Chapin’s Architectural Review Board sends Chapin Crossing back to the drawing board
Chapin, SC (Paul Kirby) – The Architectural Review Board for the Town of Chapin has sent the developers of the outparcels at the Publix on Chapin Road back to the drawing board. They presented proposed drawings to the town that were reviewed by the board for Thursday night’s meeting. The development is a part of Chapin Crossing where the new Publix is, and the newly purposed building is a strip of six units to be built on the land that fronts Chapin Road in the heart of town. This outparcel is very close to the road and the building would be easily seen by everyone who drives by.
The plans presented the ARB have the front of the building facing the Publix. Even though the plans show some widows and doors on the rear, which appeared to be an attempt to appease the ARB and the town, people in attendance said it still looked like the service entrances it would be. That is unacceptable according to the town’s ordinances that have been tightened over the past four years. One citizen in attendance said, “It looked as if needed to be flipped 180 degrees to me, it was backward. The nicer part should be facing the main road,” he concluded. He also said it would leave almost no room between the road and the building for trucks delivering supplies to the business.
The building would include tenants that have apparently agreed to move into the building once it’s completed. Some of those proposed tenants are a Verizon store, Delta Dental, a Marcos Pizza, a yogurt store, and a business that does physical therapy. Although some have said these businesses would complement the town, others say adding more of these types of businesses right in the middle of Chapin will only make the traffic problems the town already deals with worse. They also said that there were other options that were similar nearby.
The ARB, made up of experienced builders and at least one architect, had more problems with the plans they were presented before last night’s meeting. One issue was that the building had a flat roof and exposed heat and a/c units. It was also drawn with walls on each that were just flat, plain brick. Town ordinances say it would need to have a pitched roof and more features on the ends to improve its appearance. When the developer protested the pitched roof was unfeasible, a member of the ARB referenced a particular building in Lexington County that was already that way and suggested he take a look at it.
In the end, the ARB sent the developer away. They told them when they had a set of drawings in hand that met all the ordinances meant to protect the town and its appearance from developers doing anything they wanted, they could represent those for their review.