Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. I'm going to call the meeting to order. This is Tuesday, September the 15th. Graham City Council, Graham Planning Board's meeting. Roll call here. Mr. Bailey. Present. Mr. Huffine.

Here.

Chair Dean Ward's here. Mr. Wooten. Here. Here.

Here.

If everyone would please stand for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

I'd like to welcome everybody here tonight. We are the Grahams. city planning and zoning board which is an advisory board to the graham city council it considers and makes recommendations to the council regarding any request for changes to zoning assignments and as such city council is the final arbiter of approval or disapproval meetings are conducted according to the written published agenda individuals who wish to speak concerning any other requested request to be considered will be given the opportunity during the public comment period for each item. Please signify by raising your hand, your desire to speak, and the meeting moderator, typically the board chair or vice chair, and the chairs absent will recognize you. Please come to the podium, state your name and address, and voice your comment. The time limit for comments is three minutes, but may be extended by the moderator to allow questions from the board. Please maintain a respectful and civil demeanor with all comments and responses to questions. The meeting moderator will signal when an individual's time has expired and will call for the next commentator. If an individual does not respect the time limit, speaks out from the audience without being recognized by the moderator, or is disrespectful of the board, they will be subject to removal from the meeting. Once the public comment period has been closed by the moderator, Further comment from the audience will be deemed out of order. Individuals not respecting this will be subject to removal. Thank you. All right. Did everybody have a chance to read the August 18th minutes? And if so, is there any changes that need to be made or noted? If not, I'll entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion we approve the minutes.

I'll second it. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Aye. All right. Mr. Buckley, let's go to number 6A, CR 2602.

Yes, sir. And before we begin, I believe Mr. Huffines needs to recuse himself from the board. Before this agenda item comes up.

Mr. Chairman, we are, our firm and myself personally, we are the civil engineers for the project on this item. And if possible, I would like to be recused from this hearing so that we can represent the project.

I make a motion to let Mr. Huffines be recused. Second. All in favor? Aye. Thank you, Mr. Huffines.

All right. So for our first agenda item today, we have conditional rezoning for the proposed subdivision known as White Rock Estates over on Westmore Street. This is the second time this submittal has come to the planning board due to changes made to the proposed site plan. And I'll list some of the changes as demonstrated here. There were originally 27 homes. There are now 24 homes proposed. I believe the new homes are larger than what was originally proposed in square footage. There was also on-street parking provided. I believe 12 on-street parking spots. And they also replaced the T-turn around with a cul-de-sac. The... Oh, I apologize. Just to kind of skip ahead here to the... kind of staff recommendation on this. We view this proposed conditional rezoning to be in line with the policies in the comprehensive plan. Policy 4.31, 5.12, and 5.21 regarding land use patterns, variety of home ownership opportunities, and diverse neighborhood characteristics. And we would recommend approval.

Thank you, Mr. Buckman. Mr. Huffman, are you guys ready to present?

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. My name is Michael Watkins. I'm the CEO of Walker Properties and we're the developers for White Rock Estates. This is our second time coming before the planning board and appreciate the opportunity to do so. We have a prepared presentation that will be a refresh. Obviously, for some of you, we'll paraphrase as we go through. Any items that require any additional clarification or explanation, we'll be glad to stop and do so. But I'll basically summarize. This is pretty much the same presentation that we did before. but with some added characteristics to it. If you please join and go to the next page. So we're going to first talk about our journey through the city's, Graham's development process to kind of be in full transparency around that. I'm going to go through the agenda first, if you don't mind. Thank you. Why Graham? The project vision, our concept and the intent of overall for the project. We have an updated site layout for the project. Mr. Hoffine will take us through that. We'll cover the density overview in this presentation, our utility overview plan, our home site overview, and the project timing and project and benefit summary. So with that, we'll go to the next slide, Jonathan. Thank you. So a little bit about our journey through this process, and this is in the spirit of transparency. We did an application in Q1 of this year that was completed and accepted. We did an initial session with the technical review. We went through two sessions where we made some modifications. Those were made and accepted. We came through the planning board. There was general change opposition to this property by several of the residents in the area. We had some density concerns and we talked about just briefly some of the changes we made to address the density concern. Street access was another issue. We addressed that as well and parking and utilities and we've done All of those adjustments have made significant change. The board did not recommend our rezoning at that time because of some of the concerns. We made additional changes before we went before the city council. And at that meeting, it was felt that the changes were significant enough that they wanted us to go back through the technical committee. And we went back through the technical committee on September the 8th. Pretty much I think a clean slate. I think we may have to make one or two minor modifications, I think in the size of some piping for the utilities and that sort of thing. It was accepted through the Technical Review Committee and we appreciate that. We're here today back before you. We're going to take you through all of the changes that we've made. We'll talk about those, why we made those changes. and then hopefully be able to move forward to the next city council. Next slide, please, Jonathan. Why Graham? Graham at a glance is a great community. Over 20,000 population, an annual growth rate of almost 3 percent, and just a great area to work. I used to spend a great deal of time as I traveled from Raleigh to Greensboro when I was in undergraduate school and spent a lot of time here between Burlington, Graham and Mebane. So I'm very familiar with the area and I consider this home for me. I've spent almost 40 years in corporate America and have lived outside of Raleigh and Greensboro for about 40 of those years and currently making my way back home. I live at 538 Redford Place in Roseville, North Carolina. It's a great community. And I also plan to have a home here in this community if we're so fortunate to be able to put it in place for the Graham community. This area is great as far as cost of living. And I think it is truly attracting the type of residents that's going to really add to the tax base and the viability of this community. And we just want to add to that. Next slide, please. So just an overview of our White Rock Estates. It's a private gated community. We want the homes to be secluded and situated on wooded lots. So our plan is to preserve as much of the topography and the trees and vegetation as possible. The community will feature a small to medium sized homes. The current plan is for 15 cottage homes that will be anywhere between 900 and 1200 square feet and nine custom built homes anywhere between 1200 and 2500 square feet. These homes were feature uh in the community will feature open pergolas Open seating and swing areas, fire pit, walking trails, waterfall and fountain features throughout the property and around the one plus acre pond and fishing privileges for the residents. Where our homes will be built stick, all stick built and sustainable and energy efficient features for the home. This is an active adult lifestyle community. So accessibility and safety features will be offered, and I'll cover a little bit of those here in a few minutes. We really want to focus on low maintenance living, so health and wellness amenities, social and recreation features, and modern home designs with personalized options, such as single and multi-family, multi-level homes. For the multi-level homes, we'll offer elevator and stair lift provisions for the multi-level units and other home safety features and friendly features, including walk-in tubs and showers. And obviously, as I mentioned, walk-in trail for golf cart provisions and scooters throughout the community. Next slide, please. So the site layout, we have it divided into two areas. One is what we call East Lake, where the custom ranch homes will be located. And the other section is called the West Lake section for custom built cottage homes. We think it's a great location. It's 10 plus acres with the one plus acre pond. and on the corner of Hanford and Moore here in Graham, and basically two miles off of 4085. Next slide. This slide is meant to give you a depiction of the layout of the property. On the West Lake side, as I said, 15 cottage homes, and on the East Lake side, nine. We've pared down the number of units in order to meet the density, same density as is currently zoned for. There's no change there. Actually, we're a little under that. We have here all the proposed lot sizes for both the cottage and the custom homes. And it meets all the requirements for and chat to kind of walk through some of the elements as it relates to meeting the all the city and state requirements. Next slide, please. From a density perspective, the current zoning and proposed zoning equals the same number of lots. So if you look at the current zoning for the 10.05 acres, it has a density of two point or 2 units per acre which comes out to 24.3 lots when you do the map. Our request for the same footage is comes out to 2.3 9 units per acre so for 24 units. So we made the change to pare that down to meet the current the current zone and requirement as it is for our 18. Next slide please. Chad will talk a little bit about this when he goes through the layout plan, but the utilities are under private streets and tied in with the public utility access points. We satisfied all the requirements of the engineers and the public figures from a municipality standpoint. We also plan to have a wastewater sewer pump station to satisfy all of the activity. And that will be tied into city and water utilities back up on Moore Street. And Chad will walk through that in a little bit more detail here. From a project open space perspective, we're satisfying where we have about 28% is for the actual parcels for right-of-ways, about 21%. and 50% open space and about 1.68 for road and parking and sidewalks, private driveway and sidewalks about 0.33, home cottage for the cottage home site about 0.34 and for the custom home site about 0.41. And you can see the area square footage. The biggest percentage of the total space is impervious surface area allocation. Next slide, please. This is an example of some of the renderings of the cottage homes. As you can see, we got a variety that would be lifted off the topography to meet and to preserve the natural topography of the landscape of the property. Next slide. This is some of the custom renditions of the units on the cusp on the cottage home side. And we have all of the cottage homes where the designs will fit within the lots to satisfy the setbacks and all of the requirements. And these are just some some renditions that you can say this is a one story unit. And 900 plus square feet. and has options for a deck. And this is a two story unit, uh, with two different, uh, front with, um, uh, um, requirements on it. And also some units will have actual, uh, garages as well.

Next slide.

This is another rendition. This is a one bedroom with the office, uh, can be 900 plus square by 900 plus feet. And we can scale these a little bit based on what the potential customers needs are. And this is another rendition with the balcony off the end and in the garage. These are some renditions of the custom home side. Some of the types of units, as you can see some two story, but mostly one story units. And here are some renditions of a few of the floor plans. Two options with this particular floor plan, one with three bedrooms, the other one with two bedrooms with the office.

Next slide.

This is a rendition of a typical home topography based on its profile on the property. As you can see, we saw a fire truck coming down one of the main streets and shows how the units will actually sit on the property. All the units will have as best we can from a design and view perspective, a view of the pond. And the balconies will be associated so residents can walk off their balcony and have a direct view down to the pond. And we plan to have the fountain features, et cetera. All of the requirements have been made relative to fire and rescue and appropriate turnarounds and those types of things as far as being easy access in and out of the communities. A few of the amenities and accessibility and safety features as I mentioned earlier, walking trails, we plan to have natural walking trails and some paved. benches and swings for the residents to enjoy throughout the property. Walk-in tubs for those that need that level of accessibility and elevator and stellar features that will be tied in inside the units. So our phased implementation will be phase one would be site prep and infrastructure. phase two will be the cottage home side and then we'll follow that up with phase three uh on the ranch custom home side so overall project plan um assuming we can uh achieve uh approval here in the third quarter and project uh overall financing and phase two engineering in the fourth quarter of this year and project execution for completion by fourth quarter of 2024, 2027. It's 24 units. So building out 24 units in nine months, nine to 12 months is very doable. So we plan to have the project closed out at the end of 2027. The project will bring significant benefit to the community. We're looking at about a $12 million total investment in the community, which will generate significant tax, just not based on the install properties, but also just from the construction period itself. Next slide for the 24 units. We're talking about 335,000 for the city of Graham over a 10-year period based on the number of units. and a little over 500,000 for elements for a combined close to a million dollars for 24 affordable quality homes generating nearly a million dollars in local revenue in the first decade. With that, on the last slide there, I want to thank the City Council for the opportunity and I'll address any questions that you might have. Thank you for before I get to questions I like Mister Hoffman to come up and walk through if you will the details of the site plan.

Thank you Michael, my name is Chad have fun about 5 East Davis Street and the civil engineer for the White Rock states project. Coming back before you with some technical updates and some changes. I'd like to bring your attention to from the previous meetings. We had questions about provisions for utilities provisions for off street parking for density relative to the existing zoning. So if I could take just a few minutes and we'll go through the entrance and work down the plan. Our connection at the entrance has not changed. from the previous version. However, we have added the gate provision and a sufficient stem length ahead of the gate to accommodate the fire department's concerns. We've been asked to and will provide the security elements the fire department needs, including the Knox box and codes and sensors for that particular gate. There's a walk around that the pedestrians can access to bypass the gate. And immediately upon entry, your options are to go to the cottage section, the custom section, or to pull off the street to your parking areas. If you go down the south part of the project, the cottage homes are situated along the cul-de-sac, which terminates at the end with an island and some additional off-street parking. These spaces are added in response to the comments from our previous meeting. And a connection with sidewalks and walking trails create a loop around that section as it can stand alone. If you go back up to the intersection and continue kind of in a southwestern or southeastern direction, you'll enter into the custom side, which did not really change other than the access. The topography situation, the integration of each home site into the gentle slope on that side of the project remained the same to preserve the view of the pond. And then that street terminates in a new cul-de-sac with the same island and same additional parking areas and cluster mailbox that is provided on the other side. We've tried to accommodate the city's largest fire engine, 10. A turning template has been added to the presentation. It was reviewed by the fire marshal and plans inspector and was satisfactory to their review. In provisions for water and sewer, we're proposing a private sewer system built to public standards that will be designed in the vertical space to accommodate any future gravity connection that may arise in future time. In the present time, we're proposing to collect the sewage in a private pump station located at the south end of the cottage side of the project. The sewage will then be forced back up that street and into the intersection at Hanford and Moore. The water supply system will connect to the city's public water supply. It will be a public water line, adequately sized for fire protection, terminating in two hydrants, one on the southern side of the cottage area and one on the southeastern side in the custom home area. Those will be public lines. Citizens will pay the city the water bill. And because the streets and access will be private, we've added some notes in the presentation and for the record that if the city needs to go into the area and repair the water main, the Homeowners Association bears the burden of replacing the asphalt any curb, sidewalk, whatever is disturbed for the maintenance or upgrade of the water line. That is a very typical scenario for a publicly owned utility in a private area so that the city is not burdened with the street repair. They are only concerned with protection and maintenance of the water supply system. I think that captures at least the four items we had from last time, and I'll take any technical questions if you have any.

Let's give it a roll. Mr. Shevlin, you got any questions?

I do. Mr. Huffines, where's the water supply tap going to be?

At the north end of our entrance. That screen's hard to see. It might be cut off just a little bit. But at the end of that entrance, we'll connect to existing utilities at the intersection.

And that doesn't cross property?

Correct. That is on this property or public right-of-way.

And the parking status per home, is it designed to be one or two vehicles?

So each home will have a space for two vehicles.

Okay.

I'll add or add on to that question a little explanation. I would like to think that the addition of off-street parking worked out in some formula, but it just worked out aesthetically to fit, so that's the maximum number of spaces we were able to accommodate, and it still looked good.

That's all I have right now. Thank you. Thank you.

This isn't a technical question, but you can probably answer it. The sidewalks that are starting at the street that you've now added that bypass the gate, just to confirm those are open to the general public. So there's not a gated access.

To the sidewalk. Okay.

A couple of quick questions. Did you mention about mail kiosks?

I didn't specifically. I might have spoken to it in the presence at the cul-de-sac parking area. I don't know if we have a way to zoom in. I can bring you a sketch, but each one of those cul-de-sacs provides an accommodation for a cluster box unit.

Okay.

At the parking area to the north... There's also a provision for one, depending upon what the postmaster prefers. So we have three distinct locations. We could have three cluster boxes. We could have two. We could have one. It would just be up to the postmaster.

Second question. Did we ever discuss or did it come up in discussion about having a fence or buffer or something on the west boundary?

So the light green squiggly lines... And I'm glad you brought that up. That was a concern from the citizens last meeting. We have illustrated there a heavy, intense, opaque vegetative buffer. That will be specific to the lots. I think that will be, I guess that's one and two. And the boundary to their west. And that'll just be heavy vegetation that supplements any existing vegetation. There's very little tree coverage in that area. It's a lawn and it's a really well-maintained grass yard. So to provide a buffer, those plantings are proposed and committed to in this presentation.

So what about, did we ever talk about having a fence along that border with adjacent property on the west side?

I don't remember the fence being specific. It could certainly be a condition.

I was interested in that because one of the things that came up in Watkins' presentation was security, safety. I wonder if that had been a consideration somewhere along the way.

The only fencing that will be installed for, at least as a common practice for safety, is around the stormwater features.

Right.

If there's a desire for additional screening, we'd be at the mercy of any recommendations the planning board may want to make.

Mr. Huffine, what's the lot dimensions, average, across the front?

It depends. You have a table that, if Jonathan will zoom in, Yes, what we were tasked to do is provide a 3,000 square foot minimum cottage lot size. And that table provides the depth and width of each lot. In the specific consideration of lots three and four, I think they were somewhat shallow. We studied each lot on the cottage side to make sure that the builder had a product that would fit with adequate room and continued the aesthetic we were trying to achieve. So the lots are varying in size. However, the architecture is integrated for that specific lot.

So is your residence sitting at the minimum setback from the front?

It will be in most cases.

And what is the minimum setback? What's the distance from the house to the sidewalk?

So we'll have room for at least a Ford F-150. We're proposing not less than 20 feet. The majority of the homes will either have an elevated carport that's also a deck or a garage, one-car garage. So those vehicles will have room behind the sidewalk to be out of any passers-by way and an additional vehicle on the lot.

In your sewer pump station that you're proposing as a private system, where are you proposing to build that at?

So at the bottom end of around lot 9, there is a very light 50 by 50 square that is right below lot 9.

Yep, I see it.

That area is typical for accommodating a fenced-in secured wet well generator, odor control, and then access for a small crane or service vehicle to get to. In the event that a gravity provision is made, the sewer coming into that pump station will be at a correct elevation so that the pump station could be taken offline in the future. The construction, the maintenance, All of the provisions for the sewer system would be private, but constructed to public standards.

And back at the entrance, I noticed that the gate is a pretty good distance from the road itself. It's not going to be right at the road, is that correct?

That's correct.

And what's the width of that road there?

So that section varies. Our narrowest section is 27, our widest is about 38. At the gate, we make sure we have adequate 26 feet to pass the fire vehicle. And the length of stem, what we call the stem is the section of road from the gate back to the intersection, is adequate to pull a tractor trailer off the road and not be in the right of way. So it also accommodates all of the fire engines.

And as far as your entry into that gate, security system, is that going to be like a call box that calls each individual house and you have to be buzzed in?

I don't know the answer to that yet. It could be a keypad. It could be a call. It could be an intercom system. That's yet to be determined. I do want to add, though, just backing up, there is a distance that we try to achieve off the intersection before the gate that accommodates the longest vehicle but does not create a greater than 150-foot dead end so that even in the event that the gate is closed, we can abide by fire code's dead ends. So we have this little range of 150 to 78 feet that we try to fall within, and that one just happens to be 100 feet.

Any reason why you're building the public street standards? Any reason why you don't want that to be a public street?

So that we can have the gate.

Just so for the gate only?

Yes, sir. I think we wrestled with that at the last hearing. How do you gate a public street and the provisions to do that? And it just seemed too cumbersome. So this would be a private street building. fully accessible to the emergency vehicles and the citizens that choose to live there.

What kind of lighting are you going to have for the street?

They'll likely be the 8 to 10 foot acorn lamps. That, again, is further out in time for decision. They'll probably be a typical cobra head at the intersection, but we have not determined that at this point.

With no light pollution leaving the lot property?

We can certainly have that added as a condition. It is not typical in a wooded area that we would be concerned about leaving the property at its boundaries, but it is certainly something that if we were given that condition, we could meet.

That's all I got, Mr. Bailey.

Yeah, I have just one question. Yes, sir. That pump station you were speaking of, you did say it will be secured with a fence around it.

Correct. Typically, it's a chain link fence with a gate that's big enough to get a service body truck in and out of. And that'll stay locked with, I would say, access to the operator having a key and then probably someone at the neighborhood also having a key, depending on travel times. Those pump stations will also have telemetry that give an alarm and a phone call at any time there's a high flow event. But it will be fully secured.

What I want to know.

Yeah, I had a couple additional questions. Yes, sir. If we can go back down to the pump station. Now, zoom out a little bit. There's two pieces of property. The one piece of property, my first question is what happens if that pump station fails to that piece of property that's underneath it?

What happens? So if a pump station overflows, the sewage goes into the bioretention cell, which is that heavy black triangular line just south of it.

Okay.

If we're going to look at just the worst case scenario, the pump station and a hurricane come at the same time. The... Alarm goes off for the pump station. The operator is notified. The presence of two feet of water is already in the bioretention cell. So a little bit of overflow, which I can't tell you the quantity. I could figure it, but I could tell you. A little bit of the quantity of the sewage would then flow into the bioretention cell. That water then outlets and comes out of the pipe and goes into the stream, which is downstream of the bioretention cell. And then it goes on to... It continues south towards the wastewater treatment plant through the stream.

That answered that. Now, zoom out a little bit, Johnson, right there. So those two pieces of property, there was no mention of fencing, nothing to protect them, their privacy. Is there any plans? Behind Lot 9? Well, that piece of property right there.

The adjoiner property to our west? Both of them.

That one and the one over there to the other piece of property.

Correct. There has been no discussion or there is no, at this moment, there is no commitment to any fencing, privacy fencing along the perimeter boundaries.

Nothing to protect their privacy? No.

Other than the vegetation, the buffers that are required, and our own preservation of the landscaping. Thank you. We have not committed to any fencing along that perimeter properly. Thank you, sir. That was my question. Yes, sir.

Any further questions for the petitioner? All right. Thank you, Mr. Huffman. Yes, sir. Thank you. Anyone from the audience wish to speak tonight, please come up and state your name and address.

I'm going to start first. I'm Paige Cook. I live at 1202 Hanford Road. I've lived there approximately 30 years. And Mildred is my neighbor. She'll speak in a minute. And that's why they want this property. It's so beautiful because we've taken care of it. And we're still continuing to take care of that property. She still mows it. She looks after it. That's why it still looks like it does. I don't know how they're going to. You can call it a little house. You can call it a cottage. I call it tomato, tomato. It's not that much difference to me. They're taking two houses away. They haven't changed a lot. The pump station scares me to death. Would you want one in your backyard? I don't. Are you going to smell it? I mean, we haven't talked about any of that. You've talked about what might happen. These things bother me. These are things that you have to address. The other thing that bothers me is, yeah, it's beautiful back there. From my house, I can see that pond that's not very pretty right now because it's not being taken care of like it's supposed to. But at any rate, I can see that. I don't know how he's going to block what he's doing over there from me. It's going to kill the value of my land. Already behind me, you've got tons and tons of houses that are back there. They're the duplexes. So now, even when I go out in the mornings to get on Moore Street, I'm sitting there forever because there's already so much traffic that's going through there. You're going to have even more traffic and it's just going to be a nightmare. So I don't know, and I wish you would go and look at the layout of this land. I'm not an engineer, I'm not pretending to be, but I have lived there. I know the land pretty well. So I think you should go and look at it and see the layout of it and see what they're talking about. I don't even know how they're gonna, I feel like I'm in Harry Potter world with a magic wand. But at any rate, I really feel like it would make a difference to look at it. But for us, it is of no value And we spent a lifetime taking care of that, looking after our property, our land. It's just going to kill the value of my house as far as I'm concerned. But maybe Mildred has something else to say.

I'm Mildred Huey. I live at 117 Hanford Road, across the road. There's nothing but two houses down there. It's always been there. I built it. And that's been 62 years. I know this piece of property like the back of my hand. And he would have never got it if he was going to change anything on it. He knows what he needs to do, but he don't want it. And this will not fit this piece of property at all. You're talking about tiny houses, 900 square feet. i got a horse barn over there 900 square feet with put my daughter had a horse in so that's what you're getting and it'll just please don't change the zoning and let us have this kind of mess down there it's going to ruin the property i keep it up i keep it up i told the landscaping people that he had bought it and he should take care of it he did not he said he wasn't going to pay for it i have the matters mode i do the pond he told him he was not going to pay for it and nothing to keep upkeep of this property so he's not keeping it up now And I'm 93 years old and have to keep it up and have to follow up with something like this. It will absolutely ruin us. This is not going to fit this piece of property. Not on my side. I don't know what he's going to do on Elvis' side because I haven't walked that one. very long it's been a long time since i walked that one but on my side when it's coming down beside of my road off of the moore street i can't get out now and of course i don't think i'll be driving very much longer but anyway i still want to be able to get out and get in but what they're talking about now on This side of the street, it will not fit. You cannot get this kind of housing in there at all. I know more than that.

Thank you. Any questions for Ms. Huey or Ms. Cook from the board?

Can you tell us, you're saying who? Who are you saying you refer to when you spoke about having the maintenance done around the pond and stuff like that? Well, me. Okay. That's Mr.

I showed my landscaper. He told me.

Mr. Watkins. I just wanted to know who the he was. I just wanted to make sure.

That's the only one I've been dealing with.

Have you been notified of these meetings?

Landscaping man came to me and said. He made the meeting today.

Sir. Sir. Sir. No speaking from the audience. I'll give you an opportunity to come up here in just a second. Thank you.

Yes, ma'am. Just finish. No, no.

No, you're going to let these finish and then you can come up. Sir, Ms. Hewitt has got to finish, and then I will call you up.

We're finished.

Okay.

Don't change the phone zone anymore. That's false protection.

State your name and address.

Dean, remember it.

State your name and address. I'm Elvis Webster. I live at 335 West Moore Street. this kind of sneaked up on us. We understood that this meeting was going to be in October. I found out about it this afternoon at four o'clock. I'm not really prepared my presentation because I thought I had a few more weeks, but I'm going to say what's on my mind if it's okay. I would challenge you to go down and park in Mildred's driveway and try to get out between 7 in the morning and 8 o'clock in the morning and 4 o'clock and 6 o'clock in the afternoon. It's almost impossible. I'm also concerned about, what do they call it? When you've got too many people in one spot. I noticed something the other day. My water pressure has dropped since they started pulling water down there at Hanford Estates. Is that the name of it right around the corner from us? Hanford Landing, sir? I don't know the name. It's hampered something. I'm just concerned about the traffic and the population density. That's what I was looking for. I hate to see all these trees go down. Trees do two major things for the environment. They take pollutants out of the air, and they act as a sound barrier. Since all that development down there on 85, what used to be Dock Tears property, I can hear traffic noise from 85, 40. I don't know. I think there's been too much development down there in that section along Hanford Road, Morse, and Rogers Road. You go down there and look at Rogers Road, they brought in caterpillars, knocked down all the trees, leveled the ground, and they... They brought all their materials in from out of Mass County. They didn't use local subs. They take the money and run. They don't pay any taxes. Is all these houses going to pay for themselves in utilities and infrastructure upkeep? I wonder. Additional police force, additional fire departments, additional water and sewage. I don't know. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Webster. Any questions for Mr. Webster?

Thank you. I have one more question. I've been looking at this flat, and I got a little bit of copies. It doesn't look to me like there's any offset on the houses he's going to build next to my property. Is that true? What lots are you talking about, sir? I can't read it.

It's one that joins. Can you show us up on the screen?

Can you show us on the screen?

You see? Your house is on Moore Street, so are you referring to the first set of lots or the second set of lots?

22, 23, 24. OK. OK. 23, 24. It's 22, 23, 24. OK. I see it. Yeah.

It don't make any difference.

Either one of them lots right there, it backs up to 22, 23, and 24.

But they will be to the minimum setbacks, which is required by the city for rear property lines. Jonathan, what's the setback on those lots for the rear setback?

So I do see some setback here. The exact number I don't have on hand, unfortunately. Which would be required by the city. It's required by the city. This is conditional rezoning, so there is no setback requirement.

OK.

It depends what's put on the site plan and what conditions are imposed by these boards.

Mr. Huffon.

Yes, Pete.

Thank you. So this is going to be 10 feet off of the property line.

Step back.

Anyone else like to speak concerning this item tonight? I'll give you one more opportunity. I'll get you this minute, Mr. Bowman. Come on, Mr. Watkins.

What I'd like to do is make a couple closing statements and comments. If there's a conditional requirement relative to private fencing for privacy, we would seriously consider that as part of our plan. Um, we've tried to address that with making sure we satisfy the minimum requirements from a setback perspective. But if there are some conditional elements relative to private fencing, we certainly consider that we want to do what we can do affordably to address all of the concerns as best possible. And I think we've, um, put forth, uh, an effort to, to do so. Um, a couple of closing comments here, uh, members of the planning board, city staff and members of the community. Um, as we come to the end of our presentation here, I want to take a moment to focus on why we're here today and what we believe White Rock Estates can mean to the Graham City community. This has been a long process for us, but we know we still have a ways to go, and we've learned a great deal along this process. We have listened carefully to the concerns raised by the city staff, the planning board, the city council when we met with them briefly, and also And with great intent, we've tried to listen to the residents. Those concerns included density, accessibility, parking, utilities, community impact, and the overall character of the development. And we didn't just listen. We made changes. We went back to the drawing board. We worked through the technical issues. We modified the plan several times and we continue to work with the city's process. The revisions have been substantial and we are back before you today because we believe the current proposed addresses the major concerns that have been raised for this community. Let me emphasize one important point about this project. We're not asking Graham to accept more density than the property currently allows. The R18 zoning allows for 24 lots. Our proposal is for 24 lots, 24 homes, with essentially the same density as existing. What we are proposing is something different. And we believe a better way of utilizing the permitted density. We envision a private gated community with wooded lots, custom cottage and ranch homes, walking trails, gathering areas, recreational amenities, accessibility and safety features, and a pond that becomes a central community asset. Approximately five acres of this property will remain open space. So out of the 10 acres, five remain open space, including 22, 2.2 acres of active open space and approximately 1.5 for the pond and 1300 square feet of shoreline. We have also addressed infrastructure requirements through the proposed private street, resident and visited parking and utility plan, including wastewater treatment with our own pumping station that the homeowners will have responsibility for. But there's another reason we believe the project deserves your support. It represents a significant economic investment in the Graham and Alamance County community. we're putting about $12 million of private investment is anticipated here. Based on the assumptions presented today, that represents approximately $350,000 in property tax revenue for the city of Graham, approximately over half a million dollars for the Alamance County over a 10-year period, so nearly $1 million. And that's not a one-time benefit that goes on year after year after year after year. So when you step back and look at the entire property, we believe White Rock Estates checks several important boxes. It provides new affordable housing. It maintains essentially the same density as already permitted under the existing planning. It preserves significantly open space, almost half of the current acreage. It provides quality homes and community amenities. It addresses infrastructure requirements, and it creates substantial investment in the community. We understand that you have a responsibility to protect the interests of the city. and its residents, and we respect that responsibility. We are asking you to look at the entire journey of this project, not just where we started, but where we are today. We've listened, we've responded, we've made significant changes, and we believe the results is a project that is consistent with responsible growth and provides real value to Graham, in alamance county tonight we're asking we're not asking you to approve the project simply based on the fact that we want to build it we're asking you to recognize the opportunity for the gram the added quality affordable housing the preserved open space and the approximate $12 million private investment in strengthening its tax base here in Graham and the county, while maintaining essentially the same number of homes of existing zoning it allows. We believe White Rock Estates can be a positive addition to Graham. And we are committed to being a responsible partner with the city, the planning board, and the surrounding community. It is for those reasons we respectfully ask the planning board to support our project to approve the rezoning and allow White Rock Estates to move forward. We are ready to move forward. We're ready to continue to work with the city. And we are ready to invest in the future of Graham. Thank you for your time, your consideration, and the opportunity to present White Rock Estates to you today. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Bonney, your question.

Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Back to the entry, kind of close up on the entryway, the gated aspect. I guess my main question is somebody who's either just joyriding or maybe he's trying to go see somebody in that development and they're not home. How do you turn around when you come in and you're confronted with a gate that you can't get through?

27 foot wide road there. and 20-foot in some sections, I guess they'd do a three-point turn. 27 at that entry point? According to Mr. Huffines, yes. But where the gate is, that's probably close to 100 feet down. I don't know what the actual distance is. Even if it was a 20-foot, somebody could do a three-point turn. Now, Dr. Traylor couldn't. Most people probably just back out. Mr. Fowler, you want to address that?

So in a typical situation, if I drove down, I'd make a three-point turn ahead of the gate and turn around and leave. If I'm driving a tractor trailer, then I have a challenge to back out onto Moore Street. That would be the best and the worst case. you have room to put a turnaround right there before the gate on the left where all the squiggly lines are we could certainly put a hammerhead there or another parking area to pull off um you're in a significant slope against the moore street embankment but a retaining wall could be constructed around a perimeter of a 20 by 30 pull off you would turn left into the squiggly lines back yourself back into the gate and then pull out towards Moore Street. That would take care of most citizens, including up to probably an ambulance. But we're still going to be faced with backing out onto Moore Street if we have a large fire vehicle or a tractor trailer. I will say that during the construction phases, there would be no gate. So the likelihood of a tractor trailer being there, unless they inherently use the wrong GPS coordinates, highly unlikely. During construction, they would come in and use cul-de-sacs or turn around at the intersection.

Dr. Traley can make a turn in that cul-de-sac?

They will, yes, sir. They'll tear it all to pieces, but they'll do it. Yes, sir.

Okay, any further questions from anyone in the audience before I close the public hearing? All right, seeing there's none, I'll close the public hearing and

open it up for discussion chairman the one question i have on the map it shows a road going from i guess this is the west going from the side road up to the right there johnson zoom in on lot number up further up no down i meant scroll up yeah Right there.

Lot number 10.

Come on down a little bit more. Right there. So there's a, come on, move your cursor down to that side, to the right. Over here. Walking trail. Walking trail.

Walking trail. Walking trails.

Okay. So those are walking trails.

Yeah, the skinny ones.

So how does the people from the two, if they're walking trails how did the people in them two residents get out of the go back to the front how did they get up and in in the bottom lot referring to miss huey's yeah no no miss uh page uh the miss cook's lot

Right, correct. That's what you're asking about.

Is that the right thing to pull up? That's a road. That's not a sidewalk.

That's the actual road that goes down into that cul-de-sac.

Yeah.

That's the actual road that goes to the cul-de-sac for the turnaround.

You're talking about this straight stretch right here, right, Mr. Shillen? Yes. Yeah.

Where's her house sitting? Correct. She would still come in over here and go down.

Where does her house sit?

You don't see hers because it's on her property, so it's essentially to the left of this drawing.

Okay. Right here that goes here?

No, no, no. These are walking trails, right? She's coming in here.

How is she getting to her property there around the lake?

She doesn't own this anymore.

This is not hers. I guess my biggest concern is the residents that are there and their concerns. Obviously, Mr. Huffines did a great job on the architecture. I have no grounds to challenge him with that. My challenge is Which, as always, is how do we satisfy the concern of the private owners around the development? You guys have more experience with this than I do.

Our job is to determine whether it meets the development.

Okay.

Right. It's the city council's job is to give the final arbitration of what their decision is. Our job is to determine whether it meets the minimum zoning.

All right. Thank you. Thanks for getting me in straight on that. I'll get off that. I'll let somebody else while I think of something.

I think that there has been the density problems that we have discussed in the past have been resolved. And like Mr. Watkins has noted that the density that they are proposing falls within that R18 requirement, even though they're asking for the conditional rezoning. If we were to move forward with this, I think that I would like to see some sort of condition regarding fencing, since that's been something that has been discussed here and by those in the audience and those that live nearby. And I also, you know, we keep throwing things that change the architecture to your point. But that setback, I think, is also worth noting, the 10-foot setback. I think Mr. Webster has some concern there. And I do think that is a short setback. With that being said, if we do have a privacy fence, even if we make a condition that it's a taller fence than just your normal fencing height, that would probably be resolved as well. But I do think that Mr. Watkins has resolved the density problems. And I do appreciate that, before that you brought that back, that you did resolve that. But I do want to recognize the citizens' concerns and make sure that it is known that we do care. And I have driven that back there multiple times, one, because it is beautiful, and two, because you are correct that it would be unfair of us to make any decisions without knowing what it looks like. But the fencing is my largest concern at this point.

Who would that pump smell like? There are. That's not a consideration, whether it means.

It has nothing to do with. It has nothing to do. Thank you.

Mr. Wood.

Several observations. And I'll preface my remarks with saying that I am a bit torn on this one. But I'll try to explain that. I think Mr. Watkins has done a very good job of the density issues, the things that we've brought to his attention, he's addressed very well. I don't find anything regarding zoning that I can say no about. But from a purely emotional standpoint, just some comments. But I would like to say that I identify with a lot of what the neighbors have said. I happen to live just off of Hanford Road on Carolina Circle. So I've driven that many, many times. I've seen the traffic. I drove that way every day for nearly 20 years. So I've seen the traffic. I've seen the increase. I've seen the development. I've seen trees cut down. I've seen huge forests, swaths of forests cut down in the development of that area. So your comments are not lost on me in particular. One comment on the other side of the coin is regarding the cottage homes, 900 square feet. I grew up in Memphis, Tennessee. I grew up in a house that was 880 square feet. three bedrooms one bath three boys mom and dad i know what that size house is that was 20 years that house so yes i know what that size house and i've got to say that the houses that he showed us in the presentation are a heck of a lot nicer looking than what i grew up in so i i have to give mr watkins his view on that but concerning i've i've been down that miss you have been down that that road your your driveway numerous times and uh it's a beautiful piece of property but as far again as zoning i think he's he's met the conditions by nothing

speak negatively about in that regard concerns are as to privacy's fence if it is if a motion is made to approve i think privacy fence needs to be at a specific height um especially on any property that borders a property with a residential structure on it so that looks like to me that the whole side closest to moore street mr webster's property the next one up all the way up would have a privacy dance and i'm leaning towards something that eight to ten feet total privacy uh because there's not much room to work uh with the yard area to landscape and put trees there uh so i would want something total privacy at least eight to ten foot at the minimum uh on the other side uh the area that borders towards miss huey's driveway and all that i would want it to run all the way up that side also uh when it gets up there to hanford road um at the first being there they could stop it there at that first being not at the lower part at the top end of the being closest to moore street uh they could stop the fence there and same on the right side they could stop the fence up there where that turnaround area or potential turnaround area chance got there around there they could stop the fence right in that area i think it would be sufficient um i'm not concerned about the density i've lived on moore street since 1990 it wasn't actually more street in 1990 that came later but i've lived there for a long time i've seen the traffic every day i drive it every day and i witnessed that traffic i wish traffic was something that we could consider in our decisions um but it's not and uh i know the traffic's bad and i know it's only going to get worse but other than that i think it meets the zoning requirement uh for what he's asking for and i don't see any reason that i could deny that let me let me add that concerning the fencing i would add my my voice to that at least an eight foot privacy fence

on the east side six to eight feet on the west side at least uh not only for privacy but just for safety have a gated community and one of the things you're touting is safety privacy then their needs with immovable with the removal of the landscape buffers i think privacy fencing would be a mandate on that mr bailey

Well, I think Mr. Watkins nailed the zoning there. And I agree with my counterparts as far as the fencing on both sides of it. I agree with Mr. Chairman here saying 8 to 10 feet. Probably 8 to 10 on the other side. Instead of 6 to 8, I would probably recommend or suggest 8 to 10. And I did have some concern about how high does the fence have to be around that pump station? There's a minimum standard. What's the minimum for the pump station fence have to be around?

So I can't comment specifically to a minimum standard. Typically, we will build an eight foot chain link fence with a top rail. And depending on the level of security or the location, it may or may not be two strands to three strands of barbed wire on top of it. The most recent pump station that I can reference would be on cherry lane at the intersection or just below the intersection jimmy carr road that type of detail will work out during the construction design if we move forward and it will it will be at least that okay okay thank you chad yes sir thank you mr chairman that's all i have yes sir all right no further discussion here are we making the turnaround at the top of conditions

All right, this time I'll entertain a motion and if y'all don't have one, I do.

Go ahead.

Okay.

I recommend the approval of the petitioner's request to rezone the property under conditional rezoning located at GPEN number 8873964303. That the rezoning of the property would be consistent with the suburban residential land use areas and consistent with the policies of 4.3.1, 5.1.2, and 5.2.1 as put forth by the Graham 2035 Comprehensive Plan on the following conditions. I requested a fence be installed minimum eight foot total privacy for the full existing of the property, including the same matching fence for the pump station. So the pump station that you put in is going to be the same matching fence, privacy.

Just to be clear, eight-foot tall fence across all property lines?

Total privacy. Okay. And the fence can actually stop up at the Moore Street Inn. I don't know how to best describe it other than point it out. Past the last house on the left, coming in on the right side. What lot is that right there?

That's lot one.

All right, lot one, it needs to run 50 feet past lot one along the property line.

And that's on the west side?

The gates? Yeah, stop it at the gate. Stop it at the gate.

So a foot tall privacy fence running along the property line from the gate all the way to the end of the property?

Yes.

To the east cul-de-sac down there?

Yes, and all the way across the back of the property also. All the way around. Come on across, all the way around the property line.

Through the pond as well?

Yes. Well, it'll be on the outside edge of the pond.

Okay. That could, I'm not sure if that pond is fully, that the pond might go onto the abutting property to a certain degree, if that makes sense. I'm not sure if the pond is fully located on this property.

Mr. Huff, I'd be on the full pond.

Might be good to confirm that.

Mr. Chairman, um, Yes, we do own the pond entirely. However, the property line runs with about the normal pool of the pond. So if I may, could you just point out on the existing survey some features?

Yes, sir. Please. Yeah, you can approach.

If anybody wants to come up.

I believe I have a digital copy of that pulled up on the screen as well.

Oh, okay. Yeah. Yeah, this is what you're showing them, correct? Yeah. Okay. No, I'm just going to say to the end.

Yeah. Is that okay with y'all?

Yeah. Okay. mr up on uh it will be the fence instead of going all the way around the property down the right side and the left side where it meets the edge of the of the property without crossing over the water i'm sorry i'm sorry mr chairman i was not paying attention defense that i'm requesting privacy would run down both sides of the property line it will run to the edge of the prop not to the actual edge of the property line to the waterline edge where it's still your property i do not want you to cross the property line um where any water may be behind your fence i understand so what so to say it back to you the way i understand it a privacy fence fully opaque along both the western property boundary of the perimeter and the eastern property boundary of the perimeter to the property line extended from the pond water's edge to both the south and western terminus property line okay okay okay anybody else like to add anything to that make sure that the i got to get the turnaround in there too i'm also requesting that a turnaround be put uh at the front entrance there um prior to the gate that would allow somebody to pull in and back to the gate to drive out instead of having to pull out or back out into the intersection and the last thing that i want to add is under white rocks properties proposal zoning conditions all of the conditions from 1 through 15 be incorporated into my motion and the second page of the revised plan noted eight inch public water yes nothing further i'll enter hang a second second thank you all in favor aye aye any opposed thank you

All right. When ready, do you guys want to motion for a second?

Get outside. Get organized again. I get on that side. Oh, sorry. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Buckley, item number B. Hang on. We need to.

Can you guys motion to.

I make a motion to bring Mr. Huffine back. I'll second it. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Bethlehem is joining.

Yep.

Coming back. Mr. Huffine is back on the panel.

All right. Next up, we have another rezoning request. This time it's a request for a .72 acre lot at 311 Cheeks Lane. The petition is for it to be rezoned from R18 low density residential to CB conditional business for the purpose of developing a parking lot for River Mill Academy's overflow parking. The lot is currently vacant and surrounded by single family homes and the school itself, River Mill Academy. The property is listed on the future land use map as suburban residential. which describes the principal use of single-family homes with supporting uses, including places of worship, daycares, park facilities, schools, civic spaces, and other neighborhood centers that have neighborhood-oriented commercial developments like small professional offices, live-work units, etc., Since this development is associated with the currently existing school and a greater plan of the school, it would be in line with the future land use plan as a neighborhood-oriented use. Staff recommends approval.

Thank you, Mr. Buckley. Mr. Gomes?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You will notice that the rezoning application Please state your name and address, please. Hawkins 304 Travis Lane in Gibsonville. And I represent River Mill Academy, who's the applicant here. And they originally submitted this conditional rezoning request back in January 2025. You might wonder why it's taken us so long to get here. But it really comes down to stormwater and adjoining properties. And you guys may have looked at that before. You'll see from the site plan. that we have addressed the stormwater issues. And the only neighbor that is residential is really behind us there, because if you're standing in your future parking lot looking out at Cheek Lane, to the right is owned by River Mill. Behind us is Miss Belton. And back in February, we recorded an easement um that miss belton executed to give us the right to go across her driveway so her driveway runs between river mill academy and the future location of this parking lot it's a very narrow strip the fact is overflow parking has been taking liberal use of this parcel for a long period of time without anybody's approval what people are going to find a place to park And the school wants to be really good neighbors with her. And so we reflected in that easement that we recorded, not only the map and everything else for us to get the stormwater across her driveway, but also we're going to, pave or concrete her driveway all the way back to her house and put up signs that that is a private drive and it's not to be used because we don't want folks pulling down in there and bothering her for sure um and they won't be coming off the you know since the parking lot will be there be clearly designated clear in and outs there's 41 parking spaces there i think that's my math um and And it should be pretty clean in and out of cheek. Obviously, the easement that we got was to get stormwater back over onto the River Mill Academy site and use the existing stormwater services. Cameron and Jonathan and Josh Johnson have worked with us for a long time to do those details. I won't bore you with the engineering because I'm not an engineer. But we check all of those boxes. We're just looking to add parking. River Mill is in desperate need of it, which is a good thing because that means there's folks coming to River Mill and have a good, successful school in Graham. I'm open to answer any questions. Jeff Dishman is here from the school as well.

Thank you, Mr. Coates. Any questions? Mr. Devlin, you want to start?

Sir, how often is this? Is this going to be used day and night? So there'll be cars traveling in there at night as well as during the day? Like after hours, 7, 8 o'clock?

Yeah, so any kind of activities at the school, especially in the wintertime, right? And there'll be adequate lighting? There will be. Okay. There was 41 spots, is that correct? That's what the report said. I had 8 and 12 in the front and 8 and 13 in the back, so. public school math I think yes right and of course we still have to go through final construction drawings with the city of Graham and get all of those approvals as well we've got good contractors and engineers that have been working on this project thank you I don't have any questions at this time

Mr. Coach, one of my biggest things I'm concerned about is I'm not really concerned. I know it's needed down there, light pollution from the lights that you may have in the parking lot. Are they going to be on timers to where they are utilized only when school activities are going? Are they going to be on mercury switches?

As best as possible to try to both be directional and timed so that that light is not, you know, coming back on Ms. Belton's property in particular. Exactly. And you want some of it coming out on the street. That probably is not going to hurt anybody, but you don't want it directed at her property. That's right.

I just want to clarify regarding lighting. Staff did specify that a lighting plan would be required during the construction plan seminal process. If you guys wish to impose any conditions on that, you're definitely welcome to. Okay.

Bye-bye.

Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, just a couple of things. With the addition of 41 spaces and no allocation for the handicap space, we would either need at the staff level to review the total parking space for River Mill in its entirety and determine if adequate handicap space provisions are available based on the additional 41 spaces. Or we would need to add which results in the removal of one space which is not the goal we're trying to accomplish the removal of one space and the hatching of that aisle to provide two additional handicapped spaces at this location that can be something that's looked at during the final plan approval but you you're either going to look at it in its entirety for the campus or and then determine the fraction of handicapped spaces that are needed, or accessible spaces that are needed, or you're going to provide an accessible space here so that there's equal treatment for the accessible needs at this location. Unfortunately, if the, or depending on how you look at it, if a handicapped space or accessible space is added to this particular plan, then a segment of sidewalk extending from that hatched area to the right-of-way sidewalk will then be necessitated likely in the the little street yard area the only other thing i would i would ask is that we make sure the driveway culvert that the engineer in designing that is aware that that's a class four pipe i know that's very specific but because they're citing in the conditional zoning plan the minimum cover we need to address that the minimum cover would be acceptable if the type of pipe is acceptable meaning it's just a thicker piece of concrete pipe

just a heavier piece of pipe sure that's the only two things i have mr chairman i have nothing at this time mr coon sir y'all would do a recombination of flat there and combine that into one or you believe it standalone we can't because of the driveway in between is owned by miss belton in in the event we ever acquire that adjacent property i would assume that we would do a recombination and to address the great question by Mr. Huffine there, we kind of figured that putting the handicapped accessible spots next to the building that they'd be going into would be a better idea than putting them in this 41 spot area. And it is considered part of the existing That's how we got here with the stormwater. That's what took us a year and a half to get here because if you take this site and you view it independently, there's no stormwater requirement because it's under the limit. So all that we've gone through has been because of the interpretation of that as part of one plan. And, of course, we want stormwater to go to the right place and be good neighbors with Ms. Belton there as well. So we feel like it's addressed, but it'll be certainly addressed in the construction drawings as well, as will the light plan.

How will people get from the parking lot to the school then? If there's not going to be a pathway, concreted, paved from that lot, they're going to have to walk on the street?

There's a proposed sidewalk on there.

It crosses the driveway.

Yeah, I think it runs to the end of the property line right there. And then once you get there, I don't know how many feet that is. It's a small residential driveway across over to the River Mill property. Then you're on site at the school.

One of the things Mr. Coots initially said they were going to pave the driveway. So that will be a concrete strip. driveway that touches the public right-of-way sidewalk, which then the school would pick up sidewalk on the west side.

Thank you, sir. Thank you for clearing that one.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Koontz.

Thank you.

Anyone in the audience want to give any additional details or talk about this project? Mr. Barney?

I think Mr. Shovlin touched on the question I had. whether there was any access from the parking lot to the River Mill, either to the left, or I also see that it says River Mill is also to the right. I don't know what part of their penalty, if any, is down there other than green. But I guess my question is back to the sidewalk. If the only way they're going to get there from these 41 spaces is through the sidewalk along Cheeks Lane, Is there a sidewalk in front of River Mill after you cross Ms. Belton's driveway? Mr. Buckley, can you pull that up?

Yes, sir. Give me one moment and I will check that.

I think it is.

So basically they'll just go on the sidewalk. I don't know where the entry then, but they would come in and cross over

Mr. Bonner, allow this gentleman to come up and state your name and address so we can get that for the record.

I'm Jeff Dishman. My home address is 2117 Brucewood Road. This has been three years in the making for us to try to get this thing going. We've tried to be good neighbors because if you come out there In August, if you come out there during games, if you come out there during our elementary Christmas program, graduation, we got people parking on neighbor's yards and everything else, no matter what we do, no matter how much we rope it off. We got people pulling in a ditch and needing to get towed out of ditches. Everybody wants to see their baby, and I understand that. But we're trying to be a good neighbor to get this. When we first expanded, I don't know, 12 years ago, we put a sidewalk all the way in front of our property, the whole length of the property for Cheeksling. And our plan is to use these spaces for overflow parking, or if students need a park, then they can park there during the day. and they can walk up the sidewalk. We've thought about the safety issue of it. And the sidewalk would cross over Ms. Belton's driveway, but it'd be a continuation of the concrete from the sidewalk and meet our sidewalk that is existing right now. So we feel like we've tried to provide it the safest area we can to enter from our proposed lot to our facility that we have right now. Thank you. Yes, sir.

Anyone else like to speak? All right. If not, I'll close the public hearing and we can discuss it amongst us.

i certainly don't have a problem with them the parking places i think it's needed has been needed for some time yes yes you made a comment about the light noise i wonder if it would be prudent to have a privacy fence going off what we're learning from the last uh hearing of a privacy fence to help knock down some of that light from going into her property we could or they they make

lights now that are very specific yes a lot specific if you want to see some go down and look at the actual walmart distribution center amazon down there at the the light just don't leave the property um If Ms. Belton is not here requesting that, I don't see the need to add that extra expense. I certainly believe that they want to be good neighbors, and they want to keep Ms. Belton happy, so I think they'll do whatever.

Just to clarify, again, about lighting on the staff side, our lighting, we're going to, like, it's very specific and in detail with regards to, like, the amount of foot candle measurements that need to be measured at the property line based on the lighting that's on the property um and that would all need to be provided um by a lighting engineer and approved by us so we can definitely make sure that the light the brightness is that the lights is not are not too bright once they reach the property line without necessarily needing to resort to a privacy fence per se go ahead thanks anybody else entertain the motion

I'd like to make a motion that we approve this request based on some rezoning the property would be consistent with the suburban residential land use type and policies 2.3.2 and 2.2.1 put forth by the Graham 2035 Comprehensive Plan.

I will make a second.

All in favor? Aye.

Any opposed?

Mr. Coates, one other question. I noticed that River Mill owns the property across the street where they come before us many years ago about fueling, parking the buses. Is there any added space there that potentially could be considered at some point to add some more parking there?

We have exhausted all area for parking. Between our staff parking, we have a building we don't use anymore, but we haven't pointed down. And then our bus parking is behind the white center block building.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Goons.

I'm sure if the city of Grand would want to build a parking deck, we might have a good conversation about that.

I think we might build one downtown.

Right there on the corner, right?

Build it downtown.

Y'all want to walk?

The man has gone from preaching to meddling now.

Okay, Mr. Buckley, let's move on to the next. Thank y'all.

Thank you. Okay, our last... And our final agenda item tonight is a request by city council on behalf of planning staff for a text amendment for the vehicle sales use in our use table. Essentially, council has requested staff to address the lack of regulation for the use type of this vehicle dealer slash rentals new and used and update it. So that there are development standards specifically for where it is approved by right in the B2, I1 and I2 district. The use is also preventable by condition and CBCI and CMXC districts, but that's not really relevant to this conversation. So yes, this amendment will provide additional standards for this use type. And as you can see here, we have the annotation we would make to where it's located in the use table with no 26. And here is where no 26 would be displayed in the development ordinance. And these are the standards themselves that have been proposed. I'll also note that the some of the specific numbers and requirements thrown out specifically like with regarding acreage and 250 feet, that stuff is a little bit arbitrary and is definitely open to being changed by the sport and by city council.

learned that we've got a two-acre proposal for 87 and 54, and then we've got five acres for any other roads. Why the discrepancy there?

Yeah, I think it potentially comes from an angle of wanting to maybe viewing vehicle sales as a use more appropriate in the overlay districts by these highway corridors, and maybe if it's going to be off the beaten path a bit, us wanting to require more space. That being said, I think, you know, it's an arbitrary discrepancy that's being made there. You know, you could definitely impose a condition upon approval, right, that the only acreage limitation should apply to all zoning districts, not necessarily those that are abutting Highway 87 or Highway 54. Does that make sense?

It does. I'm just concerned that, you know, that you're cutting some people out potentially that could have a car lot on two acres of land i mean i don't know of many lots that are five acres in the city that hold a car lot on it now other than county ford and Westgate, Mississippi, something like that. But other than that, even the one there on South Main Street beside the funeral home, I don't remember the exact, but I don't think that's five acres. It's four. No, it's like 1.6. That's four acres there. So I think we're cutting some people out of potentially being able to operate a business without finding something five acres or more. I just wish I could justify that five acres with some other meaning.

Mr. Chairman, I'll be glad to help you. Just a little research ahead of tonight's meeting. There are only two parcels on Highway 87 south of the city that are in excess of two acres that are not currently developed or occupied. There are only four on 54 south of basically downtown until we get to Mr. Dewey Brown's assemblage of properties between Woody and Ivey. then there's one remaining parcel right at the wastewater treatment plant entrance so i i would agree with you and probably the rest of my colleagues that the acreage is a topic for discussion tonight yeah i mean if we wanted to do something like this i think it should be conditional zoning and then everyone would have to be based on conditions of each individual request um

Was anybody else has talked about this?

Just to clarify, this is these requirements will not reply to conditional resigning requests for a parking lot. These would be for where they're permitted by right. So without getting a conditional resigning, if you just want to open a parking deck or parking, excuse me, a vehicle sales business or car dealership on any normal strict, you would have to abide by these requirements.

But I understand that everyone that is in business today, they would be grandfathered in, that they would not have to come back and follow these new laws, these new guidelines that we're getting. I got that from Aaron today. Yes, sir. He clarified a few things for me.

But if they close up, the next person... No.

No.

I asked that too.

So it was a 10 because they would essentially become a non-conforming use. So if they shut down, their car dealership for a certain a lot of period of time when they try to open it back up yeah i forget these are but yes it's something it's an extended period of time when they try to open it back up they would no longer be allowed to also if a conforming use moved and say the car dealership closes and something that is approvable moves in and then someone else comes along later and tries to make it the car dealership again they would not be allowed to do that if So as long as they stay open and they don't really change anything significantly, they can persist that way, statute of limitations and all that. But the new ones would have to? The new ones would have to abide by these requirements.

But if someone that was in business today wanted to change something on their property, build a new structure, change anything, change the footprint, then they would be required to meet this new ordinance. Is that not correct?

I'll have to check that for you. Give me one moment.

travels up and down Main Street looking at each of these none of them would conform to this you know exactly from the concrete ballers to keep the cars from rolling out on Main Street I got some of them a D&D that are sitting up on walls they're on grass drive or grass front yards of people they've got homes not a fan of these those lots d d looks nice and clean it just has to follow some more safety regulations but uh most of them are just people's homes that they leased out and people put a car lot zone for it to begin with yes

To answer your question, Mr. Ward, yes. No nonconforming use shall be extended, expanded, or enlarged to occupy a different or greater area of land. And no building divided to a nonconforming use shall be enlarged or extended. So anyone who owns a current car dealership would not be able to develop their site any further than it currently is.

But that two acres is just a, it was somebody's recommendation. We can... We can change that, obviously.

Yes, sir. I believe these requirements were pulled from a nearby municipality, city of Burlington, potentially. I'd have to confirm that. But yes, these are not set in stone.

What's your thought?

There are so many anecdotal... There are so many anecdotal cases... took a little bit of time to go through the language if we make it past the lot size minimum requirement you immediately run into the 250 feet problem you have a we have a business owner in Graham that was displaced by the new roundabout at Hardin Street that particular business owner was basically forced to move. He was compensated for the property, but he was forced to move to a location that there would be no way to meet the 250 foot distance from a residential use. I changed the word district to use, but there's just a lot of things we need to go through this specifically. A parking area for a typical parking, grocery store, dollar store, place of worship. I'm struggling to justify the cordoning off of those inventory vehicles. They have the same safety parking features, parking brakes that all other vehicles have. If it's typically, or if the language is geared towards keeping the cars out of the street yards or out of required landscaping areas for parking, project then that's different that's something you could certainly enforce through code in the mere presence of the landscape plantings i do i do see a reason to be very careful of lighting that seems to be a common thread for tonight and it is as we continue to grow lighting is a is a big issue especially if you're a house that's next door to the used car lot so we could go by this go by the language paragraph by paragraph and see what we can come up with if we need to send something on to city council.

A couple of items kind of related to what Chad was talking about. I looked at the title development standard for vehicle dealers rentals, new and used. But it looks like all of this verbiage really targets used car lots. So I'm looking at paragraph G, building. All new uses are required to have one building on the lot for the sole purpose of conducting sales operations. Paragraph H, accessory use. For any accessory automobile service, repair shall be limited to minor automotive repair or routine maintenance only for vehicles sold at that location. occur within an enclosed building and limit outdoor storage of vehicles awaiting repair to the side or rear of buildings. To me, just those two alone would pretty much preclude any kind of a new dealership. So we're backing ourselves into a corner with that. You know, it would be nice to have another new car dealership here, but I don't see how that's possible given this verbiage.

Anyone else here would like to speak about this?

Mr. Barney?

Yes, Mr. Perry.

My question is, it's been alluded to, but of the existing car lots along either South Main, I don't know of any along 54, but let's say South Main 87, are any of them two acres currently? Only one. Cash for cars is a total of four acres. That's the one to the left slash north. Ivy Road, right beside McClure's. Well, that's the question, but between McClure Funeral and Ivy Road, that's all one owner?

Owner. Right. Down, right, right.

And then the smaller dealership is on the right or south side of Raymoor on the south side of McClure. Do we have any idea how many total we're talking about? Four or five?

I thought you said two, Chair, on 87.

Number of parcels? We have a number of dealerships.

South Main Street, there's... RM Cars, Ray Moore, Cash for Cars, and Dale Stearns.

And D&D. Well, and then there's a seemingly new one down on the right-hand side. It looks like it's partially under construction. I don't know how big that lot is. Across from Dollar Tree. I'm just wondering, I mean, it seems to me it's Well, I'm just going to say unfair to the dealers that are there to put a minimum that none of them can meet. So just reading it cold.

Change your name and address, please.

I'm Michael Westcott. I live at 1351 Lamb Road. I, like Mr. Hoffman, I find here, am a civil engineer.

Oh, my goodness.

So I own a...

I did not even see your...

It's good to see you, Mike. You too, by the way.

Golly.

I've owned a civil engineering firm in Greensboro since 1998. So haven't moved to... I've lived in Alamance County, but I haven't moved my business to compete with him yet. So, yet. One of the things too, and Mr. Ward, you kind of alluded to this a little bit. You're talking about the building, but you're also talking about if I own... a two and a half acre parcel, and the person next to me dies, moves out, whatever, and they own an acre, then under this, I can't do anything with that. That totally shuts me, you know, I'd have to zone that as something separate, and that's a mess. So that's another part of this as well. And again, we're talking about watershed and things like that, You know, it's just, it's a mess.

Yes, I agree. Well, if you think to go north, and I can't remember for sure, but you go up Graham-Hopedale Road, is that still 87?

No, not up Graham-Hopedale Road.

That's Washington Street. Okay. Where does 87?

Webb Avenue. Webb, okay. Thank you, thank you.

Because I'm thinking... Right there on the corner, be a little drive-through.

It's a car lot right there at Graham Hotel and 70 right there. It's a car lot there. He's got cars everywhere there.

One over on Sellers Mill Road.

Yeah, he's got cars all on the side and all everywhere. Yeah, really, he does. I went by there today.

One further time. And I heard he brought that service station across the street there, that little, that sits with the Dollar General. There's a little gas station right there by that Biscuitville.

The guy across the street, I was told he purchased that. Where are you talking about that, what the car lot is?

I think there's a lot of work that needs to be done. I agree. And I could never support anything like this, just my personal. I'm just one vote, but I would never, because we're cutting people out. I think we're being unfair to the person that's got a two-acre partial and saying he can never expand if the opportunity came along. he can never expand because of the new standards that we put in. I don't know what everybody else's thought is, but if we want to work on it, we can. If you want to vote on it as is and send it to council, council's going to do what they want to do anyway.

Chairman, I can't support this as it stands right now. I think it needs to go back for another rework or

does anybody have any ideas or things that they might want to kick around to potentially let staff know what we're how we're leaning okay you want to table it to next month or you want to send it back and just let staff work on it and then come back to us again the actual staff would like to let them work on it okay and i'll entertain a motion mr bowman i was going to ask what is the minimum size currently of any car digger lawn

either of the corridors.

So car dealerships currently have no minimum requirements they need to meet?

No, no, not requirements. Just in practice, what is the minimum size?

I don't know. There used to be one up here on Main Street, Hardin Street there, Hardin in Maine. Right there on the corner of the old gas station used to be a car lot.

So where Witt's Ice Cream used to be a car lot. That tells our age, doesn't it?

But my question is, In terms of a minimum, it would seem to me in order not to have to grandfather people is to just set the minimum of whatever the current minimums are in practice. Not that they have to have that, but that way you're not imposing a requirement on existing businesses, car businesses.

but there's no lot that is exact. I mean, close to the same measurements. You know, it used to be a car lot down there at the own ramp of the interstate at 54, where the yellow building was, where they sold granite in there for a while. That old service station there was a car lot there. So every lot size is going to be different in order to impose a minimum. I think that's where our problem is, is the minimums. I think that is the problem.

Good. Guy on 87, not right across the street from the Shell station, as you're going, you know, heading south on 87, he usually has three or four cars out there. How does this affect him? Because he's not technically a dealership, but he has people that do that.

That's right. He has like four cars in the front. I see him on the grass right there when you're going down 87.

So, you know, I mean, that's another aspect of this. If you're going to start limiting this, you're going to start affecting people like that and

I think this would only apply to vehicle sales specifically as a use type, not necessarily like storage or repairs, if that's exclusively what they're doing.

No, he's selling. He's actually selling. He's selling cars. Okay, okay. If I own three and a half acres, if I want to buy cars out there for sale, then where do I fit in this? You know what I'm saying?

Right.

The only thing that I see that we could do here that would suffice is it can't be located in the residential section.

But there's residential locations opened on 87-54. They're B-2s.

They are business. They've been rezoned. I even think Ray Moore's place there has been rezoned.

Yes, sir, it has.

So, I mean, it started as a residential, but they were preventing any new ones from starting as a residential. But if they came to the city and got a rezoning request and got it rezoned, then I don't see a minimum. It looks like we're trying to shy away from car locks. We don't want car locks. That's what it actually looks like.

And, Mr. Chairman, with all candor, it may be that the planning board and or staff would want to review the original discussions among the council because to be quite honest that really is the bottom line in my observation uh and some of them don't look as nice as some of the council members wanted them to look and so i think this was the mechanism that they took to put it off on y'all to figure out a way to curb it don't look like they want us to figure it out

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that we send this back to the city staff or planning staff for reconsideration and additional study.

I don't think we can send it back to staff. We can table it or we got to vote on it. I don't think we can send it back, can we?

I know council can send stuff back to staff. My understanding is you guys can deny stuff, table stuff, and approve stuff, or approve it with conditions.

And in 60 days, it automatically goes, whether we do anything with it or not.

So if we table it and it goes away for 60 days, it goes away?

Well, it won't go away. It automatically goes to council.

Council.

If y'all want to work on it next month, I'm open for that. If you don't, let's vote on it tonight and get it over with and let council decide. hash this out between them because it's obvious that they're they're seeing something that we're not seeing they're hearing from people that we're not hearing from there's no one here to talk about it tonight and of course you know they got the final say and they're going to do what they want to do anyway well and also just to ask the question were any of the car dealerships notified of this potential change Probably not.

We would run a newspaper advertisement for when it goes to city council, but for plan board, we did not.

Shouldn't it be? I mean, how else are we going to vet things if it don't come?

Not according to the statutes that we abide by. There's no property involved, so we don't have to do a post-it notice or a mail notice to anybody in property owners.

This is citywide, though. I mean, you say there's no property involved.

It's citywide, and you're required to run a newspaper advert for any kind of city council meeting, but from my understanding, we did not have to do that for a plan board meeting.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion we table this for a month and give us a chance to review the meeting previous and see if there's any way we can constructively help the language that will ultimately end up back at city council.

So are we to take this and give our deeper thoughts? Like John said, give us some time so we're not shooting off the cuff. Is that what you're asking us to do?

Table it to next meeting.

Okay. And then work on it and then come up with something that might be a little more appealing to everyone. I agree.

I second that motion.

I have a motion to table it and I have a second. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Mr. Buckley, I would like next month's meeting if the staff would pull the ordinance on advertising and put some language in the ordinance for us so anything that's citywide, it'd have to be advertised in planning board. There's no way that it can be properly vetted without given the car dealers' notice, they're going to get notice the day of city council meeting. So I would like it brought before us, and I'd like for us to take a vote on it and let council decide whether they want to adopt it or not.

You want to approve the Texas Amendment? Yes. Okay.

All right. Now we're past all that. Any public comments on non-agenda items? We're going to do this in a minute.

Again, Michael Westcott, 1351 Lamb Road. You did something during Mr. Huffine's portion of tonight that I don't think you intended to do. Can you pull that plan back up?

River Mill or White Rock?

White Rock.

Non-agenda item.

I'm just making an observation.

But you're talking about an agenda item.

Well, I'm...

You're talking about an agenda item that's already posted.

Do you want me to shut up? You want me to shut up? Okay.

Can it be abroad?

Y'all have a nice evening, then. Don't leave, though. Don't leave. We'll get it.

I'm all about giving people opportunities, really.

There was no... All right, let me ask a procedural question. You can't change anything.

Right.

Correct. There is a condition that was placed on White Rock that conflicts with a controlled access, a riparian buffer, a possible 401, 404 permit. When we cross, the right-of-way will cross the creek. We will cross the creek with the road, the sidewalk, the embankment. We'll put the creek in a pipe. but we will also have a fence that will run in a very thin strip of land between the right-of-way and the adjacent property line. Did we intend on the eastern side of, I can't remember the gentleman's name. No, it's basically where the road adjoins Mr. Webster without any of the residences.

I thought our intent was to display the residents. But you can see the residents across the street. Across the street, you can still see the back of the residents.

The procedural problem is I don't feel comfortable speaking about this. Mr. Westcott, who is very observant during the hearing, has made a citizen comment that can or cannot be addressed and would be addressed at the staff level if the project moves past city council.

Yes.

However, I don't want to talk about it. I'm just conveying what Mike was about to say to you.

I think it's important to clarify for staff what the actual intent is.

We're not going to reopen the meeting. You can bring it up at council.

Okay.

You can bring it up at council. We're not going to reopen the meeting.

I just think it's important that staff understand

difference between putting it putting a fence at the property line and putting it in the right way we can't do anything illegal to begin with so if it's something that's going to be illegal i'm sure staff will change that or make an amendment to uh that when he goes to council anything further on a non-agenda item all right that time of year september it's time to elect a new chair new vice chair um i open it up with discussions about either both all believe me if you want to replace me it's not going to hurt my feelings i enjoy it i've been here a long time but i'm sure there's new blood that can do things better let's make a motion we uh

Dean Ward, Chair.

I second that.

All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? All right, now we'll go to Vice Chair.

I'll make a motion we nominate Mr. John Wooten.

Second that. All in favor?

Aye.

It takes care of that. Now, staff comments. Have you got anything for us you want to talk about?

No comments.

Then I'll make a motion we adjourn. Do I hear a second?

I'll second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Thank you, everyone, for the vote.