 We love good morning The meeting will now come to order welcome to the March 23rd 2021 meeting of this Durham Board of Adjustment. My name is Jacob Rogers. I'm the chair of the board I'd like to start by acknowledging that we are conducting this meeting using a remote electronic platform as permitted by session law 2020-3 the Board of Adjustment is a quasi judicial body that is governed by the North Carolina general statutes in 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 in the remote meeting Applicants proponents and opponents were required to register in advance and are also attending the remote meeting When a case is called for its hearings speakers will be promoted within the platform so their video can be seen The chair 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 is on the website for the Board of Adjustment Before we begin at the evidentiary hearings on today's agenda I would like to provide some important information about the steps taken to ensure that each party's due process Rights are protected as we proceed in this remote 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 this 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 remote platform if there is any objection to a matter proceeding in this remote platform the case will be continued Notice of today's meeting was provided by publishing notice in the newspaper mailed to property owners within 600 feet of the subject properties Posting a sign at the property and posting on the city's website the newspaper website and mailed notices for today's meeting Contained information how the public can access at the remote meeting as it occurs These notices also contained information about the registration requirement for the meeting 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 wish to submit at the hearing prior to today's meeting All materials that the city received from participants in today's cases as well as a copy of the 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 the board on a particular case case Must submit a written request for a copy of the order I want to welcome everyone here Madam clerk, would you like to call the roll? Jacob Rogers here cad meadows here Regina DeLacy here Micah Jeter Ian Kip here Michael Retchless here Tisha Weymour here Jessica Major here Michael Tarrant Natalie Bushett, even though my headphones are now out All right, I Was contacted by Natalie. She wasn't going to be here, but she requested a an excused absence Do we need a motion and Proof on that so Chris is saying yes, so is there a motion for an excused absence for Natalie retchless motion second And and okay, I guess do we need to Susan do you need to call everyone? Yes Jacob Rogers. Yes, that meadows. Yes, Regina DeLacy. Yes Ian Kip. Yes Retchless. Yes Tisha Weymour. Yes Jessica Major. Yes, Michael Tarrant. Yes Thank you for that and Hopefully everybody had an opportunity to review the minutes from our February meeting. Is there A motion to approve those Delacy I move that we accept the minutes as submitted Motion by Delacy. Is there a second? That's for a second. All right, Susan. Would you like to call everyone? Jacob Rogers? Yes. Chad Meadows. Yes Regina DeLacy. Yes Ian Kip. Yes, Michael Retchless. Yes Tisha Weymour Yes, Jessica Major. Yes, Michael Tarrant. Yes Susan, would you like to call the first case? Yes, Case B2100006. This case was continued from February A request for a variance from the vehicular use area landscaping requirements The subject site is located at 2152 and 2362 Soha Drive and 224 Northeast Creek Parkway It's zoned Science Research Park and in the suburban tier In this case has been advertised for the required period of time and property owners within 600 feet have been notified Notarized affidavits verifying the sign postings and letter mailings are on file And to verify the seating for this case It will be Mr. Tarrant, Ms. Weymour, Mr. Retchless, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Meadows, Mr. Kip and Mr. Lacey Thank you, Susan. Would we Go ahead and promote the The applicants for this case for you Mr. Chair may interrupt. I don't believe I was seated for this case last month. All right, uh Susan or who's We could put Ms. Major seat Ms. Major for this case Was the seating the seating has to be the same since it was continued Okay, okay, so I guess the seating there would be Six members of the board Mr. Lacey, Mr. Kip, Mr. Meadows, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Retchless and Ms. Weymour There was so in which in which case the applicant would have to consent to go forward with Less than seven But it was my understanding that the applicant With either with the jew this application If this is the same case That's what they would do This is Jessica. Dockery. I apologize. Eliza's having some technical difficulties. It looks like This has actually been withdrawn By request of the applicant Right, that's what I thought Good morning, everyone. Um, I wanted to actually time in I was trying to get a time in but Mr. Chair I actually have some uh revisions to the agenda I was trying to flag in to mention those during that time, but Unfortunately was unable to but as Jessica. Dockery stated this case was withdrawn As well as the motions at the end of the hearing have been withdrawn So those would be changes to the agenda that staff would like to mention before we get underway Thank you for that All right. Well, then we will continue. Um Susan would you like to call the next case? Case b2000049 Request for a minor special use permit for a daycare in a residential zoning district The subject site is located at 2416 Pickett road zoned residential suburban and in the suburban tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time and property owners within 600 feet have been notarized Notarized affidavits verifying the sign postings and letter mailings are on file And to clarify the seating for this case It will be Mr. Tarrant, Ms. Wymore, Mr. Wretchless, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Meadows, Mr. Kip and Mr. Lacey Alrighty Are the Applicants on okay. Good. Good. Uh, mr. Oyster We'll have to see you as well. I'll be going. Uh, Cole. Could you would you mind, uh, stop chairman until we Oh, yeah, sorry, my bad. No worries. Hold on a second Well, I'm trying to hold on no worries All right. I think uh, I think we've got everybody here Anyone who plans to give testimony on this one, 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? I do Mr. Royster, we we have to have a Okay, I do. All right. And uh, do you, uh, consent to this remote meeting platform? I do Yes, sir Um, Eliza That's me. Actually. Oh, Cole I knew that. All right Good morning. I'm Corbin nigger. I'm representing the planet staff Um, please note that all um the staff report and all material submitted to the public hearing To be made part of the public record within necessary corrections as noted So noted. Thank you Sorry about that Case B two zero zero zero zero nine Um, is a minor specialty permit for daycare in a residential zoning district Uh, the case area is highlighted in red. The site is in the suburban tier zone residential suburban r s 10 And then within the city of Durham jurisdiction The existing use is single family Uh, Chrissy Chrissy Snyder applicant. Um, be on behalf of wild hot college proposes to convert the existing 2861 square foot building Um to a daycare a new addition of 591 square feet Will also be added for a total 3425 square feet for a daycare on a parcel zone residential r s 10 And located in the suburban development tier per unified development ordinance section 5.1.2 A daycare in a residential zoning district is allowed then approved minor special use permit Um, a site plan case d two zero zero zero two seven four It's currently under review this project and is included as an attachment to the application Um, you do section 3.9 point 8a and b established Four findings and 13 review factors the applicant must meet in order under the board to grant a use permit These findings and review factors are identified on the staff report and the applicant's response to the findings and review factors Are identified in the application both within your packet Um staff will be available for any questions. Um, that's needed during the meeting All right, any questions for Cole before we move forward Shifting through here shifting through here. All righty. Um With the applicant like to say a few words Mr. Chair, this is paul young. Um, my understanding is that krissy is here somewhere, but I do not see her on the screen Um, I saw her in the participants. Um Maybe we could have her promoted We apologize about that. Sorry Ms. Snyder, uh, I don't think we had you uh, uh, swear in so we'll Need to administer the oath with you as well. 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? Hey, I'm also swearing Krissy, I think I think you're muted still. Um, we can't hear you Nick mr. Kirkland, are you going to be giving as well? Uh, yes, sir. Okay, so, um Uh, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? I do and and mrs. Snyder, I don't I don't think we heard you either I do I do you both, um Consent to this remote meeting platform. I do. Thank you. All right. Um Mr. Young, did you want Mr. Snyder who wants to go first? I'll let uh, krissy go first Um, I didn't prepare anything. Um, we we began this small nonprofit Program in january of 2017 and we've fallen in love with the neighborhood and we're looking forward to Continuing to serve the community And mr. Chair, this is paul young with dtw architects I am a registered architect in the state of north carolina And I'm a partner with dtw architects and planners located at 229 north crickson street Um, I do not have a presentation to give today But I am here to answer any questions that you might have. We also have, uh, nick kirkland here To answer any questions about the appraisal that you might have. All right Well, does the board have any questions for mr. Young or or any of the, uh, applicants? Uh, mr. Meadows, I see a hand Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chair. Uh, good morning. Um I have a couple of questions. I I understand that the The the daycare is uh, going to be using um shared parking Uh, next door with with the church Would you elaborate a little more on two things one the the number of kids that you would anticipate on a regular day? um The hours that they'll be on the site And then finally why the decision was made not to provide any on-site parking So we're planning to serve 45 children, which is what we're currently serving within the church um We will plan to go back to our 7 30 to 5 30 hours. We've been running reduced hours um during the pandemic and um The church is um Happy to partner with us. They have More than required parking and we just wanted to maintain The trees and the grass and the green Charm of this property Uh follow-up mr. Chair. Absolutely um Thank you, and I appreciate that one last question I assume that in order for the kids to get from the Let's say mom and dad park in the parking lot and it's time to either walk in or or or leave um, I assume the children are accompanied by the parents as they walk from the building to The the cars that are parked next door and it's necessary to Uh cross the driveway and walk and and walk along a new sidewalk that that you guys are constructing Is that is that accurate? Yes and Have you considered the possibility of a dedicated walkway from the site to the um to the parking lot? So the kids don't have to cross over the driveway I'm not sure if we have considered that. Um, the driveway won't be used for Anything except one handicap parking space So it it won't have any traffic coming and going Okay, thank you. Any other questions for the applicant, um, mr. Tarrant Yes, um It's hard to tell from the the plans. I apologize if I've overlooked it But is there any increase in impervious surface that that is being accounted for in some fashion with this proposal? All right, mr. Rocher adjust uh address that one Or there's actually a decrease in impervious surface proposed for this project Any other questions for the applicant? All right, is there any, um All right, anyone else uh here to speak in favor of this application And and i'm i'm gonna look to you miss snider mr. Young to to timmy Krista you got something um Yes, thank you. Uh christy kukr city attorney's office. Um, I just want to remind the board of the Obligation that it has and considering a minor special use permit um The udo sets out the criteria those are in the staff report that was provided to you one of the factors is um a finding that The project is not substantially injurious to the value of the properties in the general vicinity um Based on my observation of the agenda There was not an appraisal submitted with the packet So I would urge the board to make a further inquiry on that point. Um in terms of The Values valuation of the property. I believe there's someone here to speak on that So that would be my recommendation before you all move on past the folks who are here to speak in support of the application Absolutely, uh, it's a question that I was going to have Mr. Young do you have an appraiser or someone here to speak it about property values? I've thought I heard you say something about that We do and I apologize. I thought that information was submitted in time, but we do have Nick Kirkland here to speak about the appraisal that was done for the property Hi, my name is nick Kirkland. I apologize that that didn't get submitted that was supposed to have gotten submitted I apologize for that, but I'll go ahead and walk you through what we've done I'm a licensed residential appraiser I've been accepted as an expert in property value impacts and hearings just like this over five dozen times I'm here to present the Kirkland appraisal's impact study That impact study what we've done is we've addressed both the harmony of use as well as the potential to impact the adjoining property values So to do this first what we've done is we've looked at other daycare facilities in the area to determine first Where are they commonly located and second what commonly adjoins them? What we found is they are most commonly located in residential areas with residential uses being the most predominant adjoining use Some are located on the ends of neighborhoods specifically looking at the renovated house daycare facilities just like this one. They tend to adjoin One commercial use being as they're on the ends of neighborhoods But the proposed site is very similar to where Other daycare facilities are located and based on this information It is my professional opinion that the proposed site will be a harmonious use in its location To determine whether or not it would impact the adjoining property values We've done something that's called a matched pair or a paired sales analysis Um, this is a methodology that's supported by the appraisal institute And it's actually outlined in detail in the appraisal institute textbook real estate damages, which is written by Dr. Randall Bell To do this matched pair study what we've done is we've looked at homes that have sold adjacent to daycare facilities In Durham and compared those to homes that sold that were not adjacent to daycare facilities in order to measure for any difference We have identified a number of matched pairs within the impact study that show no significant impact to the adjoining property values For those homes that sold that were adjacent to the daycare facilities They were within typical market friction of one to five percent both positive and negative When looking at the median prices per square foot and therefore based on this information Is my professional opinion that the proposed use will not impact the adjoining property values And i'm happy to go into more detail or answer any questions that you have Any questions for mr. Kirkland? From the board. Is there a submission or something we could just glance at There is um, I can I'm am I allowed to share if I can I will share that with you Don't think so. Um, okay Yeah, playing playing would like to say that, um We didn't receive a official report. Um, if one was submitted, um, it wasn't submitted in time for it to be part of the presentation Um, and even yesterday, uh, we actually added, uh, mr. Kirkland to the register because he missed that as well I apologize for that. I thought it had been smoothed in time Any other questions for mr. Kirkland? I do have a question for the applicant, you know, just kind of for the record and for the folks who are here Uh, what's the relationship between the church and uh wildflowers cottage? They've been our landlord and Certainly supported us in many intangible ways, but landlord All right, any other questions for for the applicant Mr. Ritchells Yes, um Hi, i'm snider Ritchells here Is this house? Um, it's the the only use you want to have it for is for daycare. Is there anybody living there? I know it's a two story No, the upstairs rooms would be used for conference in office storage May I ask if have any other neighbors, uh been notified or talk to you or Has there been any feedback from the neighborhood at all? In addition to the letter that you all sent I sent personal letters to everyone Within a thousand square feet I only had um one gentleman call me last week just to reiterate That we're going to Not um impede any of the um storm water in the forest And I think made a quick friend. He's decided to provide the children with seeds to plant But I haven't received any other comments At all. I do have a number of families In close proximity who have enrolled their children with us and often Walk to school and some of them may actually even be here this morning willing to speak Chair rogers, this is jesca doc or the planning department We do actually have quite a few people waiting in the wings who may wish to speak in support or opposition If it's in support you because it's such a large group you may want to consider asking for a representative But I leave that to you Uh, first before we get that, uh, I think mr. Meadows has got a question Thank you chair rogers. I do I have a couple questions I um Mr. Snyder, thank you. Thank you for the work that you're doing. I appreciate that and I know that this has been a long process for you Um, you know, we have a variety of findings that we have to make in order to approve Your um your proposal and among those are how you'll be addressing You know circulation parking loading service entrances lighting um I I guess there are Some play areas that are outside. I did not see that on the site plan Would you talk a little bit more about the the plans for outdoor activity? um The the the kind of operational aspects trash pickup um And and just a little bit more about the kind of Circulation pick up and drop off process that you anticipate. Um on a on a daily basis Or or whenever you're open Thank you All right, so someone might be able to step up with more official information. So um when it's a full day child care program, there's not a hard and fast um Start time and end time so families will arrive in park. Um at the church I'd say between 7 30 and 9 um Trickle in and trickle out. Um afternoon would probably be between 3 30 and 5 30 um we Will just be pushing regular city rolling carts Out to the street for rick trash and recycling The volume that we've been using um has met the church has been supported by that type of Waste management um the playground It seems like we may have put some type of proposal. There's already um a wooden picket fence In a portion of the backyard there. Um, and it will just be um Expanded to the left. Um It's you know, not coming up to the street. That's just the front yard. Um Yeah, so you can see the uh fence there on your screen. Um the existing fence to the Currently to the top there And then wrapping around the back and new fence starting about there where the hand is and then continuing around To the bottom of the screen and then back up to the side of the house Thank you. Um meadows one last question. How many employees on a on a regular Sort of a day a typical day Um, I would say around 10 full time All right, any other questions? All right. Um, let's let's hear from some of the public in support of this if they're, um I think uh, I think the best thing to do here. Cole is to stop sharing and See folks um, is there If there if there are a lot of people, of course, I can't tell who is signed up to speak in favor forward or against what but, um, If there are multiple folks who are wanting to speak in favor of this, maybe we could uh, hear from a single representative and Just have the others either raise their hand or wave or or show some support that way. Um Here is chris peterson. Can I recommend I lower all the hands and have them raise hands again for those who Wish to speak as a representative. Yeah, I think that's a good idea. All right stand by Okay, um, if you could please raise your hand now if you wish to speak Well, let's hear from them all. All right. I'm gonna bring them all in. Um, for those of you There'll be about a five second delay. Um, so bear with me one second. Let me bring you all in Mr. Chair. Well, um, that's occurring christa kugaro city attorney's office. Um, I'd like to make the recommendation that's I believe there's going to be a lot of people speaking um, and so when you administer the oath and ask for, um, the consent to the remote meeting platform, um, that you sort of Maybe just call people by their first or last name um, and have them respond rather than us sort of Waiting for people to respond in some random order or just kind of in unison I think that's the clearest way to get that in the record Sounds good. All right. Uh, anyone who who plans on giving any testimony today Uh, we have to administer the oath your camera must be on as well. Um, so I see a few people here. Um, I'm just looking through here Both screens and your hands came down. So may I recommend maybe have them raise their hands the the digital raise hands Of course, thank you. And we'll also have have you raise your hand again. Um Um So, uh, if you do plan on giving testimony, please raise your right hand. We'll minister the oath Uh, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give today is the truth and nothing but the truth And we'll come by each one of you that I have here Jordan glasman I do Tobias walter I do Zachary lampren Do John hill I do Joshua Klein I do Your garija mahajan Mahajan, I do right Cynthia satterfield I do Claire dinis I do I'm miss ginnings. I can't see you first. I'm sorry Johanna Jennings. I do Scott Anderson I do And I think that is everyone so I think I'm we'll go Go first here. Uh, um, Jordan glasman. Would you like to start with some comments? Sure Uh, thank you members of the board for uh, giving me the chance to speak here My name is jordan glasman and I along with my partner beth Bennett our homeowners at 2626 chapel hill Our road a few short hundred feet away from the uh, from the new property Our son river Is a precocious 22 months old and has been At wildflower, uh, since the moment we were able to enroll him there Uh, at 22 months, he does a lot of chattering now and when he leaves every day He's usually sort of rattling off the names of his Five classmates as best he can and telling us about his his good day his good day Usually wearing muddy shoes And probably babbling some new word that we needed to cipher Um, although last week was easy because uh, the word was cookie because there were four leaf clover shaped cookies that were given to the kids and cookie comes through loud and clear At the end of every day rivers in a fantastic mood and still full of energy in spite of the activities They have set up for them there and we're grateful that uh wildflower is available to keep them safe and learning and And socializing even in these difficult times I'd like to say first that I believe that wildflower is harmonious with the neighborhood It's beneficial to young families. It increases the values of the uh, surrounding properties I don't know what could be more valuable to a new family than a daycare within a comfortable walking distance Wildflower embodies many of the goals that Durham has for its city including collaboration with others eco-healthy practices Instruction on social justice synergy with nonprofits and strong community values About the parking situation I will say that uh, the number of children wildflower equals the number of children being proposed the new space There's not going to be any traffic increase Uh with the variance Every day we drop off river at the same time every day. We pick them up at the same time There has never been a wait. There's never a line of cars The the uh wildflower carefully chooses the times and staggers the times. There's no rush time There will be no line extending into the road. It's never happened. I've never waited more than than 30 seconds When dropping or picking a river off and they actually have recently started using a new app That makes it very possible very easy to change the times. It'd be very flexible in order to um Message parents and adjust that time is needed to make sure that there is no way A wildflower intent wildflower does and intends to be home like and to maintain the existing residential look of the neighborhood There's not going to be any prominent or ugly signs. No dumpster No new parking lot. No clearing of forest. No commercial gaudy play playground equipment Uh, you know, they spend so much time outside in nature that like I said, he's regularly coming home Uh muddy we often see pictures of the kids playing with plants dirt nature other natural items um and uh I couldn't be any happier about wildflower and I support uh this variance uh as strongly as I can both as a parent of uh of um Someone as a kid in wildflower as well as a very close by homeowner. Thank you for the opportunity to speak Mr. Glassman, uh, we want to uh, I know we've got a lot of folks here and I'm not sure if we've got anybody else to speak in favor or against but um I appreciate that that opportunity. Um, I'm looking at my screen here. This is uh, hajan. Would you like to Yes, thank you. I'll keep my remarks brief. Um Since 2017 our children have been part of the wildflower cottage community on our first tour of the facility We found the space to be a magical blend of individual and community-based learning spaces child center curriculum That aligns with our family values of intergenerational community nature based education Understanding uh child's uh place in space uh both in nature as well as in the community and just playing fun Over the years we've been excited to learn about miss christy and the wildflower board's desire to move to their forever home Uh to four one six picket road We at times have provided feedback on the plan and believe it will be another beautifully constructed child centered space I specifically want to speak about miss christy's creative innovative. Um, just uh, you know shift in Operations during this pandemic last June when miss christy decided to reopen She thoughtfully constructed new procedures that limited health exposures but minimized stress and anxiety for young children and their families This was an absolute lifeline for my partner and I as we were still juggling work responsibilities Uh, the procedures around drop-off and pick up are clear and parents walk hand in hand with their children to and from the facility I hope the board will support the decision to make the adjustment to let wildflower move into their new facility Specifically because miss christy and the wildflower board have been so thoughtful about engaging all stakeholders in this process. Thank you Thank you for your remarks Uh to bias walter Yes, I'll keep my uh my support of this brief as well. Um, I am a neighbor Just about 500 feet away from the proposed location and my son larce also goes to Wildflower he started last fall when the pandemic started lifting were were extremely thankful for for the helping hands at wildflower I support everything that that the two prior speakers Said as well. I love this idea of being able to take my stroller and go Actually, we went the whole winter. I don't think I've picked him up a single time in my car and it's great to see I think there was one morning where there were three strollers in the line on a On a sidewalk all moving towards wildflower, which was great to see So I love having them in the neighborhood. I think they are a really great addition to the neighborhood and make this feel like home and warm I've been very interested in the plans to and support the part right off There's there's no trees that are no forests that are being cut down This is not going to look like a new commercial building I myself here in my location have been renovating 120 year old house for the last year and a half and I've been great to see those plans And I think it fits really well in the neighborhood Or you know stays in in that way and and thus really fits in the neighborhood and it's a great harmonious relationship with with neighbors parents staff Throughout so I'm I'm heavily in support of this as well Thank you, sir. Uh, Zachary Lampren Yes, good morning. I'm a parent of a child at wildflower and also a neighbor I'm one of those strollers in the line with mr. Walter often heading to pick up my daughter juniper from wildflower We're very lucky to live within walking distance And actually the proposed move would bring the daycare about 50 yards closer to our house. So that's my disclaimer, I guess But very much as with others in support Of this move, you know, like many families Last year in the fall we were struggling to balance Childcare and work So when a spot opened up at wildflower, you know, it's such a good program and so close to our home It really provides us with tremendous peace of mind knowing that our daughter Is in a taken care of in a poem like environment where she spends as others have said a large part of her day outside with river getting filthy And that's really important to us and allows us to focus On our job. So our daughter's 19 months old. So She's a Maybe not a woman of few words, but a woman of very short sentences But we can we can tell How much she loves wildflower every morning when we get her ready. We say are you ready to go to school? And and she's she's very good at saying no, she hasn't quite mastered the word. Yes But she often just laughs in places where you would expect her to say yes So we asked her if she's excited to go and she laughs are you excited to see Miss lila miss shana all of her friends and that she's just laughing all the way out the door So we're really really happy to be able to send her there Regarding the move as others have mentioned. We're excited that on the occasions that we do need to drive Pick up and drop off are going to be just as smooth Parking will remain the same I'm happy to be able to go to the same lot have the same safe walk in and out of the building And that there won't be a traffic increase I think having a high quality daycare like wildflower within walking distance for us and other neighbors Is a is a huge asset So the neighborhood and so really happy to have the opportunity to speak In favor of the move to the proposed space and and happy to be a part of the wildflower family Thank you uh Claire dentist Mr. Chair Oh, christa. I'm sorry. Sorry to interrupt. Um christian kukura city attorney's office um I realize that we have several more speakers. I just want to offer that It might be helpful to limit non-repetitive testimony And testimony that is relevant to the factors I've heard some comments on circulation traffic and things like that I think that that's what what the board needs to hear about in terms of Making its decision today and and attorney word I'll drop those into the chat. I believe everybody can see those Most certainly I think that it's it's valuable to hear about the curriculum That the school offers but I think that the focus of the the discussion needs to be on the factors and criteria that the board needs to consider for its decision Appreciate those remarks and I'll say guys that the board of adjustment is a little different than most other boards We are it's a quasi judicial. So, uh, you know, we have to take competent testimony on these review factors I'll mention them to you in harmony with the area not substantially injurious to the value Of the properties in the general vicinity and performance with all two In conformance with all special requirements applicable to the use Three will not adversely affect the health or safety of the public four will adequately address All of these I guess the review factors circulation being one of those as well So, um, if if we've got, um, I know that, uh, Seems like there's great support here, which is, uh, I'm sure the applicant is very fond of If you've got if we can limit our our testimony just because uh, we want to make sure we Have enough time to also hear from the experts and make sure we got all the questions asked everything But uh, claire denis, would you like to Yes, I'll be brief. So so it's not to be repetitive, but um, I am a Neighbor of wildflower and also a parent of a child going to wildflower We walk to school unless i'm not brave enough to To be in the 30 degree weather. We've never had an issue with traffic When we have been driving and I will just end with I think it's really imperative that we throw our support around early childhood education centers such as this one I think it could really be A different world if more children had access to this type of early educational experience. Thank you so much Thank you, uh, john hill Yeah, uh, just to speak briefly. Uh, i'm a parent and also, um, a neighbor. Um, I Uh, speak specifically to the traffic. Uh, i'm one of the many people that create the, um, stroller traffic jam in the morning um, and I I don't see and i've never experienced any sort of traffic related to, um Cars themselves as only strollers I would say that um, it's one of the reasons that you know, we continue to stay To we've made the decision to stay in derm and not move To back to rally. Um, and my neighbor next door. Um, also has a 19 month old who's um looking for Daycares in the area to walk to and we um, you know, couldn't recommend wildflower enough Thank you, uh, joanna jennings Yes, good morning. Thank you. Um, I am also speaking in support. Um, I wanted to just point out a couple of things Uh, I'm an indigent defense attorney here in Durham. And so I put my lawyer hat on Um, I did review the required findings as well as the review factors and also noted that the The statute or the ordinance rather actually has the mandatory language of the this shall be approved If the evidence supports the required findings and review factors And so I, you know, urge the board absolutely based on based on my assessment based on planning department's report that This language is pretty unequivocal And I just want to point out that the program is simply moving next door. So I noticed for example, I'm considering something like noise Um, there really will not be substantial difference to what's happening in the neighborhood. Um, I I know that a core value of wildflower cottage and um, I'll say I sent all three of my children there. They're ages eight five and three We've been attending since 2017 Um, a core value of the program is that the we leave spaces better than we found them And so I'll just note that wildflower cottage has a very light footprint the teachers the staff are just incredibly cognizant of their environment Um, and so there won't be anything that will change the nature of the neighborhood There won't be anything unseemly or anything that causes distress to the neighbors I just have the utmost confidence in christie snider in this program. It's a nonprofit program We're just incredibly fortunate to have this program here in Durham. Um, we have received so much From them and I know That there have been some issues In in front of this board in the past. And so I just want to be really just vote very vocal in my support And ask the the board to approve the minor use permit Thank you. All right. Uh, we'll give a couple minutes each as well to uh, Cynthia siderfield First and then scott anderson Great. Thank you. My name is Cynthia siderfield. I live at 2412 picket road next door to the wildflower cottage proposed property I've spoken with coal renegar Yesterday who's answered a lot of my questions and I've also spoken with representatives of the wildflower cottage some time ago My primary concerns as a next door neighbor had been that the house be preserved that the green space be preserved This property is an anchor along this portion of picket road Um, and it's an important part of the fabric of the neighborhood and though no historic designations apply to this property I think they probably could um, I appreciate that the um, that the wildflower cottage has Excuse me found a creative, uh, solution to meeting the parking requirements Um by working with the church so that no more impervious service is added than is absolutely necessary Um, and so overall I believe that this project will best utilize the house and the property while adding a much needed service That's very compatible with the neighborhood and I think they'll be a good neighbor To myself and to the church um, I do want to ask especially since there's a focus and curriculum on um, wildlife that in considering the addition of any, uh, Lighting for the project that it be done So I don't know if the if the uh, the lighting was a requirement that was taken into consideration before or after the new Um led street light was put in uh in front of this house But it pretty much Excuse me daylights the property. Um, it's very very bright So we do have owls in the neighborhood and a lot of other wildlife And I just want to make sure that we don't add any more lighting that is absolutely necessary Um, but that is all I wanted to contribute. Um, I speak in favor of the project. Thank you. Um, Scott Anderson I I just thought I should probably speak up in favor. I am the senior pastor at St. Paul's Lutheran Church, which is Been the landlord for wildflower cottage and We will be allowing them to use the parking space and I just wanted to let you know I'm here. So if somebody had any question, we've worked together with christy now for about four years And in that time we've been able to manage all the activities of the church as well as our preschool and her Without causing any impact on traffic in the neighborhood We are certainly willing to continue to share and we share green space in the back And we will continue to allow the children to Play in the green space in the back at which I think allows a very nice buffer for the whole neighborhood And I just wanted to make sure you were aware that um, I'm here if somebody had any questions Thank you sir. All right. Um, I appreciate everyone's testimony Chris help me identify if there is anyone here to speak in opposition to this We had no registered oppositions, but if anyone in attendance can use the raise hand Once again, if you are in opposition All right, doesn't appear so. Um, is there a, um, Cole, would you like to give a recommendation? Yes, uh, staff recommends approval in accordance with everything that was submitted. Um, and the staff for and shown in the site All right, let's bring it back to the board. Um, is there any discussion or Um, anybody would like to make a motion Mr. Tarrant Yes, I just had a clarification for planning staff, please. Um, the the parking agreement would in fact be a recorded Instrument that would carry with the property. Is that correct? That is correct. It is recorded and we have received that on file and have a copy of that and it was um Reviewed and approved Okay, is that is that different than the letter from mr. Anderson that's included in the application material? Um, I believe so. It's actually a more formal document. Um, but we have received it and it has been reviewed and approved Um as acceptable Okay My my only concern was that this this particular letter indicates that it's revocable and will not run with the land and as it relates to Approving a special use permit for required parking for this facility. Um, I just had that one question So I appreciate it. Well, it doesn't it doesn't run with the land it technically runs. Um with the use that's going there So the use for the change in the future. Um They wouldn't automatically have access to the church parking Understood. Thank you Meadows, can I follow up on that? Um, let's say for the sake of argument that um, for whatever reason um, the parties to the agreement change or the agreement is no longer Desired to be honored. What would happen? Um at that point um at that time, I believe um I think it would it would carry But if it does end they would have to have provide some other form of parking to meet the requirement Um, I assume that it would be something that enforcement would handle from that spot. Um that point forward or if if not, um Hopefully the applicant would contact us But it would be something that uh would have to be um I guess found otherwise in other words, they'd have to find some other way to accommodate parking whether it is coming back to the board to do more spaces or Having some other shared agreement with another another surrounding area Thank you All right, any other discussion Mr. Retchels Yes, um my question and concern is um Where do delivery trucks come and go? Where do they? Uh drop off supplies. I'm sure you're going to be feeding the children and Um, I'm sure as well the church has deliveries. Where does where does that happen? And that's um What we actually do not provide catering the children bring their own food um So I think you would only be looking at things like the postal service or amazon Typically, I believe they enter in the picket road side of the church right now And drop off right there Thank you Any other questions comments I just wanted to chime in to say that I've always admired this house. It's a beautiful house And this is a very very high use of the house because If it got into the hands of a developer it would be turned into and I know the church owns the property But it would be turned into 10 not very cute houses So to me, this is a fantastic way To have a good use in the neighborhood keep the house on the planet preserve the green space And so I'm in support of this Yep. All right. Well, um, if there's not any more does anyone want to offer a motion? Rich let's hear Um, I would really like some more data on property values And and and it's something I could read um to support surrounding property values of course, but um I mean, I'm really in support of this but I you know, there's review factors that we have to go over and and that's just one that's a kind of preventing me from saying okay We do have testimony from a licensed appraiser. Yeah, but I can see things a little more clearly when it's submitted and read about it and That's where I'm at with it Are you okay? I think you're on mute Yeah, there we go. I'm trying to unmute. Thank you. Um We have a testimony from a licensed appraiser and we have anecdotal testimony from Neighbors who are also clients Of this place One of whom said the reason he's not moving back to Raleigh is because of this This facility Taken together. I think that's sufficient testimony to talk about property values Thank you Good point Noted Good point. All right, uh Okay, going back. Uh, any Mike Yes, I think I would just like to reiterate what mr. Kip Said I think you know the fact that they're preserving if I'm not mistaken this house is almost 100 years old if not more And I think that You know while it is a daycare To me that's certainly Fatal use for the area. I'm given it's adjacent to a church that has a preschool Um, and I don't really feel that preserving the character in the footprint of the home To make this use happen is is the right way forward. You know, even some of the more um, the larger commercial daycares would To mr. Kip's point they would they would demolish the building and put up the facility that they feel is appropriate So um as far as being in harmony with the area, I feel like this application certainly Does good job of checking that box Thank you, mr. Chair, and I have to agree. I um, I know we are generally Used to seeing an appraisal report in our packets And and sometimes those appraisers are on these meetings and give testimony as well And sometimes they're not we just have it in those in our report Having mr. Kirkland here today I think satisfies that for me Because he is the expert While while we're accustomed to having that report And in probably more detail I think in my mind that's His testimony is sufficient, but I appreciate that any other thoughts or or does anyone want to offer any kind of motion? This this is meadows and I want to share some of the Frustration with this case and the reason why I'm saying frustration is I think it's a fantastic year Use I think it's a fantastic use of the property I have a little kid and I know what it was like to have daycare and a home center daycare is a great thing um The best daycares we ever went to were in refitted homes Uh, so I get that I understand that Um, I wish that this application had a little bit more thought applied to the relationship between the operations of the business and the the the various functional aspects that are necessary For a building that's got 10 employees and 45 kids Um, if there's a fire Where do we go? Where do the trash can sit? What's up with the lighting? How do we handle? You know ingress and egress from the parking those aspects We talked about them, but anecdotally and there's really not a ton of evidence about it And and so that makes this otherwise no brainer decision more difficult than it needed to be um, and I and I you know I'm leaning towards supporting this um, but I'm just I'm I'm I'm Having some reservation about the the functional aspects of the use Maybe not necessarily with miss snider. I'm sure she's very good at what she does But who knows who's going to be in this building operating this facility? You know in two years or three years Um, and will they be as conscientious and effective as miss snider? I don't know And the site's not really well equipped to handle somebody who comes along who doesn't have that level of expertise So, uh, I just wanted to share those thoughts. Thank you Thank you As chair I can make an exception to the rule. It sounds that we can't accept a uh, or I Excuse me and clear my throat. I can't accept an appraisal report now um through the hearing if if it wanted to um And I don't see a reason why we wouldn't uh for that, um, Mr. Kirkland's report since it was not submitted on time uh, and ready for this meeting so Uh, Brian, I don't know if you've got anything else to say Mike retches. Yeah, um, I think is it mr. Young you're the architect um, have you considered exit signs and things like that to kind of upgrade to you know A standard of egress in the building. Yeah, fire extinguishers in there and things like that So by building code we are required to bring the interior of this building up to the current standards to me today care. Yes, sir Okay. Thank you Yeah, mr. Chair Uh, just responding to your question Uh, I don't think it would be inappropriate. Uh, if in fact the applicant Does have a report at this time Uh, to share that with the board if that's something that the board Feels would be necessary for its deliberations. I know typically we don't accept any Evidence that was not provided in advance Uh, in this case, uh, I think you have the the ability to accept that there's no opposition to this case Um, and if it is something that the other board members think would really be helpful I think you would have the ability as the chair to accept that at this point Krista, you know, but I would I would ask, uh, krista to certainly weigh in on that Since this is a city case Thanks Krista could go to the attorney's office. Um, I think, uh my my Opinion at this point is that the board has heard testimony on property value The report is not necessary To be included Our practice during this Nearly year remote meetings. I think we've got a late start on on actually having remote meetings has been to not accept um anything any, um written testimony After the deadline and at the meeting. I think that that poses some challenges for the board considering That evidence in real time written evidence in real time um so I just I think that that Kind of historical practice is important to consider here. Um, and I think so far. I've only heard Mr. Rectualists say that he would like to see it. I think other board members have said they feel like the testimony that was given orally was sufficient um My preference would be to to not have that report included But at the end of the day, it's the board's decision to make Yeah, I actually think that the testimony is sufficient Yeah, and I just like to say Rectuals here It's probably one of the the hardest review factors is the property values on a special use permit And that's why I'm just trying to Cross the tease. I think it's a great um It's the whole package is well done and I am in and supported But I wasn't sure about physical evidence Thank you, sir Sorry, I'll just add. I don't think um I don't think that the the physical written evidence is a requirement I think that the address has to be testimony and that can be written or oral I think that the board has received the oral testimony and if you have questions If you need to explore any of the aspects of the analysis further with mr. Kirkland, you're more than welcome to do that That's right And I also like to remind. I mean this board shouldn't get into the enforcement I mean, there there's a whole department within within the city and the county to deal with enforcing Standards and and and regulations. So Um, I know that often we have these questions I think we have to also look at what's before us and it's this uh, you know this application for the special use permit So, um, I don't I want to ask it one more time. I don't know if anybody wants to make a motion There's two things that can happen today one to continue I see And do a motion Lacey, I'm sorry. I had trouble pulling it up I hear everybody make a motion that application number b2 Whole bunch of zero is 49 An application for a minor special use permit for a daycare in a residential district on property located at 2416 picket road Has successfully met the applicable requirements of the unified development ordinance and it's hereby granted Subject to the following conditions that the improvements shall be substantially consistent with all the information submitted to the board as part of the application All right, we've got a a motion to approve by mr. Lacey. Is there a second? Mike parent is the second uh, susan, would you call the board? Mr. Meadows Yes Mr. Kip. Yes Mr. Lacey. Yes Mr. Rogers. Yes Mr. Tarrant. Yes Mr. Retchless Yes Ms. Waimour Yes Motion carries seven to zero by a vote of seven to zero your minor special use permit has been approved We wish you the best of luck and thank you before for coming before the BOA this morning Thank you. All right. Um, susan, would you like to call the next case? Yes, b21 00003 a request for minor special use permit to construct and to construct an addition onto an existing legal non-conforming single family dwelling The subject site is located at 2310 Woodrow street Zoned residential suburban and in the urban tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time And property owners within 600 feet have been notified Notarized affidavits verifying the signposting and the letter milling on file The seating for this case will be mr. Lacey mr. Kip mr. Meadows mr. Rogers mr. Retchless mr. Waimour and mr. Tarrant all right, um Cole do you have this one? Hey everybody, um, and I believe that the applicant is already queued up and has this video showing mr. Black So we'll just do the oath for him All right, uh, mr. Black, if you'll raise your right hand Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? I swear And uh, do you consent to this remote meeting platform? I do. All right. Thank you, sir Eliza, take it away. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and share my screen Good morning, everyone. My name is Eliza Monroe. I'm representing the planning department Planning staff request at the staff report and all materials submitted at the public caring to be made part of the public record With any necessary corrections as noted So noted. Thank you. Thank you Case b21 00003 is a request for a minor special use permit to construct an addition onto an existing legal Forming single family dwelling The applicant is john black with riverbank construction and the subject site is located at two three one zero two three one zero woodrow street The case area is highlighted in red on the screen The site is zoned residential suburban eight or rs eight and is located within the urban tier The site area is currently has a single family dwelling structure located on it, which you can see here in this aerial The original building is an existing Non-conforming structure as it does not conform to the current dimensional standards for the required Sideyard setbacks for a single family detached housing type per unified development ordinance section 7.1.2 b So you'll see here that the Sideyards require a minimum of nine feet and given that they're not able to meet that side yard on either side This would be considered a non-conforming structure The proposed reconstruction does not protrude past those sidelines. So there's no new encroachments being proposed However per udo section 14.4.1 c.4 Additions to a non-conforming structure are permitted with a special use permit Without a special use permit so long as the encroachment does not increase more than 10 percent of the existing square footage Of the existing structure or increase the height The applicant is proposing 246 square feet of new floor area, which is a 25 increase over the original Square footage, which would require a minor special use permit. Hence while they're here before you all today Additionally the proposed scope of work does include a high increase over the original structure original height of the home Which also requires a minor special use permit pursuant to udo section 14.4 14.4.1 c.5 So therefore they're here before you get given that the height as well as the square footage has increased of a non-conforming structure I would like to note that this structure is a part of the urban tier and therefore it would be required typically to meet The infill development standards, which we've mentioned before a couple of times in other hearings I'll just note that the infill the standards Have requirements about the height as it relates to this case. So per udo section 6.8.3 b The maximum height of a structure shall be the maximum height permitted within the zoning district Or no more than 14 feet taller than the height of any adjacent structure The maximum height permitted for a single family dwelling in the rsa zone is 35 feet And the proposed addition is not more than 14 feet taller than any adjacent structure So the height as it relates to those infill development standards is not an issue Udo section 3.8 3.14.8 Establishes review factors and findings in which the applicant must meet in order for you all to grant a minor special use permit The application as well as all submit materials were available within your packet as well as the staff report providing Analysis and staff will be available for any questions as needed throughout the hearing process And staff, of course, will also continue to have control of the screen and change over things so that you can see different attachments In addition to this original survey, there are additional attachments that show the proposed addition and renovation from different elevations Staff is now available for any questions Does you have a question just to thank you. Um, thanks, Eliza. Um Um Does this does this site have any uh off-street parking on it? That was the first question and the second question is as part of your review Um, did you notice if there are any other two-story? Uh buildings on this block face, uh, did that did that come up at all? Thank you So, um for the first question technically there is off-street parking in this front portion here There's also in looking at the aerial and I might ask mr Black to speak a little bit more because I just use google maps to see and looking at the aerial there looks like There might be an unofficial space, uh, not like a paved driveway, but area that's been compacted over time That might have had a cargo there and looking at the aerial But there is off-street parking. Woodrow is a slightly narrow road, but it looks like when I looked in the aerial There was a car that was parked in front and there's that Area behind a bush that looks like it had been compacted over time from a car parking there Um with regards to the height the way the addition is I'm going to scroll a little bit to this image here So this is the rear of the house where my cursor is pointing So the way that we measure height height for multiple roof levels shall be measured determined by the highest Roost level and when looking at the type of addition they have we measure height from the midpoint Within the city of Durham. So we go from the finish floor elevation and when you have a gable type roof It's the root midpoint Given that this addition in the rear is a flat roof We would measure the height then from the finish floor elevation to this flat roof here So it's a slight increase a little bit shorter than the height of the chimney. That's existing But therefore it's not It is a second floor installation, but from the front of the property it might not be very viewable So therefore in looking at the other adjacent homes, most of them are single family single family probably with a little bit of attic space at the top But this is still within the purview of the urban tier standards of less than 14 feet taller than the adjacent structures I hope that makes sense. It does. Thank you very helpful. Thank you. You're welcome Very well done anyone else any questions for Eliza Move on and hear from mr. Black I don't I think you're still me. Thank you very much. Um, yes, I'm with riverbank construction representing the homeowners here um, I believe you have Everything in your packet. I don't want to necessarily repeat what you have before you, but um, we'll Kind of reiterate what miss mun row said that although the height is technically increasing a little it is The rear addition will remain below the primary gable of the house So it's not something that's going to be very visible from the street And especially being set in from the sides of the house so much And then as far as the parking goes um, it's exactly what she said they don't have a driveway with gravel or You know Pavement or anything like that they tend to park on the street most of the time But there is a place where you can pull up sort of in the front yard. That's exactly then compacted That appears to be used as a driveway at times But we don't propose on any changes to anything like that we don't propose Many changes at all to a lot of the criteria that that's in the Minor special use responses, you know, there's no change to the circulation on the site the parking the lighting the use the access Signage utilities none of this stuff is changing it's it's literally Just because we're adding on to this structure that's non conforming on a non conforming lot and we would be encroaching upon one of the side yard setbacks by about 15 inches. So With that I will entertain any questions you all have Thank you, mr This is taren. Um, mr. Black. I appreciate the Summary, um, am I correct in looking at this plan that you are not removing any of the large trees in the rear of the property to construct this addition that is correct and the the footings of the The addition won't affect the critical root zone of those trees That is correct. We have We've had Bartlett Tree service on site already to inspect the health of these existing trees and to confirm that we are able to construct this as required Without affecting those trees Because actually the addition does not extend any further into the backyard than the existing deck already does Thank you You're welcome Any other questions for the applicant? Oh, mr. Ritchis Hi, mr. Black. It's a beautiful design. Um, thank you. I just want to understand The peak I mean you're not going any higher than The existing peak of that gable, but it seems to flare out So you're is that what you're saying that that's just a little bit higher on the on the tapered Back of that cantilevered broom It's a weird. It's a yeah It's kind of a kind of technical calculation as miss mun row Pointed out the way they measure the heights of these things We're we're not the roof itself is not going to be higher than the peak of that primary gable But the interior space in the back of the house is going to be higher and the roof does slope up Um, and the grade does slope down. So there is an increase in height at the very back But again I'll chime in a little bit about that too, mr. Black if that's okay We're just Eliza Monroe staff speaking the way we measure measure heights is by roof type So therefore even though it's we would consider them multiple levels So therefore the gable it would go to that midpoint but because the addition is a different roof type. It's a flat roof Different height so Not uh, I agree with you. It's a very small difference It really is just maybe a couple of inches more But the gable height since it's coming from that midpoint and then the back one is coming from the flat roof Technically, they're different heights Gotcha. Well, you've done a wonderful job in in, um Working that into um that lot. It's it's a nice it's a nice All right, any other questions for the applicant mr. Black Eliza, do you have a uh, is there anyone In the audience to speak in favor of this anyone else? Uh Eliza Monroe speaking there was no one else that registered for this case to speak or or in an in opposition either right Just mr. Black was registered to speak for this case. Thank you. Um Eliza, do you have a recommendation for I do also have a recommendation um planning staff recommends the approval of case b 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 such that the improvements So be substantially consistent with the information and plans submitted to the board as part of the application All right. Any discussion? This is meadows. I love it Yeah, wretches. I'm I'm also for this uh very well thought out and uh, it just doesn't impact you can't even tell it's there I I share the same thoughts Well, does anyone want to offer any other thoughts first and then if anybody wants to offer a motion Please do so. I'd like to offer a motion Mr. Wretches I hereby make a motion the application number b 2 1 lots of 0s 3 an application for a minor special use permit on property located at 2310 wood road street has successfully met the applicable requirements So the unified development ordinance and it's hereby granted subject to the following conditions Uh the improvement shall be substantially consistent with the plans and all information submitted to the board as part of this application We've got a motion for approval by mr. Wretchless. Is there a second? Delacy Got a second. Uh, mr. Lacey susan Yes, mr. Tarrant Yes Miss. Why more? Yes, mr. Wretchless Yes, mr. Rogers Yes, mr. Meadows Yes, mr. Q. Yes, mr. Lacey. Yes, motion carry seven to zero A vote of seven to zero your minor special use permit has been approved We uh, you'll get an order soon and uh, we appreciate you coming for the BOA this morning. Thank you Have a good day. You too Do I could call the next case or does anybody want a five or 10 minute break? Five minutes. Is that what i'm saying? We're saying 10 five Five, okay. We've got five minutes. We'll reconvene at 9 57 then all right as soon as tisha and in Come back. We'll uh Get started again. There's all right. We're here Uh, susan, would you like to call the next case? Okay, here I am Uh, let's see case b 2 1 0 0 0 0 4 a request for a variance from the structured parking design standards and to exceed the maximum parking Permitted the subject site is located at 14 17 west pedigree street zone compact design support one And in the ninth street compact neighborhood tear This case has been advertised for the required period of time and property owners within 600 feet Have been notified Notarized affidavits verifying the sign postings and letter millings are on file The seating for this case will be mr. Lacey mr. Kip mr. Meadows mr. Rogers mr. Wretchless mr. Wymore and mr. Tarrant All right, uh, would everyone who plans on giving testimony for this particular case? Would you please turn your video on? Um The case number on his is different than what the one we're on does that matter Question is on three cases today. Oh cool. Yeah, actually, I'm not on this one. Oh, let's move you back then I think we got you by accident. Sorry. No problem Preston's a star Today, all right, uh, if you plan on giving testimony, please raise your right hand Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give today will be the truth and nothing but the truth I'll need a yes from each one linwood smith I do Richard grogan Yes Yes All right, and do you each consent to this remote meeting platform? Yes. Yes Yes, Eliza. Yep, that's gonna be me Good morning again, everybody. Eliza Monroe representing the planning department The planning staff request that the staff report all materials submitted to the public hearing be made part of the public record with any necessary corrections as noted Thank you. So noted Case b2 1 0004 is a request for a variance from the structured parking design standards and to exceed the maximum parking permitted The applicant is mooring star law group and the subject site is located at 1417 west pedicure street The case area is highlighted in red. The site is zoned compact design support 1 or cds 1 And it's in the 9th street compact neighborhood development here um, we haven't had uh The site is currently the location of a congregate living facility and you can see it as an aerial here We're going to kind of focusing on this portion of the site here in the corner And there'll be some exhibits that will highlight that a little bit more We haven't had um, this type of case in a while or i'm not sure if we've had one of this specific zoning district So I kind of want to highlight the exact sections that we're going to be talking about So this might be a little bit longer presentation than normal, but it's just so that we're all on the same page So per section 10.3.1 a of the unified development ordinance A congregate living facility is required to have one motor vehicle parking space per two units In addition to one motor vehicle space per for every four employees The use on the property consists of 137 care units and the maximum of in a maximum of 100 147 onsite employees At any given time. This would require a minimum of 106 parking spaces on site within the cds one zoning district and within 400 feet tier the body But with the 400 feet of the tier boundary as the parcel is parking can reduced to 80 percent of that minimum requirement by right And must not exceed 100 percent of the amount required per udo section 10.3.1 b.1 Therefore the site currently has 104 parking spaces, but a total of 168 spaces is proposed The udo section 10.3.1 b.1 a can permit an applicant to exceed maximum parking If the following design standards are met the parking must be provided within a structured parking And two of the three following standards must be met where at least 50 of the parking structure can Is a structured roof area is a green roof A minimum of 15 of the total parking provided shall be permanently publicly Accessible and all street frontage portions of the parking structure shall be constructed to allow conversion to interior usable space Additionally within udo section 16.3.2 a it states that parking shall not be exposed on the ground floor of a structured parking And must utilize a frontage type pursuant to udo section 16.3.1 The ground floor frontage along the right of way shall only be uses other than parking so this here this request To kind of summarize that The applicants requesting a variance to exceed the maximum parking permitted without meeting those two of three design standards that i mentioned from section 10.3 And they're also requesting a variance from section 16.3.2 a Due to the desire for the parking to be exclusively in this space where 16.3 would require them to have Another use besides parking on that ground floor. I hope that was a good summary, but we can definitely talk about it a little bit more So udo section 3.14.8 establishes 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 we received within your packet and staff is available for any questions throughout the process and will remain in control of the screen chat I see a question, um, so Sorry, I hope that was a good summary that we can all kind of understand the nature of the request that we're hearing this morning Yeah, thank you for that Eliza. Let's chat. You got a question Do it was a great summary and i'm going to reiterate it so that um, I can um display the fact that maybe I didn't understand it So if I am wrong, please correct me Okay This site is In a special district and you cannot exceed 100 of the maximum required parking spaces Which is I guess about 106 they're proposing 68 and so in order to Accommodate those additional 68 however many spaces 64 whatever it is They need to do a structured parking Uh a parking structure. Uh, that's pretty much the only way that this could could happen and When they do a parking structure it needs to Either have a 50 green roof or have 15 spaces available for public use or have And this is the part I didn't understand street frontage construction I'm not sure what what that meant. Maybe you could tell us a little bit more about that But so they want to go over so they got to do structured parking the structured parking has to have these these elements these configurations it doesn't and and They also have to set up the ground floor of the parking Garage, I assume adjacent to a street so that uses Other than parking are in that portion of the building and they're they're they're wanting to not do that as well. Is that is that right? That is right. So you actually understood and you're able to graduate well So um on the screen you'll see to answer the question about street frontage So pedigree and pow street if you can envision Within the downtown area you might know there's parking decks all through downtown But most of them have a commercial or non parking uses outward facing So that's what we're talking about here those street frontage portions of the parking structure Shall be converted the first part so that it should be converted Shall be constructed to allow the conversion to interior useable space section 16, which is our downtown design That's our design district section and that particularly deals with our downtown area that blatantly states you have to have a use other than parking on the ground floor And in this case the applicant and I'll let them talk a little bit more about why they chose This specific design, but in this case the applicant is wanting to have Since they have a need for parking they're wanting everything that they're to construction to constructing first floor second floor to all be parking As opposed to having to One have a space that's possibly able to be converted into another use that's not parking Or having to provide that frontage type as required by section 16 that states it cannot be parking on the ground floor so chad you are on the money in terms of highlighting those different things Okay, thanks aliza and i'm hoping that the applicant will focus on those topics Surely well, uh any other questions for aliza? I i'm accepting I don't see any um Would the applicant like to come forward? I'm not sure which one of you would I think it might be mr. Ghosh Neil Yes, and thank you miss munro for your presentation. Good morning chair rogers Five chair meadows and members of the board of adjustment. My name is neil gosh I'm an attorney at the morning star law group at 112 west main street in durham Today i'm representing the applicant on its application for variances from certain provisions in the udo We also have richard grogan with rgg architects and linwood smith who's with the applicant group on the line as well uh Mr. Chair if now is the appropriate time I would ask that all materials relied upon by the witnesses including staff report and all our Application materials be entered into evidence and made a part of the record of this hearing So noted. Thank you, sir So let me start first by acknowledging that this is a unique variance request In a nutshell, we are requesting variances from provisions in the udo Related to parking we are not asking for the ability to reduce parking below the minimum amount of amount required Instead we seek to provide More on-site parking than is allowed on-site um Because the property is within a design district in a compact neighborhood here We also are seeking variances from various requirements for how parking can be developed so Why would we do this? Hillcrest has been part of the durham community since 1951 and active at this location for over 50 years As the forefront of senior care in the triangle Hillcrest strives to provide the best quality of life for its residents This comes through not only In the level of skilled nursing care residents can receive. It also comes down to the small things elegant facilities regular cleaning and Sanitization great food private facilities or group care settings All those things help provide that quality of life Though often overlooked parking is another one of those items Hillcrest is a victim of its own success in addition to patients visiting the site for regular treatment and the residents at hillcrest Family and friends of hillcrest residents also enjoy visiting the facilities Over the years hillcrest has seen a steady increase in its visitor and patient numbers as a result a parking issue has manifested In the aerial photo we provided with the application. You can see a number of cars along pedigree street Those cars are stationary. They are not moving Now we cannot say that all those cars belong to folks visiting hillcrest But we do acknowledge that at least some do At various portions along pedigree. There is signage that prohibits parking Regardless, it is clear that pedigree was not intended for street parking. There are no marked spaces The street is quite narrow We think the cars parked on both sides create an unsafe condition for motorists and pedestrians alike and make the street itself more difficult to navigate Therefore hillcrest is seeking to make a significant investment to provide additional on-site parking But it needs variances in order to do so Before filing this application we consulted with the planning department including the planning director to see if there were other options for Ultimately, we filed this request on the advice of the planning director As with any variance there are certain findings you all must make in order to grant the variance So i want to go through this The simplest way for me to describe the hardship is that the use itself is allowed by right In the udo. However, the limitations placed on parking Strict the amount of parking that can be provided on-site To a number that is below the demonstrated demand for parking at this specific facility In order to provide more on-site parking than otherwise is allowed The udo requires the use of structured parking While structured parking is a significant cost to the owner the applicant in this case Does propose structured parking But it cannot meet all the required design elements for structured parking contained in the udo For example, the udo requires uses other than parking along the ground floor of parking structures It envisions lobbies offices fitness rooms or even retail Along the street level of parking decks Obviously hillcrest does not have a need for any of these things and desires only to build additional parking Regardless of its desire if you are familiar with the area Then you already know that this site is on the wrong side of the track so to speak The site is not in downtown proper. It is tucked in between 147 and the train track There is very limited pedestrian level activity if any at all Providing leasable space on the ground floor of the parking structure Would serve no useful purpose to hillcrest or the community Without the variant hillcrest will be unable to provide additional on-site parking Which will allow an existing unsafe parking condition to persist Primarily the hardship is the result of changes to the udo Becoming applicable to a site that has been in existence for over 50 years When the site was built it never was envisioned as part of the downtown area And was meant to be a standalone convalescent center It operated that way for many years until recently becoming part of the 9th street compact neighborhood tier and being zoned Compact design support one with those changes the additional design commitments became applicable to changes to the hillcrest Property despite hillcrest opposition to that rezoning The hardship in this case is not the result of any action taken by the applicant The rezoning of the property was a city-led initiative and one which hillcrest publicly expressed its opposition Moreover the udo allows businesses to develop without providing Adequate on-site parking in this development here and at the same time the udo prevents those same businesses From providing adequate on-site parking in a reasonable manner Ultimately this request is consistent with the spirit and intent of the ordinance Unlike many variants requests. We actually do know what will happen here if the variance is not granted Hillcrest will continue operating at it as it currently is And existing parking issues along pettibrew will not be addressed at all Instead hillcrest's efforts to try to address an existing issue Which is not at all required which it is not at all required to address should be lauded The request is indicative of hillcrest's commitment to its patients and residents and the Durham community as a whole I doubt very seriously that you ever again will see an applicant proposing Voluntarily to build structured parking when it is not otherwise required As I said, we have our team available to answer questions And uh, we look forward to your vote today. Thank you Thank you, mr. Gush. Are there any questions for the applicant? Mr. Lacey Yes, um, how long would should this variance be granted? Um, how long would construction take and where would People park in the during that time That's a great question. I think richard on our team might be best Situated to answer that richard If you could make yourself available Yes, hello, this is richard grogan with rgg architects uh That question came up, uh within their inner circle as well and what we're hoping is that, um some of the apartment buildings and other retail concerns In the nice street area Would be able to entertain some parking and We would probably have to bus back and forth between hillcrest and those properties Delacy, have you have you talked to any of the I'm sorry Have you talked to anybody? Are you in negotiations with uh burrowing parking spaces? Or are you just hoping? We have not gotten to that point yet um So We have not And how long will the construction uh process take? Uh, probably nine nine months or so I suggest sir that you kind of start talking to people. Yeah, well And again that uh This is in in the planning phase still so uh, I want to say nine months. Um Uh, we this would be a precast structure. Um, a lot of that precast would be made off-site So when I say nine months Maybe the time for disturbance is going to be minimized but Could be as as low as three or four months actual disturbance on site Uh, Chad you got a question Thank you, mr. Chair And thank you, mr. Gersh. Thanks for for going through that. I appreciate that. Um As I understand it and staff jump in if I'm wrong There are two variances at hand here. Uh, the first is If you do a structured parking you must do two of the the meat two of the three required criteria the green roof the parking spaces available for public use Or the the configuration to allow conversion Of ground floor area to a separate use other than parking That's one then the other one is the utilizing the frontage type having some other kind of business or use type along the ground floor of the of the Of the garage, uh, so my question is Uh, mr. Gersh, did you talk at all about the first variance? Which is the The green roof or the public spaces or the the ground floor recon alternative configuration Did you talk at all about that? Uh, and if you didn't would you please now? Sure, and I guess I could speak specifically to those items. Um, So this structure would be it's called a tabletop uh parking deck When you consider a parking deck, uh, that would that would have for example a green roof Uh, typically that parking deck will be multiple stories. The roof of that structure would be You know the top of the building here The way this thing is going to be built or has been designed Yeah, and this is a great photo that's up here You can see the roof of the parking structure is really the Especially the surface level of the facility or it's actually a little bit below it So a green roof is not something that really could be accommodated on this Uh design if this were a taller parking structure, you could have a green roof on top But this essentially the the roof of this parking structure is the same level as a surface existing surface parking Up towards the facility. The green roof would not be possible here as far as um, so and Then the One of the three items is providing spaces which are providing area which could be converted to um You know a use other than parking That is We addressed that when we were talking about the second variance, which is that we really can't accommodate a pedestrian level Use here, um, they go hand in hand. I mean If this were not in a compact Uh neighborhood tier or design district a parking structure would be required for example to provide space which could be converted Uh, however, because it's in a compact neighborhood tier um, or design district The requirement under the udo is that they actually utilize that space for um Something other than parking and that I believe we did address that Earlier, so we won't be able to meet the requirement for two of the three And therefore requesting a variance in that section Thank you quick follow-up. Um, you said that you couldn't do a green roof because a taller But you'd need a taller structure to do a green roof Um, is there anything stopping are there any regulations that are impeding the ability to make this a taller structure? So a green roof could be accommodated So I just I suppose a taller structure is not envisioned here because If the parking deck were taller, it would be it would start to impede on the building itself So this is just this is essentially adding Another level of parking above the surface existing surface level parking Um, if we were to go with the taller structure, which is not what is proposed here Um, it would that that structure would actually impede the building We'll be able to see the building Okay, and one more one more question, please sir. Um To the to the second variance, which is the design district requirement that triggers the fact that you must have You know a ground floor alternative use Is I guess i'm trying to understand the hardship here. Um, the the hardship is We don't want to have ground floor uses Because we can't or we don't want to have ground floor uses because we don't want to I think the hardship here is really and I see richard has it been I think the hardship here really Is uh, kind of people one there's an existing parking issue here. They're that that's the hardship We can't add parking spaces to the site without providing A structured parking that's that's the way the udo works So if we have to do structured parking the way it works under the ordinance of that There would be we would be required to have a use other than A parking on the ground floor of that hillcrest does not have any need for that hillcrest is only trying to provide parking They have all their You know office space leasing to whatever is already in the existing building the if there were non parking uses provided along the ground level of a parking deck at this location Those uses would have minimal uh pedestrian level activity if any at all this is Right next to the train track. We're talking about uh, this is not a location where Retail would be interested in going. I'm going to let richard on our team also address this question if he has to hand it Yeah, thanks. No, uh So the intent with the design was to make this as low impact as possible uh from a visual standpoint Really, you know, this is a terrace. It's not a parking deck Uh, in our opinion The the current upper parking that hillcrest has now will be extended over the upper level of the terrace Uh There is no communicating ramp between the two levels Uh, you access the lower level from From post tree and you access the upper level from the existing parking drive Uh that hillcrest has at their uh facility We looked at well because of of the low impact We're tucking it into the bank Uh a gray level of the upper level of the building Uh ventilation becomes a problem excuse that Ventilation becomes a problem with uh, we have to have cross ventilation within the deck So if we were to Do the 20 foot retail establishment Around the perimeter of the of the exterior We lose the chance to ventilate the deck um Without some kind of very complicated mechanical system Which I don't even think we would still have enough surface area to bring the air through the through the lower level uh An occupied space, uh along that perimeter would also require an infrastructure mechanical systems electrical systems all things that If you have a multi-story deck It works, but this is a terrace. It's it's meant to be a low impact Fucking feature that you really don't know is there in fact, it would be a much more attractive feature than what you see on the photograph currently All right, we've got uh mike tarant Yes, so I think I generally understand the hardship and And that the need for the request what I what i'm really wrestling with is Um, how this is really consistent with the spirit purpose and intent of the udio um, I you're just looking at the images provided. I see a um, a standard sort of typical precast parking deck with with no other public spaces walkways um, you know, no additional screening that might suggest you're you're attempting architecturally to address some of the front requirements and so forth Do you speak to me a little bit about About those um those review criteria? sure and in in our uh In our estimation this request is consistent with the spirit purpose and intent of the udio In i'm going to just throw a number out there. We'll see if I get to that number been like in three ways um, so the first is so the picture that's up here is is uh Is informative so What you're seeing here is is inconsistent with the spirit purpose and intent of the udio This is exactly the issue that we're trying to address. I'm providing more on-site parking um The other thing to consider which is contained in the comprehensive plan and therefore is incorporated in the udio Is that the comprehensive plan envisions Allowing or supporting existing businesses in their expansion. I want to be clear Hillcrest is not adding more rooms or anything their expansion in this case is the result of their continued uh, the success and and in the High quality of care that they've provided Two residents of the triangle for you know more than 50 years So they're having more people come to the site They don't have more residents on the site and not adding any bedrooms They just have a need for more parking on the site in order to make it safe for everyone Not only the people who visit their site, but the people who might otherwise drive past this area So by by being able to provide more on-site parking um And and therefore make a favor condition on the road I would I would say that is one consistent from a safety standpoint with spirit purposes in the ordinance And also is consistent with the comprehensive plan and that it allows an existing business to Continue to thrive in this area And I guess I didn't get to three, but I will say a third thing that I wanted to note is one of the you know and Richard touched on this one of the problems with providing a retail space or what you know a non parking space Along the front edge of this site is that that use also itself would require parking And that's kind of the whole issue. We can't we can't fit More parking we're trying to fit as much parking as we can On the site to address an existing issue The site is totally right now. It's totally compliant with udf So without the variance Hillcrest can continue to operate You're just going to get more of this The picture you're seeing on the uh on the page here Hopefully that addresses your question Mike you have anything else? I think I'm fine for now. Thank you Any other questions for the applicant I don't see anyone Um Eliza, will you stop sharing the thing is stop sharing. I think we're at the point now We know we need to copy of it. All right. Uh any discussion Mr. Lacey, um just from a personal standpoint my uh My mother and my mother my mother-in-law has been a guest of Hillcrest on a number of occasions And uh my mother-in-law is there now Parking has been a real significant issue The and The front of Hillcrest faces the The railroad tracks and there is no Even though it's part of the downtown by uh downtown tier It it is It is landlocked by 147. I think they that originally Hillcrest owned land Right across 147 and had to give that up when they built the highway. Um that there's there's no uh Parking can be difficult. You can wind up having to go to Whole Foods And sneak over the over the railroad tracks or park up and down pedigree street. Um, and it's truly an issue and It's it's unique place A physical location Doesn't fit into what I believe was the idea of the change of the udo So I think they've They're trying to have a good solution to uh the problem of their popularity Um, that's all I got Thank you for those comments. Uh, mr. Meadows Thank you, mr. Chair. Um I um so The bottom line for me on this one is I haven't really seen any evidence why The design can't be met the design requirements can't be met except that the applicant simply doesn't want to um, and the hardship is that The design Compliant with the design requirements would be either too expensive or provide something the applicant doesn't need um As far as I can tell they meet the minimum parking requirement They wish to add more parking spaces As I understand the udo requirements the the the condition of adding more parking spaces is complying with the design requirements For how that parking needs to be configured Um, and the variance request is to avoid that Because it's not desired um So that's my my point of view. Um, I'm not sure that I feel like the burden of evidence has been carried I wanted to ask a question for staff Um, and that is whether or not an application For rezoning to remove the design requirement has been uh filed or discussed up to this point for the for this property Alas Monroe planning department not that I'm aware of I have been not aware of a rezoning request to remove the design district Designation from uh this site and I might also ask just cathartic timing is I'm not sure the feasibility of that That was a larger scale project in which a very vast portion of derm Well, all of derm was designated into specific tiers So I am not sure the feasibility to change that over so I might ask jessica if she Knows any further um to provide some details But at this time staff has not received any applications or is not aware of any applications to rezone to remove that designation of the design tier Jessica do you have anything this is jessica doc reflating department There are always mechanisms to explore that option, but I'm Not confident that it would be looked with favor on But that of course is not planning department's determination that would have to go to city council Well, and I would sounds like from the testimony we've heard that this property was uh rezoned Against the wishes of the property owner, um, which is uh interesting and it makes me You know ask the question, you know was Was the hardship created when those When that change was made and You know to the and has now different standards when Sounds like this building was first was built in 1951 Neil you'll make you may need to uh Correct me on that if I was wrong, but uh, you have your hand up you have would you like to address something? Yes, uh, absolutely. So I did want to say as I said earlier, we did consult with the planning department about this um, and we did discuss rezoning, uh, and it was in no uncertain terms The the planning department would not be able to support an application for rezoning um from the The cds one district because that is this based on the peer Uh makeup that is the district that would be consistent with the conference of plan And peer designation So there isn't another zoning district that would be consistent and and uh chair rogers Hillcrest has been in operation since 1951 in north carolina at this location specifically I don't I don't know when this building was built. I don't know if hillcrest built this building. I my uh my understanding is that the building Was was was built sometime after 1951, but hillcrest has been in operation in durham uh since 1951 Okay, all right, uh any other discussion Can I just chime in and um, regina had said this Ms. Delacey had said this previously. It's a very strange site. It's wedged between the railroad There's one egress and axe and accident if i'm not mistaken It really is a suburban site So i'm not a big fan of making parking, but this is a Pretty unobtrusive way to do it and there there is a definite parking need um, if you try to cross the tracks there um Right, it's sort of right at broad street. Whole foods is on the left. East campus is on the right It's a mess. It's a total mess so I don't uh I think this makes sense. Um, I don't think that I think the factors are met And I'll just leave it there I have to agree with in and regina on the fact that this is a very peculiar location given between A major railroad track and an interstate And pedigree is is um a narrow road I mean, I I've visited this site before this you know in preparation for this, of course But i'm also very familiar with the area. Um but I I actually have to agree with the applicant when he says that The intent and purpose of the ordinance is I don't think it would be all of this parking street parking on on pedigree and the way you know that picture kind of Says a thousand words if you will uh on you know I don't think that serves purposes. I also think about uh, you know for what it's worth in my opinion um Having you know putting retail on that corner of of the road in pedigree Or or whatever kind of use down there one that would require additional parking. So Maybe that would be another level to that parking deck and So that's even more needed. Um, and also it's like I don't I don't Where's the market for something for you know, uh for a used down an alley essentially uh, I don't I don't know if that's a uh A good use of of that space, but I'm in I'm in support of of this variance. Um, I think it seems to me that uh I don't I don't I don't see how the the applicant hasn't created this hardship for themselves Any other thoughts All right. Well, we this is a variance request and does not get a staff recommendation I don't know if anyone wants to offer a motion or offer additional thoughts And if you're not satisfied I I think now is the time to to to speak up as well I'm sorry, mike Sorry, I was just going to offer to make a motion I hereby make a motion that application number b2 1 0004 a request for a variance from the structured parking design standards and to exceed the maximum parking permitted The property located at 1417 west pedigree street Has successfully met the applicable requirements the unified development ordinance and here is hereby granted subject to the following conditions The improvements shall be substantially consistent with the plans and all information submitted to the board as part of the application We have a motion to approve by uh, mike tarant. Is there a second? kip second Second by in kip uh, susan. Would you call the board mr. Regulus? no Mr. Lacey. Yes Mr. Meadows, though Mr. Kip. Yes Mr. Rogers, yes Ms. Weymour No Mr. Tarant Yes Motion carries five to two Four to three four to three What is the vote count needed on on this? Motion failed You gotta have five That's correct I've got delacy kip rogers retchless and tarant voting. Yes The retchess was no Yeah All right, well motion fails four to three um I'm tempted to ask the people who voted know the reasons. Uh, I don't uh tisha. You didn't give a reason on on thoughts when asked Uh, mike, I don't know if you did either on this. Uh, do you want to share them now? I can I just don't seem that That there was enough the hardship wasn't created from Conditions peculiar as a board member here. We're we're to weigh that evidence and I just don't think You know, there's a lot of great areas here too. Don't get me wrong um, I think on a safety Uh of the area and the property public safety that is. Um, yes, but Uh, we're here to, um You know way those hardship results and I just don't I think, um Because hillcrest doesn't have a need for structured parking ways more toward a self created hardship That makes sense I uh delacy mike, I think it has to do with what you consider need Uh, it's very clear that there are more people who are going through this facility than be can be accommodated for So although there are standards that there's supposed to be one space for every four. Um Brooms, I think it was. Um There are more people that come there and more people that park along pedigree and sneak into the the parking facilities Up and down the street. Um, and there are Then there are spaces for and you know, it's it's not just about the The ordinance it's about what the need is for parking uh, and I think that It's been adequately demonstrated that you know, traffic and safety are significantly impacted By this continuing problem. Uh, and this is their solution Uh Yeah, and I don't even know if this is an appropriate conversation because this should have been happening in deliberations When we have this, um, you know, and I um, I think from now on I'll just ask every board member to have A comment and and indicate how you plan on voting or how you can support or not support Uh, because I guess we'll just move on from this. Um Because we also need this for the record itself. Uh, and discussion has to happen For the record for when cases if they do go to Are appealed for whatever reason. Uh, I think it is uh incumbent upon us to give thoughts on on Why we support or why we don't uh, every time as well. Uh, chad, do you have something before we move forward? No, mr. Chair. Let's let's just move on Good deal. Uh, susan, would you call the next case? Face b21 0005 A request for a variance from the sidewalk requirements. The subject site is located at 39 12 river mont road zone pdr 1.9 64 In the eb watershed protection overlay and in the suburban tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time and property owners within 600 feet have been notified Notarized affidavits verifying the signposting and letter mailings are on file The seating for this case is mr. Lacey, mr. Kip, mr. Meadows, mr. Rogers, mr. Wretchless, mr. Weymore and mr. Taren All right, um I think have we got everybody on camera here. I just want to make sure Um, if you plan on giving testimony today, would you please raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? I'll need a verbal yes, oh from everyone Yes Danielle Brestle. Yes All right, that's came from Julie and Danielle I'm sorry. I didn't hear you. I got you on mute Still on me All right, and also do you consent to this remote meeting platform? Maybe yes Danielle. Yes And Julie Olson. Yes All right I think that's everyone Staff want to chime in really quickly for the record to the second individual on the Olson screen Are they also going to speak because we would need their name for the record if they anticipate speaking. I was just gonna ask that Is Charles Cozart Are you uh, are you planning on speaking as well, mr. Cozart? He might All right, well then, uh, I don't know Did did you take the oath because I didn't I don't think we heard you I'm going to take the oath as well Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Yes And uh, do you consent to this remote meeting platform? Yes. Thank you, sir. All right. Uh, we've got I think we've got his name on here now um Cole, is this yours? It is Okay Good morning again. Um, Cole and I are representing the planning department Planning staff request that the staff report and all materials submitted the public hearing to be made part of the public record With any necessary corrections as noted So noted. Thank you um Case b 20 000 is a request for a variance from the south rock requirements The case area is highlighted in red The site is in the suburban tiers zoned planned development residential pdr And is within the city of Durham jurisdiction Um Daniel Brestle on half, um on behalf of the owner of weaving water lc request the variance from the apartment This sidewalk be placed on both sides of the street The site is on planned development residential pdr and is in within the suburban development tier Per unified development ordinance udo section 12.4.2 c Required sidewalk along the right of way of the development site shall be provided It's applicable paragraph 12.4.2 a through one of the following two methods payment in lieu or combination Of um, sorry our construction of a sidewalk within the right of way Um, they want to provide an additional sidewalk across riverwood road instead of doing a payment in lieu They are notable to me sidewalk within the right of way uh because of um preserve trees um staff would like to mention that on the site plan and currently There is a payment in lieu that they have as a special conditional approval um, so that is one of the options that they are ignoring um that in other words is um They would have to prove that The site meets different standards That are applicable to be exempt from that payment in lieu option. Um, however financial Financial reasons cannot be a reason for hardship. Um, so we asked the board to take that into consideration when they are um voting on the case um per udo section 3.14 establishes the findings listed below the port of adjustment may make in grading a variance these findings and more on these These findings and review factors are identified in the staff report and the applicant's response to the findings um The staff will be available for any questions at the end. Um during the meeting Thank you. Uh, any questions for co Look uh chat Thank you, mr. Chair. Good morning. Cole. Thank you for that. I have a question I'm still I'm a little confused. Is this a variance from The sidewalk requirements or is are they really kind of seeking a variance from a payment in lieu? That's part of an approval on the record so they're the um The requesting a variance from the sidewalk requirements. Um in order to I would assume avoid the uh the payment in lieu because payment in lieu is an approval option that they have um the choice to do um But when making that like I said again when making that um decision Make sure that you take into that financial hardships cannot be part of The uh the hardship case I'm sorry. Is the payment in lieu required or is it optional? The payment in lieu is one of the so when you're doing sidewalks the payment in lieu is an option Or adding sidewalks to both sides. Um, those are the options that are allowed by the udo One or the other okay, right and they're putting a sidewalk but not on both sides That's that's correct. Um, the sidewalk right now is just if on one side, um Because of the trees that they have they're preserving. Um, I'll pull up the I'll pull up the site plan To kind of show you that but so their variance is to put a They're seeking a variance from the sidewalk requirements because they only want to put the sidewalk on one side instead of both Correct and I'll I'll let the applicant speak more um in detail about what they're trying to do. Um Because I don't want to I don't want to speak on their behalf. I'm trying to um You know prove their case I'm just trying to understand what what they're asking. Thank you, right? Uh, mr. Tarrant's got his Yeah, so just a question for planning staff as far as what what's driving the requirement for sidewalk on both sides of the street Typically, it's you know, it would be required along the front edge of your property. Um, is it the Went to the right of way or the the type of street section it is. I'm just looking for clarification on that It's um, it's there's streets that are defined that require both sidewalks on one side versus two sides Um, I think a couple years ago the udo was or recently the udo was updated Some streets do apply just one but some do apply to both sides of the street, but it is a udo best um Any other questions for col? And uh, I saw I saw that in the chat there was a question to um zoom in and i'm going to do that I'm just pulling up. Uh, I can't zoom in on the actual presentation So i'm going to pull up the side plan so if I can view in on that section for one of the staff i'm Uh, if there are no other questions for col, we'll we'll go on to hear from the applicant Great, thank you And I do I'm sorry. I do have a presentation that i'm going to show um Can we allow a couple minutes just so miss why more can look at this before I move on to the applicant's presentation? I think that is appropriate. Okay Miss breast will give us a few moments sure Hey col, it's okay. If you're just waiting on me. I can look at my own packet. I mean, you know, okay, that's fine I'm going to share the applications presentation now Good morning, everyone. Uh, I'm danielle breastle with weaving water llc we are Developing a co-housing community on this parcel um when we rezoned the parcel in order to provide parking um kind of On the outside of the property is done in off often done in co-housing. We Did so in 2018 at which time as mike mentioned There was only a sidewalk requirement for one side of the street And since then there has been an additional requirement where sidewalks are needed on both sides um At that time planning commissioner tom miller requested that we preserve the evergreen buffer Next to our parking lot between reverend road and our parking so that the neighbors wouldn't see our parking lot It would block some of the light pollution, etc so um Basically when we look at what the zoning ordinance or what the ordinance is now for having sidewalks on both sides of the street there are three options for Uh Doing a sidewalk you can either have it in the right of way which conflicts with our evergreen buffer preservation that we've committed to You can have it internal to your site Which the our civil engineer lute perthens will speak to in a little bit about the difficulty of us doing that on our site And then the all the last option is to do a payment in louis Now if we can look at the first slide of the presentation, it'll show Uh an aerial view of the area Is it possible to make the screen? Maximize the screen on that I can I can zoom in and zoom out, but I cannot Maximize any bigger than yeah make it in presentation. Okay So I've color coded the sidewalks that are Proposed here. So the weaving water parcel has um the property lines are all shown in white And we would come out of our property with the the red line that's on the east side of rivermont road I'm sorry to stop I can actually stop sharing chris peterson has offered a share where this is bigger. Would you be okay to that change? That's fine. Okay So essentially we would come um out of our property where the red Sidewalk line is on the east side of rivermont road. We would come down to A crosswalk across from grayly Drive right there. And then there's an existing sidewalk that isn't shown in yellow Then if you head to the north along the yellow sidewalk, we come to an area where we need to install the sidewalk in order to Lengthen it to the edge of our property line, which is shown in white So we would lengthen that sidewalk To the center of the property at 39 15 rivermont Well, when we realized that we would have a sidewalk that sort of dead ended in the middle of their property We asked The people who live at 39 15 rivermont, which is um julie and charles Who are on the call today if they would like to extend that sidewalk Further and so that's what we're asking for is instead of doing the in lieu of payment is doing additional sidewalk length To connect it to the state park So what you'll see here is that the property to the north of us is a conservation easement that we own and we entered into with inner river state park So that's all preserved Land and then on the left side in the north of rivermont road is The state park so inner river state park and you'll see the star there shows the pump station trailhead and So we would like to be able to connect that sidewalk all the way to the state park boundary so that people in the neighborhood can can walk through and that the julie and charles won't have A stop right in the middle of their property where the sidewalk would end um If you go down to the next slide, you'll see a view from the street So again, I've shown in red where we are required to put the sidewalk This is their front area and then the blue is showing what we propose to do if this sidewalk Variance is accepted or passed we would extend that sidewalk to the edge of the state park If you go to the next side uh slide, we also spoke to the neighbors To the south And so this would show where the yellow sidewalk goes Is already in existence and then we also talked to the neighbors at 38 01 and 37 21 rivermont to see if they would like to have a sidewalk extend onto their property And they did not express any interest in that so I didn't want to go building a sidewalk in someone's front front yard Without their permission, but that was something they were not interested in So that it concludes my portion Of the presentation and I think luke perkins would like to speak to the hardship of building a sidewalk on the the site In board of the right of way Yeah, so essentially the hardship that we're running into from An engineering and design perspective is Along the right of way we have trees that Need to be maintained based on conditions of the zoning And then if you go to the next slide you it'll show our site plan There we go and then once the sidewalk leaves the the right of way and Is on our site it has to meet the requirements of ada so Basically has to be five percent or you have to have ada ramps And the hardship that that's going to create for us Is basically the design intent of the site This will be this I think Only the second project that's approved in Durham as a low-impact design project from a stormwater perspective um A lot of people throw around the low-impact design uh kind of nomenclature as They attempt to have a project that has a lower impact design But we actually are meeting the state required guidelines for a low-impact design project um The hardship that would be created by having a a sidewalk on our site that has to have ada compliance across the frontage Is it would undoubtedly create more impervious area and it would Have us impact more of the area that we are planning on having tree save um And could throw us out of our low-impact design Category um, I think you know with without walls um that would have to come on on Part of the design for the sidewalk to meet ada It would change the grade of the site significantly and Would essentially affect a lot of the trees That we are currently saving daniel's put a lot of thought Into the layout of this site where we are There's a lot. There's mature trees on site that are kind of internal to the the looped driveway um, so the design intent here was To create a site that really maintain the character of the kind of natural area and its surroundings and unfortunately having to grade a sidewalk internal to the site that meets ada Would throw a lot of that original design intent out the window and have us design the site to meet that specific constraint So that's the hardship that we're running into Beyond the obvious hardship of not being able to to install the sidewalk along the right of way to maintain the trees that were you know part of a requirement as um, the zoning rezoning condition That's all I have unless there are any questions And I think um, julie and charles wanted to also speak on their, uh Regarding the the sidewalk on their property all right, um Julie charles. Yeah, um having a sidewalk just go to the middle of our property is just kind of weird So having it stand all the way to the to the edge, you know all the way across the front would be ideal for us all right and Julie, what where do you live? Uh, 3915 rivermont. Okay. Thank you. Um Mike I saw your hand first. Um Get a question Yes, I just had a couple of clarifications or one one. We're not talking about sidewalk on private property, correct? I mean, it'll all be within the right of way We're just talking about continuing it along the frontage of your property. Is that correct? Yeah, just the right of way. Okay Uh, the second question. I don't know if this is for uh, mr. Perkins or daniel. Um, but I don't I don't fully understand Um protection of the trees, right you've got a public right of way so By right, um, you know, so your state could come in and Construct that sidewalk. They could put in utilities. They could do other things. So I don't I don't understand how Not constructing the sidewalk along the frontage of your property Will or will not affect the the tree buffers. Um the protected trees. I mean I Understand where you're coming from but there's no way that you can protect it So, you know, I feel like there should have been additional measures in place to protect those trees if it was part of the zoning condition Um, well, I mean all I can say is that the When the zoning commitment was made there was only a requirement to have the sidewalk on one side So we expected to have it on the opposite side of the street. Um, and then if we Were to allow the sidewalk to go in we would be conflicting with this commitment because you would have to take down the evergreens to put it in the in the right of way um, the The average distance of the tree trunk from the edge of rivermont is 14 feet Some of them are 10 feet and we would severely be impacting the root zone and Trimming all of the branches in order to attempt to put in a sidewalk in the limited space Most of those branches come all the way to the edge of the street Uh, mr. Meadows, you have a question I do sir. Thank you, mr. Chair and I I feel like I'm like in slow motion or something I'm sorry that I'm having such a hard time grasping this but I think I'm I think I'm closing in on it um The the udo requirement is that there be a sidewalk along the frontage of this property And the request is To not put the sidewalk in Uh, and not pay the fee in lube, but instead do a sidewalk extension off-site so That's really what we're talking about. It's the variance is we don't want to put the sidewalk in the right of way um And we don't think we can put the sidewalk on our property Because that will interfere with our Uh, low impact design approach that we're proposing And we don't want to pay fee in lube What we would like to propose is an uh, uh sidewalk continuation elsewhere Have I staff have I adequately explained what's going on? Oh, yes, okay. Are they allowed could off sidewalk Be something that the city could even consider um as uh as a solution here Is that in the realm of even allowable to begin with? It's not some of the udo necessarily allows. Um, however, if you know if the property owners agreed to it, um They would have to be it would have to be okay with that, but it also had to be okay um With the city to allow it in right away unless it would be on someone's proper property Okay, so we're not sure if if so this might conceivably be something that could be done There are still more questions. So to my next question, which is to the attorney um Christa if we approve this does that if we were to say, okay You know, let's say that an off off-site sidewalk would be acceptable Here in this situation, and I'm not saying that let's just Hypothetically we go down that road. Is that a condition that needs to go inside this variant? Or mr. Wardell Yes So you got a couple issues there. I was I was waiting for christa to chime in I think she May have stepped away for a second But sorry I was having sorry. I was having um connectivity issues with my headphones Mr. Wardell feel free to proceed With what you're going to say Yes, I think it would be a condition And certainly the condition would have to be agreed upon uh by the applicant so That would be You know That would be the issue So if you could have the applicant agree to the condition and the condition could be A condition of the variants and then it could be enforceable Through essentially through consent Thank you. So So the variants that we're considering is we we don't want to put the sidewalk in because in the in the rezoning case There was a planning commissioner who said keep the trees But it's in the right of way. So the city really I assume that's a state road. I don't know for sure So Could you uh applicant would you mind explaining again Why the sidewalk the alternative sidewalk placement couldn't take place Uh on on in on the on your in in your part of the development It looks like in the site plan there's a Walking trail that that perhaps covers you know, maybe 60 of the distance of the of the lots frontage is is there some way to to um To to configure that so that you could get something that would meet the requirement without having to do the variants Yeah to to the next slide real quick It shows a zoom up portion of the um the property where we're talking about having um A steep slope condition. So to the northern edge of our property the The so the ground slopes significantly to the north And so one option would be to put in a retaining wall to continue the sidewalk to meet ADA requirements When the sidewalk is in the right of way, it does not need to meet ADA requirements So it doesn't have to have a very shallow slope. But if it's on our property, it does Um, so if we put a retaining wall in with a sidewalk then when we got to the end of our property There would be a drop off and you would have to Figure out how you're getting back to the street. It would basically end you at this conservation area Or as luke was saying before You would have to put in a very long sidewalk that's wind back and forth and back and forth in order to maintain that very shallow Sidewalk grade And at that point people are just going to walk on the other side of the road if there's sidewalk there I think one thing that's worth mentioning too is the solution that we're proposing while it's you know, quote unquote offsite sidewalk That offsite sidewalk the intention of that is to Allow pedestrian access along this portion of rivermont drive Which is essentially what would happen, you know in in the to meet the requirements of the udo You know You provide pedestrian access along your frontage in the public right away so that you know pedestrians can Can walk down rivermont drive and that's what the the intent of the offsite sidewalk is it's not It's not just arbitrary sidewalk improvements But yeah, the the grading challenges on the site would probably require a lot of ad a ramps that Would not be a pleasurable experience for a pedestrian who's trying to walk along our frontage and then adjusting the site In any way to to compensate for that is going to mean that we're going to affect more trees and we're going to add More impervious and potentially not meet the requirements for low impact design Here I have one last question for staff and that is whether or not this is a state road or if this is a city road Give me give me one second. I will look up that for you Oh, we'll come back to that question if you'll keep that in mind, uh mike turn Because I actually had a question for Cole as well. Um But I think if I'm hearing things correctly at the time the rezoning was approved the committed to reserving The evergreens on the east side of the the roadway That's great With the understanding at that time that sidewalk was only required on one side of the street And so it could be constructed on the opposite side. So And now if I understand There's been an ordinance change that requires Sidewalk on both sides of the street. So I'm looking for clarification on my understanding correct and to when that when that text change Was made to the unified development ordinance All right my internet is working, so I'm trying to Trying to get the street question answered first I don't know if it helps. We are in the county It's about 50 feet into the county, but this road Starch in the city and ends in the county I think the question uh to me I want to make sure mike is whether the state maintains the road or another entity Or not mike uh or chad Indeed, I mean from my point of view, I don't know that if it's a state road that the the city can can necessarily Lawfully apply a zoning condition to to state right-of-way. All right. Well while Cole's working on two different questions now Uh, and we'll we'll follow up on those. Uh, regina if you got a question to the applicant Yeah, um, you keep talking about low impact design. What is um the advantage and what is the Of having low impact design or their economic considerations? Or is this just um a desire on the part of the people who are planning to build this Luke do you want to take that or should I? Yeah, sorry. I was trying to I was trying to unmute um low impact design is uh from a stormwater perspective is basically taking measures to go above and beyond the Generals state and local requirements for stormwater treatment. So this would be um, this is not an economic advantageous design consideration This is kind of sets projects apart from from others and Basically on this site. We're doing that through a large dedication of conservation area to the natural Forest that's near by the side So one of our goals for it is that typically when you are Putting a large amount of impervious surface on a site You have to grade it so that it all drains into a detention pond and we didn't want to take down All of our gorgeous trees to Masquerade the site and have it all funnel into this one detention pond And so in order to avoid masquerading the site, we've used these low impact measures Thank you. So it's also you don't have to have the detention pond Is to avoid taking down the existing trees so that we don't have to Masquerade the site to the detention pond. Thank you So sorry to interrupt. Um, this this this is in the city. Um, but it is an ncdot we maintained road Just to clarify Thank you Uh, and mike, uh Were your questions answered? I just want to make sure we've got everything squared everything away No, I'm just uh, no, I'm still looking for clarification on You know at the time the zoning was approved It sounds like sidewalk was only required on one side of the street um, and looking at the Aerial imagery would make sense to continue that on the opposite side of the street because that's where it exists today Um, but now I understand the variance is because sidewalk is required on both sides of the street So I'm trying to figure out when the the timing of that change. I don't I don't know the I don't know the exact date. Um but uh, I believe it was um It was It was after they had a the zoning case was approved. It's when it changed. I think it was um Not long after But I think that was a little after 2018 is when the zoning case was approved. Um, is that is that correct daniel? I think that's what we're talking about. I don't remember the exact date I it was within a about a year Of when our case was approved sometime in the following year The the change happened Thanks Any other questions for the applicant This is chat. I have one more and I'm sorry. I didn't ask it before it's my last question. Um, and and um Daniel is there is there? um You're indicating that you cannot that you don't wish to make the payment in lieu Is there a hardship for you in terms of making that payment in lieu? I understand finance is not an issue But I'm just curious why that's not Being considered Well, I mean it it's currently the The option in place, but that would That would not motivate us to continuing the sidewalk on the Neighbors property to reach the state park and that that's an additional cost for us And so trying to mitigate the cost of installing that sidewalk with the fee Um is of course of interest Thank you. Well, as I was muted any other questions for the applicant. All right on this wrestle. Do you have any, uh, Or is there anyone else here to speak in favor? Or do you know col would you mind? Stop sharing your screen for a moment. Or do you or chris rather? um All right, uh, is there anyone here to speak against this? Do we have anybody registered? I'm Assuming no. All right, then that is a no. Um Espresso, do you have anything else that you'd like to to you know before we go into deliberations? Yeah, I would just like to say that I think in terms of the spirit of the code and its intention to provide pedestrian connection to the things that People want connection to that this proposal To extend the sidewalk does that very well and that it connects our neighborhood to the state park state park access Which is what most people in the area are are interested in Most I ran into somebody this morning who said They walk down there all the time and that would be lovely to have this Sidewalk extend all the way to the state park. So Thank you. All right, uh any uh discussion But this is again, this is a variance. So there is no staff recommendation This is chat. Are you starting your polling the board now? I'm going to I I will request everyone say something you don't have to but I I certainly think that it is a is a fair thing to do and something that is a part of our duty as a board member I agree and welcome that uh that that thought process. Um I I'm having a hard time understanding if if there is a fee and lieu option available Um Could not the city use that fee and loo to extend the sidewalk and remove the need for the variance altogether. Um, You know, I I don't know the answer there, but I I I I'm I'm torn on this one. I'm hoping other people have some some perspective Brian did you have something I saw your hand raised? Yes, this this is actually something that christa and I discussed Uh, pursuant to the rules if if you are inclined to deny A request and you do need to discuss what the reasons are for that pursuant to the rules for 4.4 d um So that when there is an order there is um Discussion in the record to actually draft the order since That's required. So um That is a requirement. Thank you sir. Um tisha Yeah, I saw your hand raised Yeah, I am uh a opponent of Sidewalks in general and then one of my pet peeves of derm is a lot of sidewalks that just end randomly So I I like the that side of this, but I am still a little bit fuzzy on on the change in the zoning and the need for the the the variance On the on the other side, but I I like their solution and I I'm inclined to Like it Thank you, uh mike Yeah, I I think for me, um I I feel like there is a hardship here You know, there was a there was a commitment made during the rezoning process at the request of the planning commission to Preserve these trees at that time that was agreed upon because The udo only required sidewalk on one side of the street Um since that time the udo has been changed to now require sidewalk on on the second or on both sides of the street um in that Therefore would you know prohibit the applicant from being able to meet the the zoning requirements Um, potentially have to rezone the property in some fashion to remove that that commitment so I feel there is a there is a hardship here and I'm still Um still a little bit torn uh as as with mr. Meadows on on the fee in lieu If that can't be done for the additional portion of the walkway But I do I do appreciate their willingness to continue on the west side of the street to the state park as they have presented today All said, uh anyone else? So I see I concur. It's it's a tough one. I know they got caught between uh one commitment, uh to uh Take take care of the trees and then they moved the goalpost and said now you have to put it on both sides now they're not the same people but Uh, they got caught between trains um I think it's a novel way to Provide more Usable sidewalks And The alternate the alternative would be fee and loo and then they don't have to do anything Uh staff would just like to say um for clarification that the extra sidewalk does not Um make they meet the requirement for both sides. That is just something to providing um For for for the the propaganda. So that doesn't necessarily meet the requirement of the ordinance to provide It's not an option to provide extra sidewalk to meet that ordinance. Um, that's just something that they're doing Um on their own that does not meet our requirements just to clarify Thank you Ian or mike. Do you have anything? I've got a few thoughts as well, but Rachel, I'm in support of of the granting of variance for this And as well And mr. Terry It's one final clarification. Hopefully for for coal if my understanding is that sidewalk is now required on both sides of the street is Constructing it on the west side not satisfying that requirement. And then we're only really talking about a fee and loo for the east side of the street So they are providing it on the west side of the street. Um, and not the east side of the street. Um, so the payment and loo Would would be for the the sidewalk that they're not providing correct Thank you. All right, um, you know, I've got a share of some thoughts that Regina and chad mentioned, uh, as well Um, I should agree with them all. Um, you know, and also think I wrote the question here on on my Notebook of saying, you know, does this make the spirit purpose and intent? I think it does. Um, I look at Putting this on the other side and thinking, you know, a bunch of crisscross Ramps going, you know, because of the grading and understand topographical issues there And you know, people would probably just walk the street instead of walking on the sidewalk. So that makes a lot of, you know You know, what's What's the the purpose here? Uh, and I have to agree Mike, I don't know if you are tearing. Did you have your hand raised or do just not rate lowered from before? Sorry, I just didn't get lowered. I'm sorry. Okay. Got it. Um All right, then, um, any other thoughts? Does anyone want to offer a motion? I'll make the motion I hear if I make a motion that case number b 21 whole bunch of zeros five an application for a request for variants from the Sidewalks on property located at 39 12 river munt road has successfully met the app Well requirements of the unified development ordinance is hereby granted subject to the following in conditions the improvements have to be Substantially consistent with the plans and all information submitted to the board as part of the application We've got a motion for approval by mr. Lacey. Is there a second? One more second Miss one more second, um Susan Mr. Kip. Yes Mr. Lacey Yes Mr. Rogers Yes Mr. Meadows No Mr. Redschluss Yes Miss. Why more? Yes Mr. Tarrant Yes Motion carries seven to one Motion carries six to one By a vote of six to one your variant your request for variants has been approved Well, you'll get an order shortly and we appreciate you becoming coming before the BOA this morning Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you Madam clerk, would you like to call the next case? Case b2100009 a request for a variance from the project boundary buffer requirements The subject site is located at 218 north dillard street zoned office institutional and in the urban tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time and property owners within 600 feet have been notified Notarized affidavits verifying the signposting and postings and letter mailings are on file And the seating for this case is Mr. Lacey, Mr. Kip, Mr. Meadows, Mr. Rogers Mr. Redschluss, Miss. Why more and Mr. Tarrant Here I am. I need it again. All right. Thank you for that All of the folks who plan on speaking please turn on your video and we'll administer the oath before We continue So it looks like we're just waiting for Dan and Ed to turn on their screens If they're not gonna speak. Oh, they're not. Okay. Uh, well if you the those who are please raise your right hand if you and Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today is the truth in nothing but the truth Scott I gotta have a verbal yes on everybody. Sorry guys Yes, Jeremy. Yes Yes, sir, and I also need a verbal yes on do you consent to this remote meeting platform? Yes, sir Yes, thank you guys Eliza take it over Good morning Yes, morning everyone Eliza Monroe speaking from the planning department. Um, I Would like to request that the staff important all materials submitted be made part of the public hearing At the public hearing be made part of the public record with any necessary corrections as noted So noted Thank you very much Case b2 1 0 0 0 9 as a request for a variance from the project boundary buffer requirements The applicant is culture Joel Thames pa and the subject site is located at 218 north dillard street The case area is highlighted in the thick red. There's a overlay over here So we're not talking about 513 or 510 holly or 212. We're just talking about 218 north dillard Street the site is zoned office institutional or li and is located in the urban development tier As you'll see on the screen the site area is currently vacant For the nature of this request a project boundary buffers are defined as a portion of a property designated between designated to mitigate impacts between different land uses section 9.4 the unified development ordinance provides the standards for the type Quantity and location of buffering lands buffer landscaping So the type of trees and shrubs and the amount of trees and shrubs required is noted within that section Per section 9.4.3 of the union a 20 foot wide buffer With a 0.6 opacity would be required along peach street Peach tree street where the proposed development is adjacent to a right of way that is less than 60 feet wide If the right of way was greater than 60 feet wide then they would not have to meet this requirement The right of way is also across from a parcel that is residentially zoned as you'll see over here where it's zoned rum In that case the applicant is requesting to permit a five foot average project boundary buffer along peach tree Peach tree street where the project boundary buffer is required UDF section 3.14.8 establishes four findings that the applicant must make in order for the board to grant a variance These findings require approval are identified in the staff report and the applicant's responses to the findings are identified in the application Both of within your packet staff will be available for any questions as needed throughout the hearing process And the applicant did provide some additional documents that staff will pull up as needed when asked to Thank you Eliza any questions for Eliza before we move on I'm seeing some shaking of heads, but if I missed someone that raised a hand physically, please feel free to unmute yourself Um, all right. I don't see any. Um, all right. Well, we'll turn it over to the applicant Good morning everyone. Um, it's still morning. Thank you for your time today. I know y'all've had a long agenda Um, I will try to be brief which is difficult for me those that know me Um, my name is Scott Harman was center studio architecture in downtown Durham We are on the design team and the ownership development team for this project um, we are, uh, experimenting with the new housing type. Um, that is sort of born out of some of the Changes in the expanding housing choices. Uh, that was implemented by the city to give the private sector opportunities to address some of the housing crisis In this community. So we're creating a series of 19 townhomes each with five individual dwelling suites That could be rented out at a much more affordable rate for someone who wants to live in the Cleveland Holloway neighborhood or downtown We are also providing commercial space At the corner. This is a in my opinion a a The commercial space is at the far right in this image here At the corner of Dillard and Holloway street This is a gateway location in the downtown right in the middle of I believe Durham's first historic district and uh, we wanted a a neighborhood facing commercial cafe type establishment At this location. We think that's something that uh, it's just good urbanism I think it's being a good neighbor And I think it's something that the surrounding stakeholders and neighborhood would appreciate in this location um I don't mind having an edge A buffer to our property. I just feel strongly that it should be a friendly edge A lot of the whole concept of boundary buffers is based on segregated land uses, which I think is problematic And I know that there are times when Uh, they're perfectly appropriate Where what you're trying to do is create a condition where you don't see each other I think in this context, I think that's really bad urbanism. I think it's being a bad neighbor I think it's not good for safety So we want nice plants and a low fence Where the neighbors know where the edges are but that we can see one another We can protect one another and we can participate in each other's lives in the neighborhood So we're just simply asking for the opportunity to put in A boundary that uh that accomplishes that I think That's all I want to say our design team and site team at uh, culture jewel and Thames Have some additional technical aspects of how we're uh impacted by Disordinates and our uh requests for the variance and i'm happy to answer any other questions that y'all have And thank you very much All right any questions for mr. Harmon before we hear from anyone else This is chad. I just want to encourage the applicant to explain The hardship of complying with uh with the code requirements I believe that he alluded to some design considerations and desire and so forth But to to enhance that and talk about, you know, the hardship of compliance would be very helpful. Thank you Sure. Thank you chad So one as you can see in the diagram Increasing the boundary buffer would reduce the number dwelling units that we could Provide and so less housing is less impact on the housing crisis of Durham Secondly a boundary buffer as prescribed by the ordinance there would create an unsafe situation where our neighbors Would not be able to see what was going on in the adjacent apartment community right across peach tree Which is also a residential use? normally between two residential uses like that a boundary buffer of this magnitude would not be required but because of the unique Uh configuration of an odd zoning island or peninsula here It is technically required although. I don't think it is That providing it is in keeping with the spirit of the ordinance in terms of what it intends So again, we're not trying to eliminate a boundary buffer. I'm just trying to scale it down to one that is appropriate and supports a safe Defensible visible neighborhood interaction In this very close to the center of downtown urban environment And scott and chad this is this is jeremy anderson with cjt I'll cover a few of those things if if uh If you want me to continue with a little bit of the technical presentation At this point, but if you had questions for scott still I didn't want to cut you off Now we'll turn it over to you Okay, great appreciate it. Um And chad appreciate that question because I appreciate your clarity on earlier cases today. It's uh, You're uh, you're trying to decipher a lot of information and pair it down. So Uh, again, good morning, uh chairman rogers vice chair meadows and members of the board My name is jeremy anderson landscape architect with cjt colter jule temps 111 west main street in durham I have a degree with of landscape architecture from north calinus state and had been practicing Landscape architecture planning for about 20 years in the triangle area um I'm the project manager for this project as well as you know, many other multifamily and townhome projects in the downtown area you know in the past five or 10 years so uh Familiar with the udo familiar with requirements For a site like this and also had visited the site many times, you know in preparation of this meeting Um, quickly. Thank you liza for your your presentation and your your staff report. I think you cover the issues very well I'm here just to to provide a little more background information In regards to the current site condition expectations of the development As outlined in the udo and specific site conditions unique to the site um Finding number one the unnecessary hardship um The area we're focused on this what you see on the screen here is the overall development, but uh, the one parcel which aliza alluded to was really the parcel at the corner of Dillard hallway and peach tree. So it's the the convergence of all three of those right-of-ways And it happens to be kind of the narrow pinch point of our site um That previous slide and you don't have to go back, but it's okay. It showed the 10 foot Right-of-way dedication that we're being required to dedicate along peach tree I think it was in a in a in a purple color there So we've got 10 feet already taken from the site that kind of restricts Makes this this narrow corner of the site a little bit narrower And then the requirement for a 20 foot landscape buffer Um, you know scott alluded to really Pinsch is down this corner It would uh, it would reduce the number of townhomes by two or three also Probably reduce the commercial space is something that's not usable. So It's about 30 feet from the existing property line that we're we're having to set aside That we couldn't put a building in or couldn't put parking in and would be essentially a heavily landscaped buffer and That's got alluded to that's not that's not what the division is That's not really promoting good urbanism good walkability safe pedestrian, you know case In the circumstance Finding number two is hardships peculiar to this property In addition to the narrowness of the lot at this point that was outlined in number one Um This zone this this property is still zoned. Oh, and I as Eliza mentioned, uh, it's kind of odd. It's Peninsula within the downtown district It's dd zoned downtown Durham or downtown design district all the way around it except for this one property line um, if it was If the zone the property next to us was dd We wouldn't have a buffer like we have like we don't have around the remaining piece of the property Um Or if it was zoned potentially something else something more residential We may not have the the extent of the buffer we have here but because landscape or because landscape buffers are are Based on the underlying zoning, which is you know office and institutional here um We are Being buffered as if we are an office and institutional use and not the residential use that we're proposing um Finding number three hardship not as a result of any action taken by the owner There's been no changes by the owner that would has has resulted in this hardship And number four consistent with the spirit intent intent of the ordinance So the variance request again is is to reduce the area you see in green here as a 20 foot landscape buffer to an average five foot width along this area And what that generally means is we're going to take the same Same amount of area we need to within this green box and kind of redistribute it So that it's narrower in some areas and wider in other areas to get the same square footage But planted up in a in a in a more urban more pedestrian friendly manner so Again landscaping is still going to be proposed in this area as you can see here and you can see on the rendering But again something more pedestrian friendly streetscape friendly versus a densely planted 20 foot buffer Or wall that would kind of block off the the residential to the to the west of this or east of excuse me Furthermore, there is a sidewalk being proposed on peach tree currently there is not so that is within the the right-of-way dedication You see there so We're we're hoping there'll be some more pedestrian activity along peach tree and again having a 20 foot dense buffer there It creates some safety concerns If you have something that you can't see through The parking lot that you see there Now being allowed to to be placed here if this is approved Provides approximately two spaces per unit, which is what the udio would require And it will be screened through the udio requirements for for vehicle use screening as well as a fence along the sidewalk so Landscaping and and you know appropriate measures are still there to to kind of buffer the property Again the buffer flexibility allows for Kind of maximum residential units as well as the commercial space at the corner of Holloway and Dillard Which we think is very important and Overall the the townhouse the proposed townhouse development we think is is in keeping with the density scale size of units you know That the adjacent residential Is there's there's apartments duplexes triplexes To the east of this and and this is in a similar scale keeping with that So to conclude in my professional opinion That unnecessary hardships result from the strict application of the ordinance It is also my professional opinion that the hardship is not the is not Caused as a result of any action taken by the owner And also in my professional opinion the requested variances Is consistent with the spirit purpose and intent of the ordinance For the reasons described above And with that that concludes my testimony and I will Throw it back to the board for any questions you may have for the development team All right chat. I guess you have a question for mr. Anderson. I do. I have two questions. Um As I understand it the the property which I guess is to the east On the screen, it's the it's the property that where the two text boxes are located Correct. That's a that's a multifamily use. Is that correct? That's correct. Yes. Okay. And so because This property is inside the downtown design District And that property isn't That's what's triggering the requirement for the perimeter buffer That you're seeking the variance from is that accurate No, actually neither of these properties are within the Downtown design district that were then would that buffer be required? uh If If the brown property you see on here the rum which is the adjacent Multifamily if it was the kind of gray purple color, which is the downtown then it would not be If we were I mean depends there's various scenarios, but If we were downtown design district and that property was not I think there would be a 10 or 15 foot landscape buffer But both of them are outside the the dd so it's treated like any urban Project understood and one last question, which is you are planning to include Some landscaping in this area, but it is short of Of the 20 foot Requirement and is that right? That's correct. There'll be uh street trees some additional trees on site probably more ornamental and landscaping at the edge of the parking lot between the parking lot and the right-of-way to To screen the cars, which is a you know an important Design consideration. So yes, there is landscaping still placed in this area. Thank you Eliza Monroe before mr. Before delacy chimes and I just wanted to confirm What Jeremy was just talking about about the design districts So no project boundary buffers are required within the design districts unless the proposed project is adjacent to a residential district that's in the Residential district are used in the urban and suburban tier so to confirm what Jeremy was stating about this Cool color back here If they were a part of that cool color They would not necessarily need to have a project boundary buffer If this one they would both have to be within the design district If this one was in the design district, they would still have to have that requirement Just because this one would still be in the urban or suburban tier Just to clarify that. Thank you. Eliza Regina Thanks. I was just Hi Scott. I've got a question. You talked about these townhomes as being sweets How could you elaborate further and tell and tell us how This use differs from the cocoa brown Property next door to the east Uh Yes, so imagine what what what what we're creating is Townhomes for co-living where there are five different Adults living in the unit together They're sharing a kitchen facility and they're sharing laundry facility, but they have private bedroom private bathroom for each Person and it's a fairly generous, you know Uh, it's a fairly generous private suite and so And and this is entirely allowed In the current ordinance with this zoning and in particular because of the recent changes with expanding housing choices to create more flexibility for different housing types The cocoa brown area is is is rum. That's just multifamily apartment basically apartment flats um In in the written report from Jeremy, you'll note that the density per acre of that parcel is actually higher than the density per acre of ours um And I think that is I think that answered all your questions. Please. Let me know if I missed. Thanks very much Yeah, it did. Thank you very much and thank you for coming up with novels housing solutions. It's oh, you're welcome very important Uh, Eliza and our staff wanting to chime in one more time with one more clarifying thing um, if you'll if you'll note in the staff report, uh, I simply refer to it as multifamily Suites the distinction that mr. Harmon use is not Within our udo like we don't have a suite uh distinction So in the staff report, uh, we note, uh, the rum zone parcel as multifamily and this one is also considered multifamily We do not have a sweet distinction within the udo Thanks, Eliza. Um, mr. Kipp Hello Just wanted to get some clarification here peach trees peach tree play seems extremely narrow of what's actually Paved it's a it's a wider right of way, but I've driven down that I considered an alley and I don't think you can get two cars down there Without pulling off into the ditch So it just that's a little bit concerning Uh, so just so I understand it so instead of the 20 foot boundary buffer You're proposing a five foot boundary buffer And the balance 15 feet is basically going to be parking for those first However many spots 10 spots Is that right? That's true. That's correct Okay And and to to touch on the peach tree width. Um Yeah, we we're aware and we we had some conversation with transportation about the width of it Could it be closed? Could it be converted to an alley? We're not showing any driveways off that partially for that reason because it's we don't want to add additional traffic to it, but Transportation is going to keep it and add additional 10 footer right away. So We're not I think it was recently paved, but it's still you know on the narrow side, but um Great, thank you. I have another question work workforce housing. So Is it just workforce housing because there's five suites or is there actually some kind of deed restriction? On who can buy who can rent? um in the I mean, I'm using the term to generally describe what I would consider missing middle housing This is housing that is not affordable with a capital a using tax credits or subsidies But so it's entirely market rate housing, but you know, just the goal That we have been focusing In the studio on a couple of our most recent projects is how do we create a place for someone who wants to live in the downtown? neighborhood that they can have their own space That for under a thousand bucks a month and there if you look at all of the new apartments that are being built um, you know, this is uh, you know, if you go look for a for a one-bedroom Apartment somewhere in downtown right now or even a studio. You're going to be paying 12 13 $1,400 a month so this housing type allows us to to To to simply just create more affordable housing in terms of the amount that you're paying And so we use the term generally not not legally or specifically And it's it's not going to work for everyone But I mean, it's a it's a housing type that you are starting to see a lot in tier one and tier two cities that are trying to find creative ways to just Allow more flexibility different different ways for people to live together co-living is very Very popular and and the better examples of it are definitely providing places very stable desirable places for people to live With a greater sense of community and connection to their their roommates and neighbors And and also addressing, you know, affordability in general Um, Eliza, I'm right with the playing department here with a couple of more clarifications. Um, so at this time there is not a workforce housing language within the unified development ordinance The only language you do have is affordable housing and I want to make a distinction that affordable housing does have specific criteria That must be met in order for property to be deemed affordable That includes market values or a report that's submitted to various city departments. So at this time the housing If you'll as I noted in the report, we're just distinguishing it as multi-family And this time we don't have workforce housing as a distinction within the udo So, uh, thank you, mr. Harmon for providing additional clarification about what that meant But there is not anything within the udo in which we require the applicant at this time to provide a report or annual report or sorts to keep that Intent in line to ensure that it's being met. So just to provide some clarity there Mike Taren, if you've got a question Yeah, I just um, just kind of thinking about this and thinking about, you know, how cities grow and develop in the street Street networks are created every time, you know, we always end up with sort of odd parcels such as this that Are very difficult to develop in any fashion So in that regard just the the geometry of this particular property, I think is Creates a hardship that That um, you know, I think is inappropriate In the fact that this is oh and I, you know, just on the outside of when the dds was created It seemed like it could have been easily captured in that in In that, you know, creating the project boundary buffer in somewhere in the urban setting is You know, not not really appropriate in my in my professional opinion um So I think that is a hardship as well that further restricts the development potential for this particular property um, I do appreciate the um the applicant not Trying to, you know, reprieve themselves from meeting that commitment, but instead extending that total buffer area along along peach tree To create a to create an edge along the entire property instead of a buffer. I'm just a portion of it and I think In doing so that that really does better meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance in this particular case um, I I appreciate the Presentation here today and I think I'll support this application Mr. Taren any anyone else any questions for the applicant? I concur with, um, mr. Taren is scratchless Just because of that the unique uh peninsula parcel. Um, but it's a well thought out project and I'm definitely for The variance Thanks, sir Lacey I concur um, it's novel housing and it's uh It's a very tough little peninsula. Um Um, and I think it's a very clever solution to the problem This is chad since we seem to be in board discussion. Um, I'll just say, you know in my Observation, we've got a convergence of zoning standards versus some policy issues You know, we've got a desire to address a housing crisis. We've got some weird zoning configuration here Um, it you know, it's not lost on me that these are two multifamily uses. They're side by side Normally, we wouldn't buffer those Um, but because they're in just different districts where we're requiring this buffer Um, and you know, certainly this is a downtown area And I have to agree with all of the comments that you know, large suburban style Use buffers probably aren't appropriate in downtown. So I too support the variance Thank you anyone else Tisha, how about you? I am in support of this. I think it's a great solution for you know, multifamily affordable housing and certainly um, the buffer was was put in there for other uses and other Restrictions, but I think that they've had are proposing a great Solution to it from what the restrictions that they have been dealt Uh, Eliza Moro staff, sorry to be that stickler, but uh, this is not deemed affordable housing by the UDO standards Sorry My turn I think um, can we say not ducidly expensive? Maybe maybe um, you know, I I share everyone's thoughts, you know, one of the things uh We have discussed when it comes to variances Changes in design. So, uh, can you change the design to meet? whatever You know say so that you don't need a variance. I think this is Uh, a clever design and I think it's well suited and and Certainly meets the spirit purpose and intent I think that we need to Just because this project is sexy and something new is not a reason to approve it Uh, I don't think that we should apply different standards to this project than we do any other variants just because we like it Uh, I actually think that's incredibly inappropriate But um, I obviously support this and I support, um Yes, but I've made some notes to uh to to go over the next time we have a variance request and decide to wait and discuss some of these same things um but um Those are my thoughts person thoughts. Does anybody else have any, um Any any anything they'd like to have This is this this is Chad. Did you call for anybody in support or opposition? I don't remember if that happened if it I appreciate you saying that I was just looking around to make sure that we I see I was going to ask if there's anybody else to speak in favor Scott is there any I mean, I see other people on the call, but I doesn't look like they're going to be speaking I I don't know no no one else is no one else from our side. Thank you I was there anyone here to speak against this? Uh, or in opposition. I'm I don't see anybody on here, but Within the on the call I don't say I guess not Um, well, this is a variance again. There is no staff recommendation Is uh, would anybody like to offer a motion? Lacey I hear by make a motion the application number b 21 hold bunch of zeroes nine a request for a variance from the project boundary requirements on property located at 218 north dillard street has successfully met the applicable 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 submitted to the board as part of the application right, we've got a motion by mr. Lacey to approve Is there a second Meadows And I'm a second my meadows before we vote. Uh, Cole's got his hand up. What's that? What you got Cole? Maybe that was by accident Well, we'll assume it was um Susan, what'd you call? Miss. Why more? Yes Mr. Retchless Yes Mr. Tarrant Yes, mr. Lacey. Yes Mr. Meadows Yes Mr. Rogers Yes Mr. Kip. Yes Motion carries seven to zero If I vote a seven to zero your request for a variance has been approved. We appreciate you coming before the BOA You'll get an order soon. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Hope you get some lunch soon We will that's thank you very much Before this case, I don't know if there's interest in taking a quick break or if we want to just power through it Thoughts mic you got it. You want a five minute break? please All right, well, let's take a five minute break. It's 1203. We'll be back at 1208 1210 let's make it 1210 All right. I think we've got every one. It's uh mic and regina but once they get back we'll Get started Susan would you like to call the next case? Case b21 00010 A request for a variance from the requirements to not place the service area along the street frontage And for a service area to be 20 feet from the building corner The subject site is located at 509 north mancomb street in a zone downtown design support one And in the downtown tier This case has been advertised for the required period of time And property owners within 600 feet have been notified Notarized affidavits verifying the sign postings and letter mailings are on file The seating for this case is mr. Lacey, mr. Kip, mr. Meadows, mr. Rogers, mr. Wretch less miss wymore and mr. Tarrant All right So everyone who plans on giving testimony on this will need your uh video on And dan jewel Raised his hand. That's what it says Jacob yes is uh Is this the case where one of the members will be recusing themselves? No okay, so Well, the the motions at the end were I've been or withdrawn so they won't be heard today. I think that was what would be recusing Um, so everyone who plans on giving testimony will need you to raise your right hand You swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth Yes from everyone Yes Preston, yes Dan Yes, Lindsey Yes And do you all consent to this remote meeting platform? I'll need a verbal yes from everyone. Yes Yes, yes Rice and Powell, did did you take the oaths were on video? Uh, I I was not on video, but I I said yes in my office by myself Go ahead for the sake of the the record uh administer those do you uh, if you'll raise your right hand Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, sir. Um Cole is this one yours is take it over Okay Mr. Chair Yes, Krista Kukro city attorney's office. Um, sorry, I know that uh, mr. Wardell just brought this up But I do want to clarify Mr. Meadows, is this the one that you were intending to Recuse on? No, ma'am. This is I'm good for this one. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. I'm tired. I apologize to everybody I forgot to send you a note. I apologize. Okay. Thank you Okay Good morning again, uh, I guess good afternoon now. Um, I'm cold in a good represent the plan apartment Uh, planning staff request the staff for and all materials submitted the public hearing to be made part of the public record With any necessary corrections as noted. So noted. Thank you, sir The 21 00010 is a request for variance from the requirements Um, to not place a service area along a street frontage and for a service area to be Um, at least 20 feet from the building corner Um, this case area is Highland ride the site is in the downtown tier Dd Design downtown design district and is within the city of durst city of derms jurisdiction The existing use is a commercial retail, which right now is advanced auto parks Um, Lindsey Lindsey Kredgman on behalf of the developer scp dc LLC request the variance from the requirements that service areas not be placed on street frontage And the service area should be at least 20 feet from the building corner The site is owned downtown design district support one and in the downtown tier for unified development ordinance section 16.2.3 a three Unless the development site is be found sorry is Bound by right of way on all sides no service area shall be permitted along the frontage of the streets The applicant proposes to have a service area along the frontage of north mangam street It's only frontage This is a service area that is for a parking garage entry and a stairwell In addition the applicant requests a variance from udo section 16.2.3 b1 Which takes the service area shall be at least 20 feet from any building corner with street frontage the service areas propose 16 feet from the corner of the building um section udo section 3.14 b establishes the findings listed below that the board of adjustment Must make in granting a variance These findings and review factors are identified in the staff report and the applicant's responses to the findings and review factors Are identified in the application both within your packets Staff will be available for any questions Well, the map we have here is not of the case that we're looking at Oh, I'm sorry. Uh, let me let me let me pull it to write one then. Uh, thank you for pulling that to me Um one second It's pulling up And the applicant does have um exhibits that they have so I will present those as needed This is one of the ones under review because we don't have a clean copy um, but here's the service area That they're referring to where the entrance will be to the garage And here's the corner of the of the building right in this area okay Any questions for Cole to have what you got I My question So there's an advanced auto here. It's coming downward the the applicant the applicant is seeking to put I guess some um some Apartments and uh some it appears to be some structured parking and it's the the the auto entry um That's located on the on the front of the building that's requiring this variance or is there some sort of other aspect to this To this entryway other than just automobiles getting to the parking deck. I'm I'm confused about that I'm sorry. What was what was the first part of that? I'm sorry. I know I got the last part But you dropped out for me a lot. I apologize So the first part was just you know, it looks like this is an application to build apartments in a parking deck and The variance is for a service area But to me it looks like the service area is simply the access to the parking garage. Am I missing something? No, that that's correct. Um, that that is uh as our udo defines it it defines as uh as entrances to parking as a service area Okay, so that's how the udo defines it the the reason the ordinance is needed because um, generally Uh, when you have an alley, um, you have to use that for access. I see. Um, but in this case They feel like the alley isn't sufficient Um, so they're proposing to get a variance from that to place The service area on that street frontage Will there be access to the it appears as though there's access to the alley as well Am I reading that correctly from? Um, I'll I'll let them talk to that. Um, to To I think it might just be one-way traffic, but I'll let them speak to that to be more specific. Thank you sir. No problem Any other questions for call before we hear from the applicant? I'm just looking through here. I don't see any Um, would the applicant come forward? I'm not sure who is speaking first Yes, hello, uh chairman rogers and fellow board members. I'm i'm dan jewel with cjt Thank you. Uh, Cole. That's a good exhibit to start with. Thank you so much for bringing that up if you can just leave that up for For the time being great. Um, again dan jewel cjt We are the uh, civil engineers and landscape architects for this project Uh, our office is just five blocks down mangham street at 111 was main and I reside at 1025 gloria avenue With me here this afternoon our lindsay christman of the project architect with client design Who will also provide testimony as well as preston roister A professional engineer with our office and the project manager on this as well as brison powell with the development team who will Help answer questions. Uh, and and thank you for all the time you're putting in this morning to hear all of these these cases um Cole the image seems to have disappeared. Is there a way to bring that back up again? Sorry, is that better? That's perfect. Thank you. Sorry about that. We'll go with what we got. All right Um, again a bit of background on my credentials. Uh, I have a professional degree in landscape architecture from perdua university I've been practicing as a licensed landscape architect for 38 years now Uh, the last 35 of those 36 of those in north carolina with the bulk of that experience in durham Uh, most of that work involves design and preparation of site plans Very similar to this project specific to this case The udo has made a a generalized attempt to establish a set of prescriptive design rules On try and make them apply to every situation. That's what a form-based code is um But every site has quirks. Uh, every site has situations every site has things that are specific to to Each so there's there's no such thing as chapter 16 of the udo being able to accommodate One size fits all for everything. Um, I know a bit about that I was privileged to sit on the citizens advisory committee that helped guide The creation and adopted of the udo 15 years ago And I also served on the citizens advisory committee that helped with the creation of the Downtown design district mapping and rules chapter 16, which is why we are here today And those rules were always intended to have some flexibility in cases with hardship, which of course is why we are here with you today In this specific case a hardship is created by a couple of factors The vision for downtown that chapter 16 of the udo Guides and the reason that we have a downtown design district is for a denser or more urban form of development That promotes a mix of uses And a high level of much needed housing opportunities as you all know, we are still On a on a shortage of supply issue to meet the growing demand for housing in Durham This is housing that will allow residents to live downtown support all of our great Local businesses that have been suffering a bit here over the last 12 months And our proposal furthers that vision providing by providing just those housing opportunities In a scale and a forum that is prescribed by the udo For better or for worse though The need for parking is still a reality in 2021 As much as I hold out hope that at some point our culture will meet move beyond being car dependent We are not yet there The market still demands parking And the banks still demand parking in order to get a project finance And parking is at the crux of our variance request And I think this will explain mr. Mr. Meadows question a little bit more Our initial design proposal was in fact to allow all of the parking to access the alley in the rear So that dark gray area on the the left side of the page that you're you are looking at The udo requires that if you have an alley, you're supposed to access the alley Unfortunately, we ran into thealities of what is a relatively narrow one-way alley as all alleys in Durham are And what that alley could accommodate And most importantly What the city transportation and public works departments would actually allow us to do That portion of the alley that stubs to the rear of this property again the gray area in the the exhibit you're looking at Is is one way We were able to successfully request a variance through the public works department from their reference guide to allow Two-way traffic on that stretch of alley But we also had to commit to actually a very novel solution that we have A traffic control gate signal so to speak so that only one car at a time could go in and out of that alley So we were able to solve the problem of being able to access that alley at all Otherwise we would have ended up as was a situation like a a roach motel car could cars could go in but they could not go out So public works granted that And although that solved the two-way situation The folks in city transportation Still said the amount of parking that you are providing on this site Is more than can be accommodated in an alley in a public alley of this scale so Because of that they required that we actually disconnect the lower level of parking and I failed to explain So this site slopes To the to the back toward the alley So there's a lower level of parking that is a full floor below the mangane street level And then there's a street level of parking on mangane street, which is sort of the the view that you see here today But the transportation department did not want all both levels to exit and enter in the alley on the back therefore We were we were required To have an additional access On mangane street and that is the location There in the the the the right side where it says auto entry service So half of the automobile traffic will use that one and the other half will be the lower the lower with with no connection in between So short of eliminating that second level parking which would have reduced the building program to a size that is Not feasible to develop but most importantly for you is certainly not in keeping with the goal for a bigger lively or more populous downtown A smaller building would not have contributed to that goal There are also specifics having to do with the width and configuration of the site And the dimensional requirements that that Are required for parking decks that would require that the driveway on mangane Be located where it is Thus requiring the very modest reduction Of the required 20 feet of separation from that upper right corner of the building to the service entry Rather than the 16 feet That we are able to do because of all of these issues Keep in mind that's a reduction of only four feet of that width Which is literally a step and a half or a blink of an eye if you're walking up the street Past the property also keep in mind some day that there will be we're sure another building Built to the north of this site meaning that The goal of not having a big Unglazed openings of the of the building will actually be met through a nice continuous storefront at some point in the future So before I turn it over to the project architect Miss kreshman to speak a bit more about the technical issues having to do with the parking layout and also How our variance request is still very much in keeping with the spirit Purpose and intent of the ordinance I'll close my testimony by saying that in my professional opinion Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of the ordinance And that the hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to this property And that those hardships did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property owner So, uh, thank you for this time and I'd now like to turn it over to uh, Lindsay That is your question specifically to dan It is I have a few questions, but the the one that is most specific. I just needed a piece of clarity Then you mentioned that the um Was it the city that said you must have a second egress? Um, was was that um Was that the direction from public works or or quote unquote the city? Um, or was this second method of ingress egress? Uh from the from the applicant's volition So it's a combination. We need two levels of parking to support the project the scale of the project The city would only allow us to access the lower level from the alley They would not allow us to access the upper level from the alley Okay, and one more follow-on question Um, is it possible to change the configuration of the alley? Does right of way or space exist to uh upgrade that so that the the level of traffic Created from the use could could use the alley. Is that a possibility? Uh, no, sir. It is not because we did explore that too much length There there are ownership issues on either side of the alley. We don't control those and It's not simply the the gray stub of an alley that the transportation folks felt we That could only handle so much traffic It's also that portion of the alley on the the far left that uh goes from uh street to street along the back of the Uh, the the senior center. So we we tried but we couldn't get there with ownership and volume Thank you Tisha, um, you have a question Yes, hi, um, I do for mr. Jewel. Thank you for your presentation I I just need a little bit more clarification to what follow on to mr. Meadows question um The mangum street where it says auto entry would also be the exit for that level. Is that correct because there's only one they're not connected By levels. Is that right? Dan jewel again. Yes, ma'am. That is correct Okay, and then same with the lower level would only be alley exit and and an entrance Yes, ma'am. Dan jewel again. That is correct Thank you Dan, yeah, I'll turn it back over to you. I know you were had someone else Yes, I'd like to uh With your permission allow our project architect, uh, lindsay krichman to speak a little bit more about the peculiarities of the Parking and how we still meet the intent of the udio already lindsay Good afternoon, lindsay krichman as dan mentioned. I'm the architect and project manager. I'm with client design associates I am registered in i'm registered architect in north carolina with the masters of architecture from nc state university I have been designing projects in the dd district of durham for a little over 10 years now So I have encountered a lot of different conditions where sites do not Meet the direct intent of the udio as as dan alluded to This is definitely one of them. Um, I will say that we identified these issues very early on and we Brought them to the attention of coal and bow before we even had the first round of site plan comments So we're at the point now where we have an almost completely approved site plan Some middle package in this variance is kind of that last piece to approval We have done everything that we can On the design of the building to Get this to meet the intent and the spirit of the udio Dan did a very good job of describing this exhibit and how You know, we're being pulled from two directions from transportation and the udio Pulling this project to choose two different sides of the site So we've we've compromised and you know We have one entrance on one side and one entrance on the alley side, which I think is a great solution to reduce the traffic impact To both the sides of the site Another thing that we did regarding the function of the building to meet the the intent of the udio is that You can see on this exhibit that we move the trash and the move in And all of that the things that you think of that are actually service We've moved them all to the alley. And so that is definitely the intent of the udio So all of that service function will not be a long man gum The only service that we have a long man gum is that in and out entrance into the parking deck and then the code required stare egress That is required on this side of the site for fire safety And I wanted to point out one other thing about this part of the variance is We did reduce as part of our Working with coal on this we did make sure that our total service width along this frontage Is less than 20 of the frontage Which if service was allowed on man gum street on this site that is the udio requirement So we would be meeting the udio if it was allowed on man gum street Um Eliza, I believe you're presenting now. Could you go to the next exhibit? I want to talk a little more about the second part on the second variance that we're requesting this goes hand in hand if We're saying we are allowed to Have this auto entry on man gum If we do end up saying that that is going to be granted The geometry of the building is what Causes the second variance to be needed. So the width of the hardship for this part of the variance Is i'm going to do my best to describe it and definitely if you have questions. Let me know The width of the site We started laying it out and we've studied this parking configuration Of a lot of different ways We have to connect to the existing alley and you can see we're kind of flaring the alley to even get into the drive aisle So we've pushed the building to the south As much as we can and then we laid out our typical Parking bays which are required dimensions per the udio with drive aisles and parking stalls And when we get to the northern edge of the property We have a 10 foot setback from the private property line and that is for fire Code required separation and then also constructability so that we're not encouraging on the private property the adjacent private property so what that does it It's a the hardship is the width of the site So it makes that last bay of parking an angled parking bay So in order to keep our parking ratio as it needs to be for the site we Have those angled parking spaces and we've aligned the drive aisle with that We've increased it as much as we possibly could on the site and it got us to 16 feet. We're really really close The udio doesn't want to have a service area on the corner That's the intent of the requirements so you can see the Kind of rendering blow up to the right of the exhibit We created this active view space With a good amount of glazing and an entrance to the street so that you're not seeing service on the corner We've pushed all of the service area the riser rooms and all of that back from the street over 20 feet So we are complying with the udio as far as how far back the service areas are Um from mangam. It's just the drive aisle geometry that is causing the 16 feet Um, and eliza if you can go to the next slide. Um, I'll just end The last point is looking at this corner um To the right is the drive entrance for mangam flats. Um, currently and of course that could be developed in the future um, but walking down the street here you can see the You know the to the right the bottom right corner is where that active space is if you're walking as a pedestrian If this was a 20 foot wide space the pedestrian experience would be equal I don't think anyone would really see the difference if that was shifted over But it would have huge ramifications to the building and the feasibility of This development working Um, and I will leave it there for questions Chad, do you have a question for miss correct? I do I do. Thank you. Thank you. Um, thank you for that Would you Were there um any other additional design considerations regarding the entryway or or the the driveway proper for the vehicle entrance mangam I assume that the standards that we're dealing with are trying to you know, keep our our building facade pedestrian oriented and minimize the The amount of automobile character Um to the building facade. Can you talk a little bit about anything that you guys did As part of your design to address those kinds of concerns If anything Yes, definitely. Um, Lindsey Kretschman We looked at a few different locations for this auto entry and we settled on this location because It can integrate into the architecture. And so when you look at this building, it isn't prominent It's not something that jumps out to you as a service area The other part of it is we wanted the rest of the space To be contiguous. So when you're walking as a pedestrian, you have as much contiguous storefront and active area as possible Rather than placing it, you know, in the middle of the site or something like that Did that answer your question it did. Thank you. Will there be any sort of roll down gate or any sort of Appartenance that stretches across the entrance that raises and lowers as vehicles come and go or will it just be open There is a security gate. Um, it is recessed More than 20 feet. Um, I believe from the right of way so that a car can pull in and Wait behind the gate without blocking traffic Okay, so there's a there's a There's a recess in the building wall that's at least 20 feet deep for a vehicle to sit And as while the gate's coming up Um, and what is the material of the of the gate? It will be um powder coated steel. So in dark color. Um, thank you Any other questions for the witness? Mr. Rogers dan jewel that does conclude our testimony. Thank you Alrighty, thank you. Um Any questions, you know any final thoughts on on uh any Not final thoughts but questions for the applicant just one more time This is chad. I have one more question for the for the staff Which is uh, where are we on parking? Are they providing proposing more parking than would be required or How how did that fair? So parking for the design district. Um, there is no minimum requirement. Yeah so The parking to provide and is I guess, um, that's what the applicant wants So to the applicant, um, how many spaces per unit are being provided? We are providing one space per dwelling unit, which is, um, I I crunched a few of the numbers looking a few years back at the multi-family projects in downtown Durham Um, the parking that's provided for those projects is one per bedroom So if that was translated to this project, we would have 25 additional parking spaces So we are pushing the envelope to have As few parking spaces as we possibly can. Um, and we're getting there. We would love to design a project with less and less parking So we really can't afford to lose any Or it it isn't leasable for the units Thank you All right, any any other questions for the applicants? All right, um, is there anyone here to speak against this application? Um, all right, uh, darlene wall. I'll give you a Couple of minutes Okay, um, my name is darlene wall and i'm president of public hardware our business is next door To the plan project at 599 north manham street. We've been here since 1995 um My problem I have I know they have their building Units for occupancy and that's that's a good thing. I understand the need for parking um, but what I don't Agree with is the fact that that park that alley The tenants were becoming through that alley to get to that lower parking day my only issue with that is the fact that central park Middle school is right behind this building that they're going to feel And that alleyway goes right behind central park middle schools And they don't have a lot of room back there But you know, they have a picnic table when I'm walking my dog sometimes I can see a class out there or a few kids out there just you know messing around but this I feel it's too close I feel it's it's going to cause a potential problem In in meeting ways, you know Kids are kids They're throwing a ball and you know, they're not going to be looking behind them As much it could happen. That's all that's all in life. Um And I and I just think that It's it's a uh I can't find the words I'm thinking about I just think that it would be a hazard is to those kids It could be and then there's the fact that when school is in session um, the parents do go down that alleyway they and probably 15 minutes school when school is getting out A lot of times there's parents parked on manningham street to get to the alley down seminary street And down in the alley that's on the backside of the storage place right behind us And so that's my main issue is the Is this too close to the school? That is my issue. I have no problem with them building the stuff next door. That's A good thing for dawn You know, but that is my only issue And I feel like that was enough for me to be able to speak up about it and I appreciate you giving me that opportunity All right. Thank you, miss. Well, are you worried about traffic? Is that what you're saying? I don't Know Just The small size of that alley for one thing. I know they're trying to extend it out I'll have or how many feet but it's so close to that school and the other and alley. I think it's alley 27 It it goes behind the storage place behind us And then it meets where they would be required to be able to go up Into I mean go down into the park and they that they're proposing But that to turn to get to that parking deck Is right and right at the back of that school I mean, it's right there. I think it's something that you should be looked into And you know, whatever you decide you decide But I really feel that it should be considered Okay. Well, thank you miss as well. Uh, is there anyone else Here to speak against this uh case looking around Going once Going twice All right, um All right, uh, any any thoughts from the board board members deliberation I have one more question for dan rexles here. Absolutely. Mr. Richard Um, maybe it's for cole too. Is that did I hear that was a one-way alley? Uh, yeah dan jewel. Uh, yes, sir all all alleys in Durham are officially one way My experience is that People only driving on them one way at a time But nobody right but but officially officially they are all one ways. Yes, sir And what is the direction of that alley? I cannot answer that Cole would you know I also do not know the direction of that alley This is chat. I can my son went to central park And you travel that alley from the north so you, um That you you come in From goodness. What's the name of the road? Hold on a minute. Let me pull this side That's right. Yeah, and you uh, you turn so you would be you drive along the school You come you turn in at the storage place go down the hill and then come along the school Uh and turn I guess left or right on boundary I guess and that is morning drop off at that school That's seminary if he turns it into souls Yeah Alley's seminary and then hunt is that's it. Sorry hunt So you get on on seminary uh, you you you travel I guess in a northerly direction on the alley, which would be Unfortunately, it's kind of hard looking at the site plan, but you travel north on that alley Gotcha. Thanks, Jen All right any other questions for staff or or the applicant or Make sure I'd uh any deliberations thoughts This is a quest for variance. So there are as no staff recommendation at the tisha. Do you have something? I will just say from personal experience at that alleyways is quite congested already as it is with traffic going to and from that school and as is hunt street and seminary and also behind public hardware All that stuff is really congested during the school hours of time based on my experience of having uh gone back and forth there many years, but um That's just my opinion traffic Mr. Lysie you have that and yeah, um oops Okay, uh We're talking about four feet right Uh It's 16 feet instead of 20 feet for the front That's what we're talking about is a four feet and then the additional thing we're talking about is uh Agress and entrance from in the lower levels through the alley And transportation has already said yes, it can happen. So I'm sure they've uh done due diligence as the professionals they are and I don't really see that there's a barrier And we're talking about four feet. We're not talking about um putting a A garage entrance or exit right at the corner, which would be I think dangerous because when you come around the corner You don't know that there's a going to be a car waiting to get on So I think that they've done the best they could do with the to accommodate all of the needs So I'm going to vote in favor of it Thank you. Mr. Lysie any other thoughts Uh, mr. Tam. This is chad. Um, you know, this is a use that's allowed. Um, I think they've tried to be judicious in the provision of parking Um from the testimony received it was the city that was compelling them to to put this entrance On on mangham. Um, because the alley is too small Uh to accommodate The traffic they did relocate the trash Uh the moving area to the back. So to me that was a move that signals consist an attempt for for consistency um You know the I agree with um With mr. Lysie regarding the de minimis nature of the the second variants. Um, doesn't seem like That's a a major A fatal flaw in the request and they Have done some design consideration to to try to address, you know that that address the city requirements. Um, so I too Am i'm going to support this if we want to um densify downtown Uh and want to provide housing alternatives Um and have to recognize people still drive cars Um and that those cars have to operate on the transportation system that we have Maybe not the one that we want. Um, then compromises like this have to happen Thank you Well said mr. Meadows uh mike tan I um, I completely agree with with mr. Meadows mr. Lacy and I'd like to thank the applicant team for A very thorough and clear presentation and walking through each of these findings that I think you You know certainly helped um provide a good good overview of what What we're considering here today You know I am Certainly also supportive of this. I feel like you know what we're talking about four feet on the building corner Um, it might be a different situation that this property was actually on the corner of an intersection But having pulled the the building back 10 feet from the property line you actually are 24 feet from the property corner versus Um, you know just the 16 from the physical corner of the building so Um, this not being a service i.e. trash and loading You know where you have trucks backing into it out of the right of way I think I think you've done a done a great job meeting that particular criteria So again, I appreciate it. I'm supportive of this uh this application uh anyone else I Concur when mr. Turret and um jad Is delacy well spoken and uh to preserve more time. I will not speak but I am for the variants If there's no more discussion does anyone want to offer a motion? Delacy Just delice I hear may by make a motion that the application number Be 21 bunch of zeros 10 an application for a request for a variance from the requirements To not place a service area along a street frontage and for service area to be 20 feet from the building corner on property located at 509 North mangan street has successfully met the apical requirements of the unified development ordinance and is hereby granted subject to the following conditions That the improvements shall be substantially consistent with the plans and all information submitted to the board as part of the application All right, we've got a motion to approve by mr. Lacey. Is there a second? wretchless second Second by my gretch less Susan will you take it over mr. Lacey? Yes, mr. Kip. Yes mr. Meadows Yes, mr. Rogers Yes Mr. Wretch less Yes Ms. Wymore Yes, mr. Tarrant Yes Motion carries seven to zero A vote of seven to zero your variance has been approved We're gonna form a order soon and we appreciate you coming before the BOA this afternoon. Thank you so much. Okay Thank you very much good continue on our agenda here. I see no old business. I see no new business And now to the approval of orders Lacey. I have new business. Oh, you've got new business here. Yes, this will be my last meeting Um, I've uh submitted ray recommend my resignation to the mayor Um, it's been a great ride eight years here two years another sworn committee and uh The other 15 and various boards and commissions. Um, and so I'd like to thank you all for being this is the hardest job Of any committee or I've been on and I really appreciate the professionalism of these volunteers who Just care for the city and the county Um, so thank you all for your service. So Regina. What if we don't we don't accept your resignation, huh? Too bad, buddy. Stevie already did But thank you for the kind that words I truly appreciate your your commitment to this uh to this group and as well as you know, as your Two years as chair as well Just before me. So, um, Wishing nothing but the best, but thank you. Yeah Okay, now you can do the order All right about the orders, um The first one the only Pete. There are three of you who can vote uh and make a motion That's going to be mike tarrant in kip and chad meadows on this one. Uh, so This is from previous meeting b two Need a motion and a second for each of these Uh, but b two zero zero zero zero zero five one. Is there a motion to approve from one of those three people? Meadows move approval meadows first. Who's the second? Tarrant second. Oh can't make okay parent second Susan you want to take it away? Did you say the only three people that could vote was delay c one more and Nope Tarrant kip and meadows Gina Cannot vote those three and those those don't okay. Mr. Kip. Yes, mr. Meadows. Yes Mr. Rogers. Nope. Mr. Wetzel. I can't I can't vote I'm sorry. Just just the three uh, uh, tarrant kip and meadows are the only people who can vote Can okay. Let me start this over mr. Tarrant. Yes, mr. Kip. Yes, mr. Meadows. Yes Motion carries three to zero. All right Our next one is b two zero zero zero zero four nine Everyone who will see today is is eligible to vote on this one need a motion and a second Meadows move approval Lacey second Okay Mr. Lacey. Yes, mr. Kip. Yes, mr. Meadows. Yes, mr. Rogers. Yes, mr. Wetzel. Yes one more Yes, mr. Tarrant Yes All right, here he's seven to zero b two one zero zero zero zero three everyone is also eligible to vote on this one Need a motion or a second meadows move approval meadows. Who's the second? Mr. Lacey. Yes, mr. Kip. Yes, mr. Meadows Yes, mr. Rogers. Yes, mr. Wetzel Yes, one more. Yes, mr. Tarrant. Yes Motion carries seven to zero. All right. Now our next one will be b two one zero zero zero zero five Chad is can't vote on this when he voted. No, so From the other six we'll need a motion and a second Lacey some of the Lacey and who's in the second Kip second Kip second miss Mr. Lacey. Yes, mr. Kip. Yes, mr. Rogers. Yes, mr. Wetzel. Yes, one more Yes, mr. Tarrant Yes, motion carries six to zero All righty our next one will be b two one zero zero zero zero nine Everyone's eligible to vote on this one need a motion and a second Motion wretchless wretchless first. Who's the second? Mr. Lacey Mr. Tarrant Yes, mr. Wymore Yes, mr. Wretchless Yes, your Rogers Yes, mr. Meadows. Yes, mr. Kip. Yes, mr. Lacey. Yes Motion carries seven to zero All right, our final one is b two one zero zero zero one zero again. Everyone's eligible to vote I need a motion and a second hold on Krista Um, Krista could go to the attorney's office since there was opposition on that one Uh, I believe it would be appropriate to come back with a order on it. That's right. That's right No, we won't vote on that one right now Uh Well, Regina, I don't want you to go Oh, that's sweet, honey It's been a good run, but um, it was time. Yeah, I understand completely understand. It's good to have you here. Um, Let's I don't know what else to say about it. Regina. Thank you for the peer support and um, you're definitely a great role model to follow And uh, you've helped me out a lot on this board. Thank you. It means a lot coming from you, Michael Thanks for your leadership. You've been wonderful to work with I'm really happy to have met you I and I you and I love your comfy chairs Thanks Thank you, Regina You're awesome Thanks, Regina from staff Thanks, Eliza. You've been swell Thank you Great working with you as chair and as a member so many wishes in your next endeavor. Thanks a lot All right guys. Well our next meeting will be April 27th at 8 30 am Until then I will see you then if there are motion for adjournment The lacy so move In a second I See you guys today. It's been fun