York County BZA approves special exception for Highway 160 family event venue with noise and lighting conditions
February 13, 2026 | York County, South Carolina
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The York County Board of Zoning Appeals voted to approve Special Exception Case Z26-1 SE, allowing an outdoor recreation and amusement venue on Highway 160, after attaching conditions aimed at limiting noise, night lighting and site disturbance.
Planning staff told the board the resubmitted proposal calls for a 5,000‑square‑foot structure with a 2,000‑square‑foot outdoor seating and play area, a 400‑square‑foot gazebo, a small food‑truck site, a children’s play area and a nature walking trail. Staff recommended approval with conditions, saying anticipated impacts to public services would be minimal and noting that an SCDOT mitigation plan for Highway 160 had been approved.
The board’s conditions — adopted in a motion by Board Member (Speaker 2) and seconded by Board Member (Speaker 9) — require that outdoor entertainment be limited to "acoustical only" performances (no amplified music or public address systems), set hours of operation to Wednesday–Saturday 10 a.m.–9 p.m. and Sunday 1 p.m.–7 p.m., require a privacy fence on three sides of the parcel and prohibit tree removal within the 100‑foot stream buffer shown on the plan. The motion passed by raised hands; no roll‑call tally was recorded in the transcript.
Applicant representatives and supporters said the venue is intended as a family‑oriented community space that would support local vendors and provide activities such as yoga, children’s programming and small performances. "We have an almost 7 year old daughter," Erin Colicercio told the board, and the couple said they designed the project to preserve as much of the site's natural character as possible. Rich Fennell, representing the applicants, asked the board to review the packet materials including a traffic study and a noise analysis and said the applicants were willing to accept limitations to address concerns.
Opponents — many living on lots immediately behind or adjacent to the site — focused on noise, traffic safety and lighting. Michael Martin, a homeowner whose house sits about 370 feet from the proposed center of the property, told the board the packet cited a consultant (Carolina Prime Productions) as saying a speaker playing "up to 150 decibels would not disturb" nearby residences; Martin and other neighbors called that assertion incorrect and hazardous. "150 decibels is intensely loud, painful, and dangerous sound level, causes immediate permanent hearing damage," Martin said.
Several neighbors and a person with professional experience in industrial noise exposure said the consultants’ decibel examples in the materials appeared inconsistent with the actual tests the applicants described. The applicants responded that the tests they performed registered neighborhood readings in the 60–80 dB range at on‑street locations and that the engineer’s report included a poor comparison that was not intended to mean the venue would operate at extreme levels. "If you cranked it all the way up to 11... it still wouldn't cross the ordinance," an applicant representative said while acknowledging the comparison in the report was sloppy.
Lighting also drew scrutiny. Board members read York County code §155.501 into the record, which states that an outdoor recreation and amusement use illuminated with artificial lighting must be at least 500 feet from any dwelling not on the same parcel; staff said allowed fixtures must be fully shielded, down‑lit and avoid off‑site glare, and confirmed accessory lighting within the 500‑foot buffer would not be permitted.
The board asked for clarifications about the site's buffer yards and the stream buffer. Staff and the applicant detailed variable buffer yards around the parcel — including a 25‑foot Type B buffer adjacent to a veterinary clinic, a 30‑foot Type C buffer adjacent to a church and a 75‑foot Type D buffer adjacent to a manufactured home — and the applicants said they would preserve trees inside the 100‑foot stream buffer and minimize tree removals to areas needed for the building, parking and play space.
After discussion and a short executive‑session consultation on legal advice, the board adopted the motion to approve with the stated conditions. The board also asked staff to ensure any site lighting and buffer implementation be handled during the required permitting and review processes.
The board adjourned the meeting following the vote.
Planning staff told the board the resubmitted proposal calls for a 5,000‑square‑foot structure with a 2,000‑square‑foot outdoor seating and play area, a 400‑square‑foot gazebo, a small food‑truck site, a children’s play area and a nature walking trail. Staff recommended approval with conditions, saying anticipated impacts to public services would be minimal and noting that an SCDOT mitigation plan for Highway 160 had been approved.
The board’s conditions — adopted in a motion by Board Member (Speaker 2) and seconded by Board Member (Speaker 9) — require that outdoor entertainment be limited to "acoustical only" performances (no amplified music or public address systems), set hours of operation to Wednesday–Saturday 10 a.m.–9 p.m. and Sunday 1 p.m.–7 p.m., require a privacy fence on three sides of the parcel and prohibit tree removal within the 100‑foot stream buffer shown on the plan. The motion passed by raised hands; no roll‑call tally was recorded in the transcript.
Applicant representatives and supporters said the venue is intended as a family‑oriented community space that would support local vendors and provide activities such as yoga, children’s programming and small performances. "We have an almost 7 year old daughter," Erin Colicercio told the board, and the couple said they designed the project to preserve as much of the site's natural character as possible. Rich Fennell, representing the applicants, asked the board to review the packet materials including a traffic study and a noise analysis and said the applicants were willing to accept limitations to address concerns.
Opponents — many living on lots immediately behind or adjacent to the site — focused on noise, traffic safety and lighting. Michael Martin, a homeowner whose house sits about 370 feet from the proposed center of the property, told the board the packet cited a consultant (Carolina Prime Productions) as saying a speaker playing "up to 150 decibels would not disturb" nearby residences; Martin and other neighbors called that assertion incorrect and hazardous. "150 decibels is intensely loud, painful, and dangerous sound level, causes immediate permanent hearing damage," Martin said.
Several neighbors and a person with professional experience in industrial noise exposure said the consultants’ decibel examples in the materials appeared inconsistent with the actual tests the applicants described. The applicants responded that the tests they performed registered neighborhood readings in the 60–80 dB range at on‑street locations and that the engineer’s report included a poor comparison that was not intended to mean the venue would operate at extreme levels. "If you cranked it all the way up to 11... it still wouldn't cross the ordinance," an applicant representative said while acknowledging the comparison in the report was sloppy.
Lighting also drew scrutiny. Board members read York County code §155.501 into the record, which states that an outdoor recreation and amusement use illuminated with artificial lighting must be at least 500 feet from any dwelling not on the same parcel; staff said allowed fixtures must be fully shielded, down‑lit and avoid off‑site glare, and confirmed accessory lighting within the 500‑foot buffer would not be permitted.
The board asked for clarifications about the site's buffer yards and the stream buffer. Staff and the applicant detailed variable buffer yards around the parcel — including a 25‑foot Type B buffer adjacent to a veterinary clinic, a 30‑foot Type C buffer adjacent to a church and a 75‑foot Type D buffer adjacent to a manufactured home — and the applicants said they would preserve trees inside the 100‑foot stream buffer and minimize tree removals to areas needed for the building, parking and play space.
After discussion and a short executive‑session consultation on legal advice, the board adopted the motion to approve with the stated conditions. The board also asked staff to ensure any site lighting and buffer implementation be handled during the required permitting and review processes.
The board adjourned the meeting following the vote.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
