Close Close

    Minutes of 10/11/2005 Board of Adjustment Meeting [adopted]
MINUTES

Regular Meeting
Wake County Board of Adjustment
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
9:00 am, Room 700
Wake County Courthouse
316 Fayetteville Street Mall
Raleigh, North Carolina

Members Present (7): Mr. A. Thomas Anderson, Mr. Billy Myrick, Mr. Art Odom, Mr. Tim Sack, Ms. Genevieve Sims, Mr. John Welch, Mr. Jeffrey Willis

Members Not Present (2): Mr. James Compton, Mr. Ronald Raxter

Staff Present (4): Mr. Reginald Goodson (Land Development Administrator), Mr. Keith Lankford (Planner III), Mr. Joe Mangum (Planner I), Ms. Angel Kropf (Secretary to the Board)

County Attorney Present: Scott Warren (Deputy County Attorney)

IN RE MINUTES

Item 1, Call to Order: Vice-Chairman Odom called the meeting to order at 9:05 a.m. with five (5) members present.

Item 2, Approval of Minutes of September 13, 2005 meeting. Database 'WC - FYI', View 'By Author', Document 'Minutes of 09/13/2005 Board of Adjustment Meeting [adopted]' Vice-Chairman Odom asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes. Mr. Anderson made a motion that the Board adopt the minutes as written. Mr. Sack seconded the motion. All members present voted aye. So ordered.

Vice-Chairman Odom stated for the benefit of anyone in the audience who had not attended a meeting of the Wake County Board of Adjustment, that the meeting is a quasi-judicial proceeding. Anyone wishing to present testimony and/or evidence will be asked to come forward and be sworn or affirmed. The petitioner will be given the first opportunity to present testimony and/or evidence. Anyone wishing to speak in favor or opposition will present testimony and/or evidence. The petitioner will then be given an opportunity to respond.

Mr. Larry Morgan and Ms. Celena Everette was sworn/affirmed to present testimony for staff.

For the record, staff member Mr. Larry Morgan and Board member A. Thomas Anderson were present on the site tour on Monday, October 10, 2005.

Item 3, BA SU-2041-05:

Petitioner: Jason Tracy
Landowner: NCDOT
PIN: 0736.04
Location: Within the existing I-540 right-of-way on the southern side of Kit Creek Road, between Davis Drive and Weaver Road
Zoned: Research Application (RA)
Land Area: 1.50 acres

Item No. 3 heard at the regular meeting of the Wake County Board of Adjustment held on Tuesday, October 11, 2005, was a Special Use Permit, Petition No. BA SU-2041-05. The petitioner is Jason Tracy. The landowner is NCDOT. The property is located within the existing I-540 right-of-way on the southern side of Kit Creek Road, between Davis Drive and Weaver Road. The following members of the Board heard and decided this petition: Mr. Odom, Mr. Myrick, Mr. Sack, Ms. Sims, and Mr. Willis.

In this case the petitioner requests a special use permit to construct a temporary concrete batch plant.

SYNOPSIS OF TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED

Documentary Evidence: Staff report, PowerPoint slide presentation and videotaped presentation of the site; Special Use Permit Petition dated 07-21-05; Statement of Justification; Preliminary Special Use Permit Site Plans dated 07-28-05; Vicinity Map dated 09-17-05; six photographs: (1) Northeastern view at access drive to site off of Kit Creek Road, (2) Northwestern view from access road to proposed concrete batch plant site, (3) East view from access road towards proposed location of concrete batch plant (4) Southeastern view towards I-540 right-of-way from access road to the proposed concrete batch plant, (5) West view from access drive to site off of existing Kit Creek Road towards Davis Drive and (6) Northwestern view from access drive to site off of existing Kit Creek Road.

Testimony: Mr. Lankford entered the staff report for BA SU-2041-05 into the record and stated that this is a request to construct a temporary concrete batch plant. The petitioner is Jason Tracy. The landowner is NCDOT. The property is located within the existing I-540 right-of-way on the southern side of Kit Creek Road, between Davis Drive and Weaver Road. The property is zoned Research Application and consists of 1.50 acres. Mr. Lankford stated that this was considered an accessory use, but needs a Special Use Permit. He corrected two errors on the staff report, one dealing with cubic yardage and the other dealing with the timeframe for the plant to be removed.

Mr. Jason Tracy, 303 Meeting Hall Drive, Morrisville, NC was properly sworn. He also clarified the amount of cubic yardage and the timeframe for the plant to be removed.

Mr. Myrick asked what the provisions were for dust and sound created by the plant. Mr. Tracy answered there was a bag house on the silos and the stockpiles are watered down to keep the dust down. He stated they only operate the plant from 7 AM to 7 PM. Mr. Myrick asked if they were going to comply with the air quality regulations. Mr. Tracy answered that they would.

Mr. Odom asked if this was for the I-540 loop. Mr. Tracy answered that it was. Mr. Odom asked what section it was for. Mr. Tracy answered that it was from the existing I-540 to NC 55. He stated this would be the only plant serving this part of the I-540.

Ms. Sims asked how many miles of I-540 it covers. Mr. Tracy answered that it covered about five miles.

Ms. Esther Dunnigan, 6608 Kits Creek Road, Morrisville, NC was properly sworn. She stated she wanted to know exactly where this plant was going to be located. She stated she was concerned about the noise and the environmental issues. She stated the residents in the area had to deal with noise day and night from the construction. She stated the noise was a problem. She stated the construction in the area was displacing the animals and the animals were now going into the residential areas. She stated the animals were eating her trees and plants. She stated residents in the area have had to deal with problems with their wells, with electricity going off, with telephone service going down, with the noise of blasting. She stated they have been having so many problems that they are not in favor of the plant being in that location. She stated she felt they should look more towards NC 55 where there are fewer houses. She asked what would happen if they need the plant after October 2007. She stated she was concerned that it could become more than a temporary batch plant.

Mr. Odom stated that the permit expires on October 2007 and they would not be able to get an extension. They would have to get another permit. Ms. Dunnigan stated her concern was that once it is in place, they would want to keep it there. She pointed out where her property was on the map.

Ms. Sims asked if there was an opportunity to meet with the petitioner. Ms. Dunnigan stated there was no notification, but they were willing to meet with the petitioner. She stated they first heard about the meeting when they received the letter from Planning.

Mr. Odom clarified that the existing construction was for the I-540 and this meeting could not do anything about that. Ms. Dunnigan stated that she was aware of it, but stated that the batch plant concerned her because with the trucks going in and out, it would create additional noise and environmental problems.

Ms. Rita Ballentine, 6814 Kit Creek Road, Morrisville, NC was properly sworn. She stated she was the nearest resident to the proposed site. She stated she had the same concerns that Ms. Dunnigan had. She asked how much it would cost to build the plant and put water to the site. She wondered if it had been compared to using an existing concrete plant. She wondered if they had considered the site that is closer to NC 55. She asked if the applicants had looked into the environmental issues that building the plant would cause. The dust is already a problem at her house. At night, she has been hearing the sound of pounding from the I-540 construction area.

Ms. Sims asked if they had received notices that I-540 was going to be built. Ms. Ballentine stated that they had received not notice. Ms. Sims asked if DOT had bought some land for the right-of-way. Ms. Ballentine stated that they had.

Mr. Tracy showed on the map where the plant will be located. He stated there would be an acre and a half of disturbed. He pointed out on the map where Kit Creek Road will be. He stated they didn't cut existing vegetation along the right of way. The trucks involved will be using Davis Drive or the I-540 area for access.

Mr. Willis asked how close they stick to the 7 AM to 7 PM time frame. Mr. Tracy stated the last truck would be done before 7 PM.

Mr. Sack asked how much noise the plant would generate. Mr. Tracy stated there would not be a lot of noise generated by the plant.

Mr. Tracy stated that other sites were taken into consideration, but that this site was about in the middle of the project. He stated that if they used concrete from other companies, it would not be beneficial to them. He stated that NC 55 has no right of way to work in.

Ms. Sims requested that the applicant talk with the property owners about the issues and concerns they had. Mr. Tracy stated he had no problem talking with the property owners.

Ms. Sims stated she would like to delay a decision until the property owners had a chance to meet with the construction company people. Mr. Willis proposed a 7th condition for the contractor to speak with the property owners. Mr. Myrick stated that they could only consider the batch plant, not the other issues the property owners brought up about the I-540 construction.

Mr. Lankford stated that there was a noise ordinance and staff would be happy to talk to the property owners about that as well.

Vice-Chairman Odom closed the public hearing.

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

The Board of Adjustment shall not approve a petition for a Special Use Permit unless it first reaches each of the following conclusions based on findings of fact supported by competent, substantial, and material evidence. The Board of Adjustment must make positive findings on the following findings of fact from Section 1-1-11 (C) of the Zoning Ordinance in order to approve or deny this special use request:

(1) The proposed development will not materially endanger the public health or safety.
(2) The proposed development will comply with all regulations and standards generally applicable within the zoning district and specifically applicable to the particular type of special use or class of special uses.

(3) The proposed development will not substantially injure the value of adjoining property, or is a public necessity.
(4) The proposed development will be in harmony with the area in which it is located.
(5) The proposed development will be consistent with the Wake County Land Use Plan.
Recommendation

Staff recommends that, if the Board of Adjustment reaches positive conclusions on all the required findings, that it approve the request subject to the following conditions: Motion

Mr. Sack made a motion that in the matter of BA SU-2041-05, the Board of Adjustment find and conclude that the petition does meet the requirements of 1-1-11(C) of the Wake County Zoning Ordinance and the variance be granted with the recommended staff conditions. Mr. Willis seconded the motion. With a vote of 4-1, with Ms. Sims voting against, the motion passed. So ordered.


Item 4, BA V-2037-05:

Petitioner: Claude M. Stevens
Landowner: Claude M. Stevens
PIN: 1718.13 13 8489
Location: Northeastern corner of Honeycutt Road and Oak Creek Road
Zoned: Residential-40 Watershed (R-40W) with a Special Highway Overlay District (SHOD)
Land Area: 1.27 acre

Item No. 4 heard at the regular meeting of the Wake County Board of Adjustment held on Tuesday, October 11, 2005, was a Variance, Petition No. BA V-2037-05. The petitioner is Claude M. Stevens. The landowner is Claude M. Stevens. The property is located on the northeastern corner of Honeycutt Road and Oak Creek Road. The following members of the Board heard and decided this petition: Mr. Odom, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Myrick, Ms. Sims, and Mr. Welch.

In this case the petitioner requests a variance required parking associated with a school to be located within a transitional bufferyard and a variance from the stormwater management requirement.

SYNOPSIS OF TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED

Documentary Evidence: Staff report, PowerPoint slide presentation and videotaped presentation of the site; Special Use Permit Petition dated 07-21-05; Statement of Justification; Preliminary Special Use Permit Site Plans dated 05-10-05; Vicinity Map dated 09-17-05; six photographs: (1) North view of site across Oak Creek Road, (2) East view towards existing residence on site, (3) South view from southern access drive off of Oak Creek Road, (4) Southwest view from site towards intersection of Oak Creek Road and Honeycutt Road, (5) West view from access drive and parking area at north side of site off of Honeycutt Road, and (6) West view across Honeycutt Road from access drive at north side of site.

Testimony: Mr. Morgan entered the staff report for BA V-2037-05 into the record and stated that this is a request for a variance for required parking associated with a school to be located within a transitional bufferyard and a variance from the stormwater management requirement. The petitioner is Claude M. Stevens. The landowner is Claude M. Stevens. The property is located on the northeastern corner of Honeycutt Road and Oak Creek Road. The property is zoned Residential 40 Watershed and Special Highway Overlay District and consists of 1.27 acre.

Dr. CM Stevens, 801 Oak Creek Road, Raleigh was properly sworn. He stated that for 18 years he has run a prep school. He felt this house was in a good location. Before he purchased it, the house was vacant for 3 1/2 years. He stated the only change he was planning on making was to comply with the bufferyard requirements. He stated there would be no change to the impervious surface and therefore, was asking for a variance for the stormwater management requirement.

Mr. Odom asked if there was room to comply with the bufferyard requirement. Dr. Stevens answered that there was.

Mr. Myrick asked if there were any changes to the house. Dr. Stevens answered that there were no changes to the house. He discussed the fact that the house was handicapped accessible.

Mr. Willis asked what number of students Dr. Stevens was limited to. Dr. Stevens answered that he was limited to five students. He gave a brief background on the five students he currently teaches. He stated he provided 5-1 ratios. Ms. Sims asked about the ratio of students to teachers and the number of people on the property at one time. Dr. Stevens stated that as he understood it, he could have up to 25 people on the property at one time, including students and staff. He stated that by law, he could change his ratios and have 24 students and himself. There was some discussion on how many students to staff ratio would be possible.

Mr. Welch asked about space to turn around in the parking pad area. Dr. Stevens answered that there was room.

Mr. Welch asked about the waiver for the storage buildings. Mr. Goodson explained that the thought was that the accessory structures were already existing and they met the residential requirement for accessory structures. The buildings were already existing and would not have any more impact on the environment and staff felt it should be waived. The parking pad was a parking pad for residential, not for seven parking spaces and staff felt that would be more of an impact than just having the residential occupants parking on the parking pad. Mr. Lankford stated the accessory structures were not necessary for the function of the school, but the parking pad was required for the school.

Ms. Sims asked if the property was used for residential as well as the school. Mr. Goodson stated it was a home occupation and is being used for residential and a school. Dr. Stevens stated he was not sure if he would continue to use it as residential. He stated that currently he was living at the house. He gave an overview of how the house was laid out.

Mr. Mark Black, 928 Oak Creek Road, Raleigh, NC was properly sworn. He stated he was in opposition to this proposed use. He stated he felt he spoke for the majority of the neighborhood of 50+ homes. He stated he was a real estate attorney and felt that this school would devalue the homes in the area. He spoke briefly about the residents of the surrounding neighborhood. He stated Dr. Stevens told the residents that there would be no other staff, but that doesn't seem right if he has 5-1 ratios. He stated he didn't know the numbers of students and staff involved. He stated there were lots of real estate people in the area who know about the value of houses and felt that the proposed school would harm the value of their homes. He stated he was concerned that changing the building at the back entrance to their subdivision could set a precedent. He handed out a packet of information to the board.

Ms. Sims asked how anyone from the outside would know it was a school if there was no outside indication like a sign. Mr. Black stated it was the activity that would show that there was something going on there. He stated it was a very busy intersection right there.

Ms. Sims asked if there were other specific objections he had to the school. Mr. Black answered he was concerned about the traffic going in and out of the school and the inconsistencies shown by Dr. Stevens.

Mr. Anderson stated they were focusing on the variance of the parking in the bufferyard and the stormwater management requirement, not the Special Use Permit. Mr. Willis suggested that they might want to consider tabling the variance until they heard the Special Use Permit. Mr. Black stated he was concerned about the stormwater variance because the proposed school sits at the top of a hill and his subdivision is at the bottom of the hill.

Vice-Chairman Odom closed the public hearing.

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

The Board of Adjustment may in passing upon appeals, vary or modify in accordance with procedures specified below, any regulation or provision of the Ordinance relating to the use, construction, or alteration of buildings or structures or the use of land when practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships would result from carrying out the strict letter of the regulation or provision. The Board will ensure, in so doing, that the spirit of the Ordinance is observed, public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done, both for the landowner and the public at large. The Board may impose such conditions in granting such variances as will secure substantially the objectives of the regulations or provisions being varied or modified. A variance shall not be granted unless the Board of Adjustment makes findings of fact supporting its conclusions, and concludes, as a minimum that:

(1) There are special circumstances or conditions applying to the land, building, or use referred to in the application, which exist through no fault of the property owner;
(2) The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights;
(3) The granting of the application will not materially affect adversely the health, or safety of persons residing or working the neighborhood of the proposed use and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvement in such neighborhood; and
(4) A denial of the application would cause practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships to the landowner.
Recommendation

Staff recommends that, if the Board of Adjustment reaches positive conclusions on all the required findings, that it approve the request subject to the following conditions: Motion

Mr. Anderson made a motion that in the matter of BA V-2037-05, the Board of Adjustment table the variance until the Special Use permit is considered. Mr. Sack seconded the motion. All voting members voted aye. So ordered.


Item 5, BA SU-2036-05:

Petitioner: Claude M. Stevens
Landowner: Claude M. Stevens
PIN: 1718.13 13 8489
Location: Northeastern corner of Honeycutt Road and Oak Creek Road
Zoned: Residential-40 Watershed (R-40W) with a Special Highway Overlay District (SHOD)
Land Area: 1.27 acre

Item No. 5 heard at the regular meeting of the Wake County Board of Adjustment held on Tuesday, October 11, 2005, was a Special Use Permit, Petition No. BA SU-2036-05. The petitioner is Claude M. Stevens. The landowner is Claude M. Stevens. The property is located on the northeastern corner of Honeycutt Road and Oak Creek Road. The following members of the Board heard and decided this petition: Mr. Odom, Mr. Anderson, Mr. Myrick, Ms. Sims, and Mr. Welch.

In this case the petitioner requests a special use permit for an existing 5,212 square foot single-family dwelling to be used as a private school with associated parking.

SYNOPSIS OF TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE PRESENTED

Documentary Evidence: Staff report, PowerPoint slide presentation and videotaped presentation of the site; Special Use Permit Petition dated 05-20-05; Statement of Justification; Preliminary Special Use Permit Site Plans dated 05-10-05; Vicinity Map dated 09-17-05; six photographs: (1) North view of site across Oak Creek Road, (2) East view towards existing residence on site, (3) South view from southern access drive off of Oak Creek Road, (4) Southwest view from site towards intersection of Oak Creek Road and Honeycutt Road, (5) West view from access drive and parking area at north side of site off of Honeycutt Road, and (6) West view across Honeycutt Road from access drive at north side of site

Testimony: Mr. Morgan entered the staff report for BA SU-2036-05 into the record and stated that this is a special use permit for an existing 5,212 square foot single-family dwelling to be used as a private school with associated parking. The petitioner is Claude M. Stevens. The landowner is Claude M. Stevens. The property is located on the northeastern corner of Honeycutt Road and Oak Creek Road. The property is zoned Residential 40 Watershed and Special Highway Overlay District and consists of 1.27 acre. It is an application for 24 students and 2 staff. Mr. Morgan went over the bufferyards and screening for the property. There would be one parking space for every five seats in the largest gathering room. There are five parking spaces required; the applicant is showing seven.

Mr. Welch asked about the spilled gravel. Mr. Lankford stated the spilled gravel not included in the impervious surface calculations.

Dr. Stevens pointed out the entrances to his property and the local neighborhood features using the pictures from the PowerPoint sideshow.

Ms. Sims asked about the traffic patterns of the school. Dr. Stevens stated that there were no students from the surrounding neighborhood and none of his students were driving. They would all need to be picked up and dropped off.

Mr. Willis asked what the ages of the students were. Dr. Stevens answered that he had a couple of 8th graders and a couple of 11th graders and one 12th grader.

Ms. Sims asked if this was the only school they attended. Dr. Stevens answered that it was. He stated they either flunked out or dropped out of traditional schools.

Mr. Sack asked about the church parking up the road. Dr. Stevens answered that the church attendees parked right on the street.

Mr. Warren asked if Dr. Stevens owned other property. Dr. Stevens answered that he owned property off of Leesville Road, where his wife lived. He stated he also owned property off of Six Forks Road. Mr. Warren asked if the 6921 LaMarsh Court was where his wife lived. Mr. Warren asked if Dr. Stevens lived there. Dr. Stevens stated he lived in both places.

Mr. Warren asked if there were any other teachers at the school. Dr. Stevens answered that he had a secretary. Mr. Warren asked if she lived on the property. Dr. Stevens answered that she did not.

Mr. Warren asked Dr. Stevens how he obtained a home occupation permit from staff. He asked if Dr. Stevens told staff that he lived there all of the time. Dr. Stevens answered that he did not live there before he got his home occupation permit. He stated he was told that if he wanted his home occupation permit, he needed to reside there. That is when he started living there.

Mr. Willis asked what address was on Dr. Stevens' driver's licence. Dr. Stevens answered that it had 6921 LaMarsh Court on it.

Dr. Stevens handed out some written comments from his neighbors.

Mr. Odom asked if residency required for the Special Use Permit. Mr. Lankford stated there was nothing in the ordinance that it would be a requirement.

Mr. Charlie Johnson of Wake County Fire and Rescue was properly sworn. He gave a brief history of the case as it involved his department. He stated there would probably be changes that would need to be made to the residence to be a school. He stated a commercial permit would be required. He stated he couldn't comment on everything that would need to be done on the structure yet. He stated he discussed some of those items with Dr. Stevens in July. He stated the meeting was just a preliminary meeting to tell Dr. Stevens up front about the changes that may have to be made.

Mr. Myrick asked about Bay Leaf fire department having some concerns about access. Mr. Johnson answered that they only became issues if the proposed use is permitted.

Mr. Lankford stated they always warned people about the building permit in these cases.

Mr. Welch asked about the purchase of the house. Dr. Stevens stated it was sold because the owner died and his wife moved in with his daughter. Mr. Welch asked if Dr. Stevens purchased the house specifically for the school. Dr. Stevens answered that he did.

Mr. Welch asked about alternative high schools and whether the prep school students could attend that instead. Dr. Stevens stated he does not take social deviants. He takes students who need individualized special attention. Mr. Welch asked if Dr. Stevens was accredited to award diplomas. Dr. Stevens answered that he was. He stated that 99.9% of his graduates have gone on to further their education. Mr. Welch asked where Dr. Stevens was located before. Dr. Stevens went over some of his previous school locations, including off of Capital, then Six Forks. Mr. Odom asked if the other locations were zoned commercial. Dr. Stevens answered that they were. Mr. Willis asked why he moved. Dr. Stevens answered that not owning the building caused some problems.

Dr. Stevens stated that he had been trying to meet with the Fire Marshal to have him come out and inspect him since he bought the residence. He stated he never tried to hide anything from the Fire Marshal when he met with him. He stated his home occupation status was in front of the Fire Marshal when Dr. Stevens met with him.

Mr. Willis asked about the existing home occupation being valid. Mr. Warren answered that it did seem that it is not a traditional home occupation and a permit may not have been issued if the testimony heard today was known. He stated that in some cases in the past, he has been the one to enforce the home occupancy requirement.

Dr. Stevens stated he did live at the residence. Mr. Willis stated that earlier Dr. Stevens had said that his primary address was not at this location. Dr. Stevens stated he did live there and met all the requirements for living there. He stated he was there 24 hours a day. Mr. Willis asked if he was there seven days a week. Dr. Stevens answered that he was. He stated his neighbors knew that. Mr. Willis stated that earlier Dr. Stevens had said that he goes to his other property. Dr. Stevens stated that he does visit his wife's property several days a week. Mr. Warren stated that the other property was listed in Dr. Steven's name, not his wife's name. He stated this really is a side issue. He stated the neighbors are not consulted about home occupations, although they may have a stand to contest the proper issuance of the home occupation.

Mr. Odom asked about the driveway access for fire trucks. There was some discussion on whether or not the parking pad could accommodate the cars parking and a fire truck behind. It was determined that additional pavement would probably be necessary to make the parking pad large enough. The impervious surface limits would then be more than they currently are.

Mr. Lee Squires from Wake County Environmental Services was properly sworn. He stated he would have to run the numbers to be able to tell the board if additional pavement would make the property go over the impervious surface limit. He spoke about the difference between stormwater management and impervious surface issues.

Dr. Stevens requested the board to continue the item until the calculations can be made.

Vice-Chairman Odom closed the public hearing.

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

The Board of Adjustment shall not approve a petition for a Special Use Permit unless it first reaches each of the following conclusions based on findings of fact supported by competent, substantial, and material evidence. The Board of Adjustment must make positive findings on the following findings of fact from Section 1-1-11 (C) of the Zoning Ordinance in order to approve or deny this special use request:

(1) The proposed development will not materially endanger the public health or safety.
(2) The proposed development will comply with all regulations and standards generally applicable within the zoning district and specifically applicable to the particular type of special use or class of special uses.

(3) The proposed development will not substantially injure the value of adjoining property, or is a public necessity.
(4) The proposed development will be in harmony with the area in which it is located.
(5) The proposed development will be consistent with the Wake County Land Use Plan.

Recommendation

Staff recommends that, if the Board of Adjustment reaches positive conclusions on all the required findings, that it approve the request subject to the following conditions: Motion

Ms. Sims made a motion that in the matter of BA SU-2036-05, the Board of Adjustment continue the Special Use permit until the December Board of Adjustment hearing until the impervious surface calculations are complete. Mr. Welch seconded the motion. All voting members voted aye. So ordered.

Item 6, New Business:

There was none.

Item 7, Old Business:

The board was updated on the status of past cases.



REGULAR MEETING
WAKE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
October 11, 2005

All petitions complete, Vice-Chairman Art Odom declared the regular meeting
of the Wake County Board of Adjustment for
Tuesday, October 11, 2005 adjourned at 11:43 a.m.

Respectfully Submitted:


Art Odom, Vice-Chairman
Wake County Board of Adjustment

AO/ak