That's what I think that's interesting.

So is this the one thing we want to do?

This is the one that's all that is the ad well.

This I just throw to where this is the road.

This is probably at least uh protection block.

So they're gonna continue just drive right here.

There's already a road.

Yeah.

So they're gonna stick to that road and then we're gonna be fine or eight.

We would like something like a lot of this.

Uh if this is what they want to stick to, I'll say right here.

I haven't made my topics.

Was there even a problem?

No, I'm not a few.

I can see that one.

I don't think that's right now.

That's about variance changes.

And something around there is that part of the circle.

Um I don't know that there are many places that have that much.

I'm gonna call the uh design adjustment committee to order.

Um the design adjustment I gotta read uh an introduction before we get started.

The design adjustment committee's purpose is to establish clear and measurable review criteria for the consideration of major deviations from the city's technical standards and specifications manual.

The design adjustment committee does not consider housing type, cost of the proposed unit, occupants, building material, unit size, number of bedrooms, or the architectural design of the structures.

These hearings are quasi-judicial evidentiary hearings.

That means it's like a court hearing, and the committee's decisions are constrained by the standards in the ordinance and based on the facts presented.

All variance requests require four-fifths vote of the committee.

Appeals of the committee decisions are to Superior Court.

The parties to these cases are entitled to an impartial board.

If a board member has a fixed opinion on the matter, a financial interest in the outcome, a close relationship with an affected person, or has had any ex parte communication about the matter, please disclose that information to determine if a recusal is necessary.

Because witnesses are to provide sworn testimony.

If I could please have staff applicants and anyone in the audience who wishes to speak this afternoon to please stand up and be sworn in.

It's currently zoned urban mixed use legacy district.

On September 16th of 2020, the now defunct uh subdivision review board approved a preliminary plan for a three-lock commercial subdivision that included the construction of private streets and utility extensions.

There were a number of adjustments and waivers were approved as part of that process, and they remain in effect.

The approved preliminary plan.

Sorry, the approved preliminary plan includes three new streets that would connect to Wright Sill Avenue to the north and two locations that connect the pergola terrace to the south at an existing private street stub.

The applicant proposes to modify this plan to adjust the street layout and modify the street cross sections that were approved.

Access to the site will be provided by a public collector street, which would connect to Wrightsville Avenue to the north at two locations, and a private drive access easement, which would serve as a central entrance to the site off of Wrightsville Avenue.

There's also one street connection provided to the existing private stub street to the south Pergolette Terrace.

A traffic impact analysis is currently under review for this project.

There are a number of waivers that would need to be modified to account for the changes that are being proposed.

There will be a waiver from the minimum horizontal curve radius on a collector street, a waiver from the 35-foot radius of a roadway edge at the corners, a waiver from the minimum right-of-way width for a collector street, a waiver from the minimum tangent link between horizontal curves, and a waiver from providing the 10-foot wide non-emmissible easements along both sides of the right-of-way.

That concludes staff's presentation.

I'd be happy to have any questions you have, and the applicant is here to answer any questions as well.

I do have slides that kind of outline the previously approved waivers.

If you have questions about which ones were approved, which ones still apply, which ones are being modified, we can get into that.

I just wanted to keep this simple at the outset.

No, I appreciate that.

I noticed that in the staff report on page two.

You look like there was some pretty good summary on what modifications we have to consider, what are no longer necessary, and then what I guess are still valid.

There's three of them.

It looks like that there's now I have slides that correspond with those three if we need to get into any more detail and answer questions of those if the board the committee um would like to do that.

Okay.

Anyone have any questions for Brian?

Thanks.

Okay.

Does the applicant wish to speak on this?

Good afternoon.

My name is John Tunstall, Norris Tunstoel, uh Consulting Engineers, and uh we are bringing before you the Haven at Galleria project, as Brian mentioned.

It was previously submitted and approved uh back in September of 2020 through the SRB, and it uh contained 12 waivers or variances to the technical um standards.