[00:00:01]
AT THIS TIME, I'D LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE CITY OF NEW BERN'S BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING THURSDAY, AUGUST 27TH, 2020 SIXTH, HERE AT THE CITY OF NEWBURN COURTROOM.MAY WE HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? YES, SIR.
MR. CHAIRMAN, I'M START WITH BOARD MEMBER A MCCANN, PRESENT BOARD MEMBER KATHLEEN MARTIN HERE, BOARD MEMBER GEORGE
AND LET THE RECORD SHOW HE'S ABSENT.
YOU LET THE RECORD SHOW SHE WAS ALSO ABSENT.
LET THE RECORD SHOW SHE'S ABSENT.
BOARD MEMBER ASKED HOW HERE BOARD MEMBER GARY WILLIAMS. YEAH.
AND MR. CHAIRMAN, WE DO HAVE FORM.
THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO DO THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES AMERICA AND TWO, THE FOR 1:00 AM UNDEVELOPED, INVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE ALL.
[IV. CHAIRMAN’S REMARKS]
THIS EVENING'S MEETING IS NOT A REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING.THIS IS A CONTINUANCE OF OUR REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING FROM LAST WEEK ON THURSDAY.
UM, SO I'M GONNA FOREGO SOME OF THE COMMENTS, UM, THAT HE NORMALLY TRY TO START WITH, BUT AGAIN, PLEASE REMEMBER THAT WE ARE QUASI-JUDICIAL, UM, IN THE WAY WE OPERATE AND FOLKS ONLY WITHSTANDING IN A PROFESSIONAL MANNER.
WE WOULD LIKE Y'ALL TO SPEAK, UM, AND TRY TO BE MINDFUL OF TIME AS WE MOVE ON.
UM, WE'VE GOT THREE FOLKS, UM, SIGNED UP AND I KNOW TWO SPOKE IN REFERENCE TO THE PRESENTATION LAST WEEK, BUT AGAIN, WE'LL ASK Y'ALL TO STAND UP SO WE CAN SWEAR IN THE PRESENTERS.
DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? THANK.
SO KENDRICK, COULD YOU DO A LITTLE OVERVIEW AGAIN OF WHY WE'RE HERE, UM, FOR THE SECOND MEETING? YES, SIR.
MR. CHAIRMAN, UH, JUST IN CASE, JUST SO THE BOARD ALSO KNOWS THERE'S A SLIDE IN PARTICULAR THAT YOU WANT ME TO LEAVE IT ON, I CAN ABSOLUTELY DO THAT FOR YOU AS WELL.
UM, SO FAR WE'RE HERE ESSENTIALLY FOR ANOTHER OR ADDITIONAL HEARING.
UH, THE PREVIOUS, WE DID NOT HAVE THE APPRAISER'S TESTIMONY.
THAT WAS, UM, GOING TO ESSENTIALLY BE PROVIDING SOME TESTIMONY FROM THE PREVIOUS HEARING.
SO NOW WE FORWARD IT TO THE AUGUST 27TH, MAY, UH, AS OF TODAY.
SO THE APPRAISER TO MY KNOWLEDGE IS HERE IN, IN ATTENDANCE TODAY TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT THAT INFORMATION TO YOU ALL.
UH, SO WE'RE JUST PICKING UP REALLY RIGHT WHERE WE LEFT OFF IN THE PREVIOUS.
SO JAMIE, ARE WE OKAY TO CALL OUR APPRAISER FORWARD? UM, YES SIR.
UM, THERE'S ALREADY, UM, EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD FROM, UM, SOME REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE SCHOOLS WHERE WELL AS STAFF.
SO I THINK THE ONLY MATTER OUTSTANDING FOR THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION AT THIS TIME IS EXPERT TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT'S APPRAISER.
I BELIEVE WE'VE MET PREVIOUS PREVIOUSLY.
UM, IN THIS INSTANCE, I'M HERE TO ADDRESS, UM, CRITERIA NUMBER FIVE THAT THE PROPOSED USE WILL NOT, UM, AFFECT ADJOINING OR BUDDING PROPERTY VALUES.
UH, IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, THE PROPOSED USE WILL NOT, UH, AFFECT ADJOINING OR PRO A BUDDING PROPERTY VALUES.
UH, THE REACH THIS CONCLUSION, UH, PREPARED THIS REPORT.
I BELIEVE YOU HOPEFULLY HAVE IT IN FRONT OF YOU.
UM, BUT BASICALLY WHAT I DID WAS I WENT OUT INTO THE MARKET, I LOOKED AT PROPERTY, UH, A PROPERTY THAT SOLD ADJOINING A SCHOOL, UM, IN THIS INSTANCE GROVER FIELDS MIDDLE SCHOOL.
UM, I COMPARED THAT PROPERTY TO OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAVE NO INFLUENCE OF, UH, AN INSTITUTIONAL SCHOOL USE ADJOINING THEM.
UM, I THINK AS YOU'LL SEE IN THE CHART ON THE SECOND PAGE OF THE, UH, REPORT, THE PROPERTY THAT SOLD ADJOINING THE SCHOOL, FALSE RIGHT IN LINE WITH, UH, THE OTHER PROPERTY VALUES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
UH, I THINK FROM THIS ANALYSIS, THERE'S ONLY ONE CONCLUSION AND THAT'S THAT THE PROXIMITY OF THE SCHOOL HAS NO EFFECT ON PROPERTY VALUES.
SO I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, UM, ABOUT THE REPORT OR ANYTHING I JUST STATED OR DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS DISCUSSION? NO.
[00:05:03]
NO.AND MR. CHAIR, IF WE CAN JUST NOTE FOR THE RECORD THAT MR. MOODY'S REPORT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA PACKAGE FOR, UM, THIS HEARING BOTH LAST WEEK AND THIS WEEK.
UM, AND THAT YOU ARE RECEIVING HIS REPORT AS EVIDENCE IN THIS MATTER.
SO DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL, UM, DISCUSSION IN REFERENCE TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT OR DO WE WANT TO ASK FOR ANY ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY OR IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WOULD LIKE TO STEP FORWARD AND OFFER ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY? OKAY, SO LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY.
UM, ARE WE IN A POSITION TO WHERE WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SIX CRITERIA CALL FOR? OKAY.
SO OUR FIRST, UM, QUESTION IS, IS THE PERMIT WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION ACCORDING TO THE TABLE OF PERMISSIBLE USES? YES.
SO WE, WE DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S, UH, IN THE USE OF, UH, FOR THE TABLE OF PERMISSION USES.
UM, NUMBER TWO, IS THE APPLICATION COMPLETE? YES.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION THAT THE APPLICATION, MR. CHAIR, JUST TO BE CLEAR, I THINK MS. BUCHANAN, WAS THAT YOUR MOTION? YES.
SO THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS THAT THE APPLICATION IS COMPLETE? YES, MA'AM.
SO DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
UM, IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR A.
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES THE APPLICATIONS COMPLETE.
IF COMPLETED AS PROPOSED IN THE APPLICATION, THE DEVELOPMENT WILL COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS ORDINANCE.
DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? DO WE HAVE A MOTION? MOTION THAT IT'S COMPLETE? ITEM THREE.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION THAT IF COMPLETED IS PROPOSED, UH, THE APPLICATION, THE DEVELOPMENT WILL COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ORDINANCES.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES NUMBER FOUR, THAT THE USE WILL NOT IMPLY, EXCUSE ME.
THAT THE USE WILL NOT MATERIALLY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY IF LOCATED WERE PROPOSED AND DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN AS SUBMITTED.
DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION OR MOTION? MR. CHAIRMAN? I MOVE THAT THE, UM, REVISED SITE PLAN ADDRESSES ALL DRC COMMENTS AND UH, IT WILL BE, WILL NOT ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY AS LOCATED AND PROPOSED CASE.
DO WE HAVE A, A MOTION? DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION OR A SECOND? SECOND.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND THAT THE USE WILL NOT MATERIAL ENDANGER THE PUBLIC HEALTH OR SAFETY IF LOCATED WHERE? PROPOSED AND DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN AS SUBMITTED.
ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES NUMBER FIVE, THAT THE USE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE VALUE OF ADJOINING OR BUDDING PROPERTY OR THAT THE USE IS A PUBLIC NECESSITY.
DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION OR A MOTION? SO MOVED.
OKAY, SO WE HAVE UM, A MOTION.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND THAT THE USE WILL NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INJURE THE VALUE OF ADJOINING OR ABUTTING PROPERTY OR THAT THE USE IS A PUBLIC NECESSITY.
[VI. SPECIAL USE APPLICATION(S)]
SIX, THAT 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 OF THE CITY OF NEW BERN.DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION OR A MOTION? SO MOVED.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND THAT THE LOCATION AND CHARACTER OF THE USE IS DEVELOPED ACCORDING TO THE PLAN IS SUBMITTED AND APPROVED WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE AREA IN WHICH IT IS LOCATED IN GENERAL CONFORMITY
[00:10:01]
WITH THE PLAN OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY.SO AT THIS TIME, DO WE HAVE A MOTION THAT WE CAN ENTERTAIN TO GRANT THE PERMIT? MOTION TO GRANT THE PERMIT SO WE HAVE A MOTION.
DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION OR A SECOND? SECOND.
SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO GRANT SPECIAL USE PERMIT 0 0 3 6 3 7 DASH 2026.
ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES.
AND I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY ITEM THAT WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA.
DO WE HAVE ANY NEW BUSINESS NOTED BUSINESS? NO.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO HAVE A SECOND? SECOND.
DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND TO ADJOURN? ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.