Category Archives: Planning & Development

City Government, February 2023, Planning & Development, Public Safety

Development First, Public Safety Second?

5 Comments

The Left Hand Turn at Fire Station #4
by Don Moniak

February 13, 2023

Since September 2022, Aiken city officials have endorsed a proposed shopping center with 339 parking spaces, anchored by an unknown grocery store. Located along Silver Bluff Road, the shopping center will be bounded to the south by the Village at Woodside, face a residential neighborhood, Pin Oak Village, to the west, back up to Woodside Plantation to the east, and abut Aiken Public Safety’s Fire Station Number Four to the north.

A traffic signal at Pascalis Place and Silver Bluff Road, adjacent to the fire station, is proposed by the developer to manage the expected increased traffic. Aiken Public Safety fire crews will be able to control the traffic light during emergencies. According to city officials and the developer, a safety issue already exists at the station—a difficult left-hand turn during busy traffic periods. During a public meeting on January 9, 2023, Aiken Mayor Rick Osbon suggested the City of Aiken could not improve safety at the Fire Station unless the shopping center is developed.

The Access Agreement

Nearly three months after approving a new six-acre shopping center development on Silver Bluff Road, Aiken City Council will likely approve another piece of the development. On the agenda for Council’s February 13, 2023, meeting is “Second Reading of an Ordinance Authorizing the City of Aiken to Enter Into an Agreement with Peach Properties, Inc.”

The agreement will grant the project’s main developer, Peach Properties of Columbia, “a nonexclusive easement for access to and from the proposed shopping center property to access a signalized intersection at Silver Bluff Road and Pascalis Place,” through Aiken Department of Public Safety’s Fire Station Number Four. The station houses the closest engine and staff for a large area that includes unincorporated parts of Aiken County such as the Creekside neighborhood and Richardson Lake Road.

A new traffic signal is necessary due to the further anticipated traffic increase. The developer’s proposal is for a traffic signal at the junction of the existing fire station entrance, Silver Bluff Road, and Pascalis Place; with control of the signal from the fire station during emergency calls. Although the developers claimed a traffic study was underway as far back as September 13, 2022, no such study or even preliminary data has been disclosed.

With the granting of the easement, the entranceway to the fire station will also accomodate customers exiting and entering the shopping center. The traffic study that is a stated condition for final approval of the shopping center has yet to be completed, so there are no estimates on traffic volume on Silver Bluff Road and how it could impact emergency response times from the fire station.

Even without the shopping center, increased traffic from the past two decades of development on Silver Bluff Road, involving hundreds of new homes at Pin Oak Village, Colleton Place, and Village at Woodside, has already contriburted to an existing safety issue at Fire Station Number Four.

Pin Oak/Colleton Place Planned Residential Development, Approved in 2005. Bottom Photo 2012, Top Photo 2021. (1) The 4.8 acre area in blue is approved for annexation as part of a larger shopping center. Fire Station #4 is to the right.


Village at Woodside Planned Residential Development, also approved in 2005. Top photo is 2012, Bottom Photo from 2021.


An Existing Safety Issue

During Aiken City Council’s first reading of the ordinance authorizing the development, on September 26, 2022, Aiken resident Preston Rahe (2) identified among his many concerns : “increased traffic will make emergency response slower and more difficult.” Sentiments about increased traffic were also raised by numerous other speakers.

Peach Properties representative Brad Shell spoke soon after, and assured City Council this was not the case:

“In addition, a traffic light is being proposed at the intersection of Pascalis (Place) and Silver Bluff (Road) near the Fire Station. Currently that intersection without a traffic signal performs poorly from a DOT perspective at certain times of the day, particularly if one is trying to make a left turn. With a traffic signal there,that problem would be alleviated. At times a left turn out of the Fire Station, particularly at peak hours, is difficult. With the traffic signal, the Fire Station would have the ability to control the signal to stop all traffic to allow them to get out and go quickly to emergency calls.”

City Councilman Ed Girardeau later echoed Baldwin’s assertion, stating:

” There are positives. The traffic signal for Pascalis getting out to the left is a positive. For the Fire Station to be able to flip a switch and turn the traffic signal on and get out of the station and onto Silver Bluff is a positive one.” 

Shell and Girardeau did not acknowledge the probability of traffic backing up between the proposed light and the fire station exit, whether due to an existing red light or a red light triggered from the station. How will fire station personnel control traffic stuck between the light and the fire station?

Location of the proposed new traffic signal at the intersection of Silver Bluff Road, Pascalis Place, and the entrance to Fire Station #4. (Aiken County Property and Maps database photo).


An emergency traffic signal exists at APS Station 3 on West Richland Avenue in North Aiken, but this signal is directly in front of the station’s exit. (3)

Aiken Public Safety Fire Station #3 on West Richland Avenue, showing emergency traffic signals at the station’s exit. (Google Earth Photo)


Unlike the Richland Avenue emergency traffic signal, the Silver Bluff traffic signal will not be at the station’s exit, and an emergency signal is not planned. The distance from Fire Station #4 exit to the probable stopping point at the new traffic signal is at least 65 feet, and 105 feet from the signal itself. With an average car length of 15 feet, more than five vehicles could occupy south bound travel and turn lanes on Silver Bluff, and obstruct an emergency responder making a left turn.

The area between Fire Station #4 exit and the stop line for the proposed traffic signal. (Google Earth Photo)

“Seconds Count.”

These issues were raised again during City Council’s first reading of the fire station easement ordinance on January 9, 2023, when Preston Rahe stated:

“The addition of a traffic light at Pascalis Place creates a new hazard to vehicles  leaving the fire station. A steady stream of shopping center customers entering and leaving the center significantly increases the risk of an accident between an emergency vehicle and a civilian vehicle. Even if the traffic light is controlled by the fire station, it is not at the fire station, it is 105 feet away. An emergency vehicle that leaves the fire station may be blocked from turning by cars already stopped at that traffic light.”

Aiken resident John Veldman added, among his many points:

“A safer design would place the signal in front of APS Station 4, rather than the proposed design which features a signal 100 feet away. Placing the light in front of APS Station 4, would eliminate the moving vehicles that our Public Safety Officers would have to deal with as they respond to an emergency where seconds count.”

Peach Properties representative Brad Shaw countered by stating the fire station will have “total control” of the intersection, while still admitting the existing situation is often unsafe.

“The signal allows the fire station to have total control over that light over the entire intersection actually so they can stop traffic in all four ways to get out. Right now I believe they have a tough time making a left-hand turn at busy hours, and this will certainly enable them to control traffic.”

But the “total control” contention was not entirely supported by Aiken Public Safety Director Charles Barranco, who only acknowledged the proposal would be a “better situation” than the current scenario. The ideal safety arrangement has yet to be defined by city officials.

The following dialogue, which can be viewed in its entirety here, occurred after Aiken Mayor asked Chief Barranco to address the public safety concerns:

Mayor Osbon: “Obviously there’s a lot of comments of potential stacking at the light. I know this is something that your staff and you have looked at it.  I mean you feel comfortable, this is something you’re endorsing?”

Chief Barranco: “Having control of the intersection in all directions, and our emergency response vehicles have lights and siren on them as well, we believe it’s a better situation than what we currently have as far as accessing Silver Bluff Road in general.” 

Don Moniak: “What is the ideal situation then, safety wise? What would be ideal there? If the developer wasn’t coming, what would be the solution for the traffic on Silver Bluff Road?”

Mayor Osbon: “What would be the ideal?  I don’t think we have the budget to do the intersection, so this is  a solution of the developer.” 

In the absence of the major shopping center development, the City of Aiken is not even contemplating any improvements to mitigate an acknowledged, existing safety issue—the increasingly difficult left turn from Fire Station Four onto Silver Bluff Road.

The City of Aiken’s strategy for improving safety is essentially to first authorize an increase in vehicle traffic, and then rely upon the developers to solve the problem they are creating, even if that solution is far less than ideal. The City’s planning process appears strongly biased towards accommodating the desires of developers, not public safety needs.


Footnotes:

(1) All aerial photographs are from the Aiken County real property information and maps database.

(2) Edward Preston Rahe is one of two plaintiffs, along with John Veldman, in an appeal filed against the City of Aiken contesting the approval of the ordinances authorizing annexation of property for the proposed shopping center, and the Village at Woodside’s amended concept plan for the property.

Disclosure: Don Moniak is an independent researcher under contract to assist with the appeal. This article is not a part of that contract.

(3) The effectiveness of the Station Three emergency signal is compromised by two factors:
a. West Richland Avenue is a 45 mph zone where drivers frequently exceed 50 mph.
b. The light is only 450 feet west of a double traffic light at the intersections of Gregg Avenue and Summit Drive, at the top of a hill. Drivers travelling west bound are prone to speeding over the hill to beat the red light, and the fire station awaits 450 feet below the light.

(4) The January 9, 2023, first reading occurred from minutes 56:50 to and can be seen in the archived live stream on the City of Aiken’s You Tube channel.

City Government, December 2022, Planning & Development

Introducing: Parker’s Kitchen Convenience Store, and “Whiskey Road Apartments.”

Leave a comment

by Don Moniak 

December 21, 2022

The City of Aiken Planning Commission will likely open business in 2023 by recommending approval of a new convenient store and a new 76-unit apartment complex on Whiskey Road. A public notice (1) was published this past Monday, December 19th, announcing a January 10, 2023, public hearing before the commission for: 

  • An application for a utility request at Whiskey Road and Dominion Drive by Cranston Engineering Group;
  • A concept plan approval request by Drayton Parker Companies for a property at Whiskey Road and Stratford Drive; and 
  • An annexation request for 1804 Pine Log Road near Hound’s Lake. 

Parker’s Kitchen, Southside

The concept plan application from Drayton Parker Company is for a Parker’s Kitchen convenient store and eight pump service station to be located at the junction of Whiskey Road, Stratford Drive, and Powderhouse Road. This is the second Parker’s Kitchen planned for Aiken. The first one, on Richland Avenue below Sam’s Club, gained approval from Aiken City Council in May, 2022. Parker’s Kitchen is presently a chain of seventy convenient stores concentrated in the Savannah, Charleston, and Statesboro areas. 

Unlike the Richland Avenue location at the long vacant, former Dick Smith auto dealership, the second Parker’s Kitchen will necessitate clearcutting and grading an undeveloped 2.6 acre forested tract that is 300 feet east of the Springstone Villas neighborhood. The company estimates a volume of more than 1,000 vehicles at their new location.

The parcel is one-quarter of a 11.6-acre area purchased in 2019 for $1.4 million by Lulu’s Holdings of South Carolina, LLC (agent: Robert Black), and later subdivided into four lots. 

The other three lots are: 

  • A 2.7 acre tract fronting Whiskey Road where a Lulu’s Car Wash is under construction.
  • An undeveloped, forested 5.3 acre tract presently providing a 275-foot wide buffer between Springhouse Villas and the two properties fronting Whiskey Road, but could be developed next.
  • A 1.1 acre “right of way,” appraised by the Aiken County Assessor for $514. 
Lulu’s Holdings of SC properties. Car wash is in SE portion, planned Parker’s Kitchen in NE portion.


The Lulu’s Car Wash was approved as part of an annexation and Planned Commercial concept plan for the entire 11.6 acres. After rejecting the first concept plan, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended a revised version on July 14, 2020, in spite of a petition drive in the Springhouse and Stratford Hall neighborhoods that garnered more than 200 signatures.  City Council followed suit with a unanimous approval.

A subsequent lawsuit was dismissed when the judge ruled the city had not acted outside of its authority and the plaintiffs had not proven the decision was arbitrary and capricious.

Whiskey Road Apartments 

Just under one mile to the south of the developing Lulu’s commercial complex are newly planned apartments. The Whiskey Road Apartment complex city services application shows a 76-unit, three building apartment complex planned on a 6.64 acre parcel across from the junction of Talatha Church and Whiskey Roads, adjacent to the Cornerstone residential neighborhood. (The public notice contained no mention of the busy Talatha Church intersection, opting to list the location only as “Whiskey Road and Dominion Drive.” )

The property is in unincorporated Aiken County, and the developers are only requesting city water and sewer services, and not annexation. Plans show a trio of three-story apartment buildings surrounded by 114 parking spaces, with an entrance via a new spur road located approximately 325 feet south of Talatha Church Road. 

Whiskey Road Apartments Layout and Paving Plan.

Although the current apartments application lists South State Bank as the property owner, county records show that South State Bank sold the property on October 26, 20222 property for $425,000 to Cornerstone Aiken LLC (2) at 742 Trailhead Lane, Fort Mill, SC. This is the same address used by the developer,  Ishvan Realty, LLC (Agent: Venu Parapelli), a SC company incorporated on October 15, 2022. 

In 2020 a new Duke’s Bar-B-Que  Restaurant was proposed on the property. The Planning Commission heard and unanimously approved that application on the same day as the Lulu’s hearing.  There were no objections to the proposal, which was later withdrawn. Unlike the current proposal, the Duke’s application included a traffic study.

Since 2015, other developments within a half- mile of the proposed Whiskey Road Apartments include Summerton Village, the Townhomes at Chukker Creek, a new Dollar General, and the Lotus Park Senior Living Apartment Complex presently under construction.



Whiskey Roads Apartments property. Left photo from 2021, Right photo from 2014. Source: Aiken County

Footnotes

(1) The public notice in the Aiken Standard on December 19, 2022. 

(2) Cornerstone’s registered agent is LegalInc.  Registered Agents, Inc of Charleston, whose agent in turn is United States Corporation Agents, Inc. at the same Charleston address.  The firm’s registered agent is Northwest Registered Agent of Charleston, whose agent in turn is Registered Agents, Inc. at the same Charleston address, who is turn are represented by Northwest Registered Agent. From there the trail remains on a circular path. 

City Government, December 2022, Planning & Development

Aiken Planning Commission Asks Developer for More Pavement,

Leave a comment

And Offers Two City Residents a Red Herring

by Don Moniak

December 14, 2022
Updated February 3, 2023.

As reported in Introducing Powderhouse Crossing and The Parker at Aiken Apartments, the Aiken Planning Commission was scheduled to review, and expected to approve, two annexation and development proposals at its Tuesday, December 13, 2022 meeting: 

  • A 336-unit Apartment Complex on thirty-acres near USC-Aiken and along Gregg Highway named The Parker at Aiken; to be zoned as “planned residential” in accordance with city policy for residential developments greater than four acres.
  • An eleven tract equestrian subdivision of thirty-three acres—-of which 4.5 acres requires annexation—-along Powderhouse Road named Powderhouse Crossing; also to be zoned as “planned residential.”

As expected, Tuesday night the Planning Commission unanimously approved the 336-unit Parker at Aiken “luxury garden” apartment complex, but not before requiring the developer to pave more of the property at the expense of the city’s open space requirements. 

Approval of the application to annex 30 acres into the city and construct the 14-building, 336-unit complex already contained nine conditions identified by the city planning department.  The commission revised condition two to require buildings be thirty feet from the property boundary instead of ten feet; and added condition number ten: 

“Item 10 should read 50 (additional) parking spaces minimum. To achieve that a waiver can be granted for a reduction of open space….item 10 to produce or add parking as needed for spots a minimum of 50, dependent on open space requirements that can be reduced as such to achieve a 50 minimum (additional) parking spaces.” (13:45 to 14:15 of the meeting). 

Commissioners reasoned that, because of the number of two and three bedroom apartments, 1.5 parking spaces per unit provided insufficient parking.  Although the concept plan called for 517 parking spaces, “which is 13 more than required,” the planning commission made an arbitrary decision to add more; contradicting the original condition that the developer comply with open space requirements.

Page 4 of Memorandum from Planning Director Marya Moultrie to the Planning Commission

Except for the developer, who offered to answer any questions, no citizens spoke on the proposal.

Update: The decision to add more parking was not made during the public hearing, it was made during the 5-6 p.m. “work session.” During a “review of items on the regular agenda” in the work session, the change in parking requirements was recommended and commissioners concurred to change the proposed ordinance:

“Commissioner Clarkson suggested a change to the Ordinance to require more parking for apartments with more than 2 bedrooms and it was agreed that an Ordinance change should be presented to City Council.” (December 13, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, Page 2)

“Bad Information” and a Red Herring

Powderhouse Crossing also was approved unanimously, after eight
citizens spoke in favor of the proposed equestrian residential development on property recently purchased by Worth Capitol Holding’s Rusty Holzer of the famous and infamous Holzer family (1). The property is adjacent to the Autoneum manufacturing plant, Bruce’s Field equestrian park, and the Virginia Acres (unincorporated portion), Dunbarton Oaks, Ward Hills, and Gatewood neighborhoods. Only one citizen expressed opposition, but only after learning the new subdivision is planned as a gated community.

Three citizens who expressed full support for the development did have some questions and concerns. Aiken city resident and neighbor Randy Cole describing having “moved here a couple of years ago and it looks like a great project. My only concern is when we did move here we were told that was conservation land and it would never be developed, and now it looks like it’s going to be developed.” 

Planning Commission Chairman Ryan Reynolds interrupted to say “I think that’s some bad information.” 

Cole agreed, and went on to say he would “hate to see all the trees go down and I’m looking at the back of a barn where I had the woods.” He did not add that retaining some forestland would also buffer the upscale development from the adjacent neighborhood. (1)

The sentiment was repeated by city resident and neighbor Lisa Skiffington, who expressed a desire for “a restriction where they’d leave some of our trees there since that’s part of the reason we bought.” 

Instead of asking for the developer’s representative to address the issue, Reynolds then actually spoke to the developer’s intent, and offered a red herring as an alternative:

“I’m sure they’ll make every effort to get along with their neighbors but they’ll be able to do what’s in their legal right to do if moving all those trees is within their right. And they have that right to do that right now as planned residential. So they could be putting in a bunch of dense apartments in there right now and they’re not, so try to keep that in mind. But I understand the concern.” 

So minutes after opining to a concerned city resident they had received “bad information,” Chairman Reynolds provided inaccurate information to the only neighbors expressing a concern and who also pay city taxes. Neither the planning director nor commissioners offered any of the following corrections or clarifications:

  • By definition, planned residential zoning allows for conditions on development, as it “gives City Council control of the details of a proposed project through approval of a concept plan…each concept plan is subject to detailed review by City Council.” This is a condition developers accept in return for city services—water, sewer, a paid fire department, and a city police department. (2)
  • The planning department and commission required the Parker at Aiken planned residential apartment complex to “comply with the City of Aiken Tree Preservation, buffer, and landscape requirements.” Yet, the only condition for the planned residential equestrian development is “that some natural buffer of grand or significant trees are maintained in those areas that are currently vegetated (3).”

    Chairman Reynolds also mis-phrased the preservation of grand trees—a city policy—as a salvage operation, stating there will be “some salvage of grand and significant trees.”  The Planning Commission does has the authority to recommend a buffer and adherence to tree preservation rules to City Council, and council has the the authority to impose such requirements on the developer.
  • In planned residential, any proposal to develop a “bunch of dense apartments” would require twice as much open space and likely compel the planning department to require a wider forested buffer around the property. A dense apartment complex on property traditionally viewed as passive open space would also provoke a maelstrom of objections and opposition from surrounding neighbors.  Threatening city residents with a worse alternative that does not exist and is a remote possibility is a prime example of a red herring.

The commission also failed to adequately address the question of future development of a five-acre portion of the thirty acres. When county resident and neighbor John Kelly asked if the five acres “might become commercial,” Reynolds replied “if we had a crystal ball we’d tell you.” 

What was not conveyed by the commmission is the limitation of commercial space to five percent of a planned residential district, meaning the 33.4 acre tract is only allowed up to 1.67 acres of commercial development. Although the definition of “commercial space” is as malleable in Aiken City planning as the concept of open space, the proper answer to the question is that part of five acres can be commercialized if City Council approves.

From City of Aiken GIS Mapping: Unocolored areas represent property in uincorporated Aiken County.

Footnotes

(1) Rusty Holzer is a multi-millionaire New York City investor and Palm Beach real estate developer who endured a prolonged legal battle with former Wall Street business partners and recently agreed to penalties from the Security Exchange Commission for insider trading violations. His wife Ashley Holzer is a four-time Olympic equestrian from Canada who won a bronze medal in 1988. His mother Jane Holzer is a former Andy Warhol actress who has waged property disputes with KKR Investment magnet Joseph Bae and billionaire David Koch.

(2) The first page Page of the Planning Director’s memo to the Planning Commission reads:

(3) As the entire 33.4 acres is vegetated, the sentence should read “areas that are currently forested.”

(4) During the May 2022 Planning Commission meeting, Chairman Reynolds told another concerned citizen that the city did have the authority to limit clearcutting:

“Chairman Reynolds informed her that the developers would have comply with landscaping and tree requirements that would prevent clear cutting the parcel. Ms. Moultrie added that the Applicant will be required to do a tree survey and retain any grand and significant trees.”

(May 10, 2022 Planning Commission meeting minutes).

December 2022, Planning & Development

Self-Stored Regrets

6 Comments

Aiken Officials Second Guess Development on Silver Bluff Road

By Don Moniak

December 12, 2022

Along with dollar and mattress stores and car washes, self-storage units are a lightning rod for complaints on Aiken social media pages. In the past month, a finished self-storage facility and the latest proposed car wash have some Aiken officials expressing second thoughts about how they have allowed development to proceed along Silver Bluff Road.

The last item on Monday night’s (December 12, 2022) Aiken City Council meeting agenda is a request from the City of Aiken Planning Commission to consider an “overlay district” for Silver Bluff Road “similar to the existing Whiskey Road Overlay District.” The discussion originated during a November 15, 2022, work session at the suggestion of commissioner Clayton Clarkson; and was subsequently mentioned during deliberations to approve the Tidal Wave car wash at the junction of Silver Bluff and Pine Log roads.

The commission did not convey the sentiment to City Council. In fact, the commission did not submit any recommendation for the November 28th First Reading of the Tidal Wave Car Wash. The same memo submitted by the Planning Department to the Planning Commission (PC) on November 8th was re-used for the November 28th meeting. (page 110 of agenda packet).

Not until the Second Reading of the Public Hearing on December 12th did a November 16th PC memo appear in Council’s hands and into the public domain. (Page 87 of Agenda Packet). It too contained no recommendation for an overlay district.

The overlay district memo from the PC (below) was sent three weeks after the November 13th discussion, and one week after City Council approved a controversial proposal to site a 60,000 square-foot shopping center in an area zoned for residential use on Silver Bluff Road; adjacent to the Village at Woodside and across the road from the Pin Oak Farms neighborhood.

December 6, 2022 Memorandum from Aiken Planning Commission Chairman Ryan Reynolds


An “overlay district” is an additional layer of regulatory oversight in the zoning process that allows for more oversight. It is defined by the city’s Zoning Ordinance as:

“A geographic area designated on the Official Zoning Map where certain regulations of this Ordinance apply in addition to the underlying zoning district regulations.”

Nine days before the planning commission memo, Aiken City Councilwoman Andrea Gregory articulated a possible need for an overlay district on Silver Bluff Road during the November 28th City Council meeting—but not until after voting to approve the shopping center. Gregory opened the discussion regarding the proposed Tidal Wave Car Wash facility at the intersection of Silver Bluff and Pine Log Roads by expressing misgivings over Your Storage Units Aiken; the 35-foot high, three-story, 110,000 square-foot self-storage facility at the corner of Silver Bluff and Hamilton Roads. Gregory stated:

“I have a few concerns about this potential development and I’m going to use that storage unit off of Silver Bluff. When that particular development was presented to us never in a million years did I think it was, I wish I had been more, I guess , in tune, because it’s just too close to the road, it’s gigantic. It completely changes the aesthetic of Silver Bluff which I do believe we need an overlay in Silver Bluff because we have one on Whiskey Road we do not have on Silver Bluff. “
(SEE VIDEO HERE)

Your Storage Units Aiken is located at 1573 Hamilton Drive (fomerly 517 Silver Bluff Road). In 2017 the three-acre property in unincorporated Aiken County was an unoccupied island of residential use zoned as Urban Development. When West Side One, LLC of Tennessee bought the parcel that year for $700,000 from the estate of the former owner, the property had a modest, single story brick home graced by towering loblolly pines and a stand of mature trees on the back half of the acreage.

By April, 2019, the house was gone, the land was cleared for development, and West Side One had a contract to sell the property to Storage Development, Inc., a firm with strong ties to the law office of Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes. (1)

Top Photo; Google Earth, Circa 2017-18. Bottom Photo submitted to Board of Zoning Appeals, May 2019.


West Side One, LLC and Storage Development Inc then worked to get the state-of-the-art, self-storage facility approved as a City of Aiken business property:

  • After  West Side One, LLC applied to annex the property and have it rezoned to General Business for the buyer, the Planning Commission recommended the proposal to City Council on May 14, 2019; although no site details were presented.
  • The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a zoning exception for self-storage on May 28, 2019, to petitioner Storage Development, Inc. at a meeting where more details about site plans were revealed, including a photo of the proposed facility.
  • Aiken City Council approved the proposal for West Side One, LLC during readings on June 10 and 24, 2019, and were provided more details and the photo of the facility. But omitted from council’s information package were four letters from citizens regarding the project that were part of the Board of Zoning Appeals agenda packet.

    Doctors Susan Hamlet and Idris Sharaf, whose practice is next door on unincorporated county land known as a “donut hole,” wrote a letter of opposition to the special exception to then Planning Director Ryan Bland, stating:

    “The zoning ordinances are created as a component of the planning for the City of Aiken to maintain a cohesion, logical and attractive overall appearance providing General Business and other zones so that ‘like usage’ is maintained within specific zoning areas. Placing a self-storage facility at 519 Silver Bluff Road would violate the purpose of the zoning
    ordinance by unfavorably changing the appearance and integrity of Silver Bluff Road.”.

    That letter was offset by three letters of support from local State Farm agent Denny Michaelis, and Floyd and Green Jewelers proprietors Tom Williams and Steve Floyd; whose property is also in an unincorporated “donut hole.” (2) Floyd contended that the storage facility would “enhance” the location of their business.

    The proposal sailed through Aiken City Council with no discussion and no public comments. (3) Councilwoman Gregory was absent at the first reading and did not comment at the second reading. City Attorney Gary Smith was not listed as present for the first reading, and did not recuse himself from the second reading despite members of his law firm representing the project developer and owner.


    The Planned Residential Self-Storage Facility

    Whereas Your Storage Units Aiken is located in an established commercial corridor, another Silver Bluff self-storage facility was approved by City Council in 2018 in a residential area. Absolute Storage Management applied to build a 330 unit, 56,000 square foot self-service storage facililty within an eleven acre area previously designated for multi-family residential use.

    Like the proposed shopping center along Silver Bluff Road, the commercial development did not need to be designated as commercial zoning because the special Planned Residential (PR) zoning concept allows for up to five percent commercial usage in a PR zone. City Council approved Pin Oak Farms/Colleton Park as a 74-acre Planned Residential zoning unit in 2005.

    The caveat for adding commercial facilities to a planned residential area is that the business being approved must be intended to primarily serve the residents in the planned residential area. Absolute Management claimed the 330-unit building was “intended to serve the residents of Pin Oak Farms/Colleton Park, and other nearby residents of Planned Residential developments such as the Village at Woodside.” Even though the combined housing units for Pin Oak Farms, Colleton Park, and Village at Woodside were less than 300 at the time, the planning department, planning commission, and city council all accepted the notion that a 330-unit storage building would primarily serve about 300-400 local residents of planned residential neighborhoods.

    Absolute Storage presented a drawing of a rustic looking building fronting the facility, and committed to only developing 3.2 acres of the 11.8 mostly forested parcel. The final version cannot be described as rustic.
Architectural rendering of self-storage building submitted in 2018.
Self-storage facility, with Pin Oak Farms in the background. December 9, 2022. Photo by Don Moniak

The storage facility was approved unanimously at every step. The August 14th Planning Commission meeting drew a sizable crowd, with numerous residents raising concerns about trash pickup, lighting, aesthetics and buffers, and traffic. The meeting minutes then phrased the dialogue as questions and answers and failed to name the speakers. The concerns speakers raised were not forwarded to City Council within the planning commission memo or by other means.  The proposal to convert a rural residential area into a commercial self-storage facility sailed through the approval process.

These two situations raise questions about the validity of another layer of regulation for Silver Bluff Road development:

  • Why did the overlay district notion appear on the agenda only after approval of the Silver Bluff shopping center next to Village at Woodside? 
  • What has a similar overlay district effort on Whiskey Road accomplished? 
  • What benefit is another layer of oversight and regulation if the regulators and decision-makers suffer communication breakdowns, city staff withholds information, or key information is not requested from developers?

___________________

Footnotes

1. Storage Development Inc. has an address of 230 Colleton Avenue, SE.  and is represented by Brad A. Bodie, a partner in the Smith, Massey, Brodie, Guynn, and Mayes law firm; whose partner includes City Attorney Gary Smith. Following final City Council approval on June 24, 2022, the sale was completed:

West Side One LLC actually sold to Storage Units of Aiken, LLC (Agent Ray Massey), which was incorporated on June 26, 2019 at the same address (230 Colony Parkway, SE) shared by law firm. 

The closing date was June 28, 2019, partner Mary Guynn was the closing lawyer, and the grantee’s address was listed at 239 Fairfield Street, which is the same property as 230 Colleton Avenue, SE.

On , 2021, the property was transferred for $1 to Storage Units Properties 1 Aiken LLC, a Delaware company based in Maitland, Florida. 

2. Tom Williams was also one of the original members of the Aiken Municipal Development Commission; he resigned after missing most of the meetings in 2021. The Commission advocated increased annexation as an integral part the city’s growth model.

(3) The June 10, 2019 meeting did have two high-profile items on the agenda, the establishment of the Aiken Municipal Development Commission and the concept plan for the old hospital/county administration building at 828 Richland Avenue, West.

December 2022, Planning & Development

Introducing: Powderhouse Crossing and The Parker at Aiken Apartments. 

Leave a comment

A Summary of the City of Aiken Planning Commission agenda packet for the December 13, 2022 public meeting at 111 Chesterfield Street, 6 pm. 

by Don Moniak
December 11, 2022

(Editor’s Note: Aiken Planning Commission Asks Developer for More Pavement reported on the December 13th meeting discussed in this article).

The City of Aiken Planning Commission will meet Tuesday evening to discuss two new developments, an equine development adjacent to Bruce’s Field and a 336-unit apartment complex just south of the University of South Carolina at Aiken (USCA). Together the two developments will add another sixty-three acres to the City of Aiken. As the Planning Commission rarely rejects or tables any new developments, the proposals are expected to be approved with minimal discussion. At last month’s twenty-minute regular meeting, three of four proposals were recommended unanimously and one with two dissenting votes.  

Powderhouse Crossing. 

Worth Capital Holdings 105, LLC, a Florida company owned by Palm Beach and New York City investor and developer Rusty Holzer, is proposing to subdivide 33..2 acres into seven three plus acre residential lots, one three-acre equestrian development, and one five-acre lot for “future development.” Most of the property is within city limits, but two parcels totalling 4.5 acres will require annexation. The entire property will be zoned Planned Residential.

If the plan goes as proposed, it would eliminate any concerns that the property could be commercialized, i.e a large hotel.  Past development proposals for the property have included apartments and office buildings—-the county property remains zoned office-residential. In 2014, the previous owner permitted the city to use their property as a staging ground to process and convert debris from the February 2014, ice storm to mulch.

Some intriguing aspects of the planning department review include: 

– A recommended waiver of the Planned Residential requirement of twenty percent open space because “each lot will have a primary open space character.” 
– An absence of the usual “tree preservation” requirements, although the site features a ten acre forested stand within the larger parcel that will likely be clearcut or heavily cut. There is a recommendation to preserve a few “grand trees” along the perimeter of the property
– A waiving of a sidewalk requirement because the 20-foot wide riding trails are long the street. 
– A photo of a horse farm in an unidentified landscape of rolling hills, but obviously not in the proposed area. 

Location of the proposed Powderhouse Crossing residential equine development. Bruce’s Field is above (North); Autoneum is below (south)

The Parker at Aiken Apartments. 

Dozier-Sapp Development LLC of Martinez, GA, which purchased the property in March of this year for $465,000, is proposing to annex into the City of Aiken and clearcut much of a 29.82 forested parcel to develop a 336-unit apartment complex just south of USC-Aiken, and across Gregg Highway from Aiken Barnwell Mental Health. The development will consist of fourteen buildings up to three stories in height, a clubhouse with fitness, recreation, and co-working space, a picnic area, pool and lounge area, and a dog park. 

Location of proposed The Parker at Aiken 336-unit apartment complex.

Because it is over four acres, the property will be zoned Planned Residential and require forty percent open space; a requirement that, as reported in The Village at Woodside’s Clever Zoning and Land Accounting , is subject to abuse. The planning department’s memo asserts the open space areas are “not denoted.” However, whereas the plat map does not show any open space, the “concept plan map” shows two areas of six and two acres, respectively, labeled as open space. The larger area fronts Gregg Highway and would surround a detention pond. 

Conceptual Plan map for The Parker at Aiken. Open Space is shown to the SE and NE.

The development is likely planned to attract students, and workers from the planned Department of Energy’s Advanced Manufacturing Collaborative and the South Carolina National Guard cybercenter “Dreamport” that are planned at USC-Aiken. Both projects are funded in part with plutonium settlement money.

A Note on FOIA and Attendance

During the commission’s November 15, 2022, worksession, the issues of attendance and the Freedom of Information Act arose. According to the draft meeting minutes:

– Commissioners were advised that after missing more than forty percent of regular meetings in a calendar year, a commissioner is automatically removed. According to the draft meeting minutes, Commission Chairman Ryan Reynolds, who has missed nearly a third of the meetings in 2022, “offered some examples he suggested might be the exception to the rule,” but the examples are not yet noted. There are no exceptions in the city ordinance mandating 60 percent attendance at regularly scheduled meetings. 

– Commissioners were advised that their personal and work email accounts are subject to South Carolina Freedom of Information Act requests if the accounts are used for commission business. According to the minutes, the city is working on obtaining city accounts for commissioners. (2)

For update, see: Planning Commission Asks Developers for More Pavement.

Footnotes

(1) The meeting agenda packet contains the agenda, draft minutes from the previous meeting, memos from the Planning Department, and application information for agenda items.

The most recent Planning Commission agenda packet is available at cityofaikensc.gov/pca
City Council packets are at cityofaikensc.gov/cca
Design Review Board packets are at cityofaikensc.gov/drba

(2) On November 14 I wrote a letter to Planning Director Maya Moultrie and cc’ed to Planning Commissioners. In regard to FOIA and emails the letter read:

Below is the listing of contact information for the Planning Commission. It is difficult  to believe that commissioners are using private email accounts and employer email accounts to conduct any city business; and do not have either a city designated email address or an email address dedicated to Planning Commission business. The AMDC had a domain set up for something like $250 for its members (although they inexplicably failed to use it, despite City Attorney Gary Smith’s admonishment to them to not use private email accounts).

Every one of these email accounts is subject to FOIA requests. If the commission has not undergone FOIA and Ethics training, here is a link to City Attorney Smith’s June 2, 2022 presentation to the AMDC.   A refresher is always a good idea for a workshop. It is good governance. “

The letter has not been acknowledged, but the concept was.