.4 miles south of a Dollar General could add to the perception that the Highway One corridor, where locally owned businesses once prevailed, is becoming increasingly generic in nature.

Scene of proposed new Dollar General or Dollar Tree store.

A 2021 Consumer Reports article on the massive growth and presence of the two dollar store chains across the country also describes how some local governments have put a pause on these developments, or otherwise placed restrictions on dollar store densities and locations. At the same time, the authors reiterate the case that, in many areas there are few other choices as the prospects for locally owned general stores continues to grow dimmer.

Aiken County has minimal restrictions; and the one-two punch of lax restrictions and easy access to the Aiken water district’s water and sewer infrastructure further enables the corporate giants to expand their presence.

A Northside Annexation with Tiny Lots

Just under five miles along Highway One, a much more significant proposed development will be heard by the Planning Commission. Midland Valley Developers, LLC, a Fayetteville, Georgia based firm which incorporated in March 2023, is proposing to annex 90.45 acres of unincorporated lands classed as forestry and agricultural into the City of Aiken; and redevelop it into a 333-home subdivision. Two tracts totaling almost three acres and fronting Hwy 1 are proposed for commercial use.

The annexation involves five property owners whose parcels will be purchased and consolidated by Midland Valley Developers if the rezoning and concept plan is forwarded to, and approved by, Aiken City Council.

The subdivision will border Crosland Park, Osbon Drive, and Mayfield Drive. The latter two roads are flanked by 0.7 to 1.5 acre lots described by the Planning Department’s (PD) memo as “rural residential,” and are situated outside of city limits. Crosland Park is dominated by lots ranging from a quarter to one-third of an acre, and is entirely within city limits.

The design and engineering firm is Hussey Gay Bell, a regional engineering and architectural firm that boasts of “impactful projects” across the Southeast “that are the antithesis of mundane.” The company conducted a community meeting on November 9th in Crosland Park. Also attending was Midland Valley Developers representative Chad Gibson.

Tiny Lots

The Aiken Planning Department’s project description (Page 47) asserts a subdivision density of 3.68 homes per acre. However subtracting the minimum open space requirements of twenty percent (18.1 acres), and 2.7 acres of proposed commercial tracts, results in a density of 4.78 homes per acre for the remaining 69.6 acres. Subtract the land necessary for new roads and the lot sizes decrease further.

Concept Plan map for the new “May Royal Subdivision.” (Pages 47-78) The areas in light green represent proposed “open space,” which includes five stormwater management ponds (areas with black boundaries).


The density is closer to 7.1 homes per acre, since the concept plan map notes a “typical lot size” of 0.14 acres—about half the size of the typical Crosland Park parcel, and one-fifth to one-tenth the size of the parcels on Osbon and May Royal Drives. According to the community meeting notes, average home prices of $270,000 are anticipated, and neighbors were told that, “due to land costs and the current market and average demand, the smaller lots are needed.” (Page 78) .

In spite of the tiny lot size, the Planning Department (PD) contends in its memo that, due to the “more compatible” density found in Crosland Park, the proposed density provides an “appropriate transition” to the Osbon and Mayfield Drive neighborhoods it describes as “rural residential.”

In terms of housing density, the PD memo also describes Aiken County zoning rules as being more restrictive:

“The existing County’ s Rural Development ( RUD) zoning would allow for a single- family subdivision, but with a 30′ greater lot width than the proposed typical lot size denoted on the concept plan.”

Access Questions

The Planning Department’s memo and the developer’s application both identify three access points for the subdivision: one off Highway 1 North, and two off Osbon Drive. No traffic light is planned at the subdivision’s junction with the five-lanes wide Hwy 1.

Osbon Drive residents are, quite predictably, not excited about a major increase in traffic. One resident wrote to Hussey Gay Bell representative Keith Utheim that access should be off May Royal Drive, and not Osbon Drive:

“Osbon is a quiet, more narrow, less traveled street, and we would like to keep it that way. May Royal, however, is well-traveled seven days a week and is already equipped to handle this type of traffic. The residents are used to 24/ 7 365 traffic. We request that at least one of the entrances/ exits be placed on May Royal leaving only one on Osbon should this project come to fruition.”

Access off May Royal Drive might be hindered by the holdout by a single property owner of a 0.69 acre parcel with a 20-foot wide, 500-foot long access easement. (Figure 3). The property in the northwest quadrant of the proposed development is crossed off from the October 10, 2023, Hussey Gay Bell rezoning request (Figure 4).

Figure 3: Map showing subdivision boundary and inholding. (From Aiken County land database).
Figure 4: Listing of properties in rezoning request, with inholding deleted.

Forestland Buffers

Another key issue raised at the community meeting was that of existing and future forested buffers. Residents along both May Royal and Osbon generally back up to the forested lands proposed for clearcutting (Figures 5 and 6). The developer has offered a forested buffer of twenty-five feet, which is actually fifteen feet more than the “undisturbed buffer” required by the city’s zoning ordinance.

Figure 5: View into future development area from part of Osbon Drive. (Photo: Laura Lance)
Figure 6: View into development area from property along May Royal Drive. (Photo by Laura Lance).


Topography and Storm Water

Missing from the developer’s application is topographical information; a factor identified as a shortcoming during the Planning Commission’s review in October of the latest Old Aiken Hospital redevelopment proposal. (That proposal was unanimously approved by City Council last night.)

The prospect of the threat from increased stormwater runoff has been raised by at least one neighbor whose property is in the “downstream” portion of the drainage area that currently has a protective forest cover.
(Figure 7).

According to the PD’s memo to the Planning Commission, “ downstream stormwater analysis will be required,” but not until the permitting phase; and the same holds true for a probable sewer capacity review.

(Update: The proposal was tabled on Tuesday night by the Planning Commission and a summary of the issues are provided here.)

Figure 7: Topography of proposed subdivision. The property highlighted in red is downstream is one of several in the stormwater runoff path. The developer proposes to mitigate the expected increase in runoff with five stormwater management ponds; which will also double as “open space.”

The Family Dollar/Dollar Tree utility request is likely to be recommended to City Council, as the Planning Commission generally chooses to honor such requests. Residents of Aiken County can then joke about the latest profitable dollar store.

But the commission has recently shown a propensity for increased scrutiny of larger proposals, especially high-density residential plans with limited access.

In September the commission voted unanimously to deny recommending a high-density housing proposal with only one access point on East Richland Avenue. That proposal was strongly opposed by neighbors that included the Aiken Steeplechase Foundation.

In October the commission conducted a lengthy debate over parking, housing density, and affordable housing, among other factors, for the latest Old Aiken County Hospital property concept plan. As described in “What is Reasonable,” the plan was eventually recommended by a vote of 3-2; but the debate sparked a discussion over whether there is a new standard of review, or a double-standard of review. Residents along Mayfield and Osbon Drives, and other area residents who are discontent with the rapid rate of development without adequate infrastructure and conservation of natural areas, are hoping for the former.

Next: Dissent and Confusion in Aiken’s Land Planning Process.

Another example of the backyard views of Osbon Drive residents. (Photo by Laura Lance)
City Government, Development Issues, Planning & Development, Public Safety, Traffic & Safety

Gas Stations, Vice Stores, and Public Safety

4 Comments

Parker’s Kitchen and the near absence of public safety and security reviews in the planning process.

by Don Moniak

June 11, 2023

Gas stations and convenience stores are common scenes of criminal acts. Some are planned, like robberies, shoplifting, and small time grifting like quick-change artists. More are impulsive, such as assaults, robberies of individuals, and car burglaries. The risks are highest for employees, most of the incidents occur at night and early morning, and nearby neighborhoods can provide escape routes.

These risk factors seldom enter the public debate over new gas station and convenient store developments, nor any other developments. The proposed Parker’s Kitchen at Stratford and Whiskey Road is no exception.

The Proposed Parker’s Kitchen at Stratford and Whiskey.

Parker’s Kitchen applied to the City of Aiken to build a 5,175 square foot, 24-hour gas station/convenience store/restaurant with eight gas station pump islands fronting Whiskey Road. The proposal has met with strong resistance from neighbors.

The public debate features many legitimate issues, including increased traffic at an unsafe intersection, single road access to large neighborhoods, property values, the risk of major accidents, chemical exposures, and the zoning ordinance itself. As a result, the approval process has stalled.

One overlooked risk factor for nearby residents, workers, and customers is crime. Two facets are armed robberies and lower level crimes.

Armed Robberies

Gas stations are a common target for unsophisticated thieves and robbers. The number of armed robberies involving gas stations in the Aiken area include large, 24-hour establishments like the Circle K at Exit 22, Enmark on Hwy 78, and the new Sprint Station at Laurens and Rutland (1) .

These armed robberies sometimes end in assaults, shootings and murders. Low wage employees in chain stores are taught the proper policy of nonresistance, but are still at extreme risk of harm.

Robbers often escape on foot, sometimes into nearby neighborhoods where there are sheds, crawl spaces, woods, and other places to hide.

For a short period in the early to mid 2000’s, the Breaker’s Station at Six Points (below) was robbed two to three times per year. (3) On at least two occasions law enforcement converged on neighborhoods within 500 feet. In one instance it was a resident who alerted the police to a man hiding in his shed.

The instances of robbery and the threat to nearby residences greatly subsided after the owners began to close earlier and cleared the area behind the store. Better cameras were added, but cameras mainly help catch unsophisticated robbers, but do not necessarily deter them.

Breakers Gas Station and Convenience Store at intersection of Trolley Line Road, Vaucluse Road, Hampton Avenue and Shore Drive.

Lower Level Crime.

Almost all gas stations have convenient stores which generate the greatest share of profits. Convenient stores can be described as “Vice Stores,” since their primary inventory is alcohol, tobacco, sugary, salt, and caffeinated food, and Lotto. Some openly sell drug paraphanelia.

The effect is that ‘Vice Store’ establishments do attract people with personal problems ranging from substance abuse and gambling addiction. These are known factors that can lead to crime.

Another variable is that everyone who drives needs to refuel, including people with bad intentions. The nearer the neighborhood, the more likely it is to be targeted by someone with criminal intent and little sophistication.

Smaller robberies and assaults at gas stations used to be commonly reported in the days of “police blotters” (3) and occasionally are reported when more serious crime happens—-such as a shooting or the recent assault resulting from an argument over a squat-style truck.

Public Safety Reviews of New Developments.

All development applications go through planning departments.
The City of Aiken’s planning department has a process whereby each department is charged with reviewing the application and providing feedback.

An example of such a review (below) involved the Sundy Street apartments proposal in North Aiken.

Public Safety Review of Sundy Street Apartments.

Public Safety registered no concerns. But enough public safety concerns were raised by neighbors during the Planning Commission’s (PC) hearing that the developer offered to build a fence around the new apartments, (4), and the PC added it as a condition of approval.

In response to a Freedom of Information Request (5) for engineering and public safety reviews for Parker’s Kitchen, a thorough memo from engineering was provided, but there was no review by public safety in the FOIA response.

The basic fact is, gas stations/convenient stores experience robberies and other lower level crimes. An review of these risk factors should be part of any planning review process. For Parker’s Kitchen, the City of Aiken has provided no evidence of a review.

This Circle K on Hitchcock Parkway is one of many targets for armed robbers, and has been robbed in recent years.

This 24-hour Sprint Station was robbed on 1/1/2021.

Footnotes

(1) A short list of gas station/convenient store robberies in recent years.

6/11/19; 678 Pine Log Road, Circle K; 4:55 a.m

https://www.postandcourier.com/aikenstandard/news/police-asking-for-help-identifying-suspect-in-armed-robbery-at-aiken-gas-station/article_db1d0ce3-1935-59c5-bbb3-fb62b200fe37.html

6/6/20 Enmark on Charleston Highway, 4 a.m

https://www.postandcourier.com/aikenstandard/news/suspect-wanted-for-early-morning-robbery-of-aiken-gas-station/article_25b74a67-c951-53cc-b60a-c88ee1aeea22.html

1/1/2021, Sprint Gas Station, Laurens Street,

https://www.postandcourier.com/aikenstandard/news/crime/aiken-man-charged-in-armed-robbery-on-laurens-street/article_1d86b85c-0b3a-11ec-a759-4f58aed5d9f5.html

1/31/2020. Circle K. 2645 Columbia Highway, 2:25 a.m.

https://www.postandcourier.com/aikenstandard/news/police-investigating-two-robberies-in-aiken-county/article_ba41ff47-d14f-5ca2-8dfd-ccde7a727c44.html

1/14/2019 Unnamed convenience store, Wagener, SC 9:13 a.m

https://www.postandcourier.com/aikenstandard/news/deputies-seeking-wagener-armed-robbery-suspect/article_f6003810-0c11-5b9c-84ab-0a279d2a2fa6.html

4/18/2022. El Cheapo, North Augusta, 5 p.m.

https://www.postandcourier.com/aikenstandard/news/police-investigating-two-robberies-in-aiken-county/article_ba41ff47-d14f-5ca2-8dfd-ccde7a727c44.html

Page one results for a specific search on WFXG-FOX Augusta for ‘Gas Station Robberies’

(2) Don Moniak resided near Six Points for over a decade. His neighbor reported the man in the shed to police.

(3)Entry from September 5, 2018 police blotter in the Aiken Standard;

“Man called police from a gas station on Richland Avenue on Saturday claiming someone who goes by the name “Cory” assaulted him and robbed him. Officers reported the man was grossly intoxicated.”

This is just one example of dozens.

(4) After the developer agreed to build a fence, neighbor Gail Diggs called from the audience, ‘we want an 8-Foot fence.’ Ms. Diggs is a City Councilwoman who recused herself from the process, and helped fellow neighbors who had never spoken at a public hearing approach the podium to raise their concerns.

(5) FOIA Request #50-2023 was for;

1. Copies of any and all departmental reviews, including but not limited to Public Safety, Engineering and Utilities, and Public Works/Services, for all applications—-excluding annexations of single parcels—submitted to the Aiken Planning Department between December 1, 2022 and present. These reviews were cited by Planning Director Marya Moultrie during the February 14, 2023 Planning Commission meeting: “…engineering Public Safety Traffic Engineers we have to vet these against our own zoning ordinances.” Ms. Moultrie also described the existence of a public safety review of the Sundy Street apartments application, and stated “they had no concerns,” during the PC’s work session held prior to the meeting. 2. A copy of all traffic studies completed by city contractors or submitted by developers since September 1, 2022.”

After a fee determination of $138 for recent records, the request was modified to include only public safety and engineering reviews for two active applications; Parker’s Kitchen and Sundy Street Apartments.

Below is the only response for Parker’s Kitchen, a memo from Engineering detailing a number of requirements. This resulted from a developers meeting in October 2022, two month before the application was submitted. The memo is not part of the official City Council record.

Engineering input on Parker’s Kitchen, October 2022

Aiken County, April 2023, City Government, Development Issues, Public Safety, Traffic & Safety

From Fuel Tanker Fires to an Overdue Report

2 Comments

The Risk of Fuel Tanker Fires, A Water Guzzling Plant, Another Denial of Public Comment and Inquiry, and the Overdue SRNL feasability study.

by Don Moniak
April 24, 2023

Parker’s Kitchen Convenience Store and Gas Station at Stratford and Whiskey Road

The most contentious issue on Monday night’s City Council meeting will likely be the first reading of Savannah-based Parker’s Kitchen plan for a its third convenience and fuel store, this one at the corner of Whiskey Road and Stratford Drive. The proposal and developer’s application was first reported in Introducing Parker’s Kitchen. Since that report, the City of Aiken planning department has refused to release developers’ applications when Public Hearings are announced.

A few key issues that have emerged since the application was submitted include the facts that:

1. The developer met with City staff from the planning, economic development, and engineering departments two months before submitting their application. Engineering department requests made in the memo were either not completed in the initial application, or not made public; i.e. the requirement that a stormwater checklist be submitted in the initial submission. This document, obtained via a FOIA request, was either not provided to the Planning Commission nor City Council, or withheld from public disclosure.

2. Neither the engineering nor Department of Public Safety reviewed the actual application, contrary to Planning Director Marya Moultrie’s claims that reviews are a routine procedure that precludes public release of applications when public hearings are announced (1)

On January 10th the Planning Commission (PC) heard the case in a public hearing, but first met in work session to discuss the application; which is arguably an Open Meetings violation. According to the meeting minutes, the PC “clarified that it is not appropriate for members of the public to make statements or ask questions, although the Commission is able to ask questions of applicants who are present.” In this system, citizens are spectators, and developers are participants.

At the PC hearing, about fifteen neighbors from the subdivisions accessible only via Stratford Drive spoke either in opposition to the plan or questioned the plan. There was no support for the plan, but the PC recommended it to City Council by a 5-2 vote.

Among the concerns raised that day and likely to be raised again, some by Savannah River Site (SRS) employees who are constantly focused on safety and the possiblity of accidents, were:

a. The Stratford Drive entrance, the only one that accesses a traffic signal on a notoriously busy road, could be blocked by any accident, which would negatively impact emergency response time. One of those possible accident scenarios is a tanker fire, such as the one that recently occurred on the eastbound off-ramp at Exit 18 of I-20 and closed the exit for several hours. To aggravate that situation, another tractor-trailer overturned just one mile west of the exit shortly after the tanker fire began.

Nicole Drey, who identified herself as an HOA, and a mechanical engineer at SRS where worse case scenarios are routinely analyzed, stated:

“There is only have one entrance and exit coming into Stratford for the villas for Springstone and Stratford Hall. If there’s any kind of there’s any event, whether a tanker has an accident or explosion, we are stuck.”

b. The presence of a convenience store and gas station, combined with other recent commercial developments, will lower property values—a very difficult contention to prove without a detailed appraisal study.

c. Twenty years ago City Council passed a concept plan for the property that excluded the possibility of car washes, petroleum stations. People bought homes and property when those conditions were in place, but Council overruled that when it approved the LuLu’s Car Wash, and now claims:

“Since no building permits were issued within 5 years of the original commercial component of the concept plan approval, the 2003 concept plan approval for the commercial component expired.” (City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh memorandum to City Council, Page 53)

d. On March 27th, Parker’s Kitchen representative and former Goose Creek city planner Daniel Ben-Yisrael lobbied Aiken City Council for a hearing on their proposal. While not illegal, it was a breach of the planning process protocol, as developers should refrain from lobbying Council outside of the official process. The exchange, which began at the 21:30 mark of the meeting and featured eight interruptions by Mayor Osbon, lasted 4.5 minutes—1.5 minutes past the allowable comment time.

Mr. Ben-Yisrael was both correct and incorrect on one key point, that it was his understanding that traffic studies did not have to be final and approved before being heard by Aiken City Council. Another project being held up by a traffic study is the Sundy Street apartment complex proposed by a Charleston-area developer.

However, this is not typically the case. Two notable examples of this double standard on traffic studies include the Silver Bluff Shopping Center (2) and the Rutland Drive rental townhomes development. The former is a Village at Woodside project. Seven months after a traffic study was promised, and five months after it was ordered, the study remains incomplete. Yet, the project was unanimously approved without any submitted traffic study.

The owner of the Rutland Drive property includes former Aiken County assistant administrator and North Augusta City Manager Todd Glover— who addressed the Planning Commission and Council during the three hearings that preceded unanimous approval. The traffic study for that project is also incomplete.

This dichotomy suggests one standard for large, connected, local developers and another standard for smaller, downstate developers. The traffic management ordinance itself defines a single standard that says traffic studies shall be submitted during the approval process:

“Where required by section 42-178, a traffic impact analysis study shall be submitted as part of any request for approval of a site plan change, an annexation, a rezoning to a category that allows more intense uses than currently allowed on the site, a major subdivision, a concept plan for a tract zoned commercial or planned unit development, or a request for city services except where the subject property is already developed and no redevelopment is proposed. This article shall apply to any new development or change to an existing site.” (City Code, Article VI, 42-176(a).

The standard for requiring a study is 100 trips during the peak hours of 7-9 a.m and 4-6 p.m. There is no specified consideration of existing traffic, or recognition of inherent safety risks at intersections or blind curves.

Water Guzzling Data Center.

As reported in “Is Google Coming to Aiken County, “ Aiken County Council approved an agreement with an unnamed tech company to build a Data Center in the Sage Mill Industrial Park area; where the County also has $5 million to spend from the SRS/plutonium settlement.

In short, the agreement lists only the benefits of the project—50 jobs and an $800 million investment—but not the costs. The latter likely includes the need for hundreds of thousands of gallons of water, although the necessary amount is as secret as the name of the involved company.

County Council negotiated this deal without openly divulging information on the known and potential environmental costs.

According to the Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC), this area is subject to newer groundwater extraction regulations as part of the relatively new “Western Capacity Area,” as well as surface water withdrawal rules. The DHEC web page on the subject states”

“Groundwater withdrawal permits are required to withdraw and use groundwater equal to or greater than three million gallons in any month in the counties in these areas.”

Another Denial of Public Comment and Inquiry.

At the second reading of the Data Center, public comment was accepted but questions were prohibited.

On April 11th, during deliberation of a change in its by-laws, the City of Aiken Planning Commission denied any citizen comments or input during a public hearing when the by-laws were on the agenda. After introducing the agenda item, Chairman Ryan Reynolds stated,
at the 35 minute mark of the Public Hearing in which the by-law amendments were on the agenda: 

“This is not necessarily a discussion for the public” 

While the changes were minor, barring citizen input during any announced Public Hearing simply sets a bad precedent.

The Overdue Feasibility Report

On February 6th, Aiken Corporation Consultant K.J. Jacobs, of the architectural firm McMillan, Pazden, and Smith, provided a timeline (below) for a “feasibility study” of the proposed Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) downtown office complex. The draft preliminary report was due in mid-April and the second public meeting for the first week of May. To date there have been no reports issued and no public meetings scheduled. No new website has been announced, and the Aiken Corporation website is not updated.

To comment on the SRNL plan, write to nationallabaikenproject@mcmillanpazdensmith.com


Footnotes:

(1) The claim was made at about the 1:19:30 mark of the February 14, 2023 Planning Commission meeting. The meeting minutes indicate that

“Ms. Moultrie responded that the items on the agendas are still being vetted between the time that the application is received and the time it is heard so the applications cannot be shared in advance of meetings.”

The actual transcipt is as follows:

“Applications are submited 35 days ahead of time because there’s an extreme amount of vetting that has to occur. Just because we put legal ad out does not mean any of those applications have been vetted. These staff members don’t happen by Magic, we have to submit them to engineering, public safety, traffic engineers. We have to vet these against our own zoning ordinances.”

A FOIA request for staff reviews of the Parker’s Kitchen at Stratford proposal yielded only the notes from the October 2022 developer’s meeting and a January 5, 2023 memo from the city’s traffic studies consultant.

(2) Disclosure; I have worked as independent researcher on the Silver Bluff shopping center case in a paid capacity. Neither this article nor the FOIA request were billed.