The Town of James Island's Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) voted unanimously to deny a special exception for an additional car wash on Folly Road. I believe the BZA decision was fair and reasonable. I hope the owners of Huff Seafood are able to find a buyer for their property that will have a use more consistent with the goals of the Folly Road Overlay. I hope that Autobell can find a suitable location for their car wash, perhaps somewhere else on James Island.
After the meeting, the Town Administrator told me the BZA's decision. The hour was late. What happened? The BZA voted 4 to 1 to waive all time limits.
The South Carolina Code requires Boards of Zoning Appeals to adopt their own rules. The Town's BZA adopted rules five years ago that limit applicants to five minutes to make their presentation. Those opposed give remarks for up to two minutes, and then the applicant can rebut for two minutes.
The rules state that a majority vote by the BZA is needed to allow for any extension of these time limits. The BZA rules are posted here on the Town's website.
The next day, I asked the Planning Director what happened. She explained that the applicant's lawyer had been badgering her (by email) demanding more time to make their case. He said they had multiple expert witnesses to make presentations. Our Planning Director shared our rules, stating that it was solely the decision of the BZA to allow more time for applicant testimony
Before Tuesday's meeting, the BZA's Chairwoman met with the BZA Attorney. Soon after, the meeting started and the Chairwoman made the motion to waive all time limits, which passed 4 to 1. This was a surprise to everyone, including the applicants. According to Town staff, the applicants were in Council Chambers immediately before the meeting still debating how they would divide up their five minute time for their presentation.
Along with demanding more time, the applicant's attorney had been signalling an intent to appeal any unfavorable decision to circuit court. The reason for the extension of time limits was that a court might find that five minutes was an unreasonably short time for the applicants to present their arguments. Therefore, I understand and support the decision of the majority of the BZA to provide additional time.
When the motion to waive time limits was made, the Chairwoman asked that everyone be respectful and not waste time. Sadly, that was not to be. The worst offender was the applicant's attorney who wasted approximately an hour sharing his far-fetched legal theory that BZA should not be hearing the case, while attacking the competency of the Town and repeatedly sharing an intent to appeal any unfavorable decision. The arborist, stormwater engineer, and traffic engineer did provide some useful information to the BZA, and the Huff's explained their need to sell the property so they can retire.
Still, it is hard to believe that the useful information couldn't have been limited to an hour or even thirty minutes. Also, they were all supposed to be giving testimony to the BZA. Exactly why anyone thinks they should turn their back to the BZA and instead address the audience is beyond me.
The testimony of some of the opponents was nearly as bad, including one who took 45 minutes and another who removed the microphone, turned his back on the BZA and gave a speech to the audience. There is no evidence that any opponent needed more than two minutes to share their legitimate concerns with the BZA.
Fortunately, most opponents kept their remarks short and to the point. Thank you to everyone who attended the BZA meeting and did not abuse the process.
The applicants may appeal the BZA decision to circuit court within 30 days. Should that occur, the Town will defend the actions of the BZA, the Town Staff, and the Zoning Ordinance passed by Town Council.
