Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

How

Good afternoon. Welcome to the November planning commission session. Um just want to give a welcome to planning commission members, staff, and guests. Um, multiple staff members are here today to ensure that the meeting runs smoothly and all applicants and members of the public are able to participate in the meeting at the appropriate times. If you are here to speak about a case uh today, please provide your name and clearly speak into the microphone and also please be sure to sign in either at the back of the room or at the podium for documentation purposes. If you're here today to speak about a case, you must speak up when the chairperson calls for public comment. I'll go ahead and call the role. Uh, Mr. Brabbam

here, Mr. Cosy here, Mr. Cook here, Miss Cubny here, Mr. Foster here, Mr. Hulkcom here, Mr. Osorio here, and Mr. Con here.

We have quorum. All right, I'll give a u brief overview of the meeting format. Applicants [snorts] with requests before the planning commission are allotted a presentation time of 10 minutes. This should include but is not limited to an overview of the project, case history, and any pertinent meetings held regarding the request. This time also includes all persons presenting information on behalf of the applicant, such as attorneys, engineers, and architects. The time limit does not include any questions asked by the planning commission or staff regarding the request. During the public comment period, members of the general public are given the opportunity to address their concerns in intervals of 2 minutes. After the public comment period, applicants have 5 minutes to respond. The administrator has a timer and will make presenters aware of when their time has expired. and the planning commission reserves the right to amend these procedures on a case-byase basis. Are there any changes to the agenda? [clears throat]

There are no changes since publication.

All right, we will start with the consent agenda. The planning commission uses the consent agenda to approve non-controversial or routine matters by a single motion and vote. Examples of such items include approval of site plans, annexations, and street names. If a member of the planning commission or the general public would like to discuss an item on the consent agenda, you must speak up after the consent agenda is read. Then that item is removed from the consent agenda and considered during the meeting. [clears throat] The planning commission then approves the remaining consent agenda items.

Will staff please read the consent agenda?

Certainly. The first uh first case or the first item on the consent agenda is to approve the October 9th 2025 minutes. Um, next under interim future land use amendment and interim zoning amendment for a pending annexation is annex-2025-0000227 and 1235 Bakersfield Road 106, 1112, 1118, 119, 130, 131, and 140 Diamond Lane and 1049, 1057, and 1065 Statatler Road. [clears throat] request recommendation on the assignment of the interim land use classifications of urban core community activity center UCAC2 and Urban Edge Residential Large Lot UE2 and the assignment of interim zoning of community activity center corridor district CAC and residential single family large lot district RSF-1 for a pending annexation. [clears throat] The properties are currently classified as mixeduse corridor and mixed residential highdensity in a priority investment area and community community activity center with a portion in a neighborhood activity center and zoned general commercial and residential R2 by Richland County. The third case is a future land use amendment and a zoning amendment for a pending annexation NX-2025-000020 2430 Chappelle Street and unincorporated portion of 2428 Chapel Street. uh request recommendation on the assignment of the land use classification of urban core residential small lot UCR1 and the assignment of zoning of residential single family

medium lot district RSF2 for a pending annexation. The property is currently classified as mixed residential highdensity and zoned R5 by Richland County. Fourth case on the consent agenda is annex-2025-000021 a portion of 101 and 119 and 125 Lake Murray Boulevard request recommendation on the assignment of the land use classification of urban edge mixed residential UEMR and the assignment of zoning of residential mixed district RM2 for a pending annexation. The property is currently classified as mixed residential highdensity and zoned R3 residential by Richland County. And that concludes the consent agenda. Thank you. Are there any commission members that would like to see any item on the consent agenda removed to the regular agenda for discussion? Any members of the public? [sighs] All right. Um, seeing none, I'll take a motion to approve the October minutes and the November consent agenda.

Mr. Chair, I move that we approve the October 9, 2025 minutes and the rest of the consent agenda. Got a motion. Can I get a second? Second. Got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Right. We're flying uh we're flying blind right now. Oh, [laughter] I can read the All right. All right. We'll move with the regular agenda.

All right. We got one. That one's out. Thank you. Um we use the following outline for the regular agenda items. The administrator will introduce the case and the applicant will have 10 minutes to make a presentation. Planning commission may ask questions. The public comment period will be open to those present. After the public comment period is closed, the applicant will have 5 minutes to respond to the public comments. Planning commission may ask additional questions of the applicant. Then [clears throat] there'll be deliberation and action by the planning commission. first time.

Hi, good afternoon. Um, so the first item on the regular agenda is um it is KCMA 20250018 and this is a uh request for recommendation to reszone the property at 1700 block of Rosewood Drive in Fulton Street, TMS number 113091 1810. uh to resone it from neighborhood activity center corridor district and an airport safety overlay district to neighborhood activity center corridor district uh without the overlay. Um what I will note on this is just a couple of things about what the airport safety overlay is and the uh state of South Carolina through its uh um uh you know they they have designated areas around airports that um have varying levels of protections and they they've asked localities throughout the state to implement um protections. And so this is a protection within our zoning ordinance. Um this is not this does not exactly reflect what the states um maps are. And actually uh here I'll grab that real quick. So so the state for example they've these are kind of the this is a schematic illustration of of what the states um land use zones are. And um you can see it goes all the way out to this um outer approach zone, horizontal zone, conical zone. What what we're talking about this overlay is within one of these airport safety zones. And this one in particular is within the inner approach zone. So it would be the kind of the medium purple on on this map. And so this is the property and this

shows the extent of the runway protection zone that the property is in. Now our overlay itself does not go go quite as far. This is actually the furthest extent of the overlay and it's just north of Roswood Drive. And um I'll be glad to answer any questions, but also I do know the applicant is here and um available to answer any questions if you have any. Thank you. Is the applicant here to speak to the request? Would you mind please come to the podium if you wish to discuss it?

Can you can you please can you please come to the podium, sir? Thank you. It's okay. [clears throat] Just right here. Yeah. Good evening everyone. Thank you. Uh my name is Ashu Kumar. I am a GC, a commercial GC from Kumar Construction and uh I'm representing the owner right now. He wants to build some apartments in this property. He already uh have a gas station in bill in place and he's also working with an architect who can design accordingly and that's where we are planning to do it.

Do you any comm Thank you. Do any commission members have any questions for the applicant? Does he own the gas station right next to the property? He have in this property there is a gas station already existing. This property has a lot of topography, doesn't it? Like a Yes, it does have uh some kind of elevation which we are trying to get it resolved by an architect, a civil engineer I would say and um like I think I have already forward those drawings to Mr. Andrew about those things which can be reviewed. How many units in the apartment? Three units per floor and he got three floors.

So I would say nine. What's the height restriction with the proposed 35?

So within the overlay there's a maximum height of 35 ft but also residential uses are not permitted. And if it if the overlay was removed, it would permit residential uses. Um the district has a height limit of 50 ft because it is adjacent to a residential property, it would be capped at 45 ft. However, um whereas overlay has a 35 ft um hard limit. Um in our our normal height limitation allows chimneys and mechanicals and things like that to project above the height.

Right. So essentially removing the overlay allows residential with a maximum height of 45 ft. Right. Correct.

Yeah. Do do sites within a certain distance of the approach have to submit to the FAA anyway? So the process would be that um we would submit this to the um the SE aeronautics commission for for review and they would make their recommendation both on land use and on um you know other things right so height etc. Um FAA also has regulations so there would be some limitations on that but the aeronautics commission does not recommend residential in the airport safety zones. Um I think and here's their so they would say that look if it's over you know two units on a twoacre lot that that would be something they would not recommend. Um, so our overlay basically prohibits residential and commercial districts if it's within the overlay. Um, the the the district does allow multifamily, but not because of the overlay.

Okay. But there's residential all in this overlay. That's correct. However, it predates the state um code. I'm I'm also How that's more than 600. How do we know exactly how far that is from the runway? You know, I apologize. I've I've not I I don't Yeah, I'm sorry.

You can come up and um Yeah, for the applicant that we can have you come back up in a minute. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon. Peter Savales, airport general manager for the Jim Hamilton LB Owens airport. I work for Richland County and I've been work I've worked in the past with the city planning staff on this. We have other developments that have happened off the end of the runway about a little bit closer. This one in particular is about 4,900 uh linear feet from the end of the north end of the runway about 81 miles from the end of the runway. It is offset off the center line. So, it's not in a direct path. But what we've done in the past, what I've done already with the uh with the developers, other two developers, there's a property that was developed on Pickin Street and then there was also one done on I believe it was Greg Street. I've created an obstigation easement that's been approved with the FAA and with the uh county attorney on the matter. And what it does, it basically identifies the airport that the airport exists and that the air traffic could potentially come over the the development and that we are holdless. We're undemified from all all and any traffic that comes over the uh the pro the property in question.

Uh thank you m Mr. Sabas. Yes. One of the questions I think I just to make sure I understand this correctly. is the OV removing the OVA zoning overlay that doesn't absolve having to come No, it should because it's an established zone laid out by the um by the state and by the by the federal government to meet the requirements. Um but again, there are ways to and again we can't stop the the development around the city. it's happening and especially in that area a lot of residential and sport of the university in that and just in general in that area.

So given that and given that I have traffic coming into the airport at all times a lot of general aviation and corporate jet type traffic that's the largest that will ever come into that airport. We just need to establish sort of the the boundaries of who's coming in and who's going over it and and under and and the developers need to understand that that we have the traffic that's going to come through there. In in the submitt to South Carolina Aeronautics, aren't isn't there a graphic where you have to look at the angle of approach and so forth?

Yes, sir. There is. And and they are very stringent on their on their requirements. And as far as I understand, I don't believe this one actually falls in that zone, but it would be considered in other properties uh incompatible land use. So, and they they try to push that. They they don't want that, but we're in the middle of a city. You can't stop the development and the growth. So, this is the best way I see of working with the the development that goes around the airport. So a 45 foot tall building at this location would I I think you said this would likely fall under any sort of it would angle of approach. Correct. Right.

Significantly, I would think. Yes. Okay. Because that at that point at 4,900 ft away from the end of the runway, the aircraft should technically be on a higher elevation. Yes. Yeah. I'm sorry. One one question. I maybe I misunderstood. You said you had worked with other developers in the past and had had this here. Yes, sir. within the last two years. Uh is that something this developer has worked with you or you're willing to do that with? Yes, sir. Okay. I can do that too here with this one. If the developer will contact me and we'll work together on and uh again that I did one on Picking Street and I believe I did one on um Edestto Avenue those recently came up to you guys I believe for approval. So

any further question I'm okay ask staff. All right. Thank Thank you very much. I'm sure it's in front of me, but the lot's only like 32 acre, right? It's very small. It's a relatively small um lot. Um

I'm not sure what commercial would even work there, but There is one property which is exactly across the street of where my client is built trying to build an apartment [clears throat] which is which they have converted to a they have reasoned it. So and that was falling under your airport restrictions. So is there something which we can also get done? So I think um that's that's what we're working to understand.

Thank you. Thanks. I have a question if you don't mind, sir. May, Mr. Kumar, would you would you mind coming back up one moment? Thank you. [sighs] Sorry. Help me understand. Is it plan to clear the gas station and then put up apartments or to have it on the lot with the gas station? We have already in a gas station right now, but on the side of the gas station where the elevation is, we're trying to build up over there.

Okay. Okay. Might be possible down the lane, we may clear that gas station and build one whole apartments. Thank you. Any more questions? We have any further questions? All right. Are there any uh members of the public that would like to speak regarding this application? All right. Any commission members have any further questions of the applicant or staff? All right. Have a motion. Further discuss I guess for clarification sake for us just also the zoning is independent of the use in this. Is that correct?

I'm sorry. Can you repeat the evaluating this motion for a change in the zoning? It should remain independent of any any use

any specific use. I mean, in this case, the I mean, it's appropriate to consider the the totality of uses and and and so this amendment has the effect of allowing residential uses and you know, of course, it wouldn't necessarily be the specific use. Um, and I I I will say and and I believe you all are already doing so, but one thing I did forget to mention is that um certainly that uh aeronautics does want us to consider, you know, the the airport safety overlay when when making one's determination, but certainly for testimony from uh an airport professional. If if there was a motion to approve this, would we be able to have that include a subject to working out um an easement? [clears throat]

No. No. Okay. But height would keep them limited anyway just with zoning restrictions. Correct. Okay. [clears throat] Um but it not being overlay. I have a question for staff. Um, was your reservations with this proposal, was it more related to the use, like being residential or to the height or both?

Well, from from a staff standpoint, you know, our primary thing is, you know, we've had discussions with aeronautics and and the airport in the past, and, you know, we we want to make sure that we're bringing them into the decision process. So, um I guess I'll I'll leave it at that. So, so from the staff standpoint, it's both the use and and the height, but um certainly you can take the totality of testimony today to determine whether this is an appropriate removal.

All right. U Mr. Chair, um I'm inclined to support this. I just the common sense test tells me that it's surrounded by dense residential. Um [clears throat] we've improved other uses uh in a similar area. I mean I I think I maybe I would feel more comfortable if the airport director's uh easement was in place at this, but I don't think it necessarily changes the crux of the matter in my opinion. That's kind of where my sentiment is as well. And Mr. Chair, just to be clear, even if we remove the overlay, he still has to go get the easement before they can

he does he does not. But there are height restrictions. [clears throat] I think Mr. Cook was alluding to it would be it would be nice if that was a formal part of the process, but I don't think we have that in place currently. Um I I mean I will say that it is likely that aeronautics would recommend the um you know these easements, but it's the overlay that requires them. [clears throat] Gotcha. Okay. For staff, would any further use need to come back or just a major plan like an apartment?

Um, it would need to be a um residential development of over 25 units to come back before the planning commission for site plan review or a major subdivision, which I don't foresee. So it it would not be coming back. Um now there have been developments that have been done within the overlay but they are on properties that allow residential already excuse me sorry that are considered to be residential zoning districts. So, um, all right. All right. Any further questions or comments, take another pass in a motion.

Mr. Chair, I move that we recommend approval of the request to amend the zoning map for the property at 1700 block uh Rosewood Drive and Fulton Street uh ZMA 2025008 as it meets the decision standards outlining section 17-2.5C in the unified development ordinance. Thank you. We've got a motion. Can I get a second? Second. A motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I.

I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. All right. Okay. The next item on our agenda is a text amendment and this is a request for recommendation to amend the unified development ordinance uh chapter 17 article 4. Um I I won't make you listen to me read the alphabet soup here, but um this is basically to add short-term rentals as a principle of use and to establish and clarify reg rated sorry related definitions and standards. And um you know short version is is that it would add it as a regulated use within the UDO. Currently, the city regulates short-term rentals through its um rental registration program and um you know there's there's of course long-term rentals and and short-term rentals and there are performance standards within within that ordinance. Um this would further add it as permitted in our our districts that we call mixed use activity center and corridor districts and also our EC district. And then it would allow it as a conditional use within residential districts. And and specifically the conditions are that it be on a road that's classified as a collector um or an arterial in our compre excuse me in our comprehensive plan and that it have four through lanes. And so we've defined through lanes just for the sake of clarity. And and so for example a through lane is not a turn lane. Um, it's not a twiddle, which is the sometimes known as a suicide lane. You

know, the the the the lane in the middle of the road that you can turn either direction. Um, I will say that um on on a brief analysis that I don't think there are any four-lane roads that would not meet the criteria of being a collector road or an arterial, but um we figured it's best to do that just in case there's some sort of um we missed something when reviewing the city and there might be a fourlane section in in a on a residential street. So, um there are some maps that have been provided um both overview maps in a packet and also um we kind of had some zoomed in maps to show the totality of where we understand short-term rentals would be permitted. um the you know as you notice the the commercial districts we're we're showing the entire districts but when it comes to residential properties you know again like I said it needs to be um a parcel that actually has frontage on one of those fourlane roads and I'll be glad to answer any questions.

Thank you. I don't [clears throat] have any questions. Any commission members have any questions? Yeah, I have a question. So, this is a staff staff [snorts] brought this forward, correct? Sure. Um, council did um did ask for this amendment, but but it is a staff application. Okay. I mean, it kind of seems to me like, you know, there's language in here, but it seems to be basically effectively banning short term rentals in all residential neighborhoods unless it's on a major street. Yes.

Okay. [snorts] Um, now I will say for the record, any existing lawfully permitted short-term rentals as as any use that would become non-conforming over time would be regulated as a non-conforming use. And so it's allowed to continue, it may be transferred to another property owner, as long as it's not discontinued. And I I believe there's and I I apologize, I don't have the exact number, but there's quite a few already permitted in residential neighborhoods. Gotcha. Thank you. All right. There any members of the public have any comments? Yes.

Yeah. Thank you. Tell us your name, please.

Hey, good afternoon. My name is David Bergman. I'm a small business owner here in Colia and I run How much time do I get? Three or two? Two. And I run a property management company focused on short-term rentals. We employ about 25 people and our office is based in Elwood Park. I want to start with uh September 16th, the council meeting. We were told that the public uh that uh Mayor Rickman said that we the public uh would have time to review the maps and incorporate feedback and that would be shared before this meeting so that residents and stakeholders have ample time to review it. Uh that never happened. The maps and standards were released yesterday. You could see they were exported last Friday, giving the people who are most directly impacted almost no time to understand them, let alone develop a response. Um, more importantly, not a single operator that I know of, homeowner or STR related business, was invited to any conversations with staff over the last two months ahead of this meeting. Uh this means the policy being evaluated here today has had zero input from the people who live in this industry every day. My 25 people and we have hundreds of people who are host in the city and cleaners and maintenance people and homeowners. None of them have been given input. This policy impacts all of these people. They should all be included at the table in planning. That should be the standard I think to develop good policy. Um, I want to make sure that the recommendations coming out of this bo this body that they're informed and balanced. Uh, policy is going to work best when everybody's voices are heard. Neighbors and operators and homeowners and small businesses like ours. We know a lot about this industry. I mean, you guys probably don't, and that's okay. But I'd like to help educate you guys and bring forward a good policy, one that's good

for the city, and I'm open to limitations on short-term rentals. I am to make it work for the neighborhoods. Um, so I would just ask that we defer this item until the planning commission and staff can can truly engage with the stakeholders and gather more feedback. I would I would just really appreciate that if it could be considered. Thank you. I have a question.

What's your specific issue with the um proposal today? Um, well, it's a ban on our business. Um, which is I mean, if you think about short-term rentals and the where they are last time you guys went on vacation and stayed in an let's say an Airbnb, just think was was that on a four-lane road? Just I mean, it's really truly a question. it if if anybody if it was on a fourlane road. No, it's just it it's it's not short-term rentals tend to be for families who need like I have a six-year-old, a three-year-old, and a one-year-old. I can't stay in a hotel. And a lot of people who are staying in accommodations, they don't want to be in hotels. They want to for those of us who have kids, you know, you need laundry, you need beds, blackout curtains, shut your kids away, and maybe you can have dinner with your wife at night. um you can't do that in a hotel. [clears throat] So, it's providing a different type of accommodation, one that I think is needed, but I think four four-lane roads is a pretty limiting um requirement that we have put forward. Maybe there's it could be on arteries, but maybe those that are even two-lane that that might be reasonable. Just an idea.

I have a question. Uh what kind of restrictions and limitations does the city have on short terminals at present? like what do you have to abide by?

Yeah, it's it's really extensive. Um I worked with uh Howard Deval and the city and we actually had quite a few workshops on that back in like it was like 2022 when this came up and it's really restrictive occupancy limits, parking limits, um uh quiet hours. I could go on and on just all these things. And we actually just at the last uh city council meeting passed a third reading of amending that to make it even more restrictive just so that it's you know when there are short-term rentals in the city that that those are not disturbing and affecting the piece of the neighbors. So that's been something that's kind of been an ongoing uh process of adjusting.

I I got a quick question too. So, in your opinion, is there a effective way for problem Airbnbs to be have their license revoked in the city of Columbia at this point?

Absolutely. Enforcement, and that's what we heard um from David Hatcher, head of code enforcement. He did a working session in July and stated up front like they need manpower. Um and that's what the I understand the council has given them is one additional staff member. At the beginning of coming out with the ordinance, there was an intent of the emails from Howard where they were going to hire a specific dedicated resource for specifically short-term rentals. That's what's done in other cities. They didn't do that and then there's been zero enforcement since. So, what we've asked city council to do is really let's try and enforce it. I think it's important and it helps those of us who are good operators. Like we have 90 permits. We're the largest permit holder in the city and we've only ever had one violation. Um, and that was for trash and we resolved it. So, I think there is a good way to separate what we call the bad apples from the good apples.

Do you know if if you applied this to the ones you currently have licenses for, how many would not qualify? I would it would probably be out of the 90, it would probably be 85 would not qualify. Um, we have a few on Bull Street. Um, I think that would qualify and a maybe one on Rosewood. Um, but for the most part, when you think of short-term rentals, they the reason people book them is to be kind of more tucked away, not on a busy road with their family. Did you say you have 90 units? Yes. Yes, sir.

How do we balance that as a board with the fact that we need, you know, there's a need for affordable housing in the city right now? Yeah, less units that

it's a great question. I mean, I've looked at the numbers. There's about 460 permitted right now. And if you look at the total housing stock in Colombia, that's like less than half of 1%. I think there's maybe other things affecting affordability to a greater degree. Um, that's at least what I'm seeing. But, uh, a lot of people are using it. um they're putting one and this doesn't allow for this. If you have a primary residence, maybe you have a garage apartment and people are using this for their home to be more affordable um to help pay down and a lot we have a lot of retirees that we manage for like that where they have a little garage apartment and we manage that for them.

How many owners are represented across the 90 properties that you manage? Probably about 80 there. We don't have a lot of density. [snorts] I'm like, so you're not seeing like one large company owning short-term rentals? It's mainly owners that, you know, they they lived in Colia, now maybe they're moving away, but they still have family here, so they want to come back and stay here, but they need to offset the cost, the property the property taxes are expensive, so they come to us to help. Um staff, just to clarify, if this does pass, any properties that have already been established and are not breaking code will be able to stay or no,

that is correct. And and just for the sake of clarity, there's approximately 426 permitted short-term rentals in the city. Um, from your experience, just picking on you cuz you're here, how are, you know, safety matters handled? Have you ever had any type of complaints or, you know, like cuz you are in those neighborhoods where people do have young kids. I understand like how helpful it is to families visiting, but I'm also thinking of the families living in those neighborhoods and, you know, new people coming in every weekend, especially in Colombia.

Yeah, I I definitely think there's um uh maybe a misunderstanding that the use is is a shorter duration, but a lot of times it's it's 2 to 3 weeks. We have a lot of contractors, nurses, people coming in for those longer stays. Our average stay is like three to four times a hotel. And that's why people are getting these accommodations is cuz they have full kitchens and laundry and stuff like that. So, it serves a slightly different use than just weekends. There are weekends. Um, but I would say my experience has been a lot of times our guest the safety concerns we're dealing with is a guest who's checking into a property and not feeling so safe with the neighborhood that they're arriving to. We deal with that more than we deal with a neighbor letting us know that they're concerned about the safety of our guest. Question for staff. Um, this text amendment originated with council as written.

No, council had directed that we prepare a text amendment. I had the same with these restrictions though with um they had had asked for it to be um you know directed towards the the busier areas of town. Okay. Yeah. All right. And this amendment if we were to approve it still has to go to council. Correct.

That's correct. [snorts] I have I have another question for staff. So are there particular areas Amanda know this is a broader topic that is pretty sensitive that have been maybe more vocal or where this is is more of a known issue. Um [clears throat] you know certainly of those 426 um the majority of them are closer in town. Um, I mean, there are certainly ones throughout town, excuse me. But, uh, there are some neighborhoods that are more highly represented with with short-term rentals. And I apologize, I don't I don't have the maps in front of me now, but you know, um, Earlwood, Elmo Park, etc.

And then, in order to have a permit for this, do all these shift from owner occupied to non-owner nonowner occupied tax? [snorts] No. No.

Yeah. Um the state regulates what can be uh 4% or six excuse me 4% [clears throat] or 6%. And I forget the exact number of days but there's a certain amount of days that you can rent it out and still be considered 4%. Um I apologize I don't I don't recall that off the top of my head. [clears throat] Any further questions for

Yeah, I got one more thing. Um, so you know, you're saying maybe in the whole city it's like half a percent or short-term rentals. Um, has anybody talked about neighborhood or area specific limitations as well? And is there anything in place for that already? There isn't. But that was that has been our position from the short-term rental community is that caps have worked really effectively in places like Mount Pleasant and um trying to remember I think Folly and a few other places where this is an issue. I like caps. I propose capping at at the current level. It just allows there to be a replacement. Right now, if you guys vote for this, like if I lose a property, it's gone forever. there's a very low likelihood we're going to get a commercially zoned short-term rental. It's just it's just very unlikely. So, that basically means my business will be forever deteriorating and and losing clients and I have no way to replace them. So, I think if we do that,

area specific caps are not in place, but you've seen it implemented in other municipalities.

Area specific or city specific? Um it just and and when they do city specific sometimes there's even an additional uh restriction on how far from another rental it can be. So it could say 100 ft. So I think that kind of addresses the density and concern from neighbors that like an entire neighborhood like Elmwood Park could just become you know just a a tourist area or something like that which nobody wants. [snorts] So, if I was a property owner and I used your company to Airbnb or short-term rental my uh house and I was to want to sell that, does that go away? Does it follow the homeowner or does it follow the home? Can I sell it and it stay? In other words, if this were to pass like the current people who have licenses, can they sell their home and they stay short-term rentals? I mean, I don't even know if you knew the answer to that.

I think staff can answer. I'm fairly certain it would be a non-conforming use. Yeah. Right. So, a non-conforming use stays with the property. So, it's regardless of ownership. Okay. Thank you. Thanks.

Any other members of the public that would like to Thank you. U [snorts] my name is Joseph Guido. Um I'm here and I appreciate y'all's time. Uh, Chairman Con K con and uh, commission members and staff. Thank you. Um, I'm here to discuss the short-term rentals uh, as a regulated use. I'm hoping that this does not pass and I would also like to see the the moratorum on short-term short-term rentals um, be lifted. Um, I I live in Shandon. Um, I've got rentals across the street. I've got rental to my right and to my left. uh quadruplex to my right. Uh so I'm surrounded by rentals. Um I'm a homeowner and I'm also a landlord. Um my wife and I, we own several rental properties in Colombia and we do have one Airbnb and uh we do enjoy the uh option to to do this and u we would like to uh see about um converting one of our long-term rentals into an Airbnb. Um, it's been our uh experience that every time we convert one of our long-term rentals into an Airbnb, we typically beautify the property. We try to make it nicer and better, more modern because we're trying to appeal to people. Um, one of the things that we do with all of our rental properties is we have to fill out this form. Um, this is given to the city of Columbia and it identifies the property, who I am, my phone number, my contact information, and whether I live in the city limits or whether I'm an absentee landlord. There's a checklist of items that I have to meet to be able to rent a property. Um, every year I've got to fill this out and resubmit it for every property that I own. Um there's also a um

uh the a uh a citation um setup. All these code um requirements are enforced by the city of Columbia Police Department. So what's happening um is that there is a process in place right now where you can regulate who is renting whether it's a long-term, short-term, or Airbnb. uh if there is any violation, whether it's some type of a nuisance, um there's a point system set in place that if your neighbor you're having a noise complaint, you call the city of Colombia, you identify the property, they send a letter to the uh homeowner and they notify that is a nuisance complaint. They identify what the complaint is and then there's a point and it's a $100 fine. [snorts] Um if the if the reoccurrence happens twice in one year, it's two points, $200. three times in one year, it goes up to $500 and it's five points. If there is a serious violation where there can be bodily harm or injury, you get 10 points. You lose your ability to rent this property out. I feel like we've got a system in place where we can start weeding out some of the bad apples because I get it. Um I don't want to be in a situation where I've got a noisy person all the time and uh I do think that we have something that can address those issues. So, I just would like to use that rather than have a ban altogether.

Thank you. Thank you. Just a [clears throat] quick question. Why do you short-term rental the properties instead of long-term rental?

So, the the there are advantages of short-term. Um um it does generate a good return. Um it does cater to a different market. Um and uh uh it's um what we've noticed with the properties is they actually are less abused than long-term. When you have somebody there that's longterm. Most of the time when people do a short-term rental, they'll come in for a couple of days. Uh sometimes longer. We have had people stay for like construction durations or they're doing a um audit, things like that. but they're most of the time they're at work or they're going out to eat and they tend to have less wear and tear on the property uh than actually some of the long-term people that stay in there because they're they're home every day, they're sitting on the sofa or they're doing whatever they're doing. So, um you know, we there is value I think in short-term rentals. So, you Good afternoon. I'm Kim Franklin. I'm incredibly nervous, so forgive me. I also run a small business. I assist owners in managing their properties when they are not um in town or um in cases where they've moved out of town and choose to keep their property here. I would urge you to consider not approving this. As as these gentlemen have said, this is effectively a ban on our business. There are [snorts] whether we consider caps, whether we have input into a map that would protect certain areas, there are certain things that I think have not been considered given the current um zoning issues. There are areas, particularly the areas um next to Divine Street, the the new

improvements that have happened on Rosewood where the zoning hasn't kept up, but those would be really great places to have short-term rentals and I and I do manage some short-term rentals in those areas, but this effectively eliminates our ability to even work in those areas. you know, near the new Starbucks, near the MASA. Um, and then given this, do we then have to reszone properties that back up to other uh zoning options? You know, if we back up to a commercial property, then do we have to go through the process of reszoning? It's I feel like this has not considered um the advantage that short-term rentals add to Colombia in terms of both rooms and resources, particularly for folks who come into town um who work in the medical community. And we also have a strong connection to the military community, hosting lots of Fort Jackson families that come either um for graduations or for longer term deployments and they need places for their families. So, I urge you to to reconsider this as an option. Thank you. [snorts]

Hello. My name is Carla Guido, the wife Jose Guido. Um, one one question that was brought in the beginning is somebody had asked, you know, why is this addendum being brought forth? And um and I kind of asked myself the same thing because this addendum to what has already been in place is being brought forth by um staff and council. Not, you know, it doesn't seem like it's a complaint. So much of the neighbors in in the area it and we already they've already put together um like my husband was saying, they already have a point system that they they put together um that the staff and council, you know, the city had already put together, but they're not enforcing it. And when I've gone to some of the city meetings or the neighborhood meetings, I ask people, I'm like, when you have an issue with your Airbnb next door, who do you call? And no one seems to know the phone number to call to say, "Hey, I've got a problem." And to have them come there and then [clears throat] the point system be enforced and then the bad people, you know, that are bad or causing issues be removed from the actual system. So, I think that it's kind of unfair that they're now making an addendum to something that they have, you know, put together for the Airbnbs, but they actually never enforced their original plan that they put together. Instead, now they're already making an addendum to eliminate a lot of future Airbnbs and some potential ones that are out there waiting um for approval to be able to start as an Airbnb.

Thank you. I have a for question for staff. Is is that enforcement do you know is that handled through the police department or code enforcement or um it is handled through code enforcement? And of course if if this was part of the zoning ordinance, we would regulate the location. Gotcha. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public? Yeah. Yes. Hey

everybody. Um Matt Barner. I am a resident uh of Arsenal Hill Stark neighborhood across the road. Uh vice president of the neighborhood as well. Um we are not in favor of this amendment. It's current form. Um I I'll speak for myself on this. Um I know at least four neighbors that have uh short-term rental properties in the neighborhood. It's a way for us kind of in a transitional neighborhood to kind of manage the neighborhood and control it somewhat. Um, it's uh I'm not against regulation. You know, the the tragic incident that happened, it's something that spawned the, you know, the current conversation about it. So, there's there's work that we can do. I think there's a win-win out there. I think we're close to it already. Um, but you know, what do we want Columbia to be? Uh, we're hosting people, visitors, and you know, it's in my neighborhood. Um, we're we're a city, we're downtown, we're not an HOA, we're not a gated community. Um, I think there's a way we can welcome people of Columbia and have a win for both, you know, the the property owners and keep their rights from being trampled on. Um, and you know, and the point being also that accessory accessorary dwellings, I think, are are on the the chopping block for this too, that would not get to be used for short-term rentals. And that is a way for people to kind of supplement income as homeowners. So, I just wanted to share our opinion. Uh, appreciate the time. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is John Wilkinson. I'm the president of the Elwood Park Neighborhood Association. Um, we shared a letter this afternoon. Sorry that was coming a little bit late, but our neighborhood is supportive of this amendment. Um, listening to some of the comments this afternoon, this is not really a question of uh, operations or management or enforcement. I think the question before is, is our visitor accommodations a suitable use in residential zones? We're talking about putting hotels in the middle of our neighborhoods. You could have a hotel next door to you. And we've, you know, are one of the neighborhoods that um, has a higher density of them in Colombia. And so our neighbors have experienced this firsthand up close. the consequences of it. And when we surveyed our neighborhood recently, um, and our neighborhood association has 160 active members, 85% were supportive of this amendment essentially. And that other 15%, you know, our neighborhood does include Mr. Bergman and other um, STR operators. They're included uh, in that survey. And this notion of, you know, nurses and military and contractors, they live in our neighborhoods, too. And I think they deserve some of the same things that we're talking about in terms of safety and stability and really building a community. So when we talk about what do we want Columbia to be, yes, we want to be welcoming. We want to be hosts and this allows for that. We could have STRs across the city. I mean, look at all the the zones up here. There's a lot of opportunity for them, but should they be in residential zones? We don't think so. So, thank you for your consideration.

Thank you. Question, sir. So, um, have [clears throat] there been many enforcement actions or problems in your neighborhood, complaints that have been logged? Loged, I don't know the answer to that. You know, we hear that enforcement has been lacking, that I think it's been our experience as well. But when we hear from neighborhood or from our neighbors and conversations around the neighborhood and what people report back to the neighborhood association, yes, there's been a lot of frustration with them. [clears throat] Okay. Thank you. What kind of problems are you experiencing that are, you know, causing the most concern?

Well, we've had three people killed that was probably the most significant. But, you know, aside from that, which, you know, we see the parking, partying, you know, people not understanding the neighborhood, blocking driveways, you know, just generally creating disruption in the neighborhood. And unfortunately it becomes incumbent on the neighbors to become the enforcement element. You know the the management companies aren't there. They often don't even they know who's there but they check in on an app. They don't actually know who's there. So it becomes the neighbors problem and then they have to call 911. They have to be vigilant of what's going on. So it it it puts that on the neighbors. I've got a quick question for staff. So, can these in particularly with you're in an overlay district, is that correct? Historic overlay district.

Elwood Park is Yes.

Are are those overlays allowed to adopt like specific guidelines that would prevent or regulate the use that use? Like I know they do it with DDRC for aesthetics and renovations and things like that. um our overlays, you know, there's always exceptions, right? But um they are generally, for example, Elmo Park is a historic district and design overlay. It it doesn't regulate use. Um but you know, as we were just talking about the airport overlay, you know, it it it further restricted use. Um, but you would probably want to be able to tie it to the purpose of the overlay.

Thank you. Any questions for Thank you. Thank you. Any other

good afternoon. Thank you for an opportunity to be in front of you today. My name is Denise Wellman. I also am president of a historic district. And like Mr. Wilkinson said, this is a zoning issue. This is not about ordinances, operations, or about enforcement, even though we could talk about those at length. Um, this is about zoning that would protect neighborhoods. Residentially zoned areas are zoned that way for a reason. there to be family residential areas and we now have hotels in our residential areas. Imagine would you want one of those right next to you? And I think that is a question that is before you. We're only we're not taking any of them away that are currently there. Yes, they could convert them to long-term rentals, but I'm always I'm interested by the fact that no, that's not financially lucrative enough for the hosts. But you know what it does is it damages the infrastructure, the culture of our neighborhoods. We need to be a neighborhood of neighbors, people that really care about neighborhoods and people that are visitors. We like to have them in our neighborhoods. We have them. Cottontown is about 40% residential. Excuse me, 40% rental. But we need people that engage in the neighborhood in ways that advance the neighborhood. Historic districts have a significant positive impact on the economic viability of our capital city. But you're destroying property values with short-term rentals. people don't want to live next to them and it's really hard to sell property and then

they're going to go to another investor. Um, that's not what we need. If we really care about our historic assets, we should protect them. This is a zoning change simply to protect the residentially zoned areas in our city that are not hotels. Thank you.

Thank you. [clears throat and cough] Any additional members of the public like to comment? I have a question for staff. I mean, and first I guess just general commentary across the board. This is this issue I think kind of been percolating for a while and coming up and I think well, excuse me. [clears throat] While this is an attempt at addressing it, I don't know if it brings together everybody in a way that's maybe balancing the right sensitivity to different areas and different sides of the issue. Could if we you know, vote this down or either way. Is there a way to schedule a workshop that maybe facilitates more dialogue around just different concerns to to craft another, you know, zoning amendment? [clears throat]

So, state law gives the planning commission 30 days to make a recommendation to council. So you you can recommend approval, you can recommend denial. Um if if you defer it, it would continue the council. It's currently scheduled for December um um 18th, I believe. Let's see. Hold on. Just want to make sure I'm getting the right date. I feel like we've heard a lot of really good thoughts on both sides of this and just

uh yeah, December 16th. I apologize. Um uh city council meeting for for a public hearing. Um and I think the next planning commission meeting is on December 11th. Is that also correct? I believe so. Um so it um I I will say that there there has been um discussion at council and and you know there certainly it would be a public hearing at council. [sighs] Um it is it is certainly the planning commission's prerogative to and recommend approval, recommend denial or recommend uh changes. Um, but I just want you to be mindful of that time frame.

So, if we deferred, could changes be made between this hearing and the next one? Like changes to the text?

Or do we have to vote on the same text as it is now? Does that make sense? I would suggest that it would be more appropriate for the planning commission to determine [snorts] um what changes they would want to see and perhaps if that wants if you would want that to be part of your recommendation on council. I guess I'm curious too if this was deferred in the interim, could we schedule a public work session to to take these points and maybe given different guidance on this motion or this amendment? [clears throat] you know, the the planning commission could set up a workshop. Um, I'm looking at the calendar here and of course there's Thanksgiving in a couple of weeks. So, um, I mean, we can we can try to find a date if that's what the planning commission wants.

Um, I think that's what I mean I don't want to speak for everyone up here, but I would be inclined to want to try to facilitate that. Seems like there's been a lot of discussion today that would be, you know, maybe more healthfully exercised into a text amendment that had sensitivity sensitivity to points we've heard on both sides. Sure. Um, this is really broad and [clears throat] I think there could be a lot of casualties. Yeah.

Just for for discussion, you know, um, seems to me to be a obviously [clears throat] contentious issue and not the first time it's been brought up in the city, our city or any other city. This feels really extreme. Um there's probably a middle ground perhaps. Um maybe not. Maybe that's what it comes back to, but it feels very extreme to make this decision today. I would not be inclined to propose to support this. Um Mr. Chairman, can we take a brief recess so we can maybe talk through the legality of trying to set something up between now and the public hearing? Sure. Can uh we get a motion to take a brief recess? A motion to take a brief recess. Got a motion. Can I get a second? Second. Second. Motion to second. All those in favor signify by saying I.

I. Okay. I

All right. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Hey, [music] hey, hey.

[music]

Hey, hey, hey.

be back in session. [clears throat and snorts] I think where we left it, there was discussion of [snorts] motions for deferral and the ability to discuss in the interim or if anyone wants to go for a different discussion, we can discuss. Sure. Uh can I address the Yes. Thank you.

So, you know, this is part of the process of going through a text amendment. It does go to the planning commission and then again it does go to city council. This is a public meeting. The the public hearing is at city council and so really the planning commission's role is to make a recommendation and it can be a recommendation for against or we recommend it could be something in between right it could be uh you know we we have specific language we would wish to propose but but yeah I I think the deferral is not an option. [snorts] So is the next planning or is the next council after the next planning commission session?

Yes. I mean it has it has been advertised and um so if we defer to the next planning commission we would not be transmitting um a recommendation to council um in in terms of what we would be sharing with council. So, you know, effectively at some point it it it becomes um according to state law it becomes a recommendation of approval. Okay. Any further questions from planning commissioners?

Just to be clear, so we can't defer to the next meeting is what you're saying. You know, again, it's the planning commission's job to make a recommendation to council on the proposed language. Thank you. All right. So, in its current written form, can we get a motion? Mr. Chair, I will uh recommend denial of the recommendation to amend Unified Development Ordinance Chapter 17- Article 4. How far do I need to read that? I think that's far enough. Okay. Thank you. I've got a motion.

I second the motion. Got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? Nay. All right. Can we do roll call, please? [snorts] Certainly. Uh, Mr. Brabbom. Hi, [snorts] Mr. Quasy. Hi, Mr. Cook. Yes. Miss Cubny, no. Mr. Foster, hi. Mr. Hulkcom, hi. Mr. Asorio, no. And Mr. Conn, no. Motion pass.

Motion passes 43 or 53, excuse me. All right. On to the next application item. [snorts]

[clears throat]

This is going to bring us to SP plan 2025 00018 at 875 Kataba in adjacent northern lot. Um, this project entails the construction of a sevenstory multifamily residential building and associated parking on 1.88 acres at 875 Kataba Street. The proposed development will contain 237 apartments, amenity space, and a parking garage. In addition to vehicular parking in the garage, the applicant will be providing parking spaces within the link Lincoln Street rightway and providing 80 bicycle parking spaces. Um, in accordance with section 172 5I6 of the UDO, the planning commission shall approve a major site plan upon finding that the proposed major site plan demonstrates all of the following standards are met. [clears throat] The pro proposed zoning are allowed in the zoning district. The development and uses in the site plan comply with um article 4. The development and proposed site plan is in in its general layout. design comply with the applicable standards. The development proposed in the site plan and general layout design comply with all applicable standards of article 6 and that the development in a proposed plan is consistent with all other applicable standards and ordinances and code. staff has reviewed the major major site plan and has determined that the standards of 1725i6 of the UDO are met and if the planning commission is inclined to grant approval of the request we would ask that they do it with staff comments and I believe the applicant is present and can explain their case further.

Thank you. the applicant. Please come up and [snorts] tell us about the project or the application.

Hello, I am uh Tommy Sinnate, representative of Cardinal Group, the developer uh and Mark Duza, civil engineer with Tom. Um we're excited about the opportunity. The site is currently vacant um and has been so for nearly a decade. uh and we're really excited um to have the opportunity to develop uh in downtown. So I'll let uh our civil welcome.

Okay. Thank you. Um good evening. So the if we can go to the site plan C1.1, I would appreciate it. Um so just general overview of the project, it is currently a warehouse. It's on two parcels. Um the plan is to combine the two parcels to 2.1 acres. Uh it's it's zoned appropriately for multifamily. Uh both streets uh north south is uh Lincoln Street and east west is Kataba to the south. Uh both are city streets. To the west is the CSX rail uh easement. It's 100 foot easement and then to the north is a adjacent property. I believe it's a commo communication [snorts] um center. Uh north is Greek village. So um what we're doing on the eastern frontage Lincoln Street um there is a considerable rightway. So the uh developer has planned in accordance with in coordination with the city to adhere to the bike walk program for the city. Uh in that we're providing a 13oot bike lane. Um and then adjacent to that in addition there's a 8-foot walking uh sidewalk. So, those are both proposed on Lincoln Street and then they'll tie in uh back to Lincoln Street to continue north of Greek Village. The um that also includes streetscape and uh landscaping that the developer will keep and maintain for um for the city. The southern frontage is Katava Street and there's uh additionally there's streetscaping landscaping proposed there. The road will tie back into the uh railroad crossing uh going west. Let me see if I missed anything here. Utilities are all uh pre-capacities approved. So, we have water and sewer already generally approved with the city. We just have to get the plans hammered out and turned in. So, uh sewer

comes from uh Lincoln Street and so does water. There's sufficient service in those lines. um storm water is going to be a underground detention uh system and it's going to um be handled uh the roof drainage will go in and go into a detention system before it's uh pushed out. So all those things are in compliance with the city uh standards and um and I believe that is all that I I wanted to present. So we'll stand by for any questions. Thank you. Yes,

Mr. Duza. Um, I saw your drainage plan and I saw the notation that I figured it'd be underground detention. Um, but I couldn't see any piping or a discharge. What are your thoughts on where does this discharge to Kataba? Good, good question. So, the current drainage basin goes towards CSX railroad to the west. So, the plan is to um the detention underground is going to pump up and then have a little level spreader to go back to the railroad where it currently goes. Interesting. Right. So, we are uh in coordination with CSX right now um and their engineer team. Sure. To their engineering team to make sure that everything's um uh good with them.

Okay. When you answer my question, thank you. I had uh entertained putting some drainage in the uh Katava Street right away, but it's just too shallow to make it make it worth it. It looks like a tough drainage situation. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. [clears throat] Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you. All right. Thanks. I have a question for staff. [cough] On the [clears throat] agenda, did it show a airport overlay for this property? It did. Um, but I believe that's the state airport overlay. Um, so it it the zoning is not um airport overlay.

Okay. I was just thinking about the height limitations, but we're confident that we're not violating that or that's not a limitation on this parcel.

Yeah, they've already um Andrew was informing me that they've already done the clue tool to make to make sure that there's no um intrusion in that area. Okay. Thank you. I did have one more question and I apologize um and maybe Mr. Dus, I might need to come back up, but I noticed in the traffic study um that a level of service was going to be exceeded over in the Greek village. Um yes. Is there any way to resolve that or is there any plan to work that out? So the uh [clears throat] it's in the build and no build condition. I'm sorry. It's in what?

The build and no build condition will produce that result. So part of it is the pedestrian increase over the next two years. So all the foot traffic the students um so the the challenge was making a left turn if you're I'm sorry like Mccur Street or something. I don't remember that. It's called Mark Buck Street. I believe it's right there. Mark Buck Street. Yeah, right. Yeah, Mark Buck Way.

Okay. and um the number of pedestrians traveling through the intersection um can produce reduce the gaps to make that turn. So there there's no way to really improve that if you do a um dedicated right turn and left turn. They have further to cross and it's harder to have visibility. So there's really no way to resolve right issue, right? And we we feel that it would occur in the build and no build condition. So it's it's not necessarily contingent on this project. I see. Yeah. Okay.

Yes, sir. There are any members of the public that want to speak? Thank you.

How you folks doing? Good to see you. My name is Reagan Freeman. I'm here on behalf of a group called Palmetal Walk. We do the state uh pedestrian and bike advocacy work. I'm here in Colombia. Uh I just wanted to mark this. This will be the first cycle track in Colombia. That's the bike lane that we're talking about that's very wide. I think that's tremendous. It's incredible. I am in support of this really because it's the public rightway improvements that are great to kind of see as our city continues. Um infill development is always very welcome here. It's very very good overall. Um yeah, if we look longer term, I know there's were at least some concerns about the level of service and things like that. building these facilities and giving people that ability to kind of modal shift, right, and be able to feel more comfortable and safer walking or biking. I imagine that will help it longer term. So, yes, thank you so much. This is really, really exciting. We had to come out and say thank you. I will just quickly say, and I just don't think they they caught it since this is our first one. The most dangerous natural predator in Colombia is an 18-year-old driving on their phone recklessly. I would love just a Ballard on that cycle track where the driveways are on Lincoln just to make sure no one's thinking it's an extra lane if you get what I'm saying. So maybe with that recommendation as well. Um but yeah, it's it's a phenomenal day. It's it's really great that the developer and the city are working on this together. That kind of public private moment, you know, that's not something that you see often here. So very very cool stuff. So thank you.

Help. What exactly is your recommendation? So if you look on your uh plan here on the driveways on Lincoln Street where the cycle track intersects with the driveways just adding a ballard essentially a ballard at each one both sides protect and so no one thinks they can you know drive that way would be my recommendation. So if we can afford that hopefully I'm seeing heads shaking over there like good to go. I figured we would. So yeah again thank you guys. This is cool. I think we were here for William Street a few months ago. So it's great this is all happening back to back to back. Sorry I didn't catch it. What organization did you say you It's Palmetto Walk. We used to be called the Palmetto Cycling Coalition. So, we do the state ped bike work. I'm also with a group called the Colola Town Bike Collective here in town. So, we're a big fan of all the the cool stuff you guys are doing. So, had to come out here and celebrate this, too. What's your last name again?

Uh, Reagan Freeman. Freeman. Yes. Anything else? Cool. Thank you. All right. Any other comments from the public? Any commission members have any questions or comments? All right. For a motion, I'll make a motion to approve S Plan-2025-000018 at 875 Kataba Street. Subject to staff comments and subject to compliance of the request of Mr. Freeman to add some Ballards.

Second motion in a second. All those in favor [clears throat] signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Can I get clarification on who seconded the motion? I'm sorry, Mr. CY. Okay. Thanks.

Yep. That's going to take us to Splat 20250053, 7300 block of Patterson Road. Um, on October 9th, the planning commission deferred this application to allow the opportunity for the applicant to meet with the community prior to the November 13th planning commission meeting. The applicant states that they have had conversations with the community and will be hosting a meeting prior to the November 13th meeting. Um, it's my understanding that they have had meetings with the neighborhood. They have provided us with some shining sheets um as well as some diagrams that we'll put on the record. To recap, this is um 61.71 acres on the east side of Patterson Road located near the intersection of Trinity Drive. And a proposed subdivision will contain 243 detached single family residences with an average lot size of 5,500 square ft. And a portion of the site will be preserved um due to the wetlands and open space and canopied retention requirements. In accordance with section 1725 JS of the uni of the UDO, the planning commission shall approve the preliminary plat upon finding that the proposed preliminary plat is in substantial conformity with the approved sketch plan and complies with the standards of article six of the land development standards and any applicable standards in the ordinance and any other applicable city ordinances and regulations. and staff has reviewed the preliminary plat in substantial conformance with the approved sketch plan. And if the commission is inclined to grant the approval, we just ask that you do it with staff comments and the applicant as president can go into their case a

little bit more. Thank you. Would the applicant please come to the podium? [clears throat]

Good evening, commissioners. Kevin Singleary with Great Southern Homes. Um, I'll be brief given the time and since this is something we looked at last month, uh, what I'll cover is the additional community outreach that we did. Um, as I discussed in October, we were in the process of scheduling a meeting with the Church of the Cross uh, to discuss um, you know, how to be good neighbors for each other. the fact that Mission Lane they currently uses their access and parking and obviously it's incorporated as one of our entrances and the principal street within our neighborhood. Uh that meeting went well. Um right now our engineers are working on some parking schematics for the church to ultimately make a determination of how they want to address their parking and we're going to help them out with that. Um considering on street might do a separate parking lot. it'll ultimately be an agreement that we come to together in terms of what makes the most sense for them. Um the church was also very generous and allowed us to host our community meeting at their chapel. Um that occurred on Tuesday. Um uh we had a number of folks that we had met with previously in October as well as some new folks come and attend that. Um the sign-in sheets I provided are from the meeting with the church and the meeting on Tuesday. Um, you know, there were lots of questions. Uh, we were able to answer them. Um, I was very pleased that, you know, what folks communicated to me was that they had no intention of speaking against it and were appreciative of us meeting with them. And finally, um, additional meeting that we had was our follow-up meeting with DOT and Richland 1 um to discuss the traffic mitigations as it relates to Burnside Elementary School. Um I and I believe you've just been

handed um images that show just some sketch plans of the two mitigations that DOT identified for us in the traffic impact analysis. Um, the one that's for Burnside would be a realignment of the school's entrance to the intersection of Trinity and Patterson and the creation of a left turn lane on Patterson onto Trinity and from Patterson into the school's entrance. Uh, the other mitigation that SC DOT asked of us is to convert [clears throat] the intersection of Patterson and Leburg to a rightin, right out only intersection. So, we have not we don't have the full designs on those yet, but we have the sketch plans and we'll move forward with that and obviously as part of getting our encroachment permit will be the approval of those plans um by DOT as well as for the entrance of Burnside Richland 1, we'll have to approve that. And if you have any questions for me, happy to answer them.

Do you uh any commission members have any questions of the applicant? I do. you the the Patterson Leburg Road right in right out looks interesting. Um, and you know, because pork chops don't just prevent people from making left turns. So, uh, they're probably going to make you put a median in. I would assume we we've had discussion with DOT. They want as minimal impact um changes at that intersection due to recent infrastructure improvements that have already been made in that area as well as they're not particularly interested in right-of-way expansion. Um

the what the traffic impact analysis displayed and it was it was surprising is just a high number of right turns um almost exclusively occurring at that intersection. some lefts were occurring, but it was overwhelmingly right turns. I think that a a lot of that has to do with the fact that Green Lawn has two, you know, traffic control lights at both ends, and the intent is clearly to push traffic traffic to Green Lawn for left turns onto Leburg. Okay. But DOT is going to enforce this. They're going to make you create some sort of right turn. That's correct. My entire experience of development has been that what they want from me is what they will get.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. [snorts] Any further questions? Thank you. Thank you. All right. Are there any members of the public that would like to speak or this application? Yes, ma'am. [snorts] Hi, I'm Jim Harmon. I live in the neighborhood. I was not informed of the meeting that you had at the church. Did a couple of my neighbors. Would you mind stating your name again so Jean Harmon. Jean Harmon. Okay. Thank you.

Um we were not informed at that meeting. We were told by the association president that they were not going to oppose it. Not opposing it. I'm opposing that there's traffic issues already in place. The school is over capacity. So, and they are very aware of what's going on around them and they are not happy with it. So, it just seems to be it keeps [clears throat] going on. We're going to still have accidents at that landing coming out of Patricia uh excuse me, Patterson onto Caroline and they're already building 300 plus homes there. So, you're adding another 244 homes to what's already being built which is going to cause more pro uh traffic accidents, more traffic going in and out. And there's only two outlets. There's Leburg Road and Garner's Ferry. That is it. We appreciate it.

Thank you. Any uh any other members of the public like to speak or in the application? Any questions or comments among commissioners? All right, take a motion. Mr. Chairman, um we do want to acknowledge um and I believe that it was emailed to you um earlier, but we do want to acknowledge that um we did receive an email from Miss Cindy Clue um dated today at 11:06. And we wanted to put that on the record. [clears throat]

Noted. Thank you. [snorts] All right. We got a motion for the application. Further discussion. [clears throat] Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion that we approve SPLAT 2025- Z0053 7300 block of Patterson Road along with staff comments. All right, I've got a motion. Do we have a second? Second. Who was that from? [clears throat]

Me. [snorts] Uh, thank you. All right, we've got a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes. All right. Do we have any other business since the publication? The only other thing I wanted to do is um I want to introduce y'all to Colette Gruber, who is our new annexation coordinator. She's been with us a few weeks. We're super happy to have her on board, all of us, but especially Andrew. [laughter] So, we'll finally get some help with annexation stuff. So, anyway, you'll be seeing her and um as she gets up to speed and just wanted y'all to to be able to meet her today. So that's it. Do you'all have any other business?

What's What's Andrew gonna do? [clears throat] You know, nothing really. No. Okay. All right. Well, I was going to say, too, is this Clay? Is this y'all's first or second? Okay, that's right. My first. All right. Well, welcome. Welcome. [snorts] Thank you. Welcome on your second. [clears throat] Yeah. Full house. All right. If uh that'll do it, I have a motion to adjurnn. Mr. Cheer make a [snorts] motion we adjourn the meeting. All right. Motion in a second. Second. All right. Everybody in favor? I adjourn. Thank you. Alice, I bet you're really happy to hear Harris here now.