BLYTHEWOOD — A request to demolish one of Blythewood’s oldest remaining commercial buildings drew strong opposition during a Feb. 19 meeting of the town’s BAR (Board of Architectural Review), where residents urged the board to preserve the historic building, known as Wilson’s Store, located at 300 Main Street.
Because the building sits within the town’s architectural overlay district and town center area, demolition cannot occur without approval of a COA (Certificate of Approval) from the BAR.
Matthew Graham and his business partner Kimberly Bonilla, who recently purchased the 3,791 sq. ft. building for $550,000, appeared before the board seeking that COA.
At that meeting, the board denied the request, and the owners appealed the ruling based on a ‘substantial hardship’. A hearing for that appeal is set for March 16.
Graham says that, because the building is a Class II historic structure, the statute gives the BAR 60 days (from the time the application for the COA is filed) to negotiate with the owner to reach a solution before the demolition can commence. That 60 days ended March 7, according to Graham.
The BAR maintains, according to the complaint, that Graham’s interpretation of the statute is incorrect and not supported by the Town ordinances.
Nevertheless, the Town filed a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction on March 6, to further prevent demolition while the dispute is resolved.
On Tuesday, March 10, the BAR sent Graham a seven-page list of new rules that he says the BAR plans to introduce at the March 16 hearing, in order to block his appeal. Graham says the board will vote on the new rules immediately before he presents his case.
“What started as a collaborative process has revealed a pattern of bad faith, procedural manipulation, and conflicts that undermine community trust and deter investment,” Graham said about the new rulings.
He said he understands the historic significance of Wilson’s store but said the building presents serious structural and financial challenges.
”We found out the crawlspace from the dirt all the way to the subfloor and everything in between is in really, really bad disrepair,” Graham said. He told the BAR that to repair the foundation, the building would have to be lifted up.
“It would be six figures cheaper to knock it down than to repair that foundation,” he said. “That’s the bind I’m in.”
Graham said he considered building a coffee shop with a drive thru window in the building to make the cost of the building’s renovation financially feasible. But the drive thru would require a curb cut next to a busy intersection that SCDOT might balk at.
“Instead of engaging in simple discussion, the Town filed a preemptive lawsuit on March 6—only days after our hardship filing—seeking an injunction based on misrepresentations and accusing our company of numerous false allegations,” Graham claimed. “To date, the only thing our company has done, or has indicated that we will do in the future, is continue to pursue administrative remedies as stipulated by the Town’s ordinances.
“If the injunction wasn’t enough, the Town has now introduced a new set of rules that will govern our hardship meeting,” he said. “These rules will be voted on mere minutes prior to our scheduled presentation, despite our application being submitted weeks ago. The document they will be voting on is a 7-page document titled “Rules of Procedure”, imposing restrictive time limits (20 minutes total) that may hinder evidence presentation, and that changes rules mid-process. Further, these new rules provide for the Town to continue my appeal in an attempt to further stall the process,” Graham said.
‘Our preference is to preserve this building, but the Town has made zero effort to support that,” Graham told The Voice. “They have instead refused any collaboration and sent lawyers and lawsuits at their constituents’ expense,” Graham said.
“Our goal is to protect this building, and to collaborate with the Town. We are truly hoping that the Town will right the ship,” Graham said, “and prevent further costly legal endeavors.”
The March 16 appeal will be heard at the Manor, at 5:30 p.m.
