Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. It's 6 p.m. I'd like to call the meeting to order. I'd like to welcome everyone to the Town of Leland Planning Board meeting. Please note that the public and media may videotape these proceedings at any time. At this time, I'd like to remind everyone to please place their cell phones on vibrate or turn them off so we do not disturb the business of tonight's meeting. And now I would like to ask everybody to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Thank you. We'll go on to the next item, which is the approval of the agenda. Does anyone have any amendments to the agenda? Not seeing any, I do have one. I would like to add to the beginning of the agenda the opportunity for each member of the board to introduce themselves by name and then give our newest board member, Mr. Vallejo, a chance to say a couple words about himself. With that amendment, do I have a motion to accept it?

Mr. Carey, just for the record, we'll make that item 4.1, and then we'll reorder the rest of the agenda items. Got it. Thank you.

So is that acceptable to everybody?

Yes, sir. I'll make a motion to be approved as amended.

Second.

Second. Second.

Thank you, all those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Thank you. So we'll move on to the approval of the minutes. 4.1, does anyone?

I'm sorry, Mr. Carey, so I had asked for 4.1, which would now be the introduction for Mr.

Right, I'm gonna do that. Oh, okay. So 4.1, I'd like to ask everybody if they could just mention their names so that Mike has a chance to know who we all are.

Welcome, Mike. I'm Bob Lucero. I've been on the board almost two years. It's been very rewarding and a lot of fun, and I welcome you.

I'm Cody Watkins. I'm in my second term on the board, and I echo what Bob said and welcome.

And we've met, but Alan Carey, I'm also in my second term.

I'm Steve Whitney in my second term. Welcome. Thank you. Mike Panik, first term. Welcome. Thank you.

My name is Michael. I've lived in Leland for about six years. I'm a local general contractor. Married seven years and three young kids. Looking forward to helping.

That's great. Welcome. We'll move on from there. Does anyone have any amendments to the minutes as they are presented? If not, could someone make a motion to approve the minutes as presented?

So moved.

Do I have a second? Thank you, any discussion? All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? All right, great, so they're taken care of. Move on to public comment. At this time, anyone who signed up to speak during public comment prior to the start of this meeting may come forward. After all registered speakers have finished, anyone who did not sign up but wishes to provide public comment will have an opportunity to speak. And if anybody does come up, please state your name when you get to the podium. If you have documents, please give them to the officers. And then we have a three-minute time limit for public comments. You'll see a clock over here to your right, to my left. As a reminder, everyone listens to everything that's said, but the board does not answer or make comments on things specifically to the person speaking. As I understand, we do not have anybody signed up? Correct. We have no one signed up, but is there anybody in the audience who would wish to, even though they didn't sign up, make any statements? Not seeing any. Then we'll go on from there. Item six, action item. Does anyone have a conflict of interest or a disclosure statement to be placed on the record in this action?

No.

Seeing none, we're ready to proceed. Ms. Thurmond will now present the zoning map amendment to the US Highway 17 overlay district to include Brunswick County tax parcel ID 047EC003.

Good evening, thank you for that introduction. Ms. Justice Herman, I'm a planner one here at the town and I will be presenting the zoning map amendment for the parcel ID shown on the screen. Moving into our standard operating procedures for consideration of the zoning map amendment and if it aligns with the general statute. Does the proposed zoning map amendment align with and advance the goals and the visions in the adopted plans, such as the Leland 2045 plan? And is the proposed zoning map amendment appropriate for the area, i.e., does it affect any adjacent landowners or surrounding communities? Next I have for you is our public notification. It is not required by state statute. However, as town, we do like to create transparency. So we have a couple different notifications with the Star News. We have the site postings on April 14th. We've got meeting mailers also sent out on the 14th. And that's 500 feet of the subject site. So all those parcels got notified. We also have the Sunshine email list, social media postings, and the town website postings. To provide you with some background of the application, it was submitted by Allen Industries Incorporated and is a quick service restaurant on approximately 1.54 acres located near the intersection of Gateway Boulevard and Ocean Gate Plaza. Next, I have a vicinity map and a couple maps following that to show you where the subject site is located. So I have the subject site highlighted in that light blue. And as you can see, we have Leland Municipality in that darker blue. And then across the US Highway 17 in the purple, we have Belleville jurisdiction. Following that, I've got an aerial map of the subject site and adjoining parcels. Next, I have the current zoning of the site in our Leland C2 district, which promotes large-scale retail. To the west of that, in the red, I have county commercial low density. And then across the freeway, I have in the gray, Belleville Business Highway District. And then in that green, we've got Belleville Industrial District. Here we have the current zoning of the US Highway 17 overlay district in its entirety and then in the blue you'll see that subject site as well. Here we have the current zoning just a little bit more zoomed in and you can see the subject site and then its surrounding parcels highlighted in that Highway 17 district. Here I have what the proposed zoning would look like if the US Highway 17 overlay district was amended to include the subject site. Next, I would like to talk about the allowable signage between the two zoning districts, C2 and the Highway 17 district. I'd like to point out that the only noticeable comparison here is the wall signs for individual businesses and the combined development. And then regarding the sign area between the two districts, the ground signs permitted in the US Highway Overlay District have smaller dimensional standards for individual ground signs, but they have greater standards in comparison to the combined development ground signs. We also have a differentiation for wall sign standards, and those vary between those two districts. And I wanted to show a calculation for the one square foot per 75% for the building parameter in the US Highway 17 district. And this is just a simple graphic to calculate it. Lastly for dimensional standards we have the maximum height and the difference you'll see here is for combined development ground signs at 28 feet for the US Highway District and then 15 feet for the C2. Moving on to existing conditions on the subject site. There is currently a ground sign that is 43 and a half square feet, and it is permitted in the current zoning district, C2. If the zoning map amendment were to be approved, the ground sign would be 11 and a half square feet larger than what would be allowed in the highway district. So this would just be considered a legal nonconformity and it would be okay. We just couldn't have any changes to the signs unless those changes were to bring the sign closer into compliance with the highway district or in full compliance. Going into our consistency with the town adopted plans relating to the Leland 2045 plan, we have the theme of a livable, diverse and connected neighborhoods that accommodate growth with the strategy of promoting development that is consistent with Leland's visions for itself and for various areas of the town and planning area based on community input. And at this time, I would like to ask the applicant to come up for his presentation. The applicant is Ross MacArthur.

Good evening, board and staff. As Justice mentioned, my name is Ross MacArthur. I'm from Harrisonburg, Virginia. I'm here representing Panda Express in this matter. We are making application to become part of the Highway 17 zoning designation from the current seat.

Mr. McArthur, can you please stand by the mic because if anybody's listening online, they can't hear you. Thank you. I'm sorry.

From the current zoning district of C2, being in the Highway 17 overlay would allow us to have a sign on the exterior wall which currently we do not have. We have had a number of customers mention that the visibility in trying to find our site has been a challenge when they're going up and down Highway 17, and being a new commercial entity, it's pivotal that we have some good identity to the main thoroughfare. The sign was part of our national standard. It is a round Panda Express sign, which is on the west elevation of our building. This sign would go on the north elevation. It would be consistent with the HOF car wash, which just 20 feet away has their sign on the North Elevation. Lowe's, Dunkin' Donuts, Chick-fil-A, Checkout, they all have those signs facing that direction. I'm not sure if you folks have been up and down that road and noticed our building, but it does look pretty plain without having that exposure. With the current speed limit of 35, I was out there today watching the cars go up and down, and their ability to stop and make a turn, it's almost a third of a mile before if they're trying to get to our restaurant. This would cause hazard and traffic congestion, certainly in time. That would improve, potentially. But I think our request by moving 3711 Gateway into the Highway 17 Gateway District would allow us more consistency with our neighbors as far as exposure of signs. And you can see the pictures here of the round Panda Express line, which would be on the north elevation. See if I can get to it. We've called it out on the site plan. That is the south elevation. There is the north elevation. I'm sorry, that's two options. So a set of channel letters on the north elevation and the round Panda Express. We call them lock up signs. Either one would give us that exposure we feel we greatly need. We feel that we would reduce a hazard in the area, more of a public service, more consistent with our national brand and other commercial entities in the area. And that's my presentation. Any questions?

Not at the moment. Thank you. Do we have anybody signed up for public comment? Even though we have no one signed up for public comment, if anyone out there has some comments, either in support or in opposition, please feel free to come up to the podium. Seeing none, then I'm gonna see if we can have a presentation of the staff recommendations.

Sure thing. Staff recommends approval and suggests the following motion. Motion to recommend council approve the zoning map amendment as presented finding it is consistent with the Leland 2045 plan as stated earlier and reasonable and in the public interest because the proposed zoning map amendment aligns with existing adjacent commercial uses and supports more cohesive development standards along the corridor.

You have more?

No, sir. Any questions?

Okay, so we now have time for discussion or questions that you may have for applicant or staff. Anybody have any questions? Yes, sir.

No question. I move approval.

Okay, we have a motion approval. I do have a question. Okay. If you go back to where you showed the proposed zoning and the overlay district, i understand why the um the site immediately to the south or wherever you said it's county how about the two in front they do not appear to be on the overlay district that is correct they would have to also apply just like our applicant did to request to be added into the highway 17 overlay district if they would like um i don't have i just wanted to make sure that we weren't kind of um What's the word? Cherry picking one site when there were others that were not there, but they would have to apply for it, correct? Correct, yes. Okay, fine. That's the end of my questions. So we have a motion to approve.

Mr. Perry, I just want to make a quick statement real quick. The applicant did provide site-specific information in front of you. This is treated just like similar to a general rezoning. We should not be considering specific site or specific uses essentially like that. So any future potential business that would be on this site, whether it's Panda Express or any future item, Would have these same allowances. I just want to make sure that's clear the signs that they presented to you tonight May not be the signs that may be attached to the building if this item was approved by the Town Council Thank you So we do have a motion to approve.

Do I have a second? All those in favor Any opposed Thank you very much Move on to item seven. We'll talk about the, Mr. Andrea will talk to us about the UDO.

Good evening, everyone. Couldn't get all my stuff to print earlier, so I'm going digital up here, but In your agenda package last month, we offered to you a draft of Article 2 for the UDO that we've been working on. This is the administration chapter, essentially. It talks a lot about who's responsible for what and what the processes are for individual employees. So I wanted to ask you if you had any feedback. I also wanted to go through a couple of just very minor changes that we've made since the version, since you got that version last month. So let me go through those just real quick. These include some feedback that Mr. Carey emailed to me. So under 222, town council talks about the authority granted to town council by state law. We added in the phrase and the town charter, just to be clear that town council gets their authority from both of those things. When we were having a discussion with town council Recently, although they're not to this point, but they did offer some feedback on this chapter already. One of the council members suggested to add in some language to just make it clear that if someone who's on the planning board does their second term and they move off of the planning board, that they're still eligible for appointment to another board. So under, on page 16, we added in, at the end of B3E, but may be eligible to be appointed to other town boards and committees during this one year period. So it's saying that during that one year that you can't be on the planning board because you've already done your two terms, you can still be on Board of Adjustment or Economic Development Committee or whatever one may be interested in. Also made that change under the Board of Adjustment language in 224. I think there's one or two more changes I wanted to mention to you. Under 238, this is the section, this is on page 28, and I'm looking at the very small numbers at the top right corner. So under 238A2, in the version you got, it said, each person that speaks at the meeting or hearing shall identify themselves, state their home or business address. address and some other language. We struck that whole bullet there to align with the practice that we've taken on for the past couple months, not requiring someone to say their name or address if they decide to speak. Under 239, this is on page 30. 239 towards the bottom, B on your version says review and recommendation. We changed that to postponing a recommendation. We want to add some language in there about that the planning board may decide to postpone a recommendation if you need to ask for more information or something like that. We also added in some language that talks about town council may make a decision if the planning board is unable to come to a recommendation that applies specifically to zoning text amendments or rezonings. And we'll also add in the clarification about initial zonings, which says the planning board has to make a recommendation. on page 59 this is under the section for variances uh under 59 page 59 b applicability subsection two it's a list of variances that are not allowed we added in a change to a condition associated with a conditional rezoning that would be a change to that conditional rezoning that needs to go back through the rezoning process. And then also added in a change to a law or regulation that's not administered by the town unless the town has the authority to administer that law or regulation. So essentially we can't offer a variance to something like a state statute or a federal federal requirement. Thanks. Okay, those are all the changes that I had to go through. Did you all have any suggestions, questions, things you wanted to talk about? Yes, Mr. Whitney.

Yes, thank you. I have a few comments regarding the UDO information. The first is the summary table under Article 2, Section 2.1. Mm-hmm. It appears as though the planning board has really only responsibility for amendments. I believe that we have been asked and we do participate in the TCR reviews of specific projects as they come through. And I think that the document should I recognize that the planning board does have knowledge and information that may be helpful in the site planning process as it comes forward. I would like to see perhaps some R's in the sections under the advisory decision-making bodies. Obviously, we're not making decisions. We are making recommendations and I would hope that perhaps the table and the role of the planning board can be broadened to include that type of review.

Yeah, that's a good catch. I would recommend we put RC, which stands for review and comment, under all of the rows under site plans and subdivisions.

All right, thank you.

Maybe with the exception of exempt plat.

And so that would include site plans and subdivisions?

Yes. So essentially, an RC on the rows of the things that go through the TRC process that you get copied on.

OK. Secondly, I think it's Article 2.23 regarding board membership. I believe that at certain times the composition of the board has been sort of weighted toward one neighborhood or one sort of area and I would like to see the document somehow rather broaden participation of planning board members to other neighborhoods. I don't know how to do that but I know For example, town council was considering changing certain things so that there's broader representation of neighborhoods, which I think should be applauded and should be undertaken. And I think that perhaps either in this section or some other section, there should be some recognition that folks from the entire town of Leland would be represented on this body. I think it would be, considered to be more judicious among the entire town if we had some kind of language in there that at least provided some type of diversity in that area?

If I may, how would we do that for the fact that it has to be an application? In other words, You have to apply for this as opposed to, I think, the town saying, I want somebody from Village Road. I'm not sure how that would work.

I don't know how it would work either. But I think that the perceptions could be made or taken in the community that you're only picking people from certain areas. And I think that somehow or other, maybe it can't be in the documents, but. Part of it's sort of affirmatively trying to get applicants from different areas to apply and make them aware that positions are open for applications.

I think in concept, Mr. Whitney, that's a really great idea. How about I forward that feedback to town council, depending on if the rest of the board agrees that's worthy to talk to town council about. We would certainly need some more direction on how to write that and how to identify what those areas are. I also guess I would want to point out that town council has the discretion as it's set up now to decide or review who's on the board when they're reviewing applicants and if they want someone from a different neighborhood or maybe there's a town council that, wants everyone on planning board to be from the same neighborhood. So I think that ultimately that's a decision for town council to make and so subsequently I think it's a decision for them to make whether they want to codify something in the ordinance that requires them to.

It may not even belong in this particular ordinance but it could be more of a policy statement rather than something that's codified in the UDO. Right. I would like to see a little bit broader direction for the planning board with respect to the TRC process. I know there is a section about TRCs. And I would like to see somehow or other that broadened. It kind of relates to the summary table as well. So that may be something that we should be talking about. I feel that quite frequently we are given plans to review that have actually been developed fairly extensively. It's almost like they're 75% complete and the planning board really doesn't have any, in a conceptual stage, any position. And I think we'd like to maybe either see some kind of liaison to like from the planning board occasionally to participate in information and concept reviews at the early stage i don't know how to include that but that's something that i i think that typically when we receive information from a trc application, everything is pretty much done.

That's not dissimilar to how it often works for the planning staff. By the time an application is submitted, is to the point where someone needs to demonstrate whether or not it meets the technical requirements of the ordinance. And so we're also in a similar position where we're not always afforded the opportunity to work with a site designer early in the process to suggest things that may be advisory in nature.

Is there some way that includes some aspect of early review so that the consultants and the developers come in with not totally developed plans and give us the opportunity, us and the staff, the opportunity to comment and direct how a certain project should be received in the community.

Yeah, I guess I would maybe respond from a more higher level perspective and recommendation in that let's write a good set of regulations that create that are very predictable in what we're getting for site design and then keep the process predictable versus creating more steps in the process where people can interject their advisory comments that ultimately someone may or may not elect to do. So I think I would say let's write a good set of site design requirements and keep the process efficient and predictable.

That pretty much summarizes the comments that I had in reviewing the information.

Thank you.

Does anyone else have any comments for this section? Okay.

Great, thank you.

Okay, then that'd be 7.1. We'll go on to 8.1, the next UDO ordinance.

Thanks again. So this is the section, Article 9. This relates to nonconformities. So please take a look at that over the next few weeks, and we'll have a similar discussion about this article next month.

If I may, we talked about this with... with Mr. Garhu, but one thing that you had mentioned before is that there's nothing to stop us from submitting comments in advance so that they've got a chance to look at, and that's what I did on the last one. So I just suggest everybody, if you have comments, you don't have to wait till the next meeting to present them to Mr. Andrea.

I'm waiting for the environmental section. So I do have If we're done with that, just one piece of new business, if it's okay, Mr. Chair, because we're on the old and new.

Yep, thanks. Or to new business yet, unless it maybe pertains to the development ordinance itself.

I have no new business for the development ordinance whatsoever.

Okay, let's do, if it's okay, let's move on to item nine, go through the reports, then we can do old new business.

Okay, I think the reason he did that is because item eight does say old new business. It's fine.

Excuse me. We were just on item nine. We'll shift to item 10, which would be staff board committee monthly reports. Oh, no, I'm sorry. I'm reading this wrong.

Item 8.1 was the UDO, but it's under old new business. So does anybody have any other old or new business to bring up?

Really briefly. I'm going to pick at a scab here for a second. I fully respect the decision of the town council with respect to the flood ordinance, but I do know that the county did take steps that was unanimously approved regarding the, I think, the 100-year flood zone as opposed to ours, which is, I think, 25-year. And so I was wondering if next meeting we could just get a little brief on what the county did and how perhaps the town could piggyback on that.

I'll look into it and give you all a more thorough update, but it's my recollection and I'm also hearing that that was pertaining to the stormwater design requirements and not the allowance of whether or not you could build in the flood zone. So we have... To my understanding, our flood regulation allowances or restrictions are the same as the county being it in the 100-year flood zone.

Okay. If you could just enlighten me, you could do it privately, that's fine.

Sure. Thank you. It's also worth noting that the flood damage prevention ordinance is a chapter of the UDO that we'll get to later, probably in the fall. There was a new model ordinance from the state emergency management that came out, so we'll be looking at that and BE PREPARED TO GIVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS AND HEAR ANY RECOMMENDATIONS WHEN THAT TIME COMES. BUT I'LL FOLLOW UP WITH YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, BEN. SURE.

ANY OTHER OLDS IN YOUR BUSINESS? AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM NINE, STAFF, BOARD COMMITTEE, AND HUNTER REPORTS.

GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY. LAST MONTH, THE DEPARTMENT ISSUED 280 PERMITS, WITH 102 OF THOSE BEING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND TOWNHOUSE PERMITS. We had a total of 2,451 total inspections with a value of construction just shy of 27 million. I'll give you some updates on some items that you heard if you have not watched the town council meetings. Last month, the annexation initial zoning of Malmo Forums is currently on hold. The request of the property owner, just to kind of review their rezoning requests. If you recall, the board unanimously requested did not support the rezoning or the initial zoning of that property. In addition, the property in front of Seward Point, I'm sorry, the property in front of Compass Point, known as Seward Point, was approved for both the annexation as well as initial zoning. The initial zoning had changed slightly from when you heard it. All the C-3 that they proposed, they took all that away and replaced it with C-1, which was also the current zoning for all the commercial areas. So there is no C-3 on that property. It's all C-1, multifamily, and conservation district. In addition, the staff, the text amendment for C-3 data centers, excuse me, that you guys heard about a few months back. It's been kind of recognized. The council government had reached out to the town to provide some additional information, do a presentation regarding data centers as well as sustainable energy. Ben Watts is gonna be representing the town and give a presentation to individuals of local municipalities at the COG coming up in May. A staff update, a regular player that came up to see you, Javier Barra, our planner two, he took a position down in South Carolina at Hardyville, so we wish him the best of luck. He left on great terms and everything like that. Still in communication with him, so you won't see seeing him. That's it for staff reports. I can move into transportation real quick, if that's all right. Transportation, there's information for the WMPO that was in your packet. The only other thing I will add in terms of transportation, Mr. Whitney, last month you asked about the teardrop roundabout. That should be up and running hopefully by the end of May. So before Memorial Day is what I've been told.

Like they're paving or finishing the paving there today.

Yeah, so there might be some punch list items slightly, but hopefully travelable by that time frame. So that's what I've been told.

That will help the congestion along 17.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Any questions for me? Any questions?

I just want to thank the staff. I had dinner with a friend who's the planning director for Stuttgart region in Germany, and he's taken the town's ordinance and sharing it with the 300 plus localities in his region as an example of what local governments can do to address the issue of data centers. So really well done.

Any other comments or questions? Thank you. And move on to item 10, which is do I have a motion to adjourn the meeting? So moved. Do I have a second?

Second.

All those in any discussion? Aye. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? So the next regular meeting of the planning board will be held May 26th at 6 o'clock right here. Thank you all.