[I. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:03]
OKAY, SAY AT THIS TIME WE'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER, UM, THE MARCH 27TH, 2025 MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.
START OFF WITH THE BOARD MEMBER TRE FERGUSON.
AND LET THE RECORD SHOW SHE'S ABSENT.
AND MR. CHAIRMAN, WE HAVE, UH, CORUM.
UH, TAKE A MINUTE AND DO THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE PGI TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
DO WE HAVE ANY DECISIONS TO GO THROUGH? NO.
[IV. CHAIRMAN’S REMARKS]
UH, SO GOOD EVENING EVERYONE, AND WE APPRECIATE Y'ALL COMING THIS EVENING TO MEETING WITH THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS.WE HAVE A COUPLE OF ITEMS, UM, WE WE'LL GET TO HERE IN A MINUTE.
UM, PLEASE MAKE SURE ALL CELL PHONES ARE TURNED OFF AND ANY OTHER ELECTRONIC DEVICES AS WE KIND OF MOVE FORWARD.
HOPEFULLY THAT'LL HELP US GET THROUGH THE MEETING A LITTLE QUICKER.
AND AS I MENTIONED, ALSO, IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT COMES IN THAT SITS WITH YOU'ALL, PLEASE MAKE 'EM AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THEY WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE TO SIGN IN AND WE WILL HAVE TO SWEAR IN FOLKS TO SPEAK AS WE GO THROUGH.
SO THE MORE PEOPLE WE GET DONE AHEAD OF TIME, THE EASIER THE PROCESS WILL GO THROUGH.
UH, WE'RE A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING, UM, PROCESS AND WE BE VERY SIMILAR TO THE WAY THE COURT SYSTEM DOES.
AND SO WE ASK EVERYONE TO PLEASE TRY TO RESPECT EACH OTHER.
IT'S IN ATTENDANCE SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY OUTBURSTS.
UM, WE'RE GONNA LIMIT FOLKS TO, UH, THREE MINUTES.
UM, AND WE WON'T USE THE CLOCK.
AND SO WE WILL TURN THE CLOCK ON PERIODICALLY.
WE HOPE WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT.
YOU KNOW, IF WE GO OVER A LITTLE BIT, THAT'S FINE.
UM, FOR THE SHORT TERM ANYWAY, AND WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT.
AND I HAVE A BUZZER THAT GOES OFF.
MISS MARTY'S REAL GOOD AT OPERATING THE CLOCK.
SO, UM, AND SO THE WAY WE TRY TO RUN THE POLICY, WE'LL HAVE A PRESENTATION.
UH, KENDRICK WILL TALK, UH, A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, UM, WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND WHAT THE PROCESS IS THERE.
UM, THE APPLICANT GETS THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AND THEN WE'LL CALL FOLKS UP THAT HAVE SIGNED UP THAT DO HAVE STANDING.
UM, THE ONES THAT HAVE GOTTEN A NOTICE FIRST WILL BE REQUESTED TO SPEAK AND THEN WE'LL PROCEED WITH THE OTHERS.
UH, AND WE'LL USUALLY ASK FOR THE FOLKS THAT ARE OPPOSED FIRST, AND THEN FOLKS THAT ARE, UH, IN FAVOR OF.
AND THEN THE APPLICANT ALWAYS HAS THE OPPORTUNITY AS A REBUTTAL AT THE END.
AND AT ANY TIME DURING THE MEETING, THE BOARD MEMBERS DO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS AND WE TRY NOT TO DO TOO MUCH SO WE CAN GET THINGS PROCEEDED ON.
SO I GUESS WE'RE READY TO TRY TO SWEAR IN FOLKS THAT, UH, HAVE SIGNED UP.
UM, AND, AND SO ALL THE PRESENTERS AND ANYBODY THAT'S GONNA SPEAK, WE HAVE TO, TO SWEAR IN.
DO Y'ALL SOLEMNLY SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? I DO.
[VI. SPECIAL USE APPLICATION(S)]
SO THE FIRST APPLICATION THAT WE HAVE IS CENTENARY COMMERCIAL.UH, IT'S PARTIAL ID NUMBER EIGHT DASH 0 0 1 DASH B DASH 180 8.
AND IT'S SPECIAL USE PERMIT NUMBER 0 0 3 0 1 3 5.
UH, DOES ANYBODY ON THE BOARD HAVE A POTENTIAL CONFLICT? YES.
COULD JUST LET US KNOW WHAT, UH, SO I DO CURRENTLY, UM, HAVE A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE, UH, OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY, BOTH IN THE CAPACITY OF MANAGEMENT AND, UM, POTENTIAL FUTURE MANAGEMENT THERE.
MR. THOMPSON, I'M GONNA ASK YOU JUST A FEW FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS.
YOU MENTIONED YOU HAVE A, A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER.
IS YOUR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, UM, SERVICE RELATED TO 2 26 EAST FRONT STREET? NOT AT THIS TIME.
UM, DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT IT WILL INVOLVE 2 26 EAST FRONT STREET? IT IS A POTENTIAL, YES.
[00:05:01]
TO MAKE A DECISION AS TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION BASED SOLELY ON THE INFORMATION THAT'S ED IN THE HEARING TONIGHT? I'M SORRY, YOU REPEAT THAT.ARE YOU ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION, UM, ABOUT THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT BASED SOLELY ON THE, UM, EVIDENCE THAT'S PRESENTED IN THE HEARING TONIGHT? OR ARE YOU CONCERNED THAT THE POTENTIAL BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP COULD IMPACT YOUR, YOUR DECISION? I'M ABLE TO MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THE FACTS PRESENTED TONIGHT.
UM, BUT YOU DO REASONABLY ANTICIPATE HAVING A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH THAT IS CORRECT.
THIS PROPERTY IN THE NEAR FUTURE? YES.
SO, MR. CHAIR, AT THIS TIME, GIVEN MR. UM, THOMPSON'S RESPONSE, THE BOARD CAN ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO EXCUSE HIM FROM VOTING ON THIS APPLICATION, GIVEN HIS, UH, POTENTIAL FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THE PROJECT.
I MOVE TO RECUSE VICE CHAIR THOMPSON FROM THIS PARTICULAR MATTER, THE CENTENARY COMMERCIAL HEARING.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SHOULD WE TAKE A ROLL CALL ON THE COUNTER? SHOULD WE RAISE HANDS HOW SHE BEST TO PROCEED? HERE? YOU CAN RAISE HANDS.
ALL IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? OKAY.
NOW I ALSO HAVE A POTENTIAL CONFLICT AS MY BROKER, MY REAL ESTATE BROKER LICENSE IS HELD THROUGH THE APPRAISAL, UH, COMPANY REAL ESTATE SERVICES THAT DID THE APPRAISAL ON THIS POTENTIAL PROPERTY.
SO HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE APPRAISER, UM, ABOUT THIS APPLICATION? NO, MA'AM.
HAVE YOU RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION OTHER THAN THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE PACKET ABOUT THIS APPLICATION? I HAVE NOT.
DO YOU HAVE ANY FINANCIAL INTEREST, EITHER PRESENT OR IN THE NEAR FUTURE THAT WILL BE IMPACTED BY THE APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION? NO, MA'AM.
GIVEN THE THAT INFORMATION, IF MEMBERS HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT MR. THOMPSON, UM, EXCUSE ME, MR. TAKS ABILITY TO BE A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL, UM, DECISION MAKER IN THIS PROCESS, YOU CAN ENTERTAIN A VOTE TO EXCUSE HIM FROM VOTING.
IF THERE'S NO CONCERN, UM, THEN WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE HEARING.
I'M KENDRICK, ARE YOU READY TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? YES, SIR.
MR.
THANK YOU FOR ATTENDING TONIGHT'S, UH, BOARD MEETING.
I JUST WANTED TO START OFF BY SAYING AND GIVING YOU KIND OF A, A BRIEF OVERLOOK OF THE ACTUAL PROCESS PRIOR TO PRESENTING TONIGHT'S FIRST ITEM.
AND ESSENTIALLY, WHILE MOST USES ARE PERMITTED BY RIGHT, SOME USES REQUIRE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
UH, THE BOARD'S JOB IS RESPECT TO THESE CRITERIA THAT YOU SEE CURRENTLY ON THE SCREEN.
EACH CRITERIA IS ESSENTIALLY SUPPOSED TO RECEIVE APPROVAL, UM, FROM THIS BOARD PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
UM, AND ESSENTIALLY THE BOARD HAS THE ABILITY, UH, TO IMPOSE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS BEYOND ZONING REQUIREMENTS, UM, WHEN DETERMINING THEIR DECISION.
SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND GET UP AND PRESENT THIS FIRST ITEM HERE.
AND GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN.
AND GOOD EVENING TO THE BOARD.
UM, OUR FIRST ITEM HERE IS THE, I WANT TO PRONOUNCE THIS CORRECTLY, HOPEFULLY, BUT SEDENTARY COMMERCIAL.
AND THE LOCATION HERE IS 2 26 EAST FRONT STREET, NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA.
THE PROPOSED USE THAT YOU ESSENTIALLY ARE, UH, CONCERNED WITH IS THE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT IS THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT, UM, THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THAT PARTICULAR USE IN THIS DISTRICT.
BUT IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE IS A RESTAURANT WHICH IS PERMITTED BY RIGHT, YOU HAVE NO CONCERN WITH THE RESTAURANT.
UM, IN PARTICULAR THAT HAS BEEN VETTED ALONG WITH THE PROPOSAL.
AND THE REQUEST SUMMARY HERE IS FOR THE APPLICANT IS, UH, GO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, PLLC.
THE OWNER IS THE SEDENTARY FAMILY, LTD.
THE TOTAL ACREAGE IS 0.29 AND THE PARCEL IDENTIFICATION, IT'S EIGHT DASH 0 0 1 DASH B DASH 180 8.
AND THE ZONING DISTRICT IS, UH, SET AS IN COMMERCIAL TWO OR C DASH TWO.
THE FIRST MAP YOU HAVE HERE, UH, IDENTIFIES THE PROPERTY AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S OUTLINED IN RED AND THAT'S A VICINITY MAP.
THE SECOND MAP TO FOLLOW IS THE BUFFER MAP, AND ESSENTIALLY THAT BUFFER IS A HUNDRED FEET FROM WHERE THE PROPERTY LINES ARE BEFORE THE ACTUAL PARCEL.
AND ANY FOLKS THAT ARE WITHIN THAT BUFFER SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER JUST NOTIFYING
[00:10:01]
'EM OF THE ACTUAL HEARING.THE AERIAL MAP HERE, AND AGAIN, WE HAVE THAT SHOWN AS THE, UH, HIGHLIGHTED AND RED THERE FOR THE PARCEL.
AND THEN WE HAVE THAT FOLLOW WITH THE ZONING MAP AND THAT COLORATION REFLECTS THE C DASH TWO.
JUST TO KIND OF REITERATE THAT POINT FOR THE COMMERCIAL TWO DISTRICT.
SO IN ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS, UH, STAFF CAN CONFIRM THAT NO TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS WERE IMPOSED ON THE ITEM.
UH, STAFF CAN ALSO CONFIRM THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED AND DEEMED COMPLETE.
AND THEN LASTLY, THAT STAFF CAN CONFIRM THAT THE REQUEST IS WITHIN ITS JURIS JURISDICTION IN ACCORDANCE TO THE TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES.
AND HERE IS THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING ESSENTIALLY FOR THE ACTUAL PROPERTY AND WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED AS FAR AS FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE AND THE RESTAURANT.
AND THAT'S FOLLOWED BY SITE PLAN.
I'M SORRY, THAT'S A BIT DISTORTED.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO TRY TO PUT ALL THIS ON ONE SCREEN PER SE, OR ONE PAGE OF THE POWERPOINT.
UM, BUT ESSENTIALLY THE BUILDING'S LOCATION IS REFLECTED IN SEVERAL OF THE DIFFERENCES OF STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS THAT WENT THROUGH DRC ARE ALSO BEING REFLECTED ON THE ACTUAL PLAN.
AND IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL TAKE THOSE AT THIS TIME.
YES, I HAVE ONE QUESTION FROM REVIEW OF THE, THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED IN REFERENCE TO BUFFERS, UM, ALONG PROPERTY BOUNDARIES AND ALSO, UM, SETBACKS.
AND I GUESS COULD YOU JUST GIVE US A LITTLE BACKGROUND IN REFERENCE TO HOW ALL THAT WENT THROUGH AND THE RULING? YES, SIR.
A LOT OF THAT IS ACTUALLY WE WERE IN THE PROCESS AND WE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT THOROUGHLY ALONG WITH THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY IN MAKING THOSE DETERMINATIONS.
UH, THE HPC ACTUALLY, BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, IS GOING TO DICTATE A LOT OF THAT.
UM, AS FAR AS FOR WHAT YOU SEE AND WHAT IS PRESENTED HERE, THEY HAVE MET AND ADDRESSED ALL OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING CONCERNS AS IT RELATES TO THE BUFFERING.
UM, WE HAD, AS I SAID, ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE ESSENTIALLY APPLYING THE REQUIREMENTS CORRECTLY.
AND IN FACT, THE HPC IS GOING TO HAVE MUCH MORE OF A DETERMINATION PERTAINING TO THE BUFFERING AND SCREENING AND THE SETBACKS.
SO THAT PROCESS WILL ACTUALLY GO ON AFTER WHATEVER DECISION IS MADE.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? NO.
AND MR. CHAIRMAN, I SHOULD GO AHEAD AND SAY, UH, I DID NOT UN UNFORTUNATELY, I DID NOT INCLUDE THE BOARD WORKSHEETS WITHIN THE PACKETS.
SO WHAT I WILL DO IS I WILL HAVE THAT ON SCREEN, UM, AS THERE'S SOME DELIBERATION AND PRESENTATION.
I'M GONNA TRY TO SEE IF I CAN WORK TO GET THAT PULLED UP ON MY SIDE AND YOU GUYS WILL HAVE IT STILL HOPEFULLY ON YOUR SCREEN.
THE APPLICANT IS NOW GOING TO, UM, COME UP AND ESSENTIALLY PRESENT THEIR PORTION OF THE POWERPOINT.
IT'S INCLUDED IN THIS ONE, SO YOU WILL ALL BE ABLE TO HEAR FROM THERE.
REAL, JUST REAL QUICK, KENDRICK ONE, ONE MORE QUESTION FOR YOU.
LOOKING AT, I WAS LOOKING AT NOTES FROM DRC FROM FEBRUARY, 2025.
THERE'S A NOTE HERE ABOUT PARKING THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE AN AGREEMENT ESTABLISHED WITH THE OWNER AND HIMSELF, I THINK BECAUSE THE INS OR THE OWN, THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS TWO PROPERTIES IN USING THE PARKING LOT.
FOR BOTH OF THOSE, HAS THAT AGREEMENT BEEN PUT IN PLACE OR IS IT SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE THAT THE APPLICANT'S GOING TO DO IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY? YES SIR.
IT WAS EXECUTED AND I'VE HAD SOME DELIBERATION AS WELL PRIOR TO THE MEETING HERE ABOUT IT.
UM, SO IT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY AT LEAST THE ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY AND THE CITY ATTORNEY.
UM, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT MS. JAMIE FURTHER ON THAT.
AND, UH, MR. FERGUSON, I IMAGINE THE APPLICANT IN HER PRESENTATION IS GOING TO, UH, ADDRESS ANY PARKING CONCERNS.
BUT AS IT RELATES TO THE SATELLITE PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR THE CITY OF NEW BERN, UM, WE REQUIRE IF YOU CANNOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT ONSITE PARKING FOR YOUR USE OR USES THAT YOU CAN, UM, SATELLITE PARK WITHIN 600 FEET OF YOUR PRIMARY USE.
THIS PARCEL IS, UH, ADJOINED TO THE WEST, UM, TO, I THINK IT WAS TWO 20 EAST FRONT STREET.
AND I THINK THE APPLICANT IS, UM, GONNA HAVE SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE PLAN TO SATELLITE PARK AT 2 26 EAST FRONT STREET.
SO THAT INFORMATION IS FORTHCOMING.
ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO THANK YOU.
I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO THE APPLICANT.
HELLO, UH, MY NAME IS SARAH ABACK.
I'M AN ARCHITECT WITH GO ARCHITECTURAL
[00:15:01]
DESIGN, AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE TONIGHT.UM, I PUT TOGETHER THIS POWERPOINT AND SOME OF IT IS A LITTLE REDUNDANT FROM KENDRICK'S, SO I WILL SKIP THROUGH THOSE IF NECESSARY.
SO JUST, UH, TO ORIENT YOU ON THE SITE, AGAIN, THE, THE RECTANGLE IS THE SITE IN QUESTION FOR THIS PROPERTY.
AND, UM, THE OTHER TWO PROPERTIES THAT THE OWNER OWNS ARE TO THE LEFT AND, AND TO THE, THE, THE BOTTOM, UM, TWO OTHER PARCELS.
AND JUST TO GIVE YOU A VISUAL OF THE SITE, JUST, UH, THE RIGHT HAND PHOTO, IT'S AN EMPTY LOT ACROSS FROM THE GALLEYS DOOR.
UM, LOTS OF THREE STORY BUILDINGS AROUND THE AREA, RESTAURANTS, I'M SURE YOU ARE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THIS SITE AND DOING SOME RESEARCH ON THIS PROPERTY.
I FOUND THIS REALLY INTERESTING ARTICLE, UH, WITH THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY SHOWING A THREE STORY BRICK BUILDING THAT USED TO SIT EXACTLY ON THIS SITE IN PRECISELY THE LOCATION THAT WE
AND THE SANBORN MAPS, UH, THIS ONE'S FROM 1904, UH, SHOWS THIS PROPERTY AND THE TOWER AND CALLS IT OUT AS A BOARDING HOUSE, ALSO USED TO BE A JAIL AND SOME OTHER THINGS.
IT'S QUITE AN INTERESTING BUILDING AND, UH, IF YOU SEARCH UP 2 26 EAST FRONT STREET HISTORICAL SOCIETY, THEY'VE, UH, I THINK MICKEY MILLER WROTE AN ART ARTICLE ABOUT IT FIVE YEARS AGO.
UH, SO WE CAME WITH THIS PROJECT BABY STEPPING, TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF IT WAS FEASIBLE TO DO A PROJECT ON THIS LOCATION.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE CITY AND THEY HAVE RECOMMENDED THIS PROCESS TO US.
SO WE'VE DEVELOPED A SITE PLAN THAT HAD PARKING LAYOUT FOR THE MOST RESTRICTIVE, UH, USE THAT WE COULD HAVE ON THE FIRST FLOOR, WHICH WAS ONE SINGLE RESTAURANT.
AND THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE LAID OUT PARKING FOR.
OUR SITE SURVEYOR HAS LAID ALL THIS OUT, UH, PROVIDED A DUMPSTER ON SITE, AND WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES DURING THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS.
THAT WAS A MULTIM MEETING PROCESS WITH ALL THE DEPART DEPARTMENT HEADS OF THE CITY OF NEW BERN.
AND SO THAT THEY COULD SEE THIS PROJECT AND SAY, KIND OF GIVE US AN OKAY TO GO FORWARD TO COME TO THIS BOARD.
IF YOU ALL APPROVE US TONIGHT, THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO HPC AND WE WILL DEVELOP ELEVATIONS AND PUT TOGETHER SOME RENDERINGS AND KIND OF DEVELOP THIS PLAN A LITTLE BIT MORE.
SO WHAT YOU'RE SEEING TONIGHT IS IT'S A, IT'S A BASIC IDEA OF WHAT WE UNDERSTAND THE, THE PROJECT TO ENTAIL, AND HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.
BUT, UM, THE OWNER RECENTLY BOUGHT THESE THREE PARCELS AND THE SPARROW HOUSE, WHICH IS THE TALL FEDERALIST BUILDING THAT, THAT IS EXISTING ON EAST FRONT STREET NOW, UM, WE WOULD UTILIZE PARKING BEHIND THAT AND YOU'VE PROBABLY SEEN PEOPLE PARK DOWN THERE AND IT'S A LITTLE HAPHAZARD AND THERE'S SOME TRUCKS THERE, AND IT'S A GRAVEL LOT.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE BELIEVE ONCE THAT SIDE'S CLEANED UP, MARKED, YOU KNOW, STRIPED, PAVED, HAVE, UM, THE PARKING CLEAR, HAVE HANDICAPPED PARKING, HAVE RAMPS AND STAIRS AVAILABLE TO THIS, THIS SITE THAT IT WILL REALLY KIND OF TIGHTEN UP THAT, UH, THAT AREA.
AND AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THERE'S KIND OF A CUT THROUGH TO THE COMFORT SUITES.
UM, IS IT COMFORT SUITES OR COURTYARD, UH, COURTYARD, I ALWAYS FORGET OKAY.
AND SO THAT FLOW OF TRAFFIC ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE HOTEL CURRENTLY HAS A DUMPSTER THAT IS ACCESSED THROUGH THIS PROPERTY.
AND WE INTEND TO MAINTAIN THAT, UM, FOR THAT, THAT'S WHAT WE ARE PRESENTING IN THIS PROJECT, AND THAT'S WHAT THE OWNER HAS HAS INDICATED RIGHT NOW.
UM, SO THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES, WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE SITE PLAN REVIEW, WE DETERMINED BASED ON A RESTAURANT, BASED ON WHAT WE WOULD, IF WE PULLED A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THAT FOOTPRINT, WHAT THE OCCUPANCY WOULD BE, AND THEN FOR THE NUMBER OF UNITS ABOVE HOW MANY, UH, PARKING SPACES WOULD BE AVAILABLE.
AND SO PRESENTED THAT WENT BACK AND FORTH WITH THE CITY AND THEY GAVE US A DETERMINATION THAT THEY WERE HAPPY WITH THAT NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES.
[00:20:01]
INCLUDED, UM, IN, UH, IT'S, IT'S IN THIS PRESENTATION.I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS IN THE APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO YOU, UM, BUT THE FIRST FLOOR RESTAURANT, UM, THIS SITE IS IN THE FLOODPLAINS AND YOU PROBABLY HAVE SEEN THE SPARROW HOUSE IS RAISED UP.
YOU HAVE TO WALK UP SOME STEPS TO GET THERE.
AND SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A CHALLENGE AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY SINCE IT'S BEING, IT'S A MAJOR INTERSECTION IN NEW BERN, YOU KNOW, HOW PEOPLE WOULD ACCESS IT.
HAVING RAMP ACCESS TO THAT SITE IS DEFINITELY, UH, SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO DO IN A PRIORITY.
WE KIND OF WANNA MAKE IT PART OF THE EXPERIENCE COMING UP TO THAT BUILDING.
IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE ON THE SCREEN, BUT I INCLUDED, UM, IMAGES OF, UH, THE LAYOUTS OF THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR AS THEY STAND RIGHT NOW, THEY, THEY'LL BE DEVELOPED FURTHER.
UM, BUT THE APARTMENTS UP THERE, TWO SETS OF STAIRS, ELEVATOR, UH, BALCONIES.
AND THEN I JUST WANTED TO RUN THROUGH THE, THE, THE DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THAT I KNOW THAT YOU ALL HAVE TO CONSIDER.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PURPOSE OF THIS SPECIAL USE, THE REASON THAT WE'RE HERE IS REALLY THE TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES AND IT IS MARKED AS MULTIFAMILY HAS TO COME TO THIS BOARD TO OBTAIN THAT SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY WE'RE HERE TONIGHT.
AND THEN, UM, IF COMPLETED AS PROPOSED IN THE APPLICATION, THE DEVELOPMENT WILL COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ORDINANCE.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN I READ THAT SENTENCE, THE PROCESSES THAT WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH BEING THE, THE DEPARTMENTAL SITE PLAN REVIEW, UM, SPEAKING WITH THE CITY ABOUT, UH, THE ORDINANCES, SPEAKING WITH ALL THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT HEADS, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, THE FIRE MARSHAL, UM, THE, THE WATER DEPARTMENT, THE ELECTRIC DEPARTMENT, HAVING GONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS, YOU KNOW, THE, AND GIVEN AN OKAY TO MOVE FORWARD, UH, WE BELIEVE THAT, THAT WE HAVE SATISFIED THIS REQUIREMENT AND THEN THE USE WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY IF LOCATED WERE PROPOSED AND DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN SUBMITTED.
UM, YOU KNOW, REALLY ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THAT REALLY STRUCK ME WHEN, UM, DOING THE RESEARCH FOR THIS PROJECT WAS
AND THE IDEA THAT, THAT WE REALLY WOULD BE, UM, YOU KNOW, PUTTING BACK SOMETHING IN THAT AREA THAT WAS, UH, SIMILARLY LOCATED ON THE SITE, UH, KIND OF A SIMILAR MASS AND SCALE TO, TO WHAT WAS THERE HISTORICALLY, I THINK IS, UH, REALLY KIND OF EXCITING.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE, THE IDEA THAT THE, THE, THE OLD FRANK WHOREHOUSE AND THE SPARROW HOUSE BEING THREE STORIES, UH, DEALING WITH THE FLOOD PLAIN IN, IN A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS, AND THEN THE OTHER MIX OF TWO STORY BUILDINGS, UM, ALL OF WHICH WE WOULD HAVE TO SATISFY HPC, UM, WITH THE FINAL DESIGN.
AND THEN, UH, THE USE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE THE VALUE OF THE ADJOINING OR ABUTTING PROPERTY OR THAT THE USE IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE.
AND, UM, IF AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE APPRAISER JUST COME AND JUST SPEAK A FEW WORDS, UM, IF THAT WOULD BE OKAY, PARKER HOWARD, UH, MY NAME IS PARKER HOWARD.
I'M A COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER WITH REALTY SERVICES OF EASTERN CAROLINA.
AND OUR ANALYSIS EVALUATED THE POTENTIAL IMPACT, IF ANY, THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL HAVE ON SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES.
AND WE HAVE ANALYZED THREE COMPARABLE MIXED USE PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN DOWNTOWN NEW BERN, EXAMINING THE PROPERTY SURROUNDING PARCELS TAX VALUES AND MARKET TRANSACTIONS.
AND OUR FINDINGS INDICATE NO NEGATIVE IMPACT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES.
AND BASED ON OUR ANALYSIS, THE PROPOSED PROJECT SHOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE OR ALTER THE, UH, VALUES OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.
AND MR. BECK, IF WE JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT THE FULL APPRAISAL REPORT HAS BEEN, IS CONTAINED IN THE MATERIALS THAT YOU RECEIVED FOR THE APPLICATION? YES.
WE'LL MAKE THAT FOR THE RECORD.
AND THEN, UH, THE LOCATION AND CHARACTER OF THE USE IF DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN IS SUBMITTED AND APPROVED WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE AREA IN WHICH IT IS TO BE LOCATED.
AND IN GENERAL, CONFORMITY WITH THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
[00:25:01]
OF THE CITY.AND I KNOW THAT THE CITY HAS, UM, WHEN THEY ORIGINALLY PUT TOGETHER THEIR, THEIR MAJOR URBAN DESIGN PLAN, A LOT OF THAT HAD TO DO WITH THE WALKABILITY OF THE CITY.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE IDEA THAT WE WOULD HAVE ANOTHER RESTAURANT AND, UM, APARTMENTS IN THIS AREA TO ME KIND OF HELPS IMPROVE THAT WALKABILITY, UH, GIVING, UH, JUST ANOTHER PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO GO AND, AND, UH, ENJOY, UM, NEW BRUNS, GREAT DOWNTOWN AND KIND OF IN A WAY KIND OF EXTEND DOWNTOWN A LITTLE BIT FARTHER DOWN TO EAST FRONT STREET.
UM, I THINK IS IS, UH, IS A, IS A GREAT, UM, AND THERE, AND THE FACT THAT THERE ARE A MIX OF THREE AND TWO STORY BUILDINGS IN THIS AREA, I THINK THAT WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING WILL FIT IN NICELY.
AND, UH, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
I HAVE A QUESTION, MS. S OKAY.
YOU SAID IT'S GOING TO BE A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE, RIGHT? UH, ONE, ONE FLOOR RESTAURANT, TWO STORIES OF APARTMENTS ABOVE.
SO, UH, I WAS MORE ALONG THE LINE OF, UH, WHAT THE PRICE OF THE RESIDENCE WOULD BE, WHERE IT BE A CERTAIN LIMIT THAT YOU PUT UP THERE A CERTAIN AMOUNT.
I HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OWNER'S PRICE POINT IS.
UM, THE, UM, I REALLY DON'T, I'M NOT, UH, I I HAVEN'T, HE HASN'T SHARED THOSE NUMBERS WITH ME,
WITH THE RESTAURANT, WHERE, UH, WHERE WOULD IT BE LOCATED? WOULD IT BE LOCATED BESIDE, UH, THE RESIDENCE OR WHETHER IT BE BEHIND OR HOW, RIGHT NOW THE, THE WAY I'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT IT IS TO HAVE, UM, KIND OF ACCESS FROM THE STREET, UH, WITH RAMPS AND STAIRS FROM THE FRONT AND THE RESTAURANT WOULD BE THE ENTIRE FIRST FLOOR.
UH, IT, IT MAY HAVE SOME LARGE DOORS THAT OPEN THE LEAD IN AIR, BUT A WALKWAY ALL AROUND THE BUILDING BECAUSE THE, THE BUILDING IS LOCATED IN THE FLOODPLAIN AND YOU HAVE TO BE UP, YOU KNOW, ABOUT FOUR FEET OFF GRADE.
IT JUST, TO ME, IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE ABLE TO GET UP THERE, WALK AROUND, HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A VIEW OUT AND UH, YOU KNOW, KIND OF BE A LITTLE BIT MORE PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND NOT JUST A SOLID WALL LOOKING UP ON A BIG BUILDING.
MS. ALLEN, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
UM, I'M LOOKING AT THE, UM, PARKING MM-HMM
UH, REVISIT THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE PARKING.
WHEN YOU CALCULATED THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES, YOU SAID YOU HAVE 36 AND 35 WERE REQUIRED.
DID THAT ALSO INCLUDE PARKING FOR THE EXISTING FACILITIES THAT ARE THERE ADJACENT TO IT? THE, BECAUSE I KNOW NOW WHEN I WALK BY THAT LOT, THERE'S ALWAYS A ROW OF CARS FOR THE APARTMENTS THAT ARE ON THE FAR SIDE OF IT.
THE, THE PARKING FOR THE EXISTING PROJECTS HAVE BEEN, THAT HAS BEEN SATISFIED.
'CAUSE I DON'T SEE ANY PARKING SPOTS FOR IT ON THE DRAWING.
YES, THE, THERE ARE PARKING SPACES FOR THOSE UNITS AND THEY ARE ALL INCLUDED IN THOSE NUMBERS IN THE 35 OR 36 RATHER 36.
SO THOSE ARE INCORPORATED AND ALSO THE EXISTING THREE STORY BUILDING THAT'S THERE, THE EXISTING THREE STORY BUILDING.
AND WE ARE ALLOWED FOR THE ORDINANCE TO USE, UM, STREET PARKING IN SOME OF THOSE CALCULATIONS.
AND THE OWNER IS, UM, ALLOWED TO RESTRICT THE NUMBER OF PARKING, THE NUMBER OF CARS ALLOWED PER UNIT.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL, MR CHAIRMAN GOING BACK TO PARKING, HOW DO YOU CONTROL THAT THE APPROPRIATE PERSON IS ABLE TO PARK IN THEIR DESIGNATED SPOT? I THINK YOU JUST NUMBER THE SPACES AND YOU GIVE EVERYONE A NUMBER AND THAT'S THEIR SPOT AND THEY GET ONE SPOT.
I MEAN, IT'S, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, TO, TO BE FAIR, UM, NEW BERN HAS LONG HAD A PARKING ISSUE AND I REMEMBER THE DAYS WHEN THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD A PARKING DECK,
UM, THERE'S PARKING OVER AT FRANKLIN'S, THERE'S A CITY,
[00:30:01]
THERE'S CITY PARKING WITHIN A, A, A ONE BLOCK OF THIS PROJECT.BUT, BUT TO ME THE ANSWER IS YOU NUMBER THE SPOTS YOU GIVE IT, YOU GIVE, UH, THAT, THAT PERSON, THAT NUMBER AND THAT'S IT.
AND I ASSUME THEN MANAGEMENT, UM, IF A OWNER OF THE CONDO HAS ISSUES WITH, WITH PEOPLE OFF THE STREET THAT DON'T BELONG THERE PARKING IN THEIR SPACE, THE MANAGEMENT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTROLLING THAT? YES.
AND YOU KNOW, AND I THINK THAT IT'S, I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT IS ACHIEVABLE, YOU KNOW, AND RIGHT NOW I KNOW THAT THERE ARE SIGNS UP THAT, THAT LIMIT THE, THE PARKING SPACES TO WHO'S THERE, BUT I ALWAYS SEE OTHER CARS PARKED ON THE EAST FRONT STREET SIDE AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT ONCE THAT LOT ACTUALLY BECOMES A LOT AND IT'S CURVED AND GUTTERED AND, AND STRIPED AND, YOU KNOW, DESIGNATED THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WILL JUST, IT'LL BE LESS, UH, INFORMAL THAT PEOPLE WILL JUST TRY AND PARK THERE.
WHAT'S THE CAPACITY FOR THE RESTAURANT AT THIS POINT, IF YOU KNOW IT? UM, UM, OR ANTICIPATE.
I DON'T, I DO NOT REMEMBER, UM, A HUNDRED AND, UH, IF PROB I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IF YOU, I, THE, THE DRAWINGS SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN, IN, UM, YOU KNOW, YOUR, YOUR PACKET THERE.
AND WHAT I'VE LAID OUT IS A BAR AREA.
AND THEN, UM, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TABLES AND CHAIRS THERE ARE PROBABLY 20 SOMETHING LIKE THAT WITH A LITTLE AREA FOR A PRIVATE ROOM.
AND THEN I'VE ALLOWED SPACE FOR A FREEZER THAT IS ACCESSED OUTSIDE THE BUILDING BECAUSE I KNOW EVERY TIME A RESTAURANT IS BUILT, THEY JUST, THEY WANT MORE FREEZER SPACE.
SO WE KIND OF ALLOWED FOR THAT, TOOK SPACE FOR THAT, YOU KNOW, ON THAT FIRST FLOOR.
SO, I MEAN, IT'S NOT ACTUALLY A HUGE RESTAURANT.
UM, BUT I, I THINK THAT, UH, I MEAN IT'LL, YEAH, I, I DON'T HAVE THAT NUMBER.
UM, THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE ON THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR, WILL THEY HAVE ACCESS IN DIRECTLY INTO THE RESTAURANT OR DO THEY NEED TO GO OUTSIDE? NO, SO WHAT I'VE LAID OUT RIGHT NOW IS THAT THEIR ACCESS WOULD BE BEHIND THE BUILDING ON, UM, ON A, LIKE A RAISED AREA.
AND SO THERE'S TWO ACCESS POINTS.
SO TWO STAIRS, UH, WITH TWO HALLWAYS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD EITHER GO TO EITHER STAIR OR TO THE ELEVATOR.
SO THERE'S KIND OF THREE ACCESS POINTS ALONG THAT REAR.
BUT IN ORDER TO GET TO THE RESTAURANT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO AROUND AND OUTSIDE.
MS. AFLACK, JUST FOR PURPOSES OF CLARIFYING THE, THE RECORD, UM, I THINK YOU TESTIFIED THAT THERE ARE EIGHT PROPOSED CONDOMINIUMS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE BUILDING.
YOUR DRAWING SAYS 12, UM, IT SAYS NO, THAT'S, UH, IS THAT RIGHT? SITE PLAN, RATHER? THE SITE PLAN? IT SAYS 12.
THAT'S, THAT'S A PRETTY BIG DETAIL RIGHT THERE.
IS THAT JUST A TYPOGRAPHIC HERE? IT'S, UH, WE'VE LAID IT OUT FOR WHAT WE ANTICIPATE TO BE THE, THE HIGHEST NUMBER, UM, THAT WE COULD POSSIBLY FIT ON THERE.
SO IT MAY BE BROUGHT BACK AND NOT BE, IT MAY BE EIGHT.
DO YOU HAVE THAT DRAWING RIGHT THERE? I DON'T, YOUR FLOOR PLAN SHOWS FOUR AND THEN YOUR DRAWING SAYS SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR.
SO THAT WOULD EQUAL EIGHT, IF THAT'S CORRECT.
DO YOU HAVE THE OTHER, UM, LIKE BACK TWO? BACK TO BACK TWO? YEAH.
OH, I GUESS THAT WOULD BE FOUR.
YEAH, SO WE'VE GOT EIGHT TOTAL RIGHT NOW.
SO THE SITE PLAN SHOULD REFLECT EIGHT UNITS, NOT 12.
UM, AND THE NEXT QUESTION, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S CLARITY ON THE PARKING ISSUE.
THE SITE PLAN THAT IS INCLUDED IN YOUR APPLICATION SHOWS A NUMBER OF, UM, NUMBERED PARKING SPACES ACROSS TWO PARCELS.
[00:35:01]
AND IS IT YOUR INTENTION THAT THE MULTI-FAMILY USE BE ABLE TO UTILIZE BOTH ONSITE PARKING AS WELL AS PARKING BEHIND THE THREE STORY BRICK BUILDING? YES.SO, UM, THE ORDINANCE DOES ALLOW FOR AN OWNER OF A PROPERTY IF THEY, UM, OWN THE PROPERTY TO BE ABLE TO USE THAT FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING.
AND THE OWNER HAS PROVIDED, WHICH I BELIEVE, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT MADE IT INTO YOUR PACKET, BUT WE SUBMITTED IT TO STAFF, A NOTARIZED DOCUMENT SAYING THAT THE OWNER AGREES TO HAVE ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR THIS PROJECT BE LOCATED, UH, BEHIND THE SPARE HOUSE ON THAT PROPERTY.
DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY USE? JUST THE MULTI-FAMILY USE WE'RE REQUIRED.
UM, WHAT THE OWNER HAS AGREED TO IS TO LIMIT IT TO ONE PER, SO IT WOULD BE EIGHT.
AND HOW MANY ARE REQUIRED FOR THE RESTAURANT? UM, I MEAN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE BEEN THROUGH WITH DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW, SO I DIDN'T COME PREPARED WITH ALL THOSE NUMBERS.
UM, SO I, I WOULD HAVE TO, I JUST DON'T HAVE THEM WITH ME.
UM, 'CAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SPENT EXPENSIVE TIME GOING BACK AND FORTH ABOUT HOW MANY WERE NEEDED.
UM, THE SPARROW HOUSE HAS FOUR AND THEN THE REST WERE THE, THE RESTAURANT.
BUT THE POINT IS THAT THE, SOME OF THE PARKING FOR THE PROPOSED USES AT 2 26 EAST FRONT STREET WILL BE ON TWO 20 EAST FRONT STREET.
AND THE PROPERTIES ARE BOTH OWNED BY THE SAME PEOPLE, CORRECT.
AT LEAST AT THIS JUNCTURE? YES.
AND DID I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY THAT THERE IS A, YOU SAID THERE WAS A NOTARIZED DOCUMENT CONVINCING THE AGREEMENT BET THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, WHICH THE SAME PROPERTY OWNER THAT THE LOT CAN BE USED YES.
IS THAT RIGHT? AND I MEAN, HOW I READ THE ORDINANCE, IT'S NOT EVEN THAT THAT DOCUMENT'S NOT EVEN NEEDED, BUT, BUT WE PROVIDED IT AND, UM, IT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY AND I, I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE PUT IN THAT PACKAGE, BUT SO I CAN CONFIRM WE, IT DID GET SENT OUT.
IT'S A PART OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS THAT ISSUED OUT FOR THE BOARD.
I GUESS THE, THE CHALLENGE I HAVE A LITTLE BIT, WHEN IT COMES TO THE NUMBERS, THEY ARE SEPARATE PARCELS.
YOU KNOW, IF IT WAS COMBINED AS ONE PARCEL, I COULD SEE IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE BIT EASIER.
UM, AND THEN I GUESS MY OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE THAT WAS MORE OF A STATEMENT.
UM, AS THIS PROCEEDS ALONG, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT OUR DECISION TODAY GETS CARRIED THROUGH INTO THE FUTURE? DO WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO PUT, UH, A RESTRICTION, UM, ON ANY USE? I, I WOULD NOT RESTRICT THE USE.
UM, WHAT YOU MAY DO IS ADD A CONDITION TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT ABOUT PARKING.
UM, SO THAT IF THE PARCELS EVER ARE NOT IN COMMON OWNERSHIP, THAT PARKING IS ACCOMMODATED FOR ALL THE USES ON THE TWO LOTS.
SO IN, IN THE SAME SENSE THEN, WELL, IT'S NOT THE TWO LOTS, BUT SPECIFICALLY FOR 2 26 IS FRONT STREET, HOW SHOULD A PERSON THINK MOVING FORWARD? UM, IN REFERENCE TO THE NUMBER OF SPACES IN A RESTAURANT? BECAUSE I THINK, YOU KNOW, IF THE SIZE OF THE RESTAURANT WAS TO GROW, THEN WE WOULD ALSO INCREASE THE NEED FOR MORE PARKING.
IF IT WAS SMALLER, THERE'D BE LESS PARKING.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE DID ONE RESTAURANT, TO BE HONEST.
'CAUSE WE STARTED OUT WITH, UH, THREE SEPARATE BUSINESSES ON THAT SITE AND WE WANTED TO DO THE MOST RESTRICTIVE PARKING THAT WE COULD JUST BECAUSE WE ARE BABY STEPPING INTO THIS PROJECT AND THAT TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF IT'S EVEN FEASIBLE.
AND SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS WE CAN'T MAKE THAT BUILDING ANY BIGGER THAN WHAT WE'VE SHOWN.
IF, IF ANYTHING, IT WOULD GET SMALLER JUST BECAUSE WHEN WE GO TO HPC, WE'RE GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO MM-HMM
UH, THE, THE SETBACKS THAT THEY LIMIT US TO, WHICH ISN'T, IT'S, UM, AN AVERAGE OF THE BUILDINGS ON, UH, ON THE BLOCK AND THE ONLY ONE ON THE BLOCK IS THE, THE SPARROW HOUSE.
AND SO WE'VE, WE'VE SET THAT BUILDING, YOU KNOW, KIND OF IN LINE WITH THAT.
AND THERE'S NOWHERE IF WE, WE CAN'T GROW THE BUILDING BECAUSE THEN WE WOULD BE TAKING UP PARKING AND WE NEED PARKING, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S, WE, WE DID IT AS BIG AS WE COULD FOR THAT REASON.
AND I GUESS WE, I'LL GO, GO BACK AND ASK JAMIE ANOTHER QUESTION THEN.
AS THIS PROCEEDS, WHETHER IT'S STORM WATER OR PARKING, IF WE CONTINUE, IT WOULD ALSO TAKE UP SPACE.
UM, IS THAT A DECISION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY OR IS THAT SOMETHING THE DEPARTMENT
[00:40:02]
WORKS ON AS IT MOVES FORWARD DEPENDING ON WHETHER WE ALLOW THE SPECIAL USE OR NOT? THAT'S CORRECT, SIR.UM, THIS HAS GONE THROUGH DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW AND I THINK THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS FROM PUBLIC WORKS, UM, THAT WOULD ADDRESS ANY ISSUES ABOUT STORMWATER PERMITS AND OTHER TYPES OF OVERSIGHT THAT MIGHT BE APPLICABLE GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
BUT THAT IS, THAT'S NOT WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW.
SO I GUESS IF STORM WATER WAS A CHALLENGE AND IT TOOK UP TWO PARKING SPACES, THEN THE SEATING CAPACITY IN THE RESTAURANT WOULD HAVE TO BE REDUCED KIND OF THING.
OR THERE WOULD BE COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES IF THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES HAD TO BE REDUCED, THAT WOULD AFFECT THE, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT STAFF WOULD WORK ON AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
JUST, JUST FOR THE RECORD, AND I'M GONNA ASK YOU THIS, BUT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE IT ON THE RECORD, ON YOUR SITE PLAN, UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, DATA AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS, THOSE NOTES, AND I THINK THIS IS WHERE THE 12 UNIT QUESTION CAME FROM, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT NOTE ONE, THE TOTAL BUILDING AREA, 42 OR 4,209 PLUS OR MINUS SQUARE FEET, FIRST FLOOR EQUALS 21 SPACES REQUIRED.
THAT'S THE SQUARE FOOTAGE CALCULATION FOR THE NUMBER OF SPACES FOR THE FIRST FLOOR RESTAURANT THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, RIGHT? MM-HMM
AND THAT'S THE, THE, THE MOST RESTRICTIVE, THE, UH, JUST, UH, LOOKING AT THIS, THE, THE 12, UM, THE 12 UNITS IS THIS BUILDING AND WHAT IS ALSO LOCATED IN THE SPARROW HOUSE? 'CAUSE THERE ARE FOUR UNITS THERE.
AND THEN THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS HOW YOU CALCULATED THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES? YES.
THAT WAS THE MOST RESTRICTIVE.
THE ORDINANCE LAYS OUT FOR WHAT USE DO YOU HAVE, HOW MANY SPACES, UH, ARE REQUIRED BASED ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.
AND, AND WHEN YOU SAY MOST RESTRICTIVE, WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IS YOU LOOK AT THE USE THAT IS THE GREATEST DENSITY OF PEOPLE SO THAT YOU HAVE THE MOST PARKING.
SO THE MOST PARKING IS THE MOST RESTRICTIVE, IT SEEMS COUNTERINTUITIVE.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, RIGHT? RIGHT.
IF WE WERE TO SPLIT THE BUILDING IN HALF AND DO A SMALL RESTAURANT AND A BUSINESS, YOU KNOW, THE BUSINESS IS CALCULATED AT, YOU KNOW, 200 SQUARE FEET WHERE THE RESTAURANT IS, YOU KNOW, MUCH LESS SO IF WE JUST PUT BUSINESSES THERE, YOU HAVE MUCH LESS PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
SO WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF IT ALL WORKED OUT THAT THIS RESTAURANT COULD GO FORWARD, THEN WE WOULD BE OKAY.
AND IS THE APPLICANT HERE? UH, THE APPLICANT'S WIFE IS HERE.
DO YOU KNOW, UM, IF THE APPLICANT WILL, THE CITY ATTORNEY MENTIONED A POTENTIAL CONDITION, AND AS YOU KNOW, WE CAN PASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AFTER WE FIND EVIDENCE, UH, SATISFYING ALL THE ELEMENTS IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT WE CAN ALSO ADD CONDITIONS.
ONE OF THOSE CONDITIONS COULD BE THAT IF THESE TWO PARCELS, OR IF THESE PARCELS WERE NOT IN COMMON OWNERSHIP, THAT THERE WOULD BE AN AGREEMENT, UH, TO ENSURE THAT PARKING WOULD ESSENTIALLY, UM, GO WITH THE LAND TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THE MOST RESTRICTIVE, UM, THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR WHATEVER THE BUILDING USE IS.
IS THAT SOMETHING THE APPLICANT, THAT THAT TYPE OF CONDITION, IS THAT SOMETHING THE APPLICANT WOULD AGREE WITH? UM, I, I DON'T SEE WHY NOT, YOU KNOW, ANYONE WHO IS GOING TO BUY THE SPARROW HOUSE SEPARATELY, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, I CAN'T, I CAN'T SAY SPECIFICALLY FOR THE OWNER, BUT TO ME IT MAKES SENSE.
AND WHEN, AND, AND IF SOMEBODY WAS TO CHANGE THE USE OF THIS BUILDING, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THE BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THE SITE PLAN, YOU KNOW, DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAD ALL THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS CORRECT.
AND THEY WOULD ALSO LOOK AT WHAT'S THERE NOW WHAT'S THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS? AND SO AT ANY POINT IN TIME IF THAT PROPERTY WAS SEPARATED, ALL OF THOSE QUESTIONS WOULD COME BACK UP.
BUT, UM, IF YOU COULD CRAFT SUCH A, YOU KNOW, CONDITION, I DON'T SEE, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, KNOW WE'RE HERE BECAUSE OF THE MULTIFAMILY DESIGNATION, NOT FOR THE RIGHT.
THE RESTAURANT DESIGNATION, BUT I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, YOU WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IN THE FUTURE, UM, IT, UH, I, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU SAY IT, BUT I MEAN, TO THAT POINT IS THE, 'CAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE.
IS THE PARKING THAT IS PRESENTED ON SITE SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR JUST THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE?
[00:45:01]
YES.AND THEN WE COULD, I MEAN, IT COULD BE DESIGNATED AS SUCH THAT THE MULTIFAMILY, UH, PARKING STAYS WITH THAT UNIT, YOU KNOW, STAYS THE, AND TO ME THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE.
IF YOU WERE GONNA LIVE IN THAT BUILDING, YOU WOULD WANT YOUR PARKING TO BE AS CLOSE TO THE DOOR AS POSSIBLE, NOT TO HAVE TO WALK, YOU KNOW, FARTHER AWAY.
SO, I MEAN, THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO ME.
IF YOU'RE GONNA COME TO THE RESTAURANT, YOU HAVE TO PARK A LITTLE BIT FARTHER AWAY.
SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I'M HEARING YOU CORRECTLY, MS. BECK.
IS IT THE APPLICANT'S POSITION THAT A CONDITION REQUIRING M PARKING FOR THE MULTIFAMILY USE TO REMAIN ON SITE? I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD REQUIREMENT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, BUT I, YOU COULD ALSO, WELL, WE'RE NOT REALLY HERE FOR THE SPARROW HOUSE, BUT THAT COULD ALSO BE A DESIGNATION THAT PARKING FOR THAT BUILDING REMAIN ON THAT SITE.
AND, AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE, YOU KNOW, WE'LL ENTERTAIN THAT CONDITION.
I JUST WANTED, YOU KNOW, SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PARKING THAT WE'VE ADDRESSED.
IF THAT IS SOMETHING THE APPLICANT WOULD BE, UM, AMENABLE TO, WOULD THAT TYPE OF CONDITION, AS YOU SAID, IT DOES MAKE SENSE THAT IF YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENCE, THAT THEIR PARKING WOULD BE ON SITE.
AND THAT WAY YOU'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE, WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S NOT COMMON OWNERSHIP OF THOSE PARCELS ANYMORE.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A QUESTION, JAMIE? YES.
UM, ON THE DOCUMENT, MARCH 10TH, YOU HAVE IN READ, UM, SECTION 15 SLASH 3 6 7 C PROVIDES THAT ZONING, SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
HAS THAT BEEN ADDRESSED AND TAKEN CARE OF? I'LL DEFER TO KENDRICK 'CAUSE HE'S UNDER OATH AND CAN TESTIFY.
YOU'RE ASKING IF THE SETBACKS WERE TAKEN CARE OF? SO THE HBC, UM, THAT BOARD IS GOING TO ESSENTIALLY APPLY TO SETBACKS.
SO IT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE PENDING THE APPROVAL FOR THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
AND AND THAT INCLUDES THE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS ALSO? YES.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? I WAS JUST, UH, REFRESHING MY MIND MEMORY ABOUT WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER WITH THAT EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING THAT'S TO THE SOUTH ON THIS DRAWING HERE.
YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT FOUR UNITS THAT ARE IN, UH, THIS BUILDING.
YOU'VE GOT EIGHT IN THIS BUILDING, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY, THERE'S SIX UNITS IN THAT BUILDING.
SO EACH ONE OF THOSE WOULD HAVE A PARKING SPOT DESIGNATED TO THEM, AND THEN YOU HAVE 21 FOR THE RESTAURANT, IS THAT CORRECT? IS THAT, UH, YES.
THE APARTMENTS HAVE, UM, THEIR PARKING.
I MEAN, YOU CAN SEE ON THE SITE PLAN, THERE ARE, UH, SPACES AVAILABLE TO THOSE TENANTS ON THE OTHER SIDE.
UM, WHICH IS ON THAT PROPERTY SPECIFICALLY IN THIS CONCRETED AREA IN BETWEEN? YES.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO? YEAH.
SO THERE'S ENOUGH PARKING SPOTS THERE.
PEOPLE JUST DON'T LIKE TO PARK THERE
SO THERE ARE THAT, THAT, UM, APARTMENT BUILDING HAS ENOUGH SPACES PER THE ORDINANCE AND ON SITE AND WITH STREET PARKING TO SATISFY IT WITHOUT TAKING ANY PARKING FROM THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IT IS ON A, AN ENTIRELY SEPARATE PARCEL.
YEAH, THAT'S WHY I WAS CONFUSED.
I DIDN'T REALIZE THERE WERE PARKING SPACES IN THE MIDDLE BETWEEN THERE.
THAT HOUSE AND THE APARTMENT BUILDING, IT'S MOST PEOPLE DON'T, THEY, THEY JUST GO IN ON THE, ON THE OTHER SIDE AND IT'S JUST BEEN THAT WAY, BUT RIGHT.
YOU KNOW, WHEN THINGS GET TIGHTENED UP A LITTLE BIT, IT'LL, YOU'LL HAVE TO PARK ON THE OTHER SIDE.
DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL? NO.
IS YOUR PRESENTATION COMPLETE? YES.
SO BASED ON THE SPEAKER SIGN IN SHEET, IT DOESN'T APPEAR THAT WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS.
IS THERE SOMEBODY THAT HAS COME IN THAT WE'VE MISSED THAT IS GONNA SPEAK? UM, NO HANDS GO UP.
SO I GUESS PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED ALSO.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A WORKSHEET UP HERE.
I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT HAVING THAT INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET, BUT, UH, DO YOU FEEL LIKE YOU CAN READ THAT FROM THE SCREEN? OKAY.
I ALWAYS BRING IN EXTRA COPY TOO, SO YES, SIR.
TRY TO, TRY TO BE PREPARED WITH THE LAPTOP.
[00:50:01]
NOT TO SAY THAT WE'RE GONNA MAKE PROGRESS, BUT JAMIE KEEPS ME STRAIGHT ALL THE TIME, SO WE'LL BE FINE.TRY, UM, DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE BOARD, UM, BE BEFORE WE GO TO A VOTE PROCESS? NO.
UM, I GUESS OUR FIRST ONE WE HAD, OUR FIRST, ONE OF OUR SIX QUESTIONS IS THE REQUESTED PERMIT IS WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION ACCORDING TO THE TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES.
AND MR. CHAIR, I MOVE TO FIND THAT THE REQUESTED PERMIT IS WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION ACCORDING TO THE TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND.
SO THE SECOND QUESTION IS WHETHER THE APPLICATION IS COMPLETE OR NOT.
DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN? I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT THE APPLICATION IS COMPLETE.
ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
IF THE COMPLETED PROJECT IS PROPOSED, THE DEVELOPMENT WILL COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS ORDINANCE.
I THINK THIS IS THE ELEMENT THAT WE SPOKE TO THE MOST IN THE HEARING AS IT PERTAINED TO PARKING AND ENSURING THAT THERE WERE ENOUGH PARKING SPACES FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENT, UM, THAT WERE HERE TO DISCUSS.
I, I KNOW WE DISCUSSED SOME CONDITIONS ABOUT IF THERE WERE EVER, UM, IF IF THE JOINT OWNERSHIP WAS EVER SEVERED, IF THE SATELLITE PARKING WOULD THEN, UM, BY AGREEMENT BE ALLOWED TO BE USED WITH MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTS.
THERE WAS ALSO THE POTENTIAL CONDITION FOR THE MULTI RESIDENT PARKING TO BE INCLUDED ON THE SITE ITSELF AND MAKING THAT A CONDITION.
UM, WHICH I'M NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO.
I ALSO, YOU KNOW, THE SITE PLAN HAS PRESENTED, I THINK IS FINE.
I HAVE THAT CONCERN OF WHAT HAPPENS IF THESE TWO PARCELS ARE THEN SOLD AND YOU HAVE A PARKING DISPUTE.
UM, AND, AND, AND THAT, AS WE KNOW IN PARKING IN DOWNTOWN, WE'LL NEVER HEAR THE END OF IT.
AND SO MAKING SURE THAT THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THIS PROPOSED, UM, CONDOMINIUM HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING UNDER THE ORDINANCES.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE THIS ELEMENT SPEAKS TO.
WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON, I, I KIND OF LIKE THE CONDITION OF MAKING THE RESIDENTS OF THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTS, UM, HAVE PARKING ON SITE.
I LIKE THAT TYPE OF CONDITION.
I ALSO SEE THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF SAYING TO A RESTAURANT THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU HAVE TO PARK OVER HERE AND THEN ON ANOTHER SITE AND THEN WALK.
UM, SO I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT TOO.
WHAT ARE Y'ALL'S THOUGHTS? I AGREE WITH THAT.
AND, UM, WOULD EVEN CONSIDER THINKING ABOUT ONE AND A HALF PARKING SPOTS PER UNIT VERSUS ONE PER UNIT.
UM, IF YOU CONSIDER A TYPICAL HOUSEHOLD, IT COULD MAKE SENSE.
AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION, I THINK THERE'S BEEN MENTION THAT THERE'S, WE KNOW THERE'S TWO PARCELS, BUT THE HOUSE THAT'S EXISTING THERE HAS COME UP TOO.
IS THAT ACTUALLY A THIRD PARCEL? THERE? THERE ARE THREE PARCELS, YES.
SO THERE'S ACTUALLY THREE PARCELS WITH THE SAME OWNERSHIP YES.
AND THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT PARKING SPACES WITH YEAH.
SO THAT, UM, MAKES THE POSSIBILITY, YEAH.
UM, A CONDITION MAY BE THE BEST WAY TO DEAL WITH.
WELL, I THINK, AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, AND SHE'S VERY QUICK TO THE PODIUM, SO I'M SURE SHE'S GONNA ADDRESS THIS, BUT I, I THINK THE WAY IT'S PRESENTED, IT WAS THE MOST RESTRICTIVE.
AND SO IT WAS AS MANY PARKING SPACES AS POSSIBLE ALREADY TO ENSURE, AND THERE, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT THIS WILL BE A RESTAURANT ON THE BOTTOM LEVEL.
THE THE RESTAURANT IS THE MOST DENSE USE, AND SO THEY'RE PLANNING FOR THAT, BUT THEY MIGHT CHANGE IT, UH, AS IS THEIR RIGHT UNDER THE ORDINANCE.
UM, AND SO THAT'S WHY THE PARKING IS AT, AT IT'S MOST RESTRICTIVE, IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUE HERE BEFORE US IS THESE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTS MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAVE ADEQUATE PARKING UNDER THE ORDINANCE.
AND THEN TO ME, THE BIGGEST CONCERN IS WHAT HAPPENS IF THE LOT TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED CONDOMINIUMS, IF THAT IS THEN SOLD SEPARATE.
DID THE RESIDENTS LOSE THEIR PARKING? SO THAT'S WHAT I WANNA TRY TO ADDRESS IS THAT, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN PROPERTIES GET SOLD, WHEN THEY GET REDEVELOPED, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE
[00:55:01]
IS ALWAYS A VISIT TO THE, UM, THE, THE CITY OFFICES, UH, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO FIGURE THESE THINGS OUT.YOU KNOW, IF YOU, IF YOU'RE GOING TO CHANGE A USE OF SOMETHING, YOU CAN'T JUST DO IT WITHOUT TELLING ANYONE.
AND SO IF THAT PROPERTY WAS TO BE SOLD AND DESIGNATED AS, AS A DIFFERENT USE, THEN ALL THESE SAME QUESTIONS WOULD COME UP AGAIN, AS FAR AS PARKING, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY SPACES, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAPPY TO PUT FOR THE, UM, THE SPARROW HOUSE THAT, THAT THOSE, UH, PARKING SPACES HAVE TO BE ON THAT PROPERTY AND FOR THIS PROJECT THAT THOSE MULTIFAMILY, UM, HAVE TO BE ON, ON THIS PROPERTY, YOU KNOW, PER THE ORDINANCE, IT, IT IS, UM, WITHIN THE PURVIEW FOR THE OWNER TO RESTRICT THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES.
AND BEING THAT IT IS DOWNTOWN AND YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT IN FAIRFIELD HARBOR OR SOMEWHERE, IT MAKES SENSE TO ME THAT YOU WOULD LIMIT THAT PARKING TO ONE PER, AND IF YOU'RE A TWO CAR HOUSEHOLD, THEN SOMEONE'S GONNA BE PARKING ON A CITY LOT SOMEWHERE.
I MEAN, IT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S NO OTHER WAY AROUND IT.
AND I THINK THAT THAT CAN BE ENFORCED AND POLICED, YOU KNOW, WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, EASILY WITH NUMBERING THE SPOTS AND SIGNAGE AND MAKING SURE THAT EVERYONE IS AWARE AND TOWING, ENFORCE TOWING.
I I WOULD FEEL COMFORTABLE MAKING THE FINDING ON ELEMENT THREE IF WE ALSO CONSIDER A CONDITION OF TYING THE, UM, ONE PARKING SPACE PER UNIT TO EACH OF THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE.
I BELIEVE THAT IS WITHIN OUR PURVIEW, MADAM ATTORNEY.
UM, AND, AND SHE WILL SURE CRAFT IT MUCH MORE ELOQUENTLY THAN I'M SAYING IT.
BUT I I I WOULD BE, AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING MADAM ATTORNEY, THAT WE WOULD MAKE THIS FINDING, UM, CAN, WE WOULD MAKE THIS FINDING UNDER ELEMENT THREE CONDITIONED ON A POTENTIAL CONDITION FOR THE TYING THE PARKING SPACES AND THEN ADD THE CONDITION AT THE END.
UM, WITH, WITH THAT, I WOULD MOVE TO FIND THAT IF COMPLETED AS PROPOSED IN THE APPLICATION, THE DEVELOPMENT WILL COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS ORDINANCE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT I WILL PROPOSE AT THE END OF THIS.
SECOND, DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AT THIS TIME? AND I'M SURE WE'LL HEAR A LITTLE BIT.
I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, UM, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT PARKING A LOT, SO WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT NEW VERN BEING WALKABLE, BEING ACCESSIBLE, PEOPLE BE, YOU KNOW, BEING ABLE TO PARK FOR WORK, ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
AND IF THE ANSWER IS THAT A TWO CAR HOUSEHOLD WILL NEED TO PARK DOWNTOWN, THEN IT, IT DOESN'T SEEM TO REALLY HELP THAT SITUATION AT ALL TO ME, BUT UNDERSTOOD.
I, I, I THINK THAT'S WHERE OUR DISCUSSION PROCESS IS GOING THROUGH AND, UM, YOU KNOW, EVEN SOME OF THE SPACE UNDER THE BUILDING, I GUESS IT'S POTENTIALLY GONNA BE USED AS A RESTAURANT, COULD ACTUALLY BE ADDITIONAL PARKING.
UM, SO YEAH, THERE WE'VE GOT A LOT TO CONSIDER BOTH IN THE MOTION AND LATER ON IF WE DECIDE TO ADD TO WITH THE CONDITION.
SO I, I, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A BIG CHALLENGE.
JAMIE'S GONNA HAVE TO HELP US OUT A LOT HERE A LITTLE BIT.
MS. MARTY, YOU SOUND LIKE YOU LOOK LIKE YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT.
MY COMMENT WOULD BE THAT IF, IF YOU CHOOSE TO PARK, IF YOU CHOOSE TO LIVE DOWNTOWN, THEN YOU ACCEPT THE SITUATION THAT WE HAVE AND, AND ADAPT ACCORDINGLY.
I DON'T THINK THAT JUST BECAUSE IF YOU'RE A TWO PERSON OR A TWO CAR FAMILY, THAT'S YOUR CHOICE AND YOU HAVE TO GO WITH WHAT IS AVAILABLE AND WHAT IS PROVIDED IN MY OPINION.
SO I ALSO THINK THERE WILL, I MEAN, THERE IS SUBSTANTIALLY MORE PARKING PROPOSED ON THE SITE PLAN THAN THE NUMBER OF UNITS IF YOU, SO THE NUMBER OF UNITS ARE EIGHT TO A PIECE, THAT'S 16, THERE'S 21 THERE.
I I DON'T THINK ANYONE IS PRECLUDING SOMEONE WITH A SECOND CAR IN A FAMILY OF PARKING IN THAT SPACE.
IT'S JUST SAYING THAT THERE IS AT LEAST ONE SPACE DEDICATED TO THE RESIDENCE THAT'S GOING TO BE THERE.
UM, AND I THINK BY DOING A REQUIREMENT OF TWO, I THINK THAT CREATES OVERLY BURDENSOME FOR WHATEVER THAT THAT FIRST FLOOR USE IS GOING TO BE.
AND THAT, THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN WITH THAT.
I THINK, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE PUTTING A RESTRICTION THAT IS GONNA KIND OF HINDER WHAT THAT FIRST FLOOR USE COULD BE.
[01:00:01]
UM, AND, AND SO BY ADDING THE ONE SPACE REQUIREMENT, THAT'S A MINIMUM.YOU KNOW, WE DON'T, WE DON'T EVEN HAVE TO DO THAT.
BUT I THINK, I THINK IT IS INCUMBENT ON US TO INCLUDE THAT TYPE OF RESTRICTION TO ENSURE THAT IT IS NOT ONLY TIED TO THE MULTI-FAMILY, UM, RESIDENCE AND, AND UNITS, BUT ALSO ON THAT SAME PROPERTY TO ENSURE THAT, AGAIN, IF PROPERTY IS SOLD, THAT IT'S STILL THERE AND IT FLOWS WITH THAT PROPERTY.
UM, BUT AGAIN, I DON'T THINK ANYONE IS GONNA PREVENT A SECOND CAR FROM PARKING THERE.
UM, IT'S JUST THE REQUIREMENT THAT WE'RE PROVIDING.
SO I, I THINK IT'S A VERY VALID CONCERN, UM, WITH PARKING.
I JUST DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, BY DOING THAT, WE'RE GONNA CREATE ADDITIONAL OBSTACLES WHERE WHEN THAT IF EVERYONE IS GONNA BE DEDICATED RESIDENT, WELL THEN YOU GOTTA KICK ALL THOSE PEOPLE OUT IF THERE IS A RESTAURANT, AND THEN WE'RE GONNA HEAR FROM CITIZENS SAYING, OKAY, WHERE, WHERE DO I PARK TO GO TO THIS RESTAURANT? UM, SO, BUT I, I THINK IT'S A VALID CONCERN.
AND MOST DEFINITELY TOO, WHEN THE RESTAURANT'S CLOSED, THERE'S PARKING AVAILABLE.
SO IT'S ALMOST WHEN THE RESTAURANT IS OPEN, WHEN THE CHALLENGES ARRIVE.
AND SO THERE, THERE'S A LOT OF PUZZLES TO IT AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IF, IF WE CAN AGREE THAT, UM, WE CAN COME UP WITH A CONDITION AFTER WE GO THROUGH THE SIX, WE CAN PROBABLY MAKE A VOTE ON NUMBER THREE AND KNOW THAT WE ARE GONNA TALK ABOUT A CONDITION WHEN WE GET TO THE END.
UM, SO I GUESS THAT'S OUR, I THINK AS A GROUP, OUR BIGGEST CONCERN NOW THAT WE AGREE THAT WE CAN MAKE AN AGREEMENT LATER TO SOLVE THE CHALLENGE.
I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW THEN THAT THE CONDITION WOULD ACCOMPLISH, YOU KNOW, UM, QUELLING ANYONE'S CONCERNS ABOUT PARKING DOWNTOWN.
YOU KNOW, IF IT'S GONNA BE A RESTAURANT WITH THAT MANY UNITS, THEN THE BURDEN'S ON EVERYONE.
AND I THINK IT'S A GREAT, UM, PLAN.
I'D LIKE TO HAVE DINNER THERE ONE DAY.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT
AND THAT SEEMS TO BE BETWEEN THE PROPERTY OWNER AND HIS TENANTS.
AND, AND I THINK WE'RE ALL GONNA HAVE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT CONVERSATION PART AS WE KIND OF MOVE ON WITH IT.
UM, WE, WE STILL HAVE THE MOTION TO TALK ABOUT THAT.
UM, AND I KNOW WE HAVE THE MOTION AND THE SECOND, WE DON'T HAVE A SECOND YET.
SO WE WE'RE AT A LITTLE BIT OF A STALEMATE IF WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I THINK IT WAS MS. MARTY.
SO WE DO HAVE A SECOND VOTE CALL THE QUESTION.
WE'LL, WE'LL CALL THE QUESTION, DO WE NEED A VOTE? YEP.
ANY OPPOSED? AND WE WILL TALK ABOUT A CONDITION ONCE WE GET TO THE END.
UM, NUMBER FOUR, THAT THE USE WILL NOT MATERIAL ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY IF LOCATED WERE PROPOSED AND DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAINTIFF.
DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? WELL, I THINK EVIDENCE OF THIS IS THE FACT THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYONE COME OUT IN OPPOSITION, AND THAT NEVER HAPPENED.
THE ONLY TIME THAT'S EVER HAPPENED WAS WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT PARKING FOR CHICK-FIL-A.
THAT'S THE ONLY TIME THAT'S EVER HAPPENED.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I MOVE THAT THE, UH, REQUEST WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC SAFETY OR HEALTH IF LOCATED WHERE PROPOSED AND DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN AS SUBMITTED.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND? ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES, UH, NUMBER FIVE, THAT THE USE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE VALUE OF ADJOINING OR A BUDDING PROPERTY OR THAT THE USES OF PUBLIC NECESSITY.
AND, AND THAT ONE ALSO I THINK IN A WAY GOES BACK TO NUMBER THREE SOMEWHAT AS FAR AS THE ADJOINING PROPERTY, IF IT EVER GETS SEPARATED IN OWNERSHIP.
BUT, UM, CURRENTLY THAT'S JUST A THOUGHT.
UM, SO WE, WE, WE DO NEED A, A MOTION TO MOVE ON OR SOME DISCUSSION.
I, I MOVE THAT THE USE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE VALUE OF ADJOINING OR ABUTTING PROPERTY, OR THAT THE USE IS A, WELL, STRIKE THAT I MOVE, THAT THE USE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE VALUE OF ADJOINING OR ABUTTING PROPERTY.
SECOND, SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND ANY DISCUSSION? THE ONLY, I, I THINK THE EVIDENCE THAT WE HEARD, WHICH, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE IS COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL MATERIAL IS THE, UM, APPRAISER WHO GAVE HIS REPORT INTO THE RECORD THAT IN HIS PROFESSIONAL OPINION, UM, THE PROPERTY VALUES OF THE ADJOINING OR REBUTTING PROPERTIES ARE NOT GONNA BE AFFECTED BY THIS.
AND SO I, I THINK THAT HAS SATISFIED TO THE CHAIR'S POINT ABOUT HOW THAT FEEDS INTO NUMBER THREE.
I, I AGREE THAT I THINK WE CAN ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, THE FUTURE IMPACT OF PROPERTY BY TALKING ABOUT THAT CONDITION THAT TIES THE, AT LEAST ONE PARKING SPACE PER MULTI-FAMILY UNIT
[01:05:01]
ON SITE.AND I THINK THAT CONDITION WILL TAKE CARE OF IT.
SO, UM, THAT'S WHY I THINK THERE'S ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT.
DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
UH, NUMBER SIX, THAT THE LOCATION AND CHARACTER OF THE USE IF DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN AS SUBMITTED AND APPROVED, WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE AREA IN WHICH IT IS TO BE LOCATED.
AND IN GENERAL, CONFORMITY WITH THE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.
DID WE HAVE ANY, UM, DEPICTIONS OF WHAT THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING WOULD BE? NO, WE HAVE NOT.
NO, I THINK WHAT WE, THE EVIDENCE THAT WE HEARD, UM, AND I'M, I'M FORGETTING HER NAME, BUT THE ARCHITECT SARAH, UM, THE PICTURES OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY AND THEN SHOWING THAT THERE ARE OTHER TWO STORY AND THREE STORY BUILDINGS.
UM, AND I THINK AT THIS POINT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS THE USE OF WHETHER THE USE AS A MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE WITH A RESTAURANT ON BOTTOM WOULD CONFORM WITH THE NATURE OF THE COMMUNITY.
I THINK WHEN IT COMES TO THE OUTSIDE, ESPECIALLY DOWNTOWN, THE HP C'S GONNA HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO SAY ABOUT THAT.
UM, GOD BLESS YOU,
AND SO, MR. FERGUSON'S POINT, UM, THERE IS A PRESUMPTION THAT IF A USE IS ALLOWED AS A SPECIAL USE IN THE TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES, THERE'S A PRESUMPTION THAT IT IS HARMONIOUS.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL, DO WE HAVE A SENTENCE TO THE MOTION? DID SOMEBODY MAKE MOTION? WHAT THEIR MOTION DO WE HAVE DO MOTION? WELL, I'LL MOTION MYSELF.
I MOTION THAT THE LOCATION AND CHARACTER OF THE USE IF DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO PLAN AS SUBMITTED AND APPROVED WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE AREA.
ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
SO DO WE NEED TO DISCUSS THE CONDITION, I BELIEVE AT THIS TIME, RIGHT? WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE CONDITION, YES.
AND I'M ASSUMING THE ATTORNEY HAS BEEN DILIGENTLY JOTTING DOWN THE NOTES OF WHAT THE CONDITION IS SO SHE COULD READ IT BACK SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO TRY TO DRAFT IT, RIGHT? YES.
SO, AS I UNDERSTAND THE CONVERSATION, THE DELIBERATION OF THE BOARD AND ALSO THE DIALOGUE WITH THE APPLICANT, I THINK THE CONDITION, UM, THAT HAS BEEN FORECASTED IS THAT, UM, ALL PARKING, ALL REQUIRED PARKING FOR THE MULTIFAMILY USE SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON SITE.
AND SO ALL ALL PARKING REQUIRED, REQUIRED, REQUIRED, REQUIRED FOR THE MULTIFAMILY, MULTIFAMILY USE USE SHALL BE MAINTAINED, SHALL REMAIN ON SITE ON, OR SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON SITE.
AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE THE APPLICANT IS, UH, NODDING HER HEAD IN AGREEMENT.
UM, TO ME THAT JUST PUTS THE BURDEN ON EVERYONE ELSE.
YOU KNOW, LIKE WHY REQUIRE PARKING SPOTS, YOU KNOW, ON THIS PROPERTY THAT WILL OVERFLOW INTO THE CITY WHEN EVERYONE ELSE, YOU KNOW, COULD USE THOSE SPOTS IF THESE PEOPLE ARE OUT OF TOWN ON VACATION? I DON'T THINK IT RESTRICTS THE, THE PARKING FOR RESIDENT.
I THINK IT'S JUST SAYING THAT ALL I PARKING, PARKING SPACES THAT ARE REQUIRED UNDER THE ORDINANCE FOR THE MULTIFAMILY USE HAS TO REMAIN ON SITE AND THAT ON, ON SITE OF THIS PROPERTY.
AND THAT'S JUST TO ENSURE THAT IF THESE PROPERTIES GET SOLD SEPARATE AND ARE NO LONGER IN JOINT OWNERSHIP, THAT YOU DON'T HAVE A MULTIFAMILY RESIDENT LIVING OVER HERE THAT'S GOT A PARK SATELLITE OVER HERE THAT IT STAYS TIED TO.
BUT I DON'T THINK IT RESTRICTS THEM FROM THAT.
I THINK IT JUST SAYS THAT THIS PROPERTY OWNER IS AGREEING TO THIS CONDITION THAT THE MULTIFAMILY RESIDENT PARKING IS GOING TO STAY ON THIS PROPERTY.
UH, UH, CAN I HAVE A QUESTION? UH, WE SAYING THAT THOSE SPOTS ARE GOING TO BE RESERVED.
I MEAN, I'M SAYING THIS WITH, I GUESS WITH WHOEVER WAS STAYING THERE, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THEIR NAME ON IT OR THEY SAY RESERVED.
THE, THE, THE CONDITION DOES NOT CONTEMPLATE, UM, REQUIRING THE APPLICANT TO RESERVE PARKING SPACES.
THE CONDITION THAT I THINK MR. FERGUSON IS SHAKING HIS HEAD IN AGREEMENT ABOUT WOULD SPECIFICALLY SPEAK TO THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THAT ARE REQUIRED.
AND I THINK THE TESTIMONY TODAY INDICATED THERE ARE EIGHT UNITS, SO EIGHT PARKING SPACES ARE
[01:10:01]
REQUIRED AS A MINIMUM.I THINK IT'S THE TESTIMONY THAT WAS BORNE OUT FOR THE MULTIFAMILY USE.
THE CONDITION AS IT'S BEING CONTEMPLATED REQUIRES THAT AT LEAST EIGHT SPACES STAY TIED TO THAT MULTI-FAMILY USE ON THAT PROPERTY.
SO THAT IF, AND I THINK THE SITE PLAN INDICATES, UM, PARKING ACROSS THE TWO PARCELS, IF FOR SOME REASON SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE THE PARCELS ARE NO LONGER IN COMMON OWNERSHIP, THIS BOARD ENSURES THAT AT LEAST EIGHT SPACES THAT ARE ON THIS MULTI, THIS MIXED USE COMPLEX WILL BE TIED TO THE MULTIFAMILY USE.
THE BOTTOM FLOOR CAN CHANGE TO ANYTHING, UM, WHICH MAY INCREASE OR DECREASE THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THE TOTAL SITE.
BUT YOU ARE CONTEMPLATING A CONDITION THAT WILL SPEAK SPECIFICALLY TO THE USE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED TONIGHT.
AND THE APPLICANT DID MENTION THAT THEY'RE ALL GOING TO BE NUMBERED.
I THINK THE APPLICANT MENTIONED THAT THAT WAS A POSSIBILITY.
SO IS THAT SOMETHING THAT STAFF WOULD WORK THROUGH ONCE THE CONDITION WAS MADE TO MAKE THIS WORK? I, I THINK CERTAINLY STAFF AND THE APPLICANT CAN, CAN COLLABORATE THE, THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND IS HEARING YOUR COMMENTS AND SHE'S APPROACHING THE MICROPHONE.
DID YOU SAY DESIGNATED, I MEAN WITHIN YOUR WORDING, IF YOU JUST SAID DESIGNATED ON SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND DESIGNATED ON SITE.
ALRIGHT, I'M GONNA ASK THE ATTORNEY TO REREAD I WILL.
THE PROPOSED CONDITION
SO THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FOR THE MULTIFAMILY USE SHALL BE MAINTAINED ON SITE AND DESIGNATED FOR MULTIFAMILY USE.
I MOVE TO INCLUDE THAT LANGUAGE AS A CONDITION OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT THAT WE'RE GRANTING THIS EVENING.
OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? DO WE HAVE A VOTE? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED CONDITION CARRIAGES.
SO AT, AT THIS TIME, UM, THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT HAS BEEN GRANTED WITH THE CONDITION.
DO WE NEED TO READ THE CONDITION OUT? WE NEED A MOTION TO ISSUE THE PERMIT WITH THE STATED CONDITION.
DO WE HAVE A, A MOTION? I WAS WAITING 'CAUSE YOU TOLD ME I HOGGED THE MOTIONS.
UH, I MOVE TO ISSUE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT WITH THE STATED CONDITION.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT HAS BEEN GRANTED WITH THE CONDITION.
YEAH, THANKS Y'ALL FOR, FOR PATIENCE WITH US.
ALRIGHT, LET'S TALK ABOUT THE EASY ONE.
MR. CHAIR, YOU MAY WANNA ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO, UM, REINSTATE MR. THOMPSON.
UM, DO YOU WANT TO COME BACK? ALRIGHT, I MOVED TO REINSTATE, UH, VICE CHAIR THOMPSON BACK TO THE BOARD FOR DELIBERATIONS ON OUR NEXT MATTER.
IS THERE SUCH A THING AS A MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE? LIKE CAN WE JUST, ALRIGHT, SO BEFORE WE GET STARTED, YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE, UH, ITEM B IS THE CRAVEN COUNTY NATURE PARK SPECIAL USE PERMIT, AND IT'S S UT AT 0 0 3 0 2 6 DASH 2 0 2 5.
UM, THERE'S MULTIPLE PARCELS, UH, ASSOCIATED WITH IT WITH 172.61 ACRES, UH, DOWN AT THE INTERSECTION OF COUNTY LINE ROAD AND OLD AIRPORT ROAD.
DO WE HAVE ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ON THIS ONE? OKAY, SO I HAVE THREE ON THIS ONE.
SO AS PREVIOUSLY, I, I THINK, UH, REALTY SERVICES DID, UH, AN APPRAISAL ON THIS ONE.
AND MY, MY BROKER LICENSE IS WITH THEM.
UM, THE NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL LAND TRUST, UH, IS A CLIENT.
THE COASTAL LAND TRUST IS THE ONE THAT ACQUIRED THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY FROM THE DEVELOPER AND DONATED TO COUNTY, UM, TO BECOME A PARK.
AND THEN THE THIRD IS I DO LIVE IN EVANS MILL.
AND WHEN I WENT THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS HERE, I NOTICED THAT EVANS MILL, HOA, WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE NOTIFIED.
SO I NEED TO MAKE THAT OUT THERE ALSO.
SO LET'S TAKE THEM ONE AT A TIME.
UM, AS TO YOUR REAL ESTATE LICENSE, DO YOU HAVE ANY PECUNIARY INTEREST AT ALL IN THIS PROJECT? I DO NOT.
[01:15:01]
WILL THE STATUS OF YOUR LICENSE BE IMPACTED BASED ON YOUR VOTE TONIGHT? NO.GIVEN THAT INFORMATION, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT CHAIRMAN TAK HAVING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST AS IT RELATES TO HIS RELATIONSHIP TO HE IS TRYING TO GET, HE'S TRYING HIS BEST TO GET OFF THIS BOARD TO STOP RUNNING THESE THINGS? I'LL TAKE NO, ABSOLUTELY NO OBJECTION.
SO YOUR SECOND POTENTIAL CONFLICT, CHAIRMAN TAC, WAS RELATED TO THE COASTAL LAND TRUST? YES.
UM, THE COASTAL LAND TRUST IS NOT AN OWNER OR THE APPLICANT IN THIS APPLICATION.
IS IT NOT ANY LONGER? I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT NO.
DO THEY HAVE ANY RELATIONSHIP TO THIS PROJECT AT ALL WHATSOEVER OTHER THAN HAVING, UM, RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT MAY RUN WITH THE LAND? I'M NOT AWARE THAT THERE'S ANY OTHER RELATIONSHIP.
GIVEN THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO RELATIONSHIP AT ALL WHATSOEVER BETWEEN THE COASTAL LAND TRUST AND THIS PROJECT, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT MR. BECK REPRESENTING COASTAL LAND TRUST, UM, GIVEN THIS APPLICATION? NO.
AND THE FINAL, UM, YOU LIVE IN EVANS MILL, WERE YOU NOTIFIED, WERE YOU A NOTIFIED, UH, PERSON ABOUT THIS APPLICATION? DID YOU RECEIVE A LETTER? I WAS NOT.
BUT YOUR NEIGHBORS WERE CORRECT.
AND THE HOA WAS AND THE HOA, ARE YOU ON THE HOA BOARD? NO.
DO YOU HAVE ANY SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THE HOA, OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT YOU LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY? NO.
GIVEN THAT INFORMATION, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT CHAIRMAN PAYBACK'S ABILITY TO BE A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL DECISION MAKER? I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT HIS SAFETY.
AFTER HEARING THIS, THE HOA IS GONNA BE ALL OVER YOU.
NO, NO CONCERNS, NO CONCERNS ABOUT LEGALITIES.
SO WITH THAT INFORMATION AND THE FACT THAT NO MOTION HAS BEEN MADE, UM, THERE'S NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE APPLICATION.
AND, UH, AS THE CHAIRMAN SAID, HE HAD BRIEFLY INTRODUCED THIS ITEM.
THIS IS FOR THE GRAVEN COUNTY NATURE PARK.
AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, I'M JUST GONNA REITERATE, BUT THIS IS SPECIAL USE DEPARTMENT 0 0 3 0 2 6 25.
THE LOCATION ESSENTIALLY IS 40 60 COUNTY LINE ROAD AND 38 OLD AIRPORT ROAD, UH, NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA.
THE PROPOSED USE, WHILE THIS IS SPECIFIC TO OUR TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES, WE ARE AGAIN, JUST TO REITERATE, TALKING SPECIFIC TO THE PARK ASPECT, BUT THE ENTIRETY FOR THE USE IS PUBLICLY OWNED AND OPERATED.
OUTDOOR RECREATIONAL FACILITIES SUCH AS ATHLETIC FIELDS, GOLF COURSES, TENNIS COURTS, SWIMMING POOLS, PARKS, ET CETERA, NOT CONSTRUCTED PURSUANT TO A PERMIT AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF ANOTHER USE SUCH AS A SCHOOL.
SO THE REQUEST SUMMARY, UH, BRIEFLY HERE, THE APPLICANT AND OWNER IS CRAVEN COUNTY.
THE TOTAL ACRES, UH, AGAIN, IS 172.61.
PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS ARE SEVEN DASH 0 4 2 6 0 5 7 DASH ZERO FOUR DASH TWO AND 7 0 4 20.
ZONING DISTRICT HERE IS, UH, RESIDENTIAL EIGHT OR R DASH EIGHT.
FOR OUR FIRST MAP HERE, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ALL THREE PARCELS HIGHLIGHTED ESSENTIALLY, THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT.
AND THIS IS THE MAP THAT IS GONNA BE FOLLOWED HERE.
I APOLOGIZE, NOT POWERPOINT IS LAGGING.
FOLLOWED BY THE BUFFER MAP HERE.
AND AGAIN, WE TAKE THAT BUFFER FROM A HUNDRED FEET, UH, SURROUNDING THE ENTIRETY FOR THE PROPERTIES.
AND ESSENTIALLY, UH, ANYBODY WITHIN THAT BUFFER SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER AND THAT'S FOLLOWED BY AN AERIAL.
APOLOGIZE IF THE IMAGERY'S A BIT DARKER, BUT TRIES TO GIVE YOU AN UNDERSTANDING AS TO WHAT'S ON THE GROUND CURRENTLY.
THEN THAT'S FOLLOWED UP WITH OUR ZONING MAP.
UM, AND AGAIN, THIS, THE, THE, UH, R DASH EIGHT COLOR IS REFLECTED THERE BY THE YELLOW.
WHERE ARE YOU TWO ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS, UH, STAFF CONFIRMS THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED WAS DEEMED TO BE COMPLETE, AND STAFF ALSO CAN CONFIRM THAT THE REQUEST IS WITHIN A JURISDICTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES.
AND I HAVE WENT AHEAD AND PUT THE SITE PLAN JUST FOR AVAILABILITY.
THE REFERENCE, UH, THIS IS THE FIRST PAGE ESSENTIALLY THAT HAS SOME REFERENCE NOTES AND IT'S FOLLOWED, UH, WITH THE SECONDARY PAGE.
AND AGAIN, MY APOLOGIES FOR THE DISTORTION, IT'S DIFFICULT TO TRY TO INCLUDE THIS IN THE POWERPOINT WITHOUT IT KIND OF DISTORTING A LITTLE BIT.
BUT AT LEAST FOR REFERENCE POINTS, THE INFORMATION IS THERE.
AND IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I WILL TAKE THOSE AT THIS TIME.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? NO, I GUESS WE'RE GOOD.
[01:20:01]
I GUESS, UM, YOU'RE GONNA DO A PRESENTATION AT ALL OR QUESTIONS OR DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT? I NOTICED THERE'S A NOTE HERE THAT SAYS YOU'RE HERE FOR QUESTIONS, NO PRESENTATIONS.UH, NO FORMAL PRESENTATION, BUT I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
UH, I'M CHAD STRONG, THE PLANNING DIRECTOR WITH CRAVEN COUNTY.
SO WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME ON THAT.
DO WE HAVE, BEFORE WE GET INTO THE QUESTIONS, I NEED TO GO BACK AND ASK THE ATTORNEY IF I NEED TO RECUSE.
AND SO I BELIEVE, AND I APOLOGIZE, BUT I BELIEVE WHAT I NEED TO STATE, I NEED TO STATE THE POTENTIAL CONFLICT MM-HMM
SO MY FIRM HAS REPRESENTED CRAVEN COUNTY AND I BELIEVE REPRESENTS CRAVEN COUNTY IN A FEW MATTERS REGARDING FORECLOSURES.
I MYSELF DO NOT WORK ON ANY OF THOSE MATTERS.
UM, AND FROM THAT FIRM ENGAGEMENT, I DO NOT BELIEVE WE HAVE ANY, OR I HAVE ANY FINANCIAL INTEREST IN THE OUTCOME OF THIS PROJECT.
BUT I DO NEED TO, FOR THE RECORD, STATE THAT SO YOU ALL MAY CONSIDER IT, AND I APOLOGIZE THAT I DID NOT DO THAT AT THE BEGINNING.
AND MR. UH, FERGUSON, JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU DO NOT REPRESENT CRAVEN COUNTY IN ANY MATTERS AT ALL WHATSOEVER? NOT CURRENTLY.
YOU HAVE IN THE PAST, PERHAPS? I DON'T THINK I PERSONALLY HAVE.
UM, BUT YOUR FIRM DOES REPRESENT CRAVEN COUNTY FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF TAX FORECLOSURES AT THIS TIME? UH, I BELIEVE THAT IS CORRECT FOR SOME TAX FORECLOSURES.
UM, DOES YOUR RELATIONSHIP, YOUR EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP GIVE YOU ACCESS TO ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THIS PROJECT? NO.
HAVE YOU HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH ANYONE AT THE COUNTY ABOUT THIS PROJECT? NO.
WOULD YOUR PECUNIARY INTEREST BE IMPACTED BASED ON THE, UM, APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF THIS PROJECT? NO.
GIVEN MR. FERGUSON'S RELATIONSHIP, UH, FIRM'S RELATIONSHIP TO THE COUNTY, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT MR. FERGUSON'S ABILITY TO BE A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL DECISION MAKER IN TONIGHT'S HEARING? NO.
AND, AND MR. BECK, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE, UM, FOR THE RECORD THAT THE COUNTY HAS SUBMITTED AN, AN APPRAISAL REPORT.
THEY HAVE WHAT APPEARS TO BE A CERTIFIED REAL ESTATE APPRAIS.
IS THAT RIGHT, SIR? YES, MA'AM.
UM, THEY HAD IN THEIR WRITE UP, AND IT WAS ACCORDING TO SUSAN NELSON AND PARKER HOWARD'S APPRAISAL REPORT, THE PROPOSED PARK WILL SERVE AS AN AMENITY TO ALL SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH IN TURN SHOULD RESULT IN THE OVERALL POSITIVE IMPACT ON THOSE PROPERTIES COME DIRECTLY FROM THE REPORT.
SO IS THERE ANY THOUGHT ABOUT TRAFFIC, HOW IT WILL IT INCREASE OR DECREASE OUR ESTIMATES ON DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT? AND, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE TIME IT'D BE USED MORE ON THE WEEKENDS, MAYBE 20 VEHICLES OF AN INCREASE MAGNITUDE JUST BASED ON THE PARKING THAT WE HAVE AT THE LOCATION AND THE USAGE THAT WE'VE SEEN AT OTHER PARKS.
UM, LAHAM WHITEHURST PARK, OVER OFF BROAD CREEK ROAD, IT'S THE SAME TYPE OF PARK THAT IS AT THAT LOCATION.
SO THAT'S AN ESTIMATED TRAFFIC INCREASE ACCOUNT.
SO SIMILAR TO LATHAM, UM, LATHAM WHITEHURST, THAT'S ON BROAD CREEK ROAD.
LIKE YOU'RE GOING TOWARDS FAIRFIELD HARBOR AND, AND THAT'S ALL NATURE.
UH, THERE'S NO BALL FIELDS THERE AT ALL.
TRAILS, BRIDGES, UH, NET NATURE PARK.
AND SO BE SIMILAR TO WHAT'LL BE DEVELOPED HERE? THAT'S CORRECT.
EVEN, UH, KAYAK ACCESS AT THAT LOCATION AS WELL.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? AND SIR, I THINK YOUR APPLICATION MAY SPEAK TO THIS, BUT JUST FOR PURPOSES OF THE RECORD, UM, ARE THERE ANY RESTRICTIONS THAT APPLY TO THESE PARCELS THAT LIMIT DEVELOPMENT AND LIMIT THE NUMBER OF USES THAT CAN BE UNDERTAKEN THERE? YEAH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S, UH, THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS THAT HAVE PLACED IN THE PROPERTY BY THE COASTAL LAND TRUST, AND, UH, WE'VE CONSULTED WITH OUR ATTORNEY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROPOSED USES AS, UH, DELINEATED IN OUR APPLICATION, UH, MEET THOSE, UH, RESTRICTED COVERED REQUIREMENTS.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? OKAY, THANK YOU.
[01:25:02]
AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE JUST HAVE, UM, ONE GROUP, STEVE AND ANGIE.I GUESS, DO Y'ALL WANT TO COME UP TO SEPARATE OR TOGETHER, HOWEVER Y'ALL WANT TO DO IT? I GUESS JUST STATE AND NAME AND ADDRESS AND, UH, I'M STEVE WILLIAMS. THIS IS MY WIFE ANGELA.
AND WE'RE AT, UH, 35 44 OLD AIRPORT ROAD IN THE EVANS MILL NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND SIR, DID YOU RECEIVE A LETTER ABOUT TONIGHT'S HEARING? YES.
UM, WELL FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME A MOMENT.
UM, I SHOULD STATE THAT WE ARE NOT AGAINST THE CONCEPT OF THE PARK IN GENERAL, BUT MORE PRECISELY THE APPARENT, ONE APPARENT ENTRANCE TO IT.
AND THAT, UH, ENTRANCE THAT I'M REFERRING TO IS, UH, APPEARS TO BE A COMMON AREA.
WHAT IS THE COMMON AREA WITHIN THE HOA? UH, RIGHT BESIDE OUR LOT, WE'RE ON THE PARCEL 66, IF MEMORY SERVES, UM, THAT RIGHT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE, IF THAT IS INDEED AN ENTRANCE INTENDED AS AN ENTRANCE TO THE NATURE PARK, UM, RIGHT.
AND RIGHT AFTER THAT COMMON AREA, UH, I WOULD THINK SUBSTANTIAL WORK WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE TO ALLOW ACCESS TO THE REST OF THE PARK.
AGAIN, IF THAT IS INTENDED AS AN ENTRANCE POINT RIGHT NOW, UM, THAT'S, UH, BRYCE'S CREEK THAT, UH, BACKS UP TO OUR PROPERTY AND IT'S, UH, ESSENTIALLY A RAVINE, UH, RIGHT BEYOND THE COMMON AREA THERE.
AND IT'S, UH, NEARLY IMPASSABLE BY FOOT.
UM, THE OTHER THING, UH, SNAKES, UH, ANECDOTALLY, UH, OUR NEIGHBOR IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST OF US, UH, LAST FALL, UM, SON KILLED FOUR COTTON MALS IN ONE AFTERNOON, CLEANING UP DEBRIS ON HIS PROPERTY.
SO I WOULD THINK THAT BEYOND THAT, IT'S NOT A WHOLE LOT DIFFERENT IN THE UNDERBRUSH.
AND, UH, LASTLY, I GUESS I, WE REALLY DON'T WANT A LOT OF PEOPLE, UH, PASSING BEHIND OUR PROPERTY, UH, ON A REGULAR BASIS.
UH, THIS AFFORDS US, UH, UH, MODICUM OF PRIVACY IN OUR BACKYARD RIGHT NOW, WHICH WE WOULD PROBABLY LOSE, UM, IF THAT INDEED IS AGAIN, CONSIDERED AN ENTRANCE.
YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANNA ADD? IT JUST, UM, THE, THE, THE PROXIMITY TO THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS, UM, UH, WITHOUT, THERE'S NO DEMARCATIONS, UM, WITHIN THE HOA, UM, AREA THERE STATING WHAT IS OUR PROPERTY AND WHAT IS THE COMMON AREA OF THAT PROPERTY.
AND I FEEL THAT, UM, THEM PASSING FROM THE ONE AREA TO THE OTHER, THEY'RE, UM, UNLESS THERE'S SOME, UM, MAJOR CLEANUP OF THAT AREA OF THE DEBRIS, UM, THE TREES THAT ARE, HAVE FALLEN POTENTIALLY FALLING, IT CREATES AN ADDITIONAL KIND OF A LIABILITY ON OUR END.
UM, BECAUSE THERE'S NO, UH, DISTINCTION WHERE, WHERE OUR PROPERTY ENDS NOT NOT VISIBLE DISTINCTION, THERE ARE POSTS BACK THERE, BUT IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO LOCATE, LOCATE, UM, WHERE OUR PROPERTY IS AND WHERE THIS ENTRANCE ONTO, UM, THE PARK AREA WOULD BE.
SO IT'S A, UM, IT'S A CONCERN THAT WE HAVE, UM, PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE PARK, AND I UNDERSTAND I'M THAT PARK VERY WELL CLEANED UP AND MAINTAINED.
UM, BUT FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE UNACCUSTOMED TO AN AREA THAT IS NOT MAINTAINED, UM, MAY BE A SHOCK FOR THEM AND, UM, KIND OF UN THAT'S THE WAY THEY'RE STEPPING INTO.
DO WE HAVE ANY, WHAT CAN YOU, I'M LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN.
WHERE ARE YOU? YEAH, WHERE ARE YOU? WHERE'S YOUR PROPERTY? I, THE, I CAN SEE, GO BACK RIGHT THERE, KENDRA RIGHT THERE.
[01:30:01]
OKAY, YOU'RE GOOD.THAT RIGHT THERE IS THE, OKAY.
THE COMMON SPACE FOR EVANS MILL, THIS IS COMMON SPACE FOR EVANS MILL, AND THIS IS THE PROPERTY THAT, AND WHAT IS THE COMMON SPACE FACE? WHAT IS IT USED, WHAT IS IT USE? UH, IT'S, IT'S JUST BACON GROUND.
SO THE, JUST AM I, JAMIE, AM I ALLOWED TO SPEAK ABOUT HISTORY OF THE TRACK AND BECAUSE I KNOW A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY, WELL, LET'S UNPACK THAT.
SO YOU ARE NOT SWORN TO OFFER TESTIMONY.
UM, SO THE TESTIMONY IS SUPPOSED TO COME FROM THE SWORN WITNESSES.
SO TO THE EXTENT, UM, THIS GENTLEMAN AND HIS WIFE ARE ABLE TO GIVE SOME HISTORY ABOUT THE PROJECT OR THE PROPERTY OR THE TOPOGRAPHY OR WHATEVER, UM, YOU'RE, IT'LL BE MORE APPROPRIATE TO ASK THEM QUESTIONS.
UM, SO I GUESS THE BEST THING TO DO THEN WOULD ASK IN REFERENCE TO THE COMMON SPACE, DOES THE HOA CURRENTLY USE IT AT ALL? UH, NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
IN FACT, UH, WE AND OUR NEIGHBOR TO THE EAST, FOR LACK OF BETTER DIRECTION, UH, MAINTAIN THAT PARTICULAR COMMON SPACE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT'S ON THE EDGE OF EACH OF OUR TIES.
PARDON ME? I SAID THAT'S VERY NICE OF YOU GUYS.
BUT NOT FRONT, IT'S IN OUR FRONT YARD.
I HOPE YOUR HOA GIVES YOU A DISCOUNT ON YOUR FEES.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS TO, TO THAT? UH, I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT AS WELL.
UH, I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHERE THEY ARE UP THERE WHERE IT SAYS R 15, BUT THE, IT DOESN'T SHOW ANY KIND OF A DEVELOPMENT AS PART OF THIS PARK AS FAR AS WALKWAYS OR HIKING TRAILS OR ANYTHING IN THAT SPACE.
SO THE CLOSEST THAT I SEE IS ALONG, UM, OLD AIRPORT ROAD.
SO, UM, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT HAVING PEOPLE KIND OF WALKING THROUGH YOUR BACKYARD.
I DON'T SEE ANY DEVELOPMENT THERE THAT IS OCCURRING BASED ON THIS DRAWING.
THE DRAWING DOESN'T INDICATE THE COMMON SPACE.
UM, BUT IF YOU WERE TO GO INTO OUR BACKYARD, YOU WOULD SEE OUR, OUR PROPERTY LINES AND, UM, WITH BOTH, OBVIOUSLY ON BOTH ENDS MM-HMM
UM, THE SPACE BETWEEN THAT AND THAT.
THIS CREEK IS CONSIDERED COMMON AREA.
FOR THE HOA, IT JUST, YEAH, IT'S NOT VERY WELL INDICATED.
IS, IS TO THAT POINT, IS THERE RIGHT BEHIND THE COMMON AREA, IS THAT A LITTLE LIKE EXTREME? IT'S BRYCE'S CREEK.
SO WHAT I THINK, UM, OH, MS. ALLEN IS REFERRING TO THE WALKING PATHS ARE, WHEN YOU LOOK, DO YOU HAVE, ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE IT ON A SCREEN? ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE THAT? I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WAS IN FRONT OF YOU OR NOT.
WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CREEK, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S ANY WALKING TRAILS IN THAT AREA, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT PART OF THE NATURE AREA IS EVEN LIKE USED.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING, YEAH.
IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING ANYWHERE IN THIS AREA.
SO THE CLOSEST THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TO DEVELOP AS FAR AS WALKING TRAILS IS WAY OVER HERE.
MAYBE, MAYBE WE CAN TRADE SPACES AND THEN, AND GET CHAD TO COME UP AND MAYBE CHAD CAN HELP A LITTLE BIT CHAD, BECAUSE HE, HE'S LET, LET HIM HELP OUT A LITTLE BIT THERE.
SO I, IS THIS YOUR PROPERTY RIGHT HERE? UM, IS IT ON THE BRYCE CREEK? IT'S ON CREEK.
IF YOU COULD, IF YOU COULD SPEAK UP SO WE CAN CAPTURE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
YEAH, SO, UM, I'M TRYING TO IDENTIFY, OKAY, SO IF, UH, IF YOU'LL LOOK AT YOUR MAP HERE, THE PROPERTY IS UP HERE WHERE THIS R 15 IS LOCATED.
SO BASED ON THE DRAWINGS THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU, UH, THERE WILL BE A TRAIL THAT IS ON THE COUNTY'S PROPERTY ACROSS FROM WHERE, UH, THEIR PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON, SO ACROSS THE CREEK ITSELF.
AND, UH, WITH IT BEING BRYCE'S CREEK AND UH, WATERS OF THE STATE, IF SOMEONE IS USING THAT AND THEY GET OUT OF THE WATER ONTO YOUR PROPERTY, THEN THERE WOULD BE TRESPASSING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO CALL THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT IF SOMEONE WERE TO COME YOUR PROPERTY.
BUT WITH THE BRYCE'S CREEK BEING WATER TO THE STATE, THEN IT'S FOR EVERYONE'S USE, BUT THEY DON'T NEED TO COME ON APPEARS THERES A PIECE OF PROPERTY IN BETWEEN THE COUNTY PROPERTY AND THE COMMON SPACE ALSO.
[01:35:01]
IS IT NOT THIS THAT LOOKS TO BE, UH, MIKE KERN PROPERTY ACROSS YES.THERE'S ANOTHER PIECE IN BETWEEN.
BUT I DON'T SEE ANY WALKING THAT'S POSITIVE ANYWAY.
YOU SAID THERE WAS A, A WALKING TRAIL? I DON'T SEE THE WALKING ALONG THE CREEK, UM, ACROSS FROM THEIR PROPERTY.
THAT'S WHAT, NO, WE JUST, WE THOUGHT WE WERE LOOKING AT WRONG.
YEAH, THE WALK, THE WALKING TRAILS ARE FURTHER DOWN HERE.
THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO.
I DIDN'T SEE ANY KIND OF PATHS GOING PAST THEIR HOUSE.
BUT SORRY ABOUT, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BRYCE'S CREEK ITSELF.
SO DOES THE COUNTY HAVE A REBUTTAL? DOES THE COUNTY HAVE A REBUTTAL? UM, I THINK WE, UH, WORK THAT OUT BETWEEN OURSELVES, UH, JUST DESCRIBING THAT THERE IS A PARCEL THAT IS OWNED BY THE HERNS BEFORE IT GETS TO THEIR PARCEL AND OR THE, THE COMMON AREA OF THE HOA.
UH, AND I, I HOPE I EXPLAINED THAT THESE ARE THE WATERS OF THE STATE AND IF SOMEONE LEAVES THOSE WATERS ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY, THEN UH, THE COMMON LAWS OF UH, EITHER THE, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, UH, WOULD COME INTO EFFECT AT THAT POINT.
IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSIONS? YES.
UH, SO WE GOT, UM, IS IT BRIAN HUFF? YES, SIR.
BRIAN HUFF, 2017 TARPON TRAIL, NEW BERN.
AND SIR, DID YOU RECEIVE A LETTER? I'M SORRY? DID YOU RECEIVE A LETTER? DID NOT.
UM, WHERE DO YOU LIVE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THIS PROPERTY? BLUE WATER RISE SUBDIVISION, WHICH IS RIGHT ACROSS FROM THE PROPOSED PARK.
OFF OF WHAT COUNTY LINE OR RIGHT OFF OF OLD AIRPORT ROAD? RIGHT HERE.
YOU GO BACK TO THAT ONE LAST SLIDE YOU WERE ON.
THIS ONE HERE IS THE RIGHT THERE, RIGHT OFF OF THE 23,000 PARCEL STRAIGHT IN THAT SUBDIVISION.
MY ONLY CONCERN, AND I'M ALL FOR THE PROJECT IS WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE MENTIONED IS JUST ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC.
EVERYONE IN THAT SUBDIVISION, WE HAVE ONE PAVED ROAD TO GET EVERYBODY IN AND EVERYBODY OUT.
OTHER THAN COUNTY LINE ROAD, WHICH IS JUST SOMETIMES FULL OF POTHOLES, FULL OF MUD, ALMOST JUST DUST AND EVERYTHING.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE IT JUST BE CONSIDERED IS IS THERE TWO EGRESS AND KNOW EXCESS WADE TO GET OUT OF THERE? GOD FORBID SOMETHING HAPPENS THAT PEOPLE NEED TO GET OUT OF THERE.
SO CHAD, I GUESS THE NEXT QUESTION WOULD, UM, WOULD BE INGRESS AND EGRESS.
YOU KNOW, THE OLD AIRPORT ROAD IS THE ONLY PAVED ROAD WE'VE HEARD IS TESTIMONY.
UM, ARE THERE ANY OTHER OPPORTUNITIES? DOES THE CA THE COUNTY PLAN ON DOING ANY WORK WITH COUNTY LINE ROAD OR DO YOU KNOW? WELL, UM, I I THINK IT KIND OF FALLS OUT THE PER, UH, THE PURVIEW HERE TONIGHT.
BUT I ACTUALLY, UH, SERVE ON THE MPO AND THE RPO, UH, HERE WITH THE CITY AND, AND THE COUNTY AND, UH, THAT PORTION OF COUNTY LINE ROAD, WE HAVE HAD EXTENSIVE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO SEE IF WE CAN PUT THAT IN SOME TYPE OF STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TO HAVE IT PAVED AT LEAST FROM OLD AIRPORT ROAD OUT TO THE PAVED SECTION OF COUNTY LINE ROAD.
SO THOSE DISCUSSIONS, UH, ARE IN, IN THE WORKS.
MR. CHAIRMAN, IS THAT A ENTRANCE? YEAH, MAYBE ON THE MAP.
CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT? IT, THE THING THAT HAS A CIRCLE AND IT LOOKS LIKE PARKING SPACES RIGHT NEAR THE FUTURE WALKING PATH OFF OF COUNTY LINE.
SO THERE'S ONE ACCESS IN A PARKING LOT, WHICH IS ON THE COUNTY LINE ROAD, THE UNPAID SECTION OF COUNTY LINE ROAD.
SO THAT IS THE ACCESS POINTS WHERE THE WALKING PATH.
YEAH, WE, UH, WE HAD TO DO THAT BECAUSE THERE'S A, UM, LARGE SWATH OF, UH, WETLANDS AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO CROSS ANY WETLANDS, UH, WITH OUR WALKING PASS IN THAT F VICINITY RIGHT THERE.
SO THE OTHER PARKING, UH, LOT THAT YOU SEE THAT'S ON OLD AIRPORT ROAD, THAT'S, UH,
[01:40:01]
SPECIFICALLY FOR THE KAYAK LAUNCH.AND UH, SO YOU GOT TWO DIFFERENT USES THERE.
SO YOU GOT KAYAKERS THAT WOULD BE USING THE, UH, THE PARKING LOT THAT'S ON OLD AIRPORT ROAD.
AND THEN THE WALKING OR UH, BIKING, UH, PATRONS WOULD BE USING THE ONE ON, UH, COUNTY LINE ROAD.
SO THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE WALKING ARE GONNA GO IN THE OTHER, GONNA GO IN THE COUNTY LINE ENTRANCE.
DO Y'ALL HAVE ANY IDEA BASED ON LATHE WHITEHURST PARK SINCE THAT WAS ADDED IN EARLIER ON TESTIMONY, HOW MANY PEOPLE MIGHT USE IT FOR A KAYAKS? UM, I MIGHT HAVE TO CONSULT TO MY RECREATION DIRECTOR.
SO YOU'RE GOING HAVE, YEAH, SO YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT LESS, UH, TRAFFIC AT LATHAM WHITEHURST BECAUSE IT'S A HALF MILE TO PULL YOUR KAYAK TO THE WATER HERE, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT BETTER ACCESS TO THE WATER IN CLOSE PROXIMITY.
SO I WOULD PROBABLY SAY THAT, UH, YOU WOULD'VE A LITTLE BIT MORE USAGE FROM THE KAYAKERS AT THIS PART COMPARED TO LA LATHAM WHITEHURST.
AND, AND JUST FOR THE RECORD INTO A PR ATTORNEY, UM, I BELIEVE YOU GOT THAT INFORMATION FROM YOUR PARKS AND REC? YES.
CAN YOU, WHAT'S HIS NAME? CAN YOU STATE? UH, YEAH, I'M SORRY.
HE'S THE, UH, RECREATION DIRECTOR FOR CRAVEN COUNTY.
I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE PARKING.
SO I SEE A COUPLE OF ATTACHMENTS MENTIONED IN HERE THAT AREN'T IN HERE, LIKE C NINE.
IS THERE ANYWHERE IN HERE THAT DESIGNATES HOW MUCH PARKING YOU'RE ANTICIPATING? YEAH, THERE'S GONNA BE A TOTAL OF 53 PARKING SPACES, UH, 17 AT THE, UH, KAYAK AREA AND 36 AT THE WALTON TRAIL AREA.
AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, FOR THE RECORD, THE KAYAK AREA IS THE ONE LOCATED ON OLD AIRPORT ROAD, WHICH IS THE PAVED ROAD FOR THE, THE LAUNCH.
AND THAT WAS THE 17 PARKING LOT? THAT'S CORRECT.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? NO.
DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION BEFORE WE START THE NO DISCUSSION? ALRIGHT.
SO, UH, NUMBER ONE WOULD BE THE REQUESTED PERMIT IS WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION.
ACCORDING TO THE TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES, I MOVE THAT THE REQUESTED PERMIT IS WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION ACCORDING TO THE TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES.
SO WE HAVE A, A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ANY OPPOSED? UH, THE APPLICATION IS COMPLETE.
I MAKE A MOTION THAT THE APPLICATION IS COMPLETE.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? APPLICATION COMPLETE.
IF COMPLETED IS PROPOSED IN THE APPLICATION OF DEVELOPMENT, WILL COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS ORDINANCE.
DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I MOVE.
IF COMPLETED AS PROPOSED IN THE APPLICATION, THE DEVELOPMENT WILL COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS ORDINANCE.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION? DO WE HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THAT.
ANY DISCUSSION? WE PROBABLY CAN'T CONDITION TO BE NAMED THE TAPE ACT PART, RIGHT? OH NO, PLEASE
UH, NUMBER FOUR, THAT THE USE WILL NOT MATERIAL ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH FOR SAFETY IF LOCATED WHERE PROPOSED AND DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE IS SUBMITTED A MOTION THAT THE USE WILL NOT MATERIALLY END DANGER.
THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY OF LOCATED WHERE THE PROPOSED AND DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN IS SUBMITTED.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES NUMBER FIVE, THAT THE USE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE VALUE OF ADJOINING OR ABUTTING PROPERTY OR THAT THE USE IS A PUBLIC NECESSITY.
I THINK THERE WAS, IF I'M RECALLING CORRECTLY, YEAH, THERE'S THE CRAVEN CANE NATURE PARK APPRAISER'S REPORT THAT WAS INTRODUCED INTO EVIDENCE, UM, THAT SHOWED THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY ECONOMIC HARM TO THE SURROUNDING OR BUDDING PROPERTY.
SO I THINK THAT, UM, APPLICANT HAS SHOWN, HAS MET HIS BURDEN THERE.
[01:45:01]
THAT THE USE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE VALUE OF ADJOINING OR A ABUTTING PROPERTY.SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND IN DISCUSSION.
UH, NUMBER SIX, THAT THE LOCATION AND CHARACTER OF THE USE IF DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN AS SUBMITTED AND APPROVED, WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE AREA IN WHICH IT IS TO BE LOCATED AND IN GENERAL, CONFORMITY WITH THE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.
I, I THOUGHT IT WAS REALLY SMART OF THE APPLICANT TO PUT THE CITY'S MARTIN MARIETTA PART PRETTY HARD TO REFUTE THAT IT'S NOT IN CONFORMITY WHEN IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THAT PART THAT INTERESTING.
I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT THE LOCATION AND CHARACTER OF THE USE IF DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN AS SUBMITTED AND APPROVED, WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE AREA IN WHICH IT IS TO BE LOCATED IN THE GENERAL CONFORMITY WITH THE PLAN OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION.
SO WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE SIX.
DO WE HAVE ANY CONDITIONS THAT WE WANT TO ADD DISCUSSION? NONE.
MR. CHAIR, I MOVE TO ISSUE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
WISHFUL THINKING YOU WEREN'T EVEN HERE FOR THE HARD ONE.
[VII. NEW BUSINESS]
NEW BUSINESS.SO, UM, AND I'LL, I GUESS I CAN LET KENDRICK, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GO THROUGH THIS ONE, BUT SHARON, PLACE CHAIR DISCUSSIONS.
SO I JUST, UH, RECEIVED SOME BASIC, JUST SOME INQUIRIES NECESSARILY PERTAINING TO FROM SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS HERE ABOUT THE CHAIRMAN AND THE VICE CHAIRMAN SPOT.
SO ESSENTIALLY THE BOARD WANTS TO ENTERTAIN SOMETHING, WHETHER IT BE, UM, I DON'T KNOW, I MIGHT DEFER TO THE, UH, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY HERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF AT THIS PARTICULAR MEETING, BUT MAYBE THE FOLLOWING MEETING, IT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT, UM, AND GET KIND OF JUST THOUGHTS ACROSS MAYBE DISCUSSIONARY POINT FOR THE BOARD.
UM, MR. MR. CHAIRMAN FOR THE BOARD, CUSTOMARILY APPOINTED BOARDS IN THE CITY OF NEW BERN, UM, ELECT OFFICERS ANNUALLY.
UM, AND IN REVIEWING, BASED ON SOME OF THE INQUIRIES THAT HAVE COME OUT, UM, I, I THINK IT'S BEEN DETERMINED THAT CHAMBER BECK HAS BEEN SERVING FOR A LONG TIME.
UM, HE'S BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB.
UM, BUT IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO JUST, UM, REVISIT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY'S COMFORTABLE IN THEIR ROLES AND GIVE OTHER PEOPLE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE EXTENT ANYONE HAS AN APPETITE.
SO I THINK WHAT STAFF IS ASKING TONIGHT IS SOME DIRECTION FROM YOU ALL ABOUT HOW THIS BOARD WOULD LIKE TO, UM, DEAL WITH THE ISSUE OF ELECTING OFFICERS.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR? AT SOME POINT DURING THE INTERIM OF THE YEAR? AT THE END OF THE YEAR, UM, SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A CONSISTENT, UM, METHODOLOGY GOING FORWARD? YES, SIR.
DO WE NEED A POLICY? I GUESS THERE'S NOT A POLICY CURRENTLY IN PLACE FOR OUR BOARD.
NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF, NO, SIR.
SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS LIKE JAMIE HAD MENTIONED, WHETHER IT BE ANNUALLY FIRST OF THE YEAR OR MIDDLE AND, AND IN REFERENCE TO COMMENT, YEAH.
UH, I'VE, I'VE DONE IT FOR A WHILE AND I SOMEBODY ELSE MORE THAN GRACIOUS TO, TO TAKE OVER, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.
SO IF WE HAVE A PROCESS THAT WE CAN TAKE NOMINATIONS OR VOTES OR HOW, HOW, HOW DO OTHER BOARDS OPERATE? UH, GENERALLY THEY TAKE NOMINATIONS AND THEN THERE'S A VOTE.
UM, VERY OFTEN IF, IF THERE ARE MULTIPLE PEOPLE THAT ARE INTERESTED, WE CAN DO A BALLOT.
I THINK BEFORE WE GET TO THE METHODOLOGY OF VOTING, I THINK WE NEED TO DETERMINE WHEN WE WANT TO DO IT.
UH, AND THEN WE CAN SEGUE INTO THE SECOND BULLET THAT'S ON YOUR SCREEN ABOUT RULES AND, UH, PROCEDURES.
IF YOU ARE INCLINED TO CODIFY YOUR METHODOLOGIES AND SOME TYPE OF DOCUMENT, YOU CAN GIVE DIRECTION TO STAFF.
AND, UM, I'LL WORK WITH KENDRICK TO BRING RULES OF PROCEDURE BACK TO YOU THAT WILL ADDRESS ISSUES LIKE, UM, WHEN OFFICERS ARE ELECTED, THE CONDUCT OF MEETINGS, HOW, UM, MEETING MATERIALS ARE DIS DISSEMINATED, THOSE TYPES OF THINGS, WHICH I THINK YOU HAVE A, A GOOD PRACTICE.
UM, IT MIGHT JUST BE GOOD TO REDUCE IT IN THE WRITING, THAT WAY AS PEOPLE ROLL ON AND ROLL OFF THE BOARD, THERE'S SOME CONTINUITY THAT PEOPLE CAN
YEAH, AND I TOTALLY HAVE TO, TO AGREE WITH JAMIE.
I KNOW THAT, UM, AFTER SPENDING TIME WITH PLANNING AND ZONING ALSO, YOU KNOW, WHEN A PERSON SPENDS TIME AS CHAIR OR CO-CHAIR FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME AND OTHER PEOPLE DON'T AND EVERYBODY MOVES ON AND OFF, WHICH HAPPENS A LOT, IT SEEMS LIKE IT DOESN'T HAVE
[01:50:01]
MUCH CONTINUITY.AND SO I WOULD, I WOULD DEFINITELY SAY THAT IF THERE ARE FOLKS THAT WANT TO, TO, UH, SERVE AS CHAIR, CO-CHAIR, NOW'S THE TIME REALLY TO, TO TRY TO GET INVOLVED.
AND THEN EVERYBODY THAT'S HERE ON THE BOARD IS STILL THERE AS YOU GO THROUGH.
AND, UM, FOLKS THAT, UM, WILL BE HERE FOR THREE MORE YEARS WOULD THEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AND STAY ON AND, AND GO.
SO IT'S, IT'S, IT'S ALL A PROCESS AND I'M, AND I, AND I THINK JAMIE'S MADE A GOOD POINT.
WE, WE NEED TO COME UP WITH A, A PLAN.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY DIRECTION THAT WE CAN GIVE TO STAFF? JAMIE, UM, AND KENDRICK, DON'T WE HAVE, I, I DON'T REMEMBER.
IT MIGHT HAVE LAST YEAR WE ADOPTED SOME RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR HOW THE HEARINGS WOULD GO, SIR, WHERE WE HAD TIME LIMITS ON, UH, THE, WE WE HAVE THAT, RIGHT? I THINK WE DO.
I'M PRETTY CERTAIN THAT WE DO HAVE THAT LANGUAGE.
IT JUST REALLY DIDN'T GIVE OR LEAD INTO ANY TYPE OF, YOU KNOW, FOR CHAIRMAN, VICE CHAIRMAN FOLKS.
COULD WE, AND SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, COULD WE TAKE WHATEVER WE ADOPTED THAT DOCUMENT AND FLESH IT OUT FOR THESE RULES AND PROCEDURES? YES, SIR.
TO NOT ONLY SAY HERE ARE THE RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE HEARING ITSELF, BUT ALSO, UM, HOW THE BOARD WILL ELECT.
WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE IDEA OF ANNUAL IS A FINE IDEA.
UM, I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S GOOD TO FLESH THAT DOCUMENT OUT, AS YOU SAID, IS PEOPLE START TO ROLL OFF, MAKE SURE THERE'S SOME PACKET THAT IS GIVEN TO NEW BOARD MEMBERS SO THAT THEY'RE AWARE OF THE EXPECTATIONS AND HOW THINGS RUN.
UM, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE, THE DEPTH OF WHAT WE DEAL WITH.
WE HAVEN'T, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN FORTUNATE WE'VE HAVEN'T HAD TO DEAL WITH ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS OR VARIANCES, BUT IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE RULES AND PROCEDURES FLUSHED OUT FOR EACH OF THE QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARINGS THAT WE HEAR.
I THINK AS, AS FAR AS THE DIRECTION I WOULD ASK THAT STAFF AND THE ATTORNEY WORK TOGETHER TO PUT TOGETHER A, A RULES AND PROCEDURES, UM, NOT MANUAL, BUT A POLICY FOR US TO REVIEW AT OUR NEXT MEETING.
AND MOST DEFINITELY, I THINK EVEN THE CO-CHAIR POTENTIALLY MOVING UP TO CHAIR MIGHT BE AN OPTION ALSO ROLL IN AND ROLL OUT MM-HMM
UM, AND, AND IN A, IN A PERIOD.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN ALL COME UP WITH AND, AND TALK ABOUT.
UH, JAMIE, UM, ANNUALLY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BUT WHAT ACTUALLY IS CURRENTLY THE DATES OR THE, UH, THE TIME PERIOD THAT INDIVIDUALS ON THE BOARD SERVE? AND ARE WE TO BE IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT ANNUAL TIME PERIOD AS THE REST OF THE BOARDS OF THE CITY? FINE QUESTION, MS. MARTY.
SO ALL OF YOUR TERMS COMMENCE ON JULY 1ST AND TERMINATE ON JULY 30TH, DIFFERENT YEARS, BUT ALWAYS IN THAT INTERVAL OF TIME.
I'LL TELL YOU THAT THE, THE POLICIES ACROSS THE APPOINTED BOARDS VARY A LITTLE BIT, UH, 'CAUSE EACH BOARD ADOPTS THEIR OWN RULES OF PROCEDURES.
SO I THINK THERE'S ONE BOARD THAT CONDUCTS THEIR ELECTION IN DECEMBER SO THAT THE NEW CHAIR OR CONTINUING CHAIR BEGINS THEIR CHAIRMANSHIP IN JANUARY AND IT FALLS TO THE CALENDAR YEAR.
THERE'S ANOTHER BOARD I THINK THEY ELECT THERE IS IN JANUARY.
UM, THERE'S ONE MORE I CAN'T REMEMBER.
UM, BUT IT MAY BE A GOOD IDEA FOR YOU ALL TO REFLECT UPON WHEN YOUR TERMS COMMENCE AND TERMINATE AS YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT WHEN THE CHAIRMANSHIP MIGHT RUN.
IT MAY BE A GOOD NATURAL TRANSITION PERIOD THAT IN JULY, UM, YOU CONDUCT A, AN ELECTION BECAUSE YOU HAVE EVERYONE SEATED.
YOU'LL KNOW WHO'S GONNA BE SERVING FOR THE NEXT YEAR, OR YOU CAN TAKE A CALENDAR YEAR PORCH, WHATEVER IS THE PLEASURE OF THE MAJORITY.
UM, WHEN WILL WE BE TOLD IF WE'RE TO GO OFF THE BOARD OR IF WE'RE JUST TO REMAIN ON THE BOARD, IF IT'S JULY TO JULY? ARE YOU SPEAKING MORE TOWARDS YOUR TERMS THAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY ON? YEAH.
YES, I BELIEVE, AND I, I'VE LOST TRACK KENDRICK TELL YOU, I'M HOPING I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
I DO HAVE A LISTING OF THE TERMS AND WHATNOT.
AND TYPICALLY WHAT HAPPENS IS MS. BRENDA WOULD CITY HALL, SHE WILL REFERENCE LIKE, HEY, UM, THIS PERSON'S TERM IS EXPIRING IN THE COMING MONTHS.
CAN YOU PLEASE ASK THEM IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO EITHER COME BACK OR IF THEY WOULD PREFER TO CONTINUE JUST TO EXIT.
SO BRENDA GOES TO YOU AND THEN YOU COME TO, I COME TO YOU ALL THE INDIVIDUAL THAT'S YES MA'AM.
AND THAT'S GENERALLY DONE ABOUT 60 DAYS BEFORE YOUR TERM EXPIRES.
THAT, THAT'S MY NEXT QUESTION.
IT WOULD BE 30 OR 60 DAYS PRIOR TO JULY 1ST.
WELL, YEAH, KATHLEEN, YOU'RE JUNE OF 25, AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT THE WEBSITE SAYS.
YEAH, I I THOUGHT I WAS COMING UP PAST DUE.
BUT, UH, ANYWAY, SO THE, THE PART OF THE CHALLENGE WOULD BE TOO IS THAT FOLKS THAT ARE IN THE SAME TERM, NOT BE
[01:55:01]
CHAIR AND CO-CHAIR MM-HMMYOU KNOW, THAT THEY HAVE A, A CHAIR THAT'S, YOU KNOW, SAY 2005 AND THE CO-CHAIR GOES OFF 2006 TO WHERE SOMEHOW ANOTHER THAT INTERMIXES BECAUSE HISTORICALLY, UM, WHATEVER BOARD TO GO AND TO COME ON.
AND THAT'S EVEN A BIGGER CHALLENGE THAT YOU LOSE THE CHAIR AND THE CO-CHAIR IN THE SAME PERIOD.
I MEAN, I'M SURE IT MAKES IT EVEN MORE DIFFICULT FOR Y'ALL TRYING TO KEEP THE PROCESS UP.
SO IT, IT DEFINITELY CHEMISTRY CHAIRMAN, THAT'S A GOOD POINT.
THAT'S A BIG PART OF THE REASON WHY THIS, THIS ITEM WAS PLACED ON, UH, AT THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA, JUST TRYING TO GET A KIND OF AN UNDERSTANDING AS TO HOW THE BOARDS, UM, ARE LOOKING AT THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION.
AND MAYBE WE CAN KIND OF COME TOGETHER AND TRY TO MAKE A, A GOOD, UM, FOOT FORWARD WITH HOW WE WANNA LAY OUT THIS PROCESS.
UM, SO IT DOESN'T COUNTERACT OR HAVE ANY, I GUESS, IMPENDING ISSUES FOR EITHER SIDE OF STAFF, UH, SUCH AS, YOU KNOW, MYSELF OR FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE ROLLING OFF OR COMING OFF, UM, TRY TO, YOU KNOW, CREATE A SMOOTH TRANSITION IS WHAT I'M SAYING.
I I LIKE THE IDEA OF A JULY ELECTION.
WELL, THAT YOU HAD, WELL, I'M CURIOUS ON THE 40, THE, THE 60 DAY CONVERSATION, YOU SAID 60 DAYS IN ADVANCE OF A TERM TERM YOU'RE CONTACTED BY THE CLERK NORMALLY.
SO IF AT 45 DAYS, OR LET'S SEE, 15 DAYS, YEAH, 45 DAYS, YOU KNOW, BY THEN IF THEY'RE GONNA RENEW, AND THEN YOU COULD START THE ELECTORAL PROCESS FOR SOMEBODY THAT WANTS TO PROCEED AS FAR AS BECOMING A CHAIR OR VICE CHAIR.
SO WE KNOW WHEN THE TERM IS GONNA EXPIRE.
GENERALLY THE BOARD OF ALDERMAN WHO MAKES YOUR APPOINTMENTS, UM, OR THE COUNTY, DEPENDING ON WHAT SEAT YOU'RE IN, THEY WILL ENTERTAIN THOSE APPOINTMENTS AT THE END OF MAY, BEGINNING OF JUNE.
UM, SO WE, IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE THAT WE MAY NOT KNOW FOR SURE WHO'S GONNA BE ON THE BOARD BECAUSE THEIR TERM HAS NOT BEEN CONFIRMED OR APPOINTED, UM, UNTIL JUNE PROVIDED ALSO THAT YOU CONTINUE TO SERVE UNTIL YOUR REPLACEMENT IS APPOINTED.
SO IF FOR SOME REASON THE BOARD IS UNABLE TO TAKE ACTION IN JUNE, UM, WHEN YOUR TERM IS SUPPOSED TO EXPIRE, YOU WILL CONTINUE TO SERVE UNTIL THAT SEAT IS FILLED.
I DON'T, I DON'T WANNA PUT MORE WORK ON KENDRICK, BUT FOR ME IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF PRIOR TO OUR NEXT MEETING IF WE COULD HAVE JUST A LIST, UM, ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED AND POLICIES, UM, AND PROCEDURES DEVELOPED AT THAT TIME, AND NOT SAY AT THIS POINT THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE ELECTIONS IN JULY.
I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY THINGS FOR ME THAT ARE UP IN THE AIR AT THIS POINT.
DO KELLY, DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO YOU IF KENDRICK AND JAMIE, I MEAN THEY WORKED AND THEY GRABBED THE POLICIES OR PROCEDURES OF OTHER BOARDS AND PUT IT AS A MOCKUP DRAFT TO, TO SEND OUT AND THAT WAY YOU CAN, LIKE WE CAN ALL REVIEW AND MARKUP AT THE NEXT MEETING TO THEN TALK ABOUT, LIKE I SAID, I DON'T WANNA PUT MORE WORK ONTO KENDRICK, JUST, YOU KNOW, KEEP IT AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE WITH THESE ISSUES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE THOUGH.
UM, I COULD DEFINITELY MOST LIKELY FIND TIME FOR IT.
UM, I GUESS I COULD SHARE THIS PIECE OF NEWS TOO.
WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY ADDITIONAL SPECIAL USE PERMITS, UH, FOR THE UPCOMING MONTH.
SO IF YOU GUYS WILL HAVE A CANCELLATION THAT GOES OUT FOR NEXT MONTH, UM, AND SO MAYBE I CAN FIND THAT, THAT TIMEFRAME, UNLESS WE'RE STILL GONNA CONTINUE AND WE WANT TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION NECESSARILY THAT TALKS SPECIFIC TO THIS, AND THEN IN THAT CASE WE COULD HAVE THE, THE ACTUAL HEARING TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM OR, WELL, I'D SAY THAT'S A POINT OF DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD NOW.
I MEAN, IF, IF WE WANT TO TRY TO MOVE FORWARD, MAYBE WE CAN EVEN ALL WORK ON THAT AND HAVE IT, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO Y'ALL THINK? WOULD Y'ALL RATHER JUST WAIT TILL THE NEXT SPECIAL USE PERMIT COMES UP OR JUST HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING TO DISCUSS, YOU KNOW, THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES? I MEAN, DO WE, WHAT DO Y'ALL THINK? I THINK IT'D BE GREAT TO TALK ABOUT IT NEXT MONTH.
UM, WHETHER A PERMIT COMES UP BETWEEN NOW AND THEN OR NOT.
I DO THINK HAVING SOME KIND OF A FRAMEWORK THAT WE CAN LOOK AT TO, TO DECIDE WHETHER WE WANT THIS OR SOMETHING ELSE IS HELPFUL.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK IF KENDRA COULD DO THAT AND WOULD YOU ALL WANT TO ENTERTAIN THAT FOR A MEETING THAT HAS AN ITEM OR WOULD YOU WANT THAT ON AN AGENDA BY ITSELF ONCE WE KIND OF GET EVERYTHING PREPARED? I THINK WHAT RYAN SAID WAS, MAKE SURE I'M SAYING THIS RIGHT, IS THAT YOU, I THINK THE DIRECTION WOULD BE PREPARE A DRAFT SET OF PROCEDURES WITH A ELECTION IN JULY AND WE, I MEAN THAT'S THE DRAFT.
AND THEN AT OUR NEXT MEETING, WHICH WE WON'T HAVE ANY SPECIALTIES PERMIT, IT'LL BE OPEN TO HAVE THE DISCUSSION ABOUT THE POLICY.
UM, AND SO WE'RE NOT PRESSED FOR TIME.
UM, AND THEN AT THAT MEETING WE CAN THEN DISCUSS THE CHANGES POSSIBLE ADOPTION.
[02:00:01]
I MEAN WE CAN HAVE THAT KIND OF A WORKSHOP FOR THAT.IS THAT RIGHT? THE OTHER THAT SOUNDS GREAT.
THE OTHER SIDE OF IT, IF Y'ALL DON'T GET IT TOGETHER, UM, BY THE NEXT MEETING, I GUESS IT COULD BE DELAYED TILL THE NEXT SPECIAL USE.
THERE'S NO SENSE PUT UNDUE BURDEN IF SOMETHING ELSE COMES UP.
I MEAN SOMETHING, BUT I'M SAYING THAT IF A ZONING EMERGENCY COMES UP, KENDRICK, YOU, YOU CAN JUST UNILATERALLY CANCEL OUR MEETING, PUT IT ON THE NEXT ONE.
I, I THINK WE'D LIKE IT THAT BE NEXT TIME, SO IT'S EASIER.
WE HAVE MORE TIME, BUT I MEAN, UH, WHAT DO Y'ALL I THAT'S GOOD IDEA.
I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S FINE EITHER WAY.
I WILL DO MY BEST TO HAVE IT PREPARED BY THAT TIMEFRAME.
I'LL WORK WITH MS. JAMIE AND WE'LL SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.
UM, IF FOR SOME REASON THAT IT IS NOT READY OR WE ARE JUST UNABLE TO GET TO IT, PARTIC OR PARTICULARLY, PARTICULARLY, EXCUSE ME, UH, WE'LL CARRY IT OVER TO THE FOLLOWING MEETING, UH, AND MAKE SURE AT LEAST TO HOPEFULLY GIVE YOU ENOUGH TIME TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW IT.
UM, AND EVEN CONSIDERATIONS AS FAR AS FOR CHANGES OR THINGS THAT MAY NEED TO BE DIFFERENT.
SO WE WOULD DEFINITELY DO THAT.
IS IT MORE REASONABLE TO GIVE YOU 60 DAYS MINIMUM FOR THIS? I MEAN I ABSOLUTELY, YEAH.
SO IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE PUSHING FOR 30 DAYS, BUT REALLY WE NEED TO GIVE 60 MINIMUM FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP LOOKING MAY AN POLICY MANUAL SOUNDS.
SO YEAH, THAT'LL, NO, NO SOONER THAN JUNE.
THAT'LL PUT US IN MAY AND THEN WE CAN, AND THEN WE HAVE PLENTY OF TIME IF WE WANT TO APRIL.
NOW I THINK WE HAVE FORMALIZE IT BEFORE JULY.
THAT'S WHAT MAY JUST IN MAY MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL AWARE.
I THINK WE HAVE THREE OR FOUR MEMBERS TERM UP IN THIS JUNE.
NOW I IMAGINE MOST ARE GOING TO, HOPEFULLY MOST WANT TO STAY ON AND BE REAPPOINTED AND THE BOARD WILL REAPPOINT.
SO IT SHOULDN'T BE AN ISSUE, BUT JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE NO, I MAY, YEAH.
DOES THAT INCLUDE YOU HONOR? UH, NOT WELL, EXACTLY.
KEEP MOUTH SHUT WHILE WE'RE SITTING HERE.
AND I THINK AGAIN, IN WHILE THE PROCESS MOVES ON, IF ANYBODY ELSE THAT HAS NOT ALREADY MADE A COMMENT IN REFERENCE TO ONE OF THE, THE CHAIR OR CO-CHAIR WOULD KENDRICK DO.
SO IF WE NEED TO DO IT, WHAT'S UP FOR GRAB TO DO IT? CHAIR? GO FOR IT.
TELL, WHAT IS IT YOU TRIED TO GET OUTTA THE CITY? WELL, ALL THE RECUSALS.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.