Kenny's Update - Time Sensitive Information (10-13-08)

The Kenny project goes before zoning tomorrow for exception, as seen below. Resistance is not of an aggravated nature this time, but of concern for the area. Those I have spoken with have expressed concern for traffic and safety issues, and looking at the mirror recommendation, I have the same concern. If this facility’s drive through is used frequently like all banks and drugstores are, I can foresee real problems with cars, pedestrians, and bicycles. There needs to be a better way to create visibility than trying to use convex mirrors, or we will experience accidents, some fatal, at this location.

Good design should be required, style that reflects the area. The rear of the building, visible, should have design requirements just as the front. When I built Upstairs Audio & Video, the rear-adjacent to the PO-was designed with concrete block and approved by city. When I saw what was to be, I spent an extra $5000 to cover the new, visible 20’ feet with brick, the part down the alley I left as block as it is not seen, especially with a tree covering the alley entrance. But I felt that ugly was not acceptable, so I spent to correct it, even though the city did not require or care.

I am not sure that a scrolling sign is allowed within 50’ of the street inside the city limits. If Walgreens is allowed, then I am putting one up too!

A great concern of the residents is the lack of communication city staff has had with the residents on this, as well as on the part of the developers. I do not believe the residents will oppose this project, they just want to insure that it is a class act, not a corporate design and construction job. Yes, they feel the creep of pushing the limits of the guidelines so ardently created is not good, and a bit of a slap to the residents yet an easy concession to developers. I concur. If guidelines are going to be set so as to preserve an area, then stick to them. Don’t creep them or you violate & lose the whole concept. This has happened again and again and again in Columbia, ultimately costing us so many valuable historical and architecturally significant structures to so called development, which turned out to be shoddy, cheap in design, and just unattractive. And it did not last too long, either, bringing no lasting economic benefits. Main St. is a classic example.

Maybe we should get a clue from cities 100 miles from us, Charlotte and Charleston. They have better design than us, whether because or requirement, encouragement, pride, or competition. Our city leaders should encourage the same.

________________________________________

Neighbors and Friends –

As information, final approval of the construction plan of the Walgreen's on the former Kenny’s site (the corner of Blossom and Saluda in Five Points) will be tomorrow, Tuesday, October 14, 2008 at the 10:00 am Columbia Board of Zoning Appeals meeting (open to the public) in City Council Chambers, 3rd Floor, City Hall, 1737 Main Street, Columbia, South Carolina.

Developers' Request to Exceed Size Limitation
In their last meetings, on September 9, 2008, both the Columbia Board of Zoning Appeals (“BOZA”) and the Design/Development Review Commission (“DDRC”) approved the developers’ plan for construction of a Walgreen’s on the former Kenny’s site notwithstanding concerns and questions based on pedestrian safety, design issues, and signage.** (See end of email for details.)

Tomorrow, the final issue – the size of the Walgreen’s store will be considered. The developers are requesting that they be allowed to exceed the maximum size requirement of 10,000 square feet to 13,813 square feet.

At this point, public money is no longer being proposed for this property and we welcome private development in Five Points. However, we do continue to have concerns with the City's process. Andy Marion, President of Wales Garden Neighborhood Association, summarizes the situation as follows:

“The developers’ current plans propose a building of almost 14,000 square feet, which is 40% larger than the maximum of the 10,000 square feet allowed outright under the new Future Five MX-1 zoning overlay for Five Points. I believe that the reason for the overlay is to keep the Five Points village feel. It is discouraging that the first major development since the approval of the new guidelines would be a large-box chain store that is significantly bigger than the MX-1 zoning allows without concern on the part of the City staff. It is also discouraging to learn of this need for a zoning exception so late in the game after the site's plans are at the final stage of approval by the City.”

References
For BOZA staff’s case summary and to check out the proposed designs for Walgreen’s, refer to the following link:
http://www.columbiascgateway.com/content/pdf_PZ/BoZA_packet_2008_10_14_Saluda_700.pdf

For confirmation and additional information, refer to the BOZA agenda at the following link: http://www.columbiascgateway.com/content/pdf_PZ/BoZA_2008_10_14_Agenda.pdf

If you have questions or need additional information regarding this matter, contact Mike Conley, the City Staff member in the zoning department, which is under Planning and Development Services. His telephone number is 545-3204 and email address is cmconley@columbiasc.net.

Caroline Watson
516 Congaree Avenue


** Concerns raised in last month's meetings were the following:
1. Pedestrian safety – a “blind” drive-through exiting the property onto Blossom Street (i.e., drivers are unable to view pedestrians or oncoming traffic except for traffic mirrors) and allowing an entrance and exit at the Saluda Street corner of Blossom pose an unnecessary hazard at one of the most heavily traveled sections of roadway in Richland County.
2. Design issues – the design of the building faces Saluda Avenue and Blossom Street. Design concerns included:
• The "back" of the building, which accomodates delivery and other commercial functions, has no pedestrian elements even though it faces Devine and Santee Avenue (i.e., just two blank brick walls without window facades or other design elements intended to soften the effect of the building). Staff's recommendation to allow the blank brick walls facing Devine and Santee rests on the assumption that the future construction will cover the view of the walls. However, there is no guarantee when the other buildings will be built, if at all, nor that the new construction design will block the view.
• The approved design appears to be the typical corporate design of Walgreen’s buildings with little or no reflection of the village feel or conformity to the Future Five Design/Development Guidelines. (The McDonald’s in the Vista is a good example of changing a corporate design to a design molded to the feel of the surrounding area.)
• The designs for the bank and additional retail construction have not been submitted for approval and there is no construction timeline. It is the position of Planning Staff that no such approval will be required.
3. Signage – there will be an independent LED lighted sign with scrolling advertising on the corner of Blossom and Saluda. On the front of the Walgreen’s building will be an additional lighted red neon sign. Both types of signs are specifically discouraged in the Future Five Design/Development Guidelines.

Residents presented all of the above issues before the DDRC as well as the pedestrian safety issue before both BOZA and the DDRC. There was no collaboration with the surrounding neighborhoods during the design or plan development process nor was notice given to any member of the public prior to submission of the final recommendation by Staff to the Board or Commission. It is the position of Staff that there is no vehicle to provide notice to any interested party other than the 15-day public postings on the property being considered.
Caroline N. Watson
Industry Transitions Consulting
516 Congaree Avenue
Columbia, SC 29205
USA
803.252.6507 (tel)
775.535.3645 (fax)