Pendleton Street [between West End and West Greenville]

[Dino Hassiotis]

My family set the precedence when we built our building in 1992,after the city took our former property by the dubious use of eminent domain 

[vicupstate]

15 hours ago, Dino Hassiotis said:

My family set the precedence when we built our building in 1992,after the city took our former property by the dubious use of eminent domain 

Which is why you are grandfathered in. 

[Dino Hassiotis]

1 hour ago, vicupstate said:

Which is why you are grandfathered in. 

My grandfather is only good for a period of six month vacancy.If the building remains unoccupied for longer than that, any new tenant would have to apply for a special exemption to use the drive through window.The building was designed to generate 1/3 of it's revenue and traffic by it's use.During this period of Covid it's been shown to be an essential part of doing business.This RDV zoning was aimed at us,we were the only drive through on Pendleton St when this ordinance was conceived. We do not trust the city,they have done nothing but harm to our family.

[GvilleSC]

16 minutes ago, Dino Hassiotis said:

My grandfather is only good for a period of six month vacancy.If the building remains unoccupied for longer than that, any new tenant would have to apply for a special exemption to use the drive through window.The building was designed to generate 1/3 of it's revenue and traffic by it's use.During this period of Covid it's been shown to be an essential part of doing business.This RDV zoning was aimed at us,we were the only drive through on Pendleton St when this ordinance was conceived. We do not trust the city,they have done nothing but harm to our family.

Well, there's motivation to keep a tenant. I find it completely reasonable on the City's part.

The pandemic is an emergency situation. It should not be justification for maintaining a automobile-oriented business component in an area that's trying to improve walkability. I wish they'd come in and do a road diet to Pendleton Street, but you might also take that personally. 

[Dino Hassiotis]

3 minutes ago, GvilleSC said:

Well, there's motivation to keep a tenant. I find it completely reasonable on the City's part.

The pandemic is an emergency situation. It should not be justification for maintaining a automobile-oriented business component in an area that's trying to improve walkability. I wish they'd come in and do a road diet to Pendleton Street, but you might also take that personally. 

That's why the  Mosaic development is going to cut your neighborhood in half,I hope you don't take that personally 

[transplant08]

RDV may have failed to stop the Burger King, but it has kept a number of really lousy developments from infesting the neighborhoods. It's an imperfect tool, but it has done a lot of good. 

[Dino Hassiotis]

Laws should have clear and defined rights and restrictions.RDV allows for special exemptions and a Mob rules mentality where the city and local homeowners decide which business/tenant is acceptable and which isn't.

[GvilleSC]

17 minutes ago, Dino Hassiotis said:

That's why the  Mosaic development is going to cut your neighborhood in half,I hope you don't take that personally 

I don't follow.

[transplant08]

5 minutes ago, Dino Hassiotis said:

Laws should have clear and defined rights and restrictions.RDV allows for special exemptions and a Mob rules mentality where the city and local homeowners decide which business/tenant is acceptable and which isn't.

Yes, local homeowners very much want a say in what can be bought and sold in their neighborhoods. If they are tired of businesses that cater to vice and extort the poor, they should be listened to. That isn't mob mentality. That is democracy.

[Dino Hassiotis]

1 minute ago, transplant08 said:

Yes, local homeowners very much want a say in what can be bought and sold in their neighborhoods. If they are tired of businesses that cater to vice and extort the poor, they should be listened to. That isn't mob mentality. That is democracy.

 How does a minority owned business operating a drive through cater to vice and extort the poor?

[transplant08]

1 minute ago, Dino Hassiotis said:

 How does a minority owned business operating a drive through cater to vice and extort the poor?

The RDV designation is the only tool some neighborhoods have to stop bad retail from invading their neighborhood. 

[Dino Hassiotis]

It is illegal for a zoning ordinance to discriminate between functionally equivalent businesses.It is illegal for a zoning ordinance to discriminate between locally owned businesses and national chains.It is illegal for a zoning ordinance to be arbitrary and capricious.RDV has already been shown to have all of these characteristics 

[GvilleSC]

3 hours ago, Dino Hassiotis said:

 How does a minority owned business operating a drive through cater to vice and extort the poor?

I don't believe that's what he's saying. He's talking in general, not about your circumstances.

[transplant08]

9 minutes ago, GvilleSC said:

I don't believe that's what he's saying. He's talking in general, not about your circumstances.

yes, unclear, sorry. In general, without zoning regs, whats stopping a new liquor store, a pawn shop, a pay day lender, or a plasma center.... 

[GvilleSC]

35 minutes ago, transplant08 said:

yes, unclear, sorry. In general, without zoning regs, whats stopping a new liquor store, a pawn shop, a pay day lender, or a plasma center.... 

By the way- my apologies for using ‘he.’ I don’t assume to know who you are or anything about you. 

[Dino Hassiotis]

On 10/22/2021 at 11:20 AM, transplant08 said:

Yes, local homeowners very much want a say in what can be bought and sold in their neighborhoods. If they are tired of businesses that cater to vice and extort the poor, they should be listened to. That isn't mob mentality. That is democracy.

Democracy fights for the rights of the minority against the might of the majority 

[vicupstate]

On 10/22/2021 at 11:59 AM, Dino Hassiotis said:

It is illegal for a zoning ordinance to discriminate between functionally equivalent businesses.It is illegal for a zoning ordinance to discriminate between locally owned businesses and national chains.It is illegal for a zoning ordinance to be arbitrary and capricious.RDV has already been shown to have all of these characteristics 

A zoning ordinance can determine the TYPE of businesses that are allowed, but it does not and cannot allow or forbid individual tenants. 

As far as the coffee shop, I am not privy to the exact chain of events that determined the specific tenant that was selected.  In the meeting the developer themselves expresses an interest in signing local tenants. So to, have the developers of the new project going on the Allen Temple property.  I guess both see having something unique brings more value to the property as a whole. Yes, Starbucks wanted a location on S. Main St but that doesn't mean that the Mallard at Pendleton location met their criteria or that they sought or even knew about it. The surrounding residents expressed a desire to have a local coffee provider, but that may just have been  coincidentally the developers desires as well. I can tell you that the developers are in talks with another local business to take  some of the other available space. This particular business is not only needed and under served in this area, they make a big deal about being 'local' and not a chain.    It also can't be certain that had a national chain been involved, that an exception wouldn't have been granted to them as well.  

Regardless, the fact that an exception was granted only strengthens your case should you ever need one, which is a hypothetical to begin with. What isn't hypothetical, but proven reality, is that since the RDV rezoning, interest and investment in the area has increased very significantly.      

I don't think anyone, including the city, is trying to devalue your property (just the opposite), they just didn't want additional drive-thru restaurants to come into the area. Let's face it, such places can only go into C-3 zones and are primarily fast food.  Over time they tend to deteriorate and lose value.  With Burger King already there, that was a possibility, and not what the residents or city were trying to promote.  With RDV in place, higher density (and thus higher value) development is more likely and thus far that is exactly what is happening.    

[vicupstate]

906-910 Pendleton Street

This property is under contract. It was listed for lease or for sale, but it is staked off, so it must be a sale. 

Coincidentally,  this is not only exactly across the street from OJ's diner, it is almost exactly the same acreage.  

[Exile]

19 hours ago, Dino Hassiotis said:

Democracy fights for the rights of the minority against the might of the majority 

I understand what you're saying, but it was democracy that sentenced Socrates to death. Democracy inevitably leads to tyranny.

Our republican government (small r; not the party, not by a long shot), however imperfect (and boy is it ever these days), is vastly superior in that respect to democracy.

[Dino Hassiotis]

Read Alexis de Tocqueville and his thoughts on the tyranny of the masses.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Dino Hassiotis
Concept

[Dino Hassiotis]

On 10/24/2021 at 10:46 AM, vicupstate said:

A zoning ordinance can determine the TYPE of businesses that are allowed, but it does not and cannot allow or forbid individual tenants. 

As far as the coffee shop, I am not privy to the exact chain of events that determined the specific tenant that was selected.  In the meeting the developer themselves expresses an interest in signing local tenants. So to, have the developers of the new project going on the Allen Temple property.  I guess both see having something unique brings more value to the property as a whole. Yes, Starbucks wanted a location on S. Main St but that doesn't mean that the Mallard at Pendleton location met their criteria or that they sought or even knew about it. The surrounding residents expressed a desire to have a local coffee provider, but that may just have been  coincidentally the developers desires as well. I can tell you that the developers are in talks with another local business to take  some of the other available space. This particular business is not only needed and under served in this area, they make a big deal about being 'local' and not a chain.    It also can't be certain that had a national chain been involved, that an exception wouldn't have been granted to them as well.  

Regardless, the fact that an exception was granted only strengthens your case should you ever need one, which is a hypothetical to begin with. What isn't hypothetical, but proven reality, is that since the RDV rezoning, interest and investment in the area has increased very significantly.      

I don't think anyone, including the city, is trying to devalue your property (just the opposite), they just didn't want additional drive-thru restaurants to come into the area. Let's face it, such places can only go into C-3 zones and are primarily fast food.  Over time they tend to deteriorate and lose value.  With Burger King already there, that was a possibility, and not what the residents or city were trying to promote.  With RDV in place, higher density (and thus higher value) development is more likely and thus far that is exactly what is happening.    

 

On 10/24/2021 at 10:51 AM, vicupstate said:

906-910 Pendleton Street

This property is under contract. It was listed for lease or for sale, but it is staked off, so it must be a sale. 

Coincidentally,  this is not only exactly across the street from OJ's diner, it is almost exactly the same acreage.  

Socrates and French Enlightenment aside,growth was coming to this part of town.I concur a zoning ordinance should govern what types of business are allowed. It should not allow special interests,the rich,or the powerful to have an advantage that those less fortunate do not enjoy.RDV allows for an uneven playing field.A clearly worded well thought C3 could and would bring more growth to Pendleton St.

Edited October 27, 2021 by Dino Hassiotis
Context

[vicupstate]

810 Pendleton Street sold for $325k on 10/15/21. parcel is .268 acres. 

[gman430]

What’s the story with the DEW building? Is it empty? I never see any cars in the parking lot. If it is empty, why is it not for sale? 

Edited October 28, 2021 by gman430

[vicupstate]

It has been MOSTLY vacant for a long time. It may be fully vacant now perhaps, but maybe just because of Covid?

Nikki Haley had put out a list of state properties to put up for sale, and it was on the list but not in the first 'round'. Since she is no longer Governor, the priority of unloading those properties may have dropped .

The WE neighborhood association and the city are very concerned about what eventually happens to it, as it is a very crucial parcel for what the corridor will become.  The state may hold out until the surroundings evolve further, to maximize its proceeds.  

[vicupstate]

Not sure if it is final at all, but hearing that the ground floor or the Trehel/Cargill building may be an event space.