Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Mr. Bailey present. Chair Dean Ward is here. Mr. Stucker here. M here. Thank you. All right. Um let's stand for the pledge of 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.

Just make sure your mics are turned on as well. I think um as far as the new thing that Mr. Wooten here has got talk about that in just a minute. But since there's no one here, uh I'm not going to get in depth about the overview of the board in the general meeting rules uh for tonight. Uh I'll make a motion uh to approve the minutes from September the 16th. Uh has everybody had a chance to review them and is any corrections that need to be changed?

Yeah, I think there's one correction that we need in there. I was absent. My name's not shown as being absent. Okay, you got that correction, Mr. Planner. Right. I make that motion. Do I hear a second? Second. All in favor? Thank you.

All right. And new business. Cameron number 6A. See here. So just a brief overview um of what I have um is of course the city is finally um we completed our draft copy of the new future land use plan um in the agenda you all is pretty much the full plan as to its current draft state um and also I think there's a maybe a brief summary of changes to the previous plan um of course majority of this meeting will consist of review and comment on um portions of the document that we may need to be altered um these comments ments will be provided as a recommendation to city council uh during their review of the plan. So, pretty much what we're going to do here tonight um is just take a look uh through the document and its full contents and provide insight um on your recommendations on how this plan can be um updated, altered uh to meet what you believe to be rightful eyes of the planning board. So,

thank you. Oh, do I have any suggestions of how y'all want to handle this? If you want to go page by page or if you want to go person by person and talk about your personal notes that you have by page, how do you want to handle it? Well, we just go page page by page. Okay. Is that okay? Yeah. All right. Let's start on U here. I'd like to start with table of contents. Okay. What page one? What page you going to be on? Two. Two. Okay.

Personally, I would find having hyperlinks in the table of contents to the various sections would be helpful. Very appropriate. I agree. No hyperlinks are currently there. That's correct. Hyperlinks

by the way. Just a word for the record. I think the formatting and the appearance looks really good. Just my just my opinion. Yes, sir.

Any other questions on that?

All right. Next page three is any corrections or any discussion on three? Just a couple little grammar type things that mentioning to uh Cameron at some point previously that uh I think some of the the wording might do with a little bit of uh perusal. For instance, the first sentence, the purpose of a plan is to be prepared for the future. I would suggest something along the lines. The purpose of a plan is to chart a course for the future. Has a little bit different kind of mindset and direction. You have a definite not just some vague we're going to be prepared, but you chart a course. That means you have a definite starting point and someplace that you're actually headed toward. Uh something like that. Another uh comment about that particular section 1.1 uh third line down development can happen in a manner that improves the community and so forth. Suggestion would be development can happen in a manner that benefits the community or benefits and strengthens the community not just improves the community but it has benefits and has possibility of being strengthened. So, um, the fourth line down toward the end of that, uh, sentence, making this plan is an attempt. I might change that to developing this plan is an attempt. So, just some just some thoughts like that. Um, I'll shut up for a moment, let anybody else speak, and I've got got some other notes about some other things.

And Mr. Bailey, no. So with the what we talk what Mr. Wood talking about that's fine first is everybody in Yes sir. I mean of uh that's appropriate. I think that would be the best version. Yes sir. You would note that Cameron? Yes sir. I'm uh going to go through you can kind of see up here. I'm going to try and highlight some of the areas and I'm also jotting them down. And what I'll probably end up doing um is getting redline copies um that we can potentially either take a look at um at another meeting if absolutely necessary so we can make sure that all of your um comments are being taken into consideration. Okay.

Right. I I would suggest just in the uh in the interest of time, not go through it with fine tooth comb, you know, nit nitpicking every thing tonight, but maybe sit down and want to table this or take another look at it as far as the grammar and the the rest of the language goes. I I'd be glad to help with that, but I don't know that it would be most appropriate to do that and spend a lot of time doing that tonight, unless you think so. Well, we're here tonight and uh so let's go ahead and uh hammer this out and um we're going to look at it again um potentially next month before it goes to council. We I and then we can make any final corrections next month. Yeah, I think it's beneficial um to kind of hash a lot of this stuff out

right now. Let me make some changes. Um we can get y'all an official planning board recommended redlinined copy um that we can provide to council that has this is the original. this is what planning board has recommended and let them pretty much look at both of those and base their decisions off of what they have at their disposal. So, perfectly content with that. Like I said, this is, you know, we have all the time we need tonight to talk over this stuff. I mean, what I don't really want to happen, I guess, is individual, I guess, between, you know, one of y'all and me than another person and me. Um, rather all of y'all have it out here in the forefront so we can have a, you know, discussion amongst you. That's uh if that's okay. Yep. So that's certainly agreeable with me. I just I want to be Yeah.

Got to consider our people's time. So Yes, sir. totally. I understand. Yeah. Let's see. So what I have right now is of course the purpose of the plan to be edited to um um talking about charting the future. Correct. Charting a course. Purpose of the plan is to chart a course for the future. Yes. That'll be prepared. And there was another one just so I make sure I'm getting all this that you mentioned on this 1.1 correct.

Yeah. Third line down development can happen in a manner that improves the community. I would uh take out improves and substitute benefits or benefits and strengthens the community. I think that gives a more positive look to it. Yes, sir. benefits and strengthens the community. Then fourth line down toward the end of the line says making this plan is an attempt. I would say more like developing this plan. Making is not particularly the best grammar at that point and I'm just going through and highlighting this but um yeah,

of course uh wanting consensus amongst everybody else that you all are good with what he's reiterating. So yeah, if let's just we we'll keep this informal. If you anybody objects to anything without me having to ask on each one, just speak up. Okay, fair enough. Okay, perfect. One-2.

Trying to find my place here. Give me just a second if you right under one two 1.2 two in the right hand column two ninth line down and this is purely grammatical the plan's implementation is a collaborative effort the word should be among between is specifically two two parties two things for sure

among instead of between among signifies more than two I may be wrong in this, but I think a lot of what um these relevant existing plans may be um some framework and language from those previous plans that have been included inside of here. Um but we can certainly make that just to keep that in mind. And again, these are just suggestions roll out for consideration.

Have no issues with that. was somebody else talk for a minute while I try to find a place page five. I don't think so. No, ma'am. Because this is not public comment for any of this. I apologize. Are we talking?

And she was on the committee itself. Uh I feel comfortable rest this board. She was on the committee from start to finish. Oh yeah, that's fine. I'm I'm fine with it. Change that. I recall that I had in my notes. Instead of crow downtown 1.2, it was support local businesses could have gotten lost. Under the public input for this plan showed desires to grow downtown. You wanted that

grow downtown. That's right under the public input. to that

change that too. Cameron wasn't I won't get started till page 28. So you got a few more minutes, Mr. food. Okay, I'm going to touch on about every page after that.

The other things are just insignificant, but Okay, I think we can skip over those. Go ahead. Anybody else got anything before page 28?

Hold on for a second. 28. We going to go here. Well, I just assumed everybody made their own notes and I didn't say nothing that stuck out to me prior to that. All right, we can rock and roll to 28 if that's okay. You good? All right. Anybody's got anything?

Let's Let's do it. Let's rock and roll. Properties Commission. had this highlighted here for a reason. The city of Graham has developed a partnership with the Elements County Historical Properties Commission whereby the commission handles all the city of Graham's landmark designations to the state of North Carolina. The partnership is a great example of non duplication of municipal services to save taxpayer money. Uh I think it's a real good thing. I just I I highlighted it in this little blank on it. Go to 32. So in u under public transit there in 32. Um

I wanted to change a little bit in 32 under public transit. Um you know we also have ACTA now operates uh a micro transit program. Okay. Uh which allows riders to schedule at a once pickup like Uber or Lift. And the program was launched in October of 2025. Can we get that in there somewhere? Yeah, for sure. I think if it's something um now we do have mentioned about ACT in here, daytime transportation, but you're saying it's more because scheduled a day in advance. That's something different. Correct. It's more immediate. You have to schedule a day in advance.

Okay. program always existed, but Peter went back the guidance over and got a grant and microtransit is an addition to that thing that you that you um request the day before. So, it's free if you requested it in before, but if you use their app, you can use it just like Uber. You can say, "I need a car here in the next 15 minutes." Okay? And it's $2. That's a huge deal for, you know, people getting to work, people getting to school, education, all that. I think it's definitely I would agree.

So, um, taking a look at the document through here, um, it mentions, like I said, Alance County Transportation Authority provides daytime transportation services Monday through Friday. That must be scheduled a day in advance. After that, you could say Alance County uh transportation authority also offers what you're stating um micro transit um that can be scheduled a day in advance or at necessary time. Um,

it has to. Yeah, I think the and if I'm not mistaken, I think the microtransit program which allows riders to schedule at once pickup like Uber or Lyft. Kind of like a Uber or Lift. Now, what's the one you're talking about with the app? Is that the same one? It's the same one. Okay. That's you're caring for someone and they you know they have to go to right you would not feel comfortable putting them on a bus probably I wouldn't but you would feel or even with the Uber driver but you should feel very comfortable calling ACT because those people are trained they have handicap buses

okay they come and they're trained how to get people up and off you know if they're maybe if they're walk or they're g they're trying to deal with senior citizens and so you know you you could feel comfortable them transporting your loved one to a doctor's appointment or a hair appointment or see the podiatrist or whatever. That's a I mean that's a big and and it's all paid for with federal and state dollars. The local taxpayers did not have to pay for it. Okay. And what's that app and you said the day of if you do 24 hours in advance is free. Day of is $2. How many So, and I can find the app under the app.

They hope to be able to expand it to me and then to as well. So, what I'll do is I'll essentially pretty much summarize y pretty much what we say and then add it in after that sentence and highlight it instead of red line it as an inclusion in the document. Let's go on down to the bottom of page. Excuse me. Did I interrupt for just a minute? Pop back to 29 for just a second. Yes sir. Under wastewater the last sentence really nitpicking last sentence where it says this expansion will provide plenty of capacity for continued plenty just adequate capacity adequate capacity. Yes sir.

Uh we'll provide adequate capacity for continue. Is that all right with everybody else? Okay. Bottom of page 32. Um, this just stuck out as one of the things that I was looking at here, uh, about the pedestrian plan. Yes, sir. We haven't had a revision of our pedestrian plan since 2006. Um, we adopted a pedestrian or updated pedestrian plan um, last year. I believe 2006. Let's see. Yeah. provision of 206.

And it could be that they're still talking about um community facilities and services. Yep. Certainly shouldn't be too much of a problem. So I' I'd like our new pedestrian plan if we have one. I don't recall. Yes, sir. Did that come before us or to go before council? I think it went straight to council. Yes, sir. Okay. All right. They referenced the um link transit plan being finalized in late 2024 to Cameron on that same page. 32 link transit plan. Yeah. The the third paragraph. So

seventh line down if it did it get finalized that link transit plan. If so, we need to

link transit is currently developing a 5-year plan that should be finalized in late 2024. Yeah, I guess we can take a look and see if that has been finalized. Um, essentially what that would probably change is just Link Transit uh completed their 5-year plan set out for um the date whichever it's referenced. Um get back on track here a little Let me know when you're ready.

Good. Yes, sir. Okay. Also on uh 33 uh the rail and other uh do you think we need to put something in there about uh to mention that there's a new transload facility rail access in Meban? Sure. Certainly. Okay. Let's add that in. And uh you say that one more time. I'm sorry. It's um a transload facility for rail access. Transload load transload facility and it's in meban rail accessed in meban

people off the rail. It's cargo isn't it? Yeah. I feel like I'm like a doc. We have one of you know that REA. Yeah, RA because they have that. Yeah, REA. Spur there. And used to be when I was young, when I was little, you know, you see cars there and they have the dock there, the floating, they call a floating dock there. Yep.

Forklift ramp and everything. at a meeting recently and they were talking about what a big difference that like that that could bring a really big um economic business to the Graham or even the Burlington area because it's right there on the you know right there at the mine but um it's basically like having a huge truck terminal. Yeah. For trains, right? Exactly. But they offload there and then tractor trailers could back up there and just take it. Yeah. Because they have the dock there and the ramp for the portless to go up and down. Yeah. Yeah. These are things that companies look at when they're looking somewhere.

Yeah. So it it would be great if we had because it would be it could literally be a reason why a business doesn't locate somewhere because they need that. They get a lot of stuff cheaply on the rail line, but you know, having it in Beavenon is not so far away, but even having it in Graham right there would be great, too, especially in light of the fact that we're becoming such a logistics center here. Part of the plan would be to look at opportunities for to expand the u

transload opportunity. transload facilities to GR. Could it be in that light of that transload facility is located in Mebban? Um the city of Graham should advocate for um developing or bringing one into the city or the use of one that's already in the city. For sure. So just something essentially that to the extent of bringing something like that to Graham something something to developing a transload facility within Graham would be a higher priority. Sure thing.

And I would probably if we could mention the fact that we already have that dock here and emphasize where that docks at. Now I don't know who can use it. I don't know if it would be getting too premature to to say that if we can't use it. Yeah. I think um if you just uh and may I don't want to I guess if it's vague I guess it essentially states that you know we want to bring one in here and we also have the area perfect area for it. So I don't know if you have to I guess specifically call out in the plan exactly where that may be um because we already have one in mind. It seems like that would be perfect for it because there probably only one idea of the

the idea this is a plan. You don't want to put specifics like that in but the idea developing. Yeah. I'm totally with that. That's what that gives you a sense of a huge one that used for years. Yeah. Yep. That used for years and years and with the cult going to be eventually redeveloped at some point it could be a big thing there. So essentially what I have on here is devel developing one of these being you know the transload um engram would be uh trying to think of something I guess to add after the fact you develop high priority high priority high priority that's right

thank you and I can add that after the insert about talking about meban and then essentially say um you know developing one of these same facilities of course listing out the facility name and Graham would be a high priority you know for sure under fire protection. Do you think we ought to mention something about uh the substation that the council had already designated at Graham Regional Park? Future sub fire substation at Graham Regional Park and the council already identified that and if uh that's something that they'd have identified, I'm sure it wouldn't be too bad to put in there. So,

I'm almost 99.9% that they did identify the park as a potential or as a site for a substation. At the last meeting, I think they approved the swap from

to go to part of to do the swap so that they could some. So, it could be essentially um just want to make sure um writing whatever needs to be in here to y'all's um to y'all's standards. So, um fire substation has been identified inside of the Graham Regional Park. Is that uh something fair to put in there? Yeah. Um to that extent it's like a city of Graham a future substation

city of Graham has identified an area inside of the Graham regional park or or the Graham whichever park for a future substation future. Yep. I would agree with Chair Ward that that does need to be in there. I think that's significant for anybody outside developer who's reading these plans. They want to know that they're going to have good fire protection in that area if they want to go. That's the You said the regional park, correct? Yeah. Graham Regional. That's down there. Jim Miner. Is that where it is? Yeah. Yeah.

Right now. That's That's a prime area for development, is it not? Prime. Prime. The Bies. I not the BIES, but the uh sheets in right there. Jim Miner in 80 in 54. Yeah. I don't know if that sheets is going to belong to us, but it will be there. Oh, it won't be ours. It' be Swenville's. But there that area also the major town home development that's going pretty much right across the street from there, right? But you're right. Yes, sir. City council approved it um a couple months back.

Oh, no, sir. Actually, yes, they did. I think they came back and they did their um their test with our engineers and they confirmed that um it was not I guess a intermittent stream I guess is the term for it. Um so they're going to be able to potentially develop it out to their pool plan that was shown. All right. Um page 40. Yes sir. South Main Street Highway 87 overlay district. All right.

I think that um we've had a lot of discussion uh about the overlay districts and specifically uh just thinking back of the last one down here on 54. Um there where the one of the buildings down there had maybe yellow vinyl siding or some type of yellow paint or something yellow. in that we need to maybe uh think about putting something in here about uh their visual character of corridors leading from 40 to 85 into Graham's Historical Business District. Signage, landscaping, building materials, colors, design, and overall site should be complemented and not distract from the established historic district. design standards

could be complimentary too. Complimentary too. Yes.

So, walk me through. Okay. So, I'm established to prever preserve an aesthetically important thoroughare for the city of Graham. Um because it starts at Highway 87 southern boundary of the city limits. Many citizens and visitors will see the part of the city on a daily basis. In order to arrive at the central business district or historic district overlay zone from the city limits, one must travel along the overlay district is very important that the overlay district is compatible with many of the design standards in the historic district since these two overlay zones are adjacent to one another and you want to add something after the fact or alter something inside of there. Well, I think that I I just my opinion is that, you know, we need to concentrate and emphasize that it needs to be characteristic to the downtown historical.

Mhm.

And with that being said, the design, the overall design, the site, it should complement downtown, not distract from downtown. Um, I'm more than happy to include um, whatever you would like inside of there. Um, you know, I know a lot of what the um, uh, overlay district and stuff that it entails falls inside of, you know, the development ordinance and what is listed out inside of there. I don't know if it would be better suited to take a deeper look at what is actually required by our ordinance inside of the historic overlay districts and alter some of that. Um, but like I said, that's just my thoughts off the top of my head. If you would like to include something here, we certainly can if that's y'all um what you would like to do.

Um, you know, Graham is u unique in its own. Okay. is is this unique uh community with a historical uh setting in the downtown district and and I would hate to see it be turned into a complete commercial distraction from what we have here because we've got something unique that a lot of towns don't have. Yeah. Uh, so I don't know if at the proper place is here or if it's uh going and looking at our development ordinance and changing some things in the overlay district there.

Yes, suggest just a possible wording here for that last sentence. Okay. It is very important that the design standards for the overlay district are complementaryary to and compatible with the design standards in the historic district since these two overlay zones are adjacent to one another. That's appropriate. Okay. Would you like to add that for um I don't I don't think it's I was going to ask if you want to add it to the 54 overlay district as well, but I don't know if that one is much as necessary as more impactful of the um 87 one is I think the just the 87

I apologize to make you kind of go back Mr. Wooten, but if you could um you're going to ask me to remember what I said. I know it's hard for me to. I apologize. I know you said it is um is very important that the design standards of the overlay district is compatible with and complimentary to or is it just the historic district the overlay district is complimentary to? Let me let me just take it from the top here. Yes, sir. See if I can remember. It is very important that the design standards

for the overlay district are compatible and complimentary, excuse me, compatible with and complimentary to the design standards of the historic district. Perfect.

Got it. Since these two overlay areas are adjacent to one another. I appreciate it, sir. Thank you. In um page 42 under reasonzoning 3.6, Six. Something that needs to be addressed in my my mind here is uh to consider that should be addressed is the parking access to a property blood planes lighting and and I don't know if this is where we should address it or if it should be talked about here and something put here or if we should do it in the ordinances, but um you know like a driveway.

Yeah. Where we have driveways for some of these townhouse communities and we've got two cars parking there and the driveway is not long enough number one. Yes, sir. But one car. So the second car parks there also and they're hanging halfway or all the way across the sidewalk. Yes, sir. that needs to be addressed here and in our zoning.

Um certainly I'm more than happy to include that. Um like I said, I don't know if it's something that you um because it does mention here in the conditional reasoning. Some things to consider are parking, access to property, flood planes, lighting, fencing, pollution, neighborhood land uses, existing development noise, landscaping buffer, trees, water runoff, dedication, accommoded out in the conditional resoning, but not in the resoning. Right. So, would it be beneficial to just essentially copy and paste that and put it in the resoning? And same with the Yes.

Okay. But I want to make sure that we're talking about, you know, the driveways itself, uh, where cars are not blocking the sidewalks um, to accommodate a certain number of cars that developers should be thinking about this when they are in their planning stages and they're reading our comprehensive plan that they know that they're going to have to consider making it big enough, cutting some units out, making it big enough to put two cars side by side and where they're not.

Yeah, I think um and like I said, I'm just throwing kind of my two cents out there is, you know, when a developer is looking to develop pieces of land in here, they are taking a look at this document as well as the development ordinance. And if it is specifically laid out in black and white what our parking requirements are, i.e. our setback requirements are and something that is definite in black and white that says parking shall not be considered for a space that overhangs the sidewalk. um you know, I think a lot of that could possibly be defined inside of the development ordinance um and not really have much weight in the resoning conditional resoning sections through here. Um but like I said, I'm just kind of filtering my opinion through here. If y'all want to include it, I have no issue with that.

I may I speak? I understand what Dean's saying. I'm not sure I would agree with it. The reason being is that this is a document. This as a document is different in its function than the development ordinance is. Development ordinances and I'm agreeing with you at this point. I think it's where you get the specifics. This gives the overall flavor as it were. But I understand where you're coming from. I understand what you're saying. I'm not sure this is the most appropriate place to put it. If you put that in, then there's probably a dozen other things that go in there as well.

I think um you know, you d you you kind of dilute the purpose, the specific purposes for each document. How many that makes sense? It it does, but how many times have we sit right here and heard uh attorneys coming here representing developers and saying, "Well, we've complied we've complied with your 2035 plan." And because it wasn't a little more descriptive and detailed, it was so broad.

I think with that description they're talking about a lot of it is the um the uh density aspect that they saying and that they are meeting. I mean they are meeting our ordinance requirements for these things of what is required i.e. two parking spaces. One is considered to be inside the garage, one is outside of it. And that one that's overhanging isn't necessarily considered to be that third parking space essentially. Um, and I think that's more or less what they are stating that they're complying with as well as the density requirements that are future land use state plan states as well as the principal uses that are also listed out and some small other things. Um, and even going back and taking a look at some of this whenever it's talking about, you know, a lot of these things, driveways, walkways, pedestrian, I'm second guessing myself if even you could possibly even throw that into the reszoning category because there's not a site plan that is essentially submitted with a normal blanket reszoning. Um, there's not a condition that you can put on there says you got to meet a requirement for five parking spaces for this development or we're not going to approve it. um because it's just based to whatever our ordinance allows in that zoning district. Um so, you know, basing upon what I see in here is having it more specific to what we can take a look at is more appropriate inside of the conditional resoning than the normal resoning because there's actually a plan being submitted rather than not in the resoning. But all we're doing is allowing developers or come in develop leave and then we have a strain on city services and who's going to enforce who's going to enforce that that's what happens is in I'm numerous of these townhouse communities around you can ride by them all the time and I hear people come before the council and they talk about the cars I can't even walk down the sidewalk. I've got to walk in the street. Well, whose job is it to enforce that? We're not a proactive town.

I don't know what that has to do with the future development plan. Oh, we're going to encourage developers from the get-go. We're going to tell you in this 2035 plan that hey, you need to meet whatever our standards are to allow for this to change our communities and make our communities look better, safer. I don't want to see none of the people having to walk out the street because we got developers. Yeah, they're meeting. They got one car in the garage like you said. But when we go back to the same question that that I said here is that that third car that's sitting there that's out over the sidewalk, whose job is it to enforce it?

I think that is something that is probably written inside of the code ordinance due to the fact that is located inside of our public right ofway that would have to be enforceable by the police department and and but we don't we're not a proactive town. We only enforce we're a complaint driven town. That we only enforce on complaints. So we're adding more strain to our city services and more cost. Yes, sir.

So if we put it in this 2535 plan or 20 the new plan here, if we put that in the plan that hey, this is something that we're asking the developers to go ahead and meet or exceed. That's what I think. I mean, I know that I've asked two or three times about the ordinance and rewriting these ordinance and I was told that we was looking into getting quote quotes on re designing or redoing our ordinances, my understanding as well. And u but you know this is a the city the city moves slow. It's government. Governments move slow. Not just city of Graham. Government moves slow. Understand?

So, but I don't what Jennifer knows. I mean, how many people's been before the council complaining about cars and over sidewalks and and and it only really comes on our townous predicated on, you know, it's like when you say, "Okay, you're going to count a parking spot in the garage." But if you have such density that you can't allow those individual owners to have a storage building in their backyard for instance or they don't where they don't have a storage closet in the back of their home or whatever to store things, guess where all the storage goes? Goes into now you've just lost another parking spot. Yeah.

So like if you have those things, if you have the ability to be able to put storage building in your backyard or or the builder builds a storage facility on the back of the home, you know, if then maybe the garage is going to be efficient

for adequate parking. But everything is so uh dependent on um density and um you know again like um we say even in our old um plan that we don't want to go into a development and all you see is a parking lot. And honestly, that's what Riley Meadows looks like. I mean, it's they built three bedroomedroom condos at such a density that even though you have a onecar garage, I mean, literally there's like one little strip and what is maybe five feet wide, that is your yard. You have a five feet wide yard. If you can just imagine what that people I think Jerry Peterman called it a pee pad for your dog because that's all that you have. And yeah,

I think even in the old plan, they didn't like that. That's why in old fields, if you've ever gone to old fields, I don't know if y'all have ever been out there, but um they made the developer um the developers were local people and they wanted to do what was in that plan. And by talking to the residents and stuff, they said, "We'd love to just see the beauty of the building." I mean, those those homes won architectural awards, national awards, because when you drive into that development, you just see the homes and you're like, where is the park? It's on the back street going into the back of the home. And it really aesthetically is beautiful. It it really makes a huge difference. And I know you can't do that in every situation, but um you know having nothing but a bunch of parking in a very dense area causes a lot of issues. And um you know when the developers gone then like Dane says it's an enforcement issue for the police and the police have a lot of other more serious things to be doing than going out and trying to enforce parking. I think if I may interject um you know I think we're stuck on this resoning side of things but if we do look forward into some of this and this is why I wanted to go back and look at is you know there are some specific goals inside of here that set out for these different types of things and strategies to meet those um you know you have implementations uh you know small town charm of course something like that um commercial strip developments and increase regional awareness now so properties number of alternative routes throughout the city walkability of the Um, a strategy could be implementing ordinance requirements that don't allow for people to park over sidewalks. Um, stuff along those lines as it's kind of pointed out through there. Um, I think there's some places we could possibly put it throughout here to implement different types of policies um to include rather than kind of shoe boxing

it into that resoning place where it probably doesn't get looked at oftent times. Um, that's just kind of my thought process. We currently look through it. I know um you know we're talking about a lot right now just to kind of summarize I guess my understanding a lot of it is the parking requirement of course boils down to what our development ordinance states um we don't really have much input when it comes to um architectural standards of single family homes. I don't know if we can really require developers to add on additional buildings onto their home if that violates you know legal standards of the statutes and whatnot. Um, so change setbacks though.

Yeah, certainly could. And I think that's something that you can include on some of these policies or goals or standards somewhere sprinkled throughout through here is where we can specifically pull out, okay, you want to build this, but you know, we have a policy or a goal inside of our future land use plan that states we would like to encourage developers to put parking on the rear on private drives. Um, you know, is there any way we can point to this and say we have this in place. Is there any way that you can do that? Um, you know, I think it'd be more beneficial so we're serving a purpose of minimizing the parking and trying to think of it in a nice way, but the um the front-facing facade of homes where it's not just plastered with cars. It looks a little bit more better than like you said a parking lot essentially. So, I want to make sure that um one what you're wanting to talk about and put in place is put in the correct area so it's not hard to gather or look at. Um, so I think there's an appropriate area we can put some of this stuff. It's just finding it and some of these future policies or goals or something listed out through here.

Okay. Cameron, I'm going to agree with you on this one. I these two documents have to be taken together. The land use plan and the development ordinance have to be reviewed together. This one is the overview. This is the 60,000 foot view.

Okay. Development ordinance is right down the weeds. It's get the specifics. You know, I would love to see us, like Jennifer says, move to a a kind of resoning that that typifies that old fields. We've had friends out there, you know, I love that the way it's developed out there with the alleys and the backside parking. It's beautiful development. Beautiful development and so different from, you know, what we're seeing all over the place. But, you know, honestly, you could have somebody sticking their car in their in their driveway and it's still extending over the sidewalk. Whether, you know, maybe they don't pull it up to the garage door, whatever it is, that's that's a people problem. That's not an ordinance problem. I think that's a people problem. But

and and you said yes, there are things that we could do that would help spur people to be decent and and uh courteous I think would be but you can't you can't help people be everybody but what I'm getting at it still drains the city's services prime example the one out there on Lacy Holt Road where they had the parking issues. Yes sir. Aren't they private streets out there? Lacy Hole Road uh where Ricky uh lives. What's it? Valley Field. Valley Field. Valley Field. Aren't they private streets? I think they're public, are they? Yes, sir. I believe they get trash service from them. Um uh Valleyfield River the culacs.

They had the people parking out on the road and those are city-owned culacs too, right? Yeah. So it was a that was just a strain on city services that we allowed based on our development ordinance we allowed that to come in here that development to come in here with something that's too small. So when I say too small the turnaround radius too small with a car parked out if no cars are parked out there. So I guess we should have thought about it ahead and either put the no parking signs up ahead of time to curb those complaints. Yeah. I don't know. Um be able to accommodate a sanitation truck, a fire truck, and a and a school. So I guess I think there are places

just no way that you can pick up people's trash and usually what it'll be is your neighbor will park or have a visitor or whatever and they'll park and then the sand the trash didn't get picked up in theirs is yours and you're mad because their visitor was blocking that trash can and so

and that may be something that we need to address and but we need to set a timetable on addressing these in the development ordinances where we can go on and move on with it instead of waiting for someone to rewrite it which may be five years from now because we're not stopping the the issues that are coming up in today's world. Moving on here, just going on, getting a little further down in the weeds here, is that I think we should encourage our developers to um keep established natural buffers and mature landscaping in trees and discourage clear cutting. Shouldn't that be something that potentially is in this u right here?

Totally. I mean, I think so. I think, like I said, it's finding um these different strategies and policies inside of here where they can kind of fall into. I think if we um I want to make sure that, you know, everything is being heard. So, I know y'all want to talk about it going page by page. So, if we could get back to where we were and 42 and make sure that we're I guess going through this in a manner where I guess we're taking a look at it when we get down to the policy stuff, we can take a deeper look at where we can include some because I think that's a place to put a lot of this if it's not already inside of there. Um, and make a comment just of what Dean says. Yes.

Concerning the development ordinance, we need to get off our collective douffs and get that done post haste. If we've got a new land use plan, it's not going to be of much use unless we have an up-to-date, current, and useful development ordinance. I understand. That's relevant to what we're seeing here. That make sense? Yes, sir.

I don't know. But some of this I've talked about a lot of my notes that I've made here already. Um down here park cars. We got past that. Let's go to page 45 now. All right. Let's talk about strategy number five. extending the business district uh to Maple Street and Marshall Street.

Okay. You know, my long tenure and term here on this planning board has heard so many different um proposals come before us about people wanting to locate a business inside of this residential district. Mhm. And it's been this total outcry of people that live down there that don't want that. Yes, sir. But here we're we're proposing to extend our business district to Maple Street and Marshall. So, you would like to redact that?

I Well, no. I I think my opinion would be to take that out, but and I want to make sure that the board has a consensus here. I mean, of Yes, sir. everybody agrees or don't agree, but I think that we need to address that somehow because I've heard um I don't know how many different projects in that area come this way and somebody wanting to do this or somebody wanting to put a B2 business down that way and and we either I think 90% of us has voted it down to begin with us and I I don't keep up with all the time for when it goes to council but uh I just think that's this is really going against what the people that live in Graham want.

Okay. I think it should be redacted. Okay. Every time we every time that comes up, it's it's a battle royal. Yeah. It wasn't very well received from the citizens. 46 uh under strategies four and five. Let me see what notes I put there. section uh page 4.3.1 strategy 4 strategy 4.3.1 yes sir

special care needs to be taken to ensure that the granite curbing is not removed when updates or improvements are downtown made downtown. I don't know how we would get that in there or think about this, but I think we need to put something that identifies the uh granite curb curbing uh that if something's improved down there that it shouldn't be removed when things are improved or updated. Uh that is part of the historical architect and it needs to be preserved. A large portion was removed when DOT moved the uh north crosswalk and should not have been allowed.

Okay. Um so current you're talking about strategy five, correct? Yes. Okay. Currently states avoid disrupting the historic granite curving in the downtown when it is necessary to replace sidewalk materials. Should it just replace anything about to replace sidewalk materials and just say avoid disrupting it as a whole? As a whole. And Cameron, I I think that's already in that historic um handbook,

but how do you how do you prevent that from happening? Because it it happened. I mean, they they you know, the workers just took up all that granite and that granite is expensive to I mean like thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars and it's really irreplaceable because even if you replace it with new granite it's not going to look like the old and so I mean

is there a way to like I thought that before they started doing any work downtown that they're required to go to Burke or somebody and get a permit or something. I thought we passed like it was even before I got on the council, they passed something that said um if you're working in the right away, you have to let them know or notify them or something. But it's like they just showed up and started doing it and started moving the sidewalk and ripped up all that granite and broke it up with a piece of equipment and stuff.

Yeah, I'm not too sure because I know it's difficult because it is the state's right of way. Um, I'll have to look in the handbook and see if there's any inference to a requirement of getting in front of anybody for the removal of it. Um, there could be exemptions for state entities. I have no clue. I can't answer that for you right now. I apologize. We're happy to look into it.

That reality of it is just workers got a job to go do it and just did it and was unaware of what the rules say. Is there I guess my question to you is is there a better place to put it that maybe on like when you issue somebody a permit to do work should it say somewhere on there that if you're working in the historic district you need to make sure that you don't disturb the

Yeah, I think we'd have to write that somewhere on like a COA application um to take a look at it because I mean they are sidewalks um so I imagine going to be something along the lines of updating the COA application to state to reach out to public works before doing any updates to any of the right of way um to ensure that the historic granite curving is maintained in the downtown area. Did they have to get a COA when they changed that sidewalk? I don't think so because it's all inside the right way through there that they are the owners of. So

yeah, but don't does the city have that curfew? That's that's a question I would have given that that's a state highway. What's the relationship of that curbing to the state do you know? How how is that all about historic stuff like if you if you're designated as a state historic and we are the whole district is is designated that they did that back in 1993. Y

um that they're not supposed to disturb anything that's But again, like I'm just saying, you can have all the rules you want, but if the person that's actually doing the work isn't informed of it, like that's my question to you. Like, how do you make sure that that person that comes to get the permit to do it? Did they have to get up any kind of permit from you? Not that I'm aware of. When did this Well, that's just crazy because I mean I mean I'm sure they wouldn't have messed it up had they known. But it's like nobody told them, so they just destroyed it. Understood.

And you've had a couple other places downtown where people have pour back concrete. So it's it's granite, granite, granite, concrete, granite, granite. So, I guess are you looking at something like do we do we need to have something in the development ordinance that references that maybe with the imposition of fines some kind of procedure if this is going to be a significant

again I don't know that it's necessarily even intentional but it's very you know there was there was one person that was a property owner downtown that was taking sand blasting and sand blasting their building and you're not have to do that by local standards or state standards. It it pits pits in the brick and then the brick basically deteriorate way faster than it you know that's why they say don't please don't do that. Um, but again, I don't think it was any malice or it's just unintentional not not having the knowledge to know you can't you shouldn't mess with the granite that historical granite that granite goes way down in the ground. And I mean I I believe it's from the 1800s. So I mean it it's it really doesn't need it's just as significant. It would be what you would call with the historic commission a a you know a a significant contribution to the historic district and you don't want to disturb it.

Well, that's that's the that's the question, Jennifer. Do we need to have something either in the development ordinance or the code or or something that it's good to have it in here? U but with in in a procedure or permitting anytime you touch that

should you also have it maybe in a I mean, nobody doing work any downtown is going to be looking through our future land use plan probably by any means. I think it needs to be addressed in something of a fashion inside of a book or an application of some sorts that states, you know, where this is listed at and what you need to do. I mean, it's the same kind of concept of you cutting down a mature tree. I mean, some people have, you know, tree ordinances that say if you impact a city tree or whatnot, you're subject to X, Y, and Z requirements of the law and whatnot. So, essentially just adding something like that inside of our development ordinance in inside the development ordinance or inside of the historic handbook, probably in the development ordinance that refers to the historic handbook. Um, so that somewhere, but I don't know if it is anywhere currently because honestly this is the first I've heard about any of it to be quite frank. So ignorance, ignorance is no excuse. Unintentional or intentional, it's still done. Doesn't matter. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. So

that's that's what I'm saying. If we have something on record, ignorance of that would be no excuse. All right. Um, so we're essentially saying just avoid disrupting the historic granite curbing in downtown and that's it. Like cut everything else off. Avoid disturbing it downtown at all without a permit. I mean, you could even say it Yeah. at all without a permit. Gotcha. And if somebody happens to read that, at least they'll know that it's out there that they need to be asking some more questions.

And you could put specifics if you look at strategy six. All alterations and improvements to historic properties should be consistent with the historic resources handbook. Yeah. And we have that adopted here as well. Yeah. I got just a couple more and I'll be done. Uh just a question under uh bottom of 46 uh going into the top of 47 uh 4.4.2 improve the walkability of the city down under strategy number nine. The very last word there in natural resources. Does that belong there? Is that a typo or

probably not. It probably got kind of uh rebuffed over from the the next title over. So, we can uh take that out. Okay.

And then u let's go down here to 47 under strategy page 47 at the bottom number 12. Uh encouraged to bio sales encourage bio sales instead of detention bonds. encouraged bio sales whales are buy sales instead of detention bonds and consistently research methods aesthetically pleasing. Yeah, I I don't see nothing wrong with that. I put a little that's a great that's a great addition there that strategy. I think this is something new and I think in our last

something that we came up during the the steering committee and just to point out if you look at strategy 8 under that same section it talks about um

or no strategy nine develop standards requiring developers to keep existing mature trees and landscaping buffers. So, you know, we spoke about that earlier in places where, you know, we can call out whenever we're looking at these conditional reasonings and say, "Hey, you're not meeting goal 5.4 4.5.1 strategy X for maintaining a lot of this area. Why are you clearcutting? You know, we're wanting you to do this. We're not going to permit it unless you're not, you know, you have something to point back to." So I think that's the big thing is kind of looking through these strategies and seeing where some of these things can be placed that we can point to whenever people are coming here and you know making these requests. How uh is it feasible to um I know we talked about hyperlinks uh to begin with, but is it feasible to like if I wanted to know what the landscaping requirements are for commercial building and I was reading this ordinance? Could we hyper hyperlink that to the landscaping section? I mean, there's a lot of stuff I'd like to see hyperl straight to the ordinance because if you're not familiar with our ordinance book, you can't find anything in that thing.

I understand that. Um, that would probably have to be something um that I personally take a look at to see if that's something that we can work out. Um, like I said, I think the hyperlinks to some of it inside of the um document is, you know, pretty easy. and it's probably easy to reference it back over, but it's going to be tough to hyperlink it to another hyperlink inside of the development ordinance book. So, that's something that is probably going to have to be looked at to an extent because I mean, you could probably pick out a plethora of areas inside of here that could be referenced back to the development ordinance. Um, and you know, maybe if it was uh I guess thought about during um some of the time, we could have uh addressed it a little bit better. Um, but I it would be great to be able to reference pretty much everything inside of here. Um, but I can certainly take a look at it and see if that's possible.

One suggestion to that effect, referencing what I said earlier, the land use plan and the development ordinance go hand in hand. Yeah, you might look at possibility of combining them into one document, one huge document with two major sections, land use and development ordinance. that would make hyperlinking a whole lot easier. I know, you know, that's I don't know what the legal requirements would be, but just that would be a possible solution.

I think since they're two separate plans, um essentially it'd have to be lumped into a greater because, you know, previously it was all in the code of ordinance where you had all these specific things associated with, you know, everything inside of it. So, it almost like you'd have to take both of these files here, these plans, dump them back over into the code of ordinance potentially. Um, I'm not sure though. Like I said, just kind of spitballing here. Well, just one benefit that I could see immediately is that you pick up one, you have to look at the other one. Yep. So 47 another hyperlink to development ordinance section about landscaping.

That pretty much whittleles down my list for the time being unless I something else as we're going.

Oh be glad to pass the gabble along to someone else here that wants to chime in. I'd be more than happy for us to take a look through um you know some of these strategies and such. I mean you know we talked about um where we can fit some of these things in. I mean if there are some big ideas that we have in here about what we may want to include um let's add them in. You know if there's something that you think is you know beneficial for backside street parking on private drives. You know we can find a place to insert it inside of here. I mean we're already here right? So, I mean, if you all think and have some ideas of where or what you'd like to see, let's put them in here. Um, and just go ahead and knock it out. Um, like I said, if we can kind of sit here and brainstorm a little bit, we can see if there's something already mentioned inside of here. If it's not, where can we place it? Um, just so, like I said, we're continue being proactive. I'm happy to stay and help. I would certainly like to see all townhouse communities have back parking, backside parking.

But having said that, then I think about the project right down here on Jim Miner Road, uh, that you can see from the coming down Jim Mer Road, the town houses that we approved there. Even if they put the garage on the back side, you would still be able to see them from Jim M Road, but you wouldn't see them in the community, right? You wouldn't see them on the road. and it would stop the cars from parking across the sidewalks. Mint, you said something earlier about having these free um um what do they call them? Free meetings or whatever, free application meetings.

And I mean, I feel like we made really significant changes to um developers plans. um and and brought attention to things like the bof field. When you go into that development, you're going to have a big pond there that going to be liability for the HOA maintenance. You know, you can't mow around it because of the state balls, all that kind of stuff. And we talked them into doing a bio field there, which will be beautiful. It was this beautiful green area that's very aesthetically look look almost like a soccer field. and it's a circle. So, they did have all the sidewalks going down the things, but they didn't have the depth

to push the town homes back. So, said, "Well, what about putting the sidewalk around the circle?" Because what a more beautiful walk than to just go in there and you could just walk completely in a circle and just keep going. Because what is one of the number one complaints that you get from people that have sidewalks going across your front yard? You don't like

dog pooped in my yard and hoas I think. And so that alleviates that. It alleviates people from parking and blocking the sidewalks. So it's just like inhale meadows. I mean what good the sidewalks if literally in one block seven cars were parking across. Let me ask you a quick question. Where is Riley Meadows? Is that the one on Gemini? Yes, sir.

Then the bus doesn't even want to go down in there because there's cars parked on both sides. And so, so when they're letting the kids off, the kids can't go on the sidewalk because the sidewalk's all blocked. Then when the kid walks out into the road, there's cars on this side. So then now the kid's walking in the middle of the road and you know if a kid goes in and out, it easily can be hit. I mean I I was down there for a meeting and almost witnessed a boy get run over. I mean, literally the truck like uh it was a big um you know, fullsize truck just literally go sideways trying to stop and the kid was on like a big wheel coming down his mom's driveway and you can see you're going after him, but he's just too fast for her and mean I resulted in a bad situation and they have a real problem down there unfortunately. But um I think you know we try to do what we can to um learn from um you know mishaps and and try to make sure that this new new product that's going to be coming out will hopefully get not only council members and board members to think about um this some of these questions and to ask some of these questions in the meetings because you think about it. I mean, when you first got elected, did you know all the questions you should ask when you're reviewing a document, reviewing plans and stuff? I mean, council members also don't know. And that's that's a little, you know, frustrating to me. I come from a construction background. Um, you know, we we've done this for a long time, but you gota know enough about it. You know, none of us went to planky school and so

I don't even know. we have to defer a lot to the to the staff to, you know, to ask for stuff, but um yeah, we just want to make sure that future development of Graham is something that we can all be proud of.

Well, to that to that point, I I share your concerns that I've seen you express in city council meetings over the density, over the parking issues, and same with what Dean has expressed over the years. I I share those wholeheartedly. I think it's a big mess. And I personally, you know, for what it's worth, like to see us go more to a model that you see in old fields with the back streets, the alleys where you have the parking in the rear, and you have the beautiful fronts. I mean, that to me is a really good example of good construction, good development. Okay. Powerful planning. Yes. Yeah,

you know, I went back and watched my video because I fought literally from 45 minutes against not it wasn't that I was against Riley's Meadows being developed. I just wanted some things changed. And the things that I want to change are all the things that they complain about now. The parking that the I literally like talked about the length of the driveway and yeah, it's a little frustrating and and um you know when someone tells you and you and and somebody says, you know, you have a three foot setback on the side, you know, a lawnmower is five foot wide. You know, you you can't that's completely irresponsible and not to allow developers to do three foot side setbacks. If I don't know if you've ever watched a house burn at the beach, but beach property is so expensive, they have allowed those kind of three set three feet setbacks and one c catches on fire and the next one catches on fire and it literally goes all the way down the strip. That is absolutely poor planning. Um and it and setbacks are were invented and were created for safety and for us to ignore that. It's not it's not to me it's not responsible. But um I hope that um you know future projects will be people will look at that. I hope all of y'all will consider that when you're looking at projects because um being able to get a fire truck to the rear of a of a of a building uh or or structure, especially when it's two stories and sometimes even three stories. These town homes are even sometimes three stories. It's important, you know, and the time to figure out that you didn't have it right is not when you have a fire. And uh so, you

know, um I'm not against anybody developing. I just think you need to develop responsibly. We used to develop with the land. Years ago, you used to take these little flags and you go out and you you put little ribbons around the trees. you want to save and now there's somebody sitting with a CAD program and they just completely wipe out every bit of growth there is. Doesn't matter what the topography of the land is. They're going to bring in dirt or take dirt out to make it all just this big flat nothing. And uh to me I don't I don't like I didn't, you know, grow up with that kind of mentality of of um just clearcutting our our community and and putting up cracker box. Everything looks the same.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We want to move on. Thank you. Thank Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. A lot of I commend y'all. Thank you very much. Thank you, Cameron. I know it was a lot of work. me some pages and it's a lot of rewrites and everything. Happy to do it. It's it's a good product. I read through and it's very good. Appreciate it. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Jim. Who wants to take over from where I left off? Anybody else got anything? Mr. B, I used to be quiet sometimes.

Um, Mr. Woot, you got anything further? Well, I had I had some comments and questions over on page 65 where we're talking about unconnected roads versus road network. Yep. Before I I I get that one thing and I want you to understand this lot a lot of what I'm saying here is going to hearken back to my childhood is that I understand what Jennifer was talking about brought some back some very tough memories when I was growing up little girl next door to us. Paul ran out in the street. We lived on a fairly busy street. She ran out in the street, got hit, knocked about 100 feet, killed her.

So, I'm I'm particularly sensitive to the idea of safety, making sure we have roads that are conducive to people doing the right thing, that sort of thing. So, if I get a little bit energetic about some of that stuff, I want you I want y'all to know why because it's I've seen it wasn't wasn't pretty. So, anyway, about this unconnected roads versus a road network. Uh just some comments. I grew up in Memphis. And what you see there on the right hand of the page, uh, and this is also in regard to what we have on the previous page, page 64, talking about strip development, commercial center, that sort of thing. Memphis is right on the edge of the Mississippi River. Uh, started in the late 1700s and consistently grew east, north, and south. And that's the way this that town grew. It was all on a grid. They had neighborhoods. They had these uh little commercial centers similar what you see over in Burlington, little neighborhood grocery stores, drugstores. You know, I went down the street to the dentist, walk down to get get my haircut, walk down to to the drugstore, you know, that sort of thing. So that's that's quite familiar with what I see. Everything was in a grid. Everything was easy to get to. Sometimes it was not lived on a busy street, but nearly all the streets were busy because of that. And what I find interesting what they're showing unconnected roads and the impression I get from the document is

that those are undesirable. You see a lot of culde-sacs. Well, in Memphis growing up, they called them cove was co ov. My wife grew up on Waco Cove. Those were the most desirable spots in developments. So, difference in ideology, difference in in in uh what you consider desirable and not desirable. So, I'm not so sure that I would agree with all of that. Sometimes I think people like to get into their culde-sac, cuts out all that through traffic.

Yeah. They don't have to deal with the through traffic. They get to go home and they get, you know, I live at the end of a culde-sac right around the corner from where Dean lives, the end of Carolina Circle. So, I'm not so sure that I agree with uh you knowing the uh the road network that grid pattern as being more desirable than the culde-sac. It's one person's impression. Somebody else have the forer I don't have anything else. I had a lot to say. I'm sitting back listening now. I

mean, I think um you know, I don't know how much of the ordinance I guess or not the ordinance, but the plan as in current state is you know, we can currently change. Um but maybe it's just a general note on here on the red line version that essentially says planning if this is the stance of you all is planning board showed push back on the uh difference between unconnected roads and road networks they prefer the aspect of ending dead-end streets etc rather than neighborhood blocks um along those lines. I mean, would that be sufficient if that's the ideology of you all? Um, I would certainly if it's, you know, something you feel passionately about, would like to include it in something that's going to city council?

I'm I'm just expressing an opinion. Yes, sir. Totally understand. I just want to get out there. I mean, the one Yeah, I know. I'm all right with 7.2 the way it's written.

Yeah. in the past that the council's always going to do what they want to do to begin with and uh there's stubouts that's been from one community going into another that's never been opened up and council's overall approved a new project and chose to eliminate that stub out. Uh I think it it whatever we say here is not really going to make a hill of beans when it comes down to whoever's sitting on the council 5 years from now or agree with you or two years from now. So either way, uh, if that's the case, then I mean, if y'all are perfectly fine with me leaving it at is, or I can write something that

maybe is not encouraged. Maybe that we, you know, that the first one may not be encouraged, but is allowed. Yeah, our current ordinance does allow for dead end streets. Yeah. Um, but it does mention a lot of connectivity of a subdivision to stub out to vacant parcels. Um, I think it's like a shallow inside of our development ordinance. Um, so even that might be something else to take a look at. Um, of a change to um I think all commercial ought to be stubbed out to something else. Yeah. Parking lot to parking lot or

Yeah, I think so. We haven't uh there's very few requirements inside of our development boards to that. So, it hasn't been done to probably the fashion we're supposed to, but um no, I totally understand that as well. Okay. Anything else right here we want to discuss tonight?

Just I I would make the same kind of comments about 7.3 separation of uses versus mixed use. I'm not so sure I'd agree with all of that. I look at that and see think that wishful thinking. Do I really want to a 7-Eleven down at the corner of Hanford Road and Moore Road? No, I don't know. I don't think so.

I think this is more and correct me if I'm wrong. It's more wanting commercialized on the first floor and residential above it on the same property or integrated some type.

Yeah. And I also think that this type of development of mixeduse aspect is called out on the larger scale of the map of a land use zone being that we have areas that we have identified where this type of development would be satisfactory according to what our future land use plan says. So, I don't think you're really seeing it along the South Main Street or in a residential area. Um, I think a lot of it is actually falling along the lines of where um 54 intersects right there with the um the highway. Um that kind of where the underpass um right there where they take a left to go towards the challenge and all that stuff down there or back behind the hotel. I think that the center right there on our future land use map has been identified as somewhat of a mixeduse commercial residential zoned area where something like that may be beneficial to revamp some of that light dilapidated area and may drive some stuff with the current apartment state that's over there as well. I think you know you kind of try and keep that stuff a little bit close. I don't think it's looking to do like down south of South Main Street on Rogers Road or anything along.

You're talking projects more like what we looked at uh for that parcel across from the post office locker place. Um yes sir. The one that um the business retail on the office and residential.

Hey, can you look at conditions zoning? Um god that's been about two or three years ago I feel like right there. Um and that's essentially what it was. is kind of the mix of um some on the bottom then you have some townhouse apartments stuff on top. Um there are areas I think where it is and I think that really boils down to the whole land use map as a whole. is like where do you want to see this type of mixeduse development at rather than the separation of uses where you got okay we're going to have residential here park in this area and then that's the cuto off and then we'll stick some commercial and then like I think it really boils down to the map as a whole and what we're looking at

if you uh would go down to Cornelius or Huntersville you'll see a lot of this mixeduse uh and although it doesn't appeal to me it does appeal to a lot of young people. Yeah, you see a lot of in Kerry and Durm. That's the young people. They don't drive anymore and everything is convenient. They walk, they, you know, they work from home. They've got the movie theater there. They got a couple bars. They got restaurants and you see it. It is, it is just blowing up in the Kerry uh Durham area and Morrisville. See that everywhere?

I'm going to reference Memphis. That that was very typical where you'd have a little store bottom people lived above it. Res the owners lived above it and you had a little strip where that was the case. And one example that I would commend to you just get on the internet and look it up. Cross Town Concourse. Cross Town Concourse. It was uh the old Sears warehouse distribution in Memphis. They've taken it, redone it. resident, business, entertainment, all all kind school. There's a school in there. Yeah,

that's what you're talking about. Mixed use. Is that true? Yeah, I think that ties to it. Maybe not to that extent because I don't think we'd be able to uh get that. This this is this is probably the ultimate example of for sure. I mean, I think of like um because a lot of it is based around like where I see it down in the triangle is apartments. I think of like it's Fenton there in Kerry. They have some town homes and they have like your normal mall shopping places like Lululemon and some of the other stuff and ice skating rinks, parks and stuff along those lines. They got everything. Raleigh's getting ready to build right there where the um what do they call it? The NC State. They gonna put a billion dollars in there and they going to have the condos and

commercial and connected to the football stadium as well as to the arena there. That's Oh, yeah. Yeah. It's going to be Yes. Build mix. It's a mixed use. Yep. We have apartment decks and All right. All right. Moving on. That's that's that's all I had. Anything else with the future land use plan for tonight? Another and I would make a suggestion that we table this into next month. Give Cameron an opportunity to uh make a correction. Start the correction red line and we'll get back into it. dive back into it next month.

I would um I'd suggest, you know, like I mentioned, you know, get you some ideas as we come together next month for some of these goals and policies. Take a good look through some of theirs. Um as well as I mean I don't think we hit on any of the density stuff tonight. I mean there's stuff about densities in the appropriate areas that take like I think I told Mr. Stalker it's like a lot of the big impact of this development or not this development but this plan is inside of those like two sections inside of there. what we're basing our decision of a planning board off of according to what this land use plan says. So, I think, you know, I'll redline all this stuff up. I'll get it back over to you. Try and keep your copies so I don't have to print any more off if you could. Um, but I'll definitely do that if you'll take a look at some of that stuff and we'll get into a little bit deeper in that and see what we can include or take out or um fix up.

So, I'll make a motion that we table that. Uh, do I have a second? Second. And that is table that to next month's meeting. Correct. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay. Next thing in there is number seven is uh non-aggenda items. Um sorry to interrupt. Did you want to address the this thing or that's a non-aggenda item? I apologize. Go ahead. Hit on that. We're about as public as it gets.

Uh non-aggenda item. So um Mr. Wooten has taken uh direction here and u come up with a pretty good uh opportunity for opening statement for the board and I certainly uh like the work that he's done on this and uh just wonder if each one of you's had opportunity maybe to to read it tonight. If not uh does anybody see any corrections or or anything they'd like changed or potentially talked about? I like to make a I read over it and I know in the past when you ask members to speak or you give them an opportunity to speak it's you you tabor it to like three minutes you know you put a time limit. Well I haven't ever been a a fan of time limits. I think that and the council does the three minutes. I'm not a fan of that. And the reason I say that is where can you go and be heard? Where can your voice be heard on a matter? And you can't talk about much in three minutes. Now, if you're repetitive and you keep talking over and over about the same thing, I'm going to cut you off.

Okay? And but I'm not a a fan of the three minute and but if y'all are and y'all want to implement a time So it is listed inside of here um about um a time limit. Yeah, the time limit for comments is three minute minutes but may be extended by the moderator to allow questions from the board. Right. Um which I think is totally fair but to your point I think there needs to be a cut off. Um because not that you know you get somebody up here that doesn't have anything they're talking about or they're just kind of like you said repetitive repetitive. If we have something to point back to it's like hey we adopted this that says we're only going to give you three minutes. There's your three minutes. Um but of course you can fully extend it as you would like. So,

I This is the people's house. Yeah. This is what uh is for the people to come and voice their concerns.

And I'm I'm opposed to putting any time limit on anybody. Um someone else sitting in this chair may may want to put time limits on them, but you it's hard for you to come in here and talk about a big development in three minutes and get everything out unless you're running through it. And then you got board members up here just not having an opportunity to take it all in because they hit you with 60 different questions about this development and there's not enough time to to get all that said and answered. Um but if that's something y'all choose to do and I'm not opposed to taking a vote on it and if y'all choose to do that that's what we'll do. I I suggested the three minute time limit with your discretion, the chair's discretion to extend that as needed. I mean, yeah,

at the moderator's discretion. Yeah. Right. That's what I'm saying. At the Because, you know, one night we were here after midnight, but it got redundant. Everybody was coming up. Basically, they were saying the same thing. I mean, I mean, after 12 people at some point, they're not making a statement. it was they were just repeating the same thing over and over. But think about what you're saying there is that each person has a right to come say that if that's what they want to say. I mean that was their voice being heard. The only way they're they can be heard is come before this board or come before the council and and talk about it. Um I mean we didn't cut them off or anything. No, I'm I'm the first that I've told I've cut several off.

Right. But I'm the first I'll tell you I'll cut them off in a minute. I think that's why it's good. Discretion. Exactly. Yeah. With your discretion, though. I mean, give everybody the voice. I think everybody should have that right. Voice. And I just don't I'm not I know what you're saying with discretion. I'm just not I'm opposed to any time limit on anybody.

If you guys out vote me and say that you want it, then we'll certainly put it there. Uh but it's just this is the people's house. The people ought to be heard. Yeah, I would I would agree with that. I I would I would say leave that in there just as a matter of procedure and protocol. And you have you have your discretion. I I do not question your discretion or judgment in any of these cases. So, you know, somebody else may eventually sit in that chair and they may want that. So, I think we should go ahead and do it. One thing I would uh suggest is those last two sentences down at the bottom that are separate, I'd go ahead and remove those.

Great.

Absolutely. Other than that, there's uh any other changes, redactions or additions want to be recommended. It's not going to hurt my fields in the least. So if if not then I will make a motion uh that we uh approve this uh writing to be added to the planning board's authority uh that will be read uh before every meeting outlining the procedures and also request that staff place this as official document in every agenda package that goes out as somebody downloads the agenda from online, they would have that in there and maybe already know what their responsibilities are before they got here. So, I've had I got a motion. Do I hear a second?

Do you want to exclude the uh last two sentences? Excluding the last two sentences. Well, I'll second that. All in favor? Any opposed? Okay. And I got one more uh non-aggenda non-aggenda item. Uh Cameron, I've talked to you a few times and I'm ask you about that trailer again on Elm Street. Is it still out there? Last time I saw it was picked up. Last time you saw it last week, like Friday. Mhm. It's there Friday when I went by there. Now I don't know. I didn't go by there Friday afternoon. Yeah. Let me go take another look at it. But they uh mentioned to us that it was picked up and I sent somebody out there to take a look at and they said it was gone. So

good. I hadn't been back. That's what I wanted to ask about it. I have no other non-aggenda items. Did anybody else have any knowledge today? Does staff have any comments that they want to talk about? God, I feel like I did. Um, but I completely forgot about them, honestly. Um, Board of Adjustments, has that been resolved?

Thank you. Yes, sir. Um, as we currently understand, um, we're still at a standstill. They are pushing things off with the potential appeal request to the board of adjustments. I'm I'm hoping that a resolution is going to be resolved without the board of adjustment having to meet and determine on it. I think we've discussed some things, but they're working with some of their people over there to talk about it. Um so we'll see it. We may meet in January. Um it depends on whether or not they um decide to move forward with it or not. Um and there has been some movement discussion of updating the development ordinance. Um, I don't know exactly if that's a lot of hearsay or whatnot, but it's been murmured quite a few times to me. Um, so that's something that we could possibly be taking a look at and taking up a lot of my time here in the near future. So,

and just uh for each member here that happens to sit on the planning board, I mean the board of adjustments, I know we've talked about a potential meeting, but just remember that is a quasi judicial proceeding. Don't be doing no independent investigation. The only evidence that you could ever consider would be what's presented in front of us here. So, if we do uh get something on next month's agenda, just remember that is a quasi judicial proceeding and you can only hear the evidence in the chambers here. So, don't be doing no independent investigation.

I'll also add um you know, we did uh not assess um we did find somebody essentially to take a seat um to serve as the attorney for the planning board um in these cases um moving forward. So, you will have independent representation at these meetings. Um, I think we got somebody on call um that will come and assist. You'll get an agenda the week before. Um, like I chair Ward said, don't do anything crazy and go out and try and take a look at anything. We're going to hear everything that night. Testimony is going to be given and we'll go from there. So, but you will not be alone.

And um, we do do have that situation. I want to be provided with the uh council's number prior to the meeting. I may have some questions I want to ask. Don't think that's a problem at all. If uh if it's appropriate. Yes, sir. I think as long as it's not directly related questions, procedural questions. Yes, sir. As long as it's like, you know, not dealing with the item at hand. I think that's fine. Anything further? I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. So move. Second. Second. All in favor. Any opposed? Didn't think so.