►
From YouTube: Board of Adjustment – June 26, 2023
Description
Regular meeting of the City of Asheville Board of Adjustment.
Access the agenda and other meeting materials at the City of Asheville website: https://www.ashevillenc.gov/department/city-clerk/boards-and-commissions/board-of-adjustment/
Participate before and during the meeting on our public engagement hub: https://publicinput.com/P6833
A
Okay,
the
meeting
will
now
come
to
order.
Welcome
to
the
June
26
2023
city
of
Asheville
Board
of
adjustment
meeting.
My
name
is
Paul
wilzinski
I
am
the
chair
of
this
board.
The
board
of
adjustment
is
a
quad-side
Judicial
body
that
is
governed
by
the
North
Carolina
General
statutes
and
the
city's
unified
development
ordinance.
A
We
are
authorized
to
hear
requests
for
variances
from
the
city's
unified
development.
Ordinance
also
referred
to
as
the
Udo
appeals
from
final
determinations
made
by
City
officials
charged
with
enforcement
of
cities,
udl
requests
for
reasonable
accommodations
and
other
requests,
as
may
be
provided
in
the
city's
ordinances.
A
The
first
thing
on
the
agenda
is
review
and
Adoption
of
the
minutes
from
the
May
2023
minute,
as
as
I
assume
members
of
board
know
are
aware.
If
we
just
got
those
minutes
this
morning,
so
I'm
going
to
ask
anyone
who
hasn't,
but
it's
so
because
I
can
ask
it
ask
that
we
move
this
agenda
item
to
the
next
meeting.
If
I
could
get
a
show
of
hands
of
anyone
who
has
not
had
a
chance
to
review
those
minutes?
A
Okay,
okay,
so
we
have
one
person
who
has
not
had
a
chance
to
review
the
minutes.
Can
I
get
a
motion
to
to
move
this
agendaive
into
the
next
meeting?
A
A
These
rules
are
different
from
some
other
type
of
land
use
decisions
like
rezoning
cases
which
are
legislative
in
nature.
This
board's
decisions
are
constrained
by
the
standards
in
the
city's
ordinances
and
the
facts
presented
at
the
hearing
the
board
hears
and
considers
evidence
presented
at
the
hearing
and
applies
the
standards
set
forth
and
state
law
and
the
city's
ordinance.
A
Presented
at
the
hearing,
if
you
will
be
speaking
as
a
witness,
please
focus
on
the
facts
and
standards,
not
personal
preference
or
opinion
participation
is
limited.
This
meeting
is
open
to
the
public.
Everyone
is
welcome
to
watch
parties
have
rights
to
participate
fully.
Parties
may
present
evidence
call
witnesses
and
make
legal
arguments.
A
A
These
topics
include
projections
about
impacts
on
property
values
and
projections
about
impacts
on
traffic
safety,
for
variance
requests.
A
four-fifth
vote
of
the
board
is
required
to
Grant
the
variance
for
all
other
hearings
and
matters
and
I
assume.
That
includes
appeals,
including
the
adoption
of
minutes.
The
decision
will
be
made
by
a
simple
majority
of
the
vote
of
the
board.
A
A
A
A
C
Thank
you,
Mr
chair
and
members
of
the
board
good
to
see
you
this
afternoon
again
for
the
record.
My
name
is
Sam
Starbomb
I
am
a
planner
too,
with
development
services
down
at
161,
South,
Charlotte
Street
and,
as
the
chair
said,
we
have
a
variance
request
for
accessory
structured
standards
at
173,
Macon
Avenue.
This
is
a
little
different
than
all
my
other
presentations.
There's
a
lot
of
things
that
are
going
to
be
different
about
today's
meeting.
C
Can't
be
reviewed
in
this
case,
this
will
go
a
little
bit
different
than
any
other
accessory
structure
case.
You
have
seen
this
year,
so
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
move
forward
with.
What's
before
us
again
the
summary,
as
provided
by
the
chair,
one
quick
correction:
that's
actually
our
tour
Lorry
as
as
made
clear
by
the
applicant,
and
you
can
see
the
variance
request.
B
C
What
the
applicant
is
looking
to
do
is
increase
the
amount
for
One
Singular
accessory
structure
by
19
or
179
square
feet
for
a
total
of
979
square
feet
for
one
single
accessory
structure
and
then
increase
the
overall
amount
of
accessory
structures
to
1099
square
feet,
which
is
99
square
feet
in
excess
of
what
is
allowed
for
Parcels
one
acre
or
less
and
I
want
to
be
clear
that
at
32
000
square
feet.
This
is
less
than
an
acre
and
is
only
granted
1
000
square
feet
so
where,
in.
C
We,
of
course
we
are
in
North
Asheville.
This
is
just
at
the
foothills
of
town
Mountain.
You
can
actually
see
that
there
in
the
north,
as
illustrated
by
the
star,
a
little
bit
closer,
it's
right
at
the
intersection
of
Macon
and
sunset.
We
are
actually
not
that
far
from
Grove
Park.
You
can
of
course
see
the
golf
course
there
and
the
zoning
is
a
little
unique,
so
there
are
still
pockets
of
rm6
nearby,
but
really
Sunset
Trail
and
Macon
Avenue.
C
This
is
really
the
starting
point
where
you
will
see
the
ocean
of
rs2
and
RS4,
especially
moving
East
up
the
hill
to
Town,
Mountain
and
North,
as
you
get
further
to
Beaver
Dam
Valley,
where
it
is
predominantly
rs2
and
RS4,
which
are
lower
density
standards,
and
this
is
what
we
have
before
us,
so
I'm
going
to
talk
about
what
was
built
and
when
this
is
the
home.
I
have
to
admit
this
is
not
my
photo.
Thank
you
Zillow.
They
always
have
a
house
photo
available,
so
this
is
173
Macon
Avenue.
C
C
C
One
of
them
was
for
an
accessory
structure
to
be
added
onto
the
existing
accessory
structure,
so
it
was
more
of
an
addition
than
an
independent
accessory
structure
and
he
also
applied
for
a
permit
to
repair
the
port
cochair
attached
to
the
home.
Immediately,
the
review
specialist
Hayley
Mahoney
put
the
review
on
hold
for
the
accessory
structure,
saying
this
is
going
to
kick
you
over.
This
will
kick
you
into
where
we
are
today.
C
This
will,
if,
if
this
were
to
be
proposed,
this
would
bring
you
to
1099
square
feet
for
overall
accessory
structures
and
it
would
be
in
excess
of
what
is
allowed
for
one
single
accessory
structure
because
it
is
attached
to
the
original
1918
structure.
So
that
is
where
we
are
today.
You
can
actually
see
what
was
added.
The
contractor
has
gone
ahead
and
made
the
accessory
structure
addition.
C
C
Put
the
accessory
structure
permit
on
hold,
however,
when
the
building
Specter
was
out,
approving
the
port,
cochair,
Edition
and
Renovations,
he
had
made
comments
about
engineering
for
the
accessory
structure
right.
So
what
we
are
seeing
here
is
what
is
already
constructed
again
sort
of
like
when
you're
at
the
optometrist.
You
got
one
two
one,
two.
What
you're
seeing
here
is
this
structure,
which
was
already
been
added
on
and
brings
this
out
of
compliance
in
terms
of
the
overall
size
of
one
accessory
structure
and
total
overall
structures.
C
This
is
the
standard
we
look
at.
This
is
what
we,
as
planners
measure,
accessory
structures.
For
so
again,
your
maximum
size
is
going
to
be
800
square
feet
and
then
also
it
is
based
on
block
size
where
you
are
looking
at
for
less
than
one
acre
again
one
thousand
square
feet.
If
it's
one
to
three
acres,
you
get
sixteen
hundred
square
feet
more
than
three
acres
No.
D
F
C
B
C
If
this
is
a
new
application,
so
this
is
somewhat
as
if
it
hasn't
been
built,
so
the
standard
question
still
applied
over
the
four
standards
for
ovariance
still
applies,
but
this
would
be
as
if
it
were
a
new
application.
So
that
is
about
the
development.
What
is
and
is
not
allowed
for
review,
and
what
brought
us
here
and
I
would
be
happy
to
stand
any
questions
that
you
may
have.
Thank
you.
C
G
C
C
C
B
I
Name
is
Artur
Lawley.
Thank
you
for
creating
the
platform
for
for
this.
This
wasn't
the
plan
to
spend
the
day
here
today,
but
Mr
sarban.
Thank
you
for
an
impressive
work.
I
must
say.
Allow
me
to
go
through
a
very
short
timeline
and
allow
me
to
read
to
make
it
easier
for
everybody.
I'll
be
more
happy
to
answer
questions.
Of
course.
I
In
fact,
October
the
27th
I
have
Mr
Starbomb
referenced.
Haley
Mahone
sent
an
email
saying
permit
number
22.08257
for
garage
head.
Addition
will
be
on
hold
for
revision
pending
more
information
regarding
square
footage.
This
was
the
time
of
the
project
was
placed
on
hold.
I
will
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that
on
December
the
20th
missile
Lipe
live.
Forgive
me
for
butchering
language.
Lip
lip
Misty
send
an
email
with
instructions
for
scheduled
scheduling,
inspection
for
2-1-07202
through
the
online
platform
December
the
22nd.
I
The
inspector
was
completed
inspections
because
it
was
completed
for
footing
with
the
result
of
disapproved.
This
was
for
Premiere
21-07202
in
the
title,
but
the
footing
work
was
for
22-08257.
The
inspector
did
not
make
note
on
the
fact
that
the
project
work
did
not
align
with
a
permit
description
for
which
it
was
requested.
I
I
January
the
25th
202314
inspector
per
design,
professional
inspection
form
with
Jeffrey
Brown,
Mr,
Brown,
professional
engineer
and
then
again,
I
have
the
letter
dated
on
March
the
8th
2023.
on
February
the
14th.
The
inspection
was
completed
on
Portugal
share
for
permit
two
one
zero-07202,
an
inspection
was
completed
with
the
result
not
applicable,
not
that
the
inspection
was
done
on
the
wrong
permit
number.
The
protocol
share.
The
project.
I
Please
allow
me
thank
you,
of
course,
when
we
realized
that
the
only
options
were
to
demolish
the
the
shared
or
apply
for
a
variance
I
had
to
ask
someone
what
is
ovariance,
so
this
was
explainable.
That's
why
I'm
here
unnecessary
hardship
and
would
result
from
this
strict
application
of
the
ordinance
of
going
with
some
fact.
I
The
shed
has
been
fully
completed
with
high
quality
construction,
including
Footers,
inspected
and
certified
by
professional
engineer,
including
five
inch
concrete
slab
photo
show
the
architecture
detail
of
the
structure
match
the
primary
residence
on
the
law
to
destroy
in
the
shed
addition
would
cause
damage
to
the
existing
garage
wall
and
cause
the
homeowner
project
manager
and
contractor
to
incur
additional
expense
beyond
what
is
caused
to
be
to
be
built.
The
argument
is
that
the
shared
Edition
was
built
with
the
belief
that
the
permit
had
been
approved
both
permits,
2208-257
and
permit
2-1-07202
reference.
I
The
shared
addition
to
the
garage
contractor
is
requested
inspections
for
the
project
which
were
completed
by
was
completed,
but
on
the
21-07202.
It
was
not
clear
to
the
contractor
that
the
inspections
had
not
been
done
on
the
22-08257,
which
was
the
only
portion
of
the
project
underwear,
the
time
the
inspections
were
requested,
the
hardship
result
from
the
condition
that
they
are
peculiar
to
the
property,
such
as
location,
size
and
topography.
I
So
the
facts
hardship
result
from
the
confusion
due
to
two
permits
number
for
the
same
overall
project
of
the
same
address
when
the
contractor
requested
inspection
for
voters
on
December
2022,
the
inspection
did
not
pass.
Priority
was
not
brought
to
the
to
to
the
to
their
attention
that
the
inspection
was
being
done
on
a
portion
of
the
project
without
an
issued
permit
and
the
inspector's
recommendation.
I
The
contractor
and
project
manager
involved
the
professional
engineer
to
review
and
approve
the
further
excavation
and
updated
plans
on
the
upgraded
Footers
and
wall
structure,
design,
professional
inspection
form
argument.
The
initial
inspection
of
the
footer
should
have
resulted
in
a
notice
that
the
permit
for
the
shared
additional
to
the
garage
was
still
pending.
The
recommendation
to
move
forward
with
the
engineer
letter
gave
the
impression
that
there
were
no
further
issues
with
the
initial
stages
of
the
project.
Again
we
have
that
Mrs
Starbomb.
We
have
that
engineer,
form
sealed
from
the
engineer.
I
The
hardship
on
the
fact
to
work
the
work
continue
on
the
project
based
on
the
advice
given,
and
the
inspection
in
late
December,
2022,
the
contractor
product
manager
and
the
owner
were
all
trying
to
ensure
the
project
met,
not
only
met
but
exceeded
the
city's
requirements
by
working
with
the
engineer
for
further
inspection
and
certification.
At
no
point
did
the
inspector
indicate
a
mismatch
between
the
project
work
and
the
permit
number
the
owner
should
have
been
so
we
I
wrote
over
here
that
at
this
point,
the
owner
should
not
be
penalized
for
this
mistake.
I
Please
allow
me
to
mention
the
last
facts
in
the
last
phase
of
this.
The
requested
variance
is
consistent
with
the
spirit,
purpose
and
intent
of
the
ordinance
such
that
Public
Safety
is
secured
and
successional
Justice
is
achieved.
The
fact
the
owner
has
shown
intent
to
follow
CD
Udo
and
use
a
tasteful
approach
to
develop
to
this
development
of
the
property.
It
is
without
any
doubt
that
the
special
care
and
expense
that
has
been
taken
to
ensure
the
accessory
structures
are
safe
and
Visually
appealing
the
argument.
I
The
existing
shared
addition
to
the
garage
does
not
present
any
public
safety
concerns,
nor
does
it
visually
disrupt
the
appeal
of
the
property
on
the
neighborhood.
This
is
a
three-quarter
of
an
acre
lot.
I
was
told,
as
a
monk
I
think,
the
second
or
the
first
biggest
lot
in
the
map
that
Mr
Starbomb
showed
and
nor
the
contractor
nor
the
owner
intended
to
exceed
the
city's
accessories
square
footage
limit.
Nor
would
either
party
have
proceeded
with
the
work
heads
they
understood.
I
The
permit
for
the
sad
addition
to
the
garage
portion
of
the
project
was
not
yet
approved
in
his
final
thoughts.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
mentioned
that
my
interaction
with
the
the
city,
representatives
and
I'm
not
saying
this
because
Mr
Starbomb
is
in
front
of
me,
but
has
been
nothing
but
positive,
very
helpful
I
had
at
the
beginning,
I
did
not
know
the
facts.
I
did
not
know
what
was
going
on
and
then
I
realized
later.
I
My
goodness,
this
is
I,
didn't
know
a
mess,
a
mishap
oversight,
so
I'm
not
here
to
to
be
against
the
city.
I'm
I'm
simply
not
I
want
to
mention
Haley's
name
as
well,
nothing
but
very
helpful
and
a
measure
the
beginning
of
when
I
started
the
timeline
this
the
project
was
put
on
hold.
It
did
not
help
because
Mrs
Hertz,
unfortunately,
was
diagnosed
with,
with
with
cancer
and
still
fighting
so
everything
froze
and,
of
course
the
focus
was
for
Mr
Hurst
to
take
care
of
his
wife,
and
here
I
am
here.
I
We
are
with
the
project
man
who
tried
to
make
this
a
fun
small
project.
It
turned
into
something
that
we
had
no
intention
no
way
or
shape.
I
have
the
courage
or
anybody
else
to
build
something
that
was
bigger
than
it
was
intended
or
was
not
intended
at
all.
But
I
want
to
emphasize
that
that
the
more
interaction
has
been
nothing
but
positive.
I
Forgive
me.
Let
me
have
a
final
look
and
the
future
I
actually
was
aware
of
the
future
plans.
As
you
can
see
some
of
the
grassy
area
where
the
truck
is
spark
and
all
that
this
is
all
at
the
beginning
of
a
plan
to
redo
this
from
the
very
beginning,
make
it
quite
appealing,
including
a
fountain.
All
kind
of
things
that
Mr
and
Mrs
wish
to
improve
the
property.
I
I
guess
I
can
answer
a
question
as
much
as
I
understand
or
will
will
ask
your
guidance,
but
I
do
want
to
thank
you
again
for
for
your
time
and
I
do
feel
guilty
that
I'm
here
for
something
like
this.
This
was
not
the
intention
at
all.
Forgive
me
for
one
more
summarize
we're
not
asking
for
this
for
the
approval
of
the
shed
we're
asking
for
the
difference
of
Mr
Starbomb
for
100
extra
of.
I
A
I
completely
understood
everything
you
said
up
until
your
last
sentence,
which
was
I'm
not
here,
for
the
approval
of
the
shed
I'm
here
for
the
approval
of
the
square
feet
is,
is
It.
C
Something
Is
Lost
in
Translation.
He
is
there
for
the
approval
of
the
Edition
they're
they're.
What
it
is
is
there
are
no
I
I.
There
are
no
other
substantive
barriers
to
this
being
constructed
and
conforming
other
than
what
is
found
here
in
714
1B,
because
it
adheres
to
the
setbacks.
Everything
else
could
be
met
by
this,
but
I
mean
really.
The
only
ask
here
is
for
179
square
feet
addition
to
the
existing
and
then,
of
course,
the
99
square
feet
over
the
allowed
1000
on
this
partial.
B
I
Are
forgive
me
that
I
see
how
they
can
be
misleading,
I
apologize.
That
was
not
the
intention
we
are
here
to
approve.
Hopefully,
the
shedding
continue
with
this
fun
interesting
project.
Okay,.
A
I'm
gonna
I'm
gonna,
ask
one
more
question.
Please.
As
Mr
Starbomb
said
in
his
presentation,
we
we
are
obligated
to
pretend
that
the
shed
doesn't
exist.
A
Okay.
So
when
you
spoke
about
hardship,
you
were
referring
to
the
hardship
in
terms
of
the
shed
already
existing.
A
I
Is
and
if
it's
not
then
I
will
perhaps
allow
me
to
ask
question
back
and
we
can
clarify
together,
but
it's
a
legitimate
question.
Thank
you
for
that.
So
it's
obvious
that
the
that
the
shed
is
billed,
of
course,
and
in
my
view,
it's
way
over
build
with
all
kind
of
engineer.
I
That's
what
Mr
Mr
Hurst
wish
to
build,
and
so
to
detach
that,
as
you
can
see
from
the
existing
structure,
I
actually
saw
it
because
it
was
an
option.
What
we
can
do
will
destroy
actually
will
damage
not
destroy.
Forgive
me
will
destroy
the
existing
structure
again
on
your
left
on
your
right
on
on
your
right
as
well.
I
Yes,
as
far
as
hardship
I'm
trying
to
think
of
how
this
can
be
destroyed-
and
there
is
no
doubt
that
I
have
lost
sleep
for
something
like
this
and
to
the
jackhammering
all
the
feet
of
concrete
and
the
walls.
It's
something
quite
difficult
to
comprehend.
Well,.
A
I
You
can
help
me
Mr
Sam
as
well,
so
the
owner
I
think
would
still
apply
for
the
for
the
permit
to
build
the
set
shed.
It
will
be
179.
Squid
foot.
Excuse
me
square
footage.
Smaller
will
be
in
the
same
size.
It
will
be
in
this
in
the
same
shape
it
would
be
a
smaller,
so
we're
trying
to
make
it
smaller.
This
is
the
shed
then
I'm
trying
to
shave
this
much
179
square
foot
did
I
answer
your
questions
right.
No.
C
I
I
The
purpose
of
the
shed
is
only
for
his
tools
that
he
has,
and
he
has
Hobbies
with
quite
elaborate,
as
I
have
heard
and
have
seen
some
of
them
help
me
with
the
words
as
CMC
saws
or
you
know
things
a
lot
of
I'm
going
to
use
the
word
expensive
tools
that
he
has
and
it's
a
tool
shed.
There
is
no
there's
nothing,
there's
not
even
a
door.
I
Anything
like
that,
besides
the
door
that
you
can
see
in
the
front,
the
project,
manager
and
I
were
wondering
why,
in
fact
this
is
you
know
such
a
building,
but
he
wished
to
match
with
the
rest
and
and
just
simply
over
build
because
it's
simply
good,
even
though,
if
I
may
take
it
just
a
few
seconds
further
from
where
I
stand
for
I'm
from
I'm
part
of
the
mess
mess
up
this
this,
and
so
is
the
project
manager
there's
no
way
around
it.
I
But
this
is
not
the
fault
of
the
owner,
it's
it's
not,
and
especially
during
the
hardship.
It's
just
it's
heart
gradually
for
me
that
now
he's
dealing
with
also
this
and
I'm
sure
this
is
not
really
about
making
a
very
small
profit.
Now
it's
more
for
the
doing
the
right
thing,
the
dignity
as
well
and
then
make
the
making
things
right,
especially
during
the
hard
time
that
he's
passing
with
his
wife
did
I
answer
the
questions.
E
J
G
It
is,
it
is
not,
it
is
not.
It
is
not
okay,
okay,
what
are
the
dimensions
of
that
shed.
I
14
by
18,
allow
me
to.
I
G
C
Right
179
square
feet
and
then
also
you
know
this
is
this
is
a
variance
for
714
1b4,
because
that
has
both
the
single
and
the
overall
for
accessory
structures.
So,
yes,
179
for
a
single
structure
because
of
that
existing
permit
in
2010,
it
is
also
for
the
extra
99
square
feet
overall,
so
only
179
square
feet.
F
F
I
And
we
have
actually
worked.
The
project
manager
had
to
actually
worked
before
on
many
projects
around
the
house,
including
painting
the
house
took
many
months,
restoring
and
hipping.
Actually
the
historical
look
that
that
thankfully
Sam
sold
from
from
the
front,
so
we've
had
many
projects
before
for
the
same
person.
It's
been
quite
lovely.
Quite
nice,
wonderful
man
generous,
takes
care
of
cats,
On
and
On
The
Story
Goes.
G
Have
you
explored
how
you
could
bring
this
shed
this
Edition
into
compliance,
At
All
by
reducing,
say
you
left
the
roof
structure
and
had
an
extensive
overhang
and
you
pulled
the
walls
in
on
one
side
or
the
other
I.
Don't
know
which
side
is
the
14
and
which
is
the
18,
but
if
it
was
the
18,
you
need
to
bring
it
in
to
like
10..
It's
like
taking
off
four
feet.
I
We
have,
as
of
a
worst
case
scenario,
to
be
honest
with
you
Madame,
and
so
the
the
the
the
connection
of
these
the
structure
actually
I'm
just
reminded
started
a
long
time
ago,
as
an
idea
of
making
it
by
two
by
fours
two
by
six.
E
I
I
This
is
the
word
is
help
me
with
the
sliding
thank
you
barn
doors,
they're.
I
I
And
as
I
was
looking
at
the
Miss
White
I
was
considering
you
know,
then
the
corner,
knowing
from
the
the
owner
knows
enough
about
building
as
well
from
the
the
back
of
the
house
to
the
neighbor.
He
has
followed
all
the
rules.
He
knew
enough
about
him.
That's
why
their
frustration
is
like.
How
did
we
miss
something
like
this
and
and
in
fact
in
fact
we
did-
and
this
is
the
the
when
the
inspection
came.
I
You
know
I'm,
beginning
on
the
slavony,
drawing
an
engineering
letter,
so
we
provided
letter
as
well
from
the
engineering
which
I
have
it
here
and
even
on
the
engineering
form,
the
the
forgesia
and
I'm
not
trying
to
overwork,
but
even
the
permit
number
is
the
wrong
one.
They
provided
that
from
the
city.
I
B
G
Can
I
ask
you
a
question
so
just
trying
to
understand
how
this
didn't
trigger
as
a
zoning
permit,
it
looks
like
the
structure
was
placed
on
top
of
already
pre-existing
impervious
surface,
so
it
it
would
not
have
triggered
storm
water
or
a
erosion
control
plan
or.
E
J
C
What
makes
my
job
particularly
unpleasant
from
time
to
time
is,
there
are
several
permits
that
we
looked
at
for
a
project.
There
are
some
that
apply.
There
are
some
that
don't
a
zoning
permit
was
triggered
for
this
because
it
was
part
of
the
footprint
and
it
was
an
expansion
of
an
existing
accessory
structure.
It
was
less
than
500
square
feet,
so
grading
was
not
triggered,
so
really
it
is
building
and
Zoning
which
are
in
play.
Zoning
was
on
hold.
C
I
cannot
speak
for
the
building
department
as
submitted
there.
Something
happened,
but
the
the
onus
is
upon
the
applicant
to
handle
both
all
permits
associated
with
the
project.
It
is
something
again:
something
happened
with
the
building
I.
Wasn't
there
I
know
Mr
Brown,
I
I
can't
speak
to
his
interactions,
but
the
fact
of
the
matter
is
in
October
before
any
of
this
happened,
Haley
sent
the
email
and
put
this
on
hold.
So
in
excela
you
can
actually
not
request
a
zoning
inspection
if
it
is
on
hold.
So
this
was
a
building.
C
A
A
G
You
know
for
me,
I
just
did
not
hear
from
the
applicant
or
in
the
application
that
there
was
a
specific
hardship
related
to
the
land,
to
the
building,
to
the
orientation
of
the
building
or
the
circulation
inside
of
the
house
or
or
anything
to
really
show
that
there
was
a
physical
constraint
with
this
addition
to
the
Edition.
C
Mr,
chair
I
would
just
volunteer
that
you
all
and
I
think
I
think
you
all
know
this
you're
not
strictly
confined
to
what
the
applicant
has
presented
in
order
to
find
whether
there
is
or
is
not
a
hardship
any
of
the
materials
before
you
could
lead
you
to
that.
It
doesn't
have
to
be
something.
That's
been
expressly
stated
by
the
applicants
extent
that
the
lot
size
is
very
near
the
threshold
to
go
into
a
larger
amount
of
Adu
space.
C
A
E
A
And
promises
he
says
I.
Unfortunately,
the
request
for
the
variance
is
the
night.
A
Okay,
Mr
Kelly,
yes,
petitioner,
Corey
price
of
evolved
early
learning
on
behalf
of
the
property
owner
Hill
Realty
LLC
is
requesting
a
variance
to
the
section
7
8
16
F5,
Highway
Business
Development
standards.
Setbacks
of
the
unified
development
ordinance
petitioner
is
seeking
relief
for
construction
of
an
accessory
structure
in
the
35
foot
front
setback
at
five
Woodland
Drive
Unit,
a
pin,
9628-32-2558.
D
So
nor
I
nor
the
applicant
we're
here
during
the
swearing-in.
So
that's.
K
A
D
Good
afternoon,
members
of
the
board
we
have
here
five
Woodland
Drive
I'm
Tyler,
Kelly
residential
review
specialist,
with
DSD
development
services.
D
So
the
applicant
Corey
price
is
requesting
a
variance
to
the
development
standards
in
section
7
8
16
F5,
which
speak
directly
to
the
setbacks
for
this
underlying
zoning
District,
specifically
the
front
setback
which
is
35
feet
for
the
construction
placement
of
aluminum,
shade
structure
to
meet
the
existing
North
Carolina
child
care,
licensing
that
they
have
approved
for
their
property.
The
shade
structure
will
provide
shade
for
the
child
care
business
that
serves
infants
and
toddlers
with
disabilities.
D
D
The
subject
property
is
1.75,
acre
commercial
lot
zone
Highway
business
and
is
bounded
by
the
south
by
the
railroad
right-of-way,
the
north,
by
Woodland
Drive
and
RMA
residentially
zoned
Parcels
to
the
north,
pretty
much
everywhere
else
around
there.
The
existing
primary
structure
is
a
10
256
square
foot,
Class
D
commercial
building
constructed
in
1965..
The
second
structure
not
associated
with
this
business
is
a
one-story
ten
thousand
square
foot,
Class
s
commercial
building,
constructed
in
1974.
D
D
You
have
exhibit
a
this
is
just
a
vicinity
map.
The
subject
parcel
is
in
the
center
outlined
in
blue.
You
can
see
the
railroad
to
the
South
Woodland
Drive
runs
along
that
that
Western
to
North
corner.
D
This
is
the
best
shot
I
could
get
from
Google
street
view
of
where
the
shade
structure
would
be
would
basically
be
at
the
front
corner
where
that
the
chimney
stack
is
and
extend
towards.
The
point
of
view
of
the
camera
towards
Woodland
here
is
a
wider
shot
of
the
back
of
the
child
care
building.
You
can
see
this
larger
fencing
area
and
some
Shade
Sails
attached
directly
to
the
building.
D
This
is
the
applicant
provided
site
plan.
Subject
area
is
this
black
hash
line?
That's
the
license
plate
area
and
then
the
proposed
carport
sorry
shade
structure
play
area
is
in
Orange
with
the
distance
from
the
property
line
listed
as
10
feet
and
that
property
line
runs
directly
in
the
center
of
a
wooded
Hill.
It's
pretty
steep
drops
in
elevation,
roughly
8
to
12
feet
along
that
the
property
line
to
the
license
plate
area.
D
So
it's
approximately
400
square
feet
of
shaded
plate
area,
but
we're
strictly
just
talking
about,
unlike
the
last
case,
we're
strictly
just
talking
about
setbacks.
The
way
that
this
property
sort
of
operates
is
you
come
in
off
Woodland.
You
turn
in
right
here
to
the
parking
area
and
that
serves
as
a
as
a
drop
off
for
the
parents
and
children.
K
Price
I'm,
the
director
of
evolve,
Early
Learning,
also
the
one
of
the
building
owners
and
I'm
here,
because
we
desperately
need
a
shaded
and
weatherproof
area
for
our
youngest
Learners.
We
used
to
be
a
sinner
that
served
kids,
two
and
a
half
and
above
and
with
the
great
need
for
infant
toddler
here
in
our
town.
We
took
this
on
as
a
grant
from
the
EC
County
fund
and
we
are
establishing
an
infant
toddler
program
that
has
been
way
more
challenging
than
we
ever
could
have
known.
I'm
a
teacher
turned
director
did
not
know.
K
I
would
be
standing
in
front
of
city
councils
and
things
having
these
conversations
but
I'm
here
to
say
that
we
would
have
a
ultimate
hardship
if
we
could
not
have
this
play
structure
exactly
in
this
place.
The
classroom
doors
that
we
see
there
near
them
give
us
easy
access,
it's
also
on
our
fire
exit
plan.
So
if
we
had
a
fire
incident,
we
wouldn't
have
to
reroute
the
kids
into
a
different
area
from
their
place
face.
Everyone
would
end
up
at
the
same
place,
which
is
really
important.
Another
hardship
that
we
have
right
now
is.
K
We
have
five
infants
who
have
nowhere
to
go
outside
right
now,
so
they're
being
kind
of
rolled
around
in
wagons
taken
out
here
or
there
are
other
playgrounds-
are
just
not
appropriate
for
that
age.
They
have
choking
hazards,
rowdy
kids,
that
kind
of
thing
why
we
didn't
put
it
on
all
the
other
areas
that
you
saw.
The
other
areas
are
basically,
when
you
see
where
it
says:
Unit
A
the
front
side
of
the
building
and
that
whole
side
along
Woodland
Drive
are
playgrounds
in
the
classroom
spaces.
K
K
K
Okay,
I
think
I
want
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
child
development
and
the
importance
of
having
children
a
place.
That
is
where
they
can
go
out,
no
matter
what
the
weather
is,
something
that
is
familiar
and
home-like,
so
we'll
have
rockers
and
just
areas
that
can
be
out
of
the
Sun
and
out
of
the
rain
when
it
happens,
and
we
need
that
gross
motor
space
because
in
our
classrooms,
children
really
can't
get
that
gross
motor
development
that
they
need.
K
The
other
thing
that
it
kind
of
access
for
us
is
a
place
for
families
to
gather
with
covid.
We've
really
struggled
to
get
families
back
in
the
building
and
to
reconnect
with
families,
and
so
we're
looking
at
this
little
covered
area
as
the
only
space
on
our
campus,
where
people
feel
comfortable
coming
that
they
can
be
covered,
we
don't
have
to
cancel
for
rain
and
we
can
still
gather,
and
so
it
really
has
a
dual
purpose.
K
It's
kind
of
an
outdoor
living
room
for
folks,
who
maybe
have
more
reasons
to
stay
outside
it
would
definitely
be
a
multi-use
purpose
space.
As
far
as
thinking
about
the
neighbors,
you
know,
we've
really
tried
to
beautify
this
building
and
really
make
it
something
that
neighbor
the
neighborhood
wants
us
to
have.
We've
never
had
a
neighbor,
come
to
us
and
say
that
they've
had
a
problem
with
anything
that
we've
done
or
even
the
joyful
laughter
of
our
children.
K
When
we
look
at
the
building
and
then
see
that
front
classroom
right
there,
it's
a
pretty
high
peak
right
there.
So
actually
the
shade
structure
is
not
going
to
be
higher
than
that:
we're
not
going
to
change
anyone's
View
and
the
trees
on
that
slit
wooded
hill.
We
are
very
much
in
love
with
those
trees
and
are
going
to
maintain
and
take
care
of
them.
So
there
won't
be
this.
You
know
ugly
structure
in
front
of
them.
K
They
get
to
kind
of
maintain
their
beautiful
tree
view
there
we'll
keep
up
with
it,
we'll
keep
it
painted,
make
sure
that
it
stays
safe,
make
sure
that
it's
attached
appropriate
following
all
the
North
Carolina
guidelines,
and
we
won't
make
this
mistake
again.
We've
learned
a
lot
by
planning
these
things
to
start
at
the
beginning
and
go
backwards
and
have
those
early
scenes
even
on
the
things
that
are
outside,
which
we
just
didn't
know
that
the
state
structure
required
this
until
a
little
late
in
the
game.
E
K
The
license
plate
space
is
particularly
challenging
to
get
it
takes
a
long
time
for
sanitation
fire
building
our
licensing
Consultants
to
get
out
there.
If
we
were
having
to
create
a
new
license
plate
space,
we,
the
infant
room,
probably
wouldn't
be
viable
for
a
year.
It
would
probably
take
us
that
long
to
get
it
back,
open,
unders
and
then,
at
that
point
with
hiring
teachers
and
things
it's
hard
to
say
that
we
would
actually
be
able
to
keep
that
going.
So
it's
one.
K
Things
where
it
is
like
a
kind
of
a
domino
effect.
If
we
don't
get
this
space
to
be
for
this
age
group,
we
might
lose
this
age
group
altogether,
which
is
a
really
tough
age.
Group
I
think
we've
lost
like
30
some
centers
infant
care
in
the
last
year.
Here
so
I
know
some
of
y'all
probably
have
kids
and
know
of
The
Perils
of
child
care
in
Asheville.
K
A
One
question
I
believe
I
just
heard
you
saying
I,
just
wanna
make
sure
I
understand
if
you
did
not
get
the
variance
it
sounded
like
what
you
said
was
there
was
a
large
possibility,
but
not
100.
Possibility
that
you
would
have
to
close
is
that
the.
K
Infant
room
might
have
to
switch
back
to
an
older
age
group
because
without
an
outdoor
area
for
their
gross
motor
development,
I'm
really
we're
a
five
star.
Center
we're
high
quality
is
everything,
goes
we're
not
going
to
do
it
unless
we're
the
highest
quality
and
so
not
having
a
safe
infant.
Outdoor
program
really
doesn't
fit
that
need,
and
so
we
would
probably
consider
moving
it
back
to
a
two
and
a
half
and
older
age
group
we're
already
not
wanting
to
do
that,
but
we're
finding
it
to
be
very
difficult.
K
So
this
is
one
of
those
many
things
that
would
kind
of
lock
it
in
lock
it
in
for
our
community
and
for
our
teachers.
It's
also
a
teacher
retention
strategy
is
to
keep
our
teachers
in
their,
so
it's
very
vital
for
our
other
classrooms
as
well.
K
K
K
We
also
Center
equity
and
inclusion
in
children
with
disabilities,
we're
one
of
the
few
centers
that
takes
kids
that
have
been
kicked
out
of
other
facilities
and
so
we're
looking
at
those
parents
who
can't
work
because
there's
nowhere
else
for
their
kids
a
lot
of
times
and
our
infant
program
is
a
way
to
get
our
children
under
our
wings
sooner
so
that
we
can
help
them
with
early
intervention.
Before
we
get
to
those
points
where
the
parents
are
kind
of
struggling
to
figure
out
what
to
do.
K
E
G
While
you're
looking
that
up
Tyler
is
the
building
itself
complying
with
the
35
foot
setback.
D
No,
the
rest
of
the
building
definitely
is
is
not
compliant
with
the,
so
it
would
be
an
existing
non-conformity.
B
C
F
F
K
Fencing
around
it
so
part
of
our
work
during
covid
was
to
expand,
and
so
all
of
that
dotted
purplish
fencing
is
a
five
foot,
regulated
fence,
and
so
inside
of
that
is
where
we
can
have
the
child
spaces
that
are
already
licensed.
K
There
we
could
choose
to
do
something:
carports
are
economical
and
they
last
long.
So
that's
really
why
we
chose
that
Avenue,
but.
K
You
could
never
Park
in
there
ever.
You
could
not
get
a
car
in
that
space.
There
will
be
lots
of
tiny
cars
and
scooters
and
things
yes,
it
would
not
work
anywhere
else
without
the
lengthy
process.
Maybe
even
this
is
the
issue
is,
if
it
takes
a
year
for
us
to
get
new
license
space
to
move
all
of
this,
we
might
not
have
the
capacity
to
keep
the
infant
program
held
while
we
figure
that
out,
because
licensing
is
building
and
sanitation
takes
so
long
to
navigate
plus
the
finance
financial
burden.
G
As
I'm
looking
at
your
site
plan
and
looking
at
the
aerial
photography,
if
you
were
to
pull
it
back
away
and
get
it
out
of
the
setback,
you
would
have
to
reconfigure
your
parking
lot
and
change
all
that
around
which
I
don't
think,
is
feasible
in
that
weird
way
that
it
points
you
lose
spaces
and
you
know
I,
don't
know
what
the
Topography
is
out
there,
but
you
know
that
could
again
become
an
issue
as
well.
So.
G
K
The
railroad
track
is
only
I
would
say,
three-fourths
of
the
way
fenced,
and
so
that's
another
reason.
While
staying
in
that
fenced
area
that
we
see
right
there
through
those
exits
that
are
right
there
on
that
property
is
super
important,
because
we
do
have
kids
who
can
run.
We
do
have
kids,
who
you
know,
have
anxiety
or
other
things
that
happen
to
them
and
they
could
run
to
the
train
track
and
we
also
in
this
world
we
have
had.
K
We
have
cameras
and
things
right
on
this
area.
We
have
had
some
unsavory
things
happen
in
our
area
and
we
have
been
on
lockdown
and
we've
been
on
those
things.
I
don't
want
my
kids
to
have
to
travel
to
get
anywhere.
I
want
them
to
be
able
to
go
right
inside
on
the
door
right
there,
especially
if
they're,
not
mobile,
and
so
these
are
things
that
are
like
it's.
K
E
A
E
A
Ms
Weiss
I'm,
sorry
Mr,
President,
aye,
Mr,
Smith,
aye
Paul,
since
he
votes
for
the
variance
is
approved.
A
This
is
the
first
appeal
aboard
the
surgeon
several
years,
I'm,
not
even
sure
how
many
years
anymore,
so
I'd
like
to
start
by
by
introducing
the
board
to
Mr
Ron
Sneed,
who
is
an
attorney
who's
representing
the
board
in
this
case,
and
if
I
could
ask
other
council's
Indulgence
for
a
moment
if
Mr
Steve
could
explain
the
difference
between
appeals
and
variances
instructor
board
is
to
what
types
of
things
we
should
listen
for,
how
we
make
a
decision
in
this
sort
of
case.
A
How
board
members
might
be
able
to
use
your
wisdom
and
ask
you
questions
about
particular
things
that
might
come
up.
I
would
appreciate
it.
J
E
J
J
I'm
set
this
board
now
for
about
25
years,
and
the
chairman
said
we
haven't
had
an
appeal
in
a
long
time.
Last
time
I
was
here
was
in
2019,
so
it's
been
a
while
I've
been
a
variances.
You
have
the
super
majority
requirement
and
you
have
some
four
very
specific
standards.
Yet
variants
on
appeals
pill
gets
here
is
Staff
makes
a
decision
that
decision
or
action
affects
the
property
owner
or
an
adjoining
property
owner
or
property
arm.
J
Standing
person
takes
an
appeal
and
that
appeal
has
to
be
filed
within
30
days
at
the
time
the
decisions
made
for
the
property
owner.
Those
are
the
decisions.
This
board
just
does
not
have
jurisdiction
to
hear
the
appeal.
It's
not
a
decision
to
make.
It
just
is
what
will
come
before
you
and
I'm,
not
I'm,
probably
no
more
familiar
with
this
particular
case
than
you
are.
J
How
is
the
staff
interpreted
it
the
way
they
did
and
made
their
decision
you'll
be
listening
to
the
opposition
of
property
owners
in
this
case,
we'll
put
on
evidence
or
arguments,
sometimes
there's
very
little
in
the
way
of
having
us
a
whole
lot
in
the
way
of
arguments
as
to
how
the
law
should
be
read
and
how
it
should
be
applied.
J
This
can
be
the
fun
part
because
you're
actually
making
a
decision
on
what
the
law
says.
I
can
give
you
some
direction
on
that
some
general
interpretive
guidance
I
can't
make
the
decision
for
you.
So
there's
a
fair
chance.
You'll
ask
me
questions
and
I'll
confuse
you
for
you,
then,
like
you,
but
don't
forget
my
best
to
to
know
the
rules
that
you
apply
when
trying
to
interpret
an
ordinance.
J
I
will
say
that
I
said
I
haven't
heard
the
arguments,
I,
don't
know
where
it's
going
and
it
might
be
able
to
interpret
the
direction
of
the
yard,
and
it's
going
that's
about
it.
Having
to
answer
questions
where
I
can
just
can't
make
your
decision
with
any
questions
about
these
and.
A
So
in
this
appeal,
Robert
W,
Wells
Jr
on
behalf
of
summit
Townhomes,
LLC
and
Apex
family
homes.
Llc,
is
appealing
zoning
interpretation
of
section
759b
site
plan
review
for
development
projects
except
those
on
parcel
Zone,
Central
business
district
and
located
in
the
downtown
design
review
Overlake
District
regarding
proposed
developments
located
at
294,
Rock
Hill,
Road,
pin.
C
Yes,
thank
you.
Mr
chair
members
of
the
board
again
for
the
record:
Sam
Starr
bomb,
planner,
2
city
of
Asheville
development
services,
department,
161,
South,
Charlotte,
Street
and
you'll
have
to
forgive
me.
This
is
actually
my
first
rodeo,
so
I
do
ask
that
you
know
my
understanding
of
the
role
here
presently
is
I
will
be
giving
the
chronology
of
how
we
got
here
and
the
staff
decision,
at
which
point
the
council
will
speak
for
their
case.
C
So
that
is
what
I
am
doing,
is
just
preventing
or
presenting
how
we
got
to
where
we
are
today
and
anyone
can
weigh
in.
If
that
is
not
the
case
again,
here
is
the
summary.
What
we're
talking
about
is
seven
five
nine
B,
which
ultimately
gets
down
to
level
of
review.
We've
talked
about
two
properties.
There
is
11
West,
chapel
and
294
Rock
Hill
Road,
whereas
this
this
is
on
just
off
Sweden
Creek,
really
just
to
the
east.
It
is
just
shy
of
a
mile
south
of
the
interstate.
C
It
is
nine
tenths
of
a
mile
south
from
the
interstate.
It
is
immediately
across
from
the
Sunset
Cemetery
at
about
a
half
mile
West
as
the
crow
flies
of
the
ballparks
at
the
Robert
casilla
Park.
So
here
you
can
see
exactly
the
properties
we
are
talking
about.
There
is
1088
Sweden,
Creek
Road,
highlighted
in
purple
just
off
Sweden
Creek
and
West
Chapel
Road.
That's
not
really
for
the
discussion.
C
C
What
I'd
like
to
talk
about
is
how
we
got
here
from
the
temporal
standpoint,
so
last
year,
December
15th.
We
had
what
we
call
a
TRC
pre-application
meeting.
This
is
where
this
is
a
requirement
of
the
TRC.
What
happens?
Is
applicants
come
in
and
present
their
design
to
members
of
staff
and
members
of
the
TRC
to
get
design
input
prior
to
going
to
their
neighborhood
meeting
prior
to
applying
for
the
TRC
present
representing
11
West
Chapel
were
Mr
Clay,
Mooney
and
Michael
Driscoll,
the
architect
of
Michael
Driscoll
Architects.
C
What
they
were
proposing
was
21
town
homes
and
new
right-of-way
anytime.
You
get
a
land
subdivision
with
new
right-of-way.
That
is
a
major
subdivision,
which
is
a
level
two
that
was
provided
in
the
pre-application
notes
that
was
provided
to
Mr,
Mooney
and
Mr
Driscoll.
Here
you
can
see
what
was
being
proposed,
that
is,
the
new
right-of-way,
which
would
just
be
off
West
Chapel
Road,
with
21
units.
C
Assistance
was
more
akin
to
you
can
apply
and
you
can
receive
information
from
staff
about
what
would
apply.
How
would
this
go?
What
needs
to
be
done?
It
is.
It
is
for
earlier
stages
of
a
development
representing
the
applicants
of
Rock
Hill
Road
were
clay,
Mooney
and
Gary
Davis
of
civil
Solutions.
This
was
seven
town
homes,
and
you
can
see
here
in
this
fourth
bullet
point.
What
I
had
provided
in
those
pre-application
notes
concerning
the
relationship
to
11,
West,
Chapel,
potentially
being
a
larger
plan
of
development.
C
Here
is
the
proposed
drawing
for
a
294
Rock
Hill
Road.
At
that
point
it
is
seven
Town
Homes.
This
would
not
be
considered
a
major
subdivision
because
it
did
not
trigger
new
right-of-way
and
did
not
need
any
number
of
land
standards
for
that
open
space.
Also
wouldn't
apply
because
it
was
seven
town
homes.
So
that
was
the
review.
There
was
some
information,
provided
there
again
going
back
to
the
context
map,
here's
where
we
are
so
again.
What
you
had
just
seen
was
294
Rock
Hill
Road.
C
The
first
one
was
11
West
Chapel
in
the
middle,
which
shares
a
boundary.
What
is
up
for
discussion
today
is
759
B,
and
these
are
the
conditions
so
11
West
Chapel
would
have
to
have
been
a
level
two
application
regardless.
The
question
is
to
294
Rock
Hill
Road.
The
developments
are
located
within
500
feet
of
each
other.
It
was
determined
that
they
are
the
application
for
the
proposed
development
is
received
within
three
years
of
a
certificate
certificate
of
occupancy.
C
Excuse
me
for
a
previous
development
that
hasn't
been
established
yet,
but
they
have
not
applied
for
either
of
them.
That
would
likely
be
triggered
based
on
what
Mr
Mooney
had
told
the
city
in
terms
of
there
are
timelines
for
development
and
then,
of
course,
number
two
which
is
really
what
brings
us
here.
The
proposed
development
and
a
previously
approved
development
represent
different
phases
of
a
larger
plan
that
may
or
may
not
include
shared
parking
facilities,
access
and
utilities
or
walls.
So
that's
really.
What's
a
question
is
what
constitutes
a
larger
plan
or
previously
approved
development?
C
So
that's
something
that
the
lawyers
will
talk
about.
That
is
more
or
less
how
we
got
here
as
it
started
with
one
pre-application
December,
15,
11,
West
Chapel.
Very
clearly,
a
level
two,
the
other
one
which
came
March,
294,
Rock,
Hill
Road,
may
have
been
a
level
one,
but
staff
made
the
determination
that
it
would
likely
meet
those
three
criteria,
so
it
should
be
a
level
two
I
met
with
Mr
Edgerton
and
representatives
from
the
applicants
for
this
appeal.
C
A
B
L
L
L
I
think
we're
all
set
up
here.
It's
this
River's
not
really
organized
for
these
kinds
of
appeals.
Can
you
all
hear
me?
Okay,.
L
My
name
is
Bob
Ernst
I'm
with
the
local
Law
Firm
here
at
McGuire
wooden
visit
here
with
me
also
is
Clay
Mooney,
a
landscape
architect.
Who
will
be
my
chief
witness?
Perhaps
my
only
witness
next
to
him
is
Dr
Bill
Chambers,
the
local
pediatric
dentist,
who
owns
one
of
the
parcels
that
we're
talking
about
here
today.
L
This
is
Mr.
Starbomb
said
it
was
his
first
appeal.
You
said
it
was
your
first
appealed
a
long
time.
Mr
Snead
has
confirmed
all
that.
It's
my
first
appeal
to
to
to
the
city
of
Asheville.
We
like
the
staff,
Mr
money
and
I,
make
our
business
make.
L
L
We
try
to
work
them
out
when
we
can't
work
them
out,
then
we
have
to
get
the
board
of
adjustment
involved
and
that's
that's
kind
of
what
happened
here
is
Mr
storm
pointed
out
a
Mr
Mooney
is
the
site
planner
for
for
for
the
projects
along
two
adjacent
properties,
as
Mr
starball
mentioned,
he
had
a
pre-application
meeting
with
regard
to
to
the
middle
parcel
there,
which
I've
labeled
as
kinship
on
this
exhibit
and
and
then
he
attended
an
early,
an
early
assistance
meeting
with
Mr
Starbomb
on
the
on
the
other
property
known
as
which
is
shown
as
Apex
on
that
exhibit
and
and
was
advised
following
that
meeting
or
at
that
meeting.
L
The
project
would
be
combined
under
the
under
the
probation
of
the
ordinance
that
was
displayed
a
few
moments
ago,
because
they
were
considered
to
be
that
we
we
don't
quit
they're
right
next
to
each
other.
You
know
they're,
certainly
within
500
feet,
they
would
likely
be
pulling
permits
within
three
years
of
each
other.
We
don't
call
with
either
one
of
those
two
requirements,
but
but
it
is
it's,
it's
the
it's.
L
So
we
met
with
City
staff,
including
Chris
Collins
legal
staff,
including
Mr
Edgerton
and
Mr
Starbomb,
and
and
and
and
we
could
not
get
it
resolved,
and
so
here
we
are
yeah.
The
first
rule
of
Regulation
ordinance,
ordinance
drafting
is
that
you
have
to
be
precise.
L
If
you're
going
to
draw
a
line,
people
have
to
know
where
it
is
the
and
and
the
the
people
are
at
work,
activity
being
regulated
have
to
know
what's
allowed
and
what's
not,
we
think
that
this
ordinance
is
is
is
Big,
it
says,
may
or
may
not.
We
think
it's
vague
and
and
so
they
that
we
think
that
would
not
survive
a
court
challenge.
But
we're
not
here
to
talk
about
that
today.
We
don't
want
the
board
is,
is
not
being
asked
to
resolve
that
question.
L
That's
for
a
court
to
sign.
Instead
we're
asking
you
to
consider
the
language
of
this
of
this
code.
Provision
as
it
is
written
and
applied
to
the
fact
that
this
case,
when
you,
when
you
do,
we
think
that
you'll
find
the
staff
incorrectly
determined
on
the
base
of
of
those
items.
They
could
look
at
that
that
that
this
these
projects
should
have
been
combined
or
there
were
different
phases
of
a
larger
project.
They're,
not
we're.
Certainly
it's
not
clear
they
are,
and
that
brings
to
the
second
one.
L
The
second
rule
that
I
want
to
impress
upon
you
all,
and
that
is
that
zoning
ordinances
or
interrogation
of
the
common
common
law
right
to
property,
ownership
and
ordinances
in
in
the
case
of
ambiguities,
should
be
construed
in
favor
of
the
free
use
of
land.
L
Again
we
haven't
called
with
the
staff
we
work
with
them
every
day
we
try
to
work
this
out.
We
just
couldn't
so
we're
asking
the
board
of
agenda
to
decide
this
to
do
it
in
a
way
that
preserves
the
ordinance,
but
lets
us
proceed
with
our
project.
L
We
think
the
facts
and
law
leads
only
one
conclusion
that
these
projects
are
separate
and
and
should
not
be
combined.
Unless
you
all
have
any
questions
of
me,
I'll
I'll,
I'll,
ask
Mr
Mooney
to
come,
come
up
and
talk
to
us
I'm
going
to
sit
over
there
and
we'll
eat.
While
he
does
that
true.
L
I
think
it's
it's
probably
best
for
Mr
Mooney
to
respond
to
that
he's,
he's
the
professional
and
and
he's
more
intimately
familiar
with
this
than
I
am
so
it's
if
there's
no
further
questions
I'll
give
us
too
many
up
here
to
talk
about
that
exact
thing.
L
L
M
M
M
I
have
I
received
a
award
from
the
North
Carolina
chapter
of
the
American
Society
of
Landscape
Architects
for
residential
design.
I
received
an
honor
from
the
University
of
Georgia
College
of
environment
and
designed
the
dean's
honor
award
and
I
also
was
recognized
as
one
of
the
Owens
50,
which
was
also
with
the
University
of
Georgia
as
one
of
the
top
50
alums
in
the
first
50
years
of
our
program.
M
L
M
Am
I
have
worked
on
various
conceptual
site
plans,
all
three
of
those
properties
up
there
through
the
years
actually
dating
back
to
2019.
M
Well,
originally,
we
were
exploring
a
concept
plan
for
the
kinship
and
Apex
properties
together
for
a
office
complex.
It
would
be
multiple
buildings
and
so
forth
and
we
even
that,
was
going
to
necessitate
a
rezoning,
and
so
we
actually
went
through
that
process.
With
the
early
assistance
meeting
and
anyway,
it
just
turned
out
that
the
rezoning
process
was
just
going
to
be
almost
basically
a
non-starter,
so
it
evolved.
That
was
developing
a
residential
plan
because
we
were
trying
we
were
instead
of
rezoning.
M
We
were
going
to
basically
what
was
allowed
permitted
within
the
RSA
zoning
and
so
that
morphed
into
a
Township.
Excuse
me
a
town,
home
type
development,
and
so
that
was
what
we
had
submitted
and
anyway
started
that
process,
and
so
that
was
what
we
were
focused
on
at
the
time
and
preparing
some
little
documents
for
that,
and
then
I
received
a
phone
call
from
a
general
contractor
requesting
me
to
explore
a
town
home
development
for
the
Apex
project.
L
M
M
L
M
Well,
the
single-family
residential
option
would
only
allow
us
five
units-
and
that
was
governed
by
the
40-foot
lot.
Width,
minimum
lot
required
width
and
so
the
town
homes
afforded
us
to
increase
that
density.
So
we
could
get.
We
could
get
five
excuse
me
I,
don't
know.
If
I
said
four,
we
can
get
five
single
family
residential
lots,
but
by
going
to
the
town
home,
we
could
squeeze
in
two
more
units
for
a
total
of
seven.
M
It
basically
was,
as
we
submitted
in
our
early
assistance
meeting.
If
we
have
to
go
to
a
level
two,
we
will
be
required
to
have
a
sidewalk
all
across
the
frontage
of
both
Rock
Hill
and
West
Chapel
of
the
Apex
property.
Since
there's
no
curbing
gutter
on
Rock,
Hill
or
west
Chapel,
we
would
also
have
to
add,
curb
and
gutter
to
that,
which
would
then
also
increase
the
probability
that
we
would
have
to
have
pipe
storm
drainage
to
pick
up
the
drainage
in
the
curbing
gutter.
M
M
M
M
It
also
shows
the
sanitary
sewer
lines
which
are
that
actually
had
to
be
relocated,
there's
a
line
that
goes
from
the
Sunset
Cemetery
that
cuts
across
the
corner.
Our
stormwater
detention
system
necessitated
the
relocation
of
that
line
and
water
is
all
internal
again.
This
was
a
totally
self-sufficient
and
the
intention
was
that
Apex
was
going
to
be
the
same,
that
it
would
have
its
own
Water
and
Sewer
Service,
as
well
as
its
own
stormwater
detention
system.
M
And
so
this
is
the
two
buildings
comprising
the
seven
Townhome
units.
Each
one
has
its
access
off
of
Rock
Hill
Road,
the
gradient
on
Rock
Hill
Road
is
such
that
it's
much
much
more
conducive
for
driveway
connections.
M
Also,
you
would
have
to
have
a
separate
road
if
we
were
to
connect
to
West
Chapel,
also
the
grades.
We
have
no
requirements
for
retaining
walls
or
anything.
There's
there's
no
dependency
on
apex
for
anything
on
kinship.
L
Yeah
so
other
than
the
fact
that
eight
days
and
kinship,
both
town
on
projects,
but
what
common
elements
do
they
have.
L
M
M
L
L
No,
and
from
a
from
a
cyclist
ambulance
from
a
side
to
side
and
land
planning
standpoint
are
there
reasons
why
these
projects
should
not
be
combined
either
cost.
J
A
This
may
have
been
brought
up
and
I
I
missed
it,
but
is
there?
Is
there
one
one
developer
or
two
developers?
What
would
you
consider
two
projects.
M
No,
as
I
understand
it,
one
is
Dr
Chambers
and
the
other
is
Stephanie,
Chambers,
they're,
separate,
llc's
and
and
the
chip
excuse
me
Dr.
M
G
But
we
wouldn't
be
here
today.
If
it
was
me
and
a
person
I,
don't
know
developing
property
next
to
each
other.
We
would
not
be
forced
to
develop
our
projects
together.
So
there's
already
been
a
determination
and
y'all
aren't
really
appealing
the
first
one,
which
is
proposed
development
instead
of
located
within
500
feet
of
each
other.
That's
assuming
they
have
common
ownership.
L
Well,
if
the
common
ownership
is
not
one
of
the
things
that
can
be
considered
and
in
fact,
North
Carolina
behind
the
zoning
regulates
land
use
about
land
ownership.
G
E
G
C
Sure
sure
now
I
think
we'll
we'll
get
to
it
through
the
course
of
my
cross-examination
as
well,
so
maybe
that's
to
hold.
And
then,
if
there
are
any
further
questions,
yeah.
A
G
C
Their
questions,
I'm,
sorry,
babe,
I,.
G
I
did
have
another
question:
Mr
Mooney,
so
you
said
that
if
you
did
the
level
one
as
as
a
town
home
development
running
off
of
Rock,
Hill,
Road
you'd
have
to
put
in
curbing
Gutter
and
sidewalks,
or
you
wouldn't
have
to
put
in
carbon
gutter
inside.
G
M
M
M
The
safety
reason
the
safety
is
to
have
a
at
least
it's
not
a
lot,
but
it's
a
six
inch
separation
of
a
curb
from
the
sidewalk.
You
have
the
curtain
gutter.
Then
you
have
a
five
foot,
landscaped
area
and
then
a
five
foot
sidewalk.
So
it's
a
vertical.
The
curb
would
act
as
some
deterrent
for
a
car
leaving
the
road
and
careening
onto
the
sidewalk.
So
it's
a
safety
issue.
A
F
M
F
G
M
Well,
if
you
were
looking
at
development,
developing
it
as
just
one
project,
yes,
but
with
it
being
two
projects,
that's
how
I
was
presented
this
to
develop
kinship
and
then
later
on.
It
was
with
this.
If
you
have
two
separate
entities,
two
developments
there
are
different
price
points.
There
will
be
will
be
marketed
different
and
different
owners
than
just
the
administrative
headaches
of
combining
storm
water
into
one
I
think
would
outweigh
any
economies
of
that.
M
Road
I
mean
it
was
a
specific
question,
I
believe
at
the
early
assistance
meeting,
because
I
did
that.
That
was
the
clarification
that
I
needed,
because
that
was
a
little
bit
of
a
surprise
when
the
talk
was
to
combine
those
because
I've
had
instances
before
where
we've
had
adjacent
projects
that
were
aggregated
and
so,
but
that
was
also
a
same
ownership,
and
and
now
they
were
both
commercial
one
was
the
years
ago
was
the
lows
on
South
Tunnel
Road.
So
that
was
in
the
late
90s.
M
So
but
that
again
that
was
the
same
owner
and
all
that
that
didn't
that
wasn't
necessarily
A
a
point
that
we
could
argue
and
then
recently
on
glenbridge
road.
We
had.
It
was
the
jumbo
storage
in
Glen
Bridge,
which
was
a
storage
jumbo
storage,
but
also
a
flex
space
development.
They
were
also
constructed
within
three
years,
and
so
we
had
to
come
in
and
show
those
together
as
part
of
our
neighborhood
meeting.
But
again
that
was
the
same
developer
and
and
so
again
no
argument.
There.
M
But
this
with
having
the
separate
contractor,
separate
Architects
on
both
tracks
and
then
coming
in
totally
kind
of
separate
and
behind
it
and
told
that
it
was
two
I
mean
granted.
They
may
have
familial
commonality,
but
that
you
know
that
could
be
anybody.
I
mean
it's
a
to
me.
It's
a
separate
LLC,
separate
owners
and
just
totally
different
projects.
In
my
mind,.
C
Thanks
for
coming
back
to
technology
and
I'll
try
to
be
as
quick
as
possible
in
my
questioning
it's
entirely
possible
that
I'll
ask
you
something
that
is
based
on
things.
We've
talked
about
in
that
initial
meeting.
E
C
Don't
accept
any
questions
and
presume
something
incorrect,
but
I'm
going
to
start
at
the
beginning
of
your
testimony
in
response
to
Mr,
OST
and
I,
believe
you
started
out
with
this
original
2019
plan
that
included
both
what
we're
referring
to
as
the
Apex
and
the
kinship
properties.
Do
you
recall
being
asked
about
that
original
2019
plan
yeah.
M
C
It
was
a
rezoning
requirement.
Yes,
yes,
okay
and
again
correct
me.
If
I'm,
if
I
misremembering
your
words
I
heard
you
say
that
that
plan
to
get
a
rezoning
from
Office
Space
it
stopped
because
it
was
a
quote
non-starter
and
that's
a
little
bit
different
saying
that
the
rezoning
was
a
non-starter
than
saying
well,
we
would
have
had
more
retaining
walls
or
part
of
the
site
would
be
eaten
up.
Why
was
the
rezoning
a
non-starter.
M
Well
part
of
that
process,
the
rezoning
process
was,
we
were
told
that
we
would
need
to
meet
with
the
Shiloh
community
and
present
our
plans
to
them
and
to
try
to
gain
their
support
for
the
development,
and
this
was
a
we
tried
on
numerous
times,
so
we
met
with
them
and
they
totally
just
did
not
like
totally
unsupportive
of
the
office
development
scheme,
and
so
I
mean
we
continue
to
try
to
modify
things
and
to
make
things
maybe
more
attractive
to
them,
but
it
became
very
difficult.
M
They
were
very
reticent
to
even
meet
with
us.
It
was
difficult
to
get
now
granted
in
some
of
this
covet
even
came
along
too,
and
so
a
lot
of
our
meetings.
I
think
we
even
tried
to
have
some
Zoom
meetings,
but
there
was
absolutely
no
support,
zero
support
for
anything
or
any
alternative
other
than
a
residential
development
on
this
property.
C
C
M
I'm
going
to
I
think
our
the
application
meeting
was
2022
for
when
we
I
think
that's
the
date.
Maybe
Mr
starbaugh
could
tell
us
when
that
earliest
pre-application
meeting
was
with
Mike
Driscoll,
but
so
prior
to
that
we
would
have
been
doing
some
development,
so
I
would
say:
I
think
that
was
March
of
of
22
and
so
prior
to
that
we
would
have
looked
at
that
sort
of
been
in
21.
now.
C
M
No
specific
meeting,
no,
not
well
not
that
I
was
part
of
and
again
that
was
you
know.
I
was
just
saying:
well
we're
not
you
know
the
time
had
just
been
moving
on
and
on
and
on
and
it
didn't
seem
like
there
was
going
to
be
any
Headway
with
Shiloh,
and
so
they
wanted
residential,
and
so
it
seemed
like,
instead
of
just
butting
our
heads
against
the
wall,
that
we
would
explore
residential
options
that
would
satisfy
some
of
their
desires.
Okay,.
E
B
C
M
L
The
time
chairman
I'm,
going
to
I'm
going
to
inject
this
line
of
questions
at
the
Mr
Benny's
testified
that
the
the
commercial
development
that
required
resulting
is
no
longer
being
pursued.
What
we're
pursuing
here
is
is
two
projects
that
maybe
the
one
of
which
will
require
resentment.
What
happened
half
is
irrelevant.
C
Mr
chair,
my
response
would
be
that,
to
the
extent
the
board
is
here
to
consider
and
decide
whether
what
is
currently
before
the
board
is
a
common
plan
of
development
or
equity
parts
of
a
larger
plan
of
development.
It's
relevant
to
know
who
had
control
of
the
previous
iterations
of
the
project
relevant
to
know
who
was
on
board
is
relevant
to
know
why
those
fell
apart,
who
had
the
ultimate
decision-making
Authority
with
what
was
going
to
happen
on
these
properties,
at
least
as
of
2019.
A
A
That's
why
I
like
the
Quasi,
quasi-judicial
I,
wouldn't
say
more
information.
We'd
have
the
better
for
us.
M
Only
through
Carol
Hughes
Carol
Hughes
is
again
is
an
architect
been
in
town
since
mid
to
late
70s
space
plan
is
was
his
architectural
firm.
He
has
recently
retired,
and
anyway
he
handled
coordination
for
most
of
Dr
Chambers
projects.
That
I
was
involved
in.
M
I'm
sorry,
Dr,
Bill,
Chambers,
okay,.
M
Not
sure
I
know
she's
a
dentist,
but
whether
that
is
his
I,
don't
know.
C
B
M
Again,
that
probably
was
in
21
that
was
after
During,
the
period
of
time
of
trying
to
meet
and
work
with
the
shallow
community
and
and
the
efforts
with
Miss
Bellamy
were
not
yielding
any
results.
Then
it
was
just
the
decision
to
to
try
to
do
Residential,
and
so
we
just
focused
on
the
kinship
lot
at
that
time.
For
it
that
was
so.
That
was
in
2021,
probably
mid
to
late
2021.
C
M
Mr
Hughes
bowed
out
with
when
it
became
residential,
a
residential
development.
He
just
prefers
not
to
do
Residential
development
at
this
point
in
his
career,
and
so
at
that
point,
I
was
dealing
with
Mike
Driscoll,
the
architect
on
the
project.
M
C
C
M
I
can't
say
that,
have
you
ever
been
able
to
say
that
probably
it's
a
little
bit
iffy
I
mean
I,
guess
that
there
there
exists
at
any
time
that,
yes,
one
project
may
be
finishing
up
as
the
other
one
gets
started.
But
on
this
one
I
don't
know
I
know
we.
We
had
not
even
submitted
our
level
two
plans
for
kinship.
C
I
understand
your
testimony
to
me
that
there
will
be
no
shared
stormwater
features
overlapping.
The
two
properties
is
that.
C
What
permits
are
required
to
do
to
do
it's
pretty
extensive
grading
and
erosion
control
measures
like
you're
going
to
have
on
these
two
properties?
Is
it
just
City
permits,
or
do
you
have
to
get
a
permit
through
the
state
as
well.
M
An
apex
I
believe
it
would
just
be
the
city
I
think
there
is
a
threshold
above
which
you
have
to
get
a
NGO
and
I'm.
Sorry
I
can't
remember
the
number,
but
it's
from
the
state,
it's
basically
some
agreement
that
they
concur
with
the
grading
and
we
have
to
provide
them
a
copy
of
our
approved
permit
in
NGO.
M
It
were
separate
owners
understanding
is,
you
would
be
able
to
now
as
I
understand
it
I
think
there
was
a
comment
from
Nancy
Watford
at
the
pre-application
meeting
that
when
all
of
this
came
up,
it
basically
said
that
the
state
would
not
provide
separate
permits
for
two
projects
adjacent
to
each
other
with
the
same
ownership.
C
C
C
C
Information
that
may
be
used
to
determine
a
common
plan
of
development
includes
plants,
blueprints
marketing
plans,
contracts,
building
permits,
Public,
Notices
or
hearing
zoning
requests
and
infrastructure
development
plans.
Having
heard
that
now,
is
it
still
your
understanding
that
for
purposes
of
DEQ
permitting
ownership,
as
in
one
Docker
Chambers
and
one
LLC,
one
Doctrine
is
in
another
LLC,
but
that
would
have
any
bearing
on
how
many
permits
you
would
be
able
to
get
from
DEQ.
C
B
C
M
I
have
to
say,
I've
not
come
up
on
that
in
the
past,
and
so
that
would
probably
be
something
that
I
would
have
found
out
during
this
whole
review
process
and
I
think
actually,
that
was
again.
Nancy
watt
from
Miss
Watford
was
one
who
she
mentioned,
that
it
didn't
necessarily
apply
to
ownership
or
the
LLC
or
whatever.
C
C
It's
okay,
that's!
Okay!.
C
Again,
I'll
specifically
call
you
to
this:
it's
section,
7-5-9,
subsection,
B,
sub,
subsection,
C,
and
then
we've
got
one
two
and
three
down
there.
One
starts
with
the
developments
are
located
within
five
speed
of
each
other.
C
Three,
the
application
for
the
proposed
development
is
received
within
three
years
of
a
certificate
of
occupancy
for
a
previous
development,
and
then
two
proposed
development
in
a
previously
approved
development
represent
different
phases
of
a
larger
plan,
may
or
may
not
include,
share
parking
facilities,
access
utilities
or
walls.
Do
you
recall
being
asked
by
Mr
OST
what
your
opinion
was
as
to
whether
these
two
townhome
developments
on
adjoining
properties,
whether
they
constitute
different
phases
of
a
larger
plan?
You
recall
receiving
that
question
from
Mr
OST.
E
C
C
M
C
M
C
C
M
C
M
M
C
M
Based
on
the
city's
fee
and
lieu
love,
because
you're
going
to
get
contractors
or
whatever,
but
based
on
a
fee
in
lieu
of
a
five
foot,
sidewalk
is
fifty
dollars
per
lineal.
Foot
curb
and
gutter
is
25
per
lineal
foot
and
I.
Think
I've
tallied
that
and
that's
close
to
360
370,
so
we're
talking
close
to
twenty
five
thousand
dollars,
just
just
for
those
two
line
items
and
then
the
paving
repairs
that
would
be
necessitated
by
the
installation
of
curb
and
gutter
anyway
and
stormbreak
storm
drainage.
M
M
That
just
seems
like
something
that
we
were
the
development
trying
to
have
a
lower
price
point
and
having
the
city
wants,
affordable,
housing,
and
so
everything
that
you
add
to
it
makes
it
less.
And
so
that's
kind
of
why
it
may
seem
insignificant.
But
when
you're
trying
to
meet
a
specific
price
point
that
the
city
wants
every
little
bit.
M
C
C
To
ask
you
to
orient
me
to
that?
Where
is
the
sewer
line
going
to
run,
and
can
you
show
that
on
I
can
current
site
plan
or
I
guess
maybe
the.
M
E
M
You're
good,
so
these
two
Manos
here
would
be
what
would
collect
the
sewer
from
Apex
running
in
West
Chapel
down
to
a
connection
point
with
a
sewer
line.
This
is
the
existing
sewer
line
that
comes
under
the
cemetery,
and
so
that
is
the
connection
point
for
Apex
right
there.
After
it
traverses
down
West
Chapel,
okay,.
C
M
M
M
M
Kinship's
not
constructed
that's
where
Apex
ends,
that's
Apex
sewer
ends
right.
Apex.
Do
excuse
me
kinship
due
to
the
stormwater
detention
system,
which
is
over
where
this
MSD
line
currently
runs
through
here,
sort
of
like
that,
their
sewer
line
starts
here,
runs
down
the
center
of
the
road
down
through
here
and
then
would
turn
and
go
and
connect
there.
E
C
B
M
C
M
Okay
from
this
is
the
connection
point
of
Apex
to
the
existing
sewer.
This
section
right
here
would
still
be
public
sewer,
the
existing
sewer
that
section
is
not
being
removed.
It
is
only
from
that
manhole
down
this
way
that
the
line
is
being
relocated
and
again,
that
is
to
take
all
of
the
area.
That's
off-site
above
Sunset
Cemetery,
all
back
in
that
area.
That
has
to
be
routed
around
this
stormwater
detention
system
to
get
back
into
msd's
line.
M
Yes,
I
mean:
if
Apex
goes,
this
section
right
here
gets
constructed.
If
kinship
doesn't
go,
that
line
still
runs
in
its
current
location.
If
kinship
goes,
then
it
it
will
be
serviced
by
this
line
again
totally
independent,
and
it
connects
this
way
plus
it
would
be
responsible
to
provide
to
continue
the
service
through
Sunset
Cemetery
around.
M
M
On
this
map,
yes
I
believe
that's
correct.
Okay,.
C
M
C
C
C
Right,
so
that's
all
just
building
up
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I
understand
the
total
scope
of
things
that
are
being
done
to
this
same.
Existing
sewer
line
has
separately,
and
apart
by
these
two
different
projects,
to
ask
this
question:
are
you
going
to
have
one
contractor?
Do
all
of
this
work
or.
M
And
that
depends
upon
the
projects
from
a
design
standpoint
and
we
sort
of
looked
at
it
from
Total
through
here,
but
in
other
words,
having
a
a
having
a
look
to
make
sure
that
independently,
if
Apex
went
and
none
of
the
none
of
these
other
projects
went
that
it
would
still
function.
If
kinship
went
and
Apex
didn't
that
everything
would,
you
know,
would
work
so,
whether
or
not
that
would
be
all
one
contractor.
I
don't
know,
I
mean
I.
B
C
C
Gonna
Roll
Out
so
again,
the
hypothetical
I've
suggested
is
that
both
projects
are
moving
forward.
You're,
going
to
have
a
line
coming
off
of
Apex
to
connect
to
the
existing
MSD
line,
you're
going
to
have
a
portion
of
that
same
MSD
line,
dug
up
and
replaced
to
put
it
within
West,
Capitol,
Road
and
not
by
sector
property.
In
your
experience
as
a
site
planner
does
it
make
sense
to
have
multiple
different
subcontractors?
Do
separate
sections
of
all
that
work
to
one
MSD
line.
G
M
G
Rock,
Hill
and
and
then
across
the
street,
where
you're
connecting
I
think
it's
safe
to
assume
the
city
of
Asheville
is
going
to
require
you
to
do
Paving
and
pavement
patching
along
both
of
those
roads.
Is
that
going
to
be
something
that
you're
going
to
tie
in
together?
As
all
one
like
have
one
Paving
contractor
to
do
all
of
that
work?
I.
L
So
Mr
Monique
is
each
of
these
projects
assuming
they're
both
built
going
to
have
several
sewer
connections.
Is
that
correct.
M
L
M
L
A
F
B
E
E
B
B
E
H
E
B
C
Okay,
so
Mr
Rose
do
you?
Have
another
I
have
before
the
witnesses?
Okay,
Mr
Richardson?
Yes,
yes,
we'll
call
Dr,
William
Chambers.
First.
C
These
two
lots
I
wasn't
clear
on
which
property
you
own.
Can
you
clarify
that
for
me,
which
of
these
two
properties.
B
N
N
As
far
as
the
ownership
I
believe,
the
transactions
occurred
on
the
same
date.
They
were
under
contract
for
several
years
with
the
Craigs,
and
so
I
gave
up
my
interest
in
the
property,
because
I
was
developing
it
for
potential
office
structures,
but
it
was
going
nowhere.
So,
basically,
I
saw
the
writing
on
the
wall.
I
gave
up
my
interest
and
that's
when
I
pursued
it
differently
in
the
other.
Llc
pursued
their
interest.
In
this
differently.
N
C
N
N
They're
they're
totally
separate
projects
and
and
there's
a
lot
of
reasons.
Why
first
of
all
kinship,
which
is
Summit,
is
something
that
that
we
started
to
look
at
after
we
purchased
the
property
and
we
wanted
to
utilize.
One
of
my
goals
is
to
provide
housing
for
folks
in
town.
One
of
the
hard
things
in
Nashville
is
to
try
to
get
obtainable
or
affordable
housing
and
so
on
on
kinship.
N
The
reason
we
tried
to
do
Townhomes
is
we
could
develop
something
and
get
a
lot
more
utilization
for
property,
and
we
have
no
problem
going
through
the
level
two
rezoning
on
that
or
approval
process.
I'm
not
here
to
defend
kinship,
because
I
don't
have
any
interest
in
ketchup.
I
just
know
the
the
challenges
that
they
have
without
property
is
they
don't
have
City
water
or
they
don't
have
city
sewer
provided
to
them
so
that
that
entities
got
to
put
its
own
sewer
in
if
it
goes
to
level.
N
L
N
You
X
would
have
to
do
all
that
sort
of
stuff
and
it
drives
the
cost
up
for
that
project
tremendously,
if
you're
trying
to
do
obtainable,
affordable,
housing
to
conjoin
these
two
properties
as
Twins
when
they
have
no
commonality.
As
far
as
the
LLCs
are
different,
the
everything
is
different
on
these
two
projects
and
to
combine
them
into
two
only
based
on
the
fact,
if
they're
on
the
same
developmental
timeline-
and
you
can't
determine
that
because
we
don't
know
what
the
timeline
is
going
to
be
on
these
things.
N
So
if
there
were
three
years
apart
or
they
didn't
have
a
common
landscape
architect,
this
wouldn't
even
be
a
discussion.
I
think
it
all
sort
of
sent
a
red
flag
up
when
there
was
a
comment
red
flag
for
the
architect
landscape
architect.
Otherwise,
if
if
there
were
two
different
Landscape
Architects,
then
this
probably
wouldn't
have
been
an
issue.
If
there
were
two
different
timelines
for
development,
this
wouldn't
be
an
issue.
N
So
this
is
really
more
of
an
administrative
thing
and
I
hate
to
drag
your
whole
afternoon
out
when
it's
so
pretty
out
to
to
do
this,
but
I
appreciate
what
y'all
do
in
in
trying
to
sit
down
and
do
this
I'm
glad
I
didn't
put
thing
too
close
to
property
line
or
something
we
had
to
to
deconstruct
something.
But
again
it's
more
of
a
administrative
staff.
Disagreement
and
we've
tried
to
work
this
out
with
them.
It's
just
come
down
that
we've
got
a
third
party
to
look
at
it
and
from
the
legal
standpoint.
C
C
C
A
C
E
A
E
C
Good
afternoon,
Mr
sarban,
could
you
please
reintroduce
yourself
to
the
board
yeah
third
time's,
a
charm
Sam
Starbomb
certified
planner
with
the
city
of
Asheville.
My
official
title
is
planner
two
and
I
work
for
development
services
at
161,
South,
Charlotte
Street.
Could
you
please
just
give
a
quick
background
of
your
educational
history,
leading
you
up
to
the
point
of
being
a.
C
C
So
this
marks
10
years
in
planning
eight
years
of
Municipal
governance
after
graduating
from
the
University
of
Colorado,
I
worked
it
for
the
city
of
Omaha
and
then
I
was
back
in
Southwest
Colorado,
where
my
family
is
from
in
the
town
of
Mountain
Village,
and
then
I
met
my
wife
who
was
from
Asheville
and
that
prompted
us
to
move
out
here
week
before
the
pandemic.
Don't
recommend
and
I've
been
with
the
city
of
Asheville
for
two
years,
going
on
three
now
I
believe
and
in
those
10
years
of
work
experience.
C
It
sounds
like
you
may
have
been
called
upon
to
interpret
ordinance
sections
of
city
code
in
the
past
correct
before
we
reconvene
from
the
break.
I
asked
you
to
put
up
a
snapshot
of
section
7-5-9b
of
the
city
code,
which
is
what
we're
here
to
to
discuss.
Is
that,
what's
shown
on
the
screen,
through
an
accurate
copy
of
that
that
ordinance
to
the
best
of
my
ability
to
recall?
Yes,.
B
C
C
C
On
from
the
words
different
phases
of
large
plan
that
may
or
may
not
include
shared
parking
facilities,
access
utilities
or
walls
in
the
context
of
interpreting
ordinances,
typically,
when
you
see
this
sort
of
may
include
language,
is
that
supposed
to
be
an
exclusive
list
of
the
only
things
that
you
should
consider
when
interpreting
the
ordinance?
No
and
that's
what
brings
us
here
is
I
regard
that
as
being
open-ended
and
not
definitive,
it's
akin
to
including,
but
not
limited
to,
so
maybe
those
things,
but.
E
C
May
not
be
those
things
that
leads
you
to
the
conclusion
that
that
a
project
is
different
phases
of
a
larger
Planet
development.
There
could
be
others,
yes
to
constitute
the
larger
plan
of
development.
Having
heard
the
testimony
from
Mr
Mooney,
predominantly
today,
we've
gotten
a
good
bit
of
information
for
the
board
on
what
these
the
development
on
these
two
Parcels
is
to
look
like
what
of
that
information
leads
you
to
include
that.
B
C
Phases
of
a
larger
plan,
the
the
town
home
developments
on
these
two
sites
next
to
each
other.
It's
actually
not
one
thing:
it's
what
I
believe
you
call
in
the
legal
profession
of
preponderance
of
evidence.
There
are
a
number
of
things
you
know
it
starts
with
the
March
pre-application
we
had
with
Mr
Mooney
concerning
Rock
Hill
Road,
which
is
Apex.
C
That's
when
both
doctor
Bill
Chambers
and
Dr
Stephanie
Chambers
were
mentioned
and
as
having
some
familiar
relations,
it
was
looking
at
the
sanitary
sewer
as
described
if
it
is
a
level
to
11,
West
Chapel
will
require
sidewalk,
which
goes
to
the
property.
There
are
also
some
questions
to
what
constitutes
a
common
plan
of
development
for
grading
permits
and
again
I
would
refer
to
Nancy
for
that,
but
there
there
are
any
number
of
things
that
made
us
come
to
the
conclusion
that
it
is
part
of
a
larger
development.
E
C
Right
thanks
for
that
I'm
going
to
stick
with
the
sidewalks.
You
know
curve
and
gutter
aspect
of
this
yeah.
Do
you,
when
interpreting
an
ordinance,
consider
the
motivations
of.
E
C
C
No,
there
are.
There
are
ways
in
which
they
are
not
required,
though,
and
there's
also,
we
could
be
here
all
night,
because
affordable
housing
is
a
different
thing
and
there
are,
there
are
other
incentives
and
things
provided
by
planning
and
Urban
Design
and
community
and
economic
development
that
I
can't
speak
to,
because
I
am
certainly
not
a
recognized
expert
in
those
sub-disciplines,
okay,
understood
so
taking
into
consideration
all
the
factors
that
you
feel
you
are
allowed
and
properly
consider
when
determining
whether
this
is
a
larger
or
sorry
phases
of
a
larger
plan.
C
B
L
Oh
I
think
you
described
the
I'm
sorry
Bob.
C
I
will
try
and
be
as
succinct
as
possible.
So
in
the
city
we
have
three
levels
of
review:
there's
level,
one
level,
two
level,
three
level
one
is
done
at
the
administrative
level.
There
are
certain
conditions
for
that
which
you
can
look
at
at
the
Udo,
but
it's
usually
done
by
development
review,
Specialists
planner
ones
and
has
a
much
quicker
turnaround
time.
L
C
Oh
sorry,
I
wasn't
so
I
wanted
to
answer
the
question
if
I
made
Mr
Rose,
so
so
the
the
purpose
behind
this
is
if
there,
if
these
three
sufficient
conditions
are
met,
it
is
clear
that
it
will
impact
the
urban
designer
of
the
urban
fabric
of
this
particular
area
for
a
given
time
again,
500
feet
three
years
so
because
these
are
being
met,
it's
going
to
require
that
more
rigorous
standard
of
review.
So
that's
the
purpose.
B
C
Nothing
for
driveways
I
recall
in
both
the
12
15
meeting
for
the
TRC
pre-ap
and
then
also
for
the
315
Early
assistance
for
Rock
Hill
Road
is
some
discussion
of
retaining
walls.
There
are
if
it
is
steep
there
there
may
have
to
be
some
sort
of
backfill.
We
were
waiting
for
engineering
on
that,
but
never
received
anything.
L
C
L
So
so,
if
you,
if,
let's
say
that
that
that
the
the
properties
were
owned
by
two
millions
that
had
no
relationship
Galaxy
said
earlier,
if
she
had
one
part
of
that
on
the
other,
did
your.
C
Interchange,
it
probably
wouldn't,
owing
to
the
fact
that
we
still
need
more
information
for
retaining
walls.
There
was
some
element
of
sanitary
sewer
here
and
again,
I
I
really
wish
Nancy
were
here.
She
just
got
back
from
Italy
and
is
recovering
from
kovid,
but
could
speak
more
to
what
is
required
from
an
ncdeq.
But
there
are
possible
reasons
why
individuals
that
are
completely
unrelated
under
separate
ownership
would
still
be
triggered
for
a
level
two
review
under
759
b2c,
but
the
only
factors.
L
Me
to
the,
how
is
the
developer
developers
supposed
to
know.
C
C
To
an
extent
they
could
seek
us
for
guidance,
or
they
can
reach
out
to
any
number
of
design
professionals
to
get
clarity
on
that
as
well.
L
L
To
avoid
the
the
requirements
of
a
level
two
process,
good
thing
is
not
a
project
in
such
a
way
that
we're
doing
that.
C
L
L
L
C
L
C
You
had
you
were
asked
I
believe
I
got
this
right,
whether
you
could
do
a
townhome
development,
Apex
property
without
triggering
level
two
requirements.
Is
that
correct
corrected
for
that
question?
Yes,
so
would
level
two
requirements
be
required
if
this
property
was
owned
and
share
No
development
plans
in
common
with
the
neighboring
property,
so
Joe,
schmoe
or
Adam
Smith
owns
this
property,
nothing
else.
They
want
to
develop
seven
town
homes
on.
C
B
C
C
If
you
assume
that
all
three
of
these
subsections
759
b
c
one
two
and
three,
if
all
three
of
those
are
met,
do
the
permitted
usage
uses
in
our
our
enemy
RSA,
our
essay
do
the
permitted
uses
change.
No,
so
there's
nothing
in
this
section
that
we're
here
to
talk
about
that
changes.
The
permitted
uses
based
on
ownership.
C
C
No
open
space
tree
canopy
and
other
requirements
out
of
7-Eleven
one
are
based
on
number
of
units
so
because
this
is
seven,
if
it
were
eight
units,
it
would
have
to
comply
with
open
space.
L
L
You've
heard
the
evidence
consisting
of
testimony
and
Exhibits,
and
we
think
they
show
affirmatively
these
projects
don't
share
anything
that
would
justify
combining
them,
even
under
the
city's
broad
reading
of
the
code.
They
have
not
that
they
share
No
functional
characteristics,
not
one,
no
shared
driveways,
no
shared
access,
no
wall,
no
shared
walls,
no
utilities,
no
shared
parking
facilities.
L
And
and
the
fact
that
they
happen
to
be
a
a
similar
form
of
development
is
more
a
function
of
the
zoning
code
than
than
than
any
that
any
plan
to
to
any
shared
plan.
L
L
Similarity
in
the
timelines-
even
although
even
even
that
was
speculative.
None
of
these
are
things
that
the
city
can
regulate.
E
L
Should
regulate
and
there's
and-
and
there
is
there
is
case
law
in
North
Carolina
that
says
that
zoning
cannot
be
used
to
regulate
ownership.
It
won't
be
used
to
regulate
the
use
of
land.
Mr
Anderson
asked
a
question
that
suggested
that
that
is
not
what
was
happening,
but
I
would
suggest
to
you
that
that's
the
exact
opposite.
What's
because
what
is
the
the
effect
of
that
is.
L
L
So
these
are
not
different
phases
of
the
same
project.
Nothing
suggests
that
there
are.
These
are
situations
where
it
makes
sense.
There
are
situations
where
it
makes
sense
to
apply
this
provision.
This
is
not
one
of
those
situations
you
heard.
Mr
Mooney
testify
about
the
Lowe's
project
down
on
South
Tunnel
Road.
It
made
sense
there
it,
but
it's
it,
but,
but
in
in
this
case
it
does
not
and
and
the
you
know
again,
we'd
like
the
staff.
We
appreciate
the
work.
This
is
just
a
situation
where
we
disagree.
L
We
we
do
not
think
that
these
projects
were
properly
combined,
they're
separate
projects,
not
not
different
phase
of
the
same
project.
There
are
some
commonalities,
but
these
commonalities
are
are
are
more
coincidental
than
anything
else,
and
we
would.
L
We
would
ask
you
to
ask
you
to
essentially
well
I
won't
say
the
rule,
the
staff
that
sounds
bad,
but
just
the
we
think
the
staff's
determination
list
was
incorrect
and
and
and
we
and
and
it's
it
is
difficult
to
read
this
ordinance
and
know
how
to
apply
it
without
going
to
the
staff,
which
leaves
these
determinations
in
the
hands
of
in
the
hands
of
of
of
the
stamp
and
not
and
and
not
determinable.
L
By
looking
at
the
ordinance
and
I'm
going
to
ask
women
to
ask
that
you
that
you
agree
with
our
appeal
and
and
allow
us
to
proceed
without
going
through
level,
two
I'm
glad
to
answer
any
questions.
A
Correct
would
it
be
correct
for
me
to
say
that
that
a
one
sentence
summation
of
the
reason
we're
here
is
that
you
believe
that
City
staff
aired
in
ruling
that
the
that
these
were
combined.
C
Thank
you,
Mr
chair
and
I'll
Echo.
What
Mr
Rose
has
said
a
few
times
now.
There's
no
animosity
between
the
parties
I'll
go
a
step
further
and
tell
you
affirmatively
that,
regardless
of
your
decision,
there's
no
animosity
or
hurt
feelings
about
whatever
that
decision
would
be
the
Crux
of.
Why
we're
here
is
this
ordinance
section
that
we've
been
talking
about
for
a
few
hours
now
and
I?
C
Think
it
specifically
comes
down
to
whether
or
not
you
read
that
section
of
the
ordinance
to
be
an
exclusive
list
of
factors
that
staff
is
allowed
to
consider
in
determining
what
is
or
is
not
phases
of
a
larger
plan.
So
that
subsection
says
that
you
view
two
different
or
two
developments
on
two
different
sites
as
one
development
and
treat
them
as
one
development
for
review
purposes.
If
they
are
phases
of
a
larger
plan.
C
And
what
follows
is
four
examples
of
what
things
might
be
considered,
but
that
list
of
things
that
might
be
considered
begins
with
the
words
may
or
may
not
include,
which
is
why
I
believe
that
Mr
Starbomb
has
correctly
concluded
that
it's
not
an
exclusive
list
that
you
can't
start
an
exclusive
list
with
the
words
may
or
may
not
include,
if
you
intended
it
to
be
exclusive.
So
assuming
the
board
accepts
that
threshold
premise,
we're
then
to
the
question
of
whether
the
evidence
suggests
that
these
are
different
phases
of
a
larger
plan.
C
Efforts
for
both
Parcels
fell
through.
They
both
presented
townhome
development
plans
to
the
city
of
Asheville,
from
information
provided
by
the
applicants.
We
understand
that
the
ownership
of
those
Parcels
is
at
least
a
direct
familial
relationship
that
they're
presenting
the
same
type
of
development
Townhomes
that
they're
using
the
same
site
planner,
and
that
they
may
very
well
be
doing
work
on
the
same
sites
at
the
same
time
and
also
heavily
modifying
the
same
sewer
line
in
the
immediate
vicinity
of
both
both
projects.
C
Tasked
with
deciding
whether
that
determination
is
is
right
or
wrong,
you're
just
doing
that
by
a
preponderance
of
the
evidence
standard.
So
it
is
just
you've
heard
everything.
Do
you
think
it
is
more
correct
or
not
that
City
staff
got
it
right
that
these
are
phases
of
a
of
a
larger
project?
So
that's
your
that's
your
task.
Now,
I,
don't
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
evidence.
I've
failed
to
recap
for
you
and
that's
our
position
that,
based
on
that
evidence,
these
are
different
phases
of
a
larger
plan.
A
Mr
Starbomb,
I
believe
said
that
staff
has
always
interpreted
those
four
things
to
be
a
partial,
but
not
inclusively
total
list
of
possibilities,
assuming
that's
true,
is
is.
Can
that
be
taken
as
a
I
just
forgot
the
word
he
a
precedent
for.
J
Staff
to
decisions-
I,
don't
know
if
you
would
call
them
president,
it
comes
to
practice.
Practices
came
off
at
this
stage
of
the
game,
get
reinforced
or
abandoned,
depending
on
the
ruling
of
this
board.
That's
where
Preston
probably
comes
in
this
comes
up
two
or
three
times
and
the
board
with
upholds
the
way
staff
interprets
it.
That
becomes
something.
J
That's
I
guess
precedent
until
Bob
goes
to
the
Superior
Court
says:
okay
judge
did
they
got
it
right,
but
same
flip
side
of
it
could
be,
of
course,
that
you
find
that
it's
the
reading
is
more
limited
than
staff,
and
that's
that
it
takes
you
in
a
different
direction.
I
can't
tell
you
which
direction
that
goes
in,
but
the
staff
decision
has
a
precedent
in-house,
it
probably
is
is
their
practice,
but
it's
not
a
president.
C
C
There's
this
ambiguity
of
the
code-
and
this
is
how
it
is
then
applied
so
to
make
sure
that
everyone
who
does
qualify,
who
does
come
in
who
does
reach
out
who
has
these
early
systems,
has
received
the
same
amount
and
the
same
so
there
is
so
there
isn't.
It
does
go
into
practice,
but
that
is
not
to
say
that
it
doesn't
change.
I,
think
there
are
administrative.
We
have
literal
binders
full
of
passive
administrative
interpretations.
A
So
would
that
would
it
be
correct
to
say
then
that
there
have
been
previous
times
where
you've
interpreted
be
I?
Don't
want
to
get
this
wrong
bc2?
Is
that
right
as
including
is
including
more
than
those
four
things
to
other
people.
C
Apply
that
to
be
a
more
exhaustive
list,
but
the
applicants
were
clear
that
it
was
phased
for
for
cultural
or
other
reasons
as
well.
So
we
we
haven't
used
other
reasons,
not
inclusive
of
that
list,
that
those
were
those
applications
are
amazed,
aren't
necessarily
an
apple
to
Apple's
comparison.
L
L
Chairman,
if
I
may,
but
what
we're
I
think
you
put
your
finger
in
the
situation,
is
it
is
it
the
the
staff
makes
its
interpretation,
but
what
what
the
court
reveals
recently
said?
Is
the
draft
isn't
setting
ordinances
that
restricted
property
rights,
have
a
responsibility
to
provide
a
clear
rules
in
which
property
owner
can
rely?
This
is
so
because
sending
regulations
are
not
intended
to
be
a
system
working,
ambiguous
rules
where
the
permitted
uses
of
property
ultimately
depend
on
the
determined
discretion
of
government
bureaucrats
and.
C
There
is
that
Canon
of
interpretation,
which
is
correct
and
I'll,
go
a
step
further
and
call
your
attention
back
to
what
Mr
O
said
at
the
beginning
of
this,
which
is
that
zoning
regulations
are
in
derogation
of
the
common
law,
which
just
means
that
by
common
law,
you're
allowed
to
do
whatever
the
heck.
You
want
with
your
property
and
so
anytime
that
there's
a
clear.
D
C
In
favor
of
the
property
owner,
that's
correct,
but
when
Mr
OS
left
out
from
both
that
initial
statement-
and
this
last
quotation
is
that
the
the
senior
Quantum
of
interpreting
zoning
ordinances,
like
any
law,
is
that
you
get
to
the
legislative
intent
of
the
body
passing
it.
And
so,
if
you
find
that
the
that
it.
E
C
Than
not
in
your
mind
that
the
city
of
Asheville
in
passing,
795
b
c
2
was
what
the
city
is
saying,
then
you
may
properly
rule
on
that
basis,
because
you've
reached
that
point
of
I
think
we
know
what
the
city
intended
by
this
ordinance
and
we
can
rule
on
it.
So,
but
if
you
think
it's
ambiguous
it
in
in
the
event
of
a
tie,
Mr
Rose
is
right.
He
his
his
clients,
are
entitled
to
that
tiebreaker.
M
Mr
Jim
would
be
acceptable
without
having
a
clarification
or
question
sure
and
I.
Guess
part
of
this
comes
from
hearing
all
of
this
I
sort
of
get
the
feeling
that
my
clients,
somehow
because
I
am
affiliated
with
both
projects,
May
further
further
muddy
the
waters
and
so
I
guess
my
my
question
about
that
is
kind
of
in
in
the
future.
In
a
hypothetical
question.
M
If,
if
on
a
project
say
that
had
town
homes
and
it
was
built
and
everything's
fine
and
then
and
I'd
worked
on
it,
but
then
two
and
three
quarter
years
later,
another
developer
or
whatever
came
to
build
a
town
home
should
would
it
be
incumbent
to
me
to
either
excuse
myself
because
of
that
affiliation
and
anyway,
that
that
it
may
penalize
him
in
going
to
a
a
level
two,
as
opposed
to
one
I.
C
E
C
M
I
have
a
question
for
you.
Yes,
sir
Do.
I
M
H
M
We
were
the
only
time
that
we
were
looking
at
this
as
an
inclusive
project,
with
both
properties
was
from
the
commercial
side.
That
was
when
we
were
looking
at
those
buildings
because
of
the
commercial
buildings.
Their
parking
requirements
were
more
necessitated
more
land
area,
and
so
we
were
looking
that's
how
we
were
looking
at
these
two
and
then,
as
I
mentioned
in
my
testimony,
based
on
that
not
being
turning
out
to
be
feasible.
M
We
went
to
the
residential
and
then
just
focused
on
kinship,
because
my
studies
in
the
commercial
Concepts
we
were
losing
half
of
that
property
from
Apex,
so
you
weren't
that
was
just
being
taken
up
in
slope,
and
so
there
was
no
sense
in
basically
losing
that,
because
you
couldn't
the
cost
of
doing
that,
you
weren't
being
able
to
get
the
return
that
you
would
with
a
residential
development.
So
that's
why
Apex
was
just
sort
of
eliminated
from
The
View.
We
were
looking
at
the
kinship
property.
M
G
It
was
on
you,
so
have
you
engaged
in
civil
engineer
for
both
of
these
projects?
Excuse.
M
M
M
G
G
E
G
Your
sewer
improvements
and
extension,
it
seems
like
from
an
economy
of
scale.
It
would
be
good
to
do
it
as
one
project.
M
A
G
A
A
Or
before
asking
a
question,
let
me
let
me
let
me
say
only
because
I'm
I
have
a
question.
Is
there
anything
that
anyone
would
like
to
ask
Mr
Snead
about
this.
G
A
Mr
oast
said
basically
the
reason
they're
here
is
because
they
believe
that
Steph
that
Stephanie
and
error-
okay,
is
there
aside
from
from
what's
commonly
known
as
scrivener's
errors?
Are
there
levels
of
Errors
from
this?
Is
a
small
error
to
God
like
I,
must
have
been
a
dope?
A
J
G
So
I
am
also
a
landscape,
architect
and
William
planer
and
I
have
come
across
this
a
time
or
two
mostly
It's,
when
it's
the
difference
between
a
level
two
and
a
level
three
because
of
a
level
three
kicks
you
into
a
whole
different
world
of
development,
pain
and
Challenge
and
like
Mr
Mooney
was
saying
you
know
having
to
talk
to
the
neighborhood
in
a
more
careful
way
and
really
garnering
their
support
and
those
types
of
things,
and
so
I
can
understand.
G
G
I
have
been
told
multiple
times
that
you
know
waiting
three
years
is
a
great
way
to
circumvent
the
ordinance.
That's
been
a
statement,
that's
been
said
before,
and
it's
not
untrue
if
you're
trying
to
avoid
cumulative
development
costs
that
come
with
going
from
one
level
overview
to
another
level
of
review.
One
of
the
things
that
I'm
really
looking
at
is
the
word
May
in
that
sentence
and
if
you
go
to
while
May
is
subjective,
it
is
defined
in
our
ordinance
and
it
means
it's
permissive.
E
K
G
But
it's
basically
it's
permissive
image
nature
here
it
is
so
it's
not
necessarily
required
so
in
the
instance
of
this
sentence,
if
it
said-
and
it's
shall
it
it
has
to
have
all
of
these
things-
it
shall
have
walls,
it
shall
have
utilities.
It
shall
have
all
these
things
and
what
the
ordinance
is
saying
is.
It
may
include
these
things,
but
we
can't
think
of
all
the
things
that
may
make
a
project
need
to
be
combined
as
a
common
plan.
G
Kicking
it
into
this
level,
two
review,
so
that's
one
of
the
words
that
I'm
kind
of
getting
hung
up
on
and
and
in
my
thought
process
on
that
so
I'll
just
put
that
out
for
just
our
conversation,
I
think
that
the
llc's
that
were
created
on
the
same
day
it
appears
they're
related
in
terms
of
addressing
so
I
know
that
ownership
is
not
an
issue.
G
I
think
also
what
Mr
Mooney
said
about
civil
engineer,
it's
incredibly
different
difficult
to
do
sewer
improvements
on
projects
of
this
magnitude.
It's
going
to
be
a
major
sewer
infrastructure
project.
G
It
would
be
a
real
challenge
to
do
one
piece
and
then
another
and
then
have
multiple
people
out
there
doing
construction,
Administration
and
CA
and
surveyors
doing
you,
know,
survey,
work
and
resolving
multiple
as
built
survey,
plots
and
all
the
stuff
to
tie
it
in
together.
It
seems
like
there's
no
way
that
they
wouldn't
just
do
it
all
at
one
time,
so
that
I
mean
in
the
early
assistance
meeting
notes.
G
It
didn't
look
like
Kevin
Johnson
was
there
and
he
he
is
with
the
MSD
with
our
surge
district,
and
so
we
don't
really
have
what
his
thoughts
were
for
that
we
also
don't
have
Nancy
here,
Nancy
Watford,
to
speak
to
us
a
little
bit
more
clearly
about
this
common
plan
of
development
or
sale
and
and
how
that
ncgo,
0001
permit
is
established
and
everything.
G
C
Miss,
katzy
and
I
don't
want
to
interject
if
it's
not
proper,
but
to
clarify
just
on
that
exact
point
of
the
quotation.
Yeah
I
believe
you
said
quoting
from
General
statute.
It's
not
in
a
general
statute.
It's
that
Administrative
Code
provision,
which
is
just
a
level
below
General
statute,
that
I
read
to
Mr
Mooney.
It's
15a,
ncac
o2h.1002.
That
I
had
asked
him
about.
That's
where
that
definition
appears
and
that's
a
definition
for
DEQ
to
be
clear,
not
the
not
the
city's
definition,
but
that
is
deq's
definition
for
common
plan
of
development.
F
A
Looking
at
this
Sub
Sub
sub
section
two
that
mentions
the
different
phases
of
electroplan
that
may
or
may
not
include
shared
parking
facilities,
access
utilities
or
walls.
A
I've
been
I've,
been
kind
of
looking
at
that
and
I've
been
seeing
myself
well
in
in
terms
of.
Are
these
the
only
four
things
or
you
know?
Is
it
possible
to
have
more
things
if
I
were
going
to
interpret
that
as
being
the
the
only
four
things
you
could
look
at
I
would
I
would
look
at
it
as
the
being
that
those
four
things
were
parts
of
some
whole
I?
A
Don't
know
how
I
would
how
I
would
name
that
bowl,
but
but,
like
you
know
the
four
quarters
of
the
circle-
and
you
know
these
four
things
are
written
because
of
some
larger
thing
that
they're
part
of
and
I
don't
see
that
they
seem
like
four
reasonable
things,
but
but,
and
they
seem
sort
of
vaguely
connected,
but
I,
don't
I,
don't
see
any
I,
don't
see
any
reason
to
believe
that
it
would
be
incorrect
to
not
add
other
relevant
things
that
might
be
faces
of
a
larger
planet.
G
A
F
F
Suzanne,
thank
you
for
your
input.
I
was
interested
to
see
what
you
thought
with
your
background.
I
think
this
cases
like
this
or
how
are
you
deal,
gets
a
little
bit
thicker
and
a
little
bit
longer
and
more
definitive
personally,
with
the
amount
of
overlap,
and
you
know,
moving
the
sewer
if
a
certain
project
gets
through
and
just
the
amount
of
over
overlapping
projects,
I
can
see
just
how
they
could
constitute,
as
one
I
also
came
from
Real
Estate
development,
and
we
often
had
multiple
price
points.
F
N
N
E
A
Okay
board
members:
when
I
say
your
name,
please
say:
hi
or
name
is
Jackson.