 Hello. Yeah. Okay. Welcome. Good morning, everyone. And welcome to the April 9th, 2019, City of Columbia Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. I am Chuck Sally, and I serve as chair of the board. And I'd like to introduce the other board members to my far left, Reggie McKnight, to my immediate left, Jim Deakins, and to my immediate right, Josh Speed, and then next to Josh, George Schaefer. And then I'd also like to introduce the staff that will be assisting us today, Rachel Bailey, the zoning administrator, and Hope Hasty, the deputy zoning administrator. Also assisting today, Andrea Wolfe, with the land use board coordination. This board is charged with hearing applications for special exceptions, variances, and administrative appeals. All testimony is recorded for the record, and anyone wishing to speak will need to be sworn in and come to the podium to speak. So testimony may be taken from the floor. When you come to the podium, state your name, and please speak clearly into the microphone because the meeting is being recorded. Applicants with cases before the board are allotted a presentation time of 10 minutes. This time also includes all persons presenting information on behalf of the applicant. This time limit does not include any questions asked by the board or staff regarding the case. And any member of the public may address the board in intervals of three minutes or five minutes if a spokesperson for an established body or group of more than three. The applicant then has five minutes for rebuttal, and the board reserves the right to amend these limits on a case-by-case basis. Those of you who plan to speak must be sworn, and if you're an applicant or here to speak in any case, please stand at this time and raise your right hand. Do you affirm or attest that the testimony you will give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? This time I'd like to turn the meeting over to Ms. Bailey. Good morning. So we'll begin the meeting with the consent agenda. The board uses the consent agenda to approve non-controversial or routine matters by a single motion and vote. If a member of the board or the general public wants to discuss an item on the consent agenda, that item is removed and considered during the meeting. The board then approves the remaining consent agenda items. The first matter on the consent agenda is the approval of the March 12, 2019 minutes. Item number two, Case 2019-0016, 4900 Broad River Road. This is a variance to the parking requirement for government use. And item number three, Case 2019-0018 for 15 Gibbs Court. This is a variance to the fence wall height requirement. That is all on the consent agenda today. City one in the audience, we're on the board wish either of these two items to be taken off of the consent agenda, 4900 Broad River Road or 15 Gibbs Court. I see no one. The chair will entertain a motion. I move that we approve the consent agenda and everything in it. We have a motion? Second. Have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Item on the regular agenda is case number four, 2019-0017 for 700 Hardin Street. This is a variance to the height requirement for a freestanding sign. If the applicant is present, they're welcome to come forward to the podium. My name is Aaron Siegel. I'm in the home team barbecue. Thanks for having me today. We appreciate it. Pretty simple request on our end. We've got an existing pedestal down there at 700 Hardin Street that's been there since the existence of a Harper's restaurant. So the pedestal is remaining. It's brick like the building. We've painted it such and we would like to keep the pedestal and put a new sign on top of it. So that's basically our request. We feel like it's been there for a long time. It's part of the five points community. I do have an email from the five points community association. They were not able to be here today, but they have said that they have no objection to the pedestal staying there. So we think it'd be great for the five points community to refurbish the sign, place a new sign on top, and we're hoping that the board will approve that. Very good. Just so I'm clear on it. So basically we're just keeping the same pedestal that's existing, replacing it with a new sign and then require a variance to keep that because of the change in use. The variance is to the height. So even with that existing pedestal, it's non-conforming. Since that sign went up, the area has been rezoned to Mx1, where a maximum height for a freestanding sign is four feet. Gotcha. So this is an effect asking to keep the non-conforming pedestal and add to it to have a height variance above that four feet. So are you familiar with the criteria that you filled out in the application for the variance and what we were required to consider? Would you mind just kind of let's go through those quickly? The first one is describe the extraordinary and exceptional conditions such as the size, shape, topography obtained to the subject property. Obviously it's an existing pedestal that's grandfathered. Yeah, and then just basically it's kind of a unique property in five points in that it doesn't really have any frontage. So just the fact that it doesn't have any frontage, having that central sign out there on the corner is really helpful to us and an existing condition that's been there for close to 30 years. Right, and those conditions don't generally apply to other properties in the vicinity? No, and I think one of the reasons is our property so far, it's set back so far. You know, it's surrounded by a parking lot, which is pretty unique. And then describe the ways in which the application for the ordinance effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property. You know, basically we said that the pedestal in the Harper's sign is a pre-existing condition, which has been a landmark and a defining monument in five points community for many years. You know, the brick on the pedestal matches the material of the building. It seems that if the pedestal had been accepted in the community for as long as it had, that it would continue to be allowed. And in granting this variance, it would not be a substantial judgment to the adjacent property or to the public good? Yeah, much the same answer for number three. And also, you know, we are aware of no issues that have been raised regarding the pedestal housing, the Harper's sign since its construction. We don't really see a reason that the changes we would be making would affect adjacent property owners at this point. And we believe the character of the community will be enhanced by the rehab of the pedestal and the new cleanly designed sign. And this variance is the minimum necessary to accomplish what you're trying to do? Well, in our mind, Steve, we just don't want to mess with the pedestal. I mean, we're certainly open to the board's idea of reducing the size of the pedestal. But, you know, one of the concerns we have with what the zoning says is the restrictions of four foot sign is sitting on that corner. Lots of pedestrians going by and possibility for damage as well. And it looks like the area of the sign is actually smaller than the existing Harper's sign. Yeah, it's, well, our sign is a circle. The Harper's sign is a rectangle. So the sign is seven feet in diameter. I'm not exactly sure what the Harper's sign is, but it'd probably be a bit taller, but not near as wide. So that was just a record that's the current sign is seven by 16. And then explain how this proposal is in harmony with the intent of the zoning ordinance that will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Yes, sir, sir. We feel that preserving the construction of the pedestal is in line with the intent of any ordinance. The pedestal is a significant and well-built structure that has been a piece of five-point history since the early 90s. The proposed use of the pedestal is in line with the past approved use. And the sign will be a revitalized monument in the five-points community in our eyes. Any questions from the board? So this is separate from any signage on the building. Is that right? I'll just go. This is specific to the freestanding signage. Will you have signage on the building? Yes, we have signage that's about to be signed off by the city any day now. And it's pretty simple. It says home team right on the side of the building. I just have one question about I'm curious about your claim for the second criteria where you mentioned that the existing pedestal is a landmark or a defining monument. I'm just curious what your basis for making that claim. Well, just basically that's been here for a long time. So it's existing. Yeah, I don't really have any concrete. That's just kind of a lot of the feedback we've got from the community. And ever since I've been coming to five points, our person has been certainly a central part of that. So is it your claim that people would be upset if the pedestal went away? I can't really speak to that. I think that people would appreciate the existence of the pedestal and knocking it down. Like I said, I feel like it's a nicely built structure. It matches the brick on the building. So I can't speak for anybody else though on that. One other thing. So I have a question about your answer on number five as well, because one of your concerns about actually complying with the forfeit sign, which is in alignment with the MX-1, the new MX-1 district requirements that are supposed to promote as practices of urban design and pedestrian-oriented development, there are other establishments and five-points Walgreens, for example, that actually has a similar site location and a signage that complies with that height requirement. I'm curious if you talk to anybody else that reported that they had experienced damage on their signage that was within that height requirement. No, that's just basically from my experience in having restaurants and signs and being around other businesses and seeing what has happened in the past. We have signed in West Ashley in Charleston. That's about six feet off the ground and six experience damage before. And in our downtown location, we did not construct a sign on the corner because of that reason. Will you all have a delivery service as well? Or is this going to be right there? I mean, will you all deliver, yeah. Oh, for the restaurant? Yeah. We probably do large-party deliveries. We do catering for the most part. But we don't do just car deliveries. You're looking for that? Yeah. I go to church right down the street. So yeah, I'm going to talk. Get it done. Very good. Thank you for your testimony. Is there anyone in the audience here to speak and favor against this proposal? Excuse me. My name is John Scarborough. I'm speaking in favor. I'm the landlord of the property. And I just want a little bit of history on it. We originally did the sign. And we could have gone, I think it was 50 feet at the time, or no 30 feet. And we talked with them, dealing with the city. They encouraged us to, because of where that sign is such a unique location and spot, that if we went lower, they thought it was going to impede some line of sights, not only for traffic, but actually for people walking and everything. So if we had to bring it down to where it's only six feet right now, the city has, I mean, the university has worked with the city and they closed San T Avenue on the weekends. This point is the drop off and the pickup for all of the shuttles and everything from the university. And there's a lot of walking traffic in that area. And we just feel like having to sign up, it increases the visibility in that corner. And it actually keeps anybody from, I mean, kids two o'clock in the morning, lobby to be over there messing with a sign that's only six feet tall. So we feel like this is the best for the area. One other thing I want to say, because one of the questions came up, we could have put a sign up there that's just got one pole. This is, we feel like it's a very aesthetically pleasing sign. A lot of money was spent, it's bricked up and we think it looks good for the areas. That's why we feel like we would like to be able to keep this pedestal. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm Linda Hoft. I'm with Robert's Sign Company in Charleston. And I'm here to answer any questions you might have about the actual sign itself. Any questions about the sign? Will it be Neon? Yes. Okay. Wonderful. Yeah. Okay. All right. That'd be great. Thank you. Thank you, man. Is there anyone else? Okay. In that case, board discussion. The property owner brings up a good point of four or six foot sign because of the unique geometry we're saying the avenue puts into Hardin Street would be a sight of success. That's a good point. I appreciate you bringing that up. And also, I like the creative adaptive reuse of this nice looking brick structure. I think it'd be a shame to have to demolish it and then construct something else that potentially was not as aesthetically pleasing. So far as I'm concerned, I think it's a good deal. I would also point out that we did take testimony from the owner of Al's upstairs audio several months ago on a variance request regarding, you know, the traffic that comes out at night, you know, or I should say early in the morning, you know, from about one to two 30, it can be pretty, some pretty tough customers out there. And I do see where the applicants concerned about a lower sign being having, you know, vandalism to it would be a legitimate concern as well. So I would like to make a motion then that we approve this request for a variance based on the applicants written application and the testimony heard here today and subject to all comments of staff. A second. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed. No. We have a variance, the variance passes. There are no other items on the agenda today. I do want to make just a little bit of a comment about Reggie. So his term is up this month. He has graciously offered to stay on until someone new is appointed. We appreciate your service. Thank you for your service, Reggie. Thank you. No other business. I like to make a motion then that we adjourn. Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you. Maybe the lightest one I've ever been to. It really is. It was indeed. That's a bolder, right? Officer Day, if you like my favor. It looks like a, let me keep her to flow in. Yeah, I'm talking about the state.