 We are live Good morning The meeting will now come to order. Welcome to the July 27th, 2021 meeting of the Durham Board of Adjustment My name is Jacob Rogers. I'm the chair of the board I'd like to start back now and then we are conducting this meeting using a remote electronic platform as permitted by session law 2020-3 The Board of Adjustments a quasi judicial body that is governed by the North Carolina General's statutes and the city's unified development ordinance The board typically conducts evidentiary hearings on requests for variances special use permits among other requests Today's meeting will proceed much like an in-person meeting of the board on the screen You'll see members of the Board of Adjustment additionally planning staff and representatives from the city and county's attorneys offices are attending as well Applicants proponents and opponents were required to register in advance and are also attended in the remote meeting When a case is called for its hearing speakers will be promoted within the remote platform so their video can be seen I will swear in applicants and witnesses at the beginning of each case Staff will present each case and applicants will then provide their evidence Control of the presentation and screen sharing will remain with planning staff Today's meeting is being broadcast live on the city's YouTube site and a link to this broadcast Broadcast is on the website for the Board of Adjustment Before we begin the evidentiary hearings on today's agenda I'd like to provide some important information about steps taken to ensure that each party's due process rights are protected as we proceed in this platform Each applicant on today's agenda was notified that this meeting would be conducting using a remote electronic platform During registration every applicant on today's agenda consented to the board conducting the evidentiary hearing using the remote platform We will also confirm today at the start of each hearing that the participants in the hearing consent to the matter proceeding in this platform And if not the if there's an objection to matter proceeding the case will be continued Notice of today's meeting was provided by a publishing notice in the newspaper mailed property owners within 600 feet of subject properties Posted a sign at the property and posting on the city's website The newspaper website and mailed notices for today's meeting contain information how the public can access the remote meeting as it occurs These notices also contain information about the registration requirement Along with information about how to register all individuals participating in today's evidentiary hearings were also required to submit a copy of any Presentation document exhibit or other material that they wished to submit at the evidentiary hearing prior to today's meeting All materials that the city received from participants in today's cases as well as a copy of city staff's Presentations and documents were posted on the board of adjustment website as part of the agenda No new documents will be submitted during today's meeting All decisions of this board are subject to appeal to the Durham superior court Anyone in the audience other than the applicant who wishes to receive a copy of the formal order issued by this board on a particular case Must submit a written request for a copy of the order I want to welcome everyone here. It's good to see you. We've got Serving as our Well, first of all, let's do a roll call And Jessica you're going to take this over Yes, here. I will Jessica Dockery playing in staff. All right rogers here Mr. Meadows, you are muted. There you go. I'm here kip here wretchless here why more here jeter here parent here major You said here this major. Okay, sorry. I missed it in buchin here Thank you All right. Are there any adjustments to the agenda? Eliza, I think we've got one or a call. Yes. Good morning Eliza Monroe with the planning department I would like to note that case v 2 1 0 0 0 3 1 will be removed from this agenda as the applicant requested to go to a Another meeting So we will not be hearing case number v 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 1 which is a county case for a unipole We'll be hearing that at the next available All right. Thank you Our next item on the agenda is the approval from the minutes of our june Meeting, I hope everyone's had a chance to look over those and if you have is there a motion to approve them? Meadows move approval got a motion by mr. Meadows to approve. Is there a second right right? All right. Jessica, you want to take it away? Sure Rogers. Yes Meadows. Yes kip. Yes Wretchless Yes one more Yes jeter Yeah Boucher yes All right, motion passive carries seven to zero Good deal. All right. Well, let's just dive right on in this. Um Jessica you want to call the first case? Sure. Our first case is b 21 000 11 a city case So requests for a minor special use permit to allow fill in the floodway fringe The subject site is located at 17 30 tw Alexander drive is zoned industrial light and in the suburban tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time and property owners within 600 feet and neighborhood organizations have been notified Notarized affidavits verifying the signpostings and letting letter mailings are on file And the seating will be rogers Meadows kip wretchless Why more jeter and boucher All right, uh, and before we continue uh tisha, I know you you've sent me a note. You're going to be you're going to have to step out at 11 We're on 11. Yes. Okay. I just want to make make note of that now. Uh, all right. Um, and we've got uh, Mike Tarrant here as well. So good deal. Um, Eliza is it Is this your yes, I'm promoting there's a little bit of a lag. I'm promoting the Attendees over to panelists and it looks like someone might have shared a link So it's going to be three of the same names. So we're going to have to clear that up so we can make sure we're calling everyone by the right name Um, but there seems to be a little bit of a lack as we're getting everybody to come over So uh speaking of if there if anybody has, um I'll let's go ahead and mention Jessica major has joined the meeting as well um If you plan on giving testimony today, we'll need your camera on To administer the oath Everyone should be in now Um, and if everyone could also spell out your name when you identify yourself so we can change your names here Um, since we've got three ledegers All right, should we Figure this out now. Um Yeah This is this is jamie swather. I just renamed myself in the in the zoom itself. I don't know if that came through for you all It did. Um, would you turn the blue polo? Would you mind doing the same? And that's early well in Whatever be referred to as the future Got this. All right, uh, if you plan on giving testimony, please raise your right hand. Do Uh, sorry one more. It looks like from Yes, and kimlie horn smith Who we also need to identify as well Um, all right, or I guess uh, if they're not going to we'll need to your video on all right That that's ashton smith with kimlie horn and if ashton if you could click the little ellipsis dots and just rename yourself in the zoom Great. All right, and i'm i'm guessing kessler may have uh Stepped away for a moment. We'll get you know if we need to swear in later We can so if you do plan on giving testimony, please raise your right hand Do you swear or affirm and i'll call on each one of you that the testimony today? You'll give is the truth and nothing but the truth. Um, jamie Yes, I do Ashton You're on mute sir Yes, I do. All right jarvis. Yes LaDiedra I am the actual laDiedra, but I won't be giving testimony today Okay, uh, url I do Travis I do All right, and uh, also do you consent to this remote meeting platform under your answer from each of you travis? Yes url Yes LaDiedra Yes Jarvis Yes Ashton Yes And jamie Yes All right, Eliza take it away Okay, Yoki. Thanks so much everybody for working with us through that Okay, um, should be able to now see my screen. Um, so good morning everyone. Eliza Monroe here representing the planning department Um, uh planning staff does request that the staff report all materials submit at the public hearing to be made part of the public record With any necessary corrections as noticed So noted. Thank you Thank you Case B210011 is a request for a minor special use permit to allow fill in the floodway fringe Non encroachment area fringe flood future conditions flood hazard areas or areas of shallow flooding The applicant is Kimley Horn Associates and the subject site is located at 1730 TW Alexander Drive The case area is highlighted in red on the screen The site is zoned light industrial or IL and is located in the suburban tier And this looks a little bit different than some of our other maps. Um, so you're going to see here We have the floodway that's going to be hatched here as well as floodplain just to kind of show what that looks like on the site currently The subject site is currently vacant Large areas of the parcel are covered in what's considered flood emergency management agency or FEMA mapped floodplain and floodway as well as riparian stream buffers and regulated wetlands Um, and this image here is kind of a little bit better showing what exactly is being requested So per section 8.4 point Or d.1 of the unified development ordinance any filler development in the floodway fringe Or non and or non encroachment area fringe that is not under the approval authority of the floodplain Administrator requires the approval of a minor special use permit by the board of adjustment Given the environmental features on the site. The applicant is proposing to fill 1.35 acres of floodplain fringe on the site The fill in walls within the floodplains are proposed to support the west and south areas the south parking areas of building number two so right along here And fill is also proposed for the stormwater control measure or scm located to the south of building number two Which is right over here No habitable structures are proposed to be located within the floodplain and the grade of the parking lots essentially are being grazed to exceed the two foot freeboard requirement by six feet Which is a requirement that's mentioned in section 8.4.3 f.1 of the video The wall in grades that support the parking lot only extend far enough to raise above the freeboard and do not extend any further than necessary There are a total of three industrial buildings proposed on either side of the floodway So this little area here you'll note that there's nothing directly within it And the three industrial buildings are kind of on either side of it And the proposed design does not encroach into the floodway the riparian stream buffer or any other regulated wetlands on site It's just going to be inside of this area here the floodplain or the floodway The floodplain fringe excuse me We don't have a lot of these cases very often. We haven't had one since 2019 So if any of the text or any of the language is a little bit confusing if we want to go over it Myself and the applicant of course will make sure that the board understands in order to make an educated decision UDO section 3.9.8a and b establishes four findings and 13 review factors that the applicant must meet in order for the board to grant a use permit Additionally, UDO section 3.9.8c Establishes 11 review factors for development in special flood hazard areas and future condition flood hazard areas So you'll note within the staff report as well as when the applicant's responses There's going to be 11 additional factors that are required to be responded to and that the board should take into consideration when making their decision All of those findings or review factors are identified in the staff report and the applicant's responses to the findings or review factors are identified in the application Both of which are within your packet and there were also several other attachments and documents about floodplain As well as different certificates that were included as well Staff will be available for any questions as needed during the hearing process And I will now kind of open it up to everyone else Thank you. Chad, do you have a question? Good morning. Yes. Thank you. Mr. Chair. Good morning, Eliza. I have three questions Some you you may be able to answer some you may want to pass to the applicant Um The first one should I just give them to you and then let you go or do you want them in order? um Yes, let's hear them. I'm gonna probably write it a little bit on the side So I'd like to know why this isn't in the floodplain administrators wheelhouse or jurisdiction or why this decision Um, you know has has moved over to the board of adjustment the second question I wanted to get some clarity on um, I think I heard you and I think I understand That the udo requires surface parking to be above the free board So I wanted to I wanted to be sure that that was in fact that I'm understanding that correctly and then finally the last question Um will the filling um and the structures impede the stream's ability to accommodate flood water? So those are my three questions Okay So of those questions, I know for certain I can answer the first two and then I'll allow the applicant to answer The third question, which is about the stream's ability to Still function properly with this proposed 1.35 acres of fill in the floodplain So in answering the different jurisdictions and I apologize. I'm looking up text on the side here Into what the floodplain administrators allowed to do as opposed to what the board's allowed to do and what's approved by right So technically if you're looking in section 8.4.4 a of the code Development and land disturbance areas within the special flood hazard area and the future conditions flood hazard area is prohibited Technically, however, there are some exceptions. Um, so development. That's allowed by right with no special approvals or like architectural uses like active our agriculture or excuse me agriculture uses like agro active agriculture pasture forestry wildlife sanctuary Lawns and gardens those types of things are allowed by right without any additional approval When it comes to development requiring the floodplain administrator approval, we're going to be looking at single family or duplex structures We're going to be are permitted by right. Um, and any such accessory structures like driveways or walkways or utility crossings Those things the floodplain administrator can review. Um, let's see. Well, uh new construction That flood proofing or elevation by design in lieu of required feel for new construction Or substantial improvements on lots of records that were recorded before January 1st 2006, which is the adoptive date of our ordinance Those things as well that that's something that the floodplain administrator can also approve The following uses like parks and playgrounds Utility crossings crossings by streets and driveways those things can also Be approved by the floodplain administrator Um development requiring a minor special use permit is going to be fill or development in the flood plate fringe non-encrushment area fringe or future conditions flood hazard area Fill or development in the floodway or non-encrushment area As well that also includes like crossings by streets driveways, pedestrian walkways those things that um Those things require the board of adjustment any fill that may be a part of supporting any of those uses like the utility uses or Uh public facilities or things of that sort those would require the board Adjustment approval as opposed to the smaller projects in which the floodplain administrator could approve So there's a little bit different levels by right technically nothing is proved But then there's small allowances depending upon the nature of the intensity And just to follow up. Thank you for that So this project is is of a scope and a nature that is significant enough that the udo Is is drafted to require this board to make the decision instead of the floodplain administrator That is correct. This is outside of the scope of the floodplain administrator Thank you the floodplain administrator did review the project. I will make that note and also assisted staff Since i'm not a floodplain administrator and don't necessarily have all those certs They also assisted me in looking at the staff report as well as um were a part of the site plan review and at this time They don't have any further comments. Okay And then with regards to the second question we were talking about the requirement of the free board To give you what a moment to scroll up a little bit to that part Second question was about parking as it relates to the free board. So it's more so the requirement of So sorry iPad and i don't usually get this much love together So there are standards for development within the floodplain administrator Within the floodplain or within the special flood hazard or future conditions flood hazard areas And so that creates instead the standard of filler material and what needs to be done And they have to create essentially an elevation that is two feet above the bfv or the base flood elevation Or the future conditions flood elevation in this case parking is going to be the use that's going to be going again So we would require that parking to be at least two feet above that and the applicant is actually providing Walls and support that would bring it of six feet above as opposed to just the two feet So they're exceeding the expectation That we would have within section 8.4 point 3a of the unified development ordinance Could I follow on with that? I just want to be sure I understood what you said It sounded to me like The way the rules are drafted if we allow any fill in the floodplain or a special flood hazard area Let's just call it that if there's any fill in the special flood hazard area Then there must be enough fill to get uh to to get past the free board To get past that base flood elevation. That's correct. So we're not gonna Okay in simple terms, we're not going to permit something that's then in a couple years going to have an issue because we know this area is a flat A potential area where there's flooding So we need to raise it above that base flood elevation or that future conditions flood allegation So we can at least give the development a running chance to not be damaged by flooding flooding potential flooding Thank you And I think I'm going to pass the third one off which I hope you wrote down to the applicant about the stream's ability to withstand based upon this proposed fill I will wait till we hear from them any other questions for Eliza before we move forward I'm just going to go through here. I don't see any speak up. I'm not seeing any either Thank you. All right, uh with the applicant come forward. Uh, Jamie is this Are you representing? It is mr. Chair All right, take it over. Thank you And we had prepared a power point if that could be brought up while we're getting ready here Good morning, mr. Chair and members of the board of adjustment. I'm jamie swather with carker po at 31 fanfield street Here on behalf of the applicant trinity capital advisors Next slide, please Trinity plans to construct three industrial buildings in an industrial area to accommodate the growing need for distribution in the triangle This development is important to trinity and to the Durham community because it will provide industrial space To attendant bringing jobs to the tw alexander alexander industrial area This slide shows the site plan for the project and as you can see a floodway runs through the center of the property And will be the central discussion point in our presentation today Building one will be located on the west side of the floodway and the placement of buildings two and three on the east side Of the central floodway requires this minor filling of the floodplain fringe on only 1.35 acres of the 53 acre property Hence our request for the minor special use permit today Next slide, please As Eliza mentioned, this special use permit requires three sets of factors these special use Factors on your screen next slide, please These special use review factors under 3.9.8 b And finally next slide, please the limited use standards, which there are many and because the understanding that there's this is kind of a Not seldom seen and not frequently seen request and there are significant overlaps between these factors We've organized our evidence. I feel against the next slide, please by topic Which often relates to multiple factors today You will hear the evidence in order of these topics related to each of these factors and in the order of these four witnesses As chart shows each topic how they relate to the general finding in the middle column and the review factors in the other columns In addition to the limited use standards First you'll hear from mr. Travis Caldwell with trinity capital About the need and importance of this industrial development and how the nature of the use will fit into the overall industrial context of the area Second ashton smith a civil engineer at kimmy horn will testify as to the udo compliance and zoning and comprehensive plan policies Including lighting signs utilities and open space as well as a discussion of safety welfare And the flood impacts related to protection policies and the extent of fill in the floodway Third you'll hear from mr. Earl Wellin a transportation engineer with kimmy horn Who will testify as to circulation parking and loading Service entrances and areas and show how these relate to safety and welfare And finally mr. Jarvis mooring a certified appraiser will testify as a harmony with the surrounding area and impacts the property values As Eliza noted, we've submitted exhibits in advance and we'll further those throughout the case And we've also incorporated them into the slides to illustrate the testimony and i'll ask at the end of this at this PowerPoint we also be added into evidence I'd like at this time to call our first witness mr. Travis caldwell travis. Are you with us? I am Please state your name and address for the board Uh travis caldwell office address is 440 south church street sweet 800 charlotte north carolina Can you please describe your background and trinity's plans for this use? I'm a senior development manager for trinity capital advisors Which owns the two parcels subject to this request trinity acquired this property specifically for industrial use in december And began to pair for this special use permit Since then we have secured a confidential industrial tenant Who we believe will be a strong asset to the community and the area This approval was part of our obligation to provide the site to them Thank you. And can you explain this project and the importance of the proposed use to the area? Um, yes, this project involves three industrial buildings on the south side of T. W. Alexander boulevard just east of the intersection with miami boulevard And it is also adjacent to research triangle park the area is dominated by industrial uses And I believe the next slide shows those uses Um bluebird and amazon fulfillment center to the north of the site GE aviation to the south And peter malar warehouse power secure and centos uniform services to the southwest The importance of industrial uses were made all the more clear during the pandemic When consumers began to see how supply chain logistics could impact their daily lives As individual demand continues to grow this development is needed to accommodate the growth in the area Thank you. Mr. Caldwell. Are there any questions for this witness? Any questions for mr. Caldwell All right, looks like we're good. All right. If none, I'll excuse mr. Caldwell and call our next witness mr. Ashton smith and you could advance to the next slide, please Mr. Smith, could you please state your name and address for the board? Ashton Smith, uh address is at 421 Fayetteville street suite 600 in Raleigh, North Carolina 27601 And can you describe your background and experience, please? I'm a civil engineer got a bachelor's degree from into state university in 2005 Licensed in state, North Carolina. I have over 15 years of civil engineering experience I'm a senior project manager at gimli horn and have worked with the firm for the last seven months Thank you at this time. I'd like to tender mr. Smith as an expert in the field of civil engineering and site layout Thank you. Mr. Smith. Can you explain your role in this project? Uh gimli horn was Engaged to create the layout and design the facility shown and has overseen the site plan's middle process I have reviewed that full udo regulations including requirements for layout safety and environmental protection My team at gimli horn created the site plan for the proposed development and provided the plans and certifications to the city of derm Okay, great. And are you prepared to testify as a certain factors related to the permit today? Yes, I'll be testifying with respect to the udo clients and safety and welfare this includes Uh conformance with the udo and use requirements consistency with the comprehensive plan and how the layout relates to lighting signs utilities open space screening buffering and landscaping Environmental protection and the safety and welfare of the public These are factors two of three of the general findings and factors four through nine 12 and 13 of the scp review factors in the udo 3.9 3.9.8 point b and factors one three and six through ten of the limited use standards With respect to the udo compliance and the comprehensive plan the property is zoned il industrial light Which allows the proposed industrial warehouse and use subject to a scp per section 4.3.6 of comprehensive plan The il district is established by that for a wide range of light manufacturing Warehousing and wholesaling activities as well as offices and support services It is the intent of the district offer Sites for those industries whose operations exposure location or traffic have minimal impacts on adjacent properties The future land use map designation is industrial and the project is within the suburban tier policy 1.2 point c of the comp plan supports that such development in the suburban tier and close to the rtp this policy notes that Land located in the suburban tier is expected to accommodate a large portion of the derm's growth Through greenfield development infill and redevelopment While suburban tier is expected to primarily develop at traditional suburban densities and patterns It is recognized that the research triangle part may develop with more intense development The proposed industrial building use is consistent with the uses Contemplated in the il district and suburban tier As the project will accommodate the growing need for distribution in derm area, especially in the rtp Satisfying sp factors 12 and limited use standard eight Thank you. Mr. Smith before moving on I just wanted to clarify. I think you're might cut out Would you were you referring to policy 2.1 point 2c the comprehensive plan? Yes, okay. Thank you. Um if we could move on to the next slide, please Um with respect to the edo compliance and connection with site layout the slide show this slide Shows the overall layout of the three buildings streams run through the center of the site Shown in it's shown in green hatching, which is the actual tree save area on top of the the flood plain Or the flood way Let's see And with this the way the streams divide up the site the site is developed into two separate kind of building pad areas One on the west and one on the east building one is the west of the stream And it's on the left side of the screen and building two buildings two and three are on the east on the right side of the screen The blue areas show the stormwater detention ponds The magenta circles. They're real small Are the light poles Exterior lighting for the site will be largely screened by the floodway stream buffers tree coverage areas And will reduce the impact of lighting to nearby properties And all outdoor lighting will be designed in compliance with the requirements section so 7.4 of the edo in addition to In addition, um Directional signs on the site are indicated on the screen by yellow circles There will be non There will be a non illuminated monument sign to identify the site On the by the driveways all signs will be designed in compliance with requirements of article 11 of the udo The site will have direct access to city water With existing lines that run along tw. Alexander drive and a city sewer with existing lines that run along the southern portions of the property These are shown on the screen and in more detail on the site plan on pages c5-1 through c5-3 Existing trees will be preserved in the riparian buffers and tree save areas to preserve floodways along the central eastern and southern portions of the property Which again are shown in the green hatched areas on the screen In addition 10 foot street yard buffers will be located along tw. Alexander drive A 10 foot side yard buffer will be located along the western property line funding the power secure llc warehouse There are These buffers are shown in the solid green Each side of the stream running through the central and eastern portions of the property will be bordered by a 50 foot riparian buffer And a 10 foot no build setback is outside of that In addition to the 10 foot landscape buffers and the 20 foot building setbacks there will be that There will be a 20 foot building setback that's provided along the western eastern portions of the property and a 20 foot landscape buffer And 40 foot building setback that is provided along the northern portion of the property based on tw. Alexander drive The understurbed floodway will serve as a natural buffer along the remaining southern portions of the property Can you flip to the next slide, please This slide shows the environmental protection aspects and mental amounts of fill in the floodplain development proposes 58806 square feet of Disturbance in the floodplain on the eastern portion of the property to construct the parking lots on the west side of building two and the east side of building three As well as portions of the wet attention pond located south of building two the fill area has been minimized to the sense practical In an effort to minimize the impact to the site The balance of the site has been designed to mimic existing conditions to be graded in the way they are in Pre-existent conditions to minimize impacts to the floodway areas The proposed development will result in a in all three buildings having a finished floor elevation FFE that is at least two feet above the FEMA flood elevation per city and Durham requirements In the course of the review of this site plan and the scp We provided flood study calculations which show the site features Structures located within the floodplain have been designed to meet all applicable flood proofing requirements For the city of Durham requirements those calculations identified The flood impacts to the site including expected heights velocities duration and rates rise proposed storm inlets and the two stormwater wet ponds are located at low points of the site And will be maintained as such to enable water to draw down on-site rain events This will allow also ensure Compliance with the udo requirements to preserve water quality on the site and surrounding areas The project is not expected to require governmental services following flood events This property is not considered a waterfront location. So the standards regarding the necessity of for a waterfront location does not apply to this site This project as designed meets all applicable Flood proofing requirements and will be in harmony with the surrounding area Thank you. Mr. Smith. I'd like to I think you answered, um, mr. Meadows question, but just to just to reiterate Will this fill impact? The stream's ability to function What the project has designed No, the stream will still be able to function and With flood water still be able to come through and not not cause any issues Okay I think we've got a question Chad you have one. I do. I do. Thank you, mr. Chair and uh, thank you, mr. Smith That was that was very helpful. Just a couple more questions for you. You said that the amount of filling was minimal um two questions Would there have been less fill necessary if the lot had 442 spaces instead of 449 And also kind of concomitantly I noticed that there's some landscaping along the edge of the parking lot. I understand that's a udo requirement if Would would there have been less fill had it not been necessary to install that landscaping I'm I'm talking mostly about building two by the way. I'm sorry to be vague. I'm most interested in the Uh portion of building two. I guess the west side of building two the large area the larger area of of fill um, and you know, whether or not a reduction in the amount number of parking spaces and or Deviation from the landscaping requirements would have resulted in less fill along the west side of building two Uh, the the landscaping there's not not really much on that side That's uh, adjacent to the flood plain that's got the fill So I don't think any reduction in landscaping is really going to have an impact. Okay. Um The parking I mean, it's a double loaded parking I'm sure if we were reduce a significant amount of parking I don't know the the six spots that you mentioned would really have much of an impact um, it would obviously reduce just a little bit of the of that Row of parking that's in the flood plain So it would it would reduce the impacts slightly But whether or not that you know meets the Trinity's goal for parking as well as as derm's requirement. So Okay, one more question, please sir. Um, I noticed that we that it was necessary for us to put some fill um in the in the flood flood fringe for the stormwater control mechanism measure to the uh to the south of building two um Yes, thank you. Um, so it was that fill Is that fill necessary for the function of that measure or is that fill necessary? Uh, just to to meet the city's free board requirements for structures in the in the flood fringe It that feels necessary to just contain the water so we can can release the onsite runoff um Per the pre-existing conditions. Um, it's just more to dam up. It's not a free board issue there. It just uh casualty of putting a Stormwater pond at the bottom of the site. I see. Thank you All right, any other questions for the witness? All righty then. Um All right, if not, I'll excuse this witness and call our next witness. Mr. Earle well in You could advance the next slide please as well. Mr. Llewellyn, could you please state your name and address for the board? Good morning. Earl Llewellyn traffic engineer with Kimley Horn 300 Morris Street here in Durham Can you please describe your background and education? Sure. I have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from NC State I'm a registered professional engineer in North Carolina 32 years of experience in the traffic engineering field and I've worked with Kimley Horn for 12 years And are you prepared to testify as a certain factors related to the permit today? Yes, I'll be testifying regarding traffic circulation parking loading and service vehicle access All right, and are those related to factors three of the general findings and related factors to UDA 3.9.8 That's correct. Okay. I'm at this time. I'd like to tender Mr. Llewellyn as an expert in traffic engineering I think I've seen he's received so I'll I'll proceed Mr Mr. Llewellyn Could did you prepare any reports or analysis in connection with the site plan? I did I prepared a traffic impact analysis that has since been reviewed and approved by ncdot Thank you. And can you please explain the traffic and circulation aspects of this plan? Sure. The only road adjacent to the site is TW Alexander Drive, which is the Northern boundary of the site Sturt Creek Drive is located to the west of the property separated by the power secure building, which is a commercial warehouse property The proposed plan accommodates anticipated traffic via two site driveways onto TW Alexander Drive building one Access is the green arrow on the left side of the screen construction of exclusive eastbound right turn lane That's the area shown in orange there. That turn lane is proposed at the site drive There's already an exclusive westbound left turn lane present Access to buildings two and three is indicated by the green arrow on the right And both left and right turn lanes are present On TW Alexander at that entrance. There's also a pending signal installation at this intersection Both site driveways have been designed to accommodate anticipated traffic demands and vehicles including service vehicles delivery and emergency vehicles and adequate site distance is Is provided at these intersections with TW Alexander So building one provides a total of 197 parking spaces that are located along the north and east sides of the building Handicap and bicycle parking Is provided in accordance with the UDO Similarly buildings two and three Have a total of 252 parking spaces Located along the perimeter With the truck court located between the buildings Here again Handicap and bicycle parking per UDO Sorry Both site driveways have been designed to accommodate service and emergency vehicles circulation on the Building two three side offers a circular pattern for easy ingress and egress of service vehicles Um, and we've noted Access to refuse areas located in blue for easy easy access to those Great. Okay. Thank you and and based on these factors in your experience How will this use as designed impact public health or safety? Based on the traffic analysis and the layout and circulation aspects um That i've covered this use will not adversely impact the health or safety of public Thank you and and together with mr. Smith Kimley horn oversaw the layout of the site, correct That's correct and took into account the parking needs Of of the user as well as the requirements at the UDO That's right Thank you I have no further questions for this witness. Um, will the board have any questions? Any questions for miss mr. Lou Ellen? I don't think so. Jim go ahead I think mr. Meadows has his hand up, but I can't tell if that was left over last time. Okay. Okay. Thank you Just wanted to check Then i'll excuse mr. Lou Ellen and call our final witness mr. Martin If you could advance the next slide, please while mr. Martin is getting ready Uh, mr. Martin, could you please state your name and address for the board? Yes, Jarvis martin of oba office that is at 3604 Shannon road here in Durham And can you describe your background and experience, please? Yes, uh, I hold two degrees from North Carolina center university and business I'm a state certified general appraiser I'm designated through the appraiser. That's a two sra designation And I have over 45 years of experience here in the Research triangle area in terms of property valuation and sulfur services Thank you, mr. Martin at this time I'd like to tender mr. Martin as an expert in appraisal and impacts of development on adjacent properties Alrighty works. Thank you Thank you, mr. Martin. What did you do for you to prepare your testimony for today? I reviewed the site plan as getting discussion Was on various carless calls with the development team and different aspects The site was discussed. I had visited the site as well as driven the surrounding area that the adjoining properties Thank you. And are you prepared to testify as a certain factors related to the permit? Yes, I'm prepared to testify that the development is in harmony with the overall characteristics of the neighborhood That the adjacent properties based upon this proposed infield Would not be adversely impacted in terms of their value of the function and that these factors are intertwined with the general findings of factors 10 and 11 and in the standards to and for Great, could you explain? Your analysis for the board, please Well, basically, uh I went out and took a look at the existing site drove around the general area Looked at the factors that has already been presented been presented And here with the fact that this field will not have any impact on the flow of the flood plain Which would then have no adverse impact on any properties that is upstream from the property Also that this development Is consistent with what exists out there today It is nearby the existing rdu amazon fulfillment center There are other several commercial warehouses in close proximity as well as industrial and manufacturing Use all around its property Great. Thank you. As mr. Smith testified earlier Exterior lighting for the site would be screened by the floodway Um, how does that influence your opinion of any impact on the residential uses to the north of tw hud sander The townhouse development to the north based upon the buffering of the floodway as well as the natural tree Buffering that exists at a day will limit any overflow of the lighting of glare, etc and have no adverse impact on those residents Thank you. Um, and based on your analysis and uh site examination Is it your opinion that the use will be in harmony with the surrounding area? I do. Yes, it is in harmony and uh, we'll fit in well with what exists out there today Thank you. I have no further questions for this witness. Does the board have any Any questions for mr. Martin I don't see any All right, please continue Thank you at this time. I just like to confirm that The application and all materials in the agenda as well as our power point be admitted into evidence All right. So noted. Thank you. Thank you I'm happy to summarize the confident material substantial evidence you've heard before you today Um, if there are any uh opponents that would like to speak in advance. I'm happy to Defer that summary to the end of any comments. They'd like to make or give it now All right. Does the board have any questions for the applicant? Mr. Richards Uh, yes, I'm not sure who this would go to um This is just in respect to the health or safety of the public Um, was the site plan approved? um Would this infill to have any segmented walls Or any of a build-up structure To support these retention or retention areas on the south end building too yes, I'll I could jump in. Um Yes, there are a couple walls that are inside the flood plain to support the fill for the for the development and they have gone through Calculations to make sure that the walls can withstand the flood waters that are are washing up against them Um, and they should be they're they're designed with with all due respect to the safety Thank you And I just wanted to chime in and state just The site plan is not yet approved Depending upon the board's decision here today would be the final approval of the site plan Thanks, Eliza. Uh, mr. Kepp. Yeah, yeah um I heard that um the building or perhaps it's building to Maybe all three buildings are two feet above the elevations Of the stream. I assume that's the 100 year high flood point um, but I guess my question is Do you have any concerns that if there was a 500 year flood that these buildings would be inundated because I kind of do the Durham requirements two feet above the the base flood elevation As mentioned earlier, we're six feet above That was just the the meet and the minimum criteria Okay, so you're six feet above so how much of a flood would have to happen to to get to The UD I mean, I don't know the flood plains are getting worse. We all know this so So I guess in your professional opinion mr. Smith six feet is sufficient to ward off any floods in the Near and distant future Um, can I chime in real quick from a staff perspective? um So we cannot regulate Past what the UDO requires and I don't think the applicant has done any calculations Past what the UDO requires so we're looking at 100 year no further than that So we cannot regulate up to 500 year um And I did want to just clarify that it's the base flood elevation in relation to the flood plain There is no encroachments proposed within the riparian stream buffer um So if mr. Smith has anything additional to add but we do not have regulations within the unified development ordinance for 500 year That's not something that's within the code. So I don't know if that has even been prepared and even so I don't know. Um, how comfortable I feel with that testimony is we have not rebuted nor have any standards to um Put it up against okay, um So looking at building to west side where the fill is going that's not in the riparian stream No Where is the riparian stream? I'm gonna go if it's okay with everyone. I'm gonna flip through a little bit to back to that first So I actually you might be able to see it here Yes kind of yeah, so To the rear. Um, this is the floodway. It's the floodway is what's running through earlier, um, which I'm going to go back to the original map um Because it shows it a little bit in simpler terms If my computer will allow me So the floodway that runs through and then there's the floodway fringe So this will document here is the primary concerns that we're the request is for today The riparian stream buffers located on site the wetland areas located on site As well as the floodway itself have no encroachments. Nothing is going within them We're just talking about things that are going within the floodplain fringe There are no proposed encroachments within the riparian stream buffer Okay Final question. This site was once owned by GE. Is that right? The staff is not familiar with the property records, but I've jamie. I believe that's my understanding. Um And I'd invite travis to to correct me if he has a different understanding That is correct. This was purchased directly from GEA vision Okay, thank you. That's all And and I'd just like to clarify um in the question. I appreciate um, Eliza Clarifying it and I just want to make out of clear out of abundance of caution It's not that there were requirements to do a 500 year study that we didn't fulfill those were not requirements This went through multiple rounds of review with the staff For many months beginning. I think in january at the beginning of this year those Included a certification study in a no rise impact that had been thoroughly vetted By the staff and reviewed to get us to this point here today So it's not it's not that we didn't do calculations that were required of us. We did I think What was required and maybe then some And I think that testimony that mr. Smith gave just certifies that We've met and exceeded those requirements with respect to the finish floor elevation in order to accommodate a little bit more Of that rise if it would happen in the future All right. Thank you. Are there any further questions for the applicant? If not, mr. Chair, I'm happy to do a summary of our evidence now or if the board prefers to wait I don't I don't know if there's any um, buddy registered to speak in opposition Oh, we'll get to that if you want to go ahead and do the summary then we'll Move on Okay, great. Um, thank you. Uh, just to summarize we've offered competent material and substantial evidence today on Each of the factors that are before you for decision In the form of both of our exhibits and live testimony and I like to summarize how that relates to each of the factors With respect to the importance of the facility mr. Codwell testified that this development is needed to accommodate the market growth Of industrial demand in the area As this continues to grow in this industrial Area and there is a tenant that is signed up just to Occupy this space And this is kind of our last Approval that we need in order to have the site kind of proved and to have that move forward With respect to udo compliance mr. Smith testified that the proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plan policies And applicable tier guidelines and the purposes of this overall district That the use is also in conformance with all special requirements applicable to the use and has stated where those have not applied That exterior lighting with respect to glare Traffic safety and impact have all been minimized with respect to additional buffers and meeting code requirements That signs are appropriately located on the site and utilities and locations of yards all meet udo requirements Um with respect to safety Um welfare and flood impact mr. Smith testified that the proposed use will not adversely Impact the health or safety of the public that the preservation of tree cover Um flood plain and string buffers have been designed in a way to minimize impacts While still protecting natural features um and water quality Um, he has also noted that it's not a waterfront location that the expected heights velocity and duration Of the flood waters have all been studied and have been reviewed by staff I do not raise concerns based on his professional and expert opinion With respect to traffic and circulation mr Overwell and offered his expert opinion that the site proposes an appropriate number and location of access points That the appropriate review has taken place by both staff and ncdot and that certain improvements have been planned and designed in order to Max my safety and provide ingress and egress both for the routine vehicles and emergency vehicles that may need to access the site And mr. Martin offered his expert testimony based on many years of experience that the proposed use is in harmony with the area Not substantially injurious to the value of nearby properties in the general vicinity And that the various site aspects and design that were covered today All tend to have minimal effects or minimize the effects of the use on nearby properties And that the proposed use is compatible in harmony with this overall industrial area Under north canola law if you find that we've shown each of these findings competent material and substantial evidence The law indicates the permit should be approved today and we hope that our Our testimony and answers the questions lead you to that conclusion I'm happy to answer any of the questions at this time and of course throughout the remainder of the of the hearing All right, thank you. All right, uh any doesn't look like there's any further Anyone else to speak in favor of this? Is there anyone here to speak against this application for a minor special use permit? Good morning. Unless I'm not here. We did have a me me kesley register as an opponent Um, and I do see that Mimi is here within the meeting Mimi expressed in a registration that she just wanted to attend does not intend upon speaking But I don't know if that's changed based upon today's testimony. So Yes, yes, that's correct. Thank you very much. You're welcome all right, um All right, any any Any further questions for the applicant before we get a staff's recommendation? All right, Eliza, do you have a recommendation for the board? Yes, I do apologies. I was muted there for a moment staff recommends approval of the minor special use permit case number v 21 000 11 With the condition that the improvement shall be substantially consistent with the information submitted to the board as a part of the application And site plan case number d 21 000 0 9 All right, thank you Eliza All right, any board discussion here anybody doesn't look sound like anybody's got any Objections or concerns does anybody want to offer a motion? I make a motion that application number b 2 000 11 an application for the minor special use permit Allow fill in the floodway fringe non encroachment area fringe future conditions flood hazard area or areas of shallow flooding On the property located at 1 7 3 0 TW Alexander Drive has successfully met the applicable requirements of the unified Development ordinance and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions The improvement shall be substantially consistent with the information submitted to the board as a part of the application And site plan case b is in david 21 000 0 9 All right, we've got a motion for approval by miss jeter. Is there a second? Rachel a second. All right, we've got a second. I'm mr. Retchless. Uh, Jessica will you call the board? I will although I warn you there is a train coming behind me it may get noisy. I apologize Um to begin rogers. Yes Kip yes Meadows no No, no, thank you Uh, retchless Yes one more Yes jeter Yeah, and buchin Yes Motion carries six to one Uh, voted six to one your minor special request for a minor special use permit has been Granted, we appreciate you coming for the BOA this morning and wish you the best of luck. Thank you all very much All right, um, let's move on to the next case. Uh, jessica, you want to call it? Yes, sir b 21 000 25 is a city case A request for a minor special use permit to Permit an alternative street design. The subject site is located at 601 willard street Is zoned downtown design core or ddc and in the downtown tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time and property owners within 600 feet and neighborhood Organizations have been notified Notarized affidavits verifying the sign postings and letter mailings are on file The seating for this case will be rogers meadows kip retchless why more jeter and buchin? all right, um before we hear from staff, let's uh, um swearing everyone sorry my mind went blank So if you do plan on giving testimony on this one if you'll please turn your camera on i'm just looking around here Uh, is memey kessler still on this one or do we need to there's a little bit of a lag with moving everybody over Ashton's the same way. He's not on this one either. So So, um, let's let go. I've got three. So if you'll raise your right hand to do the oath Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give today is the truth in nothing but the truth? I'm looking at earl lewellin Yes Factor biker Yes, sir Christina Whitfield. Yes Tim summerville. Yes Garvin martin Yes Also, do you consent to this remote meeting platform jarvis? Yes, tim. Yes Christina. Yes Patrick Yes Earl Yes, all righty. Thank you. Uh, liza this one yours Yes, it is. Um Okay, good morning everyone. Uh, liza Monroe here representing the planning department Planning staff requests that the staff report and all materials submitted at the public hearing be made part of the public record with A necessary corrections is noted So noted. Thank you. Thank you Case b210025 is a request for a minor special use permit to allow for an alternative street design The applicant is steward and the subject site is located at 601 willard street The case area is highlighted and read on the screen The site is zoned downtown design core or ddc and is located in the downtown development tier The subject site Currently has several vacant buildings in terms of there's not a tenant in those spaces and parking lots that will be demolished and restrived as needed For the proposed mix use development First section 16 point 3.4 point 3a point 2h of the unified development ordinance Alternatives to the street design requirements of udo section 16.4 can be approved with a minor special use permit Pursuant to udo section 3.9 In addition to the general review required findings the board shall also find that the alternative design meets or exceeds the multimodal performance and functionality of the street design standards within that section strict application of the ordinance would require that the street design emulates the standards mentioned in udo section 16.43 0.4 point 3a point 2e the code requires that the street should be designed utilizing the primary street type which requires a two lane street with on street parking And bicycle lanes the total width of the primary street type is a minimum of 56 feet including a travel lane A bicycle parking lane a parking lane a bicycle parking buffer Um and a the curbing gutter section the applicant is requesting an alternative street design that excludes that bicycle lane as well as the parking structure As um they noted in their application that the streets will be internal to an overall mix use development Where pedestrian traffic will be encouraged more As there will be a parking lots or parking facilities adjacent to this development We have not had very many of these cases So I will definitely be able to dissect this if you would like I believe this is our first case in this nature So definitely as I mentioned in the last one, please feel free to ask any questions Or if you need something clarified, please feel free to do so UDO section 3.9 point AB A and B establishes four findings and review factors that the applicant must meet in order for the board to grant a use permit These findings and review factors are identified in the staff report And the applicant's responses to the finding your review factors are identified in the application Both of which are within your packet and staff will be available for any questions as needed during the hearing process Thank you, Eliza. I'm just looking through here. Do we have any questions? I think that is Uh, thank thank you, Mr. Chair. Eliza, you read my mind. Um, you're channeling My question to you was have we had any developments like this? Um, or similar to this Um, in this area or or around downtown I I don't remember seeing anything like this before but maybe it wouldn't have come to us So I'm just curious Is this happening around the city or is this kind of the one of the pioneering efforts? This is going to be the first case. That's like this. That's requesting this type of street design Um, even uh with with regards to your question if it would have been you all prior to the current minor special use permit We had design special use permits. Um, and those were also related to the design district There has not been a similar case to this Uh, so this is essentially the prototype even though there is no precedent established with you all decision today Every applicant would be required to have been brought in to proof But yes, this is the first case of this nature with this specific street typing requested Yes, hence the please ask any questions you would like we want to make sure that the board has enough information Excuse me to make an informed decision. Um based upon the evidence presented Any other questions for Eliza All right, cool Would the applicant might come forward mr. Bikers. Are you taking the lead on this one? Yes. Good morning, mr. Chairman morning Mr. Chairman members of the board i'm patrick biker with morning star law group our office address is 112 west main street here in durham We represent capital broadcasting the developer of the award-winning american tobacco campus in downtown durham The site we are discussing with the board today is the former university forward car dealership It is impossible to overstate The catalytic impact that the american tobacco campus has had on downtown durham American tobacco has spearheaded the transformation of our moribund downtown that i personally recall from 25 years ago Pardon me. I have a siren in our lively downtown going by right now American tobacco is perhaps the finest historic redevelopment in all of north carolina It has stimulated the growth of the dynamic downtown that we've enjoyed for the past decade or so The covid pandemic notwithstanding I trust that each member of the board Is familiar with this background information We are here this morning to request a minor special use permit as permitted in udo section 16.4.3 a2h for an alternative form of compliance for the new streets in the next phase of american tobacco We envision that these streets will be private when they are built within the 11 acres that formerly was university forward At the outset mr. Chairman I would like to ask that exhibits a through e that we have submitted to aliza That these be admitted into evidence. These will be relied upon or referred to by our experts And we ask that that along the staff report be moved into evidence Exhibits a through d are the resumes of our expert witnesses in order to make this Agenda item move more efficiently. I am in advance requesting that all of them be accepted as experts And we are tendering them as experts in the field of site engineering and traffic engineering and property appraisal Exhibit e is an impact analysis performed by jarvis martin our real estate appraiser I like to briefly go over our requested plan and the forecast of evidence section 16.4.3 a2h of the udo allows for alternative forms of compliance in order to deviate from the primary street type shown in udo section 16.4.3 e1 section 3.91 b of the udo gives the board of adjustment final decision making authority over all special use permit applications This proceeding therefore will be somewhat out of the ordinary and it is I understand the first one of its type Since we are not discussing any particular uses within american tobacco Rather, we are presenting competent material and substantial evidence On the record that the alternative form of compliance meets or exceeds the multimodal performance and functionality of the primary street type Our team working on the redevelopment of university four as the next phase of the american tobacco campus Will demonstrate that the alternative form of compliance meets all the requirements for approval set forth in the udo Through the exhibits and the testimony Our following witnesses again are all experts in his or her field Our first witness is mr. Tim summerville. He's our engineer and site designer from steward engineering here in downtown durham Our second witness will be mr. Earl a wellan and experienced traffic engineer from kimley horn And he's a former traffic engineer with the city of durham Our third witness is miss christina wittfield. She also is an experienced traffic engineer who with kimley horn Who specializes in bike and pedestrian design standards? And last will be mr. Jarvis martin a real estate appraiser here in durham with many years of experience Again, mr. Chairman in order to streamline our presentation since I know you have a long agenda We are tendering each of those as witnesses. So once I call them as witnesses They'll be able to proceed through their testimony And then we respectfully ask that the board hold their questions until each witness has finished with his or her Testimony on the required findings of the udo Thank you, mr. Chairman just to conclude my introduction As you consider the evidence, please keep in mind the legal standards which govern a hearing of this type It is our burden as the applicant to provide competent material and substantial evidence showing that each of the required approval standards Has been met Once this is done the applicant is entitled to issuance of the special of the special use permit as a matter of state law Again, this particular request is a little unusual. Actually, it's quite unusual In that the request is not for a specific use, but it is about an alternative street cross section Accordingly our discussion will focus on why our team's proposed design meets or exceeds the multimodal performance and functionality of the primary street type shown in udo section 16.4.3 e1 Please keep in mind the fact that the udo allows this board to consider and approve alternative forms of compliance Demonstrates that the primary street type may not be the right cross section for every development We feel confident that the material Component and substantial evidence that will be submitted to you today Will establish clearly that the applicant has completed complied with all the requirements of the udo and therefore this permit should be approved Unless there are any questions for me. I would like to call our first witness mr. Tim summerville And I understand Eliza has a powerpoint that tim sent in in advance of this hearing Thank you Any questions for mr. Biker before we hear from witnesses? Um, no chad you don't all right I I have one question that I would like to for mr. Biker or any of the witnesses to to address as as they go forward And that is um the notion that these are going to be private streets and whether or not that is Something that the city has discretion in terms of granting. Uh, I just wanted to understand that a little bit more And however, that's worked into the presentation is just fine with me. Yeah. Well, how about if we just hold that for the uh, the end Because that with all due respect, we're happy to answer that question at the end of our presentation That's actually not a finding required under udo section 3.9 I have to discuss it, but please let us hold that till the end We'd like to get in all of our evidence on the required findings Whether or not the streets or public or private is is really not relevant to this hearing today Although again, we'll we'll be happy to discuss it at the end of this presentation. Thank you. All right. Um Again our first witness will be mr. Kim somerville Yeah, thank you patrick and morning board members. Um, I am Tim somerville steward. My address is 101 west main street here in Durham Um, as patrick mentioned exhibiting your package lists on my qualifications, which I'd like to go through briefly here I have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from michigan state university I've been working in the field of civil engineering for the last 17 years with a focus on site design and land development projects I've been in north carolina registered professional engineer for the past 11 years And I've been with steward for the past 10 years and currently serve as director of civil engineering in our Durham office In regards to this application I served as a site engineer and designer and I'm here to discuss the overall design of the project Planning for the redevelopment of this university forward as the expansion of the existing award-winning american tobacco campus began about four years ago and the site plan has evolved To what you see before you over the last 12 months The plan you see before you currently is the infrastructure only site plan which shows the proposed road network Proposed road section the alternate that we're requesting today and the building pads If you go to the next slide, please The full build out of the site is for phase one of the project development Which consists of a combined residential and retail building Two office buildings with the retail on the ground floor and a parking garage also with ground floor retail The residential building also contains an internal parking garage The emphasis of this development is to be a destination A place to live and work or come visit You know the many side amenities that would be provided before going to a show or ballgame at the adjacent d-pack or Durham bowls athletic park The site design was intentional to encourage vehicles to park in the surrounding parking decks and to provide a pedestrian friendly environment There are a few items on this site plan I would like to note that we're intentional to accomplish this environment the orange items you see On the plan are raised pedestrian crossings these crossings will be at the greatest sidewalk in lieu of using traditional sidewalk ramps to aid in pedestrian crossing while also minimizing the speeds of the vehicular or bicycle traffic in the streets The longest straight segment between a raised crossing curve or intersection is 250 feet to minimize speeds Cures are designed with a maximum centerline radius of 100 feet Which is the ash tow standard for a 20 mile an hour speed limit Also, you'll notice on the site plan some green areas which are proposed bicycle parking facilities The green areas shown within the parking garages are for general public use and are there a total of 72 covered and protected bicycle parking spaces within these areas There are also an additional 62 bicycle parking spaces located throughout the site for use by the general public Additionally, there are 162 internal spaces provided That will be exclusive to the office and residential users of the site With this information I want to reiterate that the overall intent for this section in the american tobacco campus is to be a destination development and not a drive or ride through development Residents and visitors will be encouraged to park their cars or their bicycles and walk to the various amenities provided on site and throughout the surrounding area The primary street type that is required is a 60 foot wide cross section With wider drive lanes and protected bicycle lanes on both sides This section is not conducted conducive to the type of development that is being proposed as the wider section will encourage faster speeds Encourage more trapping of bicycles to utilize the streets that will conflict with pedestrians and longer crossing times Times for the pedestrians at the intersection It is my professional opinion that a 56 wide foot wide cross section as required by the primary street type Would it would encourage faster speeds More conflicts than what our team has proposed as the alternate form of clients that is before the board today There are several review factors that are that were addressed in our application. I would like to go through them quickly here You know lighting generally speaking this review factor is not impacted by the request for an alternative form of clients for residential streets Lighting will meet all udo standards signed again, this factor is not Impacted by the request for an alternative form of clients for internal streets, but all new signs will meet udo standards Utilities the request for an alternative form of clients for internal streets does not affect the utilities serving the site Open space the request for an alternative form of clients for internal streets does not affect the amount of open space required Environmental protection. There are no environmental features on the site since it is a former car dealership Screening buffering and landscaping landscaping will meet all udo standards at a minimum I hope the track record of the existing american tobacco campus speaks for itself on review factors such as this The effects on nearby properties in my expert opinion the request for an alternative form of clients for internal streets Will not result in any noticeable increase to noise odor lighting at the site as a result of granting this special use permit Compatibility again the request for alternative form of clients for internal streets is appropriate in this location Because it is my professional opinion that the request for an alternative form of clients for internal streets is consistent and compatible with the nearby properties consistency with policy Besides what is stated on page six of the staff report the only policy our team could identify that relates to this special use permit application It's the Durham belt line master plan that the city adopted in 2018 Just so happens a steward engineering was the lead consultant on the creation of the belt line master plan The master plan was developed over several years with multiple public meetings and inputs Could you go to the next slide, please? This is an expert excerpt of the of the Durham belt line master plan And it shows the trail to continue the connection of the trail from the belt line to the american tobacco trail to continue Pedigrew to blackwell street and then connect to the existing american tobacco trail There is no indication in the belt line master plan that bike lanes should go through the university fourth site Alternatively to the blackwell street connection There are bike lanes proposed to be striped on willer street which connects to an existing bike lane on the Chapel Hill street This work is proposed currently by by the city of Durham Accordingly the alternative form of clients is consistent with the regulations within the udo And all of other adopted plans pertinent to this site My professional opinion the alternative form of compliance is compatible with nearby properties and the site has Designed in a matter to minimize adverse effects and nearby properties Finally, it is my professional opinion that the alternative form of compliance for the internal street within the next phase of american tobacco Has been designed in compliance with all adopted policies applicable to the site Um, I'm happy to answer any questions at this time or else I would like to invite uh early well and to speak on behalf of the track Track all right any questions for mr. Somerville? Chad us all your hand first Thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you, mr. Somerville. I appreciate your work on On transportation throughout the city. I had two quick questions one is Did was it necessary for your plan or how did did you address? transitions between existing streets that are adjacent to the site um, and Perhaps it's if you could or someone else talk a little bit more about the sidewalk configuration within the site, uh, whether now or at some other appropriate time Um, I can answer both of those so the current site plan. I don't know lage if you could go back this previous slide um Yeah, we're showing connections right now. We have three proposed connections to the actually two proposed connections to the existing street We have one on willard on the left side of the page there And then one to the north on jackson streets um Those are be brand new connections to existing streets the connection to the bottom The very bottom of the sheet is an existing connection Which is what was formerly car called car street, but that is an existing street connection You know those will just be standard standard intersections with with curb radiuses and you know sidewalk crossings The internal sidewalk network to the site Is you know the udo requires a 12 to 18 foot sidewalk from back of curb to face the building And our our sidewalk varies anywhere between that The width throughout throughout the project whether it's you know 12 12 or 18 feet. We also have several Internal sidewalks in our open space To connect all the the different buildings retail spaces and open space amenities So if that answered your question, thank you all right, um Natalie How many non residential parking spaces did you say? bicycle parking spaces no non-residential you said you had Um So there are there are total of 162 spaces provided that will be exclusive to the office and residential users I don't have that breakdown on me currently, but I could get it for you if you want the exact number of residential spaces the udo requires Point five bicycle spaces per residential unit, and I believe were read about at that number in the residential building Just for clarification the residential building is that big square one on the left And they'll they'll have the residential Spaces located in there and then the office spaces will be in the parking deck Which is a large building at the top of the development. Okay. Thanks Mr. Kip Thank you So my understanding is there are no bikes allowed In this site. Is that right? No, that is not. Um, we're encouraging it to be a multimodal Street, you know bikes pedestrians Vehicles can trans you know drive through these sites as needed, but you know where it's encouraged to park your vehicles You know within within the bike racks or parking spaces provided, but No no form of transportation will be prohibited through the cell Okay, but there's there your street plan does not include Dedicated bike lanes correct that is correct. Yes Okay, so where will the bikes ride The bikes will ride within the street with with all the other traffic the multimodal that will share share the use with the vehicles Okay Did you consider and you probably can't answer this or don't want to answer this did you consider just having Like in the award-winning downtown of madison wisconsin state street Buses and bikes only no cars was that considered? No A pedestrian a pedestrian only area Yeah, that wasn't specifically considered It was always intended to to allow all forms of transportation to get through the site But again, you know limited discouraging by providing narrower lanes tiger curves the the speed humps to prohibit, you know If An uber needs to come in here to pick someone up or you know a grub hub to pick up food from one of the retails or you know drop people off You know, that's welcome to come through but not have everyday traffic driving through here as a as a cut through or Um, you know way from get to point a to point b again. It's a destination development I just one more question for you. Um, who's going to maintain who's going to enforce? Will will the parking uh, the will the meter maids be here? And the police riding around or will this be private security? They will it'll all be provided by the american tobacco developers capital broadcasting. Um, there are no public. There are no meters on here. Um You know, I I don't know if the long-term short-term parking within the uh In the spaces but there will be no public enforcement Okay, another question. Will this be open 24 hours to the public or will it be gated and exclusive? It will not be gated. Um, there there may be times where they want to close officer in section of the street to have a street festival But it will be accessible 24 hours most of the time You know, a lot of the businesses that are in there are not going to be over 24 hours. So Thank you All right, uh, mr. Rex was did you have something? I think i'm gonna wait to the end To to bring my questions To the applicants. Okay All right, I think that's all we have For mr. Summerville Mr. Biker Our next witness is mr. Earl Llewellyn. He'll go over his qualifications and experience and then address Uh specific findings in the udo relating to this special use permit application. Thank you Good morning again, Earl Llewellyn traffic engineer with kimley horn I think it's exhibit b list my qualifications, but to summarize I have a vouchers degree in civil engineering from nc state registered professional in north carolina professional engineer in north carolina 32 years of experience in the transportation engineering field 11 of which was with the city of Durham transportation department And for the last 12 years i've been with kimley horn I was brought in to investigate the design components of the primary and proposed street cross sections and how they would relate to the site Um, aliza could you go to the next slide please? Thank you so In addition in addition to the two travel lanes and parking lanes the udo primary cross section also requires five foot bike lanes And three and a half foot bike parking buffers on both sides of the street So that increases the total street width by 17 feet this increase in cross section Or cona vision for automobile drivers Tends to encourage higher speeds simply put The farther that you can see the faster you tend to drive Next slide please so in well there you go Uh in reviewing the site plan and the proposed street design cross section Uh, as tim said this is designed to be a low speed pedestrian oriented destination And from the layout you can see that it's not a through street um The addition of the proposed narrow cross section As well as vertical and horizontal elements That uh tim alluded to these are raised pedestrian crosswalks raised intersections And you can see there's many of those but but in addition there's horizontal aspects like the tight radii of the curves those together tend to enforce a Target speed if you will of about 15 to 17 miles per hour At these low speeds bicycles and automobiles Can easily share a mixed use lane without conflict Also being located in the shared use lane cyclists are More visible to the automobile traffic that may be making parking maneuvers or turning into the driveways or street connections And now i'll address the udo transportation related review factors um as to circulation As designed the site provides for safe and efficient circulation of cars bicycles bicycles service and emergency vehicles And as tim discussed a robust sidewalk system There's also adequate space on site to accommodate parking and loading operations And bike parking will be provided in accordance with the udo standards Also the proposed alternate form of compliance Uh for this internal street does not affect the entrance or service areas and have been designed to accommodate the anticipated service vehicles In conclusion, it's my professional opinion that the alternative street plan for the proposed next phase of american tobacco campus Is in harmony with the area and that it meets the requirements applicable to the special use permit It's also my professional opinion that the site Has been designed in an appropriate manner to safely accommodate automobile traffic including emergency vehicles I will note that in reviewing the staff report. I recognize the statement on page six That I believe is incorrect It states the applicant has proposed an alternative street design That does not provide safe bicycle transportation through the site As there are no bicycle lanes proposed interior to the site Now certainly while separate bicycle lanes are not being proposed I would disagree that this site doesn't provide safe bicycle transportation throughout the site. In fact For the reasons I mentioned earlier. It's my professional opinion that the proposed street cross section provides equal or greater safety bicycle accommodations in this context In addition This new development will not as adversely affect health or safety of the public And this application adequately addresses all the review factors identified in the udo And that the alternative design exceeds the multimodal performance and functionality Of the street design standards in article 16 of the udo Happy to address any questions you might have Any questions for mr. Luellen chat Thank you, mr. Chair Thanks, or one question if you could talk a little bit about transit. Are there are are there transit facilities or allowances or or anything like that How have you guys worked that element into the the configuration I think and I can try to answer this in conjunction with perhaps tim, but I think the the correct statement is that transit Would be most appropriately to serve this site in the future using for example, willard street that actually has connectivity With the remainder of the street network as opposed to going internally Yeah, I'd like to just add to that url you're correct that there wasn't request by Triangle transit to provide a bus stop on willard as part of our site plan Also, the Durham transportation center is located directly north of this site So there's your your transit hub right there that can serve serve the site and beyond Could I so Will you be including a transit a stop on on willard? Is that part of of your proposal? That is that will be part of the proposal as requested by Triangle transit. Thank you. All right any other questions for oh, I'm sorry, mr. Retchless Hi, mr. Llewellyn You mentioned The crosswalks are raised. Is that kind of like a speed bump type of I would say it is Better than a speed bump to be honest with you Speed bumps tend to be oriented With a pretty extreme vertical deflection And they're separated Too far to be effective These are raised pedestrian crosswalks that are Less dramatic But spaced out such that you maintain a more consistent speed throughout you'll notice You you start out with connections to the adjacent street system And they are spaced I don't know the exact dimensions a couple hundred feet apart So that you don't incur that deflection and slow down Only to speed up again So you you see the vertical and horizontal elements of this playing together To reduce the speed also with a narrow cross section that reduces the convalescent Also encouraging slower speeds Thank you and in your professional opinion does that hinder emergency vehicles as well to response time? No, not at all. In fact, that's one of the benefits of this type of design. We I've worked actually when I was with the city of Durham Lots of emergency response folks do not like speed bumps They are pleased with speed humps raised pedestrian tables because they can navigate those At a reasonable speed without having to slow down to two miles an hour Very good. Thank you. All right. Any other questions for mr. Luella, right Mr. Chairman our next witness will be miss christina wittfield again We are also tendering her as an expert witness in the field of transportation engineering Awesome. Thank you, mr. Biker Members of the board my name is christina wittfield and my office address is 421 Fayetteville street sweet 600 Raleigh, North Carolina As mr. Biker mentioned earlier my resume and qualifications are listed in exhibit c of your packet Which i'll roll review briefly for the members of our board I have been with kimley horn and associates for a little over five years I hold a bachelor of science and civil engineering with a specialty of transportation from the university of tennessee I am both a licensed professional engineer here in the state of north carolina and a certified planner through the american institute of certified planners with apa I am a project manager at kimley horn focusing on the planning of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure Including bicycle and pedestrian master plants greenway plants and complete street implementation projects both here in north carolina and across the southeast I was brought in today to evaluate the alternative form of compliance and how it promotes bicycle safety The internal site street as you guys have heard from mr. Luella and mr. Summerville earlier is designed to ensure slow vehicular speeds and as such bikes and cars will be traveling at similar speeds In my professional opinion This is further reinforced by the addition of the raised crosswalks the raised intersections and the pinch points at intersections to limit The motor vehicle speeds throughout the site to less than 20 miles per hour These speed management devices have also been proven to discourage through vehicular travel And are encouraged for implementation as you know the next steps above and beyond by nakto, which is a very well recognized bicycle design guide these These reduced speeds not only improve the bicycle environment by reducing overtaking events that wider cross section will allow cars to more easily overtake bicyclists If there's you know crossing over to get into one of the driveways or be able to park their their bikes and then they also Enhance the driver's ability to see and react to their surroundings due to those slower speeds and the design nature of the cross section As mr. Luella and shared with you earlier The alternative street type is as safe or safer than the primary street type as the bicyclists remain more visible And that narrower street section and speed control devices encourage slower travel speed and more predictable movements across the intersections and driveways internal to the site Additionally, the university ford redevelopment is intended to be a pedestrian oriented destination where visitors arrive and park their cars or their bicycles At the periphery of the site and travel and visit the various amenities and retail destinations on foot Finally, per the adopted plans for the bike facilities and Durham connections to the Durham Beltline Trail from the American Tobacco Trail are intended to occur Along Blackwell Street and new northbound bike lanes are being striped along Willard Street as part of an upcoming re-striping and water project With that, it is my professional opinion that the alternative design meets or exceeds the multimodal performance and functionality of the primary street type In udo section 16.4.3 e1 And additionally it is also my professional opinion that the applicant's proposed alternative is safer than the primary street type for the context that it is within The primary street type which is 56 feet wide would lead to higher car speeds than what the applicant has proposed Therefore along with mr. Luella and i2 respectfully disagree with the sentence on page six of the staff report Which says that the applicant has proposed an alternative street design that does not provide for safe bicycle transportation throughout the site As there are no bicycle lanes proposed interior to the site in my professional opinion. That statement is incorrect I am available to answer any questions you all may have and if not, I will turn it back over to mr. biker All right, any questions for miss wittfield. Um, mr. Rexlis Hi miss wittfield What kind of formula or study is done when you Bring pedestrians and bicyclists in cars to closer proximities rather than allow for um These separate lanes for bicycles and whatnot. It just when I hear pinch point I I think that's exactly what's going to happen People are going to get pinched Or or you know get in too tight of proximity Is there's some kind of formula or Uh a way you work through that There is not a formula, but there is a lot of research and design guidance out there through the various means that actually point to those pinch points being Proactive for bicyclist safety as they are exactly what slows down the motor vehicle traffic By what mr. Luella and shared with us earlier that narrow or cone of vision and the safety that's included by those narrower sections allows the bikes and the cars to be in a similar Portion in the lane so that there's full visibility throughout and there's no Awkward interactions of a bicyclist having to cross the buffer plus the parking lane plus the intersection to make a turning movement They're a little bit more visible because they're right there in the cars cone of vision instead of off to the side Um, mr. Luellins stated that raised crosswalks do slow down traffic and help Emergency vehicles wouldn't it be the the same result if these crosswalks were raised with a bicycle path? I would um have to yield to Mr. Luellin or mr. Somerville on the design aspects of how the bike lane would fit in with the raised cross sections I'm not sure if there would have to be a section for That is recessed or if it would still go over Yeah, you're you're correct that and the raised the raised crosswalks would have the same effect if there was a dedicated bike lane however, now we're talking about a 56 foot wide crossing that a pedestrian would have to make from curb to curb and have to watch out for bicycles that are coming through the bike lane Navigate through parking spaces across the double drive lane and then back through another set of Parking spaces and protected bike lanes so that you know that longer crossing time, you know puts the pedestrian in harm's way for a longer duration If I could also add I think one of the biggest concerns with a separated facility is the fact that Under our proposed cross section The cyclists will be in the middle of the lane just like a vehicle would be very visible if they're making Left or right turns or accessing exiting street to access the parking The bicycle parking fields Whereas if they're in a separate lane And they need to turn left into a particular establishment or parking area. They have to cross the bike pedestrian or excuse me the bike parking buffer the actual Parking lane then cross into the vision of the traffic To make a left turn lane That's that gets to the number of increased conflicts and the unpredictability Of where those interactions are going to occur. That's why in my opinion strongly in my opinion in this particular case that The inclusion of cyclists in the travel lane is much safer Okay, thank you All right, mr. Meadows Thank you, mr. Chair. I appreciate the depth of experience that's here. It's obvious. There's a lot of very You know experienced professionals Could somebody just explain quickly are these streets that you're anticipating or these these travel ways? Are they similar in nature to blackwell or vivian or or you know, some of the other roadways that are around The tobacco campus immediately next door Are I mean should should we be expecting something similar to that functionality? or Or different I think they would be a little different in the fact that blackwell and willard streets are through connections city, you know They connect You know through the city Obviously the these streets connect through the development, but there's really no reason To drive through this development if you're trying to get from one end of the other again This is you know the development is designed as a desk as the as the destination not a cut through You know the willard street you travel on will or you're traveling on blackwell to try to get from one end of the town to the other You know if you're traveling through these these internal streets that we're proposing here You know you're you're coming to visit the development So I think it would it would function similarly, but the traffic count will be much less So are these more like like Driveways like the the little through the piece that goes through near aloft and uh and mo's um You know that's that yes, I I would I would say yes They they would be more like a a driveway type of facility rather than a actual street But by definition the udl we have to call them streets Thank you. All right any further questions? Mr. Biker, we'll turn it back over to you our last witness is mr. Jarvis martin our team's real estate appraiser Good morning again to the chair and to the board Uh as indicated my complete resume is shallow native civic uh e But in brief summary again, I hold two degrees in most criminal center university Uh state certified general appraiser as well as a designation from the appraisal institute sra Priscilla with the firm steward martin and mccoy And have over 45 years of experience the applicant asked me to Get involved and take a look at the alternative street Design to see if the lack of bike lanes would have an adverse impact on the surrounding properties in terms of their value functionality I have reviewed the site plan that has been decided I have visited the site As well as tour the surrounding properties And looking at trying to gauge if there would be an adverse impact on surrounding properties in terms of a lack of a bike lane through this development I found three existing apartment complexes here in Durham That are on streets that have no bike lanes and found three complexes that are on streets that have direct access to bike lanes Looking at the occupancy rate and the average rent per square foot of these units My analysis so shows no adverse impact between the two groups in terms of access to bike lanes and no access to uh bike lanes also In the Analysis where there are no bike lanes One of the complexes exists adjacent to the proposed complex as we stand Based upon That analysis in terms of the rents It is my professional opinion that the proposed development is in harmony with the overall neighborhood The lack of bike lanes through this development will not have any adverse impact on the surrounding properties in terms of value and demand That the impact analysis demonstrated that the proposed alternative street design Would have no adverse impact on values or functionality of the properties in the percentage And that it is my professional opinion that the alternative compliance here in terms of an internal street streets Would be in harmony with the area and have no substantial endurance impact on property values or Demand so therefore I recommend that the approval of this special use permit Be granted for the proposed development and I'm open for any question Any questions for mr. Martin? Turning back over to you mr. Biker. Yeah, mr. Chairman. Is there anybody signed up in opposition of this special use permit? If there is I'd prefer to have that Those witnesses uh present their evidence prior to our summary Uh, lies and we're here playing department staff. There is no one signed up in opposition to speak for this case Just goes to show clean living pays off But anyway For the record, uh, mr. Chairman members of the board. I'm patrick biker again attorney for the applicant team At this time like to move into evidence all the exhibits that were relied upon by our witnesses On that the board reviewed in their consideration of this application As was mentioned at the beginning of this hearing It's our burden to provide competent substantial and material evidence on the record Showing that the proposal meets all of the udo standards for approval of this special use permit Again, this is a rather unique uh proceeding this morning Since we're not talking about a specific use or an increase in height or something of that nature We're talking about an alternative street design and you've heard abundant expert witness testimony from mr. Somerville mr. Llewellyn And miss witfield that the applicant's proposal meets or exceeds the udo standard for the primary street type Again, since there's no contrary evidence in the record, uh, and all the findings have been met We put forward that state law directs the issuance of this permit We're certainly happy to answer any questions. I recall I believe it was mr. Meadows had a question about the nature of the private streets Within the old university ford site And we'll be happy to address that if there are any other questions on the merits of the application We'd like to take those now and then address mr. Meadows question And again, we respectfully ask for your approval and we very much appreciate all your time this morning Thank you for your time and your patience. Thank you, mr. Excuse me. Are there any questions for the Applicant or any of the witnesses? All right Eliza, would you stop sharing for a moment? Thank you I guess there are no questions for you directly and mr. Becker. Do you want to address that? Yeah, I guess uh in terms of the private streets my my take on that is that uh American tobacco has set a very very high bar in terms of aesthetics And functionality of the existing american tobacco campus, which again was the catalyst one of the catalysts for The rebirth of downtown Durham Part of having private streets is that they can be privately maintained And that would be able to allow us to keep these streets in Excellent condition for the long haul As was done with the original american tobacco campus I deferred it to him if he's got any other insights on it But certainly the the maintenance aspect is something that I know our team takes very seriously We wish to have the right to maintain these streets privately to keep them in excellent condition for decades to come Tim or Earl do you have anything to add to that? Yeah, Patrick. I think you hit the You're exactly right on what on the intent of why they want to be private and just to clarify Your private streets are allowable within the udo This is as we stated at the beginning. This is a unique development within this downtown designers. So if it is 11 acres I don't think you're going to find too many 11 acre projects to be redeveloped in in downtown Durham The udo requires that projects of this size be broken up into what they call block standards to be separated by streets and These streets can be private if certain measures are met which is to provide stormwater control measures within the streets as well So a lot of the street trees that you'll you'll see on the site plan are actually going to be the stormwater control measures as well So what we are proposing is allowable by the udo Well, thank you I'm going to just say this for the recorder. Is there anyone in here to speak against this application? Seeing and hearing none will continue. Eliza, do you have a recommendation for the group? Good morning. Thank you everybody. Yes, I do I will pull that up Staff recommends the approval of minor special use permit case number b21 00025 with the condition being that the Improvement shall be consistent with the application information submitted and presented here before the board As part of the application and the site plan case number d21 00047 All right, we have a recommendation from staff. Is there any discussion? thoughts or concerns Mr. Chair, I'm ready to make a motion if that's appropriate. Absolutely. Go ahead Um, I hear by make a motion that application number b21 00025 an application for a minor special use permit to permit an Alternative street design on property located at 601 Willard street Has successfully met the applicable requirements of the unified development ordinance and is here by granted subject to the following conditions One that the improvement shall be substantially consistent with the information submitted to the board as part of the application and site plan case d21 00047 All right, we've got a motion for approval by mr. Meadows. Is there a second? Oshane second Natalie then Oshane on the second. Uh, will you just go what you call the board? Yes, sir Rogers Yes Meadows Yes Kip Yes Wretchless Yes Wymore Yes Jeter Yeah And Boucher Yes Motion carries seven to zero approved A vote of seven to zero your minor special use permit has been approved We thank you for coming before the BOA this morning. I wish you the best of luck Thank you very much. Thank you appreciate all your time. All right, uh, does uh Y'all want to take a a quick 10 minute break? Is that okay with you? So we're at uh 10 28 Let's come back in 12 minutes at 10 40. How about that? All right, we'll see you then All right, I think we're almost We're all here almost um Jessica, would you like to call? The next Our next case is case b 21 00027 a city case A request for a variance from the infill standards for reduced street yard The subject site is located at 825 west markham avenue is zoned residential urban M or rum and is in the urban tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time property owners within 600 feet have been notified and notarized affidavits verifying the sign postings and letter mailing are on file If miss wymore is leaving at 11 I suggest we call in another alternate. Okay, so the seating will be Kip Meadows Rogers Wretchless wymore. I'm sorry. Not wymore. She's leaving jeter major and buchin. So major will step in for wymore Uh, teacher will get to see you this morning. We appreciate you. We'll see you next month um All right, so everybody who I guess we see I see one person if there's anyone else who's going to be will need your camera on Uh, but if you'll raise your right hand, mr And we'll uh go through those Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? I do And do you consent to this remote meeting platform? I do Cole is this one yours Yes, it is Take it over All right Um, good morning. I'm core nigger representing the plan department Uh, playing rest planning staff requests that the staff for non-material submitted the public hearing to be made part of the public record within a Any necessary corrections as noted another thank you pace b 21 0007 is a request for variance from the infill standards for reduced street yard The pace area is highlighted red the site is on residential urban rum In the urban development tier and is in the city of Durham's jurisdiction The existing use is vacant residential Thomas J. Hennessey of west 4th lc requested variance from the infill infill standards of 25 foot street yard for a small option residence Unified development order to udo section 6.8.2 Parts of the street yard shall be any distance between the smallest similar to street yard within the context area The street yard in no instance shall be less than five feet The applicant plans to use a lot the small lot option per udo section 7.1.2 c As is as is permitted in the rum zoning district in any tier by right Small at all option has a minimum street yard of 10 feet, but due to the infill standards There's an approximate street yard of 25 feet As a term by the setbacks on the face of 800 block on the south side of west markham avenue The applicant is requesting the use of a 10 foot standard for small lots Small lots, but then the infill standards resulting in a 15 foot reduction in the street yard Udo section 3.4 18.8 establishes the findings list below the board of adjustment must make in granting a variance He's finding the review factors are identified in the staff for and the applicant's responses So the findings and review factors are identified in the application both within your packet Staff will be available for any questions as needed during the hearing process Thank you, Cole. Are there any questions for Cole? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Cole This is I don't remember us seeing a small lot development case before so that's interesting and I like that there is This kind of provision in the udo I had a question for you about small lot development and The the the decision to require small lot development to comply with the infill standards If if you know if you know any more about Why that was done that would be great one more question for you Which is you know, do the infill standards take into account? The structure at 101 to north duke Which is I guess the property immediately to the I guess it's the west of this site Which is is significantly closer. I think to the west markham avenue roadway So if you could just enlighten me a little bit about Why the small lot developments are subject to the infill standards and then secondly Whether or not the infill standards would address would take into account You know this lot on on 1012 do that would be great Yeah, absolutely. Um so infill duke is Technically not on the same block front based on the street address Um, so that's why it's not taken into account as far as taking that that property into um into account Um, we've never had a small lot option case before. Um, that came to the board Um, it's just the way the code is written even though It allows that option the infill standards are still there Um, it may be reviewed in the future because the small option is fairly new Um, and maybe if if someone like this happens a lot and it and it looks like it may be a good idea to exempt them from You know, it would change right now, but right now it's just added to that one section about house type Um, and it hasn't it hasn't been looked at as you know in several different areas But infill standards are there to protect areas Um, and that's why it's technically still, you know, asked to meet those those rules All right, any other questions for col I have a question kept So this is a shared driveway Leading to the small lot at the back of the lot. Is that right? Yeah, um, so the small lot is um Can you do a small option the ribbon driveway design is is required? Um, and that that driveway has to be shared between those two properties um, but I and I believe um The and I condemn that the applicants can speak to this um I believe it's the it's The um front property that you're requesting setback for is that correct thomas? Just say that again Um where my cursor is that's where the setback is correct because this is the small that is correct Yes, this is the small lot and over here is the other lot. Is that correct? That's owned by looks like uh, uh, Francis. Yes. Okay. Yeah Okay, so the this small lot in the back is conforming. It's got a shared driveway It's 10 foot, but five foot for each on each property. It looks like is that right? I believe so. Yes. Okay And so they're they're seeking a front yard A street yard a street yard because this is right here is 10 feet and normally by infill standard Do have the 25 feet based on the block face of this of the street So the other the other ones are approximately 25 feet from the street And if you apply the infill standards, it would be 25 feet But small lot options without infill standards are only in 10 feet Okay, so I mean basically the hardship here is created because the applicant has decided they want to create a small lot In the back the small lot has already been created Okay, so the small lot was created by the applicant Yes, and approved through city planning and and the plat has already been recorded Okay, so but that plat now that requires this variance today Correct, uh, just as a brief background when we submitted our, uh, building permit for the house that we had designed That's when the planning department came back to us and stated that the infill standards actually mandated a 25 foot yard And you know, I we were quite surprised by it. And this is a very Rare, you know thing to see in downtown Durham where The homes to the east on mark them on the south side of mark them Are just they're all set 25 foot back. I mean, I can't think of another street in downtown That doesn't have a home Approximately 10 feet away from the street. Um, so it's it's it's a pretty it's a rare location unique location so normally you'd have the option of of um, I guess the average of the existing street yards, but that's not Going to fly because they're all 25 feet off. Yeah, that's correct staff staff would like to mention though. Um, at the time the plan was approved. Um, you know, we didn't see the house. So, um That's the house was technically they're not creating a hardship because the hardship wasn't Um, so until they build that house, there is no hardship. It's just an empty lot that meets UDO standards So they didn't technically create the hardship because they're not a house there yet Um, so that it's it's a technical. It's a little gray area there, but it is it is okay would normally not these two go hand in hand because in other words Creating one wouldn't create the condition for the other Right, but creating creating the small lot. Um Doesn't necessarily mean they couldn't build there with it with the infill slots With the infill standard setbacks in other words If they created a small lot and they wanted to use the infill standard Standards they could and they would be in compliance The variance is because they want they want to reduce tree yard That's I see how you say they go hand in hand. I'm just saying technically the applicant didn't take any action To create the hardship because as of right now it's vacant If they built the house and then came back and asked for the variance that would be a self created hardship And since it's before Were the lot lines moved? I'm just looking Westforth also owns the property on duke street, right? That's correct. We purchased 1012 north duke street Uh, and then engaged a surveyor to subdivide and create 825 west markham um Which you know as as col did say it it is a legal small lot It does fit everything That's designed and laid out here. It does fit With the small lot regulations in the udo You're talking about the the rear the rear of a 25 markham, right? Uh, when you say the rear, what do you mean? Um the back small lot Is it are there two lots proposed at 825? No, it is just a single small lot that fronts markham for a single family house. That's all Okay, sorry. I misunderstood that. Okay. I'm good. Yep. All right, any other questions? All right, uh with the applicant but come forward Sure and uh and forgive me for for speaking without introducing myself at first. My name is tom hennessey. Uh, this is my Uh, first time before this board. I am the member manager of west fourth llc um, we have been uh investing and purchasing rental properties in Durham since approximately 2011 2012 I have one business partner and um, You know, we we try to do great work in the city of Durham um, this is a property as I as I mentioned, um that We first bought 1012 north duke street It was somewhat of an oversized lot um, and upon looking at the The udo and the new small lot provisions that Durham planning and zoning and the city council had put into effect to Create housing supply within downtown and throughout Durham that this was a candidate to To create a small lot, uh, and to build a single family house. Uh, and that's what we intended to do You know, normally what we see is infill standards While base zoning may say, you know, for example a 25 or a 20 Street yard base zoning infill may say well the house to Your left, you know to the east or to the west because that is at Eight feet from your street. You actually can bring your house forward, um, you know, it's it is pretty rare in my opinion. What I've seen is it's pretty rare for infill to actually Reduce your building footprint or to limit the house that you can build and certainly uh with this being a case of first impression um There there haven't been too many small lot developments in downtown Durham And certainly not one that infill standards actually had the opposite effect of increasing a street yard on an already small lot So as previously stated this lot was approved When we when we did the subdivision by planning and zoning We designed a single family house No, no greater than 1200 square feet to be built here Upon application for our building permit to build a home planning department had said That because of the infill because of the unique uniqueness of the south side of mark on the fact that the other houses are set back 25 feet Unfortunately that actually increases your street yard to 25 feet rather than what is compliant and Well within the udo for small odds, which is at 10 foot street yard And then it was it was the advice on on planning Um after I'd reached out to talk about the issue since again, this is also new. We haven't seen this before um that we would apply for a variance and and hopefully Get the get the support from planning and zoning as well, which I do believe that we have Um, so it's a relatively straightforward request where we are simply asking For a variance to allow us to build a single family house pursuant to the small law Uh regulations which allow for a 10 foot street yard and to be uh and to receive a variance from the infill standards Any questions? I'm sorry, mr. Yeah, any I was just going to ask if there are any other questions All right, any questions for the applicant? I don't see anyone uh chair Um All right, is there anyone Cole would you stop sharing for a moment? Is there anyone here to uh, that is Anyone else speaking in favor of this application? Any anyone speaking against this application for variance? Very non-seeing none. Okay Uh, there is no uh recommendation from staff on this one. Uh Discussion thoughts I I think the small development concept is good. I think it's one that's being used more frequently around the state um, I think that um, you know, it This applicant was caught in the middle of an an an infill standard that is a context-based standard versus, uh An approach to accommodate more housing. Um, and as you know, sort of as a result of that approach There's a reduction to the setback. Um, so I I don't know if it is or isn't appropriate to apply the infill standards Um, they apply so we're here we are today. Um You know, I I like the idea of the small lot development. I think it's appropriate. I think it addresses a problem we have. Um I understand that that small lot development needs to be consistent with the with its surroundings on the other hand You know by its nature, um, it's something that is different than than what is um, you know on other lots, um I think that it would have been interesting to know um, How far the house next door on 1012 north duke street is from the street? Uh, or how far the streets across marcom? Um are from the street whether or not they are 25 feet or they're closer Um, it looked to me like the houses across the street were actually closer to the to marcom street Then the house is on the same block face that's proposed for development. So You know, that's neither here nor there with this variance case just an issue with respect to how we determine context In the infill, um rubric so, um You know, I I don't know that I have a problem with with with this we have this small lot thing We created it's a 10 foot setback. It doesn't fit with another set of rules that we've got Uh, I don't think the applicant created that issue. Uh, I think it's an issue in our in our rules Um, but it's new. So, you know, maybe it just wasn't foreseen um, so You know, uh, I think I don't I don't know that I have a problem supporting this I do hope that we go back and have a look and see if if you know going forward We're going to continue to apply infill if we're going to keep getting hung up in these in these uh Appearance requests for setbacks. Uh, because we've allowed this small lot to be built I I hope we you know that we explore some alternatives to how we do infill Um the infill standards, um, that's it There mr. Rex let's see if you have something No, I think mr. Meadows covered a lot of that too and and um, I drove that site, uh Some like extra turnoff on that Markham Seems like parking is already on that street and uh, I'm I'm I'm for the variance for uh, this particular property Thank you. Uh anyone else All right. Does anyone want to offer a motion? I hereby make a motion that case number b2 1 00027 An application for the variance from infill standards for reduced street yard requirements on property located at 825 west markham avenue has successfully met the application requirements Of the unified development ordinance and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions The improvements shall be substantially consistent with the plans and all information needed to the board as a part of this application All right. We've got a motion for approval on this theater. Is there a second? Meadows second Meadows second, uh Jessica, would you call the board? Yes Kip Yes Meadows Yes Rogers Yes Wretchless Yes Jeter Yeah Major Yes Bouchain Yeah Motion carries seven to zero approved Uh, so boat up seven to zero your request for a variance has been approved Yeah, well, you think you're gonna mean before the BOA this morning and wish you the best of luck Thank you You're welcome. Jessica, you want to call the next case? Thank you. Have a great Our next case is B 21 00028 city case a request for a variance from the 10-foot no-build riparian buffer setback The subject site is located at 3820 Loch Norah parkway is owned residential suburban 20 or rs 20 and in the suburban tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time Property owners within 600 feet have been notified and notarized affidavits verifying the sign postings and letter mailings are on file All right, uh, everyone who plans on giving testimony will need your Camera on to administer the oath and Jordan on that side, I see two folks on here want to make sure we get both of your names. Would you mind? Giving us both of your names Um, I'm Jordan van Rumberg And I'm Pamela Wyman All right All right, so everybody who plans on giving testimony, please raise your right hand Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Jordan Yes Pamela Yes Uh, Ann Hi I'm sorry Hi Hi Do you plan on giving testimony this life? I am an adjacent property owner. Yes. I have Stuff to say All right, so we'll need to get you have your testimony. So Oh, we'll have to swear you and uh, would you mind raising your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Yes All right, and do you consent to this remote meeting platform? Yes All right, Pamela. Do you consent to this remote meeting platform? Yes Jordan Yes All right. Thank you so much Cole, is this one yours? Yes, make it over Good morning again. I'm Cole Renger representing the plan department Planning staff requested the staff court and all material submitted to the public hearing to be made part of the public record With any necessary corrections as noted noted. Thank you The 21 00028 is a request from the variance from the 10-foot no-bill setback from a stream buffer The case area is highlighted in red The site is in the residential suburban rs 20 And the suburban development here within the city of Durham's jurisdiction The existing use is single family Pamela Wyman owner and applicant requests the variance to encroach six feet into a repairing buffer 10-foot no-bill setback in order to add a screen porch to the northeast corner of the existing house The porch would extend north from a deck that encroaches into the 10-foot no-bill setback Ending at the north corner of the main house Which also increases into the 10-foot no-bill setback and into the repair and buffer itself Reunified development ordinance Um section 8.5.9 See buildings and other features that require grading and construction Shall be set back at least 10 feet from the edge of repairing buffer Placing the screen porch in a proposed location will cause a six-foot encroachment into the 10-foot no-bill setback The edo section 3.14.8 establishes the findings listed below The board of adjustment must make in granting any variance these findings and review factors are identified On the staff board and the applicant's responses to the findings and review factors are identified in the application Both within your packet Staff will be available for any questions as needed during the hearing process All right. Thank you. Cole. Are there any questions for Cole before we hear from the applicant? all right, um Miss Wyman or Yeah, I can speak. Hi Hello, so I don't have a presentation prepared Um, but as we see here This is our home. Um, there is a a lot next to it. There's part of the lachnora Property, it's not used for anything. I mean, it's an open sort of common space. There's the creek there Um, the house as it was built originally, you know, we just purchased the house a few months ago So, um, anyway, we purchased the house and the house was built into the or maybe before the variance was established I mean, I'm sorry. Not the variance the riparian buffer, I believe Um, so the house is in the buffer zone. There's a from my understanding There's the creek and then there's 50 feet of no build zone and then there's an additional 10 feet of Buffer zone Is that right col? So there's a 50 foot riparian buffer and then on top of that, there's the 10 foot no build That's right. Okay. So the 10 foot no build is what we would like to Um, extend the deck into the current situation is that The current deck the edge of the deck essentially if we built a screened porch on that it would go right through the back window the living room Main window of the house obscuring a view um, so we would like to extend the deck six feet so that it essentially matches the the Dimension the edge of the house. Thank you the edge of the house And build a screened porch on that eventually. So that's what we are aiming to do is this small extension Towards the creek that matches the house Okay I'll take the opportunity to ask Do you have an idea of how the dimensions of the deck? And then secondly, uh, how many feet it would encroach on on this? No That no build setback You know how many? Well as col said we were requesting six feet um That that would be our our ideal scenario Um, and we don't know the dimensions of the deck. We just know that we don't want the Post of the deck to go right through the window of the living room um Mr. Meadows, do you have something? I I do mr. Chair. I just wanted to understand a little bit more about what's proposed It sounds like there is a request to extend the deck and it is this deck Um above grade is it at grade? Is it above grade? Um, how far above grade? How will the deck be supported? Is it peers? Is it posts? Is it going to be some kind of curtain wall? And then ultimately there's going to be a structure that's built atop the deck. Um, So how tall is that and does that have a roof and and how does that work? Okay Should I should I respond? Please? Okay, so col has Photographs and all the materials that I that I understood I was supposed to submit I did submit I can pull them up on my phone, but we are not currently at the home um, I guess the deck Is built. I mean it and I don't know the answer to all the terms you're asking. I'm sorry. It's a deck that I would guess is Two and a half feet off the ground with posts um It's nothing fancy. We don't need a fancy deck. We just don't want the post to go through the window I think the first step that we understood was to come to you and Pay this fee and ask if we can extend the deck several feet so that it doesn't go through the back window um, and read and then you know rebuild it or modify it So that's what we're doing and and then the second piece once we have the funds would be to eventually build a screened porch on it And I don't and there's no design. We don't have the design yet. I mean there will be a roof Yes, there will be a roof on it Because we want to have the you know screened porch and really what we're just asking for is to widen the porch So we can match up with the house Okay Follow one question. It would would it be possible? It sounds like maybe You you might be reconstructing the deck. Maybe maybe not. I don't know and I understand you don't know that yet Along those lines, would it be possible to extend the deck? to the I guess it's the north east So that you could run along instead of within the the no-build area and still avoid the The the living room window view No, there would be no way to extend it Let's say vertically So the deck sits, you know along the back wall of the house And if it was if we built a screened porch on it eventually Then it would absolutely run through the back window the post would unless we extend it horizontally towards the creek The the problem is that we have is that the house was built into this No-build zone that was created later on and so for us to widen the porch I mean for if Even if we I mean if we wanted to not even go through the window if we just add on a little we will automatically go into The no-build zone because the house is in the no-build zone The the no-build zone or the buffer the 10-foot buffer was apparently added on later After the house was built after the house was built So that is where we are running into the problem From the picture that Cole has up it looks like a portion of your deck is already in the no-build Zone is that right like the corner? Yeah, we we believe so based on the that's our impression Okay, I think Chad's question was and I Trying to hope I got this right. I don't know but basically going northeast meaning Pushing the deck out further really going Toward the end of the house if you will what is that what you were asking Chad? It is I was curious about why that was was not a possibility. Um, I wanted to understand Um, why that option simply was not available that that is an option for sure Um, but that doesn't solve the problem of the window going right through the post going through the window So I'm going to try to understand so there's a picture window on the north eastern wall adjacent to the edge of the deck And it's the support the vertical support for the roof of the porch That would interfere with the view of that window is that is that right? That's right. That's right Like right now if we look at our living room window There's a you know a bit of the post the edge of the deck Goes right through the middle of the window. So if we built a screened porch on that um, it would be um It would it would Block the view. I mean obviously the view view will be impeded by the screened porch if we ever even build it But we understood this was the first step is first figuring out. Can we extend the deck even a couple feet so that it's out of the It doesn't obscure the window Right, and I understand that this is the first time around. Um, and you guys are just getting started So you're not sure you don't know if it would be necessary to rebuild the deck to support the additional load from the the The screened in porch It's entirely possible that all of that deck would have to be removed in order to reach to to put in the But you don't know that I mean, we have been told by two contractors we spoke with that it would likely need to be Mostly or all rebuilt. Yes Okay But I mean what we're looking for is to expand the footprint so that again We don't have the edge of the screened porch going right through the middle of the window Right or is there any way for you to accommodate? A screened in porch on this site in a way Since the deck likely needs to be rebuilt anyway In a slightly different location that would allow you to avoid this No build area No, I um Um Okay, that that's what you need to prove that that's Answering that question is really what this what this whole thing hinges on that. Yeah, I understand There's no there's no other option if you built Straight out from the I mean unless it was unless it was two feet Wide and there's that's the only back door. So yeah, there's one back door And then to the right of it is as a wall like which is the kitchen window and Nook breakfast nook and if we would have to we would have to We would have to I don't see any way to build now. We would have to take out the windows We would it would have to change the structure of the house. We would not want it That would that would require taking down a back an entire back wall restructuring our kitchen That's not something we would Be ever be able to do Okay, um Thank you. I I I I want to make a note to the chair, but I'll I'll do that later. Thank you All right, any question any other questions for the applicant I think I heard the applicant say there were other pictures. Is there a reason that We haven't In them or they weren't a part of the packet. Oh staff had not received any pictures v email From Pamela. Um, I just double checked On my email. I I did send pictures to you and to um Eliza At some point and I can resend them, but we I definitely had a discussion With either you or Eliza where they said oh the pictures are very helpful. So I can Look those up again I mean at this time they would they would be they weren't spending time So I don't know if they'd be considered Because they would they would the board wouldn't be speaking now as well as the Can I show you this picture, please? So we can we've waited many months for this and I'd like to just have the opportunity To show you a picture of what it looks like so you can envision so can I Can I have my screen put back on we actually? um don't allow applicants Um to share screens, but um, no, no, I'm not asking to share my screen I'm asking to show you a picture that's on my phone So that we don't have to go through months more of Red tape Yeah, your your screen is actually on your camera's on. Oh, okay. I can't see but I'll let I'll let the chair make that decision Um, if you want to Unfortunately, it's why I'm in like we would all need to like be able to see it. Um, you know, usually this all of this these items are um You know, we have a packet that would be included with all you know, so well You know, we really It's really hard to see and and to make out because it's so small on our screens and we'd really need it before Um, so I so this is just so you know, this is from an email I sent to Eliza back in May and she and she did receive this picture So I'm sorry to hear that it didn't make it into your packet, but I don't think that's from any neglect on my end um, there's a whole email thread with Eliza where I sent these pictures um miss Monroe and um, that she then transferred it to coal and There's more pictures and so I'm frustrated because I've tried to do everything possible to provide the information Pay the $900 etc to have this reviewed I completely understand um I'm sorry. So It's actually it was actually included in another It was actually I believe included in part of in part of an application that was with the survey so I think the survey actually may include the pictures um Actually, I think this is a different property, but I don't I don't I believe Um, miss Blamon is there is there air conditioning unit near that window that you're referencing Is there an air conditioning unit? I just I just don't know this the exact the right power now to make sure Is your house yellow that's Okay, I think I I'm gonna screen share this with everyone and just just let me know Um, these are the right pictures. Um, just give me one one second please. Thank you I'm trying to I'm trying to open it. Um With a different I'm gonna I'm gonna have them open. Um, I'm trying to enter these in presentation mode, but it's it's giving me a hard time Um, but if I can zoom in if you guys need me to Just let me let me know Is this the correct picture? It is not Okay So this then I do not have photos from you guys. Um, I looked through my email and I don't I don't see any photos that were sent to me um Okay, so I guess it got Somehow lost in the shuffle of emails with Eliza, but I definitely have sent pictures before Per her request. I do a I like I don't know if you can see my screen right now But this is an image of what it looks like All right. Ms. Wyman, if you don't mind just uh Forward that email again to um, you know the folks Um to to call and we'll we'll get that we'll get this settled but Uh, if you're able to do that Yeah, of course Of of what you sent Eliza All right, um any other questions while she is doing that any other questions by the board that Yeah, I have a quick question. Would it change the landscape any would you have to remove any trees to extend the deck? Not I mean we could extend it probably like a foot or two to to widen the deck Oh to widen. I'm sorry. Do you mean to move it into this buffer? No To follow your existing plans what you're asking for no no trees would need to be removed. Sorry. Yeah, no trees But it sounds like it may you may Have to remove trees if you went out further away from the house So you were going to say I'm trying to I mean, we don't need a big Expansive deck like this deck is very small. We're fine with it being small We just want to extend it a couple of feet, you know because of this window thing If we instead went vertically Meaning like I think you called it northeast or what have you then we could probably go another foot or two I don't know if we would opt to do that, but um, I don't know if it would be worth it But we would not need to remove trees going either direction with the modest Plans that we have Mr. Ritchells So you you mean like plans like not documented Text plans drawn out and plans in your head Plans in our plans in our head. I had the impression via conversations with Eliza that we were not required to have actual drawn-up plans and we didn't want to necessarily spend money on those Without knowing if it would even be a possibility to do this project Well for myself To determine I mean all the factors I are okay in my accept for the you know, the spirit and purpose and intent For the safety of the public because it's a A buffer I think it would help you to have Even a sketch of how this deck is built To support putting it in the buffer Um, you know, that is the the subject here. So You know any kind of picture the back of the house or you know, a sketched in hey I'm putting four by four posts things like that will definitely help your case You know, I want to see what what you propose. Um, what kind of footing things like that In This buffer and I know the house was built before it. Um, it was adopted, but um, you know It is what we have now. Um, and that's My take on this And so the the picture, thank you so much for your feedback The picture that I did send to miss, um, Monroe that I then just forwarded Minutes ago to coal Does show the back of the house and I do have of you know a drawing of A one potential Small screened porch that I can forward. I was not told that I needed to Provide that in conversations with Your folks, but I hear you now Chair Rogers, I am going to attempt to share the picture if you will bear with me just a moment. Thank you And I think the reason it was missed is because it wasn't sent as attachment It was sent in the body of an email Um, so I think it was missed because it was included in the email and not sent as a separate attachment Okay And generally we don't we can't include the whole email Um, the message record because you know back and forth between people and message Yep, uh, just just for the record, I guess Do you have an idea between the deck and the end of the house there? How many feet that would be so it's six feet. Is that what you were saying? Yeah, the current deck is 12 feet square. It's very it's small. I mean it's 12 feet by 12 feet Okay And even if we can just extend it past that window I don't know if you can see that I mean she drew a red line there. It was that's the end of the house But even if we can just extend it past the window Um, because we would love to not have the pole right through the window So with the end of the window if it can go past that that will be great too All right, does uh, does this photo help any of the board members? This is meadows. Um, I think it is helpful to understand that the request As I understand it right now that the hardship that we're dealing with that the applicant has Is that they have this deck and They want to put a screen in porch on the deck And in order to put the roof Structure necessary for a screened in porch on the deck. It's got to have an upright. It's got to have a post and Because the deck is where the deck is The post would be in front of the window and they don't want that they would prefer not to have that and so They're requesting to extend the deck So that the post for the screened in porch is not in front of the window So that that makes sense and it's understandable. It's very helpful to have the picture To kind of explain, you know, what was going on through the course of discussion There was the possibility or at least the suggestion that it is it could be workable To extend the deck By less than six feet And reduce the impact in the no build buffer and still allow these folks to to You know have the screened in porch and overcome the hardship that they're facing You know, it would certainly be Easier for me to approve a reduced extension into the buffer Then it would be a six foot extension I will say that, you know, it sounds to me like the deck needs to be rebuilt anyway, uh, and so That seems like it opens the realm of possibilities for how A screened in porch might might be accommodated in ways that that don't require any extension into the buffer But, you know, we don't have those plans so that's not anything we can can can ruminate on Speaking for myself, I'm more comfortable Having the picture is helpful. I understand the issue The question now is, you know, does Avoidance of a post in front of the window rise to the level of a hardship or not? And I think that's really the question If it does then, you know, moving the post To the north northeast, whatever That might solve the hardship. Is there a way for that to happen? And minimize the impact on the buffer in accordance with the spirit of the ordinance I think that's the question on my mind right now And how we You know, is it I understand these people have been waiting a long time. I understand the frustration. I understand the red tape I get all of that At the same time, I have asked other applicants for variances to produce Information for the record so that it's on the record what what we're approving. Um, and I am going to hold to that That approach or that method of operating in this case If if it is possible to get some additional information or explore deeper the possibility of a reduced Extension into the buffer. Um, I'm more I'm Able to see how that is more consistent with the udo Um And you know, if if I was asked to vote on what we had before us today I would have to vote no because I don't think there's enough information on the record about what we're approving I'm mr Regulus Got you on mute. Good sir Jessica. Thank you for that photograph Um And I see very clearly now what you're trying to do and that is really helped me Um Make the decision and I'm for and for this variance um, and um, you will definitely be You know dealing with inspections department on how you can go forth with that but I think uh, it's consistent in the spirit and uh I have any problem with it Uh anybody helps? I'm sorry. Can I add one thing? I'm sorry to interrupt. I did find a very preliminary sketch of What a screened porch could look like and I just forwarded it via email to coal and I know it's late to add things but um If that's helpful to bring up another picture then we have that Yeah, I think right now we can't we can't take that in right now. Okay. Um, is there anyone else? Let me just make you guys Oh, Micah So my question is if we were to approve this could we approve it to say something like up to six feet which would allow them the flexibility of Bring it in to mr. Meadows suggestion once they actually got with a contractor or Whoever's going to help them do it so that they have some flexibility to maybe not go the full six feet, but Or is that always the case? Yeah, we would it would be up to a certain Okay Um That's question. Uh, all right. Anybody else having thing? Uh, all right. Uh, is there anybody else here to speak in favor of this application? Seeing none. Is there anyone here to speak against? Uh, miss little do you have something you'd like to say? Um, it's am light I'm sorry to lie. I apologize. It's okay. It's that's mistakes been made before I'm I received a letter about this. So I am apparently close enough to be adjacent My property is actually located in winstead, which is across the street and beyond um from the property I appreciate what mr. Meadows and mr. Richelis have said about concern and um The army corps of engineers and the city of Durham has have learned a lot about storm water runoff since that house was built um That stream adjacent to their property runs in a culvert under the street To wetland that is between loch nora and winstead um The culvert carries that water And that wetland fills during storms such as tropical storm elsa that came through on july 8th of this year Additional runoff might disturb the trees might disturb the shape of that stream And construction may cause additional problem as people are in that area as the deck were rebuilt and the screen ports were added I'm concerned about downstream impacts to other properties in loch nora to my property and further down in Carolan woods, there's another property another construction going on on the other side of randolph road There's a lot of development in this area and that concerns me so If it were approved I would like to know how many trees are going to be disturbed Whether any of them are likely to survive Um, can the homeowner homeowner be required to plant additional trees? And what is the siltation sense requirement during and post construction? All right, um Ms. Wyman, do you have any rebuttal you this this isn't a usually doesn't go back and forth But there the applicant does have the chance to provide address those concerns and provide a rebuttal Thank you. Um, as we stated a couple times in our The meeting here. There are no trees that will be removed whatsoever. So that's not a topic that needs to be considered And We've already added more, you know another tree to the anyway I don't understand the concern with that but as we said, there's no trees that would be affected There are no trees, um on on the remotely in the area that if we were to extend that's a two feet To go to the window extended even two feet just so it's not Crossing the window if you look at the picture Then there there will be no trees to be removed. There are no trees Yeah, um the the trees that are there are in the back of the house in the backyard or Really just along the along the creek, but we that we won't touch Mr. Ritchals Hi, yeah, Pamela and Jordan is the deck going to be consistent with the elevation Of the existing deck you have now you're just kind of extending it over above grade even with the Um level of your living space Is that fair to say? Yeah, I would be happy to do whatever is recommended that Makes the least impact on the impervious structure We're happy to do whatever is recommended by the board and by the powers that be Okay, well it If we do grant this you'll be Expected to get with the the inspections department and they were they're a fine inspections department and they will help you along the way Right, that's what I mean. I mean if if we were to do this Then we would absolutely do, you know, we're learning and we would do what's recommended. We're not looking to You know increase any problems for anyone Okay, thank you All right, uh, any anybody from board having further Thoughts all right I'll provide a few I think this this house is already encroached going to the to the edge of the house. I don't have a problem I don't see a problem with that. It's not impervious uh Materials or surfaces there So, um You know we're talking six feet to the end of the house um I understand the hardship here and I think the hardship Was created uh well after this This house was built and it was due no fault of the homeowner. Uh, those are my Those are my thoughts Anyone else so I don't I don't have any concerns. I'm not concerned about the the runoff either Does anybody else want to provide anything? I would agree. This is a unique situation Um, and I also agree with you that it's it should not and likely will not affect the runoff situation Thanks Anyone else? All right. Does anyone want to offer a motion? There is no staff recommendation on this I'd like to make a motion to grant application. This is retros with conditions I I hear by make a motion the case number b2 1 0 0 0 2 8 an application for a variance from the 10 foot no build setback property located at 3820 Lucknara parkway has successfully met the applicable requirements to the new pie development ordinance and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions That the improvement shall be substantially consistent with the plans and all information submitted to the board as part of this application we have a Motion for approval for this variance by mr. Rex is there a second? jeter second I'm miss jeter Jessica take it away Rogers I forgot to call the seating for this. I'm sure you all know, but it will be kip meadows rogers wretchless jeter major and bouchain All right So kip Yes Meadows Yes Rogers Yes Wretchless Yes Jeter Yeah Major Yes Bouchain Yes Motion carries seven to zero approved I vote of seven to zero your request for a variance has it been approved. I appreciate your patience Understand this is kind of a weird process and the quasi judicial is a little strange Thank you for coming for the BOA. We wish you the best of luck. Thank you so much for your time all right Well, that was that was good. All right. Um, do we want to continue the next case? Do we need a break? How was everybody feeling? Hour three we've got one two three more cases We will only have two more because well, I like you're correct chair That's okay. All right. Well, let's go ahead and call the next one. We'll see what we can do after that All right. Our next case is b 21 00029 a city case A request for a minor special use permit for a daycare in a residential zoning district The subject site is located at 82 kimberley drive is owned residential suburban 10 or rs 10 Is in the falls of the new jordan lake protected area Watershed protection overlay, which is fjb and in the suburban tier The case has been advertised for the required period of time Property owners within 600 feet have been notified and notarized affidavits verifying the sign posting and letter mailing are on file The seating will be kip meadows rogers retch list jeter major and buchane All right. Thank you. Jessica Everyone who plans on giving testimony wanting your camera on and i'm looking here. I think we've got everybody so if you don't mind raise your right hand Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today? biker, I think we you're missing out of the camera. There you are Um Do you swear or affirm testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth will come through here, uh, calcy yes kevin, yes uh Uh, I will not be testifying today. I will be speaking. Um, but uh, we are it looks like we are waiting on a jarvis martin He is going to be one of our witnesses as well Okay, uh, so you're not speaking today Well, I will be speaking, but i'm not testifying as a witness It's our Mr. Chairman and members of the board. This is my one of our colleagues new attorneys at morning start a law group and I wanted to let her Uh, take a run at the board of adjustment with this, uh minor special use permit for st. Stephens At physical church down in home valley. Uh, I told her you were all a very nice group of people So I hope you'll live up to that standard And uh, really appreciate your time and uh, marie just for the heck of it. Say say yes Uh biker Yes, uh jarvis. I do you swear that the testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth Yes All right, uh jarvis. Do you consent to this a remote meeting platform? Yes, kevin Yes, calcy Yes biker i'm patrick mr. biker yes Uh, marie. Yes. All right. Thank you so much. Um Who has this one? It's me again. Oh cool. There you are. Sorry It's all yours. All right morning um cold ranger represent the plan apartment game um playing staff request to the staff court non-material submitted the public hearing to be made part of the public record with any Any necessary corrections is noted Noted. Thank you Case b 21 00029 is a minor special use permit for daycare in a residential longer district The case area is highlighted in red. The site is in the suburban tier zone residential suburban rs 10 Is in within the city of germ jurisdiction Um, the existing use is right now is the church and the preschool Um St. Stephen's Episcopal church, sorry if that's not pronounced right corner an applicant proposes to continue the existing uses a place of work in preschool With the addition of a daycare use The daycare is offered to preschool students who need full-time daycare instead of the half day provided by the preschool Um, these properties are on residential rs 10 And located in the suburban development tier for unified development ordinance section 5.1.2 A daycare in a residential zone district is allowed with improved minor special use permit The preschool will be run by the church and it's considered an intensification of the existing place of worship use Staff will be liable for questions throughout the hearing process Um, just to clarify, um, there is no exterior changes They are just adding the daycare use to the existing preschool basically an extended extended hours All right, uh, any questions for coal before we hear from the applicants applicant Stand hearing none. All right. Thank you. Um Mr. Becker, do you have this one? I'll let marie handle this one. Uh, she's got her outline teed up and she's ready to introduce our witnesses and We very much appreciate y'all's time again on this on this item. Thank you, marie. It's all yours Thank you chairman roger's a member of the board like patrick said. My name is marie farmer I'm an associate attorney with morning star law group here at 112 west main street As patrick also said, um, we represent state stevens a physical church Who owns and operates place of worship in a preschool on about 11 acres on kimberley drive? And we're here today to request a minor special use permit for st Stephen's preschool Which has been at this location for over 50 years so that it can offer students full days of care As opposed to half days that the preschool is currently offering At the outset, I would like to ask that exhibits a through c Relyed upon or referred to by our witnesses including the staff report and any attachments Be moved into evidence and that our witnesses Uh be tendered as experts in site engineering traffic engineering and real estate appraising Based on the exhibits a through c, which are the resumes of each of the experts Thank you Thank you So just to give a little bit of background uh the building that houses the preschool was built in 1977 And operated for several decades before the udo was adopted in january 2006 The building is zoned residential suburban 10 and has about 3,552 square feet of classroom space and a fenced in playground that is approximately 29,568 square feet The only modifications that will occur to the building are the addition of four doors So that each classroom has external doors to the fenced in playground and this is required for state licensing Uh no other modification to the current structure or landscaping will occur And to address the required findings for a minor minor special use permit under the udo You'll hear from our three witnesses today that the proposed daycare is in harmony with the area There will not be substantially injurious impact on the value of the properties in the general vicinity of st Stevens There will be no adverse impact on public health or safety And the proposed use will be in conformance with the review factors Under the udo and the special requirements for limited use as applicable to this use as a daycare facility And these issues are going to be addressed by civil engineer kelsey westwood Who is a professional engineer licensed here in the state of north carolina? Kevin deem pe a traffic engineer who is also licensed by the state of north carolina Who has 10 years of experience specializing in traffic operations and traffic engineering? And then finally you will hear from real estate appraiser jarvis martin Who is a state certified general appraiser with 45 years of real estate appraisal experience? Based on their testimony, which is going to provide competent material and substantial evidence Which will show all of the applicable standards of the udl We will ask that you approve the minor special use permit application for the daycare And with that I will turn it over to kelsey Thanks Marie Um, hello. I am kelsey westwood hall. I'm a civil engineer with kimmy horn. Um, I've worked at kimmy horn for five years and have Um, been working as a civil engineer for seven years Um, I have a bachelor of science in civil engineering from virginia polytechnic institute and state university And am a professional engineer licensed by the state of north carolina Um, st. Stephen's preschool has been in operation for nearly 50 years and has not encountered any concerns with compatibility in the surrounding area Uh to convert the existing preschool into a daycare The only proposed modification to the building is the addition of external doors to the fenced in playground In accordance with state licensing requirements. The subject property is zoned rs 10 as marie mentioned Um, which allows daycare use with an approval of a minor special use permit The lighting and signage on site will comply with standards outlined in the unified development ordinance And all utilities to serve the building including water and sewer Are existing on site and will remain unchanged with the conversion from a preschool to a daycare Um, the existing structure had to meet the then current standards in place at the time of construction But since there are no changes or increases proposed to the exterior limits of the structure or to the existing property And the site is bordered by rs 10 parcels There will be no change to the existing setbacks project boundary buffers Tree coverage or concerns with environmental protection of the site from the originally approved plan Since the daycare is an extended use of the existing preschool, which is compatible within the existing neighborhood The proposed use is appropriate and compatible in design scale and relationship to other uses in the area Additionally, there's no significant increase in noise or odor beyond the existing conditions as a result of this proposed minor special use permit The existing use of st. Stevens as a place of worship in preschool and the proposed use as a daycare is appropriate for the rs 10 zoning district And meets the intent of the unified development ordinance with a minor special use permit The outdoor place-based far exceeds the required hundred square foot per child as the playground is approximately 29 568 square feet and the daycare anticipates 65 to 80 children, which equates to over 300 square feet per child The playground is also surrounded by fencing that is at least four feet high and is fenced in accordance with the standard set forth in section 9.9 of the udo There will also be at least 35 heated square feet per child as required by section 5.3 of the udo Because the total classroom score footage is approximately 3552 square feet, which equates to 44 square feet per child In conclusion and in my professional opinion approval of st. Stevens application for the special use permit for this educational facility is in harmony with the area and there will be no Adverse impact on public health and safety All right. Thank you. Kelsey if anyone has any questions for Kelsey. Um, she is available. If not, we will turn it over to Kevin Any Questions for the witness All right stand up go ahead Morning, my name is Kevin Dean and i'm also a civil engineer with kimmy horn at 300 more street in Durham We got a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from nc state and i've been performing traffic analysis with kimmy horn For the last 10 years And and i am also a professional engineer In the state of north carolina Our team has noted special use permit that would allow for the daycare In conjunction with the preschool is not anticipated to result in an increase in either staff Or children and students on site Based on that we're not anticipating any Increases over the course of a day in trip generation associated with a special use permit There will be some shifting of traffic across the day as some students are leaving later than they do today But the institute of transportation engineers indicates that that total entering and exiting Site traffic volume would be less than 30 trips If all of those uh, if all of those students left at the exact same time in the traditional peak hour So based on that minimal volume of additional traffic It's my professional opinion That approval of the special use permit would not cause undue traffic congestion or create on-site queuing issues The daycare use is not envisioned To include changes to site access circulation or parking As adequate parking and access are already provided for this use And since no transportation related changes are proposed on-site Is also my professional opinion that approval of the special use permit will not material in danger The public health or safety and will not impact safety for vehicles including emergency vehicles Circulating on-site. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have Any questions for mr. Dean All right, and so with that we will turn it over to Jarvis Martin Good morning again, mr. Chairman members of the commission Uh, you heard from my meeting twice today in terms of my qualifications That being said in your permission, I'll go straight to my testimony At the request of the applicant, uh, I have reviewed the closed site plan Visit the site and the surrounding Area, which is primarily residential homes Given the fact that this establishment of this operation has been in existence for many many years In this location looking at Sales of the rates for homes are going to have my radius of the subject property And then looking at homes beyond that have my radius It appears that market data definitely support the fact that this Facility has had no impact on the surrounding of properties over the many years that has been there Given that to be the fact and the fact that there is a substantial amount of vegetation Between the playground and the adjoining neighborhood And that the ingress egress points are not changing in terms of traffic It is my professional opinions that the 16th facility is in harmony with the surrounding area It will have no adverse impact on market demand and for values and that this proposed use of a daycare facility already existing preschool will be in harmony and with that being said is my professional opinion that The grant of this special use permit will have no adverse impact at all on the surrounding properties And I'm open for questions any questions for mr. Martin All right All right, thank you. We would just ask if there's any opposition that would like to speak before we conclude Is there any registered opponents to this case? Do we know if anybody here seeing none hearing none? There is none sir All right, thank you So at this time we would like to move into evidence all exhibits relied on are referred to by the witnesses Including the staff report and the attachments all right, thank you, sonata and Just to summarize as an applicant We had the burden to submit competent material and substantial evidence into the record Showing that our proposal meets all the requirements of the udl for approval of the special use permit based on the review factors found in 3.9.8 a and b and the limited use requirements for daycare facilities found in 5.3.3 We have met this standard based on the testimony you've heard And therefore we ask for approval of the special use permit so that state Stevens Can provide full days of care to its students at the preschool as opposed to half days And again our team will be happy to answer any questions if there are any. Thank you Thank you. Uh, any questions for the applicant or any of the witnesses, uh, mr. Rexlis I yes, uh, can someone tell me is the Um amount of children going to increase on that site once you extend the hours I believe Kevin can address this. Um, he has all the numbers It is not expected to increase no sir So the the expectation is that some of the students who attend St. Stevens for the preschool will just shift into the the full day or a longer day Of daycare, but the total number of students or staff is not going to increase Gotcha. Is there any kind of loud speaker system outside of this? That's you know loud No, there is not And uh, mr. Dean on the service entrances, uh, is there going to be any change to trucks Coming in there to drop off goods or anything? No, sir. Not that i'm aware of Thank you All right any other questions for the applicant or any of the witnesses All right, um Cole do you have a recommendation for the board? Yes, uh, staff recommends approval. Um with in accordance with everything that was submitted at this meeting Okay, we've got a recommendation from Staff is there any discussion? And if not would anybody like to offer a motion I will I hereby make a motion that application number b 200 00029 An application for a minor special use permit for daycare in a residential zoning district on property located to 82 kimberley drive Has successfully met the the requirements of unified development ordinance and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions The improvement shall be substantially consistent with all information submitted to the board as part of the application We've got a motion for approval by miss, uh, boshane. Is there a second? hip second second by mr. Kip Jessica take it away kip yes Meadows yes rogers yes wretchless yes jeter yeah major yes mbushane yes Motion carries seven to zero approved Vote of seven to zero your request for a minor special use permit has been Approved we appreciate you coming for the boa this morning and wish you the best of luck Thank you. Thank you very much for your time. Good day. All right. Um, we need a break anybody want to break? No, yes continue 10 minutes 20 minutes. What do we want? Brought it new we only have we've got two more cases I would like a minimum of 15 minutes, please Okay, is that is that worth for everybody else? 15. All right, so I've got 1202. Let's just do uh 12 20 18 minutes is that I think that'll be good We'll return at 12 20 Um, as we return, this is chris pierson from the playing department. I have two robert the wasky the waskins Um, as if there is a second Um, I think I see probably the real robert on here Um, you know whom the other person may be No, I don't Are you signed in on two different devices? All right. Um, yes, that's my wife janet. Sorry. Oh, okay. All right Looks like we May have everybody back All right, uh, just won't you like to call the next guys? Sure. This one has a correction to the agenda. This is a county case b 21 000 30 A county case is a request for a variance from the street yard setback The subject site is located at 345 continental drive is zoned rural residential rural Is in the eno river protected area water protection overlay or eb and in the suburban tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time property owners within 600 feet have been notified And notarized affidavits verifying the sign posting and letter mailing are on file The seating will be Kip meadows rogers wretch lists jeter major embouching Thank you. Thank you. Uh, all right. So we'll do the uh, we're swearing in right now So anybody who plans on giving testimony if you'll raise your right hand Uh, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Uh, robert Yes Janet Yes, it must be in the same room, huh? Um, and do you consent to this remote meeting platform robert? Yes Janet one more time Yes All right. Thank you. Um, Eliza does this one yours? Yes, it is. Um, good afternoon everyone Eliza Monroe representing the planning department Planning staff request that the staff report and all materials submit that the public hearing to be made part of public record with any necessary corrections is noted So noted. Thank you Thank you Case b2 1 0 0 0 3 0 is a request for a variance from the street yard setback requirements The applicant and property owners robert dwoskin and janet dwoskin and the subject site is located at 3 4 5 continental drive The case area is highlighted in red on the screen The site is zoned residential rural or rr and located within the eno river protected area watershed protection overlay district and within the suburban development here As you can see in the aerial the site area is currently vacant and covered in trees and shrubs So i'm going to actually go two over um So per section six point two point one a of the unified development ordinance The required street yard setback for a single family dwelling structure in the rr zoning district is 50 feet The applicant is proposing a reduction to 30 feet in order to build a single family house Which they believe will be consistent with the size of the homes within the neighborhood And they also hope to have this setback in order to Avoid the existing 50 foot stream buffer and 10 foot no-gold setback that's located towards the rear of the property The site is located in the eb watershed protection overlay as we've noted here and although there are not specific house designs And they were not submitted at this time staff would like to note that per udo section 8.7 point 2 b point 1 There is a maximum impervious surface limit for the lot And that would be a 24 percent impervious surface limit So when they go through the building permit review process, they would have to stay below that And also staff would like to note that for those of you that were with us in 2019, you probably recognize this site and or These drawings This was a case this was previously submitted and we did hear this back in 2019 under b 1 9 0 0 0 4 0 The previous permit has unfortunately expired And that is now considered null and void. So they had to come back in order to Have that approval or potential approval done again since that a permit is expired pdio section 3.14.8 Establishes the four findings that the applicant must make in order for the board to grant a variance These findings requiring approval are identified in the staff report and the applicant's responses to the findings are identified in the application Both of which are within your packet and staff will be available for any questions as needed during the hearing process Thank you a lot. I'm sorry. I'm gonna go to the screen. That's showing the proposed Okay, any questions for Eliza before we hear from the applicant? All right. Um Well the applicant might come forward which Okay, that would be me Yes Not really much to say the this application for this variance was submitted in 2019. It was approved in october and because of we we had two years to develop a building permit and submit it and have that approved And because of cove it is we we actually pretty much locked down for a year and a half My wife and I are both in our later years and we had a pod with our our family our daughters and and we Pretty much did not go anywhere for a year and a half. We did have we did have a tackle engineering come out to look at what could be built on this site and and we also contacted a custom build Company and they came out and gave us some ideas and and gave us some proposed drawings and some proposed Plans to build a house there, but because of cove and we really just never got going on it so because the the permit The variance expires And we've learned that there's no way to get an extension on that We were told that we need to apply for a new one. So essentially this is the same packet that we submitted in 2019 And if there are any questions, I'm happy to answer them. All right. Uh, any questions for the applicant? Um, I I have one mr. Chair I I'm just wondering I I see on the exhibit that there's a red outline. I assume that's the building footprint that you would be anticipating Would you And I understand this is speculation I'm just asking If you're anticipating that this red outline it would include any additional deck Or patio or anything else that would need to be built And could potentially extend into You know the the 10 foot no build or the riparian buffer I don't know if you've given that any any thought or or have any thoughts about that question uh, no because the We This this is a really unique area this this lot border is the unistate park And uh, we're very much on a semi retired biologist of 35 years human health risk assessment and and We are both very active and preserving natural habitat So we're very concerned about Having anything that would really disrupt The the habitat or either would impact the stream in any which way. So that's why we We're asking for the variance from the the road Um, we're interested in having minimal tree removal We'll probably you know, we were looking at a net zero energy. We currently have A geothermal system in our house. So we're we're going to be very sensitive to anything that might disrupt the natural habitat As far as whether a deck gets put on or not It just depends on on what the house plans are but you can see in the In the picture there, it shows The the narrowest without the setback The depth of that lot is 17.4 feet In the narrowest part of it. Uh, so we're asking for this 20 foot um, this reduction from 50 to 30 to 30 feet so we can have 37.4 feet of depth to build within and that's that's adequate for For lin ice or other kinds of things that we could have within that footprint, but right now. No, I I I I would not be able to say exactly what the the house plan would look like Thank you Yeah It is on the it is on the left side because the right side is fairly steep. So we do need to to have it in pretty much Where it is right there All right, any other questions for the applicant? All right, uh, Eliza, would you mind stop sharing for a moment? all right, uh Is there anyone else here to speak in favor of this application? Is there anyone here to speak against this application? Seeing none No one signed up in opposition. All right. Um, discussion thoughts Does anyone want to offer a motion? I hear by make a motion. This is retulis that an application number b2 10030 requests for a variance from the street yard setback requirements on property located at three four five continental drive has successfully met the applicable requirements of the unified development ordinance And it's hereby granted subject to the growing conditions That improvement shall be substantially consistent with the plans and all information submitted to the board as part of this application All right, we've got a motion for approval by mr. Retulis. Is there a second? Oh shame second Shane second Jessica, would you call everyone? Yes kip Yes Meadows Yes Rogers Yes Retulis Yes Jeter Yeah major Yes And buchane Yes Motion carries seven to zero approved Uh by a vote of seven to zero your request for a variance has been approved We appreciate you coming for the BOA this morning and wish you the best of luck Thank you very much. Thank you The next item on the agenda has been removed. It was a case 31 at the end. We're going to move on to the last case And Jessica would you like to call it? Our next case is b2 10033 a city case A minor special use permit request to allow for increased height and expansion of floor area more than 10% of an existing non-conforming structure The subject site is located at 914 Oakland Avenue is owned residential urban 5 2 or r u 5 2 In the old west neighborhood protection overlay and in the urban tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time property owners within 600 feet have been notified and notarized affidavits Verifying the sign postings and letter mailing are on file The seating will be kip meadows rogers wretch less jeter major and bushing All right Uh, everyone who plans on giving testimony will need to swear again. So if you don't mind, please raise your right Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Mr. Black I swear Miss randall I swear all right and do you Consent to this remote meeting platform miss randall. Yes, mr. Black. I do. All right. Thank you so much. Uh, coal is this one yours? Yes, sir Good afternoon. I'm cold renegar referencing the planning department Planning staff request the staff court normal material submitted the public hearing to be made part of the public record with any Nice way to corrections as noted. Thank you My case b 21 000 33 Is a minor specialty permit to allow for increased height and expansion of floor air and more than 10 percent of an existing non-conforming structure This area is highlighted in red. The site is in the urban tier zone residential r u 52 and zoom in the city of Durham's jurisdiction The existing use is a single family dwelling Um, john black applicant requests a minor specialty permit To allow for an addition of a second story two and an expansion of floor air of an existing non-conforming structure This results in a height increase in floor area increase of more than 10 percent There will also be a rear addition and a carport that meet all applicable udo requirements and do not require minor specialty for udo section 14.4 point 1 c point 3 Additions or improvements to or reconstruction of non-conforming buildings and structures shall require A minor specialty permit and less examined Additions must be consistent with the height of the original structure and can have up to increase of 10 percent floor area The pros and innovations increase the height of the building to fee and increase the floor area about 59.8 Resulting in the need for a minor specialty permit The existing structure is in the old Durham west neighborhood protection overlay udo section 4.6 point 6 Restricts the maximum height of a building to 24 feet That proposed structure is intended to be within this threshold and meets all other apical restrictions from the apical neighborhood protection overlay district Staff will be loyal for questions throughout the process All right any questions for coal before we move on to the applicant Hearing none seeing none. Uh, would the applicant like to come forward? I have one question chair rogers for coal Yeah, mr. Regis Yes, was is the carport Kind of what brought us over the limit Is that considered the structure even though it's not living space? So the carport is not um what brought us to the What brought us to the I guess being from was mainly the second story Um because that's increased. I mean right now it's not it's not finished So now that it's becoming finished it basically adds a dark story of floor area that wasn't generally calculated Living space. Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions for coal? All right, uh, would the applicant like to come forward? Of course, uh, my name is john black. I'm the designer of this project I've been in residential design in in Durham for the past six years primarily with riverbank construction So plenty of experience working on similar projects in this neighborhood and neighboring neighborhoods So we're very sensitive i'm very sensitive to Respecting the you know the fabric of of what's there We're not trying to drastically change The appearance of the existing structure just simply adding usable square footage so that the house better suits Modern families that are moving into the neighborhood Um, as you can see on the site plan It's possible. Maybe if you zoom in a little more, but the addition that is proposed on the first floor Is is within the current setback requirements on the side of the lot Whereas the existing structure is over that setback requirement thus making this a non-conforming structure So we did our best to keep the addition within the existing setback And the second floor addition Is also not going to change the appearance of this house from the street a great deal As cold already mentioned we are proposing to increase the height by two feet And that's mainly to make it usable livable space upstairs But that existing single front dormer at the center of the the front of the house with the shed roof that will be replicated It will just be larger and the existing form of that Gable the main gable of the house is also going to be replicated just rebuilt Again two feet taller Um, so with that I am open to questions or comments Any questions for the applicant? Oh, mr. Riches. I'm sorry I didn't see you Mr. Black is uh, I'm not familiar with that overlay protection. Is that is anything Going to harm that overlay protection. Is that the city question? So the the large the largest concern with the neighborhood protection overlay is going to be the floor area ratio Um, the amount of heated floor area that is in the house compared to the size of the lot the square footage of the lot um, so if For example, if we were going to try to get this same amount of square footage in a single story addition Without altering that that roof structure We would eat up all of that surface area And we wouldn't we wouldn't be able to achieve it. So it made the most sense to go up to a second story Um and not take up more ground area on the lot Um and that by doing that that that's why we had to to rebuild the roof Understood All right, any other questions for the applicant, right? Um Cole would you mind stop sharing for a moment? And is there anyone else here to speak in favor of this application? Reminders, I should use I don't see anybody Looks like we have one person to speak against. Uh, miss randall. Do you have anything to say? Uh, yes, thank you I actually am in favor of expanding the house and I think it will bring good value and that'll be a good neighbor for that Mr. Black, my concerns really are about proposed driveway and possibly the carport And its potential impact on my property next door. I live at 912 oakland on the south side of 914 Um, given the existence of the utility poles between the two properties front and back um, the existing uh apron part of which is on my property Um, the side yard sizing which is quite small between the two houses Um, I have some questions really about the design. So I want to run those down um, a couple asks additional thought and then reiteration of It looks like a good design overall if I would like these questions addressed Uh, my questions are, you know regarding the side yard setback in the driveway Is the driveway which is essentially looking like it's being built on the property line And then the edge of the structure truly compliant My other questions are You know, will a driveway and a carport in the middle of the backyard fit within the historic nature of the neighborhood What is my remedy should construction or use of this driveway encroach upon my property line? um I would like to ask that If necessary have an updated survey I'm also a little concerned about where the placement of the gas lines are because you're talking about removing Your gas pack, but I still have mine out there. So if we put a hardscape over the gas line, that would be a concern And finally, um Would ask that you clearly mark the survey corners and clearly mark the driveway before pouring concrete Um, my one additional question really is about the backyard canopy. I understand the need to take out the tree Where you're putting in additional tree there is actually quite a bit of existing canopy So I think that could be problematic as far that canopy covers my backyard um And you know, I'm not looking for encroachment or easement here But want to be a good neighbor because I think having a Single family home with long-term family in it would be benefit to us all in the neighborhood That's it Um staff would like to mention that the car for and the driveway are shown. Um, they meet all the applicable uda requirements Um, so the variance isn't actually for those additions. Um, we just want to make the board aware of those additions Most of the concerns that miss randall had would most likely be addressed in The billing permit review as far as setbacks And um, those kind of questions as far as having an updated survey would be shown when this is put in for review Which most of those concerns, um, would be addressed during that time Um, and would show everything if Tom black would like to add anything that I didn't address or that miss randall brought up on The board, I mean, I guess the chair will allow you to to speak Would you mind just reminding us? What is that state? What is what's it the question before us? So the question before us is for um And a 10 addition of floor area. Um, that doesn't include carport or driveway That just includes the extra livable space. Um, which is basically the second story Yeah, um, and also mr. Meadows had a question. Yeah, uh, well, and that's um, you know that again, you know Board of adjustments quite quite a little bit different than most, uh legislative bodies. This is a quasi judicial Um, that we we are only really going to consider what the question is before us and not all this other While it certainly may affect, um, that's just not within our purview and um Chad do you have a question before I have okay, and uh, mr. Black you do have the opportunity to address and Providing revolts I will speak for the owner even though Some of what you brought up is out of my realm Because I will not really be involved in the construction process. However, I am acquainted with the owner and Could certainly put you in touch with the owner because I can say that the owner is willing to work with you as the neighbor to make sure that the whole process goes smoothly and that You know nothing detracts from your property or experience of your property during the project Like regarding the the tree that's proposed in the backyard completely flexible That you know, that's not something that I'm putting my foot down on it needs to be here I'm sure the homeowner feels the same way. We'd be willing to work with you on the exact location of the newly proposed tree um And as far as like the gas lines Obviously as Cole brought up during permitting and inspections um We wouldn't even be able to build without knowing where those lines are going and that everything is safe Um, so all that would be inspected prior to digging and pouring a driveway um the utility poles the light poles that are currently kind of between the two houses They are proposing to remove those Um, so if that's something you did not wish to see happen I'm sure we could talk to the homeowner about that But they're proposing to remove those to make way for the driveway and access to the backyard um and You're correct in assuming that the proposed driveway would go to the property line And then it would also go all the way to the the house Um, and that will give enough width for a car to make it by the house to the backyard And just let me know if I forgot to address anything else see From what I can see from the existing pipe the utility pole in front is actually on my property So I think there'd be need to be no more discussion there and also seeing what it's going to be replacing it In terms of water runoff You know, I'm curious about the design of this because there is so little space between the foundations of the two houses I understand your statement mr. Rogers about Boa's purvey But I also put it before you all that This part of the design is a substantial impact potential It should be considered Perhaps in the future if not for me You know one of the things I am concerned about is encroachment And want to make sure that we work this out. I understand this may not be the forum but that Is not, you know Obviously clear to surrounding homeowners where we can get these addressed as well. Thank you Things like most of these would be with you know enforcement issues as well. Um, you know, there should not be Any impacts Billing over but I totally understand your Concerns. All right, um anyone else All right, so this is a minor special use permit cold. Do you have a recommendation for the group? Um staff recommends approval. Um Consistent with everything that was submitted in the application to the board All right, we have a recommendation by the staff Discussion thought Now we're just at being asked about the extension up to the second floor and that was under our Purview at this moment. Is that correct? Yes, not that's correct wretchless Being where we're only going two feet beyond the standard I like the design I think it's fair to the neighborhood and I mean, uh, I'm for this It's, uh, NSP Anyone else? All right, does anyone want to make a motion Or further discussion? This is meadows. I will do it as soon as I get to the language. Just give me a second, please I hear by make a motion that application number b2000033 An application for a minor special use permit to allow for increased height and expansion of floor area more than 10 percent of an existing non-conforming structure on property located at 914 Oakland Avenue Has successfully met the applicable requirements of the unified development ordinance and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions One that the improvements Shall be substantially consistent with all information submitted to the board as part of the application Got a motion for approval by mr. Meadows. Is there a second? I'll second We're both showing second Jessica Yes Meadows Yes Rogers Yes Wretchless Yes Jeter Yeah Major Yes Ember Shea Yes Motion carries seven to zero approved Uh, vote of seven to zero your request for a minor special use permit has been approved. We uh Thank you for coming before the BOA this morning and wish you the best of luck Yep All right, uh, we're gonna move along on the agenda here We have no old business. I don't think we've heard any new business to be added We have that brings us to the approval of the orders We've got a few here And I've got a question for for want someone the b2 one the second one on the list 22 Is that from a previous? That's from last last month. Okay Uh, yeah, Mr. Chair, uh, christia kukura city attorney's office. That was the case. Um, the amazon wall And uh, the order is not ready for that one. So we won't be voting on that one today All right, so we'll need a motion that this we can make this real quick and but Usually in person. This is a little bit quicker, but so we'll need a motion and a second and we have to all vote Individually for each one of these on the first one b2 1 0 0 0 1 1 Chad, you're going to sit out on this one And so, uh, I need a motion Wretchless motion wretchless. Is there a second be any of you who sat in on this? Yep, second. Yep Okay, um, I'm not exactly sure if anybody was missing for that one I apologize, but I will call everyone but meadows that's here today. Does that sound right? Okay, so kip Yes Rogers Yes Wretchless Yes Jeter Yeah And then Um, who was the alternate? Do you know rogers? Natalie Oh, shame. I think I spat in on that one Okay, so I don't think I sat in on that one You don't think so? No, we had to have at least one, uh, alternate sit in on today So I believe Shane was on all of them. Yeah. Oh You were on that one Okay. Okay. Yes. Okay So that would be Six to zero What you got Brian was Tisha on that one Tisha Tisha voted on that one where she left So Vote on that. Yes, she did. We've had a we've had a alternate on all of these cases. We're missing a member Because miss delacy is no longer here. We've had an alternate for all cases Well, I know I know that uh, that she was there on that case. I remember I She voted on that case That's why were you mean 11 we heard today. So the one we're looking at today. So Natalie Oh 11. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's me. Yes. Yes. I thought I thought you were talking about last one No, the it's the first uh case on the agenda for today. Yeah, that's me. Yes so without chad And with miss buchane filling in that would be six to zero approved Okay, so just so just so i'm clear Uh, there was one board member that left Yes, Tisha you left Tisha. She voted on that case, right? Yes. He did vote on the first five zero, right? And Okay, all right. So she did Right, and it was it would be five zero the motion would be five zero since she's no longer here and chad voted no So it should be five zero Okay, okay. All right. Got you. All right. Moving on. Uh b 2 1 0 0 0 2 5 This is a unanimous vote anyone can vote who wants to offer the motion Meadows move approval. Meadows. Who's the second? Rex will suck It was was why more why more was here still for this one, right? Yes Yes, is that what you said? Okay. Yeah Kip. Yes meadows. Yes, rogers. Yes Wretchless. Yes. Why more? Is gone. So sorry jeter Yeah, in boushey. Sorry. I don't know why this is so hard every week Every month. Uh, all right. Uh, next one b 2 1 0 0 0 2 7 another unanimous vote who wants to take the motion I move that we approve here. Who's the second? Oh shang second Okay Kip. Yes Meadows. Yes rogers Yes Wretchless Yes jeter Yeah, in boushey. Yes Alrighty next one b 2 1 0 0 0 2 8 7. This is another unanimous vote But this one had opposition, right? So we'll come over that one. All right pull it b 2 1 0 0 0 2 9 unanimous vote again Who wants to take it? Wretchless Wretchless Meadows second So That's why more was gone by this one. Correct. Okay. So then we have kip Yes Meadows. Yes rogers If you say yes, mr rogers. Sorry. Yes Okay Wretchless. Yes Jeter Yeah Major Yes Boushey Yes Okay, so that was 7 0 ready The next one is b 2 1 0 0 0 3 0 another unanimous vote. Um, I think this did this one also have No, the last one had it. Sorry, um 3 0 Who wants it? Wretchless. All right. Sure Who's the second meadows jeter jeter All right, we'll go with jeter Kip Yes Meadows Yes rogers Yes Wretchless Yes jeter Yeah Major Yes Boushey Yes 7 to 0 Cool All right, uh 31 was postponed 33 had opposition. Do you want to postpone that as well? Krista Or is that a county that's a county case or city case? That's right Next month to approve that. I'm not getting it 33 postponed. All right. Our next meeting is Tuesday, august 24th, and we have a training on the morning of august 17th You probably got an email from just uh, uh was the yesterday. So, uh, nine to noon Nine to noon. All right virtual as well. So I hope everybody can change attend that just go you got some When is the date for the november december meeting? I don't have that on my calendar yet So we don't actually, um, Eliza Monroe planning so we don't actually have a november meeting that or excuse me Yes, a no november meeting. That's when we have our recess Um, and then the december meeting is actually the second tuesday of the month, which is going to be the 14th of december Thank you. So you have it off in november and then we have one the second tuesday of the month in december And at that december meeting we'll bring the calendar for next year for approval okay All right anybody got anything else? Uh, are we uh, ruchless are we we're going to continue to zoom I assume for the rest of the year Uh, from what I hear councils thinking about a hybrid options for stuff in next month Okay We actually need to have approval from city council to meet Right in person and so they're still working out the details of that and test running the hybrid first Thank you. All right guys one o'clock. What was that five six hours? I don't know four hours good Got done pretty good. Uh, looking forward to seeing you all then see you on the 24th Have a good one