Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

done a fair amount of these CTAs where we've changed uses and put them in different spots and but we haven't done really any land use plan changes really you know what I mean like to to kind of match those so which is fine then we just do amendments as they come in and that's fine I just part of the reason why we did that big land use plan amendment is we were trying to put a halt to the amendments so

I actually yeah I actually see this as as a positive thing in terms of trying to make the uses maybe line up better with what the intention of the land use plan is so that um That's a good example, but I I see that in other things too where if we have um you know need lower intensity or or the uses that are kind of have been there for a while, we're looking at them and saying, well, how does this actually work? And it's like this this probably isn't this use is not appropriate for that I mean for that zoning or for that land use.

And then um and then moving them basically I mean that's why you're moving the table around. you're saying that this th this you know especially like the convenience store and gas station you you broke it up because they were really two different functions um often combined but they they are two different functions and and which one's most intense is the gas station so um so I I see that as a positive thing and in fact you know as thinking about many of the the changes we made they have been more trying to um almost funnel everything to its appropriate place um because we started I think when we started the the whole LDO process we went pretty broad with some of these just so that we wouldn't leave anybody out or or to basically provide a lot of opportunity across the various zoning districts now now I think is probably as we're going through and fine-tuning to pick those apart and put the right uses in the right uh uh zoning districts and which and therefore the land use plan

as well. So yeah, um but it it is kind of disconcerting. It's like, well, I thought we had this, you know, we could have all of these uses in in this uh this land use and then when we move it, it will affect obviously some people that want to Oh, I was going to create a gas station in my backyard. Um but I can't know. Well, to that point, Jeez, that was that was emphatic. I can't hear you. Yeah. Yeah, I know. Excuse me. Uh to that point, when we were updating the land use plan in 2022, we know how quickly things have changed and how development trends have changed uh throughout Fugquway Arena in the south souththeast or southwest southwest southern Wake County, excuse me.

And so we're always reviewing the land use plan amendment. And at some point we'll do an across the board overview of the land use plan amendment. And then when that occurs, to your point, Andy, that is when we'll marry it up with the permitted use table to make sure that it's still relevant based on the current classifications in the land use plan. Yeah. I mean, I'm fine with land use plan amendments. I just No, but I mean sometimes it just it's a good point, but I mean this is that and my only other concern would be is like I said, I get real concerned. We throw we throw uses into one use, one zoning only. Those those kind of get a little bit. Is there opportunity for somebody to there's there's some opportunity for people to especially if we don't have enough land use plans designated that match with those zonings and we're not allowed to do land use plan amendments kind of thing that that that would be my link. Sure.

That was kind of the reason I brought it up. I don't I don't think land use plan amendments are that bad. Things change all the time. Well, and I think as before we were starting to get more and more land use plan amendments, I think that's almost a sign to staff that maybe we need to look at it, right? If if it's becoming a more current thing, then something has changed, right? I mean, it's hard to get it. The market changes daily. Yeah. Okay. Oh, any more questions or discussion? That's that's pretty good discussion. If not,

I'll make a motion. Um, move to recommend approval of CTA-2025-04 amendment number 30. An amendment to the town code of ordinance part 9 land development ordinance as presented and recommended by staff. The text amendment approves upon the land development ordinance and is reasonable and in the best interest for of the public for the reasons identified by staff. Second. Uh oh. Which one of you wants it? Rock, paper, scissors. All right. We'll give the motion to Nolan and the the second to Barbara. All right. Uh we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Everybody knows what we're voting on. All right. All in favor? I. All opposed? That motion carries. We will move to public hearing item 4B, REZ 2022-05202 Spence Farm Road. Further information provided by staff.

All right. Thank you again, Mr. Chair. Once again, I am submitting the agenda abstract and the supporting documents into the official record of the town. Second item before you tonight is RAZ 202505. It's a resoning requested by Madame Holmes at 5202 Spence Farm Road. It's pin number 0657360697. This resoning is a total of 19.78 acres from the residential agricultural zoning and the office and institutional conditional zoning districts to the PUD uh planned use devel planned unit development zoning district. have a master plan here tonight as well as some renderings. Uh staff recommends approval of the f of the proposed zoning map amendment as it is reasonable in the best interest of the public for the following reasons. Number one, the requested zoning district supports the land use plan policy 3.1 create a comprehensive connected and continuous network of green space. Two, the requested zoning district supports the land use plan policy 7.1, establish a discernable neighborhood structure. Three, the requested zoning district supports the land use plan policy 7.2, encourage transitional uses and intensities in and around project boundaries. And number four, the master plan and narrative included with the request to ensure the future use fits into the development context and demonstrates compliance with the zoning conditions offered and many goals of the 2040 land use plan. Um, our petitioner is here tonight and I am also available to answer any questions.

All right. Before we open the public hearing, anybody have any questions for staff? Seeing none, we will open the public hearing and I'll invite the applicant if they would like to come up and make an statement.

Good evening. Josh Cheney, Madame Holmes, 11,000 Regency Parkway. Um want to thank you guys for the opportunity to uh speak on this. This is a pretty good project. We're excited about smaller project for us. 47 homes um with um really reducing the density um to I think the allowable density is about six units acre. I think we're about 2 and a half 2.6 something like that. So, um just a good opportunity to be adjacent to the school. Um to really put a quality project. A lot of the conditions that we put within this um the um party siding, the elevated foundations and things like this will just really uh think will blend well into the community and and really a good-look project. We're excited about doing it.

Great. Thank you. Anybody have any questions for the applicant? I think we're good. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Does anybody wish to speak in favor? Eva, we have anybody signed up for a favor? Um, they didn't indicate that on this um signup sheet, but we do have Miss um Ashley Hails.

If you would just state your name and address and then tell us if you're in favor or opposition. Uh Ashley Hails uh 22 I'm 22000 Gateway Center Boulevard sweet 216 Morrisville, North Carolina 27560. Um I am the engineer with ESP Associates, a consultant for the project and available to answer any questions, but I'm here speaking in favor of the development. Great. Thank you. Evan, we have anybody else signed up? Um yes, Becca Boss. All right. Okay, I will do my best. My first time doing this. That's all right. Take your time.

I am at Becca's boss. I am at 5500 Spence Plantation Lane. So, we are ETJ right up the street in McKenzie. Um I guess my questions that I pose before approval would be um as we are developing that that road that is now ETJ area for way. I'm not opposed to development. However, we've had to do a lot of the work ourselves working with DOT in order to get things like speed reduced on the road, which has not actually helped. So, it has only gone from 55 to 45. And as we're increasing development on this very small two-lane road that is also twisty turnney, I would love if we were also having the city help figure out how to make that a safer transition. talking about adding a church literally across the street from our entrance. Talking about adding 40, whatever homes it was to the end of the street. Could we look at working with the DOT to lower the speed limit on that road to 35 so that it matched in town speeds? Could we look at adding stop signs along the way so it could stop being a cut through, which has only gotten worse ever since they've added the stop lights at Wilin and um Wade Nash. So it is only becoming a bigger cut through. So they each got stop lights and now in order to avoid that Spence plantation lane is becoming a let's go 65 miles an hour down this road. When you try to pull out of our neighborhood specifically and I can only speak for us. It is very dangerous because you can't see them coming and they aren't coming at 45 miles an hour and there's currently nothing stopping them from using it as a cut through. So, I would just ask the town to consider that as you're expanding development along that very tiny two-lane road where there are literally houses and driveways exiting onto that that we maybe reduce the speed limit, add some stop signs, sort of reduce the ability to make it like a fly through, but I wouldn't say I'm for or against it. I mean, I

understand development as part of it just for the current status if we could look at safety as how we're improving that pieces along the way. Right. Fair enough. Thank you. Thank you. Eva, we got anybody else signed up? Um, we have another gentleman with ESP Associates if they feel led to come. If not, okay, doesn't sound like they want to come up here. Okay, that's all we have. That's all we got. Is anybody else in? I think that's everybody that's out there, unless Josh wants to come up here and say something.

All right. Well, given that, I guess at this point, we we'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board for discussion. Um, I think it would be helpful to understand how that works out here when we get into these ETJ areas. What's DOT? What's the town and how does that work? I know that a lot of times the town typically has to request those speed limit reductions to DOT and see if they're we're at their mercy for it. Um, is that something you guys could speak on here? You are correct as far as the process, but that is something that we would look into. Absolutely. I think our neighborhood would be in full support. Sure. We have a great relationship with DOT and we'll we'll discuss it with them as soon as we can.

And I think you can also do requests for like site distance inspections and stuff like that. I know that that's happened at um uh I think it's Wagstaff and and Pine Grove. Yeah. Down there. That's that's a tough turn, too. And I think that they've had to come out there and do that as well. So,

and I agree with that. I mean, I feel like it's at least worth a study on that road. It's I drive that road quite a bit because it's kind of near my neighborhood. Sometimes getting out, it's a little easier that way. And I mean it is like a kind of a windy twisty road. You put more development on there and it's going to be more traffic and I mean it's worth a look at for sure. But I feel like it's one of those roads, you know, it's not a main corridor that people are traveling off. It's not like Lakesstone Village Commons or anything like that. So it's something that, you know, unless somebody brings it up, probably not something we're thinking about pretty often to to look at, but I think it's worth noting whenever we have development like this is probably. So is this likely to trigger a traffic impact analysis? It seems probably not.

Probably not. I was looking it was kind of like it's probably not going to get one. And then the other qu and so that that's you know our usual kind of fallback is well there'll be traffic impact analysis but there's not probably not in this case generally 100 lots is sort of the threshold for that because it's a 100 peak hour trips or this is a smaller one.

Um you can see so the CTP does have this as a both Spence Farm Road and Old Powell Road which they have a little bit of frontage on that corner. Um it's an 8.2.1 2.1 which is a two-lane road with sidewalks um and a 70 foot right ofway. So they will be dedicating along the the frontage there. They will be installing the curb gutter and sidewalk. Um and you can also see there they would be required to put a deceleration lane in like a right-hand turn lane into their neighborhood. Um which is going to help a little bit. I mean obviously they can only make improvements along their frontage

because that's the only thing they have control over. Yeah, look at look Spence Farm Road especially seems to be a pretty long road. I mean it's you know it would uh it I guess looking at the transportation plan might also be worthwhile to say is this is this um especially if there's more development planned along this uh what what should that look like? Maybe we should have you know maybe three-lane you know with the with turns or something like that. Um and they will be required to get a DOT driveway permit so they will have to go through DOT approvals. Yeah. Yes. Like I said, the TIA since it won't be done is like Okay. Well, but but again then and the transportation plan did not really anticipate

expansion of traffic along along this road because it's basically it's still what it is even, you know, that's still what it is, just adding sidewalks. I mean, that's not Yeah. We we don't really we don't really have like a discussion with with the audience.

Yeah. So, um, uh, so I think that's something that's worth at least from from the staff perspective to look at the, um, um, CTA and see see if there's something that maybe in the future we should probably flag for. And this probably isn't the only road like it. You know, we got, you know, they were they were all rural farms or, you know, large lot individual um, houses along the way. And then as those those get moved over into um into developments, even small ones like this long term, that'll have some impact. So

yeah, I mean one of the challenging aspects of this is we could we could say we think this should be a fourlane road or or have in the middle, but when this one comes through, they'll they'll do those frontage improvements, but the majority of this is already developed as either county subdivisions or county lots, right? And so it really won't make a difference. It may not change. Yeah. Yeah, I think it really is just going to fall upon petitioning DOT to lower that speed limit and making some sound arguments as to why it should be and getting them to because even a TIA wouldn't take care of that. I mean, it wouldn't it wouldn't justify they wouldn't do that. So, yeah. Well, like there isn't even a TIA required for this.

But the good news is generally when you install these curbs along these roads, it generally does slow people down a little bit more than when you just have a two-lane road. People tend to fly down those psychologically. People see curb and gutter and they think 35 even if it's not. But um yeah, I mean like it's a road where if you're going to old pal, it's rural, you know, you don't have necessarily the sidewalks there unless somebody's walking, you know, kind of on the side of the road, then maybe slow down. But like as you get more pedestrian, you know, stuff, people do tend to be a little more cautious. Yeah, I do like the the walkways and stuff in the plan as well. I think, you know, adds for a lot of pedestrian. It's a good looking plan.

Is this is this the old property that the school got reszoned? Oi, is that what this Okay. Wondering why it was an O and I sticking out in the middle of RA. That's what I thought it was. Okay. Same way. Any more questions, comments, concerns, motions?

I'll make a motion to approve um make sure I'm looking at the right one. recommend approval of RECC uh 20 uh 25-05, a zoning map amendment for 5202 Spence Farm Road from office and institutional conditional zoning district ONICZD and residential agricultural RA zoning district to the planned unit development PUD uh zoning district as it is reasonable and in the best interest of the public for the reasons identified by staff. Second. All right, we got a motion and a second. Motion by Ed, second by Nolan. All in favor? I I

All opposed. Motion carries. All right, that concludes our public hearing section for tonight. Planning staff report item 6A. Uh purpose of this agendum is to receive the information on the disposition of the planning board's recommendations to the town board of commissioners since the July 21st, 2025 planning board meeting. Uh didn't look like there was a whole lot there. Still batting a thousand as we always are. Seems like. Um with that, Barbara, it's your time to shine. Motion to adjourn. Second, Barbara and Jay. All in favor? I oppose. We are journed. Thank you.