Planning Board - Regular Meeting

e e e e

e e e e

e e e e

e e e just

e e e e

e e e ready yeah ready all all right at this time we'll call the March 17th 2025 planning board meeting to order we have forms so if everybody please stand for the pledge Al to the flag of the United States of America to stands indivisible andice all right we will move to item 2A approval of meeting minutes from the February 17th 2025 planning board meeting uh has everybody had a chance to

review them uh in this so if there any comments Corrections concerns or motions move that be approved as written second got a motion in a second any any further discussion before we vote all in favor all opposed motion passes all right we will move into the public hearing section of uh the agenda tonight and uh would ask anybody that's in the audience if you do plan to speak if you could sign up with Eva Eva is right here in the green and make sure that you sign in on the signin sheet and then when you get up please state your name and address for the record uh I will have to stop you Midway and ask you to do that all right move into item 4 a Rez 2024-25 12 it's a resoning requested by drb Group North Carolina llc at 501 509 and 517 Sunset Drive pins 0656 755 49 0656 75 9633 and pin 0656 75 6659 the resoning is a total of 17.21 Acres from the residential Agricultural and residential low density zoning districts to the town center residential zoning District the requested zoning district is consistent with the 2040 Community Vision land use plan designation of town center residential staff recommends approval of the proposed zoning M Amendment as it is reasonable and in the best interest of the public for the following reasons one the requested zoning map amendment is consisted with consistent with the 2040 Community Vision land use plan designation for of town center residential number two the requested zoning District supports infill development and reinvestment in downtown neighborhoods per the 2040 lup's

recommendation policy 2.1 encourage infill development and Redevelopment inside town limits number three the requ W ested zoning District support uh support Falls within the lup's tier 2 R infill investment area for the 240 lup's recommendation policy 4.1 manage future growth and development in accordance with the priority infrastructure investment areas map number four the requested zoning district is complimentary to the existing uses in the general vicinity of the subject properties and the proposed uses and site specific conditions effectively manage the future development of the site and number five the master plan and Associated narrative demonstrate compliance with the zon and conditions being offered and the goals of the Town Center residential classification as described in the 2040 land use plan you all have uh in front of you an email from a citizen Melissa green who sent that over she was unable to attend tonight but wished that her comments would be entered into the record as opposition I am available to answer any questions I believe the petitioner is here tonight and that's all I got good does anybody have any questions for staff before we open public hearing no thank you thank you all right this time we will uh open up the public hearing and we'll invite the petitioner to come up and make statement if they would like hi my name is Jackson McConnell with drb group 1101 Slater Road Durham North Carolina uh I'm with the developer for this I'm just here to answer any additional questions anyone might have about the project um really excited about this and thank you for having us here appreciate it thank you all right Eva do we have anybody wish that signed up to speak in favor of this um yes um they did not indicate in favor or opposed on the signin sheet but I will call them forward I hope I

pronounce it correctly if I don't please forgive me in advance Murray Hill hello I'm neither for nor against I just have concerns my name is m Hill I live at 215 Woodland Drive it's approximately 500 feet from the potential Northern entrance entrance of the drb development I learned about this resoning last week and about the developer itself uh once more information was finally posted online a few days ago since then I've reviewed publicly available data from sources like the BBB and online consumer review platforms these sources indicate a pattern of homeowner concerns related to drb homes including issues with postale service warranty fulfillment and several reported construction discrepancies W had a feature story in September of last year about issues at the company Sydney Creek development Zebulon all of this information is easily located online but I can send links to anyone who is interested this documented history of homeowner complaints combined with the development's proximity to multiple single family subdivisions raises significant concerns about the development's potential negative impact on surrounding property values especially in the long term what will these town homes look like in 10 years in 20 before the town moves forward to approve resoning I have three concerns I'd like to see addressed first that the

town consider Town Council delay a resoning decision until they investigate the de developers history of customer issues to consider the potential impacts on our community and its reputation as a quality place to live no one wants to see Fu featured on W as ulun was second to understand the potential risk to surrounding property values I request a detailed analysis comparing the historical impact of drb town home developments on surrounding property values with that of similar de developments by builders in comparable areas this should also indicate whether drb Town Homes maintain their value at the same rate as other development this data will help the town assess whether any potential negative value impact to surrounding homes is likely this zoning variance that the the developer is asking for should not be granted without absolute assurance that a highdensity development will enhance and not degrade the surrounding neighborhoods third given the development's location us on the connecting neighborhood streets is unavoidable I understand that that they are building additional streets to connect to Hill crest but that's not going to take care of all of the traffic I urge the town to proactively address this issue by requiring the developer to provide a comprehensive fully funded traffic management plan for later implementation for all streets connecting to their development to Major arter streets this plan must prioritize pesterian safety and include traffic calming and the addition of sidewalks were needed and should be a condition of zoning approval ma'am I'm going to ask you to please wrap up just so we we generally

limit comments to three minutes so that we can get everybody in okay I did ask today whether there would be a limit I just have one more thing go ahead I want you to be able to finish up I just want to make sure that you understand yes in closing the rezoning pro in closing I urge the planning board to make the resoning process more transparent by adopting notification gu guidelines similar to Raleigh's specifically Raleigh notifies residents within 500 ft for initial neighborhood resoning meetings and up to 1,000 ft in certain cases which this development would have met instead fway only requires notifying residents within 200 ft expanding notification distances would allow more residents to participate early on in the process instead of only days before a decision is made thank you thank you very much Eva do we have anybody else signed up we do not we do not has anybody in the audience that would like to speak in favor let's go with in favor at first uh not really seeing too much in favor then uh we'll go to the opposition are you in favor or opposition I am in favor and I am with the RB group and I would just and startor your name Mary excuse me sir I'm going to need you to speak to us okay so if you if you need to talk them after that that's fine I mean right now this just want I just wanted to make sure I got her name correct sure I recognize um you know some of the issues that she raised one of I guess a couple things I want to point out um looking at the plan on the screen there um one as I think Pam or uh your other staff representative pointed out this is a good planning with the transition of uses from the higher density apartments and the medical facility to the East and our proposed development buffering the

existing single family residential to the West as she pointed out this does complete a lot of these Transportation legs that are identified on your long range Transportation plan we are doing a I think a really good job of uh protecting the open space and natural areas the existing Pond that is there on the south side of the property we intend to retain in its natural state we've worked with both the homeowners associations that are on the west side of the property line there the downstream side of the dam actually extends onto those properties so we've worked out a long-term permanent maintenance and drainage easement where we can go in and maintain the back slope of that Dam and make sure that that pond is saved in perpetuity the other thing she mentioned uh was about the notification distance we not only notified the 200 ft uh requirement by town of fway but we also notified both homeowners associations of the adjacent properties and asked them to reach out to all their residents to try to come to any neighborhood meetings we offered two neighborhood meetings to try to um allow people if they had a conflict on one night to come to the second so I just wanted to um clarify some of the things that we've done and certainly understand her concerns but um we're here we we want to be good partners with the town of fway Verina and hopefully if if you have any additional questions we're here to answer them okay could you please state your name and address my name is Adam ashpa I'm with drb group 1101 Slater Road Durham thank you right all right one more chance for anybody in favor all right Switching gears anybody wish to speak in opposition that didn't sign up yet all right seeing none uh we will close the close the public hearing and bring

it back to the board um for discussion and questions to to staff I have a quick question the um neighborhood meeting um the the required format does it does it normally require there to be an attendance list um because I did not see one in this neighborhood meeting report like who who attended e either from the developer side or or from the community side is I don't know if it's required or not i' I've just been used to seeing it in in most of the neighborhood um meeting reports that we've gotten now of course this is on the developer to provide this but um I just want to make sure I understand if that's a requirement or not um it you're right it is generally included right um we don't have a list of exactly what needs to be a structure but okay so so so there's not like a checklist of include this include that include all right so yeah because that was kind of other neighborhood meetings have included that kind of uh we had these participants and um that kind of made it at least clear to us that there was either some engagement or no no engagement from uh you know because we've seen them where they've had them and there's been no attendance um so all right that's um the only question I had on that does anybody else have any questions for staff I've got a couple of them um and in looking at this plan right in front of us Pam it looks like they are providing like connection to what four stub streets one of the CTP showed like a street coming down on the east side of the um the hospital there on Ransom Street and it doesn't look like we're doing that connection which just some some clarity for the board as to why what what's driving that is is that coming off the CTP and this is just we're just kind of in the midst of because I know we're revising things is that what that's going on so this was one that the engineering director was involved in releasing them from that connection based on the fact that that dead ends into a parking lot right now so that's not real realist

there will be a CTP update coming up very shortly in next couple months um but with that said um there was also an exmple that over a 100 Lots you do need to have at least one primary entrance onto a type eight Road or larger um as an infill project sunet drive is not a type eight and there is no type eight roads adjacent to this um so as a tradeoff the engineering director did exempt from that requirement um but as a balance we are requiring and they agreed to construct um Hill crust over on the south entrance there there's a section of it not only will they do it to their property line let me go back to the master plan um you can see it in the bottom of this but there is a section of existing RightWay that does not actually contain a road today um so they will actually be connecting that creating you know one more access point to disperse traffic and and you said there's hund and how many Lots on this proposed 11 111 would would would that trigger a TIA at some point in this process um most likely the the Tia is a 100 peak hour a th daily average trips so um that would be with a preliminary subdivision right okay and if if it didn't then they'd have to supply a trip generation letter that justified why they didn't trigger the the analysis right and I just want to clarify for the folks out in the audience and uh listening to us online TI traffic analysis um we throw the acronyms around but I just want to make sure everyone understands what we're talking about so every preliminary subdivision is going to submit either a trip generation letter justifying why they don't trigger a traffic impact analysis or the traffic impact analysis and then any improvements would be on the developer to to provide even if it was offsite right so improvements are based on both CTP required and anything identified by

the traffic impact analysis gotcha so I have a question on that um on that Ransom Street um connection there if I look at the RightWay we it looks like the town has not procured the right away from West Ransom go going down to Hill crest um it's only kind of partial uh so is that was that one of the reasonings for not doing that um yes and if you look um the Aerials in that top corner you can see it's it's just a private parking lot yeah yeah I'm actually familiar with that facility and but I guess the question is that it looks like we never actually kind of carved out the right of way to actually make that happen so um somebody would actually have to give something up in order for us to do that although we did manage to get a little chunk there for a right of way but uh that's pretty useless um I would also suggest that it might be worth the town looking at um maybe uh returning that to um which whe whether it's to the uh to the medical facility or or whatever because if we're not going to build it and not going to use it um as part of you know we could return that to somebody that can actually use it any more questions for the I also state that there's actually five connections now five where do you count five I count I if you look at the master plan um master plan okay I see what you're saying yeah yeah there's actually five five you know ways in and out of this uh of this community uh and of course it it does actually um connect in complete in a throughway um existing downtown streets um so I I that was a real to me that's um it's going to be a positive thing for um you know kind of the general connectivity and traffic flow especially as we're looking at

walkable Community within the Jud Parkway this would be be a piece of it so yeah but I would also like to address that um we as the planning board we we approve we review and make recommendations to our town board on on uses not necessarily who the users are so um while those comments are uh you know they're informative but they're not something that we can take into consideration when we review a zoning case we're really looking at this as does the zoning comply with our standards and and our criteria that we've set forth in our land use plan not not who end users are um not really allowed to do those things um so no more discussion we entertain a motion if anybody's willing to do that or if there's any more questions I move we recommend approval of Rez 202 24-11 a zoning map Amendment for four or for 501 509 517 Sunset Drive from residential agricultural ra and residential low density rld zoning districts to the town center residential TCR zoning District as it is reasonable and in the best interest of the public for the reasons identified by staff so we have a motion on the table do we have a second we have a second so is there any further discussion what needed or questions need to be answered before we vote everybody understands what we're voting on all right all in favor I all opposed motion carries we will move on to item 4 B Rez 202 24-19 further information provided by staff all righty thank you Mr chair once again I submitting the agenda abstract and supporting documents into the official record of the Town second it item before you tonight is Rez 20249 it is a resoning requested by Mr Steve Hamilton at 994 West Academy Street pins 0656 3602 83 and 0656 26

9149 this rezoning is a total of 1.23 3 acres from the residential loow density zoning District to The General commercial conditional zoning district there is also a land use plan Amendment request included with this resoning from the single family neighborhood and open space classifications to the Suburban commercial and open space classifications staff recommends approval of the proposed zoning map Amendment and corresponding land use plan Amendment as they are reasonable and in the best interest of the public for the following reasons number one although the requested zoning map amendment is not consistent with the 20 240 Community Vision land use plan classification of single family neighborhood and open space the petitioner has opted to request a change of the land use plan to Suburban commercial and open space which is compatible with the property's existing use number two the requested zoning District supports the lup's policy uh encourage infill development and Redevelopment inside town limits number three the requested zoning District supports the Lup policy 2.6 encourage commercial development number four the requested zoning District supports the lup's policy 4.1 manage future growth and development in accordance with the priority infrastructure investment areas map and number five the proposed conditions offered as part of the petition align with the goals of the 2040 land use plan and effectively plan for the site's future development potential um petitioners here tonight and I am also available to answer any questions all right thank you anybody have any questions for staff all right sounds like we're good thank you thank you all right at this time we'll open the public hearing and give the petitioner an opportunity to speak good evening Mr chair members of the board my name is John Adcock of the adock law firm at 202 East Academy Street I'm here on behalf of the petitioner um this resoning is about

Hamilton Auto uh it's a business that's been located in F aren since around 1957 um these Parcels are the two Parcels that are being requested to be resoled are are parts of the business that are used as part of the business now 9004 West Academy uh has the garage that was built around in 1968 um and my clients just want to have this property Zone consistently uh as it is all consistently used with part of the business and also uh the property 900 West Academy um is mostly an unusable lot uh has significant environmental uh sensitive features associated with it including a a 100-year flood it's got a flood way actually a themea flood way um as well as a 100 year year flood zone and a 500e flood zone and those areas are identified as open space on the U land use plan and that's going to remain the same so be glad to answer any questions if the board has any anybody have any questions from Mr acock looks like we're good thank you thank you all right at this time we'll go through the anybody that has signed up that wish to speak in favor of the zoning case Eva we have anybody we do not okay anybody wish to speak in opposition we have anybody signed up Eva no no is anybody in the audience that did not sign up that wishes to speak either in opposition or in favor of seeing none we'll close the public hearing and bring the bring it table back to the discussion for the board I think this is kind of one we almost may have whiffed on the land use plan on this one for a little bit on um it was just an oversight yeah I mean it happens it's such a it's such a there's so many properties it's just and we're um we will be bringing a CTP and Lup update shortly in the next couple months um and this is one of those that will'll will adjust the and and so that's why the Hamilton's the his the real sight of the auto place is not included in this because we'll make that correction gotcha um I'll make a motion ready I

think that's awesome um M would recommend approval of Rez 202 24-19 a zoning map Amendment for 90094 West Academy Street from the residential low density zoning District to The General commercial conditional zoning district and corresponding lany's plan Amendment from the single family neighborhood and open space classification to the Suburban commercial and open space classifications as is reasonable and in the best interest of the public of the public for the reasons identified by staff second all right I didn't get a chance to ask all right Motion in a second any other further discussion before we vote all right everybody for voting on all in favor I all opposed motion carries all right we'll move on to item 4C Rez 202 24-21 zoning map Amendment 304 East Broad Street pin 06 6701 2564 where's requested to be tabled at the request of the petitioner to the April 21st 2025 PL board meeting I'll entertain a motion we're going we'll open the public hearing first open my talk you did not say to open all right we will open the public hearing and now entertain a motion so move the motion will be to continue the public hearing to the April 2st 21st and table consideration you want to make that motion yeah Mo okay all right got a motion got a second second all right all in favor I all opposed and motion carries said it so well repeat it you know all right public hearing item 4D Rez 20251 further information provided by staff all righty thank you Mr chair once again I am submitting the agenda abstract and supporting documents into the official record of the Town fourth item before you tonight is Raz 20251 a resoning requested by Wayne Malden of malen Watkins surveying PA at 629 West Academy Street pin number 0656 56

3866 this resoning is a total of 1.44 Acres from the residential Agricultural and residential low density zoning districts to the neighborhood commercial conditional zoning District staff recommends approval of the proposed zoning map Amendment as it is reasonable and in the best interest of the public for the following reasons number one requested zoning map amendment is consistent with the 2040 Community Vision land use plan for uh neighborhood commercial designation number two the requested zoning District supports the lup's policy 2.1 encourage infill development and Redevelopment inside town limits number three the requested zoning District supports the lup's policy 2.6 encourage commercial development number four the requested zoning District supports the lup's policy 4.1 manage future growth and development in accordance with the priority infrastructure investment areas map and number five the prop osed conditions offered as part of the petition align with the goals of the 2040 land use plan and effectively planned for the site's future development potential petitioners here tonight and I am also here to answer any questions thank you any questions for staff all right I think we're good thank you at this time we will open the public hearing and let the petitioner come up and make statement good evening chairman board members Wayne Malden Malden W survey and it one 139 North Main Street I'm here tonight on behalf of uh Mr Klein most of you know this s's located at the intersection Highway 42 and Jud Parkway which is fast becoming a major intersection circling town uh it's not really lending itself to a residential use uh Mr Klein is like myself is getting on up there and looking to relocate and uh just trying to get this sold as the use for this site at its location if any of you have any

questions I'd be glad to try to answer anybody got any questions for Mr molden I think we're good thank you thank you Eva we got anybody signed up to speak in favor of this one we do not have anybody signed to speak in opposition no does anybody in the audience wish to speak in favor of opposition that did not sign up seeing none we will close the public hearing and bring it back to the board for discussion this is the uh the house with all the cool Christmas lights for need a condition to add the Christmas lights keep up with it yeah I'll make a motion all right I'll make a motion to recommend approval of RZ 20251 a zoning map Amendment for 629 West Academy Street from residential Agriculture and residential low density zoning districts to the neighborhood commercial conditional zoning District as it is reasonable and the best interest in the public for the reasons identified by staff second all right we have a motion and a second any other discussion points or questions before we vote everybody the voting on all right all in favor all opposed motion carries I believe we have one more public hearing public hearing item 4E CTA 2025-the tonight all right uh once again I am submitting the agenda abstract and supporting documents into the official record of town uh this final public hearing before you tonight is the first text amendment of 2025 CTA 20251 is the text Amendment to the Land Development ordinance requested by Town staff I'm going to go over sort of a highlight reel of um the most impactful items but if anybody has any questions as to those or any other items just let me know first one is an allowance for a place of worship to have a parsonage on

site as an accessory use uh second is a clean up and standardization of the townhouse setback standards across zoning districts including the TCR and the Pud zoning districts we have expanded uh the expanded minor allowance that was recently added as a development option has been renamed the exempt major as it's more app description gives you a better idea of what you're actually getting into with that uh the responsibility for approval of Charities has been given to the town manager or design as they assign them article L our sign article has G uh undergone a minor rewrite um just reorganization and trying to streamline some things in there um and certifications for acceptance of the dedication of rightaway via minor and exempt plats have been added in response to some changes made to wake County's Recreation requirements so those are the highlights again it was a pretty long Amendment so if you guys have any questions we're here to answer those um but I'll give you our recommendation and then we can chat as necessary staff recommend approval of the proposed town code Amendment it is reasonable and in the best in the Public's best interest as it improves upon the Land Development or Land Development ordinances intent to modernize provide sustainability and allow for ease of use and enforcement concerning the town standards all right we have any questions for L of I have just a quick question on the um on the sign changes they look to all be in my View kind of cosmetic it was renaming and readjusting I didn't see any actual like changes in how we were doing signs yeah there's the categories the buckets of signs that we have different categories have never been very straightforward and so the attempt was to organize those a little bit better for ease of use right so so we really aren't changing how we do signs or anything like that we're just changing how we name them or how we group them together and and our code

enforcement officials really took a good hard look at the sign amendment and between them and Pam and everybody we kind of this hasn't been updated since like pre 20107 so the terminology we were using did not match a lot of the sign companies right words nowadays it didn't even match it time we were putting them in but it was like because we act these were inherited from the previous ordinance so in terms of the the naming so I just wanted to make sure I wasn't you know when I see something like that I just want to make sure I'm not missing that we're okay now you know we're allowing Billboards in or something ridiculous like you know just I want to make sure that that it this uh this amendment for on the sign specifically was really just about recategorizing reorganizing relabeling and that sort of thing um so it was a a shuffle but not a not any because I didn't see any but I wanted to validate that thank you correct no problem any any more questions for staff on the CTA minute I think we're good all righty thank you all right all right at this time we'll open up the public hearing Eva we got anybody signed up no we we have nobody okay then figured that was going to be a huge po real popular one but all right so anybody in the audience that didn't sign it that wishes to speak in favor or opposition all right this time we'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board for discussion or motions I'll make a motion ready I think we're ready any questions for staff I thought I think we're ready all right I'll make a motion to recommend approval of CTA 20251 amendment number 29 an amendment to the town code of ordinances part nine Land Development ordinance as presented and recommended by staff all right we have a motion we have a second and a second all right before we take a vote everybody know they voting on any last minute questions all in favor I I

all opposed motion curious we are finally done with public hearings for the night so we will move into other business 5A preliminary Subdivision plat spring valve South subdivision sub PR 20247 further information provided by staff oh we get a new one I am not Alyssa Holman and the irony that I am the only thing standing between us and supper is not lost on me oh the proposed Subdivision plat you have before you tonight is sub PR 20247 titled Springville South subdivision is located at 37 99 well Fleet drive on just over 10 acres in the Resident residential medium District zoning District the uh plat proposes 22 single family detached Lots with an average lot size of 12,179 square ft uh the subdivision does not require open space however 2.59 Acres or a little over a quarter of the overall project is proposed as open space at this time um Spring bille South is proposing an extension of the existing well Fleet stub well Fleet Drive St stub will Pro and then that's how it will provide vehicular access to the project area there will also be a proposed cross street um that will be stubbed at the Eastern project boundary um to provide the required future connection through the adjacent parcel that sits between the subject parcel and the and the ultimate kbec Road rideway um no traffic data is available since the well Fleet Drive is a town maintained residential street um public water and sewers is available via um spring Veil subdivision to the north and will be EXT Ed by the developer uh the proposed preliminary Subdivision plat meets all towns Town requirements and management staff recommend approval if you have any questions I'd be happy to answer got any questions for Josh I think we're

good any other questions for staff or clarification or motions I'll make a motion uh recommend approval of the Springville South Subdivision plat sub PR 20247 is presented and recommended we have a motion and a second all in favor I I all opposed motion carries all right move on to administrative reports purpose of this agenda item is to receive information on the disposition of the planing board's recommendations to the town Board of Commissioners on since the February 17th 2025 planning board meeting anybody see anything interesting in that one we still bat in a thousand I was at that meeting so all right with that being said Barbara I think it's your time to shine motion to adjourn second got a motion in a second all in favor I I