Board of Zoning Appeals - Regular Meeting

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Town of Lexington Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting. This meeting is being broadcast live on the Town of Lexington YouTube channel. This board is comprised of town citizens. We are appointed by town council and we serve without pay. We are a legal board operating under the comprehensive planning act of the state of South Carolina. And although this meeting may not seem as formal as a hearing in court, all statements still must be true, factual, and made in a manner not to lead us under the Freedom of Information Act. Public notification of this meeting was published, posted, and mailed in compliance with the FOIA and the town election requirements. Please understand that you we must make our decisions within the parameters of state law. State law requires us to grant a variance if and only if we find each of the following four statements true. Number one, there are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to a particular piece of property in qu excuse me pertaining to the particular piece of property in question because of its size, shape, or topography. Number two, these conditions do not generally apply to other property in the vicinity. Number three, because of these conditions, application of the ordinance to a particular piece of property would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. And number four, authorization of the variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property or the public good and the character of the district will not be harmed by granting the variance. Moreover, state law prohibits us from granting a variance simply because the property could be used more profitably if the variance were granted. We are not concerned with the use of the property. The use of the property is determined by others. We ask you please confine your remarks to the issues at hand. Second page. Should we make a decision that you believe to be incorrect, you may appeal our decision to the circuit court within certain limit time limits provided by state law. In case of such an appeal is

made. In case such an appeal is made, it's important that the circuit court know who testified at this meeting. So, please sign in the sign-in sheet and identify yourself before you speak into the microphone. New business staff.

Good evening. This is for variance number 2026 dash-2B 297 Industrial LLC has submitted a request for a variance from the town of Lexington setback ordinance to construct a warehouse addition or a building structure immediately adjacent to um 297 Industrial Drive. The existing structure is a legal non-conforming building with a setback of 14 ft from the side property line. In order to construct the proposed addition, the building must comply with current setback requirements which mandate a 30-foot setback from the side property line. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the addition to the ma to maintain the same 14oot setback as the existing structure thereby aligning with the current building.

Okay. Before we start, Michael, you got an extra pen over there. I do. I seem to have walked off without my a salesman without a pen. How sad is that? Thank you. We hear from the applicant, please.

Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, my name is Todd KS and I'm at 310 Clanbank Way and I'm one of the uh uh members of 297 Industrial and I have supplied you guys with uh with our rationale according to the the four principles. U and in short uh this building is 5,000 square ft. It sits on 45,000 square ft of paved asphalt. It was originally designed uh obviously to be larger and we are looking to uh expand the footprint of the building on the existing asphalt in the building in the uh on the property. And so in relation to uh exceptional conditions, it is a current non-conforming building and we we have an exe exceptional condition where this existing building is not able under current ordinances to be expanded to be useful on the property. The conditions don't generally apply to other buildings in the vicinity. This is as you guys know industrial industrial district surrounded by industrial buildings which are generally significantly larger and cover a larger footprint of their parcel. Uh because of these conditions see the property is prohibited or unreasonably restricted for the utilization and that goes again to expansion of the building. We're looking to expand and the the authorization of the variance will not be substantial detriment to adjacent properties. If you look at the adjacent property, uh this is to the west. The adjacent property there is 100 ft off the property line. And so we're adjacent to their parking lot. And so in short, the the building is set up uh to

be expanded. It has the asphalt footprint. It has the partial footprint was just built and the ordinance was changed subsequent to its construction. And so we wanted to ask for a variance cuz I think the ordinance is the right ordinance, but we were one of them that was caught in the middle. Uh the current building's grandfathered in. Um, so we would ask for your permission to add an addition to the building and I'll take any questions if you have them. How uh uh how big of a addition you talk about putting in?

Yeah, we we haven't uh fully defined how large the addition is. Uh right now conceptually it's 5,000 ft. So we're looking to go from 5 to 10,000. Uh but that number it could fluctuate. thousand here or there. I think what we're asking for on the variance is is the variance related to the setback, but I think the max you could get on there would probably be 12. And you're planning on maintaining the 14T on the addition as well, right?

Correct. Yeah, we just want to match the existing building. And what's on the the uh I guess it would be the are there loading docks on this building? There's not actually. There's a uh a mobile loading dock out there right now, but on the back you can come in at grade. Uh on the side they have some garage doors and

so the the I guess the western side does have some where you can drive into it. Correct. the the eastern side on the the eastern side has some garage doors and there you can come in on grade in the back and so when when we expand we will work on some kind of docking solution at the rear of the of the expansion because right now at the back you're just at grade. It's kind of a funny setup. Okay. So this this uh in picture here um it looks like when you're looking. Yes.

Um looks like you know 50 53 ft trailers can back into that that dock. So that's not a that's not a loading dock there where where we're saying that the building the new building or addition would go. Currently what you see you see a concrete pad there. Yeah. Yeah. That's one. This this was the old Schwans building. Yeah. Y. So, it's not a true loading dock. It's not a sunken dock and it's not a full height dock. They had a weird kind of setup cuz they had a freezer across half of this thing. So, it was kind of a half dock. So, we had to abandon that. Okay.

And now we have a door back there where you can drive in where you can use a mobile dock and get in on grade. So, it was really set up particularly for them. Okay. And they were there like 35 years, but their trucks had a unique setup. If you look at if you look at this, I guess it's kind of on the south side where the doors are, instead of coming in at grade, they kind of had sunk in driveins so that they could bring those refrigerated trucks in. So the building it just requires significant modification for anybody other than Schwans.

Any questions? Questions? Um, I kind of feel like we're caught in front of the horse because I don't I don't know about the rest of the board. I'm uncomfortable giving a variance when I don't see what's I mean, there's a possibility that there could be other issues. I mean, am I thinking wrong on this, Jessica? If you approve the variance, it allows them to confidently move into further planning. Does does that make sense? So okay

um we would verify then that all other requirements are met. So it would only be a variance for the setback for that one side. We would make sure that the rear setback meets the ordinance and the other side setback would meet the ordinance and we would also look at any parking recommend you know requirements that would would be needed after

for the concern because I I mean I would we've done this before and I don't like the idea of giving a cart blanch kind of thing. It would if you were to approve the request as asked would only be for that side setback closest to 293. Now

I think you well I don't know Jesse you would have to speak. I would think you could restrict it to a variance allowing us to retain that side setback when the building is receives an addition not a new building. If we're building a new building, we have set at 30 ft off, but I think you could restrict it to additions to this building. We'd certainly be amicable to that. Yeah, you can put whatever conditions you would like. Mhm. Yep. Brad, anything? No, I'm more comfortable with what you said last considering this being maybe a modification of an existing building. Absolutely. Um, that makes a lot more sense to me.

Absolutely. Do we need to if we were to to decide to pass this, do we need to put any requirements because needless to say, you're adding on. So there's some of the back of this building is going to have to have some changes where the where the dock area is. If they're adding straight back on the back side, we we would just make sure it meets current rags unless there is some sort of request for variance there, which I think at this time there is not. No.

And I don't believe one is anticipated. Okay. All right. Anybody? Thank you. Thank you. Anyone speaking against? It's so lonely here tonight. We had such a nice crowd. Um, anything we need to consider that we haven't discussed. Not that I'm aware of. No. Okay. Well, we'll talk. Or maybe somebody else will. Easy there. Yep. You break the chair, you can't come back. Well, so what are you thinking?

I agree with Brad. If um, you know, as long as we're restricted to being, you know, in additional to the existing building that goes no closer than 14 ft to the existing property, it's fine and stays in that same, you know, u line or or in the same footprint, not footprint, but line of the existing building. That um that seems okay to me. So I agree. Yep. because the the property to the left of this also is at 14 ft off the property line as well. Yep. And Jessica, just for and and our applicant has shared this. Nothing from either of the neighbors. No, no, I've not received any no ups or downs.

No concerns. I've not received any feedback either way. Okay. I thought that was actually the strongest portion. It doesn't seem at all upset the character. Yes. Right now. Yeah. Y it's an industrial district for sure. Mhm. That whole road. So Brian, you were saying if if we pass this the addition to the uh Brad, excuse me. Um addition to the existing building remaining in line with the with the existing 14 foot setback not to or did you say not to exceed? Yeah, I gave you a choice. You just said yes.

I'm just saying it makes a lot more sense to couch it as an existing building expanding because when I first read it, my initial reaction was, wait a minute, you want to build a new building under the old rules? I'm not real keen of that. But now, and see, I didn't wait.

And see, my whole mind changed because when I came, I thought, what is a concrete pad? was the addition because it talked about that this was done and I thought maybe that was the 14T off but anyway I didn't look I didn't look at the little number. All right, give me a minute. Let me see if I can figure this out. I think I have a motion. There's my papers. Peppas. Where are you? Peppas. That's so quiet. Mhm. I didn't even ask if if I'm willing to do this. Does anyone else want to do this or

go for it? Go for it. Yeah. have at it. Yeah, you got two more meetings, bro. I'm just saying.

All right. All right, I'm going to run this by you and I want I want your opinion all of us to see if we can go. I want to make a motion to approve variance 2026-2 addition with to for an addition to the existing building with the stipulation that it must remain in line with the 14t setback and meet all other building setbacks and requirements as current as current Lexington code requires. How's that with the question mark on the end? And the reason that I'm going to do this, the extraordinary and exceptional circumstant conditions are as follows. The conditions exist exist on the property due to the presence of a legal non-conforming established structure constructed in 1988 under prior zoning regulations which was built with a 14t setback from the property line. The location of the existing structure creates a physical condition specific to the property that affects the placement of any addition intended to be integrated with the existing building. Number two, the conditions unique to the property um that the conditions affecting this property do not generally apply to other properties in the vicinity. The hardship results from the specific placement and configuration of the legal non-conforming existing structure which predates the current zoning ordinance is required. Thus, the orientation and

placement of the new structure relative to the property line create a unique can excuse me create a condition unique to this parcel and not common to other surrounding properties. the unnecessary hardship. The strict number three, the the strict application of the 30-foot setback requirement would unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property because the existing building was lawfully constructed with a 14oot setback requiring a new addition to meet the current 30 would prevent practical expansion of the structure in alignment with existing building footprint. The hardship is not created by the applicant but is a result of the location of the pre-existing lawful structure relative to the current setback requirements. And finally, no harm to the charact to the uh public good or character. Granting this request in a variance will not be of substantial detriment to any adjacent property or the public good because the proposed addition will remain at the same setback alignment as the existing structure which has been present on the site since 1988. The variance therefore does not introduce any new encroachment pattern and the industrial character of the district will not be adversely affected.

Thank you. Roll call. I have a motion. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second. Roll call vote, please. Brad Cunningham, yes to the motion. Fisher, yes to the motion. Yes to the motion. Justin Brown, yes to the motion, yes to the motion. You have your variance. Thank you guys very much, sir. And can I put on my council hat and just say real quick but it's impossible to write any ordinance that doesn't need a variance somewhere sometime. Right. Yeah. But we have a few we would like you to look at sooner than later.

So I just I do appreciate what you guys do because we need exceptions to everything we do. So thank you very much. Appreciate your time and effort. Thank you'all very much. Todd, can you hang around for a minute? Absolutely. Thank you. All right. Um approval of minutes. Approval of minutes. Make a motion to approve the minutes. I have a motion to approve the minutes. Do I have a second? I'll second. Second. All in favor say I. I. All right. Anything from staff we need to know?

Um, so I am working with the signed consultant. I know we've been trying to keep you up to date on that. I am hoping to host stakeholder meetings the last week of March, March 30th. Um, you all will receive an invitation. Um, and we will also share that on the website and socials when we get to that point. Um, and we are also hoping to have a survey that we will be able to share out on socials as well so that we can just get as much feedback as possible. So, um, as we move through that process, I'll ensure to invite you all. It says stakeholders meeting open to the public. Yes. Okay.

Yes. So, we will have three target groups. We're hoping to have a group that will consist of citizens and board and commission members, council members of the town. And then we will also have a stakeholder meeting for signed contractors. So, anyone that is licensed through the business license um system with the town will receive an invite for that. And then we will also send out an invitation to business owners, townowned businesses. So, um, we're going to try to target those three groups. Okay. For feedback. Good enough. Yeah. Anything anybody need to add?

All right. I'm going to give my little speech. So, in case somebody actually is watching this on YouTube tonight, ladies and gentlemen, town government doesn't work without you. Um, we like it when you come in here, you sit and you listen. Um, especially on things like we talked about with the signs, window signs, and window clings. You have an opportunity to be involved. A computer keyboard is not the place to be involved. Come and be in person. Ask Jessica. Come call the town. Figure out how to be involved. Don't be that person from home. Come let us see you. Thank you very much. Motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. Second. Let's go. All in favor? I I. We're done.