Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Welcome to the May 20th meeting of the Georgetown Planning Commission. I call the meeting to order. The first order of business on the agenda is the acknowledgement of Ira Roach being reappointed to the commission. So welcome back, Ira. And then we're supposed to select new chairs, vice chairs this evening. However, we have noticed that Mr. Briggs will be exiting the committee after this meeting. So I would recommend that we postpone that activity until his replacements. So commissioners, I'm open to that idea. I'll take a motion to table number two.

Second.

Want a motion? Yeah. Okay, I make a motion that we postpone this.

Second.

There we go. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Motion carried. Our next order of business is approval of minutes from April 22nd, 2026. Any corrections or questions? If not, is there a motion to approve?

I'll make a motion to approve.

Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Motion and a second. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? Motion carried. We've been informed that the attorney for item number four is held up over the county council at the moment, so we're going to With that request on hold for the moment and move on to request number five, which is case number 2024-15-02, Village of College Park, an application by Larson Engineering on behalf of College Park Apartments LLC, the Onyx Group. to amend a prior approval of a waiver of required landscape buffering properties located at 506 to 542 union drive and 556 to 582 west drive zone multifamily residential with a residential plan community superimposed

How are we doing? Good. Good. Mark told me to talk slowly. So, okay. My name's Doug Liberman with Larson Engineering, here representing the property owner, College Park Apartments, LLC, for a variance in the landscape buffer for the Village Ecology Park. Project is quickly coming to a close out there, if anybody's driven out through there. All the apartments are up. I think our last CO on our apartment building is coming up in July. And the single family houses over there, they should be finished up this year also. So we're working towards finishing up the punch list items for the site and the construction plans. And the landscaping is one of the last issues come up to be completed just because you got to have everything stabilized before you start doing doing your landscaping so um we'll do oh look at that here we go all right so um i think everybody's familiar this is the site here village college park is this whole forest in blue it came through in 2019 uh as a uh RPC application with the MR1 zoning. We did the apartments We've got Walmart, zoned HC right here, and we've got First Baptist Church right here, recently been rezoned, also zoned HC, and recently rezoned to MR2. And that's kind of the crux of what we wanted to discuss today. When the project originally came through in 2019,

This portion, this whole property line along here was zoned H-C.

It required a buffer yard four. And we got a variance for a decreased buffer at that point by providing a six-foot fence and some shrubs along that property line. Now, seven years later, we are adjoining MR2 zoning. and based off of the chart within the development design standards, the buffer goes from a buffer four to none required. So along this property line, we would like to eliminate the fence and the shrubbery that's proposed to be planted in there. We still have a 10-foot buffer between through here with other landscaping, which we have shown here. So we're talking about all up along the top portion of the original plan. And then if we go back

there all the way over.

There was a fence, six-foot white vinyl fence, and those shrub plantings, which are 10 shrubs per 100 feet down through there. So we just wanted to eliminate those at this point. It's just a maintenance issue long-term, and then the fence really isn't doing anything and not required for the current buffer between zones. So we wanted to eliminate that. The next thing we wanted to look at is along this property line between Walmart and the site. We have a similar situation where we did a six-foot fence and shrubs. And on paper it looks like, okay, we comply with what we were asked to do in that situation. But if you look, we've got garages back here and we've got, I think it's 20 feet or so, and then we've got a fence and the shrubs. So the shrubs, we end up with shrubs between the fence and the back of the garages. So it really, it looks good on paper, but when you get out there, you end up seeing this. So the fence that we're talking about would end up running along this whole stretch. And the impact we would get is that this fence right here is the fence that's around the trash dumpster enclosures.

We have fences there around trash enclosures and here around trash enclosures.

All you would end up seeing from the Walmart side

or, more importantly, from the side as we're coming in College Park Lane, looking this way, you come in this way, which is near the Walmart, what you see is this back portion of the site.

You end up seeing the end of the buildings and you'd see a white fence going down through there. So what we are proposing to do, And this is kind of the one that kind of stands out to us as to what it ends up looking like is we would like to replace or remove the fence and we've got a mix of 24 trees that would replace the fence along there so you'd have a natural buffer. along that property line, and there's a mix of tall trees, understory plantings, and some evergreens through there. The mix of trees are honey locust, willow oak, red maple, and river birch trees. And then the understory trees are the Sweet Bay Magnolia, Serviceberry, and Redbud. Redbud and then our Arborvitae, our Red Cedar, Eastern Arborvitae, American Holly, and Southern Magnolias down through there. So you'll always have some color in that, along that property line. And I think it'll provide a much more natural, much more better looking, buffer and presentation to the community instead of just having the same white fence stretched all the way down along there. In reality, when you look at these, these These two pictures, this picture and this picture, are taken essentially 170 feet apart from the back of the Walmart looking over to the Village College Park and then from Village College Park looking over to Walmart. It's not like these things are like right on top of each other. Just because of the stormwater pond just provides a huge natural buffer that goes down through there. So in this case, the fence doesn't really serve anything. It won't be as attractive as the trees. That's better. And we're just not asking to take something away and not provide something. So we're going to be providing additional trees to make something that looks a lot better. So that's the nature of our request along two property lines. We highlighted in red up top Fencing would be removed down through there.

And then it continues along the back of here.

And then the fencing just being removed and the trees added. And we did maintain the rest of the shrubs through there. So the 10 shrubs per 100 feet are maintained.

Those are the little circles. And then the larger circles are the taller trees.

and a mix of understory plantings throughout there. So if you have any questions. Any questions from the commission?

I just want to say I think that's a much improvement on that white fence. Yeah, yeah.

Thank you. Thank you. And again, when we went back, you know, this is kind of. Yeah. Once we have greenery grown over there, I think it'll look better than just having the fence.

Ready to make a motion.

If there are no other questions, yeah.

Ready for a motion?

Sure. I'd like to make a motion to approve the amendment to the previously approved waiver of the landscape buffer requirement to permit alternative planning plan, the alternative planting plan as presented by applicant's submission.

I've got a motion. Is there a second?

Second for same reasons.

OK. Motion to second, we'll take a roll call vote. Commissioner Briggs?

Yes.

Commissioner Allen? Yes. Commissioner Roach? Yes. Commissioner LaKate? Yes. And I'm a yes as well. I think it will improve the property. All right.

Thank you very much.

Sorry.

All right, so moving back up to the agenda. Item number four is public hearing, case number 2024-14, James Place. It's a rezone application for RPC, Residential Planning Community, and a review and approval of a RPC concept plan. an application by James Grant and Jordan Ashburn requesting one, an amendment to the Town of Georgetown's official zoning map for one parcel totaling 21.92 acres from UR1 to RPC superimposed over UR1 and two, the review and approval of the RPC concept plan for 97 units subdivision single-family detached semi-detached and attached dwellings properties located on the northeast side of North Bedford Street extended at the intersection of 40 Street I have to recuse myself as I do business with Jordan

Good evening. For the record, my name is Mark Davis. I'm a principal land planner with Pannonia Associates located just outside of Georgetown here. We were going to be represented tonight by Mr. David Hutt of Morris James, but he is currently, I'll keep an eye on this window over here, but he's currently across the circle here at another public hearing before planning and zoning over there. So I'm going to do, I'm going to go ahead and go through the project and go through what we're requesting this evening for this particular property. I'm here representing Bedford Holdings LLC. The two managing members are Mr. James Grant and Mr. Jordan Ashburn. They're here this evening as well, and they can answer questions on the project as well. Also with me is a professional engineer from Pannoni Associates, Mr. Alan Decker. He's been inspirational in this entire project in preparing the plans, documents, submitting these concept plans. He's also been working with all the various agencies, DelDOT, Sussex Conservation District, the fire marshal's office, as well as the town of Georgetown when it comes to water and sewer and the roads. So he's here to answer any questions that you might have as well. James Place is a proposed mixed-use residential dwelling development on 21.92 acres. It's currently zoned UR1, which is your urban residential district. And so what we're proposing is an RPC, which is to be superimposed over the UR1 district to allow coordinated neighborhood design with a mix of housing types and preserved open space. The project proposes 96 total dwelling units consisting of 51 single-family detached dwellings, 26 duplex twin units, and 19 townhouse units. The site is currently vacant and partially wooded and will be served by public water and sewer by the town of Georgetown. The site is located, as you can see on this map here, the site is located on the east side of North Bedford Street Extended. It is adjacent to Carriage Place on the north side of Georgetown and it's just immediately south of the North Georgetown Elementary. It's a few parcels south of that elementary school. just to go through some contextual stuff here if you recall back in and for those that weren't here during that hearing august back in august 21st 2024 we came before the planning commission and asked for a minor variation to change the future land use map from residential to mixed residential And on September 4, 2024, the Office of State Planning issued a concurrence letter confirming that the Planning Commission's approval of the town's consideration met the requirements for minor variation to change your comprehensive plan so that this parcel is now under your future land use map is earmarked for mixed residential. Under mixed residential, two zoning districts are allowed under your comprehensive plan. It's the residential plan community district and the, if I get this right, it's the retirement residential plan community. So you have the RPC and then you have the RRPC. Those are the two zoning districts that are allowed to fall within the future land use map designated, under your future land use map that are allowed to be retained on this particular piece of property so with the ur1 is the underlying zoning district we're asking for this rpc to become the overlay with that with that residential district so under your code the rpc is you know encourages and permits a variation in residential development by allowing a deviation in lot size, bulk requirements, and type of dwellings. So it allows for design ingenuity. It allows for flexibility in our design. But what the RPC code does state that we have to have, we have to have three mixes of uh housing types and that's what you see here on this particular map here and again all this stuff that i'm going to go through i'm going to go through briefly but i'm not going to hit you up too hard because it is in the record i saw that it was in the packet it's all been documented very well so it is all on the record for you but i'll go through as you come in off of north becker street here you will come in through the entrance here it's a sole entrance within the site we tried to take these units and we tried to buffer them away from the road so We're going to try, as you can see here, this existing wooded part in here, we're going to try to maintain as much of that as possible, bringing the development into the site and taking it out of that visual corridor of Beffer Street. So in the front here, in the yellow, as you can see, those are all single-family detached dwelling units within the property here. And then there's 51 of those single-family detached dwellings. Then as you navigate back within the site there, you see the orange color ones, those are the twin duplexes that are being proposed. And there's 26 of those.

And then in the very back, and we are buffered up against the existing railway track. So in the back there, what we try to do is replace those townhouse units back there.

It's a much, you know, being a little bit taller unit and everything, kind of give that bit, that buffer away from those railway tracks. And then we tried to buffer it away from, and I'll go through the landscaping part of this and the requirements that we met with open space and everything else. But that's what we've tried to do here. We've been able to layer this subdivision back. We're providing these three housing types, and that's important because it provides a variation, it provides variety, and it provides a level of affordability. So there's three different price points here, although those price points haven't been factored out yet, but there's three price points here. And I think in your packet you'll see that you received a letter from Habitat for Humanity. They're going to be a part of this project. They're going to bring the affordability part as well as what these gentlemen do. They're going to provide affordability within this development. But with a design flair that's going to allow, that's why the RPC was asked for. We wanted that ingenuity. We wanted that flexibility to be able to provide a superior project on this side of town and on this piece of property here. But they are teaming up with Habitat for Humanity for a certain amount of units that they'll be able to come in here and be able to provide their clientele as the project progresses. We have provided for interconnectivity, the carriage place next door. However, there is a little bit of a niche with that. There is this piece of property back here. It's not within the town limits. There's four acres back there. It's in Sussex County. They have a 12-foot stem coming all the way down to here. which doesn't provide us with an ability to be able to actually connect a road here. So what we're proffering up is we're going to dedicate a 50-foot right-of-way to the property. We've shown it lined up exactly. We've been out there and we've surveyed that. We're going to line that up exactly so that someday if that 12-foot is ever acquired or ever dedicated or a road can be... connected here to provide interconnectivity which is what i think the town likes to promote in their designs so that will be that will be done we've also provided up above here as you can see on the road up there, which we're calling Y Lane right now. You can see where the easements have been extended to this four acre piece. So if they ever did want to come in and want to annex in, they have an ability to connect to a town street in the future. And the same on the north side. There is an easement that's extended to that property line with the road going close to that property line there. That way, the property to the north of us can also tie in and that interconnectivity within town streets can occur. So as I stated, the property does have frontage along North Bedford Street and will take access from the North Bedford Street. The existing roadway along North Bedford Street frontage consists of two 11 foot lanes with two foot shoulders on each side. The asphalt pavement based on what we've been able to come up with the paving is in good shape but here's the thing north bedford will be upgraded so we're going to upgrade as a part of this project we're going to upgrade this to two 11 foot wide through lanes a five foot wide bike lane 10 foot wide right turn lane into the site and 11 foot wide left turn lane into the site and six foot wide shoulders on each side So all those improvements will follow DelDOT requirements because DelDOT maintains, owns and maintains this roadway. And we've showed that on this concept plan. So you can see how the left turn lane comes into the site. You can see where the shoulders are. This small patch of stripy here, that's the bike lane. The shoulders will be six foot wide. But this pavement width here is going to be expanded to provide for safe access ingress and egress out of the site. So again, dedicated left turn lanes, a dedicated right turn lane coming into the site. And that way it will help with traffic control as folks are entering or exiting the site. It will also help with being able to control and provide for more safety measures along Becker Street. So we've submitted the ability to serve letters to all the utility companies, which is required under the RPC requirements for concept plan approval. Those utilities was the Delmarva Power for electric, Verizon, and Comcast. We submitted to the Georgetown Fire Department and to the police department, as well as station number 77, which is your ambulance EMS. I do want to state that during the request for changing the future land use map, the applicants have proffered up and I'm hoping I can get I'm going to try to explain this and get this right. They're going to proffer up on a per unit basis. So there's so what we have here is we have 96 total units here. So for every year through the Homeowners Association, each unit will donate $75 to the fire department, $50 to the ambulance service. That'll come out of the Homeowners Association dues. So every year as the homeowners, once the homeowners is set up here, the Homeowners Association is set up here and as houses are being built and being sold, that money will be allocated into the property, the till for the homeowners association. And every year, the homeowners association will have to cut a check to the fire department, to the ambulance service per unit basis. So when this is totally built out, those two organizations will receive a check times 96, that's $75 times 96 times that $50 to the ambulance. So that's a proffer that these gentlemen are going to be making as part of their application into the town. As you can see within this site here, we have a pretty extensive stormwater management pond in the middle. It's going to be a recreational pond. It's going to be a wet pond. So some of our, I think when we first proposed our change on the future land use pond, land use plan I mean, we showed a dry pond, but we've gone back And working through the requirements of the design standards in the town of Georgetown, we went ahead and changed that to more of a wet pond for more recreational value for the residents here.

We still propose some nice open space here for that.

We do have a small area across the street there that will be... host a i believe a gazebo and a top lot and some other recreational activities on that particular land there our outfall for the school more upon is the existing ditch that's located on the i'm just going to call the north side of our property that existing ditch navigates its way through goes around north elementary school and i think eventually makes its way to a tax ditch So we do have positive outfall and pond has been designed to be able to handle this entire development, reducing storm, reducing the providing quality stormwater and being able to reduce some flow or some volume and being able to provide safe discharge of stormwater management on this site. The roads are going to be turned over to the town of Georgetown. They're designed to town of Georgetown standards on this particular site. on this particular application, sidewalks on both sides, curb and gutter. All the houses will be served by, again, water and sewer provided by the town of Georgetown. So we are asking for some proposed modifications to the development standards. For the area and bulk requirements, we're asking for a side yard waiver from 10 feet down to 6 feet. The underlying standard zone for UR1 is a side yard setback for 10 feet. The requested modification is to reduce the side yard setback for single family, just for the single family detached dwellings only to six feet. RPC code allows for that, allows for a reduction in the side yard setbacks and allows you all to make that request. We don't have to go before the Board of Adjustment. That can be done through the RPC language there. So we are asking for that request. So we did provide the justifications for the requested modifications and some of the Factors for the approval under 230.75.9. So the request of side yard reduction is intended to support an efficient, cohesive neighborhood layout while maintaining compatibility and minimizing impacts. The request is offered for approval based on the following 230.75.9 considerations. So consistency with town planning and objectives, the purpose of the rpc the development is designed as an integrated community with a mix of housing types and meaningful common outdoor space a modest side yard reduction supports compact neighborhood form and allows flexibility in unit placement without increasing the overall unit count beyond the proposed rpc program so we're not asking for anything we're not asking for an extended or an addition in density we're just asking if those side yard setbacks and those do meet the requirements because Fire suppression, fire hydrants are going to be within this neighborhood. We do meet the minimum requirements for the fire marshal's office by requesting for these side yard setbacks to be reduced by four feet each on each side down to six feet wide. So we do have an adequacy of open space and recreation neighborhood amenities. The plan provides for approximately 7.85 acres of open space, about 35.9% of the gross site area, including passive habitat conservation areas, a stormwater wet pond, water feature, sidewalks and trails, a tot lot and gazebo, So the requested setback modification supports maintaining these open space features by enabling a more efficient lot and building footprint arrangement. We are, you know, the site includes approximately 8.1 acres of forested area with portions proposed to remain. and again stormwater is provided so we are going to try to remain as much of the stormwater area here we are providing 10 foot i think 10 foot buffers around the entire which will be landscaped and we will provide a nice screening from you know the adjacent neighborhood the four acres in the back back there will help provide screening with the railroad and then screening from the neighbors on the north hand side Just a real quick overview of the architectural theme. We did provide some architectural renderings inside the packet for your review at this time, although that will come in more I think when the site plan is, when we come back before site plan if you're favorable in rezoning us to RPC. But the architectural theme for this development is rooted in traditional development, Delaware small town residential design incorporating coastal influence and mid-Atlantic vernacular architecture that is historically consistent with the existing character of Georgetown and surrounding established neighborhoods. And we've provided quite an extensive array of pictures, building plans, and exhibits here, and they're all in your hearing packets to be able for you to take a look at and see how this is going to meet the intent of what I think Georgetown is looking for and what your comprehensive plan states for this type of development. So based on that, Bedford Holdings LLC respectfully requests the planning commission's support for the modification identified herein as part of the RPC application and concept plan review. We believe the requested adjustment enables a high quality site plan that provides housing variety and substantial open space while remaining compatible with adjacent land uses and adequately served by public infrastructure. And with that, with my presentation and all the exhibits that we've provided with the, we've addressed all the concept comments that were provided by Mr. Larger and DBF as part of the town engineer's comments on our project. I ask that you look favorably at the zoning of RPC for this property. I'll take any questions you have.

So you're telling me the blue area is going to be all water. Is that correct?

That's correct, yes.

So where's the open space? It's just that two little green spots on the left?

No, we have some walking paths around here.

How wide is the walking path?

It'll be five feet wide. Five feet wide. It'll tie in at points with the sidewalk as well, so it'll be a nice continuous walkway around the entire property and through the property.

Will the water area be very deep?

I believe the maximum depth, six or eight feet.

It just seems like that's a hazard for the neighborhood to have all that open water.

Well, with the slopes and everything, we have to provide a 10-foot safety bench.

In your original plan, I saw that you had a small area here for proposed stormwater management. I didn't realize it was all that.

So as we've been working through the process of getting to this point, we've been doing the design of this entire project as well. So meeting the state of Delaware stormwater management requirements, that small area, that's what I said in the beginning when we provided that proposed It was going to be a dry pond. As a matter of fact, we shed a pond on this side as well. And that has turned since. After doing extensive soils testing and meeting with the conservation district, this is the final layout and design of this stormwater management pond. And we turned it into a feature. There's going to be fountains inside. We're going to put fountains in here.

I'm just thinking of areas for families or kids to play. There's not a lot. There's two. That's pretty far away from the other side of the neighborhood.

Understood, but we also have a wooded area out front that's going to be cleaned out and thinned out, but the trees are going to remain.

That's too close to the road. I'm looking at there's only 10 feet between carriage lane, the homes there, and your property. Is that correct? Is their backyard and your backyard back up to each other? Yes.

The back of the property line is 10 feet off. There's going to be a 10-foot dedicated landscape all the way around.

Who's going to be in charge of the homeowners association? Somebody in the neighborhood?

Until a sufficient amount of units are built, the developers here and the builder, Mr. Ashburn with Ashburn Homes is one of the developers. They'll maintain the homeowners association until it's usually about 70% or 75% of the homes are built. After that, they'll turn that over to the actual homeowners association.

So we'll hope we get that $75 per unit. Because, I mean, if they don't pay their HOA.

Well, that'll be in the documents. We're hoping that the HOA here is going to be afraid. We anticipate it being a functioning HOA. I understand where you're coming from about some HOAs kind of go, they get a little lax in how they enforce their dues and everything. I can't speak to the legal side of that. I don't know if Mr. Wheeler could help out with that when it comes to HOAs and the responsibilities. Once those documents are in place, they're recorded, Each homeowner has to sign off on it when they go to settlement, I believe, that they understand the HOA. I'm sure they do. But after a while, if HOAs don't follow up, I think it's the responsibility of the Homeowners Association to take, I'm sure there's due course that has to be done in order for them to go out and collect their dues on a yearly basis.

and they they can lean the properties as well and if it seems to me the fire company and the ambulance would maybe have a dog in that fight as well because they're a beneficiary that could be yeah sounds like well the hoa can yeah they can lean the property just like the municipality can sounds like a nightmare waiting to happen Oh, yeah. I mean, you wouldn't necessarily force a sale if they didn't pay their $75. But, you know, when property is sold, that's when they collect. But, you know, if that happens, you know, that's how you do it.

And every year, they're supposed to come up with that money, correct?

I think the proffer was that, yeah, they would, 96, once it's billed out, it would be, you know, close to $7,500 or $5,000. Yeah.

Yeah, hi. My name is Jordan Ashburn. So I have several neighborhoods that I currently build and manage. And the larger neighborhoods like this one are managed by a professional management company, Seascape, IPS. So they will be managing this. And to your point, we do find them. there's always a certain percentage of people that don't pay their HOA dues, which then kind of shifts the burden to the people that do for the operation of the neighborhood. But that being said, we do find them, we do lien their properties, and the liens are, they collect interest. So eventually, and I'm not saying oftentimes we do send them to collection agencies where they finally get the idea that i'm going to have a something bad really bad on my credit which is going to affect my ability to move and a lot of times they settle and start making payments and stuff like that so we actively do go after them and it's just not something that we ideally sit by and let them not contribute after they've agreed to contribute by living in their neighborhood

So just this HOA thing always bothers me. The $75, is that being paid by the developer per the entire 96 units from the get-go, or is it being paid as the houses are sold?

They are being paid as the houses are sold.

So in year one, theoretically, it could be $75 or $500. It's an unknown.

Yeah, but the idea is to help out with the impact of the neighborhood on the community.

So the next part of that, is this going to be part of the actual deed restriction that the homeowner must pay a $75 donation?

It will be written into the deed restrictions and the operating manuals and procedures of the HOA docs.

Yes, sir. Okay. so it will be a legal binding part of not just hey we're going to say we're going to do this and then walk away nobody ever does it it's going to be part of the hoa docs okay so when you leave the community and turn it over to the hoa they do then have the right if i'm not mistaken to change that restriction and say hey we don't want to pay this anymore

I would suggest that the documents can be written in such a manner that, yes, if they want to change a deed restriction,

dog leashes in the backyard or dog runs we want to do that but there are certain things that we can write into the deed restrictions that they are not allowed to change but i think as one of the conditions of the rpc that condition can be you all that that 75 dollars and that 50 can be added as a condition so once it's conditioned on the site plan of course i don't believe that condition can change unless it comes back before you will change that condition

My question is, you've got to have, after everything's sold, somebody in that development has to be the HOA president and collect all that and send it. I mean, suppose nobody steps up or they don't want to do that. I mean, I know how some developments, nobody wants to take those roles. So then what do you do to get the money? I mean, not everybody wants to be president of HOA and beat people up for money.

You would be very surprised. When somebody buys into a neighborhood and they have a vested interest in their home and they've spent a lot of money, then yes, a lot of people do want, and often cases I have... my clients are knocking at the door, when are we going to be having self-rule? And I say, okay, it's at 75%. And there are a lot of people that, some people don't care for HOAs and some people are really into them. And a lot of people take, most people take pride in their homes and they are active parts of it. Sometimes they wanna do all the ministrational stuff that they would normally do, but oftentimes they retain and keep the management companies that are in place when it's turned over. So yes, there is a president, vice president, secretary, treasurer, but all the day-to-day things that are bothersome are subbed out to the management company.

So another question I would have, if this is a development and we have a lot of snow, then the HOA has to pay for the snow removal in the development. And that's quite costly. I'm just saying this because my daughter lives in a development that has HOA and I know how that works in their development.

Until the streets are dedicated to the town, that will be the burden of myself and the individual residents that live there. So based on the number of units, so if one person is paying, I can't just lump snow removal onto one person and say, all right, here it is. So I have to go through and clear the roads and clear the snow. And as the number of residents come into the neighborhood, then their contributions add up and mine decrease. So if there's 50 units in there, I'm paying 50, I'm paying 46, 49, 50% of the snow maintenance and that kind of thing.

Hi, my name's James Grant. I used to live in a condo association over in the Rehoboth area. And back in, I want to say, 2000, there was a problem with condo associations, homeowner associations, and I understand you're concern and the thing is the state has actually stepped in and mr willard might notice um about this is there's certain requirements like you have requirements on how to run those town meetings and there's certain requirements how the city has to run their and the town has to run their meetings and have uh reserves in their accounts and say the same thing the kind of essentially the homeless sessions have to meet certain requirements that the state has set in place to have reserves and has to be ran a certain way has to have quorums have to have certain members of the homeowners association so i just wanted to point that out it's just not you know we throw a

booklet together and say hey this is our homeowner association it's actually we have to follow state guidelines thank you so the the site plan um six foot side yard setbacks how many houses have were you able to add because of that

We didn't increase density for that. What we were asking for is for a little bit wider frontage of the lawn to provide a little bit better product on the housing type. So that's all the six foot is. The six foot doesn't gain us any density at all. The density is dictated by the UR1. We didn't fit more. A matter of fact, I think in my presentation for the future land use map change, we were at 106 lots. So when I presented to get that map change, we presented 106. And so we've lost 10. Since we've been working with all the state agencies and we've been working through the town of Georgetown's design requirements, we've lost 10 units within the site. So we're not asking for anything increased in density. We're just asking for a variation for house widths because of the widths of these lawns.

Then if I'm correct, there is no overflow parking or anything. It's all individual driveways.

That's correct. So I'll call Mr. Becker.

Hello, my name is Alan Dechter, a professional engineer with Pannonia Associates. So per the town code, for any type of housing, single family, duplex, or townhouses, you can't count the garage and the parking space behind it, where in most areas you do so in all these units they're all required to have two units so we have at a minimum we have two units in front of each unit um but then if you know if they wanted to use the garage they could so in in theory there's an extra 96 spaces here if those individual homeowners wanted to use the garage but at a minimum each unit has two side-by-side parking spaces in front of their units all right

I guess that's one of my biggest concerns about this plan is because your neighboring property has these shallow two-car driveways as well. And I rode through there this afternoon at 5 o'clock, and the streets are lined with cars. So you have narrow town streets lined with vehicle parking. And that's all single-family.

So there's one caveat with the roadway width, right? So per code, per town code, the minimum width is 28 feet. But as part of one of the code caveats for an RPC, you can reduce the roadway width. So for the coordination with the town staff, it was advised for us to reduce it from 28 feet to 24 feet. Doesn't change the right of way, but what it does is add in more green area along the roadway that was requested. So we had made that change. We can certainly put that back to allow for additional pavement for, you know, if you're concerned with parking on the street, that's what could happen here. But at minimum, we're showing a 24-foot wide road for state fire marshal requirements and just standard traffic movement.

Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question, maybe Mr. Decker? the rpc code is kind of um sort of different difficult to apply because there are a lot of shoulds right in criteria which was hard for engineers to deal with the section that deals with limiting the roads the the minimum roads are usually 28 but in an rpc you can reduce them to 24 which you did and in um 230 75 18 if you do reduce them to 24 and i'm just curious to know what your interpretation of the code is, because the language says if street width may be reduced, and if it is, it must incorporate many of the following criteria. So right away, you're like, and as a lawyer or accountant, you might say, all right, many, what's that mean? More than half or whatever? But it says you must incorporate many of them. And those are the ones where they talk about, number one, you should have adequate parking in the rear units access by alleys. Adequate parking is provided behind the dwelling units with a driveway and screen from the view. Then there's a section that says you can have parking in front. Then four says any off-street parking is clearly defined using stripes, lines, bump outs. Is it a 24-foot width road? Is there room for parking on the side of the road?

Yeah, I mean, you could easily park on the side of the road. Usually what people do is with the road curbing we have, they pull up and, you know, the tires are on the curbing or the grass, and that still allows probably, you know, 16 feet. For the fire marshal, just one-way traffic for their requirements is 14 feet. So it still is allowed. I mean, there's a car sitting there, but, you know,

one car would if there was two cars coming at each other one would wait for a second while one goes by and then they can drive around the car but there's still ample room to have traffic it's not then number five is adequate off-street parking or overflow parking provided using well-defined parking lots or areas preferably located near the community a well-defined six is well-defined street hierarchy establishing collective roads and some of this is a little ambiguous but i just it seems like the rpc calls for more parking

so it does you're correct and we have there's room at the community area here where we're going to be providing for a tot lot and gazebo and everything we can provide for some additional parking spaces for the community like it says under the rpc code but i think the goal here in vetting this through the town staff and everything was kind of trying to reduce that environmental footprint now You know, I, you know, I could be corrected on that, but I believe that was the intent.

We don't we don't see this too much. And I don't think this board, my half of this board hasn't seen an RPC. I don't think of this detail. And I'm just I'm just maybe saying more than I usually do, because it's there is interpretation in this. But when it says you should incorporate many of these and they have adjunct parking and it says adequate one of the terms in this many section is adequate park. And this is only if you reduce the streets. You only have to go through this if you reduce the streets, which you chose to do. It says adequate parking is provided by driveway in the front of the garage with no street parking.

Understood. So it's, yeah. So what's, so I guess, you know, definition of adequate parking, the code states two per unit. I think this plan provides for adequate parking under the code. I understand the interpret, I understand perception about parking, overflow parking, parking in the streets, when they're parking, when driveways are full. things like that. But I think the intent of this design, again, is that we go back to the theme, the purpose of the RPC is that design ingenuity. And the thing with this was reducing that environmental footprint. We can go, like Mr. Decker said, we could go back to 28 foot wide streets, which is the town's standard street width. We would lose some green space within the right of way. What we're providing is for more green space, for more areas to be able to do landscaping and things like that. I will take the responsibility as the staff who recommended the 24 foot cartway or pavement width.

Generally, it was in an effort to look at the site holistically and to, yes, potentially ensure some additional green space, especially to prevent effective driveway widths of 20 feet wide at the curb line, which can frequently reduce any place to, again, either plant street trees or otherwise, especially in the townhome section of the development, where a 20-foot wide lot width is about as wide as the required two-spot parking pad, which of course can restrict green space even more. That was one recommendation that I offered. Of course, you can look at these standards that are mentioned in the RPC as being criteria for reducing width. And yes, it's possible that some of these are not being met very specifically. But I will, of course, say that there is planning and town management benefits, too. narrower streets. Incidentally, there is also an indirect result of traffic as a result. But of course, at the same time, you could see some of these being, you know, potentially good recommendations as well in the criteria.

It just doesn't seem like anybody can have any company, you know? You've got room for your people who live there, but if anybody stopped by, that road's going to be congested and hard to get by. You have one on each side of the street, It's gonna be tricky.

It's perhaps one improvement or one suggestion might be to selectively widen in certain places to allow for basically a bumped in or a bumped out area of additional street parking that is lined in such a way as could meet that standard. While we're on the conversation of streets, I would also like to sort of issue a question to our town engineer specifically regarding the street stubs at the top of the page. I know we had a brief conversation about the town standard regarding stubs and whether they are a cul-de-sac might be required as a part of that and how that process would be worked out if an alternative specification could be warranted.

Good evening, Ring Lardner with Davis, Bowdoin, and Friedle. It's good to see you all again. So we did have some conversations. So the street extensions are the requirement to adjacent parcels. And in fact, they kind of act as cul-de-sacs. And within our design standards, it requires a typical bulb turnaround that you're all familiar with. However, the fire marshal does have four alternative turnaround. So in theory, these intersections act as an official turnaround for a fire marshal protection, everything else. So in going through the plan review, we kind of had asked for the applicant to kind of pull the streets back a little bit. So when The streets have been accepted. The town takes over the maintenance of the property to go back to your snow removal. They have a place to push the snow off the roadways towards the end, so they will act as dead end streets until the future land use, but they do meet fire marshal turnarounds and the like, which is why we at the time did not suggest putting in the temporary turnarounds because you can have trash trucks back up in that area, fire trucks back up in that area, so it does meet the spirit and attend to fire regulations. In the town, we have consulted with... Jeff Ward, the construction coordinator and town staff, and they are also okay with what's being proposed here. And we have thought about that future maintenance in the long run and think this will suffice for that future expansion to meet the intent of both the spirit of straight extensions to neighboring properties and turnarounds of the town standards.

Other questions from the commission?

I guess I would offer to the Planning Commission that they are in their discussion and decision-making process. And Mr. Willard can also add to this is that they are perfectly within your rights to consider any potential conditions or criteria that you might like to see differently or suggestions or otherwise as a part of your deliberations as well.

So I'll go back and state that we can put the streets back to the widths that the town requires. So it's a 28-foot pavement. Then you have two foot of road curb on each side of that pavement. So that provides for a 32-foot wide pavement section through the streets. Did I do my math right? 28 plus 4, 32. okay um it's been a long day um but anyway uh so we can put that back to what the town is requesting but what we would like to offer you know again what we're offering up is is 24 foot we could also provide some additional if we want if if if meeting some of the spirit of this rpc code is to provide some additional parking spaces we can we can do that within the open space area of where we're showing an open area for, again, a top lot.

What I suggested to the applicant is adjacent to these green spaces, bump that out to eight foot, provide the additional street space in limited areas. That's what I was trying to explain to you. A couple isolated space in here to provide the extra overflow parking. You still get the minimum street with this key, but you do provide some overflow parking on street to meet the intent. And that's what I recommended to the applicant just a few minutes ago.

So I have a question.

Would that be like a rule for everyone to go in there? They know they have to park in these?

It's overflow parking. So the homeowners would park there. These would be extra spaces for when you have visitors come over. This designated space is to be on the streets because the recommendation would be you put signs, no parking except in designated areas. Because ideally, you have a 24-foot road. People don't know how to park side by side, right? Fire marshal needs... 16 feet without the outriggers which is why the 24 foot and that's where should you decide to act favorably in a recommendation and mayor and council accept it as you're telling your guy would work with the applicant providing this overflow parking that would allow fire operators to have what they need and meet the intent what you're trying to figure out with some just overflow parking and within the spirit of the code it makes it a lot more family friendly when you can have people come over

So as part of our recommendation, are we allowed to recommend HOA covenants?

I'm sorry, what was the question, Mr. Chairman?

Are we allowed to recommend HOA covenants? They're going to have an HOA. So my concern is all these streets being lined with cars. My HOA has a covenant that says no on-street parking. It's not super easy to do. you know, police, but at least it's there. And if you have a strong HOA, they're going they're going to try to maintain the quality of their neighborhood.

Well, the nature of your decision is a recommendation. So you can make all kinds of recommendations if you want. Council must ultimately consider them. Some of them, you know, recommendation could be argued as it's a suggestion, but it's your recommendations is important because you've thought about it. And if you think you have certain concerns about certain elements of it, and this is a conditional yours and there, you know, the section is dealt, it has a lot of shoulds and a lot of shalls and even some shall encourage. And as a lawyer, Mr. Hutt will tell you this, those are kind of hard things to put your hat on. he's good at it but i mean you can make recommendations about what you think is maybe some shortcomings on this that you think should be addressed by council between now and then certainly the applicant can choose to address them or not that's the purpose of this hearing sorry we i we held it off as long as we could mr hud i appreciate it

For the record, David Hutt, an attorney with Morris James representing the applicants. I understand Mr. Davidson's been doing a fine job. guess one thing i i would say is i don't know what what has been said or not obviously um but you know the the purpose of this evening is to one get your the planning commission's thoughts and recommendations as to the first the concept of having that rpc overlay over top of the existing ur1 zoning And then the second part is to obviously do the plan, the concept plan. And that's what it sounds like people were working on the details of that when I walked in. There certainly can be conditions that, as Mr. Willard noted, or recommended conditions. There's always... as he indicated those can be difficult to craft on the fly for lack of a better term but certainly any conditions that certainly happy to consider those conditions, even the parking condition that was being discussed when I walked in. I understand from Mr. Davidson that there may have been a question about the interaction of the HOA and the proffer to to the fire department and emergency and first responders. And hopefully those were addressed, I think, by maybe Mr. Ashburn and Mr. Davidson. But those would be, it's a proffer by the applicant that ultimately, would likely become a condition of approval by the town itself. And what that condition is, is that the applicant, when they create the property owners association that will manage and govern all of the the amenities and features of the community and collect dues and such they will have to have within their documents that that get recorded with the office of the recorder of deeds they will have to have requirements for the amounts that are set forth in the proffer and then when the homeowners association sets its budget it will be including those amounts in its budget collected from all the individual residents within that community and then typically in most of these situations they send the monies either annually or biannually to the that department that's that's the type of condition that i've seen in a number of jurisdictions and locales

again it's a requirement that it's in the governing documents and then sent once or twice a year by the property owners association or its property manager to whatever that organization is if their homeowners association dues is 75 a year and that's going to go for emergency services correct well what happens when other issues come up with the road or that needs to be plowed where do they get the money to do that

that's all the property owners associations by law through the delaware uniform common interest ownership act of kiowa is what most people call it they have to annually create a budget and they have to have reserves and and within that budget there will be items for capital improvements if they need to replace any of the amenities or that type of thing all of those things are budgeted in and one of the budget items will be will

they be in that deed or just worry about getting the 75 for the emergency services in the deed just don't want to see that that money's been spent because we had a snowstorm and we can't get any money to the fire company this we don't have any right the i don't know i don't know if mr ashburn or mr grant have set the budget yet but there's going to be a lot more than 75 collected from each lot on an annual basis

So this, that'll just be one, the contribution to the emergency services will be one component of their annual dues, or they'll probably be quarterly or monthly dues.

Okay, so who determines how much their HOA is every year? Would that be when you go to sell these, you know, that's how that works? I just know this year we had a lot of snow, and it cost a lot of money to remove it.

Yes, ma'am. So typically we have a historical dollar amount that we set aside for plowing. I have a subdivision that I did, or two subdivisions that I've done up in King County, both in the city of Dover. And so I have a historical amount of money that it costs to plow. get that so your hoa is a little it's not 75 it's going to be more than that it's going to be more than that plus there's going to be money for uh grounds maintenance for grass clipping there's going to be money for um the pond maintenance because you don't want it growing up with cattails and all that other stuff okay and there's gonna have to be a certain amount of money for uh the electricity because of the uh the street lights and for the ponds you know the fountains and the ponds and all of the different categories that take to run that there's a budgeted dollar amount in that, in their budget, which is disclosed to the homeowners on a annual basis. And then from there, that's how we set the dues, but all, but to your point, some years there was no snow. So then they also get an extra bonus. And in addition to normally when we settle these subdivisions, We also take a upfront fee of like $300 or $400 that goes into the settlement, which goes into an operating account, which sits there so that after the neighborhood is turned over, they have like, say, $400 or $500 that goes into their settlement that sits in an account that gets turned over to them so that they're just not left high and dry and they have

a buffer amount just a reserve that i don't touch and they don't touch until they are actually running the hoa okay um i'd also like to clarify that if these are going to be town-owned streets which eventually yes they would be obviously because we don't permit private streets typically in the town is that actually plowing would be a tower when would that be turned over when they're all sold Once the streets were dedicated and everything was complete and it became town responsibility, that would be.

So they don't have to be sold. Just have to be had, the development just has to be there.

Yeah, if once the bond, oh yes, you want to.

there's a dedication process that i think mr lardner is about to describe there's a dedication process so the roads don't get turned over until a certain percentage of homes are complete and sold the road's been top coated all the management curves everything else has been done and baron council has accepted the infrastructure that is when the town maintenance begins OK. And there's performance bond and maintenance bond for repairs, but the snow removal does not begin until mayor and council have accepted the infrastructure.

OK.

I don't want to beat this to death, but the question I had earlier was, when the homeowners association is turned over to the homeowners, And the fire department is going to be expecting $75 a house every year, whatever. When it's turned over to the homeowners association, are you able to write the homeowners documents in a fashion that they cannot change that donation? In other words, you can.

Yes. We can certainly write that in. And there's a couple of ways to do that. One is to say that to change that they'd have to come back to the town to change that and and this goes back into the conversation that you had with mr willard earlier about ultimately conditions of approval for the rpc one of those conditions would be as i mentioned that the governing documents include that provision and that that could even go further to say that if those governing documents were to be amended regarding that provision You don't care about what the color of their houses are or whatever might be in those types of provisions, but certainly the town does want to make sure that that proffer continues for the fire department in perpetuity. And the other thing that oftentimes when writing those types of conditions, I usually, if I'm writing the conditions, would say within the document that it is subject to all of right, right. And it's subject to all the conditions of approval for whether it's a subdivision or an RPC or whatever it is. And then if that language is in the conditions about not being able to be modified without coming back and coming to the planning commission and town council, then yes, I do think that would be enforceable. And not something they could just vote out because who wouldn't vote to have lower dues, right?

Right.

That's my concern. Yeah. I would vote for that if I were.

During our meeting with the Planning Commission, we got into the weeds a little bit about architectural review. We have to meet a certain standard or architectural requirement before we're allowed to pull a permit. for building these different, and we've already have had discussions with the planning committee on the standards that's in RPC that makes it a more coastal cottage feel. So it's just not cookie cutter, it's we're actually, there's been a conversation with the planning committee to make this a nicer development in an affordable way.

I'd like to offer to the planning commission as well that as a part of the RPC approval, again, should you choose to recommend it and then the town eventually adopts it, that doesn't anything that's within this plan or within this concept plan that might not speak on certain other town obligations or town requirements that are in our design standards or our design construction standards that isn't explicitly mentioned as far as this is still assumed that they have to still meet that burden. So just because you're approving this tonight doesn't mean that there, or eventually the town council, it doesn't mean that there aren't other requirements to be met. Mr. Grant mentioned about the architectural as well. So that's certainly something that you can continue to discuss tonight, but you won't necessarily approve them. Those still can change and you may still require changes up to the point of preliminary plan approval. So just as an FYI.

explained to me again the six foot. So going from 10 to six does not change the size of those lots.

No, it allows that design flexibility in the house design for that house width.

So it allows the house to be bigger?

It allows the house to be bigger, that's correct. So in essence, wider, not longer. It allows for a more usable backyard. But if we have to thin the house up, then the house possibly gets longer, the backyard reduces. But what we're trying to promote is a little bit bigger backyard within the requirements of the town's law requirements.

Do we have anything else in the town with a six-foot setback?

I couldn't tell you at this moment, but we can look into that if you desire.

All right, so what's the will of the commissioner? If you want to make one. I've addressed my concerns. I like the ideas that Mr. Larder has thrown out to do those periodic bump-ins to allow some additional parking. So I can't make the motion, but I also like the idea of asking them to put it in their governing documents that there's no on street parking other than in designated areas.

One of you.

so we're recommending we're we're making some suggestions that's what we're doing yeah you have to no you have to make you're going to make it you have to vote on whether this should be approved as an rpc concept plan which is a zoning change with the following recommendations yeah yeah absolutely The following conditions. Because most of the statute is about the conditions.

I want to make a motion to approve the proposed amendment to the town with the following conditions. I can read the rest of the statement if you want. Official zoning map for parcel totaling 21.92 plus minus acres from urban residential UR1 to RPC, residential planning community. Superimposed over urban residential UR1 and the RPC concept plan with the following recommendations. We would like to have the documents to include monies for emergency services that must remain constant. And we would also like to have accommodations for off-street parking.

For off-street. Off-street, yeah.

For parking on the street. Sorry.

Can I go now? Prohibited in non-designated areas.

I second. Okay.

We have a motion and a second. We will take a roll call. Commissioner Allen? Yes. Commissioner Roach? Yes. Commissioner Locates?

Yes.

Yes.

Thank you.

I look forward to seeing the final plans.

Thank you very much.

Okay, where are we now?

All right. Moving on to item number six, comprehensive plan five-year review.

If you could give me about five minutes to... get resettled.

Thank you. Did you fall asleep back there?

Jesus. Amen.

Looks like the wind's picked up.

Yep.

OK. Thank you for waiting this long to get into this part. So as a part of this section of the meeting where we talk about the five-year plan, the five-year update to the comprehensive plan, I submitted to you basically a draft of the changes that we have made thus far through assent. Remember, those were largely focused on a few key areas. Remember, we talked about the South Railroad Avenue and Carver Street parcels that were industrial. We made them single family. The Savannah Grove multi-family development parcel that we made multi-family because it is. Jacqueline Drive we made multi-family as well. It's hard to see on this map. And then we made a few other changes that are also reflected in the minutes from the last meeting of isolated parcels around here to make a match with the overall area. And something that we ended last meeting with was a discussion of North Bedford Street and what the future of that should be. And you asked for some additional information. I also submitted two additional maps for our review. These maps focus on what the current future land use designation is of North Bedford Street parcels and comparing them with what is actually the existing land use of those parcels today. And then I made another map doing the same thing, comparing the future land use map with the zoning designations. So overall, our findings are, if we zoom in a little more here. OK. It's a little slow. OK. So basically, the filled-in solid shapes are the existing land use. So anything that's yellow is single family today, as of now. Anything that is pink or purple is considered retail, but that can include a lot of other different uses, like funeral homes are considered retail, just as are Sussex County Assessment Office, that's how they designate that. This tan peach color is offices. And there's a tanner color also here that's for vacant parcels as well. So mostly you can see that there's a lot of currently single family parcels that are designated currently as business for the future land use. We see as we get closer to the circle here, The actual uses today are of a more non-residential nature. So here's the circle right here. And so you can see this peach color is like your downtown types of uses. So those actually match the feature land use designation. These tend to match here, here. However, then you get into the yellow, the solid yellow. That means that doesn't match currently with a business designation. Now that doesn't mean that It will never change over to business. But this gives you an example of where in the last comprehensive plan, the town was sort of aspirational to see if we wanted to change the character of this whole area. But today, we only see a few parcels that are currently being used for a non-residential purpose, either as an office or a retail type of use. I know we brought up these three parcels. This is the separate's office right here. This is a house that they recently purchased, and these are two other properties. So these were zoned single-family, identified as single-family on the Future Land Use map, and currently today still actively single-family, though the rest of the corridor is designated as business Future Land Use. And so the question that we last left off with was, do we change over the ones that are currently some other type of single family and change them over to business to make the whole corridor the same designation, essentially? You can see further up here. We still have some single-family and multifamily uses that are being used right here, but they may be designated as single-family. So the key thing here is to either make it all the same thing or to... be more nuanced with how we may want the corridor to transfer or to transition over the course of five, 10, 20 years. Now, of course, just designating a business today doesn't change anything, because as you can see, most of it is still single family. And in the future, we can preemptively zone this area, not as a high intensity commercial use or business use, but we can do it for like an office type of designation. So that is what most of the properties closest to the circle are zoned. They're zoned that UB3 designation, which is professional office. It allows some residential and office and no retail, no restaurants, no, you know, auto body shops or anything like that. So just designating a business doesn't mean that we're gonna allow the most intense business use there. So what are some of our thoughts for? So we would only theoretically, as a part of this review, change probably in total maybe like five to 10 parcels that aren't already designated as business presently. And then in the future, we can think about do we need to preemptively rezone some or all of these parcels?

So this is what we already did last session, right? And you're just showing us that it's the final, this is the final level.

So now I'm showing you, you asked for more information basically about what the existing uses were along North Bedford Street. And so the solid colors are those existing uses. So we're seeing that actually most of North Bedford right now, even though it's designated for business uses, is only single family presently today. And as you can see, most of it doesn't match with the existing land uses, but that's okay if we are trying to be aspirational in terms of what we want to see the corridor transition to in the future. So what that means for an action is to look at some of these parcels here that are solid, solid yellow here that have no, maroon outline here. So those are designated as single family in the future land use map. So if again, the rest of these parcels are surrounded by business, does it make sense to make the rest of them that maroon outline?

So what do you want us to do? Do you think we should make them all the outlined in orange even though we don't want to do that?

Well, I think that's what we talked about last time was you take a residential property and make it commercial. What if that homeowner doesn't want it commercial or business?

Right. Well, they would get a, so let's say, so everyone who is land use, future land use would be changing would get a letter as a part of this process. It's up to, it's certainly their right to come to town council and say, hey, actually, I don't want this. But for our purposes here, as a planning commission, it's our, we do reserve the right to, through sound planning practices, to designate certain areas which might benefit the whole town, even if, I'm not saying that we need to go against any one particular property owner as part of this process, but we're sort of trying to make policy goal is like, do we want to see North Bedford transition to business? That's basically the question. And that's what I see. I don't see the business coming to North Bedford with all the residential houses.

I see offices and stuff like that, which technically is a business. But I don't see storefronts or anything like that coming.

Right. And that can totally make sense. So the business, designating a business, again, doesn't change ultimately what they're allowed to do today or tomorrow, but it's the zoning, it's the rezoning it that might only restrict it for professional office, right? So if you think professional office is more appropriate for North Bedford Street and not restaurants or retail, we can still change it to business and then make those recommendations after the adoption of the map to say, hey, we want to implement the vision of the future land use map by zoning these potentially UB3 to only allow offices and residential too.

I have a question. So the Oxford houses would not be businesses, correct?

No, they would come up as residential, yes.

If I may chime in. I know you don't have a designation for future land use as potential conditional uses, because that doesn't make any sense, because the conditional use could be anything. But like West Market Street, and for those of you familiar with Lewis, Savannah Road has become kind of what Mike was talking about. Piecemeal, conditional uses have been granted for offices modification for all those buildings. So it kind of keeps its residential charm, but can have business. maybe just the evolution of it is a better way to go than trying to, and you could put something that in the future land use plan. We designate the quarters on North Bedford as an area where businesses with, and I've done conditional uses in like Savannah Road where their condition is you have to keep it in the residential kind of look.

And that's exactly what our UB3 zoning district says. It says that you're allowed professional office and single family residential. And if you have professional office use, it has to basically look like a house.

in some way so your point is that would be a good one to just label this all for future language so for our future land use categories business professional office is considered is one of the business types yes that's right so so we're you know what commercial has its own designation so this isn't a you know commercial zoning it's a it's it's a it tends to be smaller scale in nature yes so you know we come back to the question does it make sense that we have five or six parcels that are not consistent with with the rest of the plan um because what we're doing today is a review of the plan so I don't think it's in the scope of what we're doing to say we want to hold the street to be single-family residential. We can say these three parcels don't make sense. Let's make it consistent. But if we want to go back and say, no, we think that should be single-family, that's in five years when we redo the plan.

Well, I mean, if that's the will of the commission, you know, it's not – that's actually not – prohibited okay yeah so the review aspect as i mentioned at the very beginning can take three different forms we can review it and say that nothing needs to change boom we're done uh we could review it and say some changes and then uh or we can say well we're gonna do some substantial changes and um and then if it's so substantial that actually counts as our 10-year plan which i don't think we're getting to yeah

And then the other thing about what we're doing here, this is what the town sees these properties being in the future. We're not rezoning. We're not automatically zoning. But if if whatever 313 North Pepper Street came to us and said, I want to rezone my property to business use, we'd be hard pressed to say, well, you can't because they're going to say, but you say this is what you want on my property. Right.

Right. Exactly. And so we're really talking about like, what's the character of this area? What's the character of this neighborhood? Is it small scale businesses? Is it large scale automobile centric commercial? Is it? single-family residential, is it multi-family? So that's, yeah. So we're inevitably speaking in broad terms because that's the level at which the future land use map works. We don't get into specific zones because that's the job of the zoning map. So, you know, the Planning Commission of five, ten years ago, you know, suggested that this was that this could mostly be considered a business area. And our job maybe is to say like, oh, well maybe we should finish the job or maybe slightly amend that designation because of some change in the circumstances of Georgetown as you see it as. But there's been some, There's a lot of talk about how much Georgetown is or is not business friendly. So one thought could be that if we preemptively do certain things around business, then that sort of goes towards that goal.

of being that way.

So that's one thing to consider. And if there's one place that could support that, like West Market Street, this might be another example. This could be, like you, I think, suggested, Larry, a couple months ago, this could be one, another example of a West Market Street, how there has been an evolution from the larger houses into professional offices, It seems to work there from a land use, you know, working perspective. And the same thing might be said of North Bedford as well.

Yeah, I mean, from, you know, personal perspective, you know, if this town grows in the future, you know, North Bedford Street, up this end of the street is business, the far end of the street's business. Someday, those are probably going to grow together. And a lot of those intervening properties are large older homes that a lot of people don't want a large older home. So, you know, to to maintain the character of the property, you're allowing them to convert those to office spaces is the best way to keep the look and feel of the street.

Right. Exactly. So So I could take you back to the, so either your thought process going forward should be either we could just leave it alone, we could basically complete the changes or complete the evolution of North Bedford with an I, maybe to think about rezoning in the future, or option C.

I personally think we should make it consistent.

I agree.

So what do we recommend?

Making these handfuls consistent with the rest of the street.

So let's see, one, two, three, four, five it's already designated as business and what he what he does now is allowed in residential yeah five basically i think there was one more up here that was that was not i didn't include that for some reason but yeah there was another one up here

I think we asked this last month, if you make it all business and let's just say the one on Swain Avenue comes up here as residential, now it's business, do they still have to come up here and say, I mean, but it's automatically changed the business because we changed it?

So the future land use, if we adopt the future land use map that has that as business, They can't necessarily just tomorrow start a business there. So it's still zoned, single family. They would need to go to come back to you. If we didn't rezone it in the future, then they would have to come and ask for that rezoning. Much like 316, 216, the Mid Sussex Dental when they came. So theirs was already designated business, but it was zoned UR2. So they skipped a step. We didn't have to send their request to the Office of State Planning so that they could concur that it was a minor variation. You don't have to go through a minor variation in this case. So they save a month at least, maybe two in the rezoning process. But again, there's still a fee to pay to change your zone. There's still a public hearing process that takes time. but we do save them some time as a part of the changing it to changing the future land use to business. There's still at least one step they have to take. Right.

So it's still UR1. It's still UR1 or I think it might be UR2 actually. But when they come forward, they can say, hey, you guys recommended this as a future land map. So it's pretty much back on the commission saying, hey, this is what you said you wanted it to be. That's true, yes. Which, technically, if we don't want it there, you know, the commission looks like... You know what I'm saying?

But it's still... So if the question was, say, between UB3, an office, or UB1, a, you know, like a retail store or a big restaurant or something more substantial... it's still within your purview to say, actually, we think UB3 is a more appropriate zoning designation than UB1 because of the conversations we were having about the relative intensity of development in that area. So you still have, you're not back to Duo Corner, I guess is the question, but if they do wanna come for an office, it might, again, sort of make sense with our previous conversations. But that's true. There is some, you're already indicating some intent with changing the feature legis, that's true.

So what are you looking for, a motion?

Not necessarily, just a consensus. Yes, consensus. And then you'll eventually vote on the map, the full map, once it's completed. So I just need a hint at a direction to should I change the draft in one way or another way.

What do you guys think?

Or you can even change some of them and not change all of them. We're only talking about five parcels right now. We could leave these. We could leave these and change this one or this one or again.

So do we have to decide these tonight or can we?

Well, I guess we still don't have to decide right now.

It's kind of getting late. Pressure.

See you, Tim.

See you, Tim. Yes, we don't, we don't, you can continue to mull, but hopefully that has given you some additional background to that.

Maybe to get together at like a different time, just us and say, hey, and that way we're not wasting Brian's time either. You're trying to say, do something, and we're really not doing anything, so. That's my two cents for the next 30 minutes I'm here.

Even a workshop would be a public meeting. Brian would be here even if we had an off workshop. But it is late.

Yeah, we can have a separate workshop. Don't feel like we only have to stick to these. these planning commission meetings, you know, we can have, we can schedule a special meeting. A workshop would be good. A workshop, yes, correct.

Just concentrate on this, yeah.

We could even schedule a workshop with council too if it was your intent to talk with them. It's up to, or we can just have a workshop with y'all. Ourselves first. It's up to you.

But honestly, I think a workshop with the new council would be a great idea. Yeah. Yeah. Because, you know, we all get on the same page.

True?

Yeah, we'll make it easier going through.

Very true, yes. Very true. So I did want to also draw your attention to, there's two petitions that are present, that are in front of you to consider to, to make further changes to the map. They're both from the same individuals, from John Jones and Jeff Korman. And they refer to, there's two separate ones. One is for a series of properties that are out of town. and you can read it for yourself in the letter, but they are presently designated as rural agriculture in the annexation area. And right now that is the, Petition is requesting that they be redesignated from rural agriculture to mixed, well, in part, mixed residential, which is this hash color here, which is typically reserved for RPCs. which now you are intimately familiar with. So these two, actually three properties, there's a little sliver here, one, two, three, four, and then actually parts of five and six with a strip of commercial, which is different than business, even though they sound similar. Commercial is basically Route 113 type of development. Automobile-centric, larger scale types of developments. Now this doesn't, of course, we don't have the benefit of a site plan or anything like that. I'm not sure. one is complete or not. It's not even in town yet, but as you can see in the letter, the petitioners are requesting that these properties be reconsidered and re-designated as mixed residential in part and commercial in part. Now, this is along...

It's past LTAC, right?

Yeah, right. It's past the town limits. It's on Seashore Highway. Most of them are either wooded or being cultivated in some way.

It'd be nice to have more commercial, too.

I mean, even in our account plan it says to put it MR1. Yeah. So it makes sense if it's not to just make it MR1.

And I mean, who's going to ask to annex a farm into the town of Georgetown? Right.

Right. Exactly. Yeah. No. That's true. So that's one. I'm sorry. There's actually two different. sub-request as part of this first request here. So there's this one here, which is the five or six parcels that we've just discussed as fixed residential here, here, and commercial along Seashore Highway. And then there is a second one, which is also currently indicated as a rural agriculture but is also suggested to be mixed residential. And that is on Vaughan Road here. It's just south of our Admiral's Landing development. So that's one request. And then the other request is in town. And this refers to the Greenlee Place development, which is the residential single-family lease community development, which is going to be breaking ground, I think, for the next few months, we've been told. So basically, the rest of it will be zoned or indicated as Single family residential here, actually part of it is cut off. This goes all the way back to the railroad that's back here off the page. So this would still be residential. That wouldn't change. What would change is this frontage, which would be instead re-designated as business. And now you know what business is. This is not commercial, but business. Ideally they would like to see this as potentially zoned UB1, which is your retail and restaurant and sort of downtown type of development, which, you know, being adjacent to other UB2 and UB1 zoning, you know, may be appropriate. So there's, Ness is about three acres of land here. So what would be your thoughts on these three?

I think the ones outside of town, west of town are making that MR1.

Yeah.

And the same thing with the commercial or whatever on East Market because

So we think that designation makes sense, the mixed residential for these and commercial. And then for the one in town, the greenly placed with the frontage on East Market Street here.

Yeah, because you already have business coming in to East Market. Right. Right there.

Yeah, you're, you know, a couple properties down, you have the school.

Yeah, yeah.

And then a couple houses, and then this property.

Yeah, so you have about, I think it's 120, 107, I forget the actual number, that will be constructed back here, but they will have direct access to this site. So, yes, if... Um, if business sounds... good, then we can continue with that.

Yep. Okay.

Um, so that, yeah, again, that will match if we go back to the map here. So that means that... Okay, so yeah, so the frontage here, so this will all stay yellow, but the frontage will continue this maroon along the frontage there. So it's about the same width as this parcel right here, so.

Okay?

And we are still accepting petitions into June. And so we might be considering other petitions in June unless we receive no others. But we will be reaching out to a few other property owners who have recently expressed interest in development in town too. So we will continue with that. And so I will continue to make a second draft of the map that reflects all of these changes.

Okay. Any other updates?

Mr. Liverman, Doug Liverman here, who was speaking on behalf of the Village of College Park is also the engineer for Penn's grant, which was the property that was just above the one that he discussed. Let me see if I have a better image of that. Yeah, so he's, that will likely be coming in for a concept plan review for a subdivision project. within the next month or two. So it's this orange area here. That's the property behind the church? Yes, yeah. So we might see that next month or the month after. Month after? Okay, yes. And we are finishing up our reviews of the Oaks Phase III. You might remember you looked at that. a couple months ago to revise their RPC, so it's this area here, remember, so we might see that again within the next couple months as well. But overall, I should have also mentioned that Georgetown was officially received its renewal for the Downtown Development District for an additional five years. The Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues did accept our renewal application, and so we'll have it for at least five more years. And I'll talk a little bit more about that next time. The map has changed a bit. We've expanded the district that is... liable for that is qualifying for additional incentives and investment from the state and from the town as well, which is most a lot of Ward 2 up here. And reaches, actually, does reach further along North Bedford Street, which might be another reason to make it business. Just as a thought. But yeah, I'll show you more of that next meeting.

Have you seen anything from Little Living yet?

I have not. On that, we did receive a demolition application for the foundation of the old gas station building that was there. It is a brownfield site. working with denrec to remediate the soils in that area so so that will be they will be doing that within the next couple weeks i think they will start within the next couple weeks but not the actual development of the houses that obviously comes before the planning commission when it's ready anywhere from popeyes You know, we, they issued or they requested a site plan amendment and we approved that as well, but no, almost. I feel like it's almost there.

That's all I have. Anybody have any other questions for Brian? If not, is there a motion to adjourn?

Make a motion to adjourn.

Second? Second. All in favor?