Economic Development Subcommittee — Columbia, SC
Date: 2018-11-20
Time: 09:00

COLUMBIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA
 TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2018


The Columbia Economic Development Subcommittee will conduct a meeting on Tuesday,
November 20, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. in the Mayor's Conference Room at City Hall, 1737 Main
Street, 2nd Floor, Columbia, SC 29201.

Prior to entering the meeting please turn all electronic communication devices to the silent, vibrate or off
 position. All presenters are asked to speak directly into the microphone for recording purposes.

CALL TO ORDER
DISCUSSION OF CONSTRUCTION STRATEGIES AND GROWTH

1. Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance - Ms. Amy Moore, Principal Planner for the
 Planning and Development Services Department

2. Real Estate Development Process Study

ADJOURNMENT




 Page 1 of 1

COLUMBIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA
 TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2018


The Columbia Economic Development Subcommittee will conduct a meeting on Tuesday,
November 20, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. in the Mayor's Conference Room at City Hall, 1737 Main
Street, 2nd Floor, Columbia, SC 29201.

Prior to entering the meeting please turn all electronic communication devices to the silent, vibrate or off
 position. All presenters are asked to speak directly into the microphone for recording purposes.

CALL TO ORDER
DISCUSSION OF CONSTRUCTION STRATEGIES AND GROWTH

1. Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance - Ms. Amy Moore, Principal Planner for the
 Planning and Development Services Department

2. Real Estate Development Process Study

ADJOURNMENT




 Page 1 of 1
 1




MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018

DEPARTMENT: City Clerk

FROM: Erika Moore, City Clerk

SUBJECT: Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance - Ms. Amy Moore,
 Principal Planner for the Planning and Development Services
 Department
FINANCIAL IMPACT:

STRATEGIC GOALS: Foster a healthy quality of life, Provide high quality municipal
 services


ATTACHMENTS:
  NovemberDemoDelayPacket (PDF)




Updated: 11/14/2018 3:24 PM Page 1
 Packet Pg. 2
 1.a




 MEMORANDUM




 Attachment: NovemberDemoDelayPacket (4734 : Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance)
TO: Members of the Economic Development Subcommittee
From: Amy Moore, Principal Planner, Historic Preservation
Date: November 20, 2018
RE: Proposed Demo Delay Ordinance


Summary: The demolition delay ordinance has been updated to include clarified
language and comments from the subcommittee.


Since the October subcommittee meeting in which the demolition delay proposal
was discussed, staff has been working on addressing any items of concern raised,
as well as editing criteria and language to provide as much clarity as possible. Most
of the items below were included in last month’s memo, but the items in red are
new:

 • Narrowed criteria for determining significance;
 • Clarified criteria for review of demolition;
 • A recommended documents checklist for demolition;
 • Revised penalties for demolition done without a permit;
 • Required evidence of secured funding and re-development plans for
 approved demolitions;
 • A meeting with staff at the 90-day mark;
 • Staff level approval for some limited demolition;
 • Added language to clarify that if a property is protected, then
 demolition delay would no longer apply;
 • Ten business day review time by staff included in ordinance;
 • General clarification of items in ordinance.

More detailed information on these items is available on the following pages.




 Packet Pg. 3
 1.a




Narrowed Criteria for Determining Significance
Rather than including all potentially contributing structures, these criteria restrict
demolition delay review to those structures that would meet the criteria for
landmark status as delineated below. Aside from narrowing the scope of review to
these structures, applicants could apply for landmark status and become eligible for
tax incentives.
 1. Individually listed in or has been determined eligible for listing in the National
 Register of Historic Places.
 2. Contributes to a Historic District listed in the National Register of Historic




 Attachment: NovemberDemoDelayPacket (4734 : Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance)
 Places.
 3. Distinctive characteristics in architectural design.
 4. Somewhat rare type within Columbia.
 5. Belonging to a group or style of buildings of which it is a good example.
 6. The work of an architect of local or national importance.
 7. A good example of a style or type of building which is becoming, or in danger
 of becoming, extinct locally.
 8. The site of events, homes of people, etc., having significantly contributed to
 local or national history.

Clarified Criteria for Review of Demolition
Based on feedback from Council, staff has worked to clarify the review criteria:
 1. The historic or architectural significance of a building or structure as
 delineated in the criteria for determining significance.
 2. Whether the building or structure is a contributing property to the area.
 3. Whether the building or structure is one of the last remaining examples of its
 kind in the neighborhood, city, or region.
 4. The existing structural condition as assessed by a licensed engineer or
 architect with extensive experience in historic rehabilitation projects in a
 report with visual and written documentation of any structural issues,
 whether it endangers public safety, and whether the building or structure is
 under orders from the city to be demolished due to severe structural
 deficiencies.
 5. Whether the property has been adequately maintained. Applicants shall
 supply a building maintenance history which answers the following questions:
 1) Is the building free of a history of serious, continuing code violations? 2)
 Has the property been properly maintained and stabilized? Failure to
 adequately maintain and protect the property shall be considered demolition
 by neglect and shall not be considered a reason for granting demolition
 approval. Long term deferred maintenance and/or a history of continuing
 code violations not addressed by the owner, or other proper persons having
 legal custody of the structure or building shall constitute a violation and not
 be considered as a part of the bottom line of the economic viability report
 (see submittal requirements, item 7)
 6. Whether there are definite plans with secured funding for the reuse of the
 property within the next year if the proposed demolition is carried out, and
 whether those plans would enhance or detract from the surrounding area.
 7. A determination of the building use and economic viability. The applicant
 shall submit a market analysis prepared by an architect, developer, real




 Packet Pg. 4
 1.a




 estate consultant, appraiser, or other real estate professional with extensive
 experience in both real estate and historic rehabilitation that demonstrates
 all of the following:
 a. The current use does not generate a reasonable economic return (may
 include a report of like uses and building scale in the same or similar
 neighborhood).
 b. That appropriate and reasonable alternate uses in the building could
 not generate a future reasonable economic return.
 c. That alterations or additions to the existing building could not make




 Attachment: NovemberDemoDelayPacket (4734 : Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance)
 the current or future use generate a reasonable economic return.
 d. Potential Federal tax credits, transfer of development rights, local
 abatements or incentives, or other funding sources are not feasible to
 bridge the gap identified above.

Recommended Documents Checklist
Staff detailed a list of documents (included in packet) that are recommended to be
submitted for DDRC review. These have more exacting language included for
clarity.

Added Staff Level Review
Staff may review features not visible from the public right-of-way or features which
are not historically or architecturally significant. This should ensure that these
demolitions do not trigger a submittal for demolition delay.

Added a Requirement to Submit Evidence of Secured Funding and
Redevelopment Plans
Concerns were raised by committee members and attendees at the previous sub-
committee meeting regarding demolition without feasible plans for redevelopment
or funding. Based on these concerns, a requirement to supply this information has
been added to the proposal.

Added a 90-Day Meeting Between Staff and Applicant
In the current draft, applicants are required to meet with staff to discuss document
submissions and the progress of the delay at the 90-day mark. This meeting is
intended to prevent a delay of a final decision because of insufficient information.

Revised Penalties for Demolition Conducted without the required Permit
Based on Council and community feedback on the previous draft, staff has revised
the language for penalties.

Added Ordinance Language for Staff Review Period
Staff has included the initial ten business day review time shown on the flow chart
to the ordinance language.


If Designated a City Landmark or Incorporated into a Historic District,
Demolition Delay Does Not Apply




 Packet Pg. 5
 1.a




If a property is designated a City Landmark or incorporated into a historic district
administered by the city of Columbia, then the demolition delay overlay would be
superseded by the guidelines and/or ordinance which governs that area.




 Attachment: NovemberDemoDelayPacket (4734 : Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance)




 Packet Pg. 6
 1.a


 Article V. Historic Preservation and Architectural Review

 DIVISION 1. GENERALLY

Section 17-651. Purpose of article.

  The purposes of this article are to:

  (1) Protect the beauty of the city and improve the quality of its environment through identification,
 recognition, conservation, maintenance and enhancement of areas, sites, structures and fixtures which
 constitute or reflect distinctive features of the economic, social, cultural or architectural history of the




 Attachment: NovemberDemoDelayPacket (4734 : Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance)
 city and its distinctive physical features;

  (2) Limit or mitigate the detrimental effect on the city’s existing character and heritage that may result from
 the demolition of architecturally or historically significant properties;
  (3) Foster appropriate use and wider public knowledge and appreciation of such features, areas, sites,
 structures and fixtures;

  (4) Resist and restrain environmental influences adverse to such purposes;

  (5) Encourage private efforts in support of such purposes; and

  (6) By furthering such purposes, promote the public welfare, strengthen the cultural and educational life of
 the city, and make the city a more attractive and desirable place in which to live and work.

(Code 1979, § 6-8001; Ord. No. 98-079, 11-18-98)
…


(g) Delay of demolition. The delay of demolition is intended to limit or mitigate the detrimental effect on the
 city’s existing character and heritage by postponing whole or partial demolition of architecturally or
 historically significant buildings or structures in the Design/Development Area (-DD), the Devine Street
 corridor, the Gervais Street Corridor, the North Main Corridor (exact ranges to be determined), and the
 eligible landmark list as produced by Historic Columbia that constitute or reflect the architectural, cultural,
 economic, political or social history of the city. The –DD is defined in Sec. 17-253 of the ordinance. [exact
 range of other corridors to be determined and defined in ordinance].
 (1) An architecturally or historically significant building or structure is defined as being fifty (50) years old
 or older and meeting at least one of the following criteria:
 a. Individually listed in or has been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic
 Places.
 b. Contributes to a Historic District listed in the National Register of Historic Places.
 c. Distinctive characteristics in architectural design.
 d. Somewhat rare type within Columbia.
 e. Belonging to a group or style of buildings of which it is a good example.
 f. The work of an architect of local or national importance.
 g. A good example of a style or type of building which is becoming, or in danger of becoming extinct
 locally.


 Packet Pg. 7
 1.a


 h. The site of events, homes of people, etc., having significantly contributed to local or national history.
(2) Upon receipt of a permit for demolition which falls into the areas defined in the demolition delay
 ordinance, staff shall have 10 business days in which to review a property for historic or architectural
 significance (see criteria g(1)(a-h).
(3) For properties which do not meet the criterion of g(1) and one criterion of (a-h), deemed
 “noncontributing” in accordance with subsection 17-652, a CDA for demolition may be written by staff
 immediately. Staff may issue an approval for removal of features not visible from the public right-of-
 way or for features which are not historically or architecturally significant to the structure. Additionally,
 a structure may be approved for demolition by staff if it constitutes a life safety hazard and has been
 deemed beyond repair by the City of Columbia Building Official.




 Attachment: NovemberDemoDelayPacket (4734 : Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance)
(4) In addition to complete demolition of a building or structure, reduction of a building’s footprint shall
 also be considered demolition for the purposes of this section and shall be subject to delay of demolition.
(5) The City shall not issue a permit for demolition for any architecturally or historically significant building
 or structure (as determined by criteria g(1) (a-h) visible from the public right-of-way without prior review
 and approval by the Design Development Review Commission (DDRC).
(6) Age shall be established by the records maintained by the Richland County Assessor’s Office or
 additional research. If age cannot be established by the records maintained by the Richland County
 Assessor’s Office, the applicant for a demolition shall present other documentation to the city to
 establish date of construction. If the age is unknown, not indicated, or in dispute, it shall be assumed to
 be at least 50 years.
(7) Upon receipt of an application for a request for demolition, the Design/Development Review
 Commission shall use the following criteria for review:
 a. The historic or architectural significance of a building or structure as delineated in item g(1)(a-h);
 b. Whether the building or structure is a contributing property to the area;
 c. Whether the building or structure is one of the last remaining examples of its kind in the
 neighborhood, city, or region;
 d. The existing structural condition as assessed by a licensed engineer or architect with extensive
 experience in historic rehabilitation projects in a report with visual and written documentation of
 any structural issues, whether it endangers public safety, and whether the building or structure is
 under orders from the city to be demolished due to severe structural deficiencies;
 e. Whether the property has been adequately maintained. Applicants shall supply a building
 maintenance history which answers the following questions: 1) Is the building free of a history of
 serious, continuing code violations? 2) Has the property been properly maintained and stabilized?
 Failure to adequately maintain and protect the property shall be considered demolition by neglect
 and shall not be considered a reason for granting demolition approval. Long term deferred
 maintenance and/or a history of continuing code violations not addressed by the owner, or other
 proper person having legal custody of the structure or building shall constitute a violation and will
 not be considered as a part of the bottom line of the economic viability report (see submittal
 requirement ‘g’ below).
 f. Whether there are definite plans with secured funding for the reuse of the property within the next
 year if the proposed demolition is carried out, and whether those plans would enhance or detract
 from the surrounding area;


 g. A determination of the building use and economic viability. The applicant shall submit a market
 analysis prepared by an architect, developer, real estate consultant, appraiser, or other real estate
 Packet Pg. 8
 1.a


 professional with extensive experience in both real estate and historic rehabilitation that
 demonstrates all of the following:
 i. The current use does not generate a reasonable economic return (may include market report of
 like uses and building scale in the same or similar neighborhood);
 ii. That appropriate and reasonable alternate uses in the building could not generate a future
 reasonable economic return;
 iii. That alterations or additions to the existing building could not make the current or future use
 generate a reasonable economic return; and
 iv. Potential Federal tax credits, transfer of development rights, local abatements or incentives, or




 Attachment: NovemberDemoDelayPacket (4734 : Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance)
 other funding sources are not feasible to bridge the gap identified above.


(8) For applications requiring DDRC review, if the DDRC does not find the property architecturally or
 historically significant, a Certificate of Design Approval (CDA) shall be granted to allow the demolition
 permit to be issued. Demolition may be conditional upon the detailed recordation of the subject property.
(9) Should the DDRC find the subject property to be architecturally or historically significant, a delay of
 demolition of up to one hundred eighty (180) days may be imposed at their meeting to allow the
 applicant time to find viable alternatives to demolition.
(10) No permits for demolition, new construction or alterations shall be issued during the delay period.
 Permits for repairs may be issued including emergency stabilization repairs to a property whose
 structural integrity has been compromised. Approval for such repairs must be approved in writing by
 the DDRC or DDRC staff.
(11) In order to avoid or mitigate the anticipated effects of demolition, staff shall, in conjunction with the
 property owner, accommodate reasonable requests from any interested parties for information about or
 access to the building or structure for the purpose of evaluating alternatives to demolition. Due
 consideration shall be given to all possible alternatives to demolition, including but not limited to the
 preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, relocation or sale of the property.
(12) After the 90th day of the delay of demolition, City Staff shall meet with the applicant(s) or agent(s) to
 assess the progress of the delay and ensure that applicants are compiling the necessary documentation
 to help reduce the possibility of further delays.
(13) By the end of the 180-day demolition delay period, the applicant must submit documentation to the
 DDRC that details and verifies any efforts to secure viable alternatives to demolition including but not
 limited to the preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, relocation or sale of the property. If provided with
 insufficient or incomplete data critical to the evaluation of the demolition request, the DDRC may
 impose up to an additional 180- day delay. Upon a complete submittal, the DDRC may either grant or
 deny the demolition request.
(14) Responsibilities of the applicant and staff during the delay period including, but not limited to
 documentation, assessments, estimates, plans, resource identification, and notification shall be set forth
 in the D/DRC bylaws, which require approval by City Council.

(15) If the DDRC approves a request for demolition, they may require as a condition of their approval that
 the building or structure be documented by the property owner prior to the demolition. Required
 documentation will minimally include photographs and a site plan.




 Packet Pg. 9
 1.a


(16) The removal or demolition of any building or structure within the designated demolition delay overlay
 without an approved demolition permit two five-year stay in the issuance of a building permit for any
 new construction at the site previously occupied by the historic building or structure.
(17) For any property which falls within a demolition delay overlay but which subsequently is designated
 as a landmark or which is incorporated into the boundaries of design protection district (-DP), the
 demolition delay review process will be removed and the demolition review as delineated in Sec. 17-
 674(e) of the City of Columbia Zoning Ordinance will apply.




 Attachment: NovemberDemoDelayPacket (4734 : Proposed Demolition Delay Ordinance)




 Packet Pg. 10
 2




MEETING DATE: November 20, 2018

DEPARTMENT: City Clerk

FROM: Erika Moore, City Clerk

SUBJECT: Real Estate Development Process Study
FINANCIAL IMPACT:




Updated: 11/14/2018 2:44 PM Page 1
 Packet Pg. 11