[00:00:03]
ALL RIGHT.[I. CALL TO ORDER]
I CAUGHT ORDER OF THE CITY OF UBER AND PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING FOR MAY 15TH, 2025.UH, IF YOU CAN AND ARE WILLING, PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEASURE OF ALLEGIANCE FOR OUR COUNTRY PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
CAN I GET A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? YES, SIR.
MR. CHAIRMAN, UH, STARTING OFF WITH BOARD MEMBER KYLE DEERE HERE, BOARD MEMBER DANIELLE PEOPLES HERE, AND THEN BOARD MEMBER KIT PARAGO.
JUST LET THE RECORD SHOW HE'S ABSENT.
UH, CHAIRMAN BRAD JEFFERSON HERE AND VICE CHAIRMAN RUSTY INGRAM, AND JUST LET THE RECORD SHOW HE'S ALSO ABSENT.
BOARD MEMBER KELLY KAISER HERE, BOARD MEMBER THOMAS BROWNELL HERE, AND BOARD MEMBER MARSHALL BALLARD AND LET RECORD SHOW HE'S ALSO ABSENT.
AND MR. CHAIRMAN, WE DO HAVE A QUORUM.
[IV. APPROVE AGENDA]
THE AGENDA'S GOT SOME CHANGES HERE.WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ON THAT BEFORE WE APPROVE? YES, SIR.
MR. CHAIRMAN, UH, THESE FIRST TWO ITEMS, AS YOU SEE HERE, WERE TECHNICALLY, THEY'RE WE'RE BEING WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT, WHICH IS ONE OF THEM BEING OURSELVES.
UM, ESSENTIALLY THOSE WILL BE BROUGHT BACK AT A LATER DATE, POTENTIALLY.
UH, AND THEN THE THIRD ITEM THERE FOR NUMBER C REGARDING THE SUBDIVISION.
PREVIOUSLY, A, A TEXT AMENDMENT WAS PASSED BY THE BOARD OF DERMAN.
MOST RECENT, I BELIEVE IT WAS TUESDAY OR MONDAY.
I'M APOLOGIZE ON THE DATE, BUT, UH, BASICALLY WHAT THAT MEANS IS IT BRINGS IT BACK TO AN ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL.
SO YOU WILL NOT BE HEARING THAT ITEM EITHER.
SO THAT'S WHY THE STRIKING IS THERE.
UM, THANK YOU KENDRICK TO, UH, HAVE A MOTION ON THE AGENDA.
WE APPROVE THE AGENDA FOR THIS SEASON.
SECOND, AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, MR. CHAIR, THAT MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE AGENDA LESS ITEMS A, B, AND C.
YES, APPROVE THE AGENDA, REDACTING THE ITEMS MEANS, AND CI HAVE MOTION.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
[V. CHAIRMAN’S REMARKS]
TONIGHT IN MY CHAIRMAN'S REMARKS.UM, TONIGHT IS KYLE DEARING'S LAST MEETING WITH US.
UM, WE'RE ALL VERY SAD TO SEE HIM GO.
UM, KYLE BROUGHT A, UH, LOT OF, UM, KIND OF A DIFFERENT VIEW ON THINGS TO THE BOARD.
HE COMES FROM KIND OF AN IT BACKGROUND, WHICH IS KIND OF MORE OF MY BACKGROUND, LESS OF A PLANNING BACKGROUND, AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS GOOD FOR THIS BOARD.
AND, UH, HOPEFULLY IN THE FUTURE WE GET SOME PUBLIC INTEREST, UM, WITH, UH, SOMEONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SIT ON THAT COULD CARRY SIMILAR THINGS.
UH, AND, UH, I JUST WANNA SAY THANKS FOR, FOR BEING A PART OF THE BOARD AND, UM, FOR, YOU KNOW, GETTING ON THE PARKING COMMITTEE AND ALL THAT STUFF.
AND SO, UM, YEAH, IF ANYBODY WATCHING OR, UH, ANYTHING WOULD LIKE TO JOIN THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, UH, PLEASE REACH OUT TO THE CITY CLERK.
[VI.D. Land Use Ordinance Text Amendment]
MOVE ON TO ITEM D, THE LAND USE ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT FOR THE CREATOR OF FIVE POINTS OF REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY.CAN JUDGE, DO YOU HAVE A BRIEF FORCE? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
AND, UH, GOOD EVENING TO THE BOARD.
AND I'M GONNA START OFF WITH THIS FIRST TEXT, OR EXCUSE ME, TEXT AMENDMENT SINCE TEXT AMENDMENT 0 0 3 0 8 8 20 25.
UH, THIS IS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION.
AND ALSO JUST TO LET YOU KNOW, UH, WE DO HAVE ESSENTIALLY, UH, PERSONNEL, OR AT LEAST THE PERSON SPECIFIC TO THIS AMENDMENT TO SPEAK ON AS WELL.
I'M JUST GONNA GIVE YOU A SURFACE OVERVIEW, UM, AND THAT GENTLEMAN CAN ALSO, MR. ZBB, UH, OKAY, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M PRONOUNCING THAT RIGHT.
ZEP, UH, HE'LL GIVE YOU KIND OF MORE DETAIL IF YOU NEED TO AND ANSWER ANY QUESTION THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.
OKAY, SO THE REQUEST SUMMARY, UH, THE APPLICANT REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONED NEWBURN AND THE SYNOPSIS HERE, UH, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS A REVISION OF THE DIMENSIONAL AND DENSITY REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE GREATER FIVE POINTS REDEVELOPMENT OVERLAY.
THIS IS THE RDC BOUNDARY ESSENTIALLY, AND JUST THE SECTIONS TO BE A AMENDED, UM, OR EXCUSE ME, THE SECTION, IT'S, UH, 15 DASH 4 87 AND THIS IS THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GREATER FIVE POINTS REDEVELOPMENT OVERWEIGHT DISTRICT.
UM, I'M GONNA TRY TO NOT STRUGGLE WITH THAT WORD THERE, BUT PROMULGATION OF USE AND DESIGN STANDARDS.
AND BASICALLY THERE'S SOME REFERENCE SLIDES AS ALWAYS WITH THESE TEXT AMENDMENTS, UM, THAT WE BRING BEFORE YOU.
SO ANY INFORMATION OR ANY RED LINING THAT YOU WANT TO KEY IN ON SPECIFICALLY, THIS IS JUST FOR YOU TO REFERENCE BACK TO THAT POINT IF NECESSARY.
UM, BUT MOST QUESTIONS I'LL MOST LIKELY DEFER TO OUR ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY HERE, MS. JAMIE.
UM, BUT IF THE BOARD HAS QUESTIONS FOR MYSELF, I'LL TRY TO TAKE THOSE AT THIS TIME.
UM, AND JUST REAL QUICK, STAFF DOES NOT HAVE ANY CONCERNS WITH, UH, THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED.
[00:05:01]
OKAY.BOARD, HAVE QUESTIONS FOR KENDRICK.
KENDRICK AS PART OF THE RENEW BURN EFFORT.
UH, I KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME OVERLAP BETWEEN THE HISTORICAL DISTRICT AND THE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
DOES THIS IN ANY WAY HELP ADDRESS THAT OR IS THAT A COMPLETELY SEPARATE THING STILL ON THE TABLE? I, I'LL BE HONEST, I BELIEVE THAT'S COMPLETELY SEPARATE IN SOME WAYS.
I DON'T KNOW THAT IT REALLY HAS ANY, UH, VALIDITY HERE NECESSARILY, BUT, UH, I CAN PROBABLY LET MR. ZEEP SPEAK MORE ON THAT IN CASE THAT HE WANTS TO KIND OF CHECK.
THIS IS COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT.
JUST TO WEIGH IN ON THIS, I THINK IT'D BE APPROPRIATE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT, HOWEVER, THAT PROBABLY BE THE BEST, BEST IDEA.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR KENDRICK? NO, I DON'T NEED TO CLICK HERE UNLESS YOU WANT ME TO CLICK SOMETHING.
MY COMMISSION IS VERY MUCH LESS FORMAL, SO I, I APOLOGIZE.
I'M GONNA BE MUCH LESS FORMAL THAN YOU'RE USED TO.
UH, BASICALLY THE, THE TEXT AMENDMENT IS A, A CORRECTIVE MEASURE SO THAT WE'RE MORE ACCURATELY, UH, ADDRESSING THE, THE HEART AND SPIRIT OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AS IT WAS MEANT TO BE WHEN IT WAS DRAFTED.
UH, AS IT, AS THE OVERLAY SITS NOW, IT ONLY, UH, IT ONLY RELAXES THE, UH, THE SPEC OR THE R SIX ZONE.
UM, AND SO THERE'S ONLY ONE SPECIFIC RESIDENTIAL USE, UH, THAT CAN BE DEVELOPED IN THE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS THAT WE EXPAND THAT SO THAT THE SETBACKS APPLY TO A LOT MORE RESIDENTIAL USES, UH, SO THAT WE CAN ATTRACT MORE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, THUS REINVESTING IN THE DISTRICT, WHICH IS WHY MY COMMISSION EXISTS.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? IT DOES.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ZIP? NO.
I'LL OPEN UP DISCUSSION WITH THE BOARD.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE TEXT AMENDMENT.
ALRIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION OR RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE TEXT AMENDMENT AND THE ADOPTION OF A CONSISTENCY STATEMENT AND THE ADOPTION OF A CONSISTENCY STATEMENT.
ALL RIGHT, SO YOUR MOTION IS THAT IT IS CONSISTENT AND TO RECOMMEND IT TO THE BOARD OF ALMAN.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
[VI.E. Land Use Ordinance Text Amendment]
NUMBER E LAND USE TEXT AMENDMENTS, UH, FOR THE BROAD STREET CORRIDOR ORDER.ALRIGHT, MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS NEXT TEXT AMENDMENT IS UH, 0 0 3 0 8 9 20 25.
AND THIS IS SPECIFIC TO BUILDING HEIGHT OVERLAYS.
SO THE APPLICANT HERE IS THE CITY OF NEW BERN AND THE SYNOPSIS, JUST BRIEFLY, UM, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS TO CONVERT HEIGHT CALCULATIONS FROM STILL RACE TO FEET, UM, AND ALSO SET THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT FOR THE ACTUAL, FOR THE BROAD QUEEN STREET OVERLAY, UH, THE CORRIDOR AT 60 FEET.
AND THEN LASTLY, TO REMOVE BUILDING DESIGN, UH, ELEMENTS CONSISTENT WITH NCGS ONE 60 D DASH SEVEN TWO AND SECTIONS TO BE AMENDED.
EXCUSE ME, I'M NOT GONNA READ ALL OF THESE.
THESE ARE MORE SPECIFIC TO ALL THE OVERLAY DISTRICTS, BUT I'LL READ THESE SECTIONS, UH, SPECIFICALLY, BUT 15 DASH 4 62, 4 63, 4 65, 4 66, 4 67, 4 93, AND 4 94.
AND I'LL LEAVE THAT ON THE SCREEN JUST SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT DISTRICTS THEY CORRESPOND WITH.
AND AGAIN, YOU JUST HAVE A LOT OF REFERENCE INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE TEXT AMENDMENT.
ANYTHING THAT YOU SEE THAT YOU MAY HAVE QUESTIONED OR YOU DO HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT CAN ABSOLUTELY GO BACK AND, UH, AT LEAST PUT THAT SLIDE BEFORE YOU ALL.
SO JUST KIND OF ROLL THROUGH SOME OF THESE AND IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, FEEL FREE TO STOP ME AND STAFF DOES NOT HAVE, AGAIN, ANY CONCERNS WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES, BUT THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS.
I'LL TRY TO TAKE THOSE AT THIS TIME
[00:10:01]
OR QUESTIONS I HAVE ONE, IS THERE ANY STRUCTURES RIGHT NOW OVER 60 FEET? HMM, THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION.I WISH I COULD GIVE YOU A DEFINITIVE, UM, THERE MAY BE.
I JUST DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT WILL THEY BE GRANDFATHERED IN? YES, SIR.
ANY, ANY STRUCTURE THAT MIGHT BE MORE THAN 60 FEET WOULD BE CONSIDERED AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING SITUATION.
HOWEVER, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY STRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY THE BROAD STREET QUEEN STREET OVERLAY THAT EXCEEDS 60 FEET.
AND KENDRICK, THE INTENTION OF THIS IS JUST TO HAVE MORE SPECIFICITY WITH HAVING THE ASSUMED STORY HEIGHT.
CALCULATED IN FEET IS, THERE'S SOME PLACES ACTUALLY THAT HAVE STORIES AND THEN SOME THAT HAVE FEED AND IT'S MORE SO FOR CONSISTENCY SO THAT EVERYTHING IS VERY CLEAR.
AND, AND MS. PEOPLES, TO THAT POINT, THAT IS ONE PORTION OF THE TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED TODAY.
I JUST WANT EVERYONE TO BE CLEAR THAT THERE'S ALSO SOME AMENDMENTS TO DESIGN STANDARDS THAT ARE IN OUR VARIOUS ENTRANCE CORRIDORS, UH, OVERLAYS AS WELL AS NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS.
AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS STRIKING, UM, DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE UNENFORCEABLE.
THAT WAY WHEN PEOPLE READ OUR CODE, UM, THEY CAN HAVE AN APPRECIATION FOR THE, WHAT THE RULES ARE IN LIGHT OF ONE 60 D AND REMOVING SOME OF THAT LEGACY LANGUAGE THAT SHOULD NOT BE PRESENT.
UM, WE DID HAVE A GENTLEMAN COME IN.
DO YOU HAVE ANY OFTEN WE ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? YOU DO.
WELL, NOT, NOT ON THIS, NOT ON THIS ITEM, NO.
THAT'S THE ONLY ITEM WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, RIGHT? I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ITEM D OF THE, UH, OF THE AGENDA NOTES AND MR. CHAIRMAN, HE'LL, HE'S ACTUALLY GONNA PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT TOWARDS THE END.
I DO APOLOGIZE THAT IT PROBABLY DIDN'T INFORM YOU, BUT I DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT LISTED AT THE VERY END.
AND I BELIEVE THAT'S WHERE THAT GENTLE ROGER THAT WE AHEAD, WE'LL HAVE YOU IN THERE.
UM, WHAT IS THE BOARD'S PLEASURE ON THIS ITEM? I MOTION THAT WE ONE, ADOPT A CONSISTENCY STATEMENT.
RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT.
ALRIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND TO ADOPT THE CONSISTENCY STATEMENT THAT IT IS CONSISTENT AND TO RECOMMEND FOR THE, UH, TO THE BOARD OF ALDERMAN.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? UH, HEARING NONE.
CARRIE, WE GOT THE MIC'S TOO LOUD HERE.
UM, I KNOW THERE WERE SOME COMPLAINTS, BUT NOW I'M GETTING THE FEEDBACK.
[Additional item]
F LAND USE ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT TO ESTABLISH THE DENSITY CALCULATION FOR THE COMMERCIAL SEAPORT ZONING DISTRICT.AND THE LAST ITEM HERE IS TEXT AMENDMENT 0 0 3 1 0 1 20 25.
UH, THIS IS SPECIFIC TO THE COMMERCIAL FOUR OR C FOUR DENSITY, UH, FOR THE TEXT AMENDMENT.
AND AGAIN, THE APPLICANT'S, THE CITY OF NEWBURN AND ESSENTIALLY THE SYNOPSIS, SYNOPSIS HERE, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL ESTABLISH THE DENSITY CALCULATION FOR THE COMMERCIAL FOUR ZONING DISTRICT AS IT PERTAINS TO THE MULTIFAMILY USE.
UH, CURRENTLY WE JUST DON'T HAVE ONE THAT'S READILY AVAILABLE OR READY TO READY TO READ.
SO IT'S CLARIFICATION AND ALSO ESTABLISHING THAT, UM, TO MAKE THINGS EASIER.
AND THE SECTION SPECIFICALLY, UH, IS 15 DASH 180 1 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY.
AND ONCE AGAIN, WE JUST HAVE SOME REFERENCE INFORMATION JUST TO SHOW, UM, SPECIFICALLY ON THE SECOND, THE NEXT SLIDE HERE.
IT'S ACTUALLY GOT THE RED, UH, TO KIND OF EXPLAIN TO YOU WHAT'S BEING PUT IN PLACE AND STAFF IS IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE.
AND OF COURSE IF THE BOARD HAS ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL GLADLY TAKE THOSE AT THIS TIME.
BOARD HAVE QUESTIONS FOR KENDRICK? THANK YOU, SIR.
UH, WAS A PLEASURE TO BOARD ON THIS ITEM, I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT, UM, THE CONSISTENCY STATEMENT THAT IS, AND THAT WE RECOMMENDED THE BOARD OF ALDERMAN TO APPROVE THIS.
SECOND THAT I HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY ITEMS FOR NEW BUSINESS? OKAY.
[VIII. STAFF COMMENTS]
STAFF COMMENTS? I THINK, UH, JUST THE ONLY MENTION I HAVE, MR. CHAIRMAN, IS THERE WAS A SUBDIVISION THAT[00:15:01]
CAME IN, UM, THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ON FOR THE NEXT MEETING.OF COURSE NOW WITH THAT TRANSITION AND BASED ON THE, UH, TEXT AMENDMENT, I DON'T BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO SEE THAT.
SO THUS FAR I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AT THIS VERY MOMENT.
I'M HESITANT TO CANCEL THE MEETING RIGHT NOW UNTIL WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE ANYTHING.
BUT I'LL DEFINITELY LET YOU ALL KNOW AND SEND OUT A CANCELLATION NOTICE.
[IX. PUBLIC COMMENT]
NOW'S YOUR TIME.UM, USUALLY I'M IN JUST FOUR MINUTES, SO, UM, STATE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO GO.
I'M THE, UH, OWNER OF BCJ DEVELOPMENT.
UM, JUST A LITTLE ONE MAN SHOP TRYING TO, UH, BUILD SOMETHING HERE IN NEW BERN.
UH, OVER THE PAST YEAR I'VE BEEN BUYING VACANT LOTS IN THE RDC, UH, CURRENTLY OWN SIX AND I'M GETTING READY TO CLOSE ON TWO MORE.
UH, MY GOAL WITH THE LOTS IS TO BUILD AFFORDABLE WORKFORCE HOUSING, UH, WITH A COUPLE OF SMALL HOME PLANS I HAVE AND UH, I'M WORKING ON BUILDING MY FIRST ONE RIGHT NOW ON MAIN STREET.
UH, THE REASON WHY I'M HERE TODAY IS I HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH KENDRICK AND JESSICA A. LITTLE BIT.
UH, I HAVE AN ISSUE WHERE I AM TRYING TO DIVIDE SOME OF MY LOTS IN SUCH A WAY THAT I CAN PUT MORE THAN JUST ONE HOUSE ON IT, YOU KNOW, IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THE EFFICIENCY OF EACH LOT, PROVIDE MORE HOUSING, KEEP THE RENT DOWN.
THE PROBLEM I'M HAVING IS EITHER THE LOTS WON'T ACCEPT MULTIPLE HOUSES BECAUSE OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE LIMITS OR I CAN DIVIDE THEM STILL BE WITHIN THE RDCS MINIMUM LOT SIZES, BUT BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT LOCATED DIRECTLY ON THE STREET, I CAN'T DO THAT BECAUSE OF ACCESS ISSUES BECAUSE I CAN'T USE A DRIVEWAY AS ACCESS.
UH, SO WHAT I'M ASKING IS SOME HELP, UH, WITH, I'M ASSUMING IT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME TYPE OF CODE CHANGE IN ORDER TO ALLOW A DRIVEWAY TO BE ACCESS FOR MY LOTS, UH, OR CHANGE THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOT DENSITY IN THE RDC.
AND I'M ONLY ASKING YOU IN THE RDC AND I HAVE SOME SKETCH PLOT PLANS THAT I CAN SHARE WITH YOU AND ALSO MY FIRST HOUSE PLANS FOR THE TINY HOME ON MAIN STREET IF Y'ALL WOULD LIKE TO SEE 'EM.
SORRY, I ONLY HAVE ONE COFFEE.
SEE IF I, I'M SORRY, YOUR NAME AGAIN? I, BARRY WAN WAN.
DOES OUR RECOMMENDATION ON ITEM D PERTAIN AT ALL TO THIS REQUEST? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
UH, IT, YOU COULD SAY THAT THEY, THEY KIND OF GO HAND IN HAND IN SOME WAYS.
UM, AS FAR AS FOR THE POSITION OF STAFF, WHICH WE HAVE WORKED EXTENSIVELY WITH MR. BERRY AS WELL AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN, WE CAN SUPPORT AT THIS VERY MOMENT.
UM, NOT BASED ON WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO LOOK INTO AS FAR AS FOR WHAT MR. BERRY IS PROPOSING.
HOWEVER, HE IS ALLOWED TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO COME BEFORE THIS BOARD AND ESSENTIALLY KIND OF MAKE HIS CASE.
SO THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHY HE'S PROVIDING YOU WITH THE COMMENTS THAT HE IS.
SO MS. PEEPLES, JUST TO UNPACK THAT JUST A BIT MORE, UM, IN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY, WE HAVE UM, SOME PARTICULARLY SMALL LOTS, UM, COMPARED TO OTHER YOUNGER PORTIONS OF THE CITY AND THE TEXT AMENDMENT THAT YOU REVIEWED TONIGHT WOULD RELAX THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THOSE LOTS TO, UM, APPLY.
I THINK IT'S 15 FRONT, FIVE FOOT SIDE, UH, 10 FOOT REAR SETBACKS TO ALL LOTS IN THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AREA BOUNDARY, UM, AND ANY ZONING DESIGNATION.
SO LONG AS THOSE LOTS ARE BEING USED FOR RESIDENTIAL USES, I THINK WHAT MR. HEWAN IS PROPOSING OR ASKING YOU ALL TO CONSIDER IS RELAXING THE STANDARDS ALL THE MORE, UM, TO EITHER ALLOW FOR LOTS TO BE DEVELOPED WITHOUT HAVING DIRECT ACCESS ON THE FRONTAGE ON THE PUBLIC STREET OR TO OTHERWISE MANIPULATE THE LOT SIZE OR DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS SUCH THAT HE CAN DEVELOP MORE DENSELY THAN WE
[00:20:01]
CURRENTLY ALLOW.UM, IF WE CONTINUE WITH THE RENEW BURN PROCESS AND HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER CONDITIONAL ZONING IN THE FUTURE, WOULD THAT BE A ROUTE TO EXPLORE SOME OF THESE OPTIONS BEING REQUESTED? THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION.
THAT'S SOMETHING I'D LIKE TO REFLECT UPON.
ARE WE ANYWHERE NEAR GETTING THAT OPTION? I'M SORRY, THE CONDITIONAL ZONING.
ARE YOU, ARE WE ANYWHERE NEAR BEING ABLE TO DO THAT OR IS THAT STILL AT THE PRESENT MOMENT? THERE IS NO TEXT BEFORE YOU OR ANY OTHER BOARD FOR THE CITY OF NEW BERN TO ENABLE CONDITIONAL ZONING.
I DO UNDERSTAND FROM, UM, OUR DIRECTOR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES THAT THAT IS A CONCEPT THAT IS BEING, UM, STRONGLY CONSIDERED IN OUR RENEW BURN COMPREHENSIVE LAND, UH, LAND USE ORDINANCE UPDATE.
SO COULD WE, UM, ON THIS BOARD, UM, WRITE SOME TYPE OF CHANGE TO GIVE TO THE BOARD OF ALMAN TO CONSIDER? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED HERE OR WHAT LIKE, UM, HOW, HOW CAN I HELP THIS GENTLEMAN SHOULD WE DECIDE TO HELP THIS GENTLEMAN? I THINK WHAT MR. HADWAN IS ASKING YOU TO DO IS TO CONSIDER WHAT HE'S ASKING.
AFTER YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER IT, REFLECT UPON IT DEBATED AMONGST YOURSELVES.
IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO DO, UM, PERHAPS WE CAN ADD THIS TO YOUR NEXT AGENDA FOR YOU ALL TO CONSIDER, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST HIS REQUEST, BUT HOW THAT REQUEST MIGHT IMPACT THE LARGER REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION BOUNDARY.
YOU MIGHT ELICIT, UM, SOME INPUT FROM THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ITSELF.
THAT IS ANOTHER BOARD THAT OBVIOUSLY HAS A GREAT STAKE IN MANAGING, UM, GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT AND DENSITY.
AND THERE MAY BE SOME CONSIDERATIONS THAT ARE UNIQUE TO THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION BOUNDARY THAT THEY MIGHT BE EXPERTS IN THAT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IN YOU CONSIDERING, YOU KNOW, THE APPROPRIATENESS OF MR. WAN'S REQUEST.
AND ALSO YOU HAVE, I THINK, SOME STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HE'S WORKED WITH STAFF AND AT THIS TIME, UM, THIS IS NOT A, A CONCEPT THAT CITY STAFF CURRENTLY, UM, ADVOCATES FOR.
SO YOU MAY WANT TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT HIS SKETCHES, REFLECT UPON HIS, HIS COMMENTS, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, AT A LATER DATE HAVE A MORE ROBUST DISCUSSION AFTER YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO YOUR HOMEWORK.
UM, WOULD IT BE PRUDENT TO, OR FOR THE ACCURATE FOR, UH, FOR GENTLEMEN TO, UM, SPEAK TO THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION? WOULD THAT I, I THINK MR. HADWAN HAS, I WAS HERE, I WAS HERE LAST NIGHT.
IS THERE A WAY, I KNOW KENDRICK'S GOT A LOT ON HIS PLATE.
IS THERE A WAY THAT WE COULD GET THESE PLANS PERHAPS SENT TO THE BOARD OR ANYTHING, ANY OTHER CORRESPONDENCE THAT'S BEEN SHARED OUT SO THAT, UH, KIPP AND UH, AND OTHERS COULD SEE IT? ABSOLUTELY.
I CAN DO THAT FOR YOU MR. CHAIRMAN.
I'LL TRY TO DO THAT AS QUICKLY AS I CAN.
UM, I WORK, LIKE I SAID, EXTENSIVELY WITH MR. BARRY IN TERMS OF THE, AND BACK AND FORTH, SO I'M SURE YOU HAVE THE PDF LOOKS LIKE.
I'M, I'M COMPLETELY IGNORANT WHEN IT COMES TO THIS STUFF.
I'M DON'T HAVE A BACKGROUND IN THIS.
I'M TRYING TO DO THIS FROM THE START.
AND I, I ALWAYS SING KENDRICK'S PRAISES, SO, UM, THAT'S GOOD TO HEAR.
UM, OKAY, WELL LET'S, UM, LET'S TABLE THAT ISLAND BUT KEEP US HONEST ON IT AND WE'LL SEE WHAT WE CAN SEE WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THAT.
UH, LAST ITEM THEN IS ADJOURNMENT.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE.