 That's for the camera. So welcome, everyone. To the December 11th, 2018, the City of Columbia Board of Zoning Appeals. My name is Chuck Sallie, and I serve as chair. The board, and I'd like to introduce the board to my far left. It's Reggie McKnight. My immediate left is Jean Dinkins. And then to my immediate right is Marcellus Primus. And then to my far right is Jenna Stevens. I'd also like to introduce the staff that will be assisting at the desk next to the podium. It's Rachel Bailey, the zoning administrator, and Hope Hasty, the deputy zoning administrator. Also assisting today are Andrea Wolfe, the land use board coordinator, and Erica Hyen, the zoning planning coordinator. This board is charged with hearing applications for special exceptions, variances, and administrative appeals. All testimony is recorded for the record. Anyone wishing to speak will need to be sworn in and come to the podium to speak. No testimony may be taken from the floor. When you come to the podium, please state your name and please speak clearly into the microphone. 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. Any member of the public may address the board in intervals of three minutes or five minutes if by a spokesperson for an established body or group of three or more people. The applicant then has five minutes for rebuttal. The board reserves the right to amend these limits on a case-by-case basis. For those of you who plan to speak, you must be sworn. So at this time, if you plan to speak as an applicant or for or against any application, please stand and raise your right hand. You affirm or attest that the testimony you will give today is the truth and nothing but the truth. Thank you. At this time, I'd like to turn the meeting over to Ms. Bayling. For a few cases that were deferred or withdrawn prior to today, so I just want to clarify those. Item number seven on the agenda, 2018-012 for 121 Shop Road Extension, that has been administratively deferred. Item number 11, 2018-011-0 for 1112 Hardin Street, that was withdrawn. And item number 12, 2018-011-1 for 3038 Bronx Road, that has been deferred until the January meeting. We will begin with a consent agenda today. 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 wishes 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 with one motion and vote. On the consent agenda today, we have the approval of the November 13th, 2018 minutes. Item number two, case 2018-0099 for 3401 Farrow Road. This is a special exception to permit a daycare. Item number three, case 2018-0104 for 2238 Sumter Street. This is a special exception to permit a print shop. Item number four, case 2018-0105 for 2323 Harrison Road. This is a special exception to establish a general farm primarily crop use. Item number five, case 2018-0108 for 4121 Palmetto Avenue. This is a variance to fence height requirements. Item number six, case 2018-0109 for 315 South Maple Street. This is a variance to fence height requirements. Item number eight, case 2018-0116 for 1101 and 1105 Pine Street in 2123 and 2125 Senate Street. This is a special exception to expand a religious organization. Item number nine, case 2018-0118. This is for LaBruce Lane. The TMS on this one, as it does not have an assigned street address, is 13807-0314. And this is a variance to set back requirements to construct a single family residence. So that is everything on the consent agenda. If a member of the public or the board wishes to discuss a case, please let us know now. For the sake of clarity, we are getting ready to vote on all of the items that Ms. Bailey just announced. If anyone is here, we'd like to remove those from the consent agenda and put them on the regular agenda where you'll have a chance to speak for or against those items. Raise your hand now or forever hold your peace. I see no one and I will accept a motion. I'd like to make a motion that we approve the consent agenda subject to any staff comment. Second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Anyone was on the consent agenda and they wish to leave. They are welcome to. You're welcome to stay too, but we'll give them a minute. All right, we will continue with the regular agenda. The first item is case number 13, 2018-0113 for 1700 Wayne Street. This is a variance to set back requirements for an accessory structure. If the applicant is present, they are welcome to come forward. God thank you. I am Ladi Howard, the owner of 1700 Wayne Street. This morning we are talking about a gazebo that I've constructed there. Just a little bit of, I'm getting feedback. So this sounds funny to me. It does sound a little funny. Is it? Maybe if the distance from the, I can, but I wonder if it's being recorded. So it has to be, yeah, there you go. You've got, your voice carries very well. Yeah it does, in my ears, I feel like, I say a word and I want to stop. I want to take a break. Okay, I'll try and be, so a little history. We purchased the property in 2002. I don't know if you're familiar with Wayne, with the Arsenal Hill area, but it's one of the oldest areas in Columbia. I'm trying to give you a history lesson, but what's important for me to articulate to you is that when we were, when we purchased the property in 2002, the character of the neighborhood was completely different than what we have now. Of those residents, there were probably three original residents left. Ms. Bradshaw, Mr. Richardson, and Ms. Davis. And we were the first to come in during that time and construct new residents there, outside of Governor's Hill. So there was a very active component there. I'm telling you that to tell you that I care about the neighborhood and the history of it. And everything that we've done there, a whole lot. Everything that's been developed there, it's kind of come after we came in and invested at 1700 Wayne Street. When we did that, we purchased that property from the Development Corporation to revitalize the area. And so when we purchased that property, we did so with variances already in place. That property, as most of the properties there, don't really meet the zoning codes. My particular property has a house and roughly a 9.7 inch fence there that is right on the property line. That wall of that house and the wall of that fence is actually my property line. So when we purchased that property, we purchased it with an easement so that the occupants or the owners of that would have an ingress and egress to that fence in the back. I think you can see that here. We're on the Wayne Street side there. That driveway, all of that is actually right on the property line. So there is an existing variance and most of the neighborhood with most of the structures. All of the properties there, the lots next to me, they're three lots, they're about 45 feet wide. They're not really the standard size lots. Our lot is not a standard size lot. We built it back about 16 years ago. We had to dig out and go down about five feet when we built that house. So all of it and most of the neighborhood is just kind of an exception and that they're not really a whole lot of ways that you can really observe this effect. And this particular instance when we built the gazebo, a couple of things. The neighborhood, as you see, doesn't have a whole lot of tree structure, a whole lot of coverage there except for a couple of trees that I planted. So when we are trying to enjoy or do things there at the property, we get a direct sun in and so it's kind of hard to go back in the back, especially in the heat of summer and do anything. Plus there is a tree that is on the property right next to us and that tree is kind of tall and overgrown. I'm pretty good with plants but I cannot think of the name of this one. It has this little purple, little green berries that fall all over the place. So it comes over and there is that residue from the tree that comes over into the yard. So we built the gazebo to continue to enhance and enjoy the property but to also kind of keep some of that out so that when we do things that we're doing there, when we did this particular structure and it's not completed because we got this right before we had to leave the country for a time, we were doing it because we had an event that was going on and we have, because our yard is dug out, we don't have any other space. We put a guitar player up there for our event. It's pretty nice. But in order for us to continue to enjoy the property and do things like that, we have to do it. Now the setback from the wall, the set it back to have this enforced to sit this back from the wall kind of push us right where we had to dig out that property and we really don't have the traversing space that we need to move around. And I have a pomegranate tree right there that I planted and I'm kind of in the plants. My whole property is based on scent. I was trying to stay away from the pomegranate tree as well. So when we put that there and stay away from the fence that the neighbor needs to get in and out of there. So I would ask for a variance here and that's just kind of a background of what has gone into this property as we've constructed it and enjoyed it. This is an open structure. This is not something that when I decide to build a fence, when I purchased this from Fred Elk at the GOM Development Corporation, we purchased it with a tool, knowledge and ability to be able to build any fencing or anything that we wanted to build as long as we allowed that easement and then out of that back fence there. So to enforce this zoning code here, I'm not sure that it would really further the interest of anyone here because it's still an open structure. We can still go in and build that fence that allows us to keep. We have a lot of traffic in the neighborhood because of Finley Park. So one of the issues that I have that I'm planning to deal with and this gives me what was part of it is that sometimes I'm in my backyard outside of my workshop and I have people that I don't know walk right through there which is private property and come out the back and go into the woods there. And so we're having a little issue constantly maintaining and dealing with that. So this is all in an attempt to continue to develop, continue to enhance and develop the property and to enforce the zoning code at this point, what I think ignore the existing variance that is there with that wall in that fence and it's not going to really protect the ingress and egress from the property because it's an open structure and there's any access that the city would need is still there. So I would ask for this consideration just because we really are sitting on property lines that are not the same as they are in any other area of the city. If you look at the new development and our area that has all come since we did this, there are new neighborhoods and the developments there which with I think zero lot lines. I think that's the proper term. All of the most of the new construction there there is property development here, development of the street, battery, all of those have different setbacks than what is generally code I believe. So I'll take any questions. Thank you so much. Now you mentioned an easement. Is there, is this structure on an easement an existing easement? No, no, no, the structure is if you pull up that, can you pull up the picture again? Okay, so the easement, you see it? Okay, so you see the cut out there. There's the wall of the house there. You see where the house ends and then you see where the fence is right there. That is a gate for the property right next door. You see that? Between the fence and the house. Yeah, you can't really see it. There's a flower, but if you look down, you'll see a flower pot on the ground there. Yeah, right next to the wall. So that little cut out, you see that little cut out right there. That's actually a gate that the property next door needs to be able to get in and out of their backyard. The easement, I'm sorry. The easement is actually right there on the wall. It's right there along the wall of the house. No, the property is all owned by me, but there's a parking pad there that anyone can use and of course they can use at that particular property. No one uses it because the incline is really too steep. It has been used in the past, but when I have pulled up, I have the kind of big car. It will scrape your car. So no one really uses that, but it is there. I think that easement is there more for them to walk in and out than to actually park, but the easement does cover them to be able to park there as well. And once again, that's because the walls of that house and the fence are actually on the property line. I'm having a hard time really visualizing this. It looks like the photo that we have or like there's a house there that's not shown on the actual photo at that point. That's the house right there that we're talking about. If you go back to the previous, right there. So that's not my house. That is the house that's actually, the walls of the house are actually on my property line. So that's all of my yard space there, but that's the wall of the adjacent property and the adjacent fence. So that fence, as far as maintaining that, the outside of that fence, I can maintain the outside of that fence or keep it clean, do whatever, put a structure against it. That's all on the property line. My house is right here. The brick house. The brick house. Okay. The brick house? The picture is showing this house because that's the yard and the two-story house next door to that. Gotcha. Right. Okay. So the easement, just to clarify again, the easement, because this is our property, this house right here needs to be able to get in and out of that backyard. Carry trash out to the street, pull the trash out from the backyard, do all those things. On the other side of this house, which is not shown, it's the exact same situation, I believe. There is no, that property as sits on two property lines. I'm not gonna speak too much to the other side because I'm not exactly sure as to whether or not there's any setback, but the property line is very narrow there as well. I just, I think we'll, well, let's come back to that. But first of all, let's see what, if there's anyone else here that wants to speak for this or against this. Okay, my name is Cliff Spann. I'm the owner of 1708 Wayne Street, which is adjacent to the 1700 Wayne Street location. For clarity, is that the, is that the gray brick painted brick building? Yes, sir. One story brick building adjacent to, that we're seeing in the photograph. Yes, sir. With the 10 roof. And I'm requesting that the board deny the request of variance for not meeting all the criteria for a variance as stated in the municipal code. And I broke this out into a number of things. Like Ladi, we also moved into this area of Arsenal Hill back in 2003 for the purposes of not only help building back to Columbia, but also revitalizing this neighborhood. And I would agree with Ladi, it is amazing to see what has truly happened and transpired within this neighborhood. And I enjoyed serving as a neighborhood president for about 14 years in the neighborhood. But as we talk about this, Mr. Howard States and his application that the lot is narrow and enforcement of the code would prevent an open structure that is necessary for shade and usefulness of the narrow outdoor space and would force him deeper into the lot which would crowd the flow of the gazebo. However, the resulting size and shape of the side yard must have been considered when the home was being planned. The flow around the gazebo is mostly crowded. Due in part, as you can see that one of the four sides is attached to the existing 1708 Wayne Street wall. Mr. Howard is also limited by not placing items permanent or temporary that could impede the ingress and egress pathway of the 1708 back gate. I did provide in the back of that the easement because I know that came up as a question. So there you'll be able to see and there's also a picture on the front page that shows the actual gate going into the center block wall which contains an open courtyard behind this 840 square foot dwelling that was constructed prior to 1900. But as we all talk about, these conditions do not generally apply to the other properties in the vicinity, that's part of the criteria. However, many people living in Arsenal Hill and many of the downtown communities have narrow side backyards and oftentimes their homes were constructed on the zero lot lines. An all party still must comply with the city barrier or the city codes regarding setback rules. And we've run into that with a number of neighbors and I petitioned on behalf of a few neighbors that were trying to go against the variants which were not successful. Because of these conditions, the application of the division of this particular piece of property would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the utilization of the property, we would disagree. Mr. Howard has every right to use and enjoy his property, this is his property. However, I do not believe that Mr. Howard's application for an additional recreation structure to be located on the property line proves an unnecessary hardship. Denying the setback variance for the structure does prohibit Mr. Howard's use and enjoyment of a side yard nor does it prohibit him from building an approved structure that fits the property on his, fits properly on his property. In addition, Mr. Howard references the need for shade in his application. However, the area of the property is in the northeastern corner, it's written in the minutes that it was the northwestern, is partially fully shaded throughout much of the day. But this is what I really wanted to focus in on is item number four, the authorization of variants will not be substantial detriment to adjacent property or to the public good. And I've listed out five different reasons as to why it would hinder and be a detriment to the overall good of the neighborhood characteristics. And last but not least, because I don't want to read everything in the allotment of time, but I did want to point this out. Lastly, Mr. Howard submitted the board an application in which he had to affirm and attest the seven statements. The last statement in the applicant has to attest that the property is not restricted by any recorded covenant that would prohibit the requested activity. Mr. Howard was fully aware of the recorded easement created by the previous owner of 1700, as well as Fred Delca, the Columbia Development Corporation. And we both agreed, or the previous owners agreed, for ingress, egress, and vehicular parking. And that is our desired intent for this, is to actually have a parking pad within the confines of the easement stated. But again, thank you so much for the time in which to discuss this matter. And I appreciate your service. So where would the parking be? How do you access that for the parking? How do you access? Is it like where the gazebo is? Right in front of the gazebo. So if you take a look at the actual easement, you have 20 feet from the sidewalk, and then it stair steps back to the actual back of the property. So if you take a look at the easement, and I blown it up, oh, I did not blow that one up. So this would be, so you come in from the sidewalk from the west, you will head in 20 feet, and then you will go inside a total of 5.8 feet, and then you will go east another six feet, and then you will go in another five feet. So it's stair steps, but that's indicated where the easement was originally constructed for a parking pad beside the home. But as I read this sketch here on the front page, I see the structure is lying outside of the access easement. It is outside the access of the gate. Is that what you're? No, the way I interpret it, and this is a little small picture, I see the proposed structure, existing structure as not being located within the access easement at all. Oh, it's outside of the access. Oh, there it is. I thought one of your points was regarding point seven, that Mr. Howard attested that the subject property is not restricted by recorded covenant, et cetera. There was an existing easement that again, it pretty much stated that anything regarding that wall, the only thing that could be built would be a fence or a post. That's it. There is no concrete pad that would be allotted because the actual concrete pad of which the structure is built is actually attaching to the wall. So as you take a look at the actual easement, it'll state. Is that in this package that you said? It's on page two of the actual easement that was recorded on item number four. The grantee or future grantees of the RV, which is River Vista property, shall have the right, but not the obligation to construct a fence or wall immediately adjacent to, but not on in the easement area which fence or wall may be connected to the Patrick Rear wall. That was the previous owner of 1708. So you could build a fence or a wall. Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I don't understand your point because I see the proposed structure being outside of the easement area. It is outside the easement area. What we're saying is per the actual statement was there was no type of easements that would preclude him from building there. What we're stating is that it was defined that only a fence or a wall could be built there and that both owners are responsible for that rear wall in terms of painting and maintenance of it. But I'm not contesting that. That is within his property description, the property and the structure is not being built within the actual confines of the easement. But the picture that was represented, I think really does deserve this because it does look like it actually belongs to me. And that's how we were first brought aware of the building of the structure. We had a number of neighbors call us and what are you building? And so for us, for the hopeful use of providing a lease as well as selling this house, it could be, we see it as a huge detriment, seeing the unsightly structure that was constructed. Quick, quick. Provide one view of it from the roadbed where you can see from the roadbed of Wayne Street as well as the sidewalk. Quick question. I think you said that you were the neighborhood president, correct? Yes, sir. Did you get the views of the input from your fellow neighborhood members? Oh, did we? Yeah, what are their thoughts on it? Two of the neighbors were very much against it. I do have one letter from one gentleman. I did speak with a few or two others. They didn't want to get embroiled within a neighborly dispute, but they were not in favor of it. Okay, thank you. And I have made known to the executive staff of the Arsenal Hill Neighborhood Association of not only the proposed request, but also our response. So we've got them informed. So this looks like it granted the easement which you have sketched out on the front of the property which may be fenced, I guess, by either party so long as it doesn't encroach on the easement. Correct. And can touch the wall. And it can attach to the wall. And attach to the wall. Yes, sir. Right. I just want to clarify for the record that this is a private easement between the private property owners. It does not override any zoning requirements. It's something that you can consider, but it's not the ruling document here, the ordinance says. And so this building is actually on the line. Is that correct? Yes, sir. All the way from where the house goes all the way through where that concrete block wall is. Yes, sir. And the actual rear wall is actually about three inches inside the property line which would be to Mr. Howard's property line. So I believe that's what he was talking about about the existing variants is at that point in time all those houses, many of them were built on the property line. Right. So we want to consider that as an existing variants or that's just the way in which it is. It is not an existing variant, we'll clarify as well. Many of the structures were built before our current code were in place. So they just predate our ordinance. So that would, but it would be considered an encroachment. Daddy, would you like to come back to the stadium? Is anybody else here to speak about this matter? I do want to clear up just a few things. Just I think accuracy issues. One, Mr. Spann is not the existing president. He is the former president of the neighborhood association. He doesn't live in the neighborhood anymore. He's an investor in the neighborhood. I think the first point, an accurate statement that was made just in thing Mr. Dinkins actually was asking the question. Okay, so the easement which was not between me and Mr. Spann it was between me purchasing the property and it was there with the previous owner of that property. Doesn't go past that fence, okay? The easement goes up to allow ingress and the egress to that fence. So that this pad in no way involves that easement at all. The construction of a fence on that property once again is not by either party. It's by me, the owner of the property that can then be maintained but they can't come and build a fence across that property which would then go into my because that house is actually on the property line. So I'm the one that can build and maintain that fence. They can, as them having an easement of course they have the maintenance issues but they don't have any building capability there. The other thing is there was a statement. Now I'm completely unaware as a resident of the neighborhood who's been there since 2002, I was not aware that there was any, aside from the correspondence from the zoning that there was any anyone took a fence to the structure. It was referred to as being unsightly. I have to say that the structure is not unsightly. It is the beginning of a gazebo. We had an event, the time ran out and I left the country for over a month. We got the notice right before I left the country. I didn't touch it again because I was not gonna do any more building or completion of the structure after receiving correspondence from zoning. The tarp that's over the top of that is a temporary tarp because I told you we had a guitar player there. The sun does beam down and beams down all through. It doesn't matter where you are, you're gonna get sun exposure. So we have a temporary tarp there that we had to half of that evening. We had to half of that evening. I did not remove it. I did not do anything else to finish out the structure because we received a letter from zoning. I was completely surprised. Okay, Mr. Howard, let's just go through the criteria that you're required to meet real quickly just to, you've kind of explained some of it just so we'll have it for the record and be clear. So describe the extraordinary exceptional conditions such as the size, shape, topography, et cetera that pertain to the subject property and why this variance is necessary. So we have a, because of the size of a lot, we had to go up, okay? So when I say go up, I mean construct in the house. When we did that, we had to structurally dig out a lot because we actually built, we were the first construction here after 2000. I mean, recent construction there, everything else came after we invested in this property. To get that structure there, we had to dig out about five feet. And so when we did that, that in this backyard, which is hard, you may be able to see it here, but between the gazebo now and that front yard, I mean the backyard, there's actually a five foot drop-off that goes into the courtyard area. So staying back from that is actually a safety issue for us so that when you walk around there, you don't get too close to it. You need, if you're in a kitchen or I think you need at least 36 inches out there, moving around, you need a little bit more space so that you don't actually get into an area where you might fall five feet into that courtyard area. So that is one issue there. The other issue is there, we just don't, I mean that's where the space is. That's our backyard is right there in that back corner. And as far as the enjoyment of that property and what is useful for us and the things that we have to do there, that is the only area that we could put that structure, block out the sun, be able to use that backyard and not do anything that's going to interrupt the ingress and the egress according to our easement to that property that we're trying to protect there. The parking pad, well, I'll wait, maybe you'll get to that. Yes, sir. I have a question about that. So if I'm looking for the... Where's yours then? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Right there. That's the other direction, that is. Right there, that's right. It's in that back corner, if you look at the white, it's in that back corner, which is all our property. And there's no attachment to the property. There's a pad on the ground, but the structure is completely independent of that wall. There was reference made to the parking pad and there's actually an old parking pad there now that would be on, I've thought about putting one there, but we would be the ones to construct that pad. There is nothing to prevent. And as I said in my opening testimony, which I think was fairly accurate, there is nothing there to stop parking in that area. This gazebo and everything is well beyond the easement area. And we have maintained that. I haven't torn up what is there and built a better one there, but the original parking pad is still there. So describe the conditions noted above that do generally do not apply to other property or structures in the vicinity. I'm sorry. Describe how the conditions noted above, meaning the extraordinary exceptional conditions such as size, topography and all that are not same as other, or different from other. Okay, so the property is roughly, and you have to forgive me, I didn't know there was any opposition to the gazebo. I'm really, so I didn't come with all the measurements and all that, but the property, I'll tell you that the home is sitting basically on a 45 by 66 foot lot, something like that. When we constructed that and went through the planning of that property, we had to use pretty much, let me back up. The desire when we went in with Fred Delk and the Development Corporation to invest in this area to spur development there was to do a structure that was going to be, and keeping kind of architecturally with the area, but that would also show a significant investment as per interest in the area. I think we accomplished that pretty significantly because every other development, I mean every other investment and development in that area has come prior to my wife and I bringing our young kids there and building that area. I was the one that had to deal with the heroin dealers and the prostitutes there. I was the one that did that prior to all that. So we built a structure there that pushed us to the limit structurally so that our outside yard was very limited there. And we did that, wanted to give us as much space because the lot is narrow so we had to go up. But to also give us a structure there that would help spur interest in development there, you would see up the street as Governor's Hill and then right across from Governor's Hill is a neighbor that came soon after we built there. But that was the type of, kind of the type of structure and we just wanted to show an investment in the area that would spur other interests and people wanted to say, okay, people are making an investment in this area. They're willing to do this here. We're willing to come into the area. So we wanted to maximize that space is what I'm trying to say in the home and in the design of that. Just I'm kind of getting a clear picture here. I'm sorry I've taken me so long your house actually faces Blanding Street. Our house faces Wayne M. Blanding Street. In fact, we have two addresses. So your driveway is on Blanding Street. Is on Blanding Street. Right. And so the driveway on Wayne Street. We have two driveways, I'm sorry. We have two driveways. Right, all right. So you have a driveway on Wayne Street too. So that's where the easement. Right, the easement is for the parking. So a car can actually, the easement kind of covers the parking so it's wider there. So a car can park there. But as far as engress and egress, we have, you have to be able to get to the fence. So when he was talking about the stepping in, that's where you step in to actually go into the fence in the back. So you can pull your trash can out, walk into the fence. But you come down, the easement gets a little wider there because you can park. And I think it's like 15 by 18 or something like that. I didn't bring all the measurements because once again, I didn't realize it was contestant. I would have to defend to that extent. But that's basically what it is. You have a parking easement so you can actually pull, the neighbor can pull a car into the drive. Then you also have a kind of a walking easement to get in and out of the backyard. So it does this. It looks like that's the only access to Wayne Street, it's via that easement. That's the only access to that house. Well, they have a front door right there. That, right. They have a front door and then they have a backyard which makes the easement necessary. Once again, we're completely outside of the easement. The easement doesn't extend past that gate at all. We're not touching that. And the rest of the neighborhood, I mean, we're just, I love the neighborhood. Well, we don't have any plans to go anywhere. Most of the neighborhood really has, I think I inaccurately said earlier there's an existing variance that technically is incorrect but there is an existing variance or encroachment because the whole area kind of has those exceptions to it. If you look at all the houses we have, it's just an old neighborhood. All right, bear with me if you will. Describe the ways in which the application of the requirement of the zoning ordinance effectively prohibit and reasonably restrict or your utilization of the subject property. Because of the safety of that drop off there, we wanted to stay away from, there is a five foot drop off in that backyard, like the courtyard area. You cannot see it from there but we had to dig out structurally to go in there. There is a five foot fall all around there. Is that, would that be on the back of your house? Right, if you pull that picture up again, look right up from that rainbow. Okay, right there. You can't, I know what it is, so I can, you can't distinguish it there but there is an air conditioning, heating and air conditioning unit right in that corner which is what you're seeing. Okay, right there in front of the gazebo is where that drop off starts. You can't, you're not gonna be able to pick it out. You're right, okay. So between the gazebo and that area, it's roughly eight feet, roughly, yeah. Which is where that, which is where, so this is the yard, the gazebo is right here. You have about eight feet and then right there. And that goes all the way to the, to the property line on the front and all the way back to the corner of the house. You were football balling that note. Looking at this photo though the accessory set back to be three feet, correct. So if you were to try to build this to be the, conform to the running code and regulation, you would have to be three feet for your dwelling. I'm just asking, why can't you do that? So, I mean I guess what I could do, the only thing that I would have to do, according to my understanding, and this would be onerous at this point because that is set in concrete, which is the issue. I could just, I could basically just cut those posts and move the post up a few feet. And I would be within, I would be within the zoning. The issue is, of course, when we set those posts and you pour concrete, pour them in the ground. And then that, that to me, that has a, the structural element of that would be. The thing is when we're asking to describe the extraordinary and exceptional conditions, starting the yard, topography, et cetera, I don't see that. Because I understand why you didn't, why you don't want to move, it's already done, but that was before receiving the required permit. And so, simply the fact that it's existing now, I don't think that creates unnecessary approach to it. Okay. That's the thing. Well, when we, when we constructed that, and I guess this goes to understanding to some extent, we, I'll accept, I have to accept responsibility for building the gazebo because I built the gazebo, but we hadn't had any issue or have any of this come up because when we were, we were kind of recruited to invest in this neighborhood. And when we did that, we weren't, we didn't have many limitations on that. I mean, we were asked to, we came in and encouraged to do a lot there to spur the net, and that's what we did. Perfectly understandable. I mean, I see how you got where you got. No problem there. I just, I, when we're asked to grant a variance, when we run through the specific criteria, I just have a hard time seeing that that meets a threshold because I'm not there. That's what I mean by that, but I mean, understand how you got there. Okay. We're looking at number three, Jane. I mean, I don't want to put words in your mouth, Mr. Howard, but I think you answered number three by the five foot drop off. You had to move it over so that there is space as a safety issue, so there's space near that. Yeah, I think what Mr. Jenkins is saying is technically I could move those posts. I would, really, you could move those posts in and still have a usable structure. I think when you get too small and that is really not usable, you want a gazebo to be a certain size, and that's really a standard size gazebo, 10 by 12 is what it is. So to cut that down and it would actually make the gazebo a lot less functional, but I'm not, I didn't really come prepared to contest. I didn't realize there was, aside from the zoning letter, I didn't realize he really had an issue, so. Okay. Number four is describe the way in which granting the variance will not be a substantial detriment to the adjacent property or to the public good. Additionally, in what ways will the granting of the variance not harm the character of the district? Right, well, I think that was pretty obvious. The variance doesn't touch the easement to the existing property. The structure is already our property. I already own the property, so maintaining that is our responsibility. We don't touch the easement, we protect the easement, so it just has no effect on it. If we are allowed to continue to complete the gazebo, of course it would be very attractive. The only thing that makes it, it's a gazebo now. I mean, the only thing that makes it somewhat appear unsightly is we have a temporary tarp on the top, which I have not been able to remove. We left to go to Italy for a month for something that we had to do, and I have not been able to touch it since then because of the letter from Zoning. That's the only reason that is in that state. Then I want to clarify to you just along those lines, depending on if this case is approved or not, when a permit is applied for, there will be a level of design review as well as it is in the city center design development area, so they would, planning would be looking at the actual design of this structure. I'll be happy to go through it. Rachel, I've got a question for you. So, does the concrete slab, is that affected by the setback or just the gazebo? That's the actual structure. So, essentially that slab can stay just where it is. It doesn't have to be ripped up. It could be extended three feet and the gazebo could be moved over three feet closer to his house and that would satisfy the Zoning orders. The pavement concrete, that can go up to the property line for driveway, for example. It's the actual structure that those three feet from the property line, five feet from the main structure of the setback. I'm just kidding. I'm mad, one more thing. When we did that, I didn't think we had any problem with the pad at all. I think the openness of it is probably what confused me because it's a completely open structure. I contemplated before, and this might be outside of the purview of this, but I contemplated before doing a hanging garden back there against that wall because I've actually had a garden in that area. If I wanted to do a hanging garden, I would've gone right up against that wall and had things coming down. It's just never been an issue. And because it's open, I didn't realize the post would even cause it. It's just kind of, I have no more to add. I'd be happy to answer any other questions, but I hope that we can continue with this to be a very beautiful and usable structure and continue to enhance the neighborhood as we've done for the past. The other, the fifth item that we consider is that the minimum necessary. I think we've had that discussion. Do you want to add anything to that? Is it the minimum necessary? I'm confused on that. Yes, it's just the minimum necessary. Yeah, yeah, the structure itself, yeah. Yeah, it's the minimum size necessary for, I mean, 10 by 12 is generally what they are. I think what they mean by that is, does it have to be where it is or could it be? It kind of has to be where it is unless it's put off of where it could be. It cut for the way I feel from a safety standpoint is the further we can stay back from a five foot drop off in that backyard. Now my son is 15 years old, he will jump down off of the wall into that yard, but I'm 48 now and I'm not, I don't want to have to jump into that backyard. So I want to stay away from it and be able to have the flow of traffic back there when we entertain to stay away from that drop off. So it doesn't look like there's anywhere else you could put it because if you move, I'm looking at this, if you move that way, you're moving into the easement. If you move that way, you move close to the road, you're moving that way. We can't come forward. I've never wanted to do anything to stop the, to interfere with the easement. I mean, I'm an attorney as well, so understand not violated in the easement. We've done everything to try and enhance the property and protect that easement. I've even contemplated building another parking pad for that area, just because it's my responsibility to do so. They can't come in and construct anything there, but I would like to do it just to enhance the look of the property. I've done everything that I can to protect that. Very well. The last one is explain how your proposal is in harmony with the purpose and the tenor of the zoning ordinance that will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. So my understanding of the zoning ordinance and ordinances in general is to protect one you wanna keep a minimum distance between properties. And I think the functional reason for the zoning requirement is to allow, especially in a city setting, to allow movement in and around property lines. You never know when the city or some other entity may have to come in and maintain. And so you maintain a setback from property lines to allow that sort of movement between that property so that whatever needs to be done can be done. This structure has no impact on that whatsoever. If the city needs to come in and move around the property lines, even though that house sits on our property line, this structure will not inhibit the city at all from being able to come in and move between the property lines for surveys or whatever it needs to do. Well, I think that both of the presentations have been made very well. Is there any discussion from the board? The situation where if running through the criteria, being the necessary hardship, at least the covered portion of it, three foot floors to the existing house and have you do that, but I guess the bottom line is I wish, or I would like to see the neighboring owner be okay with it, but if they're not then I have. That's well said. I think that the biggest hardship is caused because it was constructed without a permit and now it's gotta be moved in order to conform as opposed to had it been planned out before, I think it could have easily been constructed to conform to the zoning ordinance. Any further discussion? I'd be glad to entertain a motion. Let's make a motion that we deny the variance to decide your requirement for the discussion. I'll second that. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Nay. Opposed? I'm an opposite. I didn't deny. Okay. I want to approve it. We have three in favor of the motion and two against the motion. Is that correct? So then the motion carries. The record's fake. I just want to double check. Yeah, I know. I don't want to say. All right. So the motion was to deny. And as Steven's voted nay. To deny. To deny. To deny. Aye. I vote. Aye. And Reggie McKnight. I voted nay. I voted to deny. I voted against. Again, yeah. Okay. Motion. The item on the regular agenda is number 14, case 2018-0114. It's for 746 and 748 Hardin Street. It's a variance to off street parking requirement for a mixed use building. And just to provide some background on this one, a variance was approved, I believe in 2002 where it approved for the mixed use building that they would have the existing six spaces on site. So this is a follow-up variance to that of people. If the applicant's here, he is welcome to come forward. Oh, good morning, everyone. I'm Joseph Azar, upstairs Odeon Video. I'm the one applying for this. I do have some other things. I may pass out to the group. First of all is a letter from Chief Melron Kelly, Assistant Chief, I should say, who has said that they take no position on this, meaning they're neither for nor against. The second one is my neighbor, Red Webber at Supercuts. And he is in support of this. He has run into the same problems I have and he is tired of the mess that is there. Oops, excuse me. He finds a lot of the same things in front of his door that I find in mine. And actually I have some pictures here that you may want to look at or you may not want to look at of how people use their front door. And finally, completely off the record, has nothing to do with this, but I'd love to invite you to a concert Friday night in which I'm playing. It's a free concert and we'd love to have you come. So Columbia Community Concert Band. We have about 75 pieces in that. We have the busiest cornering five points. It is where Uber, Lyft, Com, taxis right there. All four of those corners are very busy. Mine and the fountain, those are the two. We're right in the center of the bar scene of five points. Everybody congregates there, especially about 1.30 in the morning when the bars start letting out and people start coming out and they're there to get a ride, friends come pick them up, whatever. We run into a lot of pee, puke, and poop. I hate to say it, but I've had people going up my stairs to my front door and urinating on my front door. That is no fun to have to clean up. It stinks. I have seen them up there. In fact, one guy knew very well and he was in the back of the paddy wagon. The cops got him for doing that. Mr. Ozark, can we go to the criteria? Yes, sir. Kind of stick on that. Let me, I don't know that you actually followed it, but the first one is to describe, please, the extraordinary conditions. Excuse me, the extraordinary exceptional conditions such as the size, shape, topography, so they pertain to your property for this request, which is the request looks like it is for a variance for operating hours for temporary vendor. That's the second request. This first one is for the parking. Okay, so this is the parking variance request. So there's two, these are two. This is a double request or is this something else? Yes, they're back-to-back requests, but for the second one to be heard, the first one. So we've got to operate. Yeah, this one is the parking variance requesting just zero parking spaces on site from 6 p.m. to 3 a.m. It's just a variance for a certain period of time after regular business hours. Can we stick to that one? Yes, sir. All right, on the first part then. And then, kind of go in there. So this is a parking variance for specific hours of the evening. Yes, sir. If you'd like me to comment on that? Yeah, do you want me to read you again? So please describe the extraordinary exceptional conditions such as the size, shape, topography of the property, et cetera, that pertain to this request. I'm not sure I understand that exactly. The problem we have there is that people come and park in that lot and they go all over five points. We don't know who's in the lot, what. My store closes at six o'clock. Grill Teriyaki's open on Thursday night till 10. On Friday and Saturday night they close the doors to the store about 10 or 11 o'clock but they have a to-go window and they sell out of that. The problem with leaving the store open at Grill Teriyaki is too many people, a lot of problems inside and that's why they run the window. Again, the lot's full. We don't know who the people are. If we, I'm not there all the time. Sometimes I work late at night. Grill Teriyaki, if they tow somebody off, somebody drunk comes back, really ticked off about it, could start a fight, they come back, knock the windows out, do some damage. So they don't know who's there and what. They don't get to use the parking lot. I don't really get to use the parking lot. It's not of use to us because people are coming through. We also have motorcycles that spill out into the street over the sidewalks and all we have a lot of hip hop cars, I should say, with loud sound systems and flashing neon lights that sometimes park there. It tracks a crowd and it tracks too much and it causes problems, sometimes some violence, which we're trying to reduce if. So what's your proposal to? The proposal is to be able to control that lot, to block it off. I believe you have the pictures that show the police blocking it off. If you could pull that up please. The police actually have either come in and put barricades over there some nights or they have parked their cars in three of them side by side or at an angle across it. They blocked us off, they blocked trips off. It has reduced a lot of the problems by doing that. Still they also put cones on my stairs to keep people from going up, though some of the kids have thrown the cones out in the street and still go up and sit on the stairs and litter my stairs with rice and dressing and all the mess that I have to clean up when we come in on Thursday, Friday morning, Saturday morning, that sort of thing. So we're asking you to allow us to control that lot on Thursday, Friday, Saturday nights and if there's a special event too, something that's going to bring masses of people to five points to be able to block the lot off so that we can control it and keep people out from all the mess that we have. And the police, again, like I said, they like the idea, they're the ones who blocked it off in fact and brought police barricades down. And I apologize that those pictures actually did not make it into the packet but he did provide a picture showing the barricade. I think I do have some on my cell phone if you'd like to see those, I still have those. No, I couldn't get the picture, it's pretty easy. So your business is closed. Mine is closed. But this is required for the restaurant question for Rachel. It applies to both businesses on that parcel. So the Royal Teriyaki and upstairs audio share a parcel though in the variants from 2002 was six spaces to be shared by both businesses. So that was the existing variants in place. And so right now what we're talking about is a request of variants to basically eliminate those spaces between the hours of six and three a.m. or something like that, right? And okay, so I'm finally starting to catch on. I apologize for being so slow. So let's get back to that. I think the extraordinary exceptional conditions that you're describing as you were saying was that basically it's those spaces become a loitering place for parkers that are not using those businesses even though they're supposed to be private parking for those businesses and controlled by the businesses you're asking to be able to barricade them off. Is that correct after the hours? That's correct. If we don't, the police have been at their will and we still don't get to use it. So it's... And I think you were getting at they don't generally apply to other structures in the vicinity because y'all are at the corner of Hardin and Green, which is a large congregation area for outside part of yours in the five points area. Quite a bit. That's where I hate to say it. Most of the violence has been, I hate to say about the shootings and such, but most of them happened right there. And then as far as demonstrating ways in which this variance will not be substantial detriment to the adjacent property or additionally other ways granting the variance will not harm the character of the district. Is this a joint application that's being made between you and the restaurant or is this just an application being made by you in the restaurant? I'm the landlord. So you're the landlord for the restaurant, gotcha. So essentially you're saying that this is not gonna be detrimental and it's basically there to stop loitering and property damage after hours. Is that what you're saying? Yes, sir. And then explain how this request is the minimum necessary? The minimum necessary. I think that you're saying that you would only wanna do this between a certain hour of the 24 hour day when you're not, business is not open and so it's not eliminating these parking spaces during normal business hours. No, we don't want to affect the daytime business. It's just that Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights are big nights for college students. Thursday night's kind of the... And that is, and just to take that a little further, so this request is limited to Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights? Yes, we'd also like to ask if it's a special event in five points, let's say there's some big event that happens, let's say there's, it's a Tuesday football game, have them forbid, but there's something like that and they're all gonna pile into five points after the game, we wanna be able to control that. If we don't, I'm sure the police will come in and lock it off anyhow, it's something like that. They're different events, we just want to make sure that we can keep it clean, keep the traffic down, the problems down, that's what we wanna do. And then finally, explain how your proposal is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance that will not be detrimental to the neighborhood or otherwise to public welfare. I can't see it being detrimental to any of the other businesses actually beneficial. If you see that note from my neighbor, he has the same problems with the type of things he's had his door busted in because people are hanging in on the street and all. So actually we feel it's beneficial to help in that sense. We're not taking anything away in essence because again, Grill Teriyaki doesn't have use of it at night when the cars park or whatever or the motorcycles are there, which the police do not want those motorcycles hanging over there. They not only fill out a lot, they come over the sidewalk and they're in that area, you can see it at little piece where it goes down into the street, they're out in that area too. So it's causing people to have to walk around and out in the street sometimes. And actually the former landlord, I mean former owner of Grill Teriyaki had a problem with that. She was saying that the people in the cars and the motorcycles were harassing, especially the girls that walked by, talking smack to them, that sort of thing, bothering the people there and they did not like it at all. We've worn two spots for Grill Teriyaki and do you take out to allow us by cars to? Well, I guess that's in the second part of this. I was gonna address that in the next issue. I guess what I'm getting at is how will this look? How will you physically barricade the spots and sign up for the leave to open? Is it okay to address the second part of this too? Okay. The second part of this, and if I may with your permission address the second issue on this which ties into this. Having a person there with a cart that's selling allows us to have someone who has eyes on the place. Part of my agreement with them is that they will clean the place up at night after they leave so we don't have that mess that you see. But they will watch people keep them from going upstairs and onto the roof, keep the cars out that are coming in and to answer your question, right against Grill Teriyaki having one or two spaces that are marked maybe with some standing signs that say they're their pickup. Because right now the Uber eats people, the Byte Squad and all the others that come in to pick up at night. They pull up out in the street, either in that ramp down part, or farther out they pull up into the turn lane. So they're parked there and they're sitting there and they're waiting for the orders to come out from Grill Teriyaki so they can take and deliver them. So actually they're blocking the street up. The cart vendor would be required to watch that and keep people out as well. That's part of the job, that's part of my requirement. If they do not do that, they do not get to be in the lot. So the cart vendor is an essential part of this to make sure it's kept clean, kept neat, keep the people out, keep them from going behind the dumpster and using my dumpster as a public bathroom, which I don't believe what we find back there, I hate to tell you. Oh, keeping it clean. And watching if there's a problem, calling the police, letting them know there's something coming down. They think there's some, I see, I'm down there sometimes at two o'clock at night. And I see people pushing each other, talking smack or they get ready to have some violence. I've stepped in the middle of it sometimes and tried to break it up and I've called the cops over. They usually sit across the street where the trucks park. You can't quite see it right there on Saluda, that little place that goes through by the fountain. And I'll holler over for them, I'll wave to them and they'll come over. And that's what the cart guys or whoever runs the cart is supposed to do as well. So we keep that down because again, most of the violence that has happened late at night and it usually happens between 1.30 and 2.30 when everybody's getting out and everybody's being pushed against each other, that's what we want to keep down. We want to keep five points clean and happy place. All right, so the item for us at this moment is to allow you to basically fence off or cordon off or block off the six parking places in front of your property from public use between the hours of 9 p.m. and 9 a.m. Thursday, Friday and Saturday, is that the way I'm reading this? For the variance, it's from 6 p.m. to 3 a.m. 6 p.m. to 3 a.m., gotcha. I want just to give some clarification of how the two tie in because we'll hear the second variance after this one if approved. For a temporary vendor to go on the site, a temporary vendor cannot take up a required parking space. And so, since he's required to have six spaces on site, the variance request is in place to allow him to be able to even have a vendor. I will tell you the reason for 6 a.m. is, I mean, 6 p.m. is because that's when we close upstairs audio and that's when people start coming down to go to restaurants, bars and such. And actually, the police have come down when they did bring the barricades and they say, can we start setting them up now to keep that out? I mean, otherwise, I would have said probably eight or nine, but they're the ones who actually started early and I'm following their lead on this. Since we have to take these one at a time, let's just have, see if there's anyone else in the room that's here to speak in favor or against this application. Would you please come forward? I'm Amy Beth Franks. I'm the executive director of the Five Points Association. We are a nonprofit governing body that looks out for the best interests of the neighbors, of the merchants. Mr. Azar has been a long time and good standing property owner and business owner in Five Points. And I am not here to speak out against or for necessarily, but rather voice some concerns that my board has for you to consider in making your ruling. I hate to hear the problems that Mr. Azar is having and I believe him. What he said about people gathering and loitering at night is absolutely happening in what I've experienced. I do have concerns that what he's proposing might not necessarily eradicate what's happening that he's opposed to. If there's any way that we could consider looking at some sort of conditional approval so we could allow him the opportunity to close it and have a food vendor and maybe reevaluate after some time. We do have some other private property vendors that have vendors in their parking lots. And I don't want to call them out while they're not here to defend themselves but some of the concerns we have with those property owners is that those vendors are not completely breaking down when they're done. So obviously we would want to make sure that there was absolutely nothing left in terms of tent or mats and set up. I also worry about these vendors not cleaning up after themselves. And I would hate to see a vendor brought in that competes with one of the brick and mortar businesses. You know, we're here to support all of the businesses. There's 150 approximately in five points. And while I very much want to fix what's happening to Mr. Azar's property and make sure that his business is not hurt by what's happening at nighttime, I want to make sure that we're going about it in the right way to eradicate his problems but not hinder any of the other businesses. Thank you. To clarify for the record, any temporary vendor would have to get a permit. There are some issues in the five point area of ones that come in after 30 hours that we are not entirely aware of. So we have been looking at a few of those but a condition of a temporary vendor permit is they are supposed to break down entirely when they are not in operation. So that is something that we could enforce from a zoning perspective outright from the permit. Got it. Glad you clarified that. Anyone else? Joe, you cannot speak from the thing. If you want to say one more thing then come up to the podium and spoke in the microphone. Oh, I agree with Amy Beth Franks. When I built the building and I put a lot of money and time into it to make sure it fit five points. In fact, if you go around behind to the post office you'll notice instead of concrete block it's brick. At that time it cost me another $5,000 or $10,000 to do that but I wanted it to look good. I'm not gonna do anything there to hurt my property or hurt five points. Any vendor that's going to be there is going to have to clean up. They're gonna have to hose down if there's what you see in those pictures. They're gonna have to shovel if there's human fertilizer I should say or hose down, whatever. Believe me, I found it in my parking lot. I've seen people squatting in my parking lot doing their business. I have no problem with trying it out. What I want to do in my neighbor is we want to reduce the problems. We know there's no cure for alcohol and hormones. You can't fight youth, unfortunately. All you can do is try to reduce the problems and this is the whole idea. I have, you know, it's just come to a head that we can't take it anymore when we find this on our stairs and all and all the problems. Even the police, we have now decided that they want to barricade it because and we've allowed them to do that but still with the barricades we do find problems. So having the cart vendor there that is responsible, a responsible one that has to live up to the requirements that I set will help reduce that and keep an eye on the problems there. So again. A question for you. How do you intend to barricade off the block off the parking? We can either use bar the police barricades. Again, you asked the question about the, you know, the two spaces, the space or two for pickup. You know, getting some sort of signs there and if people come in to park and walk off, the vendor would either call the company. First, hopefully tell them not to, but we'll have signs there and right out, not in the back, but in the front. So if that's the back of the parking space right here before you pull in, you'll see that sign. So that will be for pickup for grill teriyaki. We want that. And we do that or allow the employees of grill teriyaki to actually park there. So we block it off, let them come in. So the cooks and whatever can be there in the parking lot at night, that sort of thing. Because they don't have any place to park either. So essentially you want to block it off so that you can control who has access to it. Yes, sir. We really want to do that, you know, in one way or another. But as it stands now, it's used by everybody else but us. They park there and they go everywhere. And I do check that. I feel the hoods of the cars to see if they're warm or not. They're pretty stone cold. So we want to try to help make five points a better place and keep it clean and keep it safe. I mean, I'm a long time person down there. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Is there any discussion for the board or any questions from the board? Well, so we've got two separate issues here. We've sort of blended them together. Obviously we're gonna take two votes. But I mean, this is it as far as presentation regarding this matter and we... We didn't fully go into the second one. So this motion will just be for the parking. So if you all wanted to discuss the second one now, it might be better to just go ahead and close out the first case. And then we'll hear the second one, which is the operating hours. That makes sense. Seedually, that's certainly the way we need to do it. But addressing the first one only, and I realize we've led into the second issue. This to me seems to be a no-brainer. We've got an opportunity here to improve the safety in five points. You've demonstrated very thoroughly to us the reasons for the problems and your concerns. So we're being asked to grant a variance to all street parking requirements for this mixed-use building. As evidence that the spaces are not needed is the simple fact that you're having this problem. If you needed these spaces or were using these spaces, I feel like you wouldn't be having these issues. So to me, this is an opportunity to improve the safety in an area of five points that's seen a tremendous amount of violence in the past few years. And I think it's absolutely appropriate that we approve this variance for you. The building's not open. We don't need these spaces, and this will help clean up the area, so fully in support of this. Thank you. Okay. For clarity, you're okay with us granting this variance between the hours of 6 p.m. and 3 a.m. Thursday night through Saturday morning, Sunday morning. Yes, sir. I would like to make a motion that we approve the variance for the operating, I mean for the parking request between the hours of 6 p.m. and 3 a.m. On start beginning on Thursday at 6 p.m. and ending on Sunday morning at 3 a.m. Subject to any comments in this application or suggestions by the board. Coming by the, don't need administrator. Second. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed. Thank you. So now we go into the second case, which is the temporary vendor. Yes, case 2018-0115. It's a variance to the operating hours of a temporary vendor. We covered some of it during discussion of the last case, but within 400 feet of a residentially zoned area, the operating hours are limited to 9 p.m. They cannot operate from 9 p.m. to 9 a.m. This parcel does from lot line to lot line come within 400 feet of a residentially zoned area. It doesn't matter if there's a house on, it goes by zoning district, not by what is actually on the parcel. So the variance then basically is operating until 3 a.m. as opposed to closing at 9 p.m. Yes, it is to allow a temporary vendor once permitted to be on the parcel past 9 p.m. So in the same, the other conditions of a temporary vendor apply such as they must break down and clean up when not in operation. Understood. So I think you've thoroughly explained why you want these hours is because those are the hours that you want someone there to be looking after your property and making sure that it's not being trespassed on after hours. Yes. And if you wouldn't mind, could you pull up the map that shows where the residential areas are? This is the subject property here, at the intersection of Green and Hardin. The residential zoning again at this line is the yellow. Which is a city park. Yeah. It is a long zoning area, but it is residential zone. Part G1, so it's from zoning district. If I may point out, we would not be the only vendor. If you look in the middle of the block where it was the Chinese restaurant at one time, he grills up chicken and such at night as well. So he's just as close to it. And then over on the corner where Lucky's bar and grill is, which is where the magic mark is too, there's a vendor there. And they're close to that as well. And actually there is a residential area down on Santee. Some houses there, so they're actually close to that. And I do know that the old Harper's building, which serves alcohol, is close to the church over there as well. Which, so we would not be the only ones that would be so close to that residential area, which is actually a public park, as you mentioned. And I don't believe we would be hurting anybody at all by having a vendor in there a lot. I can't see that somebody doing hot dogs, hamburgers, or barbecue or something would bother the park at all late at night. After all, there's... Yeah, I think for the sake of time, I think that we have our discussions on this have thoroughly vetted out the different criteria that are required and why you need those and why this is a special situation with your property and its location in the hours of operation of the general public in and around your area. And so I don't think we need to go through that again. I would like to make a motion that we approve this request subject to the limitations of 6 p.m. to 3 a.m. from Thursdays through at 6 p.m., beginning at Thursdays at 6 p.m. and ending down Sundays at 3 a.m. And that I don't believe that, I believe that the city permit for a vendor will continue to apply to this. I don't think we need to put any additional restrictions on that. Yeah, so I'll table that motion and ask that anybody in the audience would like to come back up and speak about the second request. Please raise your hand. I see none. Okay, thanks. All right, so going back to my motion, I would only add that it be subject to any criteria stated in the application recommended by staff. All in favor say aye. Aye, all opposed. Motion carries. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, and I'd love to have you come to our concert. There's some invitations there. Thank you, it's Friday night. No case on the agenda is item number 16. It's case 2018-01-17. It's for 2013 Green Street. This is a variance to the off street parking requirement for a restaurant. So to give background on this one as well, a variance was granted in 2016 when the restaurant was expanded. This allowed for the restaurant to maintain just the existing 18 parking spaces that are on site. This request is to eliminate those 18 parking spaces so that they can expand to build the parcel. I believe the applicants here, they can come forward. Good morning. Morning. I think it's appropriate following Mr. Azar and the challenges that his business faces and things that we're trying to do in five points to support the efforts of Amy Beth and the Five Points Association in rebranding Five Points in Matter is speaking to be more family friendly, less bar focused. So our request has to do with that and those efforts in doing that before we came before the board here or the council. We did get with Amy Beth and the Five Points Association and informed them of our intent and they supported our efforts and we appreciate them on that very much. So first, if I can go through a couple of points here for you and I'd be happy to answer your questions. The reasons for the request is based on four primary areas that we have dealt with and observed over the last three years of being in business in Five Points. Changing habits of consumers in driving, safety, economics, and of course the efforts of the Five Points Association are the primary points that I'd like to go over. In our three years of existence, we have supported the efforts of the Five Points Association in the city of Columbia to rebrand Five Points as less of a late night only district into a family friendly, 30 plus friendly, safe entertainment district. We have had to deal with the well written report and state the expose on the articles about Five Points and the challenges that Five Points faces. And we have tried to be, I don't wanna say on a tip of the spear, but towards the tip in helping get away from that bar focus. We have continued to offer fresh made from scratch food at a very fair and reasonable price. We close earlier at night than our neighbors so as not to attract or encourage late night drinking. We have had no issues with underage drinking or any issues that would be considered unsafe, safe or unethical. In short, we have supported the mission to alter the perception of the Five Points District. So, going through these four points for you. Number one, again, I'd like to state that we are grateful for the support of the Five Points Association and specifically Amy Beth Franks. They have provided industry requests and understanding of the importance of this request and how helpful it is in their efforts to broaden Five Points appeal. Point number two, in the last three years it has become increasingly obvious that consumers have altered their habits when it comes to transportation. The proliferation of services such as Uber and Lyft have shown that many more people choose not to drive personal vehicles when going out socially for both safety and economical reasons. People choose to not drink alcohol and drive, which is a very positive thing for everyone. We have seen a tremendous increase in the amount of people using the services of Uber and Lyft. Also, we were very happy to see the addition of the bike rentals in Five Points. The availability of these bikes encouraged their use. We support that. We have added a bike rack actually in the back and it has been greatly appreciated and used regularly. Also, the amount of people of all ages that insist on walking their dogs and bringing them with them to eat has increased dramatically. Being pet friendly nowadays is a requirement, not an option. We have also seen a dramatic increase in the use of personal motorized scooters to get around. These trends by consumers and their needs have changed dramatically. Younger people have shown a preference to not own vehicles. Next, following up on that point, the issue of safety. As recent events involving the Ford Motor Company and General Motors shows with the closing of plans, eliminating the production of many cars and focusing on trucks and SUVs, it has become an increasing issue for our location to handle large vehicles safely. Our building is 70 plus years old. The alleyway along the side is very tight. The back parking lot is approximately 50 to 60 feet wide at its widest. There is nowhere to turn around if the lot is 50% full. Excuse me. The average truck SUV nowadays is 20 to 25 feet long. Our parking lot is approximately 50 to 60 feet wide. This has led to vehicles hitting each other, scratching each other, et cetera. People have gotten back there with no need to turn, no way to turn around and have had to try to back out, which is very dangerous. In short, the simple truth is that the parking area for a 70 plus year old building is outdated and unable to safely accommodate today's larger vehicles, which has proven to be the preference. We upset more guests by having to maintain this outdated lot than we can accommodate successfully. The fourth point is more of an economics point. To maintain the quality of food and the level of staffing the prep work required to execute a made from scratch menu that is healthier and still flavorful, requires a much higher level of labor cost than a bar focused on just serving drinks. To open from lunch through dinner requires more staff and more management to do it successfully and safely, more so than a bar that just opens at night to serve drinks. From a strictly economic perspective, it is much more profitable to be a bar than it is to be a restaurant. Also due to five points reputation is merely late night college zone and the fact that the lack of offices and daytime businesses is limited to students or local, local business, lunch business traffic is very limited, is expensive to prepare fresh food every morning and provide for a very limited lunch crowd. Without the ability to maximize traffic and seating during early evening and dinner, we would have to look at ways to cut labor, cut operating expenses and limit our operating hours. Unfortunately that we cannot, unfortunately that means laying people off. We have held steady for three years, but again from an economic perspective, we cannot compete with bars and five points. From an economic perspective, we would like the city council to look at our request in a similar manner to when governments offer tax incentives for businesses to go into areas that the city state is trying to alter the economic conditions. The difference here is that this request, requested variance would not be a tax reduction, however it would be a tax increase based on increased revenue production, along with not only not laying people off, but hiring more people. We believe the city council's support in approving our request serves as a very similar purpose in five points as does tax incentives. In conclusion, we do not come to asking for this request without having three years of efforts on our part to work with any guidelines as they exist. I am reminded of an old phrase. If you always do what you've always done, you always get what you always got. We support both the five points association and the city of Columbia's efforts to alter the perception of the five point district. We believe we have shown that support by not following the path of least resistance and coincidentally the path of increased profitability by being an alcohol focused business. We believe that if we are successful in getting approval on this matter, we can continue those efforts. We are sincerely appreciative of the tremendous support on this matter we've received from Amy Beth Franks and the Five Points Association Board. We are grateful our landlord Dana Wolfe of Wolfe Hotel supports our efforts 100%. We know that what we are trying to accomplish is what will make our current guests very happy and to help attract more people and their pets. We also know that the world is changing and the transportation, the environment and not driving while drinking has all changed and will continue to change. I believe we can support and embrace these changes through how we operate. I hope these items show that we have spent three years observing and studying this effort. We do not come to this request lightly or without forethought. We hope you see the challenges and opportunities and we do as we do and support our request. Any questions? Is there anyone else here to speak in favor or against this application? If you come to the podium you may. And I'm Joseph Azar upstairs on your video. I look at their building every day. When Garibaldi's closed down, we were so afraid. Here comes another late night bar and all the garbage trash and everything. Lubica has done a great job. They have wonderful tacos and they have an excellent hamburger, I gotta tell you. It's a great place. It's run well. I have to agree with them in a traffic. People are taking Uber and Lyft now. So we don't need as much parking sometimes. They're coming out in front of my place, like I said. I see them all the time in Uber and Lyft. In a parking space that tight, like he's saying, what can you do? It does cause problems. In fact, I didn't even know he had the parking space for a long time back there. So I gotta say, I think there are real asset to five points. I agree with them. And if the city of Columbia, which has bought the building, the state building on Divine Street, if they take that parking lot too, and we use that for city or five points parking, is loss of a few spaces will be greatly offset by what the city does. Hopefully they will do that and hopefully someday we'll get another parking lot for five points as well, which we could use. And then we'd be like the Vista where a lot of places don't have parking, but there is parking for people to come down. So I gotta say thank you to Publico for improving five points and I hope you'll approve their request. Thank you. That was under rehearsed. Okay, there's someone else who would like to speak. Quickly, I won't eat up too much time again. Amy Beth with the Five Points Association. I just wanted to confirm our support of Publico's request. They've been a stellar member of our community and we're happy that they're working hard to improve our image. We do ask that this approval not be conditional only to that brick and mortar building no matter who occupies it, that should Publico expand and move out of their space and a new business come in, we'd like for them to have to make the request as well and not necessarily carry the same parking variance. Thank you. Just for a quick clarification, I believe that would be the case, right? The variance runs with the property. We cannot make it specific to a specific property owner. However, it would have to be the same use coming in. It would not just be a blanket variance, it would have to be another restaurant coming in for the specific variance to apply. But it does run with the property, not just with the property owner. Okay. I would say that you've made a tremendous, and very appreciate your application. I think you've addressed very succinctly all of the questions asked of you in your written application and also verbally in your testimony. And so we appreciate that. I don't have any further questions. Does anyone on the board have a question? I will entertain a motion. Motion to approve. Second. We have a motion to approve this application. In a second, all in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Thank you very much. Have a happy holiday. Whether business is on the agenda today. Happy holidays to everybody. See you next year. I make a motion that we adjourn. Second. All in favor? Aye. Hereby adjourned. Thank you.