Columbia County approves Parker’s Kitchen variance; residents press for traffic safeguards

Commissioners on Tuesday approved a variance permitting Parker’s Kitchen to reduce structural buffer and building separation requirements at property Tax Map 078C Parcel 223 while county staff and the applicant agreed to study traffic-mitigation measures requested by nearby residents.

Neighbors said the planned convenience store and restaurant will increase cut-through traffic through the Arrowhead, Casa Rosa and Casa Linda neighborhoods and asked the county to limit access that could route vehicles into those streets. “What they do is they just come race through the neighborhood … We’ve got animals, people walking animals, and children,” resident Kimberly Johns said during public comment.

The commission’s approval of the variance followed staff testimony that the project reduced a required 30-foot structural buffer to 15 feet and increased a required 100-foot building-corner separation to 54 feet after multiple design changes, including reducing the building footprint and reassigning parking to employee use nearest the residential edge. Commissioners said those changes and the conditions listed in the Planning Commission report of June 5, 2025, formed the basis for approval.

Why it matters: the variance changes how close commercial activity will sit next to single-family yards and comes after months of neighborhood complaints about drivers using local streets to avoid the Washington Road intersection. Residents and the applicant focused on engineering fixes — not litigation or code changes — as the immediate route to reduce neighborhood impacts.

What was discussed: neighbors and nearby property owners described trash, speeding and safety risks from increased traffic. Sylvia Elam, who lives on Oak Road and spoke for an elderly neighbor, said the volume of daily deliveries and restaurant patrons will make it unsafe for children to retrieve mail or play in front yards.

Representing Parker’s Kitchen, Daniel Ben Israel, real estate development manager, and civil engineer Cody Rogers told the commission the company prefers to retain the access shown on the site plan but is open to mitigation. “We prefer to keep it open, but we’re certainly open to working with the commission [and] the community to come up with a solution that we all can live with,” Ben Israel said. He said the applicant proposed a height-restriction bar to block semi-trucks from using the rear driveway and offered to pay for speed-mitigation measures on nearby streets if the county deems them appropriate.

Staff and commissioners described several engineering options: creating a right-in/right-out (sometimes implemented as a raised median or “pork chop” island) so vehicles could only turn right out toward Washington Road, installing speed humps on feeder streets and adding a physical barrier or fence on private property that currently channels traffic into the neighborhood. County engineering staff said they would evaluate whether a functional right-in/right-out or other modifications are feasible given existing pavement widths and property lines.

Formal action and conditions: a commissioner moved to approve the variance to sections cited in the motion (referencing Planning Department code sections discussed at the hearing) for the property, subject to the conditions enumerated in the June 5, 2025 Planning Commission report. The motion passed (voice vote; no roll-call tally recorded on the transcript). The approved changes include the 15-foot structural buffer, a 54-foot separation at the building corner and an agreement that certain landscaping and employee parking will be used to reduce impacts adjacent to the single-family property line.

Direction to staff and the applicant: Commissioners asked staff to review the traffic-impact materials the applicant provided and to follow up with the developer on practical design changes. The applicant volunteered to fund speed-mitigation devices on CariB(ē)/Caribe Drive and to explore physical truck-height restrictions. Commissioners said they could revisit additional measures such as speed humps after monitoring and study.

Background and next steps: the Planning Commission considered the site and recommended conditions in a June 5, 2025 report. Because portions of the project (notably access along state routes) require GDOT permitting, some final access controls may be set by state review. County staff will meet with the applicant to determine feasible roadway modifications; commissioners indicated they could reconsider post-construction traffic controls if neighborhood problems persist.

The county’s approval permits construction under the revised setback and buffer conditions; engineering changes to access and any traffic calming on county right-of-way will require subsequent review and, where applicable, separate approvals.

Ending: Neighbors thanked commissioners for hearing their concerns and for the applicant’s willingness to assist with measures to discourage cut-through traffic. The commission’s approval leaves open a path for staff and the developer to implement on-the-ground mitigations and for the board to re-evaluate if those measures prove insufficient.